[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 179 (Friday, September 15, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 47918-47920]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-22488]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 300
[FRL-5293-4]
National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan;
National Priorities List
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Notice of Intent to Delete the Clothier Disposal site from the
National Priorities List: Request for Comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region II announces
its intent to delete the Clothier Disposal site from the National
Priorities List (NPL) and requests public comment on this action. The
NPL is Appendix B of 40 CFR part 300 which is the National Oil and
Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan ((NCP), which EPA
promulgated pursuant to Section 105 of the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), as amended. EPA and
the State of New York have determined that no further cleanup by
responsible parties is appropriate under CERCLA. Moreover, EPA and the
State have determined that CERCLA activities conducted at the Clothier
Disposal site to date have been protective of public health, welfare,
and the environment.
DATES: Comments concerning the deletion of the Clothier Disposal site
from the NPL may be submitted on or before October 15, 1995.
ADDRESSES: Comments concerning the deletion of the Clothier Disposal
site from the NPL may be submitted to: Herbert H. King, Remedial
Project Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region II, 290
Broadway, 20th floor, New York, NY 10007-1866.
Comprehensive information on the Clothier Disposal site is
contained in the EPA Region II public docket, which is located at EPA's
Region II office (the 18th floor), and is available for viewing, by
appointment only, from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding holidays. For further information, or to request an
appointment to review the public docket, please contact Mr. King at
(212) 637-4268.
Background information from the Regional public docket is also
available for viewing at the Clothier Disposal site's Administrative
Record repository located at: Fulton Library, 160 South First Street,
Fulton, NY 13069.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mr. Herbert H. King, (212) 637-4268.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. NPL Deletion Criteria
III. Deletion Procedures
IV. Basis for Intended Site Deletion
I. Introduction
EPA Region II announces its intent to delete the Clothier Disposal
site from the NPL and requests public comment on this action. The NPL
is Appendix B to the NCP, which EPA promulgated pursuant to Section 105
of CERCLA, as amended. EPA identifies sites that appear to present a
significant risk to public health, welfare, or the environment and
maintains the NPL as the list of those sites. Sites on the NPL may be
the subject of remedial actions (RAs) financed by the Hazardous
Substances Superfund Response Trust Fund (the ``Fund''). Pursuant to
Sec. 300.425(e)(3) of the NCP, any site deleted from the NPL remains
eligible for Fund-financed RAs, if conditions at such site warrant
action.
EPA will accept comments concerning the Clothier Disposal site for
thirty (30) days after publication of this notice in the Federal
Register (until October 15, 1995).
Section II of this notice explains the criteria for deleting sites
from the NPL. Section III discusses the procedures that EPA is using
for this action. Section IV discusses how the Clothier Disposal site
meets the deletion criteria.
II. NPL Deletion Criteria
The NCP establishes the criteria that the Agency uses to delete
sites from the NPL. In accordance with 40 CFR 300.425(e), sites may be
deleted from the NPL where no further response is appropriate. In
making this determination, EPA, in consultation with the State, will
consider whether any of the following criteria have been met:
1. That responsible or other persons have implemented all
appropriate response actions required; or
2. All appropriate Fund-financed responses under CERCLA have been
implemented, and no further cleanup by responsible parties is
appropriate; or
3. The remedial investigation has shown that the release poses no
significant threat to public health or the environment and, therefore,
taking remedial measures is not appropriate.
III. Deletion Procedures
The NCP provides that EPA shall not delete a site from the NPL
until the State in which the release was located has concurred, and the
public has been afforded an opportunity to comment on the proposed
deletion. Deletion of a site from the NPL does not affect responsible
party liability or impede agency efforts to recover costs associated
with response efforts. The NPL is designed primarily for informational
purposes and to assist agency management.
The following procedures were used for the intended deletion of the
Clothier Disposal site:
1. EPA Region II has recommended deletion and has prepared the
relevant documents.
2. The State of New York has concurred with the deletion decision.
3. Concurrent with this Notice of Intent to Delete, a notice has
been published in local newspapers and has been distributed to
appropriate federal, state and local officials, and other interested
parties. This notice announces a thirty (30)-day public comment period
on the deletion package starting on September 15, 1995 and concluding
on October 15, 1995.
4. The Region has made all relevant documents available in the
regional office and the local site information repository.
EPA Region II will accept and evaluate public comments and prepare
a Responsiveness Summary which will address the comments received,
before a final decision is made. The Agency believes that deletion
procedures should focus on notice and comment at the local level.
Comments from the local community may be most pertinent to deletion
decisions. If, after consideration of these comments, EPA decides to
proceed with deletion, the EPA Regional Administrator will place a
Notice of Deletion in the Federal Register. The NPL will reflect any
deletions in the next update. Public notices and copies of the
Responsiveness Summary will be made available to the public by EPA
Region II.
[[Page 47919]]
IV. Basis for Intended Site Deletion
Site History and Background
The Clothier Disposal site, located in the Town of Granby, Oswego
County, New York, is a fifteen-acre, privately-owned parcel of land, of
which six acres were used for waste disposal. Ox Creek flows through
the site in a northerly direction, feeding into the Oswego River.
In 1973, the Oswego County Health Department found approximately
2,200 drums of chemical waste dumped on the site and requested an
investigation by the New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation (NYSDEC). In 1976, NYSDEC brought suit against the owner
of the property of operating an illegal dump. Subsequently, a temporary
permit was granted for a period of one year to clean up the site. In
1977, the owner made an attempt to bury or cover the waste materials
dumped on the site. In doing so, drums were broken open and drained.
Between early 1978 and 1980, additional efforts were made by the owner
to clean up the property. Again these efforts largely entailed burying
or covering previously exposed wastes.
In 1983, Engineering-Service, Inc. performed a Phase I Engineering
Investigation and Evaluation of the site for NYSDEC, for the purpose of
computing a Hazard Ranking System score needed to evaluate whether or
not the site should be placed on the NPL. The site was proposed for
listing on the NPL on October 15, 1984 (49 FR 40320); it was included
on the NPL on June 10, 1986 (51 FR 21504).
In 1985, NYSDEC, through its contractor, URS Company, Inc.
undertook a geophysical survey of the site, and staged and sampled on-
site drums as part of the remedial investigation/feasibility study (RI/
FS) designed to determine the nature and extent of the contamination at
the site, to assess the threat that the site posed to public health and
the environment, and to develop and evaluate various alternatives to
remediate the site.
Performed concurrently with the RI/FS, a number of potentially
responsible parties (PRPs), operating under an Administrative Order,
removed and disposed of 1,858 drums and stockpiled visibly-contaminated
soil in1986. The remaining drums, as well as the visibly-contaminated
surficial soils, were removed by EPA during 1987 and 1988.
A number of data quality problems complicated the completion of the
RI/FS, which led to EPA tasking Ebasco Services, Inc. (Ebasco) to
perform a supplemental RI/FS.
The supplemental RI/FS report, issued in August 1988, concluded
that, as a result of the removal actions taken at the site, only low-
level residual soil contamination remained on-site. The RI/FS also
concluded that the risk levels associated with this residual
contamination were within the acceptable range of 10-4 to
10-6 (representing a one in ten thousand and a one in a million
incremental individual lifetime cancer risk, respectively). The risk
assessment indicated that the major route of human exposure at the site
was through direct contact with on-site soil residually contaminated
with polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and carcinogenic polyaromatic
hydrocarbons (CPAHs). The highest PCB concentration observed in the
soil was 2.5 parts per million (ppm). In order to develop a full range
of remedial alternatives, any concentration above 1 ppm PCBs in the
soil was considered to require remediation. This level was based on the
Toxic Substances Control Act definition of ``clean'' soil and is
associated with a risk below 4 x 10-7 for current use and
7 x 10-6 for plausible maximum exposure during future site use.
For CPAHs (benzo(a)anthrance, benzo(b)fluoranthene,
benzo(k)fluoranthene, Benzo(a)pyrene and chrysene), the highest total
concentration at any location was observed to be 0.9 ppm. For these
compounds, a total concentration of 0.33 ppm was set as the limit above
which remediation was required. This level was based on the CPAH
detection limit for the EPA contract laboratory program and is
associated with a risk for 2 x 10-7 for current use or
3 x 10-6 for plausible maximum exposure during future site use.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife (USFWS) conducted an investigation of Ox
Creek, and in August 1988, issued a report of its findings, entitled,
Effects of Contaminants from the Clothier Disposal Site on Fish and
Wildlife Resources of Ox Creek, Oswego County, New York. This report
stated that there was no evidence of either environmental damage in the
area around the site or contamination of Ox Creek at levels likely to
be associated with risks to wildlife.
On December 28, 1988, a Record of Decision (ROD) was signed,
selecting as the remedy for the site:
Placement of a one-foot clean soil cover over the
residually-contaminated areas;
Regarding and revegetating of the site to prevent soil
erosion and to minimize surface water runoff,
Installation of rip-rap, as needed, on the embankment
sloping towards the adjacent Ox Creek to prevent soil erosion;
Performance of long-term monitoring of the groundwater and
soil, and Ox Creek sediments and surface water; and
Application of institutional controls to prevent the
utilization of the underlying groundwater and the future development of
the site for residential use.
The ROD also noted that the maximum contaminant concentrations
(although not the geometric mean concentrations) in some of the
groundwater sample collected during the RI/FS marginally exceeded a
number of Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements (the
maximum concentrations of tetrachloroethene and trichloroethene of 24
parts per billion (ppb) and 18 ppb, respectively, exceeded the New York
State standard of 5 ppb of each; and antimony, barium, beryllium,
chromium, lead, magnesium, and manganese exceeded New York State
inorganic groundwater standards or guidances). Thus, further evaluation
to determine whether remediation of the groundwater was necessary was
called for in the ROD.
A local citizen's group, after reviewing the USFWS report,
expressed concern that the USFWS investigation did not include an
eleven-acre wetland located adjacent to the site.
To determine whether remediation of the groundwater was necessary
and to evaluate the threat to the wetland located adjacent to the site,
EPA tasked Ebasco to perform a post-RI/FS investigation, specifically
to collect and evaluate samples of the groundwater and the surface
water and sediment in the wetland. The results of this investigation,
which were presented in January 1990 in the Post RI/FS Evaluation of
Groundwater and Wetlands Report, indicated that a significant threat to
human health and the environment did not exist at that time, and RAs
for the groundwater and wetlands were not warranted.
In September 1989, a Consent Decree was entered by the Northern
District of New York with the Settling Defendants to undertake the
design and construction of the remedy selected for the site and to
perform the long-term monitoring and maintenance of the site upon
completion of the construction. The Settling Defendant's contractor,
Canonie Environmental Services Corporation (Canonie), performed pre-
design sampling to more precisely determine the area extent of the
[[Page 47920]]
residual, low-level contamination on-site. Based upon these results,
Canonie prepared the remedial design (RD) plans and specifications. As
part of the RD, calculations were performed, based on a 100-year storm
event, that determined that the erosive forces due to the overland flow
velocities would be minimal, and that rip-rap protection on the slopes
to the wetland (called for the ROD) would not be required. EPA approved
the RD in June 1991.
The Settling Defendants awarded a contract to Sevenson
Environmental Services, Inc. to implement the remedy in July 1991.
During the course of regrading the areas to be covered with clean soil,
it was discovered that an above-grade mound of soil contained parts of
four drums. Further, while regrading the slope to the wetland, parts of
three other buried drums were uncovered. The drum parts and the
surrounding soil were excavated and were subsequently disposed of at an
EPA-approved hazardous waste facility. The results of analyses of the
soil in the areas where the drum parts were discovered indicated that
the contaminants and their concentrations were comparable to those
found during the RI and, therefore, the remedy selected in the ROD
remained appropriate.
In May 1992, a representative of NYSDEC, during an inspection of
the site, observed three seeps located at the foot of the west slope to
the wetlands. After an analysis of the seeps and the soil surrounding
the seeps, it was concluded that the seeps were caused by the discharge
of groundwater at the wetland margin. The results of the analyses of
the seeps indicated low concentrations of PCBs. Since the samples were
not filtered prior to analysis, the PCBs were believed to be a result
of PCBs adsorbed to sediment suspended in the liquid while collecting
the samples (this premise has been confirmed, in that no PCBs have been
identified in five rounds of ground water testing.) The results of the
analyses of the soil associated with these seeps indicated contaminant
concentrations that are consistent with those detected during the RI.
Considering these results, EPA directed the Settling Defendants to
continue with the implementation of the remedy. The installation of the
soil cap and revegetation was completed in September 1992.
Following EPA's approval of the Settling Defendants' operation and
maintenance and long-term monitoring plan, a Superfund Site Close-Out
Report was approved on December 29, 1993.
During the first post-RA inspection/monitoring in April 1994, a
small area of black, odorous soil was observed on the western portion
of the soil cover. Three buried drums that were subsequently discovered
in this area were excavated and overpacked. A geophysical
investigation, performed to determine whether other buried drums were
present in this area, followed by the installation of two trenches in
areas of concern, revealed one crushed drum, metallic debris, and some
stained soil. The drum, debris, and soil were excavated and, along with
the overpacked drums mentioned above, were disposed of at approved
disposal facilities.
Summary of Operation and Maintenance and Five-Year Review Requirements
Since the remedy involved the installation of a soil cover, there
are no operational requirements.
The Settling Defendants are to monitor the site for five years,
commencing with the first inspection/monitoring event that occurred on
April 26, 1994.
The long-term monitoring program consists of monitoring the
groundwater, soil, and Ox Creek sediments and surface water quarterly
the first year, semi-annually the second year, and annually thereafter.
Site inspections, which will be conducted quarterly for the first
year and semi-annually thereafter, are to be coincident with the
monitoring events. Additional inspections will be conducted after any
major flooding (100-year) or rainfall events in the Ox Creek area. The
inspections will include visual observations of the soil cover, erosion
controls and silt fencing, groundwater monitoring wells, site security,
and general site conditions. Maintenance, if required, will consist of
correcting observed deficiencies (e.g., restoring the soil cover and
its vegetation to its original condition, repair of fencing, etc.) The
six groundwater monitoring wells (four located within the limits of the
soil cover, one just adjacent to it, and one up-gradient) that comprise
the groundwater monitoring program will be inspected to ensure their
integrity. They will be repaired should they become damaged, or
replaced should they become non-functional.
So that EPA can evaluate the remedy's effectiveness, following each
inspection/sampling event, the Settling Defendants are to submit to EPA
a monitoring and inspection program report, summarizing the inspection
and sampling results, and describing any corrective maintenance actions
that were taken. In addition, a review of the long-term monitoring and
inspection program reports will be performed five years after the
initiation of the RA to assure that the remedy remains effective in
protecting human health and the environment.
Summary of How the Deletion Criteria Has Been Met
Based upon the results of RA sample analyses, survey results, and
site inspections, the site meets the requirements set forth in the ROD,
in that a one-foot clean-soil cover has been installed over those
residually-contaminated locations at which concentrations above 1 ppm
PCBs and 0.33 ppmm CPAHs were detected, the site has been regraded and
revegetated to prevent soil erosion and to minimize surface water
runoff, and institutional controls (an easement) have been put into
place to prevent the utilization of the underlying groundwater and the
future development of the site for residential use.
EPA and the State have determined that the response actions
undertaken at the Clothier Disposal site are protective of human health
and the environment.
In accordance with 40 CFR 300.425(e), sites may be deleted from the
NPL where no further response is appropriate. EPA, in consultation with
the State, has determined that all appropriate responses under CERCLA
have been implemented and that no further cleanup by responsible
parties is appropriate. Having met the deletion criteria, EPA proposes
to delete the Clothier Disposal site from the NPL.
Dated: August 21, 1995.
William J. Muszynski,
Acting Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 95-22488 Filed 9-14-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6460-50-M
