[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:
     http://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 http://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 http://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 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. 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: 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


