December 1997 Storm Drain 5 South Plume Response Decision The purpose of this fact sheet is to describe the alternative selected by the Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence (AFCEE), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) to clean up the Storm Drain 5 (SD-5) South groundwater plume emanating from the Massachusetts Military Reservation. Words in italics are defined in the glossary at the end of this fact sheet. They are only italicized the first time they are used. Overview of The Selected Alternative After careful consideration of the advantages and disadvantages of each plume response alternative and comments received during the public comment period, the remedial project managers (RPMs) from AFCEE, EPA, and MassDEP reached consensus, that Alternative E best balances the decision criteria. The selected alternative uses recirculating well technology to achieve a significant degree of contaminant mass reduction. Recirculating wells will be installed along Hooppole Road and within the body of the plume. The selected alternative, as shown on page 3, is conceptual in nature. Therefore, the exact location and number of wells, and other refinements of the remedial system, will be determined by consideration of the following criteria:
Maximum engineering flexibility is necessary to allow for good design with the most up-to-date technical information about the plume. AFCEE will expedite construction of recirculating wells along Hooppole Road to reduce contaminant mass in the plume before it reaches Johns Pond. Expediting the installation of these recirculating wells will help capture some of the estimated 30 percent of the plume mass that will flow into and/or under Johns Pond before the scheduled full-system startup in June 1999. As part of this decision, data gap analysis will be completed. Data gap analysis is a study or series of studies to provide additional details regarding aquifer characteristics and contaminant distribution. Specifically, for SD-5 South, data gap analysis will include:
The Air Force will strive to complete these further investigations before Memorial Day, 1998, in order to minimize construction activities during the summer months. Completion of outstanding data gap analysis and initiation of construction will begin after Labor Day, 1998. After the data gap investigations are completed, the agencies will determine if the selected alternative protects human and ecological health and protects and restores the aquifer. As part of this decision, AFCEE, DEP, and EPA will continue ongoing public involvement efforts. In order to ensure that the public is kept informed and has an opportunity to provide input on the ongoing remedial actions at SD-5 South, the agencies will provide ongoing involvement with the affected neighborhoods and towns, the citizen process action teams, the Senior Management Board (SMB), the Barnstable Science Advisory Panel (SAP), concerned environmental groups, and the general public. Particular efforts will be made to involve residents living near and on Johns Pond. The agencies expect to hold public meetings at least once in late winter, late spring, and fall of 1998. A draft execution plan will be issued February 2, 1998. This plan will include a schedule of activities and further detail the agreed-upon actions. The enforceable milestone for full-system startup is June 22, 1999. Interim enforceable milestones also will be established. In 1997, an extraction, treatment, and reinjection (ETR) system was installed in the northern part of the SD-5 groundwater plume (as shown on page 3). The system consists of 10 extraction and 8 reinjection wells located on-base near the MMR border and an on-base treatment plant for the extracted water. The ETR system draws the water out of the ground and removes the solvent contamination by running the water through activated carbon canisters. The carbon adsorbs, or holds onto, the contaminants. Clean water is then returned to the groundwater by the reinjection wells. The carbon canisters are recycled off-site periodically. The system began operation on August 4, 1997. Sampling results from performance monitoring evaluations indicate that the ETR system for SD-5 North is cleaning up the plume. Preliminary results indicate that contaminants have been reduced downgradient of the ETR fences. Rationale for the Selected Alternative Following are the rationales for the selected alternative:
For More Information Additional information can be found in the main libraries in Falmouth, Bourne, Sandwich, and Mashpee, and in the U.S. Coast Guard Library on base. Information can also be obtained by visiting our website at http://www.mmr.org, by calling the Community Involvement Office at (508) 968-4678, or by sending an electronic mail message to: jwhitaker@mafmh.ang.af.mil Next Steps
Overview of Written Public Comments Written comments were received from 13 individuals and organizations during the public comment period. Commentors represented the affected neighborhood, the public-at-large, citizen advisory teams, local and regional environmental organizations, and state and federal agencies. Comments were received in favor of all alternatives except Alternative Z, no action. Comments focused on protecting the health of Johns Pond and minimizing impacts to the neighborhood. Responses to all written comments are described in a separate document, called a responsiveness summary. The responsiveness summary presents the comments and provides responses prepared by AFCEE, EPA, and DEP. The original text of the comments are part of the public record but are not included in the responsiveness summary. Copies of the comments can be viewed by contacting the IRP Community Involvement Office at 508-968-4678. The responsiveness summary will be mailed to everyone who submitted a written comment, as well as members of citizen teams. Copies of the responsiveness summary will also be available at the main libraries in Falmouth, Mashpee, Sandwich, and Bourne, and at the U.S. Coast Guard Library on base. The responsiveness summary also is available by calling the IRP Community Involvement Office at 508-968-4678 or by visiting our website (http://www.mmr.org) The Decision Process The decision described in this fact sheet was arrived at by following an extensive decision process. The decision process that the remedial project managers followed was described in a public document and fact sheet, and was available for public comment from February 10 to March 10, 1997. A public meeting was held on February 25, 1997, to discuss the process and take public comments on it. The decision process was developed cooperatively by AFCEE, EPA, and DEP. It includes requirements of federal and state environmental regulation, but was tailored to meet the specific needs and interests of the projects and concerns of the community surrounding the MMR. As outlined in the decision process, a set of alternatives was selected by the remedial project managers to be carried through the decision criteria matrix. The matrix is a tool designed to enable the project managers to compare and evaluate the alternatives against a broad range of criteria. Basically, the criteria answer the following questions about each alternative:
The remedial project managers, in cooperation with hydrological, ecological, human health, and other technical specialists, evaluated how well each SD-5 South plume response alternative met each of the criteria, and used "Consumer Reports" type symbols to fill in the matrix. Their analysis was presented to the public in a document entitled "SD-5 South Plume Response Decision Document," was summarized in an accompanying fact sheet, and was presented in several public posterboard sessions, public meetings, and citizen team meetings. The last set of criteria in the matrix, which answer the question "Is it acceptable to stakeholders," was completed after the public comment period ended. Based on the analysis of alternatives described in the matrix, and an analysis of the public comments that were submitted, AFCEE, EPA, and MassDEP agreed by consensus on the selected alternative. Community Involvement The decision process for SD-5 South included an extensive community involvement program. The comment period for SD-5 South ran from September 16 to November 21. During that period, a series of fact sheets was distributed to the public:
Many other opportunities were provided for information exchange and public comment. These included:
Throughout the decision process, documents were placed in the public libraries and on the website. Over 75 people attended the public meetings, posterboard sessions, and neighborhood sessions. Glossary and acronyms used in this fact sheet AFCEE: Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence aquifer: an underground geological formation containing usable amounts of groundwater that can supply wells and springs. capture: to abate, contain, or recover a contaminant by a remedy clean up: to remove contaminants from the environment data gap analysis: a study or series of studies to provide additional details regarding aquifer characteristics and contaminant distribution. The studies may consist of literature reviews an/or field work. The information is used to assist with the design of the selected alternative. decision criteria matrix: a tool designed to enable the project managers to compare and evaluate the alternatives against a broad range of criteria DEP: Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection downgradient: the area toward which groundwater flows EPA: United States Environmental Protection Agency extraction, treatment, and reinjection (ETR): a system that extracts groundwater, treats it to reduce or eliminate contaminants and reinjects the treated water into the aquifer groundwater plume: a body of groundwater containing contaminants exceeding maximum contaminant levels as defined by multiple samples from multiple wells. In the absence of maximum contaminant levels, a risk-based level will be established. plume response alternative: a specific configuration of treatment system(s) to be compared and evaluated. process action teams: citizen advisory teams at the MMR including the Plume Response Team, the Public Information Team, and the Long Range Water Supply Team recirculating well: a process for capturing, treating, and releasing groundwater within the same well. The process is not expected to adversely affect the water table. remedial project managers: the program managers appointed by the Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence (AFCEE), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (DEP). responsiveness summary: a document presenting all written public comments received and providing responses prepared by AFCEE, EPA, and DEP. Senior Management Board (SMB): an advisory team consisting of the selectmen of the four adjacent towns (Bourne, Mashpee, Falmouth, and Sandwich), the U.S. Coast Guard, the Massachusetts National Guard, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, and the Massachusetts Department of Public Health (DPH). Their current tasking is to provide input on policy and management issues involving plume response actions of public concern and to review the work of all other citizen involvement teams. Technical Review and Evaluation Team (TRET): A group of hydrogeological and ecological experts from DEP, EPA, HAZWRAP/Oak Ridge National Laboratories, Waste Policy Institute, AFCEE, the Cape Cod Commission, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the University of Utah, Kansas State University, the Barnstable County Science Advisory Panel, the Woods Hole Oceanic Institution, and other local scientists. The TRET is tasked with advising the remedial project managers, AFCEE, and its contractors on technical and scientific issues of concern.
|
