```

[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 206 (Tuesday, October 24, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 63546-63549]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-27031]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CO-001-0041a, CO-001-0042a, UT-001-0032a; FRL-6889-2]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Colorado and Utah; 1996 Periodic Carbon Monoxide Emission Inventories

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: On May 10, 2000, the Governor of Colorado submitted a revision 
to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) that addressed the Clean Air Act 
(CAA) section 187(a)(5) requirement for 1996 Periodic Emission 
Inventories (PEI), for Carbon Monoxide (CO) nonattainment areas, for 
Denver, Colorado and Fort Collins, Colorado. On June 14, 1999, the 
Governor of Utah submitted a SIP revision for the 1996 CO PEI 
requirement for Utah County, Utah. In this action, the EPA is approving 
the 1996 CO PEIs for Denver, Colorado, Fort Collins, Colorado, and Utah 
County, Utah.

DATES: This direct final rule is effective on December 26, 2000 without 
further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by November 24, 
2000. If adverse comments are received, EPA will publish a timely 
withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform 
the public that the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Written comments may be mailed to Richard R. Long, Director, 
Air and Radiation Program, Mailcode 8P-AR, Environmental Protection 
Agency (EPA), Region VIII, 999 18th Street, Suite 300, Denver, 
Colorado, 80202.
    Copies of the documents relevant to this action are available for 
public inspection during normal business hours at the Air and Radiation 
Program, Environmental Protection Agency, Region VIII, 999 18th Street, 
Suite 300, Denver, Colorado 80202.
    Copies of the State documents relevant to this action are also 
available for public inspection at the Colorado Department of Public 
Health and Environment, Air Pollution Control Division, 4300 Cherry 
Creek Drive South, Denver, Colorado 80246-1530; and at the Utah 
Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Air Quality, 150 North 
1950 West, Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-4820.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Megan Williams, EPA, Region VIII, 
(303) 312-6431.

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

Table of Contents

I. Background Information
    A. What Is the Purpose of This Action?
    B. What Is the State's Process To Submit These Materials to the 
EPA?
    C. How Did EPA Evaluate the 1996 Periodic CO Emission 
Inventories?
II. Final Action
III. Administrative Requirements

I. Background Information

A. What Is the Purpose of This Action?

    In this action, we are approving the 1996 CO PEIs for Denver, 
Colorado, Fort Collins, Colorado, and Utah County, Utah.
    On November 15, 1990, the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 were 
enacted (Public Law 101-549, 104 Stat. 2399, codified at 42 U.S.C. 
7401-7671q). Under section 187(a)(5) of the CAA, States have the 
responsibility to inventory emissions contributing to NAAQS 
nonattainment, to track these emissions over time, and to ensure that 
control strategies are being implemented that reduce emissions and move 
areas toward attainment. The CAA required States with moderate or 
serious CO nonattainment areas to initially submit a base year CO 
inventory that represented actual emissions during the peak CO season 
by November 15, 1992. This base year inventory was for calendar year 
1990. Moderate and serious CO nonattainment areas were also required to 
submit a revised emissions inventory periodically. The 1990 base year 
inventory was to serve as the primary inventory from which the periodic 
inventories were to be derived. As per CAA section 187(a)(5), the 
submittal of the first periodic emissions inventory, as a revision to 
the SIP, was required no later than September 30, 1995, and every three 
years thereafter until the area is redesignated to attainment. EPA 
approved the 1993 periodic CO emission inventories for Denver and Fort 
Collins on July 15, 1998 (see 63 FR 38087) and for Utah County on April 
14, 1998 (see 63 FR 1812). As these three areas have not been 
redesignated to attainment, the CAA section 187(a)(5) requirement 
continues to apply to Denver, Fort Collins, and Utah County. Further 
information on these inventories and their purpose can be found in the 
document ``Emission Inventory Requirements for Carbon Monoxide State 
Implementation Plans,'' USEPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and 
Standards, EPA-450/4-91-011, March 1991, the September 30, 1994, 
guidance memorandum entitled ``1993 Periodic Emission Inventory 
Guidance,'' signed by J. David Mobley, Chief of the Emission Inventory 
Branch (hereafter, the Mobley Memorandum), the June 30, 1997, guidance 
memorandum distributing the document ``Preparation of the 1996 Emission 
Inventory,'' from David Misenheimer, Acting Group Leader, Emission 
Factor and Inventory Group, and the document ``Reporting Guidance for 
1996 Periodic Emissions Inventories and National Emissions Trends (NET) 
Inventories,'' EPA-454/R-97-005, June 1997.
    The periodic inventories were to be prepared in similar detail as 
was done with the 1990 base year inventories and were to address actual 
CO emissions for the area during the peak CO season. The peak CO season 
should reflect the months when peak CO concentrations occur. As winter 
is the peak CO season for Denver, Fort Collins, and Utah County, the 
1996 periodic inventories included the period November through January. 
The periodic inventories are to address emissions from stationary 
point, area, on-road mobile, and non-road mobile sources.

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

    Section 110(k) of the CAA addresses our actions on submissions of 
revisions to a SIP. The CAA also requires States to observe certain 
procedural requirements in developing SIP revisions for submittal to 
us. Section 110(a)(2) of the CAA requires that each SIP revision be 
adopted after reasonable notice and public hearing (including emission 
inventories) \1\. This must occur before the State submits the revision 
to us.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Memorandum from John Calcagni, Air Quality Management 
Division, and William G. Laxton, Director, Technical Support 
Division, to Regional Air Division Directors, Regions I-X, ``Public 
Hearing Requirements for 1990 Base-Year Emission Inventories for 
Ozone and Carbon Monoxide Nonattainment Areas,'' September 29, 1992.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The State of Colorado held a public hearing for the Denver 1996 PEI 
on April 15, 1999, directly after which the inventory was adopted by 
the Air Quality Control Commission (AQCC). The State of Colorado held a 
public hearing for the Fort Collins 1996 PEI on

[[Page 63547]]

April 15, 1999 at which a Motion and Order to Continue the hearing on 
October 21, 1999 was granted. Directly after the October 21, 1999 
hearing, the inventory was adopted by the Air Quality Control 
Commission (AQCC). Both inventories were formally submitted by the 
Governor on May 10, 2000. EPA determined the submittal was complete on 
June 16, 2000.
    The State of Utah held a public hearing for the Utah County 1996 
PEI on August 11, 1998, directly after which the inventory was adopted 
by the Air Quality Board. The Utah County inventory was formally 
submitted by the Governor on June 14, 1999. The Governor's June 14, 
1999, submittal became complete on December 14, 1999, by operation of 
law under section 110(k)(1)(B) of the CAA.

C. How Did EPA Evaluate the 1996 Periodic CO Emission Inventories?

    Our review of the 1996 PEIs for Denver, Fort Collins, and Utah 
County was based on the September 30, 1994, Mobley memorandum which 
allowed for two options for the approach to developing the PEI. If the 
PEI was to be used for a regulatory purpose (i.e., milestone compliance 
demonstration, rate of progress, maintenance plan tracking, etc.) a 
rigorous, comprehensive PEI was to be developed similar in detail and 
documentation to that which was done for the 1990 base year inventory. 
If, however, EPA and the State determined that the subsequent PEI would 
not be used to support a regulatory purpose other than to fulfill the 
CAA section 187(a)(5) requirement, a less rigorous approach could be 
appropriate. Both Colorado and Utah chose the latter option for the 
three PEIs being approved in this action.
    EPA has reviewed the 1996 PEIs for Denver, Fort Collins, and Utah 
County. Summary tables, calculations for all identified sources in each 
source category, and adequate documentation were provided by the State 
of Colorado and the State of Utah \2\ for each of the three PEIs. EPA 
has determined that the Denver, Fort Collins, and Utah County 1996 PEIs 
satisfy the requirements of section 187(a)(5) of the CAA. One issue, 
however, arose with our review of the Fort Collins 1996 PEI. The Fort 
Collins PEI shows an increase of 64% in on-road mobile source emissions 
from 1990 to 1996. While Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) increased from 
1990 to 1996, this increase is typically outweighed by emission 
reductions from changes in the fleet composition over the years (i.e., 
newer, lower emitting vehicles comprising a higher percentage of the 
total fleet; otherwise known as ``fleet turnover''). The reason for 
this anomaly became clear after evaluating the methodology used by the 
North Front Range Transportation & Air Quality Planning Council 
(NFRT&AQPC), (the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for the Fort 
Collins area), to generate the VMT and transportation data sets for use 
by the State in calculating mobile source emissions. Since the 
development of the 1990 base year CO inventory for the Fort Collins 
nonattainment area, the NFRT&AQPC had expanded the size of its 
transportation modeling domain to encompass additional growth in the 
vicinity of Fort Collins (Fort Collins Urban Growth Area). In addition, 
the NFRT&AQPC used a less-sophisticated transportation model, MinUTP, 
to generate the VMT and used MinUTP in a very conservative mode (i.e., 
slow speeds and increased congestion) which, when run in EPA's Mobile5b 
model, produced significant estimated CO emissions. The above issues 
are currently being resolved by the State and NFRT&AQPC with the MPO 
acquiring and using a more sophisticated transportation model, 
TRANSCAD. The MPO is currently working with the State to prepare the 
forthcoming Fort Collins CO redesignation request and maintenance plan. 
Through the development of this redesignation request, the State and 
MPO will reach agreement on the most appropriate area to use for future 
transportation planning for the Fort Collins area and may request an 
adjustment of the original nonattainment boundaries as necessary to 
agree with the modeling domain. In the interim, both the State and MPO 
agreed that it was not the best use of resources to try to force fit 
the MPO's VMT data to the current Fort Collins nonattainment boundary 
and, instead, requested that EPA approve the submitted 1996 Fort 
Collins PEI as a non-regulatory inventory. As this 1996 PEI serves a 
planning, non-regulatory purpose, EPA is accepting the inventory as 
meeting the provisions of section 187(a)(5) of the CAA and looks to a 
fully updated, comprehensive, regulatory inventory to be submitted with 
the future Fort Collins redesignation request and maintenance plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Summary tables included in Utah County's point source 
section of the PEI, entitled ``Geneva Steel Total Emission Inventory 
Part 1-- and ``Geneva Steel Total Emission Inventory Part 2--Other 
Emissions'', present emissions for other pollutants (i.e., 
PM10, SO2, NOX and VOCs) in 
addition to CO. EPA is only acting on the CO emission information 
presented in these tables.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The 1996 CO emissions from point sources, area sources, on-road 
mobile sources, and non-road mobile sources for Denver, Fort Collins, 
and Utah County are summarized in the following table:

                                       Carbon Monoxide Seasonal Emissions
                                                [In tons per day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     Non-road
       Nonattainment area          Point source     Area source   On-road mobile      mobile           Total
                                     emissions       emissions       emissions       emissions       emissions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Denver..........................         * 14.66           90.66          973.35          262.74        1,341.41
Fort Collins....................          * 0.27           13.26           82.13           23.40          119.06
Utah County.....................        ** 63.01           28.93          188.04            4.74         284.72
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Point sources with CO emissions equal or greater than 1 ton per year.
** Major CO point sources (i.e., CO emissions equal to or greater than 100 tons per year).

    All supporting calculations and documentation for these 1996 carbon 
monoxide periodic inventories are contained in the States' Technical 
Support Documents (TSDs) for this action.

II. Final Action

    EPA is approving the carbon monoxide 1996 periodic emission 
inventories for Denver, Fort Collins, and Utah County as fulfilling the 
requirements of section 187(a)(5) of the CAA. The Denver and Fort 
Collins inventories were submitted by the Governor of Colorado with a 
letter dated May 19, 2000. The Utah County inventory was submitted by 
the

[[Page 63548]]

Governor of Utah with a letter dated June 14, 1999.
    EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the 
Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no 
adverse comments. However, in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of today's 
Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document 
that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision if adverse 
comments be filed. This rule will be effective December 26, 2000 
without further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comments by 
November 24, 2000. If the EPA receives adverse comments, EPA will 
publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the 
public that the rule will not take effect. EPA will address all public 
comments in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. The EPA 
will not institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties 
interested in commenting must do so at this time. Please note that if 
EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of 
this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of 
the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are 
not the subject of an adverse comment.

III. Administrative Requirements

    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. This action 
merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes 
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. 
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because 
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does 
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by 
state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4). For the same reason, 
this rule also does not significantly or uniquely affect the 
communities of tribal governments, as specified by Executive Order 
13084 (63 FR 27655, May 10, 1998). 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 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because it 
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 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), 
because it is not economically significant.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In 
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the 
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be 
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP 
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise 
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements 
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. As required by section 3 
of Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing 
this rule, EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate drafting 
errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and provide a 
clear legal standard for affected conduct. EPA has complied with 
Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by examining the 
takings implications of the rule in accordance with the ``Attorney 
General's Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk and 
Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings' issued under the executive order. 
This rule does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et 
seq.).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other 
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2). This rule will be effective December 26, 2000 unless EPA 
receives adverse written comments by November 24, 2000.
    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 26, 2000. Filing a 
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule 
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial 
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial 
review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such 
rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings 
to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: October 12, 2000.
Jack W. McGraw,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region VIII.

    Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is 
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 52.348 is amended by adding paragraph (d) to read as 
follows:

Sec. 52.348  Emission inventories.

* * * * *
    (d) On May 10, 2000, the Governor of Colorado submitted the 1996 
Carbon Monoxide Periodic Emission Inventories for Denver and Fort 
Collins, as a revision to the Colorado State Implementation Plan. The 
inventories address carbon monoxide emissions from stationary point, 
area, non-road mobile, and on-road mobile sources.

Subpart TT--Utah

    3. Section 52.2350 is amended by adding paragraph (c) to read as 
follows:

Sec. 52.2350  Emission inventories.

* * * * *
    (c) On June 14, 1999, the Governor of Utah submitted the 1996 
Carbon Monoxide Periodic Emission Inventory for Utah County as a 
revision to the Utah State Implementation Plan. The inventory addresses 
carbon monoxide emissions from stationary point, area,

[[Page 63549]]

non-road mobile, and on-road mobile sources.

[FR Doc. 00-27031 Filed 10-23-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
```