Superfund Record of Decision Pease Air Force Base Zone 2 NH


                                    EPA/ROD/R01-95/110
                                    1995
EPA Superfund
     Record of Decision:
     PEASE AIR FORCE BASE
     EPA ID:  NH7570024847
     OU06
     PORTSMOUTH/NEWINGTON, NH
     09/18/1995

-------
        

           Record of Decision
                Zone 2
Pease Air Force Base, New Hampshire

           September 1995


           Table of Contents
Section Title

I.
II.








III.
IV.
V.



VI.
VII.


VIII.
IX.











X.



DECLARATION
SITE NAME, LOCATION, AND DESCRIPTION
SITE HISTORY AND ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES
A. Site 1 (LF-1) Use and Response History
B. Site 7 (FDTA-1) Use and Response History
C. Site 10 (LFTS) Use and Response History
D. Site 22 (BA-1) Use and Response History
E. Site 37 (BA-2) Use and Response History
F. Site 43 (MRDDA) Use and Response History
G. Site 24 (Peverly Ponds and Bass Pond)
H. Zone 2 Enforcement History
COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION
SCOPE AND ROLE OF OPERABLE UNIT OR RESPONSE ACTION
SUMMARY OF SITE CHARACTERISTICS
A. Distribution of Contaminants in Soil
B. Distribution of Groundwater Contaminants
C. Distribution of Surface Water and Sediment Contaminants
SUMMARY OF SITE RISKS
DEVELOPMENT AND SCREENING OF ALTERNATIVES
A. Statutory Requirements/Response Objectives
B. Technology Screening and Alternative Development
DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES
SUMMARY OF THE COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES
A. Overall Protection of Human Health and the Environment
B. Compliance with Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate
Requirements
C. Long-Term Effectiveness and Permanence
D. Reduction of Toxicity, Mobility, or Volume of Contaminants
Through Treatment
E. Short-Term Effectiveness
F. Implementability
G. Cost
H. State Acceptance
I . Community Acceptance
THE SELECTED REMEDY
A. Methodology for Cleanup Level Determination
B. Groundwater Cleanup Goals
C. Soil Cleanup Goals
Page
xi
1
13
13
15
18
21
24
25
27
29
30
32
36
39
73
83
93
102
102
106
108
113
115

116
117

119
121
122
124
125
126
127
129
130
134

-------
            D.    Surface Water and Sediment                                            136
            E.    Description of Remedial Components                                    137

  XI.       STATUTORY DETERMINATIONS                                                    141

            A.    Protection of Human Health and the Environment                        141
            B.    Compliance with ARARs                                                 141
            C.    Cost Effectiveness                                                    142
            D.    Utilization of Permanent Solutions and Alternative Treatment          143
            E.    Preference for Treatment as a Principal Element                       144

 XII.       DOCUMENTATION OF SIGNIFICANT CHANGES                                        146

XIII.       STATE ROLE                                                                  147

   REFERENCES                                                                           R-l

   ACRONYMS                                                                          Acr-1

   APPENDIX A ) TABLES

   APPENDIX B ) ARARS FOR THE PREFERRED REMEDY

   APPENDIX C ) DECLARATION OF CONCURRENCE

   APPENDIX D ) RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARY

   APPENDIX E ) ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX

-------
                                  LIST OF FIGURES

Figure No.                              Title                                          Page

       1               General Location Map                                              3
       2               General Vicinity Land Use Map                                     5
       3               General Location Map ) Zone 2                                     7
       4               Surface Features and Delineated Wetland Boundaries               11
       5               Total BTEX Contours ) Overburden Groundwater                     37
       6               Distribution of Benzene in Bedrock Groundwater                   41
       7               Distribution of Contaminants in Soils ) LF-1                     43
       8               Distribution of Contaminants in Surface Soil ) MRDDA             47
       9               Distribution of Contaminants in Surface Soil ) FDTA-1            49
       10              Contour of Maximum TPH Concentrations in Unsaturated Soil  )
                       FDTA-1                                                           51
       11              Contaminant Cross Section Location Map ) BA-1                    55
       12              Contaminant Cross Section A-A'  Total BTEX )  BA-1                 57
       13              Contaminant Cross Section B-B'  Total BTEX )  BA-1                 59
       14              Distribution of VOC Contamination in Unsaturated Subsurface
                       Soil ) BA-1                                                      61
       15              Distribution of VOC Contamination in Saturated Subsurface
                       Soil ) BA-1                                                      63
       16              Distribution of Contaminants in Surface Soil ) LFTS              67
       17              Distribution of VOC,  SVOC, and Pesticide/PCB Contamination in
                       Surface Soil )  BA-2                                              69
       18              Distribution of VOC,  SVOC, and Pesticide/PCB Contamination
                       in Unsaturated Subsurface Soil ) BA-2                            70
       19              Distribution of VOC,  SVOC, and Pesticide/PCB Contamination in
                       Saturated Subsurface Soil ) BA-2                                 71
       20              Distribution of Organic Contaminants Above MCLs in
                       Overburden Groundwater                                           75
       21              Distribution of Soluble Metals Above MCLs and SMCLs
                       in Overburden Groundwater                                        77
       22              Extent of LNAPL at BA-1                                          79
       23              Summary of Surface Water Chemistry                               85
       24              Sediment Chemistry Summary ) Bass Pond                           87
       25              Sediment Chemistry Summary ) Upper and Lower Peverly Pond  Area   89
       26              Remedial Process Flow Sheet ) Modified Alternative BA1-4B        128
       27              Alternatives BA1-2, 3A, 3B, 3C,  and 4B ) Groundwater Management
                       Zones                                                           131

-------
                                       LIST OF TABLES

Table No.                                     Title                                 Page
   1            Summary of Highest Concentrations of Contaminants
                ) LF-1 Surface Soil                                                  A-l
   2            Summary of Highest Concentrations of Contaminants
                ) LF-1 Subsurface Soil                                               A-2
   3            Summary of Highest Concentrations of Contaminants )  MRDDA
                Surface Soil                                                         A-4
   4            Summary of Highest Concentrations of Contaminants )  MRDDA
                Subsurface Soil                                                      A-5
   5            Summary of Highest Concentrations of Contaminants )  FDTA-1
                Surface Soil                                                         A-6
   6            Summary of Highest Concentrations of Contaminants )  FDTA-1
                Subsurface Soil                                                      A-7
   7            Summary of Highest Concentrations of Contaminants )  BA-1
                Surface Soil                                                         A-8
   8            Summary of Highest Concentrations of Contaminants )  BA-1
                Subsurface Soil                                                      A-9
   9            Summary of Highest Concentrations of Contaminants )  LFTS
                Surface Soil                                                        A-10
  10            Summary of Highest Concentrations of Contaminants )  LFTS
                Subsurface Soil                                                     A-ll
  11            Summary of Highest Concentrations of Contaminants )  BA-2
                Surface Soil                                                        A-12
  12            Summary of Highest Concentrations of Contaminants )  BA-2
                Subsurface Soil                                                     A-13
  13            Summary of Maximum Detected Concentrations of Organic and
                Inorganic Compounds in Overburden and Bedrock Groundwater           A-14
  14            Summary of Highest Detected Concentrations of Metals )
                Stage 3 and 4 Surface Water Analytical Results )
                Upper Peverly Pond                                                  A-26
  15            Summary of Highest Detected Concentrations of Organic
                Compounds and Metals ) Stage 3 and 4 Sediment Analytical
                Results ) Upper Peverly Pond                                        A-27
  16            Summary of Highest Detected Concentrations of Organic
                Compounds and Metals ) Stage 3 and 4 Surface Water
                Analytical Results ) Lower Peverly Pond                             A-29
  17            Summary of Highest Detected Concentrations of Organic
                Compounds and Metals ) Stage 3 and 4 Sediment Analytical
                Results ) Lower Peverly Pond                                        A-30
  18            Summary of Highest Detected Concentrations of Metals )
                Stage 3 and 4 Surface Water Analytical Results )  Bass Pond          A-32
  19            Summary of Highest Detected Concentrations of Organic
                Compounds and Metals ) Stage 3 and 4 Sediment Analytical
                Results ) Bass Pond                                                 A-33
  20            Summary of Highest Detected Concentrations of Metals )
                Stage 3 and 4 Surface Water Analytical Results )
                Staff Gages/Seeps                                                   A-35
  21            Summary of Highest Detected Concentrations of Organic
                Compounds and Metals ) Stage 3 and 4 Sediment Analytical
                Results ) Staff Gages/Seeps                                         A-36
  22            Summary of Chemicals of Concern by Medium                           A-38
  23            Summary of Total Lifetime Cancer Risks and Hazard Indices           A-48
  24            Summary of Detailed Alternatives Evaluation                         A-56
  25            Cleanup Goal Selection ) Overburden and Bedrock Groundwater
                 (Sites 10/LFTS, 22/BA-l, and 43/MRDDA)                               A-57
  26            Cleanup Level Selection ) Overburden and Bedrock Groundwater
                 (Long-Term Zonal GMZ Monitoring at Site 1/LF-l Wells)                A-58
  27            Cleanup Level Selection ) Overburden and Bedrock Groundwater
                 (Long-Term Zonal GMZ Monitoring at Site 37/BA-2 Wells)               A-59
  28            Potential Cleanup Goal Selection for Surface Water                  A-60
  29            Potential Cleanup Goal Selection for Sediment                       A-62

-------
DECLARATION

SITE NAME AND LOCATION

Pease Air Force Base (AFB), Zone 2, New Hampshire

STATEMENT OF BASIS AND PURPOSE

This decision document presents a selected remedial action designed to protect human and ecological
receptors at Zone 2, Pease AFB, New Hampshire. Zone 2 includes the following six sites: Site 1 (Landfill
1 or LF-1), Site 7 (Fire Department Training Area 1 or FDTA-1), Site 10 (Leaded Fuel Tank Sludge Area or
LFTS), Site 22 (Burn Area 1 or BA-1), Site 37 (Burn Area 2 or BA-2), and Site 43 (Mclntyre Road Drum
Disposal Area or MRDDA). Site 24 (Peverly Ponds and Bass Pond) also is addressed as part of the Zone 2
action. This document was developed in accordance with the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) (42 USC Section 9601 et seg.) as amended by the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) of 1986, and the National Contingency Plan (NCP). Through this
document, the Air Force plans to remedy the threat to human health, human welfare, or the environment
posed by contamination at BA-1 in Zone 2. This decision is based on the Administrative Record for the
site. The Administrative Record for the site is located at the Information Repository in Building 43
(61 International Drive) at Pease International Tradeport (formerly Pease AFB). The Administrative
Record Index as it applies to Zone 2 is provided in Appendix E. The State of New Hampshire Department of
Environmental Services (NHDES) concurs with the selected remedy.

DESCRIPTION OF THE SELECTED REMEDY

This action addresses the principal threat posed by leaching of contaminants to groundwater at BA-1 and
the associated groundwater contaminant plumes [discussed as groundwater operable units (OUs)] that
encompass the LFTS/BA-1/MRDDA and BA-2 Areas of Concern (AOCs). Actual or threatened releases of
hazardous substances from this site, if not addressed by implementing the response action selected in
this Record of Decision (ROD) , may present an imminent and substantive endangerment to human health,
human welfare, or the environment.

The selected remedy includes in situ treatment of BA-1 source area light, nonagueous-phase liguids
(LNAPLs) and residual LNAPL with enhancement of soil vapor extraction (SVE) by air sparging, which
involves injection of air below the water table. Extracted soil vapor will be treated for removal of
volatile organic compounds (VOCs). The remedy selected for BA-1 addresses the groundwater plumes
associated with zonewide groundwater contamination. The selected remedy also includes establishment of
institutional controls restricting future use of Zone 2 groundwater, including a Groundwater Management
Zone (GMZ) and performance of long-term monitoring. The selected remedy for Zone 2 also includes natural
attenuation of groundwater contamination. No action is proposed for source control under CERCLA for
LF-1, FDTA-1, LFTS, BA-2, and MRDDA. In a separate action that is not part of this ROD, the Air Force
will perform final closure of LF-1 in a non-CERCLA action under state law. As part of the selected
remedy for BA-1, surface water, sediment, and fish tissue sampling will be conducted at the Peverly Ponds
and Bass Pond, although BA-1 is not considered a source of surface water and sediment contamination. The
reuse for the portion of Zone 2 located east of Mclntyre Road will be under the jurisdiction of the Pease
Development Authority (PDA) to support airport operations. Reuse of the portion of Zone 2 west of
Mclntyre Road will be under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to support a National
Wildlife Refuge.

STATUTORY DETERMINATIONS

The selected remedy is protective of human health and the environment, complies with federal and state
reguirements that are legally applicable or relevant and appropriate to the remedial action, and is cost
effective. This remedy uses permanent solutions and alternative treatment technologies to the maximum
extent practicable. The determination reflects the reguirement of CERCLA 121 (b)(1) that states
"Remedial actions, in which treatment that permanently and significantly reduces the volume, toxicity, or
mobility of hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants is a principal element, are to be preferred
over remedial alternatives not involving such treatment." A review will be conducted by the Air Force,
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and NHDES no less than 5 years after implementation to
ensure that the remedy provided adeguate protection of human health and the environment.

-------
The foregoing represents the selection of a remedial action by the Air Force and EPA Region I,  with
concurrence of NHDES.

Concur and recommended for immediate implementation:

        U.S. Air Force


        
        By:	                        Date:	
                Alan K.  Olsen
                Director,  Air Force Base Conversion Agency


        U.S. Environmental Protection Agency


        
        By:	                       Date:	
                Linda M. Murphy
                Director,  Waste Management Division

-------
I. SITE NAME, LOCATION, AND DESCRIPTION

Pease Air Force Base (AFB) is included on the federal National Priorities List (NPL). Based on Remedial
Investigations and Feasibility Studies (RI/FSs) conducted at Pease AFB, a number of sites were identified
which require remedial actions to address sources of contamination to the environment. This Record of
Decision (ROD) addresses contamination at six sites within Installation Restoration Program (IRP) Zone 2,
which is located northwest of the runway at Pease AFB (Figure 1). Zone 2 is bordered by the runway to
the east/northeast, and the Peverly Pond System to the west. The six sites include: Site 1 (Landfill 1
or LF-1) , Site 7 (Fire Department Training Area 1 or FDTA-1), Site 10 (Leaded Fuel Tank Sludge Area or
LFTS), Site 22 (Burn Area 1 or BA-1), Site 37 (Burn Area 2 or BA-2), and Site 43 (Mclntyre Road Drum
Disposal Area or MRDDA). Site 24 (Peverly Ponds and Bass Pond) is also addressed as part of the Zone 2
action. In addition, groundwater flowing beneath Zone 2 is addressed (see Section IV) in this ROD.

Pease AFB is located in the Towns of Newington and Greenland, and in the City of Portsmouth, located m
Rockingham County, New Hampshire. As shown in Figure 1, Pease AFB is located on a peninsula bounded on
the west and southwest by Great Bay; on the northwest by Little Bay; and on the north and northeast by
the Piscatagua River. Pease AFB occupies 4,365 acres and is located in the center of the peninsula. The
City of Portsmouth is located approximately 3 miles east and southeast of the base.

At the beginning of World War II, the U.S. Navy used an airport located at the current Pease AFB
location. The Air Force assumed control of the site in 1951, and construction of the existing facility
was completed in 1956. During its history, Pease AFB has been the home of the 100th Bombardment Wing and
the 509th Bombardment Wing, whose mission was to maintain a combat-ready force capable of long-range
bombardment operations. The New Hampshire Air National Guard (NHANG) relocated the 157th Military
Airlift Group (MAG) from Gremer Field at Manchester, New Hampshire, to Pease in 1966. The mission of the
group was changed in 1975, when it was designated as the 157th Air Refueling Group. Over time, various
quantities of fuels, oils, solvents, lubricants, and protective coatings were used at the base, and
releases of contaminants into the environment occurred as a result of usage and disposal of these and
other materials.

In December 1988, Pease AFB was selected as one of 86 military installations to be closed by the
Secretary of Defense's Commission on Base Realignment and Closure. The base was closed as an active
military reservation on 31 March 1991. NHANG remains at the airfield and uses some of the existing
facilities. The remainder of the reservation will be divided between the State of New Hampshire's Pease
Development Authority (PDA), the Department of the Interior (DOI), and the Air Force.

All Air Force activity within Zone 2 was halted when the base officially closed on 31 March 1991. Land
uses at the base since closure include industrial, commercial, and military. Stewardship of the area west
of Mclntyre Road, including LF-1 and MRDDA, has been granted to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and
the area is operated as part of the Great Bay National Wildlife Refuge. This area is largely wooded, and
contains Upper and Lower Peverly Ponds and Bass Pond. Between Mclntyre Road and the runway to the east
are two former burn areas, a former fire training area, and an area formerly used for sludge disposal.
Reuse of the portion of Zone 2 located east of Mclntyre Road will be under the jurisdiction of the PDA to
support airport operations. A VHS Omni-Range Tactical Air Navigation unit (VORTAC) (required for
instrument approaches to both ends of the runway, and an airway running north from Boston) is located
approximately 625 feet from the runway, and Tactical Air Navigation instrumentation is located southwest
of the VORTAC at the edge of BA-2. Much of Zone 2 east of Mclntyre Road has been cleared of vegetation
to comply with the operational requirements of the VORTAC. Reuse of the portion of Zone 2 west of
Mclntyre Road will be under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to support a National
Wildlife Refuge. Figure 2 shows historic and current land uses within Pease AFB and Zone 2. Figure 3
shows a general location map of the IR sites
within Zone 2.

The southeastern section of Zone 2 contains the highest elevation within the zone and the base as a whole
[>110 feet above mean sea level (ft MSL)]. This area is situated on a bedrock high that controls local
topography. Slopes dip away from this high to the northwest and north, and to the west toward the
Peverly Ponds, where the lowest elevation of the zone exists, at 35 ft MSL. Topographic lows correspond
to wetlands associated with the Peverly Ponds. Topography m the eastern part of Zone 2 has been altered,
presumably during construction of the runway, with some areas showing evidence of fill, while others have
been excavated (see Subsection 3.9 of the Draft Final Zone 2 RI Report) (G-626). Bedrock outcrops were
observed between 59 and 65 ft MSL on the slopes east of the Peverly Ponds and south of Nottingham Road.

-------
There are approximately 3,700 dwellings within a 1-mile radius of Pease AFB. Based on water usage
surveys conducted in 1988 and 1992 and on available U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and NHDES information,
it was determined that a number of these dwellings have wells and/or springs located on their associated
properties. The Town of Newington in particular has a large number of private wells. The majority of
Portsmouth residences surveyed are serviced by town water only. A complete compilation of area springs
and wells for Pease AFB, based on information available to date, is presented in the Pease AFB Off-Base
Well Inventory Letter Report (G-599). The closest dwelling to Zone 2 that has a well or spring is
approximately 2,000 feet away. This property is located south of BA-2.

Surface drainageways at Pease AFB flow radially away from the center of the peninsula, into Great Bay
toward the west, Little Bay to the northwest and north, and the Piscatogua River to the east. Little Bay
flows into the Piscatagua River at the northern end of the peninsula. Great Bay, Little Bay, and the
Piscatagua River are all tidally influenced. Conseguently, these water bodies are subject to semidiurnal
water-level variations.

Zone 2 is located m the Peverly Brook drainage system within the Great Bay watershed. Within Zone 2, the
Peverly Brook drainage is composed primarily of three manmade ponds (see Figure 4). From upstream to
downstream they are Upper Peverly Pond, Lower Peverly Pond, and Bass Pond. Defined channels are located
between Mclntyre Road and Upper Peverly Pond, and between Lower Peverly Pond and Bass Pond. Surface
water from Bass Pond discharges directly into Great Bay. Surface flow on the eastern side of Peverly
Brook is toward the west. A series of seeps and drainage areas is located there. Wetlands have been
identified bordering the surface water bodies. A more complete description of the zone is presented in
the Draft Final Zone 2 RI Report (G-626).

II. SITE HISTORY AND ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES

A. Site 1 (IiF-1) Use and Response History

Landfill (LF-1) is a fan-shaped landform located approximately 100 feet east of Upper Peverly Pond and
north of Nottingham Road in the northwestern corner of Zone 2 (Figure 3). Most of the approximately
7-acre landfill is on the western side of Mclntyre Road; however, a small portion of the landfill is also
evident on the eastern side of the road.

Two terraces are evident on the landfill. The upper terrace covers an area slightly larger than 5 acres.
The lower terrace extends outward approximately 200 feet beyond the upper terrace as an arc to the north.
The upper terrace of the landfill is sparsely vegetated with grasses and low shrubs, while the lower
terrace and its steep slopes are tree-covered with locally dense understory. Seeps are present along the
steep north and northwestern slopes of the landfill and at the base of the fill. Between the northern
extent of the landfill and Upper Peverly Pond are several mounded areas approximately 2 feet high and 3
feet wide, with lengths ranging from approximately 5 feet to greater than 10 feet. The mounded areas are
believed to consist of mounded soil and/or ash from the burning of houses and other structures during
base construction.

LF-1 was the original base landfill and was operated from 1953 to 1961. The site was developed on a
steep embankment west of the northern end of the runway; waste was apparently dumped over the edge of the
embankment and covered with native fill material pushed over the top of the hill (G-84).

According to base records, the types of waste deposited in the landfill included construction debris
that accumulated during base construction, domestic solid waste, and shop wastes. In addition, the IRP
Phase I records search (G-84) reports sporadic disposal of waste offs and solvents, paint strippers,
outdated paints, paint thinners, pesticide containers, empty cans and drums, and drums containing waste
solution from an on-base cadmium plating shop. The records search also indicated likely disposal of
solids from the wastewater treatment plant grit removal chamber, which contained biodegradable,
putrescible materials, along with inert sand and other solids (G-84). In contrast to these records, test
pit excavations and soil borings at LF-1 uncovered primarily construction rubble, vegetation (tree stumps
and branches, and decomposed plant material), metallic objects, and metal debris partially exposed at
existing ground surface.

Previous Investigations at LF-1

Stage 1

The 1983 IRP Phase I Investigation (G-84) ranked LF-1 fourth among the known IRP sites showing
significant potential for environmental concern. LF-1 was recommended for further investigation, and was

-------
included in the Stage 1 investigation, undertaken from November 1984 through August 1987. The objectives
of the Stage 1 investigation were to confirm environmental contamination at each site, and to evaluate
the potential for contaminant migration and, subseguently, environmental and human health risks resulting
from migrating contaminants. The Stage 1 field activities occurred from November 1984 through January
1986, and included monitor well installation, followed by groundwater and surface water sampling to
assess the impact of the landfill on these media. In addition, in sire permeability tests were conducted
on the monitor wells. The results of the investigation were summarized in the Phase II Stage 1
Confirmation/Quantification Final Report (G-527) . As a result of the investigation, LF-1 was rated as a
Category I site (i.e., no further action reguired). However, as a result of NHDES and EPA comments,
further investigation at LF-1 was deemed necessary to gather sufficient data to confirm that the site has
not had a significant impact on the environment.

Stage 2

Stage 2 activities were conducted at LF-1 from October 1987 through December 1988. At LF-1, the
objectives of the Stage 2 investigation were to identify the extent of fill and to further evaluate soil
and groundwater guality. Field activities performed during Stage 2 at LF-1 included a magnetometer
survey, excavation of test pits, installation of additional monitor wells and piezometers, groundwater
sampling, and collection of soil samples for geotechnical analysis. Additional surface geophysical
surveys [i.e., ground-penetrating radar (GPR) surveys] were planned but were not executed because of
terrain and vegetation constraints. The results of these investigations were summarized in the IRP Stage
2 Final Report (G-540).

Stage 4

The purpose of the Stage 4 investigation was to provide additional data needed to complete a risk
assessment and a detailed analysis of remedial alternatives. The Stage 4 field effort at LF-1 was
performed between August 1991 and September 1993. Field activities at LF-1 during Stage 4 included the
installation of overburden and bedrock wells to monitor groundwater guality and flow direction. Further
soil characterization was performed via collection of soil boring, surface soil, and test pit soil
samples. Initial findings from the Stage 4 effort at LF-1 were discussed in the Zone 2 Site
Characterization Summary (scs) (G-591). Follow-on field work has continued in LF-1; a description of the
results of those field efforts is presented in Section 4 of the Draft Final Zone 2 RI Report (G-626).

B. Site 7 (FDTA-1) Use and Response History

Fire Department Training Area 1 (FDTA-1, Site 7) is located north of Nottingham Road, west of the
flightline, and east of Mclntyre Road (see Figure 3). FDTA-1 is a relatively flat area approximately 300
feet in diameter. An approximate 100-foot-diameter area of blackened surface soil is located in the
center of this circular area. Most of the burn activities likely occurred in the area of blackened soil.

The land immediately surrounding FDTA-1 is sparsely vegetated. The area is generally devoid of topsoil,
which was most likely removed during runway construction. No obvious surface drainage pathway is
evident; precipitation rapidly infiltrates the coarse surface soils. North of FDTA-1, the ground surface
slopes steeply to the northwest, where seeps and small streams are present. Relatively steep slopes
border the western perimeter of the site. There is no evidence of recent use of FDTA-1.

A 1952 aerial photograph, taken before fire training activities began, shows that FDTA-1 was a wooded
plateau. Subseguently, the area's topsoil and the upper portion of the subsoil apparently were removed
as part of runway construction activities. FDTA-1 then served as the main fire training site between
1956 and 1961, after which fire training moved to FDTA-2 (Site 8) m Zone 5. According to interviews with
base personnel during the Phase I records search (G-84), between 120,000 and 200,000 gallons of waste
fuels, oils, and spent solvents were burned during the 6 years that the training area was used.

Previous Investigations at FDTA-1

Stage 1

FDTA-1 was first identified as an area of possible environmental concern in the IRP Phase I Investigation
in 1983 (G-84) . This report ranked FDTA-1 fifth in the priority listing of Pease AFB sites showing the
highest potential for environmental concerns. Although FDTA-1 was not considered to potentially affect
the base water supply aguifer, the primary concern was the potential for contamination of the nearby
Peverly Ponds and surrounding wetlands, as well as the potential for long-term groundwater contaminant
migration beyond the base boundary. In addition, the report concluded that a study of the area was
necessary because of the known disposal of moderate guantifies of hazardous wastes, and the proximity of
the site to the Munitions Maintenance Sguadron (MMS) wells (3,200 feet away), an inactive base domestic

-------
well (2,000 feet away), and Great Bay, a critical environment for shellfishing (G-84).

The Stage 1 investigation was designed to confirm environmental contamination within FDTA-1, and to
assess the potential impact of this contamination on local groundwater. In response to Phase I
recommendations, Stage 1 began with a test pit operation in January 1985 to assess the lateral and
vertical extent of soil contamination. Following this test pit investigation, a monitor well was
installed northwest of the former burn area in February 1985 to evaluate groundwater guality. This well
was sampled three times (March, May, and August 1985). The Stage 1 results were summarized in the Phase
II, Stage 1 Confirmation/Quantification Final Report (G-527). Based on Stage 1 findings, FDTA-1 was
rated as a Category. II site, reguiring additional investigation to assess the extent of contamination.

Stage 2

The objective of the Stage 2 effort was to identify specific contaminants that could pose potential
hazards to human health and the environment. Stage 2 investigations of FDTA-1 began in October 1987 with
an aerial photograph review, which was summarized in Interim Technical Report No. 1 (G-530). In a 1952
photograph, taken before training activities began, FDTA-1 was a wooded plateau. A 1960 photograph shows
an approximate 6-acre burn area, with one large area and several smaller areas of blackened soil. A 1976
photograph shows the same darkened areas and also a north-south-trending scar, believed to be an
underground utility trench. A well- traveled dirt road, bordering the site to the northeast, is also
evident in the 1976 photograph. A soil-gas survey was conducted at FDTA-1 near the darkened stained
areas to screen for halogenated and aromatic compounds and petroleum hydrocarbons.

Based on the findings of the soil-gas survey, the FDTA-1 Stage 2 investigation continued with soil boring
drilling in March and October 1988 to collect soil samples for lithologic characterization and laboratory
analysis. Piezometers were installed in selected borings to determine groundwater elevations. In
September 1988, a bedrock well was installed as a couplet with the Stage 1 hybrid well (a well screened
across the OB and BR). Groundwater samples were collected from both wells in December 1988 and May 1989
to assess overburden and bedrock groundwater guality.

Based on Stage 2 findings, FDTA-1 was recommended for No Further Action m the Stage 2 Final Report
(G-540) . It was subseguently included in the No Further Action Proposed Plan for Landfill 3, Field
Maintenance Sguadron Eguipment Cleaning Site, and FDTA-1 (G-538). However, the review comments to the
Proposed Plan by EFA and NI-DFS recommended additional characterization of site soil and groundwater, to
be completed during Stage 4.

Stage 4

The Stage 4 FDTA-1 investigation began with an exploratory boring program conducted between August and
November 1991. Soil samples collected during this program were used to delineate further the extent of
soil contamination at the site. Drilling continued with risk assessment borings in March 1992. Soil
samples collected during this effort were used to determine potential risk to both human health and the
environment that may be associated with site soil. Based on the analytical results of risk assessment
sampling, additional soil samples for dioxin analysis were collected during September 1992. In addition,
piezometers were installed to verify groundwater flow direction. Groundwater samples were collected from
wells and piezometers at the site in August 1991, May 1992, and January and September 1993 to assess
groundwater guality in the area.

C. Site 10 (LFTS) Use and Response History

The Leaded Fuel Tank Sludge Disposal Area (LFTS) (Site 10) is a relatively flat area located between the
runway and Mclntyre Road. LFTS consists of two separate areas on the eastern and western sides of
Nottingham Road (see Figure 3) .

Based on the Phase I records search (G-84), LFTS was used from the late 1950s to 1978 for disposal of
sludges from cleaning of the leaded aviation gasoline (AVGAS) tanks, which were located at the Bulk Fuel
Storage Area (BFSA). Sludge from the cleaning operations included rust, water, residual fuels, fuel
sludge, and residue from sand blasting tank interiors. Approximately 350 gallons of sludge was estimated
to be generated from these cleanings over 23 years. In early years, this sludge was drummed and buried
at LFTs. In subseguent years, the sludge was spread on the ground surface.

Previous Investigations at LFTS

Stage 1

-------
LFTS was identified as an area of potential environmental concern during the Phase 1 investigation in
1983 (G-84). The report ranked LFTS ninth in the priority listing of Pease AFB sites showing the highest
potential for environmental concerns. Further study was recommended because of the known disposal of
small guantifies of hazardous wastes at the site and because of the proximity of the site to the Haven
well (4,800 feet to the east) and Great Bay.

The objective of the Stage 1 investigation at LFTS was to confirm contamination, to locate disposal sites
at LFTS, and to assess potential off-site contaminant migration Because the precise location of the
buried drums at LFTS was unknown, a geophysical investigation was conducted to investigate site
boundaries and potential buried drums. This survey was conducted in October 1984 using GPR and
magnetomerry.

Following completion of the geophysical survey, a power auger and test pit investigation was conducted to
further evaluate the extent of contamination at LFTS. Power auger borings were drilled during November
and December 1984 in areas of suspected waste disposal. In January 1985, test pits were excavated near
anomalies detected during the geophysical survey. During the test pit operation, a pocket of three
buried drums was found. Samples of adjacent stained soil were collected for analysis, and the drums were
removed from the site to an interim staging area at Landfill 5 (LF-5) until they could be properly
disposed of. As a result of the test pit investigation, two monitor wells were installed at LFTS in
January 1985 to assess the impact of the site on groundwater guality and to monitor background
groundwater guality. Groundwater samples were subseguently collected three times (March, May, and August
1985). Based on Stage 1 findings, LFFS was rated as a Category II site, reguiring additional
investigation to assess the extent of contamination. The results of the Stage 1 investigation were
summarized in the Stage 1 Final Report (G-525).

Stage 2

The objective of the Stage 2 effort was to identify specific contaminants that could pose potential
hazards to human health and the environment, and to confirm the locations of drum disposal areas on-site.
Based on Stage 1 recommendations, Stage 2 investigations at LFTS were undertaken between October 1987 and
January 1988 with magnetomerry and GPR surveys to identify potential drum burial sites. Based on
anomalies encountered during this survey, test pits were excavated in March 1988. During this effort, a
concrete block with steel reinforcing rods, a steel pipe, and two crushed drums were discovered and
removed.

A soil-gas survey was also conducted at LFTS during Stage 2. Soil-gas samples collected at LFTS were
analyzed for selected halogenated and aromatic volatile organic compounds (VOCs), methyl ethyl ketone
(MEK) , and total hydrocarbons. The results of the survey indicated the presence of low concentrations of
PCE in the northern portion of the site; elevated concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons near the
center of the site; and elevated concentrations of aromatic VOCs in three areas (surrounding and
immediately northwest of the area of elevated hydrocarbon concentrations, and southeast of the VORTAC).

Based on the results of the geophysical and soil-gas investigations, soil borings were drilled at LFTS in
March, April, and November 1988. Soil samples were collected for lithologic information and laboratory
analysis. In addition, several piezometers were installed to obtain groundwater elevation measurements.

In September 1988, an Upper Sand (US) monitor well was installed as a couplet with the Stage 1 hybrid
well. A bedrock well also was installed in September 1988 to monitor bedrock groundwater guality.
Groundwater samples were collected from all monitor wells in December 1988 and May 1989. A short-term
pumping test was performed to characterize the hydraulic properties of the US water-bearing unit. Based
on Stage 2 findings, LFTS was recommended for further study during the Stage 4 investigations. The Stage
2 effort at the LFTS was summarized in the Stage 2 Final Report (G-540).

Stage 4

Stage 4 activities at LFTS were designed to collect data for the risk assessment and detailed analysis of
remedial alternatives. The LFTS Stage 4 investigation began with the collection of three surface soil
samples in August 1991. These samples were collected adjacent to localized areas of contamination
discovered during the Stage 2 effort to aid in risk evaluation. Exploratory borings were drilled and
sampled during September and October 1991 to characterize site soil. Piezometers were installed in
selected borings to monitor groundwater flow direction and to allow for collection of groundwater samples
for screening purposes. Drilling continued with soil sampling for the risk assessment, stratigraphic
sampling to characterize site soil, and monitor well installation between March and May 1992. Existing
and newly installed wells were sampled in May 1992. The results of this Stage 4 work were summarized in
the Zone 2 SCS (G-591) . Follow-on work subseguent to issuing the SCS continued in October 1992 and
included additional soil borings to assess the extent of soil contamination in the source area.
Additional overburden and bedrock wells were installed to investigate the extent of groundwater

-------
contamination, and to provide for a more detailed assessment of groundwater flow characteristics. In
addition to the drilling activities, a short-duration step test and 48-hour, constant-rate pumping test
were performed on well 6048 in December 1992. Additional soil sampling and XRF analyses for lead were
completed in June 1994 based on NHDES comments. The results of this effort were described in the letter
report titled "Leaded Fuel Tank Sludge Area X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF) Letter Report" (November 1994)
(G-735) .

D. Site 22 (BA-1) Use and Response History

Burn Area I (BA-1) is a relatively flat area of stressed vegetation located east of Mclntyre Road and
southwest of Nottingham Road (see Figure 3). Most of the site is devoid of topsoil and, therefore,
unable to support vegetation. No obvious surface drainage pathways are evident; precipitation apparently
infiltrates rapidly in the sandy surface soil. The main source area of contamination at BA-1 is believed
to be a circular former burn area, characterized by blackened or stained soil and little or no
vegetation. Another smaller area of stained soil exists west of the main former burn area near Mclntyre
Road. This area is littered with burned clothing, shoes, and other materials. Mounded soil south of the
main former burn area represents an additional potential source area of contamination.

BA-1 was first identified during an aerial photograph review prior to the start of Stage 1 activities.
The site was reported to have been used for burning spent fuels/solvents or as a fire training area some
time between 1954 and 1976 (G-540). Aerial photograph review indicated that BA-1 was forested at least
through 1952. By 1960, the area had been denuded of vegetation. The 1962 aerial photograph shows a
circular blackened area surrounded by what appears to be a berm in the southeastern portion of the site.
The 1976 aerial photograph shows BA-1 as a sparsely vegetated area with a dark stain at the southern
border. A blackened area, adjacent to LFTS, evident in aerial photographs, roughly corresponds to the
current location of the main former burn area. By 1987, the area was revegetated, and showed little
evidence of past activities.

Previous Investigations at BA-1

Stage 1

BA-1 was not included in the 1983 Phase I records search, but was identified on aerial photographs prior
to the onset of the Phase II Stage 1 activities. At that time, the site was rated as Category II (i.e.,
reguiring additional investigation), and field work was recommended. The work performed consisted of
reassessing aerial photographs, installing monitor wells, collecting groundwater samples, and performing
GPR and electromagnetic (EM) surveys. Stage 1 field activities were performed in 1985 and included the
aforementioned tasks, an in situ permeability test of an overburden monitor well, and a test pit
excavation operation.

Stage 2

Stage 2 field activities were conducted in Zone 2 between October 1987 and December 1988 and included
sampling soil-gas, drilling soil borings, and installing piezometers and monitor wells. These efforts
were conducted to locate the source of contamination at the site. Groundwater and soil samples from the
site were collected and analyzed to characterize the nature and extent of contamination. Geotechnical
tests were performed on site soil, and slug tests were conducted in monitor wells to assess the hydraulic
properties of the overburden. The results of the Stage 2 investigation are summarized in the IRP Stage 2
Final Report (G-540). As a result of the Stage 2 findings, BA-1 was classified as Category II, reguiring
additional investigation. Recommendations for additional work included the installation of one
domgradient overburden well for use as a potential recovery well because of the presence of free-phase
petroleum product found in a piezometer; installation of one stream gage at Lower Peverly Pond; sampling
of existing and proposed wells for VOCs, semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs), and metals; and
performing hydraulic testing on the proposed well.

Stage 4

Stage 4 field activities at BA-1 were initiated in September 1991 with the drilling and sampling of
exploratory soil borings to characterize the nature and extent of soil contamination at the site. Field
work continued in April 1992 with the installation of monitor wells and piezometers to assist in
groundwater guality and flow direction assessment and with the abandonment of the Stage 1 hybrid well. A
groundwater sampling round was conducted on previously existing and newly installed wells in May 1992.
Risk assessment borings were also drilled and sampled at BA-1 in March 1992 to evaluate the potential
risk to human health and the environment presented by contaminated on-site soil and groundwater. Based
on the analytical results of this effort, additional soil samples were collected for dioxin analysis in
September 1992. The results of the initial Stage 4 field efforts at BA-1 are summarized in the Zone 2

-------
SCS (G-591). Stage 4 follow-on work continued at BA-1 between October 1992 and September 1993; the
results of Stage 4 efforts are summarized in Section 4 of the Draft Final Zone 2 RI Report (G-626) are in
Section V of this report.

E. Site 37 (BA-2) Use and Response History

Burn Area 2 (BA-2) is located southwest of LFTS near the eastern side of Mclntyre Road (see Figure 3).
This site covers approximately 3.4 acres and consists of wooded ground surrounding roughly circular areas
characterized by blackened surface soil with little or no vegetation. BA-2 and its surrounding area
exhibit little topographic relief, and no surface drainage is evident. A small building (Building 415)
is situated at the northeastern edge of the site This building is an Air Force electrical transfer
station used to support Air Force TACAN eguipment. The site was originally considered part of LFTS, but
it was studied as a separate site during the Stage 4 effort because evidence indicated that the area was
used for different purposes than LFTS, and, therefore, different contaminants might be present.

BA-2 was suspected to be a former fire training area or fuel/waste solvent burn area. The exact period
of use is not certain, but based on aerial photograph reviews, use of BA-2 began sometime between 1954
and 1960 and ended before 1976. A smaller, circular area of blackened soil located southeast of the main
former burn area is also believed to be associated with burn activities. Identification of the area as a
former burn site is based on the current presence of blackened soil and charred materials.

Previous Investigations at BA-2

Stage 2

BA-2 was not included in the January 1984 Phase I report, and also was not investigated during the Phase
II, Stage 1 effort. The site was identified and investigated during the Stage 2 effort. when it was
considered part of LFTS. Stage 2 field work at BA-2 was performed from March 1988 through May 1989, and
included a soil-gas survey, EM survey, monitor well installation, and soil and groundwater sampling and
analysis. As a result of the Stage 2 investigation, the site was rated as Category II, reguiring
additional investigation. The Stage 2 Final Report (G-540) summarizes the results of this field effort.
Recommendations following the Stage 2 efforts included creating a separate designation for BA-2, drilling
and sampling three soil borings around the perimeter of the former burn area, installing and
sampling monitor wells, and assessing the hydraulic properties of the water-bearing unit.

Stage 4

In August 1991, Stage 4 field activities were initiated to further characterize the nature and extent of
contamination at BA-2. This field effort began with drilling and sampling exploratory, and
characterization borings. Field work continued in spring 1992 with installation and sampling of monitor
wells. In March 1992, risk assessment borings were drilled to assess potential risk to human health and
the environment, and follow-on risk assessment samples were collected in September 1992. The results of
the initial Stage 4 effort were discussed in the Zone 2 SCS (G-591). Additional Stage 4 work included
further assessment of the extent of soil and water contamination and groundwater flow directions.

F. Site 43 (MRDDA) Use and Response History

The Mclntyre Road Drum Disposal Area (MRDDA), located west of Mclntyre Road and south of Nottingham Road
in Zone 2 (see Figure 3), is generally open, with a thick growth of low brush and small trees covering
the northern guarter of the site. Elsewhere ground surface is generally devoid of topsoil and is covered
with sand and gravel. The area is generally fiat along the side bordering Mclntyre Road; however, the
southwestern edge has a steep embankment with a topographic relief of approximately 30 feet. This
embankment resulted from sand and gravel excavation adjacent to MRDDA.

Little information is available concerning the history and use of MRDDA. When first discovered during
the IR Stage 2 effort, MRDDA showed signs of past earthmoving activities. An elongated ridge,
approximately 4 feet high, and approximately 50 feet by 425 feet in size, was parallel to Mclntyre Road.
A cluster of 55-gallon drums and 5-gallon can, was partially exposed at the surface of the ridge;
conseguently, the ridge and adjacent areas were suspected to be locations of historic subsurface
disposal. The buried drums were suspected to have been associated either with disposal from other sites
within the zone, or with the construction of Mclntyre Road in 1972.

Previous Investigations at MRDDA

Stage 3B

-------
MRDDA was first investigated in August 1990 during the Stage 3B Preliminary Assessment/Site Investigation
(PA/SI) (G-553) as Point of Interest (POI) 15. Analytical results from surface soil samples collected
during the PA/SI effort suggested that past disposal practices at the Site may have affected surface soil
in the area. Recommendations for additional investigation resulting from the PA/SI work included a
geophysical survey and test pit operation to locate, characterize, and remove buried wastes from the
site.

Stage 4

Geophysical surveys were conducted in July 1991 to locate buried metal objects and disposal pits.
Subseguently, an Intensive Test Pit Operation (ITPO) was performed in September 1991. During the ITPO,
the berm was excavated and potential sources of contamination (e.g., drums and pails) were removed from
the site and disposed of off base. The results of this investigation are discussed in the Letter Report
for the Intensive Test Pit Operation at the Mclntyre Road Drum Disposal Area (G-597). The soil
immediately adjacent to the excavated drums was neither stained nor contaminated. Based on the lack of
soil contamination, the excavated drums and containers were probably empty at the time of disposal.

Stage 4 activities at MRDDA continued with monitor well installation and groundwater sampling. Drilling
at the site was conducted between October 1991 and October 1993. Soil samples were collected during
drilling to characterize site soil more fully and to identify whether soil contamination was present at
this site. Overburden and bedrock monitor wells were installed and sampled to evaluate groundwater
guality. In addition, overburden piezometers were installed to obtain information on groundwater flow
directions.

Two additional test pit operations were performed during spring 1993. One was at the Mclntyre Road Sand
Pit Area (MRSPA), located southwest of MRDDA, and the other was at an area west of MIKDDA where surficial
disposal was evident. All potential sources of contamination (e.g., drums, scrap metals, and tires) were
removed from both areas during these efforts.

Tables 2.1-1, 2.2-1, and 2.4-1 in the Draft Final Zone 2 RI Report provide a summary of the Zone 2 field
investigation activities in Stages 1, 2, and 4. Field activities conducted in Zone 2 during Stage 3
were limited to the MRDDA and are discussed under investigations at MRDDA (Stage 3B). A more detailed
description of Zone 2 history is presented in Sections 1 and 2 of the Draft Final Zone 2 RI Report
(G-626).

G. Site 24 (Peverly Ponds and Bass Pond)

Zone 2 is located in the Peverly Brook drainage system within the Great Bay watershed. Within Zone 2, the
Peverly Brook drainage is composed primarily of three manmade ponds (see Figure 4). From upstream to
downstream, they are Upper Peverly Pond, Lower Peverly Pond, and Bass Pond. Defined channels are located
between Mclntyre Road and Upper Peverly Pond, and between Lower Peverly Pond and Bass Pond. Surface
water from Bass Pond discharges directly into Great Bay. Surface water flow on the eastern side of
Peverly Brook is toward the west, where a series of seeps and drainage areas is located. Wetlands have
been delineated bordering the surface water bodies.

The Federal Facilities Agreement (FFA) identifies Site 24 as part of Zone 8, which includes many of the
waterways of Pease AFB. Because the Peverly and Bass Ponds are located adjacent to and downgradient of
the northern and western edges of Zone 2, they are subject to potential contamination from surface runoff
and groundwater discharge migration from sites in Zone 2. As such, these areas were investigated as part
of Zone 2 during the RI/FS effort.

Previous Investigations at Site 24

Stage 1

Four surface water locations (SW-13 through SW-16) in the Upper and Lower Peverly Ponds were sampled
during Stage 1 to assess the potential for contamination from surface runoff and groundwater migration.
These samples were collected in November 1984, and March, August. September, and December 1985.
Sampling locations SW-14 and SW-15 were later sampled in Stage 2 as 800 series locations 816 and 817,
respectively.

Stage 2

To further evaluate the potential impact of historic activities in Zone 2 on surface water and sediment
in Upper and Lower Peverly Ponds, surface water and sediment samples were collected from four locations
(814 and 817) in November 1988 and May 1989.

-------
Stage 4

Surface water and sediment samples were collected and analyzed from 20 stations within the Peverly Pond
drainage area in 1991 and 1992. These stations included points in Upper Peverly Pond, Lower Peverly
Pond, and Bass Pond; staff gages at an unnamed stream east of Mclntyre Road; and selected seeps and
springs in the area.

Quantitative macrobenthos samples were collected at four stations in the Peverly Pond drainage system
during 1991 to characterize existing conditions and to evaluate the potential impacts of zone-related
contaminants on the aguatic communities. The macrobenthos stations were located to correspond to surface
water and sediment sampling locations. This placement was designed to facilitate the integration of
biological community information with surface water and sediment analytical results.

Fish sampling also was conducted as part of the Stage 4 activities at Site 24. This sampling was
completed in October 1991 along the shoreline of Bass Pond. All available fish habitats in the area were
surveyed during the sampling effort.

H. Zone 2 Enforcement History

The enforcement history relative to Pease AFB, including Zone 2, is summarized as follows:

• In 1976, the Department of Defense (DOD) devised a comprehensive IRP to assess and control
environmental contamination that may have resulted from past operations and disposal
practices at DOD facilities.

• In June 1980, DOD issued a Defense Environmental Quality Program Policy Memorandum (DEQPPM)
reguiring identification of past hazardous waste disposal sites on DOD agency installations.
The DEQPPM was issued in response to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of
1976, and in anticipation of CERCLA.

On 14 July 1989, Pease AFB was proposed for addition to the NPL The effective date of
addition was 21 February 1990.

On 24 April 1991, the Air Force, EPA, and NHDES signed an FFA establishing the protocol and
timetable for conducting the RI/FS and remedial design/remedial action processes at Pease
AFB.

As part of the timetable established in the FFA, the Air Force, in an effort to streamline activities,
designed a basewide strategy plan for conducting an RI/FS investigation. This strategy plan grouped the
sites at Pease AFB into seven zones or operable units (OUs) based on geographic location, potential
receptors, and potential future uses. RI/FS reports were prepared for each of these seven zones. An
eighth zone, which included selected waterways at Pease AFB, also was identified in the FFA. Because of
its geographic location, Site 24, which was originally identified as part of Zone 8, was investigated as
part of the Zone 2 RI/FS effort.

III. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION

Throughout the recent history of the Zone 2 sites, there has been community concern and involvement.
EPA, NHDES, and the Air Force have kept the community and other interested parties apprized of site
activities through informational meetings, fact sheets, press releases, public meetings, and Restoration
Advisory Board - Technical Review Committee (RAB-TRC) meetings.

In January 1991, the Air Force released a community relations plan, which outlined a program to address
community concerns and keep citizens informed about and involved in remedial activities. This plan was
updated and reissued in September 1994.

Numerous fact sheets have been released by the Air Force throughout the IRP program at Pease AFB. These
fact sheets are intended to keep the public and other concerned parties apprized of developments and
milestones in the Pease IRP. The fact sheets released to date that concern LF-1, FDTA-1, LFTS, BA-1,
BA-2, and MRDDA are listed as follows.

-------
                             Fact Sheet                                        Release Date

                Pease AFB Installation Restoration Program Update               October 1991

                Pease AFB Installation Restoration Program Update               December 1992

                Zone 2 Proposed Plan                                            March 1995

In addition to the fact sheets, a number of public meetings have been held concerning the remedial
activities at Pease AFB including Zone 2 sites.  On 14 November 1991 an IRP update public meeting was
held, and on 12 January 1993 an IRP public workshop and meeting was conducted to provide the public with
information on the status of the IRP at Pease AFB.  The Air Force held a public informational meeting on
11 April 1995 to describe the preferred remedy for Zone 2.  Responses to verbal comments from this
meeting are included in the Responsiveness Summary (see Appendix D).  A full transcript of the public
hearing is available in the Administrative Record file at Pease AFB.  In addition, a formal public
comment period for the Proposed Plan was conducted between 22 March and 21 April 1995.  There were no
written comments received during that period.

An administrative record containing documents and correspondence pertaining to the Pease AFB IRP is
maintained at Pease AFB in Building 43.  An index of the administrative record is maintained in the EPA
Region I in Boston, Massachusetts, and is also presented in a condensed form in Appendix E.

IV.  SCOPE AND ROIiE OF OPERABLE UNIT OR RESPONSE ACTION

Zone 2 consists of six sites: Site I (Landfill 1 or LF-1) , Site 7  (Fire Department Training Area 1 or
FDTA-1), Site 10 (Leaded Fuel Tank Sludge Area or LFrs),  Site 22  (Burn Area 1 or BA-1), Site 37 (Burn
Area 2 or BA-2), and Site 43 (Mclntyre Road Drum Disposal Area or MRDDA).  Site 24 (Peverly Ponds) is
also addressed as part of the Zone 2 action. The locations of these sites are shown in Figure 3.  In
addition to the aforementioned sites, groundwater flowing beneath these sites also is addressed as part
of Zone 2 remedial action.

The overall zone cleanup strategy focuses on three remedial issues:

       •      Source control for any of the aforementioned six sites whose contents (i.e.,  waste material,
              free-phase product,  or contaminated soils)  pose significant human health or ecological risk.
              In assessing this risk,  both direct contact with source materials and leaching of
              contaminants from source  materials to groundwater/surface water are considered (see Sections
              VI and VII).

       •      Management of migration of contaminants detected in Zone 2 groundwater  at concentrations
              that  could potentially pose risk to receptors.   This portion of the overall remedy also
              addresses protection of potential future on-zone groundwater receptors.

       •      Long-term monitoring of surface water and sediments, including fish tissue sampling,  to
              ensure that Zone  2 source areas do not  impact the Peverly Ponds and Bass Pond (Site 24).

The remedial actions outlined in this ROD are intended as the only final actions for Zone 2. No other
RODs exist for Zone 2.

Remediation at a Superfund site typically involves activities to remove or isolate contaminant source
materials in conjunction with activities that mitigate migration of contamination through groundwater
and/or surface water pathways.   As stated previously, this ROD addresses both source control and
management-of-migration measures at Zone 2. The remedial alternative developed for Zone 2 was designed to
reduce potential human health and environmental risks identified in the risk assessment for Zone 2.  The
results of the risk assessment, which are presented in the Draft Final Zone 2 RI Report  (G-626) and
summarized in Section VI of this ROD, form the basis for concluding that soil media at FDTA-1, BA-2,
LFTS, and MRDDA do not reguire remediation.  No further source control action is proposed for these sites
under CERCLA.

Because of the lack of significant contamination at LF-1, and because significant sources of
contamination were not identified at the site, no further action is proposed for source materials at this
site under CERCLA.   In a separate action, which is not part of this ROD, the Air Force will perform final
closure of IF-1 in accordance with NHDES landfill closure, groundwater protection, and other applicable
reguirements.  NHDES will have jurisdiction over closure activities, and plans will be coordinated with
the respective NHDES divisions, independent of CERCLA and the FFA.

-------
At BA-1, the ecological risk assessment indicated that arsenic was the only contaminant detected in soil
that may pose an unacceptable ecological risk. However, arsenic was detected at concentrations above
background at only 2 of 13 sampling locations. Arsenic was detected at a concentration above
leaching-based cleanup goals (i.e., concentration that could potentially leach from soil into groundwater
and cause groundwater contamination that may present an unacceptable human health risk) at only 1 of 13
locations. LNAPL and residual product are present at BA-1. For this reason, the removal of LNAPL and
residual product from BA-1 was established as a remedial action objective (RAO). Subsection VILA
presents medium-specific RAOs in detail.

Additionally, contaminants associated with site soil have leached to groundwater and resulted in
groundwater contaminant concentrations that exceeded ARARs and may present an unacceptable human health
risk. The human health risk assessment indicated that contaminants in overburden and bedrock groundwater
at Zone 2 may pose a health risk to potential future groundwater users in excess of EPA acceptable risk
range (10-4 to 10-6 for cancer risk, and a hazard index of less than 1 for noncancer risk).

In the Zone 2FS Report (G-625) , the Air Force established cleanup levels for contaminants in Zone 2
groundwater to address groundwater contamination in Zone 2. For the purposes of risk assessment, cleanup
goal selection, and evaluation of remedial alternatives, soil and debris at each of the six sites were
considered to represent distinct source areas. However, groundwater flowing beneath the sites was
grouped into OUs. A total of four groundwater OUs resulted as follows:

• Groundwater beneath LF-1.
Groundwater beneath FDTA-1.
• Groundwater beneath BA-2.
Groundwater beneath BA-1, LFTS, and MRDDA, collectively.

The remedial alternative developed for Zone 2 addresses LNAPL, residual LNAPL, and contaminated
groundwater.

Pesticides were detected in a limited number of sediment samples from Upper and Lower Peverly and Bass
Ponds (Site 24) at levels that do not pose significant ecological risk. DDD and DDE were detected in
fish tissue collected from these water bodies at levels that may present risk to ecological receptors.
Inorganics were detected in these water bodies at levels exceeding regulatory standards. In addition,
sediment samples from Zone 2 seeps contained elevated levels of arsenic, nickel, and silver. However, in
view of the limited number of sampling locations affected, and because of the potential for resuspension
of sediment contaminants during remediation, the remedial alternative for Zone 2 includes long-term
monitoring only.

In summary, the preferred alternative consists of the following actions:

• In situ SVE treatment of BA-1 source area LNAPL and residual LNAPL with enhancement of SVE
by injection of air below the water table into the Marine Clay and Silt (MCS), and treatment
of extracted soil vapor for removal of VOCs.

• Establishment of institutional controls restricting the future use of Zone 2 groundwater,
including a GMZ, and conducting long-term GMZ monitoring.

• Natural attenuation of groundwater contamination During and following the completion of SVE
treatment of source area LNAPL and residual LNAPL enhanced by injection of air below the
water table, groundwater guality will be remediated by natural attenuation.

• Long-term monitoring of surface water, sediment, and fish tissue in Upper and Lower Peverly
and Bass Ponds.

These remedial actions are discussed in detail in Sections VIII through X of this ROD.

V. SUMMARY OF SITE CHARACTERISTICS

Section 1 of the Draft Final Zone 2 FS Report (G-625), contains an overview of the Draft Final Zone 2 RI
Report (G-626). Based on the results of the RI, a working conceptual model was developed that
incorporates all available data (from Stages 1 through 4) concerning Zone 2 and its vicinity, including
geological, hydrological, and analytical data and field measurements and visual observations. These data
show that soil and groundwater have been affected by past disposal practices in Zone 2. The salient
points of the conceptual model are summarized as follows:

-------
• Chemicals of concern remaining in the unsaturated soil are primarily total petroleum
hydrocarbons (TPHs) at FDTA-1, BA-1, LFTS, and BA-2, and dioxins and lead at concentrations
above background at BA-2. Low levels of contaminants remain in unsaturated soil at LF-1 and
the MRDDA; however, as discussed later in this section, many of the compounds detected were
present at levels below guantification limits.

• The principal source areas of concern in the zone are the burn areas at BA-1 and BA-2 and
the LFTS, in the vicinity of wells 543 and 5059. Although the soil in the unsaturated zone
in these areas is generally devoid of contaminants (with the exception of dioxins and lead
above background levels in surface soil at BA-2), the saturated soils in these three areas
have significant associated residual contamination, including benzene, toluene,
ethylbenzene, and xylenes (BTEX) and TPHs. The highest level of contamination is at the
US/MCS interface.

• A small area of free-phase product occurs at the US/MCS interface at BA-1, adjacent to a
former burn area. This is the only location in Zone 2 where free-phase product has been
observed.

• Groundwater contamination in Zone 2 consists primarily of the following compounds: BTEX,
other aromatic hydrocarbons (AHCs), low levels of halogenated hydrocarbons (HHCs), and
metals (including arsenic, manganese, and lead).

• The following organic compounds have exceeded the Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) in
groundwater from the central part of the zone: benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene, and
naphthalene in overburden and benzene in bedrock. Ethylene dibromide (EDB) exceeded the MCL
at one Lower Sand (LS) location at BA-1. Metals concentrations exceeded primary MCLs at
LF-1 and BA-1 (arsenic) and LFTS (lead) (see Figure 5).

Overburden BTEX plumes emanate from source areas at BA-1, LFTS, and BA-2. The plume at BA-1
flows northward 1,200 feet from the source area at two former burn areas within the US and
LS/Glacial Till (GT) (see Figure 5). North of the source areas, where bedrock is highly
fractured, the plume extends into the shallow bedrock groundwater flow zone. BTEX
contamination in the bedrock from BA-1 extends 300 feet in a northwesterly direction toward
LF-1 and approximately 1,200 feet west to southwest of the source area (see Figure 6). This
west-southwest plume flows directly under the MRDDA.

• BTEX contamination from the LFTS source area flows both east and west in the overburden and
bedrock groundwater flow units because this site is located on the groundwater divide (see
Figures 5 and 6). The northwestward extent of the LFTS overburden plume merges with the
BA-1 overburden plume. Beneath the source area, contaminants extend into the LS/GT flow
unit. In the bedrock, this plume and the BA-1 plume are included as one because it is not
possible to distinguish the source from which the bedrock contamination has originated.

• BTEX contamination at BA-2 appears to be restricted to a small area in the overburden only.
Beneath the source area at BA-2, the MCS may have acted to effectively retard downward
migration of contaminants.

• Surface water does not appear to have been impacted by past practices in Zone 2. Sediment
samples contain pesticides and metals above background levels. The pesticides are the
result of basewide pesticide use and not a result of spillage or disposal of pesticides in
Zone 2. A source of metals contamination has not been identified in Zone 2. Instead,
metals appear to be concentrated in sediment, where organic matter and Eh and pH conditions
favor precipitation and/or sorption of metals.

The subsections that follow provide site-specific summaries on contamination in the soil, groundwater,
surface water, and sediment.

A. Distribution of Contaminants in Soil

Source characterization at Zone 2 included the collection and analysis of subsurface soil, buried debris,
and surface soil samples. Surface soil refers to that material from 0 to 2 feet below ground surface
(ft BGS) , and subsurface soil refers to material collected at a depth of 2 feet or greater. Soil
contamination was most significant in BA-1. Maximum concentrations of contaminants detected in surface
and subsurface soil are presented on a site-specific basis in Tables 1 through 12 in Appendix A. Also

-------
included in the tables are relevant background concentrations and regulatory guidance values. Summaries
of soil contamination at each site are presented in the following subsections.

LF-1

It is estimated that approximately 19,800 yd3 of saturated fill material exist at LF-1 across
approximately 6.6 acres. All of the saturated fill material is believed to be natural organic fill. The
volume of saturated fill would be greatest during periods of the year when the water table elevation is
highest, although all of the saturated fill would still be natural organic materials. The entire volume
of inert debris and solid waste at LF-1 has been estimated at approximately 617,000 yd3. Analytical
results from soil samples collected from surface soil, soil borings, and test pits were used to evaluate
the extent of soil contamination in both fill and naturally occurring soil at LF-1. Figure 7 illustrates
the distribution of contaminants at the site.

The only VOCs detected above guantification limits in LF-1 surface soil were acetone, diethyl ether, and
trichlorofluoromethane (TCFM) in a sample collected from the mound at the toe of the landfill (location
3025) and MEK in a sample from the top of the landfill (location 3006). VOCs were not detected in any of
the LF-1 test pit samples. MEK and toluene were the only VOCs detected above laboratory guantification
limits in LF-1 subsurface samples. In addition to these two compounds, VOCs detected below instrument
guantification traits consisted of tetrachloroethene, ethylbenzene, toluene, xylenes, and
1,1,1-trichioroethane. With the exception of MEK, detected in one sample from boring 7942, all the VOCs
detected were present in samples collected from unsaturated fill material.

TPHs were not detected in any of the surface soil samples. The maximum detected value for TPH was 43 J
mg/kg in the duplicate of a sample collected from boring 7942. All three samples were collected from
unsaturated fill material. Benzoic acid was the only SVOC detected above laboratory guantification
limits in surface soil. Several SVOCs, primarily PAHs, were detected in subsurface soil at LF-1 at
concentrations above laboratory guantification limits. All other SVOCs were either not detected or were
detected below laboratory guantification limits.

With the exception of DDT, detected at a concentration below laboratory guantification limits, no other
pesticides or PCBs were detected in surface soil at LF-1. Alpha-endosulfan, heptachlor epoxide, and
pp'DDD were the only pesticides/PCBs detected in subsurface soil samples; these were detected at
concentrations below laboratory guantification limits in soil from the unsaturated zone. No other
pesticides or PCBs were detected in subsurface soil at LF-1.

Arsenic and calcium were the only metals detected at concentrations above current established background
levels (G-609) in LF-1 surface soil. Several metals were detected in the subsurface sod samples at
levels that exceeded established background values. The metals were arsenic, boron, calcium, copper,
iron, lead, manganese, selenium, sodium, and zinc.

MRDDA

Analytical results from surface soil borings and test pits were used to evaluate soil contamination at
MRDDA. Four surface sod samples (307 through 310) were collected from the former berm at MRRDA during
the 1990 Stage 3B PA/SI. In these surface soil samples, VOCs were detected at concentrations below
laboratory guantification limits and included the compounds tetrachloroethene (PCE), toluene, and
1,1,1-TCA TCFM. As Figure 8 shows, these sampling locations at the former berm were removed as a result
of excavation activities during the 1991 ITPO at the site. PCE and acetone were the only VOCs detected
above laboratory guantification limits in subsurface soil at MRDDA. Diethyl ether and toluene were
detected at estimated concentrations below laboratory guantification limits in one sample each.

TPHs were detected in the surface soil samples, with a maximum concentration of 390 mg/kg. With the
exception of one sample, collected adjacent to an electrical motor coil in test pit 9024, TPHs were not
detected in any subsurface samples.

DDT was the only pesticide detected above laboratory guantification limits in the surface and subsurface
soil at MRDDA. This compound was detected in one surface and one subsurface sample.

Mercury, detected in the four Stage 3B surface samples collected at MRDDA, was the only metal detected
above the background level. As discussed previously, the soil associated with these sampling locations
was removed during the 1991 ITPO excavation activities. None of the subsurface samples collected at
MRDDA contained metals above the established background.

-------
FDTA-1

The results of analyses of soil samples collected from surface soil and borings were used to evaluate
soil contamination at FDTA-1. Figure 9 illustrates the distribution of contaminants in surface soil
at FDTA-1 and Figure 10 illustrates the distribution of maximum TPH concentrations in unsaturated FDTA-1
soil.

In surface soil samples, VOCs were either not detected or were present at concentrations below laboratory
guantification limits. These compounds include carbon disulfide, MEK, TCFM, and diethyl ether. With the
exception of carbon disulfide, all of these compounds were detected in one location, and none of these
compounds were detected in a duplicate of this sample. Therefore, based on the guality assurance review,
the MEK, TCFM, and diethyl ether results are suspect, and it is assumed that these compounds are not
present in surface soil.

In subsurface soil samples, carbon disulfide and TCE were the only VOCs detected at concentrations at or
above laboratory, guantification limits. TCE was detected in samples

from a boring analyzed by WESTON's mobile laboratory. Samples from similar depths in adjacent borings
did not contain TCE. These samples were analyzed immediately after samples from Zone 3, which had very
high concentrations of TCE. Mobile laboratory instrument contamination is believed to be responsible for
the presence of TCE in these FDTA-1 soil samples. Trans-1,2-dichloroethene (trans-1,2-DCE),
1,2-dichloroethane (1,2-DCA), benzene, ethylbenzene, and m-xylene were detected in saturated subsurface
soil samples at concentrations below laboratory guantification limits.

TPHs were detected above laboratory guantification limits in all but one of the surface soil samples at
FDTA-1, at a maximum concentration of 15,000 mg/kg (see Figure 10). In subsurface soil samples, the
highest TPH concentrations were detected above the water table, with a maximum concentration of 6,500
mg/kg. The elevated TPH results for surface and subsurface soil appear to be primarily from locations
within the former burn area.

The dioxin compound groups HXCDD, OCDD, and TCDF were detected at very low concentrations in several
surface soil samples at FDTA-1. Later sampling of surface samples for specific congener analyses did not
reveal any dioxin compounds at these same locations. In subsurface soil samples, the dioxin/furan TCDF
was detected at concentrations below laboratory guantification limits in four of the six samples
submitted for analysis. The second round of sampling at these locations for specific TCDF congeners also
failed to detect any dioxin compounds.

Lead was detected in surface soil samples from three borings located in the former central burn area
above background concentrations. All other metals results were below established background
concentrations.

BA-1

Surface soil and soil boring samples were used to evaluate the extent Of Orgalflc contaminants and metals
in soil at BA-1. Figure 11 illustrates the location of contaminant cross sections A-A' and B-B', which
are shown in Figures 12 and 13, respectively. Figures 14 and 15 present the distribution of VOC
contamination in the unsaturated and saturated subsurface soil samples, respectively.

AHCs, in particular, BTEX compounds, were the primary VOC group detected at BA-1. In surface soil
samples, toluene and xylene were the only VOCs detected above instrument guantification limits. BTEX
compounds also were detected in unsaturated subsurface soil samples from the former burn area at
concentrations above laboratory guantification limits. MEK, TCE, toluene, and xylene were detected in
unsaturated soil samples below laboratory guantification limits (see Figure 14).

The highest total BTEX concentration were detected in saturated subsurface soil samples collected at or
near the MCS interface from locations at the two former burn areas (7709 and 740)(see Figures 12, 13, and
15). Several HHCs also were detected in subsurface soil samples at BA-1, but at concentrations below
laboratory guantification limits. In surface soil, the highest TPH concentration was 1,220 mg/kg. TPH
concentrations increased in the subsurface soil samples at BA-1, and were highest in the saturated
subsurface soil samples from borings located within the former burn areas.

Based on these analytical results, contaminated soil at BA-1 has been conservatively estimated to exist
across an area of approximately 15,400 ft2. LNAPL and residual product have been conservatively

-------
estimated to exist between 26 and 34 ft BGS. This represents an estimated volume of contaminated soil of
approximately 4,560 yd3. This contamination occurs predominantly in the US and MCS, and is almost
entirely within the saturated zone.

The dioxin compound groups OCDD, OCDF, and TCDF were detected in several BA-1 soil samples. Resampling
of soil was performed to verify the presence of specific congeners of these dioxins. OCDD was detected
in a surface soil sample from this second sampling round.

Arsenic, detected in one surface soil sample, was the only metal detected above established
background values in surface soil samples from BA-1. Arsenic, calcium, and nickel were detected in one
subsurface soil sample above background concentrations. Thallium also was detected in a subsurface soil
sample; however, no background value has been established for this metal.

LFTS

Soil sample analytical results from the surface and soil borings in LFTS were used to evaluate the extent
of soil contamination at that site. Figure 16 illustrates the distribution of VOC contamination in
surface soil.

In surface soil samples at LFTS, TCFM (detected in one sample) was the only VOC whose concentration was
above laboratory guantification limits. Diethyl ether and toluene were detected at concentrations below
laboratory guantification limits in surface soil at LFTS. VOC contamination in the subsurface soil at
LFTS consisted primarily of BTEX compounds. Toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene were the only VOCs
detected above laboratory guantification limits in the southwestern section of LFTS, west of Nottingham
Road. AHC concentrations were highest in samples collected from directly at and below the water table in
borings located at the center of the southwestern section of LFTS, the presumed source area.

In the northeastern section of LFTS, east of Nottingham Road, TCE was detected at concentrations both
above and below laboratory guantification limits in samples from one location only. These samples were
analyzed at the mobile laboratory with samples from Zone 3, which had elevated concentrations of TCE.
Therefore, mobile laboratory instrument contamination may have contributed to the presence of TCE in LFTS
samples. The compounds 1,1,1-trichloroethane (1,1,1-TCA) and toluene also were detected in the
northeastern section of LFTS at concentrations below laboratory guantification limits in soil samples
collected above the water table from two borings.

TPHs were detected at concentrations above laboratory guantification limits in six surface soil samples
at LFTS. The maximum TPH concentration detected was 34,000 mg/kg in surface soil sample 3023, collected
from adjacent to a drum exposed at the ground surface. An additional surface soil sample was collected in
a soil boring adjacent to sample 3023. TPHs were not detected in this surface soil sample.

TPHs were detected in 14 unsaturated subsurface samples and eight saturated subsurface soil samples at
LFTS. As with VOC contamination, TPH concentrations were highest at or just above the water table.

The pesticides DDT and p,p'-DDE were detected at concentrations above laboratory guantification limits in
a surface soil sample collected from boring 7806. These compounds were not detected in any other surface
or subsurface soil sample collected at LFTS.

Antimony was detected at a concentration of 11.9 mg/kg in one subsurface LFTS sample. There is no
established basewide background value for this metal, as it was not detected in any of the basewide
background soil samples (G-609). The detected concentration of antimony in this sample was, however,
lower than the detection limits of antimony for the background soil samples. Copper was detected at a
concentration slightly above background in a subsurface soil sample collected from boring 7411. Lead was
detected above the basewide background concentration of 65.3 mg/kg in one surface soil sample collected
near the presumed source area during the XRF study. The XRF screening result for lead, 120 mg/kg, was
not confirmed by laboratory analysis; the laboratory confirmation result from this location was 59.4
mg/kg, which is below the basewide background value for lead (G-735). No other metals were detected
above background concentrations.

-------
BA-2

Figures 17, 18, and 19 illustrate the distribution of contaminants in surface and unsaturated and
saturated subsurface soil at BA-2, respectively.

The only VOCs in the surface soil samples at BA-2 were detected at concentrations below laboratory
quantification limits. These compounds were 1,1,1-TCA, PCE, TCE, toluene, and xylenes. All VOCs present
in unsaturated subsurface soil samples at BA-2 also were detected at concentrations below laboratory
quantification limits. Compounds detected below laboratory quantification limits in one unsaturated
subsurface sample located in the former main burn area were TCE, and TCFM. PCE was detected in one
sample from characterization borinq 7336.

The followinq VOCs were detected in one saturated subsurface soil sample at BA-2 (borinq 730):
1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane, chlorobenzene, ethylbenzene, methyl isobutyl ketone, TCE, and xylenes.
1,1,1-TCA and toluene also were detected in this sample at concentrations below laboratory quantification
limits. TCFM was detected at concentrations below laboratory concentration limits in samples from borinq
7930, located 50 feet downqradient of 730.

TPHs were detected in five surface soil samples collected at BA-2. Three of the five samples analyzed
for TPH had concentrations exceedinq 1,000 mq/kq. The maximum TPH concentration in the unsaturated
subsurface soil was 3,200 mq/kq, in a sample collected from the main former burn area (borinq 7395). TPH
levels in unsaturated soil exceedinq 100 mq/kq were detected in samples from borinqs 7336, 7394, and
7396. The maximum TPH concentration in saturated subsurface soil was 640 mq/kq, in a borinq located
approximately 50 feet downqradient of the main former burn area.

All SVOCs present in the surface and subsurface soil samples at BA-2 were detected at concentrations
below laboratory quantification limits. The PCB conqener Aroclor-1260 was detected at concentrations
below laboratory quantification limits in two surface and one subsurface soil samples, and p,p'-DDE was
detected below reportinq limits in one surface soil sample at BA-2.

Fiqure 1.5-24 of the Draft Final Zone 2 FS Report (G-625) shows the distribution of dioxins in surface
soil at BA-2. HPCDD, HPCDF, HXCDD, OCDD, and OCDF were detected in samples from two risk assessment
borinqs. These locations are within or adjacent to the former main bum area. PCDD, HXCDD, HXCDF, OCDD,
and OCDF were detected at concentrations below laboratory quantification limits in samples from four
borinqs. To confirm these results, and to identify specific dioxin compounds, additional samples were
collected and analyzed. 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HPCCD, HPCDD, HPCDF, HXCDD, and OCDD were detected in the samples
collected durinq this second round of dioxin samplinq, as illustrated in Fiqure 1.5-24 of the Draft Final
Zone 2 FS Report (G-625) . Dioxin concentrations in subsurface soil at BA-2 were lower than dioxin
concentrations in surface soil.

Lead, detected in three samples, was the only metal that exceeded backqround levels (G-609) in BA-2
surface soil samples. Antimony was detected in a subsurface sample and its associated duplicate. There
is no established backqround value for this metal because it was not detected in any of the basewide
backqround soil samples (G-609). However, the detected value for antimony in sample 776 was only
sliqhtly above backqround sample detection limits.

Vanadium was detected at a concentration sliqhtly above backqround in the duplicate of a subsurface soil
sample. Vanadium was detected below backqround in the associated standard sample. Thallium was detected
at concentrations above laboratory quantification limits in a sample from characterization borinq 7335
(14.6 mq/kq), and at concentrations below laboratory quantification limits in a subsurface soil sample
and its duplicate. Thallium was not detected in the backqround soil samples collected at Pease AFB.
B. Distribution of Groundwater Contaminants

Groundwater samples collected from wells and selected piezometers within Zone 2 were analyzed to assess
the distribution of contaminants in qroundwater in the zone. Maximum concentrations of contaminants
detected in Zone 2 overburden and bedrock qroundwater, as well as relevant backqround concentrations and
requlatory quidance values, are presented in Table 13 in Appendix A. The subsections that follow
summarize the results of chemical analyses of qroundwater samples within the overburden and bedrock at
Zone 2 .

To describe the distribution of contaminants in qroundwater, the litholoqic units at Zone 2 were qrouped
into two cateqories: overburden and bedrock. The units that make up the overburden are fill, US, MCS,
LS, and GT. In this report, LS and GT are not always differentiated and are referred to as the LS/GT.

-------
Hybrid and shallow bedrock wells also are included with the overburden wells. Maps showing contaminant
distribution in the overburden and bedrock groundwater flow zones are presented in Figures 5, 6, 20, 21,
and 22.

Distribution of Organic Compounds

A review of the analytical data indicates that total BTEX is the only organic contaminant category to
depict an overburden contaminant plume (see Figure 5), and benzene is the only organic contaminant
prevalent enough to depict a bedrock contaminant plume within Zone 2 (see Figure 6). Benzene, toluene,
ethylbenzene, ethylene dibromide, naphthalene, and trichloroethene were detected at concentrations above
federal Safe Drinking Water Act MCLs and NHDES Ambient Groundwater Quality Standards (AGQSs) in the
central part of the zone. A map depicting the locations where these compound concentrations exceeded
MCLs in overburden groundwater is presented in Figure 20.

Non-BTEX organic contaminants were detected at widely scattered locations across Zone 2. The contaminants
appear to be more prevalent near known source areas; however, they are not abundant or consistent enough
to generate useful concentration contour maps.

Other chemical categories detected in the groundwater included HHCs, PAHs, and phthalates (PHTs). All
were detected at very low concentrations and were below MCLs.

Overburden Groundwater

Figure 5 depicts the distribution of total BTEX in groundwater within the unconsolidated overburden. The
total BTEX contours on the overburden map show three distinct source areas at LFTS, BA-1, and BA-2. BTEX
compounds have not been detected at FDTA-1, and only relatively minor amounts of HHCs and phthalates were
detected at LF-1. Low concentrations of BTEX compounds have been detected in two overburden wells (5134
and 7338) at the MRDDA; however, no source area for groundwater contamination has been identified at this
site. As such, although these wells are located at the MRDDA, they monitor the BA-1 plume, which has
migrated to the west from the BA-1 source area.

BTEX in the groundwater at BA-1 appears to originate along an area that stretches from piezometer 7935
and well 5105, which contain free-phase product, to the vicinity of monitor well 5065. From wells 5062,
5065, and 6107, the contaminants appear to have migrated to the north. The northern downgradient extent
of the plume in the overburden is defined by location 7687. West of the source area,. BTEX
contamination appears to have migrated into MRDDA as fax as piezometer 7934, and, additionally, 3 jlg/L of
benzene was detected in a sample from LS well 5134 at MRDDA. The plume migration implied by the total
BTEX contours is consistent with the direction of groundwater flow direction indicated by the Zone 2
water table elevation contour map (see Figure 1.4-19 of the Draft Final Zone 2FS Report (G-625).

Ethylene dibromide was contained in multiple rounds of groundwater samples from LS well 5107. This
compound was not detected in any other BA-1 wells (see Figure 20).

At LFTS, the extent of the total BTEX contamination is defined by nondetect results in all directions
except to the south. The total BTEX contours indicate a plume migration direction to the north from a
source area near well 543, which exhibited the highest BTEX concentrations. Benzene and naphthalene were
the two organic contaminants detected in LFTS overburden groundwater at concentrations above Applicable
or Relevant and Appropriate Reguirements (ARARs) from multiple wells.

At BA-2, total BTEX and halogenated VOCs were limited to the immediate vicinity of piezometers 730 and
7931, and well 5125 (see Figures 5 and 20). The extent of the BA-2 BTEX plume is delineated by the
nondetects in the following wells and piezometers: 7582 to the north, 542 to the west, 7802 to the east,
and 5108 and 5057 to the south. The majority of the BTEX contamination was attributable to xylenes. TCE
was detected at and above the MCL in piezometers 7931 and 730, respectively. TCE was not detected in
downgradient overburden groundwater samples.

Figure 21 illustrates the overburden groundwater samples with soluble metals concentrations above
background and any applicable MCLs and Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels (SMCLs). Most metals were
detected above background concentrations in overburden groundwater samples from at least one location
within Zone 2. The common rock-forming cations (i.e., iron manganese, silicon, and sodium) were found
above background levels at many sampling locations. Soluble metals concentrations that exceeded
background include: arsenic at LF-1 and BA-1, lead and cadmium at LFTS, and manganese at LF-1, LFTS, and
BA-1.

-------
Bedrock Groundwater

Benzene was detected in samples from six bedrock monitor wells, and concentrations in five of these six
were above the MCL during at least one sampling round. Figure 6 illustrates the contaminant contour for
total benzene in bedrock wells. The benzene plume in bedrock is defined by nondetects in several wells.

The shape of the bedrock plume and the concentrations of total BTEX detected indicate that maximum
concentrations and areal extent of the plumes are reduced in the bedrock compared with the overburden.
With the exception of benzene, the remaining BTEX compounds were detected at concentrations significantly
below their MCLs. There is no evidence of bedrock groundwater BTEX contamination at FDTA-1, LF-1, or
BA-2.

Unfiltered metals analytical results from groundwater samples collected from Zone 2 bedrock wells were
compared with background values determined for Pease AFB and with regulatory. guidelines. The results
were also compared with field turbidity measurements recorded at the time of field sampling. Comparison
of total dissolved solids (TDS) , total suspended solids (TSS) , and turbidity results indicate that the
highest results were in groundwater from LF-1. Bedrock wells at LF-1 tended to have higher turbidity
than other bedrock wells within Zone 2.

Most metals results exceeded background in at least one bedrock groundwater sample from Zone 2. Many
metals were detected above the total background concentration in one or more wells from LF-1.
Concentrations of soluble and total sodium exceeded background in most samples throughout Zone 2. The
occurrences of metals at concentrations above MCLs in Zone 2 bedrock groundwater were limited.

Light, Nonagueous-Phase Liquid

Light, nonagueous-phase liguid (LNAPL, or product) was observed at BA-1 to the west of the former main
burn area and a smaller former burn area, as shown in Figure 22. Product was initially detected in
piezometer 741, which was installed in March 1988. In November 1992, US well 5105 was installed and also
contained product. Product thickness was measured monthly in well 5105, and these measurements indicate
that product thickness in well 5105 has varied from 0.02 to 0.70 foot since the well was installed.
Analyses of the product from piezometer 741 and well 5105 were performed and the results of these
analyses indicate that the product is degraded JP-4 jet fuel.

To define the areal extent of product, four piezometers (7932 through 7935) were installed around well
5105 in August 1993 (see Figure 22). On 23 September 1993, piezometer 7395 contained 0.12 foot of
product. Product was not observed in the other three piezometers (7932, 7933, and 7934) . Based on these
data, it is estimated that 0.1 foot of LNAPL exists within an area of approximately 9,800 ft2 at BA-1.
Based on a soil porosity of 32%, it is estimated that 2,400 gallons of LNAPL may be present in this area.
No other piezometers or wells in BA-1 have been found to contain product.

C. Distribution of Surface Water and Sediment Contaminants

Surface water and sediment samples were collected in the Peverly Brook drainage bordering Zone 2 to
investigate the nature and extent of contamination from sites within Zone 2. Surface water and sediment
samples were collected and analyzed from 20 stations within the three ponds of the Peverly Brook drainage
area from 1988 to 1992. Data from seven staff gage stations that drain into Upper and Lower Peverly
Ponds are included in the discussion of Zone 2 surface water and sediment chemistry.

Surface water analytical data were compared to NHDES Surface Water Quality Regulations, Ambient Water
Quality Criteria (AWQC) for the Protection of Human Health ) Fish Consumption Only (FCO) , and to the
maximum background surface water analytical results collected at sampling locations outside Pease AFB
(G-609) . Freshwater Chronic Criteria were used when FCO criteria were not available. Sediment
analytical data were compared with National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
biological effects range ) low (ER-L) sediment values and biological effects range ) median (ER-M)
sediment values (G415) , Ontario Ministry of the Environment (MOE) lowest and severe effect levels, and to
the off-base maximum background sediment analytical data results (G-609) in the following discussion. In
addition, the Eguilibrium Partitioning (EgP) approach, a method recognized by EPA as a measure of
bioavailability, was used to subseguently assess the potential impact of hydrophobic organic chemicals
on sediment. Interstitial water concentrations calculated by the EgP approach were compared with
Freshwater Chronic Criteria.

Figures 23 and 24 show the locations of sampling stations and also summarize surface water and sediment
analytical results for each location sampled in Zone 2. Maximum concentrations of surface water and
sediment contaminants, as well as relevant background concentrations and regulatory guidance values, are
presented in Tables 14 through 21 in Appendix A. The paragraphs that follow summarize the sampling

-------
results.

Upper Peverlv Pond

No organic compounds were detected at concentrations above Remedial Objectives (ROs) in surface water
samples collected from Upper Peverly Pond. Six metals (aluminum, arsenic, iron, lead, manganese, and
zinc) were detected at concentrations above one or more regulatory-based RO in the September 1993 sample
collected from location 8018. Iron and manganese also were detected at concentrations above
regulatory-based ROs in the most recently collected sample from location 816.

Four organic compounds (2-butanone, benzo(k)fluoranthene, DDD, and DDE) were detected in Upper Peverly
Pond sediment samples at concentrations that exceeded the maximum background concentrations (see Figure
25). EgP values calculated for these compounds did not exceed AWQC chronic criteria.

Fourteen metals were detected in Upper Peverly Pond sediment samples at concentrations that exceeded the
maximum background concentrations. Four of the 14, arsenic, lead, nickel, and zinc, were detected in
Upper Peverly Pond sediments at concentrations that exceeded the NOAA ER-L and the maximum background
concentrations. The NOAA ER-M concentration was only exceeded for arsenic, nickel, and zinc at one
station each. Copper was detected above the maximum background concentration but below the NOAA ER-L.

Nine of the 14 metals (aluminum, barium, beryllium, calcium, cobalt, iron, manganese, sodium and
vanadium) were detected in Upper Peverly Pond sediment samples at concentrations that exceeded the
maximum background concentrations. No ER-L or ER-M concentrations are available for these nine metals.

Lower Peverlv Pond

Surface water and sediment samples were collected for analysis from five stations in Lower Peverly Pond
to assess potential contamination from Zone 2 (Figures 23 and 25).

Two inorganic analytes (cyanide and zinc) were detected in Lower Peverly Pond surface water samples at
concentrations exceeding background values and Freshwater Chromic Criteria. Cyanide was detected in a
November 1988 sample collected from station 817. Cyanide was not detected in surface water samples
collected during subseguent sampling events at any station located in Lower Peverly Pond.

Four organic compounds and four pesticides (DDT, DDD, DDE, and Lindane) were detected in Lower Peverly
Pond sediment samples at concentrations exceeding the maximum background concentrations. The EgP value
for DDT exceeded AWQC chronic criteria. The EgP value for pyrene also exceeded chronic criteria; however,
the concentration of pyrene detected was below the maximum background concentration.

Eleven metals were detected in lower Peverly Brook drainage sediment samples at concentrations that
exceeded the maximum background concentrations. No NOAA ER-L or ER-M values are available for eight of
these metals (i.e., aluminum, barium, beryllium, calcium, cobalt, iron, manganese, and vanadium).
Arsenic and zinc were detected at concentrations above NOAA ER-L concentrations, but below NOAA ER-M
concentrations. Copper was detected a; concentrations below the NOAA ER-L.

Bass Pond

Surface water and sediment samples were collected and analyzed from eight stations in Bass Pond to assess
potential contamination from Zone 2. The location of these eight stations and a summary. of the
analytical results for surface water and sediment samples included in this evaluation are shown in
Figures 23 and 24, respectively.

No organic compounds were detected at concentrations above ROs in surface water samples collected from
Bass Pond. Iron and manganese were each detected in one sample above a regulatory-based RO, but below
the background concentrations for surface water.

Three pesticides (DDD, DDE, and DDT) were detected in the Bass Pond sediments at concentrations exceeding
both the NOAA ER-L and ER-M concentrations. The EgP value for DDT exceeded AWQC chronic criteria. The
highest concentrations of DDD and DDE were detected at the uppermost station in Bass Pond. No VOCs or
SVOCs were detected in Bass Pond sediments at concentrations exceeding maximum background concentrations.
Two metals (arsenic and zinc) were detected in the Bass Pond sediments at concentrations that exceeded
the NOAA ER-L and the maximum background concentrations. Chromium and copper were detected at
concentrations above maximum background concentrations, but below NOAA ER-L values. No ER-L or ER-M

-------
concentrations are available for the 10 metals detected above maximum background concentrations:
aluminum, barium, beryllium, calcium, iron, magnesium, manganese, potassium, sodium, and vanadium,

VI. SUMMARY OF SITE RISKS

A risk assessment was performed to estimate the probability and magnitude of potential adverse human
health and environmental effects from exposure to contaminants identified in Zone 2. The human health
risk assessment followed a four-step process:

1. Contaminant identification, which identified those chemicals that, given the specifics of each of
the sites in the zone, were of significant concern. A summary of the chemicals of concern, by
medium, is presented in Table 22 in Appendix A.

2. Exposure assessment, which identified actual or potential exposure pathways, characterized the
potentially exposed populations, and determined the extent of possible exposure at each of the
sites.

3. Toxicity assessment, which considered the types and magnitude of adverse health effects associated
with exposure to hazardous substances at each of the sites.

4. Risk characterization, which integrated the three earlier steps to summarize the potential and
actual risks posed by hazardous substances at each site, including cancer and noncancer risks.

For a complete explanation of risks posed by Zone 2, refer to the baseline risk assessment presented in
Section 6 of the Draft Final Zone 2 RI Report (G-626) , which is available in the Administrative Record at
the Pease AFB Information Repository. Table 23 in Appendix A presents the human health risks on a
medium-specific basis. A summary of the findings of the human health and ecological risk assessments for
each Zone 2 site is presented in the subsections that follow.

LF-1, (Site 1) ) Soil and Groundwater

Human Health Risk: The risk assessment results indicated that there are no significant noncancer health
risks (hazard index is less than 1) associated with exposure of current or future potential workers to
soil contaminants at LF-1. The estimated risks are within the EPA range of generally acceptable risk
levels (10-4 to 10-6 for cancer risk and a hazard index of less than 1 for noncancer risk). In addition,
because of the absence of sensitive receptors, such as on-zone residents, the Air Force believes that
these risk levels do not reguire action. For example, because the area covered by LF-1 is owned by the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, it is unlikely that there will be any future residents in this area.
Additionally, much of the LF-1 area is thickly vegetated and very steep. As such, it is generally
inaccessible to standard well drilling eguipment.

Risks posed by groundwater exposure were evaluated for a future worker. Cancer risks of greater than
10-4 and/or hazard indices of greater than 1 were calculated for LF-1 overburden and shallow bedrock
groundwater, and for deep bedrock groundwater. Arsenic and manganese presented the greatest risk for the
overburden and shallow bedrock groundwater. The maximum cancer risk posed by arsenic via groundwater
ingestion was approximately 4 x 10-3, which is only slightly higher than the risk associated with the
arsenic at MCL concentration. Beryllium contributed to the majority of the estimated risk for deep
bedrock groundwater.

Ecological Risk: The representative terrestrial and avian species selected to evaluate potential
ecological risk from exposure to soil at LF-1 were the short-tailed shrew and the chipping sparrow,
respectively. The ecological risk assessment indicates that there is potential risk posed to the shrew
as a result of ingestion of invertebrates exposed to LF-1 soil, and to the chipping sparrow as a result
of ingestion of chemicals through exposure to vegetation and soil. Arsenic was the chemical of concern,
which had total hazard indices greater than 1 for these receptors.

FDTA-1 (Site 7) ) Soil and Groundwater

Human Health Risk: The results of the risk assessment indicate that there are no significant adverse
health risks (i.e., cancer risks greater than 10.6, or noncancer hazard indices greater than 1)
associated with the exposure of current or future potential receptors to soil at FDTA-1. The cancer risk
levels were within the EPA range of generally accepted levels (10-4 to 10-6 for cancer risk and a hazard
index of less than 1 for noncancer risk) for FDTA-1 overburden and shallow bedrock groundwater based on
exposure to a residential future receptor. The hazard indices for FDTA-1 overburden and shallow bedrock
groundwater were slightly greater than the target value of 1 because of manganese. There were no
carcinogenic chemicals of concern identified in the deep bedrock groundwater.

-------
Ecological Risk: The results of the ecological risk assessment indicate that there was no potential risk
to the selected receptors as a result of exposure to soil at FDTA-1. None of the chemicals of concern
had total hazard indices exceeding 1.

LFTS (Site 10) ) Soil

Human Health Risk: The results of the human health risk assessment for soil contaminants at LFTS
indicated that soil at the site did not pose a significant risk to current or potential future human
receptors. Cancer risks were less than 104, and the noncancer hazard indices were less than 1.

Ecological Risk: The results of the ecological risk assessment indicate that there was no potential risk
to the selected ecological receptors as a result of exposure to EFTS soil. None of the chemicals of
concern had total, average, or maximum cumulative hazard indices greater than 1.

BA-1 (Site 22) 1 Soil

Human Health Risk: The results of the risk assessment indicate that there are no significant adverse
health effects associated with exposure of current or future receptors to soil at BA-1. Cancer risks
were less than 10-6, and noncancer hazard indices were less than 1.

Ecological Risk: The deer mouse and chipping sparrow were the ecological receptors selected to evaluate
potential ecological risk from soil at BA-1. The results of the risk assessment indicate minimal
potential for adverse effects to the chipping sparrow through exposure to arsenic via soil and vegetation
ingestion. Average and maximum cumulative hazard indices for the deer mouse at BA-1 were less than 1.

MRDDA (Site 43) ) Soil

Human Health Risk: Risk from exposure to MRDDA soil was assessed for future receptors. The results of
the risk assessment indicate no significant adverse health effects associated with exposure to soil from
this site. The cancer risks were less than 10-6, and the noncancer hazard indices were less than 1.

Ecological Risk: An ecological risk assessment was not performed at MRDDA because the top 2 feet of soil
had been removed during the 1991 ITPO at the site.

LFTs (Site 10), BA-1 (Site 22), and MRDDA (Site 43) ) Groundwater

The overburden and shallow bedrock groundwater at LFTS, BA-1, and MRDDA were evaluated collectively in
the risk assessment. The deep bedrock groundwater at LFTS and BA-1 also were evaluated as one unit.
Risk posed by groundwater exposure was evaluated for a future residential receptor. The exposure
pathways evaluated were groundwater ingestion (drinking) and dermal contact (bathing and domestic use).
This was performed to account for the possibility of a water supply well that could be located within the
zone serving off-zone residents, although the scenario within the zone itself is not residential.
The results of the human health risk assessment indicate that cancer risks greater than 10-4 and hazard
indices of greater than 1 were calculated for LFTS, BA-1, and MRDDA main overburden and shallow bedrock
groundwater. Benzene, arsenic, lead, and manganese were the contaminants of greatest concern for
potential adverse health effects.

In addition to the main overburden and shallow bedrock groundwater, three hot spots were evaluated. Hot
spot I corresponds to an area at LFTS where leaded fuel tank sludge was disposed of. Overburden and
shallow bedrock groundwater associated with hot spot I posed risks within the EPA range of generally
acceptable risk levels (10-4 to 10-6 for cancer risk and a hazard index of less than 1 for noncancer
risk). The noncancer hazard indices for hot spot I exceeded 10. Manganese, naphthalene,
1,2,4-trimethylbenzene, and lead were the chemicals of greatest concern for potential noncancer health
effects in hot spot I groundwater.

The results of the risk assessment for hot spot II, which corresponds to an area near BA-1 at which LNAPL
has been historically observed, indicate potential cancer risks exceeding 10-4 and hazard indices above
100. Arsenic, manganese, naphthalene, and 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene contributed to the majority of the risk
levels.

For hot spot in groundwater, which includes wells at BA-1 in which LNAPL is present, the total cancer
risk also exceeded 10-4. The majority of the cancer risk was contributed by benzene, 1,2-dibromomethane,
and arsenic. The hazard indices associated with hot spot II exceeded 1,000 primarily as a result of
ethylbenzene and toluene. Among the other chemicals potentially posing a health concern were
naphthalene, 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene, and manganese.

-------
The results of the risk assessment indicated that there are no significant noncancer health risks (hazard
index is less than 1) associated with residential exposure to deep bedrock groundwater at EFTS and BA-1.
The cancer risks associated with the same scenario are within the range of generally accepted risk levels
(10-4 to 10-6 for cancer risk and a hazard index of less than 1 for noncancer risk).

BA-2 (Site 37) ) Soil and Groundwater

Human Health Risk: Risk from exposure to BA-2 soil was assessed for current and future receptors. The
results of the risk assessment indicate that there are no significant adverse health effects associated
with occupational exposure to soil at BA-2. Cancer risks were less than 10-6, and noncancer hazard
indices were less than 1.

Risks associated with exposure to BA-2 overburden groundwater and bedrock groundwater were evaluated for
a future residential receptor. Additionally, a BA-2 overburden hot spot was assessed that corresponds to
the center of the main former burn area. The BA-2 hot spot analysis was based on the analytical results
from one well.

The results of the risk assessment indicate no significant potential cancer risk associated with
exposure to BA-2 main overburden groundwater or hot spot overburden groundwater. Cancer risks for these
media did not exceed 10-6. The maximum hazard index calculated for main overburden groundwater was
slightly greater than the criterion of concern of 1 because of the concentrations of
1,2,4-trimethylbenzene. The hazard index for hot spot overburden groundwater exceeded 10. The chemicals
of greatest potential concern were 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene, naphthalene, and 2-methylnaphthalene.

An assessment of BA-2 bedrock groundwater indicated no significant potential adverse health effects
associated with exposure to this medium. The hazard indices were less than 1, and there were no
carcinogenic chemicals of concern.

Ecological Risk: The deer mouse and chipping sparrow were the ecological receptors selected to evaluate
potential ecological risk from soil at BA-2. The results of the risk assessment indicated minimal
potential for adverse effects to the chipping sparrow and deer mouse. Lead was the only chemical with an
associated hazard index that exceeded 1.

Surface Water and Sediment ) Upper and Lower Peverlv and Bass Ponds

Human Health Risk: Risk from exposure to surface water in Upper and Lower Peverly Ponds and sediment in
Upper and Lower Peverly and Bass Ponds was evaluated for current and future receptors. Because none of
the chemicals of concern in surface water has evidence of carcinogenicity through the exposure route of
concern, potential cancer risk was not evaluated for this medium. There were no significant cancer risks
associated with exposure to sediment in these surface water bodies; all calculated cancer risks were less
than 10-6. The noncarcinogenic risks were negligible for exposure to surface water or sediment; both
media had hazard indices of less than 1.

Risk from ingestion of recreationally caught catfish and bass from Bass Pond also was evaluated. Based
on the evaluated chemicals, there is no apparent risk of significant adverse health effects through the
ingestion of these species. Hazard indices were less than 1, and cancer risks were within the EPA range
of generally acceptable risk levels (10-4 to 10-6). However, because of the absence of sensitive
receptors, the Air Force believes that these risk levels do nor reguire action. EPA typically reguires
action for cancer risk levels greater than 10-4.

Ecological Risk: Based on the results of the ecological risk assessment, the risk to terrestrial
receptors at population levels appears to be negligible.

For the purposes of this evaluation, the aguatic environment is defined as the water and sediment of
Lower and Upper Peverly Ponds and Bass Ponds.

Risk to receptors associated with aguatic habitats can be summarized as follows:

• Pesticides were found in sediment at only a limited number of locations at levels that
exceed 1 based on EgP calculations.

• The pesticides DDD and DDE appear in fish tissue at levels that may present some level of
risk to piscivores.

• Exceedances of Ontario Ministry of Environment (OMOE) severe effects levels (SELs) were
detected for arsenic. Iron and manganese exceeded OMOE Sediment Quality Levels. Currently,
there is no toxicological information available for iron, and toxicological information on

-------
manganese is limited. However, it is known that under naturally occurring aerobic
conditions, arsenic, iron, and manganese will tend to precipitate. This precipitation would
make these compounds less bioavailable than they would be in soluble form. In addition,
iron precipitate may act as a complexing agent for certain toxic metals, rendering these
metals less bioavailable.

In summary, the concentrations of pesticides in the sediment pose a limited risk in these water bodies
based on EgP calculations. In addition, these pesticides are not considered to be related to Zone 2
activities. Therefore, any removal of the pesticide-contaminated sediments that exceed Water Quality
Criteria (WQC) (based on EgP calculations) , or based on sediment guality guidelines for inorganic
analytes, may pose a greater risk of exposure as a result of resuspension in the water column.

Heavy metals tend to be concentrated in environmental settings where changes in Eh and/or pH occur.
Under reducing conditions, metals such as iron and manganese are mobile. When Eh increases or conditions
become more oxidizing, iron and manganese are likely to precipitate from water. Elevated levels of iron
and manganese typically coincide with elevated levels of arsenic in sediment and surface water samples
from the surface water bodies adjacent to Zone 2. The correlation of iron and manganese with arsenic
most likely results from coprecipitation or adsorption of these metals onto the surface of iron and
manganese oxide particles. Aluminum, copper, iron, vanadium, and zinc values are higher where total
organic carbon values are higher in sediment samples. These metals may be concentrated by adsorption
onto organic particles. In general, metals are concentrated in areas where sediments have high organic
content, or in areas where Eh and pH conditions favor precipitation of metals (such as in areas where
reduced groundwater contacts oxygenated surface conditions at seeps). Additional evidence of metals
precipitation was observed in areas of iron-stained sediment and iron flocculation in surface water at
specific locations downgradient of the western side of the runway in Zone 2 and at LF-1.

A source for levels of metals above background in sediment adjacent to Zone 2 has not been identified in
the zone. Instead, it appears that metals are concentrated in sediment where chemical conditions favor
precipitation and/or absorption.
Seeps also were evaluated for their input into these water bodies. Sediment and surface water samples
were collected at these seeps, and the analytical results indicated the following:

• The surface water samples contained elevated levels of arsenic, cadmium, and iron.

• Sediment samples from the seeps at Upper Peverly Pond indicated elevated levels of arsenic,
lead, mercury, nickel, and silver. Therefore, a limited exposure pathway may exist.

In view of the limited bioavailability of pesticides and the potential for resuspension of the
sediments if the sediments were to be removed, the alternatives for Zone 2 will include long-term
monitoring of the sediment, surface water guality, and fish tissue.

VII. DEVELOPMENT AND SCREENING OF ALTERNATIVES

A. Statutory Requirements/Response Objectives

Statutory Requirements

Section 121 of CERCLA establishes several statutory reguirements and preferences, including: 1) remedial
actions must be protective of human health and the environment; 2) when complete, remedial actions must
comply with all federal and more stringent state environmental standards, reguirements, criteria, or
limitations unless a waiver is invoked; 3) the remedial action selected must be cost-effective and use
permanent solutions and alternative treatment technologies or resource recovery technologies to the
maximum extent practicable; 4) and a preference for remedies in which treatment that permanently and
significantly reduces the toxicity, mobility, or volume (TMV) of the hazardous substances is a principal
element over remedies not involving such treatment. Remedial action alternatives were developed to be
consistent with these mandates.

Based on available information relating to types of contaminants, environmental media of concern, and
potential exposure pathways, Remedial Action Objectives (RAOs) were developed to aid in the development
and screening of alternatives. These RAOs were developed to mitigate existing and future potential
threats to human health and the environment via source control. RAOs are general (i.e., nonnumerical)
goals that must be achieved by remedial response actions. Typically, RAOs include protection of human
and ecological receptors from excess risk resulting from exposure to site contaminants, reduction of

-------
off-site contaminant migration, and compliance with ARARs.

Prior to development of RAOs for the Zone 2 media of concern, Remedial Objectives (ROs) were developed.
As described in Section 2 of the Draft Final Zone 2 FS Report (G-625), ROs are numerical goals to which
contaminant levels in Zone 2 must be reduced in order to achieve RAOs. In instances in which no ROs were
established for a particular medium, then no RAOs were developed because RAOs are attained for that
medium with no further action For those sites/media for which ROs were developed, three types of
preliminary ROs were developed: regulatory-based, risk-based, and leaching-based ROs (soil only). The
three types of ROs were compared to maximum background concentrations for each medium and chemical of
concern. Those ROs exceeding background concentrations were retained for incorporation into RAOs. If no
ROs exceeded background levels, then background levels were retained for use in developing RAOs. ROs and
RAOs for each of the sites in Zone 2, which were presented in detail in the Draft Final Zone 2 FS Report
(G-625), are discussed briefly in the following paragraphs.

Development of Risk-Based ROs

The results of the baseline risk assessment (BRA) for Zone 2, completed as part of the RI and summarized
in Subsection VI of this report, indicated that risks are within the acceptable range (10-4 to 10-6 for
cancer risk and a hazard index of less than 1 for noncancer risk) and hazard indices were less than 1 for
noncancer risk resulting from incidental ingestion of, or dermal contact with, contaminated soil,
sediment, or surface water are expected. Therefore, human health risk-based ROs were not calculated for
soil, surface water, or sediment.

The BRA indicated that exposure to contaminated groundwater at some locations in Zone 2 could result in a
cumulative cancer risk greater than 10-4 for human receptors. Conseguently, human-health risk-based
objectives have been calculated for groundwater at certain sites (or OUs) only (see Section IV for a
description of the Zone 2 groundwater OUs).

The ecological risk assessment indicated that risks in excess of a hazard guotient of 1 were posed to
ecological receptors by contaminants in Zone 2 surface soil, surface water, and sediment. Risks posed by
surface water and sediment contaminants resulted from only a few chemicals (zinc in surface water and
DDT, lead, benzo(a)anthracene, and phenanthrene in sediment). DDT is not related to past Zone 2
activities, and the other contaminants were detected very infreguently, and, in the case of zinc, during
only one sampling event. In addition, some of the regulatory-based ROs for sediment (ER-Ls, ER-Ms, and
EgP values) are risk-related. For these reasons, ecological risk-based ROs were not calculated for Zone
2 surface water and sediment.

Chemicals of concern in Zone 2 soil were found to pose risks of adverse effects to select ecological
target species. As a result, ecological risk-based concentrations for soil were derived for each
chemical of concern based on a hazard index goal of 1. These risk-based concentrations were derived
for three chemicals of concern in Zone 2 on a site-specific basis. The chemicals for which soil ROs were
developed were as follows:

DDT (LF-1) .
Arsenic (LF-1 and BA-1).
Lead (BA-2).

Development of Regulatory-Based ROs

Medium- and chemical-specific regulatory-based ROs were developed for Zone 2 based on existing
exceedances of or noncompliance with environmental and public health ARAs. Subsection 2.2 of the Draft
Final Zone 2 FS Report (G-625) provides a detailed discussion of ARARs for the zone. Typically,
regulatory-based ROs for Zone 2 groundwater were based on Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) MCLs. Where
MCLs were not available, other federal or state groundwater ARARs were chosen.

Regulatory-based ROs for surface water were selected from among available federal and state AWQC (the
more conservative value was used) for protection of aguatic life or protection of human health based on
fish consumption only. Separate ROs were derived for Upper Peverly Pond, Lower Peverly Pond, and Zone 2
seeps.

Regulatory-based ROs were developed for Zone 2 sediment based on exceedances of NOAA ER-Ls and maximum
allowable sediment concentrations based on the EgP approach for selected hydrophobic organic compounds
for which the hazard guotients calculated using estimated interstitial pore water concentrations exceeded
1. Regulatory-based ROs for pesticides in sediment were not specified because pesticides are not
considered to be zone-related.

-------
Development of Leaching-Based ROs

Modeling of potential organic contaminant leaching potential was conducted as part of RO development for
Zone 2 soil. The objective of this modeling was to estimate maximum contaminant concentrations that
could exist in unsaturated soil without resulting in groundwater contamination that exceeds regulatory-
or risk-based ROs. Leaching-based ROs were developed for LF-1 and BA-1 soil based on the Summers model.

Development of RAOs

Based on the ROs developed for soil, groundwater, sediment, and surface water in Zone 2, the following
site-specific RAOs were developed:

• LF-1 solid waste and inert debris ) Compliance with State of New Hampshire Solid Waste Rules
concerning closure of solid waste facilities. (No further action under CERCLA.)

• FDTA-1 Soil ) No RAOs were established because there were no exceedances of ROs.

• LFTS Soil ) No RAOs were established because there were no exceedances of ROs.

• BA-1 Soil ) Removal of LNAPL and residual product from BA-1 soil.

• BA-2 Soil ) No RAOs were established because there was a limited extent of contamination.

• MRDDA Soil ) No RAOs were established because there were no exceedances of ROs.

• Overburden and bedrock groundwater.

) Protect human receptors from contaminated groundwater that may present an
unacceptable health risk (total cancer risk greater than 10-4, or a hazard index of
greater than 1) , given site-specific exposure scenarios (LFTS/BA-1/MRDDA and BA-2
groundwater OUs).

) Comply with chemical-specific regulatory-based ROs (LFTS/BA-1/MRDDA, LF-1, and BA-2
groundwater OUs).

) Prevent contaminated groundwater from affecting surface water quality
(LFTS/BA-1/MRDDA, BA-2, and LF-1 OUs).

) Protect against potential leaching of soil contaminants from soil to groundwater at
levels that could cause exceedances of groundwater ROs (BA-1 OU).

• Surface water in Upper and Lower Peverly and Bass Ponds

) Monitoring of surface water quality over time.

• Sediment in Upper and Lower Peverly and Bass Ponds

) Monitoring of sediment quality over time.

Cleanup goals were established for each medium of concern. These cleanup goals were established for use
in development of remedial actions to address the RAOs outlined previously. Cleanup goals for Zone 2 are
discussed in Section X of this ROD. A more detailed discussion of Zone 2 RAOs is presented in Subsection
2.5 of the Draft Final Zone 2 FS Report (G-625).

B. Technology Screening and Alternative Development

CERCLA and the NCP set forth the process by which remedial actions are evaluated and selected. In
accordance with these requirements, a range of remedial technologies were screened, and a range of
alternatives was developed for sites in Zone 2.

With respect to source control, the RI/FS developed a range of alternatives in which treatment that
reduces the TMV of the hazardous substances is a principal element. This range included an alternative
that removes or destroys hazardous substances to the maximum extent feasible, eliminating or minimizing
to the degree possible the need for long-term management, This range also included alternatives that
treat the principal threats posed by the site but vary in the degree of treatment used and the quantities
and characteristics of the treatment residuals and untreated waste that must be managed; alternatives

-------
that involve little or no treatment but provide protection through engineering or institutional controls;
and a no-action alternative.

In Section 3 of the Draft Final Zone 2 FS Report (G-625), technologies were identified, assessed, and
screened based on implementability, effectiveness, and cost. These technologies were placed in the
categories identified in Section 300.430 (e)(3) of the NCP. Section 4 of the Draft Final Zone 2 FS Report
(G-625) presents the remedial alternatives developed by combining the technologies. An initial screening
of alternatives was conducted to reduce the number of potential remedial actions for further detailed
analysis while preserving a range of options. The alternatives retained alter the initial screening are
evaluated in detail in Section 5 of the Draft Final Zone 2 FS Report (G-625).

VIII. DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES

This section provides a narrative summary of each alternative that was evaluated in detail in Section 5
of the Draft Final Zone 2 FS Report (G-625). A detailed tabular assessment of each alternative is
presented in Tables 5.2-1 through 5.2-8 of the Draft Final Zone 2 FS Report (G-625). Each remedial
alternative was evaluated in detail with respect to the nine criteria specified in the NCP.

The alternatives analyzed for the sites in Zone 2 include the following:

• Alternative BA1-1: No action (always considered as reguired by CERCLA).

• Alternative BA1-2: LNAPL recovery from BA-1 and off-zone disposal, capping of LFTS and
BA-1, and institutional controls (groundwater use restrictions, groundwater monitoring, and
establishment of a GMZ). Long-term surface water, sediment, and fish tissue monitoring.

• Alternative BA1-3A: Extraction of overburden groundwater, on-zone metals removal,
nutrient/oxygen addition, and on-zone discharge; LNAPL recovery from BA-1 and off-zone
disposal; and institutional controls. Long-term surface water, sediment, and fish tissue
monitoring.

• Alternative BA1-3B: Extraction of overburden groundwater, on-zone treatment, and on-zone
discharge; LNAPL recovery from BA-1 and off-zone disposal; and institutional controls.
Long-term surface water, sediment, and fish tissue monitoring.

• Alternative BA1-3C: Extraction of overburden groundwater; on-zone treatment, and on-zone
discharge; LNAPL recovery from BA-1 and off-zone disposal; and institutional controls.
Long-term surface water, sediment, and fish tissue monitoring.

• Alternative BA14B: In situ SVE at BA-1; extraction of overburden groundwater, on-zone
treatment, and on-zone discharge; and institutional controls. Long-term surface water,
sediment, and fish tissue monitoring.

• Modified Alternative BA1-4B: In situ SVE at BA-1, extraction of overburden groundwater and
in situ treatment via air sparging, and institutional controls. Long-term surface water,
sediment, and fish tissue monitoring.

Modified Alternative BA1-4B was developed after submittal of the Draft Final Zone 2 FS Report (G-625).
This alternative is identical to Alterative BA1-4B in all aspects, except that groundwater treatment in
Modified Alternative BA1-4B is achieved via air sparing below the water table rather than by extraction
and ex situ treatment of groundwater. A thorough comparative analysis of the implementation of Modified
Alternative BA1-4B in relation to other alternatives presented in the Draft Final Zone 2 FS Report is
presented in the Zone 2 ES Addendum 1 (G-741).

Because Modified Alternative BA1-4B is intended to replace the original Alternative BA1-4B, no further
discussion of Alternative BA1-4B is presented in this ROD. Details on Alternative BA1-4B are presented
in the Draft Final Zone 2 FS Report (G-62s) and the Zone 2 FS Addendum 1 (G-741).

Alternative BA1-1: No Action

The no-action alternative was evaluated in detail in the FS to serve as a baseline for comparison with
the other remedial alternatives under consideration. Under this alternative, no treatment or containment
of source areas would occur and no action would be taken to monitor or control potential migration of
contaminants in groundwater from LFTS and BA-1.

-------
Alternative BA1-2: LNAPL Recovery and Off-Zone Disposal, Capping of LFTS and BA-1, and Institutional
Controls

This alternative would consist of the following components:

• Establishment of institutional controls restricting future use of groundwater in Zone 2.

• Installation of LNAPL recovery wells at BA-1.

• Preparation of site for capping. Construction of a single barrier cap over portions of LFTS
and BA-1.

• Establishment of a GMZ, and performance of long-term GMZ monitoring,

• Long-term monitoring of surface water, sediment, and fish tissue.

Estimated time for design and construction: 3 months.
Estimated period of operation: 30 years.
Estimated capital cost: $1,168,500.
Estimated operation and maintenance cost (net present worth): $1,730,500.
Estimated total cost (net present worth): $2,899,100.

Alternative BA1-3A: LNAPL Recovered from BA-1 and Off-Zone Disposal, Extraction of Groundwater, On-zone
Metals Removal, Nutrient/Oxygen Addition and On-Zone Discharge, and Institutional Controls

This alternative would consist of the following components:

• Establishment of institutional controls restricting future use of Zone 2 groundwater.

• Establishment of a GMZ and performance of long-term GMZ monitoring.

• Source area overburden groundwater extraction at LFTS and BA-1. Installation of new wells,
if reguired.

• Overburden groundwater treatment for metals removal, nutrient/oxygen addition, on-zone
disposal in recharge trenches, and enhanced in situ treatment of organic contaminants in
groundwater.

• LNAPL recovery from BA-1 followed by off-zone disposal.

• Long-term monitoring of surface water, sediment, and fish tissue.

Estimated time for design and construction: 9 months.
Estimated period of operation: 30 years.
Estimated capital cost: $1,283,900.
Estimated operation and maintenance cost (net present worth): $5,265,300.
Estimated total cost (net present worth): $6,549,200.

Alternative BA1-3B: LNAPL Recovery from BA-1 and Off-Zone Disposal, Extraction of Overburden
Groundwater, On-Zone Treatment and On-Zone Discharge, and Institutional Controls

This alternative would consist of the following components:

• Establishment of institutional controls restricting future use of Zone 2 groundwater.

• Establishment of a GMZ and performance of long-term GMZ monitoring.

• Source area overburden groundwater extraction at LFTS and BA-1. Installation of new wells,
if reguired.

• Overburden groundwater treatment for metals and organic contaminant removal, and disposal in
recharge trenches on-zone.

• LNAPL recovery from BA-1 followed by off-zone disposal.

• Long-term monitoring of surface water, sediment, and fish tissue.

-------
Estimated time for design and construction: 9 months.
Estimated period of operation: 30 years.
Estimated capital cost: $1,291,500.
Estimated operation and maintenance cost (net present worth): $6,589,500.
Estimated total cost (net present worth): $7,881,000.

Alternative BA1-3C: LNAPL Recovery from BA-1 and Off-Zone Disposal, Extraction of Source Area Overburden
Groundwater and Bedrock Groundwater, On-Zone Treatment, On-Zone Discharge, and Institutional Controls

This alternative would consist of the following components:

• Establishment of institutional controls restricting future use of Zone 2 groundwater.

• Establishment of a GMZ and performance of long-term GMZ monitoring.

• Source area overburden and bedrock groundwater extraction at LFTS and BA-1. Installation of
new wells, if reguired.

• Groundwater treatment for metals and organic contaminant removal, and disposal in recharge
trenches on-zone.

• LNAPL recovery from BA-1 followed by off-zone disposal.

• Long-term monitoring of surface water, sediment, and fish tissue.

Estimated time for design and construction: 9 months.
Estimated period of operation: 30 years.
Estimated capital cost: $1,704,700.
Estimated operation and maintenance cost (net present worth): $7,625,200.
Estimated total cost (net present worth): $9,329,900.

Modified Alternative BA1-4B ) In Situ SVE of Source Area LNAPL with Enhancement of SVE by Injection of
Air Below the Water Table into the MCS Unit and Institutional Controls

This alternative consists of the following actions:

• In situ SVE treatment of BA-1 source area LNAPL with enhancement of SVE by injection of air
below the water table into the MCS, and treatment of extracted soil vapor for removal of
VOCs.

• Establishment of institutional controls restricting the future use of Zone 2 groundwater,
including a GMZ, and performance of long-term GMZ monitoring.

• Natural attenuation of bedrock groundwater contamination. During and following the
completion of SVE treatment of source area LNAPL enhanced by injection of air below the
water table, bedrock groundwater guality will be remediated by natural attenuation and
biodegradation.

• Long-term monitoring of surface water, sediment, and fish tissue.

Estimated time for design and construction: 9 to 12 months.
Estimated period of operation: 3 years for SVE/air sparging.
Estimated period of operation: 30 years.
Estimated capital cost: $926,222.
Estimated operation and maintenance cost (net present worth): $470,758.
Estimated total cost (net present worth): $1,397,000.

IX. SUMMARY OF THE COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES

Section 121(b)(1) of CERCLA presents several factors that must be considered when assessing alternatives
and specifies a preference for treatment of hazardous substances and contaminated materials. Building on
these specific statutory mandates, the NCP has promulgated nine evaluation criteria to be used in
assessing the individual remedial alternatives.

A detailed analysis was performed on the alternatives using the nine evaluation criteria to select a site
remedy. The following is a summary of the comparison of each alternative's strengths and weaknesses with

-------
respect to the nine evaluation criteria. These criteria are summarized in the following paragraphs.

Threshold Criteria

The following two threshold criteria must be met for the alternatives to be eligible for selection in
accordance with the NCP:

1. Overall protection of human health and the environment addresses whether a remedy provides adeguate
protection and describes how risks posed through each pathway are eliminated, reduced, or controlled
through treatment, engineering controls, or institutional controls.

2. Compliance with ARARs addresses whether a remedy will meet all of the ARARs or other federal and
state environmental laws and/or provide grounds for invoking a waiver.

Primary Balancing Criteria

The following five criteria are used to compare and evaluate the elements of one alternative to another
that meet the threshold criteria:

3. Long-term effectiveness and permanence address the criteria that are used to assess alternatives for
the long-term effectiveness and permanence they afford, along with the degree of certainty that they
will prove successful.

4. Reduction of TMV of contaminants through treatment addresses the degree to which alternatives employ
recycling or treatment that reduces TMV of contaminants, including how treatment is used to address
the principal threats posed by the site.

5. Short-term effectiveness addresses the period of time needed to achieve protection and any adverse
impacts on human health and the environment that may be posed during the construction and
implementation period, until cleanup goals are achieved.

6. Implementability addresses the technical and administrative feasibility of a remedy, including the
availability of materials and services needed to implement a particular option.

7. Cost includes estimated capital, O&M, and present-worth costs.

Modifying Criteria

The following modifying criteria are used in the final evaluation of remedial alternatives generally
after public comments on the RI/FS Reports and Proposed Plan are reviewed:

8. State acceptance addresses the state's position and key concerns related to the preferred
alternative and other alternatives, and the state's comments on ARARs or the proposed use of
waivers.

9. Community acceptance addresses the public's general response to the alternatives described in the
Proposed Plan and RI/FS Reports. Community acceptance of both the original and the revised Proposed
Plans for Zone 2 was evaluated based on written comments and verbal comments received in public
meetings during the public comment period.

A detailed tabular assessment of each alternative according to the threshold and balancing criteria is
presented in Tables 5.2-1 through 5.2-8 of the Draft Final Zone 2 FS Report (G-625). Following the
detailed analysis of each individual alternative, a comparative analysis, focusing on the relative
performance of each alternative against the threshold and balancing criteria, was conducted. This
comparative analysis is presented in Table 24 in Appendix A.

Subsections IX.A through IX.I present the nine criteria, including the two modifying criteria not
discussed in the Zone 2 FS Report; a brief narrative summary of the alternatives; and the strengths and
weaknesses of each alternative according to the detailed and comparative analysis. A long-term surface
water, sediment, and fish tissue monitoring component is included in all of the alternatives discussed.
For this reason, this particular component is discussed only once for each of the nine subsections that
follow rather than including it in each remedial alternative discussion.

-------
A. Overall Protection of Human Health and the Environment

Overall protection of human health and the environment addresses how an alternative as a whole will
protect human health and the environment. This includes an assessment of how both human health and
environmental risks are properly eliminated, reduced, or controlled through treatment, engineering
controls, or institutional controls.

BA-1 Alternatives

All the BA-1 alternatives, except the no-action alternative, provide adeguate protection of human health
and the environment. Alternative BA1-2 provides protection by removing free-phase product and by capping
to lower the water table and enhance aerobic degradation of dewatered saturated soil:

Alternatives BA1-3A, BA1-3B, BA1-3C, and Modified BA1-4B provide protection of human health and the
environment from risks posed by contaminated groundwater by imposing institutional controls and by
incorporating different degrees of active treatment. Alternative BA1-3B would likely provide protection
in a shorter time period than would Alternative BA1-3A. Alternative BA1-3C would likely provide
protection in a shorter time period than would Alternative BA1-3B. Protection is expected to be attained
in a shorter time period with implementation of Modified Alternative BA1-4B.

Long-Term Monitoring of Zone 2 Surface Water Bodies

Long-term monitoring of surface water, sediment, and fish tissue would be conducted in conjunction with
implementation of each of the BA-1 alternatives, except the no-action alternative. A long-term
monitoring plan would be developed during the remedial design.

This remedial component will enhance the protectiveness of each alternative by providing the data
necessary to determine whether risks to potential human and ecological receptors are being reduced, or at
least not increased, through implementation of the BA-1 alternatives.

B. Compliance with Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements

Compliance with ARARs addresses whether a remedy complies with all state and federal environmental and
public health laws and reguirements that apply or are relevant and appropriate to the conditions and
cleanup options at a specific site. ARARs are divided into three categories: (1) chemical-specific
reguirements that are health- or risk-based concentration limits or ranges in various environmental media
for specific hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants; (2) location-specific reguirements that
are restrictions on activities based on the characteristics of a site and its immediate environment; and
(3) action-specific reguirements that are controls or restrictions on particular types of activities or
treatment technologies. If an ARAR cannot be met, the reasons must be clearly stated, and a waiver by
the appropriate federal and/or state regulatory agencies may be reguired.

Each alternative was evaluated for compliance with ARARs, including chemical-, action-, and
location-specific. Alternative-specific evaluations are presented in Appendix F of the Draft Final Zone
2 FS Report (G-625). ARARs specific to Modified Alternative BA1-4B are presented in Table 4 of the Zone
2 FS Addendum 1 (G-741).

BA-1 Alternatives

Alternative BAI-1 would not meet any ARARs. Alternative BA1-2 would comply with the as in the long term.
Alternatives BA1-3A, BA1-3B, BA1-3C, and Modified BA1-4B would meet all of the respective ARARs in a
shorter time than would Alternative BA1-2 as a result of active treatment of all media of concern.
Compliance is expected to be attained in a shorter time period with implementation of Modified
Alternative BA1-4B than for the other alternatives.

Long-Term Monitoring of Zone 2 Surface Water Bodies

As discussed in Subsection IX.A, surface water, sediment, and fish tissue monitoring would accompany
implementation of all BA1 alternatives, except the no-action alternative. This remedial component would
monitor the effectiveness of implementation of the preferred BA-1 alternative in complying with ARARs
pertaining to Zone 2 surface water bodies.

C. Long-Term Effectiveness and Permanence

Long-term effectiveness and permanence refers to the ability of an alternative to maintain reliable
protection of human health and the environment over time once the cleanup goals have been met.

-------
BA-1 Alternatives

Modified Alternative BA1-4B and Alternative BA1-3C afford the highest degrees of long-term effectiveness
and permanence because these alternatives use treatment technologies to reduce hazards posed by all known
wastes at the site. Although both alternatives would reduce the contaminants to safe levels, Modified
Alternative BA1-4B would reduce the contaminants more guickly through in situ SVE treatment of source
area LNAPLs enhanced by injection of air below the water table into the MCS.

Alternative BA1-2 eliminates the risk posed by free-phase product significantly; however, it relies on a
cap for controlling infiltration into the site to enhance aerobic degradation of subsurface
contamination. Although capping is an effective and accepted approach for reducing risk from contact
with wastes, Alternative BA1-2 would be less effective than alternative BA1-3A, in which groundwater
would be extracted actively from the overburden water-bearing unit to help attain cleanup goals faster.
Alternative BA1-3B provides a higher degree of groundwater contaminant treatment than Alternative BA1-3A
through treatment for metals and VOC removal. Alternative BA1-3C has a higher level of control compared
to Alternatives BA1-3A and BA1-3B because it includes groundwater extraction from both overburden and
bedrock wells. Alternatives BA1-3A, BA1-3B, and BA1-3C are similar in terms of long-term operation of
the groundwater pump-and-treat systems; the systems are expected to be operated for 30 years. However,
the system for Alternative BA1-3C is capable of handling higher flow rates. Modified Alternative BA1-4B
is expected to attain cleanup goals in approximately 3 years.

With respect to risks associated with the free-phase product source, Alternatives BA1-2, BA1-3A, BA1-3B,
and BA1-3C have similar risks through LNAPL recovery. Because direct LNAPL recovery is not a component
of Modified Alternative BA1-4B, there is no direct risk associated with handling free-phase product,
except the free-phase product that is volatilized and subseguently extracted by the SVE system.

Remedial activities would likely be completed in less time for Modified Alternative BA1-4B than for any
of the other alternatives because of the direct treatment of source area soil and groundwater. A longer
duration than predicted may result from possible nonuniform soil treatment by air sparging in Modified
Alternative BA1-4B, although the total remedial time for this option would still be less than for other
alternatives. As a result of the extraction and treatment of groundwater, in addition to LNAPL removal,
Alternative BA1-3A would reguire less time to achieve cleanup goals than would Alternative BA1-2.
Alternative BA1-3B may reguire less time than Alternative BA1-3A because VOCs would be treated directly
in the groundwater treatment plant (GWTP). Since Alternative BA1-3C involves the extraction and
treatment of both overburden and bedrock groundwater, the time reguired for this alternative to attain
cleanup goals may be further reduced in comparison to Alternative BA1-3B.

Long-Term Monitoring of Zone 2 Surface Water Bodies

Long-term monitoring of surface water, sediment, and fish tissue from Upper and Lower Peverly and Bass
Ponds would provide a means of determining the long-term effectiveness and permanence of the BA1
alternative that is ultimately implemented. If results of the long-term monitoring indicate a lack of
effectiveness or permanence, other remedial options may be considered.

D. Reduction of Toxicitv, Mobility, or Volume of Contaminants Through Treatment

Reduction of TMV of contaminants through treatment is a principal measure of the overall performance of
an alternative. The 1986 Amendments to the Superfund Statute emphasize that, whenever possible, a remedy
should be selected that uses a treatment process that permanently reduces the level of toxicity of
contaminants at the site, the spread of contaminants at the site, the spread of contaminants away from
the source of contamination, and the volume or amount of contamination at the site.

BA-1 Alternatives

Alternatives BA1-3A, BA1-3B, BA1-3C, and Modified BA1-4B use treatment technologies to reduce the
inherent hazards posed by all known wastes at the sites. All these alternatives involve pumping and
treating groundwater, except Modified Alternative BA1-4B, in which SVE enhanced by air injection is used
instead to reduce all risks posed by LNAPL and groundwater. Alternatives BA1-3A, BA1-3B, and BA1-3C
involve the treatment of contaminated groundwater. For Alternatives BA1-3B and BAI-3C, carbon
regeneration would ultimately destroy all contaminants adsorbed onto the carbon. Modified Alternative
BA1-4B and Alternative BA1-3C are ranked very similar in terms of treatment processes used and amount of
contaminated materials to be treated; however, the GWTP component of Alternative BA1-3C is likely to
generate a large guantity of treatment residuals. Alternative BA1-3C will generate a slightly larger,
although not significant, guantity of residuals than would Alternatives BA1-3A and BA1-3B because of the
larger volume of groundwater to be treated. For Modified Alternative BA1-4B, the SVE system includes
catalytic oxidation to destroy the extracted VOCs. All these alternatives satisfy the statutory
preference for treatment as a principal element. Alternatives BA1-3A and BA1-3B treat approximately 13

-------
gallons per minute (gpm) of groundwater, and Alternative BA1-3C treats approximately 38 gpm of
groundwater. Modified Alternative BA1-4B is expected to remove a contaminant mass of approximately 40
kg/day.

Alternative BA1-2 treats the principal threat posed by the free-phase product, and thus would satisfy the
statutory preference for treatment as a principal element. Alternative BA1-2 also reduces the volume and
toxicity of contaminated groundwater.

For all alternatives in which groundwater treatment and/or LNAPL recovery are involved, residuals would
be sent to a licensed, off-zone facility for disposal.

Long-Term Monitoring of Zone 2 Surface Water Bodies

Long-term monitoring of surface water, sediment, and fish tissue from Upper and Lower Peverly and Bass
Ponds would not enhance the reduction of TMV in any of the BA-1 alternatives. However, monitoring would
serve as a means of determining whether, and to what extent, implementation of any of the BA-1
alternatives (except the no-action alternative) is reducing the TMV of contaminants in Zone 2 surface
water bodies. This knowledge would prove valuable several years after implementation of the selected
remedy, when re-evaluation of the success of the chosen alternative would be necessary to make decisions
regarding continuation of the alternative, modification of the alternative, or discontinuation of
remedial action (i.e., TMV of contaminants in all media of concern have been reduced to acceptable
levels).

E. Short-Term Effectiveness

Short-term effectiveness refers to the likelihood of adverse impacts on human health or the environment
that may be posed during the construction and implementation of an alternative until cleanup goals are
achieved.

BA-1 Alternatives

Implementation of Alternative BA1-1 would pose no additional risks other than those identified in the
baseline risk assessment because no remedial activities would be implemented in the no-action
alternative. Alternative BA1-2 would present the greatest potential for particulate emissions because of
construction of the single-barrier cap. However, dust control methods would reduce the risk. Other than
short-term particulate emissions, Alternative BA1-2 presents the least mount of risk to workers, the
community, and the environment next to Alternative BA1-1. Compared to Alternative BA1-2, Alternatives BA
1-3A, BA1-3B, and BA1-3C present slightly greater potential short-term risk to workers as a result of
inhalation of, ingestion of, or dermal contact with groundwater contaminants and LNAPLs. Modified
Alternative BA1-4B is expected to have the fewest adverse short-term impacts on the community because
most of the remedial action is achieved in situ. This remedial action results in minimal contact with
BA-1 contamination because of the absence of capping and groundwater extraction components. VC)Cs
released during SVE in Modified Alternative BA1-4B will be treated prior to discharge.

The time reguired to achieve short-term protectiveness would be shorter for Alternative BA1-2 than for
any other alternative. It is expected that only 3 months would be reguired to install a new cap.
Recovery of LNAPL is a component of Alternatives BA1-2, BA1-3A, BA1-3B, and BA1-3C, and the time for
completion of this action has not been estimated. However, it would be the same for all these
alternatives. Alternatives BA1-3A, BA1-3B, and BA1-3C are very similar with respect to overall
short-term effectiveness. There is a small potential for risk to workers and the environment through VOC
emissions during construction activities and groundwater treatment. Alternative BA1-3B has a slightly
greater, but not significant, potential for risk during groundwater treatment because of treatment-for
both VOCs and metals in comparison to Alternative BA1-3A. Alternative BA1-3C has a slightly greater, but
not significant, potential for risk during groundwater treatment because of the inclusion of treatment
for both overburden and bedrock groundwater. Modified Alternative BA1-4B would pose the lowest risk
because it involves in situ treatment of source area LNAPL.

Long-Term Monitoring of Zone 2 Surface Water Bodies

As for criteria A, B, C, and D, long-term surface water, sediment, and fish tissue monitoring in Zone 2
would provide useful information regarding the effectiveness of the selected remedial alternative in
achieving some of the RAOs for the zone.

While implementation of the sampling reguired for Zone 2 surface water body monitoring would not enhance
the ability of any of the BA1 alternatives to achieve RAOs, it would provide a means of determining the
short- and long-term effectiveness of the selected BA-1 alternative.

-------
F. Implementabilitv

Implementability refers to the technical and administrative feasibility of an alternative, including the
availability of materials and services needed to implement the alternative.

All the alternatives in the detailed analysis are implementable and have been used successfully at other
sites. The differences in this category are in the length of time reguired to implement the alternative;
the degree of difficulty in both administration and implementation; and the availability of treatment
eguipment, specialty eguipment, and construction specialists.

BA-1 Alternatives

Alternative BA1-1 is the most readily implementable alternative from a construction standpoint because no
remedial activities are involved.

Imposing deed restrictions on groundwater use is a component of all the alternatives, with the exception
of Alternative BA1-1. There are no expected technical or administrative difficulties associated with
this alternative. No major administrative difficulties are expected for any of the BA-1 alternatives,
with the exception of the no-action alternative.

While construction of LNAPL recovery wells and capping under Alternative BA1-2 would involve significant
material-handling reguirements, the materials are available locally. It would be easy to undertake
additional remedial action, if reguired. Periodic maintenance would ensure the rehability of the cap.
The groundwater monitoring program would determine the effectiveness of the cap in lowering the water
table and enhancing aerobic degradation.

The construction reguirements for Alternatives BA1-3A, BA1-3B, and BA1-3C are similar and fairly simple.
These alternatives have more operational reguirements than Alternative BA1-2 because of groundwater
extraction and treatment. The construction reguirements for Modified Alternative BA1-4B are slightly
more complex than for Alternative BA1-3C because of the SVE and air sparing components. Both SVE and air
sparging are fairly reliable technologies because of their mechanical simplicity.

The groundwater treatment component of Alternatives BA1-3A, BA1-3B, and BA1-3C reguires readily available
engineering services and materials. All components of the GWTP (i.e., activated carbon units, air
stripper, chemical precipitation system, and multimedia filtration system) are proven, reliable
technologies, and could be readily obtained and constructed. Placement and construction of the
groundwater extraction wells pose no technical or administrative difficulties.

Alternative BA1-3A would be slightly difficult to implement technically compared to Alternatives BA1-3B,
BA1-3C, and Modified BA1-4B because it relies on in sire treatment of organic contaminants in
groundwater. The infiltration of nutrient-laden groundwater and subseguent extraction of groundwater
could be technically difficult to implement. These activities would have to be evaluated more carefully
to maintain and enhance aerobic degradation.

Long-Term Monitoring of Zone 2 Surface Water Bodies

This portion of all the BA-1 alternatives, as described in Subsections IX.A through IX.E, would involve
the formulation and implementation of a long-term monitoring plan for Zone 2 surface water, sediment, and
fish tissue.

Currently, the technologies exist for both collection and analysis of surface water, sediment, and fish
tissue samples. These technologies are established, well-proven, and able to meet current regulatory
reguirements with minimal difficulty.

G. Cost

Cost includes the capital (up-from) cost of implementing an alternative, the cost of operating and
maintaining the alternative over the long term, and net present worth of both capital and O&M costs. The
capital, O&M, and total costs of each alternative are as follows:

-------
Remedial Alternative

BA1-1 No action.
0 & M Cost
Capital Cost

Not Costed

$1,168,500
BA1-2 LNAPL recovery and off-zone
disposal from BA-I/capping of
LFTS and BA-1/institutional
controls (groundwater use
restrictions; groundwater, surface
water, and sediment monitoring; and
GMZ establishment).

BA1-3A Overburden groundwater extraction, $1,283,900
metals treatment, nutrient/oxygen
addition, and recharge at LFTS and
BA-1; LNAPL recovery and off-zone
treatment/disposal from BA-1; and
institutional controls.

BA1-3B Overburden groundwater extraction, $1,291,500
treatment, and recharge at LFTS
and BA-1; LNAPL recovery and off-
zone treatment/disposal from BA-1;
and institutional controls.

BA1-3C Overburden and bedrock $1,704,700
groundwater extraction, treatment,
and recharge at LFTS and BA-1;
LNAPL recovery and off-zone
treatment/disposal from BA-1; and
institutional controls.

Modified $926,222
BA1-4B in situ SVE with air sparging at
BA-1, off-site treatment and disposal
of recovered LNAPL, and
institutional controls.
Present-Worth
Total Present
Year 30

Not Costed

$1,730,500
Worth Cost

Not Costed

$2,899,100
$5,265,300
$6,549,200
$6,589,500
$7,881,000
$7,625,200
$9,329,900
$470,758
$1,397,000
H. State Acceptance

State acceptance addresses whether, based on its review of the RI/FS Reports and Proposed Plan, the state
concurs with the alternative that the Air Force is proposing as the remedy for the site.

I. Community Acceptance

Community acceptance addresses whether the public concurs with the Air Force's Proposed Plan. Community
acceptance of this Proposed Plan was evaluated based on comments received at the 11 April 1995 public
meeting. As previously stated, no written comments were received during the public comment period.

X. THE SEIiECTED REMEDY
The selected remedy, as presented in the Zone 2 Proposed Plan (G-722), is a modified version of
Alternative BA1-4B presented in the Draft Final Zone 2 FS Report (G-625). Modified Alternative BA1-4B is
similar to Alternative BA1-4B as presented in the Draft Final Zone 2 FS Report in all aspects, except
that the groundwater extraction and treatment component has been substituted by SVE with air sparging.
An overview of the remedial actions included in Modified Alternative BA1-4B is shown in the process flow
diagram in Figure 26.

Specifically, the preferred alternative includes the following:

• In situ SVE/air sparging treatment of BA-1 source area LNAPLs and residual LNAPL and
treatment of extracted soil vapor for removal of VOCs.

-------
• Establishment of institutional controls restricting the future use of Zone 2 groundwater,
including a GMZ, and performance of long-term GMZ monitoring.

• Natural attenuation (which may include natural biodegradation) of bedrock groundwater
contamination. During and following the completion of SVE treatment of source area LNAPLs
enhanced by injection of air below the water table, bedrock groundwater guality will be
remediated by natural attenuation (which may include natural biodegradation).

• Monitoring of the surface water, sediment, and fish tissue.

No further action is proposed under CERCLA for LF-1. In a separate action, which is not part of this
ROD, the Air Force will perform final closure of LF-1 in accordance with NHDES landfill closure
reguirements. NHDES will have jurisdiction over closure activities, and plans will be coordinated with
the respective NHDES divisions, independent of CERCLA and the FFA.

A. Methodology for Cleanup Level Determination

Cleanup levels were evaluated for each medium of concern in Zone 2. Cleanup goals have been established
for chemicals of concern identified in the risk assessment section of the Draft Final Zone 2 RI Report
(G-626) and for contaminants detected at levels exceeding ARARs or risk-based concentrations.

The approach used to determine risk-based concentrations is consistent with the approach used to evaluate
human health risk in the risk assessment section of the Draft Final Zone 2 RI Report (G-626). This
approach was originally presented in a protocols document submitted to EPA Region I and NHDES. This
document was subseguently amended and a revised version was submitted. In summary, risk-based
concentrations were derived from the chemicals of concern in each medium based on the most reasonable
maximally exposed human receptor (current or future) for the medium.

Risk-based concentrations were derived for each noncarcinogenic chemical in a medium based on a goal of a
hazard index of 1. For each carcinogenic chemical, the concentrations were derived based on a goal of
10-6 (1-in-l-million) lifetime cancer risk, with the following exceptions. Some chemicals, although
categorized by EPA as carcinogens, are not considered to be carcinogenic through all exposure routes.
For example, several metals, including cadmium, chromium VI, and nickel, are not classified as
carcinogens through the oral exposure route. Therefore, in deriving risk-based concentrations for a
given medium if a carcinogenic chemical was not considered to be carcinogenic through the applicable
exposure routes, the risk-based concentration for the chemical was based on a hazard index of 1 (i.e.,
noncancer risk).

Cleanup goals were selected after comparing maximum contaminant concentrations detected for each chemical
of concern in each medium with appropriate background values, chemical-specific ARARs, human health
risk-based concentrations, and, if applicable, ecological risk-based concentrations.

In general, where ARARs were available and deemed appropriate, ARAR were selected as cleanup goals.
Where ARARs were not available, or if the basis on which the ARAR was established was not consistent with
Zone 2 exposure scenarios, a risk-based concentration was selected as the cleanup goal. If chemical
concentrations exceeded both established background levels and ARARs or risk-based concentrations, and if
the ARAR/risk-based concentration was below background, the background level was selected as the cleanup
goal. When ARARs were selected as the cleanup goals, a human health risk was calculated for the ARAR
concentration. Cleanup goals were not established for chemicals detected at maximum concentrations that
were lower than appropriate ARARs or risk-based concentrations. The cleanup goals for media in Zone 2
are presented in Tables 25 through 29 in Appendix A, and are summarized in the subsections that follow.

B. Groundwater Cleanup Goals

LF-1: The human health risk assessment indicated that contaminants were detected in groundwater from
overburden and bedrock wells in LF-1 at concentrations that may pose a health risk to potential future
users (i.e., are in excess of EPA threshold criteria) or above regulatory-based ARARs. However, there
are currently no human exposure pathways for groundwater and because the LF-1 area is currently part of a
National Wildlife Refuge, it is highly unlikely that there would be any groundwater use in the future.
No further action is recommended under CERCLA. However, since at least one LF-1 well (530) may be
included in a zonal GMZ (see Figure 27), cleanup levels have been established for five inorganic
compounds and one organic compound that exceeded regulatory-based ARARs and/or human-health risk-based
concentrations in LF-1 groundwater (see Table 26 in Appendix A).

-------
FDTA-1: In FDTA-1 groundwater, manganese was detected above the human health risk-based concentration in
a May 1992 sample from one well. However, in a more recent (September 1993) sample from this well,
manganese was detected below the human health risk-based concentration. No other compounds in FDTA-1
groundwater posed unacceptable risks. Because of the limited degree of contamination, no cleanup goals
were established for FDTA-1 groundwater, and no further action is recommended under CERCLA.

LFTS/BA-1/MRDDA: The human health risk assessment indicated that contaminants in overburden and bedrock
groundwater at LFTS may pose a health risk to potential future users in excess of EPA threshold criteria.
To meet these objectives, the Air Force has established site-specific cleanup levels for contaminants in
LFTS groundwater. Cleanup goals were established for three organic contaminants and for four metals that
exceeded regulatory-based ARARs and/or human-health risk-based concentrations in LFTS groundwater [see
Table 2.7-1 of the Draft Final Zone 2 FS Report (G-625)].

The human health risk assessment indicated that contaminants in overburden and bedrock groundwater wells
at BA-1 may pose a health risk to potential future users in excess of EPA threshold criteria. The Air
Force has established site-specific cleanup goals for contaminants in BA-1 groundwater. Cleanup goals
were established for 12 organic contaminants and two metals that exceeded regulatory-based ARARs and/or
human health risk-based concentrations in BA-1 groundwater [see Table 2.7-1 of the Draft Final Zone 2 FS
Report (G-625)].

Benzene was detected in bedrock groundwater samples from MRDDA wells at concentrations exceeding the
regulatory-based ARARs and human health-based cleanup levels. No contaminant sources were identified in
MRDDA soils, and the benzene detected in the bedrock groundwater samples is attributable to contaminant
migration from LFTS and BA-1. Consequently, the benzene detected in MRDDA bedrock groundwater is
addressed as part of the groundwater contamination at LFTS and BA-1. Therefore, no cleanup goals have
been established specifically for MRDDA groundwater. Instead, cleanup goals for BA-1 and LFTS are used
to evaluate the groundwater in this area. In all, cleanup goals were established for 12 organic and four
inorganic compounds for LFTS/BA-1/MRDDA groundwater (see Table 25 in Appendix A).

BA-2: The human health risk assessment indicated that contaminants in overburden groundwater in the
immediate vicinity of the former burn areas at BA-2 may pose a health risk to potential future users in
excess of EPA threshold criteria or above regulatory-based ARARs. However, the extent of contamination
is very localized and site conditions appear to prevent the contamination from migrating. As such, BA-2
wells may be included in a zonal GMZ under the selected remedy (see Figure 27). Therefore,
chemical-specific cleanup levels have been established for three organic compounds for use in GMZ and
site area monitoring (see Table 27 in Appendix A).

C. Soil Cleanup Goals

LF-1: Based on the results of the RI, a significant source of metals contamination is not believed to
exist within LF-1. Although a limited mount of old solid waste was found above the water table, the
majority of the test pits and borings encountered only organic fill/construction debris.

No significant potential human health risk or risk due to leaching was attributed to LF-1 soil. Based on
the ecological risk assessment (summarized in Section VI), arsenic was the only contaminant detected in
LF-1 soil at concentrations that resulted in an unacceptable ecological risk. A significant source of
arsenic (or other metals) contamination has not been found within LF-1 (arsenic was detected above
background in only 3 of 15 sampling locations). However, it is possible that naturally occurring arsenic
is mobilized from surrounding soil in the landfill by changes in geochemical processes occurring in the
landfill. Regardless of the source of arsenic (natural or site activity-related), further action at this
site will be conducted in a non-CERCLA action coordinated with the state under New Hampshire landfill
closure requirements. Therefore, no further action is recommended under CERCLA for this site.

FDTA-1: the baseline risk assessment conducted during the RI at Zone 2 (see Section VI) indicates that
FDTA-1 soils pose no current or potential future threat to human health or ecological receptors.
Therefore, no cleanup goals are required for FDTA-1 soil, and no further source control action is
recommended under CERCLA for this site.

LFTS: The baseline risk assessment indicates that LFTS soils pose no current or potential future threat
to human health or the environment. Therefore, no remedial actions are required under CERCLA for the
soil at LFTS.

BA-1: The ecological risk assessment (summarized in Section VI) indicated that arsenic was the only
contaminant detected in BA-1 soil that may pose an unacceptable ecological risk. Arsenic was detected

-------
above the background concentration at only 2 of 13 sampling locations. At only 1 of 13 locations, arsenic
was detected at concentrations above leaching-based cleanup goals (i.e., concentration that could
potentially leach from soil into groundwater and cause groundwater contamination that may present an
unacceptable human health risk). Because of the limited extent of soil contamination, no
chemical-specific cleanup goals have been established for BA-1 soil. While the groundwater cleanup goals
may serve as overall LNAPL cleanup goals, the derivation of specific LNAPL cleanup goals and specific
residual product cleanup goals .are discussed in Subsection X.E under Environmental Monitoring Program.

BA-2: The baseline risk assessment indicated that lead in BA-2 surface soils poses an unacceptable
potential ecological risk at only 3 of 17 sampling locations. TCE was detected at only 1 of 12 sample
locations at a concentration that could potentially cause a leaching concern. Because of the limited
extent of soil contamination, no cleanup goals have been established for BA-2 soil, and no source control
action is recommended under CERCLA for this site.

MRDDA: The baseline risk assessment conducted during the RI at Zone 2 (see Section VI) indicates that
MRDDA soils pose no current or potential future threat to human health or the environment. Therefore, no
further remedial actions are reguired under CERLA for the soil at MRDDA.

Based on the preceding information, no cleanup goals for soil in Zone 2 are necessary and none have been
established. As for BA-1, LNAPL is addressed in the discussion of groundwater cleanup goals.

D. Surface Water and Sediment

Section VI summarizes the results of the human health and ecological risk assessments for surface water
and sediment in Zone 2. The results indicate that the human health risks posed by chemicals of concern
in sediments or surface water are within the EPA range of generally acceptable risks, although a limited
ecological risk may be posed by the sediments. In view of the limited extent and magnitude of
contamination, and because any remedial actions would likely result in a greater adverse impact on the
ecological community than the existing conditions, no remedial actions other than environmental
monitoring of surface water, sediment, and fish tissue are proposed.

Table 28 in Appendix A presents cleanup goals for Zone 2 surface water. Because groundwater from both
the overburden and bedrock flow units discharges into the ponds, maximum background concentrations for
groundwater also are presented in Table 28 for comparison. However, maximum background concentrations
for surface water were used in the development of cleanup goals. No organic compounds were detected
above maximum background concentrations or ROs Zone 2 surface water. Surface water cleanup goals were
established for six metals in Upper Peverly Pond and for arsenic and zinc in Lower Peverly Pond. No
surface water cleanup goals were established for Bass Pond. Surface water cleanup goals were established
for arsenic, cadmium, and iron at Zone 2 seeps.

Pesticide concentrations detected in Zone 2 sediments are similar to basewide ambient concentrations.
These concentrations were the result of basewide pesticide applications, and, as such, are not the result
of a CERCLA-regulated release. Therefore, no cleanup goals were established for pesticides in Zone 2
sediments. No other organic compounds were detected above maximum background concentrations or ROs in
Zone 2 sediment samples. Sediment cleanup goals were established for arsenic and zinc in Upper and Lower
Peverly Ponds and Bass Pond (see Table 29 in Appendix A). In addition, cleanup goals for lead and nickel
were selected for Upper Peverly Pond sediments. Sediment cleanup goals were established for five metals
for Zone 2 seeps.

E. Description of Remedial Components

An overview of the remedial actions included in Modified Alternative BA1-4B is shown in the process flow
diagram in Figure 26. This alternative consists of the following remedial actions:

• In situ SVE treatment of BA-1 source area LNAPLs enhanced by injection of air below the
water table into the MCS, and treatment of extracted soil vapor for removal of VOCs.

• Establishment of institutional controls restricting the future use of Zone 2 groundwater,
including a GMZ, and performance of long-term GMZ monitoring. The GMZ will remain in effect
until cleanup goals have been attained, in accordance with NHDES regulation Env-Ws 410.

• Natural attenuation of residual contamination remaining in groundwater after excavation, air
sparging, and SVE treatment.

• Surface water, sediment, and fish tissue monitoring within the Peverly and Bass Ponds
drainage system.

-------
Detailed descriptions of the various components follow.

Institutional Controls

Institutional controls will include access restrictions during active remediation and deed restrictions.
A chain-link fence will be installed, and access restriction signs will be placed on the fence boundaries
to prevent unauthorized persons from accessing the site. Access restrictions will remain in-place until
the SVE and air sparging remedial actions are complete, and the treatment units are removed from the
site.

Environmental Monitoring Program

A detailed plan for monitoring the performance and effectiveness of the source control action and the
effectiveness of natural attenuation processes will be submitted to EPA and NHDES for review and approval
during the remedial design phase of the remedial response. The groundwater monitoring component of the
environmental monitoring plan will be developed to provide the data necessary to monitor: (1) the
effectiveness of source control remedial measures; (2) potential LNAPL movement at BA-1; (3) the natural
attenuation of dissolved-phase contamination associated with the BA-1, BA-2, and LFTS; and (4)
groundwater quality at the Zone 2 GMZ boundary.

The environmental monitoring plan will include the methods to be used to monitor the performance of the
SVE/air sparging system. NHDES Virgin Petroleum Contaminated Soils Generic Cleanup Guidelines from the 3
October 1994 Addendum VI to the Department's "Interim Policy for the Management of Soils Contaminated
from Spills/Releases of Virgin Petroleum Products" will be considered when evaluating performance.

The environmental monitoring plan also will incorporate a surface water, sediment, and fish tissue
monitoring plan that will include the information necessary to monitor and evaluate potential threats to
human health and the environment posed by contaminants in surface water, sediment, and fish tissue.

In Situ SVE/AS

Based on the results of the SVE pilot treatability study (performed from 24 June to 19 August 1994), the
proposed design for full-scale remediation at BA-1 consists of SVE from the US, with injection of air
below the water table to the MCS. In addition, injection air recovery vents would be installed in the
LS. Any groundwater extracted with the soil vapor would be separated and stored on-site, prior to being
transported off-site for treatment and disposal. The proposed full-scale remediation system is described
in greater detail in Subsections 2.1.4 through 2.1.7 of the Zone 2 FS Addendum 1 (G-741) .

SVE has been demonstrated to be an effective, established remedial technology for removal of volatile
contaminants from unsaturated zone soil (G-226). Depaoli et al. (G-103) and Dupont and Doucette (G-119)
have demonstrated the effectiveness of SVE for remediating jet fuel- contaminated soil. In addition,
several studies (G-226, G-291; G-103; G-372) have shown that the increased mount of oxygen introduced
into the soil pores as a result of SVE stimulates biological activity. These studies suggest that SVE
may indirectly enhance in situ biodegradation of organic contaminants not removed by vapor extraction.

SVE removes VOCs from the subsurface by mechanically drawing air through vadose zone soil pore spaces.
The increased flow of air through soil pores enhances volatilization of organic compounds and results in
movement of organic vapors through the soil to extraction vents. The air stream is typically treated for
removal of contaminants prior to its discharge to the atmosphere.

SVE has several advantages over other available technologies for remediation of VOC-contaminated soil:

• SVE is an in situ method that has the potential for treating large volumes of soil at
reasonable costs in comparison to other available technologies.

• SVE systems are relatively easy to install and use standard, readily available equipment.
This allows for rapid mobilization and implementation of remedial actions.

• The design of SVE systems is relatively simple.

The final design of a full-scale SVE system for BA-1 would be based on pilot testing conduced at the
site.

Air sparging is typically performed in the saturated zone below the maximum depth of known soil
contamination. In situ sparging is a technology where air is injected into the water-saturated zones for
the purpose of removing contaminants by volatilization and biodegradation. It is generally used in
conjunction with SVE to eliminate off-site migration of vapors. Like SVE, air sparging is relatively

-------
simple to implement and capital costs are moderate. Injection of air into subsurface water-saturated
areas coupled with SVE is expected to increase removal rates in comparison to SVE alone for BA-1, where a
significant portion of the contaminants is distributed within the saturated zone.

Information on spacing, distribution, and number of vapor extraction vents and sparge points is presented
in the Zone 2 FS Addendum 1 Report. Any variations to the remedial action (variation of SVE) will be
addressed during remedial design.

XI. STATUTORY DETERMINATIONS

The remedial action selected for implementation at Zone 2 is consistent with CERCLA and NCP. The
selected remedy is protective of human health and the environment, attains ARARs, and is cost-effective.
The selected remedy also satisfies the statutory preference for treatment that permanently and
significantly reduces the TMV of hazardous substances as a principal element. Additionally, the selected
remedy uses alternative treatment technologies or resource recovery technologies to the maximum extent
practicable.

A. Protection of Human Health and the Environment

The remedy at Zone 2 will permanently reduce the risks posed to human health and the environment by
eliminating, reducing, or controlling exposures to human and ecological receptors through treatment,
engineering controls, and institutional controls. Specifically, this will be accomplished through:

• In situ SVE and air sparging treatment of BA-1 source area soil LNAPL and residual to reduce
the leaching of contaminants from soil to groundwater in order to reduce ecological and
human receptor exposure.

• Establishment of a GMZ and deed restrictions on groundwater use in Zone 2 to limit human
receptor exposure.

• Surface water, sediment, and fish tissue monitoring for continuous evaluation of ecological
receptor exposure.

B. Compliance with ARARs

The selected remedy will comply with all applicable or relevant federal and state ARARs that apply to
Zone 2. ARARs for the selected remedy (Modified Alternative BA1-4B) are presented in Appendix B, which
contains a complete list of ARARs, including the regulatory citation, a summary of the reguirement, and
the action to be taken to attain the reguirement. In addition, policies, criteria, and guidelines that
are to be considered (TBC) will be considered during the implementation of the remedial action. The
ARARs are presented as follows:

Chemical-Specific ARARs.

Federal ) SDWA Maximum Contaminant Levels.

State ) New Hampshire Administrative Code Env-Ws 410,
Groundwater Protection Standards.

State ) New Hampshire Administrative Code Env-A 1300 and 303,
Toxic Air Pollutants and Ambient Air Standards.

• Location-Specific ARARs.

Floodplains Executive Order (EO 11888) .
Wetlands Executive Order (EO 11990).
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 USC 661 et seg.).
Clean Water Act (CWA), Section 404 (40 CFR Part 230).
State of New Hampshire Regulations.

Action-Specific ARARs.

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).
Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) to RCRA.
Clean Air Act (CAA) .
State of New Hampshire Regulations.

-------
Appendix B provides details on the ARARs for the preferred remedy.

C. Cost Effectiveness

The selected remedy is cost effective because it will provide overall effectiveness proportional to its
costs, the net-present worth value being $5,091,000. The estimated cost of the selected remedy is an
order of magnitude lower than all alternatives other than Alternative BA1-2. The preferred alternative
(Modified Alternative BA1-4B) is cost-effective, when the overall relationship between cost and
effectiveness is compared to the cost/effectiveness relationship of Alternative BA1-2.

A summary of costs associated with each remedial alternative is presented in Section VII. A breakdown of
the estimated capital cost, O&M costs, and total cost for each alternative is also presented in Section
VII. A summary of the costs for key elements associated with Modified Alternative BA1-4B (in net
present-worth costs) is presented as follows:

Present-Worth
Cost
Component of Remedy ($)

Capital 926,242
O&M 470,758
Total (rounded) 1,397,000

O&M includes groundwater monitoring, monitor well maintenance, and 5-year Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act (SARA) reviews intended to review the status and progress of the remedial action, as
discussed in 40 CFR 300.430(f) (4) (ii) . Miscellaneous includes mobilization, demobilization, health and
safety, engineering, procurement, administrative and legal, and contingency costs.

D. Utilization of Permanent Solutions and Alternative Treatment

Once those alternatives that attain or, as appropriate, waive ARARs and that are protective of human
health and the environment were identified, the Air Force identified the alternative that uses permanent
solutions and alternative treatment technologies or resource recovery technologies to the maximum extent
practicable. This determination was made by deciding which one of the identified alternatives provides
the most favorable balance in consideration of the following factors: (1) long-term effectiveness and
permanence; (2) reduction of TMV through treatment; (3) short-term effectiveness; (4) implementability;
and (5) cost. The balancing test emphasized long-term effectiveness and the reduction of TMV through
treatment, and considered the preference for treatment as principal clement and community and state
acceptance. Of the alternatives evaluated, the selected remedy provides the most favorable balance of
the factors considered.

The selected remedy does offer as relatively high a degree of long-term effectiveness and permanence as
do the other groundwater extraction and treatment alternatives, and it will significantly reduce the
inherent hazards posed by the LNAPL through SVE of the VOCs, and will enhance volatilization of
contaminants present in the groundwater by injecting air into the saturated zone.

The selected remedy treats the principal threat posed by the LNAPL, achieving significant VOC reductions.
The implementability of the selected remedy is comparable to the nontreatment alternatives and
significantly better than the other groundwater extraction and treatment alternative options. The
selected remedy also is the least costly in situ option and is less expensive than groundwater extraction
and treatment.

The selection of this remedy is consistent with program expectations that indicate that highly toxic and
mobile wastes are a priority for treatment and that treatment is often necessary to ensure the long-term
effectiveness of a remedy. Since the in situ and groundwater extraction and treatment options are
reasonably comparable with respect to long-term effectiveness and the toxicity and mobility reductions
achieved, the major tradeoffs that provide the basis for this selection decision are short-term
effectiveness, implementability, and cost. The selected remedy can be implemented more guickly, with
less difficulty, and at less cost than the groundwater extraction and treatment alternatives and,
therefore, is the most appropriate solution for Zone 2.

E. Preference for Treatment as a Principal Element

By treating the VOC-contamination in Zone 2 by in sire SVE and air sparging, the selected remedy
addresses the principal threats posed by the site through the use of treatment technologies. VOCs
extracted from the surface will be treated prior to discharge. By implementation of these actions, the
selected remedy will significantly reduce the TMV of contaminants in Zone 2 in a permanent and

-------
irreversible manner.  Remediation of the contaminant source area will minimize future leaching of soil
contaminants to groundwater, and, over the long-term, will result in attainment of groundwater cleanup
goals.  Therefore, the statutory preference for remedies that use treatment as a principal element is
satisfied.

XII.  DOCUMENTATION OF SIGNIFICANT CHANGES

The proposed plan for Zone 2 was released for public comment from 22 March to 21 April 1995.  The
Proposed Plan identified Modified Alternative BA1-4B as the preferred alternative.  EPA and NHDES
reviewed all verbal comments submitted at the public meeting held on 11 April 1995.  No written comments
were received during the public comment period.  Upon review of the verbal comments, it was determined
that no significant changes to the remedy, as it was originally identified in the Proposed Plan, were
necessary.

XIII.  STATE ROIiE

NHDES reviewed the various alternatives and indicated its support for the selected remedy. NHDES also
reviewed the Zone 2 RI Report  (G-626),  including the risk assessment, and the Draft Final Zone 2 FS
Report and Addendum 1 (G-625; G-741) to determine whether the selected remedy is in compliance with state
ARARs.  NHDES concurs with the selected remedy for Zone 2.

-------
                                        REFERENCES

G-84    CH2M Hill.  1984.  Installation Restoration Program Records Search for Pease AFB, NH.

G-103  Depaoli,  D.W.,  S.E.  Herbes, and M.G.  Elliott.  1991.  "Performance of In Situ Soil Venting
       System at a Jet Fuel Spill Site." In:  EPA (U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency).  1991.  Soil
       Vapor Extraction Reference Handbook.   Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory.   EPA/540/2-91/003.

G-119  Dupont, R.R. and W.J. Doucetae.  1991.  "Assessment of In Situ Bioremediation  Potential and the
       Application of  Bioventing at a Fuel-Contaminated Site." In:   In Situ Bioreclamation.  R.E.  Hinchee
       and R.F.  Olfenbuttel (editors).  Butterworth-Heinemann, Stoneham,  MA.

G-226  EPA  (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency).  1991.  Soil Vapor Extraction Reference Handbook.
       Risk Reduction  Engineering Laboratory.  EPA/540/2-91/003.

G-291  Hinchee,  R.E.,  B.C. Downey, and R.N.  Miller.   1991.  "In-Situ Biodegradation of Petroleum
       Distillates." In:   EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency).  1991.  Soil Vapor Extraction
       Reference Handbook.  Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory.   EPA/540/2-91/003.

G-372  Miller, R.N., C.C. Vogel, and R.E. Hinchee.  1991.  "A Field-Scale Investigation of Petroleum
       Hydrocarbon Biodegradation in the Vadose Zone Enhanced by Soil Venting at Tyndall AFB, Florida."
       In:  In Situ Bioreclamation.  R.E. Hinchee and R.F. Olfenbuttel (eds.).  Butterworth-Heinemann,
       Stoneham, MA.

G-415  NOAA  (National  Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration).  1990.  "The Potential for Biological
       Effects of Sediment-Sorbed Contaminants Tested in the National Status and Trends Program."   NOAA
       Technical Memorandum.  NOS OMA 52.  Seattle,  WA.

G-525  WESTON (Roy F.  Weston,  Inc.).  1986.   Installation Restoration Program, Phase II )
       Confirmation/Quantification, Stage 1  Final Report, Pease AFB,  NH.  June 1986.

G-527  WESTON (Roy F.  Weston,  Inc.).  1987.   Installation Restoration Program, Phase II )
       Confirmation/Quantification, Stage I  Final Report, Pease AFB,  NH.

G-530  WESTON (Roy F.  Weston,  Inc.).  1988.   Interim Technical Report No. 1 for the Installation
       Restoration Program Stage 2, Pease AFB,  NH.  February 1988.

G-538  WESTON (Roy F.  Weston,  Inc.).  1990.   Installation Restoration Program, Proposed Plan for Landfill
       3,  Field Maintenance Sguadron Eguipment Cleaning Site,  Fire Department Training Area 1.   Pease
       AFB,  NH.   Draft Report,  July 1990.

G-540  WESTON (Roy F.  Weston,  Inc.).  1990.   Installation Restoration Program, Stage 2 Final Report,
       Pease AFB,  NH.   July 1990.

G-553  WESTON (Roy F.  Weston,  Inc.).  1991.   Installation Restoration Program Stage 3B, Preliminary
       Assessment/Site Inspection.  Pease AFB,  NH.  Draft Report.   February 1991.

G-591  WESTON (Roy F.  Weston,  Inc.).  1992.   Installation Restoration Program, Stage 4, Site
       Characterization Summary, Zone 2, Pease AFB,  NH.   October 1992.

G-597  WESTON (Roy F.  Weston,  Inc.).  1992.   Letter Report for the Intensive Test Pit Operation at the
       Mclntyre Road Drum Disposal Area, Pease AFB,  NH.

G-599  WESTON (Roy F.  Weston,  Inc.).  1992.   Off-Base Well Inventory Letter Report.  Pease AFB,  NH.  17
       September 1992.

G-609  WESTON (Roy F.  Weston,  Inc.).  1993.   Background Values for Soil Groundwater, Surface Water, and
       Sediment at Pease Air Force Base, Letter Report.   February 1993.

G-611  WESTON (Roy F.  Weston,  Inc.).  1993.   Installation Restoration Program, Stage 3C, IRP Site 8 Draft
       Final Feasibility Study,  Pease AFB, NH.   January 1993.

G-625  WESTON (Roy F.  Weston,  Inc.).  1993.   Installation Restoration Program, Stage 4, Zone 2 Draft
       Final Feasibility Study Report, Pease AFB, NH.   December 1993.

-------
G-626  WESTON (Roy F. Weston, Inc.).  1993.  Installation Restoration Program, Stage 4, Zone 2 Draft
       Final Remedial Investigation, Pease AFB,  NH.  November 1993.

G-735  WESTON (Roy F. Weston, Inc.).  1994.  Installation Restoration Program, Stage 4, Draft, Leaded
       Fuel Tank Sludge Area X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF)  Letter Report, Pease AFB, NH.  November 1994.

G-722  WESTON (Roy F. Weston, Inc.).  1994.  Installation Restoration Program, Draft Final Proposed Plan
       for Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH.  February 1995.

G-741  WESTON (Roy F. Weston, Inc.).  1995.  Installation Restoration Program, Draft Final Zone 2
       Feasibility Study Report,  Addendum No.  1,  Pease AFB,  NH.   February 1995.

-------
                                 LIST OF ACRONYMS
1,1,1-TCA
AALs
AFB
AFBCA
AFCEE/ESB
AGQSs
AHCs
ARARs
AVGAS
BFSA
BRA
BTEX
CAA
CERCLA
CWA
DEQPPM
DOD
DOI
EDB
EPA
EqP
ER-L
ER-M
FFA
FS
ft MSL
ft BGS
GMZ
gpm
GPR
GT
GWTP
HAS
HHCs
HSWA
IRP
ITPO
LF-1
LFTS
LNAPLs
LS
MAG
MCLGs
MCLs
MCS
MEK
MMS
MOE
MOU
MRDDA
MRS PA
NAAQS
NCP
NESHAP
NHANG
NHDES
NOAA
NPL
O&G
OEHL
PA
PA/SI
PCE
PDA
1,1,1-trichloroethane
Ambient Air Limits
Air Force Base
Air Force Base Conversion Agency
Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence/Base Closure Division
Ambient Groundwater Quality Standards
aromatic hydrocarbons
Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements
aviation gasoline
Bulk Fuel Storage Area
baseline risk assessment
benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes
Clean Air Act
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
Clean Water Act
Defense Environmental Quality Program Policy Memorandum
Department of Defense
Department of the Interior
ethylene dibromide
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Equilibrium Partitioning Approach
biological effects range ) low
biological effects range ) median
Federal Facilities Agreement
Feasibility Study
feet above mean sea level
feet below ground surface
Groundwater Management Zone
gallons per minute
ground-penetrating radar
Glacial Till
groundwater treatment plant
Health Advisories
halogenareal hydrocarbons
Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments
Installation Restoration Program
Intensive Test Pit Operation
Landfill 1
Leaded Fuel Tank Sludge Disposal Area
light, nonaqueous-phase liquids
Lower Sand
Military Airlift Group
Maximum Contaminant Level Goals
Maximum Contaminant Levels
Marine Clay and Silt
methyl ethyl ketone
Munitions Maintenance Squadron
Ontario Ministry of the Environment
Memorandum of Understanding
Mclntyre Road Drum Disposal Area
Mclntyre Road Sand Pit Area
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
National Contingency Plan
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
New Hampshire Air National Guard
New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services
National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration
National Priorities List
oil and grease
Occupational and Environmental Health Laboratory
Preliminary Assessment
Preliminary Assessment/Site Investigation
tetrachloroethene
Pease Development Authority

-------
PHTs
POI
ppmw
QAPP
RAB-TRC
RAO
RCRA
RfDs
RI
RI/FSs
RME
RO
ROD
SAP
SARA
SCS
SI
SVE
SVOCs
TBC
TCE
TCFM
TDS
TMV
TOG
TOX
TPHs
TSDFs
TSS
US
USAFOEHL
USGS
VOCs
VORTAC
WQC
XRF
phthalates
Point of Interest
parts per million by weight
Quality Assurance Project Plan
Restoration Advisory Board-Technical Review Committee
Remedial Action Objective
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
reference doses
Remedial Investigation
Remedial Investigations and Feasibility Studies
most reasonable maximally exposed individual
Remedial Objective
Record of Decision
Sampling and Analysis Plan
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act
Site Characterization Summary
Site Investigation
soil vapor extraction
semivolatile organic compounds
to be considered
trichloroethene
trichlorofiuoromethane
total dissolved solids
toxicity, mobility, or volume
total organic carbon
organic halogens
total petroleum hydrocarbons
waste treatment, storage, and disposal facilities
total suspended solids
Upper Sand
U.S. Air Force Occupational and Environmental Health Laboratory
U.S. Geological Survey
volatile organic compounds
VHS Omni-Range Tactical Air Navigation unit
Water Quality Criteria
x-ray fluorescence

-------
                                APPENDIX A-TABLES
                                Table 1
Summary of Highest Concentrations of Contaminants ) LF-1 Surface Soil
                        WESTON's Fixed Laboratory
                          Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH
                                                        Maximum
                                                      Concentration
         Compound                                       Detected

        VOCs  (mg/kg)
Acetone
Diethyl ether
Methyl ethyl ketone  (2-Butanone)
Trichlorofiuoromethane  (TCFM)
        SVOCs  (mg/kg)
Benz(a)anthracene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene
Benzo-(k)fluoranthene
Benzoic acid
Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
Chrysene
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Fluoranthene
Ideno(1, 2,3-cd)pyrene
Phenanthrene
Phenol (acid fraction)
Pyrene
        Pest./PCBs  (mg/kg)
DDT  (1,l-bis-Chlorophenyl-2,2, 2-trichloroethane)
        Metals  (mg/kg)             Background
Aluminum                                24,900
Arsenic                                  15.25
Barium                                     105
Beryllium                                  1.8
Calcium                                  3,180
Chromium                                  37.5
Cobalt                                    19.6
Copper
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Nickel
Potassium
Silicon
Sodium
Vanadium
Zinc
    42
35,300
  65.3
 8,240
   623
  43.4
 6,650
 1,900
   356
  49.3
  92.3
   0.031 J
   0.005 J
   0.003 J
   0.003 J

   0.18 J
   0.19 J
   0.16 J
   0.15 J
   0.17 J
      3.6
   0.15 J
   0.19 J
   0.15 J
  0.041 J
   0.34 J
   0.11 J
   0.16 J
  0.062 J
   0.51 J

  0.023 J

   7,780
    29.7
    32.9
    0.58
   5,800
    12.7
     7.3

    13.4
  13,400
    32.6
   3,490
     357
    16.6
   1,760
1,180 J+
     199
    21.3
    59.7
Sample
ID
01-3025-S001
01-3025-S001
01-3006-S001
01-3025-S001
01-3007-S002
01-3007-S002
01)3007-3002
01-3007-S002
01-3007-S002
01-3025-S001
01-3007-S002
01-3007-S002
01-3025-S001
01-3007-S002
01-3007-S002
01-3007-S002
01-3007-S002
01-3025-S001
01-3006-S001
01-3007-S002
01-3008-S002
01-3025-S001
01-3008-S002
01-3025-S001
01-3025-S001
01-3025-S001
01-3008-S002
01-3006-S001
01-3007-S002
01-3008-S002
01-3007-S002
01-3008-S002
01-3025-S001
01-3006-S001
01-3008-S002
01-3025-S001
01-3025-S001
01-3025-S001
01-3007-S002
Sampling
Interval
(ft BGS)
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.

0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
,0-2.0
,0-2.0
,0-2.0
,0-2.0
,0-2.0
,0-2.0
,0-2.0
,0-2.0
,0-2.0
,0-2.0
,0-2.0
,0-2.0
,0-2.0
,0-2.0
,0-2.0
,0-2.0
,0-2.0
,0-2.0
,0)2.0
,0-2.0
,0-2.0
,0-2.0
,0-2.0
,0-2.0
,0-2.0
,0-2.0
,0-2.0

,0-2.0
,0-2.0
,0-2.0
,0-2.0
,0-2.0
,0-2.0
,0-2.0
,0-2.0
,0-2.0
,0-2.0
,0-2.0
J = The associated numerical value is an estimated guantity.
J + = Estimated value is biased high.

-------
                                       Table 2
        Summary of Highest Concentrations of Contaminants)LF-1 Subsurface Soil
                                WESTON's Fixed Laboratory
                                  Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH
                  Compound
        VOCs  (mg/kg)
Methyl ethyl ketone
Tetrachloroethene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
Xylenes
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
TPHs  (Method 8100)
        SVOCs  (mg/kg)
2-Methylnapthalene
4-Methylphenol
Acenaphthene
Acenapthylene
Anthracene
Benzo(a)anthracene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
Beazoic acid
Bis (2-ethythexyl) phthalate
Chyrsene
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Dibenzofuran
Fluoranthene
Fluorene
Ideno(1, 2, 3-cd)pyrene
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
        Pest./PCBs  (mg/kg)
alpha-Endosulfan
Heptachlor epoxide
p,p'-DDD
        Metals (mg/kg)
Aluminum
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Boron

Calcium
Chromium
Cobalt



































Background
24,900
15.25
105
1.8
43.6
3,180
37.5
19.6
Maximum
Concentration
Detected
0.077 J
0.007 J
0.007
0.008 J
0.017 J
0.003 J
43 J-
0.14 J
0.34 J
0.45
0.26 J
0.6
1.6
1.3
1
0.37
0.5
0,34 J
0.066 J
0.79
0.88
0.11 J
0.13 J
1.4
0.4
0.8
0.26 J
2.7
2.7
0.0083 J
0.019 J
0.0055 J

16,500
33.5
65.5
1.3
49.1
6,040
31.8
11.6

Sample
ID
01-7942-B124
01-7943-B023
01-7936-B023
01-7942-B124
01-7942-B124
01-7943-B023
01-7942-B124
01-9090-S005
01-7943-B023
01-7940-B004
01-9090-S005
01-7940-B004
01-7940-B004
01-7940-B004
01-7940-B004
01-9090-S005
01-9090-S005
01-9093-S103
01-9086-S004
01-9090-S005
01-9093-S103
01-9090-S005
01-9090-S005
01-9090-S005
01-7940-B004
01-7940-B004
01-9090-S005
01-7940-B004
01-7940-B004
01-9093-S103
01-9090-S005
01-7940-B004

01)9095)3004
01-9095-S004
01-9093-S003
01-9095-S004
01-9093-S103
01-9093-S003
01-9095-S004
01-9095-S004
Sampling
Interval
(ft BGS)
22-25
21-23
21-23
22-25
22-25
21-23
22-25
3-7
21-23
3-4
3-7
3-4
3-7
3-7
3-7
3-7
3-7
0-8
3-5
3-7
0-8
3-7
3-7
3-7
3-4
3-4
3-7
3-4
3-4
0-8
3-7
3-4

3-6
3-6
0-8
3-6
0-8
0-8
3-6
3-6

-------
                                       Table 2
        Summary of Highest Concentrations of Contaminants)LF-1 Subsurface Soil
                                WESTON's Fixed Laboratory
                                  Zone 2, Pease AFB,  NH


Compound
Metals (mg/kg) (continued)
Copper
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Nickel
Potassium
Selenium
Silicon
Sodium
Vanadium
Zinc



Background
42
35,300
653
8,240
623
43.4
6, 650
ND
1,900
356
493
923
Maximum
Concentration
Detected

97.1
37,400
89.9
5,200
866 J+
22.9
2,950
1.9 J
1,830
532
39.1
3,360

Sample
ID

01-9093-S103
01-9093-S103
01-9093-S003
01-9095-S004
01-9093-S003
01-9095-S004
01-9095-S004
01-7943-B023
01-9093-S003
01-9093-S003
01-9095-S004
01-9093-S103
Sampling
Interval
(ft BGS)

0-8
0-8
0-8
3-6
0-8
3-6
3-6
21-23
0-8
0-8
3-6
0-8
J = The associated numerical value is an estimated guantity.
J + = Estimated value is biased high.

-------
                                       Table 3
        Summary of Highest Concentrations of Contaminants ) MRDDA Surface  Soil
                                WESTON's Fixed Laboratory
                                 Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH
                Compound
                VOCs  (mg/kg)
1,1,1-Trichloroethane  (1,1,1-TCA)
Tetrachloroethene  (PCE)
Toluene
Trichlorofluoromethane  (TCFM)
Petroleum hydrocarbons  (Method E418.1)  (mg/kg)
               SVOCs  (mg/kg)
Acenapthylene
Benz(a)anthracene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
Benzoic acid
Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
Chrysene
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Diethyl phthalate
Fluoranthene
Ideno(1, 2,3-cd)pyrene
Pentachlorophenol
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
           Pest./PCBs  (mg/kg)
DDT(1,l-Bis-chlorophenyl-2,2,2-trichloroethane)
Delta-BHC (delta Hexachlorocyclohexane)
p,p'-DDE
Maximum
Concentration
Detected
0.002 J
0.011 J
0.004 J
0.002 J
390
0.037 J
0.067 J
0.072 J
0.010 J
0.085 J
0.010 J
0.20 J
0.088 J
0.13 J
0.19 J
0.047 J
0.22 J
0.068 J
0.069 J
0.11 J
0.19 J
0.036
0.0021 J
0.010 J

Sample
ID
43-9160-S001
43-310-S001
43-308-S001
43-307-S001
43-307-S001
43-309-S001
43-309-S001
43-309-S001
43-309-S001
43-309-S001
43-309-S001
43-307-S001
43-9160-S001
43-309-S001
43-307-S001
43-307-S001
43-309-S001
43-309-S001
43-309-S001
43-309-S001
43-309-S001
43-309-S001
43-310-S001
43-309-S001
Sampling
Interval
(ft BGS)
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2

-------
          Metals  (mg/kg)
Aluminum
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Calcium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Nickel
Silicon
Titanium
Vanadium
Zinc
NA = Not analyzed.
ND = Not detected.
J = The associated numerical value
Background
24,900
15.25
10.5
1.8
3,180
37.5
19.6
42
35,300
65.3
8,240
623
ND
43.4
1,900
NA
49.3
92.3

8,060
4.9
17.6
0.37
286 J+
10.3 J
3.9 J
5.7 J
11,200 J
32.8 J
1,340 J+
229
1.2 J
8.5 J
502
287
15.6
37.1 J

43-310-S001
43-308-S001
43-307-S001
43-310-S001
43-307-S001
43-310-S001
43-310-S001
43-307-S001
43-310-S001
43-309-S001
43-310-S001
43-307-S001
43-307-S001
43-310-S001
43-308-S101
43-308-S001
43-309-S001
43-308-S001
                                                              0-2
                                                              0-2
                                                              0-2
                                                              0-2
                                                              0-2
                                                              0-2
                                                              0-2
                                                              0-2
                                                              0-2
                                                              0-2
                                                              0-2
                                                              0-2
                                                              0-2
                                                              0-2
                                                              0-2
                                                              0-2
                                                              0-2
                                                              0-2
is an estimated guantity.   J + = Estimated value is biased high.

-------
                                        Table 4
Summary of Highest Concentrations of Contaminants ) MRDDA Subsurface Soil
                                WESTON's Fixed Laboratory
                                Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH
                     Compound
        VOCs  (mg/kg)
Acetone
Diethyl ether
Tetrachloroethene  (PCE)
Toluene
Petroleum hydrocarbons  (Method EA18,1)  (mg/kg)
        SVOCs  (mg/kg)
Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
Benzoic acid
Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
Chrysene
Fluoranthene
Ideno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
Pyrene
        Pest./PCBs  (mg/kg)
DDT  (1,l-Bis-chlorophenyl-2,2, 2-trichloroethane)
P,P'-DDE
        Metals  (mg/kg)          Background
Aluminum                                24,900
Arsenic                                  15.25
Barium                                     105
Beryllium                                  1.8
Calcium                                 3,180
Chromium                                  37.5
Cobalt                                    19.6
Copper                                      42
Iron                                    35,300
Lead                                      65.3
Magnesium                                8,240
Manganese                                 62.3
Nickel                                    43.4
Silicon                                  1,900
Vanadium                                  49.3
Zinc                                      92.3
Maximum
Concentration
Detected
0.081
0.005 J
0.007
0.001 J
310
0.039 J
0.045 J
0.049 J
0.035 J
0.15 J
0.076 J
0.039 J
0.044 J
0.037 J
0.035 J
0.022
0.0071 J
3,320
5.8
24.3
0.39
814
8.1
4.9
12
6,130
9.4 J-
1,290
109
7.1
693 J
7.8
31.2

Sample
ID
43-7339-B020
43-7338-B004
43-9128-S001
43-9128-S001
43-9024-S001
43-9024-S001
43-9024-S001
43-902A-S001
43-9024-S001
43-7338-B004
43-9024-S001
43-9024-S001
43-9024-S001
43-9024-S001
43-9024-S001
43-9024-S001
43-9024-S001
43-9024-S001
43-7339-B020
43-9024-S001
43-9024-S001
43-7340-B028
43-7339-B020
43-7338-B004
43-9024-S001
43-7339-B020
43-9024-S001
43-7339-B020
43-7339-B020
43-7339-B011
43-7338-B004
43-7340-B028
43-9024-S001
Sampling
Interval
(ft BGS)
20.5-22.5
2-4
0-4
0-4
4-4.5
4-4.5
4-4.5
4-4.5
4-4.5
2-4
4-4.5
4-4.5
4-4.5
4-4.5
4-4.5
4-4.5
4-4.5
4-4.5
20.5-22.
4-4.5
4-4.5
26.5-28.
20.5-22.
2-4
4-4.5
20.5-22.
4-4.5
20.5-22.
20.5-22.
11.5-12.
2-4
26.5-28.
4-4.5





















5


5
5


5

5
5
5

5

J = The associated numerical value is an estimated guantity.
J - = Estimated value is biased low.

-------
                                           Table 5
        Summary of Highest Concentrations of Contaminants*
                                WESTON's Fixed Laboratory
                                  Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH
                Compound
        VOCs  (mg/kg)
Carbon disulfide
Diethyl ether
Methyl ethyl ketone  (2-Butanone)
Trichlorofluoromethane  (TCFM)
Petroleum hydrocarbons  (Method E418.1)  (mg/kg)
        SVOCs  (mg/kg)
Benzoic acid
Di-n-butylphthaiate
        Dioxins (ng/g)
HXCDD
OCDD
TCDF
        Metals  (mg/kg)             Background
Aluminum, total                         24,900
Arsenic, total                           15.25
Barium, total                              105
Beryllium, total                           1.8
Calcium, total                           3,180
Chromium, total                           37.5
Cobalt, total                             19.6
Copper, total                               42
Iron, total                             35,300
Lead, total                               65.3
Magnesium, total                         8,240
Manganese, total                          62.3
Nickel, total                             43.4
Potassium, total                         6,650
Silicon, total                           1,900
Vanadium, total                           49.3
Zinc, total                               92.3
)  FDTA ) 1 Surface Soil
[aximum
icentration
letected
0.005 J
0.001 J
0.006 J
0.002 J
15,000
0.18 J
0.039 J
0.100 J
0.200 J
0.100 J
4,520 J
10.3 J
82.3
0.21
937 J
23.2
6.3
23.6
10,500
150 J+
2,970 J
210
16.3
1,330
831 J+
12.2
34

Sample
ID
07-7389-B002
07-7309-B002
07-7309-B002
07-7309-B002
07-7392-B002
07-7387-B002
07-7387-B002
07-7390-B002
07-7387-B002
07-7389-B002
07-7389-B002
07-7390-B002
07-7390-B002
07-7389-B002
07-7389-B002
07-7391-B002
07-7387-B002
07-7389-B002
07-7389-B002
07-7391-B002
07-7389-B002
07-7389-B002
07-7387-B002
07-7389-B002
07-7390-B002
07-7387-B002
07-7391-B002
Sampling
Interval
(ft BGS)
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-7
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
*Mobile laboratory results not included because these results were not used  in  the  risk  assessment
J = The associated numerical value is an estimated guantity.
J+ = Estimated value is biased high.

-------
                                             Table 6
Summary of Highest Concentrations of Contaminants* ) FDTA-1 Subsurface Soil
                                    WESTON's Fixed Laboratory
                                     Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH
                        Compound
        VOCs  (mg/kg)
Carbon disulfide
Petroleum hydrocarbons  (Method E418.1)
        SVOCs  (mg/kg)
Benzoic acid
Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
        Dioxins  (ng/g)
TCDF
        Metals  (mg/kg)
Aluminum, total
Arsenic, total
Barium, total
Beryllium, total
Calcium, total
Chromium, total
Cobalt, total
Copper, total
Iron, total
Lead, total
Magnesium, total
Manganese:  total
Nickel, total
Potassium, total
Silicon total
Sodium, total
Vanadium:  total
Zinc, total
Background
       24:900
        15.25
          105
          1.8
        3,180
         37.5
         19.6
           42
      35,2,00
          653
        8,240
          623
         43.4
        6,650
        1,900
          356
          493
         92.3
   Maximum
Concentration
   Detected

        0.005

        6,500

      0.067 J
         0.49
      0.049 J

      0.200 J

        5,170
          6.4
         39.4
         0.38
        1,400
         23.2
          5.9
         28.2
       14,900
       42.3J+
        3,080
          258
         21.5
        1,610
        1,130
          128
         11.1
         36.3

Sample
ID
07-7388-B013
07-7389-B013
07-7392-B013
07-7392-B013
07-7392-B013
07-701-B009
07-7392-B013
07-701-B108
07-701-B108
07-7392-B013
07-701-B108
07-701-B108
07-701-B108
07-7390-B003
07-7392-B013
07-701-B108
07-7392-B013
07-701-B108
07-797-B003
07-701-B108
07-7391-B013
07-702-B007
07-701-B108
07-7397-B014
07-703-B007
Sampling
Interval
(ft BGS)
12.5-13
12.5-13
2.5-14.5
2.5-14.5
2.5-14.5
27-29
2.5-14.5
25-27
25-27
2.5-14.5
25-27
25-27
25-27
2-13
2.5-14.5
25-27
2.5-14.5
25-27
5.5-7
25-27
4.5-12.5
20.5-22
25-27
3.5-14.5
20.5-22
*Mobile laboratory results not included because these results were not used in the risk assessment.
J = The associated numerical value is an estimated guantity.
J + = Estimated value is biased high.

-------
                                        Table 7
        Summary of Highest Concentrations of Contaminants ) BA-1 Surface  Soil
                              WESTON's Fixed Laboratory
                                Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH
                        Compound
        VOCs  (mg/kg)
Dietlayl ether
Ethylbenzene
Toluene
Xylenes  (total)
Petroleum hydrocarbons  (Method EA18.1)
        SVOCs  (mg/kg)
Benzoic acid
Di-n-butyl phthalate
        Dioxins  (ng/g)
OCDD
OCDF
        Pest,/PCBs  (mg/kg)
Heptachlor
p,p'-DDE
        Metals  (mg/kg)             Background
Aluminum, total                         24,900
Arsenic, total                           15.25
Barium, total                              105
Beryllium, total                           1.8
Calcium, total                           3,180
Chromium, total                           37.5
Cobalt, total                             19.6
Copper, total                               42
Iron, total                             35,300
Lead, total                               65.3
Magnesium, total                         8,240
Manganese, total                           623
Nickel, total                             43.4
Silicon, total                           1,900
Vanadium, total                           49.3
Zinc, total                               92.3
Maximum
Concentration
Detected
0.002 J
0.001 J
0.015
0.006
1,220
0.42 J
0.110 J
1.10 J
0.100 J
0.0087 J
0.0052 J
8,540
4.6
36
0.47
271 J
15.5
5.2
8.8
8,880
40.3
2,100 J
128 J
12.1
967
10.9
28.3

Sample
ID
22-7413-B002
22-735-B001
22-735-B001
22-735-B001
22-735-B001
22-7414-B002
22-735-B001
22-7414-B002
22-7415-B102
22-7414-B002
22-7413-B002
22-734-B001
22-734-B001
22-7414-B002
22-7413-B002
22-7413-B002
22-735-B001
22-7413-B002
22-7413-B002
22-735-B001
22-735-B001
22-7413-B002
22-7413-B002
22-7413-B002
22-735-B001
22-7413-B002
22-7415-B102
Sampling
Interval
(ft BGS)
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
J = The associated numerical value is an estimated guantity.

-------
                                Table 8
Summary of Highest Concentrations of Contaminants a ) BA - 1 Subsurface Soil
                        WESTON's Fixed Laboratory
                         Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH
                        Compound
        VOCs  (mg/kg)
Benzene
Chloroform
Ethylbenzene
Methyl ethyl ketone  (2-Butanone)
Toluene
Trichloroethene  (TCE)
Xylenes  (total)
Petroleum hydrocarbons  (Method E418.1)
        SVOCs  (mg/kg)
Acenaphthene
Dibenzofuran
2-Methylnaphthalene
Bis(2-ethyhexyl) phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Fluorene
Isophorone
Naphthalene
Phenanthrene
        Dioxins  (ng/g)
OCDD
TCDF
        Metals  (mg/kg)
Aluminum, total
Antimony
Arsenic, total
Barium, total
Beryllium, total
Calcium, total
Chromium, total
Cobalt, total
Copper, total
Iron, total
Lead, total
Magnesium, total
Manganese, total
Nickel, total
Potassium, total
Silicon, total
Sodium, total
Thallium, total
Vanadium, total
Zinc, total






















Background
24,900
NA
15.25
105
1.8
3,180
37.5
19.6
42
35,300
653
8,240
623
43.4
6,650
1,900
356
NA
49.3
92.3
Maximum
Concentration
Detected
0.18
0.13 J
17
1.8 J
1.5 J
0.002 J
190
3, 630
0.04 J
0.13 J
3.3 J
0.91
0.220 J
0.210 J
0.58
2.8
0.44
0.100 J
0.100 J

21,300
27.6
52-5 b
84.2
1.4
23,700
30.7
11.5
63.4
19,500
44
6,790
546
43.7
5,280
1,320
155
30.6 J ) b
35.7
76.4

Sample
ID
22-7866-B039
22-734-B009
22-740-B010
22-740-B010
22-7866-B032
22-739-B009
22-740-B010
22-739-B006
22-7870-B026
22-7870-B026
22-7870-B026
22-7864-B044
22-739-B004
22-739-B004
22-739-B004
22-739-B004
22-739-B004
22-7414-B103
22-7414-B103

22-737-B009
22-777-B010
22-738-B009
22-737-B009
22-737-B009
22-738-B009
22-737-B009
22-737-B009
22-736-B009
22-777-B010
22-737-B009
22-737-B009
22-738-B008
22-738-B009
22-737-B009
22-7414-B103
22-777-B010
22-777-B010
22-777-B010
22-737-B009
Sampling
Interval
(ft BGS)
38.5-39
31.5-32
35-37
35-37
32-32.5
30-32
35-37
13-14.5
24-24.5
24-24.5
24-24.5
44-44.5
8-9.4
8-9.4
8-9.4
8-9.4
8-9.4
4-14.5
4-14.5

30-32
30-32
30.5-32
30-32
30-32
30.5-32
30-32
30-32
30-32
30-32
30-32
30-32
25-27
30.5-32
30-32
4-14.5
30-32
30-32
30-32
30-32

-------
a Mobile laboratory results not included because these results were not used in the risk assessment.
b Invalid result because of iron interference.
NA = Not analyzed.
J = The associated numerical value is an estimated quantity.
J ) = Estimated value is biased low.

-------
                                   Table 9
Summary of Highest Concentrations of Contaminants ) LFTS Surface Soil
                        WESTON's Fixed Laboratory
                          Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH
                     Compound
        VOCs  (mg/kg)
Diethyl ether
Toluene
Trichlorofluoromethane  (TCFM)
Total petroleum hydrocarbons  (Method EA48.1)
        SVOCs  (mg/kg)
Benzoic acid
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Pentachlorophenol
Pyrene
        Pest./PCBs  (mg/kg)
DDT  (1,l-Bis-chlorophenyl-2,2, 2-trichloroethane)
p,p'-DDE
Total organic carbon
        Metals (mg/kg)                     Background
Aluminum, total                                 24,900
Arsenic, total                                   15.25
Barium, total                                      105
Beryllium, total                                   1.8
Calcium, total                                   3,180
Chromium, total                                   37.5
Cobalt, total                                     19.6
Copper, total                                       42
Iron, total                                     35,300
Lead, total                                       65.3
Magnesium, total                                 8,240
Manganese, total                                  62.3
Nickel, total                                     43.4
Silicon, total                                   1,900
Vanadium, total                                   49.3
Zinc, total                                       92.3

J = The associated numerical value is an estimated guantity.
J- = Estimated value is biased low.
Maximum
Concentration
Detected
0.002 J
0.019 J
0.009 J
34,000
0.27 J
0.061 J
0.23 J
0.043 J
0.038
0.021
26,500
8,780
6.6 J-
15.5
0.47 J
616
15.2
5.4
13.3
10,700
17.9
1,860
177
11.3
858
14.6
30.3

Sample
ID
10-7399-B002
10-774-B001
10-3023-S002
10-3023-S002
10-7806-B002
10-7806-B002
10-7397-B002
10-7806-B002
10-7806-B002
10-7806-B002
10-3023-S002
10-7806-B002
10-775-B001
10-775-B001
10-775-B001
10-7806-B002
10-7411-B002
10-7397-B002
10-7806-B002
10-7411-B002
10-7806-B002
10-7411-B002
10-775-B001
10-775-B001
10-7399-B002
10-775-B001
10-775-B001
Sampling
Interval
(ft BGS)
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2

-------
                                        Table 10
        Summary of Highest Concentrations of Contaminants*
                                WESTON's Fixed Laboratory
                                  Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH
)  LFTS Subsurface Soil














Background
24,900
NA
15.25
105
1.8
3,180
37.5
19.6
42
35,300
65.3
8,240
623
43.4
6,650
1,900
49.3
92.3
Maximum
Concentration
Detected
0.001 J
0.003 J
0.003 J
3.1 J-
0.003 J
11 J-
0.003 J
28 J-
922
0.2.5
0.066

8,910
11.9
8.1
27.4
0.64
1,200
20.9
6.7
43.4
17,500
21.8
3, 690
270
16.8
1,880
1,190
16.3
72.2

Sample
ID
10-729-B007
10-724-B007
10-7259-B114
10-774-B008
10-724-B003
10-774-B008
10-724-B007
10-774-B008
10-724-B007
10-7399-B015
10-7411-B003

10-726-B007
10-729-B005
10-726-B007
10-726-B007
10-726-B007
10-726-B007
10-724-B003
10-726-B007
10-7411-B003
10-729-B005
10-726-B007
10-726-B007
10-729-B005
10-729-B006
10-726-B007
10-726-B007
10-729-B005
10-729-B005
Sampling
Interval
(ft BGS)
20-22
20-22
14-14.8
20-22
5-7
20-22
20-22
20-22
20-22
4.5-13.5
2-14

20-22
10-12
20-22
20-22
20-22
20-22
25-27
20-22
2-14
10-12
20-22
20-22
10-12
12.5-14.5
20-22
20-22
10-12
10-12
                     Compound
        VOCs  (mg/kg)
1,1,1-Trichloroethane  (1,1,1-TCA)
1,3-Dichlorobenzene  (1,3-DCB)
Diethylether
Ethylbenzene
Methyl ethyl ketone  (2-Butanone)
Toluene
Trichloroethene  (TCE)
Xylenes  (Total)
Petroleum, total  (Method E418.1)
        SVOCs  (mg/kg)
Bis (2-ethylhxyl) phthalate
Pentachlorophenol
        Metals  (mg/kg)
Aluminum total
Antimony, total
Arsenic, total
Barium, total
Beryllium, total
Calcium, total
Chromium, total
Cobalt, total
Copper, total
Iron, total
Lead, total
Magnesium, total
Manganese, total
Nickel, total
Potassium, total
Silicon, total
Vanadium, total
Zinc, total

* Mobile laboratory results not included because these results were not used in  the  risk  assessment.
NA = Not analyzed.
J = The associated value is an estimated guantity.
j - = Estimated value is biased low.

-------
                                              Table 11
               Summary of Highest Concentrations of Contaminants*  ) BA - 2  Surface  Soil
                                     WESTON's Fixed Laboratory
                                       Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH
                     Compound
        VOCs  (mg/kg)
1,1,1,-Trichloroethane  (1,1,1-TCA)
Tetrachloroethene  (PCE)
Toluene
Trichloroethene  (TCE)
Xylenes  (Total)
Petroleum hydrocarbons  (Method E418.1)
        SVOCs  (mg/kg)
Benzoic acid
Pentachlorophenol
Pyrene
        Dioxins  (ng/g)
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-HPCDD
HPCDD
HPCDF
HXCDD
HXCDF
OCDD
OCDF
        Pest./PCBs  (mg/kg)
Aroclor-1260
p,p'-DDE
        Metals  (mg/kg)
Aluminum, total
Arsenic, total
Barium, total
Beryllium, total
Calcium, total
Chromium, total
Iron, total
Lead, total
Magnesium, total
Manganese, total
Nickel, total
Silicon, total
Vanadium, total

* Mobile laboratory results not included because these results were not used in  the  risk  assessment.
J = The associated numerical value is an estimated guantity.
J- = Estimated value is biased low.





















Background
24,900
15.25
105
1.8
3,180
37.5
35,300
653
8,240
623
43.4
1,900
49.3
Maximum
Concentration
Detected
0.006 J
0.008 J
0.018 J
0.017 J
0.012 J
13,000
0.47 J
0.95 J
0.074 J
1.7
31
1.7
3
0.500 J
70
0.500 J
0.33 J
0.0060 J

7,990
3.8 J-
31.3
1.2
208
10.1
8, 610
462 J+
1,040
64.7
5.7
1,330
7.2

Sample
ID
10-776-B001
10-776-B001
10-776-B001
37-7395-B002
10-776-B001
37-7395-B002
37-7394-B002
37-7394-B002
37-7395-B002
37-7569-B002
37-7394-B002
37-7394-B002
37-7394-B002
37-7394-B002
37-7394-B002
37-7394-B002
37-7394-B002
37-7393-B002

37-7393-B002
37-7396-B002
37-7395-B002
37-7395-B002
37-7395-B002
37-7393-B002
37-7393-B002
37-7394-B002
37-7393-B002
37-7393-B002
37-7393-B002
37-7393-B002
37-7395-B002
Sampling
Interval
(ft BGS)
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2

0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2
0-2

-------
                                                        Table 12
                       Summary of Highest Concentrations of Contaminants*) BA -  2  Subsurface  Soil
                                                WESTON's Fixed Laboratory
                                                  Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH
                                                                Maximum
                     Compound
                VOCs  (mg/kg)
1,1,1-Trichloroethane  (1,1,1-TCA)
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane  (1,1, 2, 2-PCA)
Chlorobenzene
Ethylbenzene
Methyl isobutyl ketone  (MIK)
Tetrachloroethene  (PCE)
Toluene
Trichloroethene (TCE)
Trichlorofluoromethane  (TCFM)
Xylenes  (Total)
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
Petroleum hydrocarbons  (Method E418.1)
Petroleum hydrocarbons
                SVOCs
Benzo(a)anthraceue
Chrysene
Benzoic acid
 (Method 8100)
(mg/kg)
1,2.,3,4,6,7,
HPCDD
HPCDF
OCDD
OCDF
PECDF
                Dioxins
             3-HPCDD
  (ng/g)
                Pest./PCBs  (mg/kg)
Aloclor-1260
Metals  (mg.kg)
Aluminum, total
Antimony
Arsenic, total
Barium
Beryllium, total
Calcium, total
Chromium, total
Cobalt
Copper
Iron, total
Lead, total
Magnesium, total
Manganese, total
Nickel, total
Potassium
Silicon, total
Sodium
Thallium, total
Vanadium, total
Zinc
             Background
Concentration Sampling Sample Interval
Detected
1.2 J
1.5
4
11
21
0.001 J
0.46 J
2
0.005 J
47
0.049 J
3,200
640
0.12 J
0.095 J
0.060 J
0.18
3.70 J
0.400 J
9.1
0.500 J
0.400 J
ID
10-730-B107
10-730-B107
10-730-B107
10-730-B107
10-730-B107
37-7336-B002
10-730-B107
10-730-B107
37-7930-B030
10-730-B107
37-7395-B003
37-7395-B003
37-79. 30-B022
10-730-B107
10-730-B107
37-7396-B015
37-7565-B013
37-7336-B002
37-7336-B002
37-7336-B002
37-7336-B002
37-7335-B012
(ft BGS)
20-22
20-22
20-22
20-22
20-22
23-33
20-22
20-22
28-30
20-22
2-2.5
2-2.5
20-22
20-22
20-22
2.5-13
2-13.
2.5-3
2.5-3
2.5-3
2.5-3
10-13
















.5
2
.3
.3
.3
.3
.8
                                                               0.061 J
                                                                                 37-7336-B002
24,900
NA
15.25
105
1.8
3,180
37.5
19.6
42
35,300
65.3
8,240
623
43.4
6, 650
1,900
356
NA
493
92.3
15,200 J
36
8.1 J
60.8
1.2 J
2,630
26.0 J
12.2
233
26,800
34.7
6,740 J
344
25.4
4,950
857
276
42.8 J
51.3
80
10-776-B109
10-776-B109
10-776-B109
10-776-B109
10-776-B109
10-776-B109
10-776-B109
10-776-B109
10-776-B109
10-776-B109
10-776-B109
10-776-B109
10-776-B109
10-776-B109
10-776-B109
37-7394-B015
10-776-B109
10-776-B109
10-776-B109
10-776-B109
25-27
25-27
25-27
25-27
25-27
25-27
25-27
25-27
25-27
25-27
25-27
25-27
25-27
25-27
25-27
2.5-14.5
25-27
25-27
25-27
25-27
* Mobile laboratory, results not included because these results were not used  in  the  risk  assessment.
  NA = Not analyzed
  J = The associated numerical value is an estimated guantity.

-------
                                                                Table 13
                                            Summary of Maximum Detected Concentrations of
                                Organic and Inorganic Compounds in Overburden and Bedrock Groundwater
                                                        Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH
        Chemical
Site 1
        VOCs  ()lg/L)
Benzene
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene
Ethylbenzene
Naphthalene
Toluene
Trichlorofluoromethane
1, 2, 4-Trimethylbenzene udm
1, 3, 5-Trimethylbenzene udm
        SVOCs  ()lg/L)
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
Diethyl phthalate dc
Di-n-butyl phthalate dc
4-Methylphenol
        Inorganics  (mg/L)

Aluminum u

Arsenic

Barium

Beryllium

Boron

Cadmium

Calcium

Chromium

Cobalt

Copper
MCL a
                MCLG b
                            NHAGOS c
  Regulatory ARARs
LHA d     RCRA e  Background
                                                                          Maximum Detected Concentrations f
                                                                        OB      OB Location     BR      BR Location
5
70
700
NVA
1,000
NVA
NVA
NVA
dc 6
NVA
NVA
NVA

NVA

0.05

2

0.004

NVA

0.005

NVA

0.1

NVA

1.3
0
70
700
NVA
1,000
NVA
NVA
NVA
0
NVA
NVA
NVA

NVA

NVA

2

0.004

NVA

0.005

NVA

0.1

NVA

1.3
5
70
700
20
1,000
2,000
NVA
NVA
6
NVA
NVA
350

NVA

0.05

2

0.004

0.6

0.005

NVA

0.1

NVA

1.3
5
70
700
20
1,000
2,000
NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA

NVA

NVA

2

NVA

0.6

0.005

NVA

0.1

NVA

NVA
NVA
NVA
4,000
NVA
10,000
10,000
NVA
NVA
3
30,000
4,000
NVA

NVA

0.05

1

0.000008

NVA

0.01

NVA

0.05 (VI)

NVA

NVA
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
46.4 t
0.398 s
0.072 t
0.0231 s
0.221 t
0.0883 s
0.0031 t
ND s
ND t
0.111 s
ND t
ND s
90.3 t
73.2 s
0.0943 t
ND
0.106 t
ND
0.0881 t
ND
0.2 J
0.4 J
0.2 J
0.2 J
0.5 J
0.2 J
0.2 J
0.2 J
150
ND
1 J
3 J
_
2.07
-
0.19
-
ND
-
ND
-
0.310
-
ND

164
-
ND
-
ND
-
ND
01-536-M003
01-529-M003
01-536-M003
01-536-M003
01-536-M004
01-5061-M002
01-536-M004
01-536-M004
01-536-M002
-
01-536-M002
01-536-M002
_
01-530-M001
-
01-5060-M001
-
-
-
-
-
J- 01-536-M004
-
-

01-529-M003
-
-
-
-
-
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.1 J
0.2 J
ND
ND
11
5 J
ND
ND
48.1
-
0.0245
-
0.384
-
0.0045
-
ND
-
ND
-
79.7 J
-
0.0996
-
0.0724
-
0.0792
-
-
-
-
-
01-6051-M001
01-6051-M002
-
-
01-6050-M002
01-603-M003
-
-
01-603-M003
-
01-603-M003
-
01-603-M003
-
01-603-M003
-
-
-
-
-
01-603-M003
-
01-603-M003
-
01-603-M003
-
01-603-M003
-

-------
                                Table 13

            Summary of Maximum Detected Concentrations of
Organic and Inorganic Compounds in Overburden and Bedrock Groundwater
                        Zone 2, Pease AFB,  NH

                                    Regulatory ARARs
Maximum Detected Concentrations f
Chemical
Site 1 (continued)
Inorganics (mg/L)

Iron

Lead

Magnesium

Manganese

Nickel

Potassium

Silicon

Sodium

Thallium

Vanadium u

Zinc
Site 7
Inorganics (mg/L)

Aluminum u

Arsenic

Barium

Beryllium

Boron
MCL a

(continued)

NVA

0.015

NVA

NVA

0.1

NVA

NVA

NVA

0.002

NVA

NVA



NVA

0.05

2

0.004

NVA
MCLG b



NVA

0

NVA

0.20

0.1

NVA

NVA

NVA

0.0005

NVA

NVA



NVA

NVA

2

0.004

NVA
NHAGOS c



NVA

0.015

NVA

NVA

0.1

35

NVA

NVA

0.002

NVA

NVA



NVA

0.05

2

0.004

0.6
LHA d



NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA

0.1

NVA

NVA

NVA

0.0004

0.02

2



NVA

NVA

2

NVA

0.6
RCRA e



NVA

0.05

NVA

NVA

0.7

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA



NVA

0.05

1

0.000008

NVA
Background


62.8 t
0.584 s
0.0976 t
ND s
38.3 t
18.9 s
5.66 t
0.942 s
0.126 t
0.0328 s
8.87 t
7.06 s
42.3 t
6.4 s
8.97 t
10.2 s
ND t
ND s
0.584 t
ND s
0.220 t
0.168 s


46.4 t
0.398 s
0.072 t
0.0231 s
0.221 t
0.0883 s
0.0031 t
ND s
ND t
0.111 s
OB


-
260
-
0.0038
-
63.3
-
5.36
-
0.0725
-
8.57
-
15.4
-
59.6
-
0.515
-
ND
-
0.0686


-
ND
-
0.0157
-
ND
-
ND
-
ND
OB Location


-
01-536-M002
-
01-530-M004
-
01-529-M004
-
01-536-M003
-
01-529-M101
-
01-5060-M002

01-5060-M001
-
01-530-M001
-
01-536-M002
-
-
-
01-5061-M001


-
-
-
07-528-M004
-
-
-
-
-
-
BR


163 J
-
0.0287
-
55.8 J
-
4.04
-
0.131
-
16.5
-
67.4
-
119 J
-
ND
-
0.0764
-
0.293
-


ND
-
0.0134
-
ND
-
ND
-
ND
-
BR Location


01-603-M003
-
01-603-M003
-
01-603-M003
-
01-603-M003
-
01-603-M003
-
01-603-M003
-
01-603-M003
-
01-6050-M001
-
-
-
01-603-M003
-
01-603-M003
-


-
-
07-610-M003
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

-------
                                Table 13

            Summary of Maximum Detected Concentrations of
Organic and Inorganic Compounds in Overburden and Bedrock Groundwater
                        Zone 2, Pease AFB,  NH
Regulatory
Chemical
Site 7 (continued)
Inorganics (mg/L)

Cadmium

Calcium

Chromium

Cobalt

Copper

Iron

Lead

Magnesium

Manganese

Nickel

Potassium

Silicon

Sodium

Vanadium u

Zinc
Site 10
Organics (]lg/L)
2 , 4-Dimethylphenol
Dimethyl phthalate
2-Methylphenol dc
MCL a

(continued)

0.005

NVA

0.1

NVA

1.3

NVA

0.015

NVA

NVA

0.1

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA


NVA
NVA
NVA
MCLG b



0.005

NVA

0.1

NVA

1.3

NVA

0

NVA

0.20

0.1

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA


NVA
NVA
NVA
NHAGOS c



0.005

NVA

0.1

NVA

1.3

NVA

0.015

NVA

NVA

0.1

35

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA


NVA
NVA
350
LHA d



0.005

NVA

0.1

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA

0.1

NVA

NVA

NVA

0.02

2


NVA
NVA
NVA
ARARs
RCRA e



0.01

NVA

0.05 (VI)

NVA

NVA

NVA

0.05

NVA

NVA

0.7

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA


NVA
NVA
NVA
Maximum Detected Concentrations f
Background


ND t
ND s
90.3 t
73.2 s
0.0943 t
ND
0.106 t
ND
0.0881 t
ND
62.8 t
0.584 s
0.0976 t
ND s
38.3 t
18.9 s
5.66 t
0.942 s
0.126 t
0.0328 s
8.87 t
7.06 s
42.3 t
6.4 s
8.97 t
10.2 s
0.584 t
ND s
0.220 t
0.168 s


NE
NE
NE
OB


-
ND
-
23.3
-
ND
-
ND
-
ND
-
0.143
-
0.0081
-
11.4
-
1.53
-
ND
-
ND
-
4.79
-
7.31
-
ND
-
ND


23
ND
22
OB Location BR


ND
-
2.26
07-528-M003
ND
-
ND
-
ND
-
5.6
07-528-M003
0.008
07-528-M004
1.09
07-528-M002
0.0648
07-528-M003
ND
-
ND
-
4.59
07-528-M002
67
07-528-M002
ND
-
ND
-


10-525-M002 ND
12
10-534-M002 ND
BR Location


-
-
07-610-M003
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
07-610-M003
-
07-610-M004
-
07-610-M003
-
07-610-M003
-
-
-
-
-
07-610-M004
-
07-610-M003
-
-
-
-
-


-
10-6108-MOO:
-

-------
                                                                Table 13
                                            Summary of Maximum Detected Concentrations of
                                Organic and Inorganic Compounds in Overburden and Bedrock Groundwater
                                                        Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH
        Chemical
Site 10 (continued)
        Organics  (]lg/L)  (continued)
4-Methylphenol
Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate dc
Naphthalene
Phenol
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzenc udm
o-Xylene
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene udm
4-Isopropyltoluene udm
Acetone
Benzene
Ethylbenzene
Isopropylbenzene
m&p-Xylenes
Methyl isobutyl ketone
(4-Methyl-2-pentanone)
Methylene chloride dc,  urm
n-Propylbenzene udm
sec-Butylbenzene udm
tert-Butylbenzene udm
Toluene
Trichlorofluoromethane
Chlorobenzene
Trichloroethene
Xylenes (total)
        Inorganics  (mg/L)

Aluminum u

Arsenic

Barium

Beryllium
MCL a
                MCLG b
                            Regulatory ARARs
                             NHAGOS c  LHA d
                                                 RCRA e
        Maximum Detected Concentrations f
Background    OB     OB Location      BR
BR Location
NVA
6
NVA
NVA
NVA
10,000 g
NVA
NVA
NVA
5
700
NVA
10.000 g
NVA
5
NVA
NVA
NVA
1,000
NVA
100
5
10,000 g

NVA

0.05

2

0.004
NVA
0
NVA
NVA
NVA
10,000 g
NVA
NVA
NVA
0
700
NVA
10,000 g
NVA
0
NVA
NVA
NVA
1,000
NVA
100
0
10,000 g

NVA

NVA

2

0.004
350
6
20
4,000
NVA
10,000 g
NVA
NVA
700
5
700
NVA
10.000 g
350
5
NVA
NVA
NVA
1,000
2,000
100
5
10,000 g

NVA

0.05

2

0.004
NVA
NVA
20
4,000
NVA
10,000
NVA
NVA
NVA
5
700
NVA
10,000
NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA
1,000
2,000
100
NVA
10,000

NVA

NVA

2

NVA
NVA
3
NVA
20,000
NVA
g 70,000 g
NVA
NVA
4,000
NVA
4,000
NVA
g 70, 000 g
2,000
5
NVA
NVA
NVA
10,000
10,000
700
5
g 70, 000 g

NVA

0.05

1

0.000008
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
46.4 t
0.398 s
0.072 t
0.0231 s
0.221 t
0.0883 s
0.0031 t
ND s
35
18 J-
28 J
9 J
70
230
28
10 J
130
160
360 J
40 J
640
400
49 J
40 J
6 J
0.2 J
1396
0.2 J
ND
0.1 J
900 J-
_
0.59
-
0.0394
-
0.225
-
ND
10-543-M002
10-543-M001
10-543-M004
10-543-M002
10-7263-M003
10-7263-M003
10-7263-M003
10-543-M004
10-525-M002
10-5112-M002
10-543-M004
10-543-M004
10-7263-M003
10-525-M002
10-543-M003
10-543-M004
10-543-M004
10-5055-M001
10-7263-M002AM
10-5109-M003
-
10-614-M005
10-525-M001
_
10-5110-M101
-
10-5055-M002
-
10-5110-M001
-
-
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.6 J
ND
ND
ND
320
0.3 J
ND
1
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
3
ND
0.2 J
ND
ND
ND
-
0.0082
-
ND
-
ND
-
-
-
-
-
-
10-6108-M001
-
-
-
10-6108-M001
10-6048-M006
-
10-6048-M006
-
_
-
-
-
10-6048-M006
-
10-6048-M004
-
-
_
-
10-6108-M001
-
-
-
-
-

-------
                                Table 13

            Summary of Maximum Detected Concentrations of
Organic and Inorganic Compounds in Overburden and Bedrock
                        Zone 2, Pease AFB,  NH

                                    Regulatory ARARs
Groundwater
                 Maximum Detected Concentrations f
Chemical
Site 10 (continued)
Inorganics (mg/L)

Boron

Cadmium

Calcium

Chromium

Cobalt

Copper

Iron

Lead

Magnesium

Manganese

Nickle

Potassium

Silicon

Sodium

Vanadium u

Zinc
MCL a

(continued)

NVA

0.005

NVA

0.1

NVA

1.3

NVA

0.015

NVA

NVA

0.1

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA
MCLG b



NVA

0.005

NVA

0.1

NVA

1.3

NVA

0

NVA

0.20

0.1

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA
NHAGOS c



0.6

0.005

NVA

0.1

NVA

1.3

NVA

0.015

NVA

NVA

0.1

35

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA
LHA d



0.6

0.005

NVA

0.1

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA

0.1

NVA

NVA

NVA

0.02

2
RCRA e



NVA

0.01

NVA

0.05 (VI)

NVA

NVA

NVA

0.05

NVA

NVA

0.7

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA
Background


ND t
0.111 s
ND t
ND s
90.3 t
73.2 s
0.0943 t
ND
0.106 t
ND
0.0881 t
ND
62.8 t
0.584 s
0.0976 t
ND s
38.3 t
18.9 s
5.66 t
0.942 s
0.126 t
0.0328 s
8.87 t
7.06 s
42.3 t
6.4 s
8.97 t
10.2 s
0.584 t
ND s
0.220 t
0.168 s
OB


-
ND
-
0.010 J-
-
32.9
-
ND
-
ND
-
0.0824
-
21
-
0.147 J-
-
15.3
-
5.69
-
0.0326
-
43.3
-
80.9
-
50.8
-
ND
-
ND
OB Location


-
-
-
10-525-M002
-
10-526-M002
-
-
-
-
-
10-525-M002
-
10-543-M004
-
10-543-M004
-
10-526-M002
-
10-534-M004
-
10-525-M001
-
10-5110-M101
-
10-7263-M003
-
10-5110-M101
-
-
-
-
BR


ND
-
ND
-
16.3
-
ND
-
ND
-
ND
-
12.9
-
ND
-
9.64
-
0.114
-
ND
-
7.35
-
6.14
-
16.4
-
ND
-
ND
-
BR Location


-
-
-
-
10-6108-M001
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
10-6108-M102
-
-
-
10-6048-M006
-
10-6108-M102
-
-
-
10-6113-M001
-
10-6098-M101
-
10-6113-M001
-
-
-
-
-

-------
                                                                Table 13
                                            Summary of Maximum Detected Concentrations of
                                Organic and Inorganic Compounds in Overburden and Bedrock Groundwater
                                                        Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH
        Chemical
Site 22
        Organics  (]lg/L)
2, 4-Dimethylphenol
2-Methylnaphthalene
Bis(-ethylhexyl)phthalate dc
Di-n-butyl phthalate dc
Dimethyl phthalate
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene udm
1,2-Dibromoethane  (ethylene dibromide)
o-Xylene
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene
Ethylbenzene
Isopropylbenzene udm
4-Isopropyltoluene
Benzene
m&p-Xylenes
Methylene chloride dc, urm
Methyl isobutyl ketone
(4-Methyl-2-pentanone)
n-Propylbenzene udm
Naphthalene
sec-Butylbenzene udm
Tetrachloroethene
Toluene
Xylenes  (total)
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
46.4 t     -          -            ND
Acetone
Trichloroethene
trans-1,2-Dichloroethane
        Inorganics (mg/L)

Aluminum u

Arsenic
Regulatory ARARs
MCL a
NVA
NVA
6
NVA
NVA
NVA
0.05
10,000 g
NVA
70
700
NVA
NVA
5
10,000 g
5
NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA
5
1,000
10,000 g
200
NVA
5
100

NVA

0.05
MCLG b
NVA
NVA
0
NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA
10,000 g
NVA
70
700
NVA
NVA
0
10,000 g
0
NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA
0
1,000
10,000 g
200
NVA
0
100

NVA

NVA
NHAGOS c
350
6
20
4,000
NVA
10,000 g
NVA
10,000 g
NVA
70
700
NVA
NVA
5
10,000 g
5
350
NVA
20
NVA
5
1,000
10,000 g
200
70
5
100

NVA

0.05
LHA d
NVA
NVA
20
4,000
NVA
10,000 g
NVA
10,000 g
NVA
70
700
NVA
NVA
5
10,000 g
NVA
NVA
NVA
20
NVA
-
1,000
10,000 g
200
NVA
NVA
100

NVA

NVA
RCRA e
NVA
3
NVA
20,000
NVA
70,000 g
NVA
70,000 g
NVA
NVA
4,000
NVA
NVA
NVA
70,000 g
5
2,000
NVA
NVA
NVA
0.70
10,000
70,000 g
3,000
4,000
5
NVA

NVA

0.05
Maximum Detected Concentrations f
Background
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
46.4 t
0.398 s
0.072 t
0.0231 s
OB
35
140
31 J
96 J
7 J
1,400 J
51
2,800
820 J
24
2,800 J
170
130
3,700 J
7,300
320 J
2,000
190
340
39
0.4 J
2,100
5,500 J-
0.30 J
ND
5
0.3 J
_
ND
-
0.194 J
OB Location
22-5124-M002
22-5105-M002
22-5124-M001
22-5065-M002
22-5065-M003
22-5105-M003
22-5107-M103
22-5105-M002
22-5105-M003
22-5107-M004
22-545-M003
22-5107-M002
22-5105-M003
22-5107-M003
22-5105-M002
22-5065-M001
22-543-M002
22-5105-M003
22-5105-M002
22-5105-M003
22-7433-M002
22-5105-M002
22-545-M002
22-6107-M001
-
22-6107-M002
22-6107-M002
_
-
-
22-5124-M002
BR
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.2 J
ND
0.1 J
ND
ND
ND
0.5 J
ND
11
0.4 J
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-
0.0107
-
BR Location

-
-
-
-
22-615-M004
-
22-6047-M002
-
-
-
22-6047-M001
-
22-6047-M001
22-615-M004
-
-
_
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
_
-
22-6047-M001
-

-------
                                Table 13

            Summary of Maximum Detected Concentrations of
Organic and Inorganic Compounds in Overburden and Bedrock Groundwater
                        Zone 2, Pease AFB,  NH

                                    Regulatory ARARs
Maximum Detected Concentrations f
Chemical
Site 22 (continued)
Inorganics (mg/L)

Barium

Beryllium

Boron

Cadmium

Calcium

Chromium

Cobalt

Copper

Iron

Lead

Magnesium

Manganese

Nickel

Potassium

Silicon

Sodium

Vanadium u
MCL a

(continued)

2

0.004

NVA

0.005

NVA

0.1

NVA

1.3

NVA

0.015

NVA

NVA

0.1

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA
MCLG b



2

0.004

NVA

0.005

NVA

0.1

NVA

1.3

NVA

0

NVA

NVA

0.1

35

NVA

NVA

NVA
NHAGOS c



2

0.004

0.6

0.005

NVA

0.1

NVA

1.3

NVA

0.015

NVA

NVA

0.1

35

NVA

NVA

NVA
LHA d



2

NVA

0.6

0.005

NVA

0.1

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA

0.1

NVA

NVA

NVA

0.02
RCRA e



1

0.000008

NVA

0.01

NVA

0.05 (VI)

NVA

NVA

NVA

0.05

NVA

NVA

0.7

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA
Background


0.221 t
0.0883 s
0.0031 t
ND s
ND t
0.111 s
ND t
ND s
90.3 t
73.2 s
0.0943 t
ND
0.106 t
ND
0.0881 t
ND
62.8 t
0.584 s
0.0976 t
ND s
38.3 t
18.9 s
5.66 t
0.942 s
0.126 t
0.0328 s
8.87 t
7.06 s
42.3 t
6.4 s
8.97 t
10.2 s
0.584 t
ND s
OB OB Location


-
ND
-
ND
-
0.154 J 22-545-M004
-
ND
-
Ill 22-5107-M103
-
ND
-
ND
-
ND
-
114 22-545-M004
-
0.0102 22-5065-M002
-
26.7 22-5107-M003
-
15.6 22-545-M004
-
0.0248 J 22-5107-M003
-
ND
-
14.6 22-5062-M001
-
43.2 22-5107-M003
-
ND
BR


ND
-
ND
-
ND
-
ND
-
15.
-
ND
-
ND
-
ND
-
13.6
-
0.0080
-
12.2
-
0.205
-
ND
-
5.96
-
5.44
-
58.8
-
ND
-
BR Location


-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
9 J+ 22-615-M004
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
22-6047-M002
-
J 22-6047-M002
-
22-6111-M002
-
22-6112-M002
-
-
-
22-6099-M101
-
22-6047-M001
-
22-6047-M001
-
-
-

-------
                                                               Table 13
                                Organic
        Chemical                MCL a
Site 22 (continued)
        Inorganics (mg/L)  (continued)
    Summary of Maximum Detected Concentrations of
and Inorganic Compounds in Overburden and Bedrock Groundwater
                Zone 2, Pease AFB,  NH
        MCLG b
       Regulatory ARARs
NHAGOS c  LHA d     RCRA e    Background
                                                                   Maximum Detected Concentrations f
                                                                 OB     OB Location      BR     BR Location

Zinc
Site 24
Inorganics (mg/L)

Arsenic

Calcium

Chromium

Iron

Lead

Magnesium

Manganese

Nickel

Silicon

Sodium

Zinc
Site 37
Organics (]lg/L)
1, 2, 4-Trimethylbenzene udm
1, 3, 5-Trimethylbenzene udm
4-Isopropyltoluene udm
Isopropylbenzene udm
n-Propylbenzene udm
sec-Butylbenzene udm
Di-n-butyl phthalate dc

NVA



0.05

NVA

0.1

NVA

0.015

NVA

NVA

0.1

NVA

NVA

NVA


NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA

NVA



NVA

NVA

0.1

NVA

0

NVA

0.20

0.1

NVA

NVA

NVA


NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA

NVA



0.05

NVA

0.1

NVA

0.015

NVA

NVA

0.1

NVA

NVA

NVA


NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA

2



NVA

NVA

0.1

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA

0.1

NVA

NVA

2


NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA

NVA



0.05

NVA

0.05 (VI)

NVA

0.05

NVA

NVA

0.7

NVA

NVA

NVA


NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA
4,000
0.220 t
0.168 s


0.072 t
0.0231 s
90.3 t
73.2 s
0.0943 t
ND
62.8 t
0.584 s
0.0976 t
ND s
38.3 t
18.9 s
5.66 t
0.942 s
0.126 t
0.0328 s
42.3 t
6.4 s
8.97 t
10.2 s
0.220 t
0.168 s


NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
-
0.0403


-
0.0094
-
0
22-527-M001


-
24-7946-M001
-
.051'
-


-
-
-
97.4 J- 24-7946-M001
-
0.0127
-
6.2
-
0.003
-
22.6
-
4.21
-
0.00223
-
6.52 J
-
19.8
-
40.8


400
150
44
34
35
11 J
17
-
J 24-7949-M001
-
24-7948-M001
-
J 24-7947-M001
-
J 24-7946-M001
-
24-7949-M001
-
J 24-7949-M001
-
24-7946-M001
-
24-7948-M001
-
24-7947-M001


22-5107-M003
-
22-5062-M001
22-5107-M003
-


-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-


ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND

-------
                                                                Table 13
                                            Summary of Maximum Detected Concentrations of
                                Organic and Inorganic Compounds in Overburden and Bedrock Groundwater
                                                        Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH
        Chemical
Site 37 (continued)
        Organics  (]lg/L)  (continued)
Phenol
o-Xylene
m&p-Xylenes
Ethylbenzene
Toluene
n-Butylbenzene
Naphthalene
2-Methylnaphthalene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Trichloroethene
Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
        Inorganics  (mg/L)

Aluminum u

Arsenic

Barium

Beryllium

Boron

Cadmium

Calcium

Chromium

Cobalt

Copper

MCL a
NVA
10,000
10,000
700
1,000

NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA
5
6

NVA

0.05

2

0.004

NVA

0.005

NVA

0.1

NVA

1.3

MCLG b
NVA
10,000
10,000
700
1,000

NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA
0
0

NVA

NVA

2

0.004

NVA

0.005

NVA

0.1

NVA

1.3
Regulatory
NHAGOS c
4,000
10,000
10,000
700
1,000

20
NVA
NVA
NVA
5
6

NVA

0.05

2

0.004

0.6

0.005

NVA

0.1

NVA

1.3
ARARs
LHA d
4,000
10,000
10,000
700
1,000

20
NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA

NVA

NVA

2

NVA

0.6

0.005

NVA

0.1

NVA

NVA
Maximum Detected Concentrations f
RCRA e
20,000
10,000
10,000
4,000
10,000

NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA
5
3

NVA

0.05

1

0.000008

NVA

0.01

NVA

0.05 (VI)

NVA

NVA
Background
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
NE
46.4 t
0.398 s
0.072 t
0.0231 s
0.221 t
0.0883 s
0.0031 t
22-5065-M001
ND t
0.111 t
ND t
ND s
90.3 t
73.2 s
0.943 t
ND
0.106 t
ND
0.0881 t
ND
OB
ND
340
620
130
10 J
94 J
100
85
5 J
4 J
26
11
-
ND
-
0.0078
-
0.0635
-
ND
-
ND
-
ND
-
13.2
-
ND
-
ND
-
ND
OB Location
_
37-5125-M001
37-5125-M001
37-5125-M001
37-5125-M002
37-5125-M002
10-730-M002
37-5125-M001
37-5125-M001
37-5125-M001
10-730-M002
37-5126-M002
-
-
-
J 37-5125-M001
-
37-5122-M101
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
37-5122-M001
-
-
-
ND
-
ND
BR
8 J
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
-
0.0083
-
ND
-
ND
-
ND
-
ND
-
8.61
-
ND
-
ND
-
ND
-
BR Location
 37-6049-M001
 37-6049-M001
37-6049-M001

-------
                                                                Table 13
                                            Summary of Maximum Detected Concentrations of
                                Organic and Inorganic Compounds in Overburden and Bedrock Groundwater
                                                        Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH
        Chemical                MCL a
Site 37 (continued)
        Inorganics  (mg/L)  (continued)
Iron

Lead

Magnesium

Manganese

Nickel

Potassium

Silicon

Sodium

Vanadium u
NVA

0.015

NVA

NVA

0.1

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA
Zinc
Site 43
        Organics  (]lg/L)
Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate dc   6
Di-n-butyl phthalate dc         NVA
Dimethyl phthalate              NVA
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene          NVA
o-Xylene                      10,000
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene udm       5
Benzene                          5
Site 43 (continued)
Ethylbenzene                    NVA
Isopropylbenzene udm            NVA
m&p-Xylenes                   10,000
Toluene                        1,000
Trichlorofluoromethane          NVA
4-Isopropyltoluene              NVA
MCLG b



NVA

 0

NVA

0.20

0.1

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA
                 0
                NVA
                NVA
                NVA
              10,000 g
                 0
                 0

                NVA
                NVA
              10,000 g
               1,000
                NVA
                NVA
                                    Regulatory ARARs
                             NHAGOS c  LHA d     RCRA e    Background

NVA

0.015

NVA

NVA

0.1

35

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA

0.1

NVA

NVA

NVA

0.02

2

NVA

0.05

NVA

NVA

0.7

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA
62.8 t
0.584
0.0976
ND s
38.3
18.9
5.66
0.942
0.126
0.0328
8.87
7.06
42.3
6.4
8.97
10.2
0.584
ND s
0.220
0.168

s
t

t
s
t
s
t
s
t
s
t
s
t
s
t

t
s
               6        NVA       3           NE
              NVA       NVA     4,000         NE
              NVA       NVA      NVA          NE
              NVA       NVA      NVA          NE
            10,000 g  10,000 g 70,000 g       NE
               5         5       NVA          NE
               5         5       NVA          NE

              NVA       NVA     4,000         NE
              NVA       NVA      NVA          NE
            10,000 g  10,000 g 70,000 g       NE
             1,000     1,000    10,000        NE
             2,000     2,000    10,000        NE
              NVA       NVA      NVA          NE
                                                           Maximum Detected Concentrations f
                                                         OB     OB Location      BR     BR Location
 5.04    37-5125-M001

0.0067   37-5125-M001

 4.1     37-5122-M001

0.226    37-5125-M001

  ND

  ND

 3.95 J  37-5122-M001

 74.8    37-5122-M001

  ND

0.0571   37-5126-M002
 4 J
 3 J
 ND
 ND
 ND
0.6 J
 3

 ND
0.3 J
0.3 J
 ND
0.1 J
0.1 J
 6.72 J    37-6049-M002

0.00335 J  37-6049-M002

  2.76     37-6049-M001

 0.0871 J  37-6049-M002

   ND

   ND

   5.8

  80.3

   ND

 0.0118    37-6049-M002
37-6049-M002

37-6049-M001
43-5056-M002
43-5051-M002
-
-
-
43-7338-M002
43-5134-M001
ND
ND
2 J
0.5 J
2
0.4 J
53
-
-
43-6114-M102
43-6103-M002
43-6103-M001
43-6103-M002
43-6114-M001
-
43-7338-M002
43-7338-M002
-
43-5056-M002
43-7338-M002
0.5 J
2
1
1
ND
ND
43-6103-M002
43-6114-M002
43-6103-M001
43-6103-M001
-
-

-------
                                                                Table 13
        Chemical
Site 43 (continued)
        Inorganics (mg/L)
                                            Summary of Maximum Detected Concentrations of
                                Organic and Inorganic Compounds in Overburden and Bedrock Groundwater
                                                        Zone 2, Pease AFB,  NH
MCL a
                MCLG b
       Regulatory ARARs
NHAGOS c  LHA d     RCRA e    Background
                                                                           Maximum Detected Concentrations f
                                                                         OB     OB Location      BR     BR Location

Aluminum u

Arsenic

Barium

Beryllium

Boron

Cadmium

Calcium

Chromium

Cobalt

Copper

Iron

Lead
Magnesium

Manganese

Nickel

Potassium

Silicon

NVA

0.05

2

0.004

NVA

0.005

NVA

0.1

NVA

1.3

NVA

0.015
NVA

NVA

0.1

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA

2

0.004

NVA

0.005

NVA

0.1

NVA

1.3

NVA

0
NVA

0.20

0.1

NVA

NVA

NVA

0.05

2

0.004

0.6

0.005

NVA

0.1

NVA

1.3

NVA

0.015
NVA

NVA

0.1

35

NVA

NVA

NVA

2

NVA

0.6

0.005

NVA

0.1

NVA

NVA

NVA

NVA
NVA

NVA

0.1

NVA

NVA

NVA

0.05

1

0.000008

NVA

0.01

NVA

0.05 (VI)

NVA

NVA

NVA

0.05
NVA

NVA

0.7

NVA

NVA
46.4 t
0.398 s
0.072 t
0.0231 s
0.221 t
0.0883 s
0.0031 t
ND s
ND t
0.111 s
ND t
ND s
90.3 t
73.2 s
0.0943 t
ND
0.106 t
ND
0.0881 t
ND
62.8 t
0.584 s
0.0976 t
ND s
18.9 s
5.66 t
0.942 s
0.126 t
0.0328 s
8.87 t
7.06 s
42.3 t
6.4 s
-
ND
-
ND
-
ND
-
ND
-
ND
43-5134-M001
ND
-
22.9
-
ND
-
ND
43-5056-M003
ND
-
0.15 43-5051-M001
-
ND
5.68 43-5051-M001
-
0.0181 43-5056-M001
-
ND
-
ND
-
6.48 43-5054-M001
ND
-
0.01:
-
ND
-
ND
-
ND
-
ND
-
17.'
-
ND
-
ND
-
ND
-
5.
-
0.00:
-
-
0.1:
-
ND
-
ND
-
5.23
-
                                                                                                                               0.0126   41-6103-M002
                                                                                                                                17.7    43-6114-M102

                                                                                                                                 ND

                                                                                                                                 ND

                                                                                                                                 ND

                                                                                                                                 5.49   43-6103-M002

                                                                                                                               0.0035   43-6114-M002


                                                                                                                                0.122   43-6103-M002

                                                                                                                                 ND

                                                                                                                                 ND

                                                                                                                               5.23 J+  43-6103-M003

-------
Table 13
Summary of Maximum Detected Concentrations of
Organic and Inorganic Compounds in Overburden and Bedrock Groundwater
Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH
Chemical MCL a
Site 43 (continued)
Inorganics (]lg/L) (continued)
Sodium

Vanadium u

Zinc
NVA

NVA

NVA
MCLG b

NVA

NVA
Regulatory ARARs
NHAGOS c LHA d RCRA e
Maximum Detected Concentrations f
NVA

NVA

NVA
NVA

0.02

2
NVA

NVA

NVA
Background
8.97 t
10.2 s
0.584 t
ND s
0.220 t
0.168 s
OB
OB Location
25.8 43-5056-M003

0.0303 43-5056-M001
BR

34.3

0.0152
BR Location
43-6103-M003
43-6114-M002
BR = Bedrock groundwater.
OB = Overburden groundwater.
a MCL = Maximum Contaminant Level, April 1991.
b MCLG = Maximum Contaminant Level Goal, April 1991.
c NHAGOS = New Hampshire Ambient Groundwater Quality Standards, Env-Ws 410.05.
d LHA = EPA Lifetime Health Advisory, March 1991.
e Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, Proposed Corrective Action Program at Solid Waste Management Units.
f Overburden inorganics concentrations represent filtered data. Bedrock inorganics concentrations represent unfiltered data.
g Value for total xylenes. Values for xylene isomers not available.
NR = Not reguired. ARAR concentration exceeds maximum detected concentration.
udm Unregulated organic contaminant reguiring discretionary monitoring (in New Hampshire).
urm Unregulated organic contaminant reguiring monitoring once, with a sample and a confirmational sample (in Hew Hampshire)
u Unregulated inorganic contaminant with an unspecified monitoring period/freguency (in New Hampshire).
ND = Analyte not detected above the detection limit.
NVA = No value available.
- = Not applicable.
J = Estimated concentration is below the method detection limit.
J - = Estimated concentration is biased low based on EPA Region I evaluation.
J + = Estimated concentration is biased high based on EPA Region I evaluation.
(VI) = ARAR refers to chromium VI.
t Total (unfiltered) sample result.
s Soluble (filtered) sample result.
NE = Not established.

-------
                                    Table 14
            Summary of Highest Detected Concentrations of Metals
                Stage 3 and 4 Surface Water Analytical Results
                              Upper Peverly Pond
                            Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH

                                        Regulatory Guidance Values a
Analyte
    Maximum
  Background
Concentration
  (mg/L)
Freshwater Chronic
 Criteria for the
   Protection of
   Aquatic Life
     (mg/L)
    Fish
 Consumption
Only Criteria
  (mg/L)
   Maximum
   Detected
Concentration
  (mg/L)
                                                                                                               Location ID
Inorganics

Aluminum
Arsenic
Calcium
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Nickel
Silicon
Sodium
Zinc
   0.896
    ND
   25.8
   2.89
   0.005
   9.14
   1.97
    NA
   5.5
   32.1
   0.043
    0.087
    0.19
    NA
    1.0
   0.00041b
    NA
    NA
   O.lOSc
    NA
    NA
   0.112d
    NA
    NA
    NA
    NA
    NA
    NA
    0.1
    0.1
    NA
    NA
    NA
4.96 J
0.069
21
46.8
0.017
6.79
2.97
0.029
15.1
23.3
0.127
8018-W002
8018-W002
816-W003
8018-W002
8018-W002
8018-W002
8018-W002
816-W001
8018-W002
8018-W002
8018-W002
Note:   Maximum background concentrations for surface water differ from the values presented in the 1993 Zone
        2 RI and FS Reports.  These changes are based on agreements made among the Air Force, EPA, and
        NHDES regarding surface water/sediment issues at Pease AFB.
ND =    Not detected.
J =     Estimated value.
NA =    Not available.
a New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services, Water Quality Criteria for Toxic Substances.
b Adjusted for a hardness of 20 mg/L CaC03.
c Adjusted for a hardness of 6431 mg/L CaC03.
d Adjusted for a hardness of 107 mg/L CaC03.

-------
                                        Table 15

        Summary of Highest Detected Concentrations of Organic Compounds and Metals
                          Stage 3 and 4 Sediment Analytical Results
                                   Upper Peverly Pond
                                  Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH

                                        Regulatory Guidance
                                              Values
    Analyte

VOCs

Acetone
2-Butanone  (MEK)
Toluene
SVOCs
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
Benzo(k)fluoraathene
Fluoranthene
TPHs
Total petroleum
hydrocarbons
Pesticides/PCBs
DDD
DDE
Inorganics
Aluminum
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Calcium
Chromium
Cobalt
   Maximum
  Background
Concentration

        mg/kg
                                                ER-L a
mg/kg
                                                                 ER-M b
mg/kg
  Maximum
  Detected
Concentration

   mg/kg
0.17
0.0715
0.024
mg/kg
6.4
6.7
22.0
mg/kg
ND
mg/kg
ND
ND
mg/kg
12,350
12.2
52.5
0.82
15,900
47.5
14.2
NA
NA
NA
mg/kg
NA
NA
0.6
mg/kg
NA
mg/kg
0.002
0.002
mg/kg
NA
33
NA
NA
NA
80
NA
NA
NA
NA
mg/kg
NA
NA
3.6
mg/kg
NA
mg/kg
0.02
0.015
mg/kg
NA
85
NA
NA
NA
145
NA
0.1.5 J
0.31 J-
0.012 J
mg/kg
0.48 J
0.72 J
1.2 J
mg/kg
450
mg/kg
0.71
0.03 J
mg/kg
26,700 J+
109 J-
464 J +
1.2
19,200
48.5
25.8
                                                                                                       Location ID
                                                                                816-D001
                                                                               8018-D001
                                                                               8019-D001

                                                                               8014-D001
                                                                               8014-D001
                                                                               8014-D001

                                                                               8017-D001
                                                                               8015-D001
                                                                               8016-D001
                                                                               8017-
                                                                               8016-
                                                                               8018-
                                                                               8017-
                                                                               8018-
                                                                               8017-
                                                                               8018-
                                                           D001
                                                           D001
                                                           D001
                                                           D001
                                                           D002
                                                           D001
                                                           D001

-------
                                                          Table 15

                Summary of Highest Detected Concentrations of Organic Compounds and Metals
                                               Stage 3 and 4 Sediment Analytical Results
                                                     Upper Peverly Pond
                                                   Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH
                                                        (Continued)
                                                        Regulatory Guidance
                                                              Values
Analyte

Inorganics

Copper
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Nickel
Potassium
Silicon
Sodium
Vanadium
Zinc
   Maximum
 Background
Concentration

   mg/kg

   168
   21,900
   42.1
   9,060
   358
   46.7
   2,640
   4,150
   1,580
   33.2
    105
                                                        ER-L a
mg/kg
                                                                         ER-M b
mg/kg
70
20,000c
35
NA
460 c
30
NA
NA
NA
NA
120
390
40,000d
110
NA
1,100 d
50
NA
NA
NA
NA
270
   Maximum
   Detected
Concentration

    mg/kg

     28.6
   108,000 J
     106 J-
     6,380
   37,000
     56.8
     2,110
     3,360
      916
      78.3
      284
                                                                                                                        Location ID
                                                                8017-D001
                                                                8018-D001
                                                                8014)0001
                                                                8017-D001
                                                                8018-D001
                                                                8018-D001
                                                                8019-D001
                                                                8018-D002
                                                                8018-D002
                                                                8014-D001
                                                                8018-D002
J = Estimated value.
NA = No value available.
ND = Not detected.
a NOAA ER-L value.
b NOAA ER-M value.
c Ontario Ministry of the Environment ) lowest effect level.
d Ontario Ministry of the Environment ) severe effect level.

-------
                                                        Table 16
                Summary of Highest Detected Concentrations of Organic Compounds and Metals
                                   Stage 3 and 4 Surface Water Analytical Results
                                                  Lower Peverly Pond
                                                Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH

                                                Regulatory Guidance Values a
Analyte
   Maximum
 Background
Concentration
  (mg/L)
    Freshwater
 Chronic Criteria
for the Protection
 of Aguatic Life
     (mg/L)
     Fish
 Consumption
Only Criteria
    (mg/L)
   Maximum
  Detected
Concentration
   (mg/L)
                                                                                                                        Location ID
Inorganics

Arsenic
Calcium
Cyanide
Iron
Magnesium
Manganese
Nickel
Silicon
Sodium
Zinc
   ND
   25.8
   ND
   2.89
   9.14
   1.97
   ND
   5.5
   32.1
   0.043
    0.19
    NA
    0.0052
    1.0
    NA
    NA
    0.0983b
    NA
    NA
    0.066b
   NA
   NA
   NA
   NA
   NA
   0.1
   0.1
   NA
   NA
   NA
   0.005
   17.8
   0.027
   0.883 J
   4.17
   0.157
   0.024
   4.59
   11.1
   0.105 J
8012-W001
817-W001
817-W001
817-W001
817-W001
817-W001
817-W101
817-W001
817-W001
817-W101
Note:   Maximum background concentrations for surface water differ from the values presented in the 1993 Zone
        2 RI and FS Reports.  These changes are based on agreements made among the Air Force, EFA, and
        NHDES regarding surface water/sediment issues at Pease AFB.
J =     Estimated value.
NA =    Not applicable.
ND )    Not detected.

a New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services, Water Quality Criteria for Toxic Substances.
b Adjusted for hardness of 57.19 mg/L CaC03.

-------
                                                         Table 17
                        Summary of Highest Detected Concentrations of Organic Compounds and Metals
                                           Stage 3 and 4 Sediment Analytical Results
                                                        Lower Peverly Pond
                                                      Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH

                                                         Regulatory
                                                      Guidance Values
        Analyte
VOCs
Acetone
2-Butanone  (MEK)
SVOCs
Benzo(a) anthracene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
Beazo(k)fluoranthene
Chrysene
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Fluoranthene
Indeno(l,2,3-cd)-
pyrene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Total PAHs
   Maximum
  Background
Concentration

   mg/kg

   0.17
   0.0715
   mg/kg
    73
   7.9
   6.4
   6.7
   8.9
    ND
   22.0
   5.9

  13.0
  18.0
 108.99
                                                        ER-L a
 mg/kg
                                                                            ER-M b
 mg/kg
NA
NA
mg/kg
0.23
0.4
NA
NA
0.4
NA
0.6
NA
0.225
0.33
4.0
NA
NA
mg/kg
1.6
2.5
NA
NA
2.8
NA
3.6
NA
1.38
2.2
35.0
   Maximum
   Detected
Concentration

    mg/kg
                                                                                                                        Location ID
0.014 J
0.036 J
mg/kg
0.57
0.57 J
1.1
1.1
0.72
4.0 J
1.5
0.4 J
0.68
1.2
6.47
8012-D001
8013-D001

817-D001
8012-D001
8012-D001
8012-D001
817-D001
817-D101
8012-D001
8012-D001
817-D001
817-D001
817-D001
Total petroleum
hydrocarbons
(mg/kg)

Pesticides/PCBs

gamma-BHC
(Lindane)

DDT
ODD
   ND



  mg/kg

  ND
  ND
  ND
  NA



mg/kg

  NA
0.001
0.002
  NA



mg/kg

  NA
 0.007
 0.02
    410



    mg/kg

    0.005 J
     4.2
     0.05 J
                                                                                                                        817-D001
                                                                                          8010-D001
817-D001
817-13001

-------
                                                              Table 17

                        Summary of Highest Detected Concentrations of Organic Compounds and Metals
                                                Stage 3 and 4 Sediment Analytical Results
                                                        Lower Peverly Pond
                                                      Zone 2, Pease AFB,  NH
                                                             (Continued)
        Analyte

Pesticides/PCBs
(continued)
   Maximum
 Background
Concentration

   mg/kg
                                                                Regulatory
                                                             Guidance Values
                                                                ER-L a
mg/kg
                                                                                        ER-M b
mg/kg
   Maximum
   Detected
Concentration

   mg/kg
                                                                                                                             Location ID
DDE
                                        ND
                                                                0.002
                                                                                        0.015
                                                                                                          0.027 J
                                                                                                                             817-D001
Inorganics

Aluminum
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Calcium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
Magnesium
Manganese
Nickel
Silicon
Vanadium
Zinc
   mg/kg

   12,350
   12.2
   52.5
   0.82
  15,900
   47.5
   14.2
   168
  21,900
   9,060
   358
   46.7
   4,150
   33.2
   105
mg/kg

  NA
  33
  NA
  NA
  NA
  80
  NA
  70
20,000
  NA
 460 c
  30
  NA
  NA
 120
mg/kg
   mg/kg








40,

1,




NA
85
NA
NA
NA
145
NA
390
000 d
NA
100 d
50
NA
NA
270
26,400
48.1 J-
184
1.3
4, 690
40.8
20.2
28.5
51,000
6,220
6,490
41.7
1,820 J
78.3
195
8013-D001
8013-D001
8010-D001
8010-D001
8011-D101
8013-D001
8013-D001
8013-D001
8013-D001
8013-D001
8010-D001
8013-D001
8011-D101
8013-D001
8013-D001
J = Estimated value.
NA = No value available.
ND = Not detected.
a NOAA ER-L value.
b NOAA ER-M value.
c Ontario Ministry of the Environment ) lowest effect level.
d Ontario Ministry of the Environment ) severe effect level.

-------
                                                        Table 18
Analyte

Inorganics

Calcium
Iron
Magnesium
Manganese
Sodium
                                Summary of Highest Detected Concentrations of Metals
                                    Stage 3 and 4 Surface Water Analytical Results
                                                        Bass Pond
                                                 Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH

                                                        Regulatory Guidance Values*
    Maximum
  Background
Concentration
    (mg/L)
    25.8
    2.89
    9.14
    1.97
    32.1
   Freshwater
    Chronic
Criteria for the
 Protection of
 Aguatic Life
    (mg/L)
   NA
  1.0
   NA
   NA
   NA
    Fish
 Consumption
Only Criteria
   (mg/L)
     NA
     NA
     NA
     0.1
     NA
   Maximum
   Detected
Concentration
   (mg/L)
    15.7
    1.16
    4.4
   0,257
    21.5
                                                                                                                              Location ID
8009-W001
8006-W001
8004-W001
8009-W001
8004-W001
* New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services, Water Quality Criteria for Toxic Substances.
NA = No value available.

-------
                                                   Table 19

                Summary of Highest Detected Concentrations of Organic Compounds and Metals
                                 Stage 3 and 4 Sediment Analytical Results
                                                  Bass Pond
                                            Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH

                                                           Regulatory
                                                        Guidance Values
        Analyte

Organics

2-Butanone  (MEK)
Toluene
Total petroleum
hydrocarbons
DDT
ODD
DDE
     Maximum
   Background
  Concentration

     mg/kg

   0.0715
   0.024
   ND

   ND
   ND
   ND
   ER-L a

   mg/kg

   NA
   NA
   NA

   0.001
   0.002
   0.002
   ER-M b

   mg/kg

   NA
   NA
   NA

   0.007
   0.02
   15
   Maximum
   Detected
Concentration

     mg/kg

  0.041 J
  0.011 J
  280

  0.19
  1.70
  0.38 J
                                                                                                                                 Location ID
8005-D001
8009-D001
8003-D001

8030-D001
8009-D001
8009-D001
Inorganics

Aluminum
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Calcium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
Magnesium
Manganese
Nickel
Potassium
Silicon
  mg/kg

 12,350
  12.2
  52.5
  0.82
15,900
  47.5
  14.2
  168
21,900
 9,060
  358
  46.7
  2, 640
  4,150
   mg/kg

   NA
   33
   NA
   NA
   NA
   80
   NA
   70
20,000 c
   NA
  460c
   30
   NA
   NA
   mg/kg

   NA
   85
   NA
   NA
   NA
  145
   NA
  390
40,000 d
   NA
 l,100d
   50
   NA
   NA
  mg/kg

  28,000
  46.6 J-
  109
  13
 6,480
  66.2
  12.3
  31.9
38,100
 8,510
 2,140
  36.4
 5,700
2,010 J+
8006-
8008-
8006-
8008-
8005-
8004-
8009-
8007-
8007-
8006-
8030-
8006-
8006-
8004-
•D001
•D001
•D001
•D001
•D001
•D001
•D001
•D001
•D001
•D001
•D001
•D001
•D001
•D001

-------
                                                        Table 19

                     Summary of Highest Detected Concentrations of Organic Compounds and Metals
                                Stage 3 and 4 Sediment Analytical Results
                                                        Bass Pond
                                                Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH
                                                       (Continued)

                                                                   Regulatory
                                                                Guidance Values
                                 Maximum                                                                Maximum
                                Background                                                              Detected
        Analyte                Concentration              ER-L a                 ER-M b              Concentration              Location ID

Inorganics                         mg/kg                  mg/kg                   mg/kg                   mg/kg
(continued)

Sodium                            1,580                    NA                     NA                      3,590                 8005-D001
Vanadium                           33.2                    NA                     NA                        64.8                8006-D001
Zinc                               105                     120                    270                      180                  8006-D001

J = Estimated value.
NA = No value available.
ND = Not detected.

a NOAA ER-L value.
b NOAA ER-M value.
c Ontario Ministry of the Environment ) lowest effect level.
d Ontario Ministry of the Environment ) severe effect level.

-------
                                                Table 20
                        Summary of Highest Detected Concentrations of Metals
                          Stage 3 and 4 Surface Water Analytical Results
                                          Staff Gages/Seeps
                                        Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH

                                        Regulatory Guidance Values
Analyte
    Maximum
  Background
Concentration
  (mg/L)
    Freshwater
 Chronic Criteria
for the Protection
 of Aguatic Life
     (mg/L)
  AWQC Fish
 Consumption
Only Criteria
   (mg/L)
   Maximum
   Detected
Concentration
    (mg/L)
                                                                                                                Location ID
Inorganics

Aluminum
Arsenic
Cadmium
Calcium
Iron
Magnesium
Manganese
Silicon
Sodium
Zinc
    0.896
    ND
    0.0071
    25.80
    2.89
    9.14
    1.97
    5.5
    32.1
    0.043
   0.087
   0.19
   0.0012b
   NA
   1.0
   NA
   NA
   NA
   NA
   0.0027 c
    NA
    NA
    NA
    NA
    NA
    NA
    0.1
    NA
    NA
    NA
   0.537
   0.032
   0.006
   213
   4.82
   5.94
   1.41
   7.27
   17.4
   0.017 J
8126-W001
8191-W001
8098-W001
8098-W001
8191-W001
8191-W001
800A-W001
8098-W101
8100-W001
800-W001
Note:   Maximum background concentrations for surface water differ from the values presented in the 1993 Zone
        2 RI and FS Reports.  These changes are based on agreements made among the Air Force, EPA, and
        NHDES regarding surface water/sediment issues at Pease AFB.
J = Estimated value.
a New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services, Water Quality Criteria for Toxic Substances.
b Adjusted for a hardness of 67 mg/L CaC03 for each individual seep location.
c Adjusted for a hardness of 21 mg/L CaC03 for each individual seep location.

-------
                                                        Table 21

                Summary of Highest Detected Concentrations of Organic Compounds and Metals
                                        Stage 3 and 4 Sediment Analytical Results
                                                   Staff Gages/Seeps
                                                Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH

                                                        Regulatory
                                                      Guidance Values
        Analyte

Organics

Benzoic acid
Bis (2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Fluoraathene
Phenanthtene
Pyrene
Total PAHs
   Maximum
  Background
Concentration

   mg/kg

   0.82
   2.8

   22.0
   13.0
   18.0
  108.99
ER-L a
mg/kg
NA
NA
NA
0.225
0.35
4.0
ER-M b
mg/kg
NA
NA
NA
138
2.2
35.0
                                  Maximum
                                  Detected
                               Concentration

                                  mg/kg

                                  0.74 J
                                  0.4 J

                                  0.062 J
                                  0.042 J
                                  0.049 J
                                  1.14
                                                                                                                Location ID
                                        8099-D001
                                        8099-D001

                                        8103-D001
                                        8103-D001
                                        8103-D001
                                        8099-D001
Inorganics

Aluminum
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Boron
Calcium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Cyanide
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
   mg/kg

 12,350
   12.2
   52.5
   0.82
   NA
15,900
  47.5
  14.2
  168
  NA
21,900
 42.1
9,060
mg/kg
mg/kg
mg/kg
NA
33
NA
NA
NA
NA
80
NA
70
NA
20,000c
35
NA
NA
85
NA
NA
NA
NA
145
NA
390
NA
40,000d
110
NA
13,800
72 J+
2,500
3.8 J
99.4
13,700
29.6
297
15.3
1.5
19, 600
140
2,800
                                                        8191-
                                                        8102-
                                                        8102-
                                                        800A-
                                                        8102-
                                                        8102-
                                                        8102-
                                                        8102-
                                                        8102-
                                                        8102-
                                                        8102-
                                                        8191-
                                                        8102-
                                             D001
                                             D001
                                             D001
                                             D001
                                             D001
                                             D001
                                             D001
                                             D001
                                             D001
                                             D101
                                             D001
                                             D001
                                             D001

-------
                                                         Table 21

                Summary of Highest Detected Concentration of Organic Compounds and Metals
                                        Stage 3 and 4 Sediment Analytical Results
                                                   Staff Gages/Seeps
                                                 Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH
                                                       (Continued)
        Analyte
Inorganics

Manganese
Mercury
Nickel
Potassium
Silicon
Silver
Sodium
Vanadium
Zinc
    Maximum
  Background
Concentration

    mg/kg

    358
   0.200
   46.7
   2, 640
   4,150
    ND
   1,580
   33.2
    105
                                                                Regulatory
                                                              Guidance Values
                                                        ER-L a          ER-M b
mg/kg           mg/kg
460c
0.15
30
NA
NA
1
NA
NA
120
l,100d
1.3
50
NA
NA
2.2
NA
NA
270
   Maximum
   Detected
Concentration

  mg/kg

  21,700
   0.28
    369
   1,300
  2,030 J+
   29.6
   135
   84.2
   88.7
                                                                                                                        Location  ID
                                                                8102-
                                                                8102-
                                                                8102-
                                                                8191-
                                                                8102-
                                                                8102-
                                                                8126-
                                                                8102-
                                                                8102-
-D001
-D001
-D001
-D001
-D001
-D001
-D001
-D001
-D001
J = Estimated value
NA = No value available.
ND = Not detected.
a NOAA ER-L value.
b NOAA ER-M value.
c Ontario Ministry of the Environment ) lowest effect level.
d Ontario Ministry of the Environment ) severe effect level.

-------
        Chemical
        Organics
Acetone
Aroclor-1260
Benzene
Benzole acid
gamma-BHC  (lindane)
Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
2-Butanone
n-Butylbenzene
sec-Butylbenzene
tert-Butylbenzene
Carbon disulfide
Chlorobenzene
4,4'-ODD
4,4'-DDE
4,4'-DDT
1,2-Dibromoethane
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene
Diethyl ether
Diethyl phthalate
2,4-Dimethylphenol
Dimethyl phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Dioxins/furans
Ethylbenzene
Heptachlor
2-Hexanone
Isophorone
Isopropylbenzene
4-Isopropyltoluene
Methylene chloride
2-Methylnaphthalene
4-Methyl-2-pentanone
2-Methylphenol
4-Methylphenol
Naphthalene
PAHs
  Benzo(a)anthracene
  Benzo(a)pyrene
  Benzo(b)fluoranthene
  Benzo(g,h,i)perylene
  Benzo(k)fluoranthene
  Chysene
  Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
  Fluoranthene
  Fluorene
  Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
  Phenanthrene
  Pyrene
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
n-Propylbenzene
Tetrachloroethene
Toluene
                                                      Table 22
                                    Summary  of  Chemicals  of Concern by Medium a
                                                 Zone  2,  Pease  AFB,  NH
                                                                                                          Soil
                                         Site 1              Site 7                     Site 10                        Site  22            Site  37
                                         0-2  ft       0-2  ft       0-15 ft       0-2 ft        0-15 ft b        0-2 ft         0-15  ft  b         0-2  ft
 Site 43
0-15 ft b
                     x d

                     x d

-------
                                    Summary of Chemicals of Concern by Medium a
                                                 Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH
        Chemical
     Organics  (continued)
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
Trichloroethene
Trichlorof1uoromethane
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
m.p-Xylenes (total)
o-Xylene
Xylenes (total) e
        Inorganics
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Boron
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Nickel
Potassium
Silicon
Sodium
Thallium
Vanadium
Zinc
                                                                                                           Soil
                                         Sitel              Site 7                    SitelO                         Site22           Site37
                                         0-2  ft       0-2 ft       0-15 ft       0-2 ft         0-15  ft  b         0-2  ft        0-15 ft b        0-2 ft
 Site 43
0-15 ft b

-------
                                   Summary  of  Chemicals  of  Concern by Medium a
                                                 Zone  2,  Pease  AFB,  NH
                                                                                                                               Hot Spot III
Acetone
Aroclor-1260
Benzene
Benzoic acid
gamma-BHC  (lindane)
Bis (2 - ethlhexyl) phthalate
2-Butanone
n-Butylbenzene
sec-Butylbenzene
tert-Butylbenzene
Carbon disulfide
Chlorobenzene
4,4'-ODD
4,4'-DDE
4,4'-DDT
1,2-Dibromoethane
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene
Diethyl ether
Diethyl phthalate
2,4-DimethylphenoI
Dimethyl phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Dioxins/furans
Ethylbenzene
Heptachlor
2-Hexanone
Isophorone
Isopropylbenzene
4-Isopropyltoluene
Methylene chloride
2-Methylnaphthalene
4-Methyl-2-pentanone
2-Methylphenol
4-Methylphenol
Naphthalene
PAHs
  Benzo(a)anthracene
  Benzo(a)pyrene
  Benzo(b)fluoranthene
  Benzo(g,h,i)perylene
  Benzo(k)fluoranthene
  Chrysene
  Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
  Fluoranthene
  Fluorene
  Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
  Phenanthrene
  Pyrene
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
n-Propylbenzene
Tetrachloroethene
Toluene

-------
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
Trichloroethene

Trichlorofluoromethane
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
m,p-Xylenes  (total)
o-Xylene
Xylenes  (total)c
        Inorganics
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Boron
Cadmium
Calcium
                                                                                 Main
                                                                                             Hot Spot I
                                                                                                               Hot  Spot  II
                                                                                                                                 Hot Spot III
                                                                                                                                                                Main Hot Spot  B
Thallium
Vanadium

-------
                                                       Table 22
                                    Summary of Chemicals  of Concern by Medium a
                                                  Zone  2,  Pease AFB, NH

                                                                 Surface Water
                                         Upper                                               Lower
                                         Peverly          Upper Peverly Pond Tributary       Peverly
                                         Pond             Upper & Lower c       Lower b      Pond
Acetone
Aroclor-12 60
Benzene
Benzole acid
gamma-BHC  (lindane)
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
2)Butanone
n-Butylbenzene
sec-Butylbenzene
tert-Butylbenzene
Carbon disulfide
Chlorobenzene
4,4'-DDD
4,4'-DDE

4,4'-DDT
1,2,-Dibromoethane
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene
Diethyl ether
Diethyl phthalate
2, 4-Dimethylphenol
Dimethyl phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate

Dioxins/furans
Ethylbenzene
Heptachlor
Isophorone
Isopropylbenzene
4-Isopropyltoluene
Methylene chloride
2-Methylnaphthalene
4-Methyl-2-pentanone
2-Methylphenol
4-Methylphenol
Naphthalene
PAHs
  Benzo(a)anthracene
  Benzo(a)pyrene
  Benzo(b)fluoranthene
  Benzo(g,h,i)perylene
  Benzo(k)fluoranthene
  Chrysene
  Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
  Fluoranthene
  Fluorene
  Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
  Phenanthrene
  Pyrene
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
n-Propylbenzene
Tetrachloroethene

-------
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
Trichlorofluoromethane

1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
m,p-Xylenes  (total)
G-Xylene
Xylenes  (total)c

        Inorganics
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Boron
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Nickel

Potassium
Silicon
        Chemical
  Organics  (continued)
                                         Upper
                                         Peverly
                                         Pond
       Surface Water
                               Lower
Upper Peverly Pond  Tributary  Peverly
Upper & Lower c        Lower  b   Pond

-------
                                                       Table  22
                                    Summary of Chemicals  of  Concern by Medium a
                                                 Zone  2,  Pease  AFB,  NH
                                         Bass
                                         Pond
                        Sediment
                Upper
               Peverly    Upper Peverly Pond    Tributary
                Pond        Upper & Lower c       Upper b
                                                                                                           Lower b
Acetone
Aroclor-12 60
Benzene
Benzole acid
gamma-BHC(lindane)
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
2-Butanone
n-Butylbenzene
sec-Butylbenzene
tert-Butylbenzene
Carbon disulfide
Chlorobenzene
4,4'-DDD
4,4'-DDE
4,4'-DDT
1,2-Dibromoethane
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene
Diethyl ether
Diethyl phthalate
2,4-Dimethylphenol
Dimethyl phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Dioxins/furans
Ethylbenzene
Heptachlor
2-Hexanone
Isophorone
Isopropylbenzene
4-Isopropyltoluene
Methylene chloride
2-Methylnaphthalene
4-Methyl-2-pentanone
2-Methylphenol
4-Methylphenol
Naphthalene
                                                         x  d
                                                                                                                             x d
x d

-------
PAHs
  Benzo(a)anthracene
  Benzo(a)pyrene
  Benzo(b)fluoranthene
  Benzo(g,h,i)perylene
  Benzo(k)fluoranthene
  Chrysene
  Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
  Fluoranthene
  Fluorene
  Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
  Phenanthrene
  Pyrene
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
n-Propylbenzene
Tetrachloroethene
Toluene
x d
                                                  x d
                                         x d
                                                          x d

-------
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
Trichloroethene
Trichlorofluoromethane
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
m,p-Xylenes  (total)
o-Xylene
Xylenes  (total) e
        Inorganics
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Boron
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Nickel
Potassium
Silicon
Sodium
Thallium
Vanadium
Zinc
                                                         Upper
                                                        Peverly
                                                         Pond
     Upper Peverly  Pond  Tributary
Upper & Lower c       Upper  b
                                                                                                          Lower b

-------
                                                       Table 22
                                    Summary of Chemicals  of Concern by Medium a
                                                  Zone  2,  Pease AFB, NH
                                      Bluegill c
Acetone
Aroclor-12 60
Benzene
Benzole acid
gamma-BHC(lindane)
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
2-Butanone
n-Butylbenzene
sec-Butylbenzene
tert-Butylbenzene
Carbon disulfide
Chlorobenzene
4,4'-DDD
4,4'-DDE
4,4'-DDT
1,2-Dibromoethane
cis-1,2-Dichloroethene
Diethyl ether
Diethyl phthalate
2,4-Dimethylphenol
Dimethyl phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Dioxins/furans
Ethylbenzene
Heptachlor
2-Hexanone
Isophorone
Isopropylbenzene
4-Isopropyltoluene
Methylene chloride
2-Methylnaphthalene
4-Methyl-2-pentanone
2-Methylphenol
4-Methylphenol
Naphthalene
PAHs
  Benzo(a)anthracene
  Benzo(a)pyrene
  Benzo(b)fluoranthene
  Benzo(g,h,i)perylene
  Benzo(k)fluoranthene
  Chrysene
  Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
  Fluoranthene

-------
  Fluorene
  I ride no (1, 2 , 3-cd) pyrene
  Phenanthrene
  Pyrene
Pentachlorophenol
Phenol
n-Propylbenzene
Tetrachloroethene
Toluene

-------
                                      Bluegill c
1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
Trichloroethene
Trichlorofluoromethane
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene
m,p-Xylenes  (total)
o-Xylene
Xylenes  (total) e
        Inorganics
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Boron
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Nickel
Potassium
Silicon
Sodium
Thallium
Vanadium
Zinc
a An "x" indicates that  the  chemical was selected as a chemical of concern  for both the human
  health and ecological  risk assessment, unless otherwise indicated.
b Selected as chemicals  of concern for the human health risk assessment  only.
c Selected as chemicals  of concern for the ecological at risk assessment  only,
d Chemical was not detected  above background.
e Chemical concentrations were  reported only as the total of all isomers  in the media in which
  they are of concern.

-------
                        Table  23

Summary of Total Lifetime  Cancer  Risks  and Hazard Indices
                  Zone 2,  Pease AFB,  NH
                                                         Total Lifetime Cancer  Risk a,b
        Future maintenance
        worker
        Future maintenance
        worker
        Current and future
        maintenance worker
Upper 95%

Mean
3E-07
(ALL)
2E-07 (BG)
4E-06
(ALL)
3E-06 (BG)
NC


1E-10
(ALL)
1E-10 (BG)
3E-09
(ALL)
3E-09 (BG)
3E-09
(ALL)
3E-09 (BG)
Co
nf idence
Limit
5E-07
4E-07

7E-06
5E-06




2E-10
2E-10

3E-09
3E-09

3E-09
3E-09

(ALL)
(BG)

(ALL)
(8G)

NC


(ALL)
(BG)

(ALL)
(BG)

(ALL)
(BG)


Maximum
5E-07
(ALL)
4E-07 (BG)
8E-06
(ALL)
6E-06 (BG)
NC


2E-10
(ALL)
2E-10 (BG)
3E-09
(ALL)
3E-09 (BG)
3E-09
(ALL)
3E-09 (BG)

Mean
IE-03
(ALL)
IE-03 (BG)
2E-02
(ALL)
ZE-02 (BG)
2E-03
(ALL)
2E-03 (BG)
7E-04
(ALL)
7E-04 (BG)
5E-06
(ALL)
3E-06 (BG)
IE-03
(ALL)
IE-03 (BG)
Upper
Conf id
Limi
2E-0
2E-0
2E-0
3E-0
3E-0
3E-0
3E-03
3E-03

IE-03
IE-03
2E-03
6E-06
3E-06
3E-06
IE-03
IE-03
IE-03
95%
ence
t
3 (ALL)
3 (BG)
3 (BG)
2 (ALL)
2 (BG)
2 (BG)
(ALL)
(BC, )

(ALL)
(BG)
(BG)
(ALL)
(BG)
(BG)
(ALL)
(BG)
(BG)


Maximum
2E-03
(ALL)

3E-02
(ALL)

4E-03
(ALL)
4E-03 (BG)
2E-03
(ALL)

7E-06
(ALL)

IE-03
(ALL)

-------
                                                 Table  23

                         Summary of Total Lifetime Cancer  Risks and Hazard Indices
                                           Zone 2, Pease AFB,  NH
                                                 (Continued)
Groundwater
                                                                                  Total  Lifetime  Cancer Risk a,b
                                                                                                                                                       Upper  95%
                                                                                                                                                      Confidence
                                                                                                                                                        Limit
                                 Current and future
                                 maintenance worker
                                 Future maintenance
                                 worker
  1E-07
  (ALL)
  1E-07  (BG)
5E-04
(ALL)
5E-04 (BG)
4E-04
(ALL)
4E-04 (BG)
1E-03 (ALL)
1E-03 (BG)
2E-03 (BG)
6E-04 (ALL)
6E-04 (BG)
9E-04 (BG)
2E-03
(ALL)

9E-04
(ALL)

                                                                  4E-08
                                                                  (ALL)
                                                               4E-08 (BG)
                                                                                                          1E-02
                                                                                                          (ALL)
                                 Future maintenance
                                 worker
                        3E-08  (ALL)
                        3E-08  (BG)
                                                                                  6E-03
                                                                                  (ALL)
Site 43  (0 to 15  feet
deep)
  1E-07
  (ALL)
NAP  (BG)
                                               1E-07
                                               (ALL)
                                              NAP (BG
                                                                                  IE-OS
                                                                                  (ALL)
                                 Future off-zone
                                 resident
  2E-03
(filtered)
   4E-03
(filtered)
                                              4E-03
                                             (filtered)
   2E + 01
(filtered)
 4E+01
(filtered)
 4E+01
(filtered)

-------
                                                  Table  23
                         Surranary of Total Lifetime  Cancer Risks and Hazard Indices
                                           Zone  2,  Pease  AFB,  NH
                                                 (Continued)
                                                                                   Total  Lifetime Cancer Risk a,b
Sites 10/22/43
Overburden and
Shallow Bedrock  )
Hot Spot I


RME
Future off-zone
resident



Future off-zone
resident
Future off-zone
resident
Future off-zone
resident
Future off-zone
resident


Mean
1E-06
( filtered)
8E-05
(total)

2E-07
(filtered)
NA

2E-04
(filtered)
5E-06
( filtered)
Upper 95%
Confidence
Limit
1E-06
(filtered)
1E-04
(total)

2E-07
(filtered)
NA

2E-04
(filtered)
6E-06
(filtered)
Upper 95%

Maximum
1E-06
(filtered)
1E-04 to
(total)

2E-07
(filtered)
NA

6E-04
( filtered)
6E-06
(filtered)

Mean
4E-02
(filtered)
3E-01 to
4E-01
(total) f
2E + 00
(filtered)
NC

2E + 00
(filtered)
3E + 01
(filtered)
Confidence
Limit
6E-02
(filtered)
4E-01 to
7E-01
(total) f
3E + 00
(filtered)
NC

2E + 00
(filtered)
4E + 01
(filtered)

Maximum
6E-02
(filtered)
4E-01 to
7E-01
(total) f
3E + 00
( filtered)
NC

8E + 00
(filtered)
4E + 01
(filtered)

-------
                                                 Table 23
                         Summary of Total Lifetime Cancer Risks and Hazard  Indices
                                           Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH
                                                (Continued)
                                                                                  Total Lifetime Cancer Risk a,b
                                                                                                                                                   Total Hazard Index a,c
Sites 10/22/43
Overburden and
Shallow Bedrock )
Hot Spot II
Site 37 Overburden-
Main

Site 37 Overburden-
Hot Spot


RME
Future off-zone
resident
Future off-zone
resident


Future off-zone
resident


Future off-zone
resident
Future off-zone
resident
Future off-zone
resident




Mean
2E-03
( filtered)
9E-02
(filtered)
1E-01
(total )
IE-OS
(filtered)
IE-OS
(total)
1E-06
( filtered)
7E-07
(filtered)
NA



Upper 95%
Confidence
Limit
4E-03
(filtered)
3E-01
(filtered)
3E-01
(total)
2E-05
(filtered)
2E-05
(total)
1E-06
(filtered)
NAG

NAC





Maximum
4E-03
(filtered)
4E-01
(filtered)
4E-01
(total)
7E-05
( filtered)
7E-05
(total)
1E-06
(filtered)
NAC

NAC





Mean
IE + 02
(filtered)
IE + 03
(filtered)
IE + 03
(total)
4E-02
(filtered)
4E-02
(total)
6E-01
(filtered)
2E + 01
(filtered)
1E-03
(filtered)
1E-03
(total )
Upper 95%
Confidence
Limit
IE + 02
(filtered)
4E + 03
( filtered)
4E + 03
(total)
4E-02
(filtered)
4E-02
(total)
IE + 00
(filtered)
NAC

NAC





Maximum
IE + 02
(filtered)
4E + 03
(filtered)
4E + 03
(total)
6E-02
(filtered)
6E-02
(total)
3E + 00
(filtered)
NAC

NAC

-------
                                                  Table  23
                         Surranary of Total Lifetime  Cancer Risks and Hazard Indices
                                           Zone 2,  Pease  AFB,  NH
                                                 (Continued)
                                                                                  Total  Lifetime Cancer Risk a,b
        Medium
Surface Water d
Upper Peverly  Pond
Current maintenance       NA
worker
                                                                                                                NA
                                         Future recreational
                                         user
                                                                                             4E-06
                                                                                             (ALL)
                                                                                           4E-06  (BG)
8E-06  (ALL)
8E-06  (BG)
   IE-OS
   (ALL)
IE-OS (BG)
Upper Peverly  Pond
Tributary  (Lower)
                                                                                                                                       NC
                                         Future recreational      NA
                                         user
                                                                                                                NA
                                                                                                         5E-06  (ALL)
                                                                                                         5E-06  (BG)
                     6E-06
                     (ALL)

-------
                                                 Table  23
                         Summary of Total Lifetime Cancer  Risks and Hazard Indices
                                           Zone 2, Pease AFB,  NH
                                                 (Continued)
                                                                                  Total Lifetime  Cancer Risk a,b
                                                                                                                                                 Total Hazard Index  a,c
        Medium
Sediment d
                                                                                          Upper  95%
                                                                                          Confidence
                                                                                          Limit
Bass Pond
Upper Peverly  Pond
Tributary  (Upper)
Current maintenance
worker



Future recreational
user


Current maintenance
worker

Future recreational
user

Current and future
maintenance
workers
4E-08
(ALL)
4E-08 (BG)


1E-
07 (ALL)
1E-07 (BG)

1E-07
(ALL)
1E-07 (BG)
3E-07
(ALL)
2E-07 (BG)
IE-OS
(ALL)
IE-OS (BG)
6E-08 (ALL)
6E-08 (BG)



1E-07 (ALL)
1E-07 (BG)


2E-07 (ALL)
1E-07 (BG)

5E-07 (ALL)
4E-07 (BG)

IE-OS (ALL)
IE-OS (BG)

9E-08
(ALL)
9E-08 (BG)


2E-
07 (ALL)
2E-07 (BG)

3E-07
(ALL)
2E-07 (BG)
6E-07
(ALL)
5E-07 (BG)
IE-OS
(ALL)
IE-OS (BG)
2E-04 to
3E-04
(ALL)
2E-04 to
3E-04 (BG) f
5E-04 (ALL)
5E-04 (BG)


8E-04
(ALL)
8E-04 (BG)
2E-03
(ALL)
2E-03 (BG)
1E-04
(ALL)
1E-04 (BG)
3E-04 to
4E-04 (ALL)
3E-04 to
4E-04 (BG) f

7E-04 to
8E-04 (ALL) f
7E-04 to
8E-04B (BG)f
1E-03 (ALL)
1E-03 (BG)

3E-03 (ALL)
3E-03 (BG)

1E-04 (ALL)
1E-04 (BG)

6E-04
(ALL)
6E-04 (no


1E-03 (ALL)
1E-03 (BG)


2E-03
(ALL)
2E-03 (BG)
5E-03
(ALL)
5E-03 (BG
1E-04
(ALL)
1E-04 (BG)

-------
                                                 Table  23
                         Surranary of Total Lifetime Cancer  Risks and Hazard Indices
                                           Zone 2, Pease AFB,  NH
                                                 (Continued)
                                                                                  Total Lifetime  Cancer Risk a,b
                                                                                                                                                      Total Hazard  Index  a,c
                                                                                          Upper  95%
                                                                                          Confidence
                                                                                          Limit
Upper Peverly  Pond
Tributary  (Lower)
Current maintenance      1E-10
worker                   (ALL)
                       1E-10 (BG)
                                                                                                                NAC
                                                                                                                                                                           NAC
                                         Future recreational      3E-10
                                         user                     (ALL)
                                                                3E-10  (BG)

                                         Current maintenance      2E-07
                                         worker                   (ALL)
                                                               6E-08 (BG)
2E-05
(ALL)
2E-05 (BG)
4E-04
(ALL)
4E-04 (BG)
NAC


6E-04 (ALL)
6E-04 (BG)

NAC


7E-04
(ALL)
7E-04 (BG)
Fish Tissue
Future recreational      5E-07
user                     (ALL)
                       1E-07  (BG)
                                                                                                                                                      1E-03  (ALL)           1E-03
                                                                                                                                                      1E-03  (BG)            (ALL)
                                                                                                                                                                       1E-03 (BG)
Bass Pond - Brown
Bullhead Catfish
                                                                                                                                                      1E-01
                                                                                                                                                                          1E-01
                                         Future recreational     5E-0^
                                         user
                                                                                                                                     2E-01

-------
Table 23
Summary of Total Lifetime Cancer Risks and Hazard Indices
Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH
(Continued)
Total Lifetime Cancer Risk a,b
Upper 95%
Confidence
Limit
1E-01
2E-01
2E-01
Future recreational 4E-05
user
4E-01
4E-01
RME = Route of maximum exposure.
NA = Not applicable. There were no carcinogenic chemicals of concern through the evaluated exposure route (s) .
NAC = Not applicable. Risk was evaluated only on one exposure concentration.
NAP = Not applicable. None of the chemicals of concern were detected above background.
NC = Not calculated. A toxicity value was not available for the chemical(s) of concern.

a Values are rounded to one signi fleant figure.
b Maximum cancer risk at hazardous waste sites is regulated in the range of 1E-06 to IE-04 (10-6 to 10-4). Risks of less than IE-06 (10-6) are generally not
of concern.
c A hazard index of greater than 1 (1E+00) is usually considered the benchmark of potential concern.
d ALL = Includes all evaluated chemicals of concern.
BG = Includes only the evaluated chemicals of concern that were detected above background.
e Filtered and total values are based on organics data plus inorganics data for filtered and unfiltered (total) samples, respectively.
f The first and second values are based on the assumption that chromium is present entirely as chromium III and chromium IV, respectively. A range is
present only if the two values differed after rounding to one signi fleant figure.

-------
                                                 Table 24

                             Summary of Detailed Alternatives Evaluation  a
                                         Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH


                                                                                         Protection of
                                                                                           Human Health                                                                 Analysis  b
Short)Term            Long-Term                  Reduction in                                      and the                         Compliance (sensitivity         Cost
Effectiveness         Effectiveness              TMV                   Implementability     Environment               with ARARs  analysis)c       Remedial Alternative
Ranking               Ranking                    Ranking               Ranking                       Ranking                   Ranking                 (in $1,000)        BA1-1   No action.

ABC                           C                                AC                               C

                                                                                                                 B                           B                          AB
                groundwater,  surface water,  and sediment
                monitoring;  and GMZ establishment).

        BA1-3A  Overburden  groundwater extraction, metals                                         AB                     B                           B                           AB
                     AB                        A
                treatment,  nutrient/oxygen
                addition, and (3,911 to
                recharge  at  Sites  10 and 22;  LNAPL recovery

                and  off-base  treatment/disposal from Site 22;
                and  institutional  controls.

        BA1-3B  Overburden  groundwater extraction, treatment,                                     A                      B                           AB                          AB
                     AB                        B                    1,397
                and  recharge  at Sites 10 and 22; LNAPL
                recovery  and  off-base treatment/disposal from
                                       Site 22; and institutional controls.
                 (1,241 to 1,566)
        BA1-3C  Overburden  and bedrock groundwater                                               AB                      B                           AB                          AB
                     AB                        A                    9,330
                extraction,  treatment, and recharge at Sites 10  (8,399 to
                and  22; LNAPL recovery and off-base                10,025)
                treatment/disposal from Site 22; and
                institutional controls.

                Modified  In  situ SVE of source area LNAPL with                                            A                       AB                         A
AB                     A                         A                    1,397
                BA1-4B  enhancement of SVH by injection of air below
                the  water table and institutional controls.
                                                        (1,241 to  1,566)

        a A ranking  of "A"  indicates that the alternative meets  the  intent  of  the criterion A ranking of "B" indicates  that  the  alternative partially meets the intent  of  the
criterion, while aranking             of "C" means
          that the alternative does not meet the intent of the criterion.   Designations of "AB" and "BC" were used to denote rankings that fell between "A", "B", and  "C".
        b Estimated  costs represent the 30-year present-worth cost.
        c The sensitivity analysis costs represent the upper and lower limits  of the 50% confidence interval.

-------
Table 25

Cleanup Goal Selection ) Overburden and Bedrock Groundwater
(Sites 10/LFTS, 22/BA-l, and 43/MRDDA)a
Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH
Cleanup Goal
Chemical
Organics (Ug/L)
Benzene
Bis(2-ethythexyi) phthalate
1,2-Dibromoethane (ethylene dibromide)
Ethylbenzene
Isopropylbenzene
Methyl isobutyl ketone (4-methyl-2-pentanone)
2-Methylnaphthalene
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
Naphthalene
Sec-butylbenzene
Toluene
Trichloroethene
1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
Arsenic
Cadmium
Lead
Manganese
NR
NR
NR
NR
a All chemical entries are groundwater chemicals of concern for the LFTS/BA-1/MRDDA groundwater OU.
b Overburden inorganic concentrations represent filtered data. Bedrock inorganic compound concentrations represent unfiltered data.
OB = Overburden.
BR = Bedrock.
NR = Not required
BG = Background.
ND = Not detected.
- = Not applicable.
J = Estimated concentration below method detection limit.
J- = Estimated concentration biased low, based on EPA Region I evaluation.
MCL = Federal Safe Drinking Water Act Maximum Contaminant Level, May 1993.
RSK = Human health risk-based concentration.
NHAGOS = New Hampshire Ambient Groundwater Quality Standards, Env-Ws 410.05.
HI = Cleanup goal based on noncancer hazard index.

-------
                                         Table 26

                Cleanup  Level  Selection )  Overburden and Bedrock Groundwater
                   (Long-Term Zonal  GMZ Monitoring at Site 1/LF-l Wells)a
                                 Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH
Organics  (Ug/L)

Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate

Inorganics  (mg/L)
11
                                                                                                                                                             BG
                                                                                                                                                             BG
                                                                                                                                                                             BG
a  All chemical entries  are  chemicals of concern for LF-1 groundwater.
b  Overburden inorganic  concentrations represent filtered data.  Bedrock  inorganic compound concentrations represent  unfiltered data.
OB = Overburden.
BR = Bedrock.
NR = Not required.
BG = Background
- = Not applicable.
J = Estimated concentration  below method detection limit.
MCL = Federal Safe Drinking  Water Act Maximum Contaminant Level, May  1993.
NHAGOS = New Hampshire Ambient  Groundwater Quality Standards, Env-Ws  410.05,  February 1993.

-------
           Cleanup Level  Selection )  Overburden and Bedrock Groundwater
              (Long-Term Zonal  GMZ Monitoring at Site 37/BA.2 Wellsja
                                 Zone  2,  Pease AFB, NH
                                                                                                     Cleanup Goal
                                                                                                     OB           BR
Trichloroethene
2-Methylnaphthalene
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
11
             ND
             ND
             ND
13.4
a  All chemical entries  are  chemicals of concern for BA-2 groundwater.
b  Overburden inorganic  concentrations represent filtered data.  Bedrock  inorganic compound concentrations represent  unfiltered data.
OB = Overburden.
BR = Bedrock.
NR = Not required.
ND = Not detected.
- = Not applicable.
MCL = Federal Safe Drinking  Water Act Maximum Contaminant Level, May  1993.
HI = Cleanup goal based  on noncancer hazard index.

-------
                                                          Table  28

                                 Potential Cleanup Goal  Selection  for Surface Water
                                                 Zone 2,  Pease  AFB,  NH
   Maximum
  Background
Concentration*
(surface water)
    (mg/L)
                                                                                                                  Potential
                                                                                                                Cleanup Goal
                                                                                                                   (mg/L)
                       Number  of
                       Locations
                Exceeding  Potential
                    Cleanup Goal
Aluminum
Arsenic
Cadmium
Iron
Arsenic
Aluminum
Iron
Lead
Manganese
Zinc
   (1)
   BG
   BG
   BG
   BG
Chronic
                                                                      Lower Peverly Pond
                                                                                                                     NR
                                                                                                                     NR

-------
Table 28

Potential Cleanup Goal Selection for Surface Water
Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH
(Continued)
Analyte
Maximum
Background
Concentration*
(surface water)
(mg/L)
Potential
Cleanup Goal
(mg/L)
Number of
Locations
Exceeding Potential
Cleanup Goal
NR
NR
* Maximum background and maximum detected concentrations represent unfiltered data.
BG = Background.
Chronic = NHDES chronic criteria for the protection of aquatic li fe.
NR = Not required.
) = Not applicable.
J = Estimated concentration below method detection unit.
ND = Not detected.
(1) = Because the detection limit for arsenic and cadmium using the most sensitive, standard, EPA-approved analytical method exceeds the NHDES AWQC,
the practical quantitation limit (PQL) was selected as the cleanup goal for these metals.
(2) = Because cyanide has not been consistently detected in Zone 2 surface water samples, no cleanup goal was established for this compound.
a Adj usted for a hardness value of 107 mg/L CaCO3
b Adj usted for a hardness value of 64.3 mg/L CaCO3
c Adj usted for a hardness value of 57.2 mg/L CaCO3
d Adj usted for a hardness value of 67 mg/L CaCO3
e Adj usted for a hardness value of 21 mg/L CaCO3
Note: Shaded entries represent chemicals of concern.
Note: Maximum background concentrations for surface water di ffer from the values presented in the 1993 Zone 2 RI and FS Reports. These changes are based
on agreements made among the Air Force, EPA, and NHDES regarding surface water/sediment issues at Pease AFB.

-------
                                                                  Table 29
                                                Potential Cleanup Goal Selection  for Sediment
                                                          Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH
        Analyte
Arsenic
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
PAHs  (total)
  Fluotanthene
   ER-L
 BG
 BG
ER-L
                                                                  Lower Peverly  Pond
Arsenic
Nickel
Zinc
PAHs  (total)
  Benzo(a) anthracene
  Benzo(a)pyrene
  Chrysene
  Fluoranthene
  Phenanthrene
  Pyrene
                                                                                                                    ER-L

-------
                                                                  Table 29
                                               Potential Cleanup  Goal  Selection for Sediment
                                                         Zone  2,  Pease AFB,  NH
        Analyte
                                                                  Bass Pond
Arsenic
Nickel
Zinc
ER-L
 )
ER-L
Arsenic
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Silver
ER-L
BG
BG
BG
ER-L
J = Estimated concentration below method detection limit.
J- = Estimated concentration biased low, based on EPA Region  I  evaluation.
J+ = Estimated concentration biased high, based on EPA Region I  evaluation.
NR = Not required.
) = Not applicable.
ER-L = NOAA Biological  Effects Range ) Low.
BG = Background.

-------
                                  APPENDIX B

                      ARARS  FOR THE PREFERRED REMEDY

                         ARARs  for Modified Alternative BA1-4B )
       In Situ Soil Vapor  Extraction of Source Area LNAPL with Enhancement  of SVE
          by Injection  of  Air Below the Water Table and Institutional  Controls
                                  Zone 2,  Pease AFB, NH
Media
                               Requirement
                                                         Action To  Be  Taken  To
                                                          Attain Requirements
              CHEMICAL-SPECIFIC
              FEDERAL-SDWA-Maximum
              Contaminant  Levels (MCLs)
               (40 CFR  141.11  -  141.16)
MCLs have been promulgated for a number of
common organic and inorganic  contaminants.
These levels regulate  the  contaminants in
public drinking water  supplies,  but also may be
considered relevant  and  appropriate for
groundwater aqui fers potentially used for
drinking water.
MCLs have been set as  the  cleanup
goals.  MCLs will be attained.
Relevant and
Appropriate
              FEDERAL-SDWA-Maximum
              Contaminant  Level  Goals (40 CFR
              141.50  and 141 .51)
MCLGs are nonenforceable,  health-based          Non-zero MCLGs were  considered when
goals for public water  systems.   MCLGs are      selecting cleanup  goals.   At  the point of
set at levels that would  result  in no known or  compliance, non-zero MCLGs will be
anticipated adverse  health effects,  with an     met.
adequate margin of safety.
                                                       Env-Ws 410.03  establishes criteria for
                                                       groundwater quality,  including that
                                                       groundwater may  not  contain contaminants at
                                                       levels above the numerical concentrations set
                                                       in Env-Ws  410.05.
                                                 The selected remedy will  establish a
                                                 Groundwater Management  Zone
                                                 (GMZ)  consistent with the provisions
                                                 (see below).
                                                 Applicable
              STATE-NH  Guidance  Document,
              September 1991,  as amended )  Interim
              Policy  for the Management of Soils
              Contaminated  from  Spills/Releases of
              Virgin  Petroleum Products
Policy identi fies  options  for treatment and
disposal, current  analytical  methods,  and
remediation goals  for  virgin  petroleum-
contaminated soils .

-------
ARARs for Modified Alternative BA1-4B )
In Situ Soil Vapor Extraction of Source Area LNAPL with Enhancement of SVE
by Injection of Air Below the Water Table and Institutional Controls
Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH
(Continued)
Media
Action To Be Taken To
Attain Requirements
LOCATION-SPECIFIC
STATE-NH Admin. Code Env-Ws
410.26, Groundwater Protection Rules
These provisions set forth requirements for a
GMZ established under Env-Ws 410.03. The
requirements include inter alia, isolation,
institutional controls, monitoring, restoration of
groundwater quality, methods of establishing
GMZ boundaries, and means to restrict
groundwater extraction.
Monitoring, institutional controls, and
other actions taken to remediate the
GMZ will be consistent with this
requirement.
STATE-NH Admin. Code Env-Ws
410.30 and 410.31, Groundwater
Protection Rules
Provisions establish requirements for
monitoring activities, including location and
design of monitor wells, frequency of sampling,
and methods of analysis.
Monitoring will comply with these
provisions.
Applicable
Air
STATE-NH Admin. Code Env-A 1300,
Toxic Air Pollutants
Ambient Air Limits (AALs) established to
protect the public from concentrations of
pollutants in ambient air that may cause adverse
health effects.
Release of contaminants to the air from
any on-site remedial action would not
result in exceedance of the respective
AAL, if one exists.
Applicable
Air
FEDERAL-CAA National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
(NESHAP)
Maximum emission standards designed to
protect the public from hazardous air
pollutants.
Precautionary measures will be taken to Relevant and
comply with NESHAPs for regulated Appropriate
pollutants.
Waste Management Units
General facility requirements for groundwater
monitoring at affected facilities and general

requirements for corrective action programs i f
required at regulated facilities.
Relevant and

-------
                            ARARs for Modified Alternative BA1-4B  )
         In Situ  Soil Vapor Extraction of Source Area LNAPL with  Enhancement  of SVE
            by Injection  of Air Below the Water Table and Institutional  Controls
                                    Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH
                                        (Continued)
  Media
                                                                                                  Action To Be  Taken  To
                                                                                                   Attain Requirements
Hazardous
Waste
FEDERAL RCRA Subtitle  C,  40  CFR
264, Hazardous Waste Regulations
Subtitle C establishes  standards for treatment,
storage, transport,  and disposal of hazardous
waste and closure  of hazardous waste facilities.
Management of hazardous  waste  must
comply with substantive  Subtitle C
regulations.
Hazardous
Waste
STATE-RSA Ch. 147-A New Hampshire       New Hampshire standards  for management  of
Waste Management Act  and Hazardous      hazardous waste and closure of  hazardous waste
Waste Rules Env-Wm 100-1000.   Specific  management facilities operate in  lieu of federal
requirements below.                      RCRA requirements, and,  as such,  the
                                         substantive requirements  of these rules must be
                                         complied with in the management of hazardous
                                         waste as part of CERCLA  response.
                                                      Requirements will  be  satisfied.   See
                                                      discussion of  sped fie requirements
                                                      below.
                         STATE-NH Admin.  Code Env-Wm 701-
                         705,  707,  708,  and 709, Standards for
                         Owners and Operators of Hazardous
                         Waste Facilities
                                         General requirements  for  owners  or operators
                                         of hazardous waste treatment  facilities.
                                         Includes environmental and  health  requirements
                                         (702.08),  general design  requirements (702.09),
                                         other monitoring  (708.02),  and technical
                                         requirements  (708.03).
                                                      Remedial activities  will  comply with the   Relevant and
                                                      substantive provisions  of state hazardous  Appropriate
                                                      waste regulations.
Hazardous
Waste
STATE-NH Admin. Code  Env-Wm
702.10 and 702.14, Monitoring of
Hazardous Waste Treatment  facilities
Requirements for installation and operation of
one or more of the  following  monitoring
systems:  groundwater monitoring network,  air
emission monitoring network,  and leachate
monitoring network.
Environmental monitoring  during
remedial operations will  be  developed
and installed in accordance  with these
regulations.
Hazardous
Waste
STATE-NH Admin. Code  Env-Wm
707.03, Waste Pile Requirements
Emergency Procedures
                                                      The excavated  soil  stockpiled at the site
                                                      will comply with  these  requirements and
                                                      40 CFR 264 Subpart  L.
                                             Applicable

-------
                            ARARs for Modified Alternative BA1-4B  )
         In Situ  Soil  Vapor Extraction of Source Area LNAPL with  Enhancement of SVE
            by Injection  of Air Below the Water Table and Institutional  Controls
                                    Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH
                                         (Continued)
  Media

Air
                         FEDERAL-RCRA 40 CFR 264, Subpart
                         AA
Contains air pollution  emission standards for
process vents associated  with distillation,
fractionation, thin-film  evaporation,  solvent
extraction, or air  or steam stripping operations.
Applicable to operations  that manage hazardous
waste.
           Action  To  Be  Taken To
            Attain Requirements

Equipment used in  remedial  activities
will meet these requirements  and will be
monitored for leaks.
Applicable
Air
                         FEDERAL-RCRA 40 CFR 264,
                         Appendix BB
Contains air pollutant  emission standards for
equipment leaks at  hazardous  waste treatment,
storage, and disposal  facilities (TSDFs).
Contains design specifications and requirements
for monitoring for  leak detection.
Equipment used in remedial  activities      Relevant and
will meet the design  specifications and    Appropriate
will be monitored for leaks.
                                                                  Contains  proposed air pollutant emission
                                                                  standards for owners and operators of  TSDFs
                                                                  using  tanks,  surface impoundments, and
                                                                  containers to manage hazardous wastes.
                                                                  Sped fie  organic emissions controls would  have
                                                                  to  be  installed if VOC concentrations  exceed
                                                                  specified concentrations.
                                                                                                                                                                      TBC
Air
                         STATE-NH Admin. Code Rules A 505,
                         Emergency Procedures
                                                      Comply with  directions in case of
                                                      warning  status.
Air
                                                                                                                        No additional action required; provides
                                                                                                                        relief from other requirements.
                                                                                                                                                                    Relevant and

-------
                            ARARs  for Modified Alternative BA1-4B  )
         In Situ  Soil Vapor Extraction of Source Area LNAPL with  Enhancement  of SVE
            by Injection  of Air Below the Water Table and Institutional  Controls
                                    Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH
                                         (Continued)
  Media

Air
                         STATE-NH Admin.  Code A 1204,
                         Control  of VOC Emissions
Sped fies VOC emission  control  methods and
establishes limitations on  VOC  emissions for
various industries.
Precautions will be  taken  during
remedial actions to  minimi ze  VOC
emissions.
                         STATE-RSA 495-A:17 and NH Admin.
                         Code  Env-Ws 415,  Terrain Alteration
Establishes criteria  to  control  erosion and
runoff for any activity  that  significantly alters
the terrain other than removing  material from a
landfill.
                                           Applicable
Air
                         STATE-NH Admin.  Code Env-A Part
                         1002,  Fugitive Dust Control
Requires precautions  to  prevent,  abate,  and
control fugitive dust  during  specified activities,
including excavation,  construction,  and bulk
hauling.
Precautions to control  fugitive dust
emissions would be required during
remedial activities.   These precautions
would be adhered to.
Applicable
Air
                         STATE-NH Admin.  Code Env-A 1300,
                         Toxic  Air Pollutants
Established AALs to protect  the  public from
concentrations of pollutants in  ambient air that
may cause adverse health  effects.
Release of contaminants  to  the  air from   Applicable
any on-site remedial  activities would not
result in exceedance  of  the respective
AAL, if one exists.   Proposed air
emissions would be coordinated  with the
Air Resources Division of NHDES.
Air
                                                                  Owners  or  operators of sources that discharge
                                                                  air  pollutants in measurable levels must retain
                                                                  records of the operation of the source, feed
                                                                  stock input to the source,  and all available
                                                                  emissions  data;  identify instances of temporary
                                                                  failure; establish compliance schedules; and
                                                                  comply  with schedules.
                                                        The in situ  soil  treatment  system and
                                                        groundwater  treatment  plant would be
                                                        operated in  accordance with these
                                                        requirements.

-------
Media
                         ARARs  for Modified Alternative BA1-4B  )
       In Situ Soil Vapor  Extraction of Source Area LNAPL with  Enhancement  of SVE
          by Injection  of  Air Below the Water Table and Institutional  Controls
                                  Zone 2,  Pease AFB, NH
                                       (Continued)
              STATE-NH Admin.  Code Env-A 800,
              Testing and  Monitoring Procedures
Identi fies procedures that must  be  followed for
the testing of air emissions  from stationary
sources.
       Action To Be  Taken  To
        Attain Requirements

The treatment systems would be
monitored in accordance  with  these
requirements.

-------
                                                APPENDIX C

                                        DECLARATION OF CONCURRENCE
             
                                              State of New Hampshire


                                      DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES

                            6 Hazen Drive, P.O. Box 95, Concord, NH 03302-0095

                                        603-271-3503       FAX 603-271-2867

                                       TDD Access:  ReLay NH 1-800-735-2967

                                                 August 10, 1995

Mr. Alan K. Olsen
Director, Air Force Base Conversion Agency
1700 North Moore Street, Suite 2300
Arlington, VA 22209-2802

Re:             Record of Decision for Zone 2 Declaration of Concurrence
                Pease Air Force Base Superfund Site

Dear Mr. Olsen:

The New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services has reviewed and concurs with the "Record of
Decision, Zone 2" (Zone 2 ROD) for the Pease Air Force Base Superfund Site, located in Newington and
Portsmouth, New Hampshire.  The Zone 2 ROD was drafted by the Air Force in accordance with the provisions
of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1986 (CERCLA) to document
the Zone 2 remedy selection and all facts, analysis and site specific policy determinations related to
the selection of the remedy.  The preferred remedy for Zone 2 has the following components:

       •      In situ SVE/Air Sparging treatment of Site 22 (BA-1)  source area LNAPLs and residual
              product,  treatment of extracted soil vapor for removal of VOCs and monitoring the
              performance of the source action.

       •      Establishment of a Groundwater Management Zone (GMZ),  institutional controls,  and long-term
              monitoring of the natural attenuation of groundwater contaminant concentrations until
              cleanup goals are achieved.

       •      Additional monitoring of the surface water,  sediment,  and fish tissue.

Consistency with State Remediation Policy and Solid Waste Rules

As a party to the "Pease Federal Facility Agreement Under CERCLA Section 120"  (Pease FFA), the Department
has been actively involved in the oversight of the Air Force's environmental response activities at Zone
2 and has worked with the Air Force to ensure that all actions that are taken comply with State
regulations and policies.  As part of this effort, when the Department reviews RODs,  it verifies that the
RODs are generally consistent with the approach the Department would reguire for similar sites in the
State of New Hampshire, regardless of their Superfund status.  The following discussion presents
the results of this review and examines in detail the eguivalency of the Zone 2 remedy with our approach
under Env-Ws 410 to groundwater remediation at similar sites.

ZONE 2 ARARs DETERMINATION AND ENV-WS 410 BACKGROUND

EPA-New England's ARARs determination for PAFB RODs concluded that significant portions of New
Hampshire's Code of Administrative Rules,  Env-Ws 410 are not "substantive" and, therefore, do not gualify
as CERCLA ARARs.  Env-Ws 410 outlines a comprehensive and integrated approach to groundwater remediation
applicable to all sites in New Hampshire.   Furthermore, Env-Ws 410 is a critical component of the overall
plan to protect the State's groundwater resources.

EPA-New England designated the State's groundwater guality criteria and ambient groundwater guality
standards at Env-Ws 410.03 and 410.05 as applicable to the groundwater response action.  These provisions
establish numeric criteria for groundwater restoration.  EPA-New England also designated the exemptions
to ambient groundwater guality standards  (Env-Ws 410.04) and the groundwater management zone  (GMZ)

-------
Letter to Alan K. Olsen
Re: Zone 2 ROD Declaration of Concurrence
August 10, 1995
Page 2

provisions (Env-Ws 410.26) as applicable ARARs. However, EPA-New England did not designate as ARARs
those portions of Env-Ws 410 that provide for the management and enforcement of GMZs.

To address concerns regarding EPA-New England's ARARs determination, the Department met with EPA-New
England to discuss the objectives and mechanics of Env-Ws 410 implementation at Superfund sites. In
order to ensure that the CERCLA remedial selection process at PAFB continued in a timely and cost
effective manner, the Department and EPA-New England reached a productive compromise for the
implementation of Env-Ws 410 as an ARAR at PAFB. The Department accepted EPA's Env-Ws 410 ARARs
determinations for PAFB RODs and EPA-New England agreed that the PAFB RODs would include language that
addresses the portions of Env-Ws 410 not designated as ARARs. In particular, criteria to determine the
effectiveness of the remedy were to be addressed in the body of the ROD's to ensure long-term protection
of the groundwater. Rapid agreement on this compromise reflects the high priority the Department and
EPA-New England place on a timely and comprehensive environmental cleanup of PAFB and recognition of the
Air Force's commitment to their environmental excellence initiatives.

Env-Ws 410 APPROACH AND THE ZONE 2 ROD

Env-Ws 410 contains rules that establish statewide groundwater guality standards and provides an
exemption from these standards under certain conditions. Env-Ws 410 allows the scope and aggressiveness
of remedial actions necessary to achieve these standards to be selected based on the resource value and
use of the groundwater. Under Env-Ws 410, a GMZ is established to manage the use of contaminated
groundwater until the statewide groundwater quality standards are met. The relevant requirements of
Env-Ws 410 applicable to the Zone 2 remedy are as follows:

• GMZ Establishment: Env-Ws 410.26 requires the establishment and containment of contaminated
groundwater within a Groundwater Management Zone (GMZ), when violations of Groundwater
Quality Standards are present.

• Source Area Treatment, Removal or Containment: Env-Ws 410 requires that sources of
continuing groundwater contamination must be either treated or removed and, if treatment or
removal are not feasible, the source must be contained.

• Groundwater Restoration: The remedial action must restore groundwater quality to meet the
groundwater quality criteria contained in Env-Ws 410.03. A high priority is given to source
control, high value groundwaters or groundwater that will or is being used as a water
supply.

• Establishment of Performance Standards: Final and interim objectives and criteria,
including specific performance standards are established for the remedial actions. If the
remedial actions do not meet the performance standards, additional action may be required.

• Long Term Monitoring of the GMZ and Remedy Performance: Env-Ws 410 requires monitoring of
the performance of remedial systems and GMZ boundary compliance.

• Groundwater Management Permit: A groundwater management permit is required to establish a
GMZ. The groundwater management permit delineates the GMZ and defines the steps that must
be taken to implement source area remedial actions and specifies performance standards for
the remedial system, etc.

• Institutional Controls: Env-Ws 410.20 requires notification to all landowners within the
GMZ within 30 days of groundwater management permit approval. Env-Ws 410.21 requires that
the permit holder record notice of the permit in the registry of deeds for each lot within
the GMZ. Env-Ws 410.26 (e) requires that use of groundwater be controlled by either
ownership of the overlying land or deeded use to the exclusive right to use the groundwater
within the GMZ, unless an alternate water supply is available.

The Zone 2 ROD implements these requirements in the following fashion:

GMZ Establishment: The ROD includes Env-Ws 410.26 as an ARAR; this provides for the
establishment of a GMZ and containment of groundwater contamination within the GMZ.

-------
Letter to Alan K. Olsen
Re: Zone 2 ROD Declaration of Concurrence
August 10, 1995
Page 3

• Source Area Treatment, Removal or Containment: Based on a review of the available data,
BA-1 is the only source area within Zone 2. The selected remedy will treat the
contamination in this source area.

• Groundwater Restoration: The FS/ROD steps of the CERCLA process and the environmental
monitoring plan provisions are functionally eguivalent to Env-Ws 410's reguirement for
development and implementation of a remedy that will restore groundwater guality to
statewide standards.

• Establishment of Remedy Performance Standards: The ROD reguires development of performance
standards for the remedial actions within the Environmental Monitoring Plan. State
groundwater guality standards are established as cleanup goals for groundwater and the
State's Virgin Petroleum Policy is to be considered as a performance standard for the source
area remedial action.

• Long Term Monitoring of the GMZ and Remedy Performance: The description of the
Environmental Monitoring Program in the ROD provides for monitoring of the performance and
effectiveness of the remedial actions as well as the groundwater guality at the GMZ
boundary.

• Eventual Achievement of Groundwater Quality Standards: The ROD includes Env-Ws 410's
numerical groundwater guality standards as an ARAR and the NCP reguires that these standards
be met within a reasonable timeframe (March 8, 1990 Federal Register, p. 8732). The
reguirement that groundwater guality will be restored within the reasonable timeframe of the
NCP is functionally eguivalent to Env-Ws 410's expectation that groundwater guality will
eventually be restored.

• Groundwater-Permit: The Air Force has voluntarily agreed to obtain permits to ensure that
the substantive reguirements of regulations are met. This ensures that substantive portions
of Env-Ws 410 permit protocols are met.

• Institutional Controls: The Description of Remedial Components section in the ROD reguires,
"Establishment of institutional controls restricting the future use of Zone 2 groundwater."

Based on the successful implementation of the Env-Ws 410 ARAR compromise, the Zone 2 ROD is consistent
with the approach that would be reguired to meet our groundwater remediation approach at similar sites
within the State. Landfill 1 will be deferred to the Department's Solid Waste and Groundwater Protection
Program and, as a result, actions taken at Landfill 1 will be consistent with approaches taken at
landfills of similar age, construction and contents.

After the remedy is implemented, the long term monitoring plan will ensure future consistency with Env-Ws
410's substantive reguirements and other key ARARs. A comprehensive, detailed review of all
environmental monitoring data will be conducted on a periodic basis by the Air Force, EPA-New England and
the Department in order to ensure that the remedial action provides adeguate protection of human health
and the environment and complies with applicable regulations.

State Concurrence

The Department, acting on behalf of the State of New Hampshire, concurs that the selected remedy,
described in the ROD, satisfies the reguirements of CERCLA.

Very truly yours,

Robert W. Varney
Commissioner
cc: Carl W. Baxter, P.E., DES-WMEB
Gary S. Lynn, P.E., DES-WMEB
Anne Renner, Esg., NHDOJ-AGO
Michael J. Daly, EPA
Arthur L. Ditto, P.E., AFBCA
James Snyder, AFCEE

-------
                                        APPENDIX D

                                  RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARY

OVERVIEW

The Air Force issued the Zone 2 Proposed Plan to the public in March 1995.  In the Zone 2 Proposed Plan,
the Air Force identified its preferred alternative for the six sites and Peverly Ponds drainage  system
in Zone 2.  The selection of this preferred alternative by the  Air Force was coordinated with the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency Region I and the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services
(NHDES).

The following subsections describe the background on community involvement with Zone 2 activities, and
the Air Force's response to comments received during the Zone 2 Proposed Plan public comment period of 22
March to 21 April 1995.

BACKGROUND ON COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT

Prior to the start of the public comment period for the Zone 2 Proposed Plan, the Air Force issued a fact
sheet that summarized the content of that document.  Presentations on the status of work being conducted
and results of the work in Zone 2 were made to the Pease Air Force Base Restoration Advisory Board -
Technical Review Committee (RAB-TRC).  Additionally, the content of the Zone 2 Proposed Plan was presented
to and discussed with the members of the RAB-TRC.  Notifications announcing the beginning of the Zone 2
Proposed Plan comment period were mailed to all individuals on the Pease AFB mailing list in March 1995.
A press release also was issued to the media announcing the beginning of the comment period.  Newspaper
announcements (advertisements)  were published prior to the public hearing date of 11 April 1995.  It is
noted that the public comment period and public hearing for Zone 2 ran concurrently with that of the
OJETS  (Site 45) .   Proposed remedial actions for Zone 2 and the OJETS were presented concurrently to the
public.

SUMMARY OF COMMENTS RECEIVED DURING THE COMMENT PERIOD AND THE AIR FORCE RESPONSES

No written comments were received during the public comment period.  Verbal comments were provided by
four individuals at the public hearing on 11 April 1995 as follows:

1.  Comment:    I go along with Zone 2 and the Air Force's preferred alternative plan for this, and I'd
like that for the record.

Response:       Air Force acknowledges the commenter's concurrence.

2.  Comment:    Let me say, first of all, that SCOPE is in agreement with the actions for both Zone 2 and
Site 45.

Response:       Air Force acknowledges agreement by commenter.

3. Comment:     We talk about groundwater contaminated plume which is of primary concern here, is
migrating northward from BA-1 in the general direction of the groundwater flow.  My question is, and I
looked at some of my old maps,  and I looked at the aquifer on this particular map, and it shows that the
aquifer extends fight out into that portion of the base.  Is this Zone 2 going to be in the aquifer? And
to we have any migration problems of the plume within the aquifer itself?.

Response:       The aquifer at Pease AFB is what is called a single aquifer, which is primarily located
in the central portion of the base.  Within this aquifer is a production well  (municipal water supply
well) called the Haven well.  Based upon the work done by the Air Force and evaluation of collected
data, the Air Force does not believe that contamination from Zone 2 will flow into the Haven well supply
aquifer.   The Air Force also has used computer modeling to evaluate potential effects to the Haven well
resulting from pumping the Haven well at various yields.  The results of the modeling indicate that
contamination within Zone 2 will not impact the Haven well.

4.  Comment:    I get a lot of GAO reports that go into contamination clean up at dosed bases all over
the country, and in here they talk about a six year BRAG funds, and BRAG is based on Base Realignment
Closure Act.  Now is funding for our IRP program, is it also tied into that six year program; and if so,
we're coming up to about the three year point, and so that we should be either running out of money or
looking for money from some other source.  And at Pease we've also talked about monitoring costs upwards
of $300,000.  Are we going to see those kinds of fundings? Is it going to come from BRAG funds, or is it
going to come out of some other pot?

-------
Response: Pease AFB is what is called a BRAG round one base, or BRAG 88 base. Funds were authorized
by Congress for BRAG one bases in 1988 and actually expire on 30 September 1995. Congress, recognizing
that the round one bases money was expiring, authorized DOD to use BRAG two funds for round one bases.
The Air Force has planned its long-term funding needs and expect that funds will be available when
reguired.

5. Comment: Just to reiterate the previous comment (comment #2), SCOPE is in concurrence with the
alternatives selected for the cleanup of Site 45 and Zone 2. Just one word of caution that I want to add
on that. The use of the air sparging technigue, in both instances (Site 45 and Zone 2) it's been shown,
in some applications of this technology, that you can have a mobilization or re-mobilization of
contaminants with groundwater by basically disturbing the subsurface, the groundwater system. This
doesn't always happen in these situations, but it has been shown to occur in some. The only
recommendation that we can make is that near downgradient monitoring wells be monitored very closely, and
on a more regular basis, especially during the initial period of operation to, in essence, measure
whether or not this phenomenon is actually occurring at these sites.

Response: The Air Force appreciates the constructive comment and recommendation made by SCOPE. The
Air Force acknowledges that air sparging can have a mounding effect on the water table and could
potentially cause mobilization of contamination. SCOPE'S recommendation will be taken into account when
developing the monitoring plans for both Zone 2 and the OJETS. Additionally, the Air Force notes that it
is expected that the SVE process will help eliminate or minimize the potential negative aspect of
mobilization from air sparging.

6. Comment: I commend you on your monitoring system. I just wondered if you could explain what
happens to its longevity. Do you remove them (monitoring wells) when the water is clear, or do you leave
them for another testing period?

Response: Once monitor wells are no longer needed they will be removed, if possible, or abandoned
in-place. The preferred option will be to remove monitor wells if at all possible, especially those
located on private property. Monitor wells that comprise the long-term monitoring system will be
in-place for many years, but once it is determined that these critical monitor wells are no longer
needed, they will also be removed, ff possible, or abandoned in-place.

-------
APPENDIX E
ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD FIIiE INDEX

FOR THE

INSTALLATION RESTORATION PROGRAM

PEASE AIR FORCE BASE
NEW HAMPSHIRE

SEPTEMBER 1995

ABOUT THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD FILE

Under section 113(k) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act
(CERCLA), the U.S. Air Force is required to establish an administrative record file for every Superfund
response action and to make a copy of the administrative record available at or near the site.

Due to funding and space limitation, and based on guidance received from EPA Region I, the Air Force has
established one administrative file for Pease Air Force Base which encompasses environmental response
actions base-wide. Since access to Pease is unrestricted, both the information repository and the
administrative record file are housed on base. Although similar in nature, the information repository
contains general information about the Air Force's Installation Restoration Program while the
administrative record documents the specific decision-making process leading to response actions.

Although draft documents are not usually placed in an administrative record, the Air Force and EPA Region
I decided to temporarily house draft documents in the Pease administrative record. Draft documents in the
administrative record are pulled and replaced with final documents as soon as the final documents are
available. The Air Force and EPA Region I believe that this policy allows for an overall more complete
administrative record.

The administrative record serves two purposes, according to EPA guidance. First the record contains
those documents which form the basis for the selection of a response action and under section 113(j) of
CERCLA judicial review of any issue concerning the adequacy of any response action is limited to the
administrative record. This does not mean that only documents which support a response decision are
placed in the record. Relevant documents that were considered but ultimately rejected are also included
in the record to better establish the decision-making process.

Second, CERCLA section 113(k) requires that the administrative record act as a vehicle for public
participation. Participation by interested citizens ensures that the concerns of the public will. be
addressed during the response selection process. The administrative record file must be reasonably
available for public review during normal business hours. The record file should be treated as a
non-circulating reference document. This will allow the public greater access to the volumes and also
minimize the risk of loss or damage. Individuals may photocopy any documents in the non-confidential
portion of the file.

Major documents in the Pease Air Force Base administrative record are shelved by specific zone. For
example, documents pertinent to Zone 1 are shelved together and are kept separate from documents
pertaining to other zones. Documents relevant to all zones are together in a general area and are
shelved in accordance with the structure of the administrative record. In addition, the administrative
record index is cross-referenced to facilitate the location of documents related to specific zones.

The documents in the administrative record file may become lost or damaged during use. If this occurs,
contact the administrative record file manager at Pease Air Force Base. Documents may be added to the
administrative record file as site work progresses. This index will be updated quarterly to reflect
documents added to the administrative record file.

The administrative record file will be maintained in Building 43 at Pease AFB. Questions and/or comments
about the administrative record file should be directed to:

Arthur L. Ditto, Remedial Project Manager
Air Force Base Conversion Agency
Operating Location A, Building 43
61 International Drive
Pease AFB, NH 03803-0157
(603) 430-2586

-------
                        ABOUT THE INDEX NUMBERING SYSTEM
Document Number -
Comprised of a 3 letter site code  (PEA),  the category number,
the entry number and the page range of a document.   (Both
page numbers will be the same for a one page document.) If
documents are eventually placed on a microfiche system, the
document number consists of the site code followed by the
microfilm reel and frame number.
Site Code               (Category.

PEA                     (1.1)

Long Title

Author



Recipient

Date

Type

Second Reference

Location

MK01\RPT:00628026.004\z2rod.ape
        Example:  PEA (1.1) #1 001-031

   1#)                   Entry #              Page Range

                      # 1                   001-031

      The long title and brief description of document.

      Indicates author or primary originator of document.  If a
      contractor prepared the document, indicates company
      and location.

      Indicates primary recipient of document.

      Indicates date document was issued.

      Indicates document type.

      Other categories pertaining to the document.

      Exact location(s)  of document.

                                                04/19/95

-------
                ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD FILE STRUCTURE

1.0     SITE IDENTIFICATION
        1.1     Background - RCRA and other Information
        1.2     Notification/Site Inspection Reports
        1.3     Preliminary Assessment (PA) Report
        1.4     Site Investigation (SI)  Report
        1.5     Previous Operable Unit Information
        1. 6     Correspondence

2.0     REMOVAL RESPONSES
        2.1     Sampling and Analysis Plans
        2.2     Sampling and Analysis Data / Chain of Custody
        2.3     EE/CA Approval Memorandum  (Non-Time-Critical Removals)
        2.4     EE/CA (Engineering Evaluation / Cost Analysis)
        2.5     Action Memorandum
        2.6     Amendments to Action Memorandum
        2.7     Removal Response Reports
        2 . 8     Correspondence

3.0     REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION (RI)
        3.1     Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP)
        3.2     Sampling and Analysis Data/Chain of Custody Forms
        3.3     Work Plan
        3.4     Preliminary RI Field Work Reports
        3.5     Remedial Investigation (RI) Reports
        3.6     Correspondence

4.0     FEASIBILITY STUDY (FS)
        4.1     ARAR Determinations
        4.2     Feasibility Reports
        4.3     Proposed Plan
        4.4     Supplements and Revisions to the Proposed Plan
        4.5     Correspondence

5.0     RECORD OF DECISION (ROD)
        5.1     ROD
        5.2     Amendments to ROD
        5.3     Explanations of Significant Differences
        5 . 4     Correspondence
6.0     STATE AND FEDERAL COORDINATION
        6.1     Cooperative Agreements/SMOAs
        6.2     Federal Facility Agreement (FFA)
        6.3     Coordination - State/Federal
        6.4     General Correspondence

7.0     ENFORCEMENT
        7.1     Enforcement History
        7.2     Endangerment Assessments
        7.3     Administrative Orders
        7.4     Consent Decrees
        7.5     Affidavits
        7.6     Documentation of Technical Discussions/Response Actions
        7.7     Notice Letters and Responses

8.0     HEALTH ASSESSMENTS
        8.1     ATSDR Health Assessments
        8.2     Toxicological Profiles
        8.3     General Correspondence

9.0     NATURAL RESOURCE TRUSTEES
        9.1     Notices Issued
        9.2     Findings of Fact
        9.3     Reports
        9.4     General Correspondence

-------
10.0
11.0
PUBLIC
10,
10,
10,

10,
10,
10,
10,
10,
10,
10,
.1
.2
.3

.4
.5
.6
.7
.8
.9
.10
PARTICIPATION
Comments and Responses
Community Relations Plan
Public Notice (s) (Availability of the Admin. Record File,
Availability of the Proposed Plan, Public Meetings)
Public Meeting Transcripts
Documentation of other Public Meetings
Fact Sheets, Press Advisories, and News Releases
Responsiveness Summary
Late Comments
Technical Review Committee Charter
Correspondence
TECHNICAL SOURCES, GUIDANCE, AND PROCEDURES DOCUMENTS
11,
11,
11,
11,
11,
11,
11,
.1
.2
.3
.4
.5
.6
.7
EPA Headguarters Guidance
EPA Regional Guidance
State Guidance
Air Force Guidance
Technical Sources
Proposed Procedures/Procedures
Correspondence
*Note:   Guidance documents listed as bibliographic sources for a document already
        included in the Administrative Record are not listed separately in this index.

12.0    CONFIDENTIAL FILE
        12.1    Privileged Documents (Extractions)

-------
                  1.1 Background - RCRA and Other Information

DOCUMENT NUMBER:                PEA  (1.1) #1 001-031
LONG TITLE:                     Scope of Work for the Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study
AUTHOR:                          USAF
RECIPIENT:                      EPA, NHDES
DATE:                           April 1991
TYPE:                           Scope of Work for RI/FS
SECOND REFERENCE:               None
LOCATION:                       ARF, IR

                1.2 Notification/Site Inspection Reports

*NOTE:  NO ENTRIES IN THIS SECTION AT THIS TIME.

                1.3 Preliminary Assessment  (PA) Report

DOCUMENT NUMBER:                PEA  (1.3) #1 001-068
LONG TITLE:                     Phase II Problem Confirmation and Quantification
                                Presurvey Report  (Field Sampling for SI Work)
AUTHOR:                          Roy F. Weston, Inc.
RECIPIENT:                      EPA; NHDES; USAF Occupational and Environmental Health
                                Lab  (OEHL), Brooks AFB, TX
DATE:                           June 1984
TYPE:                           Technical Report
SECOND REFERENCE:               None
LOCATION:                       ARF, IR

DOCUMENT NUMBER                 PEA  (1.3) #2 001-182
LONG TITLE:                     Installation Restoration Program Records Search for
                                Pease Air Force Base, New Hampshire
AUTHOR:                          CH2M Hill
RECIPIENT:                      EPA; NHDES; USAF Engineering & Services Center, Tyndall
                                AFB; SAC, Offutt AFB, NE
DATE:                           January 1984
TYPE:                           Technical Report
SECOND REFERENCE:               None
LOCATION:                       ARF, IR

DOCUMENT NUMBER:                PEA  (1.3) #3 001-041
LONG TITLE:                     Preliminary Assessment Stage 3B IRP, Pease AFB, New
                                Hampshire  (Updated PA Report)
AUTHOR:                          Roy F. Weston, Inc.
RECIPIENT:                      USAF; EPA; NHDES
DATE:                           20 July 1990
TYPE:                           Letter Report
SECOND REFERENCE:               None
LOCATION:                       ARF, IR

                        1.4 Site Investigation  (SI) Report

DOCUMENT NUMBER:                PEA  (1.4) #1 001-309
LONG TITLE:                     Installation Restoration Program, Phase II -
                                Confirmation/Quantification Stage I, Volume I, Final
                                Report for Pease Air Force Base, New Hampshire
AUTHOR:                          Roy F. Weston, Inc.
RECIPIENT:                      HQ SAC/SGPB, Offutt AFB, NE; EPA; NHDES
DATE:                           August 1986
TYPE:                           Technical Report:  Field Investigations
SECOND REFERENCE:               None
LOCATION:                       ARF, IR

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:           PEA  (1.4) #2 001-883
LONG TITLE:                Installation Restoration Program, Phase II -
                           Confirmation/Quantification Stage 1, Volume II, Appendices
AUTHOR                     Roy F. Weston, Inc.
RECIPIENT:                 HQ SAC/SGPB, Offutt AFB, NE; EPA; NHDES
DATE:                      August 1987
TYPE:                      Technical Report Field Investigations
SECOND REFERENCE           None
LOCATION:                  ARF, IR

DOCUMENT NUMBER:           PEA  (1.4) #3 001-308
LONG TITLE:                Installation Restoration Program, Stage 3B Preliminary
                           Assessment/Site Inspection for Pease Air Force
                           Base, New Hampshire - Draft
AUTHOR:                    Roy F. Weston, Inc.
RECIPIENT:                 EPA; NHDES; HQ SAC/DE, Offutt AFB, NE; AFSC HSD/YAQ, Brooks AFB, TX
DATE:                      February 1991
TYPE:                      Technical Report:  Also includes review of PA
SECOND REFERENCE:          None
LOCATION:                  ARF, IR

                        1.5 Previous Operable Unit Information

*NOTE:  NO ENTRIES IN THIS SECTION AT THIS TIME.

                                        1.6 Correspondence

DOCUMENT NUMBER:                PEA (1.6) #1 001-002
LONG TITLE:                     Comments Regarding the Installation Restoration Program,
                                Phase I Record Search Report.  Pease Air
                                Force Base
AUTHOR:                         The State of New Hampshire, Water Supply and Pollution
                                Control Commission
RECIPIENT:                      USAF,  HQ SAC, Offutt AFB, NE
DATE:                           16 March 1984
TYPE:                           Letter/Comments
SECOND REFERENCE:               None
LOCATION:                       ARF (Section 1.6 Binder)

DOCUMENT NUMBER:                PEA (1,6) #2 001-004
LONG TITLE:                     Comments Regarding the Installation Restoration Program
                                Report  (09/10/86)
AUTHOR:                         State of New Hampshire, Division of Public Health Services
RECIPIENT:                      NH Division of Public Health Services
DATE:                           24 November 1986
TYPE:                           Comments to SI  (1.4)
SECOND REFERENCE:               None
LOCATION:                       ARF (Section 1.6 Binder)

DOCUMENT NUMBER:                PEA (1.6) #3 001-005
LONG TITLE:                     Comments Regarding the Phase II Stage 1 IRP Report
                                 (08/86 Draft)
AUTHOR:                         State of New Hampshire, Department of Environmental Services
RECIPIENT:                      USAF
DATE:                           3 February 1987
TYPE:                           Comments to SI  (1.4)
SECOND REFERENCE:               None
LOCATION:                       ARF (Section 1.6 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:

DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (1.6) #4 001-007
Air Force Responses to Comments From the New Hampshire
Department of Environmental Service on
the Phase II, Stage 1 IRP Draft Report
USAF
NHDES
8 May 1987
Responses to Comments to SI (1.4)
None
ARF  (Section 1.6 Binder)

PEA  (1.6) #6 001-004
Letter Concerning Site Walkovers made with Members of
Sherburne Civic Group
State of New Hampshire, Department of Environmental Services
USAF
18 July 1990
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 1.6 Binder)

PEA  (1.6) #10 001-002
Zone 3 Water Hardness at Pease AFB, NH
Lee dePersia, Roy F. Weston, Inc.
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
25 May 1994
Letter with Attachment
Zone 3
ARF  (Section 1.6 Binder)

PEA  (1.6) #12 001-001
Zone 2 Test Pit Investigation Letter Report
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
Mike Daly, EPA;
Richard Pease, NHDES
3 June 1994
Letter
Zone 2
ARF  (Section 1.6 Binder)

PEA  (1.6) #14 001)001
Locations of Surface Waters of New Hampshire in the
Vicinity of the Former Pease Air Force Base
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
Richard Pease, NHDES
3 March 1994
Letter
Pickering Brook
ARF  (Section 1.6 Binder)
                        2.1 Sampling and Analysis Plans

*NOTE:  NO ENTRIES IN THIS SECTION AT THIS TIME.

                2.2 Sampling and Analysis Data/Chain of Custody

*NOTE:  NO ENTRIES IN THIS SECTION AT THIS TIME.

                2.3 EE/CA Approval Memorandum  (Non-Time Critical Removals)

*NOTE:  NO ENTRIES IN THIS SECTION AT THIS TIME.

                        2.4 EE/CA  (Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis)

*NOTE:  NO ENTRIES IN THIS SECTION AT THIS TIME.

                        2.5  Action Memorandum

-------
*NOTE:  NO ENTRIES IN THIS SECTION AT THIS TIME.
                    2.6 Amendments to Action Memorandum
*NOTE:  NO ENTRIES IN THIS SECTION AT THIS TIME.
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
2.7  Removal Response Reports

        PEA (2.7)  #7 001-E
        Installation Restoration Program, Stage 4, Letter Report
        for the Intensive Test Pit Operation at the
        Mclntyre Road Drum Disposal Area for Pease AFB, NH - Draft
        Roy F. Weston,  Inc.
        USAF
        February 1992
        Letter Report
        PEA (2.8)
        ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
        2.8 Correspondence

        PEA (2.8)  #25 001-003
        Surface Water and Sediment Background Values
        Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
        Mike Daly,  EPA
        4 March 1994
        Letter with Attachment
        Section 2.2
        ARF (Section 2.8 Binder)

        3.1 Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP)

        PEA (3.1)  #1 001-210
        Quality Assurance Project Plan, Integrated Installation
        Restoration Program, Stage 2, to Support the
        Preliminary Remedial Investigation Field Work, Labeled
        Stage 2 Field Work
        Roy F. Weston, Inc.
        EPA; NHDES; HQ SAC/DEPV,  Offutt AFB, NE
        November 1987
        Quality Assurance Project Plan
        None
        ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
        PEA (3.1)  #3 001-286
        Installation Restoration Program, Stage 4 Sampling and
        Analysis Plan - Draft
        Roy F. Weston,  Inc.
        EPA; NHDES
        January 1991
        Sampling and Analysis Plan
        None
        ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:

RECIPIENT:

DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
        PEA (3.1)  #7 001-003
        Locations of Background Sampling Locations
        Arthur L.  Ditto,  RPM
        U.S. Air Force/Pease AFB
        Johanna Hunter,  RPM, EPA;
        Richard Pease,  RPM, NHDES
        15 June 1992
        Letter and Map
        Stage 3C Background Data Base
        ARF (Section 3.1 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
        PEA (3.1)  #11 001-R1

-------
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
Installation Restoration Program, Stage 4 Sampling and
Analysis Plan Addendum 3, Pease AFB, NH -
Draft
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
October 1992
Addendum
None
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:

RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.1) #15 001-001
Analysts Using SW846 Method 8330 for Explosives
Edward S. Barnes, P.E., C.I. H.
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
Capt. Carl Woerhle
U.S. Air Force/Base Closure Division
Air Force Base Center for Environmental Excellence
23 October 1992
Letter
Samples for SW8330 Analysis
ARF  (Section 3.1 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:

RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:

RECIPIENT:

DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.1) #17 001-005
Ethylene Dibromide  (EDB) Analysis Using Modified Method E504.1
Edward S. Barns, P.E., C.I.H.
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
Capt Carl Woerhle
U.S. Air Force/Base Closure Division
Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence
19 November 1992
Letter with 4 Page Attachment
Analytical Method Recommended for EDB Analysis
ARF  (Section 3.1 Binder)

PEA  (3.1) #18 001-007
Object of Site 10 Aguifer Test  (Well 10-6048)
James J. Soukup, Senior Hydrogeologist
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
Mark McKenzie
U.S. Air Force/Pease AFB
30 November 1992
Letter with Tables and Maps
Zone 2
ARF  (Section 3.1 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.1) #19 2.24-R.l
Stage 4 Sampling and Analysis Plan, Addendum #3, QAPP Portion
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
2 December 1992
Addendum
None
ARF
                32 Sampling and Analysis Data / Chain of Custody Forms

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:

RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.2) #6 001-013
Preliminary Survey of Metal Concentrations in New
Hampshire Soils - Final Report
New Hampshire Division of Public Health Services, Bureau
of Health Risk Assessment
USAF
May 1991
Data
None
ARF  (Section 3.2 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.2) #7 001-D1
Background Soluble Metals Concentrations for Groundwater
at Pease AFB
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
20 November 1991
Letter Report
PEA  (3.6)
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.2) #8 001-E.l
Tolerance Limits for Background Soils at Pease AFB, NH
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
17 April 1992
Letter Report
None
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.2) #10 001-002
Results of Background Surface Water/Sediment Location Walkover
Arthur L. Ditto, USAF
Johanna Hunter, EPA
19 August 1992
Letter
Knights Brook
ARF  (Section 3.2 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER;
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.2) #11 001-004
Haven Well Test
James G. Spratt, Roy F. Weston,
Mark McKenzie, USAF
21 August 1992
Letter
Haven Well Aquifer
ARF  (Section 3.2 Binder)
Inc.
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:

RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.2) #12 001-052
Maximum Detected Concentrations for Unfiltered
Groundwater at Pease AFB, NH
Lee dePersia, Roy F. Weston Inc.
Arthur Ditto, USAF
25 August 1992
Letter with Attachments  (Tables and Graphs)
None
ARF  (Section 3-2 Binder)

PEA  (3.2) #13 001-007
Haven Well Pumping Test Data
Jim Spratt project Geologist
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
Mark McKenzie, USAF
16 September 1992
Letter with Tables
Haven Well (597)
ARF  (Section 3.2 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:

RECIPIENT:

DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:

RECIPIENT:

DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:

LOCATION:
PEA  (3.2) #14 001-009
Newington Water Quality Sampling on July 18, 1992 and
Analysis Performed on August 28, 1992  (NHDES
Sample #210239)210241)
Scott Doane, Hydrogologist
NHDES
Wayne Wood
Newington, NH 03803
21 September 1992
Letter with Chain of Custody and Tables
None
ARF  (Section 3.2 Binder)

PEA  (3.2) #15 001-009
Tissue Sample Letter Report for Great Bay, Bass Pond and
Mclntyre Brook
Lee R. dePersia, Roy F. Weston, Inc.
Through U.S. Air Force
Johanna Hunter, EPA
Richard Pease, NHDES,
9 October 1992
Routing Letters and Letter Report with Map and Table
Great Bay, Bass Pond
Mclntyre Brook
ARF  (Section 3.2 Binder)
                                        3.3 Work Plan
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.3) #4 001-258
Installation Restoration Program, Stage 4 Work Plan
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
EPA; NHDES
January 1991
Work Plan
None
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.3) #5 001-213
Work Plan for the Integrated Installation Restoration
Program, Stage 2, Labeled Stage 2
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
EPA; NHDES
September 1987
Work Plan
None
ARF, IR

PEA  (3.3) #6 001)GL.2
Installation Restoration Program, Stage 4 Work Plan
Addendum 1, Pease AFB, NH - Draft
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
September 1991
Addendum
None
ARF, IR

PEA  (3.3) #7 001-G5
Installation Restoration Program, Stage 4 Work Plan
Addendum Number 2 for Pease AFB, NH - Draft
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
March 1992
Addendum
None
ARF, IR

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.3) #9 001-3.5
Installation Restoration Program, Stage 4, Work Plan
Addendum 3, Pease AFB, NH
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
June 1992
Addendum
None
ARF, IR
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.3) #12 001-004
Groundwater Modeling Process Outline
Lee dePersia, Roy F. Weston, Inc.
Arthur Ditto, USAF
2 October 1992
Letter
Groundwater Modeling
ARF  (Section 3.3 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.3) #13 001-C.31
Installation Restoration Program, Stage 5 Health and
Safety Plan.  Pease AFB, NH - Draft
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
October 1992
Health and Safety Plan
Groundwater Modeling
ARF, IR
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.3) #15 001-F
U.S. Air Force Installation Restoration Program Pease
AFB Interim Monitoring Plan
USAF
Pease AFB
January 1994
Monitoring Plan
Groundwater Monitoring
ARF  (Zone 7 Shelf)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.3) #17 001-044
Pilot Test Work Plan for Site 22 Soil Vapor Extraction
and Air Sparging
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
5 May 1994
Work Plan
Site 22
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (33) #18 001-R.l
U.S. Air Force Installation Restoration Program Pease
Air Force Base Standard Operating Procedure for
Well Abandonment
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
October 1994
Work Plan
None
ARF

-------
                                3.4 Preliminary RI Field Work Reports
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.4) #1 001-173
Interim Technical Report No. 1 for the Installation
Restoration Program, Stage 2, Volume I, for Pease Air
Force Base
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
EPA; NHDES; USAF
February 1988
Technical Report
None
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.4) #2 001-147
Interim Technical Report No. 1 for the Installation
Restoration Program, Stage 2, Volume II- Appendices
Draft
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
EPA; NHDES; USAF
January 1998
Technical Report - Appendices
None
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.4) #3 001-214
Interim Technical Report No. 2 for the Installation
Restoration Program, Stage 2,  Volume I
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
EPA:  NHDES:  USAF
August 1988
Technical Report
None
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.4) #3 001-696
Interim Technical Report No. 2 for the Installation
Restoration Program, Stage 2, Volume II - Appendices
(Sample Tracking Information, Analytical Results)
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
EPA; NHDES; USAF
August 1988
Technical Report - Appendices
None
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.4) #5 001-838
Interim Technical Report No. 2 for the Installation
Restoration Program, Stage 2, Volume II - Appendices
(Analytical Results)
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
EPA: NHDES; USAF
August 1988
Technical Report - Appendices
None
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.4) #6 001-722
Interim Technical Report No. 2 for the Installation
Restoration Program, Stage 2, Volume IV - Appendices
(Analytical Reguire)
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
EPA; NHDES; USAF
August 1988
Technical Report - Appendices  (Analytical Results)
None
ARF

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.4) #7 001-289
Interim Technical Report No. 2 for the Installation
Restoration Program, Stage 2, Volume V - Appendices
(Field Geological, Geotechnical, and Hydrogeological Data)
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
EPA; NHDES; USAF
August 1988
Technical Report - Appendices
None
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.4) #8 001-106
Interim Technical Report No.
       3 for the Installation
Restoration Program,
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
EPA; NHDES; USAF
February 1989
Technical Report
None
ARF
Stage 2,  Volume I
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.4) #9 001-658
Interim Technical Report No. 3 for the Installation
Restoration Program, Stage 2, Volume II - Appendices
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
EPA; NHDES; USAF
February 1989
Technical Report - Appendices
None
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.4) #10 001-198
Interim Technical Report No. 4 for the Installation
Restoration Program, Stage 2, Volume I - Draft
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
EPA; NHDES; USAF
April 1989
Technical Report
None
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.4) #11 001-770
Interim Technical Report No. 4 for the Installation
Restoration Program, Stage 2, Volume II - Appendices
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
EPA; NHDES; USAF
April 1989
Technical Report - Appendices
None
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.4) #12 001-568
Interim Technical Report No. 4 for the Installation
Restoration Program, Stage 2,  Volume II - Appendices - Draft
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
EPA; NHDES; USAF
April 1989
Technical Report - Appendices
None
ARF

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.4) #13 001-770
Interim Technical Report No. 4 for the Installation
Restoration program, Stage 2, Volume IV - Appendices - Draft
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
EPA; NHDES; USAF
April 1989
Technical Report - Appendices
None
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR;
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.4) #14 001-1,150
Interim Technical Report No. 4 for the Installation
Restoration Program, Stage 2, Volume V - Appendices — Draft
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
EPA; NHDES; USAF
April 1989
Technical Report - Appendices
None
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.4) #15 001-729
Interim Technical Report No. 4 for the Installation
Restoration Program, Stage 2, Volume VI - Appendices - Draft
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
EPA; NHDES; USAF
April 1989
Technical Report - Appendices
None
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION;
PEA  (3.4) #16 001-803
Interim Technical Report No. 4 for the Installation
Restoration Program, Stage 2, Volume VII Appendices - Draft
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
EPA; NHDES; USAF
April 1989
Technical Report - Appendices
None
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.4) #17 001-251
Installation Restoration Program, Stage 2, Draft Final
Report, Volume I
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
EPA; NHDES; USAF
July 1990
Technical Report
None
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.4) #18 001-452
Installation Restoration Program, Stage 2, Draft Final
Report, Volume II
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
EPA; NHDES; USAF
July 1990
Technical Report
None
ARF

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.4) #19 001-621
Installation Restoration Program, Stage 2, Draft Final
Report, Appendices, Volume I
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
EPA; NHDES; USAF
July 1990
Technical Report - Appendices
None
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.4) #20 001-420
Installation Restoration Program, Stage 2, Draft Final
Report, Appendices, Volume II
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
EPA; NHDES; USAF
July 1990
Technical Report - Appendices
None
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.4) #21 001-658
Installation Restoration Program, Stage 2, Draft Final
Report, Appendices, Volume III
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
EPA; NHDES; USAF
July 1990
Technical Report - Appendices
None
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.4) #22 001-688
Installation Restoration Program, Stage 2, Draft Final
Report, Appendices, Volume IV
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
EPA; NHDES; USAF
July 1990
Technical Report - Appendices
None
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.4) #23 001-261
Installation Restoration Program, Stage 2, Draft Final
Report, Appendices, Volume V
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
EPA; NHDES; USAF
July 1990
Technical Report - Appendices
None
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.4) #24 001-340
Installation Restoration Program, Stage 2, Summary
Analytical Tables
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
EPA; NHDES; USAF
July 1990
Technical Report - Appendices
None
ARF

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.4) #38 001-041
Pease AFB Monitor Well Inventory and Inspection
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
7 August 1992
Report
None
ARF  (Section 3.4 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.4) #39 001-D
Background Values for Soil, Groundwater, Surface Water
and Sediment at Pease Air Force Base
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
26 February 1993
Letter
None
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.4) #40 001-Map 6
Off Base Well Inventory Letter Report for Pease AFB
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
17 September 1992
Letter Report
None
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.4) #42 001-Figure 11
United States Air Force Installation Restoration Program
Pease Air Force Base, Regional Groundwater
Model
Roy F. Weston, Inc,
USAF
April 1994
Report
None
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.4) #43 001-Appendix A
Zone 2 Test Pit Investigations
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
May 1994
Report
Zone 2
ARF  (Zone 2 Shelf)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.4) #44 001-C.2
Pease Air Force Base Monitor Well Inventory and In)on
Letter Report
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
04 October 1994
Report
None
ARF

-------
                                3.5 Remedial Investigation  (RI) Reports
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
 PEA (3.5)  #16 001-B.12
 Sampling Locations and Results Drainage Area Letter Report
 Roy F. Weston,  Inc.
 USAF
 May 1992
 Report
 None
 ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
 PEA (3.5)  #35 001-ACR.l
 Installation Restoration Program, Stage 4, Site
 Characterization Summary, IRP Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH
 Text
 Roy F. Weston,  Inc.
 USAF
 October 1992
 Report
 Zone 2
 ARF (Zone 2 Shelf)

 PEA (3.5)  #36 A-C
 Installation Restoration Program, Stage 4, Site
 Characterization Summary, IRP Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH,
 Appendices A-C
 Roy F. Weston,  Inc.
 USAF
 October 1992
 Report
 Zone 2
 ARF (Zone 2 Shelf)

 PEA (3-5)  #37 D1-D2
 Installation Restoration Program, Stage 4, Site Characterization
 Summary,  IRP Zone 2, Pease AFB,  Appendix D - Volumes 1 & 2
 Roy F. Weston,  Inc.
 USAF
 October 1992
 Appendices
 Zone 2
 ARF (Zone 2 Shelf)

 PEA (3.5)  #38 E-F
 Installation Restoration Program, Stage 4, Site Characterization
Summary, IRP Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH, Appendices E-F
 Roy F. Weston,  Inc.
 USAF
 October 1992
 Report
 Zone 2
 ARF (Zone 2 Shelf)

 PEA (3.5)  #43 001-126
 Haven Well Pumping Test Letter Report
 Roy F. Weston,  Inc.
 Jim Snyder, AFCEE/ESB,  USAF
 8 January, 1993
 Transmittal Letter, Letter Report, Maps, Appendices
 None
 ARF

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.5) #76 OOl-Acr.4
U.S. Air Force Installation Restoration Program Pease
AFB Zone 2 Remedial Investigation Report Text- DRAFT FINAL
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
November 1993
Report
Zone 2
ARF  (Zone 2 Shelf)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.5) #77 001-6.4-3
U.S. Air Force Installation Restoration Program Pease
AFB Zone 2 Remedial Investigation Report Figures. -DRAFT FINAL
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
November 1993
Figures
Zone 2
ARF  (Zone 2 Shelf)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.5) #78 001-G
U.S. Air Force Installation Restoration Program Pease AFB Zone 2
Remedial Investigation Report Appendices A, C, D, F and G)DRAFT
FINAL
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
November 1993
Appendices
Zone 2
ARF  (Zone 2 Shelf)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.5) #79 001-500
U.S. Air Force Installation Restoration Program Pease
AFB Zone 2 Remedial Investigation Report
Appendix B Part 1 of 2-DRAFT FINAL
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
November 1993
Appendix
Zone 2
ARF  (Zone 2 Shelf)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.5) #80 001-500
U.S. Air Force Installation Restoration Program Pease
AFB Zone 2 Remedial Investigation Report
Appendix B Part 2 of 2, DRAFT FINAL
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
November 1993
Appendices
Zone 2
ARF  (Zone 2 Shelf)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.5) #81 001-475
U.S. Air Force Installation Restoration Program, Pease
AFB, Zone 2 Remedial Investigation Report
Appendix H-DRAFT FINAL
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
November 1993
Appendix
Zone 2
ARF  (Zone 2 Shelf)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.5) #82 001-1.1
U.S. Air Force Installation Restoration Program, Pease
AFB, Zone 2 Remedial Investigation Report
Appendix I, Part 1 of 3-DRAFT FINAL
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
November 1993
Appendices
Zone 2
ARF  (Zone 2 Shelf)

PEA  (3.5) #83 001-1.2
U.S. Air Force Installation Restoration Program, Pease
AFB, Zone 2 Remedial Investigation Report
Appendix I Part 2 of 3)DRAFT FINAL
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
November 1993
Appendices
Zone 2
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.5) #84 001-13
U.S. Air Force Installation Restoration Program, Pease
AFB, Zone 2 Remedial Investigation Report
Appendix I Part 3 of 3)DRAFT FINAL
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
November 1993
Appendix
Zone 2
ARF  (Zone 2 Shelf)

PEA  (3.5) #85 001-J.l
U.S. Air Force Installation Restoration Program, Pease
AFB, Zone 2 Remedial Investigation Report
Appendix J Part 1 of 2-DRAFT
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
November 1993
Appendix
Zone 2
ARF  (Zone 2 Shelf)

PEA  (3.5) #86 001-J.2
U.S. Air Force Installation Restoration Program, Pease
AFB, Zone 2 Remedial Investigation Report
Appendix J Part 2 of 2-DRAFT FINAL
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
November 1993
Appendix
Zone 2
ARF  (Zone 2 Shelf)

PEA  (3.5) #86A 001-K.7-4
U.S. Air Force Installation Restoration Program, Pease
AFB, Zone 2 Remedial Investigation Report
Appendix K-DRAFT FINAL
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
November 1993
Report
Zone 2
ARF  (Zone 2 Shelf)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.5) #86B 001-300
U.S. Air Force Installation Restoration Program, Pease
AFB, Zone 2 Remedial Investigation Report
Appendices L, M, and N-DRAFT FINAL
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
November 1993
Report
Zone 2
ARF  (Zone 2 Shelf)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.5) #86C 001-1.1
U.S. Air Force Installation Restoration Program, Pease
AFB, Zone 2 Remedial Investigation Report
Appendix I, Part 1 of 2)DRAFT
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
May 1993
Appendix
Zone 2
ARF  (Zone 2 Shelf)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.5) #86D 001-1.2
U.S. Air Force Installation Program, Pease AFB, Zone 2
Remedial Investigation Report Appendix I, Part 2 of 2-DRAFT
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
May 1993
Appendix
Zone 2
ARF  (Zone 2 Shelf)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (35) #115 001-039
Cumulative Risk Evaluation for Zone 1 through Zone 5 at
Pease AFB, N.H.
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
March 1994
Risk Evaluation Report
Zone 1, Zone 2, Zone 3, Zone 4, Zone 5
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:

DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.5) #120 001-008
Zone 3 Water Hardness
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
Mike Daly, EPA
Richard Pease, NHDES
03 August 1994
Letter with enclosures
Zone 3
ARF  (Section 3.5 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.5) #121 001-007
Basewide Interim Monitoring Report No. 2 for Pease Air
Force Base, NH
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
05 August 1994
Letter with attachment
Zone 1; Zone 2; Zone 4
ARF  (Section 3.5 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.5) #123 001-E.34
Summary, of Revisions to Basewide Interim Monitoring
Plan, Pease Air Force Base, NH
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
23 November 1994
Interim Monitoring Plan
PEA  (10.1) #161 001-006
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:

LOCATION:
PEA  (3.5) #124 001-040
Basewide Interim Monitoring Report No. 4 for Pease Air
Force Base, NH
Roy F. Weston, Inc
USAF
16 December 1994
Interim Monitoring Report
Zone 1; Zone 2; Zone 4; Zone 5; Zone 7; PEA  (10.1) #161
001-006
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TITLE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.5) #127 001 - C.I
Pease Air Force Base Leaded Fuel Tank Sludge Area X-Ray
Fluorescence  (XRF) Letter Report - Draft
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
28 November 1994
Report
None
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE;
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.5) #128 i-Appendix E
DDT Sediment Evaluation Report for Pease Air Force Base, NI-I
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
November 1994
Report
None
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.5) #129 1.1-Figure 2.7.6
U.S. Air Force Installation Restoration Program, Pease
Air Force Base, Basewide Interim Monitoring
Report No. 1 for October Through December 1993- Volume I
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
April 1991
Report
None
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.5) #130 Appendix A - Appendix C
U.S. Air Force Installation Restoration Program, Pease
Air Force Base, Basewide Interim Monitoring
Report No. 1 for October Through December 1993-Volume II
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
April 1994
Report
None
ARF

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (33) #131 001-043
U.S. Air Force Installation Restoration Program, Pease
Air Force Base, Basewide Interim Monitoring
Report No. 2 for January Through March 1994
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
July 1994
Report
None
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.5) #132 001-049
U.S. Air Force Installation Restoration Program, Pease
Air Force Base, Basewide Interim Monitoring
Report No. 3
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
October 1994
Report
None
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
        3.6 RI Correspondence

PEA  (3.6) #1 001-001
Comments Regarding the Work Plan for the IRP Stage 2
State of New Hampshire, Department of Environmental Services
USAF
27 July 1987
Comments Serving 3.4  (Preliminary KI Field Work Reports)
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #2 001-006
Letter Regarding IRP, Stage 2
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
11 November 1987
Letter Serving 3.4  (Preliminary RI Field Work Reports)
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #3 001-001
Letter Stating Conformance of the Stage 2, Quality
Assurance Project Plan With Air Force IRP Practices
State of New Hampshire, Department of Environmental Services
USAF
12 November 1987
Letter Serving 3.4  (Preliminary RI Field Work Reports)
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #4 001-001
Letter Regarding the Suspect Fire Training Area
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
Air Force
16 December 1987
Letter Serving 3.4  (preliminary RI Field Work Reports)
US DA
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE;
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:

SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:

RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #6 001-001
Letter concerning Drilling Program
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
20 October 1988
Letter Serving 3.4  (Preliminary RI Field Work Reports)
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #9 001-002
Letter Concerning Disposal of Drill Cuttings From Stage
2 IRP Investigations
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
2 October 1989
Letter Serving 3.4  (Preliminary RI Field Work Reports)
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #10 001-003
Review Comments on the Phase II, Stage 2 4IRP, Draft
Final Report
State of New Hampshire, Department of Environmental Services
USAF
28 February 1990
Review Comments on Phase II, Stage 2, IRP Serving 3.4
 (Preliminary RI Field Work Reports)
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) NH 001-011
Review Comments for the Pease AFB, Phase II, Stage 2 IRP
Draft Final Report
EPA
USAF
7 March 1990
Review Comments Serving 3.4  (Preliminary RI Field Work Reports)
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #12 001-010
Review Comments Regarding the IRP, Stage 2 Draft Final
Report (December 1989)
U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration
EPA; USAF
7 March 1990
Review Comments Serving 3.4  (Preliminary RI Field Work Reports)
PEA  (10.1)
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #13 001-020
Review Comments to the IRP Stage 2 RI/FS Draft Report
USAF
Roy F. Weston, Inc.; Pease AFB
15 March 1990
Review Comments Serving 3.4  (Preliminary RI Field Work Reports)
PEA  (10.1)
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:

RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #14 001-004
Sampling Data for Off-Site Sampling at Pease AFB
State of New Hampshire, Water Supply and Pollution
Control Division
Air Force
5 July 1990
Sampling Data
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #16 001-003
Off-Base Sampling at Pease AFB
NHDES
USAF
25 October 1990
Sampling Results
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #18 001)065
Sampling Results from Pease AFB, Newington, Portsmouth
NHDES
USAF
17 January 1991
Sampling Data
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #19 001)002
Installation Restoration Program  (IRP) at Pease AFB, NH
Department of the Air Force
Pease AFB
8 March 1989
Memorandum - Pertaining to RI
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #20 001-002
Work Plan for the IRP Stage 3 and ITR #4
Department of the Air Force
Pease AFB
3 April 1989
Memorandum - Pertaining to RI
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #21 001-007
Consolidated Comments to the IRP Stage 3 Work Plan for
Pease Air Force Base, NH
USAF
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
1 June 1989
Review Comments - Pertaining to RI
PEA  (10.1)
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #22 001.001
Review Comments Regarding the Work Plan and QAPP-Stage 3
NHDES
USAF
16 June 1989
Review Comments - Pertaining to RI
PEA  (10.1)
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #23 001-008
Stage 3 Work Plan - Response to Comments
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
29 June 1989
Response to Comments - Pertaining to RI
PEA  (10.1)
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #24 001-008
Consolidated Comments to the IRP Stage 3 Quality
Assurance Project Plan  (QAPP) for Pease Air Force
Base, NH
USAF
Roy F. Weston Inc.
29 June 1989
Review Comments - Pertaining to RI
PEA  (10.1)
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #27 001-002
Letter Summarizing Discussions Between Roy F. Weston,
Inc. and the New Hampshire Department of
Environmental Services Concerning On-Site Handling and
Disposal of Soil and Water Generated During
Drilling Development, Purging, and Pump Testing of Wells
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
12 March 1990
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #29 001-007
Review Comments on the Stage 3 Work Plan for the IRP
EPA
USAF
7 June 1990
Review Comments
PEA  (10.1)
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #31 001-002
Letter Regarding Well Installation Modification
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
5 July 1990
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #34 001-004
Letter Regarding the Disposal of Clean Water, Drilling
Mud and Soil
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
25 September 1990
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #35 001-002
Letter Regarding procedures for Handling Solids and
Liguids During Well Construction and Soil Borings
NHDES
USAF
25 September 1990
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION
PEA  (3.6) #38 001-002
Information Letter 3 - Documenting discussion on 25 October 1990
Roy F. Weston, Inc,
USAF
29 October 1990
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #39 001-002
Letter Regarding the Disposal of Clean Soil Cuttings and
Drilling Mud
USAF
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
1 November 1990
Letter
None
ARF  (section 3.6 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #41 001-008
Response to Comments - Draft Final Stage 4 Work Plan and
Sampling And Analysis Plan
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
7 February 1991
Letter/Response to Comments
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #43 001-004
Issues Needing Resolution Prior to the Upcoming Field Efforts
EPA
USAF
10 April 1991
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #46 001-038
Response to Comments - Stage 4 Work Plan and SAP
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
28 September 1990
Response to Comments
PEA  (10.1)
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #47 001-011
Review comments on the Installation Restoration Plan
(IRP) Stage 4 Work Plan and Sampling and Analysis
Plan
NHDES
USAF
16 October 1990
Review Comments
PEA  (10.1)
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #48 001-017
The Town of Newington Review Comments on the IRP Stage 4
Work Plan
The Town of Newington
USAF
29 October 1990
Review Comments
PEA  (10.1)
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #49 001-076
EPA Technical Review of the Draft IRP Stage 4 Work Plan
and Sampling and Analysis Plan for Pease Air
Force Base
EPA
USAF
2 November 1990
Review Comments
PEA  (10.1)
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #50 001-002
Response to Air Force Questions on State Comments to the
Stage 4 Work Plan
NHDES
USAF
3 December 1990
Response to questions on comments
PEA  (10.1)
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #51 001-007
Response to EPA Comments on the Pease AFB Stage 4 Work
Plan/Sampling and Analysis Plan
Air Force
EPA
10 December 1990
Responses to Comments
PEA  (10.1)
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #52 001-008
Air Force Response to NHDES Comments - Draft Final Stage
4 Work Plan and Sampling and Analysis Plan
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
7 February 1991
Response to Comments
PEA  (10.1)
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR;
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #53 001-008
EPA Initial Approval of the IRP Stage 4 Work Plan and
Sampling and Analysis Plan
EPA
USAF
13 March 1991
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #54 001-058
Air Force Response to EPA Comments on the Stage 4 Work
Plan and Sampling and Analysis Plan
USAF
EPA
1991
Response to Comments
PEA  (10.1)
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #55 001-003
Off-Base Sampling at Pease Air Force Base
Richard Pease, NHDES
Art Ditto, Pease AFB
25 October 1990
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #56 001-001
EPA Concerns
USAF
Art Ditto, Pease AFB
8 April 1991
Internal Record of Phone Conversation with EPA and NHDES
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #57 001-004
Issues Needing Resolution Prior to Upcoming Field Efforts
Johanna Hunter, EPA
Arthur Ditto, Pease AFB
10 April 1991
Letter
PEA  (3.3)
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #58 001-002
Review of Risk Assessment Data and Sampling Procedures
Johanna Hunter, EPA
Arthur Ditto, Pease AFB
16 April 1991
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #59 001-067
Concerns about Analytical Methods
USAF
USAF
Johanna Hunter, EPA
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
23 April 1991
Fax with Attachments
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #60 001-001
Surface Water and Sediment Sampling Locations
Arthur Ditto, Pease AFB
Johanna Hunter, EPA
24 April 1991
Letter  (Transmittal)
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #61 001-008
Field Oversight Coordination
Johanna Hunter, EPA
Arthur Ditto, Pease AFB
29 April 1991
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #63 001-003
Review of April 25, 1991 Revised Analytical Methods
Johanna Hunter, EPA
Art Ditto, Pease AFB
08 May 1991
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #64 001-002
Review of April 25, 1991 Revised Analytical Methods
Johanna Hunter, EPA
Art Ditto, Pease AFB
08 May 1991
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #65 001-005
Field Performance Review of Weston Activities, Pease Air
Force Base, New Hampshire
Mitre Corporation
Dennis Lundquist, Human Systems Division
IRP Program Office
HSD/YAQ
Brooks AFB, TX 78235-5000
14 May 1991
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #66 001-002
Revised Analytical Methods for Pease AFB
Logan VanLeigh, Capt., USAF, BSC,
Johanna Hunter, EFA
31 May 1991
Letter
PEA  (3.1)
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #67 001-005
Procedure for Establishing Background Metal
Concentrations for Groundwater and Soil
Edward S. Barnes, Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
03 June 1991
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #68 001-012
Information to Assist Interpretation of Data Submitted
by EPA to the Air Force
Johanna Hunter, EPA
Art Ditto, Pease AFB
06 June 1991
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #69 001-004
Resolution Letter for Procedures for 8260 for VOC
Analysis of Water
Mark McKenzie, Pease AFB
Richard Pease, NHDES
Carl Gysler, Earth Technology, San Bernardino, CA
Johanna Hunter, EPA
06 June 1991
Fax
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #70 001-001
Background Determination Protocols
USAF
Richard Pease, NHDES
07 June 1991
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #71 001-001
Background Determination Protocols
USAF
Johanna Hunter, EPA
07 June 1991
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #72 001-003
Revise Analytical Methods for Pease AFB GC/MS Method
8260 for VOA
Edward S. Barnes, Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
11 June 1991
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #73 001-001
Laboratory Services
Richard Pease, NHDES
Art Ditto, Pease AFB
13 June 1991
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #75 001-002
EPA Pump Test Information Request to be Provided by Air Force
Johanna Hunter, EPA
Art Ditto, USAF
27 June 1991
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #76 001-002
Roy F. Weston, Inc., Proposed Methods for Determining
Background Concentrations at Pease Air Force
Base, New Hampshire
George Rice, Mitre Corporation
Dennis Lundguest, Human Systems Division
IRP Program Office
HSD/YAQ
Brooks AFB, TX 78235-5000
02 July 1991
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #77 001-001
Transmittal Letter for Protocols for Baseline Risk Assessments
Arthur Ditto, USAF
Richard Pease, NHDES
18 July 1991
Transmittal Letter
Baseline Risk Assessments
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #78 001-001
Transmittal Letter for Protocols for Baseline Risk Assessments
Arthur Ditto, USAF
Johanna Hunter, EPA
18 July 1991
Transmittal Letter
Baseline Risk Assessment
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #80 001-002
Exploratory Boring Soil Sampling Procedures
Edward S. Barnes, Roy F. Weston, Inc.
Capt. Logan Van Leigh, AFCEE
26 July 1991
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #81 001-001
Vented Monitoring Wells
Scott Doane, NHDES
Mark McKenzie, USAF
31 July 1991
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #82 001-006
Review of the Proposed Procedure for Background
Determination Protocols for Pease Air Force Base,
Portsmouth, NH
Johanna Hunter, EPA
Art Ditto, Pease AFB
02 August 1991
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #83 001-001
Vented Monitoring Wells - Response to July 31,
Letter on same Issue From NHDES
Arthur Ditto, USAF
Scott Doane, NHDES
26 August 1991
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)
1991
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:

DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #84 001-001
Split Sampling Results
Arthur Ditto, USAF
Johanna Hunter, EPA
Richard Pease, NHDES
9 September 1991
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #85 001-002
Field Oversight - September 1991
Richard Pease, NHDES
Arthur Ditto, USAF
28 October 1991
Letter
PEA  (3.4)
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG INDEX:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #86 001-001
Transmittal Letter for Data Collected on Surface Water
and Sediment Background Concentration
Johanna Hunter, EPA
Ed Barnes, Roy F. Weston
2 December 1991
Transmittal Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #87 001-002
Regional Literature Search to Assist Development of the
Sediment and Surface Water Background
Determination for Pease AFB, Portsmouth, NH
Johanna Hunter, EPA
Art Ditto, Pease AFB
2 December 1991
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #88 001-001
Fugitive Dust Pathway in the Baseline Risk Assessment
Arthur Ditto, USAF
Johanna Hunter, EPA
3 January 1992
Letter
PEA  (3.5)
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #89 001-001
Evaluation of the Air Pathway in Baseline Risk Assessment
USAF
Johanna Hunter, EPA
11 February 1992
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #90 001-001
Evaluation of the Air Pathway in Baseline Risk Assessment
USAF
Richard Pease, NHDES
11 February 1992
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #95 001-001
Transmittal Letter for Submittal of Baseline Risk
Assessment Protocols
Arthur Ditto, USAF
Richard Pease, NHDES
25 February 1992
Transmittal Letter
Baseline Risk Assessment
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #96 001-001
Transmittal Letter for Revised Baseline Risk Assessment Protocols
Arthur Ditto, USAF
Johanna Hunter, EPA
25 February 1992
Transmittal Letter
Revised Baseline Risk Assessment
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #98 001-003
Request for EPA Split Sampling Results
Arthur Ditto, USAF
Johanna Hunter, EPA
9 March 1992
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #99 001-D1
Letter Report of Result of Statistical Comparison of
Stage 3C Samples to the 66 Other Background
Samples
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
9 March 1992
Letter Report
PEA  (3.5)
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #100 001-001
Transmittal Letter for Submittal of Stage 4 Work Plan
Addendum Number 2 on the Draft Stage 4 Sampling
and Analysis Plan Addendum Number 2
Arthur Ditto, USAF
Johanna Hunter, EPA
24 March 1992
Transmittal Letter
PEA  (3.1); PEA (3.3)
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #101 001-001
Transmittal Letter for Submittal of Stage 4 Addendum
Number 2 Work Plan and Sampling and Analysis Plan
Arthur Ditto, USAF
Richard Pease, NHDES
24 March 1992
Transmittal Letter
PEA  (3.1); PEA (3.3)
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #102 001-001
Data You May Be Able to Provide
Thomas R. Marks, Roy F. Weston, Inc.
Mark McKenzie, Pease AFB
26 May 1992
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #103 001-022
Evaluation of Air Pathway in Baseline Risk Assessments
Richard Pease, NHDES
Art Ditto, Pease AFB
13 April 1992
Letter with Attachments
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #106 001-002
Oversight Role of Regulatory Agencies at Pease
Michael Daly, EPA
Mark McKenzie, Pease NHDES
26 May 1992
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #111 001-001
Submittal of Draft Secondary Documents, Stage 4 Work
Plan Addendum 3 and Stage 4 Health and Safety
Plan Addendum
USAF
Richard Pease, NHDES
24 June 1992
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:

DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #112 001-001
Submittal of Draft Secondary Documents, Stage 4 Work
Plan Addendum 3 and Stage 4 Health and Safety
Plan Addendum
USAF
Johanna Hunter, EPA
24 June 1992
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #113 001-002
Additional Field Oversight
USAF
Michael Daly, EPA
8 July 1992
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #116 001-021
Pease Air Force Base Groundwater Modeling Letter Report
Lee dePersia, Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
Johanna Hunter, EPA
Richard Pease, NHDES
29 July 1992
Letter with Report
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #120 001-001
Monitor Well Inventory and Inspection Report
USAF
Johanna Hunter, EPA
Richard Pease, NHDES
18 August 1992
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #122 001-002
Results of Background Surface Water Sediment Location Walkout
Richard Pease, NHDES
Arthur Ditto, Pease AFB
27 August 1992
Letter
PEA  (6.4)
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #123 001-005
Risk Assessment Issues for Pease
Lee dePersia, Roy F. Weston, Inc.
Arthur Ditto, USAF
28 August 1992
Letter Report
PEA  (3.5)
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:

DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:

DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA (3.6)  #124 001-001
Transmittal Letter for Submittal of Groundwater
Background Letter Report
Mark McKenzie for Arthur Ditto, USAF
Richard Pease, NHDES
Johanna Hunter, EPA
1 September 1992
Letter
None
ARF (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA (3.6)  #125 001-002
Policy on Data Transfer During Pumping Tests
Arthur Ditto, USAF
Richard Pease, NHDES
Johanna Hunter, EPA
9 September 1992
Letter
None
ARF (Section 3.6 Binder)
PEA  (3.6) #128 001-003
Summary of Risk Issues Meeting of August 19,
Johanna Hunter, EPA
Arthur Ditto, USAF
16 September 1992
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #130 001-002
Field Oversight - Mid-August-Mid-September
Richard Pease, NHDES
Arthur Ditto, Pease AFB
7 October 1991
Letter
PEA  (3.4)
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #133 001-001
Transmittal Letter for Pease AFB Zone 2 Site
Characterization Study
Lee dePersia, Roy F. Weston, Inc.
Capt. Carl Woerhle, AFCEE
22 October 1992
Letter
Zone 2
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)
  1992
PEA  (3.6) #134 001-001
Transmittal Letter for Submittal of Zone 2
Characterization Summary Report
Lee dePersia, Roy F. Weston, Inc.
Richard Pease, NHDES
22 October 1992
Letter
Zone 2
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)
Site

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #135 001-001
Transmittal Letter for Submittal of Zone 2 Site
Characterization Summary Report
Lee dePersia, Roy F. Weston, Inc.
Johanna Hall, TRC Member, Lowell, MA
22 October 1992
Letter
Zone 2
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #136 001-001
Transmittal Letter for Submittal of Zone 2 Site
Characterization Summary Report
Lee dePersia, Roy F. Weston, Inc.
Johanna Hunter, EPA
22 October 1992
Letter
Zone 2
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #137 001-001
Submittal of Draft Secondary Documents, Zones 1, 2, and
5 Site Characterization Summaries
USAF
Richard Pease, NHDES
26 October 1992
Letter
Zone 1, Zone 2, Zone 5
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #138 001-001
Submittal of Draft Secondary Documents, Zones 1, 2, and
5 Site Characterization Summaries
USAF
Johanna Hunter, EPA
26 October 1992
Letter
Zone 1, Zone 2, Zone 5
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #139 001-001
Submittal of Stage 4 Sampling and Analysis Plan Addendum 3
USAF
Johanna Hunter, EPA
26 October 1989
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #140 001-001
Submittal of Stage 4 Sampling and Analysis Plan Addendum 3
USAF
Richard Pease, NHDES
26 October 1992
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:

DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:

LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:

DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:

DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #142 001-001
Transmittal Letter for Submittal of Stage 5 Health and
Safety Plan
Arthur Ditto, USAF
Johanna Hunter, EPA
Richard Pease, NHDES
17 November 1992
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #146 001-001
Application of the Reachable Maximum Exposure  (RME) in
Risk Assessments
Arthur Ditto, USAF
Richard Pease, NHDES
1 December 1992
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #147 001-001
Explanation of Off-Base Well Inventory Report
Arthur Ditto, USAF
Richard Pease, NHDES
4 December 1992
Letter
Off-Base Well Inventory Letter Report of 17 September 1992
PEA  (3.5)
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #148 001-001
Transmittal Letter for Submittal of Quality Assurance
Project Plan  (QAPP) Portion of the Stage 4
Sampling and Analysis Plan  (SAP) Number 3
Arthur Ditto, USAF
Johanna Hunter, EPA
Richard Pease, NHDES
11 December 1992
Letter
PEA  (3.1)
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #149 001-002
Reguest for Deadline Extension
Arthur Ditto, USAF
Johanna Hunter, EPA
Richard Pease, NHDES
23 December 1992
Letter
PEA  (6.3)
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #152 001)002
MULTIMED as a Replacement for the Summers Model
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
Art Ditto, AFBDA
11 March 1993
Letter
PEA  (4.5)
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:

DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:

DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #156 001-002
Request for Deadline Extension
USAF
Johanna Hunter, EPA
Richard Pease, NHDES
19 March 1993
Letter
PEA  (3.5)
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #166 001-001
Submittal of Draft Primary Document, Zone 2 Remedial
Investigation Report
USAF
Johanna Hunter, EPA
21 May 1993
Letter
Zone 2; PEA  (3.5)
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #170 001-008
Locations of Surface Water of the State of New Hampshire
in the Vicinity of Former Pease AFB
Arthur Ditto, Pease AFB
Richard Pease, NHDES
16 November 1993
Letter with Attachment
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #152 001-002
Interim Monitoring Plan, DES Review Comments
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
Richard Pease, NHDES
25 April 1994
Letter, with Response to Comments
Section 10.1
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #183 001-063
Pease AFB Second Quarter Report for 1994
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
12 July 1994
Letter Report
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #185 001-001
Zone 2 Test Pit Investigation Report
Richard Pease, NHDES
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
21 July 1994
Letter
Zone 2
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

PEA  (3.6) #189 001-D.2
1994 Third Quarter Report
Mark McKenzie, AFBCA
Mike Daly, EPA
Richard Pease, NHDES
08 November 1994
Report
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (3.6) #194 001-001
Regional Groundwater Modeling Letter Report for Pease AFB, NH
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
02 May 1994
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 3.6 Binder)

4.1 ARAR Determinations
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (4.1) #1 001-024
New Hampshire ARAR List Update
Richard Pease, NHDES
Arthur Ditto, USAF
13 April 1992
Letter and Tables
None  (Section 4.1 Binder)
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (4.1) #2 001-B.3
Installation Restoration Program Stage 4, Basewide ARARs
Pease Air Force Base, NH 03803 - Draft
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
January, 1993
ARARs
None
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TYPE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (4.1) #3 001-002
Waiverability of Env-WS 430, Surface Water Quality
Regulations, as an ARAR
Arthur Ditto, Pease AFB
Richard Pease,  NHDES
21 December 1993
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 4.1 Binder)

PEA  (4.1) #4 001-023
New Hampshire ARAR List Update
NHDES
USAF
23 December 1993
Letter with Attachment
None
ARF  (Section 4.1 Binder)

PEA  (4.1) #7 001-001
Pease Air Force Base:  Resolution of Env-Ws 410 ARARs Issue
Joan Miles, Assistant Regional Counsel, EPA Region I
Anne Renner, EPA Region I
Assistant Attorney General, New Hampshire
Letter
PEA  (6.3); PEA (11.2)
ARF  (Section 4.1 Binder)

-------
                                4.2 Feasibility Reports
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (4.2) #27 001-BA1-4B-2
U.S. Air Force Installation Restoration Program Pease
AFB Zone 2 Initial Screening of Alternatives
(Preliminary Draft Feasibility Study) Draft
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
June 1993
Feasibility Study
Zone 2
ARF  (Zone 2 Shelf)

PEA  (4.2) #47 iii-ACR-3
U.S. Air Force Installation Restoration Program, Pease
Air Force Base, Zone 2 Feasibility Study Report, Text DRAFT FINAL
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
December 1993
Text
Zone 2
ARF  (Zone 2 Shelf)

PEA  (4.2) #48 A.1-K.13
U.S. Air Force Installation Restoration Program, Pease
AFB, Zone 2 Feasibility Study Report Appendices- DRAFT FINAL
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
December 1993
Appendices
Zone 2
ARF  (Zone 2 Shelf)

PEA  (4.2) #51 001-Figure 4.2.2
Pease Air Force Base Draft Zone 2 Feasability Study
 Report, copies of pages 4-47, 4-48, 4-49 and Figure
4.2.1 and 4.22
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
22 October 1993
Feasibility Study Report
Zone 2
ARF,  (Zone 2 Shelf)

PEA  (4.2) #58 001-016
Geotechnical Sample Results - Landfill 1
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
13 October 1994
Sample Results
Landfill 1
ARF  (Section 4.2 Binder)

PEA  (4.2) #59 001-016
Geotechnical Sample Results - Landfill 1
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
29 November 1994
Sample Results
Landfill 1
ARF  (Section 4.2 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (4.2) #60 001-Figure 3
U.S. Air Force Installation Restoration Program, Pease
Air Force Base, Zone 2 Feasibility Study Report
Addendum 1 ) Text and Appendices A and B - DRAFT FINAL
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
February 1995
Feasibility Study Report
Zone 2
ARF  (Zone 2 Shelf)

PEA  (4.2) #65 001-Appendix C
Pease Air Force Base Site 22 Treatability Study Letter Report
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
09 December 1994
Report
Site 22
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (42) #60 001-Figure 3
U.S. Air Force Installation Restoration Program, Pease
Air Force Base, Zone 2 Feasibility Study Report
Addendum 1 - Text and Appendices A and B - DRAFT FINAL
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
February 1995

PEA  (4.2) #67 001-026
Zone 2 Feasibility Study Supplement
USAF
EPA
08 February 1995
Report
Zone 2
ARF  (Zone 2 Shelf)

PEA  (4.2) #69 001-009
Pease Air Force Base Natural Attenuation Modeling for
Zones 2 and 3
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
February 1995
Report
Zone 2; Zone 3
ARF  (Zone 2 Shelf)
                        4.3 Proposed Plan
PEA  (4.3) #10 001-G.5
Installation Restoration Program, Proposed Plan for Zone
2, Pease AFB
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
March 1995
Proposed Plan
Zone 2
ARF Zone 2 Shelf
               4.4 Supplements and Revisions to the Proposed Plan

*NOTE:  NO ENTRIES IN THIS SECTION AT THIS TIME.

-------
                        4.5 Correspondence
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (4.5) #1 001-006
IRP Proposed Plan for Landfill 3, Field Maintenance
Squadron Equipment Cleaninq Site, Fire Department
Traininq Area 1  (October 1990, draft) Review Comments
NHDES
USAF
27 November 1990
Review Comments
PEA  (10.1); Landfill 3
ARF  (Section 4.5 Binder)

PEA  (4.5) #2 001-016
EPA Reqion I comments on the IRP Proposed Plan for
Landfill 3, Field Maintenance Squadron Equipment
Cleaninq Site, Fire Department Traininq Area 1  (October
1990, draft)
EPA
USAF
28 November 1990
Review Comments
PEA  (10.1); Landfill 3
ARF  (Section 4.5 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:

DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (4.5) #3 001-008
EPA Reqion I additional comments on the IRP Proposed
Plan for Landfill 3, Field Maintenance Squadron
Equipment Cleaninq Site, Free Department Traininq Area 1
(October 1990, draft); Review Comments"
EPA
USAF
3 December 1990
Review Comments
PEA  (10.1); Landfill 3
ARF  (Section 4-5 Binder)

PEA  (4.5) #5 001-002
Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements  (ARARs)
Richard Pease, NHDES
Art Ditto,  Pease AFB
25 November 1991
Letter
PEA  (6.4)
ARF  (Section 4.5 Binder)

PEA  (4.5) #31 001-001
Determination of Site Boundaries at the Tune of Remedial
Action Implementation  (Will Miqrate to Proposal)
USAF
Johanna Hunter, EPA
Richard Pease, NHDES
2 December 1992
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 4.5 Binder)

PEA  (4.5) #58 001-003
Former Pease AFB, Surface Water Issues
Richard Pease, NHDES
Arthur Ditto, Pease AFB
29 November 1993
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 4.5 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:

DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:

DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (4.5) #63 001-011
Request for Deadline Extension, Zone 2 Proposed Plan
Arthur Ditto, Pease AFB
Michael Daly, EPA Region 1
Richard Pease, NHDES
3 February 1994
Letter
Zone 2
ARF  (Section 4.5 Binder)

PEA  (4.5) #6.5 001-001
Regional Groundwater Model
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
John Regan, NHDES
3 June 1994
Letter
Haven Well
ARF  (Section 4.5 Binder)

PEA  (4.5) #66 001-001
Soil Vapor Extraction Pilot Test-Site #22
Dennis R. Lunderville, NHDES
Chris Conroy, Roy F. Weston, Inc.
11 February 1994
Letter
Site 22
ARF  (Section 4.5 Binder)

PEA  (4.5) #78 001-001
Submittal of Zone 2 FS Addendum
Mark McKenzie, AFBCA
Mike Daly, EPA
Richard Pease, NHDES
06 December 1994
Letter
Zone 2; PEA  (42)
ARF  (Section 4.5 Binder)

PEA  (4.5) #79 001-033
EPA's Outstanding Issues on the Draft Final Remedial
Investigation/Feasibility Study Report for Zone 2,
Pease Air Force Base, New Hampshire
Andrew F. Miniuks, EPA
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
04 January 1995
Letter with attachment
Zone 2; PEA  (4.2); PEA  (10.1)
ARF  (Section 4.5 Binder)

PEA  (4.5) #82 001-018
EPA's Comments on the Draft Proposal Plan for Zone 2,
Pease Air Force Base, Newington, New Hampshire
Andrew F. Miniuks, EPA
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
20 January 1995
Letter with attachment
Zone 2; PEA  (5.1); PEA  (10.1)
ARF  (Section 4.5 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (4.5) #85 001-802
EPA's Comments on the Zone 2 Feasibility Study Addendum
1, Pease Air Force Base, Newington, New
Hampshire
Andrew F. Miniuks, EPA
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
01 February 1995
Letter with attachment
Zone 2; PEA  (4.2); PEA  (10.1)
ARF  (Section 4.5 Binder)
DOCUMENT:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (4.5) #86 001-001
New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services
Comments on Burn Area 1 Treatability Study
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
Richard Pease, NHDES
01 February 1995
Letter
Zone 2; Site 22; PEA  (4.2); PEA  (10.1)
ARF  (Section 4.5 Binder)
DOCUMENT:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (4.3) #91 001-001
Zone 2 Feasibility Study Supplement
Mark McKenzie, AFBCA
Mike Daly, EPA
08 February 1995
Letter
Zone 24 PEA (4.2)
ARF  (Section 4.5 Binder)
DOCUMENT:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (4.5) #95 001-003
Pease Air Force Base Draft Final Zone 2 Proposed Plan
Lee dePersia, Roy F. Weston, Inc.
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
16 February 1995
Letter
Zone 2; PEA  (5.1)
ARF  (Section 4.5 Binder)
DOCUMENT:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (4.5) #96 001-005
Pease Air Force Base Draft Final Zone 2 Feasibility
Study  (FS) Report Addendum 1
Lee dePersia, Roy F. Weston, Inc.
Jim Synder, AFCEE
16 February 1995
Letter
Zone 2; PEA  (5.1)
ARF  (Section 4.5 Binder)
DOCUMENT:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (4.5) #97 001-002
Natural Attenuation Modeling for Zones 2 and 3 at Pease
Air Force Base, New Hampshire
Lee dePersia, Roy F. Weston, Inc.
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
16 February 1995
Letter
Zone 2; Zone 3
ARF  (Section 4.5 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (4.5) #102 001-001
Evaluation of the Zone 2 Feasibility Study Supplement,
Pease Air Force Base, Newington, New Hampshire
Mike Daly, EPA
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
01 March 1995
Letter
Zone 2; PEA  (4.2)
ARF  (Section 4.5 Binder)
DOCUMENT:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (4.5) #103 001-001
EPA's Comments on the Draft Final Zone 2 Feasibility
Study Addendum 1, Pease Air Force Base, New
Hampshire
Andrew Miniuks, EPA
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
02 March 1995
Letter
Zone 2; PEA  (4.2); PEA  (10.1)
ARF  (Section 4.5 Binder)
DOCUMENT:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (4.5) #104 001-001
Evaluation of the Zone 2 Feasibility Study Supplement,
Pease Air Force Base, Newington, New Hampshire
Mike Daly, EPA
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
01 March 1995
Letter
Zone 2; PEA  (42); PEA  (10.1)
ARF  (Section 4.5 Binder)
DOCUMENT:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (4.5) #105 001-002
EPA's Comments on the Draft Proposed Plan for the Zone
2, Pease Air Force Base, Newington, New
Hampshire
Mike Daly, EPA
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
02 March 1995
Letter with attachment
Zone 2:  PEA  (.5.1); PEA  (10.1)
ARF  (Section 4.5 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (4.5) #108 001-004
IRP Site 22 Soil Vapor Extraction  (SVE) and Air Sparging
(AS) Pilot Test
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
06 May 1994
Letter
Site 22
ARF  (Section 4.5 Binder)
                                5.1 ROD
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:

DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (5.1) #8 001-D
Record of Decision, Zone 2, Pease Air Force Base, New
Hampshire - DRAFT
USAF
EPA
NHDES
March 1995
ROD
Zone 2
ARF
                             5.2 Amendments to ROD

-------
*NOTE:  NO ENTRIES IN THIS SECTION AT THIS TIME.

                        5.3 Explanations of Significant Differences

*NOTE:  NO ENTRIES IN THIS SECTION AT THIS TIME.
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
       5 . 4 Correspondence

             PEA (5.4) #1 001-001
             Region 1 ROD Model Language
             USAF
             Johanna Hunter, EPA
             Unknown
             Letter
             None
             ARF (Section 5.4 Binder)

             PEA (5.4) #4 001-002
             Pease AFB IRP ROD Review Process
             Arthur Ditto, AFBCA/OL-A
             AFBCA/NE
             15 December 1993
             Letter
             None
             ARF (Section 5.4 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:

DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:

DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:

DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
Review
             PEA (5.4) #5 001-002
             Getting to a ROD, Revised Milestones
             Arthur Ditto, Pease AFB
             Michael Daly, EPA
             Richard Pease,  NHDES
             4 February 1994
             Letter
             Zone 1; Zone 2; Zone 3; Zone 4 Site 32/36
             ARF (Section 5.4 Binder)

             PEA (5.4) #12 001-002
             Getting to a ROD
             Arthur Ditto, AFBCA/OL-A
             Mike Daly, EPA
             Richard Pease,  NHDES
             15 August 1994
             Letter
             Zone 1; Zone 2; Zone 3; Zone 4; Site 32/36; Site 45
             ARF (Section 5.4 Binder)
             PEA (5.4) #24 001-006
             Document Review Schedule
             Arthur Ditto, AFBCA/OL-A
             Mike Daly, EPA
             Richard Pearce,  NHDES
             14 November 1994
             Letter with attachment
             Zone 1; Zone 2;  Zone 3; Zone 4;
             ARF (Section 5.4 Binder)
                                Site 32/36; Site 45
PEA  (5.4) #25 001-002
Additional Reguests for Additional Documents for EPA

Arthur Ditto, AFBCA/OL-A
Mike Daly, BPA
12 December 1994
Letter
Zone 1; Zone 2; Zone 3; Zone 4; Site 32/36; Site 34
ARF  (Section 5.4 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:                PEA  (5.4) #30 001-003
LONG TITLE:                     Project Status and Schedule, Pease Air Force Base,
                                Newington, New Hampshire
AUTHOR:                         Mary Sanderson, EPA
RECIPIENT:                      Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
DATE:                           02 March 1995
TYPE:                           Letter with attachments
SECOND REFERENCE:               None
LOCATION:                       ARF  (Section 5.4 Binder)

DOCUMENT NUMBER:                PEA  (5.4) #37 001-001
LONG TITLE:                     Draft Zone 2 and Site 45 Records of Decision
AUTHOR:                         Arthur Ditto, AFBCA/OL-A
RECIPIENT:                      Hank Lowman, AFBCA/NE
DATE:                           04 April 1995
TYPE:                           Letter
SECOND REFERENCE:               Zone 2; Site 45
LOCATION:                       ARF  (Section 5.4 Binder)

DOCUMENT NUMBER:                PEA  (5.4) #42 001-005
LONG TITLE:                     Zone 2, Draft Final ROD
AUTHOR:                         Roy F. Weston, Inc.
RECIPIENT:                      Jim Snyder, AFCEE
                                Mike Daly, EPA
                                Patti Tyler, EPA
                                Richard Pease, NHDES
DATE:                           31 May 1995
TYPE:                           Transmittal letter
SECOND REFERENCE:               Zone 2; PEA  (5.1)
LOCATION:                       ARF  (Section 5.4 Binder)

                6.1 Cooperative Agreements / SMOAs

DOCUMENT NUMBER:                PEA  (6.1) #1 001-013
LONG TITLE:                     Memorandum of Understanding Executed Between the Town of
                                Newington, NH, and Pease Air Force
                                Base, NH
AUTHOR:                         Town of Newington/USAF
RECIPIENT:                      USAF
DATE:                           22 August 1980
TYPE:                           Memorandum of Understanding
SECOND REFERENCE:               None
LOCATION:                       ARF  (Section 6.1 Binder)

DOCUMENT NUMBER:                PEA  (6.1) #2 001-004
LONG TITLE:                     Memorandum of Understanding  (MOU) between the U.S. Air
                                Force Occupational and Environmental
                                Health Laboratory  (USAFOEHL) and Pease Air Force Base
                                relating to procedures for conducting the IRP.
AUTHOR:                         U.S. Department of the Air Force
RECIPIENT:                      Pease AFB
DATE:                           31 July 1987
TYPE:                           Memorandum of Understanding
SECOND REFERENCE:               None
LOCATION:                       ARF  (Section 6.1 Binder)

DOCUMENT NUMBER:                PEA  (6.1) #3 001-020
LONG TITLE:                     Defense and State Memorandum of Agreement
AUTHOR:                         USAF
RECIPIENT:                      NHDES
DATE:                           14 December 1992
TYPE:                           DSMOA
SECOND REFERENCE:               None
LOCATION:                       ARF  (Section 6.1 Binder)

-------
                        6.2 Federal Facility Agreement  (FFA)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (6.2) #1 001-097
Federal Facility Agreement under CERCLA Section 120
EPA; State of New Hampshire; USA.
EPA; NHDES; USAF
24 April 1991
Federal Facility Agreement
None
ARF  (Section 6.2 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (6.2) #2 001-003
Remedial Project Mangers Meeting Minutes
Peace Air Force Base
See Distribution List
16 January 1991
Meeting Minutes
None
(Section 6.2 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (6.2) #3 001-003
Remedial Project Managers Meeting Minutes
Pease Air Force Base
See Distribution List
20 February 1991
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 6.2 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (6.2) #4 001-003
Remedial Project Managers Meeting Minutes
Pease Air Force Base
See Distribution List
20 March 1991
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 6.2 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (6.2) #5 001-002
Remedial Project Managers Meeting Minutes
Pease Air Force Base
See Distribution List
17 April 1991
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 6.2 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (6.2) #6 001-002
Remedial Project Managers Meeting Minutes
Pease Air Force Base
See Distribution List
21 May 1991
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 6.2 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (6.2) #7 001-002
Remedial Project Managers Meeting Minutes
Pease Air Force Base
See Distribution List
24 June 1991
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 6.2 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:

DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
        PEA (6.2)  #8 001-IL.4
        Modification 1 to Pease AFB Federal Facilities Agreement
        USAF
        Michael Daly,  EFA
        Richard Pease, NHDES
        8 September 1993
        FFA Modification
        None
        ARF (Section 6.2 Binder)

6.3 Coordination - State / Federal
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
        PEA (6.3)  #1 001-003
        Meeting Minutes From Air Force Meeting With State
        Officials  Concerning Pease Air Force Base IRP
        USAF
        See Distribution List
        11 March 1987
        Meeting Minutes
        None
        ARF (Section 6.3 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
        PEA (6.3)  #2 001-002
        Agenda for Meeting with State DES,  Air Force, and EPA
        Technical  Team
        Pease Air  Force Base
        See Distribution List
        26 April 1990
        Agenda
        None
        ARF (Section 6.3 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
        PEA (6.3)  #6 001-001
        Agenda and Notes for Working Meeting with U.S. EPA and
        State of New Hampshire
        USAF
        See Distribution List
        21 November 1989
        Agenda and Meeting Notes
        None
        ARF (Section 6.3 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
        PEA (6.3)  #8 001-033
        Point Paper on Installation Restoration Program (Pease
        AFB)  and Attachments (Prepared for a meeting
        of J.  Coit and M.  Aldrich,  of Senator Humphrey's office,
        with Pease, NHDES, WESTON,  and OEHL)
        USAF
        J. Coit & M. Aldrich of Senator Humphrey's Office
        31 March 1989
        Letter
        None
        ARF (Section 6.3 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
        PEA (6.3)  #9 001-003
        Recommendation to Place Pease AFB on the National
        Priority List (NPL)
        USAF
        EPA
        27 June 1989
        Letter
        None
        ARF (Section 6.3 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (6.3) #10 001-004
Remedial Project Managers' Meeting Minutes of January 16,
Arthur Ditto, USAF
See Distribution List
16 January 1991
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 6.3 Binder)
1991
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (6.3) #11 001-004
Remedial Project Managers' Meeting Minutes of February 20,
Arthur Ditto, USAF
See Distribution List
20 February 1991
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 6.3 Binder)
 1991
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (6.3) #12 001-004
Remedial Project Managers' Meeting Minutes
USAF
See Distribution List
20 March 1991
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 6.3 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (6.3) #13 001-004
Remedial Project Managers' Meeting Minutes
Arthur Ditto, USAF
See Distribution List
17 April 1991
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 6.3 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (6.3) #14 001-003
Remedial Project Managers' Meeting Minutes
Arthur Ditto, USAF
See Distribution List
21 May 1991
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 6.3 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (63) #15 001-004
Notification of Additional Investigative Work in a Wetland
USAF
NHDES
14 June 1991
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 6.3 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (63) #16 001-003
Remedial Project Managers' Meeting Minutes
Arthur Ditto, USAF
See Distribution List
24 June 1991
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 6.3 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (63) #17 001-003
Remedial Project Managers' Meeting Minutes
Arthur Ditto, USAF
See Distribution List
24 July 1991
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 6.3 Binder)

PEA  (6.3)  #18 001-004
Remedial Project Managers' Meeting Minutes
Arthur Ditto, USAF
See Distribution List
21 August 1991
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 6.3 Binder)

PEA  (6.3)  #19 001-004
Remedial Project Managers' Meeting Minutes
Arthur Ditto, USAF
See Distribution List
26 September 1991
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 6.3 Binder)

PEA  (6.3)  #20 001-004
Remedial Project Managers' Meeting Minutes
Arthur Ditto, USAF
See Distribution List
27 October 1991
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 6.3 Binder)

PEA  (63) #21 001.003
Remedial Project Managers' Meeting Minutes
Arthur Ditto, USAF
See Distribution List
20 November 1991
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 6.3 Binder)

PEA  (6.3)  #22 001-003
Remedial Project Managers' Meeting Minutes of January 27,
Arthur Ditto, USAF
See Distribution List
19 December 1991
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 6.3 Binder)

PEA  (6.3)  #23 001-003
Remedial Project Managers' Meeting Minutes
Arthur Ditto, USAF
See Distribution List
27 January 1992
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 6.3 Binder)
1992

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (63) #24 001-003
Remedial Project Managers' Meeting Minutes
Arthur Ditto, USAF
See Distribution List
25 February 1992
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 6.3 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (6.3) #25 001-002
Remedial Project Managers' Meeting Minutes
Arthur Ditto, USAF
See Distribution List
07 April 1992
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 6.3 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (6.3) #26 001-004
NH Wetlands Permit for National Priorities List Related Work
USAF
NHDES
24 April 1992
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 6.3 Binder)

PEA  (6.3) #27 001)002
Remedial Project Managers' Meeting Minutes
USAF
See Distribution List
22 April 1992
Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 6.3 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (6.3) #28 001-008
Remedial Project Managers' Meeting Minutes
Arthur Ditto, USAF
See Distribution
3 June 1992
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 6.3 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (6.3) #29 001-003
Remedial Project Managers' Meeting Minutes
Arthur Ditto, USAF
See Distribution List
21 August 1992
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 6.3 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (6.3) #30 001-003
Remedial Project Managers' Meeting Minutes
Arthur Ditto, USAF
See Distribution List
10 September 1992
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 6.3 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (6.3) #31 001-002
New Hampshire Sites Where SVE is Used for NAPL Removal
John Regan, NHDES
Art Ditto, Pease AFB
Mike Daly, EPA
Richard Pease, NHDES
Scott Doane, NHDES
30 September 1992
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 6.3 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (6.3) #32 001-002
Remedial Project Managers' Meeting Minutes
Arthur Ditto, USAF
See Distribution List
20 October 1992
Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 6.3 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:

DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (6.3) #33 001-003
Application of the Reasonable Maximum Exposure  (RME) in
Risk Assessments; Request for Site Specific
Justification for Using the "Average Maximum"
Richard Pease, NHDES
Art Ditto, Pease AFB
Johanna Hunter, EPA
Capt. Woerhle, AFCEE
22 October 1992
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 6.3 Binder)

PEA  (6.3) #34 001-001
Guidebook for Environmental Permits in New Hampshire
Richard Pease, NHDES
Art Ditto, Pease AFB
Johanna Hunter, EPA
4 November 1992
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 6.3 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (6.3) #36 001-Attachment 6
Quarterly Report, Second Quarter 1991
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
EPA; NHDES; USAF
19 July 1991
Quarterly Report
None
ARF  (Section 6.3 Binder); Arthur Ditto's office files
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (6.3) #37 001-034
Quarterly Report, Third Quarter 1991
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
EPA; NHDES; USAF
24 October 1991
Quarterly Report, Transmittal Letters
None
ARF  (Section 6.3 Binder); Arthur Ditto's office files

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (6.3) #38 001-030
Quarterly Report, Fourth Quarter 1991
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
EPA; NHDES; USAF
14 January 1992
Quarterly Report
None
ARF  (Section 6.3 Binder); Arthur Ditto's office files
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TILE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (6.3) #39 001-020
Quarterly Report First Quarter 1992
Roy F. Weston, Inc,
EPA; NHDES; USAF
15 April 1992
Quarterly Report
None
ARF  (Section 6.3 Binder); Arthur Ditto's office files
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (6.3) #40 001-032
Quarterly Report, Second Quarter 1992
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
EPA; NHDES; USAF
14 July 1992
Quarterly Report
None
ARF  (Section 6.3 Binder); Arthur Ditto's office files
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (6.3) #41 001-043
Quarterly Report, Third Quarter 1992
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
EPA; NHDES; USAF
20 October 1992
Quarterly Report
None
ARF  (Section 6.3 Binder); Arthur Ditto's office files
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:

DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (6.3) #42 001-04
Transmittal Letter for Quarterly Progress Report, Fourth
Quarter 1992
Art Ditto, Pease AFB
Johanna Hunter, EPA
Richard Pease, NHDES
19 January 1993
Transmittal Letter and Quarterly Report
None
ARF  (Section 6.3 Binder); Arthur Ditto's office files
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:

DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (6.3) #43 001-E.l
Quarterly Progress Report for Pease AFB
Art Ditto, Pease
Johanna Hunter, EPA Region 1
Richard Pease, NHDES
26 April 1993
Report
None
ARF  (Section 6.3 Binder); Arthur Ditto's office files
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (6.3) #46 001-002
Remedial Project Managers' Meeting Minutes
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
See Distribution List
05 April 1994
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 6.3 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
        PEA (6.3)  #47 001-002
        Remedial Project Managers'  Meeting Minutes
        Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
        See Distribution List
        31 May 1994
        Meeting Minutes
        None
        ARF (Section 6.3 Binder)

6.4 General Correspondence

        PEA (6.4)  #5 001-010
        Letter to EPA Regarding Background Information on Pease
        Air Force Base
        US Department of Commerce
        USAF
        7 March 1989
        Letter
        None
        ARF (Section 6.4 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
        PEA (6.4)  #9 001-041
        Quarterly Progress Report,
        August and September 1993
        Roy F. Weston,  Inc.
        USAF
        October 1993
        Report
        None
        ARF (Section 6.4 Binder)
Period of Performance July,
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
        PEA (6.4)  #10 001-004
        Appropriateness of CERCLA Versus State or Other
        Authorities for Closing Military Installations
        Robert Varney,  Commissioner,  NHDES
        Carol Browner,  Administrator, EPA
        11 February 1994
        Letter
        None
        ARF (Section 6.4 Binder)

        PEA (6.4)  #12 001-B.3
        Quarterly Progress Report, Period of Performance
        October,  November and December 1993
        Roy F. Weston,  Inc.
        USAF
        January 1994
        Report
        None
        ARF (Section 6.4 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
        PEA (6.4)  #13 001-B.4
        Quarterly Progress Report,  Period of Performance
        January,  February and March 1994
        Roy F.  Weston,  Inc.
        USAF
        April 1994
        Report
        None
        ARF (Section 6.4 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:

DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (6.4) #14 001-022
Pease, Air Force Base Installation Restoration Program
January 13, 1994 Informal Dispute Resolution
Meeting - Final Minutes
Richard Pease, NHDES
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
Michael Daly, EPA
16 March 1994
Letter with Meeting Minutes Attached
Section 10.1
ARF  (Section 6.4 Binder)

PEA  (6.4) #18 001-064
Quarterly Progress Report, Period of Performance:
Calendar Months April, May and June 1994
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
July 1994
Report
None
ARF  (Section 6.4 Binder)

PEA  (6.4) #19 001-022
Quarterly Progress Report, Period of Performance:
Calendar Months October, November, and December
1994
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
February 1995
Report
None
ARF  (Section 6.4 Binder)

PEA  (6.4) #20 001-003
Pease Air Force Base, Standard Operating Procedure for
Well Abandonment
John Regan, NHDES
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
13 January 1995
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 6.4 Binder)

PEA  (6.4) #22 001-004
Background Contamination
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
Richard Pease, NHDES
30 January 1995
Letter with attachments
None
ARF  (Section 6.4 Binder)

PEA,  (6.4)  #23 001-001
DDT Sediment Evaluation Report
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
Richard Pease, NHDES
30 January 1995
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 6.4 Binder)
                                7.1 Enforcement History

*NOTE:  NO ENTRIES IN THIS SECTION AT THIS TIME.
                                7.2 Endangerment Assessments

-------
*NOTE:  NO ENTRIES IN THIS SECTION AT THIS TIME.

                                7.3 Administrative Orders

DOCUMENT NUMBER:                PEA  (7.3) #1 001-11.3
LONG TITLE:                     Pease AFB Federal Facilities Agreement Modification
AUTHOR:                          USAF
RECIPIENT:                      Pease AFB
                                EPA Region 1
                                NHDES
                                Attorney General
DATE:                           January 1993
TYPE:                           FFA Modification
SECOND REFERENCE:               none
LOCATION:                       ARF  (Section 7.3 Binder)

                                7.4 Consent Decrees

*NOTE:  NO ENTREES IN THIS SECTION AT THIS TIME.

                                7.5 Affidavits

*NOTE:  NO ENTRIES IN THIS SECTION AT THIS TIME.

           7.6 Documentation of Technical Discussions/Response Actions

*NOTE:  NO ENTRIES IN THIS SECTION AT THIS TIME.

                        7.7 Notices, Letters, and Reports

*NOTE:  NO ENTRIES IN THIS SECTION AT THIS TIME.

                        8.1 ATSDR Health Assessment

*NOTE:  NO ENTRIES IN THIS SECTION AT THIS TIME.

                        8.2 Toxicological Profiles

DOCUMENT NUMBER:                PEA  (8.2) #1 001-ZN4
LONG TITLE:                     Installation Restoration Program Stage 4 Toxicity
                                Profiles, Pease Air Force Base, NH 03803
AUTHOR:                          Roy F. Weston, Inc.
RECIPIENT:                      USAF
DATE:                           January 1993
TYPE:                           Toxicity Profiles
SECOND REFERENCE:               None
LOCATION:                       ARF

                                8.3 General Correspondence

*NOTE:  NO ENTRIES IN THIS SECTION AT THIS TIME.

                        9.1 Notices Issued

*NOTE:  NO ENTRIES IN THIS SECTION AT THIS TIME.

                        9.2 Findings of Fact

*NOTE:  NO ENTRIES IN THIS SECTION AT THIS TIME.

                        9.3 Reports

*NOTE:  NO ENTRIES IN THIS SECTION AT THIS TIME.

                9.4 General Correspondence

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (9.4) #2 001-002
Trustees for Natural Resources
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA/OL-A
AFBCA/NE
20 May 1994
Letter with Attachment
None
ARF  (Section 9.4 Binder)
                10.1 Comments and Responses
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.1) #1 001-005
Response to Comments - Draft Final Community Relations Plan
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
7 February 1991
Letter/Response to Comments
PEA  (10.2)
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)

PEA  (10.1) #2 001-003
Draft Community Relations Plan Comments
Richard Pease, NHDES
Arthur Ditto, USAF
30 November 1990
Letter Comment Report
PEA  (10.2)
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)

PEA  (10.1) #3 001-010
EPA Region 1 Comments to IRP Draft Community Relations
Plan; Pease
Douglas S. Gutto, EPA
Arthur Ditto, USAF
7 December 1990
Letter Comment Report
PEA  (10.2)
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)

PEA  (10.1) #4 001-011
EPA Comments on Pease AFB Community Relations Plan with
Air Force's Responses
Unknown (From Air Force)
USAF
January 1991
Comment Report
PEA  (10.2)
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)

PEA  (10.1) #5 001-004
NHDES Comments on Pease AFB Community Relations Plan
with Air Force Responses
Unknown (From Air Force)
USAF
January 1991
Comment Report
PEA  (10.2)
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.1) #6 001-002
Review of Draft  (Revised) Final Report IRP Community
Relations Plan
Johanna Hunter, EPA
Arthur Ditto, USAF
25 March 1991
Letter
PEA  (10.2)
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.1) #7 001-003
Comments Remaining Unresolved for Stage 4 Work Plan
Analysis Method
Mark McKenzie, Pease AFB
Lee dePersia, Roy F. Weston, Inc.
05 May 1991
Comments
PEA  (3.1)
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.1) #9 601-002
Preliminary Assessment/Site Inspection Draft Fact Sheet Comments
Richard Pease, NHDES
Arthur Ditto, Pease AFB
17 April 1992
Comments
PEA  (10.6); PEA  (6.3)
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.1) #10 001-002
Review of Zone 2 Monitoring Well Installation Modifications
Richard Pease, NHDES
Arthur Ditto, USAF
28 April 1992
Letter
Zone 2
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.1) #12 001-003
Review Comments for Stage 4 Work Plan Addendum Number 2
Richard H. Pease, NHDES
Arthur Ditto, USAF
08 May 1992
Letter
PEA  (33)
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.1) #13 001-014
Review Comments for Stage 4 Work Plan and Sampling and
Analysis Plan Addendum Number 2
Michael Daly, EPA
Arthur Ditto, USAF
14 May 1992
Transmittal Sheet, Letter and Comment Report
PEA  (3.1); PEA (3.3)
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:

RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.1) #14 001-013
Review of Stage 4 Work Plan and Sampling and Analysis
Plan Addendum Number 2 for Pease
Michael Daly, EPA
Federal Facilities Superfund Section
Arthur Ditto, USAF
14 May 1992
Letter with Comment Report
PEA  (3.1); PEA (3.3)
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:

DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.1) #24 001-003
Comments on Haven Pump Test Design and Piezometer Installations
Richard Pease, NHDES
Arthur Ditto, Pease AFB
7 August 1992
Comments
PEA  (6.3); Haven Well
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)

PEA  (10.1) #26 001)002
Haven Well Pump Test at Pease Air Force Base, NH
Johanna Hunter, EPA
Arthur Ditto, Pease AFB
11 August 1992
Comments
Haven Well
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)

PEA  (10.1) #27 001)002
Stage 4 Work Plan Addendum 3 Review Comments
Richard Pease, NHDES
Arthur Ditto, Pease AFB
14 August 1992
Comments
PEA  (6.3)
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)

PEA  (10.1) #28 001-006
Haven Well Test Response to Comments
James G. Spratt, Roy F. Weston, Inc.
Mark McKenzie, Pease AFB
17 August 1992
Response to Comments
Haven Well
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)

PEA  (10.1) #40 001-006
Response to Comments, Stage 4 Work Plan and Sampling and
Analysis Plan Addendum 2
Arthur Ditto, USAF
Johanna Hunter, EPA
Richard Pease, NHDES
3 November 1992
Response to Comments
PEA  (3.3); PEA  (3.1)
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)

PEA  (10.1) #42 001-003
Comments on Pease Off-Base Well Inventory, Letter Report
Richard Pease, NHDES
Arthur Ditto, USAF
12 November 1992
Comments
Zone 2; Zone 5; Site 8
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)

PEA  (10.1) #44 001-002
Review of Stage 4 Sampling and Analysis Plan Addendum 3,
Pease AFB
Michael Daly, EPA
Arthur Ditto, USAF
23 November 1992
Comments
None
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.1) #45 001-001
Comments on Zone 2 Site Characterization Study
Michael Daly, EPA
Mark McKenzie, USAF
24 November 1992
Fax of Comments
Zone 2
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.1) #46 001-005
Review Comments of Stage 4, Site Characterization
Summary, IRP Zone 2
Richard Pease, NHDES
Arthur Ditto, USAF
30 November 1992
Comments
Zone 2
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.1) #49 001-005
Review of Zone 2 and Zone 5, Site Characterization
Summaries for Pease AFB
Michael Daly, EPA
Arthur Ditto, USAF
4 December 1992
Comment
Zone 2, Zone 5
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.1) #52 001-001
Comments on Zone 2 Pumping Test Letter Report
Michael Daly, EPA
Arthur Ditto, USAF
10 December 1992
Fax of Comments
Zone 2
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.1) #61 001-002
Review Comments of Pease AFB Preliminary Findings - Fish
and Shellfish Tissue Analysis
Richard Pease, NHDES
Arthur Ditto, USAF
21 January 1993
Comments
None
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:

DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.1) #65 001-001
Submittal of Responses to Comments for the Zone 2 Site
Characterization Summary
USAF
Johanna Hunter, EPA
Richard Pease, NHDES
February 1993
Response to Comments
Zone 2
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.1) #66 001-012
Response to Comments, Zone 2
USAF
EPA
2 February 1993
Responses to Comments
Zone 2
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)
SCS - EPA Comments

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR :
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.1) #67 001-009
Response to Comments, Zone 2 SCS - NHDES Comments
USAF
NHDES
2 February 1993
Report to Comments
Zone 2
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR :
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.1) #88 001-007
Review of the Air Force Installation Restoration
Program, Draft Remedial Investigation Report, Zone 2,
Pease AFB
Michael Daly, EPA
Arthur Ditto, USAF
9 July 1993
Comments
Zone 2; PEA  (10.10)
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR :
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.1) #89 001-008
Response to EPA Comments on the Draft Zone 2 RI
USAF
EPA
30 November 1993
Response to Comments
Zone 2
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)
                                                Report
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.1) #90 001-027
Response to NHDHS Comments on the Draft Zone 2 RI Report
USAF
NHDES
30 November 1993
Report to Comments
Zone 2
ARF  (See on 10.1 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.1) #91 001-004
Response to EPA Comments on the Zone 2 ISA Report
USAF
EPA
13 September 1993
Response to Comments
Zone 2
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR :
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.1) #92 001-012
Response to NHDES Comments on the Zone 2 ISA Report
USAF
NHDES
13 September 1993
Response to Comments
Zone 2
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.1) #93 001-006
Results to EPA Comments on the Zone 2 Draft FS Report
USAF
EPA
2 December 1993
Response to Comments
Zone 2
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.1) #94 001-019
Response to NHDES Comments on the Zone 2 Draft
USAF
NHDES
2 December 1993
Response to Comments
Zone 2
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)
                   FS
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.1) #116 001-003
Review of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Comments
on Background Data for Pease AFB, NH
Fred Price, Mitre Corporation
Major Charles Howell, AFCEE
11 June 1993
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR;
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.1) #119 001-003
Peer Review of Initial Screening of Alternatives,
2, Pease AFB, NH
Fred Price, Mitre Corporation
Major Charles Howell, AFCEE
10 August 1993
Letter
Zone 2
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)
                      Zone
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.1) #132 001-010
Pease AFB Zone 2 Draft Final Remedial Investigation
Review Comments
NHDES
USAF
30 December 1993
Comments
Zone 2
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.1) #139 001-006
Review Comments, Pease AFB,
Richard Pease, NHDES
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
December 1993
Review Comments
Zone 2; Section 42
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)
Zone 2 Draft Final Feasibility Study
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.1) #145 001-012
Comments, Draft Minutes of February 10, 1994 Meeting to
Discuss State Issues
Richard Pease, NHDES
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
14 March 1994
Comments
Landfill 1, CRD-2
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)

PEA  (10.1) #149 001-014
Response to NHDES Comments on the Draft Zone 2 Proposed Plan
USAF
NHDES
16 May 1994
Report to Comments
Zone 2; Section 4.3
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:

DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:

DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.1) #152 001-004
Response to Comments, Zone 2 Treatability Study Work Plan
Mark McKenzie, AFBCA
Richard Pease, NHDES
14 June 1994
Response to Comments
Zone 2, Section 3.3
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)

PEA  (10.1) #154 001-001
Response to EPA Comments and Additional Responses to
NHDES Comments on the Basewide Interim
Monitoring Plan
Mark McKenzie, AFBCA
Richard Pease, NHDES
Mike Daly, EPA
21 June 1994
Response to Comments
None
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)

PEA  (10.1) #155 001-019
Air Force Response to Comments
USAF
EPA
NHDES
26 August 1994
Response to Comments
None
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)

PEA  (10.1) #161 001-006
Response to EPA and NHDES Comments on the Basewide
Interim Monitoring Plan
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
USAF
16 June 1994
Response to Comments
PEA  (3.5)  #123 001-E34; PEA  (3.5) #124 001-007
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)

PEA  (10.1) #166 001-012
Pease AFB Basewide Interim Monitoring Plan, Response to
Air Force June 21, 1994 Letter
Richard Pease, NHDES
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
21 July 1994
Comments
PEA  (3.5)  #121 001-007
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.1) #167 001-003
Regional Groundwater Flow Model
John M. Regan, NHDES
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
22 July 1994
Comments
Zone 3; Haven Well; Harrison Well; Smith Well
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
Comments
 PEA (10.1)  #189 001-022
 Response to NHDES Comments on the Air Force's 21 June
 1994  Letter Responding to NHDES 23 March
 1994  Comments on the Pease AFB Basewide Interim Monitoring Plan
 USAF
 NHDES
 07  December 1994
 Response to Comments
 PEA (35)  #121 001-007; PEA (3.5)  #123 001-E.34:
 PEA (3.5)  #124 001-007; PEA (10.1)  #161 001-006;
 PEA (10.1)  #166 001-012
 ARF (Section 10.1 Binder)

 PEA (10.1)  #190 001-002
 Pease AFB Zone 2 XRF Letter Report,  November 1994,  Review
3
 Richard Pease,  NHDES
 Arthur Ditto,  AFBCA
 05  January 1995
 Comments
 Zone  2
 ARF (Section 10.1 Binder)

 PEA (10.1)  #191 001-001
 EPA's Comments on the Draft Final RI/FS Report for Old
 Jet Engine Test Stand and Zone 2, Pease AFB, NH
 Andrew Miniuks,  EPA
 Arthur Ditto,  AFBCA
 10  January 1995
 Comments
 Zone  2;  OJETS
 ARF (Section 10.1 Binder)

 PEA (10.1)  #192 001)003
 DDT Sediment Evaluation Report for Pease AFB, NH - Comments
 Mike  Daly,  EPA
 Arthur Ditto,  AFBCA
 11  January 1995
 Comments
 None
 ARF (Section 10.1 Binder)

 PEA (10.1)  #193 001-005
 DDT Sediment Evaluation Report Review Comments
 Richard Pease,  NHDES
 Arthur Ditto,  AFBCA
 12  January 1995
 Comments
 None
 ARF (Section 10.1 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
        PEA (10.1) #194 001-5.2
        Sediment Bioassay and Hardness Letter Reports Evaluation
        Review Comments
        Richard Pease, NHDES
        Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
        12 January 1995
        Comment
        Zone 3:  PEA  (3.5) #120 001-008; PEA  (11.1)
        ARF (Section 10.1 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.1) #198 001-014
Pease Air Force Base Installation Restoration Program,
Zone 2 FS Addendum #1 and BA-1 Treatability
Study Comments
Richard Pease, NHDES
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
24 January 1995
Comments
Zone 2; PEA  (11.5)
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)

PEA  (10.1) #203 001-007
Response to NHDES Comments on the Draft Zone 2
 Feasibility Study Addendum 1
USAF
NHDES
16 February 1995
Report to Comments
Zone 2; PEA  (4.2)
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)

PEA  (10.1) #204 001-007
Response to EPA Comments on the Draft Zone 2 Feasibility
Study Addendum 1
USAF
EPA
15 February 1995
Response to Comments
Zone 2; PEA  (4.2)
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)

PEA  (10.1) #203 001-007
Response to NHDES Comments on the Draft Zone 2
Feasibility Study Addendum 1
USAF
NHDES
16 February 1995
Response to Continents
Zone 2; PEA  (4.2)
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)

PEA  (10.1) #204 001-007
Response to EPA Comments on the Draft Zone 2 Feasibility
Study Addendum 1
USAF
EPA
15 February 1995
Response to Comments
Zone 2; PEA  (4.2)
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.1) #205 001-011
Draft Proposed Plan for Zone 2, March 1994, Review Comments
Richard Pease, NHDES
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
21 April 1994
Comments
Zone 2; PEA  (4.3)
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.1) #209 001-004
Pease Air Force Base Installation Restoration Program
Site 22 Soil Vapor Extraction and Air Sparging
pilot Test Work Plan Comments
Richard Pease, NHDES
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
01 June 1994
Comments
Site 22; PEA  (4.2)
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)

PEA  (10.1) #213 001-002
EPA's Comments on the Draft Proposed Plan for the Zone
2, Pease Air Force Base, Newington, New Hampshire
Michael Daly, EPA
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
02 March 1995
Comments
Zone 2; PEA  (4.3)
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)

PEA  (10.1) #214 001-004
Review of Pease AFB Natural Attenuation Modeling for
Zones 2 and Zone 3, February 1995
Michael Daly, EPA
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
03 March 1995
Comments
Zone 2; Zone 3; PEA  (4.2)
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)

PEA  (10.1) #236 001-006
Record of Decision Zone 2, DRAFT, March 1995
Richard Pease, NHDES
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
3 May 1995
Comments
Zone 2; PEA  (5.1) #8 001-D
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)
                            DRAFT, March 1995
PEA  (10.1) #238 001-006
Record of Decision, Zone 2,
Richard Pease, NHDES
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
5 May 1995
Comments
Zone 2; PEA  (5.1) #8 001-D
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)
PEA  (10.1) #244 001-005
Review Comments on Draft Final RODs for Site 45 and Zone 2
Christine Beling, EPA Region I
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
20 June 1995
Comments
Site 45, Zone 2; PEA (5.1)
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)

PEA  (10.1) #245 001-002
Review Comments on Draft Final ROD for Site 45
Richard Pease, NHDES
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
27 June 1995
Comments
Site 45; PEA  (5.1)
ARF  (Section 10.1 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
        PEA (10.D #246 001-006
        Review Comments on Draft Final ROD for Zone 2
        Richard Pease, NHDES
        Arthur Ditto,  AFBCA
        29 June 1995
        Comments
        Zone 24 PEA (5.1)
        ARF (Section 10.1 Binder)

10.2 Community Relations Plan

        PEA (10.2)  #1  001-040
        Installation Restoration Program Community Relations Plan
        Roy F. Weston, Inc.
        EPA; NHDES; USAF
        January 1991
        Community Relations Plan
        None
        ARF, IR
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
        PEA (10.2)  #2 i-L.l
        Pease Air Force Base Installation Restoration Program
        Revised Community Relations Plan
        Dynamac Corporation
        230 Peachtree St.,  N.W.,  Ste. 700
        Atlanta,  GA 30303
        USAF
        October 1994
        Community Relations Plan
        None
        ARF
                                10.3 Public Notices
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
        PEA (10.3)  #14 001-001
        Paid Advertisement in Foster's Daily Democrat Announcing
        the Public Hearing and Comment Period for
        the Site 45 and Zone 2 Proposed Plans
        Arthur Ditto,  AFBCA
        Local Communities via Foster's Daily Democrat; Public
        08 April 1995
        Public Notice
        Zone 2; Site 45; PEA (5.1)
        ARF (Section 10.3 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
        PEA (10.3)  #15 001-001
        Pease Advertisement in the Portsmouth Herald Announcing
        the Public Hearing and Comment Period for the
        Site 45 and Zone 2 Proposed Plans
        Arthur Ditto,  AFBCA
        Local Communities via the Portsmouth Herold; Public
        09 April 1995
        Public Notice
        Zone 2; Site 45; PEA (5.1)
        ARF (Section 10.3 Binder)
                10.4 Public Meeting Transcripts
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
        PEA (10.4)  #3 001-025
        Pease Air Force Base Public Workshop and Information
        Meeting:   Installation Restoration Program
        Dynamac Corporation
        USAF
        12 January 1993
        Meeting Summary
        None
        IR

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
        PEA (10.4)  #14 001-037
        Pease AFB Public Official Transcript of Public Hearing
        for Proposed Plans for Zone 2 and Site 45
        APEX Reporting
        USAF
        11 April 1995
        Transcript
        Zone 2 (Site 45)
        ARF (Zone 2 Shelf)

        PEA (10.4)  #15 001-Tab #6
        Summary of Pease AFB Public Hearings on Proposed Plans
        for Zone 2 and Site 45
        Dynamac Corporation
        USAF
        11 April 1995
        Hearing Summary Report
        Zone 2 (Site 45)
        ARF (Zone 2 Shelf)

10.5 Documentation of Other Public Meetings/TRC Minutes

        PEA (10.5)  #00 001-004
        Meeting Minutes of the Technical Review Committee
        USAF
        See Distribution List
        22 February 1990
        Meeting Minutes
        None
        ARF (Section 10.5 Binder)

        PEA (10.5)  #0 001-013
        Meeting Minutes of the Technical Review Committee
        USAF
        See Distribution List
        30 March 1990
        Meeting Minutes
        None
        ARF (Section 10.5 Binder)

        PEA (10.5)  #1 001-004
        Meeting Minutes of the Technical Review Committee
        USAF
        See Distribution List
        27 April 1990
        Meeting Minutes
        None
        ARF (Section 10.5 Binder)

        PEA (10.5)  #2 001-010
        Meeting Minutes of the Technical Review Committee
        USAF
        See Distribution List
        30 May 1990
        Meeting Minutes
        None
        ARF (Section 105 Binder)

        PEA (10.5)  #3 001-008
        Meeting Minutes of the Technical Review Committee
        USAF
        See Distribution List
        27 June 1990
        Meeting Minutes
        None
        ARF (Section 10.5 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.5) #4 001-005
Meeting Minutes of the Technical Review Committee
USAF
See Distribution List
25 July 1990
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (105) #5 001-005
Meeting Minutes of the Technical Review Committee
USAF
See Distribution List
29 August 1990
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.5) #6 001-012
Meeting Minutes of the Technical Review Committee
USAF
See Distribution List
26 September 1990
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.5) #7 001-008
Meeting Minutes of the Technical Review Committee
USAF
See Distribution List
31 October 1990
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.5) #8 001-004
Meeting Minutes of the Technical Review Committee
USAF
See Distribution List
29 November 1990
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.5) #9 001-003
Meeting Minutes of the Technical Review Committee
USAF
See Distribution List
31 January 1991
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.5) #10 001-003
Meeting Minutes of the Technical Review Committee
USAF
See Distribution List
27 March 1991
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.5) #11 001-006
Meeting Minutes of the Technical Review Committee
USAF
See Distribution List
24 April 1991
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)

PEA  (10.5) #12 001-003
Meeting Minutes of the Technical Review Committee
USAF
See Distribution List
28 May 1991
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)

PEA  (10.5) #13 001-006
Meeting Minutes of the Technical Review Committee
USAF
See Distribution List
25 June 1991
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)

PEA  (10.5) #14 001-007
Meeting Minutes of Technical Review Committee
USAF
See Distribution List
30 July 1991
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)

PEA  (10.5) #15 001-007
Meeting Minutes of Technical Review Committee
USAF
See Distribution List
27 August 1991
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)

PEA  (10.5) #16 001-010
Meeting Minutes of Technical Review Committee
USAF
See Distribution List
01 October 1991
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)

PEA  (10.5) #17 001-003
Meeting Minutes of Technical Review Committee
USAF
See Distribution List
29 October 1991
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.5) #18 001-013
Meeting Minutes of Technical Review Committee
USAF
See Distribution List
26 November 1991
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)

PEA  (10.5) #19 001-005
Meeting Minutes of Technical Review Committee
USAF
See Distribution List
07 January 1992
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)

PEA  (10.5) #20 001-003
Meeting Minutes of Technical Review Committee
USAF
See Distribution List
31 March 1992
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)

PEA  (10.5) #21 001-002
Meeting Minutes of Technical Review Committee
USAF
See Distribution List
28 April 1992
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)

PEA  (10.5) #22 001-003
Meeting Minutes of Technical Review Committee
USAF
See Distribution List
20 May 1992
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)

PEA  (10.5) #23 001-003
Meeting Minutes of Technical Review Committee
USAF
See Distribution List
28 July 1992
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)

PEA  (10.5) #24 001-005
Meeting Minutes of Technical Review Committee
USAF
See Distribution List
29 September 1992
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.5) #25 001-013
Meeting Minutes of Technical Review Committee
USAF
See Distribution List
27 October 1992
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.5) #26 001-004
Meeting Minutes of Technical Review Committee
USAF
See Distribution List
16 December 1992
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.5) #27 001-003
Meeting Minutes of Technical Review Committee
USAF
TRC Distribution List
17 February 1992
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.5) #28 001-003
Meeting Minutes of Technical Review Committee
USAF
TRC Distribution List
23 March 1993
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.5) #29 001-006
Meeting Minutes of Technical Review Committee
USAF
TRC Distribution List
27 April 1993
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.5) #30 001-006
Meeting Minutes of Technical Review Committee
USAF
TRC Distribution List
25 May 1993
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.5) #31 001-012
Meeting Minutes of Technical Review Committee
USAF
TRC Distribution List
29 July 1993
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.5) #32 001-002
Meeting Minutes of Technical Review Committee
USAF
TRC Distribution List
27 July 1993
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.5) #33 001-008
Meeting Minutes of the Technical Review Committee
USAF
See Distribution List
31 August 1993
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.5) #34 001-009
Meeting Minutes of Technical Review Committee
USAF
See Distribution List
28 September 1993
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.5) #35 001-010
Technical Review Committee Meeting Minutes
USAF
See Distribution List
26 October 1993
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.5) #36 001-011
Technical Review Committee Meeting Minutes
USAF
See Distribution List
30 November 1993
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.5) #37 001-002
Technical Review Committee Meeting Minutes
USAF
See Distribution List
11 January 1994
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.5) #38 001-003
Meeting Minutes of Technical Review Committee
USAF
TRC Distribution List
1 March 1994
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.5) #39 001-012
Meeting Minutes of Technical Review Committee
USAF
TRC Distribution List
26 April 1994
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)

PEA  (10.5) #40 001-001
January 13, 1994, Informal Dispute Resolution Meeting
Final Minutes
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA/OL-A
AFBCA/NE
11 April 1994
Memorandum
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)

PEA  (10.5) #41 001-013
Meeting Minutes of Technical Review
Committee/Restoration Advisory Board
USAF
TRC/RAB Distribution List
5 May 1994
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)

PEA  (10.5) #42 001-004
Meeting Minutes of Technical Review
Committee/Restoration Advisory Board
USAF
TRC/RAB Distribution List
28 June 1994
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)

PEA  (10.5) #43 001-013
Meeting Minutes of Technical Review
Committee/Restoration Advisory Board
USAF
TRC/RAB Distribution List
26 July 1994
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)

PEA  (10.5) #44 001-006
Meeting Minutes of Technical Review
Committee/Restoration Advisory Board
USAF
TRC/RAB Distribution List
30 August 1994
Meeting Minutes
None
ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:                PEA  (10.5) #45 001-011
LONG TITLE:                     Meeting Minutes of Technical Review
                                Committee/Restoration Advisory Board
AUTHOR:                         USAF
RECIPIENT:                      TRC/RAB Distribution List
DATE:                           04 October 1994
TYPE:                           Meeting Minutes
SECOND REFERENCE:               None
LOCATION:                       ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)

DOCUMENT NUMBER:                PEA  (10.5) #46 001-010
LONG TITLE:                     Pease Air Force Base Restoration Advisory
                                Board/Technical Review Committee Meeting Minutes
AUTHOR:                         USAF
RECIPIENT:                      TRC/RAB Distribution List
DATE:                           07 February 1995
TYPE:                           Meeting Minutes
SECOND REFERENCE:               None
LOCATION:                       ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)

DOCUMENT NUMBER:                PEA  (10.5) #47 001-010
LONG TITLE:                     Pease Air Force Base Restoration Advisory
                                Board/Technical Review Committee Meeting Cancellation Notice
AUTHOR:                         Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
RECIPIENT:                      TRC/RAB Distribution List
DATE:                           28 February 1995
TYPE:                           Letter
SECOND REFERENCE:               None
LOCATION:                       ARF  (Section 10.5 Binder)

        10.6 Fact Sheets, Press Advisories, and News Releases

DOCUMENT NUMBER:                PEA  (10.6) #1 001-003
LONG TITLE:                     News Release Regarding the Investigation of 22 Sites on Pease AFB
AUTHOR:                         USAF
RECIPIENT:                      Media
DATE:                           30 September 1987
TYPE:                           News Release
SECOND REFERENCE:               None
LOCATION:                       ARF  (Section 10.6 Binder)

DOCUMENT NUMBER:                PEA  (10.6) #2 001-002
LONG TITLE:                     News Release Regarding Presentation of the Second
                                Interim Technical Report
AUTHOR:                         USAF
RECIPIENT:                      Media
DATE:                           21 September 1988
TYPE:                           News Release
SECOND REFERENCE:               None
LOCATION:                       ARF  (Section 10.6 Binder)

DOCUMENT NUMBER:                PEA  (10.6) #3 001-003
LONG TITLE:                     News Release Regarding the Underground Water Sampling Program
AUTHOR:                         USAF
RECIPIENT:                      Media
DATE:                           29 November 1988
TYPE:                           News Release
SECOND REFERENCE:               None
LOCATION:                       ARF  (Section 10.6 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.6) #4 001-002
News Release Regarding the Release of the Third Interim
Technical Report
USAF
Media
22 March 1989
News Release
None
ARF  (Section 10.6 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.6) #5 001-004
News Release Regarding Off-Base Well Water Sampling Results
USAF
Media
7 June 1989
News Release
None
ARF  (Section 10.6 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.6) #7 001-003
Superfund Program Draft Interagency Agreement Fact Sheet
EPA, Region I
See Mailing List
December 1990
Fact Sheet
PEA  (6.2)
ARF  (Section 10.6 Binder), IR
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.6) #8 001-008
Pease Air Force Base Installation Restoration Program
Update:  Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study Fact Sheet
USAF
1991 Mailing List
October 1991
Fact Sheet
None
ARF  (Section 10.6 Binder), IR

PEA  (10.6) #9 001-011
Pease Air Force Base Installation Restoration Program
Update Fact Sheet
USAF
1992 Mailing List
December 1992
Fact Sheet
None
ARF  (Section 10.6 Binder), IR
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.6) #13 001-006
Pease Air Force Base Installation Restoration Program
Update Fact Sheet:  Preliminary Assessment/Site
Investigation
USAF
1993 Mailing List
January 1993
Fact Sheet
None
ARF  (Section 10.6 Binder), IR

PEA  (10.6) #20 001-004
Pease AFB Environmental Reporter Volume 1, Number 1
USAF
See Mailing List
January 1994
Quarterly Newsletter
None
ARF  (Section 10.6 Binder), IR

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
        PEA (10.6)  #24 001-004
        Pease AFB Environmental Reporter Volume 1,  Number 2
        USAF
        Mailing List
        April 1994
        Quarterly Newsletter
        None
        ARF (Section 10.6 Binder),  IR

        PEA (10.6)  #27 001-006
        Pease AFB Environmental Reporter, Volume 1, No. 3
        USAF
        Mailing List
        August 1994
        Newsletter
        None
        ARF (Section 10.6 Binder),  IR

        PEA (10.6)  #30 001-006
        Pease AFB Environmental Volume 1, No. 4
        USAF
        See Mailing List
        December 1994
        Newsletter
        None
        ARF (Section 10.6 Binder);  IR

        PEA (10.6)  #32 001-004
        Pease AFB Installation Restoration Program Update Fact
        Sheet - Prop Plan for Zone 2
        USAF
        See Mailing List
        March 1995
        Fact Sheet
        Zone 2
        ARF (Section 10.6 Binder);  IR

        PEA (10.6)  #34 001-001
        Pease AFB Public Hearing and Comment Period Announcement
        for the Proposed Plans for Zone 2 and Site 45
        USAF
        See Mailing List
        March 1995
        Public Hearing Announcement
        Zone 2; Site 45
        ARF (Section 10.6 Binder);  IR

10.7 Responsiveness Summary

        PEA (10.7)  #7 001-003
        Zone 2 Responsiveness Summary
        Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
        Mike Daly,  EPA
        Richard Pease, NHDES
        Zone 2 ROD
        May 1995
        Responsiveness Summary
        Zone 2
        ARF (Section 10.7 Binder)

10.8 Late Comments
*NOTE:  NO ENTRIES IN THIS SECTION AT THIS TIME.

               10.9 Technical Review Committee Charter

*NOTE:  NO ENTRIES IN THIS SECTION AT THIS TIME.

-------
                    10.10 Correspondence
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.10) #1 001-001
Letter Regarding Concern about the Hazardous Waste Sites
at Pease AFB
Gordon J. Humphrey, U.S. Senate
James F. McGovern, Acting Secretary of the Air Force
24 March 1989
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 10.10 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:

DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.10) #2 001-002
Letter Regarding the Migration of Air Force Hazardous
Waste Beyond the Pease AFB Perimeter
Town of Newington
Robert Field, Environmental Cleanup Advisory Committee,
Portsmouth, NH
11 May 1990
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 10.10 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.10) #4 001-001
Submittal Letter for Draft Community Relations Plan for
the Massachusetts Military Reservation  (MR)
on Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Douglas S. Gutro, EPA
Karen Cowden, Roy F. Weston, Inc.
19 June 1990
Letter
PEA  (10.2)
ARF  (Section 10.10 Binder)

PEA  (10.10) #5 001-002
Impact of Base Closure on Personnel Responsible for the
Installation Restoration Program and Public Affairs
Merrill S. Hohmam, EPA
Col. James R. Wilson, Pease AFB
27 August 1990
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 10.10 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.10) #6 001-001
Impact of Base Closure on Personnel Responsible for the
Installation Restoration Program and Public
Affairs  (Your Letter, August 27, 1990)
USAF
Merrill S. Hohman, EPA
11 October 1990
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 10.10 Binder)

PEA  (10.10) #7 001)001
Submittal of Primary Documents  (Community Relations Plan)
USAF
Jim Brown, EPA
24 October 1990
Letter
PEA  (10.2)
ARF  (Section 10.10 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (10.10) #8 001-001
Submittal of Primary Documents  (Community Relations Plan)
USAF
Richard Pease, NHDES
24 October 1990
Letter
PEA  (10.2)
ARF  (Section 10.10 Binder)

PEA  (10.10) #9 001-001
Community Relations Plan Development Extension
USAF
Johanna Hunter, EPA
17 January 1991
Letter
PEA  (10.2)
ARF  (Section 10.10 Binder)

PEA  (10.10) #10 001-001
Community Relations Plan Development Extension
USAF
Richard Pease, NHDES
17 January 1991
Letter
PEA  (10.2)
ARF  (Section 10.10 Binder)

PEA  (10.10) #11 001-001
Submittal of Draft Final Primary Documents
USAF
Richard Pease, NHDES
5 February 1991
Letter
PEA  (3.1); PEA (3.3)
ARF  (Section 10.10 Binder)

PEA  (10.10) #12 001-001
Submittal of Draft Final Primary Documents
USAF
Johanna Hunter, EPA
5 February 1991
Letter
PEA  (3.1); PEA (3.3)
ARF  (Section 10.10 Binder)

PEA  (10.10) #13 001-001
Community Relations Plan
USAF
Johanna Hunter, EPA
12 April 1991
Letter
PEA  (10.2)
ARF  (Section 10.10 Binder)

PEA  (10.10) #14 001)004
Basewide ARARs Pease AFB, NH 03803, January 1993, Draft
- Review Comments
Richard Pease, NHDES
Arthur Ditto, Pease AFB
1 April 1993
Letter
PEA  (4.1)
ARF  (Section 10.10 Binder)

-------
                                      PEA (10.10) #30 001-001
                                      Zone 2 Draft Proposed Plan
                                      Arthur Ditto,  AFBCA
                                      Ronald Gehl, SCOPE Technical Advisor
                                      18 March 1994
                                      Letter
                                      Zone 2; Section 4.3
                                      ARF (Section 10.10 Binder)

                                      PEA (10.10) #35 001-001
                                      Draft Final Community Relations Plan
                                      USAF
                                      EPA
                                      NHDES
                                      13 July 1994
                                      Letter
                                      PEA (10.2)  #3
                                      ARF (Section 10.10 Binder)

                              11.1 EPA Headquarters Guidance

      * NOTE:   Guidance documents listed as bibliographic sources for a document already
included in the Administrative Record are not listed separately in this index.
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:

DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
      DOCUMENT NUMBER:
      LONG TITLE:
      AUTHOR:
      RECIPIENT:
      DATE:
      TYPE:
      SECOND REFERENCE:
      LOCATION:

      DOCUMENT NUMBER:
      LONG TITLE:

      AUTHOR:
      RECIPIENT:
      DATE:
      TYPE:
      SECOND REFERENCE:
      LOCATION:
                                PEA  (11.1) #1 001-003
                                Risk Assessment Issue Paper for Carcinogenicity
                                Characterization for Trichloroethytene  (CASRN 79-01-6) ,
                                Tetrachloroethylane  (CASRN 127-18-4), and Styrene  (CASRN
                                100-42-5)
                                EPA
                                USAF
                                14 July 1992
                                Guidance
                                None
                                ARF  (Section 11.1 Binder)

                                PEA  (11.1) #2 001-G.2
                                Draft Guidance on Preparing Superfund Decision
                                Documents:  The Proposed Plan and Record of Decision
                                Office of Emergency & Remedial Response, EPA, Washington, DC
                                USAF
                                March 1988
                                Guidance
                                None
                                Arthur Ditto's Office
      DOCUMENT NUMBER:
      LONG TITLE:
      AUTHOR:
      RECIPIENT:
      DATE:
      TYPE:
      SECOND REFERENCE:
      LOCATION:
                                PEA  (11.1) #3 001-B.9
                                The RPM Pruner:  An Introductory Guide to the Role and
                                Responsibilities of the Superfund Remedial
                                Project Manager
                                Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, EPA, Washington, DC
                                USAF
                                September 1987
                                Guidance
                                None
                                Arthur Ditto's Office
      DOCUMENT NUMBER:
      LONG TITLE:
      AUTHOR:
      RECIPIENT:
      DATE:
      TYPE:
      SECOND REFERENCE:
      LOCATION:
                                PEA  (11.1) #4 001-11.1
                                CERCLA Site Discrepancies to POTWs Guidance Manual
                                Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, EPA, Washington,
                                USAF
                                August 1990
                                Guidance
                                None
                                Arthur Ditto's Office
DC

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.1) #5 001-041
Framework for Ecological Risk Assessment
EPA
USAF
February 1992
Guidance
None
Arthur Ditto's Office
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.1) #6 001-E.l
Preliminary Assessment Guidance Fiscal Year 1988
Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, EPA, Washington,
USAF
January 1988
Guidance
None
Arthur Ditto's Office
DC
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:

RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.1) #7 001-1.13
Community, Relations in Superfund:  A Handbook
Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, EPA,
Washington, DC  (EPA/540/R-92/009)
USAF
January 1992
Guidance
PEA  (10.0)
Arthur Ditto's Office
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.1) #8 001-H.6
Summary Report on Issues in Ecological Risk Assessment
EPA
USAF
February 1991
Guidance
None
Arthur Ditto's Office
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.1) #9 001-127
Technology Screening Guide for Treatment of CERCLA Soils
and Sludges
EPA
USAF
September 1988
Guidance
None
Arthur Ditto's Office
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.1) #10 001-F.19
Guidance for Conducting Remedial Investigations and
Feasibility Studies Under CERCLA - Interim Final
Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, EPA, Washington,
USAF
October 1988
Guidance
None
Arthur Ditto's Office
DC
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.1) #11 001-103
Final Guidance on Administrative Records for Selecting
CERCLA Response Actions
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, EPA, Washington,
USAF
1190/91
Guidance
None
Arthur Ditto's Office
   DC

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.1) #12 001-B.2
Implementing EPA' s Groundwater Protection Strategy for the
1990's:  Draft Comprehensive State Groundwater Protection Program
Guidance
EPA
USAF
1992
Guidance
None
Arthur Ditto's Office
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.1) #13 001-021
A Handbook for State Groundwater Managers
Office of Water, EPA, Washington, DC
USAF
May 1992
Guidance
None
Arthur Ditto's Office
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.1) #14 001-3.40
Conducting Remedial Investigations/Feasibility Studies
for CERCLA Municipal Landfill Site
Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, EPA, Washington,
USAF
February 1991
Guidance
None
Arthur Ditto's Office
DC
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.1) #15 001-F.2
Guidance on Preparing Superfund Decision Documents:  The
Proposed Plan, The Record of Decision, and
Explanation of Significant Differences, The Record of
Decision Amendment
Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, EPA, Washington, DC
USAF
July 1989
Guidance
None
Arthur Ditto's Office
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.1) #16 001-B.12
Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund Volume I:  Human
Health Evaluation Manual (Part A) Interim Final
Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, EPA, Washington, DC
USAF
December 1989
Guidance
None
Arthur Ditto's Office
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.1) #17 001-057
Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund Volume II:
Environmental Evaluation Manual Interim Final
Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, EPA, Washington, DC
USAF
March 1989
Guidance
None
Arthur Ditto's Office
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
PEA  (11.1) #18 ) Deleted

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.1) #19 001-B.2
Superfund Removal Procedures Action Memorandum Guidance
EPA
USAF
December 1990
Guidance
None
Arthur Ditto's Office
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.1) #20 001-G
RCRA Orientation Manual
EPA
USAF
1990
Guidance
None
Arthur Ditto's Office
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.1) #21 001-295
The Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation Program:
Technology Profiles
EPA
USAF
November 1991
Guidance
None
Arthur Ditto's Office
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.1) #22 001-017
Accessing Federal Data Bases for Contaminated Site
Clean-Up Technologies
EPA
USAF
May 1991
Guidance
None
Arthur Ditto's Office
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.1) #23 001-623
Bibliography of Federal Reports and publications
Describing Alternatives and Innovative Treatment
Technologies for Collective Action and Site Remediation
EPA
USAF
May 1991
Guidance
None
Arthur Ditto's Office
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.1) #24 001-111
Synopses of Federal Demonstrations of Innovative Site
Remediation Technologies
EPA
USAF
May 1991
Guidance
None
Arthur Ditto's Office
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.1) #25 001-A.20
CERCLA Compliance with Other Laws Manual:  Interim Final
USAF, Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, Washington, D.C.
USAF
August 1985
Guidance
None
Arthur Ditto's Office

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.1) #26 001-A.6
Ecological Assessments of Hazardous Waste Sites:  A
Field and Laboratory Reference Document
USEPA, Office of Emergency and Development, Washington, D.C.
USAF
March 1989
Guidance
None
Arthur Ditto's Office
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.1) #27 001-E.8
Guidance for Performing Site Inspections Under CERCLA
USEPA, Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, Washington,D.C.
USAF
September 1992
Guidance
None
Arthur Ditto's Office
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.1) #28 001-E.ll
Guidance for Performing Preliminary Assessments Under CERCLA
USEPA, Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, Washington,D.C.
USAF
September 1991
Guidance
None
Arthur Ditto's Office
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.1) #29 001-A.57
Hazard Ranking System Guidance Manual
USEPA, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
USAF
November 1992
Guidance
None
Arthur Ditto's Office
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.1) #30 51532-51667
Federal Register:  Part II, Environmental Protection
Agency 40 CFR Part 300, Hazard Ranking System Final Rule
USEPA
USAF
14 December 1990
Guidance
None
Arthur Ditto's Office
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.1) #31 001-0.54
Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund:  Volume I -
Human Health Evaluation Manual  (Part B,
Development of Risk-Based Preliminary Remediation Goals)
USEPA, Office of Research and Development
USAF
December 1991
Guidance
None
Arthur Ditto's Office

-------
        DOCUMENT NUMBER:                PEA (11.1)  #32 001-065
        LONG TITLE:                     Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund:  Volume I -
                                        Human Health Evaluation Manual (Part C, Risk
                                        Evaluation of Remediation Alternate)
        AUTHOR:                          USEPA, Office of Research and Development
        RECIPIENT:                      USAF
        DATE:                           December 1991
        TYPE:                           Guidance
        SECOND REFERENCE:               None
        LOCATION:                       Arthur Ditto's Office

        DOCUMENT NUMBER:                PEA (11.1)  #33 8813-8865
        LONG TITLE:                     Federal Register:  Part II, Environmental Protection
                                        Agency 40 CFR Part 300, National Oil and Hazardous
                                        Substance Pollution Contingency Plan Final Rule
        AUTHOR:                          EPA
        RECIPIENT:                      USAF
        DATE:                           08 March 1990
        TYPE:                           Guidance
        SECOND REFERENCE:               None
        LOCATION:                       Arthur Ditto's Office

                        11.2 EPA Regional Guidance

        * NOTE:   Guidance documents listed as bibliographic sources for a document already
  included in the Administrative Record are not listed separately in this index.

        DOCUMENT NUMBER:                PEA (11.2)  #1 001-C.l
        LONG TITLE:                     Land Disposal Restrictions Summary of Reguirements
        AUTHOR:                          EPA, Region 1
        RECIPIENT:                      USAF
        DATE:                           August 1990
        TYPE:                           Guidance
        SECOND REFERENCE:               None
        LOCATION:                       Arthur Ditto's Office

        DOCUMENT NUMBER:                PEA (11.2)  #2 001-007
        LONG TITLE:                     Supplemental Risk Assessment Guidance for the Superfund Program
        AUTHOR:                          EPA, Region 1
        RECIPIENT:                      USAF
        DATE:                           June 1989
        TYPE:                           Guidance
        SECOND REFERENCE:               None
        LOCATION:                       Arthur Ditto's Office

                                11.3 State Guidance

        * NOTE:  Guidance documents listed as bibliographic sources for a document already
included in the Administrative Record are not listed separately in this index.

        DOCUMENT NUMBER:                PEA (11.3)  #1 001-001
        LONG TITLE:                     ENC-WS 410 Groundwater Protection Rules
        AUTHOR:                          NHDES
        RECIPIENT:                      Art Ditto,  AFBDA
        DATE:                           February 18, 1993
        TYPE:                           Letter
        SECOND REFERENCE:               None
        LOCATION:                       ARF (Section 11.3 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.3) #2 001-B.8
Interim Policy for the Management of Soils Contaminated
from Spills/Releases of Virgin Petroleum
products
NHDES
USAF
September 1991
Guidance
None
Arthur Ditto's Office
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.3) #3 001-048
Groundwater Protection Rules
NHDES
USAF
February 1993
Guidance
None
Arthur Ditto's Office
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.3) #4 001-373
New Hampshire Rules for the Control of Radiation
NHDES
USAF
April 1983
Guidance
None
Arthur Ditto's Office
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.3) #5 001-C.15
Guidance Document for the Closure of Solid Waste
Landfills in New Hampshire
NHDES
USAF
May 1990
Guidance
None
Arthur Ditto's Office
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.3) #6 001-D.7
Guidebook for Environmental Permits in New Hampshire
NHDES
USAF
1992
Guidance
None
Arthur Ditto's Office
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:

RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.3) #7 001-017
List of Standards and Advisory Levels Used by New
Hampshire Division of Public Health Services to
Evaluate Drinking Water Quality
New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services,
Division of Public Health Services
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
7 January 1993
Guidance
None
ARF  (Section 11.3 Binder)

-------
        DOCUMENT NUMBER:
        LONG TITLE:
        AUTHOR:
        RECIPIENT:
        DATE:
        TYPE:
        SECOND REFERENCE:
        LOCATION:
PEA  (11.3) #8 001-039
New Hampshire Code of Administrative Rules, Part Evn-A 1121
State of New Hampshire
Arthur Ditto, AFBCA
12 August 1994
Guidance
None
ARF  (Section 11.3 Binder)
                        11.4 Air Force Guidance
        * NOTE: Guidance documents listed as bibliographic sources for a document already
included in the Administrative Record are not listed separately in this index.
        DOCUMENT NUMBER:
        LONG TITLE:

        AUTHOR:
        RECIPIENT:
        DATE:
        TYPE:
        SECOND REFERENCE:
        LOCATION:

        DOCUMENT NUMBER:
        LONG TITLE:

        AUTHOR:
        RECIPIENT:
        DATE:
        TYPE:
        SECOND REFERENCE:
        LOCATION:

        DOCUMENT NUMBER:
        LONG TITLE:

        AUTHOR:
        RECIPIENT:
        DATE:
        TYPE:
        SECOND REFERENCE:
        LOCATION:

        DOCUMENT NUMBER:
        LONG TITLE:
        AUTHOR:
        RECIPIENT:
        DATE:
        TYPE:
        SECOND REFERENCE:
        LOCATION:

        DOCUMENT NUMBER:
        LONG TITLE:

        AUTHOR:
        RECIPIENT:
        DATE:
        TYPE:
        SECOND REFERENCE:
        LOCATION:
PEA  (11.4) #1 001-024
Ecological Risk Assessment Guidance for Pease AFB, New
Hampshire
Mitre Corporation, Civil Systems Division
USAF
20 June 1990
Letter Report
None
ARF  (Section 11.4 Binder)

PEA  (11.4) #2 001-016
Implementation of Department of Defense (DOD) Policy
Guidance on IRP Policy No. 1
Department of the Air Force
See Distribution List
11 December 1981
Policy/Guidance Document
None
ARF  (Section 11.4 Binder)

PEA  (11.4) #3 001-002
Implementation of DOD Policy Guidance on Installation
Restoration Plan  (IRP),  Policy No. 1
Department of the Air Force
See Distribution List
5 March 1982
Policy/Guidance Document
None
ARF  (Section 11.4 Binder)

PEA  (11.4) #4 001-003
Relationship of the IRP to RCRA Enforcement Actions
Department of the Air Force
See Distribution List
26 December 1985
Policy Document
None
ARF  (Section 11.4 Binder)

PEA  (11.4) #5 001-002
Guidance for Air Force Installation Compliance with
Volatile Organic Compound Regulations
Department of the Air Force
See Distribution List
8 October 1986
Guidance Document
None
ARF  (Section 11.4 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.4) #6 001-003
IRP Decision Documentation Policy
Department of the Air Force"
See Distribution List
25 May 1988
Policy Letter
None
ARF  (Section 11.4 Binder)

PEA  (11.4) #7 001)003
RCRA Facility Assessment Guidance to Installation
Department of the Air Force
See Distribution List
3 August 1988
Guidance
None
ARF  (Section 11.4 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.4) #8 001-003
Guidance on Base Map Construction and Digitization D.O.
006 Pease AFB
Department of the Air Force
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
6 March 1989
Guidance Document
None
ARF  (Section 11.4 Binder)
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:

RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.4) #9 001-1.3
Handbook to Support the Installation Restoration Program
Statements of Work for Remedial
Investigation/Feasibility Studies Version 3.0
Air Force Occupational and Environmental Health
Laboratory Technical Services Division
Pease AFB
May 1989
Handbook
None
Arthur Ditto's Office
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.4) #10 001-BI.3
United States Air Force Environmental Restoration
Program NFRAP Guide:  Making, Documenting and
Evacuating No Further Response Action Planned Decisions
- Final Draft
USAF
Pease
February 1993
Guidance
None
Arthur Ditto's Office
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.4) #11 001-087
Air Force Logistics Command Public Affairs Environmental Guidance
USAF
Pease AFB
March 31, 1989
Guidance
None
Arthur Ditto's Office

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:                PEA  (11.4) #12 001-IX.A1.3
LONG TITLE:                     Recommended Sampling Procedures
AUTHOR:                         Air Force Occupational and Environmental Health Laboratory
RECIPIENT:                      Pease AFB
DATE:                           March 1989
TYPE:                           Guidance
SECOND REFERENCE:               None
LOCATION:                       Arthur Ditto's Office

DOCUMENT NUMBER:                PEA  (11.4) #13 001-J.2
LONG TITLE:                     Report of the Defense Environmental Response Task Force
AUTHOR:                         Department of Defense
RECIPIENT:                      Pease AFB
DATE:                           October 1991
TYPE:                           Guidance
SECOND REFERENCE:               None
LOCATION:                       Arthur Ditto's Office

DOCUMENT NUMBER:                PEA  (11.4) #14 001-1.5
LONG TITLE:                     Initiative for Accelerating Cleanup at BRAG Installations
AUTHOR:                         Department of Defense
RECIPIENT:                      Pease AFB
DATE:                           June 1992
TYPE:                           Guidance
SECOND REFERENCE:               None
LOCATION:                       Arthur Ditto's Office

DOCUMENT NUMBER:                PEA  (11.a) #15 - Deleted

               11.5 Technical Sources

DOCUMENT NUMBER:                PEA  (11.5) #1 001-022
LONG TITLE:                     Trichloroethylene in the Groundwater Supply of Pease Air
                                Force Base Portsmouth, NH
AUTHOR:                         U.S. Geological Survey
RECIPIENT:                      USAF
DATE:                           1982
TYPE:                           Technical Source
SECOND REFERENCE:               None
LOCATION:                       Arthur Ditto's Office

DOCUMENT NUMBER:                PEA  (115) #2 001-080
LONG TITLE;                     Geology and Groundwater Resources of Southeastern New
                                Hampshire
AUTHOR:                         U.S. Geological Survey
RECIPIENT:                      USAF
DATE:                           1964
TYPE:                           Technical Source
SECOND REFERENCE:               None
LOCATION:                       Arthur Ditto's Office

DOCUMENT NUMBER:                PEA  (11.5) #3 001-010
LONG TITLE:                     Preliminary Wetland Delineation and Evaluation Report
                                for Pease Air Force Base, NH - Draft
AUTHOR:                         The Smart Associates, Environmental Consultants, Inc.
RECIPIENT:                      USAF
DATE:                           April 1990
TYPE:                           Technical Source
SECOND REFERENCE:               None
LOCATION:                       Arthur Ditto's Office

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENTS:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.5) #4 001-222
The Ecology of the Great Bay Estuary, New Hampshire and
Maine:  An Estuary Profile and Bibliography
Jackson Estuarine Laboratory, Durham, NH
USAF
October 1992
Technical Source
None
Arthur Ditto's Office
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:

DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
11.6 Proposed Procedures / Procedures

PEA  (11.6) #1 001-005
Risk Assessment Data Needs and Sampling Procedures Letter
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
EPA; NHDBS; USAF
8 March 1991
Letter Report
None
ARF  (Section 11.6 Binder)

PEA  (11.6) #2 001-051
Analytical Methods Lever Report - Supplemental
Information to Stage 4 Sampling and Analysis Plan
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
EPA; NHDES; USAF
23 April 1991
Letter Report
PEA  (3.1)
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.6) #3 001-055
Protocols for Generation of Baseline Risk Assessment for
the Pease AFB Sites -
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
EPA; NHDES; USAF
July 1991
Report
None
ARF
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:
AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
DOCUMENT NUMBER:
LONG TITLE:

AUTHOR:
RECIPIENT:
DATE:
TYPE:
SECOND REFERENCE:
LOCATION:
PEA  (11.6) #5 001-002
Disposal of Drill Cuttings From Stage 2 and 3 Investigations
USAF
NHDES
14 August 1990
Procedures
None
ARF  (Section 11.6 Binder)
                        11.7 Correspondence
PEA  (11.7) #1 001-006
Letter to EPA Reguesting Review and Concurrence of Risk
Assessment Data and Sampling Procedure Letter Report
USAF
EPA
20 March 1991
Letter
None
ARF  (Section 11.7 Binder)

-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER:                PEA  (11.7) #2 001-002
LONG TITLE:                     Letter Concerning Use of Drilling Mud
AUTHOR:                         Roy F. Weston, Inc.
RECIPIENT:                      USAF
DATE:                           26 December 1990
TYPE:                           Letter
SECOND REFERENCE:               None
LOCATION:                       ARF  (Section 11.7 Binder)

DOCUMENT NUMBER:                PEA  (11.7) #3 001-002
LONG TITLE:                     Analytical Methods for Pease AFB
AUTHOR:                         Roy F. Weston, Inc.
RECIPIENT:                      USAF
DATE:                           23 April 1991
TYPE:                           Letter
SECOND REFERENCE:               None
LOCATION:                       ARF  (Section 11.7 Binder)

DOCUMENT NUMBER:                PEA  (11.7) #4 001-001
LONG TITLE:                     Consolidated Background Values Letter Report
AUTHOR:                         USAF
RECIPIENT:                      Richard Pease, NHDES
                                Johanna Hunter, EPA
DATE:                           March 9, 1993
TYPE:                           Letter Report
SECOND REFERENCE:               None
LOCATION:                       ARF  (Section 11.7 Binder)

-------