PUBLIC HEALTH ASSESSMENT
FORT DEVENS
AYER, MIDDLESEX COUNTY, MASSACHUSETTS
SUMMARY
The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) has prepared this public health
assessment to evaluate potential exposure pathways for contaminants from the Fort Devens site to
cause harm to people living near or accessing the site. From a review of the available environmental
data and exposure information, ATSDR finds that the Fort Devens site poses no apparent public
health hazard.
Fort Devens is located 35 miles northwest of Boston, Massachusetts. The site
covers approximately 9,311 acres in the towns of Ayer, Harvard, Lancaster, and
Shirley. Initially established as a temporary training camp, Fort Devens eventually
processed military equipment. During normal operations, some processing chemicals
were released to the surrounding soil and groundwater, and other environmental
media. In 1989, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) placed the site
on the National Priorities List because groundwater was contaminated by volatile
organic compounds (used to clean equipment) and/or metals. Most of the contamination
reportedly is contained within the Fort Devens property, although some contamination
has migrated via groundwater to an adjacent property.
In evaluating potential public health hazards at Fort Devens, ATSDR reviewed available
information from Fort Devens, the Ayer Department of Public Works, the Massachusetts
Department of Environmental Protection, the Massachusetts Department of Public Health, the
Massachusetts Department of Environmental Management, Massachusetts Development Finance
Agency (MassDevelopment, and formerly known as Devens Commerce Center), Nashoba
Associated Board of Health, and EPA. ATSDR also held public availability sessions in Ayer,
Harvard, Lancaster, and Shirley to hear health concerns of residents living near Fort Devens, and
prepared health consultations to respond to some of their concerns.
From a preliminary review of the data and community discussions, ATSDR identified contaminated
groundwater that might feed into public or private drinking water supplies as the principal exposure
pathway of concern. After reviewing available data in greater detail, however, ATSDR determined
that site-related contaminants pose no public health hazard to people who currently use, or people
who have used, area drinking water supplies. The Army continues to take measures to reduce
potential future exposures to groundwater by identifying and intercepting contaminants before they
can reach area drinking water supplies.
ATSDR also evaluated potential exposures from contacting Grove Pond and Plow Shop Pond
surface water and sediment, breathing indoor air at the former Devens Elementary School, and
eating pond fish. In evaluating these pathways, ATSDR considered whether people might have been
(past), are (current), or could be (future) exposed to contaminants from Fort Devens at levels known to cause public health hazards. Following its review, ATSDR has drawn these conclusions:
- No harmful exposures have occurred in the past, nor are likely to occur for people who wade, boat, or catch and release fish, at Grove Pond and Plow Shop Pond. Advisories
currently recommend against swimming at either pond.
- Air inside the former Devens Elementary School poses no current or future public health hazards from contaminants associated with historic fuel oil spills. Although limited data were collected around the time of the release, information gathered to date suggest the air inside the school was probably not adversely impacted in the past.
- People most likely were not exposed to harmful levels of contaminants when they ate
fish in the past from Grove Pond, Plow Shop Pond, or Mirror Lake. Advisories currently
recommend that people limit or refrain from consumption of fish caught from these
ponds. As a precautionary measure, people can best protect themselves by continuing to
follow the recommendations in the advisory posted at each of these water bodies.
BACKGROUND
Site Description and History
Fort Devens (also known as the Reserve Forces Training Area [Devens]) is a military base located
approximately 35 miles northwest of Boston, Massachusetts. The site covers approximately 9,300
acres in the towns of Ayer, Harvard, Lancaster, and Shirley (BRAC, 1996). As Figure 1 indicates,
Fort Devens is divided into three functionally distinct parts: the Main Post, the North Post, and the
South Post (Fort Devens, 1995a). The three posts are described below:
Main Post. The Main Post, situated on 3,528 acres, was the
center for residential, industrial, educational, and recreational activities
at Fort Devens. Most of the Main Post is located in the town of Harvard.
North Post. Located north of West Main Street in the towns
of Ayer and Shirley, the 900-acre North Post contains the Moore Army Air Field,
the installation's water treatment plant, and training areas. The wastewater
treatment plant does not currently meet Massachusetts standards. The post
Reuse Plan calls for its replacement with a state-of-the art water treatment
plant.
South Post. Separated from the Main Post by Route 2, the 4,883-acre
South Post has been and is still used for firing practices and training. The
area, also known as the Tactical Training Area or the South Post Impact Area,
is entirely within the boundaries of the town of Lancaster.
Fort Devens was established in 1917 as Camp Devens, a temporary training camp for military
personnel. By 1931, the camp had become a permanent installation, known as Fort Devens, for the
training and induction of military personnel and the processing of military equipment. More
recently, Fort Devens has "demobilized" and "out processed" equipment assigned to Army units in
New England (BRAC, 1996).
In support of its mission, the Army conducted operations (e.g., storage and distribution of fuel oil,
maintenance of vehicles and air crafts, photographic processing, and landfilling) that used a variety
of chemicals. As a result of these past operations and waste disposal practices, hazardous materials
have been released to the environment. Some of these chemicals, including volatile organic
compounds (VOCs), explosive compounds, fuels, and, perhaps, inorganic compounds (e.g., arsenic)
might have been released to the soil and into the underlying groundwater (BRAC, 1996). Most of
the contamination reportedly is contained on the Fort Devens property, though some contamination
has migrated via groundwater to adjacent property. Today, hazardous material and wastes generated
at the property are disposed off or recycled at off-site waste disposal facilities.
In 1989, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) placed Fort Devens on the National
Priorities List (NPL) of sites identified for possible long-term remedial response. The post was
placed on the list as a result of VOC contamination in groundwater at Shepley's Hill Landfill, metal
contamination in groundwater at Cold Spring Brook Landfill (area of contamination [AOC] 40),
and the proximity of these locations to drinking water wells (Grove Pond Wells and Patton Well)
(Fort Devens, 1995b).
The Army has conducted numerous and extensive investigations of environmental contamination
associated with past operations and waste handling practices at Fort Devens through its installation
restoration program (IRP). Over the years, more than 300 sites have been identified for
environmental investigation, including landfills, industrial areas, gas stations, post spill sites, waste
storage areas, and underground and above ground storage tanks. Most of the sites have been
investigated under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA), also known as Superfund (Horne Engineering Services, Inc., 1996), many of which
have been designated as requiring no further action, while other sites are in varying stages of
cleanup with Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MADEP) and EPA oversight.
Table 1 describes the use, chemical contamination, and current status of many of the study areas and
AOCs at Fort Devens.
The Federal Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission has since recommended closing
Fort Devens, and retaining a reserve enclave, which includes all of the South Post Impact Area and
significant portions of the Main and North Post. The goal of the BRAC is to quickly transfer excess
military property (about 50 percent of the total acreage) to other parties for economic reuse and
development. To guide remedial activities at Fort Devens, the Army has grouped study areas and
AOCs that share similar contaminated media or geographic proximity and assigned them to one of
six operable units (Fort Devens, 1998).
Today, the Main Post and North Post are not actively used for military support, but the South Post is
and will continue to be used by the Army for military training. In 1996, large portions of the Main
Post and North Post were transferred to the local redevelopment authority, the Massachusetts
Government Land Bank, for the development of the Devens Regional Enterprise Zone (referred to as
"Devens"). A Reuse Plan outlines many of the proposed uses for the enterprise zone. Once
transferred or leased, the management of the physical property and associated environmental issues
will be the responsibility of the Massachusetts Development Finance Agency (MassDevelopment,
also previously known as Devens Commerce Center). Any ongoing major environmental response
actions at Fort Devens will continue to be managed by the Army (BRAC, 1996; MADEP, 1999a).
With state legislative approval, the area will eventually be transferred to the local community for
economic development and reuse (MADEP, 1998a; Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc., 1994). For ease
of presentation, this PHA will refer to the site only as "Fort Devens" and will no longer refer to the site as "Devens."
ATSDR Involvement
As part of the public health assessment process, the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease
Registry (ATSDR) conducted an initial scoping visit and met with representatives from the Army,
Fort Devens, EPA, MADEP, and Massachusetts Department of Public Health (MDPH) in March
1991. ATSDR gathered information on potential pathways of human exposure to contaminants and
held session(s) with the public to gather information about community health concerns. From these
meetings and a review of the data then available, ATSDR determined that no immediate threats to
public health existed, but that several potential exposure pathways and community health concerns
required further evaluation.
ATSDR has revisited the Fort Devens site on several occasions, to confirm that no situations
requiring immediate attention existed and to further evaluate community health concerns. ATSDR
has also attended Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) meetings throughout the years in order to
remain current with environmental and health issues. At the request of MADEP, ATSDR evaluated
potential health hazards associated with explosive compounds in groundwater underlying the South
Post. In a December 1994 health consultation, ATSDR presented its conclusion that explosive
compounds were not likely to move from the source areas to drinking water supplies.
As part of its ongoing involvement at Fort Devens, ATSDR conducted another site visit and met
with representatives from the Army, MADEP, and EPA on March 23, 1998. Also, ATSDR met with
representatives of the U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Prisons, Nashoba Associated
Board of Health, League of Women Voters, Ayer Department of Public Works, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Nashua River Watershed Association, Ayer Committee for Community Wellness,
Devens Reuse Task Force, and MassDevelopment. ATSDR attended a RAB meeting, where
ATSDR staff listened to community health concerns and presented an overview of the public health
assessment process (ATSDR, 1998). ATSDR has continued to attend RAB meetings throughout the
year where ATSDR presented information as well as gathered additional community concerns. In
March 1998, ATSDR also held public availability sessions in Ayer, Harvard, Lancaster, Shirley,
and at Fort Devens to provide an additional opportunity for the public to express any site-related
health concerns. More than 50 people attended these sessions. ATSDR addresses the public's health
concerns in the "Evaluation of Potential Exposure Pathways" and "Community Health Concern" sections of this public health assessment.
From the public availability meetings, ATSDR learned that community members were particularly
concerned about the possibility of health effects from drinking water drawn from the Ayer Grove
Pond wells and from recreational uses of Grove Pond and Plow Shop Pond. In response, ATSDR
developed focused health consultations and fact sheets on the health consequences of drinking Ayer
Grove Pond well water (July 1998) and recreational uses of Grove Pond and Plow shop Pond
(December 1998). This PHA summarizes the findings of these health consultations, as well as
assesses other potential pathways of exposures (e.g., indoor air at the Devens Elementary School),
and responds to specific health concerns expressed by community members.
Demographics
ATSDR examines demographic information, or population information, to identify the presence of
sensitive populations, such as young children and the elderly, in the vicinity of a site. Demographics
also provide details on residential history in a particular area--information that helps ATSDR assess
time frames of potential human exposure to contaminants. Demographic information for the
residential areas surrounding Fort Devens is presented in this section.
Fort Devens has been a major employer of military and civilian personnel for the area. According to
the 1990 census data, Fort Devens supported more than 2,200 civilian and 6,200 military personnel.
About 80% of the military personnel (about 4,900 persons) and family members (4,280 persons)
stationed at Fort Devens lived on post. Many military retirees also used services provided by the
post. Since closure procedures began, the Fort Devens workforce has decreased to a daytime
population of about 900 civilian and 250 military personnel (Ecology and Environment, 1994; Fort
Devens, 1999a). The daytime population is expected to increase as businesses move into the newly
created enterprise zone at Fort Devens (Fort Devens 1999a).
A number of small towns are located around Fort Devens, the nearest of which are Ayer, Harvard,
Lancaster, and Shirley. The towns of Ayer (population of 6,029 persons) and Shirley (population of
5,473 persons) abut the Main Post to the north and west, respectively. Portions of Lancaster
(population of 6,610 persons) lie adjacent to the South Post and to the east of the site is the town of
Harvard (population of 6,816 persons) (Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc., 1994). Figure 2 shows
demographic information for the population within a 1-mile radius of Fort Devens boundaries. As
the figure indicates, approximately 20,000 residents of the surrounding communities live within a 1-mile buffer of the site boundaries, including approximately 2,600 children ages 6 and under and
1,000 adults ages 65 and older (ATSDR, 1999).
Land Use
ATSDR also reviewed land use at or near the Fort Devens site to identify valuable information on
the types and frequency of activities of the surrounding population and the possibility of exposure
through these activities. The predominant land use in the four towns surrounding the site is
residential, while commercial and industrial uses are concentrated along Route 2A. Still, large
portions of undeveloped, wooded, and open pasture land exist in the four town region. One of the
larger undeveloped areas is the Oxbow National Wildlife Refuge, which is located along the east-central portion of Fort Devens. Some nearby land is also used for agriculture, particularly in the
town of Harvard where several orchards exist (Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc., 1994).
Groundwater at Fort Devens is found largely in the permeable glacial-deltaic outwash deposits of
sand, gravel, and boulders. Small amounts of groundwater can also be obtained from the fractured
bedrock aquifer. The top of the saturated zone, or water table, in the area of Fort Devens is
encountered about 0 to 90 feet below ground surface (Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc., 1994).
Groundwater flow direction varies locally, but is generally toward the Nashua River (Ecology and Environment, 1994).
Groundwater, which meets MADEP's designation as a Class I potable water source, serves as a
major source of drinking water for the region (Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc., 1994). Each of the
four towns and Fort Devens provides groundwater-supplied public drinking water to its residents.
Table 2 describes the location, history, and use of area public drinking water wells. Some water is
drawn from the medium- or high-yield aquifers lying beneath portions (about 30%) of the Fort Devens property.
Some area residents rely on private wells in lieu of public water. While no complete list of active
private wells in the area currently exists, through a review of files at the Massachusetts Department
of Environmental Management and information obtained from the Nashoba Boards of Health,
ATSDR estimates that approximately 700 private wells have been installed in the four town area
since the 1960s. Of these wells, roughly 100 to 300 private wells are located within a 1- mile buffer
of the Fort Devens site. A few wells serve industrial and agricultural purposes, but most wells are
registered for domestic uses (MDEM, 1999; Nashoba Associated Board of Health, 1999). Because
of the limitations of these data and the absence of recent well information, we do not know with
certainty, however, whether the private wells are still used, or even if they have ever been used.
Fort Devens is located within the Nashua River Basin and more than 8 miles of rivers and streams
flow through its property (Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc., 1994). About 100 acres of ponds and
lakes are used for outdoor recreation, including Robbins Pond, Mirror Lake, and Little Mirror Lake
(Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc., 1994). Two other ponds, Grove Pond and Plow Shop Pond, are
situated along the northern boundary of the Fort Devens property. To reduce potential exposure to
contaminants that might be present fish and/or sediment, Mirror Lake is posted with a fish
consumption advisory and Grove Pond and Plow Shop Pond are posted with a catch and release fishing only and no swimming advisory.
Quality Assurance and Quality Control
In preparing this public health assessment, ATSDR relied on the information provided in the
referenced documents. Documents prepared for the IRP program meet specific standards for
adequate quality assurance and control measures for chain-of-custody procedures, laboratory
procedures, and data reporting. The validity of the analyses and conclusions drawn in this document
are dependent upon the availability and reliability of the referenced information. The environmental
data presented in the public health assessment are from the environmental investigations for Fort
Devens; water quality data provided by the Ayer Department of Public Works; and additional data
provided by the EPA, MADEP, and MDPH. The limitations of these data have been identified in the associated reports.
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONTAMINATION AND HUMAN EXPOSURE PATHWAYS
Introduction
In this section, ATSDR evaluates whether community members have been (past), are (current) or
could be (future) exposed to harmful levels of chemicals. Figure 3 describes the conservative
exposure evaluation process used by ATSDR. As the figure indicates, ATSDR considers how people
might come into contact with, or be exposed to, contaminated media. Specifically, ATSDR
determines whether an exposure could occur through ingestion, dermal (skin) contact with
contaminated media, or inhalation of vapors, and also considers the likely length (duration) and
frequency of the exposure.
If exposure was or is possible, ATSDR then considers whether chemicals were or are present at
levels that might be harmful to people. ATSDR does this by screening the concentrations of
contaminants in an environmental medium against health-based comparison values. Comparison
values are chemical concentrations that health scientists have determined are not likely to cause
adverse effects, even when assuming very conservative/safe exposure scenarios. Because comparison
values are not thresholds of toxicity, environmental levels that exceed comparison values would not
necessarily produce adverse health effects. If a chemical is found in the environment at levels
exceeding its corresponding comparison value, ATSDR examines potential exposure variables and
the toxicology of the contaminant. ATSDR emphasizes that regardless of the level of contamination,
a public health hazard exists only if people come in contact with, or are otherwise exposed to,
harmful levels of contaminated media.
After an initial review of potential health hazards at the Fort Devens site, ATSDR identified the
groundwater, surface water/sediment, food chain, and indoor air exposure pathways as requiring
further evaluation. Following the strategy outlined above, ATSDR examined whether human
exposure to harmful levels of contaminants via these pathways existed in the past, exists now, or
could potentially exist in the future. ATSDR summarizes its evaluation of potential exposure
pathways in Table 3 and describes it in more detail in the discussion that follows. To acquaint
readers with terminology used in this report, a list of comparison values and a glossary are included
in Appendices A and B, respectively. In addition, Appendix C presents the methods and assumptions
used to estimate exposures and support some of the report's conclusions.
Evaluation of the Groundwater Exposure Pathway
Conclusion
After a detailed review of drinking water sources and environmental monitoring data,
ATSDR has concluded that no apparent public health hazards are associated with past or
current uses of groundwater-supplied drinking water sources. The Army, MADEP, and
EPA will continue to take precautions and test groundwater to protect the underlying
aquifer and prevent contaminants from reaching drinking water supplies in the future.
Discussion
Groundwater Use
Groundwater is the primary source of drinking water for Fort Devens and the surrounding
communities of Ayer, Harvard, Lancaster, and Shirley. Fort Devens has relied on on-site drinking
water from four groundwater-supplied drinking water wells or wellfields. These wells/wellfields
include: the MacPherson well located on the North Post; the Fort Devens Grove Pond wellfield, the
Patton well, and the Shebokin well (the primary supply well) situated on the Main Post; and Well D-1 located at the South Post. Unlike the other drinking water wells, the Fort Devens Grove Pond
wellfield actually comprises eight individual wells that are connected via a single pumping system.
Currently, this wellfield supplies only a small portion of the drinking water supplied to the Fort
Devens community since it operates at only one-fifth of its full capacity (MADEP, 1999a).
According to the Reuse Plan, the wells on the Main Post and North Post will continue to be used in
the future for drinking water, and Well D-1 will continue to be used by the military as a drinking
water supply for troops training in the area (Ecology and Environment, Inc., 1994). There are no
plans to install new drinking water supply wells on either the Main or North Post, although existing
wells could be expanded to meet anticipated water demand.
Communities surrounding Fort Devens also rely on groundwater for public drinking water supplies.
Table 2 describes the years of operation, the location, and use pattern for public drinking water wells
located in Ayer, Harvard, Lancaster, and Shirley. Of these wells, Ayer's Grove Pond wells are
nearest to the Fort Devens boundary, located just beyond the site's northern boundary.
Some people in the area of Fort Devens rely on private wells. A complete inventory on the location
and use pattern of private wells in the vicinity of Fort Devens is not available. In discussions with
town representatives and following a review of private well registration information, ATSDR
learned that no private wells exist in or immediately downgradient from contaminated on-site areas
(Harvard Water Department, 1998; Shirley Water District, 1998; Lancaster Water Department,
1998; ADPW, 1998a; Ayer, 1998). It should be noted that several new homes with private wells are
located upgradient from a source of groundwater contamination known as AOC 50. We discuss the
potential health consequences of contamination at AOC 50 later in this PHA.
Groundwater Quality
As a result of past site activities various chemicals have been released to soil and subsequently to
groundwater underlying the Fort Devens property. The Army has collected groundwater samples at
many of the AOCs and study areas on Fort Devens to determine where chemical contaminants are
located and where they might move. Samples were analyzed for a wide variety of chemicals
suspected to have been used at Fort Devens, including VOCs and metals. Selected samples were also
analyzed for explosives, pesticides, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), and polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCBs).
In general, VOCs and metals were widely distributed and present in the highest concentrations,
whereas explosives, pesticides, and PCBs were much less common in groundwater beneath the post.
Table 4 summarizes the results of groundwater monitoring data for VOCs and metals. For each
contaminant, the table presents the maximum concentration, the location of that detection, and the
most conservative comparison value. As the table indicates, some of the highest levels of VOCs and
metals were found in groundwater samples collected at Shepley's Hill Landfill (AOCs 4, 5, and 18)
located in the northern portion of the Fort Devens property; the former World War II [WW II] Fuel
Points) (AOC 50) located on the northeastern boundary of Moore Army Air Field; and the Historic
Gas Station Site (AOC 43G) located in the central portion of the Main Post (see Figure 1). In these
areas, several VOCs (i.e., tetrachloroethylene [PCE], 1,2-dichloroethane) and metals (i.e., arsenic,
chromium, aluminum) exceeded health-based comparison values. Since detecting groundwater
contamination in these areas, the Army has removed or is controlling contaminated sources, and they
have started long-term groundwater monitoring programs.
Most of the groundwater contamination appears to be contained on the Fort Devens property. Recent
monitoring data, however, indicate that some contaminants have migrated with groundwater beyond
the Fort Devens property at the Moore Army Air Field (AOC 50). PCE has entered the groundwater
beneath the Army's former Parachute Rigging Facility at the Moore Army Air Field, where the
chemical was stored in drums. Although the general direction of groundwater flow in this area is to
the southwest, PCE has been transported northward, reportedly as a result of backflow (MADEP,
1998b). The PCE contamination has spread across Route 2A to the Merrimack Warehouse property,
where concentrations exceed ATSDR's conservative comparison value for cancer (i.e., cancer risk
evaluation guide [ CREG]) but are below EPA's Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) of 5 parts
per billion (ppb). (See Appendix A for a description of CREGs and MCLs). Contamination has not
spread further north beyond the warehouse property where residential properties are located
(Oakhurst Street). In fact, no detectable concentrations were found in potable wells at the
Massachusetts Game Farm located north of the source area or even in monitoring wells far north of
the source area and closest to residential areas (MADEP, 1999a). The Army installed a soil vapor
extraction system as part of an interim removal action to control the source of PCE contamination
(MADEP, 1998b). Between 1994 and 1996, the system removed approximately 240 pounds of PCE
from soil.
The Army, with MADEP and EPA oversight, continues to track contamination north of AOC 50
through their extensive network of groundwater monitoring wells. In the fall of 1998, the Army
drilled more monitoring wells in the area between the suspected source and the new residential
property to the north. These monitoring wells will help to clarify the extent of PCE contamination
associated with AOC 50. They also continue to evaluate options aimed at reducing the PCE
contamination in the groundwater associated with AOC 50.
The discussion that follows presents information on the potential for exposure to contaminated
groundwater through the area drinking water supplies identified above.
Fort Devens Drinking Water Supply (On-site)
Past and Current Exposure
No exposure has occurred through use of water supplied by these on-site wells, primarily because
contaminants associated with Fort Devens have never reached areas where any of the Main Post or
North Post drinking water wells are located. Furthermore, water from each well is tested quarterly
for compliance with state and federal drinking water quality standards to ensure its safety,
chlorinated, and then delivered to a central area where it is co-mingled with water from other
drinking water wells (MADEP, 1999a; Fort Devens, 1999a).
ATSDR previously evaluated potential health hazards associated with exposure to contaminated
groundwater beneath South Post and use of Well D-1 in its 1994 health consultation (ATSDR,
1994). From that evaluation, ATSDR concluded that the explosive contamination in Fort Devens
South Post is not a threat to human health because no one drinks water drawn from the contaminated
area. A 1996 record of decision (ROD) for the South Post recommended that no further formal
remedial action was needed to ensure protection of human health, but the Army is committed to
assessing the groundwater quality through long-term monitoring (Horne Engineering Services, Inc.,
1996).
Future Exposure
The on-site wells will continue to be used for drinking water in the future. Most of these wells are
not likely to be threatened by contamination in the future because they do not currently lie in or
downgradient from areas of contamination. Furthermore, many measures to protect the
groundwater entering these drinking water supply wells are being considered as a major goal in the
reuse planning efforts. For example, development of areas overlying the aquifer will be protected
through a variety of measures outlined in a Water Resource Protection provision contained in the
Reuse Plan Bylaws. MADEP concurs with the provisions as outlined in the reuse plan (MADEP,
1999a). Specific measures in the Bylaws include best management practices for operations on the
property and continued monitoring and regulatory control of the aquifer (Vanasse Hangen Brustlin,
Inc., 1994). These efforts should help to ensure that the water supply is protected from contaminants
in the future.
Although no new wells are planned, the capacity of a given well may be increased to meet
anticipated water demands. So far, the Patton well is slated for expansion. The Patton well is located
about 600 feet from the Cold Spring Landfill (AOC 40), and the landfill sits within the well's
recharge area. Under current pumping conditions, the Patton well is not affected by debris or
contamination in the landfill. However, groundwater modeling indicates that when the well is
pumped continuously near its capacity of 1,000 gallons per minute, contaminants from the landfill
could migrate to the Patton well. If this were to occur, material from the landfill could pose a
potential threat to the drinking water supply in the future. A ROD recommending excavation of the
landfill (as wells as excavation of AOC 9 and 11 and study area 13, with limited removal of
contaminated surface soil at AOC 41 and study areas 12) was signed in July 1999 (Devens
Commerce Center, 1998; EPA, 1999; BRAC, 1999).
Public Drinking Water Supplies (Off-site)
The majority of public water supply wells are not at risk of contamination because they are not
within or downgradient from areas of contamination. In addition, public water suppliers, under
MADEP requirements, ensure the quality and safety of their drinking water through routine testing.
The Ayer Grove Pond wells are, however, located just north of Fort Devens. Ayer residents have
expressed concern about the proximity of the Ayer Grove Pond wells to the AOCs at Fort Devens,
the closest of which are AOCs 44 and 52, about 2,500 feet away. In the particular, residents voiced
concern about potential impacts from the Shepley's Hill Landfill, located about 3,500 feet away
from the wells (see Figure 4). Because of this concern, ATSDR conducted a focused evaluation on
potential harmful exposure associated with use of the Grove Pond wells. The findings of this
evaluation were released in a health consultation in July 1998 and are summarized in discussion that
follows.
Past Exposure
The Ayer Department of Public Works used the Grove Pond wells in the past to supplement water
drawn from wells at Spectacle Pond. Grove Pond wells were taken out of service in 1993 after
numerous instances in which iron, manganese, and arsenic were detected. While the source of these
metals is not known with certainty, it is very likely that they are at least in part naturally occurring
for the geographic region (MADEP, 1999a). The wells were placed back in service in 1998.
Because the wells were closed between 1993 and 1998, exposure to contaminants, if any, in Grove
Pond wells could not have occurred during that time.
ATSDR reviewed the MADEP files to gather available water quality data to determine
if unhealthy levels of chemicals existed in the water supply prior to 1993.
Complete sampling data for all operating years prior to the 1993 shutdown of
the Grove Pond wells are not available, however.(1)
It is therefore unclear for how long Grove Pond wells contained iron, manganese,
and arsenic and at what levels. Sampling data collected sporadically since the
1960s indicate that iron and manganese levels in raw water often exceeded the
current secondary MCLs for aesthetic quality (e.g., taste, color, and/or odor
properties) (CDM, 1968, 1993; SEA Consultants, Inc., 1990).(2)
After 1978, however, raw water from the Grove Pond wells, when operating, was
then co-mingled with Spectacle Pond well water, thereby diluting contamination,
if any, in the Grove Pond well water before it reached residential taps (ADPW,
1998a). All other contaminant concentrations were safely below safe drinking
water standards.
Both manganese and arsenic are known to cause health problems at high enough
levels, but iron is rarely toxic to humans. In evaluating potential health hazards
associated with drinking water containing manganese and arsenic, ATSDR estimated
the dose of these metals an individual might have received using site-specific
considerations and conservative assumptions about how often people drink water
and how much water they drink. ATSDR also assumed that an individual drank water
containing the highest detected concentrations of manganese and arsenic in well
water. This is a highly conservative and unlikely scenario because often the
water was blended and/ or treated before use by the consumer.
ATSDR then compared the estimated exposures to acceptable health guidelines
to determine the likelihood, if any, that Ayer residents could have been exposed
to harmful levels of manganese or arsenic in their drinking water. This evaluation
is described in greater detail in Appendix C. The results of the evaluation
indicate that the estimated exposure doses for Ayer residents are below levels
at which health effects have been reported in the toxicologic literature, even
when assuming exposure to the maximum detected contaminant concentrations. ATSDR
therefore concluded that Ayer residents have not been exposed to harmful levels
of contaminants when they used water originating from the Grove Pond wells in
the past.
Current Exposure
Following a formal evaluation of the water treatment system and a permitting
process, the Ayer Department of Public Works resumed production at the Grove
Pond wells during in the summer of 1998. For several weeks after startup, EPA,
MADEP, and the Ayer Department of Public Works closely monitored the effectiveness
of the new system and the quality of its water. They found that by treating
the raw water for iron, manganese, and arsenic, and then blending the treated
water with water from Spectacle Pond wells, they produced finished drinking
water that safely met drinking water standards. Since the Grove Pond wells have
come back on line, testing by both the EPA and Ayer Department of Public Works
has shown that the public water supply has safely met drinking water standards
(ADPW, 1998a; 2000). Under the guidance of the states drinking water program,
Ayer Department of Public Works will continue to monitor routinely VOCs and
inorganic compounds (e.g., arsenic, manganese, iron). ATSDR has concluded
that Ayer residents are not exposed to harmful levels of contaminants when drinking
water from the Ayer public water supply.
Future Exposure
During the 5-year review of the Shepley's Hill Landfill, it became evident
that seeps containing leachate had formed nearby. Leachate is water that enters
the landfill as precipitation and becomes contaminated as it moves through the
decomposing refuse. Community members expressed concern about leachate discharging
into local surface water bodies, such as Plow Shop Pond, or into deeper groundwater,
and eventually reaching drinking water supplies. ATSDR also identified five
AOCs/SAs that lie within the Zone II area of influence for the Grove Pond wells
(see Figure 4), to identify potential future hazards. As defined by MADEP, a
Zone II area of influence "...is the area of groundwater contribution to the
wells under the most extreme severe pumping and recharge conditions." The sites
in the Zone II include the Battery Repair and Storage Area (study area 38),
the Maintenance Yards (AOCs 44 and 52), the Plow Shop and Grove Ponds (study
area 72), Lower Cold Spring Brook (study area 73), and the Massachusetts National
Guard property, a site located between Fort Devens property and the wells (NEET,
1997).
ATSDR closely evaluated information on Shepley's Hill Landfill and the five
sites within the Zone II area of influence for evidence of potential future
threats to the Grove Pond wells, and concluded that they are not likely to affect
the quality of drinking water. This conclusion is based on the following observations:
- The Shepley's Hill Landfill is outside the Zone II area of influence. Although Shepley's Hill Landfill has high concentrations of groundwater
contaminants (primarily VOCs and arsenic), the landfill is unlikely to influence
the groundwater entering the Grove Pond wells because it is located outside
the Zone II area of influence and water passing through the landfill moves to
the north and east and away from the Grove Pond wells. Furthermore, the Army
will take measures to ensure the quality of the aquifer that lies beneath the
site and to monitor possible contaminant migration.
- The Battery Repair and Storage Area, the Maintenance Yards, Lower Cold
Spring Brook, and the Massachusetts National Guard property have no or very
low levels of groundwater contamination. Any existing low level contamination
is unlikely to reach the Grove Pond wells. Furthermore, the Army has removed
the contaminated source material (e.g., contaminated soil), thereby reducing
the likelihood of contaminant migration from these areas in the future.
- Grove Pond and Plow Shop Pond are expected to have minimal impacts, if
any, on the wells in the future. EPA is collecting data on how much groundwater
recharge from the ponds enter the drinking water wells. ATSDR will evaluate
the relationship between the ponds and the wells when this information becomes
available.
On the basis of this information, ATSDR has concluded that residents will
not be exposed in the future to harmful levels of contaminants when drinking
water that comes from the Grove Pond wells.
Private Wells (Off-site)
Past, Current, and Future Exposures
No contamination has spread to areas where private wells exist. As previously
mentioned, PCE has moved from the former Parachute Rigging Facility at AOC 50,
but the contamination has not moved further north to where new private wells
are located (Ayer, 1998; Fort Devens, 1999b). The MADEP, EPA, and Army will
continue to track groundwater contamination and take actions to further reduce
any potential effects on off-site areas with existing private wells. At this
time, a groundwater study, undertaken by the Army with EPA and MADEP oversight,
is pending. ATSDR concluded that area private wells users are not exposed,
nor have they been in the past, to site-related contaminants when using their
well water. MADEP, EPA, and the Army continue to take precautions and track
contamination in areas near off-site private wells to limit the potential for
future exposures.
Evaluation of the Surface Water and Sediment
Exposure Pathway
Conclusion
No harmful exposures have occurred in the past, nor are likely to occur
for people who wade, boat, or catch and release fish, at Grove Pond and Plow
Shop Pond. As a precautionary measure, advisories currently recommend against
swimming at either pond.
Discussion
The community surrounding Fort Devens has used Grove Pond and Plow Shop Pond
for recreational uses in the past. A "catch and release fishing only and no
swimming advisory" has been posted at the ponds because of concerns about contamination
in pond sediment and surface water. In response to community concern, ATSDR
evaluated potential public health hazards from recreational uses of Grove Pond
and Plow Shop Pond in a health consultation released in December 1998. In the
discussion that follows, ATSDR summarizes the findings of that focused evaluation.
Grove Pond and Plow Shop Pond Description and Uses
Grove Pond and Plow Shop Pond are shallow water bodies located along Fort Devens'
northern boundary (see Figure 5). Grove Pond, once known as the Tannery Pond,
is a 60-acre pond that receives inflowing water from Balch Pond and Cold Spring
Brook. Water from Grove Pond flows through a stone arch culvert beneath a railroad
causeway and into Plow Shop Pond, so named for the Ames Plow Foundry formerly
located at the pond. Plow Shop Pond, the smaller of the two ponds (30 acres),
receives most of its water from the upstream Grove Pond. Water from Plow Shop
Pond eventually discharges from a dam at the northwest corner of the pond to
Nonacoicus Brook, which flows about 1 mile north before joining the Nashua River
(ABB, 1995).
Land use surrounding the ponds is diverse. Property along Grove Pond includes
a mix of residential (along the northern shore), recreational (Pirone Park),
and industrial, including an active railyard and a former tannery. The tannery
operated between the mid-1900s and the 1960s in the northeast corner of Grove
Pond (east of the railroad). Until 1953, the tannery reportedly discharged much
of its process wastewater into Grove Pond, often with little or no treatment.
While the former tannery was once a source of metal contamination for the pond,
the findings of a joint 1997 EPA and MADEP removal site evaluation indicate
that it no longer poses an imminent threat to either human health or the environment.
Plow Shop Pond is largely surrounded by industrial property. Over the years,
the industrial uses included railroad operations to the east, an industrial
park to the north, and Fort Devens' Shepley's Hill Landfill area to the west
and southwest (ABB, 1995).
Grove Pond and Plow Shop Pond might have been used in the past for recreational
activities, but today, little, if any, swimming or subsistence fishing is believed
to occur at either pond (ADPW, 1998b). In 1992, the Army posted an advisory
at Plow Shop Pond recommending that people not swim in the pond or eat pond
fish. The Army took this precautionary measure because of concerns about contaminants
in pond sediment and the possibility that these contaminants were accumulating
in fish (ATSDR, 1992). Following this action, ATSDR advocated that similar precautions
be followed for uses of the adjacent Grove Pond (ATSDR, 1992). It should be
noted that people can still enjoy boating and catch and release fishing at both
ponds.
In informing the community about the advisory, the Army coordinated outreach
with other agencies (e.g., ATSDR, MDPH, MADEP, EPA, and local boards of health)
and abutting landowners, including the B & M railroad. The advisory was
also posted at key access points to each pond. The EPA is responsible for providing
replacement signs, and the Ayer Department of Public Works and MassDevelopment
are responsible for maintaining the signs along the ponds in the future (ADPW,
1998b). In addition to the postings, information on these advisories (and all
Massachusetts fish consumption advisories) is summarized by MDPH and distributed
with Massachusetts fishing licenses by the Massachusetts Division of Fisheries
and Wildlife.
Grove Pond and Plow Shop Pond Surface Water and Sediment Quality
The Army conducted several rounds of surface water and shallow sediment sampling
to characterize the environmental conditions of Grove Pond and Plow Shop Pond.
Samples were collected from the interior of each pond and along shoreline areas.
Samples were analyzed for metals, and selected samples were analyzed for pesticides,
PAHs, and PCBs. ATSDR examined the sampling data and compared this information
against current ATSDR comparison values to identify contaminants of potential
health concern.
Table 5 summarizes surface water sampling results for both ponds. As the table
indicates, the metals arsenic, chromium, lead, and manganese were present in
pond surface water. Arsenic, chromium, and lead were found in only a few of
samples, and rarely at levels above ATSDR comparison values for drinking water.
Manganese was present in every sample, at times at levels (up to 130 ppb) above
its drinking water comparison value for a child (50 ppb), but most often at
levels below the comparison value.
Table 6 shows chemical concentrations measured in sediment samples collected from both Grove
Pond and Plow Shop Pond. (3) The table also specifically indicates to what extent these chemicals were
present in the sediment samples taken from the Grove Pond shoreline at Pirone Park. This area is of
interest to ATSDR and the community since children visit the park and concentrations detected near
the park most directly reflect the levels to which children could be exposed.
According to the sampling data, sediment samples taken from both ponds contained elevated levels
of arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead, manganese, and mercury. The highest levels of these metals
were generally noted in the interior of Grove Pond and Plow Shop Pond or along the shoreline of
nonpublic areas. In these areas, arsenic, cadmium, lead, and manganese concentrations exceeded
ATSDR's comparison values or EPA's interim screening values for soil. Chromium and mercury
were also measured in sediment, but no comparison values for sediment or soil currently exist for
these chemicals. Along the shoreline of Pirone Park, where people are more likely to frequent,
arsenic (up to 110 ppm) and cadmium (up to 23.3 ppm) concentrations were sometimes measured at
levels higher than their respective comparison value for a child, but most often were lower.
Distribution patterns for several contaminants found in Grove Pond sediment provide some
indication of their potential source. Chromium, used in tannery operations, was the most frequently
detected contaminant and was found in the highest concentrations in sediment along the northwest
cove of Grove Pond, where the former tannery once stood. Arsenic, manganese, and mercury were
distributed similarly to chromium, suggesting the tannery is likewise a source of these metals. In
contrast, however, distribution of metals in Plow Shop Pond sediment showed no clear pattern and
varied by chemical. Historical sources of contamination in Plow Shop Pond include Shepley's Hill
Landfill (e.g., arsenic, iron, manganese), railroad activities (e.g., PAHs and mercury), and inflow
from Grove Pond (e.g., arsenic) (ABB, 1995). It is also suspected that the tannery directly
discharged materials to Plow Shop Pond via a pipe under the railroad track (Fort Devens, 1999a).
PAHs were also detected in sediment, but they were not nearly so widespread
nor in as high concentrations as metals. Most PAHs were located near the railroad
corridor and are likely associated with railroad activities (ABB, 1995). Concentrations
of individual PAHs were generally comparable to the comparison value (0.1 parts
per million [ppm]) for the PAH compound, benzo(a)pyrene.(4) Other tested compounds (i.e., PCBs, pesticides) were either not detected
or were detected at concentrations below comparison values.
Past Exposure
The infrequently occurring elevated levels of metals found in surface water
or sediment along public areas, such as Pirone Park, would not have harmed the
health of people who used the park for wading, boating, and catch-and-release
fishing. The highest levels of contaminants were detected in the interior of
the pond or near the tannery. We do not have evidence that people swam in the
portions of the pond where higher levels of contaminants were found. If people
did access these areas, their infrequent and brief exposure to the most contaminated
sediment is unlikely to have caused adverse health effects. For this reason,
no exposure is likely to have occurred in the past at levels causing public
health concern.
Current and Future Exposures
ATSDR did not find any indications that people use or will use either pond
for recreation in ways that would result in significant dermal contact with
harmful levels of chemicals (i.e., swimming). Nonetheless, as a precautionary
measure, an advisory posted at Grove Pond and Plow Shop Pond recommends against
swimming at either pond. In response to ongoing community concern about exposure,
particularly for children, however, ATSDR further evaluated exposure that might
occur while a person wades along the shoreline where the highest levels of contaminants
were detected, as well as exposure that might occur in public areas, such as
Pirone Park.
When evaluating this potential exposure pathway, ATSDR estimated how much of
a particular metal an individual might contact and absorb. To do this, ATSDR
developed exposure doses for dermal contact with sediment based on conservative
or "safe" scenarios and compared these doses to the health-based guidelines.
ATSDR selected for further evaluation arsenic, cadmium, chromium, and mercury
because they either were measured at levels above comparison values or they
currently lack a comparison value. In estimating exposure ATSDR assumed that
an individual might wade at the pond or visit Pirone Park every day during warm
months (i.e., 140 days a year) over the course of many years (i.e., up to 30
years for an adult or 6 years for a child). Appendix C describes the methods
and assumptions used in ATSDR's evaluation in greater detail. The results of
the comparison indicated that estimated exposure doses were all below ATSDR
noncancer and cancer health guidelines, or below levels at which adverse health
effects have been reported. Moreover, the chemicals found in the sediment are
not likely to pose a health problem because they are not readily absorbed through
the skin and are not present in very high concentrations in public access areas.
Therefore, contact with pond sediment poses no health hazards to adults
or children who might wade along the shoreline of Grove Pond or Plow Shop, even
when assuming contact with highest detected contaminant concentrations frequently
(140 days a year) over an extended period of time.
Evaluation of the Food Chain Pathway
Conclusion
Mercury has been found in fish collected from Plow Shop Pond, Grove Pond,
and Mirror Lake. As a precautionary measure, health officials are advising residents
to limit or refrain from eating fish caught from these water bodies. People
can best protect themselves by continuing to follow the recommendations in the
advisory posted at each water body.
Discussion
Mirror Lake, Grove Pond, and Plow Shop Pond are water bodies where people enjoy
recreational fishing. As mentioned, fish consumption advisories posted at these
water bodies, however, advise people to limit (Mirror Lake) or refrain from
eating fish (Grove Pond and Plow Shop Pond). In the discussion that follows,
ATSDR presents its evaluation of fish sampling data collected for these water
bodies to determine whether contaminant concentrations, if any, in fish indicate
a public health concern or whether additional protective measures need to be
taken.
Fish Monitoring Data
Three sampling programs have collected fish samples from Grove Pond, Plow Shop Pond, and
Mirror Lake, and analyzed fish samples for metals, pesticides (i.e., 1,1-dichloro-2,2-bis(p-chlorophenyl)ethylene [DDD], 1,1-dichloro-2,2-bis(p-chlorophenyl)ethane [DDE]), and PCBs.(5)
The three programs include:
- The Army collected 15 fish samples (bluegills, largemouth bass, and brown bullheads) from
Plow Shop Pond in 1992 (Fort Devens, 1995b). The detection of high levels of chemicals in pond sediment and concern about the possibility that fish were accumulating the chemicals led to this investigation.
- The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service collected 28 fish samples (largemouth bass, bluegill,
brown bullhead, and yellow bullhead) from Grove Pond in September 1992 (U.S. F&W,
1993; 1997). Likewise, this investigation was prompted by concerns about high levels of pond sediment contamination.
- The MADEP collected 18 fish from Mirror Lake in June 1995. MADEP collected the fish
samples as part of its obligation under the Massachusetts Interagency Fish Toxics Program
(MADEP, 1995).
Tables 7, 8, and 9 provide the fish sampling results for Grove Pond, Plow Shop Pond, Mirror Lake,
respectively. ATSDR reviewed these sampling data to determine what chemicals, if any, had
accumulated in fish.
- Grove Pond and Plow Shop Pond: Metals, PCBs, and pesticides were present in fish
samples collected from one or both of these ponds. ATSDR compared the fish tissue
concentrations to available Food and Drug Administration (FDA) action levels for commercial
fish. Action or tolerance levels are available for mercury, PCBs, and some pesticides (e.g.,
DDD and DDE) only. As Tables 7 and 8 indicate, mercury exceeded its FDA action level (1
milligram per kilogram [mg/kg]) in a largemouth bass, while concentrations of other
compounds (i.e., PCBs, DDD, and DDE) for all fish were safely below their respective FDA
action or tolerance level.(6) Mercury found in fish from these ponds is probably associated with
the low-level mercury-contaminated sediment found near the tannery and the railroad area.
The findings of the sampling supported the existing precautionary fish consumption advisory.
- Mirror Lake: Metals were present in fish samples collected from Mirror Lake, but PCBs and
pesticides were not detected. Mercury concentrations were below the FDA action level, but the
average concentration of mercury in all largemouth bass was above the Massachusetts
Department of Public Health's (MDPH) level of 0.5 mg/kg for issuing a limited advisory. On
the basis of this finding, the state issued a limited advisory recommending that the general
public limit their consumption of largemouth bass from Mirror Lake to two meals per month
and that sensitive individuals (e.g., children, pregnant women) avoid affected Mirror Lake fish.
It should also be noted, however, that mercury is a widespread problem in Massachusetts' and many
other states' freshwater rivers, ponds, and lakes. As a precautionary measure, MDPH issued a
statewide advisory in September 1994 to urge pregnant women not to eat fish caught from
freshwater bodies in Massachusetts because of the potential harmful effects of mercury on the fetus
(MDPH, 1995).
Past Exposure
Although mercury was detected at concentrations greater than the FDA action level, consumption of
pond fish containing this level of mercury would not necessarily result in adverse health effects. To
further evaluate this exposure pathway, ATSDR estimated exposure doses considering site-specific
parameters and the maximum concentrations of contaminants detected in pond fish (see Appendix
C, Tables C-4 and C-5). ATSDR then compared the doses to health-based guidelines. Although the
estimated dose for a child slightly exceeded ATSDR's health-based guidelines, health effects are
unlikely to occur. First, a number of safety factors have been applied to the ATSDR health-based
guidelines, as a result estimated doses above these guidelines would not necessarily produce health
effects. Second, the estimated exposure dose probably overestimates the actual exposure a child
might have received because the likelihood that a child frequently consumed the most contaminated
fish for extended periods is remote. Furthermore, with the exception of a few samples of largemouth
bass, most mercury concentrations were below the FDA action level. Therefore, ATSDR has
concluded that no harmful exposures to mercury or other contaminants are likely to have
occurred in the past for people who ate fish from either Grove Pond, Plow Shop Pond, or Mirror
Lake.
Current and Future Exposures
Currently, advisories recommend that people not eat fish or limit their consumption of fish caught
from either Grove Pond, Plow Shop Pond, or Mirror Lake. Because mercury is persistent in the
environment, levels in fish may have increased since the initial fish sampling. Therefore, as a
precautionary measure, people should continue to follow the recommendations in the advisory until
additional data suggest otherwise. The Ayer Department of Public Works and MassDevelopment
have agreed to maintain the signs provided by EPA at Grove Pond and Plow Shop Ponds.
Therefore, no public health hazards are occurring now, nor are they expected to occur in the
future for people who follow the recommendations in the advisory.
Evaluation of the Indoor Air Pathway
Conclusion
Air inside the former Devens Elementary School poses no current or future public health
hazards from contaminants associated with historic fuel oil spills. Available indoor air
monitoring indicates that no fuel contaminants have been found inside the school at levels of health concern.
Discussion
In 1972 and again in 1978 fuel oil No. 2 was accidentally released into the subsurface soils and
groundwater adjacent to and beneath the Devens Elementary School (AOC 69W), located on the
northwest portion of the Main Post. The release was assumed to be from damaged piping near and
within the footprint of the school (EPA, 1998). Since 1993, the Army has closed the school for
reasons unrelated to the release, removed the damaged piping along with 3,500 cubic yards of
contaminated soil, and MassDevelopment has converted the heating system to a gas-based operation
(MADEP, 1999a; MassDevelopment, 2000). Teachers and other community members raised
concerns about the release and whether contaminants associated with the release had or could affect
the air inside the school.
In 1998, the EPA collected air quality data to determine if fuel-related contaminants present in the
soil and groundwater were migrating up through the soil and into the school.(7) Eleven samples were
collected at the following locations: six in various rooms throughout the school; three outdoors; one
in the crawlspace near the old boiler room; and one in the crawlspace beneath the kitchen. Samples
were analyzed for components of fuel oil found in the soil and groundwater, primarily VOCs and
semivolatile organic compounds.
Of the compounds analyzed for, methylene chloride was the only compound detected at levels above
air guidelines. Methylene chloride is not a constituent of fuel oil No. 2, but it is often present as a
common laboratory contaminant. Therefore, the presence of methylene chloride in the samples is
probably not related to the spill, but likely resulted from decontamination procedures used to clean
the air sampling tubes (ATSDR, 1995). No other compounds were detected at levels of health
concern.
Past Exposure
The only available air data comes from a one-time 8-hour samples collected during the spring of
1998. These data provide only a "snapshot" of actual conditions that might have existed since the
release. Because of these data limitations, ATSDR cannot conclusively determine whether harmful
levels of contaminants were present inside the school while it was open. Based on recent air
monitoring data, however, there does not appear to be any evidence that contaminants from the oil
spill exist in the school. If similar conditions existed around the time following the release, it is
unlikely that harmful exposures have occurred.
Some community members were particularly concerned about breast cancer among teachers and a
possible link to the release. To date, no studies have examined breast cancer in former occupants of
the school, but MDPH's review of health outcome data indicates that breast cancer rates are not
elevated in the community of Ayer. Although these data are not specific to the school, the
information is indicative of the general health of the population of the surrounding community,
where occupants of the school might reside.
Current and Future Exposures
The school has been closed since 1993 and therefore no exposures are currently occurring. Although
the school is scheduled to reopen in 2000, ATSDR believes that the indoor air is unlikely to pose
health threats to future occupants for the following reasons: 1) current air monitoring data suggest
the air meets safe air quality guidelines and 2) the Army has removed most of the fuel-contaminated
soil associated with the releases.(8) The EPA has determined that no further actions are needed to
clean up soil contamination, but they will oversee long-term monitoring of groundwater in the area.
COMMUNITY HEALTH CONCERNS
The following discussion evaluates community health concerns. This public health
assessment states each concern and presents a brief summary of ATSDR's conclusions.
ATSDR also received comments and questions from community members regarding
the draft PHA for the Fort Devens site (June 1999). Responses to comments
received during the public comment period are addressed in Appendix D of this PHA.
- Concern about tumors in domestic animals in the community around Fort
Devens and their relevance to humans.
Scientists consider many factors when evaluating the likelihood of developing
cancer. One such factor is species-specific sensitivity or response to a potential
carcinogen. It should be noted that an animal's response to a carcinogen is
dependent not only on its species-specific biochemical makeup but on physiological
and anatomical features as well. Therefore, mechanisms that lead to cancer
or tumor development in domestic animals may not exist for humans.
MDPH monitors human cancer incidence in Massachusetts communities. MDPH reviewed
the most recent available information (1982-1992) from the Massachusetts Cancer
Registry for the town of Ayer (MDPH, 1997). For the time period of 1982 to
1992, the cancer incidence in Ayer was approximately equal to or just slightly
higher (but not statistically higher) than expected for the majority of cancers.
On the basis of this review, the MDPH concluded that there does not appear
to be an unusual occurrence of cancer in Ayer.
Community members who would like more information about cancer rates in other
communities surrounding Fort Devens or would like to express their concerns
should contact the Massachusetts Department of Public Health at 617-624-5757.
- Concern that rates of breast cancer are slightly higher than normal
among former teachers of the former Devens Elementary School.
Several risk factors have been associated with breast cancer, including life
style, genetic factors, and, even to a certain extent, environmental factors.
In pursuing a possible environmental link, ATSDR first examines exposure pathways
related to a site of concern. If ATSDR determines that a completed exposure
pathway poses a public health threat, ATSDR then gathers health outcome
data to complement the environmental and exposure data.
ATSDR did not identify any completed exposure pathways linking air contaminants
associated with the fuel spill to the school occupants. Given this finding,
we do not have reason to suspect that the spill adversely impacted air or
that teachers were exposed to contaminant levels that could adversely affect
their health or increase their likelihood of developing cancer. MDPH's review
of health outcome data for the community of Ayer indicated that breast cancer
rates were not elevated. While not specific to teachers at the school, this
information is indicative of the breast cancer experience of the population
of Ayer, where some of the occupants of the school may reside.
For individuals concerned about breast cancer occurrence, you should know
that the Massachusetts Department of Public Health has compiled information
about risk factors for breast cancer. A copy this information can be obtained
by calling 617-624-5757.
- Concern about a link between manganese in drinking water and attention
deficit disorder among Ayer school children.
Some community members of Ayer are concerned about a possible link between
drinking water containing manganese and attention deficit disorder among school
children. As discussed in the "Evaluation of Potential Environmental Pathways"
section of this document, the Ayer Grove Pond well water contained elevated
levels of manganese (up to 1,900 ppb) before it was closed in 1993. Despite
high levels of manganese in these wells, it is unlikely that people were actually
exposed to these levels because water from these well was blended with uncontaminated
water prior to distribution to households. Also, levels of manganese fluctuated
over time and were generally much lower than maximum levels while the wells
were used for drinking water. Since reopening the wells in 1998, the Ayer
Department of Public Works has treated the well water to ensure that high
quality water is delivered to consumers.
Manganese is a naturally occurring element that is essential for normal functioning
of the human body. There are many reports of human toxicity from exposure
to manganese by inhalation; however, ingested manganese has rarely been associated
with toxicity. One reason for this may be that very little manganese is taken
up by the stomach and absorbed into the body. Human health studies suggest
that ingesting high levels of manganese in drinking water over a long period
of time may be associated with neurological changes resembling Parkinson's
disease (Kawamura et al., 1941; Kondakis et al., 1989; Goldsmith et al., 1990).
Although the findings suggest that environmental exposure to high levels of
manganese may be a health concern, there are just too many limitations to
these studies to provide conclusive evidence. It should be noted that the
exposure doses estimated by ATSDR for persons ingesting water from the Ayer
Grove Pond wells were almost 15 times lower than adverse effect levels reported
in these studies.
There is some concern by scientists that infants may be at increased risk
of toxicity from manganese ingestion because infants take up manganese from
the stomach at a higher rate than adults and they have less ability to excrete
manganese from the body. To date, there are no reports of manganese toxicity,
including attention deficit disorder, reported for infants. Again, the exposure
doses ATSDR estimated for children and adults who may have ingested water
from the Ayer Grove Pond wells are within ranges of "safe dietary intakes"
and are lower than levels shown to cause even adverse effects (including neurological
effects) in scientific studies. ATSDR has evaluated exposure to manganese
in greater detail in Appendix C of this document.
Over the past decade, scientists have explored a number of possible theories
about what causes the attention deficit disorder, but researchers at the National
Institute of Mental Health stress that the cause is still not known. While
much of the evidence from recent investigations suggests that the disorder
stems from biological causes rather than from factors in the home environment,
scientists continue to investigate possible causes of the disorder.
- Concern about safety hazards from unexploded ordnance at the South Post.
The South Post has been used as a training range for various types of small
arms fire, grenade detonation, and ordnance demolition. Unexploded ordnance
used in training may still remain buried in sections of this area. As a safety
measure, Fort Devens maintains a fence around the South Post Impact Area and
posts warning signs to discourage unauthorized access to the South Post. ATSDR
agrees with these measures that will help limit public access and improve
safety.
- Concern about safety hazards while walking around Mirror Lake.
Historically, World War II grenades were placed in Mirror Lake. In 1965,
the 14th EOD Detachment Station at Fort Devens removed the grenades from the
lake (BRAC, 1996). It should be noted that the grenades removed from the lake
were unfused and contained no explosive charge (MADEP, 1999b). An underwater
metal survey confirmed that the removal was complete. Additionally, a 1995
supplemental site investigation indicated that there was no explosive contaminants
associated with the grenades in Mirror Lake's surface water or sediment.
- Concern about health hazards for trespassers who may unknowingly contact
contaminated media along the shoreline of Grove Pond or Plow Shop Pond.
In all likelihood, people who walk along the shoreline of the ponds are not
incurring harmful exposures. People trespassing in nonpublic areas of the
shoreline probably do so infrequently and/or for a short period, spending
relatively little time standing or walking with exposed skin in areas of the
highest contaminated sediment. Limited exposures of this type are not likely
to lead to adverse health effects. Most importantly, we doubt that young children
(1 to 6 years of age) who are most suspectable to the effects of contaminants
would travel into these areas--and come in contact with the most contaminated
sediment--without adult supervision.
- Concern that subsistence fishing populations might have consumed harmful
amounts of contaminated fish from Grove Pond or Plow Shop Pond in the past.
Subsistence fishing populations rely on freshwater fish as a major staple
in their diet. Because they eat so much more fish than most people, there
is a concern that they have a greater exposure to potentially harmful levels
of chemicals found in freshwater fish of some areas. To date, however, there
is only anecdotal information to suggest that few anglers, if any at all,
regularly fished for food at either Grove Pond or Plow Shop Pond. As such,
it is unclear if subsistence anglers ever relied on either pond for food.
In the "Evaluation of Food Chain Pathway" section of this PHA, we looked
at potential health hazards for a more realistic exposure scenario--that is,
for someone likely to consume a moderate amount Grove Pond or Plow Shop Pond
fish. Based on this evaluation, we determined that consumption of a moderate
amount (one meal a month, the average consumption of fish and shellfish from
estuarine and freshwaters by the general U.S. population) of Grove Pond or
Plow Shop Pond fish was not harmful to either the adult or child consumer.
Because a few people might have routinely eaten Grove Pond and Plow Shop
Pond fish, we also considered whether they might be at increased risk of health
effects. We found that people who ate as much as seven meals a month (a substantial
amount, based on EPA's upper bound value of fish consumption of recreationally
caught fish) of Grove Pond or Plow Shop Pond fish still are not likely to
develop any harmful health effects. As with the evaluation for moderate consumption
of fish, we even assumed that individuals ate fish containing the highest
detected concentrations over many years, a highly protective but unlikely
scenario.
We hope through the existing fish consumption advisories that any subsistence
anglers will become aware of the potential public health hazards of continuing
to eat fish from Grove Pond and Plow Shop Pond. In efforts to target groups
at risk throughout the state, the MDPH has initiated education and outreach
programs to inform the state's medical community (e.g., primary care providers
and health clinics) about health concerns relating to consumption of freshwater
fish. ATSDR feels that the medical community can assist people relying on
potentially contaminated freshwater fish to understand the potential health
risks and find healthy alternatives.
- Concern about health hazards from combined risks of exposure to contaminants
in sediment, fish, and drinking water.
As stated in this PHA, neither the sediment, fish, or groundwater/drinking
water pathways alone pose a public health concern largely because either:
1) exposure was or is unlikely to occur or 2) contaminant concentrations detected
were too low to pose a health hazard. As part of our evaluation, we conservatively
derived exposure doses for chemicals (at levels above comparison values) in
these pathways but found that the values were generally lower than acceptable
health-based guidance levels such as minimal risk levels (MRLs) or reference
doses (RfDs). It should be noted that MRLs and RfDs are conservative estimates
of safe exposure doses that are generally orders of magnitude higher than
the lowest levels to which health effects have been observed in occupational
or animal studies. With this in mind, we feel that the sum of exposures to
contaminants in these pathways should not pose health concerns or adversely
impact public health.
- Concern about potential future impacts to off-site groundwater near
the South Post Impact Area.
Testing of groundwater underlying the South Post Impact Area has revealed
elevated levels of explosive compounds. While no formal remedial action (institutional
controls) was deemed necessary to control groundwater contamination in this
area, the Army, with EPA and MADEP oversight, developed a long-term monitoring
plan in 1997 for the South Post Impact Area. As detailed in the plan, the
Army monitors water in the shallow aquifer at discharge points as well as
at sentinel wells located near the perimeter. Samples are then analyzed for
metals and explosive compounds, and selected samples are analyzed for volatile
organic compounds. Monitoring of sentinel wells helps investigators identify
contaminants long before they reach area drinking water wells.
- Concern that people living in former base housing or playing in a future
school yard could be exposed to harmful levels of pesticides.
Future residents of revitalized housing or children
playing at the proposed school yard probably will not be exposed to harmful levels of soil pesticides.
The Massachusetts Development Finance Agency (MassDevelopment) is charged
with returning portions of the former Fort Devens site to productive use.
Environmental testing at Fort Devens has revealed, however, the widespread
and pervasive presence of pesticides in soil (approximately 160,000 cubic
yards of soil) beneath former base housing units (MADEP, 1998c). When these
units were constructed in the 1960s, the Department of Defense commonly applied
pesticides to control termite infestations beneath foundations built on slabs.
At Fort Devens, the soil beneath the housing unit slabs was treated with the
termiticides aldrin, chlordane, DDT, and dieldrin. Such pesticide applications
are not permitted today. Aldrin, chlordane, and dieldrin are chlorinated hydrocarbon
pesticides that are particularly persistent in our environment. Even though
applications at Fort Devens occurred more than 30 years ago, we would still
expect to see measurable levels of these compounds in the soil beneath the
slabs.
MassDevelopment proposes either reusing several hundred of these units
or demolishing these units and using the land on which they sit to build new structures. Of particular interest to ATSDR is proposed
redevelopment of units for housing and other areas for a school.
Birch Circle/Grant Housing
The Birch Circle and Grant Housing areas are located in the northwest portion
of the Fort Devens site. MassDevelopment proposes to reuse 282 units for housing,
of which approximately 25 percent will be reserved for low-and moderate-income
families and persons who have special needs. Soil testing conducted in 1996
revealed soil pesticide concentrations that exceed ATSDR comparison values (CVs).
Additional testing of the air quality inside the 300 and 800 series units of
the Birch Circle and Grant Housing areas also indicated that pesticides found
in soil had entered the units and were present in the indoor air. Aldrin (up
to 2.1 micrograms per cubic meter [µg/m3]), chlordane (up 0.15
µg/m3), and dieldrin (up to 1.00 µg/m3) were
detected in the indoor air of the 800 series units at concentrations greater
than ATSDR CVs (and state and federal guidelines) (Haley & Aldrich, 1998).
Breathing air containing these levels of pesticides over an extended time could
pose a health concern for future residents. Pesticide concentrations in the
300 series units were found to be within acceptable guidelines.
The higher concentrations of pesticides inside the
800 series units were most likely caused by features of the units' mechanical
systems and, to a lesser extent, to the building foundation (TRC, 1999). First,
the air-handling systems of these units supply air through ducts
beneath the floor--within the pesticide-contaminated soil. Because the ducts
pass through the contaminated soil, they may be potential points of entry
for contaminants into the units. Second, these units have whole-house
fans, which increase the negative pressure and draw air in from soil beneath
the slab. Third, the heating systems in these units lack a source of fresh
air. In addition to diluting chemicals in indoor air, a fresh air supply would
help reduce the negative pressure in the units.
There could be harmful effects to long-term residents in the 800 series units
who breathe the highest concentrations of pesticides detected in air inside
the units. Because of this concern, ATSDR supports measures that will reduce
indoor air pesticide concentrations to safe levels before the units are occupied
in the future. According to the MassDevelopment, the units will remain unoccupied
until the indoor air quality safely meets standards set by Massachusetts Department
of Environmental Protection (MADEP) or the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA). To date, the MassDevelopment has evaluated several options to improve
the air quality within the affected units, including modifications to the mechanical
heating systems. The U.S. Army and MassDevelopment are negotiating terms of
the cleanup. ATSDR will review the plans to ensure that the modifications will
minimize exposures to pesticides inside the units (i.e., achieve air quality
that meets ATSDR safety guidelines).
Future School
The town of Shirley considered the unoccupied Shirley Base Housing Area as
a possible site for a future school. The 22-unit Shirley Base Housing area,
also known as the 900 series units, is located to the west of the Main Post,
adjacent to the Shirley base entrance gate. Eighteen of the units encompass
the area intended for the school. Pesticides to control termites, including
aldrin, chlordane, DDT, and dieldrin, were applied to the soil beneath the housing
units before the concrete foundations were poured. Because the soil beneath
the foundations would be exposed during construction of the new school, Shirley
town officials asked ATSDR to evaluate the potential hazards from contact with
residual pesticide contamination in soil. ATSDR evaluated this exposure and
presented its findings in a September 1999 health consultation. The findings
are summarized in the discussion that follows.
ATSDR reviewed soil sampling data collected in 1996, which indicated that aldrin
and dieldrin were at levels above ATSDR CVs, while concentrations of the other
pesticides were below CVs. Because concentrations of aldrin and dieldrin exceeded
CVs, ATSDR estimated potential exposure levels for a child playing in the exposed
soil containing the maximum detected levels of these pesticides. The exposure
estimates accounted for the ways in which the pesticides could enter a child's
body either by ingestion, skin contact, or inhalation of dust. When these exposure
routes were combined, the estimated average daily exposures to aldrin and dieldrin
were more than two times lower than ATSDR's conservative minimal risk levels
(MRLs) for those pesticides. An MRL is an estimated level of daily human
exposure to chemicals that are unlikely to pose appreciable risk of adverse
noncancer health effects. Therefore, ATSDR believes that no harmful effects
are likely to occur in the future. It is important to note that no past or current
exposure is possible, because the contaminated soil is under concrete slabs
and is inaccessible.
Regulatory agencies involved in cleanup at Devens, such as EPA and MADEP, have
established requirements that guide remedial activities. These requirements
will be applied to the pesticide- contaminated soil at the housing units, and
may necessitate remedial actions that possibly could include removal of pesticide-contaminated
soil. Although ATSDR's evaluation found no increased hazard associated with
future use of the area proposed for the school yard, the Agency supports any
precautionary practices that would further minimize potential exposures to hazardous
materials.
ATSDR CHILD HEALTH INITIATIVE
ATSDR recognizes that infants and children may be more sensitive than adults
to environmental exposure in communities faced with contamination of their
water, soil, air, or food. This sensitivity is a result of the following factors:
1) children are more likely to be exposed to certain media like soil when
they play outdoors; 2) children are shorter and therefore might be more likely
to breathe dust, soil, and vapors close to the ground; and 3) children are
smaller than adults and therefore might receive a higher dose of chemical
exposure relative to their body weight. Children also can sustain permanent
damage if exposed to toxic substances during critical growth stages. ATSDR
is committed to evaluating children's special interests at sites such as Fort
Devens as part of its Child Health Initiative.
ATSDR identified no situations in which children were or are likely
to be exposed to harmful levels of chemical contaminants associated with Fort
Devens. ATSDR based its conclusion on the following factors:
- Children have not been exposed, nor are they now or should they be in the
future, to harmful levels contaminants when drinking water. Some metals were
found in the Ayer Grove Pond wells in the past, but the levels are considerably
lower than levels associated with adverse health effects. Children drinking
water from public supplies are protected because public suppliers routinely
test their water supplies to ensure that it is free of harmful levels of chemicals
and that it meets federal and state drinking water standards.
- Children are not likely to have contacted site-related contaminants often
or for long periods when using nearby surface water bodies, and are unlikely
to do so in the future. Even though some ponds were used for recreation, most
located near Fort Devens probably offered limited recreational opportunity
for a young child. Today, a precautionary advisory has been posted at the
ponds to advise people against swimming in either Grove Pond and Plow Shop
Pond. Any infrequent and brief contact to the contaminants that might occur
from wading should not pose a hazard for a child.
- Children are not likely to have consumed harmful levels of contaminated
fish, nor are they likely to in the future if they observe the fish consumption
advisory. Elevated levels of mercury have been detected in some species of
Grove Pond, Plow Shop Pond, and Mirror Lake fish. As a precautionary measure,
a fish consumption advisory recommends that children not eat freshwater fish
from these ponds. By following the advisory, children reduce their exposure
to mercury.
CONCLUSIONS
Conclusions regarding potential past, current, and future exposures to various
environmental media on and in the vicinity of Fort Devens are based on a thorough
evaluation of remedial site investigation data, groundwater and surface water
monitoring data, municipal drinking water supply data, and observations made
during site visits. On the basis of its evaluation, ATSDR reached the following
conclusions:
- Elevated levels of VOCs and metals have been detected in groundwater beneath
the Fort Devens site. No exposures resulting in public health hazards have
occurred or are occurring. The Army will continue to monitor and treat contaminated
groundwater to prevent migration to existing water supplies, thereby limiting
potential future public health hazards.
- Arsenic, iron, and manganese were detected in Ayer's Grove Pond wells
before they were closed in 1993. ATSDR has determined that the concentrations
of these compounds are unlikely to cause harmful effects, even for residents
who used the water for extended periods. The Ayer Department of Public Works
has returned the Grove Pond wells to regular service, but before the water
is delivered to residential taps, it is treated for iron, manganese, and arsenic
and tested to ensure that the water is safe to drink. The Army, with MADEP
and EPA oversight, continues to take precautions and tests groundwater to
best protect the underlying aquifers and prevent contamination from reaching
the Grove Pond wells.
- Elevated levels of metals were measured in Grove Pond and Plow Shop Pond
sediment but were rarely found in surface water. No significant exposure has
occurred, is occurring now, nor is expected in the future, however. As a precautionary
measure, a "no swimming" advisory has been posted at each pond to
advise people against swimming. Any brief and infrequent contact with the
ponds' sediment is unlikely to lead to adverse health effects. The Army and
EPA are continuing to investigate the contamination at these ponds.
- Some Grove Pond, Plow Shop Pond, and Mirror Lake fish contain elevated
levels of mercury. Mercury in fish likely originates from off base sources,
including the former tannery. As a precaution, an advisory has been posted
to either discourage people from eating fish or to advise them to limit their
consumption of fish caught from these water bodies. ATSDR has concluded that
by following the precautions, people, particularly young children and pregnant
women, can reduce their exposure to mercury.
- ATSDR has determined that air inside the former Devens Elementary School
poses no current or future public health hazards from contaminants associated
with historic fuel spills. The school was temporarily closed in 1993 (but
will reopen in 1999) and the oil-contaminated soil has been removed. Available
monitoring data indicates that no harmful levels of contaminants have been
found inside the school.
- ATSDR has concluded that the Fort Devens site poses no apparent public
health hazard. (A description of this public health hazard conclusion
category is included in the glossary.)
PUBLIC HEALTH ACTION PLAN
The Public Health Action Plan (PHAP) for Fort Devens contains a description
of actions taken and those to be taken by ATSDR, the Army, EPA, and MADEP
at and in the vicinity of the site after the completion of this public health
assessment. The purpose of the PHAP is to ensure that this public health assessment
not only identifies public health hazards, but also provides a plan of action
designed to mitigate and prevent adverse human health effects resulting from
exposure to hazardous substances in the environment. The public health actions
that are completed, being implemented, or planned are as follows:
Completed Actions:
- The Army has investigated more than 81 NPL sites and over 223 BRAC areas
requiring further evaluation under CERCLA. Of these, several have been determined
to pose no threat to human health or the environment. The Army has completed
response actions at many of them. Initial site investigations for NPL sites
at Fort Devens were completed by 1996.
- The Army has investigated areas that may have contributed to underlying
groundwater contamination and has treated (via soil-vapor extraction) or
removed contaminated soil or waste from these areas. The Army has installed
wells in many areas of the site to monitor groundwater quality over the
long term.
- ATSDR has previously prepared three health consultations that evaluated
specific concerns about Fort Devens, including an evaluation of the potential
exposure to groundwater contamination at the South Post (1994); an evaluation
of potential public health concerns associated with the use of Ayer Grove
Pond Drinking Water Wells (1998); and an evaluation of potential public
health concerns associated with the recreational use of Grove Pond and Plow
Shop Pond (1998).
- MDPH evaluated cancer rates in Ayer for the years 1982 to 1992. Findings
from their evaluation showed that the occurrence of cancer in Ayer during
that period was approximately equal to or just slightly higher than expected
for the majority of cancers.
- The Army has capped the Shepley's Hill Landfill. The Army has conducted
groundwater monitoring to determine whether contamination is or could migrate
to off-site areas and taken additional measures to ensure the integrity
of the cap.
- The Army has studied seven other debris disposal areas, or landfills,
located on the property, and found that they have not affected groundwater.
Management options for the landfills have been proposed and are under review.
- As precautionary measures, the Army posted a "catch and release fishing
only and no swimming" advisory at Grove Pond and Plow Shop Pond, and the
MDPH issued a limited fish consumption advisory for Mirror Lake.
- The Ayer Department of Public Works closed the municipal Grove Ponds
wells in 1993 following detection of iron, manganese, and arsenic. The ADPW
has built a new water treatment system and reopened the wells. Water from
the Grove Pond wells, as well as other wells, is regularly tested to ensure
that the water is safe to drink.
Ongoing/Planned Actions:
- Investigations are in various stages at several AOCs and study areas
as the Army continues to define the extent of contamination and recommend
appropriate remedial actions.
- The Army is conducting long-term groundwater monitoring and maintenance
programs associated with Fort Devens, including monitoring near Shepley's
Hill Landfill. This system will ensure that the contaminant migration will
be carefully tracked and that corrective measures will be taken, if necessary.
- The Ayer Department of Public Works, with EPA oversight, will continue
to monitor and treat Grove Pond well water, ensuring that Ayer residents have
a clean drinking water supply.
- MADEP has recently completed additional sampling of the surface water
and sediment at Grove Pond. Preliminary results indicate that the highest
levels of sediment contamination do not appear to be contributing to elevated
surface water concentrations (MADEP, 2000). ATSDR will review the final results
when they become available.
- EPA, Ayer Department of Public Works, and MassDevelopment have agreed
to work cooperatively to replace and maintain signs at key access points (e.g.,
boat ramps, Pirone Parks, public landings) along Grove Pond and Plow Shop
Pond.
- ATSDR has noted that the heating system was inactive during the air
monitoring of the Devens Elementary School. ATSDR recommends that if additional
sampling is done to 1) ensure that the school is appropriately heated prior
to sampling; 2) perform additional VOC sampling without the presence of methylene
chloride to ensure that no compounds are of health concern; and 3) collect
sufficient grab or time weighted (restrictive orifice) sampling to ensure
that methylene chloride is not present.
- ATSDR will review new information on exposure pathways that may be generated
from remedial investigation activities.
PREPARERS OF REPORT
Scott Sudweeks
Toxicologist
Federal Facilities Assessment Branch
Division of Health Assessment and Consultation
Amanda Stoddard, M.P.H.
Environmental Health Scientist
Federal Facilities Assessment Branch
Division of Health Assessment and Consultation
Gary Campbell, Ph.D.
Environmental Health Scientist
Federal Facilities Assessment Branch
Division of Health Assessment and Consultation
Technical Assistance provided by:
Brenda Weis, Ph.D.
Toxicologist
Federal Facilities Assessment Branch
Division of Health Assessment and Consultation
REFERENCES
ABB Environmental Services, Inc. (ABB). 1995. Fort Devens feasibility study
for Group 1A sites. Draft Plow Shop Pond and Grove Pond sediment evaluation.
Volume I. Sections 1.0-8.0. October 1995.
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 1992. Letters to
local boards of health and abutting landowners. RE: Recommendation for "Catch
and Release Fishing Only" and "No Swimming" Posting of Plow Shop and Grove
Ponds. December 1992.
ATSDR. 1994. Health Consultation: Fort Devens Functional Area 1, Area of
Contamination 25, 26, and 27. Ayer, Massachusetts. December 7, 1994.
ATSDR. 1995 Toxicological profile for fuel oils. Atlanta: US Department of
Health and Human Services, Public Health Services, Agency for Toxic Substances
and Disease Registry. June 1995.
ATSDR. 1998. ATSDR Public Availability Session. Ayer, Massachusetts. March
1998.
ATSDR 1999. Demographics in a 1-mile buffer of the Fort Devens site, based
on 1990 U.S. census data. March 1999.
Ayer. 1998. Personal communication with the Ayer town administrator. November
1998.
Ayer Department of Public Works (ADPW). 1998a. Personal communication with
Rick Linde, Ayer Department of Public Works. June and July, 1998.
ADPW. 1998b. Meeting at Ayer Department of Public Works with representatives
from ATSDR, Environmental Protection Agency, Massachusetts Department of Environmental
Protection, and Devens Commerce Commission. October 15, 1998.
ADPW. 2000. Personal communication with Rick Linde, Ayer Department of Public
Works. June 14, 2000.
Base Realignment and Closure Environmental Offices (BRAC). 1996a. Cleanup
Plan. Fort Devens, Fort Devens, Massachusetts. September 1996.
BRAC. 1996b. Environmental Updates. Spring 1996 to Spring 1998.
BRAC. 1997. Proposed Plan for SAs 6, 12, and 13, and AOCs 9, 11, 40, and
41. U.S. Army Reserve Forces Training Area. Devens, Massachusetts. December
1997.
BRAC. 199X. Proposed plan for defense reutilization marketing office yard
(DMRO) (AOC 32) and petroleum, oils, and lubrication storage area (POL) (AOC
43A). Devens, Massachusetts.
BRAC. 1999. Cleanup Plan. Fort Devens, Fort Devens, Massachusetts. September
1999.
Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc. (CDM). 1968. Report on water works improvements
HUD project no. P-Mass-3345. March 1968.
CDM. 1993. Town of Ayer, Massachusetts. Grove Pond Wells. Improvement to
Grove Pond Wells and pilot treatment study proposal. January 1993.
Devens Commerce Center. 1998. Personal correspondence with Alan Delaney.
October 29, 1998.
Ecology and the Environment, Inc. 1994. Remedial investigation report functional
area I. Volumes I to V. General Information. Fort Devens, Massachusetts. August
1994.
EPA. 1998. Indoor air sampling study area of contamination 69W Devens Elementary
School, Devens, Massachusetts. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. New England
Regional Laboratory. June 1998.
EPA. 1999. Personal communication with Jerry Keefe, EPA Region I. May 11,
1999.
Fort Devens. 1995a. Fort Devens community relations plan for environmental
restoration 1995 Update. May 1995.
Fort Devens. 1995b. Record of decision. Shepley's Hill Landfill operable
unit areas of contamination 4, 5, & 18. Fort Devens, Massachusetts. September
1995.
Fort Devens. 1996. Record of decision. Areas of contamination 43G and 43J.
Fort Devens, Massachusetts. October 1997.
Fort Devens. 1997. Record of decision. Area of contamination 63AX Devens
Reserve Forces Training Area. Fort Devens, Massachusetts. October 1997.
Fort Devens. 1999a. Personal communication with Jim Chambers, BRAC Environmental
Coordinator. April 30, 1999.
Fort Devens. 1999b. Personal communication with Jim Chambers, BRAC Environmental
Coordinator. February 12, 1999.
Haley & Aldrich. 1998. Residential indoor air quality results for Fort
Devens base housing, Fort Devens, Massachusetts.
Harvard Water Department. 1998. Personal communication with Jim Smith. June
3, 1998.
Horne Engineering Services, Inc. 1996. Preliminary draft record of decision
for the South Post Impact Area Groundwater areas of contamination 25, 26,
and 27. February 14, 1996.
Horne Engineering Services, Inc. 1997. Preliminary final record of decision
for the defense reutilization and marketing office yard (AOC 32) and petroleum,
oil, and lubricants storage area (AOC 43A). Devens, Massachusetts. December
1997.
Lancaster Water Department. 1998. Personal communication with Brad Locke.
June 4, 1998.
Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MADEP). 1995. Memorandum
from Robert Serbian, MADEP-Westborough to John Regan, MADEP-BWSC. RE: Results
for fish samples from Mirror Lake, Fort Devens. September.
MADEP. 1998a. Personal communication with John Regan, Central Regional Office.
July 1998.
MADEP. 1998b. Letter from John Regan, Central Regional Office, to Pauline
Hamel and Cornielius Sullivan, Ayer Board of Selectman. September 15, 1998.
MADEP. 1998c. Memorandum from John Regan, Massachusetts Department of Environmental
Protection. RE: Pesticides at Fort Devens base housing. May 8, 1998.
MADEP. 1999a. Personal communication with John Regan, Central Regional Office.
March, 1999.
MADEP. 1999b. Personal communication with Caroline E. Williams, Regional
Planner. Central Regional Office. May 7, 1999.
MADEP. 2000. Personal communication with Paul Ollila, Massachusetts Department
of Environmental Protection, Central Regional Office. June 19, 2000.
MassDevelopment. 2000. Personal communication with Ron Ostrowski, MassDevelopment,
June 16, 2000.
Massachusetts Department of Public Health (MDPH). 1995. Fish consumption
advisories for mercury in freshwater fish. Massachusetts Department of Public
Health. Presented to the Committee on Health Effects. May 1995.
MDPH. 1997. Letter from Theresa A. Barry, MDPH. RE: Cancer Incidence in Ayer.
October 23, 1997.
Nashoba Associated Board of Health. 1999. Personal communication with Walter
Murphy, Director. RE: Private wells installed in Ayer, Harvard, Lancaster,
and Shirley in 1998.
New England Environmental Technologies Corporation (NEET). 1997. Massachusetts
National Guard Maintenance Depot groundwater monitoring data. September 1997.
PACE. 1998. Personal communication from People of Ayer Concerned About the
Environment to ATSDR. March 26, 1998.
SEA Consultants, Inc. 1990. Report on water supply and distribution systems
study. Ayer, Massachusetts. Department of Public Works, Town of Ayer, Massachusetts.
August 1990. U.S. Army Environmental Center (USAEC). 1995. Record of decision.
Barnum Road maintenance yards. Fort Devens, Massachusetts. March 1995.
Shacklett, H.T. and Boergen, J.G. 1984. Element concentrations in soil and
other surficial materials of the conterminous United States. U.S. Geological
Survey profession paper 1270.U.S. Government Printing Office. Washington,
DC.
Shirley Water District. 1998. Personal communication with Brian Goodman.
June 4, 1998.
TRC Environmental Corporation (TRC). 1999. Summary report for Fort Devens redevelopment-housing
decontamination, Devens, Massachusetts.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (U.S. F&W). 1993. Concentrations of mercury
and other environmental contaminants in fish from Grove Pond, Ayer Massachusetts.
September 1993.
U.S. F&W. 1997. Letter from Kenneth Carr, Acting Supervisor of U.S. Fish
& Wildlife New England Field Office, to Dennis Gagne, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. RE: Review of the draft Plow Shop Pond and Grove Pond sediment
evaluation. January 22, 1997. 1993.
Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc. 1994. Devens Reuse Plan. Fort Devens, Massachusetts.
November 14, 1994.
1. During the early years of operation, sampling, if any, centered around bacteriological concerns. Later, when the Grove Pond wells were
used only for emergencies, sampling probably did not occur because the wells
were so infrequently used (MADEP, 1998a).
2. Secondary MCLs are not health-based standards, rather they are unenforceable federal guidelines regarding taste, odor, and color effects of drinking water. EPA recommends them to the states as reasonable goals, but federal law does not require water systems to comply with them.
3. Table 6 summarizes information on contaminants that exceed comparison values only.
4. Though likely not of health concern, it should be noted that detection levels for some of the individual PAHs were slightly higher (up to 0.8 ppm) than ATSDR's comparison value for benzo(a)pyrene.
5. Some samples were "reconstructed" using the fillet and the partial body sample. The concentration for the reconstructed whole body sample is the sum of the fillet concentration and the partial body sample concentration divided by the total body weight.
6. The MDPH, the state agency responsible for issuing fish consumption advisories, uses the FDA action level of 1 mg/kg for mercury in commercial fish as the basis for issuing a full advisory (do not eat any fish). While protective of health,
the values do account for economic considerations. MDPH uses 0.5 mg/kg for mercury
as the basis for issuing a limited advisory.
7. The Army also conducted two rounds of sampling (1996 and 1997) in the school. Although the tests were qualified as inconclusive because of data quality issues and sample contamination, EPA has used these data to compare to the 1998 EPA testing data.
8. It should be noted that the indoor air samples were taken
during the spring when the heating system was inactive. Because the suspected
source of contamination has been removed, it is doubtful that any higher concentrations
would be present even when the building is tightly closed or in use with the heating
system on.
Next Section Table
of Contents