National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan; National Priorities List: Direct Deletion of the Monroe Auto Equipment (Paragould Pit) Superfund Site, 47586-47591 [2014-19270]
Download as PDF
47586
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 157 / Thursday, August 14, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
available on VA’s Web site at https://
www1.va.gov/orpm/, by following the
link for ‘‘VA Regulations Published.’’
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 300
Unfunded Mandates
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 requires, at 2 U.S.C. 1532, that
agencies prepare an assessment of
anticipated costs and benefits before
issuing any rule that may result in the
expenditure by State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $100 million or more
(adjusted annually for inflation) in any
one year. This final rule will have no
such effect on State, local, and tribal
governments, or on the private sector.
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
Numbers and Titles
The Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance program numbers and titles
for this rule are 64.106, Specially
Adapted Housing for Disabled Veterans
and 64.109, Veterans Compensation for
Service-Connected Disability.
Signing Authority
The Secretary of Veterans Affairs, or
designee, approved this document and
authorized the undersigned to sign and
submit the document to the Office of the
Federal Register for publication
electronically as an official document of
the Department of Veterans Affairs.
Robert A. McDonald, Secretary,
Department of Veterans Affairs,
approved this document on August 6,
2014, for publication.
List of Subjects in 38 CFR Part 3
Dated: August 11, 2014.
Robert C. McFetridge,
Director, Regulation Policy and Management,
Office of the General Counsel, Department
of Veterans Affairs.
Accordingly, the interim final rule
revising 38 CFR part 3, which was
published at 78 FR 72573 on December
3, 2013, is adopted as a final rule
without change.
[FR Doc. 2014–19240 Filed 8–13–14; 8:45 am]
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
BILLING CODE 8320–01–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:59 Aug 13, 2014
Jkt 232001
National Oil and Hazardous
Substances Pollution Contingency
Plan; National Priorities List: Direct
Deletion of the Monroe Auto
Equipment (Paragould Pit) Superfund
Site
Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) Region 6 is publishing a
direct final Notice of Deletion of the
Monroe Auto (Paragould Pit) Superfund
Site located in Paragould, Greene
County, Arkansas, 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
Arkansas, through the Arkansas
Department of Environmental Quality
(ADEQ), because EPA has determined
that all appropriate response actions
under CERCLA have been completed.
However, this deletion does not
preclude future actions under
Superfund.
SUMMARY:
This direct final deletion is
effective October 14, 2014 unless EPA
receives adverse comments by
September 15, 2014. If adverse
comments are received, EPA will
publish a timely withdrawal of the
direct final deletion in the Federal
Register informing the public that the
deletion will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
SFUND–1990–0011, by one of the
following methods:
• https://www.regulations.gov: Follow
internet on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
• Email: Brian W. Mueller,
mueller.brian@epa.gov.
• Fax: 214–665–6660.
• Mail: Brian W. Mueller; U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 6; Superfund Division (6SF–RL);
1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200; Dallas,
Texas 75202–7167.
• Hand delivery: U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 6; 1445 Ross
DATES:
Administrative practice and
procedure, Claims, Disability benefits,
Health care, Pensions, Radioactive
materials, Veterans, Vietnam.
■
[EPA–HQ–SFUND–1990–0011; FRL–9915–
24–Region 6]
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Avenue, Suite 700; Dallas, Texas 75202–
2733; Contact: Brian W. Mueller (214)
665–7167. 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–1990–
0011. 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. 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 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 6; 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite
700; Dallas, Texas 75202–2733; hours
of operation: Monday through Friday,
9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. and 1:00 p.m.
to 4:00 p.m. Contact: Brian W.
Mueller (214) 665–7167.
E:\FR\FM\14AUR1.SGM
14AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 157 / Thursday, August 14, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
Arkansas Department of Environmental
Quality, 5301 Northshore Drive, North
Little Rock, Arkansas 72118; Hours of
Operation: Monday through Friday
8:00 a.m. until 4:30 p.m.
Northeast Arkansas Regional Library,
located at 120 North 12th Street,
Paragould, Arkansas 72450; Hours of
operation: Monday through Thursday
day 8:00 a.m. until 6:00 p.m., Friday
8:00 a.m. until 4:00 p.m., and
Saturday 8:00 a.m. until 1:00 p.m.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Brian W. Mueller, Remedial Project
Manager; U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 6; Superfund Division
(6SF–RL); 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite
1200; Dallas, Texas 75202–2733, (214)
665–7167; email: mueller.brian@
epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
I. Introduction
II. Deletion Criteria
III. Deletion Procedures
IV. Basis for Site Deletion
V. Deletion Action
I. Introduction
EPA Region 6 is publishing this direct
final Notice of Deletion of the Monroe
Auto Pit. Superfund Site (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
remains eligible for Fund-financed
remedial action if future conditions
warrant such actions.
Because EPA considers this action to
be noncontroversial and routine, this
action will be effective October 14, 2014
unless EPA receives adverse comments
by September 15, 2014. Along with this
direct final Notice of Deletion, EPA is
co-publishing a Notice of Intent for
Deletion in the ‘‘Proposed Rules’’
section of this 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:59 Aug 13, 2014
Jkt 232001
appropriate, prepare a response to
comments and continue with the
deletion process on the basis of the
Notice of Intent for Deletion and the
comments already received. There will
be no additional opportunity to
comment.
Section II of this document explains
the criteria for deleting sites from the
NPL. Section III discusses procedures
that EPA is using for this action. Section
IV discusses the Monroe Auto Pit
Superfund Site and demonstrates how it
meets the deletion criteria. Section V
discusses EPA’s action to delete the Site
from the NPL unless adverse comments
are received during the public comment
period.
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.
III. Deletion Procedures
The following procedures apply to the
deletion of the Site:
(1) EPA has consulted with the state
of Arkansas prior to developing this
direct final Notice of Deletion and the
Notice of Intent for Deletion copublished in the ‘‘Proposed Rules’’
section of this Federal Register.
(2) EPA has provided the state 30
working days for review of this notice
and the parallel Notice of Intent to
Delete prior to their publication today,
and the state, through the Arkansas
Department of Environmental Quality,
has concurred on this deletion of the
Site from the NPL.
(3) Concurrently with the publication
of this direct final Notice of Deletion, a
notice of the availability of the parallel
Notice of Intent for Deletion is being
published in a major local newspaper,
the Paragould Daily Press. The
newspaper notice announces the 30-day
public comment period concerning the
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
47587
Notice of Intent for Deletion of the Site
from the NPL.
(4) The EPA placed copies of
documents supporting the deletion in
the deletion docket and made these
items 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 will prepare
a response to comments and continue
with the deletion process on the basis of
the Notice of Intent for Deletion and the
comments already received.
Deletion of a site from the NPL does
not itself create, alter, or revoke any
individual’s rights or obligations.
Deletion of a site from the NPL does not
in any way alter EPA’s right to take
enforcement actions, as appropriate.
The NPL is designed primarily for
informational purposes and to assist
EPA management. Section 300.425(e)(3)
of the NCP states that the deletion of a
site from the NPL does not preclude
eligibility for further 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 Monroe Auto Equipment
(Paragould Pit) Superfund Site
(CERCLIS ID ARD980864110) is located
in northeastern Arkansas in an
unincorporated portion of Greene
County, approximately three miles
southwest of Paragould, Arkansas. The
site lies immediately west of Arkansas
Highway 358, approximately three miles
west of its intersection with U.S.
Highway 49. The site lies in the
Northwest Quarter of the Northeast
Quarter of Section 17, Township 16
North, Range 5 East, in the Paragould
West 7.5-minute quadrangle. The
southwestern corner of the site is at
latitude 36°01′0″ and longitude
90°34′30″. The site occupies seven (7)
acres of a former sand and gravel borrow
pit. The area is rural and lightly
populated with private residences
located immediately south, north, and
northeast of the site.
Monroe Auto Equipment Company
(now Tenneco Automotive, Inc.)
purchased the described property for
disposal of alum and lime electroplating
sludge that originated from settling
ponds used for the treatment of
wastewater from Monroe Auto
E:\FR\FM\14AUR1.SGM
14AUR1
47588
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 157 / Thursday, August 14, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Equipment’s Paragould manufacturing
plant. The waste material was placed on
the site from 1973 to 1978, resulting in
over 10,000 cubic yards (CY) of sludge
at the site in the sand and gravel pit. In
July 1987, the EPA conducted a Site
Assessment inspection to assess the
potential for public exposure to
contaminants being released from the
site. Principal pollutants in groundwater
identified by the EPA included solvents
and degreasing agents such as 1,1Dichloroethane (1,1–DCA), 1,2Dichloroethene (1,2–DCE), Xylenes, and
metals. As an interim action, Tenneco
initiated sampling of private residential
wells located within one-half mile of the
site beginning in July 1987. The EPA
proposed that the Site be added to the
National Priorities List (NPL) on
October 26, 1989 and was finalized to
the NPL on August 30, 1990. On-site
monitoring wells and a private drinking
water well 300 feet southeast (downgradient) of the pit are contaminated
with 1,1-dichloroethane and 1,2dichloroethylene, according to tests
conducted in 1987–88 by the Arkansas
Department of Health and a Monroe
consultant. The consultant also found
arsenic, nickel, and lead in the
monitoring wells. An estimated 2,100
people obtain drinking water from
private wells within 3 miles of the site.
Remedial Investigation and Feasibility
Study
A Potentially Responsible Party (PRP)
search conducted in 1990 under
CERCLA Section 104 (e) 42 U.S.C.
9604(e), indicated that Monroe Auto
Equipment was the only PRP for the
site. On March 14, 1991, the EPA issued
notice of an impending Remedial
Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/
FS) to the PRP. Monroe Auto
Equipment, now Tenneco, responded to
the notice with a good faith offer to
perform the RI/FS. On June 28, 1991,
Monroe Auto Equipment Company
entered into an Administrative Order on
Consent with the EPA to conduct a RI/
FS under CERCLA. The RI was
completed in August 1993, and the FS
was completed in April 1995. The RI/FS
identified the types, quantities, and
locations of contaminants found at the
Site and developed ways to address the
contamination. A Human Health Risk
Assessment and an Ecological Risk
Assessment were performed to
determine the current and future effects
of contaminants on human health and
the environment.
Remedy Components
Remedial Action Objectives (RAOs)
were developed for Site to address the
contaminated soils and ground water.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:58 Aug 13, 2014
Jkt 232001
The remedy is comprised of the
following major components as
stipulated in the Remedial Action
Workplan:
• Excavate, segregate and stage
sludge, stained soils, and overburden
(clean soil) and unstained soils;
• Stockpile overburden and
unstained soils for use as backfill;
• Stabilize sludge material with 5 to
10 percent lime addition;
• Analyze stained soil and solidified
sludge;
• Transport and dispose of stained
soil that exhibits concentrations of
constituents of concern (COC) below
toxicity characteristic leaching
procedure (TCLP) levels and EPA
Region VI Medium Specific Health
Based Screening Levels in a Subtitle D
landfill;
• Stockpile stabilized sludge in an
on-site lined containment cell;
• Apply for de-listing of stabilized
sludge;
• Verify removal of impacted
materials from the sludge pit through
analytical testing of the bottom and
sides of the excavation area;
• Restore the site by backfilling,
grading and seeding;
• Transport and dispose of stabilized
sludge in accordance with the results of
the de-listing petition; and
• Conduct groundwater monitoring to
ensure the effectiveness of the RA.
In order to achieve these RAOs,
numerical risk-based cleanup levels
were established for each environmental
medium based on the residential
scenario.
Soil/Sludge
• Prevent exposure to current and
future human and ecological receptors
through ingestion, dermal contact, and
inhalation of contaminated soil/sludge
containing trichloroethylene, vinyl
chloride, antimony, arsenic, beryllium,
chromium VI, and lead.
Groundwater
• Prevent exposure to current and
future human and ecological receptors
through ingestion, dermal contact, and
inhalation of contaminated groundwater
containing cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene,
trans-1,2-Dichloroethylene, bis(2Ethylhexyl)phthalate, beryllium,
chromium, lead, manganese.
In order to achieve these RAOs,
numerical risk-based cleanup levels
were established for each environmental
medium based on the residential
scenario.
Selected Remedy
A proposed plan for the Site was
issued on July 17, 1995, presenting the
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
preferred alternative of capping the
sludge disposal area, installing a
groundwater interception system
(french drain), and addressing the
groundwater contamination through
natural attenuation, degradation and
monitoring. On September 26, 1996, the
Record of Decision (ROD) was issued
and signed for the Site.
Remedy Modification
In February 1998, the ADPC&E
(current ADEQ) signed a Consent
Administrative Order directing Tenneco
to conduct the Remedial Design/
Remedial Action (RD/RA) under
ADPC&E oversight presenting the
preferred alternative of excavation and
offsite disposal for the waste,
contaminated soil, and contaminated
sediment at the Site.
In 1999, Tenneco submitted a petition
to modify the ROD to change the
method of contaminated soil
remediation from containment of the
contaminated soil and sludge, to
excavation and treatment as required by
the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act for removal and disposal
of contaminated soil and sludge in an
off-site permitted secure Subtitle D
disposal facility. The amended ROD was
signed by the ADEQ on September 15,
2000, and by the EPA on November 9,
2000. The amendment to the ROD did
not alter the Remedial Action Objectives
established by the 1996 ROD, or the
Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate
Requirements listed in the 1996 ROD.
The revised soil remedy did not alter
the previous requirement of monitored
natural attenuation of constituents in
the groundwater. The new remedy was
consistent with the statements and
expressed wishes regarding remediation
activities from nearby residents. By
treatment and removal of the waste from
the site, the site is available for future
development. The amended soil or
source remedy included: Excavation of
sludge and stained soils; verifying
removal of impacted materials from the
sludge disposal area; transporting and
disposing of stained soil in a Subtitle D
landfill; solidifying and stabilizing
sludge material; stockpiling stabilized
sludge; applying for de-listing of
stabilized sludge and transporting and
disposing of stabilized sludge in
accordance with the results of the
delisting petition.
The final remedy is detailed in the
Remedial Design Submittal Quality
Assurance Project Plan, Remedial
Action Workplan, Remedial Design
Submittal Sampling and Analysis Plan
(SAP), and Remedial Design Submittal
Health and Safety Plan. The final
remedy represents the culmination of
E:\FR\FM\14AUR1.SGM
14AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 157 / Thursday, August 14, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
activities that resulted from the
preliminary site investigation completed
in 1988, the RI/FS, the ROD and
Amended ROD.
Response Actions
Tenneco began on-site Remedial
Action construction in September 1999.
The soil remedial action consisted of the
excavation and segregation of 14,633
cubic yards of soil and started in
September 1999. Based on field
calculations, a total of 3,348 cubic yards
of overburden (clean fill material), 8,553
cubic yards of stained soil and 2,732
yards of sludge (prior to stabilization
and consolidation) were removed
during the excavation activities.
The overburden was removed,
stockpiled, sampled and confirmed to
meet the RA goals for soil and used as
backfill. In accordance with the SAP,
one grab sample was collected for every
2,000 cubic yards of overburden,
unstained soil or clean backfill. A total
of 8,160 cubic yards of additional soil
was imported for use as backfill,
yielding a total of 11,508 yards of
backfill used to replace the stained soil
and sludge removed from the site. The
site was recontoured to provide better
drainage, enabling use of a smaller
amount of soil required for backfill
(11,508 cubic yards backfilled as
compared to 14,633 cubic yards
removed). A total of seven samples were
collected from the overburden and
imported backfill and confirmed the
backfill material met the soil remedial
clean-up requirements for the Site.
The 8,553 cubic yards of stained soil
was stockpiled, sampled to confirm
disposal in accordance with ADEQ
requirements and disposed in two
Subtitle D Landfills upon confirmation
of soil constituent levels. In accordance
with the SAP, at a minimum, one grab
sample was collected for every 500
cubic yards of stained soil. A total of 26
samples were collected from the stained
soil to confirm this material met the
disposal requirements for the permitted
landfill. The weigh tickets from the
Subtitle D Landfills confirm the
disposal of the 8,553 cubic yards or
14,599 tons (1.7 tons/cubic yard) of
stained soil as part of the Soil RA. A
total of 11,621 tons of stained soil was
transported and disposed at the Butler
County Landfill in Poplar Bluff,
Missouri and 2,978 tons of stained soil
were transported and disposed at the
Waste Management—Two Pines
Landfill in North Little Rock, Arkansas.
The 2,732 cubic yards of sludge
removed was stabilized with
approximately 241 tons of quicklime
and stockpiled in an on-site lined
containment cell. In accordance with
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:59 Aug 13, 2014
Jkt 232001
the SAP, at a minimum, one grab
sample was collected for every 500
cubic yards of stabilized sludge. A total
of seven samples were collected from
the stabilized sludge to provide the
basis for preparation of a petition for delisting of this material. The 2,723 cubic
yards of sludge removed was based on
field measurements prior to
stabilization. Surveying of this material
after stabilization and consolidation
over several months after placement in
the containment cell yielded a volume
of 1,798 cubic yards. A De-listing
Petition (Petition) was prepared by the
PRP in August 2000. The Petition was
approved by EPA and subsequently by
the ADEQ in an August 27, 2001 letter
entitled Exclusion of F006 Waste at the
Tenneco/Monroe Facility from the
Definition of Hazardous Waste. Upon
approval of the Petition, the 1,798 cubic
yards or 3,243 tons (1.8 tons/cubic yard)
of stabilized sludge was transported and
disposed of at the Waste Management—
Two Pines Landfill in North Little Rock,
Arkansas. The bottom and sidewalls of
the sludge pit excavation were extended
until the visually impacted material had
been removed. Prior to the collection of
verification samples, an additional 1foot of material was removed and
disposed as stained soil. In accordance
with the SAP, a verification soil sample
was collected for every 500 square feet
of sidewall or floor. A total of 81
verification samples were collected
which confirmed that the excavation
activities met the RA Goals for Soil at
the site. In accordance with oral field
instructions by the EPA Remedial
Project Manager (RPM), and later
included in the amendment to the ROD,
the PRP excavated all of the stained soil
and sludge until levels were at or below
the RA Goals for Soil at the site. The
stained soil that had concentrations of
the COCs below the TCLP levels and the
EPA Region 6’s Medium Specific Health
Based Screening Levels was excavated
and disposed in a Subtitle D Landfill.
The final shipment of stained soil was
on December 16, 1999. The contractor
also stabilized all of the contaminated
soil and sludge which exhibited
contaminant levels above the TCLP
levels. The final shipment of the
stabilized material was on September
13, 2001. The final inspection was
conducted on September 14, 2001, and
the Preliminary Close Out Report was
signed on September 19, 2001.
Groundwater Remedial Implementation
History
Natural attenuation and monitoring
was the remedy selected in the ROD to
address the groundwater contamination
on and offsite. The ROD amendment did
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
47589
not change the groundwater remedy.
The ROD required the PRP to develop
and implement a Groundwater
Monitoring Plan (GMP) and beginning
in September 2001, semiannual
monitoring of eighteen (18) wells began.
The PRP conducted groundwater
monitoring events through March 2009.
The PRP has discontinued monitoring
groundwater at the Site.
The Groundwater Remedy portion of
the September 26, 1996 ROD and the
2000 ROD Amendment included
conducting long-term groundwater
monitoring of wells at the Site and local
private wells located in the vicinity of
the Site. As part of the Groundwater
Remedy, a Groundwater Monitoring
Plan (GMP) was prepared for the Site.
The GMP specified procedures to be
followed for long-term groundwater
monitoring to ensure compliance with
the requirements of the ROD and the
ROD Amendment. Tenneco initiated
GMP activities in September 2001. The
GMP also specified quality assurance
and quality control (QA/QC) protocols
for ground water sampling. The EPA
Remedial Project Manager and State
regulators visited the site during ground
water monitoring activities to observe
ground water sampling. ADEQ also took
independent samples to that confirmed
the results of the samples taken by the
PRP. No deviations or non-adherence to
QA/QC protocols, or specifications were
identified.
Based on analysis of semi-annual
groundwater sampling results since
March 2001, a request was made and
approved to reduce the number of
groundwater monitoring wells and
COCs included in the Site GMP. The
requested revised GMP focused only on
volatile organic chemicals (VOCs) at six
select groundwater monitoring well
locations. A request to remove the
requirements for sampling of the private
wells was submitted to EPA and ADEQ
on March 31, 2002. The request was
approved following submittal of the
Private Well Report in 2004. The Private
Well Report provided a summary of
available information for each of the
twenty-nine (29) wells and presented a
comparative analysis of the analytical
results from over ten (10) years of
sampling the private wells relative to
the maximum contaminant levels
(MCLs). Based on the findings presented
in the report, no VOCs were detected in
any of the private wells above the MCLs
over the past ten (10) years. Select
inorganics, primarily lead, were
detected at varying concentrations,
periodically exceeding the respective
MCL in select samples collected prior to
1996. These detections of lead however
were within background concentration
E:\FR\FM\14AUR1.SGM
14AUR1
47590
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 157 / Thursday, August 14, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
levels for the surrounding area and not
believed to have resulted from
contamination at the site. Based on the
data review presented in the Private
Well Report, none of the private wells
located within one-half mile of the site
have been impacted by contamination
from the site.
The results of the semi-annual/annual
sampling events are presented in
respective Semi-Annual/Annual
Sampling Reports. Based on the most
recent groundwater sampling results
from the site groundwater monitoring
wells, presented in the March 2009
Comprehensive Summary Report
Annual Groundwater Sampling Event
for the Monroe Superfund Site, the
concentrations of VOCs continue to
remain below the remedial goals for the
Site in all of the groundwater
monitoring wells sampled with the
approved groundwater monitoring
program. The concentrations in all of
the Site groundwater monitoring wells
have continued to exhibit
concentrations of VOCs below the
remedial goals established in the ROD
over the past eight semi-annual and two
annual sampling events. The results of
the groundwater monitoring since July
2003 confirm the effectiveness of the
completed soil remedy and
demonstrates site RA goals for
groundwater are maintained through
natural degradation and attenuation.
Demonstration That Remedial Activities
Met Cleanup Criteria for Soils/Sludges
The soil/sludge remedial action at the
Site consisted of the sampling,
excavation, solidification, and proper
disposal of contaminated soils/sludges.
The EPA and ADEQ reviewed the
remedial action report and the
construction work for compliance with
quality assurance and quality control
(QA/QC) protocols. Construction
activities at the Site were determined to
be consistent with the ROD and ROD
Amendment and adhered to the
approved quality assurance plan which
incorporated all EPA and State
requirements. Confirmatory inspections,
independent testing, audits, and
evaluations of materials and
workmanship were performed in
accordance with the technical
specifications and plans. The EPA
Remedial Project Manager and State
regulators visited the site during
construction activities to review
construction progress and evaluate and
review the results of QA/QC activities.
No deviations or non-adherence to QA/
QC protocols, or specifications were
identified.
The Remedial Design contained
provisions for performing sampling
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:59 Aug 13, 2014
Jkt 232001
during all remedial activities in order to
verify that remedial objectives were met,
to ensure quality control and assurance
for all excavation and construction
activity, and to ensure protection and
safety of the public, the environment,
and the onsite worker. Sampling was
conducted in accordance with the Site
Field Sampling Plan and all analytical
results are below the established
cleanup levels for a residential reuse
scenario. In addition, all backfill
confirmation sample results met the
established cleanup levels for a
residential reuse scenario. All analytical
data was independently validated, and
the EPA and the State determined that
analytical results were accurate to the
degree needed to assure satisfactory
execution of the RA.
Operation and Maintenance
The ROD specified monitored natural
attenuation as the remedy for ground
water remediation based on
implementation of a containment onsite
of contaminated soils. The soil remedy
was modified in the ROD Amendment
to include removal of stained soil and
sludge from the site to below the Site
RA Goals for Soil. The results of
groundwater monitoring since removal
of the stained soil and sludge
demonstrate that the natural attenuation
remedy was effective and that the
remedial goals for the groundwater as
stated in the ROD have been achieved.
Groundwater monitoring at the Site was
discontinued after the Second Five Year
Review in 2009. The monitoring wells
were properly plugged and abandoned
in 2010. There are no operation and
maintenance activities required at the
Site.
Institutional Controls
The ROD required that restrictions on
the use of ground water be placed on the
Site. A deed notice/covenant identifying
restrictions on the Site was filed by the
PRP with the Greene County Clerk in
November 2003. The covenant
prohibited the installation of any
private, commercial, industrial or other
water well or other device for the
removal or extraction of subsurface
water. The only ground water allowed
to be extracted from beneath the
property is for the purpose or purposes
associated with environmental sampling
and testing of the property. The RA
goals for the groundwater have been met
and the monitor wells have been
removed. No restrictions on the use or
sale of the property are necessary and
the existing restrictions may be removed
by the PRP.
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Five-Year Review
Five-Year Reviews were statutorily
required because hazardous substances,
pollutants, or contaminants remained at
the Site above levels that allow for
unlimited use and unrestricted
exposure. There have been two five-year
reviews conducted at the Site, with the
last one in 2009. The United States
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Region 6 and the ADEQ conducted the
second five-year review for the response
action implemented at the Monroe Auto
Pit Superfund Site. Also participating in
the five-year inspection were
representatives of Tenneco.
The 2009 Five Year Review found that
all hazardous substances in the
groundwater had naturally attenuated at
the Site below clean up levels. The
remedial action of natural attenuation
for the groundwater is completed and
no hazardous substances, pollutants or
contaminants remain above levels that
could prevent unlimited use and
unrestricted exposure. Per the 2009 Five
Year Review, unlimited use and
unrestricted exposure has been
achieved: therefore, additional Five
Year Reviews will not be required for
the Site after its deletion from the NPL.
Community Involvement
Public participation activities have
been satisfied as required in CERCLA
Section 113(k), 42 U.S.C. 9613(k) and
CERCLA Section 117, 42 U.S.C. 9617.
Throughout the Site’s history, the
community has been interested and
involved with Site activity. The EPA has
kept the community and other
interested parties updated on Site
activities through informational
meetings, fact sheets, and public
meetings. Documents in the deletion
docket which the EPA relied on for
recommendation for the deletion from
the NPL are available to the public in
the information repositories, and a
notice of availability of the Notice of
Intent for Deletion has been published
in the Paragould Daily Press to satisfy
public participation procedures
required by 40 CFR 300.425(e)(4).
Determination That the Criteria for
Deletion Have Been Met
The implemented remedy achieves
the degree of cleanup specified in the
ROD and ROD Amendment for all
pathways of exposure. All selected
remedial action objectives and clean-up
goals are consistent with agency policy
and guidance. No further Superfund
responses are needed to protect human
health and the environment at the Site.
In accordance with 40 CFR
300.425(e), sites may be deleted from
E:\FR\FM\14AUR1.SGM
14AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 157 / Thursday, August 14, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
the NPL where no further response is
appropriate.
Appendix B to Part 300—[Amended]
The EPA, with concurrence of the
State of Arkansas, through the ADEQ,
has determined that all appropriate
response actions under CERCLA 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 October 14, 2014
unless EPA receives adverse comments
by September 15, 2014. If adverse
comments are received within the 30day public comment period, EPA will
publish a timely withdrawal of this
direct final notice of deletion before the
effective date of the deletion and it will
not take effect. EPA will prepare a
response to comments and continue
with the deletion process on the basis of
the notice of intent to delete and the
comments already received. There will
be no additional opportunity to
comment.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300
Dated: August 6, 2014.
Samuel Coleman,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.
For the reasons set out in this
document, 40 CFR Part 300 is amended
as follows:
PART 300—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 300
continues to read as follows:
■
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2); 42 U.S.C.
9601–9657; E.O. 13626, 77 FR 56749, 3 CFR,
2013 Comp., p. 306; E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757,
3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52
FR 2923, 3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 193.
14:59 Aug 13, 2014
Jkt 232001
[FR Doc. 2014–19270 Filed 8–13–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
49 CFR Part 579
[Docket No. NHTSA–2012–0068; Notice 7]
RIN 2127–AK72
Early Warning Reporting, Foreign
Defect Reporting, and Motor Vehicle
and Equipment Recall Regulations;
Delay of Effective Date; Correction
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule; delay of effective
date; correction.
AGENCY:
On August 20, 2013, NHTSA
published a final rule amending its
Early Warning Rule (EWR) with an
effective date of August 20, 2014. On
July 28, 2014, NHTSA published a rule
which, in part, attempted to delay the
effective date of the provisions until
January 1, 2015. However, the
information in the DATES section of the
July 28 rule did not adequately project
that action. This document corrects that
error.
DATES: This correction is effective
August 20, 2014. The effective date for
the amendments to 49 CFR 579.21 and
579.22, published August 20, 2013 (78
FR 51382), and effective August 20,
2014, is delayed until January 1, 2015.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
non-legal issues concerning early
warning provisions, contact Leo Yon,
Safety Defects Engineer, Early Warning
Reporting Division, NHTSA, telephone
202–366–7028, email leo.yon@dot.gov.
For legal issues, contact Andrew
SUMMARY:
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Chemicals, Hazardous
substances, Hazardous waste,
Intergovernmental relations, Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Superfund, Water
pollution control, Water supply.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
2. Table 1 of Appendix B to Part 300
is amended by removing the entry
‘‘AR’’, ‘‘Monroe Auto Equipment
(Paragould Pit),’’ ’’Paragould.’’
■
V. Deletion Action
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
47591
DiMarsico, Office of Chief Counsel,
NHTSA, telephone 202–366–1834.
On August
20, 2013, NHTSA published a final rule
amending certain provisions of the EWR
regulations at 49 CFR part 579 Subpart
C ‘‘Reporting of Early Warning
Information.’’ 78 FR 51382. In summary,
the new provisions:
• Require light vehicle manufacturers
to specify the vehicle type and the fuel
and/or propulsion system type in their
quarterly EWR reports.
• Add new component categories for
reporting on light vehicles: Electronic
stability control, forward collision
avoidance, lane departure prevention,
and backover prevention, foundation
brakes, and automatic brake controls.
• Add one new component category
for buses, emergency vehicles, and
medium-heavy vehicle manufacturers:
Electronic stability control/roll stability
control.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Need for Correction
The final rule stated that these new
provisions will be effective August 20,
2014. On July 28, 2014, at 79 FR 43670,
NHTSA intended to delay the effective
date of the amendments to §§ 579.21
and 579.22 until January 1, 2015, but
did not correctly state that in the DATES
section.
In FR Doc. 2014–17497 appearing on
page 43671 in the Federal Register of
Monday, July 28, 2014, the following
corrections are made:
In the DATES section in the left
column, revise the second paragraph to
read as follows:
‘‘The effective date for the
amendments to 49 CFR 579.21 in this
final rule is January 1, 2015. The
effective date for the amendments to 49
CFR 579.21 and 579.22, published
August 20, 2013 (78 FR 51382), and
effective August 20, 2014, is delayed
until January 1, 2015.’’
Nancy L. Lewis,
Associate Administrator for Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2014–19091 Filed 8–13–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
E:\FR\FM\14AUR1.SGM
14AUR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 157 (Thursday, August 14, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 47586-47591]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-19270]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 300
[EPA-HQ-SFUND-1990-0011; FRL-9915-24-Region 6]
National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan;
National Priorities List: Direct Deletion of the Monroe Auto Equipment
(Paragould Pit) Superfund Site
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 6 is
publishing a direct final Notice of Deletion of the Monroe Auto
(Paragould Pit) Superfund Site located in Paragould, Greene County,
Arkansas, 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 Arkansas, through the
Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ), because EPA has
determined that all appropriate response actions under CERCLA have been
completed. However, this deletion does not preclude future actions
under Superfund.
DATES: This direct final deletion is effective October 14, 2014 unless
EPA receives adverse comments by September 15, 2014. If adverse
comments are received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the
direct final deletion in the Federal Register informing the public that
the deletion will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
SFUND-1990-0011, by one of the following methods:
https://www.regulations.gov: Follow internet on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
Email: Brian W. Mueller, mueller.brian@epa.gov.
Fax: 214-665-6660.
Mail: Brian W. Mueller; U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 6; Superfund Division (6SF-RL); 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite
1200; Dallas, Texas 75202-7167.
Hand delivery: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 6; 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700; Dallas, Texas 75202-2733;
Contact: Brian W. Mueller (214) 665-7167. 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-
1990-0011. 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. 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 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 6; 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite
700; Dallas, Texas 75202-2733; hours of operation: Monday through
Friday, 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. and 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. Contact:
Brian W. Mueller (214) 665-7167.
[[Page 47587]]
Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality, 5301 Northshore Drive,
North Little Rock, Arkansas 72118; Hours of Operation: Monday through
Friday 8:00 a.m. until 4:30 p.m.
Northeast Arkansas Regional Library, located at 120 North 12th Street,
Paragould, Arkansas 72450; Hours of operation: Monday through Thursday
day 8:00 a.m. until 6:00 p.m., Friday 8:00 a.m. until 4:00 p.m., and
Saturday 8:00 a.m. until 1:00 p.m.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian W. Mueller, Remedial Project
Manager; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6; Superfund
Division (6SF-RL); 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200; Dallas, Texas 75202-
2733, (214) 665-7167; email: mueller.brian@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. Deletion Criteria
III. Deletion Procedures
IV. Basis for Site Deletion
V. Deletion Action
I. Introduction
EPA Region 6 is publishing this direct final Notice of Deletion of
the Monroe Auto Pit. Superfund Site (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 Sec. 300.425(e)(3) of the NCP, sites deleted from the
NPL remains eligible for Fund-financed remedial action if future
conditions warrant such actions.
Because EPA considers this action to be noncontroversial and
routine, this action will be effective October 14, 2014 unless EPA
receives adverse comments by September 15, 2014. Along with this direct
final Notice of Deletion, EPA is co-publishing a Notice of Intent for
Deletion in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of this 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 for Deletion and
the comments already received. There will be no additional opportunity
to comment.
Section II of this document explains the criteria for deleting
sites from the NPL. Section III discusses procedures that EPA is using
for this action. Section IV discusses the Monroe Auto Pit Superfund
Site and demonstrates how it meets the deletion criteria. Section V
discusses EPA's action to delete the Site from the NPL unless adverse
comments are received during the public comment period.
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.
III. Deletion Procedures
The following procedures apply to the deletion of the Site:
(1) EPA has consulted with the state of Arkansas prior to
developing this direct final Notice of Deletion and the Notice of
Intent for Deletion co-published in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of
this Federal Register.
(2) EPA has provided the state 30 working days for review of this
notice and the parallel Notice of Intent to Delete prior to their
publication today, and the state, through the Arkansas Department of
Environmental Quality, has concurred on this deletion of the Site from
the NPL.
(3) Concurrently with the publication of this direct final Notice
of Deletion, a notice of the availability of the parallel Notice of
Intent for Deletion is being published in a major local newspaper, the
Paragould Daily Press. The newspaper notice announces the 30-day public
comment period concerning the Notice of Intent for Deletion of the Site
from the NPL.
(4) The EPA placed copies of documents supporting the deletion in
the deletion docket and made these items 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 will prepare a response to comments and continue
with the deletion process on the basis of the Notice of Intent for
Deletion and the comments already received.
Deletion of a site from the NPL does not itself create, alter, or
revoke any individual's rights or obligations. Deletion of a site from
the NPL does not in any way alter EPA's right to take enforcement
actions, as appropriate. The NPL is designed primarily for
informational purposes and to assist EPA management. Section
300.425(e)(3) of the NCP states that the deletion of a site from the
NPL does not preclude eligibility for further 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 Monroe Auto Equipment (Paragould Pit) Superfund Site (CERCLIS
ID ARD980864110) is located in northeastern Arkansas in an
unincorporated portion of Greene County, approximately three miles
southwest of Paragould, Arkansas. The site lies immediately west of
Arkansas Highway 358, approximately three miles west of its
intersection with U.S. Highway 49. The site lies in the Northwest
Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 17, Township 16 North,
Range 5 East, in the Paragould West 7.5-minute quadrangle. The
southwestern corner of the site is at latitude 36[deg]01'0'' and
longitude 90[deg]34'30''. The site occupies seven (7) acres of a former
sand and gravel borrow pit. The area is rural and lightly populated
with private residences located immediately south, north, and northeast
of the site.
Monroe Auto Equipment Company (now Tenneco Automotive, Inc.)
purchased the described property for disposal of alum and lime
electroplating sludge that originated from settling ponds used for the
treatment of wastewater from Monroe Auto
[[Page 47588]]
Equipment's Paragould manufacturing plant. The waste material was
placed on the site from 1973 to 1978, resulting in over 10,000 cubic
yards (CY) of sludge at the site in the sand and gravel pit. In July
1987, the EPA conducted a Site Assessment inspection to assess the
potential for public exposure to contaminants being released from the
site. Principal pollutants in groundwater identified by the EPA
included solvents and degreasing agents such as 1,1-Dichloroethane
(1,1-DCA), 1,2-Dichloroethene (1,2-DCE), Xylenes, and metals. As an
interim action, Tenneco initiated sampling of private residential wells
located within one-half mile of the site beginning in July 1987. The
EPA proposed that the Site be added to the National Priorities List
(NPL) on October 26, 1989 and was finalized to the NPL on August 30,
1990. On-site monitoring wells and a private drinking water well 300
feet southeast (down-gradient) of the pit are contaminated with 1,1-
dichloroethane and 1,2-dichloroethylene, according to tests conducted
in 1987-88 by the Arkansas Department of Health and a Monroe
consultant. The consultant also found arsenic, nickel, and lead in the
monitoring wells. An estimated 2,100 people obtain drinking water from
private wells within 3 miles of the site.
Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study
A Potentially Responsible Party (PRP) search conducted in 1990
under CERCLA Section 104 (e) 42 U.S.C. 9604(e), indicated that Monroe
Auto Equipment was the only PRP for the site. On March 14, 1991, the
EPA issued notice of an impending Remedial Investigation and
Feasibility Study (RI/FS) to the PRP. Monroe Auto Equipment, now
Tenneco, responded to the notice with a good faith offer to perform the
RI/FS. On June 28, 1991, Monroe Auto Equipment Company entered into an
Administrative Order on Consent with the EPA to conduct a RI/FS under
CERCLA. The RI was completed in August 1993, and the FS was completed
in April 1995. The RI/FS identified the types, quantities, and
locations of contaminants found at the Site and developed ways to
address the contamination. A Human Health Risk Assessment and an
Ecological Risk Assessment were performed to determine the current and
future effects of contaminants on human health and the environment.
Remedy Components
Remedial Action Objectives (RAOs) were developed for Site to
address the contaminated soils and ground water. The remedy is
comprised of the following major components as stipulated in the
Remedial Action Workplan:
Excavate, segregate and stage sludge, stained soils, and
overburden (clean soil) and unstained soils;
Stockpile overburden and unstained soils for use as
backfill;
Stabilize sludge material with 5 to 10 percent lime
addition;
Analyze stained soil and solidified sludge;
Transport and dispose of stained soil that exhibits
concentrations of constituents of concern (COC) below toxicity
characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP) levels and EPA Region VI
Medium Specific Health Based Screening Levels in a Subtitle D landfill;
Stockpile stabilized sludge in an on-site lined
containment cell;
Apply for de-listing of stabilized sludge;
Verify removal of impacted materials from the sludge pit
through analytical testing of the bottom and sides of the excavation
area;
Restore the site by backfilling, grading and seeding;
Transport and dispose of stabilized sludge in accordance
with the results of the de-listing petition; and
Conduct groundwater monitoring to ensure the effectiveness
of the RA.
In order to achieve these RAOs, numerical risk-based cleanup levels
were established for each environmental medium based on the residential
scenario.
Soil/Sludge
Prevent exposure to current and future human and
ecological receptors through ingestion, dermal contact, and inhalation
of contaminated soil/sludge containing trichloroethylene, vinyl
chloride, antimony, arsenic, beryllium, chromium VI, and lead.
Groundwater
Prevent exposure to current and future human and
ecological receptors through ingestion, dermal contact, and inhalation
of contaminated groundwater containing cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, trans-
1,2-Dichloroethylene, bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate, beryllium, chromium,
lead, manganese.
In order to achieve these RAOs, numerical risk-based cleanup levels
were established for each environmental medium based on the residential
scenario.
Selected Remedy
A proposed plan for the Site was issued on July 17, 1995,
presenting the preferred alternative of capping the sludge disposal
area, installing a groundwater interception system (french drain), and
addressing the groundwater contamination through natural attenuation,
degradation and monitoring. On September 26, 1996, the Record of
Decision (ROD) was issued and signed for the Site.
Remedy Modification
In February 1998, the ADPC&E (current ADEQ) signed a Consent
Administrative Order directing Tenneco to conduct the Remedial Design/
Remedial Action (RD/RA) under ADPC&E oversight presenting the preferred
alternative of excavation and offsite disposal for the waste,
contaminated soil, and contaminated sediment at the Site.
In 1999, Tenneco submitted a petition to modify the ROD to change
the method of contaminated soil remediation from containment of the
contaminated soil and sludge, to excavation and treatment as required
by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act for removal and disposal
of contaminated soil and sludge in an off-site permitted secure
Subtitle D disposal facility. The amended ROD was signed by the ADEQ on
September 15, 2000, and by the EPA on November 9, 2000. The amendment
to the ROD did not alter the Remedial Action Objectives established by
the 1996 ROD, or the Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate
Requirements listed in the 1996 ROD. The revised soil remedy did not
alter the previous requirement of monitored natural attenuation of
constituents in the groundwater. The new remedy was consistent with the
statements and expressed wishes regarding remediation activities from
nearby residents. By treatment and removal of the waste from the site,
the site is available for future development. The amended soil or
source remedy included: Excavation of sludge and stained soils;
verifying removal of impacted materials from the sludge disposal area;
transporting and disposing of stained soil in a Subtitle D landfill;
solidifying and stabilizing sludge material; stockpiling stabilized
sludge; applying for de-listing of stabilized sludge and transporting
and disposing of stabilized sludge in accordance with the results of
the delisting petition.
The final remedy is detailed in the Remedial Design Submittal
Quality Assurance Project Plan, Remedial Action Workplan, Remedial
Design Submittal Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP), and Remedial Design
Submittal Health and Safety Plan. The final remedy represents the
culmination of
[[Page 47589]]
activities that resulted from the preliminary site investigation
completed in 1988, the RI/FS, the ROD and Amended ROD.
Response Actions
Tenneco began on-site Remedial Action construction in September
1999. The soil remedial action consisted of the excavation and
segregation of 14,633 cubic yards of soil and started in September
1999. Based on field calculations, a total of 3,348 cubic yards of
overburden (clean fill material), 8,553 cubic yards of stained soil and
2,732 yards of sludge (prior to stabilization and consolidation) were
removed during the excavation activities.
The overburden was removed, stockpiled, sampled and confirmed to
meet the RA goals for soil and used as backfill. In accordance with the
SAP, one grab sample was collected for every 2,000 cubic yards of
overburden, unstained soil or clean backfill. A total of 8,160 cubic
yards of additional soil was imported for use as backfill, yielding a
total of 11,508 yards of backfill used to replace the stained soil and
sludge removed from the site. The site was recontoured to provide
better drainage, enabling use of a smaller amount of soil required for
backfill (11,508 cubic yards backfilled as compared to 14,633 cubic
yards removed). A total of seven samples were collected from the
overburden and imported backfill and confirmed the backfill material
met the soil remedial clean-up requirements for the Site.
The 8,553 cubic yards of stained soil was stockpiled, sampled to
confirm disposal in accordance with ADEQ requirements and disposed in
two Subtitle D Landfills upon confirmation of soil constituent levels.
In accordance with the SAP, at a minimum, one grab sample was collected
for every 500 cubic yards of stained soil. A total of 26 samples were
collected from the stained soil to confirm this material met the
disposal requirements for the permitted landfill. The weigh tickets
from the Subtitle D Landfills confirm the disposal of the 8,553 cubic
yards or 14,599 tons (1.7 tons/cubic yard) of stained soil as part of
the Soil RA. A total of 11,621 tons of stained soil was transported and
disposed at the Butler County Landfill in Poplar Bluff, Missouri and
2,978 tons of stained soil were transported and disposed at the Waste
Management--Two Pines Landfill in North Little Rock, Arkansas.
The 2,732 cubic yards of sludge removed was stabilized with
approximately 241 tons of quicklime and stockpiled in an on-site lined
containment cell. In accordance with the SAP, at a minimum, one grab
sample was collected for every 500 cubic yards of stabilized sludge. A
total of seven samples were collected from the stabilized sludge to
provide the basis for preparation of a petition for de-listing of this
material. The 2,723 cubic yards of sludge removed was based on field
measurements prior to stabilization. Surveying of this material after
stabilization and consolidation over several months after placement in
the containment cell yielded a volume of 1,798 cubic yards. A De-
listing Petition (Petition) was prepared by the PRP in August 2000. The
Petition was approved by EPA and subsequently by the ADEQ in an August
27, 2001 letter entitled Exclusion of F006 Waste at the Tenneco/Monroe
Facility from the Definition of Hazardous Waste. Upon approval of the
Petition, the 1,798 cubic yards or 3,243 tons (1.8 tons/cubic yard) of
stabilized sludge was transported and disposed of at the Waste
Management--Two Pines Landfill in North Little Rock, Arkansas. The
bottom and sidewalls of the sludge pit excavation were extended until
the visually impacted material had been removed. Prior to the
collection of verification samples, an additional 1-foot of material
was removed and disposed as stained soil. In accordance with the SAP, a
verification soil sample was collected for every 500 square feet of
sidewall or floor. A total of 81 verification samples were collected
which confirmed that the excavation activities met the RA Goals for
Soil at the site. In accordance with oral field instructions by the EPA
Remedial Project Manager (RPM), and later included in the amendment to
the ROD, the PRP excavated all of the stained soil and sludge until
levels were at or below the RA Goals for Soil at the site. The stained
soil that had concentrations of the COCs below the TCLP levels and the
EPA Region 6's Medium Specific Health Based Screening Levels was
excavated and disposed in a Subtitle D Landfill. The final shipment of
stained soil was on December 16, 1999. The contractor also stabilized
all of the contaminated soil and sludge which exhibited contaminant
levels above the TCLP levels. The final shipment of the stabilized
material was on September 13, 2001. The final inspection was conducted
on September 14, 2001, and the Preliminary Close Out Report was signed
on September 19, 2001.
Groundwater Remedial Implementation History
Natural attenuation and monitoring was the remedy selected in the
ROD to address the groundwater contamination on and offsite. The ROD
amendment did not change the groundwater remedy. The ROD required the
PRP to develop and implement a Groundwater Monitoring Plan (GMP) and
beginning in September 2001, semiannual monitoring of eighteen (18)
wells began. The PRP conducted groundwater monitoring events through
March 2009. The PRP has discontinued monitoring groundwater at the
Site.
The Groundwater Remedy portion of the September 26, 1996 ROD and
the 2000 ROD Amendment included conducting long-term groundwater
monitoring of wells at the Site and local private wells located in the
vicinity of the Site. As part of the Groundwater Remedy, a Groundwater
Monitoring Plan (GMP) was prepared for the Site. The GMP specified
procedures to be followed for long-term groundwater monitoring to
ensure compliance with the requirements of the ROD and the ROD
Amendment. Tenneco initiated GMP activities in September 2001. The GMP
also specified quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) protocols
for ground water sampling. The EPA Remedial Project Manager and State
regulators visited the site during ground water monitoring activities
to observe ground water sampling. ADEQ also took independent samples to
that confirmed the results of the samples taken by the PRP. No
deviations or non-adherence to QA/QC protocols, or specifications were
identified.
Based on analysis of semi-annual groundwater sampling results since
March 2001, a request was made and approved to reduce the number of
groundwater monitoring wells and COCs included in the Site GMP. The
requested revised GMP focused only on volatile organic chemicals (VOCs)
at six select groundwater monitoring well locations. A request to
remove the requirements for sampling of the private wells was submitted
to EPA and ADEQ on March 31, 2002. The request was approved following
submittal of the Private Well Report in 2004. The Private Well Report
provided a summary of available information for each of the twenty-nine
(29) wells and presented a comparative analysis of the analytical
results from over ten (10) years of sampling the private wells relative
to the maximum contaminant levels (MCLs). Based on the findings
presented in the report, no VOCs were detected in any of the private
wells above the MCLs over the past ten (10) years. Select inorganics,
primarily lead, were detected at varying concentrations, periodically
exceeding the respective MCL in select samples collected prior to 1996.
These detections of lead however were within background concentration
[[Page 47590]]
levels for the surrounding area and not believed to have resulted from
contamination at the site. Based on the data review presented in the
Private Well Report, none of the private wells located within one-half
mile of the site have been impacted by contamination from the site.
The results of the semi-annual/annual sampling events are presented
in respective Semi-Annual/Annual Sampling Reports. Based on the most
recent groundwater sampling results from the site groundwater
monitoring wells, presented in the March 2009 Comprehensive Summary
Report Annual Groundwater Sampling Event for the Monroe Superfund Site,
the concentrations of VOCs continue to remain below the remedial goals
for the Site in all of the groundwater monitoring wells sampled with
the approved groundwater monitoring program. The concentrations in all
of the Site groundwater monitoring wells have continued to exhibit
concentrations of VOCs below the remedial goals established in the ROD
over the past eight semi-annual and two annual sampling events. The
results of the groundwater monitoring since July 2003 confirm the
effectiveness of the completed soil remedy and demonstrates site RA
goals for groundwater are maintained through natural degradation and
attenuation.
Demonstration That Remedial Activities Met Cleanup Criteria for Soils/
Sludges
The soil/sludge remedial action at the Site consisted of the
sampling, excavation, solidification, and proper disposal of
contaminated soils/sludges. The EPA and ADEQ reviewed the remedial
action report and the construction work for compliance with quality
assurance and quality control (QA/QC) protocols. Construction
activities at the Site were determined to be consistent with the ROD
and ROD Amendment and adhered to the approved quality assurance plan
which incorporated all EPA and State requirements. Confirmatory
inspections, independent testing, audits, and evaluations of materials
and workmanship were performed in accordance with the technical
specifications and plans. The EPA Remedial Project Manager and State
regulators visited the site during construction activities to review
construction progress and evaluate and review the results of QA/QC
activities. No deviations or non-adherence to QA/QC protocols, or
specifications were identified.
The Remedial Design contained provisions for performing sampling
during all remedial activities in order to verify that remedial
objectives were met, to ensure quality control and assurance for all
excavation and construction activity, and to ensure protection and
safety of the public, the environment, and the onsite worker. Sampling
was conducted in accordance with the Site Field Sampling Plan and all
analytical results are below the established cleanup levels for a
residential reuse scenario. In addition, all backfill confirmation
sample results met the established cleanup levels for a residential
reuse scenario. All analytical data was independently validated, and
the EPA and the State determined that analytical results were accurate
to the degree needed to assure satisfactory execution of the RA.
Operation and Maintenance
The ROD specified monitored natural attenuation as the remedy for
ground water remediation based on implementation of a containment
onsite of contaminated soils. The soil remedy was modified in the ROD
Amendment to include removal of stained soil and sludge from the site
to below the Site RA Goals for Soil. The results of groundwater
monitoring since removal of the stained soil and sludge demonstrate
that the natural attenuation remedy was effective and that the remedial
goals for the groundwater as stated in the ROD have been achieved.
Groundwater monitoring at the Site was discontinued after the Second
Five Year Review in 2009. The monitoring wells were properly plugged
and abandoned in 2010. There are no operation and maintenance
activities required at the Site.
Institutional Controls
The ROD required that restrictions on the use of ground water be
placed on the Site. A deed notice/covenant identifying restrictions on
the Site was filed by the PRP with the Greene County Clerk in November
2003. The covenant prohibited the installation of any private,
commercial, industrial or other water well or other device for the
removal or extraction of subsurface water. The only ground water
allowed to be extracted from beneath the property is for the purpose or
purposes associated with environmental sampling and testing of the
property. The RA goals for the groundwater have been met and the
monitor wells have been removed. No restrictions on the use or sale of
the property are necessary and the existing restrictions may be removed
by the PRP.
Five-Year Review
Five-Year Reviews were statutorily required because hazardous
substances, pollutants, or contaminants remained at the Site above
levels that allow for unlimited use and unrestricted exposure. There
have been two five-year reviews conducted at the Site, with the last
one in 2009. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Region 6 and the ADEQ conducted the second five-year review for the
response action implemented at the Monroe Auto Pit Superfund Site. Also
participating in the five-year inspection were representatives of
Tenneco.
The 2009 Five Year Review found that all hazardous substances in
the groundwater had naturally attenuated at the Site below clean up
levels. The remedial action of natural attenuation for the groundwater
is completed and no hazardous substances, pollutants or contaminants
remain above levels that could prevent unlimited use and unrestricted
exposure. Per the 2009 Five Year Review, unlimited use and unrestricted
exposure has been achieved: therefore, additional Five Year Reviews
will not be required for the Site after its deletion from the NPL.
Community Involvement
Public participation activities have been satisfied as required in
CERCLA Section 113(k), 42 U.S.C. 9613(k) and CERCLA Section 117, 42
U.S.C. 9617. Throughout the Site's history, the community has been
interested and involved with Site activity. The EPA has kept the
community and other interested parties updated on Site activities
through informational meetings, fact sheets, and public meetings.
Documents in the deletion docket which the EPA relied on for
recommendation for the deletion from the NPL are available to the
public in the information repositories, and a notice of availability of
the Notice of Intent for Deletion has been published in the Paragould
Daily Press to satisfy public participation procedures required by 40
CFR 300.425(e)(4).
Determination That the Criteria for Deletion Have Been Met
The implemented remedy achieves the degree of cleanup specified in
the ROD and ROD Amendment for all pathways of exposure. All selected
remedial action objectives and clean-up goals are consistent with
agency policy and guidance. No further Superfund responses are needed
to protect human health and the environment at the Site.
In accordance with 40 CFR 300.425(e), sites may be deleted from
[[Page 47591]]
the NPL where no further response is appropriate.
V. Deletion Action
The EPA, with concurrence of the State of Arkansas, through the
ADEQ, has determined that all appropriate response actions under CERCLA
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 October 14, 2014 unless EPA receives adverse comments by
September 15, 2014. 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 the effective date of the
deletion and it will not take effect. EPA will prepare a response to
comments and continue with the deletion process on the basis of the
notice of intent to delete and the comments already received. There
will be no additional opportunity to comment.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Chemicals,
Hazardous substances, Hazardous waste, Intergovernmental relations,
Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Superfund, Water
pollution control, Water supply.
Dated: August 6, 2014.
Samuel Coleman,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.
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.
13626, 77 FR 56749, 3 CFR, 2013 Comp., p. 306; E.O. 12777, 56 FR
54757, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR 2923, 3 CFR,
1987 Comp., p. 193.
Appendix B to Part 300--[Amended]
0
2. Table 1 of Appendix B to Part 300 is amended by removing the entry
``AR'', ``Monroe Auto Equipment (Paragould Pit),'' ''Paragould.''
[FR Doc. 2014-19270 Filed 8-13-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P