National Oil and Hazardous Substance Pollution Contingency Plan; National Priorities List, 55296-55300 [05-18834]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
55296
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 182 / Wednesday, September 21, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
effects on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and
the States, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government.’’ This
final rule directly regulates growers,
food processors, food handlers and food
retailers, not States. This action does not
alter the relationships or distribution of
power and responsibilities established
by Congress in the preemption
provisions of section 408(n)(4) of the
FFDCA. For these same reasons, the
Agency has determined that this rule
does not have any ‘‘tribal implications’’
as described in Executive Order 13175,
entitled Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments (65 FR
67249, November 6, 2000). Executive
Order 13175, requires EPA to develop
an accountable process to ensure
‘‘meaningful and timely input by tribal
officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have tribal
implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have tribal
implications’’ is defined in the
Executive order to include regulations
that have ‘‘substantial direct effects on
one or more Indian tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal
Government and the Indian tribes, or on
the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes.’’ This
rule will not have substantial direct
effects on tribal governments, 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, as
specified in Executive Order 13175.
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to this rule.
VII. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of this final
rule in the Federal Register. This final
rule is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by
5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:27 Sep 20, 2005
Jkt 205001
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
§ 180.930
Dated: September 14, 2005.
Meredith F. Laws,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office
of Pesticide Programs.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is
amended as follows:
I
PART 180—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 180
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346(a) and
371.
§ 180.1045 and § 180.1066
[Removed]
2. Sections 180.1045 and 180.1066 are
removed.
I
§ 180.910
[Amended]
3. Section 180.910 is amended by
removing from the table the entries for
Ethylene methylphenyglycidate;
Phosphorus oxychloride; Sulfurous
acid; and 1,1,1-Trichloroethane.
I
§ 180.920
s. Tri-tert-butylphenol polyglycol
ether (molecular weight (in amu) 746).
[Amended]
5. Section 180.930 is amended by
removing from the table the entries for:
a. Acetylated lanolin alcohol;
b. Calcium and sodium salts of certain
sulfonated petroleum fractions
(mahogany soaps); calcium salt
molecular weight (in amu) 790–1020,
sodium salt molecular weight (in amu)
400–500;
c. Cumene (isopropylbenzene);
d. Dibutyltin dilaurate (CAS Reg. No.
77–58–7);
e. 4,4′-Isopropylidenediphenol alkyl
(C12-C15) phosphites (CAS Reg. No.
92908–32–2);
f. Polyethylene esters of fatty acids,
conforming to 21 CFR 172.854;
g. 1,1,1-Trichloroethane;
h. Triethylene glycol diacetate (CAS
Reg. No. 111–21–7); and
i. Tri-tert-butylphenol polyglycol
ether (molecular weight (in amu) 746).
I
[FR Doc. 05–18831 Filed 9–20–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
[Amended]
4. Section 180.920 is amended by
removing from the table the entries for:
a. Acetonitrile;
b. Almond, bitter;
c. Aluminum 2-ethylhexanoate;
d. 1,3-Butylene glycol
dimethyacrylate;
e. Calcium and sodium salts of certain
sulfonated petroleum fractions
(mahogany soaps); calcium salt
molecular weight (in amu) 790–1,020,
sodium salt molecular weight (in amu)
400–500;
f. Copper salts of neodecanoic acid
and 2-ethylhexanoic acid;
g. Diallyl phthalate;
h. Dipropylene glycol dibenzoate;
i. Ethyl methacrylate;
j. Furfural byproduct (a granular
steam-acid sterilized, lignocellulosic
residuum in the extraction of furfural
from corn cobs, sugarcane bagasse,
cottonseed hulls, oat hulls, and rice
hulls);
k. Isopropylbenzene;
l. Methyl isoamyl ketone;
m. Methyl methacrylate;
n. X-(p-Nonylphenyl)-v-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene) sulfosuccinate
isopropylamine and N-hydroxyethyl
isopropylamine salts of: The
poly(oxyethylene) content averages r
moles;
o. Propylene dichloride;
p. Sodium fluoride;
q. Tetrasodium N-(1,2dicarboxyethyl)-N-octadecylsulfosuccinamate;
r. (2,2′(2,5-Thiophenediyl)bis(5-tertbutylbenzoxazole)) (CAS Reg. No. 7128–
64–5); and
I
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 300
[FRL–7971–3]
National Oil and Hazardous Substance
Pollution Contingency Plan; National
Priorities List
Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Direct final notice of partial
deletion of the East Tailing Area of the
Tar Lake Superfund Site from the
National Priorities List.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), Region 5 is publishing a
notice of partial deletion of the East
Tailing Area of the Tar Lake Superfund
Site (Site), located in, Antrim County
Michigan, 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, in
appendix B of 40 CFR part 300, which
is the National Oil and Hazardous
Substances Pollution Contingency Plan
(NCP). This notice of partial deletion is
being published by EPA with the
concurrence of the State of Michigan,
through the Michigan Department of
Environmental Quality (MDEQ).
Remedial investigation results in the
East Tailing Area of the Tar Lake Site
E:\FR\FM\21SER1.SGM
21SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 182 / Wednesday, September 21, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
have shown that no threat to public
health or the environment exist and,
therefore, the taking of remedial
measures under CERCLA is not
necessary at this time.
DATES: This notice of partial deletion
will be effective November 21, 2005,
unless EPA receives adverse comments
by October 21, 2005. If adverse
comments are received, EPA will
publish a timely withdrawal of the
notice of partial deletion in the Federal
Register informing the public that the
partial deletion will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed
to: Stuart Hill, Community Involvement
Coordinator, U.S. EPA (P–19J), 77 W.
Jackson Blvd., Chicago, IL 60604.
Electronic comments may be sent to
bloom.thomas@epa.gov.
Information Repositories:
Comprehensive information about the
Site is available for viewing and copying
at the Site information repositories
located at: EPA Region 5 Record Center,
77 W. Jackson, Chicago, Il 60604, (312)
353–5821, Monday through Friday 8
a.m. to 4:00 p.m.; Mancelona Public
Library, 202 W. State Street, Mancelona,
MI 49945, (231) 587–9451. Monday
through Friday 8 a.m. to 4 p.m.,
Tuesday and Thursday 6 p.m to 8 p.m.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Thomas Bloom, Remedial Project
Manager at (312) 886–1967,
bloom.thomas@epa.gov or Gladys
Beard, State NPL Deletion Process
Manager at (312) 886–7253,
Beard.Gladys@EPA.Gov or 1–800–621–
8431, (SR–6J), U.S. EPA Region 5, 77 W.
Jackson, Chicago, IL 60604.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. NPL Partial Deletion Criteria
III. Partial Deletion Procedures
IV. Basis for Partial Deletion
V. Partial Deletion Action
I. Introduction
EPA Region 5 is publishing this notice
of partial deletion of the East Tailing
Area of the Tar Lake, Superfund Site
from the NPL. The East Tailing Area of
the Tar Lake Site, as described in the
Remedial Investigation Report for
Operable Unit 2, August 7, 2000,
consists of approximately 40 acres of
land east of Peckham Lake.
The EPA identifies sites that appear to
present a significant risk to public
health or the environment and
maintains the NPL as the list of those
sites. As described in section
300.425(e)(3) of the NCP, sites partially
deleted from the NPL remain eligible for
remedial actions if conditions at the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:27 Sep 20, 2005
Jkt 205001
partially deleted site warrant such
action.
This action will be effective
November 21, 2005 unless EPA receives
adverse comments by October 21, 2005,
on this document. If adverse comments
are received within the 30-day public
comment period on this document, EPA
will publish a timely withdrawal of this
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 partial
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.
Section II of this document explains
the criteria for partial deletion of sites
from the NPL. Section III discusses
procedures that EPA is using for this
action. Section IV discusses the East
Tailing Area of the Tar Lake Superfund
Site and demonstrates how it meets the
partial deletion criteria. Section V
discusses EPA’s action to partially
delete the East Tailing Area from the
NPL unless adverse comments are
received during the public comment
period.
II. NPL Partial Deletion Criteria
Section 300.425(e) of the NCP
provides that releases may be partially
deleted from the NPL where no further
response is appropriate. In making a
determination to delete a release from
the NPL, EPA shall 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 Trust Fund) responses under
CERCLA have 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.
Even if a portion of a site is deleted
from the NPL, where hazardous
substances, pollutants, or contaminants
remain at the portion of the deleted site
above levels that allow for unlimited
use and unrestricted exposure, CERCLA
section 121(c), 42 U.S.C. 9621(c),
requires that a subsequent review of the
deleted portion of the site be conducted
at least every five years after the
initiation of the remedial action at the
site to ensure that the action remains
protective of public health and the
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
55297
environment. If new information
becomes available which indicates a
need for further action, EPA may initiate
remedial actions. Whenever there is a
significant release from the portion
deleted from the NPL, the deleted
portion of the site may be restored to the
NPL without application of the hazard
ranking system.
III. Partial Deletion Procedures
The following procedures apply to
partial deletion of this Site:
(1) The EPA consulted with the State
of Michigan on the partial deletion of
the East Tailing Area of the Site from
the NPL prior to developing this notice
of partial deletion.
(2) Michigan concurred with partial
deletion of the East Tailing Area of the
Site from the NPL.
(3) Concurrently with the publication
of this notice of partial deletion, a notice
of intent to partially delete is published
today in the ‘‘Proposed Rules’’ section
of the Federal Register, is being
published in a major local newspaper of
general circulation at or near the Site,
and is being distributed to appropriate
federal, state, and local government
officials and other interested parties.
The newspaper notice announces the
30-day public comment period
concerning the notice of intent to
partially delete the East Tailing Area of
the Site from the NPL.
(4) The EPA placed copies of
documents supporting the partial
deletion of the East Tailing Area in the
Site information repositories identified
above.
(5) If adverse comments are received
within the 30-day public comment
period on this document, EPA will
publish a timely notice of withdrawal of
this notice of partial deletion before its
effective date and will prepare a
response to comments and continue
with a decision on the partial deletion
based on the notice of intent to partially
delete and the comments already
received.
Partial deletion of the East Tailing
Area of the Site from the NPL does not
itself create, alter, or revoke any
individual’s rights or obligations. Partial
deletion of the East Tailing Area of the
Site from the NPL does not in any way
alter EPA’s right to take enforcement
actions, as appropriate. The NPL is
designed primarily for informational
purposes and to assist EPA
management. Section 300.425(e)(3) of
the NCP states that the partial deletion
of a site from the NPL does not preclude
eligibility for future response actions
should future conditions warrant such
actions.
E:\FR\FM\21SER1.SGM
21SER1
55298
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 182 / Wednesday, September 21, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
IV. Basis for Partial Deletion
The following information provides
EPA’s rationale for deleting the East
Tailing Area of this Site from the NPL:
Site Location
The Tar Lake Superfund site (the Site)
is located in Mancelona Township,
Antrim County, Michigan. It is a former
iron manufacturing facility that
operated between 1882 and 1945.
Response actions at the Tar Lake
Superfund site have been separated into
two operable units. The first operable
unit (OU1), addressed tar contamination
in a 4-acre depression of the 200-acre
site by removing and transporting
approximately 47,000 tons of tar to an
energy recovery facility. The second
operable unit (OU2), addressed
remaining contamination throughout
the 200-acre site.
Site History
Beginning in 1882 and continuing
through 1945, the Tar Lake site was the
location of an iron production facility.
The Antrim Iron Works Company used
the charcoal method to produce iron. In
1910, the Antrim Iron Works Company
began producing charcoal in sealed
retorts from which pyroligneous (made
by destructive distillation of wood)
liquor was recovered. A secondary
chemical manufacturing process was
applied to the recovered pyroligneous
liquor at the iron works. The
pyroligneous liquor was further
processed into calcium acetate,
methanol, acetone, creosote oil, and a
tarry-like waste residue—referred to
throughout this document as tar. The tar
was discharged into a 4-acre on-site
depression. The secondary chemical
process generated tar waste until 1944.
Tar and water that remained in this
depression are referred to as Tar Lake.
As early as 1949, the groundwater
coming from the Tar Lake was
discovered to be contaminated with
phenolic compounds. Tar Lake caught
fire in 1969 and burned for several
months before being extinguished by
natural action.
Mount Clemens Metal Products
Company owned and periodically used
the Tar Lake area of the Site for waste
disposal from 1957 until 1967. Gulf and
Western Manufacturing Company,
successor to Mount Clemens Metal
Products Company, owned the property
from 1967 to approximately 1982. In
December 1982, Gulf and Western
Manufacturing Company dissolved due
to a merger with Gulf and Western, Inc.
In 1985, Gulf and Western Inc., sold the
property to Fifty-Sixth Century Antrim
Iron Works Company (56th Century). In
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:27 Sep 20, 2005
Jkt 205001
April 1989, Gulf and Western Inc.,
merged with Paramount
Communications, Inc. Officials of 56th
Century, at the Tar Lake site are
employees of Paramount
Communications Realty Corporation, a
wholly-owned subsidiary of Paramount
Communications, Inc. In 1994, Viacom
International, Inc., acquired Paramount
Communications, Inc., and 56th Century
is currently a subsidiary of French
Street Management, Inc., a subsidiary of
Viacom International, Inc. In November
1999, the Community Resource
Development (CRD) Inc., a non-profit
community development organization,
purchased approximately 88 acres of the
200 acre Tar Lake site. Current property
owners include CRD Inc., Collins
Aikman Products, Mancelona
Township, and Mr. John Apfel.
The Tar Lake site was placed on the
National Priorities List (NPL) in
September 1983. On April 21, 1986, the
U.S. EPA and 56th Century, a subsidiary
of Viacom International, Inc., signed an
Administrative Order on Consent (AOC
1986) which required that 56th Century
conduct a two-phase Remedial
Investigation (RI). Phase I was to
develop a Preliminary Endangerment
Assessment (PEA). Phase II was to be a
more detailed investigation based on the
results of the PEA. 56th Century
installed a fence around the 4-acre Tar
Lake and included an additional 14
acres of the Retort and Chemical
Production Area where on-site
structures and waste piles existed.
The PEA was submitted in October
1988, and it concluded that the
contaminants in the groundwater did
not pose a threat. EPA found the PEA
to be deficient because it relied upon
data which were inadequately and
incompletely collected, and its
conclusions were not adequately
supported. EPA did not approve the
PEA. In 1989, 56th Century performed
additional investigative-type work
required by EPA. This additional work
found that there was a connection
between the tar and groundwater.
Groundwater beneath Tar Lake was
found to contain over 50 compounds
that were also found in the tar. It also
was discovered that benzene and
styrene were present in on-site
groundwater at levels above the Safe
Drinking Water Act—Maximum
Contaminant Levels (MCLs). EPA
determined that a source control and
groundwater containment Operable Unit
(OU1) was appropriate for the Site.
The 1986 AOC was amended in
August 1990 to have 56th Century
conduct a Phased Feasibility Study
Report, to address OU1. 56th Century
submitted an unacceptable Phased
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Feasibility Study Report which utilized
a risk assessment based on the
unapproved PEA. EPA took over the
preparation of the Phased Feasibility
Study report. EPA completed the report
in March 1992. A Record of Decision
(ROD for OU1) was issued in September
1992, selecting consolidation of the tar
and contaminated soil in on-site
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA) containment cells and
interim groundwater treatment. A
second Operable Unit (OU2) was
planned to address final groundwater
clean up.
Pre-design studies were conducted at
the Tar Lake site from October 1993 to
June 1994. The pre-design studies
yielded data about tar management
alternatives and media treatability
which resulted in a reassessment of the
selected remedial alternative presented
in the 1992 ROD for OU1. An
Explanation of Significant Differences
(ESD for OU1) was issued in July 1998,
which documents modification to the
tar component of the 1992 ROD for
OU1. The ESD for OU1 explained that
instead of storing the excavated tar on
site in RCRA containment cells, tar
would be transported off site to an enduser or an energy recovery facility.
In July 1998, EPA began a response
action which included the excavation
and transportation of tar from the 4-acre
Tar Lake. In July 1999, EPA completed
the removal of 47,043 tons of tar and tar
debris, backfilled the 4-acre tar lake
depression with 1-foot of clean soil, and
installed a temporary poly-liner in the
lower areas of the 4-acre tar lake
depression. MDEQ took on the
responsibility of the management of
storm water collected in the liner. The
tar from Tar Lake was transported to
two energy recovery facilities. In
conjunction with EPA’s response action,
MDEQ installed and began to operate,
on an intermittent basis, an in-situ
biosparge system for on-site
groundwater treatment. Currently, the
in-situ biosparge system is operated
approximately 8 hours per day, seven
days per week. From November 1999 to
June 2002, MDEQ provided bottled
water to residents with site-related iron
and manganese concentrations in their
off-site groundwater wells above State
Secondary Drinking Water Standards.
Currently, a State funded municipal
water system has been extended to the
affected residents.
Remedial Investigation and Feasibility
Study (OU2)
In June 1999, EPA conducted RI
fieldwork to address OU2. The RI for
OU2 investigated residual
contamination remaining beneath the 4-
E:\FR\FM\21SER1.SGM
21SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 182 / Wednesday, September 21, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
acre Tar Lake and surface areas
potentially impacted by the Antrim Iron
Works Company’s iron manufacturing
processes. Historical information was
researched and the knowledge gained
was used to identify several production
areas and the operational history of the
iron manufacturing processes that may
have produced potential areas of
concern.
Within the 200-acre Tar Lake site, (the
Iron Production Area, Creosote Area,
Nelson Lake, Peckham Lake, East
Tailing Area, Tar Lake Area, and Retort
and Chemical Production Area), surface
and subsurface soil, sediment, surface
water and on-site groundwater samples
were collected and analyzed for general
chemistry, metals, phenolic compounds,
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and
semi-volatile organic compounds
(SVOCs).
Off-site areas of concern investigated
were a drainage ditch adjacent to the
site, off-site groundwater and a seepage
area where off-site groundwater
discharges to Saloon Creek. Samples
collected from off-site areas were
analyzed for general chemistry, metals,
phenolic compounds, volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) and semi-volatile
organic compounds (SVOCs). Results of
the RI for OU2 indicated that
approximately 45,000 tons of residual
tar remained in the ‘‘rind’’ beneath the
4-acre depression and was the source of
on-site groundwater contamination.
During the RI, it was determined that
benzene in on-site groundwater
presented an unacceptable risk because
it was above maximum contaminant
levels, and levels of 2,4-dimethylphenol
exceeded the State drinking water
standards. In addition, tar/creosote
waste was discovered on the surface in
the Creosote Area which also presented
an unacceptable risk.
Record of Decision for OU2 Findings
In February 2002, the ROD for OU2
was issued to address these
unacceptable risks. Components of this
selected remedy were:
a. Removal of on-site foundations and
miscellaneous debris impeding
remedation;
b. Removal of the poly-liner to
enhance infiltration of precipitation to
flush contaminants to groundwater;
c. Bioventing of approximately 45,000
tons of rind material;
d. Installation of a groundwater
circulation system for approximately
45,000 tons of rind material;
e. Continued operation of the on-site
groundwater biosparge system to treat
contaminants in the on-site groundwater
(costs $48,000 per year);
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:27 Sep 20, 2005
Jkt 205001
f. Institutional controls including
recording legal notices on property
deeds to restrict on-site groundwater
use;
g. Long-term monitoring to assess
groundwater conditions over time
($2,000 per event): and
h. Excavation of approximately 15,000
tons of tar/creosote waste from the
Creosote Area and transportation to an
energy recovery facility.
On page 2 of the Declaration section,
and on page 27 of the Decision
Summary section in the 2002 ROD for
OU2, it was explained that EPA would
evaluate the amount of rind beneath the
4-acre depression and determine
whether it would be more cost effective
to remove the rind rather than install
the bioventing and groundwater
circulation systems. Results of
predesign data collection, which
followed the RI for OU2, indicated that
there was approximately 21,000 tons of
rind in the 4-acre depression, as
compared to the initial estimate of
45,000 tons. In addition, the amount of
tar/creosote waste found in the Creosote
Area amounted to only 225 tons, as
compared to 15,000 tons. In September
2004, an Explanation of Significant
Differences (ESD for OU2) was issued to
document a change of two remedial
action components from bioventing and
groundwater circulation of the rind to
excavation and off-site disposal. The
remedial action component to address
tar/creosote waste found in the Creosote
Area was changed from excavation and
transportation to an energy recovery
facility to excavation and off-site
disposal.
Through groundwater modeling and
groundwater sampling conducted
during the RI for OU2, EPA was
confident that if the rind was removed,
on-site groundwater would decrease to
acceptable levels in between one to
three years. Evaluation of current
groundwater monitoring data
upgradient and downgradient of the
biosparge system indicates that the
biosparge system is operating as
designed and is effective.
Contamination was not found in the
East Tailing Area of the Tar Lake Site.
EPA does not anticipate an adverse
impact from this partial deletion. The
East Tailing Area is upgradient from the
contaminated rind and EPA has no
further concern with groundwater
beneath the East Tailing Area.
Characterization of Risk
The Remedial Investigation for OU2
has shown that there is no
contamination present in the East
Tailing Area. Therefore, there is not an
unacceptable risk in the East Tailing
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
55299
Area. No additional response action is
required at the East Tailing Area of the
Tar Lake Site. The current conditions at
the East Tailing Area are protective of
human health and the environment.
Response Action for OU2
On June 14, 2004, EPA began
remedial construction activities. Site
preparation such as mobilization of
equipment, road building, pad
construction and removal of top soil and
overburden continued until July 3,
2004. Approximately 4,000 cubic yards
of top soil and 8,000 cubic yards of
overburden (non-impacted soil and slag)
were excavated from the 4-acre
depression above the rind.
On July 7, 2004 and continuing
through August 28, 2004, 21,482 tons of
rind and 225 tons tar/creosote waste
from the Creosote Area were excavated
and disposed of locally at an approved
RCRA Subtitle D landfill in Federick,
Michigan. Removal of on-site
foundations and miscellaneous debris
impeding remediation and removal of
the poly-liner to enhance infiltration
were also completed. Remedial action
costs associated with these activities
were approximately $1,200,000.
A pre-final inspection was conducted
by EPA and MDEQ on September 20,
2004. Site restoration activities such as
backfilling, regrading and seeding the 4acre depression had been properly
conducted. Decontamination and
demobilization of all equipment was
completed at that time. The work
trailers were demobilized the following
day, which was September 21, 2004.
EPA and MDEQ have determined that
RA construction activities have been
performed according to specifications
and anticipate that removal and off-site
disposal of the rind material will meet
remedial action objectives for the Tar
Lake Site.
Cleanup Standards
The objectives of the remedies were to
ensure that by source removal, off-site
groundwater would decrease over time
and within 3 years, on-site groundwater
would decrease to an acceptable level.
Operation and Maintenance
As part of the remedy requirement for
long-term monitoring, EPA and MDEQ
will conduct three groundwater
sampling events per year. In addition,
MDEQ will continue to operate the onsite biosparge system to treat residual
contamination in the on-site
groundwater.
Five-Year Review
Because hazardous substances will
remain at other portions of the Tar Lake
E:\FR\FM\21SER1.SGM
21SER1
55300
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 182 / Wednesday, September 21, 2005 / Rules and Regulations
Site above levels that allow for
unrestricted use and unlimited
exposure, the EPA will conduct periodic
reviews at this Site. The review will be
conducted pursuant to CERCLA 121(c)
and as provided in the current guidance
on Five Year Reviews; OSWER Directive
9355.7–03B–P, Comprehensive FiveYear Guidance, June 2001. The first fiveyear review for the Tar Lake Site is
scheduled to be conducted before June
2009. In the East Tailing Area of the Tar
Lake Site, unlimited use and
unrestricted access is allowed.
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 docket which EPA
relied on for recommendation of the
partial deletion of the East Tailing Area
on the Tar Lake Site from the NPL are
available to the public in the
information repositories.
V. Partial Deletion Action
EPA, with concurrence of the State of
Michigan, has determined that all
appropriate responses under CERCLA
have been completed, and that no
further response actions, under CERCLA
are necessary at the East Tailing Area.
Therefore, EPA is deleting the East
Tailing Area of the Tar Lake Site from
the NPL.
This action will be effective
November 21, 2005, unless EPA receives
adverse comments by October 21, 2005.
If adverse comments are received within
the 30-day public comment period, EPA
will publish a timely withdrawal of this
notice of partial deletion before the
effective date of the partial deletion and
it will not take effect. Concurrent with
this action, EPA will prepare a response
to comments and as appropriate
continue with the partial 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
substances, Hazardous waste,
Intergovernmental relations, Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Superfund, Water
pollution control, Water supply.
Dated: September 6, 2005.
Bharat Mathur,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region V.
For the reasons set out in this
document, 40 CFR part 300 is amended
as follows:
I
PART 300—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 300
continues to read as follows:
I
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 under Michigan ‘‘MI’’ by
removing the entry for ‘‘The East Tailing
Area from the Tar Lake Site’’ and the
township ‘‘Mancelona, Michigan.’’
I
Appendix B to Part 300—National
Priorities List
TABLE 1.—GENERAL SUPERFUND SECTION
State
Sitename
City/county
*
*
MI ...............................................................
*
*
Tar Lake ....................................................
*
*
Antrim ........................................................
*
*
*
*
*
*
(Notes) a
*
P
*
a*
* *
P=Sites with partial deletion(s).
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 05–18834 Filed 9–20–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Parts 1 and 54
[CC Docket No. 02–6; FCC 04–190]
Schools and Libraries Universal
Service Support Mechanism
Federal Communications
Commission (FCC).
ACTION: Final rule; announcement of
effective date.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Federal Communications
Commission (Commission) announces
that its rules adopted or amended in the
Schools and Libraries Universal Service
Support Mechanism Fifth Report and
Order and Order (CC Docket No. 02–6;
FCC 04–190), to the extent they
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:20 Sep 20, 2005
Jkt 205001
contained information collection
requirements that required approval by
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB), were approved, and became
effective on November 12, 2004,
following approval by OMB.
DATES: The rules or amendments to 47
CFR 1.8003, 54.504(b)(2), 54.504(c)(1),
54.504(h), 54.508 and 54.516, published
at 69 FR 55097, September 13, 2004 and
corrected at 69 FR 59145, October 4,
2004 became effective on November 12,
2004.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Vickie Robinson, Deputy Chief,
Wireline Competition Bureau,
Telecommunications Access Policy
Division, (202) 418–7400. For additional
information concerning the information
collection contained in this document,
contact Judith-B. Herman at (202) 418–
0214, or at Judith-B.Herman@fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the
Schools and Libraries Universal Service
Support Mechanism Fifth Report and
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Order and Order, the Commission
adopted measures to protect against
waste, fraud, and abuse in the
administration of the schools and
libraries universal service support
mechanism (also known as the E-rate
program). In particular, the Commission
resolved a number of issues that have
arisen from audit activities conducted as
part of ongoing oversight over the
administration of the universal service
fund, and the Commission addressed
programmatic concerns raised by its
Office of Inspector General. A summary
of the Schools and Libraries Universal
Service Support Mechanism Fifth
Report and Order and Order was
published in the Federal Register on
September 13, 2004, 69 FR 55097, and
corrected on October 4, 2004, 69 FR
59145. In that summary, the
Commission stated that with the
exception of rules requiring OMB
approval, the rules adopted in the
Schools and Libraries Universal Service
E:\FR\FM\21SER1.SGM
21SER1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 182 (Wednesday, September 21, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 55296-55300]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-18834]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 300
[FRL-7971-3]
National Oil and Hazardous Substance Pollution Contingency Plan;
National Priorities List
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Direct final notice of partial deletion of the East Tailing
Area of the Tar Lake Superfund Site from the National Priorities List.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 5 is
publishing a notice of partial deletion of the East Tailing Area of the
Tar Lake Superfund Site (Site), located in, Antrim County Michigan,
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, in appendix B of 40 CFR part 300, which is the
National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP).
This notice of partial deletion is being published by EPA with the
concurrence of the State of Michigan, through the Michigan Department
of Environmental Quality (MDEQ). Remedial investigation results in the
East Tailing Area of the Tar Lake Site
[[Page 55297]]
have shown that no threat to public health or the environment exist
and, therefore, the taking of remedial measures under CERCLA is not
necessary at this time.
DATES: This notice of partial deletion will be effective November 21,
2005, unless EPA receives adverse comments by October 21, 2005. If
adverse comments are received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of
the notice of partial deletion in the Federal Register informing the
public that the partial deletion will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to: Stuart Hill, Community
Involvement Coordinator, U.S. EPA (P-19J), 77 W. Jackson Blvd.,
Chicago, IL 60604. Electronic comments may be sent to
bloom.thomas@epa.gov.
Information Repositories: Comprehensive information about the Site
is available for viewing and copying at the Site information
repositories located at: EPA Region 5 Record Center, 77 W. Jackson,
Chicago, Il 60604, (312) 353-5821, Monday through Friday 8 a.m. to 4:00
p.m.; Mancelona Public Library, 202 W. State Street, Mancelona, MI
49945, (231) 587-9451. Monday through Friday 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Tuesday
and Thursday 6 p.m to 8 p.m.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Bloom, Remedial Project Manager
at (312) 886-1967, bloom.thomas@epa.gov or Gladys Beard, State NPL
Deletion Process Manager at (312) 886-7253, Beard.Gladys@EPA.Gov or 1-
800-621-8431, (SR-6J), U.S. EPA Region 5, 77 W. Jackson, Chicago, IL
60604.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. NPL Partial Deletion Criteria
III. Partial Deletion Procedures
IV. Basis for Partial Deletion
V. Partial Deletion Action
I. Introduction
EPA Region 5 is publishing this notice of partial deletion of the
East Tailing Area of the Tar Lake, Superfund Site from the NPL. The
East Tailing Area of the Tar Lake Site, as described in the Remedial
Investigation Report for Operable Unit 2, August 7, 2000, consists of
approximately 40 acres of land east of Peckham Lake.
The EPA identifies sites that appear to present a significant risk
to public health or the environment and maintains the NPL as the list
of those sites. As described in section 300.425(e)(3) of the NCP, sites
partially deleted from the NPL remain eligible for remedial actions if
conditions at the partially deleted site warrant such action.
This action will be effective November 21, 2005 unless EPA receives
adverse comments by October 21, 2005, on this document. If adverse
comments are received within the 30-day public comment period on this
document, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of this 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 partial 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.
Section II of this document explains the criteria for partial
deletion of sites from the NPL. Section III discusses procedures that
EPA is using for this action. Section IV discusses the East Tailing
Area of the Tar Lake Superfund Site and demonstrates how it meets the
partial deletion criteria. Section V discusses EPA's action to
partially delete the East Tailing Area from the NPL unless adverse
comments are received during the public comment period.
II. NPL Partial Deletion Criteria
Section 300.425(e) of the NCP provides that releases may be
partially deleted from the NPL where no further response is
appropriate. In making a determination to delete a release from the
NPL, EPA shall 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 Trust Fund) responses under CERCLA have 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.
Even if a portion of a site is deleted from the NPL, where
hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants remain at the portion
of the deleted site above levels that allow for unlimited use and
unrestricted exposure, CERCLA section 121(c), 42 U.S.C. 9621(c),
requires that a subsequent review of the deleted portion of the site be
conducted at least every five years after the initiation of the
remedial action at the site to ensure that the action remains
protective of public health and the environment. If new information
becomes available which indicates a need for further action, EPA may
initiate remedial actions. Whenever there is a significant release from
the portion deleted from the NPL, the deleted portion of the site may
be restored to the NPL without application of the hazard ranking
system.
III. Partial Deletion Procedures
The following procedures apply to partial deletion of this Site:
(1) The EPA consulted with the State of Michigan on the partial
deletion of the East Tailing Area of the Site from the NPL prior to
developing this notice of partial deletion.
(2) Michigan concurred with partial deletion of the East Tailing
Area of the Site from the NPL.
(3) Concurrently with the publication of this notice of partial
deletion, a notice of intent to partially delete is published today in
the ``Proposed Rules'' section of the Federal Register, is being
published in a major local newspaper of general circulation at or near
the Site, and is being distributed to appropriate federal, state, and
local government officials and other interested parties. The newspaper
notice announces the 30-day public comment period concerning the notice
of intent to partially delete the East Tailing Area of the Site from
the NPL.
(4) The EPA placed copies of documents supporting the partial
deletion of the East Tailing Area in the Site information repositories
identified above.
(5) If adverse comments are received within the 30-day public
comment period on this document, EPA will publish a timely notice of
withdrawal of this notice of partial deletion before its effective date
and will prepare a response to comments and continue with a decision on
the partial deletion based on the notice of intent to partially delete
and the comments already received.
Partial deletion of the East Tailing Area of the Site from the NPL
does not itself create, alter, or revoke any individual's rights or
obligations. Partial deletion of the East Tailing Area of the Site from
the NPL does not in any way alter EPA's right to take enforcement
actions, as appropriate. The NPL is designed primarily for
informational purposes and to assist EPA management. Section
300.425(e)(3) of the NCP states that the partial deletion of a site
from the NPL does not preclude eligibility for future response actions
should future conditions warrant such actions.
[[Page 55298]]
IV. Basis for Partial Deletion
The following information provides EPA's rationale for deleting the
East Tailing Area of this Site from the NPL:
Site Location
The Tar Lake Superfund site (the Site) is located in Mancelona
Township, Antrim County, Michigan. It is a former iron manufacturing
facility that operated between 1882 and 1945. Response actions at the
Tar Lake Superfund site have been separated into two operable units.
The first operable unit (OU1), addressed tar contamination in a 4-acre
depression of the 200-acre site by removing and transporting
approximately 47,000 tons of tar to an energy recovery facility. The
second operable unit (OU2), addressed remaining contamination
throughout the 200-acre site.
Site History
Beginning in 1882 and continuing through 1945, the Tar Lake site
was the location of an iron production facility. The Antrim Iron Works
Company used the charcoal method to produce iron. In 1910, the Antrim
Iron Works Company began producing charcoal in sealed retorts from
which pyroligneous (made by destructive distillation of wood) liquor
was recovered. A secondary chemical manufacturing process was applied
to the recovered pyroligneous liquor at the iron works. The
pyroligneous liquor was further processed into calcium acetate,
methanol, acetone, creosote oil, and a tarry-like waste residue--
referred to throughout this document as tar. The tar was discharged
into a 4-acre on-site depression. The secondary chemical process
generated tar waste until 1944. Tar and water that remained in this
depression are referred to as Tar Lake. As early as 1949, the
groundwater coming from the Tar Lake was discovered to be contaminated
with phenolic compounds. Tar Lake caught fire in 1969 and burned for
several months before being extinguished by natural action.
Mount Clemens Metal Products Company owned and periodically used
the Tar Lake area of the Site for waste disposal from 1957 until 1967.
Gulf and Western Manufacturing Company, successor to Mount Clemens
Metal Products Company, owned the property from 1967 to approximately
1982. In December 1982, Gulf and Western Manufacturing Company
dissolved due to a merger with Gulf and Western, Inc. In 1985, Gulf and
Western Inc., sold the property to Fifty-Sixth Century Antrim Iron
Works Company (56th Century). In April 1989, Gulf and Western Inc.,
merged with Paramount Communications, Inc. Officials of 56th Century,
at the Tar Lake site are employees of Paramount Communications Realty
Corporation, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Paramount Communications,
Inc. In 1994, Viacom International, Inc., acquired Paramount
Communications, Inc., and 56th Century is currently a subsidiary of
French Street Management, Inc., a subsidiary of Viacom International,
Inc. In November 1999, the Community Resource Development (CRD) Inc., a
non-profit community development organization, purchased approximately
88 acres of the 200 acre Tar Lake site. Current property owners include
CRD Inc., Collins Aikman Products, Mancelona Township, and Mr. John
Apfel.
The Tar Lake site was placed on the National Priorities List (NPL)
in September 1983. On April 21, 1986, the U.S. EPA and 56th Century, a
subsidiary of Viacom International, Inc., signed an Administrative
Order on Consent (AOC 1986) which required that 56th Century conduct a
two-phase Remedial Investigation (RI). Phase I was to develop a
Preliminary Endangerment Assessment (PEA). Phase II was to be a more
detailed investigation based on the results of the PEA. 56th Century
installed a fence around the 4-acre Tar Lake and included an additional
14 acres of the Retort and Chemical Production Area where on-site
structures and waste piles existed.
The PEA was submitted in October 1988, and it concluded that the
contaminants in the groundwater did not pose a threat. EPA found the
PEA to be deficient because it relied upon data which were inadequately
and incompletely collected, and its conclusions were not adequately
supported. EPA did not approve the PEA. In 1989, 56th Century performed
additional investigative-type work required by EPA. This additional
work found that there was a connection between the tar and groundwater.
Groundwater beneath Tar Lake was found to contain over 50 compounds
that were also found in the tar. It also was discovered that benzene
and styrene were present in on-site groundwater at levels above the
Safe Drinking Water Act--Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs). EPA
determined that a source control and groundwater containment Operable
Unit (OU1) was appropriate for the Site.
The 1986 AOC was amended in August 1990 to have 56th Century
conduct a Phased Feasibility Study Report, to address OU1. 56th Century
submitted an unacceptable Phased Feasibility Study Report which
utilized a risk assessment based on the unapproved PEA. EPA took over
the preparation of the Phased Feasibility Study report. EPA completed
the report in March 1992. A Record of Decision (ROD for OU1) was issued
in September 1992, selecting consolidation of the tar and contaminated
soil in on-site Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
containment cells and interim groundwater treatment. A second Operable
Unit (OU2) was planned to address final groundwater clean up.
Pre-design studies were conducted at the Tar Lake site from October
1993 to June 1994. The pre-design studies yielded data about tar
management alternatives and media treatability which resulted in a
reassessment of the selected remedial alternative presented in the 1992
ROD for OU1. An Explanation of Significant Differences (ESD for OU1)
was issued in July 1998, which documents modification to the tar
component of the 1992 ROD for OU1. The ESD for OU1 explained that
instead of storing the excavated tar on site in RCRA containment cells,
tar would be transported off site to an end-user or an energy recovery
facility.
In July 1998, EPA began a response action which included the
excavation and transportation of tar from the 4-acre Tar Lake. In July
1999, EPA completed the removal of 47,043 tons of tar and tar debris,
backfilled the 4-acre tar lake depression with 1-foot of clean soil,
and installed a temporary poly-liner in the lower areas of the 4-acre
tar lake depression. MDEQ took on the responsibility of the management
of storm water collected in the liner. The tar from Tar Lake was
transported to two energy recovery facilities. In conjunction with
EPA's response action, MDEQ installed and began to operate, on an
intermittent basis, an in-situ biosparge system for on-site groundwater
treatment. Currently, the in-situ biosparge system is operated
approximately 8 hours per day, seven days per week. From November 1999
to June 2002, MDEQ provided bottled water to residents with site-
related iron and manganese concentrations in their off-site groundwater
wells above State Secondary Drinking Water Standards. Currently, a
State funded municipal water system has been extended to the affected
residents.
Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (OU2)
In June 1999, EPA conducted RI fieldwork to address OU2. The RI for
OU2 investigated residual contamination remaining beneath the 4-
[[Page 55299]]
acre Tar Lake and surface areas potentially impacted by the Antrim Iron
Works Company's iron manufacturing processes. Historical information
was researched and the knowledge gained was used to identify several
production areas and the operational history of the iron manufacturing
processes that may have produced potential areas of concern.
Within the 200-acre Tar Lake site, (the Iron Production Area,
Creosote Area, Nelson Lake, Peckham Lake, East Tailing Area, Tar Lake
Area, and Retort and Chemical Production Area), surface and subsurface
soil, sediment, surface water and on-site groundwater samples were
collected and analyzed for general chemistry, metals, phenolic
compounds, volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and semi-volatile organic
compounds (SVOCs).
Off-site areas of concern investigated were a drainage ditch
adjacent to the site, off-site groundwater and a seepage area where
off-site groundwater discharges to Saloon Creek. Samples collected from
off-site areas were analyzed for general chemistry, metals, phenolic
compounds, volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and semi-volatile organic
compounds (SVOCs). Results of the RI for OU2 indicated that
approximately 45,000 tons of residual tar remained in the ``rind''
beneath the 4-acre depression and was the source of on-site groundwater
contamination.
During the RI, it was determined that benzene in on-site
groundwater presented an unacceptable risk because it was above maximum
contaminant levels, and levels of 2,4-dimethylphenol exceeded the State
drinking water standards. In addition, tar/creosote waste was
discovered on the surface in the Creosote Area which also presented an
unacceptable risk.
Record of Decision for OU2 Findings
In February 2002, the ROD for OU2 was issued to address these
unacceptable risks. Components of this selected remedy were:
a. Removal of on-site foundations and miscellaneous debris impeding
remedation;
b. Removal of the poly-liner to enhance infiltration of
precipitation to flush contaminants to groundwater;
c. Bioventing of approximately 45,000 tons of rind material;
d. Installation of a groundwater circulation system for
approximately 45,000 tons of rind material;
e. Continued operation of the on-site groundwater biosparge system
to treat contaminants in the on-site groundwater (costs $48,000 per
year);
f. Institutional controls including recording legal notices on
property deeds to restrict on-site groundwater use;
g. Long-term monitoring to assess groundwater conditions over time
($2,000 per event): and
h. Excavation of approximately 15,000 tons of tar/creosote waste
from the Creosote Area and transportation to an energy recovery
facility.
On page 2 of the Declaration section, and on page 27 of the
Decision Summary section in the 2002 ROD for OU2, it was explained that
EPA would evaluate the amount of rind beneath the 4-acre depression and
determine whether it would be more cost effective to remove the rind
rather than install the bioventing and groundwater circulation systems.
Results of predesign data collection, which followed the RI for OU2,
indicated that there was approximately 21,000 tons of rind in the 4-
acre depression, as compared to the initial estimate of 45,000 tons. In
addition, the amount of tar/creosote waste found in the Creosote Area
amounted to only 225 tons, as compared to 15,000 tons. In September
2004, an Explanation of Significant Differences (ESD for OU2) was
issued to document a change of two remedial action components from
bioventing and groundwater circulation of the rind to excavation and
off-site disposal. The remedial action component to address tar/
creosote waste found in the Creosote Area was changed from excavation
and transportation to an energy recovery facility to excavation and
off-site disposal.
Through groundwater modeling and groundwater sampling conducted
during the RI for OU2, EPA was confident that if the rind was removed,
on-site groundwater would decrease to acceptable levels in between one
to three years. Evaluation of current groundwater monitoring data
upgradient and downgradient of the biosparge system indicates that the
biosparge system is operating as designed and is effective.
Contamination was not found in the East Tailing Area of the Tar Lake
Site. EPA does not anticipate an adverse impact from this partial
deletion. The East Tailing Area is upgradient from the contaminated
rind and EPA has no further concern with groundwater beneath the East
Tailing Area.
Characterization of Risk
The Remedial Investigation for OU2 has shown that there is no
contamination present in the East Tailing Area. Therefore, there is not
an unacceptable risk in the East Tailing Area. No additional response
action is required at the East Tailing Area of the Tar Lake Site. The
current conditions at the East Tailing Area are protective of human
health and the environment.
Response Action for OU2
On June 14, 2004, EPA began remedial construction activities. Site
preparation such as mobilization of equipment, road building, pad
construction and removal of top soil and overburden continued until
July 3, 2004. Approximately 4,000 cubic yards of top soil and 8,000
cubic yards of overburden (non-impacted soil and slag) were excavated
from the 4-acre depression above the rind.
On July 7, 2004 and continuing through August 28, 2004, 21,482 tons
of rind and 225 tons tar/creosote waste from the Creosote Area were
excavated and disposed of locally at an approved RCRA Subtitle D
landfill in Federick, Michigan. Removal of on-site foundations and
miscellaneous debris impeding remediation and removal of the poly-liner
to enhance infiltration were also completed. Remedial action costs
associated with these activities were approximately $1,200,000.
A pre-final inspection was conducted by EPA and MDEQ on September
20, 2004. Site restoration activities such as backfilling, regrading
and seeding the 4-acre depression had been properly conducted.
Decontamination and demobilization of all equipment was completed at
that time. The work trailers were demobilized the following day, which
was September 21, 2004. EPA and MDEQ have determined that RA
construction activities have been performed according to specifications
and anticipate that removal and off-site disposal of the rind material
will meet remedial action objectives for the Tar Lake Site.
Cleanup Standards
The objectives of the remedies were to ensure that by source
removal, off-site groundwater would decrease over time and within 3
years, on-site groundwater would decrease to an acceptable level.
Operation and Maintenance
As part of the remedy requirement for long-term monitoring, EPA and
MDEQ will conduct three groundwater sampling events per year. In
addition, MDEQ will continue to operate the on-site biosparge system to
treat residual contamination in the on-site groundwater.
Five-Year Review
Because hazardous substances will remain at other portions of the
Tar Lake
[[Page 55300]]
Site above levels that allow for unrestricted use and unlimited
exposure, the EPA will conduct periodic reviews at this Site. The
review will be conducted pursuant to CERCLA 121(c) and as provided in
the current guidance on Five Year Reviews; OSWER Directive 9355.7-03B-
P, Comprehensive Five-Year Guidance, June 2001. The first five-year
review for the Tar Lake Site is scheduled to be conducted before June
2009. In the East Tailing Area of the Tar Lake Site, unlimited use and
unrestricted access is allowed.
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 docket which EPA relied on for
recommendation of the partial deletion of the East Tailing Area on the
Tar Lake Site from the NPL are available to the public in the
information repositories.
V. Partial Deletion Action
EPA, with concurrence of the State of Michigan, has determined that
all appropriate responses under CERCLA have been completed, and that no
further response actions, under CERCLA are necessary at the East
Tailing Area. Therefore, EPA is deleting the East Tailing Area of the
Tar Lake Site from the NPL.
This action will be effective November 21, 2005, unless EPA
receives adverse comments by October 21, 2005. If adverse comments are
received within the 30-day public comment period, EPA will publish a
timely withdrawal of this notice of partial deletion before the
effective date of the partial deletion and it will not take effect.
Concurrent with this action, EPA will prepare a response to comments
and as appropriate continue with the partial 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 substances, Hazardous waste, Intergovernmental relations,
Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Superfund, Water
pollution control, Water supply.
Dated: September 6, 2005.
Bharat Mathur,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region V.
0
For the reasons set out in this document, 40 CFR part 300 is amended as
follows:
PART 300--[AMENDED]
0
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]
0
2. Table 1 of Appendix B to part 300 is amended under Michigan ``MI''
by removing the entry for ``The East Tailing Area from the Tar Lake
Site'' and the township ``Mancelona, Michigan.''
Appendix B to Part 300--National Priorities List
Table 1.--General Superfund Section
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Sitename City/county (Notes) \a\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
MI................................... Tar Lake................ Antrim.................. P
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
a * * *
P=Sites with partial deletion(s).
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 05-18834 Filed 9-20-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
