National Oil and Hazardous Substance Pollution Contingency Plan: Partial Deletion of the California Gulch Superfund Site; National Priorities List
Direct final rule.
CFR Part: "40 CFR Part 300"
Citation: "81 FR 6768"
Document Number: "
Page Number: "6768"
"Rules and Regulations"
SUMMARY:
EFFECTIVE DATE: This direct final partial deletion is effective
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID no.
* http://www.regulations.gov. Follow on-line instructions for submitting comments.
* Email:
* Fax: (303) 312-7151.
* Mail:
* Hand delivery:
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID no.
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 electronically in http://www.regulations.gov; by calling
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. NPL Deletion Criteria
III. Partial Deletion Procedures
IV. Basis for Partial Site Deletion
V. Partial Deletion Action
I. Introduction
EPA Region 8 is publishing this direct final Notice of Partial Deletion for all of Operable Unit 1 (OU1),
Section II of this document explains the criteria for deleting sites from the NPL. Section III discusses procedures that
This partial deletion pertains to all of OU1 and OU3. Operable Unit 2 (OU2), Malta Gulch Tailing Impoundments and Lower Malta Gulch Fluvial Tailing; Operable Unit 4 (OU4) Upper California Gulch; Operable Unit 5 (OU5), ASARCO Smelters/Slag/
II. NPL Deletion Criteria
The NCP establishes the criteria that
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,
III. Partial Deletion Procedures
The following procedures apply to the deletion of OU1 and OU3:
(1)
(2)
(3) Concurrently with the publication of this direct final Notice of Partial Deletion, a notice of the availability of the parallel Notice of Intent for Partial Deletion is being published in a major local newspaper, the Leadville Herald Democrat. The newspaper notice announces the 30-day public comment period concerning the Notice of Intent for Partial Deletion of OU1 and OU3 of the Site from the NPL.
(4) The
(5) If adverse comments are received within the 30-day public comment period on this partial deletion action,
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
IV. Basis for Partial Site Deletion
The following information provides
Site Background and History
The California Gulch Superfund Site,
All of the mines within the Site boundaries are presently inactive, and all of the mills and smelters have been demolished. Mining remains that contributed to environmental contamination are (1) mill tailing (the fine-grained residue remaining after milling has removed the metal concentrates form the ore) in impoundments and fluvial deposits; (2) mine waste rock piles (mine development rock and low grade ore removed to gain access to an ore body, and often deposited near adits and shaft openings); (3) mine water drainage tunnels; (4) draining adits; and (5) various smelter wastes including slag piles, flue dust and fallout from stack emissions.
The Site was placed on the NPL due to concerns regarding the impact of acidic and metals laden mine drainage on surface waters leading to California Gulch and the impact of heavy metals loading into the
EPA agreed, pursuant to a
The background and history, the Remedial Investigations and Feasibility Studies (RI/FS), Removal and Response Actions, Selected Remedies, Cleanup Standards, and Operation and Maintenance activities for OU1 and OU3 are discussed below.
OU1 Background and History
Operable Unit 1 (OU1) consists of the
OU1 Remedial Investigations and Feasibility Study (RI/FS)
The State, the
In
The
OU1 Selected Remedy
The
The selected remedy in the 1988 OU1 ROD was narrowly focused on the discharges from the
The original remedy selected in the 1988 OU1 ROD consisted of the following remedial components: (1) Construction of surge ponds to capture drainage from the tunnel and to minimize the impact of surges on California Gulch and the
The 1989 OU1 AROD made the following changes in the remedy: (1) Installation of a permanent water treatment system to treat contaminated groundwater from the
The 1991 OU1 ESD made the following changes in the remedy: (1) Construction of a single surge pond as a permanent part of the remedy; (2) Construction of a flow-control bulkhead within the tunnel to prevent surges. Two of three originally planned plugs were removed from the remedy; (3) Identification of groundwater flow direction and potential gradient reversal as additional element of the monitoring plan. The monitoring system was proposed to include a minimum of seven groundwater monitoring wells as opposed to a minimum of 23 wells proposed in the 1989 AROD; (4) Placement of six or more weirs, or other flow measuring devices, at key locations in the
Because the selected remedy in the 1988 OU1 ROD left wastes in place but did not include institutional controls (ICs), a second ESD was signed on
OU1 Cleanup Standards
The OU1 remedy was the first source control remedy at the Site that addressed the
OU1 Response Actions
The
OU1 Operation and Maintenance
The potentially responsible parties' (PRPs) operations and maintenance (O&M) responsibilities were first defined under the UAO and then updated in the 2008 CD. In accordance with the terms of the 2008 CD, the Routine Monitoring Plan (RMP), Contingency Plan (CP) and the OU1 Work Plan (Work Plan) govern the long-term implementation of the selected remedy for the OU1. The OU1 Work Plan, CP and the RMP are appendices to the 2008 CD.
Routine O&M includes repairing grouted areas of structures due to corrosion, settlement or other factors; occasional repair or replacement of monitor well pumps and surface water monitoring equipment; repair of access roads; routine repair or replacement of pumps, motors, mixers, piping and tankage; and inspections. The treatment plant operates under requirements established in the OU1 Work Plan, and submits monthly and annual reports to
In regards to ICs, environmental covenants for Resurrection/
OU3 Background and History
D&RGW Slag Piles/Railroad Easement/Railroad Yard (OU3) included three slag piles (
In 1961, D&RGW purchased the AV Slag Pile from
The AV Slag Pile covers approximately 40 acres just west of Stringtown. The pile generally consists of slag produced by the AV smelter that operated from 1882 to 1960. Based on aerial photography, the pile volume in the late 1950s was approximately 1.2 million cubic yards, whereas in 1998 approximately 422,000 cubic yards of slag remained, of which, approximately 190,000 cubic yards is stockpiled fine slag.
The La Plata Slag Pile, located west of the City limits of
The Harrison Reduction Works was located near the northeast corner of
Once a hotbed of transportation activities mostly related to mining, the Poverty Flats rail yard, located between
The rail easement includes the portion of railroad track that runs diagonally through
D&RGW identified a small volume of fine slag in the Poverty Flats rail yard. D&RGW prepared a plan, which addressed removal of the fine slag from this area to the AV Smelter Slag Pile. As a result of the
During the summer and fall of 1997, UPRR removed 1,264 cubic yards of slag, including fine slag, from the rail yard and placed it onto the AV Slag Pile. As a result, soils were exposed containing elevated concentrations of lead. Soils samples, taken before and after removal of the slag, showed levels of lead in soil that exceed the Site-wide residential action level of 3500 mg/kg lead, thus lead in the soils on this property may create the potential for unacceptable human health risks should the property be developed for residential use. This vacant property is zoned Business by
As part of their ballast operations, UPRR relocated approximately 104,000 cubic yards of slag to the AV Slag Pile in
In
OU3 Remedial Investigations and Feasibility Study (RI/FS)
The State, the
Concurrent with the various investigations and studies, risk assessments were conducted at the California Gulch Superfund Site. Some included the Preliminary Baseline Risk Assessment (Preliminary BRA), and the Final Baseline Human Health Risk Assessments (Final BRA): Part A, Part B, and Part C. For human health risk issues at OU3, the Preliminary BRA and the Final BRA Part C, Evaluation of Worker Scenario and Evaluation of Recreational Scenarios, were most pertinent. The Preliminary BRA indicated that lead and arsenic are responsible for the majority of human health risks at the Site. Therefore, arsenic and lead were used as indicator contaminants for risk in the Final BRA.
EPA and D&RGW entered into an Administrative Order on Consent (1991 D&RGW AOC) on
EPA and D&RGW entered into a Consent Decree on
In 1993, the
In July of 1995, D&RGW submitted a ballast operations plan to
D&RGW's 1996 Final Stockpiled Fine Slag Feasibility Study (1996 OU3 FS) focused on the AV Smelter Slag Pile's existing fine slag subpile and fine slag potentially generated from future ballast production. Based upon the 1993 SFS and 1993 D&RGW CD, the remedial action objective for the stockpiled fine slag was to: prevent leaching of metals of concern in concentrations that would have an adverse impact on soils, surface or ground water near the slag piles. The 1996 OU3 FS provided a detailed analysis of the three retained remediation alternatives (no action, institutional controls, and resource utilization) from the 1993 SFS as applied to the stockpiled fine slag. The result of the 1996 OU3 FS for the stockpiled fine slag was a Proposed Plan with a No Action Alternative for the stockpiled fine slag subpile of the AV Smelter Slag Pile. In
OU3 Selected Remedy
The
The 1998 OU3 ROD did not require maintenance of the fine slag piles. Any future use of the slag would require encapsulation prior to reuse. Encapsulation can include the use of fine slag in concrete or asphalt aggregate, as a road base, or as backfill (so long as the slag is chemically bound or physically separated from an exposure by a barrier consisting of a different material).
Sampling in the Poverty Flats rail yard property and the
OU3 Cleanup Standards
As the final determination in the 1998 OU3 ROD was No Action ROD, no cleanup standards were identified for fine slag in the record of decision. The OU12 remedy addresses site-wide surface water and groundwater contamination.
OU3 Response Actions
No response actions were taken pursuant to the No Action ROD. The ICs established by the City and County ordinances were response actions that were incorporated into the OU3 remedy by the ESD.
OU3 Operation and Maintenance
Because the 1998 OU3 ROD was a No Action ROD, no maintenance was required.
Five-Year Review
The remedies at the entire Site, including OU1 and OU3 require ongoing five-year reviews in accordance with CERCLA Section 121(c) and Section 300.430(f)(4)(ii) of the NCP. The next five-year review for the California Gulch Site is planned for 2017.
In the 2012 five-year review dated
In the 2012 five-year review for the Site, the OU3 remedies were determined to be protective in the short-term. The five-year review, recommended a review to determine whether additional response actions were needed at OU3 to insure long-term protectiveness. The review determined that ICs were needed to insure long-term protectiveness. The 2013 OU3 ESD addresses the need for ICs because some soils and residual slag remained above the residential action level, and documents the decision to require ICs. Ordinances adopted by the City and County met the IC objectives set out in the ESD
Pursuant to CERCLA section 121(c) and the NCP,
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. During the development and implementation of the remedies for these operable units, comment periods were offered for proposed plans, five-year reviews, and other public meetings. The documents that the
The State, the Lake County Commissioners, the
Determination That the Criteria for Deletion Have Been Met
EPA has consulted with the State, Lake County Commissioners, and the
The implemented remedies achieve the degree of cleanup or protection specified in: for OU1, the 1988 OU1 ROD, 1989 OU1 AROD, the 1991 OU1 ESD and 2013 OU1 ESD; and for OU3, the 1998 OU3 ROD and the 2014 OU3 ESD.
All selected removal and remedial action objectives and associated cleanup goals for OU1 and OU3 are consistent with agency policy and guidance. This partial deletion meets the completion requirements as specified in OSWER Directive 9320.2-22, Close Out Procedures for National Priority
V. Partial Deletion Action
The
Because
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:
Regional Administrator, Region 8.
[FR Doc. 2016-02601 Filed 2-8-16;
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P



Confidentiality of Substance Use Disorder Patient Records
Advisor News
- Millennials are ready to bring their advisor to the family table
- How healthcare inflation can eat up a client’s retirement income
- Global economy ‘resilient’ in the wake of massive disruption
- Cryptocurrency legislation takes one step forward with bipartisan support
- IRS CEO FRANK J. BISIGNANO VISITS OHIO TO TOUT WORKING FAMILIES TAX CUTS PROVISIONS ON NO TAX ON CAR LOAN INTEREST, NO TAX ON OVERTIME, ENHANCED DEDUCTION FOR SENIOR CITIZENS
More Advisor NewsAnnuity News
- Wink: Flat first-quarter annuity sales fall just short of $100B
- 26North Re Agrees to Acquire 100% of Independent Insurance Group
- Matthew Michelini named Athene president, with an eye on annuity growth
- Lincoln Financial Announces Executive Leadership Transitions
- MetLife Expands Guaranteed Retirement Income Offering with Innovative Flexible Annuity Option
More Annuity NewsHealth/Employee Benefits News
- Where Affordable Care Act insurance coverage has dropped most in WA
- ATTORNEY GENERAL MAYES SUES MULTIPLAN AND MAJOR HEALTH INSURERS FOR ALLEGED PRICE-FIXING CONSPIRACY
- Arizona sues major health insurance companies for 'price fixing'
- New Managed Care Findings Has Been Reported by Researchers at Duke University Medical Center (Access to pediatric eye care among Medicaid-insured children in North Carolina): Managed Care
- Researchers from West Virginia University Detail Findings in Managed Care (Under the Same Umbrella: Public Health Insurance Expansions and the Uniformity of Insurance for Families): Managed Care
More Health/Employee Benefits NewsLife Insurance News
- Study Data from National Institutes of Health Provide New Insights into Law and the Biosciences (Taking actuarial fairness seriously: what is required for the ethical use of genetics in insurance?): Legal Issues – Law and the Biosciences
- 26North Re Agrees to Acquire 100% of Independent Insurance Group
- Lincoln Financial Announces Executive Leadership Transitions
- Setting the record straight on premium-financed IUL
- AM Best Affirms Credit Ratings of Halyk-Life, JSC
More Life Insurance News