FINAL RECORD OF DECISION COAL YARD STORAGE AREA · 2021. 1. 24. · final record of decision coal...

FINAL

RECORD OF DECISION

COAL YARD STORAGE AREA

OPERABLE UNIT

FORMER GRIFFISS AIR FORCE BASE

ROME, NEW YORK

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

AIR FORCE REAL PROPERTY AGENCY

DECEMBER 2011

-ii-

This page is intentionally left blank.

-iii-

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page No.

1.0 DECLARATION .................................................................................................................1

1.1 Site Name and Location ...........................................................................................1

1.2 Statement of Basis and Purpose ...............................................................................1

1.3 Description of the Selected Remedy ........................................................................1

1.4 Statutory Determinations .........................................................................................3

1.5 Authorizing Signatures ............................................................................................4

2.0 DECISION SUMMARY .....................................................................................................5

2.1 Site Name, Location, and Description .....................................................................5

2.1.1 CYSA AOC .................................................................................................5

2.1.2 DRMO..........................................................................................................8

2.1.3 Pumphouse 5 ................................................................................................8

2.2 History and Enforcement Activities .........................................................................9

2.3 Community Participation for CSYA OU ...............................................................10

2.4 Scope and Role of Area of Concern ......................................................................11

2.5 Site Characteristics .................................................................................................11

2.5.1 CYSA AOC ...............................................................................................12

2.5.2 DRMO........................................................................................................26

2.5.3 Pumphouse 5 ..............................................................................................30

2.6 Current and Potential and Future Land and Resource Use ....................................36

2.7 Summary of Site Risks...........................................................................................37

2.8 Selected Remedies .................................................................................................41

2.9 Documentation of Significant Changes .................................................................42

3.0 RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARY ....................................................................................43

4.0 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................47

5.0 GLOSSARY ......................................................................................................................49

-iv-

FIGURES

Page No.

Figure 1 Land Use Controls – Coal Storage Yard Area Operable Unit ..........................................2

Figure 2 Location of Coal Storage Yard Operable Unit .................................................................6 Figure 3 Coal Storage Yard Operable Unit .....................................................................................7

Figure 4 CSYA Pre-Excavation Sample Locations ......................................................................13

Figure 5 AOI 66 Investigative and Confirmatory Sample Locations ...........................................21 Figure 6 CSYA Confirmatory Sample Locations .........................................................................22

Figure 7 AOI 66 Remedial Action ................................................................................................25

Figure 8 DRMO Pre-Closure and Screening Sample Locations ...................................................27 Figure 9 DRMO Exploratory Borings and Excavation Confirmatory Sample Locations ............29 Figure 10 Pumphouse 5 Sample Locations .....................................................................................32

Figure 11 Pumphouse 5 Excavation Confirmatory Sample Locations ...........................................33

TABLES

Page No.

Table 1 Coal Storage Yard Remedial Investigation Groundwater Sampling, Compounds Exceeding Standards and Guidance Values (August 1994) .............................................14

Table 2 Coal Storage Yard Remedial Investigation Drainage Swale Sediment Sampling, Compounds Exceeding Standards and Guidance Values .................................................15

Table 3 Coal Storage Yard Remedial Investigation Rainbow Creek Sediment Sampling, Compounds Exceeding Standards and Guidance Values .................................................17

Table 4 Coal Storage Yard Remedial Investigation Surface Soil Sampling, Compounds Exceeding Standards and Guidance Values (May 1994) .................................................18

Table 5 Coal Storage Yard Remedial Investigation Subsurface Soil Sampling, Compounds Exceeding Standards and Guidance Values (June 1994) .................................................19

Table 6 Coal Storage Yard Remedial Investigation Surface Water Sampling, Compounds Exceeding Standards and Guidance Values .....................................................................20

Table 7 Coal Storage Yard Area AOC Risk Assessment Scenarios and Exposures Pathways ......38

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1 CSYA OU Excavation Layout, Confirmatory Sampling Locations, and

Sampling Result Figures

Attachment 2 Pumphouse 5 Source Removal AOC Long Term Monitoring Report (July

2004)

-v-

ACRONYMS

AFB Air Force Base

AOC Area of Concern

ARARs Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements

ATSDR Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry

bgs below ground surface

CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

COPC Chemical of Potential Concern

CYSA Coal Yard Storage Area

DRMO Defense Reutilization Marketing Office

EPA Environmental Protection Agency

FFA Federal Facility Agreement

ft feet

HHRA Human Health Risk Assessment

HI Hazard Index

HQ Hazard Quotient

IRA Interim Remedial Action

IRP Installation Restoration Program

mg/kg milligrams per kilogram

µg/kg micrograms per kilogram

µg/L micrograms per liter

MIP membrane interface probe

NCP National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan

NEADS Northeast Air Defense Sector

NYANG New York Air National Guard

NYSDEC New York State Department of Environmental Conservation

OWS oil/water separator

PCBs polychlorinated biphenyls

PID photoionization detector

ppm parts per million

-vi-

ACRONYMS (continued)

RBCs Risk-Based Concentrations

RI Remedial Investigation

ROD Records of Decision

SAC Strategic Air Command

SCGs Standards, Criteria, and Guidance Values

SD Surface Drainage

SI Supplemental Investigation

STARS Spill Technology and Remediation Series

SVI Soil Vapor Intrusion

SVOC semi-volatile organic compound

TAGM Technical and Administrative Guidance Memorandum

TAL target analyte list

TAPP Technical Assistance for Public Participation

TBC to be considered

TCLP Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure

UST underground storage tank

UXO Unexploded Ordnance

VOC volatile organic compound

VMPs vapor monitoring points

-1-

1.0 DECLARATION

1.1 Site Name and Location

The Coal Yard Storage Area (CYSA) Operable Unit (OU) is located at the former Griffiss Air

Force Base (AFB), Rome, Oneida County, New York. The OU includes the CSYA Area of

Concern (AOC) [site designation Spill Site (SS)-33], the Defense Reutilization Marketing Office

(DRMO) area, and the Pumphouse 5 Source Removal AOC [site designation Storage Tanks

(ST)-37].

1.2 Statement of Basis and Purpose

This Record of Decision (ROD) presents the selected remedial alternative for the CYSA OU at

the former Griffiss AFB in Rome, New York. It has been developed in accordance with the

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA),

42 U.S.C. §§ 9601-9675, as amended, and to the extent practicable, the National Oil and

Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), 40 C.F.R. Part 300. This decision is

based on the Administrative Record for this site, a copy is available on-line at

https://afrpaar.lackland.af.mil/ar.

The remedy for Land-use Controls/Institutional Controls (LUC/ICs) for the CYSA AOC and

DRMO and No Further Action for Pumphouse 5 has been selected by the United States Air

Force (Air Force) and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) with

concurrence from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC)

pursuant to the former Griffiss AFB Federal Facility Agreement (FFA).

1.3 Description of the Selected Remedy

CYSA AOC and DRMO West

The Selected Remedy of LUC/ICs for the CYSA AOC and DRMO West is protective of human

health and the environment and complies with the federal and state applicable or relevant and

appropriate requirements (ARARs). The Interim Remedial Action (IRA) conducted in 1997 at

the CSYA AOC, Area of Interest (AOI) 66, and DRMO removed all soil contamination to soil

cleanup objectives. PCB contamination remained in Rainbow Creek sediments following the

1997 IRA; however, the entire length of the creek was culverted in 2008 and 2009. The

LUC/ICs, as illustrated in Figure 1, include:

Development and use of the areas (within site boundaries) for residential housing, elementary and secondary schools, and childcare facilities and playgrounds will be

prohibited unless prior approval is received from the Air Force, EPA, and NYSDEC.

The owner or occupant of the property shall not extract, utilize, consume, or permit to be extracted, any water from the subsurface aquifer within the boundary of the site unless

https://afrpaar.lackland.af.mil/ar

DRMO

CoalStorageArea

AOI 66

Rainbow

Creek

Culvert

Former Bu

ilding 771

Pumphou

se 5

Figure 1Land Use Controls - Coal Storage Yard AreaOperable Unit

- 2 -

LegendAirfield/RoadRainbow Creek (Culvertedin 2008 and 2009)

Demolished FacilitiesExisting Facilities

LUC/IC Boundary - Subsurface Soil Relocation RestrictionLand-Use Restriction - Industrial/Commercial/Non-ResidentialGroundwater Consumption - Prior ApprovalAdverse Aquifer Use Prohibited

No LUC/IC (NFA)LUC/IC Boundary - Rainbow Creek Restriction

³0 80 160 24040 Feet

-3-

such owner or occupant obtains prior written approval from the New York State

Department of Health.

The owner or operator will restrict the relocation of contaminated soils greater than 1 foot bgs within the subsurface soil relocation restricted area from being placed outside the

restricted area boundaries. If the contaminated soil greater than 1 foot bgs is to be

excavated, it must remain on site, stay covered if stockpiled, and covered by a minimum

of 1 foot of clean fill once it is returned to the ground. Prior to any digging within the soil

restricted area boundary, the owner/operator will notify all workers performing such work

of these restrictions. The owner/operator will notify the Air Force of any digging

activities that take place within the restricted area.

The owner or operator will restrict the relocation of contaminated soil below the geotexile fabric located in the subsurface of the former ―Rainbow Creek‖. If soil is disturbed below

the fabric, it will remain on site covered while stockpiled and will return to the ground

with a geotexile fabric cover and covered with a minimum of 12-inches of clean soil.1

The LUC/ICs will be implemented, monitored and enforced by the Air Force.

Pumphouse 5 and DRMO East

The Selected Remedy for No Further Action for DRMO East and Pumphouse 5 is protective of

human health and the environment and complies with the federal and state ARARs. A removal

action conducted in 1997 and the IRA conducted in 1999 removed all soil contamination at the

Pumphouse 5 site. LTM including groundwater and surface water sampling indicated that

contamination was absent at the site.

1.4 Statutory Determinations

The Air Force and EPA, with concurrence from the NYSDEC, have determined that the remedy

for LUC/ICs for CYSA AOC and DRMO and No Further Action for Pumphouse 5 is warranted

for this site.

1 In 2008 and 2009, the entire creek was culverted. Geotexile fabric was reinstalled above the relocated soils.

1.5 Authorizing Signatures : '

On the basis of the remedial investigations and successfully completed removal actions performed at the CSYA OU, there is no evidence that residual contamination at the OU poses a current or future potential threat to human health or the environment. The NYSDEC has concurred with the Selected Remedy presented in this Record of Decision.

ROBERT M. MOORE Date Director Air Forc&^eal Property Agency

& A '/i CD, ^ J 2 ^

WALTER E. MUGDAN Date Director, Emergency and Remedial Response Division United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2

.4-

-5-

2.0 DECISION SUMMARY

2.1 Site Name, Location, and Description

The former Griffiss AFB covered approximately 3,552 contiguous acres in the lowlands of the

Mohawk River Valley in Rome, Oneida County, New York. Topography within the valley is

relatively flat, with elevations on the former Griffiss AFB ranging from 435 to 595 feet above

mean sea level. Three Mile Creek, Six Mile Creek (both of which drain into the New York State

Barge Canal, located to the south of the base), and several state-designated wetlands are located

on the former Griffiss AFB, which is bordered by the Mohawk River on the west. Due to its

high average precipitation and predominantly silty sands, the former Griffiss AFB is considered

a groundwater recharge zone.

2.1.1 CYSA AOC

The CSYA AOC is an approximately 3-acre area located in the central portion of the former

AFB (see Figures 2 and 3). The AOC consists of the CSYA, Rainbow Creek, and AOI 66. The

CSYA was originally proposed as the location of a new coal storage facility.

This site was a DRMO salvage yard/landfill from the 1940s into the 1980s. Incidents of

chemical releases directly onto the soil surface have been reported. Unknown quantities of scrap

drums and transformers may have been disposed of at this site and several hundred drums of

pesticides were reportedly stored at this site in the 1970s. The primary contaminants of concern

are PCBs. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs), semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs) and

metals were also present.

Surface water drainage from this AOC enters a drainage swale that leads to the drainage ditch

informally referred to as "Rainbow Creek" and ultimately flows into Six Mile Creek

approximately 6,000 feet east of the site. Rainbow Creek was culverted in 2008 and 2009.

AOI 66 was identified during the AOI screening process. Based on aerial photography, it was

determined that the DRMO area extended south of the CSYA. As a result, the southern part of

the DRMO area was investigated as AOI 66 in order to address the entire former DRMO area.

Much of the area is covered with a concrete coal storage pad and the remaining area is grass-

covered with a relatively flat topography. The northern portion of the site included a 375-foot

railroad spur.

Groundwater in this area flows in a northeasterly direction toward a storm water drain, which

drains eastward into the Rainbow Creek culvert. The depth to groundwater ranges from 5 to 15

feet below ground surface (bgs). The soils are generally silty fine sand, with gravel at the

western and eastern ends of the area, and sandy gravel in the center of the area. The deeper soils

are generally gravelly silt.

Site Detail

³

1,800 0 1,800900Feet

Coal Storage Yard AreaOperable Unit

Figure 2Location of Coal Storage Yard Area Operable Unit- 6 -

1

- 7 -

Figure 3 Coal Storage Yard Operable Unit

-8-

2.1.2 DRMO The DRMO area is located in the southeast industrial portion of the former Griffiss AFB, northeast of the CSYA (see Figure 3). From the late 1950s until 1997, the DMRO area was used as a salvage/storage yard. Contaminated soil containing SVOCs, metals, and PCBs was known to be present at the site. Historical documents also revealed the possibility that Unexploded Ordnance (UXO) may have been stored at the site. The topography at the DRMO area is generally flat with approximately 3 to 4 feet of relief over the site. The soil consists of mainly coarse sandy gravel to a depth of one foot. The surface water drainage from this area enters the Rainbow Creek culvert, which borders the DRMO site on the north, west and south sides. Pre-closure sampling and delineation activities were reported to EPA and NYSDEC in the RI for the DRMO area in 1998. The Final Closeout Report describing the interim remedial actions was submitted in May 1999. 2.1.3 Pumphouse 5 The Pumphouse 5 Source Removal AOC is located in the southeast portion of the former Griffiss AFB, approximately 100 feet northwest of aircraft parking Apron 1 (see Figure 3). The Pumphouse 5 Source Removal AOC (ST-37) included Pumphouse 5, also known as Building 771, and the fueling/defueling system components and associated appurtenances. This AOC is situated in a primarily flat, grassy area on the southeast side of Rainbow Creek. From the late 1950s until 1997, Pumphouse 5 received and distributed fuel from buried lines that entered the AOC on the southeast side and extended toward parking Apron 1. This AOC contained four 50,000-gallon underground storage tanks (USTs), one 2,000-gallon collection UST connected to the pump room on the northwestern side of Pumphouse 5, two valve pits, and underground piping. The four 50,000-gallon USTs were used to store and distribute JP-4 jet fuel. The 2,000-gallon UST was used to store waste jet fuel, separator waste, and liquid collected from the pumphouse floor drain. The two valve pits, one shallow and one deep, were also located on the northwestern side of Pumphouse 5. Each pit contained one valve and a 2-foot crushed stone bottom over soil. Three large spills have occurred in the vicinity of Pumphouse 5 since 1977. On March 4, 1977, a Class III JP-4 spill (fuel spill over 50 sq. ft. in area) occurred when fuel was released due to a KC-135 aircraft fire at aircraft parking Apron 1. Griffiss AFB personnel indicated that the fuel release was discharged off site and that the spilled fuel did not reach Pumphouse 5. On June 26, 1989, free product was observed during sampling of monitoring wells, which was assigned NYSDEC Spill #8903144. As a result of this spill report, the four 50,000-gallon USTs were subjected to tightness testing, but no leaks were detected. On February 18, 1991, a Class III JP-4 spill (Spill #9012023) occurred south of Pumphouse 5 near the paved access road. The spill was cleaned up with absorbent material and closed on February 19, 1991. The former

-9-

2,000-gallon UST was connected to Pumphouse 5 by a pipe from the pumphouse fuel filter drain

and floor drain. Fuel was pumped from the tank on a regular basis. Incidents of overfilling,

including undocumented spills to the surface as well as leaks to the subsurface, were reported by

Griffiss AFB. This UST was reported to be in use until July 1993, when the pumphouse was

deactivated and each of the USTs was drained.

Undocumented spills associated with the drain and valve pits, formerly located northwest of the

pumphouse, were also reported during the deactivation activities. The pits were used for

isolation of diversion valves for UST operation. The fuels management staff at Griffiss AFB

periodically recovered product in the pits using absorbent cloths. Six 55-gallon drums of fuel

and groundwater were removed from the deep valve pit in early 1994.

In July 1994, a leak was discovered in the pipe that ran from the pumphouse floor drain and fuel

filter drain to the 2,000-gallon UST. This spill was assigned NYSDEC Spill #9404435. As a

result, the piping was removed and the soils surrounding the piping were noticeably

contaminated with fuel. The drainpipe was subsequently disconnected from the building, and

pumphouse floor drains were filled with concrete. NYSDEC Spill #9404435 was closed on

October 23, 1998.

The site-specific geology in the vicinity of Pumphouse 5 is characterized by soils consisting of

mainly silty, fine- to medium-grained sand near the water table with intermittent areas of clay

and gravel. The groundwater is presumably under compacted silts and a shallow clay layer

ranging from several inches to up to 7 feet thick. Groundwater flows northwest toward Rainbow

Creek. The depth to groundwater ranges from 14 and 19 feet bgs. Surface water discharges into

Rainbow Creek.

2.2 History and Enforcement Activities

The Former Griffiss AFB Operational History

The mission of the former Griffiss AFB varied over the years. The base was activated on

February 1, 1942, as Rome Air Depot, with the mission of storage, maintenance, and shipment of

material for the U.S. Army Air Corps. Upon creation of the U.S. Air Force in 1947, the depot

was renamed Griffiss Air Force Base. The base became an electronics center in 1950, with the

transfer of Watson Laboratory Complex (later Rome Air Development Center [1951], Rome

Laboratory [1990], and then the Air Force Research Laboratory Information Directorate [1997],

established with the mission of accomplishing applied research, development, and testing of

electronic air-ground systems). The 49th Fighter Interceptor Squadron was also added. The

headquarters of the Ground Electronics Engineering Installations Agency was established in June

1958 to engineer and install ground communications equipment throughout the world.

On July 1, 1970, the 416th Bombardment Wing of the Strategic Air Command (SAC) was

activated with the mission of maintenance and implementation of both effective air refueling

operations and long-range bombardment capability.

-10-

Griffiss AFB was designated for closure and realignment under the Base Realignment and

Closure Act in 1993 and 1995, resulting in deactivation of the 416th Bombardment Wing in

September 1995. The Information Directorate at Rome Research Site and the Northeast Air

Defense Sector (NEADS) will continue to operate at their current locations; the New York Air

National Guard (NYANG) operated the runway for the 10th Mountain Division deployments

until October 1998, when they were relocated to Fort Drum; and the Defense Finance and

Accounting Services has established an operating location at the former Griffiss AFB.

Environmental Background

As a result of the various national defense missions carried out at the former Griffiss AFB since

1942, hazardous and toxic substances were used and hazardous wastes were generated, stored, or

disposed at various sites on the installation. The defense missions involved, among others,

procurement, storage, maintenance, and shipping of war material; research and development; and

aircraft operations and maintenance.

Numerous studies and investigations under the U.S. Department of Defense Installation

Restoration Program have been carried out to locate, assess, and quantify the past toxic and

hazardous waste storage, disposal, and spill sites.

These investigations included a records search in 1981, interviews with base personnel, a field

inspection, compilation of an inventory of wastes, evaluation of disposal practices, and an

assessment to determine the nature and extent of site contamination; Problem Confirmation and

Quantification studies (similar to what is now designated a Site Investigation) in 1982 and 1985;

soil and groundwater analyses in 1986; a base-wide health assessment in 1988 by the U.S. Public

Health Service, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR); base-specific

hydrology investigations in 1989 and 1990; a groundwater investigation in 1991; and site-

specific studies and investigations between 1989 and 1995. The ATSDR issued a Public Health

Assessment for Griffiss AFB, dated October 23, 1995, and an addendum, dated September 9,

1996.

Pursuant to Section 105(a)(8)(B) of CERCLA, Griffiss AFB was included on the National

Priorities List on July 15, 1987. On August 21, 1990, the agencies entered into a FFA under

Section 120 of CERCLA.

2.3 Community Participation for CSYA OU

A proposed plan for the CYSA OU (AFRPA, February 2011), proposing LUC/ICs, was released

to the public on February 17, 2011. The document was made available to the public in the

Information Repository available on-line at https://afrpaar.lackland.af.mil/ar.

The notice of the availability of these documents was published in the Rome Daily Sentinel

Newspaper on February 16, 2011. A 30-day public comment period was held from February 17,

2011 to March 19, 2011 to solicit public input on the final Proposed Plan for the CYSA OU.

During this period, the public was invited to review the Administrative Record and comment on

the preferred alternative being considered.


-11-

In addition, Griffiss AFB hosted a public meeting on March 10, 2011 at the Griffiss Institute

located at 725 Daedalian Drive, Rome, New York 13441. The date and time of the meeting was

published in the Rome Daily Sentinel Newspaper. At the meeting, the Air Force provided data

gathered at the AOC, the preferred alternative, and the decision-making process. The meeting

provided the opportunity for the community to comment officially on the plan. The public

meeting was recorded and transcribed, and a copy of the transcript was added to the

Administrative Record.

During the proposed plan public comment period, one comment was received by the Technical

Assistance for Public Participation Subcommittee. These comments are provided in the

Responsiveness Summary (Section 3.0). Once this ROD is signed, notice of availability will be

published in the Rome Daily Sentinel Newspaper; and it will be available for public inspection

and copying on-line at https://afrpaar.lackland.af.mil/ar pursuant to 40 Code of Federal

Regulations (CFR) 300.430(f)(6).

2.4 Scope and Role of Area of Concern

The CYSA OU is one of several areas administered under the Griffiss AFB Installation

Restoration Program (IRP). The CYSA OU includes both previously contaminated soil in the

unsaturated zone (vadose zone) and contaminated groundwater. LUC/ICs are recommended for

the CYSA AOC, AOI 66, and western portion of the DRMO (See Section 1.3). The CSYA OU

will also be included in future former Griffiss AFB 5-Year Reviews for CERCLA sites. The 5-

Year Review will not include the eastern portion of the DRMO and Pumphouse 5 as no further

action is recommended.

The 1997 and 1999 IRAs for CYSA AOC, DRMO, and Pumphouse 5 removed the majority of

soil contamination found during the previous investigations. The remaining contaminants in the

unsaturated soil are below site-specific soil cleanup objectives and do not pose a risk for

continued groundwater contamination. The entire length of Rainbow Creek was culverted in

2008 and 2009 and additional PCB contamination monitoring is addressed under the Six Mile

Creek Long-term Monitoring (LTM) program. LTM at Pumphouse 5 confirmed the absence of

groundwater and surface water contamination at the site.

2.5 Site Characteristics

Site activities related to storage of hazardous/non-hazardous wastes within the vicinity of the

CYSA AOC, AOI 66, and DRMO have resulted in contaminated soil, surface water, and

sediments at the OU at levels above applicable SCGs. Additionally, site activities including

aircraft fueling operations at Pumphouse 5 have results in contaminated soils, surface water and

groundwater. Various actions undertaken at the OU have removed the sources of groundwater

and soil contamination. Past investigations, removal actions, and the IRA at the CYSA AOC are

presented in Section 2.5.1. Past investigations, removal actions, and the IRA at the DRMO are

presented in Section 2.5.2. Past investigations, 1997 removal action, the 1999 IRA, groundwater


-12-

and surface water monitoring, and the Soil Vapor Intrusion (SVI) Evaluation at Pumphouse 5 are

presented in Section 2.5.3.

2.5.1 CYSA AOC

2.5.1.1 Previous Investigations

In the 1980s, the CSYA was proposed as the location of a new coal storage yard. In 1988, prior

to establishing this lot as a new location for coal storage, PCBs were detected in soil at one part

of the AOC during routine soil testing. A preliminary soil investigation, which included 12 soil

borings, was performed in 1989. At one soil boring location, the soil/fill material collected at

approximately 2 feet bgs exhibited an odor similar to petroleum solvents. Three composite soil

samples were collected from depths of 0-6 inches bgs and 18-24 inches bgs. The analytical

results indicated the presence of PCBs, metals, and VOCs. During the advancement of

geotechnical borings, a buried container was penetrated, causing an unknown green gas to

emanate from the borehole, which overwhelmed a worker at the site.

In 1994, an RI was performed to investigate the nature and extent of environmental

contamination from historical releases at the AOC and determine whether any remedial action

was necessary to prevent potential threats to human health and the environment. As part of the

RI, a ground-penetrating radar (GPR) survey was performed to evaluate disposal areas and to

identify potential drilling hazards. Several strong point sources, indicative of buried metallic

objects, were detected in the survey area. In addition, a passive soil gas survey was performed at

37 sampling points. This survey indicated the presence of VOCs at 26 points. Field sampling

for the RI included the collection and analysis of five groundwater samples, six sediment

samples from two locations in the drainage swale to the north of the site, four surface water

samples from Rainbow Creek, eight sediment samples from five locations in Rainbow Creek,

and 16 surface soil samples (see Figure 4). In addition, five groundwater monitoring wells were

drilled, installed, and developed. Fifteen soil samples were collected from the monitoring well

borings. The samples collected during the RI field sampling were analyzed for a comprehensive

list of analytical parameters. In the discussion below, "most stringent criteria" and ―site-specific

clean-up goals‖ refer to the lowest values among all identified federal and state standards that

have been identified as ARARs at the site or in other federal and state advisories, guidance and

standards referred to as To-Be-Considereds (TBCs).

Analysis of the groundwater samples indicated the presence of eight VOCs, four SVOCs, 13

pesticides, petroleum hydrocarbons, glycols, and 19 metals. The concentrations of one SVOC,

one pesticide, and nine metals exceeded the most stringent criteria (see Table 1).

Analysis of the drainage swale sediment samples indicated the presence of five VOCs, 21

SVOCs, 17 pesticides/PCBs, petroleum hydrocarbons, and 24 metals. The concentrations of 14

SVOCs, seven pesticides, two PCBs, and 10 metals exceeded the most stringent criteria (see

Table 2).

Analysis of the Rainbow Creek sediment samples indicated the presence of five VOCs, 25

SVOCs, 22 pesticides/PCBs, petroleum hydrocarbons, and 23 metals. The concentrations of one

- 13 -

Figure 4 CSYA Pre-Excavation Sample Locations

CompoundRange of Detected

Concentrations

NYSDEC Class GA Groundwater

Standard (Frequency of Detection Above

Standard)

NYSDEC Class GA Groundwater Guidance Value (Frequency of

Detection above Guidance Values)

EPA Federal Secondary Maximum Contaminant

Level (Frequency of Detection above Level)

EPA Region III risk-based concentration for tap water (Frequency of

Detection above risk-based concentration)

SVOCs (µg/L)0.002 a NA NA NA(1/5)

0.004 a NA NA NA(1/5)

Metals (mg/L)NA NA 0.05 c NA

(2/5)0.025 a NA NA NA(1/5)

1 a NA NA NA(1/5)

0.3 a NA NA NA(3/5)

NA 35 b NA NA(1/5)

0.3 a NA NA NA(5/5)

20 a NA NA NA(1/5)

NA NA NA 22 d

(1/5)0.0005 b 0.0005 b NA NA

(2/5) (2/5)

GROUNDWATER SAMPLES, AUGUST 1994

J = Estimated concentration.D = Diluted sample.

Table 1COMPOUNDS EXCEEDING STANDARDS AND GUIDANCE VALUESCOAL STORAGE YARD REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SAMPLING

d EPA Region III risk-based concentration for tap water, April 1996.

Key:

a NYSDEC Class GA groundwater standard, June 1998.b NYSDEC Class GA groundwater guidance value; June 1998.c EPA federal secondary maximum contaminant level.

Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0.03 J

Dieldrin 0.01 J

Pesticides/PCBs (µg/kg)

Iron

Magnesium

Manganese

Sodium

Aluminum 0.57 - 1.5 J

Arsenic

Barium

Strontium

Thallium

0.0013 J - 0.088

0.027 - 23.4

0.083 J - 3.1 J

8.05 - 143

0.349 J - 3.56

1.43 - 2,350

0.146 - 90.2

0.0007 J - 0.0033 J

- 14 -

Compound Range of Detected Concentrations

NYSDEC Technical Guidance for Screening

Contaminated Sediments, Human Health

Bioaccumulation (Frequency of Detection of Above Guidance Values)


Contaminated Sediments, Lowest Level, Sediment

Criteria for Metals (Frequency of Detection of Above Guidance Values)

Effect Range, Low (Frequency of Detection of Above Effect Range)

SVOCs (µg/kg)NA NA 70 d

(3/6)NA NA 16 d

(2/6)NA NA 85 d

(3/6)13 a,b NA NA(5/6)13 a,b NA NA(5/6)13 a,b NA NA(5/6)13 a,b NA NA(5/6)NA NA 63.4 d

(1/6)NA NA 600 d

(4/6)NA NA 19 d

(2/6)13 a,b NA NA(5/6)NA NA 160 d

(1/6)NA NA 240 d

(5/6)NA NA 665 d

(5/6)Pesticides/PCBs (µg/kg)

0.1 a,b NA NA(3/6)0.1 a,b NA NA(4/6)0.1 a,b NA NA(3/6)1 a,b NA NA(2/6)

0.01 a,b NA NA(3/6)1 a,b NA NA(3/6)

0.01 a,b NA NA(1/6)

0.008 a,b NA NA(1/6)

0.008 a,b NA NA(5/6)

NA 2.0 a,c NA(1/6)

NA 6.0 a,c NA(2/6)

NA 0.6 a,c NA(6/6)

NA 26 a,c NA(2/6)

NA 16 a,c NA(6/6)

NA 31 a,c NA(5/6)

NA 460 a,c NA(1/6)

NA 0.15 a,c NA(4/6)

NA 16 a,c NA(3/6)

NA 120 a,c NA(5/6)

J = Estimated concentration.

Metals (mg/kg)

a NYSDEC Technical Guidance for Screening Contaminated Sediments, November 1993.b Human Health Bioaccumulation (assuming 1% organic carbon in sediment).c Lowest Effect Level, Sediment Criteria for Metals.d Effects Range - Low (Long, MacDonald, Smith, and Calder, 1995).

Arsenic

11.7 J

Table 2COMPOUNDS EXCEEDING STANDARDS AND GUIDANCE VALUES

COAL STORAGE YARD REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SAMPLESDRAINAGE SWALE SEDIMENT SAMPLES

* = 6 NYCRR Part 375 Environmental Remediation Programs Subparts 375-1 to 375-4 and 375-6Key:

Anthracene

Acenaphthene

2-Methylnaphthalen

300 J - 3,000 J

320 J - 2,200 J

310 J - 2,600

45 J - 1,500 J

150 J - 990

78 J - 510 J

Benzo(b)fluoranthen

Fluoranthene

Dibenzo(a,h)anthrac

Chrysene

Pyrene

Phenanthrene

Naphthalene

Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyr

Benzo(a)pyrene

Benzo(a)anthracene

200 J - 6,600

51 J - 1,100

250 J - 1,500 J

180 J - 1,100

350 J - 4,800

140 J

440 - 2,700

Fluorene

14.6 J - 50

10.2 J

570

101 J - 259

14.1 J - 72

151 - 540 J

1.5 J - 3.8 J

2.5 - 15

Dieldrin

alpha-Chlordane

Aldrin

4,4'- DDT

1,130 - 18,300PCB 1260

PCB 1254

gamma-Chlordane

22 - 56.6 J

Lead

4,4'- DDE

4,4'- DDD

350 J - 6,800

23.2 - 382Copper

Chromium 7 - 80.6 J

1.05 J - 17.4 JCadmium

25.9 J - 300

57 - 687

8.9 - 41.7

0.094 J - 1.17

136 - 898

Antimony

Zinc

Nickel

Mercury

Manganese

- 15 -

-16-

VOC, 20 SVOCs, two pesticides, two PCBs, and 9 metals exceeded the most stringent criteria

(see Table 3).

Analysis of the surface soil samples indicated the presence of four VOCs, 22 SVOCs, 11

pesticides/PCBs, petroleum hydrocarbons, and 23 metals. The concentrations of five SVOCs,

one pesticide, one PCB, and 12 metals exceeded the most stringent criteria (see Table 4).

Analysis of the subsurface soil samples indicated the presence of four VOCs, 21 SVOCs, eight

pesticides/PCBs, petroleum hydrocarbons, and 21 metals. The concentrations of six SVOCs, one

pesticide, one PCB, and 10 metals exceeded the most stringent criteria (see Table 5).

Analysis of the surface water samples indicated the presence of 16 VOCs, 18 SVOCs, 20

pesticides/PCBs, glycols, petroleum hydrocarbons, and 13 metals. The concentrations of two

VOCs, 10 SVOCs, seven pesticides, one PCB, and six metals exceeded the most stringent

criteria (see Table 6).

In 1997, soil samples were collected at AOI 66 at 15 boring locations at three depth intervals (see

Figure 5) and analyzed for VOCs, SVOCs, pesticides/PCBs, and metals. Concentrations of

PCBs in shallow soils exceeded the most stringent criteria of 1,000 µg/Kg in five locations

(SB03 through SB07). These concentrations ranged from 1,100 to 20,000 µg/Kg.

2.5.1.2 Interim Remedial Action

Coal Storage Yard Area

In 1997, surface and subsurface PCB-contaminated soil exceeding the federal standards was

removed from the CSYA AOC along with all non-native fill material, including debris consisting

of concrete, wood, metal, and rubber. This Interim Remedial Action was performed assuming

industrial reuse. The contaminated soil was excavated and stockpiled pending characterization,

transportation, and disposal. Soils were initially excavated to a depth of 2 feet bgs. Following

the initial excavation event, confirmation samples were collected on 50-foot grid centers (see

Figure 6). Confirmation sample results at 17 grid locations (Grids 1 through 16 and 30, Figure

6) indicated the presence of PCB contamination above site-specific cleanup goals and state

recommended cleanup levels (1 ppm in the first 10 inches and 10 ppm below 10 inches). Round

2 of soil excavation was performed at these locations to 4 ft bgs and confirmation samples were

collected and analyzed. Confirmation sampling results showed two grids (Grid 15 and 30,

Figure 6) still contained PCB concentrations above site-specific cleanup goals and state

recommended cleanup levels. Two additional rounds of soil excavation and confirmatory

sampling were performed until site-specific cleanup goals and state recommended cleanup levels

for PCBs were achieved. The final depth of Grid 15 and 30 was 8 ft bgs.

A total of 25,922 tons of soil and debris were removed from the CSYA, with 3,046 tons

characterized as hazardous waste and 22,876 tons characterized as nonhazardous waste. The

hazardous waste was disposed of at the Chemical Waste Management, Inc., landfill in Model

City, New York. The nonhazardous waste was disposed of at the Seneca Meadows Landfill in

Waterloo, New York.


Concentrations

NYSDEC Technical Guidance for

Screening Contaminated

Sediments (Frequency of Detection of Above

Guidance Values)


Contaminated Sediments, Human Health

Bioaccumulation (Frequency of Detection

of Above Guidance Values)


Contaminated Sediments, Benthic Aquatic Life

Chronic Toxicity (Frequency of Detection

of Above Guidance Values)


Contaminated Sediments, Lowest

Level, Sediment Criteria for Metals (Frequency of

Detection of Above Guidance Values)

Lowest Effect Level (Frequency of

Detection of Above Effect Level)

Effect Range, Low (Frequency of

Detection of Above Effect Range)

0.06 a NA NA NA NA NA(1/8)

NA NA 5 a,c NA NA NA(1/8)

NA NA NA NA NA 70 e

NA (7/8)NA NA 5 a,c NA NA NA

(1/8)NA NA 6 a,c NA NA NA

(1/8)NA NA NA NA NA 16 e



(8/8)NA 13 a,b NA NA NA NA




8/8)NA NA 1,995 a,c NA NA NA







(8/8)NA NA 5 a.c NA NA NA


(8/8)

NA 0.1 a,b NA NA NA NA(2/8)



NA NA 0.01 a,c NA NA NA(8/8)

NA NA NA 6.0 a,d NA NA(2/8)

NA NA NA 0.6 a,d NA NA(4/8)

NA NA NA 26 a,d NA NA(4/8)

NA NA NA 16 a,d NA NA(8/8)

NA NA NA NA 31 d NA(8/8)


NA NA NA NA 0.15 d NA(3/8)


NA NA NA 120 a,d NA NA(7/8) NA

a NYSDEC Technical Guidance for Screening Contaminated Sediments, November 1993.b Human Health Bioaccumulation (assuming 1% organic carbon in sediment).c Benthic Aquatic Life Chronic Toxicity (assuming 1% carbon in sediment).d Lowest Effect Level, Sediment Criteria for Metals.e Effects Range - Low (Long, MacDonald, Smith, and Calder, 1995).* = 6 NYCRR Part 375 Environmental Remediation Programs Subparts 375-1 to 375-4 and 375-6Key:J = Estimated concentration.

Arsenic

93.1 - 439

6.8 - 27.9

0.33 - 0.69

103 - 528

100 - 416

19.1 - 150

7.8 - 55.3

2.1 - 6.2

1.7 J - 8.8

Lead

Copper

Chromium

Cadmium

Zinc

Nickel

Mercury

Manganese

550 - 22,000Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene

Guthion (Azinphos-methyl)

PCB 1260

PCB 1254

4,4'- DDD 240 - 3,800 J

320 - 5,300

38 J - 8,200

140 J - 1,200

2600 - 130,000Phenanthrene

1400 J - 43,000Naphthalene

3100 - 87,000Pyrene

730 JPhenol

110 J

2100 - 46,000

260 J - 3,000 J

2800 J - 28,000

Chrysene

Benzo(a)pyrene

1900 - 53,000

390 J - 25,000

160 J - 820 J

280 J - 22,000

Fluorene

Fluoranthene

320 J - 26,000

3900 - 92,000

Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate

3 JBenzene

2,4-Dimethylphenol

2-Methylnaphthalene

550 J

76 J - 15,000

340 J

1400 - 41,000

1600 - 34,000

4-Chloro-3-methylphenol

2-Methylphenol

Benzo(k)fluoranthene

Benzo(b)fluoranthene

Benzo(a)anthracene

Anthracene

VOCs (µg/kg)


COAL STORAGE YARD REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SAMPLESRAINBOW CREEK SEDIMENT SAMPLES

Metals (mg/kg)


SVOCs (µg/kg)

Acenaphthylene

Acenaphthene

- 17 -


Concentrations

NYSDEC TAGM 4046

Recommended Soil Cleanup

Objective (Frequency of Detection of

Above TAGMs)

Proposed RCRA Correction Action Levels (Frequency

of Detection of Above Action

Levels)

Proposed Site background screening

concentration (Frequency of Detection of

Above screening concentration)

EPA Region III Risk-based

concentraion for industrial soil (Frequency of Detection of

Above risk-based concentration)

6-NYCRR Part 375 Unrestricted Use Soil Cleanup

Objective* (Frequency of Detection of

Above Objectives)

SVOCs (µg/kg)200 a NA NA NA NA(3/10)224 a NA NA NA 1000(2/10) (1/10)61 a NA NA NA 1000

(8/10) (0/10)400 a NA NA NA 1000(5/10) (2/10)14 a NA NA NA 330

(2/10) (0/10)Pesticides/PCBs (µg/kg)

44 a NA NA NA 5(2/10) (2/10)

NA 90 b NA NA 100(9/10) (8/10)

NA NA 3.4 c NA NA(3/10)

NA NA NA 1.9 d 350(3/10) (0/10)

1.1 a NA NA NA 2.5(5/10) (3/10)

NA NA 23,821 c NA NA(4/10)

NA NA 43.8 c NA 50(4/10) (4/10)

NA NA 36.2 c NA 63(5/10) (4/10)

NA NA 7,175 c NA NA(1/10)

0.1 a NA NA NA 0.18(2/10) (1/10)

NA NA 1.1 c NA 2(2/10) (2/10)

NA NA 259 c NA NA(1/10)

NA NA 55 c NA NA(4/10)

NA NA 120 c NA 109(4/10) (4/10)


COAL STORAGE YARD REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SAMPLESSURFACE SOIL SAMPLES, MAY 1994

Key:J = Estimated concentration.

Metals (mg/kg)

b Proposed RCRA Correction Action Levels (7/27/1990).c Site background screening concentration.d EPA Region III Risk-based concentration for industrial soil, 4/14/04.

a NYSDEC Technical and Administrative Guidance Memorandum (TAGM) 4046 Recommended Soil Cleanup Objective.

0.16 - 1

Zinc

Strontium

Sodium

Silver 3.4 - 4.7

161 - 260

4.8 - 232

40.2 - 12,900

Mercury

Cadmium 1.4 - 21.4

1680 - 289,000Calcium

Copper 9.1 - 763

10.2 - 143Lead

1810 - 11,600

42 J - 87

23 J - 330,000PCB 1260

Dieldrin

Magnesium

1.8 - 3.6

3.2 - 8.7

Arsenic

Antimony

44 J - 180 JDibenzo(a,h)anthracene

210 J - 900

86 J - 1,100

88 J - 1,000

100 J - 1,600Chrysene

Benzo(a)pyrene

Benzo(a)anthracene

3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine

- 18 -


Concentrations

NYSDEC TAGM 4046 Recommended Soil Cleanup Objective

(Frequency of Detection of Above TAGMs)

Proposed RCRA Correction Action

Levels (Frequency of Detection of Above

Action Levels)

Proposed Site background screening concentration

(Frequency of Detection of Above screening concentration)

EPA Region III Risk-based concentraion for

industrial soil (Frequency of Detection of Above

risk-based concentration)

6-NYCRR Part 375 Unrestricted Use Soil Cleanup Objective*

(Frequency of Detection of Above

Objectives)

224 a NA NA NA 1,000(8/15) (2/15)61 a NA NA NA 1,000

(6/15) (3/15)1,100 a NA NA NA 1,000(4/15) (4/15)1,100 a NA NA NA 800(2/15) (2/15)400 a NA NA NA 1,000(6/15) (4/15)14 a NA NA NA 330

(3/15) (0/15)

44 a NA NA NA 5(2/15) (3/15)NA 90 b NA NA 100

(8/15) (8/15)

NA NA 3.4 c NA NA(3/15)

NA NA NA 1.9 d 13(1/15) (0/15)

NA NA 23,821 c NA NA(8/15)

NA NA 43.8 c NA 50(4/15) (2/15)

NA NA 36.2 c NA 63(1/15) (0/15)

NA NA 7,175 c NA NA(1/15)

NA NA 259 c NA NA(1/15)

NA NA 55 c NA NA(5/15)

NA NA 0.5 c NA NA(1/15)

NA NA 120 c NA 109(1/15) (1/15)

SVOCs (µg/kg)


COAL STORAGE YARD REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SAMPLESSUBSURFACE SOIL SAMPLES, JUNE 1994

J = Estimated concentration.

Metals (mg/kg)


b Proposed RCRA Correction Action Levels (7/27/1990).c Site background screening concentration.d EPA Region III Risk-based concentration for industrial soil, 4/14/04.

a NYSDEC TAGM 4046 Recommended Soil Cleanup Objective.

48 - 4,600


37 J - 270 JDibenzo(a,h)anthracene

Chrysene 69 J - 2,400 J

Key:

Arsenic 0.72 - 3.4

5 - 5.3

61 J - 2,200 JBenzo(a)pyrene

66 J - 2,300 JBenzo(a)anthracene

28 J - 2,100 JBenzo(k)fluoranthene

100 J - 3,100 J

149 - 294

2.2 J - 135

1.2 J

19 - 280

PCB 1260

Dieldrin

6 J - 39.6 J

8.2 J - 139 J

749 J - 104,000Calcium

Antimony

Sodium

Magnesium

Lead

Copper

5.9 J - 187Zinc

Thallium

Strontium

80.9 - 14,500

- 19 -


Concentrations

Federal Aquatic Water Quality Criterion, for protection of

human health (Frequency of Detection of Above Quality

Criterion)

Federal Aquatic Water Quality Criterion, for protection of

aquatic organisms (Frequency of Detection of Above Quality

Criterion)

NYSDEC Surface Water Standard for protection of

aquatic organisms (Frequency of Detection of Above

Standard for protection)

0.66 a,b NA NA(2/4)

0.033 a,b NA NA(3/4)

NA NA 0.002 d

(1/4)0.003 a,b NA NA

(2/4)0.0028 a,b NA NA

(1/4)0.0028 a,b NA NA

(2/2)0.0028 a,b NA NA

(2/2)0.0028 a,b NA NA

(2/2)0.0028 a,b NA NA

(2/2)NA NA 0.002 d

(1/4)0.002 a,b NA NA

(1/4)NA NA 0.03 d

(0/1)

NA NA 0.0000006 d

(1/4)NA NA 0.005 d

(1/5)NA NA 0.001 d

(4/4)NA NA 0.001 d

(1/4)NA NA 0.001 d

(1/4)NA NA 0.001 d

(1/4)

NA 0.00072 a,c NA

(3/4)NA NA 1.0 d

(1/3)

NA NA 0.1 d

(2/4)NA 0.006 a,c NA

(1/4)NA NA 0.3 d

(2/4)NA NA 0.001 d

(2/4)0.05 a,b NA NA(4/4)NA NA 0.045 d

(2/4)


COAL STORAGE YARD REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION SAMPLESSURFACE WATER SAMPLES

Key:J = Estimated concentration.

VOCs (µg/L)

SVOCs (µg/L)

Pesticides/PCBs (µg/L)

Metals (mg/L)

a Federal Aquatic Water Quality Criterion (AWQC), EPA 440/5-86-001, May 1, 1987.b AWQC for protection of human health.c AWQC for protection of aquatic organisms.d NYSDEC Surface Water Standard for protection of aquatic organisms (Class C).

Zinc 0.025 J - 0.051

3.5 - 6.8

1.1 - 3.6cis-1,2-Dichloroethene

Benzene

Methoxychlor

Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene

gamma-Chlordane

Chrysene

0.077 J - 0.12 J

0.16 J

Benzo(k)fluoranthene


Benzo(a)pyrene

Benzo(a)anthracene

0.063Azinphos, Methyl (guthion)

Anthracene

alpha-Chlordane

0.024 J

0.1 J

0.0096

0.091 J - 0.17 J

0.055 J - 0.1 J

0.18 J - 0.22 J

0.002 J - 0.004 J

0.002 J

0.023 J - 0.025 J

0.011 J

4,4'- DDE

4,4'- DDT 0.014 J

0.002

0.003 J - 0.017 J4,4'- DDD

2.1PCB 1260

0.19 J - 0.24 J

0.02 JCopper

Aluminum

Heptachlor epoxide

Hexachlorobenzene (HCB)

Carbofuran 1.3

0.16 - 1.2 J

0.005 J - 0.008 J

0.26 - 0.71 JManganese

Lead

Iron

- 20 -

36

24

30 35

Concrete Pad

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

# # #

#

#

#

SB09

SB01

SB15

SB14

SB13

SB12

SB02

SB03

SB04

SB11 SB10

SB08

SB05

SB07

SB06

³

0 12060

Feet

Legend

Railroad

Airfield

Existing Roads

Demolished Facilities

# Soil Boring Sample (1997)FenceD

Existing Facilities

Figure 5 AOI 66 Investigative and Confirmatory Sample Locations

- 21 -

36

30 35

Drainag

e Swale

!!!

!!1

57

26082

!!!

46183

!!!

76284

!!!

106385

!!!

136486

!!!

166687

!!!

206788

!!!

246889

!!!

266990

! 56 ! 58!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! !!

!

!

! ! ! ! ! !!

!!!

!

!

! ! ! !!! ! !

!! !!! !!

! !!!

!

!

! 65

9

812

11

8114

80

6515

19

18

17

79

23

22

27

26

32

31

21

78

33

7030

7725

37

36

38

43

42

44

40

74

4135

76

29

34

75 39

45

46

47

48

49

71

51

52

53

72

50

54

56

7355

AOI 66

DRMO

Rainbow Creek

FPM Group Ltd.This map (Y:\GIS_Projects\Griffiss\Projects\Misc\LUC-LUCIC\Coal_StorageYardArea_Culvert.mxd)

was produced on 10/20/2008

LegendRailroad

D D Fence LineRemoved RoadAirfield/Road

Rainbow Creek

Sidewall of Excavation SampleBottom of Excavation Sample

!

!

Demolished FacilitiesExcavation GridExcavation AreaExcavation Area - Round 2

Existing Facilities

0 12060

Feet

³

Figure 6 CSYA Confirmatory Sample Locations

- 22 -

-23-

The analytical results from the confirmation samples were compared with applicable state and

federal guidelines. Following review and approval of the results by EPA and NYSDEC, the Air

Force authorized backfilling of the excavated site with clean fill.

Pre- and post-excavation topographic surveys were conducted to record the extent of excavation

at the AOC. The AOC was restored to approximate pre-construction grades and appearance.

During the remedial action, nine exploratory trenches were excavated in the CSYA AOC to

locate suspected buried debris or drums. The locations were selected based on the anomalies

identified during the RI GPR survey. Trenches were excavated to the soil-groundwater interface

(5 feet bgs). The trenching operations did not reveal any additional metallic debris, and no

drums were found.

Rainbow Creek

Sediment excavation activities were conducted at Rainbow Creek based on a site-specific PCB

sediment cleanup goal of 0.036 mg/kg (NYSDEC Technical Guidance for Screening

Contaminated Sediments, November 1993) in 1997. The creek was temporarily diverted and the

upper 1-foot of sediment was excavated over a 1,900-foot length. The excavated sediment was

stockpiled adjacent to the creek, dewatered, and characterized prior to transportation and

disposal. A total of 4,144 tons of sediment were disposed of as nonhazardous waste at the

Seneca Meadows Landfill in Waterloo, New York.

Following sediment excavation, confirmation samples were collected and analyzed, and the

results were compared to the site-specific cleanup goal. PCB concentrations in remaining

sediments exceeded the cleanup goal in 30 of 39 locations. In 1998, as part of the Supplemental

Investigation of AOCs, two surface water samples were collected from the outfalls of two storm

sewers at the headwaters of Rainbow Creek and one surface water sample was collected from

Rainbow Creek using the passive in-situ chemical extraction sampler (PISCES) method. All

samples were analyzed for pesticides and PCBs. No pesticides or PCBs were detected in the

samples from the storm sewers. Several pesticides were detected in the surface water sample

from Rainbow Creek; however, no PCBs were detected.

Rainbow Creek was restored by lining the entire creek bed with a geotextile fabric and

placement of 1 foot of crushed stone bedding to provide a barrier between contaminated

sediments and surface water. Riprap material was placed 50 feet upstream and downstream of

culverts to provide erosion control during periods of high water velocity. Regrading and seeding

were performed where necessary.

All of the water that was generated during the soil and sediment excavations, dewatering of

sediments, and decontamination activities, was collected, treated, and discharged to the City of

Rome Publicly-Owned Treatment Works.

Sampling results from the Six Mile Creek Long Term Monitoring program confirmed PCB

contamination in the sediments of Rainbow Creek. However, the entire length of Rainbow

Creek was culverted in 2008 and 2009 and geotextile fabric was reinstalled above the relocated

-24-

soils. The culvert eliminates the source of discharge by preventing surface water contact with

residual contaminated soils and sediments; reducing the potential for additional contamination

migration to downstream receptors in Six Mile Creek. Monitoring of PCB contamination is

being conducted in accordance with the Six Mile Creek Record of Decision. Any trends of

concern attributed to any of the contributing environmental sites are being evaluated as part of

the Six Mile Creek Long Term Monitoring Program. EPA, NYSDEC, NYSDOH and the Air

Force will review the data generated during the Long Term Monitoring program to determine

whether any additional actions are necessary. If the results of the long-term monitoring indicate

that fish tissue levels are not declining or the ecological community is not recovering, additional

investigation or remediation may be necessary.

AOI 66

Data collected in 1997 from soil boring sample locations throughout AOI 66 and post-excavation

confirmatory soil sidewall samples from the south sidewall of the CSYA excavation were used

as the basis for the 1998-1999 remedial activities at AOI 66. The remedial action objective was

to reduce the exposure to contaminants to acceptable levels through excavation and removal of

contaminated soil and debris.

Initial work involved removal of the railroad spur and 4-inch thick concrete skid pad located

adjacent to the railroad tracks (see Figure 7). The concrete was stockpiled on the alert apron to

be disposed of with the soil samples.

During the initial round (Round 1) of excavation, surface soil was excavated to a depth of 1-foot

bgs with the exception of the railway and the areas of buried debris (Figure 7). Along the

railway, the total depth of excavation was 3.5 feet bgs due to 2.5 feet of ballast and sub-ballast

that was removed. Buried debris found in the northeast portion of the site between the coal

storage pad and the railroad was excavated to a depth of 3 feet bgs. Confirmatory soil samples

were collected from the bottom and sidewalls of the excavation as illustrated on Figure 7. The

results were compared to TAGMs 4046 Recommended Soil Cleanup Objectives and Title 40,

Code of Federal Regulations, part 761.125 [c][4] requirements. Results from three confirmatory

sample locations (2-EB1, 1-SWA, and 12-SWA) showed PCB concentrations above the site-

specific cleanup goals and state recommended cleanup levels (1 ppm in the first 10 inches and 10

ppm below 10 inches). Round 2 of excavation was performed at the three locations. A second

round of confirmatory samples was conducted and results from one original sampling location

(12-SWA) still showed PCB levels above the site-specific cleanup goals and state recommended

cleanup levels. A third round of excavation was conducted at this location to 4 ft bgs.

Confirmatory samples were collected following the excavation and results showed PCB

concentrations below site-specific cleanup goals and state recommended cleanup levels and no

further excavation was performed.

A total of 2,925 tons of soil was removed from AOI 66, with 281 tons characterized as hazardous

waste and 2,644 tons characterized as nonhazardous waste. The hazardous waste was disposed

of at the Chemical Waste Management, Inc., landfill in Model City, New York. The

nonhazardous waste was disposed of at the Seneca Meadows Landfill in Waterloo, New York.

36

30 35

Concrete Pad

! !

!

! !

! ! ! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! ! !

!

!

!2 EB1/2

9-EB1

1-EB2 3-EB14-EB1

5-EB1

18-EB1

15-EB1

1-SWA

8-SWA

1-SWB

10-SWA 11-SWA

12-SWA/B/C

13-SWA

17-SWA

16-SWA

14-SWA

6-SWA

7-SWA

EB-16 EB-17

EB-18

³

0 12060

Feet

Legend

Railroad

Airfield

Existing Roads

Demolished Facilities

! Sidewall of Excavation Sample

FenceD

Existing Facilities

AOI 66 Excavation

! Exploratory Boring Sample

! Bottom of Excavation Sample

Figure 7 AOI 66 Remedial Action

- 25 -

-26-

Suspected unexploded ordnance (50 mm and 105 mm shell casings) found in the northeastern

portion of the site was later determined to be empty casings. They were placed in a 55-gallon

drum and transported to the Fort Drum UXO detachment for disposal.

As a result of metallic and ceramic debris identified during excavation (near original

confirmatory sample location 12-SWA), three exploratory borings (EB-16, EB-17, and EB-18)

were completed. No debris was encountered at the three locations and it was determined that the

debris was isolated to the area around 12-SWA.

The excavated areas were restored to pre-construction conditions with the placement of clean

backfill and topsoil, and revegetation. The railroad and concrete skid were reconstructed.

2.5.2 DRMO

2.5.2.1 Previous Investigation

In August 1996, nine pre-closure samples were collected from soil at the southwest corner of the

DRMO area (see Figure 8). Five of these samples were analyzed for PCBs, and all nine were

analyzed for metals and extractable organic halides (EOX). PCBs were detected at

concentrations above the most stringent criteria (1 mg/Kg) in two of the five samples. The PCB

exceedances were 1.7 mg/Kg and 11 mg/Kg. Metals and EOX were not detected above most

stringent criteria in any of the samples. Based on the percentage of samples with PCB

concentrations above the action levels of 1 ppm to a depth of 10 inches and 10 ppm at depths

greater than 10 inches, delineation of the PCB contamination at the DRMO area was

recommended.

From January to March 1997, a soil-screening sample boring investigation was conducted on the

western portion of the DRMO. Soil samples were initially collected at a depth of 1 foot and any

soil sample collected from previous investigations that exceeded the surface soil action level of 1

ppm was resampled at a depth of 2 feet. Additional samples were taken at a distance of 25 feet

in each direction from the original sample if it exceeded action levels. Samples were analyzed

on site and based on these results, additional samples were collected using the above approach

until on-site analytical results were below the most stringent criteria. A total of 80 soil borings

were installed (see Figure 8) and the greatest depth of contamination was at sample location

DRMO-DS11 where 10.1 ppm was measured at a depth of six to seven feet. Concentrations in

the soil ranged from non-detect to 584 ppm. The highest concentration was at sample location

DRMO-DS51A (depth 1 foot).

Exploratory borings were installed on the eastern portion of the DRMO site in October 1997 (see

Figure 9). A total of 27 borings were installed and samples were collected at 1-foot depth

intervals from 0 to 7 feet bgs and analyzed for VOCs, SVOCs, pesticides/PCBs, and metals.

Analytical results indicated that the soil samples did not exceed the site-specific cleanup goals,

with the exception of four metals (arsenic, barium, calcium, and selenium) that exceeded site

background levels. The site background level for arsenic is 4.9 mg/Kg, 27 exceedances were

reported in this event ranging from 5 to 9.6 mg/Kg. The site background level for barium is 71

mg/Kg, one exceedance (110 mg/Kg) was reported in this event. The site background level for

1

Figure 8 DRMO Pre-Closure and Screening Sample Locations

- 27 -

-28-

calcium is 23,821 mg/Kg, exceedances reported in this event ranged from 26,000 to 77,000 mg/Kg. The site background level for selenium is 0.34 mg/Kg, one exceedance (0.35 mg/Kg) was reported in this event. Based on the exploratory sampling results, no further action was recommended at the eastern portion of the DRMO. 2.5.2.2 Interim Remedial Action In October 1997, an IRA was initiated on the western portion of the DRMO area. The initial round of excavation (see Figure 9) was based on previous sampling results. Soil was removed to a maximum depth of 7 feet bgs across the area. The contaminated soil was stockpiled pending characterization, transportation, and disposal. Confirmatory samples were collected on 50-foot grid centers and analyzed for VOCs, SVOCs, pesticides/PCBs, and metals. Sampling results showed PCB concentrations exceeded the site-specific cleanup goals and state recommended cleanup levels in 2 out of 18 grid locations. Both exceedances were reported in samples collected in the western excavation. Aroclor 1260 was reported in the Grid 28 sample at 24,000 µg/Kg (site-specific cleanup goal and state recommended cleanup level was 1,000 µg/Kg). This grid is located in the northern portion of the excavation (Figure 9). Aroclor 1254 was reported in the Grid 2 sample at 3,100 µg/Kg site-specific cleanup goal and state recommended cleanup level was 1,000 µg/Kg). This grid is located in the southern portion of the excavation. In addition to the PCB exceedances, two metals were reported at concentrations above the site-specific cleanup goals. Barium was reported in three samples with concentrations ranging from 72 to 99 mg/Kg (the site-specific cleanup goal was 71 mg/Kg). Arsenic was reported in eight samples with concentrations ranging from 6.1 to 7.6 mg/Kg (site-specific cleanup goal was 4.9 mg/Kg). The metals exceedances were not reported in the same grids as the PCB exceedances. There were no VOC and SVOC concentrations reported above the site-specific clean-up goals during the confirmatory sampling event. As a result of the PCB concentrations detected during the initial confirmatory sampling round, additional soil excavation was conducted at both grid locations as illustrated in Figure 8. Following the excavation, two confirmatory soil samples were collected. Results showed that all PCB concentrations were below the site-specific cleanup goals and state recommended cleanup levels. A total of 5,318 tons of soil was excavated and removed from the DRMO area. All of the soil was characterized as nonhazardous and was transferred to the Seneca Meadows Landfill in Waterloo, New York. No armed UXO was discovered during the excavation activities. However, empty casing and cartridges were recovered, placed in a 55-gallon drum, and transported to the Fort Drum UXO detachment for disposal. Restoration of the DRMO area included placement of clean backfill and topsoil and re-vegetation. Backfill was spread and compacted to a depth four inches below final grade. Disturbed areas were covered with topsoil to a depth of four inches, seeded, fertilized and mulched.

1

Figure 9 DRMO Exploratory Boring and Excavation Confirmatory Sample Locations

- 29 -

-30-

2.5.3 Pumphouse 5

2.5.3.1 Previous Investigation

In March 1989, a soil gas survey was conducted at the Pumphouse 5 AOC. During the soil gas

survey, 90 soil gas samples were collected from a depth of approximately 4 feet bgs and

analyzed for benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes (BTEX), and total volatile organic

hydrocarbons. Analytical results indicated the presence of significant petroleum contamination.

The detected BTEX concentrations ranged from 0.1 to 1,123 µg/L and the maximum

concentration for total petroleum hydrocarbons was 307 µg/L.

In July 1989, three monitoring wells were installed to the north and northwest of Building 771,

downgradient of USTs 771-1 and -3 (771MW-1, -2, and -3). Free product was observed in two

wells.

In the fall of 1991, a leak detection survey was conducted to analyze for leaks in the vicinity of

the four 50,000-gal USTs and the 21,000-foot long main hydrant system piping along parking

Apron 1. No leaks associated with these underground utilities were found.

In late November 1991, Tracer Corporation (TRC) performed additional soil gas surveys at the

AOC. A total of 85 soil gas survey points were installed to approximately 6 feet bgs. The soil

gas survey confirmed the suspected areas of contamination identified earlier by UNC Geotech.

The detected BTEX concentrations ranged from 0.1 to 15 µg/L. Free product, a light non-

aqueous phase liquid (LNAPL), was also measured in monitoring wells 771MW-1 and 771MW-

3 with thickness of respective 2.04 feet and 4.85 feet.

In December 1991, six additional monitoring wells (771MW-4 through 771MW-9) were

installed at the site. Free product was observed in monitoring wells 771MW-4 and 771MW-7

with a respective thickness of 0.01 foot and 5.80 feet.

In conjunction with the Base-wide Quarterly Sampling Program conducted from 1992 to 1993,

monitoring wells were sampled on a quarterly basis for one year. Samples were analyzed for

VOCs and SVOCs, pesticides/PCBs, total glycols, total metals, and cyanide. BTEX compounds

were the primary contaminants of concern, and were reported at concentrations above the

NYSDEC Class GA Groundwater Standards.

In February 1993, a flexible axial peristaltic (FAP) pump petroleum-skimming system was

installed to recover free product from four of the wells; the system was in operation for six

months and removed a total of 25 to 50 gallons of free product. During FAP monitoring in April

1993, a layer of fuel was discovered in a 4-foot by 4-foot valve pit. Approximately 300 gallons

of groundwater and fuel were pumped from the valve pit, located southwest of monitoring well

771MW-7. By October 1993, the product thickness in 771MW-7 was reduced to 0.82 feet using

the FAP pump.

-31-

Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis (EE/CA)

An EE/CA was prepared in 1995 in support of the proposed removal actions at the Pumphouse 5

AOC, which included the following:

■ Demolition of the pumphouse;

■ Removal of each of the USTs and associated piping;

■ Recovery of free product from the groundwater surface via a free product recovery system, and

excavation and disposal of contaminated soil around Pumphouse 5.

Also in the spring of 1995, 15 soil borings were installed at the Pumphouse 5 site as part of the

EE/CA addendum. Soil samples were collected at 2-foot intervals and subjected to headspace

screening using a flame ionization detector. The results were used for additional delineation of

the contaminated plume area, and were incorporated into the remedial design for the

recommended removal area around Pumphouse 5. An addendum to the final EE/CA Report was

issued to EPA and NYSDEC on September 22, 1995, incorporating EPA and NYSDEC

comments. The boring locations were within the removal action boundaries performed in 1997

(Removal Action) and 1999 (Interim Remedial Action). These actions are further described

below.

Treatability Study and Pilot Test

In 1995, a treatability study was conducted at Pumphouse 5 to evaluate the use of natural

attenuation with LTM as a remedial option for dissolved BTEX contamination in the shallow

groundwater and the impact of free product and dissolved BTEX in the shallow groundwater and

in Rainbow Creek. BTEX was detected in water and sediment samples collected from the creek.

Modeling was used to estimate the rate and direction of dissolved BTEX movement through the

shallow groundwater. Results indicated that dissolved BTEX contamination present in the

groundwater posed no significant threat to human health or the environment in its present or

predicted future concentration and distribution. However, the migration of the contaminated

groundwater into Rainbow Creek could potentially exceed NYSDEC's Surface Water Quality

Standards in the Creek.

In 1996, a free product recovery pilot test to evaluate bioslurping technology was performed.

The test eliminated bioslurping as a cleanup option, but the results suggested that bioventing

might be feasible.

2.5.3.2 1997 Removal Action

In May 1997, a removal action was performed during which Pumphouse 5 was demolished and

the USTs were removed, along with their respective appurtenances and contaminated soil. An

estimated 18,619 tons of soil were removed and six of the nine existing monitoring wells were

removed. Three new monitoring wells (771MW-1A, -2A, and -3A) were installed within the

excavated area after the site was backfilled in July 1997 (see Figure 10). The extent of the

excavation is illustrated on Figure 11.

Figure 10 Pumphouse 5 Sample Locations

- 32 -

1

Figure 11 Pumphouse 5 Excavation Confirmatory Sample Locations

- 33 -

-34-

Prior to the excavation, an apparent thickness of up to 11 feet of free product was observed in

monitoring well 771MW-7; however, during the excavation, no free product was encountered or

removed. Based on the confirmation sampling results, residual soil contamination existed in the

subsurface soils. The excavation was discontinued, however, because the source of the

contaminants had been removed and the contract quantities had been exhausted. The excavated

pit was backfilled with clean fill.

2.5.3.3 1997 through 1998 AOC Investigations

An additional AOC investigation was performed in August and September 1997 to further

delineate the extent of the residual soil contamination in the vicinity of Pumphouse 5.

For this effort, 69 Geoprobe®

soil borings were installed and 129 soil samples were collected

from discrete intervals of 2 to 4 feet bgs, 6 to 8 feet bgs, and 14 to 16 feet bgs. When insufficient

soil was recovered, consecutive intervals were combined for analysis. Samples were analyzed

for VOCs and SVOCs, and compared to the STARS Memo No. 1 guidance values.

Thirty-three soil borings showed no exceedances of STARS guidance values for VOCs or

SVOCs, while 36 soil borings, generally found in the north and central areas of the AOC, had

one or more exceedance (generally for VOCs). The detected benzene concentrations were

reported up to 35 parts per million (ppm). In general, when benzene concentrations exceeded the

STARS guidance value, other VOCs were also found at concentrations exceeding their

respective STARS guidance values. The Geoprobe®

soil borings that showed soil contamination

were within the Interim Remedial Action excavation boundaries. The Interim Remedial Action

is further discussed below.

The areal distribution of soil contamination at the site was consistent with contaminant migration

toward the presumed groundwater discharge to Rainbow Creek. Soil contamination found below

the clean fill in the UST excavation area indicated that the removal action had been incomplete.

Downgradient soil contamination was found above and below the existing saturated zone; this

was likely the result of migrating groundwater contaminants and/or residual free product.

In April 1998, groundwater samples were collected from nine on-site monitoring wells (771MW-

1B, -2B, -3B, -4B, -5B, -6B, -1A, -2A, and -3A) and analyzed for VOCs and SVOCs. Results

indicated that four wells (771MW-3B, -4B, -1A, and -3A) contained at least nine VOCs at levels

above NYS Groundwater Standards. Free product was also encountered at 771MW-4B with an

apparent thickness of 0.6 feet. Additionally, naphthalene was found at levels the above NYS

Groundwater Standard at two wells (771MW-1A and -4B; see Figure 10).

Also in April 1998, surface water samples were collected from three locations in Rainbow Creek,

including five seep samples upgradient, adjacent to, and/or downgradient of the site, and one

surface water sample collected from the middle of the creek downstream of the site. Samples

were submitted for analysis of VOCs, SVOCs, and at two locations, PCBs. Benzene was found

at levels at or exceeding ARARs at the three seep sample locations collected in the vicinity of the

site and the downstream mid-creek sample. No SVOCs or PCBs were reported above NYS

-35-

Groundwater Standards. The results indicated that the contaminant plume from the site appeared

to be migrating toward and discharging to Rainbow Creek.

2.5.3.4 1999 Interim Remedial Action

In August 1999, an interim remedial action was performed to excavate contaminated soil

identified during the AOC characterization. Surface and subsurface petroleum-impacted soil was

excavated, stockpiled, and transported to the Apron 1 landfarming operation. Confirmatory

samples were collected to ensure cleanup goals were met and the excavated areas were backfilled

with clean material. This interim remedial action is briefly described below.

Stockpiles found to be contaminated above STARS guidance values were transported to the

biotreatment cells on the Apron 1 Landfarm; approximately 36,300 cubic yards of contaminated

soil were excavated and transported to the landfarm. Stockpiles found with contaminant levels

below STARS guidance values remained in place on the edge of Apron 1 for use as backfill;

approximately 14,750 cubic yards of clean soil were stockpiled.

The remedial activities were temporarily suspended through 2000 for contract modifications and

the excavation remained open until July 2001 when remedial activities continued. An additional

4,200 cubic yards of contaminated soil were excavated and transported to the Apron 1 Landfarm.

A combined total of 40,475 cubic yards of petroleum-impacted soil were removed from the

Pumphouse 5 site.

Forty-six confirmatory samples were collected from the excavation sidewall and bottom and

analyzed for total VOCs and SVOCs (see Figure 11). The Air Force, EPA, and NYSDEC

compared the results of the confirmatory soil samples to the STARS guidance values. SVOCs

exceeded the guidance values at four sample locations. The four sample locations (B7, B8, B11,

and S3) were overexcavated and resampled, with results confirming that the remaining soil

contaminant levels were below STARS guidance values.

The excavated area was first backfilled with 110 tons of clean concrete rubble and 732 tons of

cobble to ensure proper compaction of backfilled soil. A total of approximately 25,360 cubic

yards of bioremediated soil and clean stockpiled soil was used to backfill the excavation.

Topsoil was spread, compacted, graded, and then seeded, and the site restoration was completed

in November 2001. The Interim Remedial Action Report was delivered in October 2003.

2.5.3.5 Groundwater and Surface Water Monitoring

Surface Water Sampling 1999-2003

Surface water samples (seep samples) were collected from Rainbow Creek during the removal

action to ensure that contamination was not released to the creek during soil removal. The

samples were collected from three to seven different locations and analyzed for VOCs and

SVOCs. Prior to the removal action in April 1999, surface water samples were analyzed for

PCBs and metals. After completion of site restoration, surface water samples were collected and

-36-

analyzed for PCBs. During 12 sampling rounds in 1999, eight VOCs and one SVOC

(naphthalene) exceeded the NYS Surface Water Standards. During two sampling rounds in

2001, one VOC (toluene) and PCB-1260 exceeded the NYS Surface Water Standards. During

additional rounds of sampling in 2002 and 2003, no VOCs, SVOCs, or lead were measured at

levels above the standards and there was one exceedance at one location for PCB-1260 (0.49

µg/L).

Groundwater Monitoring 2001-2003

During the removal action, nine of the ten existing monitoring wells associated with the

Pumphouse 5 site were destroyed. Upgradient well 771MW-5B, located west of Rainbow Creek,

remained. As part of site restoration, six replacement monitoring wells (771MW-7, -8, -9, -10, -

11, and -12) were installed in November 2001 (see Figure 10). The wells were installed to total

depths ranging from 13 to 24 feet bgs.

Samples from the six replacement wells were collected in November 2001 and analyzed for

VOCs and SVOCs. One VOC (benzene) exceeded the NYS Groundwater Standard (1 µg/L) in

one well (771MW-11) at a concentration of 3.4 µg/L. Six consecutive sampling rounds (ending

in March 2004) were then performed which yielded results for VOCs, SVOCs, and PCBs below

the NYS Groundwater SCGs.

The groundwater has been addressed under the project entitled, Long Term Monitoring Source

Removal AOCs, and six consecutive groundwater sampling rounds confirmed the absence of

contaminants of concern. Site closure was approved by the NYSDEC on October 20, 2004. Full

closure of NYSDEC Spill #8903144 was pending approval following successful remediation of

excavation soils (FPM/CAPE, September 2011).

2.5.3.6 SVI Evaluation

The Pumphouse 5 AOC was included in the Soil Vapor Intrusion (SVI) Evaluation conducted in

March 2007. No sampling was performed at this site. As described in the NYSDEC letter dated

October 20, 2004, which addressed NYSDEC Spill #8903144, no further action is required at the

Pumphouse 5 AOC. During the IRA of 1999, confirmatory soil samples showed that all

contaminated soils were removed. In addition, groundwater and surface water sampling

conducted from 1999 to 2003 showed no VOC, SVOC or PCBs above NYS SCGs for six

consecutive sampling rounds. Therefore, since no soil or groundwater contamination is

remaining on the site, no SVI potential is present. These conclusions were reported to EPA and

NYSDEC in the March 2007 Draft Soil Vapor Intrusion Evaluation.

2.6 Current and Potential and Future Land and Resource Use

Oneida County Industrial Development Corporation is responsible for maintaining property and

developing facilities. The planned future land use designation for the CYSA OU is

industrial/commercial use.

-37-

2.7 Summary of Site Risks

Summary of AOC Risks

As part of the RI, a baseline risk assessment was conducted to evaluate current and future

potential risks to human health and the environment associated with contaminants found in the

soil and groundwater at the AOC. The results of the risk assessment were considered when

planning the remediation and formulating this ROD.

Human Health Risk Assessment Background Information

A baseline human health risk assessment was conducted in conjunction with the RI to determine

whether chemicals detected at the CSYA could pose health risks to individuals under current and

proposed future land use. As part of the baseline risk assessment, the following four-step

process was used to assess site-related human health risks for a reasonable maximum exposure

scenario: Hazard identification—identifies the contaminants of concern at the site based on

several factors such as toxicity, frequency of occurrence, and concentration; Exposure

Assessment—estimates the magnitude of actual and/or potential human exposures, the frequency

and duration of these exposures, and the pathway (e.g., ingestion of contaminated soils) by which

humans are potentially exposed; Toxicity Assessment—determines the types of adverse health

effects associated with chemical exposures and the relationship between magnitude of exposure

Date post:	03-Feb-2021
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	3 times
Download:	0 times

FINAL RECORD OF DECISION COAL YARD STORAGE AREA · 2021. 1. 24. · final record of decision coal...

Documents