National Oil and Hazardous Substance; Pollution Contingency Plan; National Priorities List, 36943-36948 [E9-17562]
Download as PDF
rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 142 / Monday, July 27, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
[Reserved for Product Description]
Bookspan Negotiated Service Agreement
[Reserved for Product Description]
Bank of America Corporation Negotiated
Service Agreement
The Bradford Group Negotiated Service
Agreement
Part B—Competitive Products
Competitive Product List
Express Mail
Express Mail
Outbound International Expedited Services
Inbound International Expedited Services
Inbound International Expedited Services 1
(CP2008–7)
Inbound International Expedited Services 2
(MC2009–10 and CP2009–12)
Priority Mail
Priority Mail
Outbound Priority Mail International
Inbound Air Parcel Post
Royal Mail Group Inbound Air Parcel Post
Agreement
Parcel Select
Parcel Return Service
International
International Priority Airlift (IPA)
International Surface Airlift (ISAL)
International Direct Sacks—M-Bags
Global Customized Shipping Services
Inbound Surface Parcel Post (at non-UPU
rates)
Canada Post—United States Postal Service
Contractual Bilateral Agreement for
Inbound Competitive Services (MC2009–
8 and CP2009–9)
International Money Transfer Service
International Ancillary Services
Special Services
Premium Forwarding Service
Negotiated Service Agreements
Domestic
Express Mail Contract 1 (MC2008–5)
Express Mail Contract 2 (MC2009–3 and
CP2009–4)
Express Mail Contract 3 (MC2009–15 and
CP2009–21)
Express Mail & Priority Mail Contract 1
(MC2009–6 and CP2009–7)
Express Mail & Priority Mail Contract 2
(MC2009–12 and CP2009–14)
Express Mail & Priority Mail Contract 3
(MC2009–13 and CP2009–17)
Express Mail & Priority Mail Contract 4
(MC2009–17 and CP2009–24)
Express Mail & Priority Mail Contract 5
(MC2009–18 and CP2009–25)
Parcel Return Service Contract 1 (MC2009–
1 and CP2009–2)
Priority Mail Contract 1 (MC2008–8 and
CP2008–26)
Priority Mail Contract 2 (MC2009–2 and
CP2009–3)
Priority Mail Contract 3 (MC2009–4 and
CP2009–5)
Priority Mail Contract 4 (MC2009–5 and
CP2009–6)
Priority Mail Contract 5 (MC2009–21 and
CP2009–26)
Priority Mail Contract 6 (MC2009–25 and
CP2009–30)
Priority Mail Contract 7 (MC2009–25 and
CP2009–31)
Priority Mail Contract 8 (MC2009–25 and
CP2009–32)
Priority Mail Contract 9 (MC2009–25 and
CP2009–33)
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:57 Jul 24, 2009
Jkt 217001
Priority Mail Contract 10 (MC2009–25 and
CP2009–34)
Priority Mail Contract 11 (MC2009–27 and
CP2009–37)
Outbound International
Global Direct Contracts (MC2009–9,
CP2009–10, and CP2009–11)
Global Expedited Package Services (GEPS)
Contracts
GEPS 1 (CP2008–5, CP2008–11, CP2008–
12, and CP2008–13, CP2008–18,
CP2008–19, CP2008–20, CP2008–21,
CP2008–22, CP2008–23, and CP2008–24)
Global Plus Contracts
Global Plus 1 (CP2008–9 and CP2008–10)
Global Plus 2 (MC2008–7, CP2008–16 and
CP2008–17)
Inbound International
Inbound Direct Entry Contracts With
Foreign Postal Administrations
(MC2008–6, CP2008–14 and CP2008–15)
International Business Reply Service
Competitive Contract 1 (MC2009–14 and
CP2009–20)
Competitive Product Descriptions
Express Mail
[Reserved for Group Description]
Express Mail
[Reserved for Product Description]
Outbound International Expedited Services
[Reserved for Product Description]
Inbound International Expedited Services
[Reserved for Product Description]
Priority
[Reserved for Product Description]
Priority Mail
[Reserved for Product Description]
Outbound Priority Mail International
[Reserved for Product Description]
Inbound Air Parcel Post
[Reserved for Product Description]
Parcel Select
[Reserved for Group Description]
Parcel Return Service
[Reserved for Group Description]
International
[Reserved for Group Description]
International Priority Airlift (IPA)
[Reserved for Product Description]
International Surface Airlift (ISAL)
[Reserved for Product Description]
International Direct Sacks—M–Bags
[Reserved for Product Description]
Global Customized Shipping Services
[Reserved for Product Description]
International Money Transfer Service
[Reserved for Product Description]
Inbound Surface Parcel Post (at non-UPU
rates)
[Reserved for Product Description]
International Ancillary Services
[Reserved for Product Description]
International Certificate of Mailing
[Reserved for Product Description]
International Registered Mail
[Reserved for Product Description]
International Return Receipt
[Reserved for Product Description]
International Restricted Delivery
[Reserved for Product Description]
International Insurance
[Reserved for Product Description]
Negotiated Service Agreements
[Reserved for Group Description]
Domestic
[Reserved for Product Description]
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
36943
Outbound International
[Reserved for Group Description]
Part C—Glossary of Terms and Conditions
[Reserved]
Part D—Country Price Lists for International
Mail
[Reserved]
[FR Doc. E9–17842 Filed 7–24–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 300
[EPA–HQ–SFUND–2009–0501; FRL–8934–2]
National Oil and Hazardous Substance;
Pollution Contingency Plan; National
Priorities List
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Direct Final Notice of Deletion
of the Southern California Edison,
Visalia Pole Yard Superfund Site from
the National Priorities List.
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) Region IX, is publishing
a Direct Final Notice of Deletion for the
Southern California Edison (SCE),
Visalia Pole Yard Superfund Site (Site)
located in northeastern Visalia, Tulare
County, California, 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
an appendix of 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
California, through the Department of
Toxic Substance Control (DTSC),
because EPA has determined that all
appropriate response actions under
CERCLA, other than operation,
maintenance, and five-year reviews,
have been completed. However, this
deletion does not preclude future
actions under Superfund.
DATES: This direct final deletion is
effective September 25, 2009 unless
EPA receives adverse comments by
August 26, 2009. If adverse comment(s)
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.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID no. EPA–HQ–
SFUND–2009–0501 by one of the
following methods:
E:\FR\FM\27JYR1.SGM
27JYR1
rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES
36944
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 142 / Monday, July 27, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
• https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
online instructions for submitting
comments.
• E-mail: lane.jackie@epa.gov.
• Fax: (415) 947–3528.
• Mail: Jackie Lane, Community
Involvement Coordinator, U.S. EPA
Region IX (SFD 6–3), 75 Hawthorne
Street, San Francisco, California 94105.
• Phone: (415) 972–3236.
• Hand delivery: U.S. EPA Region IX
(SFD 6–3), 75 Hawthorne Street, San
Francisco, California 94105. Deliveries
are only accepted during regular office
days and hours of operation (Monday
through Friday, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.).
Special arrangements will need to be
made with EPA staff for deliveries of
boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID no. EPA–HQ–SFUND–2009–
0501 EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI, or otherwise
protected, through https://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The
https://www.regulations.gov Web site is
an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means that EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless it
is provided in the body of your
comment. If you send an e-mail
comment directly to EPA, without going
through https://www.regulations.gov,
your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as
part of the publicly available docket on
the Internet. EPA recommends that all
submittals include your name and other
contact information (i.e., e-mail and/or
physical address and phone number).
Please note that electronic file
submittals should be free of any
physical defects and computer viruses
and avoid the use of special characters
and any form of encryption. If technical
difficulties prevent EPA from reading
your comment and cannot contact you
for clarification, EPA may not be able to
consider your comment.
Docket: All documents in the docket
are listed in the https://
www.regulations.gov index; however,
some information is not publicly
available (e.g., CBI or other information
restricted by disclosure statute). Certain
other materials, such as copyrighted
materials, will be publicly available
only in hard copy. All other publicly
available docket materials are available
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:57 Jul 24, 2009
Jkt 217001
either electronically https://
www.regulations.gov or hard copy at the
Site Information repositories below:
U.S. EPA Superfund Records Center, 95
Hawthorne Street, San Francisco,
California 94105–3901, (415) 536–
2000.
Tulare County Public Library, 200 West
Oak Street, Visalia, CA 93291, (818)
952–0603.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Charnjit Bhullar, Remedial Project
Manager, U.S. EPA Region IX (SFD 7–
3), 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco,
California 94105, (415) 972–3960.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. NPL Deletion Criteria
III. Deletion Procedures
IV. Basis for Site Deletion
V. Deletion Action
I. Introduction
EPA Region IX is publishing this
Direct Final Notice of Deletion of the
Southern California Edison, Visalia Pole
Yard Superfund Site (EPA ID No.
CAD980816466), hereinafter VPY or
Site, from the National Priorities List
(NPL). The NPL constitutes Appendix B
of 40 CFR part 300, which is the 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) of 1980, as amended.
EPA maintains the NPL as the list of
sites that appear to present a significant
risk to public health, welfare, or the
environment. Sites on the NPL may be
the subject of remedial actions financed
by the Hazardous Substance Superfund
(Fund). As described in 300.425(e)(3) of
the NCP, sites deleted from the NPL
remain eligible for Fund-financed
remedial actions if conditions at a
deleted site or new information warrant
such action.
Because EPA considers this action to
be noncontroversial and routine, this
action will be effective September 25,
2009 unless EPA receives adverse
comments by August 26, 2009. Along
with this direct final Notice of Deletion,
EPA is co-publishing a Notice of Intent
to Delete in the ‘‘Proposed Rules’’
section of the Federal Register. If
adverse comments are received within
the 30-day public comment period on
this deletion action, EPA will publish a
timely withdrawal of this direct final
Notice of 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
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 how the
Southern California Edison, Visalia Pole
Yard Superfund Site meets the NPL
deletion criteria; and Section V
discusses EPA’s action to delete the Site
from the NPL.
II. NPL Deletion Criteria
The NCP establishes the criteria that
EPA 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 such a
determination pursuant to 40 CFR
300.425(e), EPA will consider, in
consultation with the state, whether any
of the following criteria have been met:
(1) Responsible parties or other
parties have implemented all
appropriate response actions required;
(2) All appropriate response under
CERCLA has been implemented, and no
further response action 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 of
remedial measures is not appropriate.
Pursuant to CERCLA section 121(c)
and the NCP, EPA conducts five-year
reviews to ensure the continued
protectiveness of remedial actions
where hazardous substances, pollutants,
or contaminants remain at a site above
levels that allow for unlimited use and
unrestricted exposure. EPA conducts
such five-year reviews even if a site is
deleted from the NPL. EPA may initiate
further action to ensure continued
protectiveness at a deleted site if new
information becomes available that
indicates it is appropriate. 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.
III. Deletion Procedures
The following procedures were
followed for deletion of this Site:
(1) The EPA consulted with the State
of California’s Department of Toxic
Substances Control (DTSC) prior to
developing this Direct Final Notice of
Deletion and Notice of Intent to Delete
being co-published in the ‘‘Proposed
Rules’’ section of the Federal Register.
E:\FR\FM\27JYR1.SGM
27JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 142 / Monday, July 27, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
(2) EPA provided DTSC 30 working
days for its review and comment of this
Notice and the Notice of Intent to Delete
and, following its review, DTSC concurs
with the deletion of the Site from the
NPL.
(3) Concurrently with the publication
of this Direct Final Notice of Deletion,
a notice of availability of the parallel
Notice of Intent to Delete is being
published in a major local newspaper,
the Visalia Times-Delta. 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 has placed copies of
supporting documents for the proposed
site deletion in the Deletion Docket and
made these documents available for
public inspection and copying at the
Site Information Repositories identified
above.
(5) If adverse comments are received
within the 30-day public comment
period on this deletion action, EPA will
publish a timely notice of withdrawal of
this Direct Final Notice of Deletion
before its effective date and it will not
take effect; otherwise, 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 it has 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.
rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES
IV. Basis for Site Deletion
The following information provides
EPA’s basis for deleting the Site from
the NPL:
Site Background and History
The VPY Site is located at 432 North
Ben Maddox Way in northeastern
Visalia, Tulare County, California. The
Site is bounded on the north by East
Goshen Avenue, and on the west by
North Ben Maddox Way. Visalia is
located approximately midway between
Fresno and Bakersfield in the Central
Valley of California and is a growing
metropolitan area with a population of
approximately 110,000. Agriculture is
the dominant industry in the region and
walnuts, olives, and citrus are the
primary crops.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:57 Jul 24, 2009
Jkt 217001
The geologic strata underlying the
VPY are composed of alluvial-fan
deposits from the Kaweah River and its
distributaries. The three
hydrostratigraphic units beneath the site
include: A shallow aquifer (30 to 50 feet
bgs; dewatered since the 1980s), a
shallow aquitard (50 to 75 feet bgs), an
intermediate aquifer (75 to 100 feet bgs),
an intermediate aquitard (100 to 125 feet
bgs), and a deep aquifer (125 to about
180 feet bgs). Both aquitards generally
consist of silty sand and clay materials,
whereas the aquifers are composed
primarily of fine-grained and coarsegrained sands. When saturated, the
shallow aquitard restricts vertical
groundwater movement. Aquifer testing
of the intermediate hydrostratigraphic
unit indicated a transmissivity of
approximately 50,000 gallons per day
per foot (gpd/ft). Short-term pumping
from the deeper aquifer affects
hydrostatic water elevation levels in the
intermediate aquifer.
From 1925 to 1980, the Southern
California Edison Company operated a
fabrication yard to produce wooden
poles for use in the distribution of
electricity throughout the utility’s
service territory. Western red cedar trees
were logged and transported to the yard,
debarked, sized, shaped, and chemically
preserved to resist attack from fungi and
insects. The chemical preservation
treatment process consisted of
immersion of the wooden poles in
heated tanks of preservative fluid. The
treatment system consisted of two
above-grade dip tanks, one in-ground
full treatment tank, a fluid heating
system, hot and cold fluid storage tanks,
and underground product transfer lines.
SCE primarily used creosote to treat its
utility poles. However, in 1968, SCE
began using pentachlorophenol (PCP),
since PCP treated poles looked
‘‘cleaner’’ and were felt to be more
suitable for use in an urban
environment. A solution of
pentachlorophenol and diesel
(petroleum hydrocarbons) was
substituted as the preservative for the
wood preservation process, which
contained low levels of dioxin and furan
byproduct impurities of the PCP
manufacturing process.
During the service life of the VPY,
significant volumes of chemical
preservatives were released into
subsurface soils and groundwater.
Groundwater contamination was first
discovered in an on-site well in 1966.
Hydrogeologic investigations were
conducted between 1966 and 1975 to
determine the nature and extent of
contamination.
The types of chemicals found at the
VPY include creosote compounds, PCP,
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
36945
and its associated impurities including
octachlorodibenzo-P-dioxin. The
sources of chemical release of creosote
and PCP were primarily leakage from
piping between the storage tanks and
treatment tanks and cracks in the
treatment tanks.
In 1989, the VPY was added to the
Federal Superfund National Priorities
List (NPL) (54 FR 13296) by the United
States Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA).
Cleanup activities were first initiated
in 1975, with the installation of
extraction wells to remove
contaminated groundwater and
discharge to publicly owned treatment
works (POTW). This action was
followed by construction of the slurry
wall in 1976–77, to prevent further
downgradient migration of Wood
Treating Chemicals (WTCs) in
groundwater. In 1981, all treating
facilities were demolished and
approximately 2,300 cubic yards of
contaminated soil were removed and
disposed of into an off-site Class 1
disposal facility. Additionally, an onsite water treatment plant (WTP)
consisting of filtration and adsorption
system was built in 1985 and was
successful in removing the chemicals of
concern (COC) from the treated
groundwater. The WTP was modified
with additional filtration and gravity
separation in 1987, which optimized
plant performance by minimizing
hazardous waste generation. The WTP
pumped, treated, and discharged an
average of 0.36 million gallons per day
between 1985 and 1997. In 1997 the
construction and operation of the
Visalia Steam Remediation Project
(VSRP) began and the volume of water
treated increased to approximately 0.5
million gallons per day. The treated
effluent was now discharged to Mill
Creek under a National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
permit.
Currently there are no specific
redevelopment plans for the Site. The
City of Visalia has purchased all of the
surrounding property formerly owned
by SCE and has indicated an interest in
purchasing the subject property (Site)
after it is deleted from the NPL. It is
understood the City would expand their
current General Services operations to
include the Site.
Remedial Investigation (RI)/Feasibility
Study (FS)
In 1987, SCE and the State signed an
agreement requiring the utility to
perform a study to determine the nature
and extent of site contamination and to
recommend alternatives for final
cleanup action.
E:\FR\FM\27JYR1.SGM
27JYR1
36946
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 142 / Monday, July 27, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
The Remedial Investigation (RI)
(Geraghty & Miller, 1992a) found a
distribution of wood treating chemicals
(WTCs) in both the vadose zone and
saturated zone at the VPY. Additionally,
at that time, a non-aqueous phase diesel
hydrocarbon plume covered a
horizontal area approximately 2.1 acres
in size and extended vertically to
approximately 125 feet below ground
surface (bgs).
WTCs in the vadose zone and were
found to be concentrated near points of
release from immersion tanks and
piping. Horizontal-radial dispersion of
WTCs is believed to have occurred in
the shallow vadose zones by capillary
action of fine grained soils and
transported laterally from the source
area occurred during times when the
vadose zone was saturated. Historical
water table elevation levels were about
30 feet bgs and are currently measured
at approximately 80 feet bgs. Depression
of the regional water table elevation
level initially occurred during the statewide drought of the 1980’s, and
continues to decline from increased
regional groundwater pumping for
residential, agricultural, and industrial
uses.
The Feasibility Study (FS) (Geraghty
& Miller, 1992b) recommended
enhanced in-situ biodegradation (EISB)
in addition to continuing the pump-andtreat system as the recommended
remedial action alternative.
Selected Remedy
The remedial action objectives for the
site are:
• Prevent the migration of pole
treating chemicals, present in
unsaturated soil, to groundwater;
• Prevent occupational exposure to
soil with constituent concentrations
exceeding health-based concentrations;
• Prevent residential and
occupational exposure to groundwater
with chemical concentrations above
remediation goals; and
• Prevent dermal occupational
exposure to groundwater with chemical
concentrations above remediation goals.
The State approved a Remedial
Action Plan (RAP) in 1994 and EPA
signed a Record of Decision (ROD) on
June 10, 1994. The major components of
the selected remedy described in the
ROD include: In-situ bioremediation,
pilot test of steam remediation, property
access restrictions, and deed
restrictions. The goals of the remedy are
to remediate soils to industrial/
commercial use levels and to remediate
groundwater to drinking water
standards. The contaminants of concern
for both soil and groundwater are
Pentachloropenol (PCP),
Benzo(a)Pyrene, and TCDDeqv.
Response Actions
In 1997, before implementing the
remedy, the Visalia Steam Remediation
Project (VSRP), a pilot study approved
by DTSC and concurred by EPA, was
initiated which used steam injection
technique called Dynamic Underground
Stripping (DUS) to mobilize chemicals
of concern (COCs). The pilot study
operated in two phases between May
1997 and June 2000. Phase 1 operations
focused on the intermediate aquifer,
with injection and extraction wells
screened between 80 and 100 feet bgs.
Phase 2 operations began in November
1998 and included steam injection and
extraction below the intermediate
aquitard, with injection wells screened
between 125 and 145 feet bgs. Phase 2
operations continued until the COC
removal rate precipitously dropped in
June 2000.
Following cessation of the VSRP, an
enhanced biological degradation system
was installed and operated (SCE, 2001)
to augment existing physical processes
that were initiated by DUS and to
encourage natural biological processes
to flourish. This system was in
operation from June 2000 until March
2004 and included vadose zone
bioventing and saturated zone
biosparging coupled with continued
groundwater pump-and-treat operation.
Construction completion of the
enhanced biological degradation system
was documented in the 2001
Preliminary Close Out Report (PCOR).
A post-remediation surface soil
investigation was conducted at the Site
in November 2004. Results for
tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD)
were detected at slightly above Site
cleanup standard at four locations. As a
result, and following recommendations
of the 2005 Five-Year Review,
contaminated surface soils between zero
and ten feet below grade were removed
in July 2006 and remaining soils were
verified with confirmatory sampling to
be below ROD cleanup standards.
Cleanup Goals
The cleanup goals from the ROD are
the following:
Soil (mg/kg)
rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES
Petanchlorophenol (PCP) ................................................................................................................................
Benzo(a)Pyrene ...............................................................................................................................................
TCDDeqv ...........................................................................................................................................................
The QA/QC program used throughout
the design, construction, and operation
of the remediation systems was outlined
in a DTSC and EPA approved Quality
Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). This
program enabled EPA to determine that
all analytical results reported were
accurate and adequate and ensure
satisfactory execution of the remedial
action requirements consistent with the
ROD.
Duplicate soil and groundwater
samples were collected in accordance
with the QAPP. Matrix spike, duplicate,
and blank samples were analyzed by the
laboratory, and the resulting data were
provided to DTSC and EPA. The QA/QC
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:57 Jul 24, 2009
Jkt 217001
program was also used for the quarterly
groundwater monitoring program and
cleanup standard attainment
demonstration period.
During VSRP operations, the various
forms of WTC removal or destruction
were documented through continuous
monitoring systems and regular volume
measurements. These included:
• Non-aqueous Phase Product
recovery
• Vapor-phase removal
• Liquid-phase removal
Non-aqueous Phase product was
recovered from both dissolved air
flotation and oil-water separation
methods and transferred to storage tanks
where the volume measurements were
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
17
0.39
0.001
Ground water
(μg/L)
1
0.2
30
made. Vapor-phase recovery was
measured as both total hydrocarbons
and CO2 equivalents of oxidized
hydrocarbons via continuous emissions
analyzer systems. Liquid phase removal
was measured through a total organic
carbon analyzer.
Quarterly groundwater monitoring
was conducted from 1985 through June
2007 within, and outside the boundaries
of the area subjected to steam
remediation operations. Monitoring of
extraction wells within and on the edge
of the WTC plume was used as a tool
to assess the success of WTC removal.
Monitoring of offsite wells was
conducted to ensure WTCs were not
E:\FR\FM\27JYR1.SGM
27JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 142 / Monday, July 27, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
escaping the groundwater extraction
system.
Groundwater monitoring data from
June 2004 through June 2007 were used
to verify that all ROD groundwater
cleanup standards had been met.
The Remedial Action Completion
Report (SCE, 2008) documented that the
post-remediation groundwater
monitoring and soil removal actions
performed met the ROD cleanup
standards for soil and groundwater.
The Final Close Out Report (FCOR)
was signed on May 19, 2009.
rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES
Operation and Maintenance
A ‘‘Covenant to Restrict Use of
Property, Environmental Restriction’’,
between Southern California Edison and
the Department of Toxic Substances
Control (DTSC), was recorded in Tulare
County, California on May 23, 2007.
This Covenant satisfies the ROD
requirement for property access
restrictions and a deed restriction. The
Covenant outlines use restrictions (as
well as Site operation and maintenance
(O&M) activities). As remedial action
objectives are based on industrial
cleanup standards, prohibited Site uses
include: Residences, human hospitals,
schools, and day care centers for
children. Prohibited activities include:
Soil disturbance greater than ten feet
bgs, and the installation of water wells
for any purpose. The Covenant requires
the Site owner to conduct an annual
inspection of the property and prepare
an Annual Inspection Report, describing
how all of the site restrictions are being
complied with. The Annual Report must
certify that the property is being used in
a manner consistent with the Covenant,
and must be submitted to DTSC by June
15th of each year.
Five-Year Review
A statutory Five-Year Review was
completed in September 2005 (DTSC/
USEPA, 2005), pursuant to EPA’s
Comprehensive Five-Year Review
Guidance (OSWER No. 9355.7–03B–P,
June 2001). The Five-Year Review
concluded that remedial actions taken at
the Site were protective of human
health and the environment in the short
term, and institutional controls were
needed in order to ensure long term
human health protectiveness. A
‘‘Covenant to Restrict Use of Property,
Environmental Restriction’’, between
SCE and DTSC, was recorded in Tulare
County, California on May 23, 2007.
The Five-Year Review also
recommended an evaluation of
contaminated surface soil; soils which
were later removed and any remaining
soils were verified with confirmatory
sampling to be below the cleanup
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:57 Jul 24, 2009
Jkt 217001
standards prescribed in the ROD. The
next Five-Year Review will be
completed by September 2010.
Community Relations Activities
Community involvement activities
included the development of a
Community Relations Plan (CRP), prior
to initiation of the RI/FS activities. The
CRP included development of a
community profile and a list of key local
contacts. The community profile
indicated the surrounding area was
mainly businesses which had little
interest in the site cleanup activities.
Notification of the issuance of the Draft
ROD was made and copies of the Draft
ROD were made publicly available at
the local public library, DTSC and
USEPA Region IX Superfund Records
Center. A Public Notice was also placed
in the local newspaper. A Public
Meeting was held in Visalia, California
on October 13, 1993, to provide
information on the proposed cleanup.
There were no members of the public in
attendance at the meeting. A meeting
was also held with members of the
Visalia City Council, to apprise them of
the proposed site cleanup activities. The
Council members were supportive of the
proposed cleanup actions and deletion
of this site from the NPL.
Notification to the public of the
initiation and completion of the 2005
Five-Year Review was made through a
Public Notice in the Visalia Times-Delta
newspaper. A copy of the completed
Five-Year Review was placed in the
Tulare County Library, USEPA Region
IX Superfund Records Center.
Public participation activities for this
Site have been satisfied as required in
CERCLA 113(k) and Section 117. All
documents and information which EPA
relied on or considered in
recommending this deletion are
available for the public to review at the
information repositories identified
above.
Determination That the Site Meets the
Criteria for Deletion From the NCP
This site meets all the site completion
requirements specified in OSWER
Directive 9320.2–09–A–P, Close Out
Procedures for National Priorities List
Sites. Specifically, that the following
actions specified in the ROD have been
implemented: (1) SCE applied an
aggressive steam remediation
technology to remove COCs in Site soils
and groundwater beneath the site; (2) a
post-remediation soil investigation
verified meeting soil cleanup standards
prescribed in the ROD; (3) groundwater
has been monitored on a site-wide basis,
and the monitoring results from June
2004 through June 2007 show that
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
36947
cleanup standards specified in the ROD
have been met, and; (4) a Land Use
Covenant between DTSC and SCE has
been recorded with Tulare County that
restricts site uses and activities.
The NCP specifies that EPA may
delete a site from the NPL if ‘‘all
appropriate Fund-financed response
under CERCLA has been implemented,
and no further response action by
responsible parties is appropriate.’’ 40
CFR 300.425(e)(1)(ii). EPA, with the
concurrence from the State of California,
DTSC, believes that this criterion for
deletion has been met. Consequently,
EPA is deleting this Site from the NPL.
Documents supporting this action are
available in the Site repositories.
V. Deletion Action
The EPA, with concurrence of the
State of California, DTSC, has
determined that all appropriate
response actions under CERCLA, other
than operation, maintenance,
monitoring and five-year reviews have
been completed. 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. This
action will be effective September 25,
2009 unless EPA receives adverse
comments by August 26, 2009. If
adverse comments are received within
the 30-day public comment period, EPA
will publish a timely withdrawal of this
direct final notice of deletion before its
effective date of deletion, and it will not
take effect; otherwise, 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: July 15, 2009.
Laura Yoshii,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
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,
E:\FR\FM\27JYR1.SGM
27JYR1
36948
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 142 / Monday, July 27, 2009 / Rules and Regulations
1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR 2923;
3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 193.
Appendix B to Part 300 [Amended]
2. Table 1 of Appendix B to part 300
is amended by removing ‘‘Southern
California Edison Co. (Visalia) Visalia,
CA.’’
■
[FR Doc. E9–17562 Filed 7–24–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 1
[MD Docket No. 08–65; FCC 09–38]
Assessment and Collection of
Regulatory Fees for Fiscal Year 2008
AGENCY: Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION:
Final rule.
SUMMARY: In this document, pursuant to
section 9(b)(3) of the Communications
Act, we eliminate two international
regulatory fee categories from our
Schedule of Regulatory Fees—
International Public Fixed and
International High Frequency (HF)
Broadcast Stations.
DATES: Effective August 18, 2009, which
is 90 days from the date of notification
to Congress pursuant to section 9(b)(3)
of the Communications Act.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Daniel Daly, Office of Managing Director
at (202) 418–1832.
This is a
summary of the Commission’s Order,
MD Docket 08–65, FCC 09–38, adopted
on May 11, 2009 and released on May
14, 2009. The full text of this document
is available on the Commission’s
Internet site at https://www.fcc.gov. It is
also available for inspection and
copying during regular business hours
in the FCC Reference Center (Room CY–
A257), 445 12th St., SW., Washington,
DC 20554. The full text of this
document also may be purchased from
the Commission’s duplication
contractor, Best Copy and Printing Inc.,
Portals II, 445 12th St., SW., Room CY–
B402, Washington, DC 20554; telephone
(202) 488–5300; fax (202) 488–5563;
e-mail FCC@BCPIWEB.COM. The
Commission will send a copy of this
Order to Congress and the Government
Accountability Office pursuant to the
Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A).
rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:57 Jul 24, 2009
Jkt 217001
Summary of the Report and Order
Order,1
1. In our FY 2008 Report and
we sought comment on eliminating
several categories of services from our
schedule of regulatory fees.2 We
received no comments on these
proposals. For the reasons set forth
below, we eliminate the regulatory fee
categories for International Public Fixed
Radio 3 and International High
Frequency Broadcast Stations.4
2. There is only one licensee in the
International Public Fixed Radio
category. In the FY 2008 Report and
Order we stated that we did not expect
any additional licensees or applications
in this fee category, and that this
category did not generate any regulatory
fee revenue for the Commission in FY
2008.5 As a result, we proposed in our
FY 2008 Report and Order to eliminate
this category from our schedule of
regulatory fees in order to reduce the
administrative burden on the
Commission in assessing this regulatory
fee category.6 We received no comments
on this issue. We, therefore, eliminate
this category from the regulatory fee
schedule.
3. There are only 25 licensed stations
in the International High Frequency
Broadcast Stations category. In FY 2008,
two entities made payments in this fee
category totaling $1,720. In the FY 2008
Report and Order we observed that most
of these licensees are tax-exempt
organizations (and exempt from paying
regulatory fees), and as a result, we
proposed to eliminate this category from
our schedule of regulatory fees in order
to reduce the administrative burden on
the Commission.7 We did not receive
any comments on this issue. We,
therefore, eliminate this category from
the regulatory fee schedule.
4. Pursuant to section 9(b)(3) of the
Act, we eliminate the International
Public Fixed Radio and International
High Frequency Broadcast Station fee
categories from our schedule of
1 See Assessment and Collection of Regulatory
Fees for Fiscal Year 2008, MD Docket No. 08–65,
Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking, 24 FCC Rcd 6389 (2008) (‘‘FY 2008
Report and Order’’).
2 In this Order, we adopted only the proposals
concerning International Fixed Public Radio and
International High Frequency Broadcast Stations
raised in paragraphs 55 and 56 in the Further
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in the FY 2008
Report and Order. The remaining outstanding
matters stemming from the August 8, 2008 Further
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking may, however, be
decided at a later time in a separate Report and
Order. See FY 2008 Report and Order.
3 See 47 CFR Part 23.
4 See 47 CFR Part 73, Subpart F.
5 FY 2008 Report and Order at paragraph 55.
6 FY 2008 Report and Order at paragraph 55.
7 FY 2008 Report and Order at paragraph 56.
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
regulatory fees.8 Section 9(b)(4)(B) of the
Act requires us to notify Congress 90
days before the effective date of this rule
change.9 In letters dated May 20, 2009,
we provided Congress notification of
this Order. These permitted
amendments to our fee schedule will
become effective on August 18, 2009,
which is 90 days after notification to
Congress, if there is no Congressional
objection.
5. A final regulatory flexibility
certification for the changes adopted in
the Order herein is contained below.
The Commission will send a copy of the
Order, including the final regulatory
flexibility certification, to the Chief
Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration.
Final Regulatory Flexibility
Certification
6. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of
1980, as amended (RFA) 10 requires that
a regulatory flexibility analysis be
prepared for rulemaking proceedings,
unless the agency certifies that ‘‘the rule
will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities.’’ 11 The RFA generally defines
‘‘small entity’’ as having the same
meaning as the terms ‘‘small business,’’
‘‘small organization,’’ and ‘‘small
governmental jurisdiction.’’ 12 In
addition, the term ‘‘small business’’ has
the same meaning as the term ‘‘small
business concern’’ under the Small
Business Act.13 A small business
concern is one which: (1) Is
independently owned and operated; (2)
is not dominant in its field of operation;
and (3) satisfies any additional criteria
established by the Small Business
Administration (SBA).14
7. As required by the RFA,15 an Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA)
8 47
U.S.C. 159(b)(3).
U.S.C. 159(b)(4)(B).
10 The RFA, see 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. has been
amended by the Contract With America
Advancement Act of 1996, Public Law 104–121,
110 Stat. 847 (1996) (CWAAA). Title II of the
CWAAA is the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA).
11 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
12 5 U.S.C. 601(6).
13 5 U.S.C. 601(3) (incorporating by reference the
definition of ‘‘small business concern’’ in Small
Business Act, 15 U.S.C. 632). Pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
601(3), the statutory definition of a small business
applies ‘‘unless an agency, after consultation with
the Office of Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration and after opportunity for public
comment, establishes one or more definitions of
such term which are appropriate to the activities of
the agency and publishes such definition(s) in the
Federal Register.’’
14 Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. 632.
15 See 5 U.S.C. 603. The RFA, see 5 U.S.C. 601–
612, has been amended by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
(SBREFA), Public Law 104–121, Title II, 110 Stat.
857 (1996).
9 47
E:\FR\FM\27JYR1.SGM
27JYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 142 (Monday, July 27, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 36943-36948]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-17562]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 300
[EPA-HQ-SFUND-2009-0501; FRL-8934-2]
National Oil and Hazardous Substance; Pollution Contingency Plan;
National Priorities List
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Direct Final Notice of Deletion of the Southern California
Edison, Visalia Pole Yard Superfund Site from the National Priorities
List.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region IX, is
publishing a Direct Final Notice of Deletion for the Southern
California Edison (SCE), Visalia Pole Yard Superfund Site (Site)
located in northeastern Visalia, Tulare County, California, 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 an appendix of 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 California, through the Department of Toxic
Substance Control (DTSC), because EPA has determined that all
appropriate response actions under CERCLA, other than operation,
maintenance, and five-year reviews, have been completed. However, this
deletion does not preclude future actions under Superfund.
DATES: This direct final deletion is effective September 25, 2009
unless EPA receives adverse comments by August 26, 2009. If adverse
comment(s) 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.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID no. EPA-HQ-
SFUND-2009-0501 by one of the following methods:
[[Page 36944]]
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow online instructions for
submitting comments.
E-mail: lane.jackie@epa.gov.
Fax: (415) 947-3528.
Mail: Jackie Lane, Community Involvement Coordinator, U.S.
EPA Region IX (SFD 6-3), 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California
94105.
Phone: (415) 972-3236.
Hand delivery: U.S. EPA Region IX (SFD 6-3), 75 Hawthorne
Street, San Francisco, California 94105. Deliveries are only accepted
during regular office days and hours of operation (Monday through
Friday, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.). Special arrangements will need to be made
with EPA staff for deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID no. EPA-HQ-SFUND-
2009-0501 EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI, or otherwise protected, through https://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The https://www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means that EPA will not know
your identity or contact information unless it is provided in the body
of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA, without
going through https://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the publicly available
docket on the Internet. EPA recommends that all submittals include your
name and other contact information (i.e., e-mail and/or physical
address and phone number). Please note that electronic file submittals
should be free of any physical defects and computer viruses and avoid
the use of special characters and any form of encryption. If technical
difficulties prevent EPA from reading your comment and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the https://www.regulations.gov index; however, some information is not publicly
available (e.g., CBI or other information restricted by disclosure
statute). Certain other materials, such as copyrighted materials, will
be publicly available only in hard copy. All other publicly available
docket materials are available either electronically https://www.regulations.gov or hard copy at the Site Information repositories
below:
U.S. EPA Superfund Records Center, 95 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco,
California 94105-3901, (415) 536-2000.
Tulare County Public Library, 200 West Oak Street, Visalia, CA 93291,
(818) 952-0603.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charnjit Bhullar, Remedial Project
Manager, U.S. EPA Region IX (SFD 7-3), 75 Hawthorne Street, San
Francisco, California 94105, (415) 972-3960.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. NPL Deletion Criteria
III. Deletion Procedures
IV. Basis for Site Deletion
V. Deletion Action
I. Introduction
EPA Region IX is publishing this Direct Final Notice of Deletion of
the Southern California Edison, Visalia Pole Yard Superfund Site (EPA
ID No. CAD980816466), hereinafter VPY or Site, from the National
Priorities List (NPL). The NPL constitutes Appendix B of 40 CFR part
300, which is the 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) of 1980, as amended. EPA maintains the NPL as the list of
sites that appear to present a significant risk to public health,
welfare, or the environment. Sites on the NPL may be the subject of
remedial actions financed by the Hazardous Substance Superfund (Fund).
As described in 300.425(e)(3) of the NCP, sites deleted from the NPL
remain eligible for Fund-financed remedial actions if conditions at a
deleted site or new information warrant such action.
Because EPA considers this action to be noncontroversial and
routine, this action will be effective September 25, 2009 unless EPA
receives adverse comments by August 26, 2009. Along with this direct
final Notice of Deletion, EPA is co-publishing a Notice of Intent to
Delete in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of the Federal Register. If
adverse comments are received within the 30-day public comment period
on this deletion action, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of this
direct final Notice of 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 how the Southern California
Edison, Visalia Pole Yard Superfund Site meets the NPL deletion
criteria; and Section V discusses EPA's action to delete the Site from
the NPL.
II. NPL Deletion Criteria
The NCP establishes the criteria that EPA 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 such a
determination pursuant to 40 CFR 300.425(e), EPA will consider, in
consultation with the state, whether any of the following criteria have
been met:
(1) Responsible parties or other parties have implemented all
appropriate response actions required;
(2) All appropriate response under CERCLA has been implemented, and
no further response action 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 of remedial measures is not appropriate.
Pursuant to CERCLA section 121(c) and the NCP, EPA conducts five-
year reviews to ensure the continued protectiveness of remedial actions
where hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants remain at a
site above levels that allow for unlimited use and unrestricted
exposure. EPA conducts such five-year reviews even if a site is deleted
from the NPL. EPA may initiate further action to ensure continued
protectiveness at a deleted site if new information becomes available
that indicates it is appropriate. 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.
III. Deletion Procedures
The following procedures were followed for deletion of this Site:
(1) The EPA consulted with the State of California's Department of
Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) prior to developing this Direct Final
Notice of Deletion and Notice of Intent to Delete being co-published in
the ``Proposed Rules'' section of the Federal Register.
[[Page 36945]]
(2) EPA provided DTSC 30 working days for its review and comment of
this Notice and the Notice of Intent to Delete and, following its
review, DTSC concurs with the deletion of the Site from the NPL.
(3) Concurrently with the publication of this Direct Final Notice
of Deletion, a notice of availability of the parallel Notice of Intent
to Delete is being published in a major local newspaper, the Visalia
Times-Delta. 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 has placed copies of supporting documents for the
proposed site deletion in the Deletion Docket and made these documents
available for public inspection and copying at the Site Information
Repositories identified above.
(5) If adverse comments are received within the 30-day public
comment period on this deletion action, EPA will publish a timely
notice of withdrawal of this Direct Final Notice of Deletion before its
effective date and it will not take effect; otherwise, 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 it has 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.
IV. Basis for Site Deletion
The following information provides EPA's basis for deleting the
Site from the NPL:
Site Background and History
The VPY Site is located at 432 North Ben Maddox Way in northeastern
Visalia, Tulare County, California. The Site is bounded on the north by
East Goshen Avenue, and on the west by North Ben Maddox Way. Visalia is
located approximately midway between Fresno and Bakersfield in the
Central Valley of California and is a growing metropolitan area with a
population of approximately 110,000. Agriculture is the dominant
industry in the region and walnuts, olives, and citrus are the primary
crops.
The geologic strata underlying the VPY are composed of alluvial-fan
deposits from the Kaweah River and its distributaries. The three
hydrostratigraphic units beneath the site include: A shallow aquifer
(30 to 50 feet bgs; dewatered since the 1980s), a shallow aquitard (50
to 75 feet bgs), an intermediate aquifer (75 to 100 feet bgs), an
intermediate aquitard (100 to 125 feet bgs), and a deep aquifer (125 to
about 180 feet bgs). Both aquitards generally consist of silty sand and
clay materials, whereas the aquifers are composed primarily of fine-
grained and coarse-grained sands. When saturated, the shallow aquitard
restricts vertical groundwater movement. Aquifer testing of the
intermediate hydrostratigraphic unit indicated a transmissivity of
approximately 50,000 gallons per day per foot (gpd/ft). Short-term
pumping from the deeper aquifer affects hydrostatic water elevation
levels in the intermediate aquifer.
From 1925 to 1980, the Southern California Edison Company operated
a fabrication yard to produce wooden poles for use in the distribution
of electricity throughout the utility's service territory. Western red
cedar trees were logged and transported to the yard, debarked, sized,
shaped, and chemically preserved to resist attack from fungi and
insects. The chemical preservation treatment process consisted of
immersion of the wooden poles in heated tanks of preservative fluid.
The treatment system consisted of two above-grade dip tanks, one in-
ground full treatment tank, a fluid heating system, hot and cold fluid
storage tanks, and underground product transfer lines. SCE primarily
used creosote to treat its utility poles. However, in 1968, SCE began
using pentachlorophenol (PCP), since PCP treated poles looked
``cleaner'' and were felt to be more suitable for use in an urban
environment. A solution of pentachlorophenol and diesel (petroleum
hydrocarbons) was substituted as the preservative for the wood
preservation process, which contained low levels of dioxin and furan
byproduct impurities of the PCP manufacturing process.
During the service life of the VPY, significant volumes of chemical
preservatives were released into subsurface soils and groundwater.
Groundwater contamination was first discovered in an on-site well in
1966. Hydrogeologic investigations were conducted between 1966 and 1975
to determine the nature and extent of contamination.
The types of chemicals found at the VPY include creosote compounds,
PCP, and its associated impurities including octachlorodibenzo-P-
dioxin. The sources of chemical release of creosote and PCP were
primarily leakage from piping between the storage tanks and treatment
tanks and cracks in the treatment tanks.
In 1989, the VPY was added to the Federal Superfund National
Priorities List (NPL) (54 FR 13296) by the United States Environmental
Protection Agency (USEPA).
Cleanup activities were first initiated in 1975, with the
installation of extraction wells to remove contaminated groundwater and
discharge to publicly owned treatment works (POTW). This action was
followed by construction of the slurry wall in 1976-77, to prevent
further downgradient migration of Wood Treating Chemicals (WTCs) in
groundwater. In 1981, all treating facilities were demolished and
approximately 2,300 cubic yards of contaminated soil were removed and
disposed of into an off-site Class 1 disposal facility. Additionally,
an on-site water treatment plant (WTP) consisting of filtration and
adsorption system was built in 1985 and was successful in removing the
chemicals of concern (COC) from the treated groundwater. The WTP was
modified with additional filtration and gravity separation in 1987,
which optimized plant performance by minimizing hazardous waste
generation. The WTP pumped, treated, and discharged an average of 0.36
million gallons per day between 1985 and 1997. In 1997 the construction
and operation of the Visalia Steam Remediation Project (VSRP) began and
the volume of water treated increased to approximately 0.5 million
gallons per day. The treated effluent was now discharged to Mill Creek
under a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit.
Currently there are no specific redevelopment plans for the Site.
The City of Visalia has purchased all of the surrounding property
formerly owned by SCE and has indicated an interest in purchasing the
subject property (Site) after it is deleted from the NPL. It is
understood the City would expand their current General Services
operations to include the Site.
Remedial Investigation (RI)/Feasibility Study (FS)
In 1987, SCE and the State signed an agreement requiring the
utility to perform a study to determine the nature and extent of site
contamination and to recommend alternatives for final cleanup action.
[[Page 36946]]
The Remedial Investigation (RI) (Geraghty & Miller, 1992a) found a
distribution of wood treating chemicals (WTCs) in both the vadose zone
and saturated zone at the VPY. Additionally, at that time, a non-
aqueous phase diesel hydrocarbon plume covered a horizontal area
approximately 2.1 acres in size and extended vertically to
approximately 125 feet below ground surface (bgs).
WTCs in the vadose zone and were found to be concentrated near
points of release from immersion tanks and piping. Horizontal-radial
dispersion of WTCs is believed to have occurred in the shallow vadose
zones by capillary action of fine grained soils and transported
laterally from the source area occurred during times when the vadose
zone was saturated. Historical water table elevation levels were about
30 feet bgs and are currently measured at approximately 80 feet bgs.
Depression of the regional water table elevation level initially
occurred during the state-wide drought of the 1980's, and continues to
decline from increased regional groundwater pumping for residential,
agricultural, and industrial uses.
The Feasibility Study (FS) (Geraghty & Miller, 1992b) recommended
enhanced in-situ biodegradation (EISB) in addition to continuing the
pump-and-treat system as the recommended remedial action alternative.
Selected Remedy
The remedial action objectives for the site are:
Prevent the migration of pole treating chemicals, present
in unsaturated soil, to groundwater;
Prevent occupational exposure to soil with constituent
concentrations exceeding health-based concentrations;
Prevent residential and occupational exposure to
groundwater with chemical concentrations above remediation goals; and
Prevent dermal occupational exposure to groundwater with
chemical concentrations above remediation goals.
The State approved a Remedial Action Plan (RAP) in 1994 and EPA
signed a Record of Decision (ROD) on June 10, 1994. The major
components of the selected remedy described in the ROD include: In-situ
bioremediation, pilot test of steam remediation, property access
restrictions, and deed restrictions. The goals of the remedy are to
remediate soils to industrial/commercial use levels and to remediate
groundwater to drinking water standards. The contaminants of concern
for both soil and groundwater are Pentachloropenol (PCP),
Benzo(a)Pyrene, and TCDDeqv.
Response Actions
In 1997, before implementing the remedy, the Visalia Steam
Remediation Project (VSRP), a pilot study approved by DTSC and
concurred by EPA, was initiated which used steam injection technique
called Dynamic Underground Stripping (DUS) to mobilize chemicals of
concern (COCs). The pilot study operated in two phases between May 1997
and June 2000. Phase 1 operations focused on the intermediate aquifer,
with injection and extraction wells screened between 80 and 100 feet
bgs. Phase 2 operations began in November 1998 and included steam
injection and extraction below the intermediate aquitard, with
injection wells screened between 125 and 145 feet bgs. Phase 2
operations continued until the COC removal rate precipitously dropped
in June 2000.
Following cessation of the VSRP, an enhanced biological degradation
system was installed and operated (SCE, 2001) to augment existing
physical processes that were initiated by DUS and to encourage natural
biological processes to flourish. This system was in operation from
June 2000 until March 2004 and included vadose zone bioventing and
saturated zone biosparging coupled with continued groundwater pump-and-
treat operation. Construction completion of the enhanced biological
degradation system was documented in the 2001 Preliminary Close Out
Report (PCOR).
A post-remediation surface soil investigation was conducted at the
Site in November 2004. Results for tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD)
were detected at slightly above Site cleanup standard at four
locations. As a result, and following recommendations of the 2005 Five-
Year Review, contaminated surface soils between zero and ten feet below
grade were removed in July 2006 and remaining soils were verified with
confirmatory sampling to be below ROD cleanup standards.
Cleanup Goals
The cleanup goals from the ROD are the following:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground water
Soil (mg/kg) ([mu]g/L)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petanchlorophenol (PCP).............. 17 1
Benzo(a)Pyrene....................... 0.39 0.2
TCDDeqv.............................. 0.001 30
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The QA/QC program used throughout the design, construction, and
operation of the remediation systems was outlined in a DTSC and EPA
approved Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). This program enabled
EPA to determine that all analytical results reported were accurate and
adequate and ensure satisfactory execution of the remedial action
requirements consistent with the ROD.
Duplicate soil and groundwater samples were collected in accordance
with the QAPP. Matrix spike, duplicate, and blank samples were analyzed
by the laboratory, and the resulting data were provided to DTSC and
EPA. The QA/QC program was also used for the quarterly groundwater
monitoring program and cleanup standard attainment demonstration
period.
During VSRP operations, the various forms of WTC removal or
destruction were documented through continuous monitoring systems and
regular volume measurements. These included:
Non-aqueous Phase Product recovery
Vapor-phase removal
Liquid-phase removal
Non-aqueous Phase product was recovered from both dissolved air
flotation and oil-water separation methods and transferred to storage
tanks where the volume measurements were made. Vapor-phase recovery was
measured as both total hydrocarbons and CO2 equivalents of
oxidized hydrocarbons via continuous emissions analyzer systems. Liquid
phase removal was measured through a total organic carbon analyzer.
Quarterly groundwater monitoring was conducted from 1985 through
June 2007 within, and outside the boundaries of the area subjected to
steam remediation operations. Monitoring of extraction wells within and
on the edge of the WTC plume was used as a tool to assess the success
of WTC removal. Monitoring of offsite wells was conducted to ensure
WTCs were not
[[Page 36947]]
escaping the groundwater extraction system.
Groundwater monitoring data from June 2004 through June 2007 were
used to verify that all ROD groundwater cleanup standards had been met.
The Remedial Action Completion Report (SCE, 2008) documented that
the post-remediation groundwater monitoring and soil removal actions
performed met the ROD cleanup standards for soil and groundwater.
The Final Close Out Report (FCOR) was signed on May 19, 2009.
Operation and Maintenance
A ``Covenant to Restrict Use of Property, Environmental
Restriction'', between Southern California Edison and the Department of
Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), was recorded in Tulare County,
California on May 23, 2007. This Covenant satisfies the ROD requirement
for property access restrictions and a deed restriction. The Covenant
outlines use restrictions (as well as Site operation and maintenance
(O&M) activities). As remedial action objectives are based on
industrial cleanup standards, prohibited Site uses include: Residences,
human hospitals, schools, and day care centers for children. Prohibited
activities include: Soil disturbance greater than ten feet bgs, and the
installation of water wells for any purpose. The Covenant requires the
Site owner to conduct an annual inspection of the property and prepare
an Annual Inspection Report, describing how all of the site
restrictions are being complied with. The Annual Report must certify
that the property is being used in a manner consistent with the
Covenant, and must be submitted to DTSC by June 15th of each year.
Five-Year Review
A statutory Five-Year Review was completed in September 2005 (DTSC/
USEPA, 2005), pursuant to EPA's Comprehensive Five-Year Review Guidance
(OSWER No. 9355.7-03B-P, June 2001). The Five-Year Review concluded
that remedial actions taken at the Site were protective of human health
and the environment in the short term, and institutional controls were
needed in order to ensure long term human health protectiveness. A
``Covenant to Restrict Use of Property, Environmental Restriction'',
between SCE and DTSC, was recorded in Tulare County, California on May
23, 2007.
The Five-Year Review also recommended an evaluation of contaminated
surface soil; soils which were later removed and any remaining soils
were verified with confirmatory sampling to be below the cleanup
standards prescribed in the ROD. The next Five-Year Review will be
completed by September 2010.
Community Relations Activities
Community involvement activities included the development of a
Community Relations Plan (CRP), prior to initiation of the RI/FS
activities. The CRP included development of a community profile and a
list of key local contacts. The community profile indicated the
surrounding area was mainly businesses which had little interest in the
site cleanup activities. Notification of the issuance of the Draft ROD
was made and copies of the Draft ROD were made publicly available at
the local public library, DTSC and USEPA Region IX Superfund Records
Center. A Public Notice was also placed in the local newspaper. A
Public Meeting was held in Visalia, California on October 13, 1993, to
provide information on the proposed cleanup. There were no members of
the public in attendance at the meeting. A meeting was also held with
members of the Visalia City Council, to apprise them of the proposed
site cleanup activities. The Council members were supportive of the
proposed cleanup actions and deletion of this site from the NPL.
Notification to the public of the initiation and completion of the
2005 Five-Year Review was made through a Public Notice in the Visalia
Times-Delta newspaper. A copy of the completed Five-Year Review was
placed in the Tulare County Library, USEPA Region IX Superfund Records
Center.
Public participation activities for this Site have been satisfied
as required in CERCLA 113(k) and Section 117. All documents and
information which EPA relied on or considered in recommending this
deletion are available for the public to review at the information
repositories identified above.
Determination That the Site Meets the Criteria for Deletion From the
NCP
This site meets all the site completion requirements specified in
OSWER Directive 9320.2-09-A-P, Close Out Procedures for National
Priorities List Sites. Specifically, that the following actions
specified in the ROD have been implemented: (1) SCE applied an
aggressive steam remediation technology to remove COCs in Site soils
and groundwater beneath the site; (2) a post-remediation soil
investigation verified meeting soil cleanup standards prescribed in the
ROD; (3) groundwater has been monitored on a site-wide basis, and the
monitoring results from June 2004 through June 2007 show that cleanup
standards specified in the ROD have been met, and; (4) a Land Use
Covenant between DTSC and SCE has been recorded with Tulare County that
restricts site uses and activities.
The NCP specifies that EPA may delete a site from the NPL if ``all
appropriate Fund-financed response under CERCLA has been implemented,
and no further response action by responsible parties is appropriate.''
40 CFR 300.425(e)(1)(ii). EPA, with the concurrence from the State of
California, DTSC, believes that this criterion for deletion has been
met. Consequently, EPA is deleting this Site from the NPL. Documents
supporting this action are available in the Site repositories.
V. Deletion Action
The EPA, with concurrence of the State of California, DTSC, has
determined that all appropriate response actions under CERCLA, other
than operation, maintenance, monitoring and five-year reviews have been
completed. 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. This action will
be effective September 25, 2009 unless EPA receives adverse comments by
August 26, 2009. If adverse comments are received within the 30-day
public comment period, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of this
direct final notice of deletion before its effective date of deletion,
and it will not take effect; otherwise, 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: July 15, 2009.
Laura Yoshii,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
0
For the reasons set out in this document, 40 CFR part 300 is amended as
follows:
PART 300--[AMENDED]
0
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,
[[Page 36948]]
1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR 2923; 3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p.
193.
Appendix B to Part 300 [Amended]
0
2. Table 1 of Appendix B to part 300 is amended by removing ``Southern
California Edison Co. (Visalia) Visalia, CA.''
[FR Doc. E9-17562 Filed 7-24-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P