13568 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 55 / Friday, March 21, 1997 / Proposed Rules

40 CFR Part 300

[FRL–5711–3]

National Oil and Hazardous

Substances Pollution Contingency

Plan; National Priorities List

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Notice of intent to delete the

Cheshire Ground Water Contamination

site from the National Priorities List:

request for comments.

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) Region I announces its

intent to delete the Cheshire Ground

Water Contamination site from the

National Priorities List (NPL) and

requests public comment on this action.

The NPL constitutes Appendix B of 40

CFR part 300 which is the National Oil

and Hazardous Substances Pollution

Contingency Plan (NCP), which EPA

promulgated pursuant to Section 105 of

the Comprehensive Environmental

Response, Compensation, and Liability

Act, as amended by the Superfund

Amendments and Reauthorization Act

(CERCLA). EPA and the State of

Connecticut have determined that all

appropriate CERCLA actions have been

implemented and that no further clean

up at the site is appropriate. Moreover,

EPA and the State of Connecticut have

determined that remedial activities

conducted at the site to date have been

protective of public health, welfare, and

the environment.

DATES: Comments concerning this site

may be submitted on or before April 21,

1997.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed

to: Jane Dolan, Remedial Project

Manager, U.S. EPA Region I (HBT), JFK

Federal Building, Boston, MA 02203.

Comprehensive information on this

site is available through the EPA Region

I public docket, which is located at

EPA’s Region I office and is available for

viewing by appointment only from

Monday through Friday, excluding

holidays. Requests for appointment or

copies of the contents from the Regional

public docket should be directed to the

EPA Region I Records Center.

The address for the Region I Records

Center is: EPA Records Center, 90 Canal

Street, 1st Floor, Boston, MA 02114,

(617) 573–5729.

A copy of the Regional public docket

is also available for viewing at the

Cheshire Ground Water Contamination

site information repository at: Cheshire

Public Library, 104 Main Street,

Cheshire, CT 06410, (203) 272–2245.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jane

Dolan, Remedial Project Manager, U.S.

EPA Region I (HBT), JFK Federal

Building, Boston, MA 02203, (617) 573–

9698.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Introduction

II. NPL Deletion Criteria

III. Deletion Procedures

IV. Basis for Intended Site Deletions

I. Introduction

The Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA) Region I announces its intent to

delete the Cheshire Ground Water

Contamination Site, Cheshire,

Connecticut, from the National

Priorities List (NPL), which constitutes

Appendix B of the National Oil and

Hazardous Substances Pollution

Contingency Plan, 40 CFR part 300

(NCP), and requests comments on this

deletion. The EPA identifies sites that

appear to present a significant risk to

public health, welfare, or the

environment and maintains the NPL as

the list of those sites. Sites on the NPL

may be the subject of remedial actions

financed by the Hazardous Substance

Superfund Response Trust Fund (Fund).

Pursuant to § 300.425(e)(3) of the NCP,

any site deleted from the NPL remains

eligible for Fund-financed remedial

actions if conditions at the site warrant

such action.

The EPA will accept comments

concerning this proposal for thirty (30)

days after publication of this notice in

the Federal Register.

Section II of this document explains

the criteria for deleting sites from the

NPL. Section III discusses procedures

that EPA is using for this action. Section

IV discusses the history of the site and

how the site meets the deletion criteria.

II. NPL Deletion Criteria

The NCP establishes criteria that the

Agency uses to delete sites from the

NPL. In accordance with 40 CFR

300.425(e)(1), sites may be deleted from

or recategorized on the NPL where no

further response is appropriate. In

making a determination to delete a

release from the NPL, EPA shall

consider, in consultation with the state,

whether any of the following criteria

have been met:

(i) responsible parties or other persons

have implemented all appropriate

response actions required;

(ii) all appropriate Fund-financed

response under CERCLA has been

implemented, and no further response

action by responsible parties is

appropriate; or

(iii) the response action has shown

that the release poses no significant

threat to public health or the

environment and, therefore, taking of

remedial measures is not appropriate.

Prior to deciding to delete a site from

the NPL, EPA must determine that the

remedy, or existing site conditions at

sites where no action is required, is

protective of public health, welfare, and

the environment.

Deletion of a site from the NPL does

not preclude eligibility for subsequent

Fund-financed actions if future site

conditions warrant such action. Section

300.425(e)(3) of the NCP states that

Fund-financed actions may be taken at

sites that have been deleted from the

NPL.

III. Deletion Procedures

In the NPL rulemaking published on

October 15, 1984 (49 FR 40320), the

Agency solicited and received

comments on whether the notice of

comment procedures followed for

adding sites to the NPL also should be

used before sites are deleted. Comments

also were received in response to the

amendments to the NCP proposed on

February 12, 1985 (50 FR 5862). Formal

notice and comment procedures for

deleting sites from the NPL were

subsequently added as a part of the

March 8, 1990 amendments to the NCP

(55 FR 8666, 8846). Those procedures

are set out in § 300.425(e)(4) of the NCP.

Deletion of sites from the NPL does not

itself create, alter, or revoke any

individual’s rights or obligations. The

NPL is designed primarily for

informational purposes and to assist

Agency management.

Upon determination that at least one

of the criteria described in

§ 300.425(e)(1) has been met, EPA may

formally begin deletion procedures. The

following procedures were used for the

intended deletion of this site:

(1) EPA Region I and the State of

Connecticut agreed, in the No Action

Record of Decision, that the five-year

review was not warranted.

(2) EPA Region I has recommended

deletion and prepared the relevant

documents.

(3) The State of Connecticut has

concurred with the deletion decision.

(4) Concurrent with this National

Notice of Intent to Delete, a local notice

has been published in local newspapers

and has been distributed to appropriate

Federal, State and local officials, and

other interested parties.

(5) The Region has made all relevant

documents available in the Regional

Office and local site information

repositories.

These procedures have been

completed for the Cheshire Ground

Water Contamination site. This Federal

Register document, and a concurrent
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 55 / Friday, March 21, 1997 / Proposed Rules 13569

notice in the local newspaper in the

vicinity of the site, announces the

initiation of a 30-day public comment

period and the availability of the Notice

of Intent to Delete. The public is asked

to comment on EPA’s intention to delete

the site from the NPL; all critical

documents needed to evaluate EPA’s

decision are included in the information

repository and deletion docket.

Upon completion of the 30-day public

comment period, the EPA Regional

Office (Region I) will evaluate these

comments before the final decision to

delete. The Region will prepare a

Responsiveness Summary , which will

address comments received during the

public comment period. The

responsiveness summary will be made

available to the public at the

information repository. Members of the

public are welcome to contact the EPA

Regional Office to obtain a copy of the

responsiveness summary, when

available. If EPA still determines that

deletion from the NPL is appropriate

after receiving public comments, a final

notice of deletion will be published in

the Federal Register. However, it is not

until a notice of deletion is published in

the Federal Register that the site would

be actually deleted.

IV. Basis for Intended Site Deletions

The following summary provides the

Agency’s rationale for deleting the

Cheshire Ground Water Contamination

site from the NPL.

The Cheshire Ground Water

Contamination site which is located in

the northwestern corner of Cheshire,

New Haven County, Connecticut,

includes the industrial property at 604

West Johnson Avenue where disposal of

waste material was conducted and, in

addition, those places where waste

material emanating from the property

has come to be located in the

groundwater. The Site is immediately

bounded by vacant land to the east,

industrial property to the south, and

Knotter Drive and Route 691 to the west

and north, respectively.

EPA involvement with the Site

commenced in 1985 after the Site was

identified through a review of

background information for another

property in Cheshire. EPA sampled

ground water from on-site monitoring

wells, subsurface soils, surface water,

and sediment on the 604 West Johnson

Avenue property, and ground water

from two residential drinking water

wells in support of a Site Inspection of

the property completed in 1986.

Based on this investigation which

found groundwater both on- and off-site

contaminated with volatile organic

compounds, the Site was proposed to

the National Priorities List (NPL) in June

1988 and promulgated on August 30,

1990. The Site was defined as a plume

of contamination from an unknown

source detected in wells on property

located at 604 West Johnson Avenue

and in a nearby residential well.

The Connecticut Department of

Environmental Protection (CTDEP)

entered into Consent Agreements with

Cheshire Associates, the owner of the

property at that time, and North

American Philips Corporation, the

tenant of the property, in 1984 following

the identification of groundwater and

soil contamination. The owner of the

property agreed to remove contaminated

soil, and monitor the water quality at

two private water supply wells on a

semi-annual basis until 1988. The

tenant of the property at the time agreed

to test all in ground fuel and/or

chemical storage tanks and their

associated piping to determine their

structural integrity and their ability to

prohibit the introduction of the tanks

contents to the waters of the state. A

10,000 gallon #4 fuel oil tank was

cleaned and determined to be leak free

on September 9, 1982. This tank was

allegedly filled with concrete slurry

around 1985.

Twenty cubic yards of volatile

organic- and oil-contaminated soil were

excavated from two areas on the

property on October 19, 1983. CTDEP

approved the disposal of this nonhazardous waste on January 6, 1984.

The material was subsequently removed

from the property and disposed of on

January 25, 1984.

The property owner voluntarily

arranged for bottled water to be

provided to the remaining residence in

1986 (the other residence was

demolished for commercial

development) and subsequently

connected the home to municipal water

in 1987.

EPA completed a geohydrologic study

and sampling at the site in 1996.

Volatile organic compounds and metals

were detected in groundwater at levels

below the levels established as safe in

the Safe Drinking Water Act. Low levels

of pesticides, semi-volatile organic

compounds, and metals detected in

shallow soils around the northern side

of the building were determined not to

endanger workers nor the health of

residents in a future development of the

property. EPA also determined that the

low levels of pesticides and copper

detected in on-site pond water and

sediments would not create a risk to

human health or aquatic organisms

through exposure to the pond water or

sediments. All of the estimated

maximum cancer risks associated with

exposure to contamination at the site

fall within EPA’s acceptable risk range.

As outlined in the NCP, a cancer risk at

a Superfund site is considered

acceptable if it ranges between one in

ten thousand and one in one million

(1×10¥4 to 1×10¥6). (The carcinogenic

risk associated with a future potential

residential scenario is 4.3×10¥4. This

risk is attributable to one contaminant,

arsenic. The risk attributable to other

compounds is at or below the lower end

of the acceptable risk range (i.e., 10¥6).

Although the risk associated with

arsenic is at the upper end of the

acceptable risk range (i.e., 10¥4), the

contaminant level is below the level

established as safe in the Safe Drinking

Water Act.) In addition, the human

health risk assessment concluded that

non-cancer adverse health effects were

not likely at this site. Based on EPA’s

investigation from 1994 to 1996, it was

determined that the existing site

conditions are currently protective of

public health and the environment and

the site meets EPA’s deletion criteria.

The Proposed Plan for the Record of

Decision was released for the thirty (30)

day public comment period on October

10, 1996. The Proposed Plan

recommended that as a result of

previous removal actions ordered by the

State, and EPA’s recent investigation of

the site, no further remedial action was

warranted. Three public comments were

submitted on EPA’s Proposed Plan.

Based upon the favorable community

response, it was determined that no

change to EPA’s Proposed Plan was

necessary.

The Record of Decision (ROD) was

signed by the Director of the Office of

Site Remediation and Restoration on

December 31, 1996. The No Action ROD

recommendation includes: No further

remedial action, and no long-term

monitoring or management controls.

The five-year review requirements of

Section 121 of CERCLA and of

§ 300.430(f)(4)(ii) of the NCP are not

applicable to the Cheshire Ground

Water Contamination site because

contaminants do not remain in the

groundwater, soils, surface water and

sediment above levels that would

prevent unlimited use and unrestricted

exposure to the site. No operation and

maintenance will be required at the

Cheshire Ground Water Contamination

site. EPA, with the concurrence of the

State of Connecticut, has determined

that the release poses no significant

threat to public health or the

environment and, therefore, taking of

remedial measures is not appropriate.
13570 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 55 / Friday, March 21, 1997 / Proposed Rules

Dated: March 7, 1997.

Frank Ciavatieri,

Acting Director, Office of Site Remediation

and Restoration.

[FR Doc. 97–7066 Filed 3–20–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 1

[WT Docket No. 97–82; FCC 97–60]

Competitive Bidding Procedures

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: In this Notice of Proposed

Rule Making (‘‘NPRM’’), the

Commission proposes changes to its

general competitive bidding rules that

are intended to simplify regulations and

eliminate unnecessary rules wherever

possible, increase the efficiency of the

competitive bidding process, and

provide more specific guidance to

auction participants while also giving

them more flexibility.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on

or before March 27, 1997, and reply

comments must be submitted on or

before April 16, 1997. Written

comments by the public on the

proposed and/or modified information

collections are due March 27, 1997.

Written comments must be submitted by

the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) on the proposed and/or modified

information collections on or before

May 20, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Office of the Secretary,

Federal Communications Commission,

Washington, DC 20554. In addition to

filing comments with the Secretary, a

copy of any comments on information

collections contained herein should be

submitted to Dorothy Conway, Federal

Communications Commission, Room

234, 1919 M Street, NW., Washington

DC 20554, or via the Internet to

dconway@fcc.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mark Bollinger, Wireless

Telecommunications Bureau, (202) 416–

0660. For additional information

concerning the information collections

contained in this NPRM, contact

Dorothy Conway at (202) 418–0217, or

via the Internet at dconway@fcc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This

summarizes the Commission’s Notice of

Proposed Rule Making in FCC Number

97–60; WT Docket No. 97–82, adopted

on February 20, 1997, and released on

February 28, 1997. The complete text of

this NPRM is available for inspection

and copying during normal business

hours in the FCC Reference Center

(Room 239), 1919 M Street, NW.,

Washington, DC, and also may be

purchased from the Commission’s copy

contractor, International Transcription

Service, (202) 857–3800, 2100 M Street,

NW., Suite 140, Washington, DC 20037.

The complete NPRM is also available on

the Commission’s Internet home page

(http://www.fcc.gov/).

The NPRM contains proposed or

modified information collections subject

to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

(PRA). It has been submitted to the

Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) for review under the PRA. The

Commission, as part of its continuing

effort to reduce paperwork burdens,

invites the general public, the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB), and

other Federal agencies to comment on

the information collections contained in

this NPRM, as required by the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Pub.

L. 104–13. Public and agency comments

are due at the same time as other

comments on this NPRM; OMB

notification of action is due 60 days

from date of publication of this NPRM

in the Federal Register. Comments are

requested concerning (a) whether the

proposed collection of information is

necessary for the proper performance of

the functions of the Commission,

including whether the information shall

have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of

the Commission’s burden estimate; (c)

ways to enhance the quality, utility, and

clarity of the information collected; and

(d) ways to minimize the burden of the

collection of information on the

respondents, including the use of

automated collection techniques or

other forms of information technology.

OMB Approval Number: N/A.

Title: In the Matter of Amendment of

Part 1 of the Commission’s Rules—

Competitive Bidding Proceeding, WT

Docket No. 97–82, FCC Docket No. 97–

60.

Type of Review: New collection.

Respondents: Businesses or other forprofit entities.

Number of Respondents: 45,000.

Estimated Time for Response: 13

hours.

Total Annual Burden: 585,000 hours.

Estimated Cost to Respondents: 2,848

dollars.

Needs and Uses: The Commission’s

general competitive bidding rules

require applicants for all auctionable

services to submit: (1) Ownership

information, (2) terms of joint bidding

agreements, (3) gross revenue

calculations, and (4) evidence of

environmental impact. Furthermore, in

case a licensee defaults or loses its

license, the Commission retains the

discretion to re-auction such licenses. If

licenses are re-auctioned, the new

license winners would be required at

the close of the re-auction to comply

with the same disclosure requirements

explained above.

The information collected will be

used by the Commission to determine

whether the applicant is legally,

technically, and financially qualified to

bid in the spectrum auctions and hold

a license for spectrum based services.

Without such information the

Commission could not determine

whether to issue the license to the

successful applicant and therefore fulfill

its statutory responsibilities in

accordance with the Communications

Act of 1934, as amended.

Synopsis of Notice of Proposed Rule

Making

1. The Commission seeks comment on

a variety of proposals and tentative

conclusions set forth below. In addition,

it seeks comment on whether

competitive bidding provisions that

have been adopted in specific services

but not included in the part 1 rules

should be included in part 1 and, if so,

whether any amendments to these

provisions are needed in light of the

proposal, discussed below, to apply

these general competitive bidding rules

to future auctions.

2. As the Commission has gained

experience in conducting auctions, it

has found that much of the auction

process can be standardized and that

conducting rule makings for each

individual service slows down the

delivery of service to the public because

it may result in regulatory delays before

the licensing process begins. Thus, the

Commission propose that, to the extent

possible, all future auctions be governed

by the general competitive bidding rules

adopted in this proceeding. It envisions

that only a limited number of

competitive bidding regulations would

need to be adopted on a service-specific

basis. The Commission seeks comment

on whether the rules adopted in this

proceeding should supersede all

existing, service-specific competitive

bidding rules for future auctions. It

proposes that this action would affect

all services that are subject to pending

proceedings and any services that have

existing competitive bidding rules that

might apply to licenses that have not yet

been auctioned or that must be

reauctioned. The Commission seeks

comment on whether, alternatively, it

should phase in the applicability of the

revised general competitive bidding

rules at a future date, such that, at a