National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan; National Priorities List: Partial Deletion of the Townsend Saw Chain Co. Superfund Site, 35054-35059 [2019-15419]
Download as PDF
35054
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 140 / Monday, July 22, 2019 / Proposed Rules
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
The SIP is not approved to apply on
any Indian reservation land or in any
other area where EPA or an Indian tribe
has demonstrated that a tribe has
jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal
implications as specified by Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000), nor will it impose substantial
direct costs on tribal governments or
preempt tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dated: July 11, 2019.
Mary S. Walker,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
Jackie Mosby, Field and External Affairs
Division (7506P), Office of Pesticide
Programs, Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone
number: (703) 347–0224; email address:
OPP_NPRM_AgWorkerProtection@
epa.gov.
[FR Doc. 2019–15418 Filed 7–19–19; 8:45 am]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
I. What action is EPA taking?
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 170
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2017–0543; FRL–9994–33]
RIN 2070–AK49
Notification of Submission to the
Secretary of Agriculture; Pesticides;
Agricultural Worker Protection
Standard; Revision of the Application
Exclusion Zone Requirements
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notification of submission to
the Secretary of Agriculture.
AGENCY:
This document notifies the
public as required by the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide
Act (FIFRA) that the EPA Administrator
has forwarded to the Secretary of the
United States Department of Agriculture
(USDA) a draft regulatory document
concerning ‘‘Pesticides; Agricultural
Worker Protection Standard; Revision of
the Application Exclusion Zone
Requirements.’’ The draft regulatory
document is not available to the public
until after it has been signed and made
available by EPA.
DATES: See Unit I. under SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION.
ADDRESSES: The docket for this action,
identified by docket identification (ID)
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2017–0543, is
SUMMARY:
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
available at https://www.regulations.gov
or at the Office of Pesticide Programs
Regulatory Docket (OPP Docket) in the
Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William
Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460–0001. The Public Reading Room
is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number for the
Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744,
and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is (703) 305–5805. Please review
the visitor instructions and additional
information about the docket available
at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:59 Jul 19, 2019
Jkt 247001
Section 25(a)(2)(A) of FIFRA requires
the EPA Administrator to provide the
Secretary of USDA with a copy of any
draft proposed rule at least 60 days
before signing it in proposed form for
publication in the Federal Register. The
draft proposed rule is not available to
the public until after it has been signed
by EPA. If the Secretary of USDA
comments in writing regarding the draft
proposed rule within 30 days after
receiving it, the EPA Administrator
shall include the comments of the
Secretary of USDA and the EPA
Administrator’s response to those
comments with the proposed rule that
publishes in the Federal Register. If the
Secretary of USDA does not comment in
writing within 30 days after receiving
the draft proposed rule, the EPA
Administrator may sign the proposed
rule for publication in the Federal
Register any time after the 30-day
period.
II. Do any Statutory and Executive
Order reviews apply to this
notification?
No. This document is merely a
notification of submission to the
Secretary of USDA. As such, none of the
regulatory assessment requirements
apply to this document.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 170
Agricultural worker, Employer,
Environmental protection, Farms,
Forests, Greenhouses pesticides,
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Nurseries, Pesticide handler, Worker
protection standard.
Dated: July 12, 2019.
Edward Messina,
Acting Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. 2019–15371 Filed 7–19–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 300
[EPA–HQ–SFUND–1990–0010; FRL–9996–
76–Region 4]
National Oil and Hazardous
Substances Pollution Contingency
Plan; National Priorities List: Partial
Deletion of the Townsend Saw Chain
Co. Superfund Site
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of intent.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) Region 4 is issuing a
Notice of Intent to Delete the soil,
sediment, surface water, surficial
aquifer, and the intermediate aquifer of
this Site with the exception of a limited
area (5,000–8,000 square feet) of the
intermediate aquifer below the 1C clay
in the vicinity of monitoring wells
IMW–01B, MW–128, and OW–143 of
the Townsend Saw Chain Co.
Superfund Site (Site) located in Pontiac,
South Carolina, from the National
Priorities List (NPL) and requests public
comments on this proposed action. The
NPL, promulgated pursuant to section
105 of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is an
appendix of the National Oil and
Hazardous Substances Pollution
Contingency Plan (NCP). The EPA and
the State of South Carolina, through the
South Carolina Department of Health
and Environmental Control (SC DHEC),
have determined that all appropriate
response actions at these identified
media and/or parcels under CERCLA
except for five-year reviews, operations
and maintenance and monitoring have
been completed. However, this deletion
does not preclude future actions under
Superfund. All Site areas and media
will be included in this partial deletion
except for the groundwater in the
intermediate aquifer as specified above
which will remain on the NPL and are
not being considered for deletion as part
of this action.
DATES: Comments must be received by
August 21, 2019.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\22JYP1.SGM
22JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 140 / Monday, July 22, 2019 / Proposed Rules
Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID no. EPA–HQ–
SFUND–1990–0010, by one of the
following methods:
• https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the online instructions for submitting
comments. 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.
• Email: Joydeb Majumder, Remedial
Project Manager, majumder.joydeb@
epa.gov.
• Mail: Joydeb Majumder, Remedial
Project Manager, Superfund and
Emergency Management Division,
Superfund Restoration and
Sustainability Branch, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta,
Georgia 30303–8960.
• Hand delivery: USEPA Region 4
Superfund Record Center, Attention:
Tina Terrell, Records Center, Superfund
and Emergency Management Division,
Superfund Enforcement Branch, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta,
Georgia 30303–8960. Monday to Friday
7:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.; Phone: 404–562–
9121.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID no. EPA–HQ–SFUND–1990–
0010. EPA 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
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
ADDRESSES:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:59 Jul 19, 2019
Jkt 247001
https://www.regulations.gov website is
an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means the 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 the 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 the EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, the 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 the
hard copy. Publicly available docket
materials are available either
electronically in https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at:
(1) USEPA Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street
SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960,
Monday–Friday 7:30 a.m.–4:30 p.m.,
Contact Tina Terrell 404–562–8835; and
(2) Northeast Regional Library, 7490
Parklane Road, Columbia, South
Carolina, Monday—Thursday: 9:00
a.m.–9:00 p.m., and Friday–Saturday:
9:00 a.m.–6:00 p.m., Phone: (803) 736–
6575.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Joydeb Majumder, Remedial Project
Manager, Superfund Restoration and
Sustainability Branch, Superfund and
Emergency Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta,
Georgia 30303–8960, phone 404–562–
9121, email: majumder.joydeb@epa.gov
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. NPL Deletion Criteria
III. Deletion Procedures
IV. Basis for Intended Partial Site Deletion
I. Introduction
EPA Region 4 announces its intent to
delete the soil, sediment, surface water,
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
35055
surficial aquifer, and the intermediate
aquifer with the exception of a limited
area (5000–8000 square feet) of the
intermediate aquifer below the 1C clay
in the vicinity of monitoring wells
IMW–01B, MW–128, and OW–143 of
the Townsend Saw Chain Co.
Superfund Site (Site), from the National
Priorities List (NPL) and requests public
comment on this proposed action. 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
Site 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). This partial deletion of the
Townsend Saw Chain Co. Superfund
Site is proposed in accordance with 40
CFR 300.425(e) and is consistent with
the Notice of Policy Change: Partial
Deletion of Sites Listed on the National
Priorities List. 60 FR 55466 (Nov. 1,
1995). As described in 300.425(e)(3) of
the NCP, a portion of a Site deleted from
the NPL remains eligible for Fundfinanced remedial action if future
conditions warrant such actions.
EPA will accept comments on the
proposal to partially delete this Site for
thirty (30) days after publication of this
document in the Federal Register.
Section II of this document explains
the criteria for deleting Sites from the
NPL. Section III discusses procedures
that the EPA is using for this action.
Section IV discusses the soil, sediment,
surface water, surficial aquifer, and the
intermediate aquifer with the exception
of the intermediate aquifer below the 1C
clay in the vicinity of monitoring wells
IMW–01B, MW–128, and OW–143 of
the Townsend Saw Chain Co.
Superfund Site and demonstrates how it
meets the deletion criteria.
II. NPL Deletion Criteria
The NCP establishes the criteria that
the 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;
E:\FR\FM\22JYP1.SGM
22JYP1
35056
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 140 / Monday, July 22, 2019 / Proposed Rules
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. The EPA
conducts such five-year reviews even if
a Site is deleted from the NPL. The 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.
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
III. Deletion Procedures
The following procedures apply to
deletion of the soil, sediment, surface
water, surficial aquifer, and the
intermediate aquifer with the exception
of the intermediate aquifer below the 1C
clay in the vicinity of monitoring wells
IMW–01B, MW–128, and OW–143 of
the Site:
(1) The EPA consulted with the State
of South Carolina before developing this
Notice of Intent for Partial Deletion.
(2) The EPA has provided the state 30
working days for review of this notice
prior to publication of it today.
(3) In accordance with the criteria
discussed above, the EPA has
determined that no further response is
appropriate.
(4) The State of South Carolina,
through the SC DHEC, has concurred
with the deletion of the soil, sediment,
surface water, surficial aquifer, and the
intermediate aquifer with the exception
of the intermediate aquifer below the 1C
clay in the vicinity of monitoring wells
IMW–01B, MW–128, and OW–143 of
the Townsend Saw Chain Co.
Superfund Site, from the NPL.
(5) Concurrently, with the publication
of this Notice of Intent for Partial
Deletion in the Federal Register, a
notice is being published in a major
local newspaper, the Greenville News.
The newspaper announces the 30-day
public comment period concerning the
Notice of Intent for Partial Deletion of
the Site from the NPL.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:59 Jul 19, 2019
Jkt 247001
(6) The EPA placed copies of
documents supporting the proposed
partial deletion in the deletion docket,
made these items available for public
inspection, and copying at the Site
information repositories identified
above.
If comments are received within the
30-day comment period on this
document, EPA will evaluate and
respond accordingly to the comments
before making a final decision to
partially delete the soil, sediment,
surface water, surficial aquifer, and the
intermediate aquifer with the exception
of the intermediate aquifer below the 1C
clay in the vicinity of monitoring wells
IMW–01B, MW–128, and OW–143 of
the Townsend Saw Chain Co.
Superfund Site. If necessary, the EPA
will prepare a Responsiveness Summary
to address any significant public
comments received. After the public
comment period, if EPA determines it is
still appropriate to delete the soil,
sediment, surface water, surficial
aquifer, and the intermediate aquifer
with the exception of the intermediate
aquifer below the 1C clay in the vicinity
of monitoring wells IMW–01B, MW–
128, and OW–143 of the Townsend Saw
Chain Co. Superfund Site, the Regional
Administrator will publish a final
Notice of Partial Deletion in the Federal
Register. Public notices, public
submissions and copies of the
Responsiveness Summary, if prepared,
will be made available to interested
parties and included in the Site
information repositories listed above.
Deletion of a portion of a Site from the
NPL does not itself create, alter, or
revoke any individual’s rights or
obligations. Deletion of a portion of a
Site from the NPL does not in any way
alter the 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 Intended Partial Site
Deletion
The following information provides
the EPA’s rationale for deleting the soil,
sediment, surface water, surficial
aquifer, and the intermediate aquifer
with the exception of the intermediate
aquifer below the 1C clay in the vicinity
of monitoring wells IMW–01B, MW–
128, and OW–143 of the Site:
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Site Background and History
Due to contaminated soils, sediments,
groundwater, and surface water, the
EPA, EPA proposed listing the Site on
the National Priorities List (EPA ID:
SCD980558050) on June 24, 1988 (53 FR
23988), and finalized the listing on
February 21, 1990, (55 FR 6154), under
CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9601. The 50-acre
Site located in Pontiac, Richland
County, South Carolina was a small
manufacturing facility located
approximately two miles south of
Pontiac, South Carolina. Starting in
1971, Textron Inc., began utilizing the
facility for manufacturing the saw chain
component of chain saws. Between 1964
and 1981, under the Townsend Division
of Textron, Inc. and a previous owner,
Dictaphone Inc., waste rinse waters
from on-site plating and parts-assembly
processes were discharged to the ground
surface in a low-lying area adjacent to
the facility. These discharges are the
origin of the groundwater and soil
contamination. There is one sitewide
operable unit that includes soils,
sediments, and groundwater associated
with the waste water rinse releases from
the previous operation.
The Site consists of a 50-acre area
associated with a former metal products
Manufacturing facility and is referred to
as ‘‘the Site’’ in this report. The leading
edge of the contaminated groundwater
plume has also migrated to a 350-acre
parcel of undeveloped land located to
the northeast across Spears Creek
Church Road, which includes a 113-acre
Conservation Easement through the
Congaree Land Trust. This 350-acre
parcel is referred to as the ‘‘off-Site
area.’’ While the off-Site area is
technically part of the Superfund site,
for ease of understanding, the 50 acre
parcel is referred to as ‘‘off-Site’’ to
distinguish from the 50-acre area. The
Site has 2 underlying aquifers.
The portion of the Site being
proposed for deletion in today’s action
are soil, sediment, surface water,
surficial aquifer, and the intermediate
aquifer with the exception of the
intermediate aquifer below the 1C clay
in the vicinity of monitoring wells
IMW–01B, MW–128, and OW–143, for a
limited area (5000–8000 square feet) in
the vicinity of the three wells. Since
June 2016, all of the contaminated
groundwater plume has been
remediated to levels below the Safe
Drinking Water Act Maximum
Contaminant Levels (MCLs) except for a
limited area (5000–8000 square feet) in
the vicinity of three wells located in the
on-site area (IMW–01B, MW–128, OW–
143).
E:\FR\FM\22JYP1.SGM
22JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 140 / Monday, July 22, 2019 / Proposed Rules
Site-specific geological and
stratigraphic information was developed
during the installation of test borings
and monitoring well boring. Soils
underlying the Site can be divided into
three units; Unit I exposed at the surface
and consists of alternating layers of
sand, silty or clayey sand, and silt or
clay lenses. These various layers appear
to be hydraulically connected. Perched
water zones occur within the upper part
of Unit I. Unit II is a low-permeability
confining unit consisting of hard, dry,
kaolinitic silty clays or clayey silt. Unit
II appears to be laterally continuous on
the Site property. Unit III consists of
slightly silty, fine-to medium-grained
sand. Because only a few Site well
borings have penetrated into Unit III, its
hydrogeologic and stratigraphic
characteristics are not as well known.
Units II and III and the lower portion of
Unit I are part of the Middendorf
Formation. Sand strata within the
Middendorf are productive aquifers, and
the formation serves as a major aquifer
in South Carolina.
There is potential redevelopment of
the western portion of the Site west of
Spears Creek Church Road to
commercial property including retail
and other commercial uses. AMBAC
Intermodal (formerly American Bosch),
a manufacturer and supplier of fuel
injection equipment operates on
approximately five acres of the fifty-acre
Site. The remaining portion of the Site
east of Spears Creek Church Road has
been redeveloped to various commercial
uses.
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Remedial Investigation and Feasibility
Study (RI/FS)
In August 1991, the EPA entered into
an Administrative Order on Consent
with Homelite Division of Textron, Inc.
to perform a Remedial Investigation/
Feasibility Study (RI/FS). Investigation
results indicated that hazardous
substances, including chromium and
volatile organic compounds (VOC) were
present in soil and groundwater at the
Site and groundwater and surface water
in the off-Site area.
A Baseline Risk Assessment (BRA)
was conducted in 1993. The BRA
concluded that, under the industrial
land use scenario that existed at the Site
in 1993, the Site did not present any
unacceptable human health risks via
any medium. However, under the
anticipated future land use scenario,
which assumed residential and
commercial land uses in the off-Site
area and continued industrial land uses
on the Site, excess human health risks
existed through contact with
contaminated ground water (e.g.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:59 Jul 19, 2019
Jkt 247001
ingestion, inhalation, and dermal
exposure).
The Feasibility Study, completed on
August 19, 1996, considered remedial
options including a Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
cap, solidification/stabilization, in-situ
chemical treatment, and excavation/
offsite disposal as alternatives to
address contaminated soils. The FS
considered groundwater use
restrictions/institutional controls,
groundwater extraction/treatment/spray
field discharge, groundwater extraction/
treatment/publicly-owned treatment
works (POTW) discharge, and in-situ
chemical treatment to address
contaminated groundwater.
Selected Remedy
On December 22, 1993, an Interim
Record of Decision (IROD) was issued
for the Site. The interim remedy
selected in the IROD was intended to
prevent the continued off-Site migration
of the chromium-contaminated
groundwater plume. The interim action
consisted of the following remedial
components:
(1) Planning and execution of a
hydrogeologic investigation that would
support the remedial design of an
Interim Action Pump and Treat System
(IAPTS). This system would, at a
minimum, prevent further off-Site
migration and enlargement of the
contaminant plume; and
(2) Expeditious design and
construction of such a system and
initiation of ground water pump-andtreat operations.
The EPA issued the ROD for the Site
on December 19, 1996. Based on the
results of the RI/FS and the Baseline
Risk Assessment, the EPA determined
that remediation of soils, groundwater,
and sediments would be required for the
protection of human health and the
environment.
The remedial action objectives
includes:
Soils
Prevent the leaching of contamination
into groundwater, which can contribute
to human health risk via groundwater;
Groundwater
(1) Prevent exposure to chemicals of
concern in groundwater which pose an
unacceptable human health risk;
(2) Reduce concentrations of
chemicals of concern, thereby restoring
potential use of the aquifer as a potable
water source; and
(3) Prevent or reduce the continued
discharge of contaminated groundwater
to surface water, such that surface water
quality standards are not exceeded.
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
35057
Surface Water
(1) Reduce contamination to levels
which (a) cannot pose ecological risk to
tributary flora and fauna, and (b) are
incapable of recontaminating tributary
sediment;
(2) Prevent exposure of the tributary
ecosystem to chemicals of concern, and/
or reduce the concentrations of
chemicals of concern such that no
unacceptable ecological risks are
present. The selected remedy, as stated
in the ROD, included several major
components and a contingency remedy.
The selected remedy includes:
Soil Treatment
(1) Excavation and removal of the
uppermost highly contaminated soils,
and treatment of surficial soils through
in-situ chemical treatment.
Groundwater Remediation
(1) In-situ chemical treatment of
ground water;
(2) Continued operation of IAPTS;
and
(3) Sediment removal action at the offSite area seep (to be performed upon
completion of the chromium ground
water cleanup.
Site Monitoring
(1) Continued quarterly sampling/
analysis of Site ground water.
(2) Additional quarterly sampling of
surface water in the unnamed off-Site
tributary. and
(3) Periodic sampling of treated Site
soils.
Response Actions
The Remedial Design and Remedial
Action were implemented by Textron,
Inc. through two Unilateral
Administrative Orders. The Site’s
principal exposure pathway of concern
was ingestion of groundwater.
Therefore, the soil cleanup goal was
based upon leachability to groundwater.
Although not prescribed in the Site’s
Interim Record of Decision,
approximately 75 tons of soils from
hotspot areas contaminated with
chromium, lead, and several other
heavy metals, were excavated and
disposed of properly in 1995 and 1996.
The excavations were located near the
northeast and northwest corners of the
manufacturing facility. Soils with
contamination above the cleanup goal
for hexavalent chromium had been
removed and no further soil remediation
was required based on currently
available data. Between June and
December 1995, a five-well IAPTS was
constructed and new treatment
equipment installed for the wastewater
treatment system. The system consisted
E:\FR\FM\22JYP1.SGM
22JYP1
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
35058
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 140 / Monday, July 22, 2019 / Proposed Rules
of the three original recovery wells
located along Spears Creek Church
Road, and two new recovery wells
located in the off-Site area. The IAPTS
began operating in December 1995.
Groundwater from these wells was
pumped to a treatment facility at the
manufacturing facility and treated in
electrochemical precipitation cells.
Treated groundwater was then
discharged to an on-Site, South Carolina
DHEC-permitted spray field.
Remedial design work for the in-situ
chemical treatment technology began in
May 1997 and was completed in
September 1999. Injection lines of wells
on 40-foot centers were used to place a
ferrous sulfate solution in contact with
chromium contaminated groundwater.
The solution converted the main
contaminant, hexavalent chromium,
into an inert and harmless type of
chromium mineral, which remains
safely in the subsurface. The 2001 ESD
established an updated chromium soil
cleanup number. Based upon this ESD,
no additional soil cleanup was
necessary.
In April 2002, the IAPTS was shut
down as a trial measure because it was
thought to be affecting groundwater
flow pathways and potentially affecting
chemical treatment activities. The
system has remained shut down since
this time. While in operation, the IAPTS
recovered over 550 pounds of chromium
from groundwater. During 2000–2003,
the in-situ treatment was implemented
along successive injection well lines,
proceeding northeastward across Spears
Creek Church Road and into the off-Site
area. Since 2002, the off-Site area was
largely the focus of treatment; however,
spot treatments have been performed on
small resistant areas within the former
plume area onsite. In September to
October 2004, seven additional
monitoring wells were installed in four
locations in the off-Site area. The wells
were installed to better characterize
groundwater flow direction both above
and below the 1C clay.
The Explanation of Significant
Difference (ESD) issued in April 2007,
was to add two remedy components to
the original remedy to enhance remedy
performance and to place the IAPTS
into stand-by mode. The two new
remedy components were institutional
controls (ICs) over the 39.79 acres
portion of the Site on the western side
of Spears Creek Church Road including
parcel 28800–01–03 and a portion of
parcel 28800–01–22 and installation of
a Permeable Reactive Barrier (PRB) in
the off-Site area to prevent discharge of
TCE and chromium contaminated
groundwater to surface water. The
objectives for ICs were to (1) restrict the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:59 Jul 19, 2019
Jkt 247001
use of ground water as a drinking water
source until MCLs are met for the Site
and off-Site area; (2) restrict the use of
the Site (property associated with
original facility operations) to
commercial, industrial, or light
industrial land uses only; and (3)
restrict the use of the off-Site area in
order to protect the future PRB from
damage. The IAPTS would remain in
stand-by mode until determined that it
needed to be reactivated or dismantled.
To enhance groundwater cleanup, a
bio-stimulation approach and a pilot
test of a combination of fatty acids and
ferrous sulfate injection system (creating
a BioBarrier) was conducted in 2009.
Based on the results of the pilot study,
construction of the BioBarrier by
injection was initiated in 2010 in lieu of
the PRB proposed in the 2007 ESD. The
initial BioBarrier consisted of twelve
new wells for injection of the carbon
source substrate that were installed
along the top of the slope (upgradient
area) and three new injection wells in
the downgradient area in late 2011.
As of 2012, the BioBarrier had
reduced chromium concentrations in
the leading edge of the plume to below
MCLs. A second round of Phase 2
ferrous sulfate injections were
conducted in 2012 and completed by
April 2013. By mid-2013, the
combination of the BioBarrier and
upgradient ferrous sulfate injections, the
overall plume area had been reduced to
53,400 square feet from an original size
of 400,250 square feet. Since that time,
remedial activities at the Site have
largely consisted of installation of
injection wells and injection of the
carbon source amendment to address
residual areas of the plume. Since June
2016, all of the plume has been
remediated to levels below the MCL
except for a limited area (5000–8000
square feet) in the vicinity of three wells
located in the ‘‘on-Site area’’ (IMW–01B,
MW–128, OW–143).
In 2013, fourteen new injection wells
were installed. Seven injection wells
were installed in the perched
groundwater table in the western area of
the Site and seven injection wells were
installed in the BioBarrier area to
augment existing injection wells.
Cleanup Levels
The Remedial Design for the Soil/
Sediment remedy began in 1995 and
was completed in 1997 by the PRP with
EPA oversight. Soil cleanup levels for
chromium were attained by soil
removals conducted in 1996. As of April
2017, all groundwater monitoring wells
with the exception of IMW–01B, MW–
128, and OW–143 in the intermediate
aquifer below the 1C clay had attained
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
and maintained the groundwater
cleanup goals for a period of at least
eight separate and distinct sampling
rounds pursuant to the February 24,
2015, Textron Verification Monitoring
Strategy.
Semi-annual sampling of surface
water and sediments in the tributary to
Spears Creek have demonstrated a
declining trend in (contaminant or
chromium) concentrations over the past
eight years as groundwater remediation
progressed. The ESD did not establish a
chromium cleanup goal for sediment.
The 2010 Five-Year review referenced
the Ecotox threshold of 81 mg/kg for
total chromium. Chromium
concentrations are below screening
values in 11 of 12 samples analyzed at
4 locations and any sporadic
exceedances do not present significant
risks to ecological receptors. No
additional response action for
chromium in sediments was required.
The Ambient Water Quality Criteria
(AWQC) for surface water for ecological
protection for hexavalent chromium is
11 ug/L and the AWQC for trivalent
chromium is 74 ug/L which are
typically adjusted for hardness. The
2001 ESD set the stream cleanup goal as
40 ug/L which was retained in the 2010
and 2015 five-year reviews. As of July
2016, surface water sampling results for
total and hexavalent chromium had
been well below that level for eight
sampling events and below detection
levels for six sampling events.
Operation and Maintenance
EPA approved an Operations,
Maintenance, and Performance
Monitoring Plan for the Site in August
2001. This plan encompasses the
operation and maintenance of both the
in-situ chemical injection treatment and
pump-and-treat systems. The Plan was
revised in March 2002, to shut down the
IAPTS as a trial measure. The Site’s
2007 ESD further stipulated that the
IAPTS should be maintained in a standby condition for reactivation, if needed.
The 2010 five-year review listed as one
recommendation the evaluation of the
need to continue holding the lAPTS in
stand-by condition at the Site due to the
improved performance of the in-situ
treatment. The November 22, 2010,
semiannual groundwater results
demonstrated two years of consecutive
reduction in the contaminant plume
size and contaminant concentrations.
In 2012, an assessment of historic and
recent volatile organic chemical
concentration data at the Site was
conducted for the three chlorinated
VOCs that had been detected over time
(perchloroethylene, trichloroethylene,
and 1,1 dichloroethylene). The data
E:\FR\FM\22JYP1.SGM
22JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 140 / Monday, July 22, 2019 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
evaluation determined that the initially
low concentrations observed at the Site
had declined over time due to
attenuation and the in-situ reductive
processes employed in the remediation.
Groundwater MCLs for the 3 VOCs are
met. The potential for vapor intrusion
issues was also evaluated using the most
conservative (95th percentile) and
median attenuation factors for soil
types. Allowable groundwater
concentrations were back-calculated
from USEPA indoor air Regional
Screening Levels, the indicated
attenuation factors, and Henry’s Law
Constants. All detections of
perchloroethylene and 1,1 DCE in the
most recent data were below the
allowable groundwater concentrations
calculated using the most conservative
attenuation factors. The most recent
TCE groundwater concentrations were
an order of magnitude below with the
allowable concentrations derived from
the median attenuation factors for
depths of greater than 5 meters which
corresponds with Site groundwater
depths (approximately 30 ft bgs).
Additionally, all VOC detections were
from wells screened below the middle
clay layer which provides a barrier to
vertical vapor migration or adjacent to
the Congaree Land Trust where
development would be prohibited.
There is no vapor intrusion pathway of
concern at the Site.
The monitoring wells located on and
around the Site are regularly sampled at
designated quarterly or semi-annual
intervals. Groundwater sampling at
monitoring wells will continue until all
the remedial goals for all contaminants
are achieved at the three remaining
monitoring wells that have not yet
attained Site cleanup standards. Future
groundwater restoration activities may
include additional subsurface injections
of ferrous sulfate and a blend of fatty
acids to address chromium MCL
exceedances in the intermediate aquifer
below the 1C clay in the vicinity of
monitoring wells IMW–01B, MW–128,
and OW–143.
Institutional Controls (ICs)
The 2007 ESD required ICs over the
39.79 acres portion of the Site on the
western side of Spears Creek Church
Road including parcel 28800–01–03 and
a portion of parcel 28800–01–22. The
restrictions limit soil and groundwater
use and restrict the property use to
commercial, industrial or light
industrial uses. Groundwater use is
prohibited for potable, irrigation or
other uses except with express written
consent of Textron, Inc. This was
implemented in a Declaration of
Covenants and Restrictions recorded on
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:59 Jul 19, 2019
Jkt 247001
Deeds recorded at the Richland County
Register of Deeds on February 9, 2007 in
Instrument #2007011804. The ICs are
recorded on the deed, are transmitted to
successors, and are verified during the
five-year Review process.
Five-Year Review
Previous five-year reviews were
conducted because hazardous
substances remained on Site above
levels which allowed for Unlimited
Use/Unrestricted Exposure and the Site
groundwater had not attained all
cleanup levels contemplated in the
Record of Decision (ROD) and
subsequent Explanation of Significant
Difference (ESD). Five year Reviews will
no longer be conducted at the portions
of the Site deleted from the NPL which
achieved Unrestricted Use/Unlimited
Exposure (UU/UV). Five-year reviews
will continue to be conducted for that
portion of the Site designated for
industrial and commercial uses. A
39.79-acre portion of the Site including
parcel 28800–01–03 and a portion of
parcel 28800–01–22 meets clean up
criteria, but has Institutional Controls,
requires five-year reviews and does not
meet Unlimited Use/Unrestricted
Exposure criteria. Five-year reviews will
continue for that portion of the
groundwater of the Site still on the NPL.
The last five-year Review was
completed in July 2015 and found the
remedy protective of human health and
the environment. There were no Issues
or Recommendations in the Five-Year
Review. The next Five-Year Review is
scheduled to be completed in July 2020.
Community Involvement
On June 12, 1991, April 14, 1992,
August 23, 2001, and June 6, 2006, EPA,
SC DHEC, and Textron representatives
conducted public availability sessions
for RI/FS kickoff, the interim
groundwater remedy ROD, and two
Explanation of Significant Difference
proposals addressing groundwater. On
August 31, 1993 and September 17,
1996, EPA, DHEC, and Textron
representatives conducted proposed
plan meetings. EPA conducted
community interviews during December
10–13, 1991, prior to the Site National
Priority Listing. EPA and DHEC
conducted community interviews for
the three Five-Year reviews in 2005,
2010, and 2015.
Determination That the Criteria for
Deletion Have Been Met
The EPA has followed procedures
required by 40 CFR 300.425(e) regarding
requirements for deletions. EPA
consulted with the State of South
Carolina through the SC DHEC. South
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
35059
Carolina issued a May 12, 2017,
concurrence letter indicating its
agreement with today’s proposed action.
The implemented remedy achieves
the degree of cleanup or protection
specified in the ROD and ESD for the
areas proposed for deletion. The
selected remedial and removal action
objectives and associated cleanup levels
for the areas proposed for deletion are
consistent with agency policy and
guidance. No further Superfund
response in the areas proposed for
deletion are needed to protect human
health and the environment.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Chemicals, Hazardous
waste, Hazardous substances,
Intergovernmental relations, Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Superfund, Water
pollution control, Water supply.
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(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.
Dated: June 19, 2019.
Mary S. Walker,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2019–15419 Filed 7–19–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 300
[EPA–HQ–SFUND–1994–0001; FRL–9996–
74–Region 4]
National Oil and Hazardous
Substances Pollution Contingency
Plan; National Priorities List: Partial
Deletion of the Escambia Wood—
Pensacola Superfund Site
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of intent.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) Region 4 is issuing a
Notice of Intent to Delete 50 acres of the
Escambia Wood—Pensacola Superfund
Site (Site) located in Pensacola, Florida,
from the National Priorities List (NPL)
and requests public comments on this
proposed action. The NPL, promulgated
pursuant to section 105 of the
Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is
an appendix of the National Oil and
Hazardous Substances Pollution
Contingency Plan (NCP). The EPA and
the State of Florida, through the Florida
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\22JYP1.SGM
22JYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 140 (Monday, July 22, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 35054-35059]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-15419]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 300
[EPA-HQ-SFUND-1990-0010; FRL-9996-76-Region 4]
National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan;
National Priorities List: Partial Deletion of the Townsend Saw Chain
Co. Superfund Site
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of intent.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 4 is issuing
a Notice of Intent to Delete the soil, sediment, surface water,
surficial aquifer, and the intermediate aquifer of this Site with the
exception of a limited area (5,000-8,000 square feet) of the
intermediate aquifer below the 1C clay in the vicinity of monitoring
wells IMW-01B, MW-128, and OW-143 of the Townsend Saw Chain Co.
Superfund Site (Site) located in Pontiac, South Carolina, from the
National Priorities List (NPL) and requests public comments on this
proposed action. The NPL, promulgated pursuant to section 105 of the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is an appendix of the National Oil and
Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP). The EPA and the
State of South Carolina, through the South Carolina Department of
Health and Environmental Control (SC DHEC), have determined that all
appropriate response actions at these identified media and/or parcels
under CERCLA except for five-year reviews, operations and maintenance
and monitoring have been completed. However, this deletion does not
preclude future actions under Superfund. All Site areas and media will
be included in this partial deletion except for the groundwater in the
intermediate aquifer as specified above which will remain on the NPL
and are not being considered for deletion as part of this action.
DATES: Comments must be received by August 21, 2019.
[[Page 35055]]
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID no. EPA-HQ-
SFUND-1990-0010, by one of the following methods:
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions
for submitting comments. 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.
Email: Joydeb Majumder, Remedial Project Manager,
[email protected].
Mail: Joydeb Majumder, Remedial Project Manager, Superfund
and Emergency Management Division, Superfund Restoration and
Sustainability Branch, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4,
61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
Hand delivery: USEPA Region 4 Superfund Record Center,
Attention: Tina Terrell, Records Center, Superfund and Emergency
Management Division, Superfund Enforcement Branch, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. Monday to Friday 7:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.; Phone: 404-562-
9121.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID no. EPA-HQ-SFUND-
1990-0010. EPA 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 website is
an ``anonymous access'' system, which means the 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 the 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 the EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, the
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 the hard
copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either
electronically in https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at:
(1) USEPA Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-
8960, Monday-Friday 7:30 a.m.-4:30 p.m., Contact Tina Terrell 404-562-
8835; and
(2) Northeast Regional Library, 7490 Parklane Road, Columbia, South
Carolina, Monday--Thursday: 9:00 a.m.-9:00 p.m., and Friday-Saturday:
9:00 a.m.-6:00 p.m., Phone: (803) 736-6575.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joydeb Majumder, Remedial Project
Manager, Superfund Restoration and Sustainability Branch, Superfund and
Emergency Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960, phone 404-
562-9121, email: [email protected]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. NPL Deletion Criteria
III. Deletion Procedures
IV. Basis for Intended Partial Site Deletion
I. Introduction
EPA Region 4 announces its intent to delete the soil, sediment,
surface water, surficial aquifer, and the intermediate aquifer with the
exception of a limited area (5000-8000 square feet) of the intermediate
aquifer below the 1C clay in the vicinity of monitoring wells IMW-01B,
MW-128, and OW-143 of the Townsend Saw Chain Co. Superfund Site (Site),
from the National Priorities List (NPL) and requests public comment on
this proposed action. 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
Site 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).
This partial deletion of the Townsend Saw Chain Co. Superfund Site is
proposed in accordance with 40 CFR 300.425(e) and is consistent with
the Notice of Policy Change: Partial Deletion of Sites Listed on the
National Priorities List. 60 FR 55466 (Nov. 1, 1995). As described in
300.425(e)(3) of the NCP, a portion of a Site deleted from the NPL
remains eligible for Fund-financed remedial action if future conditions
warrant such actions.
EPA will accept comments on the proposal to partially delete this
Site for thirty (30) days after publication of this document in the
Federal Register.
Section II of this document explains the criteria for deleting
Sites from the NPL. Section III discusses procedures that the EPA is
using for this action. Section IV discusses the soil, sediment, surface
water, surficial aquifer, and the intermediate aquifer with the
exception of the intermediate aquifer below the 1C clay in the vicinity
of monitoring wells IMW-01B, MW-128, and OW-143 of the Townsend Saw
Chain Co. Superfund Site and demonstrates how it meets the deletion
criteria.
II. NPL Deletion Criteria
The NCP establishes the criteria that the 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;
[[Page 35056]]
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. The EPA conducts such five-year reviews even if a Site is
deleted from the NPL. The 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 soil, sediment,
surface water, surficial aquifer, and the intermediate aquifer with the
exception of the intermediate aquifer below the 1C clay in the vicinity
of monitoring wells IMW-01B, MW-128, and OW-143 of the Site:
(1) The EPA consulted with the State of South Carolina before
developing this Notice of Intent for Partial Deletion.
(2) The EPA has provided the state 30 working days for review of
this notice prior to publication of it today.
(3) In accordance with the criteria discussed above, the EPA has
determined that no further response is appropriate.
(4) The State of South Carolina, through the SC DHEC, has concurred
with the deletion of the soil, sediment, surface water, surficial
aquifer, and the intermediate aquifer with the exception of the
intermediate aquifer below the 1C clay in the vicinity of monitoring
wells IMW-01B, MW-128, and OW-143 of the Townsend Saw Chain Co.
Superfund Site, from the NPL.
(5) Concurrently, with the publication of this Notice of Intent for
Partial Deletion in the Federal Register, a notice is being published
in a major local newspaper, the Greenville News. The newspaper
announces the 30-day public comment period concerning the Notice of
Intent for Partial Deletion of the Site from the NPL.
(6) The EPA placed copies of documents supporting the proposed
partial deletion in the deletion docket, made these items available for
public inspection, and copying at the Site information repositories
identified above.
If comments are received within the 30-day comment period on this
document, EPA will evaluate and respond accordingly to the comments
before making a final decision to partially delete the soil, sediment,
surface water, surficial aquifer, and the intermediate aquifer with the
exception of the intermediate aquifer below the 1C clay in the vicinity
of monitoring wells IMW-01B, MW-128, and OW-143 of the Townsend Saw
Chain Co. Superfund Site. If necessary, the EPA will prepare a
Responsiveness Summary to address any significant public comments
received. After the public comment period, if EPA determines it is
still appropriate to delete the soil, sediment, surface water,
surficial aquifer, and the intermediate aquifer with the exception of
the intermediate aquifer below the 1C clay in the vicinity of
monitoring wells IMW-01B, MW-128, and OW-143 of the Townsend Saw Chain
Co. Superfund Site, the Regional Administrator will publish a final
Notice of Partial Deletion in the Federal Register. Public notices,
public submissions and copies of the Responsiveness Summary, if
prepared, will be made available to interested parties and included in
the Site information repositories listed above.
Deletion of a portion of a Site from the NPL does not itself
create, alter, or revoke any individual's rights or obligations.
Deletion of a portion of a Site from the NPL does not in any way alter
the 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 Intended Partial Site Deletion
The following information provides the EPA's rationale for deleting
the soil, sediment, surface water, surficial aquifer, and the
intermediate aquifer with the exception of the intermediate aquifer
below the 1C clay in the vicinity of monitoring wells IMW-01B, MW-128,
and OW-143 of the Site:
Site Background and History
Due to contaminated soils, sediments, groundwater, and surface
water, the EPA, EPA proposed listing the Site on the National
Priorities List (EPA ID: SCD980558050) on June 24, 1988 (53 FR 23988),
and finalized the listing on February 21, 1990, (55 FR 6154), under
CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9601. The 50-acre Site located in Pontiac, Richland
County, South Carolina was a small manufacturing facility located
approximately two miles south of Pontiac, South Carolina. Starting in
1971, Textron Inc., began utilizing the facility for manufacturing the
saw chain component of chain saws. Between 1964 and 1981, under the
Townsend Division of Textron, Inc. and a previous owner, Dictaphone
Inc., waste rinse waters from on-site plating and parts-assembly
processes were discharged to the ground surface in a low-lying area
adjacent to the facility. These discharges are the origin of the
groundwater and soil contamination. There is one sitewide operable unit
that includes soils, sediments, and groundwater associated with the
waste water rinse releases from the previous operation.
The Site consists of a 50-acre area associated with a former metal
products Manufacturing facility and is referred to as ``the Site'' in
this report. The leading edge of the contaminated groundwater plume has
also migrated to a 350-acre parcel of undeveloped land located to the
northeast across Spears Creek Church Road, which includes a 113-acre
Conservation Easement through the Congaree Land Trust. This 350-acre
parcel is referred to as the ``off-Site area.'' While the off-Site area
is technically part of the Superfund site, for ease of understanding,
the 50 acre parcel is referred to as ``off-Site'' to distinguish from
the 50-acre area. The Site has 2 underlying aquifers.
The portion of the Site being proposed for deletion in today's
action are soil, sediment, surface water, surficial aquifer, and the
intermediate aquifer with the exception of the intermediate aquifer
below the 1C clay in the vicinity of monitoring wells IMW-01B, MW-128,
and OW-143, for a limited area (5000-8000 square feet) in the vicinity
of the three wells. Since June 2016, all of the contaminated
groundwater plume has been remediated to levels below the Safe Drinking
Water Act Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) except for a limited area
(5000-8000 square feet) in the vicinity of three wells located in the
on-site area (IMW-01B, MW-128, OW-143).
[[Page 35057]]
Site-specific geological and stratigraphic information was
developed during the installation of test borings and monitoring well
boring. Soils underlying the Site can be divided into three units; Unit
I exposed at the surface and consists of alternating layers of sand,
silty or clayey sand, and silt or clay lenses. These various layers
appear to be hydraulically connected. Perched water zones occur within
the upper part of Unit I. Unit II is a low-permeability confining unit
consisting of hard, dry, kaolinitic silty clays or clayey silt. Unit II
appears to be laterally continuous on the Site property. Unit III
consists of slightly silty, fine-to medium-grained sand. Because only a
few Site well borings have penetrated into Unit III, its hydrogeologic
and stratigraphic characteristics are not as well known. Units II and
III and the lower portion of Unit I are part of the Middendorf
Formation. Sand strata within the Middendorf are productive aquifers,
and the formation serves as a major aquifer in South Carolina.
There is potential redevelopment of the western portion of the Site
west of Spears Creek Church Road to commercial property including
retail and other commercial uses. AMBAC Intermodal (formerly American
Bosch), a manufacturer and supplier of fuel injection equipment
operates on approximately five acres of the fifty-acre Site. The
remaining portion of the Site east of Spears Creek Church Road has been
redeveloped to various commercial uses.
Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/FS)
In August 1991, the EPA entered into an Administrative Order on
Consent with Homelite Division of Textron, Inc. to perform a Remedial
Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS). Investigation results
indicated that hazardous substances, including chromium and volatile
organic compounds (VOC) were present in soil and groundwater at the
Site and groundwater and surface water in the off-Site area.
A Baseline Risk Assessment (BRA) was conducted in 1993. The BRA
concluded that, under the industrial land use scenario that existed at
the Site in 1993, the Site did not present any unacceptable human
health risks via any medium. However, under the anticipated future land
use scenario, which assumed residential and commercial land uses in the
off-Site area and continued industrial land uses on the Site, excess
human health risks existed through contact with contaminated ground
water (e.g. ingestion, inhalation, and dermal exposure).
The Feasibility Study, completed on August 19, 1996, considered
remedial options including a Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA) cap, solidification/stabilization, in-situ chemical treatment,
and excavation/offsite disposal as alternatives to address contaminated
soils. The FS considered groundwater use restrictions/institutional
controls, groundwater extraction/treatment/spray field discharge,
groundwater extraction/treatment/publicly-owned treatment works (POTW)
discharge, and in-situ chemical treatment to address contaminated
groundwater.
Selected Remedy
On December 22, 1993, an Interim Record of Decision (IROD) was
issued for the Site. The interim remedy selected in the IROD was
intended to prevent the continued off-Site migration of the chromium-
contaminated groundwater plume. The interim action consisted of the
following remedial components:
(1) Planning and execution of a hydrogeologic investigation that
would support the remedial design of an Interim Action Pump and Treat
System (IAPTS). This system would, at a minimum, prevent further off-
Site migration and enlargement of the contaminant plume; and
(2) Expeditious design and construction of such a system and
initiation of ground water pump-and-treat operations.
The EPA issued the ROD for the Site on December 19, 1996. Based on
the results of the RI/FS and the Baseline Risk Assessment, the EPA
determined that remediation of soils, groundwater, and sediments would
be required for the protection of human health and the environment.
The remedial action objectives includes:
Soils
Prevent the leaching of contamination into groundwater, which can
contribute to human health risk via groundwater;
Groundwater
(1) Prevent exposure to chemicals of concern in groundwater which
pose an unacceptable human health risk;
(2) Reduce concentrations of chemicals of concern, thereby
restoring potential use of the aquifer as a potable water source; and
(3) Prevent or reduce the continued discharge of contaminated
groundwater to surface water, such that surface water quality standards
are not exceeded.
Surface Water
(1) Reduce contamination to levels which (a) cannot pose ecological
risk to tributary flora and fauna, and (b) are incapable of
recontaminating tributary sediment;
(2) Prevent exposure of the tributary ecosystem to chemicals of
concern, and/or reduce the concentrations of chemicals of concern such
that no unacceptable ecological risks are present. The selected remedy,
as stated in the ROD, included several major components and a
contingency remedy. The selected remedy includes:
Soil Treatment
(1) Excavation and removal of the uppermost highly contaminated
soils, and treatment of surficial soils through in-situ chemical
treatment.
Groundwater Remediation
(1) In-situ chemical treatment of ground water;
(2) Continued operation of IAPTS; and
(3) Sediment removal action at the off-Site area seep (to be
performed upon completion of the chromium ground water cleanup.
Site Monitoring
(1) Continued quarterly sampling/analysis of Site ground water.
(2) Additional quarterly sampling of surface water in the unnamed
off-Site tributary. and
(3) Periodic sampling of treated Site soils.
Response Actions
The Remedial Design and Remedial Action were implemented by
Textron, Inc. through two Unilateral Administrative Orders. The Site's
principal exposure pathway of concern was ingestion of groundwater.
Therefore, the soil cleanup goal was based upon leachability to
groundwater. Although not prescribed in the Site's Interim Record of
Decision, approximately 75 tons of soils from hotspot areas
contaminated with chromium, lead, and several other heavy metals, were
excavated and disposed of properly in 1995 and 1996. The excavations
were located near the northeast and northwest corners of the
manufacturing facility. Soils with contamination above the cleanup goal
for hexavalent chromium had been removed and no further soil
remediation was required based on currently available data. Between
June and December 1995, a five-well IAPTS was constructed and new
treatment equipment installed for the wastewater treatment system. The
system consisted
[[Page 35058]]
of the three original recovery wells located along Spears Creek Church
Road, and two new recovery wells located in the off-Site area. The
IAPTS began operating in December 1995. Groundwater from these wells
was pumped to a treatment facility at the manufacturing facility and
treated in electrochemical precipitation cells. Treated groundwater was
then discharged to an on-Site, South Carolina DHEC-permitted spray
field.
Remedial design work for the in-situ chemical treatment technology
began in May 1997 and was completed in September 1999. Injection lines
of wells on 40-foot centers were used to place a ferrous sulfate
solution in contact with chromium contaminated groundwater. The
solution converted the main contaminant, hexavalent chromium, into an
inert and harmless type of chromium mineral, which remains safely in
the subsurface. The 2001 ESD established an updated chromium soil
cleanup number. Based upon this ESD, no additional soil cleanup was
necessary.
In April 2002, the IAPTS was shut down as a trial measure because
it was thought to be affecting groundwater flow pathways and
potentially affecting chemical treatment activities. The system has
remained shut down since this time. While in operation, the IAPTS
recovered over 550 pounds of chromium from groundwater. During 2000-
2003, the in-situ treatment was implemented along successive injection
well lines, proceeding northeastward across Spears Creek Church Road
and into the off-Site area. Since 2002, the off-Site area was largely
the focus of treatment; however, spot treatments have been performed on
small resistant areas within the former plume area onsite. In September
to October 2004, seven additional monitoring wells were installed in
four locations in the off-Site area. The wells were installed to better
characterize groundwater flow direction both above and below the 1C
clay.
The Explanation of Significant Difference (ESD) issued in April
2007, was to add two remedy components to the original remedy to
enhance remedy performance and to place the IAPTS into stand-by mode.
The two new remedy components were institutional controls (ICs) over
the 39.79 acres portion of the Site on the western side of Spears Creek
Church Road including parcel 28800-01-03 and a portion of parcel 28800-
01-22 and installation of a Permeable Reactive Barrier (PRB) in the
off-Site area to prevent discharge of TCE and chromium contaminated
groundwater to surface water. The objectives for ICs were to (1)
restrict the use of ground water as a drinking water source until MCLs
are met for the Site and off-Site area; (2) restrict the use of the
Site (property associated with original facility operations) to
commercial, industrial, or light industrial land uses only; and (3)
restrict the use of the off-Site area in order to protect the future
PRB from damage. The IAPTS would remain in stand-by mode until
determined that it needed to be reactivated or dismantled.
To enhance groundwater cleanup, a bio-stimulation approach and a
pilot test of a combination of fatty acids and ferrous sulfate
injection system (creating a BioBarrier) was conducted in 2009. Based
on the results of the pilot study, construction of the BioBarrier by
injection was initiated in 2010 in lieu of the PRB proposed in the 2007
ESD. The initial BioBarrier consisted of twelve new wells for injection
of the carbon source substrate that were installed along the top of the
slope (upgradient area) and three new injection wells in the
downgradient area in late 2011.
As of 2012, the BioBarrier had reduced chromium concentrations in
the leading edge of the plume to below MCLs. A second round of Phase 2
ferrous sulfate injections were conducted in 2012 and completed by
April 2013. By mid-2013, the combination of the BioBarrier and
upgradient ferrous sulfate injections, the overall plume area had been
reduced to 53,400 square feet from an original size of 400,250 square
feet. Since that time, remedial activities at the Site have largely
consisted of installation of injection wells and injection of the
carbon source amendment to address residual areas of the plume. Since
June 2016, all of the plume has been remediated to levels below the MCL
except for a limited area (5000-8000 square feet) in the vicinity of
three wells located in the ``on-Site area'' (IMW-01B, MW-128, OW-143).
In 2013, fourteen new injection wells were installed. Seven
injection wells were installed in the perched groundwater table in the
western area of the Site and seven injection wells were installed in
the BioBarrier area to augment existing injection wells.
Cleanup Levels
The Remedial Design for the Soil/Sediment remedy began in 1995 and
was completed in 1997 by the PRP with EPA oversight. Soil cleanup
levels for chromium were attained by soil removals conducted in 1996.
As of April 2017, all groundwater monitoring wells with the exception
of IMW-01B, MW-128, and OW-143 in the intermediate aquifer below the 1C
clay had attained and maintained the groundwater cleanup goals for a
period of at least eight separate and distinct sampling rounds pursuant
to the February 24, 2015, Textron Verification Monitoring Strategy.
Semi-annual sampling of surface water and sediments in the
tributary to Spears Creek have demonstrated a declining trend in
(contaminant or chromium) concentrations over the past eight years as
groundwater remediation progressed. The ESD did not establish a
chromium cleanup goal for sediment. The 2010 Five-Year review
referenced the Ecotox threshold of 81 mg/kg for total chromium.
Chromium concentrations are below screening values in 11 of 12 samples
analyzed at 4 locations and any sporadic exceedances do not present
significant risks to ecological receptors. No additional response
action for chromium in sediments was required.
The Ambient Water Quality Criteria (AWQC) for surface water for
ecological protection for hexavalent chromium is 11 ug/L and the AWQC
for trivalent chromium is 74 ug/L which are typically adjusted for
hardness. The 2001 ESD set the stream cleanup goal as 40 ug/L which was
retained in the 2010 and 2015 five-year reviews. As of July 2016,
surface water sampling results for total and hexavalent chromium had
been well below that level for eight sampling events and below
detection levels for six sampling events.
Operation and Maintenance
EPA approved an Operations, Maintenance, and Performance Monitoring
Plan for the Site in August 2001. This plan encompasses the operation
and maintenance of both the in-situ chemical injection treatment and
pump-and-treat systems. The Plan was revised in March 2002, to shut
down the IAPTS as a trial measure. The Site's 2007 ESD further
stipulated that the IAPTS should be maintained in a stand-by condition
for reactivation, if needed. The 2010 five-year review listed as one
recommendation the evaluation of the need to continue holding the lAPTS
in stand-by condition at the Site due to the improved performance of
the in-situ treatment. The November 22, 2010, semiannual groundwater
results demonstrated two years of consecutive reduction in the
contaminant plume size and contaminant concentrations.
In 2012, an assessment of historic and recent volatile organic
chemical concentration data at the Site was conducted for the three
chlorinated VOCs that had been detected over time (perchloroethylene,
trichloroethylene, and 1,1 dichloroethylene). The data
[[Page 35059]]
evaluation determined that the initially low concentrations observed at
the Site had declined over time due to attenuation and the in-situ
reductive processes employed in the remediation. Groundwater MCLs for
the 3 VOCs are met. The potential for vapor intrusion issues was also
evaluated using the most conservative (95th percentile) and median
attenuation factors for soil types. Allowable groundwater
concentrations were back-calculated from USEPA indoor air Regional
Screening Levels, the indicated attenuation factors, and Henry's Law
Constants. All detections of perchloroethylene and 1,1 DCE in the most
recent data were below the allowable groundwater concentrations
calculated using the most conservative attenuation factors. The most
recent TCE groundwater concentrations were an order of magnitude below
with the allowable concentrations derived from the median attenuation
factors for depths of greater than 5 meters which corresponds with Site
groundwater depths (approximately 30 ft bgs). Additionally, all VOC
detections were from wells screened below the middle clay layer which
provides a barrier to vertical vapor migration or adjacent to the
Congaree Land Trust where development would be prohibited. There is no
vapor intrusion pathway of concern at the Site.
The monitoring wells located on and around the Site are regularly
sampled at designated quarterly or semi-annual intervals. Groundwater
sampling at monitoring wells will continue until all the remedial goals
for all contaminants are achieved at the three remaining monitoring
wells that have not yet attained Site cleanup standards. Future
groundwater restoration activities may include additional subsurface
injections of ferrous sulfate and a blend of fatty acids to address
chromium MCL exceedances in the intermediate aquifer below the 1C clay
in the vicinity of monitoring wells IMW-01B, MW-128, and OW-143.
Institutional Controls (ICs)
The 2007 ESD required ICs over the 39.79 acres portion of the Site
on the western side of Spears Creek Church Road including parcel 28800-
01-03 and a portion of parcel 28800-01-22. The restrictions limit soil
and groundwater use and restrict the property use to commercial,
industrial or light industrial uses. Groundwater use is prohibited for
potable, irrigation or other uses except with express written consent
of Textron, Inc. This was implemented in a Declaration of Covenants and
Restrictions recorded on Deeds recorded at the Richland County Register
of Deeds on February 9, 2007 in Instrument #2007011804. The ICs are
recorded on the deed, are transmitted to successors, and are verified
during the five-year Review process.
Five-Year Review
Previous five-year reviews were conducted because hazardous
substances remained on Site above levels which allowed for Unlimited
Use/Unrestricted Exposure and the Site groundwater had not attained all
cleanup levels contemplated in the Record of Decision (ROD) and
subsequent Explanation of Significant Difference (ESD). Five year
Reviews will no longer be conducted at the portions of the Site deleted
from the NPL which achieved Unrestricted Use/Unlimited Exposure (UU/
UV). Five-year reviews will continue to be conducted for that portion
of the Site designated for industrial and commercial uses. A 39.79-acre
portion of the Site including parcel 28800-01-03 and a portion of
parcel 28800-01-22 meets clean up criteria, but has Institutional
Controls, requires five-year reviews and does not meet Unlimited Use/
Unrestricted Exposure criteria. Five-year reviews will continue for
that portion of the groundwater of the Site still on the NPL. The last
five-year Review was completed in July 2015 and found the remedy
protective of human health and the environment. There were no Issues or
Recommendations in the Five-Year Review. The next Five-Year Review is
scheduled to be completed in July 2020.
Community Involvement
On June 12, 1991, April 14, 1992, August 23, 2001, and June 6,
2006, EPA, SC DHEC, and Textron representatives conducted public
availability sessions for RI/FS kickoff, the interim groundwater remedy
ROD, and two Explanation of Significant Difference proposals addressing
groundwater. On August 31, 1993 and September 17, 1996, EPA, DHEC, and
Textron representatives conducted proposed plan meetings. EPA conducted
community interviews during December 10-13, 1991, prior to the Site
National Priority Listing. EPA and DHEC conducted community interviews
for the three Five-Year reviews in 2005, 2010, and 2015.
Determination That the Criteria for Deletion Have Been Met
The EPA has followed procedures required by 40 CFR 300.425(e)
regarding requirements for deletions. EPA consulted with the State of
South Carolina through the SC DHEC. South Carolina issued a May 12,
2017, concurrence letter indicating its agreement with today's proposed
action.
The implemented remedy achieves the degree of cleanup or protection
specified in the ROD and ESD for the areas proposed for deletion. The
selected remedial and removal action objectives and associated cleanup
levels for the areas proposed for deletion are consistent with agency
policy and guidance. No further Superfund response in the areas
proposed for deletion are needed to protect human health and the
environment.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Chemicals,
Hazardous waste, Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental relations,
Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Superfund, Water
pollution control, Water supply.
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(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.
Dated: June 19, 2019.
Mary S. Walker,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2019-15419 Filed 7-19-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P