Final Groundwater
Cleanup Decisions
Fact Sheet #2001-10
November 2001
A fact sheet describing how final decisions
for groundwater cleanup will be reached.
Inside this Fact Sheet
Why
Are Final Decisions Needed?
What’s the Difference?
How Did We Get to the Interim Record of Decision?
What Has Happened Since the IROD Was Signed?
How Do We Complete a Record of Decision?
General Schedule and Project Tasks
IROD to ROD Community Involvement (CI) Process
What Happens after a Final ROD is Signed?
For More Information
Why Are Final Decisions Needed?
Over the next several years, the Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence (AFCEE)
will be implementing a public process leading to final cleanup decisions for seven
groundwater plumes emanating from the Massachusetts Military Reservation (MMR). AFCEE is
the primary agency responsible for the investigation and cleanup of these seven
groundwater plumes at MMR.
Although
treatment systems have been selected, designed, and constructed for most of these plumes,
and contaminated groundwater currently is being extracted and treated, the cleanup
decisions that were made were "interim" decisions. An "Interim Record of
Decision"; (IROD), rather than a "Final Record of Decision" (ROD), was
signed in 1995 in part to accelerate the process. Following U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) requirements, AFCEE will begin a process to reach final decisions for the
Ashumet Valley (AV), Chemical Spill 10 (CS-10), Eastern Briarwood (EB), Fuel Spill 12
(FS-12), Landfill 1 (LF-1), Storm Drain 5 (SD-5), and Western Aquafarm (WA) groundwater
plumes.
This process will include an evaluation of the effectiveness of the
current treatment systems, an analysis of other potential cleanup alternatives, a decision
on whether additional or other treatment is necessary, an analysis of the timeframe for
aquifer restoration, and a definition of what objectives need to be met in order to
consider a plume "cleaned up" and the treatment system turned off. Throughout
the process, there will be many opportunities for the public to be involved and to advise
AFCEE on the final cleanup decisions. AFCEE will solicit public opinion to determine the
following:
Are the existing treatment systems adequate to meet response action objectives?
When will the groundwater plumes be cleaned up?
Are the current systems protective of human health and the environment?
What’s the Difference?
Interim Record of Decision (IROD)
Record of Decision (ROD)
Focuses on aquifer restoration
Establishes multi-step process for
shutdown
Documents any changes for existing systems
Fulfills legal EPA requirement
How Did We Get to the Interim
Record of Decision?
1992 – 1993
- The National Guard Bureau (NGB) implemented several phases
of the Superfund process to address soil and groundwater contamination affecting the
sole-source aquifer.
The plume boundaries were defined through
extensive groundwater investigations.
Through a public process, it was
determined that there was sufficient data to design systems that would stop the seven
groundwater plumes from moving closer to residential areas and water bodies.
1994
In an attempt to accelerate the process,
the Plume Response Plan was developed to contain seven groundwater plumes simultaneously.
The Plume Management Process Action Team helped coordinate development of this plan.
The Plume Response Plan was used as a
substitute for the Feasibility Study and as a basis to develop the Proposed Plan.
The NGB, Department of Defense (DoD),
EPA, Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), and local communities
approved the plan, resulting in an accelerated effort toward "simultaneous
containment" of the following seven groundwater plumes:
- Ashumet Valley
- Chemical Spill 10
- Eastern Briarwood
- Fuel Spill 12
- Landfill 1
- Storm Drain 5
- Western Aquafarm
1995
The NGB and EPA, with MassDEP
concurrence, signed an IROD for the seven groundwater plumes. The IROD enabled the NGB to
take immediate action to protect human health and the environment, while collecting
additional information to evaluate and select final cleanup alternatives.
What Has Happened Since the IROD Was Signed?
1996
The NGB issued a 60% design report for
plume containment. While the 60% design protected human health, it presented significant
ecological impacts to the environment.
AFCEE was brought in to manage the
Installation Restoration Program (IRP). AFCEE was able to provide more resources for the
groundwater cleanup program.
The Technical Review and Evaluation Team
(TRET), consisting of various technical experts, was established as an independent review
committee to provide advice and recommendations.
After reviewing the 60% design document,
the TRET developed recommendations for next steps for each plume.
Based on the TRET recommendations, AFCEE
built treatment systems for FS-12 and SD-5 North; placed AV, SD-5 South, LF-1, and CS-10
into an accelerated decision-making process; and placed EB and WA into long-term
monitoring.
AFCEE, DEP, and EPA changed their focus
from simultaneous containment of the plumes to restoration of the groundwater aquifer.
1997
AFCEE, DEP, and EPA introduced the
Decision Criteria Matrix (DCM) process, an accelerated decision-making tool to refine
cleanup decisions. The DCM process was applied to the AV, CS-10, LF-1, and SD-5 South
groundwater plumes.
The DCM gave the public an opportunity to
review alternatives and make suggestions for final cleanup measures prior to the remedy
selection.
Enforceable milestones also were
established for design and startup of the selected cleanup systems for AV, CS-10, LF-1,
and SD-5 South plumes.
1998 – 2000
Based on recommendations received during
the DCM process, AFCEE designed and constructed treatment systems for the AV, CS-10, LF-1,
and SD-5 South plumes.
| How Do We Complete a Record of
Decision? |
The EPA Superfund process
is a series of steps that are followed to identify and define an area of contamination,
determine risks, analyze treatment options, select final remedies, and finally, clean up
the site. At each step in the process listed on Figure 1, AFCEE will prepare and submit
the required document to regulatory agencies for review and comment.
A ROD documents the technical rationale for
a final decision and establishes criteria for treatment system shutdown. It is a
legally-binding document required under the Comprehensive and Environmental Response,
Compensation, Liability Act (CERCLA), the law governing Superfund. At the ROD step, AFCEE
will prepare and submit the Final ROD to MassDEP and EPA. Then MassDEP will submit a
comment letter to AFCEE just prior to EPA signing the ROD. The state concurrence letter is
included in the Final ROD.
Throughout the Superfund process, there
will be interaction among agencies, citizen advisory teams, and the general public. The
community involvement process encourages residents to become actively involved. The public
will have many opportunities to advise AFCEE on final cleanup decisions. |
Figure 1: Superfund Process.
|
For more information, please
review the community involvement
process below.
General Schedule and Project Tasks
Each of the seven plumes in the process
will be evaluated separately, except for Western Aquafarm and Eastern Briarwood, which
will be evaluated together. The Remedial Investigations (RI) for SD-5, FS-12, LF-1, and
Ashumet Valley have been completed. Each plume will have a separate Feasibility Study
(FS), Proposed Plan (PP), Public Comment Period (PCP), and final ROD, and will have its
own community involvement activities. Although specific dates have not yet been set with
the EPA and DEP, all seven final RODs are expected to be signed by the end of year four.
IROD to ROD Community Involvement (CI) Process
Input from the community will be sought to determine the
best final cleanup decision for each plume. In addition to public meetings, AFCEE will
continue community outreach with towns, advisory teams, and affected neighborhoods. The
Senior Management Board (SMB) and Plume Cleanup Team (PCT) are citizen advisory teams to
AFCEE.
What Happens After a Final ROD is Signed?
After a ROD is signed, AFCEE will prepare information
on operation and maintenance, long-term monitoring, and performance of treatment systems.
AFCEE will continue to report on the
long-term monitoring and performance of the treatment systems. Recommendations on changes
to the treatment systems and monitoring program will be made in annual reports. Once the
cleanup levels have been met for each plume, AFCEE and the regulatory agencies will
evaluate if the treatment system can be shut down using the multi-step process to be
documented in each ROD. The public will have many opportunities for involvement with
system shutdown decisions.
Five-year reviews will be conducted by AFCEE to ensure that the selected groundwater
cleanup remedies continue to provide adequate protection of human health and the
environment.
For
more information
Upcoming fact sheets for each of the seven groundwater plumes
will be made available to the public. The IRP Annual Report also will contain an article
to highlight milestones and completion of the steps in the community involvement process.
More information is available at the main
libraries in Bourne, Falmouth, Mashpee, Sandwich, and the Coast Guard library on base, and
on the MMR web site (www.mmr.org).
Doug Karson, Community Involvement Specialist
HQ AFCEE/MMR
Phone: (508) 968-4678 x 2 Fax: (508) 968-4673
E-mail: doug.karson@mmr.brooks.af.mil
Jim Murphy, Community Involvement Coordinator
USEPA New England Region
Phone: (617) 918-1028 Fax: (617) 918-1029
E-mail: murphy.jim@epa.gov
Ellie Grillo, Community Involvement Coordinator
MassDEP
Phone: (508) 946-2866 Fax: (508) 947-6557
E-mail: ellie.grillo@state.ma.us
|
