![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan; National Priorities List
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: August 4, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 149)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 47068-47072]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr04au04-29]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 300
[FRL-7795-8]
National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan;
National Priorities List
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Notice of intent to delete the Agriculture Street Landfill
Superfund Site from the National Priorities List and request for
comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 6
announces its intent to delete the Agriculture Street Landfill
Superfund Site (``the site'') from the National Priorities List (NPL)
and requests public comment on this proposed action.
The NPL, promulgated pursuant to section 105 of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of
1980, as amended, constitutes Appendix B of 40 CFR part 300 which is
the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan
(NCP). The EPA, in consultation with the State of Louisiana, through
the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ), has
determined that the removal action for thesite has been successfully
executed.
DATES: The EPA will accept comments concerning the proposed deletion of
this site until September 3, 2004, and a newspaper of general
circulation.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to: Ms. Janetta Coats, Community
Involvement Coordinator, EPA (6SF-PO), 1445 Ross Ave., Dallas, Texas
75202-2733, (214) 665-7308 or 1-800-533-3508 (toll free).
Information Repositories: Comprehensive information on the site has
been compiled in a public docket which is available for viewing at the
Agriculture Street Landfill Superfund Site information repositories:
EPA Region 6, 7th Floor Reception Area, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite
1200, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, (214) 665-6548, Mon.-Fri. 8 a.m. to 4
p.m.
Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality, 602 N. Fifth Street,
Public Records Center--Room 127, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70802, (225)
219-3168, Mon.-Fri. 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
Norman Mayer Gentilly Library Branch, 2098 Foy Street, New Orleans,
Louisiana 70122, Mr. Damian Lambert/Branch Manager, (504) 596-2644, Mon
& Wed: 10 a.m.-5 p.m., Tue & Thurs: 10 a.m.-6 p.m., Sat: 10 a.m.-5 p.m.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Ursula R. Lennox, Remedial Project
Manager, EPA (6SF-LP), 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733,
(214) 665-6743 or 1-800-533-3508 (Toll Free).
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 Agriculture Street Landfill Superfund Site
from the National Priorities List (NPL), Appendix B of the National Oil
and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), Code of
Federal Regulations, title 40 (40 CFR), part 300, and requests public
comments on the proposed
[[Page 47069]]
action. The NPL constitutes Appendix B of the NCP, which EPA
promulgated pursuant to Section 105 of the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended.
EPA and the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ) have
determined that the removal action for the site has been successfully
executed. Operable Units No. 1, 2, and 3 (OU1, OU2, and OU3, the
undeveloped property, residential area, and Shirley Jefferson Community
Center, respectively) are included in 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. As described in Sec. 300.425(e)(3) of the
NCP, sites or portions of sites deleted from the NPL remain eligible
for remedial actions in the unlikely event that site conditions warrant
such action.
The EPA will accept comments concerning its intent to delete the
site for thirty (30) days after publication of this notice. The EPA has
also published a notice of the availability of this notice of intent to
delete in a major newspaper of general circulation at or near the site.
Section II of this notice explains the criteria for deleting sites
from the NPL. Section III discusses procedures that EPA is using for
this action. Section IV discusses the Agriculture Street Landfill
Superfund site and demonstrates how the site meets the deletion
criteria.
II. NPL Deletion Criteria
Section 300.425(e) of the NCP provides that releases may be deleted
from, or recategorized on the NPL where no further response is
appropriate. In making a determination to delete a release from the
NPL, EPA shall consider, in consultation with the State, whether any of
the following criteria have been met:
i. Responsible parties or other parties have implemented all
appropriate response actions required;
ii. All appropriate Fund-financed response under CERCLA has been
implemented, and no further action by responsible parties is
appropriate; or
iii. The remedial investigation has shown that the release poses no
significant threat to public health or the environment and, therefore,
taking of remedial measures is not appropriate.
Even if a site is deleted from the NPL, where hazardous substances,
pollutants, or contaminants remain at the site above levels that allow
for unlimited use and unrestricted exposure, CERCLA section 121(c), 42
U.S.C. 9621(c) requires that a subsequent review of the site be
conducted at least every five years after the initiation of the
remedial action at the site to ensure that the action remains
protective of public health and the environment. If new information
becomes available which indicates a need for further action, EPA may
initiate remedial actions. Whenever there is a significant release from
a site deleted from the NPL, the site may be restored to the NPL
without application of the Hazard Ranking System.
In the case of this site, all appropriate Fund-financed response
under CERCLA has been implemented, and no further action by responsible
parties is appropriate. Consistent with the State Superfund Contract,
LDEQ will conduct an annual inspection. EPA has conducted the first
five-year review of the site, finding that the response actions
implemented are protective of human health and the environment. The EPA
may also perform future five-year reviews.
III. Deletion Procedures
The following procedures were used for the intended deletion of the
site:
(1) EPA Region 6 issued a Record of Decision on April 4, 2002,
which documented that no further remedial action is necessary to ensure
protection of human health and the environment for the Agriculture
Street Landfill site;
(2) LDEQ, on behalf of the State of Louisiana, concurred by letter
dated April 2, 2002, with EPA's decision that no action was necessary
for the site. LDEQ stated by letter dated May 11, 2004, that deletion
from the NPL was appropriate;
(3) A notice has been published in the local newspaper and has been
distributed to appropriate Federal, State, and local officials and
other interested parties announcing the availability of the notice of
intent to delete and the commencement of a 30-day public comment
period; and,
(4) EPA placed copies of documents supporting the proposed deletion
in the site information repositories identified above.
Deletion of a site from the NPL does not itself create, alter, or
revoke any individual's rights or obligations. The NPL is designed
primarily for informational purposes and to assist Agency management.
As mentioned in section II of this notice, section 300.425(e)(3) of the
NCP states that the deletion of a site from the NPL does not preclude
eligibility for future response actions, should future conditions
warrant such actions.
This Federal Register notice, and a concurrent notice in a
newspaper of record, announce the initiation of a thirty (30) day
public comment period and the availability of the notice of intent to
delete. The public is asked to comment on EPA's proposal to delete the
site from the NPL. All critical documents needed to evaluate EPA's
decision are included in the Deletion Docket and are available for
review at the information repositories.
Upon completion of the thirty (30) day public comment period, EPA
will evaluate all comments received before issuing the final decision
on the deletion. The EPA will prepare a Responsiveness Summary for
comments received during the public comment period and will address
concerns presented in the comments. The Responsiveness Summary will be
made available to the public at the information repositories listed
previously, and members of the public are encouraged to review it. If,
after review of all public comments, EPA determines that the deletion
from the NPL is appropriate, EPA will publish a final notice of
deletion in the Federal Register. Deletion of the site does not
actually occur until the final notice of deletion is published in the
Federal Register.
IV. Basis for Intended Site Deletion
The following information provides the Agency's rationale for the
proposal to delete the site from the NPL and EPA's finding that the
criteria in 40 CFR 300.425(e) are satisfied.
A. Site Location
The Agriculture Street Landfill Superfund Site (site) covers
approximately 95 acres and is located in the eastern section of the
city of New Orleans. The site is bound on the north by Higgins
Boulevard, and on the south and west by the Southern Railroad rights-
of-way. The eastern site boundary extends from the cul-de-sac at the
southern end of Clouet Street, near the railroad tracks, to Higgins
Boulevard between Press and Montegut streets. Approximately 48 acres
are undeveloped property. The other 47 acres are developed with
multiple- and single-family residences, commercial properties, a
community center, and a school.
To effectively investigate and develop alternatives for the
remediation of the site, EPA divided the site into five operable units
(OUs):
? OU1--The undeveloped (currently fenced-in) property;
? OU2--The residential development which consists of the
Gordon Plaza Apartments (128 units), 7 retail businesses, 67 single
family dwellings
[[Page 47070]]
in Gordon Plaza subdivision, and the Press Park town homes (179
properties);
? OU3--Shirley Jefferson Community Center (formerly known as
Press Park Community Center);
? OU4--Moton Elementary School which includes Mugrauer
Playground; and,
? OU5--Groundwater.
B. Site Background and History
The Agriculture Street Landfill was a municipal waste landfill
operated by the City of New Orleans. Operations at the site began in
approximately 1909 and continued until the landfill was closed in the
late 1950's. The landfill was reopened for approximately one year in
1965 for use as an open burning and disposal area for debris left in
the wake of Hurricane Betsy. Records indicate that during its operation
the landfill received municipal waste, ash from the city's incineration
of municipal waste, and debris and ash from open burning. There is no
evidence that industrial or chemical wastes were ever transported to,
or disposed of at, the site.
From the 1970's through the late 1980's, approximately 47 acres of
the site were developed for private and public uses that included:
Private single-family homes, multiple-family private and public housing
units, Shirley Jefferson Community Center, a recreation center, retail
businesses, the Moton Elementary School, and an electrical substation.
The remaining 48 acres of the former landfill are currently undeveloped
and covered with vegetation. Previous investigations on the undeveloped
property have indicated the presence of hazardous substances,
pollutants, or contaminants at concentrations above background and/or
regulatory levels.
In 1986, EPA Region 6 conducted a Site Inspection and prepared a
Hazard Ranking System (HRS) documentation record package utilizing the
1982 HRS model. The site score was not sufficient for the site to be
considered for proposal and inclusion on the NPL. Pursuant to the
requirements of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of
1986 (SARA), which amended the original Superfund legislation, EPA
published a revised HRS model on December 14, 1990. At the request of
area community leaders, EPA initiated, in September 1993, an Expanded
Site Inspection (ESI) to support the preparation of an updated HRS
documentation record package that would evaluate the site's risks using
the revised HRS model. Subsequently, on August 23, 1994, the site was
proposed for inclusion on the NPL as part of NPL update No. 17, and on
December 16, 1994, EPA placed the site on the NPL.
Prior to 1994, access to OU1, the undeveloped portion of the former
landfill, was unrestricted, allowing unauthorized waste disposal and
exposure to contaminants of potential concern such as lead, arsenic and
carcinogenic polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (cPAHs) found in the
surface and subsurface soils. In a time-critical removal action,
initiated in March 1994, EPA installed an 8-foot-high, chain-link fence
topped with barbed wire around the entire undeveloped portion of the
former landfill.
Concurrent with the time-critical removal action, EPA performed a
Remedial Removal Integrated Investigation (RRII) of the entire site.
RRII fieldwork was conducted from April 4 through June 20, 1994. A
total of 1,600 samples of surface and subsurface soil, sediment,
surface water, groundwater, air, dust, tap water, garden produce, and
paint chips collected during the field investigation were submitted to
specialized laboratories for analysis. Aerial photographs, geophysical
investigations and computer modeling were used to supplement the
analytical data in defining site boundaries and evaluating migration
pathways. These data were also used to prepare the Human Health Risk
Assessment and the Ecological Risk Assessment.
In the 1995 Risk Assessment, risks were evaluated using current
site conditions at all five operable units for four receptors:
residents (adult and children), workers, and trespassers. Health risks
were evaluated for the developed portions of the former landfill--the
residential area (including 33 randomly selected study group
residences) and the Shirley Jefferson Community Center--as well as for
the undeveloped portion of the site. Current and potential future
exposure route scenarios included ingestion of soil, homegrown produce,
and ground water; dermal contact with soil and ground water; inhalation
of contaminants in soil, and in indoor and outdoor air; and inhalation
of volatile contaminants in ground water. The risk assessment was
conducted for both carcinogenic and noncarcinogenic health effects,
evaluating landfill-related contaminants as well as non-site related
contaminants (e.g., garden pesticides, chloroform in indoor air, etc.).
In addition, the IEUBK model was used to evaluate the potential for
health effects from lead.
The 1995 Human Health Risk Assessment for the site determined that
of all the chemicals detected, lead was the only chemical of concern
that exceeded the threshold levels for protectiveness of human health
in a current land use scenario. The risks from all other chemicals were
within the acceptable risk range or below levels of concern.
Based on information presented in the RRII report, EPA conducted a
second time-critical removal action at the site in February 1995, and
performed confirmational air and groundwater sampling. Through this
sampling event, EPA was able to obtain a second round of analyses of
the groundwater, to clarify earlier identified ambient air
contaminants, and to verify composition and magnitude of indoor air
contaminants. In 1995, EPA prepared an Engineering Evaluation and Cost
Analysis examining response action alternatives for Operable Units 1-3.
On September 2, 1997, the EPA Region 6 signed a Record of Decision
(ROD) and an Action Memorandum to achieve a comprehensive remedy for
the site that was protective of public health and the environment. The
ROD concluded that no further action was required at OU4 and OU5, and
recommended that both operable units be deleted from the NPL. The
Action Memorandum provided a permanent solution to all of the site's
contamination problems found on OU1, OU2 and OU3.
A Notice of Intent for Partial Deletion of OU4 and OU5 from the NPL
was published in the Federal Register on February 7, 2000. A 30-day
public comment period on the Notice of Intent for Partial Deletion
started February 7, 2000, and concluded March 17, 2000. The Notice for
Partial Deletion of OU4 and OU5 was published in the Federal Register
on June 15, 2000.
C. Response Actions
The Action Memorandum issued on September 2, 1997, authorized
funding for a Non-Time Critical Removal Action on OUs l, 2, and 3. The
removal action on OUl consisted generally of clearing the 48-acre area,
grading it to direct storm water runoff away from the adjacent
residential area, laying a permeable geotextile mat followed with
orange fencing (to serve as a highly visible marker), covering the mat/
marker with twelve inches of clean fill, and re-establishing a
vegetative layer on the clean fill.
The removal action on OU2 and 3 consisted generally of excavating
twenty-four inches of soil, placing a permeable geotextile mat/marker
in the subgrade, backfilling the excavated area with clean fill, and
covering the clean fill with grass sod. In certain areas,
[[Page 47071]]
surface features such as fences, driveways, sidewalks, etc., were
removed in the course of excavation; once the basic excavation and
backfill were completed, such surface features were restored or
replaced. The selected response action for these operable units is
consistent with soil removal and remedial actions performed at
residential/industrial properties located on or near Superfund sites.
Numerous attempts were made to encourage the city of New Orleans,
which is the primary potentially responsible party (PRP) for this site,
to perform or finance site investigations, or provide in-kind services
for the response actions planned for OUl, OU2, and OU3. Evidence of
this effort is highlighted in the site's Administrative Record. The PRP
asserted that it was unable to fund any of the requested actions. As a
result, EPA used funds from the Hazardous Substance Superfund to
finance the RRII, Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis, and all other
investigative and response actions.
The removal action was scheduled to start in January 1998, but EPA
delayed mobilization until October 1998 to address litigation and
additional community concerns. Site work began on OU1, where the
highest concentrations of contaminants were found, and at the Gordon
Plaza Apartments on OU2. All but one of the property owners on OU1
granted access to EPA, signing standard access agreements. The City of
New Orleans, which owned undeveloped street extensions in strips criss-
crossing portions of OU1, refused access. After repeated attempts to
secure the City's consent for access to conduct the response action,
EPA issued a Unilateral Administrative Order to the City of New Orleans
on February 25, 1999. The City responded by filing suit against EPA to
halt the response action, and secured a temporary restraining order
from the U.S. District Court. The City's lawsuit was subsequently
dismissed and on April 1, 1999, the district court issued an order in
aid of access in favor of EPA.
The removal action continued to completion on OU1 and OU3 and most
of OU2. Specifically, within OU2, the removal action was conducted at
the Gordon Plaza Apartments, the retail and business area, the Press
Park Townhomes, and twenty-five of the single family residences in
Gordon Plaza Subdivision. At the conclusion of Phase I site activities,
a final site inspection was performed by EPA and LDEQ on February 2,
2000. Approximately 95.5% of the surface area of the site was
addressed. The remaining 4.5% consisted of forty-two residential
properties whose owners elected not to participate in the removal
action.
In June 2000, some of the single family homeowners who had not
participated in the removal action expressed concern about problems
encountered with transferring contaminated property and requested that
EPA consider removal action on additional properties on the site. After
review of the work that had already been completed, and an initial
assessment of the number of homeowners who might be interested in
participating, the EPA re-mobilized to the site in August 2000 to
initiate Phase II of the removal action.
As part of community relations activities at the site, EPA
designated a Resident Services Manager on-site to field questions,
discuss issues, and otherwise attend to residents' concerns during on-
site activities. During Phase II of the removal action, EPA, through
personal contacts by the Resident Services Manager and through a
succession of bulletins and letters to the community, attempted to
secure access to the 42 properties upon which the action had not been
conducted. Access agreements were accepted at the EPA Command Post,
located in the Shirley Jefferson Community Center on-site, throughout
most of Phase II of the removal action. By letter of January 2001, EPA
notified non-participating homeowners of the projected schedule for
demobilization and afforded them one final opportunity to participate,
requesting that all access agreements be signed and returned to EPA by
January 22, 2001. At the conclusion of Phase II, the non-time critical
removal action had been implemented at all but nine residential
properties. The EPA and LDEQ performed a final site inspection on April
27, 2001.
At the conclusion of each phase, a Close Out Completion Package was
provided to each owner of property in OU1, OU2 or OU3 who participated
in the removal action. The package contained:
? A Close Out Letter;
? A Certificate of Completion; and
? Instructions on how to maintain the permeable cap,
including instructions for any necessary excavation below the
geotextile mat/marker.
Owners of properties that were not part of the response action
received a letter and fact sheet from EPA stating that maintaining the
surface vegetation will minimize the potential exposure to contaminants
in the subsurface soils and will prevent soil erosion.
A Final Close Out Report and ROD for OU1, OU2, and OU3 were signed
by EPA in April 2002. The response actions described above were found
to have addressed the unacceptable risks posed by site contaminants,
and EPA determined that no further action was necessary to protect
public health and welfare or the environment for OU1, OU2 and OU3.
D. Cleanup Standards
For purposes of evaluating whether soils in OU1, OU2, and OU3
presented a potential risk, EPA Region 6 Risk Based Concentrations
(RBCs) were used as a screening tool to identify areas that may require
action. The RBCs were exceeded in many locations in OU1, OU2, and OU3.
RBCs are not regulations or guidance; however, they can be used to
evaluate potential remedial requirements if the following criteria are
met:
? A single medium is contaminated;
? A single contaminant contributes most of the health risk;
? The exposure scenarios used in the development of RBCs are
appropriate for the site;
? The fixed risk levels used in the development of RBCs are
appropriate for site; and
? Risk to ecological receptors is not expected to be
significant.
Although more than one contaminant (arsenic and dioxin) contributed
significantly to the potential estimated excess cancer risks for
residential receptors at the site, the site met the other criteria
listed above. As a result, the Region 6 RBCs were used to evaluate
areas requiring potential removal actions. In addition to the RBCs, the
level of concern for lead was determined by using the IEUBK model to
calculate the concentration of lead in soil that corresponds to a
probability of 5% of exposed children exceeding a blood lead level of
10 [mu]/dL. Arithmetic mean concentrations of household dust samples
and tap water samples collected at the study group residences were used
as input parameters in the model. Standard default values were used in
the model for dietary lead and lead concentrations in air. The model
output indicated that a 5% probability of a child exceeding the target
blood lead level of 10 [mu]/dL occurs at a soil lead concentration of
480 mg/kg.
The response action that was implemented at the site:
? Prevents direct and indirect contact, ingestion, and
inhalation of soil and waste by a potentially exposed individual and
ecological receptors that contain contaminants of potential concerns
(COPCs), specifically lead and
[[Page 47072]]
arsenic, at concentrations that could pose unacceptable risks;
? Prevents the release of COPC-contaminated dust to the air
at concentrations that could adversely affect human health and the
environment;
? Is protective of human health and the environment; and
? Leaves the site in a condition that permits future use and
development.
E. Operation and Maintenance
The potential risk associated with the possible exposure to surface
soil contaminants was eliminated through the response action that was
implemented on OU1, OU2, and OU3.
All cleanup actions and other response measures identified in the
Action Memorandum dated September 2, 1997, were successfully
implemented on each OU, with the exception of nine residential
properties located in the Gordon Plaza Subdivision (OU2) where access
was not granted. The response measures were completed in accordance
with the Action Memorandum, the SOW, design documents, and Work Plans
formulated to implement the Action Memorandum. The constructed action
is operational and performing according to engineering design
specifications. Operation and maintenance activities, including
maintenance of the cap and vegetative cover, should be continued by
each individual property owner with property on OU1, OU2, or OU3. In
addition to advising all property owners where response actions had
occurred about proper maintenance procedures, EPA coordinated with the
utility companies serving the area and conducted a field demonstration
of excavation and backfill procedures. Copies of maintenance procedures
were provided to property owners and utility companies.
Those property owners who elected not to participate in the
response action were instructed to maintain the surface vegetation to
minimize the potential exposure to contaminants in the subsurface soils
and prevent soil erosion.
F. Five-Year Review
Previous response actions implemented on OU1, OU2, and OU3, have
eliminated the need for further remedial response on these operable
units. Thus, no further remedial actions for OU1, OU2, and OU3 are
necessary to ensure protection of human health and the environment. The
selected remedy complies with Federal and State requirements that are
applicable or relevant and appropriate to the response action, is cost-
effective, and utilizes permanent solutions.
Because hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants remain
onsite in subsurface soil (below one and two feet), above levels that
allow unlimited use and unrestricted exposure, as a matter of policy,
EPA conducted a five year review, to ensure that the implemented action
is protective of human health and the environment. As a commitment to
the community, the first policy five-year review was conducted June
2003. It concluded that the remedy selected for the site remains
protective of human health and the environment.
G. Community Involvement
Public participation activities have been satisfied as required in
CERCLA section 113(k), 42 U.S.C. 9613(k), and section 117, 42 U.S.C.
9617. Documents in the deletion docket which EPA relied on for
recommendation of the deletion from the NPL are available to the public
in the information repositories.
H. Applicable Deletion Criteria
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). The
EPA, with concurrence of the State of Louisiana (LDEQ), has determined
that the Agriculture Street Landfill site poses no significant threat
to public health or the environment; therefore, no further response
measures are appropriate. In accordance with EPA policy on deletion of
sites listed on the National Priorities List, EPA is proposing deletion
of this site from the NPL. Documents supporting this action are
available from the docket.
I. State Concurrence
In a letter dated May 11, 2004, the Louisiana Department of
Environmental Quality concurred with the proposed deletion of the site
from the NPL.
Dated: July 23, 2004.
Richard E. Greene,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 04-17500 Filed 8-3-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P