Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 189 / Thursday, September 30, 2004 / Notices 58433

Abstract: EPA is responsible for the 

regulation of pesticides under the 

Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and 

Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). The WPS, 

codified at 40 CFR part 170, established 

requirements to protect agricultural 

workers and pesticide handlers from 

hazards of pesticides used on farms, on 

forests, in nurseries, and in 

greenhouses. EPA regulations in 40 CFR 

part 170 contain the standard and 

workplace practices, which are designed 

to reduce or eliminate exposure to 

pesticides and establish procedures for 

responding to exposure-related 

emergencies. The practices include 

prohibitions against applying pesticides 

in a way that would cause exposure to 

workers and others; a waiting period 

before workers can return to areas 

treated with pesticides (restricted entry 

interval); basic safety training (and 

voluntary training verification) and 

posting of information about pesticide 

hazards, as well as pesticide application 

information; arrangements for the 

supply of soap, water, and towels in 

case of pesticide exposure; and 

provisions for emergency assistance. 

The training verification program 

facilitates compliance with the training 

requirements by providing a voluntary 

method for employers to verify that the 

required safety information has been 

provided to workers and handlers. This 

renewal ICR estimates the third party 

response burden from complying with 

the WPS requirements. Information is 

exchanged between agricultural 

employers and employees at farm, 

forest, nursery and greenhouse 

establishments to ensure worker safety. 

No information is collected by the 

Agency under this ICR. 

V. What are EPA’s Burden and Cost 

Estimates for this ICR?

Under the PRA, ‘‘burden’’ means the 

total time, effort, or financial resources 

expended by persons to generate, 

maintain, retain, or disclose or provide 

information to or for a Federal Agency. 

For this collection it includes the time 

needed to review instructions; develop, 

acquire, install, and utilize technology 

and systems for the purposes of 

collecting, validating, and verifying 

information, processing and 

maintaining information, and disclosing 

and providing information; adjust the 

existing ways to comply with any 

previously applicable instructions and 

requirements; train personnel to be able 

to respond to a collection of 

information; search data sources; 

complete and review the collection of 

information; and transmit or otherwise 

disclose the information.

The ICR provides a detailed 

explanation of this estimate, which is 

only briefly summarized in this notice. 

The annual public burden is 2,293,364 

millions hours valued at $117,442,454 

million. The following is a summary of 

the estimates taken from the ICR:

Respondents/affected entities:

Agricultural workers, pesticide 

handlers, employers in farms, nurseries, 

forestry, and greenhouse establishments.

Estimated total number of potential 

respondents: 3,245,393.

Frequency of response: As needed. 

Estimated total/average number of 

responses for each respondent: 3.

Estimated total annual burden hours:

2,293,364.

Estimated total annual burden costs:

$117,442,454.

VI. Are There Changes in the Estimates 

from the Last Approval?

This ICR will decrease the burden in 

the previous ICR (an estimated total of 

2,294,625 hours) by 1,261 hours to 

provide the new total estimated burden 

of 2,293,264 hours. This decrease 

represents an adjustment to the burden 

estimate, and is due to the removal of 

the cut rose exception from the burden 

estimate.

The cost estimates provided in this 

ICR are approximately $22.3 million 

more than the cost provided in the 

previous ICR due to increased wage 

rates use for calculating the costs 

associated with the burden hour 

impacts.

VII. What is the Next Step in the 

Process for this ICR?

EPA will consider the comments 

received and amend the ICR as 

appropriate. The final ICR package will 

then be submitted to OMB for review 

and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 

1320.12. EPA will issue another Federal 

Register notice pursuant to 5 CFR 

1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to announce the 

submission of the ICR to OMB and the 

opportunity to submit additional 

comments to OMB. If you have any 

questions about this ICR or the approval 

process, please contact the person listed 

under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT.

List of Subjects

Environmental protection, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: September 23, 2004.

Margaret Schneider,

Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of 

Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances.

[FR Doc. 04–21939 Filed 9–29–04; 8:45am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–S

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[FRL–7822–2] 

Status of Motor Vehicle Budgets in 

Submitted State Implementation Plan 

for Transportation Conformity 

Purposes; Metropolitan Washington 

DC Area (DC–MD–VA) Notice of 

Withdrawal of Adequacy of Motor 

Vehicle Emissions Budgets

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of withdrawal of 

adequacy. 

SUMMARY: EPA is announcing that it has 

withdrawn its June 22, 2000 adequacy 

finding on the 2015 and 2020 outyear 

motor vehicle emission budgets 

(MVEBs) for the Metropolitan 

Washington DC area. EPA has 

withdrawn the June 22, 2000 adequacy 

finding because the District of Columbia 

(DC), State of Maryland (MD), and the 

Commonwealth of Virginia (VA), 

collectively referred to as the three 

jurisdictions, withdrew the state 

implementation plan (SIP) submissions 

containing those MVEBs. Those SIP 

revisions are no longer pending before 

EPA. On August 26, 2004, EPA sent 

letters to the three jurisdictions 

withdrawing the June 22, 2000 

adequacy finding of the 2015 and 2020 

outyear MVEBs. EPA’s withdrawal of its 

June 22, 2000 adequacy finding means 

that the 2015 and 2020 outyear MVEBs 

are no longer available for 

transportation conformity purposes. 

This withdrawal of the June 22, 2000 

adequacy finding has no effect 

whatsoever on EPA’s more recent 

adequacy finding of December 9, 2003, 

which declared the MVEBs of the three 

jurisdictions’ 2005 Rate of Progress Plan 

and 2005 revised Attainment 

Demonstration Plan submissions 

adequate for conformity purposes. That 

December 9, 2003 adequacy finding 

stands and the MVEBs of the 2005 Rate 

of Progress Plan and 2005 revised 

Attainment Demonstration Plan remain 

available for transportation conformity 

determinations.

DATES: EPA’s withdrawal of the June 22, 

2000 adequacy finding was made in 

letters dated August 26, 2004 from EPA 

Region III to the three jurisdictions. This 

August 26, 2004 withdrawal of the June 

22, 2000 adequacy finding is effective 

on October 15, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Martin Kotsch, U.S. EPA, Region III, 

1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA 

19103 at (215) 814–3335 or by e-mail at 

kotsch.martin@epa.gov.

58434 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 189 / Thursday, September 30, 2004 / Notices 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Throughout this document the term 

‘‘MVEBs’’ refers to the motor vehicle 

emission budgets for volatile organic 

compounds (VOCs) and nitrogen oxides 

(NOX). The term ‘‘the three 

jurisdictions’’ refers collectively to the 

District of Columbia, the State of 

Maryland, and the Commonwealth of 

Virginia. The word ‘‘SIP’’ in this 

document refers to the revised 

attainment plan for the Metropolitan 

Washington DC area submitted to EPA 

as SIP revisions by the Commonwealth 

of Virginia, the District of Columbia, 

and State of Maryland on March 22, 

2000, March 22, 2000, and March 31, 

2000, respectively. These SIP revision 

submittals identified outyear MVEBs for 

2015 and 2020. 

I. Background 

The State of Maryland, the 

Commonwealth of Virginia, and District 

of Columbia by letters dated March 2, 

2004, March 10, 2004, and March 10, 

2004, respectively, withdrew the 

previously submitted SIPs listed in the 

table below:

State SIP title Original SIP 

submission date 

Maryland .................... State Implementation Plan (SIP) Revision Phase II Attainment Plan for the DC–MD–VA Nonattainment Area Establishing Outyear Mobile Emissions Budgets for Transportation Conformity.March 31, 2000. 

Virginia ....................... Plan amendment which establishes motor vehicle emissions budgets for 2015 and 2020 consistent 

with the Phase II Ozone Attainment Plan.

March 22, 2000. 

Washington, DC ......... Proposed Revision to State Implementation Plan (SIP) Revision, Phase II Attainment Plan for the 

DC–MD–VA Nonattainment Area Establishing Out-year Mobile Emissions Budgets for Transportation Conformity.

March 22, 2000. 

These SIP withdrawals by the three 

jurisdictions were effective on April 30, 

2004. The withdrawn SIP submissions 

had proposed new MVEBs for the 

outyears 2015 and 2020. In letters dated 

June 22, 2000 from Judith Katz, Air 

Director, EPA, Region III to the three 

jurisdictions, EPA had found these 

MVEBs adequate for transportation 

conformity purposes. That June 22, 2000 

adequacy finding was announced in the 

Federal Register on July 3, 2000 (65 FR 

41067). It is important to note that while 

EPA had made an adequacy finding for 

these budgets, they were never 

approved as SIP revisions by EPA. 

Hence, there is no SIP rulemaking 

required to be withdrawn by EPA in 

regard to these outyear MVEBs. 

Because the MVEBs EPA found 

adequate on June 22, 2000 were 

contained in the SIP submissions that 

have been withdrawn by the three 

jurisdictions, those MVEBs can no 

longer be considered adequate for 

transportation conformity purposes. 

EPA, therefore, sent letters on August 

26, 2004 to the three jurisdictions 

withdrawing the June 22, 2000 

adequacy finding. EPA has withdrawn 

its June 22, 2000 adequacy finding 

without prior notice and comment 

because adequacy findings are not 

considered rulemakings subject to the 

procedural requirements of the 

Administrative Procedures Act. In 

addition, EPA does not believe notice 

through EPA’s conformity website is 

necessary in advance because the 

withdrawn SIPs are no longer pending 

before EPA for consideration. 

Consequently, further public comment 

would be unnecessary and not in the 

public interest. By sending the August 

26, 2004 letters to the three 

jurisdictions, EPA has also withdrawn 

all statements and comments previously 

made regarding its June 22, 2000 

adequacy finding of the MVEBs budgets 

for transportation conformity purposes. 

This is an announcement of EPA’s 

withdrawal of its June 22, 2000 

adequacy finding. As previously 

explained, EPA withdrew this adequacy 

finding in letters dated August 26, 2004 

from Judith M. Katz, Director, Air 

Protection Division, EPA Region III to 

the three jurisdictions. The effective 

date of this withdrawal is October 15, 

2004. This announcement will also be 

made on EPA’s Web site: http://

www.epa.gov/otaq/transp.htm (once 

there, click on the ‘‘Conformity’’

button).

Dated: September 21, 2004. 

Thomas Voltaggio, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.

[FR Doc. 04–21929 Filed 9–29–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY

[OPP–2004–0320; FRL–7681–4]

FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel; 

Notice of Public Meeting

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: There will be a 2–day meeting 

of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, 

and Rodenticide Act Scientific Advisory 

Panel (FIFRA SAP) to consider and 

review dimethoate issues related to 

hazard and dose response assessment.

DATES: The meeting will be held on 

November 30 and December 1, 2004, 

from 8:30 a.m. to approximately 5 p.m., 

eastern time.

Comments: The deadlines for the 

submission of requests to present oral 

comments and the submission of 

written comments, see Unit I.E. of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. 

Nominations: Nominations of 

scientific experts to serve as ad hoc 

members of the FIFRA SAP for this 

meeting should be provided on or before 

October 12, 2004. 

Special seating. Requests for special 

seating arrangements should be made at 

least 5 business days prior to the 

meeting.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at 

the Holiday Inn Rosslyn at Key Bridge, 

1900 North Fort Myer Drive, Arlington, 

VA 22209. The telephone number for 

the Holiday Inn Rosslyn at Key Bridge 

is (703) 807–2000.

Comments. Written comments may be 

submitted electronically (preferred), 

through hand delivery/courier, or by 

mail. Follow the detailed instructions as 

provided in Unit I. of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

Nominations, requests to present oral 

comments, and special seating: To 

submit nominations for ad hoc members 

of the FIFRA SAP for this meeting, 

requests for special seating 

arrangements, or requests to present oral 

comments, notify the Designated 

Federal Official (DFO) listed under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. To 

ensure proper receipt by EPA, your 

request must identify docket ID number 

OPP–2004–0320 in the subject line on 

the first page of your response.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Myrta Christian, DFO, Office of Science 

Coordination and Policy (7201M), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 

564–8498; fax number: (202) 564–8382;