Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 227 / Monday, November 25, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 70231 

by State law, it does not contain any 

unfunded mandate or significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments, as 

described in the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4). For 

the same reason, this action would not 

significantly or uniquely affect the 

communities of Tribal governments, as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000). In any 

case, Executive Order 13175 does not 

apply to this rule since there are no 

Federally recognized tribes in the State 

of West Virginia. 

This action will not have substantial 

direct effects on the States, on the 

relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, 

August 10, 1999), because it merely 

authorizes State requirements as part of 

the State RCRA hazardous waste 

program without altering the 

relationship or the distribution of power 

and responsibilities established by 

RCRA. This action also is not subject to 

Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, 

April 23, 1997), because it is not 

economically significant and it does not 

make decisions based on environmental 

health or safety risks that may 

disproportionately affect children. This 

rule is not subject to Executive Order 

13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations 

That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355 (May 

22, 2001)) because it is not a significant 

regulatory action under Executive Order 

12866. 

Under RCRA 3006(b), EPA grants a 

State’s application for authorization as 

long as the State meets the criteria 

required by RCRA. It would thus be 

inconsistent with applicable law for 

EPA, when it reviews a State 

authorization application, to require the 

use of any particular voluntary 

consensus standard in place of another 

standard that otherwise satisfies the 

requirements of RCRA. Thus, the 

requirements of section 12(d) of the 

National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 

3701, et seq.) do not apply. As required 

by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 

(61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in 

issuing this rule, EPA has taken the 

necessary steps to eliminate drafting 

errors and ambiguity, minimize 

potential litigation, and provide a clear 

legal standard for affected conduct. EPA 

has complied with Executive Order 

12630 (53 FR 8859, March 18, 1988) by 

examining the takings implications of 

the rule in accordance with the Attorney 

General’s Supplemental Guidelines for 

the Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of 

Unanticipated Takings issued under the 

executive order. This rule does not 

impose an information collection 

burden under the provisions of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this document 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 in the Federal Register. A 

major rule cannot take effect until 60 

days after it is published in the Federal 

Register. This action is not a ‘‘major 

rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2); this 

action will be effective January 24, 2014. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Confidential business information, 

Hazardous waste, Hazardous waste 

transportation, Indian lands, 

Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Authority: This action is issued under the 

authority of sections 2002(a), 3006 and 

7004(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as 

amended, 42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6926, 6974(b). 

Dated: November 1, 2013. 

Shawn M. Garvin, 

Regional Administrator, EPA Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2013–28151 Filed 11–22–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 300 

[EPA–HQ–SFUND–1986–0005; FRL–9903– 

02–Region 5] 

National Oil and Hazardous 

Substances Pollution Contingency 

Plan; National Priorities List: Deletion 

of the Columbus Old Municipal Landfill 

#1 Superfund Site 

AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency Region 5 is 

publishing a direct final Notice of 

Deletion of the Columbus Old 

Municipal Landfill #1 Superfund Site 

(Site) located in Bartholomew County, 

Indiana 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 

Indiana, through the Indiana 

Department of Environmental 

Management (IDEM), because EPA has 

determined that all appropriate 

response actions under CERCLA, other 

than operation, maintenance, and fiveyear reviews, have been completed. 

However, this deletion does not 

preclude future actions under 

Superfund. 

DATES: This direct final deletion is 

effective January 24, 2014 unless EPA 

receives adverse comments by 

December 26, 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–1986–0005, by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Email: Bernard Schorle, Remedial 

Project Manager, at schorle.bernard@

epa.gov or Janet Pope, Community 

Involvement Coordinator, at 

pope.janet@epa.gov. 

• Fax: Gladys Beard, NPL Deletion 

Process Manager, at (312) 697–2077. 

• Mail: Bernard Schorle, Remedial 

Project Manager, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (SR–6J), 77 West 

Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604, 

(312) 886–4746 or Janet Pope, 

Community Involvement Coordinator, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

(SI–7J), 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, IL 60604, (312) 353–0628 or 

toll free at 1 (800) 621–8431. 

• Hand delivery: Janet Pope, 

Community Involvement Coordinator, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

(SI–7J), 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, IL 60604. Such deliveries are 

only accepted during the docket’s 

normal hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. The 

normal hours are Monday through 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
70232 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 227 / Monday, November 25, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. CST, 

excluding federal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID no. EPA–HQ–SFUND–1986– 

0005. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at http://

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through http://

www.regulations.gov or email. The 

http://www.regulations.gov Web site is 

an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an email comment directly 

to EPA without going through http://

www.regulations.gov, your email 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the http://

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

will be publicly available only in the 

hard copy. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically at http://

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at: 

• U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Region 5, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604, Phone: 

(312) 353–1063, Hours: Monday 

through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. 

CST, excluding federal holidays. 

• Bartholomew County Public Library, 

536 Fifth Street, Columbus, IN 47201, 

Phone: (812) 379–1255, Hours: 

Monday through Thursday, 8:30 a.m. 

to 9:00 p.m. EST; Friday and 

Saturday, 8:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. EST; 

and Sunday, 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. 

EST. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Bernard Schorle, Remedial Project 

Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency (SR–6J), 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604, (312) 

886–4746, schorle.bernard@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 5 is publishing this direct 

final Notice of Deletion of the Columbus 

Old Municipal Landfill #1 Superfund 

Site (Site) from the National Priorities 

List (NPL) and requests public 

comments on this proposed action. The 

NPL constitutes Appendix B of 40 CFR 

part 300, which is the National Oil and 

Hazardous Substances Pollution 

Contingency Plan (NCP), which EPA 

promulgated pursuant to Section 105 of 

the Comprehensive Environmental 

Response, Compensation and Liability 

Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended. 

EPA maintains the NPL as the list of 

sites that appear to present a significant 

risk to public health, welfare, or the 

environment. Sites on the NPL may be 

the subject of remedial actions financed 

by the Hazardous Substance Superfund 

(Fund). This deletion of the Columbus 

Old Municipal Landfill #1 Superfund 

Site is proposed in accordance with 40 

CFR 300.425(e) and is consistent with 

the Notice of Policy Change: Deletion of 

Sites Listed on the National Priorities 

List, (51 FR 21054) on June 10, 1986. As 

described in 40 CFR 300.425(e)(3) of the 

NCP, sites deleted from the NPL remain 

eligible for Fund-financed remedial 

actions if future conditions warrant 

such actions. 

Because EPA considers this action to 

be noncontroversial and routine, this 

action will be effective January 24, 2014 

unless EPA receives adverse comments 

by December 26, 2013. Along with this 

direct final Notice of Deletion, EPA is 

co-publishing a Notice of Intent to 

Delete in the ‘‘Proposed Rules’’ section 

of the Federal Register. If adverse 

comments are received within the 30- 

day public comment period on this 

deletion action, EPA will publish a 

timely withdrawal of this direct final 

Notice of Deletion before the effective 

date of the deletion, and the deletion 

will not take effect. EPA will, as 

appropriate, prepare a response to 

comments and continue with the 

deletion process on the basis of the 

Notice of Intent to Delete and the 

comments already received. There will 

be no additional opportunity to 

comment. 

Section II of this document explains 

the criteria for deleting sites from the 

NPL. Section III discusses procedures 

that EPA is using for this action. Section 

IV discusses the Columbus Old 

Municipal Landfill #1 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 

deletion of the Old Municipal Landfill 

#1 Superfund Site: 

(1) EPA consulted with the State of 

Indiana prior to developing this direct 

final Notice of Deletion and the Notice 

of Intent to Delete co-published today in 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 227 / Monday, November 25, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 70233 

the ‘‘Proposed Rules’’ section of the 

Federal Register. 

(2) EPA has provided the State 30 

working days for review of this direct 

final Notice of Deletion and the parallel 

Notice of Intent to Delete prior to their 

publication today, and the State, 

through the Indiana Department of 

Environmental Management (IDEM), has 

concurred on the deletion of the Site 

from the NPL. 

(3) Concurrently with the publication 

of this direct final Notice of Deletion, a 

notice of the availability of the parallel 

Notice of Intent to Delete is being 

published in a major local newspaper, 

The Republic. The newspaper notice 

announces the 30-day public comment 

period concerning the Notice of Intent 

to Delete the Site from the NPL. 

(4) EPA placed copies of documents 

supporting the proposed deletion in the 

deletion docket and made these items 

available for public inspection and 

copying at the Site information 

repositories identified above. 

(5) If adverse comments are received 

within the 30-day public comment 

period on this deletion action, EPA will 

publish a timely notice of withdrawal of 

this direct final Notice of Deletion 

before its effective date and will prepare 

a response to comments. EPA may 

continue with the deletion process on 

the basis of the Notice of Intent to Delete 

and the comments already received. 

Deletion of a site from the NPL does 

not itself create, alter, or revoke any 

individual’s rights or obligations. 

Deletion of a site from the NPL does not 

in any way alter EPA’s right to take 

enforcement actions, as appropriate. 

The NPL is designed primarily for 

informational purposes and to assist 

EPA management. Section 300.425(e)(3) 

of the NCP states that the deletion of a 

site from the NPL does not preclude 

eligibility for future response actions, 

should future conditions warrant such 

actions. 

IV. Basis for Site Deletion 

The following information provides 

EPA’s rationale for deleting the 

Columbus Old Municipal Landfill #1 

Superfund Site from the NPL. 

Site Background and History 

The Columbus Old Municipal 

Landfill #1 Superfund Site (CERCLIS ID 

IND980607626) is located in 

Bartholomew County, Indiana, 

approximately one-quarter mile 

southwest of Columbus, Indiana. The 

Site is bounded to the west by farmland, 

with a small portion abutting State Road 

11; to the east by the East Fork of the 

White River; to the north by 3rd Street 

Bridge; and to the south by a gravel 

quarry pond. The closest residence to 

the Site is less than one-half mile away. 

Approximately 33,000 people live 

within a three-mile radius of the Site. 

Private wells are located within one-half 

mile of the Site, and public wells for 

water supply are located within three 

miles. 

The City of Columbus operated the 

Site from 1938 until 1966 and accepted 

household solid waste, along with 

commercial and industrial solid wastes, 

at the landfill. Municipal and industrial 

wastes may have included solvents, 

acids, bases, paints, and heavy metals. 

The wastes were deposited in the 

unlined landfill. Cover material, 

consisting of river sediment dredged 

from the adjacent East Fork of the White 

River, was placed over the fill material 

in the late 1960s. 

In August 1981, the Cummins Engine 

Company (now Cummins Inc.) notified 

EPA under the provisions of Section 

103(c) of CERCLA that the Site had 

received potentially hazardous 

industrial wastes. The Site was 

proposed to the NPL on September 18, 

1985 (FR 50 37950) and finalized on 

June 10, 1986 (FR 51 21054). EPA, 

IDEM, and the three potentially 

responsible parties (PRPs) for the Site, 

Cummins Engine Company, City of 

Columbus, and Arvin Industries (now 

operating as ArvinMeritor), entered into 

an Administrative Order on Consent 

(AOC) in 1987. The AOC required the 

PRPs to conduct a remedial 

investigation/feasibility study (RI/FS) at 

the Site. EPA assumed the role of the 

lead enforcement agency and conducted 

oversight during the RI/FS. 

Remedial Investigation and Feasibility 

Study 

The remedial investigation (RI) 

commenced in October 1988. The RI 

report, which focused on surface soil, 

subsurface soil, groundwater, surface 

water, sediments, landfill waste, and 

possible leachate seeps, was finalized 

and approved by EPA in August 1990. 

Based on the results of the investigation, 

the baseline risk assessment indicated 

that the landfill posed no threat to 

human health or the environment in its 

condition at the time. EPA, therefore, 

concluded that no further action was 

needed at the Site, except for the 

installation of two additional 

monitoring wells and periodic 

monitoring of groundwater. 

During the drafting of the feasibility 

study (FS), the PRPs requested that the 

remedial alternatives developed for the 

Site incorporate the potential placement 

of a road and bridge across the Site. This 

was to be considered because plans 

developed by the Indiana Department of 

Transportation, in cooperation with the 

City of Columbus, called for having a 

section of State Highway 46 re-routed 

over the northwest portion of the Site. 

EPA and IDEM agreed to the request and 

evaluated the potential environmental 

impacts of placing the road and bridge 

across the landfill in a separate report 

entitled ‘‘Technical Supplement to the 

Feasibility Study,’’ dated November 7, 

1991. The FS report was finalized and 

approved in December 1991. 

While the RI demonstrated that no 

unacceptable levels of contamination 

were present at the Site in its condition 

at the time, the FS and Technical 

Supplement concluded that placement 

of the road and bridge across the landfill 

could potentially result in future 

releases of contaminants into the 

environment as a result of the load 

induced by the roadway fill material. 

Record of Decision Findings 

The Record of Decision (ROD) for the 

Site was signed on March 31, 1992. The 

ROD selected the following remedy: 

1. Installation of two groundwater 

monitoring wells to augment the 

existing well network; 

2. Implementation of a groundwater 

monitoring program; 

3. Implementation of a landfill cover 

inspection and maintenance program, 

including a provision for periodic 

leachate seep inspections; 

4. Development of a groundwater 

recovery system implementation plan; 

5. Implementation of deed restrictions 

on land and water use on the landfill; 

and 

6. Installation of a fence with 

appropriate warning signs around the 

landfill. 

Response Actions 

A remedial design/remedial action 

work plan, approved in October 1993, 

was developed to guide implementation 

of the elements required in the ROD. 

Installation of the two additional 

monitoring wells was completed in 

November 1993, and the PRPs began bimonthly monitoring and inspection of 

the Site in December 1993. EPA’s prefinal inspection was conducted in 

August 1994, at which point the 

construction of the remedy was 

considered complete. The Site achieved 

construction completion with the 

signing of the Preliminary Close-Out 

Report on September 15, 1994. The 

PRPs continued bi-monthly monitoring 

and inspections until the construction 

of the new bridge and approach road 

over the landfill was completed in May 

1999. The fence around the landfill was 

installed immediately following the 

completion of construction and prior to 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
70234 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 227 / Monday, November 25, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

the opening of the bridge in April 1999. 

The warning signs along the fence were 

posted as specified. After the road and 

bridge construction was completed, the 

PRPs continued groundwater 

monitoring and inspection bi-monthly 

from May through October 1999 and 

then semi-annually through April 2003. 

A Declaration of Restrictions and 

Covenants Upon Real Estate was signed 

by the land owners and filed in the 

Bartholomew County Office of Registrar 

of Deeds in June 1993, restricting land 

and water use on-site during and after 

the construction of the road and bridge. 

It was determined during the 2005 FiveYear Review (FYR), however, that this 

deed restriction encompassed only the 

southern portion of the landfill. As a 

result, an Environmental Protection 

Easement and Environmental Restrictive 

Covenant was drafted to restrict land 

and groundwater use on the northern 

portion of the landfill, now owned by 

the City of Columbus. This Covenant 

was executed by all necessary parties 

and filed in December 2010. With the 

filing of the Covenant and a final site 

inspection conducted in November 

2009, the remedial action (RA) was 

considered complete. The final RA 

report was approved in January 2011. 

Although the ROD stated that EPA 

would request the local municipality to 

enact a zoning ordinance to forbid use 

of the site and restrict drilling of 

groundwater wells, this was not 

necessary because the City of Columbus 

and the other owners of the Site agreed 

to restrict use and prohibit installation 

of groundwater wells at the Site by 

recording real estate restrictions. This 

achieved the remedial action objective 

by providing binding restrictions on 

current and future landowners. 

Cleanup Goals 

IDEM identified thirteen wells, eleven 

existing and two new wells, for bimonthly monitoring in order to evaluate 

the potential impact on the landfill from 

the road and bridge construction 

activities. Groundwater monitoring data 

was collected from the thirteen wells 

between December 1993 and October 

1999, which was before, during, and 

after the road and bridge construction 

activities at the Site. Based on the 

review of groundwater data before and 

after construction, there is no evidence 

that the construction activities had an 

effect on the groundwater quality or 

physical condition of the landfill Site. 

In December 1999, the PRPs 

submitted a summary and review of 

groundwater data collected bi-monthly 

over the 1993–1999 time period. IDEM 

approved the report in January 2000. 

With the approval of the report, the 

monitoring program was changed to 

semi-annual sampling. Semi-annual 

sampling was conducted over the 

remainder of a five-year cycle, which 

commenced with the first bi-monthly 

sampling event during road and bridge 

construction in April 1998. The cycle 

was completed in April 2003 with the 

final groundwater-monitoring event. 

IDEM approved the Final Remedial 

Action Completion Report submitted by 

the PRPs on January 31, 2011. The 

report summarized the groundwater 

monitoring and sampling work 

performed at the Site over the 11-year 

period. The report found no evidence 

that construction activities had an effect 

on the concentration and distribution of 

target compounds in groundwater at the 

Site. Since groundwater monitoring 

concentrations were consistently below 

the maximum contaminant levels and 

no additional actions were necessary, 

approval was granted by IDEM and EPA 

to permanently abandon the 

groundwater wells. This action was 

completed in November 2010, and the 

well abandonment activities were 

approved by IDEM in February 2011. 

Operation and Maintenance 

Landfill inspections will continue to 

be done annually in accordance with 

the October 2012 Operation and 

Maintenance Plan. The landfill cover 

and fence are inspected annually and 

following any major flooding event to 

verify cover integrity and look for signs 

of excessive trespassing or dumping of 

wastes. In addition, the annual 

inspections serve to determine 

compliance with the provisions of the 

Declaration of Restrictions and 

Covenants Upon Real Estate and the 

Environmental Protection Easement and 

Environmental Restrictive Covenant. 

These inspections also verify that the 

Site is not being used for prohibited 

activities and that the documents 

specifying the property use restrictions 

are still on record with the Bartholomew 

County Recorder. 

Five-Year Review 

The Site requires ongoing statutory 

FYRs because hazardous substances, 

pollutants, or contaminants remain 

onsite. FYRs were completed in August 

2000, September 2005 and May 2010. 

The most recent FYR concluded that the 

selected remedy was protective of 

human health and the environment in 

the short term. However, an 

environmental restrictive covenant for 

the northern part of the landfill was 

needed for long-term protectiveness, 

which requires compliance with 

effective institutional controls (ICs). The 

environmental restrictive covenant was 

recorded in December 2010, and the 

October 2012 Operation and 

Maintenance Plan provides the 

procedures to be used for long-term 

stewardship. 

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 

EPA relied on for recommendation of 

the deletion of this Site from the NPL 

are available to the public in the 

information repositories and at 

www.regulations.gov. 

Determination That the Site Meets the 

Criteria for Deletion in the NCP 

The implemented remedy achieves 

the degree of cleanup specified in the 

ROD for all pathways of exposure. All 

selected remedial action objectives and 

clean-up goals are consistent with 

Agency policy and guidance. No further 

Superfund response actions are needed 

to protect human health and the 

environment at the Site. 

The NCP (40 CFR 300.425(e)) states 

that a site may be deleted from the NPL 

when no further response action is 

appropriate. EPA, in consultation with 

the State of Indiana, has determined that 

all required response actions have been 

implemented and no further action is 

appropriate. 

V. Deletion Action 

EPA with the concurrence of the State 

of Indiana, through IDEM, has 

determined that all appropriate 

response actions under CERCLA, other 

than operation, maintenance, and fiveyear reviews, have been completed. 

Therefore, EPA is deleting the 

Columbus Oil Municipal Landfill #1 

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 January 24, 2014 

unless EPA receives adverse comments 

by December 26, 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. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 227 / Monday, November 25, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 70235 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Chemicals, Hazardous 

waste, Hazardous substances, 

Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Superfund, Water 

pollution control, Water supply. 

Dated: September 16, 2013. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

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—[National Priorities List] 

■ 2. Table 1 of Appendix B to part 300 

is amended by removing ‘‘Columbus 

Old Municipal Landfill #1’’, 

‘‘Columbus’’. 

[FR Doc. 2013–28142 Filed 11–22–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Federal Emergency Management 

Agency 

44 CFR Part 64 

[Docket ID FEMA–2013–0002: Internal 

Agency Docket No. FEMA–8311] 

Suspension of Community Eligibility 

AGENCY: Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, DHS. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This rule identifies 

communities where the sale of flood 

insurance has been authorized under 

the National Flood Insurance Program 

(NFIP) that are scheduled for 

suspension on the effective dates listed 

within this rule because of 

noncompliance with the floodplain 

management requirements of the 

program. If the Federal Emergency 

Management Agency (FEMA) receives 

documentation that the community has 

adopted the required floodplain 

management measures prior to the 

effective suspension date given in this 

rule, the suspension will not occur and 

a notice of this will be provided by 

publication in the Federal Register on a 

subsequent date. Also, information 

identifying the current participation 

status of a community can be obtained 

from FEMA’s Community Status Book 

(CSB). The CSB is available at http://

www.fema.gov/fema/csb.shtm. 

DATES: Effective Dates: The effective 

date of each community’s scheduled 

suspension is the third date (‘‘Susp.’’) 

listed in the third column of the 

following tables. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you want to determine whether a 

particular community was suspended 

on the suspension date or for further 

information, contact David Stearrett, 

Federal Insurance and Mitigation 

Administration, Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., 

Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–2953. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The NFIP 

enables property owners to purchase 

Federal flood insurance that is not 

otherwise generally available from 

private insurers. In return, communities 

agree to adopt and administer local 

floodplain management measures aimed 

at protecting lives and new construction 

from future flooding. Section 1315 of 

the National Flood Insurance Act of 

1968, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 4022, 

prohibits the sale of NFIP flood 

insurance unless an appropriate public 

body adopts adequate floodplain 

management measures with effective 

enforcement measures. The 

communities listed in this document no 

longer meet that statutory requirement 

for compliance with program 

regulations, 44 CFR Part 59. 

Accordingly, the communities will be 

suspended on the effective date in the 

third column. As of that date, flood 

insurance will no longer be available in 

the community. We recognize that some 

of these communities may adopt and 

submit the required documentation of 

legally enforceable floodplain 

management measures after this rule is 

published but prior to the actual 

suspension date. These communities 

will not be suspended and will continue 

to be eligible for the sale of NFIP flood 

insurance. A notice withdrawing the 

suspension of such communities will be 

published in the Federal Register. 

In addition, FEMA publishes a Flood 

Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) that 

identifies the Special Flood Hazard 

Areas (SFHAs) in these communities. 

The date of the FIRM, if one has been 

published, is indicated in the fourth 

column of the table. No direct Federal 

financial assistance (except assistance 

pursuant to the Robert T. Stafford 

Disaster Relief and Emergency 

Assistance Act not in connection with a 

flood) may be provided for construction 

or acquisition of buildings in identified 

SFHAs for communities not 

participating in the NFIP and identified 

for more than a year on FEMA’s initial 

FIRM for the community as having 

flood-prone areas (section 202(a) of the 

Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 

42 U.S.C. 4106(a), as amended). This 

prohibition against certain types of 

Federal assistance becomes effective for 

the communities listed on the date 

shown in the last column. The 

Administrator finds that notice and 

public comment procedures under 5 

U.S.C. 553(b), are impracticable and 

unnecessary because communities listed 

in this final rule have been adequately 

notified. 

Each community receives 6-month, 

90-day, and 30-day notification letters 

addressed to the Chief Executive Officer 

stating that the community will be 

suspended unless the required 

floodplain management measures are 

met prior to the effective suspension 

date. Since these notifications were 

made, this final rule may take effect 

within less than 30 days. 

National Environmental Policy Act. 

This rule is categorically excluded from 

the requirements of 44 CFR part 10, 

Environmental Considerations. No 

environmental impact assessment has 

been prepared. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act. The 

Administrator has determined that this 

rule is exempt from the requirements of 

the Regulatory Flexibility Act because 

the National Flood Insurance Act of 

1968, as amended, Section 1315, 42 

U.S.C. 4022, prohibits flood insurance 

coverage unless an appropriate public 

body adopts adequate floodplain 

management measures with effective 

enforcement measures. The 

communities listed no longer comply 

with the statutory requirements, and 

after the effective date, flood insurance 

will no longer be available in the 

communities unless remedial action 

takes place. 

Regulatory Classification. This final 

rule is not a significant regulatory action 

under the criteria of section 3(f) of 

Executive Order 12866 of September 30, 

1993, Regulatory Planning and Review, 

58 FR 51735. 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism. 

This rule involves no policies that have 

federalism implications under Executive 

Order 13132. 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform. This rule meets the applicable 

standards of Executive Order 12988. 

Paperwork Reduction Act. This rule 

does not involve any collection of 

information for purposes of the 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES