## G A B L E H O U S E 

## G R A N B E RG , L L C A tto rn ey s and

C o u n se l o rs a t Law

M E L A NIE J

. G R A N B E R G , E S Q

. 4 1 0 S EVE

N TE E NTH S TR E E T (3 0 3 ) 5 7 2

- 0 0 5 0 S UITE 1 3 7 5 (8 0 0 ) 8 1 8

- 0 0 5 0 D E N V ER, C O L O R

A D O8 0 2 0 2 F A X (3 0 3 ) 5 7 2

- 3 0 3 7 m g ra n b erg @ g cgl l c. co m
Via Email To: Kiefer.linda@epa.gov September 10, 2014
L inda Kief

er U.S. Environmental Protection Ag ency Reg ion 8 - Mail Code 8EPR-SR 1595 Wy nkoop Street Denve r, CO 80202-1129 Re: Docke t I D no. EPA-HQ- SFUND- 1983-0002 Partial Dele tion of the California Gulc h Superfund Site NPL Dea r Ms. Kiefe r: As y ou are awa

re, w e re prese nt L ake County . The B oard of County Commi ssioners, Mike Bor dog na, Dolore s Semsack and B ruce Hix , has authorized us to submit thi s comment letter on their beha lf. We appre ciate this opportunity to comment on the proposed de letion of Oper able Units 4, 5 and 7 from the Califor

nia Gulch Super fund Site (the “Site”) . As y ou are awa re, L ake County

has worke d very

hard in c onjunction with the EPA and CDPHE over the pa st many y ear s to achieve the re medial g oals adopted by the ag ency

and the c ommunity

. The L ake County

Commi ssioners ar e in favor of de leting O pera ble Units 4, 5 and 7 fr om the Site as all appr opriate r esponse a ctions have be en complete d in these units such that they no longe r pose sig nificant thre at to human hea lth or the environment. Whil e it is easy

to see the ta

ng ible progress made as a r esult of moving, r econstruc ting, c apping , re- veg etating , diversion, stabiliz ation, etc. a cross these three opera ble units, it i s not so see ea sy to see the positive impacts these actions have had on wa ter qua lity

at the Site. The Commi ssioners re cog nize and ag ree that surfa ce a nd g round water qua lity

are important conce rns, espe cially

as they impact river s and drinkingwater wells. The pr og ress a chieve d throug h reme dial and re moval actions take n to date have improved both surfa ce a nd g round water quality at the Site marke dly

and that progress c ontinues today . Due, in par t, to some of these improveme nts, the upper Ar kansas River boa sts some of the best fishingin Colorado.Linda K

iefer Septembe r 10, 2014 Page 3 They also rec og nize the importance of the fa ct that there wer e no numer ical water qua lity limit s for c ontaminants of conc ern e stablished as par t of ac tions to be taken in OUs 4, 5 and 7. I nstead, when the Site wa s established, OU12 w as desig nated a s a sepa rate opera ble unit intended to addre ss site-wide surf

ace and g round water qua lity . I mplementation of re medies in the other opera ble units was intended to ac hieve the r emedial a ction objectives for OU12 which, a

mong other thing s, include protec tion of aquatic or g anisms in the upper Ar kansas River a

nd preve nting g round and sur fac e water fr om posing a n unacc eptable r isk through huma n exposure. Admittedly , the y ear s of site work ha ve demonstrated that while the uppe r Arka nsas River has been pr otected, ground wa ter will be a

n enduringproblem. While everyone wishes it was not the case , the selec ted re medies will not return g round water qua lity to its original state a

ny time soon. As such, instituti onal controls must be implemented, a nd have be en implemented, to pre vent the inappropriate use of c ontaminated g round water. The County has take n part in adoption of loca l ordinanc es to protec t the established re medies and put intere sted parties on notice of re maining contaminants of c oncer

n prior to potential disturbance

. Throug h diversion, excavation, consolidation cove r and stabilization, erosion into local water s and lea ching /migration of metals to gr ound and surf ace water have be en contr olled. The reme dial action objec tives for OU 4 have be en met and de letion of OU4 is appr opriate at this time. Simi larly , the re medial ac tion objectives for O U5 have been me t. Controlli ng airborne transport of tailing s, flue dust and soil as we ll as erosion of these materia ls has been a ccomplished through excavation, re location, consolidation and c over. L eac hing a nd migr ation of metals to g round water is controlled as a

result of these activities and, a s a re sult, ex posures a re c ontrolled and preve nted. The a doption of instit utional controls to protect the r emedies a nd provide notice to users of the land and wa

ter fur ther these objectives. OU 5 should be delete d from the Site. Finally , OU7 is appropr iate for deletion from the Site at this time beca use airbor ne tailing s are controlled a

nd erosion of ta ilings to local waters is controlled a s is migra tion and leac hing of metals into surfac e and ground water. The se controls c ome as a result of a ctivities in the releva nt are as of OU 7 including c hannelizing a nd divertingsurfa ce w ater s, regradingand construc ting composite cove rs and r e-ve g etation. L ong -term monitoringand adoption of institutional controls further ensure the ef

fec tiveness of the c hosen re medy for OU 7. That the re medial ac tion objectives nowher e conta in the word “ eliminate” is not lost on the County Commi ssioners. Control of conta minates of conc ern at the Site in an effor t to reduce the risk they pose to humans, animals, aquatic specie s and the e nvironment has bee n the g oal and that g oal has be en met in OUs 4, 5 a nd 7. As previously

noted, site-wide w ater

quality is addre ssed in OU12 which is not par t of the propose d deletion. We are confide nt attention to water quality at the Site rema ins under close watch.Linda K

iefer Septembe r 10, 2014 Page 3 On beha lf of L ake County , we ur g e EPA to delete OUs 4, 5 and 7 f rom the California Gulch Superfund Site. Sincere ly ,

Melanie J. Granbe rg for Ga blehouse Gr anber g , L L C