Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 75 / Wednesday, April 19, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 19509

Note.—This appendix will not be

published in the Code of Federal Regulations.

Appendix

Alternative Dispute Resolution

Docket No. RM91–12–000

Commenters

American Gas Distributors (AGD)

American Public Power Association

Association of Oil Pipelines (AOPL)

Colorado Interstate Gas Company and ANR

Pipeline Company (CIG and ANR)

Colorado River Energy Distributors

Association (CREDA)

Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation

and Columbia Gulf Transmission Company

(Columbia Gas)

Consumers Power Company (Consumers)

Edison Electric Institute (EEI)

Electric Generation Association (Electric

Generation)

McCormack Institute of Public Affairs

Missouri Public Service Commission

(Missouri PSC)

Natural Gas Clearinghouse

Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America

(Natural Gas Pipeline)

Natural Gas Supply Association (Natural

Gas Supply)

New England Power Service

Northeast Energy Associates and North

Jersey Energy Associates (Northeast and

North Jersey)

Northern Distributors Group (Northern

Distributors)

Northwest Industrial Gas Users (Northwest

Users)

Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E)

Process Gas Consumers Group, American

Iron and Steel Institute, and Georgia

Industrial Group (Industrials)

Texas Eastern Transmission Corporation,

Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Company,

Trunkline Gas Company and Algonquin Gas

Transmission Company (PEC Pipeline Group)

Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line

Corporation (Transco)

U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce)

U.S. Department of the Interior (Interior)

Williams Natural Gas Company and

Northwest Pipeline Company (Williams)

Wisconsin Municipal Group

[FR Doc. 95–9594 Filed 4–18–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration

21 CFR Part 1310

[DEA No. 128F]

RIN 1117–AA26

Records, Reports, and Exports of

Listed Chemicals

AGENCY: Drug Enforcement

Administration (DES), Justice.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This final rule adds methyl

isobutyl ketone (MIBK) as a List II

Chemical under the Controlled

Substances Act (CSA). This action is

based on substantial evidence that

MIBK is increasingly being used as a

solvent in the production of cocaine

hydrochloride during the conversion of

cocaine base to cocaine hydrochloride.

The recent steps by the Government of

Columbia (GOC) to control MIBK further

support this action.

This action will only affect specific

types of transactions which are greater

than 500 gallons or 1523 kilograms of

MIBK destined for countries in the

Western Hemisphere (with the

exception of transactions destined for

Canada). These transactions include (1)

export transactions; (2) international

transactions in which a U.S. broker or

trader participates; and (3)

transshipments through the U.S.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 19, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Howard McClain Jr., Chief, Drug and

Chemical Evaluation Section, Office of

Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement

Administration, Washington, DC 20537

at (202) 307–7183.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Controlled Substances Act (CSA).

specifically 21 U.S.C. section 802,

provides the Attorney General with the

authority to specify by regulation,

additional precursor and essential

chemicals as ‘‘listed chemicals’’ if they

are used in the illicit manufacture of

controlled substances. Section 802(39)

also provides the Attorney General with

authority to establish a threshold

amount for ‘‘listed chemicals’’ if the

Attorney General so elects. This

authority has been delegated to the

Administrator of DEA by 28 CFR 0.100

and redelegated to the Deputy

Administrator under 28 CFR 0.104

(Subpart R) Appendix Sec. 12.

On February 28, 1995 the Deputy

Administrator of the Drug Enforcement

Administration (DEA) published a

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (60 FR

10814). This notice proposed the

addition of methyl isobutyl ketone

(MIBK) as a List II Chemical under the

Controlled Substances Act (CSA).

Interested parties were given 30 days in

which to submit comments and

objections.

Only one comment was received in

response to the Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking. This comment requested

further clarification of the meaning of

the term ‘‘Western Hemisphere’’.

Webster’s II New Riverside University

Dictionary defines the term ‘‘Western

Hemisphere’’ to mean, ‘‘The half of the

earth that includes North and South

America, the surrounding waters, and

all neighboring islands’’. For purposes

of this rulemaking, this is the definition

that the DEA is adopting.

While methyl ethyl ketone (MEK) has

become the solvent of choice in the

processing of cocaine base to cocaine

hydrochloride, recent regulatory and

enforcement efforts in Latin America

have resulted in a reduced availability

of MEK. Information available to DEA

indicates that in response to this

shortfall of MEK, cocaine laboratory

operators have moved to the utilization

of MIBK for the processing of cocaine

base to cocaine hydrochloride. Due to

information regarding the use of MIBK

for cocaine processing, the dramatic

increase in MIBK importation, and the

importation of MIBK by some firms that

the Government of Colombia (GOC)

considers suspect, the GOC has recently

taken steps to control the sale and

distribution of MIBK.

The United States is a major producer

of MIBK and exports MIBK to Colombia

and other countries within Latin

America. In light of the above, the DEA

has determined that the control of MIBK

as a List II Chemical under the CSA is

warranted. Since the illicit use of MIBK

for cocaine processing occurs in Latin

America, MIBK shipments exported

from the U.S., shipments transshipped

or transferred through the U.S., and

international transactions in which a

U.S. broker or trader participates, shall

be considered regulated transactions if

destined for any country in the Western

Hemisphere (with the exception of

transactions destined for Canada) 21

U.S.C. section 802(39)(A)(iii). In

addition, a threshold similar to that of

MEK shall be established for MIBK. A

threshold of 500 gallons (by volume) or

1523 kilograms (by weight) shall be

established for MIBK. Therefore, this

action will only effect specific types of

transactions which are greater than 500

gallons or 1523 kilograms of MIBK

destined for designated countries. These

transactions include (1) export

transactions; (2) international

transactions in which a U.S. broker or

trader participates; and (3)

transshipments through the U.S. Import

transactions of MIBK into the U.S. (not

destined for transshipment or transfer to

designated countries), and domestic

transactions of MIBK are excluded from

the definitions of regulated transactions

contained in 21 CFR 1310.01(f) and

1313.02(d).

The Deputy Administrator hereby

certifies that this rulemaking will have

no significant impact upon entities

whose interests must be considered

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5

U.S.C. 601 et seq. A review of maritime

shipments of MIBK reveals that during

a two year period, there were less than
19510 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 75 / Wednesday, April 19, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

1The section 182(f) exemption provisions center

on the effect on ozone concentrations due to NOX

emission reductions. In the case of new or modified

sources, even after the application of on-site

controls from NSR programs, the source will result

in increases of NOX emissions. Therefore, the

‘‘substantial NOX reductions’’ analysis used to

demonstrate that NOX reductions do not contribute

to attainment should reflect a zero emissions

increase from new or modified stationary sources.

2 ‘‘Scope of Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) Exemptions,’’

from G.T. Helms, Group Leader, Ozone/Carbon

Monoxide Programs Branch (MD–15), to the Air

Branch Chiefs, January 12, 1995. ‘‘I/M

Requirements in NOX RACT Exempt Areas’’, from

Mary T. Smith, Acting Director, Office of Mobile

Sources, to the Air Division Directors, October 14,

1994.

100 above-threshold export transactions

destined for designated countries. This

rule is not a significant regulatory action

and therefore has not been reviewed by

the Office of Management and Budget

pursuant to Executive Order 12866.

This action has been analyzed in

accordance with the principles and

criteria in E.O. 12612, and it has been

determined that the rule does not have

sufficient federalism implications to

warrant the preparation of a Federalism

Assessment.

List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 1310

Drug traffic control, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

For reasons set out above, 21 CFR part

1310 is amended as follows:

PART 1310—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 1310

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 802, 830, 871(b).

2. Section 1310.02 is amended by

adding a new paragraph (b)(10) to read

as follows:

§ 1310.02 Substances Covered.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(10) Methyl Isobutyl Ketone (MIBK)

* * * * *

3. Section 1310.04 is amended by

adding new paragraph (f)(2)(v) to read as

follows:

§ 1310.04 Maintenance of Records.

* * * * *

(f) * * *

(2) * * *

(v) Export and International

Transactions to Designated Countries,

and Importations for Transshipment or

Transfer to Designated Countries

Chemical Threshold

by volume

Threshold by

weight

(A) Methyl

Isobutyl Ketone (MIBK).

500 gallons 1523 kilograms.

(B) Reserved.

4. Section 1310.08 is amended by

adding new paragraphs (c), (d) and (e)

to read as follows:

§ 1310.08 Excluded transactions.

* * * * *

(c) Domestic transactions of Methyl

Isobutyl Ketone (MIBK).

(d) Import transactions of Methyl

Isobutyl Ketone (MIBK) destined for the

United States.

(e) Export transactions, international

transactions, and import transactions for

transshipment or transfer of Methyl

Isobutyl Ketone (MIBK) destined for

Canada or any country outside of the

Western Hemisphere.

Dated: April 12, 1995.

Stephen H. Greene,

Deputy Administrator.

[FR Doc. 95–9589 Filed 4–18–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–09–M

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[AZ–34–1–6823; FRL–5193–4]

Clean Air Act Section 182(f) NOX

Exemption Petition; Phoenix Ozone

Nonattainment Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The EPA is finalizing the

approval of a petition submitted by the

Arizona Department of Environmental

Quality (ADEQ) requesting that EPA

grant an exemption for the Phoenix

ozone nonattainment area (Phoenix

area) from the requirement to

implement oxides of nitrogen (NOX)

reasonably available control technology

(RACT). EPA published a proposed

action to approve the Phoenix area NOX

exemption in the Federal Register on

November 1, 1994. In accordance with

the requirements of the Clean Air Act,

as amended in 1990 (the Act or CAA),

the EPA has determined that additional

NOX reductions from major stationary

sources in the Phoenix area would not

contribute to attainment of the national

ambient air quality standard (NAAQS)

for ozone. The approval of this action

exempts the Phoenix area from

implementing the NOX requirements for

RACT, new source review (NSR), and

the applicable general and

transportation conformity and

inspection and maintenance (I/M)

requirements of the CAA. The EPA is

finalizing approval of this action under

provisions of the CAA regarding plan

requirements for nonattainment areas.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This action is effective

on April 11, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the petition and

EPA’s evaluation report is available for

public inspection at EPA’s Region IX

office during normal business hours.

Copies of the submitted petition is

available for inspection at the following

locations:

Rulemaking Section (A–5–3), Air and

Toxics Division, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Region IX, 75

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA

94105

Environmental Protection Agency, Air

Docket (6102), 401 ‘‘M’’ Street, SW.,

Washington, DC 20460

Arizona Department of Environmental

Quality, 3033 North Central Avenue,

Phoenix, Arizona 85012

Maricopa County Air Pollution Control

District, 2406 South 24th Street, Suite

E214, Phoenix, Arizona 85034

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Wendy Colombo, Rulemaking Section,

Air and Toxics Division, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San

Francisco, CA 94105, Telephone: (415)

744–1202.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On November 1, 1994, EPA proposed

to approve the Phoenix area NOX

exemption petition, submitted by the

ADEQ on April 13, 1994. 59 FR 54540.

The exemption petition is based on

urban airshed modeling (UAM) and

makes a demonstration that additional

NOX reductions in the Phoenix area

would not contribute to attainment of

the NAAQS for ozone. A detailed

discussion of the background

concerning the NOX requirements and

the submitted petition is provided in the

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)

cited above.

EPA has evaluated the exemption

petition for consistency with the

requirements of the CAA, EPA

regulations, and EPA interpretation of

these requirements as expressed in the

various EPA policy guidance documents

referenced in the NPRM cited above.

EPA has found that the petition satisfies

the applicable EPA requirements and is

exempting the Phoenix area from

implementing the NOX requirements for

RACT, NSR1, and the applicable general

and transportation conformity and I/M

requirements 2 of the CAA. A detailed

discussion of the petition and EPA’s

evaluation have been provided in the

NPRM and in the technical support

document (TSD), dated October 1994. A

detailed discussion of the scope of the