[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 3 (Wednesday, January 5, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 510-515]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-33109]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 300
[EPA-HQ-SFUND-1994-0001; FRL-9246-9]
National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan;
National Priorities List: Partial Deletion of the AT&SF Albuquerque
Superfund Site
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposes to
delete, from the National Priority List (NPL), 40 CFR part 300,
appendix B, 62 acres of the AT&SF Albuquerque Superfund Site (Site).
The Site is located in Albuquerque, Bernalillo County, New Mexico.
After this deletion, this 62 acres will no longer be part of the Site
and only the 27 acres making up the southern half of the Site will
remain a listed Superfund Site (see the Environmental Protection
Easement and Declaration of Restrictive Covenants in the docket). The
only contaminated medium that was identified on the northern 62 acres
of the Site was soil. This soil was remediated so that the
concentration levels of hazardous substances that remain are consistent
with future industrial or commercial use. This notice of intent for
partial deletion is being published by EPA with the concurrence of the
State of New Mexico, through the New Mexico Environment Department
(NMED), because EPA has determined that all appropriate response
actions for this parcel under CERCLA, other than operation,
maintenance, and five-year reviews, have been completed. However, this
partial deletion does not preclude future actions under Superfund.
DATES: Comments must be received by February 4, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID no. EPA-HQ-
SFUND-1994-0001, by one of the following methods:
http://www.regulations.gov: Follow on-line instructions
for submitting comments.
E-mail: [email protected].
Fax: 214-665-6660, Attention: Katrina Higgins-Coltrain.
Mail: Katrina Higgins-Coltrain, Remedial Project Manager,
U.S. EPA Region 6 (6SF-RL), 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, TX 75202-2733.
Hand delivery: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733. Such deliveries
are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID no. EPA-HQ-SFUND-
1994-0001. 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://
[[Page 511]]
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. 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 e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail 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 you submit. 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 hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
at http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at:
U.S. EPA Region 6 Library, 7th Floor, 1445 Ross Avenue,
Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, (214) 665-6424;
Albuquerque Public Library, Main Downtown Branch, 501
Copper Avenue, NW., Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102, Contact: John
Vittal; and,
New Mexico Environment Department, Harold Runnels
Building, 1190 St. Francis Drive, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87505.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Katrina Higgins-Coltrain, Remedial
Project Manager (RPM), U.S. EPA Region 6 (6SF-RL), 1445 Ross Avenue,
Dallas, TX 75202-2733, (214) 665-8143 or 1-800-533-3508
([email protected]).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. NPL Deletion Criteria
III. Deletion Procedures
IV. Basis for Partial Site Deletion
I. Introduction
EPA Region 6 is publishing this notice of intent to delete the soil
and ground water associated with the northern 62-acre parcel of the
AT&SF Albuquerque Superfund Site (Site) from the NPL and requests
public comment on this proposed action. The NPL constitutes Appendix B
of 40 CFR part 300, which is the NCP, which EPA promulgated pursuant to
section 105 of 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). This partial deletion of the 62-acre parcel of the
AT&SF Albuquerque Superfund Site (EPA Site Identification number
NMD980622864) is proposed in accordance with 40 CFR 300.425(e) and is
consistent with the Notice of Policy Change: Partial Deletion of Sites
Listed on the National Priorities List. 60 FR 55466 (Nov. 1, 1995). As
described in Sec. 300.425(e)(3) of the NCP, sites deleted from the NPL
remain eligible for Fund-financed remedial actions if future conditions
warrant such actions.
EPA will accept comments concerning its proposal for partial
deletion for thirty (30) days from the date of publication 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 AT&SF Albuquerque Superfund
Site and demonstrates how the northern 62-acre parcel meets the partial
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:
(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, 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 northern 62-acre
parcel of the Site:
(1) EPA consulted with the State of New Mexico, through the NMED,
prior to developing this notice of intent for partial deletion.
(2) EPA has provided the state 30 working days for review of this
notice prior to today's publication;
(3) In accordance with the criteria discussed above, EPA has
determined that no further response is appropriate;
(4) The State of New Mexico, through the NMED, concurred with the
intent for partial deletion of the northern 62-acre parcel of the AT&SF
Albuquerque Superfund Site from the NPL by letter dated November 4,
2010;
(5) Concurrently with the publication of this Notice of Intent for
Partial Deletion in the Federal Register, a notice is being published
in the major local newspaper, Albuquerque Journal. The newspaper notice
announces the 30-day public comment period concerning the notice of
intent for partial deletion of the Site from the NPL.
(6) The EPA placed copies of documents supporting the proposed
deletion in the deletion docket and made these items available for
public inspection and copying at the Site information repositories
identified above.
If comments are received on this document within the 30-day public
comment period, EPA will evaluate and respond appropriately to the
comments before making a final decision to partially delete the
northern 62-acre parcel. 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 partially delete the northern 62-acre parcel of
the AT&SF Albuquerque Superfund Site, the Regional Administrator will
publish a
[[Page 512]]
final Notice of Partial 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 included
in the Site information repositories listed above.
Deletion of a portion of a site from the NPL does not itself
create, alter, or revoke any individual's rights or obligations.
Deletion of a portion 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. 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 Site Deletion
The following information provides EPA's rationale for deleting the
northern 62-acre parcel of the AT&SF Albuquerque Superfund Site from
the NPL.
Site Background and History
The AT&SF Albuquerque Superfund Site (Site) is located at 3300
Second Street, SW., in the South Valley area of the City of
Albuquerque, Bernalillo County, New Mexico. It is the location of the
former The Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company Tie Treating
Plant (facility) where creosote and other compounds were used in the
wood preservation process. The Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway
Company (BNSF Railway), a successor railroad corporation to the
Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company (AT&SF) and a wholly
owned subsidiary of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corp., is the
owner of the Site. Although, the Site encompasses approximately 89
acres, the former treatment process area was primarily located on the
southern 27-acre parcel, and the tie storage area was primarily located
on the northern 62-acre parcel. A detailed map and coordinates of the
northern 62-acre parcel (actual size is 62.6121 acres) is located in
the deletion docket. The Site was proposed for inclusion on the EPA NPL
October 14, 1992 [57 FR 47204] and made final on December 16, 1994 [59
FR 65212, 65221 (December 16, 1994)]. The EPA Site Identification
number is NMD980622864.
The facility operated as a wood pressure treatment plant from March
1908 to January 1972. The facility primarily used creosote and creosote
petroleum mixtures for the manufacture of pressure treated wood
products, including railroad cross ties, bridge ties, switch ties,
bridge timbers, road crossing materials, bridge piling materials,
lumber, stock pen posts and fence posts. From 1914 through 1926, some
materials were treated with zinc chloride, followed by a creosote-
petroleum mixture. Additionally, documents from the 1950s and early
1960s refer to experiments and small scale projects performed using
solutions containing 2% to 10% pentachlorophenol. In 1972, the plant
was totally dismantled, and the only physical feature remaining on-site
was the wastewater reservoir/wastewater sump.
The Site can be divided into five general areas of environmental
impacts from the plant's former wood treating operations. The plant
treatment process area covered approximately 27 acres of the facility
and included four areas of environmental impact: The wood treatment
area, the drip tracks, the wastewater reservoir, and the wastewater
discharge ditch. The remaining area of environmental impact was the tie
storage area which was located on the northern 62 acres. The northern
62 acres is the area proposed for partial deletion; therefore, the
following discussion pertains to actions taken on the northern 62-acre
parcel.
In 1996, three areas were excavated from the northern 62-acre tie
storage area, and were backfilled with clean soil after confirmation
testing.
In 1987, approximately 25 acres of the northern 62-acre tie storage
area were redeveloped for industrial purposes by BNSF. This
redevelopment occurred when an auto unloading facility, with an
associated intermodal ramp for unloading and loading containers and
trailers on railcars, was built. It is an active facility currently in
operation. The northern 62-acre parcel also includes an estimated 17-
to 20-acre parcel under consideration for purchase by an industrial
concrete distribution company (company). BNSF and the company retain an
open dialogue regarding the potential parcel sale and redevelopment.
Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/FS)
The field investigation was considered a comprehensive approach
that addressed the Site as one operable unit. From 1987 to 1999, five
distinct phases of investigation were completed to define the extent of
impact on soil and ground water. The field activities included sampling
and characterization through geophysical surveys, hand auger, direct
push, cone penetrometer, drill rig, ground water monitoring well
installation (permanent and temporary), aquifer tests, and ground water
modeling.
Ground Water Contamination
The CERCLA RI/FS for the Site was conducted under an Administrative
Order on Consent entered between the EPA and AT&SF (now BNSF) in 1994.
The RI/FS was completed by TRC Environmental Corporation in 2001 for
BNSF and was approved by the EPA. Among the findings of the RI/FS was
the fact that most of the organic contamination found at the Site
occurs as a dense non-aqueous phase liquid (DNAPL) containing organic
compounds that slowly dissolve into the ground water and preferentially
adsorb to soil particles in the aquifer matrix. The RI report indicates
that DNAPL is present in the subsurface as either ``free phase'' or
``residual phase''. The free phase is that portion of the DNAPL that
can continue to migrate and sink into the aquifer, whereas the residual
phase is that portion of the DNAPL that is trapped in pore spaces by
capillary forces and cannot generally migrate as a separate liquid.
Both occurrences of the DNAPL act as continuing sources of
contamination to ground water. The RI estimated that there are between
59,300 and 70,000 gallons of DNAPL associated with the southern 27-acre
plant treatment process area and adjacent southern property. No
identified DNAPL sources or related ground water contamination were
identified in the three ground water zones underlying the northern 62-
acre parcel. Ground water contamination associated with the southern
27-acre parcel is not expected to impact the ground water underlying
the northern 62-acre parcel due to current ground water flow in the
east-southeast direction and the placement of institutional controls
restricting ground water extraction within the northern 62-acre parcel.
Soil Contamination
As expected, the nature of contamination across the Site is fairly
typical of a wood treating operation. These contaminants consist of
polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons. In addition, zinc contamination of
the soil was identified in the process area. The RI estimated that the
volume of contaminated soil was 5,600 cubic yards. Although the plant
used pentachlorophenol in the 1960s, its use is not believed to be as
significant as the use of other preservatives at the plant, as there
have not been significant levels of associated 2,3,7,8-tetrachloro-
dibenzo-para-dioxin (TCDD or dioxin)
[[Page 513]]
detected in wastes present at the Site. As such, dioxin is not
considered a contaminant of concern (COC) at this Site.
The northern 62-acre parcel was used as the tie storage area. This
area was where the treated ties were stored and allowed to dry.
Releases to this area would be restricted largely to drippings from
treated products. Creosote drippings would accumulate at locations
where ties were repeatedly stacked, but these accumulations may tend to
dry out between loads. With the advent of vapor drying in 1953, the
amount of drippings was reduced to some extent.
The tie storage area was investigated in two stages. However, prior
to these stages, six shallow boreholes were hand augered to a depth of
18 inches and a composite sample was collected and analyzed for
semivolatile organics and arsenic. This was followed by a grid
investigation of this area in October 1994, which included an
additional 24 locations.
Using a grid layout, 24 shallow hollow-stem auger boreholes were
logged continuously to a depth of 5 feet. The first sample was
collected from the first natural soil encountered below any fill
material, usually at a depth of approximately 3 inches to 2 feet. If a
clay or silt layer was encountered in the upper 2 feet of soil, a
sample was collected from the top of this layer. Of the 24 sample
locations, one sample was collected at each of 19 locations and two
samples were collected at each of five locations. Results from the 24
sample locations were compared to the Agency for Toxic Substances and
Disease Registry (ATSDR) health-based concentrations for creosote
constituents considered by ATSDR to be a potential threat to public
health if exceeded. Three locations were identified with concentrations
of one or more creosote constituents above the ATSDR health-based
concentration. These health-based concentrations were being used as the
screening comparison criteria at the time of the 62-acre tie storage
area investigation because the preliminary remediation goal (PRG) of 8
mg/kg benzo(a)pyrene (BAP) equivalent had not yet been derived.
However, when the PRG was issued, the data from the 24 sample locations
were reviewed and compared with the 8 mg/kg BAP equivalent PRG. This
resulted in the identification of the same three areas of concern
originally identified during the investigation. No additional sample
locations exceeded the 8 mg/kg BAP equivalent PRG.
Based upon the results of this first stage, the three areas of
concern underwent a second investigation in March 1995. Using the 8 mg/
kg BAP equivalent PRG, the soil from areas with high concentrations of
creosote constituents was excavated and stockpiled inside the southern
27-acre fenced area to be managed as part of the soil remediation in
July 1996. Depths of excavation ranged from 2 to 7 feet, and
confirmation samples did not identify exceedances of the PRG of 8 mg/kg
BAP equivalent. The highest BAP equivalent reported for soil was 0.572
mg/kg, while the highest zinc concentration reported for soil was 55.6
mg/kg.
The removal of soil from the northern 62-acre tie storage area in
1996 was motivated by BNSF's plans to expand its auto unloading
facility. The future land use for this area was anticipated to be
industrial. BNSF expected that the available land would be developed
into a railroad switching yard and an expansion to the intermodal
facility used for unloading automobiles from railcars. However, these
plans for construction are no longer considered viable by BNSF.
Selected Remedy
The Record of Decision (ROD) was signed on June 27, 2002. The
principal threat and low-level threat wastes at the Site were to be
addressed through in-situ solidification/stabilization and run-off/run-
on management for soil; an aggressive performance-based approach for
remediation of contaminated ground water consisting of ground water
restoration through pump and treat and DNAPL source removal with hot
spot treatment; and institutional controls. Based on RI data and
subsequent ground water sampling, ground water contamination was not
identified under the northern 62-acre parcel. Therefore, the only
medium of concern for the northern 62-acre parcel was soil. As such,
only the soil remedial action objectives and associated cleanup levels
selected in the ROD are presented here. [The ROD was later amended
through an Explanation of Significant Differences; however, these
changes did not effect the northern 62-acre parcel and were specific to
the southern 27-acre parcel.] The selected cleanup levels for soil are
7.8 mg/kg BAP equivalent based on an industrial/commercial use scenario
and 200 mg/kg zinc based on an ecological scenario. The selected
Remedial Action Objectives for soil included:
Prevent the ground water from being impacted above the
maximum contaminant levels through transport of COCs from the
unsaturated zone.
Prevent storm water runoff from areas that exceed any
remediation goals.
Prevent the inhalation, ingestion, and dermal contact of
contaminated soils for future on-site commercial/industrial/utility
workers exposed to the soil.
Prevent contaminated soils from becoming airborne and
leaving the Site as dust.
Prevent ecological receptors from being adversely impacted
by on-site contamination.
The selected remedial action (RA) would not result in the Site
being available for unlimited use and unrestricted exposure because
Site contaminants in the soil will only be addressed to levels
protective of future industrial or commercial use. As specified in the
ROD, five-year reviews as well as operation and maintenance and
institutional controls (ICs) will be necessary for this RA, and will
include both the 62- and 27-acre parcels.
On February 27, 2008, an Environmental Protection Easement and
Declaration of Restrictive Covenants was filed by BNSF, after approval
by EPA and NMED, and recorded by the County Clerk of Bernalillo County,
New Mexico. These ICs run with the land and restrict the use or
development of the Site property and the use or development of ground
water on or underlying the property. Specifically, the ICs prevent any
use or development that would threaten or damage remedial components on
the Site, which would include potential damage to the cap or underlying
in-situ solidified/stabilized contaminated soil. Further, at least 30
days prior to any development or property conveyance, the EPA and NMED
shall be notified in writing. Further, any development within the 27-
acre southern parcel of the Site requires prior EPA review and written
approval of development, along with certification that remediation
goals have been met. Regardless of any development or property
conveyance, BNSF's obligations under the Consent Decree for Site
cleanup remain in effect, and the Site, including both the 27- and 62-
acre parcels, remains subject to inspections and five-year reviews.
In addition to the Environmental Protection Easement and
Declaration of Restrictive Covenants, the New Mexico Office of the
State Engineer instituted a temporary IC in the form of a moratorium on
new permits for ground water wells within a 200-ft buffer zone of the
currently identified ground water plume surface area while remedial
action is being performed. This moratorium was filed on January 29,
2009, to protect human health and minimize interference with the ground
water remediation activities taking place
[[Page 514]]
on the adjacent 27-acre parcel until all ground water remediation goals
have been met. This moratorium will remain enforceable until ground
water remedial action goals associated with the southern 27-acre parcel
are met.
Data collected during the RI, in conjunction with the excavation of
soil from the three areas of concern within the northern 62-acre tie
storage treatment area, indicate that the soil and ground water meet
the cleanup levels established in the ROD. Although a PRG of 8 mg/kg
BAP equivalent was used during the RI soil excavation, the RI data and
subsequent confirmation sample results were compared with the ROD soil
cleanup levels of 7.8 mg/kg BAP equivalent and 200 mg/kg zinc to ensure
that the RI soil excavation met the soil cleanup levels in the ROD. The
highest BAP equivalent reported for soil was 0.572 mg/kg, while the
highest zinc concentration reported for soil was 55.6 mg/kg. These
confirmation soil data results meet the ROD cleanup levels. No ground
water contamination exceeding the ROD ground water cleanup levels for
the northern 62-acre parcel was identified.
Due to its proximity to the adjacent rail line, an estimated 17- to
20-acre parcel of the northern 62-acre parcel is being considered for
purchase from BNSF by an industrial concrete distribution company
(company). In support of the redevelopment potential and ongoing sales
negotiations, the company completed a characterization study of the
parcel of interest in 2006 that included both ground water and soil
sampling. Ground water data collected from four monitoring wells did
not identify ground water contamination areas of concern; however, soil
data did identify areas of concern.
In response to the study's finding, BNSF conducted additional soil
sampling and remediation activities in 2007. Soil data collected from
the 17- to 20-acre parcel exceeded the soil cleanup levels identified
in the ROD, and resulted in the excavation of soil and asphalt waste
from the northern 62-acre parcel. The excavated material was stockpiled
on the southern 27-acre fenced area for inclusion in the soil
remediation action. Subsequent confirmation samples from excavated
areas indicated that ROD soil cleanup levels were met. The highest BAP
equivalent reported for soil was 7.4 mg/kg, and the highest zinc
concentration reported for soil was 179 mg/kg.
Cleanup Goals
The quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) program for the Site
was conducted in accordance with the work plans prepared to implement
the RI and the RA construction activities. The EPA, in conjunction with
NMED, conducted regular oversight throughout the implementation of the
RI and remedial activities. Also, EPA and NMED reviewed and commented
on all project plans and reports for the Site.
The quality assurance project plan incorporated EPA and State
comments and requirements. The EPA and NMED reviewed the RI excavation
work, confirmation sample collection, and data analysis completed in
1996. The EPA and NMED reviewed RA construction work completed on the
62-acre parcel in 2007 for compliance with QA/QC protocols. The RI
excavation activities at the Site were determined to be consistent with
the RI work plans and construction practices, while the 2007 RA
construction activities were determined to be consistent with the ROD,
and remedial design and RA work plans and specifications. No deviations
or non-adherence to QA/QC protocols or specifications were identified.
All sampling equipment was properly maintained, inspected, and
decontaminated as necessary during sampling events in accordance with
instructions and protocols established in the field sampling plans and
quality assurance project plans. The EPA analytical methods and
contract laboratory program-like procedures and protocols were used for
all confirmation and monitoring samples for soil using a private
laboratory contracted by the potentially responsible party (PRP).
Based on remedial, third party, and supplemental Site investigation
results, soil excavation on the northern 62-acre parcel addressed all
identified soil areas that exceeded the ROD soil cleanup levels of 7.8
mg/kg BAP equivalent and 200 mg/kg zinc. All confirmation sampling
results are below the established cleanup level of 7.8 mg/kg BAP
equivalent and 200 mg/kg zinc indicating that all soil remedial action
objectives have been met. The excavated areas were backfilled with
suitable materials meeting Site-specific cleanup levels and graded for
proper drainage. In addition, ground water data have not identified
areas of ground water contamination beneath the northern 62-acre
parcel. The required ICs for protection of human health and the
environment were filed on the subject property restricting land and
ground water use.
Operation and Maintenance and Institutional Controls
Operation and maintenance actions for the northern 62-acre parcel
of the Site proposed for partial deletion are limited. No treated soil
repositories are located on this portion of the property and no ground
water contamination plumes have been identified there. This portion of
the property is currently fenced and partially reused as an auto
unloading facility. The 62-acre parcel is under restricted land use
(industrial only), and is under restricted ground water use controls
which support ongoing remedial actions associated with the southern 27-
acre parcel. Site inspections to determine whether land and ground
water use restrictions are being met and to confirm that the ICs remain
in place will be conducted at a minimum of once per year.
Five-Year Review
Since hazardous substances remain on-site at levels which do not
allow unrestricted use and exposure, the Site's land and ground water
use is restricted. The Site is subject to five-year reviews to ensure
the continued protectiveness of the remedy consistent with section
121(c) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9621(c), 40 CFR 300.430(f)(4)(ii), and the
current guidance on Five-Year Reviews (EPA 540-R-01-007, OSWER No.
9355.7-03B-P, Comprehensive Five-Year Review Guidance, June 2001). The
NCP requires EPA to conduct statutory five-year reviews at sites where,
upon attainment of ROD cleanup levels, hazardous substances remain on-
site at concentrations which do not allow for unlimited use and
unrestricted exposure. Based on the five-year review results, EPA will
determine whether human health and the environment continue to be
adequately protected by the implemented remedy. The first five-year
review will be completed no later than September 29, 2013.
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. Throughout the Site's history, the community has been
interested and involved with Site activity. The EPA has kept the
community and other interested parties updated on Site activities
through informational meetings, fact sheets, and public meetings.
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.
In support of the partial deletion proposal, the EPA and NMED held
an open house on October 14, 2010. The purpose of the meeting was to
present and discuss the partial deletion
[[Page 515]]
proposal. A fact sheet on the proposal was also mailed to the
community.
Determination That the Site Meets the Criteria for Deletion in the NCP
The NCP [40 CFR 300.425(e)] states that a site may be deleted from
the NPL when no further response action is appropriate. EPA, in
consultation with the State of New Mexico, has determined that all
appropriate response actions under CERCLA for the northern 62-acre
parcel of the AT&SF Albuquerque Superfund Site, other than operation,
maintenance, and five-year reviews, have been implemented, and no
further response action by the PRP is appropriate.
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.
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.
Dated: December 17, 2010.
Al Armendariz,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2010-33109 Filed 1-4-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P