Meeting Minutes

Agenda Item #1. Introductions

Mr. Karson convened the meeting at 6:30 PM. He noted that the following people are in attendance: Mr. Aker, a senior hydrologist with the Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence (AFCEE); Mr. Mike Minior, the Deputy Program Manager with AFCEE; Mr. Elliot Jacobs, with the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (DEP); Mr. Paul Marchessault with the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); and State Representative Nancy Caffyn. Mr. Karson also mentioned that various representatives from Jacobs Engineering are in attendance this evening.

Mr. Karson reviewed the meeting agenda and groundrules and then introduced Mr. Aker.

Agenda Item #2. SD-5 South and TCE Cleanup Construction Activities Update

Mr. Aker reported that there are two ongoing construction activities on Hooppole Road. These are the Storm Drain 5 (SD-5) South/Hooppole Road construction activities and the trichloroethylene (TCE) plume remediation construction activities. He noted that he will discuss the TCE construction activities.

Mr. Aker reported that the purpose of the cleanup action is to prevent further degradation of the aquifer. A benefit of this activity will be the detachment of the plume from the two wells located on Hooppole Road, which eventually would prevent contamination from entering Johns Pond and Ashumet Pond. Mr. Aker explained that the TCE and SD-5 South plumes are linked by their geographic location; both plumes are located in the isthmus between Ashumet Pond and Johns Pond. He reported that the cleanup construction work is ongoing for both plumes. He also noted that in order to make the initial connection to the SD-5 South treatment system, piping was installed and trenching was constructed on the base. Two extraction wells, one for each plume, were installed on Hooppole road. Mr. Aker reported that the comment period for the TCE plume only, runs from November 5, 1999 to December 4, 1999.

Mr. Aker displayed a map of the SD-5 and TCE plumes. He pointed to the location of the SD-5 North treatment system and reported that the plume is detached from the extraction wells. Mr. Aker stated that the same effort will be made to detach that portion of the plume and stop it from discharging into the pond. He pointed out the TCE plume, and the two currently operating recirculating wells along the axis of the SD-5 South plume. He also pointed out two recently installed extraction wells.

Mr. Aker displayed a close-up graphic of the Chemical Spill 10 (CS-10) plume, to which the Air Force believes the TCE plume is linked. He pointed out the Sandwich Road extraction fence with reinjection wells on either side, the two recirculating wells, the two recently installed extraction wells for the TCE plume and SD-5 South plume, and the approximately 6000 feet long piping run to the SD-5 treatment system. Mr. Aker pointed out the portion of the piping run that currently is installed, and the portion along Hooppole Road, which the Air Force will install next week. He displayed a map and pointed to the recirculating well located on Hillside Avenue and the recirculating well located on Highland Avenue. He reported that the TCE plume is approximately 50 to 75 feet in width, with a thickness of 70 feet at Wheeler Road and 40 feet at Hillside Avenue.

Mr. Aker reported that the extraction well located in the TCE plume, which will pump approximately 75 gallons per minute (gpm), has the capacity to pump additional volume, should more contamination be found under the pond. He stated that it will achieve 100% capture of the TCE mass upgradient of Hooppole Road. Mr. Aker also noted that there is an ongoing study to determine the TCE plume mass underneath Ashumet Pond. He said that the operation timeframe of the extraction well is unknown at this time. Mr. Aker further reported that the installation will not exceed any ecological thresholds. He stated that the ponds cannot be drawn down more than six inches, and the flux of clean water into the pond cannot exceed 20%.

Mr. Aker displayed an aerial photograph of the Briarwood neighborhood. He reported that performance monitoring evaluation (PME) wells will monitor the effectiveness of the cleanup system to determine if any modifications need to be made to the system. Mr. Aker reported that six additional PME wells will be installed in November through December 1999. He then reported that in order to expedite the ongoing Ashumet Pond investigation, the Air Force will put another barge on Ashumet Pond with another push technology drill rig. Mr. Karson noted that the possibility of working on Saturdays also is being considered in order to expedite the investigation on Ashumet Pond.

Mr. Aker displayed a map of the conceptual well layout for the PME plan. Mr. Karson asked if the conceptual layout includes wells that will be located in rights-of-way. Mr. Aker replied that most of the wells are located in right-of-ways. He also noted that a well will be located on property belonging to a Mr. Smith.

Mr. Dow asked if the TCE plume reinjection wells are located on Hooppole Road. Mr. Aker replied that the contaminated water will be piped to the SD-5/Sandwich Road treatment plant, and will be reinjected nearby.

Mr. Aker reported that the estimated cost for this system is $4.7 million, which includes six months of operation and maintenance (O&M) – it does not include the O&M cost for the lifetime of the system. Mr. Karson added that the approximate operation time of this system will be less than ten years. He further explained that when constructing a system, a certain period of performance is purchased in order to fine-tune the system while the funding is already in-place. Everything after that time period would be part of a general O&M program.

Mr. Aker displayed a Gantt chart of the activities accomplished to date and those that need to be accomplished. He reported that the Air Force currently is conducting well-field drilling and pipeline construction, which is scheduled to be completed on January 14, 2000. The system is scheduled to start by the end of January 2000.

Mr. Aker displayed a photograph of a development rig on the SD-5 well that was drilled on Hooppole Road. He explained that a well must be developed to certain parameters, which will enable samples to be taken from the groundwater without any contamination, or anything else, interfering with the analysis. He displayed a photograph of an air rotary drilling rig, which is capable of drilling to bedrock and installing the eight-inch extraction wells. Mr. Aker then displayed a photograph of an excavator involved in the construction of a vault for the SD-5 plume well, and a photograph of a well installed in the roadway.

Agenda Item #3. Questions and Answer Session

Mr. Dow commented that a lot of the TCE plume is downgradient from where the extraction well will be located. He then asked if continuous studies will be conducted of the TCE levels in the fish in Johns Pond. Mr. Aker replied that fish studies will not be done; however, ongoing surface water sampling will be conducted in that area. He added that wells installed between Hooppole Road and Johns Pond will be sampled. Mr. Dow then asked if the extraction well for the TCE plume and the SD-5 North treatment plant have enough capacity to address the TCE that might be located underneath Ashumet Pond. Mr. Aker replied that the SD-5 treatment plant does have enough additional capacity. He stated that if there were a large unknown mass of TCE, the well could be increased to 300 gpm in order to accommodate it. Mr. Karson added that additional groundwater extraction wells could be installed. He noted that there is a limitation on the Sandwich Road treatment facility. He explained that there is a great deal of reserved capacity now; however, if a much larger and wider slug of contamination is coming under the pond, it would require additional extraction wells with greatly increased flow rates. Additional modifications to the treatment plant would be necessary if it exceeds its capacity.

Ms. Caffyn asked Mr. Aker to provide an update on the recirculating well that had caused odor and noise problems. Mr. Aker replied that the recirculating well’s exhaust stack was producing a sound similar to that of a clothes dryer. A closed-loop system was implemented, thereby eliminating that exhaust noise. Mr. Aker also noted that the exhaust, when it was in existence, was emitting dichloroethylene (DCE) at levels far below those that would be dangerous to human health. This problem also was eliminated by the implementation of the closed-loop system.

Ms. Caffyn asked if the residents in the neighborhood are happy with this activity. Mr. Aker replied that the residents seem to be happy. Ms. Caffyn then inquired about sampling for contaminants just outside of the TCE plume. Mr. Aker stated that surface water sampling for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) will be conducted in the future. Ms. Caffyn inquired about the current sampling results. Mr. Aker replied that the sampling conducted to date indicates that there is no danger to any people. He reported that 126 samples have been taken and most of the contamination is "locked-up" within the pore space of the pond sediments. Samples were collected from the top of the sediments, which is actually the surface water, where the water is discharging. Mr. Aker reported that from 0.2 to 1 feet, TCE was detected at 3.5 parts per billion (ppb), which is well below the drinking water standard. Mr. Karson added that this information is related only to that portion of the TCE plume and not to the SD-5 plume. He stated that the SD-5 plume has a much larger area of upwelling, in which no measurable concentrations of TCE have been seen.

Ms. Orlando inquired about Mr. Aker’s statement that the TCE plume may be an extension of the CS-10 plume. Mr. Aker explained that the purpose of this study was to determine if those two plumes are linked. Thus far, similar concentrations (1500 ppb to 2200 ppb) and the same constituents have been seen. Mr. Aker stated that the groundwater modeling indicates that the TCE plume definitely is a part of the CS-10 plume. Ms. Orlando asked if contamination is showing up in the sampling conducted in Ashumet Pond and in the samples taken from the barge. Mr. Aker replied that it is. He explained that in order to determine the width of a plume, a well fence is drilled, and the location of the well fence is "stepped-out" from the contamination until a clean well is detected. Mr. Karson clarified that Mr. Aker is referring to detections in groundwater below the pond bottom, before it upwells into the pond. The detections are not in the actual pond water.

Mr. Orlando asked why the clean water is being reinjected in the "other" well field, and not closer to Johns Pond. Mr. Aker explained that the system was designed with excess capacity, which eliminates cost and increases efficiency. He noted that currently the two wells are pumping at a combined rate of 175 gpm; compared to the considerable mound of water that is entering the pond, the location of the reinjection does not make any difference.

Mr. Baker asked if the public comment period starts on November 4, 1999, and runs for a month. Mr. Aker replied that the public comment period for the TCE plume starts November 5, 1999 and ends on December 4, 1999. Mr. Baker inquired about the purpose of the comment period, with the decisions already made and implemented. Mr. Karson replied that, by agreement with the regulatory agencies and AFCEE, this action was conducted under a Time Critical Removal Action (TCRA), which allows for the mobilization and construction to occur in a quick time period. The public comment process "catches up" either during or after the onset of construction. Mr. Karson reported that once digging begins, the Air Force has 60 days to conduct the public comment period. He noted that construction began a month ago.

Mr. Baker inquired about the possibility that there is contamination, beyond the two pump and treat wells on Hooppole Road, coming up on the other side of Johns Pond, if the CS-10 plume travels under Ashumet Pond and then becomes very narrow. Mr. Aker replied that the Air Force, with the United States Geological Survey (USGS), has conducted diffusion sampling to locate the area of upwelling. Additional surface water sampling also has been conducted in that particular area, and out into the pond. The results of those sampling efforts indicate that nothing is discharging into the pond past "this" area. (NW portions of Johns Pond)

Mr. Baker commented that he is concerned about the landmass on the eastern shore of Johns Pond. He asked why there are no monitoring wells on the other side of Johns Pond when there is a plume approaching Ashumet Pond on the northwest and emanating on the eastern shore of Ashumet Pond. Mr. Aker replied that there are monitoring wells on the other side of Johns Pond, and there are plans to install additional wells in that area. Mr. Baker remarked that for some time he has been hearing about a plan to install additional monitoring wells. Mr. Karson replied that there are at least four monitoring wells located along the eastern shore of Johns Pond, one of which is located within the direct projected flow path of these particular plumes, if they were to underflow Johns Pond. Those wells were drilled to bedrock and sampled every ten feet and there was no evidence of these plumes underflowing the pond. Mr. Karson noted that these wells are sampled periodically, and he reiterated that those wells will be augmented with additional well installations. He added that he could provide Mr. Baker with a map of those well locations. Mr. Baker commented that he would like to see that map.

Mr. Dow asked if sampling will be done to the south of the TCE plume in order to determine whether that is the only place where the pollution underneath Ashumet Pond travels through the peninsula. Mr. Aker replied that a number of monitoring wells were installed to determine the width and thickness of the TCE plume. Drive points also were installed at narrow intervals along the shore. Mr. Aker stated that AFCEE believes that the width of the plume has been accurately defined. He also reported that as part of the pond study, sampling will be conducted in the pond to determine if there are any other fingers discharging into the pond. He said that if other fingers are found beneath the pond, the Air Force would determine the best locations to install additional monitoring wells in that area.

Agenda Item #4. Community Involvement Activities

Mr. Karson reported that the TCE plume construction comment period is from November 5, 1999 to December 5, 1999. He then reviewed the public meetings that have been held to date. (See attachment #1, which includes all slides shown during this presentation.) Mr. Karson noted that neighborhood notices are sent to the entire Briarwood Homeowners’ Association mailing list, and meeting dates and important milestones are advertised in the local newspapers. He also stated that, based on an agreement with the Town of Mashpee, AFCEE will send certified mail to the people who live in close proximity to these types of construction projects, in order to officially notify them of any construction activities. Mr. Karson stated that information about the construction activities also is provided through news releases, citizen team meetings, and the Massachusetts Military Reservation (MMR) web site.

Mr. Karson reported that neighborhood notices regarding ongoing construction activities will be provided. He then introduced Ms. Lana Brodziak, the community involvement representative specifically assigned to this project, and explained that she develops and coordinates the delivery of those notices. Mr. Karson also reported that the Administrative Record is available at the main libraries in Falmouth and Mashpee, and at the Installation Restoration Program (IRP) office. The Administrative Record consists of every document the Air Force has used to reach a decision about the TCE plume construction activities, including any reports generated, field work data, comments from the regulatory agencies, and the Air Force’s responses to the regulatory agencies’ comments. Mr. Karson also mentioned that close coordination with the local police, fire departments, schools, and towns will continue.

Mr. Karson reported that additional neighborhood notices will be developed as construction proceeds, and phone calls, and notification to the towns and the neighborhood will continue. He stated that once the system is operational, the Air Force will continue to provide periodic updates throughout the duration of the project, whether it be through neighborhood notices, fact sheets, or occasional public information meetings. The intent is to ensure that the public understands how well the systems are operating. Mr. Karson reiterated that certified mail will be sent prior to the installation of the six additional PME wells, which is scheduled to occur within the next few months. The purpose of the certified mail is to notify the residents of those well locations. Mr. Karson noted that people may review the Administrative Record and provide comments to the Air Force. He explained that the Air Force will review the comments received and prepare a responsiveness summary, which will list the concerns and questions submitted and the official Air Force response to those concerns and questions. Mr. Karson noted that comments must be postmarked no later than December 4, 1999, and can be mailed, faxed, e-mailed, or sent to the MMR web site.

Agenda Item #5. Question and Answer Session

Mr. Dow asked if the Joint Process Action Team (JPAT) is in favor of this proposal. Mr. Aker replied that, in general, the JPAT members are in favor of the proposal. He also noted that JPAT members commented on the use of recirculating wells rather than extraction wells. At that time, the Air Force explained that recirculating wells could not remove the mass to the desired level, and in this case, extraction wells were better than recirculating wells, especially with the low pumping rate (175 gpm) in that area. Mr. Aker then noted that the pumping rate will not affect the drawdown of the pond or the flux of clean water entering the pond.

Mr. Dow added that a previous set of JPAT meeting minutes indicated that the JPAT has a concern that much of the TCE plume is located downgradient of the extraction well. The JPAT members, therefore, suggested installing a recirculating well closer to the pond edge. Mr. Dow also reported that at a number of JPAT meetings Mr. Steve Hurley had remarked that many of the fish that he catches in Johns Pond have papillomas on them, and he (Mr. Hurley) feels that the fish are in worse health near the location of the two plumes discharging into Johns Pond. Mr. Dow remarked that the issue of fish sampling has been raised in the past, and in his opinion, it has not made any forward progress, other than "you take in under advisement and ignore it."

Mr. Aker stated that the JPAT’s recommendation was taken very seriously. He explained that the area in question is densely populated and the installation of a well would require access and permission. He stated that the Air Force determined that even if the decision were made to install a well closer to the pond edge, by the time access and permission were granted and the wells were turned on, the majority of the contamination already would have discharged to the pond. He added that a well in that location would operate only for a short period and it would not be economical. Mr. Karson noted that the groundwater flow rate in that area is approximately three feet per day.

Ms. Caffyn commented that it is her understanding that this summer the Air Force agreed to test the fish in both Ashumet and Johns Ponds. Mr. Minior clarified that the Air Force signed an agreement with the Mashpee Board of Health , and provided the Board with the funding to conduct fish sampling. He noted that Mr. Ellias McQuaid is planning to conduct that sampling effort.

Ms. Caffyn inquired about the Air Force’s timeframe for completion of the Ashumet Pond plume investigation. Mr. Aker replied that the investigation should be completed by mid-December 1999.

Ms. Orlando asked if the barges would be removed from the pond by the mid-December completion date. Mr. Aker replied that they would. Mr. Karson clarified that removal of the barges will be contingent upon the findings and weather conditions, which could affect the schedule.

Mr. Orlando asked if an area of TCE plume upwelling in Ashumet Pond has been found. Mr. Aker replied that it has. He explained that USGS diffusion samplers were laid out in a grid-like fashion and the area was sampled. Mr. Aker pointed to a discharge zone located within the pore spaces of the pond sediments. He reported that the Air Force confirmed that finding by drilling push-technology wells from the barge. He also noted that contamination has never been detected in the pond water itself.

Mr. Orlando inquired about the possibility of installing a recirculating well close to the shoreline at the area of discharge. He remarked that he thinks the concern about the plume upwelling into Ashumet Pond is not being addressed. He also commented that he thinks the upwelling should be addressed at its source. Mr. Aker noted that the JPAT has recommended the installation of recirculating wells along the shoreline. He then reported that Mr. Ray Cottengaim, with the Army Corps of Engineers, and a number of Jacobs Engineering representatives, walked the area and determined that physically it would be difficult to install a recirculating well there because of the residences and steep terrain in the area. Mr. Aker also noted that Dr. Joel Feigenbaum and other JPAT members walked the area and saw how densely populated the area actually is.

Mr. Orlando commented that there was not a problem when it came to installing a well across from his home. He stated that now there is a self-contained well that might easily be sold to the residents there. He questioned why a well could not be forced on others, for the good of others, if a well was forced on "us." Mr. Karson explained that several considerations were evaluated before the decision was made, including the public sentiment of that neighborhood and the amount of construction associated with installing several recirculating wells. He stated that, in consultation with the regulatory agencies, the neighborhood, and the general public, a decision was made to cut off the plume at Sandwich Road, to evaluate what is occurring in and beneath the pond, and to address what is on the other side of the pond. That is the decision that the Air Force is implementing. Mr. Karson stated that to reopen negotiations and revisit the issue of whether or not to install additional treatment in that area would require discussion with the regulatory agencies. He said that he does not believe that this would happen.

Mr. Orlando asked if it is correct that the Sandwich Road well fence was installed before it was known that contamination was going into the pond. Mr. Karson replied that this is correct. Mr. Orlando then stated that now there is an apparent problem at the pond, and asked, "why not attack the problem?" He remarked that if more recirculating wells, or pump and treat wells, are needed at the edge of the pond are needed, he sees no reason why they should not be installed. Mr. Karson commented that it is important to consider what a problem is. He reiterated that testing of the actual pond water does not show measurable concentrations of plume contaminants. Mr. Karson acknowledged that the shallow groundwater below pond bottom in the northwest corner of the pond contains TCE and PCE, which is upwelling into the pond; however, when the plume constituents enter the pond water they are not measurable. He explained that this information is provided to the local Board of Health, and to the Massachusetts Department of Public Health (MDPH), which evaluates risk, they have indicated that there is no risk. Mr. Karson questioned the sense of urgency to disrupt the neighborhood to address that portion of the plume, most of which will underflow the pond.

Mr. Orlando remarked that, in his opinion, the problem in Ashumet Pond is worse than the problem in Johns Pond, and the Ashumet Pond problem is not being addressed. He stated that he thinks that probably more TCE and PCE is upwelling into Ashumet Pond than into Johns Pond. Mr. Aker clarified that this is not true, according to the diffusion sampling and the pond water sampling. He added that anything underflowing the pond will be captured by the extraction well, or by an expanded system; eventually, it will be captured.

Mr. Orlando commented that he is concerned about the contamination entering Ashumet Pond, and finding a way to eliminating it. He asked how long it will take to stop the flow from the well fence on Sandwich Road to the edge of the pond. Mr. Karson replied that it would take about two and a half to three years.

Ms. Caffyn commented that plume maps always show the plumes ending at the pond edge, which reminds her of "the solution to pollution is dilution" – something that nine years ago the EPA and MassDEP said they would not do. She said that she thinks that this is always the case here, and therefore the residents who live near the ponds are told, "no matter how much goes in, it really is not going to be bad for you." She asked if at some point the Air Force will define the locations of these plumes. Mr. Aker replied that the purpose of this study is to define the plume and eventually, when this study is completed, a plume map will be developed. Mr. Karson added that the map will be similar to the map of Johns Pond. He referred to the Johns Pond map and explained that the blue represents water and the pinkish areas in the pond depict known areas of upwelling. He said that the same type of map will be made of Ashumet Pond, once the information is gathered.

Ms. Caffyn stated that she understands that the Air Force knows where the upwelling is, but the Air Force also is indicating that, to some degree, the plume is going underneath the pond. She then asked why the Air Force does not illustrate where the plume travels under the pond, so people can understand where the plume is going. Mr. Aker stated that the plume is going under Ashumet Pond, but to date, there is no indication that the plume is underflowing Johns Pond. Mr. Aker pointed to the portion of the CS-10 plume that is discharging to the pond and not underflowing it. Ms. Caffyn asked if this will be clarified in the maps. Mr. Aker replied that it will.

Mr. Keaney, from the Upper Cape Codder, asked how the Air Force updates and maintains the accuracy of the mailings. He noted that there is a new resident in the Highland Avenue area, who had not heard about this construction. Mr. Karson replied that this is quite possible, as residents do change. He also noted that the Briarwood Homeowners’ Association has representation in the Public Information Team (PIT), and whenever the association updates its mailing list, it provides an updated copy to the Air Force (approximately two to three times per year).

Mr. Dow noted that it is his recollection that in the past one of the wells on the eastern side of Johns Pond had a detection of PCE. Mr. Aker replied that this is correct, and noted that the well, which was located on the Sullivan property, had a low detection of PCE at the base of the aquifer. He also stated that the well was resampled and there were no detections. Mr. Pannel, the Jacobs Engineering project manager for the Ashumet/Johns Pond plume underflow investigation, referred to the Sullivan property and stated that at approximately 300 feet below ground there was a PCE detection of 0.5 ppb, which is well below the drinking water standard of 5 ppb. He noted that a well was installed at the interval of the detection; it was then sampled for confirmatory off-site analysis, and PCE was not detected. Mr. Dow asked if there are plans to sample upgradient of that detection. Mr. Aker replied that additional wells, upgradient of that location, were sampled and found to be clean. He also stated that AFCEE and the regulators are developing a plan to install additional wells in that area, and that detection of PCE will be taken into consideration in terms of placement of the wells.

Agenda Item #6. Adjourn

Mr. Karson adjourned the meeting at 7:20 PM.