Final Restoration Plan and Environmental Assessment for the Sugar Creek Valley Natural Resource Damage Assessment at the Dover Chemical Corporation Site

The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. § 9601 et seq.) and its implementing regulations authorize federal and state agencies, as well as Indian tribes, to act as trustees of natural resources on behalf of the public. When hazardous substances are released into the environment and harm the public’s natural resources, these trustees conduct assessments to determine the extent of injury, recover monetary and other damages from the responsible parties, and use these recovered damages to plan and implement restoration actions that will compensate the public for the loss of natural resources and the services they would have provided but for the hazardous substance releases. 42 U.S.C. § 9611(i).

The natural resource trustees for the Sugar Creek Valley Natural Resource Assessment Area (SCVAA) are the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI or Department), acting through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) and the State of Ohio, acting through the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (Ohio EPA) (collectively referred to as the “Trustees” or the “Trustee Council”). The Trustee Council prepared this Final Restoration Plan and Environmental Assessment (Final RP/EA) to identify and evaluate restoration projects at or in the vicinity of the SCVAA that are intended to restore, replace, rehabilitate and/or acquire the equivalent of natural resources and their services injured by releases of hazardous substances from Dover Chemical Corporation (Dover Chemical Corp. or DCC) in Dover, Ohio.

Through the CERCLA Natural Resource Damage Assessment and Restoration (NRDAR) process, the Trustees negotiated a combination restoration-based and cash settlement of $880,000.00 with DCC to restore, replace, rehabilitate and/or acquire the equivalent of natural resources and their associated service losses injured at the SCVAA. The Trustees determined that contamination was present in sufficient quantities to cause injury to ground water, surface water, sediment, and organisms living within, upon, or closely associated with those resources. The releases also adversely affected ecological services provided by injured resources (ground water, surface water, sediment, and related habitat).

Under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. § 4321 et seq.), federal agencies must identify and evaluate environmental impacts that may result from federal actions. This Final RP/EA describes the purpose and need for restoration, identifies, and evaluates potential restoration alternatives, including a No Action Alternative (Alternative One), summarizes the affected environment, and describes the potential environmental consequences of proposed restoration activities negotiated with DCC.

The restoration projects focus on restoring and acquiring the equivalent of the types of natural resources at and in the vicinity of the SCVAA. Public review of the restoration alternatives is an integral and important part of the restoration planning process and is consistent with applicable state and federal laws and regulations. Thus, the Trustees solicited public comments on the Draft RP/EA and have addressed comments received from the public in preparing this Final RP/EA, as appropriate, in response to the comments. For additional information on the terms of the proposed settlement, please see United States of America and State of Ohio v. Dover Chemical Corporation. The proposed Consent Decree (CD) was made available for public review and comment for a period of 30-days on the Department of Justice website with comments accepted until November 2, 2022.

The proposed restoration projects included ground water recharge protection, habitat improvement and preservation within the Sugar Creek watershed, and preservation or enhancement of habitat including stream, riparian riparian
Definition of riparian habitat or riparian areas.

Learn more about riparian , wetland, and mature forest environments outside the watershed to benefit trust resources. Nine Alternatives are presented in this Final RP/EA and were evaluated using CERCLA evaluation factors (43 CFR 11.82(d)).

Specifically, the nine Alternatives include:

1. Alternative One: No Action /Natural Recovery Alternative

2. Alternative Two: The Wilderness Center – Falcon Flats Restoration Project, Sugar Creek Watershed

3. Alternative Three: The Wilderness Center – Lash’s Bog Enhancement and Restoration, Sugar Creek Watershed

4. Alternative Four: Sugar Creek Habitat Conservation Project, Sugar Creek Watershed

5. Alternative Five: Western Reserve Land Conservancy – Eastern Hellbender Project, Little Beaver Creek, Yellow Creek, Cross Creek, or Captina Creek Watersheds

6. Alternative Six: Trustee implemented ground water restoration, or protection project(s)

7. Alternative Seven: Joyce Hill Road SW Property Ground Water Recharge Project, Tuscarawas River Watershed

8. Alternative Eight: The City of Dover Wellhead Protection Project/Soccer Field Protection, Sugar Creek Watershed

9. Alternative Nine: City of Dover Canal Park Restoration and Enhancement Project, Sugar Creek Watershed

Having considered and addressed all public comments (Appendices D and E) the Trustees have determined that Alternatives Two, Three, Four, Five, and Six best address natural resource injuries and service reductions resulting from the release of hazardous substances within the SVCAA. Based on the Trustees’ evaluation of the environmental consequences of all nine Alternatives, the NRDAR factors described in 43 C.F.R. § 11.82(d), the Trustees identified Alternatives Two, Three, Four, Five, and Six as their Selected Alternatives.