![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
National Oil and Hazardous Substances Contingency Plan; National Priorities List
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: July 28, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 144)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 44270-44273]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr28jy03-28]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 300
[FRL-7535-8]
National Oil and Hazardous Substances Contingency Plan; National
Priorities List
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Notice of intent to delete the Gurley Pit Superfund Site from
the National Priorities List.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 6 announces
its intent to delete the Gurley Pit Superfund Site (Site) from the
National Priorities List (NPL) and requests public comments on this
proposed deletion. The NPL constitutes Appendix B of the National Oil
and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), 40 CFR part
300, which EPA promulgated pursuant to section 105 of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980
(CERCLA), as amended. The EPA and the Arkansas Department of
Environmental Quality (ADEQ) have determined that the remedial actions
for the Site have been successfully executed, that all appropriate
Fund-financed responses under CERCLA have been implemented, and that no
further response action by responsible parties is appropriate.
DATES: Written public comments concerning this proposed deletion must
be received by EPA by August 27, 2003.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to: Mr. Donn R. Walters, Community
Involvement Coordinator (6SF-P), U.S. EPA, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue,
Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, (214) 665-6483 or 1-800-533-3508.
Comprehensive information on this Site has been compiled in a
public docket which is available for viewing at the Site information
repositories:
U.S. EPA Region 6 Library (6MD-II), 12th Floor, 1445 Ross Avenue,
Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, (214) 665-6424 or 665-6427; Hours of
Operation: 7:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday, excluding
holidays.
Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality, Attn: Mr. Kim Siew, 8001
National Drive, Little Rock, Arkansas 72219, (501) 682-0855; Hours of
Operation: 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday, excluding
holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Ernest R. Franke, P.E., Remedial
Project Manager (6SF-AP), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region
6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, (214) 665-8521 or 1-800-
533-3508.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. NPL Deletion Criteria
III. Deletion Procedures
IV. Basis For Intended Site Deletion
I. Introduction
The U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 6 announces
its intent to delete the Gurley Pit Superfund Site (Site), Edmondson,
Crittenden County, Arkansas, from the National Priorities List (NPL),
which constitutes appendix B of the National Oil and Hazardous
Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), 40 CFR part 300, and
requests comments on this proposed deletion. The EPA identifies sites
that appear to present a significant risk to public health, welfare, or
the environment, and maintains the NPL as the list of those sites.
Sites on the NPL may be the subject of remedial actions financed by the
Hazardous Substance Superfund Response Trust Fund (Fund). The EPA and
the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) have determined
that the remedial actions for the Gurley Pit Site have been
successfully completed. Pursuant to Sec. 300.425(e)(3) of the NCP, any
site deleted from the NPL remains eligible for Fund-financed remedial
actions if future conditions at the deleted site warrant such action.
The EPA will accept comments on the proposal to delete this Site
for thirty (30) days after the publication of this document in the
Federal Register.
Section II of this notice explains the criteria for deleting sites
from the NPL. Section III discusses the procedures that EPA is using
for this action. Section IV discusses the history of the Site and
explains how the Site meets the deletion criteria.
II. NPL Deletion Criteria
The NCP establishes the criteria that EPA uses to delete sites from
the NPL. In accordance with NCP Sec. 300.425(e)(1), sites may be
deleted from or recategorized on the NPL where no further response is
appropriate. In determining whether to delete a site 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 response under CERCLA has been
implemented, and no further response action by responsible parties is
appropriate; or
(iii) The remedial investigation has shown that the release poses
no significant threat to public health or the environment and,
therefore, taking of remedial measures is not appropriate.
Deletion of a site from the NPL does not preclude eligibility for
subsequent Fund-financed actions if future site conditions warrant such
action. Whenever there is a significant release from a site deleted
from the NPL, the deleted site shall be restored to the NPL without
application of the Hazard Ranking System.
The NPL is designed primarily for information purposes and to
assist EPA management. Deletion of a site from the NPL does not itself
create, alter, or revoke any person's rights or obligations.
III. Deletion Procedures
The following procedures were used for the proposed deletion of
this Site:
(1) All appropriate response actions for the Site under CERCLA have
been implemented, and no further action by EPA is appropriate.
(2) The EPA Region 6 has recommended deletion and has prepared the
relevant documents.
(3) The State of Arkansas, Arkansas Department of Environmental
Quality (ADEQ), has concurred by letter dated October 11, 1999, with
the proposed deletion.
(4) Concurrently with this Notice of Intent to Delete, a notice is
being published in a local newspaper and is being distributed to
appropriate federal, state, and local officials and other interested
parties. The local notice announces the 30-day public comment period
and the availability of this Notice of Intent to Delete for review.
(5) The EPA has made all relevant documents available in the Site
information repositories.
The EPA will consider comments received during the 30-day public
comment period before making a final decision concerning the proposed
deletion. If necessary, EPA will prepare a Responsiveness Summary to
address concerns raised by the comments received during the public
comment period. EPA responds to each significant comment and any
significant new data submitted during a public comment period. If it is
necessary to prepare a Responsiveness Summary, it will be made
available to the public at the information repositories, and members of
the public may contact EPA Region
[[Page 44271]]
6 to obtain a copy of the Responsiveness Summary, when available.
Deletion of a site from the NPL occurs when the Regional
Administrator of an EPA region publishes a final notice of deletion in
the Federal Register. Generally, the NPL will reflect deletions in the
final update following the Notice.
IV. Basis for Intended Site Deletion
The following summary provides EPA's rationale for the proposal to
delete the Gurley Pit Superfund Site from the NPL.
Site History and Background
The Gurley Pit Site is located 1.2 miles north of the community of
Edmondson, Arkansas, which has a population of 286 residents. It is
surrounded on one side by a small residential community and on three
sides by farmland. The Site is in Crittenden County, northwest of the
intersection of County Road 14, County Road 175, and State Highway 131.
The facility is situated in the flood plain of Fifteen Mile Bayou,
which is approximately 400 feet south of the Site, and has five
residences within a half-mile circular radius.
There are three major ground water aquifers within Crittenden
County, which are found at depths of 40 to 200 feet, 300 to 1125 feet,
and 1400 to 1700 feet. The deepest aquifer is used for all municipal
wells. The middle aquifer is comparatively undeveloped, and the shallow
aquifer is used for domestic wells. Due to the water quality, most of
the domestic wells found in the shallow aquifer are used for
agricultural irrigation purposes. The residences surrounding the Gurley
Pit Site obtain their drinking water from the Midway Water Association
well located in the deep (1,585 feet) aquifer, which is 2.2 miles
southeast of the Site.
The Site originally consisted of one large pit which was excavated
for the clay material found in this area. Gurley Refining Co., Inc.,
subsequently leased the property in 1970 from Robert Caldwell for use
as a disposal area. The Site pit was divided into three cells for
disposal of sludges from the refining of used oil, with major
contaminants including lead, barium, zinc, and polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCBs). Waste disposal operations were permitted under
specified conditions by the ADPC&E, now known as ADEQ, from 1970 until
1975, when Gurley Refining Co., Inc., notified the State that disposal
at the Site had stopped.
There were two releases from the pit in 1978 and 1979 requiring
response actions by EPA. It is estimated that as much as 500,000
gallons of oil were released during the second event. The Site was
proposed for inclusion on the NPL in December 1982 and was listed in
August 1983. Several attempts were made by EPA to get the potentially
responsible parties (PRPs) to conduct the Remedial Investigation,
Feasibility Study, Remedial Design, and Remedial Action. However, the
PRPs failed to take any action, and Superfund monies were used to
perform the needed actions. In 1992, the United States was awarded a
judgment against Mr. William Gurley and Mr. Larry Gurley for past
response costs associated with the Site and a declaratory judgment for
all future costs. The United States is continuing efforts to recover
all Site response costs.
Response Actions
After reviewing the results of the Remedial Investigations and
Feasibility Studies, EPA issued two decision documents for the Site.
The project was divided into source control and ground water operable
units. The Enforcement Decision Document, which was signed October 6,
1986, addressed source control and included the following major
components:
? Solidification of contaminated sludge, sediments, and soil,
and placement of the solidified material in a Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) compliant vault located in the north cell, and
? Placement of appropriate monitoring wells, and long-term
operation and maintenance (O&M) of the RCRA vault and the monitoring
wells.
The ground water operable unit investigation culminated in a Record
of Decision (ROD) dated September 26, 1988, and concluded that no
further action was necessary provided the source control measures in
the Enforcement Decision Document were implemented.
During the Remedial Design of the source control operable unit, it
was determined that an insignificant change to the Enforcement Decision
Document was desirable from a cost and construction standpoint. The
location of the RCRA vault was moved from the north cell toward the
south; this was more cost effective because the north cell had
approximately 85 percent of the contaminated materials. Using the north
cell as a temporary holding cell for all the contaminated material
during construction reduced the volume of contaminated material which
had to be handled prior to construction of the RCRA vault. This saved
EPA and ADEQ the costs of unnecessary handling and reduced the
potential for spillage during handling operations. In addition, this
approach allowed EPA to address concerns of ADEQ about the overall
height of the RCRA vault by allowing the vault to be spread out over a
larger surface area.
In 1992, the EPA began implementation of the Remedial Action
pursuant to a Superfund State Contract with ADEQ. EPA Region 6
determined during the Remedial Design phase that this Site represented
a potential opportunity for implementation of an affirmative action
approach wherein a woman-owned or minority business could conduct the
work. Through the direction of EPA, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) entered into negotiations with the Small Business
Administration, and a contract was awarded to a minority business,
Mobley Contractors, Inc., on July 31, 1992. The Notice to Proceed was
issued on September 9, 1992. Mobilization was on October 26, 1992, and
full-scale construction commenced on November 13, 1992.
Remedial construction activities were conducted as planned, and no
additional areas of contamination were identified. EPA, ADEQ, and USACE
conducted a pre-final inspection of the construction at the Site on
August 12, 1994, and conducted a final inspection on August 31, 1994. A
September 12, 1994, letter from EPA to USACE certified that the
Remedial Action construction activities were performed according to the
Remedial Design, with only minor modifications.
The Enforcement Decision Document and the ROD also called for
monitoring of the ground water; leachate sampling and analysis and
removal; and maintenance of the sumps and the perimeter fencing. Six
new monitoring wells (MW-A through MW-F) were installed and developed
on-site during the Remedial Action, and two existing off-site
monitoring wells (MW-30 & MW-31) also were monitored in each of the
sampling events. The source control Remedial Action has protected the
ground water and human health through containment of the source. Ground
water monitoring data for the Site indicates that contaminants from the
pit have not migrated through the subsurface into the ground water,
supporting EPA's decision not to conduct any separate remediation of
the ground water.
After the construction of the RCRA vault, the Site entered the
operational and functional phase of the Remedial Action. In September
1995, there was a significant volume of liquid in the detection and
collection systems. The ADEQ was concerned that this water indicated
the liner was damaged during
[[Page 44272]]
landfill construction. Measurements were made which indicated that the
water was approximately eight feet in depth, but the total volume of
water within the cell was unknown. Due to the fact that pumping
activity was principally from the secondary leak detection sump and
given the existence of water from construction activities, it was
decided that the Site could not be considered to be operational and
functional.
Operational and functional is defined in NCP Sec. 300.435(f)(2) as
follows:
A remedy becomes ``operational and functional'' either one year
after construction is complete, or when the remedy is determined
concurrently by EPA and the State to be functioning properly and is
performing as designed, whichever is earlier. EPA may grant
extensions to the one-year period, as appropriate.
Based on the measurements of water described above, and in
accordance with NCP Section 300.435(f)(2), the one-year operational and
functional period was extended by the EPA. By means of an interagency
agreement with EPA, USACE continued remedial activities at the Site.
The USACE secured a contractor and installed a permanent electrical
supply box, flow meter, high and low pump limit switches, circuit and
wiring modifications for automated water pumping activities, and
project signs; USACE also arranged for Site mowing and other related
activities. In October of 1995, Halliburton Services was contracted to
cut additional slots into the sump pipes using a hydrojet. After the
slots were cut, the recharge of the water into the sump pipes increased
appreciably.
Pumping operations began May 20, 1996. A contractor, Griffin
Electric of West Memphis, Arkansas, installed a control system on one
of the pumps in March that would turn the pumps on and off
automatically according to the water levels in the sump pipe. A flow
totalizer was installed to record the amount of water removed from the
landfill. Operational shakedown and verification of system performance
were completed on July 11, 1997, and the system ran fully
automatically. As of July 29, 1998, the automated system had pumped an
additional 16,708 gallons. Pumping by the USACE continued until January
1999, with a decrease in the average pump rate over the course of the
USACE-conducted pumping.
The Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) program utilized
throughout the Remedial Action was sufficient to enable EPA, ADEQ and
USACE to determine that the testing results reported were accurate to
assure satisfactory completion of the Remedial Action consistent with
the Enforcement Decision Document. All previous sampling results from
the Remedial Investigation, Feasibility Study, and Remedial Design are
documented in the project files and also followed appropriate QA/QC
procedures.
Several types of data were collected over the course of the USACE-
conducted operational and functional activities, including recharge
rates to the sumps, volumetric data, hydraulic characteristics, ground
water elevations, and analytical data. Based upon this data, the final
engineering report prepared by USACE concluded that the Gurley Pit
landfill cell appears to be operational and functional as designed and
constructed. The following items support this conclusion:
? Pumping data demonstrates that the collection system is
capable of maintaining less than one foot of head above the bottom
liner system.
? Recharge rates into the detection and collection sumps
continued to decrease throughout the USACE pumping period, refuting the
possibility of a major influx of water table flow and/or recurring
rainwater into the cell during or between the pumping events.
? The volume of water pumped continued to decrease steadily
with each pumping event or work period, further negating concerns of
major infiltration of ground water and bearing evidence of minimum
rainfall permeability of the cell.
? The comparison of elevation data collected over the course
of the USACE work period does not indicate hydraulic communication
between the pumping water and the water bearing zone which is being
monitored.
? Contaminant concentrations have remained consistently low
and uniform in the ground water monitoring events.
Similarities in types of chemical constituents detected in the
samples collected by USACE in both the primary and secondary leachate
collection systems indicate that the two systems may be in hydraulic
communication; a general trend in the data was that the majority of the
water pumped was from the secondary containment system. However, while
it appears that there may be a leak in the primary liner which allows
water to move into the secondary containment system, there has been no
evidence of detectable contamination in the tested ground water.
As documented in the Final Close-Out Report, dated July 31, 1998,
EPA extensively reviewed applicable regulations and guidance to
evaluate the severity of the leakage problem. EPA's review supports the
determination that there is not a serious leak of the top or bottom
liner systems at the Site and that the Site remedy is fully operational
and functional, and this determination is also supported by the results
of the second five-year review for the Site, conducted in September
2002. The presence of water in the detection and collection systems
apparently resulted from heavy rainfall during construction of the
cell, which evidently saturated the sand drainage system in the cell,
but did not indicate any problems with the remedy or the integrity of
the cell. It also should be noted that landfill covers of this design
in similar climate conditions do leak to a limited extent. Moreover,
the solidified cell waste serves to further minimize leachate and
ensure a low-risk facility at the Site. Continued pumping of leachate
from the vault will be required throughout the operation and
maintenance (O&M) period to remove construction water and leachate as
they accumulate, and continued monitoring of the ground water
monitoring wells will also be needed. These activities are detailed in
ADEQ's O&M plan for which ADEQ has secured EPA's approval; the final
O&M and monitoring plan will be implemented by ADEQ.
CERCLA requires a five-year review of all sites with hazardous
substances remaining above the health-based levels for unrestricted use
of the site. A five-year review was required for this Site because the
selected remedy does not allow for unlimited use and unrestricted
exposure. The first five-year review was completed on January 9, 1997,
and a second five-year review was completed in September 2002. Ground
water sampling performed by EPA in 2002 confirmed EPA's determination
that the Site remedy is fully operational and functional. Further five-
year reviews will be conducted pursuant to OSWER Directive 9355.7-02A,
``Structure and Components of Five Year Reviews,'' and other applicable
guidance.
On July 31, 1998, the final Close-Out Report was signed in which
EPA, in consultation with ADEQ, concluded that all appropriate response
actions required to ensure the protectiveness of human health and the
environment at the Gurley Pit Superfund Site had been implemented.
Long-term O&M of the ground water wells and the RCRA vault will be
under the direction of ADEQ.
All the completion requirements for this Site have been met as
specified in OSWER Directive 9320.2-09A, ``Close Out Procedures for
National Priorities List Sites.'' Confirmatory sampling conducted
during the second five-year review has verified that the ROD and
Enforcement Decision Document
[[Page 44273]]
objectives have been achieved and that all actions specified have been
implemented. Pursuant to the Superfund State Contract between EPA and
ADEQ executed in March 1992, ADEQ agreed to assume full responsibility
for performing Site O&M activities, and the State subsequently agreed
to begin those O&M activities after the sampling performed by EPA in
2002. EPA will be providing oversight of all O&M activities.
One of the three criteria for site deletion specifies that EPA may
delete a site from the NPL if ``all appropriate Fund-financed response
under CERCLA has been implemented, and no further response action by
responsible parties is appropriate.'' 40 CFR 300.425(e)(1)(ii). EPA,
with the concurrence of the State of Arkansas, believes that this
criterion for deletion has been met. Accordingly, EPA is proposing
deletion of this Site from the NPL.
Dated: June 23, 2003.
Myron O. Knudson,
P.E., Director, Superfund Division (6SF).
[FR Doc. 03-19006 Filed 7-25-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P