76314 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 7, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

soybean, seed and grain, aspirated 

fractions at 0.05 ppm and 0.30 ppm, 

respectively. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

This final rule establishes tolerances 

under section 408(d) of FFDCA in 

response to a petition submitted to the 

Agency. The Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) has exempted these types 

of actions from review under Executive 

Order 12866, entitled Regulatory 

Planning and Review (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993). Because this final rule 

has been exempted from review under 

Executive Order 12866, this final rule is 

not subject to Executive Order 13211, 

entitled Actions Concerning Regulations 

That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May 

22, 2001) or Executive Order 13045, 

entitled Protection of Children From 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). 

This final rule does not contain any 

information collections subject to OMB 

approval under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et 

seq., nor does it require any special 

considerations under Executive Order 

12898, entitled Federal Actions to 

Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 

1994). 

Since tolerances and exemptions that 

are established on the basis of a petition 

under section 408(d) of FFDCA, such as 

the tolerance in this final rule, do not 

require the issuance of a proposed rule, 

the requirements of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et 

seq.) do not apply. 

This final rule directly regulates 

growers, food processors, food handlers, 

and food retailers, not States or tribes, 

nor does this action alter the 

relationships or distribution of power 

and responsibilities established by 

Congress in the preemption provisions 

of section 408(n)(4) of FFDCA. As such, 

the Agency has determined that this 

action will not have a substantial direct 

effect on States or tribal governments, 

on the relationship between the national 

government and the States or tribal 

governments, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities among the 

various levels of government or between 

the Federal Government and Indian 

tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined 

that Executive Order 13132, entitled 

Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999) and Executive Order 13175, 

entitled Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR 

67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply 

to this final rule. In addition, this final 

rule does not impose any enforceable 

duty or contain any unfunded mandate 

as described under Title II of the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

(UMRA) (Pub. L. 104–4). 

This action does not involve any 

technical standards that would require 

Agency consideration of voluntary 

consensus standards pursuant to section 

12(d) of the National Technology 

Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 

(NTTAA), Public Law 104–113, section 

12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). 

VII. Congressional Review Act 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report to each House of 

the Congress and to the Comptroller 

General of the United States. EPA will 

submit a report containing this rule and 

other required information to the U.S. 

Senate, the U.S. House of 

Representatives, and the Comptroller 

General of the United States prior to 

publication of this final rule in the 

Federal Register. This final rule is not 

a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 

804(2). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Agricultural commodities, Pesticides 

and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: November 21, 2011. 

Lois Rossi, 

Director, Registration Division, Office of 

Pesticide Programs. 

Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is 

amended as follows: 

PART 180—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 180 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371. 

■ 2. Section 180.537 is amended in 

paragraph (a) by revising the 

introductory text and alphabetically 

adding the following commodities to the 

table to read as follows: 

§ 180.537 Isoxaflutole; tolerances for 

residues. 

(a) General. Tolerances are 

established for residues of the herbicide, 

isoxaflutole, including its metabolites 

and degradates, in or on the 

commodities in the table below. 

Compliance with the tolerance levels 

specified below is to be determined by 

measuring only the sum of isoxaflutole 

((5-cyclopropyl-4-isoxazolyl) [2- 

(methylsulfonyl)-4- 

(trifluoromethyl)phenyl] methanone) 

and its metabolite 1-(2-methylsulfonyl4-trifluoromethylphenyl)-2-cyano-3- 

cyclopropyl propan-1,3-dione (RPA 

202248), calculated as the 

stoichiometric equivalent of 

isoxaflutole, in or on the commodity: 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

*****

Grain, aspirated fractions ........... 0.30 

Soybean, seed ............................ 0.05 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2011–31397 Filed 12–6–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 300 

[EPA–HQ–SFUND–2000–0003; FRL–9500–9] 

National Oil and Hazardous 

Substances Pollution Contingency 

Plan; National Priorities List: Deletion 

of the Palmer Barge Line 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 

Palmer Barge Line (PBL) 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. 

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 

6, 2012. If adverse comments are 

received, EPA will publish a timely 

withdrawal of the direct final deletion 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 7, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 76315 

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: 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–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 

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 Palmer 

Barge Line (PBL) Superfund Site (Site), 

from the National Priorities List (NPL). 

The NPL constitutes Appendix B of 40 

CFR Part 300 which is the National Oil 

and Hazardous Substances Pollution 

Contingency Plan (NCP), which EPA 

promulgated pursuant to Section 105 of 

the Comprehensive Environmental 

Response, Compensation and Liability 

Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended. 

EPA maintains the NPL as the list of 

sites that appear to present a significant 

risk to public health, welfare, or the 

environment. Sites on the NPL may be 

the subject of remedial actions financed 

by the Hazardous Substance Superfund 

(Fund). As described in 300.425(e)(3) of 

the NCP, a site 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 February 6, 2012 

unless EPA receives adverse comments 

by January 6, 2012. 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 PBL 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 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
76316 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 7, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

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 all 

areas and media within the PBL 

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 PBL 

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 PBL Superfund Site (Site, 

CERCLIS ID—TXD068104561), a former 

barge-cleaning operation, encompasses 

approximately 17 acres and is 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 vacant property to the 

north, by Old Yacht Club Road to the 

west, by the State Marine of Port Arthur 

Superfund Site 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. 

The Site, along with the adjacent 

properties to the north and south, were 

used as a Municipal Landfill for the City 

of Port Arthur from 1956 to 1987. 

Although disposal at the landfill has 

long since ceased and the landfill 

contents have been covered with 

dredged sediments, the contents are still 

present on the Site in the subsurface 

soils. 

In April 1982, John Palmer, President 

of Palmer Barge Line Inc. purchased 

approximately 17 acres from the City of 

Port Arthur, for the purpose of servicing 

and maintaining barges and marine 

vessels. The company ceased operations 

on the property in July 1997. 

During operation, the typical 

activities performed at the Site included 

cleaning, degassing, maintenance, and 

inspection of barges and other marine 

equipment. Cleaning operations 

included the removal of sludge and 

other residual material by pressure 

steaming the vessel holds, engines and 

boilers. Engines were degreased and 

accumulations of sludges were removed. 

Degassing activities involved the 

removal of explosive vapors from vessel 

holds using nitrogen or boiler exhaust. 

Maintenance and inspection activities 

included the replacement and/or repair 

of valves, engine repairs, and line leak 

repairs followed by pressure tests. A 

flare was located on-site to burn excess 

gases and liquids produced during 

facility operations. 

The surface water migration pathway 

was scored as part of the Hazard 

Ranking System Documentation Record. 

The 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 inspection activities. 

The Site was proposed to be included 

on the NPL on May 11, 2000, (65 FR 

30489) and made final on July 27, 2000, 

(65 FR 46096). 

EPA conducted a Time Critical 

Removal Action in August 2000 that 

addressed the source materials stored 

on-site. Removal activities included 

waste removal, water treatment, oil/ 

water separation, and sludge 

stabilization. Approximately 250,000 

gallons of water were treated on-site; 

500 cubic yards of sludge were 

stabilized; and 100,000 gallons of oil/ 

styrene were separated and removed 

from the Site. 

The investigations of the Site 

included the wastewater aboveground 

storage tank (AST), boiler house ASTs, 

open top slop tanks area, horizontal 

ASTs, twelve ASTs area, flare area, area 

east of flare in the center of the Site, 

ground water, and sediments of Sabine 

Lake. 

Remedial Investigation and Feasibility 

Study 

On September 30, 2002, the EPA 

issued an Administrative Order on 

Consent (AOC) to the potentially 

responsible parties (PRPs) to conduct a 

Remedial Investigation and Feasibility 

Study (RI/FS). The objectives of the RI/ 

FS were to characterize the nature and 

extent of constituents of concern in soil, 

ground water, and surface water and 

sediments of Sabine Lake. 

Constituents detected in soil samples 

included metals, semivolatile organic 

compounds (SVOCs), volatile organic 

compounds (VOCs), polychlorinated 

biphenyls (PCBs), and pesticides. 

Several samples containing above 

background concentrations of metals 

and SVOCs were from samples collected 

in soil that contained municipal waste, 

indicating that some constituents 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 7, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 76317 

present may not be due to activities 

from the barge cleaning operation. 

There is no current or anticipated 

future use of the shallow groundwater at 

the Site. The shallow groundwater at the 

Site is not considered a potential 

drinking water source. The shallow 

groundwater resulted from the dredging 

activities that formed the isle where the 

former PBL Superfund Site is located. 

Ground water samples collected from 

permanent ground water monitoring 

wells installed downgradient of the Site 

did not contain significant 

concentrations of these Site-related 

constituents above risk-based levels. 

Constituents detected in the 

sediments of Sabine Lake included 

polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and 

metals. Many of the constituents found 

in the soil at the Site were not detected 

in sediment samples. Surface water 

samples contained only metals at low 

concentrations. 

The human health risk assessment 

concluded that contaminants were 

present in Site soils and sediments that 

presented an unacceptable risk to onsite workers and off-site recreational 

anglers. The screening level ecological 

risk assessment concluded that site 

contaminants did not present an 

unacceptable risk to ecological 

receptors. 

A total of four alternatives were 

developed for the Site during the 

Feasibility Study. The EPA chose 

excavation and off-site disposal as the 

Selected Remedy for the contaminated 

soils at the Site. 

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 PBL 

Superfund Site, identified in the 

September 2005 Record of Decision, was 

‘‘Excavation and Off-Site Disposal.’’ The 

Selected Remedy consisted of the 

following components: 

• Excavation of approximately 1,204 

cubic yards of the upper two feet of soil 

that exceed human health and 

ecological risk-based levels at each of 

the response areas. 

• Confirmation sampling for 

constituents of potential concern at each 

of the response areas. 

• Backfilling of excavated areas with 

clean soil. 

• Off-site disposal of the excavated 

soils at a permitted disposal facility. 

• Implementation of institutional 

controls to restrict future land use only 

for industrial purposes. The ICs shall be 

a restrictive covenant by the property 

owner recorded in the real property 

records of Jefferson County, Texas. 

• Abandonment of five existing 

ground water monitoring wells. 

• Wastewater AST sludge removal 

and decontamination and off-site 

disposal. 

Remedial Action Objectives 

The Remedial Action Objectives 

(RAOs) for the Site are based on the 

following: 

• The reasonable anticipated land use 

scenario is based on the future 

redevelopment of the Site for industrial 

or commercial use, consistent with 

current Site use and surrounding land 

use. 

• Potential ecological risks were 

considered for Site soils to prevent 

exposure to ecological receptors and 

prevent surface runoff of contaminants 

to Sabine Lake sediments. 

The RAOs for the Site were: 

• Prevent direct contact, ingestion, 

and inhalation of surface soils that 

exceed human health risk-based levels, 

based on an industrial worker scenario, 

for the chemicals of concern (COCs). 

• Prevent off-site migration of COCs 

to Sabine Lake sediments that exceed 

human health and ecological risk-based 

levels for the COCs. 

• Prevent exposure to Site soils that 

may pose a risk to ecological receptors. 

Response Actions 

On May 7, 2007, the EPA issued a 

Unilateral Administrative Order (UAO) 

for Remedial Design and Remedial 

Action to the PRPs. The UAO became 

effective on June 6, 2007. The Final 

Remedial Design/Remedial Action Work 

Plan was approved by the EPA on 

August 2, 2007. A total of 181 tons of 

contaminated soils were excavated and 

disposed at a permitted disposal facility. 

Each response area was then backfilled 

with clean soil. The Record of Decision 

(ROD) required the collection of 

confirmation samples, including 

analyses for the constituents of potential 

concern, at each of the response areas. 

Analytical results were used to 

determine horizontal limits of impacted 

media in each of the response areas. If 

constituents were found to contain 

concentrations in excess of the 

remediation goals (RG), step-out 

samples were analyzed for those 

constituents. Additional step-out 

samples were collected and analyzed 

when the step-out samples exceeded the 

RG. This process continued until 

sample results for perimeter samples 

were below the RG, indicating 

horizontal delineation had been 

achieved according to the requirements 

of the ROD. Additionally, 

approximately 78,340 pounds of oil 

were skimmed from the 10,000-barrel 

AST and recycled for fuel blending, and 

approximately 854,886 pounds of the 

remaining sludge material within the 

AST were incinerated. As required by 

the 2005 ROD, five permanent ground 

water monitoring wells were plugged 

and abandoned. 

An institutional control (IC) in the 

form of Restrictive Covenant by the 

property owner, to the benefit of the 

State of Texas and the United States 

Government, was filed in the 

appropriate property records at the 

County Clerk’s office in Jefferson 

County on March 25, 2011. This IC 

ensures that future site use remains 

commercial/industrial. 

Cleanup Goals 

The EPA chose a 1.0 × 10 ¥5 target 

cleanup goal based on exposure to COCs 

that exceeded those levels at surface 

soils. The COCs and the selected soil 

cleanup goals achieved for the Human 

Health Risk Areas were: 

• Aldrin—1.1 milligrams/kilogram 

(mg/kg). 

• Benzo(a)pyrene—2.3 mg/kg. 

• Benzo(a)anthracene—23.0 mg/kg. 

• Dieldrin—1.2 mg/kg. 

• Heptachlor Epoxide—2.1 mg/kg. 

• Naphthalene—210.0 mg/kg. 

• Pentachlorophenol—100.0 mg/kg. 

• Lead—800.0 mg/kg. 

The COCs and the selected soil 

cleanup goals achieved for ecological 

receptors were: 

• 4,4′-DDD—0.0864 mg/kg. 

• 4,4′-DDE—0.0864 mg/kg. 

• 4,4′-DDT—0.0865 mg/kg. 

• Butyl benzyl phthalate—5.37 mg/ 

kg. 

• Lead, total—497.0 mg/kg. 

• Methoxychlor—0.09 mg/kg. 

Operation and Maintenance 

Operation and maintenance activities 

include monitoring effectiveness of 

institutional controls to ensure land use 

remains industrial/commercial. 

Five-Year Reviews 

Since the Selected Remedy would 

result in hazardous substances 

remaining on-site above levels that 

allow for unlimited use and unrestricted 

exposure, a Five-Year Review will be 

conducted no less often than every five 

years from initiation of the Remedial 

Action to ensure that the remedy is, or 

will continue to be, protective of human 

health and the environment. The first 

five-year Review will be conducted 

before September 4, 2012. 

Community Involvement 

Public participation activities have 

been satisfied as required in CERCLA 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
76318 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 7, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

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 has determined 

that the criteria for deletion have been 

met. The EPA has implemented all 

appropriate response actions required 

and no further response action by 

responsible parties is appropriate. EPA 

received a letter, dated May 26, 2011, 

from the State of Texas, through the 

Texas Commission on Environmental 

Quality, concurring on the deletion of 

PBL 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 PBL 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 6, 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 

‘‘Palmer Barge Line, Port Arthur’’ under 

TX. 

[FR Doc. 2011–31268 Filed 12–6–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System 

48 CFR Parts 202, 204, 205, 206, 207, 

209, 211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217, 

219, 225, 227, 234, 237, 243, 252, and 

Appendix A to Chapter 2 

Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement; Technical 

Amendments 

AGENCY: Defense Acquisition 

Regulations System, Department of 

Defense (DoD). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: DoD is making technical 

amendments to the Defense Federal 

Acquisition Regulation Supplement 

(DFARS) to provide needed editorial 

changes and guidance to contracting 

officers. 

DATES: Effective Date: December 7, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Mary Overstreet, Defense Acquisition 

Regulations System, 

OUSD(AT&L)DPAP(DARS), Room 

3B855, 3060 Defense Pentagon, 

Washington, DC 20301–3060. 

Telephone (703) 602–0311; facsimile 

(703) 602–0350. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final 

rule amends the DFARS as follows: 

1. Updates the definition of 

‘‘Contracting activity’’ at 202.101. 

2. Directs contracting officers to 

additional procedures and guidance by 

adding references to the DFARS PGI at 

204.402, 204.403, 205.207(a)(i) and 

(d)(iii), 215.407–2, 219.202–1, 219.301– 

2, 219.301–3, 237.102–75, and 237.102– 

76. 

3. Corrects references in 206.203(b), 

207.471(b), 209.105–1(2), 209.403, 

209.406–1(a)(i)(A), 211.002, 

212.503(a)(x), 212.504(a)(xvi), 

213.301(2), 214.404–1, 216.603–4(b)(3), 

225.7501(a)(2)(i), 227.304–1, 234.003, 

234.201(4), and 243.204–71(b). 

4. Adds a paragraph at 217.171(d) 

reflecting a statutory threshold for 

multiyear contracts for services that was 

inadvertently omitted from a final rule 

published at 76 FR 58152 on September 

20, 2011. This coverage was previously 

included at DFARS 217.171(a)(6). 

5. Revises the subpart 217.5 heading 

to align with the Federal Acquisition 

Regulation (FAR), redesignates 

217.500(b) as 217.500(a), and 

redesignates 217.504 as 217.503 and 

adds a FAR reference. 

6. Makes minor editorial corrections 

at 225.403(c) and 227.7203–15(c)(1) 

through (4). 

7. Makes minor corrections to clause 

dates, format, addresses, and references 

in the clauses at 252.203–7003, 

252.211–7003, 252.212–7001, 252.227– 

7015, 252.229–7006, 252.229–7008, and 

252.235–7002. 

8. Adds an editorial footnote to the 

charter for the Armed Services Board of 

Contract Appeals in Appendix A to 

cross reference to a revised statutory 

citation. 

List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 202, 

204, 205, 206, 207, 209, 211, 212, 213, 

214, 215, 216, 217, 219, 225, 227, 234, 

237, 243, 252, and Appendix A to 

Chapter 2 

Government procurement. 

Mary Overstreet, 

Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System. 

Therefore, 48 CFR parts 202, 204, 205, 

206, 207, 209, 211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 

216, 217, 219, 225, 227, 234, 237, 243, 

252, and Appendix A to Chapter 2 are 

amended as follows: 

■ 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR 

parts 202, 204, 205, 206, 207, 209, 211, 

212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217, 219, 225, 

227, 234, 237, 243, 252 and Appendix 

A to Chapter 2 continues to read as 

follows: 

Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR 

chapter 1. 

PART 202—DEFINITIONS OF WORDS 

AND TERMS 

202.101 [Amended] 

■ 2. Section 202.101 is amended by— 

■ a. Amending the Department of 

Defense list by removing the 

‘‘Counterintelligence Field Activity’’; 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES