### 23130 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 75 / Wednesday, April 18, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

**PART 20—BOARD OF VETERANS’ APPEALS: RULES OF PRACTICE** 

■ 3. The authority citation for part 20 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501(a) and as noted in specific sections.

**Subpart H—Hearings on Appeal**

■ 4. Revise § 20.706 to read as follows: **§ 20.706 Rule 706. Functions of the presiding Member.** 

The presiding Member of a hearing panel is responsible for the conduct of the hearing, administration of the oath or affirmation, and for ruling on questions of procedure. The presiding Member will assure that the course of the hearing remains relevant to the issue, or issues, on appeal and that there is no cross-examination of the parties or witnesses. The presiding Member will take such steps as may be necessary to maintain good order at hearings and may terminate a hearing or direct that the offending party leave the hearing if an appellant, representative, or witness persists in disruptive behavior.

■ 5. Amend the table in Appendix A to Part 20 by:

■ a. Adding entry 20.1.

■ b. Revising entry 20.1304.

The revision and addition read as follows:

APPENDIX A TO PART 20—CROSSREFERENCES

Sec. Cross-reference Title of cross-referenced material or comment

20.1 ........................................................ 38 CFR 3.103(a) .................................... Statement of policy.

* * * * * * * 20.1304 .................................................. 38 CFR 3.103(c), 20.700–20.717 .......... See also re hearings. 38 CFR 3.156 ........................................ New and material evidence. 38 CFR 3.160(e) .................................... Reopened claim. 38 CFR 20.305 ...................................... Rule 305. Computation of time limit for filing. 38 CFR 20.306 ...................................... Rule 306. Legal holidays.

[FR Doc. 2012–9295 Filed 4–17–12; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 8320–01–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 52**

**[EPA–R01–OAR–2011–0711; FRL–9660–2]**

**Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;**  **Connecticut; Determination of Attainment of the One-hour Ozone**  **Standard for the Greater Connecticut Area; Correction** 

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Final rule; correction of docket number.

**SUMMARY :**  This document corrects an error in the docket number of a final rule pertaining to a determination thatthe Greater Connecticut serious onehour ozone nonattainment area did not meet the applicable deadline of November 15, 2007, for attaining the one-hour National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone. In addition, that same final rule determined that the Greater Connecticut serious one-hour ozone nonattainment area is currently attaining the now revoked one-hour NAAQS for ozone. The correct docket number for this action is EPA–R01–OAR–2011–0711.

**DATES :**  This correction is effective on April 18, 2012.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Richard P. Burkhart, Air Quality Planning Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, 5 Post Office Square, Suite 100, Boston, MA 02109–3912, telephone number (617) 918–1664, fax number (617) 918–0664, email Burkhart. Richard@epa.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  On, March 16, 2012 (77 FR 15607), EPA published a final rulemaking notice announcing that the Greater Connecticut one-hour ozone nonattainment area did not meet its applicable one-hour ozone attainment date of November 15, 2007, based on 2005–2007 quality-assured ozone monitoring data. Separate from and independent of the first determination, EPA also determined that the Greater Connecticut one-hour ozone nonattainment area is currently attaining the one-hour ozone standard, based on the most recent three years(2008–2010) of complete, qualityassured ozone monitoring data at all monitoring sites in the area. In the March 16, 2012 final rulemaking, EPA inadvertently stated an incorrect docket number. The correct docket number for this action is EPA–R01–OAR–2011– 0711. The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPR) for this action (76 FR 72377; November 23, 2011) included the correct docket number. Thus, the public had appropriate opportunity to comment on the NPR. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Ozone, Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds. Dated: April 5, 2012. H. Curtis Spalding, Regional Administrator, EPA New England.
[FR Doc. 2012–9222 Filed 4–17–12; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 52**

**[EPA–R09–OAR–2012–0243; FRL–9659–8]**

**Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Northern Sierra**  **and Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District** 

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Direct final rule.

**SUMMARY :**  EPA is taking direct final action to approve revisions to the Northern Sierra Air Quality Management District (NSAQMD) and Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD) portions of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern negative declarations for volatile organic compound (VOC) source categories for the NSAQMD and SMAQMD. We are approving these negative declarations under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).

**DATES :**  This rule is effective on June 18, 2012 without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by May 18, 2012. If we receive such comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public


### 23131 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 75 / Wednesday, April 18, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

that this direct final rule will not take effect.

**ADDRESSES :**  Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA–R09– OAR–2012–0243, by one of the following methods:

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions.

2. Email: steckel.andrew@epa.gov.
3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105–3901.

Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that you consider CBI or otherwise protected should be clearly identified as such and should not be submitted through www.regulations.gov or email. www.regulations.gov is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, and EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send email directly to EPA, your email address will be automatically captured and included as part of the public comment. 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.

Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all documents in the docket are listed in the index, some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material), and some may not be publicly available in either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business hours with the contact listed in the **FOR**
**FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT** section.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Cynthia Allen, EPA Region IX, (415) 947–4120, allen.cynthia@epa.gov. **SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’ and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The State’s Submittal

A. What negative declarations did the State

submit? B. Are there other versions of these

negative declarations? C. What is the purpose of the submitted

negative declarations? II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action

A. How is EPA evaluating the negative

declarations? B. Do the negative declarations meet the

evaluation criteria? C. Public Comment and Final Action III. Administrative Requirements

I. The State’s Submittal
A. What negative declarations did the State submit?

Table 1 lists the negative declarations we are approving with the dates that they were adopted by the NSAQMD and SMAQMD and submitted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB).



### TABLE 

### 1—S UBMITTED 

### N EGATIVE 

### D ECLARATIONS

Local agency Title Adopted Submitted

NSAQMD ..................... Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing Materials ............................................................. ......... 04/25/11 05/17/11 NSAQMD ..................... Miscellaneous Industrial Adhesives .................................................................. ............. 04/25/11 05/17/11 NSAQMD ..................... Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Assembly Coatings .................................................. 04/25/11 05/17/11 NSAQMD ..................... Industrial Cleaning Solvents ........................................................................ .................. 05/19/08 08/14/08 NSAQMD ..................... Offset Lithographic Printing and Letterpress Printing ............................................... ..... 05/19/08 08/14/08 NSAQMD ..................... Flexible Package Printing ........................................................................... ................... 05/19/08 08/14/08 NSAQMD ..................... Flat Wood Paneling Coatings ......................................................................... ............... 05/19/08 08/14/08 NSAQMD ..................... Paper, Film, and Foil Coatings ...................................................................... ................ 05/19/08 08/14/08 NSAQMD ..................... Large Appliance Coatings ............................................................................ .................. 05/19/08 08/14/08 NSAQMD ..................... Metal Furniture Coatings ............................................................................ ................... 05/19/08 08/14/08 SMAQMD .................... Coating Operations at Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework Operations .................. 10/27/11 01/12/1 2

On November 17, 2011, the submittal for Northern Sierra AQMD Negative Declarations submitted on May 17, 2011 was deemed by operation of law to meet the completeness criteria in 40 CFR Part 51 Appendix V, which must be met before formal EPA review.

On February 17, 2009, the submittal for Northern Sierra AQMD Negative Declarations submitted on August 14, 2008 was deemed by operation of law to meet the completeness criteria in 40 CFR Part 51 Appendix V, which must be met before formal EPA review.

On February 21, 2012, EPA determined that the Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD Negative Declaration submitted on January 12, 2012, met the completeness criteria in 40 CFR Part 51 Appendix V, which must be met before formal EPA review. B. Are there other versions of these negative declarations?

There are no previous versions of these negative declarations. C. What is the purpose of the submitted negative declarations?

The negative declarations were submitted to meet the requirements of CAA section 182(b)(2). Ozone Nonattainment areas classified at moderate and above are required to adopt volatile organic compound (VOC) regulations for the published Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) categories and for major non-CTG sources of VOC or NOX . If a nonattainment area does not have stationary sources covered by an EPA published CTG, then the area is required to submit a negative declaration. The negative declarations were submitted because there are no applicable sources within the NSAQMD and SMAQMD jurisdictions. EPA’s technical support documents (TSD) have more information about these negative declarations.

II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action
A. How is EPA evaluating the negative declarations?

The negative declarations are submitted as SIP revisions and must be consistent with Clean Air Act requirements for Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) (see section 182(b)(2)) and SIP relaxation (see sections 110(1) and 193.) To do so, the submittal should provide reasonable assurance that no sources subject to the CTG requirements currently exist or are planned for the NSAQMD and SMAQMD.


### 23132 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 75 / Wednesday, April 18, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

B. Do the negative declarations meet the evaluation criteria?

We believe these negative declarations are consistent with the relevant policy and guidance regarding RACT and SIP relaxations. The TSDs have more information on our evaluation.

C. Public Comment and Final Action

As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, EPA is fully approving the submitted negative declarations as additional information to the SIP because we believe they fulfill all relevant requirements. We do not think anyone will object to this approval, so we are finalizing it without proposing it in advance. However, in the Proposed Rules section of this Federal Register

, we are simultaneously proposing approval of these negative declarations. If we receive adverse comments by May 18, 2012, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that the direct final approval will not take effect and we will address the comments in a subsequent final action based on the proposal. If we do not receive timely adverse comments, the direct final approval will be effective without further notice on June 18, 2012. III. Administrative Requirements

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 interfere with Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) because EPA lacks the discretionary authority to address environmental justice in this rulemaking.

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 June 18, 2012. 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, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

Dated: March 29, 2012. Keith Takata, Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.

Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code of FederalRegulations 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 F—California**

■ 2. Section 52.222 is amended by adding paragraphs (a)(2)(ii) and (a)(9) to read as follows:

**§ 52.222 Negative declarations.**

(a) * * * (2) * * * (ii) Coating Operations at Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework Operations was submitted on January 12, 2012 and adopted on October 27, 2011.

* * * * *

(9) Northern Sierra Air Quality Management District.

(i) Flexible Package Printing, Flat Wood Paneling Coatings, Paper, Film, and Foil Coatings, Large Appliance Coatings, Metal Furniture Coatings, Industrial Cleaning Solvents, and Offset Lithographic Printing and Letterpress Printing were submitted on August 14, 2008 and adopted on May 19, 2008.

(ii) Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing Materials, Miscellaneous IndustrialAdhesives, and Automobile and LightDuty Truck Assembly Coatings were submitted on May 17, 2011 and adopted on April 25, 2011.

* * * * * [FR Doc. 2012–9078 Filed 4–17–12; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**