Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 107 / Friday, June 2, 2000 / Proposed Rules 35307

Association shall be reviewed by the

National Futures Association, and no

such agreement shall be a satisfactory

subordination agreement for the

purposes of this section unless and until

the National Futures Association has

found the agreement acceptable and

such agreement has become effective in

the form found acceptable. A proposed

agreement filed by a registrant shall be

reviewed by the designated selfregulatory organization with whom such

an agreement is required to be filed

prior to its becoming effective or, if the

registrant is not a member of any

designated self-regulatory organization,

by the regional office of the Commission

where the agreement is required to be

filed prior to its becoming effective. No

proposed agreement shall be a

satisfactory subordination agreement for

the purposes of this section unless and

until the designated self-regulatory

organization or, if a registrant is not a

member of any designated selfregulatory organization, the

Commission, has found the agreement

acceptable and such agreement has

become effective in the form found

acceptable: Provided, however, That a

proposed agreement shall be a

satisfactory subordination agreement for

purpose of this section if the registrant:

is a securities broker or dealer registered

with the Securities and Exchange

Commission; files signed copies of the

proposed subordination agreement with

the applicable securities designated

examining authority, as defined in Rule

15c3–1(c)(12) of the Securities and

Exchange Commission (17 CFR

240.15c3–1(c)(12)), in the form and

manner prescribed by the designated

examining authority; files signed copies

of the proposed subordination

agreement with the designated selfregulatory organization at the time it

files such copies with the designated

examining authority in the form and

manner prescribed by the designated

self-regulatory organization; and files a

copy of the designated examining

authority’s approval of the proposed

subordination agreement with the

designated self-regulatory organization

immediately upon receipt of such

approval. The designated examining

authority’s determination that the

proposed subordination agreement

satisfies the requirements for a

satisfactory subordination agreement

will be deemed a like finding by the

designated self-regulatory organization,

unless the designated self-regulatory

organization notifies the registrant that

the designated examining authority’s

determination shall not constitute a like

finding by the designated self-regulatory

organization.

* * * * *

Issued in Washington D.C. on May 25,

2000 by the Commission.

Jean A. Webb,

Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 00–13606 Filed 6–1–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6351–01–U

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 180

[OPP–300976; FRL–6491–9]

RIN 2070–AB78

Methyl Parathion; Notice of Proposed

Tolerance Revocations and Channels

of Trade Provision Guidance

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: This document proposes to

revoke the tolerances for the insecticide

methyl parathion on the following

commodities: apples, artichokes, beets

(greens alone), beets (with or without

tops), birdsfoot trefoil forage, birdsfoot

trefoil hay, broccoli, Brussels sprouts,

carrots, cauliflower, celery, cherries,

collards, grapes, kale, lentils, kohlrabi,

lettuce, mustard greens, nectarines,

peaches, pears, plums (fresh prunes),

rutabagas (with or without tops),

rutabaga tops, spinach, tomatoes,

turnips (with or without tops), turnip

greens, vegetables leafy Brassica (cole),

and vetch. Additionally, EPA proposes

to amend the following tolerances:

beans (amend to beans, dried), peas

(amend to peas, dried) so that methyl

parathion is not used on succulent

beans and peas. Note that methyl

parathion may still be used on lentils;

however, residues on lentils are covered

by the tolerance for peas, dried. Foods

legally treated with methyl parathion

may continue to be marketed under the

provisions of the Federal Food, Drug,

and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA). The

regulatory actions proposed in this

document are part of the Agency’s

reregistration program under the Federal

Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide

Act (FIFRA), and the tolerance

reassessment requirements of the

FFDCA. By law, EPA is required to

reassess 66% of the tolerances in

existence on August 2, 1996, by August

2002, or about 6,400 tolerances. These

tolerances were established under

section 408 of the FFDCA, 21 U.S.C.

346a. EPA is proposing to revoke these

tolerances because the Agency has

canceled the pesticide registrations

under FIFRA, 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.,

associated with them. EPA encourages

you to comment on the tolerance

revocations and on the proposed time

frame for tolerance revocation.

The Food and Drug Administration

(FDA) in a related notice published

elsewhere in this issue of the Federal

Register is announcing the availability

of a proposed guidance document

presenting FDA’s policy on its planned

enforcement approach for foods

containing methyl parathion residues.

This guidance will assist firms in

understanding the types of showing

under 408(1)(5) of the FFDCA

(hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘channels

of trade provision’’) that FDA may find

satisfactory in accordance with its

planned enforcement approach for such

section. EPA and FDA are cooperating

on this effort. FDA will be asking for

comment on this proposed guidance

and EPA also encourages you to

comment on this guidance.

DATES: Comments, identified by the

docket control number [OPP–300976],

must be received on or before August 1,

2000.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be

submitted by mail, electronically, or in

person. Please follow the detailed

instructions for each method as

provided in Unit I. of the

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of

this proposed rule. Be sure to identify

docket number OPP–300976.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Laura Parsons, Special Review and

Reregistration Division (7508C), Office

of Pesticide Programs, Environmental

Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460.

Office location: CM #2, 6th floor, 1921

Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA,

telephone: (703) 305–5776; e-mail:

parsons.laura@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does This Action Apply to Me?

You may be affected by this action if

you sell, distribute, manufacture, or use

pesticides for agricultural applications,

process food, distribute or sell food, or

implement governmental pesticide

regulations. Potentially affected

categories and entities may include, but

are not limited to the following:

35308 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 107 / Friday, June 2, 2000 / Proposed Rules

Categories NAICS

codes

Examples of potentially affected

entities

Industry 111 Crop production

112 Animal production

311 Food manufacturing

32532 Pesticide manufacturing

Agricultural

Stakeholders

Growers/Agricultural Workers,

Contractors

(Certified/Commercial Applicators, Handlers,

Advisors, etc.),

Commercial

Processors,

Pesticide Manufacturers, User

Groups, Food

Consumers

Food DistributorsWholesale Contractors, Retail

Vendors, Commercial Traders/

Importers

Inter governmental StakeholdersState, Local, and/

or Tribal Government Agencies

Foreign EntitiesGovernments,

Growers, Trade

Groups, Exporters

This listing is not exhaustive, but is

a guide to entities likely to be affected

by this action. The North American

Industrial Classification System

(NAICS) codes will assist you in

determining whether this action applies

to you. If you have 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 Additional

Information, Including Copies of This

Document and Other Related

Documents?

1. Electronically. You may obtain

electronic copies of this document, and

certain other related documents that

might be available electronically, from

the EPA Internet Home Page at http://

www.epa.gov/. To access this

document, on the Home Page select

‘‘Laws and Regulations’’ and then look

up the entry for this document under

the ‘‘Federal Register-Environmental

Documents.’’ You can also go directly to

the Federal Register listings at http://

www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/.

2. In person. The Agency has

established an official record for this

action under docket control number

OPP–300976. The official record

consists of the documents specifically

referenced in this action, any public

comments received during an applicable

comment period, and other information

related to this action, including any

information claimed as Confidential

Business Information (CBI). This official

record includes the documents that are

physically located in the docket, as well

as the documents that are referenced in

those documents. The public version of

the official record does not include any

information claimed as CBI. The public

version of the official record, which

includes printed, paper versions of any

electronic comments submitted during

an applicable comment period, is

available for inspection in the Public

Information and Records Integrity

Branch (PIRIB), Rm. 119, Crystal Mall

#2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy.,

Arlington, VA, from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.,

Monday through Friday, excluding legal

holidays. The PIRIB telephone number

is (703) 305–5805.

C. How and to Whom Do I Submit

Comments?

You may submit comments through

the mail, in person, or electronically. To

ensure proper receipt by EPA, it is

imperative that you identify docket

control number OPP–300976 in the

subject line on the first page of your

response.

1. By mail. Submit your comments to:

Public Information and Records

Integrity Branch (PIRIB), Information

Resources and Services Division

(7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs

(OPP), Environmental Protection

Agency, 401 M St., SW., Washington,

DC 20460.

2. In person or by courier. Deliver

your comments to: Public Information

and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB),

Information Resources and Services

Division (7502C), Office of Pesticide

Programs (OPP), Environmental

Protection Agency, Rm. 119, Crystal

Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy.,

Arlington, VA. The PIRIB is open from

8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through

Friday, excluding legal holidays. The

PIRIB telephone number is (703) 305–

5805.

3. Electronically. You may submit

your comments electronically by e-mail

to: ‘‘opp-docket@epa.gov,’’ or you can

submit a computer disk as described

above. Do not submit any information

electronically that you consider to be

CBI. Avoid the use of special characters

and any form of encryption. Electronic

submissions will be accepted in

WordPerfect 6.1/8.0 or ASCII file

format. All comments in electronic form

must be identified by docket control

number OPP–300976. Electronic

comments may also be filed online at

many Federal Depository Libraries.

D. How Should I Handle CBI That I

Want to Submit to the Agency?

Do not submit any information

electronically that you consider to be

CBI. You may claim information that

you submit to EPA in response to this

document as CBI by marking any part or

all of that information as CBI.

Information so marked will not be

disclosed except in accordance with

procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.

In addition to one complete version of

the comment that includes any

information claimed as CBI, a copy of

the comment that does not contain the

information claimed as CBI must be

submitted for inclusion in the public

version of the official record.

Information not marked confidential

will be included in the public version

of the official record without prior

notice. If you have any questions about

CBI or the procedures for claiming CBI,

please consult the person listed under

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

E. What Should I Consider as I Prepare

My Comments for EPA?

You may find the following

suggestions helpful for preparing your

comments:

1. Explain your views as clearly as

possible.

2. Describe any assumptions that you

used.

3. Provide copies of any technical

information and/or data you used that

support your views.

4. If you estimate potential burden or

costs, explain how you arrived at the

estimate that you provide.

5. Provide specific examples to

illustrate your concerns.

6. Offer alternative ways to improve

the proposed rule or collection activity.

7. Make sure to submit your

comments by the deadline in this

document.

8. To ensure proper receipt by EPA,

be sure to identify the docket control

number assigned to this action in the

subject line on the first page of your

response. You may also provide the

name, date, and Federal Register

citation.

II. Background

A. General

In August 1999, the methyl parathion

registrants submitted requests to

voluntarily cancel registration of

products containing methyl parathion

for certain uses as the result of an

agreement reached between EPA and

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 107 / Friday, June 2, 2000 / Proposed Rules 35309

the registrants. Given the risks

associated with use of methyl parathion

under the existing terms and conditions

of use, EPA granted the requests for

voluntary cancellation. In the Federal

Register of October 27, 1999 (64 FR

57877) (FRL–6387–8), EPA published a

notice announcing the cancellation of

all methyl parathion uses on fruits and

most uses on vegetables. The notice of

voluntary cancellation, the date of

allowable use, and the intent to revoke

the methyl parathion tolerances were

widely publicized. The U.S. Department

of Agriculture (USDA) sent notification

to our trading partners through the

World Trade Organization notification

procedures. EPA also notified the

regulatory authorities in over 145

countries as per FIFRA 17(b). For the

canceled crops, use of existing stocks of

methyl parathion was allowed until

December 31, 1999.

On August 2, 1999, the EPA

Administrator stated that while the

current food supply is safe, the

cancellation of certain uses of methyl

parathion makes the food supply safer.

This action is part of EPA’s overall effort

to reduce risks to the food supply under

the Congressional mandate imposed by

the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA).

B. What Action Is The Agency Taking?

After consultation with FDA, USDA

and stakeholders, EPA is proposing to

revoke the tolerances for the insecticide

methyl parathion on the following

commodities: apples, artichokes, beets

(greens alone), beets (with or without

tops), birdsfoot trefoil forage, birdsfoot

trefoil hay, broccoli, Brussels sprouts,

carrots, cauliflower, celery, cherries,

collards, grapes, kale, kohlrabi, lentils,

lettuce, mustard greens, nectarines,

peaches, pears, plums (fresh prunes),

rutabagas (with or without tops),

rutabaga tops, spinach, tomatoes,

turnips (with or without tops), turnip

greens, vegetables leafy Brassica (cole),

and vetch. Additionally, EPA proposes

to amend the following tolerances:

beans (amend to beans, dried), peas

(amend to peas, dried) so that methyl

parathion is not used on succulent

beans and peas. Note that methyl

parathion may still be used on lentils;

however, residues on lentils are covered

by the tolerance for peas, dried, and

therefore, the tolerance on lentils is

proposed for revocation because it is

unnecessary.

C. Why Is This Action Being Proposed?

Under FFDCA section 408(l)(2), if

EPA cancels each FIFRA registration for

the use of a pesticide on a food ‘‘due in

whole or in part to dietary risks to

humans posed by residues of that

pesticide chemical on food,’’ EPA is

required to revoke any tolerance or

exemption that in connection with the

canceled use allows residues of the

pesticide on food. This provision

imposes a mandatory duty on EPA.

Once EPA cancels a FIFRA use due to

dietary risks, EPA must revoke the

associated tolerances and exemptions.

Under 408(l)(5), foods legally treated

prior to the use cancellation may

continue to be marketed.

On August 2, 1999, EPA completed a

refined risk assessment of methyl

parathion as part of the tolerance

reassessment program under section

408(q) of the FFDCA. This dietary risk

assessment was based on residues of

methyl parathion detected in some

foods from USDA’s Pesticide Data

Program which monitors for pesticides

in certain foods at the distribution

points just before release to

supermarkets and grocery stores. The

assessment was conducted applying an

additional 10-fold safety factor to

increase the margin of safety as

mandated by FQPA. That refined risk

assessment showed acute dietary risks

from methyl parathion in food above the

EPA’s level of concern (Revised Human

Health Risk Assessment for Methyl

Parathion, August 1999). The

registrants’ request for cancellation was

in response to potential Agency action

to revoke the tolerances and cancel the

registrations because of dietary risk, and

thus the cancellation action was ‘‘due in

whole or part to dietary risks to humans

posed by residues of that pesticide

chemical on food.’’ Accordingly, under

section 408(l)(2), the above-described

tolerances must be revoked.

On October 27, 1999, EPA published

a notice in the Federal Register (64 FR

57877) announcing the cancellation of

multiple FIFRA registered uses

including those commodities for which

tolerance revocation has been proposed

in the document.

Although this cancellation notice was

requested by the methyl parathion

registrants, the cancellation closely

followed, and in EPA’s view, was

precipitated by EPA’s determination

that aggregate exposure to methyl

parathion exceeded the revised, more

stringent safety standard under the

FQPA.

D. What Is the Agency’s Authority for

Taking This Action?

A ‘‘tolerance’’ represents the

maximum level for residues of pesticide

chemicals legally allowed in or on raw

agricultural commodities and processed

foods. Section 408 of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C.

346a, as amended by the FQPA of 1996,

Public Law 104–170, authorizes the

establishment of tolerances, exemptions

from tolerance requirements,

modifications in tolerances, and

revocation of tolerances for residues of

pesticide chemicals in or on raw

agricultural commodities and processed

foods. Without a tolerance or

exemption, food containing pesticide

residues is considered to be unsafe and

therefore ‘‘adulterated’’ under section

402(a) of the FFDCA. 21 U.S.C. 342(a).

FFDCA section 301 prohibits, among

other things, introduction or delivery for

introduction into interstate commerce of

any adulterated food. 21 U.S.C. 331(a).

For a food-use pesticide to be sold and

distributed, the pesticide must be

registered under section 3, section 5, or

section 18 of FIFRA (7 U.S.C. et seq.)

Food-use pesticides not registered in the

United States may have tolerances for

residues of such pesticides in or on

commodities imported into the United

States.

Monitoring and enforcement of

pesticide tolerances and exemptions are

carried out by the FDA and the USDA.

This includes monitoring for pesticide

residues in or on commodities imported

into the United States.

E. When Do These Actions Become

Effective?

Under FFDCA section 408(l)(2),

revocations required by that provision

must take place not later than 180 days

after the date such cancellation takes

effect or the date on which the use of

the canceled pesticide becomes

unlawful under the terms of the

cancellation, whichever is later. The

date for the cancellation of the FIFRA

registrations for the affected methyl

parathion uses is October 27, 1999. Use

of methyl parathion on the affected

crops became unlawful on December 31,

1999.

EPA intends to finalize this action as

quickly as possible after consideration

of comments. The tolerance revocation

is proposed to be effective on the date

of final publication.

F. Will Food Treated Prior to the Last

Lawful Date of Application Be Permitted

to Clear the Channels of Trade?

Any commodities listed in the

regulatory text of this document that are

treated with the methyl parathion, and

that are in the channels of trade

following the tolerance revocations,

shall be subject to FFDCA section

408(l)(5), as established by the FQPA.

Under this section, any residue of

methyl parathion in or on such

commodities shall not render the

commodities adulterated so long as it is

shown to the satisfaction of FDA that:

35310 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 107 / Friday, June 2, 2000 / Proposed Rules

1. The residue is present as the result

of an application or use of the pesticide

at a time and in a manner that was

lawful under FIFRA.

2. The residue does not exceed the

level that was authorized at the time of

the application or use to be present on

the food under a tolerance or exemption

from a tolerance. The channels of trade

provision allows for the orderly

marketing of foods that may currently

contain legal residues resulting from

lawful applications of methyl parathion.

Use of methyl parathion as to the

canceled uses became unlawful under

FIFRA on December 31, 1999, the last

date on which use of existing stocks was

permitted. Although application of

methyl parathion outside the United

States is outside the scope of the

limitation on use of existing stocks and

thus is not per se prohibited after

December 31, 1999, EPA considers

commodities with residues resulting

from application outside the U.S. after

that date not to be subject to the

channels of trade provision in 408(l)(5).

Therefore, both domestic and foreign

commodities treated subsequent to

December 31, 1999, would not be

present as the result of an application or

use of the pesticide at a time and in a

manner that was lawful under FIFRA,

and thus, would not comply with the

channels of trade provision.

FDA is announcing, elsewhere in this

issue of the Federal Register, the

availability of proposed guidance

document on how it plans to enforce

FFDCA section 408(l)(5) for both

domestic and imported commodities.

FDA will invite comment on this draft

guidance before issuing any final

guidance. EPA encourages all interested

parties to comment on FDA’s draft

guidance.

G. May Interested Persons Comment on

This Proposal?

Yes. EPA is requesting comment on

this proposal. In particular, EPA

requests comment on the following

issues:

1. Under FQPA, EPA indentified

dietary risk from certain uses of methyl

parathion. In light of this risk, the

methyl parathion registrants proposed

voluntary cancellation of certain uses

under the August 2, 1999 Memorandum

of Agreement. EPA interprets 408(l)(2)

of the FFDCA which calls for tolerance

revocation within 180 days of final use

to apply to both cancellations effected

through FIFRA 6(f) (voluntary action by

a registrant) and those effected through

FIFRA 6(b) (an Agency initiated

cancellation action). The Agency seeks

comment on the application of 408(l)(2)

to voluntarily initiated cancellations.

2. Are there any alternate approaches

within the legal confines of the FFDCA

for avoiding any potential problems to

commerce or trade caused by revocation

of these tolerances subject to the

channels of trade provision?

3. EPA is also providing the

opportunity to comment on the methyl

parathion registrants requests to cancel

various methyl parathion uses. See Unit

IV.

H. What Can I Do If I Wish the Agency

to Maintain a Tolerance That the

Agency Is Proposing to Revoke?

Given the language of section 408(l)(2)

and the dietary risks posed by these

uses and tolerances for methyl

parathion, EPA does not believe that

these tolerances can be maintained in

compliance with FFDCA. However, any

person may petition EPA to establish

new tolerances. Petitioners should

consult EPA regulations and guidance

on the necessary data and information

to support tolerance petitions.

I. What Is the Contribution to Tolerance

Reassessment?

By law, EPA is required to reassess

66% or about 6,400 of the tolerances in

existence on August 2, 1996, by August

2002. EPA is also required to assess the

remaining tolerances by August 2006.

As of April 25, 2000, EPA has assessed

over 3,471 tolerances. This document

proposes to revoke 30 methyl parathion

tolerances; however, 27 of these 30

tolerances are expressed as parathion

which may be either ethyl parathion or

methyl parathion and 3 of the 30

tolerances are methyl parathion alone.

Therefore, 3 tolerances will be counted

among reassessments made toward the

August 2002 review deadline of FFDCA

section 408(q), as amended by FQPA in

1996.

III. Are the Proposed Actions

Consistent With International

Obligations?

The tolerance revocations in this

proposal are not discriminatory and are

designed to ensure that both

domestically-produced and imported

foods meet the food safety standards

established by the FFDCA. The same

food safety standards apply to

domestically-produced and imported

foods. In addition, EPA is proposing to

revoke these tolerances because it

received voluntary requests to cancel

the related methyl parathion

registrations which was precipitated by

EPA’s risk assessment showing dietary

risks from methyl parathion.

EPA is working to ensure that the U.S.

tolerance reassessment program under

FQPA does not disrupt international

trade. EPA considers Codex Maximum

Residue Limits (MRLs) in setting U.S.

tolerances and in reassessing them.

MRLs are established by the Codex

Committee on Pesticide Residues, a

committee within the Codex

Alimentarius Commission, an

international organization formed to

promote the coordination of

international food standards. It is EPA’s

policy to harmonize U.S. tolerances

with Codex MRLs to the extent possible,

provided that the MRLs achieve the

level of protection required under

FFDCA. EPA’s effort to harmonize with

Codex MRLs is summarized in the

tolerance reassessment section of

individual Reregistration Eligibility

Decision documents. The U.S. EPA has

developed guidance concerning

submissions for import tolerance

support. This guidance will be made

available to interested persons.

IV. Request for Comment on the

Request for Cancellation of the Methyl

Parathion Registrations

In a Memorandum of Agreement

effective August 2, 1999, all registrants

of products containing methyl parathion

agreed to request cancellation of their

registrations for use of methyl parathion

on all fruits, many vegetables, and all

non-food and non-feed uses. Those

requests for cancellation were received

shortly thereafter, and EPA published a

notice in the Federal Register

announcing those requests and

accepting them (64 FR 57877). That

notice informed the public of how it

could comment on the request for

cancellation but also stated that EPA

was waiving the comment period and

approving the cancellation request upon

the date of publication of the notice.

Several parties have filed an action

against the Agency claiming that EPA

unlawfully did not allow comment on

the request for cancellation of methyl

parathion. Actually, EPA provided

several opportunities for comment

concerning methyl parathion.

Comments on the risk assessment were

provided by several parties. After

considering these comments and

reaching agreement with the methyl

parathion registrants, EPA released its

revised risk assessment of methyl

parathion to the public on August 3,

1999. A small number of comments

were received on this revised

assessment which did not alter the risk

conclusions. Additionally, no comments

were submitted on the Federal Register

notice announcing receipt and

acceptance of the cancellation requests.

Nonetheless, to assure that all affected

parties have an opportunity to comment

on the methyl parathion cancellations,

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 107 / Friday, June 2, 2000 / Proposed Rules 35311

EPA is allowing further comments on

the registrants’ requests for cancellation

of the above-referenced methyl

parathion uses. Although these

cancellation requests have already been

accepted, such comments would still be

relevant to Agency decision making.

First, such comments may influence

EPA regarding whether it is appropriate

to press forward with the proposed

tolerance revocation. If it can be shown

that EPA erred in accepting these

cancellation requests, EPA will need to

consider whether revocation of

associated tolerances is the proper

course. Second, EPA believes that one of

the primary purposes of the comment

period on cancellation requests is to

allow other parties to come forward and

seek a registration for the affected

pesticide. That opportunity still exists

and any interested party can so notify

EPA by filing a registration application.

EPA would note, however, that such

applicant would have to overcome the

risk concerns that EPA has identified

regarding methyl parathion.

V. How Do the Regulatory Assessment

Requirements Apply to This Proposed

Action?

This action is proposing to revoke

tolerances established under FFDCA

section 408. The Office of Management

and Budget (OMB) has exempted this

type of action, i.e., a tolerance

revocation for which extraordinary

circumstances do not exist, from review

under Executive Order 12866, entitled

Regulatory Planning and Review (58 FR

51735, October 4, 1993). This action

does not contain any information

collections subject to OMB approval

under the Paperwork Reduction Act

(PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., or impose

any enforceable duty or contain any

unfunded mandate as described under

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Public

Law 104–4). Nor does it require any

prior consultation as specified by

Executive Order 13084, entitled

Consultation and Coordination with

Indian Tribal Governments (63 FR

27655, May 19,1998); special

considerations as required by Executive

Order 12898, entitled Federal Actions to

Address Environmental Justice in

Minority Populations and Low-Income

Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16,

1994); or require OMB review or any

Agency action under Executive Order

13045, entitled Protection of Children

from Environmental Health Risks and

Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23,

1997). This action does not involve any

technical standards that would require

Agency consideration of voluntary

consensus standards pursuant to section

12(d) of the National Technology

Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995

(NTTAA), Public Law 104–113, section

12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). Pursuant to

the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5

U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Agency

previously assessed whether revocations

of tolerances might significantly impact

a substantial number of small entities

and concluded that, as a general matter,

these actions do not impose a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. The factual

basis and the Agency’s certification

under section 605(b) for tolerance

revocations published on December 17,

1997 (62 FR 66020), and was provided

to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the

Small Business Administration. Since

no extraordinary circumstances exist as

to the present revocation that would

change EPA’s previous analysis, the

Agency is able to reference the general

certification. Any comments about the

Agency’s determination should be

submitted to EPA along with comments

on the proposal, and will be addressed

prior to issuing a final rule.

In addition, the Agency has

determined that this action will not

have a substantial direct effect on 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, entitled

Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10,

1999). Executive Order 13132 requires

EPA to develop an accountable process

to ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input

by State and local officials in the

development of regulatory policies that

have federalism implications.’’ ‘‘Policies

that have federalism implications’’ is

defined in the Executive Order to

include regulations that 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.’’ This proposed

rule directly regulates growers, food

processors, food handlers and food

retailers, not States. This action does not

alter the relationships or distribution of

power and responsibilities established

by Congress in the preemption

provisions of FFDCA section 408(n)(4).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

Environmental protection,

Administrative practice and procedure,

Agricultural commodities, Pesticides

and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Dated: May 19, 2000.

Jack E. Housenger,

Director, Special Review and Reregistration

Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

Therefore, it is proposed that 40 CFR

part 180 be amended as follows:

PART 180—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 180

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.

2. Section 180.121 is revised to read

as follows:

§ 180.121 Parathion or its methyl homolog;

tolerances for residues.

(a) General. (1) Tolerances are

established for residues of the

insecticide parathion (O,O-Diethyl-O-pnitrophenyl thiophosphate) or its

methyl homolog in or on the following

raw agricultural commodities:

Commodity Parts per million

Alfalfa (fresh) ........................ 1.25

Alfalfa (hay) .......................... 5

Almonds ................................ 0.1

Almond hulls ......................... 3

Apricots ................................. 1

Avocados .............................. 1

Barley .................................... 1

Beans, dried ......................... 1

Beets, sugar ......................... 0.1

Beets, sugar, (tops) .............. 0.1

Blackberries .......................... 1

Blueberries (huckleberries) ... 1

Boysenberries ....................... 1

Cabbage ............................... 1

Clover ................................... 1

Corn ...................................... 1

Corn, forage .......................... 1

Cotton, seed ......................... 0.75

Cranberries ........................... 1

Cucumbers ........................... 1

Currants ................................ 1

Dates .................................... 1

Dewberries ............................ 1

Eggplants .............................. 1

Endive (escarole) .................. 1

Figs ....................................... 1

Filberts .................................. 0.1

Garlic .................................... 1

Gooseberries ........................ 1

Grass (forage) ...................... 1

Guavas ................................. 1

Hops ..................................... 1

Mangos ................................. 1

Melons .................................. 1

Mustard seed ........................ 0.2

Oats ...................................... 1

Okra ...................................... 1

Olives .................................... 1

Onions .................................. 1

Parsnips (with or without

tops) .................................. 1

Parsnip greens (alone) ......... 1

Peanuts ................................. 1

Peas, dried ........................... 1

Pea, forage ........................... 1

Pecans .................................. 0.1

Peppers ................................ 1

35312 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 107 / Friday, June 2, 2000 / Proposed Rules

Commodity Parts per million

Pineapples ............................ 1

Potatoes ................................ 0.1

Pumpkins .............................. 1

Quinces ................................. 1

Radish (with or without tops) 1

Radish (tops) ........................ 1

Rape, seed ........................... 0.2

Raspberries .......................... 1

Rice ....................................... 1

Safflower seed ...................... 0.1

Sorghum ............................... 0.1

Sorghum, fodder ................... 3

Sorghum forage .................... 3

Soybeans .............................. 0.1

Soybean hay ......................... 1

Squash .................................. 1

Strawberries .......................... 1

Summer squash ................... 1

Sunflower seed ..................... 0.2

Sweet potatoes ..................... 0.1

Swiss chard .......................... 1

Walnuts ................................. 0.1

Wheat ................................... 1

Youngberries ........................ 1

(2) Tolerances are established for

residues of the insecticide parathion

(O,O-Dimethyl-O-p-nitrophenyl

thiophosphate) the methyl homolog of

parathion in or on the following raw

agricultural commodities:

Commodity Parts per

million

Guar beans ............................... 0.2

Parsley ...................................... 1

(3) Tolerances are established for

residues of the insecticide parathion

(O,O-Dimethyl-O-p-nitrophenyl

thiophosphate) (ethyl parathion) in or

on the following raw agricultural

commodities:

Commodity Parts per

million

Apples ....................................... 1

Artichokes ................................. 1

Beet greens (alone) .................. 1

Beets (with or without tops) ...... 1

Broccoli ..................................... 1

Brussels sprouts ....................... 1

Carrots ...................................... 1

Cauliflower ................................ 1

Celery ....................................... 1

Cherries .................................... 1

Collards ..................................... 1

Grapes ...................................... 1

Kale ........................................... 1

Kohlrabi ..................................... 1

Lettuce ...................................... 1

Mustard greens ......................... 1

Nectarines ................................. 1

Peaches .................................... 1

Pears ........................................ 1

Plums (fresh prunes) ................ 1

Rutabagas (with or without

tops) ...................................... 1

Rutabaga tops .......................... 1

Spinach ..................................... 1

Commodity Parts per

million

Tomatoes .................................. 1

Turnips (with or without tops) ... 1

Turnip greens ........................... 1

Vetch ......................................... 1

(b) Section 18 emergency exemptions.

[Reserved]

(c) Tolerances with regional

registrations. [Reserved]

(d) Indirect or inadvertent residues.

[Reserved]

(e) Revoked tolerances subject to the

channel of trade provisions. The

following table lists commodities for

which methyl parathion use was

unlawful after December 31, 1999, and

the revoked tolerances. Commodities

with residues of methyl parathion

resulting from lawful use are subject to

the channels of trade provisions of

section 408(1)(5) of the FFDCA.

Commodity Parts per million

Apples ................................... 1

Artichokes ............................. 1

Beet greens (alone) .............. 1

Beets (with or without tops) .. 1

Birdsfoot trefoil (forage) ........ 1.25

Birdsfoot trefoil (hay) ............ 5

Broccoli ................................. 1

Brussels sprouts ................... 1

Carrots .................................. 1

Cauliflower ............................ 1

Celery ................................... 1

Cherries ................................ 1

Collards ................................. 1

Grapes .................................. 1

Kale ....................................... 1

Kohlrabi ................................. 1

Lettuce .................................. 1

Mustard greens ..................... 1

Nectarines ............................. 1

Peaches ................................ 1

Pears .................................... 1

Plums (fresh prunes) ............ 1

Rutabagas (with or without

tops) .................................. 1

Rutabaga tops ...................... 1

Spinach ................................. 1

Tomatoes .............................. 1

Turnips (with or without tops) 1

Turnip greens ....................... 1

Vegetables leafy Brassica

(cole) ................................. 1

Vetch ..................................... 1

[FR Doc. 00–13311 Filed 6–1–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–F

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 25

[IB Docket No. 00–99; FCC 00–186]

Availability of INTELSAT Space

Segment Capacity To Direct Access

Users

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The Federal Communications

Commission requests information and

comment on whether users or service

providers of telecommunications

services have sufficient opportunity to

access INTELSAT space segment

capacity directly from INTELSAT to

meet their service and capacity

requirements. The Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking also seeks comment on

potential Commission action should it

conclude that sufficient opportunity

does not exist for users and service

providers to access INTELSAT directly.

DATES: Submit comments on or before

June 23, 2000; submit reply comments

on or before July 6, 2000; and submit

responses to reply comments on July 11,

2000.

ADDRESSES: Office of the Secretary,

Federal Communications Commission,

445 Twelfth Street, SW, Washington, DC

20554. Comments may be filed using the

Commission’s Electronic Comment

Filing System (ECFS) or by filing paper

copies. See Electronic Filing of

Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings,

63 FR 24121 (May 1, 1998). Comments

filed through the ECFS can be sent as an

electronic file via the Internet to http:/

/www.fcc.gov/e-file/ecfs.html.

Generally, only one copy of an

electronic submission must be filed. If

multiple docket or rulemaking numbers

appear in the caption proceeding,

however, commentors must transmit

one electronic copy of the comments to

each docket or rulemaking number

referenced in the caption. In completing

the transmittal screen, commentors

should include their full name, Postal

Service mailing address, and the

applicable docket or rulemaking

number. Parties may also submit an

electronic comment by Internet e-mail.

To get filing instructions for e-mail

comments, commentors should send an

e-mail to ecfs@fcc.gov, and should

include the following words in the body

of the message, ‘‘get form<your e-mail

address>.’’ A sample form and

directions will be sent in reply.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

James Ball, 202–418–0427