Jump to main content.

Federal Register Notice

58476 - 58485 Federal Register / Vol. 47, No. 251 / Thursday, December 30, 1982 / Proposed Rules

horizontal navy line

58476 - 58485 Federal Register / Vol. 47, No. 251 / Thursday, December 30, 1982 / Proposed Rules

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 300
[SWH-FRL-2274-3]

Amendment to National Oil and Hazardous Substances Contingency Plan; The National Priorities List

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION:  Proposed rule.

SUMMARY:

The Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") is proposing to amend the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Contingency Plan ("NCP"), which was promulgated on July 16, 1982, (47 FR 31180), pursuant to Section 105 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 ("CERCLA") and Executive Order 12316. The proposed amendment supplements the NCP with the National Priorities List ("NPL"), which will become Appendix B of the NCP. CERCLA requires that the NCP include a list of national priorities among the known releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances, pollutants, and contaminants throughout the United States, and the list be revised at least annually. The NPL identifies priority releases, based on the assessments of State governments and EPA, for Fund-financed remedial action and enforcement under CERCLA.

DATES:

Comments must be submitted on or before February 28, 1983.

[Return to Table of Contents]

ADDRESSES:

Comments may be mailed to:

Russel H. Wyer
Director, Hazardous Site Control Division
Office of Superfund Remediation Technology Innovation (WH-548-E)
Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460

The public docket for the NCP will contain Hazard Ranking System score sheets for all sites on the NPL, as well as a "Documentation Record" for each site, listing the sources of information used to compute the scores. The docket is located in Room S-398, Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, S.W., Washington, D.C., and is available for viewing from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding holidays. Requests for copies of these documents should be directed to Headquarters, although the same documents will be available for viewing in the EPA Regional Offices. In addition, the sources of data used to compute the scores are retained in the Regional Offices and may be obtained upon request. Addresses for the Regional Office dockets are:

John Hackler
Region I (No library facility available)
Waste Response and Compliance Branch
Superfund Program Office, Room 1903
Boston, MA 02205
617/223-5709

John Frisco
Region II (No library facility available)
Hazardous Waste Site Branch, Superfund Program Office
26 Federal Plaza, Room 402
New York, NY 11278
212/264-1573

Diane McCreary
Region III
U.S. EPA Library
Curtis Building
6th & Walnut Streets
Philadelphia, PA 19106
215/597-0580

Carolyn Mitchell
Region IV
U.S. EPA Library
345 Courtland Street, NE
Atlanta, GA 30365
404/257-4716

Lou Tilly
Region V
U.S. EPA Library
230 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, IL 60604
512/253-2022

Martha Thompson
Region VI
U.S. EPA Library
First International Building
1201 Elm Street
Dallas, TX 75270
214/729-7341

Connie McKenzie
Region VII
U.S. EPA Library
324 East 11th Street
Kansas City, MO 64106
816/374-3497

Delores Eddy
Region VIII
U.S. EPA Library
1860 Lincoln Street
Denver, CO 80295
303/327-2560

Jean Circiello
Region IX
U.S. EPA Library
215 Fremont Street
San Francisco, CA 94105

Julie Sears
Region X
U.S. EPA Library
1200 6th Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Stephen M. Caldwell
Hazardous Site Control Division
Office of Superfund Remediation Technology Innovation (WH-548-E)
Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street SW
Washington, D.C. 20460
Phone (800) 424-9346 (or 382-3000 in the Washington, D.C., metropolitan area).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Introduction
II. Contents of the NPL
III. Development Process
IV. Exclusions
V. Current Status of Sites
VI. Implementation
VII. Deletion of Sites
VIII. Changes from the Interim Lists
IX. Request for Comments
X. Promulgation and Revision
XI. Regulatory Impact and Regulatory Flexibility Analyses

[Return to Table of Contents]

I. Introduction

Pursuant to Section 105 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, 42 U.S.C. 9601-9657 ("CERCLA" or "the Act"), and Executive Order 12316 (46 FR 42237, Aug. 20, 1981), the Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA" or "the Agency") promulgated the revised National Contingency Plan ("NCP"), 40 CFR Part 300, on July 16, 1982 (47 FR 31180). Those amendments to the NCP implement the new responsibilities and powers created by CERCLA to respond to releases and threatened releases of hazardous substances, pollutants, and contaminants.

Section 105(8)(A) of CERCLA requires that the NCP include criteria for determining priorities among releases or threatened releases throughout the United States for the purpose of taking remedial action and, to the extent practicable taking into account the potential urgency of such action, for the purpose of taking removal action. Removal action involves cleanup or other actions that are taken in response to emergency conditions or on a short-term or temporary basis (CERCLA section 101 (23)). Remedial action tends to be long-term and involves response actions which are consistent with a permanent remedy for a release (CERCLA section 101(24)). Criteria for determining priorities are included in the Hazard Ranking System ("HRS"), which comprises Appendix A of the NCP (47 FR 31219, July 16, 1982).

Section 105(8)(B) requires that these criteria be used to prepare a list of national priorities among the known releases or threatened releases throughout the United States, and that to the extent practicable at least 400 sites be designated individually. EPA may include a release on the NPL if CERCLA authorizes Federal response to the release. Under Section 104(a) of CERCLA, this response authority is quite broad, extending to releases or threatened releases not only of designated hazardous substances, but of any "pollutant or contaminant." CERCLA requires that this National Priorities List ("NPL") be included as part of the NCP. Today, the Agency is proposing to amend the NCP by adding the NPL as Appendix B. The discussion below may refer to"releases or threatened releases" simply as "releases" or "sites" in referring to the NPL.

The primary purpose of the NPL is stated in the legislative history of CERCLA (Report of the Committee on Environment and Public Works, Senate Report No. 96-848, 96th Cong., 2d. Sess. 60 (1980)):

The priority lists serve primarily informational purposes, identifying for the States and the public those facilities and sites or other releases which appear to warrant remedial actions. Inclusion of a facility or site on the list does not in itself reflect a judgement of the activities of its owner or operator, it does not require those persons to undertake any action, nor does it assign liability to any person. Subsequent government action in the form of remedial actions or enforcement actions will be necessary in order to do so, and these actions will be attended by all appropriate procedural safeguards.

The entries on the proposed NPL are candidates for response action by the Agency under CERCLA, which can include remedial response, removal action, and enforcement. EPA also encourages voluntary cleanup by responsible parties. The information collected to develop HRS scores to choose sites for the NPL is not sufficient in itself to determine the appropriate remedy for a particular site. After a site is included on the NPL, more detailed studies will generally be necessary. Decisions on the type and extent of action to be taken at these sites will be made in accordance with the criteria contained in Subpart F of the NCP. EPA may conclude that no action is feasible for some sites on the NPL because of the need to efficiently use the limited resources of the Fund. EPA may also conclude that no action is needed because further investigation reveals that the site does not actually present a problem.

[Return to Table of Contents]

II. Contents of the NPL

As noted above, CERCLA requires that the NPL include, if practicable, at least 400 sites. EPA has determined that sites with a HRS score of 28.50 or higher will be included on the proposed NPL, resulting in a proposed NPL containing 418 individual entries. Each entry on the NPL contains the name of the facility, the State in which it is located, and the corresponding EPA Region. For purposes of information, each entry on the NPL is accompanied by a notation on the current status of response and enforcement activities at the site.

The entries on the proposed NPL are in groups of 50 sites. Within each group, the releases are presented in order of their HRS scores, except where EPA modified the order to reflect top priorities established by States. Section 105 (8) (B) of CERCLA requires that, to the extent practicable, the NPL include within the one hundred highest priorities at least one facility designated by each State as representing the greatest danger to public health, welfare, or the environment among known facilities in the State. Any site designated by a State as its top priority is therefore included within the one hundred highest priority sites. The States are not required to rely exclusively on the HRS in designating their top priority sites, and certain of the sites designated by States as their top priority were not among the one hundred highest sites according to HRS score. These lower scoring State priority sites are listed at the bottom of the group of one hundred highest priority sites. All top priority sites designated by States are indicated by asterisks.

[Return to Table of Contents]

III. Development Process

CERCLA requires each State to establish priorities for remedial action among known releases and potential releases in that State, based on the criteria developed pursuant to section 105 (8) (A), and to submit these priorities for consideration by EPA. EPA has worked with the States over the past year to identify candidate sites; investigate the sites through monitoring and sampling of groundwater, surface water, air, and soil; and apply the HRS criteria to the candidate sites.

After the sites were scored, the EPA Regional Offices conducted a quality control program to ensure that the sites were scored consistently and that scores were based upon adequate information. In some cases, the EPA Regional Offices added to the lists submitted by the States, taking into account State comments when available. The EPA Regional Offices then submitted the lists to EPA Headquarters.

After this Regional review, EPA conducted further quality assurance audits on a sample of the sites submitted for the NPL. Each site included in the sample was scored under the supervision of EPA Headquarters by a consultant trained in application of the HRS. The object of these audits was to ensure accuracy and consistency among the various EPA and State offices participating in the scoring. Based upon these results, several of the Regions reviewed their initial results and adjusted scores where necessary.

Sites were scored for inclusion in the NPL on the basis of the hazards that existed before any response actions were initiated. Public agencies might have been discouraged from taking early response if such actions could lower the HRS score and prevent a site from being included on the NPL. In addition, where response actions have already been initiated by private parties or another agency, listing such sites will enable EPA to evaluate the need for a more complete response. Inclusion on the NPL therefore does not reflect a judgement on any response action completed or underway. Some releases on the proposed NPL are currently being cleaned up by responsible parties or by the States and EPA.

Response actions already taken were considered in scoring the categories in the HRS involving direct human contact and fire and explosion. These categories are used only to evaluate the need for removal action in response to emergency conditions, and are not used to determine whether a site should be included on the NPL.

Section 104 (d) (4) of CERCLA authorizes the Federal government to treat two or more non-contiguous facilities as one for purposes of response, if such facilities are reasonably related on the basis of geography or on the basis of their potential threat to public health, welfare, or the environment. For purposes of the NPL, however, EPA has decided that where possible such sites should be scored and listed individually because the HRS scores more accurately reflect the hazards associated with a site if the site is scored individually. Listing facilities individually does not preclude EPA from consolidating response efforts at these sites or others where it is cost-effective to do so.

[Return to Table of Contents]

IV. Exclusions

CERCLA restricts EPA's authority to respond to certain categories of releases, and expressly excludes some substances from the definition of release. In addition, as a matter of policy, EPA may choose not to respond to certain types of releases because other Federal agencies have adequate authority to respond. This section discusses the inclusion of such releases on the NPL.

Releases of Radioactive Materials

Section 101(22) of CERCLA excludes several types of releases of radioactive materials from the statutory definition of "release." These releases are therefore not eligible for CERCLA response actions or inclusion on the NPL. The exclusions apply to:

  1. Releases of source, by-product or special nuclear materials from a nuclear incident, if these releases are subject to financial protection requirements under Section 170 of the Atomic Energy Act; and

  2. Any release of source, by-product or special nuclear material from any processing site designated under the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978.

In addition, other Federal or State authority may be adequate to remedy the threat to public health or the environment from other releases of radioactive materials. EPA therefore solicits comments on whether these releases should be included on the NPL.

Releases from Federal Facilities

CERCLA section 111(e)(3) prohibits use of the Fund for remedial actions at Federally owned facilities. EPA will not list and does not intend to respond to any site where the release come solely from the Federal facility, regardless of whether contamination remains on-site or has migrated off-site. The responsibility for cleanup of these sites rests with the responsible Federal agency, pursuant to Executive Order 12316 (46 FR 42237, Aug. 20, 1981).

EPA may be authorized to respond where the source of off-site contamination is unclear or not verified, or where it is not exclusively the responsibility of the Federal Government. In these situations, the off-site contaminated area associated with this type or release is eligible for inclusion on the NPL. Sites that are not currently owned by the Federal Government are also eligible for the NPL, even if they were previously owned by the Federal Government. Finally, non-Federally owned sites where the Federal Government may have contributed to a release are also eligible for inclusion.

RCRA-Related Sites

Both CERCLA and RCRA (the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act) contain authorities applicable to hazardous waste facilities. These authorities overelap for certain sites. Accordingly, where a site is an active RCRA facility authorized by permit or interim status, it will not be included on the NPL, but will instead be addressed under RCRA. The NPL may include sites that are inactive units within the boundaries of a RCRA facility if the units themselves are not authorized by permit or interim status.

Releases of Mining Wastes

CERCLA clearly authorizes Federal response to releases of mining wastes. Accordingly, mining waste releases were included on the Interim Priority List and the Expanded Eligibility List, and are now proposed for inclusion on the NPL. However, a number of persons have expressed the view that such releases are more appropriately addressed under other statutory authority. EPA therefore solicits comments on its policy of including mining waste sites on the NPL.

[Return to Table of Contents]

V. Current Status of Sites

For information purposess, the proposed sites are accompanied by notations concerning the status of response and enforcement actions based on the most current facts available. It should be noted, however, that a site's status will in most cases change periodically, and the notations given here may become outdated. The releases willl be included in the following categories: Voluntary or Negotiated Response; Federal and State Response; Federal or State Enforcement; and Actions to be Determined. Each category is explained below.

Voluntary or Negotiated Response

Release are included in this category if response actions are currently being taken by potentially responsible parties or private parties. This category includes response actions that are sanctioned under consent agreements, consent orders, or consent decrees to which the Federal Government is a party. Voluntary or negotiated cleanup may include actions taken pursuant to agreements reached after enforcement action had commenced. Currently, this category does not include sites undergoing response actions if the actions are not governed by such an arrangement with the Federal Government. The information currently available to EPA does not adequately reflect all private party cleanups. The Agency intends to identify ongoing corrective actions not defined by an agreement with the Federal Government in the final NPL, and solicits information from the public concerning these corrective actions.

This category does not include actions mandated under Federal and State regulatory programs to update operational pollution control systems or waste disposal operations (e.g., upgrading surface impoundments operated pursuant to an NPDES permit). This category of response may include remedial investigations, feasibility studies, and other preliminary work, as well as actual cleanup.

Federal and State Response

The Federal and State response category includes sites where EPA or State agencies have commenced or completed removal or remedial actions under CERCLA. If the State is primarily responsible for managing the response action, the site is included in this category when EPA has obligated funds for response. If EPA is managing the response action, the release is included when the State has signed a contract to meet its responsibilities and EPA has obligated funds for response. For removal actions, response has begun when EPA has obligated funds.

Federal or State Enforcement

This category includes sites where the United States Government or the State has filed a civil or criminal complaint or issued an administrative order. It also includes sites where a Federal or State court has mandated some form of non-consensual remedial action following a judicial proceeding. A number of sites on the NPL are the subject of enforcement investigation or have been formally referred to the Department of Justice for enforcement action. EPA policy precludes premature release of information concerning possible enforcement actions, and accordingly these sites have not been included in this category, even though preliminary enforcement activities may in fact be underway.

Actions To Be Determined

The category of actions to be determined includes all sites not otherwise listed. A wide range of activities may be in progress for sites in this category. Remedial projects may be under consideration, although funds have not been formally obligated. Enforcement investigations may be underway. Referrals may have been made to the Department of Justice, prior to formal commencement of enforcement action. Investigations may be underway or needed to determine the source of a release in areas adjacent to or near a Federal facility. Responsible parties may be undertaking cleanup operations that are unknown to the Federal or State government, or corrective action may not be occurring yet.

[Return to Table of Contents]

VI. Implementation

Sites on the proposed NPL are high priority candidates for Fund-financed remedial action, enforcement action, and private-party cleanup. The NPL itself does not determine priorities for removal action, although EPA may take removal actions against any site, whether listed or not, that meets the criteria of sections 300.65-.67 of the NCP. EPA will begin considering various response and enforcement actions for the sites on the proposed NPL published today, prior to final promulgation of the NPL. This approach is necessary to address potentially dangerous sites during the period before the final NPL is promulgated. Use of the proposed NPL will enable EPA to consider response action on the basis of the most current information available. This continues the policy articulated in the preamble to the proposed NCP (47 FR 10977, March 12, 1982).

Absence from the NPL does not preclude enforcement actions under CERCLA or other authorities, because enforcement action may be appropriate in some situations for sites not included on the NPL. The HRS was designed to meet specific statutory requirements for the propose of identifying priorities for response action, and was not designed to account for every type of public health or environmental effect that might merit enforcement action.

It remains Agency policy to pursue enforcement actions as an alternative or complement to Fund-financed response activities. This will help assure that the limited resources of the Fund are used as efficiently as possible. (See "Guidelines for Using the Imminent Hazard, Enforcement, and Emergency Response Authorities of Superfund and Other Statutes," 47 FR 20664, (May 13, 1982). Consistent with this policy, wherever possible, EPA has provided potentially responsible parties with notice and an opportunity to confer with the Agency before the Agency commences Fund-financed response action, including remedial investigations and feasibility studies to help determine the appropriate remedy. CERCLA does not, however, mandate such notice to potentially responsible parties, nor require notice as a condition precedent to full cost recovery.

In many situations, it has been difficult to conduct productive discussions with potentially responsible parties in the absence of preliminary studies indicating what type of response action is appropriate. The Agency therefore believes that negotiations may be more fruitful where such studies have been completed, or at least commenced. Accordingly, potentially responsible parties may be notified after the remedial investigations and feasibility studies have begun or are completed. (See the NCP, 40 CFR 300.66, and the accompanying preamble, 47 FR 31180, July 16, 1982, for a fuller discussion of remedial investigations and feasibility studies.)

Funding of response actions for sites on the NPL will not necessarily take place in order of the sites' ranking on the NPL. Sites will receive the highest priority for response funding if the State has provided cost-sharing and other assurances necessary under CERCLA section 104(c)(3), and it appears that enforcement actions will not quickly lead to private party cleanup. Priorities among these sites will be based on impacts on public health and the environment, as measured by the HRS scores and other available information, and on a case-by-case evaluation of economic, engineering, and environmental considerations.

[Return to Table of Contents]

VII. Deletion of Sites

Sites may be deleted from the NPL where one of the following criteria has been met:

  1. EPA in consultation with the State has determined that responsible parties have completed cleanup so that no Fund-financed response actions will be required.

  2. All appropriate Fund-financed cleanup action under CERCLA has been completed, and EPA has determined that no further cleanup by responsible parties is appropriate.

  3. EPA, in considering the nature and severity of the problems, the potential costs of cleanup, and available funds, has determined that no remedial actions should be undertaken at the site.

EPA will delete sites from the NPL by publishing notice in the Federal Register at the time of the next periodic update, naming the site and providing the reasons for its deletion. The process of updating the NPL is discussed more fully in Part X of this notice.

[Return to Table of Contents]

VIII. Changes from the Interim Lists

On October 23, 1981, EPA announced the selection of 115 sites for the Interim Priorities List (IPL) as candidates for response action under CERCLA. The sites were selected by applying the version of the HRS referenced in section 300.65 of the proposed NCP (47 FR 10991, March 12, 1982) and incorporating the States' designations of their top priorities. On July 23, 1982, EPA announced the selection of 45 additional sites (the "Expanded Eligibility List" or EEL), under the same criteria used to establish the IPL. EPA treated all sites on these lists as candidates for response or enforcement actions under CERCLA. The IPL and the EEL were informal lists used for internal administrative purposes in choosing initial response efforts, and are not part of the NCP.

In compiling the NPL, EPA rescored each site on the IPL and EEL to determine whether it should be included on the NPL. Scores for the IPL and EEL sites have changed because additional data are available and the HRS has been modified. However, most sites on the IPL and EEL are included on the proposed NPL, and are indicated the symbol #. The exceptions are discussed below.

Additional Information Received

EPA has determined that incorrect information was used to calculate the HRS score for Allen Transformer of Arkansas, which was included on the IPL. More accurate information became available and EPA recalculated the score using the promulgated version of the HRS. The resulting scores do not warrant placing Allen Transformer on the proposed NPL.

Ineligible for Inclusion

The Fort Lincoln site was designated by the District of Columbia as its top priority. EPA determined that the source of the release is a Federal facility. Therefore, EPA will not include Fort Lincoln on the NPL.

Criteria for Deletion

The criteria for deletion discussed in Part VII have already been met at some sites on the IPL. These sites and the reasons for deletion are:

Noncontiguous Facilities

When EPA developed the IPL, several States requested that certain noncontiguous facilities be grouped together to be considered as single facilities. As discussed in Part III, these sites are now being listed singly wherever possible. Therefore, certain areas described as single sites on the IPL will be listed as two or more sites on the proposed National Priorities List, as set forth below:


IPL NPL
Florida - Biscayne Aquifier NW 58th Street Landfill
Varsol Spill
Miami Drum
Washington - Commencement Bay Commencement Bay-South Tacoma Channel
Commencement Bay-Near-shore Tideflats
Delaware Sand and Gravel
Llangollen Army Creek Landfills		 Delaware Sand and Gravel
Army Creek

[Return to Table of Contents]

IX. Request for Comments

EPA requests comments providing information on the sites listed on the proposed NPL. Information on the factors used to score the sites would be particularly useful in determining whether site scores are accurate. Documents explaining how the sites on the NPL were scored are available for inspection in the public docket at EPA (See ADDRESSES, in this notice.) EPA will also continue collecting data independently to support development of the NPL.

EPA will review and consider comments received on the proposed NPL. EPA also invites comments and solicits information concerning sites that are not currently included on the proposed NPL that may be appropriate for inclusion in a later update of the NPL. EPA is not soliciting comments on the HRS, which was promulgated as part of the final NCP.

Commenters are requested to bear in mind the purposes of the NPL described in the Introduction to this preamble. The NPL indicates the releases that are likely to pose the greatest danger to the public, based on preliminary investigation. Inclusion on the NPL is a point of departure for further investigation. It does not establish that a particular response is appropriate, nor does it constitute a judgment concerning the responsibilities of owners or operators. The HRS used to score sites is designed to consider only the minimum quantity of data commonly available that will yield a meaningful estimate of the level of hazard posed by each site. (See the preamble explaining the HRS, 47 FR 31187-88, July 16, 1982). In developing the NPL, EPA cannot consider additional data not encompassed by the factors in the HRS. EPA will consider such information in determining the response action, if any, that is appropriate for a particular site.

[Return to Table of Contents]

X. Promulgation and Revision

Once the comments and the results of additional investigations have been considered, the NPL will be promulgated. Scores used to support promulgation of the NPL will be based on the best information available at the time, including public comment and State and EPA investigatory data.

Following promulgation, the NPL will be revised on a quarterly basis. New sites may be added on the basis of HRS scores, or deleted on the basis of the criteria outlined in Part VII of this notice. EPA will inform the States of the closing dates for each revision of the NPL.

Congressional statements made during consideration of CERCLA indicate that, once the NPL is established, revisions can be made in a routine manner without the necessity of full notice and comment rulemaking. In discussing the process for revising the NPL, Senator Randolph stated:

"Accordingly, although this list must be published as part of the National Contingency Plan, it is not intended that the entire plan be republished each time the priority list is revised. Public notice of the revised list is sufficient.  [126 Cong. Rec. S 14695 (daily ed. Nov. 24, 1980)]"

EPA intends to revise the NPL by publication in the Federal Register. The notice will name the sites and provide reasons for their inclusion or deletion. The Agency will consider any public comments concerning revision of the NPL, and make appropriate changes in a future revision if warranted.

[Return to Table of Contents]

XI. Regulatory Impact and Regulatory Flexibility Analyses

EPA prepared a Regulatory Impact Analysis pursuant to Executive Order 12291 (46 FR 13193, Feb. 19, 1981) and a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612) for the revised NCP at the time that it was promulgated. Those analyses considered the impacts of a National Priorities List; consequently, no further analyses are needed for this amendment to the NCP. The analyses of the NCP are available for inspection at Room S-398, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460.

This action was reviewed and approved by the Office and Management and Budget under the requirements of Executive Order 12291.

Signed: December 20, 1982.

Anne M. Gorsuch,
Administrator.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300

Air pollution control, Chemicals, Hazardous materials, Intergovernmental relations, Natural resources, Oil pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Superfund, Waste treatment and disposal, Water pollution control, Water supply.

BILLING CODE 6560-50-M

PART 300--[AMENDED]


It is proposed to amend 40 CFR Part 300 by adding a new Appendix B to the end to read as follows:


Appendix B--National Priorities List As Provided for in Section 105(8)(B) of CERCLA

Group 1

EPA Region State City/county Site name Response status 1
05 MN Fridley FMC# D
03 DE New Castle County Tybouts Corner #* R,E
03 PA Bruin Boro Bruin Lagoon # R
01 MA Woburn Industri-Plex # V,R,E
02 NJ Pitman Lipari Landfill # V,R,E
02 NY Wellsville Sinclair Refinery # D
02 NJ Pleasantville Price Landfill # * R,E
02 NY Oswego Pollution Abatement Services # * R,E
07 IA Charles City Labounty Site V
02 NJ Mantua Helen Kramer Landfill # D
03 DE New Castle Army Creek # D
02 NJ Old Bridge Township CPS/Madison Industries E
01 MA Ashland Nyanza Chemical # E
02 NJ Gloucester Township Gems Landfill # E
01 RI Coventry Picillo Coventry # * R,E
05 MI Swartz Creek Berlin & Farro # R,E
07 KS Cherokee County Tar Creek, Cher. Co. D
01 MA Holbrook Baird & McGuire E
02 NJ Freehold Lone Pine Landfill # R,E
01 NH Somersworth Somersworth Landfill D
03 PA McAdoo McAdoo # * D
01 NH Epping KES - Epping # R,E
06 AR Jacksonville Vertac, Inc. # V,E
08 MT Silver Bow / Deer Lodge Silver Bow Creek D
06 TX Crosby French, Ltd. # R
05 MI Utica Liquid Disposal, Inc. # R
01 NH Nashua Sylvester, Nashua # * R,E
06 TX La Marque Motco # * R
05 OH Arcanum Arcanum Iron & Metal E
06 TX Crosby Sikes Disposal Pits # R
04 AL Limestone & Morgan Triana, Tennessee River # E
09 CA Glen Avon Heights Stringfellow # * R
01 ME Gray Mckin Company R,E
06 TX Houston Crystal Chemical # R,E
02 NJ Bridgeport Bridgeport Rental & Oil # V,R,E
05 IN Gary MIDCO I R,E
08 SD Whitewood Whitewood Creek # * V
01 MA Acton W R Grace E
01 MA East Woburn Wells G&H D
02 NJ Marlboro Township Burnt Fly Bog # R,E
04 FL Plant City Schuylkill Metals D
05 MN New Brighton/Arden New Brighton # D
05 MN St. Louis Reilly Tar # * R,E
02 NY Oyster Bay Old Bethpage Landfill # E
04 FL Jacksonville Pickettville Rd Landfill # D
08 MT Anaconda Anaconda-Anaconda V
03 PA Grove City Osborne # D
05 MN Brainerd/Baxter Burlington Northern # D
02 NJ Fairfield Caldwell Trucking D
06 OK Ottawa County Tar Creek # R

Group 2

EPA Region State City/county Site name Response status 1
05 IN Seymour Seymour # * V,R,E
02 NJ Brick Township Brick Township Landfill E
05 MI Cadillac Northernaire Plating # D
10 WA Vancouver Frontier Hard Chrome E
04 FL Davie Davie Landfill # D
04 FL Miami Gold Coast Oil # D
09 AZ Tuscon Tuscon Int'l Airport # D
02 NY Brant Wide Beach Development D
09 CA Redding Iron Mountain Mine # D
02 NJ Carlstadt Scientific Chemical Processing D
02 NJ Hamilton Township D'Imperio Property # R
05 MN Oakdale Oakdale # D
04 FL Galloway Alpha Chemical # D
05 IL Greenup A & F Materials # R,E
03 PA Douglasville Douglasville Disposal D
02 NJ Hillsborough Krysowaty Farm # D
05 MN St. Paul Kopper's Coke # D
01 MA Plymouth Plymouth Harbor/Cordage E
10 ID Smelterville Bunker Hill D
10 WA Tacoma Com. Bay, S. Tacoma Channel # R,E
02 NJ East Rutherford Universal Oil Products E
09 CA Rancho Cordova Aerojet # E
09 AZ Phoenix 19th Avenue Landfill E
05 MI St. Louis Gratiot County Landfill # * V,R,E
01 MA New Bedford New Bedford # * R,E
06 LA Darrow Old Inger # * R
05 OH Hamilton Chem Dyne # * V,R,E
04 SC Columbia SCRDI Bluff Road # * V,R,E
01 CT Naugatuck Laurel Park Inc. # * E
05 IL Waukegan Outboard Marine Corp. # * R,E
08 CO Boulder Marshall Landfill # * D
01 ME Winthrop Winthrop Landfill # * R
01 VT Burlington Pine Street Canal # * D
03 WV Point Pleasant West VA Ordnance # * R
06 NM Albuquerque South Valley # * D
07 MO Ellisville Ellisville Site # * R
08 ND Southeastern Arsenic Trioxide Site # * R
09 TT Pacific Trust Terr. PCB Waste # * R
03 VA Roanoke County Matthews # * R
07 IA Council Bluffs Aidex Corp. # * R,E
09 AS American Samoa Taputimu Farms # * R
09 AZ Globe Mt. View Mobile Home # * D
04 KY Brooks A.L. Taylor # * R
04 TN Memphis North Hollywood Dump # * R
04 NC 210 Miles of Roads PCB Spills # * R,E
09 GU Guam Ordot Landfill # * R
04 MS Gulfport Plastifax # * R
08 UT Salt Lake City Rose Park Sludge Pit # * V
07 KS Arkansas City Arkansas City Dump # * R
09 CM North Marianas PCB Warehouse # * R

Group 3

EPA Region State City/county Site name Response status 1
02 NY Oyster Bay Syosset Landfill D
04 AL Greenville Mowbray Engineering D
05 MI Brighten Spiegelburg Landfill D
04 FL Miami Miami Drum # R
02 NJ Dover Township Reich Farms E
02 NJ South Brunswick South Brunswick Landfill V
04 FL Tampa Kassauf-Kimerling # D
05 IL Wauconda Wauconda Sand & Gravel # E
05 MI Muskegon OTT/Story/Cordova # D
01 NH Kingston Ottati & Goss # R,E
03 VA Saltville Saltville Waste Disposal D
02 NJ Ringwood Ringwood Mines/Landfill D
02 NY Niagara Falls Hooker - S Area E
04 FL Whitehouse Whitehouse Oil Pits # R
05 OH Deerfield Summit National # V,E
02 NY Niagara Falls Love Canal # R,E
05 IN Kingsbury Fisher Calo V,E
05 MI Pleasant Plains Twp Wash King Laundry D
04 FL Warrington Pioneer Sand # E
04 FL Tampa Reeves SE Galvanizing # D
05 MI Davisburg Springfield Township Dump D
05 MI Filer City Packaging Corp. Of America D
03 PA Buffalo Hranica # E
08 CO Leadville California Gulch D
04 NC Charlotte Martin Marietta, Sodyeco D
04 FL Zellwood Zellwood Groundwater Contam# D
05 OH Circleville Bowers Landfill D
05 OH Ashtabula Fields Brook # R
03 PA Harrison Township Lindane Dump # E
04 FL Seffner Taylor Road Landfill # E
01 RI Burrillville Western Sand & Gravel # R,E
02 NJ Maywood & Rochelle Pk Maywood Chemical Sites D
06 OK Criner Criner/Hardage # E
05 MN St. Louis Park National Lead Taracorp # D
05 MI Rose Township Rose Township Dump # D
05 MN Anoka County Waste Disposal Engineering # D
02 NJ Edison Kin-Buc Landfill # V,R,E
05 MN Lehillier/Mankato Lehillier # D
05 MI Grand Rapids Butterworth #2 Landfill D
02 NJ Bound Brook American Cyanamid E
02 NY South Glens Falls GE Moreau Site E
02 NJ Pedricktown N.L. Industries E
01 RI North Smithfield L & RR - N. Smithfield E
04 FL Hialeah NW 58th Street # E
04 FL Tampa 62nd Street Dump D
05 MI Utica G&H Landfill # R
02 NJ Franklin Township Metaltec/Aerosystems E
02 NJ Pemberton Township Lang Property D
02 NJ Parsippany, Troy Hls Sharkey Landfill D
06 LA Sorento Cleve Reber D

Group 4

EPA Region State City/county Site name Response status 1
05 IL Marshall Velsicol Illinois D
05 MI St. Louis Velsicol Michigan V,E
05 MI Mancelona Tar Lake D
10 OR Albany Teledyne Wah Chang D
02 NY South Cairo American Thermostat E
01 MA Dartmouth Re-solve # R,E
02 NJ Plumstead Township Goose Farm # R
04 TN Toone Velsicol Chemical Co. V
02 NY Moira York Oil Company# R
04 FL Cottondale SAPP Battery # R
07 KS Holiday Doepke Disposal, Holiday D
01 RI Smithfield Davis Liquid # R,E
01 MA Tyngsboro Charles-George # E
02 NJ Winslow Township King of Prussia D
03 VA York County Chisman # D
05 OH Salem Nease Chemical D
02 NJ Elizabeth Chemical Control # R,E
05 OH Ironton Allied Chemical D
05 MI Pennfield Township Verona Well Field # D
01 CT Beacon Falls Beacon Heights E
03 PA Malvern Malvern TCE Site D
02 NY Elmira Heights Facet Enterprises # D
03 DE New Castle Delaware Sand & Gravel # D
08 CO Idaho Springs Central City, Clear Creek # D
03 PA Palmerton Palmerton Zinc Pile D
05 IN Boone County Envirochem D
04 TN Lawrenceburg Murray Ohio Dump D
04 FL Whitehouse Coleman Evans # E
04 FL Indiantown Florida Steel D
09 AZ Goodyear Litchfield Airport Area D
02 NJ Plumstead Spence Farm # R
02 NJ Dover Township Toms River Chemical D
04 FL Live Oak Brown Wood D
02 NY Port Washington Port Washington Landfill E
06 AR Mena Mid-South # D
02 NJ Chester Combe Fill South Landfill D
02 NJ South Brunswick Twp JIS Landfill E
08 CO Commerce City Woodbury Chemical # D
01 MA Westborough Hocomoco Pond D
02 NY Ramapo Ramapo Landfill E
05 MI Albien McGraw Edison D
02 NY Albany Mercury Refining D
04 FL Fort Lauderdale Hollingsworth # D
02 NJ Rockaway Township Rockaway Township Wells D
02 NY Olean Olean Wellfield # R
04 FL Miami Varsol Spill # D
02 NY Batavia Batavia Landfill # D
09 CA Ukiah Coast Wood Preserving D
08 CO Denver Denver Radium Site # R
08 MT Milltown Milltown D

Group 5

EPA Region State City/county Site name Response status 1
07 MO Verona Syntex Facility V,E
02 NJ Plumstead Pijak Farm # R
02 NJ South Kearny Syncon Resins # E
09 CA Richmond Liquid Gold D
09 CA Fresno Purity Oil Sales, Inc. D
02 NJ Howell Township Bog Creek Farm D
05 IN Bloomington Neal's Landfill # D
01 MA Lowell Silresim # R,E
01 NH Londonderry Tinkham Site D
02 NJ Piscataway Chemsol E
02 NJ Marlboro Township Imperial Oil E
02 NJ Fair Lawn Fair Lawn Wellfield D
05 IN Elkhart Main Street Well Field D
02 NJ Mt. Olive Township Combe Fill North Landfill D
02 PR Juana Diaz GE Wiring Devices D
02 NJ Monroe Township Monroe Township Landfill E
02 NJ Rockaway Boro Rockaway Boro Wellfield D
05 IN Columbia City Wayne Waste Oil D
06 NM Milan Homestake # D
02 NJ Berkley Beachwood/Berkley Wells D
02 NJ Dover Dover Municipal Well 4 D
02 NY Vestal Vestal Water Supply E
10 WA Tacoma Com. Bay, Near Shore Tide Flat # D
05 IL Pembroke Cross Bros/Pembroke D
10 ID Caldwell Flynn Lumber Co. D
03 PA West Ormrod Heleva Landfill E
10 WA Seattle Harbor Island Lead D
09 CA Fullerton McColl V
10 WA Mead Kaiser Mead V
02 PR Rio Abajo Frontera Creek D
09 CA Fresno Selma Pressure Treating D
02 PR Florida Afuera Barceloneta Landfill D
03 MD Elkton Sand, Gravel and Stone E
05 MI Wyoming Spartan Chemical Company D
02 NJ Florence Roebling Steel Co D
05 MI Greilickville Grand Traverse Overall Supply Co D
02 NJ Vineland Vineland State School D
03 PA Philadelphia Enterprise Avenue D
07 MO Springfield Fulbright Landfill # D
04 SC Cayce SCRDI Dixiana # D
02 NJ Swainton Williams Property R
02 NJ Edison Renora D
04 FL Pensacola American Creosote # E
05 OH Ironton E. H. Schilling Landfill D
02 NJ Bayville Denzer & Schafer X-Ray E
02 NJ Gibbstown Hercules D
05 IN Gary Ninth Ave. Dump V,E
05 MI St. Louis Gratiot Co Golf Course V,E
01 RI Cumberland Peterson/Puritan D
01 MA Groveland Groveland Wells D

Group 6

EPA Region State City/county Site name Response status 1
10 WA Spokane Colbert Landfill R
09 AZ Scottsdale Indian Bend Wash Area D
09 AZ Kingman Kingman Airpt Industrial Area D
02 NY Wheatfield Niagara County Refuse # D
04 FL Deland Sherwood Medical D
05 MI Park Township Southwest Ottawa Landfill D
02 NY Horseheads Kentucky Ave. Wellfield # D
01 ME Washburn Pinette's Salvage Yard D
02 NJ Millington Asbestos Dump D
04 KY Louisville Lee's Lane Landfill # D
03 PA State College Centre County Kepone E
05 OH Byesville Fultz Landfill D
06 AR Walnut Ridge Fritt Industries # D
05 OH Coshocton Coshocton City Landfill D
03 PA Girard Township Lord Shope # E
05 IL Waukegan Johns-Manville D
01 MA Palmer PSC Resources R
05 MI Otisville Forest Waste Products D
04 FL Clermont Tower Chemical # E
03 PA Lock Haven Drake Chemical Inc. # R
03 MD Annapolis Middletown Road Dump E
03 DE New Castle TRIS Spill Site D
03 PA Haverford Havertown PCP Site E
05 IN Gary Lake Sandy Jo D
05 MI Grand Rapids Chem Central D
01 MA Bridgewater Cannon Engineering E
05 MI Temperance Novaco Industries D
06 LA Bayou Sorrel Bayou Sorrel # D
02 NJ Jackson Township Jackson Township Landfill E
05 MI Kalamazoo K&L Ave Landfill D
06 AR Edmondsen Gurley Pit D
05 MI Whitehall Whitehall Wells D
05 MI Ionia Ionia City Landfill D
02 NJ Montgomery Township Montgomery Housing Dev D
02 NJ Rocky Hill Rocky Hill Municipal Well D
02 NY Brewster Brewster Well Field D
02 NJ Orange US Radium D
08 MT Libby Libby Ground Water D
03 PA Jefferson Resin Disposal E
06 TX Highlands Highlands Acid Pit # R
04 KY Newport Newport Dump D
03 PA Lower Providence Twp Moyers Landfill D
04 KY West Point Distler Brickyard R
01 CT Southington Solvents Recovery System E
03 PA Erie Presque Isle D
02 NJ Sayreville Sayreville Landfill D
08 CO Commerce City Sand Creek D
08 WY Laramie Baxter/Union Pacific E
01 NH Dover Dover Landfill D
06 AR Ft. Smith Industrial Waste Control D

Group 7

EPA Region State City/county Site name Response status 1
02 NY Clayville Ludlow Sand & Gravel D
07 MO Imperial Arena 2: Fills 1 & 2 D
06 LA Slidell Bayou Bonfouca D
03 WV Leetown Leetown Pesticide Pile D
01 CT Canterbury Yaworski E
05 OH Dodgeville New Lyme Landfill D
02 NJ Old Bridge Evor Phillips D
03 PA Chester Wade (ABM) # R,E
03 PA Old Forge Lackawanna Refuse D
02 NJ Galloway Township Mannheim Avenue Dump D
02 NY Fulton Fulton Terminals D
05 MI Muskegon SCA Independent Landfill D
01 NH Londonderry Auburn Rd Landfill E
03 WV Nitro Fike Chemical V
10 WA Kent Western Processing # E
05 MI Petoskey Petoskey Municipal Wells D
05 OH Rock Creek Rock Creek/Jack Webb R
05 OH Jefferson Poplar Oil # R,E
07 KS Wichita John's Sludge Pond D
02 NJ Pennsauken Swope Oil and Chemical # D
05 MI Kentwood Kentwood Landfill D
05 MN Andover South Andover Site # D
06 AR Newport Cecil Lindsey D
05 IN Marion Marion (Bragg) Dump D
05 OH Reading Pristine D
04 KY Calvert City Airco D
05 OH St. Clairsville Buckeye Reclamation D
06 TX Grand Prairie Bio-Ecology # R
04 FL Mount Pleasant Parramore Surplus D
01 VT Springfield Old Springfield Landfill D
02 NY Lincklaen Solvent Savers D
03 VA Piney River US Titanium E
05 IL Galesburg Galesburg/Koppers D
05 OH Kingsville Big D Campgrounds D
02 NY Niagara Falls Hooker - Hyde Park V,E
05 MI Marquette Cliff/Dow Dump D
05 MI Muskegon Duell & Gardner Landfill D
02 NJ Evesham Ellis Property D
04 KY Jefferson County Distler Farm # D
09 CA Cloverdale MGM Brakes D
05 MI Ludington Mason County Landfill D
05 MI Rose Township Cemetary Dump Site D
01 RI North Smithfield Forestdale D
06 TX Houston Harris (Farley St) # R
03 PA Seven Valleys Old City of York Landfill E
05 IL Ogle County Byron Salvage Yard E
03 PA King of Prussia Stanley Kessler E
02 NJ Freehold Township Friedman Property # R
02 NJ Franklin Township Myers Property D
02 NJ Boonton Pepe Field D

Group 8

EPA Region State City/county Site name Response status 1
05 MI South Ossineke Ossineke D
05 MI Wiles U.S. Aviex D
06 NM Clovis ATSF/Clovis # E
10 WA Yakima Pesticide Pit, Yakima D
04 TN Lewisburg Lewisburg Dump D
01 ME Saco Saco Tanning D
03 PA Philadelphia Metal Banks E
06 AR Marion Crittenden Co. Landfill D
05 MI Grandville Organic Chemicals D
10 OR Portland Gould, Inc. D
02 PR Juncos Juncos Landfill D
04 FL North Florida Munisport D
05 MI Clare Clare Water Supply D
02 NJ Asbury Park M&T Delisa Landfill D
10 WA Yakima FMC Yakima D
05 MI Oden Littlefield Township Dump D
05 MI Kalamazoo Auto Ion D
04 SC Fort Lawn Carolawn, Inc. R,E
05 MI Sparta Sparta Landfill D
05 IL Winnebago Acme Solvent/Morristown# D
05 MI Charlevoix Charlevoix Municipal Well D
03 WV Follansbee Follansbee Sludge Fill D
01 ME Augusta O'Connor Site D
03 PA Westline Westline D
05 MI Brighton Rasmussen's Dump D
05 MI Oscoda Nedblum Industries D
02 PR Barceloneta RCA Del Caribe D
05 IN Lebanon Wedzeb Inc D
04 KY Calvert City B.F. Goodrich D
03 PA Stroudsburg Brodhead Creek R,E
05 MI Adrian Anderson Development D
05 MI Livingston County Shiawassee River E
05 IL La Salle LaSalle Electric Utilities E
04 TN Galloway Galloway Ponds D
03 DE Kirkwood Harvey Knott Drum Site # R
03 DE Dover Wildcat Landfill D
03 PA West Chester TWP Blosenski Landfill E
03 DE Delaware City DE City PVC Plant # D
03 MD Cumberland Limestone Road Site E
02 NY Niagara Falls Hooker - 102nd Street E
03 DE New Castle New Castle Steel Site D
06 NM Churchrock United Nuclear Corp. # D
09 CA Hoopa Celtor Chemical D
04 AL Perdido Perdido Grdwater Contamination D
02 NY Cold Springs Marathon Battery # D
03 PA Old Forge Lehigh Electric # R,E
04 TN Chattanooga Amnicola Dump D
05 OH West Chester Skinner Landfill D
07 MO Moscow Mills Arena 1 (Dioxin) D
04 NC Swannanoa Chemtronics, Inc. D

Group 9

EPA Region State City/county Site name Response status 1
07 NE Beatrice Phillips Chemical D
05 MI Buchanan Electrovoice D
03 PA Kimberton Kimberton D
05 IN Bloomington Lemon Lane Landfill D
10 ID Rathdrum Arrcom (Drexler Enterprises) D
03 PA Warminster Fischer & Porter E
10 WA Lakewood Lakewood D
05 OH Zanesville Zanesville Well Field D
09 CA Sacramento Jibboom Junkyard D
02 NJ Sparta A.O. Ploymer R
07 IA Des Moines Dico D
06 TX Orange County Triangle Chemical R,E
02 NJ Jersey City PJP Landfill D
05 OH Marietta Van Dale Junkyard D
03 PA Parker Craig Farm Drum Site D
03 PA Upper Saucon Twp Voortman D
05 IL Belvidere Belvidere D
05 IN Allen County Parrot Road D
1:    V = Voluntary or Negotiated Response;
   R = Federal and State Response;
   E = Federal and State Enforcement;
   D = Actions to be Determined.		 # = IPL/EEL.
* = States' Designated Top Priority Sites.


[FR Doc. 82-35376 Filed 12-29-82; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-C

Top of page

OSWER Home | Superfund Home | Innovative Technologies Home

Local Navigation

Jump to main content.