Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 64953 

NOX Emissions Reduction Program, as a 

revision to the Illinois SIP. 

[FR Doc. 2010–26438 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R07–OAR–2010–0415; FRL–9210–3] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; State of 

Missouri 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is approving a revision to 

a State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

submitted by the State of Missouri. The 

purpose of this revision is to update the 

Springfield City Code and is part of 

ongoing SIP maintenance to assure that 

outdated local codes and ordinances do 

not remain in the SIP. The revision 

reflects updates to the Missouri 

statewide rules, and will ensure 

consistency between the applicable 

local agency rules and the Federally 

approved rules. 

DATES: This direct final rule will be 

effective December 20, 2010, without 

further notice, unless EPA receives 

adverse comment by November 22, 

2010. If EPA receives adverse comment, 

we will publish a timely withdrawal of 

the direct final rule in the Federal 

Register informing the public that the 

rule will not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07– 

OAR–2010–0415, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. E-mail: kemp.lachala@epa.gov. 

3. Mail or Hand Delivery: Lachala 

Kemp, Environmental Protection 

Agency, Air Planning and Development 

Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas 

City, Kansas 66101. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R07–OAR–2010– 

0415. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at http:// 

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 through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected. The http:// 

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 e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through http:// 

www.regulations.gov, your e-mail 

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. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the http:// 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, i.e., 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 form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Environmental Protection Agency, 

Air Planning and Development Branch, 

901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, 

Kansas 66101. The Regional Office’s 

official hours of business are Monday 

through Friday, 8 to 4:30 excluding 

Federal holidays. The interested persons 

wanting to examine these documents 

should make an appointment with the 

office at least 24 hours in advance. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Lachala Kemp at 913–551–7214, or by 

e-mail at kemp.lachala@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or 

‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. This section provides 

additional information by addressing 

the following questions: 

I. What is being addressed in this document? 

II. What revisions is EPA approving? 

III. What action is EPA taking? 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What is being addressed in this 

document? 

On January 21, 2009, EPA received a 

request from the Missouri Department of 

Natural Resources to approve revisions 

to the SIP relating to changes in the SIPapproved program for Springfield, 

Missouri. In order for the local 

program’s ‘‘Air Pollution’’ rules to be 

incorporated into the Federallyenforceable SIP, on behalf of the local 

agency, the State must submit the 

formally adopted regulations which are 

consistent with State and Federal 

requirements to EPA for inclusion in the 

SIP. The regulation adoption process 

generally includes public notice of a 

public comment period and a public 

hearing, and formal adoption of the rule 

by the State authorized rulemaking 

body. In this case that rulemaking body 

is the local agency. After the local 

agency formally adopts the rule, the 

local agency submits the rulemaking to 

the State, and then the State submits the 

rulemaking to EPA for consideration for 

formal action (inclusion of the 

rulemaking into the SIP). EPA must 

provide public notice and seek 

additional public comment regarding 

the proposed Federal action on the 

State’s submission. 

The 2009 revisions for Springfield 

consist of administrative changes, 

removing Springfield City Code Chapter 

2A and replacing it with the Springfield 

City Code Chapter 6. EPA had 

previously approved portions of Chapter 

2A, as it relates to regulation of 

incinerators. In general, these changes 

are administrative only and they do not 

add any new limitations, conditions or 

requirements. The revisions retain all 

previous sections pertaining to 

definitions, test methods and tables, 

stack emission test methods, and 

emission limitations for incinerators, 

but with new numbering and titles. The 

revision also removes compliance 

schedules for incinerators which were 

not in compliance upon the original 

effective date of the rule (1969). 

II. What revision is EPA approving? 

EPA is approving revisions to the 

relevant portions of Springfield City 

Code Chapter 2A ‘‘Air Pollution Control 

Standards’’, which are now found in 

Chapter 6 of the Code. The local 

agency’s ‘‘Air Pollution Control 

Standards’’ were revised as follows: 

Article I, section 2A has been 

renumbered as Chapter 6 with other 

corresponding renumbering within the 

chapter. 

All previous sections pertaining to 

definitions, test methods and tables, 

stack emission test methods, and 

incinerators have all been retained, but 

with new numbering and titles. 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES
64954 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

What action is EPA taking? 

EPA is approving these revisions to 

the Springfield City Code Chapter 2A 

Air Pollution Control Standard as 

described above. We are processing this 

action as a direct final action because 

the revisions make routine changes to 

the existing rules which are 

noncontroversial. Therefore, we do not 

anticipate any adverse comments. 

Please note that if EPA receives adverse 

comment on part of this rule and if that 

part can be severed from the remainder 

of the rule, EPA may adopt as final 

those parts of the rule that are not the 

subject of an adverse comment. 

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 

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 December 20, 

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. Parties with objections to this 

direct final rule are encouraged to file a 

comment in response to the parallel 

notice of proposed rulemaking for this 

action published in the proposed rules 

section of today’s Federal Register, 

rather than file an immediate petition 

for judicial review of this direct final 

rule, so that EPA can withdraw this 

direct final rule and address the 

comment in the proposed rulemaking. 

This action may not be challenged later 

in proceedings to enforce its 

requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Lead, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: September 22, 2010. 

Karl Brooks, 

Regional Administrator, Region 7. 

■ Accordingly, 40 CFR part 52 is 

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 AA—Missouri 

■ 2. In § 52.1320 the table in paragraph 

(c) is amended by revising the entry for 

‘‘Chapter 2A’’ under the heading 

‘‘Springfield—Chapter 2A—Air 

Pollution Control Standards’’ to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.1320 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED MISSOURI REGULATIONS

Missouri 

citation Title 

State 

effective 

date 

EPA approval date Explanation 

Missouri Department of Natural Resources, Chapter 2 Air Quality Standards and Air Pollution Control Regulations for the Kansas City 

Metropolitan Area 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 64955 

EPA-APPROVED MISSOURI REGULATIONS—Continued 

Missouri 

citation Title 

State 

effective 

date 

EPA approval date Explanation 

*******

Springfield—Chapter 2A—Air Pollution Control Standards 

Article I ........................... Definitions ............................. 12/04/08 10/21/10 [insert FR page 

number where the document begins].

Only Section 6–2 is approved by EPA. 

Article II .......................... Administrative and Enforcement.12/04/08 ............................................... Only Sections 6–151, 155, 156, and 

171 are approved by EPA. 

Incinerators.

Article V .......................... ............................................... 12/04/08 ............................................... Only Sections 6–311 through 314 are 

approved by EPA. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2010–24918 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

42 CFR Part 110 

RIN 0906–AA83 

Countermeasures Injury 

Compensation Program (CICP): 

Administrative Implementation; Interim 

Final Rule 

Correction 

In rule document 2010–25110 

beginning on page 63656 in the issue of 

Friday, October 15, 2010, make the 

following corrections: 

1. On page 63656, in the first column, 

in the DATES section, in the second and 

third lines, ‘‘Written one comments’’ 

should read ‘‘Written comments’’. 

2. On the same page, in the same 

column, in the ADDRESSES section, in 

the fourth and fifth lines, ‘‘submit your 

comments in only of these ways’’ should 

read ‘‘submit your comments in only 

one of these ways’’. 

[FR Doc. C1–2010–25110 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1505–01–D 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 648 

[Docket No. 0910051338–0151–02] 

RIN 0648–XZ44 

Fisheries of the Northeastern United 

States; Northeast Multispecies 

Fishery; Correction to Cod Landing 

Limit for Handgear A Vessels in the 

Common Pool Fishery 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Temporary rule; inseason 

adjustment of landing limit. 

SUMMARY: This action addresses an 

oversight in a previous inseason action 

and decreases the landing limit for cod 

to 50 lb (22.7 kg) per trip for NE 

multispecies limited access Handgear A 

(HA) permitted vessels fishing in the 

common pool fishery for the remainder 

of the 2010 fishing year (FY) (through 

April 30, 2011). This action is 

authorized under the authority of the 

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act 

(Magnuson-Stevens Act), and is 

required by the regulations 

implementing Amendment 13, 

Amendment 16, and Framework 

Adjustment 44 (FW 44) to the NE 

Multispecies Fishery Management Plan 

(FMP). 

DATES: Effective October 21, 2010, 

through April 30, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Douglas Potts, Fishery Policy Analyst, 

(978) 281–9341, fax (978) 281–9135. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Regulations governing possession and 

landing limits for HA vessels fishing 

under common pool regulations at 

§ 648.82(b)(6) state that ‘‘The [300 lb 

(136.1 kg)] cod trip limit shall be 

adjusted proportionally to the trip limit 

for [Gulf of Maine (GOM)] cod (rounded 

up to the nearest 50 lb (22.7 kg)), as 

specified in § 648.86(b)). An inseason 

action published in the Federal Register 

on September 27, 2010 (75 FR 59154), 

reduced the GOM cod trip limit for NE 

multispecies common pool vessels 

fishing under a day-at-sea (DAS) to 100 

lb (45.4 kg) per DAS up to 1,000 lb 

(453.6 kg) per trip, from the original 800 

lb (362.9 kg) per DAS up to 4,000 lb 

(1,814.4 kg) per trip limit, a 87.5 percent 

reduction. Therefore, the HA cod trip 

limit should have been reduced 87.5 

percent from 300 lb (136.1 kg) to 37.5 

lb (17.0 kg), and rounded up to 50 lb 

(22.7 kg)). The HA cod limit applies to 

both the GOM and Georges Bank (GB) 

stocks of cod. Additional details 

regarding the need to reduce the 

common pool GOM cod in order to 

decrease the likelihood of harvest 

exceeding the subcomponent of the 

annual catch limit (ACL) allocated to 

the common pool, and the authority of 

the Administrator, Northeast (NE) 

Region, NMFS (Regional Administrator) 

to take such action, are stated in the 

action published on September 27, 2010 

(75 FR 59154), and are not repeated 

here. 

This action therefore, reduces the 

common pool cod trip limit for HA 

vessels to 50 lb (22.7 kg) from 100 lb 

(45.4 kg). Catch will be closely 

monitored through dealer-reported 

landings, vessel monitoring system 

(VMS) catch reports, and other available 

information. Further inseason 

adjustments to decrease the trip limit, or 

to increase differential DAS measures, 

may be considered, based on updated 

catch data and projections. Conversely, 

if the common pool sub-ACL is 

projected to be under-harvested by the 

end of FY 2010, in-season adjustments, 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES