7935
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
33
/
Wednesday,
February
19,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
Transfer
and
Advancement
Act
of
1995
(
NTTAA),
Public
Law
104
 
113,
section
12(
d)
(
15
U.
S.
C.
272
note).
Since
tolerances
and
exemptions
that
are
established
on
the
basis
of
a
petition
under
FFDCA
section
408(
d),
such
as
the
exemption
in
this
final
rule,
do
not
require
the
issuance
of
a
proposed
rule,
the
requirements
of
the
Regulatory
Flexibility
Act
(
RFA)
(
5
U.
S.
C.
601
et
seq.)
do
not
apply.
In
addition,
the
Agency
has
determined
that
this
action
will
not
have
a
substantial
direct
effect
on
States,
on
the
relationship
between
the
national
government
and
the
States,
or
on
the
distribution
of
power
and
responsibilities
among
the
various
levels
of
government,
as
specified
in
Executive
Order
13132,
entitled
Federalism
(
64
FR
43255,
August
10,
1999).
Executive
Order
13132
requires
EPA
to
develop
an
accountable
process
to
ensure
``
meaningful
and
timely
input
by
State
and
local
officials
in
the
development
of
regulatory
policies
that
have
federalism
implications.''
``
Policies
that
have
federalism
implications''
is
defined
in
the
Executive
Order
to
include
regulations
that
have
``
substantial
direct
effects
on
the
States,
on
the
relationship
between
the
national
government
and
the
States,
or
on
the
distribution
of
power
and
responsibilities
among
the
various
levels
of
government.''
This
final
rule
directly
regulates
growers,
food
processors,
food
handlers
and
food
retailers,
not
States.
This
action
does
not
alter
the
relationships
or
distribution
of
power
and
responsibilities
established
by
Congress
in
the
preemption
provisions
of
FFDCA
section
408(
n)(
4).
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.

VIII.
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:
January
21,
2003.
James
Jones,
Acting
Director,
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
374.

2.
Section
180.1159
is
amended
by
adding
paragraph
(
c)
to
read
as
follows:

§
180.1159
Pelargonic
acid;
exemption
from
the
requirement
of
a
tolerance.

*
*
*
*
*
(
c)
An
exemption
from
the
requirement
of
a
tolerance
is
established
for
residues
of
pelargonic
acid
in
or
on
all
raw
agricultural
commodities
and
in
processed
commodities,
when
such
residues
result
from
the
use
of
pelargonic
acid
as
an
antimicrobial
treatment
in
solutions
containing
a
diluted
end­
use
concentration
of
pelargonic
acid
up
to
170
ppm
per
application
on
food
contact
surfaces
such
as
equipment,
pipelines,
tanks,
vats,
fillers,
evaporators,
pasteurizers
and
aseptic
equipment
in
restaurants,
food
service
operations,
dairies,
breweries,
wineries,
beverage
and
food
processing
plants.

[
FR
Doc.
03
 
3842
Filed
2
 
18
 
03;
8:
45
am]

BILLING
CODE
6560
 
50
 
S
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
40
CFR
Part
180
[
OPP
 
2002
 
0272;
FRL
 
7278
 
6]

Decanoic
Acid;
Exemption
from
the
Requirement
of
a
Pesticide
Tolerance
AGENCY:
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
EPA).
ACTION:
Final
rule.

SUMMARY:
This
regulation
establishes
an
exemption
from
the
requirement
of
a
tolerance
for
residues
of
decanoic
acid
(
capric
acid)
in
or
on
all
foods
when
applied/
used
as
a
component
of
a
food
contact
surface
sanitizing
solution
in
food
handling
establishments.
Eco
Lab
Inc.
submitted
a
petition
to
EPA
under
the
Federal
Food,
Drug,
and
Cosmetic
Act
(
FFDCA),
as
amended
by
the
Food
Quality
Protection
Act
of
1996
(
FQPA),
requesting
an
exemption
from
the
requirement
of
a
tolerance.
This
regulation
eliminates
the
need
to
establish
a
maximum
permissible
level
for
residues
of
decanoic
acid.
DATES:
This
regulation
is
effective
February
19,
2003.
Objections
and
requests
for
hearings,
identified
by
docket
ID
number
OPP
 
2002
 
0272,
must
be
received
on
or
before
April
21,
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
X.
of
the
SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION.
FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT:
Adam
Heyward,
Antimicrobials
Division
(
7510C),
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs,
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
NW.,
Washington,
DC
20460
 
0001;
telephone
number:
(
703)
308
 
6422;
email
address:
heyward.
adam@
epa.
gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION:

I.
General
Information
A.
Does
this
Action
Apply
to
Me?
You
may
be
affected
by
this
action
if
you
are
an
agricultural
producer,
food
manufacturer,
or
pesticide
manufacturer.
Potentially
affected
categories
and
entities
may
include,
but
are
not
limited
to:
 
Crop
production
(
NAIC
code
111)
 
Animal
production
(
NAIC
code
112)

VerDate
Dec<
13>
2002
15:
02
Feb
18,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00039
Fmt
4700
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
19FER1.
SGM
19FER1
7936
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
33
/
Wednesday,
February
19,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
 
Food
manufacturing
(
NAIC
code
311)
 
Pesticide
manufacturing
(
NAIC
code
32532)

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
 
0272.
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
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
In
the
Federal
Register
of
December
7,
2001
(
66
FR
63534)
(
FRL
 
6737
 
9),
EPA
issued
a
notice
pursuant
to
section
408
of
FFDCA,
21
U.
S.
C.
346a,
as
amended
by
FQPA
(
Public
Law
104
 
170),
announcing
the
filing
of
a
pesticide
petition
(
PP
0F6194)
by
Eco
Lab
Inc.,
370
N.
Wabasha
Street,
St.
Paul,
MN
55102.
That
notice
included
a
summary
of
the
petition
prepared
by
Eco
Lab
Inc.,
the
registrant.
There
were
no
comments
received
in
response
to
the
notice
of
filing.
The
petition
requested
that
40
CFR
part
180
be
amended
by
establishing
an
exemption
from
the
requirement
of
a
tolerance
is
established
for
residues
of
decanoic
acid
in
or
on
all
raw
agricultural
commodities
and
in
processed
commodities,
when
such
residues
result
from
the
use
of
decanoic
acid
as
an
antimicrobial
treatment
in
solutions
containing
a
diluted
end­
use
concentration
of
decanoic
acid
up
to
170
parts
per
million
(
ppm)
per
application
on
food
contact
surfaces
such
as
equipment,
pipelines,
tanks,
vats,
fillers,
evaporators,
pasteurizers
and
aseptic
equipment
in
restaurants,
food
service
operations,
dairies,
breweries,
wineries,
beverage
and
food
processing
plants.
The
sanitizer
is
applied
by
immersion,
coarse
spray,
or
circulation
technique
as
appropriate
to
the
equipment.
The
solution,
once
applied
is
allowed
to
drain
and
dry
and
there
is
no
potable
water
rinse.
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....''
EPA
performs
a
number
of
analyses
to
determine
the
risks
from
aggregate
exposure
to
pesticide
residues.
First,
EPA
assesses
the
hazards
of
the
pesticide
through
examination
and
review
of
available
toxicology
data.
Second,
EPA
examines
the
potential
route(
s)
and
duration(
s)
of
exposure
to
the
pesticide
through
food,
drinking
water,
and
through
other
exposures
that
can
occur
as
a
result
of
pesticide
use
in
residential
settings.
III.
Aggregate
Risk
Assessment
and
Determination
of
Safety
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
and
to
make
a
determination
on
aggregate
exposure,
consistent
with
section
408(
b)(
2)
of
the
FFDCA,
for
an
exemption
from
the
requirement
of
a
tolerance
for
residues
of
decanoic
acid
on
all
food
up
to
170
ppm.
EPA's
assessment
of
exposures
and
risks
associated
with
establishing
the
tolerance
follows.

A.
Toxicological
Profile
Consistent
with
section
408(
b)(
2)(
D)
of
FFDCA,
EPA
has
reviewed
the
available
toxicology
data
from
the
open
scientific
literature
as
well
as
the
data
submitted
in
support
of
this
action
and
has
considered
its
validity,
completeness
and
reliability
and
the
relationship
to
human
risk.
EPA
has
also
considered
available
information
on
potential
differences
in
sensitivity
to
the
toxicity
of
the
pesticide
in
major
identifiable
subgroups
of
consumers,
including
infants
and
children.
The
natures
of
the
toxic
effects
caused
by
decanoic
acid
(
capric
acid)
are
discussed
in
this
unit.

B.
Acute
Toxicity
The
acute
oral
toxicity
of
decanoic
acid
is
low
lethal
dose
(
LD)
50
>
10
grams/
kilograms
(
g/
kg)
as
is
the
acute
dermal
toxicity
(
LD50
>
5
g/
kg).
Decanoic
Acid
is
a
moderate
too
severe
skin
irritant
when
applied
undiluted
to
intact
or
abraded
rabbit
skin
for
24
hours.
Decanoic
acid
is
also
a
severe
eye
irritant
when
applied
as
a
5%
solution.

C.
Subchronic
Toxicity
As
reported
in
Patty's
Industrial
Hygiene
and
Toxicology,
4th
ed.,
rats
fed
capric
acid
at
10%
in
the
diet
for
150
days
showed
no
adverse
effects
from
treatment.
In
another
study,
rats
administered
approximately
4
g
decanoic
acid
/
kg/
day
for
6
weeks
showed
reduced
body
weight
gain
and
increased
plasma
triglyceride
levels.
In
a
longer
term
study
in
which
rats
were
fed
2.5
g/
kg/
day
decanoic
acid
for
47
weeks,
no
adverse
toxicological
effects
were
noted.
Dogs
administered
4.4
g/
kg/
day
decanoic
acid
for
102
days
showed
no
adverse
effects
of
treatment.

D.
Developmental
and
Reproductive
Effects
In
a
study
by
Hendrich
et
al.
(
JAOCS,
Vol.
70,
no.
8,
August
1993,
pages
797
 
802),
the
potential
reproductive
effects
of
decanoic
acid
were
examined
in
VerDate
Dec<
13>
2002
15:
02
Feb
18,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00040
Fmt
4700
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
19FER1.
SGM
19FER1
7937
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
33
/
Wednesday,
February
19,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
CBA/
2
and
C57B1/
6
mice.
Groups
of
mice
received
diets
containing
either
17.2%
beef
tallow
and
3.5%
corn
oil
or
8.6%
crude
Cuphea
oil
and
3.5%
corn
oil.
Cuphea
oil
is
composed
of
76%
decanoic
acid,
4.8%
octanoic
acid,
2.5%
dodecanoic
acid,
2.2%
myristate,
3.4%
palmitate,
0.7%
stearate,
3.3%
oleate,
and
5.5%
linoleate.
Parental
animals
were
fed
for
various
times
due
to
the
short
supply
of
Cuphea
oil.
C57B1/
6
mice
were
fed
for
either
10
months,
8
months,
or
5
months
(
F1,
F2,
and
F3
generations),
while
the
CBA/
2
mice
were
fed
for
11
 
12
months,
9
 
11
months,
and
6
 
8
months
(
F1,
F2,
and
F3
generations).
Body
weights,
food
intake,
liver
weights,
and
total
serum
cholesterol
were
analyzed
as
well
as
the
number
of
pups
born
and
surviving
to
weaning.
Histopathology
was
performed
on
liver,
left
kidney,
spleen,
heart,
lung,
and
one
testis.
The
histopathology
appears
to
have
been
done
only
on
parental
mice.
Feeding
of
Cuphea
oil
containing
decanoic
acid
to
successive
generations
of
two
strains
of
mice
had
no
effect
on
reproduction
in
either
strain
of
mouse.
In
the
F1
generation
of
the
CBA/
2
strain,
the
reported
number
of
pups
per
female
was
decreased
in
the
Cuphea­
fed
mice
vs.
the
mice
fed
the
basal
diet
without
the
Cuphea
oil.
However,
this
effect
was
not
observed
in
any
other
generation
of
the
CBA/
2
strain
or
in
any
generation
of
the
C57B1/
6
strain
and
is
therefore
not
interpreted
as
a
treatment­
related
effect.
Body
weight
in
C57B1/
6
and
CBA/
2
mice
was
reduced
approximately
10%
after
13
weeks
of
treatment
but
this
effect
was
not
observed
in
successive
generations.
Food
intake
was
not
consistently
affected
by
treatment.
Serum
cholesterol
was
significantly
increased
in
C57B1/
6
mice
after
3
months
of
treatment,
and
the
increase
was
also
observed
after
5
and
12
months.
Fatty
vacuolization
was
observed
in
the
liver
of
most
mice
after
treatment.
CBA/
2
mice
tended
to
accumulate
fat
as
large
vacuoles
in
periportal
hepatocytes
with
smaller
vacuoles
in
centrilobular
hepatocytes.
C57B1/
6
mice
had
a
more
diffuse
fatty
change
with
large
vacuoles
in
centrilobular
areas.

E.
Carcinogenicity/
Mutagenicity
There
are
no
published
studies
on
carcinogenicity
of
decanoic
acid,
but
available
mutagenicity
data
indicate
that
decanoic
acid
is
negative
for
mutagenic
effects.

F.
Physiological
Effects
Decanoic
acid
was
observed
to
enhance
the
permeability
of
the
bloodbrain
in
Wistar
rats
to
several
hydrophilic
compounds
when
administered
into
the
carotid
artery
(
Ohnishi
et
al.,
J.
Pharm.
Pharmacol.
51:
1015
 
1018,
1998).

IV.
Aggregate
Exposures
In
examining
aggregate
exposure,
FFDCA
section
408
directs
EPA
to
consider
available
information
concerning
exposures
from
the
pesticide
residue
in
food
and
drinking
water
(
from
ground
water
or
surface
water)
and
exposure
through
non­
occupational
pesticide
use.

A.
Dietary
Exposure
1.
Food;
existing
tolerances
and
other
clearances.
The
Food
and
Drug
Administration
(
FDA)
has
established
a
food
additive
clearance
for
decanoic
acid
at
levels
up
to
234
ppm
in
sanitizing
solutions
(
21
CFR
178.1010(
c)(
22),
(
30),
(
31),
(
34)),
and
has
also
cleared
this
chemical
for
direct
addition
to
food
for
human
consumption
without
limits.
Decanoic
acid
is
also
permitted
for
use
in
food
as
a
lubricant,
binder
and
as
a
defoaming
agent
as
a
component
in
the
manufacture
of
other
food­
grade
components,
without
limits,
provided
it
meets
the
criteria
as
set
forth
in
21
CFR
172.860.
Worst
case
dietary
exposures
for
the
sanitizer
use
of
decanoic
acid
have
been
calculated
assuming
that
all
food
consumed
by
an
adult
or
child
has
contacted
a
4,000
cm2
sanitized
surface
using
decanoic
acid,
that
a
1
milligram/
centimeter
(
mg/
cm)
2
sanitizer
residue
remains
on
the
surface,
and
that
100%
of
the
residue
(
28
ppm)
is
transferred
to
the
food
from
the
surface.
Using
these
assumptions
a
worst
case
dietary
exposure
of
113
µ
g/
day
is
calculated.
For
a
70
kg
adult
this
becomes
1.6
µ
g/
kg/
day,
and
for
a
15
kg
child,
intake
is
calculated
as
7.5
µ
g/
kg/
day.
2.
Drinking
water
exposure.
The
use
of
decanoic
acid
as
a
component
of
KX­
6116
food
surface
sanitizer
could
result
in
the
introduction
of
very
low
concentrations
of
decanoic
acid
into
drinking
water.
However,
this
exposure
through
drinking
water
is
expected
to
be
minimal.

B.
Non­
Occupational
Exposure
Based
on
the
intended
use
of
decanoic
acid
in
food
handling
establishments,
exposure
to
decanoic
acid
as
a
component
of
KX­
6116
sanitizer
through
non­
occupational
sources
is
not
likely
to
occur.

V.
Cumulative
Effects
Section
408(
b)(
2)(
D)(
v)
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.
Based
on
the
information
discussed
in
Section
VII
below,
EPA
concluded
that
decanoic
acid
is
sufficiently
non­
toxic
that
EPA
can
determine
that
it
does
not
share
a
common
mechanism
of
toxicity
with
other
substances.

VI.
Additional
Safety
Factor
for
the
Protection
of
Infants
and
Children
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.
Based
on
the
considerations
discussed
in
Unit
VII.
of
this
document,
EPA
concluded
that
decanoic
acid
was
sufficiently
non­
toxic
that
a
margin
of
safety
analysis
was
not
appropriate.
For
the
same
reason,
EPA
has
not
applied
an
additional
margin
of
safety
for
the
protection
of
infants
and
children.

VII.
Determination
of
Safety
for
U.
S.
Population,
Infants
and
Children
Based
on
the
following
considerations,
EPA
concludes
that
decanoic
acid
is
unlikely
to
pose
a
risk
under
all
reasonable
exposure
scenarios:
1.
The
fatty
acids
as
a
group
including
decanoic
acid
have
a
safe
history
of
use
as
natural
components
of
many
foods,
as
direct
food
additives,
and
as
cosmetic
ingredients.
Furthermore,
fatty
acids
are
processed
by
known
metabolic
pathways
within
the
body
and
contribute
to
normal
physiological
function.
2.
The
Joint
FAO/
WHO
Expert
Committee
on
Food
Additives
did
not
establish
a
specific
allowable
daily
intake
(
ADI)
for
decanoic
acid
(
i.
e.
Reference
dose
(
RfD))
based
on
the
knowledge
that
the
compound
is
already
a
component
of
the
human
diet,
has
a
long
history
of
use,
and
does
not
present
with
any
significant
toxicology
concerns
and
therefore
does
not
represent
a
health
hazard.
3.
The
Food
and
Drug
Administration
has
established
a
food
additive
clearance
for
decanoic
acid
at
levels
up
to
234
ppm
in
sanitizing
solutions
(
21
CFR
178.1010(
c)(
22),
(
30),
(
31),
(
34)),

VerDate
Dec<
13>
2002
15:
02
Feb
18,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00041
Fmt
4700
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
19FER1.
SGM
19FER1
7938
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
33
/
Wednesday,
February
19,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
and
has
also
cleared
this
chemical
for
direct
addition
to
food
for
human
consumption
without
limits.
Decanoic
acid
is
also
permitted
for
use
in
food
as
a
lubricant,
binder
and
as
a
defoaming
agent
as
a
component
in
the
manufacture
of
other
food­
grade
components,
without
limits,
provided
it
meets
the
criteria
as
set
forth
in
21
CFR
172.860.
4.
Evidence
of
adverse
reactions
to
decanoic
acid
in
dietary
toxicity
testing
was
observed
only
at
doses
that
were
at
or
above
limit
doses.
5.
The
estimated
exposures
to
decanoic
acid
and
other
fatty
acids
from
direct
or
indirect
addition
to
food
as
well
as
sanitizer
uses
are
well
below
the
doses
administered
in
animal
studies
that
are
required
to
elicit
an
adverse
effect.
For
example,
adverse
effects
in
toxicity
testing
could
only
be
achieved
by
doses
in
the
range
of
several
grams
of
decanoic
acid
per
kilogram
of
body
weight
per
day.
A
worst
case
dietary
exposure
for
the
sanitizer
use
estimated
exposure
for
a
70
kg
adult
of
1.6
µ
g/
kg/
day,
and
for
a
15kg
child
of
7.5
µ
g/
kg/
day.
Accordingly,
EPA
concludes
that
there
is
a
reasonable
certainty
of
no
harm
to
the
general
population,
including
infants
and
children,
from
aggregate
exposure
to
pelargonic
acid.

VIII.
Other
Considerations
A.
Analytical
Method(
s)

Because
an
exemption
from
the
requirement
of
a
tolerance
without
numerical
limitation
for
residues
in
food
is
being
granted
for
decanoic
acid,
an
enforcement
analytical
method
is
not
needed.
However,
an
analytical
method
is
available
in
cases
of
gross
misuse.
The
analytical
method
is
being
made
available
to
anyone
interested
in
pesticide
enforcement
when
requested,
from
Norm
Cook,
Antimicrobials
Division
(
7510C),
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
1200
Pennsylvania
Avenue,
NW.,
Washington,
D.
C.
20460.
Office
location
and
telephone
number:
1921
Jefferson
Davis
Highway,
3rd
Floor,
Arlington,
VA
22202,
(
703)
308
 
8253.

B.
International
Tolerances
No
codex
maximum
residue
levels
have
been
established
for
decanoic
acid.

IX.
Conclusion
An
exemption
from
the
requirement
of
a
tolerance
is
established
for
residues
of
decanoic
acid
in
or
on
all
raw
agricultural
commodities
and
in
processed
commodities,
when
such
residues
result
from
the
use
of
decanoic
acid
as
an
antimicrobial
treatment
in
solutions
containing
a
diluted
end­
use
concentration
of
decanoic
acid
up
to
170
ppm
per
application
on
food
contact
surfaces
such
as
equipment,
pipelines,
tanks,
vats,
fillers,
evaporators,
pasteurizers
and
aseptic
equipment
in
restaurants,
food
service
operations,
dairies,
breweries,
wineries,
beverage
and
food
processing
plants.
The
sanitizer
is
applied
by
immersion,
coarse
spray,
or
circulation
technique
as
appropriate
to
the
equipment.
The
solution,
once
applied
is
allowed
to
drain
and
dry
and
there
is
no
potable
water
rinse.

X.
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.
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
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
 
0272
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
April
21,
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
VI.
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
docket
ID
number
OPP
 
2002
 
0272,
to:
Public
Information
VerDate
Dec<
13>
2002
15:
02
Feb
18,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00042
Fmt
4700
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
19FER1.
SGM
19FER1
7939
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
33
/
Wednesday,
February
19,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
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:
oppdocket
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).

XI.
Stautory
and
Executive
Order
Reviews
This
final
rule
establishes
an
exemption
from
the
requirement
of
a
tolerance
under
section
408(
d)
of
the
FFDCA
in
response
to
a
petition
submitted
to
the
Agency.
The
Office
of
Management
and
Budget
(
OMB)
has
exempted
these
types
of
actions
from
review
under
Executive
Order
12866,
entitled
Regulatory
Planning
and
Review
(
58
FR
51735,
October
4,
1993).
Because
this
rule
has
been
exempted
from
review
under
Executive
Order
12866
due
to
its
lack
of
significance,
this
rule
is
not
subject
to
Executive
Order
13211,
Actions
Concerning
Regulations
That
Significantly
Affect
Energy
Supply,
Distribution,
or
Use
(
66
FR
28355,
May
22,
2001).
This
final
rule
does
not
contain
any
information
collections
subject
to
OMB
approval
under
the
Paperwork
Reduction
Act
(
PRA),
44
U.
S.
C.
3501
et
seq.,
or
impose
any
enforceable
duty
or
contain
any
unfunded
mandate
as
described
under
Title
II
of
the
Unfunded
Mandates
Reform
Act
of
1995
(
UMRA)
(
Public
Law
104
 
4).
Nor
does
it
require
any
special
considerations
under
Executive
Order
12898,
entitled
Federal
Actions
to
Address
Environmental
Justice
in
Minority
Populations
and
Low­
Income
Populations
(
59
FR
7629,
February
16,
1994);
or
OMB
review
or
any
Agency
action
under
Executive
Order
13045,
entitled
Protection
of
Children
from
Environmental
Health
Risks
and
Safety
Risks
(
62
FR
19885,
April
23,
1997).
This
action
does
not
involve
any
technical
standards
that
would
require
Agency
consideration
of
voluntary
consensus
standards
pursuant
to
section
12(
d)
of
the
National
Technology
Transfer
and
Advancement
Act
of
1995
(
NTTAA),
Public
Law
104
 
113,
section
12(
d)
(
15
U.
S.
C.
272
note).
Since
tolerances
and
exemptions
that
are
established
on
the
basis
of
a
petition
under
section
408(
d)
of
the
FFDCA,
such
as
the
tolerance
in
this
final
rule,
do
not
require
the
issuance
of
a
proposed
rule,
the
requirements
of
the
Regulatory
Flexibility
Act
(
RFA)
(
5
U.
S.
C.
601
et
seq.)
do
not
apply.
In
addition,
the
Agency
has
determined
that
this
action
will
not
have
a
substantial
direct
effect
on
States,
on
the
relationship
between
the
national
government
and
the
States,
or
on
the
distribution
of
power
and
responsibilities
among
the
various
levels
of
government,
as
specified
in
Executive
Order
13132,
entitled
Federalism
(
64
FR
43255,
August
10,
1999).
Executive
Order
13132
requires
EPA
to
develop
an
accountable
process
to
ensure
``
meaningful
and
timely
input
by
State
and
local
officials
in
the
development
of
regulatory
policies
that
have
federalism
implications.''
``
Policies
that
have
federalism
implications''
is
defined
in
the
Executive
order
to
include
regulations
that
have
``
substantial
direct
effects
on
the
States,
on
the
relationship
between
the
national
government
and
the
States,
or
on
the
distribution
of
power
and
responsibilities
among
the
various
levels
of
government.''
This
final
rule
directly
regulates
growers,
food
processors,
food
handlers
and
food
retailers,
not
States.
This
action
does
not
alter
the
relationships
or
distribution
of
power
and
responsibilities
established
by
Congress
in
the
preemption
provisions
of
section
408(
n)(
4)
of
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.

XII.
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
record
keeping
requirements.

Dated:
January
21,
2003.
James
Jones,
Acting
Director,
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
374.
2.
Section
180.1223
is
added
to
subpart
D
to
read
as
follows:

§
180.1223
Decanoic
acid;
exemption
from
the
requirement
of
a
tolerance.
An
exemption
from
the
requirement
of
a
tolerance
is
established
for
residues
of
decanoic
acid
in
or
on
all
raw
VerDate
Dec<
13>
2002
15:
02
Feb
18,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00043
Fmt
4700
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
19FER1.
SGM
19FER1
7940
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
68,
No.
33
/
Wednesday,
February
19,
2003
/
Rules
and
Regulations
agricultural
commodities
and
in
processed
commodities,
when
such
residues
result
from
the
use
of
decanoic
acid
as
an
antimicrobial
treatment
in
solutions
containing
a
diluted
end­
use
concentration
of
decanoic
acid
(
up
to
170
ppm
per
application)
on
food
contact
surfaces
such
as
equipment,
pipelines,
tanks,
vats,
fillers,
evaporators,
pasteurizers
and
aseptic
equipment
in
restaurants,
food
service
operations,
dairies,
breweries,
wineries,
beverage
and
food
processing
plants.
[
FR
Doc.
03
 
3843
Filed
2
 
18
 
03;
8:
45
am]

BILLING
CODE
6560
 
50
 
S
DEPARTMENT
OF
ENERGY
41
CFR
Part
109
 
6
RIN
1991
 
AB61
Official
Use
of
Government
Passenger
Carriers
Between
Residence
and
Place
of
Employment
ACTION:
Final
rule.

AGENCY:
Office
of
Management,
Budget
and
Evaluation,
Department
of
Energy
(
DOE).
SUMMARY:
The
Department
of
Energy
publishes
a
final
rule
to
remove
from
the
DOE
Property
Management
Regulation
(
DOE
 
PMR)
certain
overly
broad
restrictions
regarding
the
use
of
government
passenger
carriers
between
an
employee's
residence
and
place
of
employment,
and
to
update
references
to
the
Federal
Management
Regulation.
EFFECTIVE
DATE:
This
rule
is
effective
February
19,
2003.
FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT:
Stephen
J.
Michelsen,
Director,
Office
of
Resource
Management,
Office
of
Procurement
and
Assistance
Management,
Department
of
Energy,
(
202)
586
 
1368,
1000
Independence
Avenue,
SW.,
Washington,
DC
20585.
SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION:
The
DOE
 
PMR
at
41
CFR
109
 
6.4
sets
forth
rules
that
apply
to
the
use
of
Government
passenger
carriers
between
a
DOE
employee's
residence
and
place
of
employment.
Section
109
 
6.402(
b)
restricts
such
use
to
the
Secretary
of
Energy
and
persons
``
engaged
in
field
work,''
as
determined
by
the
Secretary.
DOE
today
is
eliminating
this
restriction
from
the
DOE
 
PMR
because
it
prevents
certain
uses
by
employees
of
Government
passenger
carriers
between
residence
and
place
of
employment
that
are
authorized
by
statute
and
the
implementing
Federal
Management
Regulation.
Other
uses
authorized
by
31
U.
S.
C.
1344
include,
but
are
not
limited
to:
use
by
an
officer
or
employee
with
regard
to
which
the
Secretary,
has
determined,
that
highly
unusual
circumstances
present
a
clear
and
present
danger,
that
an
emergency
exists,
or
that
other
compelling
operational
considerations
make
such
transportation
essential
to
the
conduct
of
official
business;
use
by
a
single
principal
deputy
to
the
Secretary
if
the
Secretary
determines
appropriate;
and
use,
when
approved
by
the
Secretary,
by
officers
or
employees
when
essential
for
the
safe
and
efficient
performance
of
intelligence,
counterintelligence,
protective
services,
or
criminal
law
enforcement
duties.
The
rule
being
promulgated
today
harmonizes
the
DOE
 
PMR
with
the
relevant
statutory
authority
and
allows
Government
vehicles
to
be
used
in
the
manner
authorized
by
the
statute.
In
addition,
this
rule
updates
DOE
 
PMR,
41
CFR
109
 
6.4,
by
replacing
obsolete
references
to
sections
of
the
Federal
Management
Regulation
which
was
revised
in
2000
(
65
FR
54966,
September
12,
2000).
This
rule
is
being
promulgated
as
a
final
rule,
without
providing
for
a
public
comment
period,
or
a
30
day
effective
date
because
it
addresses
a
matter
relating
to
agency
management
or
personnel
or
to
public
property
and
therefore
is
not
subject
to
the
notice
and
comment
requirements
of
the
Administrative
Procedures
Act.
See
5
U.
S.
C.
553(
a).

Regulatory
Review
A.
Review
Under
Executive
Order
12866
This
final
rule
has
been
determined
not
to
be
a
``
significant
regulatory
action''
under
Executive
Order
12866,
``
Regulatory
Planning
and
Review,''
(
58
FR
51735,
October
4,
1993).
Accordingly,
this
final
rule
is
not
subject
to
review
under
that
Executive
Order
by
the
Office
of
Information
and
Regulatory
Affairs
of
the
Office
of
Management
and
Budget
(
OMB).

B.
Review
Under
the
Unfunded
Mandates
Reform
Act
of
1995
Title
II
of
the
Unfunded
Mandates
Reform
Act
of
1995
(
UMRA)
requires
each
Agency
to
assess
the
effects
of
Federal
regulatory
action
on
State,
local,
and
tribal
governments
and
the
private
sector.
DOE
has
determined
that
today's
regulatory
action
would
not
impose
a
Federal
mandate
on
State,
local,
or
tribal
governments
or
on
the
private
sector.

C.
Review
Under
Executive
Order
12988
With
respect
to
the
review
of
existing
regulations
and
the
promulgation
of
new
regulations,
section
3(
a)
of
Executive
Order
12988,
``
Civil
Justice
Reform,''
61
FR
4729
(
February
7,
1996),
imposes
on
Executive
agencies
the
general
duty
to
adhere
to
the
following
requirements:
(
1)
Eliminate
drafting
errors
and
ambiguity;
(
2)
write
regulations
to
minimize
litigation;
and
(
3)
provide
a
clear
legal
standard
for
affected
conduct
rather
than
a
general
standard
and
promote
simplification
and
burden
reduction.
With
regard
to
the
review
required
by
section
3(
a),
section
3(
b)
of
Executive
Order
12988
specifically
requires
that
Executive
agencies
make
every
reasonable
effort
to
ensure
that
the
regulation:
(
1)
Clearly
specifies
the
preemptive
effect,
if
any;
(
2)
clearly
specifies
any
effect
on
existing
Federal
law
or
regulation;
(
3)
provides
a
clear
legal
standard
for
affected
conduct
while
promoting
simplification
and
burden
reduction;
(
4)
specifies
the
retroactive
effect,
if
any;
(
5)
adequately
defines
key
terms;
and
(
6)
addresses
other
important
issues
affecting
clarity
and
general
draftsmanship
under
any
guidelines
issued
by
the
Attorney
General.
Section
3(
c)
of
Executive
Order
12988
requires
Executive
Agencies
to
review
regulations
in
light
of
applicable
standards
in
section
3(
a)
and
3(
b)
to
determine
whether
they
are
met
or
it
is
unreasonable
to
meet
one
or
more
of
them.
DOE
has
completed
the
required
review
and
determined
that,
to
the
extent
permitted
by
law,
this
final
rule
meets
the
relevant
standards
of
Executive
Order
12988.

D.
Review
Under
the
Regulatory
Flexibility
Act
The
Regulatory
Flexibility
Act
of
1980,
Public
Law
96
 
354,
requires
preparation
of
a
regulatory
flexibility
analysis
for
any
rule
which
is
subject
to
notice
and
comment
rulemaking
requirements.
As
noted
above,
this
rule
addresses
a
matter
relating
to
agency
management
or
personnel
or
to
public
property
and
maybe
is
not
subject
to
the
notice
and
comment
requirements
of
the
Administrative
Procedures
Act.

E.
Review
Under
Paperwork
Reduction
Act
No
new
information
collection
requirements
subject
to
the
Paperwork
Reduction
Act
(
44
U.
S.
C.
3501
et
seq.)
are
imposed
by
today's
regulatory
action.

F.
Review
Under
the
National
Environmental
Policy
Act
This
rule
eliminates
certain
restrictions
on
the
official
use
of
government
passenger
carriers
by
DOE
employees
between
residence
and
place
of
employment.
Implementation
of
this
rule
will
not
result
in
environmental
VerDate
Dec<
13>
2002
15:
02
Feb
18,
2003
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00044
Fmt
4700
Sfmt
4700
E:\
FR\
FM\
19FER1.
SGM
19FER1
