Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 90 / Wednesday, May 8, 1996 / Proposed Rules 20785

The public record is located in Room

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 proposal,

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.

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR

51735, October 4, 1993), the Agency

must determine whether the regulatory

action is ‘‘significant’’ and therefore

subject to all the requirements of the

Executive Order (i.e., Regulatory Impact

Analysis, review by the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB)). Under

section 3(f), the order defines

‘‘significant’’ as those actions likely to

lead to a rule (1) having an annual effect

on the economy of $100 million or

more, or adversely and materially

affecting a sector of the economy,

productivity, competition, jobs, the

environment, public health or safety, or

State, local or tribal governments or

communities (also known as

‘‘economically significant’’); (2) creating

serious inconsistency or otherwise

interfering with an action taken or

planned by another agency; (3)

materially altering the budgetary

impacts of entitlement, grants, user fees,

or loan programs; or (4) raising novel

legal or policy issues arising out of legal

mandates, the President’s priorities, or

the principles set forth in this Executive

Order.

Pursuant to the terms of this

Executive Order, EPA has determined

that this rule is not ‘‘significant’’ and is

therefore not subject to OMB review.

In addition, this action does not

impose any enforceable duty, or contain

any ‘‘unfunded mandates’’ as described

in Title II of the Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4), or

require prior consultation as specified

by Executive Order 12875 (58 FR 58093,

October 28, 1993), entitled Enhancing

the Intergovernmental Partnership, or

special consideration as required by

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629,

February 16, 1994).

Pursuant to the requirements of the

Regulatory Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 96–

354, 94 Stat. 1164, 5 U.S.C. 601–612),

the Administrator has determined that

regulations establishing new tolerances

or raising tolerance levels or

establishing exemptions from tolerance

requirements, or establishing or raising

food additive regulations do not have a

significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities. A

certification statement to this effect was

published in the Federal Register of

May 4, 1981 (46 FR 24950).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Parts 180 and

186

Environmental protection,

Administrative practice and procedure,

Agricultural commodities, Animal feed,

Food additive, Pesticides and pests,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Dated: April 30, 1996.

Stephen L. Johnson,

Director, Registration Division, Office of

Pesticide Programs.

Therefore, it is proposed that chapter

I of title 40 be amended as follows:

PART 180—[AMENDED]

1. In part 180:

a. The authority citation for part 180

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 346a and 371.

b. In § 180.145, by adding a

commodity to paragraph (a) in the table

therein and deleting paragraph (c) to

read as follows:

§ 180.145 Fluoride compounds; tolerances

for residues.

(a) * * *

Commodity Parts per million

* * * * *

Potatoes 2.0

* * * * *

* * * * *

PART 186—[AMENDED]

2. In part 186:

a. The authority citation for part 186

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 348.

b. Section 186.3375 is revised to read

as follows:

§ 186.3375 Fluorine compounds.

A tolerance is established for residues

of the insecticidal fluorine compounds

cryolite and synthetic cryolite (sodium

aluminum fluoride) in the following

ready-to-eat animal feed resulting from

application of the compounds to

growing crops:

Commodity Parts per million

Potatoes, waste from

processing

22.0

[FR Doc. 96–11341 Filed 5–7–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–F

40 CFR Part 300

[FRL–5500–3]

National Oil and Hazardous

Substances Pollution Contingency

Plan; National Priorities List

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Notice of Intent to Delete the

Carter Lee Lumber Company Superfund

Site National From Priorities List;

Request for Comments.

SUMMARY: The United States

Environmental Protection Agency (U.S.

EPA) Region V announces its intent to

delete the Carter Lee Lumber Company

Superfund Site from the National

Priorities List (NPL) and requests public

comment on this action. The NPL

constitutes Appendix B to the National

Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution

Contingency Plan (NCP), which U.S.

EPA promulgated pursuant to Section

105 of the Comprehensive

Environmental Response,

Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980

(CERCLA) as amended. This action is

being taken by U.S. EPA, because it has

been determined that all Fund-financed

responses under CERCLA have been

implemented and U.S. EPA, in

consultation with the State of Indiana,

has determined that no further response

is appropriate. Moreover, U.S. EPA and

the State have determined that remedial

activities conducted at the Site to date

have been protective of public health,

welfare, and the environment.

DATES: Comments concerning the

proposed deletion of the Site from the

NPL may be submitted on or before June

7, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to

Helen Smith (SR–6J) Environmental

Protection Assistant, Superfund

Division, U.S. EPA, Region V, 77 W.

Jackson Blvd., Chicago, IL 60604.
20786 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 90 / Wednesday, May 8, 1996 / Proposed Rules

Comprehensive information on the site

is available at U.S. EPA’s Region V

office and at the local information

repository located at: Hawthorn

Community Center, 2440 West Ohio

Street, Indianapolis IN and the offices of

the Indiana Department of

Environmental management, 100 N.

Senate Avenue, N1255, Indianapolis,

IN. Requests for comprehensive copies

of documents should be directed

formally to the Region V Docket Office.

The address and phone number for the

Regional Docket Officer is Jan

Pfundheller (SMR–7J), U.S. EPA, Region

V, 77 W. Jackson Blvd., Chicago, IL

60604, (312) 353–5821.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Deborah Orr (SR–6J) Remedial Project

Manager at (312) 886–7576, Helen

Smith (SR–6J) Environmental Protection

Assistant, Superfund Division, U.S.

EPA, Region V, 77 W. Jackson Blvd.,

Chicago, IL 60604, (312) 886–6229 or

David Novak (P–19J), Office of Public

Affairs, U.S. EPA, Region V, 77 W.

Jackson Blvd., Chicago, IL 60604, (312)

886–9840.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Introduction

II. NPL Deletion Criteria

III. Deletion Procedures

IV. Basis for Intended Site Deletion

I. Introduction

The U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) Region V announces its

intent to delete the Carter Lee Lumber

Company Superfund Site (Site) from the

National Priorities List (NPL), which

constitutes Appendix B of the (NCP),

and requests comments on the proposed

deletion. The U.S. 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 Section 300.425(e)(3) of the

NCP, any site deleted from the NPL

remains eligible for Fund-financed

remedial actions if the conditions at the

site warrant such action.

The U.S. EPA will accept comments

on this proposal for thirty (30) days after

publication of this notice in the Federal

Register.

Section II of this notice explains the

criteria for deleting sites from the NPL.

Section III discusses procedures that

U.S. EPA is using for this action.

Section IV discusses the history of this

site and explains how the site meets the

deletion criteria.

Deletion of sites from the NPL does

not itself create, alter, or revoke any

individual’s rights or obligations.

Furthermore, deletion from the NPL

does not in any way alter U.S. EPA’s

right to take enforcement actions, as

appropriate. The NPL is designed

primarily for informational purposes

and to assist in Agency management.

II. NPL Deletion Criteria

The NCP establishes the criteria the

Agency uses to delete Sites from the

NPL. In accordance with 40 CFR

300.425(e), sites may be deleted from

the NPL where no further response is

appropriate. In making this

determination, U.S. EPA will 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;

or

(ii) All appropriate Fund-financed

responses under CERCLA have been

implemented, and no further response

action by responsible parties is

appropriate; or

(iii) The Remedial investigation has

shown that the release poses no

significant threat to public health or the

environment and, therefore, remedial

measures are not appropriate.

III. Deletion Procedures

Upon determination that at least one

of the criteria described in 300.425(e)

has been met, U.S. EPA may formally

begin deletion procedures once the State

has concurred. This Federal Register

notice, and a concurrent notice in the

local newspaper in the vicinity of the

Site, announce the initiation of a 30-day

comment period. The public is asked to

comment on U.S. EPA’s intention to

delete the Site from the NPL. All critical

documents needed to evaluate U.S.

EPA’s decision are included in the

information repository and the deletion

docket.

Upon completion of the public

comment period, if necessary, the U.S.

EPA Regional Office will prepare a

Responsiveness Summary to evaluate

and address comments that were

received. The public is welcome to

contact the U.S. EPA Region V Office to

obtain a copy of this responsiveness

summary, if one is prepared. If U.S. EPA

then determines the deletion from the

NPL is appropriate, final notice of

deletion will be published in the

Federal Register.

IV. Basis for Intended Site Deletion

Decision Summary

I. Site Description

The Site is located west of downtown

Indianapolis at 1621 West Washington

Street. Eagle Creek is approximately

one-half mile southwest and the White

River is about one mile east of the site.

The Site is located 7 miles upgradient

of one of the groundwater pumps used

to supplement the drinking water

supply for the City of Indianapolis. It is

located in a commercial and industrial

center primarily composed of heavy

industry with the exception of some

scattered areas of older single-family

residential dwellings. The Site is

currently used for storage for a

commercial lumber yard and is,

therefore, fenced and access is

restricted. The Carter Lee Lumber (CLL)

Company has been at its present

location for over 120 years. The Site

occupies only part of the CLL property,

a four acre trapezoid in the southeast

corner, that was acquired by CLL in

1979 for expansion of lumber storage

capabilities.

Lumber and associated materials are

stored in three sheds on the Site. The

Site is paved with asphalt except for the

southeast corner, which is covered with

about six inches compacted gravel and

soil. The Site is relatively flat. It is

bordered on the east and south by

Conrail railroad tracks, on the west by

Reichwein Avenue and the north by

CLL property. The bordering tracks are

elevated as much as 6 to 8 feet above the

Site. The southeast corner of the

property is the lowest elevation point on

the Site.

Over 36,000 people live within 2-

miles of CLL. The closest residence is

across Reichwein Avenue.

Demographics from the 1990 census

data, show that the area adjacent to the

Site has a more culturally diverse

population than the general population

of Marion County. Thirty-two percent of

the residents within a two mile radius

of the Site are non-white while twentytwo percent of the residents of Marion

County identified themselves as nonwhite. Census data shows that the

average household within a two mile

radius of the Site has an income thirtythree percent lower than the average

income of a typical Marion County

resident.

II. Site History and Enforcement

Activities

Prior to 1979, the Site was owned by

Penn Central Corporation and, in the

period from 1960–1973, leased to

several commercial waste hauling
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 90 / Wednesday, May 8, 1996 / Proposed Rules 20787

companies that used the Site for

industrial waste product disposal. The

Site was leased first for the disposal of

calcium ferrosulfate (about 30% solid).

There is no evidence that this material

was hazardous. It was then leased to a

series of partnerships that, from court

records, state the nature of the business

was to purchase lime slurry, a waste

product from Union Carbide

Corporation, Linde Division, and to sell

it to Ford Motor Company, in

Indianapolis, Delco Electronics in

Kokomo and Jones Laughlin Steel.

Neutralized metal plating sludge and

neutralized calcium ferrosulfate were

reported sprayed on the Site from 1971–

1972.

There are unsubstantiated allegations

of tank car dumping and disposal of oily

filter cakes from Conrail Lines. In

addition, from 1940–1985, CLL operated

a small quantity, batch-load wood

preserving operation immediately offsite, north of the northeast corner of the

Site. This operation reportedly used

consumer-grade pentachlorophenol.

CCL purchased the Site in 1979.

While the property was being developed

for lumber storage, red soil was

discovered. When the red soil interfered

with proper soil compaction, it was

moved. The red soil was stored near a

trench area dug to hold construction

debris. Asphalt was laid on portions of

the Site and the storage yard was fenced

as part of this work. The soil was later

spread over an area covering about 220

by 250 feet in the southeast corner of the

Site, where it is currently located.

The Site was investigated by the

Environment and Ecology Field

Investigation Team (FIT) in 1985 as a

result of a CLL Company employee

reports of spotting small animals with

sores and patchy fur and complaints by

employees of skin lesions and weight

loss. Neither reports were confirmed by

local health officials. Following the FIT

investigation which included soil

sampling, the Site was scored for NPL

listing due to the potential for

groundwater contamination and a

concern for potential dermal contact

should the soils be disturbed.

Research to identify parties

responsible for conditions at the Site

was completed in June 1988. Potentially

responsible owners, operators and

generators were identified. Based on

information gathered during this search

and responses from information

requests, special notice letters were sent

out during January 1992.

III. Highlights of Community

Participation

U.S. EPA hosted a ‘‘kick off’’ public

meeting on September 3, 1992 at the

Presbyterian Church located across the

street from the Site. The purpose of the

meeting was to inform the local

residents of the Superfund process and

the work to be conducted under the

Remedial Investigation (RI). Thirty-nine

people attended the meeting. Two RI

update newsletters were issued to

individuals on the Site specific mailing

list in June 1993 and July 1995.

Information repositories for the Site

have been established at Hawthorn

Community Center, 2440 West Ohio

Street, Indianapolis IN and the offices of

the Indiana Department of

Environmental Management, 100 N.

Senate Avenue, N1255, Indianapolis,

IN. The Administrative Record for the

Site has been made available to the

public at the U.S. EPA Docket Room in

Region V and at the Hawthorn

Community Center.

The RI was released to the public in

May 1995. The proposed plan was

mailed July 28, 1995. A public meeting

to discuss the remedial investigation

and the proposed plan was held on

August 10, 1995. Advertisements were

placed in the Indiana Star/News and the

West-Side Enterprise to announce the

public meetings and comment period.

Ten people attended the proposed plan

meeting. The proposed plan was

available for public comments from

August 1, 1995 through August 30,

1995.

The public participation requirements

of CERCLA Sections 113(k)(2)(I–v) and

117 of CERCLA have been met in the

remedy selection process. This decision

document presents the selected

remedial action for the CLL Company

Superfund Site, chosen in accordance

with CERCLA, as amended by SARA

and, to the extent practicable, the NCP.

The decision for this Site is based on the

administrative record.

IV. Scope and Role of Operable Units

U.S. EPA has determined that no

further action is required at this Site.

Because hazardous substances at

concentrations above unacceptable risk

levels will not remain at the Site, a fiveyear review will not be necessary.

V. Site Characteristics

During the RI, sampling and analysis

of groundwater and subsurface and

surface soil occurred which allows a

determination of Site conditions to be

made. The investigation took place in

two phases beginning in November 1992

and ending about one year later in

September 1993.

During Phase I in November 1992, all

surface and subsurface on-site soil

samples were collected, five monitoring

wells were installed and sampled and

15 of the 17 off-site soil samples were

collected.

Phase II, which occurred in June,

August and September of 1993,

consisted of two rounds of groundwater

samples, 3 rounds of water level

measurements and the collection of 2

additional off-site soil samples. A

groundwater user survey was

implemented during this time period as

well. An ecological investigation of the

Site was also conducted as part of Phase

2.

Using the U.S. EPA risk assessment

guidance and procedures, many

contaminants found at the Site,

including Semi-volatile Organic

Compounds (SVOCs), Volatile Organic

Compounds (VOCs), metals and cyanide

were eliminated from further

consideration primarily because on-site

concentrations did not differ

significantly from background, or offsite contaminant concentrations.

The ecological investigation consisted

of review of current literature to

determine whether the area contained

protected plants or animals or whether

sensitive habitats existed in the area. A

Site visit also took place.

Based on the evaluation of Site

conditions, U.S. EPA determined that

there is no threat to human health and

the environment through exposure by

ingestion or direct contact with the

pesticides/herbicides and PCBs found in

the soils and groundwater on and near

the Site. The effects of background

contamination was not evaluated as part

of this study. The following is a result

of the findings.

1. Physiography. The Site is located

within the commercial and industrial

center of the City of Indianapolis,

central Marion County. The area is

relatively flat and ranges in topographic

relief from about 745 feet above mean

sea level measured 2.75 miles west of

the Site to about 705 feet at the White

River, which is 1 mile east. The Site is

paved with asphalt except for the

southeast corner, which is covered with

compacted gravel. Drainage swells,

formed by rail road track berms 6 to 8

feet high, run parallel to the eastern and

southern Site boundaries and collect

surface run-off from the Site. The

southeast corner is the lowest elevation

point on the Site at an elevation of 691

feet above mean sea level.

2. Geology. An extensive sand and

gravel outwash deposit exists under the

Site. The outwash is composed of

coarse-grained material deposited by

glacial meltwater streams during the

Wisconsian glaciation. Discontinuous

silt and clay deposits are numerous. The

outwash extends along the White River,

Eagle Creek and Fall Creek and it is
20788 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 90 / Wednesday, May 8, 1996 / Proposed Rules

about 6.5 miles wide from east to west.

At the outer edges of the outwash, the

deposits integrate with deposits of till.

Sand and gravel deposits are

discontinuous in the till plain. The

thickness of the unconsolidated

deposits in Marion County ranges from

less than 15 feet to more than 300 feet.

Within the vicinity of the Site, the

bedrock beneath the outwash deposits

consists of Silurian and Devonian age

limestones and dolomites. Depth to

bedrock is about 120 feet. West of the

Site, Mississippian age shale separates

the outwash deposits from the

limestones and dolomites. The bedrock

surface slopes gently to the west.

The Site geology is characterized by a

series of fill layers starting at about 12

inches below the ground surface This

fill material varies across the Site but

generally consists of sandy gravel and

clayey silty sand with miscellaneous

debris including bricks, concrete and

wood. Some areas of the Site are filled

with black dense sand similar to a

foundry sand mixed with what

appeared to be fly ash.

3. Hydrology. There are two

groundwater systems beneath the Site.

The outwash deposits along the White

River comprise the upper, unconfined

aquifer. The thickness of the aquifer

ranges from 30 to more than 80 feet. The

limestone and dolomite formations

comprise the uppermost bedrock

aquifer. The average horizontal

hydraulic conductivity is about 300

feet/day for the outwash aquifer and

about 10 feet/day for the bedrock

aquifer. The hydraulic conductivity in

the bedrock aquifer can be considerably

greater in areas where solution

channeling has occurred.

Wells in the outwash aquifer have

produced as much as 3,000 gallons per

minute (gpm). Bedrock wells may yield

75 to 250 gpm. The bedrock is most

productive in the upper 100 feet where

it was once exposed to weathering

elements and where the greatest amount

of solution development has occurred.

At the Site the unconfined, shallow

water table was encountered at about 20

to 25 feet below ground surface.

Typically, groundwater flows toward

the southeast. Through the well users

survey, a cone of depression was

identified southeast of the Site. Most of

the wells within 1 mile of the Site are

used exclusively for manufacturing

processes. Marion County depends on

surface water for 92% of its drinking

water supply, the remainder comes from

groundwater. The use of groundwater to

supplement drinking water is expected

to increase to 19% by the year 2000.

Groundwater elevations in Marion

County range from about 830 feet in the

northwestern portion of the county to

less than 680 feet near the White River

in the central portion of the county.

Regional groundwater flow in the

western half of Marion County is to the

east-southeast toward Eagle Creek and

the White River. In eastern Marion

County, groundwater flow is to the

west-southwest toward Fall Creek and

the White River.

4. Contamination. a. Soils. SVOCs and

heavy metals were detected in on-site

soil at depths ranging from 4 to 8 feet

below the ground surface. Several

pesticides were also detected in on-site

soil. The findings were similar to those

resulting from FIT sampling. The

concentration of SVOCs and metals in

on-site soils were within the ranges

previously found by the FIT and the

distribution of SVOCs on-site was

consistent with the presence of red soil

and with the black cinder fill material.

b. Groundwater. Sampling of the

groundwater identified low

concentrations of some SVOCs

including phenol, phenanthrene, di-nbutylphthalate, pyrene, and bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate. These were found

sporadically in groundwater samples.

Low concentrations of arsenic and

cyanide were detected in several Site

ground-water monitoring wells during

one sampling event. Low concentrations

of beryllium were also detected in two

sampling events.

5. Ecological. The investigation

determined that the area south of the

Site by virtue of plant community

composition and evidence of hydrology

typical of wetlands, appeared to consist

of palustrine emergent or scrub/shrub

communities. Through research and

observations during the Site visit, it was

determined that this area is not a

sensitive or high-value ecological

habitat. Wildlife and plant communities

are limited because of the urban nature

of the area. During the Site visit gross

evidence of adverse impacts on the

plant and animal communities from the

Site were not apparent.

VI. Summary of Site Risks

Given that most of the contaminated

soil on-site is either covered by asphalt

or six inches of compacted gravel and

soil, no worker or nearby residents are

currently exposed to contaminants

through inhalation of dust emissions.

Volatilization of some contaminants

to the air can pose a risk if present at

the soil surface. Because contaminants

on-site are covered as described above,

volatilization is not considered a

transport mechanism at this Site.

The analytical results for SVOCs and

metals for on-site and off-site samples

were evaluated using a statistical

comparative analysis. It was verified

statistically, that there is no significant

difference between the SVOCs and the

heavy metal concentrations found in onsite soils compared with those found in

off-site soils. The Site is located in an

area with many industries which may

have contributed to the metals and

PAHs found. These facts lead to the

conclusion that the source of PAH and

metals contamination are not solely

attributable to the site. Based on this,

PAHs and metals were not carried

forward in the Site related risk

evaluation. The berms surrounding the

Site on the east and southern boundary

are an effective barrier to overland flow

of contaminants into surface water via

Site run off. For this reason, the risk for

the surface water pathway was

determined to be negligible.

During the analysis, infiltration of

rainwater to groundwater was

considered as a potential transport

mechanism that could leach

contaminants from deeper soils into the

groundwater. The remedial

investigation identified some Site

characteristics that makes this unlikely.

The soils are covered with compacted

gravel and this decreases the amount of

rain through infiltration. The soils

underlying contaminants consist of

clayey sands. Since contaminants tend

to sorb more tightly to clay,

contaminants are less likely to be

released. In addition, a fate and

transport analysis of the effects of the

PAHs, arsenic and beryllium

determined that groundwater does not

appear to be threatened by Site

contaminants. Based on these findings,

it was determined that this pathway did

not present an unacceptable risk.

The contaminants of concern

evaluated quantitatively for the Site

include heptachlor and arochlor-1254 in

on-site soils and alpha BHC and 4,4’-

DDT, both in groundwater.

The risk assessment determined that

the Site contaminants do not pose a

significant risk to those who may come

in contact with them. Risk was

evaluated for on-site worker exposure

and residential exposure as well. The

risk to a hypothetical future worker

exposed to on-site soil and groundwater

was calculated. The calculated numbers

are well below U.S. EPA’s acceptable

risk range. A reasonable future land use

anticipates the land will continue to be

used as commercial/industrial property.

Notwithstanding this assumption, the

same calculation is performed for the

hypothetical on-site resident. The

estimate of cumulative excess cancer

risk is at the low end of U.S. EPA’s

acceptable risk range for exposure to
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 90 / Wednesday, May 8, 1996 / Proposed Rules 20789

soils. For groundwater, the number is

below the lower end of U.S. EPA’s

acceptable risk range.

Given the above, the no action

alternative was chosen since it has been

demonstrated that the contamination

found could not be attributed solely to

CLL and the level of contamination

attributable to the Site results in

negligible risk. U.S. EPA issued its

finding in the document Remedial

Investigation Report dated May 1995.

U.S. EPA executed a Record of Decision

requiring no action on September 29,

1995. The State concurred with this

ROD on October 13, 1995.

U.S. EPA, with concurrence from the

State of Indiana, has determined that all

appropriate Fund-financed responses

under CERCLA at the Carter Lee Lumber

Company Superfund Site have been

completed, and no further CERCLA

response is appropriate in order to

provide protection of human health and

the environment. Therefore, U.S. EPA

proposes to delete the site from the NPL.

Dated: April 25, 1996.

Valdas V. Adamkus,

Regional Administrator, U.S. EPA, Region V.

[FR Doc. 96–11311 Filed 5–7–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 96–96; RM–8791]

Radio Broadcasting Services; Castana,

IA

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The Commission requests

comments on a petition by Gene

Zortman proposing the allotment of

Channel 298A to Castana, Iowa, as the

community’s first local aural

transmission service. Channel 298A can

be allotted to Castana in compliance

with the Commission’s minimum

distance separation requirements

without the imposition of a site

restriction. The coordinates for Channel

298A at Castana are 42–04–24 and 95–

54–36.

DATES: Comments must be filed on or

before June 20, 1996, and reply

comments on or before July 5, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications

Commission, Washington, DC 20554. In

addition to filing comments with the

FCC, interested parties should serve the

petitioner, or its counsel or consultant,

as follows: Gene Zortman, Chairman,

Onawa Radio Committee, 1112 Emerald

Street, Onawa, Iowa 51040 (Petitioner).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pam

Blumenthal, Mass Media Bureau, (202)

418–2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

synopsis of the Commission’s Notice of

Proposed Rule Making, MM Docket No.

96–96, adopted April 10, 1996, and

released April 29, 1996. The full text of

this Commission decision is available

for inspection and copying during

normal business hours in the FCC’s

Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M

Street, NW., Washington, DC. The

complete text of this decision may also

be purchased from the Commission’s

copy contractor, ITS, Inc., (202) 857–

3800, 2100 M Street, NW., Suite 140,

Washington, DC 20037.

Provisions of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply to

this proceeding.

Members of the public should note

that from the time a Notice of Proposed

Rule Making is issued until the matter

is no longer subject to Commission

consideration or court review, all ex

parte contacts are prohibited in

Commission proceedings, such as this

one, which involve channel allotments.

See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules

governing permissible ex parte contacts.

For information regarding proper

filing procedures for comments, see 47

CFR 1.415 and 1.420.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

Radio broadcasting.

Federal Communications Commission.

Andrew J. Rhodes,

Acting Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and

Rules Division, Mass Media Bureau.

[FR Doc. 96–11382 Filed 5–7–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–F

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Part 628

[Docket No. 960315079–6079–01; I.D.

031296D]

RIN 0648–AI16

Bluefish Fishery; Proposed Removal of

Regulations; Comment Period

Extension

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of

comment period.

SUMMARY: NMFS announces that it is

extending the public comment period

for the proposed rule to withdraw

approval of the Fishery Management

Plan (FMP) for the Bluefish Fishery and

remove implementing regulations. The

end of the public comment period for

the proposed withdrawal of the FMP for

the Bluefish Fishery is extended from

May 13, 1996, to June 7, 1996.

DATES: Written comments must be

received on or before June 7, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Comments on the proposed

rule should be sent to Dr. Andrew A.

Rosenberg, Regional Director, Northeast

Region, NMFS, One Blackburn Drive,

Gloucester, MA 01930–3799.

Copies of the environmental

assessment and regulatory impact

review are also available from the same

address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Myles Raizin, 508–281–9104.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

As a result of comments and a request

received from the Atlantic States Marine

Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) in a

letter dated April 10, 1996, NMFS is

extending the comment period for the

proposed rule that announced an initial

determination by NMFS to withdraw

approval of the FMP for the Bluefish

Fishery (March 28, 1996, 61 FR 13810).

The ASMFC advised NMFS that it needs

additional time to consider the proposal

to withdraw the FMP for the Bluefish

Fishery and that it can make

recommendations and provide

meaningful comment only after its

Bluefish Management Board has met

during the ASMFC’s Spring 1996

meeting of May 28–31, 1996. Therefore,

NMFS is extending the public comment

period for the proposed rule to June 7,

1996.

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

Dated: May 2, 1996.

Gary Matlock,

Program Management Officer, National

Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 96–11412 Filed 5–7–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–F