Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 18 / Friday, January 26, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 2451

Also, the commentor expressed a

concern regarding the Federal Register

notice not listing detailed or specific

information on how the Administrator

reached a decision. There is no

requirement to provide in the public

notice detailed or specific information

regarding how the Regional

Administrator reached her decision. As

required by 40 CFR Part 271.21(b), the

Federal Register notice did include a

summary of New Mexico’s program

revisions and indicated that EPA

intended to approve the State’s program

revision (See 60 FR 53708 and 53709).

The notice also provided that ‘‘Copies of

the New Mexico program revision

application and the materials which

EPA used in evaluating the revision are

available for inspection and copying

from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday

through Friday at the New Mexico

Environment Department and EPA’’

(See 60 FR 53709).

Comment: The Work Share

Agreement between EPA and the State

materially impacts the State’s ability to

meet the statutory requirements

necessary to qualify for authorization.

Response: In the spirit of

authorization, the State and EPA have

agreed to a Work Share Plan to enhance

the State’s hazardous waste program to

ensure that it will be consistent with,

equivalent to, and as stringent as the

federal requirements. The EPA

headquarters encourages the use of

Work Share Plan to assist the States.

The Work Share Plan is a agreement

between EPA Region 6 and the State

providing for EPA to give technical

assistance to the New Mexico

Environment Department’s (NMED)

hazardous waste management program

revision in the review of certain

corrective action documents. The Work

Share Plan specifically acknowledges

that the State is the regulatory authority

for the correction action program and

EPA will not be making final

determinations, thus there is no sharing

of regulatory responsibilities in the

authorized program. There should be no

ambiguity in how EPA and the State

function as regulators because the State

will make all regulator determinations

for those areas that they are authorized

for. The continued involvement of EPA

at selected facilities should ensure

consistency between the State and EPA

programs.

Decision

The EPA has reevaluated its decision

to approve this final authorization for

the State’s hazardous waste program

and all documentation, including the

authorization application and several

EPA mid-year and end of year

evaluation reports on New Mexico.

Additionally, EPA also considered the

New Mexico HSWA capability

assessment. The EPA hereby affirms its

decision to approve this final

authorization.

Compliance With Executive Order

12866

The Office of Management and Budget

has exempted this rule from the

requirements of Section 3 of Executive

Order 12866.

Certification Under the Regulatory

Flexibility Act

Pursuant to the provisions of 4 U.S.C.

605(b), I hereby certify that this

authorization will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. This

authorization effectively suspends the

applicability of certain Federal

regulations in favor of New Mexico’s

program, thereby eliminating

duplicative requirements for handlers of

hazardous waste in the State. This

authorization does not impose any new

burdens on small entities. This rule,

therefore, does not require a regulatory

flexibility analysis.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271

Administrative practice and

procedure, Confidential business

information, Hazardous materials

transportation, Hazardous waste, Indian

lands, Intergovernmental relations,

Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Water pollution control,

Water supply.

Authority: This Final Determination is

issued under the authority of sections

2002(a), 3006 and 7004(b) of the Solid Waste

Disposal Act amended 42 U.S.C. 6912(a),

6926, 6974(b).

Dated: December 14, 1995.

Linda Carroll,

Acting Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 96–1208 Filed 1–25–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 300

[FRL–5403–5]

National Oil and Hazardous

Substances Contingency Plan;

National Priorities List Update

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of Deletion of the

Anderson Development Company

Superfund Site from the National

Priorities List (NPL).

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) announces the deletion of

the Anderson Development Company

site in Michigan from the National

Priorities List (NPL). The NPL is

Appendix B of the National Oil and

Hazardous Substances Contingency Plan

(NCP), which EPA promulgated

pursuant to Section 105 of the

Comprehensive Environmental

Response, Compensation, and Liability

Act of 1980 (CERCLA), as amended.

EPA and the State of Michigan have

determined that all appropriate Fundfinanced responses under CERCLA have

been implemented and that no further

response by responsible parties is

appropriate. Moreover, EPA and the

State of Michigan have determined that

remedial actions conducted at the site to

date remain protective of public health,

welfare, and the environment.

EFFECTIVE DATE: January 26, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rita

Garner-Davis at (312) 886–2440,

Associate Remedial Project Manager,

Office of Superfund, U.S. EPA—Region

V, 77 West Jackson Blvd., Chicago, IL

60604. Information on the site is

available at the local information

repository located at: Adrian Public

Library, 143 East Maumee, Adrian

Michigan 49221, Contact: Jule

Foebender, Phone No. (517) 263–2265;

and Adrian City Hall, 100 East Church

Street, Adrian, MI. Requests for

comprehensive copies of documents

should be directed formally to the

Regional Docket Office. The point of

contact for the Regional Docket Office is

Jan Pfundheller (H–7J), U.S. EPA,

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

IL 60604, (312) 353–5821.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The site to

be deleted from the NPL is the

Anderson Development Company Site

located in Adrian, Michigan. A Notice

of Intent to Delete was published

August 30, 1995 (60 FR 13944) for this

site. The closing date for comments on

the Notice of Intent to Delete was

September 29, 1995. EPA received no

comments and therefore a

Responsiveness Summary was not

prepared.

The EPA identifies sites which appear

to present a significant risk to public

health, welfare, or the environment and

it maintains the NPL as the list of those

sites. Sites on the NPL may be the

subject of Hazardous Substance

Response Trust Fund (Fund-) financed

remedial actions. Any site deleted from

the NPL remains eligible for Fundfinanced remedial actions in the

unlikely event that conditions at the site

warrant such action. Section

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

Fund-financed actions may be taken at

sites deleted from the NPL in the
2452 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 18 / Friday, January 26, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

1Order, RM–8553, DA 95–2341, released

November 13, 1995.

2Whenever the 60-day ‘‘cut-off’’ date for an

application occurs on or after the processing

‘‘freeze’’ date of November 13, 1995, we will hold

the application in abeyance. This will assure

fairness to potential applicants who were precluded

by the freeze from filing competing applications in

time to be entitled to comparative consideration.

Accordingly, all 39 GHz applications placed on

public notice on or after September 14, 1995, will

be treated for purposes of interim processing as if

they were mutually exclusive. See 47 C.F.R.

§§ 21.27, 21.31(b).

unlikely event that conditions at the site

warrant such action. 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

Air pollution control, Chemicals,

Hazardous substances, Hazardous

Waste, Intergovernmental relations,

Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Superfund, Water

pollution control, Water supply.

PART 300—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for Part 300

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 9601–9657; 33 U.S.C.

1321(c)(2); 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 entry for

‘‘Anderson Development Co.’’ at Adrian,

Michigan.’’

Dated: October 18, 1996.

Michelle Jordan,

Acting Regional Administrator, U.S. EPA,

Region V.

[FR Doc. 96–1398 Filed 1–25–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Parts 21 and 94

[FCC 95–500]

Fixed Point-to-Point Microwave

Service

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: By this Order portion of the

Notice of Proposed Rule Making and

Order, the Commission generally holds

in abeyance and will not process

pending applications for frequency

assignments in the 38.6–40.0 GHz (39

GHz) band that are mutually exclusive

with other applications or that were still

within the 60-day period for filing

mutually exclusive applications as of

November 13, 1995. Further, the

Commission holds in abeyance and will

not process modification applications

for 39 GHz licenses filed on or after

November 13, 1995, unless the

application meets certain requirements

as discussed in the summary below. The

Commission takes this action to stop

processing mutually exclusive or

potentially mutually exclusive

applications under outdated licensing

rules in anticipation of the adoption of

new licensing rules.

EFFECTIVE DATE: December 15, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom

Mooring, Office of Engineering and

Technology, (202) 418–2450.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

summary of the Commission’s Order,

adopted and released December 15,

1995. The complete Notice of Proposed

Rule Making and Order is available for

inspection and copying during normal

business hours in the FCC Reference

Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street, N.W.,

Washington, D.C., and also may be

purchased from the Commission’s

duplication contractor, International

Transcription Service, (202) 857–3800,

2100 M Street, N.W., Suite 140,

Washington D.C. 20037.

Summary of Order

1. In the companion Notice of

Proposed Rule Making (‘‘Notice’’) in this

proceeding, the Commission proposed

to amend the licensing and technical

rules for fixed point-to-point microwave

operations in the 39 GHz band. On

November 13, 1995, pursuant to

delegated authority, the Wireless

Telecommunications Bureau (Bureau)

ordered that no additional applications

for 39 GHz frequency assignments

would be accepted for filing as of the

date of the Bureau’s order pending the

outcome of this proceeding.1 The

Bureau observed that over 2,100

applications for 39 GHz licenses had

been filed since January 1995, and noted

that the increasing number of

applications filed pursuant to the

existing rules was a burden on

Commission resources and could inhibit

the Commission’s ability to update the

regulatory structure of this service in

light of today’s marketplace conditions.

The Bureau also stated that the freeze

does not apply to applications for

assignment or transfer of control of

license. Likewise, the Commission

stresses that the interim policy

described below will not apply to

assignment or transfer of control

applications, which will continue to be

processed under existing procedures.

2. With respect to previously filed 39

GHz applications now pending before

the Commission, the Commission took

the following action. Pending

applications will be processed if (1) they

were not mutually exclusive with other

applications at the time of the Bureau’s

Order, and (2) the 60-day period for

filing mutually exclusive applications

expired prior to November 13, 1995.

The Commission concluded that

processing pending applications against

which no competing application has

been timely filed will not impede the

goals of this proceeding and can be

accomplished without significant

burden on Commission resources. The

Commission also proposed to apply to

all licenses granted under this

procedure the same revised construction

threshold and grandfathering

requirements that it proposed to apply

to incumbent 39 GHz licensees who

received license grants prior to this

Notice.

3. With respect to all other pending

applications (i.e., those that were

subject to mutual exclusivity or still

within the 60-day period as of

November 13), the Commission

concluded that processing and

disposition should be held in abeyance

during the pendency of this

proceeding.2 First, resolving mutually

exclusive applications requires greater

expenditure of Commission resources

than processing uncontested

applications. Second, the Commission is

concerned that attempting to award

licenses in mutually exclusive

situations under its current rules could

lead to results that are inconsistent with

the objectives of this proceeding.

Therefore, the Commission will not

process these applications (or any

amendments thereto filed on or after

November 13, 1995) at this time, but

intends to determine whether to process

or return them, as appropriate, at the

conclusion of this proceeding. The

Commission solicits comment on how

these applications that will be held in

abeyance should later be treated if new

licensing and service rules are

ultimately adopted in this proceeding.

4. Also in regard to pending

applications for 39 GHz licenses,

amendments received on or after

November 13, 1995 will be held in

abeyance during the pendency of this

proceeding. The Commission will

similarly hold in abeyance those

applications for modification of existing

39 GHz licenses filed on or after

November 13, 1995, or modification