[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 57 (Thursday, March 24, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-6954]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: March 24, 1994]


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


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52

[AK-4-2-6299; FRL-4850-3]

 

Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans: Alaska

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is approving the State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted 
by the State of Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) 
for the purpose of bringing about the attainment of the National 
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for particulate matter with an 
aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 10 micrometers 
(PM10). The SIP revision was submitted to EPA by ADEC on June 22, 
1993 to satisfy certain Federal Clean Air Act requirements for an 
approvable moderate PM10 nonattainment area SIP for Mendenhall 
Valley, Alaska. EPA is also approving the contingency measures 
submitted by the state of Alaska for the Mendenhall Valley and Eagle 
River moderate PM10 nonattainment areas. This action to approve 
this plan has the effect of making requirements adopted by the ADEC 
federally enforceable by EPA.

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 25, 1994.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the materials submitted to EPA may be examined 
during normal business hours at: Environmental Protection Agency, Air 
Programs Branch, Docket # AK-4-1-6027, 1200 Sixth Avenue, AT-082, 
Seattle, Washington 98101; Alaska Department of Environmental 
Conservation, 410 Willoughby, suite 105, Juneau, Alaska 99801-1795.
    Documents which are incorporated by reference are available for 
public inspection at Environmental Protection Agency, Air and 
Radiation, Docket and Information Center, 6102, 401 M Street, SW., 
Washington, DC 20460, as well as the above addresses.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christi Lee, Air and Radiation Branch 
(AT-082), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, 
Washington 98101, (206) 553-1814.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Mendenhall Valley, Alaska area was designated nonattainment for 
PM10 and classified as moderate under sections 107(d)(4)(B) and 
188(a) of the Clean Air Act, upon enactment of the Clean Air Act 
Amendments of 1990.1 See 56 FR 56694 (November 6, 1991). The air 
quality planning requirements for moderate PM10 nonattainment 
areas are set out in subparts 1 and 4 of part D, title I of the 
Act.2 EPA has issued a ``General Preamble'' describing EPA's 
preliminary views on how EPA intends to review SIP's and SIP revisions 
submitted under title I of the Act, including those state submittals 
containing moderate PM10 nonattainment area SIP requirements. See 
generally 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992); see also 57 FR 18070 (April 28, 
1992).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\The 1990 Amendments to the Clean Air Act made significant 
changes to the Act. See Public Law No. 101-549, 104 Stat. 2399. 
References herein are to the Clean Air Act, as amended (``the 
Act''). The Clean Air Act is codified, as amended, in the U.S. Code 
at 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.
    \2\Subpart 1 contains provisions applicable to nonattainment 
areas generally and subpart 4 contains provisions specifically 
applicable to PM10 nonattainment areas. At times, subpart 1 and 
subpart 4 overlap or conflict. EPA has attempted to clarify the 
relationship among these provisions in the ``General Preamble'' and, 
as appropriate, in this action and supporting information
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On December 22, 1993 EPA announced its proposed approval of the 
moderate nonattainment area PM10 SIP for Mendenhall Valley, Alaska 
and the contingency measures submitted for Mendenhall Valley and Eagle 
River Alaska (58 FR 13572-13575). In that rulemaking action, EPA 
described its interpretations of title 1 and its rationale for 
proposing to approve the PM10 SIP revisions, taking into 
consideration the specific factual issues presented.
    Those states containing initial moderate PM10 nonattainment 
areas (those areas designated nonattainment under section 107(d)(4)(B)) 
were required to submit, among other things, the following provisions 
by November 15, 1991:

    1. Provisions to assure that reasonably available control measures 
(RACM) (including such reductions in emissions from existing sources in 
the area as may be obtained through the adoption, at a minimum, of 
reasonably available control technology (RACT)) shall be implemented no 
later than December 10, 1993;
    2. Either a demonstration (including air quality modeling) that the 
plan will provide for attainment as expeditiously as practicable but no 
later than December 31, 1994, or a demonstration that attainment by 
that date is impracticable;
    3. Quantitative milestones which are to be achieved every three 
years and which demonstrate reasonable further progress (RFP) toward 
attainment by December 31, 1994; and
    4. Provisions to assure that the control requirements applicable to 
major stationary sources of PM10 also apply to major stationary 
sources of PM10 precursors except where the Administrator 
determines that such sources do not contribute significantly to 
PM10 levels which exceed the NAAQS in the area. See sections 
172(c), 188, and 189 of the Act.
    Some provisions were due at a later date. States with initial 
moderate PM10 nonattainment areas were required to submit 
contingency measures by November 15, 1993 which became effective 
without further action by the state or EPA, upon a determination by EPA 
that the area has failed to achieve RFP or to attain the PM10 
NAAQS by the applicable statutory deadline (see section 172(c)(9) and 
57 FR 13543-13544).

II. Response To Comments

    EPA received no comments on its December 22, 1993 (58 FR 67754-
67759) Federal Register proposal to approve the Mendenhall Valley 
moderate nonattainment area PM10 SIP and contingency measures for 
Mendenhall Valley and Eagle River as revisions.

III. This Action

    Section 110(k) of the Act sets out provisions governing EPA's 
review and processing of SIP submittals (see 57 FR 13565-13566). In 
this action, EPA is approving the plan submitted to EPA on June 22, 
1993 which contains the Mendenhall Valley contingency measures, and the 
Eagle River contingency measures submitted to EPA on January 13, 1992. 
EPA has determined that the submittals meet all of the applicable 
requirements of the Act. Among other things, the Alaska Department of 
Environmental Conservation has demonstrated the Mendenhall Valley 
moderate PM10 nonattainment area will attain the PM10 NAAQS 
by December 31, 1994.

IV. Administrative Review

    This action has been classified as a Table 3 action by the Regional 
Administrator under the procedures published in the Federal Register on 
January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by an October 4, 1993 
memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro, Acting Assistant Administrator for 
Air and Radiation. A future document will inform the general public of 
these tables. On January 6, 1989 the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) waived Table 2 and Table 3 SIP revisions (54 FR 2222) from the 
requirements of section 3 of Executive Order 12291 for two years. The 
EPA has submitted a request for a permanent waiver for Table 2 and 
Table 3 SIP revisions. The OMB has agreed to continue the waiver until 
such time as it rules on EPA's request. This request continues in 
effect under Executive Order 12866 which superseded Executive Order 
12291 on September 30, 1993.
    Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or 
allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for 
revision to any state implementation plan. Each request for revision to 
the state implementation plan shall be considered separately in light 
of specific technical, economic and environmental factors and in 
relation to relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court 
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit May 23, 1994. Filing a petition 
for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not 
affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review 
nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review 
may be filed and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or 
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to 
enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2)) (See 42 U.S.C. 7607 
(b)(2))

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 
Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, 
Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.

    Dated: March 3, 1994.
Gerald A. Emison,
Acting Regional Administrator.
    NOTE: Incorporation by reference of the Implementation Plan for 
the State of Alaska was approved by the Director of the Office of 
Federal Register on July 1, 1982.

    Part 52, title 40, chapter I of the Code of Federal Regulations is 
amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

Subpart C--Alaska

    2. Section 52.70 is amended by adding paragraph (c) (18) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 52.70  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (18) On June 22, 1993 the Governor of the State of Alaska submitted 
revised rules to satisfy certain Federal Clean Air Act requirements for 
an approvable moderate PM10 nonattainment area SIP for Mendenhall 
Valley, Alaska. Also included in this SIP were PM10 contingency 
measures for the Mendenhall Valley. On January 21, 1992 a supplement to 
the existing Eagle River PM10 control plan was submitted by ADEC 
to EPA and certified on March 8, 1993 by the Lieutenant Governor of 
Alaska.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) June 22, 1993 letter from the Governor of the State of Alaska 
to EPA, Region 10, submitting the moderate PM10 nonattainment area 
SIP for Mendenhall Valley, Alaska.
    (B) The Control Plan for Mendenhall Valley of Juneau, effective 
July 8, 1993.
    (C) August 25, 1993 letter from ADEC showing, through enclosures, 
the permanent filing record for the supplement to the existing Eagle 
River PM10 control plan. The Lieutenant Governor certified the 
supplement on March 8, 1993.
    (D) The January 21, 1992 supplement to the existing Eagle River 
PM10 control plan, effective April 7, 1993. Also included is an 
August 27, 1991 Municipality of Anchorage memorandum listing the 1991 
capital improvement project priorities and an October 11, 1991 
Muncipality of Anchorage memorandum summarizing the supplement to the 
existing PM10 control plan .
[FR Doc. 94-6975 Filed 3-23-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-F
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52

[OR-28-1-5828; FRL-4850-4]

Approval and Promulgation of Emission Statement Implementation Plan 
for Oregon

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is announcing full 
approval of Oregon's state implementation plan (SIP) submitted for the 
purpose of implementing an emission statement program for stationary 
sources within the Portland ozone nonattainment area. The 
implementation plan was submitted by the state to satisfy the Federal 
requirements for an emission statement program as part of the SIP for 
Oregon.

DATES: This final rule will be effective on May 23, 1994 unless notice 
is received by April 25, 1994 that someone wishes to submit adverse or 
critical comments. If the effective date is delayed, timely notice will 
be published in the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should be addressed to:Montel Livingston, 
SIP Manager, Air and Radiation Branch(AT-082), Environmental Protection 
Agency, 1200 6th Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101.
    Documents which are incorporated by reference are available for 
public inspection at the Air and Radiation, Docket and Information 
Center, Environmental Protection Agency, 401 ``M'' Street, SW., 
Washington, DC 20460. Copies of material submitted to EPA may be 
examined during normal business hours at the following locations: 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, Air and Radiation Branch, 
(Docket # OR 28-1-5828) 1200 Sixth Avenue (AT-082), Seattle, Washington 
98101, and the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, 811 SW., 
Sixth Avenue, Portland, Oregon 97204-1390.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christi Lee, Air and Radiation Branch 
(AT-082), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, 
Washington 98101, (206) 553-1814.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The air quality planning and state implementation plan (SIP) 
requirements for ozone nonattainment and transport areas are set out in 
subparts I and II of part D of title I of the Clean Air Act, as amended 
by the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAA or ``the Act'').
    EPA has also issued a draft guidance document describing the 
requirements for the emission statement programs discussed in this 
document, entitled ``Guidance on the Implementation of an Emission 
Statement Program'' (July, 1992). The Agency is also conducting a 
rulemaking process to modify 40 CFR part 40 to reflect the requirements 
of the emission statement program.
    Section 182 of the Act sets out a graduated control program for 
ozone nonattainment areas. Section 182(a) sets out requirements 
applicable in Marginal nonattainment areas, which are also made 
applicable in subsections (b), (c), (d), and (e) to all other ozone 
nonattainment areas. Among the requirements in section 182(a) is a 
program in paragraph (3) of that subsection for stationary sources to 
prepare and submit to the state each year emission statements showing 
actual emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOC) and nitrogen 
oxides (NOx). This paragraph provides that the states are to 
submit a revision to their state implementation plans (SIPs) by 
November 15, 1992 establishing this emission statement program.
    The CAA requires facilities to submit the first emission statement 
to the state within three years after November 15, 1990, and annually 
thereafter. The minimum emission statement data should include: 
certification of data accuracy; source identification information; 
operating schedule; emissions information (to include annual and 
typical ozone season day emissions); control equipment information; and 
process data. EPA developed emission statement data elements to be 
consistent with other source and state reporting requirements. This 
consistency is essential to assist states with quality assurance for 
emission estimates and to facilitate consolidation of all EPA reporting 
requirements.

II. Analysis of State Submission

    There are several key general and specific components of an 
acceptable emission statement program. Specifically, the state must 
submit a revision to its SIP and the emission statement program must 
meet the minimum requirements of the CAA. In general, the program must 
include, at a minimum, provisions for applicability, definitions, 
compliance, and specific source requirements detailed below.

A. SIP Revision Submission

    The Act requires states to observe certain procedural requirements 
in developing the implementation plans and plan revisions for 
submission to EPA. Sections 110(a)(2) and 110(l) of the Act provides 
that each implementation plan and plan revision submitted by a state 
must be adopted after reasonable notice and public hearing.
    EPA also must determine whether a submittal is complete and 
therefore warrants further EPA review and action (see section 110(k)(1) 
and 57 FR 13565). EPA's completeness criteria for SIP submittals are 
set out at 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. EPA attempts to make 
completeness determinations within 60 days of receiving a submission. 
However, a submittal is deemed complete by operation of law if a 
completeness determination is not made by EPA six months after receipt 
of the submission.
    After providing adequate public notice and holding a public 
hearing, the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) 
submitted an emission statement SIP revision on November 16, 1992. A 
revised submittal was signed and submitted by the Governor's designee 
(Director of ODEQ) on November 15, 1993. Prior to the Director's 
signature, the state provided adequate public notice and public 
hearings (June 28 and August 17, 1993) on the emission statement SIP 
revision. EPA received an official SIP submitted by the Director of 
ODEQ on November 15, 1993. The November 15, 1993 submittal wholly 
superseded the November 16, 1992 SIP revision and therefore is the 
subject of this proposal.
    The November 15, 1993 SIP revision was reviewed by EPA to determine 
completeness shortly after its submittal, in accordance with the 
completeness criteria set out at 40 CFR part 51, appendix V (1991), as 
amended by 57 FR 42216 (August 26, 1991). The submittal was found to be 
complete on December 20, 1993.

B. Program Elements

    Oregon's emission statement program contains provisions covering 
applicability of the regulations, definitions of key terms used in the 
regulations, a compliance schedule for sources covered by the 
regulations, and the specific reporting requirements for sources. In 
accordance with the Act and with a portion of the suggested guidelines, 
Oregon conforms by dictating that the emission statement submitted by 
the source should contain, at a minimum, a certification that the 
information is accurate to the best knowledge of the individual 
certifying the statement, source identification information and 
emissions information. The ODEQ requires the submission of data from 
the sources no later than February 28 of each year or the due date for 
the annual permit report specified in the source's Air Contaminant 
Discharge Permit. In addition, sources subject to these rules shall 
keep records at the plant site containing all applicable operating 
data, process rate data, and control equipment efficiency information 
and other information used to calculate or estimate actual emissions, 
and shall be available for ODEQ's review, or submitted upon request. 
Such records shall be kept by the owner or operator for three calendar 
years after submittal of the emission statement.

C. Sources Covered

    The states may waive, with EPA approval, the requirement for 
emission statements for classes or categories of sources with less than 
25 tons per year of actual plant-wide NOx or VOC emissions in 
nonattainment areas if the class or category is included in the base 
year and periodic inventories and emissions are calculated using 
emission factors established by EPA (such as those found in EPA 
publication AP-42) or other methods acceptable to EPA. States should 
get clearance from the appropriate EPA Regional Office to waive the 
emission statement requirement for these smaller sources. Oregon's rule 
applies to sources of VOC and NOx in ozone nonattainment areas, with a 
Plant Site Emission Limit (PSEL) 25 tons or greater per year for either 
pollutant, and to any source whose actual emissions are equal to or 
greater than 25 tons per year. EPA believes this is sufficient to meet 
the requirements of the CAA.

D. Enforceability

    All measures and other elements in the SIP must be enforceable by 
the state and EPA. The EPA criteria addressing the enforceability of 
SIP's and SIP revisions were stated in a September 23, 1987 memorandum 
(with attachments) from J. Craig Potter, Assistant Administrator for 
Air and Radiation, et al. (see 57 FR 13541). SIP provisions must also 
contain a program that provides for enforcement of the control measures 
and other elements in the SIP (see section 110(a)(2)(C)).
    The state of Oregon has a program in its SIP that will ensure that 
the requirements of section 182(a)(3)(B) and sections 184(b)(2) and 
182(f) for emission statement measures contained in the SIP are 
adequately enforced. The ODEQ will supply sources with guidance and an 
example on how to submit emission reports, informing sources to attach 
this information with the annual permit report. The enforcement section 
of ODEQ will follow through with violators by sending out notices of 
compliance and fines accordingly. EPA expects that the state's existing 
air enforcement program will be adequate.

III. Final Action

    Section 110(k) of the Act sets out provisions governing EPA's 
review of SIP submittals (see 57 FR 13565-66). EPA is approving 
Oregon's emission statement SIP revision submitted to EPA on November 
15, 1993 because it meets all of the applicable requirements of the 
CAA.

IV. Administrative Review

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA 
must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of 
any proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604. 
Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a 
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small 
entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, 
and government entities with jurisdiction over populations of less than 
50,000.
    SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the CAA 
do not
create any new requirements, but simply approve requirements that the 
state is already imposing. Therefore, because the Federal SIP-approval 
does not impose any new requirements, I certify that it does not have a 
significant impact on any small entities affected. Moreover, due to the 
nature of the Federal-state relationship under the CAA, preparation of 
a regulatory flexibility analysis would constitute Federal inquiry into 
the economic reasonableness of state action. The CAA forbids EPA to 
base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds. Union Electric Co. v. 
U.SE.P.A., 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (S.Ct. 1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
    Because EPA considers this action noncontroversial and routine, we 
are approving it without prior proposal. The action will become 
effective on May 23, 1994. However, if we receive notice by April 25, 
1994 that someone wishes to submit adverse comments, then EPA will 
publish: (1) A document that withdraws the action; and (2) a document 
that begins a new rulemaking by proposing the action and establishing a 
comment period.
    Nothing is this action should be construed as permitting or 
allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for 
revision to any state implementation plan. Each request for revision to 
the state implementation plan shall be considered separately in light 
of specific technical, economic and environmental factors and in 
relation to relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.
    This action has been classified as a Table 2 action by the Regional 
Administrator under the procedures published in the Federal Register on 
January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by an October 4, 1993, 
memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro, Acting Assistant Administrator for 
Air and Radiation. A future document will inform the general public of 
these tables. On January 6, 1989, the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) waived Table 2 and Table 3 SIP revisions(54 FR 2222) from the 
requirements of section 3 of Executive Order 12291 for 2 years. The EPA 
has submitted a request for a permanent waiver for Table 2 and Table 3 
SIP revisions. The OMB has agreed to continue the waiver until such 
time as it rules on EPA's request. This request continues under 
Executive Order 12866 which superseded Executive Order 12291 
onSeptember 30, 1993.
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court 
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by May 23, 1994. Filing a 
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule 
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial 
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial 
review may be filed and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such 
rule or action. This action may not bechallenged later in proceedings 
to enforce its requirements. (See 42 U.S.C. 7607(b)(2))

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 
Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference, Ozone, Volatile organic 
compounds.

    Note: Incorporation by reference of the Implementation Plan for 
the state of Oregon was approved by the Director of the Office of 
Federal Register on July 1, 1982.

    Dated: March 4, 1994.
Gerald A. Emison,
Acting Regional Administrator.

    Part 52, title 40, chapter I of the Code of Federal Regulations is 
amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

Subpart MM--Oregon

    2. Section 52.1970 is amended by adding paragraph (c) (102) to read 
as follows:


Sec. 52.1970  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (102) On November 16, 1992 and on November 15, 1993 the Director of 
the Department of Environmental Quality submitted Emission Statement 
Rules as amendments to the State of Oregon Implementation Plan. The 
November 15, 1993 Emission Statement Rules revision to OAR chapter 340, 
Division 28, State of Oregon Implementation Plan, superseded the 
November 16, 1992 submittal.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) November 16, 1992 letter from Oregon Department of 
Environmental Quality to EPA Region 10 submitting the emission 
statement SIP revision. This revision was submitted as an amendment to 
the State of Oregon Implementation Plan and adopted by the 
Environmental Quality Commission on November 10, 1992.
    (B) Emission Statement Rules submitted as an amendment to the State 
of Oregon Implementation Plan, effective November 12, 1992.
    (C) November 15, 1993 letter from Oregon Department of 
Environmental Quality to EPA Region 10 submitting a revision to the 
Emission Statement Rules. This revision was submitted as an amendment 
to the State of Oregon Implementation Plan and adopted by the 
Environmental Quality Commission on September 10 and October 29, 1993.
    (D) Emission Statement Rules submitted as an amendment to the State 
of Oregon Implementation Plan, revising the air quality regulations in 
OAR, Chapter 340, Division 28, effective September 24, 1993.
    (E) December 20, 1993, Completeness Determination letter to Oregon 
Department of Environmental Quality from EPA Region 10, advising that 
the November 15, 1993 Emission Statement Rules submittal is a 
technically and administratively complete SIP revision.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 94-6977 Filed 3-23-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-F
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180

[OPP-300290A; FRL-4635-5]
RIN 2070-AB78

C.I. Pigment Violet #23 (Carbazole Violet), C.I. Pigment Blue #15, 
C.I. Pigment Green #7, and FD & C Red No. 40; Tolerance Exemptions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This document establishes an exemption from the requirement of 
a tolerance for residues of C.I. Pigment Violet #23 (Carbazole Violet; 
CAS Registry No. 6358-30-1), C.I. Pigment Blue #15 (CAS Registry No. 
147-14-8), C.I. Pigment Green #7 (CAS Registry No. 1328-53-6), and FD & 
C Red No. 40 (CAS Reg. No. 25956-17-6) when used as inert ingredients 
(dyes, coloring agents) in pesticide formulations applied to growing 
crops only.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This regulation becomes effective on March 24, 1994.

ADDRESSES: Written objections and hearing requests, identified by the 
document control number [OPP-300290A], may be submitted to: Hearing 
Clerk (1900), Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW., 
Washington, DC 20460. A copy of any objections and hearing requests 
filed with the Hearing Clerk should be identified by the document 
control number and submitted to: Public Response and Program Resources 
Branch, Field Operations Division (7506C), Office of Pesticide 
Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW., Washington, 
DC 20460. In person, bring copy of objections and hearing requests to: 
Rm. 1132, CM #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA 22202. Fees 
accompanying objections shall be labeled ``Tolerance Petition Fees'' 
and forwarded to: EPA Headquarters Accounting Operations Branch, OPP 
(Tolerance Fees), P.O. Box 360277M, Pittsburgh, PA 15251.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tina Levine, Registration Support 
Branch, Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC 
20460. Office location and telephone number: 2800 Crystal Dr., 6th Fl., 
North Tower, Arlington, VA 22202, (703)-308-8393.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Federal Register of June 30, 1993 (58 
FR 34973), EPA issued a proposed rule that gave notice that Becker-
Underwood, Inc., 801 Dayton Ave., Ames, IA 50010, had submitted 
pesticide petitions (PP) 2E4129, 2E4130, and 2E4131 requesting that the 
Administrator, pursuant to section 408(e) of the Federal Food, Drug, 
and Cosmetic Act, 21 U.S.C. 346a(e), amend 40 CFR 180.1001(d) by 
establishing an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for 
residues of C.I. Pigment Violet #23 (Carbazole Violet; Cas Registry No. 
6358-30-1), C.I. Pigment Blue #15 (CAS Registry No. 147-14-8), and C.I. 
Pigment Green #7 (CAS Registry No. 1328-53-6) when used as inert 
ingredients (dyes, coloring agents) in pesticide formulations applied 
to growing crops only. The proposal also noted that Gustafson, Inc., 
P.O. Box 660065, Dallas, TX 75266-0065, had requested a tolerance 
exemption for FD & C Red No. 40 (CAS Reg. No. 25956-17-6).
    Inert ingredients are all ingredients that are not active 
ingredients as defined in 40 CFR 153.125, and include, but are not 
limited to, the following types of ingredients (except when they have a 
pesticidal efficacy of their own): solvents such as alcohols and 
hydrocarbons; surfactants such as polyoxyethylene polymers and fatty 
acids; carriers such as clay and diatomaceous earth; thickeners such as 
carrageenan and modified cellulose; wetting, spreading, and dispersing 
agents; propellants in aerosol dispensers; microencapsulating agents; 
and emulsifiers. The term ``inert'' is not intended to imply 
nontoxicity; the ingredient may or may not be chemically active.
    One comment was received in response to the proposed rule. The 
commenter was concerned that there would be inadequate monitoring of 
impurities in the pigments and dyes. Specifically, the commenter cited 
the possibility of toxic contaminants contained in C.I. Pigment Violet 
#23, C.I. Pigment Green #7, and C.I. Pigment Blue #15 as a result of 
the manufacturing processes used. The commenter addressed the possible 
contamination of C.I. Pigment Violet #23 with polychlorinated dibenzo-
p-dioxin and/or polychlorinated dibenzofuran (as a result of the basic 
reactant chloranil) and contamination of C.I. Pigment Green #7 and C.I. 
Pigment Blue #15 with polychlorinated biphenyls. The commenter 
requested that a mechanism be included in the regulation to ensure that 
pigments made from contaminated intermediates not be sanctioned.
    As a result of this comment, the Agency has included previously 
specified limits (Significant New Use Rule (SNUR), published in the 
Federal Register of May 12, 1993 (58 FR 27980)) in the regulations for 
C.I. Pigment Violet #23, C.I. Pigment Blue #15, and C.I. Pigment Green 
#7 restricting the contamination of C.I. Pigment Violet #23 by 
polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and polychlorinated dibenzofurans, 
and restricting the contamination of C.I. Pigment Blue #15 and C.I. 
Pigment Green #7 by polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB)s. These limits were 
developed to bar use of contaminated intermediates in the production of 
these pigments. In addition, the exemptions for C.I. Pigment Violet 
#23, C.I. Pigment #15, and C.I. Pigment #7 have also been limited to 
seed treatment, as originally requested by Becker-Underwood, Inc.
    The data submitted in the proposal and other relevant material have 
been evaluated and discussed in the proposed rule. Based on the data 
and information considered, the Agency concludes that the tolerance 
exemption will protect the public health. Therefore, the tolerance 
exemption is establised as set forth below.
    Any person adversely affected by this regulation may, within 30 
days after publication of this document in the Federal Register, file 
written objections and/or request a hearing with the Hearing Clerk, at 
the address given above (40 CFR 178.20). A copy of the objections and/
or hearing requests filed with the Hearing Clerk should be submitted to 
the OPP docket for this rulemaking. The objections submitted must 
specify the provisions of the regulation deemed objectionable and the 
grounds for the objections (40 CFR 178.25). Each objection must be 
accompanied by the fee prescribed by 40 CFR 180.33(i). If a hearing is 
requested, the objections must include a statement of the factual 
issue(s) on which a hearing is requested, the requestor's contentions 
on such issues, and a summary of any evidence relied upon by the 
objector (40 CFR 178.27). A request for a hearing will be granted if 
the Administrator determines that the material submitted shows the 
following: There is a genuine and substantial issue of fact; there is a 
reasonable possibility that available evidence identified by the 
requestor would, if established, resolve one or more of such issues in 
favor of the requestor, taking into account uncontested claims or facts 
to the contrary; and resolution of the factual issue(s) in the manner 
sought by the requestor would be adequate to justify the action 
requested (40 CFR 178.32).
    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, Oct. 4, 1993), the Agency 
must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' and 
therefore subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) and the requirements of the Executive Order. Under section 3(f), 
the order defines a ``significant regulatory action'' as an action that 
is likely to result in a rule (1) having an annual effect on the 
economy of $100 million or more, or adversely and materially affecting 
a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the 
environment, public health or safety, or State local, or tribal 
governments or communities (also referred to as ``economically 
significant''); (2) creating serious inconsistency or otherwise 
interfering with an action taken or planned by another agency; (3) 
materially altering the budgetary impacts of entitlement, grants, user 
fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations or recipients 
thereof, or (4) raising novel legal or policy issues arising out of 
legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth 
in this Executive order.
    Pursuant to the terms of the Executive Order, EPA has determined 
that this rule is not ``significant'' and is therefore not subject to 
OMB review. Pursuant to the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility 
Act (Pub. L. 96-354, 94 Stat. 1164, 5 U.S.C. 601-612), the 
Administrator has determined that regulations establishing new 
tolerances or raising tolerance levels or establishing exemptions from 
tolerance requirements do not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. A certification statement to this 
effect was published in the Federal Register of May 4, 1981 (46 FR 
24950).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Recording and 
recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: March 15, 1994.

Douglas D. Campt,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR part 180 is amended as follows:

PART 180--[AMENDED]

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

    Authority: 21 U.S.C. 346a and 371.

    2. Section 180.1001(d) is amended by adding and alphabetically 
inserting the inert ingredients, to read as follows:


Sec. 180.1001   Exemptions from the requirements of a tolerance.

* * * * *
    (d) *  *  * 

------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Inert ingredients            Limits                   Uses          
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                        
                              * * * * * * *                             
C.I. Pigment Blue #15      For seed treament   Dye, coloring agent      
 (CAS Reg. No. 147-14-8;    use only.                                   
 containing no more than                                                
 50 ppm polychlorinated                                                 
 biphenyls (PCBs)).                                                     
C.I. Pigment Green #7      For seed treatment  Dye, coloring agent      
 (CAS Reg. No. 1328-53-6;   use only.                                   
 containing no more than                                                
 50 ppm polychlorinated                                                 
 biphenyls (PCBs)).                                                     
C.I. Pigment Violet #23    For seed treatment  Dye, coloring agent      
 (CAS Registry No. 6358-    use only.                                   
 30-1; containing no more                                               
 than 20 ppb of                                                         
 polychlorinated dibenzo-                                               
 p-dioxins and/or                                                       
 polychlorinated                                                        
 dibenzofurans).                                                        
                                                                        
                              * * * * * * *                             
FD & C Red No. 40 (CAS     For seed treatment  Dye, coloring agent.     
 Reg. No. 25956-17-6).      use only. Not to                            
                            exceed 2% by                                
                            weight of the                               
                            pesticide                                   
                            formulation..                               
                                                                        
                              * * * * * * *                             
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 94-6953 Filed 3-23-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-F
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180

[PP 2E4094/R2044; FRL-4761-8]
RIN 2070-AB78

Pesticide Tolerance for Metsulfuron Methyl

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This document establishes a tolerance for the combined 
residues of the herbicide metsulfuron methyl and its metabolite in or 
on the raw agricultural commodity sugarcane. The regulation to 
establish a maximum permissible level for residues of the herbicide in 
or on the commodity was requested in a petition submitted by the 
Interregional Research Project No. 4 (IR-4).

EFFECTIVE DATE: This regulation becomes effective on March 24, 1994.

ADDRESSES: Written objections and requests for a hearing, identified by 
the document control number, [PP 2E4094/R2044], may be submitted to: 
Hearing Clerk (1900), Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. M3708, 401 M 
St., SW., Washington, DC 20460. A copy of any objections and hearing 
requests filed with the Hearing Clerk should be identified by the 
document control number and submitted to: Public Response and Program 
Resources Branch, Field Operations Division (7506C), Office of 
Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW., 
Washington, DC 20460. In person, bring copy of objections and hearing 
request to: Rm. 1132, CM #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA 
22202. Fees accompanying objections shall be labeled ``Tolerance 
Petition Fees'' and forwarded to: EPA Headquarters Accounting 
Operations Branch, OPP (Tolerance Fees), P.O. Box 360277M, Pittsburgh, 
PA 15251.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By mail: Hoyt L. Jamerson, Emergency 
Response and Minor Use Section (7505W), Registration Division, Office 
of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW., 
Washington, DC 20460. Office location and telephone number: 6th Floor, 
Crystal Station #1, 2800 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA 22202, 
(703)-308-8783.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Federal Register of December 8, 1993 
(58 FR 64536), EPA issued a proposed rule that gave notice that the 
Interregional Research Project No. 4 (IR-4), New Jersey Agricultural 
Experiment Station, P.O. Box 231, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ 
08903, had submitted pesticide petition 2E4094 to EPA on behalf of the 
Agricultural Experiment Station of Hawaii requesting the Administrator 
under section 408(e) of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (21 
U.S.C. 346a(e)) to propose establishing a tolerance for residues of 
metsulfuron methyl (methyl 2-[[[[(4-methoxy-6-methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2-
yl)amino] carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl] benzoate) and its metabolite methyl 
2-[[[[(4-methoxy-6-methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2-
yl)amino]carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl]-4-hydroxybenzoate in or on the raw 
agricultural commodity sugarcane at 0.05 part per million (ppm).
    There were no comments or requests for referral to an advisory 
committee received in response to the proposed rule.
    The data submitted relevant to the proposal and other relevant 
material have been evaluated and discussed in the proposed rule. Based 
on the data and information considered, the Agency concludes that the 
tolerance will protect the public health. Therefore, the tolerance is 
established as set forth below.
    Any person adversely affected by this regulation may, within 30 
days after publication of this document in the Federal Register, file 
written objections and/or request a hearing with the Hearing Clerk, at 
the address given above (40 CFR 178.20). A copy of the objections and/
or hearing requests filed with the Hearing Clerk should be submitted to 
the OPP docket for this rulemaking. The objections submitted must 
specify the provisions of the regulation deemed objectionable and the 
grounds for the objections (40 CFR 178.25). Each objection must be 
accompanied by the fee prescribed by 40 CFR 180.33(i). If a hearing is 
requested, the objections must include a statement of the factual 
issue(s) on which a hearing is requested, the requestor's contentions 
on such issues, and a summary of any evidence relied upon by the 
objector (40 CFR 178.27). A request for a hearing will be granted if 
the Administrator determines that the material submitted shows the 
following: There is a genuine and substantial issue of fact; there is a 
reasonable possibility that available evidence identified by the 
requestor would, if established, resolve one or more of such issues in 
favor of the requestor, taking into account uncontested claims or facts 
to the contrary; and resolution of the factual issue(s) in the manner 
sought by the requestor would be adequate to justify the action 
requested (40 CFR 178.32).
    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, Oct. 4, 1993), the Agency 
must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' and 
therefore subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) and the requirements of the Executive Order. Under section 3(f), 
the order defines a ``significant regulatory action'' as an action that 
is likely to result in a rule (1) having an annual effect on the 
economy of $100 million or more, or adversely and materially affecting 
a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the 
environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal 
governments or communities (also referred to as ``economically 
significant''); (2) creating serious inconsistency or otherwise 
interfering with an action taken or planned by another agency; (3) 
materially altering the budgetary impacts of entitlement, grants, user 
fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients 
thereof; or (4) raising novel legal or policy issues arising out of 
legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth 
in this Executive Order.
    Pursuant to the terms of the Executive Order, EPA has determined 
that this rule is not ``significant'' and is therefore not subject to 
OMB review.
    Pursuant to the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act 
(Pub. L. 96-354, 94 Stat. 1164, 5 U.S.C. 601-612), the Administrator 
has determined that regulations establishing new tolerances or raising 
tolerance levels or establishing exemptions from tolerance requirements 
do not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of 
small entities. A certification statement to this effect was published 
in the Federal Register of May 4, 1981 (46 FR 24950).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: March 14, 1994.

Douglas D. Campt,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    Therefore, 40 CFR part 180 is amended as follows:

PART 180--[AMENDED]

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

    Authority: 21 U.S.C. 346a and 371.

    2. In Sec. 180.428, paragraph (a) table is amended by adding and 
alphabetically inserting the raw agricultural commodity sugarcane, to 
read as follows:


Sec. 180.428   Metsulfuron methyl; tolerances for residues.

    (a) *  *  *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Parts per 
                         Commodity                             million  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                        
                                  *****                                 
Sugarcane..................................................         0.05
                                                                        
                                  *****                                 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 94-6954 Filed 3-23-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-F