64060 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 13, 1995 / Notices

ppm; alfalfa, forage at 3.0 ppm; and

alfalfa, hay at 4.0 ppm. (PM 13)

3. PP 5F4591. Ciba Crop Protection,

Ciba-Geigy Corp., P.O. Box 18300,

Greensboro, NC 27419-8300, has

submitted the petition that proposes

that 40 CFR 180.434 be amended to

establish tolerances for the fungicide

propiconazole (1-[[2-(2,4-

dichlorophenyl)-4-propyl-1,3-dioxolan2-yl]methyl]-1H-1,2,4-triazole) and its

metabolites determined as 2,4-

dichlorobenzoic acid and expressed as

parent compound equivalent in or on

the raw agricultural commodities berry

crop grouping at 1.0 ppm, carrots at 0.2

ppm, green onions at 8.0 ppm, and dry

bulb onions at 0.3 ppm. (PM 21)

Amended Filing

4. PP 4F4309. EPA gave notice in the

Federal Register of July 13, 1994 (59 FR

35719), that Miles, Inc., 8400 Hawthorn

Rd., P.O. Box 4913, Kansas City, MO

64120-0013, had submitted the petition

proposing that 40 CFR 180.436 be

amended by establishing a tolerance to

permit residues of the insecticide

cyfluthrin, cyano(4-fluoro-3-

phenoxyphenyl)methyl-3-(2,2-

dichloroethenyl)-2,2-dimethyl

cyclopropane carboxylate, in or on

sweet corn, forage at 54.0 ppm; alfalfa,

hay at 10.0 ppm; soybean, forage at 10.0

ppm; alfalfa, forage at 5.0 ppm; soybean,

hay at 1.5 ppm; sunflower, forage at 1.0

ppm; sweet corn at 0.05 ppm; soybeans

at 0.03 ppm; and sunflower, seed at 0.02

ppm. The company has submitted an

amended petition that proposes

decreasing the proposed tolerances on

sweet corn forage from 54.0 ppm to 30.0

ppm; increasing tolerances for cattle fat,

goat fat, hog fat, horse fat, and sheep fat

from 0.05 ppm to 5.0 ppm; establishing

a tolerance of 15.0 ppm for milkfat

(representing 0.5 ppm in whole milk);

and withdrawing proposed tolerances

for soybean, forage, soybean, hay, and

soybeans. (PM 13)

Withdrawn Filing

5. FAP 4H5686. EPA gave notice in

the Federal Register of July 13, 1994 (59

FR 35719), that Miles, Inc., 8400

Hawthorn Rd., P.O. Box 4913, Kansas

City, MO 64120-0013, had submitted the

petition proposing that 40 CFR 186.1250

be amended by establishing a food/feed

additive regulation to permit the

residues of the insecticide cyfluthrin,

cyano(4-fluoro-3-

phenoxyphenyl)methyl-3-(2,2-

dichloroethenyl)-2,2-dimethyl

cyclopropane carboxylate, in or on

sunflower hulls at 2.5 ppm and soybean,

hulls at 0.1 ppm. The company has

withdrawn the petition without

prejudice to a future filing. (PM 13)

A record has been established for this

rulemaking under docket number [PF636] (including comments and data

submitted electronically as described

below). A public version of this record,

including printed, paper versions of

electronic comments, which does not

include any information claimed as CBI,

is available for inspection from 8 a.m. to

4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,

excluding legal holidays. The public

record is located in Rm. 1132 of the

Public Response and Program Resources

Branch, Field Operations Division

(7506C), Office of Pesticide Programs,

Environmental Protection Agency,

Crystal Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis

Highway, Arlington, VA.

Electronic comments can be sent

directly to EPA at:

opp-Docket@epamail.epa.gov

Electronic comments must be

submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the

use of special characters and any form

of encryption.

The official record for this

rulemaking, as well as the public

version, as described above will be kept

in paper form. Accordingly, EPA will

transfer all comments received

electronically into printed, paper form

as they are received and will place the

paper copies in the official rulemaking

record which will also include all

comments submitted directly in writing.

The official rulemaking record is the

paper record maintained at the address

in ‘‘ADDRESSES’’ at the beginning of

this document.

List of Subjects

Environmental protection,

Agricultural commodities, Pesticides

and pests, Feed additives, Food

additives, Reporting and recordkeeping

requriements.

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136a.

Dated: November 13, 1995.

Stephen L. Johnson,

Director, Registration Division, Office of

Pesticide Programs.

[FR Doc. 95–30373; Filed 12–12–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–F

[OPP–180982; FRL–4985–1]

Emergency Exemptions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: EPA has granted specific

exemptions for the control of various

pests to the 28 States as listed below.

Crisis exemptions were initiated by the

Mississippi and Montana Departments

of Agriculture. These exemptions,

issued during the months of May, June,

and July 1995, are subject to application

and timing restrictions and reporting

requirements designed to protect the

environment to the maximum extent

possible. EPA has denied 11 specific

exemption requests. Information on

these restrictions is available from the

contact persons in EPA listed below.

DATES: See each specific and crisis

exemption for its effective date.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: See

each emergency exemption for the name

of the contact person. The following

information applies to all contact

persons: By mail: Registration Division

(7505W), Office of Pesticide Programs,

Environmental Protection Agency, 401

M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460.

Office location and telephone number:

6th Floor, CS #1, 2800 Jefferson Davis

Highway, Arlington, VA, (703)–308–

8417; e-mail:

group.ermus@epamail.epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has

granted specific exemptions to the:

1. Alabama Department of Agriculture

and Industries for the use of

tebufenozide on cotton to control beet

armyworms; July 18, 1995, to September

30, 1995. Alabama had initiated a crisis

exemption for this use. (Margarita

Collantes)

2. Arizona Department of Agriculture

for the use of imidacloprid and

bifenthrin on melons to control the

sweet potato whitefly; June 9, 1995, to

June 9, 1996. (David Deegan)

3. Arkansas State Plant Board for the

use of tebufenozide on cotton to control

beet armyworms; July 18, 1995, to

September 30, 1995. (Margarita

Collantes)

4. California Environmental

Protection Agency for the use of

myclobutanil on strawberries to control

powdery mildew; July 28, 1995, to July

27, 1996. (David Deegan)

5. Florida Department of Agriculture

and Consumer Services for the use of

malathion on atemoya and sugar apples

to control Annona seed borers; July 12,

1995, to July 12, 1996. (Margarita

Collantes)

6. Georgia Department of Agriculture

for the use of tebufenozide on cotton to

control beet armyworms; July 18, 1995,

to September 30, 1995. (Margarita

Collantes)

7. Idaho Department of Agriculture for

the use of propamocarb hydrochloride,

dimethomorph, and cymoxanil on

potatoes to control late blight; July 14,

1995 to September 30, 1995. (Libby

Pemberton)

8. Louisiana Department of

Agriculture and Forestry for the use of
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 239 / Wednesday, December 13, 1995 / Notices 64061

tebufenozide on cotton to control beet

armyworms; July 18, 1995, to September

30, 1995. (Margarita Collantes)

9. Michigan Department of

Agriculture for the use of triadimefon on

asparagus to control asparagus rust; June

21, 1995, to November 1, 1995. (David

Deegan)

10. Michigan Department of

Agriculture for the use of chlorothalonil

on asparagus to control purple spot;

June 21, 1995, to November 1, 1995.

(David Deegan)

11. Minnesota Department of

Agriculture for the use of triclopyr on

aquatic sites to control purple loose

strife; July 26, 1995, to September 15,

1995. (Libby Pemberton)

12. Mississippi Department of

Agriculture and Commerce for the use

of tebufenozide on cotton to control beet

armyworms; July 18, 1995, to September

30, 1995. Mississippi had initiated a

crisis exemption for this use. (Margarita

Collantes)

13. Montana Department of

Agriculture for the use of cyhalothrin on

small grains to control cutworms; May

17, 1995, to July 1, 1995. (Margarita

Collantes)

14. New Jersey Environmental

Protection Agency for the use of

cymoxanil on tomatoes to control late

blight; July 27, 1995, to April 1, 1996.

A notice of receipt published in Federal

Register of August 2, 1995 (60 FR

39387). The situation appears to be

urgent; nonroutine; use can be

toxicologically supported and hazard to

nontarget organisms is not expected; use

is not expected to pose a threat to

surface and/or ground water. (Libby

Pemberton)

15. New Jersey Environmental

Protection Agency for the use of

propamocarb hydrochloride on

tomatoes to control late blight; July 27,

1995, to April 1, 1996. (Libby

Pemberton)

16. New York Department of

Environmental Conservation for the use

of vinclozolin on snap beans to control

white and gray mold; June 1, 1995, to

September 15, 1995. (Kerry Leifer)

17. North Dakota Department of

Agriculture for the use of sethoxydim on

buckwheat to control volunteer cereal

grains; July 18, 1995, to July 30, 1995.

(David Deegan)

18. Tennessee Department of

Agriculture for the use of tebufenozide

on cotton to control beet armyworms;

July 18, 1995, to September 30, 1995.

(Margarita Collantes)

19. Texas Department of Agriculture

for the use of carbofuran on cotton to

control aphids; June 9, 1995, to

September 15, 1995. (David Deegan)

20. Washington Department of

Agriculture for the use of propamacarb

hydrochloride, cymoxanil, and

dimethomorph on potatoes to control

late blight; July 7, 1995, to September

30, 1995. (Libby Pemberton)

21. Wisconsin Department of

Agriculture, Trade, and Consumer

Protection for the use of mancozeb on

ginseng to control leaf and stem blight;

May 23, 1995, to August 31, 1995.

(Margarita Collantes)

22. Wyoming Department of

Agriculture for the use of pirimicarb on

alfalfa grown for seed to control alfalfa

aphids, pea aphids, and lygus bugs; June

16, 1995, to August 31, 1995. (Larry

Fried)

The following States listed below

were granted an emergency exemption

for the use of propamocarb

hydrochloride on potatoes to control

late blight; June 23, 1995, to September

30, 1995, except for Florida and Oregon,

whose expiration date is June 22, 1996,

and October 31, 1995, respectively. A

notice of receipt published in the

Federal Register of June 21, 1995 (60 FR

32319). The exemption was granted on

the basis that the situation appears to be

urgent and nonroutine. Limited supplies

of recently authorized products indicate

need for a third chemical. The use can

be toxicologically supported and is not

expected to result in hazard to nontarget

organisms and should not pose a threat

to surface and/or ground water.

1. Delaware Department of

Agriculture.

2. Florida Department of

Agriculture and Consumer Services.

3. Georgia Department of

Agriculture.

4. Maine Department of Agriculture.

5. Maryland Department of

Agriculture.

6. Michigan Department of

Agriculture.

7. Minnesota Department of

Agriculture.

8. New Jersey Department of

Environmental Protection.

9. New York Department of

Environmental Conservation.

10. North Dakota Department of

Agriculture.

11. Ohio Department of Agriculture.

12. Oregon Department of

Agriculture.

13. Pennsylvania Department of

Agriculture.

14. South Dakota Department of

Agriculture.

15. Virginia Department of

Agriculture and Consumer Services.

16. Wisconsin Department of

Agriculture, Trade, and Consumer

Protection. (Libby Pemberton)

Crisis exemptions were initiated by

the:

1. Mississippi Department of

Agriculture and Commerce on July 7,

1995, for the use of tebufenozide on

cotton to control beet armyworms. This

program has ended. (Margarita

Collantes)

2. Montana Department of Agriculture

on July 15, 1995, for the use of

bifenthrin on canola to control

diamondback moth larvae. This program

has ended. (Andrea Beard)

EPA has denied a specific exemption

request from the:

1. California Department of Pesticide

Regulations for the use of fenpropathrin

on tomatoes to control silverleaf and

greehouse whiteflies. (Margarita

Collantes)

2. Montana Department of Agriculture

for the use tralkoxydim on wheat to

control weeds. The Agency denied the

exemption because the situation is

routine and not urgent, and significant

economic loss is not expected.

(Margarita Collantes)

3. Minnesota, North Dakota, and

South Dakota Departments of

Agriculture for the use of propiconazole

on wheat and barley to control fusarium

head blight. The request was denied

because residue chemistry indicated

that the crops would contain

carcinogenic residue in processed

commodities. This triggered the

‘‘Delaney Clause’’ of the Federal Food,

Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

(Margarita Collantes)

EPA denied the following specific

exemption requests for use of Pirate on

cotton to control beet armyworms.

Pirate is an unregistered chemical

which was denied due to risk of

unreasonable adverse effects to

nontarget birds, aquatic organisms, and

the environment. In addition, a

registered alternative, tebufenozide, was

granted to control this pest on the

southeastern cotton belt region.

1. Alabama Department of

Agriculture and Industries.

2. Arkansas State Plant Board.

3. Georgia Department of

Agriculture.

4. Louisiana Department of

Agriculture and Forestry.

5. Mississippi Department of

Agriculture and Commerce.

6. Tennessee Department of

Agriculture. (Margarita Collantes)

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136.

List of Subjects

Environmental protection, Pesticides

and pest, Crisis exemptions.
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