12544 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 51 / Monday, March 17, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

32 CFR Part 296

National Reconnaissance Office

Freedom of Information Act Program

Regulation

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary,

Department of Defense.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This final rule

administratively amends 32 CFR part

296 concerning National

Reconnaissance Office Freedom of

Information Act Program Regulation to

reflect organizational changes made

within the National Reconnaissance

Office.

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 17, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Barbara E. Freiman, 703–808–5029.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 296

Freedom of information.

Accordingly, 32 CFR part 296 is

amended as follows:

PART 296—NATIONAL

RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT

PROGRAM REGULATION

1. The authority citation for 32 CFR

part 296 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552.

2. Section 296.2 is revised to read as

follows:

§ 296.2 Definitions.

(a) Freedom of Information Act

Appellate Authority. The Chief of Staff,

NRO.

(b) Initial Denial Authority. The Chief,

Information Access and Release Center,

NRO.

§ 296.4 [Amended]

3. Section 296.4(a), first sentence, is

amended by revising ‘‘Director, External

Relations, National Reconnaissance

Office, 1040 Defense Pentagon,

Washington, DC 20301–1040’’ to read

‘‘Chief, Information Access and Release

Center, National Reconnaissance Office,

14675 Lee Road, Chantilly, VA 20151–

1715’’.

§ 296.5 [Amended]

4. Section 296.5 is amended by

revising ‘‘Freedom of Information Act

Appellate Authority, National

Reconnaissance Office, 1040 Defense

Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301–1040’’

to red Chief, Information Access and

Release Center, National

Reconnaissance Office, 14675 Lee Road,

Chantilly, VA 20151–1715’’.

Dated: March 12, 1997.

L.M. Bynum,

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison

Officer, Department of Defense.

[FR Doc. 97–6644 Filed 3–14–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5000–04–M

Department of the Army

32 CFR Parts 543 and 544

Promotion of Rifle Practice and

Civilian Marksmanship (Removal)

AGENCY: Office of the Administrative

Assistant, U.S. Army, DOD.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This document removes the

Department of the Army’s Promotion of

Rifle Practice and Civilian

Marksmanship regulations codified in

32 CFR. The parts have served the

purpose for which they were intended

and are no longer necessary. This is

based on the transfer of the Civilian

Marksmanship from conduct by the

Department of the Army to conduct by

the Corporation for the Promotion of

Rifle Practice and Firearms Safety as

referenced in the Federal Register

notice Vol 61 No 209, page 55621, dated

28 Oct 96.

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 17, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sandra R. Riley, Director, Policy and

Plans, Office of the Administrative

Assistant, 105 Army Pentagon,

Washington, DC 20310–0105, phone

(703) 697–6900.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Removal

of parts is based on the National Defense

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996,

Public Law 104–106 Title XVI, section

1601, 1611–1624 which has been

completed.

List of Subjects

32 CFR Part 543

Arms and munitions, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements, Surety

bonds.

32 CFR Part 544

Arms and munitions, Decorations,

medals, awards.

PARTS 543 AND 544—[REMOVED AND

RESERVED]

Accordingly, 32 CFR parts 543 and

544 are removed.

Gregory D. Showalter,

Army Federal Register Liaison Officer.

[FR Doc. 97–6575 Filed 3–14–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3710–08–M

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[AZ 059–0005a; FRL–5697–3]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans; Arizona State

Implementation Plan Revision,

Maricopa County Environmental

Services Department

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final

action on a revision to the Arizona State

Implementation Plan. The revision

concerns a rule from the following local

agency: Maricopa County

Environmental Services Department

(MCESD). This approval action will

incorporate this rule into the federally

approved SIP. The intended effect of

approving this rule is to regulate

emissions of volatile organic

compounds (VOCs) in accordance with

the requirements of the Clean Air Act,

as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).

The revised rule controls VOC

emissions from Commercial Bread

Bakeries. Thus, EPA is finalizing the

approval of this rule into the Arizona

SIP under provisions of the CAA

regarding EPA action on SIP submittals,

SIPs for national primary and secondary

ambient air quality standards and plan

requirements for nonattainment areas.

DATES: This action is effective on May

16, 1997 unless adverse or critical

comments are received by April 16,

1997. If the effective date is delayed, a

timely notice will be published in the

Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the rule and EPA’s

evaluation report for the rule are

available for public inspection at EPA’s

Region IX office during normal business

hours. Copies of the submitted rule are

available for inspection at the following

locations:

Rulemaking Office (Air-4), Air Division,

U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne

Street, San Francisco, CA 94105.
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 51 / Monday, March 17, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 12545

1The Maricopa Association of Governments

(MAG) Urban Planning Area retained its

designation of nonattainment and was classified by

operation of law pursuant to sections 107(d) and

181(a) upon the date of enactment of the CAA. See

56 FR 56694 (November 6, 1991).

2Arizona did not make the required SIP submittal

by November 15, 1992. On January 15, 1993, the

EPA made a finding of nonsubmittal pursuant to

section 179(a)(1), which started an 18-month

sanction clock. The rule being acted upon in this

action was submitted in response to the EPA

finding of failure to submit.

3EPA adopted the completeness criteria on

February 16, 1990 (55 FR 5830) and, pursuant to

section 110(k)(1)(A) of the CAA, revised the criteria

on August 26, 1991 (56 FR 42216).

4Among other things, the pre-amendment

guidance consists of those portions of the proposed

Post-1987 ozone and carbon monoxide policy that

concern RACT, 52 FR 45044 (November 24, 1987);

‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints,

Deficiencies, and Deviations, Clarification to

Appendix D of November 24, 1987 Federal Register

Notice’’ (Blue Book) (notice of availability was

published in the Federal Register on May 25, 1988);

and the existing control technique guidelines

(CTG’s).

Environmental Protection Agency, Air

Docket (6102), 401 ‘‘M’’ Street, S.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20460.

Arizona Department of Environmental

Quality, 3033 North Central Avenue,

Phoenix, AZ 85012.

Maricopa County Department of

Environmental Services, 2406 South

24th Street, Suite E–204, Phoenix, AZ

85034–6822.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Christine Vineyard, Rulemaking Office

(Air-4), Air Division, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San

Francisco, CA 94105, Telephone: (415)

744–1197.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Applicability

The rule being approved into the

Arizona SIP is: MCESD Rule 343—

Commercial Bread Bakeries. This rule

was submitted by the Arizona

Department of Environmental Quality to

EPA on August 31, 1995.

Background

On March 3, 1978, EPA promulgated

a list of ozone nonattainment areas

under the provisions of the Clean Air

Act, as amended in l977 (1977 Act or

pre-amended Act), that included the

Maricopa County Area. 43 FR 8964, 40

CFR 81.305. On March 19, 1979, EPA

changed the name and modified the

geographic boundaries of the ozone

nonattainment area of Maricopa County

to the Maricopa Association of

Governments (MAG) Urban Planning

Area. 44 FR 16391, 40 CFR 81.303. On

February 24, 1984, EPA notified the

Governor of Arizona, pursuant to

section 110(a)(2)(H) of the pre-amended

Act, that MCESD’s portion of the

Arizona SIP was inadequate to attain

and maintain the ozone standard and

requested that deficiencies in the

existing SIP be corrected (EPA’s SIPCall, 49 FR 18827, May 3, 1984). On

May 26, 1988, EPA again notified the

Governor of Arizona, pursuant to

section 110(a)(2)(H) of the 1977 Act, that

the above district’s portions of the

Arizona SIP were inadequate to attain

and maintain the ozone standard and

requested that deficiencies in the

existing SIP be corrected (EPA’s second

SIP-Call, 53 FR 34500, September 7,

1988). On November 15, 1990, the Clean

Air Act Amendments of 1990 were

enacted. Pub. L. 101–549, 104 Stat.

2399, codified at 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

In amended section 182(b)(2)(C) of the

CAA, Congress statutorily required

nonattainment areas to submit RACT

rules for all major stationary sources of

VOCs by November 15, 1992 (the RACT

catch-up requirement).

The MAG Urban Planning Area is

classified as moderate; 1 therefore, this

area was subject to the RACT catch-up

requirement and the November 15, 1992

deadline.2

The State of Arizona submitted many

revised RACT rules for incorporation

into its SIP on August 31, 1995,

including the rule being acted on in this

notice. This notice addresses EPA’s

direct-final approval action for MCESD

Rule 343—Commercial Bread Bakeries.

MCESD adopted Rule 343 on February

15, 1995. This submitted rule was found

to be complete on October 25, 1995

pursuant to EPA’s completeness criteria

that are set forth in 40 CFR part 51,

Appendix V 3 and is being finalized for

approval into the SIP.

Rule 343 controls VOC emissions

from bread ovens at commercial bread

bakeries. VOCs contribute to the

production of ground level ozone and

smog. This rule was originally adopted

as part of MCESD’s effort to achieve the

National Ambient Air Quality Standard

(NAAQS) for ozone and in response to

EPA’s 1988 SIP-Call and the section

182(b)(2)(C) CAA requirement. The

following is EPA’s evaluation and final

action for this rule.

EPA Evaluation and Action

In determining the approvability of a

VOC rule, EPA must evaluate the rule

for consistency with the requirements of

the CAA and EPA regulations, as found

in section 110 and part D of the CAA

and 40 CFR Part 51 (Requirements for

Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of

Implementation Plans). The EPA

interpretation of these requirements,

which forms the basis for today’s action,

appears in the various EPA policy

guidance documents.4 Among those

provisions is the requirement that a

VOC rule must, at a minimum, provide

for the implementation of RACT for

stationary sources of VOC emissions.

This requirement was carried forth from

the pre-amended Act.

For the purpose of assisting state and

local agencies in developing RACT

rules, EPA prepared a series of Control

Technique Guideline (CTG) documents.

The CTGs are based on the underlying

requirements of the Act and specify the

presumptive norms for what is RACT

for specific source categories. Under the

CAA, Congress ratified EPA’s use of

these documents, as well as other

Agency policy, for requiring States to

‘‘catch-up’’ their RACT rules. See

section 182(b)(2)(C). For some source

categories, such as bakeries, EPA did

not publish a CTG. In such cases, the

District may determine what controls

are required by reviewing the operation

of facilities subject to the regulation and

evaluating regulations for similar

sources in other areas. Bakery sources

have been subject to a RACT regulation

since 1989 in the Bay Area Air Quality

Management District. EPA did publish

an Alternative Control Technology

Document (ACT) entitled, ‘‘Alternative

Control Technology Document for

Bakery Oven Emissions’’, EPA 453/R–

92–017, December 1992 as guidance for

this source category. Further

interpretations of EPA policy are found

in the Blue Book, referred to in footnote

4. In general, these guidance documents

have been set forth to ensure that VOC

rules are fully enforceable and

strengthen or maintain the SIP.

MCESD’s Rule 343, Commercial Bread

Bakeries, is a new rule which was

adopted to control VOC emissions from

large commercial bakeries by

establishing emissions reduction

standards, recordkeeping requirements,

and test methods for demonstration of

compliance with the rule. A detailed

evaluation of Rule 343, Commercial

Bread Bakeries, can be found in the

Technical Support Document (TSD)

dated July 30, 1996. EPA has evaluated

the submitted rule and has determined

that it is consistent with the CAA, EPA

regulations, and EPA policy. Therefore,

MCESD, Rule 343, Commercial Bread

Bakeries, is being approved under

section 110(k)(3) of the CAA as meeting

the requirements of section 110(a) and

Part D.

Nothing in this action should be

construed as permitting or allowing or

establishing a precedent for any future

implementation plan. Each request for
12546 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 51 / Monday, March 17, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

revision to the state implementation

plan shall be considered separately in

light of specific technical, economic,

and environmental factors and in

relation to relevant statutory and

regulatory requirements.

EPA is publishing this action without

prior proposal because the Agency

views this as a noncontroversial

amendment and anticipates no adverse

comments. However, in a separate

document in this Federal Register

publication, the EPA is proposing to

approve the SIP revision should adverse

or critical comments be filed. This

action will be effective May 16, 1997,

unless, by April 16, 1997, adverse or

critical comments are received.

If the EPA receives such comments,

this action will be withdrawn before the

effective date by publishing a

subsequent document that will

withdraw the final action. All public

comments received will then be

addressed in a subsequent final rule

based on this action serving as a

proposed rule. The EPA will not

institute a second comment period on

this action. Any parties interested in

commenting on this action should do so

at this time. If no such comments are

received, the public is advised that this

action will be effective May 16, 1997.

Regulatory Process

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act,

5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA must prepare

a regulatory flexibility analysis

assessing the impact of any proposed or

final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603

and 604. Alternatively, EPA may certify

that the rule will not have a significant

impact on a substantial number of small

entities. Small entities include small

businesses, small not-for-profit

enterprises and government entities

with jurisdiction over a population of

less than 50,000.

SIP approvals under sections 110 and

301(a) and subchapter I, Part D of the

CAA do not create any new

requirements, but simply approve

requirements that the State is already

imposing. Therefore, because the

Federal SIP-approval does not impose

any new requirements, I certify that it

does not have a significant impact on

any small entities affected. Moreover,

due to the nature of the Federal-state

relationship under the CAA, preparation

of a regulatory flexibility analysis would

constitute Federal inquiry into the

economic reasonableness of state action.

The CAA forbids EPA to base its

actions concerning SIPs on such

grounds. Union Electric Co. v. U.S.

E.P.A., 427 U.S. 246, 256–66 (S. Ct.

1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410 (a)(2).

Unfunded Mandates

Under Sections 202, 203, and 205 of

the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of

1995 (‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’),

signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA

must undertake various actions in

association with proposed or final rules

that include a Federal mandate that may

result in estimated costs of $100 million

or more to the private sector or to State,

local, or tribal governments in the

aggregate.

Through submission of this state

implementation plan or plan revision,

the State and any affected local or tribal

governments have elected to adopt the

program provided for under Part D of

the Clean Air Act. These rules may bind

State, local, and tribal governments to

perform certain actions and also require

the private sector to perform certain

duties. The rule being approved by this

action will impose no new requirements

because affected sources are already

subject to these regulations under State

law. Therefore, no additional costs to

State, local, or tribal governments or to

the private sector result from this action.

EPA has also determined that this final

action does not include a mandate that

may result in estimated costs of $100

million or more to State, local, or tribal

governments in the aggregate or to the

private sector.

Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) as added

by the Small Business Regulatory

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, EPA

submitted a report containing this rule

and other required information to the

U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of

Representatives and the Comptroller

General of the General Accounting

Office prior to publication of the rule in

today’s Federal Register. This rule is

not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5

U.S.C. 804(2).

This action has been classified as a

Table 3 action for signature by the

Regional Administrator under the

procedures published in the Federal

Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR

2214–2225), as revised by a July 10,

1995 memorandum from Mary Nichols,

Assistant Administrator for Air and

Radiation. The Office of Management

and Budget (OMB) has exempted this

regulatory action from Executive Order

12866 review.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Hydrocarbons,

Incorporation by reference,

Intergovernmental relations, Ozone,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Volatile organic

compounds.

Note: Incorporation by reference of the

State Implementation Plan for the State of

California was approved by the Director of

the Federal Register on July 1, 1982.

Dated: February 19, 1997.

Nora L. McGee,

Acting Regional Administrator.

Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code

of Federal Regulations is amended as

follows:

PART 52—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for Part 52

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q

Subpart D—Arizona

2. Section 52.120 is amended by

adding paragraph (c)(82) to read as

follows:

§ 52.120 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(82) New and amended rules and

regulations for the Maricopa County

Environmental Services Department—

Air Pollution Control were submitted on

August 31, 1995, by the Governor’s

designee.

(i) Incorporated by reference.

(A) Rule 343, adopted on February 15,

1995.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 97–5972 Filed 3–14–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 63

[FRL–5700–9]

RIN 2060–AE37

Test Methods for the Polymers and

Resins I Rule; Appendix A, Test

Methods 310 A, B, C, 312 A, B, C, 313

A, B

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This action promulgates test

methods 310 a, b and c, 312 a, b and c,

and 313 a and b for the detection of

residual amounts of hazardous air

pollutants (HAPs) in conjunction with

the recently issued National Emission

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants

(NESHAP) for the Manufacture of Major

Elastomers, (commonly referred to as

Polymers and Resins I). The methods

were adapted from industrial methods

submitted by the facilities in the

polymers and resins industry and were

published for public comment as part of

the Polymers and Resins I proposed

rulemaking action. The methods will be