Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 109 / Friday, June 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 32673 

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: June 2, 2014. 

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 § 180.629, revise the table in 

paragraph (a) to read as follows: 

§ 180.629 Flutriafol; tolerances for 

residues. 

(a) * * * 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

African tree nut ......................... 0 .02 

Almond ...................................... 0 .60 

Almond, hull .............................. 15 

Banana 1 ................................... 0 .30 

Beet sugar ................................ 0 .08 

Brazil nut ................................... 0 .02 

Bur oak ..................................... 0 .02 

Butternut ................................... 0 .02 

Cajou ........................................ 0 .02 

Cashew ..................................... 0 .02 

Castanha-do-maranhao ............ 0 .02 

Cattle, fat .................................. 0 .05 

Cattle, liver ................................ 0 .80 

Cattle, meat byproducts, except 

liver ........................................ 0 .05 

Cattle, muscle ........................... 0 .05 

Coconut .................................... 0 .02 

Coffee, green, bean 1 ............... 0 .15 

Coffee, instant 1 ........................ 0 .30 

Coquito nut ............................... 0 .02 

Corn, field, forage ..................... 5 .0 

Corn, field, grain ....................... 0 .01 

Corn, field, refined oil ............... 0 .02 

Corn, field, stover ..................... 15 

Corn, pop .................................. 0 .01 

Corn, pop, stover ...................... 15 

Dika nut .................................... 0 .02 

Fruit, pome, group 11–09 ......... 0 .40 

Fruit, stone, group 12–10 ......... 1 .5 

Goat, fat .................................... 0 .05 

Goat, liver ................................. 0 .80 

Goat, meat byproducts, except 

liver ........................................ 0 .05 

Goat, muscle ............................ 0 .05 

Grain, aspirated fractions ......... 2 .2 

Grape ........................................ 1 .5 

Grape, raisin ............................. 2 .4 

Guiana chestnut ....................... 0 .02 

Hazelnut .................................... 0 .02 

Heartnut .................................... 0 .02 

Hickory nut ................................ 0 .02 

Hog, fat ..................................... 0 .01 

Hog, muscle .............................. 0 .01 

Horse, fat .................................. 0 .05 

Horse, liver ............................... 0 .80 

Horse, meat byproducts, except 

liver ........................................ 0 .05 

Horse, muscle ........................... 0 .05 

Japanese horse-chestnut ......... 0 .02 

Macadamia nut ......................... 0 .02 

Milk ........................................... 0 .01 

Mongongo nut ........................... 0 .02 

Monkey-pot ............................... 0 .02 

Pachira nut ............................... 0 .02 

Peanut ...................................... 0 .09 

Peanut, hay .............................. 15 

Pecan ........................................ 0 .02 

Sapucaia nut ............................. 0 .02 

Sheep, fat ................................. 0 .05 

Sheep, liver ............................... 0 .80 

Sheep, meat byproducts, except liver ................................ 0 .05 

Sheep, muscle .......................... 0 .05 

Soybean, seed .......................... 0 .35 

Strawberry ................................ 1 .5 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

Tomato, paste ........................... 1 .5 

Vegetable, cucurbit, group 9 .... 0 .30 

Vegetable, fruiting, group 8–10 1 .0 

Walnut, black ............................ 0 .02 

Walnut, English ......................... 0 .02 

Wheat, bran .............................. 0 .30 

Wheat, forage ........................... 30 

Wheat, germ ............................. 0 .25 

Wheat, grain ............................. 0 .15 

Wheat, hay ............................... 15 

Wheat, straw ............................. 9 .0 

1There are no U.S. registrations as of October 22, 2013. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2014–13223 Filed 6–5–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 300 

[EPA–HQ–SFUND–1990–0011; FRL–9911– 

80–Region 4] 

National Oil and Hazardous 

Substances Pollution Contingency 

Plan; National Priorities List: Deletion 

of the B&B Chemical Co., Inc. 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) Region 4 is publishing 

this direct final Notice of Deletion for 

the B&B Chemical Co., Inc. Superfund 

Site (Site), located in Miami-Dade 

County, Florida, from the National 

Priorities List (NPL) and requests public 

comments on this action. 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). The EPA and 

the State of Florida, through the Florida 

Department of Environmental Protection 

(FDEP), have determined that all 

appropriate response actions under 

CERCLA, other than operation, 

maintenance, and five year reviews, 

have been completed. However, this 

deletion does not preclude future 

actions under Superfund. 

DATES: This direct final deletion is 

effective August 5, 2014 unless EPA 

receives adverse comments by July 7, 

2014. 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. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

32674 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 109 / Friday, June 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No., EPA–HQ– 

SFUND–1990–0011, by one of the 

following methods: 

• www.regulations.gov Follow the online instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Email: johnston.shelby@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (404) 562–8287, Attention: 

Shelby Johnston. 

• Mail: Shelby Johnston, Remedial 

Project Manager, Superfund Remedial 

Section D, Superfund Remedial Branch, 

Superfund Division, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth 

Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303– 

8960. 

Hand Delivery: U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth 

Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303– 

8960. Such deliveries are only accepted 

during the Docket’s normal hours of 

operation and special arrangements 

should be made for deliveries of boxed 

information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID no. EPA–HQ–SFUND–1990– 

0011. 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 in http://

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at: 

U.S. EPA Record Center, attn: Mr. 

Ronald Saskowski, Atlanta Federal 

Center, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, 

Georgia 30303–8960, Phone: (404) 562– 

8862, Hours 8 a.m.–4 p.m., Monday 

through Friday by appointment only; or, 

John F. Kennedy Library, 190 West 49th 

Street, Hialeah, Florida 33012, Phone: 

305–821–2700, Hours 12 p.m.–8 p.m., 

Monday through Thursday, 9 a.m.–5 

p.m. Saturday. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Shelby Johnston, Remedial Project 

Manager, Superfund Remedial Section 

D, Superfund Remedial Branch, 

Superfund Division, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth 

Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303– 

8960, 404–562–8287, email: 

johnston.shelby@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 4 is publishing this direct 

final Notice of Deletion of the B&B 

Chemical Co., Inc. Superfund 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 the 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 the 

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

deleted from the NPL remain eligible for 

Fund-financed remedial actions if 

conditions at a deleted site warrant such 

actions. 

Because EPA considers this action to 

be noncontroversial and routine, this 

action will be effective August 5, 2014 

unless EPA receives adverse comments 

by July 7, 2014. 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 to delete sites from the NPL. 

Section III discusses procedures that 

EPA is using for this action. Section IV 

discusses the B&B Chemicals 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: 

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 

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. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 109 / Friday, June 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 32675 

III. Deletion Procedures 

The following procedures apply to 

deletion of the site: 

(1) EPA consulted with the State of 

Florida before 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 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 the FDEP, 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, 

Miami Today. The newspaper notice 

announces the 30-day public comment 

period concerning the Notice of Intent 

to Delete the Site from the NPL. 

(4) The 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 

B & B Chemical Co., Inc. Superfund 

Site, (EPA ID: FLD004574190) is located 

at 875 West 20th Street, Hialeah, Florida 

33010. The B&B Chemical Co., Inc. 

Superfund Site (the Site) is still 

operational and occupies 5 acres in the 

industrial area of Hialeah, Miami-Dade 

County, Florida. B&B Tritech, Inc., 

formerly B&B Chemical Co., Inc. (B&B) 

manufactured industrial cleaning 

compounds at the Site since 1958. The 

Site is bounded to the north by Highway 

934 (Hialeah Expressway), to the east by 

West 8th Avenue, to the south by West 

20th Street, and to the west by the Dade 

County Metrorail Okeechobee Station 

and parking garage. Chemicals and 

products used by the facility include a 

variety of solvents, polishes, detergents, 

oxidizing agents, corrosive inhibitors 

and metal cleaners. In the mid-1970s, 

inspectors from the Miami-Dade County 

Department of Environmental Resource 

Management (DERM) documented 

wastewater residues in soakage pits at 

the Site, and subsequently issued a 

Cease and Desist Order related to 

wastewater discharge to the soakage 

pits. In May 1976, B&B put a wastewater 

pre-treatment system into operation. 

During a 1979 area-wide ground water 

study conducted for DERM, two 

samples were collected from irrigation 

wells located on the Site. Analytical 

data from these samples indicated the 

presence of trans-1,2-dichloroethlyene, 

tetrachloroethylene, chlorobenzene, 1,1- 

dichloroethane, vinyl chloride and 

trichloroethylene. In September 1981, 

construction workers installing a 

potable water line immediately south of 

the B&B site experienced skin irritation. 

Analytical data from a ground water 

sample collected in the ditch indicated 

the presence of phenol, 

trichoroethylene, tetrachloroethlyene, 

vinyl chloride, trans-1,2 

dichloroethlyene and cis-1,2 

dichloroethylene. In June 1982, during 

the construction of the Metrorail track 

immediately south of the Site, workers 

also complained of skin bums while 

working in the trenches. 

In August 1985, at the request of 

DERM, EPA conducted an investigation 

at the Site and found benzene, 

chlorobenzene, vinyl chloride and 

chromium in the ground water. Results 

of the 1986 EPA-funded investigation 

were used to compute a Hazard Ranking 

System (HRS) score for ground water at 

the Site. The HRS score exceeded the 

threshold at which sites would normally 

be placed on the National Priorities List 

(NPL). The primary contaminants of 

concern at the Site include, but are not 

limited to, benzene, chlorobenzene, 

vinyl chloride and chromium in the 

ground water. The Site was proposed for 

the NPL June 24, 1988 (53 FR 23988) 

and finalized on the NPL August 30, 

1990 (55 FR 35502). 

Remedial Investigation, Feasibility 

Study (RI/FS) 

In 1987, B&B completed a Remedial 

Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) 

to determine the type and extent of 

contamination at the Site. Starting in 

August 1988, B&B operated a groundwater treatment system on site, in 

accordance with a Court Order of 

Stipulated Settlement with DERM. The 

treatment system operated, with some 

periods of interruption, until 1993. The 

B&B RI/FS was determined inadequate 

based on NCP requirements and thus 

EPA conducted another investigation. 

The EPA Remedial Investigation (RI) 

and Feasibility Study (FS) were 

conducted between September 13, 1989 

and September 12, 1994. 

Analytical results of the RI sampling 

identified at the Site were constituents 

commonly associated with chemical 

manufacturing operations that posed a 

threat to human health and the 

environment. The primary contaminants 

of concern (COCs) identified in the 1994 

RI/FS included benzene, chlorobenzene, 

chromium and vinyl chloride in ground 

water and were selected based on 

exceedences of State of Florida and 

federal MCLs for contaminants in the 

1992 to 1994 ground-water monitoring 

period. The feasibility study at the site 

was focused on the validity of 

monitored natural attenuation for the 

ground-water remediation. Groundwater monitoring results revealed a 

downward trend in the contaminant 

concentrations which supported the 

natural attenuation as a viable remedy. 

Selected Remedy 

EPA’s Record of Decision (ROD) was 

signed on September 12, 1994, and the 

State of Florida concurred with the 

selected remedy. The selected 

alternative included the following: 

• Natural attenuation of ground-water 

contaminants; 

• Ground-water monitoring to verify 

natural attenuation; 

• Implementation of institutional 

controls in the form of a notification 

agreement between EPA and the 

landowner to ensure continued integrity 

of the asphalt cover; 

The remedial objective for the B&B 

Chemical Co., Inc. site was to eliminate 

potential health hazards due to the 

impact of vinyl chloride, benzene, 

chromium and chlorobenzene in the 

ground water. 

Remedy Implementation 

The remedy involves the natural 

attenuation of groundwater 

contaminants to levels below MCLs. 

Decreasing trends of groundwater 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

32676 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 109 / Friday, June 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

contaminant concentrations were 

observed during the 1992 through 1994 

monitoring period. These trends gave 

evidence that natural attenuation would 

be protective of human health and the 

environment. 

Ground-water monitoring was 

conducted primarily to verify that 

natural attenuation of ground-water 

contamination is occurring. Monitoring 

consisted of semi-annual sampling of 

eight existing wells (MWT–31, MWS– 

06, MWD–07, CDM–02, CDM–03, 

MWF–27, MWD–29 and MWM–29), 

selected because of their historical 

exceedences of MCLs. Each well was 

sampled semi-annually until the 

groundwater contaminants decreased to 

levels below maximum contaminant 

levels (MCLs) for two consecutive 

rounds of sampling. Once this occurred, 

the wells were to be omitted from 

further semi-annual sampling events. 

The ROD required the final round of 

ground-water sampling to include all 

the monitoring wells at the site and that 

all contaminants of concern are below 

MCLs as requested by FDEP at the time 

the ROD was signed. Ground-water 

samples were to be analyzed for the 

analytes on EPA’s target compound list, 

excluding semivolatile compounds, as 

these compounds were not observed 

above MCLs during the RI/FS. 

On July 17, 2013 a restrictive 

covenant was filed to comply with the 

remedy component. The restrictive 

covenant states that the entire property 

is restricted to future use of commercial 

or industrial, that the potential for vapor 

intrusion into any newly constructed 

buildings is evaluated and properly 

addressed before construction, and that 

maintenance and inspection of all paved 

areas and building foundations in the 

areas for which the soil contamination 

levels did not meet the criteria for 

unlimited use is required yearly. All 

institutional controls have been 

implemented. 

Cleanup Goals 

Post-ROD ground-water sampling was 

initiated in December 1995. Sampling 

continued on a semi-annual basis until 

2007. After reviewing the results of the 

2007 ground-water sampling, FDEP and 

EPA determined that the cleanup goals 

specified in the 1994 ROD had been met 

and that there was no need to continue 

with regular, semi-annual sampling of 

the monitoring wells. Further, upon 

consultation with FDEP, EPA issued the 

2009 Explanation of Significant 

Difference (ESD) that removed the 

requirement for a final round of groundwater sampling. 

Explanation of Significant Difference 

The selected remedy was revised by 

the June 2009 ESD. The 2009 ESD 

removed the 1994 ROD requirement for 

a final round of ground-water sampling, 

this requirement was removed because 

performance standards were met for all 

monitoring wells in two consecutive 

rounds of sampling and FDEP concurred 

that the additional sampling was not 

necessary. In addition the 2009 ESD 

further outlined the requirements for the 

institutional controls to ensure the 

remedy remains protective. 

The 2009 ESD required restrictive 

covenants be placed on the site 

properties to: 

• Ensure that the integrity of existing 

impermeable surfaces is maintained. 

• Ensure that future use of the 

property remains commercial or 

industrial. 

• Ensure that the potential for vapor 

intrusion into any newly constructed 

buildings is evaluated and properly 

addressed. 

By maintaining the integrity of the 

existing impermeable surfaces and 

requiring the evaluation of vapor 

intrusion prior to and after construction 

of any new buildings on site the long 

term protectiveness can be sustained. 

Five-Year Reviews 

The first five-year review was 

completed on October 24, 2001 and the 

second was signed on April 26, 2007. 

These reviews concluded that the 

selected remedy remains protective of 

human health and the environment. 

The third statutory five-year review 

was signed on August 9, 2012 pursuant 

to EPA’s Comprehensive Five-Year 

Review Guidance (OSWER No. 9355.7– 

03B–P, June 2001). The five-year review 

concluded that remedial actions at the 

B&B Chemical Co., Inc. Superfund Site 

are protective, in the short-term, of 

human health and the environment, and 

exposure pathways that could result in 

unacceptable risks are being controlled 

in the long term by the required 

restrictive covenants. On July 17, 2013 

a restrictive covenant was filed to 

restrict the Site in the Clerk of Courts, 

Recorder’s Office, Miami-Dade County, 

Florida, at Deed Book 438, pages 341– 

345. All institutional controls have been 

implemented. 

Because hazardous materials remain 

at the Site below the pavement at levels 

above those that allow for unlimited use 

and unrestricted exposure, Section 121 

of CERCLA requires ongoing statutory 

review to be conducted no less than 

every five years from the start of 

remedial actions. The next five-year 

review will be completed by August 

2017. 

Community Involvement 

Throughout the removal and remedial 

process, EPA has kept the public 

informed of the activities being 

conducted at the Site by way of public 

meetings, progress fact sheets, and the 

announcement through local newspaper 

advertisement on the availability of 

documents such as the RI/FS, Risk 

Assessment, ROD, Proposed Plan, ESD 

and five-year reviews. 

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 from the NPL are available 

to the public in the information 

repositories identified above. 

Determination That the Site Meets the 

Criteria for Deletion From the NCP 

This Site meets all the site completion 

requirements as specified in Office of 

Solid Waste and Emergency Response 

(OSWER) Directive 9320.22, Close Out 

Procedures for National Priorities List 

Sites. Specifically, confirmatory groundwater sampling verifies that the Site has 

achieved the ROD cleanup standards, 

and that all cleanup actions specified in 

the ROD and ESD have been 

implemented. 

V. Deletion Action 

The EPA, with concurrence of the 

State of Florida through the FDEP, has 

determined that all appropriate 

response actions under CERCLA, other 

than maintenance of the pavement and 

five-year reviews have been completed. 

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 August 5, 2014 

unless EPA receives adverse comments 

by July 7, 2014. 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 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 109 / Friday, June 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 32677 

requirements, Superfund, Water 

pollution control, Water supply. 

Dated: April 15, 2014. 

A. Stanley Meiburg, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

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 the entry for 

‘‘FL’’, ‘‘B&B Chemical Co., Inc’’, 

‘‘Hialeah’’. 

[FR Doc. 2014–13210 Filed 6–5–14; 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–2009–0044; 

4500030113] 

RIN 1018–AW86 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Designating Critical 

Habitat for the California Tiger 

Salamander; Correction 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Final rule; Correction. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, published a final rule 

in the Federal Register on August 31, 

2011, that designated critical habitat for 

the Sonoma County population of the 

California tiger salamander. 

Inadvertently, we made an error in our 

amendatory instructions, which resulted 

in an error in the Code of Federal 

Regulations. With this document, we 

correct our error. 

DATES: Effective June 6, 2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Susan Wilkinson, (703) 358–2506. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We, the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, recently 

became aware that, in part 17 of title 50 

of the Code of Federal Regulations 

(CFR), we have two entries for the 

Sonoma County distinct population 

segment of the California tiger 

salamander. This error in § 17.95(d) is 

the result of an incorrect amendatory 

instruction that published in a 2011 

final rule. This document corrects the 

error in 50 CFR 17.95(d). 

Proposed and Final Rules 

In a proposed rule that published 

August 18, 2009 (74 FR 41662), the third 

amendatory instruction reads as follows: 

‘‘3. Amend § 17.95(d) by revising 

critical habitat for the California tiger 

salamander (Ambystoma californiense) 

in Sonoma County to read as follows:’’ 

However, in the final rule that 

published August 31, 2011 (76 FR 

54346), the third amendatory 

instruction reads like this: 

‘‘3. In § 17.95, amend paragraph (d) by 

adding an entry for ‘‘California Tiger 

Salamander (Ambystoma californiense) 

in Sonoma County’’ in the same order 

that the species appears in the table at 

§ 17.11(h), to read as follows:’’ 

The proposed rule was correct in 

using the word ‘‘revising,’’ as a critical 

habitat designation already existed for 

the Sonoma County distinct population 

segment of the California tiger 

salamander as the result of a final rule 

of December 14, 2005 (70 FR 74137). 

The August 31, 2011, final rule 

erroneously used the word ‘‘adding,’’ 

which resulted in an additional critical 

habitat entry being added to the CFR 

instead of replacing the entry that was 

already there. Therefore, with this 

document, we remove from 50 CFR 

17.95(d) the entry pertaining to the 

California tiger salamander in Sonoma 

County, CA, that was added to the CFR 

following the 2005 final rule and which 

should have been removed in 2011. 

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 

Endangered and threatened species, 

Exports, Imports, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, 

Transportation. 

Regulation Promulgation 

For the reasons given in the preamble, 

we amend part 17, subchapter B of 

chapter I, title 50 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations, as set forth below: 

PART 17—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 17 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 1531– 

1544; 4201–4245; unless otherwise noted. 

§ 17.95 [Amended] 

■ 2. Amend § 17.95(d) by removing the 

words ‘‘California Tiger Salamander in 

Sonoma County—Pursuant to section 

4(b)(2) of the Act, we have excluded all 

areas determined to meet the definition 

of critical habitat under section 4(b)(2) 

of the Act for California tiger 

salamander in Sonoma County. 

Therefore, no specific areas are 

designated as critical habitat for this 

species.’’. 

Susan L. Wilkinson, 

Alternate Federal Register Liaison, U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–13204 Filed 6–5–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 23 

[Docket No. FWS–R9–IA–2010–0083; 96300– 

1671–0000–R4] 

RIN 1018–AW82 

Revision of Regulations Implementing 

the Convention on International Trade 

in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna 

and Flora (CITES); Updates Following 

the Fifteenth Meeting of the 

Conference of the Parties to CITES; 

Correction 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Final rule; Correction. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, are correcting a final 

rule published in the Federal Register 

on May 27, 2014, to revise the 

regulations that implement the 

Convention on International Trade in 

Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and 

Flora (CITES) by incorporating certain 

provisions adopted at the fourteenth 

and fifteenth meetings of the Conference 

of the Parties (CoP14 and CoP15) to 

CITES and to clarify and update certain 

other provisions. In that rule, one of our 

amendatory instructions was incorrect. 

This action makes the necessary 

correction. 

DATES: This correction is effective June 

6, 2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Robert R. Gabel, Chief, Division of 

Management Authority; U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive; 

Suite 212; Arlington, VA 22203 

(telephone, (703) 358–2093; fax, (703) 

358–2280). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a final 

rule that published in the Federal 

Register on May 27, 2014, at 79 FR 

30400, the following correction is made: 

§ 23.23 [Corrected] 

■ 1. On page 30422, in the second 

column, for § 23.23 What information is 

required on U.S. and foreign CITES 

documents?, in amendment 21, 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES