36134 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices

organization (if any) the individual will

represent, and any requirements for

audiovisual equipment (e.g., overhead

projector, 35mm projector, chalkboard,

etc.) There is no limit on the length of

written comments for consideration by

the Panel, but oral statements before the

Panel are limited to approximately 5

minutes. The Agency also urges the

public to submit written comments in

lieu of oral presentations. Persons

wishing to make oral or written

statements at the meeting should

contact the persons listed under ‘‘FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT’’

and submit 30 copies of their

presentation and/or remarks to the

Panel. The Agency encourages that

written statements be submitted before

the meeting to provide Panel Members

the time necessary to consider and

review the comments.

1. By mail. You may submit a request

to: Public Information and Records

Integrity Branch (PIRIB), Information

Resources and Services Division

(7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs

(OPP), Environmental Protection

Agency, Ariel Rios Bldg., 1200

Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,

DC 20460.

2. In person or by courier. Public

Information and Records Integrity

Branch (PIRIB), Information Resources

and Services Division (7502C), Office of

Pesticide Programs (OPP),

Environmental Protection Agency, Rm.

119, CM #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 request electronically by e-mail to:

‘‘opp-docket@epa.gov.’’ Do not submit

any information electronically that you

consider to be CBI. Use WordPerfect

6.1/8.0 or ASCII file format and avoid

the use of special characters and any

form of encryption. Be sure to identify

by docket control number OPP–00664.

You may also file a request online at

many Federal Depository Libraries.

List of Subjects

Environmental protection.

Dated: June 2, 2000.

Steven Galson,

Director, Office of Science Coordination and

Policy.

[FR Doc. 00–14420 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–F

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[FRL—6711–5]

Notice of Scientific and Technological

Achievement Awards Subcommittee—

Closed Meeting

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: An ad hoc Subcommittee of

the Science Advisory Board will meet at

the U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA), Washington, DC, on June

22–23, 2000. Pursuant to section 10(d)

of the Federal Advisory Committee Act

(FACA), 5 U.S.C. app. 2, and section

(c)(6) of the Government in the

Sunshine Act, 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(6), EPA

has determined that the meeting will be

closed to the public. The purpose of the

meeting is to recommend to the

Assistant Administrator of the Office of

Research and Development (ORD) the

recipients of the Agency’s 1999

Scientific and Technological

Achievement Cash Awards. These

awards are established to honor and

recognize EPA employees who have

made outstanding contributions in the

advancement of science and technology

through their research and development

activities, as exhibited in publication of

their results in peer reviewed journals.

In making these recommendations,

including the actual cash amount of

each award, the Agency requires full

and frank advice from the Science

Advisory Board. This advice will

involve professional judgments on the

relative merits of various employees and

their respective work. Such personnel

issues, where disclosure would

constitute an unwarranted invasion of

personal privacy, are protected from

disclosure by section (c)(6) of the

Government in the Sunshine Act, 5

U.S.C. 552b(c)(6). In accordance with

the provisions of the Federal Advisory

Committee Act, minutes of the meeting

will be kept for Agency and

Congressional review.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Robert Flaak, Team Leader, Committee

Operations Staff, Science Advisory

Board (1400A), U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania

Ave, NW, Washington, DC 20460,

telephone: (202) 564–4546 or e-mail at:

flaak.robert@epa.gov.

Dated: June 1, 2000.

Carol M. Browner,

Administrator.

[FR Doc. 00–14460 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[OPP–301000; FRL–6556–1]

Cut-Roses; Request for Exception to

Worker Protection Standard’s

Prohibition of Early Entry Into

Pesticide-Treated Areas to Harvest

Roses by Hand Cutting

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of exception request;

request for comment.

SUMMARY: EPA has received a request for

an exception from some of the restricted

entry provisions of the Worker

Protection Standard for rose harvesters.

The exception would allow rose

harvesters to harvest roses by hand

before restricted entry intervals (REIs)

have expired. Roses, Inc. has submitted

a request to the Agency for a 5-year WPS

cut-rose exception similar to the terms

of a previous exception. This Notice

acknowledges receipt of Roses, Inc.’s

request and invites comment on the

request.

DATES: Comments, identified by docket

control number OPP–301000, must be

received on or before August 7, 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.’’

To ensure proper receipt by EPA, it is

imperative that you identify docket

control number OPP–301000 in the

subject line on the first page of your

response.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert I. Rose, Field and External

Affairs Division (7506C), Office of

Pesticide Programs, Environmental

Protection Agency, Ariel Rios Bldg.,

1200 Pennsylvania Ave., Washington,

DC 20460; telephone number: (703)

305–6708; fax number: (703) 308–2962;

e-mail address: rose.roberti@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 a rose producer or

harvester or pesticide manufacturer.

Potentially affected categories and

entities may include, but are not limited

to:

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36135

Categories NAICS codes Examples of potentially affected entities

Agriculture 11 Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting

Agriculture pest control services 115112 Control of rose pests and diseases

Crop harvesting 115113 Cut rose harvesting

Postharvest crop activities 115114 Reentry for management and maintenance

Agriculture production or harvesting crews 115115 Rose harvesters

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 table could

also be affected. The North American

Industrial Classification System

(NAICS) codes are provided to assist

you and others in determining whether

or not this action might apply to certain

entities. The complete NAICS codes and

descriptions are listed at: http://

www.census.gov/epcd/www/

naics.html. 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 a docket for this action

under docket control number OPP–

301000. The docket consists of

documents specifically referenced in

this action, any public comments

received during an applicable comment

period, and other information related to

this action. The public version of the

official record does not include any

information claimed as confidential

business information (CBI). The public

version of the official record including

printed paper versions of 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 Highway, Arlington, VA, from 8

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 handling by EPA, it is

imperative that you identify docket

control number OPP–301000 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, Ariel Rios Bldg., 1200

Pennsylvania Ave., 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 Highway,

Arlington, VA. The PIRIB is open from

8 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 to the address

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–301000.

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 comments 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’’ section.

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. Make sure to submit your

comments by the deadline in this

notice.

7. To ensure proper handling 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. What Action is the Agency Taking?

The Agency is announcing the receipt

of a request from Roses, Inc., of Haslett

36136 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices

Michigan, representing rose growers

throughout the U.S. for an exception to

the USEPA Worker Protection Standard

to allow early entry of workers to

harvest greenhouse grown fresh cut

roses prior to the end of pesticide

reentry intervals. The rationales

supporting this request are provided.

The Agency is providing a 60-day

period for public comment before

making a final decision.

B. WPS Background

Introduced in 1974, and revised in

1992, the Worker Protection Standard

(WPS) 40 CFR part 170, is intended to

protect agricultural workers and

pesticide handlers from risks associated

with agricultural pesticides. The WPS

covers employees working in or on

farms, forests, nurseries, and

greenhouses who perform hand-labor

operations in areas treated with

pesticides. It also applies to workers

who mix, load, apply or otherwise

handle pesticides. The WPS contains

requirements for pesticide safety

training, notification of pesticide

applications, use of personal protective

equipment (PPE), restricted entry

intervals (REIs) following pesticide

application, decontamination supplies,

and emergency medical assistance.

40 CFR 170.112 prohibits agricultural

workers from entering a pesticidetreated area during an REI. Under

specified conditions, the WPS contains

exceptions (40 CFR 170.112(b–e)) to the

general prohibition against worker entry

into treated areas during the REI.

EPA may establish exceptions under

40 CFR 170.112(e) to the WPS

provisions restricting early entry to

perform routine hand-labor tasks. The

WPS defines hand-labor as any

agricultural activity performed by hand

or with hand tools that causes a worker

to have substantial contact with treated

surfaces such as plants or soil that may

contain pesticide residues. The process

and information that must be included

in a request for exception is described

in 40 CFR 170.112(e)(1). When a request

is received, EPA issues a public notice

stating that an exception is being

considered and describes the nature of

the exception. At least 30 days is

allowed for public comment. EPA grants

or denies the exception request based on

a risk-benefit analysis as required by 40

CFR 170.112(e)(3).

C. WPS Cut-Rose Exception History

In June 1994, EPA granted a 2-year

exception to the WPS for cut rose

harvest in response to a request from the

floral industry. This exemption allowed

early entry to harvest greenhouse-grown

cut roses under certain specified

conditions. It expired on June 10, 1996.

In the spring of 1996, Roses, Inc., a rosegrower association, approached the

Agency with the need to continue the

exception. Roses, Inc. stated the

domestic cut-rose industry would not

survive economically without the

exception. After consulting with the

rose industry, EPA published a notice in

the Federal Register of October 30, 1996

(61 FR 56099) (FR–5571–8). This notice

acknowledged receipt of Roses, Inc.’s

request, described their proposal and

provided a 30-day public comment

period. On December 18, 1996, the

Agency sent a letter to the cut-rose

community announcing the WPS CutRose Exception. In the Federal Register

of October 3, 1997 (62 FR 51993) (FRL–

5599–2), the Agency announced that it

had granted a limited administrative

exemption to the 1992 WPS restrictions

on early entry into pesticide-treated

areas allowing workers to hand harvest

roses during REIs. It was effective from

December 18, 1996 until October 4,

1999.

III. Regulatory Assessment

A. Roses, Inc.’s Exception Request

Summary of request: Roses, Inc.

asserts that without an early-entry

exception allowing cut roses to be

harvested at least two times per day,

cut-rose growers will lose a significant

portion of the cash value of their crop.

The competitive market in the United

States requires that roses be cut at a

narrowly specific stage of bud

development, after which, they decrease

in value. The required twice daily

harvest is not possible when pesticides

with an REI greater than 4 hours have

been applied because the WPS earlyentry restriction eliminates the

possibility of a second harvest on the

day of pesticide treatment. For longer

reentry intervals, additional harvests on

subsequent days may also not be

possible. Roses, Inc. estimates the losses

to be as high as $35,000 per acre per

year from not being able to cut roses at

the most appropriate stage of bud

development due to pesticide REI

requirements. The fresh cut-rose

industry competes with roses imported

from countries where labor costs are

often less per day than a U.S. grower’s

pay per hour. Roses, Inc. states growers

have not moved to alternative methods

of crop pest and disease protection

because reliable, safe, proven pest

management controls are not yet in the

market. Those that are available are

typically more costly than conventional

chemical pesticide programs and not as

effective.

Considering the specific harvest and

pest and disease control requirements of

the crop, the need for a cosmetically

perfect rose and competitive market

pressure from imports, Roses, Inc.

asserts that an early-entry exception to

the WPS is essential to the cut-roses

industry. Without it, the loss of roses

would be more than rose flower

producers could economically

withstand.

Exemption usage: Roses, Inc.

surveyed those cut-rose growers that

had not registered to use the most recent

exemption to determine their reasons.

Twenty survey response forms were

returned. Each response had one or

more reasons for not registering to use

the exemption. Eleven indicated they

were making a tight bud cut and harvest

before each spray application and did

not enter before the expiration of the

REI. Eight said they did not need the

exception because they have a local

market that will accept roses that are

more open than would be accepted in

traditional markets. Five reported they

would rather suffer the loss of roses too

far open to market or accept a lower

price for open roses than use the

exception. Eighteen also indicated they

spray 12-hour REI (or less) pesticides at

night and harvest in the morning when

the REI has expired.

Exemption terms proposed by Roses,

Inc: Roses, Inc. is proposing a further

exception to the WPS to allow trained

workers to enter a pesticide-treated

greenhouse to harvest roses under

certain conditions before the end of the

REI. Roses, Inc. proposes the following

conditions.

All growers who wish to use the

exception would be required to register

for the exemption with EPA. Roses, Inc.

proposes that the appropriate form be

filed with Roses, Inc. Roses Inc. would

consolidate the forms and transmit them

to EPA. Exemption would be granted

only to growers that are members of

Roses, Inc.

The exemption would last 5 years.

Roses, Inc. proposes that the first 2 years

of the exception have the same

conditions as the current exception

followed by a planned phaseout in years

3, 4, and 5. The third year of the

exception would limit rose harvest

before the end of the pesticide REI to

only those harvest periods just prior to

major floral holidays such as Mother’s

Day, Valentine’s Day, Easter, Christmas,

and New Year’s and other recognized

floral holidays. The frequency of use

would be limited at other times of the

year to no more than once every 2

weeks. Individual growers would be

required to submit a statement to Roses,

Inc. explaining their need for the

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 7, 2000 / Notices 36137

exemption to justify its use during the

4th year of the exemption. Roses, Inc.

would consolidate these statements and

submit them to the Agency. An

individual statement of need would

continue to be required during the 5th

year of the exemption. The exemption

would terminate at the end of its 5th

year.

Roses, Inc. bases its exception request

on the following proposed conditions.

There is continued development of IPM

programs that include effective and

economic predator and parasite

biological control agents for the rose

greenhouse industry during the

proposed 5 years of the exemption.

There is also continued development

and registration of effective short REI

pesticides for this industry during this

time. An annual review of the exception

and the industry’s progress toward

phasing out the exception would be

conducted by Roses, Inc. and the

Agency. There is continued EPA

support of the Rose Exception Advisory

Workgroup. The Food Quality

Protection Act will not negatively

impact the cut-rose industry because of

mitigation measures or suspensions

based on aggregate and cumulative risk

assessments. Increasing foreign imports

will not be priced so low that individual

growers cannot afford transition to new

insect and disease control agents and

products that facilitate optimal

harvesting procedures. The National

Institute for Occupational Safety and

Health study on risk to early-entry

workers in the rose greenhouse does not

produce significant adverse effects data

on early entry after pesticide use or

other adverse pesticide effects in floral

greenhouses.

B. Agency Assessment, Concerns, and

Opinion

Under CFR 40 170.112, (e) Exception

requiring Agency approval—(1)

Requesting an exception, the following

information must be submitted to the

Agency for an exception to be

considered:

(i) The name, address and telephone

number of the submitter.

(ii) The time period for which the

exception is requested.

(iii) A description of the crop(s) and

specific crop production tasks for which the

exception is requested.

(iv) A description of the geographic area for

which the exception is requested.

(v) An explanation as to why, for each

requested crop-task combination, alternative

practices would not be technically or

financially viable. This information should

include estimates or data on a per acre

revenue and cost of production for the crop

and area for which the exception is

requested. These estimates or data should

include: the situation prior to

implementation of this final rule, the

situation after implementation of this final

rule if the exception is not granted, the

situation after implementation of this final

rule if the exception is granted, and specific

information on individual factors which

cause differences in revenues and costs

among the three situations.

(vi) A description or documentation of the

safety and feasibility of such an exception,

including, but not limited to, the feasibility

of performing the necessary hand labor

activity while wearing the personal

protective equipment required for early entry

for the pesticide(s) expected to be applied,

the means of mitigating heat-related illness

concerns, the period of time required daily

per worker to perform the hand labor

activity, any suggested methods of reducing

the worker’s exposure, and any other

mitigating factors such as the availability of

running water for routine and emergency

decontamination and mechanical devices

that would reduce the workers’ contact with

the treated surfaces.

The information should include the

costs associated with early-entry, such

as decontamination facilities, special

information and training for the

workers, heat stress avoidance

procedures, and provision, inspection,

cleaning, and maintenance of PPE. EPA

will not grant exceptions where the

costs of early entry equal or exceed the

expected loss in value of crop yield or

quality.

Since receipt of Roses, Inc.’s request

for an exception, the Agency has been

discussing the content with Roses, Inc.

and within the Agency to better

understand and supplement the request

with other information. Even though the

request remains incomplete, the Agency

has chosen to publish this notice of

receipt and would like public comment

prior to making a decision on the

request.

The petition by Roses, Inc. does not

adequately address the information

requirements regarding specific

information on individual factors which

cause differences in revenues and costs.

The petition also did not provide the

information required regarding the

means of mitigating heat-related illness

concerns, the period of time required

daily per worker to perform the hand

labor activity, and the costs associated

with early-entry as stated above.

The Agency would also like to

consider a narrower exception request,

such as one confined to specific

pesticide products, time, pest or

infestations where risks and benefits can

be better defined. This would allow for

an exception with potentially less risk

for workers because of less frequent

exposure.

C. Comments Solicited

The Agency is interested in a full

range of comments and information on

this exception request. The Agency

particularly welcomes comments

supported by information that would

help establish the economic need for the

exception in light of the significant

number of rose growers that continue

production without it, the appropriate

group to administer or manage the

exception since Roses Inc. has proposed

to administer several aspects such as

grower registration, justification of need,

limitation of eligibility to use an

exception to Roses, Inc. membership,

and pesticide exposure risks to workers

from allowing early entry for harvesting.

Data and information that will assist

worker and harvester risk assessment

and adverse incident reports are of

particular need. Through public

comment, the Agency is seeking

information to further improve the riskbenefit analysis. Individuals are

encouraged to provide comments on all

or any portions of the information

sought by the Agency.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 170

Environmental protection,

Administrative practice and procedure,

Occupational safety and health,

Pesticides and pests, Roses.

Dated: May 23, 2000.

Marcia E. Mulkey,

Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.

[FR Doc. 00–14322 Filed 6–6–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–F

FEDERAL EMERGENCY

MANAGEMENT AGENCY

Agency Information Collection

Activities: Proposed Collection;

Comment Request

ACTION: Notice and request for

comments.

SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency

Management Agency (FEMA), as part of

its continuing effort to reduce

paperwork and respondent burden,

invites the general public and other

Federal agencies to take this

opportunity to comment on proposed

new information collections. In

accordance with the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.

3506(c)(2)(A)), this notice seeks

comments concerning implementation

of Project Impact Baseline and Progress

Reports in Project Impact communities.

These reports will provide data, both

narrative and quantitative, for assessing