OHM_1995_Addendum_to_the_SI_RI_Report_Sudbury_Devens.pdf

SFIM-AEC-IR-CR-95002

Fort Devens Sudbury Training Annex Middlesex County, Massachusetts

Final Addendum Report Site/Remedial Investigation

September 1995

Prepared for:

U.S. Army Environmental Center Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland 21010-5401

Prepared by:

OHM Remediation Services Corp.

A Subsidiary of OHM Corporation

"In accordance with 40 CFR 1500, this document is intended to comply with NEPA of 1969."

AEC Form 45, 1 Feb 93 replaces THAMA Form 45 which is obsolete.

INSTRUCTIONS FOR UPDATING THE ADDENDUM REPORT

The text and tables distributed to you are to be placed in your Draft Final SI/RI Report binder as replacements for existing text and tables. You should have received:

• A 2-part color cover consisting of a front-piece and side-piece;

• New document control page, title page, and table of contents with lists of figures, tables, and acronyms;

• REPORT TEXT - new Section 1, Section 2, Section 3, Section 4, Section 5, and Section 6;

• TABLES - new Tables 1-3 and 1-4;

• APPENDIX C - new text sections for the Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessments, and one page with Table 5-6 and 5-7 for the Human Health Risk Assessment;

• Appendix D - Table D-50.

Each of these report sections are separated by a colored sheet.

1. Retain all tab dividers for text Sections, Tables, Figures, and Appendices. Retain all cover pages for each section of the report.

2. Remove the document control page, title page, table of contents, and lists of tables, figures, and acronyms.

Replace with new section.

3. Remove text sections 1 through 6 and replace with new sections.

4. Remove Tables 1-3 and 1-4 in the Tables section and replace with new tables.

5. Remove text for the Human Health Risk Assessment in Appendix C and replace with new text.

6. Remove page with Tables 5-6 and 5-7 in the Tables section following the Human Health Risk Assessment and replace with new page.

7. Remove text for the Ecological Risk Assessment in Appendix C and replace with new text.

8. Insert Table D-50 at end of Appendix D.

9. Replace black-and-white report cover with color cover.

Your report should now be a complete. If it is not, please contact Steve McGinn at 508-435-9561.

OHM Remediation Services Corp.

A Subsidiary of OHM Corporation

September 22, 1995

Commander U.S. Army Environmental Center (USAEC) Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21010-5401

ATTN: SFIM-AEC-IRB (Mr. Ted Ruff)

RE: LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

FINAL SI/RI ADDENDUM REPORT

SITE/REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION

FORT DEVENS SUDBURY TRAINING ANNEX

CONTRACT NO. DAAA15-90-D-0019; TASK ORDER 0001

OHM PROJECT NO. 14316

Dear Sir:

OHM Remediation Services Corp. (OHM), a wholly owned subsidiary of OHM Corporation, is pleased to submit 12 copies of the Final SI/RI Addendum Report. Additional copies have been submitted to Fort Devens, USEPA, MADEP, and other TRC members as indicated on Attachment I.

If you have any questions or comments, please contact me at 508/435-9561.

Sincerely, Stephen Project

SRM:pjc Attachment/Enclosures cc: J. Colella S. McGinn D. Pringle Project File

1000 RIDC Plaza, Suite 600 • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15238-2928 • 412-963-2300

ATTACHMENT I

FINAL SI/RI ADDENDUM REPORT

DISTRIBUTION LIST

Ms. Deborah Acone U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers 424 Trapelo Road Waltham, MA 02254 (1 copy)

Ms. Lorna Boseman

ATSDR

Chief Records & Information

Branch Mail Stop - E56 1600 Clifton Road Atlanta, GA 30333 (1 copy)

Mr. Jerry Collins Maynard Board of Health Maynard Town Hall Maynard, MA 01754 (1 copy)

Ms. Anne Malewicz Branch Chief, Federal

Facilities One Winter Street, 5th Floor Boston, MA 02108 (1 copy)

Mr. George Dargaty

FOCUS

214 Barton Road Stow, MA 01775 (1 copy)

Mr. Robert Leupold Sudbury Board of Health 278 Old Sudbury Road Sudbury, MA 01776 (1 copy)

Mr. Robert Lim U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency Region I (HAN-CAN1) JFK Federal Building Boston, MA 02203 (3 copies)

Mr. Jack McKenna Metcalf & Eddy Box 4043 30 Harvard Mill Square Wakefield, MA 01880 (1 copy)

Mr. Seven Mierzykowski U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service 1033 Old Main Street Old Town, ME 04468 (1 copy)

Ms. Patti Plante Corporate Place 128 107 Audobon Road Wakefield, MA 01880 (4 copies)

Mr. Ken Raina Lake Boone Association 106 North Shore Drive Stow, MA 01775 (1 copy)

Mr. Larry Roy Organization for the Assabet

River 116 Pheasant Hill Road Marlboro, MA 01752 (1 copy)

Mr. Thomas Ruggiero Stow Selectman's Office Town Hall Stow, MA 01775 (1 copy)

Ms. Cindy Ruzich

FOCUS

37 Thompson Street Maynard, MA 01754 (2 copies)

Mr. Robert Steere Hudson Board of Selectman Town Hall Hudson, MA 10749 (1 copy)

Mr. Tom Strunk Environmental Management

Office ATZD-EM Box 19 Bldg. 689 Ft. Devens, MA 01433-5190 (7 copies)

Services Corp.

ADDENDUM TO THE

SITE/REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION REPORT

FORT DEVENS SUDBURY TRAINING ANNEX

MIDDLESEX COUNTY, MASSACHUSETTS

Prepared for:

United States Army Environmental Center Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland

Contract No. DAAA15-90-D-0019 Task Order No. 0001

Prepared by:

OHM Remediation Services Corp.

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

A Subsidiary of OHM Corporation

September 22, 1995 OHM Project No. 14316

This page intentionally left blank.

r-

DECLARATION FOR THE RECORD OF DECISION

AOC 4 and Management of Migration Operable Units at AOCs A7 and A9

U.S. Army Sudbury Annex, Massachusetts

Concur and recommend for immediate implementation:

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

Thomas Strunk Date U.S. Army Sudbury Annex, BRAC Environmental Coordinator Devens Reserve Forces Training Area Devens, Massachusetts

D-3

W008977.DOC 8720-10

AOC 4 and Management of Migration Operable Units at AOCs A7 and A9 U.S. Army Sudbury Annex, Massachusetts

The foregoing represents the decision for No Action Under CERCLA by the U.S. Department of the Army and the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, with the concurrence of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection.

Concur and recommend for immediate implementation:

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

H. Carter Hunt, Jr. \ Date Installation Commander, Devens Reserve Forces Training Area Devens, Massachusetts

D-4

AOC 4 and Management of Migration Operable Units at AOCs A7 and A9

U.S. Army Sudbury Annex, Massachusetts

The foregoing represents the decision for No Action Under CERCLA by the U.S. Department of the Army and the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, with the concurrence of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection.

Concur and recommend for immediate implementation:

UNITED STATES, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

Harley F. Laing A Date Director, is Office of Site Remediation and Restoration U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region I

D-5

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES viii

LIST OF FIGURES xii

LIST OF ACRONYMS xv

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1-1

1.1 PURPOSE OF REPORT 1-1

1.2 SITE BACKGROUND INFORMATION 1-1

1.3 SCOPE OF THE PHASE II SI/RI 1-2

1.4 SCREENING CRITERIA 1-2

1.4.1 Surface Soil 1-2

1.4.1.1 Risk Based Soil Cleanup Level for Thallium 1-3

1.4.1.2 The MCP Beryllium Standard 1-3

1.4.1.3 ESAT Ecological Screening Criteria 1-3

1.4.2 Subsurface Soil 1-3

1.4.3 Ground Water 1-4

1.4.4 Surface Water 1-4

1.4.5 Sediment 1-4

1.4.6 Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure Results 1-4

1.5 REPORT ORGANIZATION 1-4

2.0 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF AOC A4 2-1

2.1 AREA CHARACTERISTICS AND HISTORY 2-1

2.1.1 Area-Specific Background Information 2-1

2.1.1.1 Historical Aerial Photographs and Site Maps 2-1

2.1.1.2 Previous Investigations and Results 2-3

2.1.1.3 Nature and Extent of Contamination Determined from

Previous Investigations 2-5

2.1.1.4 Past Site Usage 2-6

2.1.1.5 Previous Remedial Actions 2-6

2.2 TECHNICAL APPROACH AND FIELD WORK PERFORMED 2-6

2.2.1 Surface Soil Sampling 2-6

2.2.1.1 Rationale and Locations 2-7

2.2.1.2 Physical Results 2-7

2.2.2 Test Pits and Trenches 2-7

2.2.2.1 Rationale and Locations 2-7

2.2.2.2 Physical Results 2-7

2.2.3 Monitoring Well Installation with Subsurface Soil Sampling 2-8

2.2.3.1 Rationale and Location 2-8

2.2.3.2 Physical Results 2-8

TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)

2.2.4 Ground Water Sampling 2-9

2.2.4.1 Rationale and Locations 2-9

2.2.4.2 Physical Results 2-10

2.2.5 Surface Water and Sediment Sampling 2-10

2.2.5.1 Rationale and Locations 2-10

2.2.5.2 Physical Results 2-10

2.2.6 Tank Sampling 2-11

2.2.6.1 Rationale and Location 2-11

2.2.6.2 Physical Results 2-11

2.2.7 Hydrogeological Assessment 2-11

2.3 NATURE AND EXTENT OF CONTAMINATION 2-12

2.3.1 Surface Soil Sampling Results 2-12

2.3.2 Test Pit Sampling Results 2-13

2.3.3 Subsurface Soil Sampling Results 2-15

2.3.4 Ground Water Sampling Results 2-15

2.3.5 Surface Water and Sediment Sampling Results 2-17

2.3.5.1 Surface Water 2-18

2.3.5.2 Sediment 2-19

2.3.6 Tank Sampling Results 2-21

2.4 CONTAMINANT FATE AND TRANSPORT 2-21

2.4.1 Metals 2-21

2.4.2 Summary - AOC A4 2-22

2.5 BASELINE RISK ASSESSMENT SUMMARIES 2-22

2.5.1 Previous Human Health Risk Assessment Results 2-22

2.5.2 Phase II Findings 2-24

2.5.3 Human Health Risk Characterization 2-25

2.5.4 Ecological Risk Assessment 2-25

2.6 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 2-26

2.6.1 Contamination Assessment 2-26

2.6.1.1 Soils 2-26

2.6.1.2 Ground Water 2-27

2.6.1.3 Surface Water 2-28

2.6.1.4 Sediment 2-29

2.6.2 Site Summary 2-30

2.6.3 Conclusions 2-30

3.0 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF AOC A7 3-1

3.1 AREA CHARACTERISTICS AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION 3-1

3.1.1 Area-Specific Background Information 3-1

3.1.1.1 Historical Aerial Photographs and Site Maps 3-1

3.1.1.2 Previous Investigations and Results 3-3

3.1.1.3 Nature and Extent of Contamination Determined from

Previous Investigations 3-4

3.1.1.4 Past Site Usage 3-5

3.1.1.5 Previous Remedial Actions 3-6

u

3.2 TECHNICAL APPROACH AND FIELD WORK PERFORMED 3-6

3.2.1 Geophysical Study ; 3-6

3.2.2 Surface Soil Sampling 3-7

3.2.2.1 Rationale and Locations 3-7

3.2.2.2 Physical Results 3-7

3.2.3 Test Pits and Trenches 3-7

3.2.3.1 Rationale and Locations 3-7

3.2.3.2 Physical Results 3-8

3.2.4 Subsurface Soil Sampling 3-9

3.2.4.1 Rationale and Locations 3-9

3.2.4.2 Physical Results for Soil Borings 3-10

3.2.4.3 Physical Results for Shallow Subsurface Soil Sampling 3-11

3.2.5 Monitoring Well Installations and Boring Samples 3-11

3.2.5.1 Rationale and Locations 3-11

3.2.5.2 Physical Results 3-11

3.2.6 Ground Water Sampling 3-12

3.2.6.1 Rationale and Locations 3-12

3.2.6.2 Physical Results 3-13

3.2.7 Surface Water and Sediment Sampling 3-13

3.2.7.1 Rationale and Locations 3-13

3.2.7.2 Physical Results 3-13

3.2.8 Hydrogeological Assessment 3-13

3.2.8.1 Hydraulic Conductivities 3-14

3.2.8.2 Ground Water Flow 3-15

3.2.8.3 Ground Water - Surface Water Relationship 3-16

3.2.8.4 Ground Water Discharge to Surface Water 3-17

3.3 NATURE AND EXTENT OF CONTAMINATION 3-17

3.3.1 Surface Soil Sampling Results 3-18

3.3.2 Test Pit Sampling Results 3-19

3.3.3 Subsurface Soil Sampling Results 3-22

3.3.4 Ground Water Sampling Results 3-23

3.3.5 Surface Water and Sediment Sampling Results 3-26

3.4 CONTAMINANT FATE AND TRANSPORT 3-29

3.4.1 Chlorinated Volatile Organic Compounds 3-29

3.4.2 Organochlorine Pesticides 3-29

3.4.3 Metals 3-29

3.4.4 AOC A7 - Summary 3-30

3.5 BASELINE RISK ASSESSMENT SUMMARIES 3-30

3.5.1 Human Health 3-30

3.6 PREVIOUS RISK ASSESSMENT RESULTS 3-30

3.7 CURRENT FINDINGS 3-32

3.8 RISK CHARACTERIZATION 3-33

3.8.1 Ecological 3-33

3.9 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 3-34

3.9.1 Laboratory Waste Area Contamination Assessment 3-35

3.9.1.1 Soil Contamination 3-35

3.9.1.2 Ground Water Contamination 3-35

3.9.1.3 Conclusions 3-36

ill

3.9.2 Solid Waste Landfill Contamination Assessment 3-36

3.9.2.1 Soil Contamination 3-37

3.9.2.2 Ground Water Contamination 3-37

3.9.2.3 Conclusions 3-38

3.9.3 Surface Water and Sediment Contamination Assessment 3-38

3.9.3.1 Surface Water 3-38

3.9.3.2 Sediment 3-39

3.9.3.3 Conclusions 3-39

3.9.4 Conclusions 3-39

4.0 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF AOC A9 4-1

4.1 AREA CHARACTERISTICS AND HISTORY 4-1

4.1.1 Area-Specific Background Information 4-1

4.1.1.1 Historical Aerial Photographs and Site Maps 4-1

4.1.1.2 Previous Investigations and Results 4-4

4.1.1.3 Nature and Extent of Contamination Determined from

Previous Investigations 4-5

4.1.1.4 Past Site Usage 4-6

4.1.1.5 Previous Remedial Actions 4-8

4.2 TECHNICAL APPROACH AND FIELD WORK PERFORMED 4-9

4.2.1 Surface Soil Sampling 4-9

4.2.1.1 Rationale and Locations 4-9

4.2.1.2 Physical Results 4-9

4.2.2 Subsurface Soil Sampling 4-9

4.2.2.1 Rationale and Locations 4-9

4.2.2.2 Physical Results - Soil Boring Sampling 4-10

4.2.2.3 Physical Results - Hand Auger Sampling 4-10

4.2.3 Monitoring Well Installations and Soil Sampling 4-10

4.2.3.1 Rationale and Locations 4-10

4.2.3.2 Physical Results 4-11

4.2.4 Ground Water Sampling 4-13

4.2.4.1 Rationale and Locations 4-13

4.2.4.2 Physical Results 4-13

4.2.5 Hydrogeological Assessment 4-15

4.2.5.1 Hydraulic Conductivities 4-16

4.2.5.2 Ground Water Flow 4-16

4.2.5.3 Ground Water - Surface Water Relationship 4-17

4.2.5.4 Ground Water Discharge to Surface Water 4-17

4.3 NATURE AND EXTENT OF CONTAMINATION 4-18

4.3.1 Surface Soil Sampling Results 4-18

4.3.2 Subsurface Soil Sampling Results 4-20

4.3.3 Ground Water Sampling Results 4-22

4.4 CONTAMINANT FATE AND TRANSPORT 4-25

4.4.1 Monocyclic Aromatic Compounds 4-25

4.4.2 Chlorinated Volatile Organic Compounds 4-26

4.4.3 Arsenic 4-26

4.4.4 AOC A9 - Summary 4-27

IV

4.5 BASELINE RISK ASSESSMENT SUMMARIES 4-27

4.5.1 Human Health 4-27

4.6 PREVIOUS RISK ASSESSMENT RESULTS 4-27

4.7 CURRENT FINDINGS 4-29

4.8 RISK CHARACTERIZATION 4-29

4.8.1 Ecological 4-30

4.8.8.1 Ecological Risk Assessment 4-30

4.9 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 4-31

4.9.1 Contamination Assessment 4-31

4.9.1.1 Soils 4-31

4.9.1.2 Ground Water 4-32

4.9.2 Site Summary 4-33

4.9.3 Conclusions 4-33

5.0 SITE INVESTIGATIONS OF STUDY AREAS 5-1

5.1 STUDY AREA A3/P5: GENERAL DUMP/DRUM STORAGE AREA 5-1

5.1.1 Area-Specific Background Information 5-1

5.1.1.1 Historical Aerial Photographs and Site Maps 5-2

5.1.1.2 Previous Investigations and Results 5-3

5.1.1.3 Nature and Extent of Contamination Determined from

Previous Investigations 5-4

5.1.2 Technical Approach and Field Work Performed 5-5

5.1.2.1 Geophysical Survey 5-5

5.1.2.2 Test Pits 5-7

5.1.2.3 Surface Soil Sampling 5-8

5.1.2.4 Surface Water/Sediment Sampling 5-9

5.1.3 Nature and Extent of Contamination 5-9

5.1.3.1 Surface Soil Sampling Results 5-9

5.1.3.2 Test Pit Sampling Results 5-10

5.1.3.3 Subsurface Soil Sampling Results 5-10

5.1.3.4 Ground Water Sampling Results 5-11

5.1.3.5 Surface Water and Sediment Sampling Results 5-12

5.1.4 Conclusions and Recommendations 5-12

5.2 STUDY AREA P4: BUNKER DRUM AREA 5-13

5.2.1 Technical Approach and Field Work Performed 5-13

5.2.2 Nature and Extent of Contamination 5-13

5.2.2.1 Surface Soil Sampling Results 5-13

5.2.2.2 Surface Water and Sediment Sampling Results 5-14

5.2.3 Conclusions and Recommendations 5-15

5.3 STUDY AREA P7: PATROL ROAD WASTE AREA 5-16

5.3.1 Technical Approach and Field Work Performed 5-16

5.3.2 Nature and Extent of Contamination 5-16

5.3.2.1 Test Pit Sampling Results 5-16

5.3.2.2 Subsurface Soil Sampling Results 5-17

5.3.2.3 Ground Water Sampling Results 5-17

5.3.3 Conclusions and Recommendations 5-18

5.4 STUDY AREA P17: BUILDING T206 CLOTH BURIAL AREA 5-18

5.4.1 Technical Approach and Field Work Performed 5-19

5.4.2 Nature and Extent of Contamination 5-19

5.4.2.1 Surface Soil Sampling Results 5-19

5.4.2.2 Test Pit Sampling Results 5-20

5.4.2.3 Ground Water Sampling Results 5-21

5.4.3 Conclusions and Recommendations 5-21

5.5 STUDY AREA P19: CLEARING, TRACKED ROAD 5-22

5.5.1 Technical Approach and Field Work Performed 5-22

5.5.2 Nature and Extent of Contamination 5-22

5.5.3 Conclusions and Recommendations 5-23

5.6 STUDY AREA P20: BURNED AREA AND DRUM 5-23

5.6.1 Technical Approach and Field Work Performed 5-23

5.6.1.1 Geophysical Survey 5-23

5.6.1.2 Test Pits 5-24

5.6.1.3 Surface Soil Sampling 5-24

5.6.2 Nature and Extent of Contamination 5-24

5.6.3 Conclusions and Recommendations 5-25

5.7 STUDY AREAS P25: TEST CHAMBER BUILDING T463 5-26

5.7.1 Technical Approach and Field Work Performed 5-26

5.7.2 Nature and Extent of Contamination 5-26

5.7.3 Conclusions and Recommendations 5-27

5.8 STUDY AREA P35: MAIN GATE GUARD SHACK 5-28

5.8.1 Technical Approach and Field Work Performed 5-28

5.8.2 Nature and Extent of Contamination 5-28

5.8.2.1 Surface Soil Sampling Results 5-28

5.8.2.2 Ground Water Sampling Results 5-29

5.8.2.3 Transformer Sampling Results 5-29

5.8.3 Conclusions and Recommendations 5-29

5.9 STUDY AREA P49: TWO DRUMS NEAR ROAD AND BUNKER 323 5-30

5.9.1 Technical Approach and Field Work Performed 5-30

5.9.2 Nature and Extent of Contamination 5-31

5.9.3 Conclusions and Recommendations 5-32

5.10 STUDY AREA P51: ONE DRUM NEAR WHITE POND ROAD 5-32

5.10.1 Technical Approach and Field Work Performed 5-32

5.10.2 Nature and Extent of Contamination 5-32

5.10.3 Conclusions and Recommendations 5-33

5.11 STUDY AREA P59: CANS AND METALLIC DEBRIS NORTH

OF BUNKER 319 5-34

5.11.1 Technical Approach and Field Work Performed 5-34

5.11.2 Nature and Extent of Contamination 5-34

5.11.3 Conclusions and Recommendations 5-35

5.12 STUDY AREA P60: THREE DRUMS WEST OF PATROL ROAD 5-36

5.12.1 Technical Approach and Field Work Performed 5-36

5.12.2 Nature and Extent of Contamination 5-36

5.12.3 Conclusions and Recommendations 5-36

6.0 REFERENCES 6-1

VI

TABLES

FIGURES

APPENDDC A - PHASE II SAMPLE COLLECTION RECORDS

APPENDIX B - AREAS A7/A9 GRAIN-SIZE DATA AND PHASE H SI/RI AREAS CONDUCTIVITY

DATA, TEST PIT LOGS, BORING LOGS AND MONITORING WELL

COMPLETION DIAGRAMS, MONITORING WELL COMPLETION DETAILS,

FIELD SURVEY DATA, SUMMARY OF PHASE II WATER LEVEL DATA,

GEOTECHNICAL GRAIN-SIZE ANALYSIS, ASBESTOS AIR MONITORING

RESULTS

APPENDIX C - DRAFT ADDENDUM TO THE BASELINE RISK ASSESSMENT

APPENDIX D - ANALYTICAL DATA

APPENDIX E - QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL EVALUATION

vn

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE NO. TITLE

1-1 Summary of Phase II Area-Specific Activities and Sampling

1-2 Soil, Sediment, and Surface Water Screening Criteria

1-3 Ecological Screening Criteria

1-4 Ground Water Screening Criteria

1-5 Matrix for Chemical Results Tables

2-1 Area A4 - Phase II Sampling Summary

2-2 Historical Aerial Photograph Index

2-3 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Soil Criteria, Surface Soil

2-4 Summary of Compounds Exceeding ESAT Soil Criteria, Surface Soil

2-5 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Soil Criteria, Test Pits

2-6 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Soil Criteria, Borings

2-7 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Ground Water Criteria

2-8 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Surface Water Criteria

2-9 Summary of Compound Exceeding Sediment Criteria

3-1 Area A7 - Phase II Sampling Summary

3-2 Areas A7/A9 - Vertical Ground Water Gradients

3-3 Area A7 - Ground Water Discharge Estimates

3-4 Area A7 - Cross-Sectional Areas Used in Discharge Calculations

3-5 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Soil Criteria

3-6 Summary of Compounds Exceeding ESAT Soil Criteria

3-7 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Soil Criteria

3-8 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Soil Criteria viii

LIST OF TABLES (CONTINUED)

3-9 Summary of Compounds Exceeding ESAT Soil Criteria

3-10 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Ground Water Criteria

3-11 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Surface Water Criteria

3-12 Detections of Methylene Chloride Analytical Lot VGM

3-13 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Surface Water Criteria

3-14 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Sediment Criteria

3-15 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Surface Water Criteria

3-16 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Sediment Criteria

4-1 Area A9 - Phase II Sampling Summary

4-2 Chemical Results from Prior Soil Sampling Events

4-3 Chemical Results from Prior Ground Water Sampling Events

4-4 Area A9 - Ground Water Discharge Estimates

4-5 Area A9 - Cross-Sectional Areas Used in Discharge Calculations

4-6 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Soil Criteria

4-7 Summary of Compounds Exceeding ESAT Soil Criteria

4-8 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Soil Criteria

4-9 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Soil Criteria

4-10 Summary of Compounds Exceeding ESAT Soil Criteria

4-11 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Ground Water Criteria

4-12 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Surface Water Criteria

4-13 Detections of Methylene Chloride Analytical Lot VCL

5-1 SI Areas - Phase II Sampling Summary

5-2 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Soil Criteria

5-3 Summary of Compounds Exceeding ESAT Soil Criteria

5-4 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Soil Criteria

IX

5-5 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Soil Criteria

5-6 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Ground Water Criteria

5-7 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Soil Criteria

5-8 Summary of Compounds Exceeding ESAT Soil Criteria

5-9 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Surface Water Criteria

5-10 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Sediment Criteria

5-11 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Soil Criteria

5-12 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Soil Criteria

5-13 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Ground Water Criteria

5-14 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Soil Criteria

5-15 Summary of Compounds Exceeding ESAT Soil Criteria

5-16 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Soil Criteria

5-17 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Ground Water Criteria

5-18 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Soil Criteria

5-19 Summary of Compounds Exceeding ESAT Soil Criteria

5-20 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Soil Criteria

5-21 Summary of Compounds Exceeding ESAT Soil Criteria

5-22 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Soil Criteria

5-23 Summary of Compounds Exceeding ESAT Soil Criteria

5-24 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Soil Criteria

5-25 Summary of Compounds Exceeding ESAT Soil Criteria

5-26 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Soil Criteria

5-27 Summary of Compounds Exceeding ESAT Soil Criteria

5-28 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Soil Criteria

5-29 Summary of Compounds Exceeding ESAT Soil Criteria

5-30 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Sediment Criteria

5-31 Summary of Compounds Exceeding Soil Criteria

5-32 Summary of Compounds Exceeding ESAT Soil Criteria

XI

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE NO. TITLE

1-1 Area Locations

1-2 Location of Surface Soil Samples, Sediment and Surface Water Samples, and Drum/Tank Confirmation Samples

1-3 Location of Test Pits and hand Auger Samples

1-4 Location of Soil Borings

1-5 Location of Monitoring Wellj, Staff Gages, and Water Supply Wells

1-6 Rapid Bioassessment Sample Locations

1-7 Study Area Map Symbols

2-1 Area A4 - Site Map and Sample Locations

2-2 Area A4 - Prior Use 1943

2-3 Area A4 - Prior Use 1952

2-4 Area A4 - Prior Use 1963

2-5 Area A4 - Prior Use 1978

2-6 Area A4 - Prior Use 1992

2-7 Area A4 - Tank

2-8 Area A4 - Overburden Ground Water Elevation and Flow Direction for

27 April 1994

3-1 Area A7 - Site Map and Sample Locations

3-2 Area A7/A9 - Prior Use 1943

3-3 Area A7/A9 - Prior Use 1952

3-4 Area A7/A9 - Prior Use 1963

3-5 Area A7 - Overburden Ground Water Elevation and Flow Direction for 27 April 1994 xn

LIST OF FIGURES (CONTINUED)

3-6 Area A7 - Cross-Section A-A'

3-7 Area A7 - Cross-Section B-B'

3-8 Area A7-Cross-Section C-C

4-1 Area A9 - Site Map and Sample Locations

4-2 Area A9 - Enlarged Inset with Arsenic Sampling Locations and Analytical

Results

4-3 Area A9 - Prior Use 1986

4-4 Area A9 - Cross-Section Locations

4-5 Area A9 - Cross-Section A-A'

4-6 Area A9 - Cross-Section B-B'

4-7 Area A9 - Overburden Ground Water Elevation Map for 15 June 1992

4-8 Area A9 - Overburden Ground Water Elevation Map for 23 October 1992

4-9 Area A9 - Overburden Ground Water Elevation Map for 8 January 1993

4-10 Area A9 - Overburden Ground Water Elevation Map for 27 April 1994

4-11 Area A9 - Lower Aquifer Piezometric Surfaces, Top of Till, and Top of

Bedrock Elevation Map

4-12 Area A9 - Contaminant Plumes

5-1 Area A3/P5 - Site Map and Sample Locations

5-2 Area A3/P5 - Limits of Phase II Geophysical Study

5-3 Area A3 - Phase II Geophysical Study Magnetic Iso-Gradient Contour

Map

5-4 Area A3 - Magnetic Gradient Contour Map and Test Pit Locations

5-5 Area P4 - Site Map and Sample Locations

5-6 Area P7 - Site Map and Sample Locations

5-7 Area P17 - Site Map and Sample Locations

5-8 Area P19 - Site Map and Sample Locations

5-9 Area P20 - Site Map and Sample Locations xiii

LIST OF FIGURES (CONTINUED)

5-10 Area P25 - Site Map and Sample Locations

5-11 Area P35 - Site Map and Sample Locations

5-12 Area P49 - Site Map and Sample Locations

5-13 Area P51 - Site Map and Sample Locations

5-14 Area P59 - Site Map and Sample Locations

5-15 Area P60 - Site Map and Sample Locations xiv

LIST OF ACRONYMS

AEHA

Annex

AOC

ARARs

AST

ATEC

AWQC

BGS

Bionetics

BNAs

BRA

BTEX

CERCLA

COC

CX

°C ppDDD ppDDE ppDDT

DEET

DEHP

1,1-DCE

U.S. Army Environmental Hygiene Agency

Ft. Devens Sudbury Training Annex

Area of Contamination

Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements

Aboveground Storage Tank

ATEC Associates, Inc.

Ambient Water Quality Criteria

Below Ground Surface

Bionetics Corporation

Base/neutral/acid extractables

Baseline Risk Assessment

Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, and Xylenes

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act

Chemical of Concern

Categorical Exclusion

Degrees Centigrade

2,2-Bis(p-chlorophenyl)-l, 1-dichloroethane

2,2-Bis(p-chlorophenyl)-l, 1-dichloroethene

2,2-Bis(p-chlorophenyl)-l, 1,1-trichloroethane

N,N-diethyl-3-methyl-benzamide bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate

1,1-Dichloroethene xv

LIST OF ACRONYMS (CONTINUED)

EMO

Enpro

EPIC

FPDWS

FS

GEM

HA

HI

HMX

HQ

i

IAG

IRDMIS

IRP

K

Kd

K.C

Kow

MADEP

MADEQE

MCC

MCLs

MCP

MFFA

mg/kg

Environmental Management Office

Enpro Services, Inc.

Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center

Federal Priority Drinking Water Standards

Feasibility Study

Gem Systems, Inc.

Hand Auger

Hazard Index

High-melting Explosive

Hazard Quotient

Gradient

Interagency Agreement

Installation Restoration Data Management Information System

Installation Restoration Program

Hydraulic Conductivity

Adsorption Coefficient

Organic Carbon Partition Coefficient

Octanol-Water Partition Coefficient

Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection

Massachusetts Department of Environmental Quality and Engineering (now MADEP)

Maximum Contaminant Concentrations

Maximum Contaminant Levels

Massachusetts Contingency Plan

Massachusetts Fire Fighting Academy

Milligrams per kilogram (ppm) xvi

MOTS

MSL

NEPA

NPL

nc

OHM

OP Pest

PAH

PAL

PCA

PCB

PCB/Pest

PCE

PCOC

PHC

PID

POLs

PPA

ppm

PVC

QA

QC

RDX

RfD

Maynard Ordnance Test Station

Mean Sea Level

Department of the Army National Environmental Policy Act of 1969

National Priorities List

Effective Porosity

OHM Remediation Services Corp., a Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of OHM Corporation

Organophosphorus Pesticides

Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons

Public Archaeological Laboratory, Inc.

1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane

Polychlorinated Biphenyl

Polychlorinated Biphenyls/Pesticides

Perchloroethylene or Tetrachloroethylene

Potential Chemical of Concern

Petroleum Hydrocarbon

Photoionization Detector

Petroleum, Oil, or Lubricants

Potentially Productive Aquifer

Parts per million

Polyvinyl Chloride

Quality Assurance

Quality Control

Royal Demolition Explosive

Reference Dose xvn

RI

SA

SARA

SCH-40

SMCLs

SI

SI/RI

SSI

T

TAL

TBC

TCE

TCL

TCLP

TEPS

TMI

TOC

TPH

TRC

1,1,1-TCA

UBK

UCL

U. S.

USACE

USAEC

- Remedial Investigation

- Study Area

- Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act

- Schedule 40 (pipe thickness)

- Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels

- Site Investigation

- Site Investigation/Remedial Investigation

- Screening Site Inspection

- Transmissivity

- Target Analyte List

- To Be Considered

- Trichloroethylene

- Target Compound List

- Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure

- Total Environmental Program Support

- Technology Management, Inc.

- Total Organic Carbon

- Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons

- Technical Review Committee

- 1,1,1 -Trichloroethane

- Uptake/Biokinetic

- Upper Confidence Limit

- United States

- U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

- U.S. Army Environmental Center

XVlll

USAF

USATHAMA

uses

USEPA

USGS

UST

V

VOC

Zecco

Mg/1

- U.S. Air Force

- U.S. Army Toxic and Hazardous Materials Agency

- Unified Soil Classification System

- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

- U.S. Geological Survey

- Underground Storage Tank

- Velocity

- Volatile Organic Compound

- Zecco, Inc.

- Micrograms per gram (ppm)

- Micrograms per liter (ppb)

- Micrograms per deciliter xix

REPORT

collection Of information, .nctuoinq luqgnti Oawn Htqnw«v. Swife <2Q4 Arlington. i/A 12

1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave 0

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE A d d e

Inve Sudb

6. AUTHOR(S) S t e p

Suxu Pete

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION

OHM

Pitt

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING A

Unit Aber

11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

Supe Inve

12a. DISTRIBUTION /AVAILABILITY

DOD

13. ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 wo This document presen of Contamination (A0 r e s u l t s for Study Ar P59, and P60 at the Massachusetts . Base hazardous substances source cont ro l remec to publ ic hea l th , we closure under Massac Based on the SI resu SAs P17, P20, P59, a P4, and P35, and no

14. SUBJECT TERMS

Site In\

CERCLA (

Training

17. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION

OF REPORT

Unclassified

DOCUMENTATION P

om, 'Of reoucinq trm ouroen to wainmqton Me 202-002. and to the Ot«ice o* w«n«oe(n^t *n< sr>K) I 2. REPORT DATE

I September 22, 19 ndum Report to Si te/R s t i g a t i o n a t Fort Devi ury Training Annex hen R. McGinn, Projec an Huang, Senior Proj r K. LaGoy, Manager, 1

NAME(S) ANO AOORESS(ES)

Remediation Services RIDC Plaza, Suite 60 sburgh, PA 15238-292

GENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(E5

ed States Army Enviroi deen Proving Ground, rsedes Draft Final Ad stigation

< STATEMENT

ras) ts complete Remedial Cs) A4, A7, and A9, a eas (SAs) A3/P5, P4, Fort Devens Sudbury T d on the RI resu l t s , from AOCs A7 and A9, y, may present an imm Ifare, or the environ husetts state regulat I t s , supplemental s i t nd P60, limited remov further action is rec restigation, Remedial

SuperiundJ, rort Deve , Annex

18. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION

OF THIS PAGE

Unclassified

AC

MOU

1 BUC<

=me =ns t M 2Ct Ris

Cor d nine Ê) den

Inv nd P7 , rai act if ine mer ior e i a l omn

In \

19.

I

;E m m Service*. Directorate fo jet. Pioerwom Aeoumon Pro

3 . REPORT TYPE AN

Final dial anager Engineer k Assessment

P-ntal Center 21010-5401 dum Report, S estigation (R complete Site

P17, P19, P2 ning Annex, M ual or threat not addresse nt and substa

it. AOC A4 ma is due to the .nvestigations actions are r lended for P7, restigation, SECURITY CLASSIFIC

OF ABSTRACT

Jnclassified r mformatio ect (0704-01

D DATES

5. FUN

8. PERF

REPC

DAAiS Task

OHM

10. SPO

AGE

SFtt ite/Re

12b. DIS

Apprc reles is ur

I) res Inves

0, P2f iddles ened i d by :

n t ia l y reqi preser are i ecomme P 1 9 , ATION

Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0788 n ODerationt ano Aeoorts. 1215 jenefwn «8). Waviinqton. OC 20503.

COVERED

3ING NUMBERS

c

ORMING ORGANIZATION

RT NUMBER

L 1 5 - 9 0 - D - 0 0 1 9 . Order No. DA05 Pro jec t 14316

YSORING / MONITORING

NCY REPORT NUMBER

l-AEC-IR-CR-95002 medial

TRIBUTION CODE

ved for public Lse; distr ibution tlimited.

ults for Areas tigation (SI)

>, P35, P49, P51, »ex County, •eleases of implementing a endangerment lire solid waste ice of solid debris, -ecommended for mded for A3/P5, P25, P49, and P51.

15. NUMBER OF PAGES

16. PRICE CODE

N/A

20 . LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT

SAR

NSN 7540-01-280-5500 Standard Form 298 (Rev. 2-89) Premised By ANSI Std Z39-I8 298-102

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This report is submitted as the Addendum to the Final Site/Remedial Investigation Report for the Fort Devens Sudbury Training Annex (Annex) located in Middlesex County, Massachusetts (OHM, 1994), to the U.S Army Environmental Center (USAEC), formerly the U.S. Army Toxic and Hazardous Materials Agency (USATHAMA), Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland. The Site/Remedial Investigation will be referred to as the Site Investigation/Remedial Investigation (SI/RI). This report documents the results of the Phase II SI/RI and combines the data with the results of the Phase I SI/RI. The work was performed under Total Environmental Program Support (TEPS) Contract No. DAAA15-90-D-0019, Delivery Order No. DA06. This document has been prepared as Contract Data Requirement ELIN A009A.

This addendum is not a stand-alone document and is not meant to serve as a comprehensive source of information for installation history, study area (SA) characteristics, or project procedures. Detailed information regarding these topics can be found in the Final Master Environmental Plan (OHM, 1992A), the Final Addendum to the Final Technical Plans (OHM, 1992B), the Final Site/Remedial Investigation Report (OHM, 1994), and the Final Addendum to the Final Technical Plans for the Phase II Feasibility Study (OHM, 1993). Field work and data evaluation were performed in accordance with the Final Health and Safety Plan (OHM, 1992C), the Final Work Plan (OHM, 1992D), the Final Field Sampling Plan (OHM, 1992E), the Final Quality Assurance Project Plan (OHM, 1992F), and the Community Relations Plan (Dames & Moore, 1991).

These documents were developed in accordance with the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) and the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA), USAEC Geotechnical Requirements (USATHAMA, 1987), USAEC Quality Assurance Program (USATHAMA, 1990), and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Guidance for Conducting Remedial Investigations and Feasibility Studies under CERCLA (USEPA, 1988).

The activities involved in the investigation qualify for a categorical exclusion (CX) in accordance with Department of the Army National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) Regulations CS A18, Army Regulation 200-2, Appendix A, and did not require prior preparation of an environmental assessment under NEPA since no extraordinary circumstances existed. The work was conducted under the purview of USAEC, the U.S. Army, USEPA Region I, the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MADEP), and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, as well as local officials and interest groups.

1.1 PURPOSE OF REPORT

This addendum presents the results of the detailed contamination assessment in terms of the potential on-site source, nature and extent of contamination, transport pathways, and the potential effects on human health and the environment. It is intended to provide site-specific background information and chemical data to be used to support the decision making process regarding the selection and evaluation of remedial measures. To that end, information from previous investigations has been combined with data obtained by OHM during the Phase I and Phase II SI/RIs.

1.2 SITE BACKGROUND INFORMATION

The Annex, acquired by the federal government in the early 1940s, is located approximately 2 miles north of the town of Sudbury, Massachusetts. It has historically served as a munitions holding ground, an ordnance test station, a research and development facility, and as a troop training ground. In early 1990, Fort Devens Sudbury Training Annex Addendum to the Final SI/RI Report OHM Project No. 14316 Middlesex County, Massachusetts September 22, 1995

1-1

Services Corp. INTROD UCTION the Annex was placed on the National Priorities List (NPL) with a hazard ranking of 35.57. Currently, the facility contains family housing for U.S. military services personnel, a geophysical radar station, and guest houses. Figure 1-1 is a map of the installation displaying all SAs investigated or sampled during the Phase II SI/RI. A detailed description of the site, including site history, physical setting, and descriptions of each area of contamination (AOC) and SA, is included in Section 2.0 of the Final SI/RI Report (OHM, 1994).

Figures 1-2 through 1-6 show all sampling locations for the Phase I and Phase II SI/RI. Figure 1-2 shows the location of all surface soil, sediment, surface water, and drum/tank samples collected for analysis. Figure 1-3 shows all test pit and hand auger sampling locations. All soil boring locations are presented on Figure 1-4, while the locations of monitoring wells, staff gages, and water supply wells are shown on Figure 1-5. The rapid bioassessment sampling locations are presented on Figure 1-6. An explanation of the map symbols used on the SA site maps is presented on Figure 1-7.

1.3 SCOPE OF THE PHASE II SI/RI

The field work for the Phase II SI/RI was conducted between October 1993 and January 1994. It was intended to provide additional data regarding site soil, sediment, ground water, and surface water quality to support the remedy selection process and no further action decisions. Phase II SI/RIs were conducted at 16 SAs. Table 1-1 presents the investigative activities conducted in each area, along with the number and type of samples collected, while Appendix A contains the complete sample collection record.

The primary objectives of the investigation were to:

• Conduct field investigations, sampling, and analyses to support the remedy selection processes at AOCs A4, A7, and A9

• Provide additional information on chemical concentrations in soil, sediment, ground water, and surface water at the remaining SAs listed in Table 1-1 to allow the U.S. Army to make appropriate decisions regarding further action at these sites.

1.4 SCREENING CRITERIA

Based on meetings, discussions, and guidance provided by the USAEC, USEPA Region I, MADEP, and the Technical Review Committee (TRC), the following matrix-specific screening criteria were used:

1.4.1 Surface Soil

Analytical results for surface soils were initially screened using the 95% upper confidence level (UCL) and maximum background surface soil values. These values were derived using both OHM and Ecology & Environment, Inc. (E&E) background surface soil data. All background surface soil values are presented in Table 1-2. A second table presenting all background surface soil values is presented as Table 2-1 in the Draft Final Addendum to the Human Health Risk Assessment in Appendix C.

All surface soil results were also screened using Massachusetts Contingency Plan (MCP) S-l/GW-1 soil values presented in 30 CMR 40.0975(6)(a) (MADEP, 1993). The MCP S-l/GW-1 soil screening criteria are presented in Table 1-2. Ecological screening criteria were provided by USEPA Region I.

These values were compiled by the Region I Environmental Services Assistance Teams (ESAT) and are

Fort Devens Sudbury Training Annex Addendum to the Final SI/RI Report OHM Project No. 14316

1-2 presented in a letter report dated June 10, 1993, to the USEPA Region I Environmental Services Division (ESAT, 1993). Ecological screening criteria are presented in Table 1-3.

1.4.1.1 Risk Based Soil Cleanup Level for Thallium

A risk-based cleanup level for thallium of 20 /xg/g has been provided by the USEPA. This cleanup level results in a Hazard Index of One and is documented in a letter dated May 19, 1995 from Bob Lim of USEPA Region I, to Ronald Ostrowski, Installation Environmental Officer, Fort Devens, Massachusetts (USEPA, 1995). For screening purposes, the MCP S-l/GW-1 standard of 8 /xg/g was used.

1.4.1.2 The MCP Beryllium Standard

It should be noted that during the writing and revision of this and other related reports, a revised version of the MCP was issued and became effective on February 1, 1995. In the revised MCP the S-l/GW-1 soil value for beryllium was revised from 0.4 micrograms per gram (/xg/g) to 0.7 /ig/g (310 CMR 40.0975(6)(a)). The change in this screening value eliminates all but 3 of the 50 previous exceedances noted for this metal at the Annex. The 3 remaining exceedances are samples P50CD1A (1.02 /xg/g), P22SO2A (0.85 tig/g), and P51SO4B (0.73 /xg/g). Even though this change has occurred, the original discussions regarding exceedances of the 0.4 /ig/g MCP S-l/GW-1 standard have been retained in order to maintain consistency between the various OHM reports submitted for this site. In addition, since beryllium in the range of 0.4-0.7 /xg/g was considered background for the site, the MCP change does not affect recommended actions at the Annex.

1.4.1.3 ESAT Ecological Screening Criteria

Two of the ecological screening criteria for surface soil presented in the ESAT (1993) document have been amended by OHM. The screening value for beryllium presented in the original ESAT document is 55 /xg/g. The source for this value is cited as the geometric mean value for beryllium in soils of the Eastern United States (east of 96th meridian) in Shacklette and Boerngnen (1984; see Table 2, page 6).

However, the value actually presented in this publication is 0.55 /xg/g. This lower value has been used to screen all surface soil results and is presented in Table 1-3.

The ESAT screening value for the PAH fluoranthene has also been amended. The screening criteria of 0.10 /xg/g for this compound was obtained from Beyer (1990), Table 1, column A. All other soil criteria from Beyer (1990) for PAHs and other organic compounds were from column B of the Beyer (1990) table. Column B refers "..to moderate soil contamination that requires additional study..", while column A refers ". .to background concentrations in soil or detection limits..". To be consistent with other organic compounds, the column B value of 10 /xg/g for fluoranthene has been used to screen all surface soil results. This amended value is presented in Table 1-3.

1.4.2 Subsurface Soil

Analytical results for subsurface soils were screened using background surface soil values and MCP S-l/GW-1 values (Table 1-2).

Fort Devens Sudbury Training Annex Addendum to the Final SI/RI Report OHM Project No. 14316

1-3

1.4.3 Ground Water

The primary ground water screening criteria were the Federal Primary Drinking Water Standards - USEPA Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) and Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels (SMCLs) (USEPA, 1994). In addition, detected compounds not included in the USEPA MCL or SMCL lists were compared with the MCP GW-1 standards presented in 310 CMR 40.0974(2) (MADEP, 1993). Ground water criteria are presented in Table 1-4.

1.4.4 Surface Water

Surface water analytical results were initially screened using background surface water values presented by E&E in their Draft Phase II Site Investigations Report (E&E, 1994, Section 6.2.2, Table 6-2).

All positive detections were also evaluated using ecological screening criteria provided by USEPA Region I (ESAT, 1993), and the Ambient Water Quality Criteria (AWQC) freshwater continuous concentration and human health for consumption of organisms only criterion as presented in 40 CFR 131.36(b)(l). The ecological criteria are presented in Table 1-3.

1.4.5

Analytical results for sediment samples have been evaluated using background sediment values (Table 1-2) presented by E&E in their Draft Phase II Site Investigations Report (E&E, 1994, Section 6.2.2, Table 6-2). All positive detections were also evaluated using ecological values provided by USEPA Region I (ESAT, 1993) (Table 1-3).

1.4.6 Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure Results

All Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) data were compared to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Maximum Contaminant Concentrations (MCC) for Toxicity Characteristic Wastes (40 CFR 261.24).

1.5 REPORT ORGANIZATION

This report is divided into the following sections:

• Section 1.0 - Describes the purpose and organization of this report

• Section 2.0 - Describes the remedial investigation (RI) results for AOC A4

• Section 3.0 - Describes the RI results for AOC A7

• Section 4.0 - Describes the RI results for AOC A9

• Section 5.0 - Describes the site investigation (SI) results for each SA

• Section 6.0 - Contains a list of the references cited in this report

Fort Devens Sudbury Training Annex Addendum to the Final SI/RI Report OHM Project No. 14316

1-4 o OHM Remediation

Services Corp. INTRODUCTION

Appendices contain the sample collection record, field forms, boring logs, well construction diagrams, analytical data, quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) evaluation, supplemental human health and ecological risk assessments (ERAs), and data disks.

Fort Devens Sudbury Training Annex Addendum to the Final SI/RI Report OHM Project No. 14316

1-5

2.0 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OF AOC A4

AOC A4, Waste Dump, is located in the eastern Annex adjacent to the East Gate as shown on Figure 1-1. This area was reportedly used for 3 to 4 years during the late 1960s and early 1970s for the burial of unidentified chemical wastes and drums.

Figure 2-1 is a map of AOC A4 showing the locations for all investigative work performed and samples collected. Table 2-1 lists all samples collected in AOC A4 during the Phase II SI/RI, the sample media, and analytical parameters requested.

2.1 AREA CHARACTERISTICS AND HISTORY

AOC A4 is approximately 1,000 feet long by 200 feet wide and contains a surface dump in a depression at the southwest end, in addition to an old building foundation and stone well at the northeast end.

The building foundation has been identified as the site of the Rice Tavern or Vose Farm by the Public Archaeology Laboratory, Inc. (PAL) and is of potential historic significance (PAL, 1985). The stone well is collapsed approximately 3 feet below ground surface (BGS) and could not be sampled. A few drums were located northwest of the surface dump and small piles of rubbish and construction debris were found northeast of the dump. Small amounts of construction debris, including old roadway pavement, have reportedly been dumped at this location since 1986.

As shown on Figure 2-1, the majority of AOC A4 consists of a clearing which parallels the north side of Old Marlborough Road and slopes gently to the southwest. The clearing is bordered by woods and a narrow drainage ditch that flows along the northwestern side of the area and drains into a wetland adjacent to AOC A4 on the northwest.

2.1.1 Area-Specific Background Information

The area-specific background information is organized into several sections. These include past site usage, previous environmental investigations and physical results, the nature and extent of contamination as determined from prior work, and prior remedial actions. Information regarding past land usage, environmental investigations, remedial actions, and physical and chemical results have been obtained from aerial photographs, maps, reports, correspondence, memorandums, records reviews, and interviews. Each section is arranged in chronological order.

2.1.1.1 Historical Aerial Photographs and Site Maps

Six sets of aerial photographs taken between 1943 and 1992 (Table 2-2) and one set of low oblique, color infrared photographs, taken in 1981 (USEPA, 1982) have been examined. These photographs were used in conjunction with three maps prepared by OHM (1992A: Figures 3-2, 3-3, and 3-4) that summarize Ft. Devens site maps for the period 1942 to 1979. This was done in order to assess past site usage, physical changes, and developments that have occurred in and around AOC A4. The following discussion presents the results of this preliminary examination

At this time, AOC A4 was primarily cleared fallow fields with a few scattered trees (Figure 2-2). One large building and several smaller ones were present near the intersection of Old Marlborough (now Craven

Fort Devens Sudbury Training Annex Addendum to Final SI/RI Report OHM Project No. 14316

2-1 services Corp. REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OFAOCA4

Road) and Old Lancaster (Puffer) Road (now Patrol Road). The site was bordered on the north by a narrow drainage ditch in the northeast and center areas, and a wooded lowland in the northwest. A mature, well developed orchard is located north of the drainage ditch. It extends from Old Lancaster Road on the northeast, to a wooded lowland on the southwest.

The site underwent few changes between 1943 and 1952 (Figure 2-3). Although still consisting primarily of cleared, fallow fields, some revegetation had occurred in the southwest and northeast. All buildings evident in 1943 were still present, and no additional buildings were evident.

Substantial changes occurred in and around AOC A4 between 1952 and 1963 (Figure 2-4). In the northeast part of the area, all buildings had been razed, while the center and southwest portions of the area appear to be devoid of vegetation due to frequent traffic. Although heavily wooded in 1952, the lowland bordering AOC A4 on the northwest appears to be largely devoid of trees.

A low earthen dam is visible at the southwestern end of the lowland across a stream that flowed into Puffer Pond from the southeast. The dam was constructed at a narrow opening between the southwestern end of SA A3 and the northern tip of the higher ground bordering the southern shore of Puffer Pond. Rising water behind this dam may be the cause of the vegetation changes in the formerly wooded lowland.

There are few changes evident in the 1978 aerial photo of AOC A4 (Figure 2-5). The central and southwestern portions of the area appear to be devoid of all vegetation due to continuing traffic and use. The northeastern end, and the unused portions of the central and southwestern areas, have been partially revegetated. Parts of the lowland to the northwest may also be revegetated.

AOC A4 was not included in the photographic coverage of the Annex presented in the USEPA's 1981 report.

Few changes are evident between 1978 and 1986. The central and southern portions of the area still appear to be heavily traveled and are devoid of vegetation in large areas. Debris, and possibly drums, were visible in the southwestern area. The northeastern area continues to revegetate and appears to be little used relative to the rest of AOC A4. Many downed tree trunks were visible in the lowland to the northwest, and it appeared that this area was developing, or had developed, into a wetland along with the lowland areas west of Old Marlborough Road. The dam at the southwest end of the lowland appears to have been breached near its southern end, and a narrow stream appears to be flowing southwestward into Puffer Pond.

Fort Devens Sudbury Training Annex Addendum to Final SI/RI Report OHM Project No. 14316

2-2

Services Corp. REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION OFAOCA4

The sixth set of aerial photographs was taken in March 1992, by the Bionetics Corporation of Warrenton, Virginia (Bionetics) under contract to the USEPA's Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC) group. These photographs, along with numerous ground control targets and control points used to establish horizontal and vertical control, and supplemental higher-altitude aerial photographs, were used to produce an updated topographic site map of the Annex.

AOC A4 was more heavily overgrown (Figure 2-6). Revegetation of the sandy central and southwestern portions of the site had begun and there were no signs of heavy traffic or frequent use. The lowland to the northwest appeared to be an open wetland. The areas bordering AOC A4 in the north central and northeast were completely overgrown.

2.1.1.2 Previous Investigations and Results

1958 - USACE

In September 1958, the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) inspected this site and evaluated its suitability as a location for the Capehart Housing units (USACE, 1958). The location was designated Possible Site C - the East Gate Area.