[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 142 (Monday, July 26, 2004)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 44467-44470]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-16726]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 300

[FRL-7790-3]


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

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final notice of deletion of the Mid-America Tanning Co. 
site from the National Priorities List (NPL).

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

SUMMARY: The EPA, Region VII, is publishing a direct final notice of 
deletion of the Mid-America Tanning Co. site (site), located near 
Sergeant Bluff, Iowa, from the NPL.
    The NPL, promulgated pursuant to section 105 of the Comprehensive 
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 
1980, as amended, is Appendix B of 40 CFR part 300, which is the 
National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP). 
This direct final deletion is being published by EPA with the 
concurrence of the state of Iowa, through the Iowa Department of 
Natural Resources (IDNR) because EPA has determined that all 
appropriate response actions under CERCLA have been completed and, 
therefore, further remedial action pursuant to CERCLA is not 
appropriate.

DATES: This direct final deletion will be effective September 24, 2004 
unless EPA receives adverse comments by August 25, 2004. If adverse 
comments are received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the 
direct final deletion in the Federal Register informing the public that 
the deletion will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to Bob Stewart, Remedial Project 
Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Superfund Division, 901 
North 5th Street, Kansas City, KS 66101.
    Information Repositories: Comprehensive information on the site is 
available for viewing in the Deletion Docket at the information 
repositories located at: U.S. EPA Region VII, Superfund Division 
Records Center, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, KS 66101; and the 
IDNR, Henry A. Wallace Building, 900 East Grand, Des Moines, IA 50319.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bob Stewart, Remedial Project Manager, 
U.S. EPA, Superfund Division, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, KS 
66101, fax (913) 551-9654, or 1-800-223-0425.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Introduction
II. NPL Deletion Criteria
III. Deletion Procedures
IV. Basis for Site Deletion
V. Deletion Action

I. Introduction

    The EPA, Region VII, is publishing this direct final notice of 
deletion of the Mid-America Tanning Co. Superfund site from the NPL.

[[Page 44468]]

    The EPA identifies sites that appear to present a significant risk 
to public health or the environment and maintains the NPL as the list 
of those sites. As described in the Sec.  300.425(e)(3) of the NCP, 
sites deleted from the NPL remain eligible for remedial actions if 
conditions at a deleted site warrant such action.
    Because EPA considers this action to be noncontroversial and 
routine, EPA is taking it without prior publication of a notice of 
intent to delete. This action will be effective September 24, 2004 
unless EPA receives adverse comments by August 25, 2004 on this 
document. If adverse comments are received within the 30-day public 
comment period on this document, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal 
of this direct final deletion before the effective date of the deletion 
and the deletion will not take effect. The EPA will, as appropriate, 
prepare a response to comments and continue with the deletion process 
on the basis of the notice of intent to delete and the comments already 
received. There will be no additional opportunity to comment.
    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 Mid-America Tanning Superfund 
site and demonstrates how it meets the deletion criteria. Section V 
states EPA's action to delete the site from the NPL unless adverse 
comments are received during the comment period.

II. NPL Deletion Criteria

    Section 300.425(e) of the NCP provides that releases may be deleted 
from the NPL where no further response is appropriate. In making a 
determination 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 (Hazardous Substance Superfund 
Response Trust Fund) response under CERCLA has been implemented, and no 
further response action by responsible parties is appropriate.
    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.
    Even if a site is deleted from the NPL, where hazardous substances, 
pollutants, or contaminants remain at the deleted site above levels 
that allow for unlimited use and unrestricted exposure, CERCLA section 
121(c), 42 U.S.C. 9621(c) requires that a subsequent review of the site 
be conducted at least every five years after the initiation of the 
remedial action at the deleted site to ensure that the remedy remains 
protective of public health and the environment. If new information 
becomes available which indicates a need for further action, EPA may 
initiate remedial actions. Whenever there is a significant release from 
a site deleted from the NPL, the site shall be restored to the NPL 
without the application of the hazard ranking system.

III. Deletion Procedures

    The following procedures apply to deletion of the site.
    (1) The EPA consulted with the State of Iowa on the deletion of the 
site from the NPL prior to developing this direct final notice of 
deletion.
    (2) The State of Iowa concurred with deletion of the site from the 
NPL.
    (3) Concurrently with the publication of this direct final notice 
of deletion, a notice of the availability of the parallel notice of 
intent to delete published today in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of 
the Federal Register is being published in a major local newspaper of 
general circulation at or near the site and is being distributed to 
appropriate Federal, State, and local government officials and other 
interested parties; the newspaper notice announces the 30-day public 
comment period concerning the notice of intent to delete the site from 
the NPL.
    (4) The EPA placed copies of documents supporting the deletion in 
the Deletion Docket at the site information repositories identified 
above.
    (5) If adverse comments are received within the 30-day public 
comment period on this document, EPA will publish a timely notice of 
withdrawal of this direct final notice of deletion before its effective 
date and will prepare a response to comments and continue with the 
deletion process on the basis of the notice of intent to delete and the 
comments already received.
    Deletion of a site from the NPL does not itself create, alter, or 
revoke any individual's rights or obligations. Deletion of the 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 Location

    The Mid-America Tanning Co. site is located in Woodbury County, 
Iowa, and is a 98.7-acre site which lies near the Missouri River in the 
Port Neal Industrial District four miles south of the town of Sergeant 
Bluff.

Site History

    The Mid-America Tanning Co. facility was a leather tannery which 
operated from 1970 to 1989. In 1973, the plant began using a chrome 
tanning process. Process wastewater containing debris, chromium, and 
other chemicals was discharged to onsite surface impoundments. Chromium 
contaminated sludge accumulated at the bottom of the surface 
impoundments and was disposed of on site in trenches and in surface 
soil. When the facility ceased operations in 1989, there was an 
estimated 5,000 gallons of chromium tanning solution on site along with 
525 gallons of sulfuric acid used in the tanning process.
    The site was proposed to the NPL in June 1988 and became final in 
March 1989 (54 FR 13296). The site posed a threat to the public health 
through direct contact and through potential migration of chromium into 
the surrounding groundwater that is the primary drinking water source 
for approximately 850 individuals who live in the surrounding three-
mile radius of the site. This determination was made based on evidence 
of repeated discharges of chromium at the site and groundwater samples 
in exceedance of drinking water standards.

Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/FS)

    In December 1989, the EPA issued an administrative order to the 
owner and operator of the MAT facility, the U.S. Tanning Co. (UST), 
requiring UST to perform an investigation and removal action at the 
site to determine the nature and extent of the contamination problem. 
Having previously filed bankruptcy, the company failed to comply with 
the order. Because of imminent health threats, EPA initiated a removal 
action in 1990. The EPA removal action was directed toward immediate 
site stabilization measures and included excavation and stockpiling of 
contaminated sludge from the onsite burial trench, containment

[[Page 44469]]

and treatment of chromium tanning solutions, containment and 
neutralization of sulfuric acids, and cursory decontamination of the 
buildings.
    In conjunction with the removal activities, EPA conducted an 
investigation into the nature and extent of the contamination at the 
site. During EPA's investigation of the site in 1991, 18 wells located 
in shallow, intermediate, and deep water-bearing zones were sampled. 
The data obtained from the wells indicated that the direction of 
groundwater flow at the site is west to southwest toward the Missouri 
River. The results of analysis of the groundwater samples indicated the 
presence of chromium, lead, arsenic, and barium in the groundwater. The 
extent of contaminated soil was determined from borings. Wastes and 
liquids in the impoundments, treatment units, sludge disposal areas, 
and Oxbow Lake were also sampled.

Record of Decision Findings

    In September 1991, EPA decided on a cleanup plan which was 
explained in a ``Record of Decision'' (ROD). The cleanup plan included 
onsite stabilization of contaminated wastes followed by installation of 
a soil cap and continued monitoring of the groundwater. The ROD stated 
that the groundwater at the site will be addressed as a separate 
operable unit and recommended further monitoring of the groundwater. 
Subsequently, the EPA determined that the sludge in the surface 
impoundment was emitting hydrogen sulfide gas and that the 
implementation of the stabilization component of the cleanup plan would 
likely result in the release of this gas at concentrations which would 
pose a threat to public health and the environment. In response to the 
new data regarding the hydrogen sulfide emissions, the EPA modified the 
cleanup plan for the site in an amended ROD dated July 1996. The 
modified plan included dewatering the impoundment areas; treating and 
discharging the impoundment waters; excavating contaminated soils and 
combining them with the contaminated impoundment sludge; capping the 
impoundment soil/sludge; and decontaminating various cement structures 
and a portion of one building.
    A further assessment of the groundwater at the site was completed 
in December 1997 in accordance with the sampling plan approved by EPA. 
Twenty-one monitoring wells were sampled, obtaining water from both 
shallow and deep water-bearing zones at the site. These samples were 
analyzed for 19 analytes. The assessment showed that the groundwater 
flow direction was consistent with that previously determined and also 
found that upward hydraulic gradients were present. These upward 
gradients are important because they prevent downward contaminant 
migration and help limit migration at the site. Metals detected in 
groundwater samples including arsenic, barium, and chromium, were well 
below Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCL); the highest chromium levels 
were less than 10 percent of the MCL. Lead, aluminum, and arsenic were 
below Iowa Aquatic Standards as well. A ROD was issued in September 
2000 following a public notice period and public meeting, which 
determined that no further action was necessary for the groundwater at 
the site.

Characterization of Risk

    A baseline risk assessment was prepared by the EPA for the site. A 
human health baseline risk assessment was prepared and was described in 
the1991 ROD. For groundwater, the risk assessment assumed that 
residents would use the groundwater as a drinking water source. The EPA 
believed that future uses of the site will be industrial only; we, 
however, evaluated contaminant levels in the groundwater against 
drinking water standards for residential consumption as a conservative 
first step.
    The primary contaminant of concern at the site was chromium. This 
chemical may pose adverse health effects at high concentrations or 
exposures, and is considered to be a probable human carcinogen in the 
hexavalent form if inhaled. Hexavalent chromium has not been found in 
site groundwater. The volatilization of chromium dissolved in 
groundwater should not occur during typical residential use. Trivalent 
chromium, the form found at the site, is much less toxic.
    To ensure protection of human health, the risk assessment assumed 
that no action was taken on the groundwater at the site to remove the 
contamination, and the highest exposure reasonably expected to occur at 
the site was evaluated. Additionally, the EPA assumed that a future 
resident drills a new well within the area of the groundwater 
contamination and then drinks and bathes with contaminated groundwater. 
Even under residential conditions, the highest concentration of 
chromium in the groundwater would not pose adverse health effects.
    In its 1991 ROD, the EPA concluded that the only other contaminant 
in the groundwater at levels of concern was manganese, and that it 
would naturally reduce in concentration as a result of the removal and 
remedial actions at the site. The results of the 1997 sampling 
confirmed that expectation and indicated that no contaminants are 
present in the groundwater at levels of concern.
    The ecological assessment in the 1991 ROD concluded that only 
minimal impacts from site contaminants would be expected, and that a 
response action based on human health risks would also reduce this 
minimal threat to the environment. Based on the lack of any substantial 
concentrations of contaminants in the groundwater and on the remedial 
actions planned at the site, EPA decided that a threat to the surface 
environment does not exist. Therefore, further actions taken solely to 
protect surface environmental receptors were found to be unnecessary.

Response Actions

    Following the initial removal action performed by EPA in 1990, site 
conditions deteriorated due to vandalism and areas of the site were re-
contaminated. In 1994, EPA issued an Administrative Order to Foxley 
Cattle Company, a Potentially Responsible Party (PRP), to perform a 
second removal action to address re-contamination concerns, address the 
hydrogen sulfide problem and provide for site security. The removal 
action performed by Foxley was completed in 1995 and consisted of 
decontaminating buildings, removal and disposal of drummed wastes, and 
securing the site buildings and man-holes.
    The EPA implemented remedial design efforts which included the 
following work:

--Excavation and relocation of onsite contaminated soil, sediment, and 
sludge materials;
--Coverage of those materials with multi-media landfill cap structures;
--Treatment of free wastewaters located in several site impoundments;
--Installation of floating geosynthetic covers on existing site 
lagoons;
--Decontamination by steam cleaning of selected site facilities;
--Decontamination of selected buildings;
--Transfer of wastewaters from and to selected surface impoundments and 
installation of chain link fencing.

    This work was carried out and a final inspection was conducted on 
May 19, 2000. On August 1, 2000, a Remedial Action (RA) Report was 
completed, demonstrating successful completion of construction 
activities. The site will remain suitable for industrial and commercial 
uses. Institutional controls

[[Page 44470]]

have been placed on the site through the State of Iowa's Registry of 
Hazardous Waste or Hazardous Substance Disposal Sites, which prevents 
changes in land ownership or use without State approval. In addition, a 
notice has been placed on the deed.

Cleanup Standards

    Soil cleanup standards were set in the ROD at 2000 milligrams per 
kilogram (mg/kg) total chromium. This standard was met and exceeded in 
the site excavation work. The site work was considered to be completed 
when the groundwater monitoring revealed no exceedance of MCLs, or 
State action levels, for CERCLA contaminants of concern. All facets of 
the ROD and amended ROD have been met as well. Because wastes remain at 
the site in two capped landfills and in the covered impoundments, some 
residual risks remain at the site that require continued operation and 
maintenance activities, institutional controls, and five-year reviews.

Operations and Maintenance

    The State of Iowa has provided in the State Superfund Contract with 
EPA an adequate assurance to assume responsibility for operation and 
maintenance activities, including institutional controls. The state is 
conducting operation and maintenance activities pursuant to the 
Surveillance and Maintenance Plan that was approved by EPA on September 
12, 2000. Operation and maintenance of the landfill caps, floating 
covers, and fences is required and will continue after site deletion, 
since waste was left in place as part of the final source control 
remedy. The Plan, dated September 1998 and revised by technical 
memorandum of June 19, 2000, lists the activities to be performed, 
including inspections every six months to ensure erosion control, 
floating cover maintenance, mowing, and fence maintenance. 
Institutional controls will also be maintained. No major problems have 
been encountered.

Five-Year Review

    A statutory Five-Year Review Report was completed on July 11, 2003, 
pursuant to CERCLA 121 (c) and to Sec.  300.430(f)(4)(ii) of the NCP. 
The report concluded that the remedy is protective of human health and 
the environment, all threats at the site have been addressed, and 
contaminants of concern in the groundwater have been shown to be below 
drinking water standards. Another five-year review report is scheduled 
for 2008.

Community Involvement

    Public participation activities have been satisfied as required in 
CERCLA section 113(k), 42 U.S.C. 9613(k), and CERCLA section 117, 42 
U.S.C. 9617. Mailing lists were developed, fact sheets mailed out, and 
public notices placed in newspapers in July 1991, May 1996, and July 
2000 to support the proposed plans. Public meetings were held on July 
30, 1991, and July 24, 2000; opportunity for a hearing was provided in 
May 1996 but none was requested. In addition, a public notice for the 
Five-Year Review was placed in June 2003. Documents in the Deletion 
Docket which EPA relied on for recommendation of the deletion from the 
NPL are available to the public in the information repositories. A 
public notice for this action will also be published in the Sergeant 
Bluff Advocate.

V. Deletion Action

    The EPA, with concurrence of the State of Iowa, has determined that 
all appropriate responses under CERCLA have been completed, and that no 
further response actions, under CERCLA, are necessary. The State 
concurrence letter dated May 11, 2004, states that IDNR concurs with 
the proposed removal of the site from the NPL. It notes that such 
removal will not disqualify the site for Superfund funds if additional 
remedial work is deemed necessary in the future. The EPA agrees with 
the State comment; therefore, EPA is deleting the site from the NPL.
    Because EPA considers this action to be noncontroversial and 
routine, EPA is taking it without prior publication. This action will 
be effective September 24, 2004 unless EPA receives adverse comments by 
August 25, 2004. If adverse comments are received within the 30-day 
public comment period, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of this 
direct final notice of deletion before the effective date of the 
deletion and it will not take effect and, EPA will prepare a response 
to comments and continue with the deletion process on the basis of the 
notice of intent to delete and the comments already received. There 
will be no additional opportunity to comment.

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.

    Dated: June 21, 2004.
James B. Gulliford,
Regional Administrator, Region VII.


0
For the reasons set out in this document, 40 CFR part 300 is amended as 
follows:

PART 300--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 300 continues to read as follows:

    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.

Appendix B--[Amended]

0
2. Table 1 of Appendix B to part 300 is amended by removing the site, 
``Mid-America Tanning Co., Sergeant Bluff, IA.''

[FR Doc. 04-16726 Filed 7-23-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P