[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 192 (Tuesday, October 4, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68412-68413]
[FR Doc No: 2016-23982]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OECA-2007-0468; ER-FRL-9029-4]

Proposed Information Collection Request; Comment Request; Final
Rule at 40 CFR Part 8: Environmental Impact Assessment of
Nongovernmental Activities in Antarctica (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency is planning to submit an
information collection request (ICR), ``Final Rule at 40 CFR part 8:
Environmental Impact Assessment of Nongovernmental Activities in
Antarctica'' (EPA ICR No. 1808.07, OMB Control No. 2020-0007) to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in
accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
Before doing so, EPA is soliciting public comments on specific aspects
of the proposed information collection as described below. This is a
proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through
March 31, 2017. An Agency 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.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before Monday, December 5,
2016.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OECA-
2007-0468 online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method) or by
mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code
28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julie Roemele, Office of Federal
Activities, Mail Code 2252A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202)
564-5632; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Supporting documents which explain in detail the information that
the EPA will be collecting are available in the public docket for this
ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in
person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution
Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is
202-566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket,
visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA is soliciting
comments and information to enable it to: (i) Evaluate whether the
proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility; (ii) evaluate the accuracy of
the Agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of
information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions
used; (iii) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (iv) minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who are to respond, including
through the use of appropriate automated electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection techniques or other forms of information
technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. EPA
will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as appropriate.
The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for review and
approval. At that time, EPA will issue another Federal Register notice
to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to
submit additional comments to OMB.
    Abstract: The Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) regulations
at 40 CFR part 8, Environmental Impact Assessment of Nongovernmental
Activities in Antarctica (Rule), were promulgated pursuant to the
Antarctic Science, Tourism, and Conservation Act of 1996 (Act), 16
U.S.C. 2401 et seq., as amended, 16 U.S.C. 2403a, which implements the
Protocol on Environmental Protection (Protocol) to the Antarctic Treaty
of 1959 (Treaty). The Rule provides for assessment of the environmental
impacts of nongovernmental activities in Antarctica, including tourism,
for which the United States is required to give advance notice under
Paragraph 5 of Article VII of the Treaty, and for coordination of the
review of information regarding environmental impact assessments
received from other Parties under the Protocol. The requirements of the
Rule apply to operators of nongovernmental expeditions organized or
proceeding from the territory of the United States to Antarctica and
include commercial and non-commercial expeditions. Expeditions may
include ship-based tours; yacht, skiing or mountaineering expeditions;
privately funded research expeditions; and other nongovernmental
activities. The Rule does not apply to individual U.S. citizens or
groups of citizens planning travel to Antarctica on an expedition for
which they are not acting as an operator. (Operators, for example,
typically acquire use of vessels or aircraft, hire expedition staff,
plan itineraries, and undertake other organizational responsibilities.)
The rule provides nongovernmental operators with the specific
requirements they need to meet in order to comply with the requirements
of Article 8 and Annex I to the Protocol. The provisions of the Rule
are intended to ensure that potential environmental effects of
nongovernmental activities undertaken in Antarctica are appropriately
identified and considered by the operator during the planning process
and that to the extent practicable appropriate environmental safeguards
which would mitigate or prevent adverse impacts on the Antarctic
environment are identified by the operator.
    Environmental Documentation. Persons subject to the Rule must
prepare environmental documentation to support the operator's
determination regarding the level of environmental impact of the
proposed expedition.

Environmental documentation includes a Preliminary Environmental Review
Memorandum (PERM), an Initial Environmental Evaluation (IEE), or a
Comprehensive Environmental Evaluation (CEE). The environmental
document is submitted to the Office of Federal Activities (OFA). If the
operator determines that an expedition may have: (1) Less than a minor
or transitory impact, a PERM needs to be submitted no later than 180
days before the proposed departure to Antarctica; (2) no more than
minor or transitory impacts, an IEE needs to be submitted no later than
90 days before the proposed departure; or (3) more than minor or
transitory impacts, a CEE needs to be submitted. Operators who
anticipate such activities are encouraged to consult with EPA as soon
as possible regarding the date for submittal of the CEE. (Article 3(4),
of Annex I of the Protocol requires that draft CEEs be distributed to
all Parties and the Committee for Environmental Protection 120 days in
advance of the next Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting (ATCM) at
which the CEE may be addressed.)
    The Protocol and the Rule also require an operator to employ
procedures to assess and provide a regular and verifiable record of the
actual impacts of an activity which proceeds on the basis of an IEE or
CEE. The record developed through these measures needs to be designed
to: (a) Enable assessments to be made of the extent to which
environmental impacts of nongovernmental expeditions are consistent
with the Protocol; and (b) provide information useful for minimizing
and mitigating those impacts and, where appropriate, on the need for
suspension, cancellation, or modification of the activity. Moreover, an
operator needs to monitor key environmental indicators for an activity
proceeding on the basis of a CEE. An operator may also need to carry
out monitoring in order to assess and verify the impact of an activity
for which an IEE would be prepared. For activities that require an IEE,
an operator should be able to use procedures currently being
voluntarily utilized by operators to provide the required information.
Should an activity require a CEE, the operator should consult with EPA
to: (a) Identify the monitoring regime appropriate to that activity,
and (b) determine whether and how the operator might utilize relevant
monitoring data collected by the U.S. Antarctic Program. The Office of
Federal Activities (OFA) would consult with the National Science
Foundation and other interested Federal agencies regarding the
monitoring regime.
    In cases of emergency related to the safety of human life or of
ships, aircraft, equipment and facilities of high value, or the
protection of the environment which would require an activity to be
undertaken without completion of the documentation procedures set out
in the Rule, the operator would need to notify the Department of State
within 15 days of any activities which would have otherwise required
preparation of a CEE, and provide a full explanation of the activities
carried out within 45 days of those activities. (During the time the
Interim Final and Final Rules have been in effect, there were no
emergencies requiring notification by U.S. operators. An Interim Final
Rule was in effect from April 30, 1997, until replaced on December 6,
2001, by the Final Rule).
    Environmental documents (e.g., PERM, IEE, CEE) are submitted to
OFA. Environmental documents are reviewed by OFA, in consultation with
the National Science Foundation and other interested Federal agencies,
and also made available to other Parties and the public as required
under the Protocol or otherwise requested. OFA notifies the public of
document availability via the World Wide Web at: https://www.epa.gov/international-cooperation/receipt-environmental-impact-assessments-eias-regarding-nongovernmental.
    The types of nongovernmental activities currently being carried out
(e.g., ship-based tours, land-based tours, flights, and privately
funded research expeditions) are typically unlikely to have impacts
that are more than minor or transitory, thus an IEE is the typical
level of environmental documentation submitted. For the 1997-1998
through 2015-2016 austral summer seasons during the time the Rule has
been in effect, all respondents submitted IEEs with the exception of
three PERMs. Paperwork reduction provisions in the Rule that are used
by the operators include: (a) Incorporation of material in the
environmental document by referring to it in the IEE, (b) inclusion of
all proposed expeditions by one operator within one IEE; (c) use of one
IEE to address expeditions being carried out by more than one operator;
and (d) use of multi-year environmental documentation to address
proposed expeditions for a period of up to five consecutive austral
summer seasons.
    Coordination of Review of Information Received from Other Parties
to the Treaty. The Rule also provides for the coordination of review of
information received from other Parties and the public availability of
that information including: (1) A description of national procedures
for considering the environmental impacts of proposed activities; (2)
an annual list of any IEEs and any decisions taken in consequence
thereof; (3) significant information obtained and any action taken in
consequence thereof with regard to monitoring from IEEs to CEEs; and
(4) information in a final CEE. This provision fulfills the United
States' obligation to meet the requirements of Article 6 of Annex I to
the Protocol. The Department of State is responsible for coordination
of these reviews of drafts with interested Federal agencies, and for
public availability of documents and information. This portion of the
Rule does not impose paperwork requirements on any nongovernmental
person subject to U.S. regulation.
    Form Numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: Entities potentially affected by
this action are all nongovernmental operators with activities in
Antarctica, including tour operators, for which the United States is
required to give advance notice under paragraph 5 of Article VII of the
Antarctic Treaty of 1959; this includes all nongovernmental expeditions
to and within Antarctica organized in or proceeding from the territory
of the United States.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 8).
    Estimated number of respondents: 19.
    Frequency of response: Annual.
    Total estimated burden: 1,273 hours.
    Total estimated cost: $103,891 includes $3,353 annualized capital
or operation & maintenance costs.
    Changes in Estimates: There is an increase of 19 hours in the total
estimated respondent burden compared with the ICR currently approved by
OMB. This increase is the result of a change to the level of
environmental documentation EPA anticipates the operators will submit
as well as an anticipated increase in the number of operators
submitting documentation.

    Dated: September 29, 2016.
Karin Leff,
Acting Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal
Activities.
[FR Doc. 2016-23982 Filed 10-3-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 141 (Monday, July 25, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44111-44113]
[FR Doc No: 2022-15844]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP22-487-000]

Town of Colorado City, Arizona; Notice of Application and
Establishing Intervention Deadline

    Take notice that on July 8, 2022, the Town of Colorado City,
Arizona (Colorado City), 25 S. Central Street, PO Box 70, Colorado,
Arizona 86021 filed in Docket No. CP22-487-000 an application under
section 7(f) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and Part 157 of the
Commission's regulations requesting a service area determination within
which Colorado City may, without further Commission authorization,
utilize its natural gas distribution facilities to receive delivery of
natural gas supply from Utah for redelivery to and consumption by its
distribution customers in Colorado City.
    Colorado City seeks a service area determination that encompasses
its entire Arizona service, including the pipeline crossing the
Arizona/Utah border. Colorado City will receive gas from Hildale City,
a local distribution company (LDC) in Utah, into a 4-inch-diameter
distribution pipeline at an interconnection on the Arizona/Utah border.
Colorado City will redeliver the gas over its distribution system for
use

by its customers in Arizona. Colorado City also requests: (1) a finding
that it continues to qualify as a LDC for purposes of section 311 of
the Natural Gas Policy Act (NGPA); and (2) a waiver of the Commission's
accounting and reporting requirements and other regulatory requirements
typically applicable to natural gas companies under the NGA and NGPA,
all as more fully set forth in the request which is on file with the
Commission and open to public inspection.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://ferc.gov) using the
``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency
concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the
President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission at [email protected] or call toll-free,
(886) 208-3676 or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any questions regarding this filing may be directed to: Vance W.
Barlow, Colorado City Gas Department, Town of Colorado City, 25 South
Central Street, PO Box 70, Colorado City, Arizona 86021, by phone at
(928) 875-9160 or by email at [email protected].
    Pursuant to Section 157.9 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and
Procedure,\1\ within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will
either: complete its environmental review and place it into the
Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule
for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of
the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or environmental
assessment (EA) for this proposal. The filing of an EA in the
Commission's public record for this proceeding or the issuance of a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review will serve to notify
federal and state agencies of the timing for the completion of all
necessary reviews, and the subsequent need to complete all federal
authorizations within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission
staff's FEIS or EA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 18 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) 157.9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Public Participation

    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project: you can file comments on the project, and you can file a
motion to intervene in the proceeding. There is no fee or cost for
filing comments or intervening. The deadline for filing a motion to
intervene is 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on August 9, 2022.

Comments

    Any person wishing to comment on the project may do so. Comments
may include statements of support or objections to the project as a
whole or specific aspects of the project. The more specific your
comments, the more useful they will be. To ensure that your comments
are timely and properly recorded, please submit your comments on or
before August 9, 2022.
    There are three methods you can use to submit your comments to the
Commission. In all instances, please reference the Project docket
number CP22-487-000 in your submission.
    (1) You may file your comments electronically by using the eComment
feature, which is located on the Commission's website at www.ferc.gov
under the link to Documents and Filings. Using eComment is an easy
method for interested persons to submit brief, text-only comments on a
project;
    (2) You may file your comments electronically by using the eFiling
feature, which is located on the Commission's website (www.ferc.gov)
under the link to Documents and Filings. With eFiling, you can provide
comments in a variety of formats by attaching them as a file with your
submission. New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking
on ``eRegister.'' You will be asked to select the type of filing you
are making; first select ``General'' and then select ``Comment on a
Filing''; or
    (3) You can file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to
the following address below.\2\ Your written comments must reference
the Project docket number (CP22-487-000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Hand delivered submissions in docketed proceedings should be
delivered to Health and Human Services, 12225 Wilkins Avenue,
Rockville, Maryland 20852.

Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426

    The Commission encourages electronic filing of comments (options 1
and 2 above) and has eFiling staff available to assist you at (202)
502-8258 or [email protected]
    Persons who comment on the environmental review of this project
will be placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, and will
receive notification when the environmental documents (EA or EIS) are
issued for this project and will be notified of meetings associated
with the Commission's environmental review process.
    The Commission considers all comments received about the project in
determining the appropriate action to be taken. However, the filing of
a comment alone will not serve to make the filer a party to the
proceeding. To become a party, you must intervene in the proceeding.
For instructions on how to intervene, see below.

Interventions

    Any person, which includes individuals, organizations, businesses,
municipalities, and other entities,\3\ has the option to file a motion
to intervene in this proceeding. Only intervenors have the right to
request rehearing of Commission orders issued in this proceeding and to
subsequently challenge the Commission's orders in the U.S. Circuit
Courts of Appeal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 18 CFR 385.102(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To intervene, you must submit a motion to intervene to the
Commission in accordance with Rule 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure \4\ and the regulations under the NGA \5\ by the
intervention deadline for the project, which is August 9, 2022. As
described further in Rule 214, your motion to intervene must state, to
the extent known, your position regarding the proceeding, as well as
the your interest in the proceeding. [For an individual, this could
include your status as a landowner, ratepayer, resident of an impacted
community, or recreationist. You do not need to have property directly
impacted by the project in order to intervene.] For more information
about motions to intervene, refer to the FERC website at https://www.ferc.gov/resources/guides/how-to/intervene.asp.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 18 CFR 385.214.
    \5\ 18 CFR 157.10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There are two ways to submit your motion to intervene. In both
instances, please reference the Project docket number CP22-487-000 in
your submission.
    (1) You may file your motion to intervene by using the Commission's
eFiling feature, which is located on the Commission's website
(www.ferc.gov) under the link to Documents and

Filings. New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking on
``eRegister.'' You will be asked to select the type of filing you are
making; first select ``General'' and then select ``Intervention.'' The
eFiling feature includes a document-less intervention option; for more
information, visit https://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/document-less-intervention.pdf.; or
    (2) You can file a paper copy of your motion to intervene, along
with three copies, by mailing the documents to the address below.\6\
Your motion to intervene must reference the Project docket number CP22-
487-000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Hand delivered submissions in docketed proceedings should be
delivered to Health and Human Services, 12225 Wilkins Avenue,
Rockville, Maryland 20852.

Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426

    The Commission encourages electronic filing of motions to intervene
(option 1 above) and has eFiling staff available to assist you at (202)
502-8258 or [email protected]
    Protests and motions to intervene must be served on the applicant
either by mail or email (with a link to the document) at: Vance W.
Barlow, Colorado City Gas Department, Town of Colorado City, 25 South
Central Street, PO Box 70, Colorado City, Arizona 86021 or by email at
[email protected]. Any subsequent submissions by an intervenor must be
served on the applicant and all other parties to the proceeding.
Contact information for parties can be downloaded from the service list
at the eService link on FERC Online. Service can be via email with a
link to the document.
    All timely, unopposed \7\ motions to intervene are automatically
granted by operation of Rule 214(c)(1).\8\ Motions to intervene that
are filed after the intervention deadline are untimely, and may be
denied. Any late-filed motion to intervene must show good cause for
being late and must explain why the time limitation should be waived
and provide justification by reference to factors set forth in Rule
214(d) of the Commission's Rules and Regulations.\9\ A person obtaining
party status will be placed on the service list maintained by the
Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies (paper or
electronic) of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other
parties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The applicant has 15 days from the submittal of a motion to
intervene to file a written objection to the intervention.
    \8\ 18 CFR 385.214(c)(1).
    \9\ 18 CFR 385.214(b)(3) and (d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tracking the Proceeding

    Throughout the proceeding, additional information about the project
will be available from the Commission's Office of External Affairs, at
(866) 208-FERC, or on the FERC website at www.ferc.gov using the
``eLibrary'' link as described above. The eLibrary link also provides
access to the texts of all formal documents issued by the Commission,
such as orders, notices, and rulemakings.
    In addition, the Commission offers a free service called
eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances
and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time
you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with
notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to
the documents. For more information and to register, go to
www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp.
    Intervention Deadline: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on August 9, 2022.

    Dated: July 19, 2022.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-15844 Filed 7-22-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 153 (Friday, August 8, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 46436]
[FR Doc No: 2014-18819]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-R09-OAR-2014-0485; FRL-9914-85-Region 9]

Adequacy Status of Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets in Submitted
8-Hour Ozone Attainment Plan for Sacramento Metro; California

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Notice of adequacy.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is notifying the
public that the Agency has found that the motor vehicle emissions
budgets (MVEBs) for ozone for the years 2014, 2017, and 2018 in the
Sacramento Regional 8-Hour Ozone Attainment Plan and Reasonable Further
Progress Plan, 2013 SIP Revisions (``2013 Sacramento Ozone Plan'') are
adequate for transportation conformity purposes. The 2013 Sacramento
Ozone Plan was submitted to EPA on December 31, 2013 by the California
Air Resources Board (CARB) as a revision to the California State
Implementation Plan (SIP) and includes an attainment demonstration for
the 1997 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard. Upon the
effective date of this notice of adequacy, the Sacramento Area Council
of Governments and the U.S. Department of Transportation must use the
MVEBs for future conformity determinations.

DATES: This finding is effective August 25, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Ungvarsky, U.S. EPA, Region IX,
Air Division AIR-2, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901,
(415) 972-3963 or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.
    Today's notice is simply an announcement of a finding that we have
already made. EPA sent a letter to CARB on July 25, 2014 stating that
the MVEBs for oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) in the submitted 2013 Sacramento Ozone Plan for the
years of 2014, 2017, and 2018 are adequate. The adequate MVEBs are
provided in the following table:

                        Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets in the 2013 Sacramento Ozone Plan
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     NOX                                    VOC
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Budget year                 2014         2017         2018         2014         2017         2018
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tons per average summer weekday...           49           39           37           23           18           17
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Receipt of the MVEBs in the 2013 Sacramento Ozone Plan was
announced on EPA's transportation conformity Web site on May 20, 2014.
We received no comments in response to the adequacy review posting. The
finding is available at EPA's transportation conformity Web site:
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/adequacy.htm.
    Transportation conformity is required by Clean Air Act section
176(c). EPA's conformity rule requires that transportation plans,
transportation improvement programs, and projects conform to SIPs and
establishes the criteria and procedures for determining whether or not
they do conform. Conformity to a SIP means that transportation
activities will not produce new air quality violations, worsen existing
violations, or delay timely attainment of the national ambient air
quality standards.
    The criteria by which we determine whether a SIP's MVEBs are
adequate for conformity purposes are outlined in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)
which was promulgated in our August 15, 1997 final rule (62 FR 43780,
43781-43783). We have further described our process for determining the
adequacy of submitted SIP budgets in our July 1, 2004 final rule (69 FR
40004, 40038), and we used the information in these resources in making
our adequacy determination. Please note that an adequacy review is
separate from EPA's completeness review, and should not be used to
prejudge EPA's ultimate approval action for the SIP. Even if we find a
budget adequate, the SIP could later be disapproved.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: July 25, 2014.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2014-18819 Filed 8-7-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


283 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 2 / Friday, January 3, 2003 / Rules and Regulations required information to the U. S. Senate, the U. S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of this final rule in the Federal Register. This final rule is not a `` major rule'' as defined by 5 U. S. C. 804( 2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: December 20, 2002. Debra Edwards, Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180   [ AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 21 U. S. C. 321( q), 346( a) and 371.

2. Section 180.368 is amended by designating the existing paragraph ( b) as paragraph ( b)( 1) and adding a new paragraph ( b)( 2) to read as follows:

§ 180.368 Metolachlor; tolerances for residues.

* * * * * ( b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. ( 1) * * * ( 2) Time limited tolerances are established for the combined residues ( free and bound) of the herbicide smetolachlor [( S) 2 chloro N( 2 ethyl 6 methylphenyl) N( 2 methoxy 1 methylethyl) acetamide], its Renantiomer and its metabolites, determined as the derivatives, 2[( 2 ethyl 6 methylphenyl) amino] 1 propanol and 4( 2 ethyl 6 methylphenyl) 2 hydroxy 5 methyl 3 morpholinone, each expressed as the parent compound in connection with the use of the pesticide under section 18 emergency exemptions granted by EPA. The tolerance is specified in the following table. The tolerances will expire and are revoked on the dates specified in the following table.

Commodity Parts per million Expiration/ Revocation Date Sweet potato 0.2 12/ 31/ 04 * * * * *

[ FR Doc. 03   5 Filed 1   2   03; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 180 [ OPP   2002   0335; FRL   7285   2]

Lambda cyhalothrin; Pesticide Tolerances for Emergency Exemptions AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes time limited tolerances for combined residues of the pyrethroid lambdacyhalothrin 1: 1 mixture of ( S) a cyano 3 phenoxybenzyl( Z)( 1R, 3R) 3( 2 chloro 3,3,3 trifluoroprop 1 enyl) 2,2 dimethylcyclopropanecarboxylate and ( R) a cyano 3 phenoxybenzyl( Z) ( 1S, 3S) 3( 2 chloro 3,3,3 trifluoroprop 1 enyl) 2,2 dimethylcyclopropanecarboxylate and its epimer expressed as epimer of lambda cyhalothrin, a 1: 1 mixture of ( S) a cyano 3 phenoxybenzyl( Z) ( 1S, 3S)  3( 2 chloro 3,3,3 trifluoroprop 1 enyl) 2,2 dimethylcyclopropanecarboxylate and ( R) a cyano 3 phenoxybenzyl( Z) ( 1R, 3R) 3( 2 chloro 3,3,3 trifluoroprop 1 enyl) 2,2 dimethylcyclopropanecarboxylate in or on wild rice, grass forage, and grass hay. This action is in response to EPA's granting of an emergency exemption under section 18 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act ( FIFRA) authorizing use of the pesticide on wild rice and pasture grass. This regulation establishes maximum permissible levels for residues of lambda cyhalothrin and its epimer in these food commodities. The tolerances will expire and are revoked on December 31, 2005. DATES: This regulation is effective January 3, 2003. Objections and requests for hearings, identified by docket ID number OPP   2002   0335, must be received on or before March 4, 2003. ADDRESSES: Written objections and hearing requests may be submitted electronically, by mail, or through hand delivery/ courier. Follow the detailed instructions as provided in Unit VII. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew Ertman, Registration Division ( 7505C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460   0001; telephone number: ( 703) 308   9367; e mail address: sec 18 mailbox@ epa. gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. General Information A. Does this Action Apply to Me? You may be potentially affected by this action if you are a Federal or State government agency involved in administration of environmental quality programs ( i. e., Departments of Agriculture, Environment, etc). Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:   Federal or State Government Entity, ( NAICS 9241), i. e., Departments of Agriculture, Environment, etc. This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be affected. The North American Industrial Classification System ( NAICS) codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. How Can I Get Copies of this Document and Other Related Information? 1. Docket. EPA has established an official public docket for this action under docket identification ( ID) number OPP   2002   0335. The official public docket consists of the documents specifically referenced in this action, any public comments received, and other information related to this action. Although a part of the official docket, the public docket does not include Confidential Business Information ( CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. The official public docket is the collection of materials that is available for public viewing at the Public Information and Records Integrity Branch ( PIRIB), Rm. 119, Crystal Mall # 2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA. This docket facility is open from 8: 30 a. m. to 4 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The docket telephone number is ( 703) 305   5805. 2. Electronic access. You may access this Federal Register document electronically through the EPA Internet under the`` Federal Register'' listings at http:// www. epa. gov/ fedrgstr/. A frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR part 180 is available at http:// www. access. gpo. gov/ nara/ cfr/ cfrhtml__ 00/ Title__ 40/ 40cfr180_(_ 00. html, a beta site currently under development. An electronic version of the public docket is available through EPA's VerDate Dec< 13> 2002 14: 59 Jan 02, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 03JAR1. SGM 03JAR1 284 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 2 / Friday, January 3, 2003 / Rules and Regulations electronic public docket and comment system, EPA Dockets. You may use EPA Dockets at http:// www. epa. gov/ edocket/ to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the official public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Although not all docket materials may be available electronically, you may still access any of the publicly available docket materials through the docket facility identified in Unit I. B. 1. Once in the system, select `` search,'' then key in the appropriate docket ID number.

II. Background and Statutory Findings EPA, on its own initiative, in accordance with sections 408( e) and 408 ( l)( 6) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act ( FFDCA), 21 U. S. C. 346a, is establishing tolerances for combined residues of the insecticide lambdacyhalothrin and its epimer, in or on wild rice at 1.0 parts per million ( ppm), grass forage at 5.0 ppm and grass hay at 6.0 ppm. These tolerances will expire and are revoked on December 31, 2005. EPA will publish a document in the Federal Register to remove the revoked tolerances from the Code of Federal Regulations. Section 408( l)( 6) of the FFDCA requires EPA to establish a time limited tolerance or exemption from the requirement for a tolerance for pesticide chemical residues in food that will result from the use of a pesticide under an emergency exemption granted by EPA under section 18 of FIFRA. Such tolerances can be established without providing notice or period for public comment. EPA does not intend for its actions on section 18 related tolerances to set binding precedents for the application of section 408 of the FFDCA and the new safety standard to other tolerances and exemptions. Section 408( e) of the FFDCA allows EPA to establish a tolerance or an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance on its own initiative, i. e., without having received any petition from an outside party. Section 408( b)( 2)( A)( i) of the FFDCA allows EPA to establish a tolerance ( the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is `` safe.'' Section 408( b)( 2)( A)( ii) of the FFDCA defines `` safe'' to mean that `` there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure. Section 408( b)( 2)( C) of the FFDCA requires EPA to give special consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to `` ensure that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue. . . .'' Section 18 of the FIFRA authorizes EPA to exempt any Federal or State agency from any provision of FIFRA, if EPA determines that `` emergency conditions exist which require such exemption.'' This provision was not amended by the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 ( FQPA). EPA has established regulations governing such emergency exemptions in 40 CFR part 166.

III. Emergency Exemption for Lambda Cyhalothrin on Wild Rice and Pasture Grass and FFDCA Tolerances The State of Minnesota requested the use of lambda cyhalothrin on wild rice to control unusually high populations of riceworms because the registered alternatives were ineffective. The State of New York requested the use of lambda cyhalothrin to control alfalfa weevil ( Hypera postica), Armyworms ( Spodoptera spp.) and Potato leafhopper ( Empoasca fabae) on alfalfa/ clover/ grass mixed stands. The use of insecticides is the only practical means of controlling the three major pests that infest alfalfa/ clover/ grass mixed stands and there are no pesticides registered to control insect pests in these stands of mixed of alfalfa/ clover/ grass. Experts estimate a 35% yield loss if these mixed stands are not protected. EPA has authorized under section 18 of FIFRA the use of lambdacyhalothrin on wild rice for control of rice borers in Minnesota and pasture grass for control of alfalfa weevil, armyworms and potato leafhoppers on alfalfa/ clover/ grass mixed stands in New York. After having reviewed the submissions, EPA concurs that emergency conditions exist for these States. As part of its assessment of this emergency exemption, EPA assessed the potential risks presented by residues of lambda cyhalothrin in or on wild rice and grass forage and grass hay. In doing so, EPA considered the safety standard in section 408( b)( 2) of the FFDCA, and EPA decided that the necessary tolerances under section 408( l)( 6) of the FFDCA would be consistent with the safety standard and with section 18 of FIFRA. Consistent with the need to move quickly on the emergency exemption in order to address an urgent non routine situation and to ensure that the resulting food is safe and lawful, EPA is issuing these tolerances without notice and opportunity for public comment as provided in section 408( l)( 6) of the FFDCA. Although these tolerances will expire and are revoked on December 31, 2005, under section 408( l)( 5) of the FFDCA, residues of the pesticide not in excess of the amounts specified in the tolerances remaining in or on wild rice, grass forage and grass hay after that date will not be unlawful, provided the pesticide is applied in a manner that was lawful under FIFRA, and the residues do not exceed a level that was authorized by these tolerances at the time of that application. EPA will take action to revoke these tolerances earlier if any experience with, scientific data on, or other relevant information on this pesticide indicate that the residues are not safe. Because these tolerances are being approved under emergency conditions, EPA has not made any decisions about whether lambda cyhalothrin meets EPA's registration requirements for use on wild rice and pasture grass or whether permanent tolerances for these uses would be appropriate. Under these circumstances, EPA does not believe that these tolerances serve as a basis for registration of lambda cyhalothrin by a State for special local needs under section 24( c) of FIFRA. Nor do these tolerances serve as the basis for any States other than Minnesota and New York to use this pesticide on these crops under section 18 of FIFRA without following all provisions of EPA's regulations implementing section 18 of FIFRA as identified in 40 CFR part 166. For additional information regarding the emergency exemption for lambdacyhalothrin contact the Agency's Registration Division at the address provided under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

IV. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety EPA performs a number of analyses to determine the risks from aggregate exposure to pesticide residues. For further discussion of the regulatory requirements of section 408 of the FFDCA and a complete description of the risk assessment process, see the final rule on Bifenthrin Pesticide Tolerances ( 62 FR 62961, November 26, 1997) ( FRL   5754   7) . Consistent with section 408( b)( 2)( D) of the FFDCA , EPA has reviewed the available scientific data and other relevant information in support of this action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of lambda cyhalothrin and to make a determination on aggregate exposure, consistent with section VerDate Dec< 13> 2002 14: 59 Jan 02, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 03JAR1. SGM 03JAR1 285 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 2 / Friday, January 3, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 408( b)( 2) of the FFDCA, for time limited tolerances for the combined residues of lambda cyhalothrin and its epimer in or on wild rice at 1.0 ppm, grass forage at 5.0 ppm and grass hay at 6.0 ppm. EPA's assessment of the dietary exposures and risks associated with establishing the tolerances follows.

A. Toxicological Endpoints The dose at which no adverse effects are observed ( the NOAEL) from the toxicology study identified as appropriate for use in risk assessment is used to estimate the toxicological endpoint. However, the lowest dose at which adverse effects of concern are identified ( the LOAEL) is sometimes used for risk assessment if no NOAEL was achieved in the toxicology study selected. An uncertainty factor ( UF) is applied to reflect uncertainties inherent in the extrapolation from laboratory animal data to humans and in the variations in sensitivity among members of the human population as well as other unknowns. An UF of 100 is routinely used, 10X to account for interspecies differences and 10X for intra species differences. For dietary risk assessment ( other than cancer) the Agency uses the UF to calculate an acute or chronic reference dose ( acute RfD or chronic RfD) where the RfD is equal to the NOAEL divided by the appropriate UF ( RfD = NOAEL/ UF). Where an additional safety factor is retained due to concerns unique to the FQPA, this additional factor is applied to the RfD by dividing the RfD by such additional factor. The acute or chronic Population Adjusted Dose ( aPAD or cPAD) is a modification of the RfD to accommodate this type of FQPA/ SF. For non dietary risk assessments ( other than cancer) the UF is used to determine the level of concern ( LOC). For example, when 100 is the appropriate UF ( 10X to account for interspecies differences and 10X for intraspecies differences) the LOC is 100. To estimate risk, a ratio of the NOAEL to exposures ( margin of exposure ( MOE) = NOAEL/ exposure) is calculated and compared to the LOC. The linear default risk methodology ( Q*) is the primary method currently used by the Agency to quantify carcinogenic risk. The Q* approach assumes that any amount of exposure will lead to some degree of cancer risk. A Q* is calculated and used to estimate risk which represents a probability of occurrence of additional cancer cases ( e. g., risk is expressed as 1 x10 6 or one in a million). Under certain specific circumstances, MOE calculations will be used for the carcinogenic risk assessment. In this non linear approach, a `` point of departure'' is identified below which carcinogenic effects are not expected. The point of departure is typically a NOAEL based on an endpoint related to cancer effects though it may be a different value derived from the dose response curve. To estimate risk, a ratio of the point of departure to exposure ( MOEcancer = point of departure/ exposures) is calculated. A summary of the toxicological endpoints for lambda cyhalothrin used for human risk assessment is shown in the following Table 1:

TABLE 1.   SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DOSE AND ENDPOINTS FOR LAMBDA CYHALOTHRIN FOR USE IN HUMAN RISK ASSESSMENT Exposure Scenario Dose Used in Risk Assessment, UF FQPA SF* and Level of Concern for Risk Assessment Study and Toxicological Effects Acute Dietary ( General population including infants and children) NOAEL = 0.5 mg/ kg/ day UF = 100 Acute RfD = 0.005 mg/ kg/ day FQPA SF = 1 aPAD = acute RfD/ FQPA SF = 0.005 mg/ kg/ day Chronic oral study in the dog ( lambdacyhalothrin LOAEL = 3.5 mg/ kg/ day based on clinical signs of neurotoxicity ( ataxia) observed from day 2, three to seven hours post dosing.

Chronic Dietary ( All populations) NOAEL = 0.1 mg/ kg/ day UF = 100 Chronic RfD = 0.001 mg/ kg/ day FQPA SF = 1 cPAD = chronic RfD/ FQPA SF = 0.001 mg/ kg/ day Chronic oral study in the dog ( lambdacyhalothrin LOAEL = 0.5 based on gait abnormalities observed in 2 dogs Incidental Oral Short and Intermediate Term ( 1   30 Days and 1   6 Months) Residential Only NOAEL = 0.1 LOC for MOE = 100 ( Residential Chronic oral study in the dog ( lambdacyhalothrin LOAEL = 0.5 based on gait abnormalities observed in 2 dogs Dermal ( All Durations; Short Term ( 1 to 7 days)  Intermediate Term ( 1 week to several months)  Long Term ( several months to lifetime) ( Residential) dermal ( or oral) study NOAEL= 10 mg/ kg/ day LOC for MOE = 100 ( Residential) 21   Day dermal toxicity study in the rat ( lambda cyhalothrin) LOAEL = 50 mg/ kg/ day based on clinical signs of neurotoxicity ( observed from day 2) and decreased body weight and body weight gain Inhalation ( All Durations;  Short Term ( 1 to 7 days)  Intermediate Term ( 1 week to several months)  Long Term ( several months to lifetime) ( Residential) inhalation ( or oral) study NOAEL= 0.3 µ g/ L ( 0.08 mg/ kg/ day) ( inhalation absorption rate = 100%) LOC for MOE = 100 ( Residential) 21   Day inhalation study in rats ( lambdacyhalothrin LOAEL = 3.3 µ g/ L ( 0.90 mg/ kg/ day) based on clinical signs of neurotoxicity, decreased body weight gains, increased incidence of punctuate foci in the cornea, slight reductions in cholesterol in females and slight changes in selected urinalysis parameters.

Cancer ( oral, dermal, inhalation) Classification: Group D chemical ( not classifiable as to human carcinogenicity)

* The reference to the FQPA SF refers to any additional SF retained due to concerns unique to the FQPA.

VerDate Dec< 13> 2002 14: 59 Jan 02, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 03JAR1. SGM 03JAR1 286 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 2 / Friday, January 3, 2003 / Rules and Regulations B. Exposure Assessment 1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. Currently established tolerances for residues of lambdacyhalothrin are listed under 40 CFR 180.438 and include permanent tolerances on plants ranging from 0.01 ppm on soybeans to 6.0 ppm on alfalfa hay, corn forage, and tomato pomace ( dry or wet). Tolerances are also established on animal commodities ranging from 0.01 ppm in eggs, poultry meat, and poultry meat by products ( mbyp) to 5.0 ppm in milk fat ( reflecting 0.2 ppm in whole milk). The Agency has recently established additional tolerances for lambda cyhalothrin on a number of commodities ranging from 0.05 ppm on sugarcane to 3.0 ppm on peanut hay. Risk assessments were conducted by EPA to assess dietary exposures from lambda cyhalothrin in food as follows: i. Acute exposure. Acute dietary risk assessments are performed for a fooduse pesticide if a toxicological study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring as a result of a one day or single exposure. The Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model ( DEEMTM) analysis evaluated the individual food consumption as reported by respondents in the USDA 1989   1992 nationwide Continuing Surveys of Food Intake by Individuals ( CSFII) and accumulated exposure to the chemical for each commodity. A refined Tier 3 probabilistic acute dietary risk assessment was conducted for all currently registered and proposed lambda cyhalothrin food uses. For the acute dietary risk analysis the entire distribution of residue field trial data was used for not blended or partiallyblended commodities; average residue field trial data was used for blended commodities; information from cooking and processing studies were used when available; and market share data for proposed and established tolerances was used. ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting this chronic dietary risk assessment the Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model ( DEEMTM) analysis evaluated the individual food consumption as reported by respondents in the USDA 1989   1992 nationwide Continuing Surveys of Food Intake by Individuals ( CSFII) and accumulated exposure to the chemical for each commodity. For the chronic dietary risk analysis the average of the residue field trials, information from cooking and processing studies, and market share data were used. iii. Cancer. The data base for carcinogenicity is considered complete, and no additional studies are required at this time. The requirements for oncogenicity studies in the rat and the mouse with lambda cyhalothrin have been satisfied by a combined chronic/ oncogenicity study in rats and an oncogenicity study in mice, both conducted with cyhalothrin. Lambdacyhalothrin has been classified as a Group D chemical ( not classifiable as to human carcinogenicity) with regards to its carcinogenic potential. iv. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated ( PCT) information. Section 408( b)( 2)( E) of the FFDCA authorizes EPA to use available data and information on the anticipated residue levels of pesticide residues in food and the actual levels of pesticide chemicals that have been measured in food. If EPA relies on such information, EPA must require that data be provided 5 years after the tolerance is established, modified, or left in effect, demonstrating that the levels in food are not above the levels anticipated. Following the initial data submission, EPA is authorized to require similar data on a time frame it deems appropriate. As required by section 408( b)( 2)( E) of the FFDCA, EPA will issue a data call in for information relating to anticipated residues to be submitted no later than 5 years from the date of issuance of this tolerance. Section 408( b)( 2)( F) of the FFDCA states that the Agency may use data on the actual percent of food treated for assessing chronic dietary risk only if the Agency can make the following findings: Condition 1, that the data used are reliable and provide a valid basis to show what percentage of the food derived from such crop is likely to contain such pesticide residue; Condition 2, that the exposure estimate does not underestimate exposure for any significant subpopulation group; and Condition 3, if data are available on pesticide use and food consumption in a particular area, the exposure estimate does not understate exposure for the population in such area. In addition, the Agency must provide for periodic evaluation of any estimates used. To provide for the periodic evaluation of the estimate of PCT as required by section 408( b)( 2)( F) of the FFDCA, EPA may require registrants to submit data on PCT. A detailed description of how the Agency used PCT information in this assessment can be found in the lambdacyhalothrin pesticide tolerance document published on September 27, 2002 ( 67 FR 60902; FRL   7200   1) in Unit III. C. 1. iv. The Agency believes that the three conditions listed above have been met. With respect to Condition 1, PCT estimates are derived from Federal and private market survey data, which are reliable and have a valid basis. EPA uses a weighted average PCT for chronic dietary exposure estimates. This weighted average PCT figure is derived by averaging State level data for a period of up to 10 years, and weighting for the more robust and recent data. A weighted average of the PCT reasonably represents a person's dietary exposure over a lifetime, and is unlikely to underestimate exposure to an individual because of the fact that pesticide use patterns ( both regionally and nationally) tend to change continuously over time, such that an individual is unlikely to be exposed to more than the average PCT over a lifetime. For acute dietary exposure estimates, EPA uses an estimated maximum PCT. The exposure estimates resulting from this approach reasonably represent the highest levels to which an individual could be exposed, and are unlikely to underestimate an individual's acute dietary exposure. The Agency is reasonably certain that the percentage of the food treated is not likely to be an underestimation. As to Conditions 2 and 3, regional consumption information and consumption information for significant subpopulations is taken into account through EPA's computer based model for evaluating the exposure of significant subpopulations including several regional groups. Use of this consumption information in EPA's risk assessment process ensures that EPA's exposure estimate does not understate exposure for any significant subpopulation group and allows the Agency to be reasonably certain that no regional population is exposed to residue levels higher than those estimated by the Agency. Other than the data available through national food consumption surveys, EPA does not have available information on the regional consumption of food to which lambda cyhalothrin may be applied in a particular area. 2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency lacks sufficient monitoring exposure data to complete a comprehensive dietary exposure analysis and risk assessment for lambdacyhalothrin in drinking water. Because the Agency does not have comprehensive monitoring data, drinking water concentration estimates are made by reliance on simulation or modeling taking into account data on the physical characteristics of lambdacyhalothrin The Agency uses the First Index Reservoir Screening Tool ( FIRST) or the Pesticide Root Zone/ Exposure Analysis Modeling System ( PRZM/ EXAMS) to VerDate Dec< 13> 2002 14: 59 Jan 02, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 03JAR1. SGM 03JAR1 287 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 2 / Friday, January 3, 2003 / Rules and Regulations produce estimates of pesticide concentrations in an index reservoir. The SCI GROW model is used to predict pesticide concentrations in shallow groundwater. For a screening level assessment for surface water EPA will generally use FIRST ( a tier 1 model) before using PRZM/ EXAMS ( a tier 2 model). The FIRST model is a subset of the PRZM/ EXAMS model that uses a specific high end runoff scenario for pesticides. While both FIRST and PRZM/ EXAMS incorporate an index reservoir environment, the PRZM/ EXAMS model includes a percent crop area factor as an adjustment to account for the maximum percent crop coverage within a watershed or drainage basin. None of these models include consideration of the impact processing ( mixing, dilution, or treatment) of raw water for distribution as drinking water would likely have on the removal of pesticides from the source water. The primary use of these models by the Agency at this stage is to provide a coarse screen for sorting out pesticides for which it is highly unlikely that drinking water concentrations would ever exceed human health levels of concern. Since the models used are considered to be screening tools in the risk assessment process, the Agency does not use estimated environmental concentrations ( EECs) from these models to quantify drinking water exposure and risk as a % RfD or % PAD. Instead drinking water levels of comparison ( DWLOCs) are calculated and used as a point of comparison against the model estimates of a pesticide's concentration in water. DWLOCs are theoretical upper limits on a pesticide's concentration in drinking water in light of total aggregate exposure to a pesticide in food, and from residential uses. Since DWLOCs address total aggregate exposure to lambdacyhalothrin they are further discussed in the aggregate risk sections below. The compounds to be regulated in drinking water are lambda cyhalothrin and degradate XV ( parent hydroxylated in the 4 position of the phenoxy ring). Based on the FIRST, PRZM/ EXAMS and SCI GROW models the estimated environmental concentrations ( EECs) of lambda cyhalothrin and its degradate XV for acute exposures are estimated to be 0.62 parts per billion ( ppb) for surface water ( 0.51 ppb lambdacyhalothrin and 0.11 ppb degradate XV) and 0.012 ppb ( 0.006 ppb lambdacyhalothrin and 0.006 ppb degradate XV) for ground water. The EECs for chronic exposures are estimated to be 0.098 ppb for surface water ( 0.09 ppb lambda cyhalothrin and 0.008 ppb degradate XV) and 0.012 ppb for ground water ( 0.006 ppb lambda cyhalothrin and 0.006 ppb degradate XV). 3. From non dietary exposure. The term `` residential exposure'' is used in this document to refer to nonoccupational non dietary exposure ( e. g., for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control, termiticides, and flea and tick control on pets). The residential exposure/ risk assessment evaluated both proposed and existing uses for lambda cyhalothrin. Existing uses on turf, in gardens, on golf courses, and for structural pest control were qualitatively assessed, but a quantitative calculation was only completed for postapplication exposure on treated turf because this scenario is expected to have the highest associated exposures. This screening level tool is protective for all residential exposures, even the handler scenarios, because the dose levels for children playing on treated lawns are thought to exceed those expected for all other scenarios. For postapplication exposure, all residential MOEs were well above the Agency target MOE of 100 for the inhalation, dermal, and oral routes and therefore do not exceed EPA's level of concern ( range 700 to 14,700). Additionally, when total MOEs were aggregated, MOEs were still not of concern ( MOEs for children = 500 and for adults = 3,000). 4. Cumulative exposure to substances with a common mechanism of toxicity. Section 408( b)( 2)( D)( v) of the FFDCA requires that, when considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the Agency consider `` available information'' concerning the cumulative effects of a particular pesticide's residues and `` other substances that have a common mechanism of toxicity.'' EPA does not have, at this time, available data to determine whether lambda cyhalothrin has a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances or how to include this pesticide in a cumulative risk assessment. Unlike other pesticides for which EPA has followed a cumulative risk approach based on a common mechanism of toxicity, lambdacyhalothrin does not appear to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has not assumed that lambda cyhalothrin has a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances. For information regarding EPA's efforts to determine which chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to evaluate the cumulative effects of such chemicals, see the final rule for Bifenthrin Pesticide Tolerances ( 62 FR 62961, November 26, 1997).

C. Safety Factor for Infants and Children 1. In general. Section 408 of the FFDCA provides that EPA shall apply an additional tenfold margin of safety for infants and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the data base on toxicity and exposure unless EPA determines that a different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. Margins of safety are incorporated into EPA risk assessments either directly through use of a MOE analysis or through using uncertainty ( safety) factors in calculating a dose level that poses no appreciable risk to humans. 2. Developmental toxicity studies. In a developmental toxicity study in rats, the maternal NOAEL was 10 mg/ kg/ day and the LOAEL was 15 mg/ kg/ day based on uncoordiniated limbs, reduced body weight gain and food consumption. The developmental NOAEL was 15 mg/ kg/ day, highest dose tested ( HDT) and the developmental LOAEL was > 15 mg/ kg/ day. In a developmental toxicity study in rabbits, the maternal NOAEL was 10 mg/ kg/ day and the LOAEL was 30 mg/ kg/ day based on reduced body weight gain and food consumption. The developmental NOAEL was 30 mg/ kg/ day, HDT and the developmental LOAEL was > 30 mg/ kg/ day. 3. Reproductive toxicity study. In a 3   generation reproduction study in rats, the parental/ offspring NOAEL was 1.5 mg/ kg/ day and the LOAEL was 5.0 mg/ kg/ day based on decreased parental body weight and body weight gain during premating and gestation periods and reduced pup weight and weight gain during lactation. The reproductive NOAEL was 5.0 mg/ kg/ day ( HDT) 4. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. There is no evidence of increased susceptibility of rat or rabbit fetuses following in utero exposure in the developmental studies with cyhalothrin and there is no evidence of increased susceptibility of young rats in the reproduction study with cyhalothrin. 5. Conclusion. Through the use of bridging data, the toxicology database for lambda cyhalothrin is complete. The Agency has determined that the special FQPA safety factor should be reduced to 1x because as noted above, there is no evidence of increased susceptibility of rat or rabbit fetuses following in utero exposure in the developmental studies with cyhalothrin and there is no evidence of increased susceptibility of young rats in the reproduction study VerDate Dec< 13> 2002 14: 59 Jan 02, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 03JAR1. SGM 03JAR1 288 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 2 / Friday, January 3, 2003 / Rules and Regulations with cyhalothrin. The Agency concluded there are no residual uncertainties for pre and/ or postnatal exposure. The RfDs and other endpoints established for risk assessment are protective of pre/ postnatal toxicity following exposure to cyhalothrin.

D. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety To estimate total aggregate exposure to a pesticide from food, drinking water, and residential uses, the Agency calculates DWLOCs which are used as a point of comparison against the model estimates of a pesticide's concentration in water ( EECs). DWLOC values are not regulatory standards for drinking water. DWLOCs are theoretical upper limits on a pesticide's concentration in drinking water in light of total aggregate exposure to a pesticide in food and residential uses. In calculating a DWLOC, the Agency determines how much of the acceptable exposure ( i. e., the PAD) is available for exposure through drinking water e. g., allowable chronic water exposure ( mg/ kg/ day) = cPAD  ( average food + chronic non dietary, nonoccupational exposure). This allowable exposure through drinking water is used to calculate a DWLOC. A DWLOC will vary depending on the toxic endpoint, drinking water consumption, and body weights. Default body weights and consumption values as used by the Office of Water are used to calculate DWLOCs: 2 liter ( L)/ 70 kg ( adult male), 2L/ 60 kg ( adult female), and 1L/ 10 kg ( child). Default body weights and drinking water consumption values vary on an individual basis. This variation will be taken into account in more refined screening level and quantitative drinking water exposure assessments. Different populations will have different DWLOCs. Generally, a DWLOC is calculated for each type of risk assessment used: Acute, short term, intermediate term, chronic, and cancer. When EECs for surface water and groundwater are less than the calculated DWLOCs, OPP concludes with reasonable certainty that exposures to lambda cyhalothrin in drinking water ( when considered along with other sources of exposure for which OPP has reliable data) would not result in unacceptable levels of aggregate human health risk at this time. Because OPP considers the aggregate risk resulting from multiple exposure pathways associated with a pesticide's uses, levels of comparison in drinking water may vary as those uses change. If new uses are added in the future, OPP will reassess the potential impacts of lambda cyhalothrin on drinking water as a part of the aggregate risk assessment process. 1. Acute risk. Using the exposure assumptions discussed in this unit for acute exposure, the acute dietary exposure from food to lambdacyhalothrin will occupy 41% of the aPAD for the U. S. population, 24% of the aPAD for females 13 years and older, 71% of the aPAD for all infants < 1 year old and 82% of the aPAD for children 1 6 years old. In addition, despite the potential for acute dietary exposure to lambda cyhalothrin in drinking water, after calculating DWLOCs and comparing them to conservative model estimated environmental concentrations of lambda cyhalothrin in surface and ground water, EPA does not expect the aggregate exposure to exceed 100% of the aPAD, as shown in Table 2 of this unit:

TABLE 2.   AGGREGATE RISK ASSESSMENT FOR ACUTE EXPOSURE TO LAMBDA CYHALOTHRIN Population Subgroup aPAD mg/ kg) % aPAD ( Food) Surface Water EEC ( ppb) Ground Water EEC ( ppb) Acute DWLOC ( ppb)

U. S. Population ( total) 0.005 40.86 0.62 0.012 103 All Infants (< 1 year) 0.005 71.22 0.62 0.012 14 Children 1 6 years 0.005 82.36 0.62 0.012 9 Children 7 12 years 0.005 46.09 0.62 0.012 27 Females 13 50 0.005 23.83 0.62 0.012 114 Males 13 19 0.005 27.61 0.62 0.012 127 Males 20+ years 0.005 21.69 0.62 0.012 137 Seniors 55+ 0.005 21.85 0.62 0.012 137 2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that exposure to lambda cyhalothrin from food will utilize 8.2% of the cPAD for the U. S. population, 11.7% of the cPAD for all infants < 1 year old and 21.8% of the cPAD for children 1 6 years old. Based the use pattern, chronic residential exposure to residues of lambda cyhalothrin is not expected. In addition, despite the potential for chronic dietary exposure to lambdacyhalothrin in drinking water, after calculating DWLOCs and comparing them to conservative model estimated environmental concentrations of lambda cyhalothrin in surface and ground water, EPA does not expect the aggregate exposure to exceed 100% of the cPAD, as shown in Table 3 of this unit:

TABLE 3.   AGGREGATE RISK ASSESSMENT FOR CHRONIC ( NON CANCER) EXPOSURE TO LAMBDA CYHALOTHRIN Population Subgroup cPAD mg/ kg/ day % cPAD ( Food) Surface Water EEC ( ppb) Ground Water EEC ( ppb) Chronic DWLOC ( ppb)

U. S. Population ( total) 0.001 8.2 0.098 0.012 32 All Infants (< 1 year) 0.001 11.7 0.098 0.012 9 VerDate Dec< 13> 2002 14: 59 Jan 02, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 03JAR1. SGM 03JAR1 289 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 2 / Friday, January 3, 2003 / Rules and Regulations TABLE 3.   AGGREGATE RISK ASSESSMENT FOR CHRONIC ( NON CANCER) EXPOSURE TO LAMBDA CYHALOTHRIN   Continued Population Subgroup cPAD mg/ kg/ day % cPAD ( Food) Surface Water EEC ( ppb) Ground Water EEC ( ppb) Chronic DWLOC ( ppb)

Children 1 6 years 0.001 21.8 0.098 0.0 12 8 Children 7 12 years 0.001 12.9 0.098 0.012 9 Females 13 50 0.001 5.7 0.098 0.012 28 Males 13 19 0.001 7.9 0.098 0.012 32 Males 20+ years 0.001 6.0 0.098 0.012 33 Seniors 55+ 0.001 5.8 0.098 0.012 33 3. Short and intermediate term risk. Aggregate risk for short and intermediate term durations of exposure includes food, drinking water, and residential exposure pathways. The residential exposure pathway includes dermal, inhalation, and incidental oral ( hand to mouth type inadvertent exposure) routes of exposure. This aggregate risk assessment included lawn post application exposure, considered the scenario with the highest potential for exposure and is a day 0 screening level assessment. Lambda cyhalothrin is currently registered for use( s) that could result in short and intermediate term residential exposure and the Agency has determined that it is appropriate to aggregate chronic food and water and short term exposures for lambdacyhalothrin Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for short and intermediate term exposures, EPA has concluded that food and residential exposures aggregated result in aggregate MOEs of 879 for adults, 239 for children 1 6, and 302 for infants < 1 year old. These aggregate MOEs do not exceed the Agency's level of concern for aggregate exposure to food and residential uses. In addition, short term DWLOCs were calculated and compared to the EECs for chronic exposure of lambda cyhalothrin in ground water and surface water. After calculating DWLOCs and comparing them to the EECs for surface and ground water, EPA does not expect short term aggregate exposure to exceed the Agency's level of concern, as shown in Table 4 of this unit:

TABLE 4.   AGGREGATE RISK ASSESSMENT FOR SHORT AND INTERMEDIATE TERM EXPOSURE TO LAMBDA CYHALOTHRIN Population Subgroup Aggregate MOE ( Food + Residential Aggregate Level of Concern ( LOC) Surface Water EEC ( ppb) Ground Water EEC ( ppb) Short and Intermediate Term DWLOC ( ppb)

Adults 879 100 0.098 0.012 31 Child ( 1 6) 239 10 0 0.0 98 0 .012 6 Infant (< 1 yr) 302 100 0.098 0.012 7 5. Aggregate cancer risk for U. S. population. Lambda cyhalothrin has been classified as a Group D chemcial ( not classifiable as to human carcinogenicity) with regards to its carcinogenic potential. 6. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the general population, and to infants and children from aggregate exposure to lambdacyhalothrin residues.

V. Other Considerations A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology Adequate enforcement methodology ( example   gas chromotography) is available to enforce the tolerance expression. The method may be requested from: Chief, Analytical Chemistry Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. Meade, MD 20755   5350; telephone number: ( 410) 305   2905; e mail address: residuemethods@ epa. gov.

B. International Residue Limits There are no Codex, Canadian, or Mexican MRLs established for residues of lambda cyhalothrin in plant or animal commodities. Codex MRLs for cyhalothrin are established for several commodities which are unrelated to this action. Therefore, a discussion of compatibility with U. S. tolerances is not relevant at this time.

VI. Conclusion Therefore, the tolerances are established for the combined residues of lambda cyhalothrin and its epimer in or on wild rice at 1.0 ppm, grass forage at 5.0 ppm and grass hay at 6.0 ppm.

VII. Objections and Hearing Requests Under section 408( g) of the FFDCA, as amended by the FQPA, any person may file an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a hearing on those objections. The EPA procedural regulations which govern the submission of objections and requests for hearings appear in 40 CFR part 178. Although the procedures in those regulations require some modification to reflect the amendments made to the FFDCA by the FQPA, EPA will continue to use those procedures, with appropriate adjustments, until the necessary modifications can be made.

VerDate Dec< 13> 2002 14: 59 Jan 02, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 03JAR1. SGM 03JAR1 290 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 2 / Friday, January 3, 2003 / Rules and Regulations The new section 408( g) of the FFDCA provides essentially the same process for persons to `` object'' to a regulation for an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance issued by EPA under new section 408( d) of the FFDCA, as was provided in the old sections 408 and 409 of the FFDCA. However, the period for filing objections is now 60 days, rather than 30 days.

A. What Do I Need to Do to File an Objection or Request a Hearing? You must file your objection or request a hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided in this unit and in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify docket ID number OPP   2002   0335 in the subject line on the first page of your submission. All requests must be in writing, and must be mailed or delivered to the Hearing Clerk on or before March 4, 2003. 1. Filing the request. Your objection must specify the specific provisions in the regulation that you object to, and the grounds for the objections ( 40 CFR 178.25). If a hearing is requested, the objections must include a statement of the factual issues( s) on which a hearing is requested, the requestor's contentions on such issues, and a summary of any evidence relied upon by the objector ( 40 CFR 178.27). Information submitted in connection with an objection or hearing request may be claimed confidential by marking any part or all of that information as CBI. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. A copy of the information that does not contain CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public record. Information not marked confidential may be disclosed publicly by EPA without prior notice. Mail your written request to: Office of the Hearing Clerk ( 1900C), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460   0001. You may also deliver your request to the Office of the Hearing Clerk in Rm. 104, Crystal Mall # 2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA. The Office of the Hearing Clerk is open from 8 a. m. to 4 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Office of the Hearing Clerk is ( 703) 603   0061. 2. Tolerance fee payment. If you file an objection or request a hearing, you must also pay the fee prescribed by 40 CFR 180.33( i) or request a waiver of that fee pursuant to 40 CFR 180.33( m). You must mail the fee to: EPA Headquarters Accounting Operations Branch, Office of Pesticide Programs, P. O. Box 360277M, Pittsburgh, PA 15251. Please identify the fee submission by labeling it `` Tolerance Petition Fees.'' EPA is authorized to waive any fee requirement `` when in the judgement of the Administrator such a waiver or refund is equitable and not contrary to the purpose of this subsection.'' For additional information regarding the waiver of these fees, you may contact James Tompkins by phone at ( 703) 305    5697, by e mail at tompkins. jim@ epa. gov, or by mailing a request for information to Mr. Tompkins at Registration Division ( 7505C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460   0001. If you would like to request a waiver of the tolerance objection fees, you must mail your request for such a waiver to: James Hollins, Information Resources and Services Division ( 7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460   0001. 3. Copies for the Docket. In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the Hearing Clerk as described in Unit VII. A., you should also send a copy of your request to the PIRIB for its inclusion in the official record that is described in Unit I. B. 1. Mail your copies, identified by the docket ID number OPP   2002   0335, to: Public Information and Records Integrity Branch, Information Resources and Services Division ( 7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460   0001. In person or by courier, bring a copy to the location of the PIRIB described in Unit I. B. 1. You may also send an electronic copy of your request via e mail to: opp docket@ epa. gov. Please use an ASCII file format and avoid the use of special characters and any form of encryption. Copies of electronic objections and hearing requests will also be accepted on disks in WordPerfect 6.1/ 8.0 or ASCII file format. Do not include any CBI in your electronic copy. You may also submit an electronic copy of your request at many Federal Depository Libraries.

B. When Will the Agency Grant a Request for a Hearing? A request for a hearing will be granted if the Administrator determines that the material submitted shows the following: There is a genuine and substantial issue of fact; there is a reasonable possibility that available evidence identified by the requestor would, if established resolve one or more of such issues in favor of the requestor, taking into account uncontested claims or facts to the contrary; and resolution of the factual issues( s) in the manner sought by the requestor would be adequate to justify the action requested ( 40 CFR 178.32).

VIII. Regulatory Assessment Requirements This final rule establishes timelimited tolerances under section 408 of the FFDCA. The Office of Management and Budget ( OMB) has exempted these types of actions from review under Executive Order 12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and Review ( 58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this rule has been exempted from review under Executive Order 12866 due to its lack of significance, this rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use ( 66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This final rule does not contain any information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act ( PRA), 44 U. S. C. 3501 et seq., or impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 ( UMRA) ( Public Law 104   4). Nor does it require any special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low Income Populations ( 59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994); or OMB review or any Agency action under Executive Order 13045, entitled Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks ( 62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not involve any technical standards that would require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant to section 12( d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 ( NTTAA), Public Law 104   113, section 12( d) ( 15 U. S. C. 272 note). Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis of a FIFRA section 18 exemption under section 408 of the FFDCA, such as the tolerances in this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act ( RFA) ( 5 U. S. C. 601 et seq.) do not apply. In addition, the Agency has determined that this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism ( 64 FR 43255, August 10,

VerDate Dec< 13> 2002 14: 59 Jan 02, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 03JAR1. SGM 03JAR1 291 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 2 / Friday, January 3, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 1999). Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure `` meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' `` Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the Executive order to include regulations that have `` substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.'' This final rule directly regulates growers, food processors, food handlers, and food retailers, not States. This action does not alter the relationships or distribution of power and responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions of section 408( n)( 4) of the FFDCA. For these same reasons, the Agency has determined that this rule does not have any `` tribal implications'' as described in Executive Order 13175, entitled Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments ( 65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000). Executive Order 13175, requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure `` meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have tribal implications.'' `` Policies that have tribal implications'' is defined in the Executive order to include regulations that have `` substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and the Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.'' This rule will not have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule.

IX. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General The Congressional Review Act, 5 U. S. C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required information to the U. S. Senate, the U. S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of this final rule in the Federal Register. This final rule is not a `` major rule'' as defined by 5 U. S. C. 804( 2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: December 20, 2002. Debra Edwards, Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 180   [ AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 21 U. S. C. 321( q), 346( a) and 371.

2. Section 180.438 is amended by alphabetically adding commodities to the table in paragraph ( b) to read as follows:

§ 180.438 Lambda cyhalothrin; tolerances for residues.

* * * * * ( b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. * * *

Commodity Parts per million Expiration/ Revocation Date * * * * * * *

Grass, forage 5.0 12/ 31/ 05 Grass, hay 6.0 12/ 31/ 05 Rice, wild 1.0 12/ 31/ 05 * * * * *

[ FR Doc. 03   6 Filed 1   2   03; 8: 45am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   S VerDate Dec< 13> 2002 14: 59 Jan 02, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 03JAR1. SGM 03JAR1


strStateFIPs STATE NAME strCountyFIPs COUNTY NAME strSiteID NTI_ UNIQUE_ FACILITY_ ID 18 IN 167 Vigo County 21755 NTI32598 42 PA 069 Lackawanna County T$ 2000 NTIPAT$ 2000 37 NC 021 Buncombe County T$ 3279 NTINCT$ 3279 13 GA 045 Carroll County T$ 3661 NTI8042 18 IN 167 Vigo County 00032 NTIIN167201 18 IN 167 Vigo County T$ 7332 NTIIN167201 strFacilityName Street Address Line 1 Street Address Line 2 Street Address Line 3 DIGITAL AUDIO DISC WEA MFG. 1400 E. LACKAWANNA AVE.

SONOPRESS INC. 108 MONTICELLO RD. SONY MUSIC ENTERTAINMENT INC. 5152 COLUMBIA DR. DIGITAL AUDIO DISC CORPORATION 1800 N. FRUITRIDGE AVENUE DIGITAL AUDIO DISC CORP. 1800 N. FRUITRIDGE AVE. City State ZipCode NTI Year In 99 In 96 Only In 99 and 96 LatLong_ Flag 96 Yes OLYPHANT PA 18448140 0 99 Yes WEAVERVILLE NC 28787 99 Yes CARROLLTON GA 30117 99 Yes Yes TERRE HAUTE IN 47804 99 Yes TERRE HAUTE IN 47804178 0 99 Yes MERGED_ MACT_ CODE MERGED_ MACT_ CODE_ ASSIGNMENT Flag 0705 SIC Default 0705 SIC Default 0705 SIC Default 0705 SIC Default 0705 SIC Default 0705 SIC Default POPFlag STATE_ ABBREV strStateFIPs strCountyFIPs COUNTY_ NAME NTI_ UNIQUE_ FACILITY_ ID U1 GA 13 045 Carroll County NTI8042 U1 GA 13 045 Carroll County NTI8042 U2 IN 18 167 Vigo County NTIIN167201 U2 IN 18 167 Vigo County NTIIN167201 R NC 37 021 Buncombe County NTINCT$ 3279 R NC 37 021 Buncombe County NTINCT$ 3279 U1 PA 42 069 Lackawanna County NTIPAT$ 2000 strSiteID strNTISiteID strFacilityName strSICPrimary strSiteMACTCode T$ 3661 TR011079 SONY MUSIC ENTERTAINMENT INC. 3652 0705 T$ 3661 TR011079 SONY MUSIC ENTERTAINMENT INC. 3652 0705 T$ 7332 DIGITAL AUDIO DISC CORP. 3652 0705 00032 IN02191 DIGITAL AUDIO DISC CORPORATION 3652 0705 T$ 3279 SONOPRESS INC. 3652 0705 T$ 3279 SONOPRESS INC. 3652 0705 T$ 2000 WEA MFG. 3652 0705 SITE_ MACT_ CODE_ ASSIGNMENT strEmissionUnitID strProcessID strSCC strProcessMACTCode SIC Default 1 1 39999999 SIC Default 1 2 39999999 SIC Default 1 2 39999999 SIC Default TRISTK RO 39999999 SIC Default 1 1 39999999 SIC Default 1 2 39999999 SIC Default 1 2 39999999 PROCESS_ MACT_ CODE_ ASSIGNMENT strPollutantCode HAP_ CATEGORY_ NAME lngStartDate 108883 Toluene 19990101 108883 Toluene 19990101 7440020 Nickel Compounds 19990101 226 Nickel Compounds 19990101 7440020 Nickel Compounds 19990101 7440020 Nickel Compounds 19990101 226 Nickel Compounds 19990101 lngEndDate Emissions ( Text) Emissions( TPY) Emissions ( TPY) TEQ strEmissionType 19991231 7.05400033504702 7.054000335 7.054000335 ENTIRE PERIOD 19991231 2.19100010406692 2.191000104 2.191000104 ENTIRE PERIOD 19991231 4.00000018998981E 03 0.004 0.004 ENTIRE PERIOD 19991231 4.00000018998981E 03 0.004 0.004 ENTIRE PERIOD 19991231 2.50000011874363E 03 0.0025 0.0025 ENTIRE PERIOD 19991231 2.50000011874363E 03 0.0025 0.0025 ENTIRE PERIOD 19991231 42.6000020233914 42.60000202 42.60000202 ENTIRE PERIOD strEmissionReleasePointType MERGED_ MACT_ CODE MERGED_ MACT_ CODE_ ASSIGNMENT 01 0705 SIC Default 02 0705 SIC Default 02 0705 SIC Default 01 0705 SIC Default 01 0705 SIC Default 02 0705 SIC Default 02 0705 SIC Default SOURCE_ TYPE MACT/ NON MACT 33_ URBAN_ HAP strEmissionReleasePointID sngXCoordinate AREA MACT FALSE 1  85.10833 AREA MACT FALSE 2  85.10833 AREA MACT TRUE 2  87.36111 AREA MACT TRUE NO_ STK 466.01 AREA MACT TRUE 1  82.57806 AREA MACT TRUE 2  82.57806 MAJOR MACT TRUE 2  75.58334 sngYCoordinate intUTMZone strXYCoordinateType DATA_ SOURCE 33.60556 LATLON T( T)

33.60556 LATLON T( T)

39.50583 LATLON T( T)

4366.37 16 UTM S( S)

35.76833 LATLON T( T)

35.76833 LATLON T( T)

41.45833 LATLON T( T)