Stabilization at the Massachusetts Military Reservation, Training Range and Impact Area, Cape Cod, MA

Site Name:

Massachusetts Military Reservation

Location:

Cape Cod, MA

Period of
Operation:

February 1998 through June 1998

Cleanup
Type:

Remedial

Vendor:

Mike Lock or Chris Rice
Sevenson Environmental Services, Inc.
8270 Whitcomb Street
Merrillville, IN 46410
Telephone: (219) 756-4686
Fax: (219) 756-4687
E-mail: sevensonmw@aol.com

Technology:
Stabilization using MAECTITE®

- MAECTITE® is a proprietary technology that applies a liquid reagent to the soil to react with the lead and produce a geochemically stable synthetic mineral crystal; information was not provided on the type of chemicals in the liquid reagent
- Contaminated soil from sixteen small arms ranges was treated with MAECTITE® technology in both ex situ and in situ applications
- Berm soil was excavated and treated ex situ when a visual analysis showed the presence of recoverable bullet fragments
- Soil remaining in the berms that did not contain bullet fragments but still had a TCLP lead concentration of greater than 5.0 mg/L was treated in situ.

Cleanup Authority:
CERCLA
- Administrative Order issued April 10, 1997

EPA Contact:
EPA Remedial Project Manager
Mike Jasinski
U.S. EPA Region 1
J.F.K. Federal Building
1 Congress Street, Suite 1100
Boston, MA 02203-2211
Telephone: (617) 918-1352
Fax: (617) 918-1291
E-mail: jasinski.mike@epa.gov
Site Lead:
Ben Gregson
Assistant Project Officer
Army National Guard
Impact Area Groundwater Study Office
Building 2816, Room 228
Camp Edwards, MA 02542
Telephone: (508) 968-5821
Fax: 508-968-5286

Contaminants:
Heavy Metals
- Lead was the primary contaminant, with total lead concentrations in soil ranging as high as 12,200 mg/kg and TCLP leachable lead as high as 734 ug/L

Waste Source:
Training/firing ranges

Type/Quantity of Media Treated:
Soil
- 23,168 cubic yards of soil; consisting of 17,788 cubic yards treated ex situ (27,952 tons), and 5,380 cubic yards treated in situ
- Soil was classified as sandy and included stones and other oversize materials captured on 6-inch, 2-inch, and number 4 screens, and had a pH ranging from 5.0 to 6.5

Purpose/Significance of Application:
Use of a proprietary stabilization technology to treat lead in both in situ and ex situ soils

Regulatory Requirements/Cleanup Goals:
- The Administrative Order contained several requirements, including removing the maximum amount of lead munitions from the soil; recycling the removed lead munitions, as appropriate; and use of soil modifiers to minimize prospective bullet corrosion and lead migration
- A Completion of Work report established a cleanup goal as a TCLP leachable lead concentration in soil of <5.0 mg/L.

Results:
- 17,788 cubic yards of soil were treated ex situ in 56 batches (each consisting of 500 tons of soil). All batches met the cleanup goal, with no retreatment required. In addition, 96% of the samples of ex situ treated soil had a TCLP leachable lead concentration of <0.5 mg/L (one order of magnitude lower than the cleanup goal).

- 5,380 cubic yards of soil were treated in situ with 29 samples analyzed after in situ treatment of soil. All locations met the cleanup goal, with no retreatment required. In addition, 97% of the samples of in situ treated soil had a TCLP leachable lead concentration of <0.5 mg/L (one order of magnitude lower than the cleanup goal).

Cost Factors:
- The capital cost for MAECTITE® treatment of 23,168 cubic yards of contaminated soil was $3.5 million, with a calculated unit cost of $151 per cubic yard of soil treated

- The costs included ex situ and in situ treatment of berms, as well as mobilization, work plan preparation, negotiation support, meetings and briefings, reports, survey of berms, berm reconstruction, and decontamination

- In situ treatment was used at those berms and portions of berms which did not contain recoverable bullet fragments, thus limiting the amount of soil that was required to be excavated and treated on an ex situ basis.

Description:
The Massachusetts Military Reservation (MMR), founded by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts in 1935 as a National Guard training camp and federalized in 1940 to prepare for World War II, currently houses Otis Air National Guard Base, U.S. Coast Guard Air Station Cape Cod, and Army National Guard Camp Edwards. MMR covers 34 square miles of upper Cape Cod (approximately 22,000 acres), and borders the towns of Bourne, Falmouth, Mashpee and Sandwich, Massachusetts. MMR was placed on EPA's Superfund National Priority List in 1989, and has 78 pollution source areas currently identified and 10 major groundwater pollution plumes moving at approximately 1.5 to 2 feet per day. The reservation sits atop the recharge area for the sole source groundwater aquifer from which all of upper Cape Cod draws its drinking water. The Training Range and Impact Area includes 16 small arms firing ranges (training ranges). Berms constructed behind targets at the ranges to capture bullets and fragments of bullets behind targets became contaminated with lead.

MAECTITE®, a proprietary stabilization technology, was used on both an ex situ and an in situ basis to treat lead-contaminated soil in the berms at the 16 small arms ranges. A total of 23,168 cubic yards of soil were treated (17,788 cubic yards ex situ and 5,380 cubic yards in situ). All samples met the cleanup goal of <5.0 mg/L of TCLP leachable lead, and soil was not required to be retreated. In addition, 96% of the soil treated ex situ, and 97% of the soil treated in situ, had a TCLP leachable lead concentration of <0.5 mg/L (one order of magnitude lower than the cleanup goal). The soil cleanup at this site was completed in a 6 month time frame, from site mobilization through treatment and demobilization, for a capital cost of $3.5 million, and a unit cost of $151/yd3 treated.

The treatment vendor reported that the factors that affect cost and performance for the MAECTITE® technology include heavy metal constituents of concern, level of heavy metal contamination, reduction in concentrations of leachable metal, volume of material to be treated, whether in situ or ex situ methods are used, material sizing requirements, final disposition of treated material (i.e., on site or off site), reporting requirements, waste matrix complexities, site configuration, prevailing labor rates, and taxes.