+ All Categories
Home > Education > Moffett Site 1, 22, 26, and 28 Five Year Review

Moffett Site 1, 22, 26, and 28 Five Year Review

Date post: 18-Jul-2015
Category:
Upload: steve-williams
View: 170 times
Download: 2 times
Share this document with a friend
Popular Tags:
23
Five Year Review for Installation Restoration Sites 1, 22, 26 and 28 Former Naval Air Station Moffett Field Restoration Advisory Board Meeting, February 12, 2015 Wilson Doctor, Navy Project Manager
Transcript

ACTIVITY NAME

Five Year Review forInstallation Restoration Sites1, 22, 26 and 28Former Naval Air StationMoffett Field

Restoration Advisory Board Meeting, February 12, 2015

Wilson Doctor, Navy Project Manager

2 BRAC Program Management Office

Presentation Overview

•Purpose and Objective

•Background

•Five Year Review Sites, Locations, and Background–IR Site 1

–IR Site 22

–IR Site 26

–IR Site 28

•Site Specific Findings & Protectiveness Statements

•Schedule

•Questions

2/12/2015

3 BRAC Program Management Office

Purpose and Objective of Five Year Review

2/12/2015

Purpose

• Under CERCLA §121(c), the Navy is required to review the progress ofCERCLA remedies at federal installations where hazardous substancesremain on the site at levels that do not allow for unlimited use andunrestricted exposure. This must be done at a minimum frequency of everyfive years.

Objective

• The fundamental objective of the Five Year Review is to ensure continuingprotectiveness of the remedies.

4 BRAC Program Management Office

Background

Trigger Date for Five Year Reviews

• A Five Year Review schedule is triggered by the start of the first remedialaction that leaves hazardous substances, pollutants or contaminants on siteat levels that do not allow for unlimited use and unrestricted exposure.

• This is the third Five Year Review for IR Sites 22, 26, and 28, and the fourthfor IR Site 1.

• After completion of the Five Year Review, the trigger for subsequent reviewsis the date of the previous Five Year Review.

2/12/2015

5 BRAC Program Management Office

IR Sites – Five Year Review

•The Navy issued a Draft Five Year Review report datedNovember 21, 2014 for the following sites:

–IR Site 1 (Runway Landfill)

–IR Site 22 (Golf Course Landfill)

–IR Site 26 (East-Side Aquifer Treatment System [EATS]Area)

–IR Site 28 (West-Side Aquifers Treatment System [WATS]Area)

2/12/2015

6 BRAC Program Management Office

Former NAS Moffett Field Five YearReview Sites

2/12/2015

7 BRAC Program Management Office

IR Site 1 – Runway Landfill

•Decision Document

- Record of Decision (ROD) completed in 1997

•Chemicals of Concern (COCs)

- Dissolved metals

- Volatile organic compounds (VOCs)

- Semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs)

- Pesticides

- Polychlorinated bi-phenyls (PCBs)

•Remedy

- Consolidate Site 2 waste into Site 1

- Installed a multi-layer cap

- Semiannual groundwater and land fill gas monitoring

2/12/2015

8 BRAC Program Management Office

IR Site 1 - Runway Landfill (continued)

•Remedy (cont.)

- Post-closure maintenance of cap

- Institutional Controls (ICs) and Engineering Controls (ECs)

•Current Status

- Quarterly landfill site inspections by Navy and Santa Clara CountyDepartment of Environmental Health (DEH)

- Groundwater and landfill gas monitoring

2/12/2015

9 BRAC Program Management Office

IR Site 1 – Runway Landfill

2/12/2015

10 BRAC Program Management Office

IR Site 22 – Golf Course Landfill

•Decision Document

- Record of Decision (ROD) completed in 2002

•COCs

- VOCs

- SVOCs

- Pesticides

•Remedy

- Landfill cover

- Institutional controls

- Groundwater and landfill gas monitoring

2/12/2015

11 BRAC Program Management Office

IR Site 22 – Golf Course Landfill (continued)

•Current Status

- Quarterly landfill site inspections by Navy and Santa Clara DEH

- Groundwater and landfill gas monitoring

2/12/2015

12 BRAC Program Management Office

IR Site 22 – Golf Course Landfill

2/12/2015

13 BRAC Program Management Office

IR Site 26 – East-Side Aquifer Treatment System(EATS)

•Decision Document

- ROD completed in 1996

- ROD Amendment completed in September 2014

•COCs

- VOCs

- 1,2-dichloroethane (1,2-DCA)

- 1,2-dichloroethene (1,2-DCE)

- 1,1-dichloroethene (1,1-DCE)

- tetrachloroethene (PCE)

- trichloroethene (TCE)

•Remedy- Groundwater monitoring

- EATS (extraction and ex-situ treatment) 1999-2003

- ICs

2/12/2015

14 BRAC Program Management Office

IR Site 26 – EATS (continued)

• Investigations

- 2003–2010 Treatability Studies

- Focused Feasibility Study completed in 2012

•Current Status

- Annual groundwater monitoring event (Sept/Oct) and biannual wellgauging (March and September)

- ROD Amendment for biostimulation/bioaugmentation, monitorednatural attenuation, and ICs

2/12/2015

15 BRAC Program Management Office

IR Site 26 - EATS

2/12/2015

16 BRAC Program Management Office

IR Site 28 – West-Side Aquifers Treatment System(WATS)

•Decision Documents

- ROD completed in 1989

- Vapor Intrusion ROD Amendment completed in 2010

•COCs

- TCE

- 1,2-DCE

- PCE

- Vinyl Chloride

•Remedy

- WATS (extraction and ex-situ treatment) treating groundwater

- Vapor intrusion

2/12/2015

17 BRAC Program Management Office

IR Site 28 – WATS (cont.)

• Investigations

- 2010 Supplemental Investigation – Former Building 88 and TrafficIsland Area

- 2010-2011 In-situ Bioremediation Pilot Study

- 2012-2014 Vapor Intrusion (VI) evaluation

- 2013-2014 Groundwater investigation of deep aquifer

•Current Status

- WATS operating

- Groundwater monitoring events (March and October)

- Vapor intrusion assessment and mitigation

2/12/2015

18 BRAC Program Management Office

IR Site 28 - WATS

2/12/2015

19 BRAC Program Management Office

Components of Five Year Review

2/12/2015

20 BRAC Program Management Office

Components of Five Year Review (continued)

2/12/2015

Assess Protectiveness

• A technical assessment is performed with the objective of answering thefollowing three questions:

21 BRAC Program Management Office

Draft Site Specific Findings & ProtectivenessStatements

•All sites are functioning or will be functioning as intended bytheir Record of Decision.

•Exposure assumptions, cleanup levels, and Remedial ActionObjectives used at the time of the remedies are still valid.

•No other information has come to light that could call intoquestion the protectiveness of the remedies.

•Remedies are protective of human health and the environment.

2/12/2015

22 BRAC Program Management Office

Schedule

•Issued Draft Five Year Review – November 2014

•Review of Draft Five Year Review – current

•Issue Final Five Year Review

2/12/2015

23 BRAC Program Management Office

Questions

2/12/2015


Recommended