United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Off tee of
Emergency and
Remedial Response
EPA/ROD/R02-93/216
September 1993
PB94-963829
SEPA Superfund
Record of Decision
Naval Air Engineering Center
(Operable Unit 22), NJ
-------
50272-101
REPORT DOCUMENTATION
PAGE
1. REPORT NO.
EPA/ROD/R02-93/216
3. Recipient's Accession No.
4. THIe and Subtitle
SUPERFUND RECORD OF DECISION
Naval Air Engineering Center (Operable Unit 22) , NJ
Sixteenth Remedial Action
5. Report Oat*
09/27/93
6.
7. Aulhor(s)
8. Performing Organization Rept. No.
9. Performing Organization Name and Address
10 Project Task/Work Unit No.
11. Contraet(C) or Grant(G) No.
(C)
(0
12. Sponsoring Organization Nam* and Address
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
13. Typs of Report & Period Covered
800/800
14.
15. Supplementary Notes
PB94-963829
16. Abstract (Limit: 200 words)
The Naval Air Engineering Center (Operable Unit 22) site is part of the 7,400-acre
Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division located in Lakehurst, Ocean County, New
Jersey, approximately 14 miles inland from the Atlantic Ocean. Land use in the area is
mixed undeveloped woodlands, open areas, and light commercial and industrial areas,
with the closest residential area, the Borough of Lakehurst, located southeast of the
facility. The Naval Air Engineering Center (NAEC), which lies within the Toms River
Drainage Basin, contains over 1,300 acres of flood-prone areas. The estimated 65,400
people who reside in the vicinity of the NAEC, use municipal wells to obtain their
drinking water supply. Some private wells exist, but these are used primarily for
irrigation purposes. In 1916, Eddystone Chemical Company leased the property to
develop an experimental firing range for testing chemical artillery shells. In 1919,
the U.S. Navy assumed control of the property, and it formally was commissioned Naval
Air Station (NAS) Lakehurst in 1921. In 1974, the NAEC was moved from the Naval Base
in Philadelphia to NAS Lakehurst. The NAEC's mission is to conduct research,
development, engineering, testing and systems integration, limited production, and
procurement for aircraft and airborne weapons systems. Historically, various
operations at NAEC have required the use, handling, storage, and occasional onsite
(See Attached Page)
17. Document Analysis a. Descriptors
Record of Decision - Naval Air Engineering Center (Operable Unit 22), NJ
Sixteenth Remedial Action
Contaminated Medium: None
Key Contaminants: None
b. Identlfiero/Open-Ended Terms
c. COSATI Field/Group
18. Availability Statement
19. Security Class (This Report)
None
20. Security Class (This Page)
None .
21. No. of Pages
19
22. Price
(SeeANSI-Z39.18)
5*0 Instructions on Rtvene
OPTIONAL FORM 272 (4-77)
(Formerly NTIS-35)
Department of Commerce
-------
EPA/ROD/R02-93/216
Naval Air Engineering Center (Operable Unit 22), NJ
Sixteenth Remedial Action
Abstract (Continued)
disposal of hazardous substances. During the operational period of the facility, there
have been reported and suspected releases of these substances into the environment. The
Department of Defense's Installation Restoration Program (IRP) has identified 44
potentially-contaminated sites at NAEC, 16 of which have warranted further investigation
to assess potential impacts. IRP investigations revealed potential soil and ground water
contamination at the Tetraethyl Lead Disposal Site (Site 20); which is located in Area G,
northeast of the launch end of the test tracks and which transects the parachute jump
circle. During the 1960s and possibly the 1970s, the 15,000 ft2 site reportedly was used
during various Naval activities for disposal of contaminated aviation gasoline. In
addition, it is suspected that the site may have been used for the burial of tetraethyl
lead, which is a suspected carcinogen and a potentially deadly poison. Two investigations
conducted in 1980 and 1981 indicated the presence of VOCs and metals in soil and ground
water at Site 20. Subsequent investigations conducted from 1985 through 1992 did not
confirm the presence of these contaminants and indicated that there was no significant
contamination associated with Site 20. In May 1992, a field investigation led to the
discovery of old steel runway matting material buried 4 to 6 inches below ground surface
adjacent to the site. In June 1992, the steel matting was removed and a small-scale
excavation was conducted to investigate the area under the matting. During the
excavation, approximately 80 ft2 of a black rubber material was discovered 2 feet below
ground surface. This material was sampled and analyzed for hazardous properties; and,
after the results indicated no hazardous characteristics, the material was removed and
disposed of as nonhazardous waste. Additional sampling of soil and ground water in the
excavation did not indicate any significant contamination. Previous 1991 and 1992 RODs
addressed OUs 1, 2, 3, and 4, and 5, 6, and 7, respectively. This ROD addresses any soil
and ground water contamination at Site 20, as OU22. Other 1993 RODs address OUs 8, 9, 10,
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 23. EPA has determined that the site does not present a threat to
human health and the environment and that there is no need to conduct cleanup activities;
therefore, there are no contaminants of concern affecting this site.
The selected remedial action for this site is no further action, with ground water
monitoring. EPA has determined that there is no significant contamination at the site and
that site conditions pose.no risk to human health and the environment. However, a five
year monitoring plan will be implemented to ensure continued compliance with ground water
standards and to monitor the risk to human health and the environment. There are no
present worth or O&M costs associated with this no action remedy.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS:
Not applicable.
-------
ROD FACT SHEET
SITE
Name :
Location/State :
EPA Region :
HRS Score (date):
NAWC Lakehurst
Lakehurst, New Jersey
II
49.48 (July 22, 1987)
ROD
Date Signed:
Remedy:
Operating Unit Number:
Capital cost:
Construction Completion:
O & M in 1993:
1994:
1995:
1996:
Present worth:
September 27, 1993
No Action
OU-22 (Site 20)
No Cost
N/A
N/A
N/A
LEAD
Enforcement
Federal Facility
Primary contact
Secondary contact
Main PRP
PRP Contact
Jeffrey Gratz (212) 264-6667
Robert Wing (212) 264-8670
U.S. Navy
Lucy Bottomley (908) 323-2612
WASTE
Type
Medium
Origin
Est. quantity
Lead
Soil
Spills
N/A
-------
LAKEHURST
RECORD OF DECISION
FOR
SITE 20
NAVAL AIR WARFARE CENTER
AIRCRAFT DIVISION
LAKEHURST, NEW JERSEY
September 14, 1993
93-09-10
-------
RECORD OF DECISION
DECLARATION
SITE 20
NAVAL AIR WARFARE CENTER
AIRCRAFT DIVISION
LAKEHURST, NEW JERSEY
FACILITY NAME AND LOCATION
Naval Air Warfare Center
Aircraft Division
Lakehurst, New Jersey 08733
STATEMENT OF BASIS AND PURPOSE
This decision document presents the selected action for one site
(Site 20), located at the Naval Air Warfare Center, Aircraft
Division (NAWCADLKE) in Lakehurst, New Jersey (Figure 1) . The
selected remedial action was chosen in accordance with the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability
Act (CERCLA) , as amended by the Super fund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act (SARA) , and, to the extent practicable, the
National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan.
This decision is based on the administrative record for these
sites, which is available for public review at the Ocean County
Library, 101 Washington Street, Toms River, New Jersey.
Both the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA),
Region II Acting Administrator, and the Commissioner of the New
Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and Energy (NJDEPE)
concur with the selected remedy.
DESCRIPTION OF THE SELECTED REMEDY
Based on the inconsistencies in the data supplied by numerous
groundwater sampling rounds, the United States Department of the
Navy, has selected the "No Action" alternative for Site 20.
-------
SEP 22 '93 6:53 FROM PUBLIC UIORKS-ftDMIN. . PAGE. 002
DECIARATION-,STATEMENT
The United States Department of the Navy and the United States
Environmental Protection Agency have determined that no remedial
action is necessary at Site 20 to ensure protection of human health
and the environment.
This Record of Decision concerns Site 20 only. The location of the
site within NAWCADLKE is shown in Figure 2. Other areas of concern
at NAWCADLKE have been or will be the subject of separate studies
and Records of Decision.
aptain LeroylFarr (Date)
Commanding Officer
Naval Air Warfare Center
Aircraft Division
Lakehurst, New Jersey
With the concurrence of:
William J. JMszynsl^^P.E. (Date)
Acting Regional Administrator
U.S. Environmental -Protection Agency
Region II
-------
SITE-DESCRIPTION
NAWCADLKE is located in Jackson and Manchester Townships/ Ocean
County, New Jersey, approximately 14 miles inland from the Atlantic
Ocean (Figure i) . NAWCADLKE is approximately 7,400 acres and is
bordered by Route 547 to the east, the Fort Dix Military
Reservation to the west, woodland to the north (portions of which
are within Colliers Mills Wildlife Management Area), Lakehurst
Borough and woodland, including the Manchester Wildlife Management
Area, to the south. NAWCADLKE and the surrounding area are located
within the Pinelands National Reserve, the most extensive
undeveloped land tract of the Middle Atlantic -Seaboard. The
groundwater at NAWCADLKE is classified by NJDEPE as Class I-PL
(Pinelands).
NAWCADLKE lies within the Outer Coastal Plain physiographic
province, which is characterized by gently rolling terrain with
minimal relief. Surface elevations within NAWCADLKE range from a
low of approximately 60 feet above mean sea level in the east-
central part of the base, to a high of approximately 190 feet above
mean sea level in the southwestern part of the base. Maximum
relief occurs in the southwestern part of the base because of its
proximity to the more rolling terrain of the Inner Coastal Plain.
Surface slopes are generally less than five percent.
NAWCADLKE lies within the Toms River Drainage Basin. The basin is
relatively small (191 square miles) and the residence time for
surface drainage waters is short. Drainage from NAWCADLKE
discharges to the Ridgeway Branch to the north and to the Black and
Union Branches to the south. All three streams discharge into the
Toms River. Several headwater tributaries to these branches
originate at NAWCADLKE. Northern tributaries to the Ridgeway
Branch include the Elisha, Success, Harris and Obhanan Ridgeway
Branches. The southern tributaries to the Black and Union Branches
include the North Ruckles and Middle Ruckles Branches and the
Manapagua Brook. The Ridgeway and Union Branches then feed Pine
Lake; Located approximately 2.5 miles east of NAWCADLKE before
joining Toms River. Storm drainage from NAWCADLKE is divided
between the north and south, discharging into the Ridgeway Branch
and Union Branch, respectively. The Paint Branch, located in the
east-central part of the base, is a relatively small stream which
feeds the Manapagua Brook.
Three small water bodies are located in the Western portion of
NAWCADLKE; Bass Lake, Clubhouse Lake, and Pickerel Pond.
NAWCADLKE also contains over 1,300 acres of flood-prone areas,
occurring primarily in the south-central part of the base, and
approximately 1,300 acres of prime agricultural land in the western
portion of the base.
There are 913 acres on the eastern portion of NAWCADLKE that lie
within Manchester Township and the remaining acreage is in Jackson
-------
NAVAL AIR WARFARE CENTER
AIRCRAFT DIVISION", LAKEKURS7
AND NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES
NORTH
FIGURE 1. LOCATION MAP
-------
Township. The combined population of Lakehurst Borough, Manchester
and Jackson Townships is approximately 65,400, for an area of
approximately 185 square miles. The average population density of
Manchester and Jackson Townships is 169 persons per square mile.
The areas surrounding NAWCADLKE are, in general, not heavily
developed. The closest commercial area is located near the
southeastern section of the facility in the borough of Lakehurst.
This is primarily a residential area with some shops but no
industry. To the north and south are State wildlife management
areas which are essentially undeveloped. Adjacent to and south of
NAWCADLKE are commercial cranberry bogs, the drainage from which
crosses the southeast section of NAWCADLKE property.
For the combined area of Manchester and Jackson Townships,
approximately 41 percent of the land is vacant (undeveloped), 57
percent is residential, one percent is commercial and the remaining
one percent is industrial or farmed. For Lakehurst Borough, 83
percent of the land is residential, 11:.percent is vacant and the
remaining 6 percent commercially developed.
In the vicinity of NAWCADLKE, water is generally supplied to the
populace by municipal supply wells. Some private wells exist, but
these are used primarily for irrigation and not as a source of
drinking water. In Lakehurst Borough there is a well field
consisting of seven 50-foot deep wells, located approximately two-
thirds of a mile south of the eastern portion of NAWCADLKE. Three
of the seven wells (four of the wells are rarely operated) are
pumped at an average of 70 to 90 gallons per minute and supply
drinking water for a population of approximately 3,000. Jackson
Township operates one supply well in the Legler area, approximately
one-quarter mile north of NAWCADLKE, which supplies water to a very
small population (probably less than 1,000) in the immediate
vicinity of NAWCADLKE.
The history of the site dates back to 1916, when the Eddy stone
Chemical Company leased from the Manchester Land Development
Company property to develop an experimental firing range for the
testing of chemical artillery shells. In 1919, the U.S. Army
assumed control of the site and named it .Camp Kendrick. Camp
Kendrick was turned over to the Navy and formally commissioned
Naval Air Station (NAS) Lakehurst, New Jersey on June 28, 1921.
The Naval Air Engineering Center (NAEC) was moved from the Naval
Base, Philadelphia to Lakehurst in December 1974. At that time,
NAEC became the host activity, thus, the new name NAEC. In January
1992, NAEC was renamed the Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft
Division Lakehurst, due to a reorganization within the Department
of the Navy.
Currently, NAWCADLKE's mission is to conduct programs of technology
development, engineering, developmental evaluation and
verification, systems integration, limited manufacturing,
-------
procurement, integrated logistic support management, and fleet
engineering support for Aircraft-Platform Interface (API) systems.
This includes terminal guidance, recovery, handling, propulsion
support, avionics support, servicing and maintenance,
aircraft/weapons/ship compatibility, and takeoff. The Center
provides, operates, maintains product evaluation and verification
sites, aviation and other facilities, and support services
(including development of equipment and instrumentation) for API
systems and other Department of Defense programs. The Center also
provides facilities and support services for tenant activities and
units as designed by appropriate authority.
NAWCADLKE and its tenant activities now occupy more than 300
buildings, built between 1919 and 1989, totaling over 2,845,000
square feet.- The command also operates and maintains: two 5,000-
foot long runways, a 12,000-foot long catapult and arrest runway,
one-mile long jet car test track, four one and one-quarter mile
long jet car test tracks, a parachute jump circle, a 79-acre golf
course, and a 3,500-acre conservation area.
In the past, various operations and activities at the Center
required the use, handling, storage and occasionally the on-site
disposal of hazardous substances. During the operational period of
the facility, there have been documented, reported or suspected
releases of these substances into the environment.
INITIAL INVESTIGATIONS
As part of the DOD Installation Restoration Program and 'the Navy
Assessment and Control of Installation Pollutants (NACIP) program,
an initial Assessment Study was conducted in 1983 to identify and
assess sites posing a potential threat to human health or the
environment due to contamination from past hazardous materials
operations. •
Based on information from historical records, aerial photographs,
field inspections, and personnel interviews, the study identified
a total of 44 potentially contaminated sites. An additional site,
Bomarc, was also investigated by NAWCADLKE. The Bomarc Site is the
responsibility of the U.S. Air Force and is located on Fort Dix
adjacent to the .western portion of NAWCADLKE. A remedial
Investigation (RI) was recommended to confirm or deny the existence
of the suspected contamination and to quantify the extent of any
problems which may exist. Following further review of available
data by Navy personnel, it was decided that 42 of the 44 sites
should be included in the RI. Two potentially contaminated sites,
an ordnance site (Site 41) and an Advanced Underground Storage
Facility (Site 43) , were deleted from the RI because they had
already been addressed. In 1987 NAWCADLKE was designated as a
National Priorities List (NPL) or Superfund site under the federal
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability
Act (CERCLA).
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTIGATIONS
Phase I of the Remedial Investigation (Rl-Phase I) was conducted
from 1985 to 1987 to (a) confirm or refute the existence of
contamination at potentially contaminated sites identified during
the previous studies; and (b) develop recommendations for further
Phase II investigations. The results of the Rl-Phase I were
presented in a report issued in 1987.
Phase II of the RI was initiated in the summer of 1988 to: (a)
confirm the results of the Phase I study, specifically the presence
or absence of contamination; (b) identify where contamination is
located; (c) assess the potential for contaminant migration; (d)
define the sources of contamination; and (e) support a feasibility
study and final actions at the sites. Based on the results of the
Phase II Investigation, several remedial actions were initiated.
Phase III of the RI was initiated in the summer of 1991 to: (a)
confirm the presence or absence of contamination at sites where the
results of previous investigations were not definitive; (b)
delineate the lateral and vertical extent of contamination; (c)
collect and evaluate data to perform a risk assessment and assess
the need for remedial action at sites.
These investigations indicated that there is no contamination above
NJDEPE soil cleanup criteria, Class I-PL (Pinelands) groundwater
criteria, Federal Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) or EPA risk
based levels.
STATUTORY DETERMINATIONS
The NJDEPE soil cleanup criteria (SCC) are To Be Considered (TBC)
criteria for determining the need for site cleanup. Although the
NJDEPE SCC are not promulgated requirements, these criteria are
considered an appropriate means by which to assess the risk to
human health and the environment posed by contaminants found in
soil. Therefore, NAWCADLKE has been determining the need for site
cleanup based upon NJDEPE SCC as well as EPA risk-based levels and
other factors, such as aiding the effectiveness and duration of
existing groundwater remediation systems.
The cleanup criteria provide health based levels for residential
use, non-residential use and impact to groundwater (subsurface)
land uses and/or impacts. NAWCADLKE has assumed a non-residential
land use due to its mission and facilities is support of Naval
aviation. Due to our location in the Pinelands National Preserve
(Class I-PL (Pinelands)) and the shallow groundwater table, the
most stringent of the surface and subsurface (impact to
groundwater) non-residential cleanup criteria have been utilized in
our site comparisons.
-------
To satisfy the requirement for establishing EPA risk-based clean-up
criteria, an Endangerment Assessment was performed in October 1992
which included calculated Preliminary Remedial Goals or PRGs. The
PRGs are chemical specific criteria which were developed using fate
and transport and the exposure equations associated with the
relevant pathways. The PRGs determined by calculation the
contaminant concentrations in affected media that would result in
acceptable exposure levels. PRGs were developed for each site
based upon one or more (current or potential) land-use scenarios..
Typically the NJDEPE SCC are more stringent than the calculated
PRGs. With this in mind, the SCC are also considered preliminary
clean-up goals at those sites which are determined to require
active remediation.
EPA considers drinking water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs),
Maximum Contaminant Level Goals (MCLGs) , and State Practical
Quantitation Levels (PQLs) to be potential ARARs for groundwater.
The determination of exactly which requirements are applicable or
relevant and appropriate to a particular Superfund site should be
made on a site-specific basis.
Primary MCLs are Federally enforceable contaminant levels allowable
in public drinking water supplies. They have been established from
health-based data by EPA's Office of Drinking Water and are
described in the National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (40
CFR 141) established under the authority of the Safe Drinking Water
Act. MCLs are periodically revised as more information becomes
available. When MCLs are not available, proposed MCLs (PMCLs) are
used for the comparison criteria for some analytes.
On 13 January 1993, the Commissioner of the New Jersey Department
of Environmental Protection and Energy signed the revised N.J.A.C.
7:9-6 which include the Groundwater Quality Criteria. The Criteria
establish the groundwater classifications for the Pinelands,
including Class I-PL (Preservation Area) and Class I-PL (Protection
Area) . The actual groundwater criteria are the natural quality and
background quality, respectively (N.J.A.C. 7:9-6.7). Under these
revised groundwater quality standards, NAWCADLKE groundwater is
classified.as Class I-PL (Pinelands).
Practical Quantitation Levels (PQLs) are the lowest concentration
of a constituent that can be reliably achieved among laboratories
within specified (N.J.A.C. 7:9-6.9) limits of precision and
accuracy during routine laboratory operating conditions. PQLs are
considered to be ARARs.
Site 20 Description and Background
Site 20 is located in Area G which is in the north central portion
of the NAWCADLKE, northeast of the launch end of the test tracks
-------
and along the west perimeter of the parachute jump circle. No
buildings, structures or utilities are present in Area G.
Site 20 is located along the north side of Johnston Road, which
transects the parachute jump circle. The nearest NAWCADLKE
boundary is about 1435 feet to the north. . The area is heavily
wooded, although the immediate site is now cleared due to recent
investigative activity. A pit, roughly 10 feet wide by 20 feet
long by 5 feet deep, is located next to the road (see Figure 2).
The general direction of groundwater flow in Area G is
northeasterly. In this area, groundwater is encountered at a depth
of approximately 5 feet.
It was reported that this site, which measures roughly 100 feet by
150 feet, was used by various Naval activities operating at
Lakehurst during the 1960's (and possibly into the early 1970's)
for the disposal of contaminated aviation gasoline. An old sign of
unknown origin is located at this site. The sign, although now
somewhat faded, reads:
DANGER
Materials Containing
Tetraethyl Lead
Buried Here
Do not Uncover
13 April 1966
Tetraethyl Lead (Pb(C2H5)J was 'commonly used as an anti-knock
compound in automotive and aviation gasoline. It is described in
several hazardous material guides as a powerful and/or deadly
poison and lipoid solvent, readily absorbed, by inhalation or
through the skin. It is a suspected carcinogen.
From 1980 through 1992, several field investigations took place to
determine whether this site was contaminated. On May 14, 1992, a
field investigation led to the discovery of old steel runway
matting buried 4 to 6 inches below the ground surface adjacent to
the pit and sign at Site 20. Interviews with an individual
employed at this facility since the early 1960's indicated the
possible burial of containers under the matting.
-------
APPROXIMATE
EXTENT
OF REPORTED
DISPOSAL AREA
(SITE 20)
PARACHUTE JUMP CIRCLE
— DEPRESSION IN
GROUND (FIT)
UON1TCR1NC *EU- LOCATION
HYOROPUNO^SAUPUNC UOCATICN
TEST PIT AND SSL SAUPUNC lOCATlCNrPHAS 0}
TE^" KT UXATION (PHASE II)
AND SOB. SAUPUNC
AREA Of NAWC SOU. EXCAVA'HCN
(JUNE. 1992)
NAWC SOIL SAUPUNG LOCATION
(JUNE. 1992)
SITE No.20, AREA G
TETRAETHYL LEAD DISPOSAL SITE
NAVAL AIR WARFARE CENTER-AIRCRAFT 01 VISION |
LAKEHURST, NEW JERSEY
FIGUBE 2. SITE 20 MAP
10
-------
A small scale excavation was initiated by NAWCADLKE personnel in
June 1992 to investigate the area under the steel runway matting.
During the excavation, a NJDEPE representative monitored the soil
with a Photo-ionization detector (PID) to detect possible volatile
organic compound (VOC) contamination. No levels above background
were registered with the PID during the excavation process. The
excavation led to the discovery of rubber material which is
believed to be old aircraft fuel bladders. These bladders seemed
to have been shredded before burial since the pieces were generally
very small. Chemical analysis of post-excavation soil samples did
not indicate the presence of significant levels of contamination.
Analysis of the rubber material characterizes it as a non-hazardous
waste (see Table II, Appendix C).
A summary of investigative efforts is shown below. Testing results
are shown in Appendix C.
SUMMARY OF INVESTIGATIONS
PRE-REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION
1980: Five test pits were excavated at the site. Three soil
samples and one groundwater sample (bottom of the pit) were
collected from each test pit. Analysis of these samples for lead
revealed low concentrations in soil (2.2 to 20 mg/kg) and levels of
lead in unfiltered groundwater (0.2 to 2 mg/kg) which exceeded
NJDEPE drinking water standards. Highest concentrations of lead
were detected in soil samples collected near the current location
of monitoring well B, which had not been installed at the time of
sampling. In 1980, four rusted, empty, unmarked 55 gallon drums
and some other metal debris were removed from the surface of this
site.
DISCUSSION OF RESULTS: The sampling did not include taking field,
trip or lab blanks. The quality of this data is suspect given the
lack of quality control procedures and the fact that these very
high levels of lead in groundwater were not found in subsequent
remedial investigations.
1981: Five (5) monitoring wells were installed at the 5 former
test pit locations. They were designated A through E. Three soil
samples (taken during well installation) and one groundwater sample
were collected from each well. Analysis of 15 soil samples and
groundwater samples collected from each of five monitoring wells
(A-E) revealed the presence of several VOCs (including bromoform,
carbon tetrachloride and 1,2 dichloroethane) in soil and
groundwater. The maximum total concentration of VOCs in
groundwater, 754 ug/1, was detected in well B. NJDEPE conducted a
resistivity and conductivity survey at the site. No anomalous
levels (above background) were recorded.
DISCUSSION OF RESULTS: Solvent detection in wells could not be
repeated in subsequent tests. It is suspected these solvents came
from glues used in the joints of the plastic well casings as the
11
-------
compounds detected are consistent with the chemical composition of
these glues.
REMEDIAL INVESTIGATIONS
Phase I: November 1985 - January 1986- The -Phase I Remedial
Investigation (RI) was initiated to verify the existence of
reported contamination. One (1) groundwater sample was taken from
well E and revealed no contamination. Organic Vapor Analyzer (OVA)
readings within the casing of well B were 20 ppm, while in the
remaining four wells readings did not exceed background levels.
OVA levels in one foot test pits excavated near wells B and D, and
in the open depression (pit) present at the site did not exceed
background levels (1 ppm). No soil discoloration was observed at
the site.
Phase II: August 1988 - December 1988- Analyses of two rounds of
groundwater samples collected from each of the five monitoring
wells -at the site did not confirm the presence of volatile organic
compounds or petroleum hydrocarbons. Chromium was detected at an
estimated concentration, 552 ug/1, in one of the samples collected
from well B. Resampling of well B two months later showed no
detection of chromium in. the unfiltered sample and an estimated
level of 8.8 ug/1 in the filtered sample. A level of 59.2 ug/1 of
vanadium was found in one unfiltered groundwater sample from well
A. Vanadium was not detected in Well A in a previous round (2
months earlier).
No targeted contaminants were detected in soil samples collected
from two test pits excavated at the site.
DISCUSSION OF RESULTS: No VOC contamination above Applicable
Relevant or Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) was found in this
phase of groundwater sampling. Metals in unfiltered samples were
below the established background levels (see Table III, Appendix C)
for unfiltered groundwater for this facility.
Phase II Addendum: July - August 1990- Unfiltered and filtered
groundwater samples were collected from wells A and D and analyzed
for chromium. Chromium was detected at low concentrations in the
unfiltered samples and was not detected in the filtered samples.
DISCUSSION OP RESULTS: Levels of chromium detected in unfiltered
samples were well below established background levels of unfiltered
groundwater. The one high result of chromium found in 1988 was not
repeated in subsequent sample testing.
Phase III: July 1991 - April 1992- Phase III remedial
investigation- Groundwater samples were collected utilizing the
hydropunch groundwater sampling method from three different depth
intervals at each of four different sampling locations at the site
(HPG-3 through 6) . No targeted VOCs were detected in these samples
at concentrations exceeding EPA Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs).
1,1,1 trichloroethane was found at levels slightly exceeding
12
-------
Practical Quantitation Limits (PQLs) (which are considered
contaminant specific cleanup levels under the Class I-PL
Groundwater Quality Standards) in HPG-3 (see Table I, Appendix C) .
However, the average concentration of 1,1,1 TCA detected during
Phase III RI does not exceed its PQL of 1.0 ug/1.
Soil samples were collected from two test pits excavated at the
site in the vicinity of monitoring well B. The analysis of these
samples revealed total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPHC) at
concentrations of 1,500 and 2,400 mg/kg as well as 10 Tentatively
Identified Compounds (TICs) in each sample at total, concentrations
of 4,990 and 7,390 ug/1. Repeat samples at these locations were
. taken in June 1992 to determine levels of TPHC and base/neutral
acid extractables. No base/neutral acid extractables were
detected. Levels of TPHC were consistent with previous findings.
Two samples from hydropunch HPG-4 were tested for lead in filtered
and unfiltered samples. Lead levels in unfiltered samples were
well below established background levels for unfiltered groundwater
samples. In filtered samples, lead was not detected.
June 1992: EXCAVATION DETAILS
On 5 June 1992, the steel matting was removed and excavation
proceeded. Substantial amounts of black rubber material were
encountered at a depth of approximately 24 inches. The area of the
rubber was roughly 8 by 10 feet. This material was mostly
shredded, but also found in small sheets. No material was found
past a depth of about 48 inches. It has been tentatively
identified as old aircraft fuel cell material. A NJDEPE
representative was present during the excavation and monitored the
soil and air with a Photo-ionization Detector (PID). PID testing
at each stage of the excavation did not detect .levels of volatiles
above background.
On the day of the excavation, 3 samples of the rubber material and
1 soil sample from directly under the rubber (48" deep) was sent
for lab analysis. The rubber material and the adjacent soil was
tested by the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) for
metals to determine if this material was. considered hazardous
waste. The results yielded only traces of metals, all of which
were well below TCLP regulatory limits, showing that neither the
rubber nor the surrounding soil was considered hazardous waste (see
Table II, Appendix C). The rubber material was later removed from
the site and disposed of as non-hazardous waste.
On 24 June 1992, 2 more soil samples, 1 groundwater sample and 1
rubber material sample, were collected from Site 20 to determine if
the rubber material or adjacent soil revealed levels of lead or
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) above NJDEPE soil cleanup
criteria (SCC). The results of these analyses showed levels well
below the SCC and ARARs (see Tables II and III, Appendix C).
13
-------
DISCUSSION OP RESULTS: It has been determined through persistent
on-site investigative work and data analyses that significant
contamination does not exist at this site.
SITE 20 SUMMARY
All metals found in unfiltered groundwater samples fall within the
established base background levels (See Table III - Groundwater
Inorganics, Appendix C) .
During the Phase III investigation, no soil contaminants were
detected at concentrations exceeding NJDEPE soil cleanup criteria
at Site 20. During the excavation of 5 June 1992, no evidence of
contamination was found through PID monitoring at the site.
Following excavation of the suspected fuel bladders, the post
excavation samples did not detect VOCs or metals above NJDEPE soil
.cleanup criteria.
Based on the results of the investigations conducted at Site 20
(see Table III, Appendix C) , there does not appear to be any
significant soil or groundwater contamination associated with the
site.
SUMMARY OF ENDANGERMENT ASSESSMENT
An Endangerment Assessment (EA) was conducted for NAWCADLKE to
assess the potential current and future human health risks and
potential environmental impacts posed by contaminated soils,
groundwater, sediment and surface water detected during past and
on-going site investigations.
More complete EA information for Site 20 can be found in Volume VI
of the Phase III RI, which is available as part of the NAWCADLKE
Administrative Record.
The summary for Site 20 will discuss (1) the chemicals identified
by the EA as contaminants of concern (COCs) , (2) the land use
assumptions upon which estimates of potential human exposure to
site contaminants are based, (3) the quantitative estimates of
carcinogenic risk and noncarcinogenic hazard, and (4) a summary of
the ecological concerns at the site and (5) a summary
interpretation of the EA findings with the regard to need for site
remediation.
Contaminants of concern
For groundwater, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, toluene, and o-xylene were
determined to be COCs for inclusion in the EA.
14
-------
For soil. COCs retained for evaluation in the EA included mercury,
and total petroleum hydrocarbons.
Land use and exposure assumptions
For soil, a light industrial land use scenario was assumed because
of the absence of facilities .in the immediate vicinity of the site,
and the associated lack of incentive for individuals to frequent
the area. For this scenario, human exposure is affected by
mechanisms that include direct contact, inhalation, and ingestion.
For groundwater. light industrial and residential land use
scenarios were assumed to determine potential future risks.
Human health risk and hazard findings
For soil, the results of the EA indicate that hazards resulting
from noncarcinogens are not elevated for mercury above EPA's hazard
index criteria value of 1.0. The hazard index value for mercury
and the total soil hazard quotient are both 0.00062. Carcinogenic
risk estimates for soil could not be estimated since neither of the
COCs exhibit carcinogenic potential.
For groundwater, the results of the EA indicate that there is no
elevated hazard under either the light industrial land use scenario
or potential future residential scenario. The hazard quotient
(noncarcinogenic health risk) for groundwater under residential use
is 0.003183. The hazard quotient under the light industrial
scenario is 0.000274, well below the EPA's criteria of 1.0. None
of the contaminants of concern exhibit carcinogenic potential.
Ecological Assessment Findings
An endangerment assessment was performed to determine ecological
risks. For land based organisms, indicator species (e.g. field
mouse and northern bobwhite) were selected which would best show
any bioconcentration of contaminants or uptake through the food
chain.
The maximum measured inorganic soil concentrations for the sites in
the area were well below the 95 percent Upper confidence level
(UCL) New Jersey background concentrations. The only COC found in
soil was toluene which only appeared at trace levels. These
findings indicated that the contamination in this area does not
constitute a current ecological threat to the resident indicator
species chosen.
The excavation of the site resulted in the formation of a small
pond due to the shallow groundwater table. This depression will be
left for use as a new pond. Less than 4 weeks after its formation,
frogs were found in and around the pond. Regrading of the area was
15
-------
required after excavation. Since vegetation was cleared during the
excavation process, 19 native pitch pines were transplanted from
the adjacent parachute jump circle to the clearing on July 23,
1993. The trees ranged from 8 to 30 inches in height. Although
the surrounding vegetation in the area grows quickly, these trees
were introduced onto the site to aid the site restoration process.
HIGHLIGHTS OF COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION
The Proposed Plan for Site 20 was issued to interested parties on
June 4, 1993. On June 16 and 17, 1993 a newspaper notification
inviting public comment on the Proposed Plan appeared in The Asbury
Park Press and The Ocean County Observer. On June 18, 1993, a
notification also appeared in The Air Scoop, the Center's weekly
publication. The comment period was held from June 21, 1993 to
July 21, 1993. The newspaper notification also identified the
Ocean County Library as the location of the Information Repository.
A Public Meeting was held on June 30, 1993 at the Manchester Branch
of the .Ocean County Library at 7:00 p.m. At this meeting,
representatives from the Navy, USEPA, and NJDEPE were available to
answer questions about the site, and the "No Action" determination.
A list of attendees is -attached to this Record of Decision as
Appendix A. Comments received and responses provided during the
public meeting are included in the Responsiveness Summary, which is
part of this Record of Decision. No written comments were received
during the public comment period. A transcript of the meeting is
available as part of the Administrative Record.
The decision document presents the selected action (ie. No Action)
for Site 20 at NAWCADLKE in Ocean County, New Jersey, chosen in
accordance with CERCLA, as amended by SARA and, to the extent
practicable, the National Contingency Plan (NCP). The decision for
the site is based on the information contained in the
Administrative Record, which is available for public review at the
Ocean County Library, 101 Washington Street, Toms River, New
Jersey.
SCOPE AND ROLE OF RESPONSE ACTION
The results of the environmental investigations conducted show no
verifiable evidence of significant contamination at Site 20. The
levels of chlorinated solvents have been determined to not pose a
risk to human health or the environment. However, a five year
monitoring plan will be implemented to ensure continued compliance
with groundwater standards and monitor the risk to human health and
the environment.
SUMMARY OF SITE CHARACTERISTICS
The location of Site 20 within NAWCADLKE is shown in Figure 2. The
general direction of groundwater flow at NAWCADLKE is to the east-
16
-------
northeast. Summary of the chemicals detected in the analyses of
groundwater collected at the site is provided in Table II, Appendix
C.
The results of the Remedial Investigations, including the
endangerment assessment, indicate that conditions at Site 20 pose
no unacceptable risk to human health and the environment.
17
------- |