Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 157 / Friday, August 14, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 48757 

metabolites containing the (4- 

chlorophenyl)-4-methyl-2-oxo-3- 

thiazolidine moiety, as petitioned. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

This action establishes tolerances 

under FFDCA section 408(d) in 

response to a petition submitted to the 

Agency. The Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) has exempted these types 

of actions from review under Executive 

Order 12866, entitled ‘‘Regulatory 

Planning and Review’’ (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993). Because this action 

has been exempted from review under 

Executive Order 12866, this action is 

not subject to Executive Order 13211, 

entitled ‘‘Actions Concerning 

Regulations That Significantly Affect 

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66 

FR 28355, May 22, 2001) or Executive 

Order 13045, entitled ‘‘Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, 

April 23, 1997). This action does not 

contain any information collections 

subject to OMB approval under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require 

any special considerations under 

Executive Order 12898, entitled 

‘‘Federal Actions To Address 

Environmental Justice in Minority 

Populations and Low-Income 

Populations’’ (59 FR 7629, February 16, 

1994). 

Since tolerances and exemptions that 

are established on the basis of a petition 

under FFDCA section 408(d), such as 

the tolerance in this final rule, do not 

require the issuance of a proposed rule, 

the requirements of the Regulatory 

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

seq.), do not apply. 

This action directly regulates growers, 

food processors, food handlers, and food 

retailers, not States or tribes, nor does 

this action alter the relationships or 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities established by Congress 

in the preemption provisions of FFDCA 

section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency 

has determined that this action will not 

have a substantial direct effect on States 

or tribal governments, on the 

relationship between the national 

government and the States or tribal 

governments, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities among the 

various levels of government or between 

the Federal Government and Indian 

tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined 

that Executive Order 13132, entitled 

‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999) and Executive Order 13175, 

entitled ‘‘Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR 

67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply 

to this action. In addition, this action 

does not impose any enforceable duty or 

contain any unfunded mandate as 

described under Title II of the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 

1501 et seq.). 

This action does not involve any 

technical standards that would require 

Agency consideration of voluntary 

consensus standards pursuant to section 

12(d) of the National Technology 

Transfer and Advancement Act 

(NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note). 

VII. Congressional Review Act 

Pursuant to the Congressional Review 

Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), EPA will 

submit a report containing this rule and 

other required information to the U.S. 

Senate, the U.S. House of 

Representatives, and the Comptroller 

General of the United States prior to 

publication of the rule in the Federal 

Register. This action is not a ‘‘major 

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

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Agricultural commodities, Pesticides 

and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: August 6, 2015. 

Susan Lewis, 

Director, Registration Division, Office of 

Pesticide Programs. 

Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is 

amended as follows: 

PART 180—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 180 

continues to read as follows: 

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

■ 2. In § 180.448, add alphabetically the 

following commodities to the table in 

paragraph (c) to read as follows: 

§ 180.448 Hexythiazox; tolerances for 

residues. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

* * * * * 

Wheat, forage (EPA Region 

11 only) ............................. 6.0 

Wheat, hay (EPA Region 11 

only) .................................. 30 

Wheat, grain (EPA Region 

11 only) ............................. 0.02 

Wheat, straw (EPA Region 

11 only) ............................. 8.0 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2015–20012 Filed 8–13–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 300 

[EPA–HQ–SFUND–1990–0010; FRL–9932– 

37-Region 4] 

National Oil and Hazardous 

Substances Pollution Contingency 

Plan; National Priorities List: Deletion 

of the Redwing Carriers, Inc. 

(Saraland) 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) Region 4 is publishing 

this direct final Notice of Deletion for 

the Redwing Carriers, Inc. (Saraland) 

Superfund Site (Site), located in 

Saraland, Mobile County, Alabama, 

from the National Priorities List (NPL). 

The NPL, promulgated pursuant to 

Section 105 of the Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act 

(CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is an 

appendix of the National Oil and 

Hazardous Substances Pollution 

Contingency Plan (NCP). This direct 

final deletion is being published by the 

EPA with the concurrence of the State 

of Alabama, through the Alabama 

Department of Environmental 

Management (ADEM), because the EPA 

has determined that all appropriate 

response actions under CERCLA have 

been completed. However, this deletion 

does not preclude future actions under 

Superfund. 

DATES: This direct final deletion is 

effective September 28, 2015 unless the 

EPA receives adverse comments by 

September 14, 2015. If adverse 

comments are received, the EPA will 

publish a timely withdrawal of the 

direct final deletion in the Federal 

Register informing the public that the 

deletion will not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No., EPA–HQ– 

SFUND–1990–0010, by one of the 

following methods: 

• www.regulations.gov Follow the online instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Email: johnston.shelby@epa.gov 

• Fax: (404) 562–8896, Attention: 

Shelby Johnston. 

• Mail: Shelby Johnston, Remedial 

Project Manager, Superfund Restoration 

and Sustainability Branch, Superfund 

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, 

SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. 

• Hand Delivery: U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
48758 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 157 / Friday, August 14, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303– 

8960. 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–1990– 

0010. The 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 the 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 the 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, the 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 the EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, the EPA may not 

be able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the http://

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

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

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

will be publicly available only in the 

hard copy. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in http://

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at: 

U.S. EPA Record Center, attn: Ms. Tina 

Terrell, Atlanta Federal Center, 61 

Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 

30303–8960, Phone: (404) 562–8835, 

Hours 8 a.m.–4 p.m., Monday through 

Friday by appointment only; or, 

Saraland Public Library, 111 Saraland 

Loop, Saraland, AL 36571, Phone: 251– 

675–2879, Hours 10 a.m.–6 p.m., 

Monday, Wednesday, Friday, Saturday 

and 12 p.m.–8 p.m., Tuesday and 

Thursday. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Shelby Johnston, Remedial Project 

Manager, Superfund Restoration and 

Sustainability Branch, Superfund 

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, 

SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960, 404– 

562–8287, email: johnston.shelby@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Introduction 

II. NPL Deletion Criteria 

III. Deletion Procedures 

IV. Basis for Site Deletion 

V. Deletion Action 

I. Introduction 

The EPA Region 4 is publishing this 

direct final Notice of Deletion of the 

Redwing Carriers, Inc. (Saraland) 

Superfund Site from the NPL. The NPL 

constitutes Appendix B of 40 CFR part 

300 which is the NCP, which the EPA 

promulgated pursuant to section 105 of 

the CERCLA of 1980, as amended. The 

EPA maintains the NPL as the list of 

sites that appear to present a significant 

risk to public health, welfare or the 

environment. Sites on the NPL may be 

the subject of remedial actions financed 

by the Hazardous Substance Superfund 

(Fund). As described in the Section 

300.425(e)(3) of the NCP, sites deleted 

from the NPL remain eligible for Fundfinanced remedial actions if future 

conditions warrant such actions. 

Section II of this document explains 

the criteria to delete sites from the NPL. 

Section III discusses procedures that the 

EPA is using for this action. Section IV 

discusses the Site and demonstrates 

how it meets the deletion criteria. 

Section V discusses the EPA’s action to 

delete the Site from the NPL unless 

adverse comments are received during 

the public comment period. 

II. NPL Deletion Criteria 

The NCP establishes the criteria that 

the 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), the 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. 

III. Deletion Procedures 

The following procedures apply to 

deletion of the Site: 

(1) The EPA consulted with the State 

of Alabama prior to developing this 

direct final Notice of Deletion and the 

Notice of Intent to Delete co-published 

today in the ‘‘Proposed Rules’’ section 

of the Federal Register. 

(2) The EPA has provided the state 30 

working days for review of this notice 

and the parallel Notice of Intent to 

Delete prior to their publication today, 

and the state, through ADEM, has 

concurred on the deletion of the site 

from the NPL. 

(3) Concurrently with the publication 

of this direct final Notice of Deletion, a 

notice of the availability of the parallel 

Notice of Intent to Delete is being 

published in a major local newspaper, 

The Mobile Press Register. The 

newspaper notice announces the 30-day 

public comment period concerning the 

Notice of Intent to Delete the Site from 

the NPL. 

(4) The EPA placed copies of 

documents supporting the proposed 

deletion in the deletion docket and 

made these items available for public 

inspection and copying at the Site 

information repositories identified 

above. 

(5) If adverse comments are received 

within the 30-day public comment 

period on this deletion action, the EPA 

will publish a timely notice of 

withdrawal of this direct final Notice of 

Deletion before its effective date and 

will prepare a response to comments 

and continue with the deletion process 

on the basis of the Notice of Intent to 

Delete and the comments already 

received. 

Deletion of a site from the NPL does 

not itself create, alter, or revoke any 

individual’s rights or obligations. 

Deletion of a site from the NPL does not 

in any way alter the EPA’s right to take 

enforcement actions, as appropriate. 

The NPL is designed primarily for 

informational purposes and to assist the 

EPA management. Section 300.425(e)(3) 

of the NCP states that the deletion of a 

site from the NPL does not preclude 

eligibility for future response actions, 

should future conditions warrant such 

actions. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 157 / Friday, August 14, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 48759 

IV. Basis for Site Deletion 

The following information provides 

the EPA’s rationale for deleting the Site 

from the NPL: 

Site Background and History 

Redwing Carriers, Inc. (Saraland) 

Superfund Site, (EPA ID: 

ALD980844385) is located at 527 U.S. 

Highway 43, Saraland, Mobile County, 

Alabama. The Site is 5.1 acres and 

bounded to the east by U.S. Highway 43 

and a skating rink. To the north it is 

bounded by a United Gas Pipe Line 

easement and a mobile home 

community, to the south by a residential 

development, and to the west by an 

undeveloped lot. The Site was the 

former location of the Saraland 

Apartment Complex (Apartments) that 

has since been demolished to allow for 

the complete remediation of the Site. 

From 1961 to 1971, Redwing Carriers, 

Inc. (Redwing), a trucking company, 

owned and operated the Site as a 

terminal for cleaning, repairing and 

parking its fleet of trucks. The company 

transported a variety of substances, 

including asphalt, diesel fuel, chemicals 

and pesticides from local plants. 

Redwing discharged untreated 

hazardous substances to the ground 

during the cleaning of tanker trucks, 

creating a tar-like sludge and 

contaminating Site soils. The tar-like 

sludge was composed predominately of 

polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon 

compounds together with lesser 

amounts of pesticides, herbicides and 

volatile organic compounds. These 

operations resulted in contamination of 

soils, groundwater and sediment. 

In 1973, Saraland Apartments Ltd. 

purchased the Site and built a U.S. 

Housing and Urban Development (HUD) 

subsidized apartment complex on the 

Site. During construction, the sludge 

and contaminated soils were covered 

with up to 5 feet of clean soil. When 

completed, the complex consisted of 60 

apartment units located in 12 buildings, 

and at one time housed approximately 

160 residents, including 80 to 90 

preschool-age or elementary school-age 

children. 

In 1984, ADEM investigated 

apartment residents’ complaints about 

the tar-like sludge seeping to the surface 

at numerous locations at the Site. In 

1985, under Superfund removal 

authority, the EPA conducted initial 

studies in which high concentrations of 

1, 2, 4-trichlorobenzene and 

naphthalene were detected in the soil 

and in leachate coming from the sludge. 

On July 8, 1985, the EPA and Redwing 

entered into a removal Administrative 

Order on Consent (AOC) that required 

Redwing to, among other things, 

conduct a limited sludge and 

contaminated soil removal action. 

Redwing was required to periodically 

inspect the Site and remove any visible 

sludge on the surface. The Site was 

proposed for the NPL on June 24, 1988 

(53 FR 23988) and finalized on the NPL 

February 21, 1990 (55 FR 6154) due to 

the potential for consumption of 

contaminated groundwater. 

Remedial Investigation, Feasibility 

Study (RI/FS) 

On July 2, 1990, the EPA and 

Redwing entered into an AOC wherein 

Redwing agreed to conduct the Site RI/ 

FS. Redwing, under the EPA’s oversight, 

began field activities for the first phase 

of the remedial investigation in January 

1991. The RI/FS was completed in July 

of 1992. During the investigation, 39 soil 

borings were collected with a total of 

123 separate soil samples being 

analyzed. The substances found most 

frequently at concentrations above riskbased cleanup levels fall into three 

major categories: pesticides and 

herbicides; volatile organic compounds 

(VOCs) and Polycyclic Aromatic 

Hydrocarbons (PAHs). These substances 

were found in soils, ditch sediments, 

and groundwater across the Site. The 

highest levels of contamination were 

detected in the southern and eastern 

portions (the location of the former 

containment levee used by Redwing) 

and across areas of former terminal 

operations. Inorganic substances, which 

may occur in nature at significant levels, 

were also detected in soils, sludge, and 

groundwater. During this investigation, 

the EPA determined that the 

contaminants at the Site presented an 

unacceptable risk to human health by 

future groundwater consumption. 

Selected Remedy 

The EPA’s Record of Decision (ROD) 

was signed on December 15, 1992, and 

the State of Alabama concurred with the 

selected remedy. The selected 

alternative included the following: 

• Excavation of sludge, sediments, 

and contaminated soils. 

• Off-site treatment/disposal of 

contaminated soils, sediments, and 

sludge at an approved disposal facility 

as determined appropriate by Resource 

Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 

criteria and the waste sampling results 

from Toxicity Characterization Leaching 

Procedure (TCLP) testing. 

• Regrading and backfill of 

excavations using clean, compacted-fill 

material. 

• Temporary and possibly permanent 

relocation of residents with the 

potential demolition of selected 

apartment units. 

• On-site treatment of contaminated 

groundwater in the surficial aquifer. 

Monitoring and possible withdrawal 

and treatment of groundwater in the 

alluvial aquifer. Treatment of 

groundwater for discharge to a Publicly 

Owned Treatment Works, or if 

unavailable, to a nearby surface water 

body. 

While the ROD did not explicitly state 

Remedial Action Objectives (RAOs), the 

selected remedy was intended to 

address unacceptable risk presented by 

the Site, described in the risk 

assessment. The risk assessment 

summary for the Site indicated several 

areas of risk for mitigation as indicated 

below. 

• Health risk posed at the Site is 

primarily from the future use of 

groundwater in both surficial and 

alluvial aquifers as a potable source. 

• Surface soils and sediments are 

subject to contamination from continual 

leaching of contaminants from the 

sludge as it percolates to the surface. 

The 1992 ROD was subsequently 

amended on June 14, 2000 with an 

Amended ROD (AROD). The RAOs for 

the Site remained unaltered but the 

major components of the amended 

remedy were as follows: 

• Development of a phased approach 

to implement the amended remedy 

during the Remedial Design (RD). 

• Demolition, removal, and off-site 

disposal to an approved facility of all 

buildings, foundations, concrete 

walkways, asphalt driveways and 

parking areas. 

• Excavation, off-site treatment and 

disposal of the remaining source 

material (sludge, sediments and 

contaminated soils) at an approved 

disposal facility as determined 

appropriate by RCRA criteria and the 

waste sampling results from TCLP 

testing to aid in restoring and protecting 

groundwater quality. 

• Reconstitution of the groundwater 

monitoring program at the Site after the 

backfilling and regrading of excavated 

areas had been completed. 

• Postponement of the 1992 ROD 

requirement for on-site extraction and 

treatment of contaminated groundwater 

and compliance monitoring. 

Implementation was to be contingent 

upon the results of the baseline 

groundwater sampling and evaluation of 

the quarterly groundwater monitoring 

data. The groundwater response action 

would be revaluated to consider new 

groundwater monitoring data collected 

after the source removal action 

completion and determine whether or 

not the groundwater restoration could 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
48760 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 157 / Friday, August 14, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

be achieved using Monitored Natural 

Attenuation (MNA). 

Explanation of Significant Difference 

(ESD) 

On September 25, 2007, the EPA 

issued an ESD for the Redwing Site. In 

the ESD, the EPA revised the 1992 ROD 

subsurface soil cleanup levels for 

Acetone, Aldrin, Alpha-BHC, and 

Dieldrin. The remedy at the Site is 

protective of human health and the 

environment because the surface soil, 

subsurface soil, sediment and 

groundwater at the Site met 

performance standards established in 

the ROD, AROD, and the ESD. 

Response Actions 

Redwing continued periodic removal 

of surface seeps until 1994, when they 

discontinued work at the Site. On July 

5, 1995, the EPA issued a Unilateral 

Administrative Order (UAO) to Redwing 

and Saraland Apartments, Ltd. directing 

them to conduct a removal of tar seeps 

at the Site. When both parties declined 

to comply with the order, the EPA 

undertook the removal action. The 

removal action consisted of the removal 

and off-site disposal of 288 55-gallon 

drums of investigation derived waste, 

approximately 5 cubic yards of 

stockpiled soil and approximately 10 

gallons of ‘‘tar like material’’ (TLM) 

from 13 tar seeps. 

During the spring of 1996, the tar 

seeps returned, and on July 12, 1996, 

the EPA issued a UAO to Redwing and 

Saraland Apartments, Ltd. directing 

them to remove the source of the tar 

seeps. When both parties refused to 

comply with the order, the EPA 

conducted a removal action, which 

consisted of temporarily relocating 57 

families living in the complex and 

excavating and transporting off-site for 

disposal approximately 20,724 tons of 

sludge, contaminated soil, and debris. 

These contaminated materials were 

transported as nonhazardous waste, 

after passing TCLP sampling analysis, to 

the Browning-Ferris Industries’ Falcon 

Incinerator in Brewton, Alabama. 

Trucks were lined prior to filling to 

prevent further contamination and 

utilized fabric covers during transport to 

prevent soils from leaving the vehicle 

during transport. Once received at the 

disposal site, the materials were 

emptied into a covered shed to await 

thermal treatment in the primary 

incinerator with a minimum 

temperature of 700 °F. After the removal 

was completed, air monitoring 

conducted in the Apartments detected 

unacceptable levels of benzene and the 

pesticide, Aldrin, in some of the 

Apartments. Based on this monitoring, 

the EPA determined that the residents 

could not return to live in the 

Apartments. Working together, the EPA 

and HUD relocated the residents to 

comparable permanent housing. 

In July 1997, the EPA collected soil, 

sediment and water samples from 23 

properties adjacent to the Redwing Site. 

The purpose of this sampling was to 

address community concerns about 

possible releases from the Site. Based on 

a risk evaluation of the analytical results 

of these samples, the EPA determined 

that there is no unacceptable health risk 

or hazard in the neighborhood adjacent 

to the Site. 

Remedy Implementation 

The Redwing PRP conducted the 

remedial action pursuant to the 

February 26, 2002 RD/Remedial Action 

(RA) Consent Decree. Site demolition 

activities started in March 2004 and 

were completed in June 2004. During 

the demolition, 5,700 cubic yards of 

demolition debris was transported offsite for disposal and 3,915 cubic yards 

of asphalt and concrete were 

transported off-site for recycling. All 

debris was visually inspected and any 

debris found with visually questionable 

materials were sampled prior to 

transport to ensure that none of the 

debris failed RCRA criteria and waste 

sampling results from TCLP testing. 

None of the construction debris failed 

RCRA criteria and waste sampling 

results from TCLP, and as a result, all 

debris was transported to Jarrett Rd. 

Landfill in Pritchard, Alabama, a RCRA 

permitted construction debris facility, as 

required by the ROD. 

The EPA approved the Final RD 

Report on June 28, 2007. The Site RA 

started in mid-December 2007 and was 

completed in June 2008. The excavation 

of TLM-contaminated soil was executed 

by the removal of blocks of soil to 

predetermined depths based on 

analytical results from the pre-design 

investigation. Additional TLMcontaminated soil was removed laterally 

based on visual inspection and presence 

on excavated sidewalls. Additional soil 

was excavated from the bottom of predetermined excavation block depths 

based on confirmation analysis. 

Specifically, five-point composite 

samples were collected at the bottom of 

each excavation block and analyzed for 

the contaminants of concern (COC) 

established in the ROD. If the 

concentration of any constituent 

resulted in an exceedance of the 90% 

Upper Confidence Limit (UCL) average 

concentration for the Site, then 

additional soil was excavated and the 

deeper block bottom was again sampled. 

The large majority of the soils 

excavated from the site contained TLM 

and were thus removed from the Site 

based on that criterion. The removal of 

the TLM-contaminated soils resulted in 

the need to only remove a small amount 

of additional soils to meet the 90% UCL 

average concentration requirement for 

soil constituent impacts. It should be 

noted that carbon tetrachloride, while 

retained as a COC for remediation, was 

only found in a single surface soil 

sample location, which was removed 

during the first removal action. The 

COC was retained due to the risk posed 

for ingestion and dermal contact. The 

subsurface excavation pits were not 

sampled for carbon tetrachloride since 

the risk posed was related to the surface 

soils which had already been removed. 

During the RA, a total of 25,114 cubic 

yards of soil was excavated. Of this 

amount, approximately 21,375 cubic 

yards were sampled to assess for TCLP 

and subsequently transported off-site for 

disposal at Macland Disposal Center in 

Moss Point, Mississippi, a RCRA 

permitted non-hazardous waste facility, 

as no materials failed TCLP. The 

remaining soil that lacked visual signs 

for TLM and passed confirmation 

sampling, was mixed together with 

clean fill brought in from off-site and 

was used to backfill and regrade 

excavated areas of the Site. After 

regrading and seeding activities were 

completed, six monitoring wells were 

installed on-site and groundwater 

samples were collected in September 

2008 and December 2008. The sampling 

detected Vernolate in one monitoring 

well (MW–16) at a concentration above 

the ROD groundwater cleanup level. 

The monitoring wells were resampled in 

March 2009, and Vernolate was again 

detected in MW–16 while none of the 

other groundwater monitoring wells 

were found to contain any ROD COC 

above their respective cleanup goals. In 

response to the 2008–2009 groundwater 

sampling, three monitoring wells were 

installed on adjacent property in early 

April 2009 to determine if contaminated 

groundwater had migrated off-site. No 

contamination was detected in these 

wells during the sampling event. 

The June 14, 2000 AROD delayed the 

implementation of the 1992 ROD 

requirement for groundwater extraction 

and treatment to allow for evaluation of 

the groundwater monitoring data that 

would be collected after the source 

removal action completion. During this 

evaluation, degradation rates for each of 

the groundwater contaminants of 

concern were determined along with a 

prediction of future decreases in 

contaminant. After this evaluation, it 

was determined that further 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 157 / Friday, August 14, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 48761 

groundwater remediation would not be 

required since it was anticipated that 

the groundwater cleanup levels would 

be achieved within a short time frame 

as a result of natural attenuation after 

the removal of the source material. The 

EPA approved the Final RA Report 

dated July 2014 in September 2014. 

Cleanup Goals 

Long-term, post-remediation 

groundwater monitoring was initiated 

after the completion of the RA in 2008 

and was ongoing until late 2012. This 

monitoring program began with the 

installation of six new monitoring wells 

(MW–14, MW–15, MW–16, MW–17, 

MW–18 and MW- 19) on-site and 

included two monitoring wells that 

existed prior to the remediation (MW– 

12U and MW–13U). These eight wells 

were sampled in September 2008, 

December 2008 and March 2009 for the 

following constituents: Sulfate, 

Chloride, Beryllium (total and 

dissolved), Total Chromium (total and 

dissolved), Nickel (total and dissolved), 

Vanadium (total and dissolved), Total 

Organic Carbon, Methylene Chloride, 

Acetone, Carbon Disulfide, Chloroform, 

Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, Vernolate, 

Lindane, Alpha-BHC, 4,4-DDT, Dieldrin 

and Aldrin. Only a few minor 

exceedances of the ROD cleanup goals 

were observed with the exception of 

Vernolate in MW–16. 

During the March 2009 sampling 

event, it was determined by the EPA 

that the groundwater cleanup goals had 

been met for all COCs with the 

exception of Vernolate. Due to the 

persistent exceedances of Vernolate in 

MW–16, three additional monitoring 

wells were installed off-site (MWOS–01, 

MWOS–02 and MWOS–03). Some 

members of the community were 

concerned with the proximity of MW– 

16 to the property line. All monitoring 

wells except MW–16 and the three offsite monitoring wells were abandoned 

in 2010. Monitoring continued on these 

three off-site wells and on-site MW–16 

for Vernolate until the groundwater 

cleanup level was achieved in MW–16. 

No Vernolate was ever detected in the 

off-site monitoring wells. 

From September 2009 to August 2012, 

groundwater samples were collected 

quarterly from MW–16 and the three offsite monitoring wells. After reviewing 

the results of the Vernolate groundwater 

sampling, ADEM and the EPA 

determined that the cleanup goals 

specified in the 1992 ROD, 2000 AROD 

and 2007 ESD had been met and 

abandonment of the remaining 

monitoring wells for the Site was 

approved. 

Five-Year Reviews 

The first five-year review (FYR) was 

completed on September 25, 2014. This 

review concluded that the selected 

remedy remains protective of human 

health and the environment pursuant to 

CERCLA section 121(c), 42 U.S.C. 9601 

et seq. Per the EPA’s 2001 FYR 

guidance, ‘‘Five-year reviews may no 

longer be needed when no hazardous 

substances, pollutants or contaminants 

remain on-site above levels that allow 

for unlimited use or unrestricted 

exposure’’ (UU/UE). Since the Site is 

UU/UE and has met the requirements 

established by the ROD, it is not 

necessary to conduct another FYR. The 

EPA has a policy that at least one FYR 

must be conducted after initiation of 

remedial action at the Site to ensure that 

the remedy is protective of human 

health and the environment. This policy 

FYR was conducted in 2014, and it 

concluded that the selected remedy at 

the Site is protective of human health 

and the environment because the 

surface soil, subsurface soil, sediment 

and groundwater at the Site met 

performance standards established in 

the 1992 ROD, subsequent 2000 AROD 

and subsequent 2007 ESD. The policy 

requirement for the five-year review has 

been met, and accordingly, the Site FYR 

requirement has been discontinued. 

Community Involvement 

Throughout the removal and remedial 

process, the EPA has kept the public 

informed of the activities being 

conducted at the Site by way of public 

meetings, progress fact sheets, and the 

announcement through local newspaper 

advertisement on the availability of 

documents such as the RI/FS, Risk 

Assessment, ROD, Proposed Plan, 

AROD, ESD and FYRs. 

Public participation activities have 

been satisfied as required in CERCLA 

Section 113(k), 42 U.S.C. 9613(k) and 

CERCLA Section 117, 42 U.S.C. 9617. 

Documents in the deletion docket, 

which the EPA relied on for 

recommendation of the deletion from 

the NPL, are available to the public in 

the information repositories identified 

above. 

Determination That the Site Meets the 

Criteria for Deletion From the NCP 

This Site meets all the site completion 

requirements as specified in Office of 

Solid Waste and Emergency Response 

(OSWER) Directive 9320.22, Close-Out 

Procedures for National Priorities List 

Sites. Specifically, confirmatory soil and 

groundwater sampling verifies that the 

Site has achieved the ROD cleanup 

standards, and that all cleanup actions 

specified in the ROD, AROD and ESD 

have been implemented. 

V. Deletion Action 

The EPA, with concurrence of the 

State of Alabama through ADEM, has 

determined that all appropriate 

response actions under CERCLA have 

been completed. Therefore, the EPA is 

deleting the Site from the NPL. 

Because the EPA considers this action 

to be noncontroversial and routine, the 

EPA is taking it without prior 

publication. This action will be effective 

September 28, 2015 unless the EPA 

receives adverse comments by 

September 14, 2015. If adverse 

comments are received within the 30- 

day public comment period, the EPA 

will publish a timely withdrawal of this 

direct final notice of deletion before the 

effective date of the deletion, and it will 

not take effect. The EPA will prepare a 

response to comments and continue 

with the deletion process on the basis of 

the notice of intent to delete and the 

comments already received. There will 

be no additional opportunity to 

comment. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Chemicals, Hazardous 

waste, Hazardous substances, 

Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Superfund, Water 

pollution control, Water supply. 

Dated: August 3, 2015. 

Heather McTeer Toney, 

Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

For the reasons set out in this 

document, 40 CFR part 300 is amended 

as follows: 

PART 300—NATIONAL OIL AND 

HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES 

POLLUTION CONTINGENCY PLAN 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 300 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2); 42 U.S.C. 

9601–9657; E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 CFR, 

1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR 2923; 

3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 193. 

APPENDIX B TO PART 300 

[AMENDED] 

■ 2. Table 1 of Appendix B to part 300 

is amended by removing ‘‘Al’’, 

‘‘Redwing Carriers, Inc. (Saraland)’’, 

‘‘Saraland’’. 

[FR Doc. 2015–20017 Filed 8–13–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES