Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 56 / Wednesday, March 24, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 14077 

[Revise item B to remove the reference 

to label 23 as follows:] 

b. A Priority Mail Open and Distribute 

shipment must be contained in either a 

USPS-approved sack using Tag 161 or 

Tag 190 or a USPS-provided Priority 

Mail Open and Distribute tray box (Tag 

161 and 190 are not required for tray 

boxes, only the 4x6 address label should 

be applied), except as provided in 

16.5.1c and 16.5.1d. 

* * * * * 

16.5.4 Tags 161 and 190—Priority 

Mail Open and Distribute 

[Revise the first sentence of the 

introductory paragraph of 16.5.4 to 

remove the optional use of facsimiles as 

follows:] 

Tag 161 and Tag 190 provide a place 

to affix Priority Mail postage and the 

address label for the destination facility. 

* * * 

* * * * * 

[Revise the second sentence in 16.5.4b 

to remove the option of a facsimile to 

read as follows:] 

b. * * * This tag also must be affixed 

to containers used for Priority Mail 

Open and Distribute shipments 

prepared under 16.5.1c or 16.5.1d. 

[Revise heading of 16.5.5 to read as 

follows:] 

16.5.5 Tray Boxes—Express Mail 

Open and Distribute and Priority Mail 

Open and Distribute 

[Revise 16.5.5 to read as follows:] 

As an alternative to sacks for Express 

Mail Open and Distribute and Priority 

Mail Open and Distribute shipments, 

unless prepared under 16.5.1c or 

16.5.1d, mailers may use USPS-supplied 

tray boxes for this service. Mailers must 

place a 1-foot or 2-foot letter tray into 

the appropriate size tray box. 

16.5.6 Address Labels 

[Revise the first sentence of 16.5.6 by 

removing Label 23 as follows:] 

In addition to Tag 157, Tag 161, or 

Tag 190, USPS-supplied containers and 

envelopes and mailer-supplied 

containers used for Express Mail Open 

and Distribute or Priority Mail Open 

and Distribute must bear an address 

label that states ‘‘OPEN AND 

DISTRIBUTE AT:’’ followed by the 

facility name. * * * 

* * * * * 

16.6 Enter and Deposit 

[Revise the heading of 16.6.1 to read as 

follows:] 

16.6.1 Verification 

[Delete the second sentence in 16.6.1 

and add new second sentence as 

follows:] 

* * * Open and Distribute containers 

must not be sealed until the BMEU 

verification and acceptance of the 

contents has been completed, unless 

accepted under an alternate procedure 

authorized by Business Mailer Support. 

[Add new 16.6.2, Entry, as follows:] 

16.6.2 Entry 

A PS Form 3152, Confirmation 

Services Certification, must accompany 

each shipment. Mailers must present 

shipments to the BMEU with enough 

time for acceptance, processing, and 

dispatch before the facility’s critical 

entry time for Express Mail or Priority 

Mail. 

* * * * * 

We will publish an appropriate 

amendment to 39 CFR Part 111 to reflect 

these changes. 

Stanley F. Mires, 

Chief Counsel, Legislative. 

[FR Doc. 2010–6102 Filed 3–23–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7710–12–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2009–0964; FRL–9129–9] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Illinois; 

NOX Budget Trading Program; 

Correction 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule; correction. 

SUMMARY: This document contains 

technical corrections to the final 

regulations, which were published in 

the Federal Register on Monday, March 

1, 2010. The regulations related to 

terminating the provisions of the 

Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) Budget Trading 

Program that apply to electric generating 

units (EGUs) in Illinois. 

DATES: Effective Date: This correction is 

effective on April 30, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John 

Summerhays, Environmental Scientist, 

Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs 

Branch (AR–18J), Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West 

Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 

60604, (312) 886–6067, 

summerhays.john@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

document provides a technical 

correction to the direct final regulation 

published at 75 FR 9103, March 1, 2010. 

The final regulation that is the subject 

of this correction is effective on April 

30, 2010, and approves the sunset of 35 

Illinois Administrative Code (IAC) 217 

Subpart W as incorporated into 40 CFR 

Part 52. The revision to the Illinois State 

Implementation Plan terminates the 

provisions of the NOX Budget Trading 

Program that apply to EGUs. 

Correction 

As published, the final regulations 

contained an error which may prove to 

be misleading and needs to be clarified. 

The direct final rule in 75 FR 9103 

inadvertently stated that 40 CFR 52.740 

was being amended, but the actual 

section being amended is 40 CFR 

52.720. 

Accordingly, the following correction 

is made to the final rule published 

March 1, 2010, (75 FR 9103). 

1. On page 9105, in the third column, 

amendatory instruction 2 is corrected to 

read as follows: 

‘‘2. Section 52.720 is amended by 

adding paragraph (c)(185), to read as 

follows:’’ 

Dated: March 12, 2010. 

Tinka G. Hyde, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. 2010–6474 Filed 3–23–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R06–OAR–2009–0202; FRL–9129–2] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans and Designation 

of Areas for Air Quality Planning 

Purposes; Arkansas; Redesignation of 

the Crittenden County, AR Portion of 

the Memphis, Tennessee-Arkansas 

1997 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment 

Area to Attainment 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to 

approve a request submitted on 

February 24, 2009, from the State of 

Arkansas to redesignate the Arkansas 

portion of the bi-state Memphis, 

Tennessee-Arkansas 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment area (hereafter referred to 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES

14078 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 56 / Wednesday, March 24, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

as the ‘‘bi-state Memphis Area’’) to 

attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

national ambient air quality standards 

(NAAQS). The bi-state Memphis 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS nonattainment 

area is composed of Crittenden County, 

Arkansas and Shelby County, 

Tennessee. EPA’s approval of the 

redesignation request is based on the 

determination that the bi-state Memphis 

Area has met the criteria for 

redesignation to attainment set forth in 

the Clean Air Act (CAA), including the 

determination that the bi-state Memphis 

Area has attained the 1997 8-hour ozone 

standard. Additionally, EPA is 

approving a revision to the Arkansas 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

including the 1997 8-hour ozone 

maintenance plan for Crittenden 

County, Arkansas that contains the new 

2006 and 2021 motor vehicle emission 

budgets (MVEBs) for nitrogen oxides 

(NOX) and volatile organic compounds 

(VOC) for Crittenden County, Arkansas. 

The State of Tennessee has submitted a 

similar redesignation request and 

maintenance plan for the Tennessee 

portion of this 1997 8-hour ozone area. 

EPA has taken action on Tennessee’s 

redesignation request, emissions 

inventory and maintenance plan 

through a separate rulemaking action 

(75 FR 56). On March 12, 2008, EPA 

issued a revised 8-hour ozone standard. 

EPA later announced on September 16, 

2009, that it may reconsider this revised 

ozone standard. The current action, 

however, is being taken to address 

requirements under the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. Requirements for the bistate Memphis Area under the 2008 

standard will be addressed in the future. 

DATES: Effective Date: This rule will be 

effective April 23, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket 

Identification No. EPA–R06–OAR– 

2009–0202. All documents in the docket 

are listed on the http:// 

www.regulations.gov Web site. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, i.e., Confidential 

Business Information or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically through 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Air Planning Section, Air Planning 

Branch, Multimedia Planning and 

Permitting Division, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross 

Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 

75202–2733. EPA requests that if at all 

possible, you contact the person listed 

in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section to schedule your 

inspection. The Regional Office’s 

official hours of business are Monday 

through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding 

federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jeffrey Riley, Air Planning Section, Air 

Planning Branch, Multimedia Planning 

and Permitting Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 

1200, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733. Mr. 

Riley may be reached by phone at (214) 

665–8542 or via electronic mail at 

riley.jeffrey@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. What Is the Background for the Actions? 

II. What Actions Is EPA Taking? 

III. Why Is EPA Taking These Actions? 

IV. What Are the Effects of These Actions? 

V. Final Action 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What Is the Background for the 

Actions? 

On February 24, 2009, the State of 

Arkansas submitted a request to 

redesignate Crittenden County, 

Arkansas (as part of the bi-state 

Memphis Area) to attainment for the 

1997 8-hour ozone standard, and for 

EPA approval of the Arkansas SIP 

revision containing a maintenance plan 

for Crittenden County, Arkansas. In an 

action published on January 14, 2010 

(75 FR 2091), EPA proposed to approve 

the redesignation of Crittenden County, 

Arkansas (as part of the bi-state 

Memphis Area) to attainment. EPA also 

proposed approval of Arkansas’ plan for 

maintaining the 1997 8-hour NAAQS as 

a SIP revision, and proposed to approve 

the NOX and VOC MVEBs for Crittenden 

County that were contained in the 

maintenance plan. In the January 14, 

2010, proposed action, EPA also 

provided information on the status of its 

transportation conformity adequacy 

determination for the Crittenden County 

NOX and VOC MVEBs. EPA received no 

comments on the January 14, 2010, 

proposal. Additionally, in a separate 

notice, EPA has already found the NOx 

and VOC MVEBs, as contained in 

Arkansas’ maintenance plan for 

Crittenden County, adequate for the 

purposes of transportation conformity. 

The MVEBs included in the 

maintenance plan area as follows: 

TABLE 1—CRITTENDEN COUNTY VOC 

AND NOX MVEBS

[Summer season tons per day] 

Year 2006 2021 

NOX .................................. 6.27 1.84 

VOC .................................. 2.95 1.39 

EPA’s adequacy public comment 

period on these MVEBs (as contained in 

Arkansas’ submittal) began on March 

11, 2009, and closed on April 10, 2009. 

No comments were received during 

EPA’s adequacy public comment period. 

In a letter dated April 20, 2009, EPA 

informed the State of Arkansas of its 

intent to make an affirmative adequacy 

determination for the MVEBs contained 

in this maintenance plan for Crittenden 

County, Arkansas. On May 7, 2009 (74 

FR 21356), EPA published a Federal 

Register notice deeming the MVEBs for 

Crittenden County, Arkansas adequate 

for transportation conformity purposes. 

EPA provided a separate adequacy 

posting for the MVEBs in association 

with Shelby County, Tennessee. The 

Shelby County, Tennessee MVEBs (in 

association with the bi-state Memphis 

Area) were found adequate through a 

separate action published November 12, 

2009 (74 FR 58277). This action 

approves the NOX and VOC budgets in 

Table 1 for Crittenden County. 

As was discussed in greater detail in 

the January 14, 2010, proposal, this 

redesignation is for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone designations finalized in April 

30, 2004 (69 FR 23857). Various aspects 

of EPA’s Phase 1 8-hour ozone 

implementation rule were challenged in 

court and on December 22, 2006, the 

U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of 

Columbia Circuit (DC Circuit Court) 

vacated EPA’s Phase 1 Implementation 

Rule for the 8-hour Ozone Standard. (69 

FR 23951, April 30, 2004). South Coast 

Air Quality Management Dist. 

(SCAQMD) v. EPA, 472 F.3d 882 (DC 

Cir. 2006). On June 8, 2007, in response 

to several petitions for rehearing, the DC 

Circuit Court clarified that the Phase 1 

Rule was vacated only with regard to 

those parts of the Rule that had been 

successfully challenged. Therefore, the 

Phase 1 Rule provisions related to 

classifications for areas currently 

classified under subpart 2 of title I, part 

D of the CAA as 8-hour nonattainment 

areas, the 8-hour attainment dates and 

the timing for emissions reductions 

needed for attainment of the 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS, remain effective. The 

June 8th decision left intact the Court’s 

rejection of EPA’s reasons for 

implementing the 8-hour standard in 

certain nonattainment areas under 

subpart 1 in lieu of subpart 2. By 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 56 / Wednesday, March 24, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 14079 

limiting the vacatur, the Court let stand 

EPA’s revocation of the 1-hour standard 

and those anti-backsliding provisions of 

the Phase 1 Rule that had not been 

successfully challenged. The June 8th 

decision affirmed the December 22, 

2006, decision that EPA had improperly 

failed to retain measures required for 

1-hour nonattainment areas under the 

anti-backsliding provisions of the 

regulations: (1) Nonattainment area New 

Source Review requirements based on 

an area’s 1-hour nonattainment 

classification; (2) Section 185 penalty 

fees for 1-hour severe or extreme 

nonattainment areas; and (3) measures 

to be implemented pursuant to section 

172(c)(9) or 182(c)(9) of the CAA, on the 

contingency of an area not making 

reasonable further progress toward 

attainment of the 1-hour NAAQS, or for 

failure to attain that NAAQS. 

As set forth in the January 14, 2010, 

proposal for the redesignation of 

Crittenden County, Arkansas, EPA does 

not believe that the Court’s rulings alter 

any requirements relevant to this 

redesignation action so as to preclude 

redesignation, and do not prevent EPA 

from finalizing this redesignation. EPA 

believes that the Court’s December 22, 

2006, and June 8, 2007, decisions 

impose no impediment to moving 

forward with redesignation of 

Crittenden County, Arkansas to 

attainment. Even in light of the Court’s 

decisions, redesignation is appropriate 

under the relevant redesignation 

provisions of the CAA and longstanding 

policies regarding redesignation 

requests. 

II. What Actions Is EPA Taking? 

EPA is taking final action to approve 

Arkansas’ redesignation request and to 

change the legal designation of 

Crittenden County, Arkansas from 

nonattainment to attainment for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The bi-state 

Memphis 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS 

nonattainment area is composed of 

Crittenden County, Arkansas and 

Shelby County, Tennessee. The 

redesignation request, maintenance plan 

and emission inventory in association 

with the Tennessee portion of this Area 

have been addressed through a separate, 

but coordinated action (75 FR 56). In 

this action, EPA is also approving 

Arkansas’ 1997 8-hour ozone 

maintenance plan for Crittenden 

County, Arkansas (such approval being 

one of the CAA criteria for redesignation 

to attainment status). The maintenance 

plan is designed to help keep Crittenden 

County, Arkansas (as part of the bi-state 

Memphis Area) in attainment for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS through 

2021. These approval actions are based 

on EPA’s determination that Arkansas 

has demonstrated that Crittenden 

County, Arkansas has met the criteria 

for redesignation to attainment specified 

in the CAA, including a demonstration 

that the bi-state Memphis Area has 

attained the 1997 8-hour ozone 

standard. EPA’s analyses of Arkansas’ 

1997 8-hour ozone redesignation request 

and maintenance plan are described in 

detail in the proposed rule published 

January 14, 2010 (75 FR 2091). 

Consistent with the CAA, the 

maintenance plan that EPA is approving 

also includes 2006 and 2021 MVEBs for 

NOx and VOC for Crittenden County, 

Arkansas. In this action, EPA is 

approving these NOx and VOC MVEBs 

for the purposes of transportation 

conformity. For regional emission 

analysis years that involve years prior to 

2021, the new 2006 MVEB are the 

applicable budgets (for the purpose of 

conducting transportation conformity 

analyses). For regional emission 

analysis years that involve the year 2021 

and beyond, the applicable budgets, for 

the purpose of conducting 

transportation conformity analyses, are 

the new 2021 MVEB. 

III. Why Is EPA Taking These Actions? 

EPA has determined that the bi-state 

Memphis Area has attained the 1997 

8-hour ozone standard and has also 

determined that Arkansas has 

demonstrated that all other criteria for 

the redesignation of Crittenden County, 

Arkansas (as part of the bi-state 

Memphis Area) from nonattainment to 

attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS have been met. See, section 

107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA is also 

taking final action to approve the 

maintenance plan for Crittenden 

County, Arkansas as meeting the 

requirements of sections 175A and 

107(d) of the CAA. Furthermore, EPA is 

approving the new NOX and VOC 

MVEBs for the years 2006 and 2021 

contained in Arkansas’ maintenance 

plan for Crittenden County because 

these MVEBs are consistent with 

maintenance for the bi-state Memphis 

Area. In the January 14, 2010, proposal 

to redesignate Crittenden County, 

Arkansas (as part of the bi-state 

Memphis Area), EPA described the 

applicable criteria for redesignation to 

attainment and its analysis of how those 

criteria have been met. The rationale for 

EPA’s findings and actions is set forth 

in the proposed rulemaking and 

summarized in this final rulemaking. 

IV. What Are the Effects of These 

Actions? 

Approval of the redesignation request 

changes the legal designation of 

Crittenden County, Arkansas (as part of 

the bi-state Memphis Area) from 

nonattainment to attainment for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, found at 40 

CFR part 81. The approval also 

incorporates into the Arkansas SIP a 

plan for maintaining the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS in the bi-state Memphis 

Area through 2021. The maintenance 

plan includes contingency measures to 

remedy future violations of the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS, and establishes 

NOx and VOC MVEBs for the years 2006 

and 2021 for Crittenden County, 

Arkansas. The other portion of the bistate Memphis Area is Shelby County, 

Tennessee. EPA has taken action on 

Tennessee’s redesignation request for 

Shelby County, Tennessee (as part of the 

bi-state Memphis area) and the 

associated emissions inventory and 

maintenance plan through a separate 

rulemaking action (75 FR 56). 

V. Final Action 

After evaluating Arkansas’ 

redesignation request, EPA is taking 

final action to approve the redesignation 

and change the legal designation of 

Crittenden County, Arkansas (as part of 

the bi-state Memphis Area) from 

nonattainment to attainment for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA has 

addressed the redesignation request, 

emission inventory and maintenance 

plan for Shelby County, Tennessee (as a 

portion of the bi-state Memphis Area) in 

a separate but coordinated action. 

Through this action, EPA is also 

approving into the Arkansas SIP, the 

1997 8-hour ozone maintenance plan for 

Crittenden County, Arkansas, which 

includes the new NOX MVEBs of 6.27 

tons per day (tpd) for 2006, and 1.84 tpd 

for 2021; and new VOC MVEBs of 2.95 

tpd for 2006, and 1.39 tpd for 2021. 

These new MVEBs were found adequate 

through a previous action (74 FR 

21356). Within 24 months from the 

effective date of EPA’s adequacy finding 

for the MVEBs, the transportation 

partners will need to demonstrate 

conformity to the new NOX and VOC 

MVEBs pursuant to 40 CFR 93.104(e). 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

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. 

Accordingly, this action merely 

approves state law as meeting Federal 

requirements and does not impose 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES

14080 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 56 / Wednesday, March 24, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

additional requirements beyond those 

imposed by state law. For that reason, 

this 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 rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not 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. 

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 action 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). 

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 May 24, 2010. 

Filing a petition for reconsideration by 

the Administrator of this final rule does 

not affect the finality of this action 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 

40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Incorporation by reference, 

Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

40 CFR Part 81 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, National parks, 

Wilderness areas. 

Dated: March 12, 2010. 

Al Armendariz, 

Regional Administrator, Region 6. 

■ 40 CFR parts 52 and 81 are 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 E—Arkansas 

■ 2. In § 52.170(e) the third table is 

amended by revising the table heading 

and column headings; and by adding a 

new entry at the end of the table for 

‘‘8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan for 

Crittenden County, Arkansas’’ to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.170 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

* * * * * 

EPA-APPROVED NON-REGULATORY PROVISIONS AND QUASI-REGULATORY MEASURES IN THE ARKANSAS SIP 

Name of SIP provision Applicable geographic 

or nonattainment area 

State 

submittal/ 

effective date 

EPA approval date Explanation 

* * * * * * * 

8-Hour Ozone Maintenance plan for the 

Crittenden County, Arkansas Area.

Crittenden, Shelby 

County.

2/26/2009 3/24/2010 [Insert FR 

page where document begins].

PART 81—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 81 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

■ 2. In § 81.304, the table entitled 

‘‘Arkansas—Ozone (8-Hour Standard)’’ is 

amended by revising the entry for 

‘‘Memphis, TN-AR: (AQCR Metropolitan 

Memphis Interstate) Crittenden County,’’ 

to read as follows: 

§ 81.304 Arkansas. 

* * * * * 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 56 / Wednesday, March 24, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 14081 

ARKANSAS—OZONE

[8-Hour standard] 

Designated area 

Designation a Category/classification 

Date 1 Type Date 1 Type 

* * * * * * * 

Memphis, TN-AR: (AQCR Metropolitan Memphis Interstate) 

Crittenden County.

(3) Attainment .............................. (3) 

* * * * * * * 

a Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified. 

1This date is June 15, 2004, unless otherwise noted. 

2April 28, 2008. 

3April 23, 2010. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2010–6343 Filed 3–23–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 98 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0508; FRL–9127–6] 

RIN 2060–AQ15 

Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse 

Gases: Minor Harmonizing Changes to 

the General Provisions 

Correction 

In rule document 2010–5695 

beginning on page 12451 in the issue of 

March 16, 2010, on pages 12457 and 

12458, in Subpart A, the following 

tables are being corrected to read as set 

forth below: 

Subpart A [Corrected] 

TABLE A–3 OF SUBPART A—SOURCE CATEGORY LIST FOR § 98.2(a)(1) 

Source Categories 1 Applicable in 2010 and Future Years 

Electricity generation units that report CO2 mass emissions year round through 40 CFR part 75 (subpart D). 

Adipic acid production (subpart E). 

Aluminum production (subpart F). 

Ammonia manufacturing (subpart G). 

Cement production (subpart H). 

HCFC–22 production (subpart O). 

HFC–23 destruction processes that are not collected with a HCFC–22 production facility and that destroy more than 2.14 metric tons of HFC– 

23 per year (subpart O). 

Lime manufacturing (subpart S). 

Nitric acid production (subpart V). 

Petrochemical production (subpart X). 

Petroleum refineries (subpart Y). 

Phosphoric acid production (subpart Z). 

Silicon carbide production (subpart BB). 

Soda ash production (subpart CC). 

Titanium dioxide production (subpart EE). 

Municipal solid waste landfills that generate CH4 in amounts equivalent to 25,000 metric tons CO2e or more per year, as determined according 

to subpart HH of this part. 

Manure management systems with combined CH4 amd N2O emissions in amounts equivalent to 25,000 metric tons CO2e or more per year, as 

determined according to subpart JJ of this part. 

Additional Source Categories 1 Applicable in 2011 and Future Years 

(Reserved) 

1 Source categories are defined in each applicable subpart. 

TABLE A–4 OF SUBPART A—SOURCE CATEGORY LIST FOR § 98.2(a)(2) 

Source Categories 1 Applicable in 2010 and Future Years 

Ferroalloy production (subpart K). 

Glass production (subpart N). 

Hydrogen production (subpart P). 

Iron and steel production (subpart Q). 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES