[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 149 (Wednesday, August 4, 2004)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 47068-47072]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-17500]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 300

[FRL-7795-8]


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

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Notice of intent to delete the Agriculture Street Landfill 
Superfund Site from the National Priorities List and request for 
comments.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 6 
announces its intent to delete the Agriculture Street Landfill 
Superfund Site (``the site'') from the National Priorities List (NPL) 
and requests public comment 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, constitutes Appendix B of 40 CFR part 300 which is 
the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan 
(NCP). The EPA, in consultation with the State of Louisiana, through 
the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ), has 
determined that the removal action for thesite has been successfully 
executed.

DATES: The EPA will accept comments concerning the proposed deletion of 
this site until September 3, 2004, and a newspaper of general 
circulation.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to: Ms. Janetta Coats, Community 
Involvement Coordinator, EPA (6SF-PO), 1445 Ross Ave., Dallas, Texas 
75202-2733, (214) 665-7308 or 1-800-533-3508 (toll free).
    Information Repositories: Comprehensive information on the site has 
been compiled in a public docket which is available for viewing at the 
Agriculture Street Landfill Superfund Site information repositories:
    EPA Region 6, 7th Floor Reception Area, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 
1200, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, (214) 665-6548, Mon.-Fri. 8 a.m. to 4 
p.m.
    Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality, 602 N. Fifth Street, 
Public Records Center--Room 127, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70802, (225) 
219-3168, Mon.-Fri. 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
    Norman Mayer Gentilly Library Branch, 2098 Foy Street, New Orleans, 
Louisiana 70122, Mr. Damian Lambert/Branch Manager, (504) 596-2644, Mon 
& Wed: 10 a.m.-5 p.m., Tue & Thurs: 10 a.m.-6 p.m., Sat: 10 a.m.-5 p.m.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Ursula R. Lennox, Remedial Project 
Manager, EPA (6SF-LP), 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, 
(214) 665-6743 or 1-800-533-3508 (Toll Free).

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 Agriculture Street Landfill Superfund Site 
from the National Priorities List (NPL), Appendix B of the National Oil 
and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), Code of 
Federal Regulations, title 40 (40 CFR), part 300, and requests public 
comments on the proposed

[[Page 47069]]

action. The NPL constitutes Appendix B of the NCP, which EPA 
promulgated pursuant to Section 105 of the Comprehensive Environmental 
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended. 
EPA and the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ) have 
determined that the removal action for the site has been successfully 
executed. Operable Units No. 1, 2, and 3 (OU1, OU2, and OU3, the 
undeveloped property, residential area, and Shirley Jefferson Community 
Center, respectively) are included in 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. As described in Sec.  300.425(e)(3) of the 
NCP, sites or portions of sites deleted from the NPL remain eligible 
for remedial actions in the unlikely event that site conditions warrant 
such action.
    The EPA will accept comments concerning its intent to delete the 
site for thirty (30) days after publication of this notice. The EPA has 
also published a notice of the availability of this notice of intent to 
delete in a major newspaper of general circulation at or near the site.
    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 the Agriculture Street Landfill 
Superfund site and demonstrates how the site meets the deletion 
criteria.

II. NPL Deletion Criteria

    Section 300.425(e) of the NCP provides that releases may be deleted 
from, or recategorized on the NPL where no further response is 
appropriate. In making a determination to delete a release 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 parties have implemented all 
appropriate response actions required;
    ii. All appropriate Fund-financed response under CERCLA has been 
implemented, and no further 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.
    Even if a site is deleted from the NPL, where hazardous substances, 
pollutants, or contaminants remain at the 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 site to ensure that the action 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 may be restored to the NPL 
without application of the Hazard Ranking System.
    In the case of this site, all appropriate Fund-financed response 
under CERCLA has been implemented, and no further action by responsible 
parties is appropriate. Consistent with the State Superfund Contract, 
LDEQ will conduct an annual inspection. EPA has conducted the first 
five-year review of the site, finding that the response actions 
implemented are protective of human health and the environment. The EPA 
may also perform future five-year reviews.

III. Deletion Procedures

    The following procedures were used for the intended deletion of the 
site:
    (1) EPA Region 6 issued a Record of Decision on April 4, 2002, 
which documented that no further remedial action is necessary to ensure 
protection of human health and the environment for the Agriculture 
Street Landfill site;
    (2) LDEQ, on behalf of the State of Louisiana, concurred by letter 
dated April 2, 2002, with EPA's decision that no action was necessary 
for the site. LDEQ stated by letter dated May 11, 2004, that deletion 
from the NPL was appropriate;
    (3) A notice has been published in the local newspaper and has been 
distributed to appropriate Federal, State, and local officials and 
other interested parties announcing the availability of the notice of 
intent to delete and the commencement of a 30-day public comment 
period; and,
    (4) EPA placed copies of documents supporting the proposed deletion 
in the site information repositories identified above.
    Deletion of a site from the NPL does not itself create, alter, or 
revoke any individual's rights or obligations. The NPL is designed 
primarily for informational purposes and to assist Agency management. 
As mentioned in section II of this notice, 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.
    This Federal Register notice, and a concurrent notice in a 
newspaper of record, announce the initiation of a thirty (30) day 
public comment period and the availability of the notice of intent to 
delete. The public is asked to comment on EPA's proposal to delete the 
site from the NPL. All critical documents needed to evaluate EPA's 
decision are included in the Deletion Docket and are available for 
review at the information repositories.
    Upon completion of the thirty (30) day public comment period, EPA 
will evaluate all comments received before issuing the final decision 
on the deletion. The EPA will prepare a Responsiveness Summary for 
comments received during the public comment period and will address 
concerns presented in the comments. The Responsiveness Summary will be 
made available to the public at the information repositories listed 
previously, and members of the public are encouraged to review it. If, 
after review of all public comments, EPA determines that the deletion 
from the NPL is appropriate, EPA will publish a final notice of 
deletion in the Federal Register. Deletion of the site does not 
actually occur until the final notice of deletion is published in the 
Federal Register.

IV. Basis for Intended Site Deletion

    The following information provides the Agency's rationale for the 
proposal to delete the site from the NPL and EPA's finding that the 
criteria in 40 CFR 300.425(e) are satisfied.

A. Site Location

    The Agriculture Street Landfill Superfund Site (site) covers 
approximately 95 acres and is located in the eastern section of the 
city of New Orleans. The site is bound on the north by Higgins 
Boulevard, and on the south and west by the Southern Railroad rights-
of-way. The eastern site boundary extends from the cul-de-sac at the 
southern end of Clouet Street, near the railroad tracks, to Higgins 
Boulevard between Press and Montegut streets. Approximately 48 acres 
are undeveloped property. The other 47 acres are developed with 
multiple- and single-family residences, commercial properties, a 
community center, and a school.
    To effectively investigate and develop alternatives for the 
remediation of the site, EPA divided the site into five operable units 
(OUs):
     OU1--The undeveloped (currently fenced-in) property;
     OU2--The residential development which consists of the 
Gordon Plaza Apartments (128 units), 7 retail businesses, 67 single 
family dwellings

[[Page 47070]]

in Gordon Plaza subdivision, and the Press Park town homes (179 
properties);
     OU3--Shirley Jefferson Community Center (formerly known as 
Press Park Community Center);
     OU4--Moton Elementary School which includes Mugrauer 
Playground; and,
     OU5--Groundwater.

B. Site Background and History

    The Agriculture Street Landfill was a municipal waste landfill 
operated by the City of New Orleans. Operations at the site began in 
approximately 1909 and continued until the landfill was closed in the 
late 1950's. The landfill was reopened for approximately one year in 
1965 for use as an open burning and disposal area for debris left in 
the wake of Hurricane Betsy. Records indicate that during its operation 
the landfill received municipal waste, ash from the city's incineration 
of municipal waste, and debris and ash from open burning. There is no 
evidence that industrial or chemical wastes were ever transported to, 
or disposed of at, the site.
    From the 1970's through the late 1980's, approximately 47 acres of 
the site were developed for private and public uses that included: 
Private single-family homes, multiple-family private and public housing 
units, Shirley Jefferson Community Center, a recreation center, retail 
businesses, the Moton Elementary School, and an electrical substation. 
The remaining 48 acres of the former landfill are currently undeveloped 
and covered with vegetation. Previous investigations on the undeveloped 
property have indicated the presence of hazardous substances, 
pollutants, or contaminants at concentrations above background and/or 
regulatory levels.
    In 1986, EPA Region 6 conducted a Site Inspection and prepared a 
Hazard Ranking System (HRS) documentation record package utilizing the 
1982 HRS model. The site score was not sufficient for the site to be 
considered for proposal and inclusion on the NPL. Pursuant to the 
requirements of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 
1986 (SARA), which amended the original Superfund legislation, EPA 
published a revised HRS model on December 14, 1990. At the request of 
area community leaders, EPA initiated, in September 1993, an Expanded 
Site Inspection (ESI) to support the preparation of an updated HRS 
documentation record package that would evaluate the site's risks using 
the revised HRS model. Subsequently, on August 23, 1994, the site was 
proposed for inclusion on the NPL as part of NPL update No. 17, and on 
December 16, 1994, EPA placed the site on the NPL.
    Prior to 1994, access to OU1, the undeveloped portion of the former 
landfill, was unrestricted, allowing unauthorized waste disposal and 
exposure to contaminants of potential concern such as lead, arsenic and 
carcinogenic polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (cPAHs) found in the 
surface and subsurface soils. In a time-critical removal action, 
initiated in March 1994, EPA installed an 8-foot-high, chain-link fence 
topped with barbed wire around the entire undeveloped portion of the 
former landfill.
    Concurrent with the time-critical removal action, EPA performed a 
Remedial Removal Integrated Investigation (RRII) of the entire site. 
RRII fieldwork was conducted from April 4 through June 20, 1994. A 
total of 1,600 samples of surface and subsurface soil, sediment, 
surface water, groundwater, air, dust, tap water, garden produce, and 
paint chips collected during the field investigation were submitted to 
specialized laboratories for analysis. Aerial photographs, geophysical 
investigations and computer modeling were used to supplement the 
analytical data in defining site boundaries and evaluating migration 
pathways. These data were also used to prepare the Human Health Risk 
Assessment and the Ecological Risk Assessment.
    In the 1995 Risk Assessment, risks were evaluated using current 
site conditions at all five operable units for four receptors: 
residents (adult and children), workers, and trespassers. Health risks 
were evaluated for the developed portions of the former landfill--the 
residential area (including 33 randomly selected study group 
residences) and the Shirley Jefferson Community Center--as well as for 
the undeveloped portion of the site. Current and potential future 
exposure route scenarios included ingestion of soil, homegrown produce, 
and ground water; dermal contact with soil and ground water; inhalation 
of contaminants in soil, and in indoor and outdoor air; and inhalation 
of volatile contaminants in ground water. The risk assessment was 
conducted for both carcinogenic and noncarcinogenic health effects, 
evaluating landfill-related contaminants as well as non-site related 
contaminants (e.g., garden pesticides, chloroform in indoor air, etc.). 
In addition, the IEUBK model was used to evaluate the potential for 
health effects from lead.
    The 1995 Human Health Risk Assessment for the site determined that 
of all the chemicals detected, lead was the only chemical of concern 
that exceeded the threshold levels for protectiveness of human health 
in a current land use scenario. The risks from all other chemicals were 
within the acceptable risk range or below levels of concern.
    Based on information presented in the RRII report, EPA conducted a 
second time-critical removal action at the site in February 1995, and 
performed confirmational air and groundwater sampling. Through this 
sampling event, EPA was able to obtain a second round of analyses of 
the groundwater, to clarify earlier identified ambient air 
contaminants, and to verify composition and magnitude of indoor air 
contaminants. In 1995, EPA prepared an Engineering Evaluation and Cost 
Analysis examining response action alternatives for Operable Units 1-3.
    On September 2, 1997, the EPA Region 6 signed a Record of Decision 
(ROD) and an Action Memorandum to achieve a comprehensive remedy for 
the site that was protective of public health and the environment. The 
ROD concluded that no further action was required at OU4 and OU5, and 
recommended that both operable units be deleted from the NPL. The 
Action Memorandum provided a permanent solution to all of the site's 
contamination problems found on OU1, OU2 and OU3.
    A Notice of Intent for Partial Deletion of OU4 and OU5 from the NPL 
was published in the Federal Register on February 7, 2000. A 30-day 
public comment period on the Notice of Intent for Partial Deletion 
started February 7, 2000, and concluded March 17, 2000. The Notice for 
Partial Deletion of OU4 and OU5 was published in the Federal Register 
on June 15, 2000.

C. Response Actions

    The Action Memorandum issued on September 2, 1997, authorized 
funding for a Non-Time Critical Removal Action on OUs l, 2, and 3. The 
removal action on OUl consisted generally of clearing the 48-acre area, 
grading it to direct storm water runoff away from the adjacent 
residential area, laying a permeable geotextile mat followed with 
orange fencing (to serve as a highly visible marker), covering the mat/
marker with twelve inches of clean fill, and re-establishing a 
vegetative layer on the clean fill.
    The removal action on OU2 and 3 consisted generally of excavating 
twenty-four inches of soil, placing a permeable geotextile mat/marker 
in the subgrade, backfilling the excavated area with clean fill, and 
covering the clean fill with grass sod. In certain areas,

[[Page 47071]]

surface features such as fences, driveways, sidewalks, etc., were 
removed in the course of excavation; once the basic excavation and 
backfill were completed, such surface features were restored or 
replaced. The selected response action for these operable units is 
consistent with soil removal and remedial actions performed at 
residential/industrial properties located on or near Superfund sites.
    Numerous attempts were made to encourage the city of New Orleans, 
which is the primary potentially responsible party (PRP) for this site, 
to perform or finance site investigations, or provide in-kind services 
for the response actions planned for OUl, OU2, and OU3. Evidence of 
this effort is highlighted in the site's Administrative Record. The PRP 
asserted that it was unable to fund any of the requested actions. As a 
result, EPA used funds from the Hazardous Substance Superfund to 
finance the RRII, Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis, and all other 
investigative and response actions.
    The removal action was scheduled to start in January 1998, but EPA 
delayed mobilization until October 1998 to address litigation and 
additional community concerns. Site work began on OU1, where the 
highest concentrations of contaminants were found, and at the Gordon 
Plaza Apartments on OU2. All but one of the property owners on OU1 
granted access to EPA, signing standard access agreements. The City of 
New Orleans, which owned undeveloped street extensions in strips criss-
crossing portions of OU1, refused access. After repeated attempts to 
secure the City's consent for access to conduct the response action, 
EPA issued a Unilateral Administrative Order to the City of New Orleans 
on February 25, 1999. The City responded by filing suit against EPA to 
halt the response action, and secured a temporary restraining order 
from the U.S. District Court. The City's lawsuit was subsequently 
dismissed and on April 1, 1999, the district court issued an order in 
aid of access in favor of EPA.
    The removal action continued to completion on OU1 and OU3 and most 
of OU2. Specifically, within OU2, the removal action was conducted at 
the Gordon Plaza Apartments, the retail and business area, the Press 
Park Townhomes, and twenty-five of the single family residences in 
Gordon Plaza Subdivision. At the conclusion of Phase I site activities, 
a final site inspection was performed by EPA and LDEQ on February 2, 
2000. Approximately 95.5% of the surface area of the site was 
addressed. The remaining 4.5% consisted of forty-two residential 
properties whose owners elected not to participate in the removal 
action.
    In June 2000, some of the single family homeowners who had not 
participated in the removal action expressed concern about problems 
encountered with transferring contaminated property and requested that 
EPA consider removal action on additional properties on the site. After 
review of the work that had already been completed, and an initial 
assessment of the number of homeowners who might be interested in 
participating, the EPA re-mobilized to the site in August 2000 to 
initiate Phase II of the removal action.
    As part of community relations activities at the site, EPA 
designated a Resident Services Manager on-site to field questions, 
discuss issues, and otherwise attend to residents' concerns during on-
site activities. During Phase II of the removal action, EPA, through 
personal contacts by the Resident Services Manager and through a 
succession of bulletins and letters to the community, attempted to 
secure access to the 42 properties upon which the action had not been 
conducted. Access agreements were accepted at the EPA Command Post, 
located in the Shirley Jefferson Community Center on-site, throughout 
most of Phase II of the removal action. By letter of January 2001, EPA 
notified non-participating homeowners of the projected schedule for 
demobilization and afforded them one final opportunity to participate, 
requesting that all access agreements be signed and returned to EPA by 
January 22, 2001. At the conclusion of Phase II, the non-time critical 
removal action had been implemented at all but nine residential 
properties. The EPA and LDEQ performed a final site inspection on April 
27, 2001.
    At the conclusion of each phase, a Close Out Completion Package was 
provided to each owner of property in OU1, OU2 or OU3 who participated 
in the removal action. The package contained:
     A Close Out Letter;
     A Certificate of Completion; and
     Instructions on how to maintain the permeable cap, 
including instructions for any necessary excavation below the 
geotextile mat/marker.
    Owners of properties that were not part of the response action 
received a letter and fact sheet from EPA stating that maintaining the 
surface vegetation will minimize the potential exposure to contaminants 
in the subsurface soils and will prevent soil erosion.
    A Final Close Out Report and ROD for OU1, OU2, and OU3 were signed 
by EPA in April 2002. The response actions described above were found 
to have addressed the unacceptable risks posed by site contaminants, 
and EPA determined that no further action was necessary to protect 
public health and welfare or the environment for OU1, OU2 and OU3.

D. Cleanup Standards

    For purposes of evaluating whether soils in OU1, OU2, and OU3 
presented a potential risk, EPA Region 6 Risk Based Concentrations 
(RBCs) were used as a screening tool to identify areas that may require 
action. The RBCs were exceeded in many locations in OU1, OU2, and OU3. 
RBCs are not regulations or guidance; however, they can be used to 
evaluate potential remedial requirements if the following criteria are 
met:
     A single medium is contaminated;
     A single contaminant contributes most of the health risk;
     The exposure scenarios used in the development of RBCs are 
appropriate for the site;
     The fixed risk levels used in the development of RBCs are 
appropriate for site; and
     Risk to ecological receptors is not expected to be 
significant.
    Although more than one contaminant (arsenic and dioxin) contributed 
significantly to the potential estimated excess cancer risks for 
residential receptors at the site, the site met the other criteria 
listed above. As a result, the Region 6 RBCs were used to evaluate 
areas requiring potential removal actions. In addition to the RBCs, the 
level of concern for lead was determined by using the IEUBK model to 
calculate the concentration of lead in soil that corresponds to a 
probability of 5% of exposed children exceeding a blood lead level of 
10 [mu]/dL. Arithmetic mean concentrations of household dust samples 
and tap water samples collected at the study group residences were used 
as input parameters in the model. Standard default values were used in 
the model for dietary lead and lead concentrations in air. The model 
output indicated that a 5% probability of a child exceeding the target 
blood lead level of 10 [mu]/dL occurs at a soil lead concentration of 
480 mg/kg.
    The response action that was implemented at the site:
     Prevents direct and indirect contact, ingestion, and 
inhalation of soil and waste by a potentially exposed individual and 
ecological receptors that contain contaminants of potential concerns 
(COPCs), specifically lead and

[[Page 47072]]

arsenic, at concentrations that could pose unacceptable risks;
     Prevents the release of COPC-contaminated dust to the air 
at concentrations that could adversely affect human health and the 
environment;
     Is protective of human health and the environment; and
     Leaves the site in a condition that permits future use and 
development.

E. Operation and Maintenance

    The potential risk associated with the possible exposure to surface 
soil contaminants was eliminated through the response action that was 
implemented on OU1, OU2, and OU3.
    All cleanup actions and other response measures identified in the 
Action Memorandum dated September 2, 1997, were successfully 
implemented on each OU, with the exception of nine residential 
properties located in the Gordon Plaza Subdivision (OU2) where access 
was not granted. The response measures were completed in accordance 
with the Action Memorandum, the SOW, design documents, and Work Plans 
formulated to implement the Action Memorandum. The constructed action 
is operational and performing according to engineering design 
specifications. Operation and maintenance activities, including 
maintenance of the cap and vegetative cover, should be continued by 
each individual property owner with property on OU1, OU2, or OU3. In 
addition to advising all property owners where response actions had 
occurred about proper maintenance procedures, EPA coordinated with the 
utility companies serving the area and conducted a field demonstration 
of excavation and backfill procedures. Copies of maintenance procedures 
were provided to property owners and utility companies.
    Those property owners who elected not to participate in the 
response action were instructed to maintain the surface vegetation to 
minimize the potential exposure to contaminants in the subsurface soils 
and prevent soil erosion.

F. Five-Year Review

    Previous response actions implemented on OU1, OU2, and OU3, have 
eliminated the need for further remedial response on these operable 
units. Thus, no further remedial actions for OU1, OU2, and OU3 are 
necessary to ensure protection of human health and the environment. The 
selected remedy complies with Federal and State requirements that are 
applicable or relevant and appropriate to the response action, is cost-
effective, and utilizes permanent solutions.
    Because hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants remain 
onsite in subsurface soil (below one and two feet), above levels that 
allow unlimited use and unrestricted exposure, as a matter of policy, 
EPA conducted a five year review, to ensure that the implemented action 
is protective of human health and the environment. As a commitment to 
the community, the first policy five-year review was conducted June 
2003. It concluded that the remedy selected for the site remains 
protective of human health and the environment.

G. Community Involvement

    Public participation activities have been satisfied as required in 
CERCLA section 113(k), 42 U.S.C. 9613(k), and section 117, 42 U.S.C. 
9617. 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.

H. Applicable Deletion Criteria

    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). The 
EPA, with concurrence of the State of Louisiana (LDEQ), has determined 
that the Agriculture Street Landfill site poses no significant threat 
to public health or the environment; therefore, no further response 
measures are appropriate. In accordance with EPA policy on deletion of 
sites listed on the National Priorities List, EPA is proposing deletion 
of this site from the NPL. Documents supporting this action are 
available from the docket.

I. State Concurrence

    In a letter dated May 11, 2004, the Louisiana Department of 
Environmental Quality concurred with the proposed deletion of the site 
from the NPL.

    Dated: July 23, 2004.
Richard E. Greene,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 04-17500 Filed 8-3-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P