27468 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 24, 1995 / Proposed Rules

for all sources subject to this regulation.

EPA proposes to fully approve Part 234.

Conclusion

EPA is proposing full approval of

Parts 200, 201, 228, 229, 233 and 234

because they are consistent with EPA

policy and guidance and also meet the

requirements of Sections 110,

182(a)(2)(A), 182(b)(2) and 184(b) of the

Act.

Nothing in this proposal should be

construed as permitting or allowing or

establishing a precedent for any future

request for revision to any SIP. Each

request for revision to the SIP shall be

considered separately in light of specific

technical, economic, and environmental

factors and in relation to relevant

statutory and regulatory requirements.

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act,

5 U.S.C. § 600 et. seq., EPA must

prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis

assessing the impact of any proposed or

final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C.

§§ 603 and 604. Alternatively, EPA may

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.

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.

Moveover, due to the nature of the

federal-state relationship under the Act,

preparation of a regulatory flexibility

analysis would constitute federal

inquiry into the economic

reasonableness of state action. The Act

forbids EPA to base its actions

concerning SIPs on such grounds.

Union Electric Co. v. US EPA, 427 US

246, 256–66 (S.Ct. 1976); 42 U.S.C.

§ 7410(a)(2).

The Office of Management and Budget

has exempted these actions from review

under Executive Order 12866.

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.

Authority: 42 U.S.C 7401–7671q.

Dated: May 2, 1995.

William Muszynski,

Acting Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 95–12772 Filed 5–23–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 86

[FRL–5209–9]

RIN 2060–AE27

Revisions to the Federal Test

Procedure for Emissions From Motor

Vehicles

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Extension of comment period.

SUMMARY: On February 7, 1995 (60 FR

7404), EPA published a Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking in the Federal

Register that proposed additions and

revisions to the tailpipe emissions

portions of the Federal Test Procedure

for light-duty vehicles and light-duty

trucks. Interested parties should consult

that notice and/or the public docket (see

ADDRESSES below) for a detailed

description and background of the

proposal.

A public hearing regarding the

proposed regulations was held on April

19 and 20, 1995. In joint testimony

presented at that hearing the Agency

was asked by the American Automobile

Manufacturers Association and the

Association of International Automobile

Manufacturers to consider extending the

comment period from 30 days after the

public hearing to 90 days after the

public hearing. As a continuation of

previous EPA-industry cooperation

efforts, the automobile manufacturers

have extensive test programs in progress

to investigate many aspects of the

proposed regulations. The completion of

these programs and the necessary data

analyses to follow can not be

accomplished within the original

comment period. The EPA believes that

the test programs and the resulting data

have sufficient merit to warrant the

requested extension of the comment

period.

DATES: The comment period for the

notice of proposed rulemaking will be

extended from the original closing date

of May 22, 1995 to July 19, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be

submitted in duplicate to Public Docket

No. A–92–64, at: Air Docket Section,

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

401 M Street SW, Washington, DC

20460. (Phone 202–260–7548; FAX 202–

260–4000).

Materials relevant to this notice have

been placed in Docket No. A–92–64.

The docket is located at the above

address in Room M–1500, Waterside

Mall, and may be inspected weekdays

between 8:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. A

reasonable fee may be charged by EPA

for copying docket materials.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John

German, Certification Division, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions

Laboratory, 2565 Plymouth Road, Ann

Arbor, Michigan, 48105. Telephone

(313) 668–4214. Fax (313) 741–7869.

Dated: May 16, 1995.

Mary D. Nichols,

Assistant Administrator for Air and

Radiation.

[FR Doc. 95–12771 Filed 5–23–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 180

[OPP–300386; FRL–4954–1]

RIN 2070–AC18

Polymethylene Polyphenylisocyanate,

Polymer with Ethylene Diamine,

Diethylene Triamine and Sebacoyl

Chloride, Cross-Linked; Tolerance

Exemption

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: This document proposes to

establish an exemption from the

requirement of a tolerance for residues

of polymethylene

polyphenylisocyanate, polymer with

ethylene diamine, diethylene triamine

and sebacoyl chloride, cross-linked,

when used as an inert ingredient

(encapsulating agent) in pesticide

formulations applied to growing crops

only under 40 CFR 180.1001(d) to

replace and delete the existing

exemption from the requirement of a

tolerance for residues of cross-linked

nylon-type encapsulating polymer

under 40 CFR 180.1028. Elf Atochem

North America, Inc., requested this

proposed regulation pursuant to the

Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act.

DATES: Written comments, identified by

the document control number [OPP300386], must be received on or before

June 23, 1995.

ADDRESSES: By mail, submit written

comments to Public Response and

Program Resources Branch, Field

Operations Division (7506C), Office of

Pesticide Programs, Environmental

Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW.,

Washington, DC 20460. In person,

deliver comments to: Rm. 1132, CM #2,

1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington,
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 24, 1995 / Proposed Rules 27469

VA 22202. Information submitted as a

comment concerning this document

may be claimed confidential by marking

any part or all of that information as

‘‘Confidential Business Information’’

(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

will be included in the public docket by

EPA without prior notice. All written

comments will be available for public

inspection in Rm. 1132 at the address

given above, from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m.,

Monday through Friday, excluding legal

holidays.

Comments and data may also be

submitted electronically by sending

electronic mail (e-mail) to: oppdocket@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

file format or ASCII file format. All

comments and data in electronic form

must be identified by the docket number

[OPP-300386]. No Confidential Business

Information (CBI) should be submitted

through e-mail. Electronic comments on

this proposed rule may be filed online

at many Federal Depository Libraries.

Additional information on electronic

submissions can be found below in this

document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By

mail: Mary Waller, Registration Support

Branch, Registration Division (7505W),

Environmental Protection Agency, 401

M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460.

Office location and telephone number:

2800 Crystal Drive, North Tower, 6th

Floor, Arlington, VA 22202, (703)-308-

8811; e-mail:

waller.mary@epamail.epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Elf

Atochem North America, Inc., 2000

Market St., Philadelphia, PA 10103-

3222, submitted pesticide petition (PP)

5E4447 to EPA requesting that the

Administrator, pursuant to section

408(e) of the Federal Food Drug, and

Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) (21 U.S.C.

346a(e)), propose to amend 40 CFR part

180 by replacing the existing exemption

from the requirement of a tolerance for

residues of cross-linked nylon-type

encapsulating polymer listed under 40

CFR 180.1028 with an exemption from

the requirement of a tolerance for

residues of polymethylene

polyphenylisocyanate, polymer with

ethylene diamine, diethylene triamine

and sebacoyl chloride, cross-linked,

when used as an inert ingredient

(encapsulating agent) in pesticide

formulations applied to growing crops

only under 40 CFR 180.1001(d).

Inert ingredients are all ingredients

that are not active ingredients as defined

in 40 CFR 153.125, and include, but are

not limited to, the following types of

ingredients (except when they have a

pesticidal efficacy of their own):

solvents such as alcohols and

hydrocarbons; surfactants such as

polyoxyethylene polymers and fatty

acids; carriers such as clay and

diatomaceous earth; thickeners such as

carrageenan and modified cellulose;

wetting, spreading, and dispersing

agents; propellants in aerosol

dispensers; microencapsulating agents;

and emulsifiers. The term ‘‘inert’’ is not

to imply nontoxicity; the ingredient may

or may not be chemically active.

The data submitted in the petition

and other relevant material have been

evaluated. As part of the EPA policy

statement on inert ingredients published

in the Federal Register of April 22, 1987

(52 FR 13305), the Agency set forth a list

of studies which would generally be

used to evaluate the risks posed by the

presence of an inert ingredient in a

pesticide formulation. However, where

it can be determined without that data

that the inert ingredient will present

minimal or no risk, the Agency

generally does not require some or all of

the listed studies to rule on the

proposed tolerance or exemption from

the requirement of a tolerance for an

inert ingredient. The Agency has

decided that no data, in addition to that

described below, for polymethylene

polyphenylisocyanate, polymer with

ethylene diamine, diethylene triamine

and sebacoyl chloride, cross-linked, will

need to be submitted. The rationale for

this decision is described below.

In the case of certain chemical

substances that are defined as

‘‘polymers,’’ the Agency has established

a set of criteria which identify categories

of polymers that present low risk. These

criteria (described in 40 CFR 723.250)

identify polymers that are relatively

unreactive and stable compared to other

chemical substances as well as polymers

that typically are not readily absorbed.

These properties generally limit a

polymer’s ability to cause adverse

effects. In addition, these criteria

exclude polymers about which little is

known. The Agency believes that

polymers meeting the criteria noted

above will present minimal or no risk.

Polymethylene polyphenylisocyanate,

polymer with ethylene diamine,

diethylene triamine and sebacoyl

chloride, cross-linked, conforms to the

definition of a polymer given in 40 CFR

723.250(b)(11) and meets the following

criteria that are used to identify low-risk

polymers.

1. The minimum number-average

molecular weight of polymethylene

polyphenylisocyanate, polymer with

ethylene diamine, diethylene triamine

and sebacoyl chloride, cross-linked, is

100,000. Substances with molecular

weights greater than 400 generally are

not absorbed through the intact skin,

and substances with molecular weights

greater than 1,000 generally are not

absorbed through the intact

gastrointestinal tract. Chemicals not

absorbed through skin or GI tract

generally are incapable of eliciting a

toxic response.

2. Polymethylene

polyphenylisocyanate, polymer with

ethylene diamine, diethylene triamine

and sebacoyl chloride, cross-linked, is

not a cationic polymer, nor is it

reasonably expected to become a

cationic polymer in a natural aquatic

environment.

3. Polymethylene

polyphenylisocyanate, polymer with

ethylene diamine, diethylene triamine

and sebacoyl chloride, cross-linked,

does not contain less than 32.0 percent

by weight of the atomic element carbon.

4. Polymethylene

polyphenylisocyanate, polymer with

ethylene diamine, diethylene triamine

and sebacoyl chloride, cross-linked,

contains as an integral part of its

composition the atomic elements

carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, and oxygen.

5. Polymethylene

polyphenylisocyanate, polymer with

ethylene diamine, diethylene triamine

and sebacoyl chloride, cross-linked,

does not contain as an integral part of

its composition, except as impurities,

any elements other than those listed in

40 CFR 723.250(d)(3)(ii).

6. Polymethylene

polyphenylisocyanate, polymer with

ethylene diamine, diethylene triamine

and sebacoyl chloride, cross-linked, is

not a biopolymer, a synthetic equivalent

of a biopolymer, or a derivative or

modification of a biopolymer that is

substantially intact.

7. Polymethylene

polyphenylisocyanate, polymer with

ethylene diamine, diethylene triamine

and sebacoyl chloride, cross-linked, is

not manufactured from reactants

containing, other than impurities,

halogen atoms or cyano groups.

8. Polymethylene

polyphenylisocyanate, polymer with

ethylene diamine, diethylene triamine

and sebacoyl chloride, cross-linked,

does not contain a reactive functional

group that is intended or reasonably

expected to undergo further reaction.
27470 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 24, 1995 / Proposed Rules

9. Polymethylene

polyphenylisocyanate, polymer with

ethylene diamine, diethylene triamine

and sebacoyl chloride, cross-linked, is

neither designed nor reasonably

expected to substantially degrade,

decompose, or depolymerize.

The establishment of an exemption

from the requirement of a tolerance for

residues of polymethylene

polyphenylisocyanate, polymer with

ethylene diamine, diethylene triamine

and sebacoyl chloride, cross-linked,

when used as an inert ingredient

(encapsulating agent) in pesticide

formulations applied to growing crops

only under 40 CFR 180.1001 will

obviate the need to maintain an

exemption from the requirement of a

tolerance for cross-linked nylon-type

encapsulating polymer as listed under

40 CFR 180.1028. The polymer listed in

40 CFR 180.1028 is described as being

‘‘formed by the reaction of a mixture of

sebacoyl chloride and polymethylene

polyphenylisocyanate with a mixture of

ethylene diamine and diethylene

triamine.’’ The resultant polymer can

best be described as polymethylene

polyphenylisocyanate, polymer with

ethylene diamine, diethylene triamine

and sebacoyl chloride, cross-linked, the

subject of this proposed regulation.

In addition, based on the polymer’s

conformance to the set of criteria that

are used to identify low-risk polymers,

the additional use restrictions described

in 40 CFR 180.1028 (i.e., use as an

encapsulating material for formulations

of methyl parathion applied to growing

alfalfa, apples, artichokes, barley,

cabbage, cherries, corn (except

popcorn), cotton, forage grasses, grapes,

beans, (dry, lima, and snap), peaches,

pears, peas, plums (fresh prunes),

potatoes, rice, soybeans, tomotoes, and

wheat and for formulations of parathion

applied to growing sorghum), are no

longer applicable.

Based on the information above and

review of its use, EPA has found that,

when used in accordance with good

agricultural practice, this ingredient is

useful, and a tolerance is not necessary

to protect the public health. Therefore,

EPA proposes that the exemption from

the requirement of a tolerance be

established as set forth below.

Any person who has registered or

submitted an application for registration

of a pesticide, under the Federal

Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide

Act (FIFRA) as amended, that contains

any of the ingredients listed herein, may

request within 30 days after the

publication of this document in the

Federal Register that this rulemaking

proposal be referred to an Advisory

Committee in accordance with section

408(e) of the FFDCA.

Interested persons are invited to

submit written comments on the

proposed regulation. Comments must

bear a notation indicating the document

control number, [OPP-300386]. All

written comments filed in response to

this petition will be available in the

Public Response and Program Resources

Branch, at the address given above, from

8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through

Friday, except legal holidays.

A record has been established for this

rulemaking under docket number [OPP300386] (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 a.m. to

4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,

excluding legal holidays. The public

record is located in Room 1132 of the

Public Response and Program Resources

Branch, Field Operations Division

(7506C), Office of Pesticide Programs,

Environmental Protection Agency,

Crystal Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis

Highway, Arlington, VA.

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.

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 all comments 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 address

in ADDRESSES at the beginning of this

document.

The Office of Management and Budget

has exempted this rule from the

requirements of section 2 of Executive

Order 12866.

Pursuant to the requirement of the

Regulatory Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 96-

354, 94 Stat. 1164, 5 U.S.C. 601-612),

the Administrator has determined that

regulations establishing new tolerances

or raising tolerance levels or

establishing exemptions from tolerance

requirements do not have an economic

impact on a substantial number of small

entities. A certification statement to this

effect was published in the Federal

Register of May 4, 1981 (46 FR 24950).

List of Subject in 40 CFR Part 180

Environmental protection,

Administrative practice and procedure,

Agricultural commodities, Food

additives, Pesticides and pests,

Processed foods, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: May 10, 1995.

Stephen L. Johnson,

Director, Registration Division, Office of

Pesticide Programs.

Therefore, it is proposed that 40 CFR

part 180 be 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.

2. Section 180.1001(d) is amended in

the table therein by adding and

alphabetically inserting the inert

ingredient, to read as follows:

§ 180.1001 Exemptions from the

requirement of a tolerance.

* * * * *

(d) * * *

Inert ingredient Limits Uses

* * * * * * *

Polymethylene polyphenylisocyanate, polymer with

ethylene diamine, diethylene triamine and sebacoyl

chloride, cross-linked; minimum number average

molecular weight 100,000.

................................................... Encapsulating agent

* * * * * * *
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 24, 1995 / Proposed Rules 27471

* * * * *

§ 180.1028 [Removed]

3. By removing § 180.1028 Crosslinked nylon-type encapsulating

polymer; exemption from the

requirement of a tolerance is deleted.

[FR Doc. 95–12742 Filed 5–23–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–F

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 95–68, RM–8629]

Radio Broadcasting Services; Berlin,

MD

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: This document requests

comments on a petition filed by John P.

Gillen, proposing the allotment of

Channel 235A to Berlin, Maryland, as

that community’s second FM Broadcast

service. The coordinates for Channel

235A are 38–13–45 and 75–10–58.

There is a site restriction 10.8

kilometers (6.7 miles) southeast of the

community.

DATES: Comments must be filed on or

before July 10, 1995, and reply

comments on or before July 25, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications

Commission, Washington, D.C. 20554.

In addition to filing comments with the

FCC, interested parties should serve the

petitioner, as follows: John P. Gillen,

12314 Dixie Drive, Bishopville,

Maryland 21813.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kathleen Scheuerle, Mass Media

Bureau, (202) 418–2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

summary of the Commission’s Notice of

Proposed Rule Making, MM Docket No.

95–68, adopted May 11, 1995, and

released May 18, 1995. The full text of

this Commission decision is available

for inspection and copying during

normal business hours in the

Commission’s Reference Center (Room

239), 1919 M Street, NW, Washington,

D.C. The complete text of this decision

may also be purchased from the

Commission’s copy contractors,

International Transcription Services,

Inc., 2100 M Street, NW, Suite 140,

Washington, D.C. 20037, (202) 857–

3800.

Provisions of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act of l980 do not apply to

this proceeding.

Members of the public should note

that from the time a Notice of Proposed

Rule Making is issued until the matter

is no longer subject to Commission

consideration or court review, all ex

parte contacts are prohibited in

Commission proceedings, such as this

one, which involve channel allotments.

See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules

governing permissible ex parte contact.

For information regarding proper

filing procedures for comments, see 47

CFR 1.415 and 1.420.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

Radio broadcasting.

Federal Communications Commission.

John A. Karousos,

Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules

Division, Mass Media Bureau.

[FR Doc. 95–12703 Filed 5–23–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–F

47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 95–67, RM–8624]

Radio Broadcasting Services;

Greenfield & Stockton, MO

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: This document requests

comments on a petition filed by KYOO

Communications proposing the

allotment of Channel 299A at Stockton,

Missouri, as that community’s first local

service. The coordinates for Channel

299A at Stockton are 37–42–22 and 93–

53–21. There is a site restriction 8.5

kilometers (5.3 miles) west of the

community. To accommodate Channel

299A at Stockton, we shall propose the

deletion of vacant Channel 299A at

Greenfield, Missouri.

DATES: Comments must be filed on or

before July 10, 1995, and reply

comments on or before July 25, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications

Commission, Washington, D.C. 20554.

In addition to filing comments with the

FCC, interested parties should serve the

petitioner’s counsel, as follows: William

J. Pennington, III, 5519 Rockingham

Road-East, Greensboro, North Carolina

27407.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kathleen Scheuerle, Mass Media

Bureau, (202) 418–2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

summary of the Commission’s Notice of

Proposed Rule Making, MM Docket No.

95–67, adopted May 8, 1995, and

released May 18, 1995. The full text of

this Commission decision is available

for inspection and copying during

normal business hours in the

Commission’s Reference Center (Room

239), 1919 M Street, NW, Washington,

D.C. The complete text of this decision

may also be purchased from the

Commission’s copy contractors,

International Transcription Services,

Inc., 2100 M Street, NW, Suite 140,

Washington, D.C. 20037, (202) 857–

3800.

Provisions of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act of l980 do not apply to

this proceeding.

Members of the public should note

that from the time a Notice of Proposed

Rule Making is issued until the matter

is no longer subject to Commission

consideration or court review, all ex

parte contacts are prohibited in

Commission proceedings, such as this

one, which involve channel allotments.

See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules

governing permissible ex parte contact.

For information regarding proper

filing procedures for comments, see 47

CFR 1.415 and 1.420.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

Radio broadcasting.

Federal Communications Commission.

John A. Karousos,

Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules

Division, Mass Media Bureau.

[FR Doc. 95–12705 Filed 5–23–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–F

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

GENERAL SERVICES

ADMINISTRATION

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND

SPACE ADMINISTRATION

48 CFR Part 31

[FAR Case 94–753]

Federal Acquisition Regulation; Public

Meeting on Travel Cost

AGENCY: Department of Defense (DOD),

General Services Administration (GSA),

and National Aeronautics and Space

Administration (NASA).

ACTION: Notice of public meeting on

proposed rule.

SUMMARY: At 59 FR 64542, December 14,

1994, a Federal Acquisition Regulation

(FAR) proposed rule for implementing

statutory requirements of the Federal

Acquisition Streamlining Act, (the Act)

with regard to travel cost was published.

Numerous written comments have been

received at the FAR Secretariat in

response to the Federal Register

document. The notice announces a

public meeting for the Travel Cost rule.