Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 132 / Tuesday, July 9, 1996 / Notices 36059

Pacific Multiform; Pacific Northwest

Bell/US West Communications, Inc.;

Pacific Partitions; Pampco Construction/

Constructors-Pacific Company; Payless

Drugs/Pay N Save/Thrifty Payless, Inc.;

Pepsi/Seven-Up Bottling/Glaser

Beverage/Alpac Corporation; Peter Pan

Seafoods, Inc.; Petschl’s Meats; Pike

Place Market Authority; Pirates

Plunder/Great Western Pacific, Inc.;

Plaza 600/The Vance Corporation;

Providence Hospital; PSF Industries;

Purdy Company; QFC/Quality Food

Centers, Inc.; R. C. Hedreen Company;

Recreational Equipment, Inc. (REI); Red

Dot Corporation; Reynolds Aluminum

Corp.; Richardson & Holland/Bunge

Foods Corporation; Richmark Printing;

Riches & Adams/Adams News Co., Inc.;

Rubatino Refuse Removal, Inc.; SAFECO

Insurance Company of America; Salmon

Terminal/Olympic Steamship Co., Inc.;

Sanitary Service Company, Inc./City of

Bellingham; Scott Paper Company/

Kimberly Clark Corporation; Scougal

Rubber Corporation; Seaboard Lumber;

Sealand Service Inc.; Seattle Central

Community College; Seattle Community

College District; Seattle District Corps of

Engineers; Seattle First National Bank/

Seafirst; Seattle Golf & Country Club;

Seattle Iron & Metals Corporation;

Seattle Post-Intelligencer; Seattle

Seafood/Washington Fish & Oyster

Company/Ocean Beauty Seafoods, Inc.;

Seattle Times; Seattle Trade Center;

Seattle University; Sellen Construction

Co, Inc.; Skyway Luggage Company;

Snohomish County PUD; South Seattle

Community College; SQI Roofing/SQI,

Inc.; Star Machinery Co.; State of

Washington Military Department;

Swedish Hospital/Doctors Hospital;

Texaco Inc./Texaco Refining &

Marketing, Inc.; Thurman Electric &

Plumbing Supply; Tiz’s Door Sales;

Trident Imports; Tullus Gordon

Construction/Gordon Tullus

Construction; Turner & Pease; U.S.

Coast Guard; U.S. Postal Service; United

Parcel Service; V.A. Hospitals/U.S.

Department of Veterans Affairs; Virginia

Mason Hospital; W. G. Clark

Construction Co.; W. W. Wells

Millworks; Wall & Ceiling Supply;

Washington Chain & Supply;

Washington Natural Gas Company;

Washington Plaza/Seattle Westin Hotel

Company/Westin Hotel Company/

Benjamin Franklin Hotel, Inc.;

Washington State Ferry; Washington

State Liquor Warehouse; Welco Lumber

Co.; West Coast Construction; West

Waterway Lumber; Western Gear/

Bucyrus-Erie Company; Weyerhaeuser.

The EPA is entering into this

agreement under the authority of

sections 122(g), 106 and 107 of

CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9622(g), 9606 and

9607. Section 122(g) authorizes early

settlements with de minimis parties to

allow them to resolve their liabilities at

Superfund sites without incurring

substantial transaction costs. Under this

authority, the agreement proposes to

settle with parties in the Tulalip

Landfill case who each are responsible

for less than 0.6% of the volume of

hazardous substances at the site.

In February and March 1988, EPA

contractor Ecology & Environment, Inc.

(E&E) performed a site inspection of the

landfill for NPL evaluation. The

inspection revealed groundwater

contamination with unacceptably high

levels of arsenic, barium, cadmium,

chromium, lead, mercury, and silver.

Water samples taken in the wetlands

adjacent to the site showed exceedences

of marine chronic criteria for cadmium,

chromium, and lead as well as

exceedences in marine acute criteria for

copper, nickel and zinc. In addition, a

variety of metals were found in on-site

pools and leachate. The study

concluded that contamination was

migrating off site. On July 29, 1991, EPA

proposed adding the Tulalip Landfill to

the NPL, and on April 25, 1995, with

the support of the Governor of the State

of Washington and the Tulalip Tribes of

Washington, EPA published the final

rule adding the Site to the NPL.

EPA is currently performing a

Remedial Investigation (‘‘RI’’) and

Feasibility Study (‘‘FS’’) pursuant to an

Administrative Order on Consent with

several potentially responsible parties.

The FS is being conducted in two parts.

The first part, which has been

completed, evaluates various

containment alternatives for the landfill

source area, which includes

approximately 147 acres in which waste

was deposited. The second part will

evaluate the off-source areas, which

includes the wetlands and tidal

channels that surround the landfill

source area. On March 1, 1996, EPA

issued a Record of Decision that

selected an interim remedial action for

the source area. The selected interim

remedy requires installation of an

engineered, low permeability cover over

the source area of the landfill, at an

estimated cost of $25.1 million. For

purposes of this settlement, EPA

estimates that the expected future

response costs at the Site will be

$33,543,626, including EPA’s oversight

costs.

The proposed settlement requires

each settling party to pay a fixed sum

of money representing their volumetric

share of EPA’s past costs and the

estimated costs of future response

actions, plus a premium. The total

amount that may be recovered from the

proposed settlement is $8,130,610. Of

the amount paid, $270,905 will

reimburse a share of response costs

incurred by EPA at the Site, and

$7,859,705 will be deposited in the

Tulalip Landfill Special Account within

the EPA Hazardous Substance

Superfund to be retained and used to

conduct or finance response actions at

or in connection with the Site. Upon

full payment, each settling party will

receive a release from further civil or

administrative liabilities for the Site and

statutory contribution protection under

Section 122(g)(5), 42 U.S.C. 9622(g)(5).

EPA will receive written comments

relating to this proposed settlement for

a period of thirty (30) days from the date

of this publication.

The proposed agreement may be

obtained from Cindy Colgate, Office of

Environmental Cleanup (ECL–113),

1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington

98101, (206) 553–1815. The

Administrative Record for this

settlement may be examined at the

EPA’s Region 10 office located at 1200

Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington

98101 by contacting Lynn M. Williams,

Superfund Records Manager, Office of

Environmental Cleanup (ECL–113),

1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington

98101, (206) 553–2121.

Authority: The Comprehensive

Environmental Response, Compensation and

Liability Act, as amended, 41 U.S.C. Sections

9601–9675.

Jane S. Moore,

Acting Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 96–17325 Filed 7–8–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

[FRL–5532–9]

Clean Water Act Section 303(d):

Availability of List Submissions and

Proposed Decisions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Notice of Availability.

SUMMARY: This notice announces the

availability of lists submitted to EPA by

California and Hawaii pursuant to Clean

Water Act Section 303(d)(2) as well as

EPA’s proposed decisions regarding

these submissions, and requests public

comment. Section 303(d)(2) requires

that states submit and EPA approve or

disapprove lists of waters for which

existing technology-based pollution

controls are not stringent enough to

attain or maintain state water quality

standards and for which total maximum

daily loads (TMDLs) must be prepared.

On June 14, 1996, EPA partially

approved California’s submittal.
36060 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 132 / Tuesday, July 9, 1996 / Notices

Specifically, EPA approved California’s

listing of waters except for waters listed

in the Santa Ana Region of California.

Today, EPA is proposing to:

(1) approve California’s 303(d)

submission of waters in the Santa Ana

Region,

(2) disapprove California’s decisions

not to list Ten Mile River for sediment

and Navarro River, which is already

listed for sediment, for temperature,

(3) add the Ten Mile River for

sediment and the Navarro River for

temperature to California’s 1996 303(d)

list, and

(4) approve Hawaii’s 303(d)

submission.

EPA is providing the public the

opportunity to review these proposed

decisions as required by Public

Participation regulations [40 CFR Part

25]. EPA will consider public comments

in reaching its final decisions on

California and Hawaii’s final lists.

DATES: Comments must be submitted to

EPA on or before August 8, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Comments on the proposed

decisions should be sent to David

Smith, TMDL Coordinator, Water

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street,

San Francisco, CA 94105, telephone

(415) 744–2012, facsimile (415) 744–

1078. Copies of the proposed decisions

concerning California and Hawaii which

explain the rationale for EPA’s proposed

decisions can be obtained by writing or

calling Mr. Smith at the above address.

Underlying documentation comprising

the record for this decision is available

for public inspection at the above

address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

David Smith at (415) 744–2012.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section

303(d) of the Clean Water Act (CWA)

requires that each state identify those

waters for which existing technologybased pollution controls are not

stringent enough to attain or maintain

state water quality standards. For those

waters, states are required to establish

TMDLs according to a priority ranking.

On January 11, 1985, EPA published

the Water Quality Planning and

Management regulations [50 FR 1775].

These regulations included

requirements related to the

implementation of Section 303(d) of the

CWA [40 CFR 130.7]. The regulations

did not specify dates for state

compliance with the Section 303(d)

requirements, but reiterated the

statutory provisions calling for

submissions from time to time. On July

24, 1992, EPA published a final rule [57

FR 143] that amended 40 CFR 130.7 to

establish that, for the purposes of

identifying water quality-limited waters

still requiring TMDLs, ‘‘from time to

time’’ means once every two years. The

list of waters still needing TMDLs must

also include a priority ranking and must

identify the waters targeted for TMDL

development during the next two years

[40 CFR 130.7].

Consistent with EPA’s revised

regulations, California submitted to EPA

for its approval its listing decisions

under Section 303(d)(2). EPA today

proposes to:

(1) decline to make a final decision to

approve the listings and priority

rankings for the Santa Ana RWQCB

(Region 8) because that Regional Board

provided insufficient opportunity for

public participation, and instead

propose to approve the listings and

priority rankings, with EPA’s final

decision to approve or disapprove to be

issued after consideration of public

comment, (2) propose disapproval of the

State’s decision not to list Ten Mile

River for sediment and Navarro River

for temperature, and (3) propose a final

decision to add Ten Mile River for

sediment and Navarro River for

temperature to the State’s 1996 list and

establish appropriate priority rankings.

EPA solicits public comment on

California’s list of waters in the Santa

Ana Region and EPA’s proposed

decision to approve these listings, EPA’s

proposed decision to disapprove

California’s decisions concerning Ten

Mile River and Navarro River, and

EPA’s proposed decision to add the Ten

Mile River for sediment and the Navarro

River for temperature to California’s

final 1996 Section 303(d) list.

Hawaii also submitted to EPA for its

approval its listing decisions under

Section 303(d)(2). EPA today proposes

to fully approve Hawaii’s list of waters

needing TMDLs, priority rankings, and

list of waters targeted for TMDL

development during the next two years.

EPA solicits public comment on

Hawaii’s lists and EPA’s proposed

approval decision.

EPA notes that it does not normally

solicit public comment on its decisions

to approve state Section 303(d) lists.

Pursuant to the public participation

requirements of 40 CFR 25, EPA is

providing this opportunity for public

review and comment on its proposed

approval decisions because California

provided inadequate opportunity for

public comment during development of

its lists for the Santa Ana Region, and

Hawaii provided no opportunity for

public comment during the

development of its lists. In the future,

EPA expects that states will provide

adequate opportunities for public

comment during development of the

state lists.

Dated: June 14, 1996.

John Ong,

Acting Director, Water Management Division.

[FR Doc. 96–17321 Filed 7–8–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS

AUTHORITY

Sunshine Act Meeting

TIME AND DATES: 2:00 p.m., Tuesday, July

16, 1996.

PLACE: Second Floor Agenda Room, 607

14th Street, N.W., Washington, D.C.

20424.

STATUS: Open. Attendance at the

meeting will be limited because of space

constraints. Persons interested in

attending the meeting should notify the

Office of Case Control. Telephone: FTS

or Commercial (202) 482–6540.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: The Federal

Labor Relations Authority is holding

oral argument in Social Security

Administration, Baltimore, Maryland,

Case No. 3–CA–10859. The proceeding

concerns the extent to which an agency

is obligated to furnish facilities and

services, under 5 U.S.C. § 7116(a)(1) and

(3), to a labor organization that is

seeking to represent the agency’s

employees.

FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION OF PREVIOUS

ANNOUNCEMENT: Notice of Oral

Argument and Opportunity to Submit

Amicus Curiae Briefs, 61 FR 25871, May

23, 1996.

PREVIOUSLY ANNOUNCED TIME AND DATE OF

MEETING: 10:00 a.m., Wednesday, July

10, 1996.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

James H. Adams, Acting Director, Case

Control Office, Federal Labor Relations

Authority, 607 14th Street, N.W., Suite

415, Washington, D.C. 20424.

Telephone: FTS or Commercial (202)

482–6540.

Dated: July 5, 1996.

For the FLRA.

James H. Adams,

Acting Director, Case Control Office.

[FR Doc. 96–17583 Filed 7–5–96; 1:18 pm]

BILLING CODE 6727–01–P

FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH

REVIEW COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting

July 3, 1996.

TIME AND DATE: 10:00 a.m., Thursday,

July 11, 1996.