53222 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 168 / Tuesday, August 31, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

action because it will not have Tribal 

implications (i.e., there are no 

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); 

7. Executive Order 13045: Protection 

of Children from Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks—This action is not 

subject to Executive Order 13045 

because it is not economically 

significant and it is not based on health 

or safety risks; 

8. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use—This action is not 

subject to Executive Order 13211 

because it is not a significant regulatory 

action as defined in Executive Order 

12866; 

9. National Technology Transfer 

Advancement Act: This provision 

directs EPA to use voluntary consensus 

standards in its regulatory activities 

unless to do so would be inconsistent 

with applicable law or otherwise 

impracticable. Voluntary consensus 

standards are technical standards (e.g., 

material specifications, test methods, 

sampling procedures, and business 

practices) that are developed or adopted 

by voluntary consensus standards and 

bodies. EPA approves State programs so 

long as the State programs adequately 

meet the criteria set out in 40 CFR part 

258. It would be inconsistent with 

applicable law for EPA, in its review of 

a State program, to require the use of 

any particular voluntary consensus 

standard in place of another standard 

that meets the 40 CFR part 258 criteria. 

Thus, the National Technology Transfer 

Advancement Act does not apply to this 

action; 

10. Congressional Review Act: EPA 

will submit a report containing this 

action and other information required 

by the Congressional Review Act (5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq.) to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication in the 

Federal Register. 

List of Subjects 

40 CFR Part 239 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Intergovernmental relations, Waste 

treatment and disposal. 

40 CFR Part 258 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Waste treatment disposal, 

Water pollution control. 

Authority: This action is issued under the 

authority of section 2002, 4005 and 4010(c) 

of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended, 

42 U.S.C. 6912, 6945 and 6949(a). 

Dated: August 16, 2010. 

Ira W. Leighton, 

Acting Regional Administrator, EPA New 

England, Region 1. 

[FR Doc. 2010–21117 Filed 8–30–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 300 

[EPA–R04–SFUND–2010–0502; FRL–9194– 

3] 

National Oil and Hazardous 

Substances Pollution Contingency 

Plan; National Priorities List 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) Region 4 is publishing 

this direct final Notice of Deletion for 

the Powersville Site Superfund Site 

(Site), located in Peach County, Georgia, 

from the National Priorities List (NPL) 

and requests public comments on this 

proposed action. 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). The EPA and 

the State of Georgia, through the Georgia 

Environmental Protection Division 

(GAEPD), have determined that all 

appropriate response actions under 

CERCLA, other than operation, 

maintenance, and Five Year Reviews, 

have been completed. However, this 

deletion does not preclude future 

actions under Superfund. 

DATES: This direct final deletion is 

effective November 1, 2010 unless EPA 

receives adverse comments by 

September 30, 2010. 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–R04– 

SFUND–2010–0502, by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Web site: http://www.epa.gov/ 

region4/waste/sf/enforce.htm. 

• E-mail: farrier.brian@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (404) 562–8896, Attention: 

Brian Farrier. 

• Mail: Brian Farrier, Remedial 

Project Manager, Superfund Remedial 

Section C, Superfund Remedial Branch, 

Superfund Division, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth 

Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303– 

8960. 

Hand Delivery: U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth 

Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303– 

8960. Such deliveries are only accepted 

during the Docket’s normal hours of 

operation and special arrangements 

should be made for deliveries of boxed 

information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID no. EPA–R04–SFUND–2010– 

0502. 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 the 

hard copy. Publicly available docket 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 168 / Tuesday, August 31, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 53223 

materials are available either 

electronically in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at: 

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

Debbie Jourdan, Atlanta Federal Center, 

61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 

30303–8960, Phone: (404) 562–8862, 

Hours 8 a.m.–4 p.m., Monday through 

Friday by appointment only; or, Thomas 

Public Library, 315 Martin Luther King, 

Jr. Drive, Fort Valley, GA 31030, Phone: 

478–825–1640, Hours 9 a.m.–6 p.m., 

Monday through Thursday, 9 a.m.– 

1 p.m. Friday, closed Saturday and 

Sunday. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Brian Farrier, Remedial Project 

Manager, Superfund Remedial Section 

C, Superfund Remedial Branch, 

Superfund Division, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth 

Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303– 

8960. Mr. Farrier can be reached via 

electronic mail at farrier.brian@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 4 is publishing this direct 

final Notice of Deletion of the 

Powersville Site Superfund Site from 

the NPL. The NPL constitutes Appendix 

B of 40 CFR part 300 which is the NCP, 

which EPA promulgated pursuant to 

section 105 of the 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). As described in the 

Section 300.425(e)(3) of the NCP, Sites 

deleted from the NPL remain eligible for 

Fund-financed remedial actions if 

conditions at a deleted Site warrant 

such actions. 

Because EPA considers this action to 

be noncontroversial and routine, this 

action will be effective November 1, 

2010 unless EPA receives adverse 

comments by September 30, 2010. 

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 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 to delete sites from the NPL. 

Section III discusses procedures that 

EPA is using for this action. Section IV 

discusses the Powersville Site 

Superfund 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 

(Hazardous Substance Superfund) 

response under CERCLA has been 

implemented, and no further response 

action by responsible parties is 

appropriate; or 

iii. The remedial investigation has 

shown that the release poses no 

significant threat to public health or the 

environment and, therefore, the taking 

of remedial measures is not appropriate. 

Pursuant to CERCLA section 121(c) 

and the NCP, EPA conducts five-year 

reviews to ensure the continued 

protectiveness of remedial actions 

where hazardous substances, pollutants, 

or contaminants remain at a site above 

levels that allow for unlimited use and 

unrestricted exposure. EPA conducts 

such five-year reviews even if a site is 

deleted from the NPL. EPA may initiate 

further action to ensure continued 

protectiveness at a deleted site if new 

information becomes available that 

indicates it is appropriate. Whenever 

there is a significant release from a Site 

deleted from the NPL, the deleted Site 

may be restored to the NPL without 

application of the Hazard Ranking 

System. 

III. Deletion Procedures 

The following procedures apply to 

deletion of the Site: 

(1) EPA consulted with the State of 

Georgia before 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 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 GAEPD, 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, 

[Enter major local newspaper of general 

circulation]. The newspaper notice 

announces the 30-day public comment 

period concerning the Notice of Intent 

to Delete the Site from the NPL. 

(4) The EPA placed copies of 

documents supporting the proposed 

deletion in the deletion docket and 

made these items available for public 

inspection and copying at the Site 

information repositories identified 

above. 

(5) If adverse comments are received 

within the 30-day public comment 

period on this deletion action, EPA will 

publish a timely notice of withdrawal of 

this direct final Notice of Deletion 

before its effective date and will prepare 

a response to comments and continue 

with the deletion process on the basis of 

the Notice of Intent to Delete and the 

comments already received. 

Deletion of a Site from the NPL does 

not itself create, alter, or revoke any 

individual’s rights or obligations. 

Deletion of a Site from the NPL does not 

in any way alter 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 Site 

from the NPL: 

Site Background and History 

Powersville Site Superfund Site, GA 

Hwy. 49 N., Powersville, Georgia 31074. 

EPA ID: GAD980496954. 

The Powersville Site, located on GA 

Hwy. 49 N. in Powersville, Georgia, 

occupies approximately 15 acres in a 

predominantly rural area. From the 

early 1940s to 1969, this landfill was a 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
53224 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 168 / Tuesday, August 31, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

borrow pit which provided sand and fill 

material to the county for local use. 

During 1969, Peach County began 

operation of a sanitary landfill receiving 

both municipal and industrial wastes. 

Disposal records indicate that pesticide 

manufacturing wastes were disposed in 

the landfill until 1978. In 1972, the State 

of Georgia suggested a separate area be 

maintained for pesticide wastes, which 

was done in 1973. Disposal records 

indicate pesticide wastes were disposed 

in the municipal section of the landfill 

prior to June 1973 and in the hazardous 

waste area between June 1973 and 1978. 

Neither the quantity nor the location of 

the pesticide wastes in the municipal 

section of the landfill is known. The 

County closed the landfill in 1979. The 

primary contaminants of concern at the 

Site include, but are not limited to, 

vinyl chloride, 1,2-dichloroethane, lead, 

chromium, and pesticides. The Site was 

proposed for the NPL September 8, 1983 

(48 FR 40674) and finalized on the NPL 

October 15, 1984 (49 FR 40320). 

Remedial Investigation, Feasibility 

Study (RI/FS) 

The Remedial Investigation (RI) and 

Feasibility Study (FS) were conducted 

between December 28, 1984 and 

September 30, 1987. 

Analytical results of the RI sampling 

indicated the presence of gamma-BHC, 

1,2-dichloroethane, lead, chromium, 

and vinyl chloride in the groundwater 

beneath the Site; however, well-defined 

plumes did not exist. The pesticides 

gamma-BHC, dieldrin, chlordane, and 

toxaphene were also detected in the soil 

samples taken at the Site. Off-site soil 

samples were found to have no 

detectable chemical concentrations. 

The FS evaluated 13 alternatives 

including various combinations of 

capping for the landfill, incineration, 

solidification/stabilization, pump and 

treat of groundwater, and alternative 

water sources. 

Selected Remedy 

EPA’s Record of Decision (ROD) was 

signed on September 30, 1987, and the 

State of Georgia concurred with the 

selected remedy. The selected 

alternative included the following: 

• Surface cover systems for the 

hazardous waste and municipal landfill 

area; 

• Installation of a minimum of eight 

additional groundwater monitoring 

wells; 

• Provision of an alternative water 

supply for selected residents near site; 

• Imposition of on-site and off-site 

deed restrictions to prohibit specific 

actions; and 

• Development and implementation 

of an operation and maintenance (O&M) 

plan for the remedy. 

The remedial objective for the 

Powersville Site was to eliminate 

potential health hazards due to the 

impact of gamma-BHC, vinyl chloride, 

1,2-dichloroethane, lead, chromium, 

and toxaphene in the landfill. 

Remedy Implementation 

Remedy Component 1—Surface Cover 

A low permeability liner was installed 

over both the hazardous waste disposal 

area and the municipal waste disposal 

area. The municipal waste area liner 

consists of a 40 ml thick high density 

polyethylene (HDPE) liner. The 

hazardous waste area liner has an 

additional 0.25 inch thick bentonite 

liner. The liners are covered with 1.5 

feet of sandy soil for better drainage. 

Two feet of soil is then layered on top 

of the liner. A vegetative layer was then 

used to secure the soil cover. Terracing 

was used to alleviate the steepness of 

the slope to reduce erosional issues. 

Other grading was done to divert 

stormwater away from either landfill 

cover. 

Remedy Component 2—Installation of 

Groundwater Monitoring Wells 

The groundwater monitoring system 

was designed to yield samples from the 

uppermost aquifer that are 

representative of the water that passes 

through the downgradient area of the 

landfill site. There were two existing 

wells. Seven more were added (6 

downgradient, 1 upgradient). These 

seven wells were installed during three 

separate field events and were intended 

to monitor the natural attenuation of 

contaminants in the groundwater. 

Remedy Component 3—Alternate Water 

Source 

The alternate water supply system is 

owned and operated by the Fort Valley 

Utility Commission. The municipal 

water system was extended to include 

the properties possibly affected by the 

site. The Fort Valley Utility Commission 

conducts O & M on the water supply 

system. 

Remedy Component 4—Institutional 

Controls 

On December 1, 1994 a Notation on 

Deed was filed on the landfill property. 

The notation states that the property is 

on Georgia’s hazardous site inventory 

and has been designated as needing 

corrective action due to the presence of 

hazardous wastes, hazardous 

constituents, or hazardous substances. 

The site itself was required by the ROD 

to have deed restrictions placed upon it 

to prohibit the drilling of water wells 

and any activities that could cause 

damage to the remedy. In addition, 

properties between the Site and the 

unnamed tributary to Mule Creek were 

required by the ROD to have deed 

restrictions placed upon them to 

prohibit the drilling of water wells. The 

method for executing the deed 

restrictions was through restrictive 

covenant agreements. In 1993, 

restrictive covenants were placed on six 

properties adjacent to the landfill 

prohibiting the drilling of water wells. 

On March 23, 2010, a restrictive 

covenant was recorded for the landfill 

parcel. All institutional controls needed 

at the Site have been implemented. 

Remedy Component 5—Operation & 

Maintenance Plan 

There are eight major tasks involved 

in the schedule for ordinary O&M 

activities. They are the following: 

• Groundwater Monitoring—The 

groundwater monitoring program 

consisted of quarterly monitoring from 

1993 to 2005, with samples collected 

from monitoring wells MW2, MW7, 

MW20, MW21, MW22, MW23, MW24, 

MW25, and MW26. All samples were 

analyzed for Volatial Organic 

Compounds (VOC), pesticides, and 

metals. This activity has been 

discontinued. 

• Maintenance of Vegetation— 

Mowing of the covers and other 

vegetated site areas is conducted twice 

per year. Fertilization of the covers is 

conducted once per year. Lime may be 

added every four to six years to 

maintain a pH between 6 and 7. 

• Cover Settlement—Inspection and 

monitoring for cover settlement was 

conducted quarterly for the first two 

years then semi-annually since that 

time. 

• Site Structure—The following 

structures are inspected quarterly: 

concrete channels, rip rap, fence and 

signs, drainage areas, benchmarks, gas 

vents, settlement monitoring stations, 

all guard posts, and cover drainage 

pipes cleanout ports. Repairs are 

performed as needed. 

• Gas Production Monitoring—Each 

gas vent is checked semi-annually for 

the first two years and has been 

annually since that time. 

• Cost Estimate Updates—The cost 

estimate is updated annually. 

• Deed Restrictions—In 1993, 

restrictive covenants were placed on six 

properties adjacent to the landfill 

prohibiting the drilling of water wells. 

On March 23, 2010, a restrictive 

covenant was recorded for the landfill 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 168 / Tuesday, August 31, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 53225 

parcel. All institutional controls needed 

at the Site have been implemented. 

• Deliverables—Regular reports are 

submitted to the O&M administrator, 

GEPD, and EPA. 

Cleanup Goals 

The cleanup goals for soil and 

groundwater are shown on the following 

tables. The cleanup goals for surface 

water were considered to be the same as 

groundwater as implied by the ROD. 

CLEANUP LEVELS FOR GROUNDWATER

Contaminant ROD cleanup 

goals (μg/L) 

Revised EPA 

cleanup goals 

(μg/L) 

gamma-BHC .................................................................................................................................................... 4 4 

vinyl chloride .................................................................................................................................................... 1 2 

1,2-dichloroethane ........................................................................................................................................... 5 5 

Lead ................................................................................................................................................................. 50 15 

Chromium ........................................................................................................................................................ 50 100 

Toxaphene ....................................................................................................................................................... N/A 3 

Nine groundwater monitoring wells 

were sampled quarterly from 1993 until 

2005 when groundwater contaminant 

levels reached the cleanup goals shown 

above. On July 19, 2006, GAEPD 

notified EPA that groundwater 

monitoring would be discontinued and 

requested EPA pursue deleting the Site 

from the NPL. The groundwater data 

from 2004 through 2005 were below 

cleanup goals for 1,2-dichloroethane, 

lead, and chromium, except for one 

detection of chromium at 410 ug/L 

during the third quarter 2004 (EPA, 

2008). 

Operation and Maintenance 

As mentioned in Remedy Component 

5, there are eight major tasks outlined as 

part of O&M. The county has assumed 

responsibility for implementing the 

ongoing components of the 1993 O&M 

plan. 

Five-Year Reviews 

The first five-year review was 

completed in December 1997 and the 

second was completed in September 

2003. These reviews concluded that the 

selected remedy remains protective of 

human health and the environment. 

The third statutory Five-Year Review 

was completed in September 2008 

pursuant to EPA’s Comprehensive FiveYear Review Guidance (OSWER No. 

9355.7–03B–P, June 2001). The FiveYear Review concluded that remedial 

actions at the Powersville Site 

Superfund Site are protective, in the 

short-term, of human health and the 

environment, and exposure pathways 

that could result in unacceptable risks 

are being controlled. However, in order 

for the remedy to be protective in the 

long term, it was determined that 

restrictive covenants were still needed 

on three parcels. Those parcels were the 

landfill, the Peach County parcel 

acquired from the Trustees of 

Powersville Lodge No. 134 located 

adjacent to the landfill, and parcel No. 

043B 002 owned by Adele Hogan. The 

Trustees of Powersville Lodge No. 134 

parcel has been combined with the 

landfill parcel and does not need a 

separate restrictive covenant. EPA has 

also determined that the Hogan parcel is 

not impacted by contaminated 

groundwater and therefore does not 

need a restrictive covenant. On March 

23, 2010, a restrictive covenant was 

recorded for the landfill parcel in the 

Office of the Clerk, Superior Court, 

Peach County, Georgia, at Deed Book 

438, pages 341–345. All institutional 

controls required at the Site have been 

implemented. 

Because hazardous materials remain 

at the Site inside the landfill above 

levels that allow for unlimited use and 

unrestricted exposure, Section 121 of 

CERCLA requires ongoing statutory 

review to be conducted no less than 

every five years from the start of 

remedial actions. The next Five-Year 

Review will be completed by August 

2013. 

Community Involvement 

Throughout the removal and remedial 

process, EPA has kept the public 

informed of the activities being 

conducted at the Site by way of public 

meetings, progress fact sheets, and the 

announcement through local newspaper 

advertisement on the availability of 

documents such as the RI/FS, Risk 

Assessment, ROD, Proposed Plan and 

Five-Year Reviews. 

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 from the NPL are available 

to the public in the information 

repositories identified above. 

Determination That the Site Meets the 

Criteria for Deletion From the NCP 

This Site meets all the Site 

completion requirements as specified in 

Office of Solid Waste and Emergency 

Response (OSWER) Directive 9320.2– 

09–A–P, Close Out Procedures for 

National Priorities List Sites. 

Specifically, confirmatory sampling 

verifies that the Site has achieved the 

ROD cleanup standards, and that all 

cleanup actions specified in the ROD 

have been implemented. The only 

remaining activity to be performed is 

O&M that Peach County will conduct. 

V. Deletion Action 

The EPA, with concurrence of the 

State of Georgia through the GAEPD, 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 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 November 1, 

2010 unless EPA receives adverse 

comments by September 30, 2010. If 

adverse comments are received within 

the 30-day public 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 

waste, Hazardous substances, 

Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
53226 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 168 / Tuesday, August 31, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

requirements, Superfund, Water 

pollution control, Water supply. 

Dated: August 3, 2010. 

A. Stanley Meiburg, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

■ 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. 

■ 2. Table 1 of Appendix B to part 300 

is amended by removing ‘‘Powersville 

Site, Peach County, GA’’. 

[FR Doc. 2010–21442 Filed 8–30–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 20 

[Docket No. FWS–R9–MB–2010–0040; 

91200–1231–9BPP–L2] 

RIN 1018–AX06 

Migratory Bird Hunting; Early Seasons 

and Bag and Possession Limits for 

Certain Migratory Game Birds in the 

Contiguous United States, Alaska, 

Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin 

Islands 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This rule prescribes the 

hunting seasons, hours, areas, and daily 

bag and possession limits of mourning, 

white-winged, and white-tipped doves; 

band-tailed pigeons; rails; moorhens 

and gallinules; woodcock; common 

snipe; sandhill cranes; sea ducks; early 

(September) waterfowl seasons; 

migratory game birds in Alaska, Hawaii, 

Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands; and 

some extended falconry seasons. Taking 

of migratory birds is prohibited unless 

specifically provided for by annual 

regulations. This rule permits taking of 

designated species during the 2010–11 

season. 

DATES: This rule is effective on 

September 1, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: You may inspect comments 

received on the migratory bird hunting 

regulations during normal business 

hours at the Service’s office in room 

4107, Arlington Square Building, 4501 

N. Fairfax Drive, Arlington, VA. You 

may obtain copies of referenced reports 

from the street address above, or from 

the Division of Migratory Bird 

Management’s Web site at http:// 

www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/ or at 

http://www.regulations.gov at Docket 

No. FWS–R9–MB–2010–0040. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Robert Blohm, Chief, or Ron W. Kokel, 

Division of Migratory Bird Management, 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, (703) 

358–1714. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Regulations Schedule for 2010 

On May 13, 2010, we published in the 

Federal Register (75 FR 27144) a 

proposal to amend 50 CFR part 20. The 

proposal provided a background and 

overview of the migratory bird hunting 

regulations process, and addressed the 

establishment of seasons, limits, and 

other regulations for hunting migratory 

game birds under §§ 20.101 through 

20.107, 20.109, and 20.110 of subpart K. 

Major steps in the 2010–11 regulatory 

cycle relating to open public meetings 

and Federal Register notifications were 

also identified in the May 13 proposed 

rule. Further, we explained that all 

sections of subsequent documents 

outlining hunting frameworks and 

guidelines were organized under 

numbered headings. 

On June 10, 2010, we published in the 

Federal Register (75 FR 32872) a second 

document providing supplemental 

proposals for early- and late-season 

migratory bird hunting regulations. The 

June 10 supplement also provided 

detailed information on the 2010–11 

regulatory schedule and announced the 

Service Migratory Bird Regulations 

Committee (SRC) and Flyway Council 

meetings. 

On June 23 and 24, 2010, we held 

open meetings with the Flyway Council 

Consultants at which the participants 

reviewed information on the current 

status of migratory shore and upland 

game birds and developed 

recommendations for the 2010–11 

regulations for these species plus 

regulations for migratory game birds in 

Alaska, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin 

Islands; special September waterfowl 

seasons in designated States; special sea 

duck seasons in the Atlantic Flyway; 

and extended falconry seasons. In 

addition, we reviewed and discussed 

preliminary information on the status of 

waterfowl as it relates to the 

development and selection of the 

regulatory packages for the 2010–11 

regular waterfowl seasons. On July 29, 

2010, we published in the Federal 

Register (75 FR 44856) a third document 

specifically dealing with the proposed 

frameworks for early-season regulations. 

On August 30, 2010, we published in 

the Federal Register a final rule which 

contained final frameworks for early 

migratory bird hunting seasons from 

which wildlife conservation agency 

officials from the States, Puerto Rico, 

and the Virgin Islands selected earlyseason hunting dates, hours, areas, and 

limits. 

On July 28–29, 2010, we held open 

meetings with the Flyway Council 

Consultants at which the participants 

reviewed the status of waterfowl and 

developed recommendations for the 

2010–11 regulations for these species. 

Proposed hunting regulations were 

discussed for late seasons. We 

published proposed frameworks for the 

2010–11 late-season migratory bird 

hunting regulations in an August 25, 

2010 Federal Register (75 FR 52398). 

The final rule described here is the 

sixth in the series of proposed, 

supplemental, and final rulemaking 

documents for migratory game bird 

hunting regulations and deals 

specifically with amending subpart K of 

50 CFR part 20. It sets hunting seasons, 

hours, areas, and limits for mourning, 

white-winged, and white-tipped doves; 

band-tailed pigeons; rails; moorhens 

and gallinules; woodcock; common 

snipe; sandhill cranes; sea ducks; early 

(September) waterfowl seasons; 

mourning doves in Hawaii; migratory 

game birds in Alaska, Puerto Rico, and 

the Virgin Islands; youth waterfowl 

hunting day; and some extended 

falconry seasons. 

National Environmental Protection Act 

(NEPA) Consideration 

NEPA considerations are covered by 

the programmatic document ‘‘Final 

Supplemental Environmental Impact 

Statement: Issuance of Annual 

Regulations Permitting the Sport 

Hunting of Migratory Birds (FSES 88– 

14),’’ filed with the Environmental 

Protection Agency on June 9, 1988. We 

published a notice of availability in the 

Federal Register on June 16, 1988 (53 

FR 22582). We published our record of 

decision on August 18, 1988 (53 FR 

31341). In addition, an August 1985 

environmental assessment entitled 

‘‘Guidelines for Migratory Bird Hunting 

Regulations on Federal Indian 

Reservations and Ceded Lands’’ is 

available by writing to the address 

indicated under the caption ADDRESSES. 

In a notice published in the 

September 8, 2005, Federal Register (70 

FR 53376), we announced our intent to 

develop a new Supplemental 

Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) 

for the migratory bird hunting program. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES