National Oil and Hazardous Substance Pollution Contingency Plan National Priorities List: Deletion of the Federal Creosote Superfund Site, 12436-12441 [2014-04885]
Download as PDF
12436
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 43 / Wednesday, March 5, 2014 / Proposed Rules
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
This proposed rule would not result
in the expenditure by State, local, and
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or
by the private sector, of $100,000,000 or
more in any one year, and it will not
significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. The PSOB program is a
federal benefits program that provides
benefits directly to qualifying
individuals. Therefore, no actions were
deemed necessary under the provisions
of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995.
List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 32
Administrative practice and
procedure, Claims, Disability benefits,
Education, Emergency medical services,
Firefighters, Law enforcement officers,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Rescue squad.
Accordingly, for the reasons set forth
in the preamble, part 32 of chapter I of
Title 28 of the Code of Federal
Regulations is proposed to be amended
as follows:
PART 32—PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICERS’
DEATH, DISABILITY, AND
EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE
BENEFITS CLAIMS
1. The authority citation for 28 CFR
Part 32 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. ch. 46, subch. XII; 42
U.S.C. 3782(a), 3787, 3788, 3791(a),
3793(a)(4) & (b), 3795a, 3796c–1, 3796c–2;
sec. 1601, title XI, Public Law 90–351, 82
Stat. 239; secs. 4 through 6, Public Law 94–
430, 90 Stat. 1348; secs. 1 and 2, Public Law
107–37, 115 Stat. 219.
2. Section 32.3 is amended by revising
the definition of ‘‘Spouse’’ to read as
follows:
■
§ 32.3
Definitions.
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
*
*
*
*
*
Spouse means someone with whom
an individual entered into marriage
lawfully under the law of the
jurisdiction in which it was entered into
and from whom the individual is not
divorced, and includes a spouse living
apart from the individual, other than
pursuant to divorce, except that,
notwithstanding any other provision of
law, to determine whether an individual
is a spouse of a public safety officer
within the meaning of this definition
when more than one individual is
purported to be such a spouse, the
PSOB Program will apply the law of the
jurisdiction that it determines has the
most significant interest in the marital
status of the public safety officer:
(1) On the date of the officer’s death,
with respect to a claim under subpart B
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:16 Mar 04, 2014
Jkt 232001
of this part or by virtue of such death;
or
(2) As of the injury date, with respect
to a claim not under subpart B of this
part or by virtue of the officer’s death.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: February 21, 2014.
Karol V. Mason,
Assistant Attorney General.
[FR Doc. 2014–04647 Filed 3–4–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–18–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 300
[EPA–HQ–SFUND–1999–0013; FRL–9907–
49–Region 2]
National Oil and Hazardous Substance
Pollution Contingency Plan National
Priorities List: Deletion of the Federal
Creosote Superfund Site
Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of intent.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) Region II is issuing a
Notice of Intent to Delete the Federal
Creosote Superfund Site located in
Manville, New Jersey, from the National
Priorities List (NPL) and requests public
comments on this proposed action. The
NPL, promulgated pursuant to section
105 of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is an
appendix of the National Oil and
Hazardous Substances Pollution
Contingency Plan (NCP). EPA and the
State of New Jersey, through the New
Jersey Department of Environmental
Protection, have determined that all
appropriate response actions under
CERCLA, other than long-term
groundwater monitoring and five-year
reviews, have been completed.
However, this deletion does not
preclude future actions under
Superfund.
SUMMARY:
Comments must be received by
April 4, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID no. EPA–HQ–
SFUND–1999–0013, by one of the
following methods:
• https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• Email: puvogel.rich@epa.gov: Rich
Puvogel, Remedial Project Manager,
seppi.pat@epa.gov: Pat Seppi,
Community Involvement Coordinator
DATES:
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
• Fax: (212) 637–4429.
• Mail: Rich Puvogel, Remedial
Project Manager, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Emergency &
Remedial Response Division, 290
Broadway, 19th Floor, New York, NY
10007–1866.
or
Pat Seppi, Community Involvement
Coordinator, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Public Affairs
Division, 290 Broadway, 26th Floor,
New York, NY 10007–1866.
• Hand Delivery: U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Emergency &
Remedial Response Division, 290
Broadway, 19th Floor, New York, NY
10007–1866.
Such deliveries are only accepted
during the Docket’s normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements
should be made for deliveries of boxed
information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID no. EPA–HQ–SFUND–1999–
0013. 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 email. The
https://www.regulations.gov Web site is
an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an email comment directly
to EPA without going through https://
www.regulations.gov, your email
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
Docket
All documents in the docket are listed
in the https://www.regulations.gov index.
E:\FR\FM\05MRP1.SGM
05MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 43 / Wednesday, March 5, 2014 / Proposed Rules
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
e.g., CBI or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, will be publicly
available only in the hard copy. Publicly
available docket materials are available
either electronically in https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region II, Superfund Records Center,
290 Broadway, Room 1828, New
York, New York 10007–1866, (212)
637–4308, Hours: 9:00 a.m. to 5:00
p.m., Monday Through Friday;
and at
Manville Public Library, 100 South 10th
Avenue, Manville, New Jersey 08835,
(908) 722–9722.
Hours:
Mon. through Fri.: 10:00 a.m. to 8:00
p.m.
Fri.: 10:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
Sat.: 10:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Rich Puvogel, Remedial Project
Manager, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region II, 290
Broadway, 19th Floor, New York,
New York 10007–1866, (212) 637–
4410
or
email puvogel.rich@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
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 Federal Creosote Superfund
Site (Site) from the NPL and requests
public comment on this proposed
action. 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 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 40 CFR
300.425(e)(3) of the NCP, sites deleted
from the NPL remain eligible for Fundfinanced remedial actions if future
conditions warrant such actions.
EPA will accept comments on the
proposal to delete this Site for thirty
(30) days after publication of this
document in the Federal Register.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:16 Mar 04, 2014
Jkt 232001
Section II of this document explains
the criteria for deleting sites from the
NPL. Section III discusses procedures
that EPA is using for this action. Section
IV discusses the Federal Creosote
Superfund Site and demonstrates how it
meets the deletion criteria.
II. NPL Deletion Criteria
The NCP establishes the criteria that
EPA uses to delete sites from the NPL.
In accordance with 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:
i. Responsible parties or other persons
have implemented all appropriate
response actions required;
ii. All appropriate Fund-financed
response under CERCLA has been
implemented, and no further response
action by responsible parties is
appropriate; or
iii. The remedial investigation has
shown that the release poses no
significant threat to public health or the
environment and, therefore, the 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 apply to
deletion of the Site:
(1) EPA consulted with the State
before developing this Notice of Intent
to Delete;
(2) EPA has provided the State 30
working days for review of this notice
prior to publication of it today;
(3) In accordance with the criteria
discussed above, EPA has determined
that no further response is appropriate;
(4) The State of New Jersey, through
the New Jersey Department of
Environmental Protection (NJDEP), has
concurred with deletion of the Site from
the NPL;
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
12437
(5) Concurrently with the publication
of this Notice of Intent to Delete in the
Federal Register, a notice is being
published in a major local newspaper,
the New Jersey Courier News. The
newspaper notice announces the 30-day
public comment period concerning the
Notice of Intent to Delete the site from
the NPL.
(6) The EPA placed copies of
documents supporting the proposed
deletion in the deletion docket and
made these items available for public
inspection and copying at the Site
information repositories identified
above.
If comments are received within the
30-day public comment period on this
document, EPA will evaluate and
respond appropriately to the comments
before making a final decision to delete.
If necessary, EPA will prepare a
Responsiveness Summary to address
any significant public comments
received. After the public comment
period, if EPA determines it is still
appropriate to delete the Site, the
Regional Administrator will publish a
final Notice of Deletion in the Federal
Register. Public notices, public
submissions and copies of the
Responsiveness Summary, if prepared,
will be made available to interested
parties and in the Site information
repositories listed above.
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 rationale for deleting the Site
from the NPL:
Site Background and History
The Federal Creosote Superfund Site,
CERCLIS ID NJ0001900281, is located in
the Borough of Manville, Somerset
County, New Jersey. The 50-acre Site is
bordered to the west by commercial
properties that line the east side of Main
Street. To the north, on the opposite
side of the Norfolk Southern railroad
tracks, are a variety of commercial and
retail establishments, including
automobile storage, warehousing, and
large retail stores. To the south, on the
opposite side of the CSX Transportation
E:\FR\FM\05MRP1.SGM
05MRP1
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
12438
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 43 / Wednesday, March 5, 2014 / Proposed Rules
tracks, is a primarily residential area
known as Lost Valley. Approximately
5,000 people live within a one-mile
radius of the Site. Currently, drinking
water for the surrounding area is
provided by a public water supply and
no private drinking water wells are
used.
The Site is divided into two land
uses: Residential (35 acres) and
commercial (15 acres). The land use in
the Claremont Development is strictly
residential, consisting of 129 singlefamily residential houses which are
home to approximately 350 residents.
The current land use of the Rustic Mall
portion of the Site is zoned commercial.
The Borough of Manville and the
property owner are planning
revitalization of the commercial
property, which includes a combination
of commercial and residential use.
The 50-acre Site was used to treat
railroad ties with coal tar creosote prior
to development into the land uses
described above. Beginning in
approximately 1910, the Site was
operated by a company known as the
Federal Creosoting Company. During
the operations, untreated railroad ties
were delivered to the Site by rail and
were processed in a treatment plant
located on the southwest western
portion of the Site. Coal-tar creosote was
applied to the railroad ties in this area.
Treatment residuals from the plant were
discharged into two unlined canals.
Subsurface piping and a surface canal
conveyed the flow of the treatment
residuals to the northern portion of the
property for a combined distance of
approximately 1,200 feet, where the
waste spilled into an unlined lagoon.
The other canal directed the flow of
treatment residuals toward the southern
portion of the property, where the
contents of this canal flowed into
another unlined lagoon located
approximately 1,500 feet from the
treatment plant. After treatment,
railroad ties were moved from the plant
to the central portion of the property,
referred to as the drip area, where the
excess creosote dripped from the treated
wood onto the ground. Creosoting
material and contaminated soil
associated with the wood treating
facility were not removed prior to
construction of the Claremont
Development and Rustic Mall.
Land use patterns on the Federal
Creosoting Company property remained
the same until the mid-1950s, when the
wood treatment plant ceased operations
and was dismantled. During the early
through mid 1960s the property was redeveloped. The area that formerly
housed the treatment plant was
developed into the 15-acre Rustic Mall
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:16 Mar 04, 2014
Jkt 232001
containing a mixture of commercial and
retail establishments. The remaining 35
acres of the former Federal Creosoting
Company property, including the drip
area, canals and lagoons, were
developed into the Claremont
Development.
In April 1996, NJDEP responded to an
incident involving the discharge of an
unknown liquid from a sump located at
one of the Claremont Development
residences on Valerie Drive. A thick,
tarry substance was observed flowing
from the sump to the street. In January
1997, the Borough of Manville
responded to a complaint that a
sinkhole had developed around a sewer
pipe in the Claremont Development
along East Camplain Road. Excavation
of the soil around the pipe identified a
black tar-like material in the soil.
Subsequent investigations of these areas
revealed elevated levels of contaminants
consistent with creosote.
Following the discovery of this
material, NJDEP, with technical
assistance from EPA, began an
investigation of the Site. In April and
May 1997, air samples were collected
inside the majority of homes in the
Claremont Development. With the
exception of one house, the analysis of
these samples indicated that the Siterelated contaminants were not present
in indoor air at elevated levels.
In October 1997, EPA’s
Environmental Response Team initiated
a Site investigation on properties
believed to contain creosote
contamination based on analysis of
historical aerial photographs, as well as
input from residents. Over 100 surface
and subsurface soil samples were
collected. These sampling results
indicated that the canals and lagoons
still existed beneath the Claremont
Development, and that the
contamination was extensive.
In July 1998, EPA initiated a removal
action at 11 residential properties to
temporarily cover areas that contained
higher surface soil levels of carcinogenic
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
(PAHs) in exposed surface soils. As an
interim action, sod was placed over bare
areas in lawns and mulch was placed
over exposed soils in garden beds.
The Site was proposed for the NPL on
July 28, 1998 (63 FR 40247), and was
formally placed on the NPL on January
19, 1999 (64 FR 2942).
Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis
and Remedial Investigation/Feasibility
Studies
EPA conducted an engineering
evaluation/cost analysis (EE/CA)
utilizing the results of sampling
initiated in October 1997. The EE/CA
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
was conducted for the first operable unit
(OU1) of the Site, which consisted of the
creosote source areas (subsurface canals
and lagoons) located in the residential
development, and evaluated options for
the removal of these source areas. The
EE/CA was completed in April 1999,
and a Record of Decision (ROD) for OU1
was signed on September 28, 1999.
Under the remedial investigation/
feasibility study (RI/FS) process, EPA
conducted a focused feasibility study
(FFS) for operable unit two (OU2),
which consisted of residual levels of
creosote contamination in surface and
subsurface soil within the residential
development. The FFS determined the
nature and extent of residual soil
contamination within the development
and identified remedial alternatives to
address contaminated soil. The FFS
found that soils contained residual
levels of creosote components, PAHs, in
the majority of the residential property
soils. The RI/FS was completed in April
2000 and a ROD for OU2 was signed on
September 29, 2000.
EPA conducted an FFS for operable
unit 3 (OU3) to determine the extent of
subsurface soil contamination on the
commercial portion of the Site, the
nature and extent of site-wide
groundwater contamination, and to
provide remedial alternatives to address
these media. The FFS for groundwater
was completed in June 2001, and the
FFS for the commercial property soils
was completed in August 2001. A ROD
for OU3 was signed on September 30,
2002.
Selected Remedy
The OU1 ROD, signed in 1999,
established the following remedial
action objectives (RAOs) for OU1:
• Clean up the canal and lagoon
source areas to levels that will allow for
unrestricted land use; and
• Remove as much source material as
possible in order to minimize a
potential source of groundwater
contamination.
The OU1 remedy included:
• Permanent relocation of residents
from certain properties within the canal
and lagoon source areas, and temporary
relocation, where necessary, to
implement the remedy;
• Excavation of source material from
the canal and lagoon source areas,
backfilling with clean fill, and property
restoration as necessary; and
• Transportation of the source
material for off-site thermal treatment
and disposal.
The OU2 ROD, signed in September
2000, established the following RAOs:
• Prevent human exposure, via direct
contact, with contaminated soils,
E:\FR\FM\05MRP1.SGM
05MRP1
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 43 / Wednesday, March 5, 2014 / Proposed Rules
considering the current and future
residential site use;
• Prevent future impacts to
underlying groundwater quality by
contaminated soils;
• Prevent exposure and minimize
disturbance to the Claremont
Development residents, and the
surrounding community of Manville,
during implementation of the remedial
action.
The OU2 remedy included:
• Excavation of soils containing PAHs
in excess of site-specific remediation
goals from an estimated approximately
82 properties, backfilling with clean fill,
and property restoration as necessary,
and
• Transportation of the contaminated
soil off site for disposal, with treatment
as necessary.
The OU3 ROD, signed in September
2002, established the following RAOs
for soils and groundwater:
• Prevent human exposure via direct
contact, inhalation, and ingestion of
contaminated soils, considering the
future potential residential site use;
• Prevent future impacts to
underlying groundwater quality by
contaminated soils that can act as a
continuing source of groundwater
contamination; and
• Prevent exposure and minimize
disturbance to the Rustic Mall
occupants and consumers, and the
surrounding community of Manville,
during implementation of the remedial
action.
• Prevent ingestion and direct contact
with groundwater that has contaminant
concentrations greater than the
applicable or relevant and appropriate
requirements (ARARs);
• Minimize the potential for
additional off-site migration of
groundwater with contaminant
concentrations that exceed the ARARs;
• Minimize the potential for transfer
of groundwater contamination to the
other media (e.g., surface water) at
concentrations in excess of ARARs.
The OU3 soil remedy included:
• Excavation of soils containing
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
(PAHs) in excess of site-specific
remediation goals on the Rustic Mall,
backfilling with clean fill, and property
restoration as necessary; and,
• Transportation of the contaminated
soil off site for disposal, with treatment
as necessary.
As described in more detail in the
decision summaries of the OU2 and
OU3 RODs, the selected remedy would
leave residual levels of PAHs (but not
source material as defined by the
September 1999 Record of Decision) at
depths greater than approximately 14
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:16 Mar 04, 2014
Jkt 232001
feet below the ground surface in the
Rustic Mall. The backfilled clean fill
would act as a barrier or ‘‘engineering
control’’ to prevent contact with any
residual contamination. In addition, a
deed notice would be required to
prevent direct contact with any
remaining residual soil contamination.
The OU3 groundwater remedy
included:
• Implementation of a long-term
groundwater sampling and analysis
program to monitor the concentrations
of creosote components in the
groundwater at the site, to assess the
migration and attenuation of the
creosote in groundwater over time; and,
• Institutional controls to restrict the
installation of wells and the use of
groundwater in the vicinity of the
contaminated groundwater.
The evaluation of remedial
alternatives for remediation of the dense
nonaqueous phase liquid creosote
contamination, including contamination
found in the fractured bedrock aquifer,
concluded that no practicable
alternatives could be implemented. As a
result, EPA invoked an ARAR waiver for
the groundwater at this site due to
technical impracticability (TI). The area
for the TI waiver covers approximately
119 acres. The area includes three
distinct subareas: The north off-site
subarea, the on-site subarea, and the
south off-site subarea. The TI waiver
includes both the overburden aquifer
and the bedrock aquifer within the area.
The contaminants for which the ARAR
waiver apply include: Acenaphthene,
benzene, naphthalene, 2,4-dimethyl
phenol, benzo(a) anthracene,
benzo(a)pyrene, benzo(k) fluoranthene,
fluorine, chrysene,
benzo(b)fluoranthene, and indeno(l,2,3cd)pyrene.
Two Explanations of Significant
Differences (ESDs) were prepared to
document significant changes to
components of the selected remedies.
The first ESD provided an explanation
of the increase in the estimated costs for
the OU1, OU2 and OU3 remedies. A
second ESD provided an explanation of
the application of institutional controls,
in some circumstances, at depths
shallower than anticipated in the OU2
ROD.
Response Actions
The design criteria consisted of the
removal of creosote waste and soils
saturated with creosote waste. In
addition, design criteria also specified
that contaminated soils exceeding the
analytical cleanup goals (CGs) would be
removed to a depth of approximately 14
feet and transported offsite for treatment
and/or disposal according to the RCRA
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
12439
Land Disposal Requirements. These sitespecific CGs consisted of seven PAHs,
which are the primary contaminants of
concern.
As noted above, the Site was broken
into three OUs. The OU1 remedial
action included removal of source
material from 29 residential properties,
required the permanent relocation of 21
OU1 property owners, and the
demolition of 18 homes.
OU1 remedial action activities were
conducted pursuant to the 1999 ROD.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) provided oversight during all
remedial activities. USACE contracted
Cape Environmental, Inc., and Sevenson
Environmental Services (SES), Inc., to
complete the remedial actions in
accordance with the contract documents
and all applicable state and federal
regulations.
In October 2000, USACE’s demolition
contractor, Cape Environmental, Inc.,
mobilized equipment at the Federal
Creosote Site to begin demolition of
residential houses located above or
adjoining creosote waste lagoons and
canals. In December 2000, USACE’s
remediation contractor, SES mobilized
on Site.
The cleanup of OU1 was divided into
three phases. Phase 1 focused on the
cleanup of the southern lagoon; Phase 2
focused on the cleanup of the northern
lagoon and canal; and Phase 3 cleanup
efforts were focused on the southern
canal.
The OU1 Phase 1 remedial action
involved temporary relocation of one
family, the purchase of eight residential
properties and permanent relocation of
the residents, demolition of eight singlefamily homes, and excavation and
removal of 64,500 tons of soil from the
southern lagoon area to off-site
treatment and disposal facilities. Soil
requiring treatment was sent to an offsite hazardous waste incinerator in
Canada; soils requiring subtitle C
disposal were sent to a hazardous waste
landfill in New York State. Remediation
of Phase 1 was completed in June 2002.
Ownership of these eight properties was
transferred from EPA to NJDEP in July
2003. NJDEP sold these properties
through public auction in the summer of
2009.
The OU1 Phase 2 remedial action
included the acquisition of eight
residential properties and the
permanent relocation of residents from
the eight properties located over the
northern lagoon and canal. The houses
on the eight lots were demolished and
excavation of creosote-contaminated
soil from this northern lagoon and canal
started in April 2002. Excavation on this
phase reached a depth of 35 feet below
E:\FR\FM\05MRP1.SGM
05MRP1
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
12440
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 43 / Wednesday, March 5, 2014 / Proposed Rules
the ground surface. Approximately
115,600 tons of soil were excavated and
shipped off site to treatment and
disposal facilities. These properties
have been backfilled with clean soil and
have been restored. EPA currently owns
the eight lots and has placed the
properties up for sale.
OU1 Phase 3 remedial action
included the excavation and off-site
disposal of 30,600 tons of contaminated
soil from 13 residential properties and
roadways located on the buried
southern creosote canal. OU1 Phase 3
included the temporary relocation of
three families, the purchase of five
residential properties built over a
portion of the buried southern creosote
waste canal, permanent relocation of
residents from the five properties and
the demolition of two properties. After
remediation and restoration, all of the
OU1 Phase 3 properties purchased by
EPA were sold and returned to
residential use.
The remedial action objectives for the
OU2 remedy were: To prevent human
exposure via direct contact with
contaminated soils, considering current
and future residential use; prevent
future impacts to underlying
groundwater quality by contaminated
soil; and prevent exposure and
minimize disturbance to the Claremont
Development residents, and the
surrounding community during the
implementation of the remedial action.
The remediation of OU2 was divided
into two phases. The OU2 Phase 1
remedial action consisted of soil
removal at 14 residential properties that
surrounded the southern lagoon area.
The OU2 Phase 1 remedial action
involved no permanent relocations and
no demolitions. The remedial action of
this phase started in February 2002. By
June 2002, 9,000 tons of soil had been
excavated, treated and/or disposed off
site; the 14 properties were completely
restored, and temporarily relocated
residents returned to their homes.
The OU2 Phase 2 remediation began
in June 2003. Cleanup activities
occurred on 50 residential properties
and portions of residential roadways.
The OU2 Phase 2 remedial action
involved two permanent relocations and
no building demolitions. The
remediation of a day care center was
included in this phase. In August 2001,
the day care center playground was
remediated and in 2006, the day care
center parking lot was remediated. The
remedial action of OU2 Phase 2 resulted
in the excavation and off-site disposal
(with treatment as necessary) of 59,000
tons of soil.
Remediation of OU3 soils began in
August 2005. After excavation was
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:16 Mar 04, 2014
Jkt 232001
started by EPA, the Rustic Mall owners
demolished all buildings on their
property except for a bowling alley. EPA
excavated creosote waste found below
the footprints of the former Rustic Mall
buildings. Source material and residual
levels of creosote were excavated from
the Mall property. Approximately
178,000 tons of soil were excavated and
shipped off site for treatment and/or
disposal. The excavation of the Mall
was completed in November 2007.
The first round of annual long-term
monitoring of Site groundwater started
in November 2005, as required by the
OU3 ROD. Levels of PAHs in
groundwater have, in general, declined
when compared to the initial
groundwater sampling performed prior
to the remediation of the source areas.
Cleanup Goals
The Remedial Action Reports for OU1
Phase 1 dated July 2005, OU1 Phase 2
dated August 2008, OU1 Phase 3 dated
August 2006, OU2 Phase 1 dated July
2005, OU2 Phase 2 dated August 2008
and OU3 dated August 2008 found that
the construction activities at the Site
were consistent with the approved
construction plans (Design Reports, Site
Management Plan, Sampling Analysis
and Monitoring Plan, Perimeter Air
Monitoring Plan, De-watering Plan,
Waste Management Plan, Excavation
and Handling Plan, Health and Safety
Plan, and Quality Assurance Project
Plan).
The remedial action provided for a
rigorous sampling and analysis program.
Specifically, sampling was required and
implemented to protect on-site residents
and on-site workers, and to confirm
compliance with RAOs. Daily real-time
air monitoring was conducted within
the perimeter of the remediation area to
detect and quantify total volatile organic
compounds and respirable particulates.
In addition, confirmatory soil samples
were taken for Site contaminants
wherever additional contamination was
suspected or known to occur. Soil
samples were also obtained for backfill
before placement into excavated areas.
In addition to air and soil sampling
conducted during all phases of the
remediation, the OU3 ROD called for
long-term groundwater monitoring. The
objective of the long-term groundwater
monitoring is to assess the migration
and attenuation of creosote in
groundwater over time.
Operation and Maintenance
Operation, maintenance and
monitoring activities at the site include:
Maintenance of eight EPA-acquired
residential properties; sale of the eight
remaining EPA-acquired residential
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
properties; maintenance of the
institutional controls; long-term, on-site
and off-site groundwater monitoring;
and adjustments and/or modifications to
the groundwater monitoring systems.
As part of the monitoring program,
groundwater will continue to be
sampled to monitor plume properties,
including its extent over time to verify
that the plume will not increase or pose
an unacceptable risk to human health
and the environment.
Institutional controls have been
applied to the groundwater and, where
appropriate, soils at the Site.
The OU3 ROD required the
establishment of a Classification
Exception Area (CEA) for the area of
groundwater contamination. The CEA
was established to provide notice that
the constituent standards for a class IIA
aquifer classification are not or will not
be met in the area of the Federal
Creosote Site and that designated
aquifer uses are suspended in the
affected area for the term of the CEA.
Additional monitoring wells were
installed to delineate the CEA, and the
CEA was established in January 2010.
Deed notices were applied at the Site
to prevent exposure to residual
contaminants in soils that were not
excavated as part of the remediation.
The OU2 ROD anticipated the use of
deed notices on 23 properties where
residual contamination (not source
material) was left at depths greater than
approximately 14 feet. As documented
in the 2008 ESD, the implemented
remedy differed from the ROD by use of
deed notices at a number of properties
where residual contamination remained
between two feet and 14 feet in depth.
Residual contamination was not
removed between these depths in order
to preserve the structural integrity of
houses.
During the implementation of the
remedy, all source material encountered
in the residential development was
removed and residual contamination
above cleanup goals was left beneath 21
properties. All 21 residential property
owners applied deed notices to their
properties where residual
contamination remained at levels
exceeding the remedial goals
established for the Site. Consistent with
the expectations of the ROD, deed
notices were applied to six properties
where residual contamination remains
below approximately 14 feet. The
remaining 15 properties requiring deed
notices have residual contamination
shallower than 14 feet. The residual
contamination remains at depths that
are inaccessible through normal
residential activities. Property owners
are required to maintain the property in
E:\FR\FM\05MRP1.SGM
05MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 43 / Wednesday, March 5, 2014 / Proposed Rules
a manner that ensures the deed notice
continues to be protective. NJDEP is to
conduct biennial inspections and certify
the continued protectiveness of all
residential properties containing deed
notices.
A deed notice was required on
Borough of Manville roads and right-ofways that contained residual
contamination at levels exceeding the
remedial goals established for the Site.
The Borough has applied deed notices
to all areas that were required.
A deed notice was also required on
the Rustic Mall commercial property.
The owners have applied a deed notice
to this property in accordance with the
remedy selected in the OU3 ROD. The
commercial property owner is
responsible to conduct biennial
inspections and provide certification to
NJDEP that specifications of the deed
notice continue to be protective.
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Five-Year Review
Hazardous substances, pollutants, or
contaminants will remain at the Site
above levels that allow for unlimited
use and unrestricted exposure. In
accordance with CERCLA Section 121
(c), the remedies at the Site will be
reviewed no less than every five years.
The first five-year review was
completed in June 2007. A second fiveyear review was completed on May 3,
2012. This second five-year review
determined that the implemented
actions at the Site currently protect
human health and the environment
because soil excavation activities and
institutional controls prevent direct
exposure to contaminated soils. EPA
will complete the next five-year-review
prior to May 3, 2017.
Community Involvement
A very high level of community
concern was demonstrated by residents,
commercial property owners, business
owners, and borough officials at the
time the Site was discovered in 1997.
This level of community concern
persisted to the completion of cleanup
activities in 2008.
Initially, public meetings were used to
convey information to the community.
At these meetings, residents were
informed of plans for indoor air
sampling and soil sampling on their
properties. As results of the sampling
events were produced, EPA held public
availability sessions in which EPA
representatives met with residents oneon-one to discuss the sampling results.
As with the public meetings, these
public availability sessions were well
attended and preferred by many
members of the community. A
Community Advisory Group (CAG) was
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:16 Mar 04, 2014
Jkt 232001
formed early on in the project. The CAG
obtained information from EPA and
provided community input on the
implementation of field activities
associated with investigations, design
and remedial construction. As the
project moved through the remedial
investigation to the remedial design and
remedial action, the on-site presence of
equipment and contractor personnel
associated with these activities gained
higher visibility and became more
intrusive to the community. EPA
distributed informational fact sheets to
property owners immediately before
field activities were to take place in any
area of the community. The fact sheets
informed the community of Site
activities such as utility mark-offs, road
closures, equipment to be used for
upcoming work, number of personnel
involved in the work and the duration
of the work as well as upcoming
meetings. In addition, EPA distributed
periodic newsletters informing the
community of cleanup progress and
plans for future cleanup activities. EPA
held multiple interviews with different
media (newspaper, television and radio
news) to report on progress of the Site
investigation and cleanup activities.
Press events were also held to announce
major milestones of the project. Meeting
one-on-one with residents at their
homes was a critical component of
community relations activities at this
Site. A wide range of issues were
addressed at these meetings such as
access agreements, property specific
plans for upcoming environmental
testing and remediation, interpretation
of sampling results, permanent and
temporary relocation assistance, and
resident’s concerns regarding intrusive
remediation of their properties.
A notice will be published in the local
newspaper informing the public of
EPA’s intent to delete the Site. This
public notice will request public
comment on the proposed deletion and
provide EPA’s point of contact to accept
comments.
Determination That the Site Meets the
Criteria for Deletion in the NCP
All response actions required in each
of the RODs have been completed and
all remedial action objectives have been
met. One of the three criteria for Site
deletion specifies that EPA may delete
a site from the NPL if all appropriate
Fund-financed response under CERCLA
has been implemented, and no further
response action by responsible parties is
appropriate. EPA, with the concurrence
of the State of New Jersey Department
of Environmental Protection, believes
that this criterion for deletion has been
met. Subsequently, EPA is proposing
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
12441
deletion of this Site from the NPL.
Documents supporting this action are
available from the docket.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Chemicals, Hazardous
waste, Hazardous substances,
Intergovernmental relations, Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Superfund, Water
pollution control, Water supply.
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2); 42 U.S.C.
9601–9657; E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 CFR,
1991 Comp., p.351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR 2923,
3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p.193.
Dated: January 31, 2014.
Judith Enck
Regional Administrator, Region 2.
[FR Doc. 2014–04885 Filed 3–4–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Office of the Secretary
45 CFR Parts 160 and 162
[CMS–0037–N]
Administrative Simplification:
Certification of Compliance for Health
Plans; Extension of Comment Period
Office of the Secretary, HHS.
Proposed rule; extension of the
comment period.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
This document extends the
comment period for the Administrative
Simplification: Certification of
Compliance for Health Plans proposed
rule, which was published in the
January 2, 2014 Federal Register. The
comment period for the proposed rule,
which would have ended on March 3,
2014, is extended to April 3, 2014.
DATES: The comment period for the
proposed rule published in the January
2, 2014 Federal Register (79 FR 298) is
extended to April 3, 2014.
ADDRESSES: In commenting, please refer
to file code CMS–0037–P. Because of
staff and resource limitations, we cannot
accept comments by facsimile (FAX)
transmission.
You may submit comments in one of
four ways (please choose only one of the
ways listed):
1. You may submit electronic
comments on this regulation to https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
‘‘Submit a comment’’ instructions.
2. By regular mail. You may mail
written comments to the following
address ONLY:
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\05MRP1.SGM
05MRP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 43 (Wednesday, March 5, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 12436-12441]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-04885]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 300
[EPA-HQ-SFUND-1999-0013; FRL-9907-49-Region 2]
National Oil and Hazardous Substance Pollution Contingency Plan
National Priorities List: Deletion of the Federal Creosote Superfund
Site
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of intent.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region II is issuing
a Notice of Intent to Delete the Federal Creosote Superfund Site
located in Manville, New Jersey, from the National Priorities List
(NPL) and requests public comments on this proposed action. The NPL,
promulgated pursuant to section 105 of the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended,
is an appendix of the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution
Contingency Plan (NCP). EPA and the State of New Jersey, through the
New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, have determined that
all appropriate response actions under CERCLA, other than long-term
groundwater monitoring and five-year reviews, have been completed.
However, this deletion does not preclude future actions under
Superfund.
DATES: Comments must be received by April 4, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID no. EPA-HQ-
SFUND-1999-0013, by one of the following methods:
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow on-line instructions
for submitting comments.
Email: puvogel.rich@epa.gov: Rich Puvogel, Remedial
Project Manager, seppi.pat@epa.gov: Pat Seppi, Community Involvement
Coordinator
Fax: (212) 637-4429.
Mail: Rich Puvogel, Remedial Project Manager, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Emergency & Remedial Response
Division, 290 Broadway, 19th Floor, New York, NY 10007-1866.
or
Pat Seppi, Community Involvement Coordinator, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Public Affairs Division, 290 Broadway, 26th Floor,
New York, NY 10007-1866.
Hand Delivery: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Emergency & Remedial Response Division, 290 Broadway, 19th Floor, New
York, NY 10007-1866.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours
of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID no. EPA-HQ-SFUND-
1999-0013. 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 email. The https://www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an email comment directly to EPA without
going through https://www.regulations.gov, your email address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses.
Docket
All documents in the docket are listed in the https://www.regulations.gov index.
[[Page 12437]]
Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly
available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, will be publicly available only in the hard copy. Publicly
available docket materials are available either electronically in
https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region II, Superfund Records
Center, 290 Broadway, Room 1828, New York, New York 10007-1866, (212)
637-4308, Hours: 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday Through Friday;
and at
Manville Public Library, 100 South 10th Avenue, Manville, New Jersey
08835, (908) 722-9722.
Hours:
Mon. through Fri.: 10:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.
Fri.: 10:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
Sat.: 10:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Rich Puvogel, Remedial Project Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region II, 290 Broadway, 19th Floor, New York, New York 10007-
1866, (212) 637-4410
or
email puvogel.rich@epa.gov.
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 Federal Creosote
Superfund Site (Site) from the NPL and requests public comment on this
proposed action. 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 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
40 CFR 300.425(e)(3) of the NCP, sites deleted from the NPL remain
eligible for Fund-financed remedial actions if future conditions
warrant such actions.
EPA will accept comments on the proposal to delete this Site for
thirty (30) days after publication of this document in the Federal
Register.
Section II of this document explains the criteria for deleting
sites from the NPL. Section III discusses procedures that EPA is using
for this action. Section IV discusses the Federal Creosote Superfund
Site and demonstrates how it meets the deletion criteria.
II. NPL Deletion Criteria
The NCP establishes the criteria that EPA uses to delete sites from
the NPL. In accordance with 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:
i. Responsible parties or other persons have implemented all
appropriate response actions required;
ii. All appropriate Fund-financed response under CERCLA has been
implemented, and no further response action by responsible parties is
appropriate; or
iii. The remedial investigation has shown that the release poses no
significant threat to public health or the environment and, therefore,
the 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 apply to deletion of the Site:
(1) EPA consulted with the State before developing this Notice of
Intent to Delete;
(2) EPA has provided the State 30 working days for review of this
notice prior to publication of it today;
(3) In accordance with the criteria discussed above, EPA has
determined that no further response is appropriate;
(4) The State of New Jersey, through the New Jersey Department of
Environmental Protection (NJDEP), has concurred with deletion of the
Site from the NPL;
(5) Concurrently with the publication of this Notice of Intent to
Delete in the Federal Register, a notice is being published in a major
local newspaper, the New Jersey Courier News. The newspaper notice
announces the 30-day public comment period concerning the Notice of
Intent to Delete the site from the NPL.
(6) The EPA placed copies of documents supporting the proposed
deletion in the deletion docket and made these items available for
public inspection and copying at the Site information repositories
identified above.
If comments are received within the 30-day public comment period on
this document, EPA will evaluate and respond appropriately to the
comments before making a final decision to delete. If necessary, EPA
will prepare a Responsiveness Summary to address any significant public
comments received. After the public comment period, if EPA determines
it is still appropriate to delete the Site, the Regional Administrator
will publish a final Notice of Deletion in the Federal Register. Public
notices, public submissions and copies of the Responsiveness Summary,
if prepared, will be made available to interested parties and in the
Site information repositories listed above.
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 rationale for deleting the
Site from the NPL:
Site Background and History
The Federal Creosote Superfund Site, CERCLIS ID NJ0001900281, is
located in the Borough of Manville, Somerset County, New Jersey. The
50-acre Site is bordered to the west by commercial properties that line
the east side of Main Street. To the north, on the opposite side of the
Norfolk Southern railroad tracks, are a variety of commercial and
retail establishments, including automobile storage, warehousing, and
large retail stores. To the south, on the opposite side of the CSX
Transportation
[[Page 12438]]
tracks, is a primarily residential area known as Lost Valley.
Approximately 5,000 people live within a one-mile radius of the Site.
Currently, drinking water for the surrounding area is provided by a
public water supply and no private drinking water wells are used.
The Site is divided into two land uses: Residential (35 acres) and
commercial (15 acres). The land use in the Claremont Development is
strictly residential, consisting of 129 single-family residential
houses which are home to approximately 350 residents. The current land
use of the Rustic Mall portion of the Site is zoned commercial. The
Borough of Manville and the property owner are planning revitalization
of the commercial property, which includes a combination of commercial
and residential use.
The 50-acre Site was used to treat railroad ties with coal tar
creosote prior to development into the land uses described above.
Beginning in approximately 1910, the Site was operated by a company
known as the Federal Creosoting Company. During the operations,
untreated railroad ties were delivered to the Site by rail and were
processed in a treatment plant located on the southwest western portion
of the Site. Coal-tar creosote was applied to the railroad ties in this
area. Treatment residuals from the plant were discharged into two
unlined canals. Subsurface piping and a surface canal conveyed the flow
of the treatment residuals to the northern portion of the property for
a combined distance of approximately 1,200 feet, where the waste
spilled into an unlined lagoon. The other canal directed the flow of
treatment residuals toward the southern portion of the property, where
the contents of this canal flowed into another unlined lagoon located
approximately 1,500 feet from the treatment plant. After treatment,
railroad ties were moved from the plant to the central portion of the
property, referred to as the drip area, where the excess creosote
dripped from the treated wood onto the ground. Creosoting material and
contaminated soil associated with the wood treating facility were not
removed prior to construction of the Claremont Development and Rustic
Mall.
Land use patterns on the Federal Creosoting Company property
remained the same until the mid-1950s, when the wood treatment plant
ceased operations and was dismantled. During the early through mid
1960s the property was re-developed. The area that formerly housed the
treatment plant was developed into the 15-acre Rustic Mall containing a
mixture of commercial and retail establishments. The remaining 35 acres
of the former Federal Creosoting Company property, including the drip
area, canals and lagoons, were developed into the Claremont
Development.
In April 1996, NJDEP responded to an incident involving the
discharge of an unknown liquid from a sump located at one of the
Claremont Development residences on Valerie Drive. A thick, tarry
substance was observed flowing from the sump to the street. In January
1997, the Borough of Manville responded to a complaint that a sinkhole
had developed around a sewer pipe in the Claremont Development along
East Camplain Road. Excavation of the soil around the pipe identified a
black tar-like material in the soil. Subsequent investigations of these
areas revealed elevated levels of contaminants consistent with
creosote.
Following the discovery of this material, NJDEP, with technical
assistance from EPA, began an investigation of the Site. In April and
May 1997, air samples were collected inside the majority of homes in
the Claremont Development. With the exception of one house, the
analysis of these samples indicated that the Site-related contaminants
were not present in indoor air at elevated levels.
In October 1997, EPA's Environmental Response Team initiated a Site
investigation on properties believed to contain creosote contamination
based on analysis of historical aerial photographs, as well as input
from residents. Over 100 surface and subsurface soil samples were
collected. These sampling results indicated that the canals and lagoons
still existed beneath the Claremont Development, and that the
contamination was extensive.
In July 1998, EPA initiated a removal action at 11 residential
properties to temporarily cover areas that contained higher surface
soil levels of carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in
exposed surface soils. As an interim action, sod was placed over bare
areas in lawns and mulch was placed over exposed soils in garden beds.
The Site was proposed for the NPL on July 28, 1998 (63 FR 40247),
and was formally placed on the NPL on January 19, 1999 (64 FR 2942).
Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis and Remedial Investigation/
Feasibility Studies
EPA conducted an engineering evaluation/cost analysis (EE/CA)
utilizing the results of sampling initiated in October 1997. The EE/CA
was conducted for the first operable unit (OU1) of the Site, which
consisted of the creosote source areas (subsurface canals and lagoons)
located in the residential development, and evaluated options for the
removal of these source areas. The EE/CA was completed in April 1999,
and a Record of Decision (ROD) for OU1 was signed on September 28,
1999.
Under the remedial investigation/feasibility study (RI/FS) process,
EPA conducted a focused feasibility study (FFS) for operable unit two
(OU2), which consisted of residual levels of creosote contamination in
surface and subsurface soil within the residential development. The FFS
determined the nature and extent of residual soil contamination within
the development and identified remedial alternatives to address
contaminated soil. The FFS found that soils contained residual levels
of creosote components, PAHs, in the majority of the residential
property soils. The RI/FS was completed in April 2000 and a ROD for OU2
was signed on September 29, 2000.
EPA conducted an FFS for operable unit 3 (OU3) to determine the
extent of subsurface soil contamination on the commercial portion of
the Site, the nature and extent of site-wide groundwater contamination,
and to provide remedial alternatives to address these media. The FFS
for groundwater was completed in June 2001, and the FFS for the
commercial property soils was completed in August 2001. A ROD for OU3
was signed on September 30, 2002.
Selected Remedy
The OU1 ROD, signed in 1999, established the following remedial
action objectives (RAOs) for OU1:
Clean up the canal and lagoon source areas to levels that
will allow for unrestricted land use; and
Remove as much source material as possible in order to
minimize a potential source of groundwater contamination.
The OU1 remedy included:
Permanent relocation of residents from certain properties
within the canal and lagoon source areas, and temporary relocation,
where necessary, to implement the remedy;
Excavation of source material from the canal and lagoon
source areas, backfilling with clean fill, and property restoration as
necessary; and
Transportation of the source material for off-site thermal
treatment and disposal.
The OU2 ROD, signed in September 2000, established the following
RAOs:
Prevent human exposure, via direct contact, with
contaminated soils,
[[Page 12439]]
considering the current and future residential site use;
Prevent future impacts to underlying groundwater quality
by contaminated soils;
Prevent exposure and minimize disturbance to the Claremont
Development residents, and the surrounding community of Manville,
during implementation of the remedial action.
The OU2 remedy included:
Excavation of soils containing PAHs in excess of site-
specific remediation goals from an estimated approximately 82
properties, backfilling with clean fill, and property restoration as
necessary, and
Transportation of the contaminated soil off site for
disposal, with treatment as necessary.
The OU3 ROD, signed in September 2002, established the following
RAOs for soils and groundwater:
Prevent human exposure via direct contact, inhalation, and
ingestion of contaminated soils, considering the future potential
residential site use;
Prevent future impacts to underlying groundwater quality
by contaminated soils that can act as a continuing source of
groundwater contamination; and
Prevent exposure and minimize disturbance to the Rustic
Mall occupants and consumers, and the surrounding community of
Manville, during implementation of the remedial action.
Prevent ingestion and direct contact with groundwater that
has contaminant concentrations greater than the applicable or relevant
and appropriate requirements (ARARs);
Minimize the potential for additional off-site migration
of groundwater with contaminant concentrations that exceed the ARARs;
Minimize the potential for transfer of groundwater
contamination to the other media (e.g., surface water) at
concentrations in excess of ARARs.
The OU3 soil remedy included:
Excavation of soils containing polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAHs) in excess of site-specific remediation goals on the
Rustic Mall, backfilling with clean fill, and property restoration as
necessary; and,
Transportation of the contaminated soil off site for
disposal, with treatment as necessary.
As described in more detail in the decision summaries of the OU2
and OU3 RODs, the selected remedy would leave residual levels of PAHs
(but not source material as defined by the September 1999 Record of
Decision) at depths greater than approximately 14 feet below the ground
surface in the Rustic Mall. The backfilled clean fill would act as a
barrier or ``engineering control'' to prevent contact with any residual
contamination. In addition, a deed notice would be required to prevent
direct contact with any remaining residual soil contamination.
The OU3 groundwater remedy included:
Implementation of a long-term groundwater sampling and
analysis program to monitor the concentrations of creosote components
in the groundwater at the site, to assess the migration and attenuation
of the creosote in groundwater over time; and,
Institutional controls to restrict the installation of
wells and the use of groundwater in the vicinity of the contaminated
groundwater.
The evaluation of remedial alternatives for remediation of the
dense nonaqueous phase liquid creosote contamination, including
contamination found in the fractured bedrock aquifer, concluded that no
practicable alternatives could be implemented. As a result, EPA invoked
an ARAR waiver for the groundwater at this site due to technical
impracticability (TI). The area for the TI waiver covers approximately
119 acres. The area includes three distinct subareas: The north off-
site subarea, the on-site subarea, and the south off-site subarea. The
TI waiver includes both the overburden aquifer and the bedrock aquifer
within the area. The contaminants for which the ARAR waiver apply
include: Acenaphthene, benzene, naphthalene, 2,4-dimethyl phenol,
benzo(a) anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene, benzo(k) fluoranthene, fluorine,
chrysene, benzo(b)fluoranthene, and indeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene.
Two Explanations of Significant Differences (ESDs) were prepared to
document significant changes to components of the selected remedies.
The first ESD provided an explanation of the increase in the estimated
costs for the OU1, OU2 and OU3 remedies. A second ESD provided an
explanation of the application of institutional controls, in some
circumstances, at depths shallower than anticipated in the OU2 ROD.
Response Actions
The design criteria consisted of the removal of creosote waste and
soils saturated with creosote waste. In addition, design criteria also
specified that contaminated soils exceeding the analytical cleanup
goals (CGs) would be removed to a depth of approximately 14 feet and
transported offsite for treatment and/or disposal according to the RCRA
Land Disposal Requirements. These site-specific CGs consisted of seven
PAHs, which are the primary contaminants of concern.
As noted above, the Site was broken into three OUs. The OU1
remedial action included removal of source material from 29 residential
properties, required the permanent relocation of 21 OU1 property
owners, and the demolition of 18 homes.
OU1 remedial action activities were conducted pursuant to the 1999
ROD. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) provided oversight during
all remedial activities. USACE contracted Cape Environmental, Inc., and
Sevenson Environmental Services (SES), Inc., to complete the remedial
actions in accordance with the contract documents and all applicable
state and federal regulations.
In October 2000, USACE's demolition contractor, Cape Environmental,
Inc., mobilized equipment at the Federal Creosote Site to begin
demolition of residential houses located above or adjoining creosote
waste lagoons and canals. In December 2000, USACE's remediation
contractor, SES mobilized on Site.
The cleanup of OU1 was divided into three phases. Phase 1 focused
on the cleanup of the southern lagoon; Phase 2 focused on the cleanup
of the northern lagoon and canal; and Phase 3 cleanup efforts were
focused on the southern canal.
The OU1 Phase 1 remedial action involved temporary relocation of
one family, the purchase of eight residential properties and permanent
relocation of the residents, demolition of eight single-family homes,
and excavation and removal of 64,500 tons of soil from the southern
lagoon area to off-site treatment and disposal facilities. Soil
requiring treatment was sent to an off-site hazardous waste incinerator
in Canada; soils requiring subtitle C disposal were sent to a hazardous
waste landfill in New York State. Remediation of Phase 1 was completed
in June 2002. Ownership of these eight properties was transferred from
EPA to NJDEP in July 2003. NJDEP sold these properties through public
auction in the summer of 2009.
The OU1 Phase 2 remedial action included the acquisition of eight
residential properties and the permanent relocation of residents from
the eight properties located over the northern lagoon and canal. The
houses on the eight lots were demolished and excavation of creosote-
contaminated soil from this northern lagoon and canal started in April
2002. Excavation on this phase reached a depth of 35 feet below
[[Page 12440]]
the ground surface. Approximately 115,600 tons of soil were excavated
and shipped off site to treatment and disposal facilities. These
properties have been backfilled with clean soil and have been restored.
EPA currently owns the eight lots and has placed the properties up for
sale.
OU1 Phase 3 remedial action included the excavation and off-site
disposal of 30,600 tons of contaminated soil from 13 residential
properties and roadways located on the buried southern creosote canal.
OU1 Phase 3 included the temporary relocation of three families, the
purchase of five residential properties built over a portion of the
buried southern creosote waste canal, permanent relocation of residents
from the five properties and the demolition of two properties. After
remediation and restoration, all of the OU1 Phase 3 properties
purchased by EPA were sold and returned to residential use.
The remedial action objectives for the OU2 remedy were: To prevent
human exposure via direct contact with contaminated soils, considering
current and future residential use; prevent future impacts to
underlying groundwater quality by contaminated soil; and prevent
exposure and minimize disturbance to the Claremont Development
residents, and the surrounding community during the implementation of
the remedial action.
The remediation of OU2 was divided into two phases. The OU2 Phase 1
remedial action consisted of soil removal at 14 residential properties
that surrounded the southern lagoon area. The OU2 Phase 1 remedial
action involved no permanent relocations and no demolitions. The
remedial action of this phase started in February 2002. By June 2002,
9,000 tons of soil had been excavated, treated and/or disposed off
site; the 14 properties were completely restored, and temporarily
relocated residents returned to their homes.
The OU2 Phase 2 remediation began in June 2003. Cleanup activities
occurred on 50 residential properties and portions of residential
roadways. The OU2 Phase 2 remedial action involved two permanent
relocations and no building demolitions. The remediation of a day care
center was included in this phase. In August 2001, the day care center
playground was remediated and in 2006, the day care center parking lot
was remediated. The remedial action of OU2 Phase 2 resulted in the
excavation and off-site disposal (with treatment as necessary) of
59,000 tons of soil.
Remediation of OU3 soils began in August 2005. After excavation was
started by EPA, the Rustic Mall owners demolished all buildings on
their property except for a bowling alley. EPA excavated creosote waste
found below the footprints of the former Rustic Mall buildings. Source
material and residual levels of creosote were excavated from the Mall
property. Approximately 178,000 tons of soil were excavated and shipped
off site for treatment and/or disposal. The excavation of the Mall was
completed in November 2007.
The first round of annual long-term monitoring of Site groundwater
started in November 2005, as required by the OU3 ROD. Levels of PAHs in
groundwater have, in general, declined when compared to the initial
groundwater sampling performed prior to the remediation of the source
areas.
Cleanup Goals
The Remedial Action Reports for OU1 Phase 1 dated July 2005, OU1
Phase 2 dated August 2008, OU1 Phase 3 dated August 2006, OU2 Phase 1
dated July 2005, OU2 Phase 2 dated August 2008 and OU3 dated August
2008 found that the construction activities at the Site were consistent
with the approved construction plans (Design Reports, Site Management
Plan, Sampling Analysis and Monitoring Plan, Perimeter Air Monitoring
Plan, De-watering Plan, Waste Management Plan, Excavation and Handling
Plan, Health and Safety Plan, and Quality Assurance Project Plan).
The remedial action provided for a rigorous sampling and analysis
program. Specifically, sampling was required and implemented to protect
on-site residents and on-site workers, and to confirm compliance with
RAOs. Daily real-time air monitoring was conducted within the perimeter
of the remediation area to detect and quantify total volatile organic
compounds and respirable particulates. In addition, confirmatory soil
samples were taken for Site contaminants wherever additional
contamination was suspected or known to occur. Soil samples were also
obtained for backfill before placement into excavated areas.
In addition to air and soil sampling conducted during all phases of
the remediation, the OU3 ROD called for long-term groundwater
monitoring. The objective of the long-term groundwater monitoring is to
assess the migration and attenuation of creosote in groundwater over
time.
Operation and Maintenance
Operation, maintenance and monitoring activities at the site
include: Maintenance of eight EPA-acquired residential properties; sale
of the eight remaining EPA-acquired residential properties; maintenance
of the institutional controls; long-term, on-site and off-site
groundwater monitoring; and adjustments and/or modifications to the
groundwater monitoring systems.
As part of the monitoring program, groundwater will continue to be
sampled to monitor plume properties, including its extent over time to
verify that the plume will not increase or pose an unacceptable risk to
human health and the environment.
Institutional controls have been applied to the groundwater and,
where appropriate, soils at the Site.
The OU3 ROD required the establishment of a Classification
Exception Area (CEA) for the area of groundwater contamination. The CEA
was established to provide notice that the constituent standards for a
class IIA aquifer classification are not or will not be met in the area
of the Federal Creosote Site and that designated aquifer uses are
suspended in the affected area for the term of the CEA. Additional
monitoring wells were installed to delineate the CEA, and the CEA was
established in January 2010.
Deed notices were applied at the Site to prevent exposure to
residual contaminants in soils that were not excavated as part of the
remediation. The OU2 ROD anticipated the use of deed notices on 23
properties where residual contamination (not source material) was left
at depths greater than approximately 14 feet. As documented in the 2008
ESD, the implemented remedy differed from the ROD by use of deed
notices at a number of properties where residual contamination remained
between two feet and 14 feet in depth. Residual contamination was not
removed between these depths in order to preserve the structural
integrity of houses.
During the implementation of the remedy, all source material
encountered in the residential development was removed and residual
contamination above cleanup goals was left beneath 21 properties. All
21 residential property owners applied deed notices to their properties
where residual contamination remained at levels exceeding the remedial
goals established for the Site. Consistent with the expectations of the
ROD, deed notices were applied to six properties where residual
contamination remains below approximately 14 feet. The remaining 15
properties requiring deed notices have residual contamination shallower
than 14 feet. The residual contamination remains at depths that are
inaccessible through normal residential activities. Property owners are
required to maintain the property in
[[Page 12441]]
a manner that ensures the deed notice continues to be protective. NJDEP
is to conduct biennial inspections and certify the continued
protectiveness of all residential properties containing deed notices.
A deed notice was required on Borough of Manville roads and right-
of-ways that contained residual contamination at levels exceeding the
remedial goals established for the Site. The Borough has applied deed
notices to all areas that were required.
A deed notice was also required on the Rustic Mall commercial
property. The owners have applied a deed notice to this property in
accordance with the remedy selected in the OU3 ROD. The commercial
property owner is responsible to conduct biennial inspections and
provide certification to NJDEP that specifications of the deed notice
continue to be protective.
Five-Year Review
Hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants will remain at
the Site above levels that allow for unlimited use and unrestricted
exposure. In accordance with CERCLA Section 121 (c), the remedies at
the Site will be reviewed no less than every five years. The first
five-year review was completed in June 2007. A second five-year review
was completed on May 3, 2012. This second five-year review determined
that the implemented actions at the Site currently protect human health
and the environment because soil excavation activities and
institutional controls prevent direct exposure to contaminated soils.
EPA will complete the next five-year-review prior to May 3, 2017.
Community Involvement
A very high level of community concern was demonstrated by
residents, commercial property owners, business owners, and borough
officials at the time the Site was discovered in 1997. This level of
community concern persisted to the completion of cleanup activities in
2008.
Initially, public meetings were used to convey information to the
community. At these meetings, residents were informed of plans for
indoor air sampling and soil sampling on their properties. As results
of the sampling events were produced, EPA held public availability
sessions in which EPA representatives met with residents one-on-one to
discuss the sampling results. As with the public meetings, these public
availability sessions were well attended and preferred by many members
of the community. A Community Advisory Group (CAG) was formed early on
in the project. The CAG obtained information from EPA and provided
community input on the implementation of field activities associated
with investigations, design and remedial construction. As the project
moved through the remedial investigation to the remedial design and
remedial action, the on-site presence of equipment and contractor
personnel associated with these activities gained higher visibility and
became more intrusive to the community. EPA distributed informational
fact sheets to property owners immediately before field activities were
to take place in any area of the community. The fact sheets informed
the community of Site activities such as utility mark-offs, road
closures, equipment to be used for upcoming work, number of personnel
involved in the work and the duration of the work as well as upcoming
meetings. In addition, EPA distributed periodic newsletters informing
the community of cleanup progress and plans for future cleanup
activities. EPA held multiple interviews with different media
(newspaper, television and radio news) to report on progress of the
Site investigation and cleanup activities. Press events were also held
to announce major milestones of the project. Meeting one-on-one with
residents at their homes was a critical component of community
relations activities at this Site. A wide range of issues were
addressed at these meetings such as access agreements, property
specific plans for upcoming environmental testing and remediation,
interpretation of sampling results, permanent and temporary relocation
assistance, and resident's concerns regarding intrusive remediation of
their properties.
A notice will be published in the local newspaper informing the
public of EPA's intent to delete the Site. This public notice will
request public comment on the proposed deletion and provide EPA's point
of contact to accept comments.
Determination That the Site Meets the Criteria for Deletion in the NCP
All response actions required in each of the RODs have been
completed and all remedial action objectives have been met. One of the
three criteria for Site deletion specifies that EPA may delete a site
from the NPL if all appropriate Fund-financed response under CERCLA has
been implemented, and no further response action by responsible parties
is appropriate. EPA, with the concurrence of the State of New Jersey
Department of Environmental Protection, believes that this criterion
for deletion has been met. Subsequently, EPA is proposing deletion of
this Site from the NPL. Documents supporting this action are available
from the docket.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Chemicals,
Hazardous waste, Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental relations,
Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Superfund, Water
pollution control, Water supply.
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2); 42 U.S.C. 9601-9657; E.O.
12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p.351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR
2923, 3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p.193.
Dated: January 31, 2014.
Judith Enck
Regional Administrator, Region 2.
[FR Doc. 2014-04885 Filed 3-4-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P