18142 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 24, 1996 / Notices

its use could control lygus bugs and the

aphid population below economic

levels while retaining predators and

parasites.

Under the proposed exemption,

pirimicarb may be applied no more than

three applications, not to exceed the rate

of 3.0 ounces or 0.188 pound of active

ingredient (6.0 ounces of product) per

acre, applied in a minimum application

spray volume of 5 gallons per acre by air

or 10 gallons per acre by ground.

This notice does not constitute a

decision by EPA on the application

itself. The regulations governing section

18 require publication of a notice of

receipt of an application for a specific

exemption proposing use of a new

chemical (i.e., an active ingredient not

contained in any currently registered

pesticide), [40 CFR 166.24 (a)(1)].

Pirimicarb is an unregistered chemical.

Such notice provides for opportunity for

public comment on the application.

A record has been established for this

notice under docket number [OPP–

181007] (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 Resource

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 notice, 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 record which will also include

all comments submitted directly in

writing. The official record is the paper

record maintained at the address in

‘‘ADDRESSES’’ at the beginning of this

document. Accordingly, interested

persons may submit written views on

this subject to the Field Operations

Division at the address above.

The Agency, accordingly, will review

and consider all comments received

during the comment period in

determining whether to issue the

emergency exemptions requested by the

Oregon, Idaho and Washington

Departments of Agricultures.

List of Subjects

Environmental protection, Pesticides

and pests, Emergency exemptions.

Dated: April 15, 1996.

Stephen L. Johnson,

Director, Registration Division, Office of

Pesticide Programs.

[FR Doc. 96–9976 Filed 4–23–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–F

[OPP–181009; FRL–5363–7]

Emergency Exemptions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: EPA has granted specific

exemptions for the control of various

pests to 11 States listed below. A crisis

exemption was initiated by the

California Department of Pesticide

Regulation and a quarantine exemption

has been granted to the United States

Department of Agriculture. These

exemptions, issued during the months

of November 1995, and January through

February 1996 are subject to application

and timing restrictions and reporting

requirements designed to protect the

environment to the maximum extent

possible. Information on these

restrictions is available from the contact

persons in EPA listed below.

DATES: See each specific, crisis, and

quarantine exemptions for its effective

date.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: See

each emergency exemption for the name

of the contact person. The following

information applies to all contact

persons: By mail: Registration Division

(7505W), Office of Pesticide Programs,

Environmental Protection Agency, 401

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

Office location and telephone number:

6th Floor, CS 1B1, 2800 Jefferson Davis

Highway, Arlington, VA (703–308–

8417); e-mail:

group.ermus@epamail.epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has

granted specific exemptions to the:

1. Alabama Department of Agriculture

and Industries for the use of norflurazon

on bermudagrass to control annual

weeds; February 1, 1996, to July 1, 1996.

(Dave Deegan)

2. Arizona Department of Agriculture

for the use of imidacloprid on cucurbits

to control the whitefly; February 9,

1996, to February 9, 1997. (Andrea

Beard)

3. Arizona Department of Agriculture

for the use of cymoxanil on potatoes to

control late blight; February 15, 1996, to

April 15, 1996. (Libby Pemberton)

4. Arizona Department of Agriculture

for the use of dimethomorph on

potatoes to control late blight; February

15, 1996, to April 15, 1996. (Libby

Pemberton)

5. California Department of Pesticide

Regulation for the use of cymoxanil on

potatoes to control late blight; February

15, 1996, to November 13, 1996. (Libby

Pemberton)

6. California Department of Pesticide

Regulation for the use of dimethomorph

on potatoes to control late blight;

February 15, 1996, to November 13,

1996. (Libby Pemberton)

7. California Department of

Agriculture for the use of imidacloprid

on cucurbits to control the whitefly;

February 9, 1996, to February 9, 1997.

(Andrea Beard)

8. California Department of Pesticide

Regulation for the use of bifenthrin on

broccoli, cabbage, cauliflower, rapini

and lettuce to control the silverleaf

whitefly; January 26, 1996, to April 30,

1996. A notice published in the Federal

Register of February 7, 1996 (61 FR

4659). Without the the use of bifenthrin,

the applicant claims that growers will

suffer significant economic loss this

growing season. (Margarita Collantes)

9. California Department of Pesticide

Regulation for the use of cyromazine on

onion seeds to control onion maggots;

January 26, 1996, to May 31, 1996.

(Dave Deegan)

10. Florida Department of Agriculture

and Consumer Services for the use of

cymoxanil on tomatoes to control late

blight; February 6, 1996, to February 5,

1997. (Libby Pemberton)

11. Florida Department of Agriculture

and Consumer Services for the use of

mancozeb on mangoes to control

anthracnose; February 14, 1996, to

September 30, 1996. (Margarita

Collantes)

12. Georgia Department of Agriculture

for the use of norflurazon on

bermudagrass to control annual weeds;

February 1, 1996, to July 1, 1996. (Dave

Deegan)

13. Louisiana Department of

Agriculture and Forestry for the use of

norflurazon on bermudagrass to control

weeds; February 23, 1996, to April 15,

1996. (Dave Deegan)

14. Minnesota Department of

Agriculture for the use of thiophanatemethyl on sunflower seeds to control

sclerotinia head rot (white mold);

February 21, 1996, to April 15, 1996.

(Dave Deegan)

15. New Mexico Department of

Agriculture for the use of propazine on
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 24, 1996 / Notices 18143

sorghum to control broadleaf weeds;

January 31, 1996, to August 1, 1996.

(Andrea Beard)

16. North Dakota Department of

Agriculture for the use of thiophanatemethyl on sunflower seeds to control

sclerotinia head rot (white mold);

February 21, 1996, to April 15, 1996.

(Dave Deegan)

17. Texas Department of Agriculture

for the use of propazine on sorghum to

control broadleaf weeds; January 31,

1996, to August 1, 1996. (Andrea Beard)

18. Texas Department of Agriculture

for the use of bifenthrin on cucumbers,

melons, and squash to control the sweet

potato whitefly; January 26, 1996, to

January 26, 1997. (Kerry Leifer)

19. Texas Department of Agriculture

for the use of imidacloprid on melons,

cucumbers, and squash to control the

sweet potato whitefly; January 26, 1996,

to January 26, 1997. (Kerry Leifer)

20. Texas Department of Agriculture

for the use of norflurazon on

bermudagrass to control annual weeds;

February 1, 1996, to June 15, 1996.

(Dave Deegan)

21. Virginia Department of

Agriculture and Consumer Services for

the use of metolachlor on spinach to

control weeds; February 15, 1996, to

November 15, 1996. (Margarita

Collantes)

A crisis exemption was initiated by

the California Department of Pesticide

Regulation on November 20, 1995, for

the use of bifenthrin on broccoli,

cabbage, cauliflower, rapini, and lettuce

to control the silverleaf whitefly. This

program has ended. (Margarita

Collantes)

EPA has granted a quarantine

exemption to the United States

Department of Agriculture for the use of

naled baits on tree trunks, utility poles,

and other inanimate objects to eradicate

the oriental fruit fly, the melon fly, the

peach fruit fly, and other dacus species;

February 16, 1996, to February 16, 1999.

(Andrea Beard)

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136.

List of Subjects

Environmental protection, Pesticides

and pests, Crisis exemptions.

Dated: April 12, 1996.

Peter Caulkins,

Acting Director Registration Division, Office

of Pesticide Programs.

[FR Doc. 96–10097 Filed 4–23–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–F

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

[CC Docket No. 96–23, DA 96–381]

Revision of Filing Requirements:

Annual ARMIS Reports

AGENCY: Common Carrier Bureau,

Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: In this Order, the Common

Carrier Bureau rescinded the proposal

set forth in Revision of Reporting

Requirements, that carriers file

automated record management

information systems (ARMIS) quality of

service reports semi-annually rather

than quarterly as specified in current

requirements. Instead, it established that

such report may be filed annually

beginning on April 1, 1996, consistent

with revisions to ARMIS reporting

requirements prescribed by Section

402(b)(2)(B) of the Telecommunications

Act of 1996. This action reduced further

the frequency of filing of the ARMIS

quality of service reports.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Nasir M. Khilji, (202) 418–0958.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION/SYNOPSIS

OF ORDER: This is a synopsis of the

Common Carrier Bureau’s Order in CC

Docket No. 96–23, adopted March 18,

1996, and released March 20, 1996. The

full text of this Order is available for

inspection and copying during normal

business hours in the FCC Dockets

Branch, Room 230, 1919 M Street, N.W.,

Washington, D.C. The complete text

may be purchased from the

Commission’s copy contractor,

International Transcription Service,

Inc., 2100 M Street, N.W., Suite 1400,

Washington, D.C. 20037 (telephone

(202) 857–3800).

I. Background

1. In Revision of Reporting

Requirements (CC Docket No. 96–23,

FCC 96–64, released February 27, 1996;

61 FR 10522, March 14, 1996), the

Commission proposed to eliminate

thirteen, and reduce the frequency of

filing of six, information collection

requirements applicable to

communications common carriers.

Among the latter, ARMIS quality of

service reports are currently required to

be submitted quarterly by local

exchange carriers (LECs) for whom price

cap regulation is mandatory and by

LECs that have elected to be governed

by price cap rules. In Revision of

Reporting Requirements, the

Commission proposed to reduce the

frequency of filing of these reports from

quarterly to semi-annual in light of

increasingly active monitoring of service

quality by states. In Revision of

Reporting Requirements, the

Commission delegated to the Chief,

Common Carrier Bureau authority to

determine whether to adopt any of the

proposals set forth in that notice of

proposed rulemaking and to issue any

necessary reports or orders arising in

that rulemaking.

2. The Telecommunications Act of

1996 became law on February 8, 1996.

That Act provides, inter alia, that the

Commission shall permit any

communications common carrier to file

ARMIS reports annually, to the extent

such carrier is required to file such

reports.

II. Discussion

3. Section 402(b)(2)(B) of the

Telecommunications Act of 1996

supersedes both current ARMIS filing

requirements and the Commission’s

proposal in Revision of Reporting

Requirements to reduce the frequency of

filing ARMIS quality of service reports

from quarterly to semi-annual.

Accordingly, the Common Carrier

Bureau rescinded the proposal made in

this proceeding concerning ARMIS

quality of service reports. Instead, as

described in paragraph 4 below, in

accordance with the

Telecommunications Act of 1996, it

established that the quality of service

report may be filed annually.

4. Carriers subject to ARMIS reporting

requirements are currently required to

file a quarterly quality of service report

on March 31, 1996. The Common

Carrier Bureau established that the

annual ARMIS quality of service report

be filed each year on April 1, beginning

April 1, 1996. At a later date, the Bureau

will provide further guidance on

necessary changes to form and content

of the ARMIS quality of service report,

and other ARMIS reports, in light of the

Telecommunications Act of 1996.

III. Ordering Clauses

5. Accordingly, it is ordered, pursuant

to sections 0.91 and 0.291 of the

Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 0.91 and

0.291 and section 402(b)(2)(B) of the

Telecommunications Act of 1996, Pub.

L. No. 104–104, 110 Stat. 56 (1996) (to

be codified at 47 U.S.C. § 159. Sec. 11),

the proposal in Revision of Reporting

Requirements that ARMIS quality of

service reports be filed semi-annually is

rescinded.

6. It is further ordered that, pursuant

to Sections 0.91 and 0.291 of the

Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 0.91 and

0.291 and Section 402(b)(2)(B) of the

Telecommunications Act of 1996, Pub.

L. No. 104–104, 110 Stat. 56 (1996) (to