Rules and Regulations. Final rule

25,439 words·~116 min read·/register/2008/01/07/07-6297·

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

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS 38 CFR Part 3 RIN 2900-AM72 Dependents' Educational Assistance AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: This document amends the Department of Veterans Affairs

(VA)regulation regarding dependents' educational assistance. A recent statutory change provides eligibility for dependents' educational assistance for dependents of servicepersons who meet certain criteria. This final rule is necessary to incorporate statutory amendments into VA regulations. DATES: *Effective Date:* This final rule is effective January 7, 2008. *Applicability Date:* In accordance with statutory provisions, the amendment in this final rule will be applied retroactively. The amendment to 38 CFR 3.807 is applicable for a course of education pursued after December 22, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Maya Ferrandino, Regulations Staff (211D), Compensation and Pension Service, Veterans Benefits Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20420,

(202)273-7210. (This is not a toll-free number.) SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 301 of the Veterans Benefits, Health Care, and Information Technology Act of 2006, Public Law 109-461, amended the basic eligibility criteria for dependents' educational assistance

(DEA)in 38 U.S.C. 3501(a). Under prior law, spouses and children of servicemembers missing in action, captured in the line of duty by a hostile force, or forcibly detained or interned in the line of duty by a foreign government or power had eligibility for DEA. The amendments expand eligibility, for pursuit of a course of education that occurs after December 22, 2006, to include spouses and children of servicemembers receiving treatment for permanent and total disability incurred in the line of duty and likely to result in discharge or release from service. VA's DEA regulations, specifically 38 CFR 3.807(a)(5), restate the statutory basic eligibility criteria for spouses and children of servicemembers. Accordingly, we are amending that provision, consistent with the amendments to section 3501(a), to clarify that spouses and children of certain permanently and totally disabled servicemembers are eligible for DEA for pursuit of a course of education that occurs after December 22, 2006. Administrative Procedures Act Substantive changes made by this final rule merely reflect statutory requirements. Accordingly, there is a basis for dispensing with prior notice and comment and a delayed effective date under the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 553. Use of those procedures would be impracticable, unnecessary, and contrary to the public interest. Paperwork Reduction Act This document contains no provisions constituting a new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521). The Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)assigns a control number for each collection of information it approves. VA may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. In § 3.807 (concerning certification of basic eligibility for dependents' educational assistance), the final rule amends provisions concerning information collection requirements that are currently approved by OMB under the following control numbers: 2900-0049 (VA Form 21-674, Request for Approval of School Attendance), 2900-0098 (VA Form 22-5490, Application for Survivors' and Dependents' Educational Assistance), 2900-0099 (VA Form 22-5495, Request for Change of Program or Place of Training Survivors' and Dependents' Educational Assistance). Regulatory Flexibility Act The initial and final regulatory flexibility analysis requirements of sections 603 and 604 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, are not applicable to this rule because a notice of proposed rulemaking is not required for this rule. Even so, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs hereby certifies that this final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities as they are defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act. This final rule would not affect any small entities. Only individual VA beneficiaries would be directly affected. Therefore, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b), this final rule is also exempt from the regulatory flexibility analysis requirements of sections 603 and 604. Executive Order 12866 Executive Order 12866 directs agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, when regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other advantages; distributive impacts; and equity). The Executive Order classifies a “significant regulatory action,” requiring review by OMB unless OMB waives such review, as any regulatory action that is likely to result in a rule that may:

(1)Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or communities;

(2)create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency;

(3)materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or

(a)* * *

(5)Is on active duty as a member of the Armed Forces and

(i)Now is, and, for a period of more than 90 days, has been listed by the Secretary concerned as missing in action, captured in line of duty by a hostile force, or forcibly detained or interned in line of duty by a foreign Government or power; or

(ii)Has been determined by VA to have a total disability permanent in nature incurred or aggravated in the line of duty during active military, naval, or air service; is hospitalized or receiving outpatient medical care, services, or treatment for such disability; is likely to be discharged or released from such service for such disability; and the pursuit of a course of education by such individual's spouse or child for which benefits under 38 U.S.C. chapter 35 are sought occurred after December 22, 2006. 8 [FR Doc. E7-25657 Filed 1-4-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8320-01-P DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS 38 CFR Part 21 RIN 2900-AM80 Education: Approval of Accredited Courses for VA Education Benefits AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: This document amends regulations governing aspects of educational assistance programs administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs

(VA)to remove a requirement that had mirrored a former statutory requirement. This final rule reflects a statutory amendment that removed the statutory requirement that educational institutions offering accredited courses must notify VA and the student using VA education benefits of the amount of credit granted for the student's prior education and training. DATES: *Effective Date:* This final rule is effective January 7, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Devon E. Seibert, Management and Program Analyst, Education Service, Veterans Benefits Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs (225C), 810 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20420,

(202)461-9837. (This is not a toll-free telephone number.) SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This document amends VA regulations set forth in 38 CFR part 21 concerning approval criteria for payment under education programs administered by VA for accredited courses of education. Specifically, it removes a requirement from 38 CFR 21.4253(d)(3) that had mirrored a statutory requirement. On October 9, 1996, section 103(c) of the Veterans' Benefits Improvements Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-275) removed the requirement in 38 U.S.C. 3675(b) that had required institutions offering accredited courses to notify VA and the student using VA education benefits of the amount of credit granted for a student's prior education and training. A similar statutory requirement, in 38 U.S.C. 3676(c)(4), imposing the same reporting requirement for institutions offering non-accredited courses, was not removed by Pub. L. 104-275 and still remains in effect. When Pub. L. 104-275 was enacted, VA had no administratively efficient way to distinguish between the enrollment certifications submitted by institutions offering accredited courses and non-accredited courses. Consequently, retaining in VA regulations the same reporting requirement for educational institutions offering accredited or non-accredited courses assisted VA in being able to monitor compliance by institutions offering non-accredited courses. However, distinguishing between accredited and non-accredited course enrollments is now administratively feasible for VA. Because we now have the means to make this distinction, we are amending § 21.4253(d)(3) to remove the notification requirements for institutions offering accredited courses. Administrative Procedure Act This document is being published without regard to the notice-and-comment and delayed-effective-date provisions of 5 U.S.C. 553(b) and

(d)since it merely changes an interpretive rule to reflect a statutory amendment, by removing language that had mirrored the former statutory requirement. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 This final rule contains no provisions constituting a new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521). Unfunded Mandates The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires, at 2 U.S.C. 1532, that agencies prepare an assessment of anticipated costs and benefits before issuing any rule that may result in an expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more (adjusted annually for inflation) in any given year. This final rule will have no such effect on State, local, and tribal governments, or on the private sector. Executive Order 12866 Executive Order 12866 directs agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, when regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other advantages; distributive impacts; and equity). The Executive Order classifies a “significant regulatory action,” requiring review by OMB unless OMB waives such review, as any regulatory action that is likely to result in a rule that may:

(2)create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency;

(3)materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or

(4)raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive Order. The economic, interagency, budgetary, legal, and policy implications of this final rule have been examined and it has been determined that it is not a significant regulatory action under the Executive Order because this rule merely reflects a statutory amendment by removing the regulatory requirement that had mirrored the language of the former statutory requirement. Regulatory Flexibility Act The initial and final regulatory flexibility analysis requirements of sections 603 and 604 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, are not applicable to this rule because a notice of proposed rulemaking is not required for this rule. Even so, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs hereby certifies that this final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities as they are defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Any impact on the educational institutions affected by the rule that may be small entities would be minor for at least the reason that the rule merely removes from the regulations a requirement for reporting information that would still be required to be maintained by such educational institutions. Under 38 U.S.C. 3675(b), educational institutions offering accredited courses are still required to maintain written records of credit for prior education given to students using VA education benefits, with the training period shortened proportionately. This final rule is therefore also exempt pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b) from the regulatory flexibility analysis requirements of sections 603 and 604. Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance numbers and titles for the programs affected by this rule are 64.120, Post-Vietnam Era Veterans' Educational Assistance; 64.124, All-Volunteer Force Educational Assistance; and 64.117, Survivors and Dependents Educational Assistance. List of Subjects in 38 CFR Part 21 Administrative practice and procedure, Armed forces, Civil rights, Claims, Colleges and universities, Conflict of interests, Education, Employment, Grant programs—education, Grant programs—veterans, Health care, Loan programs—education, Loan programs—veterans, Manpower training programs, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Schools, Travel and transportation expenses, Veterans, Vocational education, Vocational rehabilitation. Approved: November 16, 2007. Gordon H. Mansfield, Acting Secretary of Veterans Affairs. For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Department of Veterans Affairs amends 38 CFR part 21 (subpart D) as follows: PART 21—[AMENDED] Subpart D—Administration of Educational Assistance Programs 1. The authority citation for part 21, subpart D continues to read as follows: Authority: 10 U.S.C. 2141 note, ch. 1606; 38 U.S.C. 501(a), chs. 30, 32, 34, 35, 36, and as noted in specific sections. § 21.4253 [Amended] 2. Amend § 21.4253(d)(3) by removing “, and the person and the Department of Veterans Affairs so notified”. [FR Doc. E7-25658 Filed 1-4-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8320-01-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 271 [Docket No. EPA-R05-RCRA-2007-0722; FRL-8514-1] Michigan: Final Authorization of State Hazardous Waste Management Program Revision AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: EPA is granting Michigan final authorization of the changes to its hazardous waste program under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). EPA published a proposed rule on October 9, 2007 at 72 FR 57258 and provided for public comment. The public comment period ended on November 8, 2007. We received no comments. No further opportunity for comment will be provided. EPA has determined that these changes satisfy all requirements needed to qualify for final authorization and is authorizing the State's changes through this final action. DATES: The final authorization will be effective on January 7, 2008. ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket Identification No. EPA-R05-RCRA-2007-0722. All documents in the docket are listed in the *http://www.regulations.gov* Web site index. Although listed in the index, some of the 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. You may view and copy Michigan's application from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. at the following addresses: Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, Waste and Hazardous Materials Division, Constitution Hall—Atrium North, 525 West Allegan Street, Lansing, Michigan (mailing address P.O. Box 30241, Lansing, Michigan 48909), contact Ronda Blayer,

(517)353-9548; and at EPA Region 5, contact Judy Greenberg at the following address. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Judy Greenberg, Michigan Regulatory Specialist, Land and Chemicals Division (LR-8J), EPA Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604,

(312)886-4179, e-mail: *Greenberg.Judith@epa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A. Why are revisions to State programs necessary? States which have received final authorization from EPA under RCRA section 3006(b), 42 U.S.C. 6926(b), must maintain a hazardous waste program that is equivalent to, consistent with, and no less stringent than the Federal program. As the Federal program changes, States must change their programs and ask EPA to authorize the changes. Changes to State programs may be necessary when Federal or State statutory or regulatory authority is modified or when certain other changes occur. Most commonly, States must change their programs because of changes to EPA's regulations in 40 Code of Federal Regulations

(CFR)parts 124, 260 through 266, 268, 270, 273 and 279. B. What decisions have we made in this rule? We conclude that Michigan's application to revise its authorized program meets all of the statutory and regulatory requirements established by RCRA. Therefore, we are granting Michigan final authorization to operate its hazardous waste program with the changes described in the authorization application. Michigan has responsibility for permitting Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities (TSDFs) within its borders (except in Indian Country) and for carrying out the aspects of the RCRA program described in its revised program application, subject to the limitations of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA). New Federal requirements and prohibitions imposed by Federal regulations that EPA promulgates under the authority of HSWA take effect in authorized States before they are authorized for the requirements. Thus, EPA will implement those requirements and prohibitions in Michigan, including issuing permits, until the State is granted authorization to do so. C. What is the effect of today's authorization decision? The effect of this decision is that a facility in Michigan subject to RCRA will have to comply with the authorized State requirements instead of the equivalent Federal requirements in order to comply with RCRA. Michigan has enforcement responsibilities under its State hazardous waste program for violations of such program, but EPA retains its authority under RCRA sections 3007, 3008, 3013, and 7003, which include, among others, authority to: 1. Do inspections, and require monitoring, tests, analyses or reports; 2. Enforce RCRA requirements and suspend or revoke permits; and 3. Take enforcement actions regardless of whether the State has taken its own actions. This action does not impose additional requirements on the regulated community because the regulations for which Michigan is being authorized by today's action are already effective and are not changed by today's action. D. Proposed Rule On October 9, 2007 (72 FR 57258), EPA published a proposed rule. In that rule we proposed granting authorization of changes to Michigan's hazardous waste program and opened our decision to public comment. The Agency received no comments on this proposal. EPA has found Michigan's RCRA program to be satisfactory. E. What has Michigan previously been authorized for? Michigan initially received final authorization on October 16, 1986, effective October 30, 1986 (51 FR 36804), to implement the RCRA hazardous waste management program. We granted authorization for changes to Michigan's program on November 24, 1989, effective January 23, 1990 (54 FR 48608); on April 23, 1991, effective June 24, 1991 (56 FR 18517); on October 1, 1993, effective November 30, 1993 (58 FR 51244); on January 13, 1995, effective January 13, 1995 (60 FR 3095); on February 8, 1996, effective April 8, 1996 (61 FR 4742); on November 14, 1997, effective November 14, 1997 (62 FR 61175); on March 2, 1999, effective June 1, 1999 (64 FR 10111); on July 31, 2002, effective July 31, 2002 (67 FR 49617); and on March 9, 2006, effective March 9, 2006 (71 FR 12141). F. What Changes are we authorizing with today's action? On May 21, 2007, Michigan submitted a complete program revision application, seeking authorization of its changes in accordance with 40 CFR 271.21. We have determined that Michigan's hazardous waste program revision satisfies all of the requirements necessary to qualify for final authorization. Therefore, we are granting Michigan final authorization for the following program changes: Description of Federal requirement Revision checklist 1 Federal Register date and page Analogous State authority Mineral Processing Secondary Materials Exclusion 167D May 26, 1998, 63 FR 28556 Michigan Administrative Code, R 299.9202(1)(b)(iii) and R 299.9204(1)(v), effective December 16, 2004. NESHAP: Surface Coating of Automobiles and Light-Duty Trucks 205 April 26, 2004, 69 FR 22601 Michigan Combined Laws, 324.11105a(1) and (2), effective December 29, 2006. 2 1 Revision Checklists generally reflect changes made the Federal regulations pursuant to a particular Federal Register notice and EPA publishes these checklists as aids to states to use for the development of their authorization application. *See* EPA's RCRA State Authorization Web Page at *http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/state/.* 2 The legislation we are authorizing contains a “sunset provision” by which the substantive requirements of the State legislation will lapse after a period of three years unless the legislature explicitly reauthorizes it. It is EPA's position that once program revisions are authorized, the substantive requirements of the legislation will remain federally enforceable and our authorization of the revised program will persist, until the State requests and receives authorization of superseding program revisions, despite any lapse in the legal effect or enforceability of statutory authority on the State level. G. Where are the revised state rules different from the Federal rules? These program revisions do not contain any State requirements that are considered to be more stringent or broader in scope than the analogous Federal requirements. H. Who handles permits after the authorization takes effect? Michigan will issue permits for all the provisions for which it is authorized and will administer the permits it issues. EPA will continue to administer any RCRA hazardous waste permits or portions of permits which we issued prior to the effective date of this authorization until they expire or are terminated. EPA will not issue any more new permits or new portions of permits for the provisions listed in the Table above after the effective date of this authorization. EPA will continue to implement and issue permits for HSWA requirements for which Michigan is not yet authorized. I. How does today's action affect Indian Country (18 U.S.C. 1151) in Michigan? Michigan is not authorized to carry out its hazardous waste program in Indian country within the State, as defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151. This includes: 1. All lands within the exterior boundaries of Indian reservations within the State of Michigan; 2. Any land held in trust by the U.S. for an Indian tribe; and 3. Any other land, whether on or off an Indian reservation that qualifies as Indian country. EPA will continue to implement and administer the RCRA program in Indian country. It is EPA's long-standing position that the term “Indian lands” used in past Michigan hazardous waste approvals is synonymous with the term “Indian country.” *Washington Dep't of Ecology* v. *U.S. EPA,* 752 F.2d 1465, 1467, n.1 (9th Cir. 1985). *See* 40 CFR 144.3 and 258.2. J. What is codification and is EPA codifying Michigan's hazardous waste program as authorized in this rule? Codification is the process of placing the State's statutes and regulations that comprise the State's authorized hazardous waste program into the Code of Federal Regulations. We do this by referencing the authorized State rules in 40 CFR part 272. Michigan's rules, up to and including those revised October 19, 1991, have previously been codified through incorporation-by-reference effective April 24, 1989 (54 FR 7421, February 21, 1989); as amended effective March 31, 1992 (57 FR 3724, January 31, 1992). We reserve the amendment of 40 CFR part 272, subpart X, for the codification of Michigan's program changes until a later date. K. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews This rule only authorizes hazardous waste requirements pursuant to RCRA 3006 and imposes no requirements other than those imposed by State law (see Supplementary Information, Section A. Why are Revisions to State Programs Necessary?). Therefore this rule complies with applicable executive orders and statutory provisions as follows: 1. Executive Order 18266: Regulatory Planning Review The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this rule from its review under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). 2. 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.). 3. Regulatory Flexibility Act After considering the economic impacts of today's rule on small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), I certify that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 4. 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). 5. Executive Order 13132: Federalism Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) does not apply to this rule because it will not have federalism implications (i.e., 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). 6. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000) does not apply to this rule because it will not have tribal implications (i.e., substantial direct effects 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.) 7. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health and Safety Risks This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866 and because the EPA does not have reason to believe the environmental health or safety risks addressed by this action present a disproportionate risk to children. 8. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001), because it is not a significant regulatory action as defined in Executive Order 12866. 9. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act EPA approves State programs as long as they meet criteria required by RCRA, so it would be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, in its review of a State program, to require the use of any particular voluntary consensus standard in place of another standard that meets requirements of RCRA. 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 to this rule. 10. Executive Order 12988 As required by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996), 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. 11. Executive Order 12630: Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings EPA has complied with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 18, 1988) 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. 12. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low Income Populations Because this rule authorizes pre-existing State rules and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law and there are no anticipated significant adverse human health or environmental effects, the rule is not subject to Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 13. Congressional Review Act EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other information required by the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.) to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication 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). List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271 Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business information, Hazardous materials transportation, Hazardous waste, Indians—lands, Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Authority: This action is issued under the authority of sections 2002(a), 3006 and 7004(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act as amended 42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6926, 6974(b). Dated: December 21, 2007. Bharat Mathur, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. [FR Doc. E8-16 Filed 1-4-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 76 [MB Docket No. 07-51; FCC 07-189] Exclusive Service Contracts for Provision of Video Services in Multiple Dwelling Units and Other Real Estate Developments AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Commission's action concerns “Multiple Dwelling Units” such as apartment or condominium buildings and centrally managed residential real estate developments (collectively, “MDUs”); cable operators that provide video service in MDUs; and agreements that grant them the exclusive right to provide video programming service in an MDU. The Commission finds that such agreements, in granting exclusivity, harm competition, the provision of programming to MDU residents, and broadband deployment. Thus, the Commission prohibits the enforcement of existing exclusivity clauses and the execution of new ones by cable operators (and a few others). This prohibition will materially advance the Communications Act's goals of enhancing competition, consumer choice in video service and programming, and broadband deployment. DATES: Effective March 7, 2008. ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information on this proceeding, please contact John W. Berresford,

(202)418-1886, or Holly Saurer,

(202)418-7283, both of the Policy Division, Media Bureau. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Federal Communications Commission's Report and Order in MB Docket No. 07-51, FCC 07-189, adopted October 31, 2007, and released November 13, 2007. The full text of this document is available for public inspection and copying during regular business hours in the FCC Reference Center, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. These documents will also be available via ECFS ( *http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/* ). (Documents will be available electronically in ASCII, Word 97, and/or Adobe Acrobat.) The complete text may be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554. To request this document in accessible formats (computer diskettes, large print, audio recording, and Braille), send an e-mail to *fcc504@fcc.gov* or call the Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at

(202)418-0530 (voice),

(202)418-0432 (TTY). Summary of the Report and Order 1. The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (“ *Notice* ”) in this proceeding solicited comment on the need to regulate contracts containing clauses granting one multichannel video programming distributor (an “MVPD”) exclusive access for the provision of video services (“exclusivity clauses”) to multiple dwelling units (“MDUs”) and other real estate developments. *Exclusive Service Contracts for Provision of Video Services in Multiple Dwelling Units & Other Real Estate Developments,* Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 22 FCC Rcd 5935 (2007). Approximately 30 percent of Americans live in MDUs, and their numbers are growing. In this *Report and Order,* we find that contractual agreements granting such exclusivity to cable operators harm competition and broadband deployment and that any benefits to consumers are outweighed by the harms of such clauses. Accordingly, we conclude that such clauses are proscribed by section 628 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended. That section prohibits unfair methods of competition that have the purpose or effect of hindering significantly or preventing MVPDs from providing “satellite cable” and/or “satellite broadcast” programming to subscribers and consumers. Thus, in this Order we prohibit the enforcement of existing exclusivity clauses and the execution of new ones by cable operators and others subject to the relevant statutory provisions. This prohibition will materially advance the Act's goals of enhancing competition and broadband deployment. 2. The record in this proceeding does not contain much information regarding the use of exclusivity clauses by providers of Direct Broadcast Satellite (“DBS”) or other MVPDs that are not cable operators subject to section 628 of the Act. In the interests of developing a fuller record, and in the interests of regulatory parity, we also issue a *Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking* (“ *Further Notice* ”) concerning MVPDs not subject to section 628. In this *Further Notice,* we also seek comment on whether the Commission should prohibit exclusive marketing and bulk billing arrangements. I. Background 3. This section reviews the history of this proceeding and makes several important findings of fact. Among these findings are that a large and growing number of Americans live in MDUs and that a significant number of those MDUs are subject to exclusivity clauses. The beneficiaries of most of those clauses are incumbent cable operators. Although Commission rules ensure that many residents of MDUs and other real estate developments may receive satellite-based video service, exclusivity clauses protect cable operators from competition in MDUs from new entrants into the MVPD business, chiefly incumbent local exchange carriers (“LECs”) and other wire-based MVPDs that bring satellite cable and satellite broadcast programming to their subscribers. We also find that the entry of incumbent LECs into the MVPD business has led incumbent cable operators to increase their use of exclusivity clauses in order to bar or deter the new entrants. 4. These practices are reached primarily by our authority under section 628. That section, in brief, makes it unlawful for cable operators to engage in certain unfair acts and methods of competition. Specifically, section 628(b) prohibits cable operators from engaging in unfair practices that have the purpose or effect of hindering significantly or preventing their competitors from providing satellite cable programming or satellite broadcast programming to subscribers or consumers. Such video programming is made for broadcast or cable systems and is delivered by satellite to MVPDs, who in turn deliver it to their subscribers. Section 628 concerns two kinds of programming in particular. One is “satellite cable programming,” which is video programming (not including satellite broadcast programming) that is transmitted by satellite to cable operators for retransmission to cable subscribers. See 47 U.S.C. 548(i)(1), 605(d)(1). The other is “satellite broadcast programming,” which is broadcast video programming that is retransmitted by satellite by an entity other than the broadcaster or an entity under the broadcaster's control. *See* 47 U.S.C. 548(i)(3). This programming comprises the substantial majority of programming carried by MVPDs. In section III below, we conclude that clauses that grant cable operators exclusive access to MDUs and other real estate developments fall within the scope of section 628(b), because those clauses effectively prohibit new entrants into the MVPD market from providing satellite-delivered programming to consumers who live in MDUs and other real estate developments. 5. The Commission last considered issues concerning exclusivity clauses in its 2003 Inside Wiring Order. At that time, the Commission decided that exclusivity clauses had both pro-competitive and anti-competitive effects, and that the record before the Commission made it unclear what their net effect was. The Commission therefore decided to take no action regarding exclusivity clauses at that time, but it did not close the door to action if new circumstances arose in which such clauses had new anti-competitive effects. The *Notice* of March 2007 re-opened the issue and prompted the submission of much new evidence. The *Notice* raised several questions concerning exclusivity clauses. These included the Commission's legal authority to regulate such clauses; the prevalence of such clauses; the possible increase in their number and scope at the instigation of incumbent cable operators with the impending entry of LECs into the MVPD marketplace; the benefits and harms to competition and consumers of exclusivity clauses; and the extent of any prohibition of such clauses, and other remedial action, that we should impose. 6. The *Notice* attracted filings from large and small cable operators and LECs, other providers of MVPD services (including so-called private cable operators or “PCOs”), builders and managers of MDUs and other dwellings, elected officials, two state government entities and many local governments, academic institutions, consumer groups, labor unions, and subscribers to MVPD and other services. (PCOs are also known as Satellite Master Antenna Television providers or “SMATVs.” They are video distribution facilities that use closed transmission paths without using any public right-of-way. PCOs acquire video programming and distribute it via terrestrial wiring in urban and suburban MDUs and commercial multiple tenant units such as hotels and office buildings. They are small compared to major incumbent cable operators and incumbent LECs.) 7. For purposes of this *Report and Order,* we define the term “MDU” to include the kinds of dwellings that we have defined as being MDUs in past decisions implementing the Act. That is, MDUs include apartment, cooperative, and condominium buildings. For purposes of this *Report and Order,* we adopt this definition but expand it to include other centrally managed real estate developments. Thus, the term MDUs, for purposes of this *Report and Order,* also includes gated communities, mobile home parks, garden apartments, and other centrally managed residential real estate developments. All of these are collections of private individual households with residents remaining for lengthy, indefinite periods of time, each in a dwelling space that is distinctly separate but shares some common spaces requiring central management. For purposes of this proceeding, MDUs do not include time share units, academic campuses and dormitories, military bases, hotels, rooming houses, jails, prisons, halfway houses, hospitals, nursing and other assisted living places, and other group quarters characterized by institutional living, high transience and, in some cases, a high need for security. These latter institutions do not have most of the key defining attributes of MDUs that we have just described, including voluntary long-term residency and significant control by the resident over uses of the private dwelling space. These attributes give the resident a strong interest in making his or her own choice of a MVPD provider and thus warrant regulatory action to preserve the resident's ability to do so. 8. The record in this proceeding indicates that approximately 30 percent of Americans live in MDUs and that this percentage is growing. The percentage of minorities living in MDUs is larger than that of the general population. The majority of incumbent MVPDs serving MDUs pursuant to exclusivity clauses are incumbent providers of cable television service to the surrounding local community. A few of the incumbent MVPDs that have executed contracts with exclusivity clauses are PCOs or small providers of fiber-based communications services. Some incumbent LECs have requested exclusivity clauses from MDUs. There is no evidence in the record that providers of DBS service use exclusivity clauses. 9. Exclusivity clauses that run in favor of cable operators typically are a complete bar to entry into MDUs by fiber-deploying LECs such as Verizon, AT&T, and Qwest, as well as PCOs. These competitors in the MVPD marketplace receive much of their programming, both cable and broadcast, via satellite for retransmission directly to their subscribers. Although exclusivity clauses do not prevent MDU residents from installing receiving dishes and receiving DBS service where the Commission's “Over the Air Reception Devices” rules apply, they bar new wire-based competitors from MDUs. 10. The record herein reveals that exclusivity clauses are widespread in agreements between MVPDs and MDU owners, and that the overwhelming majority of them grant exclusive access to incumbent cable operators. Exclusivity clauses between MVPDs and MDU owners have the clear effect of barring new entry into MDUs by wire-based MVPDs. The evidence before us shows that this effect occurs on a large scale. Verizon provided examples of exclusivity clauses, most of them in favor of incumbent cable operators, that provoked requests to cease and desist the marketing of its FiOS cable service. Verizon has “repeatedly encountered exclusive access arrangements which have prevented it from providing cable services to significant numbers of residents.” Early in its offering of FiOS, Verizon encountered exclusivity clauses running in favor of incumbent cable operators, which barred it from serving more than 3,000 residential units in the Dallas, Texas, area and many other places, all totaling “tens of thousands of units in five separate states.” Other examples of exclusion, again mostly involving incumbent cable operators, are in the record from would-be MVPDs, a local government, and a MDU owner who agreed to exclusivity clauses in the past and now is prohibited from offering its residents new and improved communications services. AT&T states that “efforts to lock-up MDUs have occurred in California, Texas, and virtually every market where AT&T has begun to enter the video service market”—efforts that are “plainly intended to block competition and * * * not designed to address aesthetics or congestion in a MDU's common areas.” The exclusivity clauses that AT&T has recently encountered typically last between five and 15 years, often with automatic renewal, or are perpetual. Hargray CATV Inc., an affiliate of the incumbent LEC in Hilton Head, South Carolina, began to provide cable service there as a new entrant. It was forced to stop serving or marketing to 20,000 of the 25,000 homes in the community, however, due to exclusivity clauses entered into by real estate developers and the incumbent cable operator (originally Adelphia, whose systems later were acquired by Time Warner), decades ago in some cases. 11. Consumer groups are also concerned about exclusive agreements. As noted by several consumer groups, a disproportionately large number of communities of color live within MDUs. Consumer groups are concerned that these residents are unable to enjoy the benefits of competition in the video marketplace, and ask that the Commission act to ensure that all consumers can reap the benefits of competition. 12. The record indicates that the evidence before us understates the frequency of exclusivity clauses because many MDU owners are unwilling or legally unable to make public the contracts containing them. Also, many exclusivity clauses date from the time when cable operators had a *de facto* or *de jure* monopoly on wire-based MVPD service. In those market conditions, a MDU owner might have thought that agreeing to exclusivity was not giving the cable operator anything of significance. Some commenters state that a MDU owner can bargain for good service, low prices, and other concessions in exchange for exclusives. But the owner had no such bargaining power when the first cable operator was “the only game in town.” 13. More recent developments were not part of the record the Commission compiled in the proceeding that culminated in the *2003 Inside Wiring Order.* Significantly, LECs and other wire-based providers have begun entering the video service business on a large scale. In this environment, exclusivity clauses executed by incumbent cable operators are causing an important loss of potential competition within MDUs and thereby depriving MDU residents of recognized benefits generated by competition in the form of price and service options. Exclusivity clauses may also be deterring new entry into the MVPD market in many areas because they put a significant number of new customers off limits to new entrants. 14. Moreover, AT&T, Lafayette Utilities in Louisiana, United States Telecom Association, and Verizon report that, with the imminent entry of LECs into the multichannel video marketplace, incumbent cable operators have increased the use of exclusivity clauses in their agreements with MDU owners. As one commenter noted, “[i]ncumbent providers commonly engage in a flurry of activity to lock up MDUs and other real estate developments in exclusive arrangements as soon as it becomes clear that a new entrant will be coming to town.” Sometimes these clauses are inserted in fine print, in “legalese,” and without adequate notice to the MDU owner. 15. In sum, the record demonstrates that exclusivity clauses bar entry into MDUs by new providers of multichannel video service. It also shows that, in reaction to the recent competitive challenge posed by LEC entry into the video marketplace, incumbent providers (chiefly incumbent cable operators) are increasingly using exclusivity clauses in new agreements with MDU owners to bar the entry of their new rivals and potential rivals. These developments constitute a substantial change to the record the Commission compiled in the period leading up to the *2003 Inside Wiring Order.* II. Discussion A. Harms and Benefits of Exclusivity Clauses 16. In this section, we first describe the harms and benefits of exclusivity clauses. We conclude that the harms significantly outweigh the benefits in ways they did not at the time of the Commission's 2003 *Inside Wiring Order.* Specifically, they bar new entry and competition for both MVPD services and the so-called “triple play” of voice, video, and broadband Internet access services. They also discourage the deployment of broadband facilities to American consumers. This, in turn, has the effect of significantly hindering or preventing new MVPDs from providing to MDU residents video programming services that are within the scope of section 628(b). Section 628(b) of the Act makes it unlawful for cable operators and their vertically integrated programmers to engage in certain practices that hinder or prevent MVPDs from providing “satellite cable programming” or “satellite broadcast programming” to subscribers. “Satellite cable programming” is video programming (not including satellite broadcast programming) that is transmitted by satellite to cable operators for retransmission to cable subscribers. “Satellite broadcast programming” is broadcast video programming that is retransmitted by satellite by an entity other than the broadcaster or an entity under the broadcaster's control. We therefore conclude that cable operators' use of exclusivity clauses in contracts for the provision of video services to MDUs constitutes an unfair method of competition or an unfair act or practice proscribed by section 628(b). 17. *Harms Caused by Exclusivity Clauses.* By far the greatest harm that exclusivity clauses cause residents of MDUs is that they deny those residents another choice of MVPD service and thus deny them the benefits of increased competition. Congress and the Commission have repeatedly found, and few parties dispute here, that entry by LECs and other providers of wire-based video service into various segments of the multichannel video marketplace will produce major benefits for consumers. A significant increase in multichannel competition usually results in lower prices, more channels, and a greater diversity of information and entertainment from more sources. Notably, our most recent Cable Price Survey Reports show that the presence of a second wire-based MVPD competitor clearly holds prices down more effectively than is the case where DBS is the only alternative. The fact that an incumbent cable operator may face competitive pressures on its pricing in a franchise area surrounding or adjacent to a MDU does not mean that the residents of a MDU served by the same cable operator will reap the benefits of such competition, including the option to choose among competitive providers, some of which may provide a reduced-priced bundled package. This is particularly true when incumbent cable operators and MDU owners sign contracts before a competitive provider enters the market, a practice that the record in this proceeding indicates is quite common. Within the MDU, the incumbent, protected by its exclusivity clause from any competition it may face outside the MDU's boundaries, would have no incentive to hold down its prices within the MDU. The MDU's residents would also be denied the benefits of taking service from the new entrant, with potentially lower rates and better features than the incumbent's. 18. In addition, a new provider of MVPD services such as a LEC is likely to bring into a MDU some satellite-delivered cable programming that the incumbent beneficiary of the exclusivity clause does not. Absent the new entrant, the MDU's residents who favor that programming will be denied the programming of their choice. This denial will fall disproportionately on minorities and low-income families (and on programmers specializing in programming oriented to those groups), and all residents will be denied increased competition in programming among MVPD providers. We agree with Consumers Union that we should ensure that the “no segment of the population is denied the benefits of video competition.” 19. LEC entry is also likely to result in increased deployment of fiber to American homes at lower cost per residence, and a new competitor offering the “triple play” bundle of video, voice, and Internet access service. An exclusivity clause in a MDU's agreement with a MVPD denies all these benefits to the MDU's residents. Even if exclusivity clauses do not completely bar new entrants from the MVPD market everywhere, they foreclose new entrants from many millions of households, a significant part of the national marketplace. Such clauses could therefore deter new entrants from attempting to enter the market in many areas. More important, exclusivity clauses deny consumers in a part of the market the benefits that could flow to them, and exclusivity clauses confer few, if any, benefits on those consumers. These harms to consumers are greater than they were several years ago, when new entry by LECs had not begun on a large scale, the recent increase in fiber construction had not yet materialized, and the popularity of the triple play was unproven. 20. The effect of exclusivity clauses on broadband deployment and “triple play” services merits further discussion. We have stated that broadband deployment and entry into the MVPD business are “inextricably linked.” One basis for this observation is the recent emergence of LECs, cable operators, and some other providers offering consumers a “triple play” of voice, MVPD, and broadband Internet access services. The offering of, and competition in, the triple play brings to consumers not just advanced telecommunications capability, but also a simplicity and efficiency that is proving to be highly attractive in the marketplace. 21. In a MDU where an incumbent has the exclusive right to provide MVPD service, no other provider can offer residents the triple play today on its own facilities. Any new entrant that could offer all three parts of the triple play but for the existence of an exclusivity clause, which limits its offerings to voice and broadband Internet access, would find entry less attractive. The new entrant might not enter at all. Or, if the new entrant enters despite that handicap and provides MDU residents with only voice and Internet access services, leaving MVPD service to the beneficiary of an exclusivity clause, the new entrant's wire is inefficiently underutilized. Thus, exclusivity clauses reduce competition in the provision of triple play services and result in inefficient use of communications facilities. 22. Exclusivity clauses can cause other harms to MDU residents. A MDU owner may grant exclusivity to one MVPD based on the available choice of service providers at a given time, and in doing so bar entry into the MDU by a more desirable but later-arriving MVPD. Or, the person who grants exclusivity to one MVPD may be the developer or builder of a MDU, who may grant exclusivity against the long-term interests of the residents and soon thereafter relinquish control of the MDU. In addition, exclusivity clauses can insulate the incumbent MVPD from any need to improve its service; Manatee County, Florida, aptly describes incumbent beneficiaries of exclusivity clauses as “sitting on these ‘fiefdoms.' ” 23. Finally, the record indicates that exclusivity clauses are not always in the best interest of MDUs owners, either. Technologically advanced buildings are important for attracting and retaining residents, and a lack of competition for providing new communications services can negatively affect a residential development. A MDU owner may not see a benefit in an exclusivity clause that bars entry by new providers that were not in the market when the clause was written. 24. *Benefits of Exclusivity Clauses.* When the Commission last considered issues concerning exclusivity clauses in its *2003 Inside Wiring Order* , it determined that exclusivity clauses had some pro-competitive effects. In some cases, exclusivity clauses, or at least those of a limited duration, may help a MVPD to obtain financing to wire an entire building for cable and other services and to recover its investment over the term of exclusivity. Similarly, some commenters claim that exclusivity clauses are especially necessary to attract investment in marginally attractive MDUs. 25. Some commenters argue in support of the use of exclusivity clauses that, with the decline of LECs' and cable operators' traditional duty to serve all homes in an area, an exclusivity clause may be necessary to attract a MVPD into a new real estate development. Other commenters state that a MDU owner, needing to attract buyers or tenants, may be counted on to represent them and will agree to an exclusivity clause only if it is in their interests. The rational owner, these commenters claim, will give exclusive access to the one of several bidding MVPDs that offers the best mix of low price, quality service, promised improvements and in some cases, specialized program offerings. An exclusivity clause, in this view, substitutes competition for the MDU for competition for individual residents, and the resulting benefits may be passed on to the residents. In the same vein, some commenters deny that exclusivity clauses allow MVPDs to become complacent and provide inferior service; these entities believe that the high turnover in MDUs requires building owners to maintain and constantly improve their service so that the building or development will attract new residents who will become its subscribers. 26. *Conclusion.* We conclude that exclusivity clauses cause significant harm to competition and consumers that the record did not reflect at the time of our 2003 *Inside Wiring Order* . We further find that although exclusivity clauses may in certain cases be beneficial, at least in the short term, to consumers, the harms of exclusivity clauses outweigh their benefits. The evidence described in the preceding paragraphs demonstrates that exclusivity clauses, especially when used in current market conditions by incumbent cable operators, are a barrier to new entry into the multichannel video marketplace and the provision of triple play offerings. Such exclusivity clauses inhibit competition in these markets and slow the deployment of broadband facilities. In doing so, exclusivity clauses deny MDU residents the benefits of increased competition, including lower prices and the availability of more channels with more diverse content, as well as access to alternative providers of broadband facilities and the triple play of communications services their facilities support. It is also noteworthy that there is no evidence in the record that MDU residents pay higher rates for MVPD services in states whose laws prohibit or limit exclusivity. These harms to consumers are traceable to the incumbent cable operators' practice, increased recently, of using exclusivity clauses, sometimes in fine print and without adequate notice to MDU owners, to forestall competition, particularly when new competitors are about to enter the market. We do not wish to deny MDU residents these benefits based on incumbents' alleged need to be shielded from additional competition, or to subject them to something resembling the exclusive franchises of an earlier era. 27. Moreover, we find that cable operators' use of exclusivity clauses in contracts for the provision of video services to MDUs constitutes an unfair method of competition or an unfair act or practice proscribed by section 628(b). Section 628 is designed to increase “competition and diversity” in the multichannel video marketplace, increase the availability of satellite cable and satellite broadcast programming to persons in “areas not currently able to receive such programming,” and “spur the development of communications technologies.” That provision specifically prohibits cable operators from engaging in unfair methods of competition or unfair acts or practices that have the purpose or effect of hindering significantly or preventing any MVPD from providing satellite cable programming or satellite broadcast programming to consumers. We have found above that a significant percentage of consumers live in MDUs. We also found that, with the increasing entry of wire-based competitors, such as LECs, into the MVPD marketplace, incumbent cable operators have increased their use of exclusivity clauses with MDU owners, particularly when new competitors are on the verge of entering a particular market. The record shows that these exclusivity clauses have the purpose or effect of preventing other MVPDs from providing the kind of programming covered by section 628—satellite cable and/or broadcast programming—to certain consumers; indeed, that is the intended and inevitable effect of exclusivity clauses. Exclusivity clauses prevent new entrant MVPDs from competing with entrenched incumbent providers on the basis of service offerings, including programming, and on price. Foreclosing competition in the MDU market in this way is unfair because it deprives consumers residing in MDUs of the opportunity to choose a MVPD provider. Cable operators' execution of exclusivity clauses, which foreclose the competitive provision of MVPD service, the triple play, broadband deployment, and satellite-delivered programming to MDUs, thus constitutes an unfair method of competition in violation of section 628(b). 28. We reject arguments that exclusivity clauses mostly work to the benefit of MDU owners and residents. First, as explained above, the person signing an exclusivity clause for a MDU may be a builder or manager whose interests do not coincide with those of the MDU's residents, especially after a few years. Second, the cable operator may have induced the MDU owner to accept an exclusivity clause before any wire-based competitor was on the horizon, in which case there was no “competition for the MDU” at the time and no prospect of it in the future. Third, the exclusivity clause may be in “legalese” and in fine print and the MDU owner may be unaware of it. Fourth, the fact that a new entrant wants to serve the MDU undercuts any claim that only one wire-based provider can serve the building profitably—if new entry would be unprofitable, it is unlikely that the new entrant would want to enter. Fifth, there is no evidence in the record, other than generalities and anecdotes, that incumbent MVPD providers couple exclusivity clauses with significant new investments that they do not make elsewhere, such as in states whose laws prohibit exclusivity. Sixth, SureWest states that the triple play, which offers a provider revenue from three services, reduces any need for exclusivity that it may have had in the past, when MVPD revenue was the only way it could recover its investment. Finally, other agreements between incumbent MVPDs and MDU owners, perhaps providing for marketing exclusivity or bulk discounts, can provide benefits similar to those alleged for exclusivity clauses without causing the latter clauses' entry-foreclosing harms to consumers. Therefore, although “competition for the MDU” may have some theoretical advantages in some cases over competition for individual consumers, it may not describe reality in many cases. Even if it does, in general we find that the best results for consumers come from preserving their ability to play an active role in making an individual choice rather than allowing cable operators using exclusivity clauses to foreclose individual choice. In addition, as noted above, exclusivity clauses tend to insulate the incumbent from any need to improve its service. Thus, we conclude that exclusivity clauses generally do not benefit MDU residents. 29. The record contains claims that exclusivity clauses may lead to lower prices. Although we cannot rule out the possibility that those claims may be true in some cases, such assertions are outweighed by the numerous studies showing that a second wire-based MVPD lowers prices. We also reject arguments that “exclusivity is not really a problem” because many MDUs are not subject to exclusivity clauses and such clauses expire. A practice that harms a significant number of households in this country warrants remedial action even if it does not harm everyone. B. Prohibition of Exclusivity Clauses 30. For the reasons set forth above, we prohibit cable operators and other entities that are subject to section 628 from enforcing existing exclusivity clauses and executing contracts containing new ones. These other entities are LECs and open video systems and are discussed in section III below. 31. Specifically, 60 days after publication of this *Report and Order* in the **Federal Register** , no cable operator or multichannel video programming distributor subject to section 628 of the Act shall enforce or execute any provision in a contract that grants it the exclusive right to provide any video programming service (alone or in combination with other services) to a MDU. Any such exclusivity clause shall be null and void. 32. We fashion the prohibition pursuant to section 628 for several reasons. First, that provision is a basis of our statutory authority to regulate exclusivity clauses. Second, incumbent cable operators, which are subject to section 628, are the beneficiaries of the vast majority of exclusivity clauses. As described above, incumbent cable operators are primarily responsible for the recent increase in newly executed exclusivity clauses. Also, the evidence in the record indicates that incumbent cable operators are using them to impede the entry of new competitors into the MVPD market in many areas. Incumbent cable operators are still by far the dominant force in the MVPD business, with a market share most recently measured at 67 percent and the ability to impose steadily rising prices. Our prohibition is limited to those MVPDs covered by section 628(b). It does not reach PCOs or DBS providers because we do not have an adequate record on which to decide whether such a prohibition is warranted for non-cable operators. Nevertheless, we are adopting a *Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking* in order to develop such a record and, based on it, evaluate whether action is called for. 33. We put no time limit on the prohibition we adopt in the instant order and we do not exempt from it any kind of MDU or any geographic location. We do, however, limit our prohibition to those residential real estate developments that we define as MDUs as discussed above. 34. The rule we adopt in this proceeding is consistent with the longstanding Congressional prohibition of exclusive franchises for cable service and the statement in our most recent *Inside Wiring Order* that “[n]ew entrants to the video services and telephony markets should not be foreclosed from competing for consumers in multi-unit buildings.” 35. The rule we adopt in this proceeding prohibits both the enforcement of existing exclusivity clauses and the execution of new ones. Both have the same competition- and broadband-deterring effect that harms consumers. A rule that left exclusivity clauses in effect would allow the vast majority of the harms caused by such clauses to continue for years, and we believe that it is strongly in the public interest to prohibit such clauses from being enforced. Those harms would continue indefinitely in the cases of exclusivity clauses that last perpetually or contemplate automatic renewal upon the renewal of the incumbent cable operator's franchise. 36. Our prohibition of the enforcement of existing exclusivity clauses does not disturb legitimate expectations of investors in MDUs and the video service providers affected by this Order. The lawfulness of exclusivity clauses has been under our active scrutiny for a decade, making the parties to them aware that such clauses may be prohibited. Although we have not prohibited enforcement of them until now, we had previously recognized the reasons for doing so but had lacked an adequate record on which to base such a decision. We have prohibited the enforcement of exclusivity clauses for satellite-delivered programming before. For example, the Commission prohibits, with respect to distribution to persons in areas served by cable operators and other MVPDs covered by section 628(b), exclusivity clauses for satellite cable programming and satellite broadcast programming between a cable operator and a vendor of such programming in which a cable operator has an attributable interest, unless the Commission determines that such contracts are in the public interest. Also, in the context of commercial telecommunications services, the Commission has prohibited the execution of exclusive access arrangements in multiple tenant environments and has sought comment on whether to prohibit the enforcement of existing exclusive access provisions. We recognize that the Commission has yet to address the issue raised in the *Competitive Networks Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking* regarding the enforceability of exclusivity clauses for telecommunications services in residential MDUs. In light of the competitive parity implications, we will resolve that issue within the next two months. Some states have given some or all MVPD providers rights of access to MDUs. 37. Moreover, incumbent cable operators will still be able to use their equipment in MDUs to provide service to residents who wish to continue to subscribe to their services. Finally, we note that the rule we adopt today does not require that any new entrant be given access to any MDU. A MDU owner still retains the rights it has under relevant state law to deny a particular provider the right to provide service to its property. We merely prohibit the enforcement of existing exclusivity clauses and the execution of new ones by cable operators. While this Order prohibits the enforcement of existing exclusivity clauses, it does not, on its own terms, purport to affect other provisions in contracts containing exclusivity clauses. 38. We reject proposals that we should exempt contracts with exclusivity clauses from this prohibition on a case-by-case basis or that we should allow exclusivity clauses for small cable operators, cable operators in rural areas, MVPDs that are found to lack “market power,” MVPDs other than incumbent cable operators, “planned communities,” and new real estate developments. We are reluctant to deny any large class of MDU residents the benefits of increased competition or to allow any cable operator to engage in future harmful conduct. Finally, we wish to avoid the burden that would be imposed by numerous individual adjudications about whether market power or some other undesirable condition exists in an individual MDU or community, or whether a particular entity in an allegedly unique situation is exempted from the prohibition. In addition, as discussed in section III below, restrictions adopted pursuant to section 628(b) apply automatically to certain categories of MVPDs pursuant to sections 602(7), 628(j), and 653(c)(1)(A). 39. Some commenters have suggested that we allow exclusivity clauses for a period of years or that we put a time limit on our prohibition of them, such as a specific term of years, the end of the current franchise of the incumbent cable operator, until “effective competition” is found to exist in an area, or until some other measure of competition is shown. We decline these suggestions. We are reluctant to grant any communications companies an artificial period of immunity from pro-competitive regulation during which the recovery of their investment is guaranteed; companies in communications markets regularly invest billions of dollars without any such guarantees. Chiefly, we wish to avoid the burden of individualized adjudications and measurements because we believe that they would burden us and the industry, and we believe that the limited benefits that such clauses confer are outweighed by their deleterious long-term effects on the provision of competitive services to consumers. III. Legal Authority 40. Several sources afford the Commission ample authority to prohibit exclusivity clauses in contracts between cable operators and owners of MDUs. First, consistent with our tentative conclusion in the *Notice* , we conclude that we have authority under section 628(b) of the Act to adopt rules prohibiting cable operators from enforcing or executing contracts that give them the exclusive right to provide video programming services (alone or in combination with other services) to MDUs. Moreover, we conclude that pursuant to the Act the same prohibition will apply to common carriers or their affiliates that provide video programming directly to subscribers under section 628(j) of the Act and to operators of open video systems under section 653(c)(1). Finally, we conclude that, even in the absence of this explicit statutory authority, we have ancillary authority to prohibit incumbent cable operators from entering into contracts that are for the provision of video services to MDUs and that contain exclusivity clauses. 41. Turning first to cable operators, the plain language of the statute provides a solid legal foundation for the rule adopted today. Section 628(b) broadly states that: “[i]t shall be unlawful for a cable operator * * * to engage in unfair methods of competition or unfair or deceptive acts or practices, the purpose or effect of which is to hinder significantly or to prevent any multichannel video programming distributor from providing satellite cable programming or satellite broadcast programming to subscribers or consumers.” 42. Section 628(c)(1), in turn, directs the Commission, “in order to promote the public interest, convenience, and necessity by increasing competition and diversity in the multichannel video programming market and the continuing development of communications technologies,” to promulgate rules specifying the conduct prohibited by section 628(b). 43. The plain language of section 628(b) encompasses the conduct at issue here. First, although we have never specifically defined what constitutes an “unfair method of competition” or “unfair * * * act or practice” beyond that conduct specifically proscribed in section 628(c)(2), we have recognized that there is additional conduct that could be proscribed under section 628(b). As discussed above, the use of an exclusivity clause by a cable operator to “lock up” a MDU owner is an unfair method of competition or unfair act or practice because it can be used to impede the entry of competitors into the market and foreclose competition based on the quality and price of competing service offerings. Moreover, as we have shown above, such a contract clearly has the effect of preventing a MVPD from providing satellite programming to consumers. Indeed, by its very nature, such an exclusivity clause prevents other MVPDs from providing service to the consumers who live in the MDU. 44. We reject Advance/Newhouse Communications's suggestion that this interpretation of section 628(b) suffers a logical flaw—why would Congress only focus on “satellite” programming if it sought to vest the Commission with the authority to “curb unfair practices in the cable industry generally.” First, we are not finding that section 628(b) vests the Commission with some unlimited authority to limit unfair practices in the cable industry. Rather, we are finding that the language of section 628(b) prohibits unfair methods of competition with the purpose or effect of hindering significantly or preventing MVPDs from providing satellite cable and broadcast programming to consumers. Moreover, we acknowledge that section 628 was primarily, but not exclusively, concerned about the vertical integration of cable operators and satellite programming vendors, and thus section 628 significantly focuses on those relationships. In addition, we note that our decision to prohibit exclusivity clauses for the provision of video services to MDU owners is consistent with the focus on satellite programming because most programming is delivered via satellite. Thus, we have explicit authority under section 628(b) to prohibit cable operators from entering into exclusivity clauses with MDU owners. 45. We note that the New Jersey Division of Rate Counsel raises a number of issues, including the argument that the Commission's regulation of exclusivity clauses for MDUs violates the Tenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, that hinge on its view that the Commission lacks any authority to adopt the prohibition on exclusivity clauses described herein. We need not address these tangential issues because, as explained herein, we find that we have specific statutory authority to adopt the prohibition. 46. Contrary to commenters' suggestions, the Commission's authority under section 628(b) is not restricted to unfair methods of competition or unfair or deceptive practices that deny MVPDs access to programming. Section 628(b) is not so narrowly drawn. Anticompetitive practices can hinder or prevent MVPDs from providing programming to consumers either by blocking their access to programming or by blocking their access to consumers, and there is nothing in section 628(b) that suggests that the Commission's authority is limited to the former. Although NCTA argues that the language “from providing satellite cable programming or satellite broadcast programming to subscribers or consumers” indicates that section 628(b) was “squarely directed at practices that unfairly denied MVPDs access to *programming* ,” the better reading is the one based on the clear and complete terms of the provision: any practices that unfairly deny MVPDs the ability to provide such programming to consumers are prohibited. Had Congress wanted section 628(b) to proscribe only practices denying MVPDs access to programming, it could easily have done so by focusing that provision explicitly on conduct that impairs MVPDs' access to programming. Congress knew how to draft narrowly drawn provisions of that kind as evidenced by another subsection, section 628(c)(2), which proscribes specific conduct hindering MVPDs' access to programming. Thus, we believe that our interpretation of section 628(b) gives meaning to the broad, plain language of the statutory provision. 47. We recognize, as commenters point out, that much of section 628's legislative history focuses on MVPDs' access to programming. However, the legislative history indicates that a primary concern underlying section 628 was fostering competition among cable operators and enhancing consumer choice. For example, the Conference Report on section 628 reflects a concern that is broader than MVPDs' access to programming: “[T]he conferees expect the Commission to address and resolve the problems of unreasonable cable industry practices, *including* restricting the availability of programming and charging discriminatory prices to non-cable technologies. The conferees intend that the Commission shall encourage arrangements which promote the development of new technologies providing facilities based competition to cable and extending programming to areas not served by cable.” 48. Our adoption of a rule prohibiting exclusivity clauses addresses the Congressional concerns underlying section 628(b). The rule will prohibit the continuation and proliferation of an anticompetitive cable practice that has erected a barrier to the provision of competitive video services. It also will promote the development of new technologies that will provide facilities-based competition to existing cable operators, and thus serves the purposes set forth in section 628(a) (as well as other provisions of law, such as section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996). As Verizon points out, fiber optic services and interactive video are new facilities-based technologies that competitors seek to deploy. Exclusivity clauses prevent competitive MVPDs from providing satellite cable and broadcast programming to consumers by means of such new technologies. SureWest similarly argues that, because the deployment of broadband networks and the provision of video service are intrinsically linked, exclusivity clauses that prevent it from providing video services compromise its ability to deploy other advanced telecommunications services, by inhibiting its ability to market a package of services that consumers demand and reducing the revenues it needs to support investment in new and innovative services. 49. More broadly, prohibiting exclusivity clauses for the provision of video services will further the purposes of the 1992 Cable Act and the 1934 Act. As several commenters point out, the 1992 Cable Act sought to promote competition and consumer choice in cable communications. In addition, the purpose of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, is “to make available, so far as possible, to all the people of the United States * * * a rapid, efficient, Nation-wide and world-wide wire and radio communication service with adequate facilities at reasonable charges.” Moreover, section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 directs the Commission to “encourage the deployment on a reasonable and timely basis of advanced telecommunications capability to all Americans * * * ”. Removing barriers to allow access to a broad segment of consumers in the multichannel video programming distribution market by prohibiting exclusivity clauses for the provision of video services will further these statutory purposes. As Verizon notes, once a MDU owner is “locked” into an exclusivity clause, “residents are prevented from choosing alternative services that they might prefer—on the basis of price, quality, and innovative and technologically advanced service offerings.” Thus, contrary to some commenters' arguments, our interpretation of section 628(b) to prohibit exclusivity clauses for the provision of video services is not only consistent with the plain language of that statutory provision and confirmed by that provision's legislative history, but also furthers the broader purposes of the Act. We also find that Congress's failure *in 1984* to include a provision that would have mandated access to MDUs for cable service has no bearing on our interpretation of the subsequent legislation that became the 1992 Cable Act, particularly since there is no evidence that Congress's failure to act in 1984 is at all related to the action it did take in adopting section 628(b) in 1992. 50. We disagree with those commenters who argue that the regulatory requirements outlined in section 628(c) circumscribe the Commission's authority to prohibit exclusivity clauses for the provision of video services. For example, Real Access Alliance (“RAA”) states that the specific provisions of sections 628(c)(2)(A), (B), (C), and

(D)establish the full scope of the Commission's authority under section 628. However, nothing in these provisions indicates that they were intended to establish the outer limits of the Commission's authority under section 628(b). In fact, the very title of section 628(c)(2), “Minimum Contents of Regulations,” strongly suggests that the rules the Commission was required to implement had to cover the conduct described in sections 628(c)(2) at the *least* , but that the Commission's authority under section 628(b) was broader. The term “minimum” indicates that more could be covered since it is defined as “the least quantity assignable, admissible, or possible.” (Webster's *New Collegiate Dictionary* (1977).) This interpretation is confirmed by section 628(c)(1), which grants the Commission wide latitude to “specify particular conduct that is prohibited by [section 628(b)].” Other commenters' suggestions along the same lines are unconvincing for the same reasons. 51. As pointed out by several commenters, the Commission's implementation of this provision to date has focused on ensuring MVPD access to the programming they need to provide a viable and competitive multichannel alternative to consumers, *i.e.* , on the regulations adopted pursuant to section 628(c)(2). In the decision initially implementing section 628, the Commission described the provision as “intended to increase competition and diversity in the multichannel video programming market, as well as to foster the development of competition to traditional cable systems, by prescribing regulations that govern the access by competing multichannel systems to cable programming services.” Nevertheless, the Commission stated: “Neither the record of this proceeding nor the legislative history offer much insight into the types of practices that might constitute a violation of the statute with respect to the unspecified “unfair practices” prohibited by section 628(b) beyond those more specifically referenced in section 628(c). The objectives of the provision, however, are clearly to provide a mechanism for addressing those types of conduct, primarily associated with horizontal and vertical concentration within the cable and satellite cable programming field, that inhibit the development of multichannel video distribution competition. * * * [A]lthough the types of conduct more specifically referenced in the statute * * * appear to be the primary areas of congressional concern, section 628(b) is a clear repository of Commission jurisdiction to adopt additional rules or to take additional actions to accomplish the statutory objectives should additional types of conduct emerge as barriers to competition and obstacles to the broader distribution of satellite cable and broadcast video programming.” Viewing the implementation history as a whole, the Commission's early focus on program access is not surprising. It was shaped both by the specific provisions of section 628(c)(2)—since these regulations were statutorily required and thus appeared to be of the most pressing concern to Congress—and the policy goal in the 1992 Cable Act of “'rely[ing] on the marketplace, to the maximum extent feasible' in promoting the availability of programming to the public.” But the Commission's prior attention to these requirements in no way precludes its exercise of clear statutory authority to regulate unfair practices, beyond program access, which have the purpose or effect of hindering significantly or preventing the provision of certain programming to subscribers or consumers. The Commission has imposed no such artificial limitation on the scope of its authority, and section 628(b) does not require it. 52. The Commission has authority to delineate by rule conduct prohibited under section 628(b) in order to promote the public interest through increased competition and diversity in the MVPD market and continued development of communications technologies. We have explained how a rule prohibiting exclusivity clauses for the provision of video services promotes the public interest here because it will likely increase competition in the MVPD market and promote continued development of communications technologies. Thus, we find that we may by rule prohibit cable operators from executing exclusivity clauses for the provision of video services to MDUs. 53. This prohibition necessarily also applies to common carriers and open video systems. Although section 628(b) extends only to cable operators, section 628(j) explicitly states that “[a]ny provision that applies to a cable operator under this section shall apply to a common carrier or its affiliate that provides video programming by any means directly to subscribers.” In addition, section 653(c)(1)(A) provides that “[a]ny provision that applies to a cable operator under

(A)section[ ] * * * 628 * * * of this title shall apply * * * to any operator of an open video system.” Thus, pursuant to sections 628(j) and 653(c)(1)(A), our prohibition on exclusivity clauses for the provision of video services applies to both any common carrier or its affiliate and also to OVS operators to the extent that these entities provide video programming to subscribers or consumers. 54. Although we believe that we have specific statutory authority to adopt this prohibition, as described above, we note that our ancillary authority, under titles I and III of the 1934 Act, also provides a sufficient basis to prohibit cable operators from enforcing or executing exclusivity clauses for the provision of video service to MDUs. Courts have long recognized that, even in the absence of explicit statutory authority, the Commission has authority to promulgate regulations to effectuate the goals and provisions of the Act if the regulations are “reasonably ancillary to the effective performance of the Commission's various responsibilities” under the Act. The Supreme Court has established a two-part ancillary jurisdiction test:

(1)The regulation must cover interstate or foreign communication by wire or radio; and

(2)the regulation must be reasonably ancillary to the Commission's statutory responsibilities. The prohibition we adopt here applies to “interstate and foreign communication by wire or radio,” advances the purposes of both the 1992 Cable Act and section 706 of the 1996 Telecommunications Act, and serves the public interest. 55. Title I confers on the Commission regulatory jurisdiction over all interstate radio and wire communication. The multichannel video services provided by cable operators are interstate in nature and are covered by the Act's definitions of “radio communications” and “wire communication.” In addition, these services fall within the definition of “cable service.” Thus, cable services are within the scope of our subject matter jurisdiction granted in Title I. 56. In addition, we find that applying the prohibition against exclusivity clauses for the provision of video services to cable operators is reasonably ancillary to our statutory responsibilities under the Act. As we have explained, prohibiting exclusivity clauses for the provision of video services to MDUs will prohibit an anticompetitive cable practice that has erected a barrier to the provision of competitive video services. It also will promote the development of new technologies that will provide facilities-based competition to existing cable operators, and thus serves the purposes set forth in section 628(a). In addition, for the same reasons explained above, applying this prohibition to cable operators will ensure the furtherance of the broad goals of the 1992 Cable Act and the 1934 Act generally. 57. Because several commenters raise concerns about the treatment of exclusivity clauses in existing MDU contracts, we take particular care to observe that the law affords us wide authority to prohibit the enforcement of such clauses where, as here, the public interest so requires. Indeed, as the Commission has previously stated, “Congress intended that rules promulgated pursuant to implement section 628 should be applied prospectively to existing contracts, except as specifically provided for in section 628(h).” In addition, the Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause presents no obstacle to prohibiting the enforcement of existing exclusivity clauses. To begin with, such a step obviously does not involve the permanent condemnation of physical property and thus does not constitute a *per se* taking. 58. Nor does the proposed rule represent a regulatory taking. The Supreme Court has outlined the framework for evaluating regulatory takings claims as follows: “In all of these cases, we have eschewed the development of any set formula for identifying a `taking' forbidden by the Fifth Amendment, and have relied instead on ad hoc, factual inquiries into the circumstances of each particular case. To aid in this determination, however, we have identified three factors which have particular significance:

(1)The economic impact of the regulation on the claimant;

(2)the extent to which the regulation has interfered with distinct investment-backed expectations; and

(3)the character of the governmental action.” None of these factors counsels in favor of finding a regulatory taking here. 59. First, prohibiting the enforcement of exclusivity clauses will have minimal adverse economic impact on affected MVPDs. Nothing in the rule precludes MVPDs from utilizing the wires they own to provide services to MDUs or requires them to jettison capitalized investments. Neither does it prohibit the enforcement of other types of agreements between MDUs or MVPDs, such as exclusive marketing agreements. The rule merely prohibits clauses that serve as a bar to other MVPDs that seek to provide services to a MDU. The record in this proceeding demonstrates that in some cases, exclusivity clauses in existing MDU contracts impose adverse *and* absolute impacts upon would-be competitors who are otherwise ready and able to provide customers the benefits of increased competition. 60. Second, the rule does not improperly interfere with investment-backed expectations. As previously stated, exclusivity clauses in MDU contracts have been under active scrutiny for over a decade, and the Commission has prohibited the enforcement of such clauses in similar contexts. States have also taken action to prohibit such clauses. Moreover, to the extent that MVPDs have used exclusivity clauses to “lock up” MDUs in anticipation of competitive entry or to obstruct competition, as described above, any underlying investment-backed expectations are not sufficiently longstanding or pro-competitive in nature to warrant immunity from regulation. 61. Finally, with respect to the character of governmental action, the rule's prohibition of the enforcement of exclusivity clauses in existing MDU contracts substantially advances the legitimate governmental interest in protecting consumers of programming from “unfair methods of competition or unfair acts or practices”—an interest Congress explicitly has recognized and protected by statute, *see* 47 U.S.C. 628(b), and commanded the Commission to vindicate by adopting appropriate regulations, *see id.* section 628(c)(1). The rule we adopt today is based upon the Commission's detailed analysis of the harms and benefits of exclusive MDU contracts, discussed above in section II, and is carefully calibrated to promote this interest. In short, the rule at issue here does not invoke Justice Holmes' observation that “if regulation goes too far it will be recognized as a taking.” 62. Because the prohibition that we adopt today applies only to cable operators, common carriers or their affiliates that provide video programming directly to subscribers, and operators of open video systems, and does not require MDU owners to provide access to all MVPDs, we do not address comments raising concerns about the Commission's authority to mandate such access. However, we reject arguments suggesting that the Commission has no authority to regulate such entities' contractual conduct because of the tangential effect of such regulation on MDU owners. As explained above, sections 628(b), 628(j), and our ancillary jurisdiction provide ample bases for regulating these specific MVPDs. Moreover, sections 4(i), 201(b), and 303(r) supply the Commission with strong authority to enforce the full scope of the Cable Act prohibition at issue. IV. Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 63. The *Report and Order* found that further inquiry and analysis was needed before the Commission would decide how, if at all, to regulate building exclusivity clauses that give exclusivity to DBS service providers and PCOs. The Commission also refrained, in the *Report and Order,* from regulating exclusive marketing arrangements (which allow one MVPD into a MDU or real estate development but constrain the ability of competitive MVPDs to market their services directly to MDU residents) and bulk billing arrangements (which may be exclusive but do not prohibit MDU residents from selecting a competitive MVPD provider). The Commission commenced a further rulemaking to inquire into these as-yet unresolved matters, and states that it would conclude this rulemaking and release an order within six months of publication of this *Order.* V. Procedural Matters A. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 64. Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended, the Commission has prepared a Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (“FRFA”) of the possible significant economic impact on small entities of the policies and rules addressed in this document. The FRFA is set forth in Appendix B to the *Report and Order.* B. Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis 65. The *Report and Order* does not contain new or modified information collection requirements subject to the paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-13. In addition, therefore, it does not contain any new or modified “information collection burdens for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees,” pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, *see* 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4). C. Congressional Review Act 66. The Commission has sent a copy of the *Report and Order,* including the FRFA, in a report to be sent to Congress and the Government Accountability Office pursuant to the Congressional Review Act. In addition, the Commission has sent a copy of the *Report and Order,* including the FRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration. D. Additional Information 67. For additional information on this proceeding, please contact John W. Berresford,

(202)418-1886, or Holly Saurer,

(202)418-7283, both of the Policy Division, Media Bureau. VI. Ordering Clauses 68. Accordingly, *it is ordered* that, pursuant to the authority contained in sections 1, 2(a), 4(i) 157 nt., 303(r), 335, 601(6), 628(b,c), and 653(c)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended; 47 U.S.C. 151, 152(a), 154(i), 157 nt., 303(r), 335, 521(6), 548(b,c), and 573(c)(1), this *Report and Order is adopted.* 69. *It is further ordered* that, pursuant to the authority contained in sections 1, 2(a), 4(i) 157 nt., 303(r), 335, 601(6), 628(b,c), and 653(c)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152(a), 154(i), 157 nt., 303(r), 335, 521(6), 548(b,c), and 573(c)(1), 47 CFR part 76.2000 of the Commission's rules *is amended,* as set forth below. It is our intention in adopting these rule changes that, if any provision of the rules is held invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions shall remain in effect to the fullest extent permitted by law. 70. *It is further ordered* that the following documents shall be made part of the record in this proceeding:

(a)Letter from Leora Hochstein, Executive Director, Federal Regulatory, Verizon, to Marlene H. Dortch, Commission Secretary, MB Docket No. 05-311 (Aug. 9, 2006);

(b)Letter from Ms. Hochstein to Ms. Dortch, MB Docket No. 05-311 (July 6, 2006);

(c)Comments of SureWest Communications in MM Docket No. 06-189;

(d)Comments of Manatee County, Florida, in MB Docket No. 05-311; and

(e)the Comments of Cablevision and Comcast in MB Docket No. 07-29. 71. *It is further ordered* that the rule contained herein *shall become effective* 60 days after publication of this *report and order* in the **Federal Register** . List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 76 Cable television. . Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary. Final Rules For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Communications Commission amends 47 CFR part 76 as follows: PART 76—MULTICHANNEL VIDEO AND CABLE TELEVISION SERVICE 1. The authority citation for part 76 continues to read as follows: Authority: 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 153, 154, 301, 302, 302a, 303, 303a, 307, 308, 309, 312, 315, 317, 325, 339, 340, 341, 503, 521, 522, 531, 532, 534, 535, 536, 537, 543, 544, 544a, 545, 548, 549, 552, 554, 556, 558, 560, 561, 571, 572, 573. 2. Add subpart X to part 76 to read as follows: Subpart X—Access to MDUs § 76.2000 Exclusive access to multiple dwelling units generally.

(a)*Prohibition.* No cable operator or other provider of MVPD service subject to 47 U.S.C. 548 shall enforce or execute any provision in a contract that grants to it the exclusive right to provide any video programming service (alone or in combination with other services) to a MDU. All such exclusivity clauses are null and void.

(b)*Definition.* For purposes of this rule, MDU shall include a multiple dwelling unit building (such as an apartment building, condominium building or cooperative) and any other centrally managed residential real estate development (such as a gated community, mobile home park, or garden apartment); provided however, that MDU shall not include time share units, academic campuses and dormitories, military bases, hotels, rooming houses, prisons, jails, halfway houses, hospitals, nursing homes or other assisted living facilities. [FR Doc. E7-25349 Filed 1-4-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration 49 CFR Part 172 [Docket No. PHMSA-2006-28711 (HM-145N)] RIN 2137-AE24 Hazardous Materials: Revisions to the List of Hazardous Substances and Reportable Quantities AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), DOT. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: PHMSA amends the Hazardous Materials Regulations

(HMR)by revising the list of hazardous substances and reportable quantities

(RQs)and by correcting editorial errors to the list of hazardous substances and RQs. Superfund ( *i.e.* , CERCLA) requires PHMSA to list and regulate all hazardous substances designated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This final rule enables shippers and carriers to identify the affected hazardous substances, comply with all applicable regulatory requirements, and make the required notifications if the release of a hazardous substance occurs. DATES: *Effective Date:* March 31, 2008. *Voluntary Compliance Date:* PHMSA is authorizing voluntary compliance beginning February 29, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dirk Der Kinderen

(202)366-8553, Office of Hazardous Materials Standards, PHMSA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., East Building, Washington, DC 20590-0001. Questions about hazardous substance designations or reportable quantities should be directed to EPA at the Superfund, EPCRA, RMP and Oil Information hotline at

(800)424-9346 or, in Washington, DC, local area

(703)412-9810. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background Section 306(a) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA; 42 U.S.C. 9601-9675), as amended by section 202 of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA; 42 U.S.C 11011 *et seq.* ), requires the Secretary of Transportation to regulate hazardous substances listed or designated under Section 101(14) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9601(14), as hazardous materials under the Federal hazardous materials transportation law (49 U.S.C. 5101-5128). PHMSA carries out the rulemaking responsibilities of the Secretary of Transportation under the Federal hazardous materials transportation law, 49 CFR 1.53(b). This final rule is necessary to comply with 42 U.S.C. 9656(a), as amended by Section 202 of SARA. In carrying out the statutory mandate, PHMSA has no discretion to determine what is or is not a hazardous substance or the appropriate reportable quantity

(RQ)for materials designated as hazardous substances. This authority is vested in EPA. In accordance with CERCLA requirements, EPA must issue final rules amending the list of CERCLA hazardous substances, including adjusting RQs, before PHMSA can amend the list of hazardous substances in the HMR. PHMSA periodically revises the list of hazardous substances and RQs in the HMR (49 CFR Parts 171-180) as adjustments are made by EPA. This final rule revises the “List of Hazardous Substances and Reportable Quantities” that appears in Table 1 of Appendix A to § 172.101 to be consistent with EPA's List of Hazardous Substances and Reportable Quantities in 40 CFR 302.4 (Table 302.4). The changes made in this final rule are based on several EPA final rules that added, corrected, or deleted (removed) entries to Table 302.4. In addition, this final rule revises the “List of Hazardous Substances and Reportable Quantities” to correct typographical errors or insert inadvertent omissions from previous PHMSA rulemakings that revised the list based on previous EPA rule changes. This final rule will enable shippers and carriers to identify CERCLA hazardous substances, comply with all applicable HMR and EPA requirements, and make required notifications if a release of a hazardous substance occurs. In addition to the reporting requirements of the HMR found in §§ 171.15 and 171.16, a release of a hazardous substance is subject to EPA notification requirements under 40 CFR 302.6 and may be subject to the reporting requirements of the U.S. Coast Guard under 33 CFR 153.203. II. Recent Revisions to EPA Table 302.4 This final rule revises the “List of Hazardous Substances and Reportable Quantities” that appears in Table 1 of Appendix A to § 172.101 to be consistent with revisions made in recent EPA rules that followed our last reprint of Table 1. The EPA changes to Table 302.4 are discussed as follows. (See the tables below for a listing of hazardous substances added and deleted by the EPA rules discussed below.) On July 9, 2002, EPA issued a direct final rule (67 FR 45314) correcting errors and removing obsolete or redundant language in its Table 302.4. The majority of the errors were either typographical or the result of inadvertent omissions. Specifically, errors included unintentional discrepancies between an individual hazardous substance name appearing in Table 302.4 and the same name as it appears in other statutes ( *i.e.* , Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

(RCRA)section 3001, Clean Water Act

(CWA)sections 307 and 311, and Clean Air Act

(CAA)section 112) and their implementing regulations. EPA made corrections to the names of a number of hazardous substances to make them consistent with names that appear in these other regulatory lists. Many of these corrections are simple and involve, for example, the deletion of an unnecessary hyphen or the addition of parentheses. EPA added synonyms for six hazardous substances to Table 302.4 to be consistent with a February 9, 1995 final rule (60 FR 7824) that added a number of synonyms to RCRA regulations for those same substances. The hazardous substances and the respective synonyms that were added are “Carbaryl; (1-Napthalenol, methylcarbamate)”, “Carbofuran; (7-Benzofuranol, 2,3-dihydro-2,2-dimethyl-, methylcarbamate)”, “Mercaptodimethur; (Phenol, (3,5-dimethyl-4-(methylthio)-, methylcarbamate)”, “Mexacarbate; (Phenol, 4-(dimethylamino)-3,5-dimethyl-, methylcarbamate (ester))”, “Propoxur (Baygon); (Phenol, 2-(1-methylethoxy)-, methylcarbamate)”, and “Triethylamine; (Ethanamine, N,N-diethyl-).” EPA also added the entries “Bis(chloromethyl) ether” and “Bromomethane” as synonyms to be consistent with substances listed in section 112 of the CAA. Additionally, EPA removed a number of hazardous substances from Table 302.4 in the interest of avoiding duplicative entries and deleted a number of synonyms of hazardous substances because the synonyms are not listed in RCRA, CWA, CAA, or their implementing regulations. Please refer to the July 9, 2002 **Federal Register** noted above for a complete explanation of the additions and deletions. This rule revises the entries in Table 1 of Appendix A to § 172.101 of the HMR for consistency with the revisions in EPA's July 9, 2002 final rule. However, we are retaining the entry for “Methyl chloroformate” and adding the footnote “@” because “Methyl chloroformate” is also listed as a proper shipping name in the Hazardous Materials Table (HMT). The footnote “@” signifies that the entry is added by PHMSA because it is a synonym for a listed hazardous substance and appears in the HMT as a proper shipping name. On February 24, 2005, EPA issued a final rule (70 FR 9138) that added an entry for the K181 waste code (nonwastewaters from the production of dyes and/or pigments) to Table 302.4 and assigned the waste a statutory one-pound RQ. This rule adds K181 to the “List of Hazardous Substances and Reportable Quantities.” On August 16, 2006, EPA issued a final rule (71 FR 47106) that adjusted the RQs for 34 hazardous substances from their statutory one-pound RQs. Specifically, the rule adjusted RQs for 28 individual carbamates, five carbamate-related waste codes (K156, K157, K158, K159, and K161), and the K178 waste code (inorganic manufacturing process waste). With the exception of K156, K157, K158, and K178, these materials have not been previously listed in the HMR as hazardous substances. This rule adds the 30 previously unlisted hazardous substances to the HMR and adjusts the RQs for consistency with EPA Table 302.4. The following tables identify hazardous substances added or deleted in this final rule as well as a **Federal Register** reference to the EPA rule each revision is based upon: A. Hazardous Substances Added to Table 1 of Appendix A to § 172.101 Hazardous substance Reportable quantity

(RQ)pounds (kilograms) EPA final rule A2213 5000

(2270)71 FR 47106 Aldicarb sulfone 100 (45.4) 71 FR 47106 Barban 10 (4.54) 71 FR 47106 Bendiocarb 100 (45.4) 71 FR 47106 Bendiocarb phenol 1000

(454)71 FR 47106 Benomyl 10 (4.54) 71 FR 47106 1,3-Benzodioxol-4-ol, 2,2-dimethyl- 1000

(454)71 FR 47106 1,3-Benzodioxol-4-ol, 2,2-dimethyl-, methyl carbamate 100 (45.4) 71 FR 47106 7-Benzofuranol, 2,3-dihydro-2,2-dimethyl- 10 (4.54) 71 FR 47106 7-Benzofuranol, 2,3-dihydro-2,2-dimethyl-, methylcarbamate 10 (4.54) 67 FR 45314 Benzoic acid, 2-hydroxy-, compd. with (3aS-cis)-1,2,3,3a,8,8a-hexahydro-1,3a,8-trimethylpyrrolo [2,3-b]indol-5-yl methylcarbamate ester (1:1) 100 (45.4) 71 FR 47106 Bis(chloromethyl) ether 10 (4.54) 67 FR 45314 Bromomethane 1000

(454)67 FR 45314 Carbamic acid, 1H-benzimidazol-2-yl, methyl ester 10 (4.54) 71 FR 47106 Carbamic acid, [1-[(butylamino)carbonyl]-1H-benzimidazol-2-yl]-, methyl ester 10 (4.54) 71 FR 47106 Carbamic acid, (3-chlorophenyl)-, 4-chloro-2-butynyl ester 10 (4.54) 71 FR 47106 Carbamic acid, [(dibutylamino)thio]methyl-, 2,3-dihydro-2,2-dimethyl-7-benzofuranyl ester 1000

(454)71 FR 47106 Carbamic acid, dimethyl-,1-[(dimethyl-amino)carbonyl]-5-methyl-1H-pyrazol-3-yl ester 1 (0.454) 71 FR 47106 Carbamic acid, dimethyl-, 3-methyl-1-(1-methylethyl)-1H-pyrazol-5-yl ester 100 (45.4) 71 FR 47106 Carbamic acid, methyl-, 3-methylphenyl ester 1000

(454)71 FR 47106 Carbamic acid, [1,2-phenylenebis(iminocarbonothioyl)] bis-, dimethyl ester 10 (4.54) 71 FR 47106 Carbamic acid, phenyl-, 1-methylethyl ester 1000

(454)71 FR 47106 Carbamothioic acid, bis(1-methylethyl)-, S-(2,3,3-trichloro-2-propenyl) ester 100 (45.4) 71 FR 47106 Carbamothioic acid, dipropyl-, S-(phenylmethyl) ester 5000

(2270)71 FR 47106 Carbendazim 10 (4.54) 71 FR 47106 Carbofuran phenol 10 (4.54) 71 FR 47106 Carbosulfan 1000

(454)71 FR 47106 Cresol (cresylic acid) 100 (45.4) 67 FR 45314 m-Cumenyl methylcarbamate 10 (4.54) 71 FR 47106 Diethylene glycol, dicarbamate 5000

(2270)71 FR 47106 Dimetilan 1 (0.454) 71 FR 47106 1,3-Dithiolane-2-carboxaldehyde, 2,4-dimethyl-, O-[(methylamino)carbonyl] oxime 100 (45.4) 71 FR 47106 Ethanamine, N,N-diethyl- 5000

(2270)67 FR 45314 Ethanimidothioic acid, 2-(dimethylamino)-N-hydroxy-2-oxo-, methyl ester 5000

(2270)71 FR 47106 Ethanimidothioic acid, 2-(dimethylamino)-N-[[(methylamino)carbonyl]oxy]-2-oxo-, methyl ester 100 (45.4) 71 FR 47106 Ethanimidothioic acid, N,N′[thiobis[(methylimino) carbonyloxy]]bis-, dimethyl ester 100 (45.4) 71 FR 47106 Ethanol, 2,2′-oxybis-, dicarbamate 5000

(2270)71 FR 47106 Formetanate hydrochloride 100 (45.4) 71 FR 47106 Formparanate 100 (45.4) 71 FR 47106 Isolan 100 (45.4) 71 FR 47106 3-Isopropylphenyl N-methylcarbamate 10 (4.54) 71 FR 47106 Manganese, bis(dimethylcarbamodithioato-S,S′)- 10 (4.54) 71 FR 47106 Manganese dimethyldithiocarbamate 10 (4.54) 71 FR 47106 Methanimidamide, N,N-dimethyl-N′-[3-[[(methylamino) carbonyl]oxy]phenyl]-, monohydrochloride 100 (45.4) 71 FR 47106 Methanimidamide, N,N-dimethyl-N′-[2-methyl-4-[[(methylamino)carbonyl]oxy]phenyl]- 100 (45.4) 71 FR 47106 Metolcarb 1000

(454)71 FR 47106 1-Naphthalenol, methylcarbamate 100 (45.4) 67 FR 45314 Oxamyl 100 (45.4) 71 FR 47106 Phenol, 4-(dimethylamino)-3,5-dimethyl-, methylcarbamate (ester) 1000

(454)67 FR 45314 Phenol, (3,5-dimethyl)-4-(methylthio)-, methylcarbamate 10 (4.54) 67 FR 45314 Phenol, 2-(1-methylethoxy)-, methylcarbamate 100 (45.4) 67 FR 45314 Phenol, 3-(1-methylethyl)-, methyl carbamate 10 (4.54) 71 FR 47106 Phenol, 3-methyl-5-(1-methylethyl)-, methyl carbamate 1000

(454)71 FR 47106 Physostigmine 100 (45.4) 71 FR 47106 Physostigmine salicylate 100 (45.4) 71 FR 47106 Promecarb 1000

(454)71 FR 47106 Propanal, 2-methyl-2-(methyl-sulfonyl)-, O-[(methylamino)carbonyl] oxime 100 (45.4) 71 FR 47106 Propham 1000

(454)71 FR 47106 Prosulfocarb 5000

(2270)71 FR 47106 Pyrrolo[2,3-b] indol-5-ol, 1,2,3,3a,8,8a-hexahydro-1,3a,8-trimethyl-, methylcarbamate (ester), (3aS-cis)- 100 (45.4) 71 FR 47106 Thiodicarb 100 (45.4) 71 FR 47106 Thiophanate-methyl 10 (4.54) 71 FR 47106 Tirpate 100 (45.4) 71 FR 47106 Triallate 100 (45.4) 71 FR 47106 Zinc, bis(dimethylcarbamodithioato-S,S′)- 10 (4.54) 71 FR 47106 Ziram 10 (4.54) 71 FR 47106 K159 10 (4.54) 71 FR 47106 K161 1 (0.454) 71 FR 47106 K181 1 (0.454) 70 FR 9138 B. Hazardous Substances Deleted From Table 1 of Appendix A to § 172.101 Hazardous substance Reportable quantity

(RQ)pounds (kilograms) EPA final rule Arsenic acid 1 (0.454) 67 FR 45314 Benzene, m-dimethyl 67 FR 45314 Benzene, o-dimethyl 67 FR 45314 Benzene, p-dimethy 67 FR 45314 Benzene, hydroxy- 1000

(454)67 FR 45314 Benzo[j,k]fluorine 100 (45.4) 67 FR 45314 1,2-Benzphenanthrene 100 (45.4) 67 FR 45314 Calcium cyanide 10 (4.54) 67 FR 45314 Camphene, octachloro- 1 (0.454) 67 FR 45314 4-Chloro-m-cresol 5000

(2270)67 FR 45314 Copper cyanide 10 (4.54) 67 FR 45314 m-Cresylic acid 67 FR 45314 o-Cresylic acid 67 FR 45314 p-Cresylic acid 67 FR 45314 Cyanogen bromide 1000

(454)67 FR 45314 Cyanogen chloride 10 (4.54) 67 FR 45314 1,4-Diethylenedioxide 100 (45.4) 67 FR 45314 Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma isomer) 1 (0.454) 67 FR 45314 Hydrogen sulfide 100 (45.4) 67 FR 45314 Muscimol 1000

(454)67 FR 45314 Nickel carbonyl 10 (4.54) 67 FR 45314 Nickel cyanide 10 (4.54) 67 FR 45314 1,10-(1,2-Phenylene) pyrene 100 (45.4) 67 FR 45314 Potassium cyanide 10 (4.54) 67 FR 45314 Selenium sulfide 10 (4.54) 67 FR 45314 Silver cyanide 1 (0.454) 67 FR 45314 Sodium cyanide 10 (4.54) 67 FR 45314 Tetrachloroethene 100 (45.4) 67 FR 45314 Thallium

(I)chloride 100 (45.4) 67 FR 45314 Trichloroethene 100 (45.4) 67 FR 45314 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 67 FR 45314 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 67 FR 45314 Zinc cyanide 10 (4.54) 67 FR 45314 Zinc phosphide 100 (45.4) 67 FR 45314 III. PHMSA Revisions Based on Previous EPA Rule Revisions to Table 302.4 This final rule also makes corrections to the “List of Hazardous Substances and Reportable Quantities” appearing in Table 1 of Appendix A to § 172.101 to be consistent with revisions made in past EPA final rules that pre-date the rules discussed in section II. The corrections to the “List of Hazardous Substances and Reportable Quantities” are explained as follows:

(1)“Acetic acid, (2,4,5-trichlorophenoxy)-” and “Carbamodithioic acid, 1,2-ethanediylbis-, salts & esters” were added to EPA Table 302.4 as new names for previously listed hazardous substances by a December 27, 1989 EPA final rule (54 FR 53057) but were inadvertently not added into the HMR. This rule adds “Acetic acid, (2,4,5-trichlorophenoxy)-” and “Carbamodithioic acid, 1,2-ethanediylbis-, salts & esters” to the HMR.

(2)“Diamine” and “1,2,3,4,10-10-Hexachloro-1,4,4a,5,8,8a-hexahydro-1,4:5,8-endo,exo-dimethanonaphthalene” were no longer listed in Table 302.4 as synonyms for hazardous substances by an August 14, 1989 EPA final rule (54 FR 33425) but inadvertently remained in the HMR. This rule deletes “Diamine” and “1,2,3,4,10-10-Hexachloro-1,4,4a,5,8,8a-hexahydro-1,4:5,8-endo,exo-dimethanonaphthalene” from the HMR.

(3)“3,4-Benzacridine”, “Carbamide, thio-”, “Carbamimidoselenoic acid”, “Carbon bisulfide“, “Ethanoyl chloride”, “Ethylenebisdithiocarbamic acid“, “Methanoic acid”, and “Methylene oxide” were deleted from Table 302.4 as synonyms by a December 27, 1989 EPA final rule (54 FR 53057) but inadvertently remained in the HMR. This rule deletes the synonyms from the HMR.

(4)“Methiocarb” was added to Table 302.4 as a synonym by a February 9, 1995 EPA final rule (60 FR 7824) but was inadvertently not added into the HMR. This rule adds “Methiocarb” to the HMR.

(5)“Aroclors”, “Chlorinated Camphene”, “DEHP”, “Dibromoethane”, “Hexone”, “Iodomethane”, “Lindane (all isomers)”, “PCBs”, “PCNB”, “Quinone”, “Quintobenzene”, “TCDD”, “2,4-Toluene diamine”, “2,4-Toluene diisocyanate”, and “Urethane” were added to Table 302.4 as synonyms by a June 12, 1995 EPA final rule (60 FR 30926) but were inadvertently not added into the HMR. This rule adds the synonyms to the HMR.

(6)“beta-Propiolactone” was added as a new entry to Table 302.4 by a June 12, 1995 EPA final rule (60 FR 30926) but was inadvertently not added into the HMR. This rule adds “beta-Propiolactone” to the HMR.

(7)The entry for “1,4-Diethylenedioxide” was corrected by adding “1,4-Diethyleneoxide” as a synonym to Table 302.4 by July 12, 1995 **Federal Register** corrections (60 FR 35991) but “1,4-Diethyleneoxide” was inadvertently not added into the HMR. This rule adds “1,4-Diethyleneoxide” to the HMR. IV. PHMSA Changes to Table 1 of Appendix A to § 172.101 This final rule makes several non-substantive changes to the “List of Hazardous Substances and Reportable Quantities” that appears in Table 1 of Appendix A to § 172.101 of the HMR. Most of the changes correct typographical errors (i.e., incorrect RQs) and insert inadvertent omissions from printings of previous PHMSA rulemakings and the CFR. The changes include the removal of descriptive language for waste codes found in Table 1 as well as the removal of the entry “Tetrachloroethane @” because it does not also appear in the HMT as a proper shipping name. The waste code descriptions are readily available in EPA's List of Hazardous Substances and Reportable Quantities in 40 CFR 302.4. In the interest of relieving the burden of tracking EPA revisions to waste code descriptions for consistency purposes, limiting the potential for errors in the text when printing the descriptions, and space savings, we believe the waste code descriptions do not need to be duplicated in the HMR. Several hazardous substances in Table 1 are listed with an incorrect RQ and are being corrected by this final rule. The changes are discussed as follows:

(1)The RQ for “[1,1′-Biphenyl]-4,4′-diamine, 3,3′-dimethoxy-” (and its synonym “3,3′-Dimethoxybenzidine”) was incorrectly changed from 1 to 10 pounds rather than to 100 pounds in the August 21, 1989 PHMSA final rule (HM-145G; 54 FR 34666). This rule corrects the RQ for “[1,1′-Biphenyl]-4,4′-diamine,3,3′-dimethoxy-” and its synonym to 100 pounds.

(2)The RQ for “Diethylamine” was incorrectly changed to 1000 in the November 7, 1990 PHMSA final rule (HM-145I; 55 FR 46794). This rule corrects the RQ for “Diethylamine” to 100 pounds.

(3)The F004 waste code is based on two solvents: “Cresols/Cresylic Acid” and “Nitrobenzene.” The August 2, 1995 PHMSA final rule (HM-145K; 60 FR 39608) inadvertently revised the RQ for “Nitrobenzene” from 1000 to 100 pounds rather than for “Cresols/Cresylic Acid.” This final rule corrects the RQ for “Cresols/Cresylic Acid” from 1000 to 100 pounds and the RQ for “Nitrobenzene” to 1000 pounds.

(4)The RQs for “Acetic acid, thallium(1+) salt” and “1-Acetyl-2-thiourea” were incorrectly printed starting with the 1996 edition of the CFR. This rule corrects the RQs to 100 and 1000 pounds, respectively.

(5)The RQ for “Methyl chloromethyl ether @” was inadvertently not revised to 10 pounds in the March 5, 2002 PHMSA final rule (HM-145M; 67 FR 9926). The RQs for synonyms “Chloromethyl methyl ether” and “Methane, chloromethoxy-” were revised without revising the RQ for “Methyl chloromethyl ether @.” This rule corrects the RQ for “Methyl chloromethyl ether @” to 10 pounds. Several hazardous substances were inadvertently omitted from Table 1. The omissions as well as other corrections to Table 1 are explained as follows:

(1)“1-Chloro-2,3-epoxypropane”, “Dimethyl aminoazobenzene”, “2,6-Dinitrophenol”, “2-Methyl aziridine”, and “m-Nitrophenol” were inadvertently omitted from the HMR through reprintings of the list in previous PHMSA rulemakings. This rule returns these entries to the HMR.

(2)The entry for “DDE” (and its RQ of 5000 pounds) was inadvertently omitted from the HMR starting with the 2000 edition of the CFR. This rule returns “DDE” and its RQ of 5000 pounds to the HMR. In addition, to provide clarification that there should be two listings of “DDE” with different RQs, CAS numbers are being added to the respective “DDE” entries. Also, the footnote “#” is added to the end of Table 1 of Appendix A to § 172.101 to provide a reference to the EPA rationale for having two entries with different RQs for the hazardous substance “DDE.”

(3)“1-Naphthalenamine” and “2-Naphthalenamine” were inadvertently omitted from the HMR by including their respective synonyms, “1-Naphthylamine” and “2-Naphthylamine”, instead. This rule adds “1-Naphthalenamine” and “2-Naphthalenamine” to the HMR and deletes “1-Naphthylamine” and “2-Naphthylamine” from the HMR. Because this rulemaking makes numerous changes to the “List of Hazardous Substances and Reportable Quantities” found in Table 1 of Appendix A to § 172.101, we are reprinting it in its entirety. V. Regulatory Analyses and Notices A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures This final rule is not considered a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, was not reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. The rule is not considered significant under the Regulatory Policies and Procedures of the Department of Transportation (44 FR 11034). The economic impact associated with this final rule should be minimal for shippers and carriers for several reasons:

(1)This rule does not impose new requirements on shippers or carriers of hazardous substances, but merely lists and makes corrections to hazardous substances already subject to regulation by EPA;

(2)to the extent that new hazardous substances are added to the HMR requiring compliance with regulations pertaining to transport of the hazardous substances, most of the new entries already meet an existing hazard class definition and are currently subject to the HMR. For example, carbamates are widely used as ingredients in pesticides. Shippers and carriers would incur some increased costs from additional hazard communication requirements (e.g., “RQ” on shipping papers and marking of packages) but minimal compared to costs of compliance with regulations for a hazardous substance that previously had not been regulated and;

(3)additional hazardous substances added into the HMR in this final rule were inadvertent omissions or are synonyms of hazardous substances already subject to the requirements. In consideration of the changes to the RQs for several hazardous substances in this rule, we reviewed the “Economic Impact Analysis

(EIA)of Proposed Reportable Quantity Adjustments for Carbamates Added as RCRA Hazardous Wastes and CERCLA Hazardous Substances, Volume VII,” dated December 2002 prepared by the Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA)in support of its related final rule. A copy of that document is available for review in the EPA docket (EPA-HQ-SFUND-2002-0010-0052). According to the EPA EIA, upward RQ adjustments for hazardous substances reduce the required telephone notification of releases and reduce government and industry time spent on recordkeeping. The effects of these actions taken together can be categorized as “cost savings.” Conversely, downward RQ adjustments would produce increases in these same actions and therefore result in additional costs. Likewise, from an HMR compliance cost perspective, upward RQ adjustments are expected to reduce costs by reducing the number of shipments subject to the hazard communication requirements for RQs or subject to the HMR in general (by being a hazardous material based solely on being defined as a hazardous substance) while downward RQ adjustments are expected to increase costs. The majority of the RQ adjustments (based on EPA adjustments) in this rule are upwards adjustments leading to an overall cost savings. This final rule will also enhance transportation safety and environmental protection because shippers, carriers, and emergency response personnel will be able to identify specific hazardous substances and take appropriate actions to comply with the applicable packaging and hazard communication requirements and to respond to transportation incidents involving hazardous substances. B. Executive Order 13132 This final rule has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 13132 (“Federalism”). This final rule preempts State, local and Indian tribe requirements but does not adopt any regulation that has substantial direct effects on the States, the relationship between the national government and the States, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, the consultation and funding requirements of Executive Order 13132 do not apply. The Federal hazardous material transportation law, 49 U.S.C. 5101-5128, contains an express preemption provision (49 U.S.C. 5125(b)) that preempts State, local, and Indian tribe requirements on certain covered subjects. Covered subjects are:

(1)The designation, description, and classification of hazardous material;

(2)The packing, repacking, handling, labeling, marking, and placarding of hazardous material;

(3)The preparation, execution, and use of shipping documents related to hazardous materials and requirements related to the number, contents, and placement of those documents;

(4)The written notification, recording, and reporting of the unintentional release in transportation of hazardous material; or

(5)The design, manufacture, fabrication, inspection, marking, maintenance, reconditioning, repair, or testing of a packaging or container represented, marked, certified, or sold as qualified for use in transporting hazardous material. This final rule addresses covered subject items (1), (2), and

(3)above and would preempt State, local, and Indian tribe requirements not meeting the “substantively the same” standard. This rule is required by statute. Federal hazardous materials transportation law provides at Sec. 5125(b)(2) that, if PHMSA issues a regulation concerning any of the covered subjects, PHMSA must determine and publish in the **Federal Register** the effective date of Federal preemption. The effective date may not be earlier than the 90th day following the date of issuance of the final rule and not later than two years after the date of issuance. The effective date of Federal preemption for these requirements is April 7, 2008. C. Executive Order 13175 This final rule has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 13175 (“Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments”). Because this final rule does not have tribal implications, does not impose substantial direct compliance costs, and is required by statute, the funding and consultation requirements of Executive Order 13175 do not apply. D. Regulatory Flexibility Act The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 *et seq.* ) requires an agency to review regulations to assess their impact on small entities unless the agency determines that a rule is not expected to have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. The Regulatory Flexibility Act applies only to final rules that are preceded by notices of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). Because this rule was not preceded by an NPRM, no assessment is required. EPA addressed the Regulatory Flexibility Act when it made the hazardous substances designation reflected in this rule. E. Paperwork Reduction Act This final rule does not impose any new information collection burden. F. Regulation Identifier Number

(RIN)A regulation identifier number

(RIN)is assigned to each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulations. The Regulatory Information Service Center publishes the Unified Agenda in April and October of each year. The RIN contained in the heading of this document can be used to cross-reference this action with the Unified Agenda. G. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act This final rule imposes no mandates and, thus, does not impose unfunded mandates under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995. It does not result in costs of $120.7 million or more to either State, local or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector, and is the least burdensome alternative that achieves the objective of the rule. H. Environmental Assessment The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321-4347) requires Federal agencies to consider the consequences of major Federal actions and prepare a detailed statement on actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. Releases of hazardous substances (e.g., carbamates) have the potential to cause damage to the human environment. Releases can occur during any stage of transportation (i.e., loading, transport, unloading, etc.). When a release occurs, it may result in increased risk to public health and the environment such as increased human exposure to carcinogens or adverse impacts to vegetation and wildlife surrounding the location of the release. Revisions made to the “List of Hazardous Substances and Reportable Quantities” found in Table 1 of Appendix A to § 172.101 in this final rule enhance environmental protection. Listing of hazardous substances in the HMR and the correct RQs promotes better identification of these materials, leading to greater compliance with the reporting requirements and effective emergency response to incidents involving these materials, thereby lessening the potential for damage to the human environment. Further, the adjustment of an RQ should not have any significant influence on the number of releases that occur for that substance. EPA considers inherent substance-specific risks as part of its RQ adjustment methodology. It is assumed that releases of hazardous substances below an (adjusted) RQ, under most release circumstances, would not pose a sufficient risk to the human environment to warrant a government response. We conclude there are no significant environmental impacts associated with this final rule. List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 172 Education, Hazardous materials transportation, Hazardous waste, Hazardous substances, Labeling, Markings, Packaging and containers, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. In consideration of the foregoing, Title 49, part 172 of the Code of Federal Regulations, is amended as follows: PART 172—HAZARDOUS MATERIALS TABLE, SPECIAL PROVISIONS, HAZARDOUS MATERIALS COMMUNICATIONS, EMERGENCY RESPONSE INFORMATION, AND TRAINING REQUIREMENTS 1. The authority citation for part 172 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5128, 44701; 49 CFR 1.53. 2. In Appendix A to § 172.101, Table 1 is revised to read as follows: Appendix A to § 172.101—List of Hazardous Substances and Reportable Quantities Table 1 to Appendix A.—Hazardous Substances Other Than Radionuclides Hazardous substance Reportable quantity

(RQ)pounds (kilograms) A2213 5000

(2270)Acenaphthene 100 (45.4) Acenaphthylene 5000

(2270)Acetaldehyde 1000

(454)Acetaldehyde, chloro- 1000

(454)Acetaldehyde, trichloro- 5000

(2270)Acetamide 100 (45.4) Acetamide, N-(aminothioxomethyl)- 1000

(454)Acetamide, N-(4-ethoxyphenyl)- 100 (45.4) Acetamide, N-9H-fluoren-2-yl- 1 (0.454) Acetamide, 2-fluoro- 100 (45.4) Acetic acid 5000

(2270)Acetic acid, (2,4-dichlorophenoxy)-, salts & esters 100 (45.4) Acetic acid, ethyl ester 5000

(2270)Acetic acid, fluoro-, sodium salt 10 (4.54) Acetic acid, lead(2+) salt 10 (4.54) Acetic acid, thallium(1+) salt 100 (45.4) Acetic acid, (2,4,5-trichlorophenoxy)- 1000

(454)Acetic anhydride 5000

(2270)Acetone 5000

(2270)Acetone cyanohydrin 10 (4.54) Acetonitrile 5000

(2270)Acetophenone 5000

(2270)2-Acetylaminofluorene 1 (0.454) Acetyl bromide 5000

(2270)Acetyl chloride 5000

(2270)1-Acetyl-2-thiourea 1000

(454)Acrolein 1 (0.454) Acrylamide 5000

(2270)Acrylic acid 5000

(2270)Acrylonitrile 100 (45.4) Adipic acid 5000

(2270)Aldicarb 1 (0.454) Aldicarb sulfone 100 (45.4) Aldrin 1 (0.454) Allyl alcohol 100 (45.4) Allyl chloride 1000

(454)Aluminum phosphide 100 (45.4) Aluminum sulfate 5000

(2270)4-Aminobiphenyl 1 (0.454) 5-(Aminomethyl)-3-isoxazolol 1000

(454)4-Aminopyridine 1000

(454)Amitrole 10 (4.54) Ammonia 100 (45.4) Ammonium acetate 5000

(2270)Ammonium benzoate 5000

(2270)Ammonium bicarbonate 5000

(2270)Ammonium bichromate 10 (4.54) Ammonium bifluoride 100 (45.4) Ammonium bisulfite 5000

(2270)Ammonium carbamate 5000

(2270)Ammonium carbonate 5000

(2270)Ammonium chloride 5000

(2270)Ammonium chromate 10 (4.54) Ammonium citrate, dibasic 5000

(2270)Ammonium dichromate @ 10 (4.54) Ammonium fluoborate 5000

(2270)Ammonium fluoride 100 (45.4) Ammonium hydroxide 1000

(454)Ammonium oxalate 5000

(2270)Ammonium picrate 10 (4.54) Ammonium silicofluoride 1000

(454)Ammonium sulfamate 5000

(2270)Ammonium sulfide 100 (45.4) Ammonium sulfite 5000

(2270)Ammonium tartrate 5000

(2270)Ammonium thiocyanate 5000

(2270)Ammonium vanadate 1000

(454)Amyl acetate 5000

(2270)iso-Amyl acetate sec-Amyl acetate tert-Amyl acetate Aniline 5000

(2270)o-Anisidine 100 (45.4) Anthracene 5000

(2270)Antimony ¢ 5000

(2270)Antimony pentachloride 1000

(454)Antimony potassium tartrate 100 (45.4) Antimony tribromide 1000

(454)Antimony trichloride 1000

(454)Antimony trifluoride 1000

(454)Antimony trioxide 1000

(454)Argentate(1-), bis(cyano-C)-, potassium 1 (0.454) Aroclor 1016 1 (0.454) Aroclor 1221 1 (0.454) Aroclor 1232 1 (0.454) Aroclor 1242 1 (0.454) Aroclor 1248 1 (0.454) Aroclor 1254 1 (0.454) Aroclor 1260 1 (0.454) Aroclors 1 (0.454) Arsenic ¢ 1 (0.454) Arsenic acid H 3 AsO 4 1 (0.454) Arsenic disulfide 1 (0.454) Arsenic oxide As 2 O 3 1 (0.454) Arsenic oxide As 2 O 5 1 (0.454) Arsenic pentoxide 1 (0.454) Arsenic trichloride 1 (0.454) Arsenic trioxide 1 (0.454) Arsenic trisulfide 1 (0.454) Arsine, diethyl- 1 (0.454) Arsinic acid, dimethyl- 1 (0.454) Arsonous dichloride, phenyl- 1 (0.454) Asbestos ¢¢ 1 (0.454) Auramine 100 (45.4) Azaserine 1 (0.454) Aziridine 1 (0.454) Aziridine, 2-methyl- 1 (0.454) Azirino[2′,3′:3,4]pyrrolo[1,2-a]indole-4,7-dione, 6-amino-8-[[(aminocarbonyl)oxy]methyl]-1,1a,2,8,8a,8b-hexahydro-8a-methoxy-5-methyl-, [1aS-(1aalpha,8beta,8aalpha, 8balpha)]- 10 (4.54) Barban 10 (4.54) Barium cyanide 10 (4.54) Bendiocarb 100 (45.4) Bendiocarb phenol 1000

(454)Benomyl 10 (4.54) Benz[j]aceanthrylene, 1,2-dihydro-3-methyl- 10 (4.54) Benz[c]acridine 100 (45.4) Benzal chloride 5000

(2270)Benzamide, 3,5-dichloro-N-(1,1-dimethyl-2-propynyl)- 5000

(2270)Benz[a]anthracene 10 (4.54) 1,2-Benzanthracene 10 (4.54) Benz[a]anthracene, 7,12-dimethyl- 1 (0.454) Benzenamine 5000

(2270)Benzenamine, 4,4′-carbonimidoylbis (N,N dimethyl- 100 (45.4) Benzenamine, 4-chloro- 1000

(454)Benzenamine, 4-chloro-2-methyl-, hydrochloride 100 (45.4) Benzenamine, N,N-dimethyl-4-(phenylazo)- 10 (4.54) Benzenamine, 2-methyl- 100 (45.4) Benzenamine, 4-methyl- 100 (45.4) Benzenamine, 4,4′-methylenebis[2-chloro- 10 (4.54) Benzenamine, 2-methyl-, hydrochloride 100 (45.4) Benzenamine, 2-methyl-5-nitro- 100 (45.4) Benzenamine, 4-nitro- 5000

(2270)Benzene 10 (4.54) Benzeneacetic acid, 4-chloro-α-(4-chlorophenyl)-α-hydroxy-, ethyl ester 10 (4.54) Benzene, 1-bromo-4-phenoxy- 100 (45.4) Benzenebutanoic acid, 4-[bis(2-chloroethyl)amino]- 10 (4.54) Benzene, chloro- 100 (45.4) Benzene, (chloromethyl)- 100 (45.4) Benzenediamine, ar-methyl- 10 (4.54) 1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester 100 (45.4) 1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, dibutyl ester 10 (4.54) 1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, diethyl ester 1000

(454)1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, dimethyl ester 5000

(2270)1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid, dioctyl ester 5000

(2270)Benzene, 1,2-dichloro- 100 (45.4) Benzene, 1,3-dichloro- 100 (45.4) Benzene, 1,4-dichloro- 100 (45.4) Benzene, 1,1′-(2,2-dichloroethylidene) bis[4-chloro- 1 (0.454) Benzene, (dichloromethyl)- 5000

(2270)Benzene, 1,3-diisocyanatomethyl- 100 (45.4) Benzene, dimethyl- 100 (45.4) 1,3-Benzenediol 5000

(2270)1,2-Benzenediol,4-[1-hydroxy-2-(methylamino) ethyl]- 1000

(454)Benzeneethanamine, alpha,alpha-dimethyl- 5000

(2270)Benzene, hexachloro- 10 (4.54) Benzene, hexahydro- 1000

(454)Benzene, methyl- 1000

(454)Benzene, 1-methyl-2,4-dinitro- 10 (4.54) Benzene, 2-methyl-1,3-dinitro- 100 (45.4) Benzene, (1-methylethyl)- 5000

(2270)Benzene, nitro- 1000

(454)Benzene, pentachloro- 10 (4.54) Benzene, pentachloronitro- 100 (45.4) Benzenesulfonic acid chloride 100 (45.4) Benzenesulfonyl chloride 100 (45.4) Benzene,1,2,4,5-tetrachloro- 5000

(2270)Benzenethiol 100 (45.4) Benzene,1,1′-(2,2,2-trichloroethylidene) bis[4-chloro- 1 (0.454) Benzene,1,1′-(2,2,2-trichloroethylidene) bis[4-methoxy- 1 (0.454) Benzene, (trichloromethyl)- 10 (4.54) Benzene, 1,3,5-trinitro- 10 (4.54) Benzidine 1 (0.454) 1,2-Benzisothiazol-3(2H)-one, 1,1-dioxide, & salts 100 (45.4) Benzo[a]anthracene 10 (4.54) 1,3-Benzodioxole, 5-(1-propenyl)-1 100 (45.4) 1,3-Benzodioxole, 5-(2-propenyl)- 100 (45.4) 1,3-Benzodioxole, 5-propyl- 10 (4.54) 1,3-Benzodioxol-4-ol, 2,2-dimethyl- 1000

(454)1,3-Benzodioxol-4-ol, 2,2-dimethyl-, methyl carbamate 100 (45.4) Benzo[b]fluoranthene 1 (0.454) Benzo(k)fluoranthene 5000

(2270)7-Benzofuranol, 2,3-dihydro-2,2-dimethyl- 10 (4.54) 7-Benzofuranol, 2,3-dihydro-2,2-dimethyl-, methylcarbamate 10 (4.54) Benzoic acid 5000

(2270)Benzoic acid, 2-hydroxy-, compd. with (3aS-cis)-1,2,3,3a,8,8a-hexahydro-1,3a,8-trimethylpyrrolo [2,3-b]indol-5-yl methylcarbamate ester (1:1) 100 (45.4) Benzonitrile 5000

(2270)Benzo[rst]pentaphene 10 (4.54) Benzo[ghi]perylene 5000

(2270)2H-1-Benzopyran-2-one, 4-hydroxy-3-(3-oxo-1-phenylbutyl)-, & salts 100 (45.4) Benzo[a]pyrene 1 (0.454) 3,4-Benzopyrene 1 (0.454) p-Benzoquinone 10 (4.54) Benzotrichloride 10 (4.54) Benzoyl chloride 1000

(454)Benzyl chloride 100 (45.4) Beryllium ¢ 10 (4.54) Beryllium chloride 1 (0.454) Beryllium fluoride 1 (0.454) Beryllium nitrate 1 (0.454) Beryllium powder ¢ 10 (4.54) alpha-BHC 10 (4.54) beta-BHC 1 (0.454) delta-BHC 1 (0.454) gamma-BHC 1 (0.454) 2,2′-Bioxirane 10 (4.54) Biphenyl 100 (45.4) [1,1′-Biphenyl]-4,4′-diamine 1 (0.454) [1,1′-Biphenyl]-4,4′-diamine,3,3′-dichloro- 1 (0.454) [1,1′-Biphenyl]-4,4′-diamine,3,3′-dimethoxy- 100 (45.4) [1,1′-Biphenyl]-4,4′-diamine,3,3′-dimethyl- 10 (4.54) Bis(2-chloroethoxy) methane 1000

(454)Bis(2-chloroethyl) ether 10 (4.54) Bis(chloromethyl) ether 10 (4.54) Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate 100 (45.4) Bromoacetone 1000

(454)Bromoform 100 (45.4) Bromomethane 1000

(454)4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether 100 (45.4) Brucine 100 (45.4) 1,3-Butadiene 10 (4.54) 1,3-Butadiene, 1,1,2,3,4,4-hexachloro- 1 (0.454) 1-Butanamine, N-butyl-N-nitroso- 10 (4.54) 1-Butanol 5000

(2270)2-Butanone 5000

(2270)2-Butanone, 3,3-dimethyl-1(methylthio)-, O [(methylamino) carbonyl] oxime 100 (45.4) 2-Butanone peroxide 10 (4.54) 2-Butenal 100 (45.4) 2-Butene, 1,4-dichloro- 1 (0.454) 2-Butenoic acid, 2-methyl-, 7-[[2,3-dihydroxy-2-(1-methoxyethyl)-3-methyl-1-oxobutoxy] methyl]-2,3,5,7a-tetrahydro-1H-pyrrolizin-1-yl ester, [1S-[1alpha(Z), 7(2S*,3R*),7aalpha]]- 10 (4.54) Butyl acetate 5000

(2270)iso-Butyl acetate sec-Butyl acetate tert-Butyl acetate n-Butyl alcohol 5000

(2270)Butylamine 1000

(454)iso-Butylamine sec-Butylamine tert-Butylamine Butyl benzyl phthalate 100 (45.4) n-Butyl phthalate 10 (4.54) Butyric acid 5000

(2270)iso-Butyric acid Cacodylic acid 1 (0.454) Cadmium ¢ 10 (4.54) Cadmium acetate 10 (4.54) Cadmium bromide 10 (4.54) Cadmium chloride 10 (4.54) Calcium arsenate 1 (0.454) Calcium arsenite 1 (0.454) Calcium carbide 10 (4.54) Calcium chromate 10 (4.54) Calcium cyanamide 1000

(454)Calcium cyanide Ca(CN) 2 10 (4.54) Calcium dodecylbenzenesulfonate 1000

(454)Calcium hypochlorite 10 (4.54) Captan 10 (4.54) Carbamic acid, 1H-benzimidazol-2-yl, methyl ester 10 (4.54) Carbamic acid, [1-[(butylamino)carbonyl]-1H-benzimidazol-2-yl]-, methyl ester 10 (4.54) Carbamic acid, (3-chlorophenyl)-, 4-chloro-2-butynyl ester 10 (4.54) Carbamic acid, [(dibutylamino)-thio]methyl-, 2,3-dihydro-2,2-dimethyl-7-benzofuranyl ester 1000

(454)Carbamic acid, dimethyl-,1-[(dimethyl-amino)carbonyl]-5-methyl-1H-pyrazol-3-yl ester 1 (0.454) Carbamic acid, dimethyl-, 3-methyl-1-(1-methylethyl)-1H-pyrazol-5-yl ester 100 (45.4) Carbamic acid, ethyl ester 100 (45.4) Carbamic acid, methyl-, 3-methylphenyl ester 1000

(454)Carbamic acid, methylnitroso-, ethyl ester 1 (0.454) Carbamic acid, [1,2-phenylenebis(iminocarbonothioyl)] bis-, dimethyl ester 10 (4.54) Carbamic acid, phenyl-, 1-methylethyl ester 1000

(454)Carbamic chloride, dimethyl- 1 (0.454) Carbamodithioic acid, 1,2-ethanediylbis-, salts & esters 5000

(2270)Carbamothioic acid, bis(1-methylethyl)-, S-(2,3-dichloro-2-propenyl) ester 100 (45.4) Carbamothioic acid, bis(1-methylethyl)-, S-(2,3,3-trichloro-2-propenyl) ester 100 (45.4) Carbamothioic acid, dipropyl-, S-(phenylmethyl) ester 5000

(2270)Carbaryl 100 (45.4) Carbendazim 10 (4.54) Carbofuran 10 (4.54) Carbofuran phenol 10 (4.54) Carbon disulfide 100 (45.4) Carbonic acid, dithallium(1+) salt 100 (45.4) Carbonic dichloride 10 (4.54) Carbonic difluoride 1000

(454)Carbonochloridic acid, methyl ester 1000

(454)Carbon oxyfluoride 1000

(454)Carbon tetrachloride 10 (4.54) Carbonyl sulfide 100 (45.4) Carbosulfan 1000

(454)Catechol 100 (45.4) Chloral 5000

(2270)Chloramben 100 (45.4) Chlorambucil 10 (4.54) Chlordane 1 (0.454) Chlordane, alpha & gamma isomers 1 (0.454) CHLORDANE (TECHNICAL MIXTURE AND METABOLITES) 1 (0.454) Chlorinated camphene 1 (0.454) Chlorine 10 (4.54) Chlornaphazine 100 (45.4) Chloroacetaldehyde 1000

(454)Chloroacetic acid 100 (45.4) 2-Chloroacetophenone 100 (45.4) p-Chloroaniline 1000

(454)Chlorobenzene 100 (45.4) Chlorobenzilate 10 (4.54) p-Chloro-m-cresol 5000

(2270)Chlorodibromomethane 100 (45.4) 1-Chloro-2,3-epoxypropane 100 (45.4) Chloroethane 100 (45.4) 2-Chloroethyl vinyl ether 1000

(454)Chloroform 10 (4.54) Chloromethane 100 (45.4) Chloromethyl methyl ether 10 (4.54) beta-Chloronaphthalene 5000

(2270)2-Chloronaphthalene 5000

(2270)2-Chlorophenol 100 (45.4) o-Chlorophenol 100 (45.4) 4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether 5000

(2270)1-(o-Chlorophenyl)thiourea 100 (45.4) Chloroprene 100 (45.4) 3-Chloropropionitrile 1000

(454)Chlorosulfonic acid 1000

(454)4-Chloro-o-toluidine, hydrochloride 100 (45.4) Chlorpyrifos 1 (0.454) Chromic acetate 1000

(454)Chromic acid 10 (4.54) Chromic acid H 2 CrO 4 , calcium salt 10 (4.54) Chromic sulfate 1000

(454)Chromium ¢ 5000

(2270)Chromous chloride 1000

(454)Chrysene 100 (45.4) Cobaltous bromide 1000

(454)Cobaltous formate 1000

(454)Cobaltous sulfamate 1000

(454)Coke Oven Emissions 1 (0.454) Copper ¢ 5000

(2270)Copper chloride @ 10 (4.54) Copper cyanide Cu(CN) 10 (4.54) Coumaphos 10 (4.54) Creosote 1 (0.454) Cresol (cresylic acid) 100 (45.4) m-Cresol 100 (45.4) o-Cresol 100 (45.4) p-Cresol 100 (45.4) Cresols (isomers and mixture) 100 (45.4) Cresylic acid (isomers and mixture) 100 (45.4) Crotonaldehyde 100 (45.4) Cumene 5000

(2270)m-Cumenyl methylcarbamate 10 (4.54) Cupric acetate 100 (45.4) Cupric acetoarsenite 1 (0.454) Cupric chloride 10 (4.54) Cupric nitrate 100 (45.4) Cupric oxalate 100 (45.4) Cupric sulfate 10 (4.54) Cupric sulfate, ammoniated 100 (45.4) Cupric tartrate 100 (45.4) Cyanides (soluble salts and complexes) not otherwise specified 10 (4.54) Cyanogen 100 (45.4) Cyanogen bromide (CN)Br 1000

(454)Cyanogen chloride (CN)Cl 10 (4.54) 2,5-Cyclohexadiene-1,4-dione 10 (4.54) Cyclohexane 1000

(454)Cyclohexane, 1,2,3,4,5,6-hexachloro-, (1α, 2α, 3β-, 4α, 5α, 6β) 1 (0.454) Cyclohexanone 5000

(2270)2-Cyclohexyl-4,6-dinitrophenol 100 (45.4) 1,3-Cyclopentadiene, 1,2,3,4,5,5-hexachloro- 10 (4.54) Cyclophosphamide 10 (4.54) 2,4-D Acid 100 (45.4) 2,4-D Ester 100 (45.4) 2,4-D, salts and esters 100 (45.4) Daunomycin 10 (4.54) DDD 1 (0.454) 4,4′-DDD 1 (0.454) DDE (72-55-9) # 1 (0.454) DDE (3547-04-4) # 5000

(2270)4,4′-DDE 1 (0.454) DDT 1 (0.454) 4,4′-DDT 1 (0.454) DEHP 100 (45.4) Diallate 100 (45.4) Diazinon 1 (0.454) Diazomethane 100 (45.4) Dibenz[a,h]anthracene 1 (0.454) 1,2:5,6-Dibenzanthracene 1 (0.454) Dibenzo[a,h]anthracene 1 (0.454) Dibenzofuran 100 (45.4) Dibenzo[a,i]pyrene 10 (4.54) 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 1 (0.454) Dibromoethane 1 (0.454) Dibutyl phthalate 10 (4.54) Di-n-butyl phthalate 10 (4.54) Dicamba 1000

(454)Dichlobenil 100 (45.4) Dichlone 1 (0.454) Dichlorobenzene 100 (45.4) 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 100 (45.4) 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 100 (45.4) 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 100 (45.4) m-Dichlorobenzene 100 (45.4) o-Dichlorobenzene 100 (45.4) p-Dichlorobenzene 100 (45.4) 3,3′-Dichlorobenzidine 1 (0.454) Dichlorobromomethane 5000

(2270)1,4-Dichloro-2-butene 1 (0.454) Dichlorodifluoromethane 5000

(2270)1,1-Dichloroethane 1000

(454)1,2-Dichloroethane 100 (45.4) 1,1-Dichloroethylene 100 (45.4) 1,2-Dichloroethylene 1000

(454)Dichloroethyl ether 10 (4.54) Dichloroisopropyl ether 1000

(454)Dichloromethane 1000

(454)Dichloromethoxyethane 1000

(454)Dichloromethyl ether 10 (4.54) 2,4-Dichlorophenol 100 (45.4) 2,6-Dichlorophenol 100 (45.4) Dichlorophenylarsine 1 (0.454) Dichloropropane 1000

(454)1,1-Dichloropropane 1,3-Dichloropropane 1,2-Dichloropropane 1000

(454)Dichloropropane-Dichloropropene (mixture) 100 (45.4) Dichloropropene 100 (45.4) 2,3-Dichloropropene 1,3-Dichloropropene 100 (45.4) 2,2-Dichloropropionic acid 5000

(2270)Dichlorvos 10 (4.54) Dicofol 10 (4.54) Dieldrin 1 (0.454) 1,2:3,4-Diepoxybutane 10 (4.54) Diethanolamine 100 (45.4) Diethylamine 100 (45.4) N,N-Diethylaniline 1000

(454)Diethylarsine 1 (0.454) Diethylene glycol, dicarbamate 5000

(2270)1,4-Diethyleneoxide 100 (45.4) Diethylhexyl phthalate 100 (45.4) N,N′-Diethylhydrazine 10 (4.54) O,O-Diethyl S-methyl dithiophosphate 5000

(2270)Diethyl-p-nitrophenyl phosphate 100 (45.4) Diethyl phthalate 1000

(454)O,O-Diethyl O-pyrazinyl phosphorothioate 100 (45.4) Diethylstilbestrol 1 (0.454) Diethyl sulfate 10 (4.54) Dihydrosafrole 10 (4.54) Diisopropylfluorophosphate

(DFP)100 (45.4) 1,4:5,8-Dimethanonaphthalene, 1,2,3,4,10,10-hexachloro-1,4,4a,5,8,8a-hexahydro-, (1alpha, 4alpha, 4abeta, 5alpha, 8alpha, 8abeta)- 1 (0.454) 1,4:5,8-Dimethanonaphthalene, 1,2,3,4,10,10-hexachloro-1,4,4a,5,8,8a-hexahydro-, (1alpha, 4alpha, 4abeta, 5beta, 8beta, 8abeta)-1 (0.454) 2,7:3,6-Dimethanonaphth[2,3-b]oxirene,3,4,5,6,9,9-hexachloro-1a,2,2a,3,6,6a,7,7a-octahydro-, (1aalpha, 2beta, 2aalpha, 3beta, 6beta, 6aalpha, 7beta, 7aalpha)- 1 (0.454) 2,7:3,6-Dimethanonaphth[2, 3-b]oxirene,3,4,5,6,9,9-hexachloro-1a,2,2a,3,6,6a,7,7a-octahydro-, (1aalpha, 2beta, 2abeta, 3alpha, 6alpha, 6abeta, 7beta, 7aalpha)-, & metabolites 1 (0.454) Dimethoate 10 (4.54) 3,3′-Dimethoxybenzidine 100 (45.4) Dimethylamine 1000

(454)Dimethyl aminoazobenzene 10 (4.54) p-Dimethylaminoazobenzene 10 (4.54) N,N-Dimethylaniline 100 (45.4) 7,12-Dimethylbenz[a]anthracene 1 (0.454) 3,3′-Dimethylbenzidine 10 (4.54) alpha,alpha-Dimethylbenzylhydroperoxide 10 (4.54) Dimethylcarbamoyl chloride 1 (0.454) Dimethylformamide 100 (45.4) 1,1-Dimethylhydrazine 10 (4.54) 1,2-Dimethylhydrazine 1 (0.454) Dimethylhydrazine, unsymmetrical @ 10 (4.54) alpha,alpha-Dimethylphenethylamine 5000

(2270)2,4-Dimethylphenol 100 (45.4) Dimethyl phthalate 5000

(2270)Dimethyl sulfate 100 (45.4) Dimetilan 1 (0.454) Dinitrobenzene (mixed) 100 (45.4) m-Dinitrobenzene o-Dinitrobenzene p-Dinitrobenzene 4,6-Dinitro-o-cresol, and salts 10 (4.54) Dinitrogen tetroxide @ 10 (4.54) Dinitrophenol 10 (4.54) 2,5-Dinitrophenol 2,6-Dinitrophenol 2,4-Dinitrophenol 10 (4.54) Dinitrotoluene 10 (4.54) 3,4-Dinitrotoluene 2,4-Dinitrotoluene 10 (4.54) 2,6-Dinitrotoluene 100 (45.4) Dinoseb 1000

(454)Di-n-octyl phthalate 5000

(2270)1,4-Dioxane 100 (45.4) 1,2-Diphenylhydrazine 10 (4.54) Diphosphoramide, octamethyl- 100 (45.4) Diphosphoric acid, tetraethyl ester 10 (4.54) Dipropylamine 5000

(2270)Di-n-propylnitrosamine 10 (4.54) Diquat 1000

(454)Disulfoton 1 (0.454) Dithiobiuret 100 (45.4) 1,3-Dithiolane-2-carboxaldehyde, 2,4-dimethyl-, O-[(methylamino)-carbonyl]oxime 100 (45.4) Diuron 100 (45.4) Dodecylbenzenesulfonic acid 1000

(454)Endosulfan 1 (0.454) alpha-Endosulfan 1 (0.454) beta-Endosulfan 1 (0.454) Endosulfan sulfate 1 (0.454) Endothall 1000

(454)Endrin 1 (0.454) Endrin aldehyde 1 (0.454) Endrin, & metabolites 1 (0.454) Epichlorohydrin 100 (45.4) Epinephrine 1000

(454)1,2-Epoxybutane 100 (45.4) Ethanal 1000

(454)Ethanamine, N,N-diethyl- 5000

(2270)Ethanamine, N-ethyl-N-nitroso- 1 (0.454) 1,2-Ethanediamine, N,N-dimethyl-N′-2-pyridinyl-N′-(2-thienylmethyl)- 5000

(2270)Ethane, 1,2-dibromo- 1 (0.454) Ethane, 1,1-dichloro- 1000

(454)Ethane, 1,2-dichloro- 100 (45.4) Ethanedinitrile 100 (45.4) Ethane, hexachloro- 100 (45.4) Ethane, 1,1′-[methylenebis(oxy)]bis[2-chloro- 1000

(454)Ethane, 1,1′-oxybis- 100 (45.4) Ethane, 1,1′-oxybis[2-chloro- 10 (4.54) Ethane, pentachloro- 10 (4.54) Ethane, 1,1,1,2-tetrachloro- 100 (45.4) Ethane, 1,1,2,2-tetrachloro- 100 (45.4) Ethanethioamide 10 (4.54) Ethane, 1,1,1-trichloro- 1000

(454)Ethane, 1,1,2-trichloro- 100 (45.4) Ethanimidothioic acid, 2-(dimethylamino)-N-hydroxy-2-oxo-, methyl ester 5000

(2270)Ethanimidothioic acid, 2-(dimethylamino)-N-[[(methylamino) carbonyl]oxy]-2-oxo-, methyl ester 100 (45.4) Ethanimidothioic acid, N-[[(methylamino) carbonyl]oxy]-, methyl ester 100 (45.4) Ethanimidothioic acid, N,N′[thiobis[(methylimino)carbonyloxy]] bis-, dimethyl ester 100 (45.4) Ethanol, 2-ethoxy- 1000

(454)Ethanol, 2,2′-(nitrosoimino)bis- 1 (0.454) Ethanol, 2,2′-oxybis-, dicarbamate 5000

(2270)Ethanone, 1-phenyl- 5000

(2270)Ethene, chloro- 1 (0.454) Ethene, (2-chloroethoxy)- 1000

(454)Ethene, 1,1-dichloro- 100 (45.4) Ethene, 1,2-dichloro-(E) 1000

(454)Ethene, tetrachloro- 100 (45.4) Ethene, trichloro- 100 (45.4) Ethion 10 (4.54) Ethyl acetate 5000

(2270)Ethyl acrylate 1000

(454)Ethylbenzene 1000

(454)Ethyl carbamate 100 (45.4) Ethyl chloride 100 (45.4) Ethyl cyanide 10 (4.54) Ethylenebisdithiocarbamic acid, salts & esters 5000

(2270)Ethylenediamine 5000

(2270)Ethylenediamine-tetraacetic acid

(EDTA)5000

(2270)Ethylene dibromide 1 (0.454) Ethylene dichloride 100 (45.4) Ethylene glycol 5000

(2270)Ethylene glycol monoethyl ether 1000

(454)Ethylene oxide 10 (4.54) Ethylenethiourea 10 (4.54) Ethylenimine 1 (0.454) Ethyl ether 100 (45.4) Ethylidene dichloride 1000

(454)Ethyl methacrylate 1000

(454)Ethyl methanesulfonate 1 (0.454) Ethyl methyl ketone @ 5000

(2270)Famphur 1000

(454)Ferric ammonium citrate 1000

(454)Ferric ammonium oxalate 1000

(454)Ferric chloride 1000

(454)Ferric fluoride 100 (45.4) Ferric nitrate 1000

(454)Ferric sulfate 1000

(454)Ferrous ammonium sulfate 1000

(454)Ferrous chloride 100 (45.4) Ferrous sulfate 1000

(454)Fluoranthene 100 (45.4) Fluorene 5000

(2270)Fluorine 10 (4.54) Fluoroacetamide 100 (45.4) Fluoroacetic acid, sodium salt 10 (4.54) Formaldehyde 100 (45.4) Formetanate hydrochloride 100 (45.4) Formic acid 5000

(2270)Formparanate 100 (45.4) Fulminic acid, mercury(2+)salt 10 (4.54) Fumaric acid 5000

(2270)Furan 100 (45.4) 2-Furancarboxyaldehyde 5000

(2270)2,5-Furandione 5000

(2270)Furan, tetrahydro- 1000

(454)Furfural 5000

(2270)Furfuran 100 (45.4) Glucopyranose, 2-deoxy-2-(3-methyl-3-nitrosoureido)-, D- 1 (0.454) D-Glucose, 2-deoxy-2-[[(methylnitrosoamino)-carbonyl]amino]- 1 (0.454) Glycidylaldehyde 10 (4.54) Guanidine, N-methyl-N′-nitro-N-nitroso- 10 (4.54) Guthion 1 (0.454) Heptachlor 1 (0.454) Heptachlor epoxide 1 (0.454) Hexachlorobenzene 10 (4.54) Hexachlorobutadiene 1 (0.454) Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 10 (4.54) Hexachloroethane 100 (45.4) Hexachlorophene 100 (45.4) Hexachloropropene 1000

(454)Hexaethyl tetraphosphate 100 (45.4) Hexamethylene-1,6-diisocyanate 100 (45.4) Hexamethylphosphoramide 1 (0.454) Hexane 5000

(2270)Hexone 5000

(2270)Hydrazine 1 (0.454) Hydrazinecarbothioamide 100 (45.4) Hydrazine, 1,2-diethyl- 10 (4.54) Hydrazine, 1,1-dimethyl- 10 (4.54) Hydrazine, 1,2-dimethyl- 1 (0.454) Hydrazine, 1,2-diphenyl- 10 (4.54) Hydrazine, methyl- 10 (4.54) Hydrochloric acid 5000

(2270)Hydrocyanic acid 10 (4.54) Hydrofluoric acid 100 (45.4) Hydrogen chloride 5000

(2270)Hydrogen cyanide 10 (4.54) Hydrogen fluoride 100 (45.4) Hydrogen phosphide 100 (45.4) Hydrogen sulfide H2S 100 (45.4) Hydroperoxide, 1-methyl-1-phenylethyl- 10 (4.54) Hydroquinone 100 (45.4) 2-Imidazolidinethione 10 (4.54) Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 100 (45.4) Iodomethane 100 (45.4) 1,3-Isobenzofurandione 5000

(2270)Isobutyl alcohol 5000

(2270)Isodrin 1 (0.454) Isolan 100 (45.4) Isophorone 5000

(2270)Isoprene 100 (45.4) Isopropanolamine dodecylbenzenesulfonate 1000

(454)3-Isopropylphenyl N-methylcarbamate 10 (4.54) Isosafrole 100 (45.4) 3(2H)-Isoxazolone, 5-(aminomethyl)- 1000

(454)Kepone 1 (0.454) Lasiocarpine 10 (4.54) Lead ¢ 10 (4.54) Lead acetate 10 (4.54) Lead arsenate 1 (0.454) Lead, bis(acetato-O)tetrahydroxytri- 10 (4.54) Lead chloride 10 (4.54) Lead fluoborate 10 (4.54) Lead fluoride 10 (4.54) Lead iodide 10 (4.54) Lead nitrate 10 (4.54) Lead phosphate 10 (4.54) Lead stearate 10 (4.54) Lead subacetate 10 (4.54) Lead sulfate 10 (4.54) Lead sulfide 10 (4.54) Lead thiocyanate 10 (4.54) Lindane 1 (0.454) Lindane (all isomers) 1 (0.454) Lithium chromate 10 (4.54) Malathion 100 (45.4) Maleic acid 5000

(2270)Maleic anhydride 5000

(2270)Maleic hydrazide 5000

(2270)Malononitrile 1000

(454)Manganese, bis(dimethylcarbamodithioato-S,S′)- 10 (4.54) Manganese dimethyldithiocarbamate 10 (4.54) MDI 5000

(2270)MEK 5000

(2270)Melphalan 1 (0.454) Mercaptodimethur 10 (4.54) Mercuric cyanide 1 (0.454) Mercuric nitrate 10 (4.54) Mercuric sulfate 10 (4.54) Mercuric thiocyanate 10 (4.54) Mercurous nitrate 10 (4.54) Mercury 1 (0.454) Mercury, (acetato-O)phenyl- 100 (45.4) Mercury fulminate 10 (4.54) Methacrylonitrile 1000

(454)Methanamine, N-methyl- 1000

(454)Methanamine, N-methyl-N-nitroso- 10 (4.54) Methane, bromo- 1000

(454)Methane, chloro- 100 (45.4) Methane, chloromethoxy- 10 (4.54) Methane, dibromo- 1000

(454)Methane, dichloro- 1000

(454)Methane, dichlorodifluoro- 5000

(2270)Methane, iodo- 100 (45.4) Methane, isocyanato- 10 (4.54) Methane, oxybis(chloro- 10 (4.54) Methanesulfenyl chloride, trichloro- 100 (45.4) Methanesulfonic acid, ethyl ester 1 (0.454) Methane, tetrachloro- 10 (4.54) Methane, tetranitro- 10 (4.54) Methanethiol 100 (45.4) Methane, tribromo- 100 (45.4) Methane, trichloro- 10 (4.54) Methane, trichlorofluoro- 5000

(2270)Methanimidamide, N,N-dimethyl-N′-[3-[[(methylamino) carbonyl] oxy] phenyl]-, monohydrochloride 100 (45.4) Methanimidamide, N,N-dimethyl-N′-[2-methyl-4-[[(methylamino)carbonyl] oxy]phenyl]- 100 (45.4) 6,9-Methano-2,4,3-benzodioxathiepin,6,7,8,9,10,10-hexachloro-1,5,5a,6,9,9a-hexahydro-, 3-oxide 1 (0.454) 4,7-Methano-1H-indene, 1,4,5,6,7,8,8-heptachloro-3a,4,7,7a-tetrahydro- 1 (0.454) 4,7-Methano-1H-indene, 1,2,4,5,6,7,8,8-octachloro-2,3,3a,4,7,7a-hexahydro- 1 (0.454) Methanol 5000

(2270)Methapyrilene 5000

(2270)1,3,4-Metheno-2H-cyclobuta[cd]pentalen-2-one, 1,1a,3,3a,4,5,5,5a,5b,6-decachlorooctahydro- 1 (0.454) Methiocarb 10 (4.54) Methomyl 100 (45.4) Methoxychlor 1 (0.454) Methyl alcohol 5000

(2270)Methylamine @ 100 (45.4) 2-Methyl aziridine 1 (0.454) Methyl bromide 1000

(454)1-Methylbutadiene 100 (45.4) Methyl chloride 100 (45.4) Methyl chlorocarbonate 1000

(454)Methyl chloroform 1000

(454)Methyl chloroformate @ 1000

(454)Methyl chloromethyl ether @ 10 (4.54) 3-Methylcholanthrene 10 (4.54) 4,4′-Methylenebis(2-chloroaniline) 10 (4.54) Methylene bromide 1000

(454)Methylene chloride 1000

(454)4,4′-Methylenedianiline 10 (4.54) Methylene diphenyl diisocyanate 5000

(2270)Methyl ethyl ketone 5000

(2270)Methyl ethyl ketone peroxide 10 (4.54) Methyl hydrazine 10 (4.54) Methyl iodide 100 (45.4) Methyl isobutyl ketone 5000

(2270)Methyl isocyanate 10 (4.54) 2-Methyllactonitrile 10 (4.54) Methyl mercaptan 100 (45.4) Methyl methacrylate 1000

(454)Methyl parathion 100 (45.4) 4-Methyl-2-pentanone 5000

(2270)Methyl tert-butyl ether 1000

(454)Methylthiouracil 10 (4.54) Metolcarb 1000

(454)Mevinphos 10 (4.54) Mexacarbate 1000

(454)Mitomycin C 10 (4.54) MNNG 10 (4.54) Monoethylamine 100 (45.4) Monomethylamine 100 (45.4) Naled 10 (4.54) 5,12-Naphthacenedione, 8-acetyl-10-[(3-amino-2,3,6-trideoxy-alpha-L-lyxo-hexopyranosyl)oxy]-7,8,9,10-tetrahydro-6,8,11-trihydroxy-1-methoxy-, (8S-cis)- 10 (4.54) 1-Naphthalenamine 100 (45.4) 2-Naphthalenamine 10 (4.54) Naphthalenamine, N,N′-bis(2-chloroethyl)- 100 (45.4) Naphthalene 100 (45.4) Naphthalene, 2-chloro- 5000

(2270)1,4-Naphthalenedione 5000

(2270)2,7-Naphthalenedisulfonic acid, 3,3′-[(3,3′-dimethyl-(1,1′-biphenyl)-4,4′-diyl)-bis(azo)]bis(5-amino-4-hydroxy)-tetrasodium salt 10 (4.54) 1-Naphthalenol, methylcarbamate 100 (45.4) Naphthenic acid 100 (45.4) 1,4-Naphthoquinone 5000

(2270)alpha-Naphthylamine 100 (45.4) beta-Naphthylamine 10 (4.54) alpha-Naphthylthiourea 100 (45.4) Nickel ¢ 100 (45.4) Nickel ammonium sulfate 100 (45.4) Nickel carbonyl Ni(CO)4, (T-4)- 10 (4.54) Nickel chloride 100 (45.4) Nickel cyanide Ni(CN) 2 10 (4.54) Nickel hydroxide 10 (4.54) Nickel nitrate 100 (45.4) Nickel sulfate 100 (45.4) Nicotine, & salts 100 (45.4) Nitric acid 1000

(454)Nitric acid, thallium (1+) salt 100 (45.4) Nitric oxide 10 (4.54) p-Nitroaniline 5000

(2270)Nitrobenzene 1000

(454)4-Nitrobiphenyl 10 (4.54) Nitrogen dioxide 10 (4.54) Nitrogen oxide NO 10 (4.54) Nitrogen oxide NO 2 10 (4.54) Nitroglycerine 10 (4.54) Nitrophenol (mixed) 100 (45.4) m-Nitrophenol o-Nitrophenol 100 (45.4) p-Nitrophenol 100 (45.4) 2-Nitrophenol 100 (45.4) 4-Nitrophenol 100 (45.4) 2-Nitropropane 10 (4.54) N-Nitrosodi-n-butylamine 10 (4.54) N-Nitrosodiethanolamine 1 (0.454) N-Nitrosodiethylamine 1 (0.454) N-Nitrosodimethylamine 10 (4.54) N-Nitrosodiphenylamine 100 (45.4) N-Nitroso-N-ethylurea 1 (0.454) N-Nitroso-N-methylurea 1 (0.454) N-Nitroso-N-methylurethane 1 (0.454) N-Nitrosomethylvinylamine 10 (4.54) N-Nitrosomorpholine 1 (0.454) N-Nitrosopiperidine 10 (4.54) N-Nitrosopyrrolidine 1 (0.454) Nitrotoluene 1000

(454)m-Nitrotoluene o-Nitrotoluene p-Nitrotoluene 5-Nitro-o-toluidine 100 (45.4) Octamethylpyrophosphoramide 100 (45.4) Osmium oxide OsO 4 , (T-4)- 1000

(454)Osmium tetroxide 1000

(454)7-Oxabicyclo[2.2.1]heptane-2,3-dicarboxylic acid 1000

(454)Oxamyl 100 (45.4) 1,2-Oxathiolane, 2,2-dioxide 10 (4.54) 2H-1,3,2-Oxazaphosphorin-2-amine, N,N-bis(2-chloroethyl) tetrahydro-, 2-oxide 10 (4.54) Oxirane 10 (4.54) Oxiranecarboxyaldehyde 10 (4.54) Oxirane, (chloromethyl)- 100 (45.4) Paraformaldehyde 1000

(454)Paraldehyde 1000

(454)Parathion 10 (4.54) PCBs 1 (0.454) PCNB 100 (45.4) Pentachlorobenzene 10 (4.54) Pentachloroethane 10 (4.54) Pentachloronitrobenzene 100 (45.4) Pentachlorophenol 10 (4.54) 1,3-Pentadiene 100 (45.4) Perchloroethylene 100 (45.4) Perchloromethyl mercaptan @ 100 (45.4) Phenacetin 100 (45.4) Phenanthrene 5000

(2270)Phenol 1000

(454)Phenol, 2-chloro- 100 (45.4) Phenol, 4-chloro-3-methyl- 5000

(2270)Phenol, 2-cyclohexyl-4,6-dinitro- 100 (45.4) Phenol, 2,4-dichloro- 100 (45.4) Phenol, 2,6-dichloro- 100 (45.4) Phenol, 4,4′-(1,2-diethyl-1,2-ethenediyl)bis-,

(E)1 (0.454) Phenol, 2,4-dimethyl- 100 (45.4) Phenol, 4-(dimethylamino)-3,5-dimethyl-, methylcarbamate (ester) 1000

(454)Phenol, (3,5-dimethyl-4-(methylthio)-, methylcarbamate 10 (4.54) Phenol, 2,4-dinitro- 10 (4.54) Phenol, methyl- 100 (45.4) Phenol, 2-methyl-4,6-dinitro-, & salts 10 (4.54) Phenol, 2,2′-methylenebis[3,4,6-trichloro- 100 (45.4) Phenol, 2-(1-methylethoxy)-, methylcarbamate 100 (45.4) Phenol, 3-(1-methylethyl)-, methyl carbamate 10 (4.54) Phenol, 3-methyl-5-(1-methylethyl)-, methyl carbamate 1000

(454)Phenol, 2-(1-methylpropyl)-4,6-dinitro- 1000

(454)Phenol, 4-nitro- 100 (45.4) Phenol, pentachloro- 10 (4.54) Phenol, 2,3,4,6-tetrachloro- 10 (4.54) Phenol, 2,4,5-trichloro- 10 (4.54) Phenol, 2,4,6-trichloro- 10 (4.54) Phenol, 2,4,6-trinitro-, ammonium salt 10 (4.54) L-Phenylalanine, 4-[bis(2-chloroethyl)amino]- 1 (0.454) p-Phenylenediamine 5000

(2270)Phenyl mercaptan @ 100 (45.4) Phenylmercury acetate 100 (45.4) Phenylthiourea 100 (45.4) Phorate 10 (4.54) Phosgene 10 (4.54) Phosphine 100 (45.4) Phosphoric acid 5000

(2270)Phosphoric acid, diethyl 4-nitrophenyl ester 100 (45.4) Phosphoric acid, lead(2+) salt (2:3) 10 (4.54) Phosphorodithioic acid, O,O-diethyl S-[2-(ethylthio)ethyl] ester 1 (0.454) Phosphorodithioic acid, O,O-diethyl S-[(ethylthio)methyl] ester 10 (4.54) Phosphorodithioic acid, O,O-diethyl S-methyl ester 5000

(2270)Phosphorodithioic acid, O,O-dimethyl S-[2-(methylamino)-2-oxoethyl] ester 10 (4.54) Phosphorofluoridic acid, bis(1-methylethyl) ester 100 (45.4) Phosphorothioic acid, O,O-diethyl O-(4-nitrophenyl) ester 10 (4.54) Phosphorothioic acid, O,O-diethyl O-pyrazinyl ester 100 (45.4) Phosphorothioic acid, O-[4-[(dimethylamino) sulfonyl]phenyl] O,O-dimethyl ester 1000

(454)Phosphorothioic acid, O,O-dimethyl O-(4-nitrophenyl) ester 100 (45.4) Phosphorus 1 (0.454) Phosphorus oxychloride 1000

(454)Phosphorus pentasulfide 100 (45.4) Phosphorus sulfide 100 (45.4) Phosphorus trichloride 1000

(454)Phthalic anhydride 5000

(2270)Physostigmine 100 (45.4) Physostigmine salicylate 100 (45.4) 2-Picoline 5000

(2270)Piperidine, 1-nitroso- 10 (4.54) Plumbane, tetraethyl- 10 (4.54) POLYCHLORINATED BIPHENYLS 1 (0.454) Potassium arsenate 1 (0.454) Potassium arsenite 1 (0.454) Potassium bichromate 10 (4.54) Potassium chromate 10 (4.54) Potassium cyanide K(CN) 10 (4.54) Potassium hydroxide 1000

(454)Potassium permanganate 100 (45.4) Potassium silver cyanide 1 (0.454) Promecarb 1000

(454)Pronamide 5000

(2270)Propanal, 2-methyl-2-(methyl-sulfonyl)-, O-[(methylamino)carbonyl] oxime 100 (45.4) Propanal, 2-methyl-2-(methylthio)-, O-[(methylamino)carbonyl] oxime 1 (0.454) 1-Propanamine 5000

(2270)1-Propanamine, N-propyl- 5000

(2270)1-Propanamine, N-nitroso-N-propyl- 10 (4.54) Propane, 1,2-dibromo-3-chloro- 1 (0.454) Propane, 1,2-dichloro- 1000

(454)Propanedinitrile 1000

(454)Propanenitrile 10 (4.54) Propanenitrile, 3-chloro- 1000

(454)Propanenitrile, 2-hydroxy-2-methyl- 10 (4.54) Propane, 2-nitro- 10 (4.54) Propane, 2,2′-oxybis[2-chloro- 1000

(454)1,3-Propane sultone 10 (4.54) 1,2,3-Propanetriol, trinitrate 10 (4.54) Propanoic acid, 2-(2,4,5-trichlorophenoxy)- 100 (45.4) 1-Propanol, 2,3-dibromo-, phosphate (3:1) 10 (4.54) 1-Propanol, 2-methyl- 5000

(2270)2-Propanone 5000

(2270)2-Propanone, 1-bromo- 1000

(454)Propargite 10 (4.54) Propargyl alcohol 1000

(454)2-Propenal 1 (0.454) 2-Propenamide 5000

(2270)1-Propene, 1,3-dichloro- 100 (45.4) 1-Propene, 1,1,2,3,3,3-hexachloro- 1000

(454)2-Propenenitrile 100 (45.4) 2-Propenenitrile, 2-methyl- 1000

(454)2-Propenoic acid 5000

(2270)2-Propenoic acid, ethyl ester 1000

(454)2-Propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, ethyl ester 1000

(454)2-Propenoic acid, 2-methyl-, methyl ester 1000

(454)2-Propen-1-ol 100 (45.4) Propham 1000

(454)beta-Propiolactone 10 (4.54) Propionaldehyde 1000

(454)Propionic acid 5000

(2270)Propionic anhydride 5000

(2270)Propoxur (Baygon) 100 (45.4) n-Propylamine 5000

(2270)Propylene dichloride 1000

(454)Propylene oxide 100 (45.4) 1,2-Propylenimine 1 (0.454) 2-Propyn-1-ol 1000

(454)Prosulfocarb 5000

(2270)Pyrene 5000

(2270)Pyrethrins 1 (0.454) 3,6-Pyridazinedione, 1,2-dihydro- 5000

(2270)4-Pyridinamine 1000

(454)Pyridine 1000

(454)Pyridine, 2-methyl- 5000

(2270)Pyridine, 3-(1-methyl-2-pyrrolidinyl)-, (S)-, & salts 100 (45.4) 2,4-(1H,3H)-Pyrimidinedione, 5-[bis(2-chloroethyl)amino]- 10 (4.54) 4(1H)-Pyrimidinone, 2,3-dihydro-6-methyl-2-thioxo- 10 (4.54) Pyrrolidine, 1-nitroso- 1 (0.454) Pyrrolo[2,3-b] indol-5-ol,1,2,3,3a,8,8a-hexahydro-1,3a,8-trimethyl-, methylcarbamate (ester), (3aS-cis)- 100 (45.4) Quinoline 5000

(2270)Quinone 10 (4.54) Quintobenzene 100 (45.4) RADIONUCLIDES See Table 2 Reserpine 5000

(2270)Resorcinol 5000

(2270)Saccharin & salts 100 (45.4) Safrole 100 (45.4) Selenious acid 10 (4.54) Selenious acid, dithallium (1+) salt 1000

(454)Selenium ¢ 100 (45.4) Selenium dioxide 10 (4.54) Selenium oxide 10 (4.54) Selenium sulfide SeS2 10 (4.54) Selenourea 1000

(454)L-Serine, diazoacetate (ester) 1 (0.454) Silver ¢ 1000

(454)Silver cyanide Ag(CN) 1 (0.454) Silver nitrate 1 (0.454) Silvex (2,4,5-TP) 100 (45.4) Sodium 10 (4.54) Sodium arsenate 1 (0.454) Sodium arsenite 1 (0.454) Sodium azide 1000

(454)Sodium bichromate 10 (4.54) Sodium bifluoride 100 (45.4) Sodium bisulfite 5000

(2270)Sodium chromate 10 (4.54) Sodium cyanide Na(CN) 10 (4.54) Sodium dodecylbenzenesulfonate 1000

(454)Sodium fluoride 1000

(454)Sodium hydrosulfide 5000

(2270)Sodium hydroxide 1000

(454)Sodium hypochlorite 100 (45.4) Sodium methylate 1000

(454)Sodium nitrite 100 (45.4) Sodium phosphate, dibasic 5000

(2270)Sodium phosphate, tribasic 5000

(2270)Sodium selenite 100 (45.4) Streptozotocin 1 (0.454) Strontium chromate 10 (4.54) Strychnidin-10-one, & salts 10 (4.54) Strychnidin-10-one, 2,3-dimethoxy- 100 (45.4) Strychnine, & salts 10 (4.54) Styrene 1000

(454)Styrene oxide 100 (45.4) Sulfur chlorides @ 1000

(454)Sulfuric acid 1000

(454)Sulfuric acid, dimethyl ester 100 (45.4) Sulfuric acid, dithallium (1+) salt 100 (45.4) Sulfur monochloride 1000

(454)Sulfur phosphide 100 (45.4) 2,4,5-T 1000

(454)2,4,5-T acid 1000

(454)2,4,5-T amines 5000

(2270)2,4,5-T esters 1000

(454)2,4,5-T salts 1000

(454)TCDD 1 (0.454) TDE 1 (0.454) 1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene 5000

(2270)2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin 1 (0.454) 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane 100 (45.4) 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 100 (45.4) Tetrachloroethylene 100 (45.4) 2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol 10 (4.54) Tetraethyl pyrophosphate 10 (4.54) Tetraethyl lead 10 (4.54) Tetraethyldithiopyrophosphate 100 (45.4) Tetrahydrofuran 1000

(454)Tetranitromethane 10 (4.54) Tetraphosphoric acid, hexaethyl ester 100 (45.4) Thallic oxide 100 (45.4) Thallium ¢ 1000

(454)Thallium

(I)acetate 100 (45.4) Thallium

(I)carbonate 100 (45.4) Thallium chloride TlCl 100 (45.4) Thallium

(I)nitrate 100 (45.4) Thallium oxide Tl 2 O 3 100 (45.4) Thallium

(I)selenite 1000

(454)Thallium

(I)sulfate 100 (45.4) Thioacetamide 10 (4.54) Thiodicarb 100 (45.4) Thiodiphosphoric acid, tetraethyl ester 100 (45.4) Thiofanox 100 (45.4) Thioimidodicarbonic diamide [(H 2 N)C(S)] 2 NH 100 (45.4) Thiomethanol 100 (45.4) Thioperoxydicarbonic diamide [(H 2 N)C(S)] 2 S 2 , tetramethyl- 10 (4.54) Thiophanate-methyl 10 (4.54) Thiophenol 100 (45.4) Thiosemicarbazide 100 (45.4) Thiourea 10 (4.54) Thiourea, (2-chlorophenyl)- 100 (45.4) Thiourea, 1-naphthalenyl- 100 (45.4) Thiourea, phenyl- 100 (45.4) Thiram 10 (4.54) Tirpate 100 (45.4) Titanium tetrachloride 1000

(454)Toluene 1000

(454)Toluenediamine 10 (4.54) 2,4-Toluene diamine 10 (4.54) Toluene diisocyanate 100 (45.4) 2,4-Toluene diisocyanate 100 (45.4) o-Toluidine 100 (45.4) p-Toluidine 100 (45.4) o-Toluidine hydrochloride 100 (45.4) Toxaphene 1 (0.454) 2,4,5-TP acid 100 (45.4) 2,4,5-TP esters 100 (45.4) Triallate 100 (45.4) 1H-1,2,4-Triazol-3-amine 10 (4.54) Trichlorfon 100 (45.4) 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 100 (45.4) 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 1000

(454)1,1,2-Trichloroethane 100 (45.4) Trichloroethylene 100 (45.4) Trichloromethanesulfenyl chloride 100 (45.4) Trichloromonofluoromethane 5000

(2270)Trichlorophenol 10 (4.54) 2,3,4-Trichlorophenol 2,3,5-Trichlorophenol 2,3,6-Trichlorophenol 3,4,5-Trichlorophenol 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 10 (4.54) 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 10 (4.54) Triethanolamine dodecylbenzenesulfonate 1000

(454)Triethylamine 5000

(2270)Trifluralin 10 (4.54) Trimethylamine 100 (45.4) 2,2,4-Trimethylpentane 1000

(454)1,3,5-Trinitrobenzene 10 (4.54) 1,3,5-Trioxane, 2,4,6-trimethyl- 1000

(454)Tris(2,3-dibromopropyl) phosphate 10 (4.54) Trypan blue 10 (4.54) D002 Unlisted Hazardous Wastes Characteristic of Corrosivity 100 (45.4) D001 Unlisted Hazardous Wastes Characteristic of Ignitability 100 (45.4) D003 Unlisted Hazardous Wastes Characteristic of Reactivity 100 (45.4) D004-D043 Unlisted Hazardous Wastes Characteristic of Toxicity: Arsenic

(D004)1 (0.454) Barium

(D005)1000

(454)Benzene

(D018)10 (4.54) Cadmium

(D006)10 (4.54) Carbon tetrachloride

(D019)10 (4.54) Chlordane

(D020)1 (0.454) Chlorobenzene

(D021)100 (45.4) Chloroform

(D022)10 (4.54) Chromium

(D007)10 (4.54) o-Cresol

(D023)100 (45.4) m-Cresol

(D024)100 (45.4) p-Cresol

(D025)100 (45.4) Cresol

(D026)100 (45.4) 2,4-D

(D016)100 (45.4) 1,4-Dichlorobenzene

(D027)100 (45.4) 1,2-Dichloroethane

(D028)100 (45.4) 1,1-Dichloroethylene

(D029)100 (45.4) 2,4-Dinitrotoluene

(D030)10 (4.54) Endrin

(D012)1 (0.454) Heptachlor (and epoxide)

(D031)1 (0.454) Hexachlorobenzene

(D032)10 (4.54) Hexachlorobutadiene

(D033)1 (0.454) Hexachloroethane

(D034)100 (45.4) Lead

(D008)10 (4.54) Lindane

(D013)1 (0.454) Mercury

(D009)1 (0.454) Methoxychlor

(D014)1 (0.454) Methyl ethyl ketone

(D035)5000

(2270)Nitrobenzene

(D036)1000

(454)Pentachlorophenol

(D037)10 (4.54) Pyridine

(D038)1000

(454)Selenium

(D010)10 (4.54) Silver

(D011)1 (0.454) Tetrachloroethylene

(D039)100 (45.4) Toxaphene

(D015)1 (0.454) Trichloroethylene

(D040)100 (45.4) 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol

(D041)10 (4.54) 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol

(D042)10 (4.54) 2,4,5-TP

(D017)100 (45.4) Vinyl chloride

(D043)1 (0.454) Uracil mustard 10 (4.54) Uranyl acetate 100 (45.4) Uranyl nitrate 100 (45.4) Urea, N-ethyl-N-nitroso- 1 (0.454) Urea, N-methyl-N-nitroso- 1 (0.454) Urethane 100 (45.4) Vanadic acid, ammonium salt 1000

(454)Vanadium oxide V 2 O 5 1000

(454)Vanadium pentoxide 1000

(454)Vanadyl sulfate 1000

(454)Vinyl acetate 5000

(2270)Vinyl acetate monomer 5000

(2270)Vinylamine, N-methyl-N-nitroso- 10 (4.54) Vinyl bromide 100 (45.4) Vinyl chloride 1 (0.454) Vinylidene chloride 100 (45.4) Warfarin, & salts 100 (45.4) Xylene 100 (45.4) m-Xylene 1000

(454)o-Xylene 1000

(454)p-Xylene 100 (45.4) Xylene (mixed) 100 (45.4) Xylenes (isomers and mixture) 100 (45.4) Xylenol 1000

(454)Yohimban-16-carboxylic acid,11,17-dimethoxy-18-[(3,4,5-trimethoxybenzoyl) oxy]-, methyl ester (3beta,16beta,17alpha,18beta, 20alpha) 5000

(2270)Zinc ¢ 1000

(454)Zinc acetate 1000

(454)Zinc ammonium chloride 1000

(454)Zinc, bis(dimethylcarbamodithioato-S,S′)- 10 (4.54) Zinc borate 1000

(454)Zinc bromide 1000

(454)Zinc carbonate 1000

(454)Zinc chloride 1000

(454)Zinc cyanide Zn(CN) 2 10 (4.54) Zinc fluoride 1000

(454)Zinc formate 1000

(454)Zinc hydrosulfite 1000

(454)Zinc nitrate 1000

(454)Zinc phenolsulfonate 5000

(2270)Zinc phosphide Zn 3 P 2 100 (45.4) Zinc silicofluoride 5000

(2270)Zinc sulfate 1000

(454)Ziram 10 (4.54) Zirconium nitrate 5000

(2270)Zirconium potassium fluoride 1000

(454)Zirconium sulfate 5000

(2270)Zirconium tetrachloride 5000

(2270)F001 10 (4.54)

(a)Tetrachloroethylene 100 (45.4)

(b)Trichloroethylene 100 (45.4)

(c)Methylene chloride 1000

(d)1,1,1-Trichloroethane 1000

(e)Carbon tetrachloride 10 (4.54)

(f)Chlorinated fluorocarbons 5000

(2270)F002 10 (4.54)

(a)Tetrachloroethylene 100 (45.4)

(b)Methylene chloride 1000

(c)Trichloroethylene 100 (45.4)

(d)1,1,1-Trichloroethane 1000

(e)Chlorobenzene 100 (45.4)

(f)1,1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane 5000

(g)o-Dichlorobenzene 100 (45.4)

(h)Trichlorofluoromethane 5000

(i)1,1,2-Trichloroethane 100 (45.4) F003 100 (45.4)

(a)Xylene 1000

(b)Acetone 5000

(c)Ethyl acetate 5000

(d)Ethylbenzene 1000

(e)Ethyl ether 100 (45.4)

(f)Methyl isobutyl ketone 5000

(g)n-Butyl alcohol 5000

(h)Cyclohexanone 5000

(i)Methanol 5000

(2270)F004 100 (45.4)

(a)Cresols/Cresylic acid 100 (45.4)

(b)Nitrobenzene 1000

(454)F005 100 (45.4)

(a)Toluene 1000

(b)Methyl ethyl ketone 5000

(c)Carbon disulfide 100 (45.4)

(d)Isobutanol 5000

(e)Pyridine 1000

(454)F006 10 (4.54) F007 10 (4.54) F008 10 (4.54) F009 10 (4.54) F010 10 (4.54) F011 10 (4.54) F012 10 (4.54) F019 10 (4.54) F020 1 (0.454) F021 1 (0.454) F022 1 (0.454) F023 1 (0.454) F024 1 (0.454) F025 1 (0.454) F026 1 (0.454) F027 1 (0.454) F028 1 (0.454) F032 1 (0.454) F034 1 (0.454) F035 1 (0.454) F037 1 (0.454) F038 1 (0.454) F039 1 (0.454) K001 1 (0.454) K002 10 (4.54) K003 10 (4.54) K004 10 (4.54) K005 10 (4.54) K006 10 (4.54) K007 10 (4.54) K008 10 (4.54) K009 10 (4.54) K010 10 (4.54) K011 10 (4.54) K013 10 (4.54) K014 5000

(2270)K015 10 (4.54) K016 1 (0.454) K017 10 (4.54) K018 1 (0.454) K019 1 (0.454) K020 1 (0.454) K021 10 (4.54) K022 1 (0.454) K023 5000

(2270)K024 5000

(2270)K025 10 (4.54) K026 1000

(454)K027 10 (4.54) K028 1 (0.454) K029 1 (0.454) K030 1 (0.454) K031 1 (0.454) K032 10 (4.54) K033 10 (4.54) K034 10 (4.54) K035 1 (0.454) K036 1 (0.454) K037 1 (0.454) K038 10 (4.54) K039 10 (4.54) K040 10 (4.54) K041 1 (0.454) K042 10 (4.54) K043 10 (4.54) K044 10 (4.54) K045 10 (4.54) K046 10 (4.54) K047 10 (4.54) K048 10 (4.54) K049 10 (4.54) K050 10 (4.54) K051 10 (4.54) K052 10 (4.54) K060 1 (0.454) K061 10 (4.54) K062 10 (4.54) K064 10 (4.54) K065 10 (4.54) K066 10 (4.54) K069 10 (4.54) K071 1 (0.454) K073 10 (4.54) K083 100 (45.4) K084 1 (0.454) K085 10 (4.54) K086 10 (4.54) K087 100 (45.4) K088 10 (4.54) K090 10 (4.54) K091 10 (4.54) K093 5000

(2270)K094 5000

(2270)K095 100 (45.4) K096 100 (45.4) K097 1 (0.454) K098 1 (0.454) K099 10 (4.54) K100 10 (4.54) K101 1 (0.454) K102 1 (0.454) K103 100 (45.4) K104 10 (4.54) K105 10 (4.54) K106 1 (0.454) K107 10 (4.54) K108 10 (4.54) K109 10 (4.54) K110 10 (4.54) K111 10 (4.54) K112 10 (4.54) K113 10 (4.54) K114 10 (4.54) K115 10 (4.54) K116 10 (4.54) K117 1 (0.454) K118 1 (0.454) K123 10 (4.54) K124 10 (4.54) K125 10 (4.54) K126 10 (4.54) K131 100 (45.4) K132 1000

(454)K136 1 (0.454) K141 1 (0.454) K142 1 (0.454) K143 1 (0.454) K144 1 (0.454) K145 1 (0.454) K147 1 (0.454) K148 1 (0.454) K149 10 (4.54) K150 10 (4.54) K151 10 (4.54) K156 10 (4.54) K157 10 (4.54) K158 10 (4.54) K159 10 (4.54) K161 1 (0.454) K169 10 (4.54) K170 1 (0.454) K171 1 (0.454) K172 1 (0.454) K174 1 (0.454) K175 1 (0.454) K176 1 (0.454) K177 5000

(2270)K178 1000

(454)K181 1 (0.454) ¢ The RQ for these hazardous substances is limited to those pieces of the metal having a diameter smaller than 100 micrometers (0.004 inches). ¢¢ The RQ for asbestos is limited to friable forms only. @ Indicates that the name was added by PHMSA because

(1)the name is a synonym for a specific hazardous substance and

(2)the name appears in the Hazardous Materials Table as a proper shipping name. # To provide consistency with EPA regulations, two entries with different CAS numbers are provided. Refer to the EPA Table 302.4—List of Hazardous Substances and Reportable Quantities for an explanation of the two entries. Issued in Washington, DC on December 27, 2007 under authority delegated in 49 CFR part 1. Stacey L. Gerard, Acting Deputy Administrator, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. [FR Doc. 07-6297 Filed 1-4-08; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 31

Traces to 31 documents

CFR

U.S. Code