[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 121 (Friday, June 22, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 37630-37634]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-15340]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 300

[EPA-HQ-SFUND-1989-0008; FRL-9691-6]


National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan; 
National Priorities List: Deletion of the New Hanover County Airport 
Burn Pit Superfund Site

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of intent.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 4 is issuing 
a Notice of Intent to Delete the New Hanover County Airport Burn Pit 
Superfund Site (Site) located in Wilmington, North Carolina, from the 
National Priorities List (NPL) and requests public comments on this 
proposed action. The NPL, promulgated pursuant to section 105 of the 
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act 
(CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is an appendix of the National Oil and 
Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP). EPA, with the 
concurrence of the State of North Carolina, through the North Carolina 
Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), has determined 
that all appropriate response actions under CERCLA have been completed. 
However, this deletion does not preclude future actions under 
Superfund.

DATES: Comments must be received by July 23, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID no. EPA-HQ-
SFUND-1989-0008, by one of the following methods:
     Online: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 
instructions for submitting comments.
     Email: [email protected]
     Fax: (404) 562-8788, Attention: Beverly Hudson-Stepter
     Mail: Beverly Hudson-Stepter, Remedial Project Manager, 
Superfund Remedial Section B, Superfund Remedial and Site Evaluation 
Branch, Superfund Division, U.S. Environmental

[[Page 37631]]

Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 
30303-8960.
     Hand delivery: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Such 
deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of 
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of 
boxed information. The Regional EPA Office is open for business Monday 
through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID no. EPA-HQ-SFUND-
1989-0008. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at 
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information 
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you 
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or email. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site 
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your 
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of 
your comment. If you send an email comment directly to EPA without 
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your email address will be 
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is 
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you 
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name 
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any 
disk or CD-ROM submitted. If EPA cannot read your comment due to 
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA 
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid 
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of 
any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such 
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in the hard 
copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either 
electronically in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at:
    Regional Site Information Repository: U.S EPA Record Center, Attn: 
Ms. Debbie Jourdan, Atlanta Federal Center, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., 
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960, Phone: (404) 562-8862, Hours 8 a.m.-4 
p.m., Monday through Friday by appointment only or
    Local Site Information Repository: New Hanover County Public 
Library, 210 Chestnut Street, Wilmington, North Carolina, Phone: (910) 
798-7309 Hours 9 a.m.-8 p.m., Monday and Tuesday, 9 a.m.-6 p.m., 
Wednesday and Thursday, 9 a.m.- 5 p.m., Friday and Saturday, closed on 
Sunday.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Beverly Hudson-Stepter, Remedial 
Project Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 
Superfund Remedial Section B, Superfund Remedial and Site Evaluation 
Branch, Superfund Division, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, 61 
Forsyth Street, Atlanta, Georgia 30311, (404) 562-8816, Electronic mail 
at: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents

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

I. Introduction

    EPA Region 4 announces its intent to delete the New Hanover County 
Airport Burn Pit Superfund Site from the National Priorities List (NPL) 
and requests public comment on this proposed action. The NPL 
constitutes Appendix B of 40 CFR part 300, which is the Oil and 
Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), which EPA 
promulgated pursuant to section 105 of the Comprehensive Environmental 
Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended. 
EPA maintains the NPL as the list of sites that appear to present a 
significant risk to public health, welfare, or the environment. Sites 
on the NPL may be the subject of remedial actions financed by the 
Hazardous Substance Superfund (Fund). As described in 40 CFR 
300.425(e)(3) of the NCP, sites deleted from the NPL remains eligible 
for Fund-financed remedial actions if future conditions warrant such 
actions.
    EPA will accept comments on the proposal to delete this site for 
thirty (30) days after publication of this document in the Federal 
Register.
    Section II of this document explains the criteria for deleting 
sites from the NPL. Section III discusses procedures that EPA is using 
for this action. Section IV discusses the New Hanover County Airport 
Burn Pit Superfund Site and demonstrates how it meets the deletion 
criteria.

II. NPL Deletion Criteria

    The NCP establishes the criteria that EPA uses to delete sites from 
the NPL. In accordance with 40 CFR 300.425(e), sites may be deleted 
from the NPL where no further response is appropriate. In making such a 
determination pursuant to 40 CFR 300.425(e), EPA will consider, in 
consultation with the State, whether any of the following criteria have 
been met:
    1. responsible parties or other persons have implemented all 
appropriate response actions required;
    2. all appropriate Fund-financed response under CERCLA has been 
implemented, and no further response action by responsible parties is 
appropriate; or
    3. 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.
    Pursuant to CERCLA section 121(c) and the NCP, EPA conducts five-
year reviews to ensure the continued protectiveness of remedial actions 
where hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants remain at a 
site above levels that allow for unlimited use and unrestricted 
exposure. EPA conducts such five-year reviews even if a site is deleted 
from the NPL. EPA may initiate further action to ensure continued 
protectiveness at a deleted site if new information becomes available 
that indicates it is appropriate. Whenever there is a significant 
release from a site deleted from the NPL, the deleted site may be 
restored to the NPL without application of the hazard ranking system.

III. Deletion Procedures

    The following procedures apply to deletion of the Site:
    1. EPA consulted with the State of North Carolina prior to 
developing this Notice of Intent to Delete.
    2. The State of North Carolina, through DNER, has concurred on the 
deletion of the Site from the NPL.
    3. Concurrently with the publication of this Notice of Intent to 
Delete in the Federal Register, a notice is being published in a major 
local newspaper, Wilmington Star News. 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 proposed 
deletion in the deletion docket and made these items available for 
public

[[Page 37632]]

inspection and copying at the Site information repositories identified 
above.
    If adverse comments on this deletion notice are received within the 
thirty (30) day public comment period, EPA will evaluate and respond 
appropriately to the comments before making a final decision to delete. 
If necessary, EPA will prepare a Responsiveness Summary to address any 
significant public comments received. After the public comment period, 
if EPA determines it is still appropriate to delete the Site, the 
Regional Administrator will publish a final Notice of Deletion in the 
Federal Register. Public notices, public submissions and copies of the 
Responsiveness Summary, if prepared, will be made available to 
interested parties and in the site information repositories listed 
above.
    Deletion of a site from the NPL does not itself create, alter, or 
revoke any individual's rights or obligations. Deletion of a site from 
the NPL does not in any way alter EPA's right to take enforcement 
actions, as appropriate. The NPL is designed primarily for 
informational purposes and to assist EPA management. In addition, 40 
CFR Section 300.425(e)(3) 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 Site Deletion

    The following information provides EPA's rationale for deleting the 
Site from the NPL:

Site Background and History

    New Hanover County Airport Burn Pit Site Superfund Site, (EPA ID: 
NCD981021157) is located in Wilmington, Brunswick County, North 
Carolina. The Site consists of a four-acre plot and is located on 
Gardner Road approximately 500 feet west of the Wilmington 
International Airport in New Hanover County. The airport is 
approximately one mile north of Wilmington, North Carolina, at latitude 
34[deg]16'29'' north and longitude 77[deg]54'55'' west. The New Hanover 
County Airport Burn Pit was constructed in 1968. From 1968 to 1979, the 
Cape Fear Technical Institute (now known as the Cape Fear Community 
College), used the burn pit for fire-training purposes, burning jet 
fuel and gasoline in the burn pit, and extinguishing the fires with 
water. The Wilmington Fire Department used the burn pit for fire-
training purposes from 1968 to 1976 and the United States Air Force 
used the burn pit for fire-training purposes during the Vietnam War.
    Jet fuel and drainage from petroleum fuel storage tanks in the area 
were burned, and the fires were extinguished with water, carbon 
dioxide, and dry chemicals. Some time prior to 1982, materials used in 
river spill cleanups were dumped into the burn pit.
    In 1986, the North Carolina Division of Health Services discovered 
heavy metals and numerous organics in the soil around the burn pit and 
in other nearby soil samples. Surface water within three (3) miles 
downstream of the Site is used for recreational activities, and an 
estuary wetland is located approximately one (1) mile from the Site. 
Approximately 6,300 people obtain drinking water from public and 
private wells within three (3) miles of the Site. A private well is 
located approximately 1,500 feet to the northwest of the Site.
    To date, the USEPA has identified six (6) potentially responsible 
parties (PRPs) at the Site: the County of New Hanover, North Carolina; 
the City of Wilmington, North Carolina; the Cape Fear Community 
College; the United States Air Force; Axel Johnson Inc. and Sprague 
Energy Corporation.
    The Site was proposed for the NPL on June 24, 1988 (53 FR 23978), 
and finalized on the NPL March 31, 1989 (54 FR 13296).

Removal Action

    EPA negotiated with the City of Wilmington, New Hanover County and 
Cape Fear Community College in March 1989, for performance of the 
remedial investigation/feasibility study (RI/FS), but the parties were 
unable to reach an agreement. In May 1990, however, the parties signed 
an Administrative Order on Consent (AOC) for a removal action to 
address all of the source material present on site. The removal began 
in November 1990 and was completed in December 1990. The removal 
involved removing waste materials, contaminated water, and contaminated 
surface and subsurface soils. A total of 12,500 gallons of water were 
removed from the pit and 6,000 gallons of water were removed from on-
site tanks. Contaminated surface and subsurface soils were removed from 
the firefighter training areas. In addition, structures associated with 
firefighter training activities were dismantled and removed, including 
the fuel supply tank and its associated underground piping system, the 
railroad tank car, the automobile bodies, and the aircraft mock-up. A 
total of 3,220 tons of contaminated soil and debris were removed. 
Excavated areas were backfilled to grade with 2,680 cubic yards of 
clean soil.

Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS)

    EPA conducted a fund-lead RI/FS in 1991 and 1992. Sampling 
performed indicated that no surface or subsurface soil contamination 
remained above concentrations that would indicate unacceptable risks to 
humans or the environment. This was a strong indication that the soil 
removal action in 1990 was successful in removing contaminated soils. 
Contaminants detected in the groundwater also included VOCs, SVOCs, and 
metals. Contaminants were found in both the shallow and deep zones of 
the upper water bearing formation. No monitoring wells (MWs) were 
completed in the underlying aquifer. The health risk posed by this NPL 
site is primarily from the future use of the groundwater as a potable 
source. This is due to the presence of contaminants at concentrations 
above EPA's MCLs for drinking water and the State of North Carolina 
groundwater quality standards.
    The Feasibility Study (FS) conducted by CDM and finalized on May 
18, 1992 addressed alternatives for groundwater remediation.

Selected Remedy

    A ROD was signed on 9/29/1992 to address contaminated groundwater 
at the site. The remedial action objectives of the ROD were to restore 
groundwater to beneficial use. The remedy components include:
     No further action for Site soils;
     A one-year period for the collection of additional data on 
the quality of the groundwater;
     Design and implementation of the groundwater remediation 
to be initiated after the year of groundwater monitoring. The selected 
groundwater remediation alternative consists of a groundwater 
extraction system, an air stripping process to remove volatile 
organics, and a pipeline discharging the treated groundwater to the 
Northside POTW system; and
     A review of the existing groundwater monitoring system to 
insure proper monitoring of groundwater quality and the effectiveness 
of the groundwater extraction system. Additional monitoring wells will 
be added to mitigate any deficiencies. The contaminants of concern 
(COCs) included benzene, chloroform, 1,2-dichloroethane, and the metals 
chromium and lead.
    The USEPA signed an UAO for Remedial Design/Remedial Action (RD/RA) 
for the Site on February 28, 1994. A Preliminary Remedial Design report

[[Page 37633]]

representing 30% design was submitted to the USEPA on December 15, 
1994. The USEPA approved the 30% submittal on February 1995. In 
accordance with the UAO, the PRPs submitted the Intermediate Design 
Report to the USEPA on June 1, 1995. The Intermediate Design Report did 
not provide a design for the preferred remedy. Instead, the PRPs 
submitted the intermediate design which proposed changing the remedy to 
an air sparging based system. This type of system was not an 
alternative previously considered; however, its cost could be 
significantly less than the pump and treat cost while effectively 
achieving the remediation goals.
    The 1992 ROD included metals contamination such as chromium and 
lead, as COCs. Afterwards, low flow (low turbidity) sampling of select 
monitoring wells was conducted resulting in no detection of metals. 
Previously identified metals were associated with preservative leaching 
of trace metals from high concentrations of solids from previous 
sampling. Since metals were determined to no longer be COCs, the PRPs 
requested permission to conduct a study to evaluate current groundwater 
remediation technologies and their potential applicability to the Burn 
Pit Site.
    The remedial technology considered best for treating the Site 
related VOCs was Air Sparging. In order to verify its effectiveness at 
the Burn Pit Site, an Air Sparging Treatability Study was conducted in 
1998 and the results were documented in the Air Sparging Pilot Test 
Treatability Study Report dated December 16, 1998. The Air Sparging 
Treatability Study results showed air sparging to be very effective at 
treating the VOCs present in the groundwater at the Site. In June 1998, 
a Feasibility Study Amendment (FSA) was then conducted to document the 
comparison of alternatives in the original ROD with the proposed air 
sparging remedy. The results were documented in the ``Air Sparging 
Pilot Test Treatability Study Report'' dated December 16, 1998. The 
study revealed that air sparging was very effective in treating the 
VOCs present in ground water at the Site. A feasibility study amendment 
was conducted to document the comparison of the pump-and-treat remedy 
selected in the ROD with the proposed air sparging remedy.

Amended Remedy

    On April 14, 2000, EPA issued an Amended Record of Decision, in 
which the Agency selected pulsed air sparging as the new remedy for 
groundwater. Pulsed air sparging consists of air being injected (as a 
pulse) into the aquifer through a strategically located network of 
vertical wells. The injected air travels through the groundwater 
thereby volatilizing and enhancing biological degradation of the 
contaminants dissolved in the groundwater.

Response Action

    The treatment system consisted of 16 pulse zones; each consisted of 
five wells for a total of 80 sparge wells. Performance verification and 
compliance monitoring wells were installed in accordance with the Final 
Remedial Design Report dated April 2002. Various air sparge wells were 
installed to test installation methods by verifying the integrity of 
the constructed seal (bentonite), under normal operating pressures. 
Upon installation, all air sparge wells were developed prior to 
testing. Initial testing of sparge well seal integrity was performed on 
seven sparge wells using a trailer-mounted compressor. Two Sullair 
compressors alternately produced the air pulse in succession throughout 
the 80 well systems. The rate of air injected continuously increased 
and was eventually terminated when a steady state condition was 
reached. Vapors naturally vented into the atmosphere. Each pulse of air 
was injected at a pressure of 15 psig and continued for 90 minutes. The 
recharge time between each pulse of forced air was 23.5 hours. A 
comprehensive monitoring program was implemented to verify that the 
treatment system reduced the contaminants.
    The system was started in June 2003 and was turned off on January 
22, 2010.

Cleanup Goals

    The groundwater clean-up levels for the remedy are listed below and 
based on North Carolina 2L Groundwater Quality Standards (GWQS):

                     Groundwater Clean-Up Standards
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Chemicals of concern                  Performance goals
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               GROUNDWATER
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benzene....................................  1 [mu]g/L.
Chloroform.................................  0.19 [mu]g/L.
1.2 Dichloroethane.........................  0.38 [mu]g/L.
Ethylbenzene...............................  29 [mu]g/L.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Laboratory analyses of the groundwater samples collected from site 
groundwater monitoring and performance verification wells in January 
2010 revealed no EPA Method 602 parameter concentrations in excess of 
applicable 2L GWQS except 1.24 [mu]g/L Benzene in the MWD-002 
groundwater sample. The subsequent resampling of monitoring well MWD-
002 over four (4) consecutive quarterly sampling events from January 
2010 to January 2011 did not reveal any compound concentrations in 
excess of applicable 2L GWQS.

Operation and Maintenance

    No operation and maintenance activities are required for this site.

Five-Year Reviews

    The 2008 Five-Year Review found that the selected remedy at the 
site was protective of human health and the environment in the short-
term, because all exposure pathways that could result in unacceptable 
risks were being controlled. The contaminated soils and waste materials 
have been removed from the site leaving no remaining source material 
and the contaminated groundwater is currently being treated and is not 
being used as a source for potable water. However, if the additional 
air sparging wells are not effective at treating the remaining 
contamination, then in order for the remedy to be protective in the 
long-term, ICs may need to be put in place on the property where 
contamination is above federal and state MCLs. The ICs were not 
implemented because groundwater monitoring showed that groundwater 
contamination met the restoration cleanup levels in 2011. Since no 
hazardous substances are present on-site above levels allowing for 
unlimited use and unrestricted exposure, five-year reviews at the site 
were discontinued.

Community Involvement

    EPA has conducted a range of community involvement activities at 
the Site to solicit community input and to ensure that the public 
remains informed about site-related activities throughout the cleanup 
process. Outreach activities have included public notices, interviews 
and public meetings on cleanup activities. In addition to publishing 
notices about its intent to delete the Site and amend the ROD in the 
Federal Register and in a local newspaper, EPA conducted a public 
meeting on November 30, 1999, to provide the public with the 
opportunity to comment on the proposed ROD Amendment. The ROD Amendment 
and Responsiveness Summary, addressing comments received during the 
comment period, have been included in the Administrative Record.
    EPA has also prepared the deletion docket, which includes the 
documents, which EPA relied on for its decision to propose deleting the 
Site from the NPL. Therefore, the public participation

[[Page 37634]]

requirements, required in CERCLA Section 113(k), 42 U.S.C. Section 
9613(k), and CERCLA Section 117, 42 U.S.C. Section 9617, have been 
satisfied.

Determination That the Site Meets the Criteria for Deletion in the NCP

    The NCP specifies that EPA may delete a site from the NPL if ``all 
appropriate responsible parties or other persons have implemented all 
appropriate response actions required.'' EPA, with concurrence of the 
State of North Carolina, through the Department of the Environment and 
Natural Resources, by a letter dated February 16, 2012, believes this 
criteria for deletion have been satisfied. The contaminated soils have 
been removed and the Site meets all the Site completion requirements as 
specified in Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER) 
Directive 9320.2-09-A-P, Closeout Procedures for National Priorities 
List Sites. Specifically, confirmatory sampling verifies that the Site 
has achieved the ROD cleanup standards, and that all cleanup actions 
specified in the ROD have been implemented. Therefore, EPA is deleting 
the Site from the NPL.

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: May 11, 2012.
Gwendolyn Keyes Fleming,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2012-15340 Filed 6-21-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P