[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 144 (Monday, July 28, 2003)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 44270-44273]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-19006]



[[Page 44270]]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 300

[FRL-7535-8]


National Oil and Hazardous Substances Contingency Plan; National 
Priorities List

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Notice of intent to delete the Gurley Pit Superfund Site from 
the National Priorities List.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 6 announces 
its intent to delete the Gurley Pit Superfund Site (Site) from the 
National Priorities List (NPL) and requests public comments on this 
proposed deletion. 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 of 1980 
(CERCLA), as amended. The EPA and the Arkansas Department of 
Environmental Quality (ADEQ) have determined that the remedial actions 
for the Site have been successfully executed, that all appropriate 
Fund-financed responses under CERCLA have been implemented, and that no 
further response action by responsible parties is appropriate.

DATES: Written public comments concerning this proposed deletion must 
be received by EPA by August 27, 2003.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to: Mr. Donn R. Walters, Community 
Involvement Coordinator (6SF-P), U.S. EPA, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, 
Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, (214) 665-6483 or 1-800-533-3508.
    Comprehensive information on this Site has been compiled in a 
public docket which is available for viewing at the Site information 
repositories:

U.S. EPA Region 6 Library (6MD-II), 12th Floor, 1445 Ross Avenue, 
Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, (214) 665-6424 or 665-6427; Hours of 
Operation: 7:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday, excluding 
holidays.
Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality, Attn: Mr. Kim Siew, 8001 
National Drive, Little Rock, Arkansas 72219, (501) 682-0855; Hours of 
Operation: 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday, excluding 
holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Ernest R. Franke, P.E., Remedial 
Project Manager (6SF-AP), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 
6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, (214) 665-8521 or 1-800-
533-3508.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Introduction
II. NPL Deletion Criteria
III. Deletion Procedures
IV. Basis For Intended Site Deletion

I. Introduction

    The U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 6 announces 
its intent to delete the Gurley Pit Superfund Site (Site), Edmondson, 
Crittenden County, Arkansas, from the National Priorities List (NPL), 
which constitutes appendix B of the National Oil and Hazardous 
Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), 40 CFR part 300, and 
requests comments on this proposed 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). The EPA and 
the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) have determined 
that the remedial actions for the Gurley Pit Site have been 
successfully completed. Pursuant to Sec.  300.425(e)(3) of the NCP, any 
site deleted from the NPL remains eligible for Fund-financed remedial 
actions if future conditions at the deleted site warrant such action.
    The EPA will accept comments on the proposal to delete this Site 
for thirty (30) days after the publication of this document in the 
Federal Register.
    Section II of this notice explains the criteria for deleting sites 
from the NPL. Section III discusses the procedures that EPA is using 
for this action. Section IV discusses the history of the Site and 
explains how the Site 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 NCP Sec.  300.425(e)(1), sites may be 
deleted from or recategorized on the NPL where no further response is 
appropriate. In determining whether to delete a site from the NPL, EPA 
shall 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, taking of remedial measures is not appropriate.
    Deletion of a site from the NPL does not preclude eligibility for 
subsequent Fund-financed actions if future site conditions warrant such 
action. Whenever there is a significant release from a site deleted 
from the NPL, the deleted site shall be restored to the NPL without 
application of the Hazard Ranking System.
    The NPL is designed primarily for information purposes and to 
assist EPA management. Deletion of a site from the NPL does not itself 
create, alter, or revoke any person's rights or obligations.

III. Deletion Procedures

    The following procedures were used for the proposed deletion of 
this Site:
    (1) All appropriate response actions for the Site under CERCLA have 
been implemented, and no further action by EPA is appropriate.
    (2) The EPA Region 6 has recommended deletion and has prepared the 
relevant documents.
    (3) The State of Arkansas, Arkansas Department of Environmental 
Quality (ADEQ), has concurred by letter dated October 11, 1999, with 
the proposed deletion.
    (4) Concurrently with this Notice of Intent to Delete, a notice is 
being published in a local newspaper and is being distributed to 
appropriate federal, state, and local officials and other interested 
parties. The local notice announces the 30-day public comment period 
and the availability of this Notice of Intent to Delete for review.
    (5) The EPA has made all relevant documents available in the Site 
information repositories.
    The EPA will consider comments received during the 30-day public 
comment period before making a final decision concerning the proposed 
deletion. If necessary, EPA will prepare a Responsiveness Summary to 
address concerns raised by the comments received during the public 
comment period. EPA responds to each significant comment and any 
significant new data submitted during a public comment period. If it is 
necessary to prepare a Responsiveness Summary, it will be made 
available to the public at the information repositories, and members of 
the public may contact EPA Region

[[Page 44271]]

6 to obtain a copy of the Responsiveness Summary, when available.
    Deletion of a site from the NPL occurs when the Regional 
Administrator of an EPA region publishes a final notice of deletion in 
the Federal Register. Generally, the NPL will reflect deletions in the 
final update following the Notice.

IV. Basis for Intended Site Deletion

    The following summary provides EPA's rationale for the proposal to 
delete the Gurley Pit Superfund Site from the NPL.

Site History and Background

    The Gurley Pit Site is located 1.2 miles north of the community of 
Edmondson, Arkansas, which has a population of 286 residents. It is 
surrounded on one side by a small residential community and on three 
sides by farmland. The Site is in Crittenden County, northwest of the 
intersection of County Road 14, County Road 175, and State Highway 131. 
The facility is situated in the flood plain of Fifteen Mile Bayou, 
which is approximately 400 feet south of the Site, and has five 
residences within a half-mile circular radius.
    There are three major ground water aquifers within Crittenden 
County, which are found at depths of 40 to 200 feet, 300 to 1125 feet, 
and 1400 to 1700 feet. The deepest aquifer is used for all municipal 
wells. The middle aquifer is comparatively undeveloped, and the shallow 
aquifer is used for domestic wells. Due to the water quality, most of 
the domestic wells found in the shallow aquifer are used for 
agricultural irrigation purposes. The residences surrounding the Gurley 
Pit Site obtain their drinking water from the Midway Water Association 
well located in the deep (1,585 feet) aquifer, which is 2.2 miles 
southeast of the Site.
    The Site originally consisted of one large pit which was excavated 
for the clay material found in this area. Gurley Refining Co., Inc., 
subsequently leased the property in 1970 from Robert Caldwell for use 
as a disposal area. The Site pit was divided into three cells for 
disposal of sludges from the refining of used oil, with major 
contaminants including lead, barium, zinc, and polychlorinated 
biphenyls (PCBs). Waste disposal operations were permitted under 
specified conditions by the ADPC&E, now known as ADEQ, from 1970 until 
1975, when Gurley Refining Co., Inc., notified the State that disposal 
at the Site had stopped.
    There were two releases from the pit in 1978 and 1979 requiring 
response actions by EPA. It is estimated that as much as 500,000 
gallons of oil were released during the second event. The Site was 
proposed for inclusion on the NPL in December 1982 and was listed in 
August 1983. Several attempts were made by EPA to get the potentially 
responsible parties (PRPs) to conduct the Remedial Investigation, 
Feasibility Study, Remedial Design, and Remedial Action. However, the 
PRPs failed to take any action, and Superfund monies were used to 
perform the needed actions. In 1992, the United States was awarded a 
judgment against Mr. William Gurley and Mr. Larry Gurley for past 
response costs associated with the Site and a declaratory judgment for 
all future costs. The United States is continuing efforts to recover 
all Site response costs.

Response Actions

    After reviewing the results of the Remedial Investigations and 
Feasibility Studies, EPA issued two decision documents for the Site. 
The project was divided into source control and ground water operable 
units. The Enforcement Decision Document, which was signed October 6, 
1986, addressed source control and included the following major 
components:
    [sbull] Solidification of contaminated sludge, sediments, and soil, 
and placement of the solidified material in a Resource Conservation and 
Recovery Act (RCRA) compliant vault located in the north cell, and
    [sbull] Placement of appropriate monitoring wells, and long-term 
operation and maintenance (O&M) of the RCRA vault and the monitoring 
wells.
    The ground water operable unit investigation culminated in a Record 
of Decision (ROD) dated September 26, 1988, and concluded that no 
further action was necessary provided the source control measures in 
the Enforcement Decision Document were implemented.
    During the Remedial Design of the source control operable unit, it 
was determined that an insignificant change to the Enforcement Decision 
Document was desirable from a cost and construction standpoint. The 
location of the RCRA vault was moved from the north cell toward the 
south; this was more cost effective because the north cell had 
approximately 85 percent of the contaminated materials. Using the north 
cell as a temporary holding cell for all the contaminated material 
during construction reduced the volume of contaminated material which 
had to be handled prior to construction of the RCRA vault. This saved 
EPA and ADEQ the costs of unnecessary handling and reduced the 
potential for spillage during handling operations. In addition, this 
approach allowed EPA to address concerns of ADEQ about the overall 
height of the RCRA vault by allowing the vault to be spread out over a 
larger surface area.
    In 1992, the EPA began implementation of the Remedial Action 
pursuant to a Superfund State Contract with ADEQ. EPA Region 6 
determined during the Remedial Design phase that this Site represented 
a potential opportunity for implementation of an affirmative action 
approach wherein a woman-owned or minority business could conduct the 
work. Through the direction of EPA, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 
(USACE) entered into negotiations with the Small Business 
Administration, and a contract was awarded to a minority business, 
Mobley Contractors, Inc., on July 31, 1992. The Notice to Proceed was 
issued on September 9, 1992. Mobilization was on October 26, 1992, and 
full-scale construction commenced on November 13, 1992.
    Remedial construction activities were conducted as planned, and no 
additional areas of contamination were identified. EPA, ADEQ, and USACE 
conducted a pre-final inspection of the construction at the Site on 
August 12, 1994, and conducted a final inspection on August 31, 1994. A 
September 12, 1994, letter from EPA to USACE certified that the 
Remedial Action construction activities were performed according to the 
Remedial Design, with only minor modifications.
    The Enforcement Decision Document and the ROD also called for 
monitoring of the ground water; leachate sampling and analysis and 
removal; and maintenance of the sumps and the perimeter fencing. Six 
new monitoring wells (MW-A through MW-F) were installed and developed 
on-site during the Remedial Action, and two existing off-site 
monitoring wells (MW-30 & MW-31) also were monitored in each of the 
sampling events. The source control Remedial Action has protected the 
ground water and human health through containment of the source. Ground 
water monitoring data for the Site indicates that contaminants from the 
pit have not migrated through the subsurface into the ground water, 
supporting EPA's decision not to conduct any separate remediation of 
the ground water.
    After the construction of the RCRA vault, the Site entered the 
operational and functional phase of the Remedial Action. In September 
1995, there was a significant volume of liquid in the detection and 
collection systems. The ADEQ was concerned that this water indicated 
the liner was damaged during

[[Page 44272]]

landfill construction. Measurements were made which indicated that the 
water was approximately eight feet in depth, but the total volume of 
water within the cell was unknown. Due to the fact that pumping 
activity was principally from the secondary leak detection sump and 
given the existence of water from construction activities, it was 
decided that the Site could not be considered to be operational and 
functional.
    Operational and functional is defined in NCP Sec.  300.435(f)(2) as 
follows:

    A remedy becomes ``operational and functional'' either one year 
after construction is complete, or when the remedy is determined 
concurrently by EPA and the State to be functioning properly and is 
performing as designed, whichever is earlier. EPA may grant 
extensions to the one-year period, as appropriate.

    Based on the measurements of water described above, and in 
accordance with NCP Section 300.435(f)(2), the one-year operational and 
functional period was extended by the EPA. By means of an interagency 
agreement with EPA, USACE continued remedial activities at the Site. 
The USACE secured a contractor and installed a permanent electrical 
supply box, flow meter, high and low pump limit switches, circuit and 
wiring modifications for automated water pumping activities, and 
project signs; USACE also arranged for Site mowing and other related 
activities. In October of 1995, Halliburton Services was contracted to 
cut additional slots into the sump pipes using a hydrojet. After the 
slots were cut, the recharge of the water into the sump pipes increased 
appreciably.
    Pumping operations began May 20, 1996. A contractor, Griffin 
Electric of West Memphis, Arkansas, installed a control system on one 
of the pumps in March that would turn the pumps on and off 
automatically according to the water levels in the sump pipe. A flow 
totalizer was installed to record the amount of water removed from the 
landfill. Operational shakedown and verification of system performance 
were completed on July 11, 1997, and the system ran fully 
automatically. As of July 29, 1998, the automated system had pumped an 
additional 16,708 gallons. Pumping by the USACE continued until January 
1999, with a decrease in the average pump rate over the course of the 
USACE-conducted pumping.
    The Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) program utilized 
throughout the Remedial Action was sufficient to enable EPA, ADEQ and 
USACE to determine that the testing results reported were accurate to 
assure satisfactory completion of the Remedial Action consistent with 
the Enforcement Decision Document. All previous sampling results from 
the Remedial Investigation, Feasibility Study, and Remedial Design are 
documented in the project files and also followed appropriate QA/QC 
procedures.
    Several types of data were collected over the course of the USACE-
conducted operational and functional activities, including recharge 
rates to the sumps, volumetric data, hydraulic characteristics, ground 
water elevations, and analytical data. Based upon this data, the final 
engineering report prepared by USACE concluded that the Gurley Pit 
landfill cell appears to be operational and functional as designed and 
constructed. The following items support this conclusion:
    [sbull] Pumping data demonstrates that the collection system is 
capable of maintaining less than one foot of head above the bottom 
liner system.
    [sbull] Recharge rates into the detection and collection sumps 
continued to decrease throughout the USACE pumping period, refuting the 
possibility of a major influx of water table flow and/or recurring 
rainwater into the cell during or between the pumping events.
    [sbull] The volume of water pumped continued to decrease steadily 
with each pumping event or work period, further negating concerns of 
major infiltration of ground water and bearing evidence of minimum 
rainfall permeability of the cell.
    [sbull] The comparison of elevation data collected over the course 
of the USACE work period does not indicate hydraulic communication 
between the pumping water and the water bearing zone which is being 
monitored.
    [sbull] Contaminant concentrations have remained consistently low 
and uniform in the ground water monitoring events.
    Similarities in types of chemical constituents detected in the 
samples collected by USACE in both the primary and secondary leachate 
collection systems indicate that the two systems may be in hydraulic 
communication; a general trend in the data was that the majority of the 
water pumped was from the secondary containment system. However, while 
it appears that there may be a leak in the primary liner which allows 
water to move into the secondary containment system, there has been no 
evidence of detectable contamination in the tested ground water.
    As documented in the Final Close-Out Report, dated July 31, 1998, 
EPA extensively reviewed applicable regulations and guidance to 
evaluate the severity of the leakage problem. EPA's review supports the 
determination that there is not a serious leak of the top or bottom 
liner systems at the Site and that the Site remedy is fully operational 
and functional, and this determination is also supported by the results 
of the second five-year review for the Site, conducted in September 
2002. The presence of water in the detection and collection systems 
apparently resulted from heavy rainfall during construction of the 
cell, which evidently saturated the sand drainage system in the cell, 
but did not indicate any problems with the remedy or the integrity of 
the cell. It also should be noted that landfill covers of this design 
in similar climate conditions do leak to a limited extent. Moreover, 
the solidified cell waste serves to further minimize leachate and 
ensure a low-risk facility at the Site. Continued pumping of leachate 
from the vault will be required throughout the operation and 
maintenance (O&M) period to remove construction water and leachate as 
they accumulate, and continued monitoring of the ground water 
monitoring wells will also be needed. These activities are detailed in 
ADEQ's O&M plan for which ADEQ has secured EPA's approval; the final 
O&M and monitoring plan will be implemented by ADEQ.
    CERCLA requires a five-year review of all sites with hazardous 
substances remaining above the health-based levels for unrestricted use 
of the site. A five-year review was required for this Site because the 
selected remedy does not allow for unlimited use and unrestricted 
exposure. The first five-year review was completed on January 9, 1997, 
and a second five-year review was completed in September 2002. Ground 
water sampling performed by EPA in 2002 confirmed EPA's determination 
that the Site remedy is fully operational and functional. Further five-
year reviews will be conducted pursuant to OSWER Directive 9355.7-02A, 
``Structure and Components of Five Year Reviews,'' and other applicable 
guidance.
    On July 31, 1998, the final Close-Out Report was signed in which 
EPA, in consultation with ADEQ, concluded that all appropriate response 
actions required to ensure the protectiveness of human health and the 
environment at the Gurley Pit Superfund Site had been implemented. 
Long-term O&M of the ground water wells and the RCRA vault will be 
under the direction of ADEQ.
    All the completion requirements for this Site have been met as 
specified in OSWER Directive 9320.2-09A, ``Close Out Procedures for 
National Priorities List Sites.'' Confirmatory sampling conducted 
during the second five-year review has verified that the ROD and 
Enforcement Decision Document

[[Page 44273]]

objectives have been achieved and that all actions specified have been 
implemented. Pursuant to the Superfund State Contract between EPA and 
ADEQ executed in March 1992, ADEQ agreed to assume full responsibility 
for performing Site O&M activities, and the State subsequently agreed 
to begin those O&M activities after the sampling performed by EPA in 
2002. EPA will be providing oversight of all O&M activities.
    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.'' 40 CFR 300.425(e)(1)(ii). EPA, 
with the concurrence of the State of Arkansas, believes that this 
criterion for deletion has been met. Accordingly, EPA is proposing 
deletion of this Site from the NPL.

    Dated: June 23, 2003.
Myron O. Knudson,
P.E., Director, Superfund Division (6SF).
[FR Doc. 03-19006 Filed 7-25-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P