Massachusetts Military Reservation
Installation Restoration Program Strategic Plan
Informational Public Meeting
June 26, 1996
Bourne High School

Mr. Doug Karson, Public Affairs Specialist convened the meeting at 7:15 P.M. and stated he would give a brief overview of the strategic plan and Mr. Jim Snyder, project manager would give a plume by plume summary. Mr. Karson stated that they have received over 400 comments on the draft strategic plan so far.

Mr. Karson stated that the strategic plan provides overall strategic direction and guidance for the IRP Program and integrates policy and action. It also incorporates near and long-term clean-up. The plan focuses on four major areas which are: comprehensive plume response plan and schedule, responses to regulatory requirement, responses to community needs and organization.

Mr. Karson stated that under the comprehensive plume response plan and schedule the objectives are to protect pubic health and environment which is the number one priority. Another objective is to restore community water resource and hook people up to Town ware and find new water supplies. Enhanced community involvement is on-going and interviews are being held. The plan will meet regulatory requirements and the ultimate goal is to earn and restore the public trust and confidence.

Mr. Karson stated that the plan reflects the input of the Technical Review and Evaluation team (TRET) and the Peer Review Team (PRT). When the 60% design was announced in January, there were ecological impacts and the TRET was formed to review the plan and make recommendations. Mr. Karson stated that the option for each plume will be evaluated, modeled, optimized and then implemented.

The key issues of the strategic plan are the new management for the IRP which is AFCEE. Technical assistance for the Senior Management Board (SMB) was requested and will be addressed. Long-range water supply issues are being looked at and they are looking at several locations on the MMR to replace wells #2 and #5 to the Bourne Water District which are threatened by the LF-1 plume. There is also an on-goin investigation of the impact area at an area called CS-19. Property values is also another important issues raised by the community will is included in the plan.

Mr. Snyder stated that for the proposed extraction/treatment/reinjection systems they propose to design, construct, operate, maintain and monitor systems for SD-5 north and FS-12. They will contain the FS-12 plume in place with thirty reinjection and 30 extraction wells. The construction start date is December 1996 with a system start date of October 1997. This system will be activated charcoal and is different from the previous plan to contain the plume at the toe. This is also to stop migration and gives the added benefit of extracting in the middle of the plume where concentrations are the highest.

For SD-5 north, fourteen extraction and fourteen reinjection wells are proposed at the Base boundary to stop further migration south with a construction start date of December 1996 and a system start date of September 1997. The primary treatment for the water is activated carbon. There were ecological concerns with hydrological drawdown and impacts on the cranberry bogs and vernal pools in the area so they needed to come up with a balanced solution.

Pilot scale systems to determine and evaluate efficiency, constructability and applicability for locations are proposed at CS-10 West and LF-1 South. There will be pilot scale extraction/reinjection systems and pilot-scale recirculating well systems.

Mr. Snyder showed slides of CS-10 West and LF-1 South. They both have construction start dates of June 1997 because there has to be modeling to develop strategies and to determine locations with no ecological impacts.

Senator Lois Pines asked what the dotted area on the LF-1 slide was.Mr. Snyder replied it was the Base boundary.

Senator Pines asked if he was going to explain where they were going to put the wells.Mr. Snyder replied they would be located by the design and will be in the pumping strategies and they need to go through iterations to get to pumping strategies. There will be some effect of drawdown of water tables so those results will then go to the TRET for independent review.

Senator Pines asked how long it would take for them to come up with a strategy - she thought there was a proposal for LF-1.Mr. Snyder replied the 60% proposal was not deemed acceptable from an impact standpoint and they are back to looking at a pumping strategy that will work and will not have severe impacts.

Senator Pines asked how long it would take to analyze and come up with a strategy for LF-1 where it is moving quickly everyday and going right into Buzzards Bay. She asked how much will get into the Bay before they have a proposed technical plan.Mr. Snyder replied they are doing the final revisions on the schedule right now for the first physical construction to get in front of the plume and they should start system construction in one year.

Senator Pines asked if they are anticipating that it will take one year from now before they even have a design?Mr. Snyder replied before they have an approved design, yes.

Senator Pines asked if they have a more precise strategy in terms of getting to design for LF-1 and will they show that to the public?Mr. Snyder replied they are working on the details this week for the final submission of this plan. They had to re-design and go through modeling again and the detailed schedule of activities will be out in the plan on July 3, 1996. They are working to move the schedule as far forward as possible.

Senator Pines asked if next week they will be prepared to make available to the public the proposal for the design phase.Mr. Snyder replied yes and the construction start date.

Senator Pines asked if at the present time it is his expectation that the plume will move into Buzzards Bay before they even start to deal with the issue in one year from now.Mr. Snyder replied it will continue to move.

Senator Pines asked how much does he anticipate will be into the Bay by the time they begin construction. Mr. Snyder replied he could not answer how much will be into the Bay.

Senator Pines asked for a realistic analysis or estimate as this meeting is only a week before the more precise proposal is due there must be some idea. At that point, Senator Pines introduced herself and stated she was the Chairman of the State Legislative Committee on Environmental Affairs and she is new to the chairmanship and perhaps had not met Mr. Snyder yet. Senator Pines stated she is a little disturbed that she sees the dates and wonders whether he can give some understanding of how much of that plume will be dissipating into the water before they are able to begin to address the containment or cleanup. Mr. Snyder replied he did not have an answer.

Senator Pines asked for some sense of it.Mr. Snyder replied they are low levels barely above the maximum containment levels (MCLs) for drinking water standards and it is a cumulative plume map and the levels that are there are volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and solvents that were used and as they approach the Bay. The likelihood of them being detected in the water is nil.

Senator Pines asked why then do they need to clean it up if that is his belief.Mr. Snyder replied they are looking at options and there may be very little they can do where there are so many low areas and that was what drove them to the problem of the design. Basically they could not pump without using a lot of water very close to the surface and that was unacceptable. They may need to let some of it go.

Senator Pines stated if some isn`t a problem, at what point do they get to something becoming a problem or is he suggesting that it is possible that none of it is a problem and the whole thing can go into the Bay.Mr. Snyder replied he is not suggesting any of those right now, that is why analysis is on-going.

Senator Pines asked about the seven years of analysis that has taken place to date and is there any value in any of that information to assist in making a judgment seven years later.Mr. Snyder replied that the specific calculation of how much will get into the Bay has not been made to his knowledge.

Senator Pines stated if they know that it moves one and a half feet a day and they have almost two years before construction it is a simple calculation to determine how much will get away by the time they get to deal with it.Mr. Snyder replied they could estimate how far it goes but that is not really accurate - that is how far the water flows, the contaminant do not move as fast. They stick to soil particles and do not move as fast as the water flow. The actual fate and transport modeling has not been done to show how much and how long it would take. the focus was on containment at the leading edge of the plume and containment is not feasible. They will look at other options and evaluate the potential for not being able to stop it and they will evaluate the impacts.

Senator Pines asked when will they do that analysis.Mr. Snyder replied as they get into the modeling.

Senator Pines stated he is not giving her any time table.Mr. Snyder replied in the next six to twelve months.

Senator Pines stated she finds it difficult to cope with the response given the fact that there was an analysis of this problem for seven years and she cannot imagine that no one has made the calculation to determine how much of the plume will be in the water by some finite date a year or two hence. She is sure that calculation can be made and it does not need to be precise but within a realm of reason there must be some expectation of what will be in Buzzards Bay and she asks when they can find that answer if he can`t respond today.

Mr. Minior replied that when Mr. Snyder was talking before, he was talking about LF-1 the portion of the plume at Route 28, not the Red Brook Harbor area. The schedule for LF-1 north was put up and the start date was shown. Mr. Minior stated they needed to consider that the Barnstable County Assembly of Delegates has a Science Advisory Panel. They have met with that panel and the concentration levels have been reviewed. The panel has made statements that from a toxicity standpoint when they are dealing with shellfish, they are not overly concerned with the low levels. Another issue being looked at by the USGS is where the saltwater and freshwater interface and where would the plume discharge. A final point is that the panel had a question on the inorganics associated with landfills and as part of addressing their concerns, the inorganics are being sampled in the plume in the Red Brook Harbor Road area and also some selective sampling within the body of the plume to verify the previous data and sampling methods. As soon as that information is available, it will be taken to the panel for their input and if there is any reason to be concerned. Mr. Minior stated that based on what they have heard, there does not seem to be a concern although there is a question of what is happening and they need to ensure that they are protecting human health and the environment.

Mr. Snyder continued with the pilot-scale recirculating well systems and stated they are considered an innovative technology encouraged by the US EPA. These are proposed at SD-5 South, CS-10 East, LF-1 North and Ashumet Valley. It doesn`t pull any water out of the ground and has no drawdown effect on groundwater and is considered a non-invasive approach for drawing out the volatile compounds.

LF-1 North has a proposed construction start date of December 1996 with a system start up date of May 1997. There will also be monitoring wells and water sampling conducted and if favorable, they may go full-scale with this system for other areas of the plume.

In Ashumet Valley which is another low-lying area there is a construction start date of December 1996 with a system start date of May 1997.

For SD-5 South, there is a construction start date of December 1996 with a system start date of May 1997.

For CS-10 East two systems are proposed which will be determined by design. The construction start date is September 1996 with a system start date of December 1996.

The CS-4 EDB plume is will be fully characterized and fieldwork is to begin this summer to fully define the horizontal and vertical extent of the plume and to search for the source. A baseline risk assessment is also proposed and they will then evaluate and develop remedial alternatives.

The Coonamessett well in Falmouth was shut down as a precaution when EDB was detected well below the pond. A wellhead treatment system is now being installed and will be operational by July 4, 1996. This is an interim fix and there is another supply well going in this summer.

Other activities include long-term groundwater monitoring as recommended by the TRET for the Western Aquafarm and Eastern Briarwood plumes. Federal Facilities Agreement document submittals are due by August 1997. Records of Decisions are to be submitted by December 1997. The CS-4 containment system performance test will be done this summer.

Mr. Snyder stated that the reactive wall pilot test will be done this summer at CS-10 and if successful will be going full-scale. Also, regional periodic groundwater monitoring, inorganic investigations, ecological surveys and sampling and extensive groundwater modeling will be performed.

Mr. George Seaver of Cataumet stated that on June 5, 1996 he submitted a written statement on LF-1 and had not received a response. Mr. Seaver stated that the reason LF-1 containment was abandoned was two fold. The draining of such areas as Red Brook Pond and associated creeks and rivers because of the containment process and because of the amount of extraction necessary to contain it. Mr. Seaver proposed two solutions.

1. He proposes containing between Route 28 and 28A and letting the tip of the plume proceed into the Bay. Mr. Seaver stated in answer to Ms. Pine`s question, that would allow up to 25 parts per billion (ppb) of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) to enter Buzzards Bay and by all estimates that would be unmeasurable and have no effect. That solves the low lands problem. You essentially drain the low lands and suck the sea into the aquifer.
2. The issue of the large volume of water necessary to be extracted in containing the plume needs to be revisited for three reasons:
   1. The first is that they already have a "bank account" of two millions gallons a day. Wells two and five between the northern and southern lobes have been approved for twenty years to extract 1.8 million gallons a day from the aquifer for purposes of drinking water and they have been turned off for the last year and a half. So they have already approved in terms of its effect on the overall aquifer two millions gallons day and there is nothing being taken out.
   2. It appears that the width of the plume is about two thirds as large as they had assumed and that is because there is in fact two lobes. The previous calculations were based on a 5400 foot wide plume.
   3. The advance of the southern lobe appears to be much slower than assumed. In a two year time the tip of the southern lobe has proceeded barely one hundred feet. When you add all those things together, you come up with a flow rate around 700-800 gallons per minutes (gpm) which is 1300 gpm extraction rate which is exactly what they can take out of wells two and five. They can come up with a next zero extraction based upon what that area of the aquifer has been rated to be able to handle.

Mr. Seaver stated that in addition to that, they are scheduled to begin construction on the northern lobe for a pilot system and he feels that is a reasonable time frame. He feels that if that were to be done and were to be more of a pilot system, that would allow the toe to go into the Bay at 125 ppb and that is five time the maximum containment levels (MCLs) and containing the other forward edge of the plume with concentrations of 200 ppb. He sated that is reasonable and they need to find their way from a pilot system to a 400 gpm actual containment system. He further pointed out, that in the Broyer Conservation Area they were pumping 500 gpm on a test and from the time the truck pulled and start producing was 15 days. Mr. Seaver stated it can be done. There was some odor from the effluent - or maybe someone`s septic system found it`s way over there, but they can move quickly if they need to.

Mr. Karson then commented on community involvement activities.

Senator Pines interjected and asked if anyone was going to respond to Mr. Seaver.

Mr. Minior responded that once again he has raised an interesting point and that is maybe why it took so long to respond. They have received his comments and they are #141 in the data base and will be answered by July 3, 1996. Mr. Minior replied that what he says is true about the wells two and five being taken off line and stated they are looking at developing pumping scenarios while they are trying some pilot tests to see if they can locate such a system close to the leading edge and then incorporate it into a larger system. They are still getting valuable data with the pilot scale tests and he asked Mr. Seaver to give them another week and they will respond.

Mr. Karson stated that tonight`s public meeting is the last in a series of five that have been held on the strategic plan. There will be additional meetings as they go through the process and get to final resolution and implementing the systems.

Mr. Karson also commented there is a site mailing list and community interviews. Mr. Karson stated that the public comment period ends on June 28, 1996 and comments received by that date will be incorporated in the responsive summary section of the plan.

Mr. Karson then asked if there was any further discussion before the formal part of the meeting begins.

Peter Fisher of Cataumet stated he would like to talk about the confidence of the community in this plan. He got involved in this in December 1993 and at that time MassDEP said they would have a twenty-two month simultaneous plan. In March 1994, they were told it would be a forty-two month plan. In July 1995, Mr. Minior promised that the plume would not enter the village of Cataumet. In the winter, John DeVillars and Trudy Coxe came to Scraggy Neck Road and promised that the plumes would not cross the railroad tracks in the village. Two weeks later, the plumes were reported in Buzzards Bay. He wonders where the credibility is. He hears all the promises and there was a meeting in the park in Cataumet for over 250 people to write letters for the funding. The issue a year ago was that this could not go forward if it was not funded. The funding was made available and now he feels that they were used as pawns in some sort of a game because they now find out that they have the funding and the only things being done in containing the plumes are SD-5 and FS-12 and they represent only 5% of the plumes. Mr. Fisher asked if they are going to be asking for only 5% of the money now or continue to ask for the 250 million dollars.

Mr. Fisher also stated that for the last two weeks, he has been under the scrutiny under the Department of Labor and he had to present his records for the last two years. He asked if there was any type of records showing how much money has been spent on the containment of these plumes for the last two years. Mr. Fisher stated that in the book "The Enemy Within" Seth Rolbein wrote that from 1981 to 1993 that 118 million dollars had been spent on the clean up and of that, only 12 million could be accounted for. He asked if they are asking the public to fund another 250 million dollars, which may not be enough in twenty years. He wants an accountability of where the money is being spent. If the government can ask a private citizen for that information, he feels that a private citizen can ask the government for that.

Mr. Karson replied that the issue of accountability is that 130 million has been spent on the program since 1982. Of that, approximately 25 million has been spent on actual remedial activities and cleanup of soil and groundwater, and the landfill was capped. There has also been lots of investigation and over 1300 monitoring wells and a total of 78 different sites investigated.

Mr. Karson commented that Mr. McCall made a promise that the money will be there and the project will be funded. Mr. Karson feels they will get credibility from the amount of public outreach that is on-going. He stated that this is not an easy process but they are making progress. The bulk of the investigation has been done and now they are working on remedial activities. Specifically on LF-1, Mr. Karson would suggest that the picture is positive and the ecological impacts would be worse than letting a portion of the plume go. They are proposing a pump and treat system with recirculating well on the northern part and then it can be expanded and work as a containment system.

Mr. Snyder commented that they have not received 250 million dollars. That amount was for twenty years based on the 60% design.

Mr. Fisher stated they have been working on this since 1982 and 130 million has been spent, with only 25 million for cleanup and Ms. Pines asks the percentage of the plume entering the Bay, there is no answer. Mr. Fisher requests some type of accounting of this money. Mr. Fisher also commented that Mr. Bowin of Woods Hole requested some data which was not available and he was told he would have to buy it in electronic disk.

Mr. Minior replied that this is a very detailed process and a superfund site is not easy. Early on it is very expensive to do the investigation and as the technology evolves, the costs go down. Mr. Minior stated that Mr. Fisher referred to Mr. Rolbein`s book and stated that Mr. Robein did not have access to that information. They report annually to congress. They do not report it by site, but in the Department there is an accounting by site. They are answerable for the money and where and how it is spent. Mr. Minior stated that the Air Force can always come in and audit. Mr. Minior stated it is not normal practice to release that information to the public other than totals for the year.

Mr. Fisher commented that having the Air Force come in is like having a fox in the chicken coop. He asked again if it was possible for the public to get the information.Mr. Minior replied he didn`t know if they could have any independent person come in, and assured Mr. Fisher that an Air Force audit is very difficult. Mr. Minior also commented as far as Dr. Bowin that he asked for information in electronic digital format, which would not be available until the end of the job. Mr. Minior also commented that they are now in the process of putting all the information in an electronic data base and also a GIS system.

Mr. Fisher pointed out that private industry would have had the plumes cleaned up in 1/3 the time and suggests they keep their eye on Augat and learn from them.

Mr. Karson stated it was not time for the formal public hearing and he will serve as the hearing officer. The purpose of the public hearing is to accept oral comment on the draft strategic plan. Written comments can also be submitted this evening. All comments that are given here on will be transcribed verbatim and addressed in future editions of the strategic plan.

The official hearing record opened at 8:20 P.M. Mr. Karson asked anyone wishing to speak to raise their hand and state their name and Town.

Mr. Jack Elwood stated he is a resident of the Town of Bourne and member of the Peer Review Team, so he is somewhat involved with the project. Mr. Elwood stated there has not been a lot of discussion on the LF-1 plume over the last few months. He feels that the LF-1 plume is the main concern to Bourne residents. It is his feeling that it may not be possible to contain the plume to any large degree. It is a large plume and has already moved towards Buzzards Bay. There is also a lot of uncertainty about the impact. It doesn`t appear that it will affect the public water supply and may not affect any private wells. There is also uncertainty about the impact on the marine environment. The marine fisheries are concerned but also recognize that there are many other sources of pollution. Mr. Elwood suggests a contingency plan be included in the overall plan in the event that the pilot testing shows that it is not practical to contain the plume without millions of dollars of expenditure. The plan should include a provision so that any person on a private well who feels that his water supply is in danger either real or imagined, should have the opportunity to hook up to a public water supply at no cost.

Mr. Elwood thinks there should be a highly visible monitoring program to give people a degree of comfort in the event they decide not to do major containment. He was at Squeteague Harbor last Sunday talking to people and he was told they had never seen anyone sampling. He thinks that visibility would be important.

Mr. Elwood also thinks there should be some type of contingency plan in the event there is some unforeseen effects on the environment. For example even the perception of a plume entering the harbor and making shellfish unsaleable. He feels there should be some way to compensate the commercial diggers if they lose income or any other unforeseen event. He thinks they should put some money aside rather than spend millions trying to eliminate some fraction of the plume. If 10% of the plume remains, many people will still feel uncomfortable.

Mr. Karson twice asked for any additional comments.

There were no other comments or testimony. The official record closed at 8:25 P.M.

The meeting adjourned at 8:25 P.M.