Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 55 / Tuesday, March 24, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 12267 

Executive Order 13175—Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Government 

In accordance with Executive Order 

13175, we have evaluated the potential 

effects of this rule on Federallyrecognized Indian tribes and have 

determined that the rule does not have 

substantial direct effects on one or more 

Indian tribes, on the relationship 

between the Federal Government and 

Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal Government and Indian Tribes. 

The basis for this determination is the 

fact that our decision affects the 

Pennsylvania regulatory program and 

will have no effect on Indian lands. 

Executive Order 13211—Regulations 

That Significantly Affect the Supply, 

Distribution, or Use of Energy 

On May 18, 2001, the President issued 

Executive Order 13211 which requires 

agencies to prepare a Statement of 

Energy Effects for a rule that is (1) 

considered significant under Executive 

Order 12866, and (2) likely to have a 

significant adverse effect on the supply, 

distribution, or use of energy. Because 

this rule is exempt from review under 

Executive Order 12866 and is not 

expected to have a significant adverse 

effect on the supply, distribution, or use 

of energy, a Statement of Energy Effects 

is not required. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

Section 702(d) of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 

1292(d)) provides that a decision on a 

proposed State regulatory program 

provision does not constitute a major 

Federal action within the meaning of 

Section 102(2)(C) of the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (42 

U.S.C. 4332(2)(c). A determination has 

been made that such decisions are 

categorically excluded from the NEPA 

process (516 DM 13.5A(2)). 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

This rule does not contain 

information collection requirements that 

require approval by OMB under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 

3507 et seq.). 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Department of the Interior 

certifies that this rule will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.). This certification is 

based on the fact that the required 

amendment simply requires the State of 

Pennsylvania to submit information 

sufficient to demonstrate that the 

revenues generated by the collection of 

the reclamation fee will assure that the 

Surface Mining Conservation and 

Reclamation Fund can be operated in a 

manner that will meet the requirements 

of 30 CFR 800.11(e). 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act 

This rule is not a major rule under 5 

U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. 

This rule: (a) Does not have an annual 

effect on the economy of $100 million; 

(b) Will not cause a major increase in 

costs or prices for consumers, 

individual industries, geographic 

regions, or Federal, State, or local 

government agencies; and (c) Does not 

have significant adverse effects on 

competition, employment, investment, 

productivity, innovation, or the ability 

of U.S.-based enterprises to compete 

with foreign-based enterprises. This 

determination is based on the fact that 

the required amendment simply 

requires the State of Pennsylvania to 

submit information sufficient to 

demonstrate that the revenues generated 

by the collection of the reclamation fee 

will assure that the Surface Mining 

Conservation and Reclamation Fund can 

be operated in a manner that will meet 

the requirements of 30 CFR 800.11(e). 

Unfunded Mandates 

This rule will not impose a cost of 

$100 million or more in any given year 

on any governmental entity or the 

private sector. 

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 938 

Intergovernmental relations, Surface 

mining, Underground mining. 

Dated: February 3, 2009. 

Michael K. Robinson, 

Acting Regional Director, Appalachian 

Region. 

■ For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, 30 CFR part 938 is amended 

as set forth below: 

PART 938—PENNSYLVANIA 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 938 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq. 

§ 938.16 [Amended] 

■ 2. In § 938.16, add paragraph (h) to 

read as follows: 

* * * * * 

(h) By November 1, 1991, 

Pennsylvania shall submit information, 

sufficient to demonstrate that the 

revenues generated by the collection of 

the reclamation fee, as amended in 

§ 86.17(e), will assure that the Surface 

Mining Conservation and Reclamation 

Fund can be operated in a manner that 

will meet the requirements of 30 CFR 

800.11(e). Pennsylvania could provide 

such a demonstration through an 

actuarial study showing the Fund’s 

soundness or financial solvency. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. E9–6403 Filed 3–23–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–05–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 300 

[EPA–HQ–SFUND–1986–0005; FRL–8784–7] 

National Oil and Hazardous Substance 

Pollution Contingency Plan; National 

Priorities List 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Direct final Notice of Partial 

Deletion of the Mouat Industries 

Superfund Site from the National 

Priorities List. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) Region 8 is publishing a 

direct final Notice of Partial Deletion of 

the surface and subsurface soil 

components of the Mouat Industries 

Superfund Site (Site), located in the 

Town of Columbus, Stillwater County, 

Montana, from the National Priorities 

List (NPL). The NPL, promulgated 

pursuant to section 105 of the 

Comprehensive Environmental 

Response, Compensation, and Liability 

Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is 

an appendix of the National Oil and 

Hazardous Substances Pollution 

Contingency Plan (NCP). This direct 

final partial deletion is being published 

by EPA with the concurrence of the 

State of Montana (State), through the 

Montana Department of Environmental 

Quality (MDEQ) because EPA has 

determined that all appropriate 

response actions at these identified 

parcels under CERCLA, other than five 

year reviews and operation and 

maintenance, have been completed. 

However, this partial deletion does not 

preclude future actions under 

Superfund. 

This partial deletion pertains to the 

surface and subsurface soils component 

of the Mouat Industries Superfund Site. 

The groundwater component will 

remain on the NPL and is not being 

considered for deletion as part of this 

action. 

DATES: This direct final partial deletion 

will be effective May 26, 2009 unless 

EPA receives adverse comments by 

April 23, 2009. If adverse comments are 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES

12268 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 55 / Tuesday, March 24, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

received, EPA will publish a timely 

withdrawal of the direct final partial 

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–1986–0005, by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: hoogerheide.roger@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (406) 457–5056. 

• Mail: Roger Hoogerheide, Remedial 

Project Manager; U.S. EPA Montana 

Office; Federal Building, Suite 3200; 10 

West 15th Street; Helena, MT 59626. 

• Hand delivery: U.S. EPA Montana 

Office; Federal Building, Suite 3200; 10 

West 15th Street; Helena, MT 59626. 

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–1986– 

0005. 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 e-mail. 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 e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through http:// 

www.regulations.gov, your e-mail 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the http:// 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

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

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

will be publicly available only in hard 

copy. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or are available for 

viewing and copying at the Site 

information repositories located at: 

U.S. EPA Montana Office, Federal 

Building, Suite 3200, 10 West 15th 

Street, Helena, MT 59626, (406) 457– 

5000. Viewing Hours: Mon–Fri 8 a.m. 

to 5 p.m., excluding holidays. 

Stillwater County Library, 27 North 4th 

Street; PO Box 266, Columbus, MT 

59019–0266, 406–322–5009. Hours: 

(Library hours vary). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Roger Hoogerheide, Remedial Project 

Manager, 8MO, 

hoogerheide.roger@epa.gov, U.S. EPA, 

Region 8—Montana Office, 10 W. 15th 

St., Suite 3200, Helena, Montana 59626, 

(406) 457–5031 or 1–866–457–2690, 

extension 5031. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Introduction 

II. NPL Deletion Criteria 

III. Deletion Procedures 

IV. Basis for Site Partial Deletion 

V. Partial Deletion Action 

I. Introduction 

EPA Region 8 is publishing this direct 

final Notice of Partial Deletion for the 

Mouat Industries Superfund Site from 

the National Priorities List. This partial 

deletion pertains to all surface and 

subsurface soils at the Mouat Industries 

Superfund Site. The NPL constitutes 

Appendix B of 40 CFR part 300 which 

is the Oil and Hazardous Substances 

Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), 

which EPA promulgated pursuant to 

Section 105 of the Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, Compensation 

and Liability Act 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 

Mouat Industries 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 300.425(e)(3) of 

the NCP, a portion of a site deleted from 

the NPL remains eligible for Fundfinanced remedial action if future 

conditions warrant such actions. 

Because EPA considers this action to 

be noncontroversial and routine, this 

action will be effective May 26, 2009 

unless EPA receives adverse comments 

by April 23, 2009. Along with this direct 

final Notice of Partial Deletion, EPA is 

co-publishing a Notice of Intent for 

Partial Deletion in the ‘‘Proposed Rules’’ 

section of the Federal Register. If 

adverse comments are received within 

the 30-day public comment period on 

this partial deletion action, EPA will 

publish a timely withdrawal of this 

direct final Notice of Partial Deletion 

before the effective date of the partial 

deletion and the partial deletion will 

not take effect. EPA will, as appropriate, 

prepare a response to comments and 

continue with the deletion process on 

the basis of the Notice of Intent for 

Partial Deletion and the comments 

already received. There will be no 

additional opportunity to comment. 

Section II of this document explains 

the criteria for deleting sites from the 

NPL. Section III discusses procedures 

that EPA is using for this action. Section 

IV discusses the Mouat Industries 

Superfund Site and demonstrates how 

the Site meets the deletion criteria. 

Section V discusses EPA’s action to 

partially delete the Site parcels from the 

NPL unless adverse comments are 

received during the public comment 

period. 

II. NPL Deletion Criteria 

The NCP establishes the criteria that 

EPA uses to delete sites from the NPL. 

In accordance with 40 CFR 300.425(e), 

sites may be deleted from the NPL 

where no further response is 

appropriate. In making such a 

determination pursuant to 40 CFR 

300.425(e), EPA will consider, in 

consultation with the State, whether any 

of the following criteria have been met: 

i. Responsible parties or other persons 

have implemented all appropriate 

response actions required; 

ii. All appropriate Fund-financed 

response under CERCLA has been 

implemented, and no further response 

action by responsible parties is 

appropriate; or 

iii. The remedial investigation has 

shown that the release poses no 

significant threat to public health or the 

environment and, therefore, the taking 

of remedial measures is not appropriate. 

Pursuant to CERCLA section 121(c) 

and the NCP, EPA conducts five-year 

reviews to ensure the continued 

protectiveness of remedial actions 

where hazardous substances, pollutants, 

or contaminants remain at a site above 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 55 / Tuesday, March 24, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 12269 

levels that allow for unlimited use and 

unrestricted exposure. EPA conducts 

such five-year reviews even if a site is 

deleted from the NPL. EPA may initiate 

further action to ensure continued 

protectiveness at a deleted site if new 

information becomes available that 

indicates it is appropriate. Whenever 

there is a significant release from a site 

deleted from the NPL, the deleted site 

may be restored to the NPL without 

application of the hazard ranking 

system. 

III. Deletion Procedures 

The following procedures apply to 

deletion of the surface and subsurface 

soil components of the Site: 

1. EPA has consulted with the State 

prior to developing this direct final 

Notice of Partial Deletion and the Notice 

of Intent for Partial Deletion copublished in the ‘‘proposed Rules’’ 

section of the Federal Register. 

2. EPA has provided the State 30 

working days for review of this notice 

and the parallel Notice of Intent for 

Partial Deletion prior to their 

publication today, and the State, 

through the MDEQ, has concurred with 

the partial deletion of the Site from the 

NPL. 

3. Concurrently with the publication 

of this direct final Notice of Partial 

Deletion, a notice of the availability of 

the parallel Notice of Intent for Partial 

Deletion is being published in the 

Billings Gazette. The newspaper notice 

announces the 30-day public comment 

period concerning the Notice of Intent 

for Partial Deletion of the Mouat 

Industries Superfund Site from the NPL. 

4. The EPA placed copies of 

documents supporting the partial 

deletion in the deletion docket and 

made these items available for public 

inspection and copying at the Site 

information repositories identified 

above. 

5. If adverse comments are received 

within the 30-day public comment 

period on this partial deletion, EPA will 

publish a timely notice of withdrawal of 

this direct final Notice of Partial 

Deletion before its effective date and 

continue with the deletion process on 

the basis of the Notice of Intent for 

Partial Deletion and the comments 

already received. 

Deletion of a portion of a site from the 

NPL does not itself create, alter, or 

revoke any individual’s right or 

obligations. Deletion of a portion of a 

site from the NPL does not in any way 

alter EPA’s right to take enforcement 

actions, as appropriate. The NPL is 

designed primarily for informational 

purposes and to assist EPA 

management. Section 300.425(e)(3) of 

the NCP states that the deletion of a site 

from the NPL does not preclude 

eligibility for future response actions, 

should future conditions warrant such 

actions. 

IV. Basis for Partial Site Deletion 

The following information provides 

EPA’s rationale for deleting the surface 

and subsurface soils of the Mouat 

Industries Superfund Site from the NPL. 

Site Background and History 

The Mouat Industries Superfund Site, 

CERCLIS ID MTD021997689, is located 

on Clough Avenue, Town of Columbus, 

Stillwater County, Montana. The Site is 

located in the flood-plain of the 

Yellowstone River and is less than 0.6 

miles north of the present river channel 

in the SW 1⁄4 of the NW 1⁄4 of Section 

27, T2S, R20E. The Site is 

approximately 4.5 acres. Clough Avenue 

and a railroad line are to the north of the 

Site and East 1st Avenue South and the 

Columbus Airport are to the south. The 

Site is adjacent to 13th Street and a 

parcel of open land that is owned by the 

Town of Columbus to the east and the 

Timberweld manufacturing facility is to 

the west. Land use at the Site is 

designated as light and heavy industrial. 

Residential areas lie within 0.5 miles of 

the Site. The portion of the Site that is 

fenced is owned by the Town of 

Columbus (Town) and Timberweld 

Manufacturing (Timberweld) owns the 

portion of the Site that is not fenced. 

The fenced portion of the Site is 

currently not being used and has a 

vegetative cover. Timberweld 

manufactures laminated beams and 

arches and supplies complete roof 

systems for a variety of structures 

including clubhouses, retail centers, 

banks, fine homes and churches around 

the United States and uses its portion of 

the Site as an open storage area for its 

products. Institutional Controls allow 

for redevelopment of this property as 

long as performance standards adopted 

under Chapter 17.76.030 and other 

requirements of the Town of Columbus 

Ordinance No. 328 (Superfund Overlay 

District) are followed. 

The Town has owned the eastern 

portion of the Site since 1933. In 1960, 

the Town acquired the western portion 

of the Site which was later sold to 

Timberweld. Aerial photos of Columbus 

indicate industrialization of the area 

occurred between 1954 and 1957. A 

chromium processing plant was 

constructed on the Site in 1957 by 

William G. Mouat and Mouat Industries. 

Under a 5 year lease agreement with the 

Town, Mouat operated the plant 

beginning in 1957. In 1962, the lease 

was extended through August 6, 1967. 

Mouat’s operation processed chromite 

ore mined from the Stillwater Mining 

Complex in south-central Montana into 

high-grade sodium dichromate which 

was sold as a corrosion inhibitor. The 

process subsequently generated sodium 

sulfate process wastes containing 

sodium chromate and sodium 

dichromate. These hexavalent 

chromium (Cr VI) containing 

compounds leached from the sodium 

sulfate waste piles into underlying soils 

and eventually into the groundwater. 

Additionally, normal facility operations 

resulted in sodium dichromate spills. 

The chromium processing plant was 

built and operated from 1957 to 1962. 

Chromium wastes were created during 

this time, but not after 1962. 

In May of 1963, the Monte Vista 

Company (MVC) purchased the plant 

and equipment, and received an 

assignment of Mouat’s lease for a 

portion of the Site. As mentioned above, 

Mouat’s lease expired in 1967. Once this 

lease ended, MVC executed a five year 

lease directly with the Town. This lease 

was effective from January 1, 1969 until 

December 31, 1973. 

In 1968, Mouat assigned its interest in 

the agreements it had with MVC to the 

Anaconda Minerals Company (AMC). 

AMC was involved with the Site until 

1973 and during this time AMC took 

actions to address concerns the Town 

had about the Site. In 1969, AMC 

removed approximately 468 tons of 

stockpiled chromium salts from the Site 

yard. A portion of these salts were 

drummed and placed in the 

manufacturing building. The remainder 

was simply placed on the building’s 

floor. The Site was then graded and 

gravel was laid over a portion of the 

yard. 

In 1973, AMC performed sampling 

activities at the Site, identifying 

chromium in soils, surface water, and 

groundwater. Drainage ditches were also 

constructed around the manufacturing 

building to route storm water flow away 

from the building and yard. In an 

attempt to address visible chromium 

salts, sulfuric acid and ferrous sulfate 

were applied to the soil and mixed into 

a portion of the yard west and south of 

the building. The acid addition was 

done with the intent of reducing the Cr 

VI to the more stable and less soluble 

trivalent chromium (Cr III). AMC also 

removed tons of the drummed and 

stockpiled material from the 

manufacturing building to an off-Site 

location in Butte, Montana. In 1974, 

MVC removed equipment from the Site 

and demolished the processing 

building. 

Timberweld entered into a lease with 

the Town for additional space on the 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES

12270 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 55 / Tuesday, March 24, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

Site in 1975 to expand existing 

operations. During the same year, 

Timberweld discovered what was later 

found to be chromium precipitate 

coming up onto their property. Unsure 

of the source of this material, 

Timberweld covered both the leased 

and owned portions of their property 

with a foot of gravel, in an effort to 

protect the laminate wood products 

from the precipitate. 

Groundwater sampling in 1977 

defined a hexavalent chromium plume 

migrating from the Site and spreading 

southeast toward the Yellowstone River. 

EPA and the Montana Solid Waste 

Management Bureau conducted a 

Preliminary Site Investigation in June 

1979. Further groundwater, surface 

water and soil sampling was conducted 

by EPA in September 1980, August 

1983, July 1984, and April 1985. In early 

1984, a complaint of unusual cattle 

deaths downgradient of the Site at the 

Wegner Ranch was reported to the 

Montana Department of Health and 

Environmental Sciences. In 1984 and 

1985, inspections were conducted in 

attempts to determine whether a release 

of Site contaminants may have been 

associated with cattle deaths. However, 

no report indicated that the death of 

cattle was tied to the chromium 

contamination. 

Hexavalent chromium is a hazardous 

substance as defined by CERCLA 

Section 101(14), and designated as such 

under 40 CFR part 117 and 40 CFR part 

302. EPA proposed the facility for the 

NPL in 1984, 29 FR 40320 (Oct. 15, 

1984). The Site received a Hazard 

Ranking System score of 31.66. The 

listing was final in 1986, 51 FR 21054 

(June 10, 1986). 

The contaminated surface and 

subsurface soils at the Mouat Industries 

Superfund Site were addressed through 

two Action Memorandums, signed in 

1990 and 1991, while two other Action 

Memorandums, signed in 1996 and 

2008, addressed Site controls and 

groundwater. 

Removal Actions 

The remediation of the Site was 

addressed through removal authority. 

The removal actions addressing surface 

and subsurface soils are discussed 

below. 

In 1990, EPA issued an Action 

Memorandum to initiate a time-critical 

removal action to (1) secure the Site and 

to mitigate the threat of direct contact to 

hazardous materials by Timberweld’s 

workers and nearby individuals, and (2) 

provide run-on, run-off drainage control 

for the Site. Approximately 1,400 feet of 

6-foot industrial chain link fencing with 

two 20-foot wide gates with locks were 

installed around the Site to restrict 

public access to chromium-containing 

soils and secured a portion of the area 

that used to be Timberweld’s storage 

yard. The Town performed all Site 

drainage controls. Due to the potential 

for direct contact with the high levels of 

chromium, EPA fenced the Site using 

time-critical removal authority and used 

Superfund Trust Fund money. 

After the time-critical removal action 

was completed, it was determined that 

there was still a threat to public health 

posed by the Site through exposure to 

CrVI contaminated soils, surface water 

and groundwater through the direct 

contact, inhalation and ingestion 

pathways. The threats met the removal 

criteria specified in the NCP at 40 CFR 

Section 300.415(b)(2)(i), (ii), (iv), (v). A 

second Action Memorandum was issued 

in 1991 which specified treatment of 

CrVI contaminated soils on-Site as the 

primary removal alternative with off-site 

disposal of soils as a back up. 

After efforts to negotiate an 

Administrative Order on Consent with 

the responsible parties failed, EPA 

issued Unilateral Administrative Order 

(UAO) Docket No. CERCLA–VIII–92–05 

on November 12, 1991 to FMC 

Corporation, MVC, Mouat, Timberweld, 

and the Town of Columbus requiring 

the excavation and treatment of 

chromium-contaminated soil. EPA 

specified removal clean-up standards as 

follows: 

• Soil inside the EPA perimeter fence 

for which total chromium in the extract 

Toxicity Characteristic Leaching 

procedure (TCLP chromium) was greater 

than 0.5 mg/L was to be excavated to 

elevation 3564 or to the clay-gravel 

interface, whichever was lower. 

• Soil outside the EPA fence for 

which TCLP chromium was greater than 

0.1 mg/L was to be excavated to 

elevation 3564 or to the clay-gravel 

interface, whichever was lower. 

FMC Corporation began implementing 

the provisions of the UAO in December 

1991. After preliminary work, including 

sampling and preparation of work plans, 

full-scale treatment of contaminated 

soils began on June 28, 1993. The 

treatment process included soil 

screening, chemical addition for 

chromium reduction, and Portland 

cement addition for soil fixation. 

Performance standards for treated soils 

were established as follows: 

• The TCLP chromium was to be 

equal to or less than 0.5 mg/L; 

• The total chromium in any extract 

obtained by the Multiple Extraction 

Procedure was to be equal to or less 

than 5.0 mg/L; 

• The unconfined compressive 

strength of each block was to be equal 

to or greater than 50 pounds per square 

inch; and 

• The permeability of treated soil was 

to be equal to or less than that of the 

background soils. 

On-site soil treatment operations were 

conducted through October 31, 1993. 

During that period approximately 

14,000 cubic yards of chromiumcontaining soil were treated, creating 

approximately 7,000 blocks. The treated 

soils were formed into 5′ x 5′ x 6′ blocks 

for curing, testing, and placement. The 

treatment process converted hexavalent 

chromium to the less toxic and 

immobile trivalent chromium. 

Analytical results showed that all blocks 

met performance standards. 

In 1994, in response to changing 

project conditions, EPA decided to 

change the removal action to the backup 

alternative of off-Site disposal as 

outlined in the 1991 Action 

Memorandum. The soils excavated in 

1994 by FMC, for which the TCLP 

chromium exceeded the clean-up 

standard were removed from the Site by 

rail for disposal at appropriately 

permitted off-Site disposal facilities. 

Soil that tested as hazardous (TCLP 

chromium greater than or equal to 0.5 

mg/L of leachable chromium) was sent 

to the USPCI hazardous waste treatment 

and disposal facility at Grassy 

Mountain, Utah. Soil that tested as nonhazardous (TCLP chromium less than 

0.5 mg/L of leachable chromium) was 

sent to the East Carbon Development 

Corporation nonhazardous waste 

disposal facility at East Carbon, Utah. 

Off-Site disposal of the remaining 

affected soils began on July 7, 1994 and 

was completed by October 1, 1994. 

Approximately 19,400 cubic yards of 

chromium-contaminated soils were 

excavated and transported for off-Site 

disposal. 

Upon completion of contaminated 

soil excavation and transport off-site, 

treated soil blocks formed in 1993 were 

placed in the excavation area and 

stacked until approximately 3 feet above 

original grade over the eastern twothirds of the Site. After all response 

actions contemplated in the 1991 Action 

Memorandum were completed, the Site 

was graded to modest slopes to promote 

precipitation runoff. The western 

portion of the property was surfaced 

with a gravel cover to allow vehicular 

and storage use of the area. The eastern 

portion was covered with soil and 

seeded to establish a vegetative cover. 

Cleanup Goals 

Response activities were conducted in 

accordance with the Unilateral 

Administrative Order and the Action 

Memorandums for the Site. Soil inside 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 55 / Tuesday, March 24, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 12271 

the EPA perimeter fence for which total 

chromium in the extract Toxicity 

Characteristic Leaching procedure 

(TCLP chromium) was greater than 0.5 

mg/L were excavated to elevation 3564 

or to the clay-gravel interface, 

whichever was lower. Soil outside the 

EPA fence for which TCLP chromium 

was greater than 0.1 mg/L were 

excavated to elevation 3564 or to the 

clay-gravel interface, whichever was 

lower. 

For waste left on-Site, each block of 

treated soil was sampled and analyzed 

for compliance with performance 

standards. Analytical results show that 

all blocks met the cleanup standard in 

the TCLP extract. The maximum 

chromium concentration in any TCLP 

extract was 0.47 mg/L and most values 

were less than 0.1 mg/L. EPA’s oversight 

contractor, the U.S. Bureau of 

Reclamation, also reported that 

* * * all EPA split samples for 28-day cure 

treated soils * * * met performance criteria 

* * * for TCLP extractable total chromium, 

total chromium in (the more aggressive) 

multiple extraction testing, and unconfined 

compressive strength. Moreover, the close 

correspondence between EPA and FMC split 

samples indicates that FMC data base was 

appropriate for guiding remedial site 

operations * * * 

Institutional Controls 

Long term protectiveness is 

dependent upon institutional controls 

over land use and groundwater use, 

established by the town of Columbus. A 

zoning ordinance was approved in 

March 1995 which created a special 

Superfund Overlay District (SOD) for 

both the block placement area and 

contaminated groundwater. These 

institutional controls are described in 

the 1996 Action Memorandum. The 

ordinance became enforceable in April 

1995. Requirements of the SOD are 

enforced by the zoning authority of 

Columbus. The SOD currently covers 

surface, subsurface and groundwater 

within the block placement areas and 

surrounding protective zones. 

The following land use restrictions 

are included in the ordinance: 

• Excavation into the blocks of 

treated soil is prohibited. 

• Vehicle loads on the graveled 

portion of the block placement area are 

limited. 

• Any use of the soil-covered block 

placement area, unless those areas are 

paved or covered with gravel, is 

prohibited. 

• The property owner is required to 

maintain the Site cover, drainage 

facilities, and fences. 

• Specifications for construction on 

the block placement area are 

established. 

Initially, groundwater use restrictions 

applied to the entire SOD. Those 

restrictions prohibited new wells or 

other groundwater extraction systems 

and prohibited groundwater use from 

existing wells or other groundwater 

extraction systems, except for lawn 

irrigation use, use of the existing golf 

course pond and groundwater 

monitoring. Compliance with 

performance standards triggered the 

relaxation of ground water use 

restrictions within the SOD in 

accordance with provisions of the 1996 

response action. Based on 

improvements in groundwater quality 

since adoption of the SOD, the USEPA 

approved lifting of groundwater use 

restrictions within the SOD in a May 

2005 letter to the Town of Columbus. 

In 2008, the five-year review 

recommended revisiting the SOD. Due 

to residual groundwater contamination 

levels above MCLs within the block 

placement area, groundwater use 

restrictions should be maintained 

within this area. A fourth Action 

Memorandum was issued in 2008 based 

on these recommendations from the 

Five-Year Review and had four (4) 

purposes: 

1. It clarified Points of Compliance for 

groundwater at the Site. 

2. It ensured that the restriction on 

groundwater use in the Block Placement 

Area will be maintained as long as 

institutional controls are necessary. 

3. It clarified the 30 year groundwater 

monitoring requirement identified in 

the June 21, 1996 Action Memorandum. 

4. It required MDEQ and EPA to 

prepare a Post Removal Site Control 

Plan pursuant to Section 300.415(l)(3) of 

the NCP. 

Modification in the Town of Columbus’ 

Superfund Overlay District Ordinance 

Town Council met on March 3, 2008, 

and passed the second reading of the 

Superfund Overlay District Amended 

Ordinance to restrict groundwater use in 

the block placement area. It became 

effective thirty days later. 

Operation and Maintenance 

The operation and maintenance is 

currently limited to maintenance of 

fencing and the vegetative cap over the 

block placement area and is the 

responsibility of the Town of Columbus 

and Timberweld. 

As part of the future work to be 

performed at the Site, the Town will 

continue to provide access to the Site 

and to enforce ICs through the SOD. 

EPA and MDEQ also agree to meet with 

the Town to discuss Site land use and 

groundwater restrictions at least once 

every five years. These meetings are 

intended to help all parties better 

understand the issues associated with 

these restrictions as well as to notify the 

EPA and MDEQ of any upcoming land 

use changes that may require a more 

comprehensive review. 

These requirements are documented 

in the Post Removal Site Control Plan. 

Five-Year Review 

Five-year reviews are required since 

waste remains on-Site above levels that 

allow for unlimited use and unrestricted 

exposure. The last five-year review was 

completed on March 13, 2008. No major 

concerns were identified during this 

review. The removal actions as 

implemented are currently protective of 

human health and the environment. 

Protectiveness is achieved through 

groundwater and land use restrictions 

within the block placement area. The 

next Five-Year Review is scheduled for 

the 1st quarter of Federal Fiscal Year 

2013. 

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 partial deletion 

docket which the EPA relied on for 

recommendation for the partial deletion 

from the NPL are available to the public 

in the information repositories and a 

notice of availability of the Notice of 

Intent for Partial Deletion has been 

published in the Billings Gazette to 

satisfy public participation procedures 

required by 40 CFR 300.425(e)(4). 

Determination That the Criteria for 

Deletion Have Been Met 

The response actions were successful 

in restoring the Site surface and 

subsurface soils to concentrations at or 

below the cleanup standard of less than 

0.5 mg/L TCLP chromium. For waste 

left on-Site, each block of treated soil 

was sampled and analyzed for 

compliance with this standard. 

Analytical results show that all blocks 

met the cleanup standard in the TCLP 

extract. The maximum chromium 

concentration in any TCLP extract was 

0.47 mg/L and most values were less 

than 0.1 mg/L. 

EPA has consulted with the MDEQ, 

the Town of Columbus, Timberweld 

Manufacturing and FMC Corporation on 

the proposed partial deletion of the 

surface and subsurface soils from the 

NPL prior to developing this Notice of 

Partial Deletion. EPA and MDEQ have 

also determined that the responsible 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES

12272 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 55 / Tuesday, March 24, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

parties have implemented all 

appropriate response actions as 

specified in the Unilateral 

Administrative Orders and Action 

Memorandums and no further response 

action by responsible parties is 

appropriate other than continued 

maintenance of institutional controls. 

EPA and MDEQ have also determined 

through the Five-Year Review that all 

response actions have been completed 

such that any release from the block 

placement area where waste has been 

left in place poses no significant threat 

to public health or the environment and, 

therefore, taking of remedial measures is 

not appropriate. 

The State, through MDEQ, has 

concurred on the proposed deletion and 

provided such concurrence in writing. 

EPA also provided the State 30 working 

days for review of the partial deletion 

notice prior to its publication in the 

Federal Register. 

V. Partial Deletion Action 

The EPA, with concurrence of the 

State through the MDEQ, has 

determined that all appropriate 

response actions under CERCLA, other 

than operation and maintenance and 

five-year reviews, have been completed. 

Therefore, EPA is deleting the surface 

and subsurface soils component of the 

Mouat Industries Superfund Site from 

the NPL. 

Because EPA considers this action to 

be non-controversial and routine, EPA is 

taking it without prior publication. This 

action will be effective May 26, 2009, 

unless EPA receives adverse comments 

by April 23, 2009. If adverse comments 

are received within the 30-day public 

comment period, EPA will publish a 

timely withdrawal of this direct final 

notice of partial deletion before the 

effective date of the deletion and it will 

not take effect and, EPA will prepare a 

response to comments and continue 

with the deletion process on the basis of 

the notice of intent to partially delete 

and the comments 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: March 10, 2009. 

Carol Rushin, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8. 

■ 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 

Montana for ‘‘Mouat Industries 

Superfund Site’’ to read as follows: 

Appendix B to Part 300—National 

Priorities List 

TABLE 1—GENERAL SUPERFUND

SECTION

State Site name City/county Notes a

* * * * * 

MT Mouat Industries.Columbus .... *** P 

* * * * * 

a * * *. 

***P = sites with deletion(s). 

[FR Doc. E9–6142 Filed 3–23–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

GENERAL SERVICES 

ADMINISTRATION 

41 CFR Part 102–72 

[FMR Amendment 2009–03; FMR Case 

2009–102–1; Docket 2009–0002; Sequence 

2] 

RIN 3090–AI86 

Federal Management Regulation; FMR 

Case 2009–102–1, Delegation of 

Authority To Perform Ancillary Repair 

and Alteration Work in Federally 

Owned Buildings Under the 

Jurisdiction, Custody or Control of the 

General Services Administration 

AGENCY: Office of Governmentwide 

Policy, General Services Administration 

(GSA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: GSA is amending the Federal 

Management Regulation (FMR) to 

delegate to Executive agencies the 

authority to perform ancillary repair and 

alteration work in federally owned 

buildings under the jurisdiction, 

custody or control of GSA in accordance 

with the terms, conditions and 

limitations set forth in sections 102– 

72.66 through 102–72.69. 

DATES: Effective Date: April 23, 2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Stanley C. Langfeld, Director, 

Regulations Management Division, 

Office of Governmentwide Policy, 

General Services Administration, at 

(202) 501–1737, or by e-mail at 

stanley.langfeld@gsa.gov, for 

clarification of content. For information 

pertaining to status or publication 

schedules, contact the Regulatory 

Secretariat, Room 4041, GS Building, 

Washington, DC 20405, (202) 501–4755. 

Please cite FMR Amendment 2009–03, 

FMR Case 2009–102–1. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

A. Background 

The GSA Federal Acquisition Service 

established Ancillary Repair and 

Alterations as a Special Item Number 

(SIN) in the GSA Multiple Award 

Schedule. The SIN provides for the 

acquisition of ancillary repair and 

alteration services when it is a minor 

part of a project and is required to 

support a product or service that is 

purchased under the same GSA 

Multiple Award Schedule from the 

same vendor. 

An Executive agency may not perform 

ancillary repair and alteration work in a 

federally owned building under the 

jurisdiction, custody or control of GSA 

using this SIN without first obtaining a 

delegation of authority from the 

Administrator of General Services. To 

promote efficiency and economy, 41 

CFR sections 102–72.66 through 102– 

72.69 delegate such ancillary repair and 

alteration authority to all Executive 

agencies in accordance with the terms, 

conditions and limitations set forth in 

those sections. 

B. Executive Order 12866 

The GSA has determined that this 

final rule is not a significant regulatory 

action for the purposes of Executive 

Order 12866. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

This final rule is not required to be 

published in the Federal Register for 

comment. Therefore, the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act does not apply. 

D. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The Paperwork Reduction Act does 

not apply because the changes to the 

FMR do not impose information 

collection requirements that require the 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES