[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 172 (Tuesday, September 7, 2004)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 54019-54025]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-20134]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[RME Docket Number R08-OAR-2004-CO-0002; FRL-7809-2]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
State of Colorado; Colorado Springs Revised Carbon Monoxide Maintenance 
Plan and Approval of Related Revisions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action approving a State 
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Colorado. 
On April 12, 2004, the Governor of Colorado submitted a revised 
maintenance plan for the Colorado Springs carbon monoxide (CO) 
maintenance area for the CO National Ambient Air Quality Standard 
(NAAQS). The revised maintenance plan contains a revised transportation 
conformity budget for the year 2010 and beyond. In addition, the 
Governor submitted revisions to Colorado's Regulation No. 11 ``Motor 
Vehicle Emissions Inspection Program.'' In this action, EPA is 
approving the Colorado Springs CO revised maintenance plan, revised 
transportation conformity budget, and the revisions to Regulation No. 
11. This action is being taken under section 110 of the Clean Air Act.

DATES: This rule is effective on November 8, 2004, without further 
notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by October 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: Submit your comments, identified by RME Docket Number R08-
OAR-2004-CO-0002, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Agency Web site: http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/index.jsp. 
Regional Materials in EDOCKET (RME), EPA's electronic public docket and 
comment system for regional actions, is EPA's preferred method for 
receiving comments. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting 
comments.
     E-mail: [email protected] and [email protected].
     Fax: (303) 312-6064 (please alert the individual listed in 
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT if you are faxing comments).
     Mail: Richard R. Long, Director, Air and Radiation 
Program, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P-
AR, 999 18th Street, Suite 300, Denver, Colorado 80202-2466.
     Hand Delivery: Richard R. Long, Director, Air and 
Radiation Program, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, 
Mailcode 8P-AR, 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. Special arrangements should 
be made for deliveries of boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to RME Docket Number R08-OAR-
2004-CO-0002. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be 
included in the public docket without change and may be made available 
at http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/index.jsp, including any personal 
information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed 
to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information 
that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through EDOCKET, 
regulations.gov, or e-mail. EPA's Regional Materials in EDOCKET and 
federal regulations.gov Web site are ``anonymous access'' systems, 
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information 
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA, without going through EDOCKET or 
regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and 
included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and 
made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, 
EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information 
in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If 
EPA cannot read your

[[Page 54020]]

comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for 
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic 
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of 
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional 
information about EPA's public docket visit EDOCKET online or see the 
Federal Register of May 31, 2002 (67 FR 38102). For additional 
instructions on submitting comments, go to Section I. General 
Information of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the Regional 
Materials in EDOCKET index at http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/index.jsp. 
Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly 
available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is 
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted 
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicaly available 
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are 
available either electronically in Regional Materials in EDOCKET or in 
hard copy at the Air and Radiation Program, Environmental Protection 
Agency (EPA), Region 8, 999 18th Street, Suite 300, Denver, Colorado 
80202-2466. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the 
individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 
view the hard copy of the docket. You may view the hard copy of the 
docket Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., excluding federal 
holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim Russ, Air and Radiation Program, 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P-AR, 999 
18th Street, Suite 300, Denver, Colorado 80202-2466, phone (303) 312-
6479, and e-mail at: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. General information
II. What is the purpose of this action?
III. What is the State's process to submit these materials to EPA?
IV. EPA's evaluation of the revised maintenance plan
V. EPA's evaluation of the transportation conformity requirements
VI. EPA's evaluation of the regulation No. 11 Revisions
VII. Consideration of section 110(l) of the CAA
VIII. Final Action
IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Definitions

    For the purpose of this document, we are giving meaning to certain 
words or initials as follows:
    (i) The words or initials Act or CAA mean or refer to the Clean Air 
Act, unless the context indicates otherwise.
    (ii) The words EPA, we, us or our mean or refer to the United 
States Environmental Protection Agency.
    (iii) The initials NAAQS mean National Ambient Air Quality 
Standard.
    (iv) The initials SIP mean or refer to State Implementation Plan.
    (v) The word State means the State of Colorado, unless the context 
indicates otherwise.

I. General Information

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

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through 
Regional Materials in EDOCKET, regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark 
the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI 
information in a disk or CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, 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 claimed as CBI. In 
addition to one complete version of the comment that includes 
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 
public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in 
accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments, 
remember to:
     Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other 
identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date and 
page number).
     Follow directions--The agency may ask you to respond to 
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of 
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
     Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives 
and substitute language for your requested changes.
     Describe any assumptions and provide any technical 
information and/or data that you used.
     If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how 
you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be 
reproduced.
     Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and 
suggest alternatives.
     Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the 
use of profanity or personal threats.
     Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period 
deadline identified.

II. What Is the Purpose of This Action?

    In this action, we are approving a revised maintenance plan for the 
Colorado Springs CO attainment/maintenance area that is designed to 
keep the area in attainment for CO through 2015, we're approving a 
revised transportation conformity motor vehicle emissions budget 
(MVEB), and we're approving revisions to Colorado's Regulation No. 11 
entitled ``Motor Vehicle Emissions Inspection Program.'' We approved 
the original CO redesignation to attainment and maintenance plan for 
the Colorado Springs area on August 25, 1999 (see 64 FR 46279). We 
approved the first revision to the maintenance plan on December 22, 
2000 (see 65 FR 80779).
    The revised Colorado Springs CO maintenance plan that we approved 
on December 22, 2000 (hereafter December 22, 2000 maintenance plan) 
utilized the then applicable EPA mobile sources emission factor model, 
MOBILE5a. On January 18, 2002, we issued policy guidance for States and 
local areas to use to develop SIP revisions using the new, updated 
version of the model, MOBILE6. The policy guidance was entitled 
``Policy Guidance on the Use of MOBILE6 for SIP Development and 
Transportation Conformity'' (hereafter, January 18, 2002 MOBILE6 
policy). On November 12, 2002, EPA's Office of Transportation and Air 
Quality (OTAQ) issued an updated version of the MOBILE6 model, 
MOBILE6.2, and notified Federal, State, and Local agency users of the 
model's availability. MOBILE6.2 contained additional updates for air 
toxics and particulate matter. However, the CO emission factors were 
essentially the same as in the MOBILE6 version of the model.
    For the three years analyzed in the December 22, 2000 maintenance 
plan (1990, 2005, and 2010), the State revised and updated the mobile 
sources CO emissions using MOBILE6.2 and also extended the maintenance 
period out to 2015. The State recalculated the CO MVEB for 2010 and 
beyond and also applied a selected amount of the available safety 
margin to the 2010 transportation conformity MVEB. In addition, based 
on the significant CO emissions reductions predicted by the MOBILE6.2 
model, the State's revised maintenance demonstration shows maintenance 
of the CO NAAQS with the elimination, beginning January 1, 2005, of the 
motor vehicle Basic Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) program for El 
Paso County, Colorado, which includes

[[Page 54021]]

the Colorado Springs CO attainment/maintenance area. Thus, the State 
has asked us to approve a revision to Regulation No. 11 that would 
eliminate the Basic I/M program beginning January 1, 2005. We have 
determined that all the revisions noted above are Federally-approvable, 
as described further below.

III. 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 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 
prior to the revision being submitted by a State to us.
    The Colorado Air Quality Control Commission (AQCC) held a public 
hearing for the revised Colorado Springs Carbon Monoxide (CO) 
Maintenance Plan and Regulation No. 11 revisions on December 18, 2003. 
The AQCC adopted the revised maintenance plan and Regulation No. 11 
revisions directly after the hearing. These SIP revisions became State 
effective on March 1, 2004, and were submitted by the Governor to us on 
April 12, 2004.
    We have evaluated the Governor's submittal for the revised 
maintenance plan and Regulation No. 11 revisions and have determined 
that the State met the requirements for reasonable notice and public 
hearing under section 110(a)(2) of the CAA. We reviewed these SIP 
materials for conformance with the completeness criteria in 40 CFR 51, 
Appendix V and determined that the submittals were administratively and 
technically complete. The Governor was advised of our completeness 
determination through a letter from Robert E. Roberts, Regional 
Administrator, dated June 17, 2004.

IV. EPA's Evaluation of the Revised Maintenance Plan

    EPA has reviewed the State's revised maintenance plan for the 
Colorado Springs attainment/maintenance area and believes that approval 
is warranted. The following are the key aspects of this revision along 
with our evaluation of each:
    (a) The State has revised the Colorado Springs maintenance plan and 
has air quality data that support continuous attainment of the CO 
NAAQS.
    As described in 40 CFR 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 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. The December 22, 2000 maintenance plan 
relied on ambient air quality data from 1990 through 1999. In our 
consideration of the revised Colorado Springs CO maintenance plan, 
submitted by the Governor on April 12, 2004, we reviewed ambient air 
quality data from 1990 through 2003 and the first calendar quarter of 
2004. The Colorado Springs area shows continuous attainment of the CO 
NAAQS from 1990 to present. All of the above-referenced air quality 
data are archived in our Aerometric Information and Retrieval System 
(AIRS).
    (b) Using the MOBILE6.2 emission factor model, the State revised 
the attainment year inventory (1990), prior projected years (2005, 
2010) inventories, and provided new projected years (2007 and 2015) 
emission inventories.
    The revised maintenance plan that the Governor submitted on April 
12, 2004, includes comprehensive inventories of CO emissions for the 
Colorado Springs area. These inventories include emissions from 
stationary point sources, area sources, non-road mobile sources, and 
on-road mobile sources. More detailed descriptions of the revised 1990 
attainment year inventory, the revised 2005 and 2010 projected 
inventories, and the new projected 2007 and 2015 inventories, are 
documented in the maintenance plan in section 2 entitled ``Emission 
Inventories and Maintenance Demonstration'', and in the State's 
Technical Support Document (TSD). The State's submittal contains 
emission inventory information that was prepared in accordance with EPA 
guidance. Summary emission figures from the 1990 attainment year and 
the projected years are provided in Table IV.--1 below.

                                                  Table IV.--1
                         [Summary of CO Emissions in Tons Per Day for Colorado Springs]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Source category                          1990       2005       2007       2010       2015
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point....................................................       2.83       3.28       3.34       3.84       4.32
Area.....................................................      47.39      36.26      34.78      34.48      35.42
Non-Road.................................................      28.86      41.10      42.85      45.29      49.43
On-Road..................................................     542.27     417.66     389.68     350.21     320.20
    Total \1\............................................     621.35     498.30     470.65     433.82     409.37
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ We note that the total emissions in our Table IV.--1 vary slightly from those in Table 1 of the State's
  maintenance plan (in the hundredths of a ton significant figure.) This is due to the rounding of calculations
  embedded in the State's Table 1.

    The revised mobile source emissions show the largest change from 
the December 22, 2000 maintenance plan and this is primarily due to the 
use of MOBILE6.2 instead of MOBILE5a. The MOBILE6.2 modeling 
information is contained in the State's TSD (see ``Mobile Source 
Emission Inventories'', page 6) and on a compact disk we prepared (a 
copy is available upon request). The State's TSD information is also 
available on a compact disk that may be requested from the State or it 
can be downloaded directly from the State's Web site at http://apcd.state.co.us/documents/techdocs.html. The TSD compact disc contains 
much of the modeling data, input-output files, fleet makeup, MOBILE6.2 
input parameters, etc. and is included with the docket for this action. 
Other revisions to the mobile sources category resulted from revised 
vehicle miles traveled (VMT) estimates that were provided to the State 
by the Pikes Peak Area Council of Governments (PPACG), which is the 
metropolitan planning organization (MPO) for the Colorado Springs area, 
and were extracted from PPACG's 2025 Long Range Plan. In summary, the 
revised maintenance plan and State TSD contain detailed emission 
inventory information that was prepared in accordance with EPA guidance 
and is acceptable to EPA.
    (c) The State revised the maintenance demonstration used in the 
December 22,

[[Page 54022]]

2000 Colorado Springs maintenance plan.
    The December 22, 2000 CO maintenance plan utilized the then 
applicable EPA mobile sources emission factor model, MOBILE5a. On 
January 18, 2002, we issued policy guidance for States and local areas 
to use to develop SIP revisions using the updated version of the model, 
MOBILE6. The policy guidance was entitled ``Policy Guidance on the Use 
of MOBILE6 for SIP Development and Transportation Conformity'' 
(hereafter, January 18, 2002 MOBILE6 policy). Additional policy 
guidance regarding EPA's MOBILE model was issued on November 12, 2002, 
which notified Federal, State, and Local agencies that the updated 
MOBILE6.2 model was now available and was the recommended version of 
the model to be used. We note that the State used the MOBILE6.2 model 
to revise the Colorado Springs maintenance plan.
    Our January 18, 2002, MOBILE6 policy allows areas to revise their 
motor vehicle emission inventories and transportation conformity MVEBs 
using the MOBILE6 model without needing to revise the entire SIP or 
completing additional modeling if: (1) The SIP continues to demonstrate 
attainment or maintenance when the MOBILE5-based motor vehicle emission 
inventories are replaced with MOBILE6 base year and attainment/
maintenance year inventories and, (2) the State can document that the 
growth and control strategy assumptions for non-motor vehicle emission 
sources continue to be valid and minor updates do not change the 
overall conclusion of the SIP. Our January 18, 2002 MOBILE6 policy also 
speaks specifically to CO maintenance plans on page 10 of the policy. 
The first paragraph on page 10 of the policy states ``* * * if a carbon 
monoxide (CO) maintenance plan relied on either a relative or absolute 
demonstration, the first criterion could be satisfied by documenting 
that the relative emission reductions between the base year and the 
maintenance year are the same or greater using MOBILE6 as compared to 
MOBILE5.''
    The State could have used the streamlined approach described in our 
January 18, 2002 MOBILE6 policy to update the Colorado Springs CO MVEB. 
However, the Governor's April 12, 2004 SIP submittal instead contained 
a completely revised maintenance plan and maintenance demonstration for 
the Colorado Springs area. That is, all emission source categories 
(point, area, non-road, and mobile) were updated using the latest 
versions of applicable models (including MOBILE6.2), transportation 
data sets, emissions data, emission factors, population figures and 
other demographic information. We have determined that this fully 
revised maintenance plan SIP submittal exceeds the requirements of our 
January 18, 2002 MOBILE6 policy and, therefore, our January 18, 2002 
MOBILE6 policy is not relevant to our approval of the revised 
maintenance plan and its MVEB.
    As discussed above, the State prepared revised emission inventories 
for the years 1990, 2005, 2007, and 2010, and 2015. The results of 
these calculations are presented in Table 1 ``Colorado Springs Carbon 
Monoxide Maintenance Plan Emission Inventories'' on page 4 of the 
revised Colorado Springs maintenance plan and are also summarized in 
out Table IV-1 above. The State has demonstrated that with the use of 
MOBILE6.2, mobile source emissions show a continuous decline from 1990 
to 2015 and that the total CO emissions, from all source categories, 
projected for each future year (2005, 2007, 2010, and 2015) are all 
below the 1990 attainment year level of total CO emissions. Therefore, 
we have determined that the revised maintenance plan continues to 
demonstrate maintenance of the CO NAAQS from 1990 through 2015 and is 
approvable.
    (d) The State has modified Regulation No. 11 to eliminate the Motor 
Vehicle Emissions Inspection Program for El Paso County and the 
Colorado Springs Area.
    As described in the revised maintenance plan, as of January 1, 
2005, the Basic I/M program (of Regulation No. 11) will not be a part 
of the Federally enforceable SIP for the Colorado Springs area. No CO 
emission reduction credit for this program was taken for the years 
2005, 2007, 2010, and 2015 in the maintenance demonstration.
    The State performed an analysis and determined that the 
requirements of the Basic Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) program of 
Regulation No. 11 could be eliminated for the Colorado Springs area 
without jeopardizing maintenance of the CO NAAQS. This analysis was 
performed using EPA's MOBILE6.2 emission factor model and the latest 
transportation planning data from the PPACG. We reviewed the 
methodology and analysis and we have determined they are acceptable. 
The results of the modeling are presented in the revised maintenance 
plan's ``Table 1'' and are applicable to the years 2005, 2007, 2010, 
and 2015. These mobile source emissions figures are also incorporated 
in our Table IV-1 above. Based on our review of the State's modeling 
analysis and emission figures, we agree that the Colorado Springs area 
continues to demonstrate maintenance of the CO NAAQS and we are 
approving the elimination, from the Federally-approved SIP, of the 
Basic I/M program requirements of Regulation No. 11 for El Paso County 
and the Colorado Springs area.
    (e) Monitoring Network and Verification of Continued Attainment.
    Continued attainment of the CO NAAQS in the Colorado Springs area 
depends, in part, on the State's efforts to track indicators throughout 
the maintenance period. This requirement is met in section 6. 
``Monitoring Network/Verification of Continued Attainment'' of the 
revised Colorado Springs, CO maintenance plan. In section 6., the State 
commits to continue the operation of the CO monitor in the Colorado 
Springs area and to annually review this monitoring network and make 
changes as appropriate.
    Also, in section 6 and 7.A, the State commits to track mobile 
sources' CO emissions (which are the largest component of the 
inventories) through the ongoing regional transportation planning 
process that is done by PPACG. Since regular revisions to Colorado 
Springs' transportation improvement programs must go through a 
transportation conformity finding, the State will use this process to 
periodically review the Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and mobile source 
emissions projections used in the revised maintenance plan. This 
regional transportation process is conducted by PPACG in coordination 
with the State's Air Pollution Control Division (APCD), the AQCC, and 
EPA.
    Based on the above, we are approving these commitments as 
satisfying the relevant requirements. We note that our final rulemaking 
approval renders the State's commitments federally enforceable. These 
commitments are also the same as were approved in the original 
maintenance plan and the December 22, 2000 maintenance plan.
    (f) 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 7 of the revised maintenance plan, the 
contingency measures for the Colorado Springs area will be triggered by 
a violation of the CO NAAQS. (However, the maintenance plan does note 
that an exceedance of the CO NAAQS may initiate a voluntary,

[[Page 54023]]

local process by the PPACG and APCD to identify and evaluate potential 
contingency measures.)
    The PPACG, in coordination with the APCD and AQCC, will initiate a 
subcommittee process to begin evaluating potential contingency measures 
no more than 60 days after being notified by the APCD that a violation 
of the CO NAAQS has occurred. The subcommittee will present 
recommendations within 120 days of notification and the recommended 
contingency measures will be presented to the AQCC within 180 days of 
notification. The AQCC will then hold a public hearing to consider the 
recommended contingency measures, along with any other contingency 
measures that the AQCC believes may be appropriate to effectively 
address the violation of the CO NAAQS. The necessary contingency 
measures will be adopted and implemented within one year after the 
violation occurs.
    The potential contingency measures that are identified in section 
7.C of the revised Colorado Springs, CO maintenance plan include: (1) A 
2.7% oxygenated fuels program as set forth in Regulation No. 13, as it 
existed prior to the modifications approved by the AQCC on February 17, 
2000 and (2) reinstatement of the Basic I/M program as set forth in 
Regulation No. 11, as it existed prior to the modifications approved by 
the AQCC on December 18, 2003, with the addition of any on-board 
diagnostics components required by Federal law.
    Based on the above, we find that the contingency measures provided 
in the State's revised Colorado Springs CO maintenance plan are 
sufficient and continue to meet the requirements of section 175A(d) of 
the CAA.
    (g) Subsequent Maintenance Plan Revisions.
    In accordance with section 175A(b) of the CAA, Colorado has 
committed to submit a revised maintenance plan eight years after our 
approval of the original redesignation. This provision for revising the 
maintenance plan is contained in section 8 of the revised Colorado 
Springs CO maintenance plan. In section 8, the State commits to submit 
a revised maintenance plan within 2007 to correspond with our approval 
of the original maintenance plan on August 25, 1999 (64 FR 46279).
    Based on our review of the components of the revised Colorado 
Springs CO maintenance plan, as discussed in our items IV.(a) through 
IV.(g) above, we have concluded that the State has met the necessary 
requirements in order for us to fully approve the revised Colorado 
Springs CO maintenance plan.

V. 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 
budget(s) 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.
    With respect to maintenance plans, our conformity regulation 
requires that MVEB(s) must be established for the last year of the 
maintenance plan and may be established for any other years deemed 
appropriate (40 CFR 93.118). For transportation plan analysis years 
after the last year of the maintenance plan (in this case 2015), a 
conformity determination must show that emissions are less than or 
equal to the maintenance plan's motor vehicle emissions budget(s) for 
the last year of the implementation plan. EPA's conformity regulation 
(40 CFR 93.124) also allows the implementation plan to quantify 
explicitly the amount by which motor vehicle emissions could be higher 
while still demonstrating compliance with the maintenance requirement. 
The implementation plan can then allocate some or all of this 
additional ``safety margin'' to the emissions budget(s) for 
transportation conformity purposes.
    Section 5 ``Transportation Conformity and Mobile Source Carbon 
Monoxide Emission Budget'' of the revised Colorado Springs CO 
maintenance plan briefly describes the applicable transportation 
conformity requirements, provides MVEB calculations, identifies 
``safety margin'', and indicates that the PPACG elected to apply the 
identified ``safety margin'' to update an MVEB for 2010 and beyond.
    In section 5 of the revised maintenance plan, the State evaluated 
two MVEBs; a budget for 2015 (the last year of the maintenance plan) 
and beyond, and a budget applicable to the years 2010 through 2014. For 
the 2015 MVEB, the State subtracted the total estimated 2015 emissions 
(from all sources) of 409.35 Tons Per Day (TPD) from the 1990 
attainment year total emissions of 621.33 TPD. This produced a ``safety 
margin'' of 211.98 TPD. The State then reduced this ``safety margin'' 
by one TPD. The identified ``safety margin'' of 210.98 TPD for 2015 was 
then added to the estimated 2015 mobile sources emissions, 320.20 TPD, 
to produce a 2015 MVEB of 531 TPD. For the 2010 through 2014 MVEB, the 
State subtracted the total estimated 2010 emissions (from all sources) 
of 433.82 TPD from the 1990 attainment year total emissions of 621.33 
TPD. This produced a ``safety margin'' of 187.51 TPD. The State then 
reduced this ``safety margin'' by one TPD. The identified ``safety 
margin'' of 186.51 TPD for 2010 was then added to the estimated 2010 
mobile sources emissions, 350.21 TPD, to produce a 2010 through 2014 
MVEB of 536 TPD. In consultation with the PPACG, the State then decided 
to only identify one MVEB which would apply to 2010 and beyond. The 
first sentence of paragraph two of section 5 of the revised maintenance 
plan states, ``The Colorado Springs attainment/maintenance area mobile 
source emission budget is 531 tons/day for 2010 and beyond.'' Based on 
this choice, and in order for a positive conformity determination to be 
made, transportation plan analyses for years after 2010 must show that 
motor vehicle emissions will be less than or equal to the 2010 MVEB of 
531 TPD of CO. The revised maintenance plan also states that the 
previously approved CO MVEB of 270 TPD for 2010 and beyond (see 65 FR 
80779, December 22, 2000) is removed from the SIP and is replaced by 
the new MVEB of 531 TPD. We have concluded that the State has 
satisfactorily demonstrated continued maintenance of the CO NAAQS while 
using a transportation conformity MVEB of 531 TPD for 2010 and beyond. 
Therefore, we are approving the transportation conformity MVEB of 531 
TPD of CO, for the Colorado Springs attainment/maintenance area, for 
2010 and beyond.
    In addition to the above, the State has made a commitment regarding 
transportation conformity in section 3 of the maintenance plan. Because 
informal roll-forward analyses, prepared by the State, indicate that 
the 2010 and beyond CO MVEB may be exceeded by 2030, the State has 
committed to the re-implementation of the Basic I/M program (with any 
Federally required on-board diagnostic tests) for the Colorado Springs 
area in 2026. This commitment by the State is included in the revised 
maintenance plan for purposes of 40 CFR 93.122(a)(3)(iii),

[[Page 54024]]

which provides that emissions reduction credit from such programs may 
be included in the transportation conformity emissions analysis if the 
maintenance plan contains such a written commitment. We agree with this 
interpretation of 40 CFR 93.122(a)(3)(iii) and are making this State 
commitment Federally enforceable with our approval of the Colorado 
Springs CO revised maintenance plan.

VI. EPA's Evaluation of the Regulation No. 11 Revisions

    Colorado's Regulation No. 11 is entitled ``Motor Vehicle Emissions 
Inspection Program'' (hereafter referred to as Regulation No. 11). In 
developing the Colorado Springs revised CO maintenance plan, the State 
evaluated options for revising the then applicable Basic I/M motor 
vehicle emissions inspection program that was being implemented in El 
Paso County for the Colorado Springs CO attainment/maintenance area. 
The State's final decision, which was based on results from the use of 
our MOBILE6.2 emission factor model, was to eliminate the Basic I/M 
program for El Paso County and the Colorado Springs area from the 
Federal SIP beginning on January 1, 2005.
    The Regulation No. 11 revisions adopted by the AQCC on December 18, 
2003, State effective on March 1, 2004, and submitted by the Governor 
on April 12, 2004, remove El Paso County and the Colorado Springs area 
component of the Colorado Automobile Inspection and Maintenance 
(``AIR'') program from the Federally-approved SIP, but do not make any 
changes in State laws for implementing this Basic I/M program in El 
Paso County and the Colorado Springs area. This means that the AIR 
program for the implementation of the Basic I/M program will remain in 
full force and effect as a State-only program under State laws, but it 
will not be Federally-enforceable after January 1, 2005. The revised 
maintenance plan reflects this change in Regulation No. 11 in that 
mobile source CO emissions were calculated for the Colorado Springs 
area for 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2015 without the benefit of a Basic I/M 
program. We note, though, that even with the elimination of the Basic 
I/M program beginning on January 1, 2005, the Colorado Springs area is 
still able to meet our requirements to demonstrate maintenance of the 
CO NAAQS through 2015, as described above. We have evaluated and 
determined that the Regulation No. 11 revisions described above are 
acceptable to us and we are approving them now in conjunction with this 
action.

VII. Consideration of Section 110(l) of the CAA

    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. The revised Colorado Springs CO maintenance plan and revisions 
to Regulation No. 11 will not interfere with attainment, reasonable 
further progress, or any other applicable requirement of the CAA.

VIII. Final Action

    In this action, EPA is approving the revised Colorado Springs CO 
revised maintenance plan, that was submitted by the Governor on April 
12, 2004, and the revised transportation conformity motor vehicle CO 
emission budget for the year 2010 and beyond. We are also approving the 
Regulation No. 11 revisions submitted by the Governor on April 12, 
2004.
    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 November 8, 2004 
without further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comments by 
October 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.

IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not 
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this 
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, 
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action 
merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes 
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. 
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because 
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does 
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by 
state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 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

[[Page 54025]]

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. section 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. 
section 804(2).
    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 8, 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 in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: August 26, 2004.
Robert E. Roberts,
Regional Administrator, Region VIII.

0
40 CFR part 52 is amended to read 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)(103) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.320  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (103) On April 12, 2004, the Governor of Colorado submitted 
revisions to Regulation No. 11 ``Motor Vehicle Emissions Inspection 
Program'' that eliminated the Federal applicability of the Basic I/M 
program for El Paso County and the Colorado Springs CO attainment/
maintenance area.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) Regulation No. 11 ``Motor Vehicle Emissions Inspection 
Program'', 5 CCR 1001-13, as adopted on December 18, 2003, effective 
March 1, 2004, as follows: Part A.I., ``Applicability,'' final sentence 
of paragraph 2.


0
3. Section 52.349 is amended by adding paragraph (j) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.349  Control strategy: Carbon monoxide.

* * * * *
    (j) Revisions to the Colorado State Implementation Plan, carbon 
monoxide NAAQS, revised maintenance plan for Colorado Springs entitled 
``Revised Carbon Monoxide Maintenance Plan for the Colorado Springs 
Attainment/Maintenance Area'', as adopted by the Colorado Air Quality 
Control Commission on December 18, 2003, State effective March 1, 2004, 
and submitted by the Governor on April 12, 2004.

[FR Doc. 04-20134 Filed 9-3-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P