Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 150 / Monday, August 5, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 47205 

* * * * * 

■ 51. Section 81.350 is amended as 

follows: 

■ a. By revising the table heading for 

‘‘Wisconsin—SO2’’ to read 

‘‘Wisconsin—1971 Sulfur Dioxide 

NAAQS (Primary and Secondary)’’; and 

■ b. By adding a new table entitled 

‘‘Wisconsin—2010 Sulfur Dioxide 

NAAQS (Primary)’’ following the newly 

designated table ‘‘Wisconsin—1971 

Sulfur Dioxide NAAQS (Primary and 

Secondary)’’ to read as follows: 

§ 81.350 Wisconsin. 

* * * * * 

WISCONSIN—2010 SULFUR DIOXIDE NAAQS (PRIMARY) 

Designated area 

Designation 

Date Type 

Rhinelander, WI1

Oneida County (part) ................................................................................................................................ 10–4–13 Nonattainment. 

City of Rhinelander, Crescent Town, Newbold Town, Pine Lake Town, and Pelican Town 

1Excludes Indian country located in each area, if any, unless otherwise specified. 

* * * * * 

§ 81.351 [Amended] 

■ 52. Section 81.351 is amended by 

revising the table heading for 

‘‘Wyoming—SO2’’ to read ‘‘Wyoming— 

1971 Sulfur Dioxide NAAQS (Primary 

and Secondary)’’. 

§ 81.352 [Amended] 

■ 53. Section 81.352 is amended by 

revising the table heading for 

‘‘American Samoa—SO2’’ to read 

‘‘American Samoa—1971 Sulfur Dioxide 

NAAQS (Primary and Secondary)’’. 

§ 81.353 [Amended] 

■ 54. Section 81.353 is amended by 

revising the table heading for ‘‘Guam— 

SO2’’ to read ‘‘Guam—1971 Sulfur 

Dioxide NAAQS (Primary and 

Secondary)’’. 

§ 81.354 [Amended] 

■ 55. Section 81.354 is amended by 

revising the table heading for ‘‘Northern 

Mariana Islands—SO2’’ to read 

‘‘Northern Mariana Islands—1971 

Sulfur Dioxide NAAQS (Primary and 

Secondary)’’. 

§ 81.355 [Amended] 

■ 56. Section 81.355 is amended by 

revising the table heading for ‘‘Puerto 

Rico—SO2’’ to read ‘‘Puerto Rico—1971 

Sulfur Dioxide NAAQS (Primary and 

Secondary)’’. 

§ 81.356 [Amended] 

■ 57. Section 81.356 is amended by 

revising the table heading for ‘‘Virgin 

Islands—SO2’’ to read ‘‘Virgin Islands— 

1971 Sulfur Dioxide NAAQS (Primary 

and Secondary)’’. 

[FR Doc. 2013–18835 Filed 8–2–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 300 

[EPA–HQ–SFUND–2000–0003; FRL 9842–7] 

National Oil and Hazardous 

Substances Pollution Contingency 

Plan; National Priorities List: Direct 

Deletion of the Imperial Refining 

Company 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 

Imperial Refining Co. Superfund Site 

located in Ardmore, Carter County, 

Oklahoma, 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 

Oklahoma, through the Oklahoma 

Department of Environmental Quality 

(ODEQ), because EPA 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. 

DATES: This direct final deletion is 

effective September 19, 2013 unless 

EPA receives adverse comments by 

September 4, 2013. 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–2000–0003, by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

internet on-line instructions for 

submitting comments. 

• Email: Brian W. Mueller, 

mueller.brian@epa.gov. 

• Fax: 214–665–6660. 

• Mail: Brian W. Mueller; U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

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

1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200; Dallas, 

Texas 75202–7167. 

• Hand delivery: U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 6; 1445 Ross 

Avenue, Suite 700; Dallas, Texas 75202– 

2733; Contact: Brian W. Mueller (214) 

665–7167. 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–2000– 

0003. 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 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

47206 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 150 / Monday, August 5, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

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: 

• U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 6; 1445 Ross Avenue, 

Suite 700; Dallas, Texas 75202–2733; 

hours of operation: Monday through 

Friday, 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. and 

1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.. Contact: Brian 

W. Mueller (214) 665–7167. 

• Ardmore Public Library; 320 E. Street 

NW.; Ardmore, Oklahoma 73401; 

Hours of Operation: Monday through 

Thursday 10:00 a.m. until 8:30 p.m.; 

Friday through Saturday, 10:00 a.m. 

until 4:00 p.m.; Sunday 1:00 p.m. 

until 5:00 p.m. 

• Oklahoma Department of 

Environmental Quality; 707 N. 

Robinson, 2nd floor: Oklahoma City, 

Oklahoma 73102; Hours of operation: 

Monday through Friday 8:00 a.m. 

until 4:30 p.m. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Brian W. Mueller, Remedial Project 

Manager; U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 6; Superfund Division 

(6SF–RL); 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 

1200; Dallas, Texas 75202–2733, (214) 

665–7167; email: 

mueller.brian@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 of the Imperial 

Refining Co. 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 

remains 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 September 19, 

2013 unless EPA receives adverse 

comments by September 4, 2013. Along 

with this direct final Notice of Deletion, 

EPA is co-publishing 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 Imperial Refining Co. 

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. 

III. Deletion Procedures 

The following procedures apply to the 

deletion of the Site: 

(1) EPA has consulted with the state 

of Oklahoma prior to developing this 

direct final Notice of Deletion and the 

Notice of Intent for Deletion copublished 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 ODEQ, 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 Daily Ardmoreite. 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 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 150 / Monday, August 5, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 47207 

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 Site 

from the NPL. 

Site Background and History 

The Imperial Refining Co. Superfund 

Site (CERCLIS ID OK0002024099) is the 

location of a former petroleum refinery 

that operated from 1917 to 1934 in 

Ardmore, Carter County, Oklahoma. The 

numerous tanks and most of the 

buildings that were present on the Site 

during the refinery’s operation were 

dismantled between 1934 and 1948, 

leaving the property as mixed wooded 

areas and open fields. No records have 

been found that describe the types of 

activities that took place on the Site 

after 1934. Currently, the land is 

privately owned by the Hogan Family, 

L.L.C., and no commercial activities are 

taking place at the Site. The legal 

description for the property is SE 1⁄4, NE 1⁄4, Section 20, and SW 1⁄4, NW 1⁄4, 

Section 21, T4S, R2E, Indian Meridian, 

which is located within the northeastern 

portion of the City of Ardmore, Carter 

County, Oklahoma (Figure 1). The Site 

is divided into three parcels: the West 

(36.5 acres), East (14.5 acres) and East 

Railroad (21 acres). The Site covers 

approximately 72 acres and is bisected 

by U.S. Highway 142 and railroad tracks 

operated by the BNSF Railway 

Company. The adjacent property to the 

north and east of Hwy 142 is occupied 

by a facility that manufactures roofing 

shingles. Waste-water processing 

lagoons operated by Valero Refining are 

located west of the Site, and the rest of 

the immediately adjacent property is 

largely undeveloped. 

The Imperial Refining Co. began 

operations at the Site in 1917. The 

eastern portion of the property was 

purchased in April 1917, and the 

western portion was purchased three 

months later. Imperial Refining Co. 

remained active for 17 years until it 

went bankrupt in 1934. Due to the 

absence of environmental regulations 

during the operational period, no 

permits, violations, inspections, or 

facility operation documentation have 

been identified, and no records have 

been found that describe the types of 

activities that took place on the Site. 

The ODEQ conducted a Preliminary 

Assessment in September 1997 and a 

Site Inspection (SI) in July 1998. During 

the SI and Removal Assessment, 

investigators noted 12 waste piles 

containing an asphalt-like material 

scattered throughout the property. Soil, 

sediment, waste pile, and surface water 

samples were collected. There were 

numerous pits, piles, and water 

impoundments contaminated with 

metals and polynuclear aromatic 

hydrocarbons (PAHs). 

The waste material was found in 12 

distinct piles across the Site, one 

vertical tank remnant, and one 

underground storage tank (UST). The 

average thickness of the waste piles was 

approximately 1foot (ft), and the 

benzo(a)pyrene concentrations range 

from 2.5 milligrams per kilogram (mg/ 

kg) to 570 mg/kg. In addition to the 

waste material, surface soil (0–1 ft 

below ground surface) and sediment (0– 

1 ft below ground surface) had elevated 

concentrations of benzo(a)pyrene and 

arsenic. The soil concentrations ranged 

from 1 mg/kg to 90 mg/kg for arsenic 

and 0.04 mg/kg to 10.2 mg/kg for 

benzo(a)pyrene. The exposure routes of 

concern were direct contact and 

ingestion. Sediments in onsite 

intermittent drainages were 

indistinguishable from Site soils except 

by their location within drainages; 

therefore, the drainage sediments were 

considered soils for the remedial action. 

The sediment concentrations range from 

4.7 mg/kg to 33.4 mg/kg for arsenic and 

0.062 mg/kg to 1.3 mg/kg for 

benzo(a)pyrene. 

Based on the results, ODEQ referred 

the property to the EPA for further 

action. EPA conducted a Removal 

Assessment in 1998 to determine the 

absence/presence of hazardous 

materials and the types and 

concentrations and a second Removal 

Assessment in 1999 to estimate waste 

pile volumes and evaluate disposal 

options. Based on these results, the Site 

was proposed to the NPL on May 11, 

2000, (Federal Register: May 11, 2000 

[Volume 65, No. 92, Page 30489–30495]) 

and was finalized on July 27, 2000 

(Federal Register: July 27, 2000 

[Volume 65, Number 145, Page 46096– 

46104)]). A Removal Action to install a 

perimeter fence to secure the Site was 

conducted by EPA from June 29, 2004 

through July 23, 2004. 

Remedial Investigation and Feasibility 

Study 

The EPA and ODEQ negotiated a 

Cooperative Agreement under which the 

ODEQ was the lead agency for the 

Remedial Investigation/Feasibility 

Study (RI/FS) with EPA acting as the 

supporting agency. From early 2005 

through early 2007, contractors for the 

ODEQ conducted a RI/FS including 

field sampling and investigation 

activities of soil, sediment, surface 

water, ground water, and animal tissue. 

The RI/FS identified the types, 

quantities, and locations of 

contaminants found in these samples 

and developed ways to address the 

contamination. A Human Health Risk 

Assessment and an Ecological Risk 

Assessment were performed to 

determine the current and future effects 

of contaminants on human health and 

the environment. 

On-site contamination included waste 

material, soil and sediment. Arsenic and 

benzo(a)pyrene are the primary 

contaminants of concern. The primary 

sources of contaminants are waste in an 

underground storage tank and waste 

piles characterized as dry, asphalt-like 

material. The waste material is found 

throughout the Site, and the 

benzo(a)pyrene concentrations range 

from 2.5 mg/kg to 570 mg/kg. In 

addition to the waste material, surface 

soil (0–1 ft below ground surface) and 

sediment (0–1 ft below ground surface) 

have elevated concentrations of 

benzo(a)pyrene and arsenic. The soil 

concentrations range from 1 mg/kg to 90 

mg/kg for arsenic and 0.04 mg/kg to 10.2 

mg/kg for benzo(a)pyrene. Sediments in 

on-site intermittent drainages are 

indistinguishable from Site soils except 

by their location within drainages; 

therefore, the drainage sediments are 

considered soils for the remedial action 

as these remain dry most of the year. 

Selected Remedy 

A proposed plan for the Site was 

issued in September 2007, presenting 

the preferred alternative of excavation 

and offsite disposal for the waste, 

contaminated soil, and contaminated 

sediment at the Site. The Record of 

Decision (ROD) was signed on 

December 26, 2007. Remedial Action 

Objectives (RAOs) were developed for 

Site soil, sediment, and waste material. 

Remedial Action Objectives 

Surface Soil 

• Prevent exposure to current and 

future human and ecological receptors 

through ingestion, dermal contact, and 

inhalation of contaminated soil 

containing arsenic and benzo(a)pyrene 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

47208 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 150 / Monday, August 5, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

concentrations in excess of 5E–05 and 

2.5E–05 excess cancer risk, respectively. 

Pond and Creek Sediment 

• Prevent exposure to current and 

future human receptors through 

ingestion, dermal contact, and 

inhalation of contaminated sediment 

containing arsenic concentrations in 

excess of 5E–05 excess cancer risk. 

• Prevent exposure to current and 

future ecological receptors through 

direct contact, food chain uptake, and 

incidental ingestion of contaminated 

sediment containing benzo(a)pyrene 

concentrations in excess of levels that 

are protective of ecological receptors. 

Waste Material 

• Prevent exposure to human and 

ecological receptors through ingestion 

and dermal contact. 

• Prevent further migration of waste 

material contamination. In order to 

achieve these RAOs, numerical riskbased cleanup levels were established 

for each environmental medium based 

on the residential scenario. 

Response Actions 

The EPA began on-site Remedial 

Action construction on February 13, 

2008. During remedial action, a total of 

approximately 105,993 cubic yards of 

waste/soil and sediment were removed 

from the Site and shipped to an offsite 

landfill. Excavated areas were 

backfilled, graded and seeded after 

confirmation sampling indicated that 

cleanup levels have been met. As 

excavation activities progressed, waste 

was found along the borders of the 

property, throughout the ponds, and 

surrounding a high pressure gas line. 

Excavation and removal of waste along 

the borders was not feasible, safe or 

practical due to its proximity to sloped 

areas supporting the highway, the rail 

line, and business property, as well as 

its depth under significant volumes of 

uncontaminated overburden. 

ROD Amendment 

A ROD amendment proposed plan for 

the Site was issued in November 2008, 

presenting an additional containment 

component to the remedy selected in 

the ROD in areas of the Site where 

excavation would be impracticable and 

potentially dangerous to the original 

excavation and offsite disposal remedy. 

On February 20, 2009, the EPA 

Superfund Division Director for Region 

6 signed a ROD amendment. 

Based on excavation activities and 

delineation pits throughout the east and 

west ponds, surface sediment exceeding 

the ecological cleanup numbers was 

completely removed. Due to the 

presence of 18 inches of 

uncontaminated overburden, the 

complete removal of surface sediment 

exceeding the ecological cleanup 

numbers, and the unknown locations at 

depth throughout the remaining areas of 

the ponds, no further excavation 

occurred in the ponds. Excavation in 

close proximity to the high pressure gas 

line was not recommended or 

considered safe; therefore, waste 

remains around the gas line within the 

easement boundaries. 

The cleanup levels for the Site were 

reevaluated in the 2009 ROD 

Amendment. Because waste remains inplace, cleanup levels for the Site 

changed from residential to industrial 

land use. The soil cleanup level for 

benzo(a)pyrene changed to 5.27 mg/kg. 

The soil cleanup level is still in line 

with the latest toxicity toxicological 

benchmarks. The soil cleanup level for 

arsenic did not change, and no change 

was made to sediment cleanup levels. 

The Site is restricted to industrial use 

through the enforcement of institutional 

controls (ICs). 

Containment 

The 2009 ROD Amendment required 

the placement of a clay barrier over 

waste material left in place. The 

materials left in place are identified as 

non-hazardous waste and all data 

indicate that the leaching potential of 

this material is below regulatory limits 

for characteristic hazardous waste 

categories and land disposal 

restrictions. The backfill material is 

identified as clayey sand and is 

expected to have a low hydraulic 

conductivity (within the range of 1 x 

10–3 centimeters per second to 1 x 10– 

5 centimeters per second). As such, 

backfill of the excavated areas and areas 

above the waste material eliminates the 

potential for direct contact, ingestion, 

and migration as well as provides for 

slope control, drainage control, and the 

establishment of vegetation. 

All threats at the Site have been 

addressed through excavation and 

disposal of contaminated material, 

isolation and capping of non-hazardous 

materials, installation of fencing, 

posting of warning signs, and 

implementation of institutional 

controls. Remedial activities included: 

• Transportation and disposal (at a 

permitted off-site waste disposal 

facility) of approximately 31,621 yd3 of 

debris (non-hazardous debris, foundry 

sand, and slag) and the asbestoscontaining material in the on-site 

building and scattered throughout the 

Site; 

• Removal and disposal of an 

electrical transformer, and underground 

storage tank in the vicinity of MW–20 

and Lead Area 1, and the management 

and disposal of foundry bag filters 

identified as a listed K061 waste 

material; 

• Excavation and treatment 

(solidification/stabilization, if 

necessary) of approximately 13,600 yd3

of soils with lead concentrations equal 

to or greater than 500 mg/kg to a 

maximum depth of 1.5 feet bgs and 

approximately 3,000 yd3 of soils 

stockpiled at the Site from a previous 

removal action, and transportation and 

disposal (at a permitted off-site wastes 

disposal facility) of the treated and 

untreated soils; 

• Excavation and disposal (at a 

permitted off-site waste disposal 

facility) of approximately 2,100 yd3 of 

soils contaminated with benzo(a)pyrene, 

or other organics, at the MW–11 

location, and total petroleum 

hydrocarbons at the MW–20 location; 

• Confirmation sampling for several 

locations identified to have been 

impacted by either semi-volatile organic 

compounds. 

Cleanup Goals 

The soil remedial action at the Site 

consisted of the sampling and 

excavation, including the proper 

disposal of the soils contaminated with 

arsenic greater than 20 mg/kg and 

benzo(a)pyrene greater than 5.27 mg/kg. 

The soil cleanup levels were based on 

a residential scenario of 20 mg/kg for 

arsenic and an industrial scenario of 

1.55 mg/kg for benzo(a)pyrene specified 

in Record of Decision Amendment. The 

sediment remedial action at the Site 

consisted of the sampling and 

excavation, including the proper 

disposal of the sediments contaminated 

with arsenic greater than 20 mg/kg and 

benzo(a)pyrene greater than 0.782 mg/ 

kg. The sediment cleanup levels were 

based on a residential scenario of 20 

mg/kg for arsenic and an ecological 

scenario of 0.782 mg/kg for 

benzo(a)pyrene specified in the Record 

of Decision. Institutional controls were 

required for the soils since the soils 

were cleaned up to an industrial level 

which did not exceed the cleanup level 

below 1.5 feet below ground surface. A 

total of 107,299 tons, approximately 

105, 993 cubic yards, of material were 

sent to the Waste Connection Landfill in 

Alex, Oklahoma. 

The EPA reviewed the remedial 

action contract and the construction 

work for compliance with quality 

assurance and quality control (QA/QC) 

protocols. Construction activities at the 

Site were determined to be consistent 

with the ROD and adhered to the 

approved quality assurance plan which 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 150 / Monday, August 5, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 47209 

incorporated all EPA and State 

requirements. Confirmatory inspections, 

independent testing, audits, and 

evaluations of materials and 

workmanship were performed in 

accordance with the technical 

specifications and plans. The EPA 

Remedial Project Manager and State 

regulators visited the site during 

construction activities to review 

construction progress and evaluate and 

review the results of QA/QC activities. 

No deviations or non-adherence to QA/ 

QC protocols, or specifications were 

identified. 

The quality assurance project plan 

incorporated all EPA and State QA/QC 

procedures and protocols. All 

monitoring equipment was calibrated 

and operated in accordance with the 

manufacturer’s instructions. The EPA 

analytical methods were used for all 

confirmation and monitoring samples 

during RA activities. Contract laboratory 

program-like procedures and protocol 

were followed for soil, sediments, and 

water analyses during the RA using a 

private laboratory. 

The EPA contract for the remedial 

action contained provisions for 

performing sampling during all 

remedial activities in order to verify that 

remedial objectives were met, to ensure 

quality control and assurance for all 

excavation and construction activity, 

and to ensure protection and safety of 

the public, the environment, and the 

onsite worker. Sampling was conducted 

in accordance with the Site Field 

Sampling Plan and all analytical results 

are below the established cleanup levels 

for an industrial reuse scenario. In 

addition, all backfill confirmation 

sample results met the established 

cleanup levels for an industrial reuse 

scenario. All analytical data was 

independently validated, and the EPA 

determined that analytical results were 

accurate to the degree needed to assure 

satisfactory execution of the RA. 

Operation and Maintenance 

An Operation and Maintenance 

(O&M) plan for the Site is in effect and 

is required because waste has been left 

in place and the Site has been restricted 

to industrial use. ODEQ is responsible 

for conducting O&M activities on 

annual basis or more frequently if 

necessary. O&M activities include Site 

inspections for erosion, property uses, 

and enforcement of the Institutional 

Controls (ICs). This activity may also 

include maintenance of the slopes 

through grading, seeding, or importing 

of backfill that may be needed. 

Maintenance of these slopes will 

provide continued slope support, 

continued drainage control, and 

continued vegetation growth. Areas of 

primary interest will include the slopes 

along Hwy 142, Atlas Roofing Inc., 

Oneok Gas Pipeline, BNSF Railway, and 

Valero Refining. Site operational and 

functional activities were conducted by 

EPA until ODEQ took over O&M of the 

Site in December 2012. 

Institutional Controls 

All administrative tools have been 

implemented at the Imperial Refining 

Superfund Site. Seven deed notices/ 

covenants identifying restrictions were 

filed with the Carter County Clerk from 

June 2009 to August 2011. Appendix N 

of the Final Remedial Action Report 

contains copies of each deed notice/ 

covenant. 

Some of the deed restrictions include 

the following requirements and 

information: 

• No residential land use, 

• No digging below 5 feet where 

waste remains in place, 

• No activities that will disturb or 

cause erosion of the sediments within 

the ponds located on the site, 

• No excavations causing erosion, 

• No excavation below base material 

of the road bed (State Highway 142) 

Roadway and right-of-way, and 

• No ground water taken or well 

drilling allowed. 

Five-Year Review 

Five-Year Reviews of the Site are 

statutorily required because hazardous 

substances, pollutants, or contaminants 

remain at the Site above levels that 

allow for unlimited use and unrestricted 

exposure. The first five-year review was 

conducted at the Site in February 2013. 

The implemented action taken at the 

Imperial Refining Superfund Site was 

found to be protective of human health 

and the environment in the long-term. 

The Imperial Refining Co. Superfund 

Site’s first Five-Year Review Report 

protectiveness determination follows: 

The selected remedy for the Site currently 

protects human health and the environment 

because the remedy is performing as 

intended and institutional controls are in 

place restricting land and groundwater use. 

The remedy will remain protective of human 

health and the environment in the long-term 

provided O&M activities continue, and the 

institutional controls remain in place. 

The next Five-Year Review will be 

performed in 2018. 

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. 

Throughout the Site’s history, the 

community has been interested and 

involved with Site activity. The EPA has 

kept the community and other 

interested parties updated on Site 

activities through informational 

meetings, fact sheets, and public 

meetings. 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 Daily Ardmorite to satisfy public 

participation procedures required by 40 

CFR 300.425(e)(4). 

Determination That the Criteria for 

Deletion Have Been Met 

The implemented remedy achieves 

the degree of cleanup specified in the 

ROD and ROD Amendment for all 

pathways of exposure. All selected 

remedial action objectives and clean-up 

goals are consistent with agency policy 

and guidance. No further Superfund 

responses are needed to protect human 

health and the environment at the Site. 

In accordance with 40 CFR 

300.425(e), sites may be deleted from 

the NPL where no further response is 

appropriate. 

V. Deletion Action 

The EPA, with concurrence of the 

State of Oklahoma, through the ODEQ, 

has determined that all appropriate 

response actions under CERCLA 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 September 19, 

2013 unless EPA receives adverse 

comments by September 4, 2013. If 

adverse comments are received within 

the 30-day public comment period, EPA 

will publish a timely withdrawal of this 

direct final notice of 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. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

47210 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 150 / Monday, August 5, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

Dated: July 25, 2013. 

Ron Curry, 

Regional Administrator, Region 6. 

For the reasons set out in this 

document, 40 CFR Part 300 is amended 

as follows: 

PART 300—NATIONAL OIL AND 

HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES 

POLLUTION CONTINGENCY PLAN 

■ 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 

‘‘Imperial Refining Company’’, 

’’Ardmore’’, ‘‘OK’’. 

[FR Doc. 2013–18875 Filed 8–2–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

45 CFR Part 5b 

RIN 0906–AA97 

National Practitioner Data Bank and 

Privacy Act; Exempt Records System; 

Technical Correction 

AGENCY: Health Resources and Services 

Administration (HRSA). 

ACTION: Correcting amendments. 

SUMMARY: These correcting amendments 

update a cross reference cited in the 

Privacy Act regulations. The National 

Practitioner Data Bank (NPDB) system of 

records (09–15–0054) is exempt from 

certain provisions of the Privacy Act, 

and the cross reference cited refers to 

the regulations that govern the NPDB. 

As a result of Section 6403 of the 

Affordable Care Act, the regulations 

governing the NPDB were revised and 

certain section numbers in the NPDB 

regulations were changed, including the 

NPDB regulation that was cross 

referenced. This change is technical in 

nature and does not significantly alter 

the current NPDB exemption. 

DATES: This final rule is effective August 

5, 2013. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Ernia Hughes, Acting Director, Division 

of Practitioner Data Banks, Bureau of 

Health Professions, Health Resources 

and Services Administration, Parklawn 

Building, 5600 Fishers Lane, Room 8– 

103, Rockville, Maryland 20857; 

Telephone (301) 443–2300. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

The NPDB was established by Title IV 

of Public Law 99–660, the Health Care 

Quality Improvement Act of 1986, as 

amended. The NPDB is primarily an 

alert or flagging system intended to 

facilitate a comprehensive review of 

health care practitioners’ professional 

credentials. Section 1128E of the Social 

Security Act, added by the Health 

Insurance Portability and 

Accountability Act (HIPAA) of 1996, 

(Pub. L. 104–191), created the Health 

Care Integrity and Protection Data Bank 

(HIPDB). Because a major component of 

the HIPAA’s purpose was to establish a 

health care fraud and abuse control 

program, the legislation required the 

creation of a national data bank to 

receive and disclose certain adverse 

actions against health care practitioners, 

providers, and suppliers, thus 

establishing the HIPDB. Together the 

HIPDB and NPDB served to facilitate the 

review of health care practitioners’ and 

entities’ backgrounds, however, some of 

the information collected under the 

HIPDB is also available under the 

NPDB. 

In recognition of the overlapping 

purposes of the laws governing the two 

data banks, and to eliminate the 

duplicative information in both data 

banks, Section 6403 of the Affordable 

Care Act required the Secretary for the 

Department of Health and Human 

Services (HHS) to merge the data banks 

so that information previously collected 

and disclosed under the Section 1128E 

authority be transferred and made 

available under the NPDB. In addition, 

Section 6403 ceases HIPDB operations. 

The Affordable Care Act effectively 

streamlines data reporting and 

disclosure through the merge of the data 

banks and improves program efficiency 

around reporting and querying. On 

April 5, 2013, HRSA published a final 

rule in the Federal Register (78 FR 

20473), implementing the merge of the 

HIPDB information into the NPDB. The 

rule became effective on May 6, 2013. 

All security standards remain in place 

to protect the confidentiality of the 

NPDB. Section 1128E information now 

reported under the NPDB is still only 

available to those entities authorized to 

query it. 

Because the statute permits the 

information collected in the NPDB and 

HIPDB to be used by federal and state 

government agencies with the 

responsibility of investigating and 

prosecuting violations of civil and 

criminal laws, the NPDB and HIPDB 

were made exempt from certain portions 

of the Privacy Act under two separate 

provisions, 45 CFR 5b.11(b)(2)(ii)(F) and 

(L). As cross referenced in this section, 

the access and correction rights of 

individuals are detailed in the 

regulations governing the NPDB and 

HIPDB. 

II. Summary of the Correction 

This final rule revises the cross 

reference found in the Privacy Act 

regulations at 45 CFR 5b.11(b)(2)(ii)(L) 

from § 60.16 to § 60.21, to reflect the 

changes made to the NPDB regulation 

required by the Affordable Care Act. 

The system of records notice for the 

NPDB, which was last published in the 

Federal Register on March 30, 2012, (77 

FR 19295), is being republished 

elsewhere in this issue of the Federal 

Register to reflect this change. 

III. Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking 

HHS ordinarily publishes a notice of 

proposed rulemaking in the Federal 

Register to provide a period for public 

comment before the provisions of a rule 

take effect, in accordance with Section 

553(b) of the Administrative Procedure 

Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). However, 

this notice and comment procedure can 

be waived if the Secretary finds, for 

good cause, that the notice and 

comment process is impracticable, 

unnecessary, or contrary to the public 

interest, and incorporates a statement of 

the finding and the reasons therefore in 

the notice. 

Section 553(d) of the APA ordinarily 

requires a 30-day delay in effective date 

of final rules after the date of their 

publication in the Federal Register. 

This 30-day delay in effective date can 

be waived, however, if an agency finds 

there is good cause to do so, and the 

agency incorporates a statement of the 

findings and its reasons in the rule 

issued. 

This document is purely technical in 

nature and merely corrects a crossreference in the Privacy Act regulations 

at 45 CFR 5b.11(b)(2)(ii)(L), from § 60.16 

to § 60.21. The change is not a 

substantive change and does not alter 

any rights or obligations. Therefore, the 

Secretary believes that undertaking 

further notice and comment procedures 

to incorporate this correction, which 

will delay the effective date for this 

change, is unnecessary. In addition, the 

Secretary believes it is important for the 

public to have the correct information as 

soon as possible, and further believes it 

is contrary to the public interest to delay 

the dissemination of it. For the reasons 

stated above, the Secretary finds there is 

good cause to waive notice and 

comment procedures and the 30-day 

delay in the effective date for this 

correction notice. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES