Appendix M: Installation Narrative Summaries - denix

‚����˜—��2e���2e���������2€�—�� x€vGf‚eg2PHHS
2ppshX
2ƒ���X
2w������X
2r‚ƒ2ƒ���X
2seq2ƒ�—���X
2g���—���—���X
2w���—2e������X
2p������2��2h—��X
€�������2„�2h—��
In 1942, the Army constructed what is now the Riverbank Army
Ammunition Plant (AAP) as an aluminum reduction plant to
supply military requirements. EPA placed the installation on the
NPL in February 1990. In 2005, the BRAC Commission
recommended Riverbank AAP for closure. Since 1951, the
installation has manufactured brass and steel cartridge cases
for the Army and the Navy. Other manufactured products
include grenades and projectiles, which the Army ships to other
ammunition plants for loading operations. In FY85, a
preliminary assessment and site inspection identified the
following sites: an industrial wastewater treatment plant, an
abandoned landfill, and four evaporation and percolation (E/P)
ponds located north of the plant near the Stanislaus River. The
Army and EPA signed an interagency agreement (IAG) in April
1990. In FY92, the Army extended the Riverbank City water
system and connected service to all residents potentially
affected by chromium contamination. The installation formed a
technical review committee in 1994. In FY97, the Army
submitted a petition to delete the installation from the NPL;
however, EPA determined that NPL deletion was premature
since groundwater cleanup goals had not been met. EPA
approved the preliminary closeout report and the remedial
action completion report. The Army completed 5-year reviews
in FY01 and FY06.
To date, the installation has completed one installationwide
Record of Decision. The cleanup progress at Riverbank AAP
for FY02 through FY05 is detailed below.
In FY02, the Army procured a fluidized bed treatment system
for the treatment of nitrates. With the installation of the fluidized
bed reactor at the groundwater treatment system, the
installation was no longer dependent on the City of Riverbank
discharge agreement for its treated water. The installation
continued to explore in situ treatment of the
chromium-contaminated soil at the source to reduce the overall
cleanup duration. The Army initiated an inventory of closed,
transferred, and transferring (CTT) ranges and sites with
unexploded ordnance, discarded military munitions, or
munitions constituents.
In FY03, the installation continued to work towards
implementing a pilot test for in situ treatment of the
Army
geWPIQVPHUSWHH
IUP2—���
w—���—����2����—���D2����������D2—��2�����2—�������2—�����
TQFWRY2��—��2��2x€v2��2p�˜��—��2IWWH
seq2������2��2e����2IWWH
g�������D2�—����D2���
q������—���2—��2����
62SRFU2�������
2i��F2g„g2@g���2‰�—�AX 62PFV2�������@p‰2PHHWA
2s‚€Gww‚€2ƒ����2p��—�2‚s€G‚gX p‰2IWWVGp‰2PHHU
2p���E‰�—�2‚�����2ƒ�—���X g��������2
chromium-contaminated soil in the source area, including
negotiations with the California Regional Water Quality Control
Board (RWQCB) regarding the need for an additional waste
discharge permit for this pilot test. Work continued on an
evaluation of background groundwater and surface water
conditions at the E/P ponds. The installation shut down the
fluidized bed reactor because it was no longer needed. Work
began on the bench-scale test for cyanide source destruction.
The Army completed the inventory of CTT ranges and sites.
The inventory identified one Military Munitions Response
Program (MMRP) site, a closed small arms range.
In FY04, the installation converted Monitoring Well 109B to an
extraction well and put it into service. Studies of the well's
performance showed that it improved the efficiency of the
groundwater containment system and reduced the amount of
pumping required to provide full capture, resulting in lower
costs. The Army obtained the permit from the RWQCB for the
in situ chromium treatment pilot project and initiated testing in
the primary source area. The Army completed the bench-scale
component of the in situ cyanide destruction pilot test and
initiated discussions with RWQCB regarding regulatory
requirements for implementing a field test. The Army issued a
performance-based contract to accelerate completion of the
groundwater cleanup. Work continued on evaluating
background groundwater and surface water conditions at the
E/P ponds as part of the effort to get a permanent increase in
the allowable nitrate discharge limit.
In FY05, Riverbank AAP was identified for closure as part of
BRAC 2005. Riverbank AAP initiated optimization efforts for the
extraction scenario from off-site wells. The installation
completed the in situ chromium treatment pilot test in the
primary source area. Under the MMRP, the installation awarded
a contract to conduct a historical review and archive search for
the small-arms range.
p‰HT2s‚€2€�������
Riverbank AAP continued to optimize the current groundwater
treatment system and completed the second 5-year review. The
Army initiated groundwater investigative activities necessary for
evaluation of potential treatment alternatives to potentially
expedite cleanup efforts. As part of the environmental
‚����˜—��D2g—�������—
evaluation component of BRAC 2005, the Army completed the
draft final environmental condition of property (ECP) report.
Funding issues delayed the in situ treatment of groundwater.
p‰HT2ww‚€2€�������
The Army conducted a historical records review and archive
search for the small arms range.
€�—�2��2e����
Plan of action items for Riverbank Army Ammunition Plant are
grouped below according to program category.
22222s‚€
0 Initiate in situ treatment pilot studies for
groundwater in FY07.
0 Complete BRAC 2005 ECP and CERFA reports in
FY07-FY08.
0 Complete groundwater investigation activites
and initiate potential treatment alternatives
to expedite cleanup in FY07-FY08.
22222ww‚€
0 Collect soil samples at the MMRP site in
FY07-FY08.
M-175