Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 116 / Thursday, June 17, 2010 / Proposed Rules 34405 

rule. We have determined that the 

proposed rule will not result in 

expenditures by State, local, and tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector, of $100 million or more 

in any one year. Accordingly, we have 

not prepared a budgetary impact 

statement or specifically addressed any 

regulatory alternatives. 

List of Subjects in 31 CFR Part 208 

Accounting, Automated Clearing 

House, Banks, Banking, Electronic funds 

transfer, Financial institutions, 

Government payments. 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, we propose to amend 31 CFR 

part 208 as follows: 

PART 208—MANAGEMENT OF 

FEDERAL AGENCY DISBURSEMENTS 

1. The authority citation for part 208 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 12 U.S.C. 90, 265, 

266, 1767, 1789a; 31 U.S.C. 321, 3122, 3301, 

3302, 3303, 3321, 3325, 3327, 3328, 3332, 

3335, 3336, 6503; Pub. L. 104–208, 110 Stat. 

3009. 

2. In § 208.2, redesignate paragraphs 

(c) through (o) as paragraphs (d) through 

(p), respectively, add new paragraph (c), 

and revise redesignated paragraph (e) to 

read as follows: 

§ 208.2 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

(c) Direct Express® card means the 

prepaid debit card issued to recipients 

of Federal benefits by a Financial Agent 

pursuant to requirements established by 

Treasury. 

* * * * * 

(e) Electronic benefits transfer (EBT) 

means the provision of Federal benefit, 

wage, salary, and retirement payments 

electronically, through disbursement by 

a financial institution acting as a 

Financial Agent. For purposes of this 

part, EBT includes, but is not limited to, 

disbursement through an ETAsm, a 

Federal/State EBT program, or a Direct 

Express® card account. 

* * * * * 

3. Revise § 208.4(a) to read as follows: 

§ 208.4 Waivers. 

* * * * * 

(a) Where an individual is receiving 

Federal payments from an agency by 

check prior to March 1, 2011, the 

individual may continue to receive 

those payments by check through 

February 28, 2013. In addition, an 

individual who files a claim for Federal 

benefit payments prior to March 1, 

2011, and who requests payment of 

those benefits by check at the time he 

or she files the claims, may receive 

those payments by check through 

February 28, 2013. 

* * * * * 

4. Revise § 208.6 to read as follows: 

§ 208.6 Availability of the Direct Express®

Card. 

Any individual who receives a 

Federal benefit, wage, salary, or 

retirement payment shall be eligible to 

open a Direct Express® card account. 

The offering of a Direct Express® card 

account shall constitute the provision of 

EBT services within the meaning of 

Public Law 104–208. 

5. Revise § 208.7 to read as follows: 

§ 208.7 Agency responsibilities. 

Each agency shall put in place 

procedures that allow each recipient to 

provide the information necessary for 

the delivery of payments to the recipient 

by electronic funds transfer to an 

account at the recipient’s financial 

institution, or to sign up for a Direct 

Express® card account to be held by the 

recipient. 

6. Revise § 208.8 to read as follows: 

§ 208.8 Recipient responsibilities. 

Each recipient who is required to 

receive payment by electronic funds 

transfer shall provide to an agency the 

information requested by the agency in 

order to effect payment by electronic 

funds transfer. 

7. Revise the third sentence in 

§ 208.11 to read as follows: 

§ 208.11 Accounts for disaster victims. 

* * * Treasury may deliver payments 

to these accounts notwithstanding any 

other payment instructions from the 

recipient and without regard to the 

requirements of §§ 208.4 and 208.7 of 

this part and § 210.5 of this chapter. 

* * * 

Appendixes A and B to Part 208 

[Removed] 

8. Remove Appendix A and Appendix 

B to Part 208. 

Dated: June 10, 2010. 

Richard L. Gregg, 

Fiscal Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2010–14614 Filed 6–16–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810–35–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 300 

[EPA–HQ–SFUND–1987–0002; FRL–9163–4] 

National Oil and Hazardous 

Substances Pollution Contingency 

Plan; National Priorities List: Partial 

Deletion of the Rocky Mountain 

Arsenal Federal Facility 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) Region 8 is issuing a 

Notice of Intent to Delete portions of the 

On-Post Operable Unit (OU3), 

specifically the Central and Eastern 

Surface Areas including surface media 

and structures (CES), and the surface 

media of the entire Off-Post Operable 

Unit (OU4) (OPS) of the Rocky 

Mountain Arsenal Federal Facility 

(RMA) from the National Priorities List 

(NPL) and requests public comment on 

this proposed action. The NPL, 

promulgated pursuant to section 105 of 

the Comprehensive Environmental 

Response, Compensation, and Liability 

Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is 

an appendix of the National Oil and 

Hazardous Substances Pollution 

Contingency Plan (NCP). The EPA and 

the State of Colorado, through the 

Colorado Department of Public Health 

and Environment (CDPHE), have 

determined that all appropriate 

response actions at these identified 

parcels under CERCLA, other than 

operation, maintenance, and five-year 

reviews, have been completed. However 

this deletion does not preclude future 

actions under Superfund. 

This partial deletion pertains to the 

surface media (soil, surface water, 

sediment) and structures (both former 

structures that have been demolished 

and structures retained for future use) 

within the CES and the surface media of 

the entire OPS. The rest of the On-Post 

OU (Figure 1), including groundwater 

below RMA that is west of E Street, and 

the groundwater that comprises the OffPost OU (see Section IV and Figure 1) 

will remain on the NPL and response 

activities will continue at those OUs. 

The groundwater media east of E Street 

(with the exception of a small area 

below the northwest corner of Section 6) 

was previously deleted from the NPL as 

part of the Internal Parcel Partial 

Deletion in 2006 (71 FR 43071). 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

July 19, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
34406 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 116 / Thursday, June 17, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

SFUND–1987–0002, by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: chergo.jennifer@epa.gov. 

• Fax: 303–312–7110. 

• Mail: Ms. Jennifer Chergo, 

Community Involvement Coordinator 

(8OC), U.S. EPA, Region 8, 1595 

Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado, 

80202–1129. 

• Hand Delivery: 1595 Wynkoop 

Street, Denver, Colorado, 80202–1129. 

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–1987– 

0002. 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 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 in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at: 

—EPA’s Region 8 Superfund Records 

Center, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, 

Colorado, 80202–2466. Hours: 8 a.m. 

to 4 p.m. by appointment (call 303– 

312–6473), Monday through Friday, 

excluding legal holidays; and the 

—Joint Administrative Records 

Document Facility, Rocky Mountain 

Arsenal, 5650 Havana Street, Building 

129, Commerce City, Colorado 80022– 

1748. Hours: 12 p.m. to 4 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, excluding 

legal holidays, or by appointment 

(call 303–289–0983). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Jennifer Chergo, Community 

Involvement Coordinator (8OC), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, 

Colorado, 80202–1129; telephone 

number: 1–800–227–8917 or 303–312– 

6601; fax number: 303–312–7110; e-mail 

address: chergo.jennifer@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Introduction 

II. NPL Deletion Criteria 

III. Deletion Procedures 

IV. Basis for Intended Partial Site Deletion 

I. Introduction 

The Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA) Region 8 announces its intent to 

delete the CES and OPS of the RMA 

Site, Commerce City, Colorado, from the 

NPL and requests 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 

those 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 RMA Site is proposed in 

accordance with 40 CFR 300.425(e) and 

Notice of Policy Change: Partial 

Deletion of Sites Listed on the National 

Priorities List (60 FR 55466 (Nov. 1, 

1995)). As described in 40 CFR 

300.425(e)(3), a portion of a site deleted 

from the NPL remains eligible for 

further remedial actions if warranted by 

future conditions. 

EPA will accept comments on the 

proposal to partially 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 CES and OPS of the 

RMA Site and demonstrates how they 

meet 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: 

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, 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 the 

deletion of the CES and OPS of the RMA 

Site: 

(1) EPA consulted with the State 

before developing this Notice of Intent 

for Partial Deletion. 

(2) EPA has provided the State 30 

working days for review of this notice 

prior to publication of it today. 

(3) In accordance with the criteria 

discussed above, EPA has determined 

that no further response is appropriate. 

(4) The State of Colorado, through the 

CDPHE, has concurred with the deletion 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 116 / Thursday, June 17, 2010 / Proposed Rules 34407 

of the CES and OPS of the RMA Federal 

Facility Site, from the NPL. 

(5) Concurrently, with the publication 

of this Notice of Intent for Partial 

Deletion in the Federal Register, a 

notice is being published in a major 

local newspaper, the Denver Post. The 

newspaper 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 

partial 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 within the 

30-day comment period on this 

document, EPA will evaluate and 

respond accordingly to the comments 

before making a final decision to delete 

the CES and OPS. 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 CES and 

OPS of the RMA Site, the Regional 

Administrator will publish a 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 Intended Partial Deletion 

The following information provides 

EPA’s rationale for deleting the CES and 

OPS of the RMA Federal Facility from 

the NPL. 

Site Background and History 

The Rocky Mountain Arsenal Federal 

Facility (RMA), EPA ID No. 

CO5210020769, is located in Commerce 

City—approximately eight miles 

northeast of downtown Denver—in 

Adams County, Colorado. RMA was 

established in 1942 by the U.S. Army to 

manufacture chemical warfare agents 

and incendiary munitions for use in 

World War II. Following the war and 

through the early 1980s, the facilities 

continued to be used by the U.S. Army. 

Beginning in 1946, some facilities were 

leased to private companies to 

manufacture industrial and agricultural 

chemicals. Shell Oil Company, the 

principal lessee, manufactured 

pesticides at the site from 1952 to 1982. 

Common industrial and waste disposal 

practices resulted in contamination of 

structures, soil, surface water, and 

groundwater. As a result of this 

contamination, RMA was proposed to 

the NPL, excluding the Basin F surface 

impoundment, on October 15, 1984, (49 

FR 40320). On July 22, 1987, RMA was 

finalized on the NPL and expanded to 

include Basin F (52 FR 27620 and 52 FR 

27643). 

RMA is located at the western edge of 

the Colorado Plains, consisting of a 

rolling terrain characterized by 

grasslands, shrublands, wetlands, 

aquatic habitats, and extensive weedy 

areas. Regional surface drainage is 

northwest into the South Platte River 

which eventually joins the North Platte 

River in Nebraska. The RMA Site 

consists of 30 OUs (numbers 0 through 

29) including 24 Interim Response 

Actions (IRA) conducted between 

October 1985 and June 1996 as part of 

the On-Post (OU 3) remediation and 4 

IRAs completed in 1993 for remediation 

of the Off-Post (OU 4). The IRAs were 

conducted to prevent or minimize 

further migration of groundwater 

contaminants and eliminate potential 

releases from source areas through 

isolation or destruction of the 

contaminants. Each of the OUs is 

described below. 

OU 00: South Adams County— 

Installation of temporary granular 

activated carbon filters (GAC) at the 

South Adams County plant to 

address trichloroethene in the 

potable water supply (1986). 

OU 01: Klein Water Treatment Plant— 

Groundwater treatment plant 

constructed on RMA property 

(Section 33) to treat off-post 

contaminant plumes along the 

western boundary of RMA (1989). 

OU 02: Chemical Sales—Remedial 

investigation of off-post 

groundwater plumes which resulted 

in identification of the Chemical 

Sales Company Superfund Site 

located upgradient (south) of RMA 

(1990). 

OU 03: On-Post—Addresses soil and 

groundwater contamination within 

the fenced 27 square miles of RMA 

proper (ongoing). OUs 6 through 29 

contributed to remediation of the 

On-Post OU and were completed 

prior to or integrated into the OnPost OU as part of the 1996 On-Post 

ROD. 

OU 04: Off-Post—Addresses 

contamination north and northwest 

of the RMA proper site. OUs 00 

through 02 and OU 5 contributed to 

remediation of the Off-Post OU and 

were completed prior to or 

integrated into the Off-Post OU as 

part of the 1995 ROD. 

OU 05: Off-Post Groundwater Intercept 

and Treatment System IRA— 

Treatment plant constructed to 

address contaminant plumes that 

had migrated off post prior to 

installation of the boundary 

treatment systems (1993). 

OU 06: North Boundary Groundwater 

Treatment System IRA—Recharge 

trenches were added along the 

entire length of the North Boundary 

Treatment System slurry wall and 

operational improvements were 

made to the existing system (1993). 

OU 07: Basin F Groundwater Treatment 

System IRA—Extraction of 

contaminated groundwater 

migrating from the Basin F area for 

treatment at the Basin A Neck 

Treatment System (1990). 

OU 08: Abandoned Well Closure IRA— 

Old or deteriorating farm wells and 

unused on-post wells were grouted 

closed (1990). 

OU 09: Basin A Neck Groundwater 

Treatment System IRA— 

Groundwater treatment plant 

constructed to treat contaminant 

plumes migrating through 

paleochannels from the Basin A 

area (1990). 

OU 10: Basin F Liquids & Sludges IRA— 

Containment of 600,000 cubic yards 

of Basin F sludges/soil in a lined, 

16-acre storage area with a leachate 

collection system (1989). 

OU 11: Building 1727 Sump IRA— 

Treatment of liquid in the Building 

1727 Sump with activated alumina 

and GAC to remove contaminants 

(1989). 

OU 12: Hydrazine IRA—The hydrazine 

facility was demolished and the 

debris disposed at an off-site 

hazardous waste landfill. The area 

was regraded and revegetated 

(1992). 

OU 13: Fugitive Dust Suppression 

IRA—Reapplication of a dust 

suppressant was applied to Basin A 

(1991). 

OU 14: Sanitary Sewer IRA—Sanitary 

sewer manholes were plugged to 

eliminate potential transport of 

contaminated groundwater that may 

have entered the sewer system 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
34408 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 116 / Thursday, June 17, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

through cracks or loose connections 

(1992). 

OU 15: Asbestos IRA—Continuation of 

the Army’s survey and removal of 

friable asbestos from on-post 

structures (1996). 

OU 16: M–1 Settling Basins IRA—The 

objective was to treat the M–1 

Settling Basins sludge using in situ 

vitrification (ISV). However, due to 

technology complications with the 

ISV, implementation of the IRA was 

suspended (1991). 

OU 17: CERCLA Wastewater Treatment 

Plant IRA—Facility constructed to 

treat wastewater generated by 

investigative activities and 

implementation of response actions 

(1992). 

OU 18: Motorpool IRA—An extraction 

well system was constructed to 

remove a trichlorethene plume 

emanating from the Motorpool area 

for treatment at the Irondale 

Containment System (1990). A soil 

vapor extraction system was 

operated in 1991 to remove volatile 

contaminants from the soil. 

OU 19: Rail Classification Yard IRA— 

An extraction well system was 

constructed to remove a 

dibromochloropropane plume 

emanating from the Rail Yard area 

for treatment at the Irondale 

Containment System (1991). 

OU 20: Lime Settling Basins IRA—A 

soil cover was constructed over the 

Lime Settling Basins to minimize 

infiltration of precipitation through 

the basin waste (1993). 

OU 21: South Tank Farm Plume IRA— 

Continued monitoring of 

groundwater plumes to assess if 

additional action was necessary 

(1994). 

OU 22: Army Trenches IRA—Continued 

monitoring of groundwater plumes 

to assess if additional action was 

necessary (1994). 

OU 23: Shell Trenches IRA—A slurry 

wall was constructed to isolate the 

trenches from surrounding 

groundwater and a soil cover placed 

over the trenches to minimize 

infiltration of precipitation through 

the trench waste (1994). 

OU 24: Northwest Boundary 

Containment System IRA— 

Additional extraction, reinjection, 

and monitoring wells were installed 

to increase treatment capacity 

(1993). 

OU 25: Basin F Liquid (SQI) IRA— 

Incineration of 11 million gallons of 

basin liquids and decontamination 

waters (1995). 

OU 26: Chemical Process-Related 

Activities IRA—Decontamination 

and disposal of process related 

equipment and piping for both 

agent and non-agent manufacturing 

processes in the North Plants and 

South Plant facilities (1996). 

OU 27: Underground Storage Tank 

IRA—Content characterization, 

deactivation, excavation, 

decontamination, and removal of 

underground storage tanks (1995). 

OU 28: Waste Management IRA— 

Temporary management of 

hazardous waste in storage at RMA 

or generated by the response 

actions, and not addressed by 

another IRA (1996). 

OU 29: Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB) 

IRA—Inventory and remediate PCBcontaminated structures and soil 

(1996). 

The original On-Post Operable Unit 

(OU 3) encompassed 27 square miles 

(16,990 acres) and was bounded by 56th 

Avenue and the former Stapleton 

International Airport on the south, 

Buckley Road and Denver International 

Airport on the east, Quebec Parkway 

and Commerce City on the west, 

Colorado Highway 2 and the Off-Post 

OU on the northwest, and 96th Avenue 

and the Off-Post OU on the north 

(Figure 1). In the 1980s, it was observed 

that over 300 species of wildlife, 

including bald eagles, utilize much of 

the natural environment that remains at 

RMA. In recognition of these unique 

urban wildlife resources at RMA, 

President George H.W. Bush signed the 

1992 Rocky Mountain Arsenal National 

Wildlife Refuge Act (Public Law 102– 

402). Most of the RMA On-Post OU, 

including the CES, is designated to 

become part of a National Wildlife 

Refuge upon completion of the site-wide 

remedy. 

Between 2003 and 2006, EPA 

conducted four partial deletions from 

the On-Post OU consisting of 13,406 

acres of surface media so that property 

transfer could be expedited. Of the 

property deleted to date, 917 acres were 

sold to Commerce City for commercial 

development, 12 acres were transferred 

to South Adams County Water and 

Sanitation District for the Klein 

Treatment Facility, 126 acres were 

transferred to local governments for 

road-widening, and 12,188 acres have 

been transferred to the National Wildlife 

Refuge. Another 163 acres were retained 

by the Army, primarily for water 

treatment systems. While EPA has not 

conducted any partial deletions for the 

Off-Post OU, EPA did issue a Ready for 

Reuse (RfR) Determination in September 

2009 for a portion of the Shell Oil 

Company property (approximately 294 

acres) that is within or adjacent to the 

Off-Post OU. EPA’s determination 

indicated that the Shell RfR Property ‘‘is 

ready for use for any purpose allowed 

under local land use and zoning laws.’’ 

While there has been no redevelopment/ 

reuse of the Shell RfR Property thus far, 

the area around the Shell RfR Property 

and Off-Post OU has undergone 

primarily residential development in 

recent years. 

The proposed partial deletion for the 

OPS includes the entire surface media 

of the Off-Post OU (OU 4) without 

exclusions. Of the 3,584 acres (5.6 

square miles) of the On-Post OU (OU 3) 

that remain on the NPL, the proposed 

partial deletion for the CES includes 

2,500 acres (3.9 square miles) of surface 

media (soil, surface water, and 

sediment), as shown in Figure 1, and 

structures (both former structures that 

have been demolished and structures 

retained for future use) within the OnPost OU. The entire CES proposed for 

partial deletion will be transferred from 

the Army to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service (USFWS) for expansion of the 

RMA National Wildlife Refuge. The 

portions of the On-Post OU not 

proposed for deletion, also shown in 

Figure 1, include the following: 

• Cover areas (Hazardous Waste 

Landfill (HWL), Enhanced Hazardous 

Waste Landfill (ELF), Basin F, and 

Integrated Cover System (ICS)) 

including drainages; 

• Three areas of groundwater 

treatment (Railyard Extraction and 

Treatment System, Lime Basins Mass 

Removal System, and the South Tank 

Farm Mass Removal System); 

• Three laydown areas (areas used to 

stage equipment and construction 

materials or conduct support activities 

during remedy implementation); and 

• Two structures: The CERCLA 

Wastewater Treatment Facility and the 

Landfill Wastewater Treatment System 

(LWTS). 

The following information provides 

EPA’s rationale for deletion of the CES 

and OPS of the RMA Site from the NPL: 

Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study 

(RI/FS) and Selected Remedy 

On-Post OU (OU 3). Prior to the 

selection of remedial alternatives for the 

On-Post OU, an RI/FS was conducted to 

provide information on the type and 

extent of contamination, human and 

ecological risks, and feasibility of 

remedial actions suitable for application 

at RMA. The RI, completed in January 

1992, studied five environmental media 

at the RMA Site, including soils, water, 

structures, air, and biota. The RI 

identified approximately 3,000 acres of 

contaminated soil, 15 groundwater 

plumes, and 798 structures. The FS was 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 116 / Thursday, June 17, 2010 / Proposed Rules 34409 

finalized in October 1995 for the OnPost OU. 

On June 11, 1996, the Army, EPA, and 

the State of Colorado signed the ‘‘Record 

of Decision for the On-Post Operable 

Unit’’ (On-Post ROD). The On-Post ROD 

formally established the cleanup 

approach to be taken and specified 

individual remedial actions to be 

implemented for soil, structures, and 

groundwater. In general, the remedial 

action objectives were to prevent or 

limit potential exposure of humans and 

biota and any further contamination of 

the surface water, groundwater, or air 

due to releases from the soils, 

sediments, and structures at the On-Post 

OU. The overall remedy for the On-Post 

OU includes extraction and treatment of 

the contaminated groundwater plumes, 

demolition of 750 structures with no 

designated future use, excavation and 

disposal of soil and demolition debris 

with a cumulative contamination 

concentration presenting an excess 

cancer risk to human health of greater 

than 1x10¥4 or a Hazard Index greater 

than 1.0 for non-cancer risks 

(collectively referred to as human health 

exceedance (HHE) soils), as well as 

munitions debris, in two state-of-the-art 

hazardous waste landfills to be built 

within the On-Post OU; and excavation 

and consolidation of debris and soil 

presenting a risk to biota (biota soil) in 

the Basin A, South Plants, and Basin F 

project areas. The excavated HHE soil 

areas were backfilled with on-post 

borrow material and revegetated. The 

On-Post ROD also requires continued 

use restrictions for the CES that restrict 

‘‘current and future land use, specifies 

that the U.S. government shall retain 

ownership of RMA, and prohibits 

certain activities such as agriculture, use 

of on-post groundwater as a drinking 

source, and consumption of fish and 

game taken at RMA.’’ 

Multiple changes to the On-Post ROD 

have been made during implementation 

of the remedy over the past 14 years 

through Explanations of Significant 

Differences (ESD) and two ROD 

Amendments. With regard to the CES, 

there are 13 ESDs which document 

changes in the project boundaries, 

volumes of soil excavated, and 

associated costs for each of the 

implementation projects. These changes 

have included significant increases in 

excavated HHE soils at the Section 35 

Soil project and excavated biota soils at 

the Munitions (Testing) Soil project. Of 

note, any contaminated soils to be 

contained under soil covers at the North 

Plants, Secondary Basins, and South 

Plants Balance of Areas projects were 

excavated based on additional sampling 

efforts and the 1- and 2-foot soil cover 

requirements were eliminated. These 

boundary, volume, and cover changes 

have resulted in an estimated increase 

of $123.5 million for the combined 

individual projects while the overall 

On-Post RMA remedy cost has remained 

unchanged at $2.2 billion. 

Off-Post OU (OU 4). The Off-Post OU 

followed the same investigative process 

and an RI for the Off-Post study area 

that evaluated groundwater, soil, surface 

water, sediment, air and biota was 

completed in 1988 with an addendum 

issued in 1992. The RI identified two 

plume groups encompassing 590 acres 

in the Off-Post area and wind-deposited 

contamination in surface soils 

immediately north of the On-Post 

boundary in the southeast portion of 

Section 14 and the southwest portion of 

Section 13. The Off-Post Endangerment 

Assessment/Feasibility Study (EA/FS) 

was issued in 1992 and the Off-Post 

ROD was signed by the Army, EPA, and 

the State of Colorado on December 19, 

1995. The Off-Post remedy includes 

extraction and treatment of the 

contaminated groundwater plumes, and 

closure of poorly constructed wells that 

could be acting as migration pathways. 

For settlement purposes, though the 

health risks present in the soils were 

within EPA’s acceptable cancer risk 

range (less than 1 x 10¥4) for residential 

use, Shell agreed to revegetate 

approximately 160 acres of soil to 

enhance the degradation of low-level 

pesticide residues. The Off-Post ROD 

also required institutional controls to 

prevent the use of groundwater 

exceeding remediation goals. There 

have been no remedy modifications 

related to the OPS. 

Post-RODs Investigations 

On-Post OU (OU 3). Since the signing 

of the On-Post ROD on June 11, 1996, 

three main studies have been conducted 

that are relevant to the deletion of the 

On-Post CES. These include the 

‘‘Summary and Evaluation of Potential 

Ordnance/Explosives and Recovered 

Chemical Warfare Materiel Hazards at 

the Rocky Mountain Arsenal’’ completed 

in 2002 (Summary Team), the ‘‘EPA 

Denver Front Range Dioxin Study’’ 

completed in 2001, and a two-part 

Residual Ecological Risk (RER) 

Assessment that was completed in 2003. 

Each of these on-post investigations is 

described below: 

Summary and Evaluation of Potential 

Ordnance/Explosives and Recovered 

Chemical Warfare Materiel Hazards at 

the Rocky Mountain Arsenal (2002). 

This effort was conducted in response to 

the unexpected discovery of ten M139 

bomblets as part of the Miscellaneous 

Structures Demolition and Removal 

Project—Phase I in the Section 36 

Boneyard (central portion of the RMA 

Site). Using state-of-the-art computer 

imaging, mapping technology, and 

software capability which had not 

existed previously, a comprehensive 

RMA-wide evaluation for the potential 

presence of ordnance and explosives as 

well as recovered chemical warfare 

materiel hazards was completed. The 

evaluation identified six additional 

areas for remedial action, all in the CES, 

and concluded that the future discovery 

of additional sites with ordnance/ 

explosives or recovered chemical 

warfare materiel hazards is highly 

unlikely. Remediation of four of the 

Summary Team sites (BT29–1, BT29–2, 

BT30–01, and BT32–11) was completed 

in 2004 and is documented in the 

Construction Completion Report (CCR) 

for the Burial Trenches Soil 

Remediation Project, Part II. 

Remediation of the fifth Summary Team 

site (ESA–4a) was completed in 2008 

and is documented in the CCR for the 

Munitions (Testing) Soil Remediation 

Project, Part II. Remediation of the sixth 

Summary Team site (CSA–2c) was 

completed in 2008 and is documented 

in the Munitions (Testing) Soil 

Remediation Project, Part III. 

Dioxin Study. In 2001, EPA 

conducted a four-part Denver Front 

Range Dioxin Study which determined 

that the concentration of dioxins at most 

of the RMA Site, including the CES, was 

not statistically different from values 

observed in open space and agricultural 

areas within the Denver Front Range 

area. Therefore, there is no significant 

health risk from dioxin in soils to future 

Refuge workers, volunteers, or visitors. 

RER Assessment. As required by the 

ROD, a RER assessment was completed 

in 2003 addressing both terrestrial and 

aquatic health risks. The Terrestrial 

Residual Ecological Risk Assessment 

was completed in 2002. This report 

concluded that no significant excess 

terrestrial residual risks will remain 

after the ROD-required cleanup actions 

for soil, including additional areas of 

excavation and tilling identified as part 

of remedial design refinement as 

required by the ROD, are completed. 

The Aquatic Residual Risk Assessment 

was completed in 2003. The Assessment 

presented an evaluation of risks to the 

great blue heron, shorebirds and 

waterbirds and concluded that there are 

no significant risks to aquatic birds in 

the South Lakes beyond those already 

identified for remediation in the ROD. 

Off-Post OU (OU 4) Indoor Air 

Evaluation. Since the signing of the OffPost ROD in 1995, one study has been 

conducted for the Off-Post OU. Based on 

EPA guidance issued in 2002 and 2003, 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
34410 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 116 / Thursday, June 17, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

EPA conducted an indoor air evaluation 

of volatile organic compounds for the 

entire Off-Post OU using the Johnson 

and Ettinger Model (GW–SCREEN) as 

implemented by EPA. Estimated indoor 

air concentrations and potential cancer 

and non-cancer risks were calculated for 

theoretical inhalation exposure to 

vapors emanating from groundwater at a 

depth that varies from less than 5 feet 

to 27.5 feet. Where the depth to 

groundwater was less than 11 feet, slab 

on grade foundations were assumed; 

otherwise, the future residential 

scenario assumed the residences would 

be constructed with basements. The 

result of the assessment indicated that 

modeled concentrations were below 

human health risk criteria, that no 

further evaluation of the vapor intrusion 

pathway was warranted, and that there 

was no need to implement intrusion 

controls in buildings overlying the 

groundwater plumes in the Off-Post OU. 

Response Actions 

Remedial Action for the CES of the OnPost (OU 3) 

Surface media: The surface media of 

the CES consists of soil, sediment, and 

surface water within approximately 3.9 

square miles (2,500 acres) in the central 

and eastern portions of the RMA OnPost OU. Areas with similar 

contamination were combined into 

individual projects based upon evidence 

gathered during the RI. This resulted in 

18 separate soil/sediment cleanup 

projects within the CES including 

portions of Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 10, 19, 

20, 23, 24, 25, 26, 29, 30, 31, 32, 34, 35, 

and 36. Completion of these 18 

remediation projects is documented in 

individual project CCRs. The following 

is a brief summary of these projects and 

the soil contamination that was 

remediated within the CES. 

• The Basin F/Basin F Exterior Soil 

Remediation Project included the 

excavation of soil from three pesticidecontaminated sites within Section 26 of 

the CES (NCSA–4a, 4b, and 5c). HHE 

soil was excavated from all three sites 

and disposed in the HWL. Biota risk soil 

was excavated from two of these sites 

(NCSA–4a and NCSA–4b) and 

consolidated in Basins A and F. This 

work, completed in 2008, is 

documented in two CCRs: Basin F/Basin 

F Exterior Remediation Project—Part 1 

and Basin F/Basin F Exterior 

Remediation Project—Part 1, Phase 2. 

• The Burial Trenches Soil 

Remediation Project included the 

excavation of soil from six chromiumand lead-contaminated soil sites within 

Sections 29, 30, 31, and 32 of the CES 

(BT29–1, BT29–2, BT30–1, BT32–10, 

BT32–11, ESA–2c). All six sites 

contained ordnance and explosives, 

munitions debris and related soil, as 

well as asbestos-containing material, 

general construction-related debris and 

trash that was excavated and disposed 

in the HWL. This work, completed in 

2004, is documented in the CCRs for the 

Burial Trenches Soil Remediation 

Project—Part I and Part II. 

• A portion of the Complex (Army) 

Disposal Trenches Subgrade 

Construction Project is located within 

Section 36 of the CES. This project 

consisted of surface grading to provide 

permanent stormwater drainage off of 

the adjacent RCRA–Equivalent Cover. 

No contaminated soils were identified 

in Section 36 for excavation as part of 

the Complex Trenches Subgrade Project. 

The grading, completed in 2008, is 

documented in the CCR for the Complex 

(Army) Disposal Trenches Remediation 

Project, Subgrade Construction. 

• The Corrective Action Management 

Unit (CAMU) Soil Remediation Project 

included the excavation of soil from one 

site (site ‘‘CAMU’’) within Sections 23, 

24, 25, and 26 in the CES. This site 

consisted of pesticide-contaminated, 

biota risk soils and miscellaneous debris 

that was excavated and consolidated in 

Basin A. This work, completed in 2000, 

is documented in CCRs for the CAMU 

Soils Remediation Project, and the 

CAMU Soils Remediation Completion 

and Support Project. 

• The Existing (Sanitary) Landfills 

(ESL) Remediation Project included the 

excavation of contaminated soil from 

four sites within the CES: one site in 

Section 1 (P1 soil site adjacent to SSA– 

4) and three sites in Section 36 (CSA– 

1d, CSA–2d, and P1 soil site adjacent to 

CSA–1d). As documented in the CCR for 

the Section 1 Existing (Sanitary) 

Landfills Remediation Project, 

completed in 2006, biota risk soil was 

excavated from the P1 soil site adjacent 

to SSA–4 and consolidated in Basin A. 

As documented in the CCR for the 

Section 36 ESL Project, completed in 

2004, HHE soil, biota risk soil, and trash 

and debris were excavated from site 

CSA–1d and disposed in the HWL; 

munitions debris was excavated from 

site CSA–2d and disposed in the HWL; 

and additional biota risk soil was 

excavated from the P1 soil site adjacent 

to CSA–1d and consolidated in Basin A. 

• The Miscellaneous Northern Tier 

Soil Remediation Project included the 

excavation of one site in Section 25 of 

the CES (NPSA–4) that contained HHE 

soil contaminated with chloroacetic 

acid. As documented in the CCR for the 

Miscellaneous Northern Tier Soil 

Remediation Project, completed in 2006, 

HHE soil was excavated and disposed in 

the HWL and biota risk soil was 

excavated and consolidated in Basin A. 

• The Miscellaneous RMA Structures 

Demolition and Removal Project 

included the excavation of two sites in 

Section 25 of the CES (BA9A Parcel 3 

and 25CC–3). As documented in the 

CCR for the Miscellaneous RMA 

Structures Demolition and Removal 

Project—Phase III, completed in 2009, 

ACM-contaminated soil, trash, debris, 

and munitions debris was excavated 

from the two sites and disposed in the 

Enhanced Hazardous Waste Landfill 

(ELF). Some of the ACM-contaminated 

soil was also disposed off-site at a 

permitted, CERCLA off-site rule 

approved landfill. 

• The Miscellaneous Southern Tier 

Soil Remediation Project included 

excavation of three sites within the CES 

(SSA–2a, SSA–2b, and a P1 soil site 

adjacent to SSA–2a) where former 

process water and wastewater ditches in 

Sections 1 and 2 contained HHE and 

biota risk soils contaminated with 

aldrin, dieldrin, and heavy metals. This 

work, completed in 2006, is 

documented in the CCR for the 

Miscellaneous Southern Tier Soil 

Remediation Project. A subsequent 

project, the Sand Creek Lateral Project, 

involved excavation of additional 

contaminated soil from two of the 

Miscellaneous Southern Tier Soil 

Remediation sites including site SSA– 

2b located in Section 1 and site SSA– 

2a located in Section 2. As documented 

in the CCR for the Sand Creek Lateral 

Project, completed in 2008, additional 

HHE soil was excavated from these two 

sites and disposed in the HWL and ELF, 

and biota risk soil was excavated and 

consolidated in Basin A. 

• The Munitions (Testing) Soil 

Remediation Project included 11 sites 

within Sections 19, 20, 25, 29, 30, 31, 

and 32 of the CES (BT32–10, CSA–2c, 

ESA–1b, ESA–1c, ESA–1d, ESA–4a, 

ESA–4b, MT29–1, MT–DREZ, BA 9A 

Parcel 2, and BA10 Burn Area). As 

documented in the CCRs for the 

Munitions (Testing) Soil Remediation 

Project, Parts I, II, III, and IV, completed 

in 2009, munitions debris and related 

soil, asbestos-containing material, 

mercury-contaminated biota risk soil, 

and miscellaneous debris were 

excavated from all these sites and 

disposed in the HWL and the ELF. Biota 

risk soil and miscellaneous debris was 

excavated and consolidated in Basin A. 

• The North Plants Structures 

Demolition and Removal Project 

included seven soil remediation sites in 

Section 25 of the CES (NPSA–1, NPSA– 

3, NPSA–5, NPSA–6, NPSA–8c, NPSA– 

9f, and a P1 soil site associated with 

NPSA–1). HHE soil, biota risk soil, a 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 116 / Thursday, June 17, 2010 / Proposed Rules 34411 

chemical sewer system, and a sanitary 

sewer system were present in the North 

Plants area where the nerve agent GB, 

also called Sarin, was manufactured. As 

documented in the CCR for the North 

Plants Structure Demolition and 

Removal Project, completed in 2004, 

HHE soil and chemical sewers were 

excavated from three remedy sites 

within the CES (NPSA–1, 5 and 6) and 

disposed in the HWL. Over 6,000 linear 

feet of sanitary sewer line was removed 

from the North Plants manufacturing 

area and also disposed in the HWL. In 

addition, biota risk soil and 

miscellaneous debris was excavated 

from six remedy sites within the CES 

(NPSA–3, 5, 6, 8c, 9f and the P1 soil site 

associated with NPSA–1) and 

consolidated in Basin A. 

• The Residual Ecological Risk Soil 

Project included excavation or tilling 

with sampling of biota risk soil from 18 

remedy sites within Sections 1, 2, 24, 

26, 35, and 36 (1CN–2, 1WC–1, 2NW– 

4, 6NW–3, 24SW–1, 26NW–5, 26SE–6, 

26SW–1, 26WC–2, 35NC–7, 35SW–2, 

35SW–3, 35WC–4, 36EC–1, 36NE–3, 

36NW–4, Ditch 2d backfill, Basin F Area 

1) and 8 Borrow Areas within Sections 

1, 6, 23, 24, 25, 26, 30, 31, 35, and 36 

(Borrow Areas 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 11) 

of the CES. These soils were 

contaminated with low levels of 

pesticides, primarily aldrin and 

dieldrin, which presented a residual 

health risk to biota. As documented in 

the CCRs for the Residual Ecological 

Risk Soil Remediation Project—Part 1 

and Part 2, completed in 2009, soil at 

the 18 RER sites was either excavated 

and consolidated in Basin A, Basin F, or 

in South Plants, or tilled to an 18 inch 

depth with follow-up sampling. Biota 

risk soil was removed from the eight 

borrow areas and used as daily cover in 

the HWL, ELF, and Basin A 

consolidation area, as well as gradefill at 

depths at least two feet below final 

grade in areas that will remain in Army 

control. 

• The Sanitary and Chemical Sewer 

Plugging Project consists of two project 

phases that were conducted 

independently of each other. Phase I 

included plugging manholes associated 

with sanitary sewer lines in Sections 2, 

24, 25, 26, and 35 of the CES. These 

sewer lines potentially served as 

conduits for the transport of 

contaminated groundwater and, 

therefore, the ROD required that the 

manholes be plugged with grout. As 

documented in the CCR for this project, 

completed in 1998, 62 sanitary sewer 

manholes in the CES were plugged. 

Subsequent to this plugging project, 37 

of the plugged manholes were excavated 

as part of implementation of soil 

remediation projects. 

• The Sanitary Sewer Manhole 

Plugging Project—Phase II included 

plugging additional manholes in 

Sections 3, 4 and 35 of the CES. As 

documented in the CCR for this project, 

completed in 2009, 21 sanitary sewer 

manholes in the CES were plugged with 

grout. There are three manholes in 

Section 35 which will remain open to 

support an existing future use structure. 

• The Secondary Basins Soil 

Remediation Project included the 

excavation of soil from six pesticidecontaminated sites within Section 26 of 

the CES including two former liquid 

disposal basins (NCSA–2a and –2b), one 

ditch (NCSA–2d) between the two 

basins, and adjacent surface soil areas 

(NCSA–4b, Surface Soil site, P1 Soil 

Area). As documented in the CCR for 

the Secondary Basins Soil Remediation 

Project, completed in 2004, HHE soil 

was excavated from four of these sites 

NCSA–2a, –2b, –2d, and the Surface 

Soil site and disposed in the HWL. Biota 

risk soil and miscellaneous debris were 

excavated from all six sites and 

consolidated in Basin A. In 2009, 

additional HHE soil was excavated from 

the ditch (NCSA–2d) and disposed in 

the ELF. This additional excavation is 

documented in the CCR for the 

Secondary Basins Soil Remediation 

Project, NCSA–2d (Basin F Drainage 

Ditch) Contingent Soil Volume (CSV) 

(NCSA–2d CSV Project). 

• The Section 26 Human Health 

Exceedance and Biota Exceedance Soil 

Removal Project included the 

excavation of soil from one pesticidecontaminated site (NCSA–4b) within 

Section 26 of the CES. As documented 

in the CCR for the Section 26 Human 

Health Exceedance and Biota 

Exceedance Soils Removal Project, 

completed in 2000, HHE soil was 

excavated from this site and disposed in 

the HWL, and the biota risk soil was 

excavated and either consolidated in 

Basin A or used as daily cover in the 

HWL. In 2003, additional contaminated 

soil was excavated at this site where low 

level biota risk soil was identified. The 

additional excavation is documented in 

an Addendum to the Section 26 Human 

Health Exceedance and Biota 

Exceedance Soils Removal Project CCR. 

• The Section 35 Soil Remediation 

Project included excavation of soil from 

nine sites within the CES that were 

contaminated by liquid waste from a 

former retention/detention basin 

including a basin located in Section 35 

(NCSA–5b), former process water and 

wastewater ditches in Sections 2 and 35 

(NCSA–1c, NCSA–5a, NCSA–5c, 

NCSA–5d, NCSA–6a), and areas 

surrounding the ditches (Surficial Biota, 

Surficial P1, Additional Surficial P1). 

As documented in the CCR for the 

Section 35 Soil Remediation Project, 

completed in 2004, HHE soil, chemical 

sewers, and associated debris were 

excavated and disposed in the HWL, 

and biota risk soil was excavated and 

consolidated in Basin A. A subsequent 

project, the Sand Creek Lateral Project, 

included additional work at three sites 

within Section 35 of the CES including 

two of the Section 35 Soil Remediation 

sites (NCSA–5b and –5c) and a section 

of sanitary sewer (NCSA–8a). As 

documented in the CCR for the Sand 

Creek Lateral Project, completed in 

2008, HHE soil was excavated from 

NCSA–5b and –5c and disposed in the 

HWL and the ELF, and biota risk soil 

was excavated and consolidated in 

Basin A. The sanitary sewer (NCSA–8a) 

was removed and consolidated in Basin 

A. 

• The Section 36 Balance of Areas 

Soil Remediation Project included the 

excavation of soil from six sites within 

Section 36 of the CES (CSA–1d, –2b, –3, 

–4, P1 East, and P1 North). As 

documented in CCRs for the Section 36 

Balance of Areas Soil Remediation 

Project (Parts 1 and 2), completed in 

2009, HHE soil, munitions debris, 

chemical sewers and associated debris 

from two sites (CSA–3 and –4) were 

excavated and disposed in the HWL. 

Biota risk soil and miscellaneous debris 

from four sites (CSA–1d and –2b, P1 

East and P1 North) were excavated and 

disposed in Basin A. Part 2 of the 

project also included grading in 

Sections 31 and 36 to construct 

permanent stormwater drainages off of 

the adjacent Complex (Army) Trenches 

RCRA–Equivalent Cover and the Shell 

Disposal Trenches 2–Foot Cover. 

• The South Plants Balance of Areas 

and Central Processing Area Soil 

Remediation Project included 16 

remedy sites located in Sections 1 and 

2 of the CES (SPSA–2b, –2e, –4a, –4b, 

–5b, –6, –7a, –7b, –7c, –8a, –8b, –8c, 

–9a, –9b, –10, and a P1 soil area outside 

of Borrow Area 11) which contained 

chemical sewers, HHE and biota risk 

soils contaminated with pesticides, 

chloroacetic acid, volatile organic 

compounds, metals, and mercury, as 

well as the potential for chemical 

warfare agents, munitions debris and 

unexploded ordnance. As documented 

in the CCRs for the South Plants Balance 

of Areas and Central Processing Area 

Soil Remediation Project—Phase 1 and 

Phase 2, completed in 2009, HHE soil, 

chemical sewers, and associated debris, 

and munitions debris from 12 of the 

sites (SPSA–2b, –2e, –4a, –4b, –5b, –6, 

–7c, –8a, –8b, –9a, –9b, –10) were 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
34412 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 116 / Thursday, June 17, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

excavated and disposed in the HWL. 

Biota risk soil was excavated from all of 

the sites excluding SPSA–10 and 

consolidated under the South Plants 

Covers or in Basin A. Structural debris 

from foundation demolition was 

consolidated within the South Plants 

soil cover areas. 

Structures: All but one of the 750 

ROD-identified ‘‘no future use’’ 

structures within the On-Post OU have 

been demolished. The remaining ROD 

structure is the CERCLA Wastewater 

Treatment Facility in Section 36, which 

was constructed to treat remedygenerated wastewater. The CERCLA 

facility currently treats groundwater 

from the Groundwater Mass Removal 

Project and is excluded from this 

proposed partial deletion. One other 

structure, the LWTS facility, built as 

part of the remedy to treat wastewater 

from the on-post landfills, is being 

decommissioned and is also excluded 

from this proposed partial deletion. 

Demolition and removal of structures 

within the CES was accomplished by 

several projects. The remedial action for 

structures included demolition of the 

structures and foundations; removal and 

disposal of debris, substations, roads 

and parking areas; removal and disposal 

or recycling of underground storage 

tanks, structural steel and other metal 

components; backfilling and grading; 

and revegetation of the excavated areas. 

The demolition of most structures is 

documented in the following project 

CCRs. 

(1) South Plants Structure Demolition 

and Removal Project Phase 1 and Phase 

2 (2002); 

(2) South Plants Balance of Areas and 

the Central Processing Area Soil 

Remediation Project Phase 2 (2009); 

(3) North Plant Structure Demolition 

and Removal Project (2004); and 

(4) Miscellaneous RMA Structure 

Demolition and Removal Projects— 

Phases I, II and III (2009). 

Groundwater: The proposed partial 

deletion of the CES does not include 

groundwater; however, the following 

groundwater remedy projects are or 

were located within the CES footprint of 

the RMA Site. The Section 36 Bedrock 

Ridge Groundwater Plume Extraction 

System, constructed in 2008, is an 

ongoing project which extracts 

contaminated groundwater flowing from 

the Basin A and South Plants areas for 

treatment at the Basin A Neck 

Groundwater Treatment System. The 

North of Basin F IRA intercept system 

was permanently shut down in 2004 

due to declining flows, biofouling, 

declining well capacity, and decreasing 

contaminant concentrations. The 

Confined Flow System Well Closure 

project, completed in 2000, included the 

closure of 15 wells in the CES which 

extended into the deeper, confined-low 

aquifer. 

In addition, the portion of the On-Post 

OU that currently remains on the NPL 

includes several groundwater remedy 

components that are not within the 

proposed CES deletion area and will 

remain part of the NPL site. These 

include: 

• The Rail Yard Treatment System, 

located in Section 3, is an ongoing 

project which treats contaminated 

groundwater associated with the Rail 

Yard. 

• The Lime Basins and South Tank 

Farm Groundwater Mass Removal 

extraction systems, located in Section 

36 and Section 1 respectively, are part 

of an ongoing project that extracts 

contaminated groundwater for treatment 

at the CERCLA Wastewater Treatment 

Facility. 

• The CERCLA Wastewater Treatment 

Facility, located in Section 35, is an 

ongoing project which treats 

contaminated groundwater from the 

Lime Basins and South Tank Farm areas 

as part of the Groundwater Mass 

Removal Project. 

Use of the groundwater and surface 

water for potable purposes from the 

entire original On-Post OU, including 

the CES, is prohibited by the FFA and 

On-Post ROD. The FFA and On-Post 

ROD also prohibit residential 

development, agricultural activities, and 

hunting and fishing for consumptive 

purposes throughout the original OnPost OU. These restrictions will 

continue to be prohibited even after the 

CES is transferred to the U.S. 

Department of Interior and are enforced 

by the Army through an ‘‘Interim Rocky 

Mountain Arsenal Institutional Control 

Plan’’ approved in 2003 and revised in 

2006 and 2008. 

Remedial Action for the OPS of the OffPost (OU 4) 

Soil: The Off-Post OU of the RMA Site 

is located directly north and northwest 

of the On-Post OU. To date, none of the 

Off-Post OU has been deleted. As agreed 

in the Off-Post ROD, though the health 

risks present in the soils were within 

EPA’s acceptable cancer risk range for 

residential use (less than 1 × 10¥4), 

Shell completed tilling and seeding of 

approximately 160 acres in Sections 13 

and 14 of the OPS for settlement 

purposes to enhance the degradation of 

low-level pesticide residues. This 

activity is documented in the ‘‘Final 

Inspection/Implementation Report for 

the Off-Post Tillage Task’’ completed in 

1997. 

Groundwater: The proposed partial 

deletion of the OPS does not include 

groundwater; however, the following 

groundwater remedy components are or 

were within the OPS footprint of the 

RMA Site. The Off-Post Groundwater 

Intercept and Treatment System 

(OGITS), constructed in 1993, is an 

ongoing project that treats contaminated 

groundwater plumes that flow off-post 

to the north and northwest of RMA. The 

Off-Post Well Abandonment project, 

completed in 1999, included the closure 

of 7 wells in the Off-Post OU that 

extended into the deeper, confined flow 

aquifer. Institutional controls to prevent 

the use of groundwater exceeding 

remediation goals as well as deed 

restrictions on the Shell Property have 

been in place since 1996. 

Cleanup Goals 

Cleanup goals for the On-Post OU 

were established based upon a scenario 

for potential contaminant exposure 

incurred by a biological worker, e.g., a 

wildlife biologist working in the field, 

in consideration of the anticipated 

future land use of the On-Post OU as a 

National Wildlife Refuge. Soils and 

structures with a cumulative 

contamination concentration presenting 

an excess cancer risk to human health 

of greater than 1 × 10¥4 or a Hazard 

Index greater than 1.0 for non-cancer 

risks were identified for excavation/ 

demolition and on-site disposal. To 

confirm that the ROD-delineated soil 

contamination areas and depths met 

remedial action objectives, the On-Post 

ROD provided for excavation of an 

additional 150,000 cy of soil beyond 

that estimated in the selected remedy. 

For the entire On-Post OU, this volume 

was identified using 1,014 confirmatory 

samples as well as visual observations 

(e.g., for staining, debris, and odors). For 

the CES, more than 100 samples were 

collected and roughly 22,000 cy of 

additional soil was excavated. 

Operation and Maintenance (O&M) 

No O&M is required for any of the 

proposed CES and OPS partial deletion 

areas. However, the Army is responsible 

for O&M of the On-Post internal 

groundwater treatment facilities, and 

Off-Post OGITS until contaminant 

concentrations are below remedial 

action levels, as well as continued 

maintenance of groundwater wells for 

long-term groundwater monitoring. 

Long-term access to groundwater wells 

within the On-Post OU is delineated in 

Public Law 102–402 and the ‘‘Interim 

Rocky Mountain Arsenal Institutional 

Control Plan.’’ Long-term access to the 

groundwater wells in the Off-Post OU is 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 116 / Thursday, June 17, 2010 / Proposed Rules 34413 

provided through a license agreement 

between the Army and Shell. 

Five-Year Review 

Pursuant to CERCLA Section 121(c) 

and § 300.430(f)(4)(ii) of the NCP, the 

next five-year review will be completed 

in 2011 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. Because the CES 

and OPS are subject to restrictions on 

land and water use, they will be 

included in future, RMA-wide five-year 

reviews. 

Two site-wide, five-year reviews have 

been conducted to date including the 

Five-Year Review Report completed in 

January 2001 and the Five-Year Review 

Report completed in December 2007. 

The 2005 Five-Year Review identified 

13 issues requiring followup actions, 

none of which affected the protection of 

human health or the environment for 

the Off-Post or On-Post OUs. Seven of 

these actions were related to improving 

reporting and coordination, and 

clarification of remedy requirements. 

Other issues concerned the incomplete 

capture of groundwater at the Bedrock 

Ridge Extraction System, operating 

problems of the primary sump system in 

Cell 2 of the Basin F Wastepile, 

modification of the OGITS extraction 

system, the discovery of fuel 

contamination in the groundwater 

below the North Plants area, and 

updating portions of the groundwater 

treatment systems including sitespecific treatment criteria known as 

Practical Quantitation Limits (PQLs), 

and updating monitoring well networks. 

None of the issues impacted the CES or 

OPS, though actions regarding the 

groundwater monitoring networks may 

indirectly affect small portions of the 

CES and OPS. 

All but three of the followup actions 

have been completed. Modification of 

the OGITS extraction system has been 

completed and the start-up data is being 

reviewed. A pilot study for assessing the 

North Plants Fuel Release has been 

approved and is ongoing. The PQL 

study was initiated in 2009 and 

submittals from laboratories are under 

review. 

A fourth extraction well was installed 

at the Bedrock Ridge Extraction System 

and, in 2008, was determined to be 

adequately capturing the groundwater 

plume. The Basin F Wastepile 

Remediation Project, completed in 2009, 

included the excavation of the 

Wastepile and the liner system, and 

disposed the waste in the ELF, thereby 

eliminating any continuing concerns 

regarding the sump system. 

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. 

Since 1988, each of the parties involved 

with the Arsenal cleanup has made 

extensive efforts to ensure that the 

public is kept informed on all aspects of 

the cleanup program. More than 100 fact 

sheets about topics ranging from 

historical information to site 

remediation have been developed and 

made available to the public. Upon 

completion of the 30 calendar day 

public comment period for this 

proposed partial deletion of the RMA 

Site, EPA Region 8, in consultation with 

the State and the Army, will evaluate 

each comment and any significant new 

data received before issuing a final 

decision concerning the proposed 

partial deletion. 

CES of the On-Post (OU 3): Following 

the release and distribution of the draft 

Detailed Analysis of Alternatives report 

for the On-Post OU (a second phase of 

the FS), the Army held an open house 

for about 1,000 community members. 

The open house provided opportunity 

for individual discussion and 

understanding of the various 

technologies being evaluated for 

cleanup of the On-Post RMA Site. The 

Proposed Plan for the On-Post OU was 

issued for public review from October 

16, 1995, through January 19, 1996. A 

public meeting was held on November 

18, 1995, attended by approximately 50 

members of the public, to obtain public 

comment on the Proposed Plan. 

Minimal comments were received on 

the alternatives presented for the 

projects in the Central Area of the OnPost OU. Specifically, the comments 

requested that the health and safety of 

nearby communities be protected from 

air emissions during excavation and 

demolition activities and that potential 

dioxin contamination of the entire RMA 

Site be evaluated. 

The designs for the each of the 29 

remediation projects within the CES (18 

soil remediation projects and 11 

structure demolition projects) were 

provided to the public for a thirty 

calendar day review and comment 

period at both the 30 percent and 95 

percent design completion stages (45 

separate public comment periods). Most 

designs were also presented for 

discussion at the RMA Restoration 

Advisory Board which is composed of 

community stakeholders, regulatory 

agencies, the Army, Shell Oil Company, 

and USFWS. No written comments 

regarding the excavation/demolition 

approach or the proposed health and 

safety controls for each project were 

received. 

OPS of the Off-Post (OU 4): An 

expanded Community Relations 

outreach was implemented to ensure 

community members had the 

opportunity to comment on the 

Proposed Plan for the Off-Post OU. In 

January 1993, all documents supporting 

an expected Proposed Plan were made 

available for public review in local 

libraries. A direct mailing to more than 

1200 local citizens was made. The RI, RI 

Addendum, EA/FS, and Proposed Plan 

for the Off-Post OU were issued for 

public review on March 21, 1993, and 

was extended until June 21, 1993. On 

April 28, 1993, a public meeting was 

held to obtain public comment of the 

Proposed Plan. Comments received 

focused on requests for expanded 

groundwater treatment, incorporation of 

a surface soil remedy, and concerns over 

the selection of a DIMP cleanup 

standard. 

The Draft Final ROD (1993) was 

revised in consideration of comments 

received from the city and county 

governments, environmental action 

groups and private citizens. Settlement 

discussions involving municipalities, 

local health departments, special 

districts, and citizen groups were held 

from late 1994 until April 1, 1995, to 

discuss the final remedies for both the 

On-Post and Off-Post OUs. 

Determination That the Criteria for 

Deletion Have Been Met 

EPA, with concurrence from the State 

of Colorado, dated March 22, 2010, has 

determined that all appropriate CERCLA 

response actions have been completed 

for the CES and OPS of the RMA Site 

to protect public health and the 

environment and that no further 

response action by responsible parties is 

required. Based on the extensive 

investigations and risk assessment 

performed for the CES and the OPS of 

the RMA Site, there are no further 

response actions planned or scheduled 

for these areas. 

There are no known hazardous 

substances remaining in the CES above 

health-based levels with respect to 

anticipated uses of and access to the site 

which are identified in the FFA, OnPost ROD, and Public Law 102–402. 

Similarly, no known hazardous 

substances remain in the OPS above 

health-based levels with respect to 

anticipated uses of and access to the site 

which are limited through deed 

restrictions. As a result, all completion 

requirements for the CES and OPS have 

been achieved as outlined in OSWER 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
34414 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 116 / Thursday, June 17, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

Directive 9320.2–09A–P and the NCP. 

Therefore, EPA proposes to delete the 

CES and OPS portions of the RMA 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. 

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: June 10, 2010. 

Carol Rushin, 

Deputy Regional Administrator, Region 8. 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALSEP17JN10.000</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 116 / Thursday, June 17, 2010 / Proposed Rules 34415 

[FR Doc. 2010–14524 Filed 6–16–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–C 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Federal Emergency Management 

Agency 

44 CFR Part 67 

[Docket ID FEMA–2010–0003; Internal 

Agency Docket No. FEMA–B–1114] 

Proposed Flood Elevation 

Determinations 

AGENCY: Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, DHS. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: Comments are requested on 

the proposed Base (1% annual-chance) 

Flood Elevations (BFEs) and proposed 

BFE modifications for the communities 

listed in the table below. The purpose 

of this notice is to seek general 

information and comment regarding the 

proposed regulatory flood elevations for 

the reach described by the downstream 

and upstream locations in the table 

below. The BFEs and modified BFEs are 

a part of the floodplain management 

measures that the community is 

required either to adopt or to show 

evidence of having in effect in order to 

qualify or remain qualified for 

participation in the National Flood 

Insurance Program (NFIP). In addition, 

these elevations, once finalized, will be 

used by insurance agents and others to 

calculate appropriate flood insurance 

premium rates for new buildings and 

the contents in those buildings. 

DATES: Comments are to be submitted 

on or before September 15, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: The corresponding 

preliminary Flood Insurance Rate Map 

(FIRM) for the proposed BFEs for each 

community is available for inspection at 

the community’s map repository. The 

respective addresses are listed in the 

table below. 

You may submit comments, identified 

by Docket No. FEMA–B–1114, to Kevin 

C. Long, Acting Chief, Engineering 

Management Branch, Mitigation 

Directorate, Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–2820, 

or (e-mail) kevin.long@dhs.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kevin C. Long, Acting Chief, 

Engineering Management Branch, 

Mitigation Directorate, Federal 

Emergency Management Agency, 500 C 

Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472, 

(202) 646–2820, or (e-mail) 

kevin.long@dhs.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Federal Emergency Management Agency 

(FEMA) proposes to make 

determinations of BFEs and modified 

BFEs for each community listed below, 

in accordance with section 110 of the 

Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 

42 U.S.C. 4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a). 

These proposed BFEs and modified 

BFEs, together with the floodplain 

management criteria required by 44 CFR 

60.3, are the minimum that are required. 

They should not be construed to mean 

that the community must change any 

existing ordinances that are more 

stringent in their floodplain 

management requirements. The 

community may at any time enact 

stricter requirements of its own or 

pursuant to policies established by other 

Federal, State, or regional entities. 

These proposed elevations are used to 

meet the floodplain management 

requirements of the NFIP and also are 

used to calculate the appropriate flood 

insurance premium rates for new 

buildings built after these elevations are 

made final, and for the contents in those 

buildings. 

Comments on any aspect of the Flood 

Insurance Study and FIRM, other than 

the proposed BFEs, will be considered. 

A letter acknowledging receipt of any 

comments will not be sent. 

National Environmental Policy Act. 

This proposed rule is categorically 

excluded from the requirements of 44 

CFR part 10, Environmental 

Consideration. An environmental 

impact assessment has not been 

prepared. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act. As flood 

elevation determinations are not within 

the scope of the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, a regulatory 

flexibility analysis is not required. 

Executive Order 12866, Regulatory 

Planning and Review. This proposed 

rule is not a significant regulatory action 

under the criteria of section 3(f) of 

Executive Order 12866, as amended. 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism. 

This proposed rule involves no policies 

that have federalism implications under 

Executive Order 13132. 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform. This proposed rule meets the 

applicable standards of Executive Order 

12988. 

List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 67 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Flood insurance, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

Accordingly, 44 CFR part 67 is 

proposed to be amended as follows: 

PART 67—[AMENDED] 

1. The authority citation for part 67 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.; 

Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 3 CFR, 

1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, 

3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376. 

§ 67.4 [Amended] 

2. The tables published under the 

authority of § 67.4 are proposed to be 

amended as follows: 

Flooding source(s) Location of referenced elevation 

* Elevation in feet (NGVD) 

+ Elevation in feet (NAVD) 

# Depth in feet above 

ground 

∧Elevation in meters 

(MSL) 

Communities affected 

Effective Modified 

Elmore County, Alabama, and Incorporated Areas 

Tallapoosa River ................... Approximately 3.0 miles downstream of the Thurlow 

Dam.

None +210 City of Tallassee. 

Approximately 1.7 mile downstream of the Thurlow 

Dam.

None +214 

* National Geodetic Vertical Datum. 

+ North American Vertical Datum. 

# Depth in feet above ground. 

∧ Mean Sea Level, rounded to the nearest 0.1 meter. 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS