National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan; National Priorities List

Federal RegisterJun 19, 1997

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 300

[FRL-5843-2]

National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan;

National Priorities List

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Notice of intent to delete the Hranica landfill site from the

National Priorities List and request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region III announces

its intent to delete the Hranica Landfill Site (Site) from the National

Priorities List (NPL) and requests public comment on this action. The

NPL constitutes Appendix B to the National Oil and Hazardous Substances

Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), 40 CFR part 300 which EPA promulgated

pursuant to Section 105 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response,

Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), as amended. EPA and the

Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP) have

determined that all appropriate CERCLA response actions have been

implemented and that no further cleanup is appropriate. Moreover, EPA

and the State have determined that remedial activities conducted at the

Site to date have been protective of public health, welfare, and the

environment.

DATES: Comments concerning the proposed deletion of this Site from the

NPL may be submitted on or before July 21, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted to Garth Connor, (3HW22), Project

Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 841 Chestnut Building,

Philadelphia, PA, 19107, (215) 566-3209.

Comprehensive information on this Site is available through the

public docket which is available for viewing at the Site Information

Repositories at the following locations:

U.S. EPA Region III, Hazardous Waste Technical Information Center, 841

Chestnut Building, Philadelphia, PA 19107, (215) 566-5363

Buffalo Township Municipal Building, 109 Bear Creek Road, Sarver, PA

19055, 412) 259-2648.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Garth Connor (3HW22), U.S. EPA

Region III, 841 Chestnut Building, Philadelphia, PA, 19107, (215) 566-

3209.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Introduction

II. NPL Deletion Criteria

III. Deletion Procedures

IV. Basis for Intended Site Deletion

I. Introduction

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region III announces its

intent to delete the Hranica Landfill Site, Buffalo Township, Butler

County, Pennsylvania, from the National Priorities List (NPL), Appendix

B of the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency

Plan (NCP), and requests comments on this deletion. The EPA identifies

sites that appear to present a significant risk to public health,

welfare, or the environment and maintains the NPL as the list of those

sites. Sites on the NPL may be the subject of remedial actions financed

by the Hazardous Substance Superfund Response Trust Fund (Fund).

Pursuant to Sec. 300.425(e)(3) of the NCP, any site deleted from the

NPL remains eligible for Fund-financed remedial actions if conditions

at the site warrant such action.

EPA will accept comments on the proposal to delete this Site from

the NPL on or before July 21, 1997.

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 how the Site meets the deletion

criteria.

II. NPL Deletion Criteria

The NCP establishes the criteria that the Agency 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 this determination, EPA, in consultation with the State, will

consider whether any of the following criteria have been met:

(i) Responsible or other parties have implemented all appropriate

response actions required; or

(ii) All appropriate Fund-financed responses under CERCLA have been

implemented and no further cleanup is appropriate; or

(iii) As set forth in the investigative findings for the Site, the

release poses no significant threat to public health or

[[Page 33382]]

the environment and, therefore, taking of remedial measures is not

appropriate.

(iv) In addition to the above, for all remedial actions which

result in hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants remaining

at the site above levels that allow for unlimited use and unrestricted

exposure, CERCLA 121(c), 42 U.S.C. 9621(c), the NCP at 40 CFR

300.430(f)(4)(ii) and EPA's policy, OSWER Directive 9320.2-09, dated

August 1995, provide that a subsequent review of the site will be

conducted at least every five years after the initiation of the first

remedial action at the Site to ensure that the site remains protective

of public health and the environment. In the case of this Site, EPA

conducted a ``five year review'' in April, 1997. Based on this review,

EPA determined that conditions at the Site remain protective of public

health and the environment. As explained below, the Site meets the

NCP's deletion criteria listed above. Five-year reviews will continue

to be conducted at the site until no hazardous substances, pollutants,

or contaminants remain above levels that allow for unlimited use and

unrestricted exposure. A site shall not be deleted from the NPL until

the state in which the site is located has concurred on the proposed

deletion. 40 CFR 300.425(e)(2).

All sites deleted from the NPL are eligible for further Fund-

financed remedial actions should future conditions warrant such action.

Whenever there is a significant release from a site deleted from the

NPL, the site can be restored to the NPL without application of the

Hazard Ranking System. 40 CFR 300.425(e)(3).

III. Deletion Procedures

Section 300.425(e)(4) of the NCP sets forth requirements for site

deletions to assure public involvement in the decision. During the

proposal to delete a site from the NPL, EPA is required to conduct the

following activities:

(i) Publish a notice of intent to delete in the Federal Register

and solicit comment through a public comment period of a minimum of 30

calendar days;

(ii) Publish a notice of availability of the notice of intent to

delete in a major local newspaper of general circulation at or near the

site that is proposed for deletion;

(iii) Place copies of information supporting the proposed deletion

in the information repository at or near the site proposed; and,

(iv) Respond to each significant comment and any significant new

data submitted during the comment period in a Responsiveness Summary.

If appropriate, after consideration of comments received during the

public comment period, EPA then publishes a notice of deletion in the

Federal Register and places the final deletion package, including the

Responsiveness Summary, in the Site repositories. Deletion of sites

from the NPL does not itself create, alter, or revoke any individual's

rights or obligations. The NPL is designed primarily for informational

purposes and to assist Agency management. As stated in Section II of

this document, Sec. 300.425(e)(3) of the NCP provides that the deletion

of a site from the NPL does not preclude eligibility for future

response.

IV. Basis for Intended Site Deletion

The following site summary provide's EPA's rationale for the

proposal to delete the Hranica Landfill from the NPL. The Hranica

Landfill comprises 15 acres, and is located in a rural area

approximately 21 miles north of Pittsburgh in Buffalo Township, Butler

County, Pennsylvania. Approximately thirty years ago, the Site was used

as a landfill, drum disposal area, and incineration facility. The Site

is surrounded by orchards, corn fields, and wooded areas. Buffalo

Township covers 23.9 square miles and has a population of approximately

6,600 people.

Between 1966 and 1974, William Hranica owned and operated the

facility, which accepted both municipal and industrial wastes.

Initially, the wastes were treated by a combination of open

incineration and surface impoundment storage. Subsequently, liquid

wastes were disposed of by direct discharge into surface impoundments

with resultant ground surface and soil cover infiltration. Site-related

compounds, including benzene, xylene and toluene, contaminated an

adjacent property owner's spring. The Site never had any buildings or

heavy equipment and the hazardous waste drums were stacked haphazardly

across the Site property.

The Site was listed on the EPA's National Priorities List (NPL) on

September 8, 1983. It was listed as 123 out of 418 sites on

the NPL at that time, with a Hazard Ranking Score of 51.94 on a scale

from 0 to 100. Soon after the Site's inclusion on the NPL, the Aluminum

Company of America (ALCOA) and PPG Industries, Inc. (PPG), which were

the two main generators of waste at the Site, signed a Consent

Agreement with the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources

(PADER), now the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection

(PADEP), to perform extensive removal activities at the Site. These

activities were performed from October, 1983 until July, 1984, and

involved the removal and ultimate disposal of more than 19,000 drums of

hazardous waste and over 4,000 cubic yards of visibly-contaminated

soil. Three large vats of waste were also removed from the Site as part

of this removal action. These activities essentially removed the entire

source of contamination from the Site. However, there were still soils

remaining onsite which were contaminated with site-related compounds.

In March 1987, EPA and PPG entered into a Consent Order requiring

PPG to perform a Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/FS)

at the Site. After performing the necessary field work to determine the

nature and extent of contamination at the Site, PPG submitted the Draft

RI/FS to EPA and PADER in September 1989. A Record of Decision (ROD)

for Operable Unit #1 (OU1), which addressed the remaining contaminated

soils onsite, was signed on June 29, 1990. The selected remedy included

a five-acre soil cover on lead-contaminated areas of the Site. All

soils with lead at or above 300 parts per million (ppm) were covered

with a two-foot thick soil cover. The remedy also called for deed

restrictions on the property, an eight-foot fence around the perimeter

of the Site, and long-term ground and surface water monitoring.

In April 1992, PPG began additional sampling and analysis of the

ground water portion of the Site for four consecutive quarters. After

examining the results of this additional sampling, EPA concluded that

no further action was necessary to protect the ground water. A No

Further Action ROD for the ground water portion of the Site, Operable

Unit #2, was signed on May 26, 1994.

ALCOA and PPG conducted the site remediation under EPA and PADEP

oversight. IT Corporation was hired by ALCOA and PPG to do the Remedial

Design for OU1 at this Site. The final remedial design for OU1 was

approved by EPA on March 17, 1993. ERM-Enviroclean was hired to do the

Remedial Action. The Remedial Action began in June 1993, and was

completed in October 1993. About 3,000 truckloads of clean soil were

placed onsite and compacted during the Remedial Action. A five-acre

soil cover was placed on the former drum disposal area and the

adjoining hillside. This soil cover was also graded and seeded. A

recent site inspection in October, 1996 by the EPA Remedial Project

Manager revealed that

[[Page 33383]]

the entire soil cover is now completely vegetated, and there are no

barren areas remaining onsite. The Site is now completely fenced and

has a locked entrance gate. A Consent Decree with the property owner to

record the deed restrictions has been signed, and the deed restrictions

are attached to the property deed in the Butler County Courthouse in

Butler, Pennsylvania.

Chester Engineers (Chester) was hired by PPG in 1994 to perform the

site maintenance and the long-term ground water monitoring at the Site.

This semi-annual sampling has been an important part of the operation

and maintenance at the Site. Chester samples a number of locations,

both on-and offsite, in the Spring and Fall of each year. PPG submits

quarterly progress reports to the EPA and PADEP describing the Site's

condition and detailing any upcoming sampling at the Site. A separate

report is submitted by Chester describing the actual sampling results.

A statutory Five-Year Review of the selected remedy was completed

on April 16, 1997 to ensure that the remedy is still protective of the

public health and the environment. The next five-year review must be

completed by April 30, 2002. Subsequent five-year reviews will be

conducted pursuant to OSWER Directive 9355.7-02. ``Structure and

Components of Five-Year Reviews,'' or other applicable guidance where

it exists.

The remedy selected for this Site has been implemented in

accordance with the Record of Decision, as modified and expanded in the

EPA-approved Remedial Design for Operable Unit #1. This remedy has

resulted in the significant reduction of the long-term potential for

release of contaminated soils to the surrounding surface soils, the

ambient air and the aquatic environment. Human health threats and

potential environmental impacts have been minimized. EPA and the State

of Pennsylvania find that the remedies implemented continue to provide

adequate protection of human health and the environment.

EPA, with the concurrence of the State of Pennsylvania, believes

that the criteria for deletion of this Site have been met. Therefore,

EPA is proposing deletion of this Site from the NPL.

Dated: June 5, 1997.

Stanley Laskowski,

Acting Regional Administrator, USEPA Region III.

[FR Doc. 97-15854 Filed 6-18-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.