Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 60 / Friday, March 28, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 17441 

Tribes. Thus, the Agency has 

determined that Executive Order 13132, 

entitled ‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, 

August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 

13175, entitled ‘‘Consultation and 

Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments’’ (65 FR 67249, November 

9, 2000) do not apply to this final rule. 

In addition, this final rule does not 

impose any enforceable duty or contain 

any unfunded mandate as described 

under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (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 of 1995 

(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: March 21, 2014. 

Lois Rossi, 

Director, Registration Division, Office of 

Pesticide Programs. 

Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is 

amended as follows: 

PART 180—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 180 

continues to read as follows: 

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

■ 2. In § 180.368, revise the following 

entries in the table in paragraph (a)(2) to 

read as follows: 

§ 180.368 Metolachlor; tolerances for 

residues. 

(a) * * * 

(2) * * * 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

* * * * * 

Corn, field, forage ................. 40 

Corn, field, stover ................. 40 

Commodity Parts per 

million 

* * * * * 

Corn, pop, stover .................. 40 

Corn, sweet, forage .............. 40 

* * * * * 

Corn, sweet, stover ............... 40 

* * * * * 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2014–07006 Filed 3–27–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 300 

[EPA–HQ–SFUND–2005–0011; FRL–9908– 

65-Region 5] 

National Oil and Hazardous Substance 

Pollution Contingency Plan; National 

Priorities List: Deletion of the Eau 

Claire Municipal Well Field Superfund 

Site 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) Region 5 is 

publishing a direct final notice of 

deletion of the Eau Claire Municipal 

Well Field Superfund Site (Site) located 

in Eau Claire, Wisconsin, 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 to the National Oil and 

Hazardous Substances Pollution 

Contingency Plan (NCP). This direct 

final deletion is being published by EPA 

with the concurrence of the State of 

Wisconsin, through the Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources 

(WDNR), because 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 May 27, 2014 unless EPA 

receives adverse comments by April 28, 

2014. If adverse comments are received, 

EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of 

the direct final deletion in the Federal 

Register informing the public that the 

deletion will not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID no. EPA–HQ– 

SFUND–2005–0011, by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Email: Howard Caine, Remedial 

Project Manager, at howard.caine@

epa.gov or Susan Pastor, Community 

Involvement Coordinator, at 

pastor.susan@epa.gov. 

• Fax: Gladys Beard, NPL Deletion 

Process Manager at (312) 886–4071. 

• Mail: Howard Caine, Remedial 

Project Manager, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (SR–6J), 77 West 

Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604, 

(312) 353–9685, or Susan Pastor, 

Community Involvement Coordinator, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

(SI–7J), 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, IL 60604, (312) 353–1325 or 

(800) 621–8431. 

• Hand delivery: Susan Pastor, 

Community Involvement Coordinator, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

(SI–7J), 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, IL 60604. Such deliveries are 

only accepted during the docket’s 

normal hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. The 

normal business hours are Monday 

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

CST, excluding federal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID no. EPA–HQ–SFUND–2005– 

0011. 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. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
17442 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 60 / Friday, March 28, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

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 

may not be publicly available, e.g., CBI 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

will be publicly available only in the 

hard copy. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically at http://

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at: 

• U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency-Region 5, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604, Phone: 

(312) 353–1063. 

Hours: Monday through Friday, 8:30 

a.m. to 4:30 p.m. CST, excluding federal 

holidays. 

• L.E. Phillips Memorial Public 

Library, 400 Eau Claire St., Eau Claire, 

WI 54701. Phone: (715) 839–5004. 

Hours: Monday through Thursday, 

10:00 a.m. to 9: 00 p.m., Friday 10:00 

a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Saturday 10:00 a.m. to 

5:00 p.m., Sunday 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. 

However, the library is closed every 

Sunday from May 26–September 1. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Howard Caine, Remedial Project 

Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency (SR–6J), 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604, (312) 

886–5787, or caine.howard@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Introduction 

II. NPL Deletion Criteria 

III. Deletion Procedures 

IV. Basis for Site Deletion 

V. Deletion Action 

I. Introduction 

EPA Region 5 is publishing this Direct 

Final Notice of Deletion of the Eau 

Claire Municipal Well Field Superfund 

Site from the National Priorities List 

(NPL) and requests public comments on 

this proposed action. The NPL 

constitutes Appendix B of 40 CFR part 

300, which is the National Oil and 

Hazardous Substances Pollution 

Contingency Plan (NCP), which EPA 

promulgated pursuant to Section 105 of 

the Comprehensive Environmental 

Response, Compensation and Liability 

Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended. 

EPA maintains the NPL as the list of 

sites that appear to present a significant 

risk to public health, welfare, or the 

environment. Sites on the NPL may be 

the subject of remedial actions financed 

by the Hazardous Substance Superfund 

(Fund). This deletion of the Eau Claire 

Municipal Well Field Superfund Site is 

proposed in accordance with 40 CFR 

300.425(e) and is consistent with the 

Notice of Policy Change: Deletion of 

Sites on the National Priorities List, (49 

FR 37070), 09/21/1984. As described in 

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

from the NPL remain eligible for Fundfinanced remedial actions if future 

conditions warrant such actions. 

Because EPA considers this action to 

be noncontroversial and routine, this 

action will be effective May 27, 2014 

unless EPA receives adverse comments 

by April 28, 2014. Along with this 

Direct Final Notice of Deletion, EPA is 

co-publishing a Notice of Intent to 

Delete in the ‘‘Proposed Rules’’ section 

of the Federal Register. If adverse 

comments are received within the 30- 

day public comment period on this 

deletion action, EPA will publish a 

timely withdrawal of this direct final 

Notice of Deletion before the effective 

date of the deletion, and the deletion 

will not take effect. EPA will, as 

appropriate, prepare a response to 

comments and continue with the 

deletion process on the basis of the 

Notice of Intent to Delete and the 

comments already received. There will 

be no additional opportunity to 

comment. 

Section II of this document explains 

the criteria for deleting sites from the 

NPL. Section III discusses procedures 

that EPA is using for this action. Section 

IV discusses the Eau Claire Municipal 

Well Field Site and demonstrates how it 

meets the deletion criteria. Section V 

discusses EPA’s action to delete the site 

from the NPL unless adverse comments 

are received during the public comment 

period. 

II. NPL Deletion Criteria 

The NCP establishes the criteria that 

EPA uses to delete sites from the NPL. 

In accordance with 40 CFR 300.425(e), 

sites may be deleted from the NPL 

where no further response is 

appropriate. In making such a 

determination pursuant to 40 CFR 

300.425(e), EPA will consider, in 

consultation with the State, whether any 

of the following criteria have been met: 

i. Responsible parties or other persons 

have implemented all appropriate 

response actions required; 

ii. All appropriate Fund-financed 

response under CERCLA has been 

implemented, and no further response 

action by responsible parties is 

appropriate; or 

iii. The remedial investigation has 

shown that the release poses no 

significant threat to public health or the 

environment and, therefore, the taking 

of remedial measures is not appropriate. 

Pursuant to CERCLA Section 121(c) 

and the NCP, EPA conducts five-year 

reviews to ensure the continued 

protectiveness of remedial actions 

where hazardous substances, pollutants, 

or contaminants remain at a site above 

levels that allow for unlimited use and 

unrestricted exposure. EPA may 

conduct such five-year reviews even if 

a site is deleted from the NPL. EPA may 

initiate further action to ensure 

continued protectiveness at a deleted 

site if new information becomes 

available that indicates it is appropriate. 

Whenever there is a significant release 

from a site deleted from the NPL, the 

deleted site may be restored to the NPL 

without application of the hazard 

ranking system. 

III. Deletion Procedures 

The following procedures apply to 

deletion of the Eau Claire Municipal 

Well Field Site: 

(1) EPA consulted with the State of 

Wisconsin 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) EPA has provided the State thirty 

(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 the 

WDNR, 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, 

‘‘Eau Claire Leader Telegram’’. The 

newspaper notice announces the 30-day 

public comment period concerning the 

Notice of Intent to Delete the Site from 

the NPL. 

(4) EPA placed copies of documents 

supporting the proposed deletion in the 

deletion docket and made these items 

available for public inspection and 

copying at the Site information 

repositories identified above. 

(5) If adverse comments are received 

within the 30-day public comment 

period on this deletion action, EPA will 

publish a timely notice of withdrawal of 

this direct final Notice of Deletion 

before its effective date and will prepare 

a response to comments 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 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 60 / Friday, March 28, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 17443 

in any way alter EPA’s right to take 

enforcement actions, as appropriate. 

The NPL is designed primarily for 

informational purposes and to assist 

EPA management. Section 300.425(e)(3) 

of the NCP states that the deletion of a 

site from the NPL does not preclude 

eligibility for future response actions, 

should future conditions warrant such 

actions. 

IV. Basis for Site Deletion 

The following information provides 

EPA’s rationale for deleting the Eau 

Claire Municipal Well Field Superfund 

Site from the NPL. 

Site Background and History 

The Eau Claire Municipal Well Field 

(ECMWF) site (CERCLIS ID: 

WID980820054) is located in Chippewa 

County in the Chippewa River Valley, 

east of the Chippewa River and 

approximately 2.5 miles west of the 

National Presto Industries (NPI) site. 

The ECMWF site consists of 15 

municipal groundwater wells in two 

adjoining well fields (five in the north 

well field and ten in the south) that 

provide drinking water to 

approximately 60,000 residential and 

commercial users. All municipal wells 

are installed in the glacial outwash sand 

and gravel aquifer. In addition to these 

municipal wells, a number of private 

wells previously drew drinking water 

from this sand and gravel aquifer. The 

sand and gravel aquifer is hydraulically 

connected to an underlying sandstone 

aquifer, which is not used extensively in 

the area due to its low hydraulic 

conductivity and the water’s poor 

aesthetic qualities. The well field is 

about a mile long and trends generally 

in a north-south direction. The ECMWF 

site has been used as a well field by the 

city for over the past 70 years. 

According to city personnel, prior to 

that time it was forested land. Current 

land use in the surrounding area is 

primarily residential, with a small park 

to the south and the Eau Claire airport 

located about one-quarter mile east of 

the northern portion of the city well 

field. It is anticipated that these land 

uses will continue into the foreseeable 

future. 

In March 1981, as part of the U.S. EPA 

Groundwater Supply Survey, the WDNR 

tested the Eau Claire municipal water 

supply for volatile organic compounds 

(VOCs). Trichloroethene (TCE), 1,1- 

dichloroethene (1,1–DCE), 1,1- 

dichloroethane (1,1–DCA), and 1,1,1- 

trichloroethane (1,1,1–TCA) were 

detected in samples collected from the 

north well field. The WDNR informed 

the city of Eau Claire that the 

concentrations for each of the VOCs 

detected were below Wisconsin 

groundwater standards. In addition to 

monitoring individual municipal 

production wells, the city began testing 

private residential wells located 

immediately northeast of the well field. 

VOCs were subsequently detected in 

several of the residential wells sampled 

at levels above Wisconsin groundwater 

standards. 

Remedial Investigation and Feasibility 

Study 

EPA initiated a Remedial 

Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) 

at the ECMWF site in October 1984. 

Based on groundwater monitoring data 

from private wells and monitoring wells 

installed as part of the field 

investigation, the ECMWF RI identified 

two distinct plumes of contamination at 

the site, separated by a gap of 

approximately 1,700 feet at the Eau 

Claire County Airport. The ECMWF RI 

did not confirm the source of the 

groundwater contamination at the well 

field but suggested that the nearby 

National Presto Industries (NPI) 

property (which later became a 

Superfund site) could be a potential 

source of the groundwater 

contamination at the ECMWF site. Data 

generated during the NPI RI clearly 

established that waste disposal areas at 

the NPI site were the source of TCE 

contamination at the ECMWF site, and 

indeed, continued to release 

contaminants to groundwater. A 

separate action was taken at NPI and 

cleanup at the NPI site is still ongoing. 

Record of Decision Findings 

On June 10, 1985, EPA issued a 

Record of Decision (ROD) that selected 

a packed column air stripper as an 

Initial Remedial Measure (IRM) to 

address contamination at the ECMWF 

site. During the first month of operation 

(August 1987), influent to the air 

strippers was sampled and analyzed 

weekly for VOCs. Influent and effluent 

have been tested monthly thereafter. 

Influent and effluent samples are 

analyzed for VOCs according to 

modified Method 601 of 40 CFR part 

136 by the city of Eau Claire. 

Following the completion of the RI/

FS, EPA issued the final ROD for the 

ECMWF site on March 31, 1988. The 

major components of the selected 

remedy were: 

• Continued treatment of 

contaminated municipal water with the 

air stripper constructed as the IRM; 

• provision of municipal water from 

the city of Eau Claire to private well 

users within or near the two plumes of 

groundwater contamination identified 

during the RI; 

• installation of groundwater 

extraction wells in one of the two 

plumes of contamination; and 

• discharge of untreated groundwater 

from extraction wells to the Chippewa 

River. WDNR concurred with the 

remedy selected by EPA for the ECMWF 

site. The remedies for the ECMWF site 

were developed to meet the following 

Remedial Action Objectives (RAOs): 

• Prevent human ingestion of 

contaminated groundwater, 

• Prevent inhalation of contaminants 

from the groundwater, and 

• Restore the contaminated aquifer to 

water quality objectives that are 

protective of beneficial use within a 

reasonable timeframe. 

Explanation of Significant Differences 

After EPA issued the ECMWF site 

final ROD, WDNR determined that the 

discharge of untreated groundwater 

from the proposed extraction wells into 

the Chippewa River would not comply 

with Wisconsin Statute, Chapter 283, 

Pollution Discharge Elimination. As a 

result, two of the components of the 

ECMWF site remedy, installation of 

extraction wells and the discharge of 

untreated water, were never fully 

implemented. The lack of extraction 

wells, however, did not fundamentally 

alter the selected ECMWF remedy. EPA 

issued an Explanation of Significant 

Differences (ESD) in 2008 to document 

that these measures were not 

implemented and would not be 

implemented in the future. 

The 1988 ROD states that ‘‘EPA will 

clean up the groundwater to non-detect 

for these compounds and continue to 

pump and treat for a period of time 

beyond the non-detect to assure that the 

target compound limits (TCLs) have 

been reached.’’ The target cumulative 

carcinogenic risk for the site was set at 

1 × 10-6 excess lifetime cancer risk 

(ELCR) and apportioned across several 

of the site’s VOC groundwater 

contaminants. In order to provide the 

desired protectiveness, the TCLs needed 

to be lower than federal drinking water 

standards (maximum contaminant 

levels (MCLs) under the Safe Drinking 

Water Act (SDWA)). 

EPA and WDNR reviewed the cleanup 

goals upon conclusion of the 2007 FiveYear Review. The 1988 ROD had 

developed TCLs as groundwater 

cleanup goals at the ECMWF site. 

However, in 1985 Wisconsin had 

promulgated Groundwater Quality 

regulations in the Wisconsin 

Administrative Code (WAC), Chapter 

140 (NR 140). An ESD was signed on 

December 23, 2009, to update the 

groundwater cleanup goals to 

incorporate NR 140. NR 140 provides 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
17444 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 60 / Friday, March 28, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

two types of standards that are to be 

followed. One is the Preventive Action 

Limits (PALs) and the other is the 

Enforcement Standards (ES). WDNR 

concurred with the ESD which adopted 

enforcement standards as the 

groundwater cleanup goal. 

Construction Activities 

On behalf of EPA, the U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers completed 

construction of the air stripper in June 

1987 and the system became operational 

in August 1987. The city of Eau Claire 

operates the air stripper as a part of its 

drinking water distribution operations. 

The air stripper has been in constant 

operation since completion of the 

interim remedial action in 1987. A 

permanent municipal water supply has 

been provided to affected private well 

owners in the city of Eau Claire, and a 

permanent municipal water supply was 

constructed and is operating in the 

Town of Hallie which provides its 

residents with drinking water. 

On April 25, 1989, EPA issued a 

Section 106 Administrative Order to the 

NPI PRPs to execute remedial action 

tasks consistent with the ECMWF final 

ROD and the data generated in the NPI 

RI. These activities included 

implementation of a temporary bottled 

water distribution program for those in 

the affected area in and adjacent to the 

redefined Plume 2. NPI was also 

required to conduct a Phased Feasibility 

Study (PFS) to identify and reevaluate 

options for a permanent alternate 

drinking water supply for the affected 

area. To ensure consistency with the 

ECMWF final ROD, bottled water was to 

be made available to all private well 

users in the affected area until a 

permanent and uncontaminated 

drinking water supply was fully 

implemented and operational. 

On August 1, 1990, EPA issued a ROD 

for the NPI site selecting a permanent 

drinking water supply for the affected 

area in and around the redefined Plume 

2. Under this ROD, the city of Eau Claire 

would extend its municipal service to 

those portions of the affected area which 

had been annexed to the city. The 

remaining portions of the affected area 

were to be serviced by a newly created 

Hallie Sanitary District (District). 

The city of Eau Claire hookups were 

completed by November 1991. The first 

service connections to the District were 

completed in December 1991 and by 

mid-summer 1992 the District was fully 

operational and servicing the affected 

area within the Town of Hallie. 

EPA conducted a pre-certification 

inspection of the District on August 19, 

1992. Upon completion of the 

certification process by the Agency and 

satisfaction of the terms of the 

Administrative Order, the District 

assumed full control and responsibility, 

including operation and maintenance, 

of its drinking water system. 

Remediation of off-site groundwater, 

including Plume 1–2 which migrated 

from the NPI site to the ECMWF site, 

was addressed in the final FS for the 

NPI site in conjunction with 

remediation of on-site source areas in 

the southwest corner of the NPI site. NPI 

also implemented an interim action for 

on-site plume containment pursuant to 

a third Section 106 Administrative 

Order issued to NPI on July 2, 1992. 

This action was designed to be 

consistent with the final cleanup action 

for the NPI site by preventing the off-site 

movement of contaminated groundwater 

through extraction and treatment. This 

alternative was selected in an Interim 

Action ROD issued for the NPI site by 

EPA on September 30, 1992. 

The city of Eau Claire has annexed 

and extended municipal water service 

to private well owners in the area that 

could have been subject to impacts from 

the contaminated groundwater 

originating from the NPI site. NPI paid 

for the construction of two air stripping 

towers at the ECMWF and continues to 

pay for their operation. The purpose of 

the towers is to remove the very low 

concentrations, even below federal 

drinking water standards, of volatile 

organic compounds in the groundwater 

withdrawn by the city wells and to 

ensure a safe drinking water supply for 

the city. These engineered controls 

appear to be effective in their goal of 

protecting human health and the 

environment. 

Institutional Controls 

Institutional Controls (ICs) were 

required at the ECMWF site in order to 

ensure the protectiveness of the remedy. 

ICs are non-engineered instruments, 

such as administrative and/or legal 

controls, that help minimize the 

potential for exposure to contamination 

and protect the integrity of the remedy. 

Compliance with ICs is required to 

assure long-term protectiveness for any 

areas that do not allow for unlimited use 

or unrestricted exposure (UU/UE). 

The ROD for the ECMWF site did not 

identify the need for ICs. However, the 

1996 ROD for NPI acknowledges that 

ICs are required to ensure protectiveness 

of the final site-wide remedy until 

Plume 1–2, which impacts the ECMWF, 

meets the groundwater cleanup goals. 

Residences in the affected area who 

have received municipal water are still 

allowed to use private wells for other 

purposes, such as irrigation and car 

washing as long as there is no 

connection to indoor plumbing. To use 

these private wells, property owners 

must submit applications for annual 

permits to either the City of Eau Claire’s 

Health Department or the Hallie 

Sanitary District. 

The City of Eau Claire (City), Village 

of Lake Hallie (formerly known as the 

Town of Hallie), and Chippewa County 

have all passed ordinances to protect 

citizens from impacted groundwater. 

The City has an ordinance that bans 

cross connections between private water 

supply wells and the municipal supply. 

The City has also annexed properties 

that are within and near the identified 

boundaries of the NPI plume(s) in 

Chippewa County and provided those 

properties with municipal water. The 

City recently enacted an ordinance that 

restricts the construction of new private 

water supply wells within the City, as 

well as requiring the abandonment of 

existing supply wells. The WDNR has 

promulgated Chapters NR 809 and NR 

811 of the Wisconsin Administrative 

Code, which regulate safe drinking 

water and the design and operation of 

municipal water systems, respectively. 

The key part of this code, as it pertains 

to ECMWF site, is its prohibition against 

cross connections and its requirement of 

adequate separation of potable wells 

from sources of contamination. 

The ordinances and administrative 

codes enacted by the local 

municipalities, counties, and the state 

provide a strong and effective 

framework for protection of the local 

citizens against consumption of 

contaminated groundwater from NPI 

and ECMWF until the cleanup goals are 

attained in all plumes. 

Cleanup Goals 

Recent data indicates that the levels of 

TCE in Plume 1–2 have declined and 

are meeting the Wisconsin enforcement 

standard of 5 ppb, except for 5 

groundwater monitoring wells 

associated with the NPI site, which 

exceed the enforcement standard. One 

of these groundwater monitoring wells 

is located on the NPI site property and 

is significantly above the enforcement 

standard; two groundwater monitoring 

wells are west of the NPI site along 

North Hastings Way and measures TCE 

between 5–6 ppb; and two groundwater 

monitoring wells located at and near the 

airport measure TCE between 5–6 ppb. 

Groundwater monitoring wells on the 

ECMWF site, as well as the production 

wells, all show TCE below the 

enforcement standard of 5 ppb. A 

review of the monthly production well 

data by ECMWF for wells 10, 11, 15, 16, 

17 and 19 shows that the TCE has not 

been detected except for well 19. This 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 60 / Friday, March 28, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 17445 

well does detect TCE consistently, but it 

is below the enforcement standard of 5 

ppb. The blended production well water 

entering the air stripper is non-detect for 

any VOCs. The detection limit used by 

the city in its analyses is 0.7 ppb TCE. 

As a result, the implemented remedy at 

the ECMWF site has achieved the degree 

of cleanup as specified in the decision 

documents for all pathways of exposure. 

Operation and Maintenance 

Operation and maintenance (O&M) 

requirements outlined in the O&M Plan 

for the IRM were: (1) Routine 

maintenance of the air stripper as 

described in the manufacturer’s manual; 

and (2) sampling and analysis 

requirements of stripper influent and 

effluent, as previously discussed. TCE, 

1,1–DCE, 1,1–DCA, 1,1,1–TCA and 

tetrachloroethene (PCE) are monitored 

regularly by the city of Eau Claire to 

ensure compliance with Wisconsin 

Enforcement Standards and the Safe 

Drinking Water Act Maximum 

Contaminant Limits (MCLs) for drinking 

water. 

Five-Year Review 

EPA conducted four five-year reviews 

at this site; the last report was dated July 

17, 2012. EPA, in consultation with the 

Wisconsin Department of Natural 

Resources (WDNR), determined that the 

cleanup remedy at the ECMWF site is 

protective of human health and the 

environment because cleanup standards 

have been met at the site. Additionally, 

exposure pathways from the NPI site 

that could result in unacceptable risks 

are being controlled through the use of 

ICs. EPA has also determined that the 

air strippers at ECMWF can be taken offline as the groundwater entering the 

city’s well field has met the cleanup 

standards for over 5 years and is not 

expected to exceed the standards in the 

future. The city of Eau Claire has chosen 

to keep the air strippers on-line in the 

short term, although they may turn off 

the air strippers at a future date. Since 

unlimited use/unrestricted exposure has 

been met at the ECMWF site, future fiveyear reviews are not required. 

Community Involvement 

Public participation activities have 

been satisfied as required in CERCLA 

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

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

Documents in the deletion docket which 

EPA relied on for recommendation of 

the deletion of this site from the NPL are 

available to the public in the 

information repositories and at 

www.regulations.gov. 

Determination That the Site Meets the 

Criteria for Deletion in the NCP 

The NCP (40 CFR 300.425(e)) states 

that a site may be deleted from the NPL 

when no further response action is 

appropriate. EPA, in consultation with 

the State of Wisconsin, has determined 

that all required response actions have 

been implemented and no further 

response action by the responsible 

parties is appropriate. 

V. Deletion Action 

EPA, with concurrence from the State 

of Wisconsin through the WDNR, has 

determined that all appropriate 

response actions under CERCLA have 

been completed. Therefore, EPA is 

deleting the 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 May 27, 2014 

unless EPA receives adverse comments 

by April 28, 2014. If adverse comments 

are received during the comment 

period, EPA will publish a timely 

withdrawal of this direct final Notice of 

Deletion before the effective date of the 

deletion, and it will not take effect. EPA 

will prepare a response to comments 

and continue with the deletion process 

on the basis of the notice of intent to 

delete and the comments already 

received. There will be no additional 

opportunity to comment. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Chemicals, Hazardous 

substances, Hazardous waste, 

Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, 

Radiation protection, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Superfund, 

Water pollution control, Water supply. 

Dated: March 3, 2014. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

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 to Part 300—[Amended] 

■ 2. Table 1 of Appendix B to part 300 

is amended by removing the entry for 

‘‘WI’’, ‘‘Eau Claire Municipal Well 

Field’’, ‘‘Eau Claire’’. 

[FR Doc. 2014–06817 Filed 3–27–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System 

48 CFR Parts 209, 225, and 252 

Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement; Technical 

Amendments 

AGENCY: Defense Acquisition 

Regulations System, Department of 

Defense (DoD). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: DoD is making technical 

amendments to the Defense Federal 

Acquisition Regulation Supplement 

(DFARS) to provide needed editorial 

changes. 

DATES: Effective March 28, 2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Manuel Quinones, Defense Acquisition 

Regulations System, OUSD (AT&L) 

DPAP (DARS), Room 3B855, 3060 

Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 

20301–3060. Telephone 571–372–6088; 

facsimile 571–372–6094. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final 

rule amends the DFARS as follows: 

1. Correct 209.105–1(1) conform to the 

implementation of the System for 

Award Management (SAM). 

2. Correct 225.7003–3 to update crossreferences to DFARS Procedures, 

Guidance, and Information. 

3. Correct 252.204–7007(d)(2) to 

remove obsolete text and update the 

clause date. 

4. Correct 252.209–7004 to conform to 

the System for Award Management 

(SAM) and update the clause date. 

List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 209, 

225, and 252 

Government procurement. 

Manuel Quinones, 

Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System. 

Therefore, 48 CFR parts 209, 225, and 

252 are amended as follows: 

■ 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR 

parts 209, 225, and 252 continues to 

read as follows: 

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

chapter 1. 

PART 209—CONTRACTOR 

QUALIFICATIONS 

209.105–1 [Amended] 

■ 2. Section 209.105–1 paragraph (1) is 

amended by removing ‘‘System for 

Award Management Exclusions’’ and 

adding ‘‘Exclusions section of the 

System for Award Management’’ in its 

place. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES