Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 190 / Friday, September 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules 60777 

Dated: September 27, 2011. 

Maria A. Pallante, 

Register of Copyrights. 

[FR Doc. 2011–25230 Filed 9–29–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1410–30–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R08–OAR–2010–0406; FRL–9473–8] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; North Dakota; 

Regional Haze State Implementation 

Plan; Federal Implementation Plan for 

Interstate Transport of Pollution 

Affecting Visibility and Regional Haze; 

Correction of Public Hearing 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule; Correction of 

Public Hearing. 

SUMMARY: EPA is changing the public 

hearing arrangements for our proposed 

action on North Dakota’s State 

Implementation Plans (SIPs) addressing 

regional haze and the interstate 

transport of pollutants that interfere 

with programs to protect visibility in 

other states. We are making this change 

in response to a letter that the Governor 

of North Dakota submitted on 

September 9, 2011. 

DATES: Public hearings will be held 

October 13–14, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: The public hearings will be 

held at the North Dakota Department of 

Health, Environmental Training Center, 

2639 East Main Avenue, Bismarck, ND 

58506. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gail 

Fallon, EPA Region 8, Mailcode 8P–AR, 

1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, CO, 

80202–1129, (303) 312–6281, 

Fallon.Gail@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On 

September 21, 2011 we published a 

proposed rule partially approving and 

partially disapproving a revision to the 

North Dakota SIP addressing regional 

haze and disapproving a revision to the 

North Dakota SIP for interstate transport 

of pollutants that interfere with 

programs to protect visibility in other 

states. See 76 FR 58570. To 

accommodate the Governor of North 

Dakota’s request submitted in a letter 

dated September 9, 2011 for additional 

hearing time, we have changed the 

location to the North Dakota Department 

of Health’s Environmental Training 

Center, 2639 East Main Avenue, 

Bismarck, ND 58506. We have changed 

the schedule to provide four different 

hearing sessions. Public hearings will 

now be held on Thursday, October 13, 

2011 from 1 p.m. until 5 p.m., and again 

from 7 p.m. until 9 p.m. A second day 

of public hearings will be held on 

Friday, October 14, 2011 from 8 a.m. 

until 12 p.m., and again from 1 p.m. 

until 5 p.m. 

The public hearings will provide 

interested parties the opportunity to 

present information and opinions to 

EPA concerning our proposal. Interested 

parties may also submit written 

comments, as discussed in the proposal. 

Written statements and supporting 

information submitted during the 

comment period will be considered 

with the same weight as any oral 

comments and supporting information 

presented at the public hearings. We 

will not respond to comments during 

the public hearings. When we publish 

our final action, we will provide written 

responses to all oral and written 

comments received on our proposal. 

At the public hearings, the hearing 

officer may limit the time available for 

each commenter to address the proposal 

to 5 minutes or less if the hearing officer 

determines it to be appropriate. The 

limitation is to ensure that everyone 

who wants to make a comment has the 

opportunity to do so. We will not be 

providing equipment for commenters to 

show overhead slides or make 

computerized slide presentations. Any 

person may provide written or oral 

comments and data pertaining to our 

proposal at the public hearings. 

Verbatim transcripts, in English, of the 

hearings and written statements will be 

included in the rulemaking docket. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Ozone, Particulate matter, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Dated: September 23, 2011. 

James B. Martin, 

Regional Administrator, Region 8. 

[FR Doc. 2011–25293 Filed 9–29–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 300 

[EPA–R04–SFUND–2011–0749; FRL–9472– 

9] 

National Oil and Hazardous 

Substances Pollution Contingency 

Plan; National Priorities List: Deletion 

of the Martin-Marietta/Sodyeco 

Superfund Site 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of intent. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) Region 4 is issuing a 

Notice of Intent to Delete the MartinMarietta/Sodyeco Superfund Site (Site), 

which is a portion of the Clariant 

Corporation property located at 11701 

Mount Holly Road in Charlotte, North 

Carolina, from the National Priorities 

List (NPL) and requests comment on 

this proposed action. The NPL, 

promulgated pursuant to Section 105 of 

the Comprehensive Environmental 

Response, Compensation, and Liability 

Act (CERCLA or Superfund) of 1980, as 

amended, is an appendix of the National 

Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution 

Contingency Plan (NCP). EPA, with the 

concurrence of the State of North 

Carolina, through the Department of 

Environment and Natural Resources 

(DENR), has 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 if deemed 

necessary by EPA. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

October 31, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID no. EPA–R04– 

SFUND–2011–0749, by one of the 

following methods: 

• Online: http://www.regulations.gov. 

Follow instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: townsend.michael@epa.gov. 

• Fax: 404 562–8788 Attention: 

Michael Townsend. 

• Mail: Michael Townsend, Remedial 

Project Manager, Superfund Remedial 

Section, 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. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
60778 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 190 / Friday, September 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

Such deliveries are only accepted 

during the public docket’s normal hours 

of operation, and special arrangements 

should be made for deliveries of boxed 

information. The Regional EPA Office is 

open for business Monday through 

Friday, 8:30 am to 4:30 pm, excluding 

Federal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID no. EPA–R04–SFUND–2011– 

0749. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the docket 

without change and may be made 

available online at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless a 

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 e-mail. 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 e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through http:// 

www.regulations.gov, your e-mail 

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 

electronic files 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 statue. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

will be publicly available only in hard 

copy. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically at http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at: 

Regional Site Information Repository: 

U.S. EPA Record Center, Attn: Ms. 

Debbie Jourdan, Atlanta Federal Center, 

61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 

30303–8960. Hours of Operation (by 

appointment only): 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., 

Monday through Friday. 

Local Site Information Repository: Mt. 

Holly Public Library, 235 West Catawba 

Avenue, Mt. Holley, North Carolina 

28120–1603. Hours of operation: 

10 a.m.–6 p.m., Monday, Tuesday, 

Thursday and Friday. 10 a.m.–2 p.m., 

Wednesday and Saturday. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT: 

Michael Townsend, Remedial Project 

Manager, Superfund Remedial Section, 

Superfund Remedial Branch, Superfund 

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, 

SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960, (404) 

562–8813, Electronic mail at: 

townsend.michael@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Introduction 

II. NPL Deletion Criteria 

III. Deletion Procedures 

IV. Basis for Site Deletion 

I. Introduction 

EPA Region 4 is announcing its intent 

to delete the Martin-Marietta/Sodyeco 

Superfund Site (Site), which is a portion 

of the Clariant Corporation facility, 

located at 11701 Mount Holly Road, 

Charlotte, NC, from the NPL and 

requests public comment 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), 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 40 CFR 

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

from the NPL remain eligible for Fundfinanced remedial actions if warranted 

by future conditions. 

EPA will accept comments on the 

proposal to delete the Site for thirty (30) 

days after publication of this document 

in the Federal Register. 

Section II of this document explains 

the criteria for deleting sites from the 

NPL. Section III discusses procedures 

that EPA is using for this action. Section 

IV discusses the Site and demonstrates 

that the deletion criteria are met. 

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 CERCLA 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 Site: 

(1) EPA consulted with the State of 

North Carolina prior to developing this 

Notice of Intent to Delete. 

(2) The State of North Carolina, 

through DENR, has concurred on the 

deletion of the Site from the NPL. 

(3) Concurrently with the publication 

of this Notice of Intent to Delete in the 

Federal Register, a notice is being 

published in a major local newspaper, 

the Charlotte Observer. The newspaper 

notice announces the thirty (30) day 

comment period for the proposed action 

to delete the Site from the NPL. 

(4) EPA placed copies of documents 

supporting the proposed deletion in the 

deletion docket and has made these 

items available for public inspection 

and copying at the Site’s information 

repositories identified above. 

If adverse comments on this deletion 

notice are received within the thirty (30) 

day public comment period, EPA will 

evaluate and respond appropriately to 

the comments before making a final 

decision to delete. If necessary, EPA 

will prepare a Responsiveness Summary 

to address any significant public 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 190 / Friday, September 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules 60779 

comments received. After the public 

comment period, if EPA determines it is 

still appropriate to delete the Site, the 

Regional Administrator will publish a 

final Notice of Deletion in the Federal 

Register. Public notices, public 

submissions and copies of the 

Responsiveness Summary, if prepared, 

will be made available to interested 

parties and added to the Site’s 

information repositories listed above. 

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. In addition, 40 CFR 

300.425(e)(3) 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 Martin Marietta/Sodyeco 

Superfund Site (EPA ID: 

NCD001810365) is located in Charlotte, 

Mecklenberg County, North Carolina. 

The Site is located within a 492-acre 

property referred to as the Sandoz 

Chemical Corporation, Mount Holly 

Plant, and is located on Highway 27 

West in Mecklenburg County, North 

Carolina. The Site is comprised of five 

noncontiguous areas located within the 

facility’s boundaries. Manufacturing, 

administrative and storage facilities 

cover about 362 acres. The remaining 

balance of the land is covered by 

woodlands and grassed areas. 

The entire 492-acre facility is 

regulated under RCRA authority. 

DyeStuff Company began operations at 

the facility in 1936. Initially, the plant 

produced liquid sulfur dyes from 

purchased raw materials. American 

Marietta (which became Martin Marietta 

in 1961) purchased the facility in 1958. 

Martin Marietta’s products included vat 

dyes, disperse dyes and specialty 

chemical products for the agrochemical, 

electronic, lithographic, pigment, 

plastic, rubber and general chemical 

industries. Sodyeco Inc. purchased the 

plant from Martin Marietta in 1983. 

Sodyeco Inc.’s early operations 

produced wastes that consisted of lowvolume, aqueous, acidic or alkaline 

streams containing inorganic salts, 

which were discharged untreated to the 

Catawba River. Later, Sodyeco Inc.’s 

operations were expanded and included 

organic solvent wastes. Among the 

materials placed in landfills at the Site 

were residual distillation tars from 

solvent recovery operations, empty 

drums and cartons, discarded 

chemicals, off-specification products, 

general plant wastes and construction 

debris. The first indication of potential 

groundwater contamination at the Site 

was the discovery of organic solvents in 

the Sodyeco’s potable water well in 

September 1980. Contaminated 

groundwater was also detected in water 

supply wells adjacent to the Sodeyco 

Plant. In June 1982, a hazardous waste 

site investigation was conducted by 

EPA. Results of surface water, 

groundwater and sediment samples 

revealed the presence of organic 

contaminants in groundwater and small 

amounts in the surface water. The Site 

was proposed to the NPL on December 

30, 1982 (47 FR 58476) and finalized on 

the NPL September 8, 1983 (48 FR 

40674) due to the presence of potable 

water wells within a 3-mile radius and 

the presence of two municipal surface 

water intakes on the Catawba River. 

The Site contains five contaminated 

areas designated as A, B, C, D, and E. 

Area A is an on-site landfill that 

operated between the 1930s and 1973. 

Area B is an on-site landfill that 

operated between 1973 and 1978. Area 

C consists of three covered pits that 

contained the remains of laboratory and 

production samples, distillation tars, 

and waste solvents. The two northern 

pits in Area C were excavated in March 

1981 and the contents were trucked off 

site to a landfill in Pinewood, South 

Carolina. Removal of the remaining pit 

was conducted in 1983. After 

excavation activities, Area C was 

regraded and planted with grass. Area D 

formerly contained two wastewater 

settling ponds. The ponds were taken 

from service in 1966; one was cleaned 

out in 1973 and the other between 1976 

and 1977. Area E is located downgradient of the old plant and 

manufacturing area. No waste is known 

to have been disposed of in this area. 

The current land use is heavy 

industrial. There are two business 

tenants located within the facility that 

occupy only a few buildings. Most of 

the land surrounding the Site is 

primarily undeveloped woodland. The 

Site is currently fenced and requires 

security clearance for access. The 

ground water aquifer underlying the 

Site is currently not used as a drinking 

water source; however, there are no 

controls preventing that use. Although 

the groundwater is not being used for 

drinking purposes, the aquifer is 

classified as a Class IIA aquifer, a 

current source of drinking water. There 

are no residential properties that exist 

above or near the ground water 

contaminant plume at the Site. 

Remedial Investigation and Feasibility 

Study (RI/FS) 

In February 1986, Sandoz Chemical 

Corporation, the facility owner, entered 

into an Administrative Order on 

Consent with EPA to conduct the RI/FS 

to evaluate the extent of contamination 

and identify feasible alternative 

remedies. 

Results of the RI showed the 

groundwater in the five identified 

CERCLA areas A through E were 

contaminated with toluene, 

chlorobenzene, ethylbenzene, xylene, odichlorobenzene, tetrachloroethylene, 

and trichloroethylene. The Site posed 

an unacceptable carcinogenic risk to 

human receptors via ingestion of local 

water fowl and small mammals and the 

ingestion of ground water. The Site also 

posed an unacceptable non-carcinogenic 

risk to human health via inhalation 

intake from Area D and the ingestion of 

onsite groundwater. 

Selected Remedy 

EPA issued the ROD for the clean-up 

of the Site in 1987. The remedial action 

objectives at the Site were to protect 

human health and the environment 

from exposure to contaminated on-site 

soils through inhalation and direct 

contact, and to restore contaminated 

groundwater to levels protective of 

human health and the environment. The 

cleanup consisted of the following 

elements: 

• Extraction, treatment and discharge 

of contaminated ground water for all 

five areas; 

• Excavation and off-site incineration 

for Area D; 

• Installation of a landfill cap for 

Area B; and 

• Implementation of one of the 

following activities after treatability 

studies were undertaken for Area C, 

including: (1) Flushing; (2) soil washing; 

(3) thermal processing; or (4) in-situ 

steam stripping and excavation and offsite incineration. 

No soil remediation was deemed 

necessary for CERCLA Areas A and E 

during the RI/FS. 

The initial cleanup approach for Area 

C was an interim action. The final 

cleanup plan for Area C was outlined in 

a 1994 Explanation of Significant 

Difference (ESD), and included in-situ 

soil flushing, with the flushing water 

being captured and treated by the 

existing ground water treatment system. 

The ESD also included continuation of 

a vacuum extraction pilot study to treat 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
60780 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 190 / Friday, September 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

soil stock-piled on site that was 

contaminated with VOCs. The vacuum 

extraction method eventually proved 

ineffective and EPA issued a second 

ESD in November 1998, which required 

off-site treatment and disposal for the 

stock-piled soil in Area C. 

Response Actions 

Installation of the asphalt cap for Area 

B was completed in October 1989. The 

off-site treatment and disposal of Area C 

stockpiled soils was completed in 

March of 1999. The installation of an insitu flushing system for the Area C soil 

was completed during the third week of 

September of 1999. Remediation of Area 

D soil was completed in April 1999. A 

total of 397 tons of soils were removed 

in two phases, and sent off-site for 

treatment and disposal. 

The groundwater system was 

designed to remove VOCs from the 

shallow (Areas C and D), intermediate 

(Areas A/B, D and E) and deep aquifers 

(Area D). The groundwater remediation 

involved extraction through recovery 

wells and treatment in the onsite RCRA 

wastewater treatment facility. The 

treated water is discharged to the 

Catawba River, as regulated by the 

National Pollutant Discharge 

Elimination System (NPDES) program. 

The groundwater extraction wells for 

Areas A through E were installed 1990. 

The contaminated groundwater 

continues to be treated in the RCRAregulated on-site wastewater treatment 

facility, along with contaminated 

groundwater from the RCRA-regulated 

portions of the facility. 

The remedial actions were completed 

by the responsible party, with oversight 

by the state RCRA program. The 

Preliminary Close-Out Report was 

issued by EPA on September 29, 1999. 

Since the groundwater remedy was 

constructed, implementation has been 

conducted under the facility’s RCRA 

permit and authority. The facility’s 

permit incorporated the groundwater 

remediation goals and cleanup levels 

established in the 1987 ROD and 

requires ICs for limiting the use of 

groundwater from aquifers impacted by 

Site contaminants. At the time the Site 

was listed on the NPL, the RCRA 

Hazardous Solid Waste Amendments 

(HSWA) provisions had not been 

promulgated, and it was necessary to 

use CERCLA response authority to 

address the contamination at the Site 

outside of the regulated RCRA units 

(Areas A–E). Since the facility’s RCRA 

permit and authority have been used to 

implement the groundwater cleanup 

and HSWA now provides the legal 

authority necessary to continue the 

treatment until cleanup levels are 

achieved in the CERCLA areas outside 

of the RCRA regulated units, EPA has 

concluded that the groundwater risks 

originally identified in the 1987 ROD no 

longer need to be addressed by CERCLA 

authority. 

Institutional controls were also 

necessary because the selected remedy 

resulted in hazardous substances, 

pollutants, or contaminants remaining 

at the Site above levels that would allow 

for unlimited use and unrestricted 

exposure in the soils. More specifically, 

the remedy capped soil in place in 

CERCLA Areas A and B, as well as left 

contaminated soils covered by clean 

soils in place in Area D. The Declaration 

of Perpetual Land Use Restrictions were 

implemented on 8/10/2011 with the 

Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, Register 

of Deeds. 

The 1987 ROD, as amended by the 

ESDs, was further amended to select no 

further CERCLA action for groundwater 

and required institutional controls 

preventing disturbance of the caps and 

precluding direct contact with any 

onsite soils impacted by Site 

contaminants. The ROD amendment 

was signed on July 5, 2011. 

Cleanup Goals 

Contaminated soils above industrial 

cleanup levels were excavated and 

disposed of off-site or were capped in 

place in Areas B, C and D. Postexcavation sampling was conducted and 

described in the Preliminary Closeout 

Report issued by EPA on September 29, 

1999. 

Operation and Maintenance 

For CERCLA Areas A, B, and C, the 

Clariant Corporation, under the existing 

RCRA C permit, is conducting the longterm monitoring, and operation and 

maintenance activities at the Site. The 

primary activities associated with O&M, 

associated with the Site, include: 

• Visual inspection of the cap, 

assuring that it is stable and sound; and 

• Monitoring of institutional controls. 

Operation of the water treatment plant 

and associated groundwater monitoring 

is being conducted under the RCRA 

Subtitle C permit and is not part of the 

CERCLA response. 

Five-Year Reviews 

Three five year review reports for the 

Site have been issued, in 1996, 2002 and 

2007. The 2007 five year review report 

concluded that the remedy selected in 

the ROD is protective in the short term, 

but recommended follow-up actions to 

analyze the extraction wells for their 

effectiveness in addressing ground 

water contamination, conduct 

maintenance on the Area B cap, and to 

evaluate the type of ICs that should be 

implemented at the Site. All 

recommended actions have been 

addressed. Additional groundwater 

studies are being conducted to address 

issues identified in the 2007 five year 

review report under RCRA oversight. 

These activities included installation of 

additional groundwater extraction and 

monitoring wells in Areas D and E. 

These activities were completed in 2007 

and 2010. Repairs to surficial cracks on 

the Area B cap were completed in 2008. 

EPA incorporated institutional controls 

into a decision document in the July 5, 

2011 ROD. The ICs preventing 

disturbance of the caps and precluding 

direct contact with any onsite soils 

impacted by site contaminants were 

implemented and filed on August 10, 

2011 with the Charlotte, Mecklenburg 

County, Register of Deeds. 

Community Involvement 

EPA has conducted a range of 

community involvement activities at the 

Site to solicit community input and to 

ensure that the public remains informed 

about site-related activities throughout 

the cleanup process. Outreach activities 

have included public notices, 

interviews and public meetings on 

cleanup activities. In addition to 

publishing notices about its intent to 

delete the Site and amend the ROD in 

the Federal Register and in a local 

newspaper, EPA conducted a public 

meeting on May 12, 2011 to provide the 

public with the opportunity to comment 

on the proposed ROD Amendment. The 

ROD Amendment and Responsiveness 

Summary, addressing comments 

received during the comment period, 

have been included in the 

Administrative Record. 

EPA has also prepared the deletion 

docket, which includes the documents 

which EPA relied on for its decision to 

propose deleting the Site from the NPL. 

Therefore, the public participation 

requirements, required in CERCLA 

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

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

have been satisfied. 

Determination That the Site Meets the 

Criteria for Deletion in the NCP 

The NCP specifies that EPA may 

delete a site from the NPL if ‘‘all 

appropriate responsible parties or other 

persons have implemented all 

appropriate response actions required.’’ 

EPA, with concurrence of the State of 

North Carolina, through the Department 

of the Environment and Natural 

Resources, by a letter dated June 17, 

2010, believes this criteria for deletion 

have been satisfied. The contaminated 

soils have been capped and institutional 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 190 / Friday, September 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules 60781 

controls are in place preventing 

unacceptable exposure. The 

contaminated groundwater is being 

addressed under the facility’s RCRA 

permit and authority, therefore CERCLA 

response is not warranted. Therefore, 

EPA is proposing to delete this Site from 

the NPL. 

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: September 13, 2011. 

Gwendolyn Keyes Fleming, 

Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

For the reasons set out in this 

document, 40 CFR part 300 is proposed 

to be amended as follows: 

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 ‘‘MartinMarietta, Sodyeco, Inc.,’’ ‘‘Charlotte, 

NC.’’ 

[FR Doc. 2011–25107 Filed 9–29–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 372 

[EPA–HQ–OEI–2011–0196; FRL–9472–5] 

RIN 2025–AA31 

Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) 

Reporting for Facilities Located in 

Indian Country and Clarification of 

Additional Opportunities Available to 

Tribal Governments Under the TRI 

Program 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: This action proposes to: 

require TRI reporting facilities located 

in Indian country to report to the 

appropriate Tribal government for the 

relevant area instead of the State; and 

improve and clarify certain 

opportunities allowing Tribal 

governments to participate more fully in 

the TRI Program. In 1990, EPA finalized 

regulations in the Federal Register (FR) 

requiring facilities in Indian country to 

submit annual TRI reports to EPA and 

the appropriate Tribal government. 

These amendments, however, were 

inadvertently omitted from the Code of 

Federal Regulations (CFR), and the 

relevant provisions were later 

overwritten by a subsequent final rule, 

thus resulting in the exclusion of the 

intended requirement from the CFR. 

EPA intends to correct that inadvertent 

result by proposing this rule. Further, 

because Tribal governmental structures 

may vary, EPA is proposing to update 

its terminology to refer to the principal 

elected official of the Tribe as the 

‘‘Tribal chairperson or equivalent 

elected official.’’ EPA is also amending 

its definition of ‘‘State’’ for purposes of 

40 CFR part 372 to no longer include 

Indian country, so as to avoid any 

confusing overlap in terminology with 

the proposed express discussion of 

facilities in Indian country. With regard 

to the procedures for EPA to modify the 

list of covered chemicals and TRI 

reporting facilities, EPA proposes to 

clarify the opportunities available to 

Tribal governments. In particular, EPA 

proposes to include within the relevant 

provision an opportunity for the Tribal 

Chairperson or equivalent elected 

official to request that EPA apply the 

TRI reporting requirements to a specific 

facility located within the Tribe’s Indian 

country. Secondly, EPA is proposing 

that the Tribal Chairperson or 

equivalent elected official may petition 

EPA to add or delete a particular 

chemical respectively to or from the list 

of chemicals covered by TRI. By 

increasing the participation and 

engagement of Tribal governments in 

the TRI program, EPA is helping to 

increase awareness of toxic releases 

within Tribal communities, thereby 

increasing the understanding of 

potential human health and ecological 

impacts from these hazardous 

chemicals. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before November 29, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OEI–2011–0196, by one of the following 

methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: oei.docket@epa.gov. 

• Fax: 202–566–0677 

• Mail: Office of Environmental 

Information (OEI) Docket, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Mailcode: 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. 

• Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center 

(EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 

Constitution Ave, NW., Washington, DC 

20460. 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–OEI–2011– 

0196. 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 e-mail. 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 e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through http:// 

www.regulations.gov your e-mail 

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. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage: http:// 

www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. 

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 hard copy. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in http://www.

regulations.gov or in hard copy at OEI 

Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 

1301 Constitution Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC. The Public Reading 

Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 

p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding 

legal holidays. The telephone number 

for the Public Reading Room is (202) 

566–1744, and the telephone number for 

the OEI Docket is (202) 566–1752. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS