5286 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 23 / Wednesday, February 4, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

1 Document titled ‘‘Addenda to the Ozone 

Attainment Demonstrations for the Southwest 

Connecticut Severe Ozone Nonattainment Area and 

Greater Connecticut Serious Ozone Nonattainment 

Area,’’ February 8, 2000.

■ 2. Section 165.T05–091 is reinstated 

and revised to read as follows:

§ 165.T05–091 Security Zone; Oyster 

Creek Generation Station, Forked River, 

Ocean County, New Jersey. 

(a) Location. The following area is a 

security zone: starting at the south 

branch of the Forked River in the 

vicinity of the Oyster Creek Generation 

Station, bounded by a line beginning at 

39°49′12.0′′ N, 074°12′13.0′′ W; thence to 

39°48′39.7′′ N, 074°12′0′′ W; along the 

shoreline, thence to 39°48′40.0′′ N, 

074°12′0.3′′ W; thence to 39°49′11.8′′ N, 

074°12′10.5′′ W; thence back along the 

shoreline to the beginning point. All 

coordinates reference Datum: NAD 

1983. 

(b) Regulations. (1) All persons are 

required to comply with the general 

regulations governing security zones in 

§ 165.33 of this part. 

(2) No person or vessel may enter or 

navigate within this security zone 

unless authorized to do so by the Coast 

Guard or designated representative. Any 

person or vessel authorized to enter the 

security zone must operate in strict 

conformance with any directions given 

by the Coast Guard or designated 

representative and leave the security 

zone immediately if the Coast Guard or 

designated representative so orders. 

(3) The Coast Guard or designated 

representative enforcing this section can 

be contacted on VHF Marine Band 

Radio, channels 13 and 16. The Captain 

of the Port can be contacted at (215) 

271–4807. 

(4) The Captain of the Port will notify 

the public of any changes in the status 

of this security zone by Marine Safety 

Radio Broadcast on VHF–FM marine 

band radio, channel 22 (157.1 MHZ). 

(c) Definitions. For the purposes of 

this temporary section, Captain of the 

Port means the Commanding Officer of 

the Coast Guard Marine Safety Office/

Group Philadelphia or any Coast Guard 

commissioned, warrant, or petty officer 

who has been authorized by the Captain 

of the Port to act as a designated 

representative on his behalf. 

(d) Effective period. This section is 

effective from 5 p.m. (EDT) on May 13, 

2003, through March 4, 2004.

Dated: January 16, 2004. 

Jonathan D. Sarubbi, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port Philadelphia.

[FR Doc. 04–2309 Filed 2–3–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[CT–057–7216g; A–1–FRL–7617–8] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Connecticut; 

Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for 

2005 and 2007 using MOBILE6.2 for the 

Connecticut Portion of the New YorkNorthern New Jersey-Long Island 

Nonattainment Area and for 2007 for 

the Greater Connecticut Nonattainment 

Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The EPA is approving a 

revision to the Connecticut State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) for the 

attainment and maintenance of the onehour National Ambient Air Quality 

Standard (NAAQS) for ground level 

ozone submitted by the State of 

Connecticut. The intended effect of this 

action is to approve Connecticut’s 2005 

and 2007 motor vehicle emissions 

budgets recalculated using MOBILE6.2 

for the Connecticut portion of the New 

York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island 

nonattainment area and to approve 

Connecticut’s 2007 motor vehicle 

emissions budgets for the Greater 

Connecticut nonattainment area also 

recalculated using MOBILE6.2. This 

action is being taken under the Clean 

Air Act.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule is effective on 

February 4, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the documents 

relevant to this action are available for 

public inspection during normal 

business hours, by appointment at the 

Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 

New England Regional Office, One 

Congress Street, 11th floor, Boston, MA 

02114–2023; and the Bureau of Air 

Management, Department of 

Environmental Protection, State Office 

Building, 79 Elm Street, Hartford, CT 

06106–1630.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Donald O. Cooke, Air Quality Unit, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 

New England Regional Office, One 

Congress Street, Suite 1100 (CAQ), 

Boston, MA 02114–2023, (617) 918–

1668, cooke.donald@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The following table of contents 

describes the format for the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section:

I. What Action Is EPA Taking Today? 

II. What Comments Did EPA Receive in 

Response to Its Proposal? 

A. Background information 

B. Comments Received and EPA’s 

Response 

III. What Is EPA’s Conclusion? 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What Action Is EPA Taking Today? 

On June 17, 2003, the Connecticut 

Department of Environmental Protection 

(CTDEP) submitted an amendment to 

the Connecticut State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) containing 2005 and 2007 

motor vehicle emissions budgets 

recalculated using the MOBILE6.2 

model for the Connecticut portion of the 

New York-Northern New Jersey-Long 

Island nonattainment area and 2007 

motor vehicle emissions budgets for the 

Greater Connecticut nonattainment area. 

This SIP revision fulfills the 

commitment made by the CTDEP in its 

February 8, 2000 SIP submittal to revise 

the transportation conformity budgets 

using EPA’s MOBILE6 emissions 

model.1 In addition, this SIP revision 

demonstrates that the new levels of 

motor vehicle emissions calculated 

using MOBILE6.2 continue to support 

achievement of the rate of progress 

requirements and projected attainment 

of the one-hour ozone NAAQS for the 

Connecticut portion of the New YorkNorthern New Jersey-Long Island 

nonattainment area and the Greater 

Connecticut nonattainment area. 

Connecticut held a public hearing on its 

proposed SIP revision on May 27, 2003. 

Today’s action approves these budgets.

The specific 2005 and 2007 motor 

vehicle emission budgets that EPA is 

approving in today’s rulemaking are 

identified below in Table 1. The 

rationale for EPA’s action are explained 

in the notice of direct final rulemaking 

(68 FR 70484) published in the Federal 

Register on December 18, 2003, and will 

not be restated here. 

II. What Comments Did EPA Receive in 

Response to Its Proposal? 

A. Background Information 

On December 18, 2003, the EPA 

announced in proposed and direct final 

rules published in the Federal Register

(68 FR 70437 and 68 FR 70484, 

respectively) approval of Connecticut’s 

SIP revision for its 2005 and 2007 motor 

vehicle emissions budgets using 

MOBILE6.2 for the Connecticut portion 

of the New York-Northern New JerseyLong Island nonattainment area and 

2007 budgets for the Greater 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 23 / Wednesday, February 4, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 5287

Connecticut nonattainment area, which 

are the subject of today’s final 

rulemaking. 

On December 20, 2003, EPA received 

an electronic comment on the direct 

final rule. EPA had indicated in its 

December 18, 2003 direct final rule that 

if EPA received adverse comments, it 

would withdraw the direct final rule. 

Consequently, elsewhere in today’s 

Federal Register, EPA is publishing a 

separate withdrawal document to 

inform the public that EPA received an 

adverse comment and that the direct 

final rule will not take effect. EPA did 

not receive any other comments. EPA is 

addressing the adverse comment in 

today’s final rule based upon the 

proposed action published on December 

18, 2003. 

B. Comments Received and EPA’s 

Response 

The sole comment EPA received on 

our action is as follows: 

‘‘[C]onnecticut Motor Vehicle Emissions 

[T]hese emissions pollute the air for 

New Jersey as well, so standards must 

be set exceptionally high. NJ already has 

air pollution of immense degradation. 

We must set higher standards so that 

our air is cleaned. Standards should be 

set higher than those proposed. People 

in this area are being injured and killed 

by the air pollution we presently have.’’

The State of Connecticut previously 

established the appropriate levels of 

volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and 

nitrogen oxides (NOX) emission 

necessary from stationary sources, area 

sources and mobile sources (mobile 

sources includes emissions from onroad/highway motor vehicles) to attain 

the one-hour National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard for Ozone. These 

levels were documented and supported 

in detail in Connecticut’s Ozone 

Attainment Demonstrations which EPA 

approved on January 3, 2001 (Greater 

Connecticut serious ozone 

nonattainment area, 66 FR 634) and 

December 11, 2001 (Connecticut portion 

of the New York-Northern New JerseyLong Island severe ozone nonattainment 

area, 66 FR 63921). EPA’s current action 

to approve Connecticut’s revised 2005 

and 2007 motor vehicle emission 

budgets was limited to approval of a 

change in the modeling of these 

previously established motor vehicle 

emission budgets, and EPA concluded 

that even with the new MOBILE6 

emission levels, the two areas would 

still attain in a timely fashion. Issues 

related to the appropriate level of the 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQSs) to protect human health and 

the environment, or to the emission 

levels selected by Connecticut to attain 

the one-hour ozone NAAQS are beyond 

the scope of this rulemaking. 

III. What Is EPA’s Conclusion? 

EPA is approving Connecticut’s 

revision submitted on June 17, 2003 

containing 2005 and 2007 motor vehicle 

emissions budgets using MOBILE6.2 for 

the Connecticut portion of the New 

York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island 

nonattainment area and 2007 budgets 

for the Greater Connecticut 

nonattainment area. 

Table 1 contains Connecticut’s 

revised budgets that EPA is approving 

today. These budgets were developed 

using the latest planning assumptions, 

including 2000 vehicle registration data, 

VMT, speeds, fleet mix, and SIP control 

measures. For the Connecticut portion 

of the New York-Northern New JerseyLong Island nonattainment area, EPA is 

approving budgets for 2005 and 2007, 

and for the Greater Connecticut 

nonattainment area EPA is approving 

budgets for 2007.

TABLE 1.—MOBILE6.2 TRANSPORTATION CONFORMITY BUDGETS

Year 

Connecticut portion of the New 

York-Northern New Jersey-Long 

Island nonattainment area 

Greater Connecticut 

VOC

(tons/day) 

NOX

(tons/day) 

VOC

(tons/day) 

NOX

(tons/day) 

2005 ................................................................................................................. 19.5 36.8 NA NA 

2007 ................................................................................................................. 16.4 29.7 51.9 98.4 

EPA has determined that today’s rule 

falls under the ‘‘good cause’’ exemption 

in section 553(d)(3) of the 

Administrative Procedures Act (APA) 

which, upon finding ‘‘good cause,’’

allows an agency to make a rule 

effective immediately (thereby avoiding 

the 30-day delayed effective date 

otherwise provided for in the APA). 

EPA has concluded that it is not 

necessary to delay the effectiveness of 

this rule for 30 days because the entities 

that will be directly affected by these 

new budgets have had ample notice of 

our action and wish to use the new 

budgets as soon as possible. The state 

and Federal Departments of 

Transportation (DOTs) use these 

budgets to determine whether their 

transportation improvement programs 

conform with the planning assumptions 

in the state’s implementation plan. The 

DOTs will be most immediately affected 

by EPA’s approval of these new budgets 

and their transportation planning 

obligations are directly impacted by 

changes in these budgets. EPA and the 

Connecticut DEP have been consulting 

extensively with the DOTs about these 

budget changes. The DOTs are not only 

ready to use these new budgets without 

waiting 30 days, they are eager to use 

them as soon as possible to avoid delays 

in the transportation planning process. 

Therefore, since the entities that are 

most directly impacted by this approval 

are ready to use the new budgets and 

prefer to use them immediately, EPA is 

making this rule effective immediately. 

This rule will be effective February 4, 

2004. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993), this 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 approves 

state law as meeting Federal 

requirements and imposes no additional 

requirements beyond those imposed by 

state law. Accordingly, the 

Administrator certifies that this 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 approves 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 

5288 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 23 / Wednesday, February 4, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

governments, as described in the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

(Pub. L. 104–4).

This rule also does not have tribal 

implications because it will 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). This 

action also does not have Federalism 

implications because it does not 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 

approves a state rule implementing a 

federal standard, and does not alter the 

relationship or the distribution of power 

and responsibilities established in the 

Clean Air Act. This rule also is not 

subject to Executive Order 13045 

‘‘Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

Risks’’ (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. This rule does 

not impose an information collection 

burden under the provisions of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. section 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 rule and other required 

information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. 

House of Representatives, and the 

Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

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

defined by 5 U.S.C. section 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 April 5, 2004. 

Filing a petition for reconsideration by 

the Administrator of this final rule does 

not affect the finality of this rule for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. This action 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, Hydrocarbons, 

Intergovernmental relations, Oxides of 

Nitrogen, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds.

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

Dated: January 28, 2004. 

Robert W. Varney, 

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 H—Connecticut

■ 2. Section 52.377 is amended by 

revising paragraphs (b), (c) and (d) to 

read as follows:

§ 52.377 Control strategy: Ozone.

* * * * * *

(b) Approval—Revisions to the State 

Implementation Plan submitted by the 

Connecticut Department of 

Environmental Protection on September 

16, 1998, February 8, 2000 and June 17, 

2003. The revisions are for the purpose 

of satisfying the attainment 

demonstration requirements of section 

182(c)(2)(A) of the Clean Air Act for the 

Greater Connecticut serious ozone 

nonattainment area. The revision 

establishes an attainment date of 

November 15, 2007 for the Greater 

Connecticut serious ozone 

nonattainment area. Connecticut 

commits to conduct a mid-course 

review to assess modeling and 

monitoring progress achieved toward 

the goal of attainment by 2007, and 

submit the results to EPA by December 

31, 2004. The June 17, 2003 revision 

establishes MOBILE6-based motor 

vehicle emissions budgets for 2007 of 

51.9 tons per day of volatile organic 

compounds (VOC) and 98.4 tons per day 

of nitrogen oxides (NOX) to be used in 

transportation conformity in the Greater 

Connecticut serious ozone 

nonattainment area. 

(c) Approval—Revisions to the State 

Implementation Plan submitted by the 

Connecticut Department of 

Environmental Protection on October 

15, 2001 and June 17, 2003. These 

revisions are for the purpose of 

satisfying the rate of progress 

requirement of section 182(c)(2)(B) 

through 2007, and the contingency 

measure requirements of section 

182(c)(9) of the Clean Air Act, for the 

Connecticut portion of the NY–NJ–CT 

severe ozone nonattainment area. The 

October 15, 2001 revision establishes 

motor vehicle emissions budgets for 

2002 of 15.20 tons per day of VOC and 

38.39 tons per day of NOX to be used 

in transportation conformity in the 

Connecticut portion of the NY–NJ–CT 

severe ozone nonattainment area. The 

June 17, 2003 revision establishes motor 

vehicle emissions budgets for 2005 of 

19.5 tons per day of VOC and 36.8 tons 

per day of NOX to be used in 

transportation conformity in the 

Connecticut portion of the NY–NJ–CT 

severe ozone nonattainment area. 

(d) Approval—Revisions to the State 

Implementation Plan submitted by the 

Connecticut Department of 

Environmental Protection on September 

16, 1998, February 8, 2000, October 15, 

2001 and June 17, 2003. The revisions 

are for the purpose of satisfying the 

attainment demonstration requirements 

of section 182(c)(2)(A) of the Clean Air 

Act for the Connecticut portion of the 

NY–NJ–CT severe ozone nonattainment 

area. The June 17, 2003 revision 

establishes MOBILE6-based motor 

vehicle emissions budgets for 2007 of 

16.4 tons per day of VOC and 29.7 tons 

per day of NOX to be used in 

transportation conformity in the 

Connecticut portion of the NY–NJ–CT 

severe ozone nonattainment area. 

Connecticut commits to adopt and 

submit by October 31, 2001, additional 

necessary regional control measures to 

offset the emission reduction shortfall in 

order to attain the one-hour ozone 

standard by November 2007. 

Connecticut commits to adopt and 

submit by October 31, 2001, additional 

necessary intrastate control measures to 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 23 / Wednesday, February 4, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 5289

offset the emission reduction shortfall in 

order to attain the one-hour ozone 

standard by November 2007. 

Connecticut commits to adopt and 

submit additional restrictions on VOC 

emissions from mobile equipment and 

repair operations; and requirements to 

reduce VOC emissions from certain 

consumer products. Connecticut also 

commits to conduct a mid-course 

review to assess modeling and 

monitoring progress achieved toward 

the goal of attainment by 2007, and 

submit the results to EPA by December 

31, 2004.

[FR Doc. 04–2267 Filed 2–3–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52

[CT–057–7216f; FRL–7618–1] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Connecticut; Withdrawal of Direct Final 

Rule

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Withdrawal of direct final rule.

SUMMARY: Due to an adverse comment, 

EPA is withdrawing the direct final rule 

to approve Connecticut’s 2005 and 2007 

motor vehicle emissions budgets 

recalculated using MOBILE6.2 for the 

Connecticut portion of the New YorkNorthern New Jersey-Long Island 

nonattainment area and to approve 

Connecticut’s 2007 motor vehicle 

emissions budgets for the Greater 

Connecticut nonattainment area also 

recalculated using MOBILE6.2. In the 

direct final rule published on December 

18, 2003 (68 FR 70437), we stated that 

if we received adverse comment by 

January 20, 2004, the rule would be 

withdrawn and not take effect. EPA 

subsequently received an adverse 

comment. EPA will address the 

comment received in a subsequent final 

action based upon the proposed action 

also published on December 18, 2003 

(68 FR 70484). EPA will not institute a 

second comment period on this action.

EFFECTIVE DATE: The Direct final rule is 

withdrawn as of February 4, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Donald O. Cooke, Environmental 

Scientist, Air Quality Unit, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 

New England Regional Office, One 

Congress Street, Suite 1100 (CAQ), 

Boston, MA 02114–2023, (617) 918–

1668, cooke.donald@epa.gov.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Hydrocarbons, 

Intergovernmental relations, Oxides of 

Nitrogen, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds.

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

Dated: January 26, 2004. 

Robert W. Varney, 

Regional Administrator, EPA New England.

■ Accordingly, the revisions of 40 CFR 

52.377(b), (c) and (d) (which published 

in the Federal Register on December 18, 

2003 at 68 FR 70437) are withdrawn as 

of February 4, 2004.

[FR Doc. 04–2266 Filed 2–3–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[OPP–2003–0370; FRL–7335–6]

Bifenazate; Pesticide Tolerances for 

Emergency Exemptions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes a 

time-limited tolerance for combined 

residues of bifenazate (1-methylethyl 2-

(4-methoxy[1,1’-biphenyl]-3-

yl)hydrazinecarboxylate) and 

diazinecarboxylic acid, 2-(4-methoxy-

[1,1’-biphenyl]-3-yl), 1-methylethyl ester 

(expressed as bifenazate) in or on 

potatoes. This action is in response to 

use of this chemical on potatoes under 

an emergency exemption under section 

18 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, 

and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). This 

regulation establishes a maximum 

permissible level for residues of 

bifenazate in this food commodity. The 

tolerance will expire and is revoked on 

December 31, 2006.

DATES: This regulation is effective 

February 4, 2004. Objections and 

requests for hearings, identified by 

docket ID number OPP–2003–0370, 

must be received on or before April 5, 

2004.

ADDRESSES: Written objections and 

hearing requests may be submitted 

electronically, by mail, or through hand 

delivery/courier. Follow the detailed 

instructions as provided in Unit VII. of 

the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Andrew Ertman, Registration Division 

(7505C), Office of Pesticide Programs, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC 20460–0001; telephone number: 

(703) 308–9367; e-mail address: Sec-18-

Mailbox@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does This Action Apply to Me?

You may be potentially affected by 

this action if you are an agricultural 

producer, food manufacturer, or 

pesticide manufacturer. Potentially 

affected entities may include, but are 

not limited to:

• Crop production (NAICS 111)

• Animal production (NAICS 112)

• Food manufacturing (NAICS 311)

• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS 

32532)

This listing is not intended to be 

exhaustive, but rather provides a guide 

for readers regarding entities likely to be 

affected by this action. Other types of 

entities not listed in this unit could also 

be affected. The North American 

Industrial Classification System 

(NAICS) codes have been provided to 

assist you and others in determining 

whether this action might apply to 

certain entities. If you have any 

questions regarding the applicability of 

this action to a particular entity, consult 

the person listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. How Can I Get Copies of This 

Document and Other Related 

Information?

1. Docket. EPA has established an 

official public docket for this action 

under docket identification (ID) number 

OPP–2003–0370. The official public 

docket consists of the documents 

specifically referenced in this action, 

any public comments received, and 

other information related to this action. 

Although a part of the official docket, 

the public docket does not include 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. The official public 

docket is the collection of materials that 

is available for public viewing at the 

Public Information and Records 

Integrity Branch (PIRIB), Rm. 119, 

Crystal Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis 

Hwy., Arlington, VA. This docket 

facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. The docket telephone number 

is (703) 305–5805.

2. Electronic access. You may access 

this Federal Register document 

electronically through the EPA Internet 

under the ‘‘Federal Register’’ listings at 

http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/. A 

frequently updated electronic version of 

40 CFR part 180 is available at http://