
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 43 (Wednesday, March 5, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 12436-12441]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-04885]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 300

[EPA-HQ-SFUND-1999-0013; FRL-9907-49-Region 2]


National Oil and Hazardous Substance Pollution Contingency Plan 
National Priorities List: Deletion of the Federal Creosote Superfund 
Site

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of intent.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region II is issuing 
a Notice of Intent to Delete the Federal Creosote Superfund Site 
located in Manville, New Jersey, 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). EPA and the State of New Jersey, through the 
New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, have determined that 
all appropriate response actions under CERCLA, other than long-term 
groundwater monitoring and five-year reviews, have been completed. 
However, this deletion does not preclude future actions under 
Superfund.

DATES: Comments must be received by April 4, 2014.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID no. EPA-HQ-
SFUND-1999-0013, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov. Follow on-line instructions 
for submitting comments.
     Email: puvogel.rich@epa.gov: Rich Puvogel, Remedial 
Project Manager, seppi.pat@epa.gov: Pat Seppi, Community Involvement 
Coordinator
     Fax: (212) 637-4429.
     Mail: Rich Puvogel, Remedial Project Manager, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Emergency & Remedial Response 
Division, 290 Broadway, 19th Floor, New York, NY 10007-1866.

or

Pat Seppi, Community Involvement Coordinator, U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Public Affairs Division, 290 Broadway, 26th Floor, 
New York, NY 10007-1866.

     Hand Delivery: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
Emergency & Remedial Response Division, 290 Broadway, 19th Floor, New 
York, NY 10007-1866.
    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-
1999-0013. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at 
http://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 http://www.regulations.gov or email. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site 
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your 
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of 
your comment. If you send an email comment directly to EPA without 
going through http://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 http://www.regulations.gov index.

[[Page 12437]]

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 
http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at:

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region II, Superfund Records 
Center, 290 Broadway, Room 1828, New York, New York 10007-1866, (212) 
637-4308, Hours: 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday Through Friday;

and at

Manville Public Library, 100 South 10th Avenue, Manville, New Jersey 
08835, (908) 722-9722.

    Hours:
Mon. through Fri.: 10:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.
    Fri.: 10:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
    Sat.: 10:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Rich Puvogel, Remedial Project Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, Region II, 290 Broadway, 19th Floor, New York, New York 10007-
1866, (212) 637-4410

    or

email puvogel.rich@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 II announces its intent to delete the Federal Creosote 
Superfund Site (Site) from the NPL and requests public comment on this 
proposed action. The NPL constitutes Appendix B of 40 CFR part 300 
which is the Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan 
(NCP), which EPA promulgated pursuant to section 105 of the 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 Federal Creosote 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 is not appropriate.
    Pursuant to CERCLA section 121(c) and the NCP, EPA conducts five-
year reviews to ensure the continued protectiveness of remedial actions 
where hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants remain at a 
site above levels that allow for unlimited use and unrestricted 
exposure. EPA conducts such five-year reviews even if a site is deleted 
from the NPL. EPA may initiate further action to ensure continued 
protectiveness at a deleted site if new information becomes available 
that indicates it is appropriate. Whenever there is a significant 
release from a site deleted from the NPL, the deleted site may be 
restored to the NPL without application of the hazard ranking system.

III. Deletion Procedures

    The following procedures apply to deletion of the Site:
    (1) EPA consulted with the 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 New Jersey, through the New Jersey Department of 
Environmental Protection (NJDEP), 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 New Jersey Courier News. 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 Site Deletion

    The following information provides EPA's rationale for deleting the 
Site from the NPL:

Site Background and History

    The Federal Creosote Superfund Site, CERCLIS ID NJ0001900281, is 
located in the Borough of Manville, Somerset County, New Jersey. The 
50-acre Site is bordered to the west by commercial properties that line 
the east side of Main Street. To the north, on the opposite side of the 
Norfolk Southern railroad tracks, are a variety of commercial and 
retail establishments, including automobile storage, warehousing, and 
large retail stores. To the south, on the opposite side of the CSX 
Transportation

[[Page 12438]]

tracks, is a primarily residential area known as Lost Valley. 
Approximately 5,000 people live within a one-mile radius of the Site. 
Currently, drinking water for the surrounding area is provided by a 
public water supply and no private drinking water wells are used.
    The Site is divided into two land uses: Residential (35 acres) and 
commercial (15 acres). The land use in the Claremont Development is 
strictly residential, consisting of 129 single-family residential 
houses which are home to approximately 350 residents. The current land 
use of the Rustic Mall portion of the Site is zoned commercial. The 
Borough of Manville and the property owner are planning revitalization 
of the commercial property, which includes a combination of commercial 
and residential use.
    The 50-acre Site was used to treat railroad ties with coal tar 
creosote prior to development into the land uses described above. 
Beginning in approximately 1910, the Site was operated by a company 
known as the Federal Creosoting Company. During the operations, 
untreated railroad ties were delivered to the Site by rail and were 
processed in a treatment plant located on the southwest western portion 
of the Site. Coal-tar creosote was applied to the railroad ties in this 
area. Treatment residuals from the plant were discharged into two 
unlined canals. Subsurface piping and a surface canal conveyed the flow 
of the treatment residuals to the northern portion of the property for 
a combined distance of approximately 1,200 feet, where the waste 
spilled into an unlined lagoon. The other canal directed the flow of 
treatment residuals toward the southern portion of the property, where 
the contents of this canal flowed into another unlined lagoon located 
approximately 1,500 feet from the treatment plant. After treatment, 
railroad ties were moved from the plant to the central portion of the 
property, referred to as the drip area, where the excess creosote 
dripped from the treated wood onto the ground. Creosoting material and 
contaminated soil associated with the wood treating facility were not 
removed prior to construction of the Claremont Development and Rustic 
Mall.
    Land use patterns on the Federal Creosoting Company property 
remained the same until the mid-1950s, when the wood treatment plant 
ceased operations and was dismantled. During the early through mid 
1960s the property was re-developed. The area that formerly housed the 
treatment plant was developed into the 15-acre Rustic Mall containing a 
mixture of commercial and retail establishments. The remaining 35 acres 
of the former Federal Creosoting Company property, including the drip 
area, canals and lagoons, were developed into the Claremont 
Development.
    In April 1996, NJDEP responded to an incident involving the 
discharge of an unknown liquid from a sump located at one of the 
Claremont Development residences on Valerie Drive. A thick, tarry 
substance was observed flowing from the sump to the street. In January 
1997, the Borough of Manville responded to a complaint that a sinkhole 
had developed around a sewer pipe in the Claremont Development along 
East Camplain Road. Excavation of the soil around the pipe identified a 
black tar-like material in the soil. Subsequent investigations of these 
areas revealed elevated levels of contaminants consistent with 
creosote.
    Following the discovery of this material, NJDEP, with technical 
assistance from EPA, began an investigation of the Site. In April and 
May 1997, air samples were collected inside the majority of homes in 
the Claremont Development. With the exception of one house, the 
analysis of these samples indicated that the Site-related contaminants 
were not present in indoor air at elevated levels.
    In October 1997, EPA's Environmental Response Team initiated a Site 
investigation on properties believed to contain creosote contamination 
based on analysis of historical aerial photographs, as well as input 
from residents. Over 100 surface and subsurface soil samples were 
collected. These sampling results indicated that the canals and lagoons 
still existed beneath the Claremont Development, and that the 
contamination was extensive.
    In July 1998, EPA initiated a removal action at 11 residential 
properties to temporarily cover areas that contained higher surface 
soil levels of carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in 
exposed surface soils. As an interim action, sod was placed over bare 
areas in lawns and mulch was placed over exposed soils in garden beds.
    The Site was proposed for the NPL on July 28, 1998 (63 FR 40247), 
and was formally placed on the NPL on January 19, 1999 (64 FR 2942).

Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis and Remedial Investigation/
Feasibility Studies

    EPA conducted an engineering evaluation/cost analysis (EE/CA) 
utilizing the results of sampling initiated in October 1997. The EE/CA 
was conducted for the first operable unit (OU1) of the Site, which 
consisted of the creosote source areas (subsurface canals and lagoons) 
located in the residential development, and evaluated options for the 
removal of these source areas. The EE/CA was completed in April 1999, 
and a Record of Decision (ROD) for OU1 was signed on September 28, 
1999.
    Under the remedial investigation/feasibility study (RI/FS) process, 
EPA conducted a focused feasibility study (FFS) for operable unit two 
(OU2), which consisted of residual levels of creosote contamination in 
surface and subsurface soil within the residential development. The FFS 
determined the nature and extent of residual soil contamination within 
the development and identified remedial alternatives to address 
contaminated soil. The FFS found that soils contained residual levels 
of creosote components, PAHs, in the majority of the residential 
property soils. The RI/FS was completed in April 2000 and a ROD for OU2 
was signed on September 29, 2000.
    EPA conducted an FFS for operable unit 3 (OU3) to determine the 
extent of subsurface soil contamination on the commercial portion of 
the Site, the nature and extent of site-wide groundwater contamination, 
and to provide remedial alternatives to address these media. The FFS 
for groundwater was completed in June 2001, and the FFS for the 
commercial property soils was completed in August 2001. A ROD for OU3 
was signed on September 30, 2002.

Selected Remedy

    The OU1 ROD, signed in 1999, established the following remedial 
action objectives (RAOs) for OU1:
     Clean up the canal and lagoon source areas to levels that 
will allow for unrestricted land use; and
     Remove as much source material as possible in order to 
minimize a potential source of groundwater contamination.
    The OU1 remedy included:
     Permanent relocation of residents from certain properties 
within the canal and lagoon source areas, and temporary relocation, 
where necessary, to implement the remedy;
     Excavation of source material from the canal and lagoon 
source areas, backfilling with clean fill, and property restoration as 
necessary; and
     Transportation of the source material for off-site thermal 
treatment and disposal.
    The OU2 ROD, signed in September 2000, established the following 
RAOs:
     Prevent human exposure, via direct contact, with 
contaminated soils,

[[Page 12439]]

considering the current and future residential site use;
     Prevent future impacts to underlying groundwater quality 
by contaminated soils;
     Prevent exposure and minimize disturbance to the Claremont 
Development residents, and the surrounding community of Manville, 
during implementation of the remedial action.
    The OU2 remedy included:
     Excavation of soils containing PAHs in excess of site-
specific remediation goals from an estimated approximately 82 
properties, backfilling with clean fill, and property restoration as 
necessary, and
     Transportation of the contaminated soil off site for 
disposal, with treatment as necessary.
    The OU3 ROD, signed in September 2002, established the following 
RAOs for soils and groundwater:
     Prevent human exposure via direct contact, inhalation, and 
ingestion of contaminated soils, considering the future potential 
residential site use;
     Prevent future impacts to underlying groundwater quality 
by contaminated soils that can act as a continuing source of 
groundwater contamination; and
     Prevent exposure and minimize disturbance to the Rustic 
Mall occupants and consumers, and the surrounding community of 
Manville, during implementation of the remedial action.
     Prevent ingestion and direct contact with groundwater that 
has contaminant concentrations greater than the applicable or relevant 
and appropriate requirements (ARARs);
     Minimize the potential for additional off-site migration 
of groundwater with contaminant concentrations that exceed the ARARs;
     Minimize the potential for transfer of groundwater 
contamination to the other media (e.g., surface water) at 
concentrations in excess of ARARs.
    The OU3 soil remedy included:
     Excavation of soils containing polycyclic aromatic 
hydrocarbons (PAHs) in excess of site-specific remediation goals on the 
Rustic Mall, backfilling with clean fill, and property restoration as 
necessary; and,
     Transportation of the contaminated soil off site for 
disposal, with treatment as necessary.
    As described in more detail in the decision summaries of the OU2 
and OU3 RODs, the selected remedy would leave residual levels of PAHs 
(but not source material as defined by the September 1999 Record of 
Decision) at depths greater than approximately 14 feet below the ground 
surface in the Rustic Mall. The backfilled clean fill would act as a 
barrier or ``engineering control'' to prevent contact with any residual 
contamination. In addition, a deed notice would be required to prevent 
direct contact with any remaining residual soil contamination.
    The OU3 groundwater remedy included:
     Implementation of a long-term groundwater sampling and 
analysis program to monitor the concentrations of creosote components 
in the groundwater at the site, to assess the migration and attenuation 
of the creosote in groundwater over time; and,
     Institutional controls to restrict the installation of 
wells and the use of groundwater in the vicinity of the contaminated 
groundwater.
    The evaluation of remedial alternatives for remediation of the 
dense nonaqueous phase liquid creosote contamination, including 
contamination found in the fractured bedrock aquifer, concluded that no 
practicable alternatives could be implemented. As a result, EPA invoked 
an ARAR waiver for the groundwater at this site due to technical 
impracticability (TI). The area for the TI waiver covers approximately 
119 acres. The area includes three distinct subareas: The north off-
site subarea, the on-site subarea, and the south off-site subarea. The 
TI waiver includes both the overburden aquifer and the bedrock aquifer 
within the area. The contaminants for which the ARAR waiver apply 
include: Acenaphthene, benzene, naphthalene, 2,4-dimethyl phenol, 
benzo(a) anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene, benzo(k) fluoranthene, fluorine, 
chrysene, benzo(b)fluoranthene, and indeno(l,2,3-cd)pyrene.
    Two Explanations of Significant Differences (ESDs) were prepared to 
document significant changes to components of the selected remedies. 
The first ESD provided an explanation of the increase in the estimated 
costs for the OU1, OU2 and OU3 remedies. A second ESD provided an 
explanation of the application of institutional controls, in some 
circumstances, at depths shallower than anticipated in the OU2 ROD.

Response Actions

    The design criteria consisted of the removal of creosote waste and 
soils saturated with creosote waste. In addition, design criteria also 
specified that contaminated soils exceeding the analytical cleanup 
goals (CGs) would be removed to a depth of approximately 14 feet and 
transported offsite for treatment and/or disposal according to the RCRA 
Land Disposal Requirements. These site-specific CGs consisted of seven 
PAHs, which are the primary contaminants of concern.
    As noted above, the Site was broken into three OUs. The OU1 
remedial action included removal of source material from 29 residential 
properties, required the permanent relocation of 21 OU1 property 
owners, and the demolition of 18 homes.
    OU1 remedial action activities were conducted pursuant to the 1999 
ROD. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) provided oversight during 
all remedial activities. USACE contracted Cape Environmental, Inc., and 
Sevenson Environmental Services (SES), Inc., to complete the remedial 
actions in accordance with the contract documents and all applicable 
state and federal regulations.
    In October 2000, USACE's demolition contractor, Cape Environmental, 
Inc., mobilized equipment at the Federal Creosote Site to begin 
demolition of residential houses located above or adjoining creosote 
waste lagoons and canals. In December 2000, USACE's remediation 
contractor, SES mobilized on Site.
    The cleanup of OU1 was divided into three phases. Phase 1 focused 
on the cleanup of the southern lagoon; Phase 2 focused on the cleanup 
of the northern lagoon and canal; and Phase 3 cleanup efforts were 
focused on the southern canal.
    The OU1 Phase 1 remedial action involved temporary relocation of 
one family, the purchase of eight residential properties and permanent 
relocation of the residents, demolition of eight single-family homes, 
and excavation and removal of 64,500 tons of soil from the southern 
lagoon area to off-site treatment and disposal facilities. Soil 
requiring treatment was sent to an off-site hazardous waste incinerator 
in Canada; soils requiring subtitle C disposal were sent to a hazardous 
waste landfill in New York State. Remediation of Phase 1 was completed 
in June 2002. Ownership of these eight properties was transferred from 
EPA to NJDEP in July 2003. NJDEP sold these properties through public 
auction in the summer of 2009.
    The OU1 Phase 2 remedial action included the acquisition of eight 
residential properties and the permanent relocation of residents from 
the eight properties located over the northern lagoon and canal. The 
houses on the eight lots were demolished and excavation of creosote-
contaminated soil from this northern lagoon and canal started in April 
2002. Excavation on this phase reached a depth of 35 feet below

[[Page 12440]]

the ground surface. Approximately 115,600 tons of soil were excavated 
and shipped off site to treatment and disposal facilities. These 
properties have been backfilled with clean soil and have been restored. 
EPA currently owns the eight lots and has placed the properties up for 
sale.
    OU1 Phase 3 remedial action included the excavation and off-site 
disposal of 30,600 tons of contaminated soil from 13 residential 
properties and roadways located on the buried southern creosote canal. 
OU1 Phase 3 included the temporary relocation of three families, the 
purchase of five residential properties built over a portion of the 
buried southern creosote waste canal, permanent relocation of residents 
from the five properties and the demolition of two properties. After 
remediation and restoration, all of the OU1 Phase 3 properties 
purchased by EPA were sold and returned to residential use.
    The remedial action objectives for the OU2 remedy were: To prevent 
human exposure via direct contact with contaminated soils, considering 
current and future residential use; prevent future impacts to 
underlying groundwater quality by contaminated soil; and prevent 
exposure and minimize disturbance to the Claremont Development 
residents, and the surrounding community during the implementation of 
the remedial action.
    The remediation of OU2 was divided into two phases. The OU2 Phase 1 
remedial action consisted of soil removal at 14 residential properties 
that surrounded the southern lagoon area. The OU2 Phase 1 remedial 
action involved no permanent relocations and no demolitions. The 
remedial action of this phase started in February 2002. By June 2002, 
9,000 tons of soil had been excavated, treated and/or disposed off 
site; the 14 properties were completely restored, and temporarily 
relocated residents returned to their homes.
    The OU2 Phase 2 remediation began in June 2003. Cleanup activities 
occurred on 50 residential properties and portions of residential 
roadways. The OU2 Phase 2 remedial action involved two permanent 
relocations and no building demolitions. The remediation of a day care 
center was included in this phase. In August 2001, the day care center 
playground was remediated and in 2006, the day care center parking lot 
was remediated. The remedial action of OU2 Phase 2 resulted in the 
excavation and off-site disposal (with treatment as necessary) of 
59,000 tons of soil.
    Remediation of OU3 soils began in August 2005. After excavation was 
started by EPA, the Rustic Mall owners demolished all buildings on 
their property except for a bowling alley. EPA excavated creosote waste 
found below the footprints of the former Rustic Mall buildings. Source 
material and residual levels of creosote were excavated from the Mall 
property. Approximately 178,000 tons of soil were excavated and shipped 
off site for treatment and/or disposal. The excavation of the Mall was 
completed in November 2007.
    The first round of annual long-term monitoring of Site groundwater 
started in November 2005, as required by the OU3 ROD. Levels of PAHs in 
groundwater have, in general, declined when compared to the initial 
groundwater sampling performed prior to the remediation of the source 
areas.

Cleanup Goals

    The Remedial Action Reports for OU1 Phase 1 dated July 2005, OU1 
Phase 2 dated August 2008, OU1 Phase 3 dated August 2006, OU2 Phase 1 
dated July 2005, OU2 Phase 2 dated August 2008 and OU3 dated August 
2008 found that the construction activities at the Site were consistent 
with the approved construction plans (Design Reports, Site Management 
Plan, Sampling Analysis and Monitoring Plan, Perimeter Air Monitoring 
Plan, De-watering Plan, Waste Management Plan, Excavation and Handling 
Plan, Health and Safety Plan, and Quality Assurance Project Plan).
    The remedial action provided for a rigorous sampling and analysis 
program. Specifically, sampling was required and implemented to protect 
on-site residents and on-site workers, and to confirm compliance with 
RAOs. Daily real-time air monitoring was conducted within the perimeter 
of the remediation area to detect and quantify total volatile organic 
compounds and respirable particulates. In addition, confirmatory soil 
samples were taken for Site contaminants wherever additional 
contamination was suspected or known to occur. Soil samples were also 
obtained for backfill before placement into excavated areas.
    In addition to air and soil sampling conducted during all phases of 
the remediation, the OU3 ROD called for long-term groundwater 
monitoring. The objective of the long-term groundwater monitoring is to 
assess the migration and attenuation of creosote in groundwater over 
time.

Operation and Maintenance

    Operation, maintenance and monitoring activities at the site 
include: Maintenance of eight EPA-acquired residential properties; sale 
of the eight remaining EPA-acquired residential properties; maintenance 
of the institutional controls; long-term, on-site and off-site 
groundwater monitoring; and adjustments and/or modifications to the 
groundwater monitoring systems.
    As part of the monitoring program, groundwater will continue to be 
sampled to monitor plume properties, including its extent over time to 
verify that the plume will not increase or pose an unacceptable risk to 
human health and the environment.
    Institutional controls have been applied to the groundwater and, 
where appropriate, soils at the Site.
    The OU3 ROD required the establishment of a Classification 
Exception Area (CEA) for the area of groundwater contamination. The CEA 
was established to provide notice that the constituent standards for a 
class IIA aquifer classification are not or will not be met in the area 
of the Federal Creosote Site and that designated aquifer uses are 
suspended in the affected area for the term of the CEA. Additional 
monitoring wells were installed to delineate the CEA, and the CEA was 
established in January 2010.
    Deed notices were applied at the Site to prevent exposure to 
residual contaminants in soils that were not excavated as part of the 
remediation. The OU2 ROD anticipated the use of deed notices on 23 
properties where residual contamination (not source material) was left 
at depths greater than approximately 14 feet. As documented in the 2008 
ESD, the implemented remedy differed from the ROD by use of deed 
notices at a number of properties where residual contamination remained 
between two feet and 14 feet in depth. Residual contamination was not 
removed between these depths in order to preserve the structural 
integrity of houses.
    During the implementation of the remedy, all source material 
encountered in the residential development was removed and residual 
contamination above cleanup goals was left beneath 21 properties. All 
21 residential property owners applied deed notices to their properties 
where residual contamination remained at levels exceeding the remedial 
goals established for the Site. Consistent with the expectations of the 
ROD, deed notices were applied to six properties where residual 
contamination remains below approximately 14 feet. The remaining 15 
properties requiring deed notices have residual contamination shallower 
than 14 feet. The residual contamination remains at depths that are 
inaccessible through normal residential activities. Property owners are 
required to maintain the property in

[[Page 12441]]

a manner that ensures the deed notice continues to be protective. NJDEP 
is to conduct biennial inspections and certify the continued 
protectiveness of all residential properties containing deed notices.
    A deed notice was required on Borough of Manville roads and right-
of-ways that contained residual contamination at levels exceeding the 
remedial goals established for the Site. The Borough has applied deed 
notices to all areas that were required.
    A deed notice was also required on the Rustic Mall commercial 
property. The owners have applied a deed notice to this property in 
accordance with the remedy selected in the OU3 ROD. The commercial 
property owner is responsible to conduct biennial inspections and 
provide certification to NJDEP that specifications of the deed notice 
continue to be protective.

Five-Year Review

    Hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants will remain at 
the Site above levels that allow for unlimited use and unrestricted 
exposure. In accordance with CERCLA Section 121 (c), the remedies at 
the Site will be reviewed no less than every five years. The first 
five-year review was completed in June 2007. A second five-year review 
was completed on May 3, 2012. This second five-year review determined 
that the implemented actions at the Site currently protect human health 
and the environment because soil excavation activities and 
institutional controls prevent direct exposure to contaminated soils. 
EPA will complete the next five-year-review prior to May 3, 2017.

Community Involvement

    A very high level of community concern was demonstrated by 
residents, commercial property owners, business owners, and borough 
officials at the time the Site was discovered in 1997. This level of 
community concern persisted to the completion of cleanup activities in 
2008.
    Initially, public meetings were used to convey information to the 
community. At these meetings, residents were informed of plans for 
indoor air sampling and soil sampling on their properties. As results 
of the sampling events were produced, EPA held public availability 
sessions in which EPA representatives met with residents one-on-one to 
discuss the sampling results. As with the public meetings, these public 
availability sessions were well attended and preferred by many members 
of the community. A Community Advisory Group (CAG) was formed early on 
in the project. The CAG obtained information from EPA and provided 
community input on the implementation of field activities associated 
with investigations, design and remedial construction. As the project 
moved through the remedial investigation to the remedial design and 
remedial action, the on-site presence of equipment and contractor 
personnel associated with these activities gained higher visibility and 
became more intrusive to the community. EPA distributed informational 
fact sheets to property owners immediately before field activities were 
to take place in any area of the community. The fact sheets informed 
the community of Site activities such as utility mark-offs, road 
closures, equipment to be used for upcoming work, number of personnel 
involved in the work and the duration of the work as well as upcoming 
meetings. In addition, EPA distributed periodic newsletters informing 
the community of cleanup progress and plans for future cleanup 
activities. EPA held multiple interviews with different media 
(newspaper, television and radio news) to report on progress of the 
Site investigation and cleanup activities. Press events were also held 
to announce major milestones of the project. Meeting one-on-one with 
residents at their homes was a critical component of community 
relations activities at this Site. A wide range of issues were 
addressed at these meetings such as access agreements, property 
specific plans for upcoming environmental testing and remediation, 
interpretation of sampling results, permanent and temporary relocation 
assistance, and resident's concerns regarding intrusive remediation of 
their properties.
    A notice will be published in the local newspaper informing the 
public of EPA's intent to delete the Site. This public notice will 
request public comment on the proposed deletion and provide EPA's point 
of contact to accept comments.

Determination That the Site Meets the Criteria for Deletion in the NCP

    All response actions required in each of the RODs have been 
completed and all remedial action objectives have been met. One of the 
three criteria for Site deletion specifies that EPA may delete a site 
from the NPL if all appropriate Fund-financed response under CERCLA has 
been implemented, and no further response action by responsible parties 
is appropriate. EPA, with the concurrence of the State of New Jersey 
Department of Environmental Protection, believes that this criterion 
for deletion has been met. Subsequently, EPA is proposing deletion of 
this Site from the NPL. Documents supporting this action are available 
from the docket.

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(c)(2); 42 U.S.C. 9601-9657; 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: January 31, 2014.
Judith Enck
 Regional Administrator, Region 2.
[FR Doc. 2014-04885 Filed 3-4-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


