National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan; National Priorities List: Deletion of the Intermountain Waste Oil Refinery Superfund Site, 35356-35360 [2019-15662]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
35356
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 141 / Tuesday, July 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules
federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a federalism summary
impact statement. A federalism
summary impact statement is not
required.
H. Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988)
This rule complies with the
requirements of E.O. 12988.
Specifically, this rule: (a) Meets the
criteria of section 3(a) requiring that all
regulations be reviewed to eliminate
errors and ambiguity and be written to
minimize litigation; and (b) Meets the
criteria of section 3(b)(2) requiring that
all regulations be written in clear
language and contain clear legal
standards.
I. Consultation With Indian Tribes (E.O.
13175)
The Department of the Interior strives
to strengthen its government-togovernment relationship with Indian
Tribes through a commitment to
consultation with Indian Tribes and
recognition of their right to selfgovernance and Tribal sovereignty. We
have evaluated this rule under the
Department’s consultation policy and
under the criteria in E.O. 13175 and
have determined there are no
substantial direct effects on Federally
recognized Indian Tribes that will result
from this rulemaking because BIA
consults on an individual basis with
each Tribe for which there is a change
in the status of their CFR Court.
jspears on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
J. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA),
44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., prohibits a
Federal agency from conducting or
sponsoring a collection of information
that requires OMB approval, unless
such approval has been obtained and
the collection request displays a
currently valid OMB control number.
Nor is any person required to respond
to an information collection request that
has not complied with the PRA. There
is no information collection requiring
OMB approval associated with this
proposed rule. A Federal agency may
not conduct or sponsor, and you are not
required to respond to, a collection of
information unless the form or
regulation requesting the information
displays a currently valid OMB Control
Number.
K. National Environmental Policy Act
This rule does not constitute a major
Federal action significantly affecting the
quality of the human environment. A
detailed statement under the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA) is not required because this is
an administrative and procedural
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:30 Jul 22, 2019
Jkt 247001
regulation. (For further information see
43 CFR 46.210(i)). We have also
determined that the rule does not
involve any of the extraordinary
circumstances listed in 43 CFR 46.215
that would require further analysis
under NEPA.
L. Effects on the Energy Supply (E.O.
13211)
This rule is not a significant energy
action under the definition in E.O.
13211. A Statement of Energy Effects is
not required.
M. Clarity of This Regulation
We are required by Executive Orders
12866 and 12988 and by the
Presidential Memorandum of June 1,
1998, to write all rules in plain
language. This means that each rule we
publish must:
a. Be logically organized;
b. Use the active voice to address
readers directly;
c. Use clear language rather than
jargon;
d. Be divided into short sections and
sentences; and
e. Use lists and tables wherever
possible.
If you feel that we have not met these
requirements, send us comments by one
of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES
section. To better help us revise the
rule, your comments should be as
specific as possible. For example, you
should tell us the numbers of the
sections or paragraphs that are unclearly
written, which sections or sentences are
too long, the sections where you believe
lists or tables would be useful, etc.
PART 11—COURTS OF INDIAN
OFFENSES AND LAW AND ORDER
CODE
1. The authority for part 11 continues
to read as follows:
■
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; R.S. 463, 25 U.S.C.
2; R.S. 465, 25 U.S.C. 9; 42 Stat. 208, 25
U.S.C. 13; 38 Stat. 586, 25 U.S.C. 200.
Subpart A—Application; Jurisdiction
■
2. Revise § 11.100 to read as follows:
§ 11.100 Where are Courts of Indian
Offenses established?
(a) A list of the areas in Indian
Country where Courts of Indian
Offenses are established is available on
the Bureau of Indian Affairs website
(www.bia.gov) and is published
periodically in the Federal Register.
(b) The Director, Bureau of Indian
Affairs, will maintain on the Bureau of
Indian Affairs website (www.bia.gov) an
updated list of the areas in Indian
Country where Courts of Indian
Offenses are established and, upon any
change to the list, will publish notice of
the change in the Federal Register with
an updated complete list.
■ 3. Revise § 11.104(a) introductory text
to read as follows:
§ 11.104
When does this part apply?
(a) The regulations in this part
continue to apply to each area in Indian
Country listed in accordance with
§ 11.100 until either:
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: June 25, 2019.
Tara Sweeney,
Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2019–15549 Filed 7–22–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4337–15–P
N. Public Availability of Comments
Before including your address, phone
number, email address, or other
personal identifying information in your
comment, you should be aware that
your entire comment—including your
personal identifying information—may
be made publicly available at any time.
While you can ask us in your comment
to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we
cannot guarantee that we will be able to
do so.
List of Subjects in 25 CFR Part 11
Courts, Indians-law.
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, the Department of the
Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs,
proposes to amend 25 CFR part 11 as
follows:
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 300
[EPA–HQ–SFUND–2000–0007; FRL–9997–
04–Region 8]
National Oil and Hazardous
Substances Pollution Contingency
Plan; National Priorities List: Deletion
of the Intermountain Waste Oil
Refinery Superfund Site
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of intent.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) Region 8 is issuing a
Notice of Intent to Delete Intermountain
Waste Oil Refinery Superfund Site (Site)
located in Bountiful City, Davis County,
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\23JYP1.SGM
23JYP1
jspears on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 141 / Tuesday, July 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules
Utah, 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 Utah, through the Utah
Department of Environmental Quality
(UDEQ), have determined that all
appropriate response actions under
CERCLA, other than operation and
maintenance and five-year reviews,
have been completed. However, this
deletion does not preclude future
actions under Superfund.
DATES: Comments must be received by
August 22, 2019.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID no. EPA–HQ–
SFUND–2000–0007 by one of the
following methods:
• https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
on-line 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: waterman.erna@epa.gov.
• Mail: Erna Waterman, Remedial
Project Manager, U.S. EPA, Region 8,
Mail Code 8SEM–RB, 1595 Wynkoop
Street, Denver, CO 80202–1129.
• Hand delivery: U.S. EPA, Region 8
1595 Wynkoop Street, Mailcode: SEM–
RB, Denver, CO 80202–1129. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the
Docket’s normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made
for deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID no. EPA–HQ–SFUND–2000–
0007. The https://www.regulations.gov
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:30 Jul 22, 2019
Jkt 247001
website is an ‘‘anonymous access’’
system, which means EPA will not
know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the
body of your comment. If you send an
email comment directly to EPA without
going through https://
www.regulations.gov, your email
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
Docket: All documents in the docket
are listed in the https://
www.regulations.gov index. Although
listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material,
will be publicly available only in the
hard copy. Publicly available docket
materials are available either
electronically in https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at:
Utah Department of Environmental
Quality, 168 North 1950 West, Salt Lake
City, UT 84116; Phone: (801–944–7641);
Hours: M–Th: 9 a.m.–9 p.m.; Fri–Sat:
9:00 a.m.–5:30 p.m.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Erna
Waterman, Remedial Project Manager,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 8, Mailcode: SEM–RB, Denver,
CO 80202, (303) 312–6762, email:
waterman.erna@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. NPL Deletion Criteria
III. Deletion Procedures
IV. Basis for Intended Site Deletion
I. Introduction
EPA Region 8 announces its intent to
delete the Intermountain Waste Oil
Refinery Superfund 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
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
35357
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 40 CFR
300.425(e)(3) of the NCP, sites deleted
from the NPL remain eligible for Fundfinanced remedial actions if future
conditions warrant such actions.
EPA will accept comments on the
proposal to delete this Site for thirty
(30) days after publication of this
document in the Federal Register.
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 Intermountain Waste
Oil Refinery Superfund Site and
demonstrates how it meets the deletion
criteria.
II. NPL Deletion Criteria
The NCP establishes the criteria that
EPA uses to delete sites from the NPL.
In accordance with 40 CFR 300.425(e),
sites may be deleted from the NPL
where no further response is
appropriate. In making such a
determination pursuant to 40 CFR
300.425(e), EPA will consider, in
consultation with the State, whether any
of the following criteria have been met:
i. Responsible parties or other persons
have implemented all appropriate
response actions required;
ii. All appropriate Fund-financed
response under CERCLA has been
implemented, and no further response
action by responsible parties is
appropriate; or
iii. The remedial investigation has
shown that the release poses no
significant threat to public health or the
environment and, therefore, the taking
of remedial measures in 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
E:\FR\FM\23JYP1.SGM
23JYP1
35358
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 141 / Tuesday, July 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules
IV. Basis for Intended Site Deletion
application of the hazard ranking
system.
jspears on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
III. Deletion Procedures
The following procedures apply to
deletion of the Site:
(1) EPA consulted with the State
before developing this Notice of Intent
to Delete.
(2) EPA has provided the state 30
working days for review of this notice
prior to publication of it today.
(3) In accordance with the criteria
discussed above, EPA has determined
that no further response is appropriate.
(4) The State of Utah, through the
UDEQ, has concurred with deletion of
the Site from the NPL.
(5) Concurrently with the publication
of this Notice of Intent to Delete in the
Federal Register, a notice is being
published in a major local newspaper,
the Davis Clipper. The newspaper
notice announces the 30-day public
comment period concerning the Notice
of Intent to Delete the site from the NPL.
(6) The EPA placed copies of
documents supporting the proposed
deletion in the deletion docket and
made these items available for public
inspection and copying at the Site
information repositories identified
above.
If comments are received within the
30-day public comment period on this
document, EPA will evaluate and
respond appropriately to the comments
before making a final decision to delete.
If necessary, EPA will prepare a
Responsiveness Summary to address
any significant public comments
received. After the public comment
period, if EPA determines it is still
appropriate to delete the Site, the
Regional Administrator will publish a
final Notice of Deletion in the Federal
Register. Public notices, public
submissions and copies of the
Responsiveness Summary, if prepared,
will be made available to interested
parties and in the site information
repositories listed above.
Deletion of a site from the NPL does
not itself create, alter, or revoke any
individual’s rights or obligations.
Deletion of a site from the NPL does not
in any way alter EPA’s right to take
enforcement actions, as appropriate.
The NPL is designed primarily for
informational purposes and to assist
EPA management. Section 300.425(e)(3)
of the NCP states that the deletion of a
site from the NPL does not preclude
eligibility for future response actions,
should future conditions warrant such
actions.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:30 Jul 22, 2019
Jkt 247001
The following information provides
EPA’s rationale for deleting the Site
from the NPL.
Site Background and History
The two-acre Superfund Site
Intermountain Waste Oil Refinery is
located in the City of Bountiful, in Davis
County, Utah. The site was originally
part of a brick manufacturing facility
that encompassed about 20 acres. In the
1950s, an asphalt business was operated
at the site. In 1957, a trucking business
that hauled various petroleum products
to customers opened and continued
operating for approximately 35 years
before closing in May 1993. During the
1970s, an oil blending business operated
on the property. The operation involved
blending green bottoms, purportedly a
fraction of crude oil with diesel fuel,
which was sold for dust control at coal
mines. Over the subsequent years, used
oil was treated onsite and was sent to
cement facilities for use as fuel in
cement kilns. Aboveground storage
tanks used in the operations had an
unlined secondary surface
impoundment. Waste sludge produced
in the operations was reportedly
disposed of in an offsite landfill, and
wastewater that may have remained
after the treatment process was boiled
off at the site.
The site owners began dismantling
the facility in 1993. Some of the waste
was consolidated into a waste pile of
approximately 100 cubic yards, located
on the east portion of the site. The
remainder of the site was covered with
approximately 2 inches of gravel-type
backfill. Due to unknown operations at
the site, the groundwater became
contaminated with several solvents,
mainly trichloroethylene (TCE) and
hydrocarbons. The source of the TCE
was processes which occurred in the
storage tank area or the laboratory
equipment.
The Site consists of two Operable
Units (OUs). OU1 addressed soils,
subsurface soils, and potential onsite
contaminant sources including tanks,
drums, and containers. OU2 addressed
contaminants found in the ground
water, mainly TCE, that were above
drinking water standards and the riskbased levels of concern. Investigations
at the Site showed that groundwater and
soils were contaminated with
processing and disposal of waste
products have resulted in contamination
of soils and groundwater at the Site. The
EPA proposed the site to the National
Priorities List (NPL) as The
Intermountain Waste Oil Refinery on
10/22/1999 (64 FR 56992) and listed the
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Site as final on in the NPL on 5/11/2000
(65 FR 30482). The EPA assigned the
site CERCLIS ID UT0001277359.
The first removal action of the
property occurred in August 2001.
Potential sources of soil and/or
groundwater contamination such as
laboratory chemicals, tanks, drums, and
sump contents, were removed.
Additionally, an underground storage
tank was removed during field work for
the installation of OU2 groundwater
monitoring wells.
Remedial Investigation and Feasibility
Study (RI/FS)
A Baseline Human Health Risk
Assessment (BHHRA), which also
included a screening level ecological
risk assessment, was completed for
OU1. The BHHRA evaluated risks to
potential workers and hypothetical
future residents and determined that
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in
soils could potentially accumulate
inside a building and create an
unacceptable risk. This risk was
primarily due to 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene
and 1,3,5-trimethylbenzene, with
smaller contributions from naphthalene,
hexane, and cis-1,2-dichloroethene in
soil at some locations. There were no
ecological concerns.
The OU2 BHHRA evaluated exposure
pathways for contaminated groundwater
at the Site for future or current onsite
workers and future residents. The
assessment looked at risks from the
inhalation and ingestion of
contaminated groundwater beneath the
IWOR site. Trichloroethylene was the
only contaminate of concern identified
in groundwater by the risk assessment.
Risks from exposure to contaminated
groundwater were determined to be
above a level of concern for non-cancer
and cancer risks.
Selected Remedy
EPA issued a Record of Decision
(ROD) for OU1, dated November 26,
2002, to address soils, subsurface soils,
and potential onsite contaminant
sources including tanks, drums, and
containers. Remedial action objectives
(RAOs) identified in the ROD include:
• Prevent exposure of workers and
future residents from inhalation of
contaminated vapors intruding from soil
to indoor air. Non-cancer risks should
be reduced to within or below a level of
concern (HQ<1); and
• Remove potential sources of soil
and/or groundwater contamination.
The remedy selected in the OU1 ROD
consisted of two components.
• Establishment of land use controls
that require buildings built, in whole or
in part, on the property to have a vapor
E:\FR\FM\23JYP1.SGM
23JYP1
jspears on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 141 / Tuesday, July 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules
mitigation system and require that soils
excavated during the building or other
construction activities will be managed
appropriately; and
• Removal of an underground storage
tank (UST).
EPA issued a ROD for OU2, on August
4, 2004, to address groundwater and
proper disposal of containers in the
garage. The RAOs identified in the ROD
consisted of the following:
• Restore the aquifer to beneficial use
(drinking water standards) within a
reasonable time frame;
• Prevent exposure to contaminated
ground water through ingestion of
contaminated ground water, or
inhalation of vapors during use; and
• Prevent the future contamination of
ground water that is currently
uncontaminated.
The drinking water standard of 5 mg/
L for TCE was established in the OU2
ROD as the cleanup level for restoring
the aquifer to beneficial use.
The components of the OU2 selected
remedy consisted of multiple
components.
• Dual phase extraction (DPE) and
treatment: Where effective in removing
contaminated vapors as well as
contaminated ground water, DPE will be
used. DPE involves pumping ground
water and soil vapors from the same
well. Where, or when, there are no
significant contaminated soil vapors
recovered through DPE, groundwater
pump and treatment will be used.
• Land Use Control, or Institutional
Control: The land use control will
prevent the installation of a drinking
water well on the property until
drinking water standards are met in the
ground water.
• Monitoring: A monitoring plan to
evaluate the effectiveness of the remedy
will be developed and implemented.
The plan will likely include sampling at
least four wells monthly for the first six
months, and quarterly thereafter.
• Treatment and Discharge: The
ground water that is extracted will be
treated by a treatment system that uses
granular activated carbon to remove the
contaminants. The treated water will be
discharged to a storm water drain or
other approved discharge point.
• Disposal of containers: There are
about 25 one to five-gallon containers
currently stored in the garage. A number
of the containers contain lead-based
paint, and most would be classified as
a hazardous waste for disposal
purposes. Proper disposal now will
prevent any potential future risks from
mismanagement of these containers.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:30 Jul 22, 2019
Jkt 247001
Response Actions
UDEQ and EPA have both led
different aspects of the remediation
work, as defined in a cooperative
agreement between EPA and UDEQ.
Remediation work was conducted in
three removal actions: 1. Removal action
for property redevelopment in 2001, 2.
DPE groundwater remediation from
2004–2006, and 3. the solar powered
MicroBlowerTM at monitoring well
MW–07 to remove TCE from the vadose
zone from 2013–2017.
In June 2004, a Dual Phase Extraction
(DPE) system was installed on wells as
part of a treatability study that was
completed during the RI for OU2. The
DPE system was shut down in February
2006 after groundwater goals were
reached. Groundwater data showed TCE
concentrations were below drinking
water standards for a period of
approximately 18 months. The system
was dismantled and removed from the
Site in October 2006 and semiannual
rebound monitoring and sampling
began. From October 2007 to May 2013,
TCE concentrations in groundwater
periodically exceeded the cleanup goal
and drinking water standard of 5 mg/L
in four monitoring wells. Based on these
exceedances and the findings of a
streamlined remediation system
evaluation, EPA reinitiated vapor
extraction in March 2013 by installing a
solar powered MicroBlowerTM at
monitoring well MW–07 to remove TCE
from the vadose zone. The goal of the
solar powered extraction system was to
remove the residual source of
groundwater contamination. Sample
results show TCE concentrations in
groundwater declined during the
operation of the solar panel extraction
system.
Institutional Controls
Institutional controls (ICs) were
required for both OU1 and OU2
remedies. For OU1, an Environmental
Notice and Institutional Control (IC) to
require buildings on the IWOR property
to have vapor mitigation systems was
filed with the Davis County Clerk and
Recorder’s Office on September 23,
2003. The State of Utah Department of
Environmental Quality has the authority
to enforce this IC. In 2007, the site was
sold to Bountiful Irrigation for
redevelopment. The garage, lab, and
house were demolished, and the site
was graded and all remaining debris
from the previous owners was removed.
A new office building and garage were
constructed, and the site continues to be
used as a commercial property for this
irrigation business. The office building
and garage constructed on the site have
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
35359
active sub-slab vapor mitigation
systems.
The IC for OU2 to prevent the
installation of a drinking water well on
the property until drinking water
standards are met in the ground water
was filed on July 8, 2005 by the Davis
County Clerk and Recorder’s Office. The
State of Utah Department of
Environmental Quality has the authority
to enforce this IC.
Operation and Maintenance
As noted, the OU1 ROD required the
establishment of ICs to prevent exposure
to contaminated materials and to require
State review of future changes to land
use. ICs that support commercial use
were adopted by the property owner
and the City of Bountiful. The 2013
Operations and Maintenance (O&M)
Plan consists of the groundwater
monitoring and sampling.
The O&M Plan states that once TCE
concentrations have been below 5 mg/L
for two consecutive monitoring and
sampling events, the project team may
elect to turn off the solar powered vapor
extraction system and perform quarterly
rebound monitoring. If over a period of
two years, no exceedances of 5 mg/L are
observed, then site closure can proceed.
As a result of abnormally dry and
drought conditions, rebound sampling
was not completed on a quarterly
schedule. However, groundwater
samples were collected in December
2015, April 2016, and February 2018,
and showed TCE concentrations were
below the cleanup goal and drinking
water standard of 5 mg/L for TCE. The
solar powered vapor extraction system,
installed at monitoring well MW–07,
was shut down and removed from the
Site in January 2017. The Final Close
Out Report for the IWOR Site was
signed on July 1, 2019.
Five-Year Review
Statutory Five-Year Reviews (FYR) of
the site are required because hazardous
substances remain on-site above levels
which allow for unlimited use and
unrestricted exposure. Three FYRs were
conducted in 2008, 2013 and 2018. The
2018 FYR found the remedy at the Site
to be protective of human health and the
environment, with no issues or
recommendations. The next five-year
review is scheduled to be completed by
September 2023.
Community Involvement
Community involvement activities at
the Site initially included establishing a
local presence by meeting with local
property owners and concerned
citizens. Outreach efforts included
community interviews, fact sheets,
E:\FR\FM\23JYP1.SGM
23JYP1
35360
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 141 / Tuesday, July 23, 2019 / Proposed Rules
letters, flyers, door-to-door visits, public
meetings, neighborhood meetings,
public comment periods and website
updates. The most recent interviews
were conducted in the spring 2017 and
2018 for the 2018 FYR. The EPA’s
Community Involvement criteria
associated with 40 CFR 300.425(e)(4)
requires EPA to conduct interviews and/
or gather community input.
The Site is fully developed for
commercial land-use. The successful
revitalization of this Site is sustainable,
provides valuable reuse, and elevates
the quality of life with revitalization for
years to come.
Determination That the Site Meets the
Criteria for Deletion
The implemented Site-wide remedy
achieves the RAOs specified in the OU1
and OU2 RODs for all pathways of
exposure. The selected remedy is
consistent with CERCLA, the NCP, and
EPA policy and guidance. No further
Superfund responses are needed to
protect human health and the
environment at the Site.
The NCP (40 CFR 300.425(e)) states
that a site may be deleted from the NPL
when no further response action is
appropriate. EPA, in consultation with
the State of Utah, has determined that
all required response actions have been
implemented and no further response
action by responsible parties is
appropriate.
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.
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: July 15, 2019.
Gregory E. Sopkin,
Regional Administrator, Region 8.
[FR Doc. 2019–15662 Filed 7–22–19; 8:45 am]
jspears on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:30 Jul 22, 2019
Jkt 247001
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 300
[EPA–HQ–SFUND–1990–0011; FRL–9997–
03–Region 8]
National Oil and Hazardous
Substances Pollution Contingency
Plan; National Priorities List: Deletion
of the Mystery Bridge Rd./U.S.
Highway 20 Superfund Site
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of intent.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) Region 8 is issuing a
Notice of Intent to Delete the Mystery
Bridge Rd./U.S. Highway 20 Superfund
Site (Site) located in Evansville, WY,
from the National Priorities List (NPL)
and requests public comments on this
proposed action. The NPL, promulgated
pursuant to 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 Wyoming, through the
Wyoming Department of Environmental
Quality (WDEQ), have determined that
all appropriate response actions under
CERCLA, [other than maintenance of
institutional controls and five-year
reviews], have been completed.
However, this deletion does not
preclude future actions under
Superfund.
SUMMARY:
Comments must be received by
August 22, 2019.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID no. EPA–HQ–
SFUND–1990–0011, by one of the
following methods:
• https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
on-line 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
DATES:
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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: Andrew Schmidt
(schmidt.andrew@epa.gov).
• Mail: Andrew Schmidt, Remedial
Project Manager, 8SEM–RB–SA,
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver,
CO 80202.
• Hand delivery: Andrew Schmidt,
Remedial Project Manager, 8SEM–RB–
SA, Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver,
CO 80202.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID no. EPA–HQ–SFUND–1990–
0011. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through https://
www.regulations.gov or email. The
https://www.regulations.gov website is
an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an email comment directly
to EPA without going through https://
www.regulations.gov, your email
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
Docket: All documents in the docket
are listed in the https://
www.regulations.gov index. Although
listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material,
E:\FR\FM\23JYP1.SGM
23JYP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 141 (Tuesday, July 23, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 35356-35360]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-15662]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 300
[EPA-HQ-SFUND-2000-0007; FRL-9997-04-Region 8]
National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan;
National Priorities List: Deletion of the Intermountain Waste Oil
Refinery Superfund Site
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of intent.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 8 is issuing
a Notice of Intent to Delete Intermountain Waste Oil Refinery Superfund
Site (Site) located in Bountiful City, Davis County,
[[Page 35357]]
Utah, 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 Utah, through the Utah Department of
Environmental Quality (UDEQ), have determined that all appropriate
response actions under CERCLA, other than operation and maintenance and
five-year reviews, have been completed. However, this deletion does not
preclude future actions under Superfund.
DATES: Comments must be received by August 22, 2019.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID no. EPA-HQ-
SFUND-2000-0007 by one of the following methods:
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow on-line 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: [email protected].
Mail: Erna Waterman, Remedial Project Manager, U.S. EPA,
Region 8, Mail Code 8SEM-RB, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, CO 80202-
1129.
Hand delivery: U.S. EPA, Region 8 1595 Wynkoop Street,
Mailcode: SEM-RB, Denver, CO 80202-1129. Such deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation, and special
arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID no. EPA-HQ-SFUND-
2000-0007. The https://www.regulations.gov website is an ``anonymous
access'' system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you
send an email comment directly to EPA without going through https://www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket
and made available on the internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact
information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you
submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to
consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special
characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the https://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in the hard
copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either
electronically in https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at: Utah
Department of Environmental Quality, 168 North 1950 West, Salt Lake
City, UT 84116; Phone: (801-944-7641); Hours: M-Th: 9 a.m.-9 p.m.; Fri-
Sat: 9:00 a.m.-5:30 p.m.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Erna Waterman, Remedial Project
Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8, Mailcode: SEM-
RB, Denver, CO 80202, (303) 312-6762, email: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. NPL Deletion Criteria
III. Deletion Procedures
IV. Basis for Intended Site Deletion
I. Introduction
EPA Region 8 announces its intent to delete the Intermountain Waste
Oil Refinery Superfund 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 sites that appear to present a
significant risk to public health, welfare, or the environment. Sites
on the NPL may be the subject of remedial actions financed by the
Hazardous Substance Superfund (Fund). As described in 40 CFR
300.425(e)(3) of the NCP, sites deleted from the NPL remain eligible
for Fund-financed remedial actions if future conditions warrant such
actions.
EPA will accept comments on the proposal to delete this Site for
thirty (30) days after publication of this document in the Federal
Register.
Section II of this document explains the criteria for deleting
sites from the NPL. Section III discusses procedures that EPA is using
for this action. Section IV discusses the Intermountain Waste Oil
Refinery Superfund Site and demonstrates how it meets the deletion
criteria.
II. NPL Deletion Criteria
The NCP establishes the criteria that EPA uses to delete sites from
the NPL. In accordance with 40 CFR 300.425(e), sites may be deleted
from the NPL where no further response is appropriate. In making such a
determination pursuant to 40 CFR 300.425(e), EPA will consider, in
consultation with the State, whether any of the following criteria have
been met:
i. Responsible parties or other persons have implemented all
appropriate response actions required;
ii. All appropriate Fund-financed response under CERCLA has been
implemented, and no further response action by responsible parties is
appropriate; or
iii. The remedial investigation has shown that the release poses no
significant threat to public health or the environment and, therefore,
the taking of remedial measures in 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
[[Page 35358]]
application of the hazard ranking system.
III. Deletion Procedures
The following procedures apply to deletion of the Site:
(1) EPA consulted with the State before developing this Notice of
Intent to Delete.
(2) EPA has provided the state 30 working days for review of this
notice prior to publication of it today.
(3) In accordance with the criteria discussed above, EPA has
determined that no further response is appropriate.
(4) The State of Utah, through the UDEQ, has concurred with
deletion of the Site from the NPL.
(5) Concurrently with the publication of this Notice of Intent to
Delete in the Federal Register, a notice is being published in a major
local newspaper, the Davis Clipper. The newspaper notice announces the
30-day public comment period concerning the Notice of Intent to Delete
the site from the NPL.
(6) The EPA placed copies of documents supporting the proposed
deletion in the deletion docket and made these items available for
public inspection and copying at the Site information repositories
identified above.
If comments are received within the 30-day public comment period on
this document, EPA will evaluate and respond appropriately to the
comments before making a final decision to delete. If necessary, EPA
will prepare a Responsiveness Summary to address any significant public
comments received. After the public comment period, if EPA determines
it is still appropriate to delete the Site, the Regional Administrator
will publish a final Notice of Deletion in the Federal Register. Public
notices, public submissions and copies of the Responsiveness Summary,
if prepared, will be made available to interested parties and in the
site information repositories listed above.
Deletion of a site from the NPL does not itself create, alter, or
revoke any individual's rights or obligations. Deletion of a site from
the NPL does not in any way alter EPA's right to take enforcement
actions, as appropriate. The NPL is designed primarily for
informational purposes and to assist EPA management. Section
300.425(e)(3) of the NCP states that the deletion of a site from the
NPL does not preclude eligibility for future response actions, should
future conditions warrant such actions.
IV. Basis for Intended Site Deletion
The following information provides EPA's rationale for deleting the
Site from the NPL.
Site Background and History
The two-acre Superfund Site Intermountain Waste Oil Refinery is
located in the City of Bountiful, in Davis County, Utah. The site was
originally part of a brick manufacturing facility that encompassed
about 20 acres. In the 1950s, an asphalt business was operated at the
site. In 1957, a trucking business that hauled various petroleum
products to customers opened and continued operating for approximately
35 years before closing in May 1993. During the 1970s, an oil blending
business operated on the property. The operation involved blending
green bottoms, purportedly a fraction of crude oil with diesel fuel,
which was sold for dust control at coal mines. Over the subsequent
years, used oil was treated onsite and was sent to cement facilities
for use as fuel in cement kilns. Aboveground storage tanks used in the
operations had an unlined secondary surface impoundment. Waste sludge
produced in the operations was reportedly disposed of in an offsite
landfill, and wastewater that may have remained after the treatment
process was boiled off at the site.
The site owners began dismantling the facility in 1993. Some of the
waste was consolidated into a waste pile of approximately 100 cubic
yards, located on the east portion of the site. The remainder of the
site was covered with approximately 2 inches of gravel[hyphen]type
backfill. Due to unknown operations at the site, the groundwater became
contaminated with several solvents, mainly trichloroethylene (TCE) and
hydrocarbons. The source of the TCE was processes which occurred in the
storage tank area or the laboratory equipment.
The Site consists of two Operable Units (OUs). OU1 addressed soils,
subsurface soils, and potential onsite contaminant sources including
tanks, drums, and containers. OU2 addressed contaminants found in the
ground water, mainly TCE, that were above drinking water standards and
the risk-based levels of concern. Investigations at the Site showed
that groundwater and soils were contaminated with processing and
disposal of waste products have resulted in contamination of soils and
groundwater at the Site. The EPA proposed the site to the National
Priorities List (NPL) as The Intermountain Waste Oil Refinery on 10/22/
1999 (64 FR 56992) and listed the Site as final on in the NPL on 5/11/
2000 (65 FR 30482). The EPA assigned the site CERCLIS ID UT0001277359.
The first removal action of the property occurred in August 2001.
Potential sources of soil and/or groundwater contamination such as
laboratory chemicals, tanks, drums, and sump contents, were removed.
Additionally, an underground storage tank was removed during field work
for the installation of OU2 groundwater monitoring wells.
Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/FS)
A Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment (BHHRA), which also
included a screening level ecological risk assessment, was completed
for OU1. The BHHRA evaluated risks to potential workers and
hypothetical future residents and determined that volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) in soils could potentially accumulate inside a
building and create an unacceptable risk. This risk was primarily due
to 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene and 1,3,5-trimethylbenzene, with smaller
contributions from naphthalene, hexane, and cis-1,2-dichloroethene in
soil at some locations. There were no ecological concerns.
The OU2 BHHRA evaluated exposure pathways for contaminated
groundwater at the Site for future or current onsite workers and future
residents. The assessment looked at risks from the inhalation and
ingestion of contaminated groundwater beneath the IWOR site.
Trichloroethylene was the only contaminate of concern identified in
groundwater by the risk assessment. Risks from exposure to contaminated
groundwater were determined to be above a level of concern for non-
cancer and cancer risks.
Selected Remedy
EPA issued a Record of Decision (ROD) for OU1, dated November 26,
2002, to address soils, subsurface soils, and potential onsite
contaminant sources including tanks, drums, and containers. Remedial
action objectives (RAOs) identified in the ROD include:
Prevent exposure of workers and future residents from
inhalation of contaminated vapors intruding from soil to indoor air.
Non-cancer risks should be reduced to within or below a level of
concern (HQ<1); and
Remove potential sources of soil and/or groundwater
contamination.
The remedy selected in the OU1 ROD consisted of two components.
Establishment of land use controls that require buildings
built, in whole or in part, on the property to have a vapor
[[Page 35359]]
mitigation system and require that soils excavated during the building
or other construction activities will be managed appropriately; and
Removal of an underground storage tank (UST).
EPA issued a ROD for OU2, on August 4, 2004, to address groundwater
and proper disposal of containers in the garage. The RAOs identified in
the ROD consisted of the following:
Restore the aquifer to beneficial use (drinking water
standards) within a reasonable time frame;
Prevent exposure to contaminated ground water through
ingestion of contaminated ground water, or inhalation of vapors during
use; and
Prevent the future contamination of ground water that is
currently uncontaminated.
The drinking water standard of 5 [mu]g/L for TCE was established in
the OU2 ROD as the cleanup level for restoring the aquifer to
beneficial use.
The components of the OU2 selected remedy consisted of multiple
components.
Dual phase extraction (DPE) and treatment: Where effective
in removing contaminated vapors as well as contaminated ground water,
DPE will be used. DPE involves pumping ground water and soil vapors
from the same well. Where, or when, there are no significant
contaminated soil vapors recovered through DPE, groundwater pump and
treatment will be used.
Land Use Control, or Institutional Control: The land use
control will prevent the installation of a drinking water well on the
property until drinking water standards are met in the ground water.
Monitoring: A monitoring plan to evaluate the
effectiveness of the remedy will be developed and implemented. The plan
will likely include sampling at least four wells monthly for the first
six months, and quarterly thereafter.
Treatment and Discharge: The ground water that is
extracted will be treated by a treatment system that uses granular
activated carbon to remove the contaminants. The treated water will be
discharged to a storm water drain or other approved discharge point.
Disposal of containers: There are about 25 one to five-
gallon containers currently stored in the garage. A number of the
containers contain lead-based paint, and most would be classified as a
hazardous waste for disposal purposes. Proper disposal now will prevent
any potential future risks from mismanagement of these containers.
Response Actions
UDEQ and EPA have both led different aspects of the remediation
work, as defined in a cooperative agreement between EPA and UDEQ.
Remediation work was conducted in three removal actions: 1. Removal
action for property redevelopment in 2001, 2. DPE groundwater
remediation from 2004-2006, and 3. the solar powered
MicroBlowerTM at monitoring well MW-07 to remove TCE from
the vadose zone from 2013-2017.
In June 2004, a Dual Phase Extraction (DPE) system was installed on
wells as part of a treatability study that was completed during the RI
for OU2. The DPE system was shut down in February 2006 after
groundwater goals were reached. Groundwater data showed TCE
concentrations were below drinking water standards for a period of
approximately 18 months. The system was dismantled and removed from the
Site in October 2006 and semiannual rebound monitoring and sampling
began. From October 2007 to May 2013, TCE concentrations in groundwater
periodically exceeded the cleanup goal and drinking water standard of 5
[mu]g/L in four monitoring wells. Based on these exceedances and the
findings of a streamlined remediation system evaluation, EPA
reinitiated vapor extraction in March 2013 by installing a solar
powered MicroBlowerTM at monitoring well MW-07 to remove TCE
from the vadose zone. The goal of the solar powered extraction system
was to remove the residual source of groundwater contamination. Sample
results show TCE concentrations in groundwater declined during the
operation of the solar panel extraction system.
Institutional Controls
Institutional controls (ICs) were required for both OU1 and OU2
remedies. For OU1, an Environmental Notice and Institutional Control
(IC) to require buildings on the IWOR property to have vapor mitigation
systems was filed with the Davis County Clerk and Recorder's Office on
September 23, 2003. The State of Utah Department of Environmental
Quality has the authority to enforce this IC. In 2007, the site was
sold to Bountiful Irrigation for redevelopment. The garage, lab, and
house were demolished, and the site was graded and all remaining debris
from the previous owners was removed. A new office building and garage
were constructed, and the site continues to be used as a commercial
property for this irrigation business. The office building and garage
constructed on the site have active sub-slab vapor mitigation systems.
The IC for OU2 to prevent the installation of a drinking water well
on the property until drinking water standards are met in the ground
water was filed on July 8, 2005 by the Davis County Clerk and
Recorder's Office. The State of Utah Department of Environmental
Quality has the authority to enforce this IC.
Operation and Maintenance
As noted, the OU1 ROD required the establishment of ICs to prevent
exposure to contaminated materials and to require State review of
future changes to land use. ICs that support commercial use were
adopted by the property owner and the City of Bountiful. The 2013
Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Plan consists of the groundwater
monitoring and sampling.
The O&M Plan states that once TCE concentrations have been below 5
[mu]g/L for two consecutive monitoring and sampling events, the project
team may elect to turn off the solar powered vapor extraction system
and perform quarterly rebound monitoring. If over a period of two
years, no exceedances of 5 [mu]g/L are observed, then site closure can
proceed. As a result of abnormally dry and drought conditions, rebound
sampling was not completed on a quarterly schedule. However,
groundwater samples were collected in December 2015, April 2016, and
February 2018, and showed TCE concentrations were below the cleanup
goal and drinking water standard of 5 [mu]g/L for TCE. The solar
powered vapor extraction system, installed at monitoring well MW-07,
was shut down and removed from the Site in January 2017. The Final
Close Out Report for the IWOR Site was signed on July 1, 2019.
Five-Year Review
Statutory Five-Year Reviews (FYR) of the site are required because
hazardous substances remain on-site above levels which allow for
unlimited use and unrestricted exposure. Three FYRs were conducted in
2008, 2013 and 2018. The 2018 FYR found the remedy at the Site to be
protective of human health and the environment, with no issues or
recommendations. The next five-year review is scheduled to be completed
by September 2023.
Community Involvement
Community involvement activities at the Site initially included
establishing a local presence by meeting with local property owners and
concerned citizens. Outreach efforts included community interviews,
fact sheets,
[[Page 35360]]
letters, flyers, door-to-door visits, public meetings, neighborhood
meetings, public comment periods and website updates. The most recent
interviews were conducted in the spring 2017 and 2018 for the 2018 FYR.
The EPA's Community Involvement criteria associated with 40 CFR
300.425(e)(4) requires EPA to conduct interviews and/or gather
community input.
The Site is fully developed for commercial land-use. The successful
revitalization of this Site is sustainable, provides valuable reuse,
and elevates the quality of life with revitalization for years to come.
Determination That the Site Meets the Criteria for Deletion
The implemented Site-wide remedy achieves the RAOs specified in the
OU1 and OU2 RODs for all pathways of exposure. The selected remedy is
consistent with CERCLA, the NCP, and EPA policy and guidance. No
further Superfund responses are needed to protect human health and the
environment at the Site.
The NCP (40 CFR 300.425(e)) states that a site may be deleted from
the NPL when no further response action is appropriate. EPA, in
consultation with the State of Utah, has determined that all required
response actions have been implemented and no further response action
by responsible parties is appropriate.
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.
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: July 15, 2019.
Gregory E. Sopkin,
Regional Administrator, Region 8.
[FR Doc. 2019-15662 Filed 7-22-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
