### 41348 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 135 / Friday, July 13, 2012 / Proposed Rules

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

This proposed rule establishes a tolerance under FFDCA section 408(d) in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from review under Executive Order 12866, entitled ‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review’’ (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this proposed rule has been exempted from review under Executive Order 12866 due to its lack of significance, this proposed rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This proposed rule 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) (Pub. L. 104–4). Nor does it require any special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled ‘‘Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations’’ (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994); or 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 hereby certifies that these proposed tolerances will not have significant negative economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Establishing an a pesticide tolerance or an exemption from the requirement of a pesticide tolerance is, in effect, the removal of a regulatory restriction on pesticide residues in food and thus such an action will not have any negative economic impact on any entities, including small entities. 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). For these same reasons, the Agency has determined that this proposed rule does not have any ‘‘tribal implications’’ as described in Executive Order 13175, entitled ‘‘Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). Executive Order 13175, requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have tribal implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have tribal implications’’ is defined in the Executive order to include regulations that have ‘‘substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and the Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.’’ This proposed rule will not have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, 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 in Executive Order 13175. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this proposed rule.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Dated: July 5, 2012. G. Jeffrey Herndon, Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

Therefore, it is proposed that 40 CFR chapter I 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 180.662 the table in paragraph (a) is amended by:

i. Revising the entry for ‘‘Hog,Kidney’’ to read ‘‘Hog, meatbyproducts’’,

ii. Revising the tolerance levels for ‘‘Wheat, forage’’ and ‘‘Wheat, middlings’’, and

iii. Alphabetically adding ‘‘Barley, bran’’; ‘‘Sugarcane, molasses’’; and ‘‘Wheat, bran process’’.

The amendments read as follows:

**§ 180.662 Trinexapac-ethyl; tolerances for residues.** 

(a) * * *

Commodity Parts per million

Barley, bran .............................. 2 .5

* * * * * Hog, meat by-products ............. 0 .03

* * * * * Sugarcane, molasses ............... 2 .5 Wheat, bran process ................ 6 .0 Wheat, forage ........................... 1 .0

* * * * * Wheat, middlings ...................... 10 .5

* * * * *

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2012–17143 Filed 7–12–12; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Parts 271 and 272**

**[EPA–R06–RCRA–2012–0411; FRL–9694–6]**

**Louisiana: Final Authorization of State Initiated Changes and Incorporation by**  **Reference of State Hazardous Waste Management Program** 

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Proposed rule.

**SUMMARY :**  During a review of Louisiana’s regulations, EPA identified a variety of State-initiated changes to Louisiana’s hazardous waste program


### 41349 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 135 / Friday, July 13, 2012 / Proposed Rules

under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, as amended (RCRA), for which the State had not previously sought authorization. EPA proposes to authorize the State for the program changes. In addition, EPA proposes to codify in the regulations entitled ‘‘Approved State Hazardous Waste Management Programs’’, Louisiana’s authorized hazardous waste program. The EPA will incorporate by reference into the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) those provisions of the State regulations that are authorized and that EPA will enforce under RCRA.

**DATES :**  Send written comments by August 13, 2012.

**ADDRESSES :**  Send written comments to Alima Patterson, Region 6, Regional Authorization Coordinator, or Julia Banks, Codification Coordinator (6PD– O), Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division at the address shown below. You can examine copies of the materials that form the basis for this authorization and incorporation by reference during normal business hours at the following location: EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733, phone number (214) 665–6533 or (214) 665–8178. You may also submit comments electronically or through hand delivery/courier; please follow the detailed instructions in the **ADDRESSES** section of the direct final rule which is located in the Rules section of this Federal Register

. **FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Alima Patterson or Julia Banks at (214) 665–8533 or (214) 665–8178.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  In the ‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ section of this Federal Register , the EPA is authorizing the changes to the Louisiana program, and codifying and incorporating by reference the State’s hazardous waste program as a direct final rule. The EPA did not make a proposal prior to the direct final rule because we believe these actions are not controversial and do not expect comments that oppose them. We have explained the reasons for this authorization and incorporation by reference in the preamble to the direct final rule. Unless we get written comments which oppose this authorization and incorporation by reference during the comment period, the direct final rule will become effective on the date it establishes, and we will not take further action on this proposal. If we get comments that oppose these actions, we will withdraw the direct final rule and it will not take effect. We will then respond to public comments in a later final rule based on this proposal. You may not have another opportunity for comment. If you want to comment on this action, you must do so at this time. For additional information, please see the immediate final rule published in the ‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ section of this Federal Register

.

Authority: This action is issued under the authority of sections 2002(a), 3006, and 7004(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6926, and 6974(b).

Dated: June 15, 2012.
Samuel Coleman, Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region

6.
[FR Doc. 2012–16827 Filed 7–12–12; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**