PB95-964040
EPA/ROD/R04-95/257
May 1996
EPA Superfund
Record of Decision:
Marine Corps Logistics Base,
Operable Unit 5 (PSC 8), Albany, GA
6/23/95
-------
iMTERIivl REMEDIAL ACTION
OPERABLE UMST 5
POTENTIAL SOURCE OF CONTAMINATION 8
RECORD OF DECISION
E CORPS LOG337JCS SASE ALBANY
ALBANY, GEORGIA
-
* «
a Si
AB3 Environment^ Ssryicas, Inc.
2590 Exscutiv5 Canter Circle, Sas
Tallahassee; Florida 3200']
Prepared for:
Department of tf-.a ^avy, Southern Division
Naval Facilities Engineering Command
2155 Eagle Drive
North Charleston, South Carolina 29413
att Humphrey, CccJ-3 13S17, nernedi^ ?fc|ec; Jvla
-------
The Contractor, ABB Enviror.ser.tal Services, Inc.. hereby certifies that,
tc the best of its knowledge and bsliaf, the tacr.r.iccl data delivered herewith
under Contract Mo. Nc2i57-39-D-03I7/G55 are complete ar:d accurate and comply with
DATE:
June 9, 1995
NAME AND TITLE OF CERTIFYING OFFICIAL: Joseon Daniel
Task Order Uar.aser
NAME AND TITLE OF CERTIFYING OFFICIAL: Ken Wilscr.
(DFAjx. 252.227-7036)
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMA.RY
DECLARATION FOR THE INTERIM REMEDIAL ACTION
RECORD 07 D2CISI01T
SITE NAH2 AND ADDRESS
Marina Corps Logiscics Base
Operable Ur.it 5, Potential Source of Contamination 3
£1-4 Radfcrd liculavard
Albany, Georgia 2170^-1123
STATEMENT 0? PURPOSED
This Record of Decision (ROD) docuaent presents tha selsc^ad Interim Remedial
Action (IRA) for Potential Source of Contamination (PSC) 3 of the Marine Corps
Logistics 2a^2 (I1CL3) Albany. It --as .i-iVcioped L.i accordance with the
.>o-pj;:.£.n.;\v2 5rivir:;ru22ncal Response, J-.;jf j.-.;:.a:i-vv:. -,ra Li-r-bilicy AC~ (CZ3.CLA)
.es ivr^r.dod by ch~ Su-crfund ^ar.dnsr.t:; and r.j^ucivji.'i^i£ioii Ace (SARA) , and co the
«:-:tar.~ pr-Cticabia, die Macior.al Oil and I-iaiardoua Subscsncs Contingency Plan
(;3C?) . This decision is based on the Ad^ir.is.rrativs Record, which is on file in
the Dougherty County Public Library, and the Er.vircnrssntal "ranch Office, Facili-
ties ai-.d Service Division, Building 5501, MCUl Albany, Georgia 31704.
The purpose cf this IRA is to protect hucan har.lth and the e-viror.r:2nt frca
potan-i-al thrsac while final rerudial solu-icns ars b^^i^•T d-avslc-paci. Boch tr.e
U.S. Envircnssntal Protection Asencv (U3i?A) Ra^io-i T"" ?**r. "-.- ?t?..ts of Georgia
A 1994 remedial investigation at PSC 3 revealed'the presence of polychlorinated
biphenyls (rCBs), slavated laad concentrations, and polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons (?AKs) in soil uithivi ar.d arour.d nn a^parar.t crar.ch arsa. If actual
or threatened releases cf chess substances from PSC 3 are not addressed by
implementing .the response action selected in this ROD, a current or potential
threat to public health, welfare, or the environment may result.
DESCRIPTION 0? THZ SELECTED REMEDY
Thara are 25 ?SCs at MCL3 Albany. Of these, 14 ?SCs vera identified for the
Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (3.I/F3) process ana were divided into
5 Operable Units. Operable Unit (OU) 5 consists of PSC 8 and PSC 14. PSC 8
addresses a former grit disposal area and PSC 14 is the foraer domestic wastewater
treatment facility. The scope of chis ROD is linited to contaminated soil in and
around an apparent trench area at PSC 8.
Ths ceicctod IRA for ?CC 3 inoluU=s excaviicior. cf ccr.;oi:ir.a:cd scil, cranspcr-
of the excavation area.
PSC8IROO.NEW
OLH.Oa.95
-------
TABLE CF .CONTENTS
Albany, Georgia
Chapter Title Page No.
1.0 SITE NAME, LOCATION. AND DESCRIPTION 1-1
o Q cyr^r UTCTQOV »v'rj cvrrTipTMpNjT irTTT?TTTTC •"> _ "•
3.0 HIGHLIGHTS OF COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION; 5-I
4.0 SCOPE AND ROLE OF THE INTERIM REMEDIAL ACTION (IRA)
AT POTENTIAL SOURCE Or CONTAMINATION (?SC) 3 i-1
5.0 SUMMARY OF SITE CHARACTERISTIC" 5-1
5.1 GEOLOGY . . .
5.3 ECOLOGY ............................ 5-5
5.4 Chsruiz:: c Poiia-ial Ccnca -
-
2 Contz£hijLRa.nc Scut'ces
5.0 SUMMARY OF SITE RISKS . .
7.2 ALTERNATIVE MO. 2, EXCAVAiiOi'T, INCINERATION, AND DISPOSAL . . . /-I
7.5 ALTERNATIVE NO. 3, EXCAVATION AND DISPOSAL AT TSCA LA>?DFILL . . 7-1
/ .=4 Ai^TESI'iATIVE .'.0. ^, NO ACTICl'i / -k
8.0 SUMMARY OF COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES 3-1
8.1 OVERALL PROTECTION OF HUMAN HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT .... 3-1
O . i- uu*'i*rL.lAii wil '.V 1 i*"i _'ii"*" L-—Or*—;• L.^ •-_ Jx J._l.j_.*l ,iL-i - .-i-iD fir'JT^vO'JT^. J.AJ.U r"v*l-s
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Pwtlsi Source •:? Csrr-T.ins-Jc- ;r£Ci S
Marine Ccrps Lcgistics Bass A-bany.
,;-JS"y. Gscrgia
Figure Title Page ^?o.
1-1 Vicinity Map 1-2
1-2 Site Plan, Operable Unit 5 1-2
5-1 Geologic Section of the Alb = r." Ar=
-------
GLOSSARY
ABB-ES
ARAR
bis
ABB Environmental Services, Inc.
applicable or relevant and appropriate requirement
below land surface
CAA Clean Air Act
CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act
CFR Cods of Federal regulations
C?C chemical of potential concern
DOT Department of Transportation
DWTP domestic vastsvater treatment plant
FFA Federal Facility Agreement
ft /Q3V SGM2TT2 f^St 13S~ CSV
IAS
in/yr
IRA
Georgia £nvironmental Protection Division
Georgia Hazardous Waste Management Act
Initial Assessment Study
inches per year
Interim Remedial Action
industrial vastewatar treatment slant
MCLB
PS/kg
nig/kg
NAAQS
NCP
NESKA?
NPL
O&M
OCGA
OSKA
OU
PAH
PCBs
PRE
PSC
Marine Cor^c Lczi^tics 3ase
nicrcgrans par kilogram
milligrams per kilogram
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
National Oil and Hazardous Substances Contingency Plan
National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
National Priority List
operations and maintenance
Official Code of Georgia, Annotated
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Operable Unit
polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons
polychlorinated biphenyls
preliminary risk evaluation
Potential Sourca of Contamination
RA
RCRA
RFI
Risk Assessment
Resource Conservation ana Recovery Act
Resource Conservation .-TIC Recover'- Act (?.C?A> Facil
RI/FS
ROD
Raiuedial Investigation and Feasibility Study
PSCfflROO.NEW
OLH.06.95
VI
-------
CHAPTER 1.0
-------
1.0 SITE NAME. LOCATION. AND DESCRIPTION
Marine Corps Logiscics Base (MCLB), Albany is an active facility occupying
approximately 3,500 acres 5 miles east-southeast of Albany, Georgia. Land
bordering MCLB Albany to the south, east, and northeast is primarily agricultural
or recreational open space. The land bordering northwest and west of the Base
is largely residential and commercial areas of eastern Albany.
Potential source of contamination (PSC) 8 is located in the southwestern part of
the Base, adjacent to the Marine Corps Canal and the former domestic wastewater
treatment plant (DWTP) (PSC 14). Figure 1-1 illustrates the location of MCLB
Albany and the approximate location of OU 5 (comprising PSCs 8 and 14). PSC 3
measures approximately 350 feet by 120 feet and is the location of a former grit
disposal area (Figure 1-2). The wastes disposed at PSC 8 were accumulated in the
grit chamber of the adjacent DWTP.
pscanoo.NEw
oin.oa.ss 1-1
-------
I
N
v ^
SCALE: 1" = 120
H:\AI ruNAOuAWD*-l"*\C6-ty-9i
SITEPLAIJ, OPERABLE UNIT 6
:E.Gf.'N_!>
/v Approximiilu arcu
(/ o( Irench
Approximolo oreo
of spoil
Jource;
MCLD Albany-sewage Ireolmcnl
plonl general layout plan! piping - 1952.
INTERIM REMEDIAL ACTION
RECORD OF DECISION,
PSC 8, OPERABLE UNIT 5
MARINE CORPS
LOGISTICS BASE
ALBANY, GEORGIA
-------
CHAPTER 2.0
-------
2.0 SITE HISTORY AND ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES
MCLB Albany currently serves as a U.S. military logistics center. Its primary
duties include controlling the acquisition, storage, maintenance, and distribution
of combat and support material for the U.S. Marine Corps. The Base is also used
for training military personnel and other tasks and functions as directed by the
Commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps.
MCLB Albany has generated various types of solid and liquid wastes over the years,
including hazardous wastes. The hazardous wastes include electroplating wastes
containing heavy nietals, organic solvents from stripping and cleaning operations,
and waste fuel and oil.
In 1985, three investigations were performed to assess and characterize PSCs
identified at MCLB Albany. These investigations included the 1985 Initial
Assessment Study (IAS), the 1987 Confirmation Study, and the 1989 Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Facility Investigation (RFI). As a result
of thssa investigations , 11CI3 Albany vo.3 placsd ir. Group 7 (Hariri ?.anV.ir.g System
score of 45.SI to 43.75) of tha National Priority List (N?L) for uncontrolled
hazardous vasts sizzs. MCLB Albany was placed on the NPL in December 1989.
In July 1991, the Department of the Navy, representing MCL3 Albany, entered into
a Federal Facility Agreement (FFA) with the Georgia Environmental Protection
Division (GEFD) and the U,. S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Region IV
to establish a procedural framework and schedule for developing, implementing,
and monitoring appropriate response actions at the facility in accordance with
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CER.CLA),
RCRA, the National Oil and Hazardous Substance Contingency Plan (1-TC?) , Super fund
guidance and policy, and the Georgia Hazardous Waste Management Act (GHwMA).
The following reports describe the environmental investigations and plans for PSC
8 to date.
Southern Division Naval Facilities Engineering Command, (SOUTHNAVFACENGCOM) ,
1974, Multiple Use Natural Resources Management Plan for Marine Corps Supply
^Center, Albany, Georgia.
SOUTHNAVFACENGCOM, 1978, Master Plan, MCLB Atlantic, Albany, Georgia.
' . '\- '< ' '
Crawford, V.I., 1979, Environmental Engineering Survey, Marine Corps
Logistics Base (MCLB), Albany, Ga., prepared for SOUTHNAVFACENGCOM.
Envirodyna Engineers, Inc., 1985, Initial Assessment Study, Marine Corps
Logistics Base, Albany, Georgia.
McClelland Engineers, 1987, Final Report, Confirmation Study Verification
Step,. Marine Corps Logistics Base, Albany, Georgia: .prepared for
SOUTKNAVFACENGCOM.
Applied Engineering and Science, Inc.., 1989, RCRA Facility Investigation
Phase One Confirmation Study, MCLB Albany, Georgia.
pscamoo.NEW
DIW.08.9S . .-,•'. / 2-1 '
-------
CHAPTER 3.0
-------
3.0 HIGHLIGHTS OF COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION
The Proposed Plan for the IRA at OU 5. PSC 8, vas made public April 28, 1995.
This document vas zs.dc available co the. public in the Information Repository
located at Dougherty County Public Library, and in the Administrative Record
located at che Environmental Branch Office, Building 55C1, MCLB Albany, Georgia
31704-1128. The public comment period for the IRA Proposed Plan extends from
April 28 to June 12, 1995. The public notice of the proposed IRA was published
in the Albany He-raid and the Atlanta Constitution on April 25, 1995. In addition,
a public meeting vas held on May 4, 1995. at che Human Resources Office, Building
3010, MCLB Albany. At this meeting, rsprsssncatives from SCUTHNAVFACENGCGH, MCL3
Albany, and ASB-ES were available to answer questions about PSC 8 and the IRA
under consideration. A Community Relations Responsiveness Summary is included
in Appendix A.
The Proposed Flan identifies the preferred IRA at ?SC 8 as Alternative No. 3.
Alternative No. 3 is described as follcvs: arccavaticn-of the contaminated soil
abcva action l = v"-l- .[ jorr;:;i.T.sc-=lv SO Ju'-ic varcj;; j'rca PSC 5 ar.d disposal offb-se
at; a Tc:;ic Subot.-inccs Contiol Ace (TSCA/ i2~ctill. Ccr.fir^atory sampling of the
walls ar.-d floor ^f th; 3:-ccavatic-r. area will be csnduccac co ensure ail soil
contaminated above action levels has been removed.
PSC8IROD.NEW
OLH.08.95 3-1
-------
CHAPTER 4.0
-------
4.0 SCOPE AND ROLE OF THE INTERIM REMEDIAL ACTION (IRA)
AT POTENTIAL SOURCE Of CONTAMINATION CPSCI 8
The overall strategy for remediation of rh-s MCL3 Albany NPL sites is zo group then:
ir.co five QUs. Each OU is comprised cf one or more PSCs. The IRA selected in
this ROD applies to a trench area at PSC 8, one of two PSCs comprising GU 5. A
remedial field investigation for CU 5 was performed in 1994 and a Remedial
Investigation and Risk Assessment (RI/RA) report is currently being prepared.
OU 5 is located in the southwestern ~a~:~ cf -'-.= Base. This proposed IRA is
limited to contaminated scil in ch= vicinity of cr.a trench area wichin PSC 3.
The overall strategies of the selected IRA for PSC 8 are to minimize potential
exposure of humans and the environment to contaminated soil, and to control the
potential release of hazardous substances to water bodies.
The IRA selected in this ROD will be included in the final action for OU 5 and
will be consistent vith ?.rv' vlr.r.r.^r. fur/.ra :i^•:i•-r.~ ~': :>.2 extent ~cs~i";i3.
PSC8IROO.NEW •'~ »
OLH.Oa.95 4-1 . ' "*.t*".
-------
CHAPTER 5.0
-------
5.0 SUMMARY OF SITE CHARACTERISTICS
5.1 GEOLOGY. MCLS Albany is located in the Dougherty Plain district, which is
part of the Coastal Plain physiographic province. The Albany regional geology
is characterized by layers of sand, clay, sandstone, dolomite, and limestone that
dip gently and progressively thicken to the southeast. The sediments extend to
a depth of at least 5,000 feet below land surface (bis).
The sediments of interest at MCLB Albany (sediments that affect the hydrology of
the Upper Floridan aquifer) are of late middle Eocene age and younger including,
in descending crdar, tha ur.differentiated overburden of Quaternary age. the
Suwannee Limastona, c'r.3 Ccala Limestone, the Clinchfield Sand, and the Lisbon
Formation. A geologic section and section location map of the Albany area are
presented on Figures 5-1 and 5-2, respectively.
5.2 KYDROGEOLOGY. There are two principal hydrostratigraphic units of interest
at MCLB, Albany: (I) the ur.diffarentiated Quaternary overburden deposits and (2)
ths underlying -"??=- "loridar. aquifer (Ocaia Limestone) .
Within tha cvarburdsn, most sand or clay layers are discontinuous; however, a.
thick clay zone apparently persists in the lower half of the overburden throughout
the MCLB Albany area. This clay zone, ranging in thickness from 10 to 29 feet,
serves to cause intermittent perched groundwater conditions in the overburden.
Also, it decreases the amount or groundwater recharge to the Upper Floridan
aquifer from infiltration of precipitation, and controls the rate of infiltration
of chemical contaminants. Maximum annual water-level fluctuations may range from
10 to 15 feet, based on observed differences in water levels measured at different
ciraas of the year between 1991 and 1995. Water levels in area wells are highest
during February through April and at a minimum during November through January
(vhe- the overburden walls ar-3 commonly void of water). Hydraulic properties of
the overburden are controlled primarily by the amount of sand and clay present.
The Upper Floridan aquifer, consisting primarily of the Ocala Limestone, ranges
frca about 200 to 273 feet thick in ths area of MCLB. The aquifer is confined
above by the clayey overburden and below by a low permeability layer in the Lisbon
.Formation—. .Large quantities -of - water -are -stored—and -transmitted-wi-thin—the-
aquifer. The Upper Floridan has recently been studied and judged to be favorable
for large-scale water withdrawal (Torak and others, 1991). The aquifer is
regionally unconfined, semiconfined, or confined by the overlying soil, and the
rate of recharge depends primarily on the vertical hydraulic conductivity of the
overburden. The rate of mean annual recharge to the aquifer is reported (Torak
and others, 1991) to be on the order of 6 to 14 inches per year (in/yr). The
Upper Floridan aquifer is divided into an upper zone (with greater density) and
a lower zone (with greater permeability due to solution-enlarged joints, bedding
planes, and fractures) . These solution cavities can produce transmissivity values
as high as ;.78,000 square feet per day (ft2/
-------
Potttttlxrwtflo laopUth tho*> ollltudt ot *hloh
—1SJ-—*qttr *»^l-' hov« iloed In llohlly eo»*d ««H».
Doit.tt vh4r« oftproilmotaly TooatMl. Contour Interval
(• 10 Ud. Datum to NCVQ of IMf.
4— Dlrcclli it ot groundwelcr flew
IMC., AM Ei»li«iMW Imteu he, INI.
(run Ht*j wJ ottMra, 1MT
ll:/AIHAHVlir.? 2/Klil' WOW •NP/06-07-95
FIGURE 5-3
POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE OF THE
UPPER FLORIDAN AQUIFER lil TH'£
ALBANY AREA, NOVEMBER 1985
x>-.» ,-tv INTE"IM REMEDIAL ACTION
4^ijT&\ RECORD OF DECISION,
M/rtt4rt\^ PSC 0, OPERABLE UNIT 5
]jtt MARINE CORPS
^$£3Ztw LOGISTICS BASE
^ '"iSs^ ALDANY, GEORGIA
-------
potentiometric surface exceeds the surface water elevation. The relationship can
be reversed locally during dry periods when the potentiometric surface drops and
streams discharga to the aquifer.
5.3 ECOLOGY. The majority of forested land in the vicinity of the Bass is
vegetated with longleaf pine flatwoods, the most extensive floral community in
the southern coastal plain. Also known as pine flatwoods, pine flats, low
pinelands, or pine barrens, this low flat woodland habitat occurs transitionally
between upslope xeric sandhill communities and downslope shrub-dominated evergreen
wetlands. Pine fiatvcccs grow in Florida. Georgia, South Carolina, and North
Carolina.
The high level of herbaceous productivity in the pine flatwood habitat frequently
supports a rich invertebrate faunal community. This invertebrate community often
supports a number of insectivorous vertebrates, including 20 to 30 species of
reptiles and amphibians. A number of small mammals inhabit the flatwood community
although no mammal is exclusive to this habitat.
Depending on tha vsgarativs association, pine flacwcods provide habitat for a
divarss array of avifauna, including insectivorous gleaners of pine needles and
bark, flycatchers, a seed eating assemblage, and nocturnal and diurnal aerial
predators. The red-cockaded woodpecker (Piccides faorsalis), a federally
endangered spacies, occurs almost exclusively within this pine flatwoods habitat;
however, there ars no known records of this species at MCLS Albany.
The presence of two rare and threatened species has been confirmed at the Base.
The American alligator (Alligator missLssippiensis') , now classified as threatened,
has been documented in wstland habitats at the Ease; this semi-aquatic species
is ubiquitous throughout the southeast. Bachman's sparrow (Aimophila aestLvaiis) ,
a Stats and federally listed "rare" species, is also a possible resident of the
dry open pine forests at MCLB Albany; this large, secretive sparrow is a year-
round resident of southern Georgia.
5.4 NATURE A*?D EXTENT 0? COSTAHINAI'iTo. The nacure, extent, and concentration
of hazardous substance contamination at PSC 8 was studied during -a remedial field
investigation performed from March through April 1994. In fall 1994, a
preliminary risk evaluation (PRE) was conducted on analytical data collected
during this investigation. Concurrent with the PRE, a supplemental field
investigation at PSC 8 was conducted to characterize or define "clean" boundaries
of contaminated soil in the vicinity of the trench. The following summarizes the
major observations from the 1994 investigations.
5.4.1 Chemicals of Potential Concern (CPCs) To provide a focus for IRA objec-
tives, CPCs at PSC 8 were identified in the OU 5 PRE. The following factors were
considered in the selection of CPCs:
concentration and fr-=quancy of detection:
physical, chacical, ir.d ~-v.i--olo5Xc.-l charactaristics:
comparison of detected values to background; and
regulatory criteria ar.d toxicity.
Table 5-1 lists hazardous substances detected in trench area soil at PSC 8.
PSC8IROO.NEW . . .
OLH.06.95
-------
CHAPTER 6.0
-------
6.0 SUKXARY OF SITE RISKS
As pare of the RI decision-making process, a ?RE vas conducted in late 1994 for
OU 5 that included a preliminary hunar. health and ecological evaluation. Data
collected during the RI were used to evaluate the presence of contamination, the
potential pathways of contaminant migration, and potsntial risks to human and
ecological receptors. The PR.E did not include samples collected and analyzed
during the concurrent supplemental investigation.
Ecological receptors in the vicinity of the individual study areas chat cculd
potentially be exposed tc contaminate:- dr.vironmer.tal media were identified. Major
site-specific exposure pathways were evaluated, and possible signs and symptoms
of stress on biological receptors at OU 5 were considered. Particular emphasis
was placed on identifying sensitive ecological receptors and assessing the
potential occurrence of rare, threatened, or endangered species at the Base.
As mentioned in Section 5.4.2, regular disposal of grit from the DT/7T? apparently
Other artifacts frcr:: the gri : ch'-rcr r.c^t likely wers included in the deposit
of the grit; however, the draft PF.Z determined that concentrations of the ?C3
(Aroclor-1260) and lead are the cnly C?Cs.
A supplemental field investigation of the trench area at PSC S was conducted in
November 1994. The purpose, of the iupplamsntal investigation was to delineate
the lateral extent of apparent contamination in surficial soil of the trench area
(to define "clean" boundaries). The supplemental investigation confirmed the
presence of Arcclcr-1260 in che vicinity cf the trench area. Polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons (?AH:=) ~.:z~= also c^:^-~i-:.. vith the highest concentration of total
PAHs equaling 40,590 ^ig/kg. The highest concentration cf lead was 168 milligrams
per kilogram (mg/kg} in a surf'.cs soil cc.rvrle collected adlacent to th= trench.
As mentioned above, the FEE identified PCBs and leaH as CPCs. The supplemental
investigation identified FAHs a crd=r cf magnitude higher than the original
remedial field investigation. Th3refere. analytical action (clean-up) levels were
established for ?C3s, lead, and PAHs. The action levels as described in the
Focused Feasibility Study report (AB3-ES, 1995) for the PSC 8 IRA are: (1) total
PCBs, 1 rog/kg; (2) lead, 100 mg/kg; and (3) total PAHs, 10 mg/kg. The soil action
level for lead has been reduced tc 75 -:/".;-.
PSCSBCD.NEW
PMW.09.95
-------
CHAPTER 7.0
-------
.0 DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES
ev:i i revi •--•- ci literature to identify treatr..cnt technologies capable of treating
soil contaminated by ?CBs, PAKs , and lead. Three conventional techniques were
evaluated as alte.rnativ3s to remediate. ?SC S, trench area soil: (1) containment.
(2) collection combined with off-base treatment and disposal, and (3) collection
combined with off-base disposal.
Th:-. follcvir.g is a description of the alternatives evaluated fcr ?SC 8 and
associciusd costs.
/ . 1 ALTERNATIVE lip. 1. KULTI-LAYER CAP. This alternative incorporates the
construction of a clayey-sand layer; a flexible, impermeable membrane liner; and
a layer of clean sand above the surface of the contaminated areas. The surface
layer consists of s. concrete slab. In addition, concrete walls vould be
constructed to house the slab. The surficial capping of PSC 8 would reduce the
infiltration of surface water, minimize potential migration of the contaminants,
and prevent exposure to burrowing mammals. Land use restrictions and ongoing
operations and maintenance (Of^M) wrv.ld clso be imc'leniented. O&M vould require
regular inspection of the concrete and any necessary repairs.
atcd c^pitil costs-: $ 19,550
Estimated present vcrth CiM costs: $ 9,220
Estimated present worth costs: $ 28,770
Estimated implementation time fran;e : 6 weeks
7.2 ALTERNATIVE HO. 2. Er.CAV/.TIOi;. IKCIKS5ATIOK. AND DISPOSAL. This alternative
involves excavation of the soil contaminated above action levels at PSC 8 and the
transportation of this soil (approximately 60 cubic yardr) tc an off-base TSCA
permitted incinerator fcr trszt^er.t followed by disposal cf the residua?1 ash ?.r.
an r.cr_-'. facility. T;.-e iricinsracion of the soil would potentially destroy up to
99.9 percent of the organic contaminants.
Confirmatory sampling of the walls and floor of the excavation area would be
conducted to ensure complete removal of soil that has been contaminated above
action levels. Restoration of trench area would follow excavation when action
levels are met.
Estimated capital costs: $ 212,990
Estimated present worth O&M costs: $ 0
Estimated present worth costs: $ 212,990
Estimated implementation time frame: 2 weeks
7.3 ALTERNATIVE NO. 3. EXCAVATION AND DISPOSAL AT TSCA LANDFILL. This
alternative requires excavation of the soil contaminated above action levels from
PSC S and its disposal at an off-base TSCA or RCRA landfill. The type of landfill
would be determined by PCB Concentrations. Confirmatory sampling of the walls
and floors of the excavation area would be conducted to ensure complete removal
PSC8SROD.NEW
OIH.06.95 7-1
-------
CHAPTER 8.0
-------
3.0 SUMMARY OF COMPARATIVE' ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES
The following is an evaluation of the alternatives considered J:or the ISA at
O
8.1 OVESALL PROTECTION OF HUfiAS HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT. Alternatives No.
2 and 3 provide the greatest protection for the public health and 3r.vircr_?.enr. ac
PSC 8. These alternatives eliminate the existing and potential future exposure
oatnvays nor trie puo_ic ^n-i- t.":v ir.1' ..r ^r-Ti-^nt.
Alternative No. 1 provides protection for the public and environment through the
in-place containment of the contaminated soil. This would be effective for
eliminating the existing exposure pathways, provided there is on-going security
and maintenance at ?SC S. Alternative So. 4 ;nc action) provides no proteccicn
to human health or the environment.
The first thras -7_\ ^Iter-ativs^ ••'.1". acr.iv" compliance vith the location-
specific and action-specific AJIAR:; -Jir.c guidance criteria. Air quality regulatory
compliance must be ensured, and required en.gir.asring controls must oe i~iplscentec
during the excavation, transportation, or regrading of the soil. Alternative NTc.
4 would noc achieve ccE^liar.;; -.;ic'.-. ;".-=nical-3-3cif ic A?_\3.s .
3.3 LOHG-TSSIi 2r?ZCTIVZaSS3 A?1D r^Rl^AaSHCc:. Alternative ;io. 2 previews the
destroys the PCBs and ?AHs detected in the soil. Alternatives No. 1 and 3 rely
scrictl" en tha in-plaza ~".~~~.r~.2~~ ~~ direct burial o:c the cor.tar.inated sell
at a landfill. A.lternative No. 1 has a design life expectancy of approximately
30 years. PCBs, PAHs, and lead are relatively stable compounds. Therefore, s.
re-evaluation of tha cap's structural integrity '.-rould be necessary after 30 years.
There is z. potential risk a.32cci^.:ic --rich uncontrolled exposure tc the C?Cc; at
PSC 8. Therefore, the no action alternative would not protect potential receptors
in the future.
8.4 REDUCTION 0? TOXICITY, MOBILITY. AND VOLUHS THROUGH TREATMENT. Alternative
No. 2 destroys the PCBs and PAHs E: rSC 3 through -harmal treatment, thereby
reducing tha toxicity and rcbility of tha C7niar:inants. Lead, hc-.-ever. is
unaffected by the thermal treatment.
Tne first three.alternatives vili reduce the aobility of the contaminants through
containment either onsite or at an approved facility. None of the remedial
alternatives will elisinats or reduce tb.3 - laac. concentration of PSC S soil.
PSCSIROD.NEVy
OLH.Oa.9S
-------
CHAPTER 3.0
-------
9.0 SELECTED REMEDY
Based or. the comparative analyses of alternatives, the recommended IRA alternative
is Alternative No. 3, excavation and disposal at a TSCA or RCRA-permitted
landfill. Both Alternative No. 2, excavation and incineration, and Alternative
No. 3 meet the IRA objectives, including the ability to meet the proposed target
clean-up levels and compliance with identified ARARs. The first three
alternatives require conventional technology, with the necessary equipment readily
available. The differentiating factor that makes Alternative No. 3 more
attractive than No. 2 is cost. Alternatives No. 1 and 4 vould not meet the clean-
up objectives, and therefore would not ba protective of human health and
environment should land use at ?SC 8 change. Also, Alternative No. 1 would
require a structural re-evaluation after 30 years.
9,1 PvSMEDIAL GOALS. The specific objectives of the selected IRA are to: (1)
minimize the potential for direct human and ecological exposure to hazardous
natarials, and (2) control the potential for r^leass- cf hnzarciouo substances to
ths surface vacsr and groundwacer at ?CC 3.
This is an interim action that addresses a part of OU 5. Other media at PSC 8.
are being investigated concurrently with PSC 14 as part of an overall OU 5
evaluation. The actions described in this ROD are intended to be an IRA for the
trench area soil in PSC 8 only. Any remaining contamination at PSC 8 will be
evaluated (by sampling) as part of remedial actions to comply with the Base permit
under the Georgia Hazardous Vasts Management Act (GHWMA).
This IRA will be monitored carefully to ensure rsaoval of contaminants above
action levels. Once the IRA and RI/FS process is complete, a final ROD will be
prepared for OU 5.
PSC81HOO.NEW
OLH.oe.95
-------
CHAPTER 10.0
-------
10 . 0 STATUTORY 5ETEIUIIKATIGNS
Under its legal authorities, USEPA's primary responsibility at Superfund sites
is co conduce remedial actions tnat achieve adequate protection of human health
and the environment. Section 121 of CERCLA establishes several other statutory
requirements and preferences. These specify that when complete, the selected
remedial action for a site must: comply with applicable or relevant and appropriate
environmental standards established under federal and stace environmental laws
unless a statutory waiver is justified. The selected remedy also muse be cost
eirective and use perrr.ar.snc solutions, ait3rr.a~i~.~s crescrr.snc tecnr.clcgies , or
resource recovery technologies co ~hs "sxinvuir. e:-;~ent practicable. Finally, the
statute includes a preference fcr remedies that employ treatments that permanently
and significantly reduce the volume, toxicity, or mobility of hazardous wastes
as their principal element. The following sections discuss how the selected
remedy meets these statutory requirements.
3, ei-icavazion and off-base disposal ac a T5C.~ facility, will procect human health
and environment from potentially adverse axpcsurs risl-:s associated with the
current use of the PSC.
10.2 COHPLIANCE VITK APPLICABLE OR RELEVANT AMD APPROPRIATE REQUIREMENTS (ARARs) .
The selected IRA for PSC 8 will comply with ARARs. The following were identified
as ARARs for CU 5, PSC 3.
Clean Air Act (CAA), National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), and
National Emissions Standards fcr Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs), 40 CFR
— —i _ ^ / *"' t*1 -~i f "i
^>J <=I~.C ^iu urri '0^.
USEPA regulations on Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans, 40
CFR Part 52 (Subpart L-Gaorgia).
Occupational Safety and Kealcl- Act (OSKA) regulations for air ccncaminancs ,
29 CFR 1910.1000. •
RCRA General and Locacion Standards for Permitted Hazardous waste Facilities ,
40 CFR' 264 (Subparts A through F) .
USEPA Rules for Controlling ?C3s under che Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA) , 40 CFR 751.125 (Subpart: J, G, and K) .
Georgia Hazardous Waste Management Act, Official Code of Georgia, Annotated
(OCGA) Section 12-3-60 et seq. and Rules, Section 391-3-11.
Georgia Air Quality Act of 1978. CCGA Section 12-9-1 et seq. and Sec-ion 391-
Encangered Species Act, 16 USC 1531. 50 CFR Parrs -.1. 225. and 402.
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Facility Location Regulations, 40 CFR
Part 264.18. .
PSCSRGD..NEW
CLM.oa.S5 10-1
-------
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act and FWS and NR-7S Advisories. 16 USC 661.
Fish ana Wildlife Conservation Act of 1930, 16 USC 2301, 50 CFR Fart £3.
National Historic Preservation Act, 16 USC 470.
Archaeological E.esources Protection Act, 32 CFR Part 229, 43 CF?. Parts 107
through 171.500.
Endangered Wildlife and Wiidflover Preservation Act of 1973, CCGA Section
RCRA Closure and Post-Closure Requirements, 40 CFR 264 (Subpart G) .
RCRA Regulations for Generators of. Hazardous Waste, 40 CFR 252.
RCRA Transportation Regulations and Department of Transportation (DOT) Stand-
ards , 40 CFR 253 and 49 CFR (Parts 171 through 179)."
CAA NAAOS for particulstes, 40 CFR 50.
PvCRA Standards for Environmental Performance cf Miscellaneous Units, 40 CFR
264, Subpart X.
RCRA Fiegulaticns on Land Disposal r.esevictions (Land Ban), 4Q CF?,. 265.
RCRA regulations for Use and Mav.£g£.r.":e:.\t G £ Ccr.tair.evs , —0 C~?v '-".-, Sub-part
I.
RCRA Regulations for Waste Piles, 40 CFR 264, Subpart L.
E.CRA Incinerator Standards, 40 CFR, Subpart 0.
OS HA General Industry Standards, Reccrckeeping ar.d Reporting, ar.d Standards
for Hazardous Waste Site Operations, 29 CFR Part 1926, and 29 CFR Part 1904,
29 CFR Part 1910.
USEPA Rules for Controlling ?CBs under the Tc:cic Substances Control Act
(TSCA), 40 CFR 761, Subparts D, G, and K.
Field Manual for Grid Sampling of FC3 Spill Sites Co Verify Cleanup, EPA-
560/5-86-017.
Georgia Air Quality Control Law and Georgia Air Quality Control Rules, OCGA
Section 12-9, GDN7R Chapter 391-3-1.
iJatcr U'ell Standards Act of 1991. OCGA Section 12-5-120 et seq.
Georgia Comprehensive Solid Waste Miir.ssemsr.t Act. OCGA Section 12-5-20 et
PSC8IROD.NEW
p^/w.o^.^s -;0-2
-------
The IRA for PSC 8 will meet the health-based ARARs through rescval of di
contaminants to the action levels established.
10.3 COST EFFECTIVENESS. The sslacted IRA for OU 5, PSC 8, has been determined
to provide overall effectiveness proportional to its cost. The selected IRA for
PSC 8 is protective of public health and the environment and is less expensive
than Alternative No. 2, excavation, incineration, and off-base disposal.
10.4 UTILIZATION OF PERMANENT SOLUTIONS AND ALT2P.MATIVE TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES
(OR RESOURCE RECOVERY TECHNOLOGIES':' TO TI-IZ _:iAXi:flJH EXTENT PRACTICABLE. It has
been determined that the selected IRA for PSC 3 represents the maximum extent to
which treatment technologies can be used in a cost-effective manner. The selected
IRA provides the best balance of tradeoffs in terras of reduction in toxicity,
mobility, or volume achieved through treatment, short-term effectiveness,
implementability, and cost, while also considering the statutory preference for
treatment as a principle element and considering srsca and community acceptance.
Based on the design criteria used fo" cl-a IRA, chs sclsctad alternative can be
incorporated into a final full-seals r=~ed:Lal action at OU 5.
10.5 PREFERENCE FOR TREATMENT AS A PRINCIPAL SLS-GNT. Although the remedial
action for PSC 8 is an IRA, the statutory preference for remedies that employ
treatment as the principal element will be satisfied for OU 5 in a final decision
document.
10.6 DOCUMENTATION OF SIGNIFICANT CKANGSS. No significant changes from tha
Proposed Plan were made.
PSC8IROO.NEW
OLH.M.95 10-C
-------
REFERENCES
-------
REFERENCES
GEPD, 1995, Guidance on Soil Concentrations for Type 1 and Type 3 Risk Reduction
Standards, Georgia Department of "atural Resources, Rules for Hazardous Site
Response, Section 391-19-07, March.
Hicks, D.W., Gill, H.E., and Longsvorth, S.A., 1987, Hydrogeology, Chemical
Quality, and Availability of Groundwater in the Upper Floridan Aquifer,
Albany Area, Georgia: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations
Report 87-4145, 52 p.
Torak, L.J., Davis, G.S., Strain, G.A., and Herndon, J.G., 1991, Geohydrology and
Evaluation of Water-Resource Potential of the Upper Floridan Aquifer in the
Albany Area, Southwestern Georgia: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report
91-52, 86 p.
PSC8IROO.NEW
OLH.oa.9S Ref-1
-------
APPENDIX A
-------
APFcrtDJX A
COMMUNITY RELATIONS RESPONSIVENESS
-------
COMMUNITY RELATIONS RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARY
1.0 OVERVIEW
MCL3 Albany along with SOUTHNAVFACENGCOM held a public meeting en May 4, 1995,
at MCLB Albany to discuss the Proposed Plan for the IRA for PSC 8 and solicit
comments and 'questions from the public. However, no citizens attended.
Accordingly, no questions or comments were received during the public meeting.
In addition, no written comments or questions were received from the public.
2.0 BACKGROUND ON COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT
An active community relations program providing information and soliciting input
has been conducted by MCLB Albany for OU 5, PSC 8. Interviews of citizens on Base
and in Albany were conducted in the spring of 1990 to identify community concerns.
No significant concerns that required focused response were identified. Most
comments received were concerning the potential- for contamination of water
resources. However, those interviewed indicated chat they place great trust in
MCLB Albany and chair efforts to rectify pa.sc vasts disposal practices. In
addition, the Base has formed a Technical Review Cojnmiccss that includes members
representing the City of Albany and Dougherty County. The local media has also
been kept informed since MCLB Albany was placed on the NPL. Installation
Restoration (IR) Program fact sheets have been prepared and made available at the
Public Affairs Office at MCLB Albany. Documents concerning OU 5, PSC 8 are
located in the Information Repository at Dougherty County Public Library, and the
Administrative Record at the Base Environmental Branch office.
3.0 SUMMARY OF PUBLIC COMMENT AND AGENCY RESPONSE
3.1 PUBLIC MEETING
No comments or questions were received during the Public Meeting held on May 4,
1995.
3.2 PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD
Comments and questions received during the public comment period from April 28
to June 12, 1995 are summarized below.
3.2.1 Technical Comments and Questions
No technical comments and questions were received during the public comment
period.
3.2.2 Other Comments and Questions
No other comments and questions were received during the public comment period.
PSC8IROO.NEW
OLH.06.95 A-1
-------
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
PSC 0 Interim Remedial Action Record of Decision
Marine Corps Logistics Base Albany
Albany, Georgia
Commenl Page/Para. Comment
Response
Comments from Georgia Department of Natural Resources
t Section 10.2 References to the Georgia Code are inconsistent throughout the list of
ARARs. The first citation of Georgia law should bo to tlio Official Code of
Georgia Annotated (OCGA). The abbreviation OCGA may be used
thereafter.
2 Section 10.2 1 ho list of ARARs cites tho Georgia Hazardous Waste Management Act and
Rules twice. These citations appeal on page 10-2 (Georgia Hazardous
Waste Management Act, Official Code of Georgia [Annotated] (OCGA)
Section 12-8-60 et. seq. arid Rules, Chapter 391-3-11). The Georgia
Hazardous Waste Management Act is also cited on pago 10-3 (Georgia
Hazardous Wasto Manatjmnont Act. Code of Georgia, Title 12, Chapter 6,
Ailicle 3). Tho citation on page 10-3, in addition to being redundant, also
includes the Georgia Hazardous Site Response Act, which has not been
identified as an ARAR for tho site. The citation of page 10-3 should be
deleted. The Rules for Hazardous Wasto Management are cited a second
time on page 10-4. This citation should be deleted.
The references to tho Georgia Code in Section 10.2 have been
revised as requested.
Tho second reference to the GHWMA has beon deleted from
page 10-3. The reference to the Georgia Hnziiidous Site
Response Act was listed as an ARAR because MOLD Albany is
listed as #10094 on the Hazardous Site Invontory, Hazardous
Site Response Rules 391-3-19-.05. The second leference to the
Hazardous Wasto Management Rules has been deleted from
Page 10-4.
Comments from U.S. EPA
1 Page 8-2 The first sentence should read as follows: "There is potential risk associated
with uncontrolled exposure to the CPCs at PSC 8."
2 Page 10-5 Replace the section with the following sentence: "No significant changes
Section 10.6 fiom the Proposed Plan weie made.
The text has been revised as requested.
Section 10.6 has beon replaced as requested.
N.Vl
------- |