Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 81 / Thursday, April 25, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 18287

40 CFR Part 300

[FRL–5458–9]

National Oil and Hazardous Sustances

Contingency Plan National Priorities

List

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of deletion of Lee’s Lane

Superfund Site, Louisville, Kentucky

from the National Priorities List.

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA) announces the

deletion of the Lees Lane Superfund

Site in Louisville, Kentucky, from the

National Priorities List (NPL), which is

Appendix B of 40 CFR Part 300 of the

National Oil and Hazardous Substances

Contingency Plan (NCP). EPA and the

Commonwealth of Kentucky have

determined that all appropriate Fundfinanced responses under the

Comprehensive Environmental

Response, Compensation and Liability

Act (CERCLA), as amended, have been

implemented and that no further

cleanup is appropriate. Moreover, EPA

and the Commonwealth of Kentucky

determined that response actions

conducted at the site to date have been

protective of public health, welfare, and

the environment.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 1, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Liza

Montalvo, Remedial Project Manager,

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 4, North Superfund Remedial

Branch, 345 Courtland Street NE.,

Atlanta, GA 30365, (404) 347–7791,

extension 2030.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The site to

be deleted from the NPL is: Lees Lane

Landfill Superfund Site, Louisville,

Kentucky.

A Notice of Intent to Delete for this

site was published on May 16, 1988

(SW–FRL–3380–7). A Revised Notice of

Intent to Delete was published on

February 14, 1992 (FRL–4102–6). The

closing date for comments on the

Revised Notice of Intent to Delete was

March 16, 1992. EPA received two

comment letters, one from the Kentucky

Resources Council (KRC) and the other

from the Kentucky Natural Resources

and Environmental Protection Cabinet

(KNREPC). The KRC expressed its

opposition to the Site’s deletion stating

that the remedy was not fully protective

of the environment. EPA responded that

the selected remedy protected human

health and the environment by

mitigating human exposures to

contaminated Site media, and reducing

continued uncontrolled releases to the

environment. The KNREPC stated in its

letter that the drums of hazardous waste

which were discovered and removed

from the Site in March 1992 by KNREPC

were apparently left from the original

disposal activities but had not been

addressed by EPA’s response action.

EPA replied that such drums were likely

placed there in the months preceding

their discovery, and were not left on the

Site at the close of EPA’s response

actions, or during the conduct of O&M

activities. The KRC and the KNREPC

expressed in their respective letters that

the scope of waste disposal activities

were never fully characterized at the

Site. EPA responded that the estimated

volume of waste buried at the Site was

2,400,000 yd 3. EPA also explained the

basis for this estimate, and how the Site

was characterized. These comments and

EPA’s responses are documented in

more detail in the Responsiveness

Summary which is available through the

EPA Region 4 public docket located at

EPA’s Region 4 Office, 345 Courtland,

St, N.E., Atlanta, Ga., 30365.

EPA identifies sites that appear to

present a significant risk to public

health, welfare, or the environment and

it maintains the NPL as the list of those

sites. Any site deleted from the NPL

remains eligible for Fund-financed

remedial actions in the unlikely event

that conditions at the site warrant such

action in the future. Section

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

Fund-financed actions may be taken at

sites deleted from the NPL. Deletion of

a site from the NPL does not affect

responsible party liability or impede

agency efforts to recover costs

associated with response efforts.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Chemicals, Hazardous

waste, Hazardous substances,

Intergovernmental relations, Penalties,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Superfund, Water

pollution control, Water supply.

Dated: March 25, 1996.

Phyllis P. Harris,

Acting Regional Administrator, USEPA

Region 4.

For the reasons set out in the

preamble, 40 CFR part 300 is amended

as follows:

PART 300—[AMENDED]

The authority citation for part 300

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2); 42 U.S.C.

9601–9657; E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757; 3 CFR

1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR 2923;

3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 193.

Appendix B [Amended]

2. Table 1 of appendix B to part 300

is amended by removing the site Lees

Lane Landfill, Louisville, Kentucky.

[FR Doc. 96–10100 Filed 4–24–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

FEDERAL EMERGENCY

MANAGEMENT AGENCY

44 CFR Part 64

[Docket No. FEMA–7639]

List of Communities Eligible for the

Sale of Flood Insurance

AGENCY: Federal Emergency

Management Agency (FEMA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This rule identifies

communities participating in the

National Flood Insurance Program

(NFIP). These communities have

applied to the program and have agreed

to enact certain floodplain management

measures. The communities’

participation in the program authorizes

the sale of flood insurance to owners of

property located in the communities

listed.

EFFECTIVE DATES: The dates listed in the

third column of the table.

ADDRESSES: Flood insurance policies for

property located in the communities

listed can be obtained from any licensed

property insurance agent or broker

serving the eligible community, or from

the NFIP at: Post Office Box 6464,

Rockville, MD 20849, (800) 638–6620.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert F. Shea, Jr., Division Director,

Program Implementation Division,

Mitigation Directorate, 500 C Street SW.,

room 417, Washington, DC 20472, (202)

646–3619.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The NFIP

enables property owners to purchase

flood insurance which is generally not

otherwise available. In return,

communities agree to adopt and

administer local floodplain management

measures aimed at protecting lives and

new construction from future flooding.

Since the communities on the attached

list have recently entered the NFIP,

subsidized flood insurance is now

available for property in the community.

In addition, the Director of the

Federal Emergency Management Agency

has identified the special flood hazard

areas in some of these communities by

publishing a Flood Hazard Boundary

Map (FHBM) or Flood Insurance Rate

Map (FIRM). The date of the flood map,

if one has been published, is indicated
18288 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 81 / Thursday, April 25, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

in the fourth column of the table. In the

communities listed where a flood map

has been published, Section 102 of the

Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, as

amended, 42 U.S.C. 4012(a), requires

the purchase of flood insurance as a

condition of Federal or federally related

financial assistance for acquisition or

construction of buildings in the special

flood hazard areas shown on the map.

The Director finds that the delayed

effective dates would be contrary to the

public interest. The Director also finds

that notice and public procedure under

5 U.S.C. 553(b) are impracticable and

unnecessary.

National Environmental Policy Act

This rule is categorically excluded

from the requirements of 44 CFR Part

10, Environmental Considerations. No

environmental impact assessment has

been prepared.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Acting Associate Director

certifies that this rule will not have a

significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities in

accordance with the Regulatory

Flexibility Act, 5 U. S. C. 601 et seq.,

because the rule creates no additional

burden, but lists those communities

eligible for the sale of flood insurance.

Regulatory Classification

This final rule is not a significant

regulatory action under the criteria of

section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 of

September 30, 1993, Regulatory

Planning and Review, 58 FR 51735.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This rule does not involve any

collection of information for purposes of

the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq.

Executive Order 12612, Federalism

This rule involves no policies that

have federalism implications under

Executive Order 12612, Federalism,

October 26, 1987, 3 CFR, 1987 Comp.,

p. 252.

Executive Order 12778, Civil Justice

Reform

This rule meets the applicable

standards of section 2(b)(2) of Executive

Order 12778, October 25, 1991, 56 FR

55195, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 309.

List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 64

Flood insurance, Floodplains.

Accordingly, 44 CFR part 64 is

amended as follows:

PART 64—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for Part 64

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.,

Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 3 CFR,

1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367,

3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376.

§ 64.6 [Amended]

2. The tables published under the

authority of § 64.6 are amended as

follows:

State/location Community

No. Effective date of eligibility Current effectivemap date

New Eligibles—Emergency Program

Michigan: Green, charter township of, Mecosta County 260951 Mar. 11, 1996

New York: Victor, village of, Ontario County ................. 361648 Mar. 12, 1996

Nebraska:

Nuckolls County, unincorporated areas ................. 310461 Mar. 20, 1996

Thayer County, unincorporated areas .................... 310479 ......do ............................................................................

Texas: Angelina County, unincorporated areas ............ 480007 Mar. 29, 1996 ............................................................... May 22, 1979.

Michigan: Reading, township of, Hillsdale County ........ 260410 Mar. 27, 1996 ............................................................... Oct. 28, 1977.

New Eligibles—Regular Program

Mississippi: Itawamba County, unincorporated areas ... 280290 Mar. 12, 1996 ............................................................... Sept. 4, 1991.

Illinois: Crawford County, unincorporated areas ........... 170939 Mar. 14, 1996 ............................................................... June 3, 1986.

Florida:

Ebro, town of, Washington County ........................ 120629 Mar. 19, 1996 ............................................................... June 17, 1991.

Esto, town of, Holmes County ................................ 120630 ......do ............................................................................ Dec. 5, 1990.

Noma, town of, Holmes County ............................. 120631 ......do ............................................................................ Do.

Reinstatements

Pennsylvania: White Oak, borough of, Allegheny

County.

420089 Jan. 30, 1975, Emerg; Sept. 14, 1979, Reg; Oct. 4,

1995, Susp; Mar. 8, 1996 Rein.

Oct. 4, 1995.

New York:

Plainfield, town of, Otsego County ......................... 361278 May 13, 1977, Emerg; Nov. 4, 1983 Reg; Nov. 4,

1992 Susp; Mar. 12, 1996 Rein.

Nov. 4, 1983.

Taylor, town of, Cortland County ........................... 361330 May 19, 1977, Emerg; May 15, 1985 Reg; June 15,

1988 Susp; Mar. 12, 1996 Rein.

May 15, 1985.

Pennsylvania: West Mifflin, borough of, Allegheny

County.

420085 Aug. 7, 1974, Emerg; Feb. 15, 1980, Reg; Oct. 4,

1995, Susp; Mar. 13, 1996, Rein.

Oct. 4, 1995.

Florida: Ponce de Leon, town of, Holmes County ........ 120117 Oct. 30, 1975, Emerg; Dec. 5, 1990, Reg; Dec. 5,

1990, Susp; Mar. 19, 1996, Rein.

Dec. 5, 1990.

Minnesota: St. Vincent, city of, Kittson County ............. 270232 Dec. 17, 1974, Emerg; Sept. 2, 1982, Reg; June 2,

1994, Susp; Mar. 19, 1996, Rein.

Sept. 2, 1982.
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 81 / Thursday, April 25, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 18289

State/location Community

No. Effective date of eligibility Current effectivemap date

West Virginia: Newburg, town of, Preston County ........ 540268 June 9, 1975, Emerg; Aug. 1, 1987, Reg; Aug. 1,

1987, Susp; Mar. 19, 1996, Rein.

Aug. 1, 1987.

New York: Leicester, village of, Livingston County ....... 361456 Sept. 15, 1980, Emerg; Aug. 27, 1982, Reg; June 15,

1988, Susp; Mar. 21, 1996 Rein.

Aug. 27, 1982.

West Virginia: Paw Paw, town of, Morgan County ....... 540252 Oct. 2, 1975, Emerg; Nov. 2, 1984, Reg; Mar. 5,

1996, Susp; Mar. 22, 1996, Rein.

Mar. 5, 1996.

Nebraska: Elgin, city of, Antelope County ..................... 310002 Apr. 18, 1975, Emerg; June 17, 1986, Reg; June 17,

1986, Susp; Mar. 29, 1996, Rein.

June 17, 1986.

Regular Program Conversions

Region VI

Texas: Terrell, city of, Kaufman County ........................ 480416 Mar. 4, 1996, Suspension Withdrawn .......................... Mar. 4, 1996.

Region II

New York: Clarence, town of, Erie County ................... 360232 Mar. 5, 1996,Suspension Withdrawn ........................... Mar. 5, 1996.

Region III

Pennsylvania: North Charleroi, borough of, Washington County.422137 ......do ............................................................................ Do.

West Virginia:

Bath, town of, Morgan County ............................... 540005 ......do ............................................................................ Do.

Morgan County, unincorporated areas ................... 540144 ......do ............................................................................ Do.

Region V

Indiana: Tipton, city of, Tipton County .......................... 180255 ......do ............................................................................ Do.

Michigan:

Plymouth, city of, Wayne County ........................... 260236 ......do ............................................................................ Jan. 5, 1996.

Plymouth, charter township of, Wayne County ...... 260237 ......do ............................................................................ Do.

Minnesota:

Aitkin County, unincorporated areas ...................... 270628 ......do ............................................................................ Feb. 2, 1996.

Hopkins, city of, Hennepin County ......................... 270166 ......do ............................................................................ Dec. 19, 1995.

Wisconsin:

Cadott, village of, Chippewa County ...................... 550043 ......do ............................................................................ Mar. 5, 1996.

Dane County, unincorporated areas ...................... 550077 ......do ............................................................................ Do.

Madison, city of, Dane County ............................... 550083 ......do ............................................................................ Do.

Middleton, city of, Dane County ............................. 550087 ......do ............................................................................ Do.

Region VI

Louisiana: Duson, town of, Lafayette County ............... 220104 ......do ............................................................................ Feb. 2, 1996.

Notice—New Eligible—Regular Program

The Township of Pembina, North Dakota is participating in the Regular Program under Pembina County’s application effective March 12,

1996. Pembina County’s Community Identification Number is 380079.

Code for reading third column: Emerg.—Emergency; Reg.—Regular; Rein.—Reinstatement; Susp.—Suspension; With.—Withdrawn.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No.

83.100, ‘‘Flood Insurance.’’)

Issued: April 18, 1996.

Richard W. Krimm,

Acting Associate Director, Mitigation

Directorate.

[FR Doc. 96–10237 Filed 4–24–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6718–05–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR PARTS 1 and 73

[FCC 96–172]

Implementation of Sections 204(a) and

204(c) of the Telecommunications Act

of 1996 (Broadcast License Renewal

Procedures)

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Final Rule,

SUMMARY: The Commission is

implementing Sections 204(a) and

204(c) of the Telecommunications Act

of 1996, which eliminate comparative

renewal hearings for broadcast

applications filed after May 1, 1995 and

direct the Commission to grant a

broadcaster’s renewal application if

statutory renewal standards are met.

The action is necessary in order to

conform the Commission’s rules to

Section 204(a) and (c) of the

Telecommunications Act, and the

intended effect of the action is to

conform the rules to those statutory

provisions.

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 25, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mania K. Baghdadi, Mass Media Bureau,

Policy and Rules Division (202) 418–

2130.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

synopsis of the Commission’s Order (In

the Matter of Implementation of

Sections 204(a) and 204(c) of the

Telecommunications Act of 1996

(Broadcast Renewal Procedures)),

adopted April 12, 1996, and released

April 12, 1996. The complete text of this

Order 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.

Synopsis of Order

1. This Order implements Sections

204(a) and 204(c) of the

Telecommunications Act of 1996

(‘‘Telecom Act’’) [Pub. L. No. 104–104,