Document ID: EPA-HQ-SFUND-1998-0006-0003
Agency: epa
Document Type: Rule
Title: National Oil and Hazardous Substance Pollution Contingency Plan National Priorities List: Deletion of the Peter Cooper Superfund Site
Posted Date: 2019-07-30T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 146 (Tuesday, July 30, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 36827-36833]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-16065]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 300

[EPA-HQ-SFUND-1998-0006; FRL-9997-20-Region 2]

National Oil and Hazardous Substance Pollution Contingency Plan 
National Priorities List: Deletion of the Peter Cooper Superfund Site

AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 2, is 
publishing a direct final notice of deletion of the Peter Cooper 
Superfund Site (Site) located in the Village of Gowanda, Cattaraugus 
County, New York from the National Priorities List (NPL). The NPL, 
promulgated pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, as amended (CERCLA),, which is 
the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan 
(NCP). This direct final deletion is being published by the EPA with 
the concurrence of the State of New York, through the Department of 
Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC), because the EPA has determined 
that all appropriate response under CERCLA, other than operation and 
maintenance, monitoring, and five-year reviews, have been completed. 
However, this deletion does not preclude future actions under 
Superfund.

DATES: This direct final deletion will be effective September 30, 2019 
unless the EPA receives adverse comments by August 29, 2019. If adverse 
comments are received, the EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the 
direct final deletion in the Federal Register informing the public that 
the deletion will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID no. EPA-HQ-
SFUND-1998-0006, by one of the following methods:
     https://www.regulations.gov. Follow on-line instructions 
for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or 
removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received 
to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you 
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other 
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia 
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written 
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and 
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will 
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of 
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing 
system). For

[[Page 36828]]

additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, 
information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance 
on making effective comments, please visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
     Email: henry.sherrel@epa.gov.
     Mail: Sherrel Henry, Remedial Project Manager, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2, 290 Broadway, 20th Floor, 
New York, New York 10007-1866.
     Hand delivery: Superfund Records Center, 290 Broadway, 
18th Floor, New York, NY 10007-1866 (telephone: (212) 637-4308). Such 
deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of 
operation (Monday to Friday from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.) excluding 
federal holidays and special arrangements should be made for deliveries 
of boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID no. EPA-HQ-SFUND-
1998-0006. The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be 
included in the public docket without change and may be made available 
online at https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal 
information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed 
to be CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by 
statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or 
otherwise protected through https://www.regulations.gov or email. The 
https://www.regulations.gov website is an ``anonymous access'' system, 
which means the EPA will not know your identity or contact information 
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email 
comment directly to the EPA without going through https://www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically captured 
and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket 
and made available on the internet. If you submit an electronic 
comment, the EPA recommends that you include your name and other 
contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or 
CD-ROM you submit. If the EPA cannot read your comment due to technical 
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, the EPA may not 
be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use 
of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any 
defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the https://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such 
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in the hard 
copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either 
electronically in https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at:
    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2, Superfund Records 
Center, 290 Broadway, Room 1828, New York, New York 10007-1866, (212) 
637-4308, Hours: Monday through Friday: 9:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m.
    Information for the Site is also available for viewing at the Site 
Administrative Record Repositories located at: Gowanda Free Library, 56 
W. Main Street, Gowanda, New York 14138, (716) 532-9449, Hours: Monday 
through Friday: 9:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Sherrel D. Henry, Remedial Project 
Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2, 290 Broadway, 
20th Floor, NY, NY 10007-1866, (212) 637-4273, email: 
henry.sherrel@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Introduction
II. NPL Deletion Criteria
III. Deletion Procedures
IV. Basis for Site Deletion
V. Deletion Action

I. Introduction

    EPA Region 2 is publishing this direct final Notice of Deletion of 
the Peter Cooper Superfund Site (Site) from the NPL. The NPL 
constitutes Appendix B of 40 CFR part 300, which is the National Oil 
and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), which the 
EPA promulgated pursuant to section 105 of CERCLA. The EPA maintains 
the NPL as the list of sites that appear to present a significant risk 
to public health, welfare, or the environment. Sites on the NPL may be 
the subject of remedial actions financed by the Hazardous Substance 
Superfund (Fund). As described in 300.425(e) (3) of the NCP, sites 
deleted from the NPL remain eligible for Fund-financed remedial actions 
if future conditions warrant such actions.
    Section II of this document explains the criteria for deleting 
sites from the NPL. Section III discusses procedures that the EPA is 
using for this action. Section IV discusses the Site and demonstrates 
how it meets the deletion criteria. Section V discusses EPA's action to 
delete the Site from the NPL unless adverse comments are received 
during the public comment period.

II. NPL Deletion Criteria

    The NCP establishes the criteria that EPA uses to delete sites from 
the NPL. In accordance with 40 CFR 300.425(e), sites may be deleted 
from the NPL where no further response is appropriate. In making such a 
determination pursuant to 40 CFR 300.425(e), EPA will consider, in 
consultation with the state, whether any of the following criteria have 
been met:
    i. Responsible parties or other persons have implemented all 
appropriate response actions required;
    ii. all appropriate Fund-financed response under CERCLA has been 
implemented, and no further response action by responsible parties is 
appropriate; or
    iii. the remedial investigation has shown that the release poses no 
significant threat to public health or the environment and, therefore, 
the taking of remedial measures is not appropriate.
    Pursuant to CERCLA section 121 (c) and the NCP, EPA conducts five-
year reviews to ensure the continued protectiveness of remedial actions 
where hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants remain at a 
site above levels that allow for unlimited use and unrestricted 
exposure. EPA conducts such five-year reviews even if a site is deleted 
from the NPL. EPA may initiate further action to ensure continued 
protectiveness at a deleted site if new information becomes available 
that indicates it is appropriate. Whenever there is a significant 
release from a site deleted from the NPL, the deleted site may be 
restored to the NPL without application of the hazard ranking system.

III. Deletion Procedures

    The following procedures apply to deletion of the Site:
    (1) EPA consulted with the State of New York prior to developing 
this direct final Notice of Deletion and the Notice of Intent to Delete 
co-published today in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of the Federal 
Register.
    (2) EPA has provided New York State 30 working days for review of 
this notice and the parallel Notice of Intent to Delete prior to their 
publication today, and the state, through the NYSDEC, has concurred on 
the deletion of the Site from the NPL.
    (3) Concurrently with the publication of this direct final Notice 
of Deletion, a notice of the availability of the parallel Notice of 
Intent to Delete is being published in a major local newspaper, Dunkirk 
Observer. The newspaper notice announces the 30-day public comment 
period concerning the Notice

[[Page 36829]]

of Intent to Delete the Site from the NPL.
    (4) EPA placed copies of documents supporting the proposed deletion 
in the deletion docket and made these items available for public 
inspection and copying at the Site information repositories identified 
above.
    (5) If adverse comments are received within the 30-day public 
comment period on this deletion action, EPA will publish a timely 
notice of withdrawal of this direct final Notice of Deletion before its 
effective date and will prepare a response to comments and continue 
with the deletion process on the basis of the Notice of Intent to 
Delete and the comments already received.
    Deletion of a site from the NPL does not itself create, alter, or 
revoke any individual's rights or obligations. Deletion of a site from 
the NPL does not in any way alter EPA's right to take enforcement 
actions, as appropriate. The NPL is designed primarily for 
informational purposes and to assist EPA management. Section 
300.425(e)(3) of the NCP states that the deletion of a site from the 
NPL does not preclude eligibility for future response actions, should 
future conditions warrant such actions.

IV. Basis for Site Deletion

    The following information provides EPA's rationale for deleting the 
Site from the NPL:

Site Background and History

    The Peter Cooper Site, EPA ID No. NYD980530265, is located off 
Palmer Street, in the Village of Gowanda, Cattaraugus County, New York, 
approximately 30 miles south of Buffalo, New York. The Site consists of 
an inactive landfill and land associated with the former Peter Cooper 
Corporation (PCC) animal glue and adhesives manufacturing plant. The 
Site is bound to the north by Cattaraugus Creek (Creek), to the south 
by Palmer Street, to the west by a former hydroelectric dam and wetland 
area, and to the east by residential properties. Regionally, the 
Village of Gowanda is located both in Erie County and Cattaraugus 
County and is separated by Cattaraugus Creek. In Erie County, the 
Village of Gowanda is included in the Town of Collins. The Town of 
Collins is bordered by the Seneca Nation of Indians Cattaraugus 
Reservation to the west. In Cattaraugus County, the Village of Gowanda 
is in the Town of Persia. The Site is located in an area characterized 
by mixed industrial-commercial/residential usage.
    For purposes of the remedial investigation and feasibility study 
(RI/FS), the Site was divided into two sections. The western section, 
called the inactive landfill area (ILA), is approximately 15.6 acres in 
size and includes an additional five acres referred to as the 
``elevated fill subarea.'' The westernmost portion of the elevated fill 
subarea is located on property owned by the New York State Electric & 
Gas Corporation (NYSEG). The eastern section of the Site, the former 
manufacturing plant area (FMPA), is approximately 10.4 acres.
    From 1904 to 1972, PCC and its predecessor, Eastern Tanners Glue 
Company, manufactured animal glue at the Site. When the animal glue 
product line was terminated, PCC continued to produce synthetic 
industrial adhesives until the plant closed in 1985. The wastes from 
PCC's glue production were disposed of on the elevated fill subarea. 
Between 1925 and October 1970, PCC used the northwest portion of the 
property to pile sludge remaining after the animal glue manufacturing 
process. These wastes, known as ``cookhouse sludge'' because of a 
cooking cycle that occurred just prior to extraction of the glue, are 
derived primarily from chrome-tanned hides obtained from tanneries. The 
waste material has been shown to contain elevated levels of chromium, 
arsenic, zinc, and several organic compounds.
    In June 1971, the New York State Supreme Court (8th J.D. 
Cattaraugus County) ordered PCC to remove all or part of the waste pile 
and terminate discharges into the Creek. In 1972, PCC reportedly 
removed approximately 38,600 tons of waste pile material and 
transferred it to a separate site in Markhams, New York. Between 1972 
and 1975, the remaining waste pile at the Site was graded by PCC, 
covered with a 6-inch clay barrier layer and 18 to 30 inches of soil, 
and vegetated with grass. Stone rip-rap and concrete blocks were placed 
along the bank of the Creek to protect the fill material from scouring 
or falling into the Creek.
    In July 1976, the assets of the original PCC, including the 
manufacturing plant and property located in Gowanda, were purchased by 
Rousselot Gelatin Corporation and its parent, Rousselot, S.A., of 
France. Rousselot Gelatin was renamed Peter Cooper Corporation, and 
this newly-formed PCC sold the Site to JimCar Development, Inc. in 
April 1988. The property was subsequently transferred to the Gowanda 
Area Redevelopment Corporation (GARC) in 2009. Excluding the portion of 
the Site owned by NYSEG, the remainder of the property is presently 
owned by GARC. From 1981 to 1983, NYSDEC conducted several 
investigations at the facility and identified the presence of arsenic, 
chromium and zinc in soil and sediment samples. As a result of this 
investigation, NYSDEC oversaw PCC's development of an RI/FS for the 
Site. However, because the waste detected at the Site did not meet the 
New York State statutory waste definition in effect in 1991 for an 
inactive hazardous waste disposal site, NYSDEC removed the Site from 
its Registry of Inactive Hazardous Waste Sites, and a remedy was not 
selected.
    In 1996, EPA collected and analyzed soil, groundwater, surface 
water, and sediment samples from the Site. Results of the sampling and 
analysis confirmed contamination, including the presence of arsenic, 
chromium, and other hazardous substances.
    During these Site assessments, EPA personnel observed that the 
existing retaining wall was subject to severe erosion. It was 
determined that the retaining wall and rip-rap had to be repaired or 
upgraded to prevent the continued erosion of landfill materials into 
the Creek. On October 24, 1996, EPA and NYSEG entered into an 
administrative order on consent (AOC). Pursuant to the AOC, NYSEG 
installed approximately 150 feet of rip-rap revetment along the south 
bank of the Cattaraugus Creek and adjacent to the landfill to prevent 
further erosion of materials from the landfill into the Creek.
    Based on this information, the Site was proposed to the NPL on 
September 25, 1997 (62 FR 50450) and placed on the NPL on March 6, 1998 
(63 FR 11332).

Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study

    In April 2000, EPA issued a unilateral administrative order (UAO) 
to fourteen respondents to perform the RI/FS of the Site, subject to 
EPA oversight. Media sampled during the RI included landfill gas, 
groundwater, surface water, sediment, soil, waste material, and seepage 
emanating from the landfill.
    From 2000 to 2001, the UAO respondents, through their consultants, 
Benchmark Environmental Engineering and Science PLLC (Benchmark) and 
Geomatrix Consultants, performed a comprehensive RI to define the 
nature and extent of contamination at the Site. The final RI report was 
submitted to EPA in November 2003. The scope of the RI included the 
following activities: the replacement of four wells from the existing 
network of 10 monitoring wells in the ILA and the installation of six 
new wells in the FMPA; surface water and sediment investigations of the 
Creek; sludge fill characterization of the

[[Page 36830]]

ILA, by conducting three different activities (geophysical surveys, 
test pits, and soil borings) to establish the limits of buried waste 
fill material; an existing landfill cover evaluation by excavating 24 
test holes to determine cover system thickness and characteristics; a 
surface soil investigation of the ILA and FMPA, consisting of 30 soil 
samples collected from zero to six inches below ground surface (bgs); a 
subsurface soil investigation of the ILA and FMPA consisting of 23 soil 
samples collected from three to 12 feet bgs; a landfill gas 
investigation of the elevated fill area of the ILA; and a leachate seep 
investigation of the elevated fill area of the ILA.
    An FS was then completed by the UAO respondents, and a report was 
submitted to EPA in June 2005. The FS Report identified and evaluated 
remedial alternatives to address soil contamination for the Site, 
consistent with the guidelines presented in Guidance for conducting RI/
FS under CERCLA. A preferred alternative was presented to the public 
for review and comment in July 2005. Results of the RI and FS were 
summarized in the Record of Decision (ROD) issued by EPA in September 
2005.
    Concurrent with completion of the RI/FS activities, the Village of 
Gowanda in association with the University at Buffalo Center for 
Integrated Waste Management developed a Reuse Assessment and Concept 
Plan for the Site, in which it was concluded that the ``highest and 
best use'' of the property would be as a multi-use recreational 
facility. The Reuse Assessment and Concept Plan, funded in part by the 
USEPA through its Superfund Redevelopment Initiative, envisions a 
publicly-available Site incorporating elements such as a walking/biking 
trail, fishing access, outdoor picnic areas, small boat launch, and 
other related recreational features.

Selected Remedy

    Based upon the results of the RI/FS, a Proposed Plan, and a Public 
Meeting, a Remedy was selected in September 2005. For this Site, 
remedial action objectives (RAOs) were only established for soil. The 
RAOs for soil are (1) to reduce or eliminate any direct contact threat 
associated with the contaminant soils/fill, (2) to minimize or 
eliminate contaminant migration from contaminated soils to the 
groundwater and surface water, and (3) to minimize or eliminate 
contaminant migration from groundwater to the Creek.
    The elements of the selected remedy are:
     Excavating three hot spot areas and consolidating waste 
from these areas within the elevated fill subarea, capping the five-
acre elevated fill subarea of the inactive landfill area with a low 
permeability, equivalent design barrier cap, consistent with the 
requirements of 6 New York Codes, Rules and Regulations (NYCRR) Part 
360, including seeding with a mixture of seeds to foster natural 
habitat;
     Conducting post-excavation confirmatory soil sampling;
     Backfilling of excavated areas with clean fill; collecting 
the leachate seeps, pretreating the leachate as necessary, then 
discharging the leachate to the public owned treatment works (POTW) 
collection system for further treatment and discharge. As a 
contingency, if treatment of the leachate seep at the POTW is not 
available, the leachate would be treated and discharged to Cattaraugus 
Creek. Since the installation of the cap and groundwater diversion 
system (described below) should reduce leachate generation, the volume 
of seep leachate requiring treatment is anticipated to be reduced or 
nearly eliminated over time;
     Installing a groundwater diversion system to limit 
groundwater migration through the elevated fill subarea. The remedy 
provides for the potential that if additional data collected in the 
remedial design phase of the project support the conclusion that 
installation of a diversion wall will result in a minimal increase in 
the collection of contaminants by the leachate collection system, the 
diversion wall would not be installed;
     Installing a passive gas venting system for proper venting 
of the five-acre elevated fill subarea of the ILA;
     Stabilizing the banks of the Creek;
     Performing long-term operation and maintenance including 
inspections and repairs of the landfill cap, gas venting, and leachate 
systems;
     Performing air monitoring, surface water and groundwater 
quality monitoring; and
     Evaluating Site conditions at least once every five years 
to determine if the remedy remains protective.
    The remedy also included institutional controls such as restrictive 
covenants and environmental easements for limiting future use of the 
Site and the groundwater to ensure that the implemented remedial 
measures will not be disturbed and that the Site will not be used for 
purposes incompatible with the completed remedial action. The 
institutional controls will be managed, in part, through a Site 
Management Plan (SMP) to ensure appropriate handling of subsurface 
soils during redevelopment.
    To ensure that engineering controls and institutional controls 
remain in place and effective for the protection of public health and 
the environment, an annual certification, commencing from the date of 
implementation, has been required to be performed by the parties 
responsible for implementing the remediation.
    Consistent with the future use of the property, following issuance 
of the ROD, the Village of Gowanda and the UAO recipients entered into 
discussions concerning the Village's redevelopment goals. An agreement 
was reached, and GARC took ownership of the Site and agreed to perform 
certain post-remedial operation and maintenance and monitoring 
activities in exchange for provision of specific, non-remedial 
construction activities and funding by the respondents to facilitate 
park redevelopment. Non-remedial construction activities that were 
slated to be performed by the UAO recipients, concurrent with remedial 
activities, are listed below.
     Removal of up to 1,000 tons of non-hazardous construction 
and demolition debris from the former manufacturing plant area of the 
site, with disposal of the materials beneath the elevated fill subarea 
cover (in a manner to prevent settlement) or off-site disposal at a 
permitted disposal facility.
     Construction of a clean utility corridor (i.e., waterline) 
to facilitate utility service to a future, multi-use building, 
pavilion, or other park development.
     Elevated fill subarea cover system grading and contouring 
to facilitate Site development plans. This involved creating a benched 
area along the Creek side of the landfill that may provide a level area 
for future construction of a bike or walking path.

Response Actions

    In 2009, EPA concluded consent decree (CD) negotiations with a 
subgroup of the UAO recipients, identified as the performing settling 
defendants (PSDs), related to the performance of the design and 
implementation of the remedy called for in the ROD. On February 12, 
2009, the CD was entered in United States District Court. On March 15, 
2009, Benchmark was approved as the supervising contractor to conduct 
the remedial design (RD) and implement the remedy at the Site. The ROD 
included provisions for the evaluation of the construction of a 
diversion wall around the elevated fill area in the event the wall 
would affect the planned remedial

[[Page 36831]]

actions. In accordance with the ROD, EPA and NYSDEC concurred with the 
findings of an analysis performed by the PSDs, prior to the entry of 
the CD, that the installation of an upgradient groundwater diversion 
wall around the elevated fill subarea would not materially alter the 
effectiveness of the planned remedial measures; therefore, the 
diversion wall component of the ROD was not implemented.
    In accordance with the requirements of the CD, the PSDs prepared a 
RD work plan. The RD work plan outlined the following remedial 
construction measures: Mobilization; site preparation, including 
hotspot excavation; groundwater/seep collection; and cover system 
construction (barrier layer material placement and compaction, topsoil 
and seeding, and passive gas venting). In 2009, the RD report and 
design plans and specifications were implemented under a design build 
contract for Site remediation. The RD report identified materials to be 
employed for major remedial components, construction requirements, 
quality control requirements, and measures to protect workers, the 
surrounding community, and the environment during the remedial work.
    In the Summer of 2009, the PSDs conducted certain preparatory 
activities at the Site to facilitate the remedial construction. These 
activities included the removal of small trees, shrubs, brush, and 
stumps. Clearing and grubbing in and around the area of the elevated 
fill area was performed with a hydro ax. The staged trees, stumps, and 
brush were ground into mulch and were hauled off-site for processing at 
a permitted facility.
    The excavation of the three ``hotspot'' areas of contaminated soil/
fill was completed in August 2009. Soil excavated from these impacted 
areas was hauled to the elevated fill subarea of the ILA for placement 
and compaction prior to placing the soil cover system. The excavated 
areas were then backfilled with clean soil. Confirmatory sampling of 
the excavation sidewalls and bottom indicated arsenic and VOC 
concentrations that remained were below the Site cleanup goals.
    Construction of the seep/groundwater collection system was 
substantially completed in November 2009. The collection system 
includes the Creek bank regrading and bedrock channel excavation, the 
pump station installation, the pretreatment building construction, the 
force main piping, and the sanitary sewer tie-in. The seep/groundwater 
collection system was placed into full-time operation in May 2010, with 
operation and maintenance duties transferred to GARC.
    The remedial measures for the elevated fill subarea involved re-
grading the adjacent bank (excluding the riprap-stabilized area on 
NYSEG's property) and removal of concrete blocks and boulders to 
provide a more uniform slope for reduced erosion potential. A seep 
collection trench was then excavated into the surface of the weathered 
shale bedrock at the toe of the slope to intercept and collect the 
seeps. A perforated drainage pipe and granular media envelope collect 
and transmit water to a packaged leachate pump station. The slope of 
the regraded bank is lined with a geocomposite drainage layer, leading 
to the collection trench, covered by a geomembrane liner to prevent 
seep breakout and mitigate Creek and surface water infiltration during 
high water conditions. The liner extends vertically to the 100-year 
floodplain elevation and is protected from erosion by a surface layer 
of medium and large riprap over a non-woven geotextile fabric and 
gravel bed. Collected seep water and shallow groundwater are conveyed 
from the pump station by a force main to a pretreatment building where 
an oxidant delivery system is available to mitigate hydrogen sulfide 
odors, as needed. Pretreated seeps/groundwater is discharged to the 
Village of Gowanda's sanitary sewer collection system on Palmer Street 
for treatment at the Village POTW consistent with the approved 
discharge permit.
    The final cap system, installed from August 2009 to July 2010, 
includes all the construction components in the approved RD report. 
Containment/isolation with soil cover enhancement involved the 
following: clearing and grubbing the approximate five-acre elevated 
fill subarea; moderate regrading and/or filling of low spots across the 
five-acre area to facilitate runoff; supplementing existing cover to 
provide for a minimum 18-inch thickness of a recompacted soil barrier 
layer and placement of six inches of topsoil over the five-acre area; 
and reseeding of the elevated fill subarea cover to provide for a good 
stand of grass that will foster natural habitat. Cover soils were 
tested to assure conformance with contaminant levels established under 
state law.
    Following construction of the cap, five passive gas vents were 
installed through the sludge fill in the elevated fill subarea to 
relieve gas buildup beneath the cover system. The vents were 
constructed with individual risers that extend to a sufficient height 
above ground surface to promote atmospheric dispersion of odor-causing 
constituents and prevent direct inhalation of vented gases by 
trespassers or future recreational Site users.
    EPA and NYSDEC conducted a final inspection of the constructed 
remedy on September 9, 2010. Based on the results of the inspection, it 
was determined that the Site construction was complete and that the 
remedy was implemented consistent with the ROD. In the final inspection 
EPA concluded that the PSDs constructed the remedy in accordance with 
the RD plans and specifications, and no further response (other than 
the operation and maintenance of the cap and cover, and long-term 
groundwater monitoring) is anticipated. EPA approved the remedial 
action report (RAR) for the Site on June 17, 2011. The RAR documented 
all the remedial activities conducted at the Site and included as-built 
drawings to document Site conditions at completion. The PSDs and GARC, 
the latter being the current property owner, are sharing 
responsibilities for management of the Site in accordance with the SMP. 
The ROD called for the development of a SMP to provide for the proper 
management of all post-construction remedy components including an 
environmental easement that describes the institutional controls 
incorporated into the remedy and the requirement for certification that 
the institutional controls remain effective and in place.
    As mention above, the environmental easement and/or restrictive 
covenant was designed to restrict the use of on-Site groundwater as a 
source of potable or process water and to restrict activities on the 
Site that could compromise the integrity of the cap. The restrictions 
are memorialized in an environmental easement filed with the 
Cattaraugus County Clerk on March 30, 2009.
    Currently all areas of the Site designated for passive recreational 
use have been covered with a minimum of one foot of clean, vegetated 
cover soil or pavement, and those designated for active recreational 
use have been covered with a minimum of two feet of clean, vegetated 
cover soil or pavement. Inspections were performed by GARCs designated 
engineer to verify that the minimum required soil thicknesses were 
achieved. As part of the redevelopment efforts, the following Park 
amenities and improvements were constructed during 2016 and 2017:
     Regulation (90 foot diamond) ballfield:
     Playground and equipment
     Paved parking area and extension of asphalt path
     Ballfield backstop

[[Page 36832]]

     24' x 24' gazebo

Verification of Cleanup Levels

    Data are collected and reviewed to ensure that the RAOs are met 
following implementation of the remedial action. For this Site, RAOs 
were only established for soil. The RAOs for soil are (1) to reduce or 
eliminate any direct contact threat associated with the contaminant 
soils/fill, (2) to minimize or eliminate contaminant migration from 
contaminated soils to the groundwater and surface water, and (3) to 
minimize or eliminate contaminant migration from groundwater to the 
Creek. These RAOs and the associated cleanup levels set forth in the 
ROD were met upon completion of the remedial construction, as 
documented in the RAR for the Site dated September 2010. Because of the 
limited remaining risks from exposure to the groundwater and surface 
water at this Site, institutional controls are deemed necessary to 
address any potential future exposure. Specifically, deed restrictions 
have been imposed to prevent the use of groundwater as a source of 
potable or process water unless groundwater quality standards are met. 
Long-term monitoring will be conducted to ensure that the selected Site 
remedy is protective of human health and the environment. Groundwater 
and surface water will be monitored as part of the post-construction 
response activities to ensure that the contamination is attenuating, 
and groundwater quality continues to improve.
    Groundwater monitoring was performed during 10 separate events in 
June 2011, January 2012, June 2012, January 2013, June 2013, June 2014, 
October 2015, October 2016, November 2017 and October 2018. Groundwater 
samples were collected from five monitoring wells (MWs) at the Site. 
Samples were analyzed for inorganic parameters (total metals), VOCs 
(chlorinated aliphatics only), and water quality parameters (ammonia, 
hardness, chloride, total sulfide). Total metals analyses included 
hexavalent chromium, total chromium, arsenic, and manganese. 
Groundwater results were compared to the more stringent of the State or 
federal promulgated standards.
    VOC concentrations were either not detected (nondetect) or below 
the state Groundwater Quality Standards and Guidance Values (GWQS/GV) 
at all monitoring well locations, with the exception of 
tetrachloroethene (PCE) and cis-1,2-dichloroethene (cis-1,2- DCE). PCE 
was detected above the GWQS of 5 ug/L, with concentrations ranging from 
5.9 micrograms per liter (ug/L) to 13 ug/L. Cis-1,2-DCE was detected 
above the GWQS of 5 ug/L with concentrations ranging from 5.4 ug/L to 
8.5 ug/L. These sporadic, slight VOC exceedances of GWQS criteria are 
not considered significant, and do not constitute a contaminant plume 
requiring response action.
    Concentrations reported for hexavalent chromium were nondetect or 
below GWQS at all monitoring locations. Total chromium was reported as 
nondetect or below the GWQS of 0.05 milligram/liter (mg/L) at all 
monitored locations, with the exception of two minor exceedances of 
0.056 mg/L and 0.054 mg/L. These sporadic, slight exceedances of total 
chromium GWQS criteria are not considered significant.
    Arsenic was reported above the federal Maximum Contaminant Levels 
(MCLs) of 0.010 mg/L, with concentrations ranging from 0.011 mg/L to 
0.043 mg/L. Arsenic was also detected in the upgradient well, so the 
exceedances in on-site wells are not considered to be Site-related. 
Manganese was detected above the GWQS of 0.03 mg/L with concentrations 
ranging from 0.37 mg/L to 6.6 mg/L. The manganese screening criteria is 
a secondary MCL. Secondary MCLs do not require regulatory actions since 
they represent aesthetic parameters. They will continue to be 
monitored.
    The water quality parameters reported for all sampling events were 
nondetect or below the GWQS for sulfide and chloride at all sampling 
locations. Ammonia was detected above the GWQS of 2 mg/L during all 
monitoring events at concentrations ranging from 3.5 mg/L to 10.8 mg/L. 
However, ammonia was also detected in the upgradient monitoring well, 
so the exceedances are not considered to be Site-related. The 
groundwater data review indicates that the low levels of contamination 
in Site groundwater are attenuating and groundwater quality has 
improved compared to baseline levels measured prior to commencement of 
remedial activities. In general, the data indicate minor/seasonal 
changes in concentration for the monitored parameters at each of the 
sample locations with no upward trending. These data support the 
assumption set forth in the ROD that the groundwater contamination is 
localized and the decrease in frequency indicates that limited residual 
groundwater contamination has attenuated. The environmental easement 
placed on the Site property restricts the use of groundwater as a 
source of potable or process water unless groundwater quality standards 
are met. Groundwater quality will continue to be monitored in 
accordance with the SMP.
    Surface water samples were collected from three locations along the 
Creek at the same time as the groundwater samples were obtained from 
June 2011 through October 2018. Samples were also analyzed for 
inorganic parameters (total metals), VOCs (chlorinated aliphatics only) 
and water quality parameters (ammonia, hardness, chloride, total 
sulfide). Total metals analyses include hexavalent chromium, total 
chromium, arsenic, and manganese.
    VOCs, sulfide, and chloride were not detected during any surface 
water sampling event. Ammonia was detected above the Surface Water 
Quality Standards (SWQS) of 0.035 mg/L and iron and manganese were 
detected above the SWQS of 0.30 mg/L. Although ammonia, iron and 
manganese concentrations were reported above standards, this appears 
attributable to naturally occurring conditions as evidenced by their 
presence of concentrations above the standards in the upstream surface 
water sample. In addition, iron does not have a primary standard, and 
is not considered a contaminant of concern for the Site.
    The surface water data review indicates few exceedances of the 
standards with no observed impact from the Site to the Creek. This 
indicates that there is no contaminated groundwater plume emanating 
from the landfill area. Surface water quality will continue to be 
monitored in accordance with the SMP.

Operation and Maintenance

    A long-term monitoring program in being implemented that was 
designed to ensure that the implemented remedy remains effective. The 
majority of the long-term monitoring program, which is being conducted 
by Benchmark under contract to the PSDs, includes the following: Annual 
inspection of the landfill cover system; monitoring of the gas venting 
system; inspection of groundwater level monitoring; collection of 
groundwater samples from selected wells; collection of surface water 
samples from the Creek at three locations and groundwater samples from 
five wells; and providing annual reports on these activities to NYSDEC 
and EPA. The Groundwater/Seep Collection and Pretreatment systems are 
monitored semi-annually by the Village of Gowanda, on behalf of GARC.

Five-Year Review

    Because hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants remain at 
the Site above levels that would otherwise allow for unlimited use and 
unrestricted exposure, a statutory five-

[[Page 36833]]

year review is required. The first five-year review was completed in 
April 2015. In the review EPA concluded that the remedy is functioning 
as intended and is protective of human health and the environment. The 
five-year review did not include any issues or recommendations. The 
next five-year review will be completed before April 2020.

Community Involvement

    Public participation activities for this Site have been satisfied 
as required in CERCLA 113(k) and Section 117. As part of the remedy 
selection process, the public was invited to comment on EPA's proposed 
remedies. All other documents and information that EPA relied on or 
considered in recommending this deletion are available for the public 
to review at the information repositories identified above.

Determination That the Site Meets the Criteria for Deletion in the NCP

    EPA, with the concurrence of the State of New York through NYSDEC, 
has determined that all required and appropriate response actions have 
been implemented by the responsible parties. The criteria for deletion 
from the NPL (40 CFR 300.425(e)(1)(I)) are met. The implemented remedy 
achieves the protection specified in the ROD(s) for all pathways of 
exposure. All selected remedial and removal action objectives and 
associated cleanup levels are consistent with agency policy and 
guidance. No further Superfund response is needed to protect human 
health and the environment.

V. Deletion Action

    The EPA, with concurrence of the State of New York through the 
NYSDEC, has determined that all appropriate response actions under 
CERCLA, other than operation and maintenance, monitoring and five-year 
reviews have been completed. Therefore, EPA is deleting the Site from 
the NPL.
    Because EPA considers this action to be noncontroversial and 
routine, EPA is proposing to delete the Site without prior publication. 
This action will be effective September 30, 2019, unless EPA receives 
adverse comments by August 29, 2019. If adverse comments are received 
within the 30-day public comment period, EPA will publish a timely 
withdrawal of this direct final notice of deletion before the effective 
date of the deletion, and the deletion will not take effect. EPA will 
prepare a response to comments and continue with the deletion process, 
as appropriate, on the basis of the notice of intent to delete and the 
comments already received. If there is no withdrawal of this direct 
final notice of deletion, there will be no additional opportunity to 
comment.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Chemicals, 
Hazardous substances, Hazardous waste, Intergovernmental relations, 
Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Superfund, Water 
pollution control, Water supply.

    Dated: July 16, 2019.
Peter D. Lopez,
Regional Administrator, Region 2.

    For the reasons set out in this document, 40 CFR part 300 is 
amended as follows:

PART 300--NATIONAL OIL AND HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES POLLUTION 
CONTINGENCY PLAN

0
1. The authority citation for part 300 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(d); 42 U.S.C. 9601-9657; E.O. 13626, 
77 FR 56749, 3 CFR, 2013 Comp., p. 306; E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 
CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR 2923, 3 CFR, 1987 Comp., 
p. 193.

Subpart L--National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution 
Contingency Plan; Involuntary Acquisition of Property by the 
Government

Appendix B to Part 300 [Amended]

0
2. Table 1 of Appendix B to part 300 is amended by removing the entry: 
``NY, Peter Cooper, Gowanda''.

[FR Doc. 2019-16065 Filed 7-29-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P