Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 92 /Wednesday, May 13, 1998 / Notices 26593

Review between the years of 1986–1991,

which resulted in a negotiated

settlement whereby most of the

registered uses of granular carbofuran

were phased out. While the flowable

formulation of carbofuran is not the

subject of a Special Review, EPA

believes that the proposed use of

flowable carbofuran on cotton could

pose a risk similar to the risk assessed

by EPA under the Special Review of

granular carbofuran. Additionally, in

1997 EPA denied requests made under

provisions of section 18 for this use of

flowable carbofuran. Therefore, in

accordance with 40 CFR 166.24, EPA is

soliciting public comment before

making the decision whether or not to

grant the exemption.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before May 28, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Three copies of written

comments, bearing the identification

notation ‘‘OPP–181063,’’ should be

submitted by mail 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

comments to: Rm. 119, Crystal Mall #2,

1921 Jefferson Davis Highway,

Arlington, VA.

Comments and data may also be

submitted electronically by sending

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

instruction under ‘‘SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION.’’ No Confidential

Business Information (CBI) should be

submitted through e-mail.

Information submitted in any

comment concerning this notice 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 comment that does not

contain CBI must be submitted for

inclusion in the public record.

Information not marked confidential

may be included in the public record by

EPA without prior notice.

The public docket is available for

public inspection in Rm. 119, CM#2,

1921 Jefferson Davis Highway,

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

Monday through Friday, excluding legal

holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By

mail: David Deegan, Registration

Division (7505C), Office of Pesticide

Programs, Environmental Protection

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

DC 20460. Office location, telephone

number and e-mail: CM#2, 1921

Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA,

(703) 308–9358; e-mail:

deegan.dave@epamail.epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant

to section 18 of the Federal Insecticide,

Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)

(7 U.S.C. 136p), the Administrator may,

at her discretion, exempt a state agency

from any registration provision of

FIFRA if she determines that emergency

conditions exist which require such

exemption. The Applicants have

requested the Administrator to issue a

specific exemption for the use of

carbofuran on cotton to control aphids.

Information in accordance with 40 CFR

part 166 was submitted as part of this

request.

As part of this request, the Applicant

asserts that the state of Mississippi is

likely to experience non-routine

infestations of aphids during the 1998

cotton growing season. The applicant

further claims that, without a specific

exemption of FIFRA for the use of

flowable carbofuran on cotton to control

cotton aphids, cotton growers in the

state will suffer significant economic

losses. The applicant details a use

program designed to minimize risks to

pesticide handlers and applicators, nontarget organisms (both Federally-listed

endangered species, and non-listed

species), and to reduce the possibility of

drift and runoff.

The Applicant proposes to make no

more than two applications of flowable

carbofuran on cotton at the rate of 0.25

lb. active ingredient (a.i.) [(8 fluid oz.)]

in a minimum of 2 gallons of finished

spray per acre by air, or 10 gallons of

finished spray per acre by ground

application. The total maximum

proposed use during the 1998 growing

season June 1, 1998 until September 30,

1998 would be 0.5 lb. a.i. (16 fluid oz.)

per acre. The applicant proposes that

the maximum acreage which could be

treated under the requested exemption

would be 1 million acres. If all acres

were treated at the maximum proposed

rates, then 500,000 lbs. a.i. (125,000

gallons Furadan 4F Insecticide/

Nematicide) would be used in

Mississippi.

This notice does not constitute a

decision by EPA on the application

itself. The regulations governing section

18 require publication of a notice of

receipt of an application for a specific

exemption proposing use of a chemical

(i.e., an active ingredient) which has

been the subject of a Special Review

within EPA’s Office of Pesticide

Programs, and the proposed use could

pose a risk similar to the risk assessed

by EPA under the previous Special

Review. Such notice provides for

opportunity for public comment on the

application.

The official record for this notice, as

well as the public version, has been

established for this notice under docket

number [OPP–181063](including

comments and data submitted

electronically as described below). A

public version of this record, including

printed, paper versions of electronic

comments, which does not include any

information claimed as CBI is available

for inspection from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.,

Monday through Friday, excluding legal

holidays. The official record is the paper

record maintained at the address in

‘‘ADDRESSES’’ at the beginning of this

document.

Electronic comments can be sent

directly to EPA at:

opp-docket@epamail.epa.gov

Electronic comments must be

submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the

use of special characters and any form

of encryption. Comments and data will

also be accepted on disks in

WordPerfect in 5.1/6.1 or ASCII file

format. All comments and data in

electronic form must be identified by

the docket number [OPP–181063].

Electronic comments on this notice may

be filed online at many Federal

Depository Libraries.

The Agency, accordingly, will review

and consider all comments received

during the comment period in

determining whether to issue the

emergency exemption requested by the

Mississippi Department of Agriculture.

List of Subjects

Environmental protection, Pesticides

and pests, Emergency exemptions.

Dated: May 5, 1998.

James Jones,

Director, Registration Division, Office of

Pesticide Programs.

[FR Doc. 98–12722 Filed 5–12–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–F

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

Notice of Public Information

Collection(s) Submitted to OMB for

Review and Approval

May 7, 1998.

SUMMARY: The Federal Communications

Commission, as part of its continuing

effort to reduce paperwork burden

invites the general public and other

Federal agencies to take this

opportunity to comment on the

following information collection(s), as

required by the Paperwork Reduction

Act of 1995, Public Law 104–13. An

agency may not conduct or sponsor a
26594 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 92 /Wednesday, May 13, 1998 / Notices

collection of information unless it

displays a currently valid control

number. No person shall be subject to

any penalty for failing to comply with

a collection of information subject to the

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) that

does not display a valid control number.

Comments are requested concerning (a)

whether the proposed collection of

information is necessary for the proper

performance of the functions of the

Commission, including whether the

information shall have practical utility;

(b) the accuracy of the Commission’s

burden estimate; (c) ways to enhance

the quality, utility, and clarity of the

information collected; and (d) ways to

minimize the burden of the collection of

information on the respondents,

including the use of automated

collection techniques or other forms of

information technology.

DATES: Written comments should be

submitted on or before June 12, 1998. If

you anticipate that you will be

submitting comments, but find it

difficult to do so within the period of

time allowed by this notice, you should

advise the contact listed below as soon

as possible.

ADDRESSES: Direct all comments to Les

Smith, Federal Communications

Commission, Room 234, 1919 M St.,

NW., Washington, DC 20554 or via

internet to lesmith@fcc.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

additional information or copies of the

information collection(s), contact Les

Smith at 202–418–0217 or via internet

at lesmith@fcc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

OMB Control No.: 3060–0211.

Title: Section 73. 1493 Political File.

Form No.: N/A.

Type of Review: Extension of a

currently approved collection.

Respondents: Business or other forprofit.

Number of Respondents: 15,817.

Estimated Time Per Response: 0.25

hours per request (each station is

estimated to have 25 political broadcasts

per year).

Frequency of Response: On occasion.

Cost to Respondents: N/A.

Total Annual Burden: 98,856 hours.

Needs and Uses: Section 73.1943

requires licensees of broadcast stations

to keep and permit public inspection of

a complete record (political file) of all

requests for broadcast time made by or

on behalf of candidates for public office,

together with an appropriate notation

showing the disposition made by the

licensee of such request. The data are

used by the public to assess money

expended and time allocated to a

political candidate and to ensure that

equal access was afforded to other

qualified candidates.

OMB Control No.: 3060–0454.

Title: CC Docket No. 90–337,

Regulation of International Accounting

Rates.

Form No.: N/A.

Type of Review: Extension of a

currently approved collection.

Respondents: Business or other forprofit.

Number of Respondents: 12.

Estimated Time Per Response: 1 hour.

Frequency of Response: On occasion.

Cost to Respondents: $5,850. Carriers

are expected to contract for 5% of the

burden hours to outside law firms to

prepare submissions to the FCC,

especially in their first submission. It is

estimated that Respondents would pay

the law firm approximately $150 per

hour to file the data as the collection of

the data will be handled in-house. This

figure is based on a small survey of local

firms in the D.C. area and is considered

a conservative estimate.

Total Annual Burden: 780 hours.

Needs and Uses: The FCC requests

this collection of information as a

method to monitor the international

accounting rates to insure that the

public interest is being served and also

to enforce Commission policies. By

requiring a U.S. carrier to make an

equivalency showing and to file other

documents for end users interconnected

international private lines, the FCC will

be able to preclude one-way bypass and

safeguard its international settlements

policy. The data collected is required by

Section 43.51 (d) of the FCC’s rules.

OMB Control No.: 3060–0502.

Title: Section 73. 1942 Candidate

Rates.

Form No.: N/A.

Type of Review: Extension of a

currently approved collection.

Respondents: Business or other forprofit.

Number of Respondents: 11,518.

Estimated Time Per Response: 0.5

hours per disclosure (each station is

estimated to make 25 disclosures of the

lowest unit charge to candidates

annually).

Frequency of Response: On occasion.

Cost to Respondents: N/A.

Total Annual Burden: 650,767 hours.

Needs and Uses: Section 315(b) of the

Communications Act directs broadcast

stations to charge political candidates

the ‘‘lowest unit charge of the station’’

for the same class and amount of time

for the same period, during the 45 day

preceding a primary or runoff election

and the 60 days preceding a general or

special election.

Section 73.1942 requires broadcast

licensees to disclose any station

practices offered to commercial

advertisers that enhance the value of

advertising spots and different classes of

time (immediately preemptible,

preemptible with notice, fixed, fire sale,

and make good). Section 73.1942 also

requires licensees to calculate the

lowest unit charge. Furthermore,

stations are required to review their

advertising records throughout the

election period to determine whether

compliance with this section requires

that candidates receive rebates or

credits. The disclosure would assure

candidates that they are receiving the

same lowest unit charge as other

advertisers.

OMB Control No.: 3060–0788.

Title: DTV Showings/Interference

Agreements

Form No.: FCC 301/FCC 340

Type of Review: Extension of a

currently approved collection.

Respondents: Business or other forprofit; Not-for-profit institutions.

Number of Respondents: 20.

Estimated Time Per Response: 55

hours (5 hours per applicant; 50 hours

for advisory committee).

Frequency of Response: On occasion;

Third Party Disclosure.

Cost to Respondents: Undetermined.

Total Annual Burden: 100 hours.

Needs and Uses: Section V-D of the

FCC 301/340 Forms begins with a

‘‘Certification Checklist.’’ This checklist

contains a series of questions by which

applicants may certify compliance with

key processing requirements. The first

certification requires conformance with

the DTV Table of Allotments. In the

Sixth Report and Order in MM Docket

No. 87–268, the Commission allowed

flexibility for DTV facilities to be

constructed at locations within five

kilometers of the reference allotment

sites without consideration of additional

interference to analog or DTV service,

provided the DTV service does not

exceed the allotment reference height

above average terrain or effective

radiated power. In order for the

Commission to process applications that

can not certify affirmatively, the rules

adopted in the Sixth Report and Order

require applicants to submit a technical

showing to establish that their proposed

facilities will not result in additional

interference to TV broadcast and DTV

operations.

Additionally, in the Sixth Report and

Order, the Commission permitted

broadcasters to agree to proposed DTV

facilities that do not conform to the

initial allotment parameters, even

though they might be affected by

potential new interference. The

Commission also recognized that

industry frequency coordination
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 92 /Wednesday, May 13, 1998 / Notices 26595

1Arnold requested that his signal be checked

without the amplifier on. A field strength

measurement revealed that with the amplifier off he

was still exceeding Part 15 limits. 2Arnold also admitted that he holds an Amateur

Extra Class operator license, call sign KJ7VR. On

February 28, 2005, such license is due to expire.

Should Arnold be found in violation of the

Commission’s Rules and the Communications Act

based on the evidence before the Commission, any

questions raised about Arnold’s qualifications to

remain a Commission licensee will be addressed in

a separate proceeding.

could help to facilitate the

implementation of the DTV service, and

it encouraged the broadcast industry to

continue their voluntary coordination

efforts through a process open to all

affected parties. In this regard, the

Commission will consider granting

applications on the basis of interference

agreements, including agreements

obtained through the coordination

process, if it finds that such grants will

serve the public interest. These

agreements must be signed by all parties

to the agreement. In addition, the

Commission needs the following

information to enable such public

interest determination: a list of parties

predicted to receive additional

interference from the proposed facility,

a showing as to why a grant based on

the agreements would serve the public

interest, and technical studies depicting

the additional interference. Applicants

who use a voluntary coordination

process should provide the name,

address and telephone number of the

person who coordinated studies and a

description of how the coordination

process was open to all interested

parties. The technical showings and

interference agreements will be used by

FCC staff to determine if the public

interest would be served by the grant of

the application and to ensure that the

proposed facilities will not result in

additional interference.

Federal Communications Commission.

Magalie Roman Salas,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 98–12666 Filed 5–12–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–F

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

[FCC 98–61]

Order to Show Cause and Notice of

Opportunity for Hearing

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The Federal Communications

Commission will hold a hearing to

determine whether to issue a Cease and

Desist Order, and whether a forfeiture

will be imposed for the unlicensed

operation of a radio station in violation

of the Communications Act in docket

case CI 98–45.

DATES: Prehearing on May 18, 1998, 9:00

am; Hearing on June 16, 1998; 10:00 am.

ADDRESSES: All pleadings and papers

must be mailed to Office of the

Secretary, 1919 M Street, N.W., Room

222, Washington, D.C. 20554, Hearings

held at Offices of the Commission.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Norman Goldstein and James Shook,

Mass Media Bureau, (202) 418–1430, email ngoldste@fcc.gov and

jshook@fcc.gov

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Released: April 6, 1998

The Commission has under

consideration information concerning

the transmission of radio signals

without a license by Lewis B. Arnold

(‘‘Arnold’’). For the reasons that follow,

we order Arnold to show cause,

pursuant to Section 312(c) of the

Communications Act of 1934, as

amended (the ‘‘Act’’), 47 U.S.C. 312(c),

why we should not issue a cease and

desist order which prohibits further

unauthorized transmissions on his part.

Also, pursuant to Section 1.80(g) of the

Commission’s Rules (the ‘‘rules’’), 47

CFR 1.80(g), this order constitutes a

notice of opportunity for hearing to

determine whether, in addition to or as

an alternative to the issuance of a cease

and desist order, a forfeiture should be

imposed for violations of the Act and

the rules.

2. Background. On June 26, 1997,

Dennis Anderson, the Seattle,

Washington, District Director of the

Commission’s Compliance and

Information Bureau (‘‘CIB’’), received

information from Eric Carpenter

(‘‘Carpenter’’), General Manager of AM/

FM broadcast stations KCVL/KCRK in

Colville, Washington, concerning an

unauthorized radio station operating on

95.3 MHz in Chewelah, Washington.

Carpenter alleged that the unauthorized

station caused economic harm and

interference to the reception of his

station on 92.1 MHz. On July 7, 1997,

the CIB Seattle Field Office received

additional information from Carpenter

to the effect that the Chewelah station

was owned by Arnold. On July 9, 1997,

a warning letter was sent to Arnold

regarding the unlicensed radio station

on 95.3 MHz. In pertinent part, the

warning letter stated:

Under Section 301 of the Communications

Act of 1934, as amended, and the

Commission’s Rules and Regulations, radio

transmitting apparatus, (other than certain

low powered devices operated in accordance

with Part 15 of the Commission’s Rules and

Regulations), may be operated only upon

issuance by this Commission of a station

license covering such apparatus. Unlicensed

operation may subject the operator to serious

penalties provided for in the

Communications Act. Because unlicensed

operation creates a definite danger of

interference to important radio

communications services and may subject

the operator to the penalties provided for in

the Communications Act, the importance of

complying strictly with the legal

requirements mentioned above is

emphasized.

The letter also requested that Arnold

submit a written explanation concerning

the circumstances leading to the

unauthorized operation of transmitting

equipment and what corrective action

had been or would be taken to prevent

any future recurrence. Commission

records reveal no response from Arnold

to this letter.

Thereafter, on August 20, 1997,

Agents Donald Roberson (‘‘Roberson’’)

and Michael Rothe (‘‘Rothe’’) proceeded

to the Chewelah area and detected a

radio signal on 95.3 using radio

direction-finding techniques. Further

monitoring led Roberson and Rothe to

conclude that the signal originated from

a vertical dipole antenna mounted on a

pole attached to a building located at N

103 4th Street East, Chewelah. Field

strength measurements indicated signal

levels, when extrapolated to 3 meters, of

1,261,500 ‘‘V/m and 60,700 ‘‘V/m. Part

15 of the rules allows unlicensed

operation of a low power radio

transmitter in the FM broadcast band

provided the signal level is below 250

‘‘V/m at a distance of 3 meters. 47 CFR

15.239. Thus, the field strength

measurements taken exceeded those

allowed by Part 15 of the rules.

Again, on August 22, 1997, Roberson

and Rothe located through radio

direction-finding techniques an

unlicensed radio station operating on

95.3 MHz at N 103 4th Street East,

Chewelah. At approximately 12:05 p.m.,

Roberson and Rothe, accompanied by

Chewelah Police Officer Mark Burrows,

entered the property at N 103 4th Street

East and requested to inspect the

station. Arnold invited the agents into

his station and gave them permission to

inspect the radio transmission

equipment.

5. Roberson and Rothe observed

various pieces of audio gear and an FM

stereo transmitter, an amplifier rated at

one Watt output, and a vertical dipole

antenna.1 Arnold then acknowledged

the following: (1) There is no license for

the facilities; (2) he was fully

responsible for the unlicensed station;

(3) he was operating unlicensed to see

if there was community support for his

operation; (4) he had put the radio

equipment together from a kit; (5) he has

a web page for the radio station on the

Internet; and (6) he had received the

FCC warning letter.2 By warning letter

hand-delivered by Roberson and Rothe,