Overview
Title
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Colorado; Revisions to Regulation Number 7 and RACT Requirements for 2008 8-Hour Ozone Standard for the Denver Metro/North Front Range Nonattainment Area
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The EPA is helping Colorado clean up its air by changing some rules to reduce certain gases that make the air dirty, so people can breathe better. They are also fixing an old mistake in the rules to make sure everything is right.
Summary AI
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving changes to Colorado's State Implementation Plan (SIP) concerning air quality control, specifically targeting ozone levels in certain areas. This involves updates to Regulation Number 7 for better management of emissions like volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) following the 2008 ozone standards. The action also corrects an oversight from a 2018 rule. This decision is made under the Clean Air Act and does not impose any extra requirements beyond those set by state law.
Abstract
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving and conditionally approving State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the State of Colorado on May 31, 2017, May 14, 2018 and May 8, 2019. The revisions are to Colorado Air Quality Control Commission (Commission or AQCC) Regulation Number 7 (Reg. 7). The revisions to Reg. 7 address Colorado's reasonably available control technology (RACT) SIP obligations for Moderate 2008 ozone nonattainment areas; add incorporation by reference dates to rules and reference methods; and make typographical, grammatical, and formatting corrections. Also, in this action the EPA is correcting a July 3, 2018 final rule pertaining to Colorado's SIP. In that action, we inadvertently omitted regulatory text corresponding to "incorporation by reference" (IBR) materials for graphic arts and printing revisions to Reg. 7, Section XIII (adopted November 17, 2016). The EPA is taking this action pursuant to the Clean Air Act (CAA).
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The document presented is a detailed rule from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published in the Federal Register. This particular rule aims to approve changes to Colorado’s State Implementation Plan (SIP) which is designed to govern and improve air quality specifically related to ozone levels in the Denver Metro/North Front Range area. The revisions to Colorado Air Quality Control Commission Regulation Number 7 are significant for addressing emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) as per the 2008 ozone standards. Additionally, this action corrects a previous oversight from a 2018 rule, enhancing its regulatory precision.
General Summary
In this final ruling, the EPA is approving and conditionally approving various amendments to Colorado's air quality regulations, as submitted by the state between 2017 and 2019. The adjustments focus on ensuring that Colorado meets federal standards for ozone—a pollutant that poses serious health and environmental challenges. The rule also rectifies past administrative errors to incorporate missing regulatory text essential to the state’s compliance measures. The effective date for this rule is March 26, 2021.
Significant Issues or Concerns
A key issue with this document is its complexity, with numerous legal and technical terms that could be difficult for a general audience to understand. This complexity underscores a broader concern about accessibility and public comprehension of regulatory modifications that impact environmental policy. Furthermore, the reference to conditional approvals and incomplete determinations might confuse stakeholders regarding what the state needs to achieve currently and in the future to maintain compliance.
The document requires Colorado to meet specific conditions to avoid these conditional approvals turning into disapprovals. This can potentially lead to a lack of clarity and preparedness if stakeholders, such as state regulators, cannot fulfill outlined requirements.
Impact on the Public
The revisions to the SIP and regulatory framework are intended to significantly enhance air quality in the Denver Metro/North Front Range area by controlling pollutants that contribute to ozone formation. Improved air quality directly benefits public health by reducing respiratory issues and other health concerns associated with poor air quality. It also benefits the environment by decreasing harmful effects on local ecosystems.
Impact on Stakeholders
For stakeholders such as state officials and policymakers, these changes represent both progress and possible challenges. On the one hand, aligning with federal standards enhances public health outcomes and demonstrates state accountability. On the other hand, stakeholders may face operational challenges in meeting these conditional requirements to ensure full compliance, especially if resources and expertise are limited.
Industries and businesses within the regulated areas could face stricter controls and may need to adopt new technologies or methods to reduce emissions, incurring additional costs. Conversely, these regulations could promote innovation in emissions control technologies and practices, providing new business opportunities and a cleaner environment.
In summary, while the EPA's approval of changes to Colorado's SIP is crucial for environmental improvement and compliance with federal law, it also necessitates clear communication and meticulous implementation to mitigate potential confusion and ensure successful outcomes.
Issues
• The document includes numerous sections with legal and technical references, which could be challenging for a general audience to understand without background knowledge in environmental policy and law.
• The actions described involve conditional approvals and incomplete determinations, which could potentially lead to confusion regarding the current status and future obligations of the State of Colorado.
• The document references several previous actions and submissions without providing detailed context, which may make it difficult for readers to fully grasp the implications of these actions without accessing those prior documents.
• There is a reference to corrections of a previous rule that inadvertently omitted text. It could be of concern if such omissions occur regularly, leading to potential oversight issues.
• The document discusses conditional approvals that could convert to disapprovals if certain actions are not taken, which might create uncertainty or legal challenges if not clearly communicated and managed.