Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 21 / Wednesday, January 31, 1996 / Proposed Rules 3365

Interested persons are invited to

submit written comments on the

proposed regulation. A record has been

established for this rulemaking under

docket number [PP 0E3853/P640]

(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 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

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.

Administrative Assessment

Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

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.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

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 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 Part 180

Environmental protection,

Administrative practice and procedure,

Agricultural commodities, Pesticides

and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Dated: January 17, 1996.

Stephen L. Johnson,

Director, Registration Division, Office of

Pesticide Programs

Therefore, it is proposed that 40 CFR

part 180 be amended as follows:

PART 180—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 180

continues to read as follows:

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

2. By adding new § 180.488, to read as

follows:

§ 180.488 Hexaconazole; tolerance for

residues.

A tolerance is established for residues

of the fungicide hexaconazole, [alphabutyl-alpha-(2,4-dichloro-phenyl)-1H1,2,4-triazole-1-ethanol)], in or on the

imported raw agricultural commodity

bananas at 0.1 part per million. This

tolerance will expire on [ 3 years after

the signature date of the final rule].

There are no U.S. registrations as of

January 31, 1996 for use on bananas.

[FR Doc. 96–1917 Filed 1–30–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–F

40 CFR Part 300

[FRL–5403–3]

National Oil and Hazardous

Substances Pollution Contingency

Plan; National Priorities List for

Uncontrolled Hazardous Waste Sites;

Notice of Intent to Delete 29th and

Mead Ground Water Contamination

Site from the National Priorities List

(NPL): Request for Comment

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of intent to delete and

request for comment.

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) announces its intent to

delete the 29th and Mead Ground Water

Contamination Site in Wichita,

Sedgwick County, Kansas, from the

National Priorities List (NPL) and

requests public comment on this action.

The NPL constitutes Appendix B of 40

CFR part 300 which is the National Oil

and Hazardous Substances Pollution

Contingency Plan (NCP), which EPA

promulgated pursuant to section 105 of

the Comprehensive Environmental

Response, Compensation, and Liability

Act of 1980 (CERCLA), as amended.

Because of the unique circumstances

surrounding the 29th and Mead Ground

Water Contamination Site, the Agency

has determined that no further federal

steps under CERCLA are appropriate.

The Site will instead, in a pilot project,

be deferred to the State of Kansas and

addressed by the Kansas Department of

Health and Environment (KDHE). EPA

will consider the effectiveness and

efficiency of the Site cleanup as well as

the likelihood that a similarly favorable

outcome could be reproduced elsewhere

before determining whether such a

policy will be considered for other sites.

The rationale supporting this action is

explained in the Basis for Intended Site

Deletion section.

DATES: Comments concerning the

proposed deletion of the 29th and Mead

Ground Water Contamination Site

should be submitted on or before March

1, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Mail original and three

copies of comments (no facsimiles or

tapes) to Docket Coordinator,

Headquarters; U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency; CERCLA Docket

Office; (Mail Code 5201G); 401 M Street,

SW; Washington, D.C. 20460; (703) 603–

8917.

Comprehensive information on the

29th and Mead Ground Water

Contamination Site is maintained in the

public docket, which is available for

public review at the information
3366 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 21 / Wednesday, January 31, 1996 / Proposed Rules

repositories in three locations. Requests

for appointments or copies of the

background information from the public

docket should be directed to:

Docket Coordinator, Headquarters, U.S.

EPA CERCLA Docket Office (Mail

Code 5201G); Crystal Gateway #1, 1st

Floor; 1235 Jefferson Davis Highway;

Arlington, VA 22202. Phone: (703)

603–9232; Hours: 9:00 a.m. to 4:00

p.m. Monday through Friday

excluding Federal holidays. (Please

note this is viewing address only. Do

not mail documents to this address.)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Region VII; 726 Minnesota Avenue;

Kansas City, Kansas 66101. Phone:

(913) 551–7959. Hours: 8:00 a.m. to

4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday,

excluding Federal holidays.

Wichita District Office; Kansas

Department of Health and

Environment; 130 S. Market St., Suite

6050; Wichita, Kansas 67202–3802.

Phone: (316) 337–0620; Hours: 8:00

a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through

Friday, excluding state holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sitespecific questions should be directed to

Kenneth Rapplean; U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency; Region VII; 726

Minnesota Avenue, Superfund Division;

Kansas City, Kansas 66101; Tel. (913)

551–7769. General questions should be

directed to Mary Ann Rich; Office of

Emergency and Remedial Response

(Mail Code 5204G); U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency; 401 M Street, SW;

Washington, D.C. 20460; Tel. (703) 603–

8825.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Introduction

II. NPL Deletion Criteria

III. Deletion Procedures

IV. Basis for the Intended Deletion of the

29th and Mead Site from the NPL

I. Introduction

The Environmental Protection Agency

announces its intent to delete the 29th

and Mead Ground Water Contamination

Site in Wichita, Sedgwick County,

Kansas from the NPL, which constitutes

Appendix B of the National Oil and

Hazardous Substances Pollution

Contingency Plan (NCP), and requests

comments on this proposed deletion.

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 Substances 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 should future conditions at the

Site warrant such action. EPA will

accept comments concerning this Site

for thirty (30) calendar days after

publication of this Notice in the Federal

Register.

Section II of this Notice explains the

criteria for the deletion of this Site from

the NPL. Section III discusses

procedures that EPA is using for this

action. Section IV discusses how the

Site meets the deletion criteria.

II. NPL Deletion Criteria

The NCP establishes the criteria that

the Agency uses to delete sites from the

NPL. In accordance with the NCP at 40

CFR 300.425(e), sites may be deleted

from the NPL where no further Fundfinanced CERCLA response action is

appropriate. EPA typically considers, in

consultation with the State, whether any

of the following criteria has been met:

(i) Responsible parties or other persons

have implemented all appropriate

response actions required; (ii) all

appropriate Fund-financed response

under CERCLA has 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, taking of

remedial measures is not appropriate.

In light of the planned State action in

this case, EPA finds that all appropriate

Fund-financed response under CERCLA

has been implemented, and no further

response action by responsible parties

under CERCLA is appropriate. Deletion

under this approach does not indicate

that the cleanup has been completed,

but rather that no further Superfund

involvement is necessary, and that the

Agency expects the response to be

completed under an Agreement between

the City of Wichita and the Kansas

Department of Health and Environment

(KDHE). In the event such response

action is not taken under KDHE

oversight, EPA retains the right to take

further remedial action at this site, and

to restore this Site to the NPL. CERCLA

105(e); 40 CFR 300.425(e)(3).

III. Deletion Procedures

The NCP at 40 CFR 300.425(e)

specifies the procedures to be followed

in deleting sites from the NPL. It directs

that Notice and an opportunity to

comment must be given before deleting

sites from the NPL. By this Notice, EPA

intends to notify the public of its

proposal to delete the 29th and Mead

Ground Water Contamination Site from

the NPL, and it will accept comments

from the public on this proposal for a

period of thirty (30) days after the date

of publication in the Federal Register.

The following procedures were used for

the intended deletion of this Site:

(1) EPA has recommended deletion

and has prepared the relevant

documents.

(2) The State has concurred with the

proposed deletion decision after

reviewing the deletion Notice and

providing comments to EPA before its

publication in the Federal Register. The

State reviewed the Notice in less than

the usual 30 days allotted for such

review.

(3) A notice has been published in a

major local newspaper and has been

distributed to appropriate Federal, State,

and local officials, and other interested

parties.

(4) EPA has made all relevant

documents available in the Regional

Office and local Site information

repository.

Deletion of a site from the NPL does

not itself create, alter, or revoke any

individual rights or obligations. The

NPL is designated primarily for

information purposes and to assist EPA

management. As mentioned in Section

II of this Notice, 40 CFR 300.425(e)(3)

states that deletion of a site from the

NPL does not preclude eligibility for

future Fund-financed response actions.

EPA will accept and evaluate public

comments before making a final

decision to delete, and will address

them in a Responsiveness Summary,

which EPA will place in the docket for

this decision.

Because the deletion of this site

presents nationally significant issues,

the Federal Register Notice proposing to

delete this Site from the NPL will be

signed by the Assistant Administrator,

Office of Solid Waste and Emergency

Response. The NPL will reflect any

deletions in the next final rule. Public

notices and copies of the

Responsiveness Summary will be made

available to local residents by Region

VII.

IV. Basis for Intended Site Deletion

The 29th and Mead Ground Water

Contamination Site is located in

northern Wichita, Kansas and includes

a mixture of residential, commercial,

and industrial development. The Site is

a ground water plume that covers

approximately 1,440 acres. Among

contaminants detected in significant

concentrations in the ground water are

volatile organic compounds (VOCs),

including trichloroethylene, carbon

tetrachloride, toluene, benzene,

ethylbenzene, methylene chloride,

trans- and/or cis-1,2-dichloroethylene,

vinyl chloride, and 1,1,1-
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 21 / Wednesday, January 31, 1996 / Proposed Rules 3367

trichloroethane. The Site was placed on

the NPL on February 21, 1990 (55 FR

6154).

On July 30, 1994, the City of Wichita,

Kansas, petitioned the Administrator of

the Environmental Protection Agency to

remove the 29th and Mead Ground

Water Contamination Site from the NPL,

in effect, by revising the Site’s Hazard

Ranking System (HRS) score. On

November 29, 1994, EPA denied the

petition, in part because there was no

reason to change the HRS scoring of the

Site.

The Agency, however, recognizes that

legitimate issues were raised regarding

the overall process for Site cleanup

developed by the City and State, and

has reconsidered its decision not to

delete the Site from the NPL. This

decision is not based on any reevaluation of the Site or the Hazard

Ranking System score but rather on the

City’s previous successful development

of a strategy for cleanup of the Gilbert

and Mosley Site, a site that was deferred

to the State, and the expectation that the

City and the State, through their

enforceable agreement, can accomplish

the same results at the 29th and Mead

Ground Water Contamination Site

without additional federal intervention.

The reasoning for this decision is

described below. EPA will use the

results of this pilot project to evaluate

the efficiency and effectiveness of the

Site cleanup before determining

whether to grant future deletions of final

NPL sites based on deferrals to states.

EPA finds that, because the City and

the State have agreed to address the

contamination at the 29th and Mead

Site, no further response action under

CERCLA is necessary at this Site due to

the following circumstances:

First, Kansas is one of seven states to

pilot and successfully implement EPA’s

state deferral program. The purpose of

the deferral program is to encourage

qualified, interested States to address,

under State laws, the large number of

sites now in EPA’s listing queue,

thereby accelerating cleanup. Kansas

has worked actively with EPA and

Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs) to

ensure successful cleanup of these sites.

Second, the cleanup of the 29th and

Mead Ground Water Contamination Site

will be patterned after another pilot site,

Gilbert and Mosley, one of ten sites that

was deferred to the State prior to

proposal to the NPL under EPA’s

Superfund Administrative

Improvements Program. The City of

Wichita, in partnership with KDHE,

successfully developed a strategy for

cleanup of that site. Specifically, the

City:

(1) Entered into an enforceable

agreement with KDHE;

(2) Has secured agreement from one of

the principal PRPs at Gilbert and

Mosley (Coleman Company) to pay their

part of the cleanup;

(3) Issued Certificates of Release to

property owners participating in the

cleanup strategy which ensure that no

contribution suits will be filed by

parties participating in the settlement;

(4) Developed an agreement with

financial institutions to re-establish

lending in the area, and obtained upfront financial commitments to fund the

capital investment of the clean-up costs

and studies required;

(5) Implemented a tax increment

financing (TIF) district where, after

improvements were made, the higher

restored property values provided the

tax base to pay for the improvements;

and

(6) Established a Technical Advisory

Committee and a Citizens Steering

Committee to facilitate citizen

involvement;

(7) Agreed to plan and ensure

implementation of a remedial

investigation, remedial design and

cleanup of the site.

The City of Wichita received the 1992

Ford Foundation and Kennedy School

of Government Innovations in State and

Local Government Award for its creative

solutions to the Gilbert and Mosley

Superfund site. The remedial design for

an interim groundwater containment

and treatment system is now being

developed pursuant to the Gilbert and

Mosley agreement, and the project is

ahead of the schedule proposed in that

agreement.

Third, the two sites are adjacent and

the principal PRP has been cooperative

at both sites.

Fourth, based on this experience, EPA

expects that KDHE and the City of

Wichita will undertake similar efforts

that will be protective of human health

and the environment at the 29th and

Mead Ground Water Contamination

Site.

The City of Wichita has now entered

into an enforceable agreement with

KDHE under which the City will assume

responsibility for funding and

developing a cleanup strategy at the

29th and Mead site. A copy of the

Agreement is available for review at the

three docket locations listed in the

ADDRESSES section above.

This action is consistent with EPA’s

reinvention of environmental regulation

to achieve the best results at the least

cost through emphasis on performancebased management. In particular, this

action reflects the goals of the XL

Program (FRL–5197–9; May 23, 1995) by

providing flexibility to replace current

requirements with alternative strategies

that achieve better bottom line

environmental results. This action also

reflects the goals of EPA’s communitybased environmental protection

initiative by empowering state and local

officials to better meet the needs and

priorities of the communities.

For these reasons EPA proposes to

delete the 29th and Mead Ground Water

Contamination Site from the NPL.

Should conditions change (i.e.,

insufficient progress toward cleanup),

nothing shall preclude the

Environmental Protection Agency from

restoring this facility to the NPL in the

future should the Agency determine,

after consultation with the State, that

such listing will facilitate the

implementation of response actions in a

timely manner. Should that be deemed

necessary and EPA determines that

there is a significant release from the

Site, the Agency may take remedial

action at the site, and may restore the

Site to the NPL without application of

the HRS under 40 CFR 300.425(e)(3).

Dated: December 14, 1995.

Elliott P. Laws,

Assistant Administrator.

[FR Doc. 96–1715 Filed 1–30–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATION

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 15

[ET Docket 95–177; FCC 95–488]

Biomedical Telemetry Devices

AGENCY: Federal Communication

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed Rule.

SUMMARY: By this action, the

Commission proposes to expand the

available frequencies and increase the

permitted power for unlicensed

biomedical telemetry devices operating

on VHF and UHF television channels.

This is in response to a petition for rule

making, filed on December 23, 1994, by

the Critical Care Telemetry Group

(CCTG). The Commission seeks to

provide reasonable access to additional

spectrum to meet the needs of CCTG

and the health care industry while

protecting existing television and future

advanced digital television services

from potential interference.

DATES: Comments are due on or before

April 16, 1996. Reply comments are due

on or before May 16, 1996.