Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 82 / Wednesday, April 29, 2015 / Proposed Rules 23757 

26.11.02.09. Therefore, EPA is 

proposing to approve MDE’s January 24, 

2013 SIP revision. EPA is soliciting 

public comments on the issues 

discussed in this document. These 

comments will be considered before 

taking final action. 

IV. Incorporation by Reference 

In this proposed rulemaking action, 

EPA is proposing to include in a final 

EPA rule, regulatory text that includes 

incorporation by reference. In 

accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 

51.5, the EPA is proposing to 

incorporate by reference Maryland’s 

permit to construct requirements as 

discussed in section II of this preamble. 

The EPA has made, and will continue 

to make, these documents generally 

available electronically through 

www.regulations.gov and/or in hard 

copy at the appropriate EPA office (see 

the ADDRESSES section of this preamble 

for more information). 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 

42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this 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 Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• 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); 

• 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 CAA; 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, this proposed rule, 

relating to Maryland’s preconstruction 

permitting requirements, does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the state, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Lead, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Dated: April 16, 2015. 

William C. Early, 

Acting, Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2015–10008 Filed 4–28–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 300 

[EPA–HQ–SFUND–2005–0002; FRL–9927– 

05–Region 2] 

National Oil and Hazardous Substance 

Pollution Contingency Plan National 

Priorities List: Deletion of the Crown 

Vantage Landfill Superfund Site 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of intent. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) Region 2 is issuing a 

Notice of Intent to Delete the Crown 

Vantage Landfill Superfund Site (Site), 

located in Alexandria Township, 

Hunterdon County, New Jersey, 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). EPA and the 

State of New Jersey, through the New 

Jersey Department of Environmental 

Protection, have determined that all 

appropriate response actions under 

CERCLA, other than long-term 

maintenance and five-year reviews, 

have been completed. However, this 

deletion does not preclude future 

actions under Superfund. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

May 29, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID no. EPA–HQ– 

SFUND–2005–0002, by one of the 

following methods: 

• Web site: http://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Email: hess.alison@epa.gov: 

• Mail: To the attention of Alison 

Hess, Remedial Project Manager, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 2, Emergency & Remedial 

Response Division, 290 Broadway, 19th 

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 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.). 

Special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID no. EPA–HQ–SFUND–2005– 

0002. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

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 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 comment. 

If you send an email comment directly 

to EPA without going through http://

www.regulations.gov, your email 

address will be automatically captured 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

23758 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 82 / Wednesday, April 29, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

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 comments and with 

any disk or CD–ROM that 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 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 the 

hard copy. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in http://

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at: 

U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 2, Superfund Records 

Center, 290 Broadway, Room 1828, New 

York, NY 10007–1866, Telephone: 212– 

637–4308, Hours: Monday through 

Friday from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. and 

Milford Public Library, Crown 

Vantage Landfill Site Repository File, 40 

Frenchtown Road, Milford, NJ 08848, 

Telephone: 908 995–4072, Hours: 

Monday 12:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m., 

Tuesday 11 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., 

Wednesday 12 p.m. to 8:00 p.m., 

Thursday 11 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Friday 

10:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m. to 

8:00 p.m., and Saturday 10:00 a.m. to 

1:00 p.m. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Alison Hess, Remedial Project Manager, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 2, 290 Broadway, 19th Floor, 

New York, NY 10007–1866; Telephone 

212–637–3959; or Email hess.alison@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Introduction 

II. NPL Deletion Criteria 

III. Deletion Procedures 

IV. Basis for Intended Site Deletion 

I. Introduction 

EPA Region 2 is announcing its intent 

to delete the Crown Vantage Landfill 

Superfund Site from the 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 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 40 CFR 300.425(e)(3) of 

the NCP, sites deleted from the NPL 

remain eligible for Fund-financed 

remedial actions if future conditions 

warrant such actions. 

EPA will accept comments on the 

proposal to 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 Crown Vantage Landfill 

Superfund 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 State, whether any 

of the following criteria have been met: 

i. Responsible parties or other persons 

have implemented all appropriate 

response actions required; 

ii. All appropriate Fund-financed 

response under CERCLA has been 

implemented, and no further response 

action by responsible parties is 

appropriate; or 

iii. The remedial investigation has 

shown that the release poses no 

significant threat to public health or the 

environment and, therefore, the taking 

of remedial measures is not appropriate. 

Pursuant to CERCLA section 121(c) 

and the NCP, EPA conducts five-year 

reviews to ensure the continued 

protectiveness of remedial actions 

where hazardous substances, pollutants, 

or contaminants remain at a site above 

levels that allow for unlimited use and 

unrestricted exposure. EPA conducts 

such five-year reviews even if a site is 

deleted from the NPL. EPA may initiate 

further action to ensure continued 

protectiveness at a deleted site if new 

information becomes available that 

indicates it is appropriate. Whenever 

there is a significant release from a site 

deleted from the NPL, the deleted site 

may be restored to the NPL without 

application of the hazard ranking 

system. 

III. Deletion Procedures 

The following procedures apply to 

deletion of the Site: 

(1) EPA consulted with the State 

before developing this Notice of Intent 

to Delete; 

(2) EPA has provided the State 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 State of New Jersey, through 

the New Jersey Department of 

Environmental Protection (NJDEP), has 

concurred with deletion of the Site from 

the NPL; 

(5) Concurrently with the publication 

of this Notice of Intent to Delete in the 

Federal Register, a notice is being 

published in a major local newspaper, 

the Hunterdon County Democrat. The 

newspaper notice announces the 30-day 

public comment period concerning the 

Notice of Intent to Delete the Site from 

the NPL. 

(6) EPA placed copies of documents 

supporting the proposed deletion in the 

deletion docket and made these items 

available for public inspection and 

copying at the Site information 

repositories identified above. 

If comments are received within the 

30-day public comment period on this 

document, EPA will evaluate and 

respond appropriately to the comments 

before making a final decision to delete. 

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 Site, the 

Regional Administrator will publish a 

final Notice of 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 in the Site information 

repositories listed above. 

Deletion of a site from the NPL does 

not itself create, alter, or revoke any 

individual’s rights or obligations. 

Deletion of a site from the NPL does not 

in any way alter EPA’s right to take 

enforcement actions, as appropriate. 

The NPL is designed primarily for 

informational purposes and to assist 

EPA management. Section 300.425(e)(3) 

of the NCP states that the deletion of a 

site from the NPL does not preclude 

eligibility for future response actions, 

should future conditions warrant such 

actions. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 82 / Wednesday, April 29, 2015 / Proposed Rules 23759 

IV. Basis for Site Deletion 

The following summary provides 

EPA’s rationale for deleting the Site 

from the NPL: 

Site Background and History 

The Crown Vantage Landfill Site is an 

inactive former landfill located at 500 

Milford-Frenchtown Road in Alexandria 

Township, New Jersey. The Site 

occupies about 10 acres and has 

approximately 1,500 feet of frontage on 

the eastern bank of the Delaware River. 

A mix of young and mature hardwood 

trees, shrubs and grasses covers the Site. 

Access to the landfill area is restricted 

by locked chain-link fencing. 

To the west of the site, across the 

Delaware River, lies Bucks County, 

Pennsylvania. The Delaware and Raritan 

Canal foot path and a farm field bound 

the Site to the east. Historically, railroad 

tracks bounded the Site to the east. The 

landfill property is bounded to the 

south by the Delaware Raritan Canal 

State Park and to the north by the Curtis 

Specialty Papers Superfund site. 

The landfill reportedly was utilized 

by the nearby former Curtis Specialty 

Papers mill, as well as by other nearby 

Riegel Paper Company facilities, for the 

disposal of waste beginning in the late 

1930s through the early 1970s. The 

landfill may also have accepted flooddamaged items from the local 

community following record flooding of 

the Delaware River in 1955. Types of 

wastes disposed of at the landfill 

include fly ash, cinders, and bottom ash; 

paper mill and coating-related wastes, 

including foil-backed paper, offspecification paper, 55-gallon drums 

containing press room wastes, and 

paper fiber sludge from wastewater 

treatment plant operations; steel and 

fiber barrels and pallets; and 

construction and demolition debris. 

Historical aerial photos indicated that 

shallow trenches in the surface of the 

landfill may have been used for the 

burial of drummed wastes in the early 

1970s. 

Site characterization began in 1991 

with the Preliminary Site Investigation 

(PSI), including an aerial photograph 

analysis, geophysical survey of the 

landfill area, soil gas sampling, ground 

water sampling and a wetlands 

assessment. The PSI was followed by 

the removal of drums (empty, full, and 

partially full) and paper products from 

the surface of the landfill. In 1994, 

monitoring wells were installed and the 

ground water quality was characterized. 

From 2001 through 2003, the NJDEP 

fenced the Site, removed additional 

surface debris, including drums, and 

collected surface soil samples. The EPA 

conducted additional sampling of 

surface water, sediment, surface soil and 

fly ash, and ground water in 2003 and 

2004. Additional wastes were removed 

from the surface and riprap was placed 

in flood-impacted areas. 

The Site was proposed to the National 

Priorities List (NPL) in September 2004 

(69 FR 56970) and listed on the NPL in 

April 2005 (70 FR 21644). The EPA 

CERCLIS ID# is NJN000204492. 

In May 2005, Fort James Operating 

Company, a subsidiary of GeorgiaPacific, entered into an Administrative 

Order on Consent (AOC) with EPA for 

a Removal Action. Under the 2005 AOC, 

additional surficial drums were 

removed, additional fencing was 

provided, and an engineered slope 

stabilization wall was constructed to 

stabilize the landfill’s western face. In 

total, over 700 surficial drums, drum 

remnants and drum carcasses were 

removed from the surface of the Site 

during investigations conducted 

between 1991 and 2007. 

Further investigations and removal 

actions at the Site were performed by 

Georgia-Pacific Consumer Products, LP 

(GP) under an Administrative 

Agreement and Order on Consent signed 

in September 2007 and by International 

Paper Company (IP) under a Unilateral 

Administrative Order signed in 

December 2007. During the Remedial 

Investigation (RI) conducted in 2008– 

2009, more than 1,750 drums, drum 

carcasses and drum remnants were 

removed from the Site. Analytical data 

from surface water, pore water and 

groundwater sampling showed that 

these media were not impacted by the 

Site. The RI Report was completed in 

July 2010. The RI concluded that, after 

removal activities were conducted, all 

human health risks were within or 

below EPA’s acceptable levels. An 

ecological risk assessment was also 

conducted and concluded that there was 

no need for remediation based on 

potential risks to ecological receptors. 

The Feasibility Study Report, developed 

to identify and compare cleanup 

alternatives, was completed in 

November 2010. 

Selected Remedy 

The Site remedy was selected and 

memorialized in the Site Record of 

Decision (ROD), which was issued on 

September 29, 2011. Because the 

baseline human health risk assessment 

and ecological risk assessments for the 

Site did not identify the presence of 

unacceptable human health or 

ecological risks requiring remediation 

under current and reasonably 

anticipated future Site use, the remedial 

action objectives were limited to 

preventing exposures to landfill 

materials. The major components of the 

selected remedy of the ROD are the 

following: 

• Establishment of a deed restriction 

to ensure that future Site uses do not 

result in the disturbance of the surface 

of the Site, thereby preventing future 

residential or commercial/industrial 

development of the Site; 

• Continued maintenance of security 

measures at the Site (e.g., signage and 

fencing); 

• Continued maintenance of the slope 

stabilization wall; 

• Sealing of remaining shallow 

monitoring wells; 

• Semi-annual monitoring of the Site, 

including the slope stabilization wall; 

and 

• Five-Year Reviews by EPA to 

ensure that the remedy continues to be 

protective of public health and the 

environment. 

Response Actions 

A Consent Decree for IP’s and GP’s 

performance of the Remedial Design and 

Remedial Action was entered by the 

United States District Court for the 

District of New Jersey in April 2013. 

The remedy was designed and 

constructed in a single phase pursuant 

to EPA-approved work plans. The 

monitoring well closures and fence 

relocation measures undertaken as part 

of maintaining the existing security as 

required by the ROD were conducted 

from February to April 2013. Three 

monitoring wells and two piezometers 

were located in the field and sealed in 

accordance with New Jersey well 

closure regulations. Another three 

monitoring wells and four piezometers 

were documented to have been closed 

in 2007. Lastly, two monitoring wells 

could not be located visually or with the 

use of a metal detector and may have 

been closed in 2007 or covered by silt 

and other materials since they were last 

sampled in 1994, and four piezometers 

located beneath the slope stabilization 

wall also could not be located and are 

presumed to no longer be accessible. 

New 12-foot fence posts were driven to 

a depth of four feet. Monitoring of 

ambient air was conducted during fence 

installation, with no measurable 

concentrations of volatile organic 

compounds detected above background 

levels. Old posts and fencing were 

removed and recycled, and a new 

section of fencing and fabric installed. 

New coated, rust-free aluminum signs 

were posted along the entire fence 

perimeter as needed. EPA conducted a 

final inspection in July 2013 and issued 

a Preliminary Site Close-Out Report in 

September 2013. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

23760 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 82 / Wednesday, April 29, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

IP and GP prepared a draft deed 

notice pursuant to the April 2013 

Consent Decree. EPA approved the final 

deed notice in December 2013. The 

deed notice was recorded by the 

Hunterdon County Clerk in February 

2014. 

EPA issued a Final Site Close-Out 

Report in December 2014. 

Ongoing Maintenance 

The ongoing maintenance plan was 

approved in June 2013. This plan covers 

site security, the long-term monitoring 

and maintenance of the slope 

stabilization wall and recertification of 

the deed notice. 

Five-Year Review 

Hazardous substances, pollutants, or 

contaminants will remain at the Site 

above levels that 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 

Report will be completed prior to 

February 2018, which is five years from 

the start of the on-site remedial action 

construction. 

Community Involvement 

Public participation activities for the 

Site have been satisfied as required by 

CERCLA sections 113(k) and 117, 42 

U.S.C. 9613(k) and 9617. A Community 

Advisory Group (CAG) for the Site has 

been meeting quarterly since 2009. EPA 

finalized a site-specific Community 

Involvement Plan in March 2010. The 

CAG obtains information from EPA and 

provides community input on the site 

progress, including the implementation 

of field activities associated with 

investigations, removals and remedial 

construction. EPA maintains a local site 

information repository at the Milford 

Public Library and regularly adds site 

reports and other documents. 

As part of the remedy selection 

process, the public was invited to 

comment on the proposed remedy. In 

June 2011, EPA released a Proposed 

Plan summarizing the RI/FS reports and 

identifying the preferred remedial 

alternative with the rationale for its 

preference. EPA held a public meeting 

on July 12, 2011 at the Milford 

Firehouse to explain the Proposed Plan 

and to receive public comments. EPA 

held a public comment period from July 

1 through 31, 2011 to accept written 

comments. Responses to comments 

received at the public meeting and 

comments submitted during the public 

comment period are provided in the 

Responsiveness Summary section of the 

ROD. 

All other documents and information 

the 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 the Site have been met, as described 

in the December 29, 2014 Final Site 

Close-Out Report. The State of New 

Jersey, in January 12, 2015 letter, 

concurred with the proposed deletion of 

the Site from the NPL. As described in 

this Notice of Intent to Delete, the 

implemented remedy achieves the 

degree of cleanup specified in the ROD 

for all exposure pathways; the RAO has 

been met, and no further Superfund 

response is needed to protect human 

health and the environment. 

The NCP specifies that EPA may 

delete a site from the NPL if responsible 

parties or other persons have 

implemented all appropriate response 

actions. EPA, with the concurrence of 

the State of New Jersey, believes that 

this criterion for deletion has been met. 

Consequently, EPA intends to delete the 

Crown Vantage Landfill Site from the 

NPL. Documents supporting this action 

are available for review at the 

information repositories identified 

above. 

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(c)(2); 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: April 

15, 2015. 

Judith Enck, 

Regional Administrator, Region 2. 

[FR Doc. 2015–10001 Filed 4–28–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS