Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 156 / Friday, August 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 53311 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This action does not have tribal 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13175. It will not have substantial 

direct effects on tribal governments. 

Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not 

apply to this rule. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13045 because it is not 

economically significant as defined in 

Executive Order 12866, and because 

EPA does not believe the environmental 

health or safety risks addressed by this 

action present a disproportionate risk to 

children because it proposes to 

disapprove a state rule. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution or Use 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13211, because it is not a 

significant regulatory action under 

Executive Order 12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act (NTTAA) 

This rulemaking does not involve 

technical standards. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions to Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

EPA believes the human health or 

environmental risk addressed by this 

action will not have potential 

disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects 

on minority, low-income or indigenous 

populations. 

Congressional Review Act 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this rule and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by October 11, 2016. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this rule for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. This action may not 

be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See section 

307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Ozone. 

Dated: August 1, 2016. 

Robert A. Kaplan, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

■ 2. Section 52.2591 is amended by 

revising paragraph (g) to read as follows: 

§ 52.2591 Section 110(a)(2) infrastructure 

requirements. 

* * * * * 

(g) Approval—In a June 20, 2013, 

submission with a January 28, 2015, 

clarification, Wisconsin certified that 

the state has satisfied the infrastructure 

SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A) 

through (H), and (J) through (M) for the 

2008 ozone NAAQS. For 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), we are approving 

prong one and disapproving prong two. 

We are not taking action on the 

prevention of significant deterioration 

requirements related to section 

110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), and (J) and the 

state board requirements of (E)(ii). We 

will address these requirements in a 

separate action. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2016–19025 Filed 8–11–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 300 

[EPA–HQ–SFUND–2000–0006; FRL–9950– 

62–Region 2] 

National Oil and Hazardous 

Substances Pollution Contingency 

Plan; National Priorities List: Deletion 

of the Jackson Steel Superfund Site 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Jackson Steel Superfund 

site (Site), located in the Village of 

Mineola, Nassau County, New York, 

contains a building formerly used as a 

metal-forming facility. The Site is 

bordered to the north by commercial 

spaces and single-family dwellings, to 

the east by a two-story apartment 

complex, to the south by a daycare 

center and to the west by an office 

building and restaurant. 

The Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA) Region 2 is publishing this direct 

final Notice of Deletion (NOD) of the 

Site from the National Priorities List 

(NPL). The NPL, promulgated pursuant 

to Section 105 of the Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act 

(CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is an 

appendix of the National Oil and 

Hazardous Substances Pollution 

Contingency Plan (NCP). This direct 

final deletion is being published by EPA 

with the concurrence of the State of 

New York, through the New York State 

Department of Environmental 

Conservation (NYSDEC), because EPA 

has determined that all appropriate 

response actions under CERCLA have 

been completed at the Site and that the 

soil on the Site and the groundwater 

beneath the Site no longer pose a threat 

to public health or the environment. 

Because elevated concentrations of 

volatile organic compounds (VOCs) are 

present under the slab of the vacant 

Jackson Steel building and the occupied 

daycare center, operation and 

maintenance of the subslab vapor 

intrusion mitigation systems under the 

daycare center, periodic vapor intrusion 

monitoring, and five-year reviews will 

continue. The deletion does not 

preclude future actions under 

Superfund. 

DATES: This direct final deletion will be 

effective September 26, 2016 unless 

EPA receives adverse comments by 

September 12, 2016. If adverse 

comments are received, EPA will 

publish a timely withdrawal of this 

direct final NOD in the Federal 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
53312 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 156 / Friday, August 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 

Register, informing the public that the 

deletion will not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID no. EPA–HQ– 

SFUND–2000–0006, by one of the 

following methods: 

• Web site: http://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Email: singerman.joel@epa.gov. 

• Fax: To the attention of Joel 

Singerman at 212–637–3966. 

• Mail: To the attention of Joel 

Singerman, Chief, Central New York 

Remediation Section, Emergency and 

Remedial Response Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 2, 290 Broadway, 20th Floor, 

New York, NY 10007–1866. 

• Hand Delivery: Superfund Records 

Center, 290 Broadway, 18th Floor, New 

York, NY 10007–1866 (telephone: 212– 

637–4308). Such deliveries are only 

accepted during the Record Center’s 

normal hours of operation (Monday to 

Friday from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.). 

Special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID no. EPA–HQ–SFUND–2000– 

0006. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the Docket 

without change and may be made 

available online at http://

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be confidential business 

information (CBI) or other information 

for which disclosure is restricted by 

statute. Do not submit information that 

you consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through http://

www.regulations.gov or via email. The 

http://www.regulations.gov Web site is 

an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your 

comments. If you send comments to 

EPA via email, your email address will 

be included as part of the comment that 

is placed in the Docket and made 

available on the Web site. If you submit 

electronic comments, EPA recommends 

that you include your name and other 

contact information in the body of your 

comments and with any disks or CD– 

ROMs that you submit. If EPA cannot 

read your comments because of 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comments fully. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters and any form of 

encryption and should be free of any 

defects or viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the Docket 

are listed in the http://

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other 

information for which disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

will be publicly available only in hard 

copy. Publicly-available Docket 

materials can be obtained either 

electronically at http://

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at: 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 2, Superfund Records Center, 

290 Broadway, 18th Floor, New York, 

NY 10007–1866. Phone: 212–637– 

4308. Hours: Monday to Friday: 9:00 

a.m. to 5:00 p.m. 

Town of North Hempstead, 200 

Plandome Road, Manhasset, NY 

11030. Phone: (516) 489–5000. Hours: 

Monday–Friday, 8:15 a.m.–4:00 p.m. 

Garden City Public Library, 60 Seventh 

Street, Garden City, NY 11530. Phone: 

(516) 742–8405. Hours: Monday– 

Thursday: 9:30 a.m.–9:00 p.m.; Friday 

and Saturday: 9:30 a.m.–5:00 p.m.; 

Sat: 9:30 a.m.–5:00 p.m. and Sunday: 

1:00 p.m.–5:00 p.m. 

Village of Mineola Hall, 155 Washington 

Avenue, Mineola, NY 11501. Phone: 

(516) 746–0750. Hours: Monday– 

Friday 8:30 a.m.–4:30 p.m. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joel 

Singerman, Chief, Central New York 

Remediation Section, by mail at 

Emergency and Remedial Response 

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 2, 290 Broadway, 20th 

Floor, New York, NY 10007–1866; 

telephone at 212–637–4258; fax at 212– 

637–3966; or email at singerman.joel@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Introduction 

II. NPL Deletion Criteria 

III. Deletion Procedures 

IV. Basis for Site Deletion 

V. Deletion Action 

I. Introduction 

EPA Region 2 is publishing this direct 

final NOD of the Site from the NPL. The 

NPL constitutes Appendix B of 40 CFR 

part 300, which is the NCP, which EPA 

promulgated pursuant to Section 105 of 

CERCLA, as amended. EPA maintains 

the NPL as the list of releases that 

appear to present a significant risk to 

public health, welfare, or the 

environment. The releases on the NPL 

may be the subject of remedial actions 

financed by the Hazardous Substance 

Superfund (Fund). As described in 

Section 300.425(e)(3) of the NCP, a site 

deleted from the NPL remains eligible 

for Fund-financed remedial action if 

future conditions at the site warrant 

such actions. 

Section II of this document explains 

the criteria for deleting sites from the 

NPL. Section III discusses procedures 

that EPA is using for this action. Section 

IV discusses the Site and demonstrates 

how it meets the deletion criteria. 

Section V discusses EPA’s action to 

delete the Site from the NPL unless 

adverse comments are received during 

the public comment period. 

II. NPL Deletion Criteria 

The NCP establishes the criteria that 

EPA 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 such a 

determination pursuant to 40 CFR 

300.425(e), EPA will consider, in 

consultation with the State, whether any 

of the following criteria have been met: 

i. Responsible parties or other parties 

have implemented all appropriate 

response actions required; 

ii. all appropriate Fund-financed 

responses under CERCLA have been 

implemented, and no further action by 

responsible parties is appropriate; or 

iii. the remedial investigation (RI) has 

shown that the release of hazardous 

substances poses no significant threat to 

public health or the environment and, 

therefore, taking of remedial measures is 

not appropriate. 

Pursuant to CERCLA Section 121(c) 

and the NCP, EPA conducts five-year 

reviews to ensure the continued 

protectiveness of remedial actions 

where hazardous substances, pollutants, 

or contaminants remain at a site above 

levels that allow for unlimited use and 

unrestricted exposure. EPA conducts 

such five-year reviews even if a site is 

deleted from the NPL. EPA may initiate 

further action to ensure continued 

protectiveness at a deleted site if new 

information becomes available that 

indicates it is appropriate. Whenever 

there is a significant release from a site 

deleted from the NPL, the deleted site 

may be restored to the NPL without 

application of the hazard ranking 

system. 

III. Deletion Procedures 

The following procedures apply to the 

deletion of the Site: 

(1) EPA consulted with the State of 

New York prior to developing this direct 

final NOD and the NOID also published 

today in the ‘‘Proposed Rules’’ section 

of the Federal Register. 

(2) EPA has provided the State with 

30 working days for review of this 

notice and the parallel NOID prior to 

their publication today, and the State, 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 156 / Friday, August 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 53313 

through NYSDEC, has concurred on the 

deletion of the Site from the NPL. 

(3) Concurrent with the publication of 

this direct final NOD, a notice of the 

availability of the parallel NOID is being 

published in a major local newspaper, 

the Mineola American. The newspaper 

notice announces the 30-day public 

comment period concerning the NOID 

of the Site from the NPL. 

(4) EPA placed copies of documents 

supporting the proposed deletion in the 

Deletion Docket and made these items 

available for public inspection and 

copying at the Site information 

repositories identified above. 

(5) If adverse comments are received 

within the 30-day public comment 

period on this deletion action, EPA will 

publish a timely notice of withdrawal of 

this direct final NOD before its effective 

date and will prepare a response to 

comments. If appropriate, EPA may 

continue with the deletion process 

based on the NOID and the comments 

already received. 

The NPL is designed primarily for 

informational purposes and to assist 

EPA’s management of sites. Section 

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

deletion of a site from the NPL does not 

preclude eligibility for further response 

actions should future conditions 

warrant such actions. 

IV. Basis for Site Deletion 

The following information provides 

the Agency’s rationale for deleting the 

Site from the NPL. 

Site Background and History 

The 1.5-acre Site (CERCLIS ID 

NYD001344456) contains a one-story, 

43,000-square-foot building formerly 

used as a metal-forming facility and an 

approximately 10,000-square foot paved 

parking area. It is bordered to the north 

by commercial spaces and single-family 

dwellings, to the east by a two-story 

apartment complex, to the south by a 

daycare center, and to the west by an 

office building and restaurant. 

The property was used from the mid1970s until 1991 as a ‘‘roll form metal 

shapes’’ manufacturing facility. 

Degreasers, including 

tetrachloroethylene (PCE), 

trichloroethylene, and 1,1,1- 

trichloroethane, were used at the facility 

until 1985. Sludges from degreasing 

equipment were stored in drums and in 

an on-property 275-gallon tank. 

The analytical results from samples 

collected by the Nassau County 

Department of Health (NCHD) in the 

early 1990s from within, around, and 

below three on-property dry wells 

indicated the presence of VOCs at 

depths down to 40 feet below the 

ground surface. VOCs were also 

detected in groundwater samples 

collected from monitoring wells located 

downgradient of the dry wells. 

Dumping of wastes into the dry wells 

and spills and leaks from drums storing 

various chemicals during the facility’s 

operations are the likely sources of the 

contamination that was found at the 

Site. 

The Site was proposed for listing on 

the NPL on October 22, 1999 (40 CFR 

part 300 [FRL–6462–2]). The Site was 

listed on the NPL on February 4, 2000 

(40 CFR part 300 [FRL–6532–7]). 

Following the commencement of RIrelated field work in October 2001, 

because of concerns about the proximity 

of the Site to the daycare center, NCHD 

performed air sampling inside the 

daycare center building. The air samples 

detected PCE at levels below the New 

York State Department of Health’s 

(NYSDOH’s) guideline for indoor PCE 

exposure. Given the sensitivity of the 

population exposed (preschool 

children), NCHD collected additional 

samples in December 2001. At that time, 

indoor testing was also conducted 

inside the Jackson Steel building and 

the restaurant located adjacent to the 

Site. The results indicated that PCE 

levels in the indoor air of several rooms 

in the daycare center were above 

NYSDOH’s guideline for PCE. As a 

result, in January 2002, a subslab 

depressurization system (i.e., vapor 

intrusion mitigation system) was 

installed by EPA. In addition, a 

ventilation system was installed by the 

daycare center’s contractor. Samples 

collected to assess the effectiveness of 

the implemented measures showed that 

the PCE levels in the air were 

significantly below NYSDOH’s 

guideline and below EPA’s acceptable 

noncancer risk levels. Because elevated 

PCE levels were also detected in a 

billiards club that shared common walls 

with the Site building and the daycare 

center, EPA installed a vapor intrusion 

mitigation system under the concrete 

slab of this building, as well. The 

billiards club was subsequently 

occupied as a retail store, and recently 

the daycare center (the Learn and Play 

Daycare Center) expanded to occupy 

this space, as well. The vapor intrusion 

mitigation systems were replaced by the 

property owner’s contractor in May 

2016. 

The results of the RI, which was 

completed in 2002, indicated that VOCs, 

semi-volatile organic compounds, 

pesticides, and metals contamination 

were present in the surface soil, and 

VOC contamination was present at 

several subsurface soil locations. In 

addition, contamination was found in a 

trench and sumps located inside the 

building and dry wells located under 

the parking lot at the Site. 

Groundwater from the three 

hydrogeologic units underlying the 

site—the Upper Glacial Aquifer (upper 

aquifer), Magothy Confining Bed (a low 

permeability, clay layer separating the 

upper and deep aquifers), and the 

Magothy Aquifer (deep aquifer)—were 

also sampled. VOC contamination above 

state and federal standards was detected 

both in the Upper Glacial Aquifer and 

Magothy Aquifer. 

Based upon the results of the RI and 

a feasibility study, in September 2004, 

EPA selected a remedy for the Site in a 

Record of Decision (ROD). The ROD 

outlined the following remedial action 

objectives (RAOs): 

• Minimize or eliminate contaminant 

migration from contaminated soils and 

dry wells to the groundwater; 

• minimize or eliminate any 

contaminant migration from 

contaminated soils and groundwater to 

indoor air; 

• restore groundwater to levels which 

meet state and federal standards within 

a reasonable time frame; 

• mitigate the migration of the 

affected groundwater; and 

• reduce or eliminate any direct 

contact, ingestion, or inhalation threat 

associated with contaminated soils, soil 

vapor, contaminated surfaces in the onproperty building, and groundwater. 

The selected remedy includes the 

following actions: 

• Decontamination of the Jackson 

Steel building floor; 

• in-situ soil vapor extraction (ISVE) 

to treat the contaminated subsurface 

soil; 

• excavation and off-Site disposal of 

the contaminated surface soil and 

contaminated material in on-Site sumps, 

a trench, and dry wells; 

• in-situ chemical oxidation (ISCO) to 

treat the contaminated groundwater in 

the Upper Glacial Aquifer; 

• extraction and treatment of the 

contaminated groundwater in the deep 

aquifer if confirmatory groundwater 

sampling indicates that the Site is a 

principal source of the groundwater 

contamination to the aquifer underlying 

the Site; 

• if it is determined that the Site is a 

principal source of the groundwater 

contamination to the deep aquifer 

underlying the Site, the selected remedy 

would be expanded, as necessary, to 

include off-property groundwater 

contamination; and 

• long-term groundwater monitoring. 

The soil cleanup objectives were 

established pursuant to New York State 

Technical and Administrative Guidance 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
53314 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 156 / Friday, August 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 

Memorandum (TAGM) No. 94–HWR– 

4046 objectives (Division Technical and 

Administrative Guidance Memorandum: 

Determination of Soil Cleanup 

Objectives and Cleanup Levels, Division 

of Hazardous Waste Remediation, 

January 24, 1994). As dictated by the 

TAGM objectives, the soil cleanup 

levels selected in the ROD were the 

more stringent cleanup level between a 

human-health protection value and a 

value based on protection of 

groundwater. The groundwater cleanup 

goals were the more stringent of the 

state or federal promulgated standards. 

EPA and New York State Department of 

Health promulgated health-based, 

protective Maximum Contaminant 

Levels (MCLs) that are enforceable 

standards for various drinking water 

contaminants. MCLs ensure that 

drinking water does not pose either a 

short- or long-term health risk. 

The building decontamination and 

the excavation of the contaminated 

surface soil and the contaminated 

material in the building sumps and 

trench and in the dry wells and their 

disposal were performed from 2005 to 

2006. A total of 170 cubic yards of 

material was excavated and disposed of 

at an EPA-approved off-Site facility. 

Groundwater ISCO injections were 

performed between July and December 

2005. Approximately, 15,000 gallons of 

iron-catalyzed sodium persulfate (with 

small amounts of buffering agents) and 

600 gallons of hydrogen peroxide were 

injected into the aquifer through a 

network of 20 injection wells to treat the 

contamination in the Upper Glacial 

Aquifer. 

After a successful pilot test, an ISVE 

system consisting of nine ISVE wells 

and 11 vapor monitoring probes began 

operating in 2005. 

A supplemental groundwater 

investigation was conducted from 2005 

to 2006 to determine the source of the 

Magothy Aquifer contamination 

underneath the Site and to establish 

whether there was a relationship 

between the contamination at the Site 

and the VOC contamination detected in 

nearby Village of Mineola Supply Well 

#4. Based on the results of the 

investigation, it was concluded that the 

Site was not a current source of 

contamination in the Magothy Aquifer. 

Therefore, EPA decided not to 

implement the Magothy Aquifer 

groundwater remedy. An Explanation of 

Significant Differences (ESD) was issued 

in 2007, documenting this decision. 

While the cleanup objectives for the 

Upper Glacial Aquifer and soil were met 

in 2006 and 2008, respectively, EPA 

continued to operate the ISVE system 

until 2013 because VOC vapors were 

still being recovered from underneath 

the Jackson Steel building. The 

operation of the ISVE system was 

discontinued when the levels of vapor 

removal became too low for the system 

to continue to be efficient. 

The aboveground ISVE infrastructure 

was removed by EPA in June 2013. 

From March to April 19, 2016, the 

groundwater monitoring wells, ISVE 

wells, vapor monitoring wells, ISCO 

injection wells, and ISCO monitoring 

wells, were decommissioned. 

Although EPA successfully 

remediated the soil and the groundwater 

aquifer immediately underlying the Site, 

residual levels of VOCs remain. VOCs, 

even at low levels, can migrate as vapors 

through the soil into buildings. This 

process, which is called vapor intrusion, 

can result in unacceptable human 

exposures to VOCs inside occupied 

buildings. This pathway is currently 

incomplete at the Site, because the 

building on the site is currently 

unoccupied, and subslab vapor 

intrusion mitigation systems prevent the 

migration of vapors into an adjacent 

occupied building. 

Because the residual levels of VOCs 

are expected to dissipate slowly, EPA 

concluded that preventing human 

exposure to VOCs at the occupied 

building will be needed for a number of 

years to ensure the protectiveness of the 

remedy. Therefore, the existing vapor 

intrusion mitigation systems will need 

to continue to operate, and additional 

actions, from monitoring to the 

installation of an additional vapor 

mitigation system, may be needed 

should the currently unoccupied 

building be occupied or replaced with 

another structure in the future. EPA 

determined that institutional controls 

(ICs) (i.e., property use restrictions) 

requiring the continued operation of the 

subslab vapor intrusion mitigation 

systems were needed. In addition, EPA 

determined that ICs requiring vapor 

intrusion sampling and/or mitigative 

measures were needed should the 

unoccupied Jackson Steel building be 

occupied or replaced with another 

structure in the future. 

EPA issued an ESD on June 20, 2016, 

documenting its determination to 

incorporate into the remedy ICs to 

prevent exposure through vapor 

intrusion. The ICs will remain in place 

until the residual VOCs fully dissipate 

in the subsurface. EPA noted in the ESD 

that a Vapor Intrusion Management Plan 

(VIMP) and Institutional Control 

Implementation and Assurance Plan 

(ICIAP) would be prepared to ensure 

that the ICs were appropriately 

implemented and maintained. In 

addition, in the ESD EPA noted that it 

would communicate directly with the 

Village of Mineola Superintendent of 

Buildings, requesting that EPA and 

NYSDEC be notified if the existing 

building is to be refurbished and used 

for human occupancy or demolished 

and a new structure constructed. The 

correspondence would also request that 

the Village not issue a Certificate of 

Occupancy until necessary vapor 

intrusion-related actions identified by 

EPA and NYSDEC are carried out. 

A VIMP and ICIAP were completed 

on June 20, 2016. 

On June 20, 2016, EPA sent a letter to 

the Village of Mineola Superintendent 

of Buildings, requesting that EPA and 

NYSDEC be notified if the existing 

building is to be refurbished and used 

for human occupancy or demolished 

and a new structure constructed and 

requested that the Village not issue a 

Certificate of Occupancy until necessary 

vapor intrusion-related actions 

identified by EPA and NYSDEC are 

carried out. Periodic reminders will be 

issued to the Village to help ensure the 

effectiveness of this measure. 

On July 27, 2016, notices were placed 

on the deed of the two parcels occupied 

by the daycare center and the parcel 

occupied by the Jackson Steel building. 

The notice on the deed of the daycare 

center requires that the subslab vapor 

intrusion mitigation systems be 

operated as long as elevated levels of 

vapors remain under the buildings on 

the property and the buildings are 

occupied. The notice on the deed of the 

Jackson Steel building alerts any 

potential purchaser, lessee, or other user 

of the property that EPA and NYSDEC 

must be notified if and when a 

determination is made that the existing 

building will be refurbished and used 

for human occupancy or demolished 

and a new structure constructed. EPA 

intends to effect an environmental 

easement on the Jackson Steel property 

in the future once a new owner takes 

control of the property. 

Five-Year Review 

It is the policy of EPA to conduct fiveyear reviews when remedial activities, 

including monitoring, will continue for 

more than five years. A five-year review 

that is required by policy is triggered by 

the date of the approval of the 

Preliminary Close-Out Report, which 

documents that EPA has determined 

that construction at a site has been 

completed. For this Site, the 

Preliminary Close-Out Report was 

approved on August 30, 2007. 

The first five-year review was 

completed in August 2012. The review 

concluded that the remedy was 

functioning as intended in the decision 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 156 / Friday, August 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 53315 

documents and was protecting human 

health and the environment. 

Subsequent to the 2012 five-year 

review, EPA determined that ICs were 

necessary to ensure the protectiveness 

of the remedy, as discussed above. Fiveyear reviews will be conducted as long 

as residual VOC levels remain that 

perpetuate the vapor intrusion concerns 

described in this ESD. The next fiveyear review will be conducted by 

August 2017. 

Community Involvement 

Public participation activities for the 

Site have been satisfied as required 

pursuant to CERCLA Sections 113(k) 

and 117, 42 U.S.C. 9613(k) and 9617. As 

part of the remedy selection process, the 

public was invited to comment on the 

proposed remedy. All other documents 

and information that EPA relied on or 

considered in recommending this 

deletion are available for the public to 

review at the information repositories 

identified above. 

Determination That the Site Meets the 

Criteria for Deletion From the NCP 

All of the cleanup requirements for 

the Site have been met, as described in 

the September 2006 groundwater 

Interim Groundwater Remedial Action 

Report, September 2008 soil Remedial 

Action Report, August 2007 Preliminary 

Close-Out Report, July 2016 Final CloseOut Report, and 2012 Five-Year Review 

report. The State of New York, in a July 

29, 2016 letter, concurred with the 

proposed deletion of the Site from the 

NPL. 

The NCP specifies that EPA may 

delete a site from the NPL if ‘‘all 

appropriate Fund-financed response 

under CERCLA has been implemented, 

and no further response action by 

responsible parties is appropriate.’’ 40 

CFR 300.425(e)(1)(ii). EPA, with the 

concurrence of the State of New York, 

through NYSDEC, believes that this 

criterion for the deletion of the Site has 

been met in that that the soil on the Site 

and the groundwater beneath the Site no 

longer pose a threat to public health or 

the environment. Consequently, EPA is 

deleting the Site from the NPL. 

Documents supporting this action are 

available in the deletion docket at 

http://www.regulations.gov and at the 

Site information repositories. 

V. Deletion Action 

EPA, with the concurrence of the 

State of New York through NYSDEC, 

has determined that other than the 

ongoing operation and maintenance of 

the vapor intrusion mitigation systems 

at the daycare center, periodic vapor 

intrusion monitoring, insuring that the 

ICs are in place and effective, and fiveyear reviews, all appropriate responses 

under CERCLA have been completed at 

the Site. The soil and groundwater 

immediately underlying the Site no 

longer pose a threat to public health or 

the environment. Therefore, EPA is 

deleting the Site from the NPL. Periodic 

vapor intrusion monitoring and fiveyear reviews will still be required for 

the Site. The deletion does not preclude 

future action under CERCLA. Because 

EPA considers this action to be 

noncontroversial and routine, EPA is 

taking this action without prior 

publication. This action will be effective 

September 26, 2016 unless EPA receives 

adverse comments by September 12, 

2016. If adverse comments are received 

within the 30-day public comment 

period of this action, EPA will publish 

a timely withdrawal of this direct final 

NOD before the effective date of the 

deletion and the deletion will not take 

effect. EPA will prepare a response to 

comments and continue with the 

deletion process on the basis of the 

NOID and the comments received. In 

such a case, there will be no additional 

opportunity to comment. 

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: August 2, 2016. 

Judith A. Enck, 

Regional Administrator, EPA, Region 2. 

For the reasons set out in this 

document, 40 CFR part 300 is amended 

as follows: 

PART 300—NATIONAL OIL AND 

HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES 

POLLUTION CONTINGENCY PLAN 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 300 

continues to read as follows: 

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

9601–9675; E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 CFR 

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

3 CFR 1987 Comp., p. 193. 

■ 2. Table 1 of Appendix B to part 300 

is amended by removing ‘‘Jackson 

Steel,’’ ‘‘Mineola/North Hempstead,’’ 

‘‘NY.’’ 

[FR Doc. 2016–19130 Filed 8–11–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

[Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2015–0170; 

FFXES11130000–156–FF08E00000] 

RIN 1018–BA71 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Removing the San Miguel 

Island Fox, Santa Rosa Island Fox, and 

Santa Cruz Island Fox From the 

Federal List of Endangered and 

Threatened Wildlife, and Reclassifying 

the Santa Catalina Island Fox From 

Endangered to Threatened 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), are removing 

the San Miguel Island fox (Urocyon 

littoralis littoralis), Santa Rosa Island 

fox (U. l. santarosae), and Santa Cruz 

Island fox (U. l. santacruzae) from the 

Federal List of Endangered and 

Threatened Wildlife and are 

reclassifying the Santa Catalina Island 

fox (U. l. catalinae) from an endangered 

species to a threatened species. This 

action is based on a thorough review of 

the best available scientific and 

commercial information, which 

indicates that the threats to the San 

Miguel Island fox, Santa Rosa Island 

fox, and Santa Cruz Island fox have 

been eliminated or reduced to the point 

that each of the subspecies no longer 

meets the definition of an endangered 

species or a threatened species under 

the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended (Act), and that the threats to 

the Santa Catalina Island fox have been 

reduced to the point that the subspecies 

can be reclassified as a threatened 

species. We also announce the 

availability of a final post-delisting 

monitoring plan for the San Miguel 

Island fox, Santa Rosa Island fox, and 

Santa Cruz Island fox. 

DATES: This rule is effective September 

12, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: This final rule is available 

on the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov and at the Ventura 

Fish and Wildlife Office’s Web site at 

http://www.fws.gov/Ventura/. 

Comments, materials, and supporting 

documentation considered in this 

rulemaking are available on the Internet 

at http://www.regulations.gov at Docket 

No. FWS–R8–ES–2015–0170, and are 

available for public inspection by 

appointment, during normal business 

hours at: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES