[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 90 (Tuesday, May 11, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 26131-26137]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-10849]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 300

[EPA-HQ-SFUND-2009-0654; FRL-9146-8]


National Oil and Hazardous Substance Pollution Contingency Plan; 
National Priorities List

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region II is 
publishing a direct final Notice of Deletion of the Asbestos Dump 
Superfund Site (Site), located in Long Hill Township and Harding 
Township, New Jersey, 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 New Jersey, through the New 
Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP), because EPA has 
determined that all appropriate response actions under CERCLA, other 
than operation, maintenance, and five-year reviews, have been 
completed. However, this deletion does not preclude future actions 
under Superfund.

DATES: This direct final deletion is effective July 12, 2010 unless EPA 
receives adverse comments by June 10, 2010. 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-2009-0654, by one of the following methods:
    <bullet> http://www.regulations.gov. Follow on-line instructions 
for submitting comments.
    <bullet> E-mail: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#c0a8b7a9acaba1eeb4a8a5b2a5b3a180a5b0a1eea7afb6"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="731b041a1f18125d071b1601160012331603125d141c05">[email protected]</span></a>: Theresa Hwilka, Remedial 
Project Manager; <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#a1d2c4d1d1c88fd1c0d5e1c4d1c08fc6ced7"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="a7d4c2d7d7ce89d7c6d3e7c2d7c689c0c8d1">[email protected]</span></a>: Pat Seppi, Community Involvement 
Coordinator.
    <bullet> Fax: 212-637-4429.
    <bullet> Mail: Theresa Hwilka, Remedial Project Manager, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region II, Emergency & Remedial 
Response Division, 290 Broadway, 19th Floor, New York, NY 10007; or Pat 
Seppi, Community Involvement Coordinator, U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, Region II, Public Affairs Division, 290 Broadway, 26th Floor, 
New York, NY 10007.
    <bullet> Hand delivery: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
Region II, Emergency & Remedial Response Division, 290 Broadway, 19th 
Floor, New York, NY 10007. 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-
2009-0654. 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 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: U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region II, Superfund Records Center, 
290 Broadway, Room 1828. (212) 637-4308.
    Hours: 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday; and at Long Hill 
Township Public Library, 917 Valley Road, Gillette, New Jersey 07933. 
(908) 647-2088.
    Hours: 10 a.m. to 9 p.m., Monday through Thursday. 10 a.m. to 5 
p.m., Friday and Saturday. 1 p.m. to 5 p.m., Sunday (Closed on Sundays 
in July and August).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Theresa Hwilka, Remedial Project 
Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region II, 290 Broadway, 
New

[[Page 26132]]

York, NY 10007, (212) 637-4409, e-mail: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#214956484d4a400f55494453445240614451400f464e57"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="9af2edf3f6f1fbb4eef2ffe8ffe9fbdaffeafbb4fdf5ec">[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 II is publishing this direct final Notice of Deletion of 
the Asbestos Dump Superfund site (Site), from the National Priorities 
List (NPL). The NPL constitutes Appendix B of 40 CFR part 300, which is 
the Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), 
which EPA promulgated pursuant to section 105 of the Comprehensive 
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 
1980, as amended. EPA maintains the NPL as the list of sites that 
appear to present a significant risk to public health, welfare, or the 
environment. Sites on the NPL may be the subject of remedial actions 
financed by the Hazardous Substance Superfund (Fund). As described in 
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.
    Because EPA considers this action to be noncontroversial and 
routine, this action will be effective July 12, 2010 unless EPA 
receives adverse comments by June 10, 2010. Along with this direct 
final Notice of Deletion, EPA is co-publishing a Notice of Intent to 
Delete in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of the Federal Register. If 
adverse comments are received within the 30-day public comment period 
on this deletion action, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of this 
direct final Notice of Deletion before the effective date of the 
deletion, and the deletion will not take effect. EPA will, as 
appropriate, 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.
    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 Asbestos Dump 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.
    Pursuant to CERCLA section 121(c) and the NCP, EPA conducts five-
year reviews to ensure the continued protectiveness of remedial actions 
where hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants remain at a 
site above levels that allow for unlimited use and unrestricted 
exposure. EPA conducts such five-year reviews even if a site is deleted 
from the NPL. EPA may initiate further action to ensure continued 
protectiveness at a deleted site if new information becomes available 
that indicates it is appropriate. Whenever there is a significant 
release from a site deleted from the NPL, the deleted site may be 
restored to the NPL without application of the hazard ranking system.

III. Deletion Procedures

    The following procedures apply to deletion of the Site:
    1. EPA consulted with the State of New Jersey 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. The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection 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, Courier News. 
The newspaper notice announces the 30-day public comment period 
concerning the Notice of Intent to Delete the Site from the NPL.
    4. The EPA placed copies of documents supporting the proposed 
deletion in the deletion docket and made these items available for 
public 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 information below provides EPA's rationale for deleting the 
Site from the NPL. For each Operable Unit there is a discussion section 
containing information on the following: (1) Site background and 
history; (2) remedial investigation and feasibility study (RI/FS); (3) 
selected remedy; (4) response actions; (5) cleanup goals; (6) operation 
and maintenance; (7) five year reviews; and (8) community involvement.
    The Asbestos Dump Superfund Site (the Site), CERCLIS ID 
NJD980654149, consists of four separate properties which were addressed 
in three discrete operable units (OUs). OU1 consists of the Millington 
site, located in Millington, New Jersey. OU2 consists of the New Vernon 
Road and White Bridge Road ``satellite'' sites, both of which are 
located in Meyersville, New Jersey. OU3 consists of the third satellite 
site, known as the Dietzman Tract, which is located in Harding 
Township, New Jersey. The Site was placed on the National Priorities 
List (NPL) in September 1983 (48 FR 40658).
    Given the nature of this Site, this Direct Final Notice of Deletion 
will summarize the history, remedies and remedial actions taken for 
each individual OU.

OU-1

Site Background and History
    OU1 consists of the Millington site which is an 11 acre commercial

[[Page 26133]]

property located at 50 Division Avenue in Millington, New Jersey. The 
site is bounded on the west by the Passaic River, on the north by the 
Millington Train Station, and on the east and south by commercial and 
private residences, respectively. Currently owned by Tifa Ltd., this 
parcel was formerly utilized as an asbestos processing plant that had 
several previous owners. Manufacturing of asbestos products at the 
Millington site began in 1927 by Asbestos Ltd., which engaged in the 
fiberization and sale of asbestos until 1946. From 1946 until 1953, the 
plant was owned and operated by Smith Asbestos, Inc., a manufacturer of 
asbestos roofing and siding. During this later period, asbestos 
sediment from water settling ponds was disposed of on-site.
    In May 1953, the property was acquired by the National Gypsum 
Company (NGC), which manufactured cement asbestos siding and roofing 
sheets at the plant until 1975. During this period, waste products, 
consisting of broken siding and asbestos fibers were dumped on a five 
acre area of the property. This included a 330 by 75 foot area (later 
referred to as the asbestos mound) where predominantly asbestos fibers 
were disposed. It is estimated that 90,000 cubic yards of asbestos 
waste was disposed of on-site.
Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/FS)
    RI/FS activities were initiated by NGC in 1986 and completed in 
1987. The primary contaminant of concern was asbestos. Soil borings and 
historical information revealed that the upland portion of site 
contained broken asbestos tiles and siding, while the asbestos mound 
was found to contain predominantly asbestos fibers. The upland and 
asbestos mound portions of the site were covered with varying 
thicknesses of topsoil; however, exposed areas of asbestos fibers were 
observed on the slope of the asbestos mound adjacent to the Passaic 
River. Extensive slope stability analyses indicated that the asbestos 
mound was relatively stable; however, the slope was unprotected from 
surface erosion and the potential destabilizing effects of flooding 
along the Passaic River. Analysis of groundwater samples revealed low 
concentrations of mercury and asbestos related to disposal activities 
at the site. Mercury was detected in groundwater in concentrations 
exceeding drinking water standards in a limited number of samples; 
however, the limited mercury contamination remained within the 
footprint of the landfill and did not pose an unacceptable human health 
risk. As a result, groundwater alternatives were not evaluated. 
Asbestos was detected at concentrations substantially below the 
proposed EPA drinking water standard. The RI and FS reports were 
completed in September 1988.
Selected Remedy
    On September 30, 1988, EPA issued a ROD for OU1. The major 
components of the selected remedy include the following: (1) 
Installation of a two-foot soil cover on areas of exposed or minimally 
covered asbestos; (2) installation of a chain-link security fence to 
restrict access to the asbestos mound; (3) construction of slope 
protection/stabilization measures along the asbestos mound embankment; 
(4) construction of surface run-off diversion channels on top of the 
asbestos mound; (5) operation and maintenance of the remedy; (6) long-
term monitoring; (7) institutional controls to restrict on-site 
groundwater usage and limit development on the asbestos fill areas; and 
(8) treatability studies of technologies for permanent destruction or 
immobilization of asbestos.
Response Actions
    OU1 remedial action activities were conducted pursuant to the 1988 
ROD. EPA entered into an Interagency Agreement (IAG) with the U.S. Army 
Corps of Engineers (USACE) who in turn provided oversight during all 
remedial activities. USACE contracted IT Corporation (IT) to complete 
the remedial actions in accordance with the contract documents and all 
applicable State and Federal regulations.
    Mobilization activities began on June 17, 1999 and included the 
delivery of general materials, initiation of soil erosion and sediment 
control measures, and clearing and grubbing activities. The primary 
remedial construction activities included, but were not limited to, the 
following: (1) Access road construction--completed in November 1999; 
(2) retaining wall construction for slope stabilization--completed in 
May 2000; and (3) cap construction operations and site restoration--
completed in May 2000. Capping activities consisted of relocating 
excavated material, closing the asbestos mound, grading the asbestos-
containing material (ACM) to the required elevations, installation of a 
layer of geotextile and geogrid material, and the placement and grading 
of a two-foot soil cover. A retaining wall was installed at the toe of 
the asbestos mound for stabilization purposes. The wall is an average 
of 10 feet in height and 516 feet long. The Final RA Report for OU1 was 
approved by EPA in September 2001.
    EPA also conducted treatability studies to fulfill the OU1 ROD 
requirement for evaluating innovative treatment technologies that may 
be effective in permanently remediating asbestos. Since the issuance of 
the OU1 ROD, EPA has performed treatability studies on solidification/
stabilization and vitrification (thermal treatment resulting in an 
asbestos-free glass) and has evaluated potential applicability of 
thermochemical asbestos conversion (destruction) technologies. EPA 
believes that the OU1 remedy, including the cap constructed over the 
ACM waste and institutional controls, is protective and will remain 
protective of human health and the environment. Solidification and 
stabilization of the ACM was incorporated into the OU2 remedy.
Cleanup Goals
    The cleanup goal for the Site was to contain the migration of 
asbestos. The objective was achieved through response actions conducted 
between June 1999 and June 2000 which included the consolidation of ACM 
into the landfill area and the construction of the landfill cap.
Operations and Maintenance
    In September 2001, EPA approved the Final RA Report as well as the 
30-Year Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Plan. NJDEP is currently 
responsible for operation and maintenance activities. The O&M Plan 
documents the installation of a six-foot high chain link security fence 
which surrounds the site on its north, east and south limits. 
Furthermore, the O&M Plan specifies that periodic inspections are 
conducted of all OU1 design components including the retaining wall, 
perimeter access fence, capped area, and mowing/pruning of the ACM 
cover and surrounding areas. Monitoring of surface water and sediment 
sampling of the Passaic River along with groundwater monitoring in 
accordance with the New Jersey landfill closure requirements is also 
included in the O&M Plan. Monitoring and sampling is conducted once 
every 5 years.
    In addition to O&M activities, the OU1 site is protected by 
institutional controls. A Deed Notice was filed by Tifa Realty, Inc., 
in the Morris County, New Jersey, Office of the County Clerk, on 
September 8, 2008 for the OU1 Millington property designated as Block 
12301, Lot 1 on the Long Hill Township tax map. The Deed Notice has 
been filed in Deed Book 21152, Page 508. The type of restrictions 
placed on the OU1 Millington property significantly limit

[[Page 26134]]

any type of intrusion onto the landfill cap thereby restricting on-site 
groundwater usage and limiting development on the asbestos fill areas. 
Any future use of the landfill area must be designed to protect the 
integrity of the components of the landfill.

OU-2

Site Background and History
    OU2 consists of the New Vernon Road and White Bridge Road sites. 
The OU2 New Vernon Road site is located at 237 New Vernon Road in 
Meyersville, Long Hill Township, Morris County, New Jersey. The New 
Vernon Road site consists of approximately 30 acres of land and is 
currently bounded by the Great Swamp National Wildlife Refuge (GSNWR) 
to the north, tracts of wooded and wetland areas to the east and south, 
and New Vernon Road to the west. The property previously included two 
residences and a large garage structure.
    From 1945 through 1980 the privately owned New Vernon Road site was 
used for farming. From 1968 to 1971, ACM generated by NGC, including 
asbestos fibers, broken asbestos tiles, and siding, was deposited 
throughout the site. Large amounts of ACM were deposited in the central 
portion of the property in a large depression. Asbestos was also 
detected in other areas of the property.
    The White Bridge Road site is located at 651 White Bridge Road in 
Long Hill Township, NJ. The White Bridge Road site is approximately two 
miles away from the New Vernon Road site and consists of approximately 
12 acres of privately owned land, as well as adjoining property, which 
is part of the GSNWR, in Meyersville, New Jersey. From 1945 through 
1969, the White Bridge Road site had been used for farming. In 1970, 
the property was purchased by the current residents. From 1970 to 1975, 
ACM, consisting of asbestos tiles and siding from the NGC, was disposed 
of on the property. Subsequent to these disposal activities, the 
current owner converted the property into a horse farm with stables, a 
horse riding track, and grazing fields. The horse riding track was 
comprised of large amounts of ACM mixed with soils. ACM had also been 
detected in other areas of the site.
    The remedy for the White Bridge Road portion of OU2 was completed 
and this portion of the site was deleted from the NPL in February 2002 
(67 FR 5955). Therefore, the White Bridge Road portion of the Asbestos 
Dump Site is not included in this Notice of Deletion.
Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/FS)
    EPA initiated a RI/FS in the fall of 1990 to supplement the NGC RI 
and fully characterize the extent of asbestos contamination at the OU2 
portion of the Site. The RI included a hydrogeological investigation, 
extensive sampling and subsequent laboratory analysis of subsurface 
soils, sediments, surface water, groundwater, potable water and air. 
The data indicated the presence of elevated levels of asbestos in the 
soil at both the New Vernon Road and White Bridge Road residential 
properties. With respect to groundwater, sampling results indicated 
that asbestos was not detected in levels above the analytical detection 
limit for all groundwater samples analyzed. Asbestos was determined to 
be present in air sample at both OU2 sites as a result of soil 
contamination. EPA determined that an immediate removal action was 
necessary to address the imminent threat posed by the contamination. 
Removal activities were conducted in the fall of 1990 to temporarily 
reduce the potential for airborne asbestos fibers and to restrict 
access. Removal activities included installation of fences, air and 
soil sample collection, decontamination of the residences, and visual 
inspection of ACM. RI field work was completed in 1990 and the RI and 
FS reports were completed in June 1991.
Selected Remedy
    On September 27, 1991, EPA issued a ROD documenting the remedy for 
OU2. The ROD documented the remedial actions for both the New Vernon 
Road property and the White Bridge Road property. The major components 
of the selected remedy include the following: (1) In-situ 
solidification/stabilization of asbestos contaminated soils; (2) 
appropriate environmental monitoring to confirm the effectiveness of 
the remedy; and (3) implementation of institutional controls to 
restrict future subsurface activities and assure the integrity of the 
treated waste.
    TRC and TAMS Consultants, Inc. initiated the Remedial Design (RD) 
in 1991 under contract with EPA. A solidification/stabilization 
treatability study was performed by TRC as part of the RD. Based upon 
the results of the treatability study, the solidification/stabilization 
depth was changed prior to the issuance of the Final Design Report in 
January 1993 to require that the solidified/stabilized mass be 
constructed only above the groundwater table. EPA issued an Explanation 
of Significant Differences (ESD) on October 20, 1993 to modify the 
remedy specified in the OU2 ROD.
Response Actions
    Remedial activities were conducted in two phases. Phase I 
activities at the New Vernon Road site were initiated in August 1994 
and were completed in December 1994. Phase I activities included the 
following: (1) Excavation and consolidation of ACM; (2) in-situ 
solidification/stabilization of ACM; (3) impermeable cover and 
perimeter infiltration trench construction; (4) placement of rip rap 
along the sides of the cap for slope stability protection; and (5) 
backfill of excavation areas excluding topsoil and seeding. The 
solidification process was considered complete when the cement mixture 
had set and quality control sample results indicated that the 
solidified mass conformed to the specified design criteria. Upon 
completion of the solidification/stabilization process, the site was 
graded and a minimum of six inches of soil was placed over the 
solidified material. The protective cap placed on the solidified soil 
consisted of several components including six inches of stone 
screenings, a geomembrane liner, a drainage layer consisting of a 
geocomposite, a 24 inch layer of common fill and a vegetative layer 
consisting of six inches of topsoil and grass. After the 
implementation, air monitoring was performed to demonstrate the 
effectiveness of this remedy.
    The second phase of the remedial action activities was initiated in 
March 1995 and was intended to include site restoration work such as 
final grading with topsoil, grass establishment, planting, wetlands 
restoration, asphalt paving, and demobilization. The second phase was 
halted when EPA issued a Stop Work Order on March 30, 1995. EPA 
subsequently issued a Cure Notice, in April 1995, to CDM Federal 
Programs Corporation (CDM), an EPA contractor, for failure to meet the 
contract specification for the use of fill at both the New Vernon Road 
and White Bridge Road properties. The Cure Response cleanup activities 
at New Vernon Road were initiated in July 1998 and completed by March 
1999. The USACE provided oversight of the Cure Response cleanup 
activities. In September 2000, EPA approved the Remedial Action Report 
for the New Vernon Road portion of OU2.
Cleanup Goals
    The cleanup goal for the Site was to contain the migration of 
asbestos. Asbestos containing materials on the OU2 properties that were 
either

[[Page 26135]]

detected by visual inspection or analytically (having greater than 0.5% 
asbestos, which is the detection limit of the TEM analytical method) 
were addressed in the remedy. The objective was achieved through 
consolidation of ACM, in-situ solidification/stabilization of asbestos 
contaminated soils, environmental monitoring to confirm the 
effectiveness of the remedy, and implementation of institutional 
controls to restrict future subsurface activities and assure the 
integrity of the treated waste. Response actions for OU2 were conducted 
between August 1994 and March 1999.
Operations and Maintenance
    In June 2001, an O&M plan for the New Vernon Road site was 
finalized. The overall objective of the O&M Plan is to provide for 
periodic inspection, maintenance, and monitoring to evaluate and 
maintain the effectiveness of the remedy implemented at the site. The 
landfill cap, perimeter infiltration trench and environmental 
monitoring, are the key components of the O&M Plan. Environmental 
monitoring includes the collection and analysis of groundwater and 
monitoring of wildlife species from the area around the New Vernon Road 
site.
    In January 2002, EPA, NJDEP and the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 
(FWS) reached an agreement on the terms of the transfer of a portion of 
the New Vernon Road property to FWS to expand the GSNWR. In September 
2002, an approximately 25 acre portion of the New Vernon Road property 
(Block 225, Lot 30) was formally transferred to FWS and is now in use 
as part of the Refuge. This Lot also includes the residential 
structures along New Vernon Road. The remaining five acre portion of 
the property (Block 225, Lot 30.03), which contains the solidified ACM, 
was transferred to the State of New Jersey. NJDEP is conducting the O&M 
activities on the five acre parcel of the property.
    Subsequent to the division of the New Vernon Road property between 
NJDEP and FWS, separate Deed Notices were filed for Block 225, Lots 30 
and 30.03. The Deed Notice for Block 225, Lot 30 was filed in the 
Morris County, New Jersey, Office of the County Clerk on August 20, 
2002. The Deed Notice includes a ``Limited Subsurface Use Area'' which 
exists within 10 feet of the foundation of the residences. This area is 
restricted because it could not be fully investigated for the presence 
of asbestos because such and investigation would have compromised the 
integrity of the substructure. Digging and excavating more than 12 
inches below the surface of the Limited Subsurface Area is prohibited 
unless approved by EPA or NJDEP. The Deed Notice for Block 225-Lot 
30.03, which pertains to the five acre capped OU2 parcel, was filed in 
the Morris County, New Jersey, Office of the County Clerk on October 
22, 2002. The Deed Notice specifies the restrictions placed on the 
capped area of OU2. The Deed Notice does not permit any disturbance of 
the surface or subsurface of the capped area including, but not limited 
to filling, drilling, excavation, or the removal of topsoil, sediments, 
rock or minerals, or by construction, planting anything other than 
grass or wildflowers, or changing the topography in any manner; 
however, topsoil may be added to make repairs in accordance with the 
Deed Notice. Changing, damaging or removing the perimeter trench around 
the solidified mass, the manholes or the monitoring wells is also 
prohibited.

OU-3

Site Background and History
    OU3 consists of the former Dietzman Tract which is a seven acre 
parcel of land located in the GSNWR, about two miles southeast of the 
New Vernon Road portion of the site. The GSNWR, currently owned by the 
FWS, covers approximately 7,400 acres of swamp, wooded, and wetland 
areas. The refuge is managed by FWS as a wildlife habitat and for 
recreational purposes. The Dietzman Tract included the following four 
discrete areas: (1) Site A--a five acre asbestos contaminated dump; (2) 
Site B--a half acre dump consisting of refuse and covered with ACM; (3) 
Unimproved Access Road (UAR)--a road surfaced with ACM which leads to 
Site A and Site B; and (4) three small refuse areas adjoining Site B 
(Refuse Areas <greek-i>1, 3 and 6).
    The above mentioned areas of OU3 were used for the disposal of 
refuse collected from neighboring communities. Along with refuse, ACM 
and other industrial wastes from the NGC plant in Millington were 
trucked to the OU3 site for disposal. The disposal of ACM began in 1959 
and ended in 1968 when the FWS acquired the property. Approximately 
40,000 cubic yards of ACM and refuse were delineated at OU3.
Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/FS)
    The supplemental RI, known as the Phase II RI, for OU3 was needed 
to fill data gaps remaining from prior investigations to characterize 
the nature and extent of contamination at OU3. Another goal of the 
Phase II RI was to collect geotechnical data for evaluation of remedial 
alternatives in the FS. RI activities included, but were not limited 
to, the following: (1) Characterization of the organic and inorganic 
contaminants and asbestos in the site media; (2) sampling of 
groundwater from 15 monitoring wells; (3) sampling of surface water; 
and (4) excavation of drums from Site A.
    Early Phase II RI field activities commenced in January 1996. 
Removal actions were conducted in the Fall of 1996 to address buried 
drums, and air quality monitoring was completed in December 1996. The 
Phase II RI report was completed and submitted to EPA in 1997. The 
report indicated that OU3 was found to contain approximately 36,800 
cubic yards of ACM, 3,800 cubic yards of refuse debris, an estimated 
207 buried drums at Site A, and areas of metal-impacted soil and ACM. 
Buried drums located at Site A were removed in September 1997. FWS 
completed their FS Report in 1997 which outlined general response 
actions to satisfy the remedial action objectives for OU3 and recommend 
a remedy.
Selected Remedy
    On September 8, 1998, EPA issued a ROD for OU3. The major 
components of the selected remedy include the following: (1) Access 
improvements; (2) long-term drainage improvements, and short-term 
erosion control measures; (3) drum removal activities (which were 
completed in September 1997 as a time-critical, non-emergency removal 
prior to implementation of the preferred alternative), including post-
excavation and waste classification sampling; (4) removal and off-site 
disposal of soils having lead concentrations greater than 218 mg/kg 
(completed, Spring 1998); (5) consolidation of Site B ACM into Site A 
(completed, Spring 1998); (6) placement of a biotic cover over Site A; 
(7) implementation of institutional controls to ensure the continued 
integrity of the drainage and cover activities; and (8) assessment of 
wetland impacts and wetlands restoration.
Response Actions
    The FWS contracted the USACE to perform remedial design and 
construction activities. The USACE subcontracted the design and 
construction activities to IT Corp. A three-phase approach was 
developed for the remediation of the OU3 areas described in the 
previous OU3 background section.
    Phase 1, addressed the activities including site access 
improvement, drainage improvement and drum removal from Site A. Access 
to Site A was improved by upgrading the surface

[[Page 26136]]

of the UAR and clearing dense vegetation covering Site A. The site 
drainage was enhanced by clearing the channel constriction and blockage 
where the UAR crosses the Old Great Brook Channel northwest of Site A 
and a culvert system was placed in the channel to maintain vehicle 
access to Site B and improve site drainage. After drainage improvements 
were completed, drum excavation and removal, and off-site disposal of 
the drums and miscellaneous debris was initiated and completed in 
October 1997. Post excavation sampling confirmed that contaminants in 
the drums had not been released to the soil and therefore were not 
released to groundwater above the regulatory standards before or during 
removal. Phase 1 work was completed in 1997.
    The Phase 2 removal action consisted of excavation, removal, and 
off-site disposal of lead-contaminated soils located at Site B, Refuse 
Area <greek-i>1, and Refuse Area <greek-i>6 (as defined in the OU3 
background section). The action was initiated in February 1998 and was 
completed in May 1998. Removal activities also included the 
consolidation of ACM from Site B onto Site A.
    Phase 3, the final remedial action phase, consisted of the 
excavation and removal of ACM from the UAR, consolidation of the 
excavated UAR material to Site A, backfilling the excavated portions of 
the UAR, and construction of the biotic cap on Site A. Cap construction 
activities included the installation of an anchor trench on the west 
side of the landfill, compaction of landfill material, placement of 
geotextile fabric (woven and non-woven) and placement of geonet for the 
biotic barrier. Construction of the biotic cap on the Site A landfill 
was considered to be complete after a final inspection was conducted in 
September 1999.
    The disturbed and created wetlands areas were restored by placing a 
final soil cover, consisting of six inches of organic sediment, over 
the areas. The sediment contained a natural seed bank with species 
indigenous to adjacent wetlands. The progress of wetlands restoration 
efforts continues to be monitored by FWS.
    On September 29, 1999, EPA approved the Final Remedial Action 
Report for OU3, which signified the completion of OU3 remedial 
activities.
Cleanup Goals
    The cleanup goal for the Site was to contain the migration of 
asbestos. OU3 ROD cleanup activities consisted of drum removal, removal 
of lead contaminated soils and consolidation and capping of ACM. The 
cleanup objective was achieved through the response actions conducted 
between September 1997 and September 1999.
Operations and Maintenance
    The O&M Plan for OU3 includes maintenance of the permanent features 
such as the surface water drainage improvements and the Site A biotic 
cap. The O&M plan also requires the implementation of a groundwater 
monitoring program that meets the requirements of the New Jersey 
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System regulations. FWS is responsible 
for implementing the OU3 O&M plan.
    In addition to O&M activities, FWS has implemented institutional 
controls at OU3 to ensure the continued integrity of the capped areas. 
OU3 institutional controls include the following: (1) Restricted access 
via a gated road; (2) posted signs indicating closed areas; (3) law 
enforcement presence; (4) altered trail system to divert people from 
the landfill area; and (5) periodic inspections. The OU3 property is 
located entirely within the GSNWR. As part of the National Wilderness 
Area, the remediated OU3 area is protected from development or future 
land uses that might potentially conflict with the remedial design. Any 
changes to this designation would be subject to Congressional approval. 
As such, the land will be managed in perpetuity as wildlife habitat 
with very limited public use and access insofar as these activities are 
consistent and compatible with the O&M actions that have been 
prescribed for the Site.
Five Year Review for All Operable Units
    The first Five-Year Review was completed for the Site in September 
2000. The results of the second Five-Year Review, which was completed 
in September 2005, indicated that there is no significant off-site 
migration of contaminants and that the remedies for OU1, OU2 and OU3 
are functioning as intended by the respective RODs. Since contaminants 
remain contained on-site, EPA will continue to conduct statutory five-
year reviews of the implemented remedies. The next review is scheduled 
to be completed by September 2010.
Community Involvement for All Operable Units
    Community involvement activities for the Asbestos Dump Superfund 
Site have been conducted in accordance with CERCLA requirements. Public 
meetings have been held for remedial milestones such as the 
presentation of the Proposed Plan, RI and FS reports and for the public 
comment period. Additional meetings were held with the public and/or 
stakeholders on an as needed basis throughout the remedial process. 
Documents comprising the administrative record were made available to 
the public at the Passaic Township Free Public Library in Sterling, New 
Jersey. Community notifications were also issued for the site Five-Year 
Reviews. A more detailed account of community involvement activities 
may be found in the Asbestos Dump Superfund Site Close Out Report.
Determination That the Site Meets the Criteria for Deletion in the NCP
    The NCP specifies that EPA may delete a site from the NPL if ``all 
appropriate responsible parties or other persons have implemented all 
appropriate response actions required'' or ``all appropriate Fund-
financed response under CERCLA has been implemented, and no further 
response action by responsible parties is appropriate''. 40 CFR 
300.425(e)(1). EPA, with concurrence of the State of New Jersey through 
the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection by a letter dated 
February 19, 2009, believes these criteria for deletion have been 
satisfied. Therefore, EPA is proposing the deletion of the site from 
the NPL. All of the completion requirements from the site have been met 
as described in the Superfund Final Close-Out Report, dated November 
10, 2009. Documents supporting this action are available in the site 
file and deletion dockets.

V. Deletion Action

    The EPA, with concurrence of the State of New Jersey through the 
New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, has determined that 
all appropriate response actions under CERCLA, other than operation, 
maintenance, and five-year reviews, 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 July 12, 2010 unless EPA receives adverse comments by June 
10, 2010. 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.

[[Page 26137]]

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: April 1, 2010.
Judith A. Enck,
Regional Administrator, Region 2.

0
For the reasons set out in this document, 40 CFR part 300 is amended as 
follows:

PART 300--[AMENDED]

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

    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.


0
2. Table 1 of Appendix B to part 300 is amended by removing ``Asbestos 
Dump, Millington, NJ'' from the table.

[FR Doc. 2010-10849 Filed 5-10-10; 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>