64062 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 13, 1995 / Notices

Dated: November 6, 1995.

Stephen L. Johnson,

Director, Registration Division, Office of

Pesticide Programs.

[FR Doc. 95–30112 Filed 12–12–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–F

[FRL–5343–9]

Proposed Administrative Cost

Recovery Agreement Under Section

122(h)(1) of the Comprehensive

Environmental Response,

Compensation and Liability Act,

Regarding the Hooker Chemical/Rucco

Polymer Site, Hicksville, NY

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Notice of proposed

administrative agreement and

opportunity for public comment.

SUMMARY: In accordance with Section

122(i) of the Comprehensive

Environmental Response,

Compensation, and Liability Act of

1980, as amended (‘‘CERCLA’’), 42

U.S.C. 9622(i), the U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency (‘‘EPA’’) Region II

announces a proposed administrative

settlement pursuant to Section 122(h)(1)

of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9622(h)(1),

relating to the Hooker Chemical/Ruco

Polymer Site (the ‘‘Site’’), Hicksville,

Nassau County, New York. This Site is

on the National Priorities List

established pursuant to Section 105(a)

of CERCLA. This notice is being

published to inform the public of the

proposed settlement and of the

opportunity to comment.

The settlement, memorialized in an

Administrative Cost Recovery

Agreement (‘‘Agreement’’), is being

entered into by EPA and Occidental

Chemical Corporation and Ruco

Polymer Corporation (the

‘‘Respondents’’). Under the Agreement,

the Respondents shall pay EPA the sum

of $124,665.00 in further reimbursement

of EPA’s response costs incurred and

paid with respect to the Site on or prior

to August 16, 1994. In response to EPAs

cost recovery demands, Occidental

Chemical Corp. had previously

reimbursed EPA for $883,813.00 of the

Agency’s response costs at the Site.

DATES: EPA will accept written

comments relating to the proposed

settlement on or before January 12,

1996.

ADDRESSES AND FURTHER INFORMATION:

Comments should reference the Hooker

Chemical/Ruco Polymer Site and EPA

Index No. II–CERCLA–95–0216.

Comments and any requests for further

information, including requests for a

copy of the Agreement, should be sent

to: Marla E. Wieder, Assistant Regional

Counsel, New York/Caribbean

Superfund Branch, Office of Regional

Counsel, U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, 290 Broadway, 17th Floor, New

York, New York, 10007–1866,

Telephone: (212) 637–3185.

Dated: November 14, 1995.

Jeanne M. Fox,

Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 95–30104 Filed 12–12–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–M

[FRL–5344–1]

Proposed Administrative Settlement

Under Section 122(g)(4) of the

Comprehensive Environmental

Response, Compensation, and Liability

Act, Regarding the Hudson Coal Tar

Site, Hudson, NY

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Notice of proposed

administrative settlement and

opportunity for public comment.

SUMMARY: In accordance with Section

122(i) of the Comprehensive

Environmental Response,

Compensation, and Liability Act, as

amended (‘‘CERCLA’’), 42 U.S.C.

§ 9622(i), the U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency (‘‘EPA’’) Region II

announces a proposed administrative de

minimis settlement pursuant to Section

122(g)(4) of CERCLA, relating to the

Hudson Coal Tar Site (‘‘Site’’) in

Hudson, New York. This Site is not on

the National Priorities List established

pursuant to Section 105(a) of CERCLA.

This notice is being published to inform

the public of the proposed settlement

and of the opportunity to comment.

The settlement, memorialized in an

Administrative Order on Consent (the

‘‘Order’’), is being entered into by EPA

and Lockwood Properties, Inc.

(‘‘Lockwood’’). EPA has determined that

Lockwood, the owner of a portion of the

Site, is eligible for a de minimis

settlement pursuant to Section

122(g)(1)(B) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C.

9622(g)(1)(B).

Under the Order, Lockwood will

provide EPA and Niagara Mohawk

Power Corp., a potentially responsible

party currently undertaking a removal

action at the Site, with access to its

property in order to permit the

performance of response actions there.

Lockwood has also agreed, among other

things, to cooperate with EPA and

Niagara Mohawk in their

implementation of response actions at

the Site; exercise due care with respect

to hazardous substances at Lockwood’s

property; and provide perimeter fencing

to secure the portion of the Site owned

by Lockwood. Under the Order, EPA, in

turn, covenants not to sue Lockwood for

any civil liability for injunctive relief or

reimbursement of response costs with

regard to the Site, pursuant to Sections

106 or 107(a) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C.

§§ 9606, 9607(a), subject to certain

reservations of rights.

DATES: EPA will accept written

comments relating to the proposed

settlement on or before January 12,

1996.

ADDRESSES AND FURTHER INFORMATION:

Comments should reference the Hudson

Coal Tar Site and EPA Index No. II–

CERCLA–95–0212. Comments and

requests for further information,

including requests for a copy of the

Order, should be sent to: Brian E. Carr,

Assistant Regional Counsel, New York/

Caribbean Superfund Branch, Office of

Regional Counsel, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, 290 Broadway, 17th

Floor, New York, NY 10007–1866,

telephone: (212) 637–3170.

Dated November 14, 1995.

Jeanne M. Fox,

Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 95–30103 Filed 12–12–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–M

[FRL–5343–8]

De Minimis Settlements Under Section

122(g) of the Comprehensive

Environmental Response,

Compensation and Liability Act of 1980

(CERCLA), as Amended, 42 U.S.C.

§ 9622(g), Peerless Industrial Paint

Coatings Site, City of St. Louis, St.

Louis County, Missouri

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Notice of the de minimis

settlements under Section 122(g) of the

Comprehensive Environmental

Response, Compensation and Liability

Act of 1980 (CERCLA), as amended, 42

U.S.C. 9622(g), Peerless Industrial Paint

Coatings Site, City of St. Louis, St. Louis

County, Missouri.

SUMMARY: The United States

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

has entered into four separate de

minimis administrative settlements to

resolve claims under the

Comprehensive Environmental

Response, Compensation and Liability

Act of 1980 (CERCLA), as amended, 42

U.S.C. 9622(g). These settlements are

intended to resolve the liability of

Canam Steel Company, St. Louis Steel
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 13, 1995 / Notices 64063

Products, Henkel Corporation, and

Peerless-Premier Appliance Company

for the response costs incurred and to be

incurred at the Peerless Industrial Paint

Coatings Site, City of St. Louis, St. Louis

County, Missouri.

DATES: Written comments must be

provided on or before January 12, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be

addressed to the Regional

Administrator, United States

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region VII, 726 Minnesota Avenue,

Kansas City, Kansas 66101 and should

refer to: In the Matter of the Peerless

Industrial Paint Coatings Superfund

Site, City of St. Louis, St. Louis County,

Missouri, EPA Docket Nos. VII–94–F–

0022, VII–94–F–0021, VII–94–F–0027,

and VII–94–F–0023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Denise L. Roberts, Assistant Regional

Counsel, United States Environmental

Protection Agency, Region VII, 726

Minnesota Avenue, Kansas City, Kansas

66101, (913) 551–7559.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

settling parties are Canam Steel

Company, Henkel Corporation, PeerlessPremier Appliance Company, and St.

Louis Steel Products. They are de

minimis generators of hazardous

substances found at the Peerless

Industrial Paint Coatings Site, which is

the subject Superfund Site. In July and

August 1995, Region VII entered into

four separate de minimis administrative

settlements to resolve claims under

Section 122(g) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C.

9622(g).

The Peerless Industrial Paint Coatings

Site (the Site) is located in St. Louis at

1265 Lewis Street, St. Louis, Missouri,

approximately 1⁄4 mile north of

downtown St. Louis in an industrial

section of the city. The de minimis

parties were corporations that

manufactured paints. The de minimis

parties sold paint sludges, paint solids,

and paint liquids or semi-liquids to

Peerless Industrial Paint Coatings

(‘‘Peerless’’), a St. Louis corporation, at

very low prices. The de minimis parties

either admitted that they were disposing

of hazardous substances through this

arrangement, admitted that there was no

other customer besides Peerless for such

materials, and/or that the sales price

was lower than the costs of disposal for

hazardous wastes at an authorized

permitted facility. Peerless was a

manufacturer of paints and magazine

coatings that purchased large quantities

of paint materials at low prices and

accumulated more materials on-site

than could be used. In June 1993, the

EPA began a removal action at the site.

Approximately 3500 drums of

hazardous substances that demonstrated

the characteristics of ignitability were

removed from the facility at the cost of

$1,089,062.71.

The settlements have been approved

by the U.S. Department of Justice

because the response costs in this matter

exceed $500,000.00. The EPA estimates

the total past and future costs will be

approximately $1,206,089.71. Pursuant

to the Administrative Orders on

Consent, the de minimis parties are

responsible for the following costs:

Peerless-Premier Appliance Company

has an attributable share of 1.20% and

is responsible for $13,236.45 in past

costs and $1,193.24 in future costs;

Canam Steel Corporation has an

attributable share of 1.29% and is

responsible for $14,238.45 in past costs

and $1,283.55 in future costs; St. Louis

Steel Products has an attributable share

of 1.665% and is responsible for

$18,412.20 in past costs and $1,659.80

in future costs; and Henkel Corporation

has an attributable share of .30% and is

responsible for $3,453.48 in past costs

and $311.32 in future costs. The EPA

determined these amounts to be the de

minimis parties; fair shares of liability

based on the amount of hazardous

substances found at the Site and

contributed by each of the settling

parties. These settlements include

contribution protection from lawsuits by

other potentially responsible parties as

provided for under Section 122(g)(5) of

CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9622(g)(5).

The de minimis settlements provide

that the EPA covenants not to sue the de

minimis parties for response costs at the

Site or for injunctive relief pursuant to

Sections 106 and 107 of CERCLA and

Section 7003 of the Resource

Conservation and Recovery Act of 1980,

as amended (RCRA), 42 U.S.C. 6973.

The settlements contain a reopener

clause which nullifies the covenant not

to sue if any information becomes

known to the EPA that indicates that the

parties no longer meet the criteria for a

de minimis settlement set forth in

Section 122(g)(1)(A) of CERCLA, 42

U.S.C. 9622(g)(1)(A). The covenant not

to sue does not apply to the following

matters:

(a) Claims based on a failure to

exercise due care with respect to

hazardous substances at the Site;

(b) Claims based on a failure to make

the payments required by Section IV,

Paragraph 1 of this Consent Order;

(c) Claims based on the exacerbation

by Respondent of the release or threat of

release of hazardous substances from

the Site;

(d) Claims based on the introduction

of any hazardous substance, pollutant,

or contaminant by any person at the Site

after the effective date of this Consent

Order;

(e) Criminal liability; or

(f) Liability for damages or injury to,

destruction of, or loss of the natural

resources.

The de minimis settlements will

become effective upon the date which

the EPA issues a written notice to the

parties that the statutory public

comment period has closed and that

comments received, if any, do not

require modification of or EPA

withdrawal from the settlements.

Dennis Grams,

Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 95–30102 Filed 12–12–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–M

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

Community Bankshares, Inc., et al.;

Formations of; Acquisitions by; and

Mergers of Bank Holding Companies

The companies listed in this notice

have applied for the Board’s approval

under section 3 of the Bank Holding

Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1842) and §

225.14 of the Board’s Regulation Y (12

CFR 225.14) to become a bank holding

company or to acquire a bank or bank

holding company. The factors that are

considered in acting on the applications

are set forth in section 3(c) of the Act

(12 U.S.C. 1842(c)).

Each application is available for

immediate inspection at the Federal

Reserve Bank indicated. Once the

application has been accepted for

processing, it will also be available for

inspection at the offices of the Board of

Governors. Interested persons may

express their views in writing to the

Reserve Bank or to the offices of the

Board of Governors. Any comment on

an application that requests a hearing

must include a statement of why a

written presentation would not suffice

in lieu of a hearing, identifying

specifically any questions of fact that

are in dispute and summarizing the

evidence that would be presented at a

hearing.

Unless otherwise noted, comments

regarding each of these applications

must be received not later than January

8, 1996.

A. Federal Reserve Bank of Boston

(Robert M. Brady, Vice President) 600

Atlantic Avenue, Boston, Massachusetts

02106:

1. Community Bankshares, Inc.,

Concord, New Hampshire to acquire 100

percent of the voting shares of

Centerpoint Bank, Bedford, New

Hampshire.