[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 241 (Friday, December 14, 2001)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 64751-64759]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-30816]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[CO-001-0045; CO-001-0046; CO-001-0047; CO-001-0052; CO-001-0053; CO49-
1-7187; CO-001-0061; CO-001-0062; CO-001-0064 FRL-7117-4]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
State of Colorado; Denver Carbon Monoxide Redesignation to Attainment, 
Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes, and Approval of 
Related Revisions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: On August 22, 2001, EPA published a notice of proposed 
rulemaking (NPR) to propose approval of the State of Colorado's request 
to redesignate the Denver-Boulder metropolitan (hereafter, Denver) 
``serious'' carbon monoxide (CO) nonattainment area to attainment for 
the CO National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). In that NPR, EPA 
proposed to approve the CO maintenance plan for the Denver area and the 
additional State Implementation

[[Page 64752]]

Plan elements involving revisions to Colorado's Regulation No. 11 
``Motor Vehicle Emissions Inspection Program'', Colorado's Regulation 
No. 13 ``Oxygenated Fuels Program'', and the Governor's May 7, 2001, 
submittal of a SIP revision (``United States Postal Service (USPS) 
revision'') that is intended to be a substitute for a Clean Fuel Fleet 
Program.
    In this action, EPA is approving the Denver CO redesignation 
request, the maintenance plan, the revisions to Regulation No. 11 and 
Regulation No. 13, the USPS revision and the CO transportation 
conformity budgets.

EFFECTIVE DATE: January 14, 2002.

ADDRESSES: Richard R. Long, Director, Air and Radiation Program, 
Mailcode 8P-AR, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 
VIII, 999 18th Street, Suite 300, Denver, Colorado 80202-2466.
    Copies of the documents relevant to this action are available for 
public inspection during normal business hours at the following 
offices:

United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region VIII, Air and 
Radiation Program, 999 18th Street, Suite 300, Denver, Colorado 80202-
2466; and,
United States Environmental Protection Agency, Air and Radiation Docket 
and Information Center, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460.
    Copies of the State documents relevant to this action are available 
for public inspection at:Colorado Air Pollution Control Division, 
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, 4300 Cherry Creek 
Drive South, Denver, Colorado, 880246-1530.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions concerning the Denver CO 
redesignation, contact Tim Russ, Air and Radiation Program, Mailcode 
8P-AR, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region VIII, 999 
18th Street, Suite 300, Denver, Colorado 80202-2466,Telephone number: 
(303) 312-6479.
    For questions regarding the Regulation No. 11, Regulation No. 13, 
and the U.S. Postal Service revisions, contact Kerri Fiedler, Air and 
Radiation Program, Mailcode 8P-AR, United States Environmental 
Protection Agency, Region VIII, 999 18th Street, Suite 300, Denver, 
Colorado 80202-2466, Telephone number: (303) 312-6493.

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

I. What Is the Purpose of This Action?

    On August 22, 2001, we published a NPR that proposed approval of 
the Denver CO redesignation request, maintenance plan, and associated 
SIP elements. See 66 FR 44097. The NPR also opened a 30-day public 
comment period on this proposed Agency action. We did not receive any 
comments.
    In this final action, we are approving the change in the legal 
designation of the Denver area from nonattainment to attainment for the 
CO NAAQS (hereafter referred to as ``CO NAAQS'' or ``CO standard''), 
we're approving the maintenance plan that is designed to keep the area 
in attainment for CO for the next 12 years, we're approving the changes 
to the State's Regulation No. 11 for the implementation of motor 
vehicle emissions inspections, we're approving the changes to the 
State's Regulation No. 13 for the implementation of the wintertime 
oxygenated fuels program, and we've approving of the USPS revision that 
requires the destruction, relocation, and replacement with cleaner 
vehicles of certain USPS vehicles, as a substitute for a Clean Fuel 
Fleet Program for the Denver metropolitan area. We are also approving 
the CO transportation conformity budgets.
    We originally designated Denver as nonattainment for CO under the 
provisions of the 1977 CAA Amendments (see 43 FR 8962, March 3, 1978). 
On November 15, 1990, the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 were enacted 
(Pub. L. 101-549, 104 Stat. 2399, codified at 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q). 
Under section 107(d)(1)(C) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), we designated 
the Denver area as nonattainment for CO because the area had been 
designated as nonattainment before November 15, 1990. Under section 186 
of the CAA, Denver was originally classified as a ``moderate'' CO 
nonattainment area with a design value greater than 12.7 parts per 
million (ppm), and was required to attain the CO NAAQS by December 31, 
1995. See 56 FR 56694, November 6, 1991. The Denver area, however, 
violated the CO NAAQS in 1995. With our final rule of March 10, 1997 
(62 FR 10690), we approved the State's 1994 State Implementation Plan 
(SIP) submittal and bumped-up the Denver area to a ``serious'' CO 
nonattainment classification. Further information regarding these 
classifications and the accompanying requirements are described in the 
``General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air 
Act Amendments of 1990.`` See 57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992.
    Under the CAA, we can change designations if acceptable data are 
available and if certain other requirements are met. See CAA section 
107(d)(3)(D). Section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA provides that the 
Administrator may not promulgate a redesignation of a nonattainment 
area to attainment unless:
    (i) the Administrator determines that the area has attained the 
national ambient air quality standard;
    (ii) the Administrator has fully approved the applicable 
implementation plan for the area under CAA section 110(k);
    (iii) the Administrator determines that the improvement in air 
quality is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions 
resulting from implementation of the applicable implementation plan and 
applicable Federal air pollutant control regulations and other 
permanent and enforceable reductions;
    (iv) the Administrator has fully approved a maintenance plan for 
the area as meeting the requirements of CAA section 175A; and,
    (v) the State containing such area has met all requirements 
applicable to the area under section 110 and part D of the CAA.
    Before we can approve the redesignation request, we must decide 
that all applicable SIP elements have been fully approved. Approval of 
the applicable SIP elements may occur simultaneously with final 
approval of the redesignation request. That's why we are also approving 
the revisions to Regulation No. 11, Regulation No. 13, and the USPS 
revision.

II. What Is the State's Process To Submit These Materials to EPA?

    Section 110(k) of the CAA addresses our actions on submissions of 
revisions to a SIP. The CAA 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 Denver CO redesignation request, the maintenance plan, 
the revisions to Regulation No. 11, and the revisions to Regulation No. 
13 on January 10, 2000. The AQCC adopted the redesignation request, 
maintenance plan, and revisions to Regulation No. 11 and Regulation No. 
13 directly after the hearing. These SIP revisions became State 
effective March 1, 2000, and were

[[Page 64753]]

submitted by the Governor to us on May 10, 2000.
    We have evaluated the Governor's submittal and have determined that 
the State met the requirements for reasonable notice and public hearing 
under section 110(a)(2) of the CAA. As required by section 110(k)(1)(B) 
of the CAA, we reviewed these SIP materials for conformance with the 
completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51, Appendix V and determined that 
the Governor's submittal was administratively and technically complete. 
Our completeness determination was sent on August 7, 2000, through a 
letter from Rebecca W. Hanmer, Acting Regional Administrator, to 
Governor Bill Owens.
    For the USPS revision, the Colorado AQCC held a public hearing on 
March 16, 2000. The AQCC adopted the USPS revisions directly after the 
hearing. The USPS revision became State effective May 30, 2000, and was 
submitted by the Governor to us on May 7, 2001. On May 30, 2001, the 
Colorado Attorney General's Office submitted administrative corrections 
to the USPS revision to us.
    We have evaluated the Governor's submittal of the USPS revision and 
have determined that the State met the requirements for reasonable 
notice and public hearing under section 110(a)(2) of the CAA. As 
required by section 110(k)(1)(B) of the CAA, we reviewed these SIP 
materials for conformance with the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 
51, Appendix V and determined that the Governor's submittal, with the 
subsequent administrative corrections provided by the State's Attorney 
General's office, was administratively and technically complete. Our 
completeness determination was sent on June 15, 2001, through a letter 
from Jack W. McGraw, Acting Regional Administrator, to Governor Bill 
Owens.

III. EPA's Evaluation of the Denver Redesignation Request and 
Maintenance Plan

    We have reviewed the Denver CO redesignation request and 
maintenance plan and believe that approval of the request is warranted. 
With our August 22, 2001, NPR (see 66 FR 44097), we solicited public 
comments on these materials and the additional SIP elements. We did not 
receive any public comments. We have determined that all required SIP 
elements, including the maintenance plan, have either been approved or 
will be fully approved with this final rule, that the area has attained 
the NAAQS for the CO standard, and that the improvement in air quality 
is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting 
from the implementation of the applicable implementation plan, 
applicable Federal air pollutant control regulations, and other 
permanent and enforceable reductions. Thus, with the Governor's 
submittals of May 10, 2000, and May 7, 2001, the five criteria in 
section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) have been met and 
approval of the redesignation request is warranted.
    Detailed descriptions of how the section 107(d)(3)(E) requirements 
have been met area provided in our August 22, 2001, NPR for this action 
(see 66 FR 44097) and, for the most part, will not be repeated here. 
Our discussion below takes into account our prior evaluation presented 
in our August 22, 2001, NPR and provides further emphasis regarding the 
maintenance plan and the additional SIP elements.
    As stated above, section 107(d)(3)(E)(iv) of the CAA provides that 
for an area to be redesignated to attainment, the Administrator must 
have fully approved a maintenance plan for the area meeting the 
requirements of section 175A of the CAA.
    Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance 
plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment. 
The maintenance plan must demonstrate continued attainment of the 
applicable NAAQS for at least ten years after the Administrator 
approves a redesignation to attainment. Eight years after the 
promulgation of the redesignation, the State must submit a revised 
maintenance plan that demonstrates continued attainment for the 
subsequent ten-year period following the initial ten-year maintenance 
period. To address the possibility of future NAAQS violations, the 
maintenance plan must contain contingency measures, with a schedule for 
adoption and implementation, that are adequate to assure prompt 
correction of a violation.
    In this Federal Register action, we are approving the State of 
Colorado's maintenance plan for the Denver CO nonattainment area 
because we have determined, as detailed below, that the State's 
maintenance plan submittal of May 10, 2000, meets the requirements of 
section 175A and is consistent with EPA interpretations of the CAA 
section 175A of the CAA and our September 4, 1992, policy 
memorandum.\1\ Our analysis of the pertinent maintenance plan 
requirements, was fully described in our August 22, 2001, proposed rule 
(see 66 FR 44097) and is restated, in part, with particular reference 
to the Governor's May 10, 2000, submittal:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ EPA issued maintenance plan interpretations in the ``General 
Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act 
Amendments of 1990'' (57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992), ``General 
Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act 
Amendments of 1990; Supplemental'' (57 FR 18070, April 28, 1992), 
and the EPA guidance memorandum entitled ``Procedures for Processing 
Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment'' from John Calcagni, 
Director, Air Quality Management Division, Office of Air Quality and 
Planning Standards, to Regional Air Division Directors, dated 
September 4, 1992.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(a) Emissions Inventories--Attainment Year and Projections

    Under our interpretations, areas seeking to redesignate to 
attainment for CO may demonstrate future maintenance of the CO NAAQS 
either by showing that future CO emissions will be equal to or less 
than the attainment year emissions or by providing a modeling 
demonstration. However, under the CAA, many areas (such as Denver) were 
required to submit a modeled attainment demonstration to show that 
reductions in emissions would be sufficient to attain the applicable 
NAAQS. For these areas, the maintenance demonstration is to be based on 
the same level of modeling (see the September 4, 1992, Calcagni 
Memorandum). For the Denver area, this involved the use of EPA's Urban 
Airshed Model (UAM) in conjunction with intersection Hotspot modeling 
using the CAL3QHC model (see 62 FR 10690, March 10, 1997).
    The maintenance plan that the Governor submitted on May 10, 2000, 
included comprehensive inventories of CO emissions for the Denver area. 
These inventories include emissions from stationary point sources, area 
sources, non-road mobile sources, and on-road mobile sources. The State 
used the 2001 attainment year inventory, from the March 10, 1997, EPA-
approved attainment SIP (see 62 FR 10690) and included an interim-year 
projection for 2006 along with the final maintenance year of 2013. 
Additional mobile source emission inventories were provided for the 
years 2002, 2003, 2004, and 2005. These particular mobile source 
inventories present CO emissions during the phase-in period of the 
revisions to Regulation No. 11 for the Remote Sensing Device (RSD) 
program, the phase-in of more stringent cutpoints for the motor vehicle 
enhanced Inspection and Maintenance, or I/M240, program, and the phase-
down of the oxygenated gasoline program under the revisions to 
Regulation No. 13. More detailed descriptions of the 2001 attainment 
year inventory from the approved nonattainment SIP for Denver, the 2006 
projected inventory, the 2013 projected inventory, and the 2002, 2003,

[[Page 64754]]

2004, and 2005 mobile source projected inventories are documented in 
the maintenance plan in Part II, Chapter 4, section B, and in the 
State's TSD. The State's submittal contains detailed emission inventory 
information that was prepared in accordance with EPA guidance. Summary 
emission figures from the 2001 attainment year and the interim 
projected years are provided in Table III.-1 below.

                        Table III-1.--Summary of CO Emissions in Tons Per Day for Denver
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 2001        2002        2003        2004        2005        2006        2013
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point Sources...............        70.2  ..........  ..........  ..........  ..........        46.7        46.7
Area Sources................       198.2  ..........  ..........  ..........  ..........       172.8       172.6
Non-Road Mobile Sources.....        59.9  ..........  ..........  ..........  ..........        61.2        64.9
On-Road Mobile Sources......     * 875.2       * 851       * 850       * 827       * 850     * 844.7     * 867.2
    Total...................    * 1203.3  ..........  ..........  ..........  ..........    * 1125.4    * 1151.4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* These figures represent CO emissions for the Denver CO modeling domain which is slightly larger than the
  Denver CO nonattainment area.

    We note in Table III-1 there are significant reductions projected 
in years 2006 and 2013 for point sources and area sources. The majority 
of the area source projected reductions are from the State's estimates 
for less woodburning in future years. We believe this projection of 
less woodburning is reasonable. For point sources, the original Denver 
CO nonattainment plan modeled all point sources at their potential-to-
emit (PTE) for 2001, and Table III-1 retains these values for 2001. For 
years 2006 and 2013, the State projected emissions for elevated point 
sources at PTE, but projected emissions from surface point sources 
based on actual emissions. This accounts for the reduction in emissions 
from point sources in 2006 and 2013. The State's approach follows EPA 
guidance on projected emissions and we believe it is acceptable.\2\ 
Further information on these projected emissions may also be found in 
Section 2 ``Emission Inventories'' of the State's TSD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ ``Use of Actual Emissions in Maintenance Demonstrations for 
Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment Areas'', signed by D. 
Kent Berry, Acting Director, Air Quality Management Division, 
November 30, 1993.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(b) Demonstration of Maintenance

    The September 4, 1992, Calcagni Memorandum states that where 
modeling was relied on to demonstrate maintenance, the plan is to 
contain a summary of the air quality concentrations expected to result 
from the application of the control strategies. Also, the plan is to 
identify and describe the dispersion model or other air quality model 
used to project ambient concentrations.
    For the Denver CO redesignation maintenance demonstration, the 
State used the Urban Airshed dispersion Model (UAM) in conjunction with 
concentrations derived from the CAL3QHC intersection (or ``hotspot'') 
model. This was the same level of modeling as was used for the 1994 
Denver CO SIP attainment demonstration, which was approved by EPA on 
March 10, 1997 (62 FR 10690), and addressed the requirements of section 
187(a)(7) of the CAA. The UAM and CAL3QHC models were applied to the 
2006 and 2013 inventories using meteorological data from December 5, 
1988. This was the episode day used in the modeling in the EPA-approved 
1994 Denver CO nonattainment SIP revision and was thought to represent 
the worst-case meteorological conditions. For the CAL3QHC intersection 
component, six intersections were selected for modeling based on the 
latest information from Denver Regional Council Of Governments (DRCOG) 
regarding the highest volume and most congested intersections in the 
Denver CO nonattainment area. This was done consistent with our 
modeling guidance.
    After an analysis, the State concluded that the Continuous Air 
Monitoring Project (CAMP) ambient air quality monitor, located at the 
intersection of Broadway and Champa Street, was still the maximum 
concentration monitor for the Denver CO nonattainment area. This 
analysis is further detailed in Part II, Chapter 4, section C of the 
maintenance plan and in the State's TSD. We agree with the State's 
conclusion regarding the maximum concentration monitor. The results of 
the State's modeling for 2006 and 2013 are presented in Part II, 
Chapter 4, section C, of the maintenance plan, in the State's TSD, and 
are reproduced in Table III-2 below:

           Table III-2.--Dispersion Modeling and Intersection Modeling Results (in parts per million)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                2006                                      2013
        Intersection         -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 UAM \1\     CAL3QHC \2\      Total          UAM         CAL3QHC        Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Broadway & Champa \1\.......          7.59          1.12          8.71          7.88          1.08          8.96
Foothills & Arapahoe........          0.9           4.8           5.7           0.9           4.7           5.6
1st & University............          4.0           4.3           8.3           3.9           4.2           8.0
Hampden & University........          1.9           3.6           5.5           1.9           4.3           6.2
Parker & Illiff.............          2.7           3.2           5.8           2.6           3.0           5.6
Arapahoe & University.......          1.3           3.6           5.0           1.3           3.9           5.3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Footnotes for Table III-2:
\1\ UAM (Urban Airshed Model). This column represents the dispersion model's calculated background CO
  concentration at each location.
\2\ CAL3QHC (Intersection Model). This column represents the intersection model's calculated CO component
  concentration.
\3\ The use of two significant figures by the State for the Broadway and Champa intersection, where the CAMP
  monitor is located, reflects the fact that the modeling done for the maximum concentration location was more
  detailed.


[[Page 64755]]

    The modeling results presented in the Denver CO maintenance plan, 
the State's TSD, and as repeated in Table III-2 above show that CO 
concentrations are not estimated to exceed the 9.0 ppm 8-hour average 
CO NAAQS during the maintenance period's time frame through 2013. 
Therefore, we believe the Denver area has satisfactorily demonstrated 
maintenance of the CO NAAQS.

(c) Monitoring Network and Verification of Continued Attainment

    Continued attainment of the CO NAAQS in the Denver area depends, in 
part, on the State's efforts to track indicators throughout the 
maintenance period. This requirement is met in two sections of the 
Denver CO maintenance plan. In Part II, Chapter 4, sections E and F.2, 
the State commits to continue the operation of the CO monitors in the 
Denver area and to annually review this monitoring network and make 
changes as appropriate. Please see our August 22, 2001, NPR (66 FR 
44097) for a more detailed description.
    Based on the above, we are approving these commitments as 
satisfying the relevant requirements. We note that this final approval 
renders the State's commitments federally enforceable.

(d) 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. Please see our 
August 22, 2001, NPR (66 FR 44097) for a more detailed description.
    We find that the contingency measures provided in the State's 
Denver CO maintenance plan are sufficient and meet the requirements of 
section 175A(d) of the CAA.

(e) 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 redesignation.

IV. EPA's Evaluation of the Transportation Conformity Requirements

    One key provision of our conformity regulation requires a 
demonstration that emissions from the transportation plan and 
Transportation Improvement Program are consistent with the emissions 
budget(s) in the SIP (40 CFR 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.
    The maintenance plan defines the CO motor vehicle emissions budget 
in the Denver CO attainment/maintenance area as 800 tons per day for 
all years 2002 and beyond. This budget is equal to the maintenance year 
(2013) mobile source emissions inventory for CO for the attainment/
maintenance area. We have scaled the modeling domain emissions 
projections for 2002 to the attainment/maintenance area values and 
believe the 800 tons per day value is essentially equivalent to the 
mobile source inventory for the attainment/maintenance area in 2002. In 
addition, our analysis indicates that the 800 tons per day budget is 
consistent with maintenance of the CO NAAQS throughout the maintenance 
period. Therefore, we are approving the 800 tons per day CO emissions 
budget for the Denver area.
    Pursuant to section 93.118(e)(4) of EPA's transportation conformity 
rule, as amended, EPA must determine the adequacy of submitted mobile 
source emissions budgets. EPA reviewed the Denver CO budget for 
adequacy using the criteria in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4), and determined that 
the budget was adequate for conformity purposes. EPA's adequacy 
determination was made in a letter to the Colorado APCD on July 12, 
2000, and was announced in the Federal Register on August 3, 2000 (65 
FR 47726). As a result of this adequacy finding, the 800 ton per day 
budget took effect for conformity determinations in the Denver metro 
area on August 18, 2000. However, we are not bound by that 
determination in acting on the maintenance plan.

V. 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). As 
described in our August 22, 2001, NPR (see 66 FR 44097), the version of 
Regulation No. 11 that was adopted on January 10, 2000, became 
effective on March 1, 2000, and was submitted by the Governor in 
conjunction with the Denver CO redesignation request and maintenance 
plan supersedes and replaces the other revisions of Regulation No. 11.
    We concur with the revisions enacted by the State to Regulation No. 
11 and are approving them.

VI. EPA's Evaluation of the Regulation No. 13 Revisions

    Colorado's Regulation No. 13 is entitled ``Oxygenated Fuels 
Program'' (hereafter referred to as Regulation No. 13). As described in 
our August 22, 2001, NPR (see 66 FR 44097), the revisions to Regulation 
No. 13 were adopted on January 10, 2000, became effective on March 1, 
2000, and were submitted by the Governor in conjunction with the Denver 
CO redesignation request and maintenance plan.
    We concur with the revisions enacted by the State to Regulation No. 
13 and are approving them.

VII. EPA's Evaluation of the USPS Revision

    As stated in our NPR of August 22, 2001 (see 66 FR 44097), section 
246(a)(2)(B) of the CAA requires areas such as Denver to have a clean 
fuel vehicle program in the EPA-approved SIP.
    We had previously advised the State that we would be unable to 
redesignate the Denver area to attainment for CO unless the Governor 
submitted a clean fuel vehicle program meeting the requirements of 
section 246(a)(2)(B) of the CAA or a substitute program pursuant to CAA 
section 182(c)(4).\3\ The State chose to submit a substitute program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Section 182(c)(4)(B) of the CAA refers to ozone-producing 
emissions; however, EPA has interpreted this section to allow for 
substitute programs for CO as well.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On May 22, 2000, the State, EPA, and USPS entered into an agreement 
under EPA's Project eXcellence and Leadership program (Project XL) and 
Colorado's Environmental Leadership Program under which the USPS agreed 
to destroy or relocate several hundred pre-1984 high-emitting postal 
delivery vehicles and replace them with low-emitting vehicles (LEV \4\) 
and low-emitting flexible fuel vehicles.\5\ As part of this agreement, 
the USPS agreed that the State could incorporate the major components 
of the agreement into a SIP revision that the State could use as a

[[Page 64756]]

substitute for a clean fuel vehicle program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ A LEV is any vehicle certified to the low emission vehicle 
standards specified in 40 CFR 86, subpart R.
    \5\ A flexible fuel vehicle or dual fuel vehicle is a vehicle 
which operates on the combination of gasoline and an alternative 
fuel (any fuel other than gasoline and diesel fuel, such as 
methanol, ethanol, and gaseous fuels (40 CFR 86.000-2)), such as E-
85 (gasoline blended with 85% ethanol).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The AQCC adopted the USPS revision on March 16, 2000, and the 
revision became State-effective on May 30, 2000. The Governor submitted 
the USPS SIP revision to us on May 7, 2001.
    On May 30, 2001, the Colorado Attorney General's Office submitted 
administrative corrections to the USPS SIP revision\6\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Following adoption of the USPS revision, the AQCC 
inadvertently neglected to put the revision in final form before 
sending it to the Governor's office for submittal to EPA. In 
correcting the USPS revision, State Staff merely removed headings 
that indicated the USPS revision was ``draft'', dated and titled the 
revision, and inserted the correct date for the USPS Project XL 
agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We concur with and are approving the State's USPS SIP revision 
because we have determined that the State will achieve greater 
reductions in emissions of CO with the USPS revision than would have 
been achieved by the clean fuels vehicle program required by CAA 
section 246(a)(2)(B).

VIII. Final Rulemaking Action

    In this action, we are approving the Governor's May 10, 2000, 
request to redesignate the Denver carbon monoxide NAAQS nonattainment 
area to attainment, the Denver carbon monoxide NAAQS maintenance plan 
submitted May 10, 2000, the revisions to Regulation No. 11 and the 
revisions to Regulation No. 13 submitted May 10, 2000, and the 
Governor's May 7, 2001, USPS revision including the Attorney General's 
office administrative corrections of May 30, 2001. We are also 
approving the carbon monoxide transportation conformity budgets 
contained in the maintenance plan. This final action will become 
effective on January 14, 2002.

Administrative Requirements

(a) Executive Order 12866

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this 
regulatory action from Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory 
Planning and Review.''

(b) Executive Order 13045

    Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), applies to any rule that: (1) Is 
determined to be ``economically significant'' as defined under 
Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health or 
safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a disproportionate 
effect on children. If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the 
Agency must evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of the 
planned rule on children, and explain why the planned regulation is 
preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably feasible 
alternatives considered by the Agency.
    This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does 
not involve decisions intended to mitigate environmental health or 
safety risks.

(c) Executive Order 13084

    Under Executive Order 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is 
not required by statute, that significantly affects or uniquely affects 
the communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes 
substantial direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the 
Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct 
compliance costs incurred by the tribal governments, or EPA consults 
with those governments. If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 
13084 requires EPA to provide to the Office of Management and Budget, 
in a separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a 
description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with 
representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature 
of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the 
regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to develop 
an effective process permitting elected officials and other 
representatives of Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful 
and timely input in the development of regulatory policies on matters 
that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.''
    Today's rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the 
communities of Indian tribal governments. This action does not involve 
or impose any requirements that affect Indian Tribes. Accordingly, the 
requirements of section 3(b) of Executive Order 13084 do not apply to 
this rule.

(d) Executive Order 13132

    Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) revokes and replaces 
Executive Orders 12612 (Federalism) and 12875 (Enhancing the 
Intergovernmental Partnership). Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to 
develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input 
by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies 
that have federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism 
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations 
that 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.'' Under Executive Order 13132, EPA may not issue a 
regulation that has federalism implications, that imposes substantial 
direct compliance costs, and that is not required by statute, unless 
the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct 
compliance costs incurred by State and local governments, or EPA 
consults with State and local officials early in the process of 
developing the proposed regulation. EPA also may not issue a regulation 
that has federalism implications and that preempts State law unless the 
Agency consults with State and local officials early in the process of 
developing the proposed regulation.
    This rule will 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, because it 
merely approves state rules implementing a federal standard, and does 
not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and 
responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. In addition, 
redesignation of an area to attainment under sections 107(d)(3)(D) and 
(E) of the Clean Air Act does not impose any new requirements. Thus, 
the requirements of section 6 of the Executive Order do not apply to 
this rule.

(e) Executive Order 13211 (Energy Effects)

    This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211 ``Actions 
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)) because it is not a 
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

(f) Regulatory Flexibility

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency 
to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to 
notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies 
that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small 
businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental 
jurisdictions.
    This final approval will not have a significant impact on a 
substantial number of small entities because SIP approvals under 
section 110 and

[[Page 64757]]

subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act do not create any new 
requirements, but simply approve requirements that the State is already 
imposing. Therefore, because the SIP final approval does not create any 
new requirements, I certify that this action will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-State relationship under the 
Clean Air Act, preparation of flexibility analysis would constitute 
Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The 
Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such 
grounds. Union Electric Co., v. U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976); 
42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2). Redesignation of an area to attainment under 
sections 107(d)(3)(D) and (E) of the Clean Air Act does not impose any 
new requirements. Redesignation to attainment is an action that affects 
the legal designation of a geographical area and does not impose any 
regulatory requirements. Therefore, because the final approval of the 
redesignation does not create any new requirements, I certify that the 
final approval of the redesignation request will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

(g) Unfunded Mandates

    Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA 
must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or 
final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated 
costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to 
the private sector, of $100 million or more. Under section 205, EPA 
must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative 
that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with 
statutory requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan 
for informing and advising any small governments that may be 
significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
    EPA has determined that this final approval action does not include 
a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100 million or 
more to either State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate, or 
to the private sector. This Federal action approves pre-existing 
requirements under State or local law, and imposes no new requirements. 
Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or tribal 
governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.

(h) Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of 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). This rule will be effective January 14, 2002.

(i) National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12 of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act 
(NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal agencies to evaluate existing 
technical standards when developing a new regulation. To comply with 
NTTAA, EPA must consider and use ``voluntary consensus standards'' 
(VCS) if available and applicable when developing programs and policies 
unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise 
impractical.
    The EPA believes that VCS are inapplicable to this action. Today's 
action does not require the public to perform activities conducive to 
the use of VCS.

(j) Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court 
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by February 12, 2002. 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) of the Clean Air 
Act.)

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

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

40 CFR Part 81

    Air pollution control, National parks, Wilderness areas

    Dated: December 3, 2001.
Patricia D. Hull,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region VIII.


    Title 40, chapter I, parts 52 and 81 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations are amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

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

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

Subpart G--Colorado

    2. Section 52.320 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(96 ) to read 
as follows:


Sec. 52.320  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (96) On May 10, 2000, the Governor of Colorado submitted SIP 
revisions to Colorado's Regulation No. 11 ``Motor Vehicle Emissions 
Inspection Program'' that supersede and replace all earlier versions of 
the Regulation and made several changes to the motor vehicle inspection 
and maintenance requirements including the implementation of a remote 
sensing device (RSD) program for the Denver metropolitan area. On May 
10, 2000, the Governor also submitted SIP revisions to Colorado's 
Regulation No. 13 ``Oxygenated Fuels Program'' that supersede and 
replace all earlier versions of the Regulation and modified the 
oxygenated fuel requirements for the Denver metropolitan area.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) Regulation No. 11 ``Motor Vehicle Emissions Inspection 
Program'', 5 CCR 1001-13, as adopted on January 10, 2000, effective 
March 1, 2000, as follows: Part A, Part B, Part C, Part D, Part E, and 
Part F.
    (B) Regulation No. 13 ``Oxygenated Fuels Program'', 5 CCR 1001-16, 
as adopted on January 10, 2000, effective March 1, 2000, as follows: 
Sections I.A., I.B., I.C., I.D., I..E., II..A, II.B., II.C., II.D., 
II.E., II..F., II.G., and II.H.

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


Sec. 52.349  Control strategy: Carbon monoxide.

* * * * *
    (g) Revisions to the Colorado State Implementation Plan, carbon 
monoxide NAAQS Redesignation Request and

[[Page 64758]]

Maintenance Plan for Denver entitled ``Carbon Monoxide Redesignation 
Request and Maintenance Plan for the Denver Metropolitan Area, 
``excluding Chapter 1, Chapter 2, and Appendix C, as adopted by the 
Colorado Air Quality Control Commission on January 10, 2000, State 
effective March 1, 2000, and submitted by the Governor on May 10, 2000.
    4. New Sec. 52.351 is added to read as follows:


Sec. 52.351  United States Postal Service substitute Clean Fuel Fleet 
Program.

    Revisions to the Colorado State Implementation Plan, carbon 
monoxide NAAQS, United States Postal Service substitute clean-fuel 
vehicle program, as allowed under section 182(c)(4)(B) of the Clean Air 
Act, to address the requirements of section 246 of the Clean Air Act 
for the Denver Metropolitan carbon monoxide nonattainment area. The 
revisions were adopted by the Colorado Air Quality Control Commission 
on March 16, 2000, State effective May 30, 2000, and submitted by the 
Governor on May 7, 2001. Administrative corrections to the Governor's 
May 7, 2001, submittal were submitted by the Colorado Attorney 
General's office on May 30, 2001.

PART 81--[AMENDED]

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

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

    2. In Sec. 81.306, the table entitled ``Colorado-Carbon Monoxide'' 
is amended by revising the entry for ``Denver-Boulder Area'' to read as 
follows:


Sec. 81.306  Colorado.

* * * * *

                                                                Colorado--Carbon Monoxide
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Designation                                               Classification
         Designated area          ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Date\1\                        Type                         Date\1\                        Type
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                   *                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *
Denver-Boulder Area:
    The boundaries for the Denver  January 14, 2002............  Attainment
     nonattainment area for
     carbon monixide (CO) are
     described as follows: Start
     at Colorado Highway 52 where
     it intersects the eastern
     boundary of Boulder County;
     Follow Highway 52 west until
     it intersects Colorado
     Highway 119; Follow northern
     boundary of Boulder city
     limits west to the 6,000-ft.
     elevation line; Follow the
     6000-ft. elevation line
     south through Boulder and
     Jefferson Counties to US 6
     in Jefferson County; Follow
     US 6 west to the Jefferson
     County-Clear Creek County
     line; Follow the Jefferson
     County western boundary
     south for approximately
     16.25 miles; Follow a line
     east for approximately 3.75
     mile to South Turkey Creek;
     Follow South Turkey Creek
     northeast for approximately
     3.5 miles; Follow a line
     southeast for approximately
     2.0 miles to the junction of
     South Deer Creek Road and
     South Deer Creek Canyon
     Road; Follow South Deer
     Creek Canyon Road northeast
     for approximately 3.75
     miles; Follow a line
     southeast for approximately
     five miles to the northern-
     most boundary of Pike
     National Forest where it
     intersects the Jefferson
     County-Douglas County line;
     follow the Pike National
     forest boundary southeast
     through Douglas County to
     the Douglas County-El Paso
     County line; Follow the
     southern boundary on Douglas
     County east to the Elbert
     County line; Follow the
     eastern boundary of Douglas
     County north to the Arapahoe
     County line; Follow the
     southern boundary of Araphoe
     County east to Kiowa Creek;
     Follow Kiowa Creek northeast
     through Arapahoe and Adams
     Counties to the Adams-Weld
     County line; Follow the
     northern boundary of Adams
     County west to the Boulder
     County line; Follow the
     eastern boundary of Boulder
     County north to Highway 52.
Adams County (part)
Arapahoe County (part)
Boulder County (part)
Denver County
Douglas County (part)
Jefferson County (part)
 
                   *                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This date is November 15, 1990, unless otherwise noted.


[[Page 64759]]

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 01-30816 Filed 12-13-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P