31042 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 119 / Wednesday, June 19, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

Branch, Field Operations Division

(7506C), Office of Pesticide Programs,

Environmental Protection Agency,

Crystal Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis

Highway, Arlington, VA.

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 any copies of objections and

hearing requests 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, October 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 ‘‘a

significant regulatory action’’ as an

action that is likely to result in 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

referred to 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 the

rights and obligations thereof; 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: June 4, 1996.

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 § 180.441, by adding a new

paragraph (d), to read as follows:

§ 180.441 Quizalofop ethyl; tolerances for

residues.

* * * * *

(d) Tolerances with regional

registration, as defined in § 180.1(n), are

established for the combined residues of

the herbicide quizalofop-p ethyl ester

[ethyl (R)-2-[4-((6-chloroquinoxalin-2-

yl)oxy)phenoxy] propionate], its acid

metabolite quizalofop-p [R-(2-[4-((6-

chloroquinoxalin-2-yl)oxy)phenoxy])

propanoic acid], and the S enantiomers

of both the ester and the acid, all

expressed as quizalofop-p ethyl ester, in

or the raw agricultural commodities, as

follows:

Commodity Parts per

million

* * * * *

Pineapple .................................. 0.1

* * * * *

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 96–15481 Filed 6–18–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–F

40 CFR Part 180

[OPP–300417A; FRL–5376–3]

RIN 2070–AB78

1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane; Tolerance

Exemption

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This document establishes an

exemption from the requirement of a

tolerance for residues of 1,1,1,2-

tetrafluoroethane when used as an inert

ingredient (aerosol propellant) in

insecticide formulations intended to be

applied in food handling

establishments. This regulation was

requested by Whitmire Research

Laboratories pursuant to the Federal

Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

EFFECTIVE DATE: This regulation

becomes effective June 19, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Written objections,

identified by the docket number, [OPP–

300417A] may be submitted to: Hearing

Clerk (1900), Environmental Protection

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

Washington, DC 20460. A copy of any

objections and hearing requests filed

with the Hearing Clerk should be

identified by the docket 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 request

to: Rm. 1132, CM #2, 1921 Jefferson

Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA 22202. 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 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 5.1 file format

or ASCII file format. All copies of

objections and hearing requests in

electronic form must be identified by

the docket number [OPP–300417A]. No

Confidential Business Information (CBI)

should be submitted through e-mail.

Electronic comments on this final rule

may be filed online at many Federal
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 119 / Wednesday, June 19, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 31043

Depository Libraries. Additional

information on electronic submissions

can be found below in this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By

mail: Amelia M. Acierto, Registration

Support Branch, Registration Division

(7505W), Office of Pesticide Programs,

Environmental Protection Agency, 401

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

Office location and telephone number:

Westfield Building North, 6th Fl., 2800

Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA 22202,

(703) 308–8375; e-mail:

acierto.amelia@epamail.epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the

Federal Register of April 10, 1996 (61

FR 15913), EPA issued a proposed rule

(FRL–5353–5) that gave notice that

Whitmire Research Laboratories, Inc.,

3568 Tree Court Industrial Boulevard,

Saint Louis, MO 63122-6620 had

submitted pesticide petition (PP)

5E4439 to EPA requesting that the

Administrator, pursuant to section

408(e) of the Federal Food, Drug, and

Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C.

346a(e), propose to amend 40 CFR

180.1001(c) by establishing an

exemption from the requirement of a

tolerance for residues of 1,1,1,2-

tetrafluoroethane (HFC-134a) when used

as an inert ingredient (aerosol

propellant) in insecticide formulations

intended for application in food

handling establishments.

Inert ingredients are all ingredients

that are not active ingredients as defined

in 40 CFR 153.125, and include, but are

not limited to, the following types of

ingredients (except when they have a

pesticidal efficacy of their own):

Solvents such as alcohols and

hydrocarbons; surfactants such as

polyoxyethylene polymers and fatty

acids; carriers such as clay and

diatomaceous earth; thickeners such as

carrageenan and modified cellulose;

wetting, spreading, and dispersing

agents; propellants in aerosol

dispensers; microencapsulating agents;

and emulsifiers. The term ‘‘inert’’ is not

intended to imply nontoxicity; the

ingredient may or may not be

chemically active.

There were no comments or requests

for referral to an advisory committee

received in response to the proposed

rule.

The data submitted relevant to the

proposal and other relevant material

have been evaluated and discussed in

the proposed rule. Based on the data

and information considered, the Agency

concludes that the tolerance exemption

will protect the public health.

Therefore, the tolerance exemption is

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 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).

A record has been established for this

rulemaking under docket number [OPP–

300417A] (including objections and

hearing requests 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 public 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,

Crystal Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis

Highway, Arlington, VA.

Written objections and hearing

requests, identified by the docket

number (OPP–insert number), may be

submitted to the Hearing Clerk (1900),

Environmental Protection Agency, Rm.

3708, 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC

20460.

A copy of electronic objections and

hearing requests filed with the Hearing

Clerk can be sent directly to EPA at:

opp-docket@epamail.epa.gov

A copy of electronic objections and

hearing requests filed with the Hearing

Clerk 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, October 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.

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
31044 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 119 / Wednesday, June 19, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

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: June 4, 1996.

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 § 180.1001, the table in

paragraph (c) is amended by adding

alphabetically the inert ingredient

1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane, (CAS Reg. No.

811-97-2), to read as follows:

§ 180.1001 Exemptions from the

requirement of a tolerance.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

Inert ingredients Limits Uses

* * * * * * *

1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane, (CAS Reg. No. 811–97–2) .............................................. Aerosol propellant

* * * * * * *

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 96–15482 Filed 6–18–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–F

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Parts 0, 2 and 15

[ET Docket No. 95–19; FCC 96–208]

Streamlining the Equipment

Authorization Procedures for Digital

Devices

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: These rules deregulate the

equipment authorization requirements

for personal computers and personal

computer peripherals by relaxing the

equipment authorization procedures to

provide a new self-authorization process

based on a manufacturer’s or supplier’s

declaration of compliance. These

changes were made to reduce the

regulatory burden on computer

manufacturers and assemblers. This

action will save industry approximately

$250 million annually, permit products

to reach the marketplace more quickly

and stimulate competition in the

computer industry.

EFFECTIVE DATE: August 19, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John

A. Reed at (202) 418–2455 and Anthony

Serafini at 418–2456, Office of

Engineering and Technology.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

summary of the Commission’s Report

and Order in ET Docket No. 95–19, FCC

96–208, adopted May 9, 1996 and

released May 14, 1996. The complete

text of this Report and Order is available

for inspection and copying during

normal business hours in the FCC

Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M

Street, NW., Washington, DC, and also

may be purchased from the

Commission’s copy contractor,

International Transcription Services,

Inc., (202) 857–3800, 2100 M Street,

NW., Suite 140, Washington, DC 20037.

Summary of the Report and Order

1. By this action, the Commission is

streamlining the equipment

authorization requirements for personal

computers and personal computer

peripherals. The item adopts a new

‘‘Declaration of Conformity’’ (DoC)

procedure that will permit these devices

to be authorized based on a

manufacturer’s or supplier’s declaration

that the computer product conforms

with all FCC requirements. Under this

procedure, a manufacturer or equipment

supplier will test a product to ensure

compliance with our standards for

limiting radio frequency (RF) emissions

and will include a statement, attesting

to compliance with those standards in

the literature furnished with the

product. We are also permitting the

marketing of personal computers

assembled from separate components

that have themselves been authorized

under a DoC. In such cases, no further

testing of the completed assembly will

be required.

2. We anticipate that these rule

changes will save industry

approximately $250 million annually in

administrative expenses, while

continuing to provide the same level of

protection against harmful interference

from personal computing devices to

radio communication services. In

addition, the new rules will eliminate

the need for manufacturers to obtain

FCC approval before marketing new

personal computer products and thus

will allow such products to reach the

marketplace more quickly. We also

believe that our relaxation of the

existing regulations, which can be

particularly burdensome for small

manufacturers, will stimulate

competition in the computer industry.

Further, these changes will align our

equipment authorization requirements

for personal computers with those used

in other parts of the world. This action

is consistent with new authority

provided in the Telecommunications

Act of 1996 that permits the

Commission to authorize the use of

private organizations for testing and

certifying the compliance of devices or

home electronics equipment and

systems with FCC regulations.

3. Accordingly, it is ordered that Parts

0, 2 and 15 of the Commission’s Rules

and Regulations are amended as

specified below, effective August 19,

1996. It is also ordered that the

proceeding in GEN Docket No. 90–413

is terminated. The authority for issuance

of this Report and Order is contained in

Sections 4(i), 301, 302, 303(e), 303(f),

303(r), 304 and 307 of the

Communications Act of 1934, as

amended, 47 U.S.C. Sections 154(i), 301,

302, 303(e), 303(f), 303(r), 304 and 307.

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. Section 603, an

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

was incorporated in the Notice of

Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) in ET

Docket No. 95–19, FCC 95–46, 60 FR

15116, March 22, 1995. Written

comments on the proposals in the

NPRM, including the Regulatory

Flexibility Analysis, were requested.