59340 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 12, 2005 / Notices 

forecast for 2007. The New Hampshire 

submittal meets this requirement. 

The New Hampshire DES has 

submitted an acceptable MCR and has 

fulfilled the commitment it made in its 

one-hour ozone attainment 

demonstration for the Boston–

Lawrence–Worcester MA–NH serious 1- 

hour zone nonattainment area. 

3. Rhode Island MCR Submittal 

The MCR for the Rhode Island 1-hour 

ozone nonattainment area was 

submitted on June 16, 2005. 

i. Administrative Review 

The Rhode Island MCR states that 

Rhode Island is on track to implement 

all of the state and federal emission 

control measures required by the CAA. 

The section goes further to state that 

Rhode Island has already achieved 

attainment for the one-hour ozone 

standard, and states that with the 

additional ozone precursor reductions 

that will occur both in Rhode Island and 

upwind of Rhode Island, one-hour 

ozone concentrations will continue to 

decline into the future. 

ii. Air Quality, Meteorology, Emissions 

and Modeling Data Analysis 

As stated above, Rhode Island 

presents evidence that it has already 

achieved attainment of the one-hour 

ozone standard. All design values for 

one-hour ozone are below 124 ppb. 

Rhode Island also provides ozone trends 

and trajectory analyses that support the 

findings that ozone in Rhode Island is 

below the 1-hour NAAQS and will 

continue to decline in the future. The 

trajectories show that upwind emissions 

affect ozone in Rhode Island and these 

emissions will continue to decline in 

the future lowering ozone in Rhode 

Island even more. 

iii. Document Conclusions Regarding 

Whether Progress Toward Attainment Is 

Being Made Using a Weight of Evidence 

Determination 

Rhode Island has already achieved 

attainment of the one-hour standard. 

This requirement is met. 

After reviewing Rhode Island’s MCR 

submittal, EPA agrees with Rhode 

Island that it has already achieved 

attainment of the one-hour ozone 

NAAQS and approves the Rhode Island 

submittal as fulfilling the commitment 

Rhode Island made in its one-hour 

attainment demonstration. 

III. Final Action 

EPA has reviewed the MCR 

documents submitted by Massachusetts, 

New Hampshire and Rhode Island and 

has determined that each state has 

adequately met its commitment to 

perform a MCR. This action is being 

taken for the following one-hour 

nonattainment areas: (1) The 

Massachusetts portion of the Boston–

Lawrence–Worcester, MA–NH area, (2) 

the New Hampshire portion of the 

Boston–Lawrence–Worcester, MA–NH 

area, and (3) the Providence, Rhode 

Island area. EPA has sent a letter to each 

state approving their respective MCR as 

fulfilling the commitment made by each 

state in their 1-hour ozone attainment 

demonstration. Copies of these letters 

are available from EPA at the address 

provided in the ADDRESSES section 

above. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993), this action is 

not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and 

therefore is not subject to review by the 

Office of Management and Budget. For 

this reason, this action is also not 

subject to Executive Order 13211, 

‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May 

22, 2001). This action merely approves 

the states’ mid-course review as meeting 

federal requirements and imposes no 

additional requirements beyond those 

imposed by state law. Accordingly, the 

Administrator certifies that this action 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities under the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this 

action approves pre-existing 

requirements under state law and does 

not impose any additional enforceable 

duty beyond that required by state law, 

it does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4). 

This action also does not have tribal 

implications because it will not have a 

substantial direct effect on one or more 

Indian tribes, 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 by Executive Order 13175 

(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This 

action also does not have federalism 

implications because it does not 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, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, 

August 10, 1999), because it merely 

approves a state demonstration that the 

state is implementing a federal standard, 

and does not alter the relationship or 

the distribution of power and 

responsibilities established in the Clean 

Air Act. This action also is not subject 

to Executive Order 13045 ‘‘Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, 

April 23, 1997), because it is not 

economically significant. 

In reviewing SIP submissions as well 

as submission of reports that fulfill a 

state commitment, EPA’s role is to 

approve state choices, provided that 

they meet the criteria of the Clean Air 

Act. In this context, in the absence of a 

prior existing requirement for the state 

to use voluntary consensus standards 

(VCS), EPA has no authority to 

disapprove a SIP submission or a SIP 

commitment for failure to use VCS. It 

would thus be inconsistent with 

applicable law for EPA, when it reviews 

a SIP submission or a SIP commitment, 

to use VCS in place of a SIP submission 

that otherwise satisfies the provisions of 

the Clean Air Act. Thus, the 

requirements of section 12(d) of the 

National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 

272 note) do not apply. This action does 

not impose an information collection 

burden under the provisions of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). 

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

Dated: September 26, 2005. 

Robert W. Varney, 

Regional Administrator, EPA New England. 

[FR Doc. 05–20420 Filed 10–11–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–U 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[OPP–2005–0101; FRL–7740–9] 

Pesticide Program Dialogue 

Committee Meeting 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal 

Advisory Committee Act, EPA gives 

notice of a public meeting of the 

Pesticide Program Dialogue Committee 

(PPDC) on October 20 and 21, 2005. A 

draft agenda has been developed and is 

posted on EPA’s web site. Agenda topics 

will include: Pesticide performance 

measures; human studies; farmworker 

safety; spray drift; Pesticide Registration 

Improvement Act Workgroup on Process 

Improvements Update; integrated 

testing strategy and vision; updates on 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 12, 2005 / Notices 59341 

registration review, reregistration/ 

tolerance reassessment; status of 

rulemaking activities; and discussion of 

the PPDC Committee renewal activities. 

This document also gives notice of the 

PPDC Work Group on Performance 

Measures meeting on October 19, 2005. 

DATES: The PPDC meeting will be held 

on Thursday, October 20, 2005, from 9 

a.m. to 5 p.m., and on Friday, October 

21, 2005, from 9 a.m. to noon. 

The PPDC Work Group on 

Performance Measures will meet on 

Wednesday, October 19, 2005, from 2 

p.m. to 5 p.m. 

ADDRESSES: The PPDC meeting will be 

held at the Georgetown University 

Conference Center, 3800 Reservoir 

Road, NW., (Entrance #4), Washington, 

DC in the Leavey Center, Main Floor, 

Salon ‘‘H’’; telephone number: (202) 

687–3242. The Georgetown University 

Transportation Shuttle, between the 

Leavey Center and Metro Stops at 

Dupont Circle and Rosslyn, runs every 

15 minutes from 7 a.m. to 9:30 a.m. and 

from 3:30 p.m. to 7 p.m., Monday 

through Friday. 

The PPDC Work Group on 

Performance Measures will meet at 

EPA’s offices in Crystal Mall #2, 1801 S. 

Bell St., Arlington, VA. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Margie Fehrenbach, Office of Pesticide 

Programs (7501C), Environmental 

Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20460–0001; 

telephone number: (703) 308–4775; fax 

number: (703) 308–4776; e-mail 

address:fehrenbach.margie@epa.gov. 

For information on facilities or 

services for the handicapped or to 

request special assistance for the 

handicapped at the meetings, contact 

the Designated Federal Officer, Margie 

Fehrenbach, at (703) 308–4775 as soon 

as possible. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this Action Apply to Me? 

This action is directed to the public 

in general, and may be of particular 

interest to persons who work in 

agricultural settings or persons who are 

concerned about implementation of the 

Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and 

Rodenticide Act (FIFRA); Federal Food, 

Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA); and 

the amendments to both of these major 

pesticide laws by the Food Quality 

Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996. 

Potentially affected entities may 

include, but are not limited to: 

Agricultural workers and farmers; 

pesticide industry and trade 

associations; environmental, consumer, 

and farmworker groups; pesticide users 

and growers; pest consultants; State, 

local and Tribal governments; academia; 

public health organizations; food 

processors; and the public. If you have 

questions regarding the applicability of 

this action to a particular entity, consult 

the person listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. 

B. How Can I Get Copies of this 

Document and Other Related 

Information? 

1. Docket. EPA has established an 

official public docket for this action 

under docket identification (ID) number 

OPP–2005–0101. The official public 

docket consists of the documents 

specifically referenced in this action, 

any public comments received, and 

other information related to this action. 

Although a part of the official docket, 

the public docket does not include 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. The official public 

docket is the collection of materials that 

is available for public viewing 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. 

2. Electronic access. You may access 

this Federal Register document 

electronically through the EPA Internet 

under the‘‘Federal Register’’ listings 

athttp://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/. 

An electronic version of the public 

docket is available through EPA’s 

electronic public docket and comment 

system, EPA Dockets. You may use EPA 

Dockets at http://www.epa.gov/edocket/ 

to view public comments, to access the 

index listing of the contents of the 

official public docket, and to access 

those documents in the public docket 

that are available electronically. 

Although not all docket materials may 

be available electronically, you may still 

access any of the publicly available 

docket materials through the docket 

facility identified in Unit I.B.1. Once in 

the system, select ‘‘search,’’ then key in 

the appropriate docket ID number. 

A draft agenda has been developed 

and is posted on EPA’s web site athttp:// 

www.epa.gov/pesticides/ppdc/. 

II. Background 

The Office of Pesticide Programs 

(OPP) is entrusted with responsibility to 

help ensure the safety of the American 

food supply, the education and 

protection from unreasonable risk of 

those who apply or are exposed to 

pesticides occupationally or through use 

of products, and general protection of 

the environment and special ecosystems 

from potential risks posed by pesticides. 

PPDC was established under the 

Federal Advisory Committee Act 

(FACA), Public Law 92–463, in 

September 1995, for a 2–year term and 

has been renewed every 2 years since 

that time. PPDC provides advice and 

recommendations to OPP on a broad 

range of pesticide regulatory, policy, 

and program implementation issues that 

are associated with evaluating and 

reducing risks from use of pesticides. 

The following sectors are represented on 

the PPDC: Pesticide industry and trade 

associations; environmental/public 

interest and consumer groups; farm 

worker organizations; pesticide user, 

grower, and commodity groups; Federal 

and State/local/Tribal governments; the 

general public; academia; and public 

health organizations. 

Copies of the PPDC Charter are filed 

with appropriate committees of 

Congress and the Library of Congress 

and are available upon request. 

III. How Can I Request to Participate in 

this Meeting? 

PPDC meetings are open to the public 

and seating is available on a first-come 

basis. Persons interested in attending 

the meeting do not need to register in 

advance. 

List of Subjects 

Environmental protection, 

Agricultural workers, Agriculture, 

Chemicals, Farmworker safety, Foods, 

Human studies, Pesticides and pests, 

Public health, Registration. 

Dated: October 5, 2005. 

James Jones, 

Director, Office of Pesticide Programs. 

[FR Doc. 05–20490 Filed 10–7–05; 10:33 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–S 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[OPP–2004–0381; FRL–7738–9] 

Pyrazon Reregistration Eligibility 

Decision for Low Risk Pesticide; 

Notice of Availability 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: This notice announces the 

availability of EPA’s Reregistration 

Eligibility Decision (RED) for the 

pesticide pyrazon, and opens a public 

comment period on this document. The 

Agency’s risk assessments and other