5290 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 17 / Friday, January 25, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

7. Executive Order 13045: Protection 

of Children from Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks—This action is not 

subject to Executive Order 13045 

because it is not economically 

significant and it is not based on health 

or safety risks; 

8. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use: This action is not 

subject to Executive Order 13211 

because it is not a significant regulatory 

action as defined in Executive Order 

12866; 

9. National Technology Transfer 

Advancement Act: This provision 

directs EPA to use voluntary consensus 

standards in its regulatory activities 

unless to do so would be inconsistent 

with applicable law or otherwise 

impracticable. Voluntary consensus 

standards are technical standards (e.g., 

material specifications, test methods, 

sampling procedures, and business 

practices) that are developed or adopted 

by voluntary consensus standards and 

bodies. EPA approves State programs so 

long as the State programs adequately 

meet the criteria set out in 40 CFR part 

258. It would be inconsistent with 

applicable law for EPA, in its review of 

a State program, to require the use of 

any particular voluntary consensus 

standard in place of another standard 

that meets the 40 CFR part 258 criteria. 

Thus, the National Technology Transfer 

Advancement Act does not apply to this 

action; 

10. Congressional Review Act: EPA 

will submit a report containing this 

action and other information required 

by the Congressional Review Act (5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq.) to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication in the 

Federal Register. 

List of Subjects 

40 CFR Part 239 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Intergovernmental relations, Waste 

treatment and disposal. 

40 CFR Part 258 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Waste treatment disposal, 

Water pollution control. 

Authority: This action is issued under the 

authority of section 2002, 4005 and 4010(c) 

of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended, 

42 U.S.C. 6912, 6945 and 6949(a). 

Dated: January 4, 2013. 

Ira W. Leighton, 

Acting Regional Administrator, EPA New 

England, Region 1. 

[FR Doc. 2013–01435 Filed 1–24–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2012–0610; FRL–9770–6] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Maryland; Reasonably Available 

Control Technology Requirements for 

Volatile Organic Compounds 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is approving a State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision 

submitted by the State of Maryland. 

These revisions pertain to the adoption 

of various test methods, calculations 

methods, work practice standards and 

exemptions which make Maryland 

Department of the Environment (MDE) 

regulations more consistent with EPA’s 

Control Techniques Guidelines (CTGs) 

for seven source categories. These 

categories are: Paper, film, and foil 

coatings; industrial cleaning solvents; 

miscellaneous metal and plastic parts 

coatings; large appliance coatings; offset 

lithographic printing and letterpress 

printing; flat wood paneling coatings; 

and flexible package printing. EPA is 

approving these revisions to reduce 

volatile organic compound (VOC) 

emissions from these seven categories 

which will help Maryland attain and 

maintain the National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone 

in accordance with the requirements of 

the Clean Air Act (CAA). 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

February 25, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

Number EPA–EPA–R03–OAR–2012– 

0610. All documents in the docket are 

listed in the www.regulations.gov Web 

site. Although listed in the electronic 

docket, some information is not publicly 

available, i.e., confidential business 

information (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 through 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy for 

public inspection 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: 

Christopher Cripps, (215) 814–2179, or 

by email at cripps.christoher@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

On October 23, 2012 (77 FR 64787), 

EPA published a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPR) for the State of 

Maryland. The NPR proposed approval 

of revisions to Maryland regulations for 

the control of emissions of VOC from 

seven categories of sources covered by 

a CTG. The State of Maryland submitted 

the formal SIP revision (Revision No. 

12–03) on April 4, 2012. 

II. Summary of SIP Revision 

On April 5, 2012, EPA received a SIP 

revision submittal from the Maryland 

Department of the Environment (MDE) 

which addressed sources of VOC 

emissions covered by EPA’s CTGs for 

the following seven source categories: 

(1) Paper, film, and foil coatings; (2) 

industrial cleaning solvents; (3) 

miscellaneous metal and plastic parts 

coatings; (4) large appliance coatings; (5) 

offset lithographic printing and 

letterpress printing; (6) flat wood 

paneling coatings; and (7) flexible 

package printing. This SIP revision 

submittal included amended Regulation 

.04 ‘‘Testing and Monitoring’’ under 

COMAR 26.11.01 ‘‘General 

Administrative Provisions’’ (COMAR 

26.11.01.04) and Regulation .02 

‘‘Applicability, Determining 

Compliance, Reporting and General 

Requirements’’ under COMAR 26.11.19 

‘‘Volatile Organic Compounds from 

Specific Processes’’ (COMAR 

26.11.19.02). These amendments pertain 

to the adoption of various test methods, 

calculations methods, work practice 

standards and exemptions which make 

MDE’s regulations more consistent with 

EPA’s CTGs for these seven source 

categories. 

An explanation of the CAA’s 

reasonably available control technology 

(RACT) requirements for the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS as they apply to 

Maryland, the specific details of the 

amendments to COMAR 26.11.01.04 

and COMAR 26.11.19.02 and EPA’s 

rationale for approving this SIP revision 

were provided in the NPR and will not 

be restated here. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with 
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 17 / Friday, January 25, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 5291 

Only one set of comments was 

received during the comment period 

established by EPA’s October 23, 2012 

NPR. A summary of the comment and 

EPA’s response is provided in Section 

III of this document. 

III. Summary of Public Comment and 

EPA Response 

These comments supported approving 

into the SIP MDE amendments to 

COMAR 26.11.01.04 and COMAR 

26.11.19.02. 

Comment: 

In sum, the comments stated that 

these revisions to the Maryland SIP 

controlling VOC emissions from these 

seven different industries should be 

approved. The commenter agrees with 

all the amendments and stated that the 

‘‘EPA should, without question, approve 

all of them. The amendments made to 

COMAR by the MDE only make the 7 

industries safer and update their 

practices with VOC to be more in 

accordance with EPA’s updated CTG for 

them under the CAA.’’ 

Response: 

EPA appreciates the support for this 

action. 

IV. Final Action 

EPA is approving as a revision to the 

Maryland SIP the amendments to 

COMAR 26.11.01.04 and COMAR 

26.11.19.02 pertaining to the adoption 

of various test methods, calculations 

methods, work practice standards and 

exemptions for seven CTG source 

categories. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. General Requirements 

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). 

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 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 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 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. 

B. Submission to Congress and the 

Comptroller General 

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). 

C. Petitions for Judicial Review 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by March 26, 2013. 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. This action 

concerning Maryland’s adoption of 

various test methods, calculations 

methods, work practice standards and 

exemptions in accordance with CTGs 

for VOC RACT 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: December 19, 2012. 

W.C. Early, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Subpart V—Maryland 

■ 2. In § 52.1070, the table in paragraph 

(c) is amended by revising the entries 

for COMAR 26.11.01.04 and 26.11.19.02 

to read as follows: 

§ 52.1070 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with 
5292 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 17 / Friday, January 25, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

EPA-APPROVED REGULATIONS, TECHNICAL MEMORANDA, AND STATUTES IN THE MARYLAND SIP 

Code of Maryland 

administrative 

regulations (COMAR) 

citation 

Title/subject State effective 

date EPA approval date 

Additional 

explanation/ 

citation at 40 CFR 52.1100 

26.11.01 General Administrative Provisions 

*******

26.11.01.04 ............... Testing and Monitoring ............. 3/5/12 1/25/13 [Insert page number 

where the document begins].

Amended section 04C. 

*******

26.11.19 Volatile Organic Compounds From Specific Processes 

*******

26.11.19.02 ............... Applicability, Determining Compliance, Reporting, and General Requirements.3/5/12 1/25/13 [Insert page number 

where the document begins].

Amended sections .02D, .02E, 

.02G and .02I. 

* * * * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2013–00839 Filed 1–24–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R01–OAR–2009–0433; EPA–R01– 

OAR–2012–0149; A–1–FRL–9754–6] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Massachusetts and New Hampshire; 

Enhanced Motor Vehicle Inspection 

and Maintenance Program 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is approving State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions 

submitted by the Commonwealth of 

Massachusetts and the State of New 

Hampshire. These revisions include 

regulations to update the enhanced 

motor vehicle inspection and 

maintenance (I/M) programs in 

Massachusetts and New Hampshire. The 

revised programs in Massachusetts and 

New Hampshire include a test and 

repair network for an on-board 

diagnostic (OBD2) testing program for 

model year 1996 and newer vehicles. 

The intended effect of this action is to 

approve the revised programs into the 

Massachusetts and New Hampshire 

SIPs. This action is being taken in 

accordance with the Clean Air Act. 

DATES: This direct final rule will be 

effective March 26, 2013, unless EPA 

receives adverse comments by February 

25, 2013. If adverse comments are 

received, EPA will publish a timely 

withdrawal of the direct final rule in the 

Federal Register informing the public 

that the rule will not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R01–OAR–2009–0433 for comments 

pertaining to our approval action for 

Massachusetts or EPA–R01–OAR–2012– 

0149 for comments pertaining to our 

approval action for New Hampshire by 

one of the following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: arnold.anne@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (617) 918–0047. 

4. Mail: ‘‘Docket Identification 

Number EPA–R01–OAR–2009–0433 or 

EPA–R01–OAR–2012–0149,’’ Anne 

Arnold, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, EPA New England Regional 

Office, Office of Ecosystem Protection, 

Air Quality Planning Unit, 5 Post Office 

Square—Suite 100, (Mail code OEP05– 

2), Boston, MA 02109–3912. 

5. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver 

your comments to: Anne Arnold, 

Manager, Air Quality Planning Unit, 

Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 

New England Regional Office, Office of 

Ecosystem Protection, Air Quality 

Planning Unit, 5 Post Office Square— 

Suite 100, (Mail code OEP05–2), Boston, 

MA 02109–3912. Such deliveries are 

only accepted during the Regional 

Office’s normal hours of operation. The 

Regional Office’s official hours of 

business are Monday through Friday, 

8:30 to 4:30, excluding legal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R01–OAR–2009– 

0433 for comments pertaining to our 

approval action for Massachusetts or 

EPA–R01–OAR–2012–0149 for 

comments pertaining to our approval 

action for New Hampshire. 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 

through www.regulations.gov, or email, 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected. 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 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with