33134 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 137 / Tuesday, July 17, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: July 2, 2018. 

Onis ‘‘Trey’’ Glenn, III, 

Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart RR—Tennessee 

■ 2. Section 52.2220, is amended under 

CHAPTER 1200–3–18 VOLATILE 

ORGANIC COMPOUNDS by revising 

the entry for ‘‘Section 1200–3–18–.24, 

Gasoline Dispensing Facilities’’ to read 

as follows: 

§ 52.2220 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

TABLE 1—EPA-APPROVED TENNESSEE REGULATIONS

State citation Title/subject State effective 

date EPA approval date Explanation 

*******

CHAPTER 1200–3–18 VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS 

*******

Section 1200–3–18–.24 ............... Gasoline Dispensing Facilities .... 8/31/2017 7/17/2018, [Insert citation 

of publication].

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2018–15148 Filed 7–16–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 300 

[EPA–HQ–SFUND–1989–0007; FRL–9980– 

71—Region 5] 

National Oil and Hazardous 

Substances Pollution Contingency 

Plan; National Priorities List: Partial 

Deletion of the Naval Industrial 

Reserve Ordnance Plant Superfund 

Site 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) Region 5 is publishing a 

direct final Notice of Deletion of 

Operable Unit 3 (OU3) of the Naval 

Industrial Reserve Ordnance Plant 

(NIROP) Superfund Site (Site), located 

in Fridley, Minnesota, 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 partial deletion is being published 

by EPA with the concurrence of the 

State of Minnesota, through the 

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 

(MPCA), because EPA has determined 

that all appropriate response actions 

under CERCLA at OU3, other than 

operation, maintenance, and five-year 

reviews, have been completed. 

However, this partial deletion does not 

preclude future actions under 

Superfund. 

DATES: This direct final partial deletion 

is effective September 17, 2018 unless 

EPA receives adverse comments by 

August 16, 2018. If adverse comments 

are received, EPA will publish a timely 

withdrawal of the direct final partial 

deletion in the Federal Register 

informing the public that the partial 

deletion will not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

SFUND–1989–0007, by one of the 

following methods: http://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Once submitted, comments cannot be 

edited or removed from Regulations.gov. 

The EPA may publish any comment 

received to its public docket. Do not 

submit electronically any information 

you consider to be Confidential 

Business Information (CBI) or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. The EPA will generally not 

consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or 

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, the full 

EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. 

Email: cano.randolph@epa.gov. 

Mail: Randolph Cano, NPL Deletion 

Coordinator, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency Region 5 (SR–6J), 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 

60604, (312) 886–6036. 

Hand deliver: Superfund Records 

Center, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Region 5, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, 7th Floor South, Chicago, IL 

60604, (312)886–0900. 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 business hours are Monday 

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

excluding Federal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID no. EPA–HQ–SFUND–1989– 

0007. The http://www.regulations.gov 

website 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 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 137 / Tuesday, July 17, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 33135 

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 statue. 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 5, Superfund Records 

Center, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 7th 

Floor South, Chicago, IL 60604, Phone: 

(312) 886–0900, Hours: Monday through 

Friday, 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., excluding 

Federal holidays. 

Mississippi Library, 410 Mississippi 

St. NE, Fridley, MN 55432, Phone: (763) 

324–1560, Hours: Monday and 

Wednesday, 12:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m., 

Tuesday and Thursday, 10:00 a.m. to 

6:00 p.m., Friday, 12:00 p.m. to 6:00 

p.m. and Saturday 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 

p.m. 

The Navy has an online repository for 

the NIROP Site at the link below. Please 

click on the Administrative Records link 

to see all the documents. http://

www.navfac.navy.mil/products_and_

services/ev/products_and_services/env_

restoration/administrative_

records.html?p_instln_id=FRIDLEY_

NIROP. 

The Minnesota Pollution Control 

Agency has an information repository 

for the NIROP Site at their offices: 520 

Lafayette Road, St. Paul, MN 55155. Call 

(651) 296–6300 or toll-free at (800) 657– 

3864 to schedule an appointment. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Randolph Cano, NPL Deletion 

Coordinator, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency Region 5 (SR–6J), 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 

60604, (312)886–6036, or via email at 

cano.randolph@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Introduction 

II. NPL Deletion Criteria 

III. Partial Deletion Procedures 

IV. Basis for Site Partial Deletion 

V. Partial Deletion Action 

I. Introduction 

EPA Region 5 is publishing this direct 

final Notice of Partial Deletion for the 

Naval Industrial Reserve Ordnance 

Plant (NIROP) Superfund Site (Site) 

from the National Priorities List (NPL). 

This partial deletion pertains to OU3, 

which includes all the unsaturated soils 

underlying the former Plating Shop 

Area. 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 partial deletion of the 

NIROP Site is proposed in accordance 

with 40 CFR 300.425(e) and is 

consistent with the Notice of Policy 

Change: Partial Deletion of Sites Listed 

on the National Priorities List. 60 FR 

55466 (Nov. 1, 1995). As described in 

300.425(e)(3) of the NCP, a portion of a 

site deleted from the NPL remains 

eligible for Fund-financed remedial 

action if future conditions warrant such 

actions. 

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 OU3 of the NIROP Site and 

demonstrates how OU3 meets the 

deletion criteria. Section V discusses 

EPA’s action to partially delete OU3 of 

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 (FYRs) 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 FYRs 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. Partial Deletion Procedures 

The following procedures apply to the 

deletion of OU3 of the NIROP Site: 

(1) EPA has consulted with the State 

of Minnesota prior to developing this 

direct final Notice of Partial Deletion 

and the Notification of Intent for Partial 

Deletion published in the ‘‘Proposed 

Rules’’ section of the Federal Register. 

(2) EPA has provided the State thirty 

(30) working days for review of this 

action and the parallel Notification of 

Intent for Partial Deletion prior to their 

publication today, and the State, 

through the Minnesota Pollution 

Control Agency (MPCA), has concurred 

on the partial deletion of the Site from 

the NPL. 

(3) Concurrent with the publication of 

this direct final Notice of Partial 

Deletion, a notice of the availability of 

the parallel Notification of Intent for 

Partial Deletion is being published in a 

major local newspaper, the Sun Focus, 

located in Fridley, Minnesota. The 

newspaper notice announces the 30-day 

public comment period concerning the 

Notification of Intent for Partial Deletion 

of the Site from the NPL. 

(4) EPA placed copies of documents 

supporting the partial deletion in the 

deletion docket and made these items 

available for public inspection and 

copying at the Site information 

repositories identified in the Addresses 

Section of this rule. 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
33136 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 137 / Tuesday, July 17, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

(5) If adverse comments are received 

within the 30-day public comment 

period on this partial deletion action, 

EPA will publish a timely notice of 

withdrawal of this direct final Notice of 

Partial 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 Partial Deletion and 

the comments already received. 

Deletion of a portion of a site from the 

NPL does not itself create, alter, or 

revoke any individual’s rights or 

obligations. Deletion of a portion 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 Partial Deletion 

The following information provides 

EPA’s rationale for deleting OU3 of the 

NIROP Site from the NPL. EPA believes 

it is appropriate to delete OU3 of the 

NIROP Site because all appropriate 

response actions under CERCLA, other 

than operation, maintenance, and FYRs, 

have been completed at OU3 and it is 

ready for redevelopment as a 

commercial and/or industrial property. 

Site Background and History 

The NIROP Site (CERCLIS ID 

MN3170022914) is located in the 

northern portion of the Minneapolis/St. 

Paul Metropolitan Area in an industrial/ 

commercial area at 4800 E. River Road 

within the limits of Fridley, Anoka 

County, Minnesota. The NIROP Site is 

not adjacent to any residential areas and 

is not located in an environmentally 

sensitive area, nor near any known 

environmentally sensitive areas. 

The Site is approximately 82.6 acres, 

most of which are covered with 

buildings or pavement. The U.S. Navy 

and/or its contractors produced 

advanced weapons systems at the 

facility beginning in 1940. In 2004, the 

U.S. Navy sold the property to FMC 

(now BAE). BAE then sold the property 

to ELT Minneapolis, LLC. ELT 

Minneapolis owned the former NIROP 

property and leased the space to United 

Defense LP until 2013. In 2013, ELT 

sold the property to Fridley Land, LLC, 

the current owner. Fridley Land LLC is 

in the process of redeveloping the 

property in phases for commercial and/ 

or industrial use. 

The formerly government-owned 

portion of the facility constitutes what 

is now the NIROP Site. See the site map 

in NIROP Map Delineating Operable 

Units, Docket Document ID No. EPA– 

HQ–SFUND–1989–0007–0075 in the 

Deletion Docket for OU3. (Note: 

portions of the main facility building 

depicted in the Site Map have since 

been demolished for redevelopment.) 

The Site Map also shows that the 

southern portion of the original facility 

is not part of the NIROP Site. 

The Navy and/or its contractors 

disposed paint sludges and chlorinated 

solvents generated from ordnance 

manufacturing processes in pits and 

trenches in the undeveloped area of the 

NIROP Site immediately north of the 

main facility building in the early 

1970s. This area is called the North 40 

area. MPCA received information 

concerning the historical waste disposal 

practices at NIROP and about the 

contaminant sources in the North 40 

area and beneath the NIROP building in 

1980. 

Trichloroethylene (TCE) was 

discovered in on-site groundwater wells 

and in the City of Minneapolis’s 

drinking water treatment plant intake 

pipe, located in the Mississippi River 

less than 1 mile downstream from the 

Site, in 1981. The Navy conducted 

investigations in 1983 which identified 

pits and trenches in the North 40 area 

of the NIROP Site where drummed 

wastes were deposited. The Navy 

excavated approximately 1,200 cubic 

yards of contaminated soil and 43 (55- 

gallon) drums and disposed them offsite from November 1983 to March 

1984. 

EPA proposed the NIROP Site to the 

NPL on July 14, 1989 (54 FR 29820). 

EPA finalized the NIROP Site on the 

NPL on November 21, 1989 (54 FR 

48184). 

EPA, MPCA and the Navy signed a 

Federal Facilities Agreement (FFA) in 

March 1991. Per the FFA, one of the 

purposes of that agreement was to 

’’Identify alternatives for Remedial 

Action for Operable Units’’ appropriate 

for the Site prior to the implementation 

of Final Remedial Actions for the Site. 

EPA divided the NIROP Site into 

three operable units (OUs) to make it 

easier to address the contaminant issues 

at the Site. OU3, the subject of this 

partial deletion, includes all the 

unsaturated soils underlying the former 

Plating Shop Area of the Site. The 

extent of OU3 is detailed in the site map 

in NIROP Map Delineating Operable 

Units, Docket Document ID No. EPA– 

HQ–SFUND–1989–0007–0075 in the 

Deletion Docket for OU3. 

The current scope of OU3 is provided 

in EPA’s August 12, 2013 Memorandum 

to File that restructured the OUs at the 

Site. OU3 initially included: (1) All 

saturated and unsaturated soil 

underneath the main NIROP 

manufacturing building, excluding the 

extreme southern portion of the 

building, and (2) all saturated soil under 

and outside the main NIROP 

manufacturing building, within the legal 

boundaries of the Site. 

EPA’s 2013 Memorandum limited the 

scope of OU3 to unsaturated soil under 

the former Plating Shop Area. The 

saturated soils that were initially part of 

OU3 are now included with OU1. The 

remaining unsaturated soil under the 

main NIROP building outside the former 

Plating Shop Area that were part of OU3 

are being addressed as part of OU2. 

OU1, which includes the 

contaminated groundwater within and 

originating from the NIROP Site, and 

now saturated soils, will remain on the 

NPL and is not being considered for 

deletion as part of this action. EPA 

deleted OU2, which includes all the 

unsaturated soils within the legal 

boundaries of the NIROP Site excluding 

the unsaturated soils under the former 

Plating Shop Area, from the NPL 

effective August 29, 2014 (79 FR 36658, 

June 30, 2014). 

Remedial Investigation and Feasibility 

Study (RI/FS) 

The groundwater in the 

unconsolidated aquifer beneath the Site 

is contaminated with volatile organic 

compounds (VOCs), including: TCE, 

1,1,1-trichloroethane (TCA), 1,2- 

dichloroethylene (DCE), 

tetrachloroethylene (PERC), 1,1- 

dichloroethane, toluene, xylene, and 

ethylbenzene. Some or all of the 

contaminants identified are hazardous 

substances as defined in section 104(14) 

of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9601(14), and 40 

CFR 302.4. TCE was found more 

frequently and at higher concentrations 

than any other VOC, and is considered 

to be the best indicator chemical for the 

Site. 

In April 1995, the Navy was 

renovating the East Plating Shop (now 

called the former Plating Shop Area or 

OU3) inside the main manufacturing 

building, to accommodate an electrical 

assembly facility. During the renovation, 

when all of the tanks were removed and 

prior to the floor repairs being made, the 

Navy collected soil and groundwater 

samples to determine whether past 

plating activities had impacted soil and 

groundwater beneath the building. 

The Navy detected TCE, TCA, PERC 

and DCE at elevated levels in soil and 

groundwater. The Navy also found 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 137 / Tuesday, July 17, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 33137 

elevated metals concentrations, 

including chromium, in the vicinity of 

a former sump. (Note: With the ongoing 

redevelopment at the Site, OU3 is no 

longer inside the main manufacturing 

building. The portion of the building 

that housed OU3 has since been 

demolished.) 

The Navy detected the highest 

concentrations of TCE and PERC in the 

1995 sampling event in surface (0 to 4 

feet below ground surface [bgs]), 

shallow subsurface (4 to 12 feet bgs), 

and deep subsurface (>12 feet bgs) soil 

samples collected from the East Plating 

Shop. This indicated the possible 

presence of a ‘‘hot spot’’ of TCE and 

PERC in this area and the likelihood 

that the East Plating Shop was the 

source area for these VOCs and 

chromium. 

The 2002 Baseline Human Health 

Risk Assessment (HHRA) identified an 

unacceptable potential risk/hazard in 

OU3 for exposure to soil in the East 

Plating Shop area under the majorinfrequent construction worker 

exposure scenario. The major-infrequent 

construction worker exposure scenario 

assumed construction workers would 

have a short-term exposure to the 

maximum concentration of soil 

contaminants detected from 0–12 feet 

bgs in the East Plating Shop area during 

major modifications to the building slab 

and foundations. The HHRA did not 

identify any unacceptable risks or 

hazards to exposure to OU3 soil under 

a commercial/industrial scenario. 

The cancer risk calculated for the 

major-infrequent construction worker in 

the 2002 HHRA was 2.1 × 10¥6. This 

risk is within EPA’s acceptable risk 

range of 1 × 10¥4 to 1 × 10¥6, but 

exceeds MPCA’s acceptable subchronic 

incremental cancer risk of 1 × 10¥6. 

The noncancer risks calculated for the 

major-infrequent construction worker in 

OU3 in the 2002 HHRA was a hazard 

quotient (HQ) of 1.35 for chromium, and 

a total hazard index (HI) of 2.9 for all 

chemicals. These levels exceed EPA’s 

acceptable noncancer HQ of 1 for 

individual contaminants and a HI of 1 

for multiple chemicals, and MCPA’s 

acceptable subchronic HQ and HI levels 

of 1 for individual and multiple 

chemicals. 

Chromium is most commonly present 

in its less-toxic trivalent form because 

environmental conditions typically 

favor the reduction of the more-toxic 

hexavalent chromium to its less-toxic 

trivalent state. The 2002 HHRA, 

however, conservatively assumed that 

100 percent of the chromium detected 

in the East Plating Shop area was in the 

hexavalent form, due to the absence of 

site-specific speciated data and 

considering historic Site use. Based on 

this assumption of 100 percent 

hexavalent chromium, the potential 

risks to OU3 receptors from exposure to 

chromium in the 2002 HHRA were 

likely overestimated. 

Several years after the OU3 remedy 

was selected and implemented, in 2015, 

the Navy conducted additional soil 

sampling in OU3 for total and 

hexavalent chromium analysis. The 

analytical results show that at most, the 

more toxic hexavalent chromium 

constitutes only 7 percent of the total 

OU3 chromium measured. The 2015 

total and hexavalent chromium 

concentrations in soil were both below 

the MPCA soil reference values for 

industrial use. The Navy used these 

speciated chromium results to complete 

a more accurate, focused risk 

assessment for OU3 chromium in 2016. 

In 2016, the Navy also excavated soils 

beneath the East Plating Shop to remove 

a potential source of TCE to the 

groundwater. The excavated soil was in 

the same area as the elevated chromium 

concentrations evaluated in the 2002 

HHRA. This soil removal aided in 

reducing any potential health risks 

associated with chromium. 

The Navy completed the Focused 

Human Health Risk Assessment 

(FHHRA) for the East Plating Shop area 

in 2016. The Navy did not include in 

the data set the soil samples collected in 

2015 in the areas subsequently 

excavated as part of the 2016 East 

Plating Shop excavation because they 

were no longer present or available for 

contact by human receptors. 

The FHHRA determined that, for the 

major-infrequent construction worker 

exposure scenario, the potential noncancer HI for all contaminants of 

potential concern (COPCs)/target organs 

combined is 0.16. This HI is below 

EPA’s and MPCA’s target HI of 1 and 

does not exceed MPCA’s target HQ level 

of 0.2 for individual COCs. Therefore, 

the 2016 FHHRA concluded that there 

are no unacceptable risks or hazards for 

major-infrequent construction workers 

who may be exposed to chemicals in 

mixed OU3 soil. 

Selected Remedy 

EPA, MPCA and the Navy issued a 

Record of Decision (ROD) for OU1 on 

September 28, 1990, and a ROD for OU2 

and OU3 on September 17, 2003. EPA 

issued a Memorandum to File on 

September 5, 2013 clarifying the OU 

definitions at the site. The changes to 

the structure of the OUs in the 2013 

Memorandum to File did not alter any 

of the selected remedies for the Site. 

EPA, MPCA and the Navy issued an 

Explanation of Significant Differences 

(ESD) documenting a requirement for 

groundwater institutional controls (ICs) 

as part of the OU1 remedy on September 

26, 2014. EPA, MPCA and the Navy 

issued an ESD documenting a change in 

some of the IC requirements for OU3 on 

July 19, 2017. These documents are 

available the Docket under Docket 

Document IDs EPA–HQ–SFUND–1989– 

0007–0062 (1990 OU1 ROD), EPA–HQ– 

SFUND–1989–0007–0063 (2003 OU2 

and OU3 ROD), EPA–HQ–SFUND– 

1989–0007–0068 (2013 Memorandum to 

File), EPA–HQ–SFUND–1989–0007– 

0069 (2014 OU1 ESD) and EPA–HQ– 

SFUND–1989–0007–0071 (2017 OU3 

ESD). 

The original remedial action 

objectives (RAOs) for OU3 in the 2003 

OU2 and OU3 ROD were: (1) To prevent 

unacceptable risks due to residential or 

other unrestricted exposures to 

contaminated soils at the Site, and (2) to 

prevent unacceptable risks to industrial 

or construction workers due to 

exposures to contaminated soils at the 

Site. The remedial action specified for 

OU3 soils in the 2003 ROD were 

engineering controls (ECs) and ICs. The 

original selected remedy for OU3 was: 

(1) To restrict the use of the Property to 

industrial or restricted commercial use, 

until and unless EPA and MPCA 

determine that concentrations of 

hazardous substances in the soils have 

been reduced to levels that allow for a 

less restrictive use; (2) to prohibit the 

disturbance of soils beneath the 

Designated Restricted Area known as 

the concrete pit foundations where 

metal-finishing operations previously 

occurred at the former Plating Shop 

within the Main Manufacturing 

Building without the prior written 

approval of the EPA and MPCA; and (3) 

to ensure that the concrete pit floor 

(approximately 8 to 12 feet below grade 

floor) where metal finishing operations 

previously occurred at the former 

Plating Shop within the Main 

Manufacturing Building is not removed 

without the prior written approval of 

EPA and MPCA. That floor will serve as 

an EC. 

On July 19, 2017, EPA, MPCA and the 

Navy issued an ESD to remove the 

requirement for some of the ICs and ECs 

in the OU3 remedy. The remedy 

components described in the 2003 OU2 

and OU3 ROD were initially required to 

ensure the long-term protectiveness of 

the OU3 soil because the OU3 soil 

contamination remained at the Site 

above levels that allow for unlimited 

use and unrestricted exposure. 

The 2017 ESD modified the selected 

remedy for OU3 by removing the second 

and third remedy components described 

above from the OU3 remedy. 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
33138 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 137 / Tuesday, July 17, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

Specifically, there was no longer a need 

to prohibit the disturbance of soils 

beneath the former Plating Shop area, 

nor to ensure that the concrete pit floor 

at the former Plating Shop remains in 

place. 

EPA, MPCA and the Navy included 

these two OU3 remedy components in 

the 2003 ROD based on the conservative 

assumption in the 2002 HHRA that all 

of the chromium in OU3 soil was in the 

more-toxic hexavalent form. Based on 

the 2015 sampling data, which included 

speciated chromium results, and the 

2016 FHHRA, which found no 

unacceptable risks or hazards for the 

major-infrequent construction worker 

scenario at OU3, the floor in the Plating 

Shop is no longer needed as an EC and 

OU3 ICs prohibiting the soils beneath 

the Plating Shop from being disturbed 

are no longer necessary. 

The IC restricting OU3 to industrial or 

restricted commercial use in the 2003 

OU2 and OU3 ROD [i.e., OU3 remedy 

component (1) listed above], remains 

part of the selected remedy for OU3. 

Implemented ICs at the Site are shown 

in Figure 2 of the 2017 OU3 ESD in the 

Docket (Docket Document ID No. EPA– 

HQ–SFUND–1989–0007–0071). 

Response Actions 

EPA concurred with the Navy’s March 

2004 Land Use Control Remedial Design 

(LUCRD) for OU3 in August 2004. The 

LUCRD specifies how the OU3 remedy 

will be implemented, maintained, and 

enforced if any breach of the remedy 

should occur. The LUCRD details the 

Navy’s continuing responsibilities with 

respect to OU3, including: Ensuring that 

annual on-site physical inspections of 

OU3 are performed to confirm 

continued compliance with all Land 

Use Control (LUC) Performance 

Objectives; ensuring that annual LUC 

Compliance Certifications are provided 

to EPA and MPCA that explain any 

deficiency, if found; conducting FYRs of 

the remedy as required by CERCLA and 

the NCP; notifying EPA and MPCA prior 

to any planned property conveyance; 

providing EPA and MPCA the 

opportunity to review the text of 

intended deed provisions; and notifying 

EPA and MPCA if Site activities might 

interfere with LUC effectiveness. 

The LUCs were incorporated into a 

Quitclaim Deed that was executed by 

the property owner, the United States 

and MPCA on June 17, 2004. The 

Quitclaim Deed acts as an 

environmental covenant describing the 

property restrictions. The deed 

restrictions run with the land such that 

any subsequent property owner is 

bound by the same restrictions. The 

LUCs are to remain in place until EPA 

and MPCA determine that the 

concentrations of hazardous substances 

in the OU3 soils have been reduced to 

levels that allow for a less restrictive 

use. 

In 2017, EPA, MPCA and the Navy 

issued an ESD for OU3 removing the 

requirement for two of the three OU3 

LUCs required by the 2003 OU2 and 

OU3 ROD. The 2017 ESD removed the 

requirement for the LUCs that required 

the concrete pit floor in the former 

Plating Shop to remain in place and for 

the soils in the former Plating Shop area 

to remain undisturbed. 

Cleanup Levels 

There was no cleanup associated with 

the original remedy for OU3. In 2016, 

however, soils beneath the East Plating 

Shop were excavated and replaced with 

clean soil to address a potential source 

of TCE to the groundwater as part of 

OU1. The excavated soil was in the 

same area as the elevated chromium 

concentrations evaluated in the 2002 

HHRA. The 2016 TCE soil removal also 

aided in reducing any potential health 

risk associated with chromium. This 

further justified the removal of the LUCs 

for the former Plating Shop floor and for 

the soil below the floor described in the 

2017 OU3 ESD. 

Operation and Maintenance 

The Navy is the lead agency for the 

Site and is responsible for conducting 

routine inspections to ensure that the 

LUCs are maintained and enforced. The 

Navy is responsible for reporting the 

results of the inspections and any 

breach of the LUCs to the MPCA and 

EPA. 

Five-Year Review 

The Navy conducted the last FYR at 

the Site in October 2013. The 2013 FYR 

concluded that the remedy at NIROP for 

OU3 is protective of human health and 

the environment. The 2013 FYR did not 

identify any issues or recommendations 

for OU3. The FYR calls for the Navy to 

continue long-term stewardship to 

ensure that the LUC restricting land use 

at the Site to industrial or restricted 

commercial use is maintained. The next 

FYR for the Site is scheduled for 

October 2018. 

Redevelopment 

Redevelopment is currently underway 

to redevelop the NIROP Site into a 

commercial office/warehouse complex. 

This redevelopment is consistent with 

the existing Land Use Designation for 

the Site. The three parties to the FFA 

agree that delisting OU3 from the NPL 

will facilitate the redevelopment effort 

and allow OU3 to become eligible for 

State and Federal Brownfields funding. 

Superfund NPL site property is not 

eligible for Federal Brownfields 

funding. 

A developer has enrolled the NIROP 

Site and adjacent land into MPCA’s 

Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup 

(VIC) program. In conjunction with the 

redevelopment of the NIROP Site, any 

additional investigations will be 

conducted under the oversight and 

direction of MPCA’s VIC program. 

Under the VIC program, MPCA also 

requested that all buildings at the 

NIROP Site have vapor mitigation units 

installed them and the builder has 

complied. 

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. 

EPA published a document announcing 

this proposed Direct Final Partial 

Deletion and announcing the 30-day 

public comment period in the Sun 

Focus concurrent with publishing this 

partial deletion in the Federal Register. 

Documents in the deletion docket, 

which EPA relied on for recommending 

the partial deletion of the Site from the 

NPL, are available to the public in the 

information repositories and at 

www.regulations.gov. Documents in the 

docket include maps which identify the 

specific parcels of land that are 

included in this proposed Direct Final 

Partial Deletion (i.e., OU3). 

Determination That the Criteria for 

Partial Deletion Have Been Met 

The NCP (40 CFR 300.425(e)) states 

that portions of a site may be deleted 

from the NPL when no further response 

action is appropriate in that area or 

media. All cleanup actions specified for 

OU3 of the NIROP Site in the 2003 OU2 

and OU3 ROD and the 2017 OU3 ESD 

have been implemented at the Site. 

EPA, in consultation with the State of 

Minnesota, has determined that no 

further action is warranted to protect 

human health and the environment at 

OU3 and that OU3 of the NIROP Site 

meets the criteria for Partial Deletion 

from the NPL. 

V. Partial Deletion Action 

EPA, with concurrence of the State of 

Minnesota through the MPCA, has 

determined that all appropriate 

response actions under CERCLA at OU3, 

other than operation, maintenance, and 

five-year reviews, have been completed. 

Therefore, EPA is deleting OU3 of the 

NIROP Site from the NPL. 

Because EPA considers this action to 

be noncontroversial and routine, EPA is 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 137 / Tuesday, July 17, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 33139 

taking it without prior publication. This 

action will be effective September 17, 

2018 unless EPA receives adverse 

comments by August 16, 2018. If 

adverse comments are received within 

the 30-day public comment period, EPA 

will publish a timely withdrawal of this 

direct final notice of partial deletion 

before the effective date of the partial 

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 notification of intent 

to partially 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. 

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

9601–9657; E.O. 13626, 77 FR 56749, 3 CFR, 

2013 Comp., p. 306; E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757, 

3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 

FR 2923, 3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 193. 

Dated: June 25, 2018. 

Cathy Stepp, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. 2018–15240 Filed 7–16–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 54 

[WC Docket No. 10–90, 16–271; FCC 16– 

115] 

Connect America Fund, Connect 

America Fund—Alaska Plan 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule; announcement of 

effective date. 

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal 

Communications Commission 

(Commission) announces that the Office 

of Management and Budget (OMB) has 

approved, for a period of three years, an 

information collection associated with 

the rules for the Connect America Fund 

contained in the Commission’s Connect 

America Fund—Alaska Plan Order, FCC 

16–115. This document is consistent 

with the Connect America Fund— 

Alaska Plan Order, which stated that 

the Commission would publish a 

document in the Federal Register 

announcing the effective date of the new 

information collection requirements. 

DATES: The amendments regarding 

§§ 54.313(f)(1)(i), 54.313(f)(3) and 

54.313(l) published at 81 FR 69696, 

October 7, 2016, are effective July 17, 

2018. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Alexander Minard, Wireline 

Competition Bureau at (202) 418–7400 

or TTY (202) 418–0484. For additional 

information concerning the Paperwork 

Reduction Act information collection 

requirements contact Nicole Ongele at 

(202) 418–2991 or via email: 

Nicole.Ongele@fcc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Commission submitted revised 

information collection requirements for 

review and approval by OMB, as 

required by the Paperwork Reduction 

Act (PRA) of 1995, on May 30, 2018, 

which were approved by OMB on July 

2, 2018. The information collection 

requirements are contained in the 

Commission’s Connect America Fund— 

Alaska Plan Order, FCC 16–115, 

published at 81 FR 69696, October 7, 

2016. The OMB Control Number is 

3060–0986. The Commission publishes 

this document as an announcement of 

the effective date of the rules published 

October 7, 2016. If you have any 

comments on the burden estimates 

listed below, or how the Commission 

can improve the collections and reduce 

any burdens caused thereby, please 

contact Nicole Ongele, Federal 

Communications Commission, Room 

1–A620, 445 12th Street SW, 

Washington, DC 20554. Please include 

the OMB Control Number, 3060–0986, 

in your correspondence. The 

Commission will also accept your 

comments via email at PRA@fcc.gov. 

To request materials in accessible 

formats for people with disabilities 

(Braille, large print, electronic files, 

audio format), send an email to fcc504@

fcc.gov or call the Consumer and 

Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 

418–0530 (voice), (202) 418–0432 

(TTY). 

Synopsis 

As required by the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507), 

the Commission is notifying the public 

that it received OMB approval on July 

2, 2018, for the information collection 

requirements contained in 47 CFR 

54.313(f)(1)(i), 54.313(f)(3) and 

54.313(l), published at 81 FR 69696, 

October 7, 2016. Under 5 CFR part 1320, 

an agency may not conduct or sponsor 

a collection of information unless it 

displays a current, valid OMB Control 

Number. 

No person shall be subject to any 

penalty for failing to comply with a 

collection of information subject to the 

Paperwork Reduction Act that does not 

display a current, valid OMB Control 

Number. The OMB Control Number is 

3060–0986. 

The foregoing notice is required by 

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 

Public Law 104–13, October 1, 1995, 

and 44 U.S.C. 3507. 

The total annual reporting burdens 

and costs for the respondents are as 

follows: 

OMB Control Number: 3060–0986. 

OMB Approval Date: July 2, 2018. 

OMB Expiration Date: July 31, 2021. 

Title: High-Cost Universal Service 

Support. 

Form Number: FCC Form 481, FCC 

Form 505, FCC Form 507, FCC Form 

508, FCC Form 509 and FCC Form 525. 

Type of Review: Revision of a 

currently approved collection. 

Respondents: Business or other forprofit, not-for-profit institutions and 

state, local or tribal government. 

Number of Respondents and 

Responses: 1,877 respondents; 14,335 

responses. 

Estimated Time per Response: 0.5–15 

hours. 

Frequency of Response: On occasion, 

quarterly and annual reporting 

requirements, recordkeeping 

requirement and third party disclosure 

requirement. 

Obligation to Respond: Required to 

obtain or retain benefits. Statutory 

authority for this information collection 

is contained in 47 U.S.C. 151–154, 155, 

201–206, 214, 218–220, 251, 252, 254, 

256, 303(r), 332, 403, 405, 410, and 

1302. 

Total Annual Burden: 63,486 hours. 

Total Annual Cost: No Cost. 

Privacy Act Impact Assessment: No 

impact(s). 

Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: 

The Commission notes that USAC must 

preserve the confidentiality of all data 

obtained from respondents; must not 

use the data except for purposes of 

administering the universal service 

programs; and must not disclose data in 

company-specific form unless directed 

to do so by the Commission. Privatelyheld rate-of-return carriers may file the 

financial information they disclose in 

FCC Form 481 pursuant to a protective 

order. 

Needs and Uses: On November 18, 

2011, the Commission adopted an order 

reforming its high-cost universal service 

support mechanisms. Connect America 

Fund; A National Broadband Plan for 

Our Future; Establish Just and 

Reasonable Rates for Local Exchange 

Carriers; High-Cost Universal Service 

Support; Developing a Unified 

Intercarrier Compensation Regime; 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES