No abstract

LIST OF FIGURES (Continued) 4.8 Wastewater Treatment and Sewage Sludge Disposal 4-30 4.9 Waste Disposal to Surface Drainage 4-34 LIST OF TABLES NUMBER TITLE PAGE NO. 1 Sites Evaluated Using the Hazard Assessment Rating 5 Methodology-Williams AFB 2 Recommended Monitoring Program for Phase II IRP 7 3.1 Williams AFB Summary of Selected Meterological Data 3-2 3.2 Generalized Stratigraphy 3-9 3.3 Well Construction Summary 3-11 3.4 Arizona Water Quality Limits for Irrigation Water 3-17 3.5 Summary of Selected Chemical Analyses for 3-20 Wastewater Discharge 3.6 Summary of Selected Chemical Analyses for Water 3-22 From Wells 3.7 Summary of Selected Chemical Analyses for Wastewater 3-24 Discharge 3.8 Summary of Selected Chenmical Analyses for Water 3-25 4.1 Industrial Operations (Shops) 4-4 4.2 Underground Waste Oil Storage Tanks 4-16 4.3 Landfill Sites, Hardfill Sites, Waste Burial Sites 4-27 4.4 Summary of Decision Tree Logic for Areas of Initial 4-36 77'4 Environmental Concern at Williams AFB 4.5 Summary of HARM Scores for Potential Contamination 4-38 Sources at Williams AFB iv TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) LIST OF TABLES (Continued) 5.1 Sites Evaluated Using the Hazard Assessment Rating 5-2 Methodology-Williams AFB

or sandy loam with low permeability values. These data indicate that recharge by precipitation infiltrating the soils will be slow. 3. Surface water in the vicinity ot the plant may recharge the shallow water-table aouifer or may flow downstream in the San Jose Drain to the Rio Grande River. 4. Clay is a dominant lithologic unit under the plant which nay limit the vertical migration of grourd water. 5. Alluvial deposits of sand, gravel, cobbles and clay urderly the plant. Water levels are approximately 15 to 20 feet below ground within the shallow alluvial deposits. f 6. Water levels within the deeper alluvial depostis and the Santa Fe group (undivided) are approximately 35-50 feet deep. These data indicate that a shallow water-table aquifer exists under the plant and a potential exists for the horizontal and vertical migration of ground water 1rom the shallow water-table aquifer to the regional water-table aquifer. 7. Groundwater contamination has been detected in shallow monitoring wells on the plant property. 8. The direction of groundwater flow within the shallow water-table aquifer cannot be determined based on available data. 9. The regional groundwater flow direction is east and northeast from the plant to major water prodiicing wells tor the City of Albuquerque. 10. The operation of wells SJ3 and SJ6 may impact tie groundwater conditions underlying the plant in both the shallow and regional water-table aquifers. 11. The plant is located in a "declared underground water basin" which is the sole source aquifer for Albuquerque's water supply. 12. There are no Federally-or state-listed endangered or threatened species which inhabit the plant property. EITHODOLOGY During the course of this project, interviews were conducted with plant personnel (past and presert) familiar with past waste disposal p-actices; file searches were performed for past hazardous waste activities; interviews were held with local, state and Federal agencies; and M-3-the NMWQCC Human Health Standard of 0.02 mg/l. There are no standards for triohloromethane or 1,1,1-trichl.oroethane. The source of these three organic contaminants has not been identified. No sampling of the San Jose Drain upstream of the plant was conducted at the time of the '1 downstream sampling. Water quality sampling of the twelve water discharge outfall points into the San Jose Drain are conducted by the plant (Figure 3.6). These twelve discharge points are sampled according to the Na.ional Pollutant 3 Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). The results of recent sampling are shown in Table 3.3. The allowable discharge limits for oil and grease has been exceeded on six occasions while the allowaile discharge for chemical oxygen demand has been exceeded on five occasions. The stations at which these excesses were dete:ted were station numbers 001,

The Department of Defense (DOD) has developed a program to identify and evaluate past hazardous material disposal sites on DOD property, to control the migration of hazardous contaminants, and to control hazards to health or welfare that may result from these past disposal operations. This program is called the Installation Restoration Program (IRP). The IRP has four phases consisting of Phase I, Initial Assess

No abstract