65578 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 20, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

developmental toxicity do not raise

concerns.

The metabolism of the chemical in

plants and animals for the use is

adequately understood. Secondary

residues occurring in livestock and their

by-products are not expected since there

are no known animal feed stock uses for

pears. Adequate analytical methodology

(HPLC-Fluorescence Methods) is

available for enforcement purposes. The

enforcement methodology has been

submitted to the Food and Drug

Administration for publication in the

Pesticide Analytical Manual, Vol. II

(PAM II). Because of the long lead time

for publication of the method in PAM II,

the analytical methodology is being

made available in the interim to anyone

interested in pesticide enforcement

when requested from Calvin Furlow,

Public Response and Program Resource

Branch, Field Operations Division

(7506C), Office of Pesticide Programs,

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

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

Office location and telephone number:

Rm. 1132, CM #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis

Hwy., Arlington, VA 22202, (703)-305-

5232.

The tolerances established by

amending 40 CFR part 180 will be

adequate to cover residues in or on

pears. There are currently no actions

pending against the continued

registration of this chemical. Based on

the information and data considered,

the Agency has determined that the

tolerance established by amending 40

CFR part 180 would protect the public

health. Therefore, it is proposed that the

tolerance be established as set forth

below.

Any person adversely affected by this

regulation may, within 30 days after

publication of this document in the

Federal Register, file written objections

and/or request a hearing 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 issue(s) on

which a hearing is requested, the

requestor’s contentions on such issues,

and a summary of any evidence relied

upon by the objector (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 a 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 or

the requestor, taking into account

uncontested claims or facts to the

contrary; and resolution of the factual

issues(s) in the manner sought by the

requestor would be adequate to justify

the action requested (40 CFR 178.32).

A record has been established for this

rulemaking under docket number [PP

9F3787/R2194] (including comments

and data submitted electronically as

described below). A public version of

this record, including printed, paper

version 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, Crystall Mall #2,

1921 Jefferson Davis Highway,

Arlington, VA.

Electronic comments can be sent

directly to EPA at:

oop-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.

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR

51735, Oct. 4, 1993), the Agency must

determine whether the regulatory action

is ‘‘significant’’ and therefore subject to

all the requirements of the Executive

Order (i.e., Regulatory Impact Analysis,

review by the Office of Management and

Budget (OMB)). Under section 3(f), the

order defines ‘‘significant’’ as those

actions likely to lead to a rule (1) having

an annual effect on the economy of $100

million or more, or adversely and

materially affecting a sector of the

economy, productivity, competition,

jobs, the environment, public health or

safety, or State, local or tribal

governments or communities (also

known as ‘‘economically significant’’);

(2) creating serious inconsistency or

otherwise interfering with an action

taken or planned by another agency; (3)

materially altering the budgetary

impacts of entitlement, grants, user fees,

or loan programs; or (4) raising novel

legal or policy issues arising out of legal

mandates, the President’s priorities, or

the principles set forth in this Executive

Order.

Pursuant to the terms of this

Executive Order, EPA has determined

that this rule is not ‘‘significant’’ and is

therefore not subject to OMB review.

Pursuant to the requirements 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 a significant

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 Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

Environmental protection,

Administrative practice and procedure,

Agricultural commodities, Pesticides

and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Dated: December 7, 1995.

Stephen L. Johnson,

Director, Registration Division, Office of

Pesticide Programs.

Therefore, 40 CFR part 180 continues

to read as follows:

PART 180—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation of part 180

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 346a and 371.

2. By amending § 180.449(b) in the

table therein by adding and

alphabetically inserting an entry for

pears, to read as follows:

§ 180.449 Avermectin B1 and its delta-8,9-

isomer; tolerances for residues.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

Commodity Parts per

million

* * * * *

Pears ......................................... 0.02

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 95–30975 Filed 12–19–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–F
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 20, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 65579

40 CFR Part 180

[PP 2F4105/R2191; FRL–4989–2]

RIN 2070–AB78

Metalaxyl; Pesticide Tolerances

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This rule establishes

tolerances for combined residues of the

fungicide metalaxyl [N-(2,6-

dimethylphenyl)-N-(methoxyacetyl)

alanine methyl ester] and its metabolites

containing the 2,6-dimethylaniline

moiety and N-(2-hydroxymethyl-6-

methylphenyl)-N-(methoxyacetyl)-

alanine methyl ester, each expressed as

metalaxyl, in or on clover, forage at 1.0

part per million (ppm) and clover, hay

at 2.5 ppm. Ciba-Geigy Corp. submitted

a petition pursuant to the Federal Food,

Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) for the

regulation to establish a maximum

permissible level for residues of the

fungicide.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule is effective on

December 4, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Written objections and

hearing requests, identified by the

document control number, [PP 2F4105/

R2191], may be submitted to: Hearing

Clerk (1900), Environmental Protection

Agency, Rm. M3708, 401 M St., SW.,

Washington, DC 20460. Fees

accompanying objections 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 should be

identified by the document control

number and submitted 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, bring copy of objections and

hearing requests to Rm. 1132, CM #2,

1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington,

VA 22202.

A copy of any 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. Copies of

objections and hearing requests must be

submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the

use of special characters and any form

of encryption. Copies of objections and

hearing requests will also be accepted

on disks in WordPerfect in 5.1 file

format or ASCII file format. All copies

of objections and hearing requests in

electronic form must be identified by

the document number [PP 2F4105/

R2191]. No Confidential Business

Information (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. Additional

information on electronic submissions

can be found below in this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By

mail: Connie B. Welch, Product

Manager (PM) 21, Registration Division

(7505C), Office of Pesticide Programs,

Environmental Protection Agency, 401

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

Office location and telephone number:

Rm. 227, CM #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis

Highway, Arlington, VA 22202, (703)

305-6226; e-mail:

welch.connie@.epamail.epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA

issued a notice of filing, published in

the Federal Register of June 15, 1995

(60 FR 31465), which announced that

Ciba-Geigy Corp., P.O. Box 18300,

Greensboro, NC 27419, had submitted a

pesticide petition, PP 2F4105, to EPA

requesting that the Administrator,

pursuant to section 408(d) of the

FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 346a(d), establish

tolerances for combined residues of the

fungicide metalaxyl [N-(2,6-

dimethylphenyl)-N-(methoxyacetyl)

alanine methyl ester] and its metabolites

containing the 2,6-dimethylaniline

moiety and N-(2-hydroxymethyl-6-

methylphenyl)-N-(methoxyacetyl)-

alanine methyl ester, each expressed as

metalaxyl, in or on the raw agricultural

commmodities cover, forage at 1.0 ppm

and clover, hay at 2.5 ppm.

There were no comments received in

response to the notice of filing. The

scientific data submitted in the petition

and other relevant material have been

evaluated. The toxicological data

considered in support of the tolerance

include:

1. A 3-month dietary study in rats

with a no-observed-effect level (NOEL)

at 17.5 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg)

body weight (bwt)/day (250 parts per

million (ppm)).

2. A developmental toxicity study in

rats with a NOEL of 50 mg/kg bwt for

developmental toxicity and maternal

toxicity.

3. A developmental toxicity study in

rabbits with a NOEL of 300 mg/kg bwt

highest dose tested (HDT). Metalaxyl

did not cause developmental toxicity,

even in the presence of maternal

toxicity.

4. Metalaxyl was negative in bacterial

and mammalian gene mutation. The

fungicide also did not increase the

frequency of reverse mutations in yeast.

Metalaxyl was negative in an in vivo

cytogenetics assay (hamsters) and a

dominant-lethal assay (mice).

Metalaxyl did not increase

unscheduled DNA synthesis in rat

primary hepatocytes or in human

fibroblasts. These results suggest that

metalaxyl is not genotoxic.

5. A three-generation rat reproduction

study with a NOEL of 63 mg/kg bwt/day

(1,250 ppm).

6. A 6-month dog feeding study with

a NOEL of 6.3 mg/kg bwt/day (250

ppm). Effects found at 25 mg/kg were

increased serum alkaline phosphatase

activity and increased liver weight and

liver-to-brain weight ratios without

histological changes.

7. A 2-year rat chronic feeding/

carcinogenicity study with no

compound-related carcinogenic effects

under the conditions of the study at

dietary levels up to 1,250 ppm. The

NOEL is 13 mg/kg bwt/day (250 ppm).

The lowest-observed-effect level (LOEL)

is 63 mg/kg/day based upon slight

increases in liver weight to body weight

ratios and periacinar vacuolation of

hepatocytes.

8. A 2-year mouse oncogenic study

with no compound-related carcinogenic

effects under the conditions of the study

at dietary levels up to 190 mg/kg/day.

Because of concerns raised over some

equivocal increases in tumor incidences

in the male mouse liver and the male rat

adrenal medulla, and the female rat

thyroid, the two chronic feeding studies

were submitted to the Environmental

Pathology Laboratories (EPL) for an

independent reading of the microscopic

slides. The new pathological evaluation

by EPL and the original reports of the rat

and mouse oncogenicity studies were

then both submitted for review to EPA’s

Carcinogen Assessment Group (CAG). A

final review of the carcinogenicity

studies and related material was

performed by the Peer Review

Committee of the Toxicology Branch

(TB) of the Office of Pesticide Programs

(OPP).

The four major issues evaluated by

CAG and the peer review group

included: (1) Perifollicular cell

adenomas in the thyroid of female rats;

(2) adrenal medullary tumors

(pheochromocytomas) in male rats; (3)

liver tumors in male mice; and (4)

whether the HDT (1,250 ppm) in the rat

and mouse oncogenicity studies

represented a maximum-tolerated dose

(MTD).

Regarding the thyroid tumors in

female rats, the peer review group

concluded that the increased incidences

of thyroid tumors in females of treated

groups were not compound related. This
65580 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 20, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

conclusion was based on the following:

(1) There was no progression of benign

tumors (adenomas) to malignancy

(carcinomas); (2) there was no increase

in hyperplastic changes; (3) there was

no dose-response relationship; and (4)

the two reevaluations of the microscopic

slides by the pathologists at EPL and TB

in OPP further did not confirm any

apparent effects observed in the original

report.

The issue of a possible treatmentrelated increase of adrenal medullary

gland tumors, namely,

pheochromocytomas, in the male rat

was also reassessed by both CAG and

the Peer Review Committee. Both

concluded that the data, especially in

view of the reevaluation of the

microscopic slides performed by EPL,

did not support a compound-related

increase of adrenal medullary tumors;

the incidence of pheochromocytomas

more accurately represented

spontaneous variations of a commonly

occurring tumor in the aged rat.

The analysis of the significance of the

equivocal increase in the incidence of

liver tumors in male mice was very

similar to that performed for the rat

thyroid and adrenal gland tumors. The

original pathological reading of the

tissue slides reported an elevated

increase of tumors in some treatment

groups; however, these increases were

not evident after a reevaluation of

themicroscopic slides was performed by

an independent pathologist at EPL and

by the reading of a CAG pathologist. The

Peer Review Committee concurred that

the reevaluation of the slides is reliable

and does not show any compoundrelated increase in the incidence of liver

tumors in the mouse.

The Agency believes that the data

from the rat and mouse long-term

studies are sufficient to support the

conclusion that metalaxyl does not

show a carcinogenic potential in

laboratory animals. This conclusion is

supported by the following: (1) The

doses tested in both the rat and mouse

long-term studies approached an MTD

based upon compound-related changes

in liver weight and/or liver histology;

(2) extensive available mutagenic

evidence indicates no potential

genotoxic activity which correlates with

the negative carcinogenic potential

demonstrated in long-term testing; (3)

metalaxyl is not structurally related to

known carcinogens; and (4) under the

conditions of the rat and mouse tests, no

indication of compound-related

carcinogenic effects was noted at any of

the treatment doses, sexes, or species.

The reference dose (RfD), anticipated

residue contribution (ARC), and food

additive regulations are covered by

existing tolerances.

The nature of the residue is

adequately understood. The

enforcement methodology has been

submitted to the Food and Drug

Administration for publication in the

Pesticide Analytical Manual, Volume II

(PAM II). Because of the long lead time

for publication of the method in PAM II,

the analytical methodology is being

made available in the interim to anyone

interested in pesticide enforcement

when requested from: Calvin Furlow,

Public Response and Program Resources

Branch, Field Operations Division

(7506C), Office of Pesticide Programs,

Environmental Protection Agency, 401

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

Office location and telephone number:

Rm. 1132, CM #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis

Highway, Arlington, VA 22202, (703)-

305-5232.

There are presently no actions

pending against the continued

registration of this chemical.

Based on the information and data

considered, the Agency has determined

that the tolerances established by

amending 40 CFR part 180 will protect

the public health. Therefore, the

tolerances are established as set forth

below.

Any person adversely affected by this

regulation may, within 30 days after

publication of this document in the

Federal Register, file written objections

to the 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 issue(s) on

which a hearing is requested, the

requestor’s contentions on such issues,

and a summary of any evidence relied

upon by the objector (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

issue(s) in the manner sought by the

requestor would be adequate to justify

the action requested (40 CFR 178.32).

EPA has established a record for this

rulemaking under docket number [PP

2F4105/R2191] (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, except legal

holidays. The public record is located in

Rm. 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.

Under Executive Order 12866, EPA

must judge whether a rule is ‘‘major’’

and therefore requires a Regulatory

Impact Analysis. This rule was

submitted to the Office of Management

and Budget (OMB) for review as

required by Executive Order 12866.

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act

(5 U.S.C. 605(b)), EPA has determined

that regulations establishing new

tolerances or raising tolerance levels or

establishing exemptions from tolerance

requirements do not have a significant

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 Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

Environmental protection,

Administrative practice and procedure,

Agricultural commodities, Pesticides

and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Dated: December 4, 1995.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 20, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 65581

Stephen L. Johnson,

Director, Registration Division, Office of

Pesticide Programs.

Therefore, 40 CFR part 180 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.

2. In § 180.408(a) by revising the

introductory text and by amending the

table therein by adding and

alphabetically inserting new entries for

clover, forage and clover, hay, to read as

follows:

§ 180.408 Metalaxyl; tolerances for

residues.

(a) Tolerances are established for the

combined residues of the fungicide

metalaxyl [N-(2,6-dmethylphyenyl)-N-

(methoxyacetyl) alanine methylester]

and its metabolites containing the 2,6-

dimethylaniline moiety, and N-(2-

hydroxy methyl-6-methylphenyl)-N-

(methoxyacetyl)-alanine methyl ester,

each expressed as metalaxyl

equivalents, in or on the following raw

agricultural commodities:

Commodity Parts per

million

* * * * *

Clover, forage ........................... 1.0

Clover, hay ................................ 2.5

* * * * *

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 95–30976 Filed 12–19–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–F

40 CFR Part 721

[OPPTS–50582L; FRL–4982–9]

RIN 2070–AB27

1,3-Propanediamine, N, N’-1,2-

ethanediylbis-, Polymer with 2,4,6-

Trichloro-1,3,5-triazine, Reaction

Products with N-Butyl-2,2,6,6-

tetramethyl-4-piperidinamine;

Modification of Significant New Use

Rules

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is modifying the

significant new use rule (SNUR)

promulgated under section 5(a)(2) of the

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)

for 1,3-propanediamine, N, N’-1,2-

ethanediylbis-, polymer with 2,4,6-

trichloro-1,3,5-triazine, reaction

products with N-butyl-2,2,6,6-

tetramethyl-4-piperidinamine based on

a modification to the TSCA 5(e) consent

order regulating the substance. EPA is

modifying this rule based on receipt of

toxicity data.

EFFECTIVE DATE: The effective date of

this rule is January 19, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Susan B. Hazen, Director, TSCA

Assistance Office (7408), Office of

Pollution Prevention and Toxics,

Environmental Protection Agency, Rm.

E–543B, 401 M St., SW., Washington,

DC 20460, telephone: (202) 554–1404,

TDD: (202) 554–0551; e-mail: TSCAHotline@epamail.epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the

Federal Register of August 15, 1990 (55

FR 33296), EPA issued a SNUR (FRL–

3741–8) establishing significant new

uses for 1,3-propanediamine, N, N’-1,2-

ethanediylbis-, polymer with 2,4,6-

trichloro-1,3,5-triazine, reaction

products with N-butyl-2,2,6,6-

tetramethyl-4-piperidinamine based on

the section 5(e) consent order for the

substance. Because of additional data

EPA has received for this substance,

EPA is modifying the SNUR.

I. Background

The Agency proposed the

modification of the SNUR (FRL–4919–6)

for this substance in the Federal

Register of May 30, 1995 (60 FR 28075).

The background and reasons for the

modification of the SNUR are set forth

in the preamble to the proposed

modification. The Agency received no

public comment concerning the

proposed modification. As a result EPA

is modifying this SNUR.

II. Objectives and Rationale of

Modification of the Rule

During review of the premanufacture

notice (PMN) submitted for the

chemical substance that is the subject of

this modification, EPA concluded that

regulation was warranted under section

5(e) of TSCA pending the development

of information sufficient to make a

reasoned evaluation of the health and

environmental effects of the substances.

EPA identified the tests considered

necessary to evaluate the risks of the

substances and identified the protective

equipment necessary to protect any

workers who may be exposed to the

substances. The basis for such findings

is in the rulemaking record referenced

in Unit III of this preamble. Based on

these findings, a section 5(e) consent

order modification was negotiated with

the PMN submitter.

In light of the petition to modify the

consent order and SNUR, the 90-day

subchronic test, the data on structurally

similar polycationic polymers, and the

recalculation of the risk assessment of

the PMN substances based on

information provided by the petitioner,

the Agency determined that it could no

longer support a finding that the PMN

substance may present an unreasonable

risk to human health or the environment

for the hazard communication and

respiratory protection requirements in

this modification. The modification of

SNUR provisions for the substances

designated herein is consistent with the

provisions of the section 5(e) order.

III. Rulemaking Record

The record for the rule which EPA is

modifying was established at OPPTS–

50582. This record includes information

considered by the Agency in developing

this rule and includes the modification

to consent orders to which the Agency

has responded with this modification.

A public version of the record,

without any Confidential Business

Information, is available in the OPPT

Non-Confidential Information Center

(NCIC) from 12 p.m. to 4 p.m., Monday

through Friday, except legal holidays.

The TSCA NCIC is located in the

Northeast Mall Basement Rm. B–607,

401 M St., SW., Washington, DC.

IV. Regulatory Assessment

Requirements

EPA is modifying the requirements of

this rule by eliminating several

requirements. Any costs or burdens

associated with this rule will be reduced

when the rule is modified. Therefore,

EPA finds that no additional

assessments of costs or burdens are

necessary under Executive Order 12866,

the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.

605(b)), or the Paperwork Reduction Act

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

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 721

Environmental protection, Chemicals,

Hazardous materials, Recordkeeping

and reporting requirements, Significant

new uses.

Dated: December 11, 1995.

Charles M. Auer,

Director, Chemical Control Division, Office

of Pollution Prevention and Toxics.

Therefore, 40 CFR part 721 is

amended to read as follows:

PART 721—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 721

continues to read as follows: