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). 

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 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) 

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). 

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 

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 

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. 

L. National Environmental Policy Act 

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. 

M. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

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. 

N. Paperwork Reduction Act 

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 

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. 

37 CFR Part 41 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Inventions and patents, 

Lawyers. 

Dated: May 8, 2012. 

David J. Kappos, 

Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual 

Property and Director of the United States 

Patent and Trademark Office. 

[FR Doc. 2012–11649 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

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: 


emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules 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 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 

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 http://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). 


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. 

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 

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. 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 

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. 


emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS