[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 145 (Friday, July 27, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 35555-35560]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-16119]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 300

[EPA-HQ-SFUND-2008-0084; FRL-9981-36--Region 6]


National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan; 
National Priorities List: Deletion of the Old Esco Manufacturing 
Superfund Site

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 6 is 
publishing a direct final Notice of Deletion of the Old Esco 
Manufacturing, Superfund Site (Site), located in Greenville, Texas, 
from the National Priorities List (NPL). 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). This direct final deletion is being published 
by EPA with the concurrence of the State of Texas, through the Texas 
Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), because EPA has determined 
that all appropriate response actions under CERCLA, have been 
completed. However, this deletion does not preclude future actions 
under Superfund.

DATES: This direct final deletion is effective September 10, 2018 
unless EPA receives adverse comments by August 27, 2018. 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: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID no. EPA-HQ-
SFUND-2008-0084, by one of the following methods:
    <bullet> http://www.regulations.gov. Follow on-line instructions 
for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or 
removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received 
to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you 
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other 
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia 
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written 
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and 
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will 
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of 
the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing 
system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment 
policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general 
guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
    <bullet> Email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#523f27373e3e37207c30203b333c123722337c353d24"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="8de0f8e8e1e1e8ffa3efffe4ece3cde8fdeca3eae2fb">[email protected]</span></a>.
    <bullet> Mail: Brian W. Mueller; U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, Region 6; Superfund Division (6SF-RL); 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 
1200, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733.
    <bullet> Hand delivery: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733; 
Contact: Brian W. Mueller (214) 665-7167. 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-
2008-0084. The http://www.regulations.gov website 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

[[Page 35556]]

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 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 statue. 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:

City of Greenville Municipal Bldg., 2821 Washington Street, Greenville, 
TX 75401, Telephone Number: (903) 457-3130, Hours of Operation: Monday 
thru Friday 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 
1200, Dallas, TX 75202-2733, Telephone number: (800) 533-3508, Contact: 
Brian W. Mueller: (214) 665-7167, Hours of operation: Monday thru 
Friday, 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. and 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, Records Management Center, 
Central File Room, Technical Park Center Bld. E, 1st Floor, Room 1003, 
12100 Park 35 Circle, Austin, TX 78753, Telephone Numbers: (512) 239-
2900 and (800) 633-9363, Hours of operation: Monday thru Friday, 8:00 
a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian W. Mueller, Remedial Project 
Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, 6SF-RL 1445 
Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, (214) 665-7167, 
email <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#4a273f2f26262f38642838232b240a2f3a2b642d253c"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="9ef3ebfbf2f2fbecb0fcecf7fff0defbeeffb0f9f1e8">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

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

I. Introduction

    EPA Region 6 is publishing this direct final Notice of Deletion of 
the Old Esco Manufacturing (Site), from the National Priorities List 
(NPL). The NPL constitutes Appendix B of 40 CFR part 300, which is the 
National 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 
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.
    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 Old Esco Manufacturing 
Superfund Site and demonstrates how it meets the deletion criteria. 
Section V discusses EPA's action to delete the Site from the NPL unless 
adverse comments are received during the public comment period.

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.

III. Deletion Procedures

    The following procedures apply to deletion of the Site:
    (1) EPA consulted with the State of Texas prior to developing this 
direct final Notice of Deletion and the Notice of Intent to Delete co-
published today in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of the Federal 
Register.
    (2) EPA has provided the state 30 working days for review of this 
notice and the parallel Notice of Intent to Delete prior to their 
publication today, and the state, through the Texas Commission on 
Environmental Quality, has concurred on the 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 is being published in a major local newspaper, 
Greenville Herald Banner. 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 inspection and copying at the Site information repositories 
identified above.
    (5) If adverse comments are received within the 30-day public 
comment period on this deletion action, 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 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 
Site from the NPL:

Site Background and History

    The Old Esco Manufacturing (``Old Esco'' or ``site'') Superfund 
Site (CERCLIS ID TXD980573808) is located at 500 Forrester Street, 
Greenville, Hunt County, Texas. The geographic coordinates of the Site 
are Latitude 33.138732[deg] N and Longitude -96.075961[deg] W. The 
facility, which is currently abandoned, is situated on a

[[Page 35557]]

4.7-acre tract of land owned by the City of Greenville.
    The boundaries of the Site are surrounded by fencing. The Site is 
bordered to the north by Forrester Street, to the east by a residential 
area and vacant lot, to the south by the frontage road of Interstate 30 
and a drainage pathway to Horse Creek and the Cowleech Fork of the 
Sabine River, and to the west by a private lake. The Site consisted of 
several attached buildings that form one main building (125 by 500 
feet), a small shed (15 by 20 feet), and vacant land. A former soil and 
gravel parking lot is located on the north and west sides of the 
building.
    Esco began operations at the Site in the late 1940s, leasing the 
property and building, until approximately 1970, when the company 
relocated to another property in Greenville, Texas. In 1983, Esco 
purchased the Site and owned it until it defaulted for non-payment of 
taxes in 2001. Esco manufactured electrical transformers and high 
voltage switchgear for electrical distribution at the Site. Other 
manufacturing operations at the Site included metal fabrication, 
welding, grinding, sandblasting, silver electroplating, and painting. 
Completed transformers from the facility were either shipped dry (i.e., 
empty of coolant) or were filled with polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) 
dielectric oil, depending on the requirements of the purchaser.
    PCBs are mixtures of synthetic organic chemicals that were commonly 
used for various applications from approximately 1929 until 1979. PCBs 
were regulated under a series of EPA actions culminating with a ban in 
1979 on manufacturing, processing, distribution, and use of PCBs under 
the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). Items such as transformers and 
hydraulic fluids were identified as high-risk sources and were targeted 
for accelerated phase-out.
    In July 1980, the Texas Department of Water Resources (TDWR) 
received a complaint about the historic disposal of transformer oil by 
Esco on the property. The investigation by TDWR revealed the presence 
of PCBs at concentrations of 760, 8,400, and 85,000 milligrams per 
kilogram (mg/kg) in the soils. In April 1981, the TDWR recommended that 
Esco conduct an extent-of-contamination survey within 180 days and 
develop a removal plan that would eliminate the PCB-contaminated soil 
from the Site. In 1990, Esco filed for Chapter 11 Bankruptcy without 
conducting the cleanup. In 1991, the Chapter 11 bankruptcy was 
converted to a Chapter 7 bankruptcy. In 2003, the (TCEQ) conducted a 
Phase I & II Environmental Site Assessment, and installed one new 
monitoring well and collected 23 surface and subsurface soil samples. 
Chemical analysis of the surface soil samples indicated the presence of 
the PCB, Aroclor-1260 in concentrations ranging from 0.338 to 2,390 mg/
kg. Chemical analysis of the subsurface soil samples indicated the 
presence of Aroclor-1260 at a concentration of 12.2 mg/kg. Ground water 
was encountered at approximately 10 to 15 feet below ground surface 
(bgs). Chemical analysis of the ground water samples collected from two 
monitoring wells indicated the presence of Aroclor-1260.
    In 2004, the TCEQ formally referred the Site to EPA Region 6 for 
assistance. From 2005 through 2007, EPA's removal program conducted 
numerous field sampling and assessment activities at the Site and 
adjacent properties to determine the extent of contamination and for 
National Priorities List (NPL) Hazard Ranking System scoring purposes. 
The Site was proposed to the NPL on March 19, 2008, (73 FR 14742). The 
Site was added to the NPL as final on September 3, 2008, (73 FR 51368).

History of EPA CERCLA Removal Actions

    EPA conducted two Time Critical Removal Actions which began in 
August 2008 and September 2009, respectively. The purpose of these 
Removal Actions was to investigate the PCB-contaminated soils in the 
residential and other adjacent areas of the Site; and to eliminate the 
imminent threat and substantial endangerment to public health or 
welfare, or to the environment, posed by site-related contamination 
associated with the Old Esco Manufacturing Site. Based on removal 
assessment activities conducted by EPA, the Old Esco Manufacturing Site 
and surrounding residential properties were found to contain elevated 
levels of PCBs above the EPA Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) 
screening level of 1 milligram per kilogram (mg/kg).

First Removal Action

    The first of these two Removal Actions was completed in January 
2009. This Removal Action included:
    <bullet> Removal of PCB-contaminated soils with a concentration 
greater than 1.0 mg/kg from six adjacent residential properties and the 
adjacent Texas Department of Transportation road right-of-way drainage 
ditches located directly east of the Site.
    <bullet> Restoration of the six residential properties and roadside 
ditches.
    <bullet> Transportation and disposal of 922 tons of soils in the 
CSC Landfill in Avalon, Texas with concentrations of PCBs equal to or 
greater than 50.0 mg/kg (TSCA soils) and 4,221 tons of soils in the 
Maloy Landfill near Campbell, Texas with concentrations of PCBs less 
than 50.0 mg/kg (Non-TSCA soils).
    <bullet> On-site consolidation and storage of approximately 4,000 
cubic yards (yd\3\) of TSCA soils in the building.
    <bullet> Fencing of the perimeter of the Esco property.
    <bullet> Removal and disposal of 120 yd\3\ of asbestos-containing 
materials from the on-site building in the Maloy Landfill.
    <bullet> Placement of ripple dams/storm water controls in drainage 
pathways between residential properties and the Site to reduce the 
potential for contaminated soil backflow onto clean areas during 
flooding situations.
    <bullet> Placement of ripple dams at several locations on the Esco 
drainage system to reduce off-site soil migration.

Second Removal Action

    The second Removal Action was completed in December 2009. This 
Removal Action included:
    <bullet> Removal of soils with concentrations of PCBs greater than 
1.0 mg/kg from three residential properties and portions of the road 
side drainage ditches along Fannin and Forrester Streets.
    <bullet> Restoration of the three residential properties and the 
road side drainage ditches.
    <bullet> Transportation and disposal of approximately 3,194 tons of 
soils in the Maloy Landfill with concentrations of PCBs less than 50.0 
mg/kg (Non-TSCA soils).

Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/FS)

    In 2009, EPA's remedial program started and completed the off-site 
Remedial Investigation (RI) and extent of contamination study by 
collecting soil samples for PCB analysis from an additional 52 
residential properties, and from Texas Department of Transportation 
highway median and road right-of-way drainage ditches that had not been 
previously sampled. The RI also included the collection of twelve co-
located water and sediment samples from Horse Creek and the Cowleech 
Fork of the Sabine River, and the collection of ground water samples 
for PCB analyses.
    In 2010, EPA's remedial program completed the full RI/FS. Surface 
and subsurface soil samples were collected from the on-site areas of 
the Site to determine the nature and extent of contamination. Sampling 
results

[[Page 35558]]

showed that soils as deep as 10.0 feet below ground surface were 
impacted by PCBs and required remediation. TSCA PCB regulations applied 
to the Site because surface and subsurface soils were contaminated by 
PCBs. The concentrations of PCBs required that the contaminated soils 
be managed as non-TSCA (i.e., concentration less than 50.0 mg/l total 
PCBs) or TSCA wastes (i.e., concentration equal to or greater than 50.0 
mg/kg total PCBs).
    Ground water samples were collected from the on-site monitoring 
wells to determine the nature and extent of contamination in the ground 
water underlying the Site. The primary ground water contaminants were 
PCBs and the extent of ground water impact was limited. A total of nine 
monitoring wells were installed on the Site. Five were installed and 
sampled prior to the Site being listed on the NPL. In 2003 the wells 
were sampled and the results indicated that the PCB Aroclor-1260 was 
present in the ground water in two monitoring wells at concentrations 
ranging from 9.26 to 0.379 micrograms per liter ([micro]g/L). In 2009 
the wells were resampled and the same two wells reported PCB results of 
1.1 and 1.5 [micro]g/L, both above the Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) 
of 0.5 [micro]g/L.
    In 2010, four additional wells were installed by EPA's contractor. 
Nine ground water samples were collected for PCB analysis in 2010. The 
ground water chemical analytical data collected indicated that only 
Aroclor-1260 was detected in four wells ranging from 0.04 to 0.46 
[micro]g/L, which were below the MCL of 0.5 [micro]g/L.
    Surface water samples were collected from Horse Creek and the 
Cowleech Fork of the Sabine River to determine the nature and extent of 
surface water contamination. No Aroclors were detected at the 
appropriate detection limits and no further action was recommended for 
surface water.
    Sediment data were collected from Horse Creek and the Cowleech Fork 
of the Sabine River to determine the nature and extent of sediment 
contamination. Although the maximum sediment concentrations for 
Aroclor-1268 and Aroclor-1260 were above the screening benchmark for 
sediments, the screening level ecological risk assessment findings 
indicated that no further action was required for sediments.

Remedial Action Objectives

    The Remedial Action Objectives to be achieved by the Site Remedy 
were:
    <bullet> Prevent direct dermal contact, incidental ingestion and 
inhalation of fugitive dust from PCB-contaminated soils,
    <bullet> Prevent off-site migration of PCB-contaminated soils to 
Horse Creek or the Cowleech Fork of the Sabine River,
    <bullet> Prevent exposure to Site soils that may pose a risk to 
ecological receptors, and
    <bullet> Ensure that current and future receptors were not exposed 
to ground water that could possibly be contaminated with PCBs above the 
federal MCL of 0.5 [micro]g/L.

Remedial Action Goals

    The excavation, on-site treatment, and off-site disposal of the 
soils with a concentration of total PCBs greater than 1.0 mg/kg would 
allow the Site to be developed for reuse (i.e., residential and/or 
recreational and commercial and/or industrial land use). The 
remediation goal for total PCBs for the Site was 1.0 mg/kg.

Selected Remedy

    The selected remedy for the Site, as described in the original 2010 
Record of Decision (ROD), was Soil Excavation and Treatment with Off-
site Disposal for Residential and/or Recreational Land Use, and 
included the following major components:
    <bullet> Soil Excavation, Treatment, and Disposal Components: 
Approximately 5,200 and 16,250 yd\3\ of TSCA and non-TSCA soils, 
respectively, with a concentration of total PCBs greater than 1.0 
milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) were to be excavated and transported 
off-site to a permitted waste disposal facility. Soils were to be 
excavated to a maximum depth of 15.0 bgs, consistent with the State's 
requirements. Soils with a concentration of total PCBs equal to or 
greater than 50.0 mg/kg were to be disposed of at a TSCA-permitted 
landfill. Soils with a concentration of total PCBs greater than 1.0 mg/
kg and less than 50.0 mg/kg were to be disposed of at a non-TSCA 
landfill. Approximately 1,850 yd\3\ of soils with a concentration of 
total PCBs greater than 100.0 mg/kg, constituting principal threat 
wastes, were to be treated on-site by solidification or stabilization 
techniques prior to disposal. Approximately 4,000 yd\3\ of TSCA soils, 
with a concentration of total PCBs less than 100.0 mg/kg, staged in the 
existing building from EPA's first removal action, were also to be 
transported off-site for disposal. Excavated areas were to be 
backfilled with clean off-site soils and the Site was to be graded to 
drain and not pond water. The existing building and its foundation were 
to be demolished and also transported off-site for disposal.
    <bullet> Institutional Controls Component--Institutional Controls 
(ICs), in the form of deed restrictions, were to be implemented to 
prevent exposure of human receptors to contaminated ground water.
    <bullet> Ground Water Monitoring Component--Ground water monitoring 
was to be conducted annually for a minimum period of five years to 
evaluate the protectiveness of the Selected Remedy. Ground water 
monitoring was to be discontinued if the concentration of total PCBs in 
the ground water did not exceed the federal MCL of 0.5 [micro]g/L for 
three consecutive monitoring periods. The additional data collected 
during the annual monitoring events was to be used to confirm previous 
PCB data and further evaluate trends over time. The additional 
monitoring data was to also allow decisions to be made in the future 
regarding ground water impacts and evaluation of risks to human health, 
the need for additional monitoring, whether to continue maintaining 
ICs, and whether any additional actions would be needed to protect 
human health and the environment. These decisions were to be made 
during the first five-year review report for the Site.
    <bullet> Operations and Maintenance Component--Operations and 
maintenance was to involve the ground water component of the remedy to 
ensure that the remedy performed as intended.
    <bullet> Five-Year Review Component--Because this alternative would 
result in hazardous substances (i.e., PCBs) remaining on-site in the 
ground water, possibly above levels that allow for unlimited use and 
unrestricted exposure, a statutory review was to be conducted no less 
often than every five years after initiation of the RA to ensure that 
the remedy was, or will continue to be, protective of human health and 
the environment. Five-year reviews were to be discontinued if the 
ground water monitoring data indicate that the concentration of total 
PCBs did not exceed the federal MCL of 0.5 [micro]g/L for three 
consecutive monitoring periods.

Third Removal Action

    On May 4, 2011, EPA signed a Third Action Memorandum, which 
documented the continuation of the Time Critical Removal Action and 
approval of the Consistency Exemption for the Site. The Consistency 
Exemption documented that the continued response actions were 
appropriate and consistent with the 2010 ROD selected remedy and 
remedial actions.
    The Third Removal Action was completed with issuance of the final 
Pollution Report #10 on September 30, 2011. Between May 24 and 
September

[[Page 35559]]

12, 2011, all PCB-contaminated soils were excavated and transported 
off-site to permitted disposal facilities, and the existing building 
and foundation was demolished and also transported off-site for 
disposal. A total of 28,288 tons of Non-TSCA soils, 24,137 tons of TSCA 
PCB-contaminated soils, 343 tons of construction debris, and 1,455 tons 
of non-TSCA PCB-contaminated Class II concrete were transported off-
site for disposal. The TSCA soils were disposed of at the CSC Landfill 
and the non-TSCA soils, construction debris, and non-TSCA PCB Class II 
concrete were disposed of at the Maloy Landfill. Following confirmation 
that all PCB-contaminated had been removed, excavated areas were 
backfilled with approximately 60,000 yd \3\ of clean off-site soils and 
the Site was graded so that it would drain and prevent the formation of 
standing water.

No Further Action Is Necessary Record of Decision Amendment and 
Explanation of Significant Differences (2011)

    The No Further Action is Necessary Record of Decision Amendment and 
Explanation of Significant Differences (ROD Amendment) was signed on 
September 28, 2011. The ROD Amendment was prepared to document EPA's 
implementation and completion of the post-ROD Third Removal Action for 
the PCB-contaminated soils at the Site. The completion of the soil 
clean up, which utilized the selected remedy in the original 2010 ROD, 
eliminated the need to conduct further soil remedial actions at the 
Site. The Explanation of Significant Differences (ESD) portion of the 
ROD Amendment presented the details of non-significant or minor changes 
to the July 2011 Proposed Plan. After the 2011 Proposed Plan was 
proposed to the public, but before the ROD Amendment was finalized, EPA 
received the 2011 annual ground water monitoring data, which showed 
that all concentrations for total PCBs did not exceed the federal MCL 
of 0.5 [micro]g/L. As a result, EPA determined that changes to the 2011 
Proposed Plan were necessary, and the ESD documented those changes. The 
changes would not have a significant impact on the scope, performance 
or cost of the remedy.
    <bullet> The 2011 Proposed Plan stated that ground water monitoring 
was to be conducted annually for a minimum of five years to evaluate 
the protectiveness of the proposed remedy. Ground water monitoring was 
to be discontinued if the concentration of total PCBs in ground water 
did not exceed the federal MCL of 0.5 ug/l for three consecutive 
monitoring periods. The ESD added to the Ground Water Monitoring 
Component that PCB concentrations had already been below the MCL for 
two (2010 and 2011) consecutive monitoring periods and that if the PCB 
levels were below the MCL in the third round of ground water sampling 
scheduled for 2012, ground water monitoring would be discontinued.
    <bullet> Institutional controls in the form of deed restrictions 
were to be implemented to prevent exposure of human receptors to 
contaminated ground water. The ESD stated that these institutional 
controls would not be implemented at the Site because the 2010 and 2011 
monitoring results for PCBs were below the MCL.
    <bullet> The ESD eliminated the Operations and Maintenance of the 
ground water component of the remedy after ground water monitoring was 
to be discontinued.
    <bullet> Five-Year Reviews would be discontinued if the ground 
water data indicated that the concentration of total PCBs did not 
exceed the federal MCL of 0.5 [micro]g/L.

Cleanup Levels

Soils
    As stated above, during the Third Removal Action all PCB-
contaminated soils were excavated and transported off-site to permitted 
disposal facilities. The Removal Action was completed by September 
2011. After the Removal Action was completed, EPA collected post-
construction confirmation soil samples from the bottom of the 52 
excavated grids to verify that all PCB-contaminated soils above the 
total PCB cleanup level of 1.00 mg/kg had been removed. All soil 
samples were reported below the 1.00 mg/kg cleanup level.
Ground Water
    EPA conducted three consecutive annual (2010, 2011, and 2012) 
ground water sampling events, and all laboratory total PCB results were 
below the MCL level of 0.5 [mu]g/L. Ground water monitoring has been 
discontinued and the nine ground water monitoring wells were plugged 
and properly abandoned in 2012. Although a requirement for Five-Year 
Reviews was included in the decision documents, Five-Year Reviews were 
not conducted and are no longer required because the ground water data 
indicated that the concentration of total PCBs did not exceed the 
federal MCL of 0.5 [mu]g/L and the Site met unlimited use/unrestricted 
exposure criteria for the soils and groundwater.

Quality Assurance and Quality Control (QA/QC)

    The QA/QC program for the Third Removal Action was conducted in 
accordance with the Site Removal QA/QC Work Plan prepared by the EPA 
Superfund Technical Assessment and Response Team (START) contractor and 
the EPA Emergency and Rapid Response Services (ERRS) contractor. The 
START contractor was responsible for post-excavation confirmation, soil 
sample collection, and coordination of sample analyses performed by 
either the EPA Houston Laboratory or a commercial laboratory selected 
by the START contractor. All sample results were either validated by 
the EPA Houston Laboratory or by a START representative.
    The cleanup activities met all QA/QC requirements for the Site. The 
EPA Remedial Project Manager (RPM) conducted daily oversight throughout 
the Removal Action activities. During the Removal Action the TCEQ 
Project Manager conducted routine inspections and was in regular 
contact with the RPM. The TCEQ Project Manager conducted two site 
visits to verify that construction was complete.

Community Involvement

    Public participation activities have satisfied the requirements of 
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 activities. 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 
for the deletion from the NPL are available to the public in the 
information repositories, and a notice of availability of the Notice of 
Intent for Deletion has been published in the Greenville Herald Banner.

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

    The implemented remedy achieves the degree of cleanup specified in 
the ROD and ROD Amendment for all pathways of exposure. All selected 
remedial action objectives and clean-up goals are consistent with 
agency policy and guidance. No further Superfund responses are needed 
to protect human health and the environment at the Site.
    In accordance with 40 CFR 300.425(e), sites may be deleted from the 
NPL where no further response is appropriate.

[[Page 35560]]

V. Deletion Action

    The EPA, with concurrence of the State of Texas through the Texas 
Commission on Environment Quality, has determined that all appropriate 
response actions under CERCLA, have been completed. 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 10, 2018 unless EPA receives adverse comments by 
August 27, 2018. 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. 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: July 19, 2018.
Arturo Blanco,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.

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

PART 300--NATIONAL OIL AND HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES POLLUTION 
CONTINGENCY PLAN

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

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(d); 42 U.S.C. 9601-9657; E.O. 13626, 
77 FR 56749, 3 CFR, 2013 Comp., p. 306; 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 to Part 300--[Amended]

0
2. Table 1 of Appendix B to part 300 is amended in the table by 
removing the entry for ``TX, Old Esco Manufacturing, Greenville''.

[FR Doc. 2018-16119 Filed 7-26-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>