Adequacy Determination for Lamar and Steamboat Springs PM10 Maintenance Plans' Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for Transportation Conformity Purposes; State of Colorado |
|---|
|
Shaun L. McGrath
Environmental Protection Agency
October 3, 2014
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 192 (Friday, October 3, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 59767]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-23636]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[EPA-R08-OAR-2014-0236; FRL-9917-35-Region-8]
Adequacy Determination for Lamar and Steamboat Springs PM10
Maintenance Plans' Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for Transportation
Conformity Purposes; State of Colorado
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Notice of adequacy.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this notice, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is
notifying the public that the Agency has found the following adequate
for transportation conformity purposes: The ``Revised PM10
Maintenance Plan for the Lamar Attainment/Maintenance Area'' and its
motor vehicle emissions budget, and the ``Revised PM10
Maintenance Plan for the Steamboat Springs Attainment/Maintenance
Area'' and its motor vehicle emissions budget. As more fully explained
in the Supplementary Information section of this notice, this finding
will affect future transportation conformity determinations.
DATES: This finding is effective on October 20, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim Russ, Air Program, Mailcode 8P-AR,
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver,
Colorado 80202-1129, telephone number (303) 312-6479, fax number (303)
312-6064, or email russ.tim@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our,'' are used, we mean EPA. Whenever ``State'' is used,
we mean the State of Colorado.
Transportation conformity is required by section 176(c) of the
Clean Air Act (CAA). The conformity rule provisions at 40 CFR 93
require that transportation plans, programs, and projects conform to a
State Implementation Plan (SIP) and establish the criteria and
procedures for determining whether or not they do. Conformity to a SIP
means that transportation activities will not produce new air quality
violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of
the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS).
The criteria by which we determine whether a SIP revision's motor
vehicle emissions budget (MVEB) is adequate for conformity purposes are
outlined in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4), which was promulgated August 15, 1997
(62 FR 43780). We described our process for determining the adequacy of
submitted SIP MVEBs in our July 1, 2004 Transportation Conformity Rule
Amendments (69 FR 40004). We used these resources in making our
adequacy determinations announced in this notice.
This notice is simply an announcement of findings that we have
already made and are as described below:
Lamar (PM10): The State submitted the ``Revised PM10
Maintenance Plan for the Lamar Attainment/Maintenance Area'' \1\ on May
13, 2013. The State prepared the submittal to meet the requirements of
section 175A(b) of the CAA for a second 10-year maintenance plan. We
posted the ``Revised PM10 Maintenance Plan for the Lamar
Attainment/Maintenance Area'' for adequacy review on EPA's
transportation conformity Web site on November 15, 2013. The public
comment period closed on December 16, 2013, and we did not receive any
comments in response to the adequacy review posting (see http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/currsips.htm#lamar-co). EPA
sent a letter to the Colorado Department of Public Health and
Environment (CDPHE) on January 23, 2014, stating that the submitted
Lamar PM10 second 10-year maintenance plan and the 2025
PM10 MVEB were adequate for transportation conformity
purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ PM10 refers to particulate matter less than or
equal to 10 microns in diameter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steamboat Springs (PM10): The State submitted the
``Revised PM10 Maintenance Plan for the Steamboat Springs
Attainment/Maintenance Area'' on May 11, 2012. The State prepared the
submittal to meet the requirements of section 175A(b) of the CAA for a
second 10-year maintenance plan. We posted the ``Revised
PM10 Maintenance Plan for the Steamboat Springs Attainment/
Maintenance Area'' for adequacy review on EPA's transportation
conformity Web site on November 15, 2013. The public comment period
closed on December 16, 2013, and we did not receive any comments in
response to the adequacy review posting (see http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/currsips.htm#steam-spr-co). EPA sent a letter
to the CDPHE on January 23, 2014, stating that the submitted Steamboat
Springs PM10 second 10-year maintenance plan and the 2024
PM10 MVEB were adequate for transportation conformity
purposes.
For the Lamar PM10 maintenance area, the MVEB we found
adequate is 764 pounds of PM10 per day in 2025. Following
the effective date listed in the DATES section of this notice, the
Colorado Department of Transportation and the U.S. Department of
Transportation are required to use this motor vehicle emissions budget
for future transportation conformity determinations for projects in the
Lamar PM10 maintenance area. For the Steamboat Springs
PM10 maintenance area, the MVEB we found adequate is 1,103
pounds of PM10 per day in 2024. Following the effective date
listed in the DATES section of this notice, the Colorado Department of
Transportation and the U.S. Department of Transportation are required
to use this motor vehicle emissions budget for future transportation
conformity determinations for projects in the Steamboat Springs
PM10 maintenance area.
Please note that our adequacy review described above is separate
from our rulemaking action on the two maintenance plans discussed above
and should not be used to prejudge our ultimate approval or disapproval
of each of the SIP revisions. Even if we find a maintenance plan and
its MVEB adequate for transportation conformity purposes now, we may
later find it necessary to disapprove the SIP revision. Should this
situation arise, we would then revisit our adequacy finding.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: September 4, 2014.
Shaun L. McGrath,
Regional Administrator, Region 8.
[FR Doc. 2014-23636 Filed 10-2-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P