55326 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 182 / Wednesday, September 21, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

lowering the floor to 1,200 feet MSL 

within a 45 NM radius of Deering 

Airport, AK. The purpose of this 

proposal is to establish controlled 

airspace to support instrument flight 

rules operations at Deering Airport, AK. 

The FAA Instrument Flight Procedures 

Production and Maintenance Branch 

has developed four new instrument 

approach procedures for the Deering 

Airport. New controlled airspace 

extending upward from 1,200 feet MSL 

above the surface in international 

airspace would be created by this 

action. The proposed airspace is 

sufficient to support instrument 

operations at the Deering airport. 

The FAA has determined that this 

proposed regulation only involves an 

established body of technical 

regulations for which frequent and 

routine amendments are necessary to 

keep them operationally current. 

Therefore, this proposed regulation: (1) 

Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’

under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not 

a ‘‘significant rule’’ under Department of 

Transportation (DOT) Regulatory 

Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; 

February 26, 1979); and (3) does not 

warrant preparation of a regulatory 

evaluation as the anticipated impact is 

so minimal. Since this is a routine 

matter that will only affect air traffic 

procedures and air navigation, it is 

certified that this proposed rule, when 

promulgated, will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities under the 

criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. 

ICAO Considerations 

As part of this proposal relates to 

navigable airspace outside the United 

States, this notice is submitted in 

accordance with the International Civil 

Aviation Organization (ICAO) 

International Standards and 

Recommended Practices. 

The application of International 

Standards and Recommended Practices 

by the FAA, Office of System 

Operations Airspace and AIM, Airspace 

& Rules, in areas outside the United 

States domestic airspace, is governed by 

the Convention on International Civil 

Aviation. Specifically, the FAA is 

governed by Article 12 and Annex 11, 

which pertain to the establishment of 

necessary air navigational facilities and 

services to promote the safe, orderly, 

and expeditious flow of civil air traffic. 

The purpose of Article 12 and Annex 11 

is to ensure that civil aircraft operations 

on international air routes are 

performed under uniform conditions. 

The International Standards and 

Recommended Practices in Annex 11 

apply to airspace under the jurisdiction 

of a contracting state, derived from 

ICAO. Annex 11 provisions apply when 

air traffic services are provided and a 

contracting state accepts the 

responsibility of providing air traffic 

services over high seas or in airspace of 

undetermined sovereignty. A 

contracting state accepting this 

responsibility may apply the 

International Standards and 

Recommended Practices that are 

consistent with standards and practices 

utilized in its domestic jurisdiction. 

In accordance with Article 3 of the 

Convention, state-owned aircraft are 

exempt from the Standards and 

Recommended Practices of Annex 11. 

The United States is a contracting state 

to the Convention. Article 3(d) of the 

Convention provides that participating 

state aircraft will be operated in 

international airspace with due regard 

for the safety of civil aircraft. Since this 

action involves, in part, the designation 

of navigable airspace outside the United 

States, the Administrator is consulting 

with the Secretary of State and the 

Secretary of Defense in accordance with 

the provisions of Executive Order 

10854. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, 

Navigation (air). 

The Proposed Amendment 

In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Federal Aviation Administration 

proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as 

follows: 

PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, 

B, C, D AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR 

TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND 

REPORTING POINTS 

1. The authority citation for part 71 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 

40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959–

1963 Comp., p. 389. 

§ 71.1 [Amended] 

2. The incorporation by reference in 

14 CFR 71.1 of the Federal Aviation 

Administration Order 7400.9N, 

Airspace Designations and Reporting 

Points, dated September 1, 2005, and 

effective September 16, 2005, is 

amended as follows: 

Paragraph 6007 Offshore Airspace Areas 

* * * * * 

Norton Sound Low, AK [Amended] 

That airspace extending upward from 

1,200 MSL within a 45-mile radius of the 

Deering Airport Alaska, and airspace 

extending upward from 14,500 feet MSL 

within an area bounded by a line beginning 

at lat. 59°59′57′′ N., long. 168°00′08′′ W.; to 

lat. 62°35′00′′ N., long. 175°00′00′′ W.; to lat. 

65°00′00′′ N., long. 168°58′23′′ W.; to lat. 

68°00′00′′ N., long. 168°58′23′′ W.; to a point 

12 miles offshore at lat. 68°00′00′′ N.; thence 

by a line 12 miles from and parallel to the 

shoreline to lat. 56°42′59′′ N., long. 

160°00′00′′ W.; to lat. 58°06′57′′ N., long. 

160°00′00′′ W.; to lat. 57°45′57′′ N., long. 

161°46′08′′ W.; to the point of beginning, 

excluding that portion that lies within Class 

E airspace above 14,500 feet MSL, Federal 

airways and the Nome and Kotzebue, AK, 

Class E airspace areas. 

* * * * * 

Issued in Washington, DC, on September 

14, 2005. 

Edith V. Parish, 

Acting Manager, Airspace and Rules. 

[FR Doc. 05–18812 Filed 9–20–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[OPP–2004–0344; FRL–7719–7] 

C8, C10, and C12 Straight-Chain Fatty 

Acid Monoesters of Glycerol and 

Propylene Glycol; Amendment to 

Tolerance Exemption 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: This document proposes to 

amend an exemption from the 

requirement of a tolerance for residues 

of the C8, C10, and C12 straight- chain 

fatty acid monoesters of glycerol and 

propylene glycol on all food 

commodities when applied/used for 

both pre-harvest and post-harvest 

purposes. On June 23, 2004, EPA 

established an exemption from the 

requirement of a tolerance for these 

residues but did not expressly approve 

post-harvest uses in accordance with 40 

CFR 180.1(i). Therefore, EPA is 

proposing this regulation, to amend the 

existing tolerance exemption to allow 

for post-harvest uses of C8, C10, and 

C12 straight-chain fatty acid monoesters 

of glycerol and propylene glycol in 

accordance with section 408(e) of the 

Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act 

(FFDCA) as amended by the Food 

Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA). 

DATES: Comments, identified by docket 

ID number OPP–2004–0344, must be 

received on or before October 6, 2005. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by docket ID number OPP–

2004–0344, by one of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov/. Follow the onVerDate Aug<31>2005 14:37 Sep 20, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21SEP1.SGM 21SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 182 / Wednesday, September 21, 2005 / Proposed Rules 55327 

line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Agency Website: http:// 

www.epa.gov/edocket/. EDOCKET, 

EPA’s electronic public docket and 

comment system, is EPA’s preferred 

method for receiving comments. Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: Comments may be sent by 

e-mail to opp-docket@epa.gov, 

Attention: Docket ID Number OPP–

2004–0344. 

• Mail: Public Information and 

Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB) 

(7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs 

(OPP), Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20460–0001, Attention: 

Docket ID Number OPP–2004–0344. 

• Hand delivery: Public Information 

and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB), 

Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP), 

Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. 

119, Crystal Mall #2, 1801 S. Bell St., 

Arlington, VA, Attention: Docket ID 

Number OPP–2004–0344. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Docket’s normal hours of operation, and 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

docket ID number OPP–2004–0344. 

EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at http:// 

www.epa.gov/edocket/, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through EDOCKET, 

regulations.gov, or e-mail. The EPA 

EDOCKET and the regulations.gov 

websites are ‘‘anonymous access’’

systems, which means EPA will not 

know your identity or contact 

information unless you provide it in the 

body of your comment. If you send an 

e-mail comment directly to EPA without 

going through EDOCKET or 

regulations.gov, your e-mail address 

will be automatically captured and 

included as part of the comment that is 

placed in the public docket and made 

available on the Internet. If you submit 

an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket visit 

EDOCKET on-line or see the Federal 

Register of May 31, 2002 (67 FR 38102) 

(FRL–7181–7). 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the EDOCKET index at 

http://www.epa.gov/edocket/. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in EDOCKET or in hard 

copy at the Public Information and 

Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB), Rm. 

119, Crystal Mall #2, 1801 S. Bell St., 

Arlington, VA. This Docket Facility is 

open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. The Docket telephone number 

is (703) 305–5805. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Carol E. Frazer, Biopesticides and 

Pollution Prevention Division (7511C), 

Office of Pesticide Programs, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC 20460–0001; telephone number: 

(703) 308–8810; fax number: (703) 308–

7026; e-mail address: 

frazer.carol@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this Action Apply to Me? 

You may be potentially affected by 

this action if you are an agricultural 

producer, food manufacturer, or 

pesticide manufacturer. Potentially 

affected entities may include, but are 

not limited to: 

• Crop production (NAICS code 111) 

• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS 

code 32532) 

• Animal production (NAICS code 

112) 

• Food manufacturing (NAICS code 

311) 

This listing is not intended to be 

exhaustive, but rather provides a guide 

for readers regarding entities likely to be 

affected by this action. Other types of 

entities not listed in this unit could also 

be affected. The North American 

Industrial Classification System 

(NAICS) codes have been provided to 

assist you and others in determining 

whether this action might apply to 

certain entities. If you have any 

questions regarding the applicability of 

this action to a particular entity, consult 

the person listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. 

B. How Can I Access Electronic Copies 

of this Document and Other Related 

Information? 

In addition to using EDOCKET (http:// 

www.epa.gov/edocket/), you may access 

this Federal Register document 

electronically through the EPA Internet 

under the ‘‘Federal Register’’ listings at 

http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/. A 

frequently updated electronic version of 

40 CFR part 180 is available at E-CFR 

Beta Site Two at http:// 

www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr/. 

C. What Should I Consider as I Prepare 

My Comments for EPA? 

1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this 

information to EPA through EDOCKET, 

regulations.gov, or e-mail. Clearly mark 

the part or all of the information that 

you claim to be CBI. For CBI 

information in a disk or CD ROM that 

you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the 

disk or CD ROM as CBI and then 

identify electronically within the disk or 

CD ROM the specific information that is 

claimed as CBI. In addition to one 

complete version of the comment that 

includes information claimed as CBI, a 

copy of the comment that does not 

contain the information claimed as CBI 

must be submitted for inclusion in the 

public docket. Information so marked 

will not be disclosed except in 

accordance with procedures set forth in 

40 CFR part 2. 

2. Tips for preparing your comments. 

When submitting comments, remember 

to: 

i. Identify the rulemaking by docket 

ID number and other identifying 

information (subject heading, Federal 

Register date, and page number). 

ii. Follow directions. The Agency may 

ask you to respond to specific questions 

or organize comments by referencing a 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 

or section number. 

iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; 

suggest alternatives and substitute 

language for your requested changes. 

iv. Describe any assumptions and 

provide any technical information and/ 

or data that you used. 

v. If you estimate potential costs or 

burdens, explain how you arrived at 

your estimate in sufficient detail to 

allow for it to be reproduced. 

vi. Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns, and suggest 

alternatives. 

vii. Explain your views as clearly as 

possible, avoiding the use of profanity 

or personal threats. 

55328 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 182 / Wednesday, September 21, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

viii. Make sure to submit your 

comments by the comment period 

deadline identified. 

II. Background 

A. What Action is the Agency Taking? 

EPA on its own initiative, pursuant to 

section 408(e) of the FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 

346a(e), is proposing to amend 40 CFR 

part 180 by adding post-harvest uses to 

the language in 40 CFR 180.1250. In the 

Federal Register of June 23, 2004 (69 FR 

34937) (FRL–7352–6), EPA issued a 

final rule pursuant to section 408(d)(3) 

of the FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), 

establishing an exemption from the 

requirement of a tolerance for residues 

of the C8, C10, and C12 straight-chain 

fatty acid monoesters of glycerol and 

propylene glycol after reviewing a 

petition for a tolerance exemption (PP 

1F6314) submitted by 3M Corporation, 

3M Center, St. Paul MN 55144–1000. 

The Notice of Filing of a Pesticide 

Petition to Establish a Tolerance for a 

Certain Pesticide Chemical in or on 

Food (66 FR 64251, December 12, 2001) 

(FRL–6809–8) failed to notify the public 

that the C8, C10, and C12 straight-chain 

fatty acid monoesters would be used for 

post-harvest applications ‘‘to control 

spoilage of food and feed crops after 

harvest.’’ Even though the first page of 

3M’s petition for a tolerance exemption 

stated that its proposed end use 

products, which contain the fatty acid 

monoesters that are the subject of this 

tolerance rule amendment, were to be 

used for the ‘‘treatment of potatoes after 

harvest to prevent spoilage in storage,’’

the summary of the petition that was 

published in the Federal Register 

Notice did not specifically mention the 

post-harvest use. Under 40 CFR 180.1(i), 

‘‘[u]nless otherwise specified, tolerances 

and exemptions established under the 

regulations in this part apply to residues 

from only pre-harvest application of this 

chemical.’’

In the preamble to the June 23, 2004 

rule establishing the exemption for 

these monoesters (69 FR 34937) (Unit 

IV.A.1, Aggregate Exposures), EPA relies 

upon the aggregate dietary exposure 

estimates generated by 3M using EPA’s 

Dietary Exposure Potential Model. 

Although not expressly stated in that 

rule, those residue estimates included 

post-harvest exposures. In order to 

simulate a worst-case exposure analysis, 

18 different raw agricultural 

commodities from seeds for sprouts to 

leafy vegetables like spinach to solid 

produce like apple and potato were 

obtained from local supermarkets in St. 

Paul, Minnesota and soaked in a typical 

diluted treatment solution for 15 

minutes to provide an idea about postharvest residues on agricultural 

commodities. As can be seen from this, 

the Agency’s evaluation of residue 

levels of these chemicals’ pesticide 

usage included both the extant residues 

resulting from pre-harvest applications 

and the residues resulting from the 

proposed post-harvest use. 

Even if the exposure resulting from 

post-harvest use was significantly 

higher than exposure based on only preharvest use of monoesters as pesticides, 

the Agency is not concerned due to the 

low to non-existent toxicity level of 

these fatty acids. The preamble to the 

June 23, 2004 rule (69 FR 34937) 

discusses the long history of 

consumption by humans of fatty acids 

and their monoesters in food and the 

Agency knows of no instance where 

these have been associated with any 

toxic effects related to the consumption 

of the food. Due to this knowledge of 

fatty acid monoesters’ presence and 

function in the human system and the 

acute testing, EPA believes the fatty acid 

monoesters are unlikely to be 

carcinogenic or have other long-term 

toxic effects. The data from the residue 

information, the toxicity studies, and 

the additional information from the 

scientific literature submitted by the 

registrant are sufficient to demonstrate 

that no substantial risks to human 

health are expected from the use of 

glycerol or propylene glycol fatty acid 

monoesters, even when used on crops 

post-harvest, when used in accordance 

with good agricultural practices and in 

accordance with all relevant labeling. 

B. What is the Agency’s Authority for 

Taking this Action? 

Section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of the FFDCA 

allows EPA to establish an exemption 

from the requirement for a tolerance (the 

legal limit for a pesticide chemical 

residue in or on a food) only if EPA 

determines that the exemption is ‘‘safe.’’

Section 408(c)(2)(A)(ii) of the FFDCA 

defines ‘‘safe’’ to mean that ‘‘there is a 

reasonable certainty that no harm will 

result from aggregate exposure to the 

pesticide chemical residue, including 

all anticipated dietary exposures and all 

other exposures for which there is 

reliable information.’’ This includes 

exposure through drinking water and in 

residential settings, but does not include 

occupational exposure. Pursuant to 

section 408(c)(2)(B), in establishing or 

maintaining in effect an exemption from 

the requirement of a tolerance, EPA 

must take into account the factors set 

forth in section 408(b)(2)(C), which 

require EPA to give special 

consideration to exposure of infants and 

children to the pesticide chemical 

residue in establishing a tolerance and 

to ‘‘ensure that there is a reasonable 

certainty that no harm will result to 

infants and children from aggregate 

exposure to the pesticide chemical 

residue. . . .’’ Additionally, section 

408(b)(2)(D) of the FFDCA requires that 

the Agency consider ‘‘available 

information concerning the cumulative 

effects of a particular pesticide’s 

residues’’ and ‘‘other substances that 

have a common mechanism of toxicity.’’

Section 408(c)(1)(B) of the FFDCA 

allows EPA to modify a regulation on its 

own initiative under section 408(e). 

Section 408(e) requires EPA to issue a 

notice of proposed rulemaking and 

provide a public comment period of not 

less than 60 days. However, this 

provision also allows EPA to shorten the 

comment period if the Administrator for 

good cause finds that it would be in the 

public interest to do so and states the 

reasons for the finding in the notice of 

proposed rulemaking. For this particular 

rule, EPA has shortened the public 

comment period to 15 days because the 

Agency believes that it is in the public 

interest to do so. The first end-use 

product using one of these pesticide 

active ingredients has been approved, 

and growers face a potential hardship if 

a decision is not made expeditiously. 

EPA on its own initiative, under 

section 408(e) of the FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 

346a(e), is proposing to amend 40 CFR 

180.1250. 

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

This proposed rule amends an 

exemption from the tolerance 

requirement under section 408(e) of the 

FFDCA, as an action taken on the 

Agency’s own initiative to correct an 

oversight in establishing the current 

tolerance exemption for the C8, C10, 

and C12 straight-chain fatty acid 

monoesters of glycerol and propylene 

glycol to allow for both pre-harvest and 

post-harvest uses. 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, 

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 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 182 / Wednesday, September 21, 2005 / Proposed Rules 55329 

unfunded mandate as described under 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Public 

Law 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). The 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.) generally requires an 

Agency to prepare a regulatory 

flexibility analysis of any rule subject to 

notice and comment rulemaking 

requirements under the Administrative 

Procedure Act or any other statute 

unless the agency certifies that the rule 

will not have a significant impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

Small entities include small businesses, 

small organizations, and small 

governmental organizations. After 

considering the economic impact of this 

proposed rule on small entities, the 

Agency hereby certifies that this 

proposed rule will not have significant 

negative economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

Establishing an exemption from the 

requirement of a pesticide tolerance (or, 

amending a tolerance exemption, as is 

proposed), 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 section 408(n)(4) of the 

FFDCA. 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 

6, 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. The Agency 

hereby certifies that this proposed 

action will not have significant negative 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Agricultural commodities, Pesticides 

and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: September 7, 2005. 

Janet L. Andersen, 

Director, Biopesticides and Pollution 

Prevention 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 

would continue to read as follows: 

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371. 

2. By revising § 180.1250 to read as 

follows: 

§ 180.1250 C8, C10, and C12 straight-chain 

fatty acid monoesters of glycerol and 

propylene glycol; exemption from the 

requirement of a tolerance. 

The C8, C10, and C12 straight-chain 

fatty acid monoesters of glycerol 

(glycerol monocaprylate, glycerol 

monocaprate, and glycerol monolaurate) 

and propylene glycol (propylene glycol 

monocaprylate, propylene glycol 

monocaprate, and propylene glycol 

monolaurate) are exempt from the 

requirement of a tolerance in or on all 

food commodities when used for both 

pre-harvest and post-harvest purposes, 

in accordance with approved label rates 

and good agricultural practice. 

[FR Doc. 05–18724 Filed 9–20–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–S 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 300 

[FRL–7971–4] 

National Oil and Hazardous Substance; 

Pollution Contingency Plan; National 

Priorities List 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of intent 

to partially delete the East Tailing 

portion of the Tar Lake Superfund Site 

from the National Priorities List. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency, (EPA) Region 5 is issuing a 

notice of intent to partially delete the 

East Tailing Area of the Tar Lake 

Superfund Site (Site) located in Antrim 

County, Michigan, from the National 

Priorities List (NPL) and requests public 

comments on this notice of intent to 

partially delete. The East Tailing Area, 

as defined in the Remedial Investigation 

Report dated August 7, 2000, includes 

all soil, subsurface soil and groundwater 

associated with that part of the Tar Lake 

Superfund Site. The NPL, promulgated 

pursuant to section 105 of the 

Comprehensive Environmental 

Response, Compensation, and Liability 

Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is 

found at Appendix B of 40 CFR part 300 

which is the National Oil and 

Hazardous Substances Pollution 

Contingency Plan (NCP). The EPA and 

the State of Michigan, through the 

Michigan Department of Environmental 

Quality, have determined that all 

appropriate response actions under 

CERCLA have been completed.