Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 188 / Monday, September 29, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 50875

water standards. Additional information

can be found in the Health Consultation

by the Agency for Toxic Substances and

Disease Registry, dated May 8, 1995.

7. No one has ever followed up ‘‘on

anything’’ at the site—only one rabbit

and one fish were tested during the

cleanup. How do we know that animals

and fish aren’t still being contaminated?

Is animal/biota testing still taking place?

Seventy-five fish samples were taken

in the area near the site and analyzed for

polychlorinated biphenyls, pesticides,

volatile organic compounds, and metals,

including arsenic, mercury, and

thallium. The samples were collected by

the Louisiana Department of

Environmental Quality and Louisiana

Office of Public Health in June and July

of 1993. No elevated levels of

polychlorinated biphenyls and

pesticides were detected in the fish. No

volatile organic compounds were

detected in the fish, either. Additional

information can be found in the Health

Consultation by the Agency for Toxic

Substances and Disease Registry, dated

May 8, 1995.

8. Pesticides and PCBs have been

detected in channel catfish, crappie

bass, * * *. Everybody in this area are

consumers of the fish, crawfish, and

wild game obtained in these waterways

and woods. A fishing and hunting ban

should be established in the area of the

site.

EPA is unaware of the alleged

pesticide and polychlorinated biphenyls

detections in the fish. Sampling results

and data collected from supporting state

agencies and EPA indicate otherwise. In

addition, EPA does not establish

hunting and fishing bans. Those actions

are taken by state and local health

agencies.

9. The site should be fenced and

clearly marked as a hazard—establish

institutional controls.

Installation of fences around all

capped areas to restrict access has been

in place since the remedial construction

activities were completed. The fences

are inspected and maintained as part of

the ongoing Operations & Maintenance

site activities. Institutional controls

such as deed restrictions were

established along with posting of

warning signs on all fenced areas. The

gravel roads around the fenced areas

allow for continued recreational use of

adjacent lands and the borrow lake

while diverting traffic around and away

from the capped areas.

10. The site is adding to the overall

pollution of the area—such as the

‘‘illegal’’ injection well in Bayou Sorrel.

The permit for that well should have

never been renewed—that well is

‘‘illegal.’’

The permits for injection wells in

Louisiana are given by the Louisiana

Department of Natural Resources and

checked for federal regulations

compliance by EPA. The permitted,

legal injection well within Bayou Sorrel

currently meets all federal standards

and has satisfactorily passed state

inspections.

11. The community unanimously

objected to the cap/containment remedy

for this site, but EPA, the State and the

industries that polluted the site went

ahead and did what they wanted to

anyway. Has the public ever ‘‘gotten

their wishes’’ when it comes to

Superfund cleanups or permits? Or can

someone high up in EPA tell them that

the ‘‘fix is already in’’ so we can stop

wasting our time commenting on things

that have already been decided?

EPA encourages the community to

participate at all points during the

Superfund process. EPA invited the

community to participate in selecting

the remedy for the Bayou Sorrel

Superfund Site during the Record of

Decision phase in 1986. At that time,

the community raised a number of

questions and concerns regarding

remediation of the site. These comments

can be found in the Record of Decision

dated November 14, 1986. As a result of

the community’s input and other

considerations, the cap/containment

remedy for the Bayou Sorrel Superfund

Site was selected as the best alternative

after evaluating performance, reliability,

engineering implementability, public

health and welfare, environmental

impacts, institutional factors, and costs.

EPA solicited and reviewed

comments regarding its intent to delete

the Bayou Sorrel Superfund Site from

the National Priorities List. The decision

to delete any Superfund site from the

National Priorities List is not final until

EPA has extended an opportunity to the

public to comment on the proposed

action. At this time, EPA has decided to

move forward with its decision to delete

the Bayou Sorrel Superfund Site from

the National Priorities List, but only

after careful consideration and response

to all public comments. EPA has also

established a Superfund Ombudsman

position to address any concerns from

the public on the Superfund process.

Please feel free to contact the EPA

Region 6 Superfund Ombudsman at 1–

800–533–3508, to share any concerns

which were not resolved to your

satisfaction.

[FR Doc. 97–25653 Filed 9–26–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 97–102; RM–8969]

Radio Broadcasting Services; Slidell

and Kenner, LA

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Commission, at the

request of Phase II Broadcasting, reallots

Channel 287C1 from Slidell to Kenner,

Louisiana, and modifies Station WLTSFM’s license to specify Kenner as its

community of license. See 62 FR 15869,

April 3, 1997. Channel 287C1 can be

allotted to Kenner in compliance with

the Commission’s minimum distance

separation requirements at the site

specified in Station WLTS-FM’s license.

The coordinates for Channel 287C1 at

Kenner are 29–58–57 NL and 89–57–09

WL. With this action, this proceeding is

terminated.

EFFECTIVE DATE: November 3, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pam

Blumenthal, Mass Media Bureau, (202)

418–2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

synopsis of the Commission’s Report

and Order, MM Docket No. 97–102,

adopted September 10, 1997, and

released September 19, 1997. The full

text of this Commission decision is

available for inspection and copying

during normal business hours in the

FCC Reference Center (Room 239), 1919

M Street, NW, Washington, DC. The

complete text of this decision may also

be purchased from the Commission’s

copy contractor, ITS, Inc., (202) 857–

3800, 1231 20th Street, NW,

Washington, DC 20036.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

Radio broadcasting.

Part 73 of title 47 of the Code of

Federal Regulations is amended as

follows:

PART 73—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for Part 73

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336.

§ 73.202 [Amended]

2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM

Allotments under Louisiana, is

amended by removing Slidell, Channel

287C1 and adding Kenner, Channel

287C1.
50876 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 188 / Monday, September 29, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

Federal Communications Commission.

John A. Karousos,

Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules

Division, Mass Media Bureau.

[FR Doc. 97–25591 Filed 9–26–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–F

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 97–133; RM–9086]

Radio Broadcasting Services; Lake

City, MN

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This document allots Channel

235A to Lake City, Minnesota, as that

community’s second FM broadcast

service in response to a petition filed by

Phoenix Media Group, Inc. See 62 FR

27711, May 21, 1997. The coordinates

for Channel 235A at Lake City are 44–

22–58 and 92–21–45. There is a site

restriction 10.6 kilometeres (6.6 miles)

southwest of the communtiy. With this

action, this proceeding is terminated.

DATES: Effective November 3, 1997. The

window period for filing applications

for Channel 235A at Lake City,

Minnesota, will open on November 3,

1997, and close on December 4, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kathleen Scheuerle, Mass Media

Bureau, (202) 418–2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

summary of the Commission’s Report

and Order, MM Docket No. 97–133,

adopted September 10, 1997, and

released September 19, 1997. The full

text of this Commission decision is

available for inspection and copying

during normal business hours in the

Commission’s Reference Center (Room

239), 1919 M Street, NW., Washington,

DC. The complete text of this decision

may also be purchased from the

Commission’s copy contractors,

International Transcription Services,

Inc., 1231 20th Street, NW.,

Washington, DC. 20036, (202) 857–3800,

facsimile (202) 857–3805.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

Radio broadcasting.

Part 73 of title 47 of the Code of

Federal Regulations is amended as

follows:

PART 73—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for Part 73

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336.

§ 73.202 [Amended]

2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM

Allotments under Minnesota, is

amended by adding Channel 235A at

Lake City.

Federal Communications Commission.

John A. Karousos,

Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules

Division, Mass Media Bureau.

[FR Doc. 97–25590 Filed 9–26–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–F

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration

49 CFR Part 594

[Docket No. 97–046; Notice 2]

RIN 2127–AG73

Schedule of Fees Authorized by 49

U.S.C. 30141; Fee for Review and

Processing of Conformity Certificates

for Nonconforming Vehicles

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration (NHTSA),

Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This rule amends NHTSA’s

regulations that prescribe a schedule of

fees authorized by 49 U.S.C. 30141 for

various functions performed by the

agency with respect to the importation

of motor vehicles. The amendment

establishes a fee for the agency’s review

and processing of statements that

registered importers submit to certify

that vehicles that were not originally

manufactured to conform to all

applicable Federal motor vehicle safety

standards have been brought into

conformity with those standards. The

fee, which is set at $14.00 for fiscal year

1998, applies to all vehicles for which

conformity certificates are submitted to

NHTSA, including vehicles imported

from Canada, which currently account

for over 98 percent of the

nonconforming vehicles that are

processed by NHTSA.

DATES: The amendment established by

this final rule will become effective on

October 29, 1997.

Any petitions for reconsideration

must be received by NHTSA not later

than November 13, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Any petitions for

reconsideration should refer to the

docket and notice numbers above and

be submitted to: Docket Section,

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration, 400 Seventh Street,

S.W., Washington, D.C. 20590. Docket

hours are 9:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday

through Friday.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

non-legal issues: Clive Van Orden,

Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance,

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration, 400 Seventh Street,

S.W., Washington, D.C. 20590 (202–

366–2830). For legal issues: Coleman

Sachs, Office of Chief Counsel, National

Highway Traffic Safety Administration,

400 Seventh Street, S.W., Washington,

D.C. 20590 (202–366–5238).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Background

This rule was preceded by a notice of

proposed rulemaking (NPRM) that

NHTSA published on July 15, 1997 (62

FR 37847), proposing to establish a fee

for the agency’s review and processing

of conformity certificates submitted by

registered importers and to set the fee

for fiscal year (FY) 1998 at $17.00 per

vehicle. The NPRM stated that 49 U.S.C.

30141 permits an importer who is

registered with NHTSA (a ‘‘registered

importer’’) to import a motor vehicle

that was not originally manufactured to

conform to all applicable Federal motor

vehicle safety standards (FMVSS),

provided that NHTSA has decided that

the vehicle is eligible for importation.

Once a motor vehicle has been declared

eligible for importation, it is imported

under bond by a registered importer or

by an individual who has executed a

contract or other agreement with a

registered importer to bring the vehicle

into compliance with applicable

FMVSS. When the registered importer

completes all necessary alterations, it

must certify to NHTSA that the vehicle

meets the FMVSS. See 49 U.S.C.

30146(b) and 49 CFR 592.6(e). This is

accomplished by submitting, in

accordance with regulations and

guidance issued by NHTSA, a package

containing photographic and

documentary evidence of the vehicle’s

conformance with each applicable

FMVSS. Each of these packages is

reviewed by NHTSA’s Office of Vehicle

Safety Compliance (OVSC) to verify the

accuracy of the information it contains.

If NHTSA questions the registered

importer’s certification of compliance,

the registered importer is notified

pursuant to 49 CFR 592.8(c) to hold the

vehicle for inspection. Acceptance of

the certification ends the agency’s

involvement with the vehicle.

The NPRM noted that NHTSA staff

expends much time reviewing and

evaluating routine compliance packages,

and even more time if a package does

not indicate conformance with the

FMVSS, necessitating follow-up action.