3326 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 21 / Wednesday, January 31, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

and tribal governments or the private

sector of less then $100 million in any

one year, the USEPA has not prepared

a budgetary impact statement or

specifically addressed the selection of

the least costly, most cost-effective, or

least burdensome alternative. Because

small governments will not be

significantly or uniquely affected by this

rule, the USEPA is not required to

develop a plan with regard to small

governments. This rule only approves

the incorporation of existing state rules

into the SIP. It imposes no additional

requirements.

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act,

5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., USEPA must

prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis

assessing the impact of any proposed or

final rule on small entities. (5 U.S.C. 603

and 604.) Alternatively, USEPA may

certify that the rule will not have a

significant impact on a substantial

number of small entities. Small entities

include small businesses, small not-forprofit enterprises, and government

entities with jurisdiction over

populations of less than 50,000.

SIP approvals under section 110 and

subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act

do not create any new requirements, but

simply approve requirements that the

State is already imposing. Therefore,

because the Federal SIP-approval does

not impose any new requirements, I

certify that it does not have a significant

impact on any small entities affected.

Moreover, due to the nature of the

Federal-State relationship under the

Act, preparation of a regulatory

flexibility analysis would constitute

Federal inquiry into the economic

reasonableness of the State action. The

Clean Air Act forbids USEPA to base its

actions concerning SIPs on such

grounds. Union Electric Co. v. USEPA.,

427 U.S. 246, 256–66 (S.Ct. 1976); 42

U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of

this action must be filed in the United

States Court of Appeals for the

appropriate circuit by April 1, 1996.

Filing a petition for reconsideration by

the Administrator of this final rule does

not affect the finality of this rule for the

purposes of judicial review nor does it

extend the time within which a petition

for judicial review may be filed, and

shall not postpone the effectiveness of

such rule or action. This action may not

be challenged later in proceedings to

enforce its requirements. (See Section

307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Intergovernmental

relations, Ozone.

40 CFR Part 81

Air pollution control.

Dated: December 15, 1995.

Valdas V. Adamkus,

Regional Administrator.

Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of

Federal Regulations is amended as

follows:

PART 52—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 52

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

2. Section 52.1885 is amended by

adding paragraphs (b) (7) and (8) to read

as follows:

§ 52.1885 Control strategy: Ozone.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(7) Stark County.

(8) Mahoning and Trumbull Counties.

* * * * *

PART 81—DESIGNATION OF AREAS

FOR AIR QUALITY PURPOSES—OHIO

1. The authority citation for part 81

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401—7671q.

2. In § 81.336 the ozone table is

amended by revising the entries for

Stark, Mahoning, and Trumbull

Counties to read as follows:

§ 81.336 Ohio.

* * * * *

OHIO—OZONE

Designated area

Designation Classification

Date1 Type Date1 Type

* * * * * * *

Canton Area .............................................................. .

Stark County ..................................... April 1, 1996 ........................................ Attainment.

* * * * * * *

Youngstown-Warren-Sharon Area: .............................................................. .

Mahoning County..... ........................ April 1, 1996 ........................................ Attainment.

Trumbull County..... .......................... April 1, 1996 ........................................ Attainment.

* * * * * * *

1This date is November 15, 1990, unless otherwise noted.

[FR Doc. 96–1848 Filed 1–30–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 180

[PP 2E4037 and 5E4437/R2195; FRL–4993–

1]

RIN 2070–AB78

1-[[2-(2,4-Dichlorophenyl)-4-Propyl-1,3-

Dioxolan-2-yl]Methyl]-1H-1,2,4-

Triazole; Pesticide Tolerances

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This rule establishes

tolerances for residues of the fungicide

1-[[2-(2,4-dichlorophenyl)-4-propyl-1,3-

dioxolan-2yl]methyl]-1H-1,2,4-triazole

(also called propiconazole) and its

metabolites determined as 2,4-

dichlorobenzoic acid and expressed as

parent compound in or on the raw

agricultural commodities mint tops

(leaves and stems) at 0.3 part per
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 21 / Wednesday, January 31, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 3327

million (ppm) and mushrooms at 0.1

ppm. The Interregional Research Project

No. 4 (IR-4) submitted petitions under

the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic

Act (FFDCA) requesting that EPA

establish maximum permissible levels

for residues of propiconazole in or on

the commodities.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This regulation

becomes effective January 31, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Written objections and

hearing requests, identified by the

document control number, [PP 2E4037

and 5E4437/R2195], 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 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 1B2,

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.

An electronic copy of objections and

hearing requests filed with the Hearing

Clerk may be submitted to OPP by

sending electronic mail (e-mail) to:

opp-docket@epamail.epa.gov

Copies of electronic objections and

hearing requests must be submitted as

an ASCII file avoiding the use of special

characters and any form of encryption.

Copies of electronic objections and

hearing requests will also be accepted

on disks in WordPerfect 5.1 file format

or ASCII file format. All copies of

electronic objections and hearing

requests must be identified by the

docket number [PP 2E4037 and 5E4437/

R2195] . No Confidential Business

Information (CBI) should be submitted

through e-mail. Copies of electronic

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: Hoyt L. Jamerson, Registration

Division (7505W), Office of Pesticide

Programs, Environmental Protection

Agency, 401 M St., SW., Washington,

DC 20460. Office location and telephone

number: Rm. 207, CM #2, 1921 Jefferson

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

308-8783; e-mail:

jamerson.hoyt@epamail.epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA

issued a proposed rule, published in the

Federal Register of November 15, 1995

(60 FR 57375), which announced that

the Interregional Research Project No. 4

(IR-4), New Jersey Agricultural

Experiment Station, P.O. Box 231,

Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ

08903, had submitted to EPA pesticide

petitions, PP 2E4037 and PP 5E4437, on

behalf of the named Agricultural

Experiment Stations. The petitions

requested that the Administrator,

pursuant to section 408(e) of th Federal

Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA),

21 U.S.C. 346a(e), amend 40 CFR

180.434 by establishing tolerances for

residues of 1-[[2-(2,4-dichlorophenyl)-4-

propyl-1,3-dioxolan-2yl]methyl]-1H1,2,4-triazole and its metabolites

determined as 2,4-dichlorobenzoic acid

and expressed as parent compound in or

on certain raw agricultural commodities

as follows:

1. PP 2E4037. Petition submitted on

behalf of the Agricultural Experiment

Station of Oregon proposing a tolerance

for mint tops (leaves and stems) at 0.3

ppm. The petitioner proposed that use

of propiconazole on mint be limited to

mint production areas west of the

Cascade Mountains based on the

geographical representation of the

residue data submitted. Additional

residue data will be required to expand

the area of usage. Persons seeking

broader registration should contact the

Agency’s Registration Division at the

address provided above.

2. PP 5E4437. Petition submitted on

behalf of the Agricultural Experiment

Station of Pennsylvania proposing a

tolerance for mushrooms at 0.1 ppm.

There were no comments or requests

for referral to an advisory committee

received in response to the proposed

rule.

The data submitted with 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 tolerances 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

2E4037 and 5E4437/R2195] (including

any comments and data submitted

electronically). 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 Resources Branch, Field

Operations Division (7506C), Office of

Pesticide Programs, Environmental

Protection Agency, Crystal Mall 1B2,

1921 Jefferson Davis Highway,

Arlington, VA.

Electronic comments may 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 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
3328 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 21 / Wednesday, January 31, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

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.

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: January 23, 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 § 180.434, paragraph (a) is

amended in the table therein by adding

and alphabetically inserting an entry for

mushrooms, and paragraph (b) is

amended in the table therein by adding

and alphabetically inserting an entry for

mint, to read as follows:

§ 180.434 1-[[2-(2,4-dichlorophenyl)-4-

propyl-1,3-dioxolan-2-yl]methyl]-1H-1,2,4-

triazole; tolerances for residues.

(a) * * *

Commodity Parts per

million

* * * * *

Mushrooms ............................... 0.1

* * * * *

(b) * * *

Commodity Parts per

million

* * * * *

Mint, tops (leaves and stems) .. 0.3

* * * * *

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 96–1719 Filed 1–30–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–F

40 CFR Part 180

[PP 4E4288 and 4E4289/R2198; FRL–4995–

1]

RIN 2070–AC18

Chlorpyrifos; Pesticide Tolerance

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This rule revises tolerances

for residues of the insecticide

chlorpyrifos in or on the raw

agricultural commodities peaches,

pears, plums, and nectarines by

establishing the current time-limited

tolerances as permanent tolerances. The

regulations to establish maximum

permissible levels of residues of the

insecticide were requested in petitions

submitted by DowElanco and are

needed to cover maximum expected

residues in or on imported

commodities.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This regulation became

effective January 24, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Written objections and

hearing requests, identified by the

docket control number, [PP 4E4288 and

4E4289/R2198], may be submitted to:

Hearing Clerk (A–110), 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 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 1B2, 1921 Jefferson

Davis Highway, Arlington, VA. 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.

An electronic copy of objections and

hearing requests filed with the Hearing

Clerk may be submitted to OPP by

sending electronic mail (e-mail) to:

opp-docket@epamail.epa.gov

Copies of electronic objections and

hearing requests must be submitted as

an ASCII file avoiding the use of special

characters and any form of encryption.

Copies of electronic objections and

hearing requests will also be accepted

on disks in WordPerfect 5.1 file format

or ASCII file format. All copies of

electronic objections and hearing

requests must be identified by the

docket number [PP 4E4288 and 4E4289/

R2198]. No Confidential Business

Information (CBI) should be submitted

through e-mail. Copies of electronic

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: Dennis H. Edwards, Jr., Product

Manager (PM) 19, Registration Division

(7505C), Office of Pesticide Programs,

Environmental Protection Agency, 401

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

Office location, telephone number, and

e-mail address: Rm. 207, CM #2, 1921

Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA,

(703) 305-6386; email:edwards.dennis@epamail.epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA

issued a proposed rule, published in the

Federal Register of September 28, 1993

(58 FR 68621) which announced that

DowElanco had submitted pesticide

petitions (PP 4E4288 and PP 4E4289) to

the Administrator, pursuant to section

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

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

346a(e), to amend 40 CFR 180.342 by

revising the tolerances for residues of

the insecticide chlorpyrifos [O,O-diethyl

O-(3,5,6-trichloro-2-pyridyl)