Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Allegany Ballistics Laboratory (ABL) Environmental Cleanup.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Allegany Ballistics Laboratory (ABL) Environmental Cleanup."— Presentation transcript:

1 Allegany Ballistics Laboratory (ABL) Environmental Cleanup

2 Area Map ABL Maryland West Virginia Cumberland, Md.

3 Allegany Ballistics Laboratory   A government-owned, contractor-operated plant (Plant 1) of the Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA)   Operated by ATK Tactical Systems Company, LLC   Installation Restoration Program (IRP) managed by the Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Atlantic Division (LANTDIV)   Environmental studies/engineering - CH2M Hill

4 Allegany Ballistics Laboratory  Conducts research, development, testing and production of solid rocket propulsion, laser initiation systems, composite and metal structures for military tactical missiles and gun launched systems.  These include air-to-air, air-to-surface and surface-to-air missiles and gun launched systems for the U.S. Army, Navy and Air Force.

5 ABL Economic Impact  850 full time employees (Oct 2003)  $38 million annual payroll (2002)  $73 million goods & services purchased locally in FY2003  $260 million facility improvements & maintenance since – $28 million/year projected thru 2005.

6 ABL Environmental Issues 1983 study identified 9 sites, 7 were recommended for further evaluation: - Northern Riverside Waste Disposal Area (1) - Previous Burning Grounds (2 & 3) - X-ray developing solution disposal site (4) - Inert landfill (5) - Sensitivity test area water impoundment (6) - Beryllium landfill (7) Production Well ‘A’ identified in 1983, became Site 10 Production Well ‘F’ identified in 1995, became Site 11 Various Building 167 areas identified in 1983, became Site 12

7 Environmental Concerns  Soil and ground water contamination – Solvents – Production materials and by-products  No immediate threat to human health or the environment  Concerns are for potential future residential land and water uses

8 Environmental Cleanup 1. Preliminary Assessment / Site Inspection (PA/SI) - Specific sites identified - Sampling is conducted to confirm or deny the presence of contamination 2. Remedial Investigation / Feasibility Study (RI/FS) - Determines the nature and extent of contamination. - Risk Assessment for human health and the environment - Evaluates numerous options 3. Record of Decision (ROD) - All parties involved agree on proposed cleanup 4. Remedial Design / Remedial Action (RD/RA) - Determines and emplaces selected technology A multi-step process

9 Installation Restoration Program   January Initial Assessment Study   February Technical Review Committee (TRC) formed   May Plant 1 listed on National Priorities List   December 8, TRC changed to Restoration Advisory Board (RAB)   January Federal Facility Agreement

10 National Priorities List (NPL)  National list of environmental sites based on calculation of risk to human health and the environment –“Worst-First” clean up  Listing on NPL brings funding priority –“Superfund” for civilian sites – DoD funding for military sites  Federal Facilities Agreement establishes working arrangement between Navy, EPA, and W.Va.

11 Site 1 - Riverside Disposal Area l l Approx. 11 acres l l Used as waste burning, storage and disposal area l l Volatile organic compounds (primarilysolvents) and metals detected in soil, ground water, and sediment. l l Air stripping of ground water began in 1998 l l Soil investigation completed in 2002, ecological and human health risk assessments for soil are in progress

12 Site 1 Groundwater Time Line

13 Site 1 Treatment Plant Construction  1 % OHM Equipment  1% Local Equipment Rental  4% OHM  7% Direct Costs (local)  8% Direct Costs (others)  18% Major Equipment  20% Labor and Fees  41% Subcontractors (local) 53% of the project budget of approximately $5 million was allocated to local vendors or businesses

14 Site 2 Previous Burning Ground ( ) Burning ground area utilized from located southwest of Building 361 A few solvents, hydrocarbons, and metals detected in soil and groundwater Additional groundwater sampling is proposed for this site

15 Site 3 Previous Burning Ground ( ) Burning ground area utilized from Two areas of disturbed soil and four linear features identified in aerial photographs A few solvents and metals were detected in soil and groundwater Ecological and human health risk assessments are in progress

16 Site 4B Spent Photographic Developing Solution Site Area adjacent to Building 181 were spent photographic solutions (containing silver, cyanide and phenols) were discharged Metals contamination found in soil A Pilot Study is planned to assist with clean up of soil

17 Site 5 Inert (non ordnance) Landfill l l Soil and ground water contamination from disposal of drums which had contained solvents, laboratory and photographic chemicals, and construction debris. l l Landfill cap completed in September 1998 l l Groundwater studies completed in 2002 l l Ecological and human health risk assessments are in progress Approximately 4 acres

18 Site 6 - Sensitivity Test Area Surface Water Impoundment l l Approximately 2.5-acre man-made surface water impoundment located 500 feet down-slope from sensitivity test area l l Part of Area of Concern I l l Sediment samples collected in September 2001 indicate no explosive constituents were detected. l l Therefore, a no further action closeout document was prepared for the site in February 2002

19 Site 7- Beryllium Landfill l l 6 x 6 x 10-foot pit for disposal of laboratory materials l l Contents excavated in 1995, segregated in 1996, and disposed of in 1997 l l No further action decision document was signed for the site in 2001

20 Site 10 - Production Well ‘A’ l l Interim Remedial Action to treat water at Site 1 treatment plant proposed in March Decision document signed in June 1998 l l Identified in 1983 and recommended for continued monitoring l l Shallow groundwater treatment began in February 1999 l l Final decision document for Site 10 groundwater (not yet issued) stipulates that the system be expanded to include bedrock groundwater extraction and treatment. Expanded system began operation in February 2002

21 Site 11 - Production Well ‘F’ l l Well installed in 1961 but never put into operation because sand in borehole prevented pumping. l l Free product (solvents) found in well in l l Investigation of soil and groundwater, sampling and re-boring of the well during Sept.-Oct removed source of contamination. l l Performed 4 rounds of quarterly groundwater sampling following source removal l l Draft Remedial Investigation Report, including a risk assessment, submitted November 2002.

22 Site 12 - Former Area of Concern N, Building 167 Solid Waste Management Units l l Nine units in the vicinity of Building 167 where wastes historically handled l l Investigated Units 37N and 52 during Phase I Phase II and Phase III (as Area of Concern N) Solid Waste Management Unit/ Area of Concern Investigations l l Discovered two solvent plumes l l One centered around Building 167 (primarily TCE) l l One centered around former wastewater sump (Unit 37N) l l Area of Concern N was designated IR Site 12 l l RI currently underway to determine vertical extent of groundwater contamination and the extent of subsurface soil contamination

23 SiteStudyInvest.DecisionCleanup B 4B 5 5 Site Status Groundwater Soil All media Soil All media Groundwater, Surface Water and Sediment

24 SiteStudyInvest.DecisionCleanup Site Status Cont’d... Interim decision document for groundwater signed June 1998; final remedy implemented February 2002 NFA decision document prepared in February 2002 All media Soil NFA decision document signed September 2001 All media

25 Public Participation Two-way, interactive communication that involves the community in the clean up process.

26 The Players Navy ATK EPA WestVirginia Maryland RAB Decision Document Communities

27 What is a RAB?   Made up of representatives from the community and government agencies   Members provide advice to decision makers   All members are equal Restoration Advisory Board

28 ABL RAB Mission Statement   Serve as a forum for discussion and exchange of information between federal/state agencies and the community regarding the cleanup program at ABL   Provide an opportunity for stakeholders to review Installation Restoration Program cleanup progress, provide input and participate in dialogue with decision makers   Complement other public participation initiatives

29 ABL RAB Mission Statement continued The purpose of this mission of private-public dialogue is to provide a trust-building process among the various stakeholders and government agencies, to protect human health and the environment, to restore the identified National Priorities List sites and to prevent or minimize future pollution from these sites. Accomplishing this mission is expected to enhance the viability of ABL to provide employment and valuable public services for years to come.

30 RAB Responsibilities   Provide advice to regulatory agencies   Consider important clean up issues   Review and evaluate technical documents   Recommend priorities   Conduct regular meetings, which are open to the public

31 Benefits of Public Participation   Understanding cleanup issues and progress   Opportunity to participate in the process and influence decisions   Clean up that is responsive to community desires

32 RAB Members   Stakeholders   Interested individuals   Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)   State regulatory agencies (Md. & W.Va.)   Local city and county governments   U.S. Navy and ATK Tactical Systems Company, LLC.

33 Stakeholders Any person, group, or organization affected by, or having a vested interest in, the environmental issues or the process used for their resolution.

34 RAB Activities   Publicize RAB meetings & activities   Update Community Relations Plan   Increase community awareness   Increase understanding of environmental issues, process, and accomplishments

35 RAB Members   The number of RAB members should be large enough to reflect community diversity, yet small enough to be workable   The ABL RAB meets quarterly   New community members are welcome

36 Community Member Expectations   Serve at least a two-year term   Attend all RAB meetings   Review and comment on technical documents   Communicate with the community and interested groups

37 RAB Co-chairs   Dr. Betsey T. Kagey, Ph.D. (301)   Mr. Lou Williams, NAVSEA, (909)   ABL contact: Les Mull (304)

38 Information Repositories LaVale Public Library 815 National Highway LaVale, Md Fort Ashby Public Library Lincoln Street Fort Ashby, W. Va.


Download ppt "Allegany Ballistics Laboratory (ABL) Environmental Cleanup."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google