National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan; National Priorities List: Deletion of the Hiteman Leather Superfund Site, 77388-77392 [2011-31912]
Download as PDF
77388
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 239 / Tuesday, December 13, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
Using agency. New Jersey ANG, 177th
Fighter Wing, Atlantic City, NJ.
*
*
*
*
*
6. R–5002F Warren Grove, NJ [New]
Boundaries. Beginning at lat. 39°43′25″ N.,
long. 74°17′36″ W.;
to lat. 39°40′10″ N., long. 74°20′14″ W.; to
lat. 39°38′50″ N., long. 74°21′19″ W.; to lat.
39°38′25″ N., long. 74°22′05″ W.; to lat.
39°38′25″ N., long. 74°24′19″ W.; to lat.
39°38′30″ N., long. 74°29′29″ W.; to lat.
39°39′20″ N., long. 74°29′59″ W.; to lat.
39°44′50″ N., long. 74°24′39″ W.; to lat.
39°44′50″ N., long. 74°19′19″ W.; to the point
of beginning.
Designated altitudes. 14,000 feet MSL to
but not including FL 200.
Time of designation. Sunrise to sunset;
other times as activated by NOTAM issued at
least 48 hours in advance.
Controlling agency. FAA, New York
ARTCC.
Using agency. New Jersey ANG, 177th
Fighter Wing, Atlantic City, NJ.
*
*
*
*
*
Issued in Washington, DC, on December 5,
2011.
Gary A. Norek,
Acting Manager, Airspace, Regulations and
ATC Procedures Group.
[FR Doc. 2011–31853 Filed 12–12–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 300
[EPA–HQ–SFUND–1999–0013; FRL–9503–9]
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES
National Oil and Hazardous
Substances Pollution Contingency
Plan; National Priorities List: Deletion
of the Hiteman Leather Superfund Site
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
EPA, Region 2, is publishing
a direct final Notice of Deletion of the
Hiteman Leather Superfund Site (Site),
SUMMARY:
15:58 Dec 12, 2011
This direct final deletion will be
effective February 13, 2012 unless EPA
receives significant adverse comments
by January 12, 2012. If significant
adverse comments are received, EPA
will publish a timely withdrawal of this
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–1999–0013, by one of the
following methods:
Web site: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
Email: mongelli.thomas@epa.gov.
Fax: To the attention of Thomas
Mongelli at (212) 637–3966.
Mail: To the attention of Thomas
Mongelli, Remedial Project Manager,
Emergency and Remedial Response
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 2, 290 Broadway, 20th
Floor, New York, NY 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 Record Center’s
normal hours of operation (Monday to
Friday from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.). Special
arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID no. EPA–HQ–SFUND–1999–
0013. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the 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 Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
DATES:
7. R–5002G Warren Grove, NJ [New]
Boundaries. Beginning at lat. 39°49′02″ N.,
long. 74°00′45″ W.; to lat. 39°38′18″ N., long.
74°12′34″ W.; to lat. 39°38′25″ N., long.
74°22′05″ W.; to lat. 39°38′25″ N., long.
74°24′19″ W.; to lat. 39°38′30″ N., long.
74°29′29″ W.; to lat. 39°39′20″ N., long.
74°29′59″ W.; to lat. 39°44′50″ N., long.
74°24′39″ W.; to lat. 39°49′02″ N., long.
74°16′18″ W.; to point of beginning.
Designated altitudes. FL 200 to FL 230.
Time of designation. Sunrise to sunset;
other times as activated by NOTAM issued at
least 48 hours in advance.
Controlling agency. FAA, New York
ARTCC.
Using agency. New Jersey ANG, 177th
Fighter Wing, Atlantic City, NJ.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
located in West Winfield, Herkimer
County, New York, 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 Notice of Deletion is being
published by EPA with the concurrence
of the State of New York, through the
New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC).
EPA and NYSDEC have determined that
all appropriate response actions under
CERCLA, other than monitoring and
maintenance (M&M) and five-year
reviews, have been completed.
However, this deletion does not
preclude future actions under
Superfund.
Jkt 226001
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 via email. The
https://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
comments. If you send comments to
EPA via email, your email address will
be included as part of the comment that
is placed in the Docket and made
available on the Web site. If you submit
electronic comments, EPA recommends
that you include your name and other
contact information in the body of your
comments and with any disks or CD–
ROMs that you submit. If EPA cannot
read your comments due to technical
difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to
consider your comments. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special
characters and any form of encryption
and should 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 hard
copy. Publicly available Docket
materials can be viewed electronically
at https://www.regulations.gov or
obtained in hard copy at:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 2, Superfund Records Center,
290 Broadway, 18th Floor, New York,
NY 10007–1866, Phone: (212) 637–
4308, Hours: Monday to Friday from
9 a.m. to 5 p.m.
and
West Winfield Library, Bisby Hall, 179
South Street, West Winfield, NY
13491, Phone: (315) 822–6394, Hours:
Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, and
Friday from 12:30–5:30 p.m.,
Wednesday from 10 a.m.–12 p.m. and
6–8 p.m., and Saturdays from 10
a.m.–12 p.m. (Sept.–May).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Thomas Mongelli, Remedial Project
Manager, by mail at Emergency and
Remedial Response Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 2, 290 Broadway, 20th floor,
New York, NY 10007–1866; telephone
at (212) 637–4256; fax at (212) 637–
3966; or email at
mongelli.thomas@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\13DER1.SGM
13DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 239 / Tuesday, December 13, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. NPL Deletion Criteria
III. Deletion Procedures
IV. Basis for Site Deletion
V. Deletion Action
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES
I. Introduction
EPA Region 2 is publishing this direct
final deletion of the Site from the NPL.
The NPL constitutes Appendix B of 40
CFR part 300, which is the NCP, which
EPA promulgated pursuant to Section
105 of CERCLA, 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 Section
300.425(e)(3) of the NCP, a site deleted
from the NPL remains eligible for
remedial actions if conditions at the site
warrant such action.
Because EPA considers this action to
be noncontroversial and routine, this
action will be effective February 13,
2012 unless EPA receives significant
adverse comments by January 12, 2012.
Along with this direct final Notice of
Deletion, EPA is co-publishing a Notice
of Intent to delete the Site in the
‘‘Proposed Rules’’ section of today’s
Federal Register. 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, if
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 received. In such a case,
there will be no additional opportunity
to comment.
Section II below explains the criteria
for deleting sites from the NPL. Section
III discusses procedures that 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
significant 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 there is no risk posed or no
further response is appropriate. In
making such a determination pursuant
to 40 CFR 300.425(e), EPA will
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:58 Dec 12, 2011
Jkt 226001
consider, in consultation with the state,
whether any of the following criteria
have been met:
i. Responsible parties or other parties
have implemented all appropriate
response actions required;
ii. All appropriate Fund-financed
responses under CERCLA have been
implemented, and no further action by
responsible parties is appropriate; or
iii. The remedial investigation has
shown that the release of hazardous
substances poses no significant threat to
public health or the environment and,
therefore, 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 also 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 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,
The Observer Dispatch (Utica). The
newspaper notice announces the 30-day
public comment period concerning the
Notice of Intent to Delete the Site from
the NPL.
(4) EPA placed copies of documents
supporting the proposed deletion in the
Docket and made these items available
for public inspection and copying at the
Site information repositories identified
above.
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
77389
(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. If appropriate,
EPA may then continue with the
deletion process based on 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’s management of sites. 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 summary provides the
Agency’s rationale for deleting the Site
from the NPL.
Background
The Site includes a former tannery
and leather manufacturing facility
located in the Village of West Winfield,
New York at 173 South Street (Route 51)
just south of the intersection of Route 51
with State Highway Route 20. The
former tannery property, currently
owned by the Village of West Winfield,
is bordered to the north by commercial
buildings and residences, to the east by
South Street, to the south by a
residential property, to the southwest by
a landlocked, privately-owned 2-acre
parcel, and to the west by the West
Winfield Cemetery. The Site is
approximately 12 acres in size and is
traversed by approximately 800 feet of
the Unadilla River. Ten acres are located
on the northern bank of the river and 2
acres are located on the southern bank.
A tannery business was established at
the Site in 1820 on the northern bank
of the Unadilla River by a Mr. Adsit. In
1910, after several changes in
ownership, the tannery business was
acquired by the Hiteman family and the
name of the business was later changed
to the Hiteman Leather Company. In
1922, the company was reorganized as
a corporation under the name of
Hiteman Leather Company, Inc., and the
name remained unchanged until the
termination of the business in 1968.
In the leather tanning process, animal
hides and skins absorb chemicals that
prevent the resulting leather from
decaying, make it resistant to wetting,
E:\FR\FM\13DER1.SGM
13DER1
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES
77390
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 239 / Tuesday, December 13, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
and keep it supple and durable. In the
early years, tree bark extract containing
tannins was used, but in later years,
chromium salts were also used. Waste
from tannery operations at the Site was
originally discharged from the tannery
buildings directly to the Unadilla River.
During operation under the Hiteman
family, the tannery and tannery
property experienced many changes
over the years to expand business and
increase production, including a major
change during the early 1900s to
incorporate chromium-based tanning
into the process. The chromium-based
process, in combination with
mechanization, reduced the time to
manufacture leather from years to
weeks; however, the wastes that were
generated were more toxic and far more
voluminous, resulting in the
construction of two unlined lagoons in
1931 and a third unlined lagoon in
1959. Berms were constructed around
the lagoons to increase their capacity.
Wastewater was discharged via a
sluiceway to the lagoons. The
wastewater lagoons reportedly
discharged to the Unadilla River and to
the wetland area to the northwest of the
lagoons (which ultimately drains to the
Unadilla River). Wastewater from the
coloring process was discharged into
two 240-cubic foot concrete dye tanks
prior to being discharged to the Unadilla
River. Sludge from the bottom of the
lagoons was periodically dredged and
was reportedly deposited as berm
material surrounding the lagoons.
The inability to economically treat
contaminated wastewater from the
tannery forced the closing of tannery
operations at the Site in 1968. The real
property and buildings were sold in
1969 to Erle Davis of Clinton, New York,
who subsequently rented the buildings
in the 1970s, mostly for storage, to
various small businesses including a
cookie company and a tire company.
The former tannery buildings were no
longer occupied after 1982 and they
gradually deteriorated.
In 1985, NYSDEC added the Site to its
Registry of Inactive Hazardous Waste
Disposal Sites and, thereafter, from 1988
to 1992, conducted environmental
investigations of the Site that resulted in
the Site being referred to EPA for further
evaluation. In 1994, EPA performed
some preliminary sampling at the
former tannery property and fenced the
northern part of the Site to prevent
unauthorized access, particularly to the
deteriorating buildings.
In 1996, EPA conducted a Site
Investigation (SI) that found elevated
concentrations of chromium in the
surface soil, subsurface soils, and
surface water. Several other
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:58 Dec 12, 2011
Jkt 226001
contaminants were detected at low
levels in soils, including metals,
pesticides, semi-volatiles, and volatiles.
The SI also found asbestos-covered
pipes throughout the main former
tannery building and determined that
the wood-frame sections of the building
were structurally unsound.
Based upon the SI, EPA conducted an
asbestos removal pursuant to CERCLA
and demolished the wood frame
sections of the building, power house,
and chimney stack in 1996. The
remaining concrete and steel building
was demolished by the Davis estate in
1998, with the latter demolition leaving
piles of loose brick and concrete debris,
as well as other concrete remnants (e.g.,
building pillars, concrete dye tanks,
etc.). Much of the loose debris was
removed from the concrete foundation
floor by EPA in May 2001 to facilitate
sampling under the floor.
The Site was proposed to the NPL in
March 1998 (63 FR 51882) and listed on
the NPL in January 1999 (64 FR 2942).
In 2003, EPA awarded a $100,000
Federal grant to the Village of West
Winfield to develop a reuse assessment
and redevelopment plan for the
Hiteman Leather site as part of the
EPA’s Superfund Redevelopment
Initiative, a nationally coordinated effort
to restore toxic waste sites to productive
reuse. The Village’s reuse assessment
and redevelopment plan calls for the
construction of a community center,
development of recreational facilities,
consolidation and modernization of the
existing Department of Public Works
facility, and commercial development.
Remedial Investigation and Feasibility
Study
EPA conducted a remedial
investigation and feasibility study (RI/
FS) at the Site from 2001–2006. The
findings are presented in an RI report
and FS report. The results of the RI
indicated that metals were the
predominant contaminants in the soils
in the northern 10 acres of the Site and
in sediments in the wetland and in the
Unadilla River. While carcinogenic risks
were found to be within acceptable risk
ranges, the results of the risk assessment
indicated that former tannery property
soil hot spots presented unacceptable
increased non-cancer hazards.
Contaminated soils along the river on
the former tannery property area and
contaminated wetland and river
sediments posed unacceptable
ecological risks. In addition, inorganic
groundwater concentrations in the semiconfining unit exceeded their respective
federally recognized Maximum
Contaminant Levels, thereby posing a
potential human health risk. Although a
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
number of organic compounds were
detected in the groundwater at the Site,
they appear to be incidental, were found
only infrequently and at relatively low
concentrations, and could not be
attributed to tannery operations. In
addition, some of the organics appear to
be from an upgradient source. The
contaminants of concern identified for
the Site include antimony, arsenic,
cadmium, chromium, hexavalent
chromium, lead, manganese, mercury,
and nickel.
Selected Remedy
Based upon the results of the RI/FS,
on September 28, 2006, a Record of
Decision (ROD) was signed, selecting a
remedy for the Site. The selected
remedy included the excavation of
contaminated soil from the former
tannery property; excavation of
contaminated riverbank soils;
excavation/dredging of contaminated
wetland and river sediments located
adjacent to the former tannery property;
treatment by solidification (the addition
of cement additives to change the
physical and chemical characteristics in
order to immobilize contaminants) and
consolidation of the excavated/dredged
soils and sediments on the former
tannery property; placement of a soil
cover; and intermittent groundwater
extraction and treatment. The ROD also
indicated that the need for the
remediation of river sediments in areas
downstream of the former tannery
would be determined based upon postremediation sediment chemical
analyses, sediment toxicity testing, and
analysis of benthic macroinvertebrate
communities. In addition, an
environmental easement/restrictive
covenant would be filed to restrict the
future land use of the Site, and a Site
Management Plan (SMP) would provide
for the proper management of all postconstruction remedy components.
The following remedial action
objectives were established for the Site:
• Reduce or eliminate any direct
contact, ingestion, or inhalation threat
to future recreational users or
construction workers to contaminated
soils and sediments;
• Minimize exposure of wildlife or
fish to contaminated soils and
sediments;
• Protect human health by preventing
exposure of future users to
contaminated groundwater; and
• Restore groundwater to levels that
meet state and Federal standards within
a reasonable time frame.
Response Actions
Based upon the results of additional
testing at the Site during the design, it
E:\FR\FM\13DER1.SGM
13DER1
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 239 / Tuesday, December 13, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
was determined, that the excavated Site
soils and sediments did not require
treatment prior to on-Site consolidation
and containment as called for in the
ROD.
The ROD also called for the
excavation of a metals-contaminated
strip along the top of the northern bank
of the river to protect ecological
resources. As part of plans to redevelop
the Site, a walkway was placed along
the top of the northern bank. Since the
soils that would underlie the walkway
would not be accessible to ecological
receptors, the width of the area
requiring excavation was changed. The
remaining soil was to be covered with
two feet of clean material.
The ROD identified the cleanup goal
for manganese for the Site to be that
level found to be present in the vicinity
of the Site, or background. Based upon
the results of more representative soil
sampling in the area, the average
background concentration for
manganese was found to be higher than
originally determined. The cleanup goal
for manganese was changed to the
updated higher average background
concentration.
The above-noted changes to the
remedy, which were documented in a
June 2008 Explanation of Significant
Differences (ESD), were incorporated
into the soil and sediment design.
EPA, through its contractor, mobilized
to the Site on May 5, 2008. During the
course of the five-month construction
effort, 16,000 cubic yards of
contaminated soil, 8,700 cubic yards of
contaminated wetland sediments, and
200 cubic yards of contaminated
riverbank soils and sediments at the toe
of the riverbank were excavated and
consolidated in low-lying areas of the
Site. A geomembrane liner and two-foot
thick soil cover were placed over the
consolidated soils and sediments. In
addition, in areas where residual soil
contamination exceeded the cleanup
objectives, a soil cover with a thickness
of two feet was placed in areas with
‘‘active’’ exposure potential (e.g.,
playing fields) and a thickness of one
foot in areas with ‘‘passive’’ exposure
potential (e.g., walking trails, parking
lots). The ‘‘active’’ and ‘‘passive’’ areas
were based on the future-use plan
prepared by the Village of West
Winfield. Approximately 7 acres of the
Site (upland and the soil and sediment
disposal area) was covered with a twofoot soil cover and 1.5 acres (building
foundation) was covered with a one-foot
cover.
The ROD indicated that the extent, if
necessary, for the remediation of river
sediments in areas downstream of the
former tannery would be determined
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:58 Dec 12, 2011
Jkt 226001
based upon post-remediation sediment
and ecological sampling.
The results of these investigations
suggest that there are no discernable
downstream impacts to the Unadilla
River ecosystem from the Site.
Therefore, the downstream sediments
were determined not to need
remediation. In order to measure the
success that the remediation of Site soils
and sediments has had on downstream
ecological receptors, downstream
sediment (chemical analysis) and
ecological monitoring was conducted
for three years. The results of these
monitoring events are discussed in the
‘‘Cleanup Goals’’ section below.
During the RI, groundwater samples
collected from the bedrock aquifer never
exceeded groundwater standards. While
there were groundwater exceedances in
the shallow aquifer during early RI
sampling rounds, these samples were
highly turbid. Subsequent samples with
lower turbidity did not exceed
groundwater standards. Groundwater
standards for inorganics were, however,
exceeded in the semi-confining unit,
which is located between the shallow
and bedrock aquifers. Since similar
contaminants were also present in Site
soils, this contamination was believed
to be Site-related. As a result of these
findings, the ROD called for the
extraction and treatment of
contaminated groundwater on an
intermittent basis from the semiconfining unit.
Based upon the results of sampling
conducted during the design phase, it
was concluded that the contamination
present in the semi-confining unit is not
related to disposal activities at the Site
(i.e., the contamination is naturally
occurring). Based upon these findings, it
was determined the contaminated
groundwater would not be extracted and
treated. These above-noted changes to
the remedy were documented in a
second ESD, issued in September 2008.
Based on the results of an EPA and
NYSDEC pre-final inspection on
September 30, 2008, a Preliminary
Close-Out Report was approved on
September 30, 2008.
A Remedial Action (RA) Report was
approved by EPA in March 2009. The
RA Report documented that the work
was performed in accordance with the
approved design, consistent with the
decision documents and that
appropriate construction standards and
quality assurance/quality control
procedures were used.
The ROD required the imposition of
institutional controls to restrict the
future development/use of the Site
where contaminated sediments and
soils were consolidated, prohibit
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
77391
excavation below the soil cover unless
the activities are in accordance with an
SMP, and restrict the use of
groundwater. An Environmental
Easement effecting such restrictions was
recorded with the Herkimer County
Clerk on July 22, 2010.
The ROD called for the development
of an SMP to provide for the proper
management of all post-construction
remedy components. The SMP was
issued on December 29, 2010.
On September 9, 2010, a final
inspection was conducted by EPA and
NYSDEC. Based on the results of this
inspection, it has been determined that
the construction for the entire Site had
been completed and that the remedy as
implemented was consistent with the
ROD, as modified by the two ESDs.
Monitoring and Maintenance
Post-construction M&M activities at
the Site called for in the SMP are being
performed by NYSDEC and the Village
of West Winfield. NYSDEC has entered
into a Transfer Agreement (October 13,
2011) with EPA. The Site maintenance
activities will be performed at three
areas of the Site: Upland Area; Wetland
Area; and Riverbank Area.
Five-Year Review
Hazardous substances remain at this
Site above levels that would allow for
unlimited use and unrestricted
exposure. Therefore, pursuant to
CERCLA Section 121(c), EPA is required
to conduct a review of the remedy at
least once every five years. The first
five-year review will be performed
before May 2013, which is five years
following the initiation of construction.
Community Involvement
Public participation activities for this
Site have been satisfied as required in
CERCLA Sections 113(k) and 117, 42
U.S.C. 9613(k) and 9617. As part of the
remedy selection process, the public
was invited to comment on the
proposed remedy. 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 From the NCP
All of the completion requirements
for this Site have been met, as described
in the September 13, 2011 Final CloseOut Report. The State of New York, in
a September 21, 2011 letter, concurred
with the proposed deletion of this Site
from the NPL.
The NCP specifies that EPA may
delete a site from the NPL if ‘‘all
E:\FR\FM\13DER1.SGM
13DER1
77392
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 239 / Tuesday, December 13, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
appropriate Fund-financed response
under CERCLA has been implemented,
and no further response action by
responsible parties is appropriate.’’ 40
CFR 300.425(e)(1)(ii). EPA, with the
concurrence of the State of New York,
through NYSDEC, believes that this
criterion for deletion has been met.
Consequently, EPA is deleting this Site
from the NPL. Documents supporting
this action are available in the Site files.
■
V. Deletion Action
[CMS–9983–F]
EPA, with the concurrence of the
State of New York, has determined that
all appropriate responses under
CERCLA have been completed and that
no further response actions under
CERCLA, other than M&M and five-year
reviews, are necessary. Therefore, EPA
is deleting the Site from the NPL.
Because EPA considers this action to be
noncontroversial and routine, EPA is
taking this action without prior
publication. This action will be effective
February 13, 2012 unless EPA receives
adverse comments by January 12, 2012.
If adverse comments are received within
the 30-day public comment period of
this 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, if 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 received. In such a case,
there will be no additional opportunity
to comment.
RIN 0938–AQ98
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Chemicals, Hazardous
waste, Hazardous substances,
Intergovernmental relations, Natural
resources, Oil pollution, Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Superfund, Water
pollution control, Water supply.
Dated: November 22, 2011.
Judith A. Enck,
Regional Administrator, EPA, Region 2.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, 40 CFR part 300 is amended
as follows:
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES
PART 300—[AMENDED]
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.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:58 Dec 12, 2011
Jkt 226001
2. Table 1 of Appendix B to part 300
is amended by removing ‘‘Hiteman
Leather,’’ ‘‘West Winfield’’, ‘‘NY.’’
[FR Doc. 2011–31912 Filed 12–12–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
45 CFR Part 156
Patient Protection and Affordable Care
Act; Establishment of Consumer
Operated and Oriented Plan (CO–OP)
Program
Department of Health and
Human Services.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This final rule implements
the Consumer Operated and Oriented
Plan (CO–OP) program, which provides
loans to foster the creation of consumergoverned, private, nonprofit health
insurance issuers to offer qualified
health plans in the Affordable Insurance
Exchanges (Exchanges). The goal of this
program is to create a new CO–OP in
every State in order to expand the
number of health plans available in the
Exchanges with a focus on integrated
care and greater plan accountability.
DATES: These regulations are effective
February 13, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Meghan Elrington, (301) 492–4388 for
general issues and issues related to
loan terms and governance standards.
Anne Bollinger, (301) 492–4395 for
issues related to definitions and
eligibility.
Ilana Cohen, (301) 492–4371 for issues
related to CO–OP standards.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Patient Protection and Affordable Care
Act, (Pub. L. 111–148), enacted on
March 23, 2010, and the Health Care
and Education Reconciliation Act of
2010 (Pub. L. 111–152), enacted on
March 30, 2010, are collectively referred
to in this final rule as the ‘‘Affordable
Care Act.’’ The Department of Defense
and Full-Year Continuing
Appropriations Act, 2011 (Pub. L. 112–
10), which amended Section 1322 of the
Affordable Care Act, was enacted on
April 15, 2011. Section 1322 of the
Affordable Care Act created the
Consumer Operated and Oriented Plan
program (CO–OP) to foster the creation
of new consumer-governed, private,
nonprofit health insurance issuers. In
addition to improving consumer choice
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
and plan accountability, the CO–OP
program also seeks to promote
integrated models of care and enhance
competition in the Affordable Insurance
Exchanges (Exchanges) established
under the Affordable Care Act.
The statute authorizes the Secretary to
make loans to capitalize eligible
prospective CO–OPs with a goal of
having at least one CO–OP in each State.
It also permits the funding of multiple
CO–OPs in any State, provided that
there is sufficient funding to capitalize
at least one CO–OP in each State. There
is $3.8 billion in appropriations for the
program.
All CO–OP loans must be repaid with
interest, and loans will only be made to
private, nonprofit entities that
demonstrate a high probability of
becoming financially viable. The CO–
OP program contains extensive
provisions to protect against fraud,
waste, and abuse. Loan recipients are
subject to strict monitoring, audits, and
reporting requirements for the length of
the loan repayment period plus 10 years
and CO–OPs must meet a series of
milestones before drawing down
disbursements, as described in their
loan agreements.
This final rule—(1) Sets forth the
eligibility standards for the CO–OP
program; (2) establishes terms for loans;
and (3) provides basic standards that
organizations must meet to participate
in this program and become a CO–OP.
This rule is intended to provide
flexibility for eligible organizations to
encourage diversity in the
organizational design and approach
while ensuring that the statutory goals
are met.
Starting in 2014, individuals and
small businesses will be able to
purchase private health insurance
through State-based competitive
marketplaces called Affordable
Insurance Exchanges (Exchanges).
Insurance companies will compete for
new business on the basis of price and
value and consumers will have a choice
of health plans to fit their needs. The
Departments of Health and Human
Services, Labor, and the Treasury (the
Departments) are seeking public input,
providing guidance, and issuing
regulations implementing Exchanges in
several phases. A Request for Comment
relating to Exchanges was published in
the Federal Register on August 3, 2010.
Initial Guidance to States on Exchanges
was published on November 18, 2010. A
proposed rule for the application,
review, and reporting process for
waivers for State innovation was
published in the Federal Register on
March 14, 2011 (76 FR 13553). On July
15, 2011, two proposed regulations were
E:\FR\FM\13DER1.SGM
13DER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 239 (Tuesday, December 13, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 77388-77392]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-31912]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 300
[EPA-HQ-SFUND-1999-0013; FRL-9503-9]
National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan;
National Priorities List: Deletion of the Hiteman Leather Superfund
Site
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA, Region 2, is publishing a direct final Notice of Deletion
of the Hiteman Leather Superfund Site (Site), located in West Winfield,
Herkimer County, New York, 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 Notice of
Deletion is being published by EPA with the concurrence of the State of
New York, through the New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation (NYSDEC). EPA and NYSDEC have determined that all
appropriate response actions under CERCLA, other than monitoring and
maintenance (M&M) 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 February 13, 2012
unless EPA receives significant adverse comments by January 12, 2012.
If significant adverse comments are received, EPA will publish a timely
withdrawal of this 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-1999-0013, by one of the following methods:
Web site: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
Email: mongelli.thomas@epa.gov.
Fax: To the attention of Thomas Mongelli at (212) 637-3966.
Mail: To the attention of Thomas Mongelli, Remedial Project
Manager, Emergency and Remedial Response Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 2, 290 Broadway, 20th Floor, New York, NY
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 Record Center's normal hours of operation
(Monday to Friday from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.). Special arrangements should
be made for deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID no. EPA-HQ-SFUND-
1999-0013. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the 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 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 https://www.regulations.gov or via
email. The https://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 comments. If you
send comments to EPA via email, your email address will be included as
part of the comment that is placed in the Docket and made available on
the Web site. If you submit electronic comments, EPA recommends that
you include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comments and with any disks or CD-ROMs that you submit. If EPA cannot
read your comments due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you
for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comments.
Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters and any
form of encryption and should 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 hard copy.
Publicly available Docket materials can be viewed electronically at
https://www.regulations.gov or obtained in hard copy at:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2, Superfund Records
Center, 290 Broadway, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10007-1866, Phone: (212)
637-4308, Hours: Monday to Friday from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.
and
West Winfield Library, Bisby Hall, 179 South Street, West Winfield, NY
13491, Phone: (315) 822-6394, Hours: Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, and
Friday from 12:30-5:30 p.m., Wednesday from 10 a.m.-12 p.m. and 6-8
p.m., and Saturdays from 10 a.m.-12 p.m. (Sept.-May).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Mongelli, Remedial Project
Manager, by mail at Emergency and Remedial Response Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2, 290 Broadway, 20th floor,
New York, NY 10007-1866; telephone at (212) 637-4256; fax at (212) 637-
3966; or email at mongelli.thomas@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[[Page 77389]]
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 deletion of the Site
from the NPL. The NPL constitutes Appendix B of 40 CFR part 300, which
is the NCP, which EPA promulgated pursuant to Section 105 of CERCLA, 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
Section 300.425(e)(3) of the NCP, a site deleted from the NPL remains
eligible for remedial actions if conditions at the site warrant such
action.
Because EPA considers this action to be noncontroversial and
routine, this action will be effective February 13, 2012 unless EPA
receives significant adverse comments by January 12, 2012. Along with
this direct final Notice of Deletion, EPA is co-publishing a Notice of
Intent to delete the Site in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of today's
Federal Register. 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, if
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 received. In such a case, there will be no additional
opportunity to comment.
Section II below explains the criteria for deleting sites from the
NPL. Section III discusses procedures that 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 significant 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 there is no risk posed or 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 parties have implemented all
appropriate response actions required;
ii. All appropriate Fund-financed responses under CERCLA have been
implemented, and no further action by responsible parties is
appropriate; or
iii. The remedial investigation has shown that the release of
hazardous substances poses no significant threat to public health or
the environment and, therefore, 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
also 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 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, The
Observer Dispatch (Utica). The newspaper notice announces the 30-day
public comment period concerning the Notice of Intent to Delete the
Site from the NPL.
(4) EPA placed copies of documents supporting the proposed deletion
in the 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. If appropriate,
EPA may then continue with the deletion process based on 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's management of sites. 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 summary provides the Agency's rationale for deleting
the Site from the NPL.
Background
The Site includes a former tannery and leather manufacturing
facility located in the Village of West Winfield, New York at 173 South
Street (Route 51) just south of the intersection of Route 51 with State
Highway Route 20. The former tannery property, currently owned by the
Village of West Winfield, is bordered to the north by commercial
buildings and residences, to the east by South Street, to the south by
a residential property, to the southwest by a landlocked, privately-
owned 2-acre parcel, and to the west by the West Winfield Cemetery. The
Site is approximately 12 acres in size and is traversed by
approximately 800 feet of the Unadilla River. Ten acres are located on
the northern bank of the river and 2 acres are located on the southern
bank.
A tannery business was established at the Site in 1820 on the
northern bank of the Unadilla River by a Mr. Adsit. In 1910, after
several changes in ownership, the tannery business was acquired by the
Hiteman family and the name of the business was later changed to the
Hiteman Leather Company. In 1922, the company was reorganized as a
corporation under the name of Hiteman Leather Company, Inc., and the
name remained unchanged until the termination of the business in 1968.
In the leather tanning process, animal hides and skins absorb
chemicals that prevent the resulting leather from decaying, make it
resistant to wetting,
[[Page 77390]]
and keep it supple and durable. In the early years, tree bark extract
containing tannins was used, but in later years, chromium salts were
also used. Waste from tannery operations at the Site was originally
discharged from the tannery buildings directly to the Unadilla River.
During operation under the Hiteman family, the tannery and tannery
property experienced many changes over the years to expand business and
increase production, including a major change during the early 1900s to
incorporate chromium-based tanning into the process. The chromium-based
process, in combination with mechanization, reduced the time to
manufacture leather from years to weeks; however, the wastes that were
generated were more toxic and far more voluminous, resulting in the
construction of two unlined lagoons in 1931 and a third unlined lagoon
in 1959. Berms were constructed around the lagoons to increase their
capacity.
Wastewater was discharged via a sluiceway to the lagoons. The
wastewater lagoons reportedly discharged to the Unadilla River and to
the wetland area to the northwest of the lagoons (which ultimately
drains to the Unadilla River). Wastewater from the coloring process was
discharged into two 240-cubic foot concrete dye tanks prior to being
discharged to the Unadilla River. Sludge from the bottom of the lagoons
was periodically dredged and was reportedly deposited as berm material
surrounding the lagoons.
The inability to economically treat contaminated wastewater from
the tannery forced the closing of tannery operations at the Site in
1968. The real property and buildings were sold in 1969 to Erle Davis
of Clinton, New York, who subsequently rented the buildings in the
1970s, mostly for storage, to various small businesses including a
cookie company and a tire company. The former tannery buildings were no
longer occupied after 1982 and they gradually deteriorated.
In 1985, NYSDEC added the Site to its Registry of Inactive
Hazardous Waste Disposal Sites and, thereafter, from 1988 to 1992,
conducted environmental investigations of the Site that resulted in the
Site being referred to EPA for further evaluation. In 1994, EPA
performed some preliminary sampling at the former tannery property and
fenced the northern part of the Site to prevent unauthorized access,
particularly to the deteriorating buildings.
In 1996, EPA conducted a Site Investigation (SI) that found
elevated concentrations of chromium in the surface soil, subsurface
soils, and surface water. Several other contaminants were detected at
low levels in soils, including metals, pesticides, semi-volatiles, and
volatiles. The SI also found asbestos-covered pipes throughout the main
former tannery building and determined that the wood-frame sections of
the building were structurally unsound.
Based upon the SI, EPA conducted an asbestos removal pursuant to
CERCLA and demolished the wood frame sections of the building, power
house, and chimney stack in 1996. The remaining concrete and steel
building was demolished by the Davis estate in 1998, with the latter
demolition leaving piles of loose brick and concrete debris, as well as
other concrete remnants (e.g., building pillars, concrete dye tanks,
etc.). Much of the loose debris was removed from the concrete
foundation floor by EPA in May 2001 to facilitate sampling under the
floor.
The Site was proposed to the NPL in March 1998 (63 FR 51882) and
listed on the NPL in January 1999 (64 FR 2942).
In 2003, EPA awarded a $100,000 Federal grant to the Village of
West Winfield to develop a reuse assessment and redevelopment plan for
the Hiteman Leather site as part of the EPA's Superfund Redevelopment
Initiative, a nationally coordinated effort to restore toxic waste
sites to productive reuse. The Village's reuse assessment and
redevelopment plan calls for the construction of a community center,
development of recreational facilities, consolidation and modernization
of the existing Department of Public Works facility, and commercial
development.
Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study
EPA conducted a remedial investigation and feasibility study (RI/
FS) at the Site from 2001-2006. The findings are presented in an RI
report and FS report. The results of the RI indicated that metals were
the predominant contaminants in the soils in the northern 10 acres of
the Site and in sediments in the wetland and in the Unadilla River.
While carcinogenic risks were found to be within acceptable risk
ranges, the results of the risk assessment indicated that former
tannery property soil hot spots presented unacceptable increased non-
cancer hazards. Contaminated soils along the river on the former
tannery property area and contaminated wetland and river sediments
posed unacceptable ecological risks. In addition, inorganic groundwater
concentrations in the semi-confining unit exceeded their respective
federally recognized Maximum Contaminant Levels, thereby posing a
potential human health risk. Although a number of organic compounds
were detected in the groundwater at the Site, they appear to be
incidental, were found only infrequently and at relatively low
concentrations, and could not be attributed to tannery operations. In
addition, some of the organics appear to be from an upgradient source.
The contaminants of concern identified for the Site include antimony,
arsenic, cadmium, chromium, hexavalent chromium, lead, manganese,
mercury, and nickel.
Selected Remedy
Based upon the results of the RI/FS, on September 28, 2006, a
Record of Decision (ROD) was signed, selecting a remedy for the Site.
The selected remedy included the excavation of contaminated soil from
the former tannery property; excavation of contaminated riverbank
soils; excavation/dredging of contaminated wetland and river sediments
located adjacent to the former tannery property; treatment by
solidification (the addition of cement additives to change the physical
and chemical characteristics in order to immobilize contaminants) and
consolidation of the excavated/dredged soils and sediments on the
former tannery property; placement of a soil cover; and intermittent
groundwater extraction and treatment. The ROD also indicated that the
need for the remediation of river sediments in areas downstream of the
former tannery would be determined based upon post-remediation sediment
chemical analyses, sediment toxicity testing, and analysis of benthic
macroinvertebrate communities. In addition, an environmental easement/
restrictive covenant would be filed to restrict the future land use of
the Site, and a Site Management Plan (SMP) would provide for the proper
management of all post-construction remedy components.
The following remedial action objectives were established for the
Site:
Reduce or eliminate any direct contact, ingestion, or
inhalation threat to future recreational users or construction workers
to contaminated soils and sediments;
Minimize exposure of wildlife or fish to contaminated
soils and sediments;
Protect human health by preventing exposure of future
users to contaminated groundwater; and
Restore groundwater to levels that meet state and Federal
standards within a reasonable time frame.
Response Actions
Based upon the results of additional testing at the Site during the
design, it
[[Page 77391]]
was determined, that the excavated Site soils and sediments did not
require treatment prior to on-Site consolidation and containment as
called for in the ROD.
The ROD also called for the excavation of a metals-contaminated
strip along the top of the northern bank of the river to protect
ecological resources. As part of plans to redevelop the Site, a walkway
was placed along the top of the northern bank. Since the soils that
would underlie the walkway would not be accessible to ecological
receptors, the width of the area requiring excavation was changed. The
remaining soil was to be covered with two feet of clean material.
The ROD identified the cleanup goal for manganese for the Site to
be that level found to be present in the vicinity of the Site, or
background. Based upon the results of more representative soil sampling
in the area, the average background concentration for manganese was
found to be higher than originally determined. The cleanup goal for
manganese was changed to the updated higher average background
concentration.
The above-noted changes to the remedy, which were documented in a
June 2008 Explanation of Significant Differences (ESD), were
incorporated into the soil and sediment design.
EPA, through its contractor, mobilized to the Site on May 5, 2008.
During the course of the five-month construction effort, 16,000 cubic
yards of contaminated soil, 8,700 cubic yards of contaminated wetland
sediments, and 200 cubic yards of contaminated riverbank soils and
sediments at the toe of the riverbank were excavated and consolidated
in low-lying areas of the Site. A geomembrane liner and two-foot thick
soil cover were placed over the consolidated soils and sediments. In
addition, in areas where residual soil contamination exceeded the
cleanup objectives, a soil cover with a thickness of two feet was
placed in areas with ``active'' exposure potential (e.g., playing
fields) and a thickness of one foot in areas with ``passive'' exposure
potential (e.g., walking trails, parking lots). The ``active'' and
``passive'' areas were based on the future-use plan prepared by the
Village of West Winfield. Approximately 7 acres of the Site (upland and
the soil and sediment disposal area) was covered with a two-foot soil
cover and 1.5 acres (building foundation) was covered with a one-foot
cover.
The ROD indicated that the extent, if necessary, for the
remediation of river sediments in areas downstream of the former
tannery would be determined based upon post-remediation sediment and
ecological sampling.
The results of these investigations suggest that there are no
discernable downstream impacts to the Unadilla River ecosystem from the
Site. Therefore, the downstream sediments were determined not to need
remediation. In order to measure the success that the remediation of
Site soils and sediments has had on downstream ecological receptors,
downstream sediment (chemical analysis) and ecological monitoring was
conducted for three years. The results of these monitoring events are
discussed in the ``Cleanup Goals'' section below.
During the RI, groundwater samples collected from the bedrock
aquifer never exceeded groundwater standards. While there were
groundwater exceedances in the shallow aquifer during early RI sampling
rounds, these samples were highly turbid. Subsequent samples with lower
turbidity did not exceed groundwater standards. Groundwater standards
for inorganics were, however, exceeded in the semi-confining unit,
which is located between the shallow and bedrock aquifers. Since
similar contaminants were also present in Site soils, this
contamination was believed to be Site-related. As a result of these
findings, the ROD called for the extraction and treatment of
contaminated groundwater on an intermittent basis from the semi-
confining unit.
Based upon the results of sampling conducted during the design
phase, it was concluded that the contamination present in the semi-
confining unit is not related to disposal activities at the Site (i.e.,
the contamination is naturally occurring). Based upon these findings,
it was determined the contaminated groundwater would not be extracted
and treated. These above-noted changes to the remedy were documented in
a second ESD, issued in September 2008.
Based on the results of an EPA and NYSDEC pre-final inspection on
September 30, 2008, a Preliminary Close-Out Report was approved on
September 30, 2008.
A Remedial Action (RA) Report was approved by EPA in March 2009.
The RA Report documented that the work was performed in accordance with
the approved design, consistent with the decision documents and that
appropriate construction standards and quality assurance/quality
control procedures were used.
The ROD required the imposition of institutional controls to
restrict the future development/use of the Site where contaminated
sediments and soils were consolidated, prohibit excavation below the
soil cover unless the activities are in accordance with an SMP, and
restrict the use of groundwater. An Environmental Easement effecting
such restrictions was recorded with the Herkimer County Clerk on July
22, 2010.
The ROD called for the development of an SMP to provide for the
proper management of all post-construction remedy components. The SMP
was issued on December 29, 2010.
On September 9, 2010, a final inspection was conducted by EPA and
NYSDEC. Based on the results of this inspection, it has been determined
that the construction for the entire Site had been completed and that
the remedy as implemented was consistent with the ROD, as modified by
the two ESDs.
Monitoring and Maintenance
Post-construction M&M activities at the Site called for in the SMP
are being performed by NYSDEC and the Village of West Winfield. NYSDEC
has entered into a Transfer Agreement (October 13, 2011) with EPA. The
Site maintenance activities will be performed at three areas of the
Site: Upland Area; Wetland Area; and Riverbank Area.
Five-Year Review
Hazardous substances remain at this Site above levels that would
allow for unlimited use and unrestricted exposure. Therefore, pursuant
to CERCLA Section 121(c), EPA is required to conduct a review of the
remedy at least once every five years. The first five-year review will
be performed before May 2013, which is five years following the
initiation of construction.
Community Involvement
Public participation activities for this Site have been satisfied
as required in CERCLA Sections 113(k) and 117, 42 U.S.C. 9613(k) and
9617. As part of the remedy selection process, the public was invited
to comment on the proposed remedy. 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 From the
NCP
All of the completion requirements for this Site have been met, as
described in the September 13, 2011 Final Close-Out Report. The State
of New York, in a September 21, 2011 letter, concurred with the
proposed deletion of this Site from the NPL.
The NCP specifies that EPA may delete a site from the NPL if ``all
[[Page 77392]]
appropriate Fund-financed response under CERCLA has been implemented,
and no further response action by responsible parties is appropriate.''
40 CFR 300.425(e)(1)(ii). EPA, with the concurrence of the State of New
York, through NYSDEC, believes that this criterion for deletion has
been met. Consequently, EPA is deleting this Site from the NPL.
Documents supporting this action are available in the Site files.
V. Deletion Action
EPA, with the concurrence of the State of New York, has determined
that all appropriate responses under CERCLA have been completed and
that no further response actions under CERCLA, other than M&M and five-
year reviews, are necessary. Therefore, EPA is deleting the Site from
the NPL. Because EPA considers this action to be noncontroversial and
routine, EPA is taking this action without prior publication. This
action will be effective February 13, 2012 unless EPA receives adverse
comments by January 12, 2012. If adverse comments are received within
the 30-day public comment period of this 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, if 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 received. In such a case, 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,
Natural resources, Oil pollution, Penalties, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Superfund, Water pollution control, Water
supply.
Dated: November 22, 2011.
Judith A. Enck,
Regional Administrator, EPA, Region 2.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 40 CFR part 300 is amended
as follows:
PART 300--[AMENDED]
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.
0
2. Table 1 of Appendix B to part 300 is amended by removing ``Hiteman
Leather,'' ``West Winfield'', ``NY.''
[FR Doc. 2011-31912 Filed 12-12-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P