Moffett RAB Basewide Five-Year Review Update Restoration Advisory Board Former NAS Moffett Field January 14, 2010 Wilson Doctor, Navy BRAC Program Management Office West

1. Five-Year Review Report
for Sites 1, 22, 26 and 28
Restoration Advisory Board
Former NAS Moffett Field
January 14, 2010
Wilson Doctor
Navy Project Manager

2. Outline
• What a Five-Year Review is
• Sites 1, 22, 26, 28
• Five-Year Review Report findings
2

3. Five-Year Review Report
• Five-Year Review Report
– Site 1: Runway Landfill
– Site 22: Golf Course Landfill
– Site 26: East Side Aquifers Treatment System (EATS); groundwater
VOC plume
– Site 28: West Side Aquifers Treatment System (WATS); groundwater
VOC plume
• Purpose: Evaluate implementation and performance of selected remedies
and whether they remain protective
• Schedule
– Draft report issued October 15, 2009
– Comments received
– Final February 2010
3

4. When is Five-Year Review Required?
• If selected remedy does not allow for unlimited use and unrestricted
exposure
– For remedial action construction: Initiation of construction triggers the
Five-Year Review clock
– For no remedial action construction: Record of Decision date is trigger
• First Five-Year Review completed within five years
• Subsequent Five-Year Reviews completed within five years
4

5. Past Five-Year Reviews
• Site 1 - July 2002 and September 2007
• Site 22 – February 2008
• Site 26 – February 2005
• Site 28 – February 2005
• 2010 – first Five-Year Review with these sites in one report
5

6. CERCLA Sites 1, 22, 26, and 28
Former NAS Moffett Field, CA
6

7. Five-Year Review: Sites 1, 22, 26, and 28
Site 1 Record of Decision (ROD) and Remedy
The Final ROD, signed in 1997, selected the following remedy:
• Institutional controls (IC)
• Groundwater and landfill gas monitoring
• Consolidation of former Site 2 landfill materials into the Site 1 landfill
• Construction and maintenance of a multi-layer Site 1 Landfill cap
Purpose:
• To prevent contact with landfill waste
• To prevent further release of contamination from the landfill to the
groundwater
• To prevent migration of landfill gas
7

8. Five-Year Review: Sites 1, 22, 26, and 28
Site 22 ROD and Remedy
The Final Site 22 ROD, signed in 2002, selected the following remedy:
• ICs
• Groundwater and landfill gas monitoring
• Construction of landfill cover
Purpose:
• To prevent contact with landfill waste
• To prevent further release of contamination from the landfill to the
groundwater
• To prevent migration of landfill gas
8

9. Five-Year Review: Sites 1, 22, 26, and 28
Sites 1 and 22 Findings
• Groundwater contaminants are not migrating from the landfills
• Landfill gas is not migrating past the landfill boundaries.
• The Site 1 and Site 22 landfill covers are functioning as intended.
• Burrowing animals have not penetrated deeper layers or exhumed landfill
wastes.
9

10. Five-Year Review: Sites 1, 22, 26, and 28
Site 26 ROD and Remedy
The Final Site 26 ROD, signed in 1996, selected the following remedy:
• Southern Plume:
– ICs
– Groundwater monitoring
– Extraction and treatment of groundwater to drinking water
standards
• Northern Plume:
– Groundwater monitoring only due to poor water quality and low risk
Purpose:
• To protect beneficial use of groundwater as potential future source of
drinking water
10

11. Five-Year Review: Sites 1, 22, 26, and 28
Site 26 Remedy Implementation
• Navy constructed the East-side Aquifer Treatment System (EATS) to
extract and treat groundwater
– EATS operational beginning in January 1999
– EATS turned off in 2003 so alternative treatments could be
evaluated
– Navy is currently conducting pilot test
• Groundwater monitoring conducted annually
• Navy and NASA signed MOA in 1999 for ICs
11

12. Five-Year Review: Sites 1, 22, 26, and 28
Site 26 Findings
• Even though EATS has remained off, the dimensions of the VOC plumes
have been stable and their boundaries have not migrated.
• Overall, VOC concentrations are stable or decreasing.
TCE plume, Upper A Aquifer 2003/2008
12

13. Five-Year Review: Sites 1, 22, 26, and 28
Site 28 ROD and Remedy
In 1993, the Navy adopted the existing 1989 MEW ROD, agreeing to clean
up contamination attributable to Navy sources.
The ROD selected the following remedy:
• Treatment of unsaturated soil
• Extraction and treatment of groundwater to drinking water standards
Purpose:
• To remove sources of VOCs to groundwater
• To protect beneficial use of groundwater as potential future source of
drinking water
• West-side Aquifers Treatment System (WATS) constructed and operated
since 1998
• Groundwater monitoring conducted annually
13

14. Five-Year Review: Sites 1, 22, 26, and 28
Site 28 Findings
• Since startup of WATS, the extent of the VOC plumes generally has not changed.
• VOC concentrations generally have remained the same or decreased.
• WATS is functioning as intended in accordance with the ROD.
TCE plume, Upper A Aquifer 2003/2008 TCE plume, Lower A Aquifer 2003/2008
14

15. Five-Year Review Purpose
• Evaluates implementation and performance of selected remedy
• Five-Year Review report includes the following:
– Determines whether remedy is functioning as intended and is protective
– Documents any deficiencies identified during the review
– Recommends specific actions to ensure that a remedy will be or will
continue to be protective
15

16. Five-Year Review: Sites 1, 22, 26, and 28
Protectiveness Statement
• The remedies for Sites 1, 22, 26, and 28 are currently protective of
human health and the environment.
• To ensure long-term protectiveness, follow-up actions to address issues
must be implemented.
16

17. Five-Year Review: Sites 1, 22, 26, and 28
Site 1 Issues and Recommendations
• Land use restrictions have not been documented in its land use
planning documents as specified in MOA.
– NASA to add necessary documentation to its ERD.
• Ground squirrels and gophers burrowing within the landfill boundary.
– Navy has implemented abatement plan
17

18. Five-Year Review: Sites 1, 22, 26, and 28
Site 22 Issues and Recommendations
• Land use restrictions have not been documented in NASA’s land use
planning documents as specified in MOA.
– NASA to add necessary documentation to its planning documents.
18

19. Five-Year Review: Sites 1, 22, 26, and 28
Site 26 Issues and Recommendations
• EATS groundwater extraction and treatment remedy is an inefficient
and ineffective method to address groundwater contamination.
– Navy is implementing a second pilot test and will determine next
course of action based on the results.
• NASA has not restricted groundwater use in its land use planning
documents as required in the ROD.
– NASA to incorporate this language into its planning documents.
19

20. Five-Year Review: Sites 1, 22, 26, and 28
Site 28 Issues and Recommendations
• Potential contaminant sources exist in the former Building 88 area,
associated sewer lines, and the Traffic Island Area.
– Navy is implementing a pilot test and will determine next course of
action based on the results.
• Vapor Intrusion
– Potential long-term human health risk
– Being addressed by EPA Proposed Plan and Record of Decision
• Meeting cleanup goals
– Navy will continue to participate in a regional strategy to address
groundwater contamination; strategy will be documented in a
Regional Feasibility Study.
20

21. Summary
Protectiveness Statements of Draft Five-Year Review Report
• The remedies for Sites 1, 22, 26, and 28 are currently protective of human
health and the environment.
• To ensure long-term protectiveness, follow-up actions to address issues
must be implemented.
Five-Year Review Report Schedule
• Draft report issued October 15, 2010
• Received comments
• Final February 2010
21

22. Questions
22