32138 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 113 / Friday, June 12, 1998 /Rules and Regulations

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, the

Agency has 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: June 2, 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.

§180.482 [Amended]

2. In §180.482, by amending

paragraph (b) by changing the date for

cotton gin byproducts; cottonseed hulls;

cottonseed meal; cottonseed oil;

cottonseed, undelinted; from ‘‘6/30/98’’

to read ‘‘12/31/99’’.

[FR Doc. 98–15744 Filed 6–11–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–F

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[OPP–300671; FRL–5795–4]

RIN 2070–AB78

Dimethomorph; Extension of

Tolerances for Emergency Exemptions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

fungicide dimethomorph in or on

potatoes at 0.05 part per million (ppm)

for an additional one and one-half-year

period, to March 15, 2000. This action

is in response to EPA’s granting of

emergency exemptions under section 18

of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide,

and Rodenticide Act authorizing use of

the pesticide on potatoes. Section

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

Cosmetic Act (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.

DATES: This regulation becomes

effective June 12, 1998. Objections and

requests for hearings must be received

by EPA, on or before August 11, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Written objections and

hearing requests, identified by the

docket control number, [OPP–300671],

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–

300671], 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, Crystal Mall #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: Libby Pemberton, 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 ι2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy.,

Arlington, VA 22202, (703)–308–9364;

e-mail: ie-lpemberton@epamail.epa.gov.

.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA

issued a final rule, published in the

Federal Register of May 14, 1997 (FR

26412) (FRL–5715–5), 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 timelimited tolerance for the residues of

dimethomorph in or on potatoes at 0.05

ppm, with an expiration date of March

15, 1999. 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
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 113 / Friday, June 12, 1998 /Rules and Regulations 32139

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 dimethomorph for this year’s

growing season due to continued failure

to control immigrant strains of late

blight in potatoes with registered

fungicides. After having reviewed the

submissions, EPA concurs that

emergency conditions exist for the states

which have requested this use. EPA has

authorized under FIFRA section 18 the

use of dimethomorph on for control of

late blight in potatoes and tomatoes.

EPA assessed the potential risks

presented by residues of dimethomorph

in or on potatoes and tomatoes . 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

rules of May 14 and July 25, 1997 (FR

26412 and 39956). Based on that data

and information considered, the Agency

reaffirms that extension of the timelimited tolerances will continue to meet

the requirements of section 408(l)(6).

Therefore, the time-limited tolerances

are extended for an additional one and

one-half-year period. Although these

tolerances will expire and are revoked

on September 15, 2000 and November

15, 2000, under FFDCA section

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

excess of the amounts specified in the

tolerances remaining in or on after these

dates 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 tolerances. EPA will

take action to revoke these tolerances

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 August 11, 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

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–300671]. 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 the timelimited 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
32140 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 113 / Friday, June 12, 1998 /Rules and Regulations

1 Volvo’s use of the term ‘‘voluntarily installed’’

reflects that company’s interpretation that Standard

No. 208 does not require the installation of Type

2 belts at locations where Standard No. 208 allows

manufacturers to meet seat belt requirements by

installing either a Type 1 or a Type 2 belt. As the

minimum requirement for those locations can be

met by installing a Type 1 belt, Volvo adheres to

the view that Type 2 belts used where only a Type

1 is required are ‘‘voluntarily installed’’ belts.

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: June 2, 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.

§ 180.493 [Amended]

2. In § 180.493, by amending

paragraph (b) by changing the date ‘‘3/

15/99’’ to read ‘‘9/15/00’’.

[FR Doc. 98–15745 Filed 6–11–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–F

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration

49 CFR Part 571

[Docket No. NHTSA–98–3773]

RIN 2127–AF91

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety

Standards; Seat Belt Assembly

Anchorages

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This document responds to a

petition from Volvo Cars of North

America (Volvo), by amending the seat

belt anchorage strength requirements of

FMVSS No. 210, ‘‘Seat belt assembly

anchorages,’’ to require the anchorages

of all lap/shoulder belts to meet a 6,000

pound strength requirement, regardless

of whether a manufacturer has the

option of installing a lap belt or a lap/

shoulder belt at that seating position.

Two different requirements existed for

testing the anchorages of lap/shoulder

belts. One requirement, applicable to

lap/shoulder belts installed at locations

where manufacturers did not have the

option of installing any other type of

belt, called for all three anchorages of a

lap/shoulder belt to withstand a 6,000

pound strength test. The second

requirement, applicable to lap/shoulder

belts installed at locations where a

manufacturer could install either a lap

belt or a lap/shoulder belt, required the

anchorages of the lap portions of a lap/

shoulder belt to withstand the 5,000

pound strength test applied to lap belts.

The adoption of this new certification

requirement allows manufacturers to

test all lap/shoulder belts alike, i.e.

according to the 6,000 pound strength

test appropriate for lap/shoulder belts,

and no longer need also test the

anchorages for the lap belt portion to the

5,000 pound test used for belts

consisting of just a lap belt.

DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is

effective June 14, 1999. Manufacturers

wishing to comply with the

requirements of this final rule may do

so before the effective date commencing

September 10, 1998.

Petition Date: Any petitions for

reconsideration must be received by

NHTSA no later than July 27, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Any petitions for

reconsideration should refer to the

docket and notice number of this notice

and be submitted to: Administrator,

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW,

Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The

following persons at the National

Highway Traffic Safety Administration,

400 Seventh Street, SW, Washington,

DC 20590:

For non-legal issues: Mr. John Lee,

Light Duty Vehicle Division, Office of

Crashworthiness Standards, NPS–11,

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration, telephone: (202) 366–

4924, facsimile (202) 493–2739,

electronic mail ‘‘jlee@nhtsa.dot.gov’’.

For legal issues: Otto Matheke, Office

of the Chief Counsel, NCC–20,

telephone (202) 366–5263, facsimile

(202) 366–3820, electronic mail

‘‘omatheke@nhtsa.dot.gov’’.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under

Standard No. 208, ‘‘Occupant crash

protection,’’ manufacturers have the

option of installing a Type 1 seat belt

(i.e., lap belt) instead of a Type 2 seat

belt assembly (i.e., lap/shoulder belts) at

these locations:

• Vehicles, including school buses,

with a GVWR of more than 10,000

pounds: all seats, except passenger seats

in buses;

• School buses with a gross vehicle

weight rating (GVWR) of 10,000 pounds

or less: the passenger seats; and

• All other vehicles with a GVWR of

10,000 pounds or less: all seats, except

forward-facing outboard seats.

Prior to this final rule, the anchorage

requirements in Federal Motor Vehicle

Safety Standard No. 210, ‘‘Seat belt

assembly anchorages,’’ required the lap

belt anchorages for Type 2 belts

installed at these positions to meet the

5,000 pound load requirement

applicable to Type 1 belts. However, the

anchorages for the shoulder belt portion

were not subject to any load

requirement. These requirements were

established in a final rule published on

April 30, 1990 (55 FR 17970) without

any explanatory discussion in the

preamble to the final rule. Where Type

2 belts were the only configuration

allowed at a seating position, the

Standard required the anchorages for

Type 2 seat belts to withstand the

simultaneous application of a 3,000-

pound load applied to the lap belt

anchorages and a separate 3,000-pound

load to the shoulder belt anchorages.

The Volvo Petition

On May 18, 1995, Volvo Cars of North

America, Inc. (Volvo) petitioned

NHTSA to amend Standard No. 210.

Volvo stated that it subjects the

anchorages of its ‘‘voluntarily installed

Type 2 seat belts’’ to two different tests.1

Pursuant to Standard No. 210, it tests

the anchorages for the lap belt portion

of those belts for compliance with the

anchorage requirements for a Type 1

seat belt. In addition, for quality control

purposes, it tests the anchorages of its

voluntarily installed Type 2 seat belts

for compliance with the requirements