FINAL SITE INSPECTION REPORT

183184185186187188189190191192193194195196197198199200201202203204205206207208209210211212213214215216217218219collect the additional data necessary to complete the Munitions Response Site PrioritizationProtocol (MRSPP).The scope of the SI reported herein is restricted to evaluation of the presence of MEC or MCrelated to historical use of the FUDS prior to transfer. Potential releases of hazardous, toxic, orradioactive wastes (HTRW) are not addressed within the current scope. The intent of the SI is toconfirm the presence or absence of contamination from MEC and/or MC. The general approachfor each SI is to conduct records review and site reconnaissance to evaluate the presence orabsence of MEC, and to collect samples at locations where MC might be expected based on theconceptual site model (CSM). The following decision rules are used to evaluate the results ofthe SI:Is No DoD Action Indicated (NDAI)? An NDAI recommendation may be made if: There is no indication of MEC;and MC contamination does not exceed screening levels determined from TPP.Is an RI/FS warranted? An RI/FS may be recommended if: There is evidence of MEC hazard. MEC hazard may be indicated by directobservation of MEC during the SI, by indirect evidence (e.g., a crater potentiallycaused by impact of unexploded ordnance [UXO]), or by a report of MEC beingfound in the past without record that the area was subsequently cleared;or MC contamination exceeds screening levels determined from TPP.Is a removal action warranted? A removal action may be needed if: High MEC hazard is identified. Shaw will immediately report any MEC findingsso that USACE can determine the hazard in accordance with the MRSPP. Anexample of a high hazard would be finding sensitive MEC at the surface in apopulated area with no barriers to restrict access;or Elevated MC risk is identified. Identification of a complete exposure pathway(e.g., confirming MC concentrations above health-based risk standards in a watersupply well) would trigger notification of affected stakeholders. Data would bepresented at a second TPP meeting regarding the possible need for a removal.For purposes of applying these decision rules, USACE has provided guidance that evidence ofMEC will generally be a basis of recommending RI/FS. Evidence of MEC may includeconfirmed presence of MEC from historical sources or SI field work, or presence of MD.1.4 Munitions Response Site Prioritization ProtocolThe MRSPP was published as a rule on October 5, 2005 (70 FR 58028). This rule implementsthe requirement established in section 311(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act forBoardman AFR Final SI Report.doc 1-3 Contract No. W912DY-04-D-0010 Delivery Order No. 003September 2007