Decision_Document_for_Present_Fire_Training_Area_(FT-03).pdf

DECISION DOCUMENT FOR

PRESENT FIRE TRAINING AREA (FT -03)

Dobbins Air Reserve Base, Georgia

Department of Defense United States Air Foree

Installation Restoration Program Decision Doenment

Site owner:

94 Airlift 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

--------PRESENT FIRETRAININGAREA(FT..()3;)---------

DobblnsAir 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

PRESENT FIRE TRAINING AREA (FT ..Q3)

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

11 May2000

The following infonnation 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 infonnation 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 tenninated, the Air Force prepared the Decision Documents in final fonnat 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 LiabOity Act (CERCLA) and the National Contingency Plan (NCP).

DECISION DECLARATION STATEMENT AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

To FINAL DECISION DOCUMENT dated September 1997

---------PRESENT FIRETRAININGAREA(FT..031l----------- 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

PRESENT FIRE TRAINING AREA (FT -03)

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

11 May 2000

DECLARATION

This Decision Document has been prepared for The Present Fire Training Area (Ff -03), 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 m 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 Summary.

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 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 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.

Page D1

I·

I I I I I I I

I I I I I I

I

DECISION DECLARATION STATEMENT AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

To FINAL DECISION DOCUMENT dated September 1997

---------PRESENT FIRETRAININGAREA(FT-031)----------

Dobbins PJr Reserve Base, Georgia --------------- United S1ates AJr 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 statns 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.

WilliamP. Kane,.Colonel, USAFR Commander, Dobbins Air Reserve Base

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION AND DECISION DECLARATION STATEMENT

--~------PRESENT RRETRAININGAREA(FT-03;}------------

Dobbins I'Jr Reserve Base, Georgia ---------------United States I'Jr 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

PRESENT FIRE TRAINING AREA (FT -03)

Site Manager;

94SPTG/CEV

884 Industrial Drive

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

11 May 2000

Dobbins ARB, GA 30069-4210

(770) 919-4696 or (770) 919-3547

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION TO FINAL DECISION DOCUMENT DATED

SEPTEMBER 1997:

The following supplemantallnformatlon 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 Georgia Environmental Protection DMslon on 6 June 1997and released to the public for review and comments. Following an extended period where the Air Force awaltad Stata and Public review and comments and having received none, the Air Force finalized the draft documents, correcting minor wording arrors made In tha original draft document, finalizing the Dectslon Documents In September 1997. Again, these documents remained unsigned at the request of the State's Hazardous Slta Response Program Office and Headquarters Air Force Reserve Command while ewaltlng the Stata evaluation under the Hazardous Slta Response Act for status on Hazardous Site Inventory.

Thesa finalized document do not change any of the facts and positions postulated In tha original draft document made avaHable for public and Stata ravlew. 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 racord 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, Include as the 4th bullet The Georgia EPD notified the Base by letter datad 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 6th bullet The Air Force dallvered the Draft Decision Document to the State of Georgia Environmental Protection DMslon on 6 June 1997. Review was officially requested by 30 days, but since the Decision Document was not signed and published at that time, Dobbins AFB remained open to accept any comments until today. To date, the Air Force has not received any written comments or racommandations from the Stata on this Decision Document

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

Page 1 of Supplemental Information

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION ANO DECISION DECLARATION STATEMENT

----------PRESENT FIRETRAININGAREA(FT-031)----------

Dobblns Nr Reserve Base, Georgia ---------------United Slates Air Force

11 May 2000 Into the draft Decision Document and prepared a final Decision Document dated September 1997. The Air Force has made no substantial change to the dreft Decision Documents that would altar the data 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 Wasta Branch pertaining to the listing of the site on the State's Hazardous Site Inventory, and the Stata's review of any and all other documents previously submitted to the State.

Addition as a new bullet statement: Section 1.2, Include as a slh bullet: The State of Georgia Hazardous Site Response Program Management Office within the State's Hazardous Wasta 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 Stata had no reason to believe that a release exceeding the reportable quantity had occurred at these sites.

The State. In effect, de-listed the sites from the Hazardous Site Inventory.

Addition as a new buDet statement Section 1.2, Include as an glh bullet The Facilities Compllanoe Program Office of the Hazardous Wasta Management Branch performed a RCRA Facility Assessment (RFA) at Dobbins ARB on Tuesday, 20 July 1999. To data, the Base has not received any written comments or direction from tha State on the results of the RFA or the Intents of the State. In addition, the State Hazardous Wasta Branch has not provided any review comments or suggestions on any of the subsequent Installation Restoration Program dreft and final reports and plans forwarded by the Air Force after the Draft Rl report submitted In 1995.

SECTION 1.3: HIGHLIGHTS OF COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION

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

The Air Force made Public Notification on 221111

, 24th, 25th, and 26th June 1997 via the local newspaper and letter mailed to the local community leaders, adjacent property owners, and parties that had previously expressed and Interest In the environmental restoration program at Dobbins ARB. The Base sponsored Public Meeting was held at the Cobb County Central Ubrery on 26 June 1997, as scheduled, In conjunction with the Restoration Advisory Board's (RAB) Scoplng Meeting. Public review and comment period was officially left open untll1 August 1997, but since the Decision Document was 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 Scoplng meeting held on 26 June 1997, representatives from the Base outlined the overelllnstallatlon Restoration Program at Dobbins ARB. described the purpose and benefits of the establishment of a Restoration Advisory Board, announced the evallabUity of the Dreft Decision Documents for review, and announced the comment period. The representatives from the Base outlined the plan to prepare the final Decision Documents, after the public had bean afforded the opportunity to address concerns. Community members participating had the opportunity to ask questions; none of the attendees expressed either exception to the data 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 result 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 advertisements.

Addition as a third paragraph: The Air Force sponsored a third Restoration Advisory Board Scoplng Mealing to determine community and regulatory agency's Interests In the formation of a Restoration Advisory Board on 30 Sep 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 scoplng meatlng did not express concern with the Air Force's

Page 2 of Supplemental Information fi ii

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION AND DECISION DECLARATION STATEMENT

To FINAL DECISION DOCUMENT dated September 1997

----------PRESENTFIRETRAIN!NGAREA(FT-!l3J----------- Dobbins Air Reserve Base, Georgia ---------------United states Air Force

11 May2000 management of the program, or any past action to Investigate the sites, nor future plans. Based on guidance provided by the Air Force, and the limited communitY stakeholder attendance at the scoplng meeting, the Base Commander elected not to form a Restoration Advisory Board, opting Instead to continue notifying local Interested parties, elected officials, and Stete regulatory agencies of changes, phases, or discoveries.

APPENDIX B: ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX

The following documentation and correspondence has been 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 Administrative Record Ale No (AR Ale No.) found In the first column.

Addition as a new Administrative Record database line Item updates:

B.o7.

Bm.

C.o1.

Letters announdng Dac Doc and RAB scoplng

Plan COmmander, auaDty FUght Dobbins ARB

Page 3 of Supplemental Informatioo listing of site (Implied reference Is to an sttea on reviewed semiannually ,ARIIRwiU maintain ~edition.

----------PRESCNTFIRETRAININGAREA(FT..Q3}-----------

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

11 May2000

C.o2.1l Mise RAB Meeting PP- 94SPTG/CEV Ganeral Public 26 JIO'Ie LF01, RABSccplng Documentation -1997 RABMis< 1997 FT02, Agenda and .0040 FT03, Sign-In

OT04, SheeiS.

DP05,

CPOS,

OT07

C.02.e Mise RAB Meeting PP- 94SPTG/CEV · Ganeral Pubftc Sep LF01, RABSccplng Documenlallon • 1999 RABMis< 1999 FT02, Sign-In

.0050 FT03, Sheels, 0T04, egande,and DP05, presen!allon

DP06,

OT07

C.02.t Untilled ccrrespondenoa - Ccrrref William F Jennifer 21 Feb LF01, Llrto Pubftc Letters ennounclng RAB RAB Haber, Keduck.GA 1995 FT02, Oflldals, .0030 seeping Seeping Cclonel, EPD FT03, Regulatory

Commander OT04, agencies, DP05 and DPOO, ccmmunlly OT07 Slakehcldem

C.02.t Untilled ccrreepcndenoa - Ccrrref William F Jennifer 19June LF01, Llr to Public Letters ennouncing Dec RAB Heber, Keduck, GA 1997 FT02, Oflldals, .0040 Doc end RABsccping Seeping Cclonel, EPO. et. al. FT03, Regulatory and Dec Ccmmender OT04, agencies, Doc DP05 and

DP06, ccmmunl!y OT07 Slakeholders

C.02. Unlllled Ccrreepondenoa eon: ret Joyce H. Hal Huddlestun 26Juns LF01, urto Base

.0045 - Letter Hal Huddlestun RAB Cerlar 1997 FT02, Reetonal!on dated 26 June 1997 FT03, Prcjecl

OT04, Meneger DP05 about DP05, lnlerestln

OT07, RAB

ST-08

C.02.t Unlllled ccrreepcndenoe- Ccrrref Jel!reyW. Jennifer 24 LF01, Llr to Public Letters announcing RAB RAB lppcllto, Keduck.GA Seplem FT02. Oflldals, .0050 seeping wHit rnaiUng list Seeping Cclonel, EPD, et.aL ber FT03, Regulatory

Commander 1999 OT04, agencies, DP05 and DP06, ccmmunl!y OT07, Slekeholders

ST-08

C.02.b Reelonation Advisory PP- JelferyW HQAFRCICEV 8May LF01, Crnd(S Boerd status RABCcrr lppcllto, 2000 FT02, Decision to

.0055 Chairperson, FT03, Not Forma Environmental OT04, RAB Protsctlon DP05, ConunJtfee DPOO, OT07, ST05

C.oa. Fact Shee~ RAB pp.fecl 94SPTG/CEV General Pubftc 1995 LF01, FaciSheels

0010 Sheets &94AWIPA FT02.

FT03,

OT04,

DP05,

OP06,

OT07

C.oa. FeciSheels, RAB,IRP, PP- Feel 94SPTG/CEV General PubUc 1999 LF01, IRPprogram Sites Sheets &94AWIPA FT02, and aU alias

0030 FT03, Feci Sheets

OT04,

DP05,

DPOO,

OT07,

ST05

Page 4 of Supplemental Information

To FINAL DECISION DOCUMENT dated Septsmber 1997

----------PRESENT FIRETRAININGAREA(FT-031)-----------

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

11 Mey2000

C.04. RAB Scoplng Meeting PP-

0040 Announcemenfs, Atian!a PubUc Journal COnstitution and Notice Marietta Dally Journal

C.04. RAB Scoplng Meeting PP-

OQ50 Announcements, Atienta PubUc Journal COnstitution end Notice Marietta DeDy Journal

Abbrevlatlo n reference:

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

94AWIPA

94AWIPA

EPD - Environmental Protection DMslon FT- Are Training facility GA-Gaorgla HSI - Hazardous Site Inventory HSRA- Hazardous Site Response Act IRP - Installation Restoration Program LF - past Base landfill OT- Lake sediment PP - Public Participation RAD - Restoration Advisory Boerd ST- Tank AssOciated Release

General Public

General Public

22.24, LF01, RABJDD

25,and FT02, Newspaper 26 FT03, Ad June OT04, 1997 DP05, CPOS, OT07

Sep LF01, RABJDD 1999 FT02, Newspaper

FT03, Ad

OT04,

DP05,

CPOS,

---------End of Supplemental Information-------

Page 5 of Supplemental Information

FINAL

DECISION DOCUMENT FOR

PRESENT FIRE TRAINING AREA (FT-03)

ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM

DOBBINS AIR RESERVE BASE, GEORGIA

Contract No. F09609-95-D-OOO 1

Delivery Order No. 5008

Prepared for:

94SPTG/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 SITEIDSTORY AND ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES .......................... 1-1

1.3 IDGHLIGHTS OF COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION ........................... 1-2

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

2. SUMMARY OF SITECHARACIERISTICS ........................................... 2-1

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

2.2 SOIL .....................................................................•................ 2-2

2.2.1 S~l Setting : ... ·: .. .............................................................. 2-2

2.2.2 Soil ContammaNon ............................................................. 2-2

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

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

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

2.4 SURFACE WATER .................................................................... 2-3

2.4.1 Surface Water Setting .......................................................... 2-3

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

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

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

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

3.1 HUMANHEALTHRISKASSESSMENT ......................................... 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

SHAREI>-.FBD PllOJECTS:APRC·1267005:08 Dobbins EMP:Reports:DD3 FbtaJ:Ptcsent FTA (fT .Q3) DD:Tcxt:TOCPtfTA.dcc

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure No.

1-1 LocationMap

1-2 Installation Location Map 1-3 SiteMap

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

3-1 Exposure Pathway Scenarios ii Seprember 1997 SHARED:FED PROJECTS:AFRC-1267005-.0S Dobbins BMP-Jteports:DDI Fl:na1:PJeseut FTA (FT -03) DD:Ten:TOCPrfTA.doc

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

IDS

TPH

TSS

USAF

USAFOEHL

USEPA

VOC

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 of Natural Resources Environmental Monitoring Program Environmental Protection Agency Effects Range - Low Effects Range -Medium Ecological Risk Assessment Parsons Engineering-Science Environmental Science & Engineering Inc.

Fahrenheit Feasibility Study Human Health Risk Assessment Hazard Index Hazard Quotient Hazardous Site Inventory Hazardous-Site Response Act Installation Restoration Program Maximum 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 Sernivolatile Organic Compound To Be Considered 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 iii SHARED:FED PROJECTS:AFRC-126700!1:08 Dobbins EMP:Rcpons:DDs ffnal:Prl:seut FrA (FT..o3} DD:Tcu:TOCPrFrA.d:oc

DECLARATION

This Decision Document has been prepared for the Present Fire Training Area (FT-03), a site 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 a Category ill decision criteria presented as guidance by the United States Air Force (USAF) entitled NFRAP Guide, A Resource for Making, Documenting. and Evaluating No Further Response Action Planned Decisions. (USAF, June 1995) This Decision Document is organized into two parts. The first part presents the Declaration, and the second part presents the Decision Summary which is divided into four sections:

Section I presents the Introduction; Section 2 presents the Summary of Site Characteristics;

Section 3 presents the Risk Assessment; and Section 4 presents the Description of NFRAP Alternative.

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

STATEMENT OF BASIS AND PURPOSE

This Decision Document presents the selected action for the Present Fire Training Area (FT-03) site, located at Dobbins ARB, Georgia. This decision is based on information obtained from the Remedial Investigation (R1) 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 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.

• 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 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 respouse 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 becanse 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 Date

D-2 September 1997 SHARED-.FED PROJECTS:AFRC·126700S:08 Oobhlns EMP:Rcports:OOs Final:Ptescnt FfA (FI'~) OD:Text:TextPtFfAV2.doc

9/12197 3:42 PM

DECISION SUMMARY

1. INTRODUCTION

This Decision Document has been prepared for the Present Fire Training Area (FT-03), a site designated llllder the Installation Restoration Program (IRPj located at Dobbins Air Reserve Base (ARB), Georgia (Figure 1-1). This Decision Document has been prepared based on a 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, Jlllle 1995) This Decision Document is organized into two parts. The first part presents the Declaration, and the second part presents the Decision Summary which is divided into four sections: Section I presents the Introduction; Section 2 presents the Summary of Site Characteristics; Section 3 presents the Risk Assessment; and Section 4 presents the Description ofNFRAP Alternative.

This Decision Document was prepared as part of Delivery Order Nwnber 5008 of Contract Nwnber F09609-95-D-OOOI 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 Present Fire Training Area (FT-03) was constructed in 1974 to the north of the Dobbins ARB rllllway, adjacent to Big Lake (Figure 1-2). Dobbins ARB is located approximately 5 miles northwest of the city limits of Atlanta and consists of I ,964 acres of land llllder the command of the AFRC. An adjoining 709 acres in two parcels located to the north of the site house 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)

Figure 1-3 presents a map of the site. The fire training area at the base is not currently used. It is topographically lower than the main rllllway and approximately 20 feet higher than Big Lake. The facility consists of a concrete-lined burn pit with a 2,500 gallon tank for fuel storage. Rlllloff from the burn pit was collected in a baffled swnp pit and conveyed to an oiVwater separator. The water from the oiYwater separator is piped to the Industrial Waste Treatment Plant located at AFP 6 for further treatment (Montgomery Watson, 1996)

1.2 SITE IDSTORY AND ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES

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

1-1

~~~ PR.OJECTS:AFRC-1267005:03 Doblri:ns EMP:Rcports:DD$ Final: Present FTA {Fl'.o3) DD:Tcxt:TcxtPrFTAV2.doc

• In April 1992, an IRP Records Search for Dobbins ARB was completed by CH2M Hill Inc. for Dobbins ARB. The purpose of the records search was to identify the potential for environmental contamination from past waste management practices and to assess the probability for contaminant migration. The site was identified to pose a potential contamination problem. (ES, 1995)

• Following the record reviews, the site was then evaluated to assess its potential for hazardous material contamination and migration. The Present 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 by Georgia Department of Natural Resources {DNR) in 1994 (the year HSRA was authorized and implemented in Georgia). 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 IRP sites at Dobbins ARB in 1995. The comments were incorporated into the Final RI Report by ES.

• On June 5, 1997 the Draft Decision Document was submitted to the Georgia Environmental Protection Division (GAEPD). However, the document was not reviewed by GAEPD.

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 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, GAEPD 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 22, 24, 25, and 26 for the consideration of the formation of a RAB and for the release of the Draft Decision

1-2 September 1997 SHARE:I>.FED PROJECTS:AFRC-126700S:OS Dobbins EMP:Reports:ODs Fina1:Presam FI'A {PT.oJ) OD:Tcxt:TextPrFI'AVl.doc OT".on? 1-&' PM

Documents for public review and comment The public announcement invited interested parties to a public meeting of the RAB on June 26. However, due to 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. The investigations for this site included an IRP Phase II Stage 1 Confirmation/Quantification study, a Site Characterization Study, a Remedial Investigation (RI), 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 the site. The investigation at the Present Fire Training Area consisted of the installation of three groundwater monitoring wells, and sampling and analysis of 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) e In October 1988, Hunter/ESE conducted a two-part Site Characterization Study in support of a Rl to confirm previous results, establish the lateral and vertical limits of contamination, and assess potential risks posed by past waste disposal sites. As part of the investigation, additional monitoring wells were installed at the site and groundwater and surface water samples were collected for analysis. In April 1991, ESE prepared a Final Site Characterization Summary for the above investigation and submitted the report to AFRC and Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence (AFCEE). The report was revised by AFRC and AFCEE in December 1991. (ESE, 1991)

In 1992, Parsons Engineering-Science (ES) conducted an Rl. The Rl included the Present Fire Training Area that was previously identified and assessed in the IRP Phase II - Stage 1 Study and the Phase II Site Characterization Study. The purpose of the Rl 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 surface water, sediment and groundwater samples. In 1995, a Remedial Investigation (RI) 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 excess risks were found at The Present Fire Training Area site, due to a lack of completed pathways. (ES, 1995)

In 1995 and 1996, Montgomery Watson conducted an Environmental Monitoring Program (EMP) at the site. The purpose of the EMP was to obtain more recent data for the site, compare this data to previous data, and conduct a qualitative human 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. Five monitoring wells were selected based on the results of previous sampling rounds for additional monitoring to characterize groundwater quality in the vicinity of the site. 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 SHARID.FED PROJECTS:AFRC-t26700S:08 Dobbins EMP-.&pons:DDs final:Ptcscut FTA (FI'.o3) DD:Text:TcxtPrFTAVl.doc Qll?.lln ~·4? PU

2. SUMMARY OF SITE CHARACI'ERISTICS

This section presents a S1liilllllllY of site characteristics, geology, physiography, soils, groundwater, surface water, sediment, and biota. The receptors at the Present Fire Training Area (FT -03) 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 (TBC) criteria. Georgia Hazardous Site Response Act (HSRA) Type 3 risk reduction levels for soil (Georgia HSRA 391-3-19 Appendix III) 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 are the same as the USEPA Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for public water supplies. USEPA Water Quality Criteria for Protection of Human Health and Freshwater Aquatic Life (USEP A, 1986) were used for surface water ARARs. Sediment results were compared to TBCs generated by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). (NOAA, 1990) A complete S1liilllllllY of ARARs for detected analytes at the site is presented in the Comprehensive Analytical Report (CAR).

2.1 GEOLOGIC SETTING, PHYSIOGRAPHY, AND CLIMATOLOGY

The Present Fire Training Area (FT-03) 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 area 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. Depth to bedrock was encountered at the site ranging from 4 and

20.4 feet. (ES, 1995)

The general area around the 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 site is approximately 1,040 feet above mean aea level (MSL).

The climate at the site 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 (F), with an average daily maximum and minimum 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

~~ PROJECTS:AFRC-126700S:o& DDhbins EMP-.Reports:Dih Fim11::Prcscnt PTA (FI'-03) DD:Text:TextPrFTAV2.doc recorded each year between December and March. Lake evaporation is approximately 40 inches per year; evapotranspiration over land 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 site consist of micaceous silts and micaceous, silty to clayey sands. Soils around the fire training area are bermed. Bedrock, consisting of biotite-rich granite gneiss with some muscovite-biotite schist, was encountered in borings at depths ranging from 13 to 43 feet below grade at the site.

2.2.2 Soil Contamination

A sununary ofhistorical soil analytical results obtained at the site is presented in the CAR.

Table 2-1 summarizes the maximum concentrations for constituents of concern in soil samples collected at the site. The only VOC detected in soil samples was trichloro fluoromethane at concentrations well below the Georgia Type 3 Risk Reduction Levels.

SVOCs detected at the site were primarily polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). Of the PAHs detected, three compounds (benzo (a) anthracene, benzo (k) fluoranthene, or chrysene) were detected in four samples (W24-A, W32-C, W33-C and D3-BW45) at concentrations that exceeded Type 3 Risk Reduction Levels. Pesticides and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) were not detected in the site soil. Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) were detected in several of the soil samples collected in 1988 at relatively low concentrations; however, no relevant Federal or current Georgia regulatory limits have been established for TPH. Four metals (beryllium, selenium, thallium, and zinc) were detected at levels that were generally above Georgia Type 3 Risk Reduction Levels.

2.3 GROUNDWATER

2.3.1 Hydrogeologie Setting

Groundwater flow across the site is generally east towards Rottenwood Creek, based on water level measurements in November 1995 and March 1996. The 0.17 feet/foot hydraulic gradient west of the man-made dam that created Big Lake, as measured between D3-W4 and D3-W3, is higher than the 0.022 ftlft measured south of the fire training pad between monitoring wells D3-W5 and D3-W45. The steep gradient is the result of ponded water on the upstream side of the dam. The hydraulic conductivity of the overburden flow unit, based on slug test data, ranges from 8.18E-05 to 1.17E-03 feet/minute (ESE, 1991) Groundwater potentiometric surface measurements obtained during the most recent

2-2 sampling rounds at the site are consistent with data reported previously, suggesting that the direction of groundwater flow does not change seasonally.

2.3.2 Groundwater Contamination

A summary of historical groundwater analytical results obtained at the site is presented in the CAR. Table 2-2 summarizes the maximmn concentrations for constituents of concern detected in groundwater samples collected during the two most recent sampling rounds (1995 and 1996) at the site. Concentrations of VOCs (including benzene, toluene, and ethylbenzene) in groundwater samples collected downgradient of the Fire Training Area have decreased during the five sampling rounds conducted at the site. Benzene concentrations in samples collected from two downgradient monitoring wells exceeded the Type 3 Risk Reduction Level of 5 mg/1 during the 1996 sampling round. Type 3 Risk Reduction Levels for VOCs were exceeded only for samples collected from monitoring wells D3-W33 and D3-W45. These wells are the closest wells to the suspected source area at the site.

The only detected SVOC that exceeded Type 3 Risk Reduction Levels at the site was naphthalene, which was detected in sample D3-W33 at concentrations that exceeded the Type 3 Risk Reduction Level of 20 mgll for all sampling rounds. Naphthalene was not detected in samples collected from any other monitoring wells at the site.

Total metals concentrations were generally below Type 3 Risk Reduction Levels.

However, cadmium exceeded the Type 3 Risk Reduction Level of 5 mgll in sample D3-W3 during the 1989 and 1996 sampling rounds. No other metals exceeded regulatory limits during the 1995 and 1996 sampling rounds at the site.

2.4 SURFACEWATER

2.4.1 Surface Water Setting

No surface water was observed at the site during the 1995 and 1996 sampling rounds. As a result, surface water was not sampled at the site during those sampling rounds. Smface water was, however, observed and collected for analysis at two locations in 1990.

2.4.2 Surface Water Contamination

A summary of historical surface water analytical results obtained at the site is presented in the CAR. The results of the 1990 surface water samples at the site show that volatile organic compounds (VOCs), semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs), pesticide/ polychlorinated (PCBs), and TPH were not detected. Total and dissolved chromium were detected in both surface water samples. Total chromium exceeded the USEPA Fresh Water

2-3

Quality Criteria standards of 10 mgll in both surface water samples. However, dissolved chromium exceeded the standard in only one of the samples (SW-2). All other detected metals concentrations were below regulatory limits.

2.5 SEDIMENT

No sediment was identified during the RI or EMP investigations as being present at the site.

As a result, no sediment at the site was evaluated.

2.6 RECEPTORS

In the risk assessment, two risk scenarios were evaluated for this site; current use and hypothetical 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. 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. This water supply 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 wells were filled in and covered during the early 1980s and are no longer accessible. (ES, 1992) As a result, no human receptors to groundwater exist under the current land use scenario. 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.

Under the future use scenario, the hypothetical future commercial use scenario was chosen because of the likelihood that, shonld the base be closed, it wonld be developed as a municipal-type airport with associated bnsinesses and industries. · The potential human receptors under this hypothetical future scenario are industrial workers or construction workers at a industriallcommercial facility located at the site. No ecological receptors were identified for this site under the future use scenario.

2-4

3. RISK ASSESSMENT

A quantitative baseline risk assessment was initially conducted to characterize the potential risks to human health (HHRA) posed by constituents detected at Present Fire Training Area (FT -03). The HHRA was conducted for the site by ES to assess the risks associated with potential exposures to receptors, and the results were presented in the Rl Report. (ES, 1995). A qualitative HHRA was conducted by Montgomery Watson in 1996 to establish whether differences in the data obtained during the 1995 and 1996 sampling rounds could potentially result in increased human health risks, and if so, necessitate a revised quantitative risk evaluation. The HHRA presented in this section is based on the quantitative HHRA presented in the Rl Report prepared by ES because the qualitative · HHRA did not indicate a need to modify the HHRA. (ES, 1995)

3.1 HUMAN HEALm RISK ASSESSMENT

The HHRA conducted for this site integrates the results of the RI conducted by Parsons Engineering-Science. (ES, 1995) This revised baseline HHRA evaluates the contaminants detected at this site, potential exposure pathways between compounds and human receptors and the potential human health risks posed by these exposures. The four basic steps in this assessment are as follows: (1) identification of contaminants of potential concern (COPC), (2) exposure assessment, (3) toxicity assessment, and (4) risk characterization.

All constituents detected in the various environmental media during multiple sampling investigations (ES, 1995; MW, 1996) were evaluated to determine COPCs for analysis in the risk assessment Traditional risk assessment criteria (EPA, 1989a) used in selection of COPCs included frequency of detection, comparison with laboratory and field blanks, and comparison with background concentrations. Comparison of concentrations detected at the site with applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements (ARARs) and to be considered (TBC) criteria is presented earlier in Section 2.0 of this document

In the risk assessment for this site, couservative site-specific current and hypothetical future exposure scenarios were evaluated based on the general physical characteristics of the site and the characteristics of populations on or near Dobbins ARB: However, for the purposes of this decision document only the current or existing exposures are critically…