Decision_Document_for_Pat_Fire_Training_Area_(FT-02).pdf

DECISION DOCUMENT FOR

PAST FIRE TRAINING AREA (FT -02)

Dobbins Air Reserve Base, Georgia

Department of Defense United States Air Force

Installation Restoration Program Decision Document

Site owner:

94 AirHft Wing (94 A W)

1430 First Street Dobbins Air Reserve Base, Georgia 30069-5009

Restoration Project Manager:

94 Support Group/Environmental Quality Flight (94 SPTG/CEV)

884 Industrial Drive Dobbins Air Reserve Base, Georgia 30069-4210

11 May2000

DECISION DECLARATION STATEMENT AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

To ANAL DECISION DOCUMENT dated September 1997

---------PAST FIRETRAININGAREA(FT-02}----------

Dobbins Air Reserve Base, Georgia -------------United States Air Force

11 May2QOO

DECISION DECLARATION STATEMENT

To FINAL DECISION DOCUMENT dated September 1997 and SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION dated 11 May 2000 for Installation Restoration Program Site

PAST FIRE TRAINING AREA (FT .02)

Owner: Dobbins Air Reserve Base, Georgia United States Air Force

11 May 2000

The following Information is supplemental to the Decision Document dated September 1997.

Please insert these pages In the front of the September 1997 Decision Document just prior to the Cover Page.

Executive Summary:

The following supplemental information is provided to further document actions taken in the approximate two and one-half years since the unsigned Draft Decision Document was released for comment This Draft Decision Document, dated December 1996, was released for Public Comment in June 1997 and received by the State of Georgia Environmental Protection Division (EPD) on 6 June 1997. The Air Force did not receive any comments from either the State EPD or the Public. After the comment period terminated, the Air Force prepared the Decision Documents In final format in September 1997, correcting minor spelling and grammar errors noted during another internal review.

The final Decision Document remained unsigned at the request of the State's Hazardous Site Response Program Office and Headquarters Air Force Reserve Command while awaiting the State evaluation under the Hazardous Site Response Act for status on the Hazardous Site Inventory. In January 1998, the Georgia EPD notified the Air Force that a listed site was de-listed from the Hazardous Site Inventory and that releases at other sites did not exceed reportable quantities.

The finalized document does not change any of the facts and positions postulated in the original draft document that was made available for public and State review. This supplement restates the Declaration Statement made in the original Decision Document. The Air Force, fulfilling its responsibility as lead agent in this process, signs this Decision Document into record in accordance with Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) and the National Contingency Plan (NCP).

DECISION DECLARATION STATEMENT AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

To ANAL DECISION DOCUMENT dated September 1997

-----------PAST FIRE TRAINING AREA (FT-02,)-----------

Dobbins Air Reserve Base, Georgia ----------------United States Air Force

11 May2000

I

" lj

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION AND DECISION DECLARATION STATEMENT

To FINAL DECISION DOCUMENT dated September 1997

----------PASTFIRETRAININGAREA(FT-02!----------

Dobbins Air Reserve Base, Georgia --------------United States Air Force

11 May2000

DECISION DECLARATION STATEMENT

To FINAL DECISION DOCUMENT dated September 1997 and SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION dated 11 May 2000 for Installation Restoration Program Site

PAST FIRE TRAINING AREA (FT-02)

Owner: Dobbins Air Reserve Base, Georgia United States Air Force

11 May2000

DECLARATION

This Decision Document has been prepared for The Past Fire Training Area (Ff-02), which is designated under the Installation Restoration Program (IRP) located at Dobbins Air Reserve Base (ARB), Georgia (Figure 1-1). This Decision Document has been prepared based on Category ill decision criteria presented as guidance by United States Air Force (USAF) entitled NFRAP Guide, A Resource for Making, Documenting, and Evaluating No Further Response Action Planned Decisions (USAF, 1995). This Decision Document is organized into two parts. The first part presents the Declaration, and the second part presents the Decision Smnmary.

STATEMENT OF BASIS AND PURPOSE

This Decision Document presents the selected action for the site, located at Dobbins ARB, Georgia. This decision is based on information obtained from the Remedial Investigation (RI) Report prepared by Parsons Engineering-Science (ES) (ES, 1995) and the Comprehensive Analytical Report (CAR) prepared by Montgomery Watson (Montgomery Watson, 1996). The primary information from these reports used in this Decision Document is the comparison of site concentrations in all environmental media with applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements (ARARs) or to be considered (TBC) criteria, and risk assessment of current or existing exposures to public health and the environment. The risk assessment also evaluated hypothetical future exposures and this evaluation is smnmarized in Section 3.0. However, for the purposes of this Decision Document, only current or existing exposures were critically reviewed. This is consistent with Air Force guidance. (USAF, 1995)

The primary purpose of this Decision Document is to demonstrate that the response at the site is complete and therefore "no further response action is planned" (NFRAP). Section

2.2.9 of Air Force Instruction 32-7020 (USAF, 1994) states that NFRAP status has been achieved when any of the following conditions apply:

• Investigation finds no evidence of contamination, insignificant levels of contamination, or low levels of contamination that pose no significant current or existing threat to public health or the environment.

• The removal of contamination is complete.

PageD1

I·

I I I I I I

I I I I I I f

. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION AND DECISION DECLARATION STATEMENT

To FINAL DECISION DOCUMENT dated September 1997

----------PAST FIRE TRAINING AREA (FT-02:}-----------

Dobbins />Jr Reserve Base. Georgia ---------------United States />Jr Force

11 May2000

• The cleanup system is in place and operating effectively.

DESCRIPTION OF SELECTED REMEDY

Studies have demonstrated that contamination is limited in nature and does not pose a significant existing or current risk to human health or the environment Dobbins ARB, therefore, has determined that the response at this site is complete and NFRAP status has been achieved. ·

DECLARATION STATEMENT

This Decision Document represents the selected action for this site developed in accordance with the IRP which uses as its basis the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), as amended by Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA), and the National Contingency Plan (NCP). It also satisfies the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act that applies to CERCLA response actions. It has been determined that the selected remedy of no further action is protective of human health and the environment, attains federal and state requirements that are applicable or relevant and appropriate, and is cost effective. The statutory preference for further treatment is not satisfied because contaminant levels at the site have been determined to present no significant threat to human health or the environment under current use scenarios for the site.

w~LQ William P. Kane, Colonel, USAFR Commander, Dobbins Air Reserve Base

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION AND OECJSJON DECLARATION STATEMENT

To FINAL DECISION DOCUMENT dated September 1997

----------PAST FIRETRAININGAREA(FT-02}----------

Dobbins Pdr Reserve Base, Georgia ---------------United States Air Force

11 May2000

DECISION DECLARATION STATEMENT

To FINAL DECISION DOCUMENT dated September 1997 and SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION dated 11 May 2000 for Installation Restoration Program Site

Site Manager:

94SPTG/CEV

884 Industrial Drive

PAST FIRE TRAINING AREA (FT -02)

Owner: Dobbins Air ReseJVe Base, Georgia

UnHed States Air Force 11 May2000

Dobbins ARB, GA 30069-4210

(770) 919-4898 or (770) 919-3547

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION TO FINAL DECISION DOCUMENT DATED

SEPTEMBER 1997:

The following supplemental Information Is provided to further document actions taken In the approximate two and one-half years since the unsigned Draft Decision Document, datad December 1996, was prepared and forwarded to the State of.Georgla Environmental Protactlon DMslon on 6 June 1997and released to the public for review and comments. Following an extended period where the Air Force awaited State and Public review and comments and hevlng received none, the Air Force finalized the draft documents, correcting minor wording errors rnsde In the original draft document, finalizing the Decision Documents In September 1997. Again, these documents remained unsigned at the request of the State's Hazardous Site Response Program Office and Headquarters Air Force Reserve Com~nd while awaiting the State evaluation under the Hazardous Site Response Act for status on Hazardous Site Inventory.

These finalized document do not change any of the facts and positions postulated In the original draft document rnsde available for public and State review. Lastly, this supplement restates the Declaration Statement made In the original Decision Document. The Air Force, In Its position as lead-agent In this process, signs this Decision Document Into record In accordance with Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Uablllty Act (CERCLA) and the National Contingency Plan (NCP).

SECTION 1.2: SITE HISTORY AND ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES

Addition as a new bullet statement: Section 1.2,1nclude as the 4th bullet The Georgia EPD nOtified the Base by letter dated 24 Jan 94 that a site at Dobbins ARB warranted listing the Base on the State's Hazardous Site Inventory.

Renumber bullet statements: Section 1.2: Renumber the original 4th bullet to become the 5th bullet "Georgia DNR reviewed .... •

Addition. as a new bullet statement: Section 1.2, Include as a If' bullet: The Air Force delivered the Draft Decision Document to the State of Georgia Environmental Protection Division on 6 June 1997. Review was officially requested by 30 days, but since the Decision Document wes not signed and published at that time, Dobbins AFB rernslned open to accept any comments until today. To date, the Air Force hes not received any wrltlen comments or recommendations from the State on this Decision Document.

Addition as a new bullet statement: Section 1.2,1nclude as a 7th bullet In September 1997, the Air Force Incorporated minor corrections as recommended through Internal Air Force sources

Page 1 of Supplemental Information

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION AND DECISION DECLARATION STATEMENT

-----------PASTFIRETRAININGAREA(FT-021-----------

Dobbins Air Reserve Base, Georgia --------~------United S1ates Air Foroa

11 May2000 into the draft Decision Document end prepared a final Decision Document dated September 1997. The Air Force has made no substantial change to the draft Decision Documents that would alter the date collected by the Air Force or the decisions made for the sites. The Air Force delayed signing these documents while awaiting further action, determinations and recommendations by the Georgia Hazardous Waste Branch pertaining to the listing of the site on the Stele's Hazardous Site Inventory, and the Stele's review of any and all other documents previously submitted to the Stele.

AddHion as li new bullet ststement Section 1.2, include as a 8th bullet: The Stele of Georgia Hazardous Site Response Program Management Office within the Stele's Hazardous Waste Management Branch indicated on 23 July 1998 and 31 July 1998 that either sites FT-02, OT -04, DP-06, DP-06 (by reference), and OT-07 did not have reportable quantities or that the Stete had no reason to believe that a release exceeding the reportable quantity had occurred at these sites.

The Stete, in effect, de-listed the sites from the Hazardous Site Inventory.

Addition as a new bullet ststement Section 1.2, Include as an 9th bullet: The Facilities Compliance Program Office of the Hazardous Waste Management Branch performed a RCRA Facility Assessment (RFA) at Dobbins ARB on Tuesday, 20 July 199g, To data, the Base has not received any written comments or direction from the Stale on the nesults of the RFA or the intents of the Stele. In addition, the Stete Hazardous Waste Branch has not provided any review comments or suggestions on any of the subsequent Installation Restoration Program dr'aft end final reports and plans forwarded by the Air Force after the Draft Ri report submitted In 1995.

SECTION 1.3: HIGHLIGHTS OF COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION

Clarification to second paragraph: Page 1-2, Para 1.3, Second paragraph, Third sentence:

The Air Force made Public Notification on 22nc1. 24th, 25th, and 26th June 1997 via the locel newspaper and letter mailed to the lccal community leaders, adjacent property owners, end parties that had previously expressed end lntenest in the environmental restoration program at Dobbins ARB. The Base sponsored Public Meeting was held at the Cobb County Central Library on 26 June 1997, as scheduled, In conjunction with the Restoration Advisory Board's (RAB) Seeping Meeting. Public review and comment period was officially left open until 1 August 19g7, but since the Decision Document wes not signed and published at that time, Dobbins AFB has remained open to accept any comments until 1 May 2000. The Air Force has received no comments.

During this second RAB Seeping meeting held on 26 June 1997, representatives from the Base outlined the overalllnsteliation Restoration Program at Dobbins ARB, described the purpose and benefits of the establishment of a Restoration Advisory Board, announced the availability of the Draft Decision Documents for review, and announced the comment period. The repnesentetlves from the Base outlined the plan to prepare the final Decision Documents, after the public had been afforded the opportunity to address concerns. Community members participating had the opportunity to ask questions; none of the atlendees expressed either exception to the date provided or concern with the Air Force's stated position or future plans. In addition, the Base received no additional comments at that time or at any time since that data. As a nesult of the apparent limited Interest from the public and regulatory agencies, the Base Commander determined that community stakeholder Interest was neither sufficient nor sustainable to form a RAB; however, attendees were placed on the mailing list for subsequent environmental restoration notifications and advarllsements.

Addition as a third paragraph: The Air Force sponsored a third Restoration Advisory Board Scoplng Meeting to determine community and regulatory agency's lntenests in the formation of a Restoration Advisory Board on 30 Sap 1999. Only one community member attended; no regulatory agencies attended. The Dobbins Remedial Program Manager outlined the overall environmental restoration program on-going at Dobbins Air Reserve Base. The community member attending this seeping meeting did not express concern with the Air Force's

Page 2 of Supplemental Information

-----------PAST FIRETRAININGAREA(FT'-02)r----------- Dobbins />Jr Reserve Base, Georgia ---------------United Slates Air Force

11 May2000 management of the program, or any past action to investigate the sltas, nor Mure plans. Based on guidance provided by the Air Force, and the limited communlly stakeholder attendance at the seeping meeting, the Base Commander elected not to form a Restoration Advisory Board, opting Instead to continue notifying locallnterastad parties, elected officials, and State regulatory agencies of changes, phases, or dlscoverlas.

APPENDIX 8: ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX

The following documentation and correspondence has bean Introduced Into the Administrative Record since the June 1997 submission of the draft Decision Document Each line Item Is an addition to the line Items currently shown In the referenced draft Decision Document and should be Included In the appropriate location as Indicated by the Admlnlstratlva Record File No (AR File No.) found In the first column.

Addition as a new Administrative Record database line Hem updates:

AR Title Type Author Recipient Date Slte(s) Notes File Ne

A.2o. Untilled correspondence- Corrref Rober!P. Jennifer 5Jun LF01, Ural

0020 Ltr o!Transmltlal of Draft Draft DO Doen!chner, Kaduck,GA lifT FT02, Transmtl of Decision Documents to Base Civil EPD FT03, Draft DO to GAEPD Engineer, 94 OT04, S!ateEPD lt~CE, DP06, OT07

A.2o. Untilled COJlespo.ldence- Corr ref WIUiamF Jennifer 19June LF01, Llr to Public

0025 Letters announcing Dec Dec Doc Haber, Kaduci<,GA 1997 FT02, Officials, Doc and RAB scoplng endRAB Colonel, EPD,elal. FT03, Regulafory

Scoping Commander OT04, agencies, DP05 and DP06, communlty OT07 S!akeholders

A21. Unt!Ued correspondence Corr ref Alexandra Y. Doerschner July23, FT-02, HSRAde-

0010 reference "l..sttng on the HSRA Cleary, GA (USAF) 1998 OT-o4, llstlng of HazardOUS Site Inventory" EPD DP-05, aJtes And de-llstlng of DOB OT-07 aJtes

A21. Unt!Ued correspondence Corrref Jennifer R Doen!chner July 31, Ref HSRAde-

0016 reference "HSI10178" HSI Kaduck, Hez (USAF) 1998 DP-05 llstlng of site (DP-05) (HSRA) Weets Mnmgl OmpOed

Branch,GA reference Is EPD to ell aJtes on

Dobb!OO

A.22. Staff SUmmary Sheet- Corrfor 94SPTG/CEV 94 AW offices 8July AOC1 Internal

0015 Decision Document tor AOCoo 1999 AOC2 Review& Areas of Concern Coordination

Sheet for AOC'sDD

8.07. Decision Docunlent- Fire DO Jeff&ryW. General PubUc AprU AOC..1 Final

Training Plllndustrlal lppolllo, 1998 Decision Wastewater Una (AOC..1) Colonal, Document

Commander

8.07. Dedslon Document- DO Jef!eryW. General PubUc April AOc-2 Final

0120 Lockheed I'OL and lppoUto, 1998 Decision Industrial 't~ Colonal. Docunlent Unes (AOC.. Commander

C.o1. Conununlly Relellens PP..CRP Col WIIUern P PubDc Aifellll, Nov LF01, Plan

0010 Plan Kane, Environmental 1999 FT02, reviewed Commander, Quality Fllghl FT03, sernlennuelly Dobbins ARB OT04, ,ARIIRwiD

DP06; maintain DP06, Ia- edition.

OT07,

ST08

Page 3 of Supplemental Information

To FINAL DECISION DOCUMENT dated September 1997

-----------PAST FIRETRAININGAREA(FT..Q2}----------

Dobblns i'Jr Reserve Base, Georgia ----------------United States i'Jr Force

.0055 BoardSJalus

Kaduck, GA EPD,elal.

Page 4 of Supplemental Information

Reslolatlon Project Manager about In-In

RAB

Officials, Regulatory agencies, and community Stakeholders

To FINAL DECISION DOCUMENT dated September 1997

----------~-------=-=-~PMIT~~F~IRE~TRN~~NI~N~G~AREA~~WT~~~========~;ct;;.~;F;; Dobbins fJJr Reserve Base, Gecrgla U nlted Slates fJJr Force 11 May2000

C.04. RAB Scoplng Meeting PP-

Announcemenfs, Atienfa Public Journal Constitution and Notice Matletla Dally Journal

C.04. RAB Scoplng Meeting PP-

Announcemenfs, Allanfa PubUc Journal Constitution end Notice Matletla Dally Journal

Abbreviation reference:

AF -Air Force AFRC- Air Force Reserve Command AOC- Area of Concern Cmdr- Commander Corr- Comespondence DD or Dec Doc- Decision Document DP- Disposal Site e-man - Electronic Messaging

94AW/PA

94AW/PA

EPD- Environmental ProtecUon DMslon FT- Flra Training facility GA-Georgla HSI- Hazardous Site Inventory HSRA- Hazardous Site Response Act IRP -Installation Restoration Program LF - past Sese landfill OT- Lake sediment PP - Public Parllclpation RAD - Restoration Advisory Board ST- Tank Associated Relaasa

General Public

General Public

22.24. LF01, RAB/00

25.end FT02, Newspaper

26 FT03, A!J

June OT04, 1997 DP05, DP05, OT07

Sep LF01, RAB/00 1999 FT02, Newspaper

FT03, A!J

OT04.

DP05,

CPOS,

OT07

---------E1nd of Supplemental Information--------

Page 5 of Supplemental Information

FINAL

DECISION DOCUMENT FOR

PAST FIRE TRAINING AREA (FT-02)

ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM

DOBBINS AIR RESERVE BASE, GEORGIA

Contract No. F09609-95-D-0001

Delivery Order No. 5008

Prepared for:

94 SPI'G/CEV

84 InduStrial Drive

Dobbins Air Reserve Base, GA 30069-4210

Prepared by:

Montgomery Watson 460 East Swedesford Road, Suite 3010

Wayne, Pennsylvania 19087

September 1997

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section Page No.

DECLARATION .................................................................................. D-1

DECISION SUMMARY

1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................... 1-1

1.1 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION ........................................... 1-1

1.2 SITE IDSTORY AND ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES .......................... 1-2

1.3 HIGHLIGHTS OF COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION ........................... 1-3

1.4 SCOPE AND ROLE OF RESPONSE ACTION .................................... 1-3

2. SUMMARY OF SITE CHARACTERISTICS ........................................... 2-1

2.1 GEOLOGIC SETTING, PHYSIOGRAPHY, AND CLIMATOLOGY ......... 2-1

2.2 son. ...................................................................................... 2-2

2.2.1 So!l Setting :····:····························: ................................... 2-2

2.2.2 Soil ContammaNon .... 00 ••••••••••••••••••• oooo ••• oo• 00 00 ••• 00 ••••••••••••••••• 2-2

2.3 GROUNDWATER ..................................................................... 2-2

2.3.1 Hydrogeologic Setting ......................................................... 2-2

2.3.2 Groundwater Contamination .................................................. 2-3

2.4 SURFACEWATER. ................................................................... 2-3

2. 4. 1 Surface Water Setting .......................................................... 2-3

2.4.2 Surface Water Contamination ................................................. 2-3

2.5 SEDIMENT ............................................................................. 2-4

2.5.1 Sediment Setting ................................................................ 2-4

2.5.2 Sediment Contamination ....................................................... 2-4

2.6 RECEPTORS ........................................................................... 2-4

3. RISK ASSESSMENT ....................................................................... 3-1

3.1 HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT ......................................... 3-1

3 .1.1 Current Existing Exposures ................................................... 3-3 3 .1.2 Hypothetical Future Exposures ............................................... 3-4

3.2 SUMMARY ............................................................................. 3-4

4. NFRAP DECISION SUMMARY ......................................................... 4-1

APPENDIX A REFERENCES

APPENDIX B ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX

i Septemberl997 ~~ ~OJECTS:APRC1267005:08 Dobbins BMP-.Rcpom:Dth flnaJ:Pim PTA {f1'.()2);Tm:Txt Past FTA DD2.doc

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure No.

1-1 Location Map 1-2 Installation Location Map 1-3 Site Map

2-1 Sample Location Map

LIST OF TABLES

Table No.

2-1 Maximum Detected Concentrations for Constituents of Concern in Soil 2-2 Maximum Detected Concentrations for Constituents of Concern in

Groundwater During the 1995 and 1996 Sampling Rounds 2-3 Maximum Detected Concentrations for Constituents of Concern in Surface

Water During the 1996 Sampling Round 2-4 Maximum Detected Concentrations for Constituents of Concern in Sediment

During the 1996 Sampling Round

3-1 Exposure Pathway Scenarios ii September 1997 SJIAREDo.FED PROJECTS:AFRC·126700S:08 DobblDs EMP-.ltcports:I)J)s Ffnai:Past FI'A (FT .Ql}:Te:n:Tu Past PTA DD2.doc QIJ')IQ7 'l·~ PU

AFCEE

AFFF

AFI

AFP

AFRC

AFSC

ARARs

ARB

CAR

CFR

COPC

COPEC

DNR

EMP

EPA

ER-L

ER-M

ERA

ES

ESE

F

FS

HHRA

HI

HQ

HSI

HSRA

IRP

MCL

MSL

NAS

NFRAP

NOAA

oc PAHs PCBs

POL

RI

svoc

TBC

September 1997

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence Aqueous Film-Forming Foam Air Force Instruction Air Force Plant Air Force Reserve Command Air Force Systems Command Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements Air Reserve Base Comprehensive Analytical Report Code of Federal Regulations Contaminants of Potential Concern Contaminant of Potential Ecological Concern Department ofNatural Resources Environmental Monitoring Program Environmental Protection Agency Effects Range - Low Effects Range - Medinm Ecological Risk Assessment Parsons Engineering-Science Environmental Science & Engineering Inc.

Fahrenheit Feasibility Study Hnman Health Risk Assessment Hamrd.Index Hazard Quotient Hazardous Site Inventory Hazardous-Site Response Act Installation Restoration Program Maximnm Contaminant Level Mean Sea Level Naval Air Station No Further Response Action is Planned National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Organochlorine Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons Polychlorinated Biphenyls Petroleum, Oil, and Lubricant Remedial Investigation Semivolatile Organic Compound To Be Considered iii SHAREI>-.FED PROIECTS!AFRC-1261005:081>obbins EMP-.Rcports:DI)s Final:Past FrA (FT.()2):Tcxt:Txt Past FrA DD2:.doc Glt?m .,.~PM

TDS

TPH

TSS

USAF

USAFOEHL

USEPA

voc

September 1997

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS (continued)

Total Dissolved Solids Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons Total Suspended Solids United States Air Force USAF Occupational and Environmental Health Laboratory United States Environmental Protection Agency Volatile Organic Compound iv

SHARID.FED PROJECTS:AFRC-126700S:08 Dobbins EMP-.Repom:ODs Finai:Past FrA (fT.Q2l:Text:Tu Past FTA OD2.Aoc QJI')Jin ?·111 PV

DECLARATION

This Decision Document has been prepared for the Past Fire Training Area (FT -02), a site designated under the Installation Restoration Program ORP) and located at Dobbins Air Reserve Base (ARB) in Georgia (Figure 1-1). This Decision Document has been prepared based on Category ill decision criteria presented in the United States Air Force (USAF) guidance document entitled NFRAP Guide, A Resource for Making, Documenting, and Evaluating No Further Response Action Planned Decisions (USAF, 1995). This Decision Document is organized into two parts. The first part presents the Declaration, and the second part presents the Decision Summary.

STATEMENT OF BASIS AND PURPOSE

This Decision Document was prepared as part of Delivery Order Number 5008 of Contract Number F09609-95-D-0001 dated September 30, 1995. The contract was issued by the Air Force Reserve Command (AFRC), Dobbins ARB Contracting, Dobbins ARB, Georgia.

This Decision Document presents the selected action for the Past Fire Training Area (FT-

02) site, located at Dobbins ARB, Georgia. It is based on information obtained from the Remedial investigation (RI) Report prepared by Parsons Engineering-8cience (ES) (ES, 1995) and the Comprehensive Analytical Report (CAR) prepared by Montgomery Watson (Montgomery Watson, 1996). The primary information from these reports used in this Decision Document is the comparison of site concentrations in all environmental media with applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements (ARARs) or to be considered (TBC) criteria, and a risk assessment of current or existing exposures to public health and the environment. The risk assessment also evaluated hypothetical future exposures and this evaluation is summarized in Section 3.0. However, for the purposes of this Decision Document, only current or existing exposures were critically reviewed. This is consistent with USAF guidance (USAF, 1995). A summary of the administrative record index of documents prepared for IRP sites at Dobbins ARB is presented in Appendix B.

The primary purpose of this Decision Document is to demonstrate that the response at the site is complete and, therefore, "no further response action is planned" (NFRAP). Section

2.2.9 of Air Force Instruction 32-7020 (USAF, 1994) states that NFRAP status has been achieved when any of the following conditions apply:

• Investigation finds no evidence of contamination, insignificant levels of contamination, or low levels of contamination that pose no significant current or existing threat to public health or the environment.

D-1

~f.FPU PR0JECTS:AFRC-12ti700S:08 Dobbins EMP".Repons:ODs Fh:lal:Past FfA (fT-o2l:TOXl:TX1 Past FfA DD2doc

• The removal of contamination is complete.

• The cleanup system is in place and operating effectively.

DESCRIPTION OF SELECTED REMEDY

Studies have demonstrated that contamination was detected at the site at levels that pose no significant risk to public health or the environment. Therefore, Dobbins ARB, has determined that the response at this site is complete and NFRAP status has been achieved.

DECLARATION STATEMENT

This Decision Document represents the selected action for this site developed in accordance with the IRP which uses as its basis Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), as amended by Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA), and the National Contingency Plan (NCP). It also satisfies the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act that applies to CERCLA response actions. It has been determined that the selected remedy of no further action is protective of human health and the environment, attains federal and state requirements that are applicable or relevant and appropriate, and is cost-effective. The statutory preference for further treatment is not satisfied because contaminant levels at the site have been determined to present no significant threat to human health or the environment under current use scenarios for the site.

Colonel William F. Haber, USAFR

D-2 September 1997 SHAREJ>o.FED PROJEC'I'S:AFRC-1267005:08 Dobbins EMP-.Reports:I)Ds Finai:Past Fl'A CFf.ol):Text:Txt Past FTA DDl.doc

OII?IQ'? ')·WPU

Date

DECISION SUMMARY

1 . INTRODUCTION

This Decision Document has been prepared for the Past Fire Training Area (FT -02), a site designated under the Installation Restoration Program (IRP) and located at Dobbins Air Reserve Base (ARB) in Georgia (Figure 1-1 ). This Decision Document has been prepared based on Catego:ty Ill decision criteria presented in the United States Air Force (USAF) guidance document entitled NFRAP Guide, A Resource for Making, Documenting, and Evaluating No Further Response Action Planned Decisions (USAF, 1995). The Decision Smnma:ry is divided into four sections: Section 1 presents the Introduction; Section 2 presents the Smnma:ry of Site Characteristics; Section 3 presents the Risk Assessment; and Section 4 presents the NFRAP Decision Summa:ry.

This Decision Document was prepared as part of Delivery Order Number 5008 of Contract Number F09609-95-D-0001 dated September 30, 1995. The contract was issued by the Air Force Reserve Command (AFRC), Dobbins ARB Contracting, Dobbins ARB, Georgia.

1.1 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION

The Past Fire Training Area (FT -02) is located south of the main runway at Dobbins ARB in Cobb County, Georgia, next to the cities of Marietta and Smyrna (Figure 1-2). Dobbins ARB is located approximately 5 miles northwest of the city limits of Atlanta and consists of 1,964 acres of land under the command of AFRC. An adjoining 709 acres houses Air Force Plant 6 (AFP 6), operated by Lockheed-Martin for Air Force Systems Command (AFSC). The Naval Air Station (NAS) Atlanta occupies a tract of land located adjacent to Dobbins ARB. (ES, 1995)

From the early 1950s to 1974, petroleum, oil, and lubricant (POL) wastes were stored in drums and consumed at the site during fire training exercises. Waste POLs were dumped into an unlined earthen pit measuring approximately 100 feet square by 3 to 4 feet deep and ignited.

Prior to 1969, a protein foam was used to extinguish fires. Between 1969 and 1974, Aqueous Film-Forming Foam (AFFF) has been used. AFFF contains non-corrosive, biodegradable fluorocarbon surfactants with foam stabilizers (CH2M Hill, 1982). In addition, water was used to extinguish the fire. Water was obtained from a 10 to 12 foot deep holding pond located next to the training area. Excess water from the Fire Training Area flowed into an unnamed creek located west of the site, as illustrated in Figure 1-3.

(ES, 1995)

After fire training activities ceased at the site, it was regraded and paved for use as a power check pad. The pad was abandoned after one month of use. A 1982 records search indicated buried drums containing small quantities of hazardous wastes may still have been at the site. No buried drums were detected during a geophysical study conducted as p\U"t of the RI. (ESE, 1986)

Figure 1-3 presents a map of the site. It is topographically lower than the main runway and approximately 50 feet higher than the creek located west of the site. The site is presently used as an equipment storage area.

1.2 SITE HISTORY AND ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES

The following is a summary ofthe site history and enforcement activities applicable to the site:

• In April1982, an IRP Records Search for Dobbins ARB was completed by CH2M Hill Inc. The purpose of the records search was to identify the potential for enviromnental contamination from past waste management practices and to assess the probability for cootaminant migration. The site was identified to pose a potential contamination problem. Analysis of soil samples collected from the site indicated the possibility of petroleum-based contaminants in the area. (ES, 1995)

• Following the record reviews, the site was evaluated to assess its potential for hazardous material contamination and migration. The Past Fire Training Area was found to have a significant potential for contaminant migration and was recommended for further study. (ES, 1995)

• The site was included in the IRP in 1982. Based on findings at another site, Dobbins ARB was placed on the Georgia Hazardous Site Inventory (HSI) in 1994 (the year the Georgia Hazardous Site Response Act (HSRA) was authorized and implemented). As a result, investigations and risk assessments, including the P A/SI and RifFS, were conducted by Environmental Science & Engineering (ESE) in 1988 and 1991, Parsons Engineering-Science (ES) in 1992, and Montgomery Watson in 1995 to address concerns at the site.

• Georgia DNR reviewed a Draft RI Report prepared by ES for the site in 1995. The comments were incorporated into the Final RI Report byES.

• On June 5, 1997 the Draft Decision Document for this site was submitted to the Georgia Environmental Protection Division (GAEPD).

However, the document was not reviewed by GAEPD.

l-2 September 1997 SHARED:FED PROJECTS:AFRC-1267tm:08 DQbbins EMP:Repam:DDs Final:Past FfA {Fr.Q2):Tcxt:Txt Past FI'A OD2Aoe QIJ?m ?o'l!QPM

1.3 IDGHLIGHTS OF COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION

An Administrative Record was established in 1988 for the IRP in accordance with CERCLA. A scoping meeting was held in March 1995 to determine the public interest in and availability for the formation of a Restoration Advisory Board (RAB). However, based on the results of that meeting, the RAB was not formed in 1995. The USEPA was actively involved in the review and development of actions and documents during the early stages of the IRP. In addition, GAPED has reviewed the initial R1 documentation, and this documentation is retained within the Georgia HSRA section.

A public announcement was placed in the Marietta Journal on June 11, 14, 15, and 26 for the consideration of the formation of a RAB and for the release of the Draft Decision Documents for public review and comment The public announcement invited interested parties to a public meeting of the RABon June 26. However, due to a lack of interest the RAB Meeting was not held. The public announcement also provided for a review period from June 27 to August 1, 1997 for the Decision Documents. During the review period there was no record of comment on the decision documents by the public or the state.

1.4 SCOPE AND ROLE OF RESPONSE ACTION

The following is a chronology of the investigations conducted at the site, which included an IRP Phase II Stage 1 Confirmation/Quantification study, a Site Characterization Study, a e Remedial Investigation (Rl), and an Environmental Monitoring Program (EMP).

In August 1986, ESE completed an IRP Phase II Stage 1 Confirmation/Quantification study. The purpose of this study was to confirm or deny the presence and/or migration of contaminants at this site. The investigation at the site consisted of a geophysical investigation to identi.fY the presence of buried drums and other metallic objects, the insta11ation of three groundwater monitoring wells, and sampling and analysis of soil and groundwater. In August 1986, ESE prepared a Phase II - Confirmation/Quantification Stage 1 Final Report and submitted the report to USAF Occupational and Environmental Health Laboratory (USAFOEHL) Technical Services Division. The report recommended that additional groundwater monitoring be conducted at the site. (ESE, 1986)

In October 1988, Hunter/ESE conducted a two-part Site Characterization Study in support of an R1 to confirm previous results, establish the lateral and vertical limits of contamination, and assess potential risks posed by past site activities. As part of the investigation, four soil borings were drilled, two additional monitoring wells were installed, and soil and groundwater samples were collected for analysis. In Aprill991, ESE prepared a Final Site Characterization Sununary for the above investigation and submitted the report to AFRC and Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence (AFCEE). The report was revised by AFRC andAFCEE in December 1991. (ESE, 1991)

1-3 September 1997 SHARE.D-.FED PROJEC'TS:AFRC·1267tm:08 Dobbins EMP'.Repo:m:DD:s Raai:Past PTA (FI'.Ql):Text:Txt Past FTA DD2.doc Wt?m ?·10 PV

In 1992, Parsons Engineering-Science (ES) conducted a RI that included the Past Fire Training Area (Ff-02). The purpose of the RI was to document the nature and extent of contamination at the site. Analytical data collected during the previous investigations were supplemented with additional data from the chemical analysis of groundwater samples. A quantitative baseline risk assessment was conducted for the site assuming exposures to current installation workers and to potential future site workers under a counnercial/light industrial scenario. In December 1992, ES collected groundwater samples from three monitoring wells at the site, and analyzed the samples for volatile organic compounds 0/0Cs), semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs), and metals. (ES, 1995)

In 1995, a Remedial Investigation (Rl) Report was prepared by ES that documented the results of the 1992 investigations and risk assessment conducted at the site as part of the IRP. The RI Report indicated that no current risks were found at the Past Fire Training Area (Ff -02), due to a lack of completed pathways. (ES, 1995)

In 1995 and 1996, Montgomery Watson conducted an EMP at the Past Fire Training Area (Ff-02). The purpose of the EMP was to obtain more recent data for the site, compare this data to previous data, and conduct a qualitative hmnan health risk assessment (HHRA) that indicated whether the 1995 and 1996 data was likely to change the results of the original HHRA conducted by ES. The results of the EMP as well as historical data were summarized and presented in the Comprehensive Analytical Report (CAR) (Montgomery Watson, 1996).

1-4 September 1997 SHARED-.PED PROJBcrS:AFRC1267tm:08 Dobbina EMP-.Repom:DDs Fblai:Past FTA (Fr-02):TexcTxt Past FfA DDl.doc

QII?IQ7 ?•W PU

1.

2. SUMMARY OF SITE CHARACTERISTICS

This section presents a summary of site characteristics, geology, physiography, soils, groundwater, surface water, sediment, and biota. The receptors at the Past Fire Training Area (FT -02) are also discussed in this section. The analytical data obtained at the site were compared to applicable, or relevant and appropriate requirements (ARARs) or to be considered (1BC) criteria. Georgia Hazardous Site Response Act (HSRA) Type 3 criteria for soils (Georgia HSRA 391-3-19 Appendix I and Appendix ill, Table 2) (HSRA, 1993) were used for soil ARARs at the site. Georgia HSRA Type 3 Risk Reduction Levels were used for groundwater ARARs at the site. For most analytes the Georgia Type 3 Risk Reduction Levels for groundwater (Georgia HSRA 391-3-19 Appendix ill, Table 1) (HSRA, 1993) are the same as the USEPA Maximmn Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for public water supplies. USEPA Water Quality Criteria for Protection of Human Health and Freshwater Aquatic Life (USEPA, 1986) were used for surface water ARARs. Sediment results were compared to TBCs generated by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) {NOAA, 1990). Figure 2-1 shows sample locations at the site. A complete summary of ARARs for detected analytes at the site is presented in the CAR (Montgomery Watson, 1996).

2.1 GEOLOGIC SETTING, PHYSIOGRAPHY, AND CLIMATOLOGY

The Past Fire Training Area (FT -02) is located in the Central Uplands district of the Piedmont physiographic province. This district is characterized by a series of low, linear ridges separated by broad, open valleys. Streams flowing through this section are generally transverse to the underlying geologic structure and occupy valleys 150 to 200 feet below the ridge crests. The site is underlain by the Powers Ferry Formation, which is part of the Sandy Springs Group. The Powers Ferry Formation consists of interbedded gneisses, schists, and amphibolites. (ES, 1995)

Dobbins ARB is situated on a gently rolling plateau that slopes gradually downward to the Southeast. The plateau is dissected by several small stream channels, including Rottenwood and Poorhouse Creeks. Elevation at the Past Fire Training Area (FT-02) is approximately 1,000 feet above mean sea level (MSL).

The climate is characteristic of the northern temperate zone, with four clearly separated seasons and a predominant weather movement from west to east. The average annual temperature at Dobbins ARB is 61 degrees Fahrenheit eF), with an average daily maximum and minimmn of70 °F and 51 °F respectively. Dobbins ARB experiences an average of 58 days with freezing temperatures each year. (ES, 1995)

The average annual rainfall at Dobbins ARB is 52.6 inches. Precipitation is distributed fairly evenly throughout the year, although minor peaks in the rainfall curve are generally recorded in early spring and in mid-summer. An average of about 2 inches of snowfall is

2-1 September 1997 SHAREJ:)o.fED PROJECTS:AFRC-1267Cm:08 Dobbins EMP:Rcpons:DDs Final:Past FTA (FT..oa):Tut:Txt Past FTA DDl.doo CWl?m ?•'N PM recorded each year between December and March. Lake evapomtion is approximately 40 inches per year; evapotranspiration overland areas may be greater or less than this value, depending on vegetative cover type. (ES, 1995)

2.2 SOIL

2 . 2 .1 Soil Setting

Soils at the Past Fire Training Area (Ff -02) include silts and fine sands. Bedrock was not encountered in any of the site borings.

2.2.2 Soil Contamination

A summary of historical soil analytical results obtained at the site are presented in the CAR.

Table 2-1 summarizes the maximum concentmtions for constituents of concern detected in soil samples collected at the site. Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs ), Semivolatile Organic Compounds (SVOCs), total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH), pesticides, and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) were not detected at concentmtions eJrceeding the State of Georgia Type 3 Risk Reduction Levels in soil samples.

The only VOC detected in soil samples was trichlorofluoromethane. It was detected at a concentmtion below the corresponding Georgia Type 3 Risk Reduction Level of 700 mg1kg.

A single SVOC, naphthalene, was also detected at a level less than the Georgia Type 3 Risk Reduction Level (I 00 mglkg). Of the metals detected, six were detected at levels eJrceeding Type 3 Risk Reduction Levels listed in Table 2-1 including antimony, arsenic, beryllium, cobalt, thallium, and vanadium. Each of the subsurface soil ARAR exceedances at the Past Fire Tmining Area (FT -02), with the exception of the slight beryllium exceedance in soil boring B5, occurred in cross gradient borings located southeast of the suspected source area at the site, suggesting that the past site activities may not have been a significant source for these metal contaminants. The distribution of the soil samples with metals concentmtions that exceeded ARARs indicate that the metals concentmtions at the site may be natumlly occurring.

2.3 GROUNDWATER

2.3.1 Hydrogeologic Setting

Groundwater level measurements recorded in November 1995 and March 1996 by Montgomery Watson indicate groundwater beneath the Past Fire Tmining Area (FT-02) flows southwesterly towards the unnamed creek located west of the site. This flow mimics the surface topography which also slopes towards the southwest. The approximate hydraulic gradient is 0.015 feet per foot (ft/ft) as measured between D2-W6 and D2-W8 in

2-2

November 1995 and March 1996. Hydraulic conductivities in the overburden flow zone measured from slug tests range from 7.6E-04 to 3.5E-03 feet/minute. (ESE, 1986)

2.3.2 Groundwater Contamination

A summary of historical grm.mdwater analytical results obtained at the site is presented in the CAR. Table 2-2 summarizes the maximwn concentrations for constituents of concern detected in groundwater samples collected during the two most recent sampling rounds (1995 and 1996) at the site. A single VOC, trichloroethene, was detected at concentrations that exceeded the Georgia Type 3 Risk Reduction Level of 5 IJ.gll. All other VOCs and SVOCs detected were at levels less than the corresponding Georgia Type 3 Risk Reduction Levels. Total metals concentrations, with the exception of cadmium, were below Type 3 Risk Reduction Levels. No other metals exceeded regulatory limits during the 1995 and 1996 sampling ro1n1ds at the site.

2.4 SURFACE WATER

2.4.1 Surface Water Setting

Surface water is present in an unnamed creek located west of the site. During the 1996 investigation conducted at the Past Fire Training Area (FT -02), two surface water samples were collected from the creek. One sample was collected upstream of the site and one sample was collected from a downstream location.

2.4.2 Surface Water Contamination

A summary of historical grolnldwater analytical results obtained at the site is presented in the CAR. Table 2-3 summarizes the maximwn analytical results for constituents of concern for the surface water samples during the 1995 and 1996 sampling ro1n1ds. VOCs were not detected in any of the surface water samples collected. Total lead was detected exceeding the Freshwater Aquatic Life Continuous Concentration Criteria of 0.43 J.1gll for dissolved lead in both the upstream sample (3.3 J.Lg/1) and the downstream sample ( 4.9 J.lgll). Because lead was detected in the upstream sample at a concentration similar. to the downstream sample, the lead is thought to be naturally occurring or due to a source other than the Past Fire Training Area

2-3 September 1997 SlfAREI>.PED PROJECTS:AFRC·J267005:o8 .Dobbins EMP-.Reports:DDs Final:Past FrA (Ff-02):Tcxt:Tst Past FfA DD2..doc 011?107 ?•'m l>M

2. 5 . SEDIMENT

2.5.1 Sediment Setting

During the 1996 investigation conducted at the Past Fire Training Area, two sediment samples (one upstream and one downstream of the site) were collected from the creek located west of the site.

2.5.2 Sediment Contamination

A summary of sediment analytical results obtained at the site is presented in the CAR.

Table 2-4 summarizes the maximum analytical results for constituents of concern for the sediment samples. No VOCs were detected in any of the samples. Three metals were detected; however, the concentrations were well below the NOAA Effects Range-Low (ER L) screening levels. Analytical results of the downstream sample (D2-SD01) indicate the presence ofzinc at a concentration higher than that in the upstream sample (Dl-SD02).

Chromium and lead levels were similar in upstream and downstream samples suggesting that site activities have not contributed to the presence of these two compounds in sediment samples. The elevated metals results may be naturally occurring and not present as a result of past site operations.

2.6 RECEPTORS

In the risk assessment, two risk scenarios were evaluated for this site; current use and future use. For the purposes of this Decision Document, only the current use exposure scenario is critically reviewed. Under the current land use scenario, the potential human receptors at the site are the base personnel and nearby residents who may or may not have access and exposure to present AFRC operations. No exposure to groundwater exists under the current land use scenario. Dobbins ARB presently receives its water from Air Force Plant 6 (AFP 6), which in turn, receives its water from the Cobb-Marietta Water Authority. The water supplied by the Cobb-Marietta Water Authority is derived from off site surface water sources. No public groundwater supply wells exist within 3 miles of Dobbins ARB. Sixteen inactive water supply wells were located on Dobbins ARB or Air Force Plant 6, however, the wells have been inactive since the early 1950s. Fifteen of these previous well locations were filled in and covered during the early 1980s and are no longer accessible. (ES, 1992) The closure status of the remaining inactive well location is not known.

The site is currently located in a secure area adjacent to the Dobbins ARB flight line. As a result, there are no human receptors for exposure to soil at the site. No ecological receptors were identified for this site under the current use scenario.

2-4

The future use scenarios assumed the site would be developed as a municipal-type airport with associated businesses and industries. Therefore, potential human receptors exposed to air, soil, and groundwater were assmned to be adult typical and construction workers under this hypothetical future use scenario. Incidental ingestion of soil and groundwater by potential human receptors were also assmned to be adult typical and construction workers under this hypothetical future use scenario. The incidental ingestion pathway was retained since future developers could install groundwater supply wells for use by employees if groundwater use was not prohibited. No ecological receptors were identified for this site under the future use scenario.

3. RISK ASSESSMENT

A quantitative baseline risk assessment was initially conducted to characterize the potential risks to…