Rule2026-04904
National Priorities List
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
March 13, 2026
Effective
April 13, 2026
Issuing agencies
Environmental Protection Agency
Abstract
The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 ("CERCLA" or "the Act"), as amended, requires that the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan ("NCP") include a list of national priorities among the known releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances, pollutants or contaminants throughout the United States. The National Priorities List ("NPL") constitutes this list. The NPL is intended primarily to guide the Environmental Protection Agency ("the EPA" or "the agency") in determining which sites warrant further investigation. These further investigations will allow the EPA to assess the nature and extent of public health and environmental risks associated with the site and to determine what CERCLA-authorized remedial action(s), if any, may be appropriate. This rule adds one site, Gelman Sciences Inc., to the General Superfund section of the NPL.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 49 (Friday, March 13, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 49 (Friday, March 13, 2026)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 12304-12308]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-04904]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 300
[EPA-HQ-OLEM-2024-0067; FRL-11724.1-02-OLEM]
National Priorities List
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act of 1980 (``CERCLA'' or ``the Act''), as amended, requires
that the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency
Plan (``NCP'') include a list of national priorities among the known
releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances, pollutants or
contaminants throughout the United States. The National Priorities List
(``NPL'') constitutes this list. The NPL is intended primarily to guide
the Environmental Protection Agency (``the EPA'' or ``the agency'') in
determining which sites warrant further investigation. These further
investigations will allow the EPA to assess the nature and extent of
public health and environmental risks associated with the site and to
determine what CERCLA-authorized remedial action(s), if any, may be
appropriate. This rule adds one site, Gelman Sciences Inc., to the
General Superfund section of the NPL.
DATES: The rule is effective on April 13, 2026.
ADDRESSES: Contact information for the EPA Headquarters:
<bullet> Docket Coordinator, Headquarters; U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency; CERCLA Docket Office; 1301 Constitution Avenue NW;
William Jefferson Clinton Building West, Room 3334, Washington, DC
20004, telephone number: (202) 566-1744.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vanessa Van Note, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Project Oversight Branch, Assessment and Cleanup
Division, Office of Superfund and Emergency Management (Mail Code
5203T), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460, telephone
number: (202) 564-4830, email address: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#f88e999696978c9dd68e99969d8b8b99b89d8899d69f978e"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="572136393938233279213639322424361732273679303821">[email protected]</span></a>.
The contact information for the regional dockets is as follows:
<bullet> Todd Quesada, Region 5 (IL, IN, MI, MN, OH, WI),
Information Services Section Supervisor & Interim U.S. EPA Superfund
Records Officer, Metcalfe Federal Building, 77 West Jackson Boulevard
(MI-10J), Chicago, IL 60604; telephone number: (312) 886-4465.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Background
A. What are CERCLA and SARA?
B. What is the NCP?
C. What is the National Priorities List (NPL)?
D. How are sites listed on the NPL?
E. What happens to sites on the NPL?
F. Does the NPL define the boundaries of sites?
G. How are sites removed from the NPL?
H. May the EPA delete portions of sites from the NPL as they are
cleaned up?
I. What is state/Tribal correspondence concerning NPL Listing?
II. Availability of Information to the Public
A. May I review the documents relevant to this final rule?
B. What documents are available for review at the EPA
Headquarters docket?
C. What documents are available for review at the EPA regional
dockets?
D. How do I access the documents?
E. How may I obtain a current list of NPL sites?
III. Contents of This Final Rule
A. Additions to the NPL
B. What did the EPA do with the public comments it received?
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
[[Page 12305]]
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health and Safety Risks
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
J. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
K. Executive Order 14192: Unleashing Prosperity Through
Deregulation
I. Background
A. What are CERCLA and SARA?
In 1980, Congress enacted the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act, 42 U.S.C. 9601-9675 (``CERCLA'' or
``the Act''), in response to the dangers of uncontrolled releases or
threatened releases of hazardous substances, and releases or
substantial threats of releases into the environment of any pollutant
or contaminant that may present an imminent or substantial danger to
the public health or welfare. CERCLA was amended on October 17, 1986,
by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (``SARA''), Public
Law 99-499, 100 Stat. 1613 et seq.
B. What is the NCP?
To implement CERCLA, the EPA promulgated the revised National Oil
and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (``NCP''), 40 CFR
part 300, on July 16, 1982 (47 FR 31180), pursuant to CERCLA section
105 and Executive Order 12316 (46 FR 42237, August 20, 1981). The NCP
sets guidelines and procedures for responding to releases and
threatened releases of hazardous substances, or releases or substantial
threats of releases into the environment of any pollutant or
contaminant that may present an imminent or substantial danger to the
public health or welfare. The EPA has revised the NCP on several
occasions. The most recent comprehensive revision was on March 8, 1990
(55 FR 8666).
As required under section 105(a)(8)(A) of CERCLA, the NCP also
includes ``criteria for determining priorities among releases or
threatened releases throughout the United States for the purpose of
taking remedial action and, to the extent practicable, taking into
account the potential urgency of such action, for the purpose of taking
removal action.'' ``Removal'' actions are defined broadly and include a
wide range of actions taken to study, clean up, prevent or otherwise
address releases and threatened releases of hazardous substances,
pollutants or contaminants (42 U.S.C. 9601(23)).
C. What is the National Priorities List (NPL)?
The NPL is a list of national priorities among the known or
threatened releases of hazardous substances, pollutants or contaminants
throughout the United States. The list, which is appendix B of the NCP
(40 CFR part 300), was required under section 105(a)(8)(B) of CERCLA,
as amended. Section 105(a)(8)(B) defines the NPL as a list of
``releases'' and the highest priority ``facilities'' and requires that
the NPL be revised at least annually. The NPL is intended primarily to
guide the EPA in determining which sites warrant further investigation
to assess the nature and extent of public health and environmental
risks associated with a release of hazardous substances, pollutants or
contaminants. The NPL is of only limited significance, however, as it
does not assign liability to any party or to the owner of any specific
property. Also, placing a site on the NPL does not mean that any
remedial or removal action necessarily need be taken.
For purposes of listing, the NPL includes two sections, one of
sites that are generally evaluated and cleaned up by the EPA (the
``General Superfund section'') and one of sites that are owned or
operated by other Federal agencies (the ``Federal Facilities
section''). With respect to sites in the Federal Facilities section,
these sites are generally being addressed by other federal agencies.
Under Executive Order 12580 (52 FR 2923, January 29, 1987) and CERCLA
section 120, each Federal agency is responsible for carrying out most
response actions at facilities under its own jurisdiction, custody or
control, although the EPA is responsible for preparing a Hazard Ranking
System (``HRS'') score and determining whether the facility is placed
on the NPL.
D. How are sites listed on the NPL?
There are three mechanisms for placing sites on the NPL for
possible remedial action (see 40 CFR 300.425(c) of the NCP):
(1) A site may be included on the NPL if it scores sufficiently
high on the HRS, which the EPA promulgated as appendix A of the NCP (40
CFR part 300). The HRS serves as a screening tool to evaluate the
relative potential of uncontrolled hazardous substances, pollutants or
contaminants to pose a threat to human health or the environment. On
December 14, 1990 (55 FR 51532), the EPA promulgated revisions to the
HRS partly in response to CERCLA section 105(c), added by SARA. On
January 9, 2017 (82 FR 2760), a subsurface intrusion component was
added to the HRS to enable the EPA to consider human exposure to
hazardous substances or pollutants and contaminants that enter
regularly occupied structures through subsurface intrusion when
evaluating sites for the NPL. The current HRS evaluates four pathways:
ground water, surface water, soil exposure and subsurface intrusion,
and air. As a matter of agency policy, those sites that score 28.50 or
greater on the HRS are eligible for the NPL.
(2) Each state may designate a single site as its top priority to
be listed on the NPL, without any HRS score. This provision of CERCLA
requires that, to the extent practicable, the NPL include one facility
designated by each state as the greatest danger to public health,
welfare or the environment among known facilities in the state. This
mechanism for listing is set out in the NCP at 40 CFR 300.425(c)(2).
(3) Certain sites may be listed according to the NCP at 40 CFR
300.425(c)(3). This provision provides that a site can be listed
without an HRS score, if all of the following conditions are met:
<bullet> The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry of
the U.S. Public Health Service has issued a health advisory that
recommends dissociation of individuals from the release.
<bullet> The EPA determines that the release poses a significant
threat to public health.
<bullet> The EPA anticipates that it will be more cost-effective to
use its remedial authority than to use its removal authority to respond
to the release.
The EPA promulgated an original NPL of 406 sites on September 8,
1983 (48 FR 40658) and generally has updated it at least annually.
E. What happens to sites on the NPL?
A site may undergo remedial action financed by the Trust Fund
established under CERCLA (commonly referred to as the ``Superfund'')
only after it is placed on the NPL, as provided in the NCP at 40 CFR
300.425(b)(1). (``Remedial actions'' are those ``consistent with a
permanent remedy, taken instead of or in addition to removal actions''
(40 CFR 300.5).) However, under 40 CFR 300.425(b)(2), placing a site on
the NPL ``does not imply that monies will be expended.'' The EPA may
pursue other appropriate authorities to respond to the releases,
including enforcement action under CERCLA and other laws.
F. Does the NPL define the boundaries of sites?
The NPL does not describe releases in precise geographical terms;
it would be
[[Page 12306]]
neither feasible nor consistent with the limited purpose of the NPL (to
identify releases that are priorities for further evaluation), for it
to do so. Indeed, the precise nature and extent of the site are
typically not known at the time of listing.
Although a CERCLA ``facility'' is broadly defined to include any
area where a hazardous substance has ``come to be located'' (42 U.S.C.
9601(9)), the listing process itself is not intended to define or
reflect the boundaries of such facilities or releases. Of course, HRS
data (if the HRS is used to list a site) upon which the NPL placement
was based will, to some extent, describe the release(s) at issue. That
is, the NPL site would include all releases evaluated as part of that
HRS analysis.
When a site is listed, the approach generally used to describe the
relevant release(s) is to delineate a geographical area (usually the
area within an installation or plant boundaries) and identify the site
by reference to that area. However, the NPL site is not necessarily
coextensive with the boundaries of the installation or plant, and the
boundaries of the installation or plant are not necessarily the
``boundaries'' of the site. Rather, the site consists of all
contaminated areas within the area used to identify the site, as well
as any other location where that contamination has come to be located,
or from where that contamination came.
In other words, while geographic terms are often used to designate
the site (e.g., the ``Jones Co. Plant site'') in terms of the property
owned by a particular party, the site, properly understood, is not
limited to that property (e.g., it may extend beyond the property due
to contaminant migration), and conversely may not occupy the full
extent of the property (e.g., where there are uncontaminated parts of
the identified property, they may not be, strictly speaking, part of
the ``site''). The ``site'' is thus neither equal to, nor confined by,
the boundaries of any specific property that may give the site its
name, and the name itself should not be read to imply that this site is
coextensive with the entire area within the property boundary of the
installation or plant. In addition, the site name is merely used to
help identify the geographic location of the contamination; and is not
meant to constitute any determination of liability at a site. For
example, the name ``Jones Co. plant site,'' does not imply that the
Jones Company is responsible for the contamination located on the plant
site. So, NPL listing does not assign liability to any party or to the
owner of any specific property. And if a party does not believe it is
liable for releases on discrete parcels of property, it can submit
supporting information to the agency at any time after it receives
notice that it is a potentially responsible party.
EPA regulations provide that the remedial investigation (``RI'')
``is a process undertaken . . . to determine the nature and extent of
the problem presented by the release'' as more information is developed
on site contamination, and which is generally performed in an
interactive fashion with the feasibility study (``FS'') (40 CFR 300.5).
During the RI/FS process, the release may be found to be larger or
smaller than was originally thought, as more is learned about the
source(s) and any migration of the contamination. However, the HRS
inquiry focuses on an evaluation of the threat posed and therefore the
boundaries of the release need not be exactly defined. Moreover, it
generally is impossible to discover the full extent of where the
contamination ``has come to be located'' before all necessary studies
and remedial work are completed at a site. Indeed, the known boundaries
of the contamination can be expected to change over time. Thus, in most
cases, it may be impossible to describe the boundaries of a release
with absolute certainty.
For these reasons, the NPL need not be amended as further research
reveals more information about the location of the contamination or
release.
G. How are sites removed from the NPL?
The EPA may delete sites from the NPL where no further response is
appropriate under Superfund, as explained in the NCP at 40 CFR
300.425(e). This section also provides that the EPA shall consult with
states on proposed deletions and shall consider 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 Superfund-financed response has been
implemented, and no further response action is required; or
(iii) The remedial investigation has shown the release poses no
significant threat to public health or the environment and taking of
remedial measures is not appropriate.
H. May the EPA delete portions of sites from the NPL as they are
cleaned up?
In November 1995, the EPA initiated a policy to delete portions of
NPL sites where cleanup is complete (60 FR 55465, November 1, 1995).
Total site cleanup may take many years, while portions of the site may
have been cleaned up and made available for productive use.
I. What is state/Tribal correspondence concerning NPL Listing?
In order to maintain close coordination with states and Tribes in
the NPL listing decision process, the EPA's policy is to determine the
position of the states and Tribes regarding sites that the EPA is
considering for listing. This consultation process is outlined in two
memoranda that can be found at the following website: <a href="https://www.epa.gov/superfund/statetribal-correspondence-concerning-npl-site-listing">https://www.epa.gov/superfund/statetribal-correspondence-concerning-npl-site-listing</a>.
The EPA has improved the transparency of the process by which state
and Tribal input is solicited. The EPA is using the Web and where
appropriate more structured state and Tribal correspondence that: (1)
explains the concerns at the site and the EPA's rationale for
proceeding; (2) requests an explanation of how the state intends to
address the site if placement on the NPL is not favored; and (3)
emphasizes the transparent nature of the process by informing states
that information on their responses will be publicly available.
A model letter and past correspondence between the EPA and states
and Tribes, where applicable, is available on the EPA's website at
<a href="https://www.epa.gov/superfund/statetribal-correspondence-concerning-npl-site-listing">https://www.epa.gov/superfund/statetribal-correspondence-concerning-npl-site-listing</a>.
II. Availability of Information to the Public
A. May I review the documents relevant to this final rule?
Yes, documents relating to the evaluation and scoring of the site
in this final rule are contained in dockets located both at the EPA
headquarters and in the EPA regional offices.
An electronic version of the public docket is available through
<a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> (see table below for Docket ID Nos.).
Although not all docket materials may be available electronically, you
may still access any of the publicly available docket materials through
the docket facilities identified in section II.D.
[[Page 12307]]
Docket Identification Numbers by Site
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Site Name City/county, state Docket ID No.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gelman Sciences Inc................ Ann Arbor, MI.............. EPA-HQ-OLEM-2024-0067.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. What documents are available for review at the EPA Headquarters
docket?
The headquarters docket for this rule contains the HRS score
sheets, the documentation record describing the information used to
compute the score, a list of documents referenced in the documentation
record for each site and any other information used to support the NPL
listing of the site. These documents are available online at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>.
C. What documents are available for review at the EPA regional dockets?
The EPA regional dockets contain all the information in the
headquarters docket, plus the actual documents referenced in the
documentation record containing the data principally relied upon by the
EPA in calculating or evaluating the HRS score. These reference
documents are available only in the regional dockets.
D. How do I access the documents?
You may view the documents that support this rule online at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> or by contacting the EPA headquarters docket or
appropriate regional docket. See FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section in the beginning portion of this preamble for docket contact
information. The hours of operation for the headquarters docket are
from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding federal
holidays. Please contact the individual regional dockets for hours. For
addresses for the headquarters and regional dockets, see ADDRESSES
section in the beginning portion of this preamble.
E. How may I obtain a current list of NPL sites?
You may obtain a current list of NPL sites online at <a href="https://www.epa.gov/superfund/national-priorities-list-npl-sites-site-name">https://www.epa.gov/superfund/national-priorities-list-npl-sites-site-name</a>.
III. Contents of This Final Rule
A. Additions to the NPL
This final rule adds the following site to the General Superfund
section of the NPL. This site is being added to the NPL based on an HRS
score of 28.50 or above.
General Superfund Section
------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Site name City/county
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MI................ Gelman Sciences Inc...... Ann Arbor.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. What did the EPA do with the public comments it received?
The EPA is adding one site to the National Priorities List (NPL) in
this final rule. The Gelman Sciences Inc. site in Ann Arbor, MI was
proposed for addition to the NPL on March 7, 2024 (89 FR 16498). The
public comment period on the proposed rule to add this site to the NPL
closed on May 6, 2024.
The EPA reviewed and considered all public comments received
following the proposed rule publication and responded to all comments
in Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OLEM-2024-0067 (Gelman Sciences Inc., MI).
Through the process of addressing the public comments received on
proposing the Site to the NPL, the EPA is proceeding with adding the
Gelman Sciences Inc. site to the NPL through this final rule. The
public comments received on the proposal of the Gelman Sciences Inc.
site to the NPL are being addressed in a response to comment support
document that has been made available in the public docket concurrently
with rule. To view the compilation of public comments received on the
proposal of the Gelman Sciences Inc. site to the NPL, as well as EPA's
response to these comments, please refer to the support document
available at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>, Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OLEM-
2024-0067.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at <a href="https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders">https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders</a>.
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
This action is not a significant regulatory action and was
therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget
(``OMB'') for review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the PRA. This rule does not contain any information collection
requirements that require approval of the OMB.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This
action will not impose any requirements on small entities. This rule
listing sites on the NPL does not impose any obligations on any group,
including small entities. This rule also does not establish standards
or requirements that any small entity must meet and imposes no direct
costs on any small entity. Whether an entity, small or otherwise, is
liable for response costs for a release of hazardous substances depends
on whether that entity is liable under CERCLA section 107(a). Any such
liability exists regardless of whether the site is listed on the NPL
through this rulemaking.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. This action imposes no enforceable duty on any
state, local or Tribal governments or the private sector. Listing a
site on the NPL does not itself impose any costs. Listing does not mean
that the EPA necessarily will undertake remedial action. Nor does
listing require any action by a private party, state, local or Tribal
governments or determine liability for response costs. Costs that arise
out of site responses result from future site-specific decisions
regarding what actions to take, not directly from the act of placing a
site on the NPL.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This final rule does not have federalism implications. It will not
have substantial direct 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.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This action does not have Tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175. Listing a site on the NPL
[[Page 12308]]
does not impose any costs on a Tribe or require a Tribe to take
remedial action. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this
action.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks
The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks
that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect
children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in
section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to
Executive Order 13045 because this action itself is procedural in
nature (adds sites to a list) and does not, in and of itself, provide
protection from environmental health and safety risks. Separate future
regulatory actions are required for mitigation of environmental health
and safety risks.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.
J. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
This action is subject to the CRA, and the EPA will submit a rule
report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of
the United States. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2). Provisions of the CRA may alter the effective date of
this regulation. Under 5 U.S.C. 801(b)(1), a rule shall not take
effect, or continue in effect, if Congress enacts (and the President
signs) a joint resolution of disapproval, described under section 802.
If action by Congress under the CRA calls the effective date of this
regulation into question, the EPA will publish a document of
clarification in the Federal Register.
K. Executive Order 14192: Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation
This rulemaking is not subject to Executive Order 14192 (90 FR
9065, February 6, 2025) because it is not a significant regulatory
action subject to OMB review. This rulemaking is published in
accordance with direction provided in CERCLA to address the cleanup of
the Nation's most highly contaminated sites.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Chemicals,
Hazardous substances, Hazardous waste, Intergovernmental relations,
Natural resources, Oil pollution, Penalties, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Superfund, Water pollution control, Water
supply.
John Busterud,
Assistant Administrator, Office of Land and Emergency Management.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part
300, of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 300--NATIONAL OIL AND HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES POLLUTION
CONTINGENCY PLAN
0
1. The authority citation for part 300 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 9601-9657; E.O.
13626, 77 FR 56749, 3 CFR, 2013 Comp., p. 306; E.O. 12777, 56 FR
54757, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR 2923, 3 CFR,
1987 Comp., p. 193.
0
2. In appendix B to part 300, table 1 is amended by adding the entry
``MI, Gelman Sciences Inc.'' in alphabetical order to read as follows:
Appendix B to Part 300--National Priorities List
Table 1--General Superfund Section
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Site name City/county Notes \a\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
MI................................ Gelman Sciences Inc..... Ann Arbor...............
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ 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).
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2026-04904 Filed 3-12-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on March 13, 2026.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.