[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 100 (Friday, May 23, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 28407-28410]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-13481]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 300
[FRL-5828-5]
National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan
National Priorities List
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Notice of intent to delete the Middletown Air Field Site,
located in Middletown, Pennsylvania, from the National Priorities List
and request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region III announces
its intent to delete the Middletown Air Field Site (Site) from the
National Priorities List (NPL) and requests public comment on this
action. The NPL constitutes Appendix B of 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 June 23, 1997.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted to Nicholas J. DiNardo, (3HW50),
Project Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 841 Chestnut
Building, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107, (215) 566-3365.
Comprehensive information on this Site 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.
Middletown Public Library, 20 North Catherine Street, Middletown, PA
17057, (717) 944-6412.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nicholas J. DiNardo (3HW50), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 841 Chestnut Building,
Philadelphia, PA 19107, (215) 566-3365.
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 Middletown Air Field Site, Dauphin 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) 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 for thirty calendar days after publication of this notice in
the Federal Register.
Section II of this notice 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 will consider, in consultation with the
State, whether any of the following criteria have been met:
(i) Responsible or other parties have implemented all appropriate
response actions required; or
[[Page 28408]]
(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 the environment
and, therefore, taking of remedial measures is not appropriate.
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,
section 121(c) of CERCLA, 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 conditions at the Site
remain protective of public health and the environment. In the case of
this Site, EPA conducted a ``five year review'' in August of 1996.
Based on the inspection, EPA determined that conditions at the Site
remain protective of public health and the environment. As explained/
discussed 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.
Releases shall not be deleted from the NPL until the state in which
the release was located has concurred on the proposed deletion. 40 CFR
300.425(e)(2).
All releases 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 for
deletion; 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 a site from the NPL does not itself create, alter, or
revoke any individual's rights or obligations. As stated in Section II
of this Notice, 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 actions.
IV. Basis for Intended Site Deletion
The following site summary provide's EPA's rationale for the
proposal to delete the Middletown Air Field Site from the NPL.
The Site is located in Dauphin County, Pennsylvania, about 8 miles
southeast of Harrisburg. It is situated between the boroughs of
Highspire and Middletown along Pennsylvania Route 230, and bordered by
the Susquehanna River to the south. The site property was initially
established as Camp George Gordon Meade by the Army in July 1898 and
then was operated as a pickle farm by the H.J. Heinz company until May
15, 1917, when ground was broken for an Army Signal Corps storage depot
(the Aviation General Depot, later known as the Middletown Air
Intermediate Depot). Flight activities began on the site in 1918 and
the airfield was named Olmstead Field in 1923. In 1947 it became known
as Olmstead Air Force base. In 1967 Olmstead Air Force Base was
transferred to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and the facility was
renamed Olmstead State Airport. It was renamed Harrisburg International
Airport in 1971.
The former Air Force field and most of the former Air Force
industrial buildings (approximately 625 acres) are currently owned by
the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The Pennsylvania Department of
Transportation (PennDOT) maintains and manages the Harrisburg
International Airport (HIA) portion. The 193rd Special Operations group
of the Pennsylvania Air National Guard operates a small portion of the
Site, just east of the airport complex. Approximately 218 acres of
former administrative and housing facilities north of Route 230 are
owned by the Harrisburg campus of Pennsylvania State University. An
additional 93 acres of former Air Force warehouse facilities north of
the Pennsylvania Turnpike (I-76) were originally leased to Fruehauf
Industries (Fruehauf) in May 1966 by a local industrial development
authority. Fruehauf manufactured truck trailers and its Site activities
including welding, punching, fastening, foaming and painting. By May
23, 1986, Fruehauf had acquired ownership of the 93 acres. In June
1995, the property, excluding the North Base Landfill, was sold to
First Industrial Realty Trust, Inc. by Fruehauf. Fruehauf still retains
ownership the North Base Landfill property.
Activities throughout the history of the Site included:
Warehousing and supply of parts, equipment, general
supplies, petroleum, oil and lubricants (POL) for the Department of the
Army's Northeast Procurement District;
Complete aircraft overhaul including stripping,
repainting, engine overhaul, reassembly, and equipment replacement;
Engine and aircraft testing; and
General base support maintenance and operation.
HIA currently conducts general airport operations and maintenance,
and leases buildings to fixed base operators and industrial tenants.
Tenants have performed a number of activities at this Site, including:
Aircraft maintenance operations, aircraft paint stripping
and repainting, and parts cleaning;
Aircraft instrument overhaul and repair;
Fabric dying;
Machine shop operations; and
Typewriter ribbon inking and cartridge assembly.
Various studies have been conducted by both EPA and the
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP, formerly
the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources), at the
facility since 1983 to investigate and monitor areas that were affected
by operations at the Site. In March 1983, PADEP discovered the volatile
organic compound (VOC) trichloroethylene (TCE) in six of ten HIA
production wells. This discovery triggered subsequent environmental
investigations and studies, and the installation of a water treatment
system that is currently still in use at the facility.
In 1984, EPA conducted ground penetrating radar and magnetometer
surveys at the Runway, Industrial, and
[[Page 28409]]
North Base Landfill areas at the Site. EPA removed nine partially
exposed 55-gallon drums from a fill area located along a stream bank
northeast of the Meade Heights housing complex. The drums were empty
except for water and coatings of a hard, black tarry substance. EPA
sampled the drum contents and found that they did not exhibit the
characteristic of EP toxicity (as described in 40 CFR 261.24) at the
time of the sampling.
EPA evaluated the Site under the Hazard Ranking System and was
proposed for inclusion on the National Priorities List (NPL) on October
1, 1984. EPA added the Site to the NPL on June 1, 1986. 51 FR 21054
(June 6, 1996). EPA's initial response after the NPL listing focused on
the presence of VOCs found in the groundwater beneath the Site. EPA
selected an interim remedy in the December 30, 1987, Record of Decision
(1987 ROD) that addressed HIA's contaminated drinking water supply. The
selected response consisted of the installation of an air stripping
system for the removal of VOCs to meet the drinking water standards.
The existing treatment system consists of two air strippers, an ion
exchange unit for the removal of hardness, and disinfection prior to
distribution.
A train spill occurred northwest of the runway area on June 4,
1988, approximately 500 feet west of Production Well HIA-12. Diethylene
glycol and mineral oil were released to the soil as a result of the
spill. PADEP remediated the site of the spill through pumping ground
water into settling tanks, skimming the mineral oil, biotreatment of
the diethylene glycol, and reinjection of the treated water. PADEP
completed the remediation in 1989.
In order to fully characterize the remainder of the Site and
identify potential public health and environmental concerns, EPA issued
a contract for an extensive study of the Site in 1988. The study was
performed in two phases--the Remedial Investigation (RI) and the
Feasibility Study (FS). See 40 CFR 300.430 (d) and (e).
Based upon the 1988 RI/FS for the Site, the Operable Unit 2 Record
of Decision (1990 ROD), signed on December 17, 1990, directed continued
operation of existing drinking water supply treatment and the current
distribution system, the institution of groundwater use restrictions,
and additional monitoring of the water supply wells. The remedy
contained in the 1990 ROD also directed the use of institutional
controls to address direct contact and other threats from potentially
contaminated soils that may be exposed at the Site during construction,
demolition, excavation or other activities that disturb Site soils and
involve the potential for worker and public exposure to presently
contaminated soils. The 1990 ROD also selected final remedial actions
at study areas (SAs) 1, 2, 3, and 4 and an interim action at SA-5,
since the field investigation results at SA-5 were inconclusive in
determining contaminant sources and their potential environmental
impact.
Under the 1990 ROD, the remedy selection for SA-1 involved the
continued operation of the ground water treatment system currently in
place at the Site, the institution of restrictions for all ground water
use throughout the Site (which extends from the North Base Landfill to
the Susquehanna River), and the addition of monitoring for the water
supply wells.
The remedy for SA-2 and SA-3 included land use and access
restrictions, and the development of public and worker health and
safety requirements for activities involving construction, demolition,
and excavation or other activities that would disturb the Site soil.
The remedy for SA-4, which provided for the installation of
``sentinel wells'' designed to assure protection of well MID-04 from
contaminants found on the Site, was coupled with the remedy for SA-1 to
efficiently and effectively address ground water contamination at the
Site.
The interim action required for SA-5 included a study evaluating
the water quality of, and organisms living in, the stream near Meade
Heights.
After reviewing the 1990 ROD, PADEP asserted that the ROD did not
fully investigate the relationship between soil and ground water
contamination, nor did it consider active soil cleanup technologies. In
1992, an Explanation of Significant Differences (ESD) was issued to
address PADEP's concerns by expanding the scope of the Supplemental
Studies Investigation (SSI) required by the 1990 ROD. The ESD explained
that the ground water remedy selected in the 1990 ROD was an interim
action and that the final decision would follow in the third ROD. The
ESD also rescinded the requirement in the 1990 ROD, that the existing
water supply system must continue to operate even if airport operations
cease would be eliminated and reevaluated at a later date.
The SSI concluded that no contaminants of concern were identified
in the surface water or sediment at the Site above the Biological
Technical Assistance Group (BTAG) screening levels. Furthermore, based
on the Baseline Risk Assessment (BRA) that was performed as part of the
SSI, EPA concluded in the third ROD, issued on September 17 1996, that:
No additional action, other than that already required by
earlier RODs, is necessary to address soils at the Site. Therefore all
remedial designs and remedial actions are complete, and no cleanup
standards are set for any operable unit.
Institutional restrictions on ground water use will be
continued at the Site.
Monitoring of surface water and sediment in the
Susquehanna River as required by the 1990 ROD should continue. In
addition, two locations involving the J-5 storm drain, situated next to
building 208, should also be sampled quarterly and evaluated as part of
the five year review for the Site. These locations are the J-5 storm
drain and the outfall of the J-5 storm line at Post Run. The sampling
frequency may be modified by PADEP after one year. No other sampling
for surface water and sediment is deemed necessary at this time.
Monitoring of the sentinel wells in the North Base
Landfill Area, as required by the 1990 ROD for the protection of the
MID-04 well, should continue. No other actions for this area are deemed
necessary at this time.
No action is required for surface water or sediment in
Meade Heights.
In the event that the HIA should cease or reduce the
pumping of the production wells, PADEP will assess the potential for
currently contained hazardous substances to migrate towards the
Susquehanna River and PADEP, as provided for in the April 16, 1997,
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between PADEP and PennDOT, may impose
a sampling and review period (not to initially exceed 5 years) to
assess whether any impact is occurring regarding the Susquehanna River.
After the initial review, PADEP will again review the Site's status and
determine if additional action is warranted.
As required by the 1990 ROD, ground water use will be
restricted in the event any new wells are to be installed or
modification of usage to existing wells is to be implemented at the
Site. The extracted ground water must be tested and the results
reported to PADEP. Ground water use at the Site will require a permit
or approval by PADEP prior to use.
The 1996 ROD concluded that no additional action, other than that
already required by the 1987 ROD and the 1990 ROD, as modified by the
1992
[[Page 28410]]
ESD, is required at the Site. Further, EPA has concluded that the 1996
ROD's ``No Further Action'' alternative's use of engineering and
institutional controls at the Site will not interfere with the
redevelopment and expansion objectives set forth in the October 1990
Master Plan Harrisburg International Airport commissioned by PennDOT's
Bureau of Aviation's State-owned Airports Division.
On August 21, 1996, EPA and PADEP conducted a final inspection of
the sentinel well construction. No deficiencies were noted nor were
additional activities deemed necessary as a result of the inspection.
All remedial actions for this Site are complete. Collection of
monitoring well data from the HIA production wells and the North Base
Landfill sentinel wells, initially on a quarterly basis (unless and
until modified by PADEP), is the only O&M requirement necessary.
PADEP has assumed the responsibility for assuring compliance with
the institutional controls identified in the RODs for this Site, and
the review of data generated as part of the 5-year review process. On
April 16, 1997, PADEP and PennDOT entered into a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU). The MOU expresses the intent of PADEP and PennDOT
that PennDOT will, inter alia, perform the sampling of the wells, water
and sediment and implement institutional controls, as required by
remedy selected in the 1996 ROD.
The statutorily required five-year review of the ground water
treatment remedy selected in the 1987 ROD was completed on September
1996. Further five year reviews will be conducted pursuant to OSWER
Directive 9355.7-02. ``Structure and Components of Five-Year Reviews,''
and/or other applicable guidance. The next scheduled five year review
is set for September, 1998. Subsequent five year reviews will be
conducted pursuant to the directive.
The remedies selected for this Site have been implemented in
accordance with the three Records of Decision as modified and expanded
in the EPA-approved Remedial Designs for the Operable Units and the
1992 ESD. Human health threats and potential environmental impacts have
been reduced to acceptable levels. EPA and the PADEP find that the
remedies implemented continue to provide adequate protection of human
health and the environment.
EPA, with the concurrence of PADEP, believes that the criteria for
deletion of this Site have been met. Therefore, EPA is proposing
deletion of this Site from the NPL.
Dated: May 15, 1997.
W. Michael McCabe,
Regional Administrator, USEPA Region III.
[FR Doc. 97-13481 Filed 5-22-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P