69302 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 19, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

emission limits.’’, 3745–18–61 ‘‘Miami 

County emission limits.’’, 3745–18–62 

‘‘Monroe County emission limits.’’, 

3745–18–63 ‘‘Montgomery County 

emission limits.’’, 3745–18–64 ‘‘Morgan 

County emission limits.’’, 3745–18–65 

‘‘Morrow County emission limits.’’, 

3745–18–66 ‘‘Muskingum County 

emission limits.’’, 3745–18–67 ‘‘Noble 

County emission limits.’’, 3745–18–68 

‘‘Ottawa County emission limits.’’, 

3745–18–69 ‘‘Paulding County emission 

limits.’’, 3745–18–70 ‘‘Perry County 

emission limits.’’, 3745–18–71 

‘‘Pickaway County emission limits.’’, 

3745–18–72 ‘‘Pike County emission 

limits.’’, 3745–18–73 ‘‘Portage County 

emission limits.’’, 3745–18–74 ‘‘Preble 

County emission limits.’’, 3745–18–75 

‘‘Putnam County emission limits.’’, 

3745–18–76 ‘‘Richland County emission 

limits.’’, 3745–18–77 ‘‘Ross County 

emission limits.’’, 3745–18–79 ‘‘Scioto 

County emission limits.’’, 3745–18–81 

‘‘Shelby County emission limits.’’, 

3745–18–83 ‘‘Summit County emission 

limits.’’, 3745–18–84 ‘‘Trumbull County 

emission limits.’’, 3745–18–85 

‘‘Tuscarawas County emission limits.’’, 

3745–18–86 ‘‘Union County emission 

limits.’’, 3745–18–87 ‘‘Van Wert County 

emission limits.’’, 3745–18–88 ‘‘Vinton 

County emission limits.’’, 3745–18–89 

‘‘Warren County emission limits.’’, 

3745–18–91 ‘‘Wayne County emission 

limits.’’, 3745–18–92 ‘‘Williams County 

emission limits.’’, 3745–18–93 ‘‘Wood 

County emission limits.’’, 3745–18–94 

‘‘Wyandot County emission limits.’’, 

adopted on February 7, 2011, effective 

February 17, 2011. 

(B) February 7, 2011, ‘‘Director’s Final 

Findings and Orders’’, signed by Scott J. 

Nally, Director, Ohio Environmental 

Protection Agency, adopting the rules 

identified in paragraph (160)(i)(A) of 

this section. 

(C) Ohio Administrative Code Rules 

3745–18–01 ‘‘Definitions and 

incorporation by reference.’’, 3745–18– 

54 ‘‘Lucas County emission limits.’’, 

3745–18–82 ‘‘Stark County emission 

limits.’’, adopted on March 24, 2011, 

effective April 3, 2011. 

(D) March 24, 2011, ‘‘Director’s Final 

Findings and Orders’’, signed by Scott J. 

Nally, Director, Ohio Environmental 

Protection Agency, adopting the rules 

identified in paragraph (160)(i)(C) of 

this section. 

■ 3. Section 52.1881 is amended by 

revising paragraph (a)(4) to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.1881 Control strategy: Sulfur oxides 

(sulfur dioxide). 

(a) * * * 

(4) Notwithstanding the portions of 

this section that EPA has either 

disapproved or taken no action on, EPA 

has approved a complete plan 

addressing all counties in the State of 

Ohio. In addition, specific approved 

rules are listed in § 52.1870. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2013–27561 Filed 11–18–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 300 

[EPA–HQ–SFUND–1910–0010; FRL 9902– 

79–Region 9] 

National Oil and Hazardous 

Substances Pollution Contingency 

Plan; National Priorities List: Partial 

Deletion of the El Toro Marine Corps 

Air Station Superfund Site 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) Region IX is publishing a 

direct final Notice of Deletion of 

portions of the El Toro Marine Corp Air 

Station Superfund Site (Site), located in 

Irvine, California, 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 California through the 

Department of Toxic Substances Control 

(DTSC), because EPA has determined 

that all appropriate response actions at 

these identified parcels under CERCLA 

have been completed. However, this 

partial deletion does not preclude future 

actions under Superfund. 

This partial deletion pertains to all 

Site media, including soil and 

groundwater, of parcels I–A, II–A, III–A, 

II–J, II–Q, II–S, II–T, III–C, I–C, II–U, I– 

B, I–E, I–G, I–H, I–I, I–J, I–L, I–M, I–P, 

II–G, II–I, II–P, III–D, I–K, I–N, I–O, I– 

S, II–E, II–L, II–M, II–R, I–Q, I–R, II–B, 

II–K, and II–O of the Site. The current 

remaining areas of the Site will remain 

on the NPL and are not being 

considered for deletion as part of this 

action. 

DATES: This direct final partial deletion 

is effective January 21, 2014 unless EPA 

receives adverse comments by 

December 19, 2013. 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–1910–0010, by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Email: Aycock.Mary@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (415) 947–3528. 

• Mail: Mary Aycock, U.S. EPA 

Remedial Project Manager, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region IX, Mail Code SFD–8–1, 75 

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 

94105. 

• Hand delivery: Mary Aycock, U.S. 

EPA Remedial Project Manager, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region IX, Mail Code SFD81, 75 

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 

94105. 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–SFUND–1910– 

0010. 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 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 19, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 69303 

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: 

Superfund Records Center, Mail Stop 

SFD–7C, 95 Hawthorne Street, Room 

403, San Francisco, CA 94105. Phone: 

(415) 820–4700. Hours: Mon. thru 

Fri.—8 a.m. to 5 p.m. 

Heritage Park Regional Library, 

Reference Section, 14361 Yale Street, 

Irvine, CA 92714. Phone: (949) 936– 

4040. Hours: Mon. thru Thu.—10 a.m. 

to 9 p.m.; Sat.—10 a.m. to 5 p.m.; 

Sun.—12 p.m. to 5 p.m. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Mary Aycock, Remedial Project 

Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region IX, Mail Code SFD81 75 

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 

94105, (415) 972–2389, email: 

Aycock.Mary@epamail.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 IX is publishing this 

direct final Notice of Partial Deletion for 

the El Toro Marine Corp Air Station 

(Site), from the National Priorities List 

(NPL). This partial deletion pertains to 

all Site media, including soil and 

groundwater, of parcels I–A, II–A, III–A, 

II–J, II–Q, II–S, II–T, III–C, I–C, II–U, 

I–B, I–E, I–G, I–H, I–I, I–J, I–L, I–M, I– 

P, II–G, II–I, II–P, III–D, I–K, I–N, I–O, 

I–S, II–E, II–L, II–M, II–R, I–Q, I–R, II– 

B, II–K, and II–O of the Site. The 

properties proposed for deletion are 

shown in the map available in the 

partial deletion docket and will be 

referred to hereafter as ‘‘the properties 

proposed for deletion.’’ The NPL 

constitutes Appendix B of 40 CFR part 

300 which is the Oil and Hazardous 

Substances Pollution Contingency Plan 

(NCP), which EPA promulgated 

pursuant to Section 105 of the 

Comprehensive Environmental 

Response, Compensation and Liability 

Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended. 

EPA maintains the NPL as the list of 

sites that appear to present a significant 

risk to public health, welfare, or the 

environment. Sites on the NPL may be 

the subject of remedial actions financed 

by the Hazardous Substance Superfund 

(Fund). This partial deletion of the El 

Toro Marine Corp Air Station 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 Fundfinanced remedial action if future 

conditions warrant such actions. 

Because EPA considers this action to 

be noncontroversial and routine, this 

action will be effective January 21, 2014 

unless EPA receives adverse comments 

by December 19, 2013. Along with this 

direct final Notice of Partial Deletion, 

EPA is co-publishing a Notice of Intent 

for Partial Deletion in the ‘‘Proposed 

Rules’’ section of the Federal Register. 

If adverse comments are received within 

the 30-day public comment period on 

this partial deletion action, EPA will 

publish a timely withdrawal of this 

direct final Notice of Partial Deletion 

before the effective date of the partial 

deletion and the partial 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 

Partial 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 properties proposed for 

deletion of El Toro Marine Corp Air 

Station and demonstrates how they 

meet the deletion criteria. Section V 

discusses EPA’s action to partially 

delete the Site parcels 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. Partial Deletion Procedures 

The following procedures apply to the 

properties proposed for deletion: 

(1) EPA has consulted with the state 

of California prior to developing this 

direct final Notice of Partial Deletion 

and the Notice of Intent for Partial 

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 

Partial Deletion prior to their 

publication today, and the state, through 

the Department of Toxic Substances 

Control, has concurred on the partial 

deletion of the Site from the NPL. 

(3) Concurrently with the publication 

of this direct final Notice of Partial 

Deletion, a notice of the availability of 

the parallel Notice of Intent for Partial 

Deletion is being published in a major 

local newspaper, the Orange County 

Register. The newspaper notice 

announces the 30-day public comment 

period concerning the Notice of Intent 

for Partial Deletion of the Site from the 

NPL. 

(4) The 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 

above. 

(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 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
69304 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 19, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

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 the 

properties proposed for deletion from 

the NPL: 

Site Background and History 

The former El Toro Marine Corps Air 

Station (EPA ID: CA6170023208), (El 

Toro MCAS) covering approximately 

4,712 acres in the City of Irvine, County 

of Orange, California is located at 33 

degrees (°) 38 minutes (′) to 33°41′ north 

latitude,117°41′ to 117°45′ west 

longitude, Township 6 South, Range 6 

West (T6S/R6W) (Sections 2–5, 7–11, 

16–17, 20–21) and T5S/R8W (Sections 

32–33, 35). 

Development of former El Toro MCAS 

began in July 1942, when construction 

of a United States Marine Corps pilot’s 

fleet operational training facility began 

on approximately 2,319 acres of land in 

Orange County, California. The Site was 

commissioned as El Toro Marine Corps 

Air Station on March 17, 1943. In 1950, 

the Station was selected for 

development as a master jet air station 

and permanent center for marine 

aviation of the west coast to support the 

operations and combat readiness of 

Fleet Marine Forces, Pacific. Between 

1944 and 1986, additional land was 

acquired to bring the size of the onstation portion of the installation to 

4,712 acres. 

Major activities at the Site 

contributing to the generation of 

hazardous wastes included vehicle 

maintenance, ground support 

maintenance, aircraft maintenance, and 

aircraft corrosion control. Other waste 

generating activities included munitions 

disposal, pest control, fire protection 

training, and laboratory operations 

including photo development, nondestructive inspection, and fuel 

analysis. Wastes generated by the 

maintenance operations included spent 

solvents and waste oils (including TCE, 

TCA, MEK, toluene, and PD–680), fuels, 

greases removed from the spent 

solvents, and spent strippers. Aircraft 

washrack activities resulted in discharge 

of alkaline soaps, detergents, and small 

amounts of PD–680. Vehicle and aircraft 

waste discharge produced the greatest 

volume of industrial waste of any of the 

base activities. 

A number of potentially contaminated 

areas were identified on the Site, 

including four landfills suspected of 

containing both hazardous and solid 

waste, and other areas where 

polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), 

battery acids, leaded fuels, and other 

hazardous substances were suspected of 

being dumped or spilled. A Remedial 

Investigation (RI) conducted by El Toro 

MCAS identified volatile organic 

compounds (VOCs), primarily 

trichloroethene (TCE), in groundwater 

that migrated more than three miles off 

base. The primary source of the 

groundwater contamination was two 

large aircraft hangars. Land irrigated by 

wells is located within three miles of 

the site; however, none of these wells 

are drinking water sources. Surface 

water flows into the Upper Newport Bay 

Ecological Reserve, located 

approximately eight miles from the 

base. 

In recent years, portions of the Site 

were transferred to different 

governmental agencies. In 1998, the 

Bake Parkway/Interstate 5 public 

highway expansion project was 

completed resulting in the transfer of 

approximately 23 acres to the California 

Department of Transportation. In 2001, 

896.7 acres in the northeast portion of 

the station were transferred to the 

Federal Aviation Administration. 

The Site was decommissioned as an 

active base in July 1999. The parcels to 

be deleted from the NPL have all been 

transferred from the Department of the 

Navy (DON) to Heritage Fields LLC 

(Heritage Fields) under the Base 

Realignment and Closure Act of 1995. 

Heritage Fields plans to build a 

combination of residential, commercial, 

retail and educational facilities on Site. 

In addition, Heritage Fields has 

transferred 1,387 acres to the City of 

Irvine to create the Orange County Great 

Park. The Orange County Great Park 

will be home to a world-class Olympicstyle sports village and entertainment 

center, a new high school and 

neighborhood elementary schools, and 

infrastructure and support for a 

substantially expanded Irvine 

transportation center. Redevelopment 

efforts are on-going. 

The Site was proposed to be placed 

on the NPL on June 24, 1988 (53 FR 

23988); and was placed on the NPL on 

February 21, 1990 (55 FR 6154). In 

October 1990, the U.S. EPA (EPA), 

California Department of Health 

Services (CDPH) (the CDPH was the 

predecessor program to the California 

Department of Health Toxic Substances 

Control (DTSC)), California Regional 

Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) 

and the DON signed a Federal Facility 

Agreement (FFA) which formalized the 

process for environmental response 

actions and the relative roles of the EPA, 

state agencies, and the DON under 

CERCLA and the Installation 

Restoration Program (IRP). The FFA was 

signed by the EPA, the State of 

California, and the DON in October 

1990. 

Environmental Baseline Surveys 

(EBSs), which identify parcels of land 

for sale, lease, or needing further 

investigation, were completed in 1995 

and 2003. The EBSs identified 

environmental factors and locations of 

concern (LOCs) where further 

evaluation and/or actions were ongoing 

or required. Once identified, these LOCs 

were reviewed by the DON, state 

regulatory agencies and EPA. Based 

upon this review, sites were either 

recommended for no further action 

(NFA) or for further sampling. Based 

upon the subsequent sampling, those 

sites either became NFA sites or 

proceeded to the more extensive 

Comprehensive Environmental 

Response, Compensation, and Liability 

Act (CERCLA) cleanup process. 

The portions of the Site to be deleted 

from the NPL include 1,900.4 acres of 

contiguous property. All of these parcels 

have been transferred from the DON to 

Heritage Fields. Prior to transferring 

property at El Toro MCAS, the DON was 

required, pursuant to Section 102(h) of 

CERCLA, to document that all 

environmental impacts associated with 

the DON’s activities on the Site had 

been thoroughly investigated and 

appropriate remedial actions have been 

taken to protect the public health, 

welfare, and the environment. DON 

presented this documentation in a series 

of successive Finding of Suitability to 

Transfer (FOST) documents. In each 

case, the FOST described the LOCs on 

the property to be transferred and the 

investigation and remedial actions taken 

at those properties to obtain 

concurrence from the EPA, CDPH/DTSC 

and RWQCB. A total of 7 FOSTs were 

finalized for all parcels to be deleted 

between July 2005 and September 2012. 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 19, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 69305 

LOC site narratives where release, 

disposal, and/or migration of hazardous 

substances occurred, but at 

concentrations that did not require a 

removal or remedial action because site 

conditions were found to be protective 

of both human health and the 

environment may be found in a tables 

appendix in the Deletion Docket. This 

appendix does not include LOCs that 

were only contaminated with 

petroleum, as these sites are not subject 

to CERCLA based on the petroleum 

exemption. In total, 112 such LOCs were 

thoroughly evaluated and recommended 

for no further action. 

This partial deletion covers the 

following Site parcels: I–A, II–A, III–A, 

II–J, II–Q, II–S, II–T, III–C, I–C, II–U, 

I–B, I–E, I–G, I–H, I–I, I–J, I–L, I–M, I– 

P, II–G, II–I, II–P, III–D, I–K, I–N, I–O, 

I–S, II–E, II–L, II–M, II–R, I–Q, I–R, II– 

B, II–K, and II–O. A map identifying the 

areas to be deleted, as well as the areas 

to remain on the NPL, is available in the 

partial deletion docket. 

1. Property Covered by FOST #1 

Approximately 2,798 acres of the Site 

were covered by FOST #1, including 

1,070.2 acres that EPA determined had 

not been impacted by hazardous waste 

and that therefore were not part of the 

NPL. These two areas of the Site were 

removed from the NPL through two 

clarification letters issued by EPA. 

Clarification Areas A, B, C, and D, 

consisting of 978.6 acres, were removed 

from the NPL through an EPA 

clarification letter dated October 27, 

2005. Clarification Area E, consisting of 

91.6 acres, was removed from the NPL 

through an EPA clarification letter dated 

March 21, 2006. 

The unclarified portions of the FOST 

#1 area consisted of three Transfer 

Parcels: Transfer Parcels I–A, II–A, and 

III–A. 

1.1 Transfer Parcel I–A 

Transfer Parcel I–A was 

approximately 809.5 acres. This parcel 

contained 225 non-demolished 

buildings/structures/facilities including 

the units located in the Saddleback 

Terrace housing area. In addition, Parcel 

I–A contained IRP Site 20—Hobby Shop 

and a portion of IRP Site 25—Major 

Drainages. 

1.1.1 IRP Site 20—Hobby Shop 

Site Location and History 

IRP Site 20—Hobby Shop 

encompassed approximately 0.5 acre 

immediately northwest of the 

intersection of North 9th Street and 

West Marine Way and included 

Building 626. Beginning in 1967, the 

site was used as an auto shop for 

military personnel to service and repair 

privately owned vehicles. Kerosene was 

reportedly used to wash down the 

paved area at the site until 

approximately 1976. The wash runoff 

drained into a catch basin situated in 

the entry driveway and finally drained 

into an oil/water separator (OWS). From 

1976 until closure of the Hobby Shop in 

1999, a biodegradable soap was used in 

place of kerosene. 

Site 20 originally consisted of four 

units: 

• Unit 1—Shallow Drainage Swale 

(1–2 feet below grade), adjacent to the 

east side of Building 626. 

• Unit 2—South Drainage Ditch, ran 

along North 9th Street 

• Unit 3—Stained Area, small area 

adjacent to the northwest side of 

Building 626 

• Unit 4—Inner Courtyard of Building 

626, an entry driveway, and a frontsloping area adjacent to the drainage 

ditch along North 9th Street. The inner 

portion was paved with asphalt. The 

entry driveway was concrete and 

crossed over the drainage ditch. The 

front area was covered with grass with 

some bare spots and various trees. 

Remedial Investigations 

Investigations at the IRP Site 20 

included a RCRA Facility Assessment 

(RFA), a Phase I RI, aerial photograph 

surveys in 1993, and a Phase II RI in 

1996. In 1997, Units 2 and 3 were 

excluded from the site based on the 

CERCLA petroleum exemption, 42 

U.S.C. 9601(14)(F). Sites containing 

only petroleum contamination were, 

and continue to be remediated under 

the oversight of the RWQCB). 

Soil sampling identified VOCs, semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs), 

PCBs, and pesticides at the site, all 

below residential PRGs. Arsenic was 

detected at concentrations above the 

former El Toro MCAS background 

value. The RI of the site indicated that 

the site-related contamination was 

limited to the shallow soil interval. 

Selected Remedy 

The human health and ecological risk 

assessments showed that the 

contaminants present in the soil did not 

present an unacceptable risk to human 

health or the environment. Therefore, 

no remedial action was required. A 

Record of Decision (ROD) for NFA was 

signed on September 30, 1997. No risks 

are present at IRP Site 20 and no 

institutional controls are present. 

Response Actions and Cleanup 

Standards 

No response actions have been taken 

and no cleanup standards have been set. 

Operation and Maintenance 

No operation and maintenance is 

required for this site. 

1.1.2 IRP Site 25—Major Drainages 

IRP Site 25 encompassed 

approximately 22 acres and comprised 

the four major washes that flowed 

through former El Toro MCAS. These 

included Agua Chinon Wash, Bee 

Canyon Wash, Borrego Canyon Wash, 

and Marshburn Channel. Three of these 

drainages (Agua Chinon Wash, Bee 

Canyon Wash, and Borrego Canyon 

Wash) were continuations of natural 

washes that originated in the Santa Ana 

Mountains. Surface drainage from the 

hills and upgradient irrigated farmland 

combined with runoff generated from 

extensive paved surfaces at former El 

Toro MCAS. The on-station storm sewer 

system discharged to the drainage 

channels, which then flowed into San 

Diego Creek. San Diego Creek 

discharged into upper Newport Bay, 

about 7 miles downstream from its 

intersection with Marshburn Channel. 

These washes traversed Transfer Parcels 

I–A, II–A, and III–A, and also traversed 

property that was not part of FOST #1. 

Remedial Investigations 

IRP Site 25 was constituted before the 

source of the regional VOC groundwater 

contamination had been identified as 

IRP Site 24 (which is not part of this 

deletion). IRP Site 25 was identified for 

a Phase II RI, but the drainages were 

investigated as part of the Phase I RI for 

IRP Sites 18 and 24 to evaluate the 

source of the off-site VOC groundwater 

plume. Potential contamination within 

the major drainages and San Diego 

Creek was assessed by analyzing surface 

water, sediment, soil, and soil gas 

samples. Except for the Borrego Canyon 

Wash, metals and pesticides were 

detected above former El Toro MCAS 

background concentrations in all 

drainages. Significant petroleum 

hydrocarbon contamination was 

detected at depths of 15 to 20 feet below 

ground surface (bgs) at the southern end 

of Agua Chinon Wash, near the former 

El Toro MCAS boundary. 

Within the Agua Chinon Wash, total 

petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) were 

detected at depths up to 57 feet bgs. The 

RI of the site indicated that the siterelated contamination was limited to 

sediment and surface water. 

Selected Remedy 

The human health and ecological risk 

assessments showed that the 

contaminants present in these media 

did not present an unacceptable risk to 

human health or the environment. 

Therefore, no remedial action was 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
69306 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 19, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

required. The Draft Final RI Report was 

completed in 1997, and a ROD for NFA 

was signed on September 30, 1997. No 

risks are present at IRP Site 25 and no 

institutional controls are present. 

Response Actions and Cleanup 

Standards 

No response actions have been taken 

and no cleanup standards have been set. 

Operation and Maintenance 

No operation and maintenance is 

required for this site. 

1.2 Transfer Parcel II–A 

Transfer Parcel II–A was 

approximately 1,439.6 acres. This parcel 

contained a golf course and 1,078 nondemolished buildings/structures/

facilities which included the units 

located in San Joaquin, Vista Terrace, 

Navy/Marine (NAMAR), and Wherry 

housing areas. Transfer Parcel II–A 

included IRP Sites 6 and 19, and a 

portion of IRP Site 25 (described above). 

1.2.1 IRP Site 6—Drop Tank Drainage 

Area No. 1 

Site Location and History 

IRP Site 6 encompassed 

approximately 3 acres bounded by 

taxiways to the north and west, a 

concrete aircraft parking apron to the 

east, and East Marine Way to the south. 

The site consisted of three units: 

• Unit 1 was an area along the edge 

of a concrete parking apron where 

aircraft drop tanks were formerly 

drained of residual jet fuel and then 

cleaned prior to reuse. 

• Unit 2 was a shallow drainage 

swale that extends from the north side 

of Building 727, west to a catch basin 

that eventually discharged into the Agua 

Chinon Wash. The catch basin received 

surface runoff and sediment from the 

site. 

• Unit 3 was a flat, grass-covered area 

south of the drainage swale where drop 

tanks were stored. 

From 1969 to 1983, aircraft drop tanks 

were transported to the site where the 

fuel remaining in the tanks was drained. 

Residual jet propulsion fuel, grade 5 

(JP 5) in the tanks was drained to the 

concrete apron, and the combined fuel/ 

rinse water ran onto the adjacent grassy 

area. In addition to fuel, waste lubricant 

oils from maintenance operations were 

also reportedly stored in drums and 

staged in the area. 

Approximately 1,400 gallons of JP 5 

fuel were reportedly drained from the 

drop tanks onto the concrete apron and 

washed onto the adjacent area. Portions 

of the unpaved areas at the site were 

also reportedly used for storing oil 

drums. It was estimated that 

approximately 300 gallons of waste oil 

leaked from these storage drums at the 

site. 

Remedial Investigations 

Investigations conducted at IRP Site 6 

included a Phase I remedial 

investigation (RI) and aerial photograph 

surveys in 1993, employee interviews in 

1994, and a Phase II RI in 1996. During 

the investigations, VOCs, SVOCs, and 

polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons 

were detected at concentrations below 

residential PRGs. The maximum arsenic 

concentration was detected at a depth of 

Property of 8–10 feet bgs and was above 

the former El Toro MCAS background 

concentration for arsenic. The RI of the 

site indicated that the site-related 

contamination was limited to the 

shallow soil interval. 

Selected Remedy 

The human health and ecological risk 

assessments indicated that the 

contaminants present in the soil did not 

present an unacceptable risk to human 

health or the environment. Therefore, 

no remedial action was required. A ROD 

for NFA was signed on September 30, 

1997. 

Response Actions and Cleanup 

Standards 

No response actions have been taken 

and no cleanup standards have been set. 

Operation and Maintenance 

No operation and maintenance is 

required for this site. 

1.2.2 IRP Site 19—Aircraft 

Expeditionary Refueling Site 

Site Location and History 

IRP Site 19 was within Transfer Parcel 

II–A and encompassed approximately 4 

acres southwest of Buildings 404 and 

414. Between 1964 and 1986, the site 

operated as a fuel-storage and fueldispensing area. The site consisted of 

six 20,000-gallon JP 5 fuel bladders in 

4-foot-high earthen revetments and 

associated piping and fuel-dispensing 

equipment. The site originally consisted 

of four units: 

• Unit 1, Northeast Stained Area 

• Unit 2, Excavated Areas; 

• Unit 3, Stained Area Around 

Excavations; and 

• Unit 4, Pump Station (this area was 

added for the Phase II RI and then was 

removed under the CERCLA petroleum 

exclusion). 

Initial Response 

Various spills and leaks reportedly 

occurred during operation of the site. In 

one instance, an estimated 20,000 

gallons of JP 5 were reportedly released 

after a bladder rupture. Petroleum 

hydrocarbons were detected in the soil 

beneath the ruptured bladder. 

The fuel bladders were removed in 

1986, and the soil was excavated to a 

maximum depth of 15 feet bgs in a 30- 

foot-square area beneath the location of 

the bladder rupture (Unit 2). The 

excavation was partially backfilled to a 

depth of approximately 11 feet in 1994. 

Prior to backfill, soil samples were 

collected within the excavated area, i.e., 

IRP Site 19. No chemicals of potential 

concern were detected at concentrations 

greater than EPA industrial PRGs. In 

1996, the remaining excavation was 

backfilled to grade the surrounding area 

with clean fill material. An additional 

19,000-square-foot area beneath the 

locations of the other bladders was also 

excavated in 1986 to a depth of 

approximately 2.5 feet. All of the 

buildings/structures/facilities at the site 

were removed following site closure and 

were replaced by a pump station and 

UST complex situated adjacent to the 

east side of the site. 

Remedial Investigations 

Investigations conducted at the site 

included a Phase I RI and aerial 

photograph surveys in 1993, employee 

interviews in 1994, and a Phase II RI in 

1996. The investigations indicated 

SVOCs at concentrations below 

residential PRGs, with the exception of 

benzo(a)pyrene, which was above the 

industrial PRG value. VOCs were 

detected at concentrations below 

residential PRGs. Arsenic was detected 

at concentrations above the industrial 

PRG value, and the maximum arsenic 

value was above the former El Toro 

MCAS background concentration. 

Selected Remedy 

The human health and ecological risk 

assessments showed that the 

contaminants present in the soil did not 

present an unacceptable risk to human 

health or the environment. A ROD for 

NFA for Units 2 and 3 was signed on 

September 30, 1997. Unit 1 was 

excluded from the IRP under the 

CERCLA petroleum exclusion in 1995 

(closed by RWQCB in a letter dated May 

14, 1997), and Unit 4 was excluded from 

the IRP under the CERCLA petroleum 

exclusion in 1997 (Unit 4 was being 

addressed with a number of USTs and 

the associated area was therefore 

unsuitable for transfer and was not part 

of FOST #1). 

Response Actions and Cleanup 

Standards 

No further response actions have been 

taken. 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 19, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 69307 

Operation and Maintenance 

No operation and maintenance is 

required for this site. 

1.2.3 PCB T56, concrete pad of 

transformer 56 

Site Location and History 

A minor release of transformer oil 

containing PCBs 

Selected Remedy 

No risks are present at PCB T56 and 

no institutional controls are present. 

Response Actions and Cleanup 

Standards 

The transformer was replaced and the 

concrete pad was removed. No further 

action was required. 

Operation and Maintenance 

No operation and maintenance is 

required for this site. 

1.3 Transfer Parcel III–A 

Transfer Parcel III–A was 

approximately 329.0 acres. This parcel 

contained 10 non-demolished 

buildings/structures/facilities, as well as 

a portion of IRP Site 13. 

1.3.1 IRP Site 13—Oil Change Area 

Site Location and History 

IRP Site 13 encompassed 

approximately 34,000 square feet and 

was bounded on the north by Former 

Tank Farm No. 2 and on the south by 

the storage yard for Building 242. The 

site was situated within Transfer Parcel 

III–A and Carve-Out (CO) III–B. The site 

was relatively flat, unpaved, and 

generally unvegetated. Site 13 consisted 

of two units: Unit 1 comprised the area 

southeast of Tank Farm No. 2 and Unit 

2 comprised the area southwest of Tank 

Farm No. 2. Trucks were driven to the 

area southeast of the tank farm (Unit 1) 

for oil changes, and crank case oil was 

frequently drained onto the ground. 

From 1977 to 1983, approximately 7,000 

gallons of waste oil were drained onto 

the ground. The oily soil was 

subsequently removed, and no visible 

evidence of the oily soil remained. A 

review of aerial photographs indicated 

heavy staining throughout the area 

between the tank farm and Building 242 

(Unit 2), which persisted over the years 

of photographic record. It is likely that 

oil changes were also conducted in that 

area. 

Remedial Investigations 

Investigations conducted at the site 

included an RFA, a Phase I RI and aerial 

photographic surveys in 1993, and 

employee interviews in 1994. VOCs, 

SVOCs, polynuclear aromatic 

hydrocarbons, and pesticides were 

detected at concentrations below 

residential PRGs. Arsenic was detected 

at concentrations above the industrial 

PRG from the surface to a depth of 80 

feet bgs. The maximum arsenic 

concentration was below the former El 

Toro MCAS background concentration. 

Total recoverable petroleum 

hydrocarbons (TRPH) were detected at 

the soil surface and at a depth of 5 feet 

bgs. Based on the results of the Phase I 

RI investigation, a Phase II RI was not 

recommended. The RI of the site 

indicated that the site-related 

contamination was limited to the 

shallow soil interval. 

Selected Remedy 

The human health and ecological risk 

assessments showed that the 

contaminants present in the soil did not 

present an unacceptable risk to human 

health or the environment. A ROD for 

NFA was signed on September 30, 1997. 

Response Actions and Cleanup 

Standards 

No response actions have been taken 

and no cleanup standards have been set. 

Operation and Maintenance 

No operation and maintenance is 

required for this site. No deed 

restrictions were recommended for Site 

13 due to chemicals present in the soil. 

However since the groundwater beneath 

Site 13 was contaminated by 

trichloroethylene (TCE) and 

tetrachloroethylene (PCE; also 

perchloroethylene) due to Site 24—VOC 

source area, when the NFA ROD was 

signed on September 30, 1997, the use 

restrictions prohibiting drilling of wells 

and/or extraction of groundwater and 

allowing access for groundwater 

monitoring and maintenance of 

equipment associated with groundwater 

remediation were to be addressed in the 

ROD for Site 18 and Site 24. When the 

Final ROD for Site 18 and Site 24 was 

completed in 2002, the updated VOC 

plume and 500 foot buffer zone were no 

longer located beneath Site 13. 

Consequently, groundwater restrictions 

due to the Site 24 VOC plume were no 

longer applicable for Site 13. 

2. Property Covered by FOST #2 

Approximately 8 acres of El Toro 

MCAS were covered by FOST #2. This 

area consisted of four Transfer Parcels 

(II–J, II–S, II–T, and III–C), and a portion 

of one Transfer Parcel (II–Q). Transfer 

parcels II–J and II–Q did not contain any 

CERCLA LOCs. Transfer Parcel II–T was 

approximately 0.5 acres in size and 

contained one building/structure/

facility (Building 761). Transfer Parcel 

III–C was approximately 1 acre in size 

and contained one building/structure/

facility (Building 240). NFA 

determinations were made for all LOCs 

within Transfer Parcels II–T and III–C. 

2.1 Transfer Parcel II–S 

Transfer Parcel II–S was 

approximately 1.3 acres in size and 

included six buildings/structures/

facilities (Buildings 374, 377, 447, 448, 

566, and 726) and former Building 603 

(demolished). 

2.1.1 RFA 131 

Site Location and History 

RFA 131, an engine test cell, was 

located within Transfer Parcel II–S near 

Building 447. 

Initial Response 

Near surface soils were removed in 

1997. 

Selected Remedy 

DTSC concurred with NFA in a letter 

from July 1999. RWQCB concurred with 

NFA in June 2000. 

Response Actions and Cleanup 

Standards 

No further response actions have been 

taken. 

Operation and Maintenance 

No operation and maintenance is 

required for this site. 

3. Property Covered by FOST #3 

Approximately 3.9 acres of El Toro 

MCAS were covered by FOST #3. 

Site Location and History 

This area consisted of two Transfer 

Parcels referred to in FOST #3 as 

‘‘Carve-Outs’’ (COs): 

• CO I–C consisted of approximately 

0.1 acre in the northeastern portion of 

the former base. This CO was created 

during preparation of the 2004 Finding 

of Suitability to Lease when a portion of 

an underground pipeline (Norwalk-El 

Toro Pipeline) was believed to exist 

within this area. However, based on a 

detailed review of the pipeline physical 

alignment, it was determined that no 

portion of the pipeline was within 

Transfer Parcel I–C. No buildings or 

utilities were located on the Transfer 

Parcel. 

• CO II–U consisted of approximately 

3.8 acres in the northeastern portion of 

the former base. No buildings or utilities 

were located on the CO. 

Initial Response 

A portion of the Norwalk-El Toro 

Pipeline was removed from CO II–U in 

the fall of 2006, with the exception of 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
69308 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 19, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

approximately 100 feet of pipeline that 

remains under Agua Chinon Wash. 

Remedial Investigations 

The COs were evaluated during the 

initial phase of environmental 

assessment and the results were 

documented in the Final 2003 EBS. The 

EBS concluded that no hazardous 

substances were stored or released on 

the COs. 

Selected Remedy 

No further action was necessary in 

these areas. 

Response Actions and Cleanup 

Standards 

No response actions have been taken 

and no cleanup standards have been set. 

Operation and Maintenance 

No operation and maintenance is 

required for this site. 

4. Property Covered by FOST #4 

Approximately 42.9 acres of El Toro 

MCAS were covered by FOST #4. 

Site Location and History 

This area consisted of thirteen COs: 

COs I–B, I–E, I–G, I–H, I–I, I–J, I–L, I– 

M, I–P, II–G, II–I, II–P, III–D. COs I–L, 

I–M, I–P, II–G, II–I, and II–P did not 

contain CERCLA LOCs. 

Remedial Investigations 

As these COs did not contain CERCLA 

LOCs, no remedial investigations were 

conducted. 

Selected Remedy 

No Further Action determinations 

were issued for all LOCs within COs I– 

B, I–E, I–G, I–H, I–I, I–J, and II–G. CO 

III–D contained a portion of IRP Site 13. 

All other LOCs in CO III–D received 

NFA determinations and no cleanup 

was required. 

Response Actions and Cleanup 

Standards 

No response actions have been taken 

and no cleanup standards have been set. 

Operation and Maintenance 

No operation and maintenance is 

required for these sites. 

5. Property Covered by FOST #5 

Approximately 119.3 acres of El Toro 

MCAS were covered by FOST #5. 

Site Location and History 

This area included nine COs: COs I– 

F, I–K, I–N, I–O, I–S, II–E, II–L, II–M, II– 

R, and CO Building 746. CO I–F is not 

part of this deletion request and will 

remain on the NPL. CO Building 746 is 

located within CO II–D and is not part 

of this partial deletion request and will 

also remain on the NPL. COs I–K, I–N, 

I–O, I–S contained only petroleum LOCs 

or no release, disposal, and/or migration 

of hazardous substances occurred there. 

Remedial Investigations 

As these COs did not contain CERCLA 

LOCs, no remedial investigations were 

conducted. 

Selected Remedy 

No Further Action determinations 

were issued for all LOCs within CO II– 

E and II–M. CO II–L contained a portion 

of IRP Site 25. All other LOCs in CO II– 

L received NFA determinations and no 

cleanup was required. 

Response Actions and Cleanup 

Standards 

No response actions have been taken 

and no cleanup standards have been set. 

Operation and Maintenance 

No operation and maintenance is 

required for these sites. 

5.1 CO II–R 

CO II–R consisted of approximately 

1.2 acres and was located in the 

southeast portion of the former base. 

5.1.1 Resource Conservation and 

Recovery Act (RCRA) Facility 

Assessment (RFA) Site 244/PCB T74 

Site Location and History 

There was one pad-mounted 

transformer (PCB T74) at Building 457. 

Historically, disposal activities were 

conducted at this site, though the dates 

of these operations are unknown. A 

response action was required for 

releases of transformer oil containing 

PCBs at Building 457 (RCRA Facility 

Assessment (RFA) Site 244). 

Remedial Investigations 

While no remedial investigations 

were conducted under CERCLA, RFA 

Site 244/PCB T74 was evaluated under 

a RCRA Facility Assessment. 

Selected Remedy 

DTSC concurred with NFA for RFA 

244 in a letter dated December 1998. 

EPA and DTSC concurred with NFA for 

PCB T74 in September 2003. 

Response Actions and Cleanup 

Standards 

Shallow soil samples that were 

collected in the area affected by the PCB 

release identified PCBs in one of the 

seven samples collected. The 

transformer was replaced and removal 

of impacted soils was completed in 

1997. The response action was 

completed and closed in December 

1998. No evidence of a release was 

observed during the visual site 

inspections conducted for the 2003 EBS. 

Building 457 was subsequently 

demolished to its foundation. 

Operation and Maintenance 

No operation and maintenance is 

required for this site. 

6. Property Covered by FOST #6 

Approximately 356.81 acres of El 

Toro MCAS were covered by FOST #6. 

Site Location and History 

This area included eleven COs: COs 

I–D, I–Q, I–R, II–B, II–K, II–N, II–O, III– 

B–1, III–B–2, III–E, and III–F. COs I–Q 

and I–R contained only petroleum LOCs 

and were therefore subject to the 

CERCLA petroleum exclusion, or no 

release, disposal, and/or migration of 

hazardous substances occurred there. As 

a result, these COs are not discussed in 

this document. Additionally, COs I–D, 

II–N, III–B–1, III–B–2, III–E, and III–F 

are not part of this partial deletion 

request and will remain on the NPL. 

Remedial Investigations 

As these COs did not contain CERCLA 

LOCs, no remedial investigations were 

conducted. 

Selected Remedy 

COs II–K contained a portion of IRP 

Site 25. All other LOCs in CO II–K 

received NFA determinations and no 

cleanup was required. All LOCs in CO 

II–O received NFA determinations and 

no cleanup was required. 

Response Actions and Cleanup 

Standards 

No response actions have been taken 

and no cleanup standards have been set. 

Operation and Maintenance 

No operation and maintenance is 

required for these sites. 

6.1 CO II–B 

CO II–B consisted of approximately 

6.73 acres located in the northeast 

portion of the former base. 

6.1.1 Temporary Accumulation Area 

(TAA) Site 130C 

Site Location and History 

TAA 130C was located northing of 

Building 130. 

Remedial Investigations 

While no remedial investigations 

were conducted under CERCLA, TAA 

130C was evaluated under a RCRA 

Facility Assessment. Sampling 

indicated low levels of arsenic and 

chlorinated pesticides. 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 19, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 69309 

Selected Remedy 

TAA 130C received site closure 

concurrence from DTSC in March 2009. 

No further action was required. 

Response Actions and Cleanup 

Standards 

Contaminated soil was excavated and 

confirmation soil samples were 

collected at TAA 130C in 2008. 

Operation and Maintenance 

No operation and maintenance is 

required for this site. 

7. Property Covered by FOST #7 

Approximately 151.06 acres of El 

Toro MCAS were covered by FOST #7. 

This area included three COs: COs 

II–F–1, II–Q, and II–V–1. There were no 

CERCLA LOCs within CO II–F–1 or CO 

II–V–1. As a result, COs II–F–1 and II– 

V–1 are not discussed in this document. 

Any contamination on these COs was, 

and continues to be remediated under 

the oversight of the RWQCB. 

7.1 CO II–Q 

CO II–Q consisted of approximately 

84.49 acres located in the central 

portion of the former base and 

contained buildings 114, 124, 125, 126, 

127, 230, 231, 363, 372, 642, 658, 677, 

698, 716, 747, 752, 763, 779, 903, 923, 

938, 952, and 1804. CO II–Q also 

contained structures 396, 558, 559, 560, 

561, 659, 904, 905, 906, 907, 908, 909, 

910, and 911. The DON leased this CO 

to Heritage Fields, LLC, who 

subsequently assigned the lease for the 

majority of this CO to the City of Irvine. 

CO II–Q includes portions of IRP 4 and 

25. 

7.1.1 IRP Site 4 

Site Location and History 

IRP Site 4 is located immediately 

southeast of Building 658, a former jetengine testing facility. The site is 

bounded by 9th Street to the south, 

Building 658 to the north and west, and 

Tank Farm No. 5 to the east. The IRP 

Site 4 consists of two units: Unit 1 is an 

oil-stained area southeast of Building 

658 which overlaps a concrete 

transformer pad, and Unit 2 is a 

drainage ditch which received runoff 

from a ferrocene spill. 

The staining at Unit 1 was the result 

of oily discharges from Building 658, 

which were observed over an 

approximate 2-year period. The 

contamination at Unit 2 originated from 

an August 1983 spill, when the contents 

of a 500-gallon tank (wash water and 

residual jet fuel) reportedly overflowed 

during washing and spilled onto the 

ground, draining into a ditch adjacent to 

9th Street. The spilled liquid reportedly 

contained approximately 5 gallons of 

ferrocene and a hydrocarbon carrier 

solution. 

Remedial Investigations 

Investigations conducted at IRP Site 4 

included a Phase I RI and aerial 

photograph surveys in 1993. VOCs and 

SVOCs were below residential PRGs in 

both units. 

Selected Remedy 

The human health and ecological risk 

assessments showed that the 

contaminants present in the soil did not 

present an unacceptable risk to human 

health or the environment. Therefore, 

no remedial action was required. The 

NFA ROD was signed on September 30, 

1997. 

Response Actions and Cleanup 

Standards 

No response actions have been taken 

and no cleanup standards have been set. 

Operation and Maintenance 

No operation and maintenance is 

required for this site. 

Five Year Reviews 

Cleanup activities at El Toro MCAS 

have resulted in the remediation of all 

Site-related contamination such that 

restrictions on use and/or institutional 

controls were unnecessary. Accordingly, 

no Five-Year Reviews were required 

under CERCLA. 

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. 

Community input has been sought by 

the DON throughout the cleanup 

process. The El Toro MCAS Restoration 

Advisory Board (RAB) serves as a focal 

point for the exchange of information 

about environmental restoration 

activities between the DON, regulatory 

agencies, and the local community. RAB 

members review technical reports and 

plans pertaining to the El Toro MCAS 

cleanup and provide input to the DON 

and the regulatory agencies. RAB 

members serve as volunteers and act as 

a liaison to the specific community they 

represent including various cities and 

homeowner associations in the vicinity 

of El Toro MCAS. All RAB meetings are 

open to the public and anyone 

interested may attend. They are held 

semi-annually on a Wednesday evening 

in April and November at the Irvine City 

Hall, One Civic Center Plaza. 

Community involvement for the areas 

that are the subject of this document has 

occurred by soliciting public comment 

on various documents depending on the 

site’s investigation and cleanup (if 

needed) process. All NFA decision 

documents were issued for 30-day 

public comment periods with 

comments, if any, addressed in the 

Responsiveness Summary of the Record 

of Decision. In addition, sites where 

non-time critical removal actions 

occurred provided public involvement 

with the issuance of the engineering 

evaluation/cost analysis for public 

comment. 

Since there are a number of ongoing 

investigations and cleanup at El Toro 

MCAS, community involvement 

activities such as the biannual RAB 

meetings will continue to occur. 

Determination That the Criteria for 

Deletion Have Been Met 

The NCP (40 CFR 300.425(e)) states 

that a site may be deleted from the NPL 

when no further response action is 

necessary. EPA, in consultation with the 

State of California, has determined that 

all appropriate response actions under 

CERCLA have been completed on the 

properties proposed for deletion. 

Therefore, these portions of the former 

El Toro Marine Corps Air Station meet 

the criteria of 40 CFR 300.425(e) and 

may be deleted from the NPL. The State 

of California, through the DTSC, 

concurred on this proposed deletion by 

letter dated February 1, 2013. 

V. Partial Deletion Action 

The EPA, with concurrence of the 

State of California through the 

Department of Toxic Substances 

Control, has determined that all 

appropriate response actions under 

CERCLA have been completed. 

Therefore, EPA is deleting parcels I–A, 

II–A, III–A, II–J, II–Q, II–S, II–T, III–C, 

I–C, II–U, I–B, I–E, I–G, I–H, I–I, I–J, 

I–L, I–M, I–P, II–G, II–I, II–P, III–D, 

I–K, I–N, I–O, I–S, II–E, II–L, II–M, II– 

R, I–R, II–B, II–K, and II–O of the El 

Toro Marine Corp Air Station 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 21, 2014 

unless EPA receives adverse comments 

by December 19, 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 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 notice of intent to 

partially delete and the comments 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
69310 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 19, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

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: October 22, 2013. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator Region IX. 

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 2 of Appendix B to part 300 

is amended by revising the entry under 

‘‘El Toro Marine Corps Air Station’’, 

California to read as follows: 

Appendix B to Part 300—National 

Priorities List 

* * * * * 

TABLE 2—FEDERAL FACILITIES SECTION

State Site name City/county Notes (a)

*******

CA ..................... El Toro Marine Corps Air Station ............................................................ El Toro ............................................ P 

* * * * * * * 

(a)* * * 

*P = Sites with partial deletion(s). 

[FR Doc. 2013–27724 Filed 11–18–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 

Safety Administration 

49 CFR Part 172 

Hazardous Materials Table, Special 

Provisions, Hazardous Materials 

Communications, Emergency 

Response Information, Training 

Requirements, and Security Plans 

CFR Correction 

In Title 49 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations, Parts 100 to 177, revised as 

of October 1, 2012, on page 242, in 

§ 172.101, in the Hazardous Materials 

Table, in the entry for ‘‘Oxygen, 

compressed’’, in column 10A, the letter 

‘‘A’’ is added. 

[FR Doc. 2013–27733 Filed 11–18–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1505–01–D 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 223 

RIN 0648–AY96 

[Docket No. 100813359–3908–02] 

Endangered and Threatened Species; 

Protective Regulations for the Gulf of 

Maine Distinct Population Segment of 

Atlantic Sturgeon 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Interim final rule. 

SUMMARY: We, NMFS, are issuing an 

interim final regulation to conserve the 

Gulf of Maine Distinct Population 

Segment (DPS) of Atlantic sturgeon 

(Acipenser oxyrinchus oxyrinchus). On 

February 6, 2012, we listed the Gulf of 

Maine DPS of Atlantic sturgeon as 

threatened under the Endangered 

Species Act (ESA). When a species is 

listed as threatened under the ESA, we 

are required to issue protective 

regulations under section 4(d) of the 

ESA. Such protective regulations are 

ones deemed ‘‘necessary and advisable 

for the conservation of the species’’ and 

may include any act prohibited for 

endangered species under section 

9(a)(1) of the ESA. This regulation 

extends the prohibitions listed in 

section 9 of the ESA to Gulf of Maine 

DPS Atlantic sturgeon. The prohibitions 

set forth in this rule are considered 

necessary and advisable for the 

conservation of this species. Given that 

the changes made to this rule are based 

on the new information that was not 

submitted as public comment on the 

proposed rule, we are publishing this 

rule as an interim final rule and are 

soliciting additional public comment. 

This document also announces the 

availability of a final Environmental 

Assessment that analyzes the 

environmental impacts of promulgating 

this interim final regulation. 

DATES: This interim final rule is 

effective on December 19, 2013. 

Comments on this interim final rule 

must be received by December 19, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by RIN No. 0648–AY96, by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: To the attention of Lynn 

Lankshear at (978) 281–9394. 

• Mail or hand-delivery: Submit 

written comments to the Assistant 

Regional Administrator, Protected 

Resources Division, NMFS, Northeast 

Region, 55 Great Republic Drive, 

Gloucester, MA 01930. 

Instructions: All comments received 

are a part of the public record and will 

generally be posted to http://

www.regulations.gov without change. 

All Personal Identifying Information (for 

example, name, address, etc.) 

voluntarily submitted by the commenter 

may be publicly accessible. Do not 

submit Confidential Business 

Information or otherwise sensitive or 

protected information. 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES