21490 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 2, 1995 / Proposed Rules

Dated: March 21, 1995.

Stanley L. Laskowski,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.

[FR Doc. 95–10707 Filed 5–1–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[OH50–1–6077b; FRL–5183–6]

Approval And Promulgation Of

Implementation Plans And Designation

Of Areas For Air Quality Planning

Purposes: State Of Ohio

AGENCY: United States Environmental

Protection Agency (USEPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The USEPA proposes to

approve the redesignation request and

maintenance plan for Toledo, Ohio as a

revision to Ohio’s State Implementation

Plan (SIP) for ozone. In the final rules

section of this Federal Register, the

USEPA is approving the State’s

redesignation request and maintenance

plan as a direct final rule without prior

proposal because USEPA views this as

a noncontroversial revision amendment

and anticipates no adverse comments. A

detailed rationale for the approval is set

forth in the direct final rule. If no

adverse comments are received in

response to that direct final rule, no

further activity is contemplated in

relation to this proposed rule. If USEPA

receives adverse comments, the direct

final rule will be withdrawn and all

public comments received will be

addressed in a subsequent final rule

based on the proposed rule. USEPA will

not institute a second comment period

on this notice. Any parties interested in

commenting on this notice should do so

at this time.

DATES: Comments on this action must be

received by June 1, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be mailed to:

William MacDowell, Chief, Regulation

Development Section, Air

Enforcement Branch (AE–17J), United

States Environmental Protection

Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois, 60604

Copies of the State submittal and

USEPA’s analysis of it are available for

inspection at:

Regulation Development Section, Air

Enforcement Branch (AE–17J), United

States Environmental Protection

Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois, 60604

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Angela Lee, (312) 353–5142, Regulation

Development Section, Air Enforcement

Branch (AE–17J), United States

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,

Chicago, Illinois 60604.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For

additional information see the direct

final rule published in the final rules

section of this Federal Register.

Dated: March 14, 1995.

Valdas V. Adamkus,

Regional Administrtor.

[FR Doc. 95–10694 Filed 5–1–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–M

40 CFR Part 82

[FRL–5199–5]

Reconsideration of the Significant New

Alternatives Policy Rule

AGENCY: United States Environmental

Protection Agency.

ACTION: Proposed stay.

SUMMARY: On December 8, 1994 EPA

announced a 3-month administrative

stay (59 FR 63255) based on EPA’s

decision to reconsider the Significant

New Alternative Policy (SNAP) rule as

it applies to substitutes manufactured

solely for export (59 FR 13044, March

18, 1994). This action stays the

effectiveness of the SNAP rule as it

applies to substances produced solely

for export, including the applicable

compliance dates, until EPA takes final

action reconsidering the SNAP rule. At

that time, EPA will also take final

action, as appropriate, establishing the

effective date of the rule for such

substances.

DATES: Comments on this proposal must

be received by June 1, 1995 at the

address below. A public hearing, if

requested, will be held in Washington,

D.C. Requests for a hearing should be

submitted to Robert Waugh by June 1,

1995 at the address below. If a hearing

is requested, EPA will publish notice of

such hearing in the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on this

proposed action should be addressed to

Robert Waugh, Substitutes Analysis and

Review Branch, Stratospheric Protection

Division, Office of Air and Radiation,

(6205–J) 401 M Street, SW, Washington,

DC 20460. Comments should be strictly

limited to the subject matter of this

proposal, the scope of which is

discussed below.

DOCKET: Pursuant to section 307(d)(1) of

the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7607(d)(1), this

action is a public docket for this action,

A–91–42, which is available for public

inspection and copying between 8 a.m.

and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, at

the following address. A reasonable fee

may be charged for copying. U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Docket No. A–91–42, Air Docket (6102),

Room M1500, Waterside Mall, 401 M

Street SW., Washington, DC 20460 (202)

245–3639.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert Waugh at (202) 233–9152 or Fax

(202) 233–9577.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

On December 8, 1994, EPA

announced that, pursuant to CAA

section 307(d)(7)(B), 42 U.S.C.

7607(d)(7)(B), it was convening a

proceeding for reconsideration of the

SNAP rule as it applies to substances

manufactured for export (59 FR 63255).

In that notice, USEPA also announced a

3-month administrative stay of the

SNAP rule as it applies to substitutes

produced solely for export. However,

USEPA will be unable to complete

reconsideration (including any

appropriate regulatory revision) of the

rule within the 3-month period

expressly provided by CAA section

307(d)(7)(B). Therefore, EPA is

proposing to temporarily extend the stay

of the SNAP rule as it applies to

substitute use for export until EPA

completes its reconsideration and final

rulemaking action. If USEPA takes final

action to impose this stay, the stay

would extend until the effective date of

USEPA’s final action following

reconsideration of the SNAP rule.

II. Authority for Stay and

Reconsideration

This notice proposes, pursuant to

CAA section 110(c), 301(a)(1) and

307(d)(1)(B), 42 U.S.C. 7410(c),

7601(a)(1) and 7607(d)(1)(B), to

temporarily stay the elements of the rule

that apply to substitutes manufactured

solely for export, as well as applicable

compliance dates beyond the three

months expressly provided in section

307(d)(7)(B). This stay is only effective

if and as long as it is necessary to

complete reconsideration (including any

appropriate regulatory action) of the

referenced elements of the rule.

Pursuant to the rulemaking procedures

set forth in CAA section 307(d), 42

U.S.C. 7607(d), USEPA hereby requests

public comment on this proposed

temporary extension of the three-month

stay.

III. Administrative Requirements

It has been determined that this notice

is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’

under the terms of Executive Order

12866 (58 FR 51735; October 4, 1993)
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 2, 1995 / Proposed Rules 21491

and is therefore not subject to OMB

review.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 82

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control.

Dated: April 24, 1995.

Carol M. Browner,

Administrator.

40 CFR part 82 is amended as follows:

PART 82—PROTECTION OF

STRATOSPHERIC OZONE

1. The authority citation of part 82

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7414, 7601, 7671–

7671q.

2. Section 82.174 is amended by

adding paragraph (e) to read as follows:

§ 82.174 Prohibitions.

* * * * *

(e) Rules Stayed for Reconsideration.

Notwithstanding any other provision of

this subpart, the effectiveness of subpart

G is stayed from May 2, 1995 to until

the effective date of USEPA’s final

action following reconsideration of the

SNAP rule only as applied to use of

substitutes for export.

[FR Doc. 95–10624 Filed 5–1–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 300

[FRL–5200–3]

National Priorities List for Uncontrolled

Hazardous Waste Sites

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal.

SUMMARY: The Comprehensive

Environmental Response,

Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980

(‘‘CERCLA’’ or ‘‘the Act’’), as amended,

requires that the National Oil and

Hazardous Substances Pollution

Contingency Plan (‘‘NCP’’) include a list

of national priorities among the known

releases or threatened releases of

hazardous substances, pollutants, or

contaminants throughout the United

States. The National Priorities List

(‘‘NPL’’) which is appendix B to 40 CFR

part 300 constitutes this list.

In this document, the Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA) is withdrawing

its proposal to list the Texas Eastern

Kosciusko Compressor Station site on

the NPL. Because of the unique

circumstances surrounding this site,

NPL listing has been deemed

unnecessary. The rationale supporting

this action are explained further in the

Supplementary Information section

below.

DATES: This withdrawal is effective May

2, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: June

Wiaz, Hazardous Site Evaluation

Division, (703) 603–8864, Office of

Emergency and Remedial Response

(5204G), U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, 401 M Street, SW., Washington,

DC, 20460, or the Superfund Hotline,

phone (800) 424–9346, or (703) 412–

9810 in the Washington DC,

metropolitan area.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In this

document, EPA is withdrawing its

proposal to list Texas Eastern’s

Kosciusko, Mississippi, Compressor

Station Site on the National Priorities

List (NPL). EPA proposed to add the

Kosciusko site to the NPL on August 23,

1994 (59 FR 43314).

Texas Eastern’s comments on the

proposal and other information

submitted to the Agency have led EPA

to withdraw it. EPA’s reasons for

withdrawal are multi-faceted. First, this

is a site unique among those on the NPL

or proposed for NPL listing. The

Kosciusko site is just one of 89 along the

company’s pipeline (which extends

from the Gulf of Mexico to New York).

Second, Texas Eastern currently is

addressing all of the affected sites under

a federally enforceable Consent Decree

negotiated with the United States

pursuant to the Toxic Substances

Control Act (TSCA). Texas Eastern is

expected to spend approximately $750

million over the next 10 years

complying with the Consent Decree.

Under the Consent Decree, dated June

1988 and amended March 1995, there is

an agreed-upon schedule of

characterization for the 89 sites. Texas

Eastern maintains that it was their

expectation, when they entered into the

consent agreement, that it would shield

them from inclusion on the NPL and

action under CERCLA. The Agency

accepts that Texas Eastern has acted in

good faith to carry out the provisions of

that agreement.

Texas Eastern has nominated the

Kosciusko site as one of 10 of its

pipeline sites scheduled for remediation

in 1996. This represents an accelerated

schedule for the Kosciusko site which

will be fully characterized during 1995.

EPA and Texas Eastern have negotiated

modifications to the Consent Decree

requiring that the company address all

significant off-site contamination

attributable to the Kosciusko

Compressor Station. Texas Eastern’s

efforts at characterizing the site include

a five-year fish study. The study which

has been going on for more than two

years, will help determine the nature

and extent of the PCB contamination.

This characterization of downstream

effects will be useful in remedy

selection.

Allowing the Consent Decree process

to govern cleanup of the Kosciusko site

stems from a desire to avoid a

fragmented approach to Texas Eastern’s

89 sites. The alternative—trying to

address all sites under various Federal

statutes with different requirements and

cleanup levels—would result in

inconsistent cleanups and a much

slower process. In negotiating the

Consent Decree, the United States and

Texas Eastern sought to develop an

orderly process by which response work

would proceed. Listing the site on the

NPL arguably violates this process.

For these reasons EPA, at this time,

elects to withdraw its proposal to list

the Kosciusko compressor station site

on the NPL. However, should

conditions change (i.e. insufficient

progress toward cleanup) such that

placing the site on the NPL would effect

a more thorough and timely cleanup,

EPA reserves the right to re-propose the

site.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300

Air pollution control, Chemicals,

Environmental protection, Hazardous

materials, Hazardous substances,

Incorporation by reference,

Intergovernmental relations, Natural

resources, Occupational safety and

health, Oil pollution, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements, Superfund,

Waste treatment and disposal, Water

pollution control, Water supply.

Dated: April 24, 1995.

Elliott P. Laws,

Assistant Administrator, Office of Solid Waste

and Emergency Response.

[FR Doc. 95–10751 Filed 5–1–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Part 625

[Docket No. 950421111–5111–01; I.D.

022895B]

Summer Flounder Fishery; Dealer

Reporting Requirements

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for

comments.