76048 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 6, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements (see section 

307(b)(2)). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental 

regulations, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: November 22, 2011. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, EPA Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2011–31184 Filed 12–5–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2011–0017; EPA–R05– 

OAR–2011–0106; FRL–9499–7] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Ohio 

and Indiana; Redesignation of the Ohio 

and Indiana Portions CincinnatiHamilton Area to Attainment of the 

1997 Annual Standard for Fine 

Particulate Matter 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Withdrawal of direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: Due to the receipt of an 

adverse comment, EPA is withdrawing 

the October 19, 2011 (76 FR 64825), 

direct final rule approving Ohio’s and 

Indiana’s requests to redesignate their 

respective portions of the CincinnatiHamilton nonattainment area (for Ohio: 

Butler, Clermont, Hamilton, and Warren 

Counties, Ohio; for Indiana: a portion of 

Dearborn County) to attainment for the 

1997 annual National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard (NAAQS or standard) 

for fine particulate matter (PM2.5). In the 

direct final rule, EPA stated that if 

adverse comments were received by 

November 18, 2011, the rule would be 

withdrawn and not take effect. On 

October 19, 2011, EPA received a 

comment. EPA interprets this comment 

as adverse and, therefore, EPA is 

withdrawing the direct final rule. EPA 

will address the comment in a 

subsequent final action based upon the 

proposed rulemaking action, also 

published on October 19, 2011 (76 FR 

64880). EPA will not institute a second 

comment period on this action. 

DATES: The direct final rule published at 

76 FR 64825 on October 19, 2011, is 

withdrawn as of December 6, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Carolyn Persoon, Environmental 

Engineer, Control Strategies Section, Air 

Programs Branch (AR–18J), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–8290, 

persoon.carolyn@epa.gov. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Particulate matter. 

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

Dated: November 23, 2011. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

PART 52—[AMENDED] 

■ Accordingly, the amendments to 40 

CFR 52.776 and 40 CFR 52.1880 

published in the Federal Register on 

October 19, 2011 (76 FR 64825) on page 

64837 are withdrawn as of December 6, 

2011. 

PART 81—[AMENDED] 

■ Accordingly, the amendments to 40 

CFR 81.315 and 40 CFR 81.336 

published in the Federal Register on 

October 19, 2011 (76 FR 64825) on 

pages 64837–64838 are withdrawn as of 

December 6, 2011. 

[FR Doc. 2011–31136 Filed 12–5–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 81 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0443; FRL–9492–3] 

RIN 2060–AR17 

Air Quality Designations for the 2008 

Lead (Pb) National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards 

Correction 

In rule document 2011–29460 

appearing on pages 72097–72120 in the 

issues of Tuesday, November 22, 2011, 

make the following corrections: 

§ 81.337 [Corrected] 

■ 1. On page 72115, in the first table on 

the page, the column heading 

‘‘Designation for the 2008 NAAQS’’ 

should read ‘‘Designation for the 2008 

NAAQSa’’. 

§ 81.338 [Corrected] 

■ 2. On page 72115, in the second table 

on the page, the column heading 

‘‘Designation for the 2008 NAAQS’’ 

should read ‘‘Designation for the 2008 

NAAQSa’’. 

§ 81.339 [Corrected] 

■ 3. On page 72115, in the third table on 

the page, the column heading 

‘‘Designation for the 2008 NAAQS’’ 

should read ‘‘Designation for the 2008 

NAAQSa’’. 

§ 81.340 [Corrected] 

■ 4. On page 72115, in the last table on 

the page, the column heading 

‘‘Designation for the 2008 NAAQS’’ 

should read ‘‘Designation for the 2008 

NAAQSa’’. 

§ 81.341 [Corrected] 

■ 5. On page 72116, in the first table on 

the page, the column heading 

‘‘Designation for the 2008 NAAQS’’ 

should read ‘‘Designation for the 2008 

NAAQSa’’. 

§ 81.342 [Corrected] 

■ 6. On page 72116, in the second table 

on the page, the column heading 

‘‘Designation for the 2008 NAAQS’’ 

should read ‘‘Designation for the 2008 

NAAQSa’’. 

[FR Doc. C1–2011–29460 Filed 12–5–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1505–01–D 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 300 

[EPA–HQ–SFUND–1998–0007; FRL–9500–4] 

National Oil and Hazardous 

Substances Pollution Contingency 

Plan; National Priorities List: Deletion 

of the State Marine of Port Arthur 

Superfund Site 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) Region 6 is publishing a 

direct final Notice of Deletion of the 

State Marine of Port Arthur (SMPA) 

Superfund Site located in Port Arthur, 

Texas (Jefferson County), from the 

National Priorities List (NPL). The NPL, 

promulgated pursuant to Section 105 of 

the Comprehensive Environmental 

Response, Compensation, and Liability 

Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is 

an appendix of the National Oil and 

Hazardous Substances Pollution 

Contingency Plan (NCP). This direct 

final deletion is being published by EPA 

with the concurrence of the State of 

Texas, through the Texas Commission 

on Environmental Quality, because EPA 

has determined that all appropriate 

response actions at these identified 

parcels under CERCLA, other than 

operation, maintenance, and Five-Year 

Reviews, have been completed. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 6, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 76049 

However, this deletion does not 

preclude future actions under 

Superfund. 

DATES: This direct final deletion is 

effective February 6, 2012 unless EPA 

receives adverse comments by January 

5, 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–1998–0007, by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

Internet on-line instructions for 

submitting comments. 

• Email: Rafael Casanova, 

casanova.rafael@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (214) 665–6660. 

• Mail: Rafael A. Casanova; U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 6; Superfund Division (6SF–RA); 

1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200; Dallas, 

Texas 75202–2733. 

• Hand delivery: U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 6; 1445 Ross 

Avenue, Suite 700; Dallas, Texas 75202– 

2733; Contact: Rafael A. Casanova (214) 

665–7437. 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–AFUND–1998– 

0007. 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 hard 

copy. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at: 

1. U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 6; 1445 Ross Avenue, 

Suite 700; Dallas, Texas 75202–2733; 

Hours of operation: Monday thru 

Friday, 9 a.m. to 12 p.m. and 1 p.m. to 

4 p.m. Contact: Rafael A. Casanova (214) 

665–7437. 

2. Port Arthur Public Library; 4615 

9th Avenue; Port Arthur, Texas 77642– 

5799; Hours of operation: Monday thru 

Thursday, 9 a.m. to 9 p.m.; Friday, 9 

a.m. to 6 p.m.; Saturday, 9 a.m. to 5 

p.m.; and Sunday, 2 p.m. to 5 p.m. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Rafael A. Casanova, Remedial Project 

Manager; U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 6; Superfund Division 

(6SF–RA); 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 

1200; Dallas, Texas 75202–2733; 

telephone number: (214) 665–7437; 

email: casanova.rafael@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 6 is publishing this direct 

final Notice of Deletion for the State 

Marine of Port Arthur (SMPA) 

Superfund Site (Site), from the National 

Priorities List (NPL). The NPL 

constitutes Appendix B of 40 CFR Part 

300 which is the 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 Fund-financed 

remedial action if future conditions 

warrant such actions. 

Because EPA considers this action to 

be noncontroversial and routine, this 

action will be effective February 6, 2012 

unless EPA receives adverse comments 

January 5, 2012. Along with this direct 

final Notice of Deletion, EPA is copublishing a Notice of Intent for 

Deletion 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 for Deletion and the 

comments already received. There will 

be no additional opportunity to 

comment. 

Section II of this document explains 

the criteria for deleting sites from the 

NPL. Section III discusses procedures 

that EPA is using for this action. Section 

IV discusses the SMPA 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 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
76050 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 6, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

reviews to ensure the continued 

protectiveness of remedial actions 

where hazardous substances, pollutants, 

or contaminants remain at a site above 

levels that allow for unlimited use and 

unrestricted exposure. EPA conducts 

such five-year reviews even if a site is 

deleted from the NPL. EPA may initiate 

further action to ensure continued 

protectiveness at a deleted site if new 

information becomes available that 

indicates it is appropriate. Whenever 

there is a significant release from a site 

deleted from the NPL, the deleted site 

may be restored to the NPL without 

application of the hazard ranking 

system. 

III. Deletion Procedures 

The following procedures apply to the 

deletion of all areas and media within 

the SMPA Superfund Site: 

1. EPA has consulted with the state of 

Texas prior to developing this direct 

final Notice of Deletion and the Notice 

of Intent for Deletion co-published 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 for 

Deletion prior to their publication 

today, and the state, through the Texas 

Commission on Environmental Quality, 

has concurred on this 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 for Deletion is being 

published in a major local newspaper, 

The Port Arthur News. The newspaper 

announces the 30-day public comment 

period concerning the Notice of Intent 

for Deletion of the Site from the NPL. 

4. The EPA placed copies of 

documents supporting the 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 for Deletion 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 further response actions, 

should future conditions warrant such 

actions. 

IV. Basis for Site Deletion 

The following information provides 

EPA’s rationale for deleting the SMPA 

Superfund Site from the NPL. A map of 

the Site, including the aerial extent of 

the Site proposed for deletion, is 

available in the deletion docket: 

Site Location and History 

The SMPA Superfund Site (Site, 

CERCLIS ID–TXD099801102), a former 

barge-cleaning operation and municipal 

landfill, occupied a 17-acre industrial 

tract of land located approximately 4.5 

miles east-northeast of the City of Port 

Arthur on Old Yacht Club Road on 

Pleasure Islet. Pleasure Islet is a 

peninsula located approximately 0.5 

miles southwest of the mouth of the 

Neches River. The Site is bordered by 

the Palmer Barge Line Superfund Site to 

the north, by Old Yacht Club Road to 

the west, by undeveloped property to 

the south, and Sabine Lake to the east. 

Pleasure Islet is a manmade landmass 

consisting of dredge spoils generated 

during the construction and 

maintenance of the Sabine-Neches 

canal, also called the Intercoastal 

Waterway. The canal was constructed 

between 1898 and approximately 1920 

in the vicinity of Sabine Lake and the 

Neches River, between the current Site 

location and the mainland. Between 

1955 and 1957, a portion of the canal 

along the western side of Pleasure Islet 

was abandoned, and a new canal was 

cut along the eastern and southern sides 

of Pleasure Islet. Pleasure Islet was 

created when a land bridge was 

constructed across the abandoned 

portions of the canal, between the 

northern tip of Pleasure Island and the 

mainland. Vehicle access to the Site is 

limited to a single dirt road starting at 

the western Site border along Old Yacht 

Club Road. 

Ownership of Pleasure Islet was 

transferred from the State of Texas to 

the City of Port Arthur, Texas, in 1955. 

Development of the islet and the Site 

began after 1957, following construction 

of the land bridge across the abandoned 

portions of the Sabine-Neches Canal. In 

approximately 1963, the City of Port 

Arthur began municipal landfill 

operations in the northern and central 

portions of the islet. Initially, the 

landfill consisted of a burn pit in which 

wastes were incinerated. By December 

1969, burn operations were 

discontinued, and the landfill was used 

solely for disposal of wastes. Between 

1969 and 1972, landfill disposal 

operations expanded to include the 

central and northern portions of the Site 

and the property north of the Site. 

Between 1972 and 1974, disposal 

activities were generally concentrated in 

the northern parts of the islet. In 

December 1974, the City of Port Arthur 

closed the landfill in accordance with 

Texas Department of Health regulations, 

which required covering the entire 

landfill with approximately two feet of 

fine-grained fill material. The cover 

material is believed to be dredge spoils 

that originated on the islet. Site 

operations began about 1973 under the 

names of State Welding and Marine 

Works and the Golden Triangle 

Shipyard. The construction of 

wastewater impoundments in the 

northwestern portion of the Site was 

also reported. The impoundments were 

reportedly unlined earthen dike areas 

approximately two acres in size used to 

store oil and wastewater from bargecleaning operations. Inspection reports 

indicate that wastewater from bargecleaning operations was directed to two 

aboveground storage tanks and then 

pumped to the wastewater 

impoundments. Some of the oil from the 

tanks was diverted to an old ship, 

located on the land, that was used as an 

oil/water separator. Oil from the 

separator was collected for reuse, 

potentially on the Site. The Site 

included the locations of the former 

wastewater impoundments, waste water 

treatment facility, tar burn area, above 

ground storage tank area, maintenance 

shed area, distillation column, the 

former location of the Lauren Refining 

Company Tank Farm area, non-source 

areas of the Site, sediments, and ground 

water. The Site is currently being 

operated by the owner as an industrial 

property for metal scrapping activities. 

The surface water migration pathway 

was scored as part of the Hazard 

Ranking System Documentation Record. 

EPA determined that the Site warranted 

further investigation to assess the nature 

and extent of the human health and 

environmental risks associated with the 

Site’s previous barge-cleaning and 

landfill activities. The site was proposed 

to be included on the NPL on March 6, 

1998 (63 FR 11340) and made final July 

28, 1998 (63 FR 40182). 

The EPA’s Time Critical Removal 

Action, completed in August 2001, 

consisted of the removal and off-site 

disposal of waste materials, water 

treatment, oil and water separation, and 

stabilization and off-site disposal of 

sludge materials. This Removal Action 

addressed the materials that posed a risk 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 6, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 76051 

to human health and ecological 

receptors. 

The investigations of the Site 

included the locations of the former 

wastewater impoundments, waste water 

treatment facility, tar burn area, above 

ground storage tank area, maintenance 

shed area, Lauren Refining Company 

tank farm area, non-source areas of the 

Site, ground water, and the sediments of 

Sabine Lake. 

Remedial Investigation and 

Supplemental Remedial Investigation 

The objectives of the Remedial 

Investigation (RI) for the Site were to: 

• To determine the nature and extent 

of contamination known or suspected 

on-site and off-site locations, and 

• To assess the potential human 

health and ecological risks associated 

with the Site. 

The objectives of the Supplemental 

Remedial Investigation (SRI) for the Site 

were to: 

• Collect and analyze sediment 

samples to determine if contaminants in 

Sabine Lake sediments posed an 

unacceptable risk to benthic organisms. 

• Collect and analyze subsurface soil 

samples from the wastewater 

impoundment area to determine if 

contaminants in the impoundment soil 

could serve as a potential source of 

contamination to the ground water and 

eventually to benthic organisms in the 

sediments of Sabine Lake. 

• Collect and analyze subsurface soil 

samples from the wastewater 

impoundment area to determine if 

contaminants in the impoundment soil 

posed an unacceptable risk to future 

onsite construction workers. 

• Install and develop monitoring 

wells at two of the soil boring locations 

in the wastewater impoundment area for 

associated ground water sampling. 

• Collect and analyze ground water 

samples to determine if Site ground 

water is a current or potentially future 

source of contamination to benthic 

organisms in Sabine Lake. 

• Store, analyze, and properly 

dispose of any investigation-derived 

waste that is produced during field 

activities in support of the 

Supplemental Remedial Investigation. 

The RI scope of work focused on 

collecting additional information not 

obtained during previous investigations. 

The 2001 RI investigation consisted of 

two sampling events. The first sampling 

event consisted of collecting sediment 

samples from off-site locations in Sabine 

Lake. The second sampling event 

consisted of collecting soil and ground 

water samples from on-site locations. 

The following tasks were completed 

during the RI: 

• Completion of five shallow and six 

deep borings ranging in depths from 4.0 

to 9.0 and 25.0 to 60.0 feet below the 

ground’s surface (bgs), respectively. 

• Installation of six ground water 

monitoring wells. 

• Collection of surface soil samples 

from 87 locations ranging in depth from 

0.0 to 6.0 inches bgs. 

• Collection of intertidal samples 

from nine locations ranging in depth 

from 0.0 to 6.0 inches bgs. 

• Collection of sediment samples 

from 46 locations ranging in depth from 

0.0 to 6.0 feet bgs. 

The RI analytical results were 

compared to commercial/industrial 

protective concentration levels (PCLs) 

established by the Texas Risk Reduction 

Program, and where appropriate, to 

background levels for the Site’s 

contaminants of concern (COCs). 

The most frequently detected COCs 

for all sediment samples collected were 

metals including arsenic, lead, and 

mercury. For intertidal sediments, six 

metals (antimony, arsenic, cadmium, 

lead, mercury, and selenium) and one 

semi-volatile organic compound (SVOC, 

pentachlorophenol) exceeded their 

respective PCLs. Constituents that 

exceeded PCLs for nearshore sediments 

included six metals (arsenic, barium, 

beryllium, cadmium, lead, and mercury) 

and one SVOC (3,3 dichlorobenzidine). 

Only arsenic, lead, and mercury 

exceeded PCLs for off-shore sediments. 

The most frequently detected COCs 

for soils were metals including 

antimony, arsenic, barium, lead, 

mercury, and silver. These metals 

consistently exceeded the Gw Soil PCL 

(i.e., the soil-to-ground water leaching of 

COCs to ground water). Based on the 

distribution of these constituents, their 

occurrence is most likely a result of the 

former incineration and landfill 

operations. In general, the metals were 

widely distributed across the Site and 

not limited to the Site’s source areas. 

Isolated detections of the SVOCs 

(benzo[a]pyrene, benzo[a]anthracene, 

benzo[a]fluoranthene, and 

pentachlorophenol) were reported at 

relatively low concentrations for on-site 

soils. Because the SVOC exceedances 

were only detected at isolated locations, 

impact from operations on the Site 

appeared minimal. 

Nine constituents including eight 

metals (antimony, arsenic, barium, 

beryllium, lead, manganese, silver, and 

thallium) and one SVOC 

(pentachlorophenol) exceeded Gw Soil Ing

PCLs (Exposure pathway: Soil-to-ground 

water leaching COCs to ground water). 

Based on a preliminary comparison of 

ground water analytical results to Class 

3 ground water criteria, no constituents 

exceeded Class 3 ground water PCLs 

and it is unrealistic to assume any 

beneficial use of the shallow ground 

water. The State of Texas defines 

ground water resources based on water 

quality and sustainable well yield. A 

Class 3 ground water bearing unit is not 

capable of producing greater than a 150 

gallon/day ground water flow with a 

Total Dissolved Solids content less than 

10,000 milligrams/liter. 

The SRI included an investigation of 

the former wastewater impoundments to 

determine if waste materials were still 

present that could be a source of 

contamination to the Sabine Lake 

sediments. Soil samples were analyzed 

for metals and SVOCs. The SRI also 

included the installation of ground 

water monitoring wells downgradient of 

the former wastewater impoundments 

and the collection of sediments samples 

from Sabine Lake. These samples were 

also analyzed for metals and SVOCs. 

The screening level ecological risk 

assessment indicates that selenium 

concentrations in the Site sediments 

from the SRI may pose a risk to benthic 

invertebrates; however, the selenium 

concentrations are within one order of 

magnitude of the primary effects 

screening level. Furthermore, results 

from the soils and ground water data do 

not indicate that a selenium pathway 

exists from the Site to the sediments as 

the potential source of selenium 

contamination. Therefore, the EPA has 

determined that no Remedial Action is 

warranted for the Site soils to prevent 

contamination of the Site sediments. 

Based on selenium concentrations in the 

sediments, no Remedial Action is 

warranted for the Site sediments to 

protect ecological receptors. 

Selected Remedy 

Based on the results of the Baseline 

Human Health Risk Assessment 

(BHHRA) and Screening Level 

Ecological Risk Assessment (SLERA), 

the EPA’s Selected Remedy for the 

SMPA Superfund Site, identified in the 

April 2007 Record of Decision, was ‘‘No 

Further Action is Necessary.’’ 

Institutional controls will be required to 

ensure that the current and future use of 

the Site remains for industrial or 

commercial purposes. The ‘‘No Further 

is Action Necessary’’ remedy is based 

on an industrial/commercial land use 

scenario. 

Remedial Action Objectives 

The Remedial Action Objectives 

(RAOs) for the Site are based on the 

future redevelopment of the Site for 

industrial/commercial land use and 

protecting future industrial/construction 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
76052 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 6, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

workers and ecological receptors. The 

RAOs for the Site were: 

• Prevent exposure to contaminated 

soil/sediment via ingestion, inhalation, 

or dermal contact that would result in 

an excess carcinogenic risk of 1.0 × 10¥5

or a Hazard Index of 1.0. 

• Prevent exposure of contaminated 

soil/sediment to aquatic or terrestrial 

organisms via direct contact or indirect 

ingestion of bioaccumulative chemicals 

that would result in a Hazard Quotient 

of 1.0. 

• Prevent or minimize migration of 

soil contaminants to ground water. 

• Prevent or minimize further 

migration of soil and sediment 

contaminants to surface water that 

could result in exceedance of ambient 

water quality criteria. 

Response Actions 

Based on the results of the BHHRA 

and SLERA, the EPA’s Selected Remedy 

for the SMPA Superfund Site was ‘‘No 

Further Action is Necessary.’’ The EPA 

has obtained a Restrictive Covenant 

from the landowner indicating that the 

future use of the property is restricted 

to commercial/industrial purposes. The 

Restrictive Covenant was filed in the 

appropriate property records at the 

County Clerk’s office in Jefferson 

County on March 25, 2011. 

Cleanup Goals 

The cleanup goals, accomplished by 

the 2001 Time Critical Removal Action, 

included the removal, treatment, and 

off-site disposal of the liquids and 

sludges in the above ground storage 

tanks and drums. There were no 

cleanup goals selected in the Record of 

Decision. 

Operation and Maintenance 

Operation and maintenance activities 

at the Site will include surface water 

and sediment sampling. In addition, the 

restrictive covenant will be monitored 

to ensure it is effective in maintaining 

industrial/commercial land use at the 

Site. 

Five-Year Reviews 

Since remaining conditions at the Site 

will not allow for unlimited use and 

unrestricted exposure, a Five-Year 

Review must be conducted for the Site 

to ensure that future Site development 

is consistent with the industrial cleanup 

standards for which the remedy is based 

and that conditions remain protective of 

human health and the environment. As 

part of the Five-Year Review, sediment 

sampling and monitoring will be 

considered in Sabine Lake adjacent to 

the Site to ensure that the remedy 

remains protective of ecological 

receptors. The EPA will conduct a 

statutory review before April 18, 2012. 

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 

the EPA relied on for recommendation 

for the deletion from the NPL are 

available to the public in the 

information repositories, and a notice of 

availability of the Notice of Intent for 

Deletion has been published in The Port 

Arthur News to satisfy public 

participation procedures required by 40 

CFR 300.425(e)(4). 

Determination That the Criteria for 

Deletion Have Been Met 

In accordance with 40 CFR 

300.425(e), sites may be deleted from 

the NPL where no further response is 

appropriate. The EPA, in consultation 

with the State of Texas (through the 

Texas Commission on Environmental 

Quality), has determined that based on 

the results of the BHHRA and SLERA 

and the completion of the EPA’s Time 

Critical Removal Action that addressed 

contamination at the Site that posed a 

risk to human health and the 

environment, the EPA’s Selected 

Remedy for the SMPA Superfund Site 

was ‘‘No Further Action is Necessary.’’ 

The EPA has implemented all 

appropriate response actions required; 

no further response action by 

responsible parties is appropriate; and 

the RI, SRI, BHHRA, and SLERA, have 

shown that the release poses no 

significant threat to public health or the 

environment under a commercial/ 

industrial land use scenario and, 

therefore, the taking of additional 

remedial measures is not appropriate. 

EPA received a letter, dated May 25, 

2011, from the State of Texas, through 

the Texas Commission on 

Environmental Quality, concurring on 

the deletion of the SMPA Superfund 

Site from the NPL. 

V. Deletion Action 

The EPA, with concurrence of the 

State of Texas, through the Texas 

Commission on Environmental Quality, 

has determined that all appropriate 

response actions under CERCLA, other 

than operation, maintenance, 

monitoring, and Five-Year Reviews, 

have been completed. Therefore, EPA is 

deleting the SMPA Superfund Site from 

the NPL. 

Because EPA considers this action to 

be noncontroversial and routine, EPA is 

taking it without prior publication. This 

action will be effective February 6, 2012 

unless EPA receives adverse comments 

by January 5, 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, Water supply. 

Dated: November 14, 2011. 

Al Armendariz, 

Regional Administrator, Region 6. 

For the reasons set out in this 

document, 40 CFR part 300 is amended 

as follows: 

PART 300—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 300 

continues to read as follows: 

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

9601–9657; E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 CFR, 

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

3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 193. 

Appendix B—[Amended] 

■ 2. Table 1 of Appendix B to Part 300 

is amended by removing the entry 

‘‘State Marine of Port Arthur, Jefferson 

County’’ under TX. 

[FR Doc. 2011–31260 Filed 12–5–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Federal Emergency Management 

Agency 

44 CFR Part 65 

[Docket ID FEMA–2011–0002; Internal 

Agency Docket No. FEMA–B–1231] 

Changes in Flood Elevation 

Determinations 

AGENCY: Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, DHS. 

ACTION: Interim rule. 

SUMMARY: This interim rule lists 

communities where modification of the 

Base (1% annual-chance) Flood 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES