Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; State of Colorado Second Ten-Year PM10, 71550-71554 [2013-28652]
Download as PDF
71550
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 2013 / Proposed Rules
published in the Federal Register, in
text or Adobe Portable Document
Format (PDF). To use PDF, you must
have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is
available free at this site.
You may also access documents of the
Department published in the Federal
Register by using the article search
feature at: www.federalregister.gov.
Specifically, through the advanced
search feature at this site, you can limit
your search to documents published by
the Department.
Dated: November 25, 2013.
Michael K. Yudin,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Special
Education and Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 2013–28667 Filed 11–27–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R08–OAR–2011–0833; FRL–9903–25–
Region–8]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; State of
Colorado Second Ten-Year PM10
Maintenance Plan for Telluride
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is proposing to approve
State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revisions submitted by the State of
Colorado. On March 31, 2010, the
Governor of Colorado’s designee
submitted to EPA a revised maintenance
plan for the Telluride area for the 24hour National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) for particulate
matter with an aerodynamic diameter
less than or equal to 10 microns (PM10),
which was adopted on November 19,
2009. As required by Clean Air Act
(CAA) section 175A(b), this revised
maintenance plan addresses
maintenance of the PM10 standard for a
second 10-year period beyond the area’s
original redesignation to attainment for
the PM10 NAAQS. In addition, EPA is
proposing to approve the revised
maintenance plan’s 2021 transportation
conformity motor vehicle emissions
budget for PM10. Also, we are proposing
to exclude from use in determining that
Telluride continues to attain the PM10
NAAQS exceedances of the PM10
NAAQS that were recorded at the
Telluride PM10 monitor on April 5, 2010
and April 16, 2013, because they meet
the criteria for exceptional events
caused by high wind natural events.
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:32 Nov 27, 2013
Jkt 232001
This action is being taken under
sections 110 and 175A of the CAA.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before December 30,
2013.
Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R08–
OAR–2011–0833, by one of the
following methods:
• https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• Email: ostigaard.crystal@epa.gov.
• Fax: (303) 312–6064 (please alert
the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT if you are faxing
comments).
• Mail: Carl Daly, Director, Air
Program, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P–
AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver,
Colorado 80202–1129.
• Hand Delivery: Carl Daly, Director,
Air Program, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8,
Mailcode 8P–AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street,
Denver, Colorado 80202–1129. Such
deliveries are only accepted Monday
through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
excluding Federal holidays. Special
arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R08–OAR–2011–
0833. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at https://
www.regulations.gov, 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 https://
www.regulations.gov or email. The
https://www.regulations.gov Web site is
an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an email comment directly
to EPA, without going through https://
www.regulations.gov, your email
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
ADDRESSES:
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses. For additional instructions on
submitting comments, go to Section I.
General Information of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document.
Docket: All documents in the docket
are listed in the https://
www.regulations.gov index. Although
listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material,
will be publicly available only in hard
copy. Publicly available docket
materials are available either
electronically in https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Air Program, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8,
Mailcode 8P–AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street,
Denver, Colorado 80202–1129. EPA
requests that if at all possible, you
contact the individual listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
view the hard copy of the docket. You
may view the hard copy of the docket
Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to
4:00 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Crystal Ostigaard, Air Program, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 8, Mailcode 8P–AR, 1595
Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado
80202–1129, (303) 312–6602,
ostigaard.crystal@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Definitions
For the purpose of this document, we
are giving meaning to certain words or
initials as follows:
(i) The words or initials Act or CAA
mean or refer to the Clean Air Act,
unless the context indicates otherwise.
(ii) The initials APCD mean or refer to
the Colorado Air Pollution Control
Division.
(iii) The initials AQCC mean or refer
to the Colorado Air Quality Control
Commission.
(iv) The initials AQS mean or refer to
the EPA Air Quality System database.
(v) The words Colorado and State
mean or refer to the State of Colorado.
(vi) The initials CDOT mean or refer
to the Colorado Department of
Transportation.
(vii) The initials CDPHE mean or refer
to the Colorado Department of Public
Health and Environment.
(viii) The words EPA, we, us or our
mean or refer to the United States
Environmental Protection Agency.
E:\FR\FM\29NOP1.SGM
29NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 2013 / Proposed Rules
(ix) The initials MVEB mean or refer
to motor vehicle emissions budget.
(x) The initials NAAQS mean or refer
to National Ambient Air Quality
Standard.
(xi) The initials PM10 mean or refer to
particulate matter with an aerodynamic
diameter of less than or equal to 10
micrometers (coarse particulate matter).
(xii) The initials RTP mean or refer to
the Regional Transportation Plan.
(xiii) The initials SIP mean or refer to
State Implementation Plan.
(xiv) The initials TIP mean or refer to
the Transportation Improvement
Program.
(xv) The initials TSD mean or refer to
technical support document.
Table of Contents
I. General Information
II. Background
III. What was the State’s process?
IV. EPA’s Evaluation of the Revised Telluride
PM10 Maintenance Plan
V. Proposed Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Orders Review
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
I. General Information
1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit CBI
to EPA through https://
www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly
mark the part or all of the information
that you claim to be CBI. For CBI
information in a disk or CD ROM that
you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the
disk or CD ROM as CBI and then
identify electronically within the disk or
CD ROM the specific information that is
claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that
includes information claimed as CBI, a
copy of the comment that does not
contain the information claimed as CBI
must be submitted for inclusion in the
public docket. Information so marked
will not be disclosed except in
accordance with procedures set forth in
40 CFR part 2.
2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments.
When submitting comments, remember
to:
a. Identify the rulemaking by docket
number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal
Register date and page number).
b. Follow directions—The agency may
ask you to respond to specific questions
or organize comments by referencing a
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part
or section number.
c. Explain why you agree or disagree;
suggest alternatives and substitute
language for your requested changes.
d. Describe any assumptions and
provide any technical information and/
or data that you used.
e. If you estimate potential costs or
burdens, explain how you arrived at
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:32 Nov 27, 2013
Jkt 232001
your estimate in sufficient detail to
allow for it to be reproduced.
f. Provide specific examples to
illustrate your concerns, and suggest
alternatives.
g. Explain your views as clearly as
possible, avoiding the use of profanity
or personal threats.
h. Make sure to submit your
comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
II. Background
The Telluride area was designated
nonattainment for PM10 and classified
as moderate by operation of law upon
enactment of the CAA Amendments of
1990. See 56 FR 56694, 56705, 56736
(November 6, 1991). EPA partially/
conditionally approved Colorado’s
nonattainment area SIP for the Telluride
PM10 nonattainment area on September
19, 1994 (59 FR 47807) and fully
approved the SIP on October 4, 1996 (61
FR 51784). On May 10, 2000, the
Governor of Colorado submitted a
request to EPA to redesignate the
Telluride moderate PM10 nonattainment
area to attainment for the 1987 24-hour
PM10 NAAQS. Along with this request,
the State submitted a maintenance plan,
which demonstrated that the area was
expected to remain in attainment of the
24-hour PM10 NAAQS through 2012.
EPA approved the Telluride
maintenance plan and redesignation to
attainment on June 15, 2001 (66 FR
32556).
Eight years after an area is
redesignated to attainment, CAA section
175A(b) requires the state to submit a
subsequent maintenance plan to EPA,
covering a second 10-year period.1 This
second 10-year maintenance plan must
demonstrate continued maintenance of
the applicable NAAQS during this
second 10-year period. To fulfill this
requirement of the Act, the Governor of
Colorado’s designee submitted the
second 10-year update of the PM10
maintenance plan to EPA on March 31,
2010 (hereafter; ‘‘revised Telluride PM10
Maintenance Plan’’).
As described in 40 CFR 50.6, the level
of the national primary and secondary
24-hour ambient air quality standards
for PM10 is 150 micrograms per cubic
meter (mg/m3). An area attains the 241 In this case, the initial maintenance period
described in CAA section 175A(a) was required to
extend for at least 10 years after the redesignation
to attainment, which was effective on August 14,
2001. See 66 FR 32556. So the first maintenance
plan was required to show maintenance at least
through 2011. CAA section 175A(b) requires that
the second 10-year maintenance plan maintain the
NAAQS for ‘‘10 years after the expiration of the 10year period referred to in [section 175A(a)].’’ Thus,
for the Telluride area, the second 10-year period
ends in 2021.
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
71551
hour PM10 standard when the expected
number of days per calendar year with
a 24-hour concentration in excess of the
standard (referred to herein as
‘‘exceedance’’), as determined in
accordance with 40 CFR part 50,
appendix K, is equal to or less than one,
averaged over a three-year period.2 See
40 CFR 50.6 and 40 CFR part 50,
appendix K.
Table 1 below shows the maximum
monitored 24-hour PM10 values for the
Telluride PM10 maintenance area for
2004 through 2012, excluding one value
that the State flagged as being caused by
an exceptional event. The table reflects
that the values for the Telluride area
were well below the 24-hour PM10
NAAQS standard of 150 mg/m3.
However, on April 5, 2010, the area
experienced an exceedance measured at
354 mg/m3. The State flagged this value
as a high wind exceptional event in
EPA’s Air Quality System (AQS), which
is EPA’s repository for ambient air
quality data.
40 CFR 50.1(j) defines an exceptional
event as an event which affects air
quality, is not reasonably controllable or
preventable, is an event caused by
human activity that is unlikely to recur
at a particular location or a natural
event, and is determined by the
Administrator in accordance with 40
CFR 50.14 to be an exceptional event.
Exceptional events do not include
stagnation of air masses or
meteorological inversions,
meteorological events involving high
temperatures or lack of precipitation, or
air pollution relating to source
noncompliance. 40 CFR 5.14(b) states
that EPA shall exclude data from use in
determinations of exceedances and
NAAQS violations where a state
demonstrates to EPA’s satisfaction that
an exceptional event caused a specific
air pollution concentration in excess of
one or more NAAQS at a particular air
quality monitoring location and
otherwise satisfies the requirements of
section 50.14.
The State submitted an exceptional
event package on June 28, 2013
requesting EPA’s concurrence on the
flag for the April 5, 2010 exceedance.
EPA completed its review of the
exceptional events package for
Telluride’s 2010 exceedance and
concurred on the flag on August 21,
2 An exceedance is defined as a daily value that
is above the level of the 24-hour standard, 150 mg/
m3, after rounding to the nearest 10 mg/m3 (i.e.,
values ending in five or greater are to be rounded
up). Thus, a recorded value of 154 mg/m3 would not
be an exceedance since it would be rounded to 150
mg/m3; whereas, a recorded value of 155 mg/m3
would be an exceedance since it would be rounded
to 160 mg/m3. See 40 CFR part 50, appendix K,
section 1.0.
E:\FR\FM\29NOP1.SGM
29NOP1
71552
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 2013 / Proposed Rules
2013 because the State successfully
demonstrated that the exceedance on
April 5, 2010 was caused by a natural
high wind exceptional event due to
blowing desert dust from upwind
natural desert areas of Arizona, Utah,
and southwest Colorado into the
Telluride area.3 Thus, we are proposing
to exclude from use in determining that
Telluride continues to attain the 24hour PM10 NAAQS the exceedance of
the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS that was
recorded at the Telluride PM10 monitor
on April 5, 2010. See 40 CFR 50.14(b)
and (c)(2)(ii). With the exclusion of this
data point, the highest value in 2010 is
133 mg/m3, which is well below the 24hour PM10 NAAQS standard.
Additionally, EPA reviewed 2013 data
from AQS (this data has not yet been
quality assured by Colorado) and found
a high wind exceptional event of 265
mg/m3 at the Telluride monitor on April
16, 2013. The State submitted the
exceptional events package for this
exceedance on October 3, 2013, and
EPA concurred on the package on
November 1, 2013, because the State
successfully demonstrated that the
exceedance on April 16, 2013 was
caused by a natural high wind
exceptional event blowing desert dust
from upwind natural desert areas of
Arizona, Utah, and southwest Colorado
into the Telluride area.4 Thus, we are
proposing to exclude from use in
determining that Telluride continues to
attain the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS the
exceedance of the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS
that was recorded at the Telluride PM10
monitor on April 16, 2013.
TABLE 1—TELLURIDE PM10 MAXIMUM
24-HOUR VALUES
[Based on Data from 333 West Colorado Avenue, AQS Identification Number 08–113–
0004]
Year
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Maximum
Value
(μg/m3)
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
72
70
69
77
82
130
133
68
80
Table 2 below shows the estimated
number of exceedances for the Telluride
3 Copies of the State’s June 28, 2013 exceptional
events package and our concurrence documents are
included in the docket for this action.
4 Copies of the State’s October 3, 2013 exceptional
events package and our concurrence documents are
included in the docket for this action.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:32 Nov 27, 2013
Jkt 232001
PM10 maintenance area for the threerevised Telluride PM10 Maintenance
year periods of 2004 through 2006, 2005 Plan.
through 2007, 2006 through 2008, 2007
A. Emission Inventory
through 2009, 2008 through 2010, 2009
The revised Telluride PM10
through 2011, and 2010 through 2012.
Maintenance Plan includes three
To attain the standard, the three-year
inventories of daily PM10 emissions for
average number of expected
exceedances (values greater than 150 mg/ the Telluride area, for years 2007, 2015,
and 2021. The Air Pollution Control
m3) must be less than or equal to one.
The table reflects continuous attainment Division (APCD) developed these
emission inventories using EPAof the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS.
approved emissions modeling methods
TABLE 2—TELLURIDE PM10 ESTIMATED and updated transportation and
demographics data. Each emission
EXCEEDANCES
inventory is a list, by source category, of
[Based on Data from 333 West Colorado Ave- the air contaminants directly emitted
nue, AQS Identification Number 08–113–
into the Telluride PM10 maintenance
0004]
area. A more detailed description of the
2007, 2015 and 2021 inventories and
3-Year
estimated
information on model assumptions and
Design value period
number of
parameters for each source category are
exceedances
contained in the State’s PM10
2004—2006 ........................
0 Maintenance Plan Technical Support
2005—2007 ........................
0 Document (TSD). Included in both
2006—2008 ........................
0 inventories are agriculture, highway
2007—2009 ........................
0 vehicle exhaust, railroads, road dust,
2008—2010 ........................
0 commercial cooking, construction, fuel
2009—2011 ........................
0 combustion, non-road sources, structure
2010—2012 ........................
0 fires, and woodburning. We find that
Colorado has prepared adequate
III. What was the State’s process?
emission inventories for the area.
Section 110(a)(2) of the CAA requires
B. Maintenance Demonstration
that a state provide reasonable notice
The revised Telluride PM10
and public hearing before adopting a
Maintenance Plan uses emission rollSIP revision and submitting it to EPA.
forward modeling to demonstrate
The Colorado Air Quality Control
maintenance of the 24-hour PM10
Commission (AQCC) held a public
NAAQS through 2021. Using the 2007
hearing for the revised Telluride PM10
and 2021 emissions inventories, the
Maintenance Plan on November 19,
State first determined the projected
2009. The AQCC approved and adopted
growth in PM10 emissions from the 2007
the revised Telluride PM10 Maintenance
base year to the 2021 maintenance year.
Plan during the hearing. The Governor’s
The State estimated that emissions
designee submitted the revised plan to
would increase from 1,285 pounds per
EPA on March 31, 2010.
day in 2007 to 1,989 pounds per day in
We have evaluated the revised
2021. This represents an increase of 54.8
maintenance plan and have determined percent.
that the State met the requirements for
The State then applied this percentage
reasonable public notice and public
increase to the design day concentration
hearing under section 110(a)(2) of the
of 82 mg/m3, which was the highest 24CAA. On September 30, 2010, by
hour maximum PM10 value recorded in
operation of law under CAA section
the Telluride area from 2006–2008. This
110(k)(1)(B), the revised maintenance
resulted in an estimated maximum 24plan was deemed to have met the
hour PM10 concentration in 2021 of
minimum ‘‘completeness’’ criteria
126.9 mg/m3. This is well below the 24found in 40 CFR part 51, appendix V.
hour PM10 NAAQS of 150 mg/m3.
IV. EPA’s Evaluation of the Revised
C. Monitoring Network/Verification of
Telluride PM10 Maintenance Plan
Continued Attainment
The following are the key elements of
In the revised Telluride PM10
a Maintenance Plan for PM10: Emission
Maintenance Plan, the State commits to
Inventory, Maintenance Demonstration, continue to operate an air quality
Monitoring Network/Verification of
monitoring network in accordance with
Continued Attainment, Contingency
40 CFR part 58 to verify continued
Plan, and Transportation Conformity
attainment of the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS.
Requirements including the Motor
This includes the continued operation
Vehicle Emission Budget for PM10.
of a PM10 monitor in the Telluride area,
Below, we describe our evaluation of
which the State will rely on to track
these elements as they pertain to the
PM10 emissions in the maintenance
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\29NOP1.SGM
29NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 2013 / Proposed Rules
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
area. The State also commits to conduct
an annual review of the air quality
surveillance system in accordance with
40 CFR 58.20(d) to determine whether
the system continues to meet the
monitoring objectives presented in
Appendix D of 40 CFR part 58.
Additionally, the State commits to track
and document PM10 mobile source
parameters and new and modified
stationary source permits. If these and
the resulting emissions change
significantly over time, the APCD will
perform appropriate studies to
determine: (1) whether additional and/
or re-sited monitors are necessary; and
(2) whether mobile and stationary
source emissions projections are on
target.
Based on the above, we are proposing
approval of these commitments as
satisfying the relevant requirements.
D. Contingency Plan
Section 175A(d) of the CAA requires
that a maintenance plan include
contingency provisions to promptly
correct any violation of the NAAQS that
occurs after redesignation of an area. To
meet this requirement the State has
identified appropriate contingency
measures along with a schedule for the
development and implementation of
such measures.
As stated in the revised Telluride
PM10 Maintenance Plan, the
contingency measures will be triggered
by a violation of the 24-hour PM10
NAAQS. However, the maintenance
plan notes that an exceedance of the 24hour PM10 NAAQS may initiate a
voluntary, local process by the Town of
Telluride, the Town of Mountain
Village, San Miguel County and the
APCD to identify and evaluate potential
contingency measures.
The Town of Telluride, the Town of
Mountain Village and San Miguel
County in coordination with the APCD,
AQCC, and the Colorado Department of
Transportation (CDOT) will initiate a
process to begin evaluating potential
contingency measures no more than 60
days after notification from APCD that
a violation of the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS
has occurred. The AQCC will then hold
a public hearing to consider the
contingency measures recommended by
the Town of Telluride, the Town of
Mountain Village, San Miguel County,
APCD and CDOT along with any other
contingency measures the AQCC
determines may be appropriate to
effectively address the violation. The
State commits to adopt and implement
any necessary contingency measures
within one year after a violation occurs.
The State identifies the following as
potential contingency measures in the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:32 Nov 27, 2013
Jkt 232001
revised Telluride PM10 maintenance
plan: (1) Increased street sweeping
requirements; (2) expanded, mandatory
use of alternative de-icers; (3) more
stringent street sand specifications; (4)
road paving requirements; (5)
woodburning restrictions; (6) reestablishing new source review
permitting requirements for stationary
sources; and (7) other emission control
measures appropriate for the area based
on consideration of cost effectiveness,
PM10 emission reduction potential,
economic and social considerations, or
other factors.
We find that the contingency
measures provided in the revised
Telluride PM10 Maintenance Plan are
sufficient and meet the requirements of
section 175A(d) of the CAA.
E. Transportation Conformity
Requirements: Motor Vehicle Emission
Budget for PM10
Transportation conformity is required
by section 176(c) of the CAA. EPA’s
conformity rule at 40 CFR part 93
requires that transportation plans,
programs, and projects conform to SIPs
and establishes the criteria and
procedures for determining whether or
not they conform. Conformity to a SIP
means that transportation activities will
not produce new air quality violations,
worsen existing violations, or delay
timely attainment of the NAAQS. To
effectuate its purpose, the conformity
rule requires a demonstration that
emissions from the Regional
Transportation Plan (RTP) and the
Transportation Improvement Program
(TIP) are consistent with the motor
vehicle emissions budget(s) (MVEB(s))
contained in a control strategy SIP
revision or maintenance plan (40 CFR
93.101, 93.118, and 93.124). A MVEB is
defined as the level of mobile source
emissions of a pollutant relied upon in
the attainment or maintenance
demonstration to attain or maintain
compliance with the NAAQS in the
nonattainment or maintenance area.
Further information concerning EPA’s
interpretations regarding MVEBs can be
found in the preamble to EPA’s
November 24, 1993, transportation
conformity rule (see 58 FR 62193—
62196).
The revised Telluride PM10
Maintenance Plan contains a single
MVEB of 1,108 lbs/day of PM10 for the
year 2021, the maintenance year. Once
the State submitted the revised plan
with the 2021 MVEB to EPA for
approval, 40 CFR 93.118 required that
EPA determine whether the MVEB was
adequate.
Our criteria for determining whether
a SIP’s MVEB is adequate for conformity
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
71553
purposes are outlined in 40 CFR
93.118(e)(4), which was promulgated
August 15, 1997 (see 62 FR 43780). Our
process for determining adequacy is
described in our July 1, 2004
Transportation Conformity Rule
Amendments (see 69 FR 40004) and in
relevant guidance.5 We used these
resources in making our adequacy
determination described below.
On November 22, 2010, EPA
announced the availability of the
revised Telluride PM10 Maintenance
Plan, and the PM10 MVEB, on EPA’s
transportation conformity adequacy
Web site. EPA solicited public comment
on the MVEB, and the public comment
period closed on December 22, 2010.
We did not receive any comments. This
information is available at EPA’s
conformity Web site: https://
www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/
transconf/currsips.htm#telluride.
By letter to the Colorado Department
of Public Health and Environment
(CDPHE) dated March 21, 2011, EPA
found that the revised Telluride PM10
Maintenance Plan and the 2021 PM10
MVEB were adequate for transportation
conformity purposes.6 However, we
noted in our letter that the revised
Telluride PM10 Maintenance Plan did
not discuss the PM10 MVEB for 2012 of
10,001 lbs/day from the original PM10
maintenance plan that EPA approved in
2001 (see 66 FR 32556, June 15, 2001).
According to 40 CFR 93.118(e)(1), the
EPA-approved 2012 PM10 MVEB must
continue to be used for analysis years
2012 through 2020 (as long as such
years are within the timeframe of the
transportation plan), unless the State
elects to submit a SIP revision to revise
the 2012 PM10 MVEB and EPA approves
the SIP revision. This is because the
revised Telluride PM10 Maintenance
Plan did not revise the previouslyapproved 2012 PM10 MVEB nor
establish a new MVEB for 2012.
Accordingly, the MVEB ‘‘. . . for the
most recent prior year . . .’’ (i.e., 2012)
from the original maintenance plan
must continue to be used (see 40 CFR
93.118(b)(1)(ii) and (b)(2)(iv)).
We note that there is a considerable
difference between the 2021 and 2012
budgets—1,108 lbs/day versus 10,001
lbs/day. This is largely an artifact of
changes in the methods, models, and
5 ‘‘Companion Guidance for the July 1, 2004 Final
Transportation Conformity Rule, Conformity
Implementation in Multi-Jurisdictional
Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas for Existing
and New Air Quality Standards’’ (EPA 420–B–04–
012 July, 2004).
6 In a Federal Register notice dated August 2,
2011, we notified the public of our finding (see 76
FR 46288). This adequacy determination became
effective on August 17, 2011.
E:\FR\FM\29NOP1.SGM
29NOP1
71554
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 230 / Friday, November 29, 2013 / Proposed Rules
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
emission factors used to estimate mobile
source emissions. The 2021 MVEB is
consistent with the State’s 2021
emissions inventory for vehicle exhaust
and road dust, and, thus, is consistent
with the State’s maintenance
demonstration for 2021.
The discrepancy between the 2012
and 2021 MVEBs is not a significant
issue for several reasons. As a practical
matter, the 2021 MVEB of 1,108 lbs/day
of PM10 would be controlling for any
conformity determination involving the
relevant years because conformity
would have to be shown to both the
2012 MVEB and the 2021 MVEB. Also,
for any maintenance plan, like the
revised Telluride PM10 Maintenance
Plan, that only establishes a MVEB for
the last year of the maintenance plan, 40
CFR 93.118(b)(2)(i) requires that the
demonstration of consistency with the
budget be accompanied by a qualitative
finding that there are no factors that
would cause or contribute to a new
violation or exacerbate an existing
violation in the years before the last year
of the maintenance plan. Therefore,
when a conformity determination is
prepared which assesses conformity for
the years before 2021, the 2021 MVEB
and the underlying assumptions
supporting it would have to be
considered. Finally, 40 CFR 93.110
requires the use of the latest planning
assumptions in conformity
determinations. Thus, the most current
motor vehicle and road dust emission
factors would need to be used, and we
expect the analysis would show greatly
reduced PM10 motor vehicle and road
dust emissions from those calculated in
the first maintenance plan. In view of
the above, EPA is proposing to approve
the 2021 PM10 MVEB of 1,108 lbs/day.
V. Proposed Action
We are proposing to approve the
revised Telluride PM10 Maintenance
Plan that was submitted to us on March
31, 2010. We are proposing to approve
the revised maintenance plan because it
demonstrates maintenance through 2021
as required by CAA section 175A(b),
retains the control measures from the
initial PM10 maintenance plan that EPA
approved in June of 2001, and meets
other CAA requirements for a section
175A maintenance plan. We are
proposing to exclude from use in
determining that Telluride continues to
attain the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS
exceedances of the 24-hour PM10
NAAQS that were recorded at the
Telluride PM10 monitor on April 5, 2010
and April 16, 2013 because they meet
the criteria for exceptional events
caused by high wind natural events. We
are also proposing to approve the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:32 Nov 27, 2013
Jkt 232001
revised maintenance plan’s 2021
transportation conformity MVEB for
PM10 of 1,108 lbs/day.
VI. Statutory and Executive Orders
Review
Under the Clean Air Act, the
Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the
provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k);
40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP
submissions, EPA’s role is to approve
state choices, provided that they meet
the criteria of the Clean Air Act. This
proposed action merely proposes to
approve state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not propose to
impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law. For that
reason, this proposed action:
• is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• 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);
• does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act;
and
• does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this proposed action does
not have tribal implications as specified
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because the SIP
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
would not be approved to apply in
Indian country located in the state, and
EPA notes that it will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, PM10, Incorporation
by reference, Intergovernmental
relations, Particulate matter, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: November 18, 2013.
Howard M. Cantor,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8.
[FR Doc. 2013–28652 Filed 11–27–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R01–OAR–2012–0113; A–1–FRL–
9903–20–Region 1]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; New
Hampshire; Transportation Conformity
and Conformity of General Federal
Actions
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The EPA is proposing to
approve a State Implementation Plan
(SIP) revision submitted by the State of
New Hampshire. This revision
establishes transportation conformity
criteria and procedures related to
interagency consultation and
enforceability of certain transportationrelated control measures and mitigation
measures. In addition, the revision
relies on the Federal rule for General
Conformity. The intended effect of this
action is to approve State criteria and
procedures to govern conformity
determinations. This action is being
taken in accordance with the Clean Air
Act.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before December 30,
2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R01–
OAR–2012–0113 by one of the following
methods:
1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. Email: arnold.anne@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (617) 918–0047.
4. Mail: ‘‘EPA–R01–OAR–2012–
0113,’’ Anne Arnold, U.S.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\29NOP1.SGM
29NOP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 230 (Friday, November 29, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 71550-71554]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-28652]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R08-OAR-2011-0833; FRL-9903-25-Region-8]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
State of Colorado Second Ten-Year PM10 Maintenance Plan for
Telluride
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revisions submitted by the State of Colorado. On March 31, 2010, the
Governor of Colorado's designee submitted to EPA a revised maintenance
plan for the Telluride area for the 24-hour National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS) for particulate matter with an aerodynamic
diameter less than or equal to 10 microns (PM10), which was
adopted on November 19, 2009. As required by Clean Air Act (CAA)
section 175A(b), this revised maintenance plan addresses maintenance of
the PM10 standard for a second 10-year period beyond the
area's original redesignation to attainment for the PM10
NAAQS. In addition, EPA is proposing to approve the revised maintenance
plan's 2021 transportation conformity motor vehicle emissions budget
for PM10. Also, we are proposing to exclude from use in
determining that Telluride continues to attain the PM10
NAAQS exceedances of the PM10 NAAQS that were recorded at
the Telluride PM10 monitor on April 5, 2010 and April 16,
2013, because they meet the criteria for exceptional events caused by
high wind natural events. This action is being taken under sections 110
and 175A of the CAA.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before December 30,
2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R08-
OAR-2011-0833, by one of the following methods:
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
Email: ostigaard.crystal@epa.gov.
Fax: (303) 312-6064 (please alert the individual listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT if you are faxing comments).
Mail: Carl Daly, Director, Air Program, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P-AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street,
Denver, Colorado 80202-1129.
Hand Delivery: Carl Daly, Director, Air Program, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P-AR, 1595
Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129. Such deliveries are only
accepted Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding
Federal holidays. Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R08-OAR-
2011-0833. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
https://www.regulations.gov, 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 https://www.regulations.gov or email. The https://www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an email comment directly to EPA, without
going through https://www.regulations.gov, your email address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses. For additional instructions on submitting
comments, go to Section I. General Information of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section of this document.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the https://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Program, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P-AR, 1595
Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129. EPA requests that if at
all possible, you contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to view the hard copy of the docket. You
may view the hard copy of the docket Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m.
to 4:00 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Crystal Ostigaard, Air Program, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8, Mailcode 8P-AR, 1595 Wynkoop
Street, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129, (303) 312-6602,
ostigaard.crystal@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Definitions
For the purpose of this document, we are giving meaning to certain
words or initials as follows:
(i) The words or initials Act or CAA mean or refer to the Clean Air
Act, unless the context indicates otherwise.
(ii) The initials APCD mean or refer to the Colorado Air Pollution
Control Division.
(iii) The initials AQCC mean or refer to the Colorado Air Quality
Control Commission.
(iv) The initials AQS mean or refer to the EPA Air Quality System
database.
(v) The words Colorado and State mean or refer to the State of
Colorado.
(vi) The initials CDOT mean or refer to the Colorado Department of
Transportation.
(vii) The initials CDPHE mean or refer to the Colorado Department
of Public Health and Environment.
(viii) The words EPA, we, us or our mean or refer to the United
States Environmental Protection Agency.
[[Page 71551]]
(ix) The initials MVEB mean or refer to motor vehicle emissions
budget.
(x) The initials NAAQS mean or refer to National Ambient Air
Quality Standard.
(xi) The initials PM10 mean or refer to particulate
matter with an aerodynamic diameter of less than or equal to 10
micrometers (coarse particulate matter).
(xii) The initials RTP mean or refer to the Regional Transportation
Plan.
(xiii) The initials SIP mean or refer to State Implementation Plan.
(xiv) The initials TIP mean or refer to the Transportation
Improvement Program.
(xv) The initials TSD mean or refer to technical support document.
Table of Contents
I. General Information
II. Background
III. What was the State's process?
IV. EPA's Evaluation of the Revised Telluride PM10
Maintenance Plan
V. Proposed Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Orders Review
I. General Information
1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit CBI to EPA through https://www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
a. Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
b. Follow directions--The agency may ask you to respond to specific
questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
c. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
d. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
e. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
f. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
g. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
h. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline
identified.
II. Background
The Telluride area was designated nonattainment for PM10
and classified as moderate by operation of law upon enactment of the
CAA Amendments of 1990. See 56 FR 56694, 56705, 56736 (November 6,
1991). EPA partially/conditionally approved Colorado's nonattainment
area SIP for the Telluride PM10 nonattainment area on
September 19, 1994 (59 FR 47807) and fully approved the SIP on October
4, 1996 (61 FR 51784). On May 10, 2000, the Governor of Colorado
submitted a request to EPA to redesignate the Telluride moderate
PM10 nonattainment area to attainment for the 1987 24-hour
PM10 NAAQS. Along with this request, the State submitted a
maintenance plan, which demonstrated that the area was expected to
remain in attainment of the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS through 2012.
EPA approved the Telluride maintenance plan and redesignation to
attainment on June 15, 2001 (66 FR 32556).
Eight years after an area is redesignated to attainment, CAA
section 175A(b) requires the state to submit a subsequent maintenance
plan to EPA, covering a second 10-year period.\1\ This second 10-year
maintenance plan must demonstrate continued maintenance of the
applicable NAAQS during this second 10-year period. To fulfill this
requirement of the Act, the Governor of Colorado's designee submitted
the second 10-year update of the PM10 maintenance plan to
EPA on March 31, 2010 (hereafter; ``revised Telluride PM10
Maintenance Plan'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In this case, the initial maintenance period described in
CAA section 175A(a) was required to extend for at least 10 years
after the redesignation to attainment, which was effective on August
14, 2001. See 66 FR 32556. So the first maintenance plan was
required to show maintenance at least through 2011. CAA section
175A(b) requires that the second 10-year maintenance plan maintain
the NAAQS for ``10 years after the expiration of the 10-year period
referred to in [section 175A(a)].'' Thus, for the Telluride area,
the second 10-year period ends in 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As described in 40 CFR 50.6, the level of the national primary and
secondary 24-hour ambient air quality standards for PM10 is
150 micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\). An area attains the 24-
hour PM10 standard when the expected number of days per
calendar year with a 24-hour concentration in excess of the standard
(referred to herein as ``exceedance''), as determined in accordance
with 40 CFR part 50, appendix K, is equal to or less than one, averaged
over a three-year period.\2\ See 40 CFR 50.6 and 40 CFR part 50,
appendix K.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ An exceedance is defined as a daily value that is above the
level of the 24-hour standard, 150 [micro]g/m\3\, after rounding to
the nearest 10 [micro]g/m\3\ (i.e., values ending in five or greater
are to be rounded up). Thus, a recorded value of 154 [micro]g/m\3\
would not be an exceedance since it would be rounded to 150
[micro]g/m\3\; whereas, a recorded value of 155 [micro]g/m\3\ would
be an exceedance since it would be rounded to 160 [micro]g/m\3\. See
40 CFR part 50, appendix K, section 1.0.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 1 below shows the maximum monitored 24-hour PM10
values for the Telluride PM10 maintenance area for 2004
through 2012, excluding one value that the State flagged as being
caused by an exceptional event. The table reflects that the values for
the Telluride area were well below the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS
standard of 150 [mu]g/m\3\. However, on April 5, 2010, the area
experienced an exceedance measured at 354 [mu]g/m\3\. The State flagged
this value as a high wind exceptional event in EPA's Air Quality System
(AQS), which is EPA's repository for ambient air quality data.
40 CFR 50.1(j) defines an exceptional event as an event which
affects air quality, is not reasonably controllable or preventable, is
an event caused by human activity that is unlikely to recur at a
particular location or a natural event, and is determined by the
Administrator in accordance with 40 CFR 50.14 to be an exceptional
event. Exceptional events do not include stagnation of air masses or
meteorological inversions, meteorological events involving high
temperatures or lack of precipitation, or air pollution relating to
source noncompliance. 40 CFR 5.14(b) states that EPA shall exclude data
from use in determinations of exceedances and NAAQS violations where a
state demonstrates to EPA's satisfaction that an exceptional event
caused a specific air pollution concentration in excess of one or more
NAAQS at a particular air quality monitoring location and otherwise
satisfies the requirements of section 50.14.
The State submitted an exceptional event package on June 28, 2013
requesting EPA's concurrence on the flag for the April 5, 2010
exceedance. EPA completed its review of the exceptional events package
for Telluride's 2010 exceedance and concurred on the flag on August 21,
[[Page 71552]]
2013 because the State successfully demonstrated that the exceedance on
April 5, 2010 was caused by a natural high wind exceptional event due
to blowing desert dust from upwind natural desert areas of Arizona,
Utah, and southwest Colorado into the Telluride area.\3\ Thus, we are
proposing to exclude from use in determining that Telluride continues
to attain the 24- hour PM10 NAAQS the exceedance of the 24-
hour PM10 NAAQS that was recorded at the Telluride
PM10 monitor on April 5, 2010. See 40 CFR 50.14(b) and
(c)(2)(ii). With the exclusion of this data point, the highest value in
2010 is 133 [mu]g/m\3\, which is well below the 24-hour PM10
NAAQS standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Copies of the State's June 28, 2013 exceptional events
package and our concurrence documents are included in the docket for
this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, EPA reviewed 2013 data from AQS (this data has not
yet been quality assured by Colorado) and found a high wind exceptional
event of 265 [mu]g/m\3\ at the Telluride monitor on April 16, 2013. The
State submitted the exceptional events package for this exceedance on
October 3, 2013, and EPA concurred on the package on November 1, 2013,
because the State successfully demonstrated that the exceedance on
April 16, 2013 was caused by a natural high wind exceptional event
blowing desert dust from upwind natural desert areas of Arizona, Utah,
and southwest Colorado into the Telluride area.\4\ Thus, we are
proposing to exclude from use in determining that Telluride continues
to attain the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS the exceedance of the 24-
hour PM10 NAAQS that was recorded at the Telluride
PM10 monitor on April 16, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Copies of the State's October 3, 2013 exceptional events
package and our concurrence documents are included in the docket for
this action.
Table 1--Telluride PM10 Maximum 24-Hour Values
[Based on Data from 333 West Colorado Avenue, AQS Identification Number
08-113-0004]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum
Value
Year ([mu]g/
m\3\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2004....................................................... 72
2005....................................................... 70
2006....................................................... 69
2007....................................................... 77
2008....................................................... 82
2009....................................................... 130
2010....................................................... 133
2011....................................................... 68
2012....................................................... 80
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 2 below shows the estimated number of exceedances for the
Telluride PM10 maintenance area for the three-year periods
of 2004 through 2006, 2005 through 2007, 2006 through 2008, 2007
through 2009, 2008 through 2010, 2009 through 2011, and 2010 through
2012. To attain the standard, the three-year average number of expected
exceedances (values greater than 150 [mu]g/m\3\) must be less than or
equal to one. The table reflects continuous attainment of the 24-hour
PM10 NAAQS.
Table 2--Telluride PM10 Estimated Exceedances
[Based on Data from 333 West Colorado Avenue, AQS Identification Number
08-113-0004]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3-Year
estimated
Design value period number of
exceedances
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2004--2006............................................. 0
2005--2007............................................. 0
2006--2008............................................. 0
2007--2009............................................. 0
2008--2010............................................. 0
2009--2011............................................. 0
2010--2012............................................. 0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. What was the State's process?
Section 110(a)(2) of the CAA requires that a state provide
reasonable notice and public hearing before adopting a SIP revision and
submitting it to EPA.
The Colorado Air Quality Control Commission (AQCC) held a public
hearing for the revised Telluride PM10 Maintenance Plan on
November 19, 2009. The AQCC approved and adopted the revised Telluride
PM10 Maintenance Plan during the hearing. The Governor's
designee submitted the revised plan to EPA on March 31, 2010.
We have evaluated the revised maintenance plan and have determined
that the State met the requirements for reasonable public notice and
public hearing under section 110(a)(2) of the CAA. On September 30,
2010, by operation of law under CAA section 110(k)(1)(B), the revised
maintenance plan was deemed to have met the minimum ``completeness''
criteria found in 40 CFR part 51, appendix V.
IV. EPA's Evaluation of the Revised Telluride PM10
Maintenance Plan
The following are the key elements of a Maintenance Plan for
PM10: Emission Inventory, Maintenance Demonstration,
Monitoring Network/Verification of Continued Attainment, Contingency
Plan, and Transportation Conformity Requirements including the Motor
Vehicle Emission Budget for PM10. Below, we describe our
evaluation of these elements as they pertain to the revised Telluride
PM10 Maintenance Plan.
A. Emission Inventory
The revised Telluride PM10 Maintenance Plan includes
three inventories of daily PM10 emissions for the Telluride
area, for years 2007, 2015, and 2021. The Air Pollution Control
Division (APCD) developed these emission inventories using EPA-approved
emissions modeling methods and updated transportation and demographics
data. Each emission inventory is a list, by source category, of the air
contaminants directly emitted into the Telluride PM10
maintenance area. A more detailed description of the 2007, 2015 and
2021 inventories and information on model assumptions and parameters
for each source category are contained in the State's PM10
Maintenance Plan Technical Support Document (TSD). Included in both
inventories are agriculture, highway vehicle exhaust, railroads, road
dust, commercial cooking, construction, fuel combustion, non-road
sources, structure fires, and woodburning. We find that Colorado has
prepared adequate emission inventories for the area.
B. Maintenance Demonstration
The revised Telluride PM10 Maintenance Plan uses
emission roll-forward modeling to demonstrate maintenance of the 24-
hour PM10 NAAQS through 2021. Using the 2007 and 2021
emissions inventories, the State first determined the projected growth
in PM10 emissions from the 2007 base year to the 2021
maintenance year. The State estimated that emissions would increase
from 1,285 pounds per day in 2007 to 1,989 pounds per day in 2021. This
represents an increase of 54.8 percent.
The State then applied this percentage increase to the design day
concentration of 82 [mu]g/m\3\, which was the highest 24-hour maximum
PM10 value recorded in the Telluride area from 2006-2008.
This resulted in an estimated maximum 24-hour PM10
concentration in 2021 of 126.9 [mu]g/m\3\. This is well below the 24-
hour PM10 NAAQS of 150 [mu]g/m\3\.
C. Monitoring Network/Verification of Continued Attainment
In the revised Telluride PM10 Maintenance Plan, the
State commits to continue to operate an air quality monitoring network
in accordance with 40 CFR part 58 to verify continued attainment of the
24-hour PM10 NAAQS. This includes the continued operation of
a PM10 monitor in the Telluride area, which the State will
rely on to track PM10 emissions in the maintenance
[[Page 71553]]
area. The State also commits to conduct an annual review of the air
quality surveillance system in accordance with 40 CFR 58.20(d) to
determine whether the system continues to meet the monitoring
objectives presented in Appendix D of 40 CFR part 58. Additionally, the
State commits to track and document PM10 mobile source
parameters and new and modified stationary source permits. If these and
the resulting emissions change significantly over time, the APCD will
perform appropriate studies to determine: (1) whether additional and/or
re-sited monitors are necessary; and (2) whether mobile and stationary
source emissions projections are on target.
Based on the above, we are proposing approval of these commitments
as satisfying the relevant requirements.
D. Contingency Plan
Section 175A(d) of the CAA requires that a maintenance plan include
contingency provisions to promptly correct any violation of the NAAQS
that occurs after redesignation of an area. To meet this requirement
the State has identified appropriate contingency measures along with a
schedule for the development and implementation of such measures.
As stated in the revised Telluride PM10 Maintenance
Plan, the contingency measures will be triggered by a violation of the
24-hour PM10 NAAQS. However, the maintenance plan notes that
an exceedance of the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS may initiate a
voluntary, local process by the Town of Telluride, the Town of Mountain
Village, San Miguel County and the APCD to identify and evaluate
potential contingency measures.
The Town of Telluride, the Town of Mountain Village and San Miguel
County in coordination with the APCD, AQCC, and the Colorado Department
of Transportation (CDOT) will initiate a process to begin evaluating
potential contingency measures no more than 60 days after notification
from APCD that a violation of the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS has
occurred. The AQCC will then hold a public hearing to consider the
contingency measures recommended by the Town of Telluride, the Town of
Mountain Village, San Miguel County, APCD and CDOT along with any other
contingency measures the AQCC determines may be appropriate to
effectively address the violation. The State commits to adopt and
implement any necessary contingency measures within one year after a
violation occurs.
The State identifies the following as potential contingency
measures in the revised Telluride PM10 maintenance plan: (1)
Increased street sweeping requirements; (2) expanded, mandatory use of
alternative de-icers; (3) more stringent street sand specifications;
(4) road paving requirements; (5) woodburning restrictions; (6) re-
establishing new source review permitting requirements for stationary
sources; and (7) other emission control measures appropriate for the
area based on consideration of cost effectiveness, PM10
emission reduction potential, economic and social considerations, or
other factors.
We find that the contingency measures provided in the revised
Telluride PM10 Maintenance Plan are sufficient and meet the
requirements of section 175A(d) of the CAA.
E. Transportation Conformity Requirements: Motor Vehicle Emission
Budget for PM10
Transportation conformity is required by section 176(c) of the CAA.
EPA's conformity rule at 40 CFR part 93 requires that transportation
plans, programs, and projects conform to SIPs and establishes the
criteria and procedures for determining whether or not they conform.
Conformity to a SIP means that transportation activities will not
produce new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or
delay timely attainment of the NAAQS. To effectuate its purpose, the
conformity rule requires a demonstration that emissions from the
Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and the Transportation Improvement
Program (TIP) are consistent with the motor vehicle emissions budget(s)
(MVEB(s)) contained in a control strategy SIP revision or maintenance
plan (40 CFR 93.101, 93.118, and 93.124). A MVEB is defined as the
level of mobile source emissions of a pollutant relied upon in the
attainment or maintenance demonstration to attain or maintain
compliance with the NAAQS in the nonattainment or maintenance area.
Further information concerning EPA's interpretations regarding MVEBs
can be found in the preamble to EPA's November 24, 1993, transportation
conformity rule (see 58 FR 62193--62196).
The revised Telluride PM10 Maintenance Plan contains a
single MVEB of 1,108 lbs/day of PM10 for the year 2021, the
maintenance year. Once the State submitted the revised plan with the
2021 MVEB to EPA for approval, 40 CFR 93.118 required that EPA
determine whether the MVEB was adequate.
Our criteria for determining whether a SIP's MVEB is adequate for
conformity purposes are outlined in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4), which was
promulgated August 15, 1997 (see 62 FR 43780). Our process for
determining adequacy is described in our July 1, 2004 Transportation
Conformity Rule Amendments (see 69 FR 40004) and in relevant
guidance.\5\ We used these resources in making our adequacy
determination described below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ ``Companion Guidance for the July 1, 2004 Final
Transportation Conformity Rule, Conformity Implementation in Multi-
Jurisdictional Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas for Existing and
New Air Quality Standards'' (EPA 420-B-04-012 July, 2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On November 22, 2010, EPA announced the availability of the revised
Telluride PM10 Maintenance Plan, and the PM10
MVEB, on EPA's transportation conformity adequacy Web site. EPA
solicited public comment on the MVEB, and the public comment period
closed on December 22, 2010. We did not receive any comments. This
information is available at EPA's conformity Web site: https://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/currsips.htm#telluride.
By letter to the Colorado Department of Public Health and
Environment (CDPHE) dated March 21, 2011, EPA found that the revised
Telluride PM10 Maintenance Plan and the 2021 PM10
MVEB were adequate for transportation conformity purposes.\6\ However,
we noted in our letter that the revised Telluride PM10
Maintenance Plan did not discuss the PM10 MVEB for 2012 of
10,001 lbs/day from the original PM10 maintenance plan that
EPA approved in 2001 (see 66 FR 32556, June 15, 2001).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ In a Federal Register notice dated August 2, 2011, we
notified the public of our finding (see 76 FR 46288). This adequacy
determination became effective on August 17, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to 40 CFR 93.118(e)(1), the EPA-approved 2012
PM10 MVEB must continue to be used for analysis years 2012
through 2020 (as long as such years are within the timeframe of the
transportation plan), unless the State elects to submit a SIP revision
to revise the 2012 PM10 MVEB and EPA approves the SIP
revision. This is because the revised Telluride PM10
Maintenance Plan did not revise the previously-approved 2012
PM10 MVEB nor establish a new MVEB for 2012. Accordingly,
the MVEB ``. . . for the most recent prior year . . .'' (i.e., 2012)
from the original maintenance plan must continue to be used (see 40 CFR
93.118(b)(1)(ii) and (b)(2)(iv)).
We note that there is a considerable difference between the 2021
and 2012 budgets--1,108 lbs/day versus 10,001 lbs/day. This is largely
an artifact of changes in the methods, models, and
[[Page 71554]]
emission factors used to estimate mobile source emissions. The 2021
MVEB is consistent with the State's 2021 emissions inventory for
vehicle exhaust and road dust, and, thus, is consistent with the
State's maintenance demonstration for 2021.
The discrepancy between the 2012 and 2021 MVEBs is not a
significant issue for several reasons. As a practical matter, the 2021
MVEB of 1,108 lbs/day of PM10 would be controlling for any
conformity determination involving the relevant years because
conformity would have to be shown to both the 2012 MVEB and the 2021
MVEB. Also, for any maintenance plan, like the revised Telluride
PM10 Maintenance Plan, that only establishes a MVEB for the
last year of the maintenance plan, 40 CFR 93.118(b)(2)(i) requires that
the demonstration of consistency with the budget be accompanied by a
qualitative finding that there are no factors that would cause or
contribute to a new violation or exacerbate an existing violation in
the years before the last year of the maintenance plan. Therefore, when
a conformity determination is prepared which assesses conformity for
the years before 2021, the 2021 MVEB and the underlying assumptions
supporting it would have to be considered. Finally, 40 CFR 93.110
requires the use of the latest planning assumptions in conformity
determinations. Thus, the most current motor vehicle and road dust
emission factors would need to be used, and we expect the analysis
would show greatly reduced PM10 motor vehicle and road dust
emissions from those calculated in the first maintenance plan. In view
of the above, EPA is proposing to approve the 2021 PM10 MVEB
of 1,108 lbs/day.
V. Proposed Action
We are proposing to approve the revised Telluride PM10
Maintenance Plan that was submitted to us on March 31, 2010. We are
proposing to approve the revised maintenance plan because it
demonstrates maintenance through 2021 as required by CAA section
175A(b), retains the control measures from the initial PM10
maintenance plan that EPA approved in June of 2001, and meets other CAA
requirements for a section 175A maintenance plan. We are proposing to
exclude from use in determining that Telluride continues to attain the
24-hour PM10 NAAQS exceedances of the 24-hour
PM10 NAAQS that were recorded at the Telluride
PM10 monitor on April 5, 2010 and April 16, 2013 because
they meet the criteria for exceptional events caused by high wind
natural events. We are also proposing to approve the revised
maintenance plan's 2021 transportation conformity MVEB for
PM10 of 1,108 lbs/day.
VI. Statutory and Executive Orders Review
Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
This proposed action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting
Federal requirements and does not propose to impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this
proposed action:
is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
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);
does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this proposed action does not have tribal implications
as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP would not be approved to apply in Indian country
located in the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial
direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, PM10,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: November 18, 2013.
Howard M. Cantor,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8.
[FR Doc. 2013-28652 Filed 11-27-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P