[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 180 (Friday, September 17, 1999)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 50477-50482]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-24280]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 300

[FRL-6439-8]


National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan 
National Priorities List

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Notice of Intent to Delete the Tipton Army Airfield portion of 
Fort George Meade Site, located in Fort Meade, Maryland, from the 
National Priorities List (partial site deletion) and Request for 
Comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region III announces 
its intent to delete the Tipton Army Airfield portion of the Fort 
George Meade Site (Site) from the National Priorities List (NPL) and 
requests public comment on this action.
    The NPL constitutes Appendix B of the National Oil and Hazardous 
Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), 40 CFR Part 300, which EPA 
promulgated pursuant to Section 105 of the Comprehensive Environmental 
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), as amended. EPA and 
the Maryland Department of Environment (MDE) have determined that all 
appropriate CERCLA response actions have been implemented and that no 
further action is appropriate. Moreover, EPA and the State have 
determined that remedial activities conducted at the Site to date have 
been protective of public health, welfare, and the environment.

DATES: Comments concerning the proposed deletion of this Site from the 
NPL may be submitted on or before October 18, 1999.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted to Nicholas J. DiNardo, (3HS13), 
Project Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1650 Arch 
Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19103-2029, (215) 814-3365.
    Comprehensive information on this Site is available for viewing at 
the Site information repositories at the following locations:
    (1) Provinces Public Library, 2624 Annapolis Road, Severn, MD 
21144, Phone: (410) 222-6280.
    Hours: Mondays, Tuesdays and Thursdays--1:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.; 
Wednesdays and Saturdays--9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.; and Fridays--1:00 
p.m. to 5:00 p.m.
    (2) U.S. Army, Directorate of Public Works, Attn: ANME-PWE, Bldg. 
239, 2-1/2 Street and Ross Road, Fort Meade, MD 20755, Phone: (301) 
677-9648.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nicholas J. DiNardo, (3HS13), Project 
Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1650 Arch Street, 
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19103-2029, (215) 814-3365.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Introduction
II. NPL Deletion Criteria
III. Deletion Procedures
IV. Basis for Intended Site Deletion

I. Introduction

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region III announces its 
intent to delete the Tipton Army Airfield portion of the Fort George 
Meade Site, located in Fort Meade, Anne Arundel County, Maryland, from 
the National Priorities List (NPL), Appendix B of the National Oil and 
Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), and requests 
comments on this partial deletion. Releases on the Tipton Army Airfield 
portion were located at Inactive Landfill 1, Inactive Landfill 2, 
Inactive Landfill 3, Fire Training Area, and Helicopter Hangar Area. 
The Army is the DOD component and is responsible for implementing all 
response actions at the Fort George Meade NPL Site. In consultation 
with EPA and MDE, the Army has completed all required response actions 
at Tipton Army Airfield portion of the Fort George Meade NPL Site as 
detailed below.
    The EPA identifies sites that appear to present a significant risk 
to public health, welfare, or the environment and maintains the NPL as 
the list of those sites. Sites on the NPL may be the subject of 
remedial actions. Pursuant to Sec. 300.425(e)(3) of the NCP, any site 
deleted from the NPL remains eligible for remedial actions if future 
conditions at the site warrant such action.
    In a December 1998 Record of Decision (ROD), an interim remedial 
action decision for Tipton groundwater was made, in addition to a no 
further action determination for the soils in the following areas of 
concern:
     Helicopter Hangar Area (HHA);
     Fire Training Area (FTA); and
     Inactive Landfill No. 3 (IAL3).
    In a June 1999 ROD, a final determination for Tipton groundwater, 
which includes continued monitoring, was made in addition to a no 
further action determination for the soils in the following areas of 
concern:
     Inactive Landfill No. 1 (IAL1); and
     Inactive Landfill No. 2 (IAL2).

[[Page 50478]]

    EPA will accept comments on the proposal to delete this Site from 
the NPL for thirty calendar days after publication of this notice in 
the Federal Register. Section II of this notice explains the criteria 
for deleting sites from the NPL. Section III discusses procedures that 
EPA is using for this action. Section IV discusses how the Site meets 
the deletion criteria.

II. NPL Deletion Criteria

    The NCP establishes the criteria that the Agency uses to delete 
sites from the NPL. In accordance with 40 CFR 300.425(e), sites may be 
deleted from the NPL where no further response is appropriate. In 
making this determination, EPA will consider, in consultation with the 
State, whether any of the following criteria have been met:
    (i) Responsible parties or other persons have implemented all 
appropriate response actions required;
    (ii) All appropriate responses under CERCLA have been implemented 
and no further response action by responsible parties is appropriate; 
or
    (iii) The remedial investigation has shown that the release poses 
no significant threat to public health or the environment and, 
therefore, taking of remedial measures is not appropriate.
    In addition to the above, for all remedial actions which result in 
hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants remaining at a site 
above levels that allow for unlimited use and unrestricted exposure, 
CERCLA Sec. 121(c), 42 U.S.C. 9621(c), the NCP at 40 CFR 
300.430(f)(4)(ii) and EPA's policy, OSWER Directive 9320.2-09, dated 
August 1995, provide that a subsequent review of a site will be 
conducted by the lead Agency ``no less often than'' every five years 
after the initiation of the first remedial action at a site to ensure 
that conditions at a site remain protective of public health and the 
environment. In the case of a site, the Army will conduct a review 
every 5 years to evaluate the frequency and need for continued 
monitoring of conditions at the Site. This is to ensure that the no 
further action remedies continue to provide adequate protection of 
human health and the environment. As explained/discussed below, the 
Site meets the NCP's deletion criteria listed above. Five-year reviews 
will continue to be conducted at the Site until no hazardous 
substances, pollutants, or contaminants remain above levels that allow 
for unlimited use and unrestricted exposure.
    The NCP further specifies that releases shall not be deleted from 
the NPL until the State in which the release was located has concurred 
on the proposed deletion. 40 CFR 300.425(e)(2). All releases deleted 
from the NPL are eligible for further remedial actions should future 
conditions warrant such action. Whenever there is a significant release 
from a site deleted from the NPL, the site shall be restored to the NPL 
without application of the Hazard Ranking System. 40 CFR 300.425(e)(3).

III. Deletion Procedures

    Section 300.425(e)(4) of the NCP sets forth requirements for site 
deletions to assure public involvement in the decision. MDE also will 
review this document along with all other documents in the 
Administrative Record and any public comment that may be received 
during the public comments period. During the process of proposing to 
delete a site from the NPL, EPA is required to conduct the following 
activities:
    (i) Publish a notice of intent to delete in the Federal Register 
and solicit comment through a public comment period of a minimum of 30 
calendar days;
    (ii) Publish a notice of availability of the notice of intent to 
delete in a major local newspaper of general circulation at or near the 
release that is proposed for deletion;
    (iii) Place copies of information supporting the proposed deletion 
in the information repository at or near the site proposed for 
deletion. These items shall be available for public inspection and 
copying; and,
    (iv) Respond to each significant comment and any significant new 
data submitted during the comment period in a Responsiveness Summary 
and include this response document in the final deletion package.
    If appropriate, after consideration of comments received during the 
public comment period, EPA will then publish a notice of final deletion 
in the Federal Register and place the final deletion package, including 
the Responsiveness Summary, in the Site information repositories.
    Deletion of a site from the NPL does not itself create, alter, or 
revoke any individual's rights or obligations. As stated in Section II 
of this Notice, Section 300.425(e)(3) of the NCP provides that the 
deletion of a site from the NPL does not preclude eligibility for 
future response actions.

IV. Basis for Intended Site Deletion

A. Site History

    The following site summary provides EPA's rationale for the 
proposal to delete the Tipton Army Airfield portion of the Fort George 
Meade Site from the NPL.
    Fort George G. Meade (FGGM) is located in Fort Meade, Maryland. 
FGGM formerly occupied 13,596 acres of land in the northwest corner of 
Anne Arundel County. FGGM is a Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1988 
(BRAC) parcel, located east of State Route 198 and south of Highway 32. 
It is bounded on the west by the Baltimore-Washington Parkway and by 
the Patuxent River to the south. The Amtrak railroad track right-of-way 
and State Route 175 form the southeast and northeast boundaries of 
FGGM, respectively.
    The facility was authorized by Congress in 1917 as a training 
cantonment for troops during World War I. The U.S. Government 
commandeered 4,000 acres, most of which was then farm land, and named 
the installation Camp Meade in honor of Major General George G. Meade. 
In January 1941, additional training areas were added within the 
installation, expanding the post to 13,596 acres. During the 1940s, the 
facility underwent widespread growth to accommodate several regiments 
who moved their base of operations to FGGM, including the Second U.S. 
Army and the Eleventh Cavalry. Tipton Army Airfield was completed in 
1963, replacing a small airstrip which had been in operation since 
1928.
    In 1988, the Defense Authorization Amendments and Base Closure and 
Realignment Act of 1988 mandated the closure and/or realignment of 
approximately 9,000 acres, encompassing the southernmost two-thirds of 
the installation. In 1991, the Army transferred 7,600 of the 9,000 
acres to the Department of the Interior's Patuxent Research Refuge 
(PRR), formerly known as the Patuxent Wildlife Research Center. A 
second land transfer of approximately 500 acres to the PRR took place 
in January, 1993.
    Use of the Site as a military range has been documented as far back 
as the early 1920s. In Special Military Maps from 1923, the area, later 
designated as Tipton Army Airfield, was identified as an artillery 
impact area. A 1941 South Cantonment Map shows that two ranges were 
located within the future Tipton Army Airfield area; one was an anti-
tank range to the west of Bullard Hill, the other was an anti-aircraft 
range to the east of Bullard Hill. In the summer of 1942, 81mm and 60mm 
mortars were used in this area for target practice. During the same 
timeframe, live high-explosive shells were fired over the heads of 
troops for training purposes.

[[Page 50479]]

    The investigation of the Tipton Army Airfield portion of the Fort 
George Meade NPL Site included the following areas: Helicopter Hangar 
Area (HHA), Fire Training Area (FTA), Inactive Landfill #1 (IAL1), 
Inactive Landfill #2 (IAL2), and Inactive Landfill #3 (IAL3).
    HHA includes Building 90 and adjacent areas located at the 
northwest corner of the airfield. The HHA is roughly bounded by the 
Little Patuxent River to the west, an unnamed tributary to the Little 
Patuxent River to the north, Patuxent Road to the east, and the 
helicopter parking area to the south. The HHA is located approximately 
800 feet west of the FTA. The HHA covers approximately 5 acres.
    During operations, the 97th Army Command performed maintenance and 
storage of helicopters at Hangar 90. Typical activities included 
washing, disassembly, repair, and painting of aircraft. In addition to 
the use of fuels such as aviation and diesel fuel, other materials that 
were typically used, handled or stored included hydraulic and 
lubricating oils, detergents, and solvents. Hangar 90 was cleared and 
taken out of service when it was decommissioned in early 1996.
    The FTA is located north of Airfield Road and is about 800 feet 
east of the HHA. The FTA covers approximately two acres. The FTA is 
flat and sparsely vegetated with grass. A drainage swale and culvert 
were located parallel to the gate that drained to wetlands/forested 
area just west of the FTA. The northern half of the FTA is fenced off, 
enclosing the fire training pit and adjacent training areas. The area 
was constructed around 1979 for training purposes by the Fort Meade 
Fire Department. Fires were typically set inside the pit or in portable 
burn pans by using gasoline or aviation fuel. The fires were then 
extinguished with water or aqueous film-forming foam, a synthetic 
extinguishing agent. Other emergency response training, such as self-
contained breathing apparatus training and emergency rescues, were 
performed at the FTA. The fire training pit was constructed of a 
concrete berm about one foot high and twenty feet in diameter, which 
was surrounded by a concrete apron. An oil-water separator located on 
the south side of the fire training pit was used in draining the pit. 
Water from the separator was transported from the site via an 
underground pipeline to a sanitary sewer. Both the fire training pit 
and the oil-water separator were removed in 1998. During the Final RI 
report (USACE, 1998b), contaminants from this area were shown to be 
restricted to the two wells nearest the FTA.
    IAL3 is located on the Tipton Army Airfield parcel in the eastern 
portion of the runway area. According to the Enhanced Preliminary 
Assessment (PA) Report (USAEC, 1989), IAL3 was initially used as a sand 
borrow area. During the late 1940s and 1950s, the area was used as a 
sanitary and ``leaf-dump'' landfill. The Tipton Army Airfield was 
constructed over the fill area in 1963. The airfield consists of four 
hangars, an operations building, a fire station, taxiways and runway, 
and a helicopter training area. A storm water management system is 
located under the airfield. The site history indicates that the main 
disposal area was under what is now the eastern portion of the runway 
area. According to the Enhanced PA, during construction of the airfield 
in 1963, much of IAL3 was excavated and the materials were disposed of 
off-post. The airfield construction plans, which include both pre- and 
post-construction geotechnical soil boring logs, indicate that landfill 
materials were removed from beneath all runway construction areas for 
structural reasons. However, landfilled materials are still present in 
areas subjacent to the runways. The landfill boundary was developed 
based on the extent of historical operations, aerial photographs, and 
subsequent site investigations.
    IAL1 covers 16 acres in the north-central portion of the BRAC 
parcel between the Little Patuxent River and Bald Eagle Drive. IAL1 is 
considered part of the Tipton Army Airfield parcel although it is 
physically separated from the airfield by the Little Patuxent River. A 
small concrete blockhouse, formerly used as a communications building, 
is present on the northwest corner of the area. This boundary was 
developed based on the extent of historical operations, aerial 
photographs, and subsequent site investigation activities.
    According to the Enhanced PA report (USAEC, 1989), IAL1 was used as 
an unlined sanitary landfill from approximately 1950 to 1964. No 
information has been found indicating the types of material disposed of 
at this location. Select historical aerial photographs of IAL1, 
compiled by the USEPA (1990 and 1996), are presented in the Final RI 
report (USACE, 1998a). The earliest known aerial photograph (1938) 
shows IAL1 as a cultivated field. In subsequent aerial photographs from 
1943, 1952, and 1957, IAL1 appears as an open clearing or training 
area, with no evidence of ground scarring or landfill activity. 
Landfill activities were first indicated in aerial photographs from 
1963, which show barren areas and what appear to be trenches, probable 
debris, and mounded material presumably associated with landfill 
activities (USEPA, 1990). Aerial photographs since 1970 show the area 
as inactive. The 1963 treeline, which appears to correspond to the 
maximum extent of man-made activities, persists to the present. Areas 
of mounded materials located on the north side of IAL1, which were 
first observed on the 1970 photographs, also persist to the present. A 
possible former burial trench location, corresponding to the mounded 
area and an area of strong magnetic responses, was tentatively located 
in the northern part of IAL1.
    IAL2 is located within the BRAC parcel on approximately 10 acres of 
land north of New Tank Road (now Wildlife Loop), approximately 450 feet 
north and east of the Little Patuxent River. The bulk of IAL2 is 
separated from the PRR by the perimeter fence which runs along New Tank 
Road then turns north along the western side of IAL2. A dirt access 
road runs north, from a locked gate in the fence, through IAL2 to 
Tipton Airfield. Other unnamed tracks provide access to the area 
between IAL2 and the Little Patuxent River. No buildings or structures 
are present at IAL2. This boundary was developed based on the extent of 
historical operations, aerial photographs, and subsequent site 
investigations.
    Select historical aerial photographs of IAL2 from USEPA photo 
compilations are presented in the Final Remedial Investigation (RI) 
report (USACE, 1998a). IAL2 was initially operated as a soil borrow 
area. Large active excavations are apparent in aerial photographs from 
1938 and 1943 (USEPA, 1996). By 1952, the borrow area was mostly 
overgrown. According to the Enhanced PA (USAEC, 1989), the area was 
subsequently operated as an unlined rubble disposal area. In 1957 and 
1963, at its maximum extent, mounded materials and probable fill 
material are visible in the southern portion of the area. IAL2 was 
little used between 1963 and 1970, with aerial photographs showing the 
area being increasingly revegetated. A single north-northwest trending 
trench is visible along the east side of the access road in 1970 
(USEPA, 1990). Continued disposal activity occurred after 1980 in the 
northern portion of IAL2 where graded and disturbed areas are visible 
in 1986. During RI fieldwork, piles of rubble material (brush, concrete 
and asphalt debris) which appear to be of more recent origin were 
observed in a marshy area on the north side of IAL2.
    Several environmental investigations have been performed at FGGM 
since 1988, including an Enhanced PA

[[Page 50480]]

(USAEC, 1989), a study by the Maryland Department of Natural Resources 
(MDNR), an RI (USAEC, 1992a), a Site Inspection (SI) Study (USAEC, 
1992b), a Draft SI Addendum (which included an Environmental Impact 
Statement (EIS) and a Wetland Identification Study) (USACE, 1991), an 
Ordnance and Explosives (OE) Removal Action (USACE, 1997), RI reports 
(USACE 1998a and 1998b), and sampling and data evaluation for the 
Defense Reutilization and Marketing Office Salvage Yard (DRMO) (USACE, 
1999). The Enhanced PA includes a review of all available records 
related to air, soil, surface water, and groundwater, and identifies 
six areas of concern requiring additional investigation at FGGM: active 
and inactive landfills, underground storage tanks, asbestos, unexploded 
ordnance, surface water, and burning grounds. These reports either 
address totally or in part parcels of Tipton Army Airfield.
    Maryland Department of Natural Resources ``MDNR'' conducted an 
evaluation of the 9,000-acre BRAC parcel in January 1990, which 
includes the Tipton area. The study describes the natural features and 
land uses associated with the 9,000 acres to be excessed from FGGM and 
discusses the degree of development of the retained land. In January 
1991, a wetland identification study was prepared by RGH/CH2M Hill, 
Inc. to complete the study of the closure and use/reuse alternatives 
for the 9,000-acre parcel at FGGM (USAEC, 1994). The report describes 
the methods used to identify wetlands on the parcel and presents a map 
of wetlands distribution.
    A Final EIS for the comprehensive base realignment and partial 
closure for FGGM and Fort Holabird was prepared by the U.S. Army Corps 
of Engineers, Baltimore District, in August, 1991. This report focuses 
on the environmental and socioeconomic impacts associated with the 
planned base realignment and partial closure at FGGM and Fort Holabird. 
The EIS covers the 9,000-acre BRAC parcel at FGGM. A Draft SI report 
was submitted by EA Engineering, Science and Technology (EA) in 
January, 1992. This report discusses conditions at the Helicopter 
Hangar Area (HHA), four inactive landfills (IAL1 to IAL4), the DRMO, 
the Fire Training Area (FTA), the Ordnance Demolition Area (ODA), 
underground storage tanks, and asbestos. The Final SI was submitted in 
October 1992 (USAEC, 1992b).
    A Draft SI Addendum (SIA) report, prepared by Arthur D. Little, 
Inc., addresses data gaps identified in the previous SI report (USAEC, 
1994a). The SIA focused on the following six areas of investigation: 
DRMO Salvage Yard, the FTA, the HHA, IAL2, the ODA, and Soldiers Lake. 
Another study, a Remedial Investigation Addendum (RIA), was conducted 
concurrently with the SIA (USAEC, 1993a). The results of the RIA are 
reported as a separate document. However, some basewide data, such as 
geology, general hydrogeology, and background soil concentrations, are 
reported in both reports. An OE Removal was conducted by Human Factors 
Applications, Inc. (HFA) over the Tipton Army Airfield parcel in 1996 
(USACE, 1997a). With the exception of the interior areas of the 
inactive landfill sites and areas beneath water, all unpaved areas of 
the parcel were searched for potential unexploded ordnance (UXO) to a 
depth of four feet.
    RI reports (USACE, 1998a and USACE, 1998b) of IAL1, IAL2, IAL3, the 
CFD, the FTA, and the HHA were prepared by ICF Kaiser. In addition, an 
ecological risk assessment was performed for the 9,000-acre BRAC 
parcel, which included data from the inactive landfills, the CFD, FTA, 
and HHA. RI sampling data for the DRMO (USACE, 1999) was recently 
approved by EPA and MDE. This RI evaluated the potential for the DRMO 
to act as an upgradient source for groundwater contamination in the 
Tipton Army Airfield area. The RI data evaluation determined that the 
DRMO was not impacting the groundwater at the Tipton Army Airfield. 
While other groundwater studies will still be conducted for separate 
operable units at the Fort George Meade Site and may still include the 
Tipton area, no other upgradient areas are suspected as sources of 
groundwater contamination at the Tipton Army Airfield.

B. Other Army Actions and Safety Precautions Taken in the Tipton Army 
Airfield Area

    Past military training activities resulted in the presence of UXO 
at the Tipton Army Airfield parcel. The following is a list of many 
actions and safety precautions taken by the Army at the Site:
Ordnance Survey (1994)
    The Army commissioned an ordnance survey covering all areas of the 
airfield to assess the extent of ordnance remaining at the Site and 
surrounding areas. During this survey, ordnance was searched for to a 
depth of six inches below the surface, and 10% of the remaining area 
was surveyed for ordnance to a depth of five feet. During this action, 
a total of 1,400 ordnance items were recovered from the Site and 
surrounding areas.
Ordnance Clearance (1995-1997)
    The Army searched for ordnance from all accessible areas of the 
Site to a four-foot depth. Inactive landfill areas, wetlands, and all 
paved surfaces were excluded. During this action, 1,548 ordnance items 
were recovered, rendered safe, and disposed of. In addition, more than 
33 tons of scrap (concrete, metal, and miscellaneous debris) were 
recovered incidental to the ordnance removal. Much of this material was 
recycled at local facilities.
Miscellaneous Debris Removal (Summer 1998)
    Several items that were identified during previous ordnance 
clearance projects were recovered for disposal. Items removed included 
several 55-gallon drums and an old vehicle-mounted storage tank.
Ordnance Safety Measures, Inactive Landfill 3 (1998)
    The Army performed ordnance survey work in and around IAL3. The 
safety plan for this area includes developing a long-term monitoring 
plan for the site. The first step in this effort was to identify the 
depth of soil cover over any landfill debris at this site. The Army 
will now develop a schedule for periodic surface sweeps of the area to 
ensure that no ordnance items have migrated to the surface through 
frost action.
Ordnance Safety Measures, Inactive Landfill 2 (1998)
    IAL2, located at the southern most end of the Tipton parcel, could 
not be cleared of suspected ordnance because the area contains large 
amounts of rubble debris and is partially composed of wetlands with a 
shallow water table. The selected response action for this site was the 
installation of a passive engineering control consisting of a seven-
foot high chain link fence with three-strand barbed wire surrounding 
the entire site. The fence ties into an existing fence along Wildlife 
Loop Road, and encompasses an area of 24.68 acres that will be retained 
by the United States as a part of FGGM. IAL2 will not be included in 
the Tipton parcel transfer.
Ordnance Safety Measures, Building Debris Site (1999)
    The Army took additional ordnance safety measures at a 2\1/2\-acre 
area designated as the Building Debris Site. Because of its central 
location, this area has been made a priority for reuse. The

[[Page 50481]]

selected response action for the site is a combination of additional 
ordnance clearance and construction of a vehicle parking lot.
Ordnance Safety Measures, Inactive Landfill 1 (1998-1999)
    The selected response action for IAL1 was a combination of ordnance 
clearance to a four-foot depth and construction of a safety cover. 
During this action, 54 ordnance items were recovered, rendered safe, 
and disposed of. In addition, more than 760 tons of scrap (concrete, 
metal, and miscellaneous debris) were recovered incidental to the 
ordnance removal, and recycled at local facilities. The area of IAL1 
not cleared of suspected ordnance is approximately 5.5 acres. A three-
foot thick safety cover has been constructed over the entire landfill.
    In summary, the Army's prior response actions addressed the 
explosives risks related to UXO and protect human health and the 
environment. The specifics of the Tipton Airfield Decision Document 
(July, 1998), and the Decision Document Addendum (November, 1998) 
include the establishment and enforcement of land use restrictions, 
initially via the FGGM Master Plan and, subsequent to property 
transfer, via deed restrictions. Existing land use restrictions include 
a prohibition on conducting any surface or subsurface excavations, 
digging, well drilling, or other disturbances of soil, or below paved 
surfaces, without prior written approval of the U.S. Government. This 
approval is also required for the first four feet which was previously 
cleared of ordnance items. Exceptions can be made for emergency repair 
of existing utilities. Groundwater use at the Site is restricted for 
any potable or non-potable purposes except for environmental studies. 
Furthermore, the existing land use restrictions prohibit residential 
use of the property without evaluation of residential exposure risk.

C. Hazard Ranking Process

    On April 1, 1997, Fort George G. Meade (FGGM) was proposed for 
inclusion to the National Priorities List (NPL). FGGM was added to the 
final NPL on July 28,1998. The initial proposal was based on a Hazard 
Ranking System (HRS) Score of 51.44, compiled by EPA. An HRS score of 
28.5 has been determined as the cut-off point for inclusion on the NPL; 
thus sites scoring below that will typically not be added to the NPL. 
None of the areas included in this deletion proposal were used in 
compiling the above score. Releases at the following four areas at FGGM 
were evaluated by the HRS scoring team;
    (1) Defense Property Disposal Office (DPDO) Salvage Yard;
    (2) Post Laundry Facility (PLF);
    (3) Active Sanitary Landfill (ASL); and
    (4) Clean Fill Dump (CFD).
    The most significant exposure pathway within the HRS Documentation 
Record was the observed releases to the surface water migration pathway 
(SWMP) from these areas. Primary contaminants of potential concern 
(COPCs) in the SWMP were DDT and Lindane. Atrazine was the primary COPC 
in the groundwater migration pathway of the HRS. New information 
indicates that none of the private wells in the HRS Documentation 
Record are currently being used for drinking water purposes (Phone 
record with Amanda Sigillito of Maryland Department of Environment). In 
addition to the COPCs identified in the offpost private wells, new and 
existing information (Ref. No. 25 and No. 26 in the HRS) indicates that 
Atrazine was detected in offpost private wells only and not attributed 
to the ASL (``ASL Atrazine Study'', U.S. Army Environmental Center, 
June 1995). Atrazine is stored and mixed at the Amtrak rail yard, which 
is located between the ASL and the offpost wells. Although Atrazine was 
not used for HRS purposes, it is likely to be attributable to sources 
other than the ASL.
    The Army and EPA issued a Record of Decision in December, 1998 
which included an interim remedy for the Tipton area groundwater, and 
which included a final remedy of no further action for soils at HHA, 
FTA, and IAL3. The Army and EPA issued a Record of Decision in June, 
1999 which included no further action as a final remedy for Tipton area 
groundwater with continued monitoring, and no further action for soils 
at IAL1 and IAL2. Details of the groundwater remedies are discussed in 
the following sections. The RI reports provide the basis for the no 
further action determinations. These reports, which include the 
Baseline Risk Assessment, document the findings associated with the 
Site. These findings indicate that contaminants detected in the 
environment do not pose an unacceptable risk to human health and the 
environment as long as the land use restrictions selected and 
established by the Tipton Airfield Decision Document and the Decision 
Document Addendum remain in effect. The risk calculated under the 
current and reasonably anticipated future land use scenarios for the 
Site is within the EPA's acceptable risk range. Previously established 
land use restrictions focus on maintaining these land use assumptions.
    The RI reports included both ecological and human health risk 
assessments to address the potential current and future risks posed to 
human health and the environment associated with the Site. The human 
health risk assessment was based on exposure to soil, surface water, 
sediment, and supplementary evaluations of groundwater. The ecological 
risk assessment was based on exposure to soil, sediments, and surface 
water. The risk assessment included estimates of the risk posed to 
human health and the environment assuming the continuation of the 
current industrial (non-residential) land use scenario, as well as risk 
in the absence of restrictions, or in the event of contaminant 
migration. The establishment of land use restrictions eliminates the 
exposure route to the contaminated groundwater and, therefore, protects 
human health and the environment. The groundwater assessment supports 
the continuation of these restrictions. The current land use scenario 
estimates the level of risk posed by Fort Meade's current use of the 
land. The current land use scenario is based on the assumption that the 
property continues in current or like use remains, remains under U.S. 
Government authority to enforce existing land use restrictions, and 
assumes that groundwater contaminant migration to off-site receptors 
will not occur at unacceptable levels.
    The RI report for IAL3 also documents Maximum Contaminant Level 
(MCL) exceedances of the volatile organic compound, benzene, in 
groundwater sampled from well MW3-2 during two sampling rounds. Benzene 
has an MCL of 5.0 g/l. The average benzene concentration 
detected during the two sampling events is 9.05 g/l. The RI 
investigation did not reveal a likely source area. Although the average 
concentration of 9.05 g/l exceeds the MCL, the risks 
associated with benzene in the Tipton area groundwater as a whole were 
relatively low. Even if the groundwater were used residentially, the 
benzene risks would be as follows: for a child, the Hazard Index (HI) 
would be 0.04; for an adult, the HI would be 0.07; and the cancer risk 
would be 2  x  10-6. Therefore, it has been determined that 
benzene is not a risk driver for groundwater.
    Health risks are based on a conservative estimate of the potential 
carcinogenic risk or potential to cause other health effects not 
related to cancer. Carcinogenic risks and non-carcinogenic risks were 
evaluated as part of the risk assessment; three factors

[[Page 50482]]

were considered: (1) Nature and extent of chemicals at the Site, (2) 
the pathways through which human and ecological receptors are or may be 
exposed to those chemicals at the Site, and (3) potential toxic effects 
of those chemicals.
    Cancer risks are expressed as numbers reflecting the increased 
chance that a person will develop cancer, if he/she is directly exposed 
(e.g., through working at the Site) to the chemicals found in the 
groundwater and soil at the Site over a period of time. For example, 
EPA's acceptable risk range for Superfund sites is 1  x  
10-4 to 1  x  10-6, meaning there is one 
additional chance in ten thousand (1  x  10-4) to one 
additional chance in one million (1  x  10-6) that a person 
will develop cancer if exposed to a Superfund site. The risk associated 
with developing other health effects is expressed as a HI, which is the 
ratio of the existing level of exposure to contaminants at a site to an 
acceptable level of exposure. Below a HI of 1, adverse effects are not 
expected. A HI is also used to evaluate ecological risks.
    An isolated detection of 2-amino-4, 6-dinitrotoluene was observed 
at 0.522 g/l in well MW3-2. This compound, an explosive's 
degradation product, was detected at lower depths (Arundel Confining 
Layer) during one of two sampling rounds. This isolated detection 
resulted in an HI less than 1 for commercial/industrial use scenarios. 
4-amino-2,6-dinitrotoluene was detected in both sampling rounds in well 
MW3-2. The average sample concentration is 28.6 g/l resulting 
in a HI of 2 (EPA Region 3 risk-based screening concentration = 2.2 
g/l; Hazard Quotient of 1). The area-wide evaluation of 
groundwater concluded that the contamination was not originating from 
an identifiable source area within the Site, but was the result of past 
activities at Fort George Meade. There is no known carcinogenic risk 
associated with 4-amino-2,6-dinitrotoluene. The aminodinitrotoluenes 
(particularly 4-A-2,6-DNT) are associated with HIs greater than 1 for 
groundwater use by workers or residents. Because of the land use 
restrictions already in effect, it has been determined that no exposure 
pathways to the public exist due to this class of contaminants, 
provided that the land use restrictions are maintained. This is also 
true of metals, bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate, and acetophenone, which 
could contribute further to risks (both carcinogenic and 
noncarcinogenic) if residential receptors were ever exposed to the 
groundwater. In addition, a study of groundwater migration does not 
indicate expected migration of these chemicals to off-post residential 
wells above unacceptable concentrations. Given the relatively low 
concentrations of the aminodinitrotoluenes, the lack of a known 
carcinogenic risk relating to this class of contaminants, the lack of 
an identifiable source of these contaminants within the Site, and the 
lack of an exposure route, it has been determined that no active 
groundwater remediation is required.
    Because of the RI findings, the Army and EPA determined that every 
two years after the date of the June 1999 ROD, groundwater will be 
sampled from certain wells. Monitoring results will be provided to EPA, 
MDE, and the Army. In addition, the Tipton area will be inspected to 
assure compliance with the land use restrictions. A review every 5 
years will be conducted to evaluate the frequency and need for 
continued monitoring. This is to ensure that the remedies continue to 
provide adequate protection to human health and the environment. The 
five year reviews will be conducted pursuant to OSWER Directive 9355.7-
02. ``Structure and Components of Five-Year Reviews,'' and/or other 
applicable guidance.
    The remedies selected for this Site will be implemented in 
accordance with the two Records of Decision. Human health threats and 
potential environmental impacts have been reduced to acceptable levels. 
EPA and the MDE, therefore, find that the remedies implemented will 
provide adequate protection to human health and the environment.
    EPA, with the concurrence of MDE, believes that the criteria for 
deletion of the Tipton Army Airfield portion of the Fort George Meade 
Site have been met. Therefore, EPA is proposing deletion of the Tipton 
Army Airfield portion of the Fort George Meade Site from the NPL.

    Dated: September 10, 1999.
Thomas Voltaggio,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 99-24280 Filed 9-16-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P