Tap any paragraph to write a margin note. Your notes collect in the Desk below the text and file under cases with @. The side-by-side margin rail opens on a larger screen.

§
Marginalia
Code · REGISTER · 2006-09-06 · Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) · Rules and Regulations

Rules and Regulations. Direct final rule

27,146 words·~123 min read·/register/2006/09/06/06-7427

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R05-OAR-2006-0436; FRL-8214-2] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Illinois; Ford Motor Company Adjusted Standard AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Direct final rule. SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA)is approving a January 4, 2006, request from Illinois for a site specific revision to the State Implementation Plan
(SIP)for the Ford Motor Company (Ford). The revision will allow Ford to discontinue use of its Stage II vapor recovery system (Stage II) at its Chicago Assembly Plant. In place of Stage II, Ford will comply with the standards of the federal onboard refueling vapor recovery
(ORVR)regulations, as well as meet other minor conditions. The exclusive use of ORVR will provide at least an equivalent amount of gasoline vapor capture as Stage II. DATES: This direct final rule will be effective November 6, 2006, unless EPA receives adverse comments by October 6, 2006. If adverse comments are received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the **Federal Register** informing the public that the rule will not take effect. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-2006-0436, by one of the following methods: • *http://www.regulations.gov:* Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. • *E-mail: mooney.john@epa.gov.* • *Fax:*
(312)886-5824. • *Mail:* John M. Mooney, Chief, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. • *Hand Delivery:* John M. Mooney, Chief, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The Regional Office official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. excluding Federal holidays. *Instructions:* Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-2006-0436. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at *http://www.regulations.gov,* including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information
(CBI)or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional instructions on submitting comments, go to Section I of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. *Docket:* All documents in the docket are listed in the *www.regulations.gov* index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in *http://www.regulations.gov* or in hard copy at the Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. We recommend that you telephone Julie Henning, Environmental Protection Specialist, at
(312)886-4882 before visiting the Region 5 office. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julie Henning, Environmental Protection Specialist, State and Tribal Planning Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604,
(312)886-4882, *henning.julie@epa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever “we,” “us,” or “our” is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information section is arranged as follows: I. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA? II. Why Did Ford Request an Adjusted Standard from the State? III. What Are the Environmental Effects of This Action? IV. What Action Is EPA Taking Today? V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA? A. Submitting CBI Do not submit this information to EPA through www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI). In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. B. Tips for Preparing Your Comments When submitting comments, remember to: 1. Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying information (subject heading, **Federal Register** date and page number). 2. Follow directions—The EPA may ask you to respond to specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR)part or section number. 3. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and substitute language for your requested changes. 4. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information and/or data that you used. 5. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be reproduced. 6. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and suggest alternatives. 7. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of profanity or personal threats. 8. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline identified. II. Why Did Ford Request an Adjusted Standard From the State? Pursuant to requirements at 35 Illinois Administrative Code 218.586, Ford has been using and maintaining a vapor collection and control system (Stage II) at the Chicago Assembly Plant, which is certified as having a vapor recovery and removal efficiency of at least 95%. In addition, Section 202(a)(6) of the Clean Air Act
(CAA)requires that automobile manufacturers such as Ford incorporate onboard refueling vapor recovery
(ORVR)systems in new cars that recover at least 95% of the gasoline vapors displaced during the refueling of vehicles, with the intent that ORVR would fully replace the Stage II system once the ORVR systems were in widespread use throughout the motor vehicle fleet. Only ORVR-equipped vehicles can be fueled at this facility, therefore, the Stage II system at the Chicago Assembly Plant can be discontinued because it is a redundant control system. III. What Are the Environmental Effects of This Action? The overall amount of gasoline vapor emissions emitted to the atmosphere will not change as a result of this action, and the action will therefore have no environmental effect. The Stage II system has a 95% vapor recovery. Every vehicle fueled with the Stage II system, however, is already equipped with ORVR, which also captures at least 95% of evaporative gasoline emissions. ORVR therefore fully displaces the need for Stage II vapor recovery at the Chicago Assembly Plant. IV. What Action Is EPA Taking Today? EPA is approving changes to the Illinois SIP to grant an adjusted standard that will allow Ford to discontinue use of its Stage II vapor recovery system at its Chicago Assembly Plant. We are publishing this action without prior proposal because we view this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipate no adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this **Federal Register** publication, we are publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposal to approve the state plan if relevant adverse written comments are filed. This rule will be effective November 6, 2006 without further notice unless we receive relevant adverse written comments by October 6, 2006. If we receive such comments, we will withdraw this action before the effective date by publishing a subsequent document that will withdraw the final action. All public comments received will then be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed action. The EPA will not institute a second comment period. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do so at this time. If we do not receive any comments, this action will be effective November 6, 2006. V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews. Executive Order 12866; Regulatory Planning and Review Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is not a “significant regulatory action” and therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use Because it is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866 or a “significant energy action,” this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use” (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). Regulatory Flexibility Act This action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 *et seq.* ). Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Because this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4). Executive Order 13175 Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (59 FR 22951, November 9, 2000). Executive Order 13132 Federalism This action also does not have federalism implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a state rule implementing a federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. Executive Order 13045 Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 “Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks” (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the state to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. Paperwork Reduction Act This rule does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ). Congressional Review Act The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 *et seq.* , as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the **Federal Register** . A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the **Federal Register** . This action is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(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 November 6, 2006. 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 in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds. Dated: August 17, 2006. Norman Niedergang, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. For the reasons stated in the preamble, part 52, chapter I, of 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 *et seq.* Subpart O—Illinois 2. Section 52.720 is amended by adding and reserving paragraph (c)(174) and adding paragraph (c)(175) to read as follows: § 52.720 Identification of plan.
(c)* * *
(174)[Reserved]
(175)On January 4, 2006, Illinois submitted a site-specific State Implementation Plan revision for the Ford Motor Company
(Ford)Chicago Assembly Plant. The revision allows Ford to discontinue use of its Stage II vapor recovery system and requires instead that Ford comply with federal onboard refueling vapor recovery regulations and other conditions.
(i)Incorporation by reference.
(A)September 1, 2005, Opinion and Order of the Illinois Pollution Control Board, AS 05-5, effective September 1, 2005. [FR Doc. E6-14543 Filed 9-5-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [MI-87-1; FRL-8214-1] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Michigan; Revised Format of 40 CFR Part 52 for Materials Being Incorporated by Reference AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule; Notice of administrative change. SUMMARY: EPA is revising the format of materials submitted by the state of Michigan that are incorporated by reference
(IBR)into its State Implementation Plan (SIP). The regulations affected by this format change have all been previously submitted by Michigan and approved by EPA. This format revision will primarily affect the “Identification of plan” section, as well as the format of the SIP materials that will be available for public inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center located at EPA Headquarters in Washington, DC, and the EPA Region 5 Office. EPA is also adding a table in the “Identification of plan” section which summarizes the approval actions that EPA has taken on the non-regulatory and quasi-regulatory portions of the Michigan SIP. The sections pertaining to provisions promulgated by EPA or state-submitted materials not subject to IBR review remain unchanged. DATES: *Effective Date:* This final rule is effective on September 6, 2006. ADDRESSES: SIP materials which are incorporated by reference into 40 CFR part 52 are available for inspection at the following locations: Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604; the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, EPA Headquarters Library, Infoterra Room (Room Number 3334), EPA West Building, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460, and the National Archives and Records Administration. If you wish to obtain materials from a docket in the EPA Headquarters Library, please call the Office of Air and Radiation
(OAR)Docket/Telephone number:
(202)566-1742. For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: *http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathleen D'Agostino, Environmental Engineer, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604,
(312)886-1767, *dagostino.kathleen@epa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever “we,” “us,” or “our” is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information section is arranged as follows: Table of Contents I. Background A. Description of a SIP B. How EPA Enforces SIPs C. How the State and EPA Update the SIP D. How EPA Compiles the SIP E. How EPA Organizes the SIP Compilation F. Where You Can Find a Copy of the SIP Compilation G. The Format of the New Identification of Plan Section H. When a SIP Revision Becomes Federally Enforceable I. The Historical Record of SIP Revision Approvals II. What EPA Is Doing in This Action III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Background A. Description of a SIP Each state has a SIP containing the control measures and strategies used to attain and maintain the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The SIP is extensive, containing elements covering a variety of subjects, such as air pollution control regulations, emission inventories, monitoring networks, attainment demonstrations, and enforcement mechanisms. B. How EPA Enforces SIPs Each state must formally adopt the control measures and strategies in the SIP after the public has had an opportunity to comment on them. They are then submitted to EPA as SIP revisions on which EPA must formally act. Once these control measures and strategies are approved by EPA, after notice and comment rulemaking, they are incorporated into the federally approved SIP and are identified in Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations part 52 (Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans), (40 CFR part 52). The actual state regulations approved by EPA are not reproduced in their entirety in 40 CFR part 52, but are “incorporated by reference,” which means that EPA has approved a given state regulation with a specific effective date. This format allows both EPA and the public to know which measures are contained in a given SIP and ensures that the state is enforcing the regulations. It also allows EPA and the public to take enforcement action, should a state not enforce its SIP-approved regulations. C. How the State and EPA Update the SIP The SIP is a living document which can be revised as necessary to address the unique air pollution problems in the state. Therefore, EPA must, from time to time, take action on SIP revisions containing new and/or revised regulations as being part of the SIP. On May 22, 1997 (62 FR 27968), EPA revised the procedures for incorporating by reference federally approved SIPs, as a result of consultations between EPA and the Office of the Federal Register (OFR). EPA began the process of developing:
(1)A revised SIP document for each state that would be incorporated by reference under the provisions of title 1 CFR part 51;
(2)a revised mechanism for announcing EPA approval of revisions to an applicable SIP and updating both the IBR document and the CFR; and
(3)a revised format of the “Identification of plan” sections for each applicable subpart to reflect these revised IBR procedures. The description of the revised SIP document, IBR procedures, and “Identification of plan” format are discussed in further detail in the May 22, 1997, **Federal Register** document. D. How EPA Compiles the SIP The federally approved regulations, source-specific requirements, and nonregulatory provisions (entirely or portions of) submitted by each state agency have been organized by EPA into a “SIP compilation.” The SIP compilation contains the updated regulations, source-specific requirements, and nonregulatory provisions approved by EPA through previous rulemaking actions in the **Federal Register** . The compilation is contained in three-ring binders and will be updated, primarily on an annual basis. The nonregulatory provisions are available by contacting Kathleen D'Agostino at the Regional Office. E. How EPA Organizes the SIP Compilation Each compilation contains three parts. Part one contains the regulations, part two contains the source-specific requirements that have been approved as part of the SIP, and part three contains nonregulatory provisions that have been approved by EPA. Each part consists of a table of identifying information for each SIP-approved regulation, each SIP-approved source-specific requirement, and each nonregulatory SIP provision. In this action, EPA is publishing the tables summarizing the applicable SIP requirements for Michigan. The effective dates in the tables indicate the date of the most recent revision of each regulation. The EPA Regional Offices have the primary responsibility for updating the compilation and ensuring its accuracy. F. Where You Can Find a Copy of the SIP Compilation EPA's Region 5 Office developed and will maintain the compilation for Michigan. A copy of the full text of Michigan's regulatory and source-specific compilation will also be maintained at NARA and EPA's Air Docket and Information Center. G. The Format of the New Identification of Plan Section In order to better serve the public, EPA revised the organization of the “Identification of plan” section and included additional information to clarify the enforceable elements of the SIP. The revised Identification of plan section contains five subsections:
(a)Purpose and scope,
(b)Incorporation by reference,
(c)EPA approved regulations,
(d)EPA approved source specific permits, and
(e)EPA approved nonregulatory and quasi-regulatory provisions such as transportation control measures, statutory provisions, control strategies, monitoring networks, etc. H. When a SIP Revision Becomes Federally Enforceable All revisions to the applicable SIP become federally enforceable as of the effective date of the revisions to paragraphs (c), (d), or
(e)of the applicable Identification of plan section found in each subpart of 40 CFR part 52. I. The Historical Record of SIP Revision Approvals To facilitate enforcement of previously approved SIP provisions and provide a smooth transition to the new SIP processing system, EPA retains the original Identification of plan section, previously appearing in the CFR as the first or second section of part 52 for each state subpart. After an initial two-year period, EPA will review its experience with the new system and enforceability of previously approved SIP measures and will decide whether or not to retain the Identification of plan appendices for some further period. II. What EPA Is Doing in This Action Today's rule constitutes a “house­keeping” exercise to ensure that all revisions to the state programs that have occurred are accurately reflected in 40 CFR part 52. State SIP revisions are controlled by EPA regulations at 40 CFR part 51. When EPA receives a formal SIP revision request, the Agency must publish the proposed revision in the **Federal Register** and provide for public comment before approval. EPA has determined that today's rule falls under the “good cause” exemption in section 553(b)(3)(B) of the Administrative Procedures Act
(APA)which, upon finding “good cause,” authorizes agencies to dispense with public participation and section 553(d)(3) which allows an agency to make a rule effective immediately (thereby avoiding the 30-day delayed effective date otherwise provided for in the APA). Today's rule simply codifies provisions which are already in effect as a matter of law in Federal and approved state programs. Under section 553 of the APA, an agency may find good cause where procedures are “impractical, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” Public comment is “unnecessary” and “contrary to the public interest” since the codification only reflects existing law. Immediate notice in the CFR benefits the public by removing outdated citations. III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews A. General Requirements Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is not a “significant regulatory action” and is therefore not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use” (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866. Because the agency has made a “good cause” finding that this action is not subject to notice-and-comment requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act or any other statute as indicated in the Supplementary Information section above, it is not subject to the regulatory flexibility provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C 601 *et seq.* ), or to sections 202 and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(UMRA)(Pub. L. 104-4). In addition, this action does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments or impose a significant intergovernmental mandate, as described in sections 203 and 204 of UMRA. This rule also does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant. This rule does not involve technical standards; thus the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. The rule also does not involve special consideration of environmental justice related issues as required by Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). In issuing this rule, EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct, as required by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996). EPA has complied with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1998) by examining the takings implications of the rule in accordance with the “Attorney General's Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings” issued under the executive order. This rule does not impose an information collection burden under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ). EPA's compliance with these statutes and Executive Orders for the underlying rules are discussed in previous actions taken on the State's rules. B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General The Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 *et seq.* ), as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. Section 808 allows the issuing agency to make a rule effective sooner than otherwise provided by the CRA if the agency makes a good cause finding that notice and public procedure is impracticable, unnecessary or contrary to the public interest. Today's action simply codifies provisions which are already in effect as a matter of law in Federal and approved State programs. 5 U.S.C. 808(2). As stated previously, EPA has made such a good cause finding, including the reasons therefore, and established an effective date of September 6, 2006. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the **Federal Register** . This rule is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). C. Petitions for Judicial Review EPA has also determined that the provisions of section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act pertaining to petitions for judicial review are not applicable to this action. Prior EPA rulemaking actions for each individual component of the Michigan SIP compilation had previously afforded interested parties the opportunity to file a petition for judicial review in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit within 60 days of such rulemaking action. Thus, EPA sees no need in this action to reopen the 60-day period for filing such petitions for judicial review for these “Identification of plan” reorganization actions for Michigan. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds. Dated: August 17, 2006. Norman Niedergang, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. Part 52 of chapter I, title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, is amended as follows: PART 52—[AMENDED] 1. The authority for citation for part 52 continues to read as follows: Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 *et seq.* Subpart X—Michigan § 52.1170 [Redesignated as § 52.1190] 2. Section 52.1170 is redesignated as § 52.1190 and the section heading and paragraph
(a)are revised to read as follows: § 52.1190 Original Identification of plan section.
(a)This section identifies the original “Air Implementation Plan for the State of Michigan” and all revisions submitted by Michigan that were federally approved prior to August 1, 2006. 3. A new § 52.1170 is added to read as follows: § 52.1170 Identification of plan.
(a)*Purpose and scope.* This section sets forth the applicable State Implementation Plan
(SIP)for Michigan under section 110 of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7401, and 40 CFR part 51 to meet National Ambient Air Quality Standards.
(b)*Incorporation by reference.*
(1)Material listed in paragraphs (c), (d), and
(e)of this section with an EPA approval date prior to August 1, 2006, was approved for incorporation by reference by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Material is incorporated as it exists on the date of the approval, and notice of any change in the material will be published in the **Federal Register** . Entries in paragraphs (c), (d), and
(e)of this section with the EPA approval dates after August 1, 2006, will be incorporated by reference in the next update to the SIP compilation.
(2)EPA Region 5 certifies that the rules/regulations provided by the EPA in the SIP compilation at the addresses in paragraph (b)(3) of this section are an exact duplicate of the officially promulgated state rules/regulations which have been approved as part of the SIP as of August 1, 2006.
(3)Copies of the materials incorporated by reference may be inspected at the Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air Programs Branch, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604; the EPA, Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, EPA Headquarters Library, Infoterra Room (Room Number 3334), EPA West Building, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460, and the National Archives and Records Administration. If you wish to obtain materials from a docket in the EPA Headquarters Library, please call the Office of Air and Radiation
(OAR)Docket/Telephone number:
(202)566-1742. For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: *http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.*
(c)EPA approved regulations. EPA-Approved Michigan Regulations Michigan citation Title State effective date EPA approval date Comments Annual Reporting R 336.202 Annual reports 11/11/86 3/8/94, 59 FR 10752 Part 1. General Provisions R 336.1101 Definitions; A 4/27/93 9/7/94, 59 FR 46182 Only: actual emissions, air-dried coating, air quality standard, allowable emissions, and alternate opacity. 2/22/85 6/11/92, 57 FR 24752 R 336.1102 Definitions; B 5/27/02 2/24/03, 68 FR 8550 R 336.1103 Definitions; C 4/27/93 9/7/94, 59 FR 46182 Only: coating category, calendar day, class II hardboard paneling finish, coating line, coating of automobiles and light duty trucks, coating of fabric, coating of large appliances, coating of paper, coating of vinyl, component, component in field gas service, component in gaseous volatile organic compound service, component in heavy liquid service, component in light liquid service, component in liquid volatile organic compound service, condenser, conveyorized vapor degreaser, and creditable. 2/22/85 6/11/92, 57 FR 24752 R 336.1104 Definitions; D 5/27/02 2/24/03, 68 FR 8550 R 336.1105 Definitions; E 5/27/02 2/24/03, 68 FR 8550 R 336.1106 Definitions; F 2/22/85 6/11/92, 57 FR 24752 R 336.1107 Definitions; G 5/27/02 2/24/03, 68 FR 8550 R 336.1108 Definitions; H 5/27/02 2/24/03, 68 FR 8550 R 336.1109 Definitions; I 8/21/81 7/26/82, 47 FR 32116 R 336.1112 Definitions; L 1/18/80 5/6/80, 45 FR 29790 R 336.1113 Definitions; M 5/27/02 2/24/03, 68 FR 8550 R 336.1114 Definitions; N 8/21/81 7/26/82, 47 FR 32116 R 336.1115 Definitions; O 8/21/81 7/26/82, 47 FR 32116 R 336.1116 Definitions; P 4/27/93 9/7/94, 59 FR 46182 Only: packaging rotogravure printing, printed interior panel, process unit turnaround, publication rotogravure printing, and pushside Removed: pneumatic rubber tire manufacturing. 2/22/85 6/11/92, 57 FR 24752 All except pneumatic rubber tire manufacturing, which was removed 9/7/94. R 336.1118 Definitions; R 5/27/02 2/24/03, 68 FR 8550 R 336.1119 Definitions; S 2/22/85 6/11/92, 57 FR 24752 R 336.1120 Definitions; T 5/27/02 2/24/03, 68 FR 8550 R 336.1121 Definitions; U 4/20/89 9/15/94, 59 FR 47254 R 336.1122 Definitions; V 3/13/03 2/9/04, 69 FR 5932 R 336.1123 Definitions; W 8/21/81 7/26/82, 47 FR 32116 R 336.1127 Terms defined in the act 1/18/80 5/6/80, 45 FR 29790 Part 2. Air Use Approval R 336.1201 Permits to install 1/18/80 5/6/80, 45 FR 29790 R 336.1202 Waivers of approval 1/18/80 5/6/80, 45 FR 29790 R 336.1203 Information required 1/18/80 5/6/80, 45 FR 29790 R 336.1204 Authority of agents 1/18/80 5/6/80, 45 FR 29790 R 336.1206 Processing of applications for other facilities 1/18/80 5/6/80, 45 FR 29790 R 336.1207 Denial of permits to install 1/18/80 5/6/80, 45 FR 29790 R 336.1208 Permits to operate 1/18/80 5/6/80, 45 FR 29790 R 336.1220 Construction of sources of volatile organic compounds in ozone nonattainment areas; conditions for approval 8/21/81 1/27/82, 47 FR 3764 R 336.1221 Construction of sources of particulate matter, sulfur dioxide, or carbon monoxide in or near nonattainment areas; conditions for approval 7/17/80 1/12/82, 47 FR 1292 R 336.1240 Required air quality models 1/18/80 5/6/80, 45 FR 29790 R 336.1241 Air quality modeling demonstration requirements 1/18/80 5/6/80, 45 FR 29790 R 336.1280 Permit system exemptions; cooling and ventilation equipment 1/18/80 5/6/80, 45 FR 29790 R 336.1281 Permit system exemptions; cleaning, washing and drying equipment 1/18/80 5/6/80, 45 FR 29790 R 336.1282 Permit system exemptions; cooling and ventilation equipment 1/18/80 5/6/80, 45 FR 29790 R 336.1283 Permit system exemptions; testing and inspection equipment 7/17/80 8/28/81, 46 FR 43422 R 336.1284 Permit system exemptions; containers 1/18/80 5/6/80, 45 FR 29790 R 336.1285 Permit system exemptions; miscellaneous 1/18/80 5/6/80, 45 FR 29790 Part 3. Emission Limitations and Prohibitions—Particulate Matter R 336.1301 Standards for density of emissions 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.1303 Grading visible emissions 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.1310 Open burning 2/3/99 6/28/02, 67 FR 43548 R 336.1330 Electrostatic precipitation control systems 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.1331 Emissions of particulate matter 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 All except Table 31, section C.8. 1/18/80 5/22/81, 46 FR 27923 Only Table 31 Section C.7, preheater equipment. R 336.1349 Coke oven compliance date 2/22/85 6/11/92, 57 FR 24752 R 336.1350 Emissions from larry-car charging of coke ovens 2/22/85 6/11/92, 57 FR 24752 R 336.1351 Charging hole emissions from coke ovens 2/22/85 6/11/92, 57 FR 24752 R 336.1352 Pushing operation fugitive emissions from coke ovens 2/22/85 6/11/92, 57 FR 24752 R 336.1353 Standpipe assembly emissions during coke cycle from coke ovens 2/22/85 6/11/92, 57 FR 24752 R 336.1354 Standpipe assembly emissions during decarbonization from coke ovens 2/22/85 6/11/92, 57 FR 24752 R 336.1355 Coke oven gas collector main emissions from slot-type coke ovens 1/18/80 5/55/81, 46 FR 27923 R 336.1356 Coke oven door emissions from coke ovens; doors that are 5 meters or shorter 2/22/85 6/11/92, 57 FR 24752 R 336.1357 Coke oven door emissions from coke oven doors; doors that are taller than 5 meters 2/22/85 6/11/92, 57 FR 24752 R 336.1358 Roof monitor visible emissions at steel manufacturing facilities from electric arc furnaces and blast furnaces 4/30/98 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.1359 Visible emissions from scarfer operation stacks at steel manufacturing facilities 2/22/85 6/11/92, 57 FR 24752 R 336.1360 Visible emissions from coke oven push stacks 2/22/85 6/11/92, 57 FR 24752 R 336.1361 Visible emissions from blast furnace casthouse operations at steel manufacturing facilities 4/30/98 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.1362 Visible emissions from electric arc furnace operations at steel manufacturing facilities 4/30/98 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.1363 Visible emissions from argon-oxygen decarburization operations at steel manufacturing facilities 4/30/98 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.1364 Visible emissions from basic oxygen furnace operations 2/22/85 6/11/92, 57 FR 24752 R 336.1365 Visible emissions from hot metal transfer operations at steel manufacturing facilities 2/22/85 6/11/92, 57 FR 24752 R 336.1366 Visible emissions from hot metal desulphurization operations at steel manufacturing facilities 2/22/85 6/11/92, 57 FR 24752 R 336.1367 Visible emissions from sintering operations 2/22/85 6/11/92, 57 FR 24752 R 336.1370 Collected air contaminants 2/17/81 11/15/82, 47 FR 51398 R 336.1371 Fugitive dust control programs other than areas listed in Table 36 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.1372 Fugitive dust control program; required activities; typical control methods 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.1374 Particulate matter contingency measures: Areas listed in Table 37 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 Part 4. Emission Limitations and Prohibitions—Sulfur-Bearing Compounds R 336.1401 Emissions of sulfur dioxide from power plants 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.1402 Emission of sulfur dioxide from fuel-burning sources other than power plants 1/18/80 5/6/80, 45 FR 29790 R 336.1403 Oil- and natural gas-producing or transporting facilities and natural gas-processing facilities; emissions; operation 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.1404 Emissions of sulfuric acid mist from sulfuric acid plants 1/18/80 5/6/80, 45 FR 29790 Part 6. Emission Limitations and Prohibitions—Existing Sources of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions R 336.1601 Definitions 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.1602 General provisions for existing sources of volatile organic compound emissions 4/10/00 6/28/02, 67 FR 43548 R 336.1604 Storage of organic compounds having a true vapor pressure of more than 1.5 psia, but less than 11 psia, in existing fixed roof stationary vessels of more than 40,000 gallon capacity 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.1605 Storage of organic compounds having a true vapor pressure of 11 or more psia in existing stationary vessels of more than 40,000 gallon capacity 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.1606 Loading gasoline into existing stationary vessels of more than 2,000 gallon capacity at dispensing facilities handling 250,000 gallons per year 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.1607 Loading gasoline into existing stationary vessels of more than 2,000 capacity at loading facilities 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.1608 Loading gasoline into existing delivery vessels at loading facilities handling less than 5,000,000 gallons per year 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.1609 Loading existing delivery vessels with organic compounds having a true vapor pressure of more than 1.5 psia at existing loading facilities handling 5,000,000 or more gallons of such compounds per year 4/20/89 9/15/94, 59 FR 47254 R 336.1610 Existing coating lines; emission of volatile organic compounds from existing automobile, light-duty truck, and other product and material coating lines 4/27/93 9/7/94, 59 FR 46182 R 336.1611 Existing cold cleaners 6/13/97 7/21/99, 64 FR 39034 R 336.1612 Existing open top vapor degreasers 6/13/97 7/21/99, 64 FR 39034 R 336.1613 Existing conveyorized cold cleaners 6/13/97 7/21/99, 64 FR 39034 R 336.1614 Existing conveyorized vapor degreasers 6/13/97 7/21/99, 64 FR 39034 R 336.1615 Existing vacuum-producing system at petroleum refineries 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.1616 Process unit turnarounds at petroleum refineries 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.1617 Existing organic compound-water separators at petroleum refineries 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.1618 Use of cutback paving asphalt 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.1619 Perchloroethylene; emission from existing dry cleaning equipment; disposal 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.1620 Emission of volatile organic compounds from the coating of flat wood paneling from existing coating lines 4/27/93 9/7/94, 59 FR 46182 R 336.1621 Emission of volatile organic compounds from the coating of metallic surfaces from existing coating lines 4/27/93 9/7/94, 59 FR 46182 R 336.1622 Emission of volatile organic compound from existing component of a petroleum refinery; refinery monitoring program 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.1623 Storage of petroleum liquids having a true vapor pressure of more than 1.0 psia but less than 11.0 psia, in existing external floating roof stationary vessels of more than 40,000 gallon capacity 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.1624 Emission of volatile organic compound from an existing graphic arts line 11/18/93 9/7/94, 59 FR 46182 R 336.1625 Emission of volatile organic compound from existing equipment utilized in the manufacturing of synthesized pharmaceutical products 11/30/00 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.1627 Delivery vessels; vapor collection systems 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.1628 Emission of volatile organic compounds from components of existing process equipment used in manufacturing synthetic organic chemicals and polymers 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.1629 Emission of volatile organic compounds from components of existing process equipment used in processing natural gas; monitoring program 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.1630 Emission of volatile organic compounds from existing paint manufacturing processes 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.1631 Emission of volatile organic compounds from existing process equipment utilized in manufacture of polystyrene of other organic resins 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.1632 Emission of volatile organic compounds form existing automobile, truck, and business machine plastic part coating lines 4/27/93 9/7/94, 59 FR 46182 R 336.1651 Standards for degreasers 6/13/97 7/21/99, 64 FR 39034 Part 7. Emission Limitations and Prohibitions—New Sources of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions R 336.1702 General provisions for new sources of volatile organic compound emissions 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.1705 Loading gasoline into delivery vessels at new loading facilities handling less than 5,000,000 gallons per year 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.1706 Loading delivery vessels with organic compounds having a true vapor pressure of more than 1.5 psia at new loading facilities handling 5,000,000 or more gallons of such compounds per year 6/13/97 7/21/99, 64 FR 39034 R 336.1707 New cold cleaners 6/13/97 7/21/99, 64 FR 39034 R 336.1708 New open top vapor degreasers 6/13/97 7/21/99, 64 FR 39034 R 336.1709 New conveyorized cold cleaners 6/13/97 7/21/99, 64 FR 39034 R 336.1710 New conveyorized vapor degreasers 6/13/97 7/21/99, 64 FR 39034 Part 8. Emission Limitations and Prohibitions—Oxides of Nitrogen R 336.1802 Applicability under oxides of nitrogen budget trading program 5/20/04 12/23/04, 69 FR 76848 R 336.1803 Definitions for oxides of nitrogen budget trading program 12/4/02 12/23/04, 69 FR 76848 R 336.1804 Retired unit exemption from oxides of nitrogen budget trading program 5/20/04 12/23/04, 69 FR 76848 R 336.1805 Standard requirements of oxides of nitrogen budget trading program 12/4/02 12/23/04, 69 FR 76848 R 336.1806 Computation of time under oxides of nitrogen budget trading program 12/4/02 12/23/04, 69 FR 76848 R 336.1807 Authorized account representative under oxides of nitrogen budget trading program 12/4/02 12/23/04, 69 FR 76848 R 336.1808 Permit requirements under oxides of nitrogen budget trading program 12/4/02 12/23/04, 69 FR 76848 R 336.1809 Compliance certification under oxides of nitrogen budget trading program 12/4/02 12/23/04, 69 FR 76848 R 336.1810 Allowance allocations under oxides of nitrogen budget trading program 12/4/02 12/23/04, 69 FR 76848 R 336.1811 New source set-aside under oxides of nitrogen budget trading program 5/20/04 12/23/04, 69 FR 76848 R 336.1812 Allowance tracking system and transfers under oxides of nitrogen budget trading program 12/4/02 12/23/04, 69 FR 76848 R 336.1813 Monitoring and reporting requirements under oxides of nitrogen budget trading program 12/4/02 12/23/04, 69 FR 76848 R 336.1814 Individual opt-ins under oxides of nitrogen budget trading program 12/4/02 12/23/04, 69 FR 76848 R 336.1815 Allowance banking under oxides of nitrogen budget trading program 12/4/02 12/23/04, 69 FR 76848 R 336.1816 Compliance supplement pool under oxides of nitrogen budget trading program 12/4/02 12/23/04, 69 FR 76848 R 336.1817 Emission limitations and restrictions for Portland cement kilns 12/4/02 12/23/04, 69 FR 76848 Part 9. Emission Limitations and Prohibitions—Miscellaneous R 339.1901 Air contaminant or water vapor, when prohibited 1/18/80 5/6/80, 45 FR 29790 R 339.1906 Diluting and concealing emissions 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 339.1910 Air-cleaning devices 1/18/80 5/6/80, 45 FR 29790 R 339.1911 Malfunction abatement plans 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 339.1912 Abnormal conditions and breakdown of equipment 1/18/80 5/6/80, 45 FR 29790 R 339.1915 Enforcement discretion in instances of excess emission resulting from malfunction, start-up, or shutdown 5/27/02 2/24/03, 68 FR 8550 R 339.1916 Affirmative defense for excess emissions during start-up or shutdown 5/27/02 2/24/03, 68 FR 8550 R 339.1930 Emission of carbon monoxide from ferrous cupola operations 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 Part 10. Intermittent Testing and Sampling R 336.2001 Performance tests by owner 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093, 6/1/06 71 FR 31093 R 336.2002 Performance tests by commission 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.2003 Performance test criteria 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.2004 Appendix A; reference test methods; adoption of federal reference test methods 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.2005 Reference test methods for delivery vessels 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.2006 Reference test method serving as alternate version of federal reference test method 25 by incorporating Byron analysis 4/27/93 9/7/94, 59 FR 46182 R 336.2007 Alternate version of procedure L, referenced in R 336.2040(10) 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.2011 Reference test method 5B 4/29/05 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.2012 Reference test method 5C 10/15/04 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.2013 Reference test method 5D 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.2014 Reference test method 5E 10/15/04 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.2021 Figures 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.2030 Reference test method 9A 2/22/85 6/11/92, 57 FR 24752 R 336.2031 Reference test method 9B 2/22/85 6/11/92, 57 FR 24752 R 336.2032 Reference test method 9C 2/22/85 6/11/92, 57 FR 24752 R 336.2033 Test methods for coke oven quench towers 2/22/85 6/11/92, 57 FR 24752 R 336.2040 Method for determination of volatile organic compound emissions from coating lines and graphic arts lines 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 All except sections
(9)and (10). R 336.2041 Recording requirements for coating lines and graphic arts lines 4/27/93 9/7/94, 59 FR 46182 Part 11. Continuous Emission Monitoring R 336.2101 Continuous emission monitoring, fossil fuel-fired steam generators 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.2102 Continuous emission monitoring, sulfuric acid-producing facilities 1/18/80 11/2/88, 53 FR 44189 R 336.2103 Continuous emission monitoring, fluid bed catalytic cracking unit catalyst regenerators at petroleum refineries 1/18/80 11/2/88, 53 FR 44189 R 336.2150 Performance specifications for continuous emission monitoring systems 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.2151 Calibration gases for continuous emission monitoring systems 1/18/80 11/2/88, 53 FR 44189 R 336.2152 Cycling time for continuous emission monitoring systems 1/18/80 11/2/88, 53 FR 44189 R 336.2153 Zero and drift for continuous emission monitoring systems 1/18/80 11/2/88, 53 FR 44189 R 336.2154 Instrument span for continuous emission monitoring systems 1/18/80 11/2/88, 53 FR 44189 R 336.2155 Monitor location for continuous emission monitoring systems 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.2159 Alternative continuous emission monitoring systems 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.2170 Monitoring data reporting and recordkeeping 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.2175 Data reduction procedures for fossil fuel-fired steam generators 11/15/04 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.2176 Data reduction procedures for sulfuric acid plants 1/18/80 11/2/88, 53 FR 44189 R 336.2189 Alternative data reporting or reduction procedures 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.2190 Monitoring System Malfunctions 3/19/02 6/1/06, 71 FR 31093 R 336.2199 Exemptions from continuous emission monitoring requirements 1/18/80 11/2/88, 53 FR 44189 All except section (c). Part 16. Organization, Operation and Procedures R 336.2606 Declaratory rulings requests 1/18/80 11/2/88, 53 FR 44189 R 336.2607 Consideration and disposition of declaratory rulings requests 1/18/80 11/2/88, 53 FR 44189 Part 17. Hearings R 336.2701 Procedures from Administrative Procedures Act 4/10/00 6/28/02, 67 FR 43548 R 336.2702 Service of notices and orders; appearances 4/10/00 6/28/02, 67 FR 43548 R 336.2704 Hearing commissioner's hearings 1/18/80 11/2/88, 53 FR 44189 R 336.2705 Agency files and records, use in connection with hearings 1/18/80 11/2/88, 53 FR 44189 R 336.2706 Commission hearings after hearing commissioner hearings 1/18/80 11/2/88, 53 FR 44189 Executive Orders 1991-31 Commission of Natural Resources, Department of Natural Resources, Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Executive Reorganization 1/7/92 11/6/97, 62 FR 59995 Introductory and concluding words of issuance; Title I: General, Part A Sections 1, 2, 4 & 5 and Part B; Title III: Environmental Protection, Part A Sections 1 & 2 and Part D; Title IV: Miscellaneous, Parts A & B, Part C Sections 1, 2 & 4 and Part D. 1995-18 Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Executive Reorganization 9/30/95 11/6/97, 62 FR 59995 Introductory and concluding words of issuance; Paragraphs 1, 2, 3(a) & (g), 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, and 18. State Statutes Act 250 of 1965, as amended Tax Exemption Act 1972 5/31/72, 37 FR 10841 Act 348 of 1965, as amended Air Pollution Act 1972 5/31/72, 37 FR 10841 Act 348 of 1965, as amended Air Pollution Act 1986 2/17/88, 53 FR 4622 Only section 7a. Act 348 of 1965, as amended Air Pollution Act 1990 3/8/94, 59 FR 10752 Only sections 5 and 14a. Act 127 of 1970 Michigan Environmental Protection Act 7/27/70 5/31/72, 37 FR 10841 Act 283 of 1964, as amended Weights and Measures Act 8/28/64 5/5/97, 62 FR 24341 Only chapter 290, sections 613 and 615. Act 44 of 1984, as amended Michigan Motor Fuels Quality Act 11/13/93 5/5/97, 62 FR 24341 Only chapter 290, sections 642, 643, 645, 646, 647, and 649. Act 12 of 1993 Small Business Clean Air Assistance Act 4/1/93 6/3/94, 59 FR 28785 Act 451 of 1994, as amended Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act 3/30/95 2/10/98, 63 FR 6650 Only sections 324.5524 and 324.5525. House Bill 4165 Motor Vehicle Emissions Inspection and Maintenance Program Act 11/13/93 2/21/96, 61 FR 31831 House Bill 4898 An Act to amend section 3 of Act 44 of 1984 11/13/93 10/11/94, 59 FR 51379 House Bill 5016 Motor Vehicle Emissions Testing Program Act 11/13/93 3/7/95, 60 FR 12459 Senate Bill 726 An Act to amend sections 2, 5, 6, 7, and 8 of Act 44 of 1984 11/13/93 9/7/94, 59 FR 46182 Local Regulations City of Grand Rapids Ordinance 72-34 City of Grand Rapids Air Pollution Control Regulations 1972 5/31/72, 57 FR 10841 Ordinance amends sections 9.35 and 9.36 of article 4, Chapter 151 Title IX of the Code of the City of Grand Rapids. Muskegon County Air Pollution Control Rules Muskegon County Air Pollution Control Rules and Regulations, as amended 3/27/73 5/16/84, 49 FR 20650 Only article 14, section J. Wayne County Air Pollution Control Regulations Wayne County Air Pollution Control Regulations 3/20/69 5/16/80, 45 FR 29790 Wayne County variance Minutes from 1981 board meeting 9/18/81 5/16/80, 45 FR 29790 Wayne County Air Pollution Control Ordinance Wayne County Air Pollution Control Ordinance 11/18/85 5/13/93, 58 FR 28359 Only: chapters 1, 2, 3, 5 (except for the portions of section 501 which incorporate by reference the following parts of the state rules: the quench tower limit in R 336.1331, Table 31, section C.8; the deletion of the limit in R 336.1331 for coke oven coal preheater equipment; and R 336.1355), 8 (except section 802), 9, 11, 12, 13, and appendices A and D.
(d)EPA approved state source-specific requirements. EPA-Approved Michigan Source-Specific Provisions Name of source Order No. State effective date EPA approval date Comments Allied Signal, Inc., Detroit Tar Plant, Wayne County 4-1993 10/12/94 1/17/95, 60 FR 3346 American Colloid Plant Permit 341-79 12/18/79 9/15/83, 48 FR 41403 American Colloid Plant Permit 375-79 11/23/79 9/15/83, 48 FR 41403 Asphalt Products Company, Plant 5A, Wayne County 5-1993 10/12/94 1/17/95, 60 FR 3346 Clark Oil and Refining Corporation, Calhoun County 6-1981 6/24/82 12/13/82, 47 FR 55678 Clawson Concrete Company, Plant #1, Wayne County 6-1993 10/12/94 1/17/95, 60 FR 3346 Conoco, Inc., Berrien County 17-1981 9/28/81 2/17/82, 47 FR 6828 Consumers Power Company, B. C. Cobb Plant, Muskegon County 6-1979 12/10/79 5/1/81, 46 FR 24560 Consumers Power Company, J.H. Campbell Plant, Units 1 and 2, Ottawa County 12-1984 10/1/84 1/12/87, 52 FR 1183 Continental Fibre Drum, Inc., Midland County 14-1987 12/9/87 6/11/92, 57 FR 24752 Cummings-Moore Graphite Company, Wayne County 7-1993 10/12/94 1/17/95, 60 FR 3346 CWC Castings Division of Textron, Muskegon County 12-1979 2/15/80 5/16/84, 49 FR 20650 Delray Connecting Railroad Company, Wayne County 8-1993 10/12/94 1/17/95, 60 FR 3346 Detroit Edison Company, Boulevard Heating Plant, Wayne County 7-1981 4/28/81 5/4/82, 47 FR 19133 Detroit Edison Company, City of St. Clair, St. Clair County 4-1978 11/14/78 8/25/80, 45 FR 56344 Detroit Edison Company, Monroe County 9-1977 7/7/77 12/21/79, 44 FR 75635 (correction: 3/20/80, 45 FR 17997) Detroit Edison Company, River Rouge Power Plant, Wayne County 9-1993 10/12/94 1/17/95, 60 FR 3346 Detroit Edison Company, Sibley Quarry, Wayne County 10-1993 10/12/94 1/17/95, 60 FR 3346 Detroit Water and Sewerage Department, Wastewater Treatment Plant, Wayne County 11-1993 10/12/94 1/17/95, 60 FR 3346 Diamond Crystal Salt Company, St. Clair County 13-1982 9/8/82 3/14/83, 48 FR 9256 Dow Chemical Company, Midland County 12-1981 6/15/81 3/24/82, 47 FR 12625 Dow Chemical Company, West Side and South Side Power Plants, Midland County 19-1981 7/21/81 3/24/82, 47 FR 12625 Only sections A(3), B, C, D, and E. Dundee Cement Company, Monroe County 8-1979 10/17/79 8/11/80, 45 FR 53137 Dundee Cement Company, Monroe County 16-1980 11/19/80 12/3/81, 46 FR 58673 Eagle Ottawa Leather Company, Ottawa County 7-1994 7/13/94 10/23/95, 60 FR 54308 Edward C. Levy Company, Detroit Lime Company, Wayne County 15-1993 10/12/94 1/17/95, 60 FR 3346 Edward C. Levy Company, Plant #1, Wayne County 16-1993 10/12/94 1/17/95, 60 FR 3346 Edward C. Levy Company, Plant #3, Wayne County 17-1993 10/12/94 1/17/95, 60 FR 3346 Edward C. Levy Company, Plant #4 and 5, Wayne County 19-1993 10/12/94 1/17/95, 60 FR 3346 Edward C. Levy Company, Plant #6, Wayne County 18-1993 10/12/94 1/17/95, 60 FR 3346 Edward C. Levy Company, Scrap Up-Grade Facility, Wayne County 20-1993 10/12/94 1/17/95, 60 FR 3346 Enamalum Corporation, Oakland County 6-1994 6/27/94 2/21/96, 61 FR 6545 Ferrous Processing and Trading Company, Wayne County 12-1993 10/12/94 1/17/95, 60 FR 3346 Ford Motor Company, Rouge Industrial Complex, Wayne County 13-1993 10/12/94 1/17/95, 60 FR 3346 Ford Motor Company, Utica Trim Plant, Macomb County 39-1993 11/12/93 9/7/94, 59 FR 46182 Ford Motor Company, Vulcan Forge, Wayne County 14-1993 10/12/94 1/17/95, 60 FR 3346 General Motors Corporation, Warehousing and Distribution Division, Genesee County 18-1981 7/28/83 5/16/84, 49 FR 20649 Original order effective 12/1/81, as altered effective 7/28/83. General Motors Corporation, Buick Motor Division Complex, Flint, Genesee County 10-1979 5/5/80 2/10/82, 47 FR 6013 General Motors Corporation, Buick Motor Division, Genesee County 8-1982 4/2/84 8/22/88, 53 FR 31861 Original order effective 7/12/82, as altered effective 4/2/82. General Motors Corporation, Cadillac Motor Car Division, Wayne County 12-1982 7/22/82 7/5/83, 48 FR 31022 General Motors Corporation, Central Foundry Division, Saginaw Malleable Iron Plant, Saginaw County 8-1983 6/9/83 12/13/85, 50 FR 50907 Supersedes paragraph 7.F of order 6-1980. General Motors Corporation, Central Foundry Division, Saginaw Malleable Iron Plant, Saginaw County 6-1980 7/30/82 8/15/83, 48 FR 36818 Paragraph 7.F superseded by order 8-1983. Original order effective 6/3/80, as altered effective 7/30/82. General Motors Corporation, Chevrolet Flint Truck Assembly, Genesee County 10-1982 7/12/82 7/5/83, 48 FR 31022 General Motors Corporation, Chevrolet Motor Division, Saginaw Grey Iron Casting Plant and Nodular Iron Casting Plant, Saginaw County 1-1980 4/16/80 2/10/82, 47 FR 6013 General Motors Corporation, Fisher Body Division, Fleetwood, Wayne County 11-1982 7/22/82 7/5/83, 48 FR 31022 General Motors Corporation, Fisher Body Division, Flint No. 1, Genesee County 9-1982 7/12/82 7/5/83, 48 FR 31022 General Motors Corporation, GM Assembly Division, Washtenaw County 5-1983 5/5/83 12/13/84, 49 FR 5345 General Motors Corporation, Hydra-Matic Division, Washtenaw County 3-1982 6/24/82 3/4/83, 48 FR 9256 General Motors Corporation, Oldsmobile Division, Ingham County 4-1983 5/5/83 12/13/84, 49 FR 5345 Hayes-Albion Corporation Foundry, Calhoun County 2-1980 2/2/82 48 FR 41403 Original order effective 2/15/80, as altered effective 2/2/82. J. H. Campbell Plant, Ottawa County 5-1979 2/6/80 12/24/80, 45 FR 85004 (correction: 3/16/81 46 FR 16895) Original order effective 6/25/79, as altered effective 2/6/80. Keywell Corporation, Wayne County 31-1993 10/12/94 1/17/95, 60 FR 3346 Lansing Board of Water and Light 4-1979 5/23/79 12/17/80, 45 FR 82926 All except sections 7 A, B, C1, D, E, F, and section 8. Marathon Oil Company, Muskegon County 16-1981 7/31/81 2/22/82, 47 FR 7661 Marblehead Lime Company, Brennan Avenue Plant, Wayne County 21-1993 10/12/94 1/17/95, 60 FR 3346 Marblehead Lime Company, River Rouge Plant, Wayne County 22-1993 10/12/94 1/17/95, 60 FR 3346 McLouth Steel Company, Trenton Plant, Wayne County 23-1993 10/12/94 1/17/95, 60 FR 3346 Michigan Foundation Company, Cement Plant, Wayne County 24-1993 10/12/94 1/17/95, 60 FR 3346 Michigan Foundation Company, Sibley Quarry, Wayne County 25-1993 10/12/94 1/17/95.60 FR 3346 Monitor Sugar Company, Bay County 21-1981 10/29/81 5/19/82, 47 FR 21534 Morton International, Inc., Morton Salt Division, Wayne County 26-1993 10/12/94 1/17/95, 60 FR 3346 National Steel Corporation, Great Lakes Division, Wayne County 27-1993 10/12/94 1/17/95, 60 FR 3346 National Steel Corporation, Transportation and Materials Handling Division, Wayne County 28-1993 10/12/94 1/17/95, 60 FR 3346 New Haven Foundry, Inc., Macomb County 12-1980 8/14/80 2/10/82, 47 FR 6013 Northern Michigan Electric Cooperative Advance Steam Plant, Charlevoix County 16-1979 1/10/80 46 FR 34584 Packaging Corporation of America, Manistee County 23-1984 7/8/85 5/4/87, 52 FR 16246 Peerless Metal Powders, Incorporated, Wayne County 29-1993 10/12/94 1/17/95, 60 FR 3346 Rouge Steel Company, Wayne County 30-1993 10/12/94 1/17/95, 60 FR 3346 S. D. Warren Company, Muskegon 9-1979 10/31/99 1/27/81, 46 FR 8476 St. Marys Cement Company, Wayne County 32-1993 10/12/94 1/17/95, 60 FR 3346 Traverse City Board of Light and Power, Grand Traverse County 23-1981 1/4/82 5/19/82, 47 FR 21534 Union Camp Corporation, Monroe County 14-1979 1/3/80 5/14/81, 46 FR 26641 United States Gypsum Company, Wayne County 33-1993 10/12/94 1/17/95, 60 FR 3346 VCF Films, Inc., Livingston County 3-1993 6/21/93 9/7/94, 59 FR 46182 Woodbridge Corporation, Washtenaw County 40-1993 11/12/93 9/7/94, 59 FR 46182 Wyandotte Municipal Power Plant, Wayne County 34-1993 10/12/94 1/17/95, 60 FR 3346
(e)EPA approved nonregulatory and quasi-regulatory provisions. EPA-Approved Michigan Nonregulatory and Quasi-Regulatory Provisions Name of nonregulatory SIP provision Applicable geographic or nonattainment area State submittal date EPA approval date Comments Implementation plan for the control of suspended particulates, sulfur oxides, carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, nitrogen oxides, and photochemical oxidants in the state of Michigan Statewide 2/3/72 5/31/72, 37 FR 10841 Sections include: Air quality control regions, legal authority, air quality data, emission data, control strategy, control regulations, compliance plans and schedules, prevention of air pollution emergency episodes, air quality surveillance program, control of emission sources, organization and resources, and intergovernmental cooperation. Reevaluation of control strategies Berrien and Ingham Counties 3/3/72 10/28/72, 37 FR 23085 Reasons and justifications Statewide 7/12/72 10/28/72, 37 FR 23085 Concerning general requirements of control strategy for nitrogen dioxide, compliance schedules, and review of new sources and modifications. Public availability of emissions data Statewide 7/24/72 10/28/72, 37 FR 23085 Compliance schedules Alpena, Baraga, Charlevoix, Huron, Ionia, Marquette, Midland, Muskegon, Oakland, Otsego, and St. Clair Counties 5/4/73, 9/19/73, 10/23/73, and 12/13/73 8/5/74, 39 FR 28155 Compliance schedules Allegan, Eaton, Emmet, Genesee, Huron, Ingham, Macomb, Monroe, Ottawa, Saginaw, and St. Clair Counties 2/16/73 and 5/4/73 9/10/74, 39 FR 32606 Air quality maintenance area identifications for particulate matter Macomb, Oakland, Wayne and Monroe Counties 6/27/74 and 10/18/74 6/2/75, 40 FR 23746 Carbon monoxide control strategy Saginaw area 4/25/79 5/6/80, 45 FR 29790 Ozone attainment demonstrations and transportation control plans Flint, Lansing and Grand Rapids urban areas 4/25/79, 7/25/79, 10/12/79, 10/26/79, 11/8/79, 12/26/79 6/2/80, 45 FR 37188 Transportation control plans Detroit urban area 4/25/79, 7/25/79, 10/12/79, 10/26/79, 11/8/79, 12/26/79 6/2/80, 45 FR 37188 Ozone control strategy for rural ozone nonattainment areas Marquette, Muskegon, Gratiot, Midland, Saginaw, Bay, Tuscola, Huron, Sanilac, Ottawa, Ionia, Shiawassee, Lapeer, Allegan, Barry, Van Buren, Kalamazoo, Calhoun, Jackson, Berrien, Cass, Branch, Hillsdale, and Lenawee Counties 4/25/79, 7/25/79, 10/12/79, 10/26/79, 11/8/79, 12/26/79 6/2/80, 45 FR 37188 Carbon monoxide and ozone demonstrations of attainment and I/M program Detroit urban area 4/25/79, 7/25/79, 10/12/79, 10/26/79, 11/8/79, 12/26/79, 3/20/80, 5/12/80, and 5/21/80 6/2/80, 45 FR 37192 Ambient air quality monitoring, data reporting, and surveillance provisions Statewide 12/19/79 3/4/81, 46 FR 15138 Transportation control plan Niles 4/25/79, 10/26/79, 11/8/79, 12/26/79, 8/4/80, and 8/8/80 4/17/81, 46 FR 22373 Provisions addressing sections 110(a)(2)(K), 126(a)(2), 127, and 128 of the Clean Air Act as amended in 1977 Statewide 4/25/79 and 10/12/79 6/5/81, 46 FR 30082 Concerns permit fees, interstate pollution, public notification, and state boards. Section 121, intergovernmental consultation Statewide 5/25/79 11/27/81, 46 FR 57893 Total suspended particulate studies Detroit area 3/7/80 and 4/21/81 2/18/82, 47 FR 7227 Lead plan Statewide 12/27/79 and 2/9/81 4/13/82, 47 FR 15792 Reduction in size of Detroit ozone area Wayne, Oakland, Macomb, Livingston, Monroe, St. Clair, and Washtenaw Counties 9/1/82 7/7/83, 48 FR 31199 Negative declarations Wayne, Oakland and Macomb Counties 10/10/83, 5/17/85, and 6/12/85 11/24/86, 51 FR 42221 Includes large petroleum dry cleaners, high-density polyethylene, polypropylene, and polystyrene resin manufacturers, and synthetic organic chemical manufacturing industry—oxidation. Information relating to order 8-1982: letter dated 9/6/84 from Michigan Department of Natural Resources to EPA Genesee County 9/6/84 8/22/88, 53 FR 31861 Information relating to order 14-1987: letter dated 12/17/87 from Michigan Department of Natural Resources to EPA Midland County 12/17/87 10/3/89, 54 FR 40657 Appendices A and D of Wayne County Air Pollution Control Ordinance Wayne County 10/10/86 5/13/93, 58 FR 28359 Effective 11/18/85. Information supporting emissions statement program Statewide 11/16/92, 10/25/93, and 2/7/94 3/8/94, 59 FR 10752 1990 base year emissions inventory Grand Rapids and Muskegon areas 1/5/93 7/26/94, 59 FR 37944 Section 182(f) NO <sup>X</sup> exemption Detroit-Ann Arbor area 11/12/93 8/10/94, 59 FR 40826 Negative declarations Livingston, Macomb, Monroe, Oakland, St. Clair, Washtenaw, Wayne, Kent, Ottawa, and Muskegon Counties 3/30/94 9/7/94, 59 FR 46182 Includes: Large petroleum dry cleaners, SOCMI air oxidation processes, high-density polyethylene and polypropylene resin manufacturing and pneumatic rubber tire manufacturing. I/M program Grand Rapids and Muskegon areas 11/12/93 and 7/19/94 10/11/94, 59 FR 51379 Includes: document entitled “Motor Vehicle Emissions Inspection and Maintenance Program for Southeast Michigan, Grand Rapids MSA, and Muskegon MSA Moderate Nonattainment Areas,” RFP, and supplemental materials. 1990 base year emissions inventory and 1-hour ozone maintenance plan Detroit-Ann Arbor area (Livingston, Macomb, Monroe, Oakland, St. Clair, Washtenaw, and Wayne Counties) 11/12/93 3/7/95, 60 FR 12459 Section 182(f) NO <sup>X</sup> exemptions Clinton, Ingham, Eaton, and Genesee Counties 7/1/94 and 7/8/94 4/27/95, 60 FR 20644 Section 182(f) NO <sup>X</sup> exemptions Kent, Ottawa, Muskegon, Allegan, Barry, Bay, Berrien, Branch, Calhoun, Cass, Clinton, Eaton, Gratiot, Genesee, Hillsdale, Ingham, Ionia, Jackson, Kalamazoo, Lenawee, Midland, Montcalm, St. Joseph, Saginaw, Shiawassee, and Van Buren Counties 7/13/94 1/26/96, 61 FR 2428 1-hour ozone maintenance plan Grand Rapids area 3/9/95 6/21/96, 61 FR 31831 PM-10 maintenance plan Wayne County 7/24/95 8/5/96, 61 FR 40516 General conformity Statewide 11/29/94 12/18/96, 61 FR 66607 Transportation conformity Statewide 11/24/94 12/18/96, 61 FR 66609 7.8 psi Reid vapor pressure gasoline-supplemental materials Wayne, Oakland, Macomb, Washtenaw, Livingston, St. Clair, and Monroe Counties 5/16/96, 1/5/96, and 5/14/96 5/5/97, 62 FR 24341 Includes: letter from Michigan Governor John Engler to Regional Administrator Valdas Adamkus, dated 1/5/96, letter from Michigan Director of Environmental Quality Russell Harding to Regional Administrator Valdas Adamkus, dated 5/14/96, and state report entitled “Evaluation of Air Quality Contingency Measures for Implementation in Southeast Michigan”. Section 182(f) NO <sup>X</sup> exemption Muskegon County 11/22/95 9/26/97, 62 FR 50512 Carbon monoxide maintenance plan Detroit area (portions of Wayne, Oakland, and Macomb Counties) 3/18/99 6/30/99, 64 FR 35017 1-hour ozone maintenance plan Muskegon County 3/9/95 8/30/00, 65 FR 52651 1-hour ozone maintenance plan Allegan County 9/1/00 and 10/13/00 11/24/00, 65 FR 70490 1-hour ozone maintenance plan Genesee, Bay Midland, and Saginaw Counties 5/9/00 11/13/00, 65 FR 67629 1-hour ozone maintenance plan revision Muskegon County 3/22/01 8/6/01, 66 FR 40895 Revision to motor vehicle emission budgets. [FR Doc. E6-14708 Filed 9-5-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 180 EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0504; FRL-8091-4 Propoxycarbazone; Pesticide Tolerance AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: This regulation establishes increased tolerances for residues of propoxycarbazone in or on wheat forage, meat byproducts and milk. Bayer CropScience requested this tolerance under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), as amended by the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA). DATES: This regulation is effective September 6, 2006. Objections and requests for hearings must be received on or before November 6, 2006, and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION) . ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under docket identification
(ID)number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0504. All documents in the docket are listed in the index for the docket. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business Information
(CBI)or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available in the electronic docket at *http://www.regulations.gov* , or, if only available in hard copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Building), 2777 S. Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA. The Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket telephone number is
(703)305-5805. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joanne I. Miller, Registration Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:
(703)305-6224; e-mail address: *miller.joanne@epa.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. General Information A. Does this Action Apply to Me? You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer. Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to: • Crop production (NAICS 111), e.g., agricultural workers; greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture workers; farmers. • Animal production (NAICS 112), e.g., cattle ranchers and farmers, dairy cattle farmers, livestock farmers. • Food manufacturing (NAICS 311), e.g., agricultural workers; farmers; greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture workers; ranchers; pesticide applicators. • Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS 32532), e.g., agricultural workers; commercial applicators; farmers; greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture workers; residential users. This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . B. How Can I Access Electronic Copies of this Document? In addition to accessing an electronic copy of this **Federal Register** document through the electronic docket at *http://www.regulations.gov* , you may access this **Federal Register** document electronically through the EPA Internet under the “ **Federal Register** ” listings at *http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr* . You may also access a frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR part 180 through the Government Printing Office's pilot e-CFR site at *http://www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr* . C. Can I File an Objection or Hearing Request? Under section 408(g) of the FFDCA, as amended by the FQPA, any person may file an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a hearing on those objections. The EPA procedural regulations which govern the submission of objections and requests for hearings appear in 40 CFR part 178. You must file your objection or request a hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0504 in the subject line on the first page of your submission. All requests must be in writing, and must be mailed or delivered to the Hearing Clerk on or before November 6, 2006. In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of the filing that does not contain any CBI for inclusion in the public docket that is described in ADDRESSES . Information not marked confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without prior notice. Submit your copies, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0504, by one of the following methods: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: *http://www.regulations.gov* . Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. • *Mail* : Office of Pesticide Programs
(OPP)Regulatory Public Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. • *Delivery* : OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Building), 2777 S. Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation (8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays). Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The Docket telephone number is
(703)305-5805. II. Background and Statutory Findings In the **Federal Register** of July 5, 2006 (71 FR 38151) (FRL-8073-5), EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP 5F6959) by Bayer CropScience, 2 T.W. Alexander Drive, P.O. Box 12014, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709. The petition requested that 40 CFR 180. 600 be amended by increasing tolerances for residues of the herbicide propoxycarbazone, methyl 2-[[[(4,5-dihydro-4-methyl-5-oxo-3-propoxy-1H-1,2,4-triazol-1-yl)carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl]benzoate (MKH-6561) and its metabolite, methyl 2-[[[(4,5-dihydro-3-(2-hydroxypropoxy)-4-methyl-5-oxo-1H-1,2,4-triazol-1-yl)carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl] benzoate (Pr-2-OH MKH-6561), in or on wheat, forage from 1.5 parts per million
(ppm)to 11 ppm; and of propoxycarbazone in or on animal commodities cattle/goat/horse/sheep, meat byproducts from 0.05 ppm to 0.30 ppm; and milk from 0.004 ppm to 0.03 ppm. Based on the scientific review of the residue chemistry data, EPA is raising the wheat forage tolerance to 17 ppm. The petitioner proposed raising the tolerances in order that wheat forage may be grazed by livestock immediately after the herbicide's application. Comments were received on the notice of filing. EPA's response to these comments is discussed in Unit IV.C. Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is “safe.” Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines “safe” to mean that “there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable information.” This includes exposure through drinking water and in residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to “ensure that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue....” EPA performs a number of analyses to determine the risks from aggregate exposure to pesticide residues. For further discussion of the regulatory requirements of section 408 of the FFDCA and a complete description of the risk assessment process, see *http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/1997/November/Day-26/p30948.htm* . III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, EPA has reviewed the available scientific data and other relevant information in support of this action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a determination on aggregate exposure, consistent with section 408(b)(2) of FFDCA, for increasing tolerances for residues of the herbicide propoxycarbazone and its metabolite in or on wheat, forage to 17 ppm; and for propoxycarbazone in or on animal commodities cattle/goat/horse/sheep, meat byproducts to 0.30 ppm; and milk to 0.03 ppm. EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with establishing the tolerance follows. A. Toxicological Profile EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and children. Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the toxic effects caused by propoxycarbazone as well as the no-observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies are discussed in the **Federal Register** of July 7, 2004 (69 FR 40774) (FRL-7365-7). B. Toxicological Endpoints For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no appreciable risk, the dose at which no adverse effects are observed (the NOAEL) from the toxicology study identified as appropriate for use in risk assessment is used to estimate the toxicological level of concern (LOC). However, the lowest dose at which adverse effects of concern are identified (the LOAEL) is sometimes used for risk assessment if no NOAEL was achieved in the toxicology study selected. An uncertainty factor
(UF)is applied to reflect uncertainties inherent in the extrapolation from laboratory animal data to humans and in the variations in sensitivity among members of the human population as well as other unknowns. The linear default risk methodology (Q*) is the primary method currently used by the Agency to quantify non-threshold hazards such as cancer. The Q* approach assumes that any amount of exposure will lead to some degree of cancer risk, estimates risk in terms of the probability of occurrence of additional cancer cases. A summary of the toxicological endpoints for propoxycarbazone used for human risk assessment is discussed in Unit III.B. of the final rule published in the **Federal Register** of July 7, 2004 (69 FR 40774) (FRL-7365-7). C. Exposure Assessment 1. *Dietary exposure from food and feed uses* . Tolerances have been established (40 CFR 180.600) for the residues of propoxycarbazone, in or on a variety of raw agricultural commodities. Risk assessments were conducted by EPA to assess dietary exposures from propoxycarbazone in food as follows: i. *Acute exposure* . Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide, if a toxicological study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring as a result of a one-day or single exposure. No such effects were identified in the toxicological studies for propoxycarbazone therefore, a quantitative acute dietary exposure assessment is unnecessary. ii. *Chronic exposure* . In conducting the chronic dietary exposure assessment EPA used the Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model software with the Food Commodity Intake Database (DEEM-FCID TM ), which incorporates food consumption data as reported by respondents in the USDA 1994-1996 and 1998 Nationwide Continuing Surveys of Food Intake by Individuals (CSFII), and accumulated exposure to the chemical for each commodity. The following assumptions were made for the chronic exposure assessments: For the chronic analyses, tolerance-level residues were assumed for all food commodities with current or proposed propoxycarbazone-sodium tolerances, and it was assumed that all of the crops included in the analysis were treated. Percent Crop Treated
(PCT)and/or anticipated residues were not used in the chronic risk assessment. 2. *Dietary exposure from drinking water* . The Agency lacks sufficient monitoring exposure data to complete a comprehensive dietary exposure analysis and risk assessment for propoxycarbazone in drinking water. Because the Agency does not have comprehensive monitoring data, drinking water concentration estimates are made by reliance on simulation or modeling taking into account data on the physical characteristics of propoxycarbazone. The Agency uses the FQPA Index Reservoir Screening Tool (FIRST) or the Pesticide Root Zone Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling System (PRZM/EXAMS), to produce estimates of pesticide concentrations in an index reservoir. The SCI-GROW model is used to predict pesticide concentrations in shallow ground water. For a screening-level assessment for surface water EPA will use FIRST (a tier 1 model) before using PRZM/EXAMS (a tier 2 model). The FIRST model is a subset of the PRZM/EXAMS model that uses a specific high-end runoff scenario for pesticides. Both FIRST and PRZM/EXAMS incorporate an index reservoir environment, and both models include a percent crop area factor as an adjustment to account for the maximum percent crop coverage within a watershed or drainage basin. None of these models include consideration of the impact processing (mixing, dilution, or treatment) of raw water for distribution as drinking water would likely have on the removal of pesticides from the source water. The primary use of these models by the Agency at this stage is to provide a screen for sorting out pesticides for which it is unlikely that drinking water concentrations would exceed human health levels of concern. Since the models used are considered to be screening tools in the risk assessment process, the Agency uses the estimated environmental concentrations (EECs), which are the model estimates of a pesticide's concentration in water. EECs derived from these models are used to quantify drinking water exposure and risk as a %RfD or %PAD. Based on the FIRST and SCI-GROW models, the estimated environmental concentrations
(EECs)of propoxycarbazone for chronic exposures are estimated to be 0.9 ppb for surface water and 0.4 ppb for ground water. 3. *From non-dietary exposure* . The term “residential exposure” is used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary exposure (e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control, termiticides, and flea and tick control on pets). Propoxycarbazone is not registered for use on any sites that would result in residential exposure. 4. *Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of toxicity* . Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of the FFDCA requires that, when considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the Agency consider “available information” concerning the cumulative effects of a particular pesticide's residues and “other substances that have a common mechanism of toxicity.” Unlike other pesticides for which EPA has followed a cumulative risk approach based on a common mechanism of toxicity, EPA has not made a common mechanism of toxicity finding as to propoxycarbazone and any other substances and propoxycarbazone does not appear to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has not assumed that propoxycarbazone has a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the cumulative effects of such chemicals, see the policy statements released by EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs concerning common mechanism determinations and procedures for cumulating effects from substances found to have a common mechanism on EPA's website at *http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative* . D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children 1. *In general* . Section 408 of FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply an additional tenfold margin of safety for infants and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the data base on toxicity and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. Margins of safety are incorporated into EPA risk assessments either directly through use of a MOE analysis or through using uncertainty (safety) factors in calculating a dose level that poses no appreciable risk to humans. In applying this provision, EPA either retains the default value of 10X when reliable data do not support the choice of a different factor, or, if reliable data are available, EPA uses a different additional safety factor value based on the use of traditional uncertainty factors and/or special FQPA safety factors, as appropriate. 2. *Conclusion* . EPA has determined that there is reliable data showing that it will be safe for infants and children to remove the FQPA safety factor. The FQPA factor is removed based on the following: i. There is no quantitative or qualitative evidence of increased susceptibility of rat and rabbit fetuses to *in utero* exposure to propoxycarbazone-sodium in developmental toxicity studies. There is no quantitative or qualitative evidence of increased susceptibility to propoxycarbazone-sodium following pre-/post-natal exposure to a 2-generation reproduction study; ii. There is no concern for developmental neurotoxicity resulting from exposure to propoxycarbazone-sodium. A developmental neurotoxicity study
(DNT)study is not required; iii. The toxicological database is complete for FQPA assessment; iv. The chronic dietary food exposure assessment utilizes HED recommended tolerance level residues and 100% CT information for all commodities. By using these screening-level assessments, actual exposures/risks will not be underestimated; and v. The dietary drinking water assessment utilizes water concentration values generated by model and associated modeling parameters which are designed to provide conservative, health protective, high-end estimates of water concentrations which will not likely be exceeded. E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety 1. *Acute risk* . An effect of concern attributable to a single exposure
(dose)was not identified from the oral toxicity studies including the developmental toxicity studies in rat and rabbits. No acute risk is expected from exposure to propoxycarbazone-sodium. 2. *Chronic risk* . Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that exposure to propoxycarbazone from food and drinking water will utilize < 1 % of the cPAD for the U.S. population, and < 1 % of the cPAD for Children 1-2 years old. There are no residential uses for propoxycarbazone that result in chronic residential exposure to propoxycarbazone. 3. *Short-term risk* . Propoxycarbazone is not registered for use on any sites that would result in residential exposure. Therefore, the aggregate risk is the sum of the risk from food and water, which do not exceed the Agency's level of concern. 4. *Determination of safety* . Based on these risk assessments, EPA concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the general population and to infants and children from aggregate exposure to propoxycarbazone residues. IV. Other Considerations A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology Adequate enforcement methodology (liquid chromatography/mass spectroscopy) is available to enforce the tolerance expression. The method may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755-5350; telephone number:
(410)305-2905; e-mail address: *residuemethods@epa.gov* . B. International Residue Limits There are no Codex, Canadian or Mexican maximum residue limits established for propoxycarbazone-sodium on wheat, meat, meat byproducts or milk. C. Response to Comments Public comments were received from B. Sachau who objected to the proposed tolerances because of the amounts of pesticides already consumed and carried by the American population. She further indicated that testing conducted on animals have absolutely no validity and are cruel to the test animals. B. Sachau's comments contained no scientific data or evidence to rebut the Agency's conclusion that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure to propoxycarbazone, including all anticipated dietary exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable information. EPA has responded to B. Sachau's generalized comments on numerous previous occasions. [January 7, 2005, 70 FR 1349, 1354 (FRL-7691-4); October 29, 2004, 69 FR 63083, 63096 (FRL-7681-9)]. V. Conclusion Therefore, the tolerances are increased for residues of the herbicide propoxycarbazone and its metabolite in or on wheat, forage to 17 ppm; and for propoxycarbazone in or on animal commodities cattle/goat/horse/sheep, meat byproducts to 0.30 ppm; and milk to 0.03 ppm. VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews This final rule establishes a tolerance under section 408(d) of FFDCA in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)has exempted these types of actions from review under Executive Order 12866, entitled *Regulatory Planning and Review* (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this rule has been exempted from review under Executive Order 12866 due to its lack of significance, this rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, *Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use* (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This final rule does not contain any information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* , or impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(UMRA)(Public Law 104-4). Nor does it require any special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled *Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations* (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994); or OMB review or any Agency action under Executive Order 13045, entitled * Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks * (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not involve any technical standards that would require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis of a petition under section 408(d) of FFDCA, such as the tolerance in this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(RFA)(5 U.S.C. 601 *et seq.* ) do not apply. In addition, the Agency has determined that this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132, entitled *Federalism* (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure “meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.” “Policies that have federalism implications” is defined in the Executive order to include regulations that have “substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.” This final rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food handlers and food retailers, not States. This action does not alter the relationships or distribution of power and responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions of section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. For these same reasons, the Agency has determined that this rule does not have any “tribal implications” as described in Executive Order 13175, entitled *Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments* (65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000). Executive Order 13175, requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure “meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have tribal implications.” “Policies that have tribal implications” is defined in the Executive order to include regulations that have “substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and the Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.” This rule will not have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule. VII. Congressional Review Act The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 *et seq.* , as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of this final rule in the **Federal Register** . This final rule is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Dated: August 28, 2006. Donald R. Stubbs, Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs. Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows: PART 180—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows: Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371. 2. Section 180.600 is amended by revising the tolerance levels for wheat, forage in the table in paragraph (a)(1) and for cattle, meat byproducts; goat, meat byproducts; horse, meat byproducts; milk; and sheep, meat byproducts in the table in paragraph (a)(2) to read as follows: § 180.600 Propoxycarbazone; tolerances for residues.
(a)*General* .
(1)* * * Commodity Parts per million Wheat, forage 17 * * * * *
(2)* * * Commodity Parts per million * * * * * Cattle, meat byproducts 0.3 * * * * * Goat, meat byproducts 0.3 * * * * * Horse, meat byproducts 0.3 Milk 0.03 * * * * * Sheep, meat byproducts 0.3 [FR Doc. E6-14641 Filed 9-5-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 180 [EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0664; FRL-8089-3] Paraquat Dichloride; Pesticide Tolerance AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of paraquat dichloride in or on various food and feed commodities. The tolerances were requestd by Syngenta Crop Protection Inc. through submission of several pesticide petitions. Syngenta Crop Protection Inc. requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), as amended by the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA). DATES: This regulation is effective September 6, 2006. Objections and requests for hearings must be received on or before November 6, 2006, and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION ). ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under docket identification
(ID)number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0664. All documents in the docket are listed in the index for the docket. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business Information
(CBI)or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available in the electronic docket at *http://www.regulations.gov* , or, if only available in hard copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Building), 2777 S. Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA. The Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket telephone number is
(703)305-5805. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Hope Johnson, Registration Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: 703-305-5410; e-mail address: *johnson.hope@epa.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. General Information A. Does this Action Apply to Me? You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer. Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to: • Crop production (NAICS 111), e.g., agricultural workers; greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture workers; farmers. • Animal production (NAICS 112), e.g., cattle ranchers and farmers, dairy cattle farmers, livestock farmers. • Food manufacturing (NAICS 311), e.g., agricultural workers; farmers; greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture workers; ranchers; pesticide applicators. • Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS 32532), e.g., agricultural workers; commercial applicators; farmers; greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture workers; residential users. This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . B. How Can I Access Electronic Copies of this Document? In addition to accessing an electronic copy of this **Federal Register** document through the electronic docket at *http://www.regulations.gov* , you may access this **Federal Register** document electronically through the EPA Internet under the “ **Federal Register** ” listings at *http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr.* You may also access a frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR part 180 through the Government Printing Office's pilot e-CFR site at *http://www.gpoaccess.gov/ecfr.* C. Can I File an Objection or Hearing Request? Under section 408(g) of the FFDCA, as amended by the FQPA, any person may file an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a hearing on those objections. The EPA procedural regulations which govern the submission of objections and requests for hearings appear in 40 CFR part 178. You must file your objection or request a hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0664 in the subject line on the first page of your submission. All requests must be in writing, and must be mailed or delivered to the Hearing Clerk on or before November 6, 2006. In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of the filing that does not contain any CBI for inclusion in the public docket that is described in ADDRESSES . Information not marked confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without prior notice. Submit your copies, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0664, by one of the following methods: • *Federal eRulemaking Portal* : *http://www.regulations.gov.* Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. • *Mail* : Office of Pesticide Programs
(OPP)Regulatory Public Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. • *Delivery* : OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Building), 2777 S. Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation (8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays). Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The Docket telephone number is
(703)305-5805. II. Background and Statutory Findings In the **Federal Register** of June 29, 2005 (70 FR 124) (FRL-7718-8), EPA issued a notice pursuant to section 408(d)(3) of FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of pesticide petitions (PP 1E6332, PP 1E6319, PP 1E6223, PP 2F6433, PP 3E6763) by Syngenta Crop Protection Inc, P.O. Box 18300, Greensboro, NC 27419-8300. The petitions requested that 40 CFR 180.205 be amended by establishing tolerances for residues of the herbicide paraquat dichloride as follows: In or on okra at 0.05 ppm (PP 1E6332); onion (dry bulb) at 0.1 ppm (PP 1E6319); tanier at 0.05 ppm (PP 1E6223); animal feed, nongrass, group at 5.0; barley, hay at 3.0 ppm; barley, straw at 1.0 ppm; beet, sugar, tops at 0.05 ppm ; berry group at 0.05 ppm; cattle, kidney at 0.3 ppm; cotton gin byproducts at 82.0 ppm; cotton, seed at 5.0 ppm; cranberry at 0.05 ppm; ; fruit, pome, group at 0.05 ppm; fruit, stone, group at 0.05 ppm; goat, kidney at 0.3 ppm; grape at 0.05 ppm; hog, kidney at 0.3 ppm; hops, cone, dry at 0.5 ppm; horse, kidney at 0.3 ppm; nut, tree, group at 0.05 ppm; pea and bean, dried shelled, except soybean, subgroup at 0.30 ppm; pea and bean, succulent, shelled, subgroup at 0.05 ppm; sheep, kidney at 0.3 ppm; sorghum, forage at 0.1 ppm; soybean, seed at 0.70 ppm; soybean, forage at 0.40 ppm; soybean, hay at 6.0 ppm; soybean, aspirated grain fractions at 60.0 ppm; vegetable, brassica leafy, group at 0.05 ppm; vegetable, cucurbit, group at 0.05 ppm; vegetable, fruiting, group at 0.05 ppm; vegetable, legume, edible-podded, subgroup at 0.05 ppm; wheat, grain at 1.5 ppm; wheat, forage at 0.40 ppm; wheat, hay at 3.0 ppm; wheat, straw at 40.0 ppm; wheat, aspirated grain fractions at 65.0 ppm (PP 2F6433); ginger at 0.1 ppm (PP 3E6763). That notice included a summary of the petition prepared by Syngenta Crop Protection Inc., the registrant. As a result of the review of the residue field trials, the proposed tolerance level for barley, hay was subsequently revised to 3.5 ppm. One comment was received on the notice of filing. EPA's response to this comment is discussed in Unit IV
(C)below. Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is “safe.” Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines “safe” to mean that “there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable information.” This includes exposure through drinking water and in residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to “ensure that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue....” EPA performs a number of analyses to determine the risks from aggregate exposure to pesticide residues. For further discussion of the regulatory requirements of section 408 of the FFDCA and a complete description of the risk assessment process, see *http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/1997/November/Day-26/p30948.htm.* III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety Consistent with section 408(b)(2)(D) of FFDCA, EPA has reviewed the available scientific data and other relevant information in support of this action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a determination on aggregate exposure, consistent with section 408(b)(2) of FFDCA, for a tolerance for residues of paraquat dichloride on animal feed, nongrass, group 18, forage at 75 ppm; animal feed, nongrass, group 18, hay at 210 ppm; barley, hay at 3.5 ppm; barley, straw at 1.0 ppm; beet, sugar, tops at 0.05 ppm; berry group 13 at 0.05 ppm; cattle, kidney at 0.50 ppm; cotton, gin byproducts at 110 ppm; cotton, undelinted seed at 3.5 ppm; cranberry at 0.05 ppm; fruit, pome, group 11 at 0.05 ppm; fruit, stone, group 12 at 0.05 ppm; ginger at 0.10 ppm; goat, kidney at 0.50 ppm; grain, aspirated fractions at 65 ppm; grape at 0.05 ppm; hog, kidney at 0.50 ppm; hop, dried cones at 0.50 ppm; horse, kidney at 0.50 ppm; nut, tree, group 14 at 0.05 ppm; okra at 0.05 ppm; onion, bulb at 0.10 ppm; pea and bean, dried shelled, except soybean, subgroup 6C, except guar bean at 0.30 ppm; pea and bean, succulent shelled, subgroup 6B at 0.05 ppm; sheep, kidney at 0.50 ppm; sorghum, forage, forage at 0.10 ppm; sorghum, grain, forage at 0.10 ppm; soybean, forage at 0.40 ppm; soybean, hay at 10 ppm; soybean, hulls at 4.5 ppm; soybean, seed at 0.70 ppm; vegetable, Brassica leafy, group 5 at 0.05 ppm; vegetable, cucurbit, group 9 at 0.05 ppm; vegetable, fruiting, group 8 at 0.05 ppm; vegetable, legume, edible podded, subgroup 6A at 0.05 ppm; wheat, forage at 0.50 ppm; wheat, grain at 1.1 ppm; wheat, hay at 3.5 ppm; and wheat, straw at 50 ppm. Additionally, EPA has determined that the current tolerance with regional registrations for residues of paraquat dichloride on tanier at 0.05 ppm may be extended to the State of Florida. EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with establishing the tolerance follows. A. Toxicological Profile EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered its validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship of the results of the studies to human risk. EPA has also considered available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and children. Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the toxic effects caused by paraquat dichloride as well as the no-observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at *http://www.regulations.gov* in the index of docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0664. B. Toxicological Endpoints For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no appreciable risk, the dose at which no adverse effects are observed (the NOAEL) from the toxicology study identified as appropriate for use in risk assessment is used to estimate the toxicological level of concern (LOC). However, the lowest dose at which adverse effects of concern are identified (the LOAEL) is sometimes used for risk assessment if no NOAEL was achieved in the toxicology study selected. An uncertainty factor
(UF)is applied to reflect uncertainties inherent in the extrapolation from laboratory animal data to humans and in the variations in sensitivity among members of the human population as well as other unknowns. The linear default risk methodology (Q*) is the primary method currently used by the Agency to quantify non-threshold hazards such as cancer. The Q* approach assumes that any amount of exposure will lead to some degree of cancer risk, estimates risk in terms of the probability of occurrence of additional cancer cases. More information can be found on the general principles EPA uses in risk characterization at *http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/health/human.htm.* A summary of the toxicological endpoints for dichloride used for human risk assessment is shown in Table 1 of this unit: **Table 1.—Summary of Toxicological Dose and Endpoints for paraquat dichloride for Use in Human Risk Assessment** Exposure/Scenario Dose Used in Risk Assessment, Interspecies and Intraspecies and any Traditional UF Special FQPA SF and Level of Concern for Risk Assessment Study and Toxicological Effects Acute Dietary (Females 13-50 years of age) NOAEL = 1.25 mg/kg/day UF = 300 Acute RfD = 0.0125 mg/kg/day Special FQPA SF = 1X aPAD = 0.0042 mg/kg/day Multi-generation rat study LOAEL = 3.75 mg/kg/day based on increased invidences of alveolar histiocytes in both sexes Acute Dietary (General population including infants and children) NOAEL = 1.25 mg/kg/day UF = 100 Acute RfD = 0.0125 mg/kg/day Special FQPA SF = 1X aPAD = 0.0125 mg/kg/day Multi-generation rat study LOAEL = 3.75 mg/kg/day based on increased incidences of alveolar histiocytes in both sexes Chronic Dietary (All populations) NOAEL= 0.45 mg/kg/day UF = 100 Chronic RfD = 0.0045 mg/kg/day Special FQPA SF = 1X cPAD = 0.0045 mg/kg/day Chronic toxicity in dogs LOAEL = 0.93 mg/kg/day based on increased severity of chronic pneumonitis and gross lung lesions in both sexes, and focal pulmonary granulomas in males Short-Term/Intermediate-Term Dermal (1 day to 6 months) NOAEL = 1.25 mg/kg/day (dermal absorption factor = 0.3%) LOC = MOE = 100 Multi-generation rat study LOAEL = 3.75 mg/kg/day based on increased incidences of alveolar histiocytes in both sexes Long-Term Dermal (> 6 months) NOAEL= 0.45 mg/kg/day (dermal absorption factor = 0.3%) LOC = MOE = 100 Chronic toxicity in dogs LOAEL = 0.93 mg/kg/day based on increased severity of chronic pneumonitis and gross lung lesions in both sexes, and focal pulmonary granulomas in males Short-Term, Intermediate-Term, Long-Term Inhalation (1 to > 6 months) NOAEL= 0.01 μg/L (inhalation absorption factor = 100%) LOC = MOE = 100 21-day inhalation toxicity study LOAEL = 0.10 μg/L based on squamous keratinizing metaplasia and hyperplasia of the epithelium of the larynx Cancer (oral, dermal, inhalation) Classification: Category E (evidence of non-carcinogenicity to humans) C. Exposure Assessment 1. *Dietary exposure from food and feed uses.* Tolerances have been previously established (40 CFR 180.205) for the residues of paraquat dichloride, in or on a variety of raw agricultural commodities, including egg, milk, and the meat, fat and meat by-products of cattle, goats, hogs, horses, and sheep. Risk assessments were conducted by EPA to assess dietary exposures from paraquat dichloride in food as follows: i. *Acute exposure.* Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide, if a toxicological study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring as a result of a one-day or single exposure. The Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model (DEEM-FCID TM , Version 2.03) analysis evaluated the individual food consumption as reported by respondents in the USDA 1994-1996 Nationwide Continuing Surveys of Food Intake by Individuals (CSFII) and a supplemental children's survey conducted in 1998 and accumulated exposure to the chemical for each commodity. The following assumptions were made for the acute exposure assessments: A partially refined, probabilistic acute dietary exposure assessment using tolerance-level residues for all registered and proposed commodities, maximum estimates of percent crop treated information for some registered commodities, and DEEM default processing factors for some commodities, was conducted for the general U.S. population and various population subgroups. Drinking water was incorporated directly into the dietary assessment using a high-end monitoring value of 1.52 ppb. ii. *Chronic exposure.* In conducting the chronic dietary exposure assessment EPA used the Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model software with the Food Commodity Intake Database (DEEM-FCID TM , Version 2.03), which incorporates food consumption data as reported by respondents in the USDA 1994-1996 and 1998 Nationwide Continuing Surveys of Food Intake by Individuals (CSFII), and accumulated exposure to the chemical for each commodity. The following assumptions were made for the chronic exposure assessments: A partially refined, chronic dietary exposure assessment using tolerance-level residues for all registered and proposed commodities, average estimates of percent crop treated information for some registered commodities, and DEEM default processing factors for some commodities, was conducted for the general U.S. population and various population subgroups. Drinking water was incorporated directly into the dietary assessment using a high-end monitoring value of 1.52 ppb. iii. *Cancer.* Paraquat dichloride is a Category E chemical (evidence of non-carcinogenicity to humans). iv. *Anticipated residue and percent crop treated
(PCT)information.* Section 408(b)(2)(F) of FFDCA states that the Agency may use data on the actual percent of food treated for assessing chronic dietary risk only if the Agency can make the following findings: Condition 1, that the data used are reliable and provide a valid basis to show what percentage of the food derived from such crop is likely to contain such pesticide residue; Condition 2, that the exposure estimate does not underestimate exposure for any significant subpopulation group; and Condition 3, if data are available on pesticide use and food consumption in a particular area, the exposure estimate does not understate exposure for the population in such area. In addition, the Agency must provide for periodic evaluation of any estimates used. To provide for the periodic evaluation of the estimate of PCT as required by section 408(b)(2)(F) of FFDCA, EPA may require registrants to submit data on PCT. The Agency used PCT information as follows: For the acute assessment, maximum percent crop treated information was used on the following commodities: alfalfa 2.5%, almonds 30%, apples 30%, apricots 20%, artichokes 40%, asparagus 15%, avocados 5%, barley 2.5%, green beans 3%, blackberries 40%, blueberries 15%, broccoli 3%, Brussels sprouts 3%, cabbage 3%, cantaloupes 3%, carrots 3%, cherries 30%, corn 5%, cotton 20%, cucumbers 30%, dry beans/peas 5%, eggplant 20%, figs 10%, garlic 5%, grapefruit 5%, grapes 55%, hazelnuts (filberts) 70%, kiwifruit 3%, lemons 3%, lettuce 3%, nectarines 25%, olives 10%, onions 5%, oranges 10%, peaches 40%, peanuts 35%, pears 15%, green peas 3%, pecans 15%, peppers 30%, pistachios 45%, potatoes 5%, prunes and plums 20%, pumpkins 5%, raspberries 75%, rice 2.5%, safflower 2.5%, sorghum 2.5%, soybeans 2.5%, squash 10%, strawberries 25%, sugar beets 2.5%, sugarcane 5%, sunflowers 2.5%, sweet corn 5%, tangelos 30%, tangerines 10%, tomatoes 15%, walnuts 20%, watermelons 10%, and wheat 2.5%. For the chronic assessment, average percent crop treated information was used on the following commodities: alfalfa 1%, almonds 30%, apples 20%, apricots 10%, artichokes 30%, asparagus 10%, avocados 1%, barley 1%, green beans 1%, blackberries 30%, blueberries 10%, broccoli 1%, cabbage 1%, cantaloupes 1%, carrots 1%, cherries 20%, corn 1%, cotton 20%, cucumbers 5%, dry beans/peas 1%, eggplant 20%, figs 10%, garlic 1%, grapefruit 5%, grapes 20%, hazelnuts (filberts) 55%, hops 80%, kiwifruit 1%, lemons 1%, lettuce 1%, nectarines 15%, olives 5%, onions 1%, oranges 5%, peaches 30%, peanuts 25%, pears 10%, green peas 1%, pecans 10%, peppers 10%, pistachios 30%, potatoes 5%, prunes and plums 15%, pumpkins 5%, raspberries 70%, rice 1%, safflower 1%, sorghum 1%, soybeans 1%, squash 5%, strawberries 15%, sugar beets 1%, sugarcane 5%, sunflowers 1%, sweet corn 1%, tangelos 20%, tangerines 5%, tomatoes 5%, walnuts 15%, watermelons 5%, and wheat 1%. EPA uses an average PCT for chronic dietary risk analysis. The average PCT figure for each existing use is derived by combining available Federal, State, and private market survey data for that use, averaging by year, averaging across all years, and rounding up to the nearest multiple of 5% except for those situations in which the average PCT is less than one. In those cases 1% is used as the average. EPA uses a maximum PCT for acute dietary risk analysis. The maximum PCT figure is the single maximum value reported overall from available Federal, State, and private market survey data on the existing use, across all years, and rounded up to the nearest multiple of 5%, except for those situations in which the maximum PCT is 2.5%. In those cases, 2.5% is used as the maximum. In most cases, EPA uses available data from United States Department of Agriculture/National Agricultural Statistics Service (USDA/NASS), Proprietary Market Surveys, and the National Center for Food and Agriculture Policy (NCFAP) for the most recent 6 years. 2. *Dietary exposure from drinking water.* Paraquat dichloride undergoes minimal degradation in the environment, and thus is very persistent (as parent). However, its very high propensity to bind to solids, particularly clay, makes it very immobile. In addition, paraquat dichloride does not readily appear to desorb from clay. The greatest cause for concern is likely to be erosion of contaminated sediments off-site and subsequent redeposition onto non-target areas (especially surface water bodies). There is an additional (minor) concern for the one proposed new usage (wheat) that includes aerial spray; however, this use entails very small amounts (relative to all other uses), so spray drift onto nearby surface water drinking water sources should be fairly limited. Because of its very low mobility and strong tendency to bind tightly to soils, paraquat dichloride contamination of drinking water supplies derived from groundwater is expected to be highly unlikely. In addition, the strong binding characteristics of paraquat dichloride are likely to render most residues in raw drinking water sources removable through sedimentation processes, which are typically included as part of standard drinking water treatments. Because of its strong cation-exchange sorption to soils, modeling is not appropriate for paraquat dichloride. In most circumstances, the levels of paraquat dichloride residues in surface or ground water are expected to be insignificant. Because it should sorb to suspended sediment, coagulation and flocculation processes in drinking water treatment plants are likely to remove any paraquat dichloride residues present in the raw water. Residues of paraquat dichloride in drinking water derived from surface supplies can therefore be assumed to be negligible. For residues in ground water however, the EPA used the value of 1.52 ppb reported in Virginia, for human exposure assessment, as this represents a high-end, but not worst-case value from the available monitoring data. As a result, the groundwater monitoring value of 1.52 ppb was used for both the acute and chronic analyses. This estimate of drinking water concentration was directly entered into the dietary exposure model (DEEM-FCID TM ). 3. *From non-dietary exposure.* The term “residential exposure” is used in this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary exposure (e.g., for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control, termiticides, and flea and tick control on pets). Paraquat dichloride is not registered for use on any sites that would result in residential exposure. 4. *Cumulative effects from substances with a common mechanism of toxicity.* Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of the FFDCA requires that, when considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the Agency consider “available information” concerning the cumulative effects of a particular pesticide's residues and “other substances that have a common mechanism of toxicity.” Unlike other pesticides for which EPA has followed a cumulative risk approach based on a common mechanism of toxicity, EPA has not made a common mechanism of toxicity finding as to paraquat dichloride and any other substances and paraquat dichloride does not appear to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has not assumed that paraquat dichloride has a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the cumulative effects of such chemicals, see the policy statements released by EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs concerning common mechanism determinations and procedures for cumulating effects from substances found to have a common mechanism on EPA's website at *http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative.* D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children 1. *In general* . Section 408 of FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply an additional tenfold margin of safety for infants and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. Margins of safety are incorporated into EPA risk assessments either directly through use of a MOE analysis or through using uncertainty (safety) factors in calculating a dose level that poses no appreciable risk to humans. In applying this provision, EPA either retains the default value of 10X when reliable data do not support the choice of a different factor, or, if reliable data are available, EPA uses a different additional safety factor value based on the use of traditional uncertainty factors and/or special FQPA safety factors, as appropriate. 2. *Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity.* Prenatal developmental studies in rats and mice show that developmental effects only occur in the presence of maternal toxicity. No effect on reproduction was observed. Fetal effects were limited to delayed ossification and decreased body weights. There was no indication from these studies that paraquat dichloride is involved in endocrine disruption. 3. *Conclusion.* The toxicological database for paraquat dichloride is incomplete, lacking an acceptable prenatal developmental study in a non-rodent species. However, four acceptable developmental studies in rats and mice have been submitted for paraquat dichloride, and the Agency considers the toxicology database adequate for hazard characterization, and to address FQPA concerns. The Agency is retaining a 3x uncertainty factor for the acute dietary subpopulation Females 13-49 years old because of residual concerns for developing fetuses. All other populations will have a 1x safety factor. The FQPA safety factor was reduced to
(1x)for the following reasons:
(i)There is no evidence of neurotoxicity;
(ii)There is no indication of quantitative or qualitative increased susceptibility of rats or mice to *in utero* and/or prenatal/postnatal exposure of rats;
(iii)The dietary (food and drinking water) exposure assessments will not underestimate the potential exposures for infants and children; and
(iv)There are no registered residential uses of paraquat dichloride. E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety 1. *Acute risk.* Using the exposure assumptions discussed in this unit for acute exposure, the acute dietary exposure from food to paraquat dichloride will occupy 33% of the aPAD for the U.S. population, 54% of the aPAD for females 13-49 years old, 52% of the aPAD for all infants (<1 year old), and 66% of the aPAD for children 1-2 years old. Acute aggregate risk consists of risks resulting from exposure to residues in food and drink water only. The acute dietary exposure analysis included both food and drinking water, and as a result, the acute aggregate risk assessment is equivalent to the acute dietary analysis. **Table 2.—Aggregate Risk Assessment for Acute Exposure to paraquat dichloride** Population Subgroup Dietary Exposure(mg/kg/day) % aPAD General U.S. Population 0.004064 33 All Infants (<1 year old) 0.006550 52 Children 1-2 years old 0.008240 66 Females 13-49 years old 0.002284 54 2. *Chronic risk.* Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that exposure to paraquat dichloride from food will utilize 8% of the cPAD for the U.S. population, 13% of the cPAD for all infants (<1 year old), and 26% of the cPAD for children 1-2 years old. There are no residential uses for paraquat dichloride that result in chronic residential exposure to paraquat dichloride. Chronic aggregate risk consists of risks resulting from exposure to residues in food and drink water only. The chronic dietary exposure analysis included both food and drinking water, and as a result, the chronic aggregate risk assessment is equivalent to the chronic dietary analysis. **Table 3.—Aggregate Risk Assessment for Chronic (Non-Cancer) Exposure to paraquat dichloride** Population/Subgroup Dietary Exposure (mg/kg/day) %/cPAD General U.S. Population 0.000353 8 All Infants (<1 year old) 0.000584 13 Children 1-2 years old 0.001175 26 Females 13-49 years old 0.000250 6 3. *Short-term risk.* Short-term aggregate exposure takes into account residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure level). Paraquat dichloride is not registered for use on any sites that would result in residential exposure. Therefore, the aggregate risk is the sum of the risk from food and water, which does not exceed the Agency's level of concern. 4. *Intermediate-term risk.* Intermediate-term aggregate exposure takes into account residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food and water (considered to be a background exposure level). Paraquat dichloride is not registered for use on any sites that would result in residential exposure. Therefore, the aggregate risk is the sum of the risk from food and water, which does not exceed the Agency's level of concern. 5. *Aggregate cancer risk for U.S.* population. Paraquat dichloride is a Category E chemical (evidence of non-carcinogenicity in humans). As a result, an aggregate cancer risk assessment was not conducted. 6. *Determination of safety.* Based on these risk assessments, EPA concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the general population, and to infants and children from aggregate exposure to paraquat dichloride residues. IV. Other Considerations A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology Adequate enforcement methodology is available to enforce the tolerance expression. Method I of Pesticide Analytical Manual (PAM), Volume II (spectrophotometric), is adequate for plant tolerance enforcement purposes. In addition, Method 1B (spectrophotometric) has also been found to adequately recover paraquat cation residues. Method IA of PAM Volume II (spectrophotometric) is available for animal tolerance enforcement purposes. Method 4B of PAM Volume II
(HPLC)is also available for animal tolerance enforcement purposes. Adequate enforcement methodology (specify method; example--gas chromatography) is available to enforce the tolerance expression. The method may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755-5350; telephone number:
(410)305-2905; e-mail address: *residuemethods@epa.gov* . B. International Residue Limits The Codex Alimentarius Commission has established several maximum residue limits
(MRLs)for paraquat dichloride residues in various commodities. The Codex and U.S. tolerances are in harmony with respect to MRL/tolerance expression; both regulate the parent paraquat cation only. Compatibility between U.S. tolerances and Codex MRLs exists for eggs, passion fruit, sunflower seed, and vegetables [including Brassica leafy vegetables, carrots, cassava, corn (sweet), edible podded legume vegetables, fruiting vegetables, lettuce, onions (green), pigeon peas, turnips (roots and tops), and yams], milk and ruminant tissue, and poultry eggs. Incompatibilities of U.S. tolerances and Codex MRLs on the following raw plant commodities remain because of differences in agricultural practices: cotton seed, dry hops, maize, olives, sorghum, dry soya bean and certain vegetables (such as bulb onion). No Canadian or Mexican MRLs have been established for paraquat dichloride. C. Response to Comments Several comments were received from a private citizen objecting to pesticide body load, IR-4 profiteering, animal testing, establishing tolerances, and pesticide residues. The Agency has received these same comments from this commenter on numerous previous occasions. Refer to the following **Federal Register** cites: 70 FR 37686, June 30, 2005; 70 FR 1354, January 7, 2005;, 69 FR 63096-63098, October 29, 2004; for the Agency's response to these objections. V. Conclusion Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of paraquat dichloride in or on animal feed, nongrass, group 18, forage at 75 ppm; animal feed, nongrass, group 18, hay at 210 ppm; barley, hay at 3.5 ppm; barley, straw at 1.0 ppm; beet, sugar, tops at 0.05 ppm; berry group 13 at 0.05 ppm; cattle, kidney at 0.50 ppm; cotton, gin byproducts at 110 ppm; cotton, undelinted seed at 3.5 ppm; cranberry at 0.05 ppm; fruit, pome, group 11 at 0.05 ppm; fruit, stone, group 12 at 0.05 ppm; ginger at 0.10 ppm; goat, kidney at 0.50 ppm; grain, aspirated fractions at 65 ppm; grape at 0.05 ppm; hog, kidney at 0.50 ppm; hop, dried cones at 0.50 ppm; horse, kidney at 0.50 ppm; nut, tree, group 14 at 0.05 ppm; okra at 0.05 ppm; onion, bulb at 0.10 ppm; pea and bean, dried shelled, except soybean, subgroup 6C, except guar bean at 0.30 ppm; pea and bean, succulent shelled, subgroup 6B at 0.05 ppm; sheep, kidney at 0.50 ppm; sorghum, forage, forage at 0.10 ppm; sorghum, grain, forage at 0.10 ppm; soybean, forage at 0.40 ppm; soybean, hay at 10 ppm; soybean, hulls at 4.50 ppm; soybean, seed at 0.70 ppm; vegetable, Brassica leafy, group 5 at 0.05 ppm; vegetable, cucurbit, group 9 at 0.05 ppm; vegetable, fruiting, group 8 at 0.05 ppm; vegetable, legume, edible podded, subgroup 6A at 0.05 ppm; wheat, forage at 0.50 ppm; wheat, grain at 1.1 ppm; wheat, hay at 3.5 ppm; and wheat, straw at 50 ppm.. VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews This final rule establishes tolerances under section 408(d) of FFDCA in response to petitions submitted to the Agency. The Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)has exempted these types of actions from review under Executive Order 12866, entitled *Regulatory Planning and Review* (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this rule has been exempted from review under Executive Order 12866 due to its lack of significance, this rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, *Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use* (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This final rule does not contain any information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., or impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(UMRA)(Public Law 104-4). Nor does it require any special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled *Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations* (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994); or OMB review or any Agency action under Executive Order 13045, entitled *Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks* (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not involve any technical standards that would require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis of a petition under section 408(d) of FFDCA, such as the tolerance in this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(RFA)(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) do not apply. In addition, the Agency has determined that this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132, entitled *Federalism* (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure “meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.” “Policies that have federalism implications” is defined in the Executive order to include regulations that have “substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.” This final rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food handlers and food retailers, not States. This action does not alter the relationships or distribution of power and responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions of section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. For these same reasons, the Agency has determined that this rule does not have any “tribal implications” as described in Executive Order 13175, entitled Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000). Executive Order 13175, requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure “meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have tribal implications.” “Policies that have tribal implications” is defined in the Executive order to include regulations that have “substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and the Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.” This rule will not have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule. VII. Congressional Review Act The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of this final rule in the **Federal Register** . This final rule is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Dated: August 25, 2006. Lois Rossi, Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs. Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows: PART 180—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows: Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371. 2. In § 180.205, the table to paragraph
(a)is amended as follows: a. By adding entries for animal feed, nongrass, group 18, forage; animal feed, nongrass, group 18, hay; barley, hay; barley, straw; berry, group 13; cotton, gin byproducts; cranberry; fruit, pome group 11; fruit, pome group 12; grain, aspirated fractions; ginger; grape; okra; nut, tree, group 14; onion, bulb; pea and bean, dried shelled, except soybean, subgroup 6C, except guar bean; pea and bean, succulent shelled, subgroup 6B; sorghum, forage, forage; sorghum, grain, forage; soybean, hay; soybean, hulls; soybean, seed; vegetable, Brassica leafy, group 5; vegetable, cucurbit, group 9; vegetable, fruiting, group 8; vegetable, legume, edible podded, subgroup 6A; wheat, forage; wheat, hay; and wheat, straw. b. By revising the entries for beet, sugar, tops; cattle, kidney; cotton, undelinted seed; goat, kidney; hog, kidney; hop, dried cone; horse, kidney; sheep, kidney; soybean, forage; and wheat, grain. c. By removing from the table in paragraph
(a)the entries for onion, dry bulb; sorghum, forage; and vegetable, fruiting. § 180.205 Paraquat; tolerances for residues.
(a)* * * Commodity Parts per million * * * * * Animal feed, nongrass, group 18, forage 75 Animal feed, nongrass, group 18, hay 210 * * * * * Barley, hay 3.5 Barley, straw 1.0 * * * * * Beet, sugar, tops 0.05 Berry group 13 0.05 * * * * * Cattle, kidney 0.50 * * * * * Cotton, gin byproducts 110 Cotton, undelinted seed 3.5 Cranberry 0.05 * * * * * Fruit, pome, group 11 0.05 Fruit, pome, group 12 0.05 Ginger 0.10 Goat, kidney 0.50 * * * * * Grain, aspirated fractions 65 Grape 0.05 * * * * * Hog, kidney 0.50 * * * * * Hop, dried cones 0.50 * * * * * Horse, kidney 0.50 * * * * * Nut, tree, group 14 0.05 Okra 0.05 * * * * * Onion, bulb 0.10 * * * * * Pea and bean, dried shelled, except soybean, subgroup 6C, except guar bean 0.30 Pea and bean, succulent shelled, subgroup 6B 0.05 * * * * * Sheep, kidney 0.50 * * * * * Sorghum, forage, forage 0.10 * * * * * Sorghum, grain, forage 0.10 * * * * * Soybean, forage 0.40 Soybean, hay 10 Soybean, hulls 4.5 Soybean, seed 0.70 * * * * * Vegetable, Brassica leafy, group 5 0.05 Vegetable, cucurbit, group 9 0.05 * * * * * Vegetable, fruiting, group 8 0.05 Vegetable, legume, edible podded, subgroup 6A 0.05 * * * * * Wheat, forage 0.50 Wheat, grain 1.1 Wheat, hay 3.5 Wheat, straw 50 [FR Doc. E6-14642 Filed 9-5-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 710 [EPA-HQ-OPPT-2005-0059; FRL-7752-8] RIN 2070-AC61 TSCA Inventory Update Reporting Rule; Electronic Reporting AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Direct final rule. SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to amend the Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA)section 8(a) Inventory Update Reporting
(IUR)regulations to allow the electronic submission of information and to make several minor corrections. For the first time, in 2006, reporters of IUR data will be able to use the Internet, through EPA's Central Data Exchange (CDX), to submit information on their chemicals to EPA. In addition, EPA will continue to allow IUR submissions either on CD ROM or on paper. EPA is also correcting two paragraph cross-references and a section heading. Additionally, EPA is clarifying requirements for the reporting of company identification information. DATES: This direct final rule is effective on November 6, 2006 without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by October 6, 2006. If, however, EPA receives adverse comment, EPA will publish a **Federal Register** document to withdraw the portion of the rule that relates to the specific comment that was made before the effective date of the direct final rule. The remainder of the rule will become effective on November 6, 2006. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID)number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2005-0059, by one of the following methods: • *Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov* . Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. • *Mail* : Document Control Office (7407M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. • *Hand Delivery* : OPPT Document Control Office (DCO), EPA East, Rm. 6428, 1201 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. Attention: Docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2005-0059. The DCO is open from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the DCO is
(202)564-8930. Such deliveries are only accepted during the DCO's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. *Instructions* : Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2005-0059. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available in the on-line docket at *http://www.regulations.gov* , including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information
(CBI)or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov or e-mail. The regulations.gov website is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. *Docket* : All documents in the docket are listed in the docket index at *http://www.regulations.gov* . Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in the on-line docket at *http://www.regulations.gov* or in hard copy at the OPPT Docket, EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Rm. B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The EPA Docket Center Reading Room telephone number is
(202)566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPPT Docket, which is located in the EPA Docket Center, is
(202)566-0280. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: *For general information contact* : Colby Lintner, Regulatory Coordinator, Environmental Assistance Division (7408M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:
(202)554-1404; e-mail address: *TSCA-Hotline@epa.gov* . *For technical information contact* : Susan Sharkey, Project Manager, Economics, Exposure and Technology Division (7406M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:
(202)564-8789; e-mail address: *sharkey.susan@epa.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. General Information A. Does this Action Apply to Me? You may be affected by this action if you manufacture (defined by statute at 15 U.S.C. 2602(7) to include import) chemical substances, including inorganic chemical substances, subject to reporting under the Inventory Update Reporting
(IUR)regulations at 40 CFR part 710. Any use of the term “manufacture” in this document will encompass import, unless otherwise stated. Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to: Chemical manufacturers and importers subject to IUR reporting, including chemical manufacturers and importers of inorganic chemical substances (NAICS codes 325, 32411). This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining whether this action might apply to certain entities. To determine whether you or your business may be affected by this action, you should carefully examine the applicability provisions at 40 CFR 710.48. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the technical contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA? 1. *Submitting CBI* . Do not submit CBI to EPA through regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. 2. *Tips for preparing your comments* . When submitting comments, remember to: i. Identify the rulemaking by docket ID number and other identifying information (subject heading, **Federal Register** date and page number). ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR)part or section number. iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives, and substitute language for your requested changes. iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information and/or data that you used. v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be reproduced. vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and suggest alternatives. vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of profanity or personal threats. viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline identified. II. Background A. What is the Agency's Authority for Taking this Action? EPA is required under TSCA section 8(b), 15 U.S.C. 2607(b), to compile and keep current an inventory of chemical substances manufactured or processed in the United States. This inventory is known as the TSCA Chemical Substances Inventory (the TSCA Inventory). In 1977, EPA promulgated a rule (42 FR 64572, December 23, 1977) under TSCA section 8(a), 15 U.S.C. 2607(a), to compile an inventory of chemical substances in commerce at that time. In 1986, EPA promulgated the initial IUR rule under TSCA section 8(a) at 40 CFR part 710 (51 FR 21438, June 12, 1986) to facilitate the periodic updating of the TSCA Inventory and to support activities associated with the implementation of TSCA. In 2003, EPA promulgated extensive amendments to the IUR rule (68 FR 848, January 7, 2003) (FRL-6767-4) (2003 Amendments) to collect manufacturing, processing, and use exposure-related information, and to make certain other changes. Minor corrections to the IUR rule were made in July of 2004 (69 FR 40787, July 7, 2004) (FRL-7332-3), and additional revisions to the IUR rule were made on December 19, 2005 (70 FR 75059) (FRL-7743-9). TSCA section 8(a)(1) authorizes the EPA Administrator to promulgate rules under which manufacturers and processors of chemical substances and mixtures (referred to hereinafter as chemical substances) must maintain such records and submit such information as the Administrator may reasonably require. TSCA section 8(a) generally excludes small manufacturers and processors of chemical substances from the reporting requirements established in TSCA section 8(a). However, EPA is authorized by TSCA section 8(a)(3) to require TSCA section 8(a) reporting from small manufacturers and processors with respect to any chemical substance that is the subject of a rule proposed or promulgated under TSCA section 4, 5(b)(4), or 6, or that is the subject of an order under TSCA section 5(e), or that is the subject of relief that has been granted pursuant to a civil action under TSCA section 5 or 7. Pursuant to TSCA section 8(a)(3)(B), the standard for determining whether an entity qualifies as a small manufacturer for purposes of 40 CFR part 710 generally is defined in 40 CFR 704.3. Processors are not currently subject to the regulations at 40 CFR part 710. B. What is the Inventory Update Reporting
(IUR)Regulation? The data reported under the IUR rule are used to update the information maintained on the TSCA Inventory. EPA uses the TSCA Inventory and data reported under the IUR rule to support many TSCA-related activities and to provide overall support for a number of EPA and other federal health, safety, and environmental protection activities. The IUR rule, as amended by the 2003 Amendments and subsequent revisions, requires U.S. manufacturers (including importers) of chemicals listed on the TSCA Inventory to report to EPA every 5 years the identity of chemical substances manufactured for a commercial purpose during the reporting year in quantities of 25,000 pounds or more at any single site they own or control. The IUR generally excludes several categories of substances from its reporting requirements, i.e., polymers, microorganisms, naturally occurring chemical substances, and certain natural gas substances. Sites are required to report information such as company name, site location and other identifying information, identity and production volume of the reportable chemical substance, manufacturing exposure-related information associated with each reportable chemical substance, including the physical form and maximum concentration of the chemical substance and the number of potentially exposed workers. Manufacturers (including importers) of larger volume chemicals (i.e., 300,000 pounds or more manufactured during the reporting year at any site) are additionally required to report certain processing and use information (40 CFR 710.52(c)(4)). This information includes process or use category, NAICS code, industrial function category, percent production volume associated with each process or use category, number of use sites, number of potentially exposed workers, and consumer/commercial information such as use category, use in or on products intended for use by children, and maximum concentration. For the 2006 submission period, inorganic chemicals are partially exempt regardless of production volume (i.e., submitters do not report the processing and use information listed in 40 CFR 710.52(c)(4)). After the 2006 reporting period, the partial exemption for inorganic chemicals will no longer be applicable and submitters will report processing and use information on inorganic chemical substances manufactured (including imported) at a site in volumes of 300,000 pounds or more, unless partially exempted as described in Unit II.C. In addition, specifically listed petroleum process streams and other specifically listed chemical substances are partially exempt during the 2006 submission period as well as during subsequent submission periods. C. What Action is the Agency Taking? Through this action, EPA is amending the methods available for obtaining documents, including reporting instructions, and for submitting reports. Additionally, EPA is making several minor corrections, including clarifying requirements for the reporting of company identification information. 1. *Methods to obtain reporting instructions and submit reports.* Because IUR reporting occurs only once every 5 years, the methods used to make available or otherwise distribute reporting materials, and for submitting the required information to EPA, often change from one submission period to another. EPA is therefore providing instructions to obtain the most up-to-date information concerning IUR submissions. For the 2006 submission period, EPA is allowing submissions, including those containing CBI, over the Internet using EPA's Central Data Exchange (CDX). Submitting IUR information through CDX is EPA's preferred submission method because this method enables EPA to notify the submitter that the Agency has received their submission, it reduces reporting errors, and it enables data to be available more quickly. Coupled with EPA's new reporting software, eIUR, the Agency believes electronic reporting will become the preferred method of reporting for industry as well as for EPA. The reporting form, reporting software, instruction manual, and other guidance materials are available on EPA's website at *www.epa.gov/oppt/iur* or through EPA's hotline, and can be obtained as described in the regulatory text. EPA plans to continue to notify sites that submitted during the previous submission period of the advent of the next submission period. The notification will include information on how to obtain the documents described in this paragraph. Although EPA prefers that submissions be made using CDX, the Agency will continue to accept submissions on CD ROM or in hard copy. Instructions for submitting IUR information in these formats are also included on the website and in the instructions manual. 2. *Corrections* . Section 710.52 describes the information to be reported by persons described in § 710.48. EPA is correcting two of the cross-references in this section. Section 710.57 describes recordkeeping requirements. EPA is correcting the title for this section. These changes are purely administrative, make the relevant regulatory provision internally consistent and correct, and do not have any substantive effect on any other part of the regulations at 40 CFR part 710. a. Section 710.52(c)(4)(i)(F) states that: [f]or each combination of industrial processing or use operation, NAICS code and industrial function category, the submitter must estimate the number of workers reasonably likely to be exposed to each reportable chemical substance. For each combination associated with each substance, the submitter must select from among the worker ranges listed in paragraph (c)(3)(vi) of this section and report the corresponding code (i.e., W1 though W8). The reference to paragraph (c)(3)(vi) is incorrect as that paragraph does not contain worker ranges. Instead, the appropriate cross reference is to paragraph (c)(3)(v). As a result, EPA is correcting § 710.52(c)(4)(i)(F) by changing the cross-reference to the worker ranges from “paragraph (c)(3)(vi)” to “paragraph (c)(3)(v).” b. Section 710.52(c)(4)(ii)(D) states that: [w]here the reportable chemical substance is used in commercial or consumer products, the estimated typical maximum concentration, measured by weight, of the chemical substance in each commercial and consumer product category reported under paragraph (c)(4)(ii)(A) of this section. For each substance in each commercial and consumer product category reported under paragraph (c)(4)(ii)(A) of this section, submitters must select from among the ranges of concentrations listed in the table in paragraph (c)(3)(vii) of this section and report the corresponding code (i.e., M1 through M5). The reference to paragraph (c)(3)(vii) is incorrect as that paragraph does not contain ranges of concentrations. Instead, the appropriate cross-reference is to paragraph (c)(3)(vi). As a result, EPA is correcting § 710.52(c)(4)(ii)(D) by changing the cross-reference to the ranges of concentrations from “paragraph (c)(3)(vii)” to “paragraph (c)(3)(vi).” c. Section 710.57 is titled “Reporting requirements” and states that “[e]ach person who is subject to the reporting requirements of this subpart must retain records that document any information reported to EPA.” Because the subject of this section is recordkeeping requirements, EPA is correcting the section by changing the heading from “Reporting requirements” to “Recordkeeping requirements.” 3. *Clarification* . Section 710.52(c)(2)(i) states that: [t]he name of a person who will serve as technical contact for the submitter company and who will be able to answer questions about the information submitted by the company to EPA, the parent company name and Dun and Bradstreet Number, the contact person's full mailing address, the contact person's telephone number, and the contact person's e-mail address must be reported for each site at which at least 25,000 lbs. (11,340 kg) of a reportable chemical substance is manufactured (including imported). The use of the term “parent company” has created confusion, and therefore EPA is clarifying this requirement by changing the phrase “parent company” to “company.” Submitters are to report the company name associated with the manufacturing (including importing) site and do not need to identify a parent company, if any, that would be associated with the company that reports information under this rule. III. Direct Final Rule Procedures EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no adverse comment. This final rule will be effective on November 6, 2006 without further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comment by October 6, 2006. If EPA receives adverse comment on one or more distinct amendments, paragraphs, or sections of this rulemaking, the Agency will publish a timely withdrawal in the **Federal Register** indicating which provisions will become effective and which provisions are being withdrawn due to adverse comment. Any distinct amendment, paragraph, or section of today's rulemaking for which the Agency does not receive adverse comment will become effective on November 6, 2006, notwithstanding any adverse comment on any other distinct amendment, paragraph, or section of today's rule. For any distinct amendment, paragraph, or section of today's rule that is withdrawn due to adverse comment, EPA will publish a notice of proposed rulemaking in a future edition of the **Federal Register** . The Agency will address the comments on any such distinct amendment, paragraph, or section as part of that proposed rulemaking. IV. Materials in the Rulemaking Record The public version of the official record for this rulemaking is contained in three separate dockets that can be accessed as described in the ADDRESSES unit. Docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2005-0059 contains the rulemaking record. This record includes the documents located in the docket. 1. USEPA. “Instructions for Reporting for the 2006 Partial Updating of the TSCA Chemical Inventory Database,” Draft. May 2006. 2. USEPA. “News About: The 2006 IUR Rule...change for easier, more accurate filing,” November 2005. V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews A. Executive Order 12866 This direct final rule implements one change and several minor corrections to 40 CFR part 710, resulting in a burden and cost reduction. Since this direct final rule does not impose any new requirements, it is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)under Executive Order 12866, entitled *Regulatory Planning and Review* (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). B. Paperwork Reduction Act This direct final rule does not contain any information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq* . C. Regulatory Flexibility Act Since this action makes one change, several minor corrections, and a clarification to 40 CFR part 710, resulting in a burden reduction, EPA certifies this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. There will be no adverse impact on small entities resulting from this action. D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act This action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(UMRA)(Public Law 104-4). E. Executive Order 3132 The Agency has determined that this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132, entitled *Federalism* (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure “meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.” “Policies that have federalism implications” is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations that have “substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.” This action does not alter the relationships or distribution of power and responsibilities established by Congress. F. Executive Order 13175 The Agency has determined that this rule does not have any “tribal implications” as described in Executive Order 13175, entitled *Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments* (65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000). Executive Order 13175, requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure “meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have tribal implications.” This direct final rule will not have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule. G. Executive Order 13045 This action does not require OMB review or any other Agency action under Executive Order 13045, entitled *Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks* (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). H. Executive Order 13211 Because this direct final rule is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866 due to its lack of significance, this direct final rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled *Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use* (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act This action does not involve any technical standards that would require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). J. Congressional Review Act The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 *et seq* ., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the Agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the **Federal Register** . This rule is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 710 Environmental protection, Central Data Exchange, CDX, Chemicals, Electronic reporting, Hazardous materials, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Dated: August 25, 2006. James B. Gulliford, Assistant Administrator, Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances. Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows: PART 710—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for part 710 continues to read as follows: Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2607(a). § 710.52 [Amended] 2. Section 710.52 is amended as follows: a. By revising the phrase “parent company” to read “company” in paragraph (c)(2)(i). b. By revising the phrase “paragraph (c)(3)(vi)” to read “paragraph (c)(3)(v)” in paragraph (c)(4)(i)(F). c. By revising the phrase “paragraph (c)(3)(vii)” to read “paragraph (c)(3)(vi)” in paragraph (c)(4)(ii)(D). § 710.57 [Amended] 3. Section 710.57 is amended by revising the section heading to read: “§ 710.57 Recordkeeping requirements.” 4. Section 710.59 is revised to read as follows: § 710.59 Availability of reporting form and instructions.
(a)*Use the proper EPA form* . You must use the EPA form identified as “Form U” to submit written information in response to the requirements of this subpart. Instructions for obtaining copies of Form U are in paragraph
(c)of this section.
(b)*Follow the reporting instructions* . You should follow the detailed instructions for completing and submitting an electronic or hard copy report. Instructions given in the EPA publication titled, “Instructions for Reporting for the 2006 Partial Updating of the TSCA Chemical Inventory Database,” are available as described in paragraph
(c)of this section. EPA encourages reporting sites subject to this part to submit the required information to EPA electronically.
(c)*Obtain the reporting package and copies of the form* . You can obtain the reporting form or software, reporting instructions, and other associated documents as follows:
(1)*By website* . Go to the EPA Inventory Update Reporting Internet home page at *http://www.epa.gov/oppt/iur* and follow the appropriate links. EPA encourages reporting sites subject to this subpart to visit this home page.
(2)*By phone* . Call the EPA TSCA Hotline at
(202)554-1404.
(3)*By e-mail* . Send an e-mail request for this information to the EPA TSCA Hotline at *TSCA-Hotline@epa.gov* .
(4)*By mail* . Send a written request for this information to the following address: TSCA Hotline, Mail Code 7408M, ATTN: Inventory Update Reporting, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. [FR Doc. E6-14716 Filed 9-5-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-S GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 41 CFR Part 102-76 [FMR Amendment 2005-03; FMR Case 2005-102-8] Federal Management Regulation; Real Property Policies Update; Technical Amendment AGENCY: Office of Governmentwide Policy, General Services Administration. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: This document amends the Federal Management Regulation
(FMR)to extend the implementation date of the Real Property Policies section entitled “What standards must facilities subject to the Architectural Barriers Act meet?,” which was published in the **Federal Register** , at 70 FR 67846, on November 8, 2005. The implementation date of the section previously was extended to August 7, 2006, but only with respect to leasing actions. The implementation date of the section, currently August 7, 2006, is hereby further extended to February 6, 2007, but only for leasing actions (other than those where the Government expressly requires new construction to meet its needs) where solicitations have not been issued by February 6, 2007. The May 8, 2006, implementation date remains unchanged with respect to Federal construction or alteration projects. The August 7, 2006, implementation date remains unchanged with respect to lease projects where new construction is required by the Government to meet its needs. Except as expressly modified by this final rule, all other terms and conditions of the Architectural Barriers Act standards remain in full force and effect. DATES: Effective Date: September 6, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Regulatory Secretariat, Room 4035, GSA Building, 1800 F Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20405, (202)501-4755, for information pertaining to status or publication schedules. For clarification of content, contact Mr. Stanley C. Langfeld, Director, Regulations Management Division, Office of Governmentwide Policy, General Services Administration, at
(202)501-1737, or by e-mail at *Stanley.langfeld@gsa.gov* . Please cite FMR Case 2005-102-8, Amendment 2005-03, Technical Amendment.1 List of Subjects in 41 CFR Part 102-76 Federal buildings and facilities. Dated: August 21, 2006. Lurita Doan, Administrator of General Services For the reasons set forth in the preamble, GSA amends 41 CFR chapter 102 as set forth below: PART 102-76—DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION 1. The authority citation for 41 CFR part 102-76 continues to read as follows: Authority: Authority: 40 U.S.C. 121(c); (in furtherance of the Administrator’s authorities under 40 U.S.C. 3301-3315 and elsewhere as included under 40 U.S.C. 581 and 583; E.O. 12411, 48 FR 13391, 3 CFR, 1983 Comp., p. 155; E.O. 12512, 50 FR 18453, 3 CFR, 1985 Comp., p. 340). 2. Amend section 102-76.65 by revising paragraph
(a)to read as follows: § 102-76.65 What standards must facilities subject to the Architectural Barrier Act meet?
(a)GSA adopts Appendices C and D to 36 CFR part 1191 (ABA Chapters 1 and 2, and Chapters 3 through 10) as the Architectural Barriers Act Accessibility Standard (ABAAS). Facilities subject to the Architectural Barriers Act (other than facilities in 102-76.65(b) and (c)) must comply with ABAAS as set forth below:
(1)For construction or alteration of Federally-owned facilities, compliance with ABAAS is required if the construction or alteration commenced after May 8, 2006. If the construction or alteration of a Federally-owned facility commenced on or before May 8, 2006, compliance with the Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards
(UFAS)is required.
(2)For Federal lease-construction actions subject to the Architectural Barriers Act, where the Government expressly requires new construction to meet its needs, compliance with ABAAS is required for all such leases awarded on or after June 30, 2006. UFAS compliance is required for all such leases awarded before June 30, 2006.
(3)For all other lease actions subject to the Architectural Barriers Act (other than those described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section), compliance with ABAAS is required for all such leases awarded pursuant to solicitations issued after February 6, 2007. UFAS compliance is required for all such leases awarded pursuant to solicitations issued on or before February 6, 2007. [FR Doc. E6-14727 Filed 9-5-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6820-RH-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 648 [Docket No. 051209329-6046-02; I.D. 082806A] Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish Fisheries; Closure of the Quarter III Fishery for Loligo Squid AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Closure. SUMMARY: NMFS announces that the directed fishery for *Loligo* squid in the Exclusive Economic Zone
(EEZ)will be closed effective 0001 hours, September 2, 2006. Vessels issued a Federal permit to harvest *Loligo* squid may not retain or land more than 2,500 lb (1,134 kg) of *Loligo* squid per trip for the remainder of the quarter (through September 30, 2006). This action is necessary to prevent the fishery from exceeding its Quarter III quota and to allow for effective management of this stock. DATES: Effective 0001 hours, September 02, 2006, through 2400 hours, September 30, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Don Frei, Fishery Management Specialist, 978-281-9221, Fax 978-281-9135. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulations governing the Loligo squid fishery are found at 50 CFR part 648. The regulations require specifications for maximum sustainable yield, initial optimum yield, allowable biological catch, domestic annual harvest (DAH), domestic annual processing, joint venture processing, and total allowable levels of foreign fishing for the species managed under the Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish Fishery Management Plan. The procedures for setting the annual initial specifications are described in § 648.21. The 2006 specification of DAH for *Loligo* squid was set at 16,872.4 mt (71 FR 10621, March 2, 2006). This amount is allocated by quarter, as shown below. Table. 1 *Loligo* Squid Quarterly Allocations. Quarter Percent Metric Tons 1 Research Set-aside I (Jan-Mar) 33.23 5,606.70 N/A II (Apr-Jun) 17.61 2,971.30 N/A III (Jul-Sep) 17.3 2,918.90 N/A IV (Oct-Dec) 31.86 5,375.60 N/A Total 100 16,872.50 127.5 1 Quarterly allocations after 127.5 mt research set-aside deduction. Section 648.22 requires NMFS to close the directed *Loligo* squid fishery in the EEZ when 80 percent of the quarterly allocation is harvested in Quarters I, II, and III, and when 95 percent of the total annual DAH has been harvested. NMFS is further required to notify, in advance of the closure, the Executive Directors of the Mid-Atlantic, New England, and South Atlantic Fishery Management Councils; mail notification of the closure to all holders of *Loligo* squid permits at least 72 hours before the effective date of the closure; provide adequate notice of the closure to recreational participants in the fishery; and publish notification of the closure in the **Federal Register** . The Administrator, Northeast Region, NMFS, based on dealer reports and other available information, has determined that 80 percent of the DAH for *Loligo* squid in Quarter III will be harvested. Therefore, effective 0001 hours, September 2, 2006, the directed fishery for *Loligo* squid is closed and vessels issued Federal permits for *Loligo* squid may not retain or land more than 2,500 lb (1,134 kg) of *Loligo* during a calendar day. The directed fishery will reopen effective 0001 hours, October 1, 2006, when the Quarter IV quota becomes available. Classification This action is required by 50 CFR part 648 and is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866. Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 *et seq.* Dated: August 29, 2006. Alan D. Risenhoover, Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. 06-7427 Filed 8-30-06; 3:25 pm]
Connectionstraces to 21
Traces to 21 documents
19 references not yet in our index
  • 40 CFR 52
  • 40 CFR 2
  • Pub. L. 104-4
  • 1 CFR 51
  • 40 CFR 51
  • 40 CFR 180
  • 40 CFR 178
  • 40 CFR 180.600
  • Pub. L. 104-113
  • 40 CFR 180.205
  • 40 CFR 710
  • 40 CFR 710.48
  • 40 CFR 704.3
  • 40 CFR 710.52(c)(4)
  • EO 3132
  • 41 CFR 102
  • 40 USC 3301-3315
  • 36 CFR 1191
  • 50 CFR 648
Citation graph
cites case law
Rules and Regulations
Direct final rule
Fed. Reg.Notices
Fed. Reg.Notices
U.S.C.§ 601
Fed. Reg.Notices
Fed. Reg.Proposed Rules
Fed. Reg.Notices
U.S.C.§ 272
U.S.C.§ 3501
U.S.C.§ 801
Cite40 CFR 52
Cite40 CFR 2
Pub. L.Pub. L. 104-4
Cites 40 · showing 12Cited by 0 across 0 sources
★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

"If you don't know your rights, you don't have any."

Marginalia · a citizen's law index
A research desk, not legal advice. Always read the cited source before relying on a summary.
Questions or an issue? support@self-law.org
disclaimerMarginalia is a research index, not a law firm. Nothing on this site is legal, tax, or financial advice and no attorney–client relationship is formed by using it. Statutes, regulations, and case law change; summaries, search results, AI output, and member posts may be incomplete, out of date, or wrong. Any interpretation drawn from material on this site should be validated by a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before you act on it.