Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 70057 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Internal Revenue Service 

26 CFR Part 301 

[TD 9554] 

RIN 1545–BJ07 

Extending Religious and Family 

Member FICA and FUTA Exceptions to 

Disregarded Entities; Correction 

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), 

Treasury. 

ACTION: Correction to final and 

temporary regulations. 

SUMMARY: This document describes a 

correction to final and temporary 

regulations (TD 9554) extending the 

exceptions from taxes under the Federal 

Insurance Contributions Act (‘‘FICA’’) 

and the Federal Unemployment Tax Act 

(‘‘FUTA’’) under sections 3121(b)(3) 

(concerning individuals who work for 

certain family members), 3127 

(concerning members of religious 

faiths), and 3306(c)(5) (concerning 

persons employed by children and 

spouses and children under 21 

employed by their parents) of the 

Internal Revenue Code (‘‘Code’’) to 

entities that are disregarded as separate 

from their owners for Federal tax 

purposes. The temporary regulations 

also clarify the existing rule that the 

owners of disregarded entities, except 

for qualified subchapter S subsidiaries, 

are responsible for backup withholding 

and related information reporting 

requirements under section 3406. These 

regulations were published in the 

Federal Register on Tuesday, November 

1, 2011 (76 FR 67363). 

DATES: This correction is effective on 

November 10, 2011, and is applicable 

on November 1, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Joseph Perera, (202) 622–6040 (not a 

toll-free number). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The correction notice that is the 

subject of this document is under 

section 7701 of the Internal Revenue 

Code. 

Need for Correction 

As published, final and temporary 

regulations (TD 9554) contain an error 

that may prove to be misleading and is 

in need of clarification. 

Correction of Publication 

Accordingly, the publication of final 

and temporary regulations (TD 9554), 

which was the subject of FR Doc. 2011– 

28176, is corrected as follows: 

On page 67366, column 1, under an 

amendatory instruction, the language 

‘‘Par. 9. Section 301.7701–2T is revised 

to read as follows:’’ is removed and is 

replaced with the new language ‘‘Par. 9. 

Section 301.7701–2T is added to read as 

follows:’’ in its place. 

LaNita Van Dyke, 

Chief, Publications and Regulations Branch, 

Legal Processing Division, Associate Chief 

Counsel, Procedure and Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2011–29087 Filed 11–9–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 300 

[EPA–HQ–SFUND–1983–0002; FRL–9488–7] 

National Oil and Hazardous Substance 

Pollution Contingency Plan; National 

Priorities List: Partial Deletion of the 

Tar Lake Superfund Site 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) Region 5 is 

publishing a direct final Notice of 

Partial Deletion of the following two 

parcels of the Tar Lake Superfund Site 

(Site) located in Mancelona, Michigan 

from the National Priorities List (NPL): 

The non-East Tailings Area (ETA) part 

of property PIN 05–11–129–006–00 

(41.4 acres); and the non-ETA part of 

property PIN 05–11–129–007–00 (33.63 

acres). Refer to Figures 1 to 3 in the 

deletion docket to view the location of 

the two parcels being proposed for 

deletion. 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 partial deletion is being published 

by EPA with the concurrence of the 

State of Michigan, through the Michigan 

Department of Environmental Quality 

(MDEQ), because EPA has determined 

that all appropriate response actions at 

these two parcels under CERCLA, other 

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

However, this partial deletion does not 

preclude future actions under 

Superfund. 

This partial deletion pertains only to 

the two property PINs listed above. The 

deletion of these two parcels from the 

Site affects all surface soils, subsurface 

soils, structures and groundwater within 

the boundaries of these parcels. In 2005, 

the ETA, approximately 45.49 acres in 

the northeastern part of the Site, was 

deleted from the NPL when EPA 

determined that the ETA was acceptable 

for unrestricted use and unlimited 

exposure (UU/UE). The two parcels 

being proposed for deletion are adjacent 

to and south of the ETA. The 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 9, 2012 unless EPA 

receives adverse comments by 

December 12, 2011. 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–1983–0002, by one of the 

following methods: 

• Email: Karen Cibulskis, Remedial 

Project Manager, at 

cibulskis.karen@epa.gov or Megan 

McSeveney, Community Involvement 

Coordinator, at 

mcseveney.megan@epa.gov. 

• Fax: Gladys Beard, Deletion Process 

Manager, at (312) 697–2077. 

• Mail: Karen Cibulskis, Remedial 

Project Manager, U.S. Environmental 

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

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 

60604, (312) 886–1843; or Megan 

McSeveney, Community Involvement 

Coordinator, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (SI–7J), 77 West 

Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604, 

(312) 886–1972 or (800) 621–8431. 

• Hand delivery: Megan McSeveney, 

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., 

excluding Federal holidays. 

Instruction: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–SFUND–1983– 

0002. 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 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
70058 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

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 with any disk 

or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA cannot 

read your comment due to technical 

difficulties and cannot contact you for 

clarification, EPA may not be able to 

consider your comment. Electronic files 

should avoid the use of special 

characters, any form of encryption, and 

be free of any defects or viruses. 

Docket 

All documents in the docket are listed 

in the http://www.regulations.gov index. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

e.g., CBI or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, will be publicly 

available only in the hard copy. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically at http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at: 

• U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency-Region 5, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604, Hours: 

Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays. 

• Mancelona Public Library, 202 West 

State Street, Mancelona, MI 49659, 

Phone: (231) 587–9451, Hours: Monday 

through Thursday, 9 a.m. to 8 p.m.; 

Friday 12 p.m. to 6 p.m. and Saturday 

9 a.m. to 5 p.m. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Karen Cibulskis, Remedial Project 

Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, (SR–6J), 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604, (312) 

886–1843, cibulskis.karen@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 Partial Deletion to delete 

two parcels of the Tar Lake Superfund 

Site from the NPL. This partial deletion 

pertains to all surface soils, subsurface 

soils, structures and groundwater within 

the boundaries of the non-ETA part of 

PIN 05–11–129–006–00 (41.4 acres) and 

the non-ETA part of PIN 05–11–129– 

007–00 (33.63 acres). The NPL 

constitutes Appendix B of 40 CFR part 

300, which is the National Oil and 

Hazardous Substances Pollution 

Contingency Plan (NCP), which EPA 

promulgated pursuant to section 105 of 

the Comprehensive Environmental 

Response, Compensation and Liability 

Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended. 

EPA maintains the NPL as the list of 

sites that appear to present a significant 

risk to public health, welfare, or the 

environment. Sites on the NPL may be 

the subject of remedial actions financed 

by the Hazardous Substance Superfund 

(Fund). This partial deletion of the Tar 

Lake Superfund Site is proposed in 

accordance with 40 CFR 300.425(e) and 

is consistent with the Notice of Policy 

Change: Partial Deletion of Sites Listed 

on the National Priorities List, 60 FR 

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

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

portion of a site deleted from the NPL 

remains eligible for Fund-financed 

remedial action if future conditions 

warrant such actions. 

Because EPA considers this action to 

be noncontroversial and routine, this 

action will be effective January 9, 2012 

unless EPA receives adverse comments 

by December 12, 2011. Along with this 

direct final Notice of Partial 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 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 two parcels of the Tar 

Lake Superfund Site and demonstrates 

how they meet the deletion criteria. 

Section V discusses EPA’s action to 

partially delete these two parcels of the 

Site from the NPL unless adverse 

comments are received during the 

public comment period. 

II. NPL Partial 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 UU/UE. 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 

this partial deletion of the Tar Lake 

Superfund Site: 

(1) EPA consulted with the State of 

Michigan on this partial deletion prior 

to developing this direct final Notice of 

Partial Deletion and the Notice of Intent 

to Delete co-published today in the 

‘‘Proposed Rules’’ section of the Federal 

Register. 

(2) EPA provided the State with 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 MDEQ, 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 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 70059 

the parallel Notice of Intent for Partial 

Deletion is being published in a major 

local newspaper, The Antrim Review, in 

Bellarie, Michigan. 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) EPA placed copies of documents 

supporting the proposed 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 

withdrawal of this direct final Notice for 

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 in 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 partial 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 Deletions 

The following information provides 

EPA’s rationale for deleting the nonETA part of PIN 05–11–129–006–00 

(41.4 acres) and the non-ETA part of PIN 

05–11–129–007–00 (33.63 acres) of the 

Site from the NPL. 

Site Background and History 

The Site (EPA ID: MID980794655) 

originally consisted of approximately 

234 acres of land located just east of 

Highway 131, north and south of Elder 

Road, and south of the Village of 

Mancelona in the north central part of 

the lower peninsula of Michigan. The 

John Otis Charcoal Iron Furnace 

Company manufactured iron at the Site 

from 1882 to 1886, and the Antrim Iron 

Works Company took over the Site in 

1886 and continued to manufacture iron 

there until 1945. From approximately 

1910 to 1944, a tar-like residue from 

Antrim Iron Works’ charcoal production 

process was discharged into an on-site 

depression south of Elder Road (also 

known as ‘‘Tar Lake’’) that covered four 

acres of land. The Site was proposed to 

be placed on the NPL on December 30, 

1982 (47 FR 58476); and was placed on 

the NPL on September 8, 1983 (48 FR 

40658). 

The Site was separated into two 

operable units (OUs): The first operable 

unit (OU1) included the tar 

contamination in the 4-acre depression 

in the northwest corner of the Site and 

the second operable unit (OU2), 

comprised the remaining contamination 

beneath the 4-acre Tar Lake depression 

and any additional contaminated 

groundwater and soil within the Site. 

On November 25, 2005 EPA partially 

deleted the ETA component of OU2. At 

this time, all surface soils, subsurface 

soils, structures and groundwater within 

the boundaries of the non-ETA part of 

PIN 05–11–129–006–00 (41.4 acres) and 

the non-ETA part of PIN 05–11–129– 

007–00 (33.63 acres) proposed for 

deletion are part of OU2. All of OU1 and 

the remaining sections of OU2 will 

remain on the NPL (please refer to 

Figures 1 to 3). This partial deletion 

notice will focus on the activities 

conducted at the two parcels in OU2 

subject to this notice. 

Ownership of the Site changed several 

times during the succeeding years after 

1945, and in 2009 Mancelona Private 

Power Producers (MP3) of Traverse City, 

Michigan, purchased the two parcels 

that are the subject of this partial 

deletion and are the current owners of 

this property. MP3 is an energy 

company planning to build and operate 

a $140,000,000 biomass energy plant on 

these two parcels and the alreadydeleted ETA section of the Site. 

Remedial Investigation and Feasibility 

Study (RI/FS) 

In June 1999, EPA commenced the 

Remedial Investigation (RI) field work 

for OU2. The overall objective of the RI 

for OU2 was to characterize what 

effects, if any, the former iron 

manufacturing processes had on the 

Site, including determining the lateral 

and vertical extent of any 

contamination; understanding the 

potential risk to human health and the 

environment; and developing sufficient 

data to perform a feasibility study (FS). 

As part of the RI/FS for OU2, EPA 

conducted a baseline risk assessment to 

determine the current and future effects 

of contaminants on human health and 

the environment. Initially, the Site was 

anticipated to have only industrial reuse 

potential. The RI for OU2 originally 

quantified only industrial reuse risks, 

but was expanded to apply address 

industrial, commercial, recreational, 

and residential uses. 

During the RI, EPA determined that 

an on-site plume of groundwater in the 

shallow unconfined aquifer beneath the 

4-acre Tar Lake depression was 

contaminated with benzene and 2,4- 

dimethylphenol above maximum 

contaminant levels (MCLs) and state 

drinking water standards. EPA also 

concluded that on-site groundwater 

collected from groundwater monitoring 

wells and off-site groundwater collected 

from residential wells in the shallow 

drinking water aquifer were 

contaminated with iron and manganese 

at concentrations above the State of 

Michigan’s Secondary Drinking Water 

Standards, but not at concentrations 

above EPA’s health-based risk levels. 

Therefore, the 2002 Record of Decision 

(ROD) determined that iron and 

manganese were not chemicals of 

concern for the CERCLA remedy. 

Groundwater samples collected up 

gradient and between the 4-acre 

depression and the two parcels 

proposed for deletion did not contain 

benzene, 2,4-dimethylphenol or iron 

above MCLs or risk-based levels during 

the RI. The RI and FS were completed 

on August 7, 2000. 

Selected Remedy 

A ROD for OU2 was signed on 

February 25, 2002 to address the soil 

and groundwater. The OU2 ROD listed 

the following site-wide remedial action 

objectives: 

a. Prevent human exposure through 

contact, ingestion, or inhalation of 

contaminated tarry-like waste residue 

(surface tar) in the Creosote Area. 

b. Prevent potential ecological 

impacts from exposure to surface tar. 

c. Control potential erosion and offsite transport of tar to nearby Nelson 

Lake. 

d. Prevent leaching of contaminants 

from the 4-acre depression or ‘‘rind’’ 

into soil and from soil into groundwater. 

e. Remediate on-site contaminated 

groundwater in the shallow unconfined 

aquifer to concentrations below MCLs or 

risk-based Michigan PA 451 Part 201 

Generic Cleanup Criteria for 

Groundwater within a reasonable time 

frame. Groundwater down gradient of 

the site is used for drinking water 

purposes and therefore a rapid 

restoration of on-site groundwater 

should be considered. 

f. Minimize potential for future 

releases of contaminated on-site 

groundwater to off-site groundwater. 

The parcels identified for deletion are 

up gradient of both the sources of 

contamination and the contaminated 

groundwater plume being addressed in 

the ROD for OU2. The elements of the 

selected remedy pertaining to the two 

parcels are: 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
70060 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

a. Institutional controls (ICs), 

including recording legal notices on 

property deeds to restrict on-site land 

and groundwater use; and 

b. Long-term monitoring to assess 

groundwater conditions over time. 

The ICs would indicate that only 

industrial, commercial and recreational 

land use would be allowed until risks 

associated with residential use had been 

assessed. In addition, EPA would ensure 

that the current property owners place 

language in their property deed to 

explain that no groundwater wells 

should be installed until on-site 

groundwater in the shallow drinking 

water aquifer is below the MCL for 

benzene (5 parts per billion (ppb)) and 

below the state drinking water standard 

for 2,4-dimethylphenol (370 ppb). When 

groundwater monitoring indicates that 

on-site groundwater is below MCLs and 

state drinking water standards during 

four consecutive sampling events, there 

would no longer be restrictions on 

groundwater. 

Two Explanation of Significant 

Differences (ESDs) were written, in 2002 

and 2004, for the Site; however neither 

one impacted the areas currently 

proposed for deletion. In 2009, property 

owners redeveloping a portion of the 

Site requested clarification of the 

groundwater institutional controls. The 

2002 ROD did not clarify whether 

groundwater use was prohibited on the 

entire site until the groundwater 

contamination is cleaned up, even if 

groundwater sampling at a specific 

property indicates chemical 

concentrations are below MCLs and 

MDEQ criteria at that property. Also, the 

requirements for groundwater use 

referenced in the 2002 ROD are drinking 

water standards. On September 14, 2009 

EPA issued an ESD clarifying that 

groundwater at the Site may be used for 

either drinking water or non-potable 

purposes before the biosparge 

groundwater treatment cleanup is 

complete, provided the use of the 

groundwater does not negatively impact 

EPA’s selected remedy for the site, 

including, but not limited to, the 

biosparge system and groundwater 

monitoring wells, or pose an 

unacceptable risk to human health. The 

restrictive covenants or other 

institutional controls to be implemented 

at the Site will state that groundwater at 

the Site may be used for drinking water 

or non-potable purposes provided the 

property owner submits a proposal to 

EPA and MDEQ, showing the proposed 

depth, location and pumping rate of 

each proposed non-potable well, 

including an evaluation demonstrating 

that the expected use of the proposed 

well(s) should not negatively impact 

EPA’s remedy. The proposal must also 

certify that non-potable wells will not 

be used for potable use and for drinking 

water wells, and the property owner 

must submit four consecutive sampling 

events at a monitoring well installed at 

each proposed well location, indicating 

that groundwater contaminants do not 

exceed applicable MCLs, MDEQ 

drinking water criteria, and other 

applicable or relevant and appropriate 

criteria. 

Response Actions 

Institutional controls are necessary for 

the non-ETA part of PIN 05–11–129– 

006–00 (41.4 acres) and the non-ETA 

part of PIN 05–11–129–007–00 (33.63 

acres) to restrict residential land use 

because the ROD, and subsequent 

investigations, assumed future 

commercial, industrial or recreational 

land use. In addition, ICs are necessary 

for groundwater to prevent drinking 

water wells or non-potable use wells 

from being installed and to protect the 

integrity of the ongoing biosparge 

remedy, unless property owners provide 

assurances that groundwater use does 

not impact the ongoing groundwater 

remedy or provide an unacceptable risk. 

On April 16, 2010 and June 10, 2010 

MP3 recorded two Declarations of 

Restrictive Covenants for the non-ETA 

part of PIN 05–11–129–006–00 (41.4 

acres), and the non-ETA part of PIN 05– 

11–129–007–00 (33.63 acres), 

respectively. These Declarations are 

consistent with the land and 

groundwater use restrictions required in 

EPA’s 2002 ROD and 2009 ESD. These 

restrictive covenants were approved by 

both EPA and the state before being 

recorded. These two parcels are 

facilities as that term is defined in part 

201 (Environmental Remediation) of the 

State of Michigan’s Natural Resources 

and Environmental Protection Act, 1994 

PA 451, as amended (NREPA). MDEQ 

makes no warranty as to the fitness of 

these two parcels for any general or 

specific use, and prospective purchasers 

or users are advised to conduct due 

diligence prior to acquiring or using any 

portion of these two parcels and to 

undertake appropriate actions to comply 

with the requirements of section 20107a 

of the NREPA. 

As noted in the RI, groundwater 

sampling conducted up gradient and 

between the 4-acre depression and the 

two parcels proposed for deletion did 

not contain benzene, 2,4- 

dimethylphenol or iron above MCLs or 

EPA risk-based levels. Sampling during 

the RI at MW–16, located within the 

parcels proposed for deletion, also 

resulted in non-detects for Volatile 

Organic Compounds (VOCs) and SemiVolatile Organic Compounds (SVOCs) 

prior to the well going dry. MDEQ has 

been conducting annual and semiannual groundwater monitoring since 

2004 at a groundwater monitoring well 

cluster located between the area of 

groundwater contamination that is being 

remediated as part of OU2 and the two 

parcels that are being deleted. Benzene, 

2,4-dimethylphenol, methylphenols or 

iron have not been detected in these 

wells above applicable criteria, 

including MDEQ’s health-based 

drinking water standard for iron, which 

is currently 2,000 mg/L. This data, along 

with the data collected from MW–16 

and subsequent groundwater data 

collected by the current property owner 

for their Baseline Environmental 

Assessment and Due Care Plan, 

provides assurance that the 

contaminated groundwater plume being 

remediated as part of OU2 has not 

impacted the groundwater beneath these 

two parcels. 

Cleanup Goals 

EPA determined and documented in a 

June 22, 2010 memo to the file that all 

remedy components pertaining to these 

two parcels have been implemented. 

There were no cleanup standards 

associated with remedial actions taken 

at these parcels. Groundwater 

monitoring results obtained during the 

RI and during the operation of the 

groundwater remedy demonstrate that 

MCLs and MDEQ Residency Drinking 

Water Criteria (RDWC) for benzene (5 

mg/L), 2,4-dimethylphenol (370 mg/L), 

methylphenols (370 mg/L) or iron (2,000 

mg/L) have not been exceeded in the 

groundwater underlying these parcels 

proposed for deletion. 

Operation and Maintenance 

The selected remedy in the 2002 ROD 

did not specify any ongoing operation 

and maintenance on the two parcels 

being proposed for deletion, other than 

ensuring compliance with the recorded 

ICs and conducting monitoring to 

ensure groundwater is not being 

impacted by the benzene contaminated 

groundwater beneath Tar Lake. 

Five-Year Review 

EPA conducted a five-year review of 

the Site in 2009 and determined that the 

remedy selected in the 2002 ROD was 

protective in the short-term. The fiveyear review did not recommend any 

modifications to the selected remedy for 

the two parcels being proposed for 

deletion. To achieve long-term 

protectiveness, the five-year review 

recommended implementation of proper 

restrictive covenants on all Site 

properties now in place for these two 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 70061 

parcels proposed for deletion, as well as 

additional data collection and 

evaluation activities in some areas of the 

Site to evaluate iron concentrations in 

groundwater. These evaluations being 

conducted are outside the boundaries of 

these two parcels and do not affect these 

two parcels. Five-year reviews will 

continue because waste was left in place 

in other areas of the Site above levels 

that allow for unrestricted use/ 

unrestricted exposure (UU/UE). These 

two parcels proposed for deletion will 

be reviewed during the Site-wide FYR 

to ensure compliance with the 

institutional controls. The next five-year 

review will be conducted in 2014. 

Community Involvement 

Public participation activities have 

been satisfied as required by section 

113(k) of CERCLA, 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 determining 

that the parcels listed herein meet the 

criteria for deletion from the NPL are 

available to the public in the 

information repositories listed above in 

the Docket section and at http://www.

regulations.gov. 

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 

appropriate. EPA, in consultation with 

the State of Michigan, has determined 

that all appropriate response actions 

under CERCLA, other than five-year 

reviews, have been completed on the 

non-ETA part of PIN 05–11–129–006–00 

(41.4 acres) and the non-ETA part of PIN 

05–11–129–007–00 (33.63 acres). 

Therefore, these two parcels meet the 

criteria of 40 CFR 300.425(e) may be 

deleted from the NPL. The State of 

Michigan, through MDEQ, concurred on 

this proposed deletion by letter dated 

May 10, 2011. 

Deletion Action 

EPA, with concurrence of the State of 

Michigan through MDEQ, has 

determined that all appropriate 

response actions under CERCLA, other 

than operation, maintenance, 

monitoring and five-year reviews, have 

been completed. Therefore, EPA is 

deleting all surface soils, subsurface 

soils, structures and groundwater within 

the boundaries of the non-ETA part of 

PIN 05–11–129–006–00 (41.4 acres) and 

the non-ETA part of PIN 05–11–129– 

007–00 (33.63 acres) parcels of the Tar 

Lake 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 9, 2012 

unless EPA receives adverse comments 

by December 12, 2011. If adverse 

comments are received within the 30- 

day public comment period, EPA will 

publish a timely withdrawal of this 

direct final Notice for Partial 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 for 

Partial Deletion 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: October 24, 2011. 

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—[Amended] 

■ 2. Table 1 of Appendix B to part 300 

is amended by revising the entry under 

‘‘Tar Lake’’, ‘‘MI ’’ to read as follows: 

Appendix B to Part 300—National 

Priorities List 

TABLE 1—GENERAL SUPERFUND SECTION

State Site name City/County Notes a

*******

MI Tar Lake Antrim P 

*******

a * * * 

P = Sites with partial deletion(s). 

[FR Doc. 2011–29069 Filed 11–9–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES