Text Box: Text Box: Page #
Text Box: Environmental Happenings
Text Box: disclosed significantly lower levels more consistent with previous data. Arcadis  asserts that it has recorded the daily and monthly mean GPB discharge data from the nearest USGS gauging station for each surface water sampling event since September of 2007. In fact, as a response to previous comments, Arcadis maintains that it began including a summary table of the discharge data in the 3rd. quarter of 2008 report (Table 4) and that it has continued to include updated tables in subsequent quarterly and annual reports. Arcadis states that the most recent and comprehensive table was provided as Table 4 in

ANOMALOUS RESULTS AT AREA D ( Continued from page 1 )

the first quarter 2009 report  apparently issued in May of 2009. Arcadis explains that Table 4 of this report provides GPB discharge water data for all seven surface water sampling events at Area D. The Army/Arcadis provides the following reassurance : “The Permeable Reactive Barrier is not the sole remedy for Area D ...but part of the remedy for Area D Groundwater. The remedy also includes monitored natural attention, land use controls. Sampling is also required with certain trigger levels layed out in the remedial design as approved by the regulators. The pump and treat also remains on standby”.

 

Michael Glaab the PAERAB’s Community Co-chmn. offers the following comments: ‘The RAB has generally expressed approval of the concept of utilizing a permeable reactive barrier to shield GPB from nearby water soluble contaminants. But, many RAB members, including myself, have also repeatedly expressed concern that the pump and treat facility not be dismantled prematurely. Permanent dismantlement should only occur once it has been sufficiently demonstrated over an appropriate length of time that the PRB is functioning satisfactorily and that the

 

pump and treat facility is no longer required. This appears to be a particular concern of several community RAB members such as  Mr. Robert Crothers the official representative for Denville who is very knowledgeable about past  activities at the Arsenal. The board has been reassured that the pump and treat facility is essentially “mothballed” and that it can be reactivated for use if necessary. Presumably it can be utilized in the interim for other short term purposes such as materials storage’.  

SOIL MANAGEMENT POLICY AT PICATINNY ARSENAL   ( Continued from page 2 )

e-mail was submitted to Mr. Ted Gabel by Mr. Bill Roach  a

Project Manager of the USEPA who is also its official representative to the PAERAB:

 

“Ted, EPA concurs on the Soil Reuse Plan for the proposed PHS&T Center. Soils being removed from the

 

Guncotton Line (CERCLA Site 16 will be used beneath an asphalt  cap associated with the PHS&T Center. The capping of Guncotton Line soils at the site will be documented in the ROD for Site 16. Other soils to be removed from the site are not associated with the Gun Cotton

 

Line or other CERCLA site will be used for fill at the SCAT  gun facility. Bill.”  

 

It was further agreed at the meeting that the Gun Cotton Line Record of Decision (ROD) must document the status of the reused soils.

 

Michael Glaab comments that “...the RAB generally tends to prefer that contaminants either be treated onsite or expeditiously removed from the Arsenal to a  suitable location for safe storage”.

 

 

 

 surface-water quality criteria in the brook near the PRB. In the August 2008 sampling event trichloroethene (TCE) was detected at a concentration of 1,550 micrograms per liter (ug/L) in Well D-PRB-06. In the May 2009 “2008 Annual Monitoring Report – Area D Groundwater” Arcadis characterized this detection as “anomalous” and reported that a TCE concentration of 20.8 ug/L was detected in the November 2008 sample from the same well.   No explanation has yet been

provided for the anomaly.

Text Box: As discussed in the  “ANOMALOUS RESULTS AT AREA D”  article on page 1, the Winter 2009 newsletter had reported that volatile organic compounds (VOC) had been detected in Green Pond Brook in the vicinity of the permeable reactive barrier (PRB) that is the remedy for Area D groundwater contamination migrating to the brook. Relatively high VOC concentrations were detected in one of the wells downgradient of the PRB coincident with the detection of VOCs exceeding

Possible sources of the “anomaly” might be cross-contamination from sampling, a clerical mistake and/or a laboratory error. It is as of yet unclear whether laboratory data was properly validated. Flow conditions at the time of either the August 2008 or November 2008 sampling event are perhaps factors contributing to the anomalous results. Summer months are typically dry with flow in receiving streams (those

gaining groundwater)

representing close to baseflow conditions (flow contributed from groundwater). Fall and winter months typically have greater precipitation and flow within streams can consist of baseflow and also surface water runoff. During these conditions baseflow may be diluted by surface-water runoff and thereby contaminants entering a stream via groundwater contribution would be similarly diluted.

 

 

Text Box: POSSIBLE  SOURCES  of  ANOMALOUS  RESULTS  at  AREA D
PAERAB Home Previous Page Next Page