National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan; National Priorities List: Deletion of the Hatheway & Patterson Superfund Site, 56890-56895 [2017-25937]
Download as PDF
56890
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 230 / Friday, December 1, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
25. Clothing, footwear, headgear.
26. Lace and embroidery, ribbons and
braid; buttons, hooks and eyes, pins and
needles; artificial flowers; hair
decorations; false hair.
27. Carpets, rugs, mats and matting,
linoleum and other materials for
covering existing floors; wall hangings
(non-textile).
28. Games, toys and playthings; video
game apparatus; gymnastic and sporting
articles; decorations for Christmas trees.
29. Meat, fish, poultry and game; meat
extracts; preserved, frozen, dried and
cooked fruits and vegetables; jellies,
jams, compotes; eggs; milk and milk
products; oils and fats for food.
30. Coffee, tea, cocoa and artificial
coffee; rice; tapioca and sago; flour and
preparations made from cereals; bread,
pastries and confectionery; edible ices;
sugar, honey, treacle; yeast, bakingpowder; salt; mustard; vinegar, sauces
(condiments); spices; ice (frozen water).
31. Raw and unprocessed agricultural,
aquacultural, horticultural and forestry
products; raw and unprocessed grains
and seeds; fresh fruits and vegetables,
fresh herbs; natural plants and flowers;
bulbs, seedlings and seeds for planting;
live animals; foodstuffs and beverages
for animals; malt.
32. Beers; mineral and aerated waters
and other non-alcoholic beverages; fruit
beverages and fruit juices; syrups and
other preparations for making beverages.
33. Alcoholic beverages (except
beers).
34. Tobacco; smokers’ articles;
matches.
Services
35. Advertising; business
management; business administration;
office functions.
36. Insurance; financial affairs;
monetary affairs; real estate affairs.
37. Building construction; repair;
installation services.
38. Telecommunications.
39. Transport; packaging and storage
of goods; travel arrangement.
40. Treatment of materials.
41. Education; providing of training;
entertainment; sporting and cultural
activities.
42. Scientific and technological
services and research and design
relating thereto; industrial analysis and
research services; design and
development of computer hardware and
software.
43. Services for providing food and
drink; temporary accommodation.
44. Medical services; veterinary
services; hygienic and beauty care for
human beings or animals; agriculture,
horticulture and forestry services.
45. Legal services; security services
for the physical protection of tangible
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:57 Nov 30, 2017
Jkt 244001
property and individuals; personal and
social services rendered by others to
meet the needs of individuals.
Dated: November 27, 2017.
Joseph D. Matal,
Associate Solicitor, performing the functions
and duties of the Under Secretary of
Commerce for Intellectual Property and
Director of the United States Patent and
Trademark Office.
[FR Doc. 2017–25880 Filed 11–30–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–16–P
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
U.S. Copyright Office
37 CFR Parts 201 and 202
[Docket No. 2017–8]
Secure Tests: Extension of Comment
Period
U.S. Copyright Office, Library
of Congress.
ACTION: Interim rule with request for
comments; extension of comment
period.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Copyright Office is
extending the deadline for the
submission of written comments in
response to its June 12, 2017 and
November 13, 2017 interim rules,
regarding changes to the special
procedure for examining secure tests,
and the creation of a new group
registration option for secure tests,
respectively.
DATES: The comment period for the
interim rules, published on June 12,
2017 (82 FR 26850), and November 13,
2017 (82 FR 52224), is extended.
Comments must be made in writing and
must be received in the U.S. Copyright
Office no later than January 31, 2018.
ADDRESSES: For reasons of government
efficiency, the Copyright Office is using
the regulations.gov system for the
submission and posting of public
comments in this proceeding. All
comments are therefore to be submitted
electronically through regulations.gov.
Specific instructions for submitting
comments are available on the
Copyright Office Web site at https://
www.copyright.gov/rulemaking/
securetests/. If electronic submission of
comments is not feasible due to lack of
access to a computer and/or the
internet, please contact the Office for
special instructions using the contact
information below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robert J. Kasunic, Associate Register of
Copyrights and Director of Registration
Policy and Practice; Sarang Vijay Damle,
General Counsel and Associate Register
of Copyrights; Erik Bertin, Deputy
Director of Registration Policy and
Practice; or Abioye Ella Mosheim,
Attorney-Advisor, by telephone at 202–
707–8040 or by email at rkas@loc.gov,
sdam@loc.gov, ebertin@loc.gov, and
abmo@loc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: As
detailed in a June 12, 2017 interim
rule,1 the U.S. Copyright Office
memorialized its special procedures for
examining secure tests. As detailed in a
November 13, 2017 interim rule,2 the
Office established a new group
registration option for secure test
questions. The Office is extending the
December 11, 2017 deadline for the
submission of written comments to
allow greater time for public comment
following implementation of the
November 13, 2017 interim rule.
Dated: November 27, 2017.
Sarang V. Damle,
General Counsel and Associate Register of
Copyrights.
[FR Doc. 2017–25859 Filed 11–30–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1410–30–P
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 300
[EPA–HQ–SFUND–2002–0001; FRL–9971–
32-Region 1]
National Oil and Hazardous
Substances Pollution Contingency
Plan; National Priorities List: Deletion
of the Hatheway & Patterson
Superfund Site
Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) Region 1 is publishing a
direct final Notice of Deletion of the
Hatheway & Patterson Superfund Site
(Site), located in Mansfield and
Foxborough, Massachusetts, from the
National Priorities List (NPL). The NPL,
promulgated pursuant to section 105 of
the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is
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
Commonwealth of Massachusetts,
through Massachusetts Department of
SUMMARY:
1 82
2 82
E:\FR\FM\01DER1.SGM
FR 26850 (June 12, 2017).
FR 52224 (Nov. 13, 2017).
01DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 230 / Friday, December 1, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
Environmental Protection (MassDEP),
because EPA has determined that all
appropriate response actions under
CERCLA, other than operation,
maintenance, monitoring, and five-year
reviews, have been completed.
However, this deletion does not
preclude future actions under
Superfund.
This direct final deletion is
effective January 30, 2018 unless EPA
receives adverse comments by January
2, 2018. 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.
DATES:
Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
SFUND–2002–0001, at https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Comments may also be submitted by
email or mail to Kimberly White,
Remedial Project Manager for Hatheway
& Patterson Superfund Site, Office of
Site Remediation and Restoration, Mail
Code: OSRR07–1, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 1, 5 Post
Office Square, Suite 100, Boston, MA
02109–3912, email: white.kimberly@
epa.gov or Emily Bender, Community
Involvement Coordinator, Office of the
Regional Administrator, Mail Code:
ORA01–3, 5 Post Office Square, Suite
100, Boston, MA 02109–3912, email:
bender.emily@epa.gov. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed
from Regulations.gov. The EPA may
publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit
electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video,
etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is
considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points
you wish to make. The EPA will
generally not consider comments or
comment contents located outside of the
primary submission (i.e. on the web,
cloud, or other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, the full
EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets. Publicly
available docket materials are available
either electronically through https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the site information repositories.
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
ADDRESSES:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:57 Nov 30, 2017
Jkt 244001
Locations, contacts, phone numbers
and viewing hours are: U.S. EPA Region
1, Superfund Records Center, 5 Post
Office Square, Suite 100, Boston, MA
02109, Phone: 617–918–1440, Monday–
Friday: 9:00 a.m.–5:00 p.m., Saturday
and Sunday—Closed.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kimberly White, Remedial Project
Manager for Hatheway & Patterson
Superfund Site, Office of Site
Remediation and Restoration, Mail
Code: OSRR07–1, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 1, 5 Post
Office Square, Suite 100, Boston, MA
02109–3912, telephone number: 617–
918–1752, email address:
white.kimberly@epa.gov or Emily
Bender, Community Involvement
Coordinator, Office of the Regional
Administrator, Mail Code: ORA01–3, 5
Post Office Square, Suite 100, Boston,
MA 02109–3912, telephone number:
617–918–1037, email address:
bender.emily@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. NPL Deletion Criteria
III. Deletion Procedures
IV. Basis for Site Deletion
V. Deletion Action
I. Introduction
EPA Region 1 is publishing this direct
final Notice of Deletion of the Hatheway
& Patterson Superfund Site (Site), from
the National Priorities List (NPL). The
NPL constitutes Appendix B of 40 CFR
part 300, which is the National Oil and
Hazardous Substances Pollution
Contingency Plan (NCP), which EPA
promulgated pursuant to section 105 of
the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation and Liability
Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended.
EPA maintains the NPL as the list of
sites that appear to present a significant
risk to public health, welfare, or the
environment. Sites on the NPL may be
the subject of remedial actions financed
by the Hazardous Substance Superfund
(Fund). As described in 300.425(e)(3) of
the NCP, sites deleted from the NPL
remain eligible for Fund-financed
remedial actions if future conditions
warrant such actions.
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 Hatheway & Patterson
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
56891
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
Commonwealth of Massachusetts (the
‘‘state’’) prior to developing this direct
final Notice of Deletion and the Notice
of Intent to Delete co-published today in
the ‘‘Proposed Rules’’ section of the
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 Massachusetts
Department of Environmental Protection
(MassDEP), has concurred on the
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 to Delete is being
published in a major local newspaper,
The Sun Chronicle, Attleboro, MA. The
E:\FR\FM\01DER1.SGM
01DER1
56892
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 230 / Friday, December 1, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
newspaper notice announces the 30-day
public comment period concerning the
Notice of Intent to Delete the Site from
the NPL.
(4) The EPA placed copies of
documents supporting the proposed
deletion in the deletion docket and
made these items available for public
inspection and copying at the Site
information repository 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 to Delete and the
comments already received.
Deletion of a site from the NPL does
not itself create, alter, or revoke any
individual’s rights or obligations.
Deletion of a site from the NPL does not
in any way alter EPA’s right to take
enforcement actions, as appropriate.
The NPL is designed primarily for
informational purposes and to assist
EPA management. Section 300.425(e)(3)
of the NCP states that the deletion of a
site from the NPL does not preclude
eligibility for future response actions,
should future conditions warrant such
actions.
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
IV. Basis for Site Deletion
The following information provides
EPA’s rationale for deleting the Site
from the NPL:
Site Background and History
The Hatheway and Patterson
Superfund Site (Site), known by EPA
Site Identification Number:
MAD001060805, is located in the towns
of Mansfield and Foxborough,
Massachusetts. Approximately 36 acres
of the Site are located in the Town of
Mansfield, which is zoned for
commercial/industrial use. The
remaining 1.77 acres are located in the
Town of Foxborough, also zoned for
commercial use. The Site is bisected by
the Rumford River, which runs north to
south, and by a railroad right-of-way,
which runs east to west.
Prior to the 1950’s, the property was
reportedly used for various activities,
including railroad operations, coal
storage, bulk chemical transfer, and
storage of electric/utility poles and
railroad ties. Beginning in 1952, wood
treatment operations by Hatheway &
Patterson Co., Inc. (Hatheway &
Patterson) began. Operations at the Site
included the preservation of wood
sheeting, planking, timber, piling, poles
and other wood products and included
the use of pentachlorophenol (PCP),
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:57 Nov 30, 2017
Jkt 244001
creosote, fluoro-chrome-arsenate-phenol
(FCAP) salts, chromated copper-arsenate
(CCA) salts, and fire retardants,
including DriconTM (boric acid and
anhydrous sodium tetraborate).
Contamination was initially discovered
in 1972, when a tar seep (approximately
62 feet long and 6 inches thick) was
discovered on the banks of the Rumford
River on the southern portion of the
property.
Following the initial discovery of
contamination, Hatheway & Patterson
took steps to control the ‘‘oily seepage’’
from 1973 to 1991. Hatheway &
Patterson filed for bankruptcy in 1993,
leading to a removal action by EPA in
1993–1995 to address the imminent
hazard posed by abandoned chemicals
and waste at the Site. The Site was
placed on the National Priorities List
(NPL) by publication in the Federal
Register on September 5, 2002, 67 FR
56757.
Remedial Investigation and Feasibility
Study (RI/FS)
The Remedial Investigation and
Feasibility Study were completed in
2005. As part of the investigation, soil,
surface water, groundwater, sediments
and fish tissue were evaluated. The
primary contaminants identified at the
Site were arsenic, dioxin, polycyclic
aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs),
pentachlorophenol (PCP) and other
semi-volatile organic compounds
(SVOCs). Light Non-Aqueous Phase
Liquid (LNAPL) hot spot areas/isolated
pockets of free product and LNAPLsaturated subsurface soils were also
detected throughout the Site.
The baseline human health risk
assessment concluded that exposure to
surface and subsurface soil was
associated with an unacceptable human
health risk outside EPA’s acceptable risk
range under current and future exposure
scenarios. On-site overburden and
bedrock groundwater was also
associated with an unacceptable human
health risk. The baseline ecological risk
assessment concluded that there was
not a substantial risk from exposure to
site-related contaminants. The FS
evaluated alternatives with various
combinations of soil treatment
technologies, excavation, off-site
disposal of contaminants, consolidation
of contaminated soil and sediments
under a cap and institutional controls.
Selected Remedy
In September 2005, EPA issued a
Record of Decision (ROD) that set forth
the Selected Remedy at the Hatheway
and Patterson Superfund Site to address
current and future risks due to direct
contact and incidental ingestion of soil
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
and risks to future users of groundwater.
The Remedial Action Objectives (RAOs)
for the Site outlined in the ROD were as
follows:
Surface Soil—Prevent current and future
users from ingesting or contacting surface
soils contaminated with arsenic, dioxin,
pentachlorophenol, benzo(a)pyrene, and
other Site contaminants that pose a risk to
human health.
Subsurface Soil—Prevent future users from
ingesting or contacting subsurface soils
contaminated with arsenic, dioxin,
pentachlorophenol, benzo(a)pyrene, and
other Site contaminants that pose a risk to
human health.
LNAPL—Prevent further contaminant
transfer from LNAPL to groundwater by
reducing LNAPL source material in soil
excavation/treatment areas. Prevent further
migration of LNAPL to groundwater and
surface water by removing free product
‘‘hotspots’’ to the extent feasible.
The Selected Remedy included:
Demolition of buildings in and near
Hatheway & Patterson’s former
manufacturing area; excavation and onsite consolidation of soils contaminated
with arsenic and pentachlorophenol
under a low-permeability cover, after
being stabilized with cement to achieve
leachability criteria; disposal of soil
contaminated with dioxin and free
product LNAPL at a licensed off-site
facility; institutional controls to prohibit
the use of Site groundwater and restrict
land uses in a manner that ensures the
protectiveness of the remedy as
described in the ROD; long term
monitoring of groundwater, surface
water, sediment, as well as fish tissue
analysis of specimens caught in the
Rumford River; and Five-Year Reviews
of the remedy.
Modifications to the remedy were
documented in the 2011 Explanation of
Significant Differences (ESD). Based on
a zoning change for the Foxborough
parcel from residential use to ‘‘Limited
Industrial’’ use, and intended reuse of
the parcel as a parking lot, EPA and
MassDEP determined that the
Foxborough parcel should be
remediated to a Reasonably Anticipated
Future Use of commercial/open space.
Therefore, the cleanup level for arsenic
was changed for this parcel, and it was
then used as a consolidation area for
soils contaminated with arsenic and
covered with asphalt in order to
facilitate the use of the parcel as a
parking lot. The ESD also documented
that PCP and arsenic-contaminated soils
in the Mansfield portion of the Site were
disposed at an off-site facility rather
than consolidated on-site as described
in the ROD. In addition, the ESD
clarified the extent of institutional
controls to be placed on the Site
properties.
E:\FR\FM\01DER1.SGM
01DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 230 / Friday, December 1, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
the site. The NAUL provides
information about the risks remaining at
the Site for current and future owners
and interest holders. The NAULs
Pentachlorophenol ................
90.0
require that the site owner submit
annual reports to EPA and MassDEP
During the remedial action, if
regarding the status of the ICs. EPA will
contaminants of concern (COCs) were
also assess site conditions and interview
detected above the clean-up criteria
town officials as part of the Five Year
listed above, excavation continued
Review process to confirm that only the
horizontally and vertically until either:
permitted uses have taken place on the
(1) Post-excavation confirmatory
restricted properties. Should there be
samples met the clean-up criteria; (2)
planned excavation limits along County violations of the restrictions contained
Street and the railroad right of way were in the NAUL, the state has the authority
to take an enforcement action against
met, or (3) for vertical excavation, the
any property owner.
water table was reached.
Post-excavation confirmatory
In addition to NAULs, institutional
sampling was performed in conjunction controls in the form of signage were
with excavation activities from the
used along the railroad right-of-way that
bottom of excavation and ‘‘clean’’
intersects the Site stating to contact the
perimeter embankment and tested for
property owner before soils are
the COCs. Generally, as excavation was
disturbed. The signage along the
completed in a grid cell area,
railroad right-of-way will be inspected
confirmatory soil samples were
periodically at a minimum every five
collected from the bottom and sidewalls
years as part of EPA’s Five Year Review
of the excavation. Bottom samples were
process and/or during regular operation
comprised of a five-point composite
and maintenance activities conducted
sample collected from the center and
by the state.
four corners of the excavation cell.
Sidewall samples were collected from
Long-Term Groundwater, Surface Water
the sidewalls of excavations when grids and Sediment Monitoring
were adjacent to the Site perimeter. If
The ROD required long-term
excavation sidewalls were greater than
three feet in depth, an additional sample monitoring of groundwater, surface
water, fish tissue and sediment, and
was collected below this interval to the
operation and maintenance of the lowbottom of the excavation. All samples
permeability cover. As a result of
collected and analytical results are
changes to the remedy documented in
summarized in the Remedial Action
Completion Report, dated August 2011.
the ESD, the Hatheway and Patterson
Operation and Maintenance Manual,
Operation and Maintenance
dated August 2017 requires semi-annual
Institutional Controls
monitoring of groundwater following
the first five-year review, and sampling
Institutional controls in the form of
of sediment and surface water at least
enforceable Notices of Activity and Use
once every five years following the
Limitations (NAULs) were recorded
second five-year review. The 2017
with the deed on properties associated
Operation and maintenance (O&M)
with the Site, as listed below:
Manual also provides an explanation for
Northern Mansfield Property, 35 County
eliminating the fish tissue sampling
St., Mansfield, MA [Map 19 Lot 210, Book
requirement which is primarily due to
6160 Page 89] (Northern Bristol County
the lack of fish in the Rumford River.
Registry of Deeds),
Southern Mansfield Property, Morrow St.,
Cleanup Levels
The ROD contains performance
Mansfield, MA [Map 18 Lot 230–235, Book
standards for on-site groundwater and
The source control remedy at the Site 2164 Page 64] (Northern Bristol County
for groundwater at the boundary of the
was performed in accordance with EPA- Registry of Deeds), and
Site. If monitoring indicates
approved plans and specifications. No
Foxborough Property, 41 County St.,
exceedances of the on-site groundwater
Foxborough, MA [Map 158 Lot 4060, Book
additional EPA construction is
11412 Page 408] (Norfolk County Registry of
performance standards, further
anticipated at the Site. The source
Deeds).
evaluation of the impacts to surface
control remedial cleanup levels (listed
below) were set in the ROD based on
The NAUL on each property specifies water and sediments is needed. If
monitoring indicates exceedances of the
commercial/open-space reuse:
the current allowable and prohibited
Site boundary groundwater performance
uses of the property, and establishes
Cleanup
limits and conditions on the future uses standards, the ROD requires an
Contaminant
level
evaluation of whether off-site receptors
of contaminated portions of the
(ppm)
are at risk. MassDEP is the lead agency
property. The restrictions are different
performing the O&M, including the
Benzo(a)pyrene ....................
2.1 for each property, but generally restrict
groundwater, surface water and
Dioxin ....................................
0.001 the use of groundwater and subsurface
Arsenic ..................................
16.0 soils where contamination remains on
sediment monitoring for the Site.
Response Actions
Through an Interagency Agreement
with EPA Region 1, the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers New England
District (USACE) performed the
Selected Remedy. Remedial
construction activities commenced in
September 2009 and were substantially
completed in September 2010. A total of
34,000 tons of soil was removed from
the Northern Mansfield Property and
the Foxborough Property and 9,500 tons
of soil was removed from the eastern
portion of the Southern Mansfield
Property for off-site disposal to a RCRA
subtitle C hazardous waste landfill,
Envirosafe of Oregon, Ohio.
Approximately 5,000 tons of soil
exceeding arsenic cleanup levels were
consolidated in the ‘‘Capped
Consolidation Area’’ on the Foxborough
Property under a multi-layer lowpermeability barrier (i.e., the asphalt
cover). A small portion of land along the
western boundary of the Foxborough
Property, approximately 30 feet wide,
was left unpaved. All portions of the
Foxborough Property that are not part of
the Capped Consolidation Area are
referred to as the ‘‘Unpaved Area’’. The
Unpaved Area of the Foxborough
Property was cleaned-up to the same
level that was being used in the rest of
the Site in Mansfield that was zoned
open space/commercial.
The properties owned by the towns of
Mansfield and Foxborough have
institutional controls in the form of
Notice of Activity and Uses Limitations
(NAULs), to prevent uncontrolled access
to the remaining contamination.
Institutional controls were also placed
on the railroad right-of way, owned by
the Massachusetts Department of
Transportation, in the form of signage to
prevent the potential exposure to any
future utility workers. The property
owners are required comply with the
institutional controls for the Site; this
will be verified during the Five-Year
Reviews.
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
56893
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:57 Nov 30, 2017
Jkt 244001
PO 00000
Cleanup
level
(ppm)
Contaminant
Frm 00035
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\01DER1.SGM
01DER1
56894
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 230 / Friday, December 1, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
Five-Year Review
Five-year reviews are required at the
Site because hazardous substances will
remain at the Site above concentration
levels that would allow for unrestricted
use and unrestricted exposure after the
completion of all remedial actions.
Pursuant to CERCLA Section 121(c),
NCP Section 300.400(f)(4)(ii) and as
provided in OSWER Directive 9355.7–
03B–P, June 2001, Comprehensive FiveYear Review Guidance, EPA must
conduct statutory five-year reviews at
the Site. The purpose of these reviews
is to evaluate whether the selected
remedy remains protective of human
health and the environment. These fiveyear reviews are required no less often
than each five years after the initiation
of the remedial action. EPA may
terminate these reviews when no
hazardous substances, pollutants, or
contaminants remain at the Site above
levels that allow for unrestricted use
and unlimited exposure.
The first five-year review was
conducted in 2014, and found that the
remedy at the Hatheway & Patterson
Superfund Site currently protects
human health and the environment.
Several issues were raised in the 2014
Five-Year Review and resolved as
discussed below.
Institutional Controls: At the time of
the 2014 Five-Year Review, institutional
controls were not in place. Between
2015 and 2017, all institutional controls
for the Site were implemented.
Sediment Sampling: An issue was
noted with the sediment sampling
locations. To address the issue
additional sediment sampling was
performed and the results showed
contaminants concentrations in
sediment at the Site remain protective of
human health and the environment.
Fish Tissue and Surface Water
Sampling: Fish tissue and surface water
sampling were not performed as
required by the ROD. To address this
issue, the 2017 O&M Manual was
written to reflect site conditions (a lack
of fish in the Rumford River) and to
require sediment and surface water
monitoring at a minimum in
conjunction with the five-year reviews.
Groundwater: Two issues related to
groundwater were raised in the 2014
Five-Year review. First, to determine
whether a detection of a contaminant of
concern at an off-site well was site
actual and persistent; and second, to
evaluate whether the active irrigation
wells outside the compliance boundary
have impacted groundwater flow
directions. To address the first issue,
additional sampling was performed at
the off-site well which showed the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:57 Nov 30, 2017
Jkt 244001
contaminant was below state
groundwater standards and was likely
not site-related. To address the second
issue, EPA compiled a technical
memorandum documenting that the
irrigations wells are not impacting
groundwater flowpaths near the Site.
Also, periodic groundwater monitoring
will continue to confirm that off-site
wells are not impacted.
The 2014 Five-Year Review found
that the remedy at the Hatheway &
Patterson Superfund Site protects
human health and the environment
because remediation of the soil (soil
removal and on-site consolidation) has
been completed to cleanup levels that
are considered protective for the
anticipated future use of the property,
and there is no current use of on-site
groundwater which is classified as nonpotable. Institutional controls have been
created and recorded to restrict
inappropriate land uses (including use
of groundwater) and protect the
consolidation area cover. Operation and
maintenance activities have been
initiated and will ensure that the
consolidation area and associated
components of the remedy (e.g.,
groundwater monitoring wells) remain
in good condition. In addition,
monitoring of groundwater will
continue to assess the protectiveness of
the remedy.
Community Involvement
Throughout the Site’s history, EPA
has kept the community and other
interested parties apprised of Site
activities through informational
meetings, fact sheets, press releases, and
public meetings. A Community
Relations Plan was established before
remedial actions were performed at the
Site to address issues of community
concern and community relation
activities conducted by EPA. Activities
included providing information
concerning the progress of remedial
activities to interested citizens and
allowing those individuals or groups an
opportunity to provide comments as
EPA conducts remedial activities at the
Site. EPA also issued press releases
announcing the start and conclusion of
the five-year review and will continue
to do so.
Determination That the Site Meets the
Criteria for Deletion in the NCP
Remedial Design and Remedial
Action (RD/RA) activities at the Site
were consistent with the ROD and EPA
RD/RA Statements of Work provided to
USACE. RA plans for all phases of
construction included a Quality
Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated
October 2009 and QAPP Revision 1,
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
dated March 2010. The QAPP
incorporated all EPA and state quality
assurance and quality control
procedures and protocols (where
necessary). All procedures and
protocols were followed for soil,
sediment, water, and air sampling
during the RA. EPA analytical methods
were used for all validation and
monitoring samples during all RA
activities. EPA has determined that the
analytical results are accurate to the
degree needed to assure satisfactory
execution of the RA, and are consistent
with the ROD and the RD/RA plans and
specifications. All Institutional Controls
are in place and currently EPA expects
that no further Superfund response is
needed to protect human health and the
environment, except future Five Year
Reviews.
Operation and maintenance (O&M)
activities were agreed upon by EPA and
the state following construction of the
remedy. The operation and maintenance
activities are documented in the 2017
O&M Manual. The state preforms O&M
at the Site and will follow state quality
assurance/quality control plans
associated with the 2017 O&M plan.
This Site meets all the site completion
requirements as specified in OSWER
Directive 9320.2–09–A–P, Close Out
Procedures for National Priorities List
Sites. All cleanup actions specified in
the ROD and ESD have been
implemented. Confirmatory groundwater monitoring and institutional
controls provide further assurance that
the Site no longer poses any threats to
human health or the environment. The
only remaining activity to be performed
is O&M that the state has guaranteed.
Five year reviews and monitoring will
also be conducted at the Site. A
bibliography of all reports relevant to
the completion of this Site under the
Superfund program is in the
administrative record for this deletion.
V. Deletion Action
The EPA, with concurrence of the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts
through the Department of
Environmental Protection, has
determined that all appropriate
response actions under CERCLA, other
than operation and maintenance,
monitoring, and five-year reviews have
been completed. Therefore, EPA is
deleting the Site from the NPL.
Because EPA considers this action to
be noncontroversial and routine, EPA is
taking it without prior publication. This
action will be effective January 30, 2018
unless EPA receives adverse comments
by January 2, 2018. If adverse comments
are received within the 30-day public
comment period, EPA will publish a
E:\FR\FM\01DER1.SGM
01DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 230 / Friday, December 1, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
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: October 18, 2017.
Deborah Szaro,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 1.
For the reasons set out in this
document, 40 CFR part 300 is amended
as follows:
PART 300—NATIONAL OIL AND
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES
POLLUTION CONTINGENCY PLAN
1. The authority citation for part 300
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(d); 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]
2. Table 1 of appendix B to part 300
is amended by removing ‘‘MA’’,
‘‘Hatheway and Patterson Company’’,
‘‘Mansfield’’.
■
[FR Doc. 2017–25937 Filed 11–30–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Maritime Administration
46 CFR Part 296
RIN 2133–AB85
Maritime Security Program
Maritime Administration,
Department of Transportation.
ACTION: Final rule.
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
AGENCY:
The Maritime Administration
(‘‘MARAD’’) is amending its regulations
to implement amendments to the
Maritime Security Act of 2003 by the
National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2013 (‘‘NDAA 2013’’), the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016
(‘‘CAA 2016’’), and the National Defense
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:57 Nov 30, 2017
Jkt 244001
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016
(‘‘NDAA 2016’’). The revisions to the
regulations, among other things, make
changes to vessel eligibility for
participation in the Maritime Security
Program (‘‘MSP’’), authorize the
extension of current MSP Operating
Agreements, amend the procedures for
the award of new MSP Operating
Agreements, extend the MSP through
2025, update the MSP Operating
Agreement payments and schedule of
payments, and eliminate the
Maintenance and Repair Pilot Program.
DATES: This final rule becomes effective
on January 2, 2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
William G. McDonald, Director, Office
of Sealift Support, U.S. Department of
Transportation, Maritime
Administration, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
Telephone (202) 366–0688; Fax (202)
366–5904, electronic mail to
William.G.McDonald@dot.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Section 3508 of the NDAA 2013
authorized the extension of the
Maritime Security Program through
fiscal year 2025. Under section 3508, the
Secretary of Transportation, acting
through the Maritime Administrator, is
authorized to offer to extend the existing
60 MSP Operating Agreements through
fiscal year 2025. Section 3508
authorized a new payment schedule of
increasing MSP Operating Agreement
payments through fiscal year 2025.
These payment amounts were
subsequently updated by the CAA 2016
and the NDAA 2016. Section 3508 of the
NDAA 2013 also provided a new
procedure for awarding MSP Operating
Agreements, including a new priority
system for the award of operating
agreements. Under the new priority,
award will be first based on vessel type
as determined by military requirements
and then based on the citizenship status
of the applicant. Section 3508 revised
the procedure for the transfer of MSP
Operating Agreements by eliminating
the requirement to first offer an MSP
Operating Agreement to a U.S. Citizen
under 46 U.S.C. 50501. In addition,
Section 3508 eliminated the procedure
for early termination of MSP Operating
Agreements based on the availability of
replacement vessels. Section 3508 also
eliminated the eligibility of Lighter
Aboard Ship (LASH) vessels to
participate in the MSP Fleet as a standalone category of vessel. The rule
eliminates the Maintenance and Repair
Pilot Program, which has sunset and
was not extended by the NDAA 2013.
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
56895
The rule also updates MARAD’s address
for the purposes of submitting required
reports and vouchers.
Rulemaking Analysis and Notices
Executive Orders 12866 (Regulatory
Planning and Review), 13563
(Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review) and DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures. Under E.O. 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993),
supplemented by E.O. 13563 (76 FR
3821, January 18, 2011) and DOT
policies and procedures, MARAD must
determine whether a regulatory action is
‘‘significant’’ and, therefore, subject to
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) review and the requirements of
the E.O.s. The Orders define ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ as one likely to result
in a rule that may: (1) Have an annual
effect on the economy of $100 million
or more or adversely affect in a material
way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition,
jobs, the environment, public health or
safety, or State, local, or tribal
government or communities; (2) create a
serious inconsistency or otherwise
interfere with an action taken or
planned by another Agency; (3)
materially alter the budgetary impact of
entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan
programs or the rights and obligations of
recipients thereof; and (4) raise novel
legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President’s priorities, or
the principles set forth in the E.O.s.
A determination has been made that
this rulemaking is not considered a
significant regulatory action under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866.
This rulemaking will not result in an
annual effect on the economy of $100
million or more. It is also not
considered a major rule for purposes of
Congressional review under Public Law
104–121. This rulemaking is also not
significant under the Regulatory Policies
and Procedures of the Department of
Transportation (44 FR 11034, February
26, 1979). The costs and overall
economic impact of this rulemaking do
not require further analysis because the
rulemaking will create no additional
costs or new substantive burdens to
participants in or applicants to the
existing program as it addresses only
new processing procedures.
Executive Order 13771 (Reducing
Regulation and Controlling Regulatory
Costs)
This rule is not an E.O. 13771
regulatory action because this rule is not
significant under E.O. 12866.
E:\FR\FM\01DER1.SGM
01DER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 230 (Friday, December 1, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 56890-56895]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-25937]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 300
[EPA-HQ-SFUND-2002-0001; FRL-9971-32-Region 1]
National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan;
National Priorities List: Deletion of the Hatheway & Patterson
Superfund Site
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 1 is
publishing a direct final Notice of Deletion of the Hatheway &
Patterson Superfund Site (Site), located in Mansfield and Foxborough,
Massachusetts, from the National Priorities List (NPL). The NPL,
promulgated pursuant to section 105 of the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended,
is 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 Commonwealth of Massachusetts,
through Massachusetts Department of
[[Page 56891]]
Environmental Protection (MassDEP), because EPA has determined that all
appropriate response actions under CERCLA, other than operation,
maintenance, monitoring, and five-year reviews, have been completed.
However, this deletion does not preclude future actions under
Superfund.
DATES: This direct final deletion is effective January 30, 2018 unless
EPA receives adverse comments by January 2, 2018. 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-2002-0001, at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Comments may also be submitted by
email or mail to Kimberly White, Remedial Project Manager for Hatheway
& Patterson Superfund Site, Office of Site Remediation and Restoration,
Mail Code: OSRR07-1, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 1, 5
Post Office Square, Suite 100, Boston, MA 02109-3912, email:
white.kimberly@epa.gov or Emily Bender, Community Involvement
Coordinator, Office of the Regional Administrator, Mail Code: ORA01-3,
5 Post Office Square, Suite 100, Boston, MA 02109-3912, email:
bender.emily@epa.gov. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or
removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received
to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment
policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general
guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically through https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the site information
repositories.
Locations, contacts, phone numbers and viewing hours are: U.S. EPA
Region 1, Superfund Records Center, 5 Post Office Square, Suite 100,
Boston, MA 02109, Phone: 617-918-1440, Monday-Friday: 9:00 a.m.-5:00
p.m., Saturday and Sunday--Closed.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kimberly White, Remedial Project
Manager for Hatheway & Patterson Superfund Site, Office of Site
Remediation and Restoration, Mail Code: OSRR07-1, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 1, 5 Post Office Square, Suite 100, Boston,
MA 02109-3912, telephone number: 617-918-1752, email address:
white.kimberly@epa.gov or Emily Bender, Community Involvement
Coordinator, Office of the Regional Administrator, Mail Code: ORA01-3,
5 Post Office Square, Suite 100, Boston, MA 02109-3912, telephone
number: 617-918-1037, email address: bender.emily@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. NPL Deletion Criteria
III. Deletion Procedures
IV. Basis for Site Deletion
V. Deletion Action
I. Introduction
EPA Region 1 is publishing this direct final Notice of Deletion of
the Hatheway & Patterson Superfund Site (Site), from the National
Priorities List (NPL). The NPL constitutes Appendix B of 40 CFR part
300, which is the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution
Contingency Plan (NCP), which EPA promulgated pursuant to section 105
of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability
Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended. EPA maintains the NPL as the list of
sites that appear to present a significant risk to public health,
welfare, or the environment. Sites on the NPL may be the subject of
remedial actions financed by the Hazardous Substance Superfund (Fund).
As described in 300.425(e)(3) of the NCP, sites deleted from the NPL
remain eligible for Fund-financed remedial actions if future conditions
warrant such actions.
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 Hatheway & Patterson
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.
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 Commonwealth of Massachusetts (the
``state'') prior to developing this direct final Notice of Deletion and
the Notice of Intent to Delete co-published today in the ``Proposed
Rules'' section of the 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 Massachusetts Department
of Environmental Protection (MassDEP), has concurred on the 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 to Delete is being published in a major local newspaper, The Sun
Chronicle, Attleboro, MA. The
[[Page 56892]]
newspaper notice announces the 30-day public comment period concerning
the Notice of Intent to Delete the Site from the NPL.
(4) The EPA placed copies of documents supporting the proposed
deletion in the deletion docket and made these items available for
public inspection and copying at the Site information repository
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 to
Delete and the comments already received.
Deletion of a site from the NPL does not itself create, alter, or
revoke any individual's rights or obligations. Deletion of a site from
the NPL does not in any way alter EPA's right to take enforcement
actions, as appropriate. The NPL is designed primarily for
informational purposes and to assist EPA management. Section
300.425(e)(3) of the NCP states that the deletion of a site from the
NPL does not preclude eligibility for future response actions, should
future conditions warrant such actions.
IV. Basis for Site Deletion
The following information provides EPA's rationale for deleting the
Site from the NPL:
Site Background and History
The Hatheway and Patterson Superfund Site (Site), known by EPA Site
Identification Number: MAD001060805, is located in the towns of
Mansfield and Foxborough, Massachusetts. Approximately 36 acres of the
Site are located in the Town of Mansfield, which is zoned for
commercial/industrial use. The remaining 1.77 acres are located in the
Town of Foxborough, also zoned for commercial use. The Site is bisected
by the Rumford River, which runs north to south, and by a railroad
right-of-way, which runs east to west.
Prior to the 1950's, the property was reportedly used for various
activities, including railroad operations, coal storage, bulk chemical
transfer, and storage of electric/utility poles and railroad ties.
Beginning in 1952, wood treatment operations by Hatheway & Patterson
Co., Inc. (Hatheway & Patterson) began. Operations at the Site included
the preservation of wood sheeting, planking, timber, piling, poles and
other wood products and included the use of pentachlorophenol (PCP),
creosote, fluoro-chrome-arsenate-phenol (FCAP) salts, chromated copper-
arsenate (CCA) salts, and fire retardants, including Dricon\TM\ (boric
acid and anhydrous sodium tetraborate). Contamination was initially
discovered in 1972, when a tar seep (approximately 62 feet long and 6
inches thick) was discovered on the banks of the Rumford River on the
southern portion of the property.
Following the initial discovery of contamination, Hatheway &
Patterson took steps to control the ``oily seepage'' from 1973 to 1991.
Hatheway & Patterson filed for bankruptcy in 1993, leading to a removal
action by EPA in 1993-1995 to address the imminent hazard posed by
abandoned chemicals and waste at the Site. The Site was placed on the
National Priorities List (NPL) by publication in the Federal Register
on September 5, 2002, 67 FR 56757.
Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/FS)
The Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study were completed in
2005. As part of the investigation, soil, surface water, groundwater,
sediments and fish tissue were evaluated. The primary contaminants
identified at the Site were arsenic, dioxin, polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAHs), pentachlorophenol (PCP) and other semi-volatile
organic compounds (SVOCs). Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid (LNAPL) hot
spot areas/isolated pockets of free product and LNAPL-saturated
subsurface soils were also detected throughout the Site.
The baseline human health risk assessment concluded that exposure
to surface and subsurface soil was associated with an unacceptable
human health risk outside EPA's acceptable risk range under current and
future exposure scenarios. On-site overburden and bedrock groundwater
was also associated with an unacceptable human health risk. The
baseline ecological risk assessment concluded that there was not a
substantial risk from exposure to site-related contaminants. The FS
evaluated alternatives with various combinations of soil treatment
technologies, excavation, off-site disposal of contaminants,
consolidation of contaminated soil and sediments under a cap and
institutional controls.
Selected Remedy
In September 2005, EPA issued a Record of Decision (ROD) that set
forth the Selected Remedy at the Hatheway and Patterson Superfund Site
to address current and future risks due to direct contact and
incidental ingestion of soil and risks to future users of groundwater.
The Remedial Action Objectives (RAOs) for the Site outlined in the ROD
were as follows:
Surface Soil--Prevent current and future users from ingesting or
contacting surface soils contaminated with arsenic, dioxin,
pentachlorophenol, benzo(a)pyrene, and other Site contaminants that
pose a risk to human health.
Subsurface Soil--Prevent future users from ingesting or
contacting subsurface soils contaminated with arsenic, dioxin,
pentachlorophenol, benzo(a)pyrene, and other Site contaminants that
pose a risk to human health.
LNAPL--Prevent further contaminant transfer from LNAPL to
groundwater by reducing LNAPL source material in soil excavation/
treatment areas. Prevent further migration of LNAPL to groundwater
and surface water by removing free product ``hotspots'' to the
extent feasible.
The Selected Remedy included: Demolition of buildings in and near
Hatheway & Patterson's former manufacturing area; excavation and on-
site consolidation of soils contaminated with arsenic and
pentachlorophenol under a low-permeability cover, after being
stabilized with cement to achieve leachability criteria; disposal of
soil contaminated with dioxin and free product LNAPL at a licensed off-
site facility; institutional controls to prohibit the use of Site
groundwater and restrict land uses in a manner that ensures the
protectiveness of the remedy as described in the ROD; long term
monitoring of groundwater, surface water, sediment, as well as fish
tissue analysis of specimens caught in the Rumford River; and Five-Year
Reviews of the remedy.
Modifications to the remedy were documented in the 2011 Explanation
of Significant Differences (ESD). Based on a zoning change for the
Foxborough parcel from residential use to ``Limited Industrial'' use,
and intended reuse of the parcel as a parking lot, EPA and MassDEP
determined that the Foxborough parcel should be remediated to a
Reasonably Anticipated Future Use of commercial/open space. Therefore,
the cleanup level for arsenic was changed for this parcel, and it was
then used as a consolidation area for soils contaminated with arsenic
and covered with asphalt in order to facilitate the use of the parcel
as a parking lot. The ESD also documented that PCP and arsenic-
contaminated soils in the Mansfield portion of the Site were disposed
at an off-site facility rather than consolidated on-site as described
in the ROD. In addition, the ESD clarified the extent of institutional
controls to be placed on the Site properties.
[[Page 56893]]
Response Actions
Through an Interagency Agreement with EPA Region 1, the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers New England District (USACE) performed the Selected
Remedy. Remedial construction activities commenced in September 2009
and were substantially completed in September 2010. A total of 34,000
tons of soil was removed from the Northern Mansfield Property and the
Foxborough Property and 9,500 tons of soil was removed from the eastern
portion of the Southern Mansfield Property for off-site disposal to a
RCRA subtitle C hazardous waste landfill, Envirosafe of Oregon, Ohio.
Approximately 5,000 tons of soil exceeding arsenic cleanup levels were
consolidated in the ``Capped Consolidation Area'' on the Foxborough
Property under a multi-layer low-permeability barrier (i.e., the
asphalt cover). A small portion of land along the western boundary of
the Foxborough Property, approximately 30 feet wide, was left unpaved.
All portions of the Foxborough Property that are not part of the Capped
Consolidation Area are referred to as the ``Unpaved Area''. The Unpaved
Area of the Foxborough Property was cleaned-up to the same level that
was being used in the rest of the Site in Mansfield that was zoned open
space/commercial.
The properties owned by the towns of Mansfield and Foxborough have
institutional controls in the form of Notice of Activity and Uses
Limitations (NAULs), to prevent uncontrolled access to the remaining
contamination. Institutional controls were also placed on the railroad
right-of way, owned by the Massachusetts Department of Transportation,
in the form of signage to prevent the potential exposure to any future
utility workers. The property owners are required comply with the
institutional controls for the Site; this will be verified during the
Five-Year Reviews.
Cleanup Levels
The source control remedy at the Site was performed in accordance
with EPA-approved plans and specifications. No additional EPA
construction is anticipated at the Site. The source control remedial
cleanup levels (listed below) were set in the ROD based on commercial/
open-space reuse:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cleanup level
Contaminant (ppm)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benzo(a)pyrene.......................................... 2.1
Dioxin.................................................. 0.001
Arsenic................................................. 16.0
Pentachlorophenol....................................... 90.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
During the remedial action, if contaminants of concern (COCs) were
detected above the clean-up criteria listed above, excavation continued
horizontally and vertically until either: (1) Post-excavation
confirmatory samples met the clean-up criteria; (2) planned excavation
limits along County Street and the railroad right of way were met, or
(3) for vertical excavation, the water table was reached.
Post-excavation confirmatory sampling was performed in conjunction
with excavation activities from the bottom of excavation and ``clean''
perimeter embankment and tested for the COCs. Generally, as excavation
was completed in a grid cell area, confirmatory soil samples were
collected from the bottom and sidewalls of the excavation. Bottom
samples were comprised of a five-point composite sample collected from
the center and four corners of the excavation cell. Sidewall samples
were collected from the sidewalls of excavations when grids were
adjacent to the Site perimeter. If excavation sidewalls were greater
than three feet in depth, an additional sample was collected below this
interval to the bottom of the excavation. All samples collected and
analytical results are summarized in the Remedial Action Completion
Report, dated August 2011.
Operation and Maintenance
Institutional Controls
Institutional controls in the form of enforceable Notices of
Activity and Use Limitations (NAULs) were recorded with the deed on
properties associated with the Site, as listed below:
Northern Mansfield Property, 35 County St., Mansfield, MA [Map
19 Lot 210, Book 6160 Page 89] (Northern Bristol County Registry of
Deeds),
Southern Mansfield Property, Morrow St., Mansfield, MA [Map 18
Lot 230-235, Book 2164 Page 64] (Northern Bristol County Registry of
Deeds), and
Foxborough Property, 41 County St., Foxborough, MA [Map 158 Lot
4060, Book 11412 Page 408] (Norfolk County Registry of Deeds).
The NAUL on each property specifies the current allowable and
prohibited uses of the property, and establishes limits and conditions
on the future uses of contaminated portions of the property. The
restrictions are different for each property, but generally restrict
the use of groundwater and subsurface soils where contamination remains
on the site. The NAUL provides information about the risks remaining at
the Site for current and future owners and interest holders. The NAULs
require that the site owner submit annual reports to EPA and MassDEP
regarding the status of the ICs. EPA will also assess site conditions
and interview town officials as part of the Five Year Review process to
confirm that only the permitted uses have taken place on the restricted
properties. Should there be violations of the restrictions contained in
the NAUL, the state has the authority to take an enforcement action
against any property owner.
In addition to NAULs, institutional controls in the form of signage
were used along the railroad right-of-way that intersects the Site
stating to contact the property owner before soils are disturbed. The
signage along the railroad right-of-way will be inspected periodically
at a minimum every five years as part of EPA's Five Year Review process
and/or during regular operation and maintenance activities conducted by
the state.
Long-Term Groundwater, Surface Water and Sediment Monitoring
The ROD required long-term monitoring of groundwater, surface
water, fish tissue and sediment, and operation and maintenance of the
low-permeability cover. As a result of changes to the remedy documented
in the ESD, the Hatheway and Patterson Operation and Maintenance
Manual, dated August 2017 requires semi-annual monitoring of
groundwater following the first five-year review, and sampling of
sediment and surface water at least once every five years following the
second five-year review. The 2017 Operation and maintenance (O&M)
Manual also provides an explanation for eliminating the fish tissue
sampling requirement which is primarily due to the lack of fish in the
Rumford River.
The ROD contains performance standards for on-site groundwater and
for groundwater at the boundary of the Site. If monitoring indicates
exceedances of the on-site groundwater performance standards, further
evaluation of the impacts to surface water and sediments is needed. If
monitoring indicates exceedances of the Site boundary groundwater
performance standards, the ROD requires an evaluation of whether off-
site receptors are at risk. MassDEP is the lead agency performing the
O&M, including the groundwater, surface water and sediment monitoring
for the Site.
[[Page 56894]]
Five-Year Review
Five-year reviews are required at the Site because hazardous
substances will remain at the Site above concentration levels that
would allow for unrestricted use and unrestricted exposure after the
completion of all remedial actions. Pursuant to CERCLA Section 121(c),
NCP Section 300.400(f)(4)(ii) and as provided in OSWER Directive
9355.7-03B-P, June 2001, Comprehensive Five-Year Review Guidance, EPA
must conduct statutory five-year reviews at the Site. The purpose of
these reviews is to evaluate whether the selected remedy remains
protective of human health and the environment. These five-year reviews
are required no less often than each five years after the initiation of
the remedial action. EPA may terminate these reviews when no hazardous
substances, pollutants, or contaminants remain at the Site above levels
that allow for unrestricted use and unlimited exposure.
The first five-year review was conducted in 2014, and found that
the remedy at the Hatheway & Patterson Superfund Site currently
protects human health and the environment. Several issues were raised
in the 2014 Five-Year Review and resolved as discussed below.
Institutional Controls: At the time of the 2014 Five-Year Review,
institutional controls were not in place. Between 2015 and 2017, all
institutional controls for the Site were implemented.
Sediment Sampling: An issue was noted with the sediment sampling
locations. To address the issue additional sediment sampling was
performed and the results showed contaminants concentrations in
sediment at the Site remain protective of human health and the
environment.
Fish Tissue and Surface Water Sampling: Fish tissue and surface
water sampling were not performed as required by the ROD. To address
this issue, the 2017 O&M Manual was written to reflect site conditions
(a lack of fish in the Rumford River) and to require sediment and
surface water monitoring at a minimum in conjunction with the five-year
reviews.
Groundwater: Two issues related to groundwater were raised in the
2014 Five-Year review. First, to determine whether a detection of a
contaminant of concern at an off-site well was site actual and
persistent; and second, to evaluate whether the active irrigation wells
outside the compliance boundary have impacted groundwater flow
directions. To address the first issue, additional sampling was
performed at the off-site well which showed the contaminant was below
state groundwater standards and was likely not site-related. To address
the second issue, EPA compiled a technical memorandum documenting that
the irrigations wells are not impacting groundwater flowpaths near the
Site. Also, periodic groundwater monitoring will continue to confirm
that off-site wells are not impacted.
The 2014 Five-Year Review found that the remedy at the Hatheway &
Patterson Superfund Site protects human health and the environment
because remediation of the soil (soil removal and on-site
consolidation) has been completed to cleanup levels that are considered
protective for the anticipated future use of the property, and there is
no current use of on-site groundwater which is classified as non-
potable. Institutional controls have been created and recorded to
restrict inappropriate land uses (including use of groundwater) and
protect the consolidation area cover. Operation and maintenance
activities have been initiated and will ensure that the consolidation
area and associated components of the remedy (e.g., groundwater
monitoring wells) remain in good condition. In addition, monitoring of
groundwater will continue to assess the protectiveness of the remedy.
Community Involvement
Throughout the Site's history, EPA has kept the community and other
interested parties apprised of Site activities through informational
meetings, fact sheets, press releases, and public meetings. A Community
Relations Plan was established before remedial actions were performed
at the Site to address issues of community concern and community
relation activities conducted by EPA. Activities included providing
information concerning the progress of remedial activities to
interested citizens and allowing those individuals or groups an
opportunity to provide comments as EPA conducts remedial activities at
the Site. EPA also issued press releases announcing the start and
conclusion of the five-year review and will continue to do so.
Determination That the Site Meets the Criteria for Deletion in the NCP
Remedial Design and Remedial Action (RD/RA) activities at the Site
were consistent with the ROD and EPA RD/RA Statements of Work provided
to USACE. RA plans for all phases of construction included a Quality
Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated October 2009 and QAPP Revision 1,
dated March 2010. The QAPP incorporated all EPA and state quality
assurance and quality control procedures and protocols (where
necessary). All procedures and protocols were followed for soil,
sediment, water, and air sampling during the RA. EPA analytical methods
were used for all validation and monitoring samples during all RA
activities. EPA has determined that the analytical results are accurate
to the degree needed to assure satisfactory execution of the RA, and
are consistent with the ROD and the RD/RA plans and specifications. All
Institutional Controls are in place and currently EPA expects that no
further Superfund response is needed to protect human health and the
environment, except future Five Year Reviews.
Operation and maintenance (O&M) activities were agreed upon by EPA
and the state following construction of the remedy. The operation and
maintenance activities are documented in the 2017 O&M Manual. The state
preforms O&M at the Site and will follow state quality assurance/
quality control plans associated with the 2017 O&M plan.
This Site meets all the site completion requirements as specified
in OSWER Directive 9320.2-09-A-P, Close Out Procedures for National
Priorities List Sites. All cleanup actions specified in the ROD and ESD
have been implemented. Confirmatory ground-water monitoring and
institutional controls provide further assurance that the Site no
longer poses any threats to human health or the environment. The only
remaining activity to be performed is O&M that the state has
guaranteed. Five year reviews and monitoring will also be conducted at
the Site. A bibliography of all reports relevant to the completion of
this Site under the Superfund program is in the administrative record
for this deletion.
V. Deletion Action
The EPA, with concurrence of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts
through the Department of Environmental Protection, has determined that
all appropriate response actions under CERCLA, other than operation and
maintenance, monitoring, and five-year reviews have been completed.
Therefore, EPA is deleting the Site from the NPL.
Because EPA considers this action to be noncontroversial and
routine, EPA is taking it without prior publication. This action will
be effective January 30, 2018 unless EPA receives adverse comments by
January 2, 2018. If adverse comments are received within the 30-day
public comment period, EPA will publish a
[[Page 56895]]
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: October 18, 2017.
Deborah Szaro,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 1.
For the reasons set out in this document, 40 CFR part 300 is
amended as follows:
PART 300--NATIONAL OIL AND HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES POLLUTION
CONTINGENCY PLAN
0
1. The authority citation for part 300 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(d); 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 ``MA'',
``Hatheway and Patterson Company'', ``Mansfield''.
[FR Doc. 2017-25937 Filed 11-30-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P