[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 195 (Tuesday, October 10, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 59413-59414]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-16653]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R03-OAR-2006-0638; FRL-8229-6]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Maryland; Control of Volatile Organic Compounds From Medical Device
Manufacturing
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a State Implementation Plan
revision submitted by the Maryland Department of the Environment. This
revision pertains to the control of volatile organic compounds from
medical device manufacturing. This action is being taken under the
Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act).
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before November 9, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2006-0638 by one of the following methods:
A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
B. E-mail: [email protected].
C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2006-0638, Makeba Morris, Chief, Air Quality
Planning Branch, Mailcode 3AP21, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2006-0638. 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 e-mail.
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 e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov,
your e-mail 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: Helene Drago, (215) 814-5796, or by e-
mail at [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 31, 2006 and July 5, 2006, the
Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) submitted a revision
(06-04) to its State Implementation Plan (SIP) to establish
Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) requirements for the
manufacturing of hypodermic products, syringes, catheters, blood
handling and other medical devices. The revision applies to any medical
device manufacturing installation that emits, or has the potential to
emit, 100 pounds or more per day of volatile organic carbon (VOC). The
revisions add Regulation .31 under the Code of Maryland Regulations
(COMAR) 26.11.19, Volatile Organic Compounds from Specific Processes.
I. Background
Medical device manufacturing includes production of hypodermic
products, catheters, syringes, blood collection, processing, storage
and transfusion products. Although the products are small in size, the
large volume of pieces manufactured generates significant VOC
emissions. The majority of VOC emissions from manufacturing of medical
devices comes from bonding of components, coating and cleaning
operations. First and foremost, medical device manufacturers are
required to comply with the requirements of Food, Drug and Cosmetics
Act and the regulations promulgated by Food and Drug Administration
(FDA). Medical device manufacturing operations are not covered under
any specific Federal environmental regulations.
Under Maryland's regulations found at COMAR 26.11.19, Control of
Volatile Organic Compounds from Specific Processes, a facility that has
the potential to emit more than 25 tons a year of VOC emissions is
subject to the RACT requirements under COMAR 26.11.19.02. The purpose
of this regulation is to establish a RACT requirement specific to the
medical device manufacturers engaged in the production of hypodermic
products, syringes, catheters, blood handling and other medical
devices.
II. Summary of SIP Revision
The regulation applies to a person who owns or operates a medical
device manufacturing installation that emits or has the potential to
emit, 100 pounds or more per day of VOC emissions. Medical device
manufacturing operations are also subject to the compliance,
recordkeeping and general requirements under COMAR 26.11.19.02 and
equipment leak requirements under COMAR 26.11.19.16. The regulations
establish control requirements for three main VOC emitting operations:
(1) Solvent bonding, (2) biopassive coating, and (3) steel cannula
coating. For solvent bonding operations, appropriately designed VOC
impermeable covers on dip pots are required. Due to the evolving nature
of the process, the State may, if necessary, require participation in
an evaluation of new or innovative designs or VOC material
substitutions. Biopassive coating operation is required
[[Page 59414]]
to be carried out using an enclosed system for fully assembled medical
devices. Individual components can only be coated if an approval is
granted based on technical and economic justification. Solvents used in
steel cannula coating must be chilled to 50 [deg]F or less using a
solvent chiller system to minimize VOC emissions. The regulations
provide flexibility for companies to achieve an equivalent level of
control through an alternative method.
At this time, there is only one affected source located in Cecil
County, Maryland. The company manufactures syringes and a range of
cardiovascular products and devices such as catheters, filters, pumps
and heat exchangers. It is estimated that as a result of this
regulation, approximately 1.2 to 1.7 tons of VOC emissions per year
will be reduced.
III. Proposed Action
EPA has reviewed the material submitted by Maryland on May 31, 2006
and July 5, 2006. EPA is proposing to approve the Maryland SIP revision
for RACT requirements for the manufacturing of hypodermic products,
syringes, catheters, blood handling and other medical devices. 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 Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
proposed action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and
therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and
Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive
Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)).
This action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal
requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that
this proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule proposes to approve pre-
existing requirements under state law and does not impose any
additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it 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). This proposed rule also does not have a
substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it have substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified
in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because it
merely proposes to approve a state rule implementing a Federal
requirement, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of
power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This
proposed rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. As required by section 3
of Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing
this proposed rule, EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate
drafting errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and
provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct. EPA has complied
with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by examining
the takings implications of the rule in accordance with the ``Attorney
General's Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk and
Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings'' issued under the executive order.
This proposed rule for RACT requirements for the manufacturing of
hypodermic products, syringes, catheters, blood handling and other
medical devices does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.).
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: September 28, 2006.
William T. Wisniewski,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. E6-16653 Filed 10-6-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P