National Priorities List • Michelle Delgado-Brown, Region 6 Planning and Review and Executive (AR, LA, NM, OK, TX), U.S

Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 172 / Thursday, September 3, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 54931

[FR Doc. 2020–19491 Filed 9–2–20; 8:45 am] 3HS12, Philadelphia, PA 19103; 215/ B. What documents are available for review BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 814–3355. at the EPA Headquarters docket? • Sandra Harrigan, Region 4 (AL, FL, C. What documents are available for review GA, KY, MS, NC, SC, TN), U.S. EPA, 61 at the EPA regional dockets? ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Forsyth Street SW, Mailcode 9T25, D. How do I access the documents? E. How may I obtain a current list of NPL AGENCY Atlanta, GA 30303; 404/562–8926. • sites? Todd Quesada, Region 5 (IL, IN, MI, III. Contents of This Final Rule 40 CFR Part 300 MN, OH, WI), U.S. EPA Superfund A. Additions to the NPL [EPA–HQ–OLEM–2017–0603, EPA–HQ– Division Librarian/SFD Records B. What did the EPA do with the public OLEM–2019–0484, 0485, 0486, 0487 and Manager SRC–7J, Metcalfe Federal comments it received? 0488; FRL–10012–71–OLEM] Building, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Chicago, IL 60604; 312/886–4465. A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory National Priorities List • Michelle Delgado-Brown, Region 6 Planning and Review and Executive (AR, LA, NM, OK, TX), U.S. EPA, 1201 Order 13563: Improving Regulation and AGENCY: Environmental Protection Elm Street, Suite 500, Mailcode SED, Regulatory Review Agency (EPA). B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Dallas, TX 75270; 214/665–3154. ACTION: Final rule. • Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Kumud Pyakuryal, Region 7 (IA, Costs KS, MO, NE), U.S. EPA, 11201 Renner SUMMARY: The Comprehensive C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) Environmental Response, Blvd., Mailcode SUPRSTAR, Lenexa, KS D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 66219; 913/551–7956. E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act • Victor Ketellapper, Region 8 (CO, (‘‘CERCLA’’ or ‘‘the Act’’), as amended, (UMRA) MT, ND, SD, UT, WY), U.S. EPA, 1595 F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism requires that the National Oil and Wynkoop Street, Mailcode 8EPR–B, G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation Hazardous Substances Pollution Denver, CO 80202–1129; 303/312–6578. and Coordination With Indian Tribal Contingency Plan (‘‘NCP’’) include a list • Eugenia Chow, Region 9 (AZ, CA, Governments of national priorities among the known HI, NV, AS, GU, MP), U.S. EPA, 75 H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of releases or threatened releases of Hawthorne Street, Mailcode SFD 6–1, Children From Environmental Health and Safety Risks hazardous substances, pollutants or San Francisco, CA 94105; 415/972– contaminants throughout the United I. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 3160. Significantly Affect Energy Supply, States. The National Priorities List • Ken Marcy, Region 10 (AK, ID, OR, (‘‘NPL’’) constitutes this list. The NPL is Distribution, or Use WA), U.S. EPA, 1200 6th Avenue, Suite J. National Technology Transfer and intended primarily to guide the 155, Mailcode 12–D12–1, Seattle, WA Advancement Act (NTTAA) Environmental Protection Agency (‘‘the 98101; 206/890–0591. K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions EPA’’ or ‘‘the agency’’) in determining FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To Address Environmental Justice in which sites warrant further Terry Jeng, phone: (703) 603–8852, Minority Populations and Low-Income investigation. These further Populations email: [email protected], Site investigations will allow the EPA to L. Congressional Review Act Assessment and Remedy Decisions assess the nature and extent of public Branch, Assessment and Remediation I. Background health and environmental risks Division, Office of Superfund associated with the site and to A. What are CERCLA and SARA? Remediation and Technology determine what CERCLA-financed Innovation (Mailcode 5204P), U.S. In 1980, Congress enacted the remedial action(s), if any, may be Environmental Protection Agency; 1200 Comprehensive Environmental appropriate. This rule adds six sites to Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, Response, Compensation, and Liability the General Superfund section of the DC 20460; or the Superfund Hotline, Act, 42 U.S.C. 9601–9675 (‘‘CERCLA’’ or NPL. phone (800) 424–9346 or (703) 412– ‘‘the Act’’), in response to the dangers of DATES: The document is effective on 9810 in the Washington, DC, uncontrolled releases or threatened October 5, 2020. metropolitan area. releases of hazardous substances, and ADDRESSES: Contact information for the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: releases or substantial threats of releases EPA Headquarters: into the environment of any pollutant or • Docket Coordinator, Headquarters; Table of Contents contaminant that may present an U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; I. Background imminent or substantial danger to the CERCLA Docket Office; 1301 A. What are CERCLA and SARA? public health or welfare. CERCLA was Constitution Avenue NW; William B. What is the NCP? amended on October 17, 1986, by the Jefferson Clinton Building West, Room C. What is the National Priorities List Superfund Amendments and 3334, Washington, DC 20004, 202/566– (NPL)? Reauthorization Act (‘‘SARA’’), Public D. How are sites listed on the NPL? Law 99–499, 100 Stat. 1613 et seq. 0276. E. What happens to sites on the NPL? The contact information for the F. Does the NPL define the boundaries of B. What is the NCP? regional dockets is as follows: sites? • Holly Inglis, Region 1 (CT, ME, MA, G. How are sites removed from the NPL? To implement CERCLA, the EPA NH, RI, VT), U.S. EPA, Superfund H. May the EPA delete portions of sites promulgated the revised National Oil Records and Information Center, 5 Post from the NPL as they are cleaned up? and Hazardous Substances Pollution Office Square, Suite 100, Boston, MA I. What is the Construction Completion List Contingency Plan (‘‘NCP’’), 40 CFR part 02109–3912; 617/918–1413. (CCL)? 300, on July 16, 1982 (47 FR 31180), • James Desir, Region 2 (NJ, NY, PR, J. What is the Sitewide Ready for pursuant to CERCLA section 105 and Anticipated Use measure? Executive Order 12316 (46 FR 42237, VI), U.S. EPA, 290 Broadway, New K. What is state/tribal correspondence York, NY 10007–1866; 212/637–4342. August 20, 1981). The NCP sets • concerning NPL Listing? Lorie Baker (ASRC), Region 3 (DE, II. Availability of Information to the Public guidelines and procedures for DC, MD, PA, VA, WV), U.S. EPA, A. May I review the documents relevant to responding to releases and threatened Library, 1650 Arch Street, Mailcode this final rule? releases of hazardous substances, or

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:53 Sep 02, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\03SER1.SGM 03SER1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES 54932 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 172 / Thursday, September 3, 2020 / Rules and Regulations

releases or substantial threats of releases responsible for preparing a Hazard E. What happens to sites on the NPL? into the environment of any pollutant or Ranking System (‘‘HRS’’) score and A site may undergo remedial action contaminant that may present an determining whether the facility is financed by the Trust Fund established imminent or substantial danger to the placed on the NPL. under CERCLA (commonly referred to public health or welfare. The EPA has D. How are sites listed on the NPL? as the ‘‘Superfund’’) only after it is revised the NCP on several occasions. placed on the NPL, as provided in the The most recent comprehensive revision There are three mechanisms for NCP at 40 CFR 300.425(b)(1). was on March 8, 1990 (55 FR 8666). placing sites on the NPL for possible (‘‘Remedial actions’’ are those As required under section remedial action (see 40 CFR 300.425(c) ‘‘consistent with a permanent remedy, 105(a)(8)(A) of CERCLA, the NCP also of the NCP): (1) A site may be included taken instead of or in addition to includes ‘‘criteria for determining on the NPL if it scores sufficiently high priorities among releases or threatened removal actions’’ (40 CFR 300.5).) on the HRS, which the EPA However, under 40 CFR 300.425(b)(2), releases throughout the United States promulgated as appendix A of the NCP for the purpose of taking remedial placing a site on the NPL ‘‘does not (40 CFR part 300). The HRS serves as a imply that monies will be expended.’’ action and, to the extent practicable, screening tool to evaluate the relative taking into account the potential The EPA may pursue other appropriate potential of uncontrolled hazardous authorities to respond to the releases, urgency of such action, for the purpose substances, pollutants or contaminants of taking removal action.’’ ‘‘Removal’’ including enforcement action under to pose a threat to human health or the CERCLA and other laws. actions are defined broadly and include environment. On December 14, 1990 (55 a wide range of actions taken to study, FR 51532), the EPA promulgated F. Does the NPL define the boundaries clean up, prevent or otherwise address revisions to the HRS partly in response of sites? releases and threatened releases of to CERCLA section 105(c), added by The NPL does not describe releases in hazardous substances, pollutants or SARA. On January 9, 2017 (82 FR 2760), precise geographical terms; it would be contaminants (42 U.S.C. 9601(23)). a subsurface intrusion component was neither feasible nor consistent with the C. What is the National Priorities List added to the HRS to enable the EPA to limited purpose of the NPL (to identify (NPL)? consider human exposure to hazardous releases that are priorities for further substances or pollutants and The NPL is a list of national priorities evaluation), for it to do so. Indeed, the contaminants that enter regularly among the known or threatened releases precise nature and extent of the site are occupied structures through subsurface of hazardous substances, pollutants or typically not known at the time of intrusion when evaluating sites for the contaminants throughout the United listing. NPL. The current HRS evaluates four States. The list, which is appendix B of Although a CERCLA ‘‘facility’’ is pathways: Ground water, surface water, the NCP (40 CFR part 300), was required broadly defined to include any area soil exposure and subsurface intrusion, under section 105(a)(8)(B) of CERCLA, where a hazardous substance has ‘‘come and air. As a matter of agency policy, as amended. Section 105(a)(8)(B) to be located’’ (CERCLA section 101(9)), those sites that score 28.50 or greater on defines the NPL as a list of ‘‘releases’’ the listing process itself is not intended and the highest priority ‘‘facilities’’ and the HRS are eligible for the NPL. (2) to define or reflect the boundaries of requires that the NPL be revised at least Each state may designate a single site as such facilities or releases. Of course, annually. The NPL is intended its top priority to be listed on the NPL, HRS data (if the HRS is used to list a primarily to guide the EPA in without any HRS score. This provision site) upon which the NPL placement determining which sites warrant further of CERCLA requires that, to the extent was based will, to some extent, describe investigation to assess the nature and practicable, the NPL include one facility the release(s) at issue. That is, the NPL extent of public health and designated by each state as the greatest site would include all releases evaluated environmental risks associated with a danger to public health, welfare or the as part of that HRS analysis. release of hazardous substances, environment among known facilities in When a site is listed, the approach pollutants or contaminants. The NPL is the state. This mechanism for listing is generally used to describe the relevant of only limited significance, however, as set out in the NCP at 40 CFR release(s) is to delineate a geographical it does not assign liability to any party 300.425(c)(2). (3) The third mechanism area (usually the area within an or to the owner of any specific property. for listing, included in the NCP at 40 installation or plant boundaries) and Also, placing a site on the NPL does not CFR 300.425(c)(3), allows certain sites identify the site by reference to that mean that any remedial or removal to be listed without any HRS score, if all area. However, the NPL site is not action necessarily need be taken. of the following conditions are met: necessarily coextensive with the For purposes of listing, the NPL • The Agency for Toxic Substances boundaries of the installation or plant, includes two sections, one of sites that and Disease Registry (ATSDR) of the and the boundaries of the installation or are generally evaluated and cleaned up U.S. Public Health Service has issued a plant are not necessarily the by the EPA (the ‘‘General Superfund health advisory that recommends ‘‘boundaries’’ of the site. Rather, the site section’’) and one of sites that are dissociation of individuals from the consists of all contaminated areas owned or operated by other Federal release. within the area used to identify the site, agencies (the ‘‘Federal Facilities • The EPA determines that the release as well as any other location where that section’’). With respect to sites in the poses a significant threat to public contamination has come to be located, Federal Facilities section, these sites are health. or from where that contamination came. generally being addressed by other • The EPA anticipates that it will be In other words, while geographic Federal agencies. Under Executive more cost-effective to use its remedial terms are often used to designate the site Order 12580 (52 FR 2923, January 29, authority than to use its removal (e.g., the ‘‘Jones Co. Plant site’’) in terms 1987) and CERCLA section 120, each authority to respond to the release. of the property owned by a particular Federal agency is responsible for The EPA promulgated an original NPL party, the site, properly understood, is carrying out most response actions at of 406 sites on September 8, 1983 (48 FR not limited to that property (e.g., it may facilities under its own jurisdiction, 40658) and generally has updated it at extend beyond the property due to custody or control, although the EPA is least annually. contaminant migration), and conversely

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:53 Sep 02, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\03SER1.SGM 03SER1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 172 / Thursday, September 3, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 54933

may not occupy the full extent of the 300.425(e). This section also provides controls are in place. The EPA has been property (e.g., where there are that the EPA shall consult with states on successful on many occasions in uncontaminated parts of the identified proposed deletions and shall consider carrying out remedial actions that property, they may not be, strictly whether any of the following criteria ensure protectiveness of human health speaking, part of the ‘‘site’’). The ‘‘site’’ have been met: and the environment for current and is thus neither equal to, nor confined by, (i) Responsible parties or other future land uses, in a manner that the boundaries of any specific property persons have implemented all allows contaminated properties to be that may give the site its name, and the appropriate response actions required; restored to environmental and economic name itself should not be read to imply (ii) All appropriate Superfund- vitality. For further information, please that this site is coextensive with the financed response has been go to https://www.epa.gov/superfund/ entire area within the property implemented and no further response about-superfund-cleanup-process#tab-9. boundary of the installation or plant. In action is required; or addition, the site name is merely used (iii) The remedial investigation has K. What is state/tribal correspondence to help identify the geographic location shown the release poses no significant concerning NPL listing? threat to public health or the of the contamination; and is not meant In order to maintain close to constitute any determination of environment and taking of remedial measures is not appropriate. coordination with states and tribes in liability at a site. For example, the name the NPL listing decision process, the ‘‘Jones Co. plant site,’’ does not imply H. May the EPA delete portions of sites EPA’s policy is to determine the that the Jones Company is responsible from the NPL as they are cleaned up? position of the states and tribes for the contamination located on the In November 1995, the EPA initiated regarding sites that the EPA is plant site. considering for listing. This EPA regulations provide that the a policy to delete portions of NPL sites consultation process is outlined in two remedial investigation (‘‘RI’’) ‘‘is a where cleanup is complete (60 FR memoranda that can be found at the process undertaken . . . to determine 55465, November 1, 1995). Total site following website: https://www.epa.gov/ the nature and extent of the problem cleanup may take many years, while presented by the release’’ as more portions of the site may have been superfund/statetribal-correspondence- information is developed on site cleaned up and made available for concerning-npl-site-listing. contamination, and which is generally productive use. The EPA has improved the performed in an interactive fashion with I. What is the Construction Completion transparency of the process by which the feasibility study (‘‘FS’’) (40 CFR List (CCL)? state and tribal input is solicited. The 300.5). During the RI/FS process, the EPA is using the Web and where release may be found to be larger or The EPA also has developed an NPL appropriate more structured state and smaller than was originally thought, as construction completion list (‘‘CCL’’) to tribal correspondence that (1) explains more is learned about the source(s) and simplify its system of categorizing sites the concerns at the site and the EPA’s the migration of the contamination. and to better communicate the rationale for proceeding; (2) requests an However, the HRS inquiry focuses on an successful completion of cleanup explanation of how the state intends to evaluation of the threat posed and activities (58 FR 12142, March 2, 1993). address the site if placement on the NPL therefore the boundaries of the release Inclusion of a site on the CCL has no is not favored; and (3) emphasizes the need not be exactly defined. Moreover, legal significance. transparent nature of the process by it generally is impossible to discover the Sites qualify for the CCL when: (1) informing states that information on full extent of where the contamination Any necessary physical construction is their responses will be publicly ‘‘has come to be located’’ before all complete, whether or not final cleanup available. necessary studies and remedial work are levels or other requirements have been achieved; (2) the EPA has determined A model letter and correspondence completed at a site. Indeed, the known between the EPA and states and tribes boundaries of the contamination can be that the response action should be limited to measures that do not involve where applicable, is available on the expected to change over time. Thus, in EPA’s website at https://www.epa.gov/ most cases, it may be impossible to construction (e.g., institutional controls); or (3) the site qualifies for superfund/statetribal-correspondence- describe the boundaries of a release concerning-npl-site-listing. with absolute certainty. deletion from the NPL. For more Further, as noted previously, NPL information on the CCL, see the EPA’s II. Availability of Information to the listing does not assign liability to any internet site at https://www.epa.gov/ Public party or to the owner of any specific superfund/construction-completions- property. Thus, if a party does not national-priorities-list-npl-sites-number. A. May I review the documents relevant to this final rule? believe it is liable for releases on J. What is the Sitewide Ready for discrete parcels of property, it can Anticipated Use measure? Yes, documents relating to the submit supporting information to the The Sitewide Ready for Anticipated evaluation and scoring of the sites in agency at any time after it receives this final rule are contained in dockets notice it is a potentially responsible Use measure represents important Superfund accomplishments and the located both at the EPA headquarters party. and in the EPA regional offices. For these reasons, the NPL need not measure reflects the high priority the be amended as further research reveals EPA places on considering anticipated An electronic version of the public more information about the location of future land use as part of the remedy docket is available through https:// the contamination or release. selection process. See Guidance for www.regulations.gov (see table below Implementing the Sitewide Ready-for- for docket identification numbers). G. How are sites removed from the NPL? Reuse Measure, May 24, 2006, OSWER Although not all docket materials may The EPA may delete sites from the 9365.0–36. This measure applies to final be available electronically, you may still NPL where no further response is and deleted sites where construction is access any of the publicly available appropriate under Superfund, as complete, all cleanup goals have been docket materials through the docket explained in the NCP at 40 CFR achieved, and all institutional or other facilities identified in section II.D.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:53 Sep 02, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\03SER1.SGM 03SER1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES 54934 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 172 / Thursday, September 3, 2020 / Rules and Regulations

DOCKET IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS BY SITE

Site name City/county, state Docket ID No.

Orange County North Basin ...... Orange County, CA ...... EPA–HQ–OLEM–2017–0603. Blades Groundwater ...... Blades, DE ...... EPA–HQ–OLEM–2019–0484. Caney Residential Yards ...... Caney, KS ...... EPA–HQ–OLEM–2019–0485. Highway 100 and County Road 3 Groundwater St. Louis Park and Edina, MN ...... EPA–HQ–OLEM–2019–0486. Plume. Henryetta Iron and Metal ...... Henryetta, OK ...... EPA–HQ–OLEM–2019–0487. Clearwater Finishing ...... Clearwater, SC ...... EPA–HQ–OLEM–2019–0488.

B. What documents are available for GENERAL SUPERFUND SECTION of increased public awareness of review at the EPA Headquarters docket? potential hazards. In addition to the State Site name City/county potential for federally financed remedial The headquarters docket for this rule CA ... Orange County North Orange County. actions, the addition of a site to the NPL contains the HRS score sheets, the Basin. could accelerate privately financed, documentation record describing the DE ... Blades Groundwater Blades. voluntary cleanup efforts. Listing sites information used to compute the score, KS ... Caney Residential Caney. Yards. as national priority targets also may give a list of documents referenced in the MN .. Highway 100 and St. Louis Park and states increased support for funding documentation record for each site and County Road 3 Edina. responses at particular sites. As a result any other information used to support Groundwater of the additional CERCLA remedies, Plume. the NPL listing of the site. OK .. Henryetta Iron and Henryetta. there will be lower human exposure to Metal. high-risk chemicals, and higher quality C. What documents are available for SC ... Clearwater Finishing Clearwater. surface water, ground water, soil, and review at the EPA regional dockets? air. Therefore, it is possible that any B. What did the EPA do with the public The EPA regional dockets contain all perceived or actual negative fluctuations comments it received? the information in the headquarters in property values or development opportunities that may result from docket, plus the actual reference The EPA reviewed all comments contamination may also be countered by documents containing the data received on the sites in this rule and positive fluctuations when a CERCLA principally relied upon by the EPA in responded to all relevant comments. The EPA is adding six sites to the NPL investigation and any necessary cleanup calculating or evaluating the HRS score. are completed. These reference documents are available in this final rule. The Orange County North Basin site in Orange County, CA For the Caney Residential Yards site, only in the regional dockets. was proposed for addition to the NPL on the EPA received several comments D. How do I access the documents? January 18, 2018 (83 FR 2576). The which are unrelated to listing the site on remaining five sites were proposed for the NPL. You may view the documents, by addition to the NPL on November 8, IV. Statutory and Executive Order appointment only, after the publication 2019 (84 FR 60357). Reviews of this rule. The hours of operation for Comments on the Orange County the headquarters docket are from 8:30 North Basin and Hwy 100 and County Additional information about these a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Road 3 Groundwater Plume sites are statutes and Executive orders can be Friday, excluding federal holidays. being addressed in a response to found at https://www.epa.gov/laws- Please contact the regional dockets for comment support document available in regulations/laws-and-executive-orders. the public docket concurrently with this hours. For addresses for the A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory rule. To view public comments on this headquarters and regional dockets, see Planning and Review and Executive site, as well as EPA’s response, please ADDRESSES section in the beginning Order 13563: Improving Regulation and refer to the support document available portion of this preamble. Regulatory Review at https://www.regulations.gov. E. How may I obtain a current list of The EPA received no comments on This action is not a significant NPL sites? the Henryetta Iron and Metal site. regulatory action and was therefore not The EPA received one comment submitted to the Office of Management You may obtain a current list of NPL supporting the listing of the Clearwater and Budget (OMB) for review. sites via the internet at https:// Finishing site, and two additional www.epa.gov/superfund/national- comments that are not site specific but B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing priorities-list-npl-sites-site-name or by that support the implementation of the Regulation and Controlling Regulatory contacting the Superfund docket (see Superfund statute. Costs contact information in the beginning For the Blades Groundwater site, in This action is not an Executive Order portion of this document). addition to comments in support of the 13771 regulatory action because this listing, the EPA received one comment action is not significant under Executive III. Contents of This Final Rule from a member of the public raising Order 12866. A. Additions to the NPL concerns about the impact on property values and another regarding health C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) This final rule adds the following six concerns of residents. The EPA notes This action does not impose an sites to the General Superfund section of that there are both costs and benefits information collection burden under the the NPL. These sites are being added to that can be associated with listing a site. PRA. This rule does not contain any the NPL based on an HRS score of 28.50 Among the benefits are increased health information collection requirements that or above. and environmental protection as a result require approval of the OMB.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:53 Sep 02, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\03SER1.SGM 03SER1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 172 / Thursday, September 3, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 54935

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) regulatory actions that concern 801(b)(1), a rule shall not take effect, or I certify that this action will not have environmental health or safety risks that continue in effect, if Congress enacts a significant economic impact on a the EPA has reason to believe may (and the President signs) a joint substantial number of small entities disproportionately affect children, per resolution of disapproval, described under the RFA. This action will not the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory under section 802. Another statutory impose any requirements on small action’’ in section 2–202 of the provision that may affect this rule is entities. This rule listing sites on the Executive order. This action is not CERCLA section 305, which provides subject to Executive Order 13045 NPL does not impose any obligations on for a legislative veto of regulations because this action itself is procedural any group, including small entities. This promulgated under CERCLA. Although in nature (adds sites to a list) and does rule also does not establish standards or INS v. Chadha, 462 U.S. 919,103 S. Ct. not, in and of itself, provide protection requirements that any small entity must 2764 (1983), and Bd. of Regents of the from environmental health and safety meet and imposes no direct costs on any University of Washington v. EPA, 86 risks. Separate future regulatory actions small entity. Whether an entity, small or F.3d 1214,1222 (D.C. Cir. 1996), cast the are required for mitigation of otherwise, is liable for response costs for validity of the legislative veto into environmental health and safety risks. a release of hazardous substances question, the EPA has transmitted a depends on whether that entity is liable I. Executive Order 13211: Actions That copy of this regulation to the Secretary under CERCLA 107(a). Any such Significantly Affect Energy Supply, of the Senate and the Clerk of the House liability exists regardless of whether the Distribution, or Use of Representatives. If action by Congress under either the site is listed on the NPL through this This action is not subject to Executive CRA or CERCLA section 305 calls the rulemaking. Order 13211, because it is not a effective date of this regulation into significant regulatory action under E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act question, the EPA will publish a Executive Order 12866. (UMRA) document of clarification in the Federal This action does not contain any J. National Technology Transfer and Register. Advancement Act (NTTAA) unfunded mandate as described in List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300 UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does This rulemaking does not involve not significantly or uniquely affect small technical standards. Environmental protection, Air governments. This action imposes no pollution control, Chemicals, Hazardous enforceable duty on any state, local or K. Executive Order 12898: Federal substances, Hazardous waste, tribal governments or the private sector. Actions To Address Environmental Intergovernmental relations, Natural Listing a site on the NPL does not itself Justice in Minority Populations and resources, Oil pollution, Penalties, impose any costs. Listing does not mean Low-Income Populations Reporting and recordkeeping that the EPA necessarily will undertake The EPA believes the human health or requirements, Superfund, Water remedial action. Nor does listing require environmental risk addressed by this pollution control, Water supply. any action by a private party, state, local action will not have potential Dated: August 24 2020. disproportionately high and adverse or tribal governments or determine Peter Wright, liability for response costs. Costs that human health or environmental effects on minority, low-income or indigenous Assistant Administrator, Office of Land and arise out of site responses result from Emergency Management. future site-specific decisions regarding populations because it does not affect what actions to take, not directly from the level of protection provided to For the reasons set out in the the act of placing a site on the NPL. human health or the environment. As preamble, title 40, chapter I, part 300, of discussed in Section I.C. of the the Code of Federal Regulations is F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism preamble to this action, the NPL is a list amended as follows: This final rule does not have of national priorities. The NPL is federalism implications. It will not have intended primarily to guide the EPA in PART 300—NATIONAL OIL AND substantial direct effects on the states, determining which sites warrant further HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES on the relationship between the investigation to assess the nature and POLLUTION CONTINGENCY PLAN National Government and the states, or extent of public health and on the distribution of power and environmental risks associated with a ■ 1. The authority citation for part 300 responsibilities among the various release of hazardous substances, is revised to read as follows: levels of government. pollutants or contaminants. The NPL is Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. of only limited significance as it does 9601–9657; E.O. 13626, 77 FR 56749, 3 CFR, G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation not assign liability to any party. Also, 2013 Comp., p. 306; E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757, and Coordination With Indian Tribal placing a site on the NPL does not mean 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 Governments that any remedial or removal action FR 2923, 3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 193. This action does not have tribal necessarily need be taken. ■ 2. Table 1 of appendix B to part 300 implications as specified in Executive L. Congressional Review Act is amended by adding the entries for Order 13175. Listing a site on the NPL ‘‘CA,’’ ‘‘Orange County North Basin’’, does not impose any costs on a tribe or This action is subject to the CRA, and ‘‘DE,’’ ‘‘Blades Groundwater’’, ‘‘KS,’’ require a tribe to take remedial action. the EPA will submit a rule report to ‘‘Caney Residential Yards’’, ‘‘MN,’’ Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not each House of the Congress and to the ‘‘Highway 100 and County Road 3 apply to this action. Comptroller General of the United Groundwater Plume’’, ‘‘OK,’’ ‘‘Henryetta States. This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Iron and Metal’’, and ‘‘SC,’’ ‘‘Clearwater as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). Finishing’’ in alphabetical order by state Children From Environmental Health Provisions of the Congressional to read as follows: and Safety Risks Review Act (CRA) or section 305 of The EPA interprets Executive Order CERCLA may alter the effective date of Appendix B to Part 300—National 13045 as applying only to those this regulation. Under 5 U.S.C. Priorities List

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:53 Sep 02, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\03SER1.SGM 03SER1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES 54936 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 172 / Thursday, September 3, 2020 / Rules and Regulations

TABLE 1—GENERAL SUPERFUND SECTION

State Site name City/county Notes a

******* CA ...... Orange County North Basin ...... Orange County.

******* DE ...... Blades Groundwater ...... Blades.

******* KS ...... Caney Residential Yards ...... Caney.

******* MN ...... Highway 100 and County Road 3 St. Louis Park and Edina. Groundwater Plume.

******* OK ...... Henryetta Iron and Metal ...... Henryetta.

******* SC ...... Clearwater Finishing ...... Clearwater.

******* A = Based on issuance of health advisory by Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (if scored, HRS score need not be greater than or equal to 28.50).

* * * * * the basis for determining the freight TABLE 1—CURRENT WAYBILL [FR Doc. 2020–19172 Filed 9–2–20; 8:45 am] charges and interline settlements.’’ 49 SAMPLING RATES BILLING CODE 6560–50–P CFR 1244.1(c). Among other things, a [Computerized System of Reporting] waybill contains the following data: (1) The originating and terminating freight Number of carloads Sample rate 3 SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD stations; (2) the railroads participating on waybill\ in the movement; (3) the points of all 49 CFR Part 1244 railroad interchanges; (4) the number 1 to 2 ...... 1/40 and type of cars; (5) the car initial and 3 to 15 ...... 1/12 [EP 385 (Sub-No. 8)] 16 to 60 ...... 1/4 number; (6) the movement weight in 61 to 100 ...... 1/3 Waybill Sample Reporting hundredweight; (7) the commodity; and 101 and over ...... 1/2 (8) the freight revenue. AGENCY: Surface Transportation Board. A railroad is required to file with the The Board creates an aggregate ACTION: Final rule. Board a sample of its waybill data for all compilation of the sampled waybills of line-haul revenue waybills terminated all reporting carriers, referred to as the SUMMARY: The Surface Transportation on its lines in the United States,1 if the Waybill Sample. First collected in 1946 Board (Board) adopts a final rule that railroad: (a) Terminated at least 4,500 by the Board’s predecessor,4 the amends its Waybill Sample data revenue carloads in any of the three Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC), collection regulations by increasing the preceding years, or (b) terminated at the Waybill Sample is the Board’s sampling rates of certain non- least 5% of the revenue carloads principal source of data about freight intermodal carload shipments, terminating in any state in any of the rail shipments. It has broad application specifying separate sampling strata and three preceding years. 49 CFR 1244.2(a). in, among other things, rate cases, the rates for intermodal shipments, and The number of waybills that a railroad development of costing systems, eliminating the manual system for is required to file (i.e., the sampling rate) productivity studies, exemption reporting waybill data. is set forth at current 49 CFR 1244.4(b) decisions, and analyses of industry DATES: This rule is effective on January and (c), and varies based on the number trends. The Waybill Sample is also used 1, 2021. Waybill reporting on or after of carloads on the waybill, as shown in by other Federal agencies, state and the effective date must comply with the Table 1 below.2 local government agencies, the final rule. transportation industry, shippers, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 1 A railroad moving traffic on the U.S. rail system research organizations, universities, and Jonathon Binet at (202) 245–0368. to the Canadian or Mexican border is required to ‘‘include a representative sample of such 3 Assistance for the hearing impaired is The column showing the sample rate indicates international export traffic in the Waybill Sample.’’ the fraction of the total number of waybills within available through the Federal Relay 49 CFR 1244.3(c). each stratum that must be submitted (e.g., for Service at (800) 877–8339. 2 The Board’s regulations set forth different waybills of one to two carloads, the railroad must SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A waybill sampling rates for computerized and manual submit one out of every 40 waybills). systems of reporting. See 49 CFR 1244.4(b)–(c). 4 See Bureau of Transp. Econ. & Stat., Interstate is a ‘‘document or instrument prepared Under the manual system, railroads submit Waybill Com. Comm’n, Statement No. 543, Waybill from the bill of lading contract or Sample data through authenticated copies of a Statistics their History & Uses 15, 19, 40 (1954); shipper’s instructions as to the sample of audited revenue waybills instead of using Waybill Analysis of Transp. of Prop.—R.Rs., 364 disposition of the freight, and [is] used a computerized system. Id. section 1244.4(a). The I.C.C. 928, 929 (1981) (‘‘Since 1946, the Interstate manual system of reporting is not currently used by Commerce Commission has collected a continuous by the railroad(s) involved as the any railroads and, as discussed further below, this sample of carload waybills for railroads terminating authority to move the shipment and as final rule eliminates it. shipments.’’).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:53 Sep 02, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\03SER1.SGM 03SER1 jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES