62210 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 205 / Monday, October 25, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Secretary of Defense and the 

Secretary of Veterans Affairs hereby 

certify that this final rule will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities as 

they are defined in the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 501–612. This 

final rule directly affects only 

individuals and does not directly affect 

small entities. Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 

605(b), this final rule, therefore, is 

exempt from the initial and final 

regulatory flexibility analyses 

requirements of sections 603 and 604. 

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance 

There is no Catalog of Federal 

Domestic Assistance number for the 

program affected by this final rule.

List of Subjects in 38 CFR Part 21 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Armed forces, Civil rights, 

Claims, Colleges and universities, 

Conflict of interests, Defense 

Department, Education, Employment, 

Grant programs—education, Grant 

programs—veterans, Health care, Loan 

programs—education, Loan programs—

veterans, Manpower training programs, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Schools, Travel and 

transportation expenses, Veterans, 

Vocational education, Vocational 

rehabilitation.

Approved: July 28, 2004. 

Anthony J. Principi, 

Secretary of Veterans Affairs. 

August 26, 2004. 

William J. Carr, 

Acting Deputy Under Secretary (Military 

Personnel Policy).

■ For the reasons set out above, 38 CFR 

part 21, subpart H, is amended as set 

forth below:

PART 21—VOCATIONAL 

REHABILITATION AND EDUCATION

Subpart H—Educational Assistance 

Test Program

■ 1. The authority citation for part 21, 

subpart H, continues to read as follows:

Authority: 10 U.S.C. ch.107; 38 U.S.C. 

501(a), 3695, 5101, 5113, 5303A; 42 U.S.C. 

2000; sec. 901, Pub. L. 96–342, 94 Stat. 1111–

1114, unless otherwise noted.

21.5820 [Amended]

■ 2. Section 21.5820 is amended by:

■ a. In paragraph (b)(1), removing 

‘‘2002–03’’ and adding, in its place, 

‘‘2003–04’’, and by removing ‘‘$3,849’’

and adding, it its place, ‘‘$4,219’’.

■ b. In paragraph (b)(2)(ii), removing 

‘‘2002–03’’ and adding, in its place, 

‘‘2003–04’’.

■ c. In paragraphs (b)(2)(ii)(A) and 

(b)(3)(ii)(A), removing ‘‘$427.67’’ and 

adding, in each place, ‘‘$468.78’’, and by 

removing ‘‘$213.84’’ and adding, in each 

place, ‘‘$234.39’’.

■ d. In paragraphs (b)(2)(ii)(B) and 

(b)(3)(ii)(B), removing ‘‘$14.26’’ and 

adding, in each place, ‘‘$15.63’’, and by 

removing ‘‘$7.13’’ and adding, in each 

place, ‘‘$7.81’’.

■ e. In paragraphs (b)(2)(ii)(C) and 

(b)(3)(ii)(C), removing ‘‘3 cents’’ and 

adding, in each place ‘‘2 cents’’, and by 

removing ‘‘6 cents’’ and adding, in each 

place ‘‘1 cent’’.

■ f. In paragraph (b)(3)(ii) introductory 

text, removing ‘‘2002–03’’ and adding, in 

its place, ‘‘2003–04’’.

21.5822 [Amended]

■ 3. Section 21.5822 is amended by:

■ a. In paragraphs (b)(1)(i) and (b)(2)(i), 

removing ‘‘$959’’ and adding, in each 

place, ‘‘$1,051’’, and by removing 

‘‘2002–03’’ and adding, in each place, 

‘‘2003–04’’.

■ b. In paragraphs (b)(1)(ii) and (b)(2)(ii), 

removing ‘‘$479.50’’ and adding, in each 

place, ‘‘$525.50’’, and by removing 

‘‘2002–03’’ and adding, in each place, 

‘‘2003–04’’.

[FR Doc. 04–23756 Filed 10–22–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8320–01–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[CO–001–0077a; FRL–7815–5] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Colorado; Designation of Areas for Air 

Quality Planning Purposes, Steamboat 

Springs

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is taking final rule action 

to approve a State Implementation Plan 

(SIP) revision submitted by the State of 

Colorado on July 31, 2002, for the 

purpose of redesignating the Steamboat 

Springs, Colorado area from 

nonattainment to attainment for 

particulate matter with an aerodynamic 

diameter less than or equal to a nominal 

10 micrometers (PM10) under the 1987 

standards. The Governor’s submittal, 

among other things, documents that the 

Steamboat Springs area has attained the 

PM10 national ambient air quality 

standards (NAAQS), requests 

redesignation to attainment and 

includes a maintenance plan for the area 

demonstrating maintenance of the PM10

NAAQS for ten years. On August 5, 

2004, EPA proposed to approve (69 FR 

47399) in parallel with a direct final 

rule (69 FR 47366) Colorado’s 

Steamboat Springs submittal in 

conjunction with Colorado’s submittal 

to redesignate Lamar, Colorado. 

However, adverse comments pertaining 

to the Lamar PM10 redesignation were 

received during the public comment 

period, therefore, EPA withdrew the 

approval of Lamar and Steamboat 

Springs. Since no comments were 

received during the public comment 

period on the approval of redesignating 

Steamboat Springs, EPA is acting to 

approve the redesignation in this final 

rule. EPA is approving this 

redesignation request and maintenance 

plan for Steamboat Springs because 

Colorado has met the applicable 

requirements of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA), as amended. Upon the effective 

date of this approval, the Steamboat 

Springs area will be designated 

attainment for the PM10 NAAQS. This 

action is being taken under sections 107, 

110, and 175A of the Clean Air Act.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule is 

effective November 24, 2004.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this under Docket ID No. CO–

001–0077a. Some information in the 

docket is not publicly available, i.e., 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Publicly available 

docket materials are available 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 docket. You may view the 

docket Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. 

to 4 p.m., excluding federal holidays. 

Copies of the Incorporation by 

Reference material are also available at 

the Air and Radiation Docket and 

Information Center, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Room B–108 (Mail 

Code 6102T), 1301 Constitution Ave., 

NW., Washington, DC 20460.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Libby Faulk, Air and Radiation Program, 

U.S. EPA, Region VIII, 999 18th Street, 

Ste. 300 (8P–AR), Denver, Colorado, 

80202–2466. Telephone: (303) 312–

6083. E-mail Address: 

faulk.libby@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For the 

purpose of this document, we are giving 

meaning to certain words or initials as 

follows: 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 205 / Monday, October 25, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 62211

(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 SIP mean or refer to 

State Implementation Plan. 

(iv) The words State mean the State 

of Colorado, unless the context indicates 

otherwise.

Table of Contents 

I. EPA’s Final Action 

A. What Action Is EPA Taking in This 

Direct Final Rule? 

II. Summary of Redesignation Request and 

Maintenance Plan 

A. What Requirements Must Be Followed 

for Redesignation to Attainment? 

B. Does the Steamboat Springs 

Redesignation Requests and 

Maintenance Plan Meet the CAA 

Requirements? 

C. Have the Transportation Conformity 

Requirements Been Met? 

D. Did Colorado Follow the Proper 

Procedures for Adopting this Action? 

III. Background 

IV. Consideration of CAA section 110(l) 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. EPA’s Final Action 

A. What Action Is EPA Taking in This 

Direct Final Rule? 

We are approving the Governor’s 

submittal of July 31, 2002, that requests 

redesignation for the Steamboat Springs 

nonattainment area to attainment for the 

1987 PM10 standards. Included in 

Colorado’s submittal are changes to the 

‘‘State Implementation Plan—Specific 

Regulations for Nonattainment—

Attainment/Maintenance Areas (Local 

Areas)’’ which we are approving, under 

section 110 of the CAA, into Colorado’s 

SIP. We are also approving the 

maintenance plan for the Steamboat 

Springs PM10 nonattainment area, 

which was submitted with Colorado’s 

July 31, 2002 redesignation request. We 

are approving this request and 

maintenance plan because Colorado has 

adequately addressed all of the 

requirements of the CAA for 

redesignation to attainment applicable 

to the Steamboat Springs PM10

nonattainment area. Upon the effective 

date of this action, the Steamboat 

Springs area designation status under 40 

CFR Part 81 will be revised to 

attainment. 

II. Summary of Redesignation Request 

and Maintenance Plan 

A. What Requirements Must Be 

Followed for Redesignations to 

Attainment? 

In order for a nonattainment area to be 

redesignated to attainment, the 

following conditions in section 

107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA must be met: 

(i) We must determine that the area 

has attained the NAAQS; 

(ii) The applicable implementation 

plan for the area must be fully approved 

under section 110(k) of the CAA; 

(iii) We must determine that the 

improvement in air quality is due to 

permanent and enforceable reductions 

in emissions resulting from 

implementation of the applicable 

implementation plan and applicable 

Federal air pollutant control regulations 

and other permanent and enforceable 

reductions; 

(iv) We must fully approve a 

maintenance plan for the area as 

meeting the requirements of CAA 

section 175A; and,

(v) The State containing such an area 

must meet all requirements applicable 

to the area under section 110 and part 

D of the CAA. 

Our September 4, 1992 guidance 

entitled ‘‘Procedures for Processing 

Requests to Redesignate Areas to 

Attainment’’ outlines how to assess the 

adequacy of redesignation requests 

against the conditions listed above. 

The following is a brief discussion of 

how Colorado’s redesignation request 

and maintenance plan meets the 

requirements of the CAA for 

redesignation of the Steamboat Springs 

area to attainment for PM10. 

B. Does the Steamboat Springs 

Redesignation Request and 

Maintenance Plan Meet the CAA 

Requirements? 

i. Attainment of the PM10 NAAQS 

A state must demonstrate that an area 

has attained the PM10 NAAQS through 

submittal of ambient air quality data 

from an ambient air monitoring network 

representing maximum PM10

concentrations. The data, which must be 

quality assured and recorded in the 

Aerometric Information Retrieval 

System (AIRS), must show that the 

average annual number of expected 

exceedances for the area is less than or 

equal to 1.0, pursuant to 40 CFR 50.6. 

In making this showing, the three most 

recent years of complete air quality data 

must be used. 

Colorado operates two PM10

monitoring sites in the Steamboat 

Springs PM10 nonattainment area. 

Colorado submitted ambient air quality 

data from both monitoring sites which 

demonstrate that the area has attained 

the PM10 NAAQS. These air quality data 

were quality assured and placed in 

AIRS. Two exceedances of the 24-hour 

PM10 NAAQS were measured in 1993 

and 1996. However, the 3-year average 

of estimated exceedances remained 

below 1.0 (per year) (40 CFR Part 50.6) 

and therefore did not result in a 

violation of the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS. 

The three most recent years of data for 

the area (2000–2002) are complete (i.e., 

data are available for at least 75% of the 

scheduled PM10 samples per quarter) 

with no recorded violations. The annual 

PM10 NAAQS has never been exceeded 

in Steamboat Springs. We believe that 

Colorado has adequately demonstrated, 

through ambient air quality data, that 

the PM10 NAAQS have been attained in 

the Steamboat Springs area. 

ii. State Implementation Plan Approval 

Those States containing initial 

moderate PM10 nonattainment areas 

were required by the 1990 amendments 

to the CAA to submit a SIP by 

November 15, 1991 which demonstrated 

attainment of the PM10 NAAQS by 

December 31, 1994. To approve a 

redesignation request, the SIP for the 

area must be fully approved under 

section 110(k) and must satisfy all 

requirements that apply to that area. 

The Steamboat Springs area was 

designated nonattainment for PM10 on 

December 21, 1993 (58 FR 67334). EPA 

fully approved the PM10 SIP for 

Steamboat Springs on December 31, 

1997 (62 FR 68188). The PM10 SIP for 

Steamboat Springs is approved as 

meeting the moderate PM10

nonattainment plan requirements. 

iii. Improvement in Air Quality Due to 

Permanent and Enforceable Measures 

Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii) of the CAA 

provides that for an area to be 

redesignated to attainment, the 

Administrator must determine that the 

improvement in air quality is due to 

emission reductions which are 

permanent and enforceable. The 

primary sources of PM10 emissions in 

the Steamboat Springs area are reentrained road dust (from highways, 

paved roads, chip sealed roads, and 

unpaved roads) and woodburning. The 

permanent and enforceable control 

measures that brought the Steamboat 

Springs PM10 nonattainment area into 

attainment and were approved by EPA 

into Colorado’s SIP in 1997 are 

described in detail below. 

The City of Steamboat Springs and 

Routt County adopted local ordinance 

and resolutions that limit the number 

and types of woodburning devices in 

new construction in the Steamboat 

Springs area. Installation of new solid 

fuel burning devices is limited to one 

approved device for any building. The 

Steamboat Springs area adopted these 

measures in the late 1980s and early 

1990s and the measures were included 

62212 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 205 / Monday, October 25, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

in State regulation in 1993 (Section 

VIII.E. of the ‘‘State Implementation 

Plan—Specific Regulations for 

Nonattainment—Attainment/

Maintenance Areas (Local Areas)). The 

rule was approved by EPA on December 

31, 1997 (62 FR 68188). 

The Steamboat Springs area adopted 

two street sanding control strategies for 

the nonattainment area. The first street 

sanding control strategy requires that 

any user that applies street sanding 

materials in the Steamboat Springs area 

must use materials containing less than 

two percent fines, except on U.S. 

Highway 40 from the junction of U.S. 

Highway 131 towards Rabbit Ears Pass. 

This strategy was included in State 

regulations in 1996 (Section VIII.B. of 

the ‘‘State Implementation Plan—

Specific Regulations for 

Nonattainment—Attainment/

Maintenance Areas (Local Areas)). The 

second street sanding control strategy 

requires that the Colorado Department 

of Transportation (CDOT) reduce the 

amount of sand applied on U.S. 

Highways 40 and 131 in the Steamboat 

Springs area by 10 percent. This strategy 

was included in State regulation in 1996 

(Section VIII.C. of the ‘‘State 

Implementation Plan—Specific 

Regulations for Nonattainment—

Attainment/Maintenance Areas (Local 

Areas)). Both the street sanding controls 

were approved by EPA on December 31, 

1997 (62 FR 68188). 

In addition, the Steamboat Springs 

area adopted street sweeping 

requirements for a defined section of 

Lincoln Avenue (Highway 40 in town). 

Street cleaning using vacuum sweepers 

or any other sweepers with equal 

efficiency must be performed four times 

within four days of the roadways 

becoming free and clear of snow and ice 

following each sanding deployment use. 

This strategy was included in State 

regulations in 1996 (Section VIII.D. of 

the ‘‘State Implementation Plan—

Specific Regulations for 

Nonattainment—Attainment/

Maintenance Areas (Local Areas)). The 

rule was approved by EPA on December 

31, 1997 (62 FR 68188). 

In addition to the local control 

measures that have been adopted in the 

Steamboat Springs area, Colorado’s July 

31, 2002 submittal did cite several Statewide regulations that limit emissions 

from any new source that may locate in 

the Steamboat Springs area. These rules 

are: ‘‘Air Pollution Emission Notices, 

Construction Permits and Fees, 

Operating Permits and Including the 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration’’

(Regulation No. 3), ‘‘Standards of 

Performance for New Stationary 

Sources’’ (Regulation No. 6), and the 

‘‘Common Provisions Regulation.’’

In addition to these State and Local 

control measures, the Federal Motor 

Vehicle Emission Control Program has 

helped reduce PM10 emissions in 

Steamboat Springs as older, higher 

emitting diesel vehicles are replaced 

with newer vehicles that meet tighter 

emission standards. Overall, despite 

growth in the Steamboat Springs 

nonattainment area (e.g., in population 

and vehicle miles traveled), attainment 

of the PM10 NAAQS has been 

demonstrated. We have evaluated the 

various control measures, in addition to 

the 1999 attainment year emission 

inventory and the projected emissions 

described below, and have concluded 

that the continued attainment of the 

PM10 NAAQS in the Steamboat Springs 

area has resulted from emission 

reductions that are permanent and 

enforceable. 

iv. Fully Approved Maintenance Plan 

Under Section 175A of the CAA

Section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA 

requires that, for a nonattainment area 

to be redesignated to attainment, we 

must fully approve a maintenance plan 

which meets the requirements of section 

175A of the CAA. The plan must 

demonstrate continued attainment of 

the relevant NAAQS in the area for at 

least 10 years after our approval of the 

redesignation. Eight years after our 

approval of a redesignation, Colorado 

must submit a revised maintenance plan 

demonstrating attainment for the 10 

years following the initial 10 year 

period. The maintenance plan must also 

contain a contingency plan to ensure 

prompt correction of any violation of 

the NAAQS. (See sections 175A(b) and 

(d).) Our September 4, 1992 guidance 

outlines five core elements that are 

necessary to ensure maintenance of the 

relevant NAAQS in an area seeking 

redesignation from nonattainment to 

attainment. Those elements, as well as 

guidelines for subsequent maintenance 

plan revisions, are as follows: 

a. Attainment Inventory 

The maintenance plan should include 

an attainment emission inventory to 

identify the level of emissions in the 

area which is sufficient to attain the 

NAAQS. An emission inventory for 

Steamboat Springs was developed for 

the attainment year 1999 as well as the 

projection inventory for the 2005 and 

2010 interim years and the 2015 

maintenance year. The emission 

inventory incorporates the emission 

estimates for aircrafts, restaurants, 

stationary sources, woodburning, 

mobile exhaust, and re-entrained road 

dust emissions from paved and unpaved 

roads that are contained in the 

nonattainment area SIP element that 

was approved by EPA on December 31, 

1997 (62 FR 68188). Aircraft emissions 

were determined by using EPA and 

Colorado’s Air Pollution Control 

Division (APCD) developed emission 

factors and activity data provided by the 

City of Steamboat Springs. Restaurant 

emissions were developed using 

emission factors and survey data of 

activity in the Steamboat Springs area. 

Woodburning emissions were 

determined by using EPA and APCD 

developed emission factors and survey 

data of woodburning activity and 

practices in the Steamboat Springs area. 

Re-entrained dust from paved and 

unpaved roads were developed using 

APCD and CDOT vehicle miles traveled 

data and emission factors that were 

calculated using the EPA-approved 

formula, local silt loading data, and the 

application of credits from street 

sweeping and street sand reduction 

control measures. Mobil exhaust was 

determined using EPA’s PART5 model. 

Stationary source emission in the 

Steamboat Springs area were 

determined by calculating allowable 

emissions from three facilities in the 

area in existence in the mid-1990s. The 

Craig and Hayden power plants were 

modeled at allowable emissions for all 

years however these emissions were not 

included in the emission inventories 

because they are not located within the 

Steamboat Springs nonattainment—

attainment/maintenance area and 

modeling domain. Summary emission 

figures from the 1999 attainment year 

inventory, the 2005 and 2010 interim 

years, and the 2015 projected inventory 

for the Steamboat Springs area are 

provided in Table 1 below.

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 205 / Monday, October 25, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 62213

1EPA’s current guidance on the preparation of 

PM10 emission inventories includes, ‘‘PM10

Emission Inventory Requirements,’’ September 

1994, ‘‘Emission Inventory Improvement Program 

Technical Report Series, Volumes I–VII,’’ July 1997 

and September 1999, ‘‘Revised 1999 National 

Emission Inventory Preparation Plan,’’ February 

2001.

TABLE 1.—1999, 2005, 2010 AND 2015 PM10 TOTAL EMISSION INVENTORY IN POUNDS PER DAY FOR STEAMBOAT

SPRINGS

PM10 emissions (lbs./day) 

1999 2005 2010 2015 

Aircraft .............................................................................................................................................. 24 27 30 34 

Restaurant Grills .............................................................................................................................. 99 114 127 143 

Vehicle Exhaust ............................................................................................................................... 53 52 56 63 

Paved Roads ................................................................................................................................... 9122 10059 11271 12630 

Unpaved Roads ............................................................................................................................... 7519 7233 8104 9080 

Stationary Sources .......................................................................................................................... 584 242 271 304 

Woodburning .................................................................................................................................... 1057 1216 1353 1522 

More detailed descriptions of the 

1999 attainment year inventory, the 

2005 and 2010 interim years, and the 

2015 projected inventory for the 

Steamboat Springs area are documented 

in the maintenance plan in Chapter 3, 

section B and in the Colorado technical 

support documentation. Colorado’s 

submittal contains detailed emission 

inventory information that was prepared 

in accordance with EPA emission 

inventory guidance.1 Following our 

review, we have determined that 

Colorado prepared an adequate 

attainment inventory for the Steamboat 

Springs area.

b. Maintenance Demonstration 

A state may generally demonstrate 

maintenance of the NAAQS by either 

showing that future emissions of a 

pollutant or its precursors will not 

exceed the level of the attainment 

inventory, or by modeling to show that 

the future mix of sources and emission 

rates will not cause a violation of the 

NAAQS. The maintenance 

demonstration for the Steamboat 

Springs area relied on the dispersion 

modeling methodology, which is the 

same level of modeling used in the 

original attainment demonstration for 

the moderate PM10 SIP for this area. 

Maintenance is demonstrated when the 

highest modeled values at each receptor 

on the modeling grid are below the 150 

μg/m3. The emission inventories for 

2005, 2010, and 2015 were input into 

the dispersion model to obtain 2005, 

2010, and 2015 projected PM10

concentrations. The dispersion 

modeling for the Steamboat Springs 

PM10 maintenance area demonstrates 

that in 2005 the highest concentration is 

121 μg/m3, in 2010 the highest 

concentration is 132 μg/m3, and in 2015 

the highest concentration is 146 μg/m3

for the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS. 

Since no exceedances of the PM10

annual NAAQS have ever occurred in 

the Steamboat Springs area and since 

the maintenance demonstration clearly 

shows maintenance of the 24-hour PM10

NAAQS in this area through the year 

2015, it is reasonable and adequate to 

assume that protection of the 24-hour 

standard will be sufficient to protect the 

annual standard as well. Thus, EPA 

believes Colorado has adequately 

demonstrated that the Steamboat 

Springs area will maintain the PM10

NAAQS for at least the next ten years. 

Detailed information regarding the 

dispersion modeling results and source 

apportionment can be found in Chapter 

3, section C of the Steamboat Springs 

maintenance plan and in the technical 

support document. 

c. Monitoring Network 

Once a nonattainment area has been 

redesignated to attainment, the State 

must continue to operate an appropriate 

air quality monitoring network, in 

accordance with 40 CFR part 58, to 

verify the attainment status of the area. 

The maintenance plan should contain 

provisions for continued operation of air 

quality monitors that will provide such 

verification. Colorado operates two 

PM10 monitoring sites in the Steamboat 

Springs area. We approve these sites 

annually, and any future change would 

require discussion with, and approval 

from, us. In their July 31, 2002 

submittal, Colorado committed to 

continue to operate the PM10 monitoring 

stations in Steamboat Springs, in 

accordance with 40 CFR part 58.

d. Verification of Continued Attainment 

A state’s maintenance plan submittal 

should indicate how it will track the 

progress of the maintenance plan. This 

is necessary due to the fact that the 

emission projections made for the 

maintenance demonstration depend on 

assumptions of point and area source 

growth. Colorado commits to operating 

the Steamboat Springs PM10 monitoring 

network and analyze the PM10

concentrations in accordance with 40 

CFR Part 58 to verify continued 

maintenance of the PM10 NAAQS. In 

addition, Colorado commits to track the 

progress of the Steamboat Springs 

maintenance plan through a periodic 

review (every three years) of the 

assumptions made in the emissions 

inventories to verify continued 

maintenance of the PM10 NAAQS in 

both areas. EPA relies on these 

commitments in approving the 

Steamboat Springs maintenance plan. 

e. Contingency Plan 

Section 175A(d) of the CAA requires 

that a maintenance plan also include 

contingency provisions, as necessary, to 

promptly correct any violation of the 

NAAQS that occurs after redesignation 

of the area. For the purposes of section 

175A, a state is not required to have 

fully adopted contingency measures that 

will take effect without further action by 

the State in order for the maintenance 

plan to be approved. However, the 

contingency plan is an enforceable part 

of the SIP and should ensure that 

contingency measures are adopted 

expeditiously when a violation of the 

NAAQS has occurred in a redesignated 

area. The plan should clearly identify 

the measures to be adopted, a schedule 

and procedure for adoption and 

implementation, and a specific time 

limit for action by the State. The State 

should also identify the specific 

indicators, or triggers, which will be 

used to determine when the 

contingency plan will be implemented. 

Chapter 3, section H, of the Steamboat 

Springs maintenance plan contains the 

area’s PM10 contingency plan. 

Exceedances trigger one level of 

response and violations trigger another. 

If there’s an exceedance, the Air 

Pollution Control Division (APCD) and 

the local government staff will develop 

appropriate contingency measures 

intended to prevent or correct a 

violation of the PM10 standard for the 

PM10 maintenance area. APCD and local 

62214 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 205 / Monday, October 25, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

government staff will consider relevant 

information, including information 

about historical exceedances, 

meteorological data, the most recent 

estimates of growth and emissions, and 

whether the exceedance might be 

attributed to an exceptional event. The 

Steamboat Springs maintenance plan 

indicates that the State will generally 

notify EPA and local governments in the 

PM10 maintenance area within 30 days 

of the exceedance, but no later than 45 

days. The process for exceedances will 

be completed within six months of the 

exceedance notification. 

If a violation of the PM10 NAAQS has 

occurred, a public hearing process at the 

State and local level will begin. If the 

Colorado Air Quality Control 

Commission (AQCC) agrees that the 

implementation of local measures will 

prevent further exceedances or 

violations, the AQCC may endorse or 

approve of the local measures without 

adopting State requirements. If, 

however, the AQCC finds locally 

adopted contingency measures to be 

inadequate, the AQCC will adopt State 

enforceable measures as deemed 

necessary to prevent additional 

exceedances or violations. Contingency 

measures will be adopted and fully 

implemented within one year of the 

PM10 NAAQS violation. Any Stateenforceable measures will become part 

of the next revised maintenance plan, 

submitted to us for approval. 

The Steamboat Springs PM10

maintenance plan specifies the 

following as potential contingency 

measures for the Steamboat Springs 

area: Reinstating the 10 percent street 

sand reduction requirement for State 

highways; increasing the Lincoln 

Avenue street sweeping frequency from 

two to four times after each sanding 

event; increased street sweeping 

requirements; road paving requirements; 

more stringent street sand 

specifications; voluntary or mandatory 

woodburning curtailment; bans on all 

woodburning; expanded, mandatory use 

of alternative de-icers; re-establishing 

nonattainment new source review 

permitting requirements for stationary 

sources; 2 transportation control 

measures designed to reduce vehicle 

miles traveled; or other emission control 

measures as deemed appropriate, 

considering various factors. 

f. Subsequent Maintenance Plan 

Revisions 

In accordance with section 175A(b) of 

the CAA, the State of Colorado is 

required to submit a revision to the 

maintenance plan eight years after the 

redesignation of the Steamboat Springs 

area to attainment for PM10. This 

revision is to provide for maintenance of 

the NAAQS for an additional ten years 

following the first ten year period. 

Colorado committed, in the Steamboat 

Springs redesignation request, to submit 

a revised maintenance plan, for each 

area, to EPA eight years after the 

approval of the redesignation request 

and maintenance plan. 

v. Meeting Applicable Requirements of 

Section 110 and Part D of the CAA 

In order for an area to be redesignated 

to attainment, section 107(d)(3)(E) 

requires that it must have met all 

applicable requirements of section 110 

and part D of the CAA. We interpret this 

to mean that, for a redesignation request 

to be approved, the State must have met 

all requirements that applied to the 

subject area prior to, or at the time of, 

submitting a complete redesignation 

request. In our evaluation of a 

redesignation request, we don’t need to 

consider other requirements of the CAA 

that became due after the date of the 

submission of a complete redesignation 

request.

a. Section 110 Requirements 

Section 110(a)(2) contains general 

requirements for nonattainment plans. 

These requirements were met for 

Steamboat Springs with Colorado’s 

September 16, 1997 submittal for the 

Steamboat Springs PM10 nonattainment 

area. EPA fully approved the Steamboat 

Springs PM10 SIP on December 31, 1997 

(62 FR 68188). 

b. Part D Requirements 

Before a PM10 nonattainment area 

may be redesignated to attainment, the 

State must have fulfilled the applicable 

requirements of part D. Subpart 1 of part 

D establishes the general requirements 

applicable to all nonattainment areas, 

subpart 4 of part D establishes specific 

requirements applicable to PM10

nonattainment areas. 

The requirements of sections 172(c) 

and 189(a) regarding attainment of the 

PM10 NAAQS, and the requirements of 

section 172(c) regarding reasonable 

further progress, imposition of 

Reasonably Available Control Measures 

(RACM), the adoption of contingency 

measures, and the submission of an 

emission inventory, have been satisfied 

through our December 31, 1997 (62 FR 

68188) approval of the Steamboat 

Springs PM10 SIP. 

Although EPA’s regulations (see 40 

CFR 51.396) require that states adopt 

transportation conformity provisions in 

their SIPs for areas designated 

nonattainment or subject to an EPAapproved maintenance plan, we have 

decided that a transportation conformity 

SIP is not an applicable requirement for 

purposes of evaluating a redesignation 

request under section 107(d) of the 

CAA. This decision is reflected in EPA’s 

1996 approval of the Boston carbon 

monoxide redesignation. (See 61 FR 

2918, January 30, 1996.) 

We approved the requirements of the 

part D new source review (NSR) permit 

program for the Steamboat Springs 

moderate PM10 nonattainment area on 

December 31, 1997 (62 FR 68188). 

Colorado’s nonattainment area NSR 

permitting regulations were fully 

approved on September 19, 1994 (59 FR 

47807). Once the Steamboat Springs 

area is redesignated to attainment, the 

prevention of significant deterioration 

(PSD) requirements of part C of the CAA 

will apply. Colorado’s PSD regulations, 

which we approved as meeting all 

applicable Federal requirements, apply 

to any area designated as unclassifiable 

or attainment and, thus, will become 

fully effective in the Steamboat Springs 

area upon redesignation of the area to 

attainment. 

C. Have the Transportation Conformity 

Requirements Been Met? 

Transportation conformity is required 

by section 176(c) of the CAA. Our 

conformity rule requires that 

transportation plans, programs and 

projects conform to SIPs and that 

transportation activities will not 

produce new air quality violations, 

worsen existing violations, or delay 

timely attainment of the NAAQS. On 

March 2, 1999, the United States Court 

of Appeals for the District of Columbia 

Circuit issued a decision in 

Environmental Defense Fund v. the 

Environmental Protection Agency, No. 

97–1637, that we must make an 

affirmative determination that the 

submitted motor vehicle emission 

budgets contained in State 

Implementation Plans (SIPs) are 

adequate before they are used to 

determine the conformity of 

Transportation Plans or Transportation 

Improvement Programs. In response to 

the court decision, we make any 

submitted SIP revision containing an 

emission budget available for public 

comment and respond to these 

comments before announcing our 

adequacy determination. The criteria 

and process by which we determine 

whether a SIP’s motor vehicle emission 

budgets are adequate for conformity 

purposes are outlined in 40 CFR 

93.118(e)(4) and in the guidance 

‘‘Conformity Guidance on 

Implementation of March 2, 1999 

Conformity Court Decision,’’ dated May 

14, 1999. 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 205 / Monday, October 25, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 62215

In the Steamboat Springs maintenance 

plan, Colorado established a new mobile 

source emissions budget of 21,773 lbs./

day for the year 2015 and beyond. The 

new mobile source emissions budget for 

Steamboat Spring is the total of the 2015 

mobile source PM10 emissions for the 

area and includes emissions from 

vehicle exhaust, highways, paved 

arterial and local roads, and gravel 

roads. EPA’s approval of 21,773 lbs./day 

for Steamboat Springs as the budget for 

this area means that the value must be 

used for conformity determinations for 

2015 and beyond. 

EPA sent a letter to the Colorado Air 

Pollution Control Division (APCD) on 

September 25, 2002 stating that the 

motor vehicle emission budgets that was 

submitted with the Steamboat Springs 

PM10 maintenance plan is adequate. 

This finding has also been announced 

on EPA’s conformity Web site: http://

www.epa.gov/otaq/transp/conform/

adequacy.htm. We documented our 

adequacy determination for Steamboat 

Springs in the Federal Register on 

October 28, 2002 (67 FR 65789). The 

budgets took effect on November 12, 

2002 (15 days after our announcement 

in the Federal Register). 

D. Did Colorado Follow the Proper 

Procedures for Adopting This Action? 

The CAA requires States to observe 

certain procedural requirements in 

developing implementation plans and 

plan revisions for submission. Section 

110(a)(2) of the CAA provides that each 

implementation plan submitted by a 

State must be adopted after reasonable 

notice and public hearing. Section 

110(l) of the CAA similarly provides 

that each revision to an implementation 

plan submitted by a State under the 

CAA must be adopted by such State 

after reasonable notice and public 

hearing.

Colorado held a public hearing for the 

proposed rule changes on November 15, 

2001. The rulemaking was adopted by 

the Air Quality Control Commission 

(AQCC) directly after the November 15, 

2001 hearing and was formally 

submitted to EPA by the Governor on 

July 31, 2002. We have evaluated the 

Governor’s submittal and have 

determined that Colorado met the 

requirements for reasonable notice and 

public hearing under section 110(a)(2) 

of the CAA. 

III. Background 

To implement our 1987 revisions to 

the particulate matter NAAQS, on 

August 7, 1987 (52 FR 29383), we 

categorized areas of the nation into three 

groups based on the likelihood that 

protection of the PM10 NAAQS would 

require revisions of the existing SIP. We 

identified the Steamboat Springs area as 

a ‘‘Group II’’ area of concern, i.e., areas 

where attainment of the NAAQS is 

uncertain and the SIP may require only 

slight adjustment. 

Pursuant to sections 107(d)(4)(B) and 

188(a) of the Act, areas previously 

identified as Group I (55 FR 45799, 

October 31, 1990) and other areas which 

had monitored violations of the PM10

NAAQS prior to January 1, 1989 were, 

by operation of law upon enactment of 

the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments 

(Pub. L. 101–549, 104 Stat. 2399), 

designated nonattainment and classified 

as moderate for PM10. Formal 

codification in 40 CFR part 81 of those 

areas was announced in a Federal 

Register notice dated November 6, 1991 

(56 FR 56694) (see also 57 FR 56762, 

November 30, 1992). All other areas of 

the country were designated 

unclassifiable for PM10 by operation of 

law upon enactment of the 1990 

Amendments (see section 

107(d)(4)(B)(iii) of the Act). EPA 

redesignated and classified the 

Steamboat Springs area as a PM10

moderate nonattainment area on 

December 21, 1993 (58 FR 67334) and 

fully approved the PM10 SIP for 

Steamboat Springs on December 31, 

1997 (62 FR 68188). 

EPA promulgated new standards for 

PM10 on September 18, 1997. Areas 

were to be designated under the new 

PM10 standard by July 2000. On May 14, 

1999, the United States Court of 

Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in 

American Trucking Associations, Inc. et 

al., v. United States Environmental 

Protection Agency vacated the 1997 

PM10 standard. Because of the Court 

ruling, we are continuing to implement 

the pre-existing PM10 standard, and are 

therefore approving redesignations to 

qualified PM10 nonattainment areas. On 

July 31, 2002 the Governor of Colorado 

submitted a request to redesignate the 

Steamboat Springs moderate PM10

nonattainment area to attainment (for 

the 1987 PM10 NAAQS) and submitted 

maintenance plans for the areas. 

IV. Consideration of CAA Section 110(I) 

Section 110(l) of the CAA states that 

a SIP revision cannot be approved if the 

revision would interfere with any 

applicable requirement concerning 

attainment and reasonable further 

progress towards attainment of a 

NAAQS or any other applicable 

requirement of the CAA. As stated 

above, the Steamboat Springs area has 

shown continuous attainment of the 

PM10 NAAQS and has met the 

applicable Federal requirements for 

redesignation to attainment. The 

maintenance plan and associated SIP 

revision will not interfere with 

attainment, reasonable further progress, 

or any other applicable requirement of 

the CAA. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Review 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993), this action is 

not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and 

therefore is not subject to review by the 

Office of Management and Budget. For 

this reason, this action is also not 

subject to Executive Order 13211, 

‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May 

22, 2001). This action merely approves 

state law as meeting Federal 

requirements and imposes no additional 

requirements beyond those imposed by 

state law. Accordingly, the 

Administrator certifies that this rule 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities under the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this 

rule approves pre-existing requirements 

under state law and does not impose 

any additional enforceable duty beyond 

that required by state law, it does not 

contain any unfunded mandate or 

significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments, as described in the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

(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.

62216 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 205 / Monday, October 25, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s 

role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the 

absence of a prior existing requirement 

for the State to use voluntary consensus 

standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 

to disapprove a SIP submission for 

failure to use VCS. It would thus be 

inconsistent with applicable law for 

EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, 

to use VCS in place of a SIP submission 

that otherwise satisfies the provisions of 

the Clean Air Act. Thus, the 

requirements of section 12(d) of the 

National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 

272 note) do not apply. This rule does 

not impose an information collection 

burden under the provisions of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 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 December 27, 

2004. Filing a petition for 

reconsideration by the Administrator of 

this final rule does not affect the finality 

of this rule for the purposes of judicial 

review nor does it extend the time 

within which a petition for judicial 

review may be filed, and shall not 

postpone the effectiveness of such rule 

or action. This action may not be 

challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See section 

307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects 

40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Particulate Matter, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

40 CFR Part 81 

Air pollution control.

Dated: September 9, 2004. 

Patricia D. Hull, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8.

■ 40 CFR parts 52 and 81, chapter I, title 

40 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)(101) to read as 

follows:

§ 52.320 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * * 

(101) On July 31, 2002, the State of 

Colorado submitted a maintenance plan 

for the Steamboat Springs PM10

nonattainment area and requested that 

this area be redesignated to attainment 

for the PM10 National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards. The redesignation 

request and maintenance plan satisfies 

all applicable requirements of the Clean 

Air Act. 

(i) Incorporation by reference. 

(A) Colorado Air Quality Control 

Commission, ‘‘State Implementation 

Plan—Specific Regulations for 

Nonattainment—Attainment/

Maintenance Areas (Local Elements),’’ 5 

CCR 1001–20, revisions adopted 

November 15, 2001, effective December 

30, 2001 as follows: Section VIII., titled 

‘‘Steamboat Springs PM10 Attainment/

Maintenance Area’’ and supersedes and 

replaces all prior versions of Section 

VIII.

■ 3. Section 52.332 is amended by 

adding paragraph (n) to read as follows:

§ 52.332 Control strategy: Particulate 

matter.

* * * * *

(n) On July 31, 2002, the State of 

Colorado submitted a maintenance plan 

for the Steamboat Springs PM10

nonattainment area and requested that 

this area be redesignated to attainment 

for the PM10 National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards. The redesignation 

request and maintenance plan satisfies 

all applicable requirements of the Clean 

Air Act.

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 section 81.306, the table entitled 

‘‘Colorado–PM–10’’ is amended by 

revising the entries under Routt County 

(part) for ‘‘Steamboat Springs’’ to read as 

follows:

§ 81.306 Colorado.

* * * * *

COLORADO.—PM–10 

Designated Area 

Designation Classification 

Date Type Date Type 

* * * * * * * 

Routt County (part)—Steamboat Springs ............................................ November 24, 

2004.

Attainment. 

On the East—The Routt National Forest. 

On the South—The southern border of sections 19, 10, 21, 

T4N, R84W of the 6th P.M. and the southern border of sections 23, 24, T4N, R85W of the 6th P.M. 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 205 / Monday, October 25, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 62217

COLORADO.—PM–10—Continued

Designated Area 

Designation Classification 

Date Type Date Type 

On the West—Beginning at the southwestern corner of section 

23, T4N, R85W of the 6th P.M. North along the western border of sections 23, 14, 11, T4N, R85W. Thence, along the 

ridge which bisects sections 35, 36, 25, 24, 13, 14, 11, 12, 1, 

T5N, R85W, and sections 36, 25, 24, T6N, R85W. Thence 

heading northwest along the ridge which bisects sections 23, 

15, 10, 9, 4, T6N, R85W of 6th P.M. Thence, heading northeast along the ridge which bisects sections 33, 34, 35, 36, 25, 

T7N, R85W and sections 30 and 10 of T7N, R84W. Thence, 

north along the N 1/2 of the western edge of section 19, to 

the NW corner of section 18, T7N, R84W. 

On the North—The northern boundary of sections 16, 17, 18, 

T7N, R84W of 6th P.M. 

* * * * * * * 

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 04–23840 Filed 10–22–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 262 

[OA–2004–0004; FRL–7830–1] 

RIN 2090–AA13 

National Environmental Performance 

Track Program; Corrections

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA)

ACTION: Direct final rule; corrections.

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final 

action to revise and correct certain 

provisions in the Resource Conservation 

and Recovery Act (RCRA) program 

applicable only to members of the 

National Environmental Performance 

Track Program. The revisions concern 

the proposed rule published on August 

13, 2002 (67 FR 52674), and the 

subsequent final rule published on 

April 22, 2004 (69 FR 21737). Both the 

proposal and the final rule contained an 

inconsistency between the preamble 

language and regulatory language. The 

final rule also inadvertently omitted 

three references to applicable regulatory 

provisions that were properly 

referenced in the proposed rule. The 

proposed and final rules cover 

provisions under both the Clean Air Act 

and RCRA. Today’s direct final rule 

applies only to the RCRA provisions. 

The Clean Air Act provisions are 

unchanged. 

The regulatory proposal of August 13, 

2002 was published with a description 

in the preamble that was inconsistent 

with the proposed regulatory language. 

EPA used the word ‘‘or’’ in the preamble 

description of the provision requiring 

notice when a generator accumulates 

hazardous waste, while the subject 

regulatory language used the word 

‘‘and.’’ No public comment was 

received during the public comment 

period concerning the inconsistent 

language, and the April 2004 rule 

repeated the inconsistency between the 

preamble and the regulatory language. 

Today’s rule corrects the preamble 

language to clarify that the rule requires 

notification to both the Regional 

Administrator and the authorized State. 

In addition, the April 2004 final rule 

did not include three applicable 

regulatory provisions that were 

included in the original preamble of 

August 13, 2002 (67 FR 52674) proposal. 

The applicable regulatory provisions 

omitted from the final rule were 

correctly published in the proposal. 

Today’s rule corrects the April 2004 

final rule to include the applicable 

regulatory provisions. 

EPA is publishing today’s direct final 

rulemaking to address the inconsistency 

between the preamble and regulatory 

language, and to correct the 

inadvertently omitted applicable 

regulatory provisions. The applicable 

regulatory provisions corrected and 

finalized today are the same as the 

language that was proposed in August 

2002 and received public comment. 

Today’s corrections are being 

published as a direct final rule because 

EPA believes these revisions to be noncontroversial and does not anticipate 

any adverse comment. We are approving 

these revisions to correct the earlier 

inconsistency and omissions.

DATES: This direct final rule is effective 

December 27, 2004 unless EPA receives 

adverse comments by November 24, 

2004. If the Agency receives adverse 

comments it will withdraw this direct 

final rule by publishing a timely 

withdrawal in the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. OA–2004–

0004, 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://

www.epa.gov/edocket. EDOCKET, EPA’s 

electronic public docket and comment 

system, is EPA’s preferred method for 

receiving comments. Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments.

• Mail: Mr. Robert D. Sachs, 

Environmental Protection Agency, Mail 

code 1807T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, 

Washington, DC 20460 telephone 

number 202–566–2884; fax number 

202–566–0966; e-mail address: 

sachs.robert@epa.gov. 

• Hand Delivery: Office of 

Environmental Information Docket, 

Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 

West Building, Room B102, 1301 

Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC 20460. Such deliveries are only 

accepted during the Docket’s normal 

hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. OA–2004–0004. EPA’s 

policy is that all comments received 

will be included in the public docket 

without change and may be made 

available online at http://www.epa.gov/

edocket, 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,