32084 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 128 / Tuesday, July 7, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

security and safety of the large 

passenger vessels, including their crew 

and passengers, as well as the maritime 

public. During the enforcement period, 

no person or vessel may enter or remain 

in the security and safety zone without 

permission of the Captain of the Port, 

Portland, Oregon. 

DATES: The regulations in 33 CFR 

165.1318 will be enforced during the 

following dates and times for the vessels 

noted: 

(1) LPV Carnival Splendor: From 7 

a.m. June 9, 2009, through 12 a.m. 

(midnight) June 10, 2009. 

(2) LPV Carnival Splendor: From 7 

a.m. June 16, 2009, through 12 a.m. 

(midnight) June 17, 2009. 

(3) LPV The World: From 7 a.m. June 

19, 2009, through 12 a.m. (midnight) 

June 20, 2009. 

(4) LPV Norwegian Pearl: From 7 a.m. 

September 22, 2009, through 12 a.m. 

(midnight) September 23, 2009. 

(5) LPV Norwegian Star: From 7 a.m. 

September 22, 2009, through 12 a.m. 

(midnight) September 23, 2009. 

(6) LPV Serenade of the Seas: From 7 

a.m. September 29, 2009, through 12 

a.m. (midnight) September 30, 2009. 

(7) LPV Veendam: From 5:30 a.m. 

September 29, 2009, through 12 a.m. 

(midnight) September 30, 2009. 

(8) LPV Millennium: From 7 a.m. 

October 3, 2009, through 12 a.m. 

(midnight) October 4, 2009. 

(9) LPV Mercury: From 7 a.m. October 

16, 2009, through 12 a.m. (midnight) 

October 17, 2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this notice, call 

or e-mail MST1 Jaime Sayers, U.S. Coast 

Guard Sector Portland, Waterways 

Management Branch; telephone 503– 

240–9319, e-mail 

Jaime.A.Sayers@uscg.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast 

Guard will enforce the security and 

safety zone regulation in 33 CFR 

165.1318 for large passenger vessels 

operating in the Portland, Oregon 

Captain of the Port Zone during the 

dates and times listed in DATES. 

Under the provisions of 33 CFR 

165.1318 and 33 CFR 165 Subparts C 

and D, no person or vessel may enter or 

remain in the security and safety zone 

without permission of the Captain of the 

Port, Portland, Oregon. Persons or 

vessels wishing to enter the safety and 

security zone may request permission to 

do so from the on scene Captain of the 

Port representative via VHF Channel 16 

or 13. The Coast Guard may be assisted 

by other Federal, State, or local 

enforcement agencies in enforcing this 

regulation. 

This notice is issued under authority 

of 33 CFR 165.1318 and 5 U.S.C. 552(a). 

In addition to this notice in the Federal 

Register, the Coast Guard will provide 

the maritime community with 

notification of the enforcement periods 

via a Local Notice to Mariners. 

Dated: June 22, 2009. 

F.G. Myer, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port, Portland. 

[FR Doc. E9–15951 Filed 7–6–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 300 

[EPA–HQ–SFUND–2009–0146; FRL–8926–1] 

National Oil and Hazardous 

Substances Pollution Contingency 

Plan; National Priorities List 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct Final Notice of Deletion 

of the Wilson Farm Superfund Site 

(Site) from the National Priorities List. 

SUMMARY: EPA, Region 2, is publishing 

a direct final notice of deletion of the 

Site, located in Plumsted Township, 

Ocean County, New Jersey, 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 Notice of Deletion is being 

published by EPA with the concurrence 

of the State of New Jersey, through the 

Department of Environmental Protection 

(NJDEP). EPA and NJDEP have 

determined that all appropriate 

remedial actions under CERCLA, 

including operation and maintenance, 

have been implemented. 

DATES: This direct final deletion will be 

effective September 8, 2009 unless EPA 

receives significant adverse comments 

by August 6, 2009. If significant adverse 

comments are received, EPA will 

publish a timely withdrawal of this 

direct final deletion in the Federal 

Register, informing the public that the 

deletion will not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID no. EPA–HQ– 

SFUND–2009–0146, by one of the 

following methods: 

Web Site: http://www.regulations.gov. 

Follow the on-line instructions for 

submitting comments. 

E-mail: zeolla.michael@epa.gov. 

Fax: To the attention of Michael 

Zeolla at (212) 637–4393. 

Mail: To the attention of Michael 

Zeolla, Remedial Project Manager, 

Emergency and Remedial Response 

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 2, 290 Broadway, 19th 

Floor, New York, New York 10007– 

1866. 

Hand Delivery: Superfund Records 

Center, 290 Broadway, 18th Floor, New 

York, NY 10007–1866 (telephone: 212– 

637–4308). Such deliveries are only 

accepted during the Docket’s normal 

hours of operation (Monday to Friday 

from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.). Special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID no. EPA–HQ–SFUND–2009– 

0146; EPA’ policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the 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 CBI or otherwise protected 

through http://www.regulations.gov or 

via 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 

comments. If you send comments to 

EPA via e-mail, your e-mail address will 

be included as part of the comment that 

is placed in the Docket and made 

available on the Web Site. If you submit 

electronic comments, EPA recommends 

that you include your name and other 

contact information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD–ROM 

that 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 comments. 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 can be available either 

electronically in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at: 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 128 / Tuesday, July 7, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 32085 

U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 2, Superfund Records 

Center, 290 Broadway, 18th Floor, New 

York, NY 10007–1866, Phone: (212) 

637–4308, Hours: Monday to Friday 

from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., and 

New Jersey Department of 

Environmental Protection, 401 East 

State Street, Trenton, New Jersey 

08625–0410, Phone: 609–777–3373. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michael Zeolla, Remedial Project 

Manager, Emergency and Remedial 

Response Division, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 2, 290 

Broadway, 19th Floor, New York, New 

York 10007–1866, telephone at (212) 

637–4376; fax at (212) 637–4393; or 

e-mail at: zeolla.michael@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Introduction 

II. NPL Deletion Criteria 

III. Deletion Procedures 

IV. Basis for Intended Site Deletion 

V. Deletion Action 

I. Introduction 

EPA Region 2 is publishing this direct 

final notice of deletion of the Wilson 

Farm Superfund Site (Site) from the 

National Priorities List (NPL). 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 (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 300.425(e)(3) of 

the NCP, a site deleted from the NPL 

remains eligible for remedial actions if 

conditions at the site warrant such 

action. 

Because EPA considers this action to 

be noncontroversial and routine, this 

action will be effective September 8, 

2009 unless EPA receives significant 

adverse comments by August 6, 2009. 

Along with this direct final Notice of 

Deletion, EPA is co-publishing the 

Notice of Intent to Delete in the 

‘‘Proposed Rule’’ section of today’s 

Federal Register. If adverse comments 

are received within the 30-day public 

comment period on this deletion action, 

EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of 

this direct final notice of deletion before 

the effective date of the deletion and the 

deletion will not take effect. EPA will, 

as appropriate, prepare a response to 

comments and continue with the 

deletion process on the basis of the 

Notice of Intent to Delete and the 

comments already received. There will 

be no additional opportunity to 

comment. 

Section II of this document explains 

the criteria for deleting sites from the 

NPL. Section III discusses procedures 

that EPA is using for this action. Section 

IV discusses the Site and demonstrates 

how it meets the deletion criteria. 

Section V discusses EPA’s action to 

delete the Site from the NPL unless 

significant 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 parties 

have implemented all appropriate 

response actions required; 

ii. All appropriate Fund-financed 

responses under CERCLA have been 

implemented, and no further 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, 

implementing remedial measures is not 

appropriate. 

III. Deletion Procedures 

The following procedures apply to 

deletion of this Site. 

(1) EPA consulted with the State of 

New Jersey prior to developing this 

direct final Notice of Deletion and the 

Notice of Intent to Delete co-published 

today in the ‘‘Proposed Rules’’ section 

of the Federal Register. 

(2) EPA has provided the State of New 

Jersey thirty (30) working days for 

review of this notice and the parallel 

Notice of Intent to Delete prior to their 

publication today, and the State of New 

Jersey, through the NJDEP, has 

concurred on the deletion of the Site 

from the NPL. 

(3) Concurrently with the publication 

of this direct final Notice of Deletion, a 

notice of the availability of the parallel 

Notice of Intent to Delete is being 

published in a major local newspaper, 

the Ocean County Observer. The 

newspaper notice announces the 30-day 

public comment period concerning the 

Notice of Intent to Delete the Site from 

the NPL. 

(4) EPA placed copies of documents 

supporting the proposed deletion in the 

deletion docket and made these items 

available for public inspection and 

copying at the Site information 

repositories identified above. 

(5) If adverse comments are received 

within the 30-day public comment 

period on this deletion action, EPA will 

publish a timely notice of withdrawal of 

this direct final Notice of Deletion 

before its effective date and will prepare 

a response to comments. If appropriate, 

EPA may then continue with the 

deletion process based on 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 summary provides the 

Agency’s rationale for the proposal to 

delete this Site from the NPL. 

Site Background and History 

The Site consists of 10 acres within a 

218-acre property and is located onequarter mile southwest from the 

intersection of State Highway Route 528 

(New Egypt-Lakewood Road) and 

Hawkin Road (State Highway Route 

640) in Plumsted Township, Ocean 

County, New Jersey. The Site is situated 

in a predominantly rural area with some 

residential homes to the south. The 10- 

acre site, bordered on the north side by 

cultivated land which is part of the 

Wilson Farm property, is wooded and 

unoccupied. A dirt road runs through 

the center of the Site, which allows 

access into the property from Hawkin 

Road. The Site has a number of 

unimproved roadways in and around it 

and is used mainly for hunting. Colliers 

Mills Wildlife Management Area is east 

of the Site and consists of forested 

undeveloped property that runs north 

and south along Hawkin Road. Borden 

Run Creek runs west and south of the 

site and flows into Colliers Mills Lake. 

At the northern edge of the Site towards 

New Egypt/Lakewood Road is an active 

farm field and beyond that a small 

residential neighborhood. The Site is 

32086 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 128 / Tuesday, July 7, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

located within the boundaries of a 

national reserve known as the 

‘‘Pinelands.’’ The Pinelands reserve is 

separated into ‘‘Management Areas.’’ 

The Wilson Farm property was one of 

seven sites used to dispose of liquid and 

drummed chemical waste from the 

Thiokol Corporation facility during the 

1960’s and early 1970’s. The property 

on which the Site is located is privately 

owned and has been posted with ‘‘No 

Trespassing Signs.’’ 

The Site was inspected by the Ocean 

County Health Department and New 

Jersey Department of Environmental 

Protection (NJDEP) in February 1980, 

which led to the implementation of an 

Immediate Removal Action in 

September 1980. Approximately 620 

cubic yards of mixed chemical waste 

material and soils were removed from 

the Site. Prior to the Immediate Removal 

Action, NJDEP had installed and 

sampled six groundwater monitoring 

wells in July 1980. Groundwater from 

these monitoring wells was found to 

contain chemical contamination. 

In December 1982, the NJDEP scored 

the Site utilizing the Hazard Ranking 

System. Based on this ranking, the Site 

was added to the NPL on September 21, 

1984 (FRL–2646–2). 

In 1986, the NJDEP established a Well 

Restriction Area (WRA) on the Site and 

surrounding properties in order to 

protect any new drinking water wells 

which might be installed near the Site. 

The WRA required that all new wells 

within approximately a 2,000-foot 

radius of the Site be installed to a depth 

of at least 150 feet. The purpose of this 

action was to ensure that new wells 

were not impacted by contamination in 

the shallow aquifer. 

Remedial Investigation and Feasibility 

Study (RI/FS) 

In July 1986, the NJDEP directed 

Morton Thiokol Inc. (Thiokol merged 

with Morton Norwich Corporation) to 

make payments to the NJDEP for the 

cost of conducting a Remedial 

Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/ 

FS) at the Site. On December 3, 1987, 

the NJDEP and Morton Thiokol Inc. 

(MTI) entered into an Administrative 

Consent Order (ACO) in which MTI 

agreed to comply with this Directive 

(Directive No. 1). 

In January 1987, Acres International 

Corporation (Acres) was contracted by 

the NJDEP to perform the RI/FS. After 

initial site investigations were 

performed, NJDEP determined that 

further remedial studies were necessary. 

In January 1990, the NJDEP directed 

Morton International Incorporated (MII) 

and the Thiokol Corporation (after 

Directive No. 1 was issued, MTI split 

into MII and Thiokol) to pay for the 

additional studies. MII complied and 

the RI/FS was completed by Acres in 

March 1992. 

The RI/FS identified that 

approximately six to twelve cubic yards 

of industrial waste, including a black 

rubbery tar-like substance and 

miscellaneous laboratory glassware, to a 

depth of six inches, still remained at the 

Site. No buried waste was encountered. 

The RI/FS found that this waste did not 

present a risk to human health or the 

environment. 

On August 23, 1991, the NJDEP and 

MII entered into a second ACO for the 

removal of the remaining contaminated 

surface waste materials at the Site. MII 

prepared and submitted an Interim 

Removal Action Plan to the NJDEP and 

EPA in October 1991. The final removal 

activities were agreed to between NJDEP 

and MII in May 1992. 

The surficial waste removal activities 

were conducted at the Site between June 

and July 1992. Approximately 645 cubic 

yards of waste/soil material was 

removed and transported for treatment 

and disposal to a federally permitted 

hazardous waste landfill. A comparison 

of the post-excavation soil sample 

analytical results to the NJDEP proposed 

cleanup goals for residential surface 

soils confirmed the effectiveness of the 

removal work. In October 1993, MII 

restored all areas disturbed by the 

removal activities through back-filling 

and grading soils and re-vegetating. A 

final surficial waste removal report was 

submitted by MII in February 1994. 

After completing the Interim Removal 

Action, EPA conducted a baseline risk 

assessment to evaluate the potential 

risks to human health and the 

environment for residual contaminants 

in the soil, groundwater, surface water 

and sediments. EPA issued the final 

Risk Assessment Report on May 3, 1993. 

Selected Remedy 

Based on this Risk Assessment 

Report, EPA concurred on a ‘‘No Further 

Action’’ Record of Decision (ROD) 

which was issued by NJDEP on August 

2, 1993. The selected remedy included 

implementing a groundwater, surface 

water and sediment monitoring program 

for five years to ensure that any residual 

contamination remained below levels of 

concern and confirmed the no action 

determination. Visual inspection of the 

Site during monitoring was also 

conducted to ensure that no further 

waste materials were present. Lastly, the 

ROD called for continuation of the WRA 

for a minimum of five years to ensure 

the protection of area drinking water 

supplies. 

Response Action 

Pursuant to the remedy selected in the 

ROD, MII and the NJDEP entered into a 

Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) on 

August 25, 1994, to perform postremediation monitoring activities. A 

Post-Remediation Monitoring Work Plan 

was submitted by MII in October 1994. 

A final post-remediation monitoring 

work plan was approved in January 

1995. 

The five years of monitoring, as 

outlined in the ROD, began in May 1995 

with the first quarterly sampling event 

and continued until September 1999. 

The monitoring consisted of collecting 

samples at ten monitoring wells and 

three surface water and sediment 

locations on a quarterly basis in the first 

year and on an annual basis in 1996, 

1997, 1998 and 1999. During each 

sample event, the Site was inspected for 

any evidence of remaining surface waste 

material that would then be removed. 

After five years of monitoring, site 

contaminants remained below Federal 

Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs). 

Since the Site is located in New Jersey’s 

Pinelands Protection Area, the aquifer is 

classified by the NJDEP as Class I–PL 

under its Groundwater Quality Criteria 

Standards (GWQS). Class I–PL 

standards are defined as the higher of 

the Practical Quantitative Levels (PQLs) 

or background levels. NJDEP requires 

groundwater sample results to indicate 

concentrations are below the PQL. The 

GWQS establish anti-degradation 

policies that are designed to protect the 

existing and designated uses of the State 

of New Jersey ground waters and are not 

considered health-based Federal MCLs. 

A review of the post-remediation 

monitoring results revealed that lead in 

MW–5S, and chloroform in MW–8S 

were present above the PQLs for all 

sampling events. Lead concentrations 

were detected above the PQL of 10 ppb 

(5 ppb is now the current standard) in 

MW–5S and ranged from 14.5 ppb (2nd 

sample event) to 94.9 ppb (6th sample 

event). Chloroform concentrations were 

detected above the PQL of 1 ppb and 

ranged from 1.2 ppb (7th sample event) 

to 6.2 ppb (2nd sample event). Due to 

these groundwater concentrations above 

the PQL, NJDEP recommended that 

Rohm and Haas (which acquired MII) 

conduct additional investigative 

activities including soil and 

groundwater sampling around MW–5S 

and MW–8S for lead and chloroform, 

respectively. 

A Supplemental Groundwater 

Investigation (SGI) was conducted by 

ENSR (on behalf of the Rohm and Hass 

Company which acquired MII) in 

October 2004. The SGI consisted of 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 128 / Tuesday, July 7, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 32087 

collecting sixteen subsurface soil 

samples around MW–5S and MW–8S, 

four groundwater samples from 

temporary wells MW–5S–5, MW–5S–6, 

MW–8S–2 and MW–8S–4, and four 

surface water and sediments samples in 

Borden Run Creek. The results of 

sampling found non-detect levels of Site 

contaminants in the surface water, 

sediments and soils. In a March 18, 

2005 letter, NJDEP concluded that no 

further monitoring of the Site surface 

water, sediments or soils was required 

but recommended that a Classification 

Exemption Area (CEA) be proposed for 

the Site groundwater. The SGI results 

are summarized as follows: 

(1) Subsurface soil samples collected 

from the area around MW–5S (for lead) 

and MW–8S (for chloroform) did not 

have lead or chloroform detected above 

the New Jersey Residential Direct 

Contact, Non-Residential Direct Contact 

or the Impact to Groundwater Soil 

Cleanup Criteria. The data also found 

field screening results showing no 

detectable concentrations of lead and 

chloroform are present in soils. NJDEP 

concluded that the subsurface soil data 

for the area around MW–5S and MW– 

8S indicate that the soils are not 

impacted and a no further action for the 

soils is appropriate; 

(2) Groundwater samples collected 

from MW–5S–5 and MW–5S–6 (for total 

and dissolved lead analysis), and MW– 

8S–2 and MW–8S–4 (for chloroform 

analysis) found no detectable levels of 

lead above the method detection limit or 

chloroform above the GWQS of 6 ppb, 

and neither above the Federal MCLs. 

Chloroform did, however, exceed the 

PQL criteria of 1 ppb at three locations 

(MW–8S–2, MW–8S–4, and MW–8S– 

4D); 

(3) Surface water samples collected 

found that chloroform, toluene, lead and 

zinc did not exceed the NJDEP Surface 

Water Quality Standards (SWQS) or 

EPA National Ambient Water Quality 

Criteria (NAWQC). However, zinc 

concentrations were found slightly 

above the background levels; and 

(4) Sediment sample-analyses did not 

detect chloroform or toluene above the 

analytical detection limits. However, the 

detection limits were above the NJDEP 

Guidance for Sediment Quality 

Evaluations (SQE) and EPA Region 5 

Ecological Screening Levels (ESLs). 

NJDEP believes that neither toluene nor 

chloroform is problematic in sediments. 

Lead and zinc concentrations did not 

exceed the SQE and ESLs but were 

detected above the background level at 

the two most down gradient sediment 

locations. 

NJDEP’s review of the current and 

historical surface water and sediment 

data concluded that additional sampling 

is not necessary and no further action 

for this area of concern is appropriate. 

In December 2005 and November 

2006, ENSR re-sampled MW–5S and 

MW–8S. The analytical results 

indicated that lead and chloroform 

concentrations continued to be above 

the Class I–PL groundwater standards 

(or PQL). Because of the historical 

concentrations of lead in MW–5S and 

chloroform in MW–8S exceeding the 

PQL, NJDEP requested that Rohm and 

Haas propose a CEA at the Site. 

Institutional Controls 

At the time of the ROD, a WRA was 

in place and recognized by the ROD as 

a temporary measure along with 

continued monitoring for five years. 

NJDEP indicates that the WRA is still in 

place. Since the groundwater currently 

meets federal and state standards for 

public consumption, it does not appear 

that the WRA provides any specific 

purpose at the Site. 

Although not required by the 1993 

ROD remedy, the NJDEP required the 

institution of a CEA at the Site due to 

limited groundwater contaminant levels 

continuing to exceed PQLs. The CEA 

was submitted in October 2006. As part 

of the CEA requirements, Rohm and 

Hass proposed several actions to reduce 

the length of time the CEA would 

remain in effect. Those actions included 

installing a replacement well that would 

evaluate the possibility that the elevated 

lead concentrations were an artifact of 

some unexpected problem at MW–5S 

and performing a one-day high vacuum 

groundwater extraction in order to 

remove chloroform impacted 

groundwater and soil vapors from MW– 

8S. 

ENSR replaced MW–5S with MW–5R 

and performed the high vacuum 

groundwater extraction at MW–8S on 

May 7, 2007. MW–5S was 

decommissioned. Following these field 

activities, ENSR collected groundwater 

samples from MW–5R and MW–8S on 

June 6 and September 5, 2007. The 

results indicate that lead concentrations 

in MW–5R were no longer detected but 

the chloroform concentrations in MW– 

8S continue to exceed the PQL but not 

the MCL. Based on these results, the 

NJDEP issued a no further action for 

lead at MW–5R on April 13, 2008, and 

requested that the CEA be revised for 

chloroform at MW–8S. Rohm and Haas 

will continue to monitor MW–8S until 

chloroform is not detected at 

concentrations above the PQL for two 

consecutive quarterly sampling events. 

NJDEP has accepted the Rohm and 

Hass proposal of no further action with 

a CEA for chloroform at MW–8S, 

without the need of a WRA designation. 

Rohm and Haas submitted the final 

revised CEA proposal in January 2009. 

Once approved by the NJDEP, the CEA 

will continue until chloroform is below 

the PQL for two consecutive quarterly 

sampling events. The NJDEP will issue 

a no further action for chloroform at 

MW–8S when two consecutive quarterly 

sampling events results in chloroform 

detection below the PQL concentration. 

Since contaminant levels in all media 

are below risk based levels, no 

institutional controls are required at this 

Site under CERCLA. 

Cleanup Goals 

Post-excavation sampling conducted 

as part of the removal actions verifies 

that the Site soils were below the NJDEP 

cleanup standards for residential 

properties. Groundwater CERCLA 

cleanup standards were Federal 

Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) 

and Maximum Contaminant Level Goal 

(MCLG). 

Operations and Maintenance 

No operation and maintenance was 

required for the Site property, where 

mixed surface waste and contaminated 

soils were removed for off-site disposal, 

and post-excavation sampling 

confirmed that remediation goals were 

achieved. Post-remediation groundwater 

monitoring was conducted for five years 

and all contaminants are below MCLs. 

Five-Year Review 

There were two five-year reviews of 

the selected remedy for this Site. The 

first review was issued on May 12, 2000. 

A second five-year review was signed 

on June 3, 2005. The June 2005 FiveYear Review Report found that the no 

further action remedy protects human 

health and the environment at this Site. 

It indicates that no future five-year 

reviews will be necessary if the Site is 

found to be suitable for unlimited use 

without restriction and that finding is 

part of the deletion process or is 

contained within an appropriate EPA 

decision document. The deletion 

process has determined that the Site is 

suitable for unlimited use without 

restriction. Therefore, no future fiveyear reviews will be conducted at this 

Site. 

Community Involvement 

Public participation activities for this 

Site have been satisfied as required in 

CERCLA sections 113(k) and 117, 42 

U.S.C. 9613(k) and 9617. Throughout 

the removal and remedial process, EPA 

and the NJDEP have kept the public 

informed of the activities being 

conducted at the Site by way of public 

32088 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 128 / Tuesday, July 7, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

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. Notices associated 

with these community relations 

activities were also mailed out to the 

area residents and other concerned 

parties on the mailing list for the Site. 

Determination That the Site Meets the 

Criteria for Deletion From the NCP 

The NCP specifies that EPA may 

delete a site from the NPL if ‘‘all 

appropriate Fund-financed response 

under CERCLA has been implemented, 

and no further response action by 

responsible parties is appropriate.’’ 40 

CFR 300.425(e)(1)(ii). EPA, with the 

concurrence from the State of New 

Jersey, through NJDEP, believes that this 

criterion for deletion has been met and 

the Site is available for use without 

restriction. Consequently, EPA is 

deleting this Site from the NPL. 

Documents supporting this action are 

available in the Site files. 

V. Deletion Action 

EPA, with the concurrence of the 

State of New Jersey, has determined that 

all appropriate Fund-financed responses 

under CERCLA have been implemented, 

and no further action by responsible 

parties is appropriate. Therefore, EPA is 

deleting the Site from the NPL. 

Because EPA considers this action to 

be noncontroversial and routine, EPA is 

deleting the Site without prior 

publication. This action will be effective 

September 8, 2009 unless EPA receives 

adverse comments by August 6, 2009. If 

adverse comments are received within 

the 30-day public comment period of 

this action, EPA will publish a timely 

withdrawal of this Direct Final Deletion 

before the effective date of the deletion 

and the deletion will not take effect. 

EPA will, if 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 received. In such a case, 

there will be no additional opportunity 

to comment. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Chemicals, Hazardous 

substances, Hazardous waste, 

Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Superfund, Water 

pollution control, Water supply. 

Dated: June 25, 2009. 

George Pavlou, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 2. 

■ For the reasons set out in the 

preamble Part 300 Title 40 of Chapter I 

of the Code of Federal Regulations 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 removing ‘‘Wilson Farm, 

Plumsted Township, NJ.’’ 

[FR Doc. E9–15801 Filed 7–6–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

46 CFR Part 8 

[USCG–2008–1014] 

RIN 1625–AB31 

International Air Pollution Prevention 

(IAPP) Certificates 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Direct final rule; confirmation of 

effective date. 

SUMMARY: On May 8, 2009, the Coast 

Guard published a direct final rule that 

notified the public of the Coast Guard’s 

intent to amend its vessel inspection 

regulations to add the International Air 

Pollution Prevention (IAPP) certificate 

to the list of certificates a recognized 

classification society may be authorized 

to issue on behalf of the United States. 

We have not received an adverse 

comment, or notice of intent to submit 

an adverse comment, on this rule. 

Therefore, the rule will go into effect as 

scheduled. 

DATES: The effective date of the direct 

final rule published at 74 FR 21554, is 

confirmed as August 6, 2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this notice, call 

Mr. Wayne Lundy, Systems Engineering 

Division, Coast Guard, telephone 202– 

372–1379. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 8, 

2009, we published a direct final rule 

entitled ‘‘International Air Pollution 

Prevention (IAPP) Certificates’’ in the 

Federal Register at 74 FR 21554. We 

promulgated this rule because the 

United States deposited an instrument 

of ratification with the International 

Maritime Organization for Annex VI of 

the International Convention for the 

Prevention of Pollution by Ships, 1973 

as modified by the Protocol of 1978 

(MARPOL 73/78). As a result, Annex VI 

entered into force for the United States 

on January 8, 2009. The rule offers a 

more efficient means for U.S. vessels to 

obtain an IAPP certificate. 

We published the rule as a direct final 

rule under 33 CFR 1.05–55 because we 

considered this rule to be 

noncontroversial and did not expect an 

adverse comment regarding this 

rulemaking. In the direct final rule we 

stated that if no adverse comment, or 

notice of intent to submit an adverse 

comment is received by June 22, 2009, 

the rule would become effective on 

August 6, 2009. 

We have not received adverse 

comments, or notices of intent to submit 

adverse comments, on this rulemaking. 

Therefore, this notice confirms that the 

direct final rule will become effective as 

scheduled, on August 6, 2009. 

Dated: June 29, 2009. 

Howard L. Hime, 

Acting Director of Commercial Regulations 

and Standards, U.S. Coast Guard. 

[FR Doc. E9–15875 Filed 7–6–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P