DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
Environmental Baseline Survey
In Support of the
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
March 2000
United States Air Force
Air Combat Command
Final
-__I-
__.~^----I.--_-
,.-.
-
.-___-___I
W,“_
..~.
-------
LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
ACC
Air Combat Command
ACM
Asbestos-Containing Material
AFB
Air Force Base
AFI
Air Force Instruction
AST
Aboveground Storage Tank
CERCLA
Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensations and Liability Act
CRP
Conservation Reserve Program
EBS
Environmental Baseline Survey
EDS
Environmental Database Summary
EDR
Environmental Data Resources, Inc.
EIS
Environmental Impact Statement
FSA
Farm Service Agency
HUD
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
LBP
Lead-Based Paint
LUST
Leaking Underground Storage Tank
MTR
Military Training Route
MOA
Military Operating Area
MUTES
Multiple Threat Emitter Systems
NM
Nautical Miles
NRCS
Natural Resources Conservation Services
PCBs
Polychlorinated Biphenyls
RBTI
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
USAF
United States Air Force
Environmental Baseline Survey
In Support of the
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
March 2000
United States Air Force
Air Combat Command
Final
La Junta, CO
8.0
CERTIFICATIONS
CERTIFICATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE SURVEY
Ogden Environmental & Energy Services conducted this Environmental Baseline Survey on behalf of the
U.S. Air Force. Ogden has reviewed all appropriate records made available, conducted visual site
inspections of the selected properties, and performed an analysis of information collected during the
record search. The information contained within the survey report is based on records made available
and, to the best of Ogden’s knowledge, is correct.
Certified by:
REVIN% PETER
Project Manager
Ogden Environmental and Energy Services
Approved by:
ci%?&
ALTON CHAVIS
Chief, Environmental Analysis Branch
La Junta, CO
CERTIFICATION OF CONTAMINATION
A complete search of agency files has revealed that hazardous substance(s), as that term is defined in the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (42 U.S.C. 9601), as
amended, are known to have been stored for one year or more, been released, or disposed of on the excess
Air Force-controlled real property described below.
I.
The following notice provides information discovered as a result of a complete search of
agency files pertaining to hazardous substances known to have been stored, released, or
disposed of on the excess real property:
l
Hazardous materials are present in small quantities at the Lemay Technical Operations Facility.
Materials stored on site include propane, a lead acid battery, 4 aerosol paint cans, cleaning
solvents, four 5-gallon drums containing used insulating oil lubricants and a milk jug
approximately 1/3rd full of used oil.
As mentioned in section 3.3.1, the milk jug of used oil appears to have leaked a portion of the
contents, however, a containment pallet is in place below the plywood platform, so no hazardous
materials have escaped the containment system.
II.
The above information, based on agency files or other available information, addresses the
period prior to June 1998. This information is the best available and is believed to be correct,
but no guarantee as to accuracy can be provided.
III.
The U.S. Air Force will take all remedial action necessary to protect human health and the
environment with respect to any hazardous substance(s) released disposed of, or stored on the
real property described below which is identified as excess to Air Force requirements and
proposed for disposal.
Certified by:
.
9LEcg&
KEVIN J. ETER
Project Manager
Ogden Environmental and Energy Services
Date:
Date:
Approved by:
ALTON CHAVIS
Chief, Environmental Analysis Branch
La Junta, CO
CERTIFICATION OF POLYCHLORINATED BIPHENYLS CLEARANCE*
X
1. This Real Property is in compliance with 40 CFR 761 as outlined below
(check all that apply):
X
a. An Inventory has been prepared and is being maintained of all USAF-owned
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB) Real Property Installed Equipment and Real Property
PCB Items per Section 761.45.
All in-service
b.
and stored serviceable PCB and PCB-contaminated Real Property
Installed Equipment and Real Property PCB Items have been inspected, repaired, and are
being maintained to prevent leakage, and therefore can be distributed per Section 76 1.30.
- c. PCB Real Property Installed Equipment and Real Property PCB Items have been
-
stored, decontaminated, and labeled per Section 76 1.42,76 1.43, and 761.44.
d. There
.X
is no known PCB-contaminated soil, wastes, or unserviceable
equipment remaining on the existing property.
2.
A records search and an on-site inspection indicate that this property has
not been exposed to PCB materials or equipment.
* Certify to either paragraph 1 or 2.
Certified by:
K~VIN~PETER
Project Manager
Ogden Environmental and Energy Services
Approved by:
-.-
_- . .
lIi?i?Gm
ALTON CHAVIS
Chief, Environmental Analysis Branch
-..
Date:
.--
La Junta, CO
CERTIFICATION OF ASBESTOS CLEARANCE
_ 1, On-site surveys have identified asbestos-containing materials. Friable asbestos
will be properly removed and disposed of prior to, or in conjunction with, the
disposal of the property, should it ever occur. Removal and disposal will be in
accordance the Federal Regulations 29 CFR 1910.1001 and 40 CFR 61.145
through 61.151.
X
2. A records search and on-site inspection indicate that this property does not have
asbestos containing materials or equipment.
-3. An on-site inspection revealed no friable asbestos based on current standards.
Certified by:
Project Manager
Ogden Environmental and Energy Services
Approved by:
Date: t;‘/d/”
ALTON CHAVIS
Chief, Environmental Analysis Branch
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.0
2.0
-*
.-
3.0
ES-l
INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................
1.1
Purpose of Survey ....................................................................................
1.2
Scope of Survey .......................................................................................
1.3
La Junta, Colorado and Harrison, Arkansas .............................................
1.4
Site Description .......................................................................................
METHODOLOGY ..............................................................................
11
2.1
Documents Reviewed ...............................................................................
11
2.2
Property Inspection ..................................................................................
11
2.3
Personal Interviews., ................................................................................
12
2.4
Sampling .................................................................................................
12
SURVEY
FINDINGS ..........................................................................................................
3.1
13
Site History and Current Use ....................................................................
13
3.1.1
Historic Ownership ....................................................................
13
3.1.2
Historic Property Review ...........................................................
16
3.1.3
Aerial Photographs ....................................................................
18
3.1.4
Current Use ...............................................................................
19
3.1.5
Utilities ......................................................................................
19
3.2
Environmental Setting ..............................................................................
22
3.3
Above Ground Storage Tanks (ASTs) ......................................................
25
3.4
Lead-Based Paint (LBP) ..........................................................................
26
3.5
Asbestos ..................................................................................................
27
3.6
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs). ...........................................................
28
3.7
Soil Contamination ..................................................................................
28
3.8
Underground Ground Storage Tanks (USTs) ............................................
29
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
i
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
TABLE OF CONTENTS - continued
LIST OF TABLES
Table l-l
Elements of the Electronic Scoring Site System ........................................
2
Table l-2
Construction Features of Emitter and Scoring Sites ..................................
3
Table 1-3
Site Descriptions ......................................................................................
10
Table 3-1
1Environmental Hazards Summary ............................................................
14
Table 3-2
Site Ownership and Legal Descriptions ....................................................
15
Table 3-3
Summary of Cultural Resources Sites ......................................................
17
Table 3-4
Aerial Photography Review ......................................................................
18
Table 3-5
Current Site Use ......................................................................................
20
Table 3-6
Utilities....................................................................................................
21
Table 3-7
Soil Type, Erosion Potentials, and Site Limitations ...................................
23-24
Table 6-l
Facility Matrix of Hazardous Substance Categories ..................................
37
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
Glossary
APPENDIX B
La Junta, Colorado, Electronic Combat Range, EBS
APPENDIX C
Harrison, Arkansas, Everton Electronic Scoring site, EBS
APPENDIX D
Federal and State Environmental Database Search
APPENDIX E
Site Photography
APPENDIX F
Interview
Questionnaires
...
11
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
--
_ _ -.
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Environmental Baseline Survey (EBS) has been prepared for the U.S. Air Force (USAF) Air
Combat Command’s (ACC) Realistic Bomber Training Initiative (RBTI) Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS). This survey satisfies the requirements for an EBS as outlined in AFI 32-7066,
Environmental Baseline Surveys in Real Estate Transactions and involves only those tasks stated
in Section 2.0, Survey Methodology, of this report. Disclosure of information in this EBS is
prohibited without prior notification of the USAF.
RBTI proposes to develop interrelated airspace and ground training components to support
realistic training within approximately 600 nautical miles (NM) of Dyess and Barksdale AFBs.
The EIS analyzes four alternatives, including the No-Action Alternative and three action
alternatives (B, C, or D). Under the No-Action Alternative, no changes to current facilities or
airspace would occur. The three action alternatives would establish electronic emitter and
scoring sites under Military Training Routes (MTRs) and Military Operating Areas (MOAs) in
west Texas or northeast New Mexico. Specifically, under any of the three actions alternatives,
electronic emitters and two electronic scoring sites would be built and two existing electronic
scoring sites in La Junta, Colorado and Harrison, Arkansas would be decommissioned. The Air
Force identified a total of 42 sites to provide flexibility choice. Only 12 sites would be needed
for the Proposed Action. Each of these sites was designated by a site number and analyzed. The
two decommissioned sites were also surveyed and can be found in Appendix B and Appendix C.
In addition, cultural and biological resource surveys were conducted and the findings are found
in separate reports.
Site assessments were generated by conducting a visual inspection of the candidate sites,
interviewing available landowners, and reviewing all available data on potential contamination
sources. Properties of potential concern include:
•
Site 60 (Alternatives B and C) - two above-ground storage tanks (AST); one propane and
the other potentially water; as well as associated piping;
•
Site 61 Dyess AFB former Transmitter site (Alternatives B, C, and D) - one 1,000-gallon
diesel AST (removed in October 1999 after initial survey) and confirmed presence of
lead-based paint (LBP);
•
Site 62 Dyess AFB former Receiver site (Alternatives B, C, and D) - one 50-gallon diesel
AST (removed in October 1999 after initial survey) and confirmed presence of LBP;
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
ES-1
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Should site 60 be selected to establish an emitter site, the portion of the parcel containing the
ASTs is recommended to be eliminated from the real estate transaction. ACC/XOR and 7
OSS/OSTA have indicated there is adequate area to shift the emitter site perimeter and remain in
the surveyed area. Should the portion of land containing the ASTs be included in any real estate
transaction, confirmation of the water contents of the ASTs would be in order. Also, it should be
confirmed with the landowner that no underground storage tanks or hazardous substance spills
have ever been associated with the site. The landowner was not available during the initial
survey to answer specific questions regarding this assessment, the observed tanks and piping on
the site, or the property's historical use. Repeated attempts to contact the landowner have been
unsuccessful and his whereabouts remains unknown.
Although surveys performed on 61 and 62 confirmed that ACM and LBP are present on the
property, establishment of the scoring site at either site would not affect the existing buildings. If
the decision is made to utilize the existing buildings at either site, further evaluation of both the
ACM and LBP would be necessary. Further, since the initial survey, the ASTs on both sites have
been removed and the stained soil removed.
.
Properties of interest due to adjacent properties include:
•
Site 64 (Alternative B) - one oil/gas well (not currently functioning) located immediately
adjacent to the site; and
•
Site 79 (Alternative C) - one oil/gas well (currently functioning) and one 1,000-gallon
AST located on the site.
These sites were categorized as Category 2 where only storage has occurred.
Based on the information and recommendations contained in this EBS, there appear to be no
known environmental liabilities associated with the USAF proposed use, lease or purchase of the
following sites for implementing Alternative B/IR-178, Lancer MOA in support of the Realistic
Bomber Training Initiative: Sites 54, 59, 64, 72, 81, 82, 93, and 95.
ES-2
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
1.0
INTRODUCTION
Under the provisions of Air Force Instruction (AFI) 32-7066, Environmental Baseline Surveys in
Real Estate Transactions, 25 April 1994, the United States Air Force must conduct an
Environmental Baseline Survey for all real property that is located within the United States, its
territories, or its possessions that is identified for acquisition, lease, sale, or transfer to, from, or
with a party other than the USAF. Upon identification of the proposed transaction, the USAF
requires that the appropriate Command or installation conduct the EBS.
This report will be used in support of an environmental impact statement for (EIS) RBTI that will
comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and Council on Environmental
Quality regulations (40 CFR 1500 et. seq.) implementing NEPA, AFI 32-7061, and other
applicable federal and state-delegated environmental regulations. RBTI would consist of an
interrelated set of airspace and ground-based training assets, or an Electronic Scoring Site system
(ESS system). This system would include ten, 15-acre electronic emitters, two Electronic
Scoring Sites, and airspace consisting of an MTR and MOA with overlying Air Traffic Control
Assigned Airspace (ATCAA) in either west Texas or northeast New Mexico.
Proposed Action
The Air Combat Command has prepared this Environmental Baseline Survey concurrently and in
conjunction with the RBTI EIS, a Biological Resources Survey, and a Cultural Resources
Survey. RBTI proposes to develop interrelated airspace and ground training components that
would support realistic training within approximately 600 nautical miles (NM) from Dyess and
Barksdale Air Force Base (AFBs). These assets and capabilities would include:
•
An MTR allowing flight down to 300 feet above ground level in some segments, offering
variable terrain, overlying lands capable of supporting electronic threat emitters and
electronic scoring sites, and linked to a MOA;
•
A MOA and overlying ATCAA measuring at least 40 by 80 NM with a floor (lower)
altitude of 3,000 feet above ground level and an available ceiling (upper) altitude up to
40,000 feet mean sea level;
•
An array of five sites (15 acres each) for placing electronic emitters under or near the
MTR corridor and five additional sites (15 acres each) for placing electronic emitters
under or near the MOA; and
•
Two Electronic Scoring Sites co-located with operations and maintenance centers, one
under or near the MTR corridor and the other enroute from the training airspace to
Barksdale and Dyess AFBs.
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
1
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
The EIS analyzes four alternatives: the No-Action Alternative and three action alternatives (B, C,
or D). The three action alternatives could fulfill the need defined under the Proposed Action.
None are considered the preferred alternative at this time, and it is expected that the Air Force
will not define a preferred or environmentally preferred alternative until after the Draft EIS and
public comment period are concluded.
ALTERNATIVE A: NO-ACTION
The No-Action Alternative would not establish interrelated training facilities, and use of existing
airspace would remain the same. Under the No-Action Alternative, no new land acquisition or
construction of emitter or scoring sites would occur.
ALTERNATIVE B: INSTRUMENT ROUTE (IR)-178/LANCER MOA
To accommodate training requirements for RBTI, an ESS system would be established. Table 11 shows the elements of the ESS system. For RBTI, the Air Force would use portable emitters
under or near the MTR and MOA. These emitters would be located on 15-acre parcels of land
and remotely programmed. The emitters are carried on a medium-sized travel trailer and are
about 17 feet high, including an antenna.
RBTI proposes a total of ten emitter sites associated with the MTR and MOA, and two scoring
sites (Table 1-1). However, to provide greater flexibility with regard to potential environmental
impacts, the Air Force analyzed 42 sites. Final sites would be chosen after the analysis is
complete.
Table 1-1 Elements of the Electronic Scoring Site System
Facility
2
Sites Required
MTR Emitters
5
MOA Emitters
5
Scoring Site/Operations and Maintenance Center
2
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Alternative B is located almost wholly in west Texas, with only a small portion extending into
southeastern New Mexico. All ground sites are located in Texas. Figure 1 presents the proposed
locations of the emitter and scoring sites identified for Alternative B.
Land Acquisition. Prior to construction, the Air Force would acquire the necessary 15-acre
parcels through lease or purchase. With the exception of the two scoring sites at Dyess AFB, all
the sites are on private property.
Construction. Construction activities would include clearing and grading of the site,
development of a gravel or asphalt pad near its center, and construction of chain-link fence
around the site perimeter. For emitter sites, an emitter would be linked to existing power and
telephone lines and sit on a 0.25-acre gravel pad. For the scoring sites, a 3-acre asphalt parking
lot would surround a 7,000 square-foot building. Table 1-2 summarizes the type of construction
needed.
Table 1-2 Construction Features of Emitter and Scoring Sites
Facility
Additional
Features
Size
Site Preparation
Construction
MTR
emitters
15 acres/
800x800 ft.
Grading of central
0.25-acre pad and
driveway
Chain-link perimeter
fence, 0.25-acre
gravel pad in center,
emitter placement
Gravel driveway,
power/telephone
lines
MOA
emitters
15 acres/
800x800 ft.
Grading of central
0.25-acre pad and
driveway
Chain-link perimeter
fence, 0.25 acre
gravel pad in center,
emitter placement
Gravel driveway,
power/telephone
lines
Scoring
Site/
Operations
Facilities
15 acres/
800x800 ft.
Grading of central
3-acre pad and
driveway
Chain-link perimeter
fence, 3-acre asphalt
pad in center, 7,000
sq. ft. 1-story
building
Asphalt driveway,
power/ telephone
lines, septic tank,
potable water
storage tank
At some sites, additional power lines or telephone cables from existing lines to the proposed
location may be needed. These could include power poles and/or underground cables.
Operations and Maintenance. Use of the scoring site would occur primarily during weekdays,
with only occasional use on weekends. Maintenance on the emitters would occur monthly and
when required for emergency repairs.
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
3
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
I
~- .__ _-I--..- -~I
1
. . . ..*.............y.........y....*
i
‘*1
Lancer
’
I
NEW MEXICO /
-..-..-..-..
..e..-..-..T
TEXAS
-
Candidate Electronic Scorine
Sites
MEXICO
:’
.
MEXKO
LEGEND
,
+I
\)’
Proposed IR-178
A
Can&date Eminn
Proposed 1R- I78 Corridor
*
Candidate Electroruc Scoring Site
Site
State Boundary
/Y/
County Boundary
. . . . . . .
MOA
Proposed location of Candidate Emitters and Electronic Scoring Sites for
Alternative B: IR- 178/Lancer MOA
4
Figure 1
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
--..
_-.
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Personnel. Approximately 30 personnel would be present at each of the two operations facilities
when aircraft are scheduled to use the system. The MTR and MOA emitters would operate in
response to scheduled use, but no personnel would be on-site. The unmanned emitters would be
remotely activated and programmed from the operational centers during periods of aircraft use.
Depending upon the training scenario and expected threats, not all emitters would be used all the
time.
ALTERNATIVE C: IR-178/TEXON MOA
Alternative C would use an ESS system established with the same land acquisition processes,
construction, operations, maintenance, and personnel as described under Alternative B.
Alternative C airspace lies almost wholly in west Texas, with only a small portion of airspace
extending into southeastern New Mexico. All emitter sites are located in west Texas. Figure 2
presents the proposed locations of the sites identified for Alternative C.
ALTERNATIVE D: IR-153/MT. DORA MOA
Alternative D would establish an ESS system with the same land acquisition processes,
construction, operations, maintenance, and personnel as described under Alternative B.
Alternative D airspace is almost wholly in northeastern New Mexico. The MTR and MOA
emitters and one scoring site would be located in New Mexico. The second scoring site would
be at Dyess AFB. Figure 3 presents the proposed locations of the sites identified for Alternative
D.
1.1
Purpose of Survey
The purpose of this EBS is to assess the present environmental conditions of properties identified
as potential locations for the ground-based electronic scoring site system. This is done prior to
real estate transactions to lease or purchase properties. This EBS includes the following:
•
a description of the nature, magnitude, and extent of environmental contamination of the
sites;
•
a definition of potential environmental contamination liabilities associated with the sites;
•
a compilation of information to assess health and safety risks and to ensure protection of
human health and the environment;
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
5
NEW MWCO
/
‘t
\
’
y%
- - l+cpedlR-178
I- IR-178 conidw
CandIdate
*
Candidate Electronic Site
Emitter
I
I$es+W
*I1
/
LEGEND
A
_ Candidate Electronic Scoringjittgittwmi
.L ..-.- - - - - - -;
I
,
\
\
‘r- -.- -..
Site
stale Boru~
,“‘\J
.......
County~
MOA
Proposed location of Candidate Emitters and Electronic Scoring Sites for
Alternative C: IR-17%Texon MOA
6
Figure 2
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
. _ - . “ l
- - - -
_ _
Realistic Bomber Training Xnitiative
AREA SHOWN
COLORADO
OKLAHOMA
Candidate
Propo,cd IR-153 Corridor
Candidate Elcctron~ Scorq Ste
,,-,/ County Boundary
Proposed location of Candidate Emitter and Elecronic Scoring Sites for
Alternative D: IR-153iMt. Dora MOA
Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Figure 3
7
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
•
information to assist in determining possible effects on property valuation from any
contamination discovered; and
•
information necessary for notice of type, quantity, and time frame of any storage, release,
or disposal of a hazardous substance on the sites when required by the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA).
Appendix A contains a glossary of EBS terms.
1.2
Scope of Survey
This EBS documents the environmental conditions of the candidate sites as observed in April and
May of 1998. Information was obtained in the following ways:
•
visiting the subject sites;
•
reviewing existing environmental data;
•
reviewing available chain-of-title information;
•
analyzing records concerning environmental condition and use of hazardous materials,
and the generation and disposal of hazardous waste; and
•
interviewing property landowners who have knowledge of current and past
environmental conditions and hazardous materials handling practices.
The results of this study are limited to a visual surface investigation. Subsurface, waste
characterization, air quality, asbestos, lead-based paint (LBP), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB),
and radon samples were deemed unnecessary due to lack of sufficient evidence of contamination
in existing documentation.
1.3
La Junta, Colorado and Harrison, Arkansas
The La Junta and Harrison electronic scoring sites were separately assessed following the survey
methods above. Appendices B and C contain the EBS for these sites.
8
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
1.4
Site Description
A total of 42 proposed sites were surveyed. Refer to Figures 1, 2, and 3 for the locations of the
proposed emitter sites for Alternatives B, C, and D. Table 1-3 lists each candidate site, with a
location description including the state and county, a legal description, and latitude/longitude
coordinates. Current land features are minimal, as most sites are privately owned and located on
agricultural or grazing lands. Properties 61 and 62 are currently owned by the Air Force and an
unused building is located on each of the sites.
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
9
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Table 1-3 Site Descriptions
SITE
#
Alt
State
County
Proposed Site Use
Coordinates
Legal Descriptions
2
D
NM
Guadalupe
MTR Emitter
35° 03 12.52N 105° 12 35.94W Anton Chico Land Grant T10R16 35NW
6
D
NM
Guadalupe
MTR Emitter
34° 50 44.28N 104° 15 40.12W T7N R25E 11 NW
7
D
NM
Guadalupe
MTR Emitter
34° 51 25.63N 104° 19 46.27W T7NR25E 06 NE
14
D
NM
Harding
Mt Dora MOA Emitter 35° 59 49.06N 104° 12 53.81W R26 T20 6 NE
15
D
NM
Colfax
Mt Dora MOA Emitter 36° 18 10.16N 104° 11 43.08W T24 N R26E 21 NE
16
D
NM
Colfax
Mt Dora MOA Emitter 36° 17 50.98N 104° 10 07.85W T24N R26E 21 NE
17
D
NM
Union
Mt Dora MOA Emitter 36° 17 02.14N 103° 49 44.20W T24N R29E 27NE
20
D
NM
Union
Mt Dora MOA Emitter 38° 03.3N
21
D
NM
Union
Mt Dora MOA Emitter 36° 22 36.91N 103° 11 22.59W T25N R35E 27 NE
24
D
NM
Guadalupe
28
D
NM
Harding
MTR ESS
35° 48 04.78N 103° 57 52.24W T18N R28E 09SE
33
D
NM
Union
MTR ESS
35° 51 13.71N 103° 20 45.85W T19N R34E 20 SE
MTR ESS
35° 37 22.39N 103° 09 25.84W T16N R36E 07SW
MTR Emitter
103° 42 57.07W T28N R30E 26 NW
34° 58 37.18N 105° 03 40.84W Anton Chico Land Grant T9 R18 30SW
34
D
NM
Quay
35
D
NM
Harding
Mt Dora MOA Emitter 35° 54 0.31N
Mt Dora MOA Emitter 35° 56 19.07N 104° 07 25.83W T20N R26E 25NE
103° 56 57.90W T19N R28E 3SE
36
D
NM
Harding
37
D
NM
Guadalupe
MTR Emitter
35° 01 53.56N 104° 55 41.48W Anton Chico Land Grant T9 R19 4
38
D
NM
Guadalupe
MTR Emitter
34° 55 06.66N 104° 24 50.30W T8N R24E 17NE
39
D
NM
Guadalupe
MTR Emitter
34° 55 03.20N 104° 20 57.81W T8N R24E 13SW
40
D
NM
Mora
MTR Emitter
35° 56 08.25N 104° 45 21.97W Mora Grant T20 R21 30&31
41
D
NM
Mora
MTR Emitter
35° 53 47.95N 104° 44 44.51W Mora Grant T19 R21 7NW
54
B/C
TX
Brewster
MTR Emitter
29° 34 33.16N 103° 33 10.88W B217 ST9
55
B/C
TX
Presidio
MTR Emitter
29° 85 04.54N 104° 00 44.57W B338 S582
59
B/C
TX
Reeves
MTR ESS
31°9N 103° 37 59.46W
60
B/C
TX
Reeves
MTR ESS
31° 11 54.44N 103° 39 33.67W B54 S17,18
61
B/C/D
TX
Taylor
Enroute ESS
32° 26 27.53N 99° 52 09.23W
Tract A - 109
62
B/C/D
TX
Taylor
Enroute ESS
32° 24 58.93N 99° 52 38.59W
Tract A - 108
BC-4 S8
64
B
TX
Scurry
Lancer MOA Emitter
32° 46 02.92N 100° 59 39.59W B97 S293 ANW
65
B
TX
Borden
Lancer MOA Emitter
32° 37 38.40N 101° 12 11.19W B25 S94 AH&TC
66
B
TX
Borden
Lancer MOA Emitter
32° 49 59.47N 101° 36 06.94W B32 S39 AH&OB
67
B
TX
Borden
Lancer MOA Emitter
32° 42 07.37N 101° 27 59.81W B31 S3 AT&P4N
72
B
TX
Garza
Lancer MOA Emitter
32° 59 114N 101° 09 163W
78
C
TX
Upton
Texon MOA Emitter
31° 21 47.11N 101° 56 23.21W BY S54 A20
79
C
TX
Schleicher
Texon MOA Emitter
30° 58 17.10N 100° 48 56.64W BA S36 A1619
80
C
TX
Upton
Texon MOA Emitters
31° 07 21.23N 101° 58 54.90W S6 BA MK&T
81
B/C
TX
Brewster
82
B/C
TX
Pecos
88
C
TX
Reagan
Texon MOA Emitter
31° 10 59.88N 101° 24 15.11W B1 S226 T&P
89
C
TX
Reagan
Texon MOA Emitter
31° 13 29.63N 101° 27 55.55W Section 10 GC & SF
91
B/C
TX
Pecos
93
B/C
TX
Pecos
MTR Emitter
94
C
TX
Irion
Texon MOA Emitter
31° 19 44.28N 100° 48 06.06W B2 S25 H & TC
95
B
TX
Scurry
Lancer MOA Emitter
32° 45 17.36N 100° 41 17.68W B3 S11 H&TC
10
MTR Emitter
MTR Emitter
MTR Emitter
B6 S14 ASE
31° 14 39.87N 102° 38 55.03W Bl C S 11 Massy
31° 14 39.87N 102° 38 55.03W B3 S3 SE1/2 H&TC
30° 38 23.46N 102° 38 45.51W B136 S3 TS&TL
30° 37 41.34N 102° 40 08.62W
B136 S4 TS&TL
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
2.0
SURVEY METHODOLOGY
Survey methodologies included document reviews, on-site investigations, and landowner
interviews.
2.1
Documents Reviewed
The documents reviewed consisted of environmental databases from federal and state regulatory
agencies, aerial photographs, historic maps, site plans, floor plans, and chain-of-title information.
Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) was contracted to perform a search of federal and
state environmental databases for locations of landfills, hazardous waste disposal sites, treatment
facilities, hazardous materials, and/or waste operations near the 42 sites. A detailed table
defining the search databases, compiled by EDR, is included as Appendix D.
Aerial photography interpretation allows identification of evidence of potential environmental
concerns associated with prior uses of the property and adjacent properties. Aerial photographs
of the sites were available for review at the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS),
Farm Service Agency (FSA) county offices, and EDR. Sources used by EDR to obtain aerial
photographs included the Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service (renamed Farm
Service Agency in 1995) and United States Geological Survey.
Topographic and soil survey maps were reviewed to identify natural and man-made site features.
These maps were used to determine elevation, surface water flow, shallow groundwater flow,
sensitive ecological areas, existing and historical land use, and land ownership. Local title
companies were contracted to research chain-of-title information through review of County Deed
Books and plat maps pertaining to the candidate sites.
2.2
Property Inspection
Candidate site inspections and reconnaissance of the surrounding areas were conducted in April
and May of 1998. The inspection incorporated American Society for Testing and Materials
standard practices E1528-96, Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments:
Transaction Screen Process and E1527-97, Standard Practice for Environmental Site
Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process. Photographs of each of the
candidate sites were taken and representative photos are included in Appendix E.
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
11
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Each site was visually inspected to assess the contamination potential from on- and off-site
sources, including the presence of hazardous activities or materials, stained soil, stressed
vegetation, leaking electrical transformers, and any signs of excavation or burial. Summary
information on the soil type, biological resources, and potential wetland information may be
found in Section 3 of this report. Further details may be found in the Draft Natural Resource
Report in Support of the Realistic Bomber Training Initiative, July 1999.
2.3
Personal Interviews
State and local government personnel and property owners were interviewed to determine the
past potential for hazardous material/hazardous waste spills, regulatory violations, and the
presence of hazardous materials at each site. Information was also gathered on past and present
handling practices for hazardous substances and presence of natural and cultural resources. If
available, documents were reviewed to validate interview information. A list of persons
interviewed and summaries of the interviews are presented in Appendix F.
2.4
Sampling
The results of this study are limited to a visual surface investigation. Subsurface, waste
characterization, air quality, asbestos, LBP, PCB, and radon samples were not taken because
interviews and available documentation did not show sufficient evidence of contamination to
warrant sampling.
12
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
3.0
FINDINGS
This section summarizes the findings of the EBS and provides the environmental conditions of
the candidate emitters and electronic scoring sites. This includes investigation of hazardous
materials and waste handling practices, location of utilities, determination of surface water runoff
patterns, identification of natural and cultural resources, and review of ownership history. Table
3-1 summarizes the findings at each site. If no findings on a topic were discovered at any of the
sites, then there is no further text discussion.
EBS findings for the existing Harrison and La Junta electronic scoring sites are found in
Appendix B and C. Findings included hazardous materials such as mixed fuels and antifreeze at
the Harrison site. Findings at the La Junta site included a small container of used oil leaking,
however, it was contained within a pallet. Neither site has undergone radon testing.
3.1
Site History and Current Use
3.1.1
Historic Ownership
Chain-of-title information was reviewed for all sites to determine past ownership and land uses.
Two of the sites, 61 and 62, are USAF-owned and do not require this review. Title search
companies, local to the subject sites, were contracted to research the chain-of-titles through deed
books and plat maps from their respective counties. The legal descriptions, current ownership,
and title search status for all sites are presented in Table 3-2.
Alternative B: IR-178/Lancer MOA
Chain-of-title documents were reviewed for all sites. Nothing was identified through this
documentation that indicates any negative environmental impacts to these properties. Previous
owners have used these properties for grazeland or farm use only. No liens were identified in
conjunction with any of these properties.
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
13
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
14
no findings in EDS
no findings in EDS
no findings in EDS
no findings in EDS
no findings in EDS
no findings in EDS
no findings in EDS
no findings in EDS
no findings in EDS
no findings in EDS
no findings in EDS
no findings in EDS
no findings in EDS
no findings in EDS
no findings in EDS
no findings in EDS
no findings in EDS
no findings in EDS
no findings in EDS
no findings in EDS
no findings in EDS
no findings in EDS
no findings in EDS
no findings in EDS
LUSTs w/in 0.5 mile
no findings in EDS
no findings in EDS
no findings in EDS
no findings in EDS
no findings in EDS
no findings in EDS
no findings in EDS
no findings in EDS
no findings in EDS
no findings in EDS
no findings in EDS
no findings in EDS
no findings in EDS
no findings in EDS
no findings in EDS
no findings in EDS
no findings in EDS
X
X
X
X
X X
Soil Contamination
Lead-based Paint
Radon
Polychlorinated biphenyls
Asbestos
Drinking water Supply
Disposal
Collection
Treatment
Groundwater Contamination
Solid Waste
Radioactive Waste
Ordnance
Medical and Biohazardous Waste
Pesticides and Herbicides
Oil/Water Separator
Pipelines, Hydrants, Transfer Systems
Underground Storage Tanks
Above Ground Storage Tanks
Installation Restoration Program
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
B/C
B/C
B/C
B/C
B/C/D
B/C/D
B
B
B
B
B
C
C
C
B/C
B/C
C
C
B/C
B/C
C
B
Hazardous and Petroleum Waste
Alternative
NM - Guadalupe
NM - Guadalupe
NM - Guadalupe
NM - Harding
NM - Colfax
NM - Colfax
NM - Union
NM - Union
NM - Union
NM - Guadalupe
NM - Harding
NM - Union
NM - Quay
NM - Harding
NM - Harding
NM - Guadalupe
NM - Guadalupe
NM - Guadalupe
NM - Mora
NM - Mora
TX - Brewster
TX - Presidio
TX - Reeves
TX - Reeves
TX - Taylor
TX – Taylor
TX - Scurry
TX - Borden
TX - Borden
TX - Borden
TX - Garza
TX - Upton
TX - Schleicher
TX - Upton
TX - Brewster
TX - Pecos
TX - Reagan
TX - Reagan
TX - Pecos
TX - Pecos
TX - Irion
TX - Scurry
Hazardous Materials / Petroleum Products
State - County
02
06
07
14
15
16
17
20
21
24
28
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
54
55
59
60
61
62
64
65
66
67
72
78
79
80
81
82
88
89
91
93
94
95
Environmental Database Summary (EDS)
Site
Table 3-1 Environmental Hazards Summary
X
X X
X X
X
X
X
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
TABLE 3-2 Site Ownership And Legal Descriptions
Site
State - County
Alternative
B/C/D
Current Owner
Private
or Public
Title Search
02
NM - Guadalupe
D
Mr. Peterson
Private
Complete
Anton Chico Land
Grant T10R16 35NW
06
07
14
15
NM - Guadalupe
NM - Guadalupe
NM - Harding
NM - Colfax
D
D
D
D
Mr. Pettigrew
Mr. J.B. and Mrs. Wanda Autrey
Mr. John A. Mahoney
Mr. Sciles/Deaf Smith County Grain
Private
Private
Private
Private
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
T7N R25E 11 NW
T7NR25E 06 NE
R26 T20 6 NE
T24 N R26E 21 NE
16
NM - Colfax
D
Mr. Sciles/Deaf Smith County Grain
Private
Complete
T24N R26E 21 NE
17
20
21
24
NM - Union
NM - Union
NM - Union
NM - Guadalupe
D
D
D
D
Triple M Cattle
Mr. Vincent/Springhill Corp
Mr. Edward Walker
Mr. Tom Payne
Private
Private
Private
Private
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
T24N R29E 27NE
T28N R30E 26 NW
T25N R35E 27 NE
Anton Chico Land
Grant T9 R18 30SW
28
33
NM - Harding
NM - Union
D
D
Mr. Lyell and Mr. Jimmie Hazen
Hutchison Family Limited
Partnership
Private
Private
Complete
Complete
T18N R28E 09SE
T19N R34E 20 SE
34
35
36
37
NM - Quay
NM - Harding
NM - Harding
NM - Guadalupe
D
D
D
D
Mr. Ralph Fort
Mr. Lewis
Mr. Hilario Ebell
Mr. Chris Marquez
Private
Private
Private
Private
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
T16N R36E 07SW
T19N R28E 3SE
T20N R26E 25NE
Anton Chico Land
Grant T9 R19 4
38
39
40
NM - Guadalupe
NM - Guadalupe
NM - Mora
D
D
D
Mr. Charles and Mrs. Judy Beford
Mr. Charles and Mrs. Judy Beford
Mr. Walter Wiggins
Private
Private
Private
Complete
Complete
Complete
T8N R24E 17NE
T8N R24E 13SW
Mora Grant T20 R21
30&31
41
NM - Mora
D
Mr. David Krush
Private
Complete
Mora Grant T19 R21
7NW
54
55
59
60
61
TX - Brewster
TX - Presidio
TX - Reeves
TX - Reeves
TX - Taylor
B/C
B/C
B/C
B/C
B/C/D
Mr. Richard Allen
Mr. James Harnett
Mr. Kevin Lanaham
Mr. Ronnie Terrell
Dyess AFB Transmitter Site
Private
Private
Private
Private
Private
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
USAF-owned
since 1955
B217 ST9
B338 S582
BC-4 S8
B54 S17,18
Tract A-109
62
TX - Taylor
B/C/D
Dyess AFB Receiver Site
Private
USAF-owned
since 1955
Tract A-108
64
65
66
67
72
78
79
80
81
82
88
89
91
93
94
95
TX - Scurry
TX - Borden
TX - Borden
TX - Borden
TX - Garza
TX - Upton
TX - Schleicher
TX - Upton
TX - Brewster
TX - Pecos
TX - Reagan
TX - Reagan
TX - Pecos
TX - Pecos
TX - Irion
TX - Scurry
B
B
B
B
B
C
C
C
B/C
B/C
C
C
B/C
B/C
C
B
Mr. Wesley Graves
Mr. Max Von Roeder
Mr. C.C. Nunnally
Mr. Norman Clark
Mr. Hickmann
Mr. DeWayne Lindsey
Mr. Horace H. Linthicum
Mr. George Poage
Mr. Bill Ivey
Mr. Andy Freudenrich
Mr. Jim McCoy
Mr. Bill Schneeman
Camaron and Bunger
Mr. Dick Henderson
Mr. Richie Cravens
Mr. Glenn Williamson
Private
Private
Private
Private
Private
Private
Private
Private
Private
Private
Private
Private
Private
Private
Private
Private
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Pending
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Complete
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Legal Descriptions
B97 S293 ANW
B25 S94 AH&TC
B32 S39 AH&OB
B31 S3 AT&P4N
B6 S14 ASE
BY S54 A20
BA S36 A1619
S6 BA MK&T
Bl C S 11 Massy
B3 S3 SE1/2 H&TC
B1 S226 T&P
Section 10 GC & SF
B136 S3 TS&TL
B136 S4 TS&TL
B2 S25 H & TC
B3 S11 H&TC
15
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Alternative C: IR-178/Texon MOA
Chain-of-title documents have been reviewed for all sites. Nothing was identified at any site that
indicates any past potential contamination or negative environmental impacts to these properties.
The previous owners used these properties for grazing and/or farming. No liens were identified
in conjunction with any of these properties.
Alternative D: IR-153/Mt. Dora MOA
Chain-of-title documents have been reviewed for all sites. Nothing was identified that indicates
any past environmental impacts to these properties, or that they have ever been used for anything
more than grazing and/or farming. No liens were identified in conjunction with any of these
properties.
3.1.2
Historic Property Review
Please refer to the document Draft Cultural Report in Support of the Realistic Bomber Training
Initiative, July 1999, prepared concurrently with this EBS for details of all findings mentioned in
this EBS.
Of the 42 candidate emitters and electronic scoring sites assessed, archeological sites were
identified on 7, 34, 38, 39, 61, and 94. Isolated artifacts were observed on sites 2, 37, 54, 62, 64,
72, and 81. These artifacts have not been evaluated by the State Historical Preservation Offices,
however, preliminary examination of the isolates found were determined to not be significant or
eligible for the National Register. Table 3-3 presents a summary of cultural resources.
Alternative B: IR-178/Lancer MOA
Under this alternative, candidate site 61 contained a prehistoric lithic scatter potentially eligible
for listing in the Natural Register. However, this site is located on a small portion of an existing
Dyess AFB facility and could be avoided by constructing the electronic scoring site on another
portion of this property. Prehistoric isolates were found on sites 54, 62, 64, 72, and 81, but are
not eligible for the National Register.
16
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Table 3-3 Summary of Cultural Resources Sites
Property
Alt.
Concerns
2
D
1 prehistoric isolate
7
D
1 prehistoric site – lithic and tool scatter
34
D
1 historic site
37
D
Prehistoric isolates
38
D
Prehistoric site – lithic scatter
39
D
Prehistoric site – lithic scatter
54
B/C
61
B/C/D
Prehistoric site – lithic scatter / quarry
62
B/C/D
Prehistoric isolates
64
B
Prehistoric isolates
72
B
Prehistoric isolates
81
B/C
Prehistoric isolates
94
C
Prehistoric isolate
Historic site, 2 prehistoric isolates
Alternative C: IR-178/Texon MOA
Under this alternative, the two properties, 61 and 94, contain sites with the potential for National
Register listing. Site 61 is already discussed under Alternative B. At site 94, a dump was found.
Non-eligible, prehistoric isolates were found on properties 54, 62, and 81.
Alternative D: IR-153/Mt. Dora MOA
Archeological sites on properties 7, 34, 38, 39, and 61 were identified as potentially eligible for
listing in the National Register. Archeological site 7 is a prehistoric lithic and tool scatter
containing two discrete clusters of flakes and two tools. The site integrity is poor. The
archeological site at 34 is located on high ground and contains materials from a homestead,
reportedly established around 1915. The archeological site on 38 was a previously recorded
other scatter/quarry of unknown age. The site on 39 is a small lithic scatter, interpreted as a short
term hunting camp. Site 61 has already been discussed in Alternative B.
3.1.3
Aerial Photographs
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
17
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Aerial photographs of the sites illustrated that historic land conditions were similar to their
current condition. Nothing was identified that would indicate that potential contamination might
have resulted from an on- or off-site source. Table 3-4 presents a summary of sites assessed by
aerial photography and the years reviewed.
Table 3-4 Aerial Photography Review
Site
2
Alternative 1996 1992 1990 1985 1983 1981 1980 1978 1977 1976 1973 1964 1960 1956 1940 1937 Source
D
x
x
x
NRCS
6
D
x
x
x
x
NRCS
7
D
14
D
17
D
x
NRCS
20
D
x
NRCS
21
D
x
NRCS
24
D
28
D
33
D
x
NRCS
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
NRCS
x
x
x
x
x
x
NRCS
NRCS
NRCS
34
D
35
D
36
D
37
D
x
x
x
38
D
x
x
x
NRCS
39
D
x
x
x
NRCS
40
D
x
x
NRCS
41
D
x
x
NRCS
61
B/C/D
x
x
x
EDR
62
B/C/D
x
x
x
EDR
78
C
x
x
FSA
80
C
x
x
FSA
82
B/C
88
C
x
x
FSA
x
x
x
89
C
B,C
93
B,C
94
C
x
95
B
x
x
x
NRCS
x
x
NRCS
x
NRCS
x
91
18
x
x
EDR
FSA
FSA
x
x
FSA
x
FSA
FSA
x
FSA
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
3.1.4
Current Use
At the time of inspections, most of the sites were unimproved rangeland or dormant (fallow) crop
fields. Exceptional cases are noted below in the discussion for each alternative. Table 3-5
presents current uses at the candidate emitters and electronic scoring sites.
Alternative B: IR-178/Lancer MOA
Most of the properties assessed for Alternative B are currently used for grazing livestock.
However, two of the sites (64 and 65) are enrolled in the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP).
The CRP is a national program to reduce soil erosion, improve wildlife habitat, and improve
water quality. It is a long-term, voluntary, cropland retirement program that provides annual
income for farmers. Program enrollment is for 10 to 15 years, but may be revoked if the
landowner agrees to repay all government assistance.
Sites 60, 82, and 95 were fallow fields during the on-site assessment. They had been historically
used to grow cotton crops. Two sites, 61 and 62, have existing buildings previously used as a
transmitter and receiver site for Dyess AFB, in Abilene, Texas.
Alternative C: IR-178/Texon MOA
Most of the properties assessed for Alternative C are currently used for grazing livestock with the
exception of sites 60, 61, and 62 – already assessed in Alternative B.
Alternative D: IR-153/Mt. Dora MOA
Most of the properties assessed for Alternative D are currently used for grazing livestock.
However, sites 14 and 28 are enrolled in CRP. Sites 61 and 62 have already been discussed in
Alternative B.
3.1.5
Utilities
Requirements for each of the proposed sites include telephone and electricity. Table 3-6 presents
the known telephone and electric companies nearest to the candidate sites.
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
19
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Table 3-5 Current Site Use
Site
02
06
07
14
15
16
17
20
21
24
28
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
54
55
59
60
61
62
64
65
66
67
72
78
79
80
81
82
88
89
91
93
94
95
20
State - County
NM - Guadalupe
NM - Guadalupe
NM - Guadalupe
NM – Harding
NM - Colfax
NM - Colfax
NM - Union
NM - Union
NM - Union
NM - Guadalupe
NM - Harding
NM - Union
NM - Quay
NM - Harding
NM - Harding
NM - Guadalupe
NM - Guadalupe
NM - Guadalupe
NM - Mora
NM - Mora
TX - Brewster
TX - Presidio
TX - Reeves
TX - Reeves
TX - Taylor
TX - Taylor
TX - Scurry
TX - Borden
TX - Borden
TX - Borden
TX - Garza
TX - Upton
TX - Schleicher
TX - Upton
TX - Brewster
TX - Pecos
TX - Reagan
TX - Reagan
TX-Pecos
TX-Pecos
TX-Irion
TX-Scurry
Alternative
B/C/D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
B/C
B/C
B/C
B/C
B/C/D
B/C/D
B
B
B
B
B
C
C
C
B/C
B/C
C
C
B/C
B/C
C
B
Current Use
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
fallow field-CRP
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
fallow field-CRP
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
agriculture
Dyess AFB Transmitter site
Dyess AFB Receiver site
fallow field-CRP
fallow field-CRP
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
agriculture
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
agriculture
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Table 3-6 Utilities
Site
State - County
Alternative
Electric Company
Electric Distance
From Site Center
Phone Company
02
NM - Guadalupe
D
Central New Mexico Rural Coop 505-425-9544
<1 mile
Eastern New Mexico Rural Coop 505-389-5100
06
NM - Guadalupe
D
Farmers Electric 505-472-5856
120'
Eastern New Mexico Rural Coop 505-389-5100
07
NM - Guadalupe
D
Farmers Electric 505-472-5856
<100'
Eastern New Mexico Rural Coop 505-389-5100
14
NM - Harding
D
Springer Electric REA 505-483-2421
144'
Eastern New Mexico Rural Coop 505-389-5100
15
NM - Colfax
D
Springer Electric REA 505-483-2421
500'
Mountain Bell Telephone 505-445-3621
16
NM - Colfax
D
Springer Electric REA 505-483-2421
450'
Mountain Bell Telephone 505-445-3621
17
NM - Union
D
Springer Electric REA 505-483-2421
400'
Mountain Bell Telephone 505-445-3621
20
NM - Union
D
Springer Electric REA 505-483-2421
400'
Mountain Bell Telephone 505-445-3621
21
NM - Union
D
Springer Electric REA 505-483-2421
400'
Mountain Bell Telephone 505-445-3621
24
NM - Guadalupe
D
Central New Mexico Rural Coop 505-425-9544
1707'
Eastern New Mexico Rural Coop 505-847-2521
28
NM - Harding
D
Springer Electric REA 505-483-2421
527'
Mountain Bell Telephone 505-445-3621
33
NM - Union
D
Springer Electric REA 505-483-2421
1300'
Eastern New Mexico Rural Coop 505-389-5100
34
NM - Quay
D
Springer Electric REA 505-483-2421
2 miles
Eastern New Mexico Rural Coop 505-389-5100
35
NM - Harding
D
Springer Electric REA 505-483-2421
3150'
Eastern New Mexico Rural Coop 505-389-5100
36
NM - Harding
D
Springer Electric REA 505-483-2421
450'
Eastern New Mexico Rural Coop 505-389-5100
37
NM - Guadalupe
D
Eastern New Mexico Rural Coop 505-389-5100
1.4 miles
Central New Mexico Rural Coop 505-425-9544
38
NM - Guadalupe
D
Farmers Electric 505-762-4466
1.4 miles
Eastern New Mexico Rural Coop 505-389-5100
39
NM - Guadalupe
D
Farmers Electric 505-762-4466
2.4 miles
Eastern New Mexico Rural Coop 505-389-5100
40
NM - Mora
D
Mora San Miguel 505-387-2205
1.4 miles
La Jicarita Telephone 505-387-2216
41
NM - Mora
D
Mora San Miguel 505-387-2205
450'
La Jicarita Telephone 505-387-2216
54
TX - Brewster
B/C
West Texas Utilities Company 915-837-3311
700'
Big Bend Telephone 800-592-4781
55
TX - Presidio
B/C
West Texas Utilities Company 915-837-3311
450'
Big Bend Telephone 800-592-4781
59
TX - Reeves
B/C
Texas New Mexico Power 915-445-4501
400'
GTE 800-483-5400
60
TX - Reeves
B/C
Texas New Mexico Power 915-445-4501
400'
GTE 800-483-5400
61
TX - Taylor
B/C/D
Unknown
Service already exists unknown
62
TX - Taylor
B/C/D
Unknown
Service already exists unknown
64
TX - Scurry
B
Unknown
400'
unknown
65
TX - Borden
B
Unknown
450'
unknown
66
TX - Borden
B
Unknown
400'
unknown
67
TX - Borden
B
Unknown
400'
unknown
72
TX - Garza
B
Unknown
400'
unknown
78
TX - Upton
C
Unknown
600'
unknown
79
TX - Schleicher
C
Unknown
450'
unknown
80
TX - Upton
C
Unknown
0.5 mile
unknown
81
TX - Brewster
B/C
West Texas Utilities Company 915-837-3311
<2.0 miles
82
TX - Pecos
B/C
Texas New Mexico Power 915-445-4501
400'
GTE 800-483-5400
88
TX - Reagan
C
Unknown
400'
unknown
89
TX - Reagan
C
Unknown
400'
unknown
91
TX - Pecos
B/C
Unknown
2100'
unknown
93
TX - Pecos
B/C
Unknown
2100'
unknown
94
TX - Irion
C
Unknown
500'
unknown
95
TX - Scurry
B
Unknown
500'
unknown
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Big Bend Telephone 800-592-4781
21
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Alternative B: IR-178/Lancer MOA
Electric power and telephone utilities exist adjacent to most of the sites.
Alternative C: IR-178/Texon MOA
Electric power and telephone utilities exist adjacent to most of the sites.
Alternative D: IR-153/Mt. Dora MOA
Electric power and telephone utilities exist near the sites.
3.2
Environmental Setting
The area potentially impacted by RBTI is located in the southern portion of the Great Plains
which include shortgrass prairie, desert grasslands, and mixed prairie regions. The area is arid,
with few trees and gently rolling topography. The thin layers of soils covering the region are
derived from the various parent materials found directly beneath the location where they sit, or
were transported there by erosional forces. As such, it is difficult to generalize about soils
because of the complex interactions between climate, parent material, organisms, and
topography. Table 3.7 lists each site and its associated soil type, including erosion potentials and
site limitations.
No perennial surface waters were found on the candidate sites. Two small perennial streams are
located about 1,900 to 2,300 ft. from sites 24 and 37. In addition to perennial streams,
seasonally intermittent drainages and depressions in the ground surface are found on many of the
sites, and may act as pathways for accidental contamination of surface and ground waters.
Proposed locations of ESS facilities in western Texas and eastern New Mexico are underlain by
geologically permeable parent materials with moderately vulnerable aquifers, some having water
tables less than 200 ft. below the surface (Wilson 1981).
Additional information on biological resources and potential surface water and wetlands, usually
addressed in an EBS, are incorporated into the Draft Natural Resources Report in Support of the
Realistic Training Initiative, July 1999.
22
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Table 3.7 Soil Types, Erosion Potentials, and Site Limitations
Slope
Soil Map Unit
Erosion
Road/ Building Site
(%)
Potential
Limitations
Alt.
Site #
D
2
0-3
Clovis-Pastura Association 1, 3
wind-moderate
water -slight
slight to severe (cemented
pan, low strength)
D
6
0-5
Tucumcari-Redona Association
wind-mod.-severe
water-slight-mod.
wind-severe
water-moderate
wind-moderate
water-moderate
moderate (clayey and
shrink-swell, low strength)
moderate to severe (slope
and erosion potential)
moderate to severe (mod.
shrink-swell, severe
permeability)
mod. to sev.( mod. shrinkswell clays and severe low
strength)
severe (low strength,
clayey)
moderate (shrink-swell
clay)
severe (shrink-swell clays,
shallow depth to bedrock)
moderate (shrink-swell
clays, shallow depth
indurated caliche)
slight to severe (cemented
pan, low strength)
mod. to sev.( mod. shrinkswell clays and severe due
to slow permeability)
moderate to severe (shrinkswell clays, shallow depth
to indurated caliche)
slight to moderate (blowing
sand, low compactability)
1, 3
D
7
3-15
La Lande-Chispa Complex 1, 3
D
14
0-3
Dumas loam 1, 4
D
15
1-5
Dioxice fine sandy loam 1, 2
wind-high
water-moderate
D
16
0-3
Gruver fine sandy loam 1, 2
D
17
0-5
Colmor silty clay loam 1, 8
D
20
0-3
Torreon silty clay loam 1, 8
D
21
1-5
Spurlock loam 1, 8
wind-high
water-slight
wind-moderate
water-moderate
wind-moderate
water-moderate
wind-moderate
water-moderate
D
24
0-3
Clovis-Pastura Association 1, 3
D
28
0-3
Dioxice loam 1, 4
D
33
0-9
Spurlock-Plack Complex 1, 8
wind-moderate
water-moderate
D
34
0-3
Amarillo fine sandy loam,
Amarillo loamy fine sand 1, 6
D
35
0-3
Tricon loam 1, 4
wind-moderate to
severe
water-slight
wind-moderate
water-moderate
D
36
0-3
Dioxie loam 1, 4
wind-moderate
water-moderate
D
37
0-8
Pastura-Clovis Association 1, 3
D
38
0-2
Redona-Hilken Loams 1, 3
D
39
1-10
D
40
3-45
D
41
1-3
San Jon-Latom Rock Outcrop
Complex 1, 3
Mion-Penrose Varient-Rock
Outcrop Complex 1, 5
Partri loam 1, 5
wind-severe
water-moderate
wind-moderate
water-slight-mod.
wind-severe
water moderate
wind-moderate
water-high
wind-moderate
water-moderate
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
wind-moderate
water -slight
wind-moderate
water-moderate
mod. to severe (med. soil
plasticity, severe shrinkswell)
mod. to sev.( mod. shrinkswell clays and severe due
to slow permeability)
moderate to severe (shallow
depth to cemented pan)
slight to severe (shallow
depth to cemented pan)
moderate to severe (shallow
depth to bedrock)
severe (shallow depth to
bedrock, slope)
moderate to severe (shrinkswell clayey soil)
23
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Alt.
Table 3.7 Soil Types, Erosion Potentials, and Site Limitations - continued
Site # Slope
Soil Map Unit
Erosion
Road/ Building Site
(%)
Potential
Limitations
B/C
54
3-15
Badland-Vieja Association 1, 3
B/C
55
0-3
Nickel-Canutio Association
B/C
59
5-12
Delnorte-Nickel Association 1, 7
B/C
60
0-1
Hodgins silty clay loam 1, 3
B/C/D
61
1-3
Vernon Clay 1, 7, 10
B/C/D
62
1-3
Tillman clay loam 1, 7, 10
B
64
Mansker series, Olton series 1, 9
B
65
1-3
(est.)
1-3
B
66
Lofton clay loam 1, 2
B
67
0.20.6
2-5
Spade-Latom Complex 1, 2
B
72
1-3
Berda loam 1, 4
C
80
1-8
Ector very gravelly loam 1, 8
B/C
81
B/C
82
1-15
(est.)
0-1
Reagan-Hodgins-Sanderson
Association 1, 3
Reagan silty clay loam, saline 1, 5
B/C
91
20-45
B/C
93
10-30
Ector-Rock Outcrop
Associationsteep 1, 5
Ector Association hilly 1, 5
B
95
1-3
Miles and Cobb fine sandy loam
1, 6
Patricia fine sandy loam 1, 2
1, 9
moderate (est.)
wind-slight
water-slight
wind-slight
water-slight
wind-moderate
water-slight
wind-slight
water-slight-mod.
wind-slight
water-slight
wind-slight
water-moderate
wind-mod. to
high
water- moderate
slight
wind- moderate
water-moderate
wind-slight
water-moderate
wind-slight
water-moderate
moderate (est.)
wind-slight
water-moderate
wind-slight
water-moderate
wind-slight
water-moderate
wind-moderate
water-slight to
mod.
slight to severe (shrinkswell clay)
slight to moderate (stony,
arroyos flood)
slight to severe (rippable
caliche layer, severe
limitations for septics,
slope)
moderate (moderate shrinkswell clay, low strength)
severe (shrink-swell clay,
low strength, clayey)
severe (mod.)-(shrink-swell
clay, low strength)
slight to mod. (mod. shrinkswell clay)
slight to moderate (erosion
and clay loam subsoils)
severe (high shrink-swell
clay, flood hazard)
slight to severe (severe for
septic development)
slight to moderate
severe (shallow depth to
limestone bedrock, slope)
moderate (mod. shrinkswell clay)
severe-too clayey (moderate
shrink-swell clay, low
strength)
severe (shallow depth to
limestone bedrock, slope)
severe (shallow depth to
limestone bedrock, slope)
slight to mod. (slight
shrink-swell clay, mod.
load cap.)
Source:
1. Ogden Environmental and Energy Services. 1999. Natural Resources Report in Support of RBTI. Boise, ID.
2. USDA-SCS. 1975. Soil Survey of Borden County, Texas.
3. USDA-SCS and Texas Agri. Expr’t. Sta. 1973. General Soil Map, Brewster County, Texas.
4. USDA-SCS and Texas Agri. Expr’t. Sta. 1975. Soil Survey of Garza County, Texas.
5. USDA-SCS and Texas Agri. Expr’t. Sta. 1980. Soil Survey of Pecos County, Texas.
6. USDA-SCS and Texas Agri. Expr’t. Sta. 1973. General Soil Map, Presidio County, Texas.
7. USDA-SCS and Texas Agri. Expr’t. Sta. 1979. Soil Survey of Reeves County, Texas.
8. USDA-SCS. Unpublished Soil Survey of Reagan and Upton Counties, Texas.
9. USDA-SCS and Texas Agri. Expr’t. Sta. 1973. Soil Survey of Scurry County, Texas.
10. USDA-SCS and Texas Agri. Expr’t. Sta. 1976. Soil Survey of Taylor County, Texas.
24
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
3.3
Above Ground Storage Tanks (ASTs)
Four of the candidate emitter and electronic scoring sites proposed under Alternatives B, C, and
D were identified as having ASTs. Sites 61 and 62, common to all action alternatives, have
ASTs (removed in October 1999). Two other sites, 60 and 79, in Alternatives B and C, were
observed with ASTs.
Alternative B: IR-178/Lancer MOA
The EDR report did not identify any registered ASTs on any of the candidate sites. However,
based on interviews with available landowners, site inspections, and review of available
documents, ASTs were identified on three of the candidate sites within Alternative B.
Three ASTs (two 10,000 gallon and one 1,000 gallon) exist on 60, however, the exact capacities
and contents of the tanks are unknown since they were not labeled and efforts to contact the
landowner were not successful. Based on the shape of the tanks, surrounding land use,
associated piping, and irrigation ditches adjacent to and in the vicinity of two of 10,000-gallon
tanks, it may be assumed that they were used for water storage. The other AST of approximately
1,000-gallons, may have been used to store propane gas. The pipes may indicate that there is a
UST, however, all efforts to locate the landowner were not successful and the interview of his
son-in-law indicated that he was unsure as to the existence of a UST on the premises.
Two diesel fuel ASTs were identified at site 61, Dyess AFB Transmitter site, including a 35gallon AST in the building’s generator room and a 1,000-gallon AST located approximately 20
feet from the northeast corner of the building. Both of these tanks served an emergency
generator that was removed in 1996. The 1,000-gallon AST was formerly used as the primary
storage tank and the 35-gallon AST was a day tank. Dyess AFB personnel reported that the
1,000-gallon AST has been empty for more than six years. However, at the time of the site visit,
a small area (less than one square foot) was observed to be stained and had a slight petroleum
odor. The vegetation did not appear to be stressed, and it is not anticipated that the soil
contamination beneath the AST is extensive. Two 50-gallon diesel fuel ASTs were identified at
candidate site 62 (Dyess AFB Receiver Site). Since the ASTs at 61 and 62 have not been used in
several years, and neither records nor visual inspection indicated any potential contamination, it
is not anticipated that they pose an environmental hazard. In October 1999, these ASTs at both
sites 61 and 62 were removed and stained soil removed.
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
25
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Alternative C: IR-178/Texon MOA
The EDR report did not identify any registered ASTs on any of the sites. However, based on
interviews with available landowners, the site inspections, and review of available documents
ASTs were identified on four of the sites within Alternative C.
Three of the sites, 60, 61, and 62, were identified in Alternative B. One AST also exists on
candidate site 79. The landowner reports that the AST is used to store oil that is pumped from a
functioning oil/gas well adjacent to the AST. The AST has a capacity of approximately 1,000
gallons; however, it was not known how much petroleum oil might be in the tank. No stained
soil or stressed vegetation was observed near the AST or the oil/gas well.
Alternative D: IR-153/Mt. Dora MOA
The EDR report did not identify any registered ASTs on any of the sites for Alternative D.
However, based on interviews with available landowners, the site inspections, and review of
available documents, ASTs were identified on sites 61 and 62. Refer to Alternative B of this
section for details.
3.4
Lead-Based Paint (LBP)
Lead-based paint is present in the structures at site 61 and 62, common to all three alternatives.
It is unlikely that LBP is present at any of the other subject properties since there are no
structures on the candidate sites.
Starting in 1978, lead was “banned” in residential paint by the U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD) but the structures on sites 61 and 62 are industrial not residential,
therefore, HUD guidelines do not apply. However, lead is also defined as a CERCLA hazardous
substance and potential soil contamination may occur from LBP flakes reaching the soil surface.
Building 1001 at site 61 does contain LBP, including areas of potential contamination from
deteriorated floor paint in the generator room and flaking/peeling brown paint on the exterior
door leading to the mechanical room. Analyses of 1997 paint samples showed a lead content in
excess of .06%. Deteriorated paint from the mechanical room door and the generator room floor
was found to contain 43,800 mg/kg (4.38 percent) and 31,100 mg/kg (3.1 percent) lead,
respectively. The exterior paint and all other surfaces (e.g., interior wall paint) of Building 1001
26
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
appeared in good condition. These areas had little potential for soil contamination due to their
location.
Building 2001 at site 62 also contained potential LBP areas, including flaking paint on the
exterior entrance stoop, deteriorated floor paint in the generator room, and flaking/peeling gray
paint on the plenum in the mechanical room. Analyses of 1997 samples showed the deteriorated
paint from the stoop outside of the generator room door and the floor of the generator room to
contain 7,010 mg/kg (0.70 percent) and 45,100 mg/kg (4.51 percent) lead, respectively. Because
there is a limited potential for soil contamination from the flaking LBP on the stoop, soil
sampling may be considered an alternative to determine the extent and concentration of potential
soil contamination. The exterior paint and all other surfaces of Building 2001 appeared in good
condition.
USAF policy requires a general and site-specific LBP management plan, dictating how LBP
hazards will be addressed and prevented. Dyess AFB personnel indicated that the Dyess AFB
lead management plan includes all sites, both on and off the main base. However, none of these
pre-existing buildings (1001 and 2001) would be used by RBTI, new buildings would be
constructed. Depending on the candidate site chose, the existing buildings would either be left in
place or dismantled using best management practices to dispose of LBPs.
3.5
Asbestos
Based on interviews with available landowners, site inspections, and review of available
documents, potential asbestos-containing materials (ACM) that were once present at sites 61 and
62, have been removed (confirmed by Dyess AFB personnel). These sites are common to all
three alternatives. ACMs are not present at any of the other locations because there are no
existing structures at any of the candidate sites.
Building 1001, at site 61, has several locations which have potential ACM, including the HVAC
plenum, boiler hot water line, and boiler access door. Building 2001, at 62, also has several
locations that have potential ACM, including the boiler hot water storage tank and the HVAC
Plenum. According to Dyess AFB (7 CES/CEVC), these sites were reviewed as part of the 1993
Dyess AFB asbestos survey. Although these buildings had been positively identified as
containing friable asbestos, there were no plans to conduct renovation or demolition activities
there and the buildings are currently unused. No written ACM operation or management plan for
these facilities have been prepared, although Dyess AFB policy dictates that any actions
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
27
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
impacting asbestos at this facility would be covered under the ACM operations and maintenance
plan developed for the base.
3.6
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs)
During the site inspections, no pole-mounted transformers were observed on any of the sites that
would potentially contain PCBs. However, pole-mounted transformers were located adjacent to
several candidate sites. At the time of inspections, no stained soil or stressed vegetation related
to possible transformer leads was observed on, or immediately adjacent to the sites.
Dyess AFB PCB inventory indicates that site 61 was surveyed and free of PCB-containing
equipment in 1994.
3.7
Soil Contamination
The candidate site ground surfaces were visually inspected for signs of stained soil, stressed
vegetation, suspicious depressions, and fill or vent pipes. Potential properties which would be
suspect of soil contamination include the following:
•
Site 60 (Alternatives B and C) - two potential water ASTs; one propane AST; and other
associated piping;
•
Site 61 (Alternatives B, C, and D) - one 1,000-gallon diesel AST (removed in October
1999);
•
Site 62 (Alternatives B, C, and D) - one 50-gallon diesel AST (removed in October
1999);
•
Site 64 (Alternative B) - one oil/gas well (not currently functioning) located immediately
adjacent to the site; and
•
Site 79 (Alternative C) - one oil/gas well (currently functioning) and one 1,000-gallon
AST located on the site.
As previously mentioned in Section 3.3, no signs of stained soil or stressed vegetation were
observed at sites 60, 62, or 79. No signs of stained soil or stressed vegetation were observed at
site 64, either. However, as previously mention, a small stain was observed under the 1,000gallon diesel AST at 61. The stain was approximately less than one square foot, and the odor
was faint. The vegetation did not appear to be stressed, and it is not anticipated that the surficial
28
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
soil contamination beneath the AST is extensive. Reportedly, the AST has not been used in more
than six years.
3.8
Underground Storage Tanks (USTs)
Underground storage tanks (USTs) formerly existed at sites 61 and 62. HQ/ACC CEVR
(Edward Newsome, Chief) confirmed in a memo to HQ ACC/CEVP (September 1999) that these
USTs were at sites 61 and 62. This memo states that the Environmental Restoration Program
(ERP) at Dyess AFB found an unreported number of leaking diesel USTs at both sites. Dyess
AFB removed them in 1991. In 1994 the ERP investigation was completed and “although the
USTs and some soil were removed, most of the contaminated soil remained in place. The Texas
Natural Resources Conservation Commission (TNRCC) allows closure under their UST Program
if the risk to human health or the environment is at an acceptable level based on anticipated land
use. Therefore, no further action is required and none planned based on projected land use.”
According to the Dyess AFB ST-40 and ST-41 UST Site Assessment Report1, both the total
hazard index calculated for noncarcinogenic health effects and the estimated lifetime excess
cancer risk are below hazard levels. These findings indicate that no health effects are
anticipated, even to sensitive individuals.
Should either site be selected as the permanent
location of the electronic scoring site, the construction contractor would coordinate with 7
CES/CEV and HQ ACC/CEVR on siting and design of the facilities.
1
Compiled in Dyess AFB Administrative Record 369, Disc 4, pages 67-68 and 139-140.
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
29
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
4.0
FINDINGS FOR ADJACENT PROPERTIES
The areas adjacent to the sites were inspected to assess the potential for contamination from offsite sources. This inspection was performed by review of federal and state regulatory databases,
area maps, and visual inspection from public roads and private properties based on permitted
access.
4.1
Land Use
Property immediately surrounding most of the sites within the three alternatives B, C, and D was
rural, agricultural land. Site 61 is located near residential properties and site 62 is located
adjacent to a petroleum storage tank farm. There are no other major commercial or industrial
operations within a 0.5 mile radius of any of the other sites.
4.2
Adjacent Properties
The review of federal and state environmental databases identified two properties of
environmental concern between 0.25 and 0.50 miles from site candidate 61. The State of Texas
Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) records show that one LUST is located at a facility
called Contract Paving, more than 0.25 mile southwest of site 61; and one LUST is located at a
facility called Bilbo, approximately 0.5 miles south of 61. Both of these locations are at an
elevation equal to or higher than 61.
The LUST identified at Contract Paving released petroleum product to the subsurface, the
investigation concluded that groundwater was impacted. Investigation also concluded that no
apparent threats or impacts to receptors are expected as a result of the release. The Texas
Natural Resource Conservation Commission LUST database reports that the status of this LUST
is currently in the clean-up and monitoring phase.
The Bilbo LUST released petroleum product to the subsurface, the investigation concluded that
only soil contamination resulted from the release. The LUST database reports the status of the
investigation is closed after review of a full site assessment.
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
31
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
5.0
APPLICABLE REGULATORY COMPLIANCE ISSUES
Federal and state environmental databases were reviewed to determine if any of the sites have
had any documented environmental and/or hazardous material/waste regulatory compliance
issues.
5.1
List of Compliance Issues
Based upon a review of the federal and state environmental databases and interviews with
available landowners, no outstanding notice-of-violation regulatory compliance issues exist for
any of the sites for Alternatives B, C, and D.
5.2
Corrective Actions
There are no compliance issues associated with the sites of all three Alternatives , therefore, no
corrective actions are necessary.
5.3
Cost Estimates of Various Alternatives
There are no corrective actions required, therefore, there are no additional costs for corrective
actions.
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
33
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
6.0
CONCLUSIONS
Information generated for this EBS was accomplished by conducting a visual inspection of the
sites and their surrounding vicinities, conducting personal interviews with available landowners
who have experience with the histories of the sites, and reviewing available data, including
Federal and state environmental databases.
Properties of potential concern include:
•
Site 60 (Alternatives B and C) - two potential water ASTs; one potential propane AST;
and associated piping;
•
Site 61 (Alternatives B, C, and D) - one 1,000-gallon diesel AST (removed in October
1999 after initial survey) and confirmed presence of LBP;
•
Site 62 (Alternatives B, C, and D) - one 50-gallon diesel AST (removed in October 1999
after initial survey) and confirmed presence of LBP;
Properties of interest include:
•
Site 64 (Alternative B) - one oil/gas well (not currently functioning) located immediately
adjacent to the site; and
•
Site 79 (Alternative C) - one oil/gas well (currently functioning) and one 1,000-gallon
AST located on the site.
6.1
Facility Matrix
Based on the findings, AFI 32-7066 requires the EBS to categorize the presence of hazardous
substances, petroleum products, or their derivatives for each property or area. There are seven
categories which cover USAF properties:
1. those with no history of storage, release, or disposal;
2. those where only storage occurred but no release was reported;
3. those with minimal contamination below action levels;
4. those where remedial action has been completed;
5. those where remedial actions are underway;
6. those where response actions have not commenced; and
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
35
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
7. those where further evaluation is recommended.
Table 6-1 summarizes the facility matrix and the property categories.
6.2
Data Gaps
Every reasonable effort was made to collect and review information for this EBS.
36
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Table 6-1: Facility Matrix of Hazardous Substance Categories
Site
02
06
07
14
15
16
17
20
21
24
28
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
54
55
59
60
61
62
64
65
66
67
72
78
79
80
81
82
88
89
91
93
94
95
Alternative
Alt.
State - County
D
NM - Guadalupe
D
NM - Guadalupe
D
NM - Guadalupe
D
NM - Harding
D
NM - Colfax
D
NM - Colfax
D
NM - Union
D
NM - Union
D
NM - Union
D
NM - Guadalupe
D
NM - Harding
D
NM - Union
D
NM - Quay
D
NM - Harding
D
NM - Harding
D
NM - Guadalupe
D
NM - Guadalupe
D
NM - Guadalupe
D
NM - Quay
D
NM - Quay
B/C
TX - Brewster
B/C
TX - Presidio
B/C
TX - Reeves
B/C
TX - Reeves
B/C/D TX - Taylor
B/C/D TX - Taylor
B
TX - Scurry
B
TX - Borden
B
TX - Borden
B
TX - Borden
B
TX - Garza
C
TX - Upton
C
TX - Schleicher
C
TX - Upton
B/C
TX - Brewster
B/C
TX - Pecos
C
TX - Reagan
C
TX - Reagan
B/C
TX - Pecos
B/C
TX - Pecos
C
TX - Irion
B
TX - Scurry
Findings
Category
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
4
4
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Current Use
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
CRP
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
CRP
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
agriculture
Dyess AFB Transmitter site
Dyess AFB Receiver site
CRP
CRP
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
agriculture
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
livestock grazing
agriculture
Note:
2 - Only storage occurred, but no release was reported
4 - Remedial action taken
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
37
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
7.0
RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the information contained in this EBS, there appear to be no known environmental
liabilities (except as noted) associated with proposed use, lease, or purchase of the sites.
Should site 60 be selected to establish an emitter site, the portion of the parcel containing the
ASTs is recommended to be eliminated from the real estate transaction. ACC/XOR and 7
OSS/OSTA have indicated there is adequate area to shift the emitter site perimeter and remain in
the surveyed area. Should the portion of land containing the ASTs be included in any real estate
transaction, confirmation of the water contents of the ASTs would be in order.
Also, it should
be confirmed with the landownerthat no underground storage tanks or hazardous substance spills
have ever been associated with the site. The landowner was not available during the initial
survey to answer specific questions regarding this assessment, the observed tanks and piping on
the site, or the property's historical use. Repeated attempts to contact the landowner have been
unsuccessful and his whereabouts remains unknown.
Although surveys performed on 61 and 62 confirmed that ACM and LBP are present on the
property, establishment of the scoring site at either site would not affect the existing buildings. If
the decision is made to utilize the existing buildings at either site, further evaluation of both the
ACM and LBP would be necessary. Further, since the initial survey, the ASTs on both sites have
been removed and the stained soil removed.
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
39
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
9.0
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Air Force Instruction (AFI) 32-7066. 1994. United States Air Force, Environmental Baseline
Surveys in Real Estate Transactions. April 25.
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 1996. Standard Practice for
Environmental Site Assessments: Transaction Screen Process,
Practice E1528-96.
__________. 1997. Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I
Environmental Site Assessment Process, Practice E1527-97.
Anderson, George W., Terry E. Hiley, Paul G. Martin, Jr., Charles R. Neal, and Robert S.
Comez. 1982. Soil Survey of Colfax County, New Mexico. Prepared by the United States
Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, in cooperation with the New
Mexico Agricultural Experiment Station. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington
D.C.
Conner, Nathaniel, R. 1976. Soil Survey of Taylor county, Texas. Prepared by the United
States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, in cooperation with the
Texas Agricultural Experiment Station. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington
D.C.
Dixion, L. Marvin. 1975. Soil Survey of Borden County, Texas. Prepared by the United States
Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation service, in cooperation with Texas
Agricultural Experiment Station. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington D.C.
Dixon, Marvin, L., William H. Dittemore, JR., and Harold W. Hyde. 1973. Soil Survey of
Scurry County, Texas. Prepared by the United States Department of Agriculture, Soil
Conservation service, in cooperation with Texas Agricultural Experiment Station. U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington D.C.
Environmental Data Resources, Inc. 1998. EDR-Radius Map and Geocheck Report. Search
of available environmental databases.
Jaco, Hubert B. 1980. Soil Survey of Reeves County, Texas. Prepared by the United States
Department of Agriculture, soil Conservation Service, in cooperation with the Texas
Agricultural Experiment Station. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington D.C.
Maxwell, Harold B., Steven P. Shade, Hayden D. Rounsaville, and Abe Stevenson. 1981. Soil
Survey of Union County, New Mexico. Prepared by the United States Department of
Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, and Forest Service, in cooperation with the New
Mexico Agricultural Experiment Station. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington
D. C.
Pease, Douglas S., Norman M. Davis, Parker D. Ingram, Paul Shields, Max V. Hodson, Jess C.
Epple, Jr., David S. Totah, and Lonnie G. Berglan. 1973. Soil Survey of Harding County,
New Mexico. Prepared by the United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation
Service, in cooperation with the New Mexico Agricultural Experiment Station. U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington D.C.
Richardson, Wayne E., Darrell G. Grace, and Lee A. Putnam. 1973. Soil Survey of Garza
County, Texas. Prepared by the United States Department of Agriculture, Soil
Conservation Service, in cooperation with the Texas Agricultural Experiment Station.
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington D.C.
Rives, Jerry L. 1980. Soil Survey of Pecos County, Texas. Prepared by the United State
Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service in cooperation with Texas
Agricultural Experiment Station. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington D.C.
Ross, James W. and Douglas S. Pease. 1974. Soil Survey of Tucumcari Area, New Mexico,
Northern Quay County. Prepared by the United State Department of Agriculture, Soil
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
41
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Conservation Service, in cooperation with the New Mexico Agricultural Experimental
Station. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington D. C.
Sellnow, Steven L. 1985. Soil Survey of Mora County Area, New Mexico. Prepare by the
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, in cooperation with
the New Mexico Agricultural Experiment Station. U.S. Government Printing Office,
Washington D.C.
United States Department of Agriculture Farm Services. Aerial photography. Reviewed
parcels and surrounding areas.
United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service. 1970. Soil Survey of
Butte County, South Dakota. U.S. Government Printing Office.
United States Geologic Survey (USGS) 7.5-Minute Series Topographic Maps. Reviewed
topography of parcels and surrounding properties.
Wiedenfeld, C. C. 1980. Soil Survey of Schleicher County, Texas. Prepared by the United
States Department of agriculture, Soil Conservation Service in cooperation with Texas
Agricultural Experiment Station. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington D.C.
Wilson, L. 1981. Potential for Ground-Water Pollution in New Mexico. New Mexico
Geological Society, Special Publication 10:47-54.
42
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
APPENDIX A
Glossary
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Acquisition - Any authorized method of obtaining USAF control of and responsibility for real
property. An Acquisition may be a temporary or permanent interest in real property. Includes
inter-agency transfers or real property accountability from other Federal government agencies.
Methods include purchase, condemnation, donation, exchange, leasing, licenses, permits, reinvestment and capture.
Adjacent Properties - Not only those properties contiguous to the boundaries of the installation
or WP site, but also those properties relatively nearby that could pose significant environmental
impact or concern on the installation of WP site.
Aquifer - Rock or sediment that is saturated and sufficiently permeable to transmit economic
quantities of water to wells and springs. Not all groundwater is in an aquifer.
CERCLA - Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
CERCLIS - Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information
System. CERCLIS contains data on potentially hazardous waste sites that have been reported to
the USEPA pursuant to Section 103 of CERCLA. CERCLIS contains sites which are either
proposed to or on the National Priority List (NPL) and sites which are in the screening and
assessment phase for possible inclusion on the NPL.
CERC-NFRAP - Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Information System - No Further Remedial Action Planned. As of February 1995, CERCLIS
sites designated “No Further Remedial Action Planned” have been removed from CERCLIS.
NFRAP sites may be sites where, following an initial investigation, no contamination was found,
contamination was removed quickly without the need for the site to be placed on the NPL, or the
contamination was not serious enough to require Federal Superfund action or NPL consideration.
CONSENT - Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees. CONSENTs are major legal settlements
that establish responsibility and standards for cleanup at NPL (Superfund) sites. Released
periodically by the U.S. District Courts after settlement by parties to litigation matters.
CORRACTS - Corrective Action Report. CORRACTS identifies hazardous waste handlers with
RCRA corrective action activity.
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
A-1
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Disposal - Any authorized method of permanently divesting the Air Force of control of and
responsibility for real property. Includes fee conveyance and inter-agency transfers of other
disposition.
Disposal by Deed - A conveyance of fee or any interest in real property.
Due Diligence- The process of inquiring into the environmental characteristics or other
conditions of a parcel of commercial real estate, usually in connection with a commercial real
estate transaction. The degree and type of due diligence will vary for different properties and
differing purposes
ERNS - Emergency Response Notification System. ERNS records and stores information on
reported releases of oil and hazardous substances.
FINDS - Facility Index System. FINDS contains both facility information and “pointers” to other
sources that contain more detail.
Hazardous Substance - In addition to the meaning provided in CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9601(14),
this term specifically includes petroleum, petroleum products, oil, and lubricants (POL).
HMIRS - Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System. HMIRS contains hazardous
material spill incidents reported to the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT).
Installation Restoration Program - An environmental program developed by the Department of
Defense (DoD) to evaluate DoD installations and to identify former waste, spill, storage, and
disposal sites; to evaluate the extent and nature of contamination if present; and to initiate
appropriate remedial action.
Interagency Transfer - Transfer of Federal government property accountability to or from other
Federal government agencies.
MLTS - Material Licensing Tracking System. MLTS is maintained by the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) and contains a list of sites which possess or use radioactive materials and
which are subject to NRC licensing requirements.
A-2
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
NPL - National Priority List (Superfund). NPL is a sub-set of CERCLIS and identifies sites for
clean-up under the Superfund Program.
NPL Liens - Federal Superfund Liens. Under authority granted the USEPA by CERCLA of
1980, the USEPA has the authority to file liens against real property in order to recover remedial
action expenditures or when the property owner receives notification of potential liability.
USEPA compiles a listing of filed notices of Superfund Liens.
Out-grant - A temporary grant of an interest in the right to use Air Force controlled real property
by means of either a lease, license, or permit.
PADS - PCB Activity Database System. PADS identifies generators, transporters, commercial
storers, and/or brokers and disposers of PCBs who are required to notify the EPA of such
activities.
RAATS - RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System. RAATS contains records based on
enforcement action issued under RCRA pertaining to major violators and includes administrative
and civil actions brought by the USEPA.
RCRA - Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
RCRIS - Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System. RCRIS includes selective
information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat, and/or dispose of hazardous waste as
defined by RCRA.
Real Property - Land, fixtures, and other improvements to the land.
Release - This term will have the meaning provided in CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9601(22).
ROD - Records of Decision. ROD documents mandate a permanent remedy at an NPL
(Superfund) site containing technical and health information to aid in the cleanup.
Storage - The holding of hazardous substances for a temporary period prior to the hazardous
substance either being used, treated, transported, or disposed of.
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
A-3
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Temporary Interest - A grant of interest in or use of real property which expires at the end of a
stated term or which can be terminated. Instruments include leases, licenses, and permits.
TRIS - Toxic Chemical Release Information System. TRIS identifies facilities which release
toxic chemicals to the air, water, and land in reportable quantities under SARA Title III Section
313.
TSCA - Toxic Substances Control Act. TSCA identifies manufacturers and importers of
chemical substances included on the TSCA Chemical Substance Inventory list. It includes data
on the production volume of these substances by plant site.
A-4
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
APPENDIX B
La Junta, Colorado, Electronic Combat Range, EBS
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
1.0
1.1
INTRODUCTION
Purpose of Survey
An environmental baseline survey (EBS) was conducted at the Electronic Combat Range in La
Junta, Colorado. The survey was performed in order to assess current environmental conditions
at the facility for consideration in future planning. Verifying the existing environmental
conditions at these locations is important in determining potential environmental liabilities
attributable to the U.S. Air Force (USAF) or to the current contractor operating the facility,
Lockheed Martin.
1.2
Scope of Survey
The EBS involved a site visit and inspection of all properties and facilities associated with the
Electronic Combat Range in and around La Junta, Colorado. These facilities included the
Lemay Technical Operations Facility in La Junta, Colorado, four AN/MST-T1(V) Multiple
Threat Emitter System (Mini-MUTE) sites located in Bent and Las Animas Counties, and one
MLQ-T4(V) Ground Jammer site located in Bent County. Interviews were also conducted with
personnel familiar with the activities at the Electronic Combat Range and relevant documentation
was examined.
1.3
Site Descriptions
The Lemay Technical Operations Facility is located adjacent to the La Junta Municipal Airport
and Industrial Park in the City of La Junta, Otero County, Colorado (Figure 1). The Mini-MUTE
and jammer sites are located in rural rangeland areas in the surrounding counties of Bent and Las
Animas. The sites are relatively flat topographically and are fenced for security purposes. MiniMUTE site 1MM2 is located in Bent County, approximately 20 miles north of Pritchett, near the
intersection of County Road D and County Road 27. The site elevation is approximately 4,700
feet above mean sea level (mean sea level). Mini-MUTE site 1MM5 is located in Bent County,
approximately 8 miles east of La Junta, Colorado. The site has an approximate elevation of
4,390 feet above mean sea level and is accessed by County Road Z. Mini-MUTE site 1MM6,
also located in Bent County, is accessed by County Road BB and is located east of the
intersection of County Road BB and County Road CC. The approximate elevation of site 1MM6
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
B-1
B-2
Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
is 4,100 feet above mean sea level. The jammer site is located in Bent County, east of the
intersection of Colorado State Highway 194 and County Road HH. The approximate elevation
of the site is 4,000 feet above mean sea level. Mini-MUTE site 1MM4 is located off of Colorado
State Highway 109 in Las Animas County, approximately six miles north of the town of Kim.
The site has an approximate elevation of 5,590 feet above mean sea level and is bounded to the
west by the Commanche National Grassland and to the north by Farm Road 197.
The 9,000-square-foot operations facility, constructed in 1990, consists of a building with several
attached trailers containing radar and communications systems. The building is heated by natural
gas and cooled electrically. Next to the operations facility is a pre-existing concrete slab on
which rest several structures from previous construction. A small building used to house
hazardous materials is located in the southeast corner of the site. Next to this building is a small
shed used for storing hazardous waste. Also located in this area are a Quonset hut; used for
storing dry goods such as boxes, parts, and cable; and a small maintenance building where lawn
and grounds maintenance equipment is kept. Another small shed used for storing system
components is located near the center of the concrete slab, west of the operations facility. A
chain-link fence with a gated entry surrounds the site.
The Mini-MUTE sites, constructed in 1994, consist of a parcel of land measuring roughly 800
feet by 800 feet surrounded by a barbed wire fence with a gated entry. Inside these fences are
gravel pads for the emitter units, ranging in size from 110 feet by 110 feet to 150 feet by 150
feet. A chain-link security fence with gated entry surrounds all the gravel pads. None of the
Mini-MUTE sites contain permanent structures. The Mini-MUTE sites are supplied with
electrical power and have the accompanying utility poles and transformers on site. Southeastern
Colorado Power Association supplies power to the sites. The jammer site contains a group of
interconnected small buildings and trailers. Three maintenance trucks are used at the various
sites and they are typically parked at either the Mini-MUTE sites or the operations facility.
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
B-3
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
2.0
2.1
SURVEY METHODOLOGY
Documents Reviewed
Documents reviewed prior to and during the survey included:
•
Establishment of Electronic Combat Sites Near La Junta, Colorado: Environmental
Baseline Survey Report (USAF 1993).
•
Establishment of Four Electronic Combat Mini-MUTE Sites Near La Junta, Colorado:
Environmental Assessment (USAF 1993).
•
Finding of No Significant Impact: Establishment of Five Electronic Combat Mini-MUTE
Sites near La Junta, Colorado (USAF 1993).
•
Internal ECAMP-La Junta (USAF 1992).
•
AFI 32-7066: Environmental Baseline Surveys in Real Estate Transactions.
•
Environmental Assessment: La Junta, Colorado, STR Site, Upgrading of Facilities
(USAF 1996).
•
Soil Survey of Otero County, Colorado (United States Department of Agriculture
[USDA] 1972).
•
Soil Survey of Bent County, Colorado (USDA 1971).
•
Correspondence from Detachment 1, 99th Electronic Combat Range Group (ACC) La
Junta, Colorado to 21 CES/DEEV Peterson AFB, Colorado, concerning the internal
ECAMP.
•
Physical Inventory of Chemicals in Paint Shed (Lockheed Martin 1998).
•
Aerial Photos of La Junta Municipal Airport (USDA 1972, 1980, 1989).
•
Commercial Property Appraisal Record, USAF “Bomb Plot” (Otero County 1988).
•
Warranty Deed, Strategic Training Range Complex, La Junta, Colorado (Otero County
1988).
•
Lemay Technical Operations Facility Environmental Management and Emergency
Response Operating Instructions (USAF 1997).
2.2
Property Inspection
The property and buildings at the operations facility, Mini-MUTE sites, and jammer site were
inspected by two individuals from Ogden Environmental and Energy Services, Lakewood,
Colorado. The site visits took place on July 23-24, 1998. Mini-MUTE sites 1MM2, 1MM4, and
1MM6 were inspected on July 23, while Mini-MUTE site 1MM5, the jammer site, and the
operations facility were investigated on July 24.
B-4
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
2.3
Personal Interviews
Personal interviews were conducted with the following individuals:
•
Bob Johnson, Facilities Manager, USAF.
•
Frank Easley, QAE, USAF
•
Gaylon Taylor, Environmental Manager, Lockheed Martin.
•
Patrick White, Facility Environmental Manager, Lockheed Martin.
•
Dan Poniatowski, QAE Supervisor, USAF.
•
Jerry Bradfield, Fire Chief, City of La Junta.
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
B-5
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
3.0
3.1
FINDINGS
Site History and Current Use
The area where the Lemay Technical Operations Facility is located was historically owned by the
U.S. Air Force and used extensively to train B-24, B-25, and B-29 pilots during World War II
(Easley 1998a, Johnson 1998). From 1940 to 1948, B-29 bombers were on site and the paved
area adjacent to the current operations facility was used as a tie-down location for aircraft.
Following the end of World War II, the area was sold to the City of La Junta and became the La
Junta Municipal Airport and Industrial Park. The site adjacent to the current operations facility
remained under military control and commenced operations as an electronic combat training site
in approximately 1948. Various trailers, tents, and other temporary structures were established
on the concrete tarmac for the training site.
The property at the eastern end of the airfield, where the operations facility is now located, was
acquired by the USAF from the City of La Junta (Easley 1998b) and the facility was constructed
in 1990. It was then transferred to civilian contractor control (Lockheed Martin) in 1995 and
currently employs 26 personnel. The facility grounds consist of approximately 25 acres,
including 8 acres leased from the City of La Junta.
Aerial photographs of the operations facility were reviewed for the periods 1972, 1980, and
1989-90. The 1972 and 1980 photographs showed buildings in place on the concrete tarmac
area. No evidence of construction or other activity is seen adjacent to the east end of the tarmac,
where the current operations facility is now located. The 1989-90 photographs show the site
much as it appears today, with a permanent structure located east and adjacent to the concrete
tarmac, and the small storage buildings present in the southeast corner of the site.
The four Mini-MUTE sites and the jammer site constituting the Electronic Combat Range are
located in Las Animas County (Site 1MM4) and Bent County (Site 1MM2, 1MM5, IMM6, and
the jammer site) in southeastern Colorado. The land use at the Mini-MUTE sites was historically
rangeland for cattle grazing, which currently continues on adjoining properties. All sites are
rural with good visual resource quality.
B-6
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
3.2
Environmental Setting
The Lemay Technical Operations Facility is located adjacent to the La Junta Municipal Airport
and Industrial Park. The grounds surrounding the building are about 60 percent paved and
surrounded by fencing. Inside the fencing, vegetation consists of planted ornamental species and
maintained lawn (Poa pratensis) behind the facility. The north and west sides are landscaped.
The operations facility area is drained by two rock-lined depressions. The surrounding area
outside the fencing is native grasslands, with species such as blue grama (Bouteloua gracilis),
buffalo grass (Buchloe dactyloides), Russian thistle (Salsola kali) and prickly-pear cacti (Opuntia
spp.). The dominant soil is an Olney sandy loam with 0 to 3 percent slopes (USDA 1972). This
series consists of deep, well drained, nearly level, loamy soils with a slow surface runoff rate and
a high infiltration rate (USDA 1972).
The Electronic Combat Range sites are located in rural areas consisting of agricultural rangeland.
The sites are relatively flat, although some backfilling and grading has been performed on the
jammer site, 1MM2, and 1MM5 to ensure a level surface for the emitter units. Site 1MM2 has a
graveled area and shows evidence of having been cleared of vegetation in some areas, possibly
due to grading during site construction. Sites 1MM2 and 1MM5 have slightly undulating
topography. The vegetation is predominately native grassland with such species as blue grama,
buffalo grass, Russian thistle, prickly-pear cacti, yucca (Yucca spp.), and sagebrush (Artemisia
spp.). The vegetation at the Electronic Combat Range sites is mowed by a Lockheed Martin
subcontractor in order to conform to USAF specifications (Johnson 1998).
The sites are primarily drained by sheet flow, although some small drainage channels are present
in areas of sufficient topography. The jammer site shows signs of heavy erosion following a
recent storm event. Erosion has cut several drainage channels that have undermined portions of
the chain-link fence. The soil type at site 1MM2 is the Minnequa series with 0 to 9 percent
slopes. These soils are loamy with moderate runoff and water permeability rates (USDA 1971).
The soils found at site 1MM4 are of the Baca series with 0 to 3 percent slopes. These deep, silty,
loamy soils have moderate permeability and runoff rates (USDA 1971). Site 1MM5 has soils in
the Penrose series with 0 to 25 percent slopes. These soils are of moderate permeability and
have a medium to high runoff rate (USDA 1971). Wiley silt loams with 0 to 3 percent slopes are
found at site 1MM6. These soils have moderate permeability and a medium runoff rate (USDA
1971).
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
B-7
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
3.3
Hazardous Substances
3.3.1
Hazardous Materials and Petroleum Products
Hazardous materials are present in small quantities at the Lemay Technical Operations Facility
but none exist at the Mini-MUTE or jammer sites. Hazardous materials at the operations facility
are stored inside the facility and in two sheds in the southwestern corner of the site. One shed is
used to store hazardous materials, including paints, aerosols, insulating oil, grease, gasoline
alcohol, carpet adhesive, and other facility maintenance supplies, while the adjacent shed is the
designated hazardous waste accumulation area for the site. Materials stored in the hazardous
waste shed include a lead acid battery, four aerosol paint cans, and a milk jug approximately one
third full of used oil. This jug appears to have leaked a portion of the contents, leaving oil on the
plywood platform. However, a containment pallet is in place below the plywood platform, so no
hazardous materials have escaped the containment system. Inside the operations facility, two
flammable material storage cabinets are located in the Mini-MUTE work center and in the
maintenance office. The storage cabinets inside the facility contain cleaning solvents, lubricants,
aerosols, and paint. A propane storage cabinet containing two 5-gallon tanks is located outside
the building near the radio mast. Four 5-gallon drums containing used insulating oil are located
next to the southeast side of the building. Small coffee cans are located at various workstations
in the operations facility; these are labeled “Hazardous Waste Satellite Accumulation Point” and
are used to collect scrap lead solder.
No reportable incidents of hazardous material spills or releases have occurred at the operations
facility or the Electronic Combat Range sites (Easley 1998a, Johnson 1998, and White 1998).
A spill plan has been prepared for the facility and spill absorbent material are readily available
throughout the operations facility. Hazardous wastes generated at the sites are removed by a
contractor if the proper means of disposal are unavailable to the site personnel. Rags used in
conjunction with hazardous materials are removed by an independent industrial rag recycling
contractor. Used oil filters are drained, triple bagged in plastic, and disposed of at the used oil
recycling company (Easley 1998).
Due in part to the rural nature of the Electronic Combat Range sites and their past history of
agricultural use, there are no reported past incidents of hazardous materials usage or disposal.
No evidence of PCB-containing equipment, petroleum or chemical storage tanks, asbestos-
B-8
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
containing building materials, wastewater treatment and disposal, or lead-based paint is present.
An 8-inch petroleum, oil or lubricant (POL) stain is located at site 1MM2.
3.4
Installation Restoration Program Contamination
There are no installation restoration program activities or sites present at the Lemay Technical
Operations Facility or any of the Electronic Combat Range sites.
3.5
Storage Tanks
3.5.1
Underground Storage Tanks
No underground storage tanks are known to exist at the Lemay Technical Operations Facility nor
any of the Electronic Combat Range sites. There are no indications that underground tanks were
ever in place at the operations facility. The closest known underground storage tanks in the
vicinity of the operations facility are two 1,000-gallon jet fuel tanks and three 10,000- gallon
gasoline tanks approximately one-quarter of a mile to the west of the facility (Bradfield 1998).
No underground storage tanks are present, or have been present, in the immediate vicinity of the
Electronic Combat Range sites.
3.5.2
Aboveground Storage Tanks
Historically, a 150-gallon aboveground storage tank was located near the storage buildings on the
concrete tarmac west of the existing operations facility. The tank contained gasoline and was
removed in 1988. A large (250,000-gallon) aboveground storage tank is located over a mile west
of the facility (Bradfield 1998). The tank contains diesel fuel and is surrounded by a protective
berm. No above ground storage tanks are present, or have been present, at any of the Electronic
Combat Range sites.
3.5.3
Pipelines, Hydrant Fueling, and Transfer Systems
No pipelines, hydrant fueling, or transfer systems are located on or in the immediate vicinity of
the operations facility or the Electronic Combat Range sites.
3.6
Oil/Water Separators
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
B-9
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
No oil/water separators are located on or in the immediate vicinity of the operations facility or
the Electronic Combat Range sites.
3.7
Pesticides and Herbicides
No pesticides or herbicides are present at the operations facility or the Electronic Combat Range.
All pesticide applications at the facility are performed by independent contractors under the
direction of Lockheed Martin (Easley 1998b).
3.8
Medical and Biohazardous Waste
The routine operations of the Lemay Technical Operations Facility and the Electronic Combat
Range sites do not generate medical or biohazardous waste.
3.9
Ordnance
The primary purpose of the Lemay Technical Operations Facility and the Electronic Combat
Range sites is to provide the U.S. Air Force with an electronic simulated combat range. As a
result, no live ordnance is used during Air Force training operations in the vicinity of the facility
sites.
3.10
Radioactive Waste
No radioactive waste is generated at the Lemay Technical Operations Facility or any of the
Electronic Combat Range sites.
3.11
Solid Waste
The removal of solid waste from the facilities is accomplished by an independent contractor.
The waste is transferred to a landfill in Swink, Colorado for disposal.
3.12
Groundwater
Groundwater in the vicinity of the operations facility and the Electronic Combat Range sites is
estimated at 500 to 600 feet deep (Bradfield 1998). Due to the depth of the water table and the
B-10
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
character of the operations performed by the facility, no contamination of groundwater is
believed to have occurred.
3.13
Wastewater Treatment, Collection, and Disposal
Wastewater is removed by sewer lines provided and serviced by the City of La Junta. A sewage
lift station is present adjacent to the operations facility along the southern boundary fence. The
sewage pipes cross the field adjacent to the facility property and head to a treatment plant
approximately 1 mile south of the facility. No wastewater from a commercial or industrial
process is generated at the Electronic Combat Range sites. The only wastewater generated is
from small sinks used for hand-washing at the jammer site. This water is allowed to drain from
the jammer site as surface runoff
3.14
Drinking Water Supply
Drinking water for the operations facility is supplied by the City of La Junta. Drinking water
quality is tested semi-annually by the City of La Junta. Current Safe Drinking Water Act quality
standards are being met. No drinking water is provided at the Electronic Combat Range sites.
3.15
Asbestos
The operations facility was constructed recently (1990) and, according to facility personnel, no
asbestos was present in construction materials. All storage sheds of earlier construction contain
no asbestos. All of the Mini-MUTE sites have no structures present. The jammer site has a
series of structures (primarily trailers) that do not contain asbestos.
3.16
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB)
All PCB containing transformers found at all sites have been removed (USAF 1992). No other
PCB sources have been identified. Electrical power is supplied to the sites by the local utility
(Southeast Colorado Power), which also owns the ground transformers present at the operations
facility.
3.17
Radon
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
B-11
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
The Lemay Technical Operations Facility site falls within Zone 1 of the EPA Map of Radon
Zones, indicating a risk for radon contamination. However, no radon testing has been performed
at the operations facility (Easley 1998b).
3.18
Lead-Based Paint
Due to the recent construction of the operations facility and lack of structures at the Electronic
Combat Range, no lead-based paints are known to have been used. All paints in use for building
surfaces are latex paints. These paints are stored in the hazardous material storage shed in the
southwest corner of the site.
3.19
Surface Water and Wetlands
The topography of the operations facility and the Electronic Combat Range sites is relatively flat.
Drainage is mostly accomplished through sheet flow, with an occasional small drainage channel
being present. The operations facility drains the concrete area and the surrounding property via
two rock lined swales located in depressional areas. The jammer site shows signs of heavy
erosion on slight slopes that have cut channels and undermined the chain-link security fence. No
surface water bodies or wetlands are located on or near any of the sites.
3.20
Soil Contamination
No incidents of soil contamination are known to have occurred at any of the sites (White 1998,
Easley 1998a, Bradfield 1998, and Johnson 1998). No major spills are known to have occurred.
A small 8-inch POL stain is present at Mini-MUTE site 1MM2. The stain was in the vicinity of
the on-site equipment with a noticeable POL odor. It is probable that the stain was caused by a
spill or leak of lubrication oil used for on-site equipment maintenance.
B-12
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
4.0
4.1
FINDINGS FOR ADJACENT PROPERTIES
Land Use
The land adjoining the operations facility to the north contains paved runways used by the La
Junta Municipal Airport. To the south and east is undeveloped grassland pasture used as a buffer
for the airport. The land to the west of the operations facility is used by the La Junta Municipal
Airport and businesses associated with the industrial park. The land surrounding the Electronic
Combat Range sites is agricultural rangeland used for grazing cattle. All of the Electronic
Combat Range sites have one side adjacent to a roadway.
4.2
Adjacent Properties
The property surrounding the operations facility is part of the La Junta Municipal Airport and is
owned by the City of La Junta. Progressive Growers, Inc., a nursery and greenhouse, is located
west of the operations facility. Also to the west, approximately ¼-mile, are two local aviation
companies, LJM Aviation and 007 Dusting. Electronic Combat Range sites 1MM2, 1MM4,
1MM5, and 1MM6, as well as the jammer site are completely surrounded by unimproved
rangeland.
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
B-13
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
5.0
5.1
APPLICABLE REGULATORY COMPLIANCE ISSUES
Compliance Issues
The Lemay Technical Operations Facility is primarily in compliance regarding relevant
environmental regulations. The facility has taken steps to bring itself into compliance following
the internal ECAMP performed in 1992. However, the facility has not undergone any radon
testing to date and this issue has not been addressed by the appropriate personnel. In addition, a
container of used oil in the hazardous waste accumulation area is cracked and leaking.
5.2
Corrective Actions
Based on the EPA radon zone (Zone 1), indicating a potential for radon contamination, radon
testing should be performed at the operations facility.
A new container should be procured for storage of the hazardous waste oil in the hazardous
waste accumulation area. The area around which the container sits should be cleaned of spilled
material and the used cleanup supplies should be disposed of in the appropriate manner.
5.3
Cost Estimate of Various Alternatives
The cost of radon testing would be approximately $15 per test kit, with kits to be placed in work
and office areas.
The cost of a new container for hazardous used oil would be minimal. Cleanup costs and
disposal of the used cleanup materials as hazardous waste could cost up to $200 to 400 per drum
disposal.
B-14
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
6.0
6.1
CONCLUSIONS
Facility Matrix
Based on the findings, AFI 32-7066 requires the EBS to categorize the presence of hazardous
substances, petroleum products, or their derivatives for each property or area. There are seven
categories which cover USAF properties:
1. those with no history of storage, release, or disposal;
2. those where only storage occurred but no release was reported;
3. those with minimal contamination below action levels;
4. those where remedial action has been completed;
5. those where remedial actions are underway;
6. those where response actions have not commenced; and
7. those where further evaluation is recommended.
Table 6-1 summarizes the facility matrix and the property categories.
Table 6-1: Facility Matrix of Hazardous Substance Categories
Site
State – County
Finding
Category
Current Use
1MM2
CO - Bent
3
Mini-MUTE site/grazing
1MM4
CO - Las Animas
1
Mini-MUTE site/grazing
1MM5
CO - Bent
1
Mini-MUTE site/grazing
1MM6
CO - Bent
1
Mini-MUTE site/grazing
Jammer
CO - Bent
1
Lemay Jammer site
Lemay Technical
Operations Facility
CO - Otero
2
Lemay Electronic Scoring
Site
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
B-15
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
6.2
Data Gaps
Access was not provided to the buildings located at the jammer site. Facility personnel indicate
that the buildings contain electronic equipment and that no hazardous materials are stored onsite. Access was also not provided to the maintenance trucks that support the emitter and jammer
units. Facility personnel indicate that the trucks also do not contain any stored hazardous
materials. Aerial photographs were only available from 1972 through 1990 at the local USDA
office.
B-16
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
7.0
7.1
RECOMMENDATIONS
Radon Testing
Radon testing should be performed at the Lemay Technical Operation Facility and the structures
at the jammer site to ensure compliance and provide a safe environment for facility personnel.
Due to the lack of structures at the remaining Electronic Combat Range sites, radon testing is
unnecessary.
7.2
Hazardous Waste Container
Replace the existing hazardous waste oil container with one providing adequate integrity for the
stored materials. Clean up spill material and dispose of it in an appropriate manner.
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
B-17
8.0
CERTIFICATIONS
CERTIFICATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE SURVEY
Ogden Environmental & Energy Services conducted this Environmental Baseline Survey on behalf of the
U.S. Air Force. Ogden has reviewed all appropriate records made available, conducted visual site
inspections of the selected properties, and performed an analysis of information collected during the
record search. The information contained within the survey report is based on records made available
and, to the best of Ogden’s knowledge, is correct.
Certified by:
Date:
Kevin J. Peter
Project Manager
Ogden Environmental and Energy Services
Approved by:
Date:
MICHAEL R. PATRICK, Colonel, USAF
Chairperson, HQ ACC Environmental Leadership Board
CERTIFICATION OF CONTAMINATION
A complete search of agency files has revealed that hazardous substance(s), as that term is defined in the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (42 U.S.C. 9601), as
amended, are known to have been stored for one year or more, been released, or disposed of on the excess
Air Force-controlled real property described below.
I.
The following notice provides information discovered as a result of a complete search of
agency files pertaining to hazardous substances known to have been stored, released, or
disposed of on the excess real property:
•
Hazardous materials are present in small quantities at the Lemay Technical Operations Facility.
Materials stored on site include propane, a lead acid battery, 4 aerosol paint cans, cleaning
solvents, four 5-gallon drums containing used insulating oil lubricants and a milk jug
approximately 1/3rd full of used oil.
As mentioned in section 3.3.1, the milk jug of used oil appears to have leaked a portion of the
contents, however, a containment pallet is in place below the plywood platform, so no hazardous
materials have escaped the containment system.
II.
The above information, based on agency files or other available information, addresses the
period prior to June 1998. This information is the best available and is believed to be correct,
but no guarantee as to accuracy can be provided.
III.
The U.S. Air Force will take all remedial action necessary to protect human health and the
environment with respect to any hazardous substance(s) released disposed of, or stored on the
real property described below which is identified as excess to Air Force requirements and
proposed for disposal.
Certified by:
Date:
Kevin J. Peter
Project Manager
Ogden Environmental and Energy Services
Approved by:
Date:
MICHAEL R. PATRICK, Colonel, USAF
Chairperson, HQ ACC Environmental Leadership Board
CERTIFICATION OF POLYCHLORINATED BIPHENYLS CLEARANCE*
X 1. This Real Property is in compliance with 40 CFR 761 as outlined below
(check all that apply):
X a. An Inventory has been prepared and is being maintained of all USAF-owned
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB) Real Property Installed Equipment and Real Property
PCB Items per Section 761.45.
b. All in-service and stored serviceable PCB and PCB-contaminated Real Property
Installed Equipment and Real Property PCB Items have been inspected, repaired, and are
being maintained to prevent leakage, and therefore can be distributed per Section 761.30.
c. PCB Real Property Installed Equipment and Real Property PCB Items have been
stored, decontaminated, and labeled per Section 761.42, 761.43, and 761.44.
X d. There is no known PCB-contaminated soil, wastes, or unserviceable
equipment remaining on the existing property.
2. A records search and an on-site inspection indicate that this property has
not been exposed to PCB materials or equipment.
* Certify to either paragraph 1 or 2.
Certified by:
Date:
Kevin J. Peter
Project Manager
Ogden Environmental and Energy Services
Approved by:
Date:
MICHAEL R. PATRICK, Colonel, USAF
Chairperson, HQ ACC Environmental Leadership Board
CERTIFICATION OF ASBESTOS CLEARANCE
1. On-site surveys have identified asbestos-containing materials. Friable asbestos
will be properly removed and disposed of prior to, or in conjunction with, the
disposal of the property, should it ever occur. Removal and disposal will be in
accordance the Federal Regulations 29 CFR 1910.1001 and 40 CFR 61.145
through 61.151.
X
2. A records search and on-site inspection indicate that this property does not have
asbestos containing materials or equipment.
3. An on-site inspection revealed no friable asbestos based on current standards.
Certified by:
Date:
Kevin J. Peter
Project Manager
Ogden Environmental and Energy Services
Approved by:
Date:
MICHAEL R. PATRICK, Colonel, USAF
Chairperson, HQ ACC Environmental Leadership Board
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
9.0
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bradfield, 1998. Personal communication with Jerry Bradfield, Fire Chief, City of La Junta,
Colorado, 24 July.
Easley, 1998a. Personal communication with Frank Easley, QAE Officer, Lemay Technical
Operations Facility, La Junta, Colorado, 24 July.
Easley, 1998b. Personal communication with Frank Easely, QAE Officer, Lemay Technical
Operations Facility, La Junta, Colorado, 29 July.
Johnson, 1998. Personal communication with Bob Johnson, Facilities Manager, Lemay
Technical Operations Facility, La Junta, Colorado, 23 July.
Otero County, 1988a. Commercial Property Appraisal Record, USAF “Bomb Plot.” Otero
County Courthouse, La Junta, Colorado.
__________, 1988b. Warranty Deed, Strategic Training Range Complex, La Junta Colorado.
Otero County Courthouse, La Junta, Colorado.
Poniatowski, 1998. Personal communication with Dan Poniatowski, QAE Supervisor, Lemay
Technical Operations Facility, La Junta, Colorado, 23 July.
Taylor, 1998. Personal communication with Gaylon Taylor, Environmental Manager, Lemay
Technical Operations Facility, La Junta Colorado, 23 July.
U.S. Air Force (USAF), 1992. Internal ECAMP Report, 99th Electronic Combat Range Group
(ERCG) - La Junta. Prepared by Peterson AFB.
_________, 1992-1994. Numerous ECAMP Correspondence from Detachment 1, 99th
Electronic Combat Range Group (ACC) La Junta, Colorado, to 21 CES/DEEV Peterson
AFB, Colorado.
_________, 1993a. Environmental Assessment, Establishment of Four Electronic Combat MiniMUTE Sites Near La Junta, Colorado.
_________, 1993b. Environmental Baseline Report, Establishment of Electronic Combat Sites
Near La Junta, Colorado.
_________, 1993c. Finding of No Significant Impact, Establishment of Five Electronic Combat
Mini-MUTE Sites Near La Junta, Colorado.
_________, 1994. Environmental Baseline Surveys in Real Estate Transactions (AFI 32-7066).
_________, 1985. Environmental Assessment, La Junta, Colorado, STR Site, Upgrading of
Facilities.
_________, 1997. Lemay Technical Operations Center Environmental Management and
Emergency Response Operating Instructions. 99th Electronic Combat Range Group.
B-22
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), 1971. Soil Survey of Bent County, Colorado. Soil
Conservation Service, Washington DC.
_________, 1972. Soil Survey of Otero County, Colorado. Soil Conservation Service,
Washington, DC.
_________, 1972, 1980, 1989. Aerial photos of the La Junta Municipal Airport. Natural
Resources Conservation Service, Rocky Ford, Colorado.
White, 1998a. Personal communication with Patrick White, Facility Environmental Manager,
Lemay Technical Operations Facility, La Junta, Colorado, 23 July.
_________, 1998b. Physical Inventory of Chemicals in Paint Shed. Lockheed Martin, La Junta,
Colorado.
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
B-23
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
APPENDIX C
Harrison, Arkansas, Everton Electronic Scoring Site, EBS
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
1.0
1.1
INTRODUCTION
Purpose of Survey
An environmental baseline survey (EBS) was conducted at the Everton Electronic Scoring Site
near Harrison, Arkansas, and three AN/MST-T1(V) Multiple Threat Emitter System (MiniMUTE) sites. The survey assessed environmental conditions present at the various sites for
consideration in future planning. The Everton Electronic Scoring Site contains a manned site
with personnel and the Mini-MUTE sites support unmanned electronic combat radar units.
These sites provide a simulated combat training environment for Air Force crews (USAF 1993b).
1.2
Scope of Survey
The environmental baseline survey involved a site visit and inspection of all properties and
facilities associated with the Everton Electronic Scoring Site operated by Lockheed Martin and
the United States Air Force (USAF). These site visits included the Everton Electronic Scoring
Site itself and three associated Mini-MUTE sites scattered throughout the surrounding area.
Interviews were conducted with base personnel and relevant documentation was examined.
1.3
Site Descriptions
The Everton Electronic Scoring Site is located off Arkansas State Highway 206, near the city of
Harrison in Boone County, Arkansas (Figure 1). The Mini-MUTE sites are located in rural
agricultural areas in the surrounding counties of Baxter and Marion, as well as one site in Howell
County, Missouri. Mini-MUTE site 4MM1 is located in Baxter County, roughly 1 mile east of
Big Flat, near the intersection of County Road 81 and Arkansas State Highway 14. Mini-MUTE
site 4MM4 is located in Howell County, Missouri, approximately 2 miles south of the town of
Caulfield. The site is situated north of the intersection of Missouri State Highway 101 and
County Road YY and accessed by State Highway 101. Mini-MUTE site 4MM5, located in
Marion County, Arkansas, is south of Bull Shoals Lake and accessed by County Road 227. The
sites varied topographically and are fenced for security purposes.
The Everton Electronic Scoring Site facility, constructed by the USAF in 1994-1995 (Brumett
1998), consists of a building with many attached trailers that allow transfer of complex radar
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
C-1
C-2
Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
systems. The 6.94 acre property is leased from Denton Yearns, a private landowner. The
property is bordered to the north by Old Everton Road, which is lined with trees. The site is
bordered to the south by Arkansas State Highway 206 and to the east by grazing land. The
western border of the property is L-shaped to accommodate a pond and grazing land used by the
adjacent landowner. The facility is located in the northeast corner of the property. A chain-link
fence with gated entry surrounds the facility and a barbed wire fence surrounds the entirety of the
leased property. Four sheds are located northwest of the facility and were used for hazardous
material and general storage. A power shed is located west of the main facility and a break area
with a few picnic tables is found to the south. The facility grounds cover approximately 30
percent of the leased 6.94-acre property.
The Mini-MUTE sites, constructed in 1996-1997, consists of a parcel of land measuring roughly
800 feet by 800 feet surrounded by a barbed wire fence with a gated entry. Inside these barbed
wire fences are gravel pads for the radar units ranging from 120 feet by 120 feet to 150 feet by
150 feet. These pads are all surrounded by a chain-link security fence with gated entry. MiniMUTE sites 4MM1 and 4MM5 have electrical and telephone lines with the accompanying utility
poles and transformers. Power is supplied to the sites by Entergy, Inc. Telephone service is
provided to the sites by ALLTELL and North Arkansas Telephone Co. None of the Mini-MUTE
sites contain any structures. Three service trucks are used by the facility personnel and can be
found parked at the Electronic Scoring Site or Mimi-MUTE sites. Grazing rights inside the
initial barbed wire fence have been secured with the landowners via written or verbal agreement
(Sumey 1998).
Mini-MUTE site 4MM1 is situated in an area surrounded by grazing land. The property is
bounded to the north by Arkansas State Highway 14 and to the south by agricultural land that
contains some forested areas. The property is bounded to the east by a gravel driveway and to
the west by grazing land and an old barn. Mini-MUTE site 4MM4 is also primarily surrounded
by grazing land. The property is bordered to the north by forested grazing land and to the south
by grazing land and a barn. East of the property is forested grazing land and west of the property
is Missouri State Highway 101. Mini-MUTE site 4MM5 is located in an area previously used
for grazing horses. The site is bordered to the north and south by grazing pasture. Pasture and a
residence are located to the east and a gravel access road is located to the west.
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
C-3
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
2.0
2.1
SURVEY METHODOLOGY
Document Review
•
Establishment of an Electronic Combat Site Near Harrison, Arkansas, Environmental
Baseline Survey Report, USAF 1993.
•
Establishment of an Electronic Combat Site Near Harrison, Arkansas, Final
Environmental Assessment, USAF 1993.
•
Land Lease Between Denton And Carolyn Yearns and The United States of America,
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1998.
•
Land Lease Between Floyd Wynn and The United States of America, U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers, 1995.
•
Land Lease Between Johnnie M. Jones and The United States of America, U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, 199?
•
Land Lease Between Jerry Jarvis and The United States of America, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, 1995.
•
Mini-MUTES Emergency Data Information, Caulfield, Missouri.
•
Mini-MUTES Emergency Data Information, Lead Hill, Arkansas.
•
Mini-MUTES Emergency Data Information, Big Flat, Arkansas.
•
Application for Individual Sewage Disposal Permit, Arkansas Department of Health,
Division of Sanitation Services, 1993.
•
Aerial photo of the S 1/2, NW 1/4, Sec. 7 T17N R18W. United States Department of
Agriculture (USDA), 1990.
•
Aerial photo of the Everton Electronic Scoring Site. Lockheed Martin, 1993.
•
Internal ECAMP Report, Vol. I and Vol. II, USAF 1996.
•
Soil Survey of Boone County, USDA, 1981.
•
Soil Survey of Baxter and Marion County, USDA, 1983.
•
Deed Records of the Everton Electronic Scoring Site, Boone County, 1966-1998.
•
Everton, Arkansas 7.5’ Topographic Map, United States Geological Survey (USGS),
1975.
C-4
•
Big Flat, Arkansas 7.5’ Topographic Map, USGS, 1966.
•
Caulfield, Missouri 7.5’ Topographic Map, USGS, 1968.
•
Diamond City, Arkansas/Missouri 7.5’ Topographic Map, USGS, 1972.
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
2.2
Property Inspection
The property and facilities for the Everton Electronic Scoring Site and the associated MiniMUTE sites were inspected by a group of two individuals from Ogden Environmental and
Energy Services, Lakewood, Colorado. Mini-MUTE sites 4MM1, 4MM4, and 4MM5 were
visited on August 6, 1998. The Everton Electronic Scoring Site was investigated on August 7,
1998.
2.3
Personal Interviews
Personal interviews were conducted with the following individuals:
•
Mildred Brumett, QAE Supervisor, USAF.
•
Bonnie Sumey, QAE, USAF.
•
Mike Angus, Environmental Manager, Lockheed Martin.
•
Sid Lewis, Site Manager, Lockheed Martin.
•
T.A. “Chip” Dillard Maintenance Supervisor, Lockheed Martin.
•
Dennis Nelson, Supply Technician, Lockheed Martin.
•
Terry Barton, Maintenance Technician, Lockheed Martin.
•
Dave Weber, Boone County Judge.
•
Walt Record, Fire Chief, Valley Springs Volunteer Fire Department.
•
Reggie Harrell, Operations Coordinator, Entergy, Inc.
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
C-5
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
3.0
3.1
FINDINGS
Site History and Current Use
The grounds for the Everton Electronic Scoring Site were historically used for growing corn, but
the productivity of the land was quickly reduced. When the land was acquired by Denton Yearns
in 1963 it became grazing pasture for cattle (USAF 1993b). The leased property is now used for
the Electronic Scoring Site. On June 18, 1996 this property was placed under the civilian control
of Lockheed Martin who employs 25 to 30 personnel (Brumett 1998, Sumey 1998). The land use
at the Mini-MUTE sites has historically been agricultural land for grazing, which continues on
most of the adjoining properties. All the sites were rural and surrounded by either productive or
nonproductive agricultural land.
3.2
Environmental Setting
The Everton Electronic Scoring Site is located in an area used primarily for agriculture. The
facility has a gravel parking lot and drive from State Highway 206. Areas of maintained lawn are
present to the south, east, and west. Lawn species include red fescue (Festuca rubra) and
Bermuda grass (Cynodon dactylon). The site contains several species of trees (Quercus falcata
and Ulmus alata) and a few of the larger trees create shade for the employee break area, south of
the facility (USAF 1993a). An unused Mini-MUTE radar unit sits in the lawn, south of the
facility. The topography of the site was relatively flat and the site elevation was 1,120 feet above
ground level (AGL) (USGS 1975). The dominant soil type found at the Everton Electronic
Scoring Site is Noark very cherty silt loam with 3 to 8 percent slopes. This soil, formed from
residuum from cherty limestone, is deep, well drained, and moderately permeable (USDA 1981).
The building is heated and cooled electrically, with power supplied by Arkansas Power and
Lighting. Fire protection is provided by the City of Valley Springs and police protection is
provided by Boone County (Brumett 1998, Sumey 1998, Record 1998).
The Mini-MUTE sites have variable environmental settings. Mini-MUTE site 4MM1 is situated
in an area surrounded by grazing land. The vegetation present at the site is primarily native
grasses and weedy species. The topography is relatively flat and a small drainage swale is
located in the northeast section of the property. The site elevation is approximately 1,200 feet
AGL (USGS 1966). Some backfilling has been performed to create a level surface for the radar
pad. The fill is grated from the surrounding area and no outside material used (Dillard 1998).
The dominant soil type found at the site is Sidon silt loam wit 3 to 8 percent slopes. This soil is
C-6
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
deep, moderately well drained, with low permeability (USDA 1983). On the site rested two
Mini-MUTE units and a service truck.
Mini-MUTE site 4MM4 is located in an area that once contained a home. Evidence of a
foundation can be seen in the northwest corner of the property, as well as an old furnace and
water heater unit. The former homesite is dominated by Eastern red cedar (Juniperus
virginiana); the rest of the site supports Southern red oak (Quercus falcata) and native grasses.
The topography of the site is undulating with elevations ranging from 1,020 to 1,040 feet AGL
(USGS 1968). A small agricultural pond is located on the western slope of the site,
approximately 60 yards from the interior chain-link fence and gravel pad. The exterior barbed
wire fence has gates on the east side, north side, and northwest corner. Cattle grazing has
continued on the lands inside the barbed-wire security fence. No radar units, telephone lines, or
power equipment are present at the site, having been removed on September 15, 1997 (Sumey
1998).
Mini-MUTE site 4MM5 is located in an area previously used by grazing horses. This is still
permitted and continuing inside the initial barbed-wire security fence. The vegetation found on
the site is primarily grass species used for horse forage. The topography of the site is relatively
flat with an approximate elevation of 840 feet AGL (USGS 1972). The site has a drainage
channel in the southeast corner that drains off of the property. The site has been backfilled to
provide a level surface for the radar equipment. The dominant soil present at the site is the
Arkana-Moko Complex with 3 to 8 percent slopes. This soil is a mixture of Arkana moderately
deep, well drained, very slowly permeable soils and Moko shallow, well drained, moderately
permeable soils (USDA 1983). Two radar units are situated on the gravel pad, as well as a
service truck for each of the units.
3.3
Hazardous Substances
3.3.1
Hazardous Materials and Petroleum Products
Hazardous materials are of relatively low abundance at the Everton Electronic Scoring Site and
the Mini-MUTE sites. Hazardous materials from the Electronic Scoring Site and the MiniMUTE sites, such as used insulating oil and aerosol cans, are transported by Lockheed Martin
employees to a consolidated accumulation point at Little Rock Air Force Base (AFB), Little
Rock, Arkansas. Used batteries and old fluorescent light bulbs are also transported to Little
Rock AFB via Lockheed Martin employees. Rags that are soaked with oils are bagged and taken
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
C-7
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
to Little Rock AFB. Rags that are soaked with hydraulic fluid are double bagged and disposed of
as solid waste (Nelson 1998).
Hazardous materials present outside the Everton Electronic Scoring Site facility are mostly
confined to the storage sheds located to the northwest. Inside, hazardous materials are located
within appropriate storage cabinets. The storage sheds are numbered from one to four, with four
being the closest shed to the facility and one being the furthest shed from the facility. Along the
eastern outside wall of shed number four, were four large propane tanks that were apparently
empty. A flammable/combustionable materials storage cabinet was located inside shed number
three that contained paint, oil, mixed fuels, fuel additives, and antifreeze. The shed also
contained assorted fuels and oils that were not inside the flammable/combustionable cabinet. No
spill materials were located in shed number three. Storage shed number one contained several
aerosol cans not inside a containment cabinet and a 2.5-gallon bucket of tar. A coffee can fuel of
used tractor oil was on the ground, north of shed number one. Also outside the facility, on the
northeast side, were two plastic containment pallets that could each hold up to four 55-gallon
drums. One of the containment pallets contained three 55-gallon drums of used oil. The other
containment pallet held two empty 55-gallon drums and a 5-gallon drum of used hydraulic oil.
A flammable/combustionable materials storage cabinet is located inside the facility in the MiniMUTES work center. The cabinet contained aerosol paints, hydraulic fluid, and alcohols. The
work center also contained fourteen 5-gallon cans of insulating oil for the radar systems within a
plastic containment tub. A bucket for oily rags was found in the Mini-MUTES work center, as
well as spill materials. Another flammable cabinet was found in the maintenance area, near the
Route Information Integration System area. This cabinet contained aerosol paint cans, solvents,
gallons of paint, charcoal lighter fluid, glass cleaner, hydraulic fluid, and a 5-gallon propane
tank. Spill materials were present in the maintenance area. A metal storage cabinet was also
located in the maintenance area that contained janitorial supplies, such as multi-purpose cleaner,
glass cleaner, floor wax, scouring powder, and aerosol furniture polish. Next to this cabinet were
two boxes that contained new and used fluorescent light bulbs. Empty aerosol cans and used 6volt batteries were stored in two separate boxes in the supply room. Spill materials were also
located inside the power shed, west of the main facility.
Due to the rural nature of the Mini-MUTE sites and their past history of agricultural use, there
were no past incidents of hazardous materials usage or disposal. There are no present signs of
PCB containing equipment, asbestos-containing building materials, wastewater treatment and
disposal, or lead-based paint. Two of the sites (4MM1 and 4MM5) contain 55-gallon drums to
C-8
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
store used insulating oil from the radar units. These drums were stored inside a plastic storage
unit, placed against the chain-link fence away from the radar units. Site 4MM1 had one empty
55-gallon storage drum inside the plastic storage container. Site 4MM5 had ten 5-gallon cans of
electrical insulating oil inside the plastic storage container in addition to a half full 55-gallon oil
storage drum. Another empty 55-gallon storage drum was on site, but was not placed inside the
plastic storage container. The used oil is drained via a hose system into the 55-gallon drums and
returned to the Everton Electronic Scoring Site where it is stored before transport to Little Rock
AFB (Dillard 1998). No incidents of hazardous material spills involving these storage drums are
known to have occurred (Sumey 1998, Dillard 1998).
3.4
Installation Restoration Program Contamination
There are no Installation Restoration Program sites present at the Everton Electronic Scoring Site
or any of the Mini-MUTE sites.
3.5
Storage Tanks
3.5.1
Underground Storage Tanks
No underground storage tanks are known to exist at the Everton Electronic Scoring Site or any of
the Mini-MUTE sites (Brumett 1998, Angus 1998). No underground storage tanks are present,
or have been present, in the immediate vicinity of the Everton Electronic Scoring Site or the
Mini-MUTE sites.
3.5.2
Aboveground Storage Tanks
No aboveground storage tanks are present at the Everton Electronic Scoring Site. Due to the
sites history of agricultural use, no aboveground storage tanks have ever been present on the site
(Brumett 1998, Angus 1998). No aboveground storage tanks are present, or have been present, at
any of the Mini-MUTE sites.
3.5.3
Pipelines, Hydrant Fueling, and Transfer Systems
No pipelines, hydrant fueling, or transfer systems are located in the immediate vicinity of the
Everton Electronic Scoring Site or the Mini-MUTE sites.
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
C-9
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
3.6
Oil/Water Separators
No oil/water separators are located in the immediate vicinity of the Everton Electronic Scoring
Site or the Mini-MUTE sites.
3.7
Pesticides and Herbicides
Inside a metal cabinet was found 22.5 gallons of Round-Up™ brand herbicide. This cabinet is
located inside storage shed number one. Round-Up™ is a general use herbicide and does not
require the applicator to be certified. All herbicide applications at the Everton Electronic
Scoring Site are conducted by Terry Barton, who is not a certified applicator. Herbicides are
applied around fences, survey markers, the driveway, and septic tank leach field to keep areas
clear of vegetation. To keep the roads and fences clear of vegetation, herbicides are applied at
the Mini-MUTE sites by an independent contractor for Lockheed Martin (Sumey 1998, Dillard
1998). Several types of hazardous pesticides were also found within the metal storage cabinet in
shed number one. The cabinet contained wasp killer, diazinon crawling insect killer, malathion
insecticide, and pyrethrum insect fogger. All appropriate chemical warning labels were posted.
3.8
Medical and Biohazardous Waste
The routine operations of the Everton Electronic Scoring Site and the Mini-MUTE sites do not
generate medical or biohazardous waste.
3.9
Ordnance
The primary purpose of the Everton Electronic Scoring Site and the accompanying Mini-MUTE
sites is to provide the U.S. Air Force with an electronic simulated combat range. As a result, no
live ordnance is used during Air Force training operations in the vicinity of the facility sites.
3.10
Radioactive Waste
No radioactive waste is generated at the Everton Electronic Scoring Site and the Mini-MUTE
sites.
C-10
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
3.11
Solid Waste
The removal of solid waste from the facilities is accomplished by Sun-Ray Co., an independent
contractor. The waste is taken to either of two landfills located in Van Buren or Carroll County
(USAF 1993b).
3.12
Groundwater
At the Everton Electronic Scoring Site, groundwater is found 200 to 300 feet deep (USAF
1993b). Due to the depth of groundwater, the nature of the operations performed by the facility,
and the lack of hazardous chemical spills, groundwater contamination is unlikely to have
occurred.
3.13
Wastewater Treatment, Collection, and Disposal
Wastewater is handled by a 1,800 gallon septic tank located on site. The septic system has a
required absorption area of 1,530 square feet. The system has eight-field lines with a 96 foot
field length. The leach field is located north of the site and vegetative growth on the field is
controlled with herbicides. A permit for an individual sewage disposal system was approved by
the Arkansas Department of Health, Division of Sanitation Services on September 1, 1993. An
inspection of the septic system while in place and uncovered was performed by on November 15,
1993 (Arkansas Department of Health 1993). No wastewater is generated at the Mini-MUTE
sites.
3.14
Drinking Water Supply
Drinking water for the Everton Electronic Scoring Site is supplied by the Valley Springs
Municipal Water Supply. Drinking water quality testing is performed at unknown intervals and
periodic boiling warnings are often issued (Brumett 1998, Lewis 1998). No drinking water is
provided to the Mini-MUTE sites.
3.15
Asbestos
The Everton Electronic Scoring Site was constructed recently (1994-1995) and no asbestos was
used during the process (Sumey 1998, Brumett 1998). Mini-MUTE sites do not have structures
present and, therefore, lack asbestos.
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
C-11
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
3.16
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB)
PCB content in transformers is considered negligible due to their recent installation. Ninety nine
percent of energy transformers in the region contain less than 50 PPM of PCBs (Harrell 1998).
No other PCB sources have been identified.
3.17
Radon
The Everton Electronic Scoring Site falls within Zone 2 of the EPA Map of Radon Zones,
indicating a potential for radon contamination. The facility is a modular trailer, situated about 3
feet above unsealed ground. No radon testing has been performed at any of the sites (Brumett
1998).
3.18
Lead-Based Paint
Due to the recent construction of the Everton Electronic Scoring Site and lack of structures at the
Mini-MUTE sites, no lead-based paints are known to have been used. All paints are stored in
designated areas on site.
3.19
Surface Waters and Wetlands
The Everton Electronic Scoring Site and the Mini-MUTE sites are primarily drained by sheet
flow along defined slopes. A dry drainage swale is located in the northeast corner of MiniMUTE site 4MM1. A defined drainage channel is found in the southeast corner of Mini-MUTE
site 4MM5. This channel was dry and is probably only active during large precipitation events.
No wetlands occurred at any of the Mini-MUTE sites or the Everton Electronic Scoring Site.
Mini-MUTE site 4MM4 has a small agricultural pond located inside the first barbed wire
security fence. Grazing continues on this site and the pond is used as a water source for cattle.
3.20
Soil Contamination
No major incidents of soil contamination are known to occur at any of the sites (Brumett 1998,
Angus 1998). No major spills are known to have occurred at the Everton Electronic Scoring Site
or any of the Mini-MUTE sites (Brumett 1998, Angus 1998). According to an Internal ECAMP
performed in 1996, two small spills have occurred. One was a 2-quart spill of transmitter oil that
occurred on March 23, 1995. The other was a 3-gallon spill of roof tar on July 24, 1995 (USAF
C-12
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
1996). A 4-foot stain was observed near the jammer equipment on the east side of the facility.
The stain may have resulted from spilled cooking oil used to deep fry turkeys (Angus 1998).
Two creosote stains have occurred around power poles. One stain was around a utility pole in
the northeast corner of the Everton Electronic Scoring Site that had been in place since 1997
(Angus 1998). The stain is approximately one foot in diameter. The other stain is around a
utility pole at Mini-MUTE site 4MM4.
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
C-13
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
4.0
4.1
FINDINGS FOR ADJACENT PROPERTIES
Land Use
The land surrounding the Everton Electronic Scoring Site is used as for agricultural grazing. The
southern side of the Electronic Scoring Site is adjacent to Arkansas State Highway 206. The
land surrounding the Mini-MUTE sites is also used for agricultural grazing. A residence is
located near the northern boundary of site 4MM5. All of the Mini-MUTE sites have at least one
side adjacent to a roadway.
4.2
Adjacent Properties
The Everton Electronic Scoring Site is bordered by a pond on the western side. A pond is also
located adjacent to the eastern boundary of Mini-MUTE site 4MM1. It is used as a water source
for cattle grazing on the adjacent properties. Some of the land to the south and west of site
4MM1 support forested woodlots. Residences were present to the south of site 4MM1 and to the
east of site 4MM5. The lands adjacent to Site 4MM5 are used to graze horses while the grazing
lands adjacent to the other properties are used to graze cattle.
C-14
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
5.0
5.1
APPLICABLE REGULATORY COMPLIANCE ISSUES
Compliance Issues
The Everton Electronic Scoring Site had several hazardous materials not stored in the proper
containment areas. Radon testing had not been performed at the Everton Electronic Scoring Site,
however, this site does fall within the EPA radon zone 2, indicating a potential for radon
contamination. In addition, there is unsealed or unpaved ground underneath the facility, which
could be a potential radon hazard.
5.2
Corrective Actions
Hazardous materials not properly stored could be placed in the proper storage cabinets. If more
cabinets were needed they could be purchased. Radon testing could be performed to resolve this
outstanding health and safety issue.
5.3
Cost Estimate of Various Alternatives
If more flammable/combustionable material storage cabinets were needed, they could be
purchased for $200 to $400. The average cost of radon testing is $15 per kit.
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
C-15
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
6.0
6.1
CONCLUSIONS
Facility Matrix
Based on the findings, AFI 32-7066 requires the EBS to categorize the presence of hazardous
substances, petroleum products, or their derivatives for each property or area. There are seven
categories which cover USAF properties:
1. those with no history of storage, release, or disposal;
2. those where only storage occurred but no release was reported;
3. those with minimal contamination below action levels;
4. those where remedial action has been completed;
5. those where remedial actions are underway;
6. those where response actions have not commenced; and
7. those where further evaluation is recommended.
Table 6-1 summarizes the facility matrix and the property categories.
Table 6-1: Facility Matrix of Hazardous Substance Categories
Site
6.2
State – County
Finding
Category
Current Use
4MM1
AR - Baxter
2
Mini-MUTE site/grazing
4MM4
MO - Howell
2
Closed Mini-MUTE site/grazing
4MM5
AR - Marion
2
Mini-MUTE site/grazing
Everton E.S.S.
AR - Boone
2
Everton Electronic Scoring Site
Data Gaps
Every reasonable effort was made to collect and review all data available. There are no known
data gaps.
C-16
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
7.0
7.1
RECOMMENDATIONS
Hazardous Materials
Hazardous materials should be stored in designated accumulation areas and inside the proper
containment equipment. Flammable materials should be stored inside flammable/
combustionable material storage cabinets to reduce the risk of chemical spills and combustion.
7.2
Radon Testing
Radon testing should be performed at the Everton Electronic Scoring Site to ensure compliance
and provide a safe environment for facility personnel. Due to the lack of structures at the MiniMUTE sites radon testing is unnecessary.
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
C-17
8.0
CERTIFICATIONS
CERTIFICATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE SURVEY
Ogden Environmental & Energy Services conducted this Environmental Baseline Survey, on behalf of the
U.S. Air Force. Ogden has reviewed all appropriate records made available, conducted visual site
inspections of the selected properties, and, performed an analysis of information collected during the
record search. The information contained within the survey report is based on records made available
and, to the best of Ogden’s knowledge, is correct.
Certified by:
Date:
Kevin J. Peter
Project Manager
Ogden Environmental and Energy Services
Approved by:
Date:
MICHAEL R. PATRICK, Colonel, USAF
Chairperson, HQ ACC Environmental Leadership Board
CERTIFICATION OF CONTAMINATION
A complete search of agency files has revealed that hazardous substance(s), as that term is defined in the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (42 U.S.C. 9601), as
amended, are known to have been stored for one year or more, been released, or disposed of on the excess
Air Force-controlled real property described below.
I.
The following notice provides information discovered as a result of a complete search of
agency files pertaining to hazardous substances known to have been stored, released, or
disposed of on the excess real property:
•
Hazardous materials are present in small quantities at the Everton Electronic Scoring Site.
Materials stored on site include insulating oil and aerosol paint cans and used batteries.
•
Small quantities of both pesticides and herbicides are found at the Everton Electronic Scoring
Site. Materials include Round-Up™, diazinon, malathion, and pyrethrum.
•
Site 4MM1 and 4MM5 stored used insulating oil.
No spill or areas of contamination were noted, however, some of the flammable/combustible
materials were not stored inside a proper container.
II.
The above information, based on agency files or other available information, addresses the
period prior to June 1998. This information is the best available and is believed to be correct,
but no guarantee as to accuracy can be provided.
III.
The U.S. Air Force will take all remedial action necessary to protect human health and the
environment with respect to any hazardous substance(s) released disposed of, or stored on the
real property described below which is identified as excess to Air Force requirements and
proposed for disposal.
Certified by:
Date:
Kevin J. Peter
Project Manager
Ogden Environmental and Energy Services
Approved by:
Date:
MICHAEL R. PATRICK, Colonel, USAF
Chairperson, HQ ACC Environmental Leadership Board
CERTIFICATION OF POLYCHLORINATED BIPHENYLS CLEARANCE*
1. This Real Property is in compliance with 40 CFR 761 as outlined below
(check all that apply):
a. An Inventory has been prepared and is being maintained of all USAF-owned
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB) Real Property Installed Equipment and Real Property
PCB Items per Section 761.45.
b. All in-service and stored serviceable PCB and PCB-contaminated Real Property
Installed Equipment and Real Property PCB Items have been inspected, repaired, and are
being maintained to prevent leakage, and therefore can be distributed per Section 761.30.
c. PCB Real Property Installed Equipment and Real Property PCB Items have been
stored, decontaminated, and labeled per Section 761.42, 761.43, and 761.44.
d. There is no known PCB-contaminated soil, wastes, or unserviceable equipment
remaining on the existing property.
X 2. A records search and an on-site inspection indicate that this property has
not been exposed to PCB materials or equipment.
* Certify to either paragraph 1 or 2.
Certified by:
Date:
Kevin J. Peter
Project Manager
Ogden Environmental and Energy Services
Approved by:
Date:
MICHAEL R. PATRICK, Colonel, USAF
Chairperson, HQ ACC Environmental Leadership Board
CERTIFICATION OF ASBESTOS CLEARANCE
1. On-site surveys have identified asbestos-containing materials on USAFowned properties. Friable asbestos will be properly removed and disposed of
prior to, or in conjunction with, the disposal of the property, should it ever occur.
Removal and disposal will be in accordance the Federal Regulations 29 CFR
1910.1001 and 40 CFR 61.145 through 61.151.
X
2. A records search and on-site inspection indicate that this property does not
have asbestos containing materials or equipment.
3. An on-site inspection revealed no friable asbestos based on current standards.
Certified by:
Date:
Kevin J. Peter
Project Manager
Ogden Environmental and Energy Services
Approved by:
Date:
MICHAEL R. PATRICK, Colonel, USAF
Chairperson, HQ ACC Environmental Leadership Board
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
9.0
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Angus, 1998. Personal communication with Mike Angus, Environmental Manager, Lockheed
Martin, on 7 August.
Arkansas Department of Health, 1993. Application for Individual Sewage Disposal Permit.
Division of Sanitation Services, Little Rock, AR.
Barton, 1998. Personal communication with Terry Barton, Maintenance Technician, Lockheed
Martin, on 7 August.
Boone County, 1998. Deed Records of the Everton Electronic Scoring Site. Boone County
Courthouse, Harrison, AR.
Brumett, 1998. Personal communication with Mildred Brumett, QAE Supervisor, USAF, on 7
August.
Dillard, 1998. Personal communication with T.A. “Chip” Dillard, Maintenance Supervisor,
Lockheed Martin, on 6 August.
Harrell, 1998. Personal communication with Reggie Harrell, Operations Coordinator, Entergy,
Inc., on 12, August.
Lewis, 1998. Personal communication with Sid Lewis, Site Manager, Lockheed Martin, on
7 August.
Lockheed Martin, 1993. Aerial photo of the Everton Electronic Scoring Site.
Nelson, 1998. Personal communication with Dennis Nelson, Supply Technician, Lockheed
Martin, on 7 August.
Record, 1998. Personal communication with Walt Record, Fire Chief, Valley Springs Volunteer
Fire Department on 12 August.
Sumey, 1998. Personal communication with Bonnie Sumey, QAE, USAF on 6 August.
U.S. Air Force (USAF), 1993a. Environmental Assessment, Establishment of an Electronic
Combat Site Near Harrison, Arkansas..
_________, 1993b. Environmental Baseline Report, Establishment of an Electronic Combat Site
Near Harrison, Arkansas
_________, 1994. Environmental Baseline Surveys in Real Estate Transactions (AFI 32-7066).
_________, 1995a. Mini-MUTE Emergency Data Information, Big Flat, AR.
_________, 1995b. Mini-MUTE Emergency Data Information, Caulfield, MO.
_________, 1995c. Mini-MUTE Emergency Data Information, Lead Hill, AR.
C-22
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
_________, 1996. Internal ECAMP Report, 99th Electronic Combat Range Group (ERCG) Harrison.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), 1995a. Land Lease Between Floyd Wynn and The
United States of America
_________, 1995b. Land Lease Between Jerry Jarvis and The United States of America.
_________, 1998. Land Lease Between Denton and Carolyn Yearns and The United States of
America.
_________, unknown. Land Lease Between Johnnie M. Jones and The United States of America.
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), 1981. Soil Survey of Boone County, Arkansas. Soil
Conservation Service, Washington DC.
_________, 1983. Soil Survey of Baxter and Marion Counties, Arkansas. Soil Conservation
Service, Washington, DC.
_________, 1990. Aerial Photo of S 1/2, NW 1/4, Sec. 7 T17N R18W, Boone County, AR.
United States Geological Survey (USGS), 1966. 7.5’ Topographic Map, Big Flat, Arkansas.
U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, D.C.
_________, 1968. 7.5’ Topographic Map, Caulfield, Missouri. U.S. Geological Survey,
Washington, D.C.
_________, 1972. 7.5’ Topographic Map, Diamond City, Arkansas/Missouri. U.S. Geological
Survey, Washington, D.C.
_________, 1975. 7.5’ Topographic Map, Everton, Arkansas. U.S. Geological Survey,
Washington, D.C.
Weber, 1998. Personal communication with Dave Weber, Boone County Judge, on 7 August.
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
C-23
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
APPENDIX D
Federal and State Environmental Database Search
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Environmental Databases
Federal Databases
Last
Updated
TX
Last
Updated
NM
NPL, National Priority List (Superfund Sites)
09/97
09/97
1.0
Delisted NPL (NPL Deletions)
09/97
09/97
TP*
NPL Liens, Federal Superfund Liens
10/91
10/91
TP
CERCLIS, Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Information System
(Sites under review by U.S. EPA for NPL listing)
12/97
12/97
0.5
CERC-NFRAP, Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Information System - No
Further Remedial Action Planned
(Sites removed from CERCLIS)
12/97
12/97
TP
ERNS, Emergency Response Notification Systems
(Reported releases of oil and hazardous substances)
09/30
09/30
TP
FINDS, Facility Index System
04/97
04/97
TP
HMIRS, Hazardous Materials Information Reporting
System (Hazardous material spill incidents reported to the
U.S. Department of Transportation [DOT])
12/96
12/96
TP
MLTS, Material Licensing Tracking System
(Lists sites which possess or use radioactive materials)
01/98
01/98
TP
PADS, PCB Activity Database System
09/97
09/97
TP
RAATS, RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System
04/95
04/95
TP
RCRIS-TSD, Resource Conservation and Recovery
Information System - Treatment, Storage, and Disposal
Facilities
01/98
01/98
0.5
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Search
Radius
(mi)
D-1
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Last
Updated
TX
Last
Updated
NM
RCRIS-LQG, Resource Conservation and Recovery
Information System - Large Quantity Generators of
hazardous waste
01/98
01/98
TP
RCRIS-SQG, Resource Conservation and Recovery
Information System - Small Quantity Generators of
hazardous waste
01/98
01/98
TP
Federal Databases
Search
Radius
(mi)
CORRACTS, Corrective Action Report (Identifies
hazardous waste handlers with RCRA corrective action
activity)
12/97
12/97
1.0
TSCA, Toxic Substances Control Act (Identifies
manufacturers and importers of chemical substances)
01/95
01/95
TP
TRIS, Toxic Chemical Release Information System
12/95
12/95
TP
RAST, Registered Aboveground Storage Tanks
01/98
04/97
TP
RUST, Registered Underground Storage Tanks
01/98
11/97
TP
LUST, Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
12/97
10/97
0.5
Texas Spills1
04/97
NA*
TP
Texas VCP, Voluntary Cleanup Program Sites
11/97
NA
TP
Texas MM, Multimedia Enforcement Cases
08/97
NA
TP
Texas IHW, Industrial Hazardous Waste Database
09/97
NA
TP
SHWS, State Hazardous Waste Sites
03/97
12/97
1.0
SLF, State Landfill Sites
12/97
11/97
0.5
Texas Waste Management, Recycling Facilities
09/96
NA
TP
Coal Gas
1993
1993
1.0
State Databases
1
Similar databases for New Mexico are not compiled.
* Note: TP = Target Property
NA = Not Applicable
D-2
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
APPENDIX E
Site Photography
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 2
Site 2
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
E-1
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 6
Site 7
E-2
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 14
Site 15
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
E-3
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 16
Site 17
E-4
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 20
Site 21
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
E-5
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 24
Site 28
E-6
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 33
Site 34
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
E-7
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 35
Site 36
E-8
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 37
Site 38
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
E-9
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 39
Site 40
E-10
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 41
Site 54
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
E-11
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 55
Site 59
E-12
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 60
Site 61
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
E-13
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 62
Site 64
E-14
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 65
Site 66
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
E-15
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 67
Site 72
E-16
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 78
Site 79
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
E-17
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 80
Site 81
E-18
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 82
Site 88
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
E-19
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 89
Site 91
E-20
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 93
Site 94
- NO PICTURE AVAILABLE -
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
E-21
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 95
E-22
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
APPENDIX F
Interview Questionnaires
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Summary of Interviews Regarding the Site Inspections
Name
Title
Site
Mr. Peterson
Landowner
Site 02
Mr. Pettigrew
Landowner
Site 06
Mr. J.B. and Mrs. Wanda Autrey
Landowner
Site 07
Mr. John A. Mahoney
Landowner
Site 14
Mr. Sciles, Deaf Smith County Grain
Landowner
Site 15
Mr. Sciles, Deaf Smith County Grain
Landowner
Site 16
Mr. Vincent, Springhill Corp
Landowner
Site 20
Mr. Edward Walker
Landowner
Site 21
Mr. Tom Payne
Landowner
Site 24
Mr. Lyell and Mr. Jimmie Hazen
Landowner
Site 28
Hutchison Family Limited Partnership
Landowner
Site 33
Mr. Ralph Fort
Landowner
Site 34
Mr. Lewis
Landowner
Site 35
Mr. Hilario Ebell
Landowner
Site 36
Mr. Chris Marquez
Land Grant Manager
Site 37
Mr. Charles and Mrs. Judy Beford
Landowner
Site 38
Mr. Charles and Mrs. Judy Beford
Landowner
Site 39
Mr. Walter Wiggins
Landowner
Site 40
Mr. David Krush
Landowner
Site 41
Mr. Richard Allen
Landowner
Site 54
Mr. James Harnett
Landowner
Site 55
Mr. Kevin Lanaham
Landowner
Site 59
Mr. Ken Linderman
Son-in-Law of Landowner,
Mr. Ronnie Terrell
Site 60
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-1
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Mr. Wesley Graves
Landowner
Site 64
Mr. Max Von Roeder
Landowner
Site 65
Mr. C.C. Nunnally
Landowner
Site 66
Mr. Norman Clark
Landowner
Site 67
Mr. Hickmann
Landowner
Site 72
Mr. DeWayne Lindsey
Landowner
Site 78
Mr. Horace H. Linthicum
Landowner
Site 79
Mr. George Poage
Landowner
Site 80
Mr. Andy Freudenrich
Landowner
Site 82
Mr. Jim McCoy
Landowner
Site 88
Mr. Bill Schneeman
Landowner
Site 89
F-2
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 2 OWNER/OCCUPANT QUESTIONNAIRE
General
1. Is the property or any adjoining property used for an industrial use?
yes
unk No oil wells exist on the site. The nearest petroleum pipeline (Amarillono
Albuquerque) runs east to west and comes within 1.5 miles south of the site. Mr. Peterson
reported that the pipeline is flown over weekly to inspect for leaks or other problems. A pump
house for the petroleum pipeline is located approximately 2 miles west of the site. Information
posted for the pump house stated “Diamond Shamrock Company, Amarillo, TX; Call collect
806-373-0531”. Mr. Peterson also reported that there had been a spill at the pump station in the
1970s which measured approximately 8-10 feet deep by a couple hundred feet in diameter;
however, the area was cleaned up.
2. Has the property or any adjoining property been used for an industrial use in the past?
yes
no
unk
3. Is the property or any adjoining property used, or has the property or any adjoining property
been used in the past, as a gasoline station, motor repair facility, commercial printing facility, dry
cleaners, photo developing laboratory, junkyard, or landfill, or as a waste treatment, storage,
disposal, processing, or recycling facility?
yes
no
unk
Land Issues
4. Are there currently or have there been previously, any damaged or discarded automotive or
industrial batteries, or pesticides, paints, or other chemicals in individual containers of greater
than 5 gallons (19L) in volume or 50 gallons (190L) on the aggregate, stored on or used at the
property or facility?
yes
no
unk
5. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any industrial drums (typically 55 gallons
(208L)) or sacks of chemicals located on the property or at the facility?
yes
no
unk
6. Has fill dirt been brought onto the property that originated from a contaminated site or that is
unknown in origin?
yes
no
unk
7. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any pits, lagoons, or ponds located on the
property in connection with waste treatment or waste disposal?
yes
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-3
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
8. Is there currently, or has there been previously, any stained soil on the property?
yes
no
unk
9. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any registered or unregistered storage
tanks (above or underground) located on the property?
yes
no
unk
10. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any vent pipes, fill pipes, or access ways
indicating a fill pipe protruding from the ground on the property or adjacent to any structure
located on the property?
yes
no
unk
Structural Issues
11. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any flooring, drains, or walls located
within the facility that are stained by substances other than water or are emitting foul odors?
yes
no
unk
Other Issues
12. If the property is served by a private well or non-public water system, have contaminants
been identified in the well or system that exceed guidelines applicable to the water system or has
the well been designated as contaminated by any government environmental/health agency?
yes
unk The site is not served by a groundwater well. A domestic stock water line
no
originates from a well pump 1.25 miles west of the site and is pumped along a buried PVC line to
a water tank adjacent to the north of the site for livestock.
13. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of environmental liens or
government notification relating to past or recurrent violations of environmental laws with
respect to the property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
14. Has the owner or occupant of the property been informed of the past or current existence of
hazardous substances or petroleum products or environmental violations with respect to the
property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
15. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of an environmental
assessment of the property or facility that indicated the presence of hazardous substances or
petroleum products on, or contamination of, the property or recommended further assessment of
the property?
F-4
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
yes
no
unk
16. Does the owner or occupant of the property know of any past, threatened, or pending
lawsuits or administrative proceedings concerning a release or threatened release of any
hazardous substance or petroleum products involving the property by any owner or occupant of
the property?
yes
no
unk
17. Does the property discharge wastewater on or adjacent to the property other than stormwater
into a sanitary sewer system?
yes
no
unk
18. Have any hazardous substances or petroleum products, unidentified waste materials, tires,
automotive or industrial batteries or any other waste materials been dumped above grade, buried,
and/or burned on the property?
yes
no
unk
19. Is there a transformer, capacitor, or any hydraulic equipment for which there are any records
indicating the presence of PCBs?
yes
no
unk
PERSON(S) INTERVIEWED
On-site interview with Mr. Don Peterson, Landowner
Mora Rt. Box 115
Las Vegas, NM 87701
505-425-9544 phone
505-454-1928 fax
FORM COMPLETED
Monday 11 May 1998 at 1500
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-5
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 6
OWNER/OCCUPANT QUESTIONNAIRE
General
1. Is the property or any adjoining property used for an industrial use?
yes
no
landowner.
unk The property has always been used for livestock grazing, according to the
2. Has the property or any adjoining property been used for an industrial use in the past?
yes
no
unk
3. Is the property or any adjoining property used, or has the property or any adjoining property
been used in the past, as a gasoline station, motor repair facility, commercial printing facility, dry
cleaners, photo developing laboratory, junkyard, or landfill, or as a waste treatment, storage,
disposal, processing, or recycling facility?
yes
no
unk
Land Issues
4. Are there currently or have there been previously, any damaged or discarded automotive or
industrial batteries, or pesticides, paints, or other chemicals in individual containers of greater
than 5 gallons (19L) in volume or 50 gallons (190L) on the aggregate, stored on or used at the
property or facility?
yes
no
unk
5. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any industrial drums (typically 55 gallons
(208L)) or sacks of chemicals located on the property or at the facility?
yes
no
unk
6. Has fill dirt been brought onto the property that originated from a contaminated site or that is
unknown in origin?
yes
no
unk
7. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any pits, lagoons, or ponds located on the
property in connection with waste treatment or waste disposal?
yes
no
unk
8. Is there currently, or has there been previously, any stained soil on the property?
yes
F-6
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
9. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any registered or unregistered storage
tanks (above or underground) located on the property?
yes
no
unk
10. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any vent pipes, fill pipes, or access ways
indicating a fill pipe protruding from the ground on the property or adjacent to any structure
located on the property?
yes
no
unk
Structural Issues
11. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any flooring, drains, or walls located
within the facility that are stained by substances other than water or are emitting foul odors?
yes
no
unk
Other Issues
12. If the property is served by a private well or non-public water system, have contaminants
been identified in the well or system that exceed guidelines applicable to the water system or has
the well been designated as contaminated by any government environmental/health agency?
yes
no
unk
13. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of environmental liens or
government notification relating to past or recurrent violations of environmental laws with
respect to the property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
14. Has the owner or occupant of the property been informed of the past or current existence of
hazardous substances or petroleum products or environmental violations with respect to the
property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
15. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of an environmental
assessment of the property or facility that indicated the presence of hazardous substances or
petroleum products on, or contamination of, the property or recommended further assessment of
the property?
yes
no
unk
16. Does the owner or occupant of the property know of any past, threatened, or pending
lawsuits or administrative proceedings concerning a release or threatened release of any
hazardous substance or petroleum products involving the property by any owner or occupant of
the property?
yes
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-7
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
17. Does the property discharge wastewater on or adjacent to the property other than stormwater
into a sanitary sewer system?
yes
no
unk
18. Have any hazardous substances or petroleum products, unidentified waste materials, tires,
automotive or industrial batteries or any other waste materials been dumped above grade, buried,
and/or burned on the property?
yes
no
unk
19. Is there a transformer, capacitor, or any hydraulic equipment for which there are any records
indicating the presence of PCBs?
yes
no
unk
PERSON(S) INTERVIEWED
Mr. Michael Kit Pettigrew, Landowner
Alamo Rt. Box 5
Ft. Sumner, NM 88119
505-472-5856 phone
FORM COMPLETED
Wednesday 13 May 1998 at 1530
F-8
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 7
OWNER/OCCUPANT QUESTIONNAIRE
General
1. Is the property or any adjoining property used for an industrial use?
yes
no
landowner.
unk The property has always been used for livestock grazing, according to the
2. Has the property or any adjoining property been used for an industrial use in the past?
yes
no
unk
3. Is the property or any adjoining property used, or has the property or any adjoining property
been used in the past, as a gasoline station, motor repair facility, commercial printing facility, dry
cleaners, photo developing laboratory, junkyard, or landfill, or as a waste treatment, storage,
disposal, processing, or recycling facility?
yes
no
unk
Land Issues
4. Are there currently or have there been previously, any damaged or discarded automotive or
industrial batteries, or pesticides, paints, or other chemicals in individual containers of greater
than 5 gallons (19L) in volume or 50 gallons (190L) on the aggregate, stored on or used at the
property or facility?
yes
no
unk
5. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any industrial drums (typically 55 gallons
(208L)) or sacks of chemicals located on the property or at the facility?
yes
no
unk
6. Has fill dirt been brought onto the property that originated from a contaminated site or that is
unknown in origin?
yes
no
unk
7. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any pits, lagoons, or ponds located on the
property in connection with waste treatment or waste disposal?
yes
no
unk
8. Is there currently, or has there been previously, any stained soil on the property?
yes
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-9
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
9. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any registered or unregistered storage
tanks (above or underground) located on the property?
yes
no
unk
10. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any vent pipes, fill pipes, or access ways
indicating a fill pipe protruding from the ground on the property or adjacent to any structure
located on the property?
yes
no
unk
Structural Issues
11. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any flooring, drains, or walls located
within the facility that are stained by substances other than water or are emitting foul odors?
yes
no
unk
Other Issues
12. If the property is served by a private well or non-public water system, have contaminants
been identified in the well or system that exceed guidelines applicable to the water system or has
the well been designated as contaminated by any government environmental/health agency?
yes
no
unk
13. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of environmental liens or
government notification relating to past or recurrent violations of environmental laws with
respect to the property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
14. Has the owner or occupant of the property been informed of the past or current existence of
hazardous substances or petroleum products or environmental violations with respect to the
property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
15. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of an environmental
assessment of the property or facility that indicated the presence of hazardous substances or
petroleum products on, or contamination of, the property or recommended further assessment of
the property?
yes
no
unk
16. Does the owner or occupant of the property know of any past, threatened, or pending
lawsuits or administrative proceedings concerning a release or threatened release of any
hazardous substance or petroleum products involving the property by any owner or occupant of
the property?
F-10
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
yes
no
unk
17. Does the property discharge wastewater on or adjacent to the property other than stormwater
into a sanitary sewer system?
yes
no
unk
18. Have any hazardous substances or petroleum products, unidentified waste materials, tires,
automotive or industrial batteries or any other waste materials been dumped above grade, buried,
and/or burned on the property?
yes
no
unk
19. Is there a transformer, capacitor, or any hydraulic equipment for which there are any records
indicating the presence of PCBs?
yes
no
unk
PERSON(S) INTERVIEWED
Mr. JB Autrey, Landowner
HC 64 Box 75
Ft. Sumner, NM 88119
505-355-2572 phone
FORM COMPLETED
Wednesday 13 May 1998 at 1330
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-11
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 14 OWNER/OCCUPANT QUESTIONNAIRE
General
1. Is the property or any adjoining property used for an industrial use?
yes
no
unk
2. Has the property or any adjoining property been used for an industrial use in the past?
yes
unk
The property was first settled as a homestead in 1905, and it has been
no
used for livestock grazing ever since, according to the landowner.
3. Is the property or any adjoining property used, or has the property or any adjoining property
been used in the past, as a gasoline station, motor repair facility, commercial printing facility, dry
cleaners, photo developing laboratory, junkyard, or landfill, or as a waste treatment, storage,
disposal, processing, or recycling facility?
yes
no
unk
Land Issues
4. Are there currently or have there been previously, any damaged or discarded automotive or
industrial batteries, or pesticides, paints, or other chemicals in individual containers of greater
than 5 gallons (19L) in volume or 50 gallons (190L) on the aggregate, stored on or used at the
property or facility?
yes
no
unk
5. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any industrial drums (typically 55 gallons
(208L)) or sacks of chemicals located on the property or at the facility?
yes
no
unk
6. Has fill dirt been brought onto the property that originated from a contaminated site or that is
unknown in origin?
yes
no
unk
7. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any pits, lagoons, or ponds located on the
property in connection with waste treatment or waste disposal?
yes
no
unk
8. Is there currently, or has there been previously, any stained soil on the property?
yes
F-12
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
9. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any registered or unregistered storage
tanks (above or underground) located on the property?
yes
no
unk
10. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any vent pipes, fill pipes, or access ways
indicating a fill pipe protruding from the ground on the property or adjacent to any structure
located on the property?
yes
no
unk
Structural Issues
11. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any flooring, drains, or walls located
within the facility that are stained by substances other than water or are emitting foul odors?
yes
no
unk
Other Issues
12. If the property is served by a private well or non-public water system, have contaminants
been identified in the well or system that exceed guidelines applicable to the water system or has
the well been designated as contaminated by any government environmental/health agency?
yes
no
unk
13. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of environmental liens or
government notification relating to past or recurrent violations of environmental laws with
respect to the property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
14. Has the owner or occupant of the property been informed of the past or current existence of
hazardous substances or petroleum products or environmental violations with respect to the
property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
15. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of an environmental
assessment of the property or facility that indicated the presence of hazardous substances or
petroleum products on, or contamination of, the property or recommended further assessment of
the property?
yes
no
unk
16. Does the owner or occupant of the property know of any past, threatened, or pending
lawsuits or administrative proceedings concerning a release or threatened release of any
hazardous substance or petroleum products involving the property by any owner or occupant of
the property?
yes
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-13
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
17. Does the property discharge wastewater on or adjacent to the property other than stormwater
into a sanitary sewer system?
yes
no
unk
18. Have any hazardous substances or petroleum products, unidentified waste materials, tires,
automotive or industrial batteries or any other waste materials been dumped above grade, buried,
and/or burned on the property?
yes
no
unk
19. Is there a transformer, capacitor, or any hydraulic equipment for which there are any records
indicating the presence of PCBs?
yes
unk
The closest pole-mounted transformer is located southeast of the site at
no
the landowner’s ranch house. A 6,600-volt overhead powerline transects the site N/NW to S/SE
and a 60,000-volt overhead powerline transects the site NW to SE.
PERSON(S) INTERVIEWED
On-site interview with Mr. John A. Mahoney, Landowner
HC 72 Box 61
Roy, NM 87743
505-485-2244 phone
505-447-7377
FORM COMPLETED
Sunday 17 May 1998 at 1730
F-14
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 15
OWNER/OCCUPANT QUESTIONNAIRE
General
1. Is the property or any adjoining property used for an industrial use?
yes
no
unk
2. Has the property or any adjoining property been used for an industrial use in the past?
yes
no
landowner.
unk
The site has always been used for livestock grazing, according to the
3. Is the property or any adjoining property used, or has the property or any adjoining property
been used in the past, as a gasoline station, motor repair facility, commercial printing facility, dry
cleaners, photo developing laboratory, junkyard, or landfill, or as a waste treatment, storage,
disposal, processing, or recycling facility?
yes
no
unk
Land Issues
4. Are there currently or have there been previously, any damaged or discarded automotive or
industrial batteries, or pesticides, paints, or other chemicals in individual containers of greater
than 5 gallons (19L) in volume or 50 gallons (190L) on the aggregate, stored on or used at the
property or facility?
yes
no
unk
5. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any industrial drums (typically 55 gallons
(208L)) or sacks of chemicals located on the property or at the facility?
yes
no
unk
6. Has fill dirt been brought onto the property that originated from a contaminated site or that is
unknown in origin?
yes
no
unk
7. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any pits, lagoons, or ponds located on the
property in connection with waste treatment or waste disposal?
yes
no
unk
8. Is there currently, or has there been previously, any stained soil on the property?
yes
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-15
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
9. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any registered or unregistered storage
tanks (above or underground) located on the property?
yes
no
unk
10. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any vent pipes, fill pipes, or access ways
indicating a fill pipe protruding from the ground on the property or adjacent to any structure
located on the property?
yes
no
unk
Structural Issues
11. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any flooring, drains, or walls located
within the facility that are stained by substances other than water or are emitting foul odors?
yes
no
unk
Other Issues
12. If the property is served by a private well or non-public water system, have contaminants
been identified in the well or system that exceed guidelines applicable to the water system or has
the well been designated as contaminated by any government environmental/health agency?
yes
no
unk
13. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of environmental liens or
government notification relating to past or recurrent violations of environmental laws with
respect to the property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
14. Has the owner or occupant of the property been informed of the past or current existence of
hazardous substances or petroleum products or environmental violations with respect to the
property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
15. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of an environmental
assessment of the property or facility that indicated the presence of hazardous substances or
petroleum products on, or contamination of, the property or recommended further assessment of
the property?
yes
no
unk
16. Does the owner or occupant of the property know of any past, threatened, or pending
lawsuits or administrative proceedings concerning a release or threatened release of any
hazardous substance or petroleum products involving the property by any owner or occupant of
the property?
F-16
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
yes
no
unk
17. Does the property discharge wastewater on or adjacent to the property other than stormwater
into a sanitary sewer system?
yes
no
unk
18. Have any hazardous substances or petroleum products, unidentified waste materials, tires,
automotive or industrial batteries or any other waste materials been dumped above grade, buried,
and/or burned on the property?
yes
no
unk
19. Is there a transformer, capacitor, or any hydraulic equipment for which there are any records
indicating the presence of PCBs?
yes
no
unk
PERSON(S) INTERVIEWED
Telephone interview with Mr. Cliff Sciles, Landowner
1506 N Park Ave
Hereford, TX 70945
806-578-4211 phone
806-578-4214 fax
FORM COMPLETED
2 July 1998 at 0815 Pacific Time
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-17
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 16
OWNER/OCCUPANT QUESTIONNAIRE
General
1. Is the property or any adjoining property used for an industrial use?
yes
no
unk
2. Has the property or any adjoining property been used for an industrial use in the past?
yes
no
landowner.
unk The site has always been used for livestock grazing, according to the
3. Is the property or any adjoining property used, or has the property or any adjoining property
been used in the past, as a gasoline station, motor repair facility, commercial printing facility, dry
cleaners, photo developing laboratory, junkyard, or landfill, or as a waste treatment, storage,
disposal, processing, or recycling facility?
yes
no
unk
Land Issues
4. Are there currently or have there been previously, any damaged or discarded automotive or
industrial batteries, or pesticides, paints, or other chemicals in individual containers of greater
than 5 gallons (19L) in volume or 50 gallons (190L) on the aggregate, stored on or used at the
property or facility?
yes
no
unk
5. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any industrial drums (typically 55 gallons
(208L)) or sacks of chemicals located on the property or at the facility?
yes
no
unk
6. Has fill dirt been brought onto the property that originated from a contaminated site or that is
unknown in origin?
yes
no
unk
7. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any pits, lagoons, or ponds located on the
property in connection with waste treatment or waste disposal?
yes
no
unk
8. Is there currently, or has there been previously, any stained soil on the property?
yes
F-18
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
9. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any registered or unregistered storage
tanks (above or underground) located on the property?
yes
no
unk
10. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any vent pipes, fill pipes, or access ways
indicating a fill pipe protruding from the ground on the property or adjacent to any structure
located on the property?
yes
no
unk
Structural Issues
11. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any flooring, drains, or walls located
within the facility that are stained by substances other than water or are emitting foul odors?
yes
no
unk
Other Issues
12. If the property is served by a private well or non-public water system, have contaminants
been identified in the well or system that exceed guidelines applicable to the water system or has
the well been designated as contaminated by any government environmental/health agency?
yes
no
unk
13. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of environmental liens or
government notification relating to past or recurrent violations of environmental laws with
respect to the property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
14. Has the owner or occupant of the property been informed of the past or current existence of
hazardous substances or petroleum products or environmental violations with respect to the
property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
15. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of an environmental
assessment of the property or facility that indicated the presence of hazardous substances or
petroleum products on, or contamination of, the property or recommended further assessment of
the property?
yes
no
unk
16. Does the owner or occupant of the property know of any past, threatened, or pending
lawsuits or administrative proceedings concerning a release or threatened release of any
hazardous substance or petroleum products involving the property by any owner or occupant of
the property?
yes
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-19
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
17. Does the property discharge wastewater on or adjacent to the property other than stormwater
into a sanitary sewer system?
yes
no
unk
18. Have any hazardous substances or petroleum products, unidentified waste materials, tires,
automotive or industrial batteries or any other waste materials been dumped above grade, buried,
and/or burned on the property?
yes
no
unk
19. Is there a transformer, capacitor, or any hydraulic equipment for which there are any records
indicating the presence of PCBs?
yes
no
unk
PERSON(S) INTERVIEWED
Telephone interview with Mr. Cliff Sciles, Landowner
1506 N Park Ave
Hereford, TX 70945
806-578-4211 phone
806-578-4214 fax
FORM COMPLETED
2 July 1998 at 0815 Pacific Time
F-20
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 17
OWNER/OCCUPANT QUESTIONNAIRE
Questionnaire has not been completed. Landowner and foreman have not returned
telephone messages nor have they responded to mailed questionnaire.
PERSON(S) TO BE INTERVIEWED
Mr. Mark Martin, Landowner
POB 567
San Saba, TX 76877
915-372-3903 phone
505-374-2219 foreman – Doug Cain
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-21
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 20
OWNER/OCCUPANT QUESTIONNAIRE
General
1. Is the property or any adjoining property used for an industrial use?
yes
no
unk
2. Has the property or any adjoining property been used for an industrial use in the past?
yes
no
landowner.
unk The site has always been used for livestock grazing, according to the
3. Is the property or any adjoining property used, or has the property or any adjoining property
been used in the past, as a gasoline station, motor repair facility, commercial printing facility, dry
cleaners, photo developing laboratory, junkyard, or landfill, or as a waste treatment, storage,
disposal, processing, or recycling facility?
yes
no
unk
Land Issues
4. Are there currently or have there been previously, any damaged or discarded automotive or
industrial batteries, or pesticides, paints, or other chemicals in individual containers of greater
than 5 gallons (19L) in volume or 50 gallons (190L) on the aggregate, stored on or used at the
property or facility?
yes
no
unk
5. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any industrial drums (typically 55 gallons
(208L)) or sacks of chemicals located on the property or at the facility?
yes
no
unk
6. Has fill dirt been brought onto the property that originated from a contaminated site or that is
unknown in origin?
yes
no
unk
7. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any pits, lagoons, or ponds located on the
property in connection with waste treatment or waste disposal?
yes
no
unk
8. Is there currently, or has there been previously, any stained soil on the property?
yes
F-22
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
9. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any registered or unregistered storage
tanks (above or underground) located on the property?
yes
no
unk
10. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any vent pipes, fill pipes, or access ways
indicating a fill pipe protruding from the ground on the property or adjacent to any structure
located on the property?
yes
no
unk
Structural Issues
11. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any flooring, drains, or walls located
within the facility that are stained by substances other than water or are emitting foul odors?
yes
no
unk
Other Issues
12. If the property is served by a private well or non-public water system, have contaminants
been identified in the well or system that exceed guidelines applicable to the water system or has
the well been designated as contaminated by any government environmental/health agency?
yes
no
unk
13. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of environmental liens or
government notification relating to past or recurrent violations of environmental laws with
respect to the property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
14. Has the owner or occupant of the property been informed of the past or current existence of
hazardous substances or petroleum products or environmental violations with respect to the
property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
15. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of an environmental
assessment of the property or facility that indicated the presence of hazardous substances or
petroleum products on, or contamination of, the property or recommended further assessment of
the property?
yes
no
unk
16. Does the owner or occupant of the property know of any past, threatened, or pending
lawsuits or administrative proceedings concerning a release or threatened release of any
hazardous substance or petroleum products involving the property by any owner or occupant of
the property?
yes
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-23
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
17. Does the property discharge wastewater on or adjacent to the property other than stormwater
into a sanitary sewer system?
yes
no
unk
18. Have any hazardous substances or petroleum products, unidentified waste materials, tires,
automotive or industrial batteries or any other waste materials been dumped above grade, buried,
and/or burned on the property?
yes
no
unk
19. Is there a transformer, capacitor, or any hydraulic equipment for which there are any records
indicating the presence of PCBs?
yes
no
unk
PERSON(S) INTERVIEWED
Telephone interview with Mr. Robert Vincent, Landowner
1500 Lamar
Amarillo, TX 79102
806-355-1541 phone
FORM COMPLETED
1 July 1998 at 1715 Pacific Time
F-24
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 21
OWNER/OCCUPANT QUESTIONNAIRE
General
1. Is the property or any adjoining property used for an industrial use?
yes
no
unk
2. Has the property or any adjoining property been used for an industrial use in the past?
yes
unk
The site has always been used for livestock grazing, according to the
no
landowner. The landowner inherited the land from her father who used the land for live stock
grazing.
3. Is the property or any adjoining property used, or has the property or any adjoining property
been used in the past, as a gasoline station, motor repair facility, commercial printing facility, dry
cleaners, photo developing laboratory, junkyard, or landfill, or as a waste treatment, storage,
disposal, processing, or recycling facility?
yes
no
unk
Land Issues
4. Are there currently or have there been previously, any damaged or discarded automotive or
industrial batteries, or pesticides, paints, or other chemicals in individual containers of greater
than 5 gallons (19L) in volume or 50 gallons (190L) on the aggregate, stored on or used at the
property or facility?
yes
no
unk
5. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any industrial drums (typically 55 gallons
(208L)) or sacks of chemicals located on the property or at the facility?
yes
no
unk
6. Has fill dirt been brought onto the property that originated from a contaminated site or that is
unknown in origin?
yes
no
unk
7. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any pits, lagoons, or ponds located on the
property in connection with waste treatment or waste disposal?
yes
no
unk
8. Is there currently, or has there been previously, any stained soil on the property?
yes
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-25
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
9. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any registered or unregistered storage
tanks (above or underground) located on the property?
yes
no
unk
10. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any vent pipes, fill pipes, or access ways
indicating a fill pipe protruding from the ground on the property or adjacent to any structure
located on the property?
yes
no
unk
Structural Issues
11. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any flooring, drains, or walls located
within the facility that are stained by substances other than water or are emitting foul odors?
yes
no
unk
Other Issues
12. If the property is served by a private well or non-public water system, have contaminants
been identified in the well or system that exceed guidelines applicable to the water system or has
the well been designated as contaminated by any government environmental/health agency?
yes
no
unk
13. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of environmental liens or
government notification relating to past or recurrent violations of environmental laws with
respect to the property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
14. Has the owner or occupant of the property been informed of the past or current existence of
hazardous substances or petroleum products or environmental violations with respect to the
property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
15. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of an environmental
assessment of the property or facility that indicated the presence of hazardous substances or
petroleum products on, or contamination of, the property or recommended further assessment of
the property?
yes
no
unk
16. Does the owner or occupant of the property know of any past, threatened, or pending
lawsuits or administrative proceedings concerning a release or threatened release of any
hazardous substance or petroleum products involving the property by any owner or occupant of
the property?
F-26
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
yes
no
unk
17. Does the property discharge wastewater on or adjacent to the property other than stormwater
into a sanitary sewer system?
yes
no
unk
18. Have any hazardous substances or petroleum products, unidentified waste materials, tires,
automotive or industrial batteries or any other waste materials been dumped above grade, buried,
and/or burned on the property?
yes
no
unk
19. Is there a transformer, capacitor, or any hydraulic equipment for which there are any records
indicating the presence of PCBs?
yes
no
unk
PERSON(S) INTERVIEWED
Telephone interview with Mrs. Edward Walker, Landowner
HC 63 Box 390 Lamar
Hugo, OK 74743
505-425-8482 phone
FORM COMPLETED
29 June 1998 at 1735 Pacific Time
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-27
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 24
OWNER/OCCUPANT QUESTIONNAIRE
General
1. Is the property or any adjoining property used for an industrial use?
yes
no
unk
2. Has the property or any adjoining property been used for an industrial use in the past?
yes
unk
The site has always been used for livestock grazing, according to the
no
landowner. The landowner inherited the land from her father who used the land for live stock
grazing.
3. Is the property or any adjoining property used, or has the property or any adjoining property
been used in the past, as a gasoline station, motor repair facility, commercial printing facility, dry
cleaners, photo developing laboratory, junkyard, or landfill, or as a waste treatment, storage,
disposal, processing, or recycling facility?
yes
no
unk
Land Issues
4. Are there currently or have there been previously, any damaged or discarded automotive or
industrial batteries, or pesticides, paints, or other chemicals in individual containers of greater
than 5 gallons (19L) in volume or 50 gallons (190L) on the aggregate, stored on or used at the
property or facility?
yes
no
unk
5. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any industrial drums (typically 55 gallons
(208L)) or sacks of chemicals located on the property or at the facility?
yes
no
unk
6. Has fill dirt been brought onto the property that originated from a contaminated site or that is
unknown in origin?
yes
no
unk
7. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any pits, lagoons, or ponds located on the
property in connection with waste treatment or waste disposal?
yes
no
unk
8. Is there currently, or has there been previously, any stained soil on the property?
yes
F-28
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
9. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any registered or unregistered storage
tanks (above or underground) located on the property?
yes
no
unk
10. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any vent pipes, fill pipes, or access ways
indicating a fill pipe protruding from the ground on the property or adjacent to any structure
located on the property?
yes
no
unk
Structural Issues
11. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any flooring, drains, or walls located
within the facility that are stained by substances other than water or are emitting foul odors?
yes
no
unk
Other Issues
12. If the property is served by a private well or non-public water system, have contaminants
been identified in the well or system that exceed guidelines applicable to the water system or has
the well been designated as contaminated by any government environmental/health agency?
yes
no
unk
13. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of environmental liens or
government notification relating to past or recurrent violations of environmental laws with
respect to the property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
14. Has the owner or occupant of the property been informed of the past or current existence of
hazardous substances or petroleum products or environmental violations with respect to the
property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
15. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of an environmental
assessment of the property or facility that indicated the presence of hazardous substances or
petroleum products on, or contamination of, the property or recommended further assessment of
the property?
yes
no
unk
16. Does the owner or occupant of the property know of any past, threatened, or pending
lawsuits or administrative proceedings concerning a release or threatened release of any
hazardous substance or petroleum products involving the property by any owner or occupant of
the property?
yes
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-29
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
17. Does the property discharge wastewater on or adjacent to the property other than stormwater
into a sanitary sewer system?
yes
no
unk
18. Have any hazardous substances or petroleum products, unidentified waste materials, tires,
automotive or industrial batteries or any other waste materials been dumped above grade, buried,
and/or burned on the property?
yes
no
unk
19. Is there a transformer, capacitor, or any hydraulic equipment for which there are any records
indicating the presence of PCBs?
yes
no
unk
PERSON(S) INTERVIEWED
On-site interview with Mr. Tom & Mrs. Pat Payne, Landowners
PO Box S
Santa Rosa, NM 88435
505-472-3744 phone
FORM COMPLETED
Tuesday 12 May 1998 at 1500
F-30
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 28
OWNER/OCCUPANT QUESTIONNAIRE
General
1. Is the property or any adjoining property used for an industrial use?
yes
no
unk
2. Has the property or any adjoining property been used for an industrial use in the past?
yes
no
unk
3. Is the property or any adjoining property used, or has the property or any adjoining property
been used in the past, as a gasoline station, motor repair facility, commercial printing facility, dry
cleaners, photo developing laboratory, junkyard, or landfill, or as a waste treatment, storage,
disposal, processing, or recycling facility?
yes
no
unk
Land Issues
4. Are there currently or have there been previously, any damaged or discarded automotive or
industrial batteries, or pesticides, paints, or other chemicals in individual containers of greater
than 5 gallons (19L) in volume or 50 gallons (190L) on the aggregate, stored on or used at the
property or facility?
yes
no
unk
5. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any industrial drums (typically 55 gallons
(208L)) or sacks of chemicals located on the property or at the facility?
yes
no
unk
6. Has fill dirt been brought onto the property that originated from a contaminated site or that is
unknown in origin?
yes
no
unk
7. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any pits, lagoons, or ponds located on the
property in connection with waste treatment or waste disposal?
yes
no
unk
8. Is there currently, or has there been previously, any stained soil on the property?
yes
no
unk
9. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any registered or unregistered storage
tanks (above or underground) located on the property?
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-31
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
yes
no
unk
10. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any vent pipes, fill pipes, or access ways
indicating a fill pipe protruding from the ground on the property or adjacent to any structure
located on the property?
yes
no
unk
Structural Issues
11. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any flooring, drains, or walls located
within the facility that are stained by substances other than water or are emitting foul odors?
yes
no
unk
Other Issues
12. If the property is served by a private well or non-public water system, have contaminants
been identified in the well or system that exceed guidelines applicable to the water system or has
the well been designated as contaminated by any government environmental/health agency?
yes
no
unk
13. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of environmental liens or
government notification relating to past or recurrent violations of environmental laws with
respect to the property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
14. Has the owner or occupant of the property been informed of the past or current existence of
hazardous substances or petroleum products or environmental violations with respect to the
property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
15. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of an environmental
assessment of the property or facility that indicated the presence of hazardous substances or
petroleum products on, or contamination of, the property or recommended further assessment of
the property?
yes
no
unk
16. Does the owner or occupant of the property know of any past, threatened, or pending
lawsuits or administrative proceedings concerning a release or threatened release of any
hazardous substance or petroleum products involving the property by any owner or occupant of
the property?
yes
F-32
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
17. Does the property discharge wastewater on or adjacent to the property other than stormwater
into a sanitary sewer system?
yes
no
unk
18. Have any hazardous substances or petroleum products, unidentified waste materials, tires,
automotive or industrial batteries or any other waste materials been dumped above grade, buried,
and/or burned on the property?
yes
no
unk
19. Is there a transformer, capacitor, or any hydraulic equipment for which there are any records
indicating the presence of PCBs?
yes
no
unk
PERSON(S) INTERVIEWED
Mr. Hazen, Landowner
PO Box 126
Mosquero, NM 87733
505-673-2238 phone
FORM COMPLETED
Friday 15 May 1998 at 1400
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-33
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 33
OWNER/OCCUPANT QUESTIONNAIRE
General
1. Is the property or any adjoining property used for an industrial use?
yes
no
unk
2. Has the property or any adjoining property been used for an industrial use in the past?
yes
no
landowner.
unk
The site has always been used for grazing livestock, according to the
3. Is the property or any adjoining property used, or has the property or any adjoining property
been used in the past, as a gasoline station, motor repair facility, commercial printing facility, dry
cleaners, photo developing laboratory, junkyard, or landfill, or as a waste treatment, storage,
disposal, processing, or recycling facility?
yes
no
unk
Land Issues
4. Are there currently or have there been previously, any damaged or discarded automotive or
industrial batteries, or pesticides, paints, or other chemicals in individual containers of greater
than 5 gallons (19L) in volume or 50 gallons (190L) on the aggregate, stored on or used at the
property or facility?
yes
no
unk
5. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any industrial drums (typically 55 gallons
(208L)) or sacks of chemicals located on the property or at the facility?
yes
no
unk
6. Has fill dirt been brought onto the property that originated from a contaminated site or that is
unknown in origin?
yes
no
unk
7. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any pits, lagoons, or ponds located on the
property in connection with waste treatment or waste disposal?
yes
no
unk
8. Is there currently, or has there been previously, any stained soil on the property?
yes
F-34
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
9. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any registered or unregistered storage
tanks (above or underground) located on the property?
yes
no
unk
10. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any vent pipes, fill pipes, or access ways
indicating a fill pipe protruding from the ground on the property or adjacent to any structure
located on the property?
yes
no
unk
Structural Issues
11. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any flooring, drains, or walls located
within the facility that are stained by substances other than water or are emitting foul odors?
yes
no
unk
Other Issues
12. If the property is served by a private well or non-public water system, have contaminants
been identified in the well or system that exceed guidelines applicable to the water system or has
the well been designated as contaminated by any government environmental/health agency?
yes
no
unk
13. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of environmental liens or
government notification relating to past or recurrent violations of environmental laws with
respect to the property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
14. Has the owner or occupant of the property been informed of the past or current existence of
hazardous substances or petroleum products or environmental violations with respect to the
property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
15. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of an environmental
assessment of the property or facility that indicated the presence of hazardous substances or
petroleum products on, or contamination of, the property or recommended further assessment of
the property?
yes
no
unk
16. Does the owner or occupant of the property know of any past, threatened, or pending
lawsuits or administrative proceedings concerning a release or threatened release of any
hazardous substance or petroleum products involving the property by any owner or occupant of
the property?
yes
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-35
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
17. Does the property discharge wastewater on or adjacent to the property other than stormwater
into a sanitary sewer system?
yes
no
unk
18. Have any hazardous substances or petroleum products, unidentified waste materials, tires,
automotive or industrial batteries or any other waste materials been dumped above grade, buried,
and/or burned on the property?
yes
no
unk
19. Is there a transformer, capacitor, or any hydraulic equipment for which there are any records
indicating the presence of PCBs?
yes
no
unk
PERSON(S) INTERVIEWED
Telephone interview with Mr. Michael Hutchinson, Landowner
PO Box 940
Plainview, TX 79072
806-293-1307 phone
FORM COMPLETED
2 July 1998 at 0800 Pacific Time
F-36
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 34
OWNER/OCCUPANT QUESTIONNAIRE
Note: Three access roads were proposed for Site 34 in the field. Only one of the options
(Mr. Fort’s property) was assessed. The other two landowners did not give permission to
enter their properties; hence, they were not fully assessed – only observed from an adjacent
property or access road.
General
1. Is the property or any adjoining property used for an industrial use?
yes
no
unk
2. Has the property or any adjoining property been used for an industrial use in the past?
yes
no
landowner.
unk
The site has always been used for grazing livestock, according to the
3. Is the property or any adjoining property used, or has the property or any adjoining property
been used in the past, as a gasoline station, motor repair facility, commercial printing facility, dry
cleaners, photo developing laboratory, junkyard, or landfill, or as a waste treatment, storage,
disposal, processing, or recycling facility?
yes
no
unk
Land Issues
4. Are there currently or have there been previously, any damaged or discarded automotive or
industrial batteries, or pesticides, paints, or other chemicals in individual containers of greater
than 5 gallons (19L) in volume or 50 gallons (190L) on the aggregate, stored on or used at the
property or facility?
yes
no
unk
5. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any industrial drums (typically 55 gallons
(208L)) or sacks of chemicals located on the property or at the facility?
yes
no
unk
6. Has fill dirt been brought onto the property that originated from a contaminated site or that is
unknown in origin?
yes
no
unk
7. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any pits, lagoons, or ponds located on the
property in connection with waste treatment or waste disposal?
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-37
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
yes
no
unk
8. Is there currently, or has there been previously, any stained soil on the property?
yes
no
unk
9. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any registered or unregistered storage
tanks (above or underground) located on the property?
yes
no
unk
10. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any vent pipes, fill pipes, or access ways
indicating a fill pipe protruding from the ground on the property or adjacent to any structure
located on the property?
yes
no
unk
Structural Issues
11. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any flooring, drains, or walls located
within the facility that are stained by substances other than water or are emitting foul odors?
yes
unk
A homestead used to exist on the property approximately around 1910.
no
However, it did not have plumbing of any sort, according to the landowner.
Other Issues
12. If the property is served by a private well or non-public water system, have contaminants
been identified in the well or system that exceed guidelines applicable to the water system or has
the well been designated as contaminated by any government environmental/health agency?
yes
unk
The old homestead used to have a domestic ground water well for
no
potable water; however, this well was abandoned. A hole in the ground and parts of a windmill
were observed at the old well location.
13. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of environmental liens or
government notification relating to past or recurrent violations of environmental laws with
respect to the property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
14. Has the owner or occupant of the property been informed of the past or current existence of
hazardous substances or petroleum products or environmental violations with respect to the
property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
15. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of an environmental
assessment of the property or facility that indicated the presence of hazardous substances or
F-38
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
petroleum products on, or contamination of, the property or recommended further assessment of
the property?
yes
no
unk
16. Does the owner or occupant of the property know of any past, threatened, or pending
lawsuits or administrative proceedings concerning a release or threatened release of any
hazardous substance or petroleum products involving the property by any owner or occupant of
the property?
yes
no
unk
17. Does the property discharge wastewater on or adjacent to the property other than stormwater
into a sanitary sewer system?
yes
no
unk
18. Have any hazardous substances or petroleum products, unidentified waste materials, tires,
automotive or industrial batteries or any other waste materials been dumped above grade, buried,
and/or burned on the property?
yes
no
unk
19. Is there a transformer, capacitor, or any hydraulic equipment for which there are any records
indicating the presence of PCBs?
yes
no
unk
PERSON(S) INTERVIEWED
On-site interview with Mr. Ralph Fort, Landowner
PO Box 53
Nara Visa, NM 88340
505-633-2212 phone
FORM COMPLETED
Friday 15 May 1998
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-39
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 35
OWNER/OCCUPANT QUESTIONNAIRE
General
1. Is the property or any adjoining property used for an industrial use?
yes
no
unk
2. Has the property or any adjoining property been used for an industrial use in the past?
yes
unk
The site has always been used for grazing livestock, according to the
no
landowners. The land was inherited from her Grandmother.
3. Is the property or any adjoining property used, or has the property or any adjoining property
been used in the past, as a gasoline station, motor repair facility, commercial printing facility, dry
cleaners, photo developing laboratory, junkyard, or landfill, or as a waste treatment, storage,
disposal, processing, or recycling facility?
yes
no
unk
Land Issues
4. Are there currently or have there been previously, any damaged or discarded automotive or
industrial batteries, or pesticides, paints, or other chemicals in individual containers of greater
than 5 gallons (19L) in volume or 50 gallons (190L) on the aggregate, stored on or used at the
property or facility?
yes
no
unk
5. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any industrial drums (typically 55 gallons
(208L)) or sacks of chemicals located on the property or at the facility?
yes
no
unk
6. Has fill dirt been brought onto the property that originated from a contaminated site or that is
unknown in origin?
yes
no
unk
7. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any pits, lagoons, or ponds located on the
property in connection with waste treatment or waste disposal?
yes
no
unk
8. Is there currently, or has there been previously, any stained soil on the property?
yes
F-40
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
9. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any registered or unregistered storage
tanks (above or underground) located on the property?
yes
no
unk
10. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any vent pipes, fill pipes, or access ways
indicating a fill pipe protruding from the ground on the property or adjacent to any structure
located on the property?
yes
no
unk
Structural Issues
11. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any flooring, drains, or walls located
within the facility that are stained by substances other than water or are emitting foul odors?
yes
unk
A homestead used to exist on the property approximately around 1907.
no
However, it did not have plumbing of any sort, according to the landowner.
Other Issues
12. If the property is served by a private well or non-public water system, have contaminants
been identified in the well or system that exceed guidelines applicable to the water system or has
the well been designated as contaminated by any government environmental/health agency?
yes
no
unk
13. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of environmental liens or
government notification relating to past or recurrent violations of environmental laws with
respect to the property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
14. Has the owner or occupant of the property been informed of the past or current existence of
hazardous substances or petroleum products or environmental violations with respect to the
property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
15. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of an environmental
assessment of the property or facility that indicated the presence of hazardous substances or
petroleum products on, or contamination of, the property or recommended further assessment of
the property?
yes
no
unk
16. Does the owner or occupant of the property know of any past, threatened, or pending
lawsuits or administrative proceedings concerning a release or threatened release of any
hazardous substance or petroleum products involving the property by any owner or occupant of
the property?
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-41
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
yes
no
unk
17. Does the property discharge wastewater on or adjacent to the property other than stormwater
into a sanitary sewer system?
yes
no
unk
18. Have any hazardous substances or petroleum products, unidentified waste materials, tires,
automotive or industrial batteries or any other waste materials been dumped above grade, buried,
and/or burned on the property?
yes
no
unk
19. Is there a transformer, capacitor, or any hydraulic equipment for which there are any records
indicating the presence of PCBs?
yes
no
unk
PERSON(S) INTERVIEWED
On-site interview with Mr. & Mrs. Lewis, Landowners
Box 188
Mosquero, NM 87733
505-673-2298 phone
505-673-2321
FORM COMPLETED
Friday 15 May 1998 at 1630
F-42
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 36
OWNER/OCCUPANT QUESTIONNAIRE
General
1. Is the property or any adjoining property used for an industrial use?
yes
no
unk
2. Has the property or any adjoining property been used for an industrial use in the past?
yes
unk
The site has mostly been used for grazing livestock, according to the
no
landowner. Approximately 35 to 40 years ago an unsuccessful attempt was made to farm the
land.
3. Is the property or any adjoining property used, or has the property or any adjoining property
been used in the past, as a gasoline station, motor repair facility, commercial printing facility, dry
cleaners, photo developing laboratory, junkyard, or landfill, or as a waste treatment, storage,
disposal, processing, or recycling facility?
yes
no
unk
Land Issues
4. Are there currently or have there been previously, any damaged or discarded automotive or
industrial batteries, or pesticides, paints, or other chemicals in individual containers of greater
than 5 gallons (19L) in volume or 50 gallons (190L) on the aggregate, stored on or used at the
property or facility?
yes
no
unk
5. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any industrial drums (typically 55 gallons
(208L)) or sacks of chemicals located on the property or at the facility?
yes
no
unk
6. Has fill dirt been brought onto the property that originated from a contaminated site or that is
unknown in origin?
yes
no
unk
7. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any pits, lagoons, or ponds located on the
property in connection with waste treatment or waste disposal?
yes
no
unk
8. Is there currently, or has there been previously, any stained soil on the property?
yes
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-43
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
9. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any registered or unregistered storage
tanks (above or underground) located on the property?
yes
no
unk
10. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any vent pipes, fill pipes, or access ways
indicating a fill pipe protruding from the ground on the property or adjacent to any structure
located on the property?
yes
no
unk
Structural Issues
11. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any flooring, drains, or walls located
within the facility that are stained by substances other than water or are emitting foul odors?
yes
no
unk
Other Issues
12. If the property is served by a private well or non-public water system, have contaminants
been identified in the well or system that exceed guidelines applicable to the water system or has
the well been designated as contaminated by any government environmental/health agency?
yes
no
unk
13. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of environmental liens or
government notification relating to past or recurrent violations of environmental laws with
respect to the property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
14. Has the owner or occupant of the property been informed of the past or current existence of
hazardous substances or petroleum products or environmental violations with respect to the
property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
15. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of an environmental
assessment of the property or facility that indicated the presence of hazardous substances or
petroleum products on, or contamination of, the property or recommended further assessment of
the property?
yes
no
unk
16. Does the owner or occupant of the property know of any past, threatened, or pending
lawsuits or administrative proceedings concerning a release or threatened release of any
hazardous substance or petroleum products involving the property by any owner or occupant of
the property?
F-44
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
yes
no
unk
17. Does the property discharge wastewater on or adjacent to the property other than stormwater
into a sanitary sewer system?
yes
no
unk
18. Have any hazardous substances or petroleum products, unidentified waste materials, tires,
automotive or industrial batteries or any other waste materials been dumped above grade, buried,
and/or burned on the property?
yes
no
unk
19. Is there a transformer, capacitor, or any hydraulic equipment for which there are any records
indicating the presence of PCBs?
yes
no
unk
PERSON(S) INTERVIEWED
On-site interview with Mr. Hilario Ebell, Landowner
Box 174
Roy, NM 87734
505-485-2241 phone
FORM COMPLETED
Thursday 14 May 1998 at 1130
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-45
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 37
OWNER/OCCUPANT QUESTIONNAIRE
General
1. Is the property or any adjoining property used for an industrial use?
yes
no
unk
2. Has the property or any adjoining property been used for an industrial use in the past?
yes
unk
The use of the site has always been restricted, according to the land
no
grant manager. There is limited activity of livestock grazing, wood cutting and hauling, and
hunting. No piñon tress are to be cut, and there is no shooting of roadrunners.
3. Is the property or any adjoining property used, or has the property or any adjoining property
been used in the past, as a gasoline station, motor repair facility, commercial printing facility, dry
cleaners, photo developing laboratory, junkyard, or landfill, or as a waste treatment, storage,
disposal, processing, or recycling facility?
yes
no
unk
Land Issues
4. Are there currently or have there been previously, any damaged or discarded automotive or
industrial batteries, or pesticides, paints, or other chemicals in individual containers of greater
than 5 gallons (19L) in volume or 50 gallons (190L) on the aggregate, stored on or used at the
property or facility?
yes
no
unk
5. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any industrial drums (typically 55 gallons
(208L)) or sacks of chemicals located on the property or at the facility?
yes
no
unk
6. Has fill dirt been brought onto the property that originated from a contaminated site or that is
unknown in origin?
yes
no
unk
7. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any pits, lagoons, or ponds located on the
property in connection with waste treatment or waste disposal?
yes
no
unk
8. Is there currently, or has there been previously, any stained soil on the property?
yes
F-46
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
9. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any registered or unregistered storage
tanks (above or underground) located on the property?
yes
no
unk
10. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any vent pipes, fill pipes, or access ways
indicating a fill pipe protruding from the ground on the property or adjacent to any structure
located on the property?
yes
no
unk
Structural Issues
11. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any flooring, drains, or walls located
within the facility that are stained by substances other than water or are emitting foul odors?
yes
no
unk
Other Issues
12. If the property is served by a private well or non-public water system, have contaminants
been identified in the well or system that exceed guidelines applicable to the water system or has
the well been designated as contaminated by any government environmental/health agency?
yes
no
unk
13. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of environmental liens or
government notification relating to past or recurrent violations of environmental laws with
respect to the property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
14. Has the owner or occupant of the property been informed of the past or current existence of
hazardous substances or petroleum products or environmental violations with respect to the
property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
15. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of an environmental
assessment of the property or facility that indicated the presence of hazardous substances or
petroleum products on, or contamination of, the property or recommended further assessment of
the property?
yes
no
unk
16. Does the owner or occupant of the property know of any past, threatened, or pending
lawsuits or administrative proceedings concerning a release or threatened release of any
hazardous substance or petroleum products involving the property by any owner or occupant of
the property?
yes
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-47
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
17. Does the property discharge wastewater on or adjacent to the property other than stormwater
into a sanitary sewer system?
yes
no
unk
18. Have any hazardous substances or petroleum products, unidentified waste materials, tires,
automotive or industrial batteries or any other waste materials been dumped above grade, buried,
and/or burned on the property?
yes
no
unk
19. Is there a transformer, capacitor, or any hydraulic equipment for which there are any records
indicating the presence of PCBs?
yes
no
unk
PERSON(S) INTERVIEWED
Mr. Joe M. Sisneros, Land Grant Manager
626 Baca
Santa Fe, NM 87503
505-983-1230 phone
FORM COMPLETED
Tuesday 12 May 1998 at 1130
F-48
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 38
OWNER/OCCUPANT QUESTIONNAIRE
General
1. Is the property or any adjoining property used for an industrial use?
yes
no
unk
2. Has the property or any adjoining property been used for an industrial use in the past?
yes
no
landowner.
unk
The site has always been used livestock grazing, according the
3. Is the property or any adjoining property used, or has the property or any adjoining property
been used in the past, as a gasoline station, motor repair facility, commercial printing facility, dry
cleaners, photo developing laboratory, junkyard, or landfill, or as a waste treatment, storage,
disposal, processing, or recycling facility?
yes
no
unk
Land Issues
4. Are there currently or have there been previously, any damaged or discarded automotive or
industrial batteries, or pesticides, paints, or other chemicals in individual containers of greater
than 5 gallons (19L) in volume or 50 gallons (190L) on the aggregate, stored on or used at the
property or facility?
yes
no
unk
5. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any industrial drums (typically 55 gallons
(208L)) or sacks of chemicals located on the property or at the facility?
yes
no
unk
6. Has fill dirt been brought onto the property that originated from a contaminated site or that is
unknown in origin?
yes
no
unk
7. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any pits, lagoons, or ponds located on the
property in connection with waste treatment or waste disposal?
yes
no
unk
8. Is there currently, or has there been previously, any stained soil on the property?
yes
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-49
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
9. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any registered or unregistered storage
tanks (above or underground) located on the property?
yes
no
unk
10. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any vent pipes, fill pipes, or access ways
indicating a fill pipe protruding from the ground on the property or adjacent to any structure
located on the property?
yes
no
unk
Structural Issues
11. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any flooring, drains, or walls located
within the facility that are stained by substances other than water or are emitting foul odors?
yes
no
unk
Other Issues
12. If the property is served by a private well or non-public water system, have contaminants
been identified in the well or system that exceed guidelines applicable to the water system or has
the well been designated as contaminated by any government environmental/health agency?
yes
no
unk
13. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of environmental liens or
government notification relating to past or recurrent violations of environmental laws with
respect to the property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
14. Has the owner or occupant of the property been informed of the past or current existence of
hazardous substances or petroleum products or environmental violations with respect to the
property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
15. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of an environmental
assessment of the property or facility that indicated the presence of hazardous substances or
petroleum products on, or contamination of, the property or recommended further assessment of
the property?
yes
no
unk
16. Does the owner or occupant of the property know of any past, threatened, or pending
lawsuits or administrative proceedings concerning a release or threatened release of any
hazardous substance or petroleum products involving the property by any owner or occupant of
the property?
F-50
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
yes
no
unk
17. Does the property discharge wastewater on or adjacent to the property other than stormwater
into a sanitary sewer system?
yes
no
unk
18. Have any hazardous substances or petroleum products, unidentified waste materials, tires,
automotive or industrial batteries or any other waste materials been dumped above grade, buried,
and/or burned on the property?
yes
no
unk
19. Is there a transformer, capacitor, or any hydraulic equipment for which there are any records
indicating the presence of PCBs?
yes
no
unk
PERSON(S) INTERVIEWED
On-site interview with Mr. Charles & Mrs. Judy Bedford, Landowners
Ima Rt. Box 4
Cuervo, NM 88417
505-472-5158 phone
FORM COMPLETED
Wednesday 13 May 1998 at 0830
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-51
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 39
OWNER/OCCUPANT QUESTIONNAIRE
General
1. Is the property or any adjoining property used for an industrial use?
yes
no
unk
2. Has the property or any adjoining property been used for an industrial use in the past?
yes
no
landowner.
unk
The site has always been used livestock grazing, according the
3. Is the property or any adjoining property used, or has the property or any adjoining property
been used in the past, as a gasoline station, motor repair facility, commercial printing facility, dry
cleaners, photo developing laboratory, junkyard, or landfill, or as a waste treatment, storage,
disposal, processing, or recycling facility?
yes
no
unk
Land Issues
4. Are there currently or have there been previously, any damaged or discarded automotive or
industrial batteries, or pesticides, paints, or other chemicals in individual containers of greater
than 5 gallons (19L) in volume or 50 gallons (190L) on the aggregate, stored on or used at the
property or facility?
yes
no
unk
5. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any industrial drums (typically 55 gallons
(208L)) or sacks of chemicals located on the property or at the facility?
yes
no
unk
6. Has fill dirt been brought onto the property that originated from a contaminated site or that is
unknown in origin?
yes
no
unk
7. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any pits, lagoons, or ponds located on the
property in connection with waste treatment or waste disposal?
yes
no
unk
8. Is there currently, or has there been previously, any stained soil on the property?
yes
F-52
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
9. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any registered or unregistered storage
tanks (above or underground) located on the property?
yes
no
unk
10. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any vent pipes, fill pipes, or access ways
indicating a fill pipe protruding from the ground on the property or adjacent to any structure
located on the property?
yes
no
unk
Structural Issues
11. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any flooring, drains, or walls located
within the facility that are stained by substances other than water or are emitting foul odors?
yes
no
unk
Other Issues
12. If the property is served by a private well or non-public water system, have contaminants
been identified in the well or system that exceed guidelines applicable to the water system or has
the well been designated as contaminated by any government environmental/health agency?
yes
no
unk
13. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of environmental liens or
government notification relating to past or recurrent violations of environmental laws with
respect to the property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
14. Has the owner or occupant of the property been informed of the past or current existence of
hazardous substances or petroleum products or environmental violations with respect to the
property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
15. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of an environmental
assessment of the property or facility that indicated the presence of hazardous substances or
petroleum products on, or contamination of, the property or recommended further assessment of
the property?
yes
no
unk
16. Does the owner or occupant of the property know of any past, threatened, or pending
lawsuits or administrative proceedings concerning a release or threatened release of any
hazardous substance or petroleum products involving the property by any owner or occupant of
the property?
yes
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-53
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
17. Does the property discharge wastewater on or adjacent to the property other than stormwater
into a sanitary sewer system?
yes
no
unk
18. Have any hazardous substances or petroleum products, unidentified waste materials, tires,
automotive or industrial batteries or any other waste materials been dumped above grade, buried,
and/or burned on the property?
yes
no
unk
19. Is there a transformer, capacitor, or any hydraulic equipment for which there are any records
indicating the presence of PCBs?
yes
no
unk
PERSON(S) INTERVIEWED
On-site interview with Mr. Charles & Mrs. Judy Bedford, Landowners
Ima Rt. Box 4
Cuervo, NM 88417
505-472-5158 phone
FORM COMPLETED
Wednesday 13 May 1998 at 1030
F-54
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 40
OWNER/OCCUPANT QUESTIONNAIRE
General
1. Is the property or any adjoining property used for an industrial use?
yes
no
unk
2. Has the property or any adjoining property been used for an industrial use in the past?
yes
no
landowner.
unk
The site has always been used livestock grazing, according the
3. Is the property or any adjoining property used, or has the property or any adjoining property
been used in the past, as a gasoline station, motor repair facility, commercial printing facility, dry
cleaners, photo developing laboratory, junkyard, or landfill, or as a waste treatment, storage,
disposal, processing, or recycling facility?
yes
no
unk
Land Issues
4. Are there currently or have there been previously, any damaged or discarded automotive or
industrial batteries, or pesticides, paints, or other chemicals in individual containers of greater
than 5 gallons (19L) in volume or 50 gallons (190L) on the aggregate, stored on or used at the
property or facility?
yes
no
unk
5. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any industrial drums (typically 55 gallons
(208L)) or sacks of chemicals located on the property or at the facility?
yes
no
unk
6. Has fill dirt been brought onto the property that originated from a contaminated site or that is
unknown in origin?
yes
no
unk
7. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any pits, lagoons, or ponds located on the
property in connection with waste treatment or waste disposal?
yes
no
unk
8. Is there currently, or has there been previously, any stained soil on the property?
yes
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-55
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
9. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any registered or unregistered storage
tanks (above or underground) located on the property?
yes
no
unk
10. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any vent pipes, fill pipes, or access ways
indicating a fill pipe protruding from the ground on the property or adjacent to any structure
located on the property?
yes
no
unk
Structural Issues
11. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any flooring, drains, or walls located
within the facility that are stained by substances other than water or are emitting foul odors?
yes
no
unk
Other Issues
12. If the property is served by a private well or non-public water system, have contaminants
been identified in the well or system that exceed guidelines applicable to the water system or has
the well been designated as contaminated by any government environmental/health agency?
yes
no
unk
13. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of environmental liens or
government notification relating to past or recurrent violations of environmental laws with
respect to the property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
14. Has the owner or occupant of the property been informed of the past or current existence of
hazardous substances or petroleum products or environmental violations with respect to the
property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
15. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of an environmental
assessment of the property or facility that indicated the presence of hazardous substances or
petroleum products on, or contamination of, the property or recommended further assessment of
the property?
yes
no
unk
16. Does the owner or occupant of the property know of any past, threatened, or pending
lawsuits or administrative proceedings concerning a release or threatened release of any
hazardous substance or petroleum products involving the property by any owner or occupant of
the property?
F-56
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
yes
no
unk
17. Does the property discharge wastewater on or adjacent to the property other than stormwater
into a sanitary sewer system?
yes
no
unk
18. Have any hazardous substances or petroleum products, unidentified waste materials, tires,
automotive or industrial batteries or any other waste materials been dumped above grade, buried,
and/or burned on the property?
yes
no
unk
19. Is there a transformer, capacitor, or any hydraulic equipment for which there are any records
indicating the presence of PCBs?
yes no unk
PERSON(S) INTERVIEWED
On-site interview with Mr. Walter Wiggins, Landowner
Box 188
Wagon Mound, NM 87752
505-666-2253 phone
FORM COMPLETED
Tuesday 18 May 1998 at 0900
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-57
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 41
OWNER/OCCUPANT QUESTIONNAIRE
General
1. Is the property or any adjoining property used for an industrial use?
yes
no
unk
2. Has the property or any adjoining property been used for an industrial use in the past?
yes
no
landowner.
unk
The site has always been used livestock grazing, according the
3. Is the property or any adjoining property used, or has the property or any adjoining property
been used in the past, as a gasoline station, motor repair facility, commercial printing facility, dry
cleaners, photo developing laboratory, junkyard, or landfill, or as a waste treatment, storage,
disposal, processing, or recycling facility?
yes
no
unk
Land Issues
4. Are there currently or have there been previously, any damaged or discarded automotive or
industrial batteries, or pesticides, paints, or other chemicals in individual containers of greater
than 5 gallons (19L) in volume or 50 gallons (190L) on the aggregate, stored on or used at the
property or facility?
yes
no
unk
5. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any industrial drums (typically 55 gallons
(208L)) or sacks of chemicals located on the property or at the facility?
yes
no
unk
6. Has fill dirt been brought onto the property that originated from a contaminated site or that is
unknown in origin?
yes
no
unk
7. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any pits, lagoons, or ponds located on the
property in connection with waste treatment or waste disposal?
yes
no
unk
8. Is there currently, or has there been previously, any stained soil on the property?
yes
F-58
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
9. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any registered or unregistered storage
tanks (above or underground) located on the property?
yes
no
unk
10. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any vent pipes, fill pipes, or access ways
indicating a fill pipe protruding from the ground on the property or adjacent to any structure
located on the property?
yes
no
unk
Structural Issues
11. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any flooring, drains, or walls located
within the facility that are stained by substances other than water or are emitting foul odors?
yes
no
unk
Other Issues
12. If the property is served by a private well or non-public water system, have contaminants
been identified in the well or system that exceed guidelines applicable to the water system or has
the well been designated as contaminated by any government environmental/health agency?
yes
no
unk
13. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of environmental liens or
government notification relating to past or recurrent violations of environmental laws with
respect to the property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
14. Has the owner or occupant of the property been informed of the past or current existence of
hazardous substances or petroleum products or environmental violations with respect to the
property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
15. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of an environmental
assessment of the property or facility that indicated the presence of hazardous substances or
petroleum products on, or contamination of, the property or recommended further assessment of
the property?
yes
no
unk
16. Does the owner or occupant of the property know of any past, threatened, or pending
lawsuits or administrative proceedings concerning a release or threatened release of any
hazardous substance or petroleum products involving the property by any owner or occupant of
the property?
yes
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-59
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
17. Does the property discharge wastewater on or adjacent to the property other than stormwater
into a sanitary sewer system?
yes
no
unk
18. Have any hazardous substances or petroleum products, unidentified waste materials, tires,
automotive or industrial batteries or any other waste materials been dumped above grade, buried,
and/or burned on the property?
yes
no
unk
19. Is there a transformer, capacitor, or any hydraulic equipment for which there are any records
indicating the presence of PCBs?
yes
no
unk
PERSON(S) INTERVIEWED
Telephone interview with Mr. David Krush, Landowner
HC 66 Box 27
Wagon Mound, NM 87752
505-666-2494 phone
505-447-6116
FORM COMPLETED
2 July 1998 at 0825 Pacific Time
F-60
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 54
OWNER/OCCUPANT QUESTIONNAIRE
General
1. Is the property or any adjoining property used for an industrial use?
yes
no
unk
2. Has the property or any adjoining property been used for an industrial use in the past?
yes
no
landowner.
unk
The site has always been used livestock grazing, according the
3. Is the property or any adjoining property used, or has the property or any adjoining property
been used in the past, as a gasoline station, motor repair facility, commercial printing facility, dry
cleaners, photo developing laboratory, junkyard, or landfill, or as a waste treatment, storage,
disposal, processing, or recycling facility?
yes
no
unk
Land Issues
4. Are there currently or have there been previously, any damaged or discarded automotive or
industrial batteries, or pesticides, paints, or other chemicals in individual containers of greater
than 5 gallons (19L) in volume or 50 gallons (190L) on the aggregate, stored on or used at the
property or facility?
yes
no
unk
5. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any industrial drums (typically 55 gallons
(208L)) or sacks of chemicals located on the property or at the facility?
yes
no
unk
6. Has fill dirt been brought onto the property that originated from a contaminated site or that is
unknown in origin?
yes
no
unk
7. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any pits, lagoons, or ponds located on the
property in connection with waste treatment or waste disposal?
yes
no
unk
8. Is there currently, or has there been previously, any stained soil on the property?
yes
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-61
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
9. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any registered or unregistered storage
tanks (above or underground) located on the property?
yes
no
unk
10. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any vent pipes, fill pipes, or access ways
indicating a fill pipe protruding from the ground on the property or adjacent to any structure
located on the property?
yes
no
unk
Structural Issues
11. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any flooring, drains, or walls located
within the facility that are stained by substances other than water or are emitting foul odors?
yes
no
unk
Other Issues
12. If the property is served by a private well or non-public water system, have contaminants
been identified in the well or system that exceed guidelines applicable to the water system or has
the well been designated as contaminated by any government environmental/health agency?
yes
no
unk
13. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of environmental liens or
government notification relating to past or recurrent violations of environmental laws with
respect to the property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
14. Has the owner or occupant of the property been informed of the past or current existence of
hazardous substances or petroleum products or environmental violations with respect to the
property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
15. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of an environmental
assessment of the property or facility that indicated the presence of hazardous substances or
petroleum products on, or contamination of, the property or recommended further assessment of
the property?
yes
no
unk
16. Does the owner or occupant of the property know of any past, threatened, or pending
lawsuits or administrative proceedings concerning a release or threatened release of any
hazardous substance or petroleum products involving the property by any owner or occupant of
the property?
F-62
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
yes
no
unk
17. Does the property discharge wastewater on or adjacent to the property other than stormwater
into a sanitary sewer system?
yes
no
unk
18. Have any hazardous substances or petroleum products, unidentified waste materials, tires,
automotive or industrial batteries or any other waste materials been dumped above grade, buried,
and/or burned on the property?
yes
no
unk
19. Is there a transformer, capacitor, or any hydraulic equipment for which there are any records
indicating the presence of PCBs?
yes
no
unk
PERSON(S) INTERVIEWED
Mr. Richard Allen, Landowner
2707 W. Hwy 90
Alpine, TX 79831-0929
915-837-5149 phone
FORM COMPLETED
Tuesday 21 April1998 at 1300
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-63
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 55
OWNER/OCCUPANT QUESTIONNAIRE
Questionnaire has not been completed. Landowner has not responded to telephone calls or
mailed questionnaire.
PERSON(S) TO BE INTERVIEWED
Mr. James J. Harnett, Moody Estates Trustee
4900 Thanksgiving Tower
1601 Elm St.
Dallas, TX 75201
214-742-4655 phone
F-64
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 59
OWNER/OCCUPANT QUESTIONNAIRE
General
1. Is the property or any adjoining property used for an industrial use?
yes
no
unk
2. Has the property or any adjoining property been used for an industrial use in the past?
yes
no
landowner.
unk
The site has always been used livestock grazing, according the
3. Is the property or any adjoining property used, or has the property or any adjoining property
been used in the past, as a gasoline station, motor repair facility, commercial printing facility, dry
cleaners, photo developing laboratory, junkyard, or landfill, or as a waste treatment, storage,
disposal, processing, or recycling facility?
yes
no
unk
Land Issues
4. Are there currently or have there been previously, any damaged or discarded automotive or
industrial batteries, or pesticides, paints, or other chemicals in individual containers of greater
than 5 gallons (19L) in volume or 50 gallons (190L) on the aggregate, stored on or used at the
property or facility?
yes
no
unk
5. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any industrial drums (typically 55 gallons
(208L)) or sacks of chemicals located on the property or at the facility?
yes
no
unk
6. Has fill dirt been brought onto the property that originated from a contaminated site or that is
unknown in origin?
yes
no
unk
7. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any pits, lagoons, or ponds located on the
property in connection with waste treatment or waste disposal?
yes
no
unk
8. Is there currently, or has there been previously, any stained soil on the property?
yes
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-65
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
9. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any registered or unregistered storage
tanks (above or underground) located on the property?
yes
no
unk
10. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any vent pipes, fill pipes, or access ways
indicating a fill pipe protruding from the ground on the property or adjacent to any structure
located on the property?
yes
no
unk
Structural Issues
11. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any flooring, drains, or walls located
within the facility that are stained by substances other than water or are emitting foul odors?
yes
no
unk
Other Issues
12. If the property is served by a private well or non-public water system, have contaminants
been identified in the well or system that exceed guidelines applicable to the water system or has
the well been designated as contaminated by any government environmental/health agency?
yes
no
unk
13. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of environmental liens or
government notification relating to past or recurrent violations of environmental laws with
respect to the property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
14. Has the owner or occupant of the property been informed of the past or current existence of
hazardous substances or petroleum products or environmental violations with respect to the
property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
15. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of an environmental
assessment of the property or facility that indicated the presence of hazardous substances or
petroleum products on, or contamination of, the property or recommended further assessment of
the property?
yes
no
unk
16. Does the owner or occupant of the property know of any past, threatened, or pending
lawsuits or administrative proceedings concerning a release or threatened release of any
hazardous substance or petroleum products involving the property by any owner or occupant of
the property?
F-66
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
yes
no
unk
17. Does the property discharge wastewater on or adjacent to the property other than stormwater
into a sanitary sewer system?
yes
no
unk
18. Have any hazardous substances or petroleum products, unidentified waste materials, tires,
automotive or industrial batteries or any other waste materials been dumped above grade, buried,
and/or burned on the property?
yes
no
unk
19. Is there a transformer, capacitor, or any hydraulic equipment for which there are any records
indicating the presence of PCBs?
yes
no
unk
PERSON(S) INTERVIEWED
Telephone interview with Mr. Kevin W. Lanaham, Landowner
1501 Bronzeway
El Paso, TX 79926
915-565-9778 phone
FORM COMPLETED
29 June 1998 at 1500 Pacific Time
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-67
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 60
OWNER/OCCUPANT QUESTIONNAIRE
General
1. Is the property or any adjoining property used for an industrial use?
yes
no
unk
2. Has the property or any adjoining property been used for an industrial use in the past?
yes
unk
The site has always been used for farming and ranching, according the
no
landowner’s son-in-law.
3. Is the property or any adjoining property used, or has the property or any adjoining property
been used in the past, as a gasoline station, motor repair facility, commercial printing facility, dry
cleaners, photo developing laboratory, junkyard, or landfill, or as a waste treatment, storage,
disposal, processing, or recycling facility?
yes
no
unk
Land Issues
4. Are there currently or have there been previously, any damaged or discarded automotive or
industrial batteries, or pesticides, paints, or other chemicals in individual containers of greater
than 5 gallons (19L) in volume or 50 gallons (190L) on the aggregate, stored on or used at the
property or facility?
yes
no
unk
5. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any industrial drums (typically 55 gallons
(208L)) or sacks of chemicals located on the property or at the facility?
yes
no
unk
6. Has fill dirt been brought onto the property that originated from a contaminated site or that is
unknown in origin?
yes
no
unk
7. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any pits, lagoons, or ponds located on the
property in connection with waste treatment or waste disposal?
yes
no
unk
8. Is there currently, or has there been previously, any stained soil on the property?
yes
F-68
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
9. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any registered or unregistered storage
tanks (above or underground) located on the property?
yes
no
unk
10. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any vent pipes, fill pipes, or access ways
indicating a fill pipe protruding from the ground on the property or adjacent to any structure
located on the property?
yes
no
unk
Structural Issues
11. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any flooring, drains, or walls located
within the facility that are stained by substances other than water or are emitting foul odors?
yes
no
unk
Other Issues
12. If the property is served by a private well or non-public water system, have contaminants
been identified in the well or system that exceed guidelines applicable to the water system or has
the well been designated as contaminated by any government environmental/health agency?
yes
no
unk
13. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of environmental liens or
government notification relating to past or recurrent violations of environmental laws with
respect to the property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
14. Has the owner or occupant of the property been informed of the past or current existence of
hazardous substances or petroleum products or environmental violations with respect to the
property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
15. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of an environmental
assessment of the property or facility that indicated the presence of hazardous substances or
petroleum products on, or contamination of, the property or recommended further assessment of
the property?
yes
no
unk
16. Does the owner or occupant of the property know of any past, threatened, or pending
lawsuits or administrative proceedings concerning a release or threatened release of any
hazardous substance or petroleum products involving the property by any owner or occupant of
the property?
yes
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-69
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
17. Does the property discharge wastewater on or adjacent to the property other than stormwater
into a sanitary sewer system?
yes
no
unk
18. Have any hazardous substances or petroleum products, unidentified waste materials, tires,
automotive or industrial batteries or any other waste materials been dumped above grade, buried,
and/or burned on the property?
yes
no
unk
19. Is there a transformer, capacitor, or any hydraulic equipment for which there are any records
indicating the presence of PCBs?
yes
no
unk
PERSON(S) INTERVIEWED
Via U.S. mail
Mr. Kenneth Linderman, son-in-law of landowner (Mr. Ronnie G. Terrell)
P.O. Drawer 2037
Pecos, TX 79772
14 July 1998
F-70
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 64
OWNER/OCCUPANT QUESTIONNAIRE
General
1. Is the property or any adjoining property used for an industrial use?
yes
unk
However, of the two sites that were assessed on this property, one oil
no
injection well is located in the center of one site and immediately adjacent to the other site.
2. Has the property or any adjoining property been used for an industrial use in the past?
yes
unk
The site has always been used for agricultural or ranching purposes,
no
according the landowner.
3. Is the property or any adjoining property used, or has the property or any adjoining property
been used in the past, as a gasoline station, motor repair facility, commercial printing facility, dry
cleaners, photo developing laboratory, junkyard, or landfill, or as a waste treatment, storage,
disposal, processing, or recycling facility?
yes
no
unk
Land Issues
4. Are there currently or have there been previously, any damaged or discarded automotive or
industrial batteries, or pesticides, paints, or other chemicals in individual containers of greater
than 5 gallons (19L) in volume or 50 gallons (190L) on the aggregate, stored on or used at the
property or facility?
yes
no
unk
5. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any industrial drums (typically 55 gallons
(208L)) or sacks of chemicals located on the property or at the facility?
no
unk
According to the landowner, two 55-gallon drums of chemicals, which
yes
were used to treat the oil well by the Tretolite Company, were stored immediately adjacent to the
well for a couple of years, between 1-5 years.
6. Has fill dirt been brought onto the property that originated from a contaminated site or that is
unknown in origin?
yes
no
unk
7. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any pits, lagoons, or ponds located on the
property in connection with waste treatment or waste disposal?
no
unk
According to the landowner, a pit was associated with the oil well for
yes
waste material, such as salt water drilling mud and cement.
8. Is there currently, or has there been previously, any stained soil on the property?
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-71
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
no
unk
According to the landowner, stain soil could have been present at one
yes
time as a result of the oil activity on, or adjacent to, the site.
9. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any registered or unregistered storage
tanks (above or underground) located on the property?
yes
no
unk
10. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any vent pipes, fill pipes, or access ways
indicating a fill pipe protruding from the ground on the property or adjacent to any structure
located on the property?
yes
no
unk
Structural Issues
11. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any flooring, drains, or walls located
within the facility that are stained by substances other than water or are emitting foul odors?
yes
no
unk
Other Issues
12. If the property is served by a private well or non-public water system, have contaminants
been identified in the well or system that exceed guidelines applicable to the water system or has
the well been designated as contaminated by any government environmental/health agency?
yes
no
unk
13. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of environmental liens or
government notification relating to past or recurrent violations of environmental laws with
respect to the property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
14. Has the owner or occupant of the property been informed of the past or current existence of
hazardous substances or petroleum products or environmental violations with respect to the
property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
15. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of an environmental
assessment of the property or facility that indicated the presence of hazardous substances or
petroleum products on, or contamination of, the property or recommended further assessment of
the property?
yes
F-72
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
16. Does the owner or occupant of the property know of any past, threatened, or pending
lawsuits or administrative proceedings concerning a release or threatened release of any
hazardous substance or petroleum products involving the property by any owner or occupant of
the property?
yes
no
unk
17. Does the property discharge wastewater on or adjacent to the property other than stormwater
into a sanitary sewer system?
yes
no
unk
18. Have any hazardous substances or petroleum products, unidentified waste materials, tires,
automotive or industrial batteries or any other waste materials been dumped above grade, buried,
and/or burned on the property?
yes
no
unk
19. Is there a transformer, capacitor, or any hydraulic equipment for which there are any records
indicating the presence of PCBs?
yes
no
unk
PERSON(S) INTERVIEWED
On-site interview with Mr. Wesley Graves, Landowner
1195 Graves Rd.
Snyder, TX 79549
FORM COMPLETED
Sunday 26 April 1998 at 1100
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-73
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 65
OWNER/OCCUPANT QUESTIONNAIRE
General
1. Is the property or any adjoining property used for an industrial use?
yes
no
unk
2. Has the property or any adjoining property been used for an industrial use in the past?
yes
no
landowner.
unk
The site has always been used for agricultural purposes, according the
3. Is the property or any adjoining property used, or has the property or any adjoining property
been used in the past, as a gasoline station, motor repair facility, commercial printing facility, dry
cleaners, photo developing laboratory, junkyard, or landfill, or as a waste treatment, storage,
disposal, processing, or recycling facility?
yes
no
unk
Land Issues
4. Are there currently or have there been previously, any damaged or discarded automotive or
industrial batteries, or pesticides, paints, or other chemicals in individual containers of greater
than 5 gallons (19L) in volume or 50 gallons (190L) on the aggregate, stored on or used at the
property or facility?
yes
no
unk
5. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any industrial drums (typically 55 gallons
(208L)) or sacks of chemicals located on the property or at the facility?
yes
no
unk
6. Has fill dirt been brought onto the property that originated from a contaminated site or that is
unknown in origin?
yes
no
unk
7. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any pits, lagoons, or ponds located on the
property in connection with waste treatment or waste disposal?
yes
no
unk
8. Is there currently, or has there been previously, any stained soil on the property?
yes
F-74
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
9. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any registered or unregistered storage
tanks (above or underground) located on the property?
yes
no
unk
10. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any vent pipes, fill pipes, or access ways
indicating a fill pipe protruding from the ground on the property or adjacent to any structure
located on the property?
yes
no
unk
Structural Issues
11. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any flooring, drains, or walls located
within the facility that are stained by substances other than water or are emitting foul odors?
yes
no
unk
Other Issues
12. If the property is served by a private well or non-public water system, have contaminants
been identified in the well or system that exceed guidelines applicable to the water system or has
the well been designated as contaminated by any government environmental/health agency?
yes
no
unk
13. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of environmental liens or
government notification relating to past or recurrent violations of environmental laws with
respect to the property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
14. Has the owner or occupant of the property been informed of the past or current existence of
hazardous substances or petroleum products or environmental violations with respect to the
property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
15. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of an environmental
assessment of the property or facility that indicated the presence of hazardous substances or
petroleum products on, or contamination of, the property or recommended further assessment of
the property?
yes
no
unk
16. Does the owner or occupant of the property know of any past, threatened, or pending
lawsuits or administrative proceedings concerning a release or threatened release of any
hazardous substance or petroleum products involving the property by any owner or occupant of
the property?
yes
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-75
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
17. Does the property discharge wastewater on or adjacent to the property other than stormwater
into a sanitary sewer system?
yes
no
unk
18. Have any hazardous substances or petroleum products, unidentified waste materials, tires,
automotive or industrial batteries or any other waste materials been dumped above grade, buried,
and/or burned on the property?
yes
no
unk
19. Is there a transformer, capacitor, or any hydraulic equipment for which there are any records
indicating the presence of PCBs?
yes
no
unk
PERSON(S) INTERVIEWED
Telephone interview with Mr. Max VonRoeder, Landowner
Rt. 1, Box 82
Snyder, TX 79549
FORM COMPLETED
29 June 1998 at 0815
F-76
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 66
OWNER/OCCUPANT QUESTIONNAIRE
Questionnaire has not been completed. Landowner has not responded to mailed
questionnaire. No telephone number is known for the landowner.
PERSON(S) INTERVIEWED
Mr. C.C. Nunnaly, Landowner
Rt. 1, Box 109
O’Donnell, TX 79351-9510
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-77
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 67 OWNER/OCCUPANT QUESTIONNAIRE
General
1. Is the property or any adjoining property used for an industrial use?
yes
no
unk
2. Has the property or any adjoining property been used for an industrial use in the past?
yes
unk
The site has always been used for livestock grazing and ranching
no
purposes, according the landowner.
3. Is the property or any adjoining property used, or has the property or any adjoining property
been used in the past, as a gasoline station, motor repair facility, commercial printing facility, dry
cleaners, photo developing laboratory, junkyard, or landfill, or as a waste treatment, storage,
disposal, processing, or recycling facility?
yes
no
unk
Land Issues
4. Are there currently or have there been previously, any damaged or discarded automotive or
industrial batteries, or pesticides, paints, or other chemicals in individual containers of greater
than 5 gallons (19L) in volume or 50 gallons (190L) on the aggregate, stored on or used at the
property or facility?
yes
no
unk
5. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any industrial drums (typically 55 gallons
(208L)) or sacks of chemicals located on the property or at the facility?
yes
no
unk
6. Has fill dirt been brought onto the property that originated from a contaminated site or that is
unknown in origin?
yes
no
unk
7. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any pits, lagoons, or ponds located on the
property in connection with waste treatment or waste disposal?
yes
no
unk
8. Is there currently, or has there been previously, any stained soil on the property?
yes
F-78
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
9. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any registered or unregistered storage
tanks (above or underground) located on the property?
yes
no
unk
10. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any vent pipes, fill pipes, or access ways
indicating a fill pipe protruding from the ground on the property or adjacent to any structure
located on the property?
yes
no
unk
Structural Issues
11. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any flooring, drains, or walls located
within the facility that are stained by substances other than water or are emitting foul odors?
yes
no
unk
Other Issues
12. If the property is served by a private well or non-public water system, have contaminants
been identified in the well or system that exceed guidelines applicable to the water system or has
the well been designated as contaminated by any government environmental/health agency?
yes
no
unk
13. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of environmental liens or
government notification relating to past or recurrent violations of environmental laws with
respect to the property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
14. Has the owner or occupant of the property been informed of the past or current existence of
hazardous substances or petroleum products or environmental violations with respect to the
property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
15. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of an environmental
assessment of the property or facility that indicated the presence of hazardous substances or
petroleum products on, or contamination of, the property or recommended further assessment of
the property?
yes
no
unk
16. Does the owner or occupant of the property know of any past, threatened, or pending
lawsuits or administrative proceedings concerning a release or threatened release of any
hazardous substance or petroleum products involving the property by any owner or occupant of
the property?
yes
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-79
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
17. Does the property discharge wastewater on or adjacent to the property other than stormwater
into a sanitary sewer system?
yes
no
unk
18. Have any hazardous substances or petroleum products, unidentified waste materials, tires,
automotive or industrial batteries or any other waste materials been dumped above grade, buried,
and/or burned on the property?
yes
no
unk
19. Is there a transformer, capacitor, or any hydraulic equipment for which there are any records
indicating the presence of PCBs?
yes
no
unk
PERSON(S) INTERVIEWED
Telephone interview with Mr. Norman Clark, Landowner
412 Fall Creek
Richardson, TX 75080
972-699-7239 phone
FORM COMPLETED
2 July 1998 at 1215 Pacific Time
F-80
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 72
OWNER/OCCUPANT QUESTIONNAIRE
The landowner refused to participate in an interview or to answer this questionnaire. He
stated that he is no longer interested in participating in the RBTI project.
PERSON(S) TO BE INTERVIEWED
Telephone correspondence with Mr. W.A. Hickman, Landowner
Box 389
Blackwell, TX 79506
915-282-2531
FORM COMPLETED
29 June 1998 at 0800 Pacific Time
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-81
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 78
OWNER/OCCUPANT QUESTIONNAIRE
General
1. Is the property or any adjoining property used for an industrial use?
yes
no
unk
Oil wells exist on adjacent properties.
2. Has the property or any adjoining property been used for an industrial use in the past?
yes
unk
The site has always been used for livestock grazing and ranching
no
purposes, according the landowner.
3. Is the property or any adjoining property used, or has the property or any adjoining property
been used in the past, as a gasoline station, motor repair facility, commercial printing facility, dry
cleaners, photo developing laboratory, junkyard, or landfill, or as a waste treatment, storage,
disposal, processing, or recycling facility?
yes
no
unk
Land Issues
4. Are there currently or have there been previously, any damaged or discarded automotive or
industrial batteries, or pesticides, paints, or other chemicals in individual containers of greater
than 5 gallons (19L) in volume or 50 gallons (190L) on the aggregate, stored on or used at the
property or facility?
yes
no
unk
5. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any industrial drums (typically 55 gallons
(208L)) or sacks of chemicals located on the property or at the facility?
yes
no
unk
6. Has fill dirt been brought onto the property that originated from a contaminated site or that is
unknown in origin?
yes
no
unk
7. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any pits, lagoons, or ponds located on the
property in connection with waste treatment or waste disposal?
yes
no
unk
8. Is there currently, or has there been previously, any stained soil on the property?
yes
F-82
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
9. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any registered or unregistered storage
tanks (above or underground) located on the property?
yes
no
unk
10. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any vent pipes, fill pipes, or access ways
indicating a fill pipe protruding from the ground on the property or adjacent to any structure
located on the property?
yes
no
unk
Structural Issues
11. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any flooring, drains, or walls located
within the facility that are stained by substances other than water or are emitting foul odors?
yes
no
unk
Other Issues
12. If the property is served by a private well or non-public water system, have contaminants
been identified in the well or system that exceed guidelines applicable to the water system or has
the well been designated as contaminated by any government environmental/health agency?
yes
no
unk
13. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of environmental liens or
government notification relating to past or recurrent violations of environmental laws with
respect to the property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
14. Has the owner or occupant of the property been informed of the past or current existence of
hazardous substances or petroleum products or environmental violations with respect to the
property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
15. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of an environmental
assessment of the property or facility that indicated the presence of hazardous substances or
petroleum products on, or contamination of, the property or recommended further assessment of
the property?
yes
no
unk
16. Does the owner or occupant of the property know of any past, threatened, or pending
lawsuits or administrative proceedings concerning a release or threatened release of any
hazardous substance or petroleum products involving the property by any owner or occupant of
the property?
yes
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-83
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
17. Does the property discharge wastewater on or adjacent to the property other than stormwater
into a sanitary sewer system?
yes
no
unk
18. Have any hazardous substances or petroleum products, unidentified waste materials, tires,
automotive or industrial batteries or any other waste materials been dumped above grade, buried,
and/or burned on the property?
yes
no
unk
19. Is there a transformer, capacitor, or any hydraulic equipment for which there are any records
indicating the presence of PCBs?
yes
no
unk
PERSON(S) INTERVIEWED
Telephone interview with Mr. Dewayne Lindsey, Landowner
Box 4
Rankin, TX 79778
915-693-2577 phone
FORM COMPLETED
26 July 1998 at 1445 Pacific Time
F-84
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 79
OWNER/OCCUPANT QUESTIONNAIRE
General
1. Is the property or any adjoining property used for an industrial use?
yes
unk
An oil/gas well exists on the northwest portion of the property; however,
no
according to the landowner, "it does not yield much oil, just gas."
2. Has the property or any adjoining property been used for an industrial use in the past?
yes
unk
The site has always been used for livestock grazing and ranching
no
purposes, and according the landowner, native Americans occupied the property until
approximately 1918.
3. Is the property or any adjoining property used, or has the property or any adjoining property
been used in the past, as a gasoline station, motor repair facility, commercial printing facility, dry
cleaners, photo developing laboratory, junkyard, or landfill, or as a waste treatment, storage,
disposal, processing, or recycling facility?
yes
no
unk
Land Issues
4. Are there currently or have there been previously, any damaged or discarded automotive or
industrial batteries, or pesticides, paints, or other chemicals in individual containers of greater
than 5 gallons (19L) in volume or 50 gallons (190L) on the aggregate, stored on or used at the
property or facility?
yes
no
unk
5. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any industrial drums (typically 55 gallons
(208L)) or sacks of chemicals located on the property or at the facility?
yes
no
unk
6. Has fill dirt been brought onto the property that originated from a contaminated site or that is
unknown in origin?
yes
no
unk
7. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any pits, lagoons, or ponds located on the
property in connection with waste treatment or waste disposal?
yes
no
unk
8. Is there currently, or has there been previously, any stained soil on the property?
yes
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-85
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
9. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any registered or unregistered storage
tanks (above or underground) located on the property?
yes
unk
There is an approximate 10,000-gallon AST on the site, which may
no
contain approximately 8,000 gallons of oil.
10. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any vent pipes, fill pipes, or access ways
indicating a fill pipe protruding from the ground on the property or adjacent to any structure
located on the property?
yes
no
unk
Structural Issues
11. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any flooring, drains, or walls located
within the facility that are stained by substances other than water or are emitting foul odors?
yes
no
unk
Other Issues
12. If the property is served by a private well or non-public water system, have contaminants
been identified in the well or system that exceed guidelines applicable to the water system or has
the well been designated as contaminated by any government environmental/health agency?
yes
no
unk
13. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of environmental liens or
government notification relating to past or recurrent violations of environmental laws with
respect to the property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
14. Has the owner or occupant of the property been informed of the past or current existence of
hazardous substances or petroleum products or environmental violations with respect to the
property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
15. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of an environmental
assessment of the property or facility that indicated the presence of hazardous substances or
petroleum products on, or contamination of, the property or recommended further assessment of
the property?
yes
no
unk
16. Does the owner or occupant of the property know of any past, threatened, or pending
lawsuits or administrative proceedings concerning a release or threatened release of any
F-86
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
hazardous substance or petroleum products involving the property by any owner or occupant of
the property?
yes
no
unk
17. Does the property discharge wastewater on or adjacent to the property other than stormwater
into a sanitary sewer system?
yes
no
unk
18. Have any hazardous substances or petroleum products, unidentified waste materials, tires,
automotive or industrial batteries or any other waste materials been dumped above grade, buried,
and/or burned on the property?
yes
no
unk
19. Is there a transformer, capacitor, or any hydraulic equipment for which there are any records
indicating the presence of PCBs?
yes
no
unk
PERSON(S) INTERVIEWED
Telephone interview with Mr. Horace H. Linthicum, Landowner
Box 94
Barnhart, TX 76930
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-87
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 80
OWNER/OCCUPANT QUESTIONNAIRE
General
1. Is the property or any adjoining property used for an industrial use?
yes
site..
no
unk
Oil and gas wells currently exist within 0.5 mile to the northwest of the
2. Has the property or any adjoining property been used for an industrial use in the past?
yes
unk
The site has historically been used as ranchland, according to the
no
landowner. A dry hole was drilled on the site in approximately 1950; however, it never yielded
any oil or gas.
3. Is the property or any adjoining property used, or has the property or any adjoining property
been used in the past, as a gasoline station, motor repair facility, commercial printing facility, dry
cleaners, photo developing laboratory, junkyard, or landfill, or as a waste treatment, storage,
disposal, processing, or recycling facility?
yes
no
unk
Land Issues
4. Are there currently or have there been previously, any damaged or discarded automotive or
industrial batteries, or pesticides, paints, or other chemicals in individual containers of greater
than 5 gallons (19L) in volume or 50 gallons (190L) on the aggregate, stored on or used at the
property or facility?
yes
no
unk
5. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any industrial drums (typically 55 gallons
(208L)) or sacks of chemicals located on the property or at the facility?
yes
no
unk
6. Has fill dirt been brought onto the property that originated from a contaminated site or that is
unknown in origin?
yes
no
unk
7. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any pits, lagoons, or ponds located on the
property in connection with waste treatment or waste disposal?
yes
unk
According to the landowner, "slush" pits exist in association with the
no
oil/gas wells within 0.5 mile of the site. Pits are created as a result of drilling activity, and recirculated drilling mud and water are deposited adjacent to the drills and pumps.
F-88
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
8. Is there currently, or has there been previously, any stained soil on the property?
yes
no
unk
9. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any registered or unregistered storage
tanks (above or underground) located on the property?
yes
no
unk
10. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any vent pipes, fill pipes, or access ways
indicating a fill pipe protruding from the ground on the property or adjacent to any structure
located on the property?
yes
no
unk
Structural Issues
11. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any flooring, drains, or walls located
within the facility that are stained by substances other than water or are emitting foul odors?
yes
no
unk
Other Issues
12. If the property is served by a private well or non-public water system, have contaminants
been identified in the well or system that exceed guidelines applicable to the water system or has
the well been designated as contaminated by any government environmental/health agency?
yes
no
unk
13. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of environmental liens or
government notification relating to past or recurrent violations of environmental laws with
respect to the property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
14. Has the owner or occupant of the property been informed of the past or current existence of
hazardous substances or petroleum products or environmental violations with respect to the
property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
15. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of an environmental
assessment of the property or facility that indicated the presence of hazardous substances or
petroleum products on, or contamination of, the property or recommended further assessment of
the property?
yes
no
unk
16. Does the owner or occupant of the property know of any past, threatened, or pending
lawsuits or administrative proceedings concerning a release or threatened release of any
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-89
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
hazardous substance or petroleum products involving the property by any owner or occupant of
the property?
yes
no
unk
17. Does the property discharge wastewater on or adjacent to the property other than stormwater
into a sanitary sewer system?
yes
no
unk
18. Have any hazardous substances or petroleum products, unidentified waste materials, tires,
automotive or industrial batteries or any other waste materials been dumped above grade, buried,
and/or burned on the property?
yes
no
unk
19. Is there a transformer, capacitor, or any hydraulic equipment for which there are any records
indicating the presence of PCBs?
yes
no
unk
PERSON(S) INTERVIEWED
On-site interview with Mr. George W. Poage, Jr., Landowner
P. O. Box 106
Rankin, TX 79778
915-693-2609 phone
FORM COMPLETED
Thursday 23 April 1998 at 0900
F-90
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 81
OWNER/OCCUPANT QUESTIONNAIRE
Questionnaire has not been completed. Landowner has not responded to telephone calls or
mailed questionnaire.
PERSON(S) TO BE INTERVIEWED
Mr. Bill Ivey, Son of Landowner
710 East Sul Ross
Alpine, TX 78830
915-837-3830
915-837-1793
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-91
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 82
OWNER/OCCUPANT QUESTIONNAIRE
General
1. Is the property or any adjoining property used for an industrial use?
yes
no
unk
2. Has the property or any adjoining property been used for an industrial use in the past?
yes
no
unk
The site has always been used for pasture land, according the landowner.
3. Is the property or any adjoining property used, or has the property or any adjoining property
been used in the past, as a gasoline station, motor repair facility, commercial printing facility, dry
cleaners, photo developing laboratory, junkyard, or landfill, or as a waste treatment, storage,
disposal, processing, or recycling facility?
yes
no
unk
Land Issues
4. Are there currently or have there been previously, any damaged or discarded automotive or
industrial batteries, or pesticides, paints, or other chemicals in individual containers of greater
than 5 gallons (19L) in volume or 50 gallons (190L) on the aggregate, stored on or used at the
property or facility?
yes
no
unk
5. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any industrial drums (typically 55 gallons
(208L)) or sacks of chemicals located on the property or at the facility?
yes
no
unk
6. Has fill dirt been brought onto the property that originated from a contaminated site or that is
unknown in origin?
yes
no
unk
7. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any pits, lagoons, or ponds located on the
property in connection with waste treatment or waste disposal?
yes
no
unk
8. Is there currently, or has there been previously, any stained soil on the property?
yes
F-92
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
9. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any registered or unregistered storage
tanks (above or underground) located on the property?
yes
no
unk
10. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any vent pipes, fill pipes, or access ways
indicating a fill pipe protruding from the ground on the property or adjacent to any structure
located on the property?
yes
no
unk
Structural Issues
11. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any flooring, drains, or walls located
within the facility that are stained by substances other than water or are emitting foul odors?
yes
no
unk
Other Issues
12. If the property is served by a private well or non-public water system, have contaminants
been identified in the well or system that exceed guidelines applicable to the water system or has
the well been designated as contaminated by any government environmental/health agency?
yes
no
unk
13. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of environmental liens or
government notification relating to past or recurrent violations of environmental laws with
respect to the property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
14. Has the owner or occupant of the property been informed of the past or current existence of
hazardous substances or petroleum products or environmental violations with respect to the
property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
15. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of an environmental
assessment of the property or facility that indicated the presence of hazardous substances or
petroleum products on, or contamination of, the property or recommended further assessment of
the property?
yes
no
unk
16. Does the owner or occupant of the property know of any past, threatened, or pending
lawsuits or administrative proceedings concerning a release or threatened release of any
hazardous substance or petroleum products involving the property by any owner or occupant of
the property?
yes
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-93
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
17. Does the property discharge wastewater on or adjacent to the property other than stormwater
into a sanitary sewer system?
yes
no
unk
18. Have any hazardous substances or petroleum products, unidentified waste materials, tires,
automotive or industrial batteries or any other waste materials been dumped above grade, buried,
and/or burned on the property?
yes
no
unk
19. Is there a transformer, capacitor, or any hydraulic equipment for which there are any records
indicating the presence of PCBs?
yes
no
unk
PERSON(S) INTERVIEWED
Telephone interview with Mr. Andy Freudenrich, Landowner
P. O. Box 162
Imperial, TX 79743
915-536-2385 phone
FORM COMPLETED
29 June 1998 at 1435 Pacific Time
F-94
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 88
OWNER/OCCUPANT QUESTIONNAIRE
General
1. Is the property or any adjoining property used for an industrial use?
yes
no
unk
2. Has the property or any adjoining property been used for an industrial use in the past?
yes
no
unk
The site has always been used for grazing land, according the landowner.
3. Is the property or any adjoining property used, or has the property or any adjoining property
been used in the past, as a gasoline station, motor repair facility, commercial printing facility, dry
cleaners, photo developing laboratory, junkyard, or landfill, or as a waste treatment, storage,
disposal, processing, or recycling facility?
yes
no
unk
Land Issues
4. Are there currently or have there been previously, any damaged or discarded automotive or
industrial batteries, or pesticides, paints, or other chemicals in individual containers of greater
than 5 gallons (19L) in volume or 50 gallons (190L) on the aggregate, stored on or used at the
property or facility?
yes
no
unk
5. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any industrial drums (typically 55 gallons
(208L)) or sacks of chemicals located on the property or at the facility?
yes
no
unk
6. Has fill dirt been brought onto the property that originated from a contaminated site or that is
unknown in origin?
yes
no
unk
7. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any pits, lagoons, or ponds located on the
property in connection with waste treatment or waste disposal?
yes
no
unk
8. Is there currently, or has there been previously, any stained soil on the property?
yes
no
unk
9. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any registered or unregistered storage
tanks (above or underground) located on the property?
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-95
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
yes
no
unk
10. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any vent pipes, fill pipes, or access ways
indicating a fill pipe protruding from the ground on the property or adjacent to any structure
located on the property?
yes
no
unk
Structural Issues
11. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any flooring, drains, or walls located
within the facility that are stained by substances other than water or are emitting foul odors?
yes
no
unk
Other Issues
12. If the property is served by a private well or non-public water system, have contaminants
been identified in the well or system that exceed guidelines applicable to the water system or has
the well been designated as contaminated by any government environmental/health agency?
yes
no
unk
13. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of environmental liens or
government notification relating to past or recurrent violations of environmental laws with
respect to the property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
14. Has the owner or occupant of the property been informed of the past or current existence of
hazardous substances or petroleum products or environmental violations with respect to the
property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
15. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of an environmental
assessment of the property or facility that indicated the presence of hazardous substances or
petroleum products on, or contamination of, the property or recommended further assessment of
the property?
yes
no
unk
16. Does the owner or occupant of the property know of any past, threatened, or pending
lawsuits or administrative proceedings concerning a release or threatened release of any
hazardous substance or petroleum products involving the property by any owner or occupant of
the property?
yes
F-96
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
17. Does the property discharge wastewater on or adjacent to the property other than stormwater
into a sanitary sewer system?
yes
no
unk
18. Have any hazardous substances or petroleum products, unidentified waste materials, tires,
automotive or industrial batteries or any other waste materials been dumped above grade, buried,
and/or burned on the property?
yes
no
unk
19. Is there a transformer, capacitor, or any hydraulic equipment for which there are any records
indicating the presence of PCBs?
yes
no
unk
PERSON(S) INTERVIEWED
On-site interview with Mr. Jim McCoy, Landowner
P. O. Box 82
Big Lake, TX 76932
915-884-2222 phone
FORM COMPLETED
Friday 24 April 1998 at 1130
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-97
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
Site 89
OWNER/OCCUPANT QUESTIONNAIRE
General
1. Is the property or any adjoining property used for an industrial use?
yes
no
unk
2. Has the property or any adjoining property been used for an industrial use in the past?
yes
unk
The site has been used for livestock grazing for the past 70 years,
no
according the landowner.
3. Is the property or any adjoining property used, or has the property or any adjoining property
been used in the past, as a gasoline station, motor repair facility, commercial printing facility, dry
cleaners, photo developing laboratory, junkyard, or landfill, or as a waste treatment, storage,
disposal, processing, or recycling facility?
yes
no
unk
Land Issues
4. Are there currently or have there been previously, any damaged or discarded automotive or
industrial batteries, or pesticides, paints, or other chemicals in individual containers of greater
than 5 gallons (19L) in volume or 50 gallons (190L) on the aggregate, stored on or used at the
property or facility?
yes
no
unk
5. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any industrial drums (typically 55 gallons
(208L)) or sacks of chemicals located on the property or at the facility?
yes
no
unk
6. Has fill dirt been brought onto the property that originated from a contaminated site or that is
unknown in origin?
yes
no
unk
7. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any pits, lagoons, or ponds located on the
property in connection with waste treatment or waste disposal?
yes
no
unk
8. Is there currently, or has there been previously, any stained soil on the property?
yes
F-98
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
9. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any registered or unregistered storage
tanks (above or underground) located on the property?
yes
no
unk
10. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any vent pipes, fill pipes, or access ways
indicating a fill pipe protruding from the ground on the property or adjacent to any structure
located on the property?
yes
no
unk
Structural Issues
11. Are there currently, or have there been previously, any flooring, drains, or walls located
within the facility that are stained by substances other than water or are emitting foul odors?
yes
no
unk
Other Issues
12. If the property is served by a private well or non-public water system, have contaminants
been identified in the well or system that exceed guidelines applicable to the water system or has
the well been designated as contaminated by any government environmental/health agency?
yes
no
unk
13. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of environmental liens or
government notification relating to past or recurrent violations of environmental laws with
respect to the property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
14. Has the owner or occupant of the property been informed of the past or current existence of
hazardous substances or petroleum products or environmental violations with respect to the
property or any facility located on the property?
yes
no
unk
15. Does the owner or occupant of the property have any knowledge of an environmental
assessment of the property or facility that indicated the presence of hazardous substances or
petroleum products on, or contamination of, the property or recommended further assessment of
the property?
yes
no
unk
16. Does the owner or occupant of the property know of any past, threatened, or pending
lawsuits or administrative proceedings concerning a release or threatened release of any
hazardous substance or petroleum products involving the property by any owner or occupant of
the property?
yes
no
unk
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000
F-99
Realistic Bomber Training Initiative
17. Does the property discharge wastewater on or adjacent to the property other than stormwater
into a sanitary sewer system?
yes
no
unk
18. Have any hazardous substances or petroleum products, unidentified waste materials, tires,
automotive or industrial batteries or any other waste materials been dumped above grade, buried,
and/or burned on the property?
yes
no
unk
19. Is there a transformer, capacitor, or any hydraulic equipment for which there are any records
indicating the presence of PCBs?
yes
no
unk
PERSON(S) INTERVIEWED
On-site interview with Mr. Bill Schneeman, Landowner
1005 Plaza
Big Lake, TX 76932
915-884-2400 phone
FORM COMPLETED
Friday 24 April 1998 at 0900
F-100
Final Environmental Baseline Survey
March 2000