Document ID: EPA-HQ-SFUND-2003-0010-1574
Agency: epa
Document Type: Proposed Rule
Title: National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan; National Priorities List: Deletion of the Davenport and Flagstaff Smelters Superfund Site
Posted Date: 2018-06-04T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 107 (Monday, June 4, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 25635-25638]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-11758]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 300

[EPA-HQ-SFUND-2003-0010; FRL-9977-80--Region 8]

National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan; 
National Priorities List: Deletion of the Davenport and Flagstaff 
Smelters Superfund Site

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of intent.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 8 is issuing 
a Notice of Intent to Delete Davenport and Flagstaff Smelters Superfund 
Site (Site) located in Sandy City, Salt Lake County, Utah, from the 
National Priorities List (NPL) and requests public comments 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 Utah, through the Utah Department of Environmental Quality 
(UDEQ), have determined that all appropriate response actions under 
CERCLA, other than operation and maintenance and five-year reviews 
(FYR), have been completed. However,

[[Page 25636]]

this deletion does not preclude future actions under Superfund.

DATES: Comments must be received by July 5, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID no. EPA-HQ-
SFUND-2003-0010 by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov. Follow on-line instructions 
for submitting comments Follow the online instructions for submitting 
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from 
Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public 
docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, 
video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written 
comment is considered the official comment and should include 
discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not 
consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary 
submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For 
additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, 
information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance 
on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
     Email: [email protected].
     Mail: Erna Waterman, Remedial Project Manager, U.S. EPA, 
Region 8, Mail Code 8EPR-SR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, CO 80202-1129
     Hand delivery: U.S. EPA, Region 8 1595 Wynkoop Street 
(EPR-SR), Denver, CO 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-
2003-0010. The http://www.regulations.gov website is an ``anonymous 
access'' system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact 
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you 
send an email comment directly to EPA without going through http://www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically captured 
and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket 
and made available on the internet. If you submit an electronic 
comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact 
information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you 
submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties 
and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to 
consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special 
characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or 
viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 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: Utah 
Department of Environmental Quality, 168 North 1950 West, Salt Lake 
City, UT 84116; Phone: (801-944-7641); Hours: M-Th: 9 a.m.-9 p.m.; Fri-
Sat: 9:00 a.m.-5:30 p.m.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Erna Waterman, Remedial Project 
Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8, EPR-SR, 
Denver, CO 80202, (303) 312-6762, email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

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

I. Introduction

    EPA Region 8 announces its intent to delete the remaining portions 
of Davenport and Flagstaff Smelters Superfund Site from the National 
Priorities List (NPL) and requests public comment on this proposed 
action. The NPL constitutes Appendix B of 40 CFR part 300 which is the 
National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), 
which EPA promulgated pursuant to section 105 of the Comprehensive 
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 
1980, as amended. EPA maintains the NPL as the list of sites that 
appear to present a significant risk to public health, welfare, or the 
environment. Sites on the NPL may be the subject of remedial actions 
financed by the Hazardous Substance Superfund (Fund). As described in 
40 CFR 300.425(e)(3) of the NCP, sites deleted from the NPL remain 
eligible for Fund-financed remedial actions if future conditions 
warrant such actions.
    EPA will accept comments on the proposal to 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 Davenport and Flagstaff 
Smelters Superfund Site and demonstrates how it meets 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, 
the taking of remedial measures in 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 before developing this Notice of 
Intent to Delete.
    (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;

[[Page 25637]]

    (4) The State of Utah, through the UDEQ, has concurred with 
deletion of the Site from the NPL.
    (5) Concurrently with the publication of this Notice of Intent to 
Delete in the Federal Register, a notice is being published in a major 
local newspaper, Deseret News. The newspaper notice announces the 30-
day public comment period concerning the Notice of Intent to Delete the 
Site from the NPL.
    (6) The EPA placed copies of documents supporting the proposed 
deletion in the deletion docket and made these items available for 
public inspection and copying at the Site information repositories 
identified above.
    If comments are received within the 30-day public comment period on 
this document, EPA will evaluate and respond appropriately to the 
comments before making a final decision to delete. 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 Site, the Regional Administrator 
will publish a final Notice of 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 in the 
Site information repositories listed above.
    Deletion of a site from the NPL does not itself create, alter, or 
revoke any individual's rights or obligations. Deletion of a site from 
the NPL does not in any way alter EPA's right to take enforcement 
actions, as appropriate. The NPL is designed primarily for 
informational purposes and to assist EPA management. Section 
300.425(e)(3) of the NCP states that the deletion of a site from the 
NPL does not preclude eligibility for future response actions, should 
future conditions warrant such actions.

IV. Basis for Site Deletion

    The following information provides EPA's rationale for deleting the 
Site from the NPL.

Site Background and History

    The 106-acre Davenport and Flagstaff Smelters Superfund Site 
(UTD988075719) is located 15 miles southeast of Salt Lake City at the 
mouth of Little Cottonwood Canyon. Constructed in the 1870s, the 
Davenport and the Flagstaff smelters treated ores from mines near Alta, 
Utah. Lead smelting was the dominant industrial activity at the Site. 
Lead and arsenic were the primary products associated with ore 
processing. At times copper, gold, silver, and other metals were also 
produced at the Site. Ore processing and disposal of waste products 
have resulted in contamination at the Site.
    The EPA proposed the Davenport and Flagstaff Smelters Superfund 
Site on the National Priorities List (NPL) in January 2000 and 
finalized listing of the Site on April 30, 2003 (68 FR 23077). The EPA 
proposed the Site to the NPL based on studies conducted between 1992 
and 2003 due to soil and sediments contaminated with lead and arsenic. 
Lead levels greater than 200,000 mg/kg were detected in an 
investigation conducted in 2000.
    The Site is divided into three operable units. Operable Unit 1 
(OU1) is the southern 28 acres of the Site. It is the location of the 
former Davenport Smelter and current location of residential 
properties. Operable Unit 2 (OU2) is the middle and western part of the 
Site, and is comprised of 29 acres of commercial and undeveloped land. 
Operable Unit 3 (OU3) is the northern 49 acres of the Site. The 
location of the former Flagstaff Smelter, which was once agricultural 
land, is now mostly residential. Wastes were present on the Site for 
many years and, in some locations, groundwater was in direct contact 
with visible slag without appreciable impact on groundwater. 
Concentrations of contaminants of concern (COCs) in groundwater are 
generally below federal maximum contamination limits (MCLs).
    Because portions of OU1 was deleted from the NPL on August 20, 2004 
under a Partial Deletion (69 FR 51583), the remaining portions of OU1, 
OU2 and OU3 are the focus of this deletion.

Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/FS)

    The former smelters were the suspected source of waste within OU1, 
OU2 and OU3. Analysis of sample data confirmed that soil contamination 
was caused by deliberate use of waste as fill and environmental factors 
transporting smelter waste. The 1999 Baseline Human Health Risk 
Assessment identified arsenic and lead as contaminants of concern. This 
Risk Assessment established the action levels of 600 mg/kg for lead and 
126 mg/kg for arsenic for surface soils. EPA completed a Focused 
Feasibility Study (FS) in December 2001.

Selected Remedy

    Prior to the signing of the Record on Decision (ROD) in 2009, a 
removal action in OU1 was conducted. While the majority of OU2 land was 
undeveloped, there were three residences and a restaurant within OU2. 
EPA issued a ROD for OU2 dated September 16, 2009, an Explanation of 
Significant Differences (ESD) dated July, 2012 and an ESD for OU1/OU3, 
dated November 11, 2015. These decision documents defined the remedy as 
follows:
     Soils on properties with principal threat wastes (wastes 
that fail TCLP and/or is a characteristic hazardous waste) required 
stabilization and disposal in a RCRA Subtitle C Hazardous Waste 
Landfill.
     Excavation of a minimum of 18 inches of soil of all 
properties was recommended for remediation of all residential 
properties that had soil lead levels which exceeded the established 
action levels of 600 mg/kg for lead and 126 mg/kg for arsenic.
     Hand excavation would be conducted around affected areas 
of native vegetation.
     Institutional Controls (ICs) to make sure the remedy is 
protective.
     Off-Site disposal of contaminated soils and backfill with 
clean soil.
     Due to physical restrictions presented by topography and 
existing utility structures, and to preserve mature vegetation to 
enhance the overall remedy performance, contamination at concentrations 
greater than action levels could be left in place.
     If removal of contaminated soils was not feasible due to 
steep slopes and existing structures, these soils remained after 
construction activities were completed if they did not pose a threat to 
human health.
    The Remedial Action Objectives (RAOs), as amended, were to prevent 
unacceptable exposure risks to current and future human populations 
presented by contact, ingestion, or inhalation of smelter materials, 
associated contaminated materials, or COCs derived from the smelter 
wastes.

Response Actions

    In 2004, an OU1 removal action addressed 26 residential properties. 
Remediation work for OU2 and OU3 was conducted in two removal actions. 
The contractor mobilized in August 2011. The pre-final inspection of 
the removal action was on November 16, 2011 and the final inspection on 
May 29, 2012. The OU2 Construction Completion Report was signed on 
September 24, 2012. Little Cottonwood Canyon Partners conducted a non-
time critical removal action at OU3 under an agreement with the EPA and 
under oversight of the UDEQ. This action allowed for redevelopment of 
the agricultural land for residential use. Remediation work for OU3 
began on April 26, 2006; the final inspection was

[[Page 25638]]

conducted on September 6, 2006. The Final Close Out Report for OU3 is 
dated September 7, 2006. Site-wide, approximately a total of 137,000 
tons were excavated and placed beneath an engineered soil and clay cap 
on-site. UDEQ was the lead agency for the remediation as defined in a 
cooperative agreement between EPA and UDEQ.

Operation and Maintenance

    The Operations and Maintenance Plan consists of the following 
activities: inspection/observation during redevelopment construction; 
review of development construction plans and specification for 
conformance with cover requirements; storm water management and 
irrigation restrictions; and temporary stockpile and covering of soil 
and slag. Maintaining appropriate soil cover and drainage is a required 
operation and maintenance IC. The State is responsible for enforcing 
the cap and soil ICs.
    The 2009 OU2 ROD required the establishment of ICs to prevent 
exposure to contaminated materials and to require State review of 
future changes to land use. ICs that support limited commercial and 
residential re-use were adopted by the City of Sandy. In addition, ICs 
for groundwater and surface water were established by the State to 
prohibit use as drinking water.

Five-Year Review

    Statutory Five-Year Reviews (FYR) of the Site are required because 
hazardous substances remain on-Site above levels which allow for 
unlimited use and unrestricted exposure. Two FYRs were conducted, in 
2012 and 2017. Both FYRs found the remedy at the Site to be protective. 
The 2017 FYR identified an issue of needing to clarify roles of local 
authorities with respect to ICs. The issue was resolved by ensuring 
Salt Lake County would monitor and enforce ICs. The next five-year 
review is scheduled to be completed by September 2022.

Community Involvement

    Major community involvement activities included establishing a 
local presence by meeting with local property owners and concerned 
citizens. Outreach efforts included community interviews, fact sheets, 
letters, flyers, door-to-door visits, public meetings, neighborhood 
meetings, public comment periods and website updates. The most recent 
interviews were conducted in the spring 2017 for the FYR. The EPA's 
Community Involvement criteria associated with 40 CFR 300.425(e)(4) 
require EPA to conduct interviews and/or gather community input.
    Today, approximately seventy percent of the Site has been fully 
developed for residential and commercial land-use. The successful 
revitalization of this Site is sustainable, provides valuable reuse, 
and elevates the quality of life with revitalization for years to come.

Determination that the Site Meets the Criteria for Deletion

    The implemented Site-wide remedy achieves the RAOs specified in the 
September 2009 OU2 ROD and the April 25, 2005 OU1/OU3 ESD for all 
pathways of exposure. No further Superfund responses are needed to 
protect human health and the environment at the Site.
    The NCP (40 CFR 300.425(e)) states that a site may be deleted from 
the NPL when no further response action is appropriate. EPA, in 
consultation with the State of Utah, has determined that all required 
response actions have been implemented and no further response action 
is appropriate.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Chemicals, 
Hazardous waste, Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental relations, 
Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Superfund, Water 
pollution control, Water supply.

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(d); 42 U.S.C. 9601-9657; E.O. 13626, 
77 FR 56749, 3 CFR, 2013 Comp., p. 306; E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 
CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR 2923, 3 CFR, 1987 Comp., 
p. 193.

    Dated: May 21, 2018.
Douglas H. Benevento,
Regional Administrator, Region 8.
[FR Doc. 2018-11758 Filed 6-1-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P