[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 150 (Thursday, August 5, 2004)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 47366-47377]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-17656]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[CO-001-0076a, CO-001-0077a; FRL-7784-9]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Colorado; Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes, Lamar 
and Steamboat Springs

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve a State 
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Colorado 
on July 31, 2002, for the purpose of redesignating the Lamar, Colorado 
and Steamboat Springs, Colorado areas from

[[Page 47367]]

nonattainment to attainment for particulate matter with an aerodynamic 
diameter less than or equal to a nominal 10 micrometers 
(PM10) under the 1987 standards. The Governor's submittal, 
among other things, documents that the Lamar and Steamboat Springs 
areas have attained the PM10 national ambient air quality 
standards (NAAQS), requests redesignation to attainment and includes a 
maintenance plan for each of the areas demonstrating maintenance of the 
PM10 NAAQS for ten years. EPA is approving these 
redesignation requests and maintenance plans because Colorado has met 
the applicable requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA), as amended. 
Upon the effective date of this approval, the Lamar and Steamboat 
Springs areas will be designated attainment for the PM10 
NAAQS. This action is being taken under sections 107, 110, and 175A of 
the Clean Air Act.

DATES: This rule is effective on October 4, 2004, without further 
notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by September 7, 2004. If 
adverse comment is received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of 
the direct final rule in the Federal Register informing the public that 
the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Written comments may be mailed to Richard R. Long, Director, 
Air and Radiation Program, Mailcode 8P-AR, Environmental Protection 
Agency, Region VIII, 999 18th Street, Suite 300, Denver, CO 80202. 
Comments may also be submitted electronically, or through hand 
delivery/courier. Please follow the detailed instructions described in 
section (I)(B)(1)(i) through (iii) of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION 
section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Libby Faulk, EPA, Region VIII, (303) 
312-6083.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, wherever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' are used, we mean the Environmental Protection 
Agency (EPA).

Table of Contents

I. General Information
II. EPA's Final Action
    A. What Action Is EPA Taking in This Direct Final Rule?
III. Summary of Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan
    A. What Requirements Must Be Followed for Redesignations to 
Attainment?
    B. Do the Lamar and Steamboat Springs Redesignation Requests and 
Maintenance Plans Meet the CAA Requirements?
    C. Have the Transportation Conformity Requirements Been Met?
    D. Did Colorado Follow the Proper Procedures for Adopting This 
Action?
IV. Background
V. Consideration of CAA section 110(l)
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. General Information

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

    1. The Regional Office has established an official public 
rulemaking file available for inspection at the Regional Office. EPA 
has established an official public rulemaking file for this action 
under CO-001-0076a, CO-001-0077a. The official public file consists of 
the documents specifically referenced in this action, any public 
comments received, and other information related to this action. 
Although a part of the official docket, the public rulemaking file does 
not include Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other 
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. The official 
public rulemaking file is the collection of materials that is available 
for public viewing at the Air and Radiation Program, EPA Region 8, 999 
18th Street, Suite 300, Denver, CO. EPA requests that if at all 
possible, you contact the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. You may view the public 
rulemaking file at the Regional Office Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 
4 p.m., excluding federal holidays. Copies of the Incorporation by 
Reference material are also available at the Air and Radiation Docket 
and Information Center, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Room B-
108 (Mail Code 6102T), 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 
20460.
    2. Copies of the State submittal are also available for public 
inspection during normal business hours, by appointment at the State 
Air Agency. Copies of the State documents relevant to this action are 
also available for public inspection at the Colorado Department of 
Public Health and Environment, Air Pollution Control Division, 4300 
Cherry Creek Drive South, Denver, Colorado 80246-1530.
    3. Electronic Access. You may access this Federal Register document 
electronically through the Regulations.gov web site located at http://www.regulations.gov where you can find, review, and submit comments on 
Federal rules that have been published in the Federal Register, the 
Government's legal newspaper, and are open for comment.
    For public commenters, it is important to note that EPA's policy is 
that public comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, 
will be made available for public viewing at the EPA Regional Office, 
as EPA receives them and without change, unless the comment contains 
copyrighted material, CBI, or other information whose disclosure is 
restricted by statute. When EPA identifies a comment containing 
copyrighted material, EPA will provide a reference to that material in 
the version of the comment that is placed in the official public 
rulemaking file. The entire printed comment, including the copyrighted 
material, will be available at the Regional Office for public 
inspection.

B. How and to Whom Do I Submit Comments?

    You may submit comments electronically, by mail, or through hand 
delivery/courier. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, identify the 
appropriate rulemaking identification number by including the text 
``Public comment on proposed rulemaking CO-001-0076a, CO-001-0077a'' in 
the subject line on the first page of your comment. Please ensure that 
your comments are submitted within the specified comment period. 
Comments received after the close of the comment period will be marked 
``late.'' EPA is not required to consider these late comments.
    1. Electronically. If you submit an electronic comment as 
prescribed below, EPA recommends that you include your name, mailing 
address, and an e-mail address or other contact information in the body 
of your comment. Also include this contact information on the outside 
of any disk or CD ROM you submit, and in any cover letter accompanying 
the disk or CD ROM. This ensures that you can be identified as the 
submitter of the comment and allows EPA to contact you in case EPA 
cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties or needs further 
information on the substance of your comment. EPA's policy is that EPA 
will not edit your comment, and any identifying or contact information 
provided in the body of a comment will be included as part of the 
comment that is placed in the official public docket. If EPA cannot 
read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you 
for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment.
    i. E-mail. Comments may be sent by electronic mail (e-mail). Please 
send any comments to [email protected] and [email protected] and 
include the text ``Public comment on proposed rulemaking CO-001-0076a, 
CO-001-0077a'' in the subject line. EPA's e-mail system is not an 
``anonymous access'' system. If you send an e-mail comment directly 
without going through

[[Page 47368]]

``Regulations.gov'' (see below), EPA's e-mail system will automatically 
capture your e-mail address. E-mail addresses that are automatically 
captured by EPA's e-mail system are included as part of the comment 
that is placed in the official public docket.
    ii. Regulations.gov. Your use of Regulations.gov is an alternative 
method of submitting electronic comments to EPA. Go directly to 
Regulations.gov at http://www.regulations.gov, then click on the button 
``TO SEARCH FOR REGULATIONS CLICK HERE,'' and select Environmental 
Protection Agency as the Agency name to search on. The list of current 
EPA actions available for comment will be listed. Please follow the 
online instructions for submitting comments. The system is an 
``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your 
identity, e-mail address, or other contact information unless you 
provide it in the body of your comment.
    iii. Disk or CD ROM. You may submit comments on a disk or CD ROM 
that you mail to the mailing address identified in Section 2, directly 
below. These electronic submissions will be accepted in WordPerfect, 
Word or ASCII file format. Avoid the use of special characters and any 
form of encryption.
    2. By Mail. Send your comments to: Richard R. Long, Director, Air 
and Radiation Program, Mailcode 8P-AR, Environmental Protection Agency 
(EPA), Region 8, 999 18th Street, Suite 300, Denver, Colorado 80202-
2466. Please include the text ``Public comment on proposed rulemaking 
CO-001-0076a, CO-001-0077a'' in the subject line on the first page of 
your comment.
    3. By Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to: Richard 
R. Long, Director, Air and Radiation Program, Mailcode 8P-AR, 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, 999 18th Street, Suite 
300, Denver, Colorado 80202-2466. Such deliveries are only accepted 
Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4:55 p.m., excluding federal holidays.

C. How Should I Submit CBI to the Agency?

    Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI 
electronically to EPA. You may claim information that you submit to EPA 
as CBI by marking any part or all of that information as CBI (if you 
submit CBI on disk or CD ROM, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as 
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the 
specific information that is CBI). Information so marked will not be 
disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 
2.
    In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes 
any information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not 
contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion 
in the official public regional rulemaking file. If you submit the copy 
that does not contain CBI on disk or CD ROM, mark the outside of the 
disk or CD ROM clearly that it does not contain CBI. Information not 
marked as CBI will be included in the public file and available for 
public inspection without prior notice. If you have any questions about 
CBI or the procedures for claiming CBI, please consult the person 
identified in the For Further Information Contact

II. EPA's Final Action

A. What Action Is EPA Taking in This Direct Final Rule?

    We are approving the Governor's submittal of July 31, 2002, that 
requests redesignation for the Lamar and Steamboat Springs 
nonattainment areas to attainment for the 1987 PM10 
standards. Included in Colorado's submittal are changes to the ``State 
Implementation Plan--Specific Regulations for Nonattainment--
Attainment/Maintenance Areas (Local Areas)'' which we are approving, 
under section 110 of the CAA, into Colorado's SIP. We are also 
approving the maintenance plans for the Lamar and Steamboat Springs 
PM10 nonattainment areas, which were submitted with 
Colorado's July 31, 2002 redesignation requests. We are approving these 
requests and maintenance plans because Colorado has adequately 
addressed all of the requirements of the CAA for redesignation to 
attainment applicable to the Lamar and Steamboat Springs 
PM10 nonattainment areas. Upon the effective date of this 
action, the Lamar and Steamboat Springs areas' designation status under 
40 CFR part 81 will be revised to attainment.
    EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the 
Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no 
adverse comments. However, in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of today's 
Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document 
that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision if adverse 
comments are filed. This rule will be effective October 4, 2004 without 
further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comments by September 
7, 2004. If the EPA receives adverse comments, EPA will publish a 
timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that the 
rule will not take effect. EPA will address all public comments in a 
subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. The EPA will not 
institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties 
interested in commenting must do so at this time. Please note that if 
EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of 
this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of 
the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are 
not the subject of an adverse comment.

III. Summary of Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan

A. What Requirements Must Be Followed for Redesignations to Attainment?

    In order for a nonattainment area to be redesignated to attainment, 
the following conditions in section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA must be 
met:
    (i) We must determine that the area has attained the NAAQS;
    (ii) The applicable implementation plan for the area must be fully 
approved under section 110(k) of the CAA;
    (iii) We must determine that the improvement in air quality is due 
to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from 
implementation of the applicable implementation plan and applicable 
Federal air pollutant control regulations and other permanent and 
enforceable reductions;
    (iv) We must fully approve a maintenance plan for the area as 
meeting the requirements of CAA section 175A; and,
    (v) The State containing such an area must meet all requirements 
applicable to the area under section 110 and part D of the CAA.
    Our September 4, 1992 guidance entitled ``Procedures for Processing 
Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment'' outlines how to assess 
the adequacy of redesignation requests against the conditions listed 
above.
    The following is a brief discussion of how Colorado's redesignation 
requests and maintenance plans meet the requirements of the CAA for 
redesignation of the Lamar and Steamboat Springs areas to attainment 
for PM10.

[[Page 47369]]

B. Do the Lamar and Steamboat Springs Redesignation Requests and 
Maintenance Plans Meet the CAA Requirements?

i. Attainment of the PM10 NAAQS
    A state must demonstrate that an area has attained the 
PM10 NAAQS through submittal of ambient air quality data 
from an ambient air monitoring network representing maximum 
PM10 concentrations. The data, which must be quality assured 
and recorded in the Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS), 
must show that the average annual number of expected exceedances for 
the area is less than or equal to 1.0, pursuant to 40 CFR 50.6. In 
making this showing, the three most recent years of complete air 
quality data must be used.
    Colorado operates two PM10 monitoring sites in the Lamar 
PM10 nonattainment area. Colorado submitted ambient air 
quality data from the monitoring site which demonstrate that the area 
has attained the PM10 NAAQS. These air quality data were 
quality-assured and placed in AIRS. There were three exceedances of the 
24-hour PM10 NAAQS recorded in the Lamar area between 1996 
and 2000 due to high winds. Lamar has a Natural Events Action Plan 
(NEAP) that was approved by EPA on June 5, 1998 that addresses high 
wind events. The three exceedances between 1996 and 2000 were flagged 
in the AIRS database and were not included in the attainment 
demonstration because of Lamar's approved NEAP (see section III.B.iii. 
for additional information regarding Lamar's NEAP). EPA approved the 
flagging of the three exceedances in a letter to the State on July 3, 
2001. The annual PM10 NAAQS has never been exceeded in 
Lamar. The three most recent years of data for the area (2000--2002) 
are complete (i.e., data are available for at least 75% of the 
scheduled PM10 samples per quarter) with no recorded 
violations. We believe that Colorado has adequately demonstrated, 
through ambient air quality data, that the PM10 NAAQS have 
been attained in the Lamar area.
    Colorado also operates two PM10 monitoring sites in the 
Steamboat Springs PM10 nonattainment area. Colorado 
submitted ambient air quality data from both monitoring sites which 
demonstrate that the area has attained the PM10 NAAQS. These 
air quality data were quality assured and placed in AIRS. Two 
exceedances of the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS were measured in 1993 
and 1996. However, the 3-year average of estimated exceedances remained 
below 1.0 (per year) (40 CFR 50.6) and therefore did not result in a 
violation of the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS. The three most recent 
years of data for the area (2000-2002) are complete (i.e., data are 
available for at least 75% of the scheduled PM10 samples per 
quarter) with no recorded violations. The annual PM10 NAAQS 
has never been exceeded in Steamboat Springs. We believe that Colorado 
has adequately demonstrated, through ambient air quality data, that the 
PM10 NAAQS have been attained in the Steamboat Springs area.
ii. State Implementation Plan Approval
    Those States containing initial moderate PM10 
nonattainment areas were required by the 1990 amendments to the CAA to 
submit a SIP by November 15, 1991 which demonstrated attainment of the 
PM10 NAAQS by December 31, 1994. To approve a redesignation 
request, the SIP for the area must be fully approved under section 
110(k) and must satisfy all requirements that apply to that area. The 
Lamar area was among the initial moderate PM10 nonattainment 
areas. EPA fully approved the PM10 SIP for Lamar on June 9, 
1994 (59 FR 29732). The Steamboat Springs area was designated 
nonattainment for PM10 on December 21, 1993 (58 FR 67334). 
EPA fully approved the PM10 SIP for Steamboat Springs on 
December 31, 1997 (62 FR 68188). These PM10 SIPs for Lamar 
and Steamboat Springs were approved as meeting the moderate 
PM10 nonattainment plan requirements.
iii. Improvement in Air Quality Due to Permanent and Enforceable 
Measures
    Section 107(d)(3(E)(iii) of the CAA provides that for an area to be 
redesignated to attainment, the Administrator must determine that the 
improvement in air quality is due to emission reductions which are 
permanent and enforceable. The Lamar PM10 nonattainment area 
is a unique case in which no area-specific PM10 control 
measures were needed to bring the area into attainment (or to ensure 
continued attainment). The primary source of PM10 emissions 
in Lamar is blowing fugitive dust resulting from high wind events. 
Colorado's July 31, 2002 submittal did cite several State-wide 
regulations as being responsible for the improvement in air quality in 
Lamar as well as control measures implemented under the Lamar Natural 
Events Action Plan (NEAP) addressing PM10 emissions as a 
result of blowing fugitive dust. EPA's Natural Events Policy (NEP) and 
the local measures Lamar implemented under the area's NEAP are 
discussed in more detail below. The State-wide regulations cited are 
the following: ``Emission Control Regulation for Particulates, Smoke, 
Carbon Monoxide and Sulfur Oxides'' (Regulation No. 1), ``Air Pollution 
Emission Notices, Construction Permits and Fees, Operating Permits and 
Including the Prevention of Significant Deterioration'' (Regulation No. 
3), ``New Woodstoves and Woodburning Appliance Use During High 
Pollution Days'' (Regulation No. 4), ``Standards of Performance for New 
Stationary Sources'' (Regulation No. 6), and the ``Common Provisions 
Regulation.''
    Recognizing that certain uncontrollable natural events, such as 
high winds, and wildfires, can have on the NAAQS, the EPA issued a 
Natural Events Policy (NEP) on May 30, 1996. The NEP sets forth 
procedures through the development of a Natural Events Action Plan 
(NEAP) for protecting public health in areas where the PM10 
standard may be violated due to these uncontrollable natural events. 
One of the requirements of the NEP is that Best Available Control 
Measures (BACM) must be implemented at contributing anthropogenic 
sources of dust in order for PM10 exceedances to be treated 
as due to uncontrollable natural events. BACM for PM10 are 
defined by EPA as techniques that achieve the maximum degree of 
emission reduction from a source as determined on a case-by-case basis 
considering technological and economic feasibility (59 FR 41998). An 
additional requirement of the NEP is that in order for an area to 
request redesignation of a nonattainment to attainment, the area must 
demonstrate that the area would be meeting the NAAQS but for the 
emissions caused by natural events.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ This policy applies to emissions caused by natural events 
that have occurred since January 1, 1994.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Over the past eight years, the monitors located at the Municipal 
Power Plant and Municipal Building in Lamar, Colorado experienced 
exceedances of the 24-hour NAAQS for PM10. Each of these 
exceedances was associated with unusually high winds and blowing dust 
in the Lamar area. In response to Lamar's exceedances of the 
PM10 NAAQS, the Colorado Department of Public Health and 
Environment's Air Pollution Control Division, in conjunction with the 
City of Lamar's Public Works Department, Parks and Recreation, and 
Prowers County Commissioners, the Natural Resources Conservation 
Services, the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad, and other agencies 
developed a NEAP. The NEAP was presented to EPA in 1998. EPA 
subsequently approved the NEAP for

[[Page 47370]]

Lamar as meeting all the requirements of the 1996 NEP. Since 1998, it 
is this plan that has assisted the area in addressing blowing dust due 
to uncontrollable winds. In the Lamar area the BACM that were 
implemented as part of the 1998 NEAP to address high wind events 
include wind breaks, controls at the East Lamar Landfill, vegetative 
cover at Escondido Park, soil stabilization along rail lines, 
installation of perennial grass over croplands, and the implementation 
of soil erosion conservation practices. In addition, the 1996 NEP 
requires that the State provide a five-year review of the NEAP, which 
was submitted to EPA in 2003 and subsequently approved. The five-year 
review of the NEAP for Lamar includes commitments for additional BACM 
control measures, including irrigation of tree groves established for 
wind breaks, additional litter control at the East Lamar Landfill, 
stabilization of the entrance road to Escondido Park, and the purchase 
and use of a regenerative air street sweeper. In addition to the BACM 
control measures, public education and notification procedures have 
been implemented as part of the NEAP for Lamar. Based on our approval 
of the 1998 Lamar NEAP and our subsequent approval of the 2003 Lamar 
NEAP's five-year review, EPA has concluded that, but for the emissions 
caused by natural events, the Lamar area has demonstrated attainment of 
the PM10 NAAQS.
    In addition to the local and State control measures discussed 
above, the Federal Motor Vehicle Emission Control Program has helped 
reduce PM10 emissions in Lamar as older, higher emitting 
diesel vehicles are replaced with newer vehicles that meet tighter 
emission standards. Overall, despite growth in the Lamar nonattainment 
area (e.g., in population and vehicle miles traveled), attainment of 
the PM10 NAAQS has been demonstrated. We have evaluated the 
various control measures, in addition to the 2000 attainment year 
emission inventory and the projected emissions described below, and 
have concluded that the continued attainment of the PM10 
NAAQS in the Lamar area has resulted from emission reductions that are 
permanent and enforceable.
    The primary sources of PM10 emissions in the Steamboat 
Springs area are re-entrained road dust (from highways, paved roads, 
chip sealed roads, and unpaved roads) and woodburning. The permanent 
and enforceable control measures that brought the Steamboat Springs 
PM10 nonattainment area into attainment and were approved by 
EPA into Colorado's SIP in 1997 are described in detail below.
    The City of Steamboat Springs and Routt County adopted local 
ordinance and resolutions that limit the number and types of 
woodburning devices in new construction in the Steamboat Springs area. 
Installation of new solid fuel burning devices is limited to one 
approved device for any building. The Steamboat Springs area adopted 
these measures in the late 1980s and early 1990s and the measures were 
included in State regulation in 1993 (Section VIII.E. of the ``State 
Implementation Plan--Specific Regulations for Nonattainment--
Attainment/Maintenance Areas (Local Areas)''). The rule was approved by 
EPA on December 31, 1997 (62 FR 68188).
    The Steamboat Springs area adopted two street sanding control 
strategies for the nonattainment area. The first street sanding control 
strategy requires that any user that applies street sanding materials 
in the Steamboat Springs area must use materials containing less than 
two percent fines, except on U.S. Highway 40 from the junction of U.S. 
Highway 131 towards Rabbit Ears Pass. This strategy was included in 
State regulations in 1996 (Section VIII.B. of the ``State 
Implementation Plan--Specific Regulations for Nonattainment--
Attainment/Maintenance Areas (Local Areas)). The second street sanding 
control strategy requires that the Colorado Department of 
Transportation (CDOT) reduce the amount of sand applied on U.S. 
Highways 40 and 131 in the Steamboat Springs area by 10 percent. This 
strategy was included in State regulation in 1996 (Section VIII.C. of 
the ``State Implementation Plan--Specific Regulations for 
Nonattainment--Attainment/Maintenance Areas (Local Areas)). Both the 
street sanding controls were approved by EPA on December 31, 1997 (62 
FR 68188).
    In addition, the Steamboat Springs area adopted street sweeping 
requirements for a defined section of Lincoln Avenue (Highway 40 in 
town). Street cleaning using vacuum sweepers or any other sweepers with 
equal efficiency must be performed four times within four days of the 
roadways becoming free and clear of snow and ice following each sanding 
deployment use. This strategy was included in State regulations in 1996 
(Section VIII.D. of the ``State Implementation Plan--Specific 
Regulations for Nonattainment--Attainment/Maintenance Areas (Local 
Areas)). The rule was approved by EPA on December 31, 1997 (62 FR 
68188).
    In addition to the local control measures that have been adopted in 
the Steamboat Springs area, Colorado's July 31, 2002 submittal did cite 
several Statewide regulations that limit emissions from any new source 
that may locate in the Steamboat Springs area. These rules are: ``Air 
Pollution Emission Notices, Construction Permits and Fees, Operating 
Permits and Including the Prevention of Significant Deterioration'' 
(Regulation No. 3), ``Standards of Performance for New Stationary 
Sources'' (Regulation No. 6), and the ``Common Provisions Regulation.''
    In addition to these State and Local control measures, the Federal 
Motor Vehicle Emission Control Program has helped reduce 
PM10 emissions in Steamboat Springs as older, higher 
emitting diesel vehicles are replaced with newer vehicles that meet 
tighter emission standards. Overall, despite growth in the Steamboat 
Springs nonattainment area (e.g., in population and vehicle miles 
traveled), attainment of the PM10 NAAQS has been 
demonstrated. We have evaluated the various control measures, in 
addition to the 1999 attainment year emission inventory and the 
projected emissions described below, and have concluded that the 
continued attainment of the PM10 NAAQS in the Steamboat 
Springs area has resulted from emission reductions that are permanent 
and enforceable.
iv. Fully Approved Maintenance Plan Under Section 175A of the CAA
    Section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA requires that, for a nonattainment 
area to be redesignated to attainment, we must fully approve a 
maintenance plan which meets the requirements of section 175A of the 
CAA. The plan must demonstrate continued attainment of the relevant 
NAAQS in the area for at least 10 years after our approval of the 
redesignation. Eight years after our approval of a redesignation, 
Colorado must submit a revised maintenance plan demonstrating 
attainment for the 10 years following the initial 10 year period. The 
maintenance plan must also contain a contingency plan to ensure prompt 
correction of any violation of the NAAQS. (See sections 175A(b) and 
(d).) Our September 4, 1992 guidance outlines five core elements that 
are necessary to ensure maintenance of the relevant NAAQS in an area 
seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment. Those elements, 
as well as guidelines for subsequent maintenance plan revisions, are as 
follows:

[[Page 47371]]

a. Attainment Inventory
    The maintenance plan should include an attainment emission 
inventory to identify the level of emissions in the area which is 
sufficient to attain the NAAQS. An emission inventory for Lamar was 
developed for the attainment year 2000 as well as the projection 
inventory for the year 2015. The emission inventory incorporates 
emission estimates for woodburning (fireplaces and wood stoves), 
restaurant and mobile exhaust emissions, highway, arterial and local 
re-entrained road dust emissions, and gravel road emissions. Summary 
emission figures from the 2000 attainment year inventory and the 2015 
projected inventory for the Lamar area are provided in Tables 1, 2, and 
3 below.

  Table 1.--2000 and 2015 PM10 Total Emission Inventory for Road Dust Activity in Pounds per Day for Lamar City
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                  Paved roads
                                                                Highway   --------------------------   Unpaved
                                                                             Arterial      Local        roads
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2000........................................................         2530          866         3195           24
2015........................................................         2792          993         3665          28
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\*\ Highway re-entrained road dust emissions for the year 2000 were developed using the latest traffic counts
  from Colorado Deparment of Transportation (CDOT) as well as revised emissions factors that incorporate the
  latest EPA methods for determining paved road emission and measured silt loadings from the area.
\**\ Arterial and local street re-entrained emissions for 2000 were determined using VMT information contained
  in the 1993 SIP element (grown to 2000 by appropriate growth rates) as well as the latest EPA methods for
  determining paved road emissions and measured silt loadings form the area.
\***\ Gravel road emissions were developed using VMT information contained in the 1993 SIP element (grown to
  2000 by appropriate growth rates) as well as EPA methods for determining gravel road emissions.


   Table 2.--2000 and 2015 PM10 Total Emission Inventory for Vehicle Exhaust, Fireplaces, Woodstoves and Point
                                    Sources in Pounds per Day for Lamar City
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Vehicle                                 Point
                                                                exhaust     Fireplace    Woodstoves    sources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2000........................................................           56          208          269         1271
2015........................................................           56          228          294        1281
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\*\ The woodburning emission estimates and mobile exhaust emissions for the year 1997 were taken from the 1993
  SIP element that was approved by EPA on June 9, 1994 (59 FR 29732) and rolled forward to 2000. VMT was also
  adjusted using actual CDOT traffic counts.


  Table 3.--2000 and 2015 PM10 Total Emission Inventory for Tilling, Wind Erosion/Feedlot, Grain Elevators, and
                                 Storage Piles in Pounds per Day for Lamar City
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                               Wind
                                                                Tilling      erosion/      Grain       Storage
                                                                             feedlot     elevators      piles
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2000........................................................           28         4231            2           22
2015........................................................           28         4231            2          22
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\*\ The tilling, wind erosion, and the area's feedlot emissions were rolled forward from 2000 inventory levels
  as well as the storage piles emission inventory. The 2000 emissions are the same as the 1997 emissions
  documented in the 1994 Lamar SIP.

    More detailed descriptions of the 2000 attainment year inventory 
and the 2015 projected inventory for the Lamar area are documented in 
the maintenance plan in Chapter 3, section B and in the Colorado 
technical support documentation. Colorado's submittal contains detailed 
emission inventory information that was prepared in accordance with EPA 
emission inventory guidance.\2\ Following our review, we have 
determined that Colorado prepared an adequate attainment inventory for 
the Lamar area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ EPA's current guidance on the preparation of PM10 
emission inventories includes, ``PM10 Emission Inventory 
Requirements,'' September 1994, ``Emission Inventory Improvement 
Program Technical Report Series, Volumes I-VII,'' July 1997 and 
September 1999, ``Revised 1999 National Emission Inventory 
Preparation Plan,'' February 2001.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    An emission inventory for Steamboat Springs was developed for the 
attainment year 1999 as well as the projection inventory for the 2005 
and 2010 interim years and the 2015 maintenance year. The emission 
inventory incorporates the emission estimates for aircrafts, 
restaurants, stationary sources, woodburning, mobile exhaust, and re-
entrained road dust emissions from paved and unpaved roads that are 
contained in the nonattainment area SIP element that was approved by 
EPA on December 31, 1997 (62 FR 68188). Aircraft emissions were 
determined by using EPA and Colorado's Air Pollution Control Division 
(APCD) developed emission factors and activity data provided by the 
City of Steamboat Springs. Restaurant emissions were developed using 
emission factors and survey data of activity in the Steamboat Springs 
area. Woodburning emissions were determined by using EPA and APCD 
developed emission factors and survey data of woodburning activity and 
practices in the Steamboat Springs area. Re-entrained dust from paved 
and unpaved roads were developed using APCD and CDOT vehicle miles 
traveled data and emission factors that were calculated using the EPA-
approved formula, local silt loading data, and the application of 
credits from street sweeping and street sand reduction control 
measures. Mobil exhaust was determined using EPA's PART5 model. 
Stationary source emission in the Steamboat Springs area were

[[Page 47372]]

determined by calculating allowable emissions from three facilities in 
the area in existence in the mid-1990s. The Craig and Hayden power 
plants were modeled at allowable emissions for all years however these 
emissions were not included in the emission inventories because they 
are not located within the Steamboat Springs nonattainment--attainment/
maintenance area and modeling domain. Summary emission figures from the 
1999 attainment year inventory, the 2005 and 2010 interim years, and 
the 2015 projected inventory for the Steamboat Springs area are 
provided in Table 1 below.

    Table 1.--1999, 2005, 2010 and 2015 PM10 Total Emission Inventory in Pounds per Day for Steamboat Springs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    PM10 emissions  (lbs./day)
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       1999            2005            2010            2015
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aircraft........................................              24              27              30              34
Restaurant Grills...............................              99             114             127             143
Vehicle Exhaust.................................              53              52              56              63
Paved Roads.....................................            9122           10059           11271           12630
Unpaved Roads...................................            7519            7233            8104            9080
Stationary Sources..............................             584             242             271             304
Woodburning.....................................            1057            1216            1353            1522
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    More detailed descriptions of the 1999 attainment year inventory, 
the 2005 and 2010 interim years, and the 2015 projected inventory for 
the Steamboat Springs area are documented in the maintenance plan in 
Chapter 3, section B and in the Colorado technical support 
documentation. Colorado's submittal contains detailed emission 
inventory information that was prepared in accordance with EPA emission 
inventory guidance.\3\ Following our review, we have determined that 
Colorado prepared an adequate attainment inventory for the Steamboat 
Springs area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ EPA's current guidance on the preparation of PM10 
emission inventories includes, ``PM10 Emission Inventory 
Requirements,'' September 1994, ``Emission Inventory Improvement 
Program Technical Report Series, Volumes I-VII,'' July 1997 and 
September 1999, ``Revised 1999 National Emission Inventory 
Preparation Plan,'' February 2001.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

b. Maintenance Demonstration
    A state may generally demonstrate maintenance of the NAAQS by 
either showing that future emissions of a pollutant or its precursors 
will not exceed the level of the attainment inventory, or by modeling 
to show that the future mix of sources and emission rates will not 
cause a violation of the NAAQS. Colorado chose the chemical mass 
balance (CMB) modeling approach for the Lamar area and the dispersion 
modeling approach for the Steamboat Springs area.
    The maintenance demonstration for the Lamar area uses the CMB roll-
forward methodology, which is the same level of modeling used in the 
original attainment demonstration for the moderate PM10 SIP 
for this area. The CMB receptor model data are used to identify the 
sources of emissions that influence PM10 concentrations in 
the area. Colorado used the attainment inventory to further refine the 
CMB source identification and then apportion the design day 
concentration. The design day concentration was determined using EPA's 
``Table look-up'' method. Based on the number of samples collected 
during a three year period from 1998--2000 (2026 samples total), the 
third highest concentration measured during that period is used as the 
design value. For the Lamar area, the design value is 137 [mu]g/
m3. Colorado prepared a maintenance inventory for the year 
2015 and rolled forward the design day concentration based on the 
changes that occurred in the emission inventory from the attainment 
year to the maintenance year. Based on this process, the Lamar 2015 
maintenance concentration is 145.4 [mu]g/m3. Since this 2015 
projection for Lamar is below the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS of 150 
[mu]g/m3, maintenance is demonstrated.
    Although EPA would normally insist on some interim year projections 
between the attainment year and 2015, we have no reason to believe that 
total emissions for the Lamar area will be greater than the 2015 
projections in any of the interim years. Colorado applied simple, 
environmentally conservative, growth rates to all source categories. 
Thus, total emissions in all years before 2015 in the Lamar area should 
be less than 2015 total emissions and no interim year projections are 
required.
    Since no violation of the PM10 annual NAAQS have ever 
occurred in the Lamar area and since the maintenance demonstration 
clearly shows maintenance of the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS in this 
area through the year 2015, it is reasonable and adequate to assume 
that protection of the 24-hour standard will be sufficient to protect 
the annual standard as well. Thus, EPA believes Colorado has adequately 
demonstrated that the Lamar area will maintain the PM10 
NAAQS for at least the next ten years. Detailed information regarding 
the CMB modeling results and source apportionment can be found in 
Chapter 3, section C of the Lamar maintenance plan and in the technical 
support document.
    The maintenance demonstration for the Steamboat Springs area relied 
on the dispersion modeling methodology, which is the same level of 
modeling used in the original attainment demonstration for the moderate 
PM10 SIP for this area. Maintenance is demonstrated when the 
highest modeled values at each receptor on the modeling grid are below 
the 150 [mu]g/m3. The emission inventories for 2005, 2010, 
and 2015 were input into the dispersion model to obtain 2005, 2010, and 
2015 projected PM10 concentrations. The dispersion modeling 
for the Steamboat Springs PM10 maintenance area demonstrates 
that in 2005 the highest concentration is 121 [mu]g/m3, in 
2010 the highest concentration is 132 [mu]g/m3, and in 2015 
the highest concentration is 146 [mu]g/m3 for the 24-hour 
PM10 NAAQS.
    Since no exceedances of the PM10 annual NAAQS have ever 
occurred in the Steamboat Springs area and since the maintenance 
demonstration clearly shows maintenance of the 24-hour PM10 
NAAQS in this area through the year 2015, it is reasonable and adequate 
to assume that protection of the 24-hour standard will be sufficient to 
protect the annual standard as well. Thus, EPA believes Colorado has 
adequately demonstrated that the Steamboat

[[Page 47373]]

Springs area will maintain the PM10 NAAQS for at least the 
next ten years. Detailed information regarding the dispersion modeling 
results and source apportionment can be found in Chapter 3, section C 
of the Steamboat Springs maintenance plan and in the technical support 
document.
c. Monitoring Network
    Once a nonattainment area has been redesignated to attainment, the 
State must continue to operate an appropriate air quality monitoring 
network, in accordance with 40 CFR part 58, to verify the attainment 
status of the area. The maintenance plan should contain provisions for 
continued operation of air quality monitors that will provide such 
verification. Colorado operates two PM10 monitoring sites in 
the Lamar area and two in the Steamboat Springs area. We approve these 
sites annually, and any future change would require discussion with, 
and approval from, us. In their July 31, 2002 submittal, Colorado 
committed to continue to operate these PM10 monitoring 
stations in Lamar and Steamboat Springs, in accordance with 40 CFR part 
58.
d. Verification of Continued Attainment
    A state's maintenance plan submittal should indicate how it will 
track the progress of the maintenance plan. This is necessary due to 
the fact that the emission projections made for the maintenance 
demonstration depend on assumptions of point and area source growth. 
Colorado commits to operating both the Lamar and Steamboat Springs 
PM10 monitoring network and analyze the PM10 
concentrations in accordance with 40 CFR part 58 to verify continued 
maintenance of the PM10 NAAQS. In addition, Colorado commits 
to track the progress of both the Lamar and Steamboat Springs 
maintenance plans through a periodic review (every three years) of the 
assumptions made in the emissions inventories to verify continued 
maintenance of the PE10 NAAQS in both areas. EPA relies on 
these commitments in approving the Lamar and Steamboat Springs 
maintenance plans.
e. Contingency Plan
    Section 175A(d) of the CAA requires that a maintenance plan also 
include contingency provisions, as necessary, to promptly correct any 
violation of the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation of the area. For 
the purposes of section 175A, a state is not required to have fully 
adopted contingency measures that will take effect without further 
action by the State in order for the maintenance plan to be approved. 
However, the contingency plan is an enforceable part of the SIP and 
should ensure that contingency measures are adopted expeditiously when 
a violation of the NAAQS has occurred in a redesignated area. The plan 
should clearly identify the measures to be adopted, a schedule and 
procedure for adoption and implementation, and a specific time limit 
for action by the State. The State should also identify the specific 
indicators, or triggers, which will be used to determine when the 
contingency plan will be implemented.
    Chapter 3, section H, of both the Lamar and Steamboat Springs 
maintenance plan contains the area's PM10 contingency plan. 
Exceedances trigger one level of response and violations trigger 
another. If there's an exceedance, the Air Pollution Control Division 
(APCD) and the local government staff will develop appropriate 
contingency measures intended to prevent or correct a violation of the 
PM10 standard for the PM10 maintenance area. APCD 
and local government staff will consider relevant information, 
including information about historical exceedances, meteorological 
data, the most recent estimates of growth and emissions, and whether 
the exceedance might be attributed to an exceptional event. The Lamar 
and Steamboat Springs maintenance plans indicate that the State will 
generally notify EPA and local governments in the PM10 
maintenance area within 30 days of the exceedance, but no later than 45 
days. The process for exceedances will be completed within six months 
of the exceedance notification.
    If a violation of the PM10 NAAQS has occurred, a public 
hearing process at the State and local level will begin. If the 
Colorado Air Quality Control Commission (AQCC) agrees that the 
implementation of local measures will prevent further exceedances or 
violations, the AQCC may endorse or approve of the local measures 
without adopting State requirements. If, however, the AQCC finds 
locally adopted contingency measures to be inadequate, the AQCC will 
adopt State enforceable measures as deemed necessary to prevent 
additional exceedances or violations. Contingency measures will be 
adopted and fully implemented within one year of the PM10 
NAAQS violation. Any State-enforceable measures will become part of the 
next revised maintenance plan, submitted to us for approval.
    The Lamar PM10 maintenance plan specifies the following 
as potential contingency measures for the Lamar area: street sweeping 
requirements; road paving requirements; street sand specifications; 
woodburning restrictions; use of alternative de-icers; re-establishing 
nonattainment new source review permitting requirements for stationary 
sources; \4\ controls at existing stationary sources; transportation 
control measures designed to reduce vehicle miles traveled; or other 
emission control measures as deemed appropriate, considering various 
factors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The maintenance plan refers to ``Re-establishing new source 
review permitting requirement for stationary sources.'' Given that 
PSD permitting requirements will apply to the area after the 
effective date of this action, we interpret the maintenance plan's 
reference to mean ``nonattainment new source review.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Steamboat Springs PM10 maintenance plan specifies 
the following as potential contingency measures for the Steamboat 
Springs area: reinstating the 10 percent street sand reduction 
requirement for State highways; increasing the Lincoln Avenue street 
sweeping frequency from two to four times after each sanding event; 
increased street sweeping requirements; road paving requirements; more 
stringent street sand specifications; voluntary or mandatory 
woodburning curtailment; bans on all woodburning; expanded, mandatory 
use of alternative de-icers; re-establishing nonattainment new source 
review permitting requirements for stationary sources; \3\ 
transportation control measures designed to reduce vehicle miles 
traveled; or other emission control measures as deemed appropriate, 
considering various factors.
f. Subsequent Maintenance Plan Revisions
    In accordance with section 175A(b) of the CAA, the State of 
Colorado is required to submit a revision to the maintenance plan eight 
years after the redesignation of the Lamar and Steamboat Springs areas 
to attainment for PM10. This revision is to provide for 
maintenance of the NAAQS for an additional ten years following the 
first ten year period. Colorado committed, in the Lamar and Steamboat 
Springs redesignation requests, to submit a revised maintenance plan, 
for each area, to EPA eight years after the approval of the 
redesignation request and maintenance plan.
v. Meeting Applicable Requirements of Section 110 and Part D of the CAA
    In order for an area to be redesignated to attainment, section 
107(d)(3)(E) requires that it must have met all applicable requirements 
of section 110 and part D of the CAA. We interpret this

[[Page 47374]]

to mean that, for a redesignation request to be approved, the State 
must have met all requirements that applied to the subject area prior 
to, or at the time of, submitting a complete redesignation request. In 
our evaluation of a redesignation request, we don't need to consider 
other requirements of the CAA that became due after the date of the 
submission of a complete redesignation request.
a. Section 110 Requirements
    Section 110(a)(2) contains general requirements for nonattainment 
plans. These requirements were met for Lamar with Colorado's May 7, 
1993 submittal for the Lamar PM10 nonattainment area. EPA 
fully approved the Lamar PM10 SIP on June 9, 1994 (59 FR 
29732). The section 110(a)(2) requirements were met for Steamboat 
Springs with Colorado's September 16, 1997 submittal for the Steamboat 
Springs PM10 nonattainment area. EPA fully approved the 
Steamboat Springs PM10 SIP on December 31, 1997 (62 FR 
68188).
b. Part D Requirements
    Before a PM10 nonattainment area may be redesignated to 
attainment, the State must have fulfilled the applicable requirements 
of part D. Subpart 1 of part D establishes the general requirements 
applicable to all nonattainment areas, subpart 4 of part D establishes 
specific requirements applicable to PM10 nonattainment 
areas.
    The requirements of sections 172(c) and 189(a) regarding attainment 
of the PM10 NAAQS, and the requirements of section 172(c) 
regarding reasonable further progress, imposition of Reasonably 
Available Control Measures (RACM), the adoption of contingency 
measures, and the submission of an emission inventory, have been 
satisfied through our June 9, 1994 (59 FR 29732) approval of the Lamar 
PM10 SIP and our December 31, 1997 (62 FR 68188) approval of 
the Steamboat Springs PM10 SIP.
    Although EPA's regulations (see 40 CFR 51.396) require that states 
adopt transportation conformity provisions in their SIPs for areas 
designated nonattainment or subject to an EPA-approved maintenance 
plan, we have decided that a transportation conformity SIP is not an 
applicable requirement for purposes of evaluating a redesignation 
request under section 107(d) of the CAA. This decision is reflected in 
EPA's 1996 approval of the Boston carbon monoxide redesignation. (See 
61 FR 2918, January 30, 1996.)
    We approved the requirements of the part D new source review (NSR) 
permit program for the Lamar moderate PM10 nonattainment 
area on August 18, 1994 (59 FR 42500) and for the Steamboat Springs 
moderate PM10 nonattainment area on December 31, 1997 (62 FR 
68188). Colorado's nonattainment area NSR permitting regulations were 
fully approved on September 19, 1994 (59 FR 47807). Once the Lamar and 
Steamboat Springs areas are redesignated to attainment, the prevention 
of significant deterioration (PSD) requirements of part C of the CAA 
will apply. Colorado's PSD regulations, which we approved as meeting 
all applicable Federal requirements, apply to any area designated as 
unclassifiable or attainment and, thus, will become fully effective in 
the Lamar and Steamboat Springs area upon redesignation of the area to 
attainment.

C. Have the Transportation Conformity Requirements Been Met?

    Transportation conformity is required by section 176(c) of the CAA. 
Our conformity rule requires that transportation plans, programs and 
projects conform to SIPs and that transportation activities will not 
produce new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or 
delay timely attainment of the NAAQS. On March 2, 1999, the United 
States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued a 
decision in Environmental Defense Fund v. the Environmental Protection 
Agency, No. 97-1637, that we must make an affirmative determination 
that the submitted motor vehicle emission budgets contained in State 
Implementation Plans (SIPs) are adequate before they are used to 
determine the conformity of Transportation Plans or Transportation 
Improvement Programs. In response to the court decision, we make any 
submitted SIP revision containing an emission budget available for 
public comment and respond to these comments before announcing our 
adequacy determination. The criteria and process by which we determine 
whether a SIP's motor vehicle emission budgets are adequate for 
conformity purposes are outlined in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) and in the 
guidance ``Conformity Guidance on Implementation of March 2, 1999 
Conformity Court Decision,'' dated May 14, 1999.
    In the Lamar maintenance plan, Colorado established a new mobile 
source emissions budget of 7,534 lbs./day for the year 2015 and beyond. 
In the Steamboat Springs maintenance plan, Colorado established a new 
mobile source emissions budget of 21,773 lbs./day for the year 2015 and 
beyond. The new mobile source emissions budgets for both Lamar and 
Steamboat Springs are the total of the 2015 mobile source 
PM10 emissions for each area and includes emissions from 
vehicle exhaust, highways, paved arterial and local roads, and gravel 
roads. EPA's approval of 7,534 lbs./day for Lamar and 21,773 lbs./day 
for Steamboat Springs as the budget for those areas means that these 
values must be used for conformity determinations for 2015 and beyond.
    EPA sent a letter to the Colorado Air Pollution Control Division 
(APCD) on September 25, 2002 stating that the motor vehicle emission 
budgets that were submitted with the Lamar and Steamboat Springs 
PM10 maintenance plan is adequate. This finding has also 
been announced on EPA's conformity Web site: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/transp/conform/adequacy.htm. We documented our adequacy determination 
for Lamar and Steamboat Springs in the Federal Register on October 28, 
2002 (67 FR 65789). The budgets took effect on November 12, 2002 (15 
days after our announcement in the Federal Register).

D. Did Colorado Follow the Proper Procedures for Adopting This Action?

    The CAA requires States to observe certain procedural requirements 
in developing implementation plans and plan revisions for submission. 
Section 110(a)(2) of the CAA provides that each implementation plan 
submitted by a State must be adopted after reasonable notice and public 
hearing. Section 110(l) of the CAA similarly provides that each 
revision to an implementation plan submitted by a State under the CAA 
must be adopted by such State after reasonable notice and public 
hearing.
    Colorado held a public hearing for the proposed rule changes on 
November 15, 2001. The rulemaking was adopted by the Air Quality 
Control Commission (AQCC) directly after the November 15, 2001 hearing 
and was formally submitted to EPA by the Governor on July 31, 2002. We 
have evaluated the Governor's submittal and have determined that 
Colorado met the requirements for reasonable notice and public hearing 
under section 110(a)(2) of the CAA.

IV. Background

    To implement our 1987 revisions to the particulate matter NAAQS, on 
August 7, 1987 (52 FR 29383), we categorized areas of the nation into 
three groups based on the likelihood that protection of the 
PM10 NAAQS would require revisions of the existing SIP. We

[[Page 47375]]

identified Lamar as PM10 ``Group I'' area of concern, i.e., 
areas with a strong likelihood of violating the PM10 NAAQS 
and requiring a substantial SIP revision and the Steamboat Springs area 
as a ``Group II'' area of concern, i.e., areas where attainment of the 
NAAQS is uncertain and the SIP may require only slight adjustment.
    The Lamar area was among several Group I PM10 areas, all 
of which were designated and classified as moderate PM10 
nonattainment areas by operation of law upon enactment of the Clean Air 
Act Amendments of 1990 (November 15, 1990). See 56 FR 56694 at 56705-
56706 (November 6, 1991). By November 15, 1991, States containing 
initial moderate PM10 nonattainment areas were required to 
submit most elements of their PM10 SIPs. (See sections 
172(c), 188, and 189 of the CAA.) Some provisions, such as 
PM10 contingency measures required by section 172(c)(9) of 
the CAA and nonattainment new source review (NSR) provisions, were due 
at later dates. In order for a nonattainment area to be redesignated to 
attainment, the above mentioned conditions in section 107(d)(3)(E) of 
the CAA must be met. EPA fully approved the PM10 SIP for 
Lamar on June 9, 1994 (59 FR 29732).
    Pursuant to sections 107(d)(4)(B) and 188(a) of the Act, areas 
previously identified as Group I (55 FR 45799, October 31, 1990) and 
other areas which had monitored violations of the PM10 NAAQS 
prior to January 1, 1989 were, by operation of law upon enactment of 
the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (Public Law 101-549, 104 Stat. 2399), 
designated nonattainment and classified as moderate for 
PM10. Formal codification in 40 CFR part 81 of those areas 
was announced in a Federal Register notice dated November 6, 1991 (56 
FR 56694) (see also 57 FR 56762, November 30, 1992). All other areas of 
the country were designated unclassifiable for PM10 by 
operation of law upon enactment of the 1990 Amendments (see section 
107(d)(4)(B)(iii) of the Act). EPA redesignated and classified the 
Steamboat Springs area as a PM10 moderate nonattainment area 
on December 21, 1993 (58 FR 67334) and fully approved the 
PM10 SIP for Steamboat Springs on December 31, 1997 (62 FR 
68188).
    EPA promulgated new standards for PM10 on September 18, 
1997. Areas were to be designated under the new PM10 
standard by July 2000. On May 14, 1999, the United States Court of 
Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in American Trucking Associations, Inc. et 
al., v. United States Environmental Protection Agency vacated the 1997 
PM10 standard. Because of the Court ruling, we are 
continuing to implement the pre-existing PM10 standard, and 
are therefore approving redesignations to qualified PM10 
nonattainment areas. On July 31, 2002 the Governor of Colorado 
submitted a request to redesignate the Lamar and Steamboat Springs 
moderate PM10 nonattainment areas to attainment (for the 
1987 PM10 NAAQS) and submitted maintenance plans for the 
areas.

V. Consideration of CAA Section 110(l)

    Section 110(l) of the CAA states that a SIP revision cannot be 
approved if the revision would interfere with any applicable 
requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further progress 
towards attainment of a NAAQS or any other applicable requirement of 
the CAA. As stated above, the Lamar and Steamboat Springs area has 
shown continuous attainment of the PM10 NAAQS and has met 
the applicable Federal requirements for redesignation to attainment. 
The maintenance plan and associated SIP revisions will not interfere 
with attainment, reasonable further progress, or any other applicable 
requirement of the CAA.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Review

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not 
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this 
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, 
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action 
merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes 
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. 
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because 
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does 
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by 
state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4).
    This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will 
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on 
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or 
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism 
implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the 
States, on the relationship between the national government and the 
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the 
various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 
FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a state rule 
implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or 
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean 
Air Act. This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically 
significant.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In 
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the 
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be 
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP 
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise 
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements 
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not 
impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other 
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).

[[Page 47376]]

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court 
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by October 4, 2004. Filing a 
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule 
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial 
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial 
review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such 
rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings 
to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, Reporting 
and recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Part 81

    Air pollution control.

    Dated: June 28, 2004.
Robert E. Roberts,
Regional Administrator, Region 8.


0
40 CFR parts 52 and 81, chapter I, title 40 are amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart G--Colorado

0
2. Section 52.320 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(101) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.320  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (101) On July 31, 2002, the State of Colorado submitted maintenance 
plans for the Lamar and Steamboat Springs PM10 nonattainment 
areas and requested that these areas be redesignated to attainment for 
the PM10 National Ambient Air Quality Standards. The 
redesignation requests and maintenance plans satisfy all applicable 
requirements of the Clean Air Act.
(i) Incorporation by Reference
    (A) Colorado Air Quality Control Commission, ``State Implementation 
Plan--Specific Regulations for Nonattainment--Attainment/Maintenance 
Areas (Local Elements),'' 5 CCR 1001-20, revisions adopted November 15, 
2001, effective December 30, 2001 as follows: Section IV, which is 
titled ``Lamar Attainment/Maintenance Area,'' and Section VIII., which 
is titled ``Steamboat Springs PM10 Attainment/Maintenance 
Area'' and which supersedes and replaces all prior versions of Section 
IV and VIII.
(ii) Additional Material
    (A) Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, ``Natural 
Events Action Plan for High Wind Events, Lamar, Colorado,'' submitted 
to EPA on February 9, 1998 and subsequently approved by EPA, June 5, 
1998 and Lamar's revised 2003 ``Natural Events Action Plan for High 
Wind Events, Lamar, Colorado,'' submitted to EPA on April 16, 2003 and 
subsequently approved by EPA, February 9, 2004.

0
3. Section 52.332 is amended by adding paragraph (n) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.332  Control strategy: Particulate matter.

* * * * *
    (n) On July 31, 2002, the State of Colorado submitted maintenance 
plans for the Lamar and Steamboat Springs PM10 nonattainment 
areas and requested that these areas be redesignated to attainment for 
the PM10 National Ambient Air Quality Standards. The 
redesignation requests and maintenance plans satisfy all applicable 
requirements of the Clean Air Act.

PART 81--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:

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


0
2. In Sec.  81.306, the table entitled ``Colorado-PM-10'' is amended by 
revising the entries under Prowers County for ``Lamar'' and under Routt 
County (part) for ``Steamboat Springs'' to read as follows:


Sec.  81.306  Colorado.

* * * * *

                                                                     Colorado--PM-10
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Designation                                                 Classification
       Designated Area        --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Date                             Type                         Date                         Type
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                                      * * * * * * *
Prowers County: Lamar........  October 4, 2004...................  Attainment
 
                                                                      * * * * * * *
Routt County (part)--          October 4, 2004...................  Attainment
 Steamboat Springs:.
    On the East--The Routt
     National Forest.
    On the South--The
     southern border of
     sections 19, 10, 21,
     T4N, R84W of the 6th
     P.M. and the southern
     border of sections 23,
     24, T4N, R85W of the 6th
     P.M.
    On the West--Beginning at
     the southwestern corner
     of section 23, T4N, R85W
     of the 6th P.M.

[[Page 47377]]

 
    North along the western
     border of sections 23,
     14, 11, T4N, R85W.
     Thence, along the ridge
     which bisects sections
     35, 36, 25, 24, 13, 14,
     11, 12, 1, T5N, R85W,
     and sections 36, 25, 24,
     T6N, R85W. Thence
     heading northwest along
     the ridge which bisects
     sections 23, 15, 10, 9,
     4, T6N, R85W of 6th P.M.
     Thence, heading
     northeast along the
     ridge which bisects
     sections 33, 34, 35, 36,
     25, T7N, R85W and
     sections 30 and 10 of
     T7N, R84W. Thence, north
     along the N \1/2\ of the
     western edge of section
     19, to the NW corner of
     section 18, T7N, R84W.
    On the North--The
     northern boundary of
     sections 16, 17, 18,
     T7N, R84W of 6th P.M.
 
                                                                      * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 04-17656 Filed 8-4-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P