[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 146 (Tuesday, July 30, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 36827-36833]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-16065]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 300
[EPA-HQ-SFUND-1998-0006; FRL-9997-20-Region 2]
National Oil and Hazardous Substance Pollution Contingency Plan
National Priorities List: Deletion of the Peter Cooper Superfund Site
AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 2, is
publishing a direct final notice of deletion of the Peter Cooper
Superfund Site (Site) located in the Village of Gowanda, Cattaraugus
County, New York from the National Priorities List (NPL). The NPL,
promulgated pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, as amended (CERCLA),, which is
the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan
(NCP). This direct final deletion is being published by the EPA with
the concurrence of the State of New York, through the Department of
Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC), because the EPA has determined
that all appropriate response under CERCLA, other than operation and
maintenance, monitoring, and five-year reviews, have been completed.
However, this deletion does not preclude future actions under
Superfund.
DATES: This direct final deletion will be effective September 30, 2019
unless the EPA receives adverse comments by August 29, 2019. If adverse
comments are received, the 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-1998-0006, by one of the following methods:
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow on-line instructions
for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or
removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received
to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For
[[Page 36828]]
additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance
on making effective comments, please visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
Email: [email protected].
Mail: Sherrel Henry, Remedial Project Manager, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2, 290 Broadway, 20th Floor,
New York, New York 10007-1866.
Hand delivery: Superfund Records Center, 290 Broadway,
18th Floor, New York, NY 10007-1866 (telephone: (212) 637-4308). Such
deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation (Monday to Friday from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.) excluding
federal holidays and special arrangements should be made for deliveries
of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID no. EPA-HQ-SFUND-
1998-0006. The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be
included in the public docket without change and may be made available
online at https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed
to be CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by
statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or
otherwise protected through https://www.regulations.gov or email. The
https://www.regulations.gov website is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means the 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 the EPA without going through https://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, the 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 the EPA cannot read your comment due to technical
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, the EPA may not
be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use
of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any
defects or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the https://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in the hard
copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either
electronically in https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2, Superfund Records
Center, 290 Broadway, Room 1828, New York, New York 10007-1866, (212)
637-4308, Hours: Monday through Friday: 9:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m.
Information for the Site is also available for viewing at the Site
Administrative Record Repositories located at: Gowanda Free Library, 56
W. Main Street, Gowanda, New York 14138, (716) 532-9449, Hours: Monday
through Friday: 9:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Sherrel D. Henry, Remedial Project
Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2, 290 Broadway,
20th Floor, NY, NY 10007-1866, (212) 637-4273, email:
[email protected].
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 2 is publishing this direct final Notice of Deletion of
the Peter Cooper Superfund Site (Site) from the NPL. The NPL
constitutes Appendix B of 40 CFR part 300, which is the National Oil
and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), which the
EPA promulgated pursuant to section 105 of CERCLA. The 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.
Section II of this document explains the criteria for deleting
sites from the NPL. Section III discusses procedures that the EPA is
using for this action. Section IV discusses the Site and demonstrates
how it meets the deletion criteria. Section V discusses EPA's action to
delete the Site from the NPL unless adverse comments are received
during the public comment period.
II. NPL Deletion Criteria
The NCP establishes the criteria that EPA uses to delete sites from
the NPL. In accordance with 40 CFR 300.425(e), sites may be deleted
from the NPL where no further response is appropriate. In making such a
determination pursuant to 40 CFR 300.425(e), EPA will consider, in
consultation with the state, whether any of the following criteria have
been met:
i. Responsible parties or other persons have implemented all
appropriate response actions required;
ii. all appropriate Fund-financed response under CERCLA has been
implemented, and no further response action by responsible parties is
appropriate; or
iii. the remedial investigation has shown that the release poses no
significant threat to public health or the environment and, therefore,
the taking of remedial measures is not appropriate.
Pursuant to CERCLA section 121 (c) and the NCP, EPA conducts five-
year reviews to ensure the continued protectiveness of remedial actions
where hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants remain at a
site above levels that allow for unlimited use and unrestricted
exposure. EPA conducts such five-year reviews even if a site is deleted
from the NPL. EPA may initiate further action to ensure continued
protectiveness at a deleted site if new information becomes available
that indicates it is appropriate. Whenever there is a significant
release from a site deleted from the NPL, the deleted site may be
restored to the NPL without application of the hazard ranking system.
III. Deletion Procedures
The following procedures apply to deletion of the Site:
(1) EPA consulted with the State of New York 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 New York 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 NYSDEC, 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, Dunkirk
Observer. The newspaper notice announces the 30-day public comment
period concerning the Notice
[[Page 36829]]
of Intent to Delete the Site from the NPL.
(4) EPA placed copies of documents supporting the proposed deletion
in the deletion docket and made these items available for public
inspection and copying at the Site information repositories identified
above.
(5) If adverse comments are received within the 30-day public
comment period on this deletion action, EPA will publish a timely
notice of withdrawal of this direct final Notice of Deletion before its
effective date and will prepare a response to comments and continue
with the deletion process on the basis of the Notice of Intent to
Delete and the comments already received.
Deletion of a site from the NPL does not itself create, alter, or
revoke any individual's rights or obligations. Deletion of a site from
the NPL does not in any way alter EPA's right to take enforcement
actions, as appropriate. The NPL is designed primarily for
informational purposes and to assist EPA management. Section
300.425(e)(3) of the NCP states that the deletion of a site from the
NPL does not preclude eligibility for future response actions, should
future conditions warrant such actions.
IV. Basis for Site Deletion
The following information provides EPA's rationale for deleting the
Site from the NPL:
Site Background and History
The Peter Cooper Site, EPA ID No. NYD980530265, is located off
Palmer Street, in the Village of Gowanda, Cattaraugus County, New York,
approximately 30 miles south of Buffalo, New York. The Site consists of
an inactive landfill and land associated with the former Peter Cooper
Corporation (PCC) animal glue and adhesives manufacturing plant. The
Site is bound to the north by Cattaraugus Creek (Creek), to the south
by Palmer Street, to the west by a former hydroelectric dam and wetland
area, and to the east by residential properties. Regionally, the
Village of Gowanda is located both in Erie County and Cattaraugus
County and is separated by Cattaraugus Creek. In Erie County, the
Village of Gowanda is included in the Town of Collins. The Town of
Collins is bordered by the Seneca Nation of Indians Cattaraugus
Reservation to the west. In Cattaraugus County, the Village of Gowanda
is in the Town of Persia. The Site is located in an area characterized
by mixed industrial-commercial/residential usage.
For purposes of the remedial investigation and feasibility study
(RI/FS), the Site was divided into two sections. The western section,
called the inactive landfill area (ILA), is approximately 15.6 acres in
size and includes an additional five acres referred to as the
``elevated fill subarea.'' The westernmost portion of the elevated fill
subarea is located on property owned by the New York State Electric &
Gas Corporation (NYSEG). The eastern section of the Site, the former
manufacturing plant area (FMPA), is approximately 10.4 acres.
From 1904 to 1972, PCC and its predecessor, Eastern Tanners Glue
Company, manufactured animal glue at the Site. When the animal glue
product line was terminated, PCC continued to produce synthetic
industrial adhesives until the plant closed in 1985. The wastes from
PCC's glue production were disposed of on the elevated fill subarea.
Between 1925 and October 1970, PCC used the northwest portion of the
property to pile sludge remaining after the animal glue manufacturing
process. These wastes, known as ``cookhouse sludge'' because of a
cooking cycle that occurred just prior to extraction of the glue, are
derived primarily from chrome-tanned hides obtained from tanneries. The
waste material has been shown to contain elevated levels of chromium,
arsenic, zinc, and several organic compounds.
In June 1971, the New York State Supreme Court (8th J.D.
Cattaraugus County) ordered PCC to remove all or part of the waste pile
and terminate discharges into the Creek. In 1972, PCC reportedly
removed approximately 38,600 tons of waste pile material and
transferred it to a separate site in Markhams, New York. Between 1972
and 1975, the remaining waste pile at the Site was graded by PCC,
covered with a 6-inch clay barrier layer and 18 to 30 inches of soil,
and vegetated with grass. Stone rip-rap and concrete blocks were placed
along the bank of the Creek to protect the fill material from scouring
or falling into the Creek.
In July 1976, the assets of the original PCC, including the
manufacturing plant and property located in Gowanda, were purchased by
Rousselot Gelatin Corporation and its parent, Rousselot, S.A., of
France. Rousselot Gelatin was renamed Peter Cooper Corporation, and
this newly-formed PCC sold the Site to JimCar Development, Inc. in
April 1988. The property was subsequently transferred to the Gowanda
Area Redevelopment Corporation (GARC) in 2009. Excluding the portion of
the Site owned by NYSEG, the remainder of the property is presently
owned by GARC. From 1981 to 1983, NYSDEC conducted several
investigations at the facility and identified the presence of arsenic,
chromium and zinc in soil and sediment samples. As a result of this
investigation, NYSDEC oversaw PCC's development of an RI/FS for the
Site. However, because the waste detected at the Site did not meet the
New York State statutory waste definition in effect in 1991 for an
inactive hazardous waste disposal site, NYSDEC removed the Site from
its Registry of Inactive Hazardous Waste Sites, and a remedy was not
selected.
In 1996, EPA collected and analyzed soil, groundwater, surface
water, and sediment samples from the Site. Results of the sampling and
analysis confirmed contamination, including the presence of arsenic,
chromium, and other hazardous substances.
During these Site assessments, EPA personnel observed that the
existing retaining wall was subject to severe erosion. It was
determined that the retaining wall and rip-rap had to be repaired or
upgraded to prevent the continued erosion of landfill materials into
the Creek. On October 24, 1996, EPA and NYSEG entered into an
administrative order on consent (AOC). Pursuant to the AOC, NYSEG
installed approximately 150 feet of rip-rap revetment along the south
bank of the Cattaraugus Creek and adjacent to the landfill to prevent
further erosion of materials from the landfill into the Creek.
Based on this information, the Site was proposed to the NPL on
September 25, 1997 (62 FR 50450) and placed on the NPL on March 6, 1998
(63 FR 11332).
Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study
In April 2000, EPA issued a unilateral administrative order (UAO)
to fourteen respondents to perform the RI/FS of the Site, subject to
EPA oversight. Media sampled during the RI included landfill gas,
groundwater, surface water, sediment, soil, waste material, and seepage
emanating from the landfill.
From 2000 to 2001, the UAO respondents, through their consultants,
Benchmark Environmental Engineering and Science PLLC (Benchmark) and
Geomatrix Consultants, performed a comprehensive RI to define the
nature and extent of contamination at the Site. The final RI report was
submitted to EPA in November 2003. The scope of the RI included the
following activities: the replacement of four wells from the existing
network of 10 monitoring wells in the ILA and the installation of six
new wells in the FMPA; surface water and sediment investigations of the
Creek; sludge fill characterization of the
[[Page 36830]]
ILA, by conducting three different activities (geophysical surveys,
test pits, and soil borings) to establish the limits of buried waste
fill material; an existing landfill cover evaluation by excavating 24
test holes to determine cover system thickness and characteristics; a
surface soil investigation of the ILA and FMPA, consisting of 30 soil
samples collected from zero to six inches below ground surface (bgs); a
subsurface soil investigation of the ILA and FMPA consisting of 23 soil
samples collected from three to 12 feet bgs; a landfill gas
investigation of the elevated fill area of the ILA; and a leachate seep
investigation of the elevated fill area of the ILA.
An FS was then completed by the UAO respondents, and a report was
submitted to EPA in June 2005. The FS Report identified and evaluated
remedial alternatives to address soil contamination for the Site,
consistent with the guidelines presented in Guidance for conducting RI/
FS under CERCLA. A preferred alternative was presented to the public
for review and comment in July 2005. Results of the RI and FS were
summarized in the Record of Decision (ROD) issued by EPA in September
2005.
Concurrent with completion of the RI/FS activities, the Village of
Gowanda in association with the University at Buffalo Center for
Integrated Waste Management developed a Reuse Assessment and Concept
Plan for the Site, in which it was concluded that the ``highest and
best use'' of the property would be as a multi-use recreational
facility. The Reuse Assessment and Concept Plan, funded in part by the
USEPA through its Superfund Redevelopment Initiative, envisions a
publicly-available Site incorporating elements such as a walking/biking
trail, fishing access, outdoor picnic areas, small boat launch, and
other related recreational features.
Selected Remedy
Based upon the results of the RI/FS, a Proposed Plan, and a Public
Meeting, a Remedy was selected in September 2005. For this Site,
remedial action objectives (RAOs) were only established for soil. The
RAOs for soil are (1) to reduce or eliminate any direct contact threat
associated with the contaminant soils/fill, (2) to minimize or
eliminate contaminant migration from contaminated soils to the
groundwater and surface water, and (3) to minimize or eliminate
contaminant migration from groundwater to the Creek.
The elements of the selected remedy are:
Excavating three hot spot areas and consolidating waste
from these areas within the elevated fill subarea, capping the five-
acre elevated fill subarea of the inactive landfill area with a low
permeability, equivalent design barrier cap, consistent with the
requirements of 6 New York Codes, Rules and Regulations (NYCRR) Part
360, including seeding with a mixture of seeds to foster natural
habitat;
Conducting post-excavation confirmatory soil sampling;
Backfilling of excavated areas with clean fill; collecting
the leachate seeps, pretreating the leachate as necessary, then
discharging the leachate to the public owned treatment works (POTW)
collection system for further treatment and discharge. As a
contingency, if treatment of the leachate seep at the POTW is not
available, the leachate would be treated and discharged to Cattaraugus
Creek. Since the installation of the cap and groundwater diversion
system (described below) should reduce leachate generation, the volume
of seep leachate requiring treatment is anticipated to be reduced or
nearly eliminated over time;
Installing a groundwater diversion system to limit
groundwater migration through the elevated fill subarea. The remedy
provides for the potential that if additional data collected in the
remedial design phase of the project support the conclusion that
installation of a diversion wall will result in a minimal increase in
the collection of contaminants by the leachate collection system, the
diversion wall would not be installed;
Installing a passive gas venting system for proper venting
of the five-acre elevated fill subarea of the ILA;
Stabilizing the banks of the Creek;
Performing long-term operation and maintenance including
inspections and repairs of the landfill cap, gas venting, and leachate
systems;
Performing air monitoring, surface water and groundwater
quality monitoring; and
Evaluating Site conditions at least once every five years
to determine if the remedy remains protective.
The remedy also included institutional controls such as restrictive
covenants and environmental easements for limiting future use of the
Site and the groundwater to ensure that the implemented remedial
measures will not be disturbed and that the Site will not be used for
purposes incompatible with the completed remedial action. The
institutional controls will be managed, in part, through a Site
Management Plan (SMP) to ensure appropriate handling of subsurface
soils during redevelopment.
To ensure that engineering controls and institutional controls
remain in place and effective for the protection of public health and
the environment, an annual certification, commencing from the date of
implementation, has been required to be performed by the parties
responsible for implementing the remediation.
Consistent with the future use of the property, following issuance
of the ROD, the Village of Gowanda and the UAO recipients entered into
discussions concerning the Village's redevelopment goals. An agreement
was reached, and GARC took ownership of the Site and agreed to perform
certain post-remedial operation and maintenance and monitoring
activities in exchange for provision of specific, non-remedial
construction activities and funding by the respondents to facilitate
park redevelopment. Non-remedial construction activities that were
slated to be performed by the UAO recipients, concurrent with remedial
activities, are listed below.
Removal of up to 1,000 tons of non-hazardous construction
and demolition debris from the former manufacturing plant area of the
site, with disposal of the materials beneath the elevated fill subarea
cover (in a manner to prevent settlement) or off-site disposal at a
permitted disposal facility.
Construction of a clean utility corridor (i.e., waterline)
to facilitate utility service to a future, multi-use building,
pavilion, or other park development.
Elevated fill subarea cover system grading and contouring
to facilitate Site development plans. This involved creating a benched
area along the Creek side of the landfill that may provide a level area
for future construction of a bike or walking path.
Response Actions
In 2009, EPA concluded consent decree (CD) negotiations with a
subgroup of the UAO recipients, identified as the performing settling
defendants (PSDs), related to the performance of the design and
implementation of the remedy called for in the ROD. On February 12,
2009, the CD was entered in United States District Court. On March 15,
2009, Benchmark was approved as the supervising contractor to conduct
the remedial design (RD) and implement the remedy at the Site. The ROD
included provisions for the evaluation of the construction of a
diversion wall around the elevated fill area in the event the wall
would affect the planned remedial
[[Page 36831]]
actions. In accordance with the ROD, EPA and NYSDEC concurred with the
findings of an analysis performed by the PSDs, prior to the entry of
the CD, that the installation of an upgradient groundwater diversion
wall around the elevated fill subarea would not materially alter the
effectiveness of the planned remedial measures; therefore, the
diversion wall component of the ROD was not implemented.
In accordance with the requirements of the CD, the PSDs prepared a
RD work plan. The RD work plan outlined the following remedial
construction measures: Mobilization; site preparation, including
hotspot excavation; groundwater/seep collection; and cover system
construction (barrier layer material placement and compaction, topsoil
and seeding, and passive gas venting). In 2009, the RD report and
design plans and specifications were implemented under a design build
contract for Site remediation. The RD report identified materials to be
employed for major remedial components, construction requirements,
quality control requirements, and measures to protect workers, the
surrounding community, and the environment during the remedial work.
In the Summer of 2009, the PSDs conducted certain preparatory
activities at the Site to facilitate the remedial construction. These
activities included the removal of small trees, shrubs, brush, and
stumps. Clearing and grubbing in and around the area of the elevated
fill area was performed with a hydro ax. The staged trees, stumps, and
brush were ground into mulch and were hauled off-site for processing at
a permitted facility.
The excavation of the three ``hotspot'' areas of contaminated soil/
fill was completed in August 2009. Soil excavated from these impacted
areas was hauled to the elevated fill subarea of the ILA for placement
and compaction prior to placing the soil cover system. The excavated
areas were then backfilled with clean soil. Confirmatory sampling of
the excavation sidewalls and bottom indicated arsenic and VOC
concentrations that remained were below the Site cleanup goals.
Construction of the seep/groundwater collection system was
substantially completed in November 2009. The collection system
includes the Creek bank regrading and bedrock channel excavation, the
pump station installation, the pretreatment building construction, the
force main piping, and the sanitary sewer tie-in. The seep/groundwater
collection system was placed into full-time operation in May 2010, with
operation and maintenance duties transferred to GARC.
The remedial measures for the elevated fill subarea involved re-
grading the adjacent bank (excluding the riprap-stabilized area on
NYSEG's property) and removal of concrete blocks and boulders to
provide a more uniform slope for reduced erosion potential. A seep
collection trench was then excavated into the surface of the weathered
shale bedrock at the toe of the slope to intercept and collect the
seeps. A perforated drainage pipe and granular media envelope collect
and transmit water to a packaged leachate pump station. The slope of
the regraded bank is lined with a geocomposite drainage layer, leading
to the collection trench, covered by a geomembrane liner to prevent
seep breakout and mitigate Creek and surface water infiltration during
high water conditions. The liner extends vertically to the 100-year
floodplain elevation and is protected from erosion by a surface layer
of medium and large riprap over a non-woven geotextile fabric and
gravel bed. Collected seep water and shallow groundwater are conveyed
from the pump station by a force main to a pretreatment building where
an oxidant delivery system is available to mitigate hydrogen sulfide
odors, as needed. Pretreated seeps/groundwater is discharged to the
Village of Gowanda's sanitary sewer collection system on Palmer Street
for treatment at the Village POTW consistent with the approved
discharge permit.
The final cap system, installed from August 2009 to July 2010,
includes all the construction components in the approved RD report.
Containment/isolation with soil cover enhancement involved the
following: clearing and grubbing the approximate five-acre elevated
fill subarea; moderate regrading and/or filling of low spots across the
five-acre area to facilitate runoff; supplementing existing cover to
provide for a minimum 18-inch thickness of a recompacted soil barrier
layer and placement of six inches of topsoil over the five-acre area;
and reseeding of the elevated fill subarea cover to provide for a good
stand of grass that will foster natural habitat. Cover soils were
tested to assure conformance with contaminant levels established under
state law.
Following construction of the cap, five passive gas vents were
installed through the sludge fill in the elevated fill subarea to
relieve gas buildup beneath the cover system. The vents were
constructed with individual risers that extend to a sufficient height
above ground surface to promote atmospheric dispersion of odor-causing
constituents and prevent direct inhalation of vented gases by
trespassers or future recreational Site users.
EPA and NYSDEC conducted a final inspection of the constructed
remedy on September 9, 2010. Based on the results of the inspection, it
was determined that the Site construction was complete and that the
remedy was implemented consistent with the ROD. In the final inspection
EPA concluded that the PSDs constructed the remedy in accordance with
the RD plans and specifications, and no further response (other than
the operation and maintenance of the cap and cover, and long-term
groundwater monitoring) is anticipated. EPA approved the remedial
action report (RAR) for the Site on June 17, 2011. The RAR documented
all the remedial activities conducted at the Site and included as-built
drawings to document Site conditions at completion. The PSDs and GARC,
the latter being the current property owner, are sharing
responsibilities for management of the Site in accordance with the SMP.
The ROD called for the development of a SMP to provide for the proper
management of all post-construction remedy components including an
environmental easement that describes the institutional controls
incorporated into the remedy and the requirement for certification that
the institutional controls remain effective and in place.
As mention above, the environmental easement and/or restrictive
covenant was designed to restrict the use of on-Site groundwater as a
source of potable or process water and to restrict activities on the
Site that could compromise the integrity of the cap. The restrictions
are memorialized in an environmental easement filed with the
Cattaraugus County Clerk on March 30, 2009.
Currently all areas of the Site designated for passive recreational
use have been covered with a minimum of one foot of clean, vegetated
cover soil or pavement, and those designated for active recreational
use have been covered with a minimum of two feet of clean, vegetated
cover soil or pavement. Inspections were performed by GARCs designated
engineer to verify that the minimum required soil thicknesses were
achieved. As part of the redevelopment efforts, the following Park
amenities and improvements were constructed during 2016 and 2017:
Regulation (90 foot diamond) ballfield:
Playground and equipment
Paved parking area and extension of asphalt path
Ballfield backstop
[[Page 36832]]
24' x 24' gazebo
Verification of Cleanup Levels
Data are collected and reviewed to ensure that the RAOs are met
following implementation of the remedial action. For this Site, RAOs
were only established for soil. The RAOs for soil are (1) to reduce or
eliminate any direct contact threat associated with the contaminant
soils/fill, (2) to minimize or eliminate contaminant migration from
contaminated soils to the groundwater and surface water, and (3) to
minimize or eliminate contaminant migration from groundwater to the
Creek. These RAOs and the associated cleanup levels set forth in the
ROD were met upon completion of the remedial construction, as
documented in the RAR for the Site dated September 2010. Because of the
limited remaining risks from exposure to the groundwater and surface
water at this Site, institutional controls are deemed necessary to
address any potential future exposure. Specifically, deed restrictions
have been imposed to prevent the use of groundwater as a source of
potable or process water unless groundwater quality standards are met.
Long-term monitoring will be conducted to ensure that the selected Site
remedy is protective of human health and the environment. Groundwater
and surface water will be monitored as part of the post-construction
response activities to ensure that the contamination is attenuating,
and groundwater quality continues to improve.
Groundwater monitoring was performed during 10 separate events in
June 2011, January 2012, June 2012, January 2013, June 2013, June 2014,
October 2015, October 2016, November 2017 and October 2018. Groundwater
samples were collected from five monitoring wells (MWs) at the Site.
Samples were analyzed for inorganic parameters (total metals), VOCs
(chlorinated aliphatics only), and water quality parameters (ammonia,
hardness, chloride, total sulfide). Total metals analyses included
hexavalent chromium, total chromium, arsenic, and manganese.
Groundwater results were compared to the more stringent of the State or
federal promulgated standards.
VOC concentrations were either not detected (nondetect) or below
the state Groundwater Quality Standards and Guidance Values (GWQS/GV)
at all monitoring well locations, with the exception of
tetrachloroethene (PCE) and cis-1,2-dichloroethene (cis-1,2- DCE). PCE
was detected above the GWQS of 5 ug/L, with concentrations ranging from
5.9 micrograms per liter (ug/L) to 13 ug/L. Cis-1,2-DCE was detected
above the GWQS of 5 ug/L with concentrations ranging from 5.4 ug/L to
8.5 ug/L. These sporadic, slight VOC exceedances of GWQS criteria are
not considered significant, and do not constitute a contaminant plume
requiring response action.
Concentrations reported for hexavalent chromium were nondetect or
below GWQS at all monitoring locations. Total chromium was reported as
nondetect or below the GWQS of 0.05 milligram/liter (mg/L) at all
monitored locations, with the exception of two minor exceedances of
0.056 mg/L and 0.054 mg/L. These sporadic, slight exceedances of total
chromium GWQS criteria are not considered significant.
Arsenic was reported above the federal Maximum Contaminant Levels
(MCLs) of 0.010 mg/L, with concentrations ranging from 0.011 mg/L to
0.043 mg/L. Arsenic was also detected in the upgradient well, so the
exceedances in on-site wells are not considered to be Site-related.
Manganese was detected above the GWQS of 0.03 mg/L with concentrations
ranging from 0.37 mg/L to 6.6 mg/L. The manganese screening criteria is
a secondary MCL. Secondary MCLs do not require regulatory actions since
they represent aesthetic parameters. They will continue to be
monitored.
The water quality parameters reported for all sampling events were
nondetect or below the GWQS for sulfide and chloride at all sampling
locations. Ammonia was detected above the GWQS of 2 mg/L during all
monitoring events at concentrations ranging from 3.5 mg/L to 10.8 mg/L.
However, ammonia was also detected in the upgradient monitoring well,
so the exceedances are not considered to be Site-related. The
groundwater data review indicates that the low levels of contamination
in Site groundwater are attenuating and groundwater quality has
improved compared to baseline levels measured prior to commencement of
remedial activities. In general, the data indicate minor/seasonal
changes in concentration for the monitored parameters at each of the
sample locations with no upward trending. These data support the
assumption set forth in the ROD that the groundwater contamination is
localized and the decrease in frequency indicates that limited residual
groundwater contamination has attenuated. The environmental easement
placed on the Site property restricts the use of groundwater as a
source of potable or process water unless groundwater quality standards
are met. Groundwater quality will continue to be monitored in
accordance with the SMP.
Surface water samples were collected from three locations along the
Creek at the same time as the groundwater samples were obtained from
June 2011 through October 2018. Samples were also analyzed for
inorganic parameters (total metals), VOCs (chlorinated aliphatics only)
and water quality parameters (ammonia, hardness, chloride, total
sulfide). Total metals analyses include hexavalent chromium, total
chromium, arsenic, and manganese.
VOCs, sulfide, and chloride were not detected during any surface
water sampling event. Ammonia was detected above the Surface Water
Quality Standards (SWQS) of 0.035 mg/L and iron and manganese were
detected above the SWQS of 0.30 mg/L. Although ammonia, iron and
manganese concentrations were reported above standards, this appears
attributable to naturally occurring conditions as evidenced by their
presence of concentrations above the standards in the upstream surface
water sample. In addition, iron does not have a primary standard, and
is not considered a contaminant of concern for the Site.
The surface water data review indicates few exceedances of the
standards with no observed impact from the Site to the Creek. This
indicates that there is no contaminated groundwater plume emanating
from the landfill area. Surface water quality will continue to be
monitored in accordance with the SMP.
Operation and Maintenance
A long-term monitoring program in being implemented that was
designed to ensure that the implemented remedy remains effective. The
majority of the long-term monitoring program, which is being conducted
by Benchmark under contract to the PSDs, includes the following: Annual
inspection of the landfill cover system; monitoring of the gas venting
system; inspection of groundwater level monitoring; collection of
groundwater samples from selected wells; collection of surface water
samples from the Creek at three locations and groundwater samples from
five wells; and providing annual reports on these activities to NYSDEC
and EPA. The Groundwater/Seep Collection and Pretreatment systems are
monitored semi-annually by the Village of Gowanda, on behalf of GARC.
Five-Year Review
Because hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants remain at
the Site above levels that would otherwise allow for unlimited use and
unrestricted exposure, a statutory five-
[[Page 36833]]
year review is required. The first five-year review was completed in
April 2015. In the review EPA concluded that the remedy is functioning
as intended and is protective of human health and the environment. The
five-year review did not include any issues or recommendations. The
next five-year review will be completed before April 2020.
Community Involvement
Public participation activities for this Site have been satisfied
as required in CERCLA 113(k) and Section 117. As part of the remedy
selection process, the public was invited to comment on EPA's proposed
remedies. All other documents and information that EPA relied on or
considered in recommending this deletion are available for the public
to review at the information repositories identified above.
Determination That the Site Meets the Criteria for Deletion in the NCP
EPA, with the concurrence of the State of New York through NYSDEC,
has determined that all required and appropriate response actions have
been implemented by the responsible parties. The criteria for deletion
from the NPL (40 CFR 300.425(e)(1)(I)) are met. The implemented remedy
achieves the protection specified in the ROD(s) for all pathways of
exposure. All selected remedial and removal action objectives and
associated cleanup levels are consistent with agency policy and
guidance. No further Superfund response is needed to protect human
health and the environment.
V. Deletion Action
The EPA, with concurrence of the State of New York through the
NYSDEC, has determined that all appropriate response actions under
CERCLA, other than operation and 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 proposing to delete the Site without prior publication.
This action will be effective September 30, 2019, unless EPA receives
adverse comments by August 29, 2019. 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 the deletion will not take effect. EPA will
prepare a response to comments and continue with the deletion process,
as appropriate, on the basis of the notice of intent to delete and the
comments already received. If there is no withdrawal of this direct
final notice of deletion, there will be no additional opportunity to
comment.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Chemicals,
Hazardous substances, Hazardous waste, Intergovernmental relations,
Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Superfund, Water
pollution control, Water supply.
Dated: July 16, 2019.
Peter D. Lopez,
Regional Administrator, Region 2.
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(d); 42 U.S.C. 9601-9657; E.O. 13626,
77 FR 56749, 3 CFR, 2013 Comp., p. 306; E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757, 3
CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR 2923, 3 CFR, 1987 Comp.,
p. 193.
Subpart L--National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution
Contingency Plan; Involuntary Acquisition of Property by the
Government
Appendix B to Part 300 [Amended]
0
2. Table 1 of Appendix B to part 300 is amended by removing the entry:
``NY, Peter Cooper, Gowanda''.
[FR Doc. 2019-16065 Filed 7-29-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P