US 6 has been moved off I-70 between Exit 72 and Exit 87, and continues east until rejoining I-70 at Exit 109, as shown in the HB.
Interesting. Exit 72 did not exist prior to some time between 2012 and 2015, so there simply is no prior signage at this location to compare to.
This sign off exit 75 points to US 6 going both ways along the frontage road from here as seen in 2018, roll GMSV back to 2012 and there is no such sign present. So that's one other location corroborating this!
That said, I'm seeing no mention of US 6 whatsoever at exit 87 (okay, one way or another something is missing there), and GMSV imagery between exits 75 and 87 all predates when this change would have occurred.
Also,
this sign implies US 6 also goes west from exit 75 along the frontage road... okay, so what about west of there? Well, GMSV at exit 62 is too old to show if any shields have been erected there... and the old alignment is not continuously intact between exit 62 and the next interchange west.
So this situation is a bit messy and bears further research. Can you confirm (or deny) whether US 6 shields are present in the field at any other locations not linked to here?
It is also (barely) signed to and along its old alignment in Glenwood Springs between Exits 114 and 116 (and, oddly, along a dead-end segment west of Exit 114). It then rejoins I-70 through Glenwood Canyon and departs at Exit 140, as shown in the HB.
The other thing is that all the signage on this apparent segment is around exit 114. There are no signs for US 6 at exit 116.
That plus the signs pointing to US 6 down the dead end are suggesting to me that whoever put the plans together for this signage project goofed and acted on outdated info about where US 6 is... an easy mistake to make especially if some people in the areas are still used to thinking of the old road as "highway 6".
At any rate, AASHTO did not approve either of these changes... and by policy would not, since a US highway is not supposed to be moved from a higher quality road to a parallel lower quality road. Whatever CDOT is doing is rogue, if it is even deliberate (and the lack of consistency makes me question whether it is).
By the general principle of "if signage is inconsistent, defer to what is on paper" I would suggest leaving US 6 as is unless clearer and more convincing evidence that it should be routed along the surface alignment can be presented.