Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 90 / Monday, May 11, 1998 /Rules and Regulations 25775

certify that the rule will not have a

significant impact on a substantial

number of small entities. Small entities

include small businesses, small not-forprofit enterprises, and government

entities with jurisdiction over

populations of less than 50,000.

The SIP approvals under section 110

and subchapter I, part D of the Act do

not create any new requirements but

simply approve requirements that the

State is already imposing. Therefore,

because the Federal SIP approval does

not impose any new requirements, I

certify that it does not have a significant

impact on any small entities affected.

Moreover, due to the nature of the

Federal-State relationship under the

Act, preparation of a flexibility analysis

would constitute Federal inquiry into

the economic reasonableness of State

action. The Act forbids the EPA to base

its actions concerning SIPs on such

grounds. See Union Electric Co. v. U.S.

EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255–66 (1976); 42

U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).

C. Unfunded Mandates

Under section 202 of the Unfunded

Mandates Reform Act of 1995, signed

into law on March 22, 1995, EPA must

prepare a budgetary impact statement to

accompany any proposed or final rule

that includes a Federal mandate that

may result in estimated costs to State,

local, or tribal governments in the

aggregate; or to private sector, of $100

million or more. Under section 205,

EPA must select the most cost-effective

and least burdensome alternative that

achieves the objectives of the rule and

is consistent with statutory

requirements. Section 203 requires EPA

to establish a plan for informing and

advising any small governments that

may be significantly or uniquely

impacted by the rule.

The EPA has determined that the

approval action promulgated does not

include a Federal mandate that may

result in estimated costs of $100 million

or more to either State, local, or tribal

governments in the aggregate, or to the

private sector. This Federal action

approves preexisting requirements

under State or local law, and imposes

no new requirements. Accordingly, no

additional costs to State, local, or tribal

governments, or to the private sector,

result from this action.

D. Submission to Congress and the

Comptroller General

The Congressional Review Act, 5

U.S.C. 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. Section 804,

however, exempts from section 801 the

following types of rules: rules of

particular applicability; rules relating to

agency management or personnel; and

rules of agency organization, procedure,

or practice that do not substantially

affect the rights or obligations of nonagency parties. 5 U.S.C. 804(3). The EPA

is not required to submit a rule report

regarding today’s action under section

801 because this is a rule of particular

applicability.

E. Petitions for Judicial Review

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Act,

petitions for judicial review of this

action must be filed in the United States

Court of Appeals for the appropriate

circuit by July 10, 1998. 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,

Incorporation by reference,

Intergovernmental relations, Ozone,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Volatile organic

compounds.

Note: Incorporation by reference of the SIP

for the State of Louisiana was approved by

the Director of the Federal Register on July

1, 1982.

Dated: April 23, 1998.

Lynda F. Carroll,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.

Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code

of Federal Regulations is amended as

follows:

PART 52—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation of part 52

continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart T—Louisiana

2. Section 52.970 is amended by

adding paragraphs (c)(79) to read as

follows:

§ 52.970 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(79) Site-specific revision to the 15%

Rate-of-Progress plan submitted by the

Governor in a letter dated December 20,

1997. The revision provides for a

schedule extension for installation of

guide pole sliding cover gaskets on 33

external floating roof tanks located at

the Baton Rouge refinery of Exxon

Company U.S.A.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

Letters dated July 17, 1997, and

September 12, 1997, from the LDEQ to

Exxon Company U.S.A. approving the

compliance date extension; which are

included in the State Implementation

Plan submittal entitled, ‘‘Summary of

15% Rate-of-Progress State

Implementation Plan Revision,’’ dated

December 20, 1997.

(ii) Additional material.

(A) Letter from the Governor of

Louisiana dated December 20, 1997,

transmitting a copy of the State

Implementation Plan revision.

(B) Letters dated November 13, 1996;

May 14, 1997; and July 3, 1997; from

Exxon Company U.S.A. to the LDEQ

requesting the compliance date

extension and including a list of the

subject tanks, the date of the next

maintenance downtime, and emissions

estimates for the tanks; which are

included in the State Implementation

Plan submittal entitled, ‘‘Summary of

15% Rate-of-Progress State

Implementation Plan Revision,’’ dated

December 20, 1997.

[FR Doc. 98–12433 Filed 5–8–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[OPP–300646; FRL–5787–4]

RIN 2070–AB78

Bentazon; Extension of Tolerance for

Emergency Exemptions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This rule extends a timelimited tolerance for residues of the

herbicide bentazon and its metabolites

in or on succulent peas at 3 part per

million (ppm) for an additional 1–year

period, to June 30, 1999. This action is

in response to EPA’s granting of an

emergency exemption under section 18

of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide,

and Rodenticide Act authorizing use of

the pesticide on succulent peas. Section

408(l)(6) of the Federal Food, Drug, and

Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) requires EPA to
25776 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 90 / Monday, May 11, 1998 /Rules and Regulations

establish a time-limited tolerance or

exemption from the requirement for a

tolerance for pesticide chemical

residues in food that will result from the

use of a pesticide under an emergency

exemption granted by EPA under

section 18 of FIFRA.

DATES: This regulation becomes

effective May 11, 1998. Objections and

requests for hearings must be received

by EPA, on or before July 10, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Written objections and

hearing requests, identified by the

docket control number, [OPP–300646],

must be submitted to: Hearing Clerk

(1900), Environmental Protection

Agency, Rm. M3708, 401 M St., SW.,

Washington, DC 20460. Fees

accompanying objections and hearing

requests shall be labeled ‘‘Tolerance

Petition Fees’’ and forwarded to: EPA

Headquarters Accounting Operations

Branch, OPP (Tolerance Fees), P.O. Box

360277M, Pittsburgh, PA 15251. A copy

of any objections and hearing requests

filed with the Hearing Clerk identified

by the docket control number, [OPP–

300646], must also be submitted to:

Public Information and Records

Integrity Branch, Information Resources

and Services Division (7502C), Office of

Pesticide Programs, Environmental

Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW.,

Washington, DC 20460. In person, bring

a copy of objections and hearing

requests to Rm. 119, CM #2, 1921

Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA.

A copy of objections and hearing

requests filed with the Hearing Clerk

may also be submitted electronically by

sending electronic mail (e-mail) to: oppdocket@epamail.epa.gov. Follow the

instructions in Unit II. of this preamble.

No Confidential Business Information

(CBI) should be submitted through email.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By

mail:Virginia Dietrich, Registration

Division (7505C), Office of Pesticide

Programs, Environmental Protection

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

DC 20460. Office location , telephone

number, and e-mail address: Rm. 272,

CM #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy.,

Arlington, VA 22202, (703) 308–9359; email:dietrich.virginia@epamail.epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA

issued a final rule, published in the

Federal Register of June 20, 1997 (62 FR

33563–33569) (FRL–5720–4) , which

announced that on its own initiative

and under section 408(e) of the FFDCA,

21 U.S.C. 346a(e) and (l)(6), it

established a time-limited tolerance for

the residues of bentazon and its

metabolites in or on succulent peas at 3

ppm, with an expiration date of June 30,

1998. EPA established the tolerance

because section 408(l)(6) of the FFDCA

requires EPA to establish a time-limited

tolerance or exemption from the

requirement for a tolerance for pesticide

chemical residues in food that will

result from the use of a pesticide under

an emergency exemption granted by

EPA under section 18 of FIFRA. Such

tolerances can be established without

providing notice or period for public

comment.

EPA received a request to extend the

use of bentazon on succulent peas for

this year’s growing season due to

infestation with the weed Canada

thistle. After having reviewed the

submission, EPA concurs that

emergency conditions exist for

Minnesota. EPA has authorized under

FIFRA section 18 the use of bentazon on

succulent peas for control of Canada

thistle in succulent peas.

EPA assessed the potential risks

presented by residues of bentazon in or

on succulent peas. In doing so, EPA

considered the new safety standard in

FFDCA section 408(b)(2), and decided

that the necessary tolerance under

FFDCA section 408(l)(6) would be

consistent with the new safety standard

and with FIFRA section 18. The data

and other relevant material have been

evaluated and discussed in the final rule

of June 20, 1997 (62 FR 33563–33569).

Based on that data and information

considered, the Agency reaffirms that

extension of the time-limited tolerance

will continue to meet the requirements

of section 408(l)(6). Therefore, the timelimited tolerance is extended for an

additional 1–year period. Although this

tolerance will expire and is revoked on

June 30, 1999, under FFDCA section

408(l)(5), residues of the pesticide not in

excess of the amounts specified in the

tolerance remaining in or on succulent

peas after that date will not be unlawful,

provided the pesticide is applied in a

manner that was lawful under FIFRA

and the application occurred prior to

the revocation of the tolerance. EPA will

take action to revoke this tolerance

earlier if any experience with, scientific

data on, or other relevant information

on this pesticide indicate that the

residues are not safe.

I. Objections and Hearing Requests

The new FFDCA section 408(g)

provides essentially the same process

for persons to ‘‘object’’ to a tolerance

regulation issued by EPA under new

section 408(e) and (l)(6) as was provided

in the old section 408 and in section

409. However, the period for filing

objections is 60 days, rather than 30

days. EPA currently has procedural

regulations which govern the

submission of objections and hearing

requests. These regulations will require

some modification to reflect the new

law. However, until those modifications

can be made, EPA will continue to use

those procedural regulations with

appropriate adjustments to reflect the

new law.

Any person may, by July 10, 1998, file

written objections to any aspect of this

regulation and may also request a

hearing on those objections. Objections

and hearing requests must be filed with

the Hearing Clerk, at the address given

above (40 CFR 178.20). A copy of the

objections and/or hearing requests filed

with the Hearing Clerk should be

submitted to the OPP docket for this

rulemaking. The objections submitted

must specify the provisions of the

regulation deemed objectionable and the

grounds for the objections (40 CFR

178.25). Each objection must be

accompanied by the fee prescribed by

40 CFR 180.33(i). If a hearing is

requested, the objections must include a

statement of the factual issues on which

a hearing is requested, the requestor’s

contentions on such issues, and a

summary of any evidence relied upon

by the requestor (40 CFR 178.27). A

request for a hearing will be granted if

the Administrator determines that the

material submitted shows the following:

There is genuine and substantial issue

of fact; there is a reasonable possibility

that available evidence identified by the

requestor would, if established, resolve

one or more of such issues in favor of

the requestor, taking into account

uncontested claims or facts to the

contrary; and resolution of the factual

issues in the manner sought by the

requestor would be adequate to justify

the action requested (40 CFR 178.32).

Information submitted in connection

with an objection or hearing request

may be claimed confidential 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.

A copy of the information that does not

contain CBI must be submitted for

inclusion in the public record.

Information not marked confidential

may be disclosed publicly by EPA

without prior notice.

II. Public Record and Electronic

Submissions

The official record for this

rulemaking, as well as the public

version, as described above will be kept

in paper form. Accordingly, EPA will

transfer any copies of objections and

hearing requests received electronically

into printed, paper form as they are

received and will place the paper copies

in the official rulemaking record which
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 90 / Monday, May 11, 1998 /Rules and Regulations 25777

will also include all comments

submitted directly in writing. The

official rulemaking record is the paper

record maintained at the Virginia

address in ‘‘ADDRESSES’’ at the

beginning of this document

Electronic comments may be sent

directly to EPA at:

opp-docket@epamail.epa.gov.

Electronic objections and hearing

requests must be submitted as an ASCII

file avoiding the use of special

characters and any form of encryption.

Objections and hearing requests will

also be accepted on disks in

WordPerfect 51/6.1 or ASCII file format.

All copies of objections and hearing

requests in electronic form must be

identified by the docket control number

[OPP–300646]. No CBI should be

submitted through e-mail. Electronic

copies of objections and hearing

requests on this rule may be filed online

at many Federal Depository Libraries.

III. Regulatory Assessment

Requirements

This final rule extends a time-limited

tolerance that was previously extended

by EPA 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). In addition, this final

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 prior

consultation as specified by Executive

Order 12875, entitled Enhancing the

Intergovernmental Partnership (58 FR

58093, October 28, 1993), or 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 in

accordance with Executive Order 13045,

entitled Protection of Children from

Environmental Health Risks and Safety

Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997).

Since this extension of an existing

time-limited tolerance does not require

the issuance of a proposed rule, the

requirements of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et

seq.) do not apply. Nevertheless, the

Agency has previously assessed whether

establishing tolerances, exemptions

from tolerances, raising tolerance levels

or expanding exemptions might

adversely impact small entities and

concluded, as a generic matter, that

there is no adverse economic impact.

The factual basis for the Agency’s

generic certification for tolerance

actions published on May 4, 1981 (46

FR 24950), and was provided to the

Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small

Business Administration.

IV. Submission to Congress and the

General Accounting Office

Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A), as added

by the Small Business Regulatory

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, EPA

submitted 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 General Accounting

Office prior to publication of this rule in

today’s Federal Register. This is not a

‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.

804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

Environmental protection,

Administrative practice and procedure,

Agricultural commodities, Pesticides

and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Dated: April 27, 1998.

James Jones,

Director, Registration Division, Office of

Pesticide Programs.

Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is

amended as follows:

PART 180— [AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 180

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 346a and 371.

§ 180.355 [Amended]

2. In § 180.355, the table to paragraph

(b) is amended by changing the date ‘‘6/

30/98’’ to read ‘‘6/30/99’’.

[FR Doc. 98–12425 Filed 5–8–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–F

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES

Health Resources and Services

Administration

42 CFR Part 60

RIN 0906–AA49

National Vaccine Injury Compensation

Program (VICP): Effective Date

Provisions of Coverage of Certain

Vaccines to the Vaccine Injury Table

AGENCY: Health Resources and Services

Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: Section 904(b) of the

Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 provides for

an excise tax for three new vaccines,

effective August 6, 1997. Petitions for

compensation for injuries or deaths

related to hepatitis B, Hib, and varicella

vaccines may now be filed under the

Vaccine Injury Compensation Program

(VICP). This technical amendment

amends the Code of Federal Regulations

(CFR) to include a date certain (August

6, 1997) in § 100.3(c) of the Vaccine

Injury Compensation regulations, so that

there will be no uncertainty as to the

coverage of these three vaccines.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule is

effective May 11, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Geoffrey Evans, M.D., Medical Director,

Division of Vaccine Injury

Compensation, Bureau of Health

Professions, (301) 443–4198, or David

Benor, Senior Attorney, Office of the

General Counsel (301) 443–2006.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

National Vaccine Injury Compensation

Program (VICP), established by Subtitle

2 of Title XXI of the Public Health

Service Act (the Act), provides a system

of no-fault compensation for certain

individuals who have been injured by

specific childhood vaccines. The

Vaccine Injury Table (the Table)

establishes presumptions about

causation of certain illnesses and

conditions which are used by the U.S.

Court of Federal Claims to adjudicate

petitions. The Act provides that a

revision to the Table, based on addition

of new vaccines under section 2114(e)

of the Act, shall take effect upon the

effective date of a tax enacted to provide

funds for compensation for injuries from

vaccines that are added to the Table.

(See section 13632(a)(3) of the Omnibus

Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993,

Public Law 103–66, enacted August 10,

1993.)

On August 5, 1997, the President

signed Public Law 105–34, the