26152 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 102 / Friday, May 24, 1996 / Proposed Rules

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.

This action does not impose any

enforceable duty, or contain any

‘‘unfunded mandates’’ as described in

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act of 1995 (Pub.L. 104–4), or

require prior consultation as specified

by Executive Order 12875 (58 FR 58093,

October 28, 1993), entitled Enhancing

the Intergovernmental Partnership, or

special consideration as required by

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629,

February 16, 1994).

Pursuant to the requirements of the

Regulatory Flexibility Act (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 explaining the

factual basis for this determination 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: May 10, 1996.

Peter Caulkins,

Acting 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. In § 180.368, by removing

‘‘peppers, bell’’ from the table in

paragraph (a), by revising the table in

paragraph (c) and by adding a new

paragraph (d) to read as follows:

§ 180.368 Metolachlor; tolerances for

residues.

* * * *

*

(c)* * *

Commodity Parts per

million Expiration date

Onions, dry bulb ........................................................................................................................................... 1.0 ........................................

Grass forage, fodder and hay group (excluding Bermudagrass), forage .................................................... 10 December 31, 1998

Grass forage, fodder and hay group (excluding Bermudagrass), hay ........................................................ 0.2 December 31, 1998

(d) A time-limited tolerance is

established for the combined residues

(free and bound) of the herbicide

metolachlor [2-chloro-N-(2-ethyl-6-

methylphenyl)-N-(2-methoxy-1-

methylethyl)acetamide], and its

metabolites, determined as the

derivatives, 2-[(2-ethyl-6-

methylphenyl)amino]-1-propanol and 4-

(2-ethyl-6-methylphenyl)-2-hydroxy-5-

methyl-3-morpholinone, each expressed

as the parent compound in or on the

following raw agricultural commodity:

Commodity Parts per

million Expiration date

Pepper .......................................................................................................................................................... 0.5 December 31, 1998

[FR Doc. 96–13022 Filed 5–23–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–F

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Chapter I and Part 64

[CC Docket No. 96–98; CC Docket No. 96–

112; DA 96–753]

Implementation of the Local

Competition Provisions in the

Telecommunications Act of 1996;

Allocation of Costs Associated With

Local Exchange Provision of Video

Programming Services

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The Common Carrier Bureau

released a public notice inviting parties

filing comments or reply comments on

the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in

CC Docket No. 96–98, regarding

implementation of the local competition

provisions in the Telecommunications

Act of 1996, and the Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking in CC Docket No. 96–112,

regarding allocation of costs associated

with local exchange provision of video

programming services, to submit

proposed language for rules that the

Commission could adopt in these

proceedings. Such proposed language

will not be counted against the page

limits set forth in those notices.

DATES: Comment dates in CC Docket No.

96–98 are May 16, 1996, with reply

comments due May 30, 1996, and also

May 20, 1996, with reply comments due

June 3, 1996. Comments in CC Docket

No. 96–112 are due May 28, 1996; reply

comments are due June 7, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Comments must be filed

with the Office of the Secretary, Federal

Communications Commission, 1919 M

Street, N.W., Washington, D. C. 20554.

The complete text of the Notice released

by the Commission is available for

inspection and copying during normal

business hours in the FCC Reference

Center, 1919 M Street, N.W., Room 239,

Washington, D. C. 20554.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul

Gallant (202/418–1941), Policy and

Program Planning Division, Common

Carrier Bureau.
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 102 / Friday, May 24, 1996 / Proposed Rules 26153

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Synopsis of Public Notice

On April 19, 1996, the Commission

released a Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking in CC Docket No. 96–98 to

implement the local competition

provisions of the Telecommunications

Act of 1996. Implementation of the

Local Competition Provisions of the

Telecommunications Act of 1996,

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, FCC

96–182 (Local Competition NPRM) (61

FR 18311, April 25, 1996). Parties are

hereby invited to submit, in conjunction

with their comments or reply

comments, proposed text for rules that

the Commission could adopt in this

proceeding. Specific rule proposals

should be filed as an appendix to a

party’s comments or reply comments,

and will not be counted against the page

limits set forth in paragraph 291 of the

Local Competition NPRM or the Order

released May 7, 1996, modifying those

page limits. Implementation of the Local

Competition Provisions of the

Telecommunications Act of 1996,

Order, DA 96–700. Such appendices

may include only proposed text for

rules that would implement proposals

set forth in the parties’ comments and

reply comments in this proceeding, and

may not include any comments or

arguments. Proposed rules should be

provided in the format used for rules in

the Code of Federal Regulations, and

should otherwise conform to the

Comment Filing Procedures set forth in

the Local Competition NPRM.

On May 10, 1996, the Commission

released a Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking in CC Docket No. 96–112.

Allocation of Costs Associated with

Local Exchange Carrier Provision of

Video Programming Services, Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking, FCC 96–214 (LEC

Video Programming NPRM) (61 FR

25184, May 20, 1996). Parties are hereby

invited to submit, in conjunction with

their comments or reply comments,

proposed text for rules that the

Commission could adopt in this

proceeding. Specific rule proposals

should be attached as an appendix to a

party’s comments or reply comments,

and will not be counted against the page

limits set forth in paragraph 66 of the

LEC Video Programming NPRM. Such

appendices may include only proposed

text for rules that would implement

proposals set forth in the parties’

comments and reply comments in this

proceeding, and may not include any

comments or arguments. Proposed rules

should be provided in the format used

for rules in the Code of Federal

Regulations, and should otherwise

conform to the Comment Filing

Procedures set forth in the LEC Video

Programming NPRM.

Accordingly, it is ordered That parties

may file proposed language for rules in

this proceeding consistent with the

procedures set forth above.

Federal Communications Commission.

Regina M. Keeney,

Chief, Common Carrier Bureau.

[FR Doc. 96–13101 Filed 5–23–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P