21870 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 71 / Thursday, April 12, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

with Indian Tribal Governments, 

because it does not have a substantial 

direct effect on one or more Indian 

tribes, on the relationship between the 

Federal Government and Indian tribes, 

or on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

Government and Indian tribes. 

Energy Effects 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Executive Order 13211, Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use. We have 

determined that it is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ under that order because 

it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ 

under Executive Order 12866 and is not 

likely to have a significant adverse effect 

on the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy. The Administrator of the Office 

of Information and Regulatory Affairs 

has not designated it as a significant 

energy action. Therefore, it does not 

require a Statement of Energy Effects 

under Executive Order 13211. 

Technical Standards 

The National Technology Transfer 

and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 

U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use 

voluntary consensus standards in their 

regulatory activities unless the agency 

provides Congress, through the Office of 

Management and Budget, with an 

explanation of why using these 

standards would be inconsistent with 

applicable law or otherwise impractical. 

Voluntary consensus standards are 

technical standards (e.g., specifications 

of materials, performance, design, or 

operation; test methods; sampling 

procedures; and related management 

systems practices) that are developed or 

adopted by voluntary consensus 

standards bodies. 

This rule does not use technical 

standards. Therefore, we did not 

consider the use of voluntary consensus 

standards. 

Environment 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Department of Homeland Security 

Management Directive 023–01 and 

Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, 

which guide the Coast Guard in 

complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and 

have concluded this action is one of a 

category of actions which do not 

individually or cumulatively have a 

significant effect on the human 

environment. This rule is categorically 

excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph 

(34)(g), of the Instruction. An 

environmental analysis checklist and a 

categorical exclusion determination will 

be available in the docket where 

indicated under ADDRESSES. 

List of Subjects 33 CFR Part 165 

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation 

(water), Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Security measures, 

Waterways. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 

CFR part 165 as follows: 

PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION 

AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 165 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. 

Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 

33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, 160.5; Pub. L. 

107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of 

Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1 

■ 2. Add a temporary § 165.T13–215 to 

read as follows: 

§ 165.T13–215 Safety Zone; Marina 

Salvage, Bellingham Bay, Bellingham, WA. 

(a) Location. The following area is 

designated as a safety zone: All waters 

of the Squalicum Harbor Marina and all 

waters within 200 yards of the entrance 

to the marina, located in Bellingham, 

WA. 

(b) Regulations. In accordance with 

the general regulations in 33 CFR 165, 

Subpart C, vessels wishing to enter the 

zone must request permission for entry 

by contacting the Joint Harbor Operation 

Center at (206) 217–6001 or the onscene patrol craft on VHF CH 13. Once 

permission for entry is granted vessels 

must proceed at a minimum speed 

necessary for safe navigation. 

(c) Enforcement period. This rule will 

be effective from 12 a.m. on April 5, 

2012, through 11:59 p.m. on April 13, 

2012, unless cancelled sooner by the 

Captain of the Port. 

Dated: April 4, 2012. 

S. J. Ferguson, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port, Puget Sound. 

[FR Doc. 2012–8876 Filed 4–10–12; 11:15 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 300 

[EPA–HQ–SFUND–1983–0002; FRL–9657–7] 

National Oil and Hazardous 

Substances Pollution Contingency 

Plan; National Priorities List: Deletion 

of the A & F Material Reclaiming, Inc. 

Superfund Site 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) Region 5 is publishing a 

direct final Notice of Deletion of the 

A & F Material Reclaiming, Inc. 

Superfund Site (Site), located in 

Greenup, Illinois 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 to 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 

Illinois, through the Illinois 

Environmental Protection Agency 

(IEPA), because EPA has determined 

that all appropriate response actions 

under CERCLA have been completed. 

However, this deletion does not 

preclude future actions under 

Superfund. 

DATES: This direct final deletion is 

effective June 11, 2012 unless EPA 

receives adverse comments by May 14, 

2012. If adverse comments are received, 

EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of 

the direct final 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–1983–0002, by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Email: Gladys Beard, NPL Deletion 

Process Manager, at 

beard.gladys@epa.gov or Janet Pope, 

Community Involvement Coordinator, at 

pope.janet@epa.gov. 

• Fax: Gladys Beard, NPL Deletion 

Process Manager, at (312) 697–2077. 

• Mail: Gladys Beard, NPL Deletion 

Process Manager, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (SR–6J), 77 West 

Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604, 

(312) 886–7253; or Janet Pope, 

Community Involvement Coordinator, 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 71 / Thursday, April 12, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 21871 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

(SI–7J), 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, IL 60604, (312) 353–0628 or 

(800) 621–8431. 

• Hand delivery: Janet Pope, 

Community Involvement Coordinator, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

(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., 

excluding federal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–SFUND–1983– 

0002. 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 

may not be 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., excluding 

federal holidays. 

• Greenup City Clerk’s Office, 

Greenup Municipal Building, 115 

Cumberland Avenue, Greenup, IL 

62428. Phone: (217) 923–3401. Hours: 

Monday through Friday, 7:30 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Gladys Beard, NPL Deletion Process 

Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency (SR–6J), 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604, (312) 

353–2315, or beard.gladys@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 A & F 

Material Reclaiming, Inc. Superfund 

Site from the National Priorities List 

(NPL). 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 (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). 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 June 11, 2012 

unless EPA receives adverse comments 

by May 14, 2012. Along with this direct 

final Notice of Deletion, EPA is copublishing a Notice of Intent to Delete 

in the ‘‘Proposed Rules’’ section of the 

Federal Register. If adverse comments 

are received within the 30-day public 

comment period on this deletion action, 

EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of 

this direct final Notice of Deletion 

before the effective date of the 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 to Delete 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 A & F Material 

Reclaiming, Inc. Superfund 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: 

1. Responsible parties or other 

persons have implemented all 

appropriate response actions required; 

2. All appropriate Fund-financed 

response under CERCLA has been 

implemented, and no further response 

action by responsible parties is 

appropriate; or 

3. 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. 

III. Deletion Procedures 

The following procedures apply to 

deletion of the Site: 

1. EPA consulted with the State of 

Illinois prior to developing this direct 

final Notice of Deletion and the Notice 

of Intent to Delete co-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 Notice of Intent to 

Delete prior to their publication today, 

and the State, through IEPA, has 

concurred on the deletion of the Site 

from the NPL. 

3. Concurrently with the publication 

of this direct final Notice of Deletion, a 

notice of the availability of the parallel 

Notice of Intent to Delete is being 

published in a major local newspaper, 

the Times Courier News, located in 

Charleston, Illinois. The newspaper 

notice announces the 30-day public 

comment period concerning the Notice 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
21872 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 71 / Thursday, April 12, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

of Intent to Delete 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 Notice of Deletion 

before its effective date and will prepare 

a response to comments and continue 

with the deletion process on the basis of 

the Notice of Intent to Delete and the 

comments already received. 

Deletion of a site from the NPL does 

not itself create, alter, or revoke any 

individual’s rights or obligations. 

Deletion 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 Site 

from the NPL: 

Site Background and History 

The A & F Material Reclaiming, Inc. 

Superfund Site (CERCLIS ID# 

ILD980397079) is located on 

approximately four acres of land on the 

western border of the Village of 

Greenup, in east-central Illinois. The 

Site, which lies on the west side of the 

village, is bounded by open farmland 

and woodland, the local wastewater 

treatment plant, and private residences; 

fairgrounds lie to the southwest. The 

Site has a slope toward the Embarras 

River, which lies about 600 feet to the 

north. Drainage from the Site reaches 

the river by way of a ditch along a 

former railroad right-of-way west of the 

Site and east of the municipal 

wastewater treatment plant. The local 

wastewater treatment plant has several 

lagoons and the plant discharges the 

treated water into the ditch along the 

railroad right-of-way. 

Three distinct aquifers exit at the Site: 

Alluvium till, present at or near ground 

surface; sand and gravel, present at 

shallow depths below ground surface, 

and bedrock. The shallow aquifer is a 

poor water producer and is not used as 

a source of water supply. However, it 

does furnish recharge to the underlying 

sand and gravel. The alluvium forms an 

essentially level surface and contains 

groundwater at shallow depths in the 

range of 8 to 12 feet below grade. 

According to the measured water levels, 

groundwater flow is directed downslope 

to the west and north of the Site. No 

private wells have been found north or 

west of the Site. The sand and gravel 

outwash aquifer is a regionally 

significant unit which is present 

beneath the entire Site and receives 

recharge from the overlying alluvium. In 

the outwash sand and gravel aquifer, 

groundwater flow is generally 

downslope from the highlands east of 

the Site, and flow in the level section of 

the study area is directed northward 

toward the Embarras River. Discharge is 

also directed toward the Embarras River. 

The bedrock aquifer is not significant in 

the area of the Site. Water contained in 

the fractured section of the 

Pennsylvanian bedrock is present under 

strong artesian conditions. Recharge of 

the bedrock aquifer probably occurs 

from overlying units located elsewhere 

where water levels are higher than those 

observed in the study area. Based upon 

water level data from the remedial 

investigation, neither of the 

unconsolidated aquifers encountered 

on-site discharges to the drainage ditch. 

The lagoons constructed on site during 

operation of the facility were excavated 

into the unsaturated portion of the 

alluvial aquifer. 

The historic use of the Site has been 

for industrial purposes. However, there 

have not been any industrial activities at 

the Site since the facility closed in 1980. 

The A & F Material Reclaiming facility 

began operations in March 1977 as a 

recycling plant. The facility processed 

waste materials such as oil, sludge, 

caustics, and sulfuric acid into fuel oil 

and fire retardant chemicals. There were 

numerous violations of the operating 

permits issued by IEPA. Within a year 

of operating, four storage lagoons 

overflowed, contaminating the 

surrounding soil and water drainage 

pathway to the Embarras River. In 

addition, some of the steel storage tanks 

failed on several occasions, releasing 

their contents on the Site. These tanks 

held mixtures of waste oils, sludges, 

spent caustics, spent acids, 

contaminated water, and other waster 

products. Present land use for the 

surrounding area is residential, 

commercial, and recreational 

(fairgrounds are located southwest of 

the Site). Currently no groundwater 

underlying the Site is used as a drinking 

water source. 

From December 1980 through 

December 1982 there were several 

removal actions at the Site in which 

contaminated soils, sediments, tank, 

and buildings were removed and 

disposed off site. These actions 

included lowering the level of waste in 

the lagoons, diking, trenching, and 

removing drums and wastes off site. In 

addition, a temporary cap was placed 

over a portion of the consolidated 

sludge on site. 

In December 1982 the Site was 

included on the Proposed NPL (47 FR 

58476). The Site was finalized on the 

NPL on September 8, 1983 (48 FR 

40674). In November 1983 an Initial 

Remedial Measure was implemented to 

address remaining site contaminants in 

tanks and drums. The remaining on-site 

waste included approximately 153,000 

gallons of contaminated liquids in 

tanks, 16,000 gallons of contaminated 

oil in tanks, and 20 drums with 

unknown contents. All tank liquids, 

oils, and drums were disposed off site 

at an approved facility through the 

Initial Remedial Measure. 

On September 12, 1984, a Partial 

Consent Decree was entered into by four 

of the potentially responsible parties, 

which outlined a remedial action plan 

that included a phased approach for 

cleaning up the Site. The first phase 

included the remedial investigation and 

the feasibility study; the second phase 

was an immediate removal action to 

address the threatened release of 

contaminates from the two lagoons; the 

third phase involved removal and 

disposal of contaminated soils and 

sediments, removal and disposal of the 

building and equipment, final site 

grading, air monitoring, and site 

security; and the final phase of the 

remedial action plan involved closure 

and groundwater monitoring 

requirements. 

Remedial Investigation and Feasibility 

Study 

The remedial investigation report did 

not include a formal baseline risk 

assessment. Since the lagoon sludge, 

wastewater, oil, and tank waste were 

removed under the Interim Remedial 

Measure, they posed no environmental 

impacts or adverse health effects to the 

neighboring community. The primary 

concerns associated with the Site were 

from ingestion or direct contact 

exposures to the soil, sediment, 

groundwater, and surface water. Soils in 

the area of the tank farm were 

contaminated and posed an 

environmental threat. Several sediment 

samples taken from the drainage ditch 

showed low levels of polynuclear 

aromatic hydrocarbons, but sediments 

from the river did not have any 

substantial contamination. Neither the 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 71 / Thursday, April 12, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 21873 

drainage ditch nor the river showed any 

contamination above background levels. 

Data from groundwater monitoring 

wells showed elevated levels of sulfate, 

total dissolved solids (TDS), and oil and 

grease. Additionally, several metals 

were detected at levels higher than 

background and in some cases higher 

than the IEPA standard for groundwater. 

Because of the dilution effect between 

the groundwater and surface water, it 

was expected that the contaminated 

groundwater would not cause 

contamination in the river. Also, the 

planned removal of contaminated 

materials from the Site would remove 

the primary source of contamination to 

the groundwater. The remedial 

investigation concluded there was a 

high flow rate through the sand and 

gravel aquifer, which would allow for 

rapid flushing of any residual 

contaminants. 

Selected Remedy 

1985 and 1986 Enforcement Decision 

Document (EDD) Findings: 

EPA issued an EDD for Operable Unit 

1 (OU1) on June 14, 1985 that addressed 

the soil, sediments, building, and 

equipment. The goal of this remedy was 

to remove soils found with 

contamination above action levels for 

site contaminants of concern (COCs) 

and to remove on-site buildings in order 

to protect public health, welfare, and 

the environment. The remedy for OU1 

included: 

• All soils, surface and subsurface, 

contaminated above the recommended 

action levels were to be removed and 

disposed at an off-site facility; 

• Facility equipment and building 

structures were to be cleaned, 

dismantled, removed, and disposed at 

an off-site facility; 

• Site grading to eliminate ponding; 

• Maintenance of a vegetative cover 

to prevent erosion; and 

• Groundwater monitoring to confirm 

that no further soil removal was 

required. 

On August 14, 1986 EPA issued an 

EDD for Operable Unit 2 (OU2) that 

addressed groundwater. The goal of this 

remedy was to restore groundwater to 

below Maximum Concentration Levels 

(MCLs) in order to protect public health, 

welfare, and the environment. The 

remedy for OU2 included: 

• Establishing a groundwater 

monitoring program to test whether all 

residual groundwater contamination 

remaining after the cleanup would 

steadily decrease to safe levels by 

natural dilution and purging to the 

Embarras River without causing 

violation of the water quality standards 

of the river; 

• Establishing adequate institutional 

controls so that drinking water wells are 

not placed in the contaminated 

groundwater areas during the period of 

natural dilution and purging; and 

• Establishing procedures for regular 

review of monitoring data until safe 

levels are reached or data contradicting 

the feasibility study conclusions 

demonstrates the need to reevaluate the 

remedy. 

2010 ESD Findings: 

On May 24, 2010 an Explanation of 

Significant Differences (ESD) was signed 

by EPA. The purpose of the ESD was to 

eliminate iron, manganese, sulfate, and 

TDS as site contaminants of concern 

from the groundwater cleanup remedy 

selected in the 1986 EDD for OU2. 

These contaminants were removed 

because the action levels for these four 

parameters are secondary MCLs, which 

are non-enforceable guidelines 

regulating contaminants that may cause 

cosmetic or aesthetic effects in drinking 

water. Furthermore, review of 

groundwater data by EPA concluded 

that these constituents are naturally 

occurring, do not pose a risk to human 

health and the environment, and are 

stable or decreasing in concentration. 

Response Actions 

With the implementation of the OU1 

remedy, an additional 1,600 tons of soil 

and sludge, 1,300 cubic yards of 

polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB)- 

contaminated soil, and a process 

building with contaminated equipment 

were removed from the Site. The soils 

remaining on site were sampled and 

analyzed prior to placing clean fill over 

the area. All compounds analyzed for, 

including PCBs, were at non-detectable 

limits. Only phenols and benzoic acid 

were detected in two pocket areas, but 

the detected levels were below action 

levels. Soil and sediment action levels 

in the 1985 EDD for OU1 remain 

protective. Any remaining residual soil 

or sediment contamination are at levels 

comparable to concentrations found 

naturally in the environment and do not 

present any environmental or public 

health risks. The entire area was then 

filled with clean soil, graded, and 

vegetated. 

The groundwater monitoring program 

was agreed to by the Consenting 

Defendants in 1988 and documented in 

the August 1988 Remedial Action Plan 

as required by the August 14, 1986 EDD 

for OU2. EPA approved the design, 

including plans and specifications for 

well placement, project health and 

safety plan, and quality assurance 

project plan in May 1990. Well 

construction was completed, and a final 

inspection was conducted on July 9, 

1990. 

EPA signed the Preliminary Close-Out 

Report, documenting that all 

construction activities for the final 

operable unit at the Site had been 

completed on September 24, 1992. In 

2000, as part of the institutional controls 

requirements for the Site, Cumberland 

County and the Village of Greenup 

adopted ordinances restricting 

groundwater use on approximately 68 

acres that include the A & F Material 

Reclaiming Site and some surrounding 

areas. The ordinances were intended to 

prevent contact and use of the 

contaminated groundwater at and near 

the Site until groundwater quality 

reaches safe levels, in accordance with 

the 1986 EDD for OU2. 

With the signing of the May 24, 2010 

ESD, all groundwater cleanup levels 

have been attained and groundwater 

monitoring is no longer required. The 

1986 EDD for OU2 specified that 

‘‘institutional controls will be required 

until groundwater quality returns to 

background levels or below the State 

and Federal criteria shown in Table 2’’ 

(Table 1). Because groundwater cleanup 

levels have been attained, EPA no 

longer requires that institutional 

controls be maintained at the Site. 

Cleanup Goals 

Under the August 1988 Remedial 

Action Plan required by the August 14, 

1986 EDD for OU2, several additional 

monitoring wells were installed and a 

few existing wells were abandoned. 

Twenty parameters listed in the 1986 

EDD for OU2 (Table 1) were to be 

periodically monitored until their 

concentrations dropped below the 

action levels specified in the EDD. The 

action levels were based upon MCLs 

and secondary MCLs of the Safe 

Drinking Water Act. Elimination of a 

parameter in a given well could occur 

when that parameter had not been 

detected above the action limits per the 

procedures in the August 1988 

Remedial Action Plan. 

TABLE 1—CONTAMINANTS OF

CONCERN

[From the 1986 Record of Decision for the A & 

F Material Reclaiming Superfund Site] 

Contaminant of concern 

Action 

level 

(mg/l) 

Trichloroethylene .......................... 0 .005 

Benzene ........................................ 0 .005 

Phenolics ...................................... 0 .001 

Sulfates ......................................... 250 

Nitrates ......................................... 10 

Total Dissolved Solids .................. 500 

Oil and Grease ............................. 0 .1 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
21874 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 71 / Thursday, April 12, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

TABLE 1—CONTAMINANTS OF

CONCERN—Continued 

[From the 1986 Record of Decision for the A & 

F Material Reclaiming Superfund Site] 

Contaminant of concern 

Action 

level 

(mg/l) 

Chloride ........................................ 250 

Arsenic .......................................... 0 .05 

Barium .......................................... 1 

Cadmium ...................................... 1 .01 

Chromium ..................................... 0 .05 

Copper .......................................... 1 .02 

Iron ................................................ 0 .3 

Lead .............................................. 1 .05 

Manganese ................................... 0 .05 

Nickel ............................................ 13 .4 

Silver ............................................. 0 .005 

Thallium ........................................ 0 .013 

Zinc ............................................... 1 

Note: Toxicity, Conductivity, and Aluminum 

were listed but were not given an action level 

and were not included in the long-term monitoring plan. 

Between 1990 and 1999 sixteen of the 

twenty monitoring parameters were 

eliminated as their concentrations had 

dropped below their respective action 

levels. Following the March 1999 

sampling event, only four of the original 

twenty parameters were monitored: 

Iron, manganese, sulfate, and TDS. 

These parameters were eliminated as 

site contaminants of concern in the 2010 

ESD. With the elimination of the four 

remaining site contaminants of concern, 

the action levels identified in the 1986 

EDD for OU2 for these contaminants are 

no longer applicable or relevant and 

appropriate. Therefore, all groundwater 

cleanup levels have been attained and 

groundwater monitoring will no longer 

be required. Cumberland County and 

the Village of Greenup were notified by 

EPA in May 2010 that no further 

groundwater monitoring will be 

required. As noted previously, 

confirmatory soil sampling has 

indicated that all compounds sampled 

and analyzed for yielded either nondetectable levels or levels that are still 

below action levels for soil. All 

monitoring conducted for surface water 

and sediments in the Embarras River 

were below sediment action levels and 

surface water quality criteria for all 

groundwater parameters listed in the 

EDD, as modified by the ESD. The COCs 

that were listed in the 1985 EDD 

included the following: 

Trichloroethylene, benzene, sulfates, 

TDS, oil and grease, copper, silver, zinc, 

lead, chromium (+6), barium, thallium, 

phenolics, total organic halogens, 

nitrates, chloride, conductivity, nickel, 

aluminum, iron, manganese, cadmium, 

and arsenic. 

Operation and Maintenance 

Operation and maintenance activities 

are no longer required at this Site. 

Five-Year Reviews 

Policy five-year reviews were 

completed for the A & F Material 

Reclaiming Site on September 27, 2000; 

September 29, 2005; and June 30, 2010. 

The June 30, 2010 five-year review 

concluded that the site remedy was 

protective of human health and the 

environment. No issues or 

recommendations were identified as 

part of this review. This five-year review 

also concluded that the cleanup goals 

for soil and groundwater have been 

achieved and that hazardous wastes no 

longer remain on site that would 

prohibit unlimited use or unrestricted 

exposure. Therefore, five-year reviews 

are no longer required at the A & F 

Material Reclaiming Superfund Site. 

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 deletion of this 

Site from the NPL, are available to the 

public in the information repositories 

and at www.regulations.gov. 

Determination That the Site Meets the 

Criteria for Deletion in the NCP 

The NCP (40 CFR 300.425(e)) states 

that a site may be deleted from the NPL 

when no further response action is 

appropriate. EPA, in consultation with 

the State of Illinois, has determined that 

the responsible parties have 

implemented all response actions 

required, and no further response action 

by responsible parties is appropriate. 

V. Deletion Action 

EPA, with concurrence from the State 

of Illinois through IEPA, has determined 

that all appropriate response actions 

under CERCLA have been completed. 

EPA received concurrence from the 

State of Illinois on January 10, 2012. 

Therefore, EPA is deleting the 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 June 11, 2012 

unless EPA receives adverse comments 

by May 14, 2012. If adverse comments 

are received within the 30-day public 

comment period, EPA will publish a 

timely withdrawal of this direct final 

Notice of Deletion before the effective 

date of the 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 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, and Water supply. 

Dated: March 19, 2012. 

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. 

■ 2. Table 1 of Appendix B to part 300 

is amended by removing ‘‘A & F 

Material Reclaiming, Inc.’’, ‘‘Greenup’’, 

‘‘IL’’. 

[FR Doc. 2012–8855 Filed 4–11–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES