Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||Feasibility study of contamination remediation at Naval Weapons Station, Concord, California|
|Authors:||United States. Naval Facilities Engineering Command. Western Division.|
Cullinane, M. John.
Lee, Charles R.
O'Neil, L. Jean.
Clairain, Ellis J.
Naval Weapons Station
|Publisher:||Environmental Laboratory (U.S.)|
Engineer Research and Development Center (U.S.)
|Series/Report no.:||Miscellaneous paper (U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station) ; EL-86-3.|
Abstract: This report identifies and describes potential remedial actions to eliminate or mitigate the release of hazardous substances onto lands of the Naval Weapons Station Concord. Hazardous substances identified as necessitating remedial actions include lead, cadmium, zinc, copper, selenium, and arsenic. The proposed remedial actions are designed to address existing or potential damages identified in a separate study. These identified damages include: contamination of soil with metals; contamination and toxicity of plants and soil invertebrates; reduced plant growth; increased soil acidity; surface water contamination; air contamination; losses of wildlife food quantity and quality of habitat; loss of wetland function; and loss of ultimate land use. The release of hazardous substances at seven sites is identified. Sites include both wetland and upland habitat. The sites are consolidated into three areas based on the important nature of the habitat and category of remedial action that may be appropriate. Five categories of remedial actions were evaluated for implementation at NWS, Concord including: no action, increased environmental monitoring, source removal, source isolation, and site restoration. Fourteen remedial action technologies were initially assessed with five technologies found to be applicable at NWS Concord. These five technologies were combined into ten alternative remedial actions. Seven alternatives survived the initial screening process and were subjected to a detailed evaluation using nine criteria: reliability, implementability, technical effectiveness, environmental concerns, safety, operation and maintenance, costs, regulatory requirements, and public acceptance. NOTE: This file is large. Allow your browser several minutes to download the file.
|Appears in Collections:||Documents|