Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 217 / Thursday, November 8, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 66921 

being developed. Applicants for group 

registration were required to use the 

existing paper forms. 

On September 29, 2009, the Copyright 

Office initiated a limited pilot project to 

allow groups of related serials to be filed 

electronically. This pilot project 

involved modifying the information 

provided on the basic electronic 

application to obtain information about 

the group of related serials. Revisions to 

the electronic registration system will 

upgrade the capacity of the system to 

provide a new group serial option for 

general use by eligible applicants. 

Interim Regulation 

The interim regulation creates minor 

changes in sections 202.3, relating to 

registration of copyright, and 202.20, 

relating to copyright deposit, in order to 

create an option of filing electronically 

to register groups of related serial issues. 

All conditions for applying for group 

registration of serial issues using a Form 

SE/Group will also apply to electronic 

registration. Therefore, in order to be 

eligible to apply for electronic 

registration of a group of serial issues, 

automatic regular submission of two 

complimentary subscription copies of 

each issue for the Library of Congress 

must be provided, just as is the case for 

using paper form SE/Group, unless 

directed otherwise by the Copyright 

Office. Moreover, group serial claims 

remain limited to claims in collective 

works by the same author and claimant 

and must be works made for hire. 

In the pilot phase, all of the 

volunteers filing electronically for 

registration of groups of serial issues 

were required to upload a digital file of 

a complete copy of each issue. Because 

some publishers did not have electronic 

versions of the serial issues and found 

it difficult to create such deposit copies, 

these interim rules will allow the 

applicant to provide either a hard copy 

deposit, or a digital file format 

complying with § 202.20(b)(2)(iii) of the 

regulations. In order to enhance 

efficiency and expedite the handling of 

claims, the Office encourages electronic 

registration generally, and also 

encourages electronic deposit of groups 

of serials when applying electronically, 

where possible. In either case, two 

complimentary subscription copies of 

the serial must be sent to the Library of 

Congress as a condition of eligibility, 

unless directed otherwise by Copyright 

Office. 

Adoption of Interim Regulations 

Section 553(b)(3)(A) of the 

Administrative Procedure Act states that 

general notice of proposed rulemaking 

is not required for rules of agency 

organization, procedure, or practice. 

Since the Office finds that the following 

interim regulations are rules of agency 

organization, procedure, or practice, no 

notice of proposed rulemaking is 

required. Additionally, the interim 

regulations relieve applicants from 

procedural restrictions by permitting 

online registration in situations where, 

previously, applications were required 

to be filed on paper. Pursuant to section 

553(d) of the Administrative Procedure 

Act, these regulations may be effective 

immediately. Moreover, the Register 

finds that because these regulations 

provide additional options to applicants 

for group registration of serial issues, 

good cause exists for making these 

interim rules effective immediately and 

without notice and comment. 

List of Subject in 37 CFR Part 202 

Copyright, Registration. 

Interim Regulation 

In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Copyright Office amends part 202 to 

Title 37 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations to read as follows: 

PART 202—PREREGISTRATION AND 

REGISTRATION OF CLAIMS TO 

COPYRIGHT 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 202 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 17 U.S.C. 408, 702. 

■ 2. Section 202.3 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b)(6)(v) to read as 

follows: 

§ 202.3 Registration of copyright. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(6) * * * 

(v) To apply for registration of a group 

of serial issues under 408(c)(1) of title 

17 and this section, an applicant may 

file electronically, or submit a 

completed Form SE/Group. 

(A) For applicants filing 

electronically: 

(1) Furnish the requested information 

for group of serial issues. 

(2) Submit the appropriate filing fee, 

as required in § 201.3(c) of this chapter, 

for each issue covered by the group 

registration. 

(3) Submit either a digital format 

which complies with § 202.20(b)(2)(iii) 

or a deposit consisting of one complete 

copy of the best edition of each issue 

included in the group registration. 

(B) For applicants filing a completed 

Form SE/Group, the following must be 

sent together in the same package: 

(1) A completed Form SE/Group, 

providing the requested information. 

(2) The appropriate filing fee, as 

required in § 201.3(c) of this chapter, for 

each issue covered by the group 

registration. 

(3) A deposit consisting of one 

complete copy of the best edition of 

each issue included in the group 

registration. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Section 202.20 is amended by 

revising paragraph (c)(2)(xvii) to read as 

follows: 

§ 202.20 Deposit of copies and 

phonorecords for copyright registration. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(2) * * * 

(xvii) Group registration of serials. For 

group registration of related serials, as 

specified in § 202.3(b)(6), for applicants 

filing electronically, the deposit must 

consist of one complete copy of the best 

edition of each issue included in the 

group registration, or a digital format of 

a complete copy which complies with 

§ 202.20(b)(2)(iii). For applicants filing a 

completed Form SE/Group, the deposit 

must consist of one complete copy of 

the best edition of each issue included 

in the group registration. In addition, for 

all filings for group registration of serial 

issues, two complimentary 

subscriptions to any serial for which 

group registration is sought must be 

entered and maintained in the name of 

the Library of Congress, and the copies 

must be submitted regularly and 

promptly after publication. 

* * * * * 

Dated: September 27, 2012. 

Maria A. Pallante, 

Register of Copyrights. 

Approved by: 

James H. Billington, 

The Librarian of Congress. 

[FR Doc. 2012–27231 Filed 11–7–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1410–30–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R01–OAR–2012–0255; A–1–FRL– 

9749–8] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; New 

Hampshire; Reasonably Available 

Control Technology Update To 

Address Control Techniques 

Guidelines Issued in 2006, 2007, and 

2008 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
66922 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 217 / Thursday, November 8, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is approving a State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision 

submitted by the State of New 

Hampshire. The revision establishes 

Reasonably Available Control 

Technology (RACT) for several 

categories of volatile organic compound 

(VOC) sources. The intended effect of 

this action is to approve these 

requirements into the New Hampshire 

SIP. This action is being taken in 

accordance with the Clean Air Act. 

DATES: This direct final rule will be 

effective January 7, 2013, unless EPA 

receives adverse comments by 

December 10, 2012. 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–2012–0255 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–2012–0255,’’ 

Anne Arnold, Manager, Air Quality 

Planning Unit, Office of Ecosystem 

Protection, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, EPA New England 

Regional Office, 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, 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 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m., excluding legal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID Number EPA–R01–OAR– 

2012–0255. 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 

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 at Office of Ecosystem 

Protection, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, EPA New England 

Regional Office, 5 Post Office Square— 

Suite 100, Boston, MA. EPA requests 

that if at all possible, you contact the 

contact listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

schedule your inspection. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m., excluding legal holidays. 

In addition, the state’s submittal is 

available for public inspection during 

normal business hours, by appointment 

at the State Air Agency: Air Resources 

Division, Department of Environmental 

Services, P.O. Box 95, 29 Hazen Drive, 

Concord, NH 03302–0095. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

David Mackintosh, Air Quality Planning 

Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, New England Regional Office, 5 

Post Office Square—Suite 100, (Mail 

Code OEP05–02), Boston, MA 02109– 

3912, telephone 617–918–1584, 

facsimile 617–918–0584, email 

mackintosh.david@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

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

EPA. 

Organization of this document. The 

following outline is provided to aid in 

locating information in this preamble. 

I. What action is EPA taking? 

II. What is the background for this action? 

III. What is included in New Hampshire’s 

submittal? 

IV. What is EPA’s evaluation of New 

Hampshire’s submittal? 

V. Final Action 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What action is EPA taking? 

EPA is approving New Hampshire’s 

Chapter Env-A 1200 ‘‘Volatile Organic 

Compounds (VOCs) Reasonably 

Available Control Technology (RACT),’’ 

specifically PART Env-A 1201 through 

1222, submitted by the New Hampshire 

Department of Environmental Services 

(NH DES) on July 26, 2011, as meeting 

RACT for the VOC source categories 

covered by the Control Technique 

Guidelines (CTGs) issued by EPA in 

2006, 2007, and 2008. EPA is also 

approving negative declarations for the 

CTGs for which NH DES determined no 

applicable sources exist in New 

Hampshire. 

II. What is the background for this 

action? 

In 1997, EPA revised the health-based 

National Ambient Air Quality Standard 

(NAAQS) for ozone, setting it at 0.08 

parts per million (ppm) averaged over 

an 8-hour time frame. EPA set the 8- 

hour ozone standard based on scientific 

evidence demonstrating that ozone 

causes adverse health effects at lower 

ozone concentrations and over longer 

periods of time than was understood 

when the pre-existing 1-hour ozone 

standard was set. EPA determined that 

the 8-hour standard would be more 

protective of human health, especially 

with regard to children and adults who 

are active outdoors, and individuals 

with a pre-existing respiratory disease, 

such as asthma. 

On April 30, 2004, pursuant to the 

Federal Clean Air Act (the Act, or CAA), 

42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq., EPA designated 

portions of the country as being in 

nonattainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS (69 FR 23858). In New 

Hampshire, the Boston-ManchesterPortsmouth (SE), New Hampshire area 

was designated nonattainment for the 

1997 ozone standard and classified as 

moderate, and the remainder of the state 

was designated as unclassifiable/ 

attainment. New Hampshire is also part 

of the Ozone Transport Region (OTR) 

under Section 184(a) of the CAA. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 217 / Thursday, November 8, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 66923 

Sections 182(b)(2) and 184 of the CAA 

compel states with moderate and above 

ozone nonattainment areas, as well as 

areas in the OTR respectively, to submit 

a SIP revision requiring the 

implementation of RACT for sources 

covered by a CTG and for all major 

sources. A CTG is a document issued by 

EPA which establishes a ‘‘presumptive 

norm’’ for RACT for a specific VOC 

source category. 

Furthermore, effective on May 27, 

2008, EPA made further revisions to the 

ozone NAAQS setting the 8-hour 

standard at 0.075 ppm (73 FR 16436, 

March 27, 2008). Today’s action does 

not address the requirements of the 

2008 ozone NAAQS. 

On October 5, 2006, EPA issued four 

new CTGs which states were required to 

address by October 5, 2007 (71 FR 

58745). Then, on October 9, 2007, EPA 

issued three more CTGs which states 

were required to address by October 9, 

2008 (72 FR 57215). Lastly, on October 

7, 2008, EPA issued an additional four 

CTGs which states were required to 

address by October 7, 2009 (73 FR 

58841). The State of New Hampshire 

submitted a SIP revision addressing all 

eleven CTGs on July 26, 2011. 

III. What is included in New 

Hampshire’s submittal? 

New Hampshire’s SIP revision 

consists of updates to VOC RACT 

requirements to address the eleven EPA 

CTGs issued in 2006 through 2008. New 

Hampshire adopted regulations for nine 

CTGs: Fiberglass boat manufacturing 

materials; flat wood paneling coatings; 

flexible package printing; industrial 

cleaning solvent; metal furniture 

coatings; miscellaneous industrial 

adhesives; miscellaneous metal and 

plastic parts coatings; offset lithographic 

printing and letterpress printing; and 

paper, film, and foil coatings. New 

Hampshire also submitted negative 

declarations for two CTGs: Automobile 

and light-duty truck assembly coatings; 

and large appliance coatings. 

IV. What is EPA’s evaluation of New 

Hampshire’s submittal? 

New Hampshire’s Paper, Film, and 

Foil Coatings Rule, PART Env-A 1207, 

was previously approved by EPA on 

July 23, 2002 (67 FR 48033) and 

contained a general emissions limit of 

0.35 kilograms of VOC per liter (kg 

VOC/l) of coating for facilities with 

actual emissions of 3 tons of VOC or 

more per year. The following are 

exempt: Application of a coating to 

vinyl or urethane coated fabric, or vinyl 

or urethane sheets; coating performed 

on or in-line with any offset 

lithographic, screen, letterpress, 

flexographic, rotogravure, or digital 

printing press; and size presses and onmachine coaters on papermaking 

machines that apply sizing, such as 

starch or water-base-clays. The revised 

regulation contains the same general 

emissions limit but now applies to a 

broader scope of activities consistent 

with EPA’s CTG for Paper, Film, and 

Foil Coatings (EPA 453/R–07–003, 

September 2007). The regulation also 

includes additional requirements for 

facilities with a potential to emit 25 tons 

of VOC or more per year on or after 

January 1, 2016. These facilities must 

meet lower VOC coating limits or use 

pollution control equipment meeting 

90% control efficiency. There are also 

updated work practices and 

recordkeeping requirements for all 

applicable facilities. New Hampshire’s 

revised rule is consistent with the CTG 

and satisfies the anti-back sliding 

requirements in Section 110(l) of the 

CAA, since it applies to a broader scope 

of activities than the previously SIPapproved version of the rule. 

The New Hampshire Metal Furniture 

Coatings Rule, PART Env-A 1209, was 

previously approved by EPA on July 23, 

2002 (67 FR 48033) and contained just 

one general coating limit of 0.36 kg 

VOC/l. New Hampshire’s revised rule 

includes eight coating categories each of 

which has limits for baked or air-dried 

coatings ranging from 0.275 kg to 0.420 

kg VOC/l. These limits are consistent 

with the limits recommended in the 

EPA CTG for Metal Furniture Coatings 

(EPA–453/R–07–005, September 2007). 

While two specialty coating categories, 

pretreatment coatings and metallic 

coatings, have a higher limit (0.420 kg 

VOC/l (baked or air dried)) than the 

previous general coating limit, the new 

general use coating limit has been 

reduced from 0.36 kg to 0.275 kg VOC/ 

l (baked or air dried). Since the general 

use coatings are applied more frequently 

than pretreatment and metallic coatings, 

fewer VOCs will be emitted in New 

Hampshire as a result of the new 

regulations. This approach is consistent 

with the EPA guidance memorandum 

entitled Approving SIP Revisions 

Addressing VOC RACT Requirements 

for Certain Coating Categories from 

Scott Mathias to Regional Air Division 

Directors dated March 17, 2011. 

Therefore, the revised rule satisfies the 

anti-back sliding requirements in 

Section 110(l) of the CAA. PART EnvA 1209 allows for controls by equivalent 

emissions limits expressed in terms of 

mass of VOC per volume of solids as 

applied or the use of add-on controls 

capable of achieving an overall VOC 

efficiency of 90 percent. The revised 

rule also requires facilities to use work 

practices that limit VOC emissions and 

minimize spills during material 

application, storage, containment, 

conveyance, and mixing. The rule also 

updates record keeping requirements 

and revises the definition of metal 

furniture coatings in accordance with 

EPA’s Metal Furniture Coating CTG. 

Specifically, decorative, protective, or 

functional materials that consist only of 

protective oils for metal, acids, bases, or 

any combination of these substances are 

not considered metal furniture coatings. 

Additionally, stencil coatings, safety 

indicating coatings, solid film 

lubricants, electric-insulating and 

thermal conducting coatings, touch-up 

and repair coatings, and coating 

applications with hand-held aerosol 

cans are exempt 

New Hampshire’s Miscellaneous 

Metal Parts and Plastic Parts Coatings 

Rule, PART Env-A 1212, was previously 

approved by EPA on July 23, 2002 (67 

FR 48033). The revised rule contains 

updated work practices, coating 

application methods, and recordkeeping 

requirements for all applicable facilities. 

While the regulation lists multiple types 

of coating applications methods, other 

coating application methods capable of 

achieving a transfer efficiency 

equivalent to, or better than, that 

provided by high-volume low-pressure 

(HVLP) spray application may also be 

used. The EPA CTG for Miscellaneous 

Metal and Plastic Parts Coatings (EPA– 

453/R–08–003, September 2008) defines 

transfer efficiency as ‘‘the percent of 

coating applied to the metal furniture 

component or product.’’ Additional 

control options permit equivalent 

emissions limits expressed in terms of 

mass of VOC per volume of solids as 

applied or the use of add-on controls 

capable of achieving an overall VOC 

efficiency of 90 percent. 

The new coating limits generally 

follow the recommendations in EPA’s 

CTG for Miscellaneous Metal and 

Plastic Parts Coating, with the exception 

of three coating categories. New 

Hampshire adopted higher coating 

limits than the CTG for extreme high 

gloss topcoat, other substrate antifoulant 

coating, and antifouling sealer/tire. For 

these three categories, New Hampshire 

reviewed industry data and determined 

that for purpose of functionality, cost, 

and VOC emissions, the alternative 

limits adopted for these three coating 

categories constitute RACT. New 

Hampshire’s approach is consistent 

with the EPA guidance memorandum 

entitled Control Technique Guidelines 

for Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic Part 

Coatings—Industry Request for 

Reconsideration from Stephen Page to 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
66924 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 217 / Thursday, November 8, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

1Env-A 1205.08 subjects all sources that fall 

under the requirements of Env-A 1200 to record 

keeping obligations in Env-A 900. 

Air Branch Chiefs, Regions I–X, dated 

June 1, 2010. The applicability 

threshold for plastic parts coatings was 

tightened from 10 tons total potential 

emissions to 3 tons actual VOC 

emissions per 12-month period, before 

controls. New Hampshire’s new VOC 

coating limits are also lower than most 

of the previously SIP-approved limits. 

Although some specialty coatings limits 

are higher than previous limits, since 

the general use coating limit is lower 

and these coatings are more frequently 

used, coupled with the fact that the 

revised rule’s applicability is broader, 

the revised rule reduces VOC emissions 

and satisfies the anti-back sliding 

requirements in Section 110(l) of the 

CAA. This analysis is also consistent 

with the EPA guidance memorandum 

entitled Approving SIP Revisions 

Addressing VOC RACT Requirements 

for Certain Coating Categories. 

New Hampshire’s new PART Env-A 

1214 Flat Wood Paneling is consistent 

with the recommendations for RACT 

found in EPA’s CTG for Flat Wood 

Paneling Coatings (EPA–453/R–06–004, 

September 2006). This new regulation 

applies on or after January 1, 2016 to 

sources whose flat wood paneling 

coating operations have, before controls, 

combined actual emissions of 3 tons of 

VOC or more, during any consecutive 

12-month period. Applicable sources 

are required to limit VOC emissions by 

one of the following methods: An addon pollution control device with 90% 

efficiency; an emission limit of 350 

grams of VOC per liter (g VOC/l) of 

solids; or an emission limit of 250 g 

VOC/l of material, excluding water and 

exempt compounds. The rule also 

requires record keeping and work 

practices for handling VOC-containing 

coatings, thinners, cleaning materials, 

and coatings-related waste materials. 

New Hampshire’s Rotogravure and 

Flexographic Printing Rule, PART EnvA 1215, was previously approved by 

EPA on July 23, 2002 (67 FR 48033). 

The revised rule is consistent with the 

recommendations for RACT found in 

EPA’s CTG for Flexible Package Printing 

(EPA–453/R–06–003, September 2006). 

The revised rule adds compliance 

standards for any individual flexiblepackage printing press with a total 

potential to emit 25 tons of VOC or more 

per year on or after January 1, 2016, 

whereas the previous rule applied to 

only rotogravure and flexographic 

printing. Applicable flexible package 

printing sources are required to limit 

VOC emissions by one or more of the 

following techniques: Use of low-VOC 

content materials; averaging the VOC 

content of materials to meet low-VOC 

content standards; or operating add-on 

VOC pollution controls. The rule also 

requires record keeping and work 

practices for handling VOC-containing 

materials. Since New Hampshire’s 

revised rule applies to more operations 

than the previously SIP-approved 

version, it satisfies the anti-back sliding 

requirements in Section 110(l) of the 

CAA. 

New Hampshire’s Offset Lithographic 

Printing and Letterpress Printing Rule, 

PART Env-A 1216, was previously 

approved by EPA on July 23, 2002 (67 

FR 48033). The revised rule is 

consistent with the recommendations 

for RACT found in EPA’s CTG for Offset 

Lithographic Printing and Letterpress 

Printing (EPA–453/R–06–002, 

September 2006). The applicability 

threshold of the rule was changed from 

50 tons per year potential emissions to 

3 tons per year actual emissions. The 

rule also now applies to letterpress 

printing operations, where it previously 

only applied to offset lithographic 

printing. All applicable facilities are 

required to maintain records and use 

work practices to reduce VOC 

emissions.1 New Hampshire’s revised 

rule satisfies the anti-back sliding 

requirements in Section 110(l) of the 

CAA, since it applies to more operations 

than the previously SIP-approved 

version of the rule. 

New Hampshire’s new Fiberglass Boat 

Manufacturing Rule, PART Env-A 1219, 

is consistent with the recommendations 

for RACT found in EPA’s CTG for 

Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing Materials 

(EPA–453/R–08–004, September 2008). 

This new regulation applies to fiberglass 

boat manufacturing operations that on 

or after January 1, 2016 have, before 

controls, combined actual emissions of 

3 tons of VOC or more, during any 

consecutive 12-month period, from the 

use of gel coats, resins, and materials 

used to clean application equipment. 

Applicable sources are required to limit 

VOC emissions by one of the following 

prescribed techniques: Use of low-VOC 

content materials; averaging the VOC 

content of materials to meet low-VOC 

content standards; use of a facilityspecific VOC mass emission limit; or the 

operation of VOC pollution control 

devices. The new regulation also 

specifies work practices to reduce VOC 

emissions during the application, 

storage, mixing, and conveyance of 

coatings, resins, and cleaning materials. 

New Hampshire’s new Miscellaneous 

Industrial Adhesives, PART Env-A 

1220, is consistent with the 

recommendations for RACT found in 

EPA’s CTG for Miscellaneous Industrial 

Adhesives (EPA–453/R–08–005, 

September 2008). The new regulation 

applies to miscellaneous industrial 

adhesive and adhesive primer 

application processes, including related 

cleaning activities with combined actual 

emissions of 3 tons of VOC or more, 

during any consecutive 12-month 

period on or after January 1, 2016. The 

use of industrial adhesives by sources 

regulated by another CTG category is 

exempt from the regulation. Applicable 

sources are required to limit their VOC 

emissions by using a combination of 

low-VOC adhesives, specified 

application methods, and add-on 

control equipment, or an overall control 

efficiency of 85%. The new regulation 

also specifies application methods, as 

well as work practices for waste and 

cleaning materials, to further limit VOC 

emissions from industrial adhesive 

activities. 

New Hampshire’s Industrial Cleaning 

Solvents Rule, PART Env-A 1221, is 

consistent with the recommendations 

for RACT found in EPA’s CTG for 

Industrial Cleaning Solvents (EPA–453/ 

R–06–001, September 2006). Previously, 

this rule only applied to cold cleaning, 

vapor degreasing, and conveyorized 

degreasing operations. New provisions 

were added to address the Industrial 

Cleaning Solvents CTG. These new 

provisions apply to sources that use 

organic solvents in their cleaning 

activities with actual emissions, before 

controls, of 3 tons or more during any 

consecutive 12-month period on or after 

January 1, 2016. The use of industrial 

cleaning solvents for certain specialty 

applications and sources regulated by 

another CTG category are exempt from 

the regulation. Applicable sources are 

required to limit VOC emissions by 

using cleaning solvents that contain no 

more than 50 g VOC/l or have a 

composite vapor pressure of 8.0 

millimeters of mercury (mm Hg) at 20 

degrees Celsius (with the exception of 

cold cleaning operations for which the 

rule prohibits the use of solvents having 

a vapor pressure of 1.0 mm Hg or greater 

at 20 degrees Celsius), or by using addon control equipment. The work 

practices in the regulation minimize 

VOC emissions during the use, 

handling, storage, and disposal of 

cleaning solvents. 

New Hampshire’s SIP revision also 

includes numerous minor revisions 

such as chapter renumbering, updated 

citations, and references to the newly 

adopted regulations. These updates 

include PARTS Env-A 1201 through 

1206, 1208, 1210, 1211, 1213, 1217, 

1218, and 1222. Throughout Chapter 

Env-A 1200, the term ‘‘2011 effective 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 217 / Thursday, November 8, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 66925 

date’’ is understood to mean June 1, 

2011. PART Env-A 1205 RACT 

Procedures has been revised to include 

conducting a public hearing on 

proposed RACT orders, if requested, 

rather than always conducting a 

hearing. Additionally, where PART EnvA 1205 uses the term ‘‘weighted 

average’’ EPA interprets this to be the 

sum of the VOC emissions divided by 

the sum of the weights. In PART EnvA 1213.11, the formula for calculating 

‘‘percentage reduction’’ is now defined 

in PART Env-A 800 Testing and 

Monitoring Procedures. PART Env-A 

1217.07(d)(3) and (5) both reference ‘‘a,’’ 

‘‘b,’’ and ‘‘c,’’ which EPA interprets as 

actually referencing ‘‘1,’’ ‘‘2,’’ and ‘‘3,’’ 

respectively. 

New Hampshire’s SIP revision also 

includes negative declarations for two 

CTGs: Automobile and Light-Duty 

Truck Assembly Coatings (EPA–453/R– 

08–006, September 2008); and Large 

Appliance Coatings (EPA–453/R–07– 

004, September 2007). NH DES based 

these negative declarations on periodic 

field inspections, information from their 

air permitting program, and a search by 

Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) 

and North American Industry 

Classification System (NAICS) code of 

databases maintained both by the NH 

DES and by the New Hampshire 

Manufacturers’ Association. A survey 

was also made of facilities with reported 

SIC or NAICS codes indicating that they 

might conduct Large Appliance Coating 

operations. Upon questioning, it was 

determined that none of the facilities 

was subject to the CTG. 

In summary, as noted above, EPA has 

reviewed New Hampshire’s new and 

revised VOC regulations and found that 

they are consistent with the relevant 

CTGs. In addition, New Hampshire’s 

process for determining the categories 

for which the state should make 

negative declarations was reasonable. 

Therefore, EPA concludes that New 

Hampshire has met the CAA 

requirement to adopt RACT for all the 

2006, 2007, and 2008 CTGs. 

V. Final Action 

EPA is approving and incorporating 

into the SIP, New Hampshire’s Chapter 

Env-A 1200, Volatile Organic 

Compounds (VOCs) Reasonably 

Available Control Technology (RACT), 

specifically, PART Env-A 1201 through 

PART Env-A 1222, as meeting RACT for 

the following CTG categories: Fiberglass 

boat manufacturing materials; flat wood 

paneling coatings; flexible package 

printing; industrial cleaning solvents; 

metal furniture coatings; miscellaneous 

industrial adhesives; miscellaneous 

metal parts and plastic parts coatings; 

offset lithographic printing and 

letterpress printing; and paper, film, and 

foil coatings. EPA is also approving New 

Hampshire’s negative declarations for 

two categories: Automobile and lightduty truck assembly coatings; and large 

appliance coatings. New Hampshire has, 

therefore, met the CAA requirement to 

adopt RACT for all of the 2006, 2007, 

and 2008 CTGs. 

The EPA is publishing this action 

without prior proposal because the 

Agency views this as a noncontroversial 

amendment and anticipates no adverse 

comments. However, in the proposed 

rules section of this Federal Register 

publication, EPA is publishing a 

separate document that will serve as the 

proposal to approve the SIP revision 

should relevant adverse comments be 

filed. This rule will be effective January 

7, 2013 without further notice unless 

the Agency receives relevant adverse 

comments by December 10, 2012. 

If the EPA receives such comments, 

then EPA will publish a notice 

withdrawing the final rule and 

informing the public that the rule will 

not take effect. All public comments 

received will then be addressed in a 

subsequent final rule based on the 

proposed rule. The EPA will not 

institute a second comment period on 

the proposed rule. All parties interested 

in commenting on the proposed rule 

should do so at this time. If no such 

comments are received, the public is 

advised that this rule will be effective 

on January 7, 2013 and no further action 

will be taken on the proposed rule. 

Please note that if EPA receives adverse 

comment on an amendment, paragraph, 

or section of this rule and if that 

provision may be severed from the 

remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt 

as final those provisions of the rule that 

are not the subject of an adverse 

comment. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the Clean Air Act, the 

Administrator is required to approve a 

SIP submission that complies with the 

provisions of the Act 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 Clean Air Act. 

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 Clean Air Act; 

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. 

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. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
66926 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 217 / Thursday, November 8, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean 

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of 

this action must be filed in the United 

States Court of Appeals for the 

appropriate circuit by January 7, 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. Parties with 

objections to this direct final rule are 

encouraged to file a comment in 

response to the parallel notice of 

proposed rulemaking for this action 

published in the proposed rules section 

of today’s Federal Register, rather than 

file an immediate petition for judicial 

review of this direct final rule, so that 

EPA can withdraw this direct final rule 

and address the comment in the 

proposed rulemaking. This action 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, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Lead, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: October 25, 2012. 

H. Curtis Spalding, 

Regional Administrator, EPA New England. 

Part 52 of chapter I, title 40 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations is amended 

as follows: 

PART 52—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart EE—New Hampshire 

■ 2. Section 52.1520 is amended by: 

■ a. In paragraph (c), in the table titled 

‘‘EPA-Approved New Hampshire 

Regulations’’, by revising the entry for 

existing state citation Env-A 1200; and 

■ b. In paragraph (e), in the table titled 

‘‘New Hampshire Non Regulatory’’, by 

adding a new entry for Negative 

Declarations at the end of the table. 

The revised and added text reads as 

follows: 

§ 52.1520 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) EPA approved regulations. 

EPA-APPROVED NEW HAMPSHIRE REGULATIONS

State citation Title/subject State effective 

date EPA approval date 1 Explanations 

*******

Env-A 1200 ............................. Volatile Organic Compounds 

(VOCs) Reasonably Available Control Technology 

(RACT).

05/26/11 11/8/12 [Insert Federal Register page number where 

the document begins].

Approved PART Env-A 1201 

through 1222 for the following CTG categories: Fiberglass boat manufacturing materials; flat wood 

paneling coatings; flexible 

package printing; industrial 

cleaning solvent; metal furniture coatings; miscellaneous industrial adhesives; 

miscellaneous metal parts 

and plastic parts coatings; 

offset lithographic printing 

and letterpress printing; 

and paper, film, and foil 

coatings. 

*******

1 In order to determine the EPA effective date for a specific provision listed in this table, consult the Federal Register notice cited in this column for the particular provision. 

* * * * * (e) Nonregulatory. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 217 / Thursday, November 8, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 66927 

NEW HAMPSHIRE NON REGULATORY

Name of non regulatory 

SIP provision 

Applicable geographic 

or nonattainment area 

State submittal 

date/effective 

date 

EPA approved date 3 Explanations 

*******

Negative Declarations 

included in New 

Hampshire’s State 

Implementation Plan 

Revision for the 

2006, 2007, and 

2008 Control Techniques Guidelines.

Statewide .................... 07/26/2011 11/8/12 [Insert Federal 

Register page number 

where the document begins].

Includes negative declarations for the following 

CTG categories: Large appliance coatings; 

and automobile and light-duty truck assembly coatings. 

3 In order to determine the EPA effective date for a specific provision listed in this table, consult the Federal Register notice cited in this column for the particular provision. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2012–27217 Filed 11–7–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2012–0382; FRL–9734–6] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Florida 110(a)(1) 

and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for 

the 1997 and 2006 Fine Particulate 

Matter National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to 

approve the State Implementation Plan 

(SIP) submissions, submitted by the 

State of Florida, through the Florida 

Department of Environmental Protection 

(FDEP), as demonstrating that the State 

meets certain SIP requirements of 

sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the Clean 

Air Act (CAA or the Act) for the 1997 

annual and 2006 24-hour fine 

particulate matter (PM2.5) national 

ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). 

Section 110(a) of the CAA requires that 

each state adopt and submit a SIP for 

the implementation, maintenance, and 

enforcement of each NAAQS 

promulgated by EPA, which is 

commonly referred to as an 

‘‘infrastructure’’ SIP. Florida certified 

that the Florida SIP contains provisions 

that ensure the 1997 annual and 2006 

24-hour PM2 NAAQS are implemented, 

enforced, and maintained in Florida 

(hereafter referred to as ‘‘infrastructure 

submissions’’). Florida’s infrastructure 

submissions, provided to EPA on April 

18, 2008, and September 23, 2009, with 

the exception of element 110(a)(2)(D)(i) 

which will be addressed in a separate 

rulemaking action. 

DATES: This rule is effective December 

10, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket 

Identification No. EPA–R04–OAR– 

2012–0382. All documents in the docket 

are listed on the www.regulations.gov 

web site. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, i.e., Confidential Business 

Information 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 at 

the Regulatory Development Section, 

Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA 

requests that if at all possible, you 

contact the person listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

schedule your inspection. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30 

excluding federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sean Lakeman, Regulatory Development 

Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, 

Pesticides and Toxics Management 

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street 

SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. The 

telephone number is (404) 562–9043. 

Mr. Lakeman can be reached via 

electronic mail at 

lakeman.sean@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. This Action 

III. Final Action 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

Upon promulgation of a new or 

revised NAAQS, sections 110(a)(1) and 

(2) of the CAA require states to address 

basic SIP requirements, including 

emissions inventories, monitoring, and 

modeling to assure attainment and 

maintenance for that new NAAQS. On 

July 18, 1997 (62 FR 38652), EPA 

promulgated a new annual PM2.5

NAAQS and on October 17, 2006 (71 FR 

61144), EPA promulgated a new 24-hour 

NAAQS. On June 12, 2012, EPA 

proposed to approve Florida’s April 18, 

2008, and September 23, 2009, 

infrastructure submissions for the 1997 

annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. 

See 77 FR 34906. A summary of the 

background for today’s final action is 

provided below. See EPA’s June 12, 

2012, proposed rulemaking at 77 FR 

34906 for more detail. 

Section 110(a) of the CAA requires 

states to submit SIPs to provide for the 

implementation, maintenance, and 

enforcement of a new or revised 

NAAQS within three years following 

the promulgation of such NAAQS, or 

within such shorter period as EPA may 

prescribe. Section 110(a) imposes the 

obligation upon states to make a SIP 

submission to EPA for a new or revised 

NAAQS, but the contents of that 

submission may vary from depending 

upon the facts and circumstances. The 

data and analytical tools available at the 

time the state develops and submits the 

SIP for a new or revised NAAQS affects 

the content of the submission. The 

contents of such SIP submissions may 

also vary depending upon what 

provisions the state’s existing SIP 

already contains. In the case of the 1997 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES