Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Maryland; Offset Lithographic Printing and Letterpress Printing Regulations, 28336-28338 [2012-11650]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
28336
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules
ensured the objectivity of scientific and
technological information and
processes, to the extent applicable.
E. Executive Order 13175 (Tribal
Consultation)
This rulemaking will not: (1) Have
substantial direct effects on one or more
Indian tribes; (2) impose substantial
direct compliance costs on Indian tribal
governments; or (3) preempt tribal law.
Therefore, a tribal summary impact
statement is not required under
Executive Order 13175 (Nov. 6, 2000).
of United States-based enterprises to
compete with foreign-based enterprises
in domestic and export markets.
Therefore, this rulemaking is not likely
to result in a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined in
5 U.S.C. 804(2).
K. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995
0651–0064 if the changes proposed in
this notice are adopted.
An agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number.
List of Subjects
37 CFR Part 1
Administrative practice and
procedure, Courts, Freedom of
information, Inventions and patents,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Small businesses.
The changes proposed in this notice
do not involve a Federal
intergovernmental mandate that will
result in the expenditure by State, local,
and tribal governments, in the aggregate,
of 100 million dollars (as adjusted) or
more in any one year, or a Federal
private sector mandate that will result
in the expenditure by the private sector
of 100 million dollars (as adjusted) or
more in any one year, and will not
significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. Therefore, no actions are
necessary under the provisions of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995. See 2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.
Dated: May 8, 2012.
David J. Kappos,
Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual
Property and Director of the United States
Patent and Trademark Office.
L. National Environmental Policy Act
[FR Doc. 2012–11649 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am]
This rulemaking will not have any
effect on the quality of environment and
is thus categorically excluded from
review under the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969. See
42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.
BILLING CODE P
This rulemaking meets applicable
standards to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden
as set forth in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988 (Feb. 5, 1996).
H. Executive Order 13045 (Protection of
Children)
M. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
[EPA–R03–OAR–2012–0042; FRL–9672–1]
The requirements of section 12(d) of
the National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C.
272 note) are inapplicable because this
rulemaking does not contain provisions
which involve the use of technical
standards.
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans;
Maryland; Offset Lithographic Printing
and Letterpress Printing Regulations
F. Executive Order 13211 (Energy
Effects)
This rulemaking is not a significant
energy action under Executive Order
13211 because this rulemaking is not
likely to have a significant adverse effect
on the supply, distribution, or use of
energy. Therefore, a Statement of Energy
Effects is not required under Executive
Order 13211 (May 18, 2001).
G. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice
Reform)
This rulemaking is not an
economically significant rule and does
not concern an environmental risk to
health or safety that may
disproportionately affect children under
Executive Order 13045 (Apr. 21, 1997).
I. Executive Order 12630 (Taking of
Private Property)
This rulemaking will not affect a
taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under
Executive Order 12630 (Mar. 15, 1988).
emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
J. Congressional Review Act
Under the Congressional Review Act
provisions of the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996 (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), prior to
issuing any final rule, the USPTO will
submit a report containing the final rule
and other required information to the
U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives and the Comptroller
General of the Government
Accountability Office. The changes
proposed in this notice are not expected
to result in an annual effect on the
economy of 100 million dollars or more,
a major increase in costs or prices, or
significant adverse effects on
competition, employment, investment,
productivity, innovation, or the ability
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:46 May 11, 2012
Jkt 226001
N. Paperwork Reduction Act
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is proposing to approve
a State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision submitted by the State of
Maryland (Maryland). This revision
pertains to amendments to the Code of
Maryland (COMAR) 26.11.19.11,
Lithographic and Letterpress Printing.
Maryland’s SIP revision meets the
requirement to adopt Reasonably
Available Control Technology (RACT)
for sources covered by EPA’s Control
Techniques Guidelines (CTG) for offset
lithographic printing and letterpress
printing. This will help Maryland attain
and maintain the National Ambient Air
Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone.
This action is being taken under the
Clean Air Act (CAA).
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before June 13, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID Number EPA–
R03–OAR–2012–0042 by one of the
following methods:
SUMMARY:
This proposed rule involves
information collection requirements
which are subject to review by the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
The collections of information
involved in this proposed rule have
been reviewed and approved by OMB.
The Office is not resubmitting
information collection requests to OMB
for its review and approval at this time
because the changes proposed in this
notice revise the fees for existing
information collection requirements
under OMB control numbers 0651–
0016, 0651–0021, 0651–0024, 0651–
0031, 0651–0032, 0651–0033, 0651–
0063, and 0651–0064. The USPTO will
submit to OMB fee revision changes for
OMB control numbers 0651–0016,
0651–0021, 0651–0024, 0651–0031,
0651–0032, 0651–0033, 0651–0063, and
PO 00000
37 CFR Part 41
Administrative practice and
procedure, Inventions and patents,
Lawyers.
E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM
14MYP1
emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules
A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
B. Email: fernandez.cristina@epa.gov.
C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2012–0042,
Cristina Fernandez, Associate Director,
Office of Air Program Planning,
Mailcode 3AP30, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region III, 1650
Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
19103.
D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the
Docket’s normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made
for deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2012–
0042. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received 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 information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through www.regulations.gov
or email. The 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 email
comment directly to EPA without going
through www.regulations.gov, your
email 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
electronic docket are listed in the
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,
is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy
form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:46 May 11, 2012
Jkt 226001
electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy during normal business
hours at the Air Protection Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
Copies of the State submittal are
available at the Maryland Department of
the Environment, 1800 Washington
Boulevard, Suite 705, Baltimore,
Maryland 21230.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Asrah Khadr, (215) 814–2071, or by
email at khadr.asrah@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
EPA. On December 15, 2011, the
Maryland Department of the
Environment (MDE) submitted a
revision to its SIP for the adoption of
EPA’s CTG for offset lithographic
printing and letterpress printing into the
Code of Maryland.
I. Background
Section 172(c)(1) of the CAA provides
that SIPs for nonattainment areas must
include reasonably available control
measures (RACM), including RACT for
sources of emissions. Section
182(b)(2)(A) provides that for certain
nonattainment areas, states must revise
their SIPs to include RACT for sources
of volatile organic compound (VOC)
emissions covered by a CTG document
issued after November 15, 1990 and
prior to the area’s date of attainment.
CTGs are intended to provide state
and local air pollution control
authorities information that should
assist them in determining RACT for
VOCs from various sources, which
include offset lithographic and
letterpress printers. In developing these
CTGs, EPA, among other things,
evaluated the sources of VOC emissions
from this industry and the available
control approaches for addressing these
emissions, including the costs of such
approaches. Based on available
information and data, EPA provided
recommendations for RACT for offset
lithographic printers and letterpress
printers.
In November 1993, EPA published a
draft CTG for offset lithographic
printing. This CTG discusses the nature
of VOC emissions from this industry,
available control technologies for
addressing such emissions, the costs of
available control options, and other
items. In June 1994, EPA published an
alternative control techniques (ACT)
document for states to use in developing
rules based on RACT for offset
lithographic printing. In 2006, after
conducting a review of currently
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
28337
existing state and local VOC emission
reduction approaches for this industry,
reviewing the 1993 draft CTG and the
1994 ACT, and taking into account the
information that has become available
since then, EPA developed a new CTG
for offset lithographic printers and
letterpress printers, entitled Control
Techniques Guidelines for Offset
Lithographic Printing and Letterpress
Printing (see EPA 453/R–06–002). The
CTG for offset lithographic printing and
letterpress printing provides VOC
control recommendations for the
following components involved in offset
lithographic and letterpress printing:
Heatset inks, fountain solutions and
cleaning materials. A detailed
description of this CTG may be found in
the technical support document (TSD).
II. Summary of SIP Revision
On December 15, 2011, the MDE
submitted to EPA a SIP revision (#11–
09) concerning the adoption of EPA’s
CTG for offset lithographic printing and
letterpress printing. EPA develops CTGs
as guidance on control requirements for
source categories. States can follow the
CTGs or adopt more restrictive
standards. Maryland has adopted EPA’s
CTG standards for offset lithographic
printing and letterpress printing. These
regulations are in COMAR 26.11.19,
Volatile Organic Compounds from
Specific Processes. Specifically, this
revision amends the existing regulation
in Section 26.11.19.11 to include the
recommendations from the
aforementioned CTG. A detailed
summary of EPA’s review of and
rationale for proposing to approve this
SIP revision may be found in the TSD
for this action which is available on line
at https://www.regulations.gov, Docket
number EPA–R03–OAR–2012–0042.
III. Proposed Action
EPA’s review of this material
indicates that the proposed SIP revision
will reduce VOC emissions which will
help maintain environmental protection
and public health. EPA is proposing to
approve the Maryland SIP revision for
adoption of the CTG standards for offset
lithographic printing and letterpress
printing into the Code of Maryland. EPA
is soliciting public comments on the
issues discussed in this document.
These comments will be considered
before taking final action.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
CAA and applicable Federal regulations.
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM
14MYP1
emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
28338
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. Accordingly, this action
merely proposes to approve state law as
meeting Federal requirements and does
not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law. For
that reason, this proposed 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 CAA; 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 proposed rule
concerning Maryland’s adoption of the
CTG for offset lithographic printing and
letterpress printing 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.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:46 May 11, 2012
Jkt 226001
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: May 2, 2012.
W.C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2012–11650 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R03–OAR–2012–0208; FRL–9672–2]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans;
Maryland; Reasonably Available
Control Technology for the 1997
8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standard
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is proposing to approve
a State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision submitted by the State of
Maryland. This revision pertains to the
requirements for meeting reasonably
available control technology (RACT) for
the 1997 8-hour ozone national ambient
air quality standard (NAAQS). These
requirements are based on: A
certification that previously adopted
RACT controls in Maryland’s SIP, that
were approved by EPA under the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS, are based on the
currently available technically and
economically feasible controls, and that
they continue to represent RACT for the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS
implementation purposes; a negative
declaration demonstrating that no
facilities exist in the State for the
applicable control technique guideline
(CTG) categories; and adoption of new
or more stringent RACT determinations.
This action is being taken in accordance
with the requirements of the Clean Air
Act (CAA).
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before June 13, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID Number EPA–
R03–OAR–2012–0208 by one of the
following methods:
A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
B. Email: Fernandez.cristina@epa.gov.
C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2012–0208,
Cristina Fernandez, Associate Director,
Office of Program Planning, Mailcode
3AP30, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
deliveries are only accepted during the
Docket’s normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made
for deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2012–
0208. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received 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 information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through www.regulations.gov
or email. The 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 email
comment directly to EPA without going
through www.regulations.gov, your
email 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
electronic docket are listed in the
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,
is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy
form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either
electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy during normal business
hours at the Air Protection Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
Copies of the State submittal are
available at Maryland Department of the
Environment, 1800 Washington
Boulevard, Suite 705, Baltimore,
Maryland 21230.
E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM
14MYP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 93 (Monday, May 14, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 28336-28338]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-11650]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R03-OAR-2012-0042; FRL-9672-1]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Maryland; Offset Lithographic Printing and Letterpress Printing
Regulations
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision submitted by the State of Maryland (Maryland). This revision
pertains to amendments to the Code of Maryland (COMAR) 26.11.19.11,
Lithographic and Letterpress Printing. Maryland's SIP revision meets
the requirement to adopt Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT)
for sources covered by EPA's Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) for
offset lithographic printing and letterpress printing. This will help
Maryland attain and maintain the National Ambient Air Quality Standard
(NAAQS) for ozone. This action is being taken under the Clean Air Act
(CAA).
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before June 13, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2012-0042 by one of the following methods:
[[Page 28337]]
A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
B. Email: fernandez.cristina@epa.gov.
C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2012-0042, Cristina Fernandez, Associate
Director, Office of Air Program Planning, Mailcode 3AP30, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2012-0042. EPA's policy is that all comments received 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 information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The
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 email comment
directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your email
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 electronic docket are listed in the
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, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy during normal business hours at the Air Protection
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch
Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State submittal
are available at the Maryland Department of the Environment, 1800
Washington Boulevard, Suite 705, Baltimore, Maryland 21230.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Asrah Khadr, (215) 814-2071, or by
email at khadr.asrah@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. On December 15, 2011, the
Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) submitted a revision to
its SIP for the adoption of EPA's CTG for offset lithographic printing
and letterpress printing into the Code of Maryland.
I. Background
Section 172(c)(1) of the CAA provides that SIPs for nonattainment
areas must include reasonably available control measures (RACM),
including RACT for sources of emissions. Section 182(b)(2)(A) provides
that for certain nonattainment areas, states must revise their SIPs to
include RACT for sources of volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions
covered by a CTG document issued after November 15, 1990 and prior to
the area's date of attainment.
CTGs are intended to provide state and local air pollution control
authorities information that should assist them in determining RACT for
VOCs from various sources, which include offset lithographic and
letterpress printers. In developing these CTGs, EPA, among other
things, evaluated the sources of VOC emissions from this industry and
the available control approaches for addressing these emissions,
including the costs of such approaches. Based on available information
and data, EPA provided recommendations for RACT for offset lithographic
printers and letterpress printers.
In November 1993, EPA published a draft CTG for offset lithographic
printing. This CTG discusses the nature of VOC emissions from this
industry, available control technologies for addressing such emissions,
the costs of available control options, and other items. In June 1994,
EPA published an alternative control techniques (ACT) document for
states to use in developing rules based on RACT for offset lithographic
printing. In 2006, after conducting a review of currently existing
state and local VOC emission reduction approaches for this industry,
reviewing the 1993 draft CTG and the 1994 ACT, and taking into account
the information that has become available since then, EPA developed a
new CTG for offset lithographic printers and letterpress printers,
entitled Control Techniques Guidelines for Offset Lithographic Printing
and Letterpress Printing (see EPA 453/R-06-002). The CTG for offset
lithographic printing and letterpress printing provides VOC control
recommendations for the following components involved in offset
lithographic and letterpress printing: Heatset inks, fountain solutions
and cleaning materials. A detailed description of this CTG may be found
in the technical support document (TSD).
II. Summary of SIP Revision
On December 15, 2011, the MDE submitted to EPA a SIP revision
(11-09) concerning the adoption of EPA's CTG for offset
lithographic printing and letterpress printing. EPA develops CTGs as
guidance on control requirements for source categories. States can
follow the CTGs or adopt more restrictive standards. Maryland has
adopted EPA's CTG standards for offset lithographic printing and
letterpress printing. These regulations are in COMAR 26.11.19, Volatile
Organic Compounds from Specific Processes. Specifically, this revision
amends the existing regulation in Section 26.11.19.11 to include the
recommendations from the aforementioned CTG. A detailed summary of
EPA's review of and rationale for proposing to approve this SIP
revision may be found in the TSD for this action which is available on
line at https://www.regulations.gov, Docket number EPA-R03-OAR-2012-
0042.
III. Proposed Action
EPA's review of this material indicates that the proposed SIP
revision will reduce VOC emissions which will help maintain
environmental protection and public health. EPA is proposing to approve
the Maryland SIP revision for adoption of the CTG standards for offset
lithographic printing and letterpress printing into the Code of
Maryland. EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in
this document. These comments will be considered before taking final
action.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
[[Page 28338]]
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly,
this action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed 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 CAA; 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 proposed rule concerning Maryland's adoption of
the CTG for offset lithographic printing and letterpress printing 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.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Ozone, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: May 2, 2012.
W.C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2012-11650 Filed 5-11-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
