National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan; National Priorities List: Partial Deletion of the Novak Sanitary Landfill Superfund Site, 38905-38911 [2019-17017]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 153 / Thursday, August 8, 2019 / Proposed Rules
IV. Proposed Action
The EPA is proposing to approve
Massachusetts’s February 9, 2018
submission of the 2010 SO2 NAAQS as
meeting the interstate transport
requirements of CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). The EPA is soliciting
public comments on the issues
discussed in this notice or on other
relevant matters. These comments will
be considered before taking final action.
Interested parties may participate in the
Federal rulemaking procedure by
submitting written comments to this
proposed rule by following the
instructions listed in the ADDRESSES
section of this Federal Register.
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the
Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the
provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k);
40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP
submissions, the EPA’s role is to
approve state choices, provided that
they meet the criteria of the Clean Air
Act. Accordingly, this proposed action
merely approves state law as meeting
Federal requirements and does not
impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law. For that
reason, this proposed action:
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget under
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• Is not expected to be an Executive
Order 13771 regulatory action because
this action is not significant under
Executive Order 12866;
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:03 Aug 07, 2019
Jkt 247001
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act;
and
• Does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, the SIP is not approved
to apply on any Indian reservation land
or in any other area where the EPA or
an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have
tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Dated: August 5, 2019.
Deborah Szaro,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region
1.
[FR Doc. 2019–17000 Filed 8–7–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 300
[EPA–HQ–SFUND–1989–0011; FRL–9997–
99–Region 3]
National Oil and Hazardous
Substances Pollution Contingency
Plan; National Priorities List: Partial
Deletion of the Novak Sanitary Landfill
Superfund Site
Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of intent.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) Region 3 is issuing a
Notice of Intent to Delete the
groundwater portion of the Novak
Sanitary Landfill Superfund Site (Site)
located in South Whitehall Township,
Pennsylvania, from the National
Priorities List (NPL) and requests public
comments on this proposed action. The
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
38905
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). The EPA and
the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,
through the Pennsylvania Department of
Environmental Protection (PADEP),
have determined that all appropriate
response actions to address the
groundwater portion of the Site, other
than monitoring, operations and
maintenance and Five-Year Reviews
(FYRs), have been completed. However,
this deletion does not preclude future
actions under Superfund.
This partial deletion pertains only to
the groundwater portion of the Site. The
landfill and landfill gas components of
the Site will remain on the NPL and are
not being considered for deletion as part
of this action.
DATES: Comments must be received by
September 9, 2019.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID no. EPA–HQ–
SFUND–1989–0011, 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
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: Remedial Project Manager:
arquines.rombel@epa.gov.
• Mail: Community Involvement
Coordinator: mandell.alexander@
epa.gov.
Rombel Arquines (3SD21), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 3, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, PA 19103–2029.
E:\FR\FM\08AUP1.SGM
08AUP1
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
38906
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 153 / Thursday, August 8, 2019 / Proposed Rules
Alexander Mandell (3RA22), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 3, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, PA 19103–2029.
• Hand delivery: U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 3, 1650 Arch
Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
19103–2029. Such deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket’s normal
hours of operation, and special
arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID no. EPA–HQ–SFUND–1989–
0011. 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 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 email. The
https://www.regulations.gov website is
an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an email comment directly
to EPA without going through 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, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
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 3 Records Center, 1650 Arch
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:37 Aug 07, 2019
Jkt 247001
Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
19103–2029. Business Hours: 8 a.m.–
5 p.m. (by appointment only),
Monday–Friday excluding federal
holidays (215) 814–3157.
Parkland Community Library, 4422
Walbert Ave., Allentown, PA 18104,
Business Hours: Monday–Thursday 9
a.m.–9 p.m.; Friday 9 a.m.–6 p.m.;
Saturday 9 a.m.–1 p.m.; closed
Sunday. (610) 398–1361.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Rombel Arquines, Remedial Project
Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 3, (3SD21), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 3, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103–
2029, (215) 814–3182, arquines.rombel@
epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. NPL Deletion Criteria
III. Deletion Procedures
IV. Basis for Intended Partial Site Deletion
I. Introduction
EPA announces its intent to delete the
groundwater portion of the Novak
Sanitary Landfill Superfund Site (Site),
from the National Priorities List (NPL)
and requests public comment on this
proposed action. The NPL constitutes
Appendix B of 40 CFR part 300 which
is the NCP, which EPA promulgated
pursuant to section 105 of the CERCLA
of 1980, as amended. EPA maintains the
NPL as those 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). This
deletion of the groundwater portion of
the Site is proposed in accordance with
40 CFR 300.425(e) and is consistent
with the Notice of Policy Change: Partial
Deletion of Sites Listed on the National
Priorities List. 60 FR 55466 (Nov. 1,
1995). As described in 300.425(e)(3) of
the NCP, a portion of a site deleted from
the NPL remains eligible for Fundfinanced remedial action if future
conditions warrant such actions.
EPA will accept comments on the
proposal to partially delete this Site for
thirty (30) days after publication of this
document in the Federal Register.
Section II of this document explains
the criteria for deleting sites from the
NPL. Section III discusses procedures
that EPA is using for this action. Section
IV discusses the groundwater portion of
the Site and demonstrates how it meets
the deletion criteria.
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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 Commonwealth,
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 FYRs 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 FYRs
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 groundwater portion of
the Site:
(1) EPA consulted with the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania before
developing this Notice of Intent for
Partial Deletion.
(2) EPA provided the Commonwealth
of Pennsylvania thirty (30) working days
for review of this notice prior to
publication of it today.
(3) In accordance with the criteria
discussed above, EPA has determined
that no further response is appropriate.
(4) The Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania, through the Pennsylvania
Department of Environmental Protection
(PADEP), has concurred with the
deletion of the groundwater portion of
the Site, from the NPL.
(5) Concurrently, with the publication
of this Notice of Intent for Partial
Deletion in the Federal Register, a
E:\FR\FM\08AUP1.SGM
08AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 153 / Thursday, August 8, 2019 / Proposed Rules
notice is being published in a major
local newspaper, the Parkland Press.
The newspaper announces the 30-day
public comment period concerning the
Notice of Intent for Partial Deletion of
the Site from the NPL.
(6) EPA placed copies of documents
supporting the proposed partial deletion
in the deletion docket, made these items
available for public inspection, and
copying at the Site information
repositories identified above.
If comments are received within the
30-day comment period on this
document, EPA will evaluate and
respond accordingly to the comments
before making a final decision to delete
the groundwater portion of the Site. If
necessary, EPA will prepare a
Responsiveness Summary to address
any significant public comments
received. After the public comment
period, if EPA determines it is still
appropriate to delete the groundwater
portion of the Site, the Regional
Administrator will publish a final
Notice of Partial Deletion in the Federal
Register. Public notices, public
submissions and copies of the
Responsiveness Summary, if prepared,
will be made available to interested
parties and included in the site
information repositories listed above.
Deletion of a portion of a site from the
NPL does not itself create, alter, or
revoke any individual’s rights or
obligations. Deletion of a portion of a
site from the NPL does not in any way
alter 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.
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
IV. Basis for Intended Partial Site
Deletion
The following information provides
EPA’s rationale for deleting the
groundwater portion of the Site from the
NPL:
Site Background and History
The Site (EPA ID: PAD079160842) is
located in the northern portion of South
Whitehall Township in Lehigh County,
Pennsylvania. The approximately 65acre parcel is situated on a hillside
north of Jordan Creek and south of
Orefield Road. The Site is separated
from neighboring properties by a steep
drop in elevation to the south and
southwest due to natural topography
and to the buildup of the landfill
disposal areas and storm-water
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:03 Aug 07, 2019
Jkt 247001
management berms. The Beekmantown
Group and Allentown Formation
comprise the aquifer that underlies the
Site. Groundwater mounds in the
bedrock beneath the landfill waste, and
water within the landfill flows radially.
From the mid-1950’s until May 1990,
Novak Sanitary Landfill, Inc. operated
the Site as a landfill for municipal,
commercial, and industrial solid waste.
Alleged permit violations discovered by
the Pennsylvania Department of
Environmental Protection (PADEP) in
1984, then known as the Pennsylvania
Department of Environmental Resources
(PADER), led to a Site Investigation (SI)
by EPA in 1985. The SI identified Siterelated hazardous substances in the
groundwater in proximity to private
residential wells and a public supply
well. Based on the information gathered
in the SI, the Site was proposed to the
National Priorities List (NPL) on January
22, 1987 (52 FR 2492) and added as
final on October 4, 1989 (54 FR 41000).
The historical waste disposal areas of
the landfill include:
• An old surface iron mine
excavation (Old Mine Area) in the
north-central area (approximately 9
acres) containing municipal,
commercial and industrial waste;
• A demolition debris fill area
(Demolition Fill Area) in the northeast
area (approximately 2 acres) containing
municipal and commercial solid waste;
• A Surface Fill Area (including the
East, West and Southwest Trenches)
containing municipal and commercial
solid waste which extends across the
northwestern and central part of the Site
property (approximately 14 acres); and,
• A Trench Fill Area occupying the
southern portion of the Site property
(approximately 9 acres) also containing
municipal and commercial solid waste.
Remedial Investigation and Feasibility
Study (RI/FS)
On January 11, 1989, sixteen
Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs)
entered into an Administrative Order on
Consent with EPA to perform the
Remedial Investigation (RI) and to
prepare the Feasibility Study (FS) for
the Site. The RI/FS report was approved
by EPA on September 30, 1993.
Selected Remedy
The Selected Remedy for the Site was
documented in a September 30, 1993
Record of Decision (1993 ROD) and
modified in a March 13, 2015
Explanation of Significant Differences
(2015 ESD). The Selected Remedy
identified in the 1993 ROD was
comprised of the following components:
• Installation of a perimeter fence
around the Site boundaries;
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
38907
• Implementation of deed restrictions
within the Site boundaries;
• Removal of contaminated landfill
surface water and sediments based on
the results of additional sampling and
environmental risk assessments to be
conducted;
• Installation of landfill surface water
control systems to provide drainage and
to minimize soil erosion throughout the
Site;
• Containment of the landfill contents
by construction of a cap over the entire
waste area, including the Surface Fill,
Trench Fill, Old Surface Iron Mine
Excavation and Demolition Debris Fill
Areas; the constructed cap is a
multilayer, impermeable soil cap with a
geo-synthetic layer.
• Site restoration to promote wildlife
habitat diversity without jeopardizing
the integrity of the cap;
• Installation and monitoring of a gas
collection system that is compatible
with an active gas collection and
treatment system;
• Ongoing leachate collection and
monitoring throughout the Site and
transport of leachate to an approved
wastewater treatment facility by tanker
for disposal;
• Preparation of a contingency
method for on-site leachate treatment
and disposal to surface water if approval
for disposal at an approved wastewater
treatment facility was not obtained;
• Long-term groundwater monitoring
in the vicinity of the Site. Achievement
of background levels or maximum
contaminant levels (MCLs), whichever
is lower, in groundwater. Create a
contingency plan for provision of
drinking water (via residential treatment
units or waterline hookups) to affected
residences. Delineation of the source of
groundwater contamination in the
vicinity of RW–13;
• Operation and Maintenance (O&M)
of the vegetative soil cover, the cap and
the treatment systems (gas venting
system and leachate collection system)
on-site.
The 2015 ESD modified the Selected
Remedy as follows:
• It eliminated the requirement to
continuously remove leachate from the
landfill. Monitoring of the leachate
system will continue and provisions for
removing and treating additional
leachate, if determined to be necessary
by EPA, will remain.
• It eliminated the performance
standard that required continuous
removal of leachate to ensure that
leachate depth in the waste disposal
areas does not exceed one (1) foot.
• It changed the groundwater
performance standard to the lower of
either the MCL codified at 40 CFR part
E:\FR\FM\08AUP1.SGM
08AUP1
38908
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 153 / Thursday, August 8, 2019 / Proposed Rules
141 and promulgated pursuant to the
Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C. 300f,
et seq. or the non-zero maximum
contaminant level goal (MCLG) for that
contaminant. The ESD also modified the
groundwater performance standard by
including the requirement that, in
addition to MCLs and non-zero MCLGs
being achieved, the cumulative risk
presented by all remaining Site-related
compounds in the groundwater at the
conclusion of the Selected Remedy must
be at or below the 1 × 10¥4 cancer risk
level, and the non-cancer Hazard Index
(HI) must be less than or equal to 1 for
four consecutive quarters.
The Remedial Action Objectives
(RAOs) for the Site as established in the
1993 ROD were as follows:
• Landfill Contents
—Prevent direct contact to exposed
landfill contents;
• Leachate
—Prevent direct contact to the leachate
seeps on the landfill surface;
—Reduce the leaching of constituents
from the landfill contents to the
groundwater;
• Landfill Gas
—Control subsurface off-site migration
of landfill gas;
—Control combustible gas
concentrations;
• Groundwater
—Prevent human ingestion and
inhalation of groundwater containing
Site-related constituents in excess of
federal MCLs or Pennsylvania Water
Quality Criteria;
—Prevent human ingestion and
inhalation of groundwater which
would present excess lifetime cancer
risks greater than 1 × 10¥4 or hazard
indices greater than one (1);
—Remediate groundwater to
background levels;
• On-Site Surface Water
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
—Remediate altered surface water
quality exhibiting excess lifetime
cancer risks greater than 1 × 10¥4 or
hazard indices greater than one (1);
—Prevent contact of surface water with
landfill contents;
—Control surface water runoff and
erosion;
• Ecological Receptors
—Conduct chronic toxicity studies
(through environmental risk
assessments) to determine if low
levels of contamination may cause
ecological impairment; and,
• Jordan Creek
—Based upon the analytical results of
sediment samples taken from Jordan
Creek, and an evaluation of
groundwater and surface flow
characteristics, it was determined that
the conditions of Jordan Creek
downstream of the landfill are
consistent with conditions upstream
of the landfill, or background
conditions. Since inorganic sediment
samples did not indicate that the
creek was altered by surface water
run-off from the Site, a determination
was made that no further
investigation of the creek was
necessary.
Response Actions
Pursuant to a June 30, 1995 Unilateral
Administrative Order for Remedial
Design/Remedial Action (Docket No.
III–95–52–DC), the PRP group
developed a Remedial Design Report
that was approved by EPA on July 16,
1999. The PRPs initiated construction of
the Selected Remedy on June 5, 2000.
The final inspection was completed on
August 29, 2002 and construction
completion for the Site was documented
in the Preliminary Close-Out Report
(PCOR), dated September 17, 2002. EPA
approved the PRP Remedial Action
Completion Report on July 13, 2004.
The following Remedial Action (RA)
activities were implemented by the PRP
group according to the EPA-approved
RD specifications:
• Installation of a perimeter fence
around the Site boundaries;
• Installation of a multi-layered
impermeable cap over the entire waste
area;
• Removal of contaminated on-site
surface water and sediments based on
results of additional sampling and
environmental risk assessments;
• Installation of surface water control
systems to provide drainage and to
minimize soil erosion throughout the
Site which includes four sediment
ponds, spillways, drainage swales,
diversion berms, and a discharge line
for surface waters to Jordan Creek;
• Site restoration to promote wildlife
habitat diversity including planting
wetland plant species within and
around the sediment ponds;
• Installation and monitoring of a
passive gas collection system that is
compatible with an active gas collection
and treatment system (if future data
indicates it is needed); and
• Ongoing leachate collection and
monitoring throughout the Site and
transport of leachate through a series of
sixteen extraction wells and three main
leachate collection lines to a 100,000gallon collection tank, and a pump
house and tanker truck pad for
transportation of the collected leachate
to the Allentown wastewater treatment
facility for disposal.
As required by the 1993 ROD, an
investigation of the former well RW–13
was performed by the PRP group in
March 1999 as part of a pre-design
investigation to determine the source of
contamination in groundwater. A soil
vapor contamination assessment was
conducted to assess the potential source
of constituents detected in the former
well RW–13, as well as to aid in locating
additional monitoring wells. Two new
monitoring wells, MW–24 and MW–25,
were installed and analyzed after the
soil vapor contamination assessment.
These wells were placed to hydrogeologically isolate the maintenance
area, a potential source area of
contamination. It was concluded that
the type and concentrations of
constituents found in the bedrock wells
MW–24 and MW–25 are consistent with
the nature of impacted groundwater
historically found in well RW–13, as
well as other monitoring wells. No
additional source area was identified.
Long-term monitoring of Site
monitoring wells and nearby residential
wells has been performed since 2000.
Cleanup Levels
The 1993 ROD performance standard
requiring continuous removal of
leachate from the landfill to a depth of
one foot was eliminated by the 2015
ESD. The groundwater cleanup levels
for the COCs identified in the 1993
ROD, as modified in the 2015 ESD, are
identified below in Table 1.
TABLE 1—GROUNDWATER CLEANUP LEVELS FOR SITE CONTAMINANTS OF CONCERN
MCL
(ug/L) *
Contaminant of concern
Organics:
benzene ......................................................................................................................................................
bromodichloromethane ...............................................................................................................................
chlorobenzene ............................................................................................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:03 Aug 07, 2019
Jkt 247001
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\08AUP1.SGM
08AUP1
Non-zero MCLG
(ug/L) *
5
80
100
..............................
..............................
100
38909
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 153 / Thursday, August 8, 2019 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 1—GROUNDWATER CLEANUP LEVELS FOR SITE CONTAMINANTS OF CONCERN—Continued
MCL
(ug/L) *
Contaminant of concern
chloroform ...................................................................................................................................................
dibromochloromethane ...............................................................................................................................
1,4-dichlorobenzene ...................................................................................................................................
1,1-dichloroethane ......................................................................................................................................
1,2-dichloroethane ......................................................................................................................................
1,1-dichloroethene ......................................................................................................................................
1,2-dichloroethene (cis) ..............................................................................................................................
1,2-dichloroethene (trans) ..........................................................................................................................
1,2-dichloropropane ....................................................................................................................................
1,3-dichloropropene (trans) ........................................................................................................................
ethyl benzene .............................................................................................................................................
toluene ........................................................................................................................................................
tetrachloroethene ........................................................................................................................................
1,1,1-trichloroethane ...................................................................................................................................
trichloroethylene .........................................................................................................................................
vinyl chloride ...............................................................................................................................................
xylene (total) ...............................................................................................................................................
Inorganics:
Cadmium ....................................................................................................................................................
Beryllium .....................................................................................................................................................
Non-zero MCLG
(ug/L) *
80
80
75
(**)
5
7
70
100
5
(**)
700
1,000
5
200
5
2
10,000
70
60
75
(**)
..............................
7
70
100
..............................
(**)
700
1,000
..............................
200
..............................
..............................
10,000
5
4
5
4
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
‘‘.....’’ Non-zero MCLGs are not available for these site-related compounds.
* Values in bold are the selected performance standard.
** These site-related compounds do not have MCLs or non-zero MCLGs but were included in the cumulative risk assessment.
The PRP group samples 13 monitoring
wells on an annual basis for the
compounds listed in Table 1, above.
Groundwater COC concentrations at all
sampling locations have been below the
cleanup levels for all COCs since 2004.
Additionally, in accordance with the
2015 ESD, EPA performed a cumulative
risk assessment using the four most
recent annual groundwater sampling
results from 2015 through 2018. The
2015 ESD specifies that the cumulative
risk assessment be performed using data
from four consecutive quarters. Since
groundwater at the Site is monitored
annually, rather than quarterly, EPA
conservatively performed the risk
assessment based upon four years,
rather than four quarters, of monitoring
data. Groundwater COC concentrations
were compared to EPA Tap Water Risk
Screening Level (RSLs) and if the RSL
was exceeded, a risk assessment was
performed. Chlorobenzene, 1,2dichloroethane, TCE, and vinyl chloride
exceeded their respective RSLs in the
2015–2018 dataset at a limited number
of wells. However, when risks were
calculated for these chemicals assuming
a conservative default future residential
exposure (ingestion, dermal exposure,
and inhalation from showering exposure
routes), the cumulative non-cancer HIs
were below 1 and the cumulative cancer
risks were below 1 × 10¥4 at each
monitoring well.
Based on the results of the annual
groundwater monitoring and the
cumulative risk assessment, the
groundwater cleanup levels and
performance standards have been
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:03 Aug 07, 2019
Jkt 247001
achieved and the groundwater portion
of the Site is eligible for deletion from
the NPL.
Operation and Maintenance
O&M activities of the remediation
system are being performed by the PRP
group in accordance with the
requirements of the 1995 UAO. Ongoing
O&M activities include operation,
maintenance, and monitoring of the
Landfill cap and passive gas vent
system, groundwater and residential
well monitoring, and stormwater
management. The PRP group also
historically performed O&M of the
leachate extraction system before it was
decommissioned in 2011.
Landfill Cap
Vegetative cover at the Landfill is
maintained by a cutting program. The
entire Site is mowed three times per
year. Wetland areas, vegetated with the
specified wetland seed, are not mowed.
Other cover vegetation maintenance
measures include removal of trees,
saplings, shrubs, weeds, and other
plants that may cause damage to the cap
system. The cap is also re-seeded where
bare spots occur. Soil ruts, channels,
washouts, animal burrows or other
erosion greater than six inches deep are
repaired. Repairs to the cap geosynthetics and the on-site gravel road
are completed, as necessary. Landfill
cap maintenance is documented in
monthly progress reports to EPA.
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Landfill Gas Monitoring System
Quarterly gas monitoring is performed
at 14 gas monitoring points located
outside the perimeter of the Landfill
cap, and 12 residences to ensure that
measured concentrations of combustible
gases remain below the lower explosive
limit (LEL). The collected information
includes flow, percent LEL, percent
oxygen, and concentrations of VOCs,
methane, carbon monoxide, and
hydrogen sulfide in parts per million.
Since the leachate extraction system
was decommissioned, including the
pump house electrical systems, the
pump house is primarily used as storage
and gas monitoring in the pump house
is unnecessary.
The basements of 12 residences
adjacent to the Site are monitored on a
quarterly basis for the percent LEL and
percent oxygen as well as total VOCs
(TVOCs). Because the sampling method
cannot distinguish specific VOCs, it
cannot be the sole line of evidence used
to determine if the measured TVOCs are
from the Landfill or from household
chemicals/solvents being used in the
residences. In 2007–2008, a three-phase
investigation addressed the concern that
TVOCs detections in the monitoring
results could be caused by gas migration
from the Site. EPA concluded that the
occasional TVOC results in the
residential sampling were not Siterelated and that further vapor intrusion
mitigation action was not warranted at
the Site. In the past five years, there
have been no detections above the LEL
and no detections of TVOC COCs above
E:\FR\FM\08AUP1.SGM
08AUP1
38910
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 153 / Thursday, August 8, 2019 / Proposed Rules
screening levels in any of the quarterly
residential air monitoring samples.
A passive gas collection system was
installed within the Landfill limits to
collect and vent accumulated gases in
the Surface Fill, Trench Fill, Demolition
Fill, and Old Mine areas and to control
gas migration. Additionally, 14 gas
monitoring points (GMPs) were
installed along the perimeter of the
Landfill boundary. These passive gas
points were installed to serve two
purposes: (1) To intercept the potential
migration of subsurface Landfill gas offsite, and (2) to monitor the effectiveness
of the Landfill gas venting system. In
addition, residential indoor air
monitoring occurs quarterly. Since the
installation of two pairs of passive gas
vents in 2007, only three GMPs, GMP–
3, GMP–7, and GMP–8, have had
detections above the LEL of methane.
Quarterly monitoring of the on-site
GMPs and residential properties will
continue to be performed by the PRP
group.
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Leachate Extraction Wells
As indicated above, the leachate
collection system was decommissioned
in 2011. The leachate collection system
was intended to remove accumulated
leachate present beneath the Landfill as
a singular event, prior to the
construction of the cap. It
accommodated leachate extraction from
21 pumping leachate extraction/gas
venting wells (eventually optimized
down to eight producing wells) at a
combined maximum design flow rate of
63 gallons per minute. Extracted
leachate was temporarily stored in an
aboveground 100,000-gallon tank within
a lined containment berm prior to
transfer to the local Publicly Owned
Treatment Works for disposal via tanker
trucks. No leachate was pumped during
the second leachate pilot (2009–2011),
which tested the effects of shutting
down the entire leachate system, or after
EPA determined that the pilot provided
sufficient evidence to discontinue
pumping. The total cumulative volume
of leachate that was removed from the
Landfill since the leachate collection
system’s construction in 2002 was
304,481 gallons, including the final
shipment in December 2011 of 72,000
gallons remaining in the tank before it
was decommissioned.
Groundwater and Residential Well
Monitoring
Designated Landfill monitoring wells
are monitored annually to evaluate
concentrations of the Landfill-related
contaminants of concern relative to the
performance standards specified in the
1993 ROD. Various residential wells in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:03 Aug 07, 2019
Jkt 247001
close proximity to the Site are sampled
quarterly and one community supply
well is sampled annually to confirm that
the drinking water quality at the point
of use remains below MCLs for drinking
water. No groundwater COCs have been
detected in site monitoring wells or
residential wells since 2004. The
monitoring wells and residential wells
will continue to be monitored on an
annual basis by the PRP group.
Storm-Water Management
The Site is graded to provide drainage
off the cap, and to minimize soil erosion
in accordance with the 1993 ROD
requirements. The final design for the
Site included a conversion of three
existing sedimentation ponds into
storm-water management basins. In
addition to their dewatering devices, the
basins have an overflow outlet structure
or spillway, which helps dissipate any
flow that leaves the basin through these
structures. Additional storm-water
management components include
diversion berms and rip-rap lined
drainage swales. Quarterly inspections
are performed to evaluate the
performance and maintenance needs of
the storm-water management system.
Institutional Controls
Institutional Controls (ICs) were
required by the 1993 ROD to prohibit:
(1) The use of the land for residential or
agricultural purposes; and (2) the use of
on-site ground water for domestic
purposes, including drinking water. The
purpose of these restrictions is to
prevent excavation or construction on
the capped and closed Landfill, and to
prevent the risks associated with human
exposure to landfill contents, leachate
and groundwater.
To fulfill the IC requirements in the
1993 ROD, a Uniform Environmental
Covenant Act (UECA) covenant was
recorded with the Lehigh County
Recorder of Deeds on July 28, 2011. The
Site property is currently owned by
Novak Sanitary Landfill, Inc. Pursuant
to the 2011 UECA Covenant, the PRP
group has the authority to enforce the
ICs at the Site property. The PRP group
is responsible for monitoring
compliance with the ICs, in accordance
with the requirements of the 1995 UAO.
Five-Year Review
Pursuant to CERCLA section 121(c)
and as provided in the current guidance
on FYRs Comprehensive Five-Year
Review Guidance, OSWER Directive
9355.7–03B–P, June 2001, EPA must
conduct a statutory FYR if hazardous
substances remain on-site above levels
that would not allow for unlimited use
and unrestricted exposure. EPA has
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
performed three FYRs at the Site in
2006, 2011, and 2016 and statutory
FYRs will continue to be performed
because waste is left in place at the Site.
The next FYR will be completed by May
16, 2021.
The Third FYR (signed May 16, 2016)
concluded that the Site is protective of
human health and the environment but
identified one issue and
recommendation that does not impact
current or future protectiveness. The
FYR recommended that an ecological
investigation of the Site be performed to
modify the O&M plan to meet the 1993
ROD’s goal of promoting wildlife
diversity.
The recommended ecological
inspection was conducted on June 12,
2017 and potential solutions to promote
wildlife habitat diversity were explored.
Minor revisions to the O&M plan were
completed in September 2018.
Community Involvement
In accordance with the requirements
of 40 CFR 300.425(e)(4), EPA’s
community involvement activities
associated with this partial deletion will
consist of information supporting the
deletion docket in the local Site
information repository and placing a
public notice of EPA’s intent to delete
the groundwater portion of the Site from
the NPL in the Parkland Press, a major,
local newspaper of general circulation.
Determination That the Site Meets the
Criteria for Deletion in the NCP
Construction of the Selected Remedy
for groundwater at the Site has been
completed and O&M has been
performed and is still ongoing in
accordance with the EPA-approved
O&M Plans. All RAOs, performance
standards, and cleanup levels
established for groundwater at the Site
in the 1993 ROD, as amended by the
2015 ESD, have been achieved and the
Selected Remedy for groundwater is
protective of human health and the
environment. No further Superfund
response actions for the groundwater
portion of the Site, other than O&M,
monitoring, and FYRs, are necessary to
protect human health and the
environment. The Landfill and Landfill
gas components of the Site will be
considered for deletion from the NPL
when all RAOs, performance standards,
and cleanup levels have been achieved
for those components.
The procedures specified in 40 CFR
300.425(e) have been followed for the
deletion of the groundwater portion of
the Site. EPA, with concurrence of the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
through PADEP, has determined that all
appropriate response actions under
E:\FR\FM\08AUP1.SGM
08AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 153 / Thursday, August 8, 2019 / Proposed Rules
CERCLA have been completed for the
groundwater portion of the Site.
Therefore, EPA proposes to delete the
groundwater portion of the Site from the
NPL.
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.
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.
Dated: July 31, 2019.
Cosmo Servidio,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 3.
[FR Doc. 2019–17017 Filed 8–7–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
49 CFR Part 576
[Docket No. NHTSA–2019–0035]
RIN 2127–AL81
Record Retention Requirement;
Proposed Rule; Correction
National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Proposed rule; correction
AGENCY:
The National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA)
published a document in the Federal
Register of May 15, 2019, proposing
changes to NHTSA’s records retention
requirements. The document contained
outdated information that is now being
updated along with other minor
corrections.
SUMMARY:
August 8, 2019.
You may submit written
comments to the docket number
identified in the heading of this
document by any of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
online instructions for submitting
comments.
• Mail: Docket Management Facility,
U.S. Department of Transportation,
West Building Ground Floor, Rm. W12–
140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590.
DATES:
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
ADDRESSES:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:03 Aug 07, 2019
Jkt 247001
• Hand Delivery or Courier: U.S.
Department of Transportation, West
Building Ground Floor, Rm. W12–140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590 between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m. ET, Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
• Fax: (202) 493–2251.
Regardless of how you submit your
comments, please be sure you mention
the docket number of this document
located at the top of this notice in your
correspondence.
You may call the Docket at 202–366–
9826.
Note that all comments received will
be posted without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. Please
see the Privacy Act discussion below.
Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search
the electronic form of all comments
received into our dockets by the name
of the individual submitting the
comment (or signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may
review DOT’s complete Privacy Act
Statement, in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000. 65 FR
19477–78.
Confidential Information: If you wish
to submit any information under a claim
of confidentiality, you should submit
two copies of your complete
submission, including the information
you claim to be confidential business
information, and one copy with the
claimed confidential business
information deleted from the document,
to the Chief Counsel, NHTSA, at the
address given below under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT. In addition, you
should submit two copies, from which
you have deleted the claimed
confidential business information, to
Docket Management at the address
given above under ADDRESSES. When
you send a comment containing
information claimed to be confidential
business information, you should follow
the procedures set forth in 49 CFR part
512 and include a cover letter setting
forth the information specified in our
confidential business information
regulation. 49 CFR part 512.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments received, go to https://
www.regulations.gov and follow the
online instructions for accessing the
dockets or go to the street address listed
above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Thomas Healy, Trial Attorney, Office of
the Chief Counsel, National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC
20590 (telephone: 202–366–2992).
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
38911
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Correction
This notice is to correct citations
included in a notice of proposed
rulemaking published in the Federal
Register on May 15, 2019, on
amendments to the record retention
requirements (84 FR 21741). NHTSA is
correcting the following text in the
Federal Register Document Number
2019–09844.
On page 21741, in first paragraph of
the third column, correct ‘‘we have
determined that a ten-year records
retention requirement would ensure that
the agency’s investigative needs are
meet without unnecessarily burdening
manufacturers of motor vehicles and
equipment.’’ to ‘‘we have determined
that a ten-year records retention
requirement would ensure that the
agency’s investigative needs are met
without unnecessarily burdening
manufacturers of motor vehicles and
equipment.’’
On page 21742, in the third paragraph
of the second column, correct ‘‘The
average age of the United States light
vehicle fleet has been trending upward
reaching 11.6 years in 2016’’ to ‘‘The
average age of the United States light
vehicle fleet has been trending upward
reaching 11.7 years in 2017.’’
Again on page 21742, correct
corresponding footnote 2 ‘‘Vehicles
Getting Older: Average Age of Light Cars
and Trucks in U.S. Rises Again in 2016
to 11.6 Years, HIS Markit Says, IHS
Markit (Nov. 22, 2016), https://
news.ihsmarkit.com/press-release/
automotive/vehicles-getting-olderaverage-age-lightcars-and-trucks-usrises-again-201 (last visited Sept. 19,
2018)’’ to ‘‘America’s Cars and Trucks
are Getting Older, Business Insider
(Aug. 22, 2018), https://
www.businessinsider.com/americascars-and-trucks-are-getting-older-2018-8
(last visited April 26, 2019).’’
Yet again on page 21742, correct
footnote 3, ‘‘Average Age of
Automobiles and Trucks in Use, 1970–
1999, Fed. Highway Admin., https://
www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/onh00/
line3.htm (last visited Sept. 19, 2018).
From 1977 to 2017 the average of
medium and heavy duty trucks
increased from 11.6 years to 17.3 years
and the average age of recreational
vehicles increased from 4.5 years to 15.8
years. See Average Age of Automobiles
and Trucks in Operation in the United
States, Bureau of Transp. Statistics,
https://www.bts.gov/content/averageage-automobiles-and-trucks-operationunited-states (last visited Sept. 19,
2018).’’ to ‘‘Average Age of Automobiles
and Trucks in Use, 1970–1999, Fed.
E:\FR\FM\08AUP1.SGM
08AUP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 153 (Thursday, August 8, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 38905-38911]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-17017]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 300
[EPA-HQ-SFUND-1989-0011; FRL-9997-99-Region 3]
National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan;
National Priorities List: Partial Deletion of the Novak Sanitary
Landfill Superfund Site
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of intent.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 3 is issuing
a Notice of Intent to Delete the groundwater portion of the Novak
Sanitary Landfill Superfund Site (Site) located in South Whitehall
Township, Pennsylvania, from the National Priorities List (NPL) and
requests public comments on this proposed action. 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). The EPA and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,
through the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection
(PADEP), have determined that all appropriate response actions to
address the groundwater portion of the Site, other than monitoring,
operations and maintenance and Five-Year Reviews (FYRs), have been
completed. However, this deletion does not preclude future actions
under Superfund.
This partial deletion pertains only to the groundwater portion of
the Site. The landfill and landfill gas components of the Site will
remain on the NPL and are not being considered for deletion as part of
this action.
DATES: Comments must be received by September 9, 2019.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID no. EPA-HQ-
SFUND-1989-0011, 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 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: Remedial Project Manager: [email protected].
Mail: Community Involvement Coordinator:
[email protected].
Rombel Arquines (3SD21), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region
3, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029.
[[Page 38906]]
Alexander Mandell (3RA22), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region
3, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029.
Hand delivery: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 3, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103-2029. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID no. EPA-HQ-SFUND-
1989-0011. 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
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 email. The https://www.regulations.gov website is
an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an email comment directly to EPA without
going through 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, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be 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 3 Records Center, 1650
Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103-2029. Business Hours: 8
a.m.-5 p.m. (by appointment only), Monday-Friday excluding federal
holidays (215) 814-3157.
Parkland Community Library, 4422 Walbert Ave., Allentown, PA 18104,
Business Hours: Monday-Thursday 9 a.m.-9 p.m.; Friday 9 a.m.-6 p.m.;
Saturday 9 a.m.-1 p.m.; closed Sunday. (610) 398-1361.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rombel Arquines, Remedial Project
Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 3, (3SD21), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 3, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103-2029, (215) 814-3182,
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. NPL Deletion Criteria
III. Deletion Procedures
IV. Basis for Intended Partial Site Deletion
I. Introduction
EPA announces its intent to delete the groundwater portion of the
Novak Sanitary Landfill Superfund Site (Site), from the National
Priorities List (NPL) and requests public comment on this proposed
action. The NPL constitutes Appendix B of 40 CFR part 300 which is the
NCP, which EPA promulgated pursuant to section 105 of the CERCLA of
1980, as amended. EPA maintains the NPL as those 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). This deletion of
the groundwater portion of the Site is proposed in accordance with 40
CFR 300.425(e) and is consistent with the Notice of Policy Change:
Partial Deletion of Sites Listed on the National Priorities List. 60 FR
55466 (Nov. 1, 1995). As described in 300.425(e)(3) of the NCP, a
portion of a site deleted from the NPL remains eligible for Fund-
financed remedial action if future conditions warrant such actions.
EPA will accept comments on the proposal to partially delete this
Site for thirty (30) days after publication of this document in the
Federal Register.
Section II of this document explains the criteria for deleting
sites from the NPL. Section III discusses procedures that EPA is using
for this action. Section IV discusses the groundwater portion of the
Site and demonstrates how it meets the deletion criteria.
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 Commonwealth, 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 FYRs 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 FYRs 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 groundwater
portion of the Site:
(1) EPA consulted with the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania before
developing this Notice of Intent for Partial Deletion.
(2) EPA provided the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania thirty (30)
working days for review of this notice prior to publication of it
today.
(3) In accordance with the criteria discussed above, EPA has
determined that no further response is appropriate.
(4) The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, through the Pennsylvania
Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP), has concurred with the
deletion of the groundwater portion of the Site, from the NPL.
(5) Concurrently, with the publication of this Notice of Intent for
Partial Deletion in the Federal Register, a
[[Page 38907]]
notice is being published in a major local newspaper, the Parkland
Press. The newspaper announces the 30-day public comment period
concerning the Notice of Intent for Partial Deletion of the Site from
the NPL.
(6) EPA placed copies of documents supporting the proposed partial
deletion in the deletion docket, made these items available for public
inspection, and copying at the Site information repositories identified
above.
If comments are received within the 30-day comment period on this
document, EPA will evaluate and respond accordingly to the comments
before making a final decision to delete the groundwater portion of the
Site. If necessary, EPA will prepare a Responsiveness Summary to
address any significant public comments received. After the public
comment period, if EPA determines it is still appropriate to delete the
groundwater portion of the Site, the Regional Administrator will
publish a final Notice of Partial Deletion in the Federal Register.
Public notices, public submissions and copies of the Responsiveness
Summary, if prepared, will be made available to interested parties and
included in the site information repositories listed above.
Deletion of a portion of a site from the NPL does not itself
create, alter, or revoke any individual's rights or obligations.
Deletion of a portion of a site from the NPL does not in any way alter
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 Intended Partial Site Deletion
The following information provides EPA's rationale for deleting the
groundwater portion of the Site from the NPL:
Site Background and History
The Site (EPA ID: PAD079160842) is located in the northern portion
of South Whitehall Township in Lehigh County, Pennsylvania. The
approximately 65-acre parcel is situated on a hillside north of Jordan
Creek and south of Orefield Road. The Site is separated from
neighboring properties by a steep drop in elevation to the south and
southwest due to natural topography and to the buildup of the landfill
disposal areas and storm-water management berms. The Beekmantown Group
and Allentown Formation comprise the aquifer that underlies the Site.
Groundwater mounds in the bedrock beneath the landfill waste, and water
within the landfill flows radially.
From the mid-1950's until May 1990, Novak Sanitary Landfill, Inc.
operated the Site as a landfill for municipal, commercial, and
industrial solid waste. Alleged permit violations discovered by the
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP) in 1984,
then known as the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources
(PADER), led to a Site Investigation (SI) by EPA in 1985. The SI
identified Site-related hazardous substances in the groundwater in
proximity to private residential wells and a public supply well. Based
on the information gathered in the SI, the Site was proposed to the
National Priorities List (NPL) on January 22, 1987 (52 FR 2492) and
added as final on October 4, 1989 (54 FR 41000).
The historical waste disposal areas of the landfill include:
An old surface iron mine excavation (Old Mine Area) in the
north-central area (approximately 9 acres) containing municipal,
commercial and industrial waste;
A demolition debris fill area (Demolition Fill Area) in
the northeast area (approximately 2 acres) containing municipal and
commercial solid waste;
A Surface Fill Area (including the East, West and
Southwest Trenches) containing municipal and commercial solid waste
which extends across the northwestern and central part of the Site
property (approximately 14 acres); and,
A Trench Fill Area occupying the southern portion of the
Site property (approximately 9 acres) also containing municipal and
commercial solid waste.
Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/FS)
On January 11, 1989, sixteen Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs)
entered into an Administrative Order on Consent with EPA to perform the
Remedial Investigation (RI) and to prepare the Feasibility Study (FS)
for the Site. The RI/FS report was approved by EPA on September 30,
1993.
Selected Remedy
The Selected Remedy for the Site was documented in a September 30,
1993 Record of Decision (1993 ROD) and modified in a March 13, 2015
Explanation of Significant Differences (2015 ESD). The Selected Remedy
identified in the 1993 ROD was comprised of the following components:
Installation of a perimeter fence around the Site
boundaries;
Implementation of deed restrictions within the Site
boundaries;
Removal of contaminated landfill surface water and
sediments based on the results of additional sampling and environmental
risk assessments to be conducted;
Installation of landfill surface water control systems to
provide drainage and to minimize soil erosion throughout the Site;
Containment of the landfill contents by construction of a
cap over the entire waste area, including the Surface Fill, Trench
Fill, Old Surface Iron Mine Excavation and Demolition Debris Fill
Areas; the constructed cap is a multilayer, impermeable soil cap with a
geo-synthetic layer.
Site restoration to promote wildlife habitat diversity
without jeopardizing the integrity of the cap;
Installation and monitoring of a gas collection system
that is compatible with an active gas collection and treatment system;
Ongoing leachate collection and monitoring throughout the
Site and transport of leachate to an approved wastewater treatment
facility by tanker for disposal;
Preparation of a contingency method for on-site leachate
treatment and disposal to surface water if approval for disposal at an
approved wastewater treatment facility was not obtained;
Long-term groundwater monitoring in the vicinity of the
Site. Achievement of background levels or maximum contaminant levels
(MCLs), whichever is lower, in groundwater. Create a contingency plan
for provision of drinking water (via residential treatment units or
waterline hookups) to affected residences. Delineation of the source of
groundwater contamination in the vicinity of RW-13;
Operation and Maintenance (O&M) of the vegetative soil
cover, the cap and the treatment systems (gas venting system and
leachate collection system) on-site.
The 2015 ESD modified the Selected Remedy as follows:
It eliminated the requirement to continuously remove
leachate from the landfill. Monitoring of the leachate system will
continue and provisions for removing and treating additional leachate,
if determined to be necessary by EPA, will remain.
It eliminated the performance standard that required
continuous removal of leachate to ensure that leachate depth in the
waste disposal areas does not exceed one (1) foot.
It changed the groundwater performance standard to the
lower of either the MCL codified at 40 CFR part
[[Page 38908]]
141 and promulgated pursuant to the Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C.
300f, et seq. or the non-zero maximum contaminant level goal (MCLG) for
that contaminant. The ESD also modified the groundwater performance
standard by including the requirement that, in addition to MCLs and
non-zero MCLGs being achieved, the cumulative risk presented by all
remaining Site-related compounds in the groundwater at the conclusion
of the Selected Remedy must be at or below the 1 x 10-4
cancer risk level, and the non-cancer Hazard Index (HI) must be less
than or equal to 1 for four consecutive quarters.
The Remedial Action Objectives (RAOs) for the Site as established
in the 1993 ROD were as follows:
Landfill Contents
--Prevent direct contact to exposed landfill contents;
Leachate
--Prevent direct contact to the leachate seeps on the landfill surface;
--Reduce the leaching of constituents from the landfill contents to the
groundwater;
Landfill Gas
--Control subsurface off-site migration of landfill gas;
--Control combustible gas concentrations;
Groundwater
--Prevent human ingestion and inhalation of groundwater containing
Site-related constituents in excess of federal MCLs or Pennsylvania
Water Quality Criteria;
--Prevent human ingestion and inhalation of groundwater which would
present excess lifetime cancer risks greater than 1 x 10-4
or hazard indices greater than one (1);
--Remediate groundwater to background levels;
On-Site Surface Water
--Remediate altered surface water quality exhibiting excess lifetime
cancer risks greater than 1 x 10-4 or hazard indices greater
than one (1);
--Prevent contact of surface water with landfill contents;
--Control surface water runoff and erosion;
Ecological Receptors
--Conduct chronic toxicity studies (through environmental risk
assessments) to determine if low levels of contamination may cause
ecological impairment; and,
Jordan Creek
--Based upon the analytical results of sediment samples taken from
Jordan Creek, and an evaluation of groundwater and surface flow
characteristics, it was determined that the conditions of Jordan Creek
downstream of the landfill are consistent with conditions upstream of
the landfill, or background conditions. Since inorganic sediment
samples did not indicate that the creek was altered by surface water
run-off from the Site, a determination was made that no further
investigation of the creek was necessary.
Response Actions
Pursuant to a June 30, 1995 Unilateral Administrative Order for
Remedial Design/Remedial Action (Docket No. III-95-52-DC), the PRP
group developed a Remedial Design Report that was approved by EPA on
July 16, 1999. The PRPs initiated construction of the Selected Remedy
on June 5, 2000. The final inspection was completed on August 29, 2002
and construction completion for the Site was documented in the
Preliminary Close-Out Report (PCOR), dated September 17, 2002. EPA
approved the PRP Remedial Action Completion Report on July 13, 2004.
The following Remedial Action (RA) activities were implemented by the
PRP group according to the EPA-approved RD specifications:
Installation of a perimeter fence around the Site
boundaries;
Installation of a multi-layered impermeable cap over the
entire waste area;
Removal of contaminated on-site surface water and
sediments based on results of additional sampling and environmental
risk assessments;
Installation of surface water control systems to provide
drainage and to minimize soil erosion throughout the Site which
includes four sediment ponds, spillways, drainage swales, diversion
berms, and a discharge line for surface waters to Jordan Creek;
Site restoration to promote wildlife habitat diversity
including planting wetland plant species within and around the sediment
ponds;
Installation and monitoring of a passive gas collection
system that is compatible with an active gas collection and treatment
system (if future data indicates it is needed); and
Ongoing leachate collection and monitoring throughout the
Site and transport of leachate through a series of sixteen extraction
wells and three main leachate collection lines to a 100,000-gallon
collection tank, and a pump house and tanker truck pad for
transportation of the collected leachate to the Allentown wastewater
treatment facility for disposal.
As required by the 1993 ROD, an investigation of the former well
RW-13 was performed by the PRP group in March 1999 as part of a pre-
design investigation to determine the source of contamination in
groundwater. A soil vapor contamination assessment was conducted to
assess the potential source of constituents detected in the former well
RW-13, as well as to aid in locating additional monitoring wells. Two
new monitoring wells, MW-24 and MW-25, were installed and analyzed
after the soil vapor contamination assessment. These wells were placed
to hydro-geologically isolate the maintenance area, a potential source
area of contamination. It was concluded that the type and
concentrations of constituents found in the bedrock wells MW-24 and MW-
25 are consistent with the nature of impacted groundwater historically
found in well RW-13, as well as other monitoring wells. No additional
source area was identified. Long-term monitoring of Site monitoring
wells and nearby residential wells has been performed since 2000.
Cleanup Levels
The 1993 ROD performance standard requiring continuous removal of
leachate from the landfill to a depth of one foot was eliminated by the
2015 ESD. The groundwater cleanup levels for the COCs identified in the
1993 ROD, as modified in the 2015 ESD, are identified below in Table 1.
Table 1--Groundwater Cleanup Levels for Site Contaminants of Concern
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-zero MCLG (ug/
Contaminant of concern MCL (ug/L) * L) *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Organics:
benzene.................................................................. 5 .................
bromodichloromethane..................................................... 80 .................
chlorobenzene............................................................ 100 100
[[Page 38909]]
chloroform............................................................... 80 70
dibromochloromethane..................................................... 80 60
1,4-dichlorobenzene...................................................... 75 75
1,1-dichloroethane....................................................... (**) (**)
1,2-dichloroethane....................................................... 5 .................
1,1-dichloroethene....................................................... 7 7
1,2-dichloroethene (cis)................................................. 70 70
1,2-dichloroethene (trans)............................................... 100 100
1,2-dichloropropane...................................................... 5 .................
1,3-dichloropropene (trans).............................................. (**) (**)
ethyl benzene............................................................ 700 700
toluene.................................................................. 1,000 1,000
tetrachloroethene........................................................ 5 .................
1,1,1-trichloroethane.................................................... 200 200
trichloroethylene........................................................ 5 .................
vinyl chloride........................................................... 2 .................
xylene (total)........................................................... 10,000 10,000
Inorganics:
Cadmium.................................................................. 5 5
Beryllium................................................................ 4 4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
``.....'' Non-zero MCLGs are not available for these site-related compounds.
* Values in bold are the selected performance standard.
** These site-related compounds do not have MCLs or non-zero MCLGs but were included in the cumulative risk
assessment.
The PRP group samples 13 monitoring wells on an annual basis for
the compounds listed in Table 1, above. Groundwater COC concentrations
at all sampling locations have been below the cleanup levels for all
COCs since 2004. Additionally, in accordance with the 2015 ESD, EPA
performed a cumulative risk assessment using the four most recent
annual groundwater sampling results from 2015 through 2018. The 2015
ESD specifies that the cumulative risk assessment be performed using
data from four consecutive quarters. Since groundwater at the Site is
monitored annually, rather than quarterly, EPA conservatively performed
the risk assessment based upon four years, rather than four quarters,
of monitoring data. Groundwater COC concentrations were compared to EPA
Tap Water Risk Screening Level (RSLs) and if the RSL was exceeded, a
risk assessment was performed. Chlorobenzene, 1,2-dichloroethane, TCE,
and vinyl chloride exceeded their respective RSLs in the 2015-2018
dataset at a limited number of wells. However, when risks were
calculated for these chemicals assuming a conservative default future
residential exposure (ingestion, dermal exposure, and inhalation from
showering exposure routes), the cumulative non-cancer HIs were below 1
and the cumulative cancer risks were below 1 x 10-4 at each
monitoring well.
Based on the results of the annual groundwater monitoring and the
cumulative risk assessment, the groundwater cleanup levels and
performance standards have been achieved and the groundwater portion of
the Site is eligible for deletion from the NPL.
Operation and Maintenance
O&M activities of the remediation system are being performed by the
PRP group in accordance with the requirements of the 1995 UAO. Ongoing
O&M activities include operation, maintenance, and monitoring of the
Landfill cap and passive gas vent system, groundwater and residential
well monitoring, and stormwater management. The PRP group also
historically performed O&M of the leachate extraction system before it
was decommissioned in 2011.
Landfill Cap
Vegetative cover at the Landfill is maintained by a cutting
program. The entire Site is mowed three times per year. Wetland areas,
vegetated with the specified wetland seed, are not mowed. Other cover
vegetation maintenance measures include removal of trees, saplings,
shrubs, weeds, and other plants that may cause damage to the cap
system. The cap is also re-seeded where bare spots occur. Soil ruts,
channels, washouts, animal burrows or other erosion greater than six
inches deep are repaired. Repairs to the cap geo-synthetics and the on-
site gravel road are completed, as necessary. Landfill cap maintenance
is documented in monthly progress reports to EPA.
Landfill Gas Monitoring System
Quarterly gas monitoring is performed at 14 gas monitoring points
located outside the perimeter of the Landfill cap, and 12 residences to
ensure that measured concentrations of combustible gases remain below
the lower explosive limit (LEL). The collected information includes
flow, percent LEL, percent oxygen, and concentrations of VOCs, methane,
carbon monoxide, and hydrogen sulfide in parts per million. Since the
leachate extraction system was decommissioned, including the pump house
electrical systems, the pump house is primarily used as storage and gas
monitoring in the pump house is unnecessary.
The basements of 12 residences adjacent to the Site are monitored
on a quarterly basis for the percent LEL and percent oxygen as well as
total VOCs (TVOCs). Because the sampling method cannot distinguish
specific VOCs, it cannot be the sole line of evidence used to determine
if the measured TVOCs are from the Landfill or from household
chemicals/solvents being used in the residences. In 2007-2008, a three-
phase investigation addressed the concern that TVOCs detections in the
monitoring results could be caused by gas migration from the Site. EPA
concluded that the occasional TVOC results in the residential sampling
were not Site-related and that further vapor intrusion mitigation
action was not warranted at the Site. In the past five years, there
have been no detections above the LEL and no detections of TVOC COCs
above
[[Page 38910]]
screening levels in any of the quarterly residential air monitoring
samples.
A passive gas collection system was installed within the Landfill
limits to collect and vent accumulated gases in the Surface Fill,
Trench Fill, Demolition Fill, and Old Mine areas and to control gas
migration. Additionally, 14 gas monitoring points (GMPs) were installed
along the perimeter of the Landfill boundary. These passive gas points
were installed to serve two purposes: (1) To intercept the potential
migration of subsurface Landfill gas off-site, and (2) to monitor the
effectiveness of the Landfill gas venting system. In addition,
residential indoor air monitoring occurs quarterly. Since the
installation of two pairs of passive gas vents in 2007, only three
GMPs, GMP-3, GMP-7, and GMP-8, have had detections above the LEL of
methane.
Quarterly monitoring of the on-site GMPs and residential properties
will continue to be performed by the PRP group.
Leachate Extraction Wells
As indicated above, the leachate collection system was
decommissioned in 2011. The leachate collection system was intended to
remove accumulated leachate present beneath the Landfill as a singular
event, prior to the construction of the cap. It accommodated leachate
extraction from 21 pumping leachate extraction/gas venting wells
(eventually optimized down to eight producing wells) at a combined
maximum design flow rate of 63 gallons per minute. Extracted leachate
was temporarily stored in an aboveground 100,000-gallon tank within a
lined containment berm prior to transfer to the local Publicly Owned
Treatment Works for disposal via tanker trucks. No leachate was pumped
during the second leachate pilot (2009-2011), which tested the effects
of shutting down the entire leachate system, or after EPA determined
that the pilot provided sufficient evidence to discontinue pumping. The
total cumulative volume of leachate that was removed from the Landfill
since the leachate collection system's construction in 2002 was 304,481
gallons, including the final shipment in December 2011 of 72,000
gallons remaining in the tank before it was decommissioned.
Groundwater and Residential Well Monitoring
Designated Landfill monitoring wells are monitored annually to
evaluate concentrations of the Landfill-related contaminants of concern
relative to the performance standards specified in the 1993 ROD.
Various residential wells in close proximity to the Site are sampled
quarterly and one community supply well is sampled annually to confirm
that the drinking water quality at the point of use remains below MCLs
for drinking water. No groundwater COCs have been detected in site
monitoring wells or residential wells since 2004. The monitoring wells
and residential wells will continue to be monitored on an annual basis
by the PRP group.
Storm-Water Management
The Site is graded to provide drainage off the cap, and to minimize
soil erosion in accordance with the 1993 ROD requirements. The final
design for the Site included a conversion of three existing
sedimentation ponds into storm-water management basins. In addition to
their dewatering devices, the basins have an overflow outlet structure
or spillway, which helps dissipate any flow that leaves the basin
through these structures. Additional storm-water management components
include diversion berms and rip-rap lined drainage swales. Quarterly
inspections are performed to evaluate the performance and maintenance
needs of the storm-water management system.
Institutional Controls
Institutional Controls (ICs) were required by the 1993 ROD to
prohibit: (1) The use of the land for residential or agricultural
purposes; and (2) the use of on-site ground water for domestic
purposes, including drinking water. The purpose of these restrictions
is to prevent excavation or construction on the capped and closed
Landfill, and to prevent the risks associated with human exposure to
landfill contents, leachate and groundwater.
To fulfill the IC requirements in the 1993 ROD, a Uniform
Environmental Covenant Act (UECA) covenant was recorded with the Lehigh
County Recorder of Deeds on July 28, 2011. The Site property is
currently owned by Novak Sanitary Landfill, Inc. Pursuant to the 2011
UECA Covenant, the PRP group has the authority to enforce the ICs at
the Site property. The PRP group is responsible for monitoring
compliance with the ICs, in accordance with the requirements of the
1995 UAO.
Five-Year Review
Pursuant to CERCLA section 121(c) and as provided in the current
guidance on FYRs Comprehensive Five-Year Review Guidance, OSWER
Directive 9355.7-03B-P, June 2001, EPA must conduct a statutory FYR if
hazardous substances remain on-site above levels that would not allow
for unlimited use and unrestricted exposure. EPA has performed three
FYRs at the Site in 2006, 2011, and 2016 and statutory FYRs will
continue to be performed because waste is left in place at the Site.
The next FYR will be completed by May 16, 2021.
The Third FYR (signed May 16, 2016) concluded that the Site is
protective of human health and the environment but identified one issue
and recommendation that does not impact current or future
protectiveness. The FYR recommended that an ecological investigation of
the Site be performed to modify the O&M plan to meet the 1993 ROD's
goal of promoting wildlife diversity.
The recommended ecological inspection was conducted on June 12,
2017 and potential solutions to promote wildlife habitat diversity were
explored. Minor revisions to the O&M plan were completed in September
2018.
Community Involvement
In accordance with the requirements of 40 CFR 300.425(e)(4), EPA's
community involvement activities associated with this partial deletion
will consist of information supporting the deletion docket in the local
Site information repository and placing a public notice of EPA's intent
to delete the groundwater portion of the Site from the NPL in the
Parkland Press, a major, local newspaper of general circulation.
Determination That the Site Meets the Criteria for Deletion in the NCP
Construction of the Selected Remedy for groundwater at the Site has
been completed and O&M has been performed and is still ongoing in
accordance with the EPA-approved O&M Plans. All RAOs, performance
standards, and cleanup levels established for groundwater at the Site
in the 1993 ROD, as amended by the 2015 ESD, have been achieved and the
Selected Remedy for groundwater is protective of human health and the
environment. No further Superfund response actions for the groundwater
portion of the Site, other than O&M, monitoring, and FYRs, are
necessary to protect human health and the environment. The Landfill and
Landfill gas components of the Site will be considered for deletion
from the NPL when all RAOs, performance standards, and cleanup levels
have been achieved for those components.
The procedures specified in 40 CFR 300.425(e) have been followed
for the deletion of the groundwater portion of the Site. EPA, with
concurrence of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania through PADEP, has
determined that all appropriate response actions under
[[Page 38911]]
CERCLA have been completed for the groundwater portion of the Site.
Therefore, EPA proposes to delete the groundwater portion of the Site
from the NPL.
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.
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.
Dated: July 31, 2019.
Cosmo Servidio,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 3.
[FR Doc. 2019-17017 Filed 8-7-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P