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. 

* * * * * 

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. 

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] 

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: http://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 http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or via email. The 

http://www.regulations.gov Web site is 

an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your 

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 http:// 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by 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 http://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: 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 239 / Tuesday, December 13, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 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, 


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 

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 

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 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 239 / Tuesday, December 13, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 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 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 

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 

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 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES
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 

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] 

■ 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. 

■ 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 

[CMS–9983–F] 

RIN 0938–AQ98 

Patient Protection and Affordable Care 

Act; Establishment of Consumer 

Operated and Oriented Plan (CO–OP) 

Program 

AGENCY: Department of Health and 

Human Services. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: 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 

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 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES