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
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules 28339 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jacqueline Lewis, (215) 814–2037, or by 

email at lewis.jacqueline@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, whenever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

EPA. On October 17, 2011, the 

Maryland Department of the 

Environment submitted a revision to its 

SIP that addresses requirements of 

RACT for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS set forth by the CAA. 

I. Background 

Ozone is formed in the atmosphere by 

photochemical reactions between 

volatile organic compounds (VOC), 

oxides of nitrogen (NOX), and carbon 

monoxide (CO) in the presence of 

sunlight. In order to reduce ozone 

concentrations in the ambient air, the 

CAA requires all nonattainment areas to 

apply control on VOC and NOX

emission sources to achieve emission 

reductions. Among effective control 

measures, RACT controls are a major 

group for reducing VOC and NOX

emissions from stationary sources. 

Since the 1970’s, EPA has 

consistently interpreted RACT to mean 

the lowest emission limit that a 

particular source is capable of meeting 

by the application of the control 

technology that is reasonably available 

considering technological and economic 

feasibility. See 44 FR 53761, September 

17, 1979. Section 182 of the CAA sets 

forth two separate RACT requirements 

for ozone nonattainment areas. The first 

requirement, contained in section 

182(a)(2)(A) of the CAA and referred to 

as RACT fix-up, requires the correction 

of RACT rules for which EPA identified 

deficiencies before the CAA was 

amended in 1990. EPA published final 

rulemaking notices approving the State 

of Maryland’s SIP revisions in order to 

correct their VOC RACT regulations and 

establish and require the 

implementation for revised SIP 

regulations to control VOCs. See 58 FR 

63085, November 30, 1993; 59 FR 

46180, September 7, 1994; 59 FR 60908, 

November 29, 1994; and 60 FR 2018, 

January 6, 1995. 

The second requirement, set forth in 

section 182(b)(2) of the CAA and 

referred to as RACT catch-up, applies to 

moderate (or worse) ozone 

nonattainment areas as well as to 

marginal and attainment areas in the 

ozone transport region (OTR) 

established pursuant to section 184 of 

the CAA, and requires these areas to 

implement RACT controls on all major 

VOC and NOX emission sources and on 

all sources and source categories 

covered by a CTG issued by EPA. On 

January 6, 1995, EPA published one of 

many final rulemaking notices 

approving the State of Maryland’s SIP 

revision as meeting the CTG RACT 

provisions of the CAA. See 60 FR 2018, 

January 6, 1995. 

All Maryland counties were subject to 

RACT requirements under the 1-hour 

ozone standard. The Baltimore, 

Washington, DC, and Cecil County, 

Maryland nonattainment areas were 

designated as severe 1-hour ozone 

nonattainment areas. Kent and Queen 

Anne’s counties were designated as a 

marginal 1-hour ozone nonattainment 

area. All remaining Maryland counties 

were identified as part of the OTR. As 

part of the planning process, section 

182(b)(2) of the CAA required the State 

of Maryland to adopt all RACT 

regulations for all CTG sources and all 

major non-CTG VOC sources (VOC 

sources with the potential to emit 

greater than or equal to 25 tons per year 

(TPY) in Baltimore, Washington, DC, 

and Cecil County, Maryland 

nonattainment areas and greater than or 

equal to 50 TPY in the remainder of the 

State) throughout the State. 

On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated 

an 8-hour NAAQS for ozone. See 62 FR 

38856, July 18, 1997. Under the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS, four areas were 

designated nonattainment for the 1997 

8-hour ozone standard in Maryland. 

Three areas were classified as moderate 

and one as marginal. Maryland also had 

an Early Action Compact area. All other 

remaining counties are part of the OTR. 

The three moderate 1997 8-hour ozone 

standard nonattainment areas are 

Baltimore, Washington, DC, and Cecil 

County (part of the Philadelphia 

nonattainment area). The one marginal 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS 

nonattainment area consists of Kent and 

Queen Anne’s Counties. Washington 

County was part of the Early Action 

Compact program. 

EPA requires under the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS that states meet the CAA 

RACT requirements, either through a 

certification that previously adopted 

RACT controls in their SIP revisions be 

approved by EPA under the 1-hour 

ozone NAAQS represent adequate 

RACT control levels for 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS attainment purposes, or 

through the adoption of new or more 

stringent regulations that represent 

RACT control levels. A certification 

must be accompanied by appropriate 

supporting information such as 

consideration of information received 

during the public comment period and 

consideration of new data. This 

information may supplement existing 

RACT guidance documents that were 

developed for the 1-hour standard, such 

that the state’s SIP accurately reflects 

RACT for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

standard based on the current 

availability of technically and 

economically feasible controls. 

Adoption of new RACT regulations will 

occur when states have new stationary 

sources not covered by existing RACT 

regulations, or when new data or 

technical information indicates that a 

previously adopted RACT measure does 

not represent a newly available RACT 

control level. Another 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS requirement for RACT is 

to submit a negative declaration that 

there are no CTG major sources of VOC 

and NOX emissions within Maryland. 

II. Summary of SIP Revision 

Maryland’s SIP revision contains the 

requirements of RACT set forth by the 

CAA under the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. Maryland’s SIP revision 

satisfies the 1997 8-hour ozone standard 

RACT requirements through (1) 

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 

8-hour implementation purpose; (2) a 

negative declaration demonstrating that 

no facilities exist in Maryland for the 

applicable CTG categories; and (3) 

adoption of new or more stringent 

RACT determinations. A detailed 

summary of EPA’s review and rationale 

for proposing to approve this SIP 

revision may be found in the Technical 

Support Document (TSD) for this action 

which is available on line at 

www.regulations.gov. Docket number 

EPA–R03–OAR–2012–0208. 

III. Proposed Action 

EPA’s review of this material 

indicates that Maryland has met the 

requirements of RACT for NOX and 

VOCs set forth by the CAA with respect 

to the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. EPA 

is proposing to approve the Maryland 

SIP revision for the requirements of 

RACT set forth by the CAA under the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, which was 

submitted on October 17, 2011. 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). 

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 


emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
28340 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 93 / Monday, May 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

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 

pertaining to Maryland RACT for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, 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, Nitrogen dioxide, 

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. 2012–11639 Filed 5–11–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 799 

[EPA–HQ–OPPT–2005–0033; FRL–9350–1] 

RIN 2070–AD16 

Revocation of TSCA Section 4 Testing 

Requirements for One High Production 

Volume Chemical Substance 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing the 

revocation of certain testing 

requirements promulgated under the 

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) 

for benzenesulfonic acid, [[4-[[4- 

(phenylamino)phenyl][4-(phenylimino)- 

2,5-cyclohexadien-1- 

ylidene]methyl]phenyl]amino]- (CAS 

No. 1324–76–1), also known as C.I. 

Pigment Blue 61. EPA is basing its 

decision to take this action on 

information received since publication 

of the final rule that established testing 

requirements for this chemical 

substance. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before June 13, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by docket identification (ID) 

number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2005–0033, by 

one of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail: Document Control Office 

(7407M), Office of Pollution Prevention 

and Toxics (OPPT), Environmental 

Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001. 

• Hand Delivery: OPPT Document 

Control Office (DCO), EPA East Bldg., 

Rm. 6428, 1201 Constitution Ave. NW., 

Washington, DC. Attention: Docket ID 

number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2005–0033. 

The DCO is open from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. The telephone number for the 

DCO is (202) 564–8930. Such deliveries 

are only accepted during the DCO’s 

normal hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPPT– 

2005–0033. EPA’s policy is that all 

comments received will be included in 

the docket without change and may be 

made available online at http:// 

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 regulations.gov or 

email. The 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 

regulations.gov, your email address will 

be automatically captured and included 

as part of the comment that is placed in 

the 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 docket 

are listed in the docket index available 

at http://www.regulations.gov. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, e.g., 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 in the electronic 

docket at http://www.regulations.gov, 

or, if only available in hard copy, at the 

OPPT Docket. The OPPT Docket is 

located in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/ 

DC) at Rm. 3334, EPA West Bldg., 1301 

Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, 

DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room 

hours of operation are 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 

p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding 

legal holidays. The telephone number of 

the EPA/DC Public Reading Room is 

(202) 566–1744, and the telephone 

number for the OPPT Docket is (202) 

566–0280. Docket visitors are required 

to show photographic identification, 

pass through a metal detector, and sign 

the EPA visitor log. All visitor bags are 

processed through an X-ray machine 

and subject to search. Visitors will be 


emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS