Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 159 / Friday, August 16, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 49939 

require the issuance of a proposed rule, 

the requirements of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et 

seq.), do not apply. 

This final rule directly regulates 

growers, food processors, food handlers, 

and food retailers, not States or tribes, 

nor does this action alter the 

relationships or distribution of power 

and responsibilities established by 

Congress in the preemption provisions 

of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, 

the Agency has determined that this 

action will not have a substantial direct 

effect on States or tribal governments, 

on the relationship between the national 

government and the States or tribal 

governments, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities among the 

various levels of government or between 

the Federal Government and Indian 

tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined 

that Executive Order 13132, entitled 

‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999) and Executive Order 13175, 

entitled ‘‘Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR 

67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply 

to this final rule. In addition, this final 

rule does not impose any enforceable 

duty or contain any unfunded mandate 

as described under Title II of the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

(UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.). 

This action does not involve any 

technical standards that would require 

Agency consideration of voluntary 

consensus standards pursuant to section 

12(d) of the National Technology 

Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 

(NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). 

VII. Congressional Review Act 

Pursuant to the Congressional Review 

Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), 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. This action is not a ‘‘major 

rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Agricultural commodities, Pesticides 

and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: August 7, 2013. 

Lois Rossi, 

Director, Registration Division, Office of 

Pesticide Programs. 

Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is 

amended as follows: 

PART 180—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 180 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371. 

■ 2. In § 180.505: 

■ a. Add alphabetically the following 

commodity and footnote 1 to the table 

in paragraph (a)(1). 

■ b. Revise the introductory text of 

paragraph (a)(2). 

The amendments read as follows: 

§ 180.505 Emamectin; tolerances for 

residues. 

(a) * * * 

(1) * * * 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

* * * * * 

Grape, wine 1 ........................ 0.03 

* * * * * 

1There are no U.S. registrations for use of 

emamectin on grape, wine. 

(2) Tolerances are established for 

emamectin, including its metabolites 

and degradates, in or on the 

commodities in the following table. 

Compliance with the tolerance levels 

specified in the following table is to be 

determined by measuring only the sum 

of emamectin (MAB1a + MAB1b isomers) 

and the associated 8,9-Z isomers (8,9- 

ZB1a and 8,9-ZB1b). 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2013–19863 Filed 8–15–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 300 

[EPA–HQ–SFUND–1986–0005; FRL–9846–4] 

National Oil and Hazardous 

Substances Pollution Contingency 

Plan; National Priorities List: Partial 

Deletion of the Torch Lake Superfund 

Site 

AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency Region 5 is 

publishing a direct final Notice of 

Deletion of the Quincy Smelter and 

Calumet Lake parcels of Operable Unit 

3 (OU3) of the Torch Lake Superfund 

Site (Site), located in Houghton County, 

Michigan, 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 partial deletion is being published 

by EPA with the concurrence of the 

State of Michigan, through the Michigan 

Department of Environmental Quality 

(MDEQ), because EPA has determined 

that all appropriate response actions at 

these identified parcels under CERCLA, 

other than operation, maintenance, and 

five-year reviews, have been completed. 

However, this partial deletion does not 

preclude future actions under 

Superfund. 

This partial deletion pertains to the 

surface tailings and slag deposits of the 

Quincy Smelter and Calumet Lake 

parcels of OU3. The following parcels or 

areas will remain on the NPL and are 

not being considered for deletion as part 

of this action: Dollar Bay, Point Mills, 

Boston Pond, and North Entry. 

DATES: This direct final partial deletion 

is effective October 15, 2013 unless EPA 

receives adverse comments by 

September 16, 2013. If adverse 

comments are received, EPA will 

publish a timely withdrawal of the 

direct final partial deletion in the 

Federal Register informing the public 

that the deletion will not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

SFUND–1986–0005, by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Email: Nefertiti DiCosmo, Remedial 

Project Manager, at dicosmo.nefertiti@

epa.gov or Dave Novak, Community 

Involvement Coordinator, at 

novak.dave@epa.gov. 

• Fax: Gladys Beard at (312) 697– 

2077. 

• Mail: Nefertiti DiCosmo, Remedial 

Project Manager, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (SR–6J), 77 West 

Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604, 

(312) 886–6148 or Dave Novak, 

Community Involvement Coordinator, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

(SI–7J), 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, IL 60604, (312) 886–7478 or 

toll free at 1 (800) 621–8431. 

• Hand delivery: Dave Novak, 

Community Involvement Coordinator, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
49940 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 159 / Friday, August 16, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

(SI–7J), 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, IL 60604. Such deliveries are 

only accepted during the docket’s 

normal hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. The 

normal business hours are Monday 

through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. 

CST, excluding federal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–SFUND–1986– 

0005. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

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 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through http://

www.regulations.gov or 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 comment. 

If you send an email comment directly 

to EPA without going through http://

www.regulations.gov, your email 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and 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 whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

will be publicly available only in the 

hard copy. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically at http://

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at: 

• U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Region 5, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604, Phone: 

(312) 353–1063, Hours: Monday 

through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. 

CST, excluding federal holidays. 

• Lake Linden/Hubbell Public Library, 

601 Calumet Street, Lake Linden, MI 

49945, Phone: (906) 296–6211, 

Summer Hours: Tuesday and 

Thursday, 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. EST; 

Wednesday, 9:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. 

EST, Winter Hours: Monday through 

Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. EST 

(when school is in session); Tuesday 

and Thursday, 3:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. 

EST 

• Portage Lake District Library, 58 

Huron Street, Houghton, MI 49931, 

Phone: (906) 482–4570, Hours: 

Monday through Thursday, 10:00 a.m. 

to 8:00 p.m. EST; Friday, 10:00 a.m. 

to 5:00 p.m. EST; and Saturday 10:00 

a.m. to 3:00 p.m. EST 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Nefertiti DiCosmo, Remedial Project 

Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency (SR–6J), 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604, (312) 

886–6148, dicosmo.nefertiti@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 5 is publishing this Direct 

Final Notice of Deletion of the Quincy 

Smelter and Calumet Lake parcels of 

Operable Unit (OU3) of the Torch Lake 

Superfund (Site) from the National 

Priorities List (NPL) and requests public 

comments on this proposed action. The 

NPL constitutes Appendix B of 40 CFR 

part 300, which is the National Oil and 

Hazardous Substances Pollution 

Contingency Plan (NCP), and which 

EPA promulgated pursuant to section 

105 of the Comprehensive 

Environmental Response Compensation 

and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as 

amended. EPA maintains the NPL as the 

list of sites that appear to present a 

significant risk to public health, welfare, 

or the environment. Sites on the NPL 

may be the subject of remedial actions 

financed by the Hazardous Substance 

Superfund (Fund). This partial deletion 

of the Torch Lake Superfund Site is 

proposed in accordance with 40 CFR 

300.425(e) and is consistent with the 

Notice of Policy Change: Partial 

Deletion of Sites Listed on the National 

Priorities List, (60 FR 55466) on 

November 1, 1995. As described in 

300.425(e)(3) of the NCP, sites deleted 

from the NPL remain eligible for Fundfinanced remedial actions if future 

conditions warrant such actions. 

Because EPA considers this action to 

be noncontroversial and routine, this 

action will be effective October 15, 2013 

unless EPA receives adverse comments 

by September 16, 2013. Along with this 

Direct Final Notice of Partial Deletion, 

EPA is co-publishing a Notice of Intent 

for Partial Deletion in the ‘‘Proposed 

Rules’’ section of the Federal Register. 

If adverse comments are received within 

the 30-day public comment period on 

this partial deletion action, EPA will 

publish a timely withdrawal of this 

Direct Final Notice of Partial Deletion 

before the effective date of the partial 

deletion, and the deletion will not take 

effect. EPA will, as appropriate, prepare 

a response to comments and continue 

with the deletion process on the basis of 

the Notice of Intent for Partial Deletion 

and the comments already received. 

There will be no additional opportunity 

to comment. 

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 Quincy Smelter and 

Calumet Lake parcels of OU3 and 

demonstrates how the deletion criteria 

are met at these land parcels. Section V 

discusses EPA’s action to partially 

delete the Site parcels 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 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, the 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 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 159 / Friday, August 16, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 49941 

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 

deletion of the Quincy Smelter and 

Calumet Lake parcels of OU3 of the 

Torch Lake Superfund Site: 

(1) EPA consulted with the State of 

Michigan prior to developing this Direct 

Final Notice of Partial Deletion and the 

Notice of Intent for Partial Deletion copublished today in the ‘‘Proposed 

Rules’’ section of the Federal Register. 

(2) EPA has provided the State 30 

working days for review of this direct 

final Notice of Partial Deletion and the 

parallel Notice of Intent for Partial 

Deletion prior to their publication 

today, and the State, through MDEQ, 

has concurred on the partial deletion of 

the Site from the NPL. 

(3) Concurrently with the publication 

of this direct final Notice of Partial 

Deletion, a notice of the availability of 

the parallel Notice of Intent for Partial 

Deletion is being published in the Daily 

Mining Gazette Newspaper, located in 

Houghton, Michigan. The newspaper 

notice announces the 30-day public 

comment period concerning the Notice 

of Intent for Partial Deletion of the Site 

from the NPL. 

(4) EPA placed copies of documents 

supporting the proposed partial deletion 

in the deletion docket and made these 

items available for public inspection 

and copying at the Site information 

repositories. 

(5) If adverse comments are received 

within the 30-day public comment 

period on this partial deletion action, 

EPA will publish a timely notice of 

withdrawal of this direct final Notice of 

Partial Deletion before its effective date 

and will prepare a response to 

comments. EPA may continue with the 

deletion process on the basis of the 

Notice of Intent for Partial Deletion and 

the comments already received. 

Deletion of a portion of a site from the 

NPL does not itself create, alter, or 

revoke any individual’s rights or 

obligations. Deletion of a portion of a 

site from the NPL does not in any way 

alter EPA’s right to take enforcement 

actions, as appropriate. The NPL is 

designed primarily for informational 

purposes and to assist EPA 

management. Section 300.425(e)(3) of 

the NCP states that the deletion of a site 

from the NPL does not preclude 

eligibility for future response actions, 

should future conditions warrant such 

actions. 

IV. Basis for Site Deletion 

The following information provides 

EPA’s rationale for deleting the Quincy 

Smelter and Calumet Lake parcels of 

OU3 from the NPL. 

Site Background and History 

The Torch Lake Superfund Site 

(CERCLIS ID MID980901946) is located 

on the Keweenaw Peninsula in 

Houghton County, Michigan. The Site 

includes Torch Lake, the northern 

portion of Portage Lake, and the 

northern entry of Torch Lake. In the 

process of selecting a remedy for the 

Torch Lake Site, the following areas 

were selected for remedial measures and 

thus became part of the Site: defined 

areas of stamp sands, tailing piles, and 

slag materials along the shore of and in 

the vicinity of Torch Lake, Northern 

Portage Lake, Keweenaw Waterway, 

Lake Superior, Boston Pond, Calumet 

Lake, Lake Linden, Hubbell/Tamarack 

City, Mason Sands, Calumet Lake, 

Michigan Smelter, Isle-Royale, GrossePoint, and Quincy Smelter. More 

specifically, Calumet Lake is located in 

Calumet, Michigan, about five miles 

northwest of Torch Lake. Quincy 

Smelter is located along the Portage 

Canal in Hancock, Michigan. The 

Quincy Smelter clean up did not 

include the historic smelting facility, 

which was left as is out of historic 

preservation and community concerns. 

These properties, covering 600 acres, 

were not investigated at depth but were 

defined as part of the Torch Lake 

Superfund Site because of the surficial 

materials (stamp sands, tailings, and 

slag) and their relative locations to the 

Torch Lake water body. During the site 

investigation, samples were taken of the 

surface (0–6 inches) and shallow 

subsurface (0–3 feet) stamp sands, 

tailings, and slag piles at the frequency 

of approximately one composite sample 

per 20-acre parcel. Data generated 

reflected similar chemical 

characteristics in all samples collected. 

This data was sufficient to assume 

homogeneity of these materials and to 

support selection of the remedial action 

at the Site. 

The remedial action included the 

installation of a soil vegetative cover 

over areas of stamp sands, tailings, and 

slag in order to meet the Remedial 

Action Objectives (RAOs). The remedial 

action only addressed surface materials 

associated with the covered land 

parcels. There may be non-site related 

contamination with depth or in the 

vicinity of these defined areas of stamp 

sands, tailings and slag that is not 

addressed by this remedial action. This 

potential contamination was not 

evaluated or addressed as part of the 

remedial measures for the Site. Non-site 

related contamination, if identified in 

the future, will not be addressed by a 

subsequent action as part of the 

remedial action. 

Torch Lake was the site of copper 

milling and smelting facilities and 

operations for over 100 years. The Lake 

was a repository of milling wastes, and 

served as the waterway transportation to 

support the mining industry. The first of 

many mills opened on Torch Lake in 

1868. At the mills, copper was extracted 

by crushing or stamping the rock into 

smaller pieces and driving them through 

successively smaller meshes. The 

copper and crushed rocks were 

separated by gravimetric sorting in a 

liquid medium. The copper was then 

sent to a smelter. The crushed rock 

particles, called tailings, were discarded 

along with mill processing water, 

typically by pumping them into the 

Lake. 

Mining output, milling activity, and 

tailing production peaked in the 

Keweenaw Peninsula in the early 1900s 

to 1920. All of the mills at Torch Lake 

were located on the west shore of the 

Lake. Many other mining mills and 

smelters were located throughout the 

Keweenaw Peninsula. By around 1916, 

advances in technology allowed for the 

recovery of copper from tailings 

previously deposited in Torch Lake. 

Dredges were used to collect submerged 

tailings, which were then screened, 

recrushed, and gravity separated. An 

ammonia leaching process involving 

cupric ammonium carbonate was used 

to recover copper and other metals from 

conglomerate tailings. During the 1920s, 

chemical reagents were used to further 

increase the efficiency of reclamation. 

The chemical reagents included lime, 

pyridine oil, coal tar creosotes, wood 

creosote, pine oil, and xanthates. After 

reclamation activities were complete, 

chemically treated tailings were 

returned to the Lake. In the 1930s and 

1940s, the Torch Lake mills operated 

mainly to recover tailings in Torch Lake. 

Copper mills were still active in the 

1950s, but by the late 1960s copper 

milling had ceased. 

Over 5 million tons of native copper 

was produced from the Keweenaw 

Peninsula and more than half of this 

was processed along the shores of Torch 

Lake. Between 1868 and 1968, 

approximately 200 million tons of 

tailings were dumped into Torch Lake, 

filling at least 20 percent of the Lake’s 

original volume. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
49942 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 159 / Friday, August 16, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

In June 1972, a discharge of 27,000 

gallons of cupric ammonium carbonate 

leaching liquor occurred into the north 

end of Torch Lake from the storage vats 

at the Lake Linden Leaching Plant. The 

Michigan Water Resources Commission 

(MWRC) investigated the spill. The 1973 

MWRC report discerned no deleterious 

effects associated with the spill, but did 

observe that discoloration of several 

acres of lake bottom indicated previous 

discharges. 

In the 1970s, environmental concern 

developed regarding the century-long 

deposition of tailings into Torch Lake. 

High concentrations of copper and other 

heavy metals in sediments, toxic 

discharges into the Lake, and fish 

abnormalities prompted many 

investigations into long and short-term 

impacts attributed to mine waste 

disposal. The International Joint 

Commission’s Water Quality Board 

designated the Torch Lake basin as a 

Great Lakes Area of Concern (AOC) in 

1983. Also in 1983, the Michigan 

Department of Public Health announced 

an advisory against the consumption of 

Torch Lake sauger and walleye fish due 

to tumors of unknown origin. 

The Torch Lake Superfund Site was 

proposed for inclusion on the NPL in 

October 1984 (49 FR 40320). The Site 

was placed on the NPL in June 1986 (51 

FR 21054). The Site is also on the list 

of sites identified under Michigan’s 

Natural Resources and Environmental 

Protection Act 451 Part 201. 

Remedial Investigation and Feasibility 

Study (RI/FS) 

On May 9, 1988 Notice Letters were 

issued to Universal Oil Products (UOP) 

and Quincy Mining Company to 

perform an RI/FS. UOP is the successor 

corporation of Calumet Hecla Mining 

Company, which operated its milling 

and smelting on the shore of Torch Lake 

and disposed of the generated tailings 

near the City of Lake Linden. On June 

13, 1988, a Notice Letter was to perform 

the RI/FS was also issued to Quincy 

Development Company, which was the 

current owner of a tailing pile located 

on the lake shore of Mason City. 

Negotiations for the RI/FS Consent 

Order with these Potentially 

Responsible Parties (PRPs) were not 

successful due to issues such as the 

extent of the Site and the number of 

PRPs. 

During the week of May 8, 1989 EPA 

conducted ground penetrating radar and 

a sub bottom profile (seismic) survey of 

the bottom of Torch Lake. The area in 

which this survey was conducted is 

immediately off-shore from the Old 

Calumet and Hecla Smelting Mill Site. 

The survey located several point targets 

(possibly drums) on the bottom of Torch 

Lake. On June 21, 1989 EPA collected a 

total of eight samples from drums 

located in the Old Calumet and Hecla 

Smelting Mill Site near Lake Linden, the 

Ahmeek Mill Site near Hubbell City, 

and the Quincy Smelter Site near Mason 

City. On August 1, 1990 nine more 

samples were collected from drums 

located near Tamarack City. Based on 

the results of this sampling, EPA 

determined that some of these drums 

may have contained hazardous 

substances. 

Due to the size and complex nature of 

the Site, three operable units (OUs) were 

defined for the Site. Operable Unit 1 

includes approximately 500 acres of 

surface tailings, drums, and slag piles 

on the western shore of Torch Lake. 

These areas include the Hubbell/

Tamarack City, Lake Linden, and Mason 

Sands parcels. Operable Unit 2 includes 

groundwater, surface water, submerged 

tailings, and sediments in Torch Lake, 

Portage Lake, the Portage Channel, and 

other surface water bodies at the Site. 

Operable Unit 3 includes tailings and 

slag deposits located at the North Entry 

of Lake Superior, Michigan Smelter, 

Quincy Smelter, Calumet Lake, IsleRoyale, Boston Pond, and Grosse-Point 

(Point Mills/Dollar Bay). Remedial 

Investigations (RIs) have been 

completed for all three operable units. 

The RI for OU1 and OU3 only 

investigated the surface (0–6 inches) 

and shallow subsurface (0–3 feet) stamp 

sands. 

Also, the RI assumed that the stamp 

sands were homogenous, i.e., the stamp 

sands had similar characteristics 

wherever they were located. The 

sampling performed to characterize the 

OU1 and OU3 tailings was adequate to 

select the remedial action based on the 

homogeneity of the parameters 

measured, the distribution of 

contaminant compounds, and the 

relatively low levels of contaminants 

found. While hot spot contamination 

may exist, it is not attributable to 

tailings composition, and could not be 

reliably located or predicted using any 

reasonable sampling program. The RI 

and Baseline Risk Assessment (BRA) 

reports for OU1 were finalized in July 

1991. The RI and BRA reports for OU3 

were finalized on February 7, 1992. 

Record of Decision (ROD) Findings 

The ROD for OU1 and OU3 was 

signed on September 30, 1992, and the 

ROD for OU2 was signed on March 31, 

1994. 

ROD for OU1 and OU3 (September 30, 

1992) 

The selected remedial action for the 

various tailings areas was a soil and 

vegetative cover and institutional 

controls. The cover prevents erosion 

from surface water runoff and wind of 

contaminants to the impaired sediment. 

The cover also helps prevent the further 

degradation of Torch Lake’s ecosystem, 

allowing the Lake to recover over time. 

The RAOs for OU1 and OU3 were 

developed as a result of data collected 

during the RI and included activities to 

reduce or minimize the exposure to and 

release of contaminants in tailings and/ 

or slag located at the Site. These 

activities included: 

1. Reducing or minimizing potential 

risks to human health associated with 

the inhalation of airborne contaminants 

from the tailings and/or slag located at 

the Site; 

2. Reducing or minimizing potential 

risks to human health associated with 

direct contact with and/or the ingestion 

of the tailings and/or the slag located at 

the Site; 

3. Reducing or minimizing the release 

of contaminants in tailings to the 

groundwater through leaching; and 

4. Reducing or minimizing the release 

of contaminants in tailings to the 

surface water and sediment by soil 

erosion and/or air deposition. 

All of the RAOs for the Torch Lake 

parcels in this deletion package have 

been met with the successful 

implementation of a vegetative cover 

over the stamp sands, tailing piles, and 

slag materials over the various tailings 

areas. The vegetative soil cover reduces 

airborne and direct contact exposure to 

the contaminants in the stamp sands, 

tailings, and slag. The affected 

groundwater is part of OU2, for which 

the selected remedy was no action, and 

OU2 was deleted from the NPL in 2002. 

Since the selected remedy for 

groundwater was no action, it is not 

imperative that the OU1 and OU3 

remedy achieve the third RAO. The 

vegetative soil cover serves to stabilize 

the stamp sands, tailings, and slag 

underneath and reduce the erosion of 

these materials and their associated 

contaminants to the surface water and 

sediment. The selected remedy for OU1 

and OU3 has the following specific 

components: 

1. Deed restrictions to control the use 

of tailing piles so that tailings will not 

be left in a condition which is contrary 

to the intent of the remedy; 

2. Removal of debris such as wood, 

empty drums, and other garbage in the 

tailing piles for off-site disposal in order 

to effectively implement the soil cover 

with vegetation; 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 159 / Friday, August 16, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 49943 

3. Soil cover with vegetation in the 

following areas: 

• Operable Unit 1 tailings in Hubbell/ 

Tamarack City, Lake Linden, and Mason 

Sands (approximately 442 acres); 

• Operable Unit 1 slag pile in Hubbell 

(approximately 9 acres); and 

• Operable Unit 3 tailings in Calumet 

Lake, Boston Pond, Michigan Smelter, 

and Grosse-Point (Point Mills/Dollar 

Bay) (approximately 229 acres) 

4. Assuming that the slag pile located 

in the Quincy Smelter area 

(approximately 25 acres) will be 

developed as part of a national park, no 

action was taken. If this area is not 

developed as a national park in the 

future, deed restrictions will be sought 

to prevent the development of 

residences in the slag pile area; 

5. North Entry, Redridge and Freda 

tailings are excluded from the area to be 

covered with soil and vegetation (and 

are not currently being proposed for 

deletion here). North Entry, Redridge, 

and Freda are along the Lake Superior 

shore where pounding waves and water 

currents will likely retard or destroy any 

remedial actions. As a result, EPA 

currently believes it to be technically 

impracticable to implement the chosen 

remedy at these locations. 

ROD Amendment for OU1 and OU3 

(July 2009) 

The amended remedy was developed 

because of information that had been 

collected and analyzed since the 1992 

ROD. The 1992 ROD for OU1 and OU3 

determined that no action should be 

taken at Quincy Smelter, as it was slated 

for development as a national park. The 

1992 ROD stipulated that if this area 

were not developed as a national park 

in the future, deed restrictions would be 

implemented to prevent residential 

development in the historic slag pile 

area. The data presented in the Second 

Five-Year Review Report, signed on 

March 27, 2008, showed that no 

development had occurred to date and 

that the stamp sands and slag at the Site 

continued to erode into the Portage 

Channel, degrading the environment 

and weakening the integrity and 

protectiveness of the overall remedy. 

Based upon this information, EPA 

determined that it was appropriate to 

modify the remedy selected in the 1992 

ROD. A ROD amendment, signed in July 

2009, selected a soil and vegetative 

cover at Quincy Smelter, consistent 

with other stamp sand areas in OU3, to 

minimize erosion and aerial deposition 

of the stamp sands. Institutional 

controls (ICs) were also implemented to 

protect the long-term integrity of the 

cover materials and minimize direct 

contact with the stamp sands and slag 

piles. The area addressed with 

vegetative cover encompasses about 6.5 

acres which are situated outside of the 

currently fenced buildings and 

structures. 

Remedial Design (RD) 

In August 1994, an Interagency 

Agreement (IAG) was signed with the 

United States Department of Agriculture 

(USDA)-Natural Resources Conservation 

Service (NRCS) to perform RD work. 

The RD was conducted in conformance 

with the 1992 ROD and was completed 

for the entire Site in September 1998. At 

that time, the IAG with USDA–NRCS 

was amended to perform remedial 

action (RA) management and oversight. 

The September 1998 IAG was funded 

with $13.8 million, and the Michigan 

Department of Environmental Quality 

(MDEQ) provided a $1.52 million match 

for the RA work. The construction 

schedule was set at six years (1999– 

2004). It was estimated in the 1992 ROD 

that remedy implementation time would 

be five years. Other factors that 

influenced the construction schedule 

included the restricted availability of 

USDA–NRCS engineers and the 

relatively short construction season due 

to the northerly location of the Site. 

Construction Activities 

On-site construction began in June 

1999 and was completed in September 

2005. A Preliminary Close-Out Report 

documenting construction completion 

was signed on September 23, 2005. 

OU1 

In April 2002, EPA and MDEQ 

determined that the remedy was 

functioning as intended, and a partial 

NPL deletion of the Lake Linden parcel, 

in addition to all of OU2, was finalized. 

The Hubbell/Tamarack City parcels 

were deleted from the NPL via a partial 

deletion in 2004. 

OU2 

No remedial work was required as 

part of the OU2 No Action ROD. Thus, 

there were no construction activities for 

this OU. EPA deleted OU2 in the April 

2002 partial NPL deletion. 

OU3 

Construction activities at Calumet 

Lake were completed in late October 

2003. Shoreline protection, including 

rip-rap rock, was also installed along 

much of the shoreline where the remedy 

was implemented. The rip-rap rock 

(boulders averaging about one-foot in 

diameter with a specified density and 

integrity) protects the remedy from 

wave erosion. 

RA construction activities were 

performed at Calumet Lake in 

accordance with approved the design 

and specifications. It is anticipated that 

the cover material and shoreline 

protection installed at the Site will 

continue to meet the RAOs established 

for the Site. 

The Quincy Smelter portion of the 

Site was originally excluded from the 

vegetative soil cover remedy in the 1992 

ROD for OU1 and OU3, as described 

previously, assuming that the on-site 

slag pile would be developed as part of 

the Keweenaw National Historical Park. 

The 1992 ROD further stated that if this 

area was not developed as a national 

park, deed restrictions would be sought 

to prevent residential development in 

the slag pile area. 

In July 2005, EPA removed asbestos 

from two buildings at Quincy Smelter as 

part of a time-critical removal action. In 

August and September 2005, EPA 

installed rip-rap along the shoreline and 

a water diversion system to prevent 

storm water from running directly into 

the Keweenaw Waterway. A fence was 

also constructed around the buildings. 

On September 13, 2005, EPA inspected 

the rip-rap and storm water culvert and 

found it to be in compliance with all 

design specifications. 

In July 2006, the Keweenaw National 

Historical Park observed and notified 

EPA of continued erosion along the 

shoreline. During a site inspection in 

June 2007, EPA and MDEQ documented 

the level of continuing erosion at the 

Quincy Smelter, as well as the 

continued deterioration of buildings. 

EPA discussed the need for further 

actions at the property and possible 

solutions with the National Park 

Service, Franklin Township, and other 

stakeholders. As a result of these 

communications, EPA conducted a 

removal action at Quincy Smelter in 

2008 to stabilize area conditions. 

A ROD amendment was signed on 

July 31, 2009 selecting a vegetative 

cover for the stamp sands on the Quincy 

Smelter portion of the site. The 1992 

ROD selected no action for the Quincy 

Smelter area because there were plans to 

develop the area as a national park. A 

national park was not developed by 

2009, and no ICs were implemented for 

that area. As a result, EPA determined 

that additional remedial action at 

Quincy Smelter was necessary. The 

ROD amendment required the 

implementation of the same vegetative 

cover at Quincy Smelter as the rest of 

the site. This included placing an 

earthen cover over the stamp sands, 

debris removal, seeding and mulching, 

lined channel/shoreline/slope 

protection, access road construction, 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
49944 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 159 / Friday, August 16, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

and installation of a fence and metal 

gates to secure the site. 

Institutional Controls (ICs) 

In 1994, EPA issued an 

Administrative Order on Consent (AOC) 

to all affected landowners requiring 

them, within six months of the AOC, to 

implement the appropriate deed 

restrictions on their property. The deed 

restrictions run with the land and bind 

future owners to the restrictions. These 

ICs serve to protect vegetative cover and 

thus prevent residual mining 

contamination from entering surface 

water by ensuring that no disturbance of 

vegetative cover occurs. If disturbance 

occurs, the owner is required to replace 

soil and repair vegetative cover. There 

are restrictive covenants in place on 

approximately half of the properties at 

the Torch Lake Superfund Site. The ICs 

for the parcels proposed for deletion, 

Quincy Smelter and Calumet Lake, are 

in place and effective. The following 

restriction applies at these parcels: if 

during the process of any development, 

building, construction, or other activity 

on the property by or with consent from 

the owner of the property, the cover is 

disturbed so that upon completion of 

the development, construction, building 

or other activity on the property by or 

with consent of the owner of the 

property stamp sand is exposed, then 

the owner of the property shall cover 

the exposed stamp sand and shall revegetate the re-covered area. 

Cleanup Goals 

The objectives of the remedies were to 

control exposures to Site contaminants 

and control erosion of stamp sands, 

tailings, and slag to the surface water 

and sediments by covering with 

vegetation. The remedial actions at 

Quincy Smelter and Calumet Lake are 

operational and functional. The 

remedial actions are functioning 

properly and performing as designed. 

Operation and Maintenance (O&M) 

EPA conducted activities necessary to 

ensure that the implemented remedy at 

Quincy Smelter and Calumet Lake was 

operational and functional for a period 

of three years after the remedial 

construction at the last parcel. The 

remedy was jointly determined by EPA 

and MDEQ to be functioning properly 

and performing as designed in 

September 2008. EPA conducted annual 

observations of the remediated areas for 

three years after construction, and 

conducted major repairs, as necessary, 

on each area where the remedy was 

implemented. 

MDEQ will be conducting O&M of the 

shoreline protection and cover material. 

In accordance with the September 1998 

Superfund Site Contract signed by EPA 

and MDEQ, O&M was to begin three 

years after the remedy implementation 

or when the remedy was jointly 

determined by EPA and MDEQ to be 

functioning properly as designed, 

whichever is earlier. This milestone was 

reached in September 2008 for Calumet 

Lake and Quincy Smelter, along with 

several other Torch Lake property 

parcels. EPA has conducted sampling 

since then and has been working with 

the State to finalize a revised O&M plan 

to fit the new estimated recovery time 

for the sediment. MDEQ will be 

conducting the O&M at Quincy Smelter 

and Calumet Lake. 

Five-Year Review (FYR) 

EPA conducted its most recent FYR at 

the Site in March 2013. The 2013 FYR 

noted that the remedy at OU3, which 

includes Quincy Smelter and Calumet 

Lake, is protective of human health and 

the environment in the short-term. This 

FYR calls for continued documentation 

from landowners at the Site to verify 

proper deed and permitting restrictions 

are in place on wells screened in the 

stamp sands on other parcels of OU1 

and OU3. Additionally, a lack of 

vegetative cover exists on certain 

properties of Point Mills. There is also 

a recommendation to work with the 

Houghton County Road Commission to 

ensure that road traction tailings 

excavation practices at Point Mills are 

consistent with the 1992 ROD. However, 

the parcels proposed for this deletion 

did not have any issues affecting 

protectiveness. 

Community Involvement 

Public participation activities have 

been satisfied as required in CERCLA 

section 113(k), 42 U.S.C. 9613(k), and 

CERCLA section 117, 42 U.S.C. 9617. 

Documents in the deletion docket, 

which EPA relied on for 

recommendation of the partial deletion 

of this Site from the NPL, are available 

to the public in the information 

repositories and at www.regulations.gov. 

Documents in the docket include maps 

which identify the specific parcels of 

land that are proposed in this Notice 

(Quincy Smelter and Calumet Lake). 

Determination That the Site Meets the 

Criteria for Deletion in the NCP 

The NCP (40 CFR 300.425(e)) states 

that portions of a site may be deleted 

from the NPL when no further response 

action is appropriate. EPA, in 

consultation with the State of Michigan, 

has determined that no further action is 

appropriate. 

V. Deletion Action 

EPA, with concurrence of the State of 

Michigan through MDEQ, has 

determined that all appropriate 

response actions under CERCLA, other 

than operation, maintenance, and fiveyear reviews, have been completed. 

Therefore, EPA is deleting the Quincy 

Smelter and Calumet Lake parcels of 

OU3 of the Torch Lake Superfund Site 

from the NPL. 

Because EPA considers this action to 

be noncontroversial and routine, EPA is 

taking it without prior publication. This 

action will be effective October 15, 2013 

unless EPA receives adverse comments 

by September 16, 2013. If adverse 

comments are received within the 30- 

day public comment period, EPA will 

publish a timely withdrawal of this 

direct final notice of partial deletion 

before the effective date of the partial 

deletion and it will not take effect. EPA 

will prepare a response to comments 

and continue with the deletion process 

on the basis of the notice of intent to 

partially delete and the comments 

already received. 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: July 25, 2013. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

For the reasons set out in this 

document, 40 CFR part 300 is amended 

as follows: 

PART 300—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 300 

continues to read as follows: 

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

9601–9657; 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 under Michigan ‘‘MI’’ by 

revising the entry for ’’ Torch Lake’’, 

‘‘Houghton County, Michigan’’. 

Appendix B to Part 300—National 

Priorities List 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 159 / Friday, August 16, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 49945 

TABLE 1—GENERAL SUPERFUND SECTION

State Site name City/County Notes (a)

*******

MI ..... Torch Lake ................................................................................ Houghton .................................................................................. P 

* * * * * * * 

(a)* * * 

* P = Sites with partial deletion(s). 

[FR Doc. 2013–19759 Filed 8–15–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Land Management 

43 CFR Part 3000 

[L13100000 PP0000 LLWO310000; L1990000 

PO0000 LLWO320000] 

RIN 1004–AE32 

Minerals Management: Adjustment of 

Cost Recovery Fees 

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This final rule amends the 

Bureau of Land Management (BLM) 

mineral resources regulations to update 

some fees that cover the BLM’s cost of 

processing certain documents relating to 

its minerals programs and some filing 

fees for mineral-related documents. 

These updated fees include those for 

actions such as lease renewals and 

mineral patent adjudications. 

DATES: This final rule is effective 

October 1, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: You may send inquiries or 

suggestions to Director (630), Bureau of 

Land Management, 2134LM, 1849 C 

Street NW., Washington, DC 20240; 

Attention: RIN 1004–AE32. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Steven Wells, Chief, Division of Fluid 

Minerals, 202–912–7143, Mitchell 

Leverette, Chief, Division of Solid 

Minerals, 202–912–7113; or Faith 

Bremner, Regulatory Affairs Analyst, 

202–912–7441. Persons who use a 

telecommunications device for the deaf 

(TDD) may leave a message for these 

individuals with the Federal 

Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1– 

800–877–8339, 24 hours a day, 7 days 

a week. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

The BLM has specific authority to 

charge fees for processing applications 

and other documents relating to public 

lands under Section 304 of the Federal 

Land Policy and Management Act of 

1976 (FLPMA), 43 U.S.C. 1734. In 2005, 

the BLM published a final cost recovery 

rule (70 FR 58854) establishing or 

revising certain fees and service charges, 

and establishing the method it would 

use to adjust those fees and service 

charges on an annual basis. 

At 43 CFR 3000.12(a), the regulations 

provide that the BLM will annually 

adjust fees established in Subchapter C 

according to changes in the Implicit 

Price Deflator for Gross Domestic 

Product (IPD–GDP), which is published 

quarterly by the U.S. Department of 

Commerce. See also 43 CFR 3000.10. 

This final rule will allow the BLM to 

update these fees and service charges by 

October 1 of this year, as required by the 

2005 regulation. The fee recalculations 

are based on a mathematical formula. 

The public had an opportunity to 

comment on this procedure during the 

comment period on the original cost 

recovery rule, and this new rule simply 

administers the procedure set forth in 

those regulations. Therefore, the BLM 

has changed the fees in this final rule 

without providing opportunity for 

additional notice and comment. The 

Department of the Interior, therefore, for 

good cause finds under 5 U.S.C. 

553(b)(B) and (d)(3) that notice and 

public comment procedures are 

unnecessary. 

II. Discussion of Final Rule 

The BLM publishes a fee update rule 

each year, which becomes effective on 

October 1 of that year. The fee updates 

are based on the change in the IPD–GDP 

from the 4th Quarter of one calendar 

year to the 4th Quarter of the following 

calendar year. This fee update rule is 

based on the change in the IPD–GDP 

from the 4th Quarter of 2011 to the 4th 

Quarter of 2012, thus reflecting the rate 

of inflation over four calendar quarters. 

The fee is calculated by applying the 

IPD–GDP to the base value from the 

previous year’s rule, also known as the 

‘‘existing value.’’ This calculation 

results in an updated base value. The 

updated base value is then rounded to 

the closest multiple of $5, or to the 

nearest cent for fees under $1, to 

establish the new fee. 

Under this rule, 30 fees will remain 

the same and 18 fees will increase. Nine 

of the fee increases will amount to $5 

each. The largest increase, $55, will be 

applied to the fee for adjudicating a 

mineral patent application containing 

more than 10 claims, which will 

increase from $2,940 to $2,995. The fee 

for adjudicating a patent application 

containing 10 or fewer claims will 

increase by $25—from $1,470 to $1,495. 

In this rule, we will correct the title 

given in the table for 43 CFR part 3730. 

The title used in prior rules, ‘‘Multiple 

Use, Mining,’’ is actually the title for 

Group 3700, the group of regulations 

that includes part 3730. The specific 

title for part 3730, in which the fee for 

a notice of protest of placer mining 

operations is found at 43 CFR 3736.2(b), 

is ‘‘Public Law 359; Mining in Powersite 

Withdrawals: General.’’ This is a 

technical revision that has no 

substantive effect. 

The calculations that resulted in the 

new fees are included in the table 

below: 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES