Jump to main content.

Federal Register Notice

This page contains the following four Federal Register Notices published on Tuesday, May 22, 2001:

28093 - 28096 Federal Register: Direct final rule; deletion of the Gulf Coast Vacuum Services Superfund Site from the National Priorities List.

28096 - 28099 Federal Register: Direct final deletion of the Cleveland Mill Superfund Site from the National Priorities List.

28099 - 28102 Federal Register: Direct Final Deletion of the Brodhead Creek Superfund Site from the National Priorities List.

28102 - 28106 Federal Register: Direct final deletion of the Salem Acres Superfund Site from the National Priorities List.

horizontal navy line

Notice of Direct Final Action, Effective July 23, 2001

28093 - 28096 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 22, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

horizontal navy line

28093 - 28096 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 22, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 300
[FRL-6965-2]

National Oil and Hazardous Substance Pollution Contingency Plan; National Priorities List

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION:  Direct final rule; deletion of the Gulf Coast Vacuum Services Superfund Site from the National Priorities List.

SUMMARY:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 6 is publishing a direct final rule of deletion of the Gulf Coast Vacuum Services Superfund Site (Site), located in Vermilion Parish, Louisiana from the National Priorities List (NPL). The NPL, promulgated pursuant to section 105, 42 U.S.C. 9605(a) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is found at appendix B of 40 CFR part 300 of the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP). This direct final rule of deletion is being published by the EPA with the concurrence of the State of Louisiana, through the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ), because the EPA has determined that all appropriate response actions under CERCLA have been completed and, therefore, further remedial action pursuant to CERCLA is not appropriate.

DATES:

This direct final rule of deletion will be effective July 23, 2001 unless the EPA receives adverse comments by June 21, 2001. If adverse comments are received, the EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule of deletion in the Federal Register informing the public that the deletion will not take effect.

[Return to Table of Contents]

ADDRESSES:

Comments may be mailed to:

Ms. Beverly Negri
Community Involvement Coordinator (6SF-PO)
U.S. EPA Region 6
1445 Ross Avenue
Dallas, Texas, 75202-2733
(214) 665-8157
1-800-533-3508

Comprehensive information about the Site is available for viewing and copying at the Site information repositories located at:

U.S. EPA Region 6 Library
Suite 12D13
1445 Ross Avenue
Dallas, Texas, 75202-2733
(214) 665-6524
Monday through Friday 7:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.

Vermillion Parish Library
200 North Magdalen Square
Abbeville, Louisiana, 75011
(318) 893-2674
Monday and Thursday 9:00 a.m. to 8:00p.m., Tuesday, Wednesday, and Friday 9:00 a.m. to 5:30p.m., and Saturday 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.

Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality
7290 Bluebonnet Road
Baton Rouge, Louisiana, 70809
(225) 765-0487
Monday through Friday 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mrs. Katrina Coltrain
Remedial Project Manager (6SF-LP)
U.S. EPA Region 6
1445 Ross Avenue
Dalas, Texas, 75202-2733
(214) 665-8143
1-800-533-3508

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I.Introduction
II.NPL Deletion Criteria
III.Deletion Procedures
IV.Basis for Site Deletion
V.Deletion Action

[Return to Table of Contents]

I. Introduction

EPA Region 6 is publishing this Direct Final Notice of Deletion of the Gulf Coast Vacuum Services Superfund Site from the NPL.

The EPA identifies sites that appear to present a significant risk to public health or the environment and maintains the NPL as the list of those sites. As described in Sec. 300.425(e)(3) of the NCP, sites deleted from the NPL remain eligible for remedial actions, if conditions at a deleted site warrant such action.

Because the EPA considers this action to be noncontroversial and routine, the EPA is taking it without prior publication of a notice of intent to delete. This action will be effective July 23, 2001 unless the EPA receives adverse comments by June 21, 2001 on this rule. If adverse comments are received within the 30-day public comment period on this rule, the EPA will publish a timely Withdrawal of this Direct Final Rule of Deletion before the effective date of the deletion, and said deletion will not take effect. The EPA will, as appropriate, prepare a response to comments and continue with the deletion process on the basis of the proposed Notice of Intent to Delete and the comments already received. There will be no additional opportunity to comment.

Section II of this document explains the criteria for deleting sites from the NPL. Section III discusses procedures that the EPA is using for this action. Section IV discusses the Gulf Coast Vacuum Services Superfund Site and demonstrates how it meets the deletion criteria. Section V discusses the EPA's action to delete the Site from the NPL unless adverse comments are received during the public comment period.

[Return to Table of Contents]

II. NPL Deletion Criteria

Section 300.425(e) of the NCP provides that releases may be deleted from the NPL where no further response is appropriate. In making a determination to delete a release from the NPL, the EPA shall consider, in consultation with the State, whether any of the following criteria have been met:

Even if a site is deleted from the NPL, where hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants remain at the deleted site above levels that allow for unlimited use and unrestricted exposure, CERCLA section 121(c), 42 U.S.C. 9621(c) requires that a subsequent review of the site be conducted at least every five years after the initiation of the remedial action at the deleted 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, the EPA may initiate remedial actions. Whenever there is a significant release from a site deleted from the NPL, the deleted site may be restored to the NPL without application of the hazard ranking system.

[Return to Table of Contents]

III. Deletion Procedures

The following procedures apply to deletion of the Site:

  1. The EPA consulted with the State of Louisiana on the deletion of the Site from the NPL prior to developing this Direct Final Rule of Deletion.

  2. The State of Louisiana concurred with deletion of the Site from the NPL.

  3. Concurrently with the publication of this Direct Final rule of Deletion, a parallel proposed Notice of Intent to Delete published today in the "Proposed Rules" section of the Federal Register is being published in a major local newspaper of general circulation at or near the Site and is being distributed to appropriate federal, state, and local government officials and other interested parties; the newspaper notice announces the 30-day public comment period concerning this action.

  4. The EPA placed copies of documents supporting the deletion in the Site information repositories identified above.

  5. If adverse comments are received within the 30-day public comment period, the EPA will publish a timely notice of Withdrawal of this Direct Final rule of Deletion, before its effective date and will prepare a response to comments and continue with the deletion process on the basis of the proposed Notice of Intent to Delete and the comments already received.

Deletion of a site from the NPL does not itself create, alter, or revoke any individual's rights or obligations. Deletion of a site from the NPL does not in any way alter the EPA's right to take enforcement actions, as appropriate. The NPL is designed primarily for informational purposes and to assist the EPA management. 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.

[Return to Table of Contents]

IV. Basis for Site Deletion

The following information provides the EPA's rationale for deleting the Site from the NPL:

A. Site Location

The Site is located 3.5 miles southwest of the town of Abbeville in Vermilion Parish, Louisiana, on Parish Road P-7-31, also called Junuis Road. The Site occupies approximately 12.8 acres, and is bounded to the north and west by pasture land and to the east and south by the D.L. Mud Superfund Site and the LeBoeuf Canal. Areas adjacent to the Site are used as pasture land for grazing cattle and for other agricultural uses, predominantly rice, sugar-cane, and soybean crop raising. Ten residences are located within \1/2\ mile of the Site on Parish Road P- 7-31 and Route 335, the nearest being on the southeast site boundary. Because these homes are outside the corporate limits of Abbeville, residents in the area rely on ground water for their drinking water and for irrigation.

B. Site History

The Site was a vacuum truck and oilfield drilling mud plant operation from approximately 1969 to 1980. During the period that the facility was in operation, unpermitted disposal of contaminated organic and inorganic materials, primarily oil industry-related waste, occurred in several open pits. Gulf Coast Vacuum Services and its predecessors used the property as a trucking terminal and disposal facility for materials and wastes generated from oil and gas exploration and production. Vacuum trucks were rinsed out in several on-site pits, while unpermitted disposal of contaminated material and waste also occurred. Primary hazardous substances at the Site were organic compounds such as benzene, carcinogenic polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), and metals such as arsenic and barium.

The EPA performed three Removal Actions at the Site prior to the initiation of a Remedial Action (RA). The purpose of these Removal Actions was to prevent contaminated rainwater, which accumulated on top of the sludge pits, from overflowing onto adjacent agricultural fields. These removals were conducted in March through April 1990, February through March 1991, and in April 1992. During each Removal Action, approximately 800,000 gallons of water were pumped, treated, and discharged. In addition, during the 1990 and 1992 removal actions, fencing around the pit areas was installed.

The EPA performed the Remedial Investigation (RI) of the Site from November 1990 through March 1992. Various heavy metal and PAH contaminants were detected at levels on-site that measured above health-based standards.

In July 1992, the EPA released the RI Report and the Feasibility Study (FS). The RI Report included all RI sampling results. The FS provided an in-depth analysis of remedial alternatives, which included on-site and off-site treatment alternatives such as incineration, on-site and off-site containment alternatives such as disposal and capping, and a "no action" alternative. The FS concluded that a "no action" alternative at the Site could result in a potential health threat to the public, through dermal contact with contaminated soils and sludges, and a potential health threat to nearby residents, who rely on ground water for their drinking water.

The EPA, in consultation with the LDEQ, signed two Records of Decision (ROD) on September 30, 1992. The Operable Unit 2 (OU2), Interim Source Control ROD, designed to address the short-term, immediate exposure risks associated with rainwater overflow from the pits, called for treatment of contaminated rainwater to LDEQ surface discharge standards, the consolidation of the Washout Pit into the West Pit, and the covering of the West Pit.

The September 1992 Operable Unit 1 (OU1), Final Source Action ROD, selected on-site incineration to address the long-term environmental and human health risks associated with the organic contaminants on- site. The OU1 ROD also selected stabilization and solidification of inorganic-contaminated soils and residuals of the organic treatment, and monitoring of the ground water. The OU1 ROD was amended in May 1995 ("the Amended ROD") to change the way in which the organic- contaminated material was handled. Based on the OU1 ROD and the Amended ROD, the Final Source Control remedy for the Site included: on-site biological treatment of organic-contaminated pit sludges (surface and buried), associated soils and tank contents; stabilization and on-site disposal of the treated residuals from the bio-treatment as required to meet performance standards for inorganic compounds, and capping with a two (2) foot compacted clay cover; on-site stabilization and disposal of the Site soils contaminated with metals (inorganics), and capping with a two (2) foot compacted clay cover; and institutional controls, such as deed notices and long-term monitoring of the ground water.

One additional performance standard was that the stabilized material would have to pass Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) requirements using a modified TCLP test (distilled water was substituted for the specified acid) and that the leachate from the TCLP test would also have to meet Clean Water Act Maximum Contaminant Levels.

The OU2 RD Work Plan submitted by the PRP Group was approved by the EPA on September 13, 1993. The OU1 RD Work Plan was approved by the EPA on June 2, 1997. These Work Plans detailed the design criteria and the steps that would be undertaken to achieve the goals of the Site RODs.

The OU2 ROD was implemented by a PRP group, consisting of 13 PRPs who were directed to do the action through a December 11, 1992, Unilateral Administrative Order (UAO). Implementation of the OU2 Remedial Action (RA) began on September 29, 1993. The OU2 RA work, performed in accordance with the UAO Statement of Work and the OU2 RD Work Plan, was completed on September 30, 1994. During the OU2 Interim Action, approximately 2 million gallons of water were treated and discharged, approximately 2,100 cubic yards of contaminated soil were moved from the Washout Pit to the West Pit, and the West Pit was covered with a synthetic cover. The OU2 remedial action was completed on September 30, 1994, the date the EPA approved the OU2 Remedial Action Certification Report.

On June 5, 1995, a Consent Decree (CD) between the EPA and a fourteen-member PRP group was entered in Federal District Court. The PRP group performed the OU1 activities under this CD and its accompanying Statement of Work and the OU1 RD Work Plan. OU1 remedy construction began on June 2, 1997. The PRPs conducted the following remedial activities: on-site biological treatment of 31,617 cubic yards of organic-contaminated pit sludges (surface and buried) and associated soils and tank contents; stabilization and on-site disposal (in the excavated West Pit and Washout Pit) of 21,347 cubic yards of Site soils contaminated with metals (inorganics) and approximately 20,000 cubic yards of biological treatment residuals; capping of the stabilized material with a two (2) foot compacted clay cover and seeding of the cover; fencing of the Site; implementation of deed notices; and ground water monitoring.

Confirmatory samples were taken of all excavated areas of the Site to ensure that all materials with concentrations of contaminants higher than the health-based Remedial Action Goals (RAGs) had been removed. In addition, performance samples were taken to ensure that the bio- treatment residuals met the RAGs, to show that the stabilized Site materials met the TCLP standard, and to show that the stabilized material had the physical properties (such as strength) specified in the RD work plan.

A pre-final inspection was conducted on February 19, 1999, and a final inspection was conducted on March 11, 1999. The EPA determined that the RA was complete during the final inspection, except for the submittal of the RA report and the filing of deed notices. The PRP group submitted the RA Report for OU1 to EPA on June 11, 1999. This report was reviewed by the LDEQ and a representative of the Technical Assistance Grant (TAG) group for the Site, and minor adjustments were made. Institutional controls, in the form of restrictive covenants were filed on September 29, 1999. The EPA approved the RA Report on October 4, 1999, and issued a Final Close Out Report on March 24, 2000.

C. Characterization of Risk

The following contaminants were detected in the various Site media above health-based standards: Surface Soils--arsenic (2.3-56.7 mg/kg) and barium (480-21,400 mg/kg); Sludges--carcinogenic PAHs (.09-7.5 mg/ kg), benzene (7-529 mg/kg); and Ground Water-barium (Non-detect (ND)-- 5550 g/L), cadmium (ND-210 g/L), chromium (ND--2580 g/L), mercury (ND--4.6 g/L), and lead (ND--2580 g/L).

The RAGs specified in the OU1 ROD and the Amended ROD are: arsenic, 16 mg/kg; barium, 5,400 mg/kg, total carcinogenic PAHs, 3 mg/kg; total non-carcinogenic PAHs, Hazard Index 1; previously unidentified carcinogenic compounds of concern (COCs), residual risk 10-4--10-6 cumulative risk prior to stabilization and capping; and previously unidentified non-carcinogenic compounds of concern, HI < 1.

D. Future Activity

Site Operation & Maintenance (O&M) activities which will be performed by the PRP Group include routine Site inspections to ensure that the cap on the disposal cells remains intact and maintenance of perimeter fencing. These activities are sufficient to maintain the protectiveness of the remedy. The PRP group, as agreed upon in the CD and accompanying Statement of Work and as detailed in the RA Work Plan and the O&M Plan, has assumed all responsibility for O&M at the Site. In addition, under the CD, the PRP Group shall perform ground water monitoring during the O&M period. Plans for O&M are in place and are sufficient to maintain the protectiveness of the remedy. The PRP Group is fulfilling its obligation to perform the O&M. All institutional controls are also in place, as the Site is fenced and a declaration of restrictions was filed with Vermilion Parish on September 29, 1999, restricting use of the Site ground water and limiting activities in the capped disposal cells.

Because the implementation of the Site remedies resulted in hazardous substances remaining on-site at concentration levels above levels that allow for unlimited use and unrestricted exposure (see CERCLA section 121(c), 42 U.S.C. 9621(c), and 40 CFR 300.430(f)(4)(ii)), a review will be conducted at least every five years after commencement of the Remedial Action to assure that human health and the environment are being protected by the response action. The five-year reviews will be conducted pursuant to "Comprehensive Five-Year Review Guidance," OSWER Directive 9355.7-03B-P, Draft October 1999, or whatever EPA guidance is current at the time of the review. All response activities have been completed at the Site other than O&M and five-year reviews.

E. Community Involvement

Public participation activities have been satisfied as required in CERCLA section 113(k), 42 U.S.C. 9613(k), and CERCLA section 117, 42 U.S.C. 9617. Documents in the deletion docket which the EPA relied on for recommendation of the deletion from the NPL are available to the public in the information repositories.

[Return to Table of Contents]

V. Deletion Action

The EPA, with concurrence of the State of Louisiana, has determined that all appropriate responses under CERCLA have been completed, and that no further response actions, under CERCLA, other than O&M and five-year reviews, are necessary. Therefore, the EPA is deleting the Site from the NPL.

Because the EPA considers this action to be noncontroversial and routine, EPA is taking it without prior publication of a notice of intent to delete. This action will be effective July 23, 2001 unless EPA receives adverse comments by June 21, 2001. If adverse comments are received within the 30-day public comment period on the proposal, the EPA will publish a timely Withdrawal of this Direct Final rule of Deletion before the effective date of the deletion, and it will not take effect, and the EPA will prepare a response to comments and continue with the deletion process on the basis of the proposed Notice of Intent to Delete and the comments already received. There will be no additional opportunity to comment.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Chemicals, Hazardous waste, Hazardous substances, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Superfund, Water pollution control, Water supply.

Dated: March 19, 2001.

Lynda F. Carroll,,
Acting Regional Administrator, U.S. EPA, Region 6.

For the reasons set out in this document, 40 CFR part 300 is ammended as follows:

PART 300--[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 300 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2); 42 U.S.C. 9601-9657; E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR 2923, 3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 193.

Appendix B--[Amended]

2. Table 1 of Appendix B to Part 300 is amended under State of Louisiana ("LA") by removing the site name for "Gulf Coast Vacuum Services" and the city "Abbeville, Louisiana."

[FR Doc. 01-12703 Filed 5-21-01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

horizontal navy line

Notice of Direct Final Action, Effective July 23, 2001

28096 - 28099 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 22, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

horizontal navy line

28096 - 28099 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 22, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 300
[FRL-6956-2]

National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan; National Priorities List

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION:  Direct final deletion of the Cleveland Mill Superfund Site from the National Priorities List.

SUMMARY:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 6 is publishing a direct final deletion of the Cleveland Mill Superfund Site (the "site"), located in Grant County, New Mexico, from the National Priorities List (NPL).

The NPL, promulgated pursuant to section 105 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is appendix B of 40 CFR part 300, which is the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP). This direct final deletion is being published by EPA with the concurrence of the State of New Mexico, through the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) because EPA has determined that all appropriate response actions under CERCLA have been completed at the Site and, therefore, further remedial action pursuant to CERCLA is not appropriate.

EFFECTIVE DATES:

This direct final deletion will be effective July 23, 2001 unless EPA receives adverse comments by June 21, 2001. If adverse comments are received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final deletion in the Federal Register informing the public that the deletion will not take effect.

[Return to Table of Contents]

ADDRESSES:

Comments may be mailed to:

Ms. Beverly Negri
Community Involvement Corrdinator (6SF-PO)
U.S. EPA Region 6
1445 Ross Avenue
Dallas, Texas 75202-2733
(214) 665-8157
1-800-533-3508

Information Repositories:

Comprehensive information about the Site is avaliable for viewing and copying at the Site information repsoitories located at:

U.S. EPA Region 6 Library
12th Floor
1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 12D13
Dallas, Texas 75202-2733
(241)665-6424
Monday through Friday 7:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.

Silver City Public Library
5151 West College Avenue
Silver City, New Mexico 88061
(505) 538-3672
Monday and Thursday 9:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Tuesday and Wednesday 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Friday 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. and Saturday 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.

New Mexico Environment Department Library
1190 St. Francis Drive
Santa Fe, New Mexico 87502
(505) 827-2844
Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ms. Kathleen Aisling
Remedial Project Manager (6SF-LT)
U.S. EPA Region 6
1445 Ross Avenue
Dallas, Texas 75202-2733
(214) 665-8509
1-800-533-3508

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I.Introduction
II.NPL Deletion Criteria
III.Deletion Procedures
IV.Basis For Site Deletion
V.Deletion Action

[Return to Table of Contents]

I. Introduction

EPA Region 6 is publishing this direct final notice of deletion of the Cleveland Mill Superfund Site from the NPL.

The EPA identifies sites that appear to present a significant risk to public health or the environment and maintains the NPL as the list of those sites. As described in the NCP at 40 CFR 300.425(e)(3), sites deleted from the NPL remain eligible for remedial actions if conditions at a deleted site warrant such action.

Because EPA considers this action to be noncontroversial and routine, EPA is taking it without prior publication of a notice of intent to delete. This action will be effective July 23, 2001 unless EPA receives adverse comments by June 21, 2001 on this document. If adverse comments are received within the 30-day public comment period on this deletion, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of this direct final deletion before the effective date of the deletion and the deletion will not take effect. EPA will, as appropriate, prepare a response to comments and continue with the deletion process on the basis of the notice of intent to delete and the comments already received. There will be no additional opportunity to comment.

Section II of this document explains the criteria for deleting sites from the NPL. Section III discusses procedures that EPA is using for this action. Section IV discusses the Cleveland Mill Superfund Site and demonstrates how it meets the deletion criteria. Section V discusses EPA's action to delete the Site from the NPL unless adverse comments are received during the public comment period.

[Return to Table of Contents]

II. NPL Deletion Criteria

Section 300.425(e) of the NCP provides that releases may be deleted from the NPL where no further response is appropriate. In making a determination to delete a release from the NPL, EPA shall consider, in consultation with the State, whether any of the following criteria have been met:

Even if a site is deleted from the NPL, where hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants remain at the deleted site above levels that allow for unlimited use and unrestricted exposure, CERCLA section 121(c), 42 U.S.C. 9621(c), requires that a subsequent review of the site be conducted at least every five years after the initiation of the remedial action at the deleted 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 deleted site may be restored to the NPL without application of the hazard ranking system.

[Return to Table of Contents]

III. Deletion Procedures

The following procedures apply to deletion of the Site:

  1. The EPA consulted with NMED on the deletion of the Site from the NPL prior to developing this direct final deletion.

  2. The NMED concurred with deletion of the Site from the NPL.

  3. Concurrently with the publication of this direct final deletion, a notice of the availability of the parallel notice of intent to delete published today in the "Proposed Rules" section of the Federal Register is being published in a major local newspaper of general circulation at or near the Site and is being distributed to appropriate federal, state, and local government officials and other interested parties; the newspaper notice announces the 30-day public comment period concerning the notice of intent to delete the Site from the NPL.

  4. The EPA placed copies of documents supporting the deletion in the Site information repositories identified above.

  5. If adverse comments are received within the 30-day public comment period on this document, EPA will publish a timely notice of withdrawal of this direct final deletion before its effective date and will prepare a response to comments and continue with the deletion process on the basis of the notice of intent to delete and the comments already received.

Deletion of a site from the NPL does not itself create, alter, or revoke any individual's rights or obligations. Deletion of a site from the NPL does not in any way alter EPA's right to take enforcement actions, as appropriate. The NPL is designed primarily for informational purposes and to assist EPA management. Section 300.425(e)(3) of the NCP states that the deletion of a site from the NPL does not preclude eligibility for future response actions, should future conditions warrant such actions.

[Return to Table of Contents]

IV. Basis for Site Deletion

The following information provides EPA's rationale for deleting the Site from the NPL:

A. Site Location

The Site is located in Grant County, in southwestern New Mexico, approximately 5.5 miles northeast of Silver City, New Mexico. The Site includes approximately 4 acres in mountainous terrain and 14 acres which extend down a drainage area into the streambed of Little Walnut Creek. The surrounding property is located in a rapidly developing residential area that is adjacent to the Gila National Forest and private lands. The population within a 3-mile radius of the Site is estimated to be 1,200.

B. Site History

The Site is a former ore processing mill area adjacent to the Cleveland Mine. The Cleveland Mine, located approximately 0.5 mile northeast of the mill area, is one of the Cleveland Group of Mines located in the West Pinos Altos Mining District. The first of the Cleveland Mining claims was staked in the early 1900s and included a milling operation at the Site. The milling operation employed a gravity separator until 1916, and a flotation process from 1916 until at least 1919. Approximately 125,000 tons of lead, zinc, and copper ore were produced from the Cleveland Mine during the period from about 1900 until 1919. After this time, the site was leased for mining and grazing. The tailings from the milling operations were deposited at the headwaters of the Little Walnut Creek and both the soil and the surface water were contaminated with Site-related hazardous substances.

The Site was proposed for inclusion on the NPL on June 24, 1988, and inclusion was finalized on March 31, 1989, pursuant to section 105 of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9605, identifying the Site as a priority for long- term remedial evaluation and response.

Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/FS)

From August 1990 through March 1992, NMED, under an agreement with EPA, conducted a Remedial Investigation (RI) at the Cleveland Mill Superfund Site to determine the nature and extent of the problem presented by the release of hazardous substances, pollutants or contaminants at the Site. Hazardous substances were detected in soil and other surface materials at the site at concentration levels that exceed health-based standards: arsenic ranged from 4.1 to 3,020 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg); beryllium ranged from 0.25 to 12.8 mg/ kg; cadmium ranged from 0.15 to 376 mg/kg; lead ranged from 5.8 to 13,500 mg/kg; and zinc ranged from 57.3 to 122,000 mg/kg. The NMED also conducted a Feasibility Study (FS) on the Site, under an agreement with EPA. The primary objective of the FS, completed in March 1993, was to ensure that appropriate remedial alternatives were developed and evaluated such that relevant information concerning the remedial action options could be presented to a decision-maker (in this case the EPA Region 6 Regional Administrator) and an appropriate remedy selected.

On April 9, 1993, the EPA released the RI and FS Reports. The RI concluded that if no action was taken at the Site, there would be a threat to human health because Site visitors may be exposed to dangerous concentrations of hazardous substances in tailings, sediment, and surface water at the Site. Moreover, there was a potential for the wells of nearby residents to become contaminated. These residents rely on ground water for drinking.

Record of Decision Findings

On September 24, 1993, after consideration of public comments, the EPA, with the concurrence of the NMED, issued a Record of Decision (ROD) memorializing its selection of a remedy to address the contamination at the Site. The remedy was chosen in accordance with CERCLA and the NCP. The ROD was based on the administrative record for the Site. The overall Site remedy, as described in the 1993 ROD, called for excavation of the contaminated mill waste material, transportation of the waste material to a reprocessor for treatment, and disposal of the treatment residuals at the reprocessing facility in an area where other tailings and residuals from ore-processing were disposed. The remedy in the 1993 ROD did not include a remedy for the shallow on-site aquifer because the EPA believed that the contamination would attenuate once the source (i.e., the contaminated waste material) was removed. Therefore, the 1993 ROD included ground water monitoring, to ensure that the contamination did not worsen or spread to nearby residential wells prior to the excavation and removal of the source of the contamination, and to verify that the ground water quality improved once the source was removed.

Removal Action

In a June 1995, Consent Decree (CD), the participating companies agreed to implement the remedy specified in the 1993 ROD. However, the 1993 ROD remedy was not implemented because the search for an acceptable off-site disposal facility was ultimately unsuccessful, and because, during the search, unanticipated and powerful rainfall events caused hazardous substances from the Site to migrate in contaminated runoff. This unanticipated contaminant migration posed an immediate increased risk to human health and the environment.

On July 11, 1997, to address the immediate risk, the EPA, with the concurrence of the NMED, issued an Action Memorandum that authorized a time-critical removal action to physically address the Site contamination and to restore affected surface areas at the Site. The participating companies agreed to implement this removal action through an EPA Administrative Order on Consent (AOC) which became effective on September 23, 1997. As described below, the removal action included the excavation of the contaminated material, and the placement of that material in an on-Site containment cell. The field activities required by the AOC were completed on November 19, 1998, the date on which the seeds of native plants were sown on the last area of the Site in order to provide vegetative cover. Completion of the final AOC requirement occurred on December 10, 1998, the date the participating companies submitted the Removal Action Final Report which was accepted by EPA.

Cleanup Activities Performed

The cleanup activities at the Site were conducted from September 1997 through December 1998 during the time-critical removal action. The time-critical removal action included:

C. Characterization of Risk

Contaminated materials were removed from Site soils and sediments until concentrations of contaminants remaining on the Site met the health-based remediation goals specified in the 1993 ROD (these goals were referred to as "Remedial Action Goals" in the ROD) and incorporated into the Action Memorandum as soil and sediment "cleanup levels." Cleanup levels for soil and sediment included: arsenic, 30 milligrams per kilogram in soil (mg/kg); beryllium, 4 mg/kg; cadmium, 140 mg/kg; lead, 500 mg/kg; and zinc, 82,000 mg/kg. At the conclusion of the time-critical removal action, confirmatory samples were taken at all excavated areas of the Site to verify that all soils (including tailings) and sediment with concentrations of contaminants higher than the cleanup levels (i.e., the remediation goals established in the ROD) had been removed.

The environmental threat at the Site was addressed through this time-critical removal. As part of this removal, the waste material in the mill area and in the stream was excavated, the waste material was treated with limestone to neutralize its acidity, the treated material was disposed of in a limestone cell constructed at the Site, and the cell was covered by a multi-layered cap.

The EPA issued an Amended ROD for the Site on September 20, 1999, stating that no further response action was necessary; however, as explained in the Amended ROD, the continuation of ground water and surface water monitoring, operation and maintenance (O&M) of the constructed remedy, and implementation of the existing institutional controls will continue. The O&M activities include inspections to ensure that erosion does not compromise the remedy and to ensure that the revegetation efforts are successful. Institutional controls include restrictive covenants warning against the use of ground water and advising future owners about the risks of disturbing the cover and/or the underlying material.

The original selected remedy, the time-critical removal action and the remedy selected in the Amended ROD (collectively the "Site remedies") are protective of public health and the environment, comply with federal and state requirements that are legally applicable or relevant and appropriate to the remedial action, and are cost effective. The Site remedies utilized permanent solutions to the maximum extent practicable for this Site. This Site meets all the completion requirements as specified in "Close Out Procedures for National Priorities List Sites," OSWER Directive 9320.2-09A-P (2000), and in the June 16, 2000, Site Close Out Report prepared by the EPA Region 6 Superfund Division.

D. Future Activity

Because the implementation of the Site remedies resulted in hazardous substances remaining on-site at concentration levels above levels that allow for unlimited use and unrestricted exposure (see 42 U.S.C. 9621(c), and 40 CFR 300.430(f)(4)(ii)), a review will be conducted at least every five years after commencement of the remedial action (which, at this Site for the purposes of the five-year review only, is considered to be the start of the time-critical removal action) to assure that human health and the environment are being protected by the response action. The five-year reviews will be conducted pursuant to "Structure and Components of Five-Year Reviews," OSWER Directive 9355.7-02 (May 23, 1991) and "Supplemental Five-Year Review Guidance," OSWER Directive 9355.7-02A (July 26, 1994) or other EPA guidance current at the time of the review. All response activities have been completed at the Site other than O&M and five-year reviews.

E. Community Involvement

Public participation activities have been satisfied as required by CERCLA section 113(k), 42 U.S.C. 9613(k), and CERCLA section 117, 42 U.S.C. 9617. Documents in the deletion docket which EPA relied on for its decision to delete the Site from the NPL are available to the public at the information repositories.

[Return to Table of Contents]

V. Deletion Action

The EPA, with concurrence of the NMED, has determined that responsible parties have implemented all appropriate response actions required at the Site and that no further response actions, under CERCLA, other than O&M and five-year reviews, are necessary. Therefore, EPA is deleting the Site from the NPL.

Because EPA considers this action to be noncontroversial and routine, EPA is taking it without prior publication of a notice of intent to delete. This action will be effective July 23, 2001 unless EPA receives adverse comments by June 21, 2001. If adverse comments are received within the 30-day public comment period, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of this direct final deletion before the effective date of the deletion and it will not take effect and EPA will prepare a response to comments and continue with the deletion process on the basis of the notice of intent to delete and the comments already received. There will be no additional opportunity to comment.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Chemicals, Hazardous waste, Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Superfund, Water pollution control, Water supply.

Dated: January 22, 2001.

Jerry Clifford,
Deputy Regional Administrator, Region 6.

For the reasons set out in this document, 40 CFR part 300 is amended as follows:

PART 300--[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 300 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2); 42 U.S.C. 9601-9657; E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR 2923, 3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 193.

Appendix B--[Amended]

2. Table 1 of Appendix B to Part 300 is amended by removing the site for Cleveland Mill, Silver City, NM.

[FR Doc. 01-12705 Filed 5-21-01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

horizontal navy line

Notice of Direct Final Action, Effective July 23, 2001

28099 - 28102 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 22, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

horizontal navy line

28099 - 28102 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 22, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 300
[FRL-6957-8]

National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan; National Priorities List

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION:  Direct Final Deletion of the Brodhead Creek Superfund Site from the National Priorities List.

SUMMARY:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region III is publishing a direct final deletion of the Brodhead Creek Superfund Site (Site) located in the Borough of Stroudsburg, Monroe County, Pennsylvania, from the National Priorities List (NPL).

The NPL, promulgated pursuant to section 105 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is Appendix B of 40 CFR Part 300, which is the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP). This direct final deletion is being published by EPA with the concurrence of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, through the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP) because EPA has determined that all appropriate response actions under CERCLA have been completed and, therefore, further remedial action pursuant to CERCLA is not appropriate.

EFFECTIVE DATES:

This direct final deletion will be effective July 23, 2001, unless EPA receives adverse comments by June 21, 2001. If adverse comments are received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final deletion in the Federal Register informing the public that the deletion will not take effect.

[Return to Table of Contents]

ADDRESSES:

Comments may be mailed to:

William Hudson
Community Involvement Coordinator, (3HS43)
U.S. EPA Region III
1650 Arch Street
Philadelphia, PA 19103
(215) 814-5532

Information Repositories:

Comprehensive information about the Site is avaliable for viewing and copying at the Site Information Repsoitories at the following locations:

U.S. EPA Region III
Regional Center for Environmental Information (RCEI)
1650 Arch Street
Philadelphia, PA 19103
(215) 814-5364
Monday through Friday 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.

Stroudsburg Borough Building
Seventh and Sarah Streets
Stroudsburg, PA 18360
(570) 421-5444
Monday through Friday 8:00 to 5:00 p.m.

Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection
Northeast Regional Office
2 Public Square
Wilkes-Barre, PA 18711-0790
(570) 826-2511
Monday through Friday 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

John Banks
Remedial Project Manager (3HS22)
U.S. EPA Region III
1650 Arch Street
Philadelphia, PA 19103
(215) 814-3214
Fax (215) 814-3002
E-mail banks.john-d@epa.gov

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I.Introduction
II.NPL Deletion Criteria
III.Deletion Procedures
IV.Basis For Site Deletion
V.Deletion Action

[Return to Table of Contents]

I. Introduction

EPA Region III is publishing this direct final deletion of the Brodhead Creek Superfund Site from the NPL.

The EPA identifies sites that appear to present a significant risk to public health or the environment and maintains the NPL as the list of those sites. As described in Sec. 300.425(e)(3) of the NCP, sites deleted from the NPL remain eligible for remedial actions if conditions at a deleted site warrant such action.

Because EPA considers this action to be noncontroversial and routine, EPA is taking it without prior publication of a notice of intent to delete. This action will be effective July 23, 2001 unless EPA receives adverse comments by June 21, 2001. If adverse comments are received within the 30-day public comment period on this document, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of this direct final deletion before the effective date of the deletion and the deletion will not take effect. EPA will, as appropriate, prepare a response to comments and continue with the deletion process on the basis of the notice of intent to delete and the comments already received. There will be no additional opportunity to comment.

Section II of this document explains the criteria for deleting sites from the NPL. Section III discusses procedures that EPA is using for this action. Section IV discusses the Brodhead Creek Superfund Site and demonstrates how it meets the deletion criteria. Section V discusses EPA's action to delete the Site from the NPL unless adverse comments are received during the public comment period.

[Return to Table of Contents]

II. NPL Deletion Criteria

Section 300.425(e) of the NCP provides that releases may be deleted from the NPL where no further response is appropriate. In making a determination to delete a release from the NPL, EPA shall consider, in consultation with the State, whether any of the following criteria have been met:

Even if a site is deleted from the NPL, where hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants remain at the deleted site above levels that allow for unlimited use and unrestricted exposure, CERCLA Section 121(c), 42 U.S.C. 9621(c) requires that a subsequent review of the site be conducted at least every five years after the initiation of the remedial action at the deleted 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 deleted site may be restored to the NPL without application of the hazard ranking system.

[Return to Table of Contents]

III. Deletion Procedures

The following procedures apply to deletion of the Site:

  1. The EPA consulted with the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania on the deletion of the Site from the NPL prior to developing this direct final deletion.

  2. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania concurred with the deletion of the Site from the NPL.

  3. Concurrently with the publication of this direct final deletion, a notice of the availability of the parallel notice of intent to delete published today in the "Proposed Rules" section of the Federal Register is being published in a major local newspaper of general circulation at or near the Site and is being distributed to the appropriate federal, state, and local government officials and other interested parties; the newspaper notice announces the 30-day public comment period concerning the notice of intent to delete the Site from the NPL.

  4. The EPA placed copies of documents supporting the deletion in the Site information repositories identified above.

  5. If adverse comments are received within the 30-day public comment period on this document, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of this direct final deletion before its effective date and will prepare a response to comments and continue with the deletion process on the basis of the notice of intent to delete and the comments already received.

Deletion of a Site from the NPL does not itself create, alter, or revoke any individual's rights or obligations. Deletion of a site from the NPL does not in any way alter EPA's right to take enforcement actions, as appropriate. The NPL is designed primarily for informational purposes and to assist EPA management. Section 300.425(e)(3) of the NCP states that the deletion of a site from the NPL does not preclude eligibility for future response actions, should future conditions warrant such action.

[Return to Table of Contents]

IV. Basis for Site Deletion

The following information provides EPA's rationale for deleting the Site from the NPL:

A. Site Location

The Brodhead Creek Site occupies approximately 12 acres of a flood plain area on the western bank of Brodhead Creek at the confluence of Brodhead Creek and McMichael Creek in the Borough of Stroudsburg in Monroe County, Pennsylvania.

B. Site History

The Site is the former location of a coal gasification plant which operated from approximately 1888 to 1944. A waste product from these operations was a black tar-like liquid ("coal tar") which has a density greater than water and which is principally composed of polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons ("PAHs"). The coal tar was placed in an open pit located on the Site. This practice continued to the mid- 1940s when the plant was abandoned.

On October 7, 1980, during construction repairs to the flood control levee at the Site, materials identified as coal tar were observed seeping into Brodhead Creek. As a result, several investigations and emergency response measures were initiated by EPA, PADEP, and Pennsylvania Power and Light Company (PP&L) from 1981 through 1984, including: (1) Installation of temporary filter fences and underflow dams to intercept coal tar seepage; (2) installation of a temporary coal tar recovery pit on the west bank of Brodhead Creek; (3) construction of a slurry wall by EPA to mitigate coal tar migration from the Site toward Brodhead Creek; (4) excavation of a backwater channel area where coal tar seepage appeared to be particularly significant; and (5) installation of recovery wells in the main coal tar pool by PP&L, with the subsequent recovery of approximately 8,000 gallons of coal tar.

The Site was placed on the NPL in December 1982, with a Hazard Ranking Score of 31.09.

Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/FS)

On August 20, 1987, PP&L and Union Gas Company (UGC) entered into a Consent Order and Agreement with the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to conduct the original remedial investigation and feasibility study (RI/ FS) for the Brodhead Creek Site. The original RI/FS was completed in 1991.

The results of the original RI indicated that coal tar from the former coal gasification operations had migrated vertically through the unsaturated and saturated portions of the stream gravel unit underlying the Site to the interface with the silty sand. The silty sand prevents further downward movement of the coal tar because of the higher capillary pressures within that unit. Approximately 4.28 acres of the gravel unit at the Site were contaminated with free and residual coal tar. The free coal tar (i.e., coal tar at 100% pore volume saturation) is limited to a small area of a stratigraphic depression east of the slurry wall near monitoring well MW-2 (the MW-2 Area) and to the lowest portion of the stratigraphic depression located west of the slurry wall (the RCC Area). Both of these free coal tar accumulations are confined from further downward migration by the top of the silty sand unit. Residual coal tar (i.e., coal tar at less than 100% pore volume saturation) can be found throughout the remainder of the 4.28 acres.

The total volume of free coal tar at the Site was estimated to be 9,000 gallons, 8,715 gallons at the RCC Area and 338 gallons at the MW- 2 Area. The extent of residual coal tar contamination at the Site was estimated to be from 303,000 gallons to 409,000 gallons.

Characterization of Risk

The risk assessment in the original RI identified PAHs, benzene, and arsenic as the primary contaminants of concern at the Site. Federal Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for drinking water established pursuant to the Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C. 300f et seq., were exceeded for arsenic, benzene, and benzo(a)pyrene in the subsurface gravel unit. Proposed MCLs were exceeded in the ground water in the gravel unit for the following PAHs: benzo(a)anthracene; benzo(b)fluoranthene; benzo(k)fluoranthene; chrysene, dibenz(a,h)anthracene; and indenopyrene. These PAHs, as well as arsenic and benzene, are "hazardous substances" as defined in Section 101(14) of CERCLA.

After reviewing the results of the original RI/FS, EPA divided the remedial work to be undertaken at the Site into two operable units ("OUs"). These were as follows:

OU-1: Contaminated subsurface soils containing free coal tar in the stream gravel unit

OU-2: Ground water in the stream gravel unit to and including bedrock EPA determined that an interim remedial action should be taken for OU-1 to initiate reduction of the toxicity, mobility, and volume of contaminants in the stream gravel unit at the Site. The interim remedial action would entail the removal of the free coal tar from the stream gravel unit. The free coal tar was a principal threat to human health and the environment since it imparted high levels of contaminants to the ground water in the stream gravel unit and could serve as a potential source of release of contamination to the ground water in bedrock. Implementation of an interim remedial action would remove the source of the highest level of contamination and would reduce further leaching of contaminants into the ground water. Data generated during the implementation of the interim action and further investigations for OU-2 would provide the information necessary to assist EPA in determining whether (and where) restoration of ground water to beneficial use was feasible. This in turn would enable EPA to issue a final Record of Decision for the Brodhead Creek Site.

Record of Decision Findings for OU-1

In a Record of Decision (ROD) issued on March 29, 1991, EPA selected an interim remedial action for OU-1 which included the following major components:

Response Actions for OU-1

On September 2, 1992, EPA, PP&L and UGC entered into a Consent Decree under which the companies agreed to implement the remedial design/remedial action (RD/RA) for OU-1 at the Site. The original performance standard in the ROD required that at least 60% of the free coal tar in the subsurface soils be removed. On July 14, 1994, EPA issued an Explanation of Significant Differences (ESD) which revised the performance standard in the ROD by requiring the operation of the CROW process until the increase in cumulative recovery of the coal tar dropped to 0.5% or less per pore volume flushed through the formation. This revision of the performance standard was based on EPA's determination that accurate measurement of the removal of 60% of the free coal tar would not be possible because of the geology of the Site and the nature of the subsurface coal tar contamination. By June of 1996, approximately 1,500 total gallons of coal tar had been removed from the RCC Area and the performance standard had been met.

EPA determined during the CROW operational period that it would not be practical to implement CROW at the MW-2 Area (the area located at monitoring well MW-2) since the MW-2 Area contained only a small amount of free coal tar. Instead, EPA determined that the relatively minor amount of coal tar in the MW-2 Area wells should be removed via intermittent pumping. Approximately 100.5 gallons of coal tar were recovered from the MW-2 Area between February 1996 and March 1997.

Because of the variable nature of the coal tar recovery effort at the MW-2 wells, EPA determined that continued active intermittent pumping of the MW-2 wells could be suspended. However, as part of operation and maintenance of the Site, EPA has required that the MW-2 wells, and any wells in the RCC Area that have historically contained coal tar, be monitored for a free coal tar surface as part of the long- term ground water monitoring requirement at the Site. If a coal tar layer greater than six inches is discovered, it will be removed by pumping at that time.

These changes for the MW-2 Area were documented in a second Explanation of Significant Differences dated September 30, 1997. This second ESD also converted the interim remedy in the ROD for OU-1 into the final remedy for the Site and described the long-term monitoring strategy for the Site.

Record of Decision Findings for OU-2

On June 3, 1992, EPA, PP&L and UGC entered into a Consent Order under which the companies agreed to conduct a Focused RI/FS for OU-2 to further investigate ground water contamination at the Site. On June 30, 1995, EPA issued a ROD for OU-2 at the Brodhead Creek Site. This ROD addressed ground water contamination and residual coal tar contamination in the subsurface soils. In the ROD for OU-2, EPA selected a No Further Action alternative and established a technical impracticability ("TI") zone within which the Agency determined it would be impracticable to remediate ground water and residual coal tar contamination. EPA waived federal MCLs and Pennsylvania's Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirement (ARAR) for cleanup to "background" levels of contamination on the basis of "Technical Impracticability." Several Site-specific constraints made the implementation of engineering solutions to the residual coal tar contamination impracticable. As stated in the OU-2 ROD, these included: (1) the need to temporarily reroute Brodhead Creek to access coal tar- impacted soils beneath the creek bed; (2) the need to reinforce the existing interstate I-80 bridge abutments in order to protect them from the increased velocity and height of the creek which would result from rerouting the creek; and (3) the need to restore wetlands which would be impacted by any remediation alternative. In addition, the existing earthen levee which currently bisects the Site, and which protects the Borough of Stroudsburg and the slurry wall installed by EPA as an emergency action in the early 1980s, would probably sustain damage from the implementation of any engineering alternative, and require repair.

In the ROD for OU-2, EPA determined that the No Further Action alternative, in conjunction with the OU-1 selected remedy, is protective of human health and the environment. Implementation of the OU-1 enhanced recovery program for the free coal tar areas on-site reduced the areas of highest subsurface soil contamination. The OU-1 monitoring program will provide the data required to evaluate the fate of the coal tar-related constituents, the integrity of the slurry wall and the "health" of the biological community in Brodhead Creek. This will provide long term protection against the unlikely event that Site conditions might change and potential exposures increase. In addition, the slurry wall installed at the Site will continue to prevent free coal tar from discharging to Brodhead Creek.

C. Future Activity

Operation and Maintenance

Operation and Maintenance (O&M) activities, which are performed by PP&L(now known as PPL Electric Utilities Corporation (PPL)) with EPA oversight, include periodic inspections, ground water monitoring, stream sediment and biota monitoring, and the removal of relatively minor amounts of free coal tar from the two stratigraphically isolated areas of the Site, as necessary, but no less often than annually, and any other activities necessary to ensure continued protection of public health and the environment. The free coal tar removal, in conjunction with long-term ground water monitoring, will continue to ensure the effectiveness of the completed remedy at the Brodhead Creek Site.

Five-Year Review

CERCLA requires a five-year review of all sites with hazardous substances remaining above the health based levels for unrestricted use of the Site. Since residual coal tar contamination and ground water contamination remain at the Site, the five-year review process will be used to ensure that the selected remedy continues to be protective of human health and the environment. EPA completed the first five-year review of the Brodhead Creek Site on May 28, 1999. In that five-year review, EPA determined that the remedy was not completely protective of human health and the environment because institutional controls on future land use at the Site had not yet been implemented. On September 22, 2000, institutional controls which limit future land use at the Brodhead Creek Site were implemented by PPL and UGC (now known as PFG Gas, Inc.), and recorded at the Monroe County Courthouse, Recorder of Deeds Office, in Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania. These controls include restricting use of ground water at the Site and prohibiting excavation at the Site unless prior written approval is provided by the property owner, EPA, and PADEP. These institutional controls will reinforce the protectiveness of the selected remedy. EPA has determined that all requirements of the ROD for OU-1, as modified by the ESDs dated July 14, 1994 and September 30, 1997, have been achieved at the Site and the Site is protective of human health and the environment. EPA plans to complete the next five year review prior to May 28, 2004.

D. Community Involvement

Public participation activities have been satisfied as required in CERCLA Section 113(k), 42 U.S.C. 9613(k), and CERCLA Section 117, 42 U.S.C 9617. Documents in the deletion docket which EPA relied on for recommendation of the deletion from the NPL are available to the public in the information repositories.

[Return to Table of Contents]

V. Deletion Action

The EPA, with the concurrence of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, has determined that all appropriate responses under CERCLA have been completed, and that no further response actions, under CERCLA, other than O&M and five-year reviews, are necessary. Therefore, EPA is deleting the Site from the NPL.

Because EPA considers this action to be noncontroversial and routine, EPA is taking it without prior publication of a notice of intent to delete. This action will be effective July 23, 2001 unless EPA receives adverse comments by June 21, 2001 on this document. If adverse comments are received within the 30-day public comment period on this document to delete, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of this direct final deletion before the effective date of the deletion and the deletion will not take effect. EPA will prepare a response to comments and continue with the deletion process on the basis of the notice of intent to delete and the comments already received. There will be no additional opportunity to comment.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Chemicals, Hazardous Substances, Hazardous waste, Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Superfund, Water pollution control, Water supply.

Dated: March 8, 2001.

Thomas C. Voltaggio,
Acting Regional Administrator, U.S. EPA Region III.

For the reasons set out in this document, 40 CFR part 300 is amended as follows:

PART 300--[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for Part 300 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2); 42 U.S.C. 9601-9657; E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 CFR., 1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR 2923, 3 CFR., 1987 Comp., p. 193.

Appendix B--[Amended]

2. Table 1 of Appendix B to Part 300 is amended by removing the site for "Brodhead Creek, Stroudsburg, PA."

[FR Doc. 01-12707 Filed 5-21-01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

horizontal navy line

Notice of Direct Final Action, Effective July 23, 2001

28102 - 28106 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 22, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

horizontal navy line

28102 - 28106 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 22, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 300
[FRL-6969-7]

National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan; National Priorities List

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION:  Direct final deletion of the Salem Acres Superfund Site from the National Priorities List.

SUMMARY:

EPA-New England is publishing a direct final deletion of the Salem Acres Superfund Site (Site), located in Salem, Massachusetts, from the National Priorities List (NPL).

The NPL, promulgated pursuant to Section 105 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is Appendix B of 40 CFR Part 300, which is the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP). This direct final deletion is being published by EPA with the concurrence of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, through the Department of Environmental Protection (MADEP) because EPA has determined that all appropriate response actions under CERCLA have been completed and, therefore, further remedial action pursuant to CERCLA is not appropriate.

EFFECTIVE DATES:

This direct final deletion will be effective July 23, 2001 unless EPA receives adverse comments by June 21, 2001. If adverse comments are received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final deletion in the Federal Register informing the public that the deletion will not take effect.

[Return to Table of Contents]

ADDRESSES:

Comments may be mailed to:

Elaine Stanley
Remedial Project Manager
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - New England
One Congress Street, Suite 1100 (HBO)
Boston, Massachusetts 02114-2023
(617) 918-1332
Fax (617) 918-1291
E-mail stanley.elainet@epa.gov

Information Repositories:

Comprehensive information about the Site is avaliable for viewing and copying at the Site information repsoitories located at:

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - New England Records Center
One Congress Street, Suite 1100 (HBS)
Boston, Massachusetts 02114-2023
(617) 918-1440
1-800-252-3402 - toll free
Monday through Friday - 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.

Salem Public Library
370 Essex Street
Salem, Massachusetts 01970
(978) 744-0860
Monday through Thursday - 9 a.m. to 9 p.m., Friday and Saturday - 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. and Sunday - 1 p.m. to 5 p.m.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Elaine Stanley
Remedial Project Manager
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
One Congress Street, Suite 1100 (HBO)
Boston, Massachusetts 02114-2023
(617) 918-1332
Fax (617) 918-1291
E-mail stanley.elainet@epa.gov

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I.Introduction
II.NPL Deletion Criteria
III.Deletion Procedures
IV.Basis for Site Deletion
V.Deletion Action

[Return to Table of Contents]

I. Introduction

EPA-New England is publishing this direct final notice of deletion of the Salem Acres Superfund Site from the NPL.

The EPA identifies sites that appear to present a significant risk to public health or the environment and maintains the NPL as the list of those sites. As described in Sec. 300.425(e)(3) of the NCP, sites deleted from the NPL remain eligible for remedial actions if conditions at a deleted site warrant such action.

Because EPA considers this action to be noncontroversial and routine, EPA is taking it without prior publication of a notice of intent to delete. This action will be effective July 23, 2001 unless EPA receives adverse comments by June 21, 2001 on this document. If adverse comments are received within the 30-day public comment period on this document, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of this direct final deletion before the effective date of the deletion and the deletion will not take effect. EPA will, as appropriate, prepare a response to comments and continue with the deletion process on the basis of the notice of intent to delete and the comments already received. There will be no additional opportunity to comment.

Section II of this document 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 Salem Acres Superfund Site and demonstrates how it meets the deletion criteria. Section V discusses EPA's action to delete the site from the NPL unless adverse comments are received during the public comment period.

[Return to Table of Contents]

II. NPL Deletion Criteria

Section 300.425(e) of the NCP provides that release may be deleted from the NPL where no further response is appropriate. In making a determination to delete a release from the NPL, EPA shall consider, in consultation with the State, whether any of the following criteria has been met:

Even if a site is deleted from the NPL, where hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants remain at the deleted site above levels that allow for unlimited use and unrestricted exposure, CERCLA Section 121(c), 42 U.S.C. 9621(c) requires that a subsequent review of the site will be conducted at least every five years after the initiation of the remedial action at the deleted site to ensure that the action remains protective of public health and the environment. In the case of this Site, a five year review is not necessary since all hazardous substances, pollutants and contaminants have been removed from the Site. 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 deleted site may be restored to the NPL without the application of the hazard ranking system.

[Return to Table of Contents]

III. Deletion Procedures

The following procedures apply to deletion of the Site:

  1. The EPA consulted with the Commonwealth of Massachusetts on the deletion of the Site from the NPL prior to developing this direct final deletion.

  2. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts concurred with the deletion of the Site from the NPL.

  3. Concurrently with the publication of this direct final deletion, a notice of the availability of the parallel notice of intent to delete published today in the "Proposed Rules" section of the Federal Register is being published in a major local newspaper of general circulation at or near the Site and is being distributed to appropriate federal, state and local government officials and other interested parties; the newspaper notice announces the 30-day public comment period concerning the notice of intent to delete the Site from the NPL.

  4. The EPA places copies of the documents supporting the deletion in the Site information repositories identified.

  5. If adverse comments are received within the 30-day public comment period on this document, EPA will publish a timely notice of withdrawal of this direct final deletion before its effective date and will prepare a response to comments and continue with the deletion process on the basis of the notice of intent to delete and the comments already received.

Deletion of a site from the NPL does not itself create, alter, or revoke any individual's rights or obligations. Deletion of a site from the NPL does not in any way alter EPA's right to take enforcement actions, as appropriate. The NPL is designed primarily for informational purposes and to assist EPA management. Section 300.425(e)(3) of the NCP states that the deletion of a site from the NPL does not preclude eligibility for future response actions, should future conditions warrant such actions.

[Return to Table of Contents]

IV. Basis for Site Deletion

The following information provides EPA's rationale for deleting the Site from the NPL:

Site Location

The Salem Acres Superfund Site (Site) is an approximately two hundred and thirty-five (235) acre parcel of land located in the Cities of Peabody and Salem, Massachusetts. The entire Site is zoned residential but remains undeveloped. The actual contaminated portion of the Site was confined to the southernmost thirteen acres of the property. This area borders a residential area to the south, wetlands to the east and west and undeveloped upland to the north.

Site History

The contaminated area consisted of three adjacent and separate disposal areas. There is a Responsible Party (RP) associated with each area. The first area where hazardous substances were located consisted of eight unlined sludge lagoons containing industrial sewage sludge originating from and disposed of by the South Essex Sewerage District (SESD), a wastewater treatment plant located in Salem, MA. The second area containing hazardous substances consisted of a coal fly ash pile disposed of by the Massachusetts Electric Company (MEC). Disposal activities by SESD and MEC occurred between the mid 1940's and 1969. The third and final area containing hazardous substances included an old landfill and three debris piles (collectively Landfill) which existed prior to the present ownership of the property. The owner of the property, Ugo DiBiase Salem Realty Trust (DiBiase) is the RP for the Landfill. Generation and disposal of the landfill and debris piles is not known. Although DiBiase did not contribute any waste to the Site, it was deemed liable by virtue of property ownership and failing to take any action to minimize exposure to contaminants. Operable Unit No. 1 includes the entire Site.

EPA conducted two Emergency Removal Actions (ERAs) at the Site, one in 1987 and one in 1990. EPA funded the first action and a portion of the second action with SESD performing and funding the remaining portion of the second action. The first action consisted of lagoon water removal and disposal, capping the lagoons, constructing a slurry wall and provide fencing to preclude site access. The second action consisted drum repacking and storage, fence and gate replacement and installation of signs.

Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/FS)

The SESD completed a site-wide Remedial Investigation (RI) on May 29, 1992. They then conducted a Feasibility Study (FS) which was completed in June 1992. Results of the RI showed the nature and extent of contamination and assessed the associated risks from exposure. The contaminants of concern include polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), polychlorinated biphenyls PCBs, dioxins/furans, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), semi-VOCs (sVOCs), chromium, arsenic, beryllium, vanadium and thallium. The concentration levels for the dioxin equivalent 2,3,7,8-TCDD found during the RA were below the cleanup level of 1 part per billion. The primary exposure pathways for both existing and future land use (residential) that showed unacceptable risk include: ingestion, dermal contact and inhalation of (airborne particulates originating from) sludge, fly ash and contaminated soil.

The FS developed and evaluated various remedies for each contaminated area, including RCRA capping, incineration, immobilization, thermal desorption, solvent extraction, in-situ vitrification, sludge fixation, excavation and off-site disposal.

Record of Decision Findings

A Record of Decision (ROD) was signed on March 25, 1993. The ROD required a preferred remedy of soil/sludge fixation, excavation and off-site disposal at a permitted landfill. Implementation of the preferred remedy required that certain conditions be met which included that the waste must be classified as non-hazardous under RCRA before shipment off-site. If these conditions could not be met, the ROD required construction of a RCRA cap over the hazardous substances to minimize possible exposure, implementation of institutional controls and long term monitoring to assure cap integrity. All areas to be remediated on Site are identified as Operable Unit No. 1. If the preferred remedy proved to be feasible, then no institutional controls or long term monitoring would be required.

On April 11, 1997, EPA issued an Explanation of Significant Difference (ESD). Based on updated toxicity data regarding carcinogenic polyaromatic hydrocarbons (cPAHs), EPA recalculated cleanup values for soils using this new information. The cleanup risk value established in the ROD for the Site was held constant, providing the same level of protectiveness. Each cPAH was given a separate cleanup value rather than a total cPAH value 1.2 parts per million (ppm) provided in the ROD. In addition, EPA calculated a new cleanup value for beryllium after a background study was performed. EPA redefined the background concentration of beryllium in soils as 1.0 ppm and revised the cleanup level from 0.42 ppm to 1.0. The excess lifetime cancer risk resulting from exposure to 1 ppm beryllium in soils given the exposure scenario and assumptions specified in the HRA is 2 x 10-6 which is consistent with EPA's goal for remedial actions (clean up to within the acceptable risk range of 1 x 10-4 to 1 x 10-6).

Characterization of Risk

The risk assessment performed as part of the RI for existing and future use scenarios determined that unacceptable risks exist from exposure to cPAHs, PCBs, dioxins/furans, VOCs, sVOCs, chromium, arsenic, beryllium, vanadium and thallium. The primary exposure pathways for both existing and future land use (residential) that showed unacceptable risk include: ingestion, dermal contact and inhalation of (airborne particulates originating from) sludge, fly ash and contaminated soil.

Response Actions

Each of the three RPs entered into separate Consent Decrees to pay for past costs expended at the Site, all future costs incurred at the Site and to perform separate remedial designs (RDs) (SESD and MEC only) and remedial actions (RAs) for each responsible area. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, on behalf of the EPA, performed the RD for the Landfill with Fund-lead monies. Just prior to the start of a fund lead RA, DiBiase entered into a Consent Decree to perform the RA and to cover certain past and all future costs associated with its cleanup. All future costs incurred by EPA and DEP for each of the three RD/RAs were covered by each respective RP. EPA retained the Corps to provide design review and evaluation, oversight of the remedial actions, including evaluation of quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) procedures, performance standards and verified that the validated data met the established data quality objectives (DQOs) for each project.

For the first RA, DiBiase excavated approximately 2,000 cubic yards (cy) of material and disposed of it at an off-site permitted landfill. During the remedial action, fly ash was shown to be present well into the landfill. DiBiase removed approximately 1,500 cy of fly ash and MEC agreed to incur the costs associated with this work. Final site restoration of the Landfill and debris piles was performed in the spring of 1996.

MEC commenced RA activities in August 1995 and was substantially completed but discontinued in December 1995 at the boundary of the fly ash area and the adjacent wetland. Approximately 11,000 cy of fly ash and approximately 6,100 cy of adjacent contaminated soils were excavated and shipped off-site to a permitted special waste landfill located in New Hampshire. Site restoration was performed in the spring of 1996.

MEC excavated the remaining fly ash found in the wetlands in August 1999. Approximately 1,000 cy of fly ash was removed from the wetland and shipped off-site to an appropriate landfill. Restoration of the wetland included seeding the slopes with an appropriate wetland soils and seed mix. A final inspection was performed on August 18, 1999. This is the date for which all construction activities were considered complete for the entire Site.

SESD performed treatability tests for the fixation of the sludges during the pre-design phase. The purpose of fixation was to render any ignitable sludges non-ignitable. The treatability study shown that the sludges were non-ignitable and non-RCRA toxic and thus not RCRA- characteristic hazardous waste. SESD implemented the remedy of excavation and off-site disposal. The remedial work commenced in September 1996 and substantially completed in September 1997. Final site restoration was completed in the spring of 1998. A final site inspection for the sludge areas occurred on April 29, 1999.

A total of 28,755 tons of sludge were excavated and disposed of off-site at a permitted solid waste disposal facility located in Maine. A total of 60,304 tons of soil were excavated and disposed of at a solid waste disposal facility in Massachusetts. The slurry wall, sludge lagoon HDPE covers installed during the 1987 ERA and other demolition debris were also removed and sent to the Massachusetts disposal facility. A total of approximately 7.5 million gallons of site water accumulated in the excavated areas were collected and discharged to the SESD treatment plant for treatment via municipal sewer. The water was tested regularly to ensure compliance with the plant's pre-treatment limits. The high volume of water that accumulated in the excavated areas was due to the occurrence of a hundred year storm event, unanticipated depth of excavation and contractor delays based on cost claims with SESD.

Each of the RPs monitored surface water and sediments in the wetlands prior to and after their remediation. SESD was also tasked to monitor Site ground water during and after remediation. The last and final ground water sampling event occurred in May of 1999. The results showed that ground water was not impacted by any remediation. Ground water had also not been impacted by past disposal of materials at the Site.

Cleanup Standards

Remedial action cleanup activities at the Site were consistent with the NCP, the ROD, the ESD and with each RD/RA Consent Decree and provides protection to human health and the environment. RD/RA plans for all phases of construction included a Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPPs) and incorporated all EPA and State quality assurance and quality control procedures and protocols (where necessary). All procedures and protocol were followed for soil, sediment, water and air sampling during the RA. EPA analytical methods were used for the confirmatory and monitoring samples during all RA activities. EPA has determined that the analytical results, having been Tier III validated, are accurate to the degree needed to assure satisfactory execution of each RA, show that the cleanup standards have been met, and are consistent with the ROD/ESD and the RD plans and specifications.

Operations and Maintenance

The Site has been entirely cleaned up in accordance with the ROD, the ESD and the three CDs. There will be no need for operation and maintenance activities at the Site. The Site requires no institutional controls and now provides for unrestricted use. The Site is zoned as residential. The landowner has informally suggested that he may build multi-family residences on the Site but at the time of this writing, no definitive or formal plans have been made public.

Five Year Review

No hazardous substances remain at the site above health-based levels after the completion of all remedial actions. Therefore, pursuant to CERCLA Section 121(c) and as provided in OSWER Directive 9355.7-02, Structure and Components of Five-Year Reviews, May 23, 1991 and OSWER Directive 9355.702A, Supplemental Five-Year Review Guidance, July, 26, 1994, five year reviews will not be necessary.

Community Involvement

Public participation activities have been satisfied as required in CERCLA Section 113(k), 42 U.S.C. 9613(k), and CERCLA Section 117, 42 U.S.C. 9617. Documents in the deletion docket which EPA relied on for recommendation of the deletion from the NPL are available to the public in the information repositories.

Informal public meetings were held in the neighborhood prior to and after each remedial action. Representatives from EPA, MADEP and the RPs with their consultants and contractors were present. These meetings proved to be extremely helpful in providing the public, especially the immediate neighborhood residents who would be most affected, with important information regarding activities associated with each remedial action. These meetings were also particularly useful for the agencies and the RPs in hearing and addressing the residents' concerns regarding on-site and off-site activities. Some examples of what the agencies and the RPs implemented as a result of these meetings included: prohibiting truck traffic before 8 a.m. and after 5 p.m. and during school bus pickup and drop off periods; setting a speed limit of 15 m.p.h. for all site-related vehicles on residential streets; daily street cleaning; air monitoring at the site gate adjacent to the neighborhood and the RPs agreeing to repave the neighborhood roadway used to transport wastes off-site.

[Return to Table of Contents]

V. Deletion Action

The EPA, with concurrence from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, has determined that all appropriate responses under CERCLA have been completed, and that no further response actions, under CERCLA are necessary. Therefore, EPA is deleting the Site from the NPL.

Because EPA considers this action to be noncontroversial and routine, EPA is taking it without prior publication of a notice of intent to delete. This action will become effective July 23, 2001 unless EPA receives adverse comments by June 21, 2001. If adverse comments are received within the 30-day public comment period on this document, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of this direct final deletion before the effective date of the deletion and it will not take effect and, EPA will prepare a response to comments and continue with the deletion process on the basis of the notice of intent to delete and the comments already received. There will be no additional opportunity to comment.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Chemicals, Hazardous waste, Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Superfund, Water pollution control, Water supply.

Dated: March 23, 2001.

Ira W. Leighton,
Acting Regional Administrator, U.S. EPA - New England.

For the reasons set out in this document, 40 CFR part 300 is amended as follows:

PART 300--[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 300 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2); 42 U.S.C. 9601-9657; E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp.; p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR 2923, 3 CFR, 1987 Comp. p. 193.

Appendix B--[Amended]

2. Table 1 of Appendix B to part 300 is amended under Salem Acres Superfund Site by removing the "Salem Acres Superfund Site, Salem, Massachusetts".

[FR Doc. 01-12709 Filed 5-21-01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

Top of page

OSWER Home | Superfund Home | Innovative Technologies Home

Local Navigation

Jump to main content.