[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 48 (Wednesday, March 12, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 13882-13887]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-05224]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 300

[EPA-HQ-SFUND-1983-0002; FRL 9907-66-Region 1]


National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan; 
National Priorities List: Deletion of the O'Connor Superfund Site

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 1 is 
publishing a direct final Notice of Deletion of the O'Connor Superfund 
Site (Site), located in Augusta, Maine, 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 Maine, through the Maine Department of Environmental 
Protection, 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 May 12, 2014 unless EPA 
receives adverse comments by April 11, 2014. 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-1983-0002, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov. Follow on-line instructions 
for submitting comments.
     Email: connelly.terry@epa.gov.
     Fax: 617 918-0373.
     Mail: Terrence Connelly, US EPA Region 1, 5 Post Office 
Square, Suite 100, Boston, MA 02109--3919.
     Hand delivery: US EPA Region 1, 5 Post Office Square, 
Suite 100, Boston, MA 02109-3912. 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-
1983-0002. 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 email. 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 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

[[Page 13883]]

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:

EPA Records and Information Center, 5 Post Office Square, First Floor, 
Boston, MA 02109[middot]3912, Monday-Friday 8:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m.

and

Lithgow Public Library, 45 Winthrop St., Augusta, Maine 04330, Mon-
Thurs 9:00 a.m.-8 p.m., Friday 9:00 a.m.-5 p.m., Saturday 9:00 a.m.-
12:00 p.m.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Terrence Connelly, Remedial Project 
Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 1, Mailcode 
OSRR07-1, 5 Post Office Square, Suite 100, Boston, MA 02109-3919, (617) 
918-1373, email: connelly.terry@epa.gov.

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 1 is publishing this direct final Notice of Deletion of 
the O'Connor, also known as the F. O'Connor Company, Superfund Site 
(Site), from the National Priorities List (NPL). 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 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 May 12, 2014 unless EPA receives 
adverse comments by April 11, 2014. 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 O'Connor 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 Maine 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) EPA has provided the State 30 working days for review of this 
notice and the parallel Notice of Intent to Delete prior to their 
publication today, and the State, through the Maine 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, the 
Kennebec Journal. 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.

[[Page 13884]]

IV. Basis for Site Deletion

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

Site Background and History

    The Site CERCLIS ID is MED980731475. The Site consists of 
approximately 23 acres within a 28-acre property owned by Central Maine 
Power Company (CMP) and is located on Maine State Route 17 
approximately three miles east of the Kennebec River in Augusta, in 
Kennebec County, Maine. The Maine Department of Environmental 
Protection (MEDEP) also designated the same 23-acre property as a 
Hazardous Substance Site. The surrounding area is generally rural. The 
property is bordered on the east and southeast by Riggs Brook, a small 
northerly flowing tributary of the Kennebec River, on the north and 
west by woodlands, and on the south by Route 17. The property south of 
Route 17 is primarily wooded. A residence abuts the CMP property along 
its western boundary. Automotive entry to the Site is limited to Route 
17; there are trails which enter the Site from the north and west.
    The land at the Site was used as farmland until the 1950s when the 
F. O'Connor Company established a salvage yard and transformer 
recycling operation on the property. The F. O'Connor Company operated 
until the late 1970s. This resulted in drippage and spillage of oil to 
the ground, principally in the three transformer work areas (TWAs).
    In February 1972, an oil spill was found to have migrated toward 
Riggs Brook. In 1976, MEDEP began investigations through sampling and 
analysis of the soils, sediments, and surface waters for 
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). Soil and groundwater contamination 
primarily consisted of PCBs with some volatile and semivolatile organic 
compounds (VOCs and SVOCs), and inorganics. Potential sources of 
contamination that were identified included the TWAs, scrap piles, oil 
storage tanks, and two lagoons installed to help control oil migration 
from the property. Concern for the potential impact on soils, surface 
water, and groundwater were the primary reasons the Site was proposed 
for the National Priorities List on December 30, 1982, (47 FR 58476). 
The Site was listed on September 8, 1983, (48 FR 40658).
    Three removal actions were performed at the Site by the F. O'Connor 
Company and CMP. In 1977, at the request of MEDEP the F. O'Connor 
Company discontinued use of the lagoons, pumped the lagoon water into 
storage tanks and excavated the lagoon sediments which were then placed 
in an upland area upgradient of the TWAs. In 1984, EPA issued a 
Unilateral Administrative Order to the F. O'Connor Company to construct 
a fence encompassing approximately five acres of the Site. Under a 1986 
Administrative Order by Consent between MEDEP and F. O'Connor Company 
and CMP, 20 storage tanks and 21 55-gallon drums were removed off the 
Site.

Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/FS)

    On May 13, 1986, EPA issued an Administrative Order by Consent to 
the F. O'Connor Company and CMP. This Order was entered into 
voluntarily by these parties in order to conduct a Remedial 
Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) to determine the nature and 
extent of contamination, to evaluate alternatives, and to make 
recommendations for the appropriate remedial actions at the Site. The 
FS identified seven exposure scenarios posing potential risks to human 
health or the environment: Direct contact with soils by children; 
inhalation of vapors from surface soils; ingestion of fish caught in 
Riggs Brook; future direct contact with soils by on-site inhabitants; 
future direct contact with sediments in the lower lagoon by children; 
future inhalation of vapors by on-site inhabitants; and future 
ingestion of groundwater from within the bedrock.
    In 1992 CMP acquired ownership of the property from the F. O'Connor 
Company.

Selected Remedy

    A remedy was selected to meet the following Remedial Action 
Objectives (RAOs) identified for the Site in the 1989 Record of 
Decision (ROD):
     Reduce potential present and future public health and 
environmental risks from direct contact, ingestion, and/or dermal 
absorption with the PCB-, cPAH-, and lead-contaminated soils and 
sediments located on- and off-site;
     Reduce potential present and future public health risks 
from the inhalation of PCB vapors;
     Reduce potential present and future public health risks 
from the ingestion of PCB-contaminated fish from Riggs Brook;
     Reduce potential future public health risks from the 
ingestion of PCB-, benzene-, and 1,4 dichlorobenzene-contaminated 
groundwater found on the Site; and
     Reduce potential present and future environmental risks to 
aquatic and terrestrial wildlife from exposures to the PCB-, lead-, and 
aluminum-contaminated on-site surface water.
    The major components of the Source Control (OU-1) remedy were:
     Excavation and on-site treatment by solvent extraction 
technology of all soil and sediment containing concentrations of PCBs 
and cPAHs greater than 1 ppm and lead greater than 248 ppm;
     Draining and off-site treatment of surface waters from the 
Upland Marsh, Upper Lagoon, and Lower Lagoon;
     Transportation and off-site disposal of soil and sediments 
should solvent extraction not achieve target cleanup levels;
     Establishment of compensatory wetlands; and
     Site restoration following excavation activities.
    The major components of the Management of Migration (OU-2) remedy 
were:
     Establishment of temporary institutional controls until 
groundwater remediation goals were achieved;
     Installation of groundwater extraction and monitoring 
wells;
     Installation of an on-site groundwater treatment and 
recharge system; and
     Treatment and recharge system monitoring, operation, and 
maintenance.
    The Management of Migration remedy also included response actions 
for Riggs Brook sediment. These included:
     Establishment and implementation of an extensive sediment 
and biota sampling and analysis program within Riggs Brook; and
     Implementation of public education programs.
    In 1996, EPA designated Riggs Brook as OU-3. The remedy also 
included five-year reviews of site-wide conditions.
    The 1989 ROD has been modified three times. On July 11, 1994, an 
Explanation of Significant Differences (ESD) was approved. This 
adjusted the soil target cleanup goals for all soils that would be 
located more than 12 inches below grade and within a three- to four-
acre area (the Designated Area) to a maximum 10 ppm for PCBs and for 
cPAHs, and 248 ppm for lead. The target cleanup goals for soils outside 
the Designated Area remained at 1 ppm for PCBs and for cPAHs, and 248 
ppm for lead. The ESD also included a contingency that allowed soils 
and sediments to be disposed offsite without solvent extraction 
treatment, upon approval by EPA.
    On October 23, 1995, EPA approved the contingency based upon the 
determination that the solvent extraction treatment was not feasible to 
meet the target cleanup goals.

[[Page 13885]]

    On September 26, 2002, EPA issued a ROD Amendment. The ROD 
Amendment for OU-2 required permanent institutional controls, active 
oil recovery, long-term monitoring of groundwater, and five-year 
reviews. The ROD Amendment also recognized the technical 
impracticability of achieving the cleanup levels required by the 1989 
ROD in groundwater found on the Site (third RAO of 1989 ROD) within a 
reasonable timeframe. As a result, the ROD Amendment established a 
Technical Impracticability Zone (TI Zone) for a portion of the Site 
(including TWA II Area) where state and federal drinking water 
standards are waived. The ROD Amendment did not substantially alter the 
Source Control or Riggs Brook remedies.

Response Actions

    The Source Control Remedial Action (SCRA) was conducted in two 
phases. Phase I was completed in 1996. A subset of the soils were 
remediated, the barn was decontaminated, demolished and disposed of 
offsite, non-native debris was collected and disposed offsite, and the 
Support Area for Phase II was constructed. Phase II activities were 
conducted in 1997. During Phase II, surface water from the Upper 
Lagoon, Lower Lagoon, and Upland Marsh was collected and disposed of 
offsite, the remaining soils and sediments were remediated, the lagoons 
and marsh were reconstructed, and the Site re-graded and vegetated.
    All soils and sediments within OU-1 containing greater than 10 ppm 
PCBs, 10 ppm cPAHs, and 248 ppm total lead were excavated and disposed 
of at approved disposal facilities offsite. A total of 19,357 tons of 
soil and sediment were excavated and disposed of: 8,010 tons 
characterized as Special Waste (a State of Maine designation) were 
transported to two facilities in Maine; 11,222 tons characterized as 
TSCA and/or RCRA wastes to a facility in New York; and 125 tons 
characterized as RCRA waste to a facility in Quebec.
    Soils and sediments within the Designated Area containing less than 
or equal to 10 ppm PCBs or cPAHs and less than 248 ppm total lead were 
not excavated. Approximately 3,000 to 4,000 tons of soil and sediments 
located outside the Designated Area and containing between 1 and 10 ppm 
PCBs or cPAHs and less than 248 ppm total lead were excavated and 
placed within the Designated Area.
    The Management of Migration Remedial Action, as amended in 2002, 
included active and passive oil recovery and monitoring of water 
quality at the TI boundary and downgradient of it. Investigations 
completed following the 1989 ROD determined that the migration of 
contaminants in the shallow groundwater in the downgradient direction 
was limited; the bedrock aquifer had low groundwater storage and 
therefore a relatively small volume of water. It was also concluded 
that the 1992 pump test had mobilized the PCB transformer oil and other 
contaminants vertically downward into the bedrock flow regime.
    Seepage of the transformer oil with elevated PCB concentrations 
into the TWA II wells had been observed since it was first induced into 
the wells during the 1992 pump test. The total amount of transformer 
oil recovered from the five TWA II wells since their installation using 
a combination of vacuum enhanced recovery (VER) and passive oil 
recovery is about 125 gallons. Approximately 79 gallons of oil (about 
63%) were recovered prior to the completion of the source control work, 
and approximately 35 gallons (about 28%) after the completion of source 
control through the summer of 2002. Approximately 7.4 gallons of oil 
were recovered by the VER system in 2002, 2.5 gallons in 2003, and 
about 0.3 gallons in both 2004 and 2006. The system was not operated in 
2005 because of equipment failure. Significantly there was not any 
increase in the amount recovered passively nor was any increase 
observed when the active recovery resumed in August 2006. The amount of 
oil removed from the wells using the VER system decreased steadily over 
time to minimal amounts. In December 2006, the VER system was 
decommissioned because the rate of oil recovery using passive recovery 
was equal to or greater than with the VER system. Prior to 2005, the 
passive oil recovery program was conducted monthly. Since 2005, passive 
oil recovery has continued on a quarterly basis.
    Groundwater cleanup standards defined in the 2002 ROD Amendment for 
VOCs have been met at all wells at the TI boundary and beyond the TI 
Zone since Spring 2002, and the cleanup standard for PCBs has been met 
at all wells at the TI boundary and beyond the TI Zone since Spring 
2006.
    The 1989 ROD selected yearly sediment sampling for ten years for 
Riggs Brook and its associated wetlands. In addition, biota sampling 
was to be performed at least once, after five years of sediment 
sampling. CMP conducted annual sediment monitoring of Riggs Brook for 
ten years (1996-2005) as required by the ROD. At EPA's request, the 
2000 annual sediment sampling program was supplemented with a sampling 
grid with 51 locations adjacent to Riggs Brook in adjacent source 
control areas. Biota sampling was first conducted in 1997 with the 
collection of twenty samples. Following a recalculation of the data 
from mg/kg dry weight to mg/kg wet weight, it was determined that all 
samples were below the target level of 2 mg/kg (or ppm) of PCBs. A 
second biota sampling occurred in September 2000, when a total of 
twenty biota samples were collected from Riggs Brook and analyzed for 
PCBs. As was the case in 1997, all samples were below the target level 
of 2 mg/kg wet weight. A comparison to the 1997 data indicated that the 
biota PCB concentrations had decreased.
    Following review of the results from the 2000 sediment and biota 
sampling, EPA and MEDEP agreed that with the decrease of PCBs in the 
biota samples as well as the scattered locations of the sediment 
exceedances, remedial efforts to address the scattered sediment 
exceedances were not required at that time. Instead, the 2001 sampling 
(year six of the ROD-required ten) was to be expanded to monitor the 
locations identified in the supplemental sampling grid. The 2001 
sediment sampling had one exceedance above the 5 ppm trigger level of 
the thirty-six samples. This one location (location 3018, at 6.1 ppm) 
is located near the wetland/upland boundary and within the area 
excavated during the SCRA.

Cleanup Levels

    The 1994 ESD changed the cleanup levels from 1 ppm PCBS and 1 ppm 
PAHs to less than 10 ppm PCBs and 10 ppm cPAHs within the Designated 
Area, while affirming the 1989 ROD cleanup levels of 1 ppm outside the 
Designated Area. The total lead cleanup level remained the same at 248 
ppm total. All soils and sediment within OU-1 above 10 ppm PCBs or 10 
ppm cPAHs were disposed of at offsite facilities. The limits of 
excavation within and outside the Designated Area were based on 
analytical results, isopachs, and visual examination of the 
contamination. Following excavation, confirmation samples were 
collected at the base of the excavation to determine if the 
concentrations of PCBs, cPAHs, and total lead were below the respective 
cleanup goals. If a sample exceeded the target cleanup goal, excavation 
continued. If the target cleanup goals were met, the sample was used as 
a confirmation sample, and the area represented by the sample node was 
confirmed as closed. Pre-excavation and most confirmation samples were 
collected at specified locations on a sampling grid that was developed 
to

[[Page 13886]]

provide a statistically valid approach for confirming that the soils 
and sediments had meet the target cleanup goals. Additional random 
samples were collected as determined necessary in the field to confirm 
attainment of target cleanup goals.
    The Site was divided into five sample areas in the 100% Remedial 
Design, based on contaminants, target cleanup goals, Site history, 
geology, and a review of the Remedial Investigation data. Based on all 
this information, a work plan was developed, approved, and implemented. 
Areas 1, 2, and 3 were sampled for PCBs, Area 4 for lead, and Area 5 
for cPAHs. All five areas were further divided into subareas. 
Statistical analysis of the sampling concluded that the cleanup levels 
were met in all Sample Areas except Subarea 5B.
    Subarea 5B underwent two rounds of excavation and three rounds of 
sampling. Analyses of the third round of samples collected at 1.4 to 
3.3 feet below ground surface found cPAHs concentrations ranging 
between 1.2 to 6.6 ppm. In a letter dated October 27, 1997, MEDEP 
approved no further excavation was warranted in subarea 5B after 
calculating toxicity equivalence factors for the individual cPAH 
concentrations remaining in subarea 5B. The total toxicological 
equivalency value was found to be 1 ppm, which was less than the 
applicable worker standard of 7 ppm and less than the residential 
scenario of 2 ppm. EPA provided approval for no further action at 
subarea 5B.
    Groundwater has been monitored at the Site since 1986. Beginning in 
Spring 2008, the sampling frequency was changed from semi-annual to 
annual. The monitoring program currently consists of nine wells, four 
outside the TI Zone and five within the TI Zone and downgradient of the 
TWA II area. Based on steady improvements in groundwater, and that 
groundwater had met target cleanup goals for the Site in all wells 
outside the TI Zone since 2006, 28 monitoring wells and piezometers at 
the Site were decommissioned in September 2008. Groundwater monitoring 
reports have been prepared by CMP's consultant Woodard & Curran and the 
data demonstrate the attainment of the cleanup levels for the Site.
    The results of the ten-year sampling program showed the sediments 
in Riggs Brook to be stable, with no indication that PCBs were 
migrating or increasing in concentration. Over 95% of the samples were 
below the PCB action trigger level of 5 ppm with the annual mean 
varying between 0.38 to 1.93 ppm. With one location, sediment 3018, 
having the maximum PCB concentration from 2001 through 2005, CMP 
proposed to excavate a ten-foot square centered on that sediment 
location. EPA, after opportunity for review and comment by MEDEP, 
approved this approach. Approximately three tons of material were 
excavated and disposed offsite at a Special Waste landfill in Maine.

Operation and Maintenance

    The O&M activities associated with the SCRA and long-term 
monitoring at the Site were initiated in 1998 upon completion of the 
SCRA. Inspections of the Site have been conducted semi-annually. The 
O&M Plan for the Site was last updated in October 2009 and describes 
the long-term activities for OU-1 and OU-2 at the Site, including 
inspections, soil cover sampling, routine maintenance, and repairs as 
necessary. Sediment and biota sampling have been completed for OU-3, 
and therefore, there are no O&M activities associated with OU-3. 
Inspections have been conducted at the Site and have documented that 
the vegetation is well developed and minor ruts in the access road have 
been repaired. There has been no significant erosion of the soil cover 
over the Designated Area or on the slope leading down to the Riggs 
Brook since the completion of the SCRA. Because contamination remains 
that prevents unlimited exposure and unrestricted use of the Site, it 
is anticipated that maintenance and inspections will continue for an 
extended period of time.
    In 1994, CMP and MEDEP signed an agreement in the form of a 
Declaration of Restrictive Covenant. This covenant includes the 
following: Any use of the groundwater beneath the Site is prohibited 
without the written approval of MEDEP; any activity which might disrupt 
remedial or monitoring measures is prohibited without the written 
approval of MEDEP; and CMP or any subsequent owner shall maintain the 
Site in a condition adequate to ensure the continued compliance with 
all applicable standards and to ensure the ongoing adequacy of the 
remediation. On September 13, 2002, the Declaration of Restrictive 
Covenant was recorded in the Kennebec County Registry of Deeds.
    Additionally, the restrictive covenant provides that CMP and all 
subsequent owners shall maintain the Site property in a condition 
adequate to ensure the continued compliance with all applicable cleanup 
standards and to ensure the ongoing adequacy of the remedial action 
implemented under the Consent Decree. Specific examples of required 
ongoing activities include, but are not limited to maintenance of ``all 
drainage ways, berms, monitoring wells, permeable or impervious caps or 
covers (including paved portions of the property and areas covered by 
topsoil or other clean fill), piping, pumps and electrical equipment 
constructed or installed under the Consent Decree.'' By its terms, the 
restrictive covenant is enforceable only by MEDEP. Compliance with this 
covenant is confirmed at the same time as the spring Site inspection.

Five-Year Review

    Statutory five-year reviews are required at the O'Connor Superfund 
Site since hazardous substances remain at the Site above levels that 
allow for unlimited use and unrestricted exposure. Five-year reviews 
were completed for the Site in 2002, 2007, and 2012. The 2012 Five-Year 
Review stated that remedial actions at all OUs are protective, and 
therefore the Site is protective of human health and the environment. 
The 2012 Five-Year Review made the following protectiveness statements 
for each operable unit and sitewide:

OU-1: The remedial action for OU-1 has been completed and is protective 
of human health and the environment. Exposure pathways that could 
result in unacceptable risk are being controlled through a clean soil 
cap that covers remaining contamination and institutional controls that 
have been placed on the Site. The O&M plan was updated and approved in 
2009 and its implementation will ensure that the OU-1 remedy remains 
protective.
OU-2: The remedy for OU-2 is protective of human health and the 
environment. Exposure pathways that could result in unacceptable risk 
are being controlled with institutional controls covering the entire 
Site. Outside the TI Zone, groundwater has met the performance 
standards for VOCs since Spring 2002 and for PCBs since Spring 2006. 
Long-term monitoring will continue to ensure that the performance 
standards continue to be met.
OU-3: The remedy at OU-3 is protective of human health and the 
environment. Annual sampling of sediments for ten years resulted in 
over 95% of the samples being below the 5 ppm trigger level with the 
annual mean PCB concentration varying between 0.38 and 1.72 ppm. 
Results from the two biota sampling events were below the threshold 
level of 2 ppm for all samples, with the overall average being below 1 
ppm. Site inspections have documented functioning habitat in both the 
uplands and wetlands.


[[Page 13887]]


    Sitewide: Because the remedial actions at all OUs are protective, 
the Site is protective of human health and the environment.
    The 2012 Five-Year Review did not identify any issues in any of the 
operable units. The Final Remedial Action Report for OU-1 was signed in 
1998 and the Final Remedial Action Report for OU-3 was signed in 2007. 
EPA signed the Superfund Property Reuse Evaluation Checklist for 
Reporting the Sitewide Ready for Anticipated Use Government Performance 
and Results Act Measure in 2009.
    The next Five-Year Review is scheduled to be completed in September 
2017.

Community Involvement

    Leading up to the 1989 ROD, EPA kept the community and other 
interested parties apprised of the Site activities through 
informational meetings, fact sheets, press releases and public 
meetings. On July 19, 1989, EPA held a public informational meeting to 
discuss the results of the Remedial Investigation and the cleanup 
alternatives presented in the Feasibility Study, and to present the 
Agency's Proposed Plan. On August 10, 1989, the Agency held a public 
hearing to accept any oral comments about the Site.
    Since the 1989 ROD, community involvement has been low. In June 
2002 EPA published a Proposed Plan to amend the 1989 ROD. EPA held a 
public information meeting on June 24, 2002, and a formal public 
hearing on July 9, 2002. Only a few community members attended the 
informational meeting and none attended the public hearing. No comments 
from the community were received on the June 2002 Proposed Plan.
    EPA issued a press release on May 8, 2002, that was published in 
the Kennebec Journal announcing EPA's first five-year review of the 
O'Connor Site cleanup. The press release encouraged public 
participation. Similarly, EPA issued public notices announcing EPA's 
second and third five-year reviews that were published in the Kennebec 
Journal on May 24, 2007, and May 25, 2012, respectively. These notices 
encouraged public participation and provided EPA contact information.
    EPA will follow the procedures for community involvement activities 
associated with deletion described in the 2011 guidance document 
``Close Out Procedures for National Priorities List Sites.'' These 
include preparing a public notice for publication in the local paper 
and notification to the Natural Resource Trustees of EPA's plan to 
delete the Site from the NPL.

Determination That the Site Meets the Criteria for Deletion in the NCP

    EPA Region 1 has followed the deletion procedures required by 40 
CFR 300.425(e). The implemented remedy has achieved the degree of 
cleanup or protection specified in the 1989 ROD, 1994 ESD, and 2002 ROD 
Amendment for all pathways of exposure. The activities for OU-1 remedy 
were successfully completed in 1997 and the activities for OU-3 remedy 
were successfully completed in 2006. With the 2002 Technical 
Impracticability waiver, groundwater (OU-2) beyond the TI Zone has met 
all cleanup standards since 2006. Therefore, EPA has determined, in 
consultation with MEDEP, all appropriate response actions have been 
implemented, and thus a criterion for deletion has been met.

V. Deletion Action

    The EPA, with concurrence of the State of Maine through the Maine 
Department of Environmental Protection, has determined that all 
appropriate response actions under CERCLA, other than operation, 
maintenance, monitoring 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 May 12, 2014 unless EPA receives adverse comments by April 
11, 2014. 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.

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: February 27, 2014.
H. Curtis Spalding,
Regional Administrator, Region 1.

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

PART 300--NATIONAL OIL AND HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES POLLUTION 
CONTINGENCY PLAN

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.

Appendix B to Part 300 [Amended]

0
2. Table 1 of Appendix B to part 300 is amended by removing the entry 
for ``ME,'' ``O'Connor Co'', ``Augusta''.

[FR Doc. 2014-05224 Filed 3-11-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P