|
|
|
|
|
- The meeting was held at the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation Offices in Anchorage, AK. In attendance were:
Name Affiliation Elim Yoom ADEC Kevin Oates EPA Patty Vessel RAB Community Member Rich Vessel RAB Community Member Jenna Mueller* USFWS Cathy Villa Community Co-Chair Mary Grisco Anchorage Community Member Mike Mitchell Anchorage Community Member Langston Walker* EFA, NW Doug Murray* EFA, NW Mark Murphy * Navy Co-Chair Patty Kelly EFA, NW Tim Roy Aleut Enterprise Corporation JoAnn Grady Grady & Associates Ron Scrudato* RAB Technical Advisor Chris Gates The Aleut Corporation Chris Riggio A/PAI Inc. Participated by telephone Opening Remarks:
Cathy Villa opened the meeting at 7:05 p.m. in Anchorage. She said the primary intent of the meeting was to establish an agenda for the next formal RAB meeting to be held March 21, 2001, at the Hilton Hotel, Anchorage, 7:00 p.m.
Cathy stated that after review of surveys sent out to the RAB community members regarding a technical advisor, the RAB wants to retain Ron Scrudato. She said that the most efficient way to get him back on contract is to utilize the existing statement of work and RAB application. She clarified that with Patty Kelly. Patty stated that because the RAB community members and the Chief of Naval Operations already approved the existing statement of work and RAB application, EFA, NW has approval to contract with Ron Scrudato.
Adak Community:
Patty Vessel said that there was much snow on Adak this year, other than that, not much has been going on. They are gearing up for the field season now. Tim Roy said he talked with the CSO and he is getting a list of activities that they plan to do. Jenna Mueller said that regular plane service has been a problem. She said the cannery has about 80 people on the island and they hope to process a 1,000,000 pounds of fish per week. Tim Roy said that the Air Force is pushing the Federal Aviation Administration to take military flight approaches. The planes are operating on 1,500-foot ceilings now, an FAA commercial flight regulation since the Navy equipment had been removed and the approved flight approaches expired.BECT Meeting held January 8:
Cathy Villa said that the Navy presented much information related to petroleum cleanup plans and that it would be useful to have some of that information presented at the next RAB meeting. She said the presentations by Langston Walker, and the contractors, URS, Bristol and Hart Crowser, were interesting and informative. Cathy said she emailed information to the island. Tim Roy asked her to email her information to him. She agreed.
She also asked Kevin Oates to discuss EPA's position regarding the UXO dispute resolution. Kevin said that the OU B process has very active participation by stakeholders. He said that a brief presentation by the Federal Facility Agreement partners regarding the end of the dispute resolution and where it's going from here would be useful.
A question was raised concerning regulatory oversight of the petroleum sites now that the dispute has ended. Elim Yoon said that the end of the dispute resolution process isn't related to the regulatory oversight of petroleum. The dispute was strictly an OU B issue. Kevin agreed. He said at the last BECT meeting there was a brainstorming discussion raised by the Navy on approaches to streamline the petroleum cleanup process. Right now they're following a CERCLA process, and there were discussions regarding how it would work if it were turned over to the state. The state law is the applicable law for petroleum cleanups. Whatever process is used, there would be public comment and review. Nothing has changed; there is not a shift in the Federal Facility Agreement. Mark Murphy said that additional discussions regarding the best approach for the petroleum process will be discussed at the next BECT meeting in March.
RAB Roundtable:
Cathy said the Department of Defense sponsored a RAB Roundtable. Community members from across the state were invited to attend. She said the DOD has a huge investment in cleanup in Alaska and they are beginning to communicate very well. They're working on it, and she said the role of the Adak RAB is to make sure the community voices are heard. She said that is the benefit of the RAB. She said she would present more information at the next RAB. She said she would send information to Adak. She has forwarded emails to Agafon Krukoff.Diving in Finger Bay:
Cathy Villa asked about the diving in Finger Bay as it relates to OU B. Mark Murphy stated that the contractor is writing standard operating procedures for diving operations based on the last OUB project team meeting. It will be executed this field season at Finger Bay and Sweeper Cove. The standard operating procedures will be made available as soon as they are in the work plan. Chris Gates noted that there are 3 to 4 transects that they performed that may not have to be repeated. Mark said that there are specific data quality objectives that must be maintained for the UXO investigation and definitive location data. He said that the Navy would look at it, but he didn't think there was much information that will be useful without location data.
Petroleum:
Chris Gates asked about the status of Arctic Acres. Langston Walker said that the recovery system was shut down last November. It was a monitored natural attenuation site and product was found. Product was found and it increased over time. When it was shut down in November, approximately 13 gallons per month was being recovered. He said, in accordance with the OU A ROD, it will become a free product recovery site, and it is slated to be investigated further this summer. Tim Roy said that the plume is shown bigger in the Comprehensive Monitoring Plan than it is being identified. Langston said that if there are problems identified, the ROD directs us to go back and do further investigation at that site. Arctic Acres is a good example of how the process works. Chris Gates asked if they were trying to find the source, it appears different than assumed. Langston said, that's part of the investigative process. Chris asked if that was going to be true for NORPAC Hill. Langston said that an investigation would be performed at NORPAC Hill also.
Chris asked if everyone bought into the cleanup standard of pumping petroleum at a ½ gallon per every 1,000 gallons of water. He stated that those standards can be manipulated by how much water you pump. He further stated that they can be manipulated by how much oil you recover. Kevin Oates stated that Chris may have been confusing performance standards with cleanup standards. He said the whole point of the performance standard was to determine at what point there were diminishing returns, or cost effectiveness, with the technology used. Kevin stated if it gets to that point, the ROD kicks it into something else. He said that it's not in anyone's best interest to manipulate the performance standard, since the changed approaches will cost more money. The Navy would have to spend more money on another technology if the existing technology reached that point and cleanup standards were not reached. The cleanup standards are based on Alaska groundwater standards. Chris stated that if that was the premise that you draw a lot of water into the well by drawing it in quickly. Elim Yoon stated that there is absolutely no benefit to drawing the water in quickly. It's in the Navy's benefit to remove as much free product as possible. The wells depress the water table, and the oil will follow the water. The oil will not stay behind, it will be pulled into the well. Kevin also noted that there is a cool down period in the process. That is, the Navy must do extensive monitoring over the course of a year for any rebound effect. He said wherever there is product or a sheen, the systems are run to keep them away from surface water.
Chris said there are products in the streams. Langston said that should not be happening. He said there were problems in Sweeper Creek and Airport Ditch, they are boomed. Tim Roy stated that the power plant stream was a problem. Langston stated that they optimized the power plant, after that was done, the person operating it left an absorbent boom in the wrong location and it caused discharge into the stream. The water level was increased. That has been fixed and it's operating fine now. The malfunction allowed the water table to rise. The water level decreased once it was fixed and it's operating as it should be. Chris said they have photographs and asked Langston if he wanted them. Langston said he did. He also pointed out that those are interim actions at those particular sites. A final remedy is not in place. He said the petroleum cleanup process is pretty involved. He said you can be assured that the end product will be protective of human health and the environment.
Chris wondered why the endpoints for the dissolved phase were agreed to for cleanup. Langston stated that sentinel wells are monitored for rebound effects and the systems are in place and ready to go back online. Chris clarified, he was wondering about the 75 years. Langston said that's not the focus, that the remedies are being evaluated. Elim pointed out that monitored natural attenuation is one alternative considered in the focused feasibility studies, others might include source removal or a combination. She clarified that the focus is not on 75 years, but the petroleum cleanup. Kevin stated that the Navy has been taking into consideration the reduction of discharge into the POTW and the power draw on the island. He said he noticed some very interesting self-contained units last summer, some of them worked, some of them didn't. He said that's why the Navy performs treatability studies, and they plan to continue to pursue effective cleanup systems with a fairly aggressive schedule this year.
Jesse Morgan:
Cathy Villa asked if the Navy interviewed Jesse Morgan. Doug Murray said his interview with Mr. Morgan had just concluded a few hours before this RAB. Chris asked if the conversation was taped and would it be available. Doug assured him a tape would be placed in the information repository. Doug said the interview fleshed out some of the details of what Mr. Morgan had disclosed in his September 2000 letter. With respect to deep sea dumping, Mr. Morgan reported that he was responsible for loading and dumping 2 barges of unserviceable projectiles. He didn't have a compass or know the distance from shore where the dumping took place; he did tell the Navy that he was out of site of landfall, and straight out of Kuluk Bay. Mr. Morgan also reported on the on-island disposal of approximately 20 rounds of 105mm projectiles filled with mustard gas and lewisite. Doug then described the process used and how Mr. Morgan erected a fence around it afterwards. He was unable to pinpoint the location based on maps Doug had provided since he had not seen any maps of the island before the interview. He did say it was in the Lake Jean area, however.
Chris Gates said this was very important information. He also asked about work the Navy and Army were working on together to put together a literature research. He wanted to know what the archival records show. Doug said that the Navy commissioned a literature research last year. That report was published in September 2000 and it is in the site record and repositories. The only new revelation concerned the final disposition of the 1-ton chemical agent containers, being traced back to Fort Richardson in Alaska.
Chris asked when it was placed in the site file. Doug reported that the file had been provided to URS for filing and that he would follow up on it. Chris remarked how distressing that was because of the number of sites. Mark Murphy stated that did look at the sites, and the document is a summary. It does not contain all the sources of information that they already looked at in the past. They were specifically asked not to repeat existing information. Chris asked if there was a work analysis log. Doug said that was precisely identified, and it is part of the report.
Adak Repositories:
Tim Roy stated there is much information missing in the Adak repository. He noticed that as far back as last September. Cathy Villa stated that when she left the island in September, the repository was up to date. Tim said that there are documents missing. Chris Gates said that he has run into the same difficulties in Anchorage. Mark Murphy asked if they had specific documents to let him know because it's difficult to work off of nebulous information. Mark stated that it's the Navy's intention to get the information to the repositories for availability. If there are specific documents that are missing, there is an 800 number to call, there is email, and there is mail. He said it's easier to work off of specifics. None were presented, however it was appreciated that the avenues are available to get information.Focused Feasibility Studies:
Chris Gates asked about the status of the focused feasibility studies. Langston Walker stated they were under review by the Navy. Chris also asked about the master schedule. Mark stated that the Navy is working on the master schedule. He said it's the Navy's plan to have it to the agencies for the next BECT meeting. Chris asked if there was any way possible to expedite that to the island. Mark said he's aware of its importance, and the Navy is working to get it out.OU B Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study:
Mark stated that the Draft RI/FS is on the street right now. Chris Gates noted that he did not receive it. Mark said it was fairly widely distributed to the OU B project team. Elim stated that TAC was on the distribution list. Chris asked if the no further action sites were discussed. Mark said yes. Chris asked whether the minefields were discussed in the document. Mark stated that the minefields were not investigated last summer and is not in the RI/FS in great detail. The Preliminary Assessment Report has the detailed discussion regarding minefields. Chris asked whether that report would be made available. Mark said that it was finalized last September and that it's in the repository. Elim noted that TAC was on the distribution list for the document.
Chris asked if there was agreement with the agencies and the Navy regarding the no further action UXO sites. Kevin stated that EPA agrees with the recommendations, however there is no record of decision. Kevin stated that there would be a public comment period prior to a record of decision. Mark added that the recommendations have come out of the OU B project team process which includes TAC, A/PIA, USFW and community representatives.
Upcoming Field Season:
Mark Murphy stated that there would be substantial UXO investigative and clearance work. There will also be significant petroleum work this summer.EKI Report:
Cathy asked Chris for a status of the EKI Report. Chris said they met with the Navy and discussed the report; he was not present at the meeting. Mark stated that the Navy met with TAC and the Navy will provide comments on the EKI report on March 9. Cathy asked if the document was going to be made available in the repositories. Mark stated that the availability of the document is up to TAC; it's not a Navy document.Upcoming RAB Meeting Agenda:
Cathy asked that the following be discussed at the next RAB meeting:
Administrative Issues 30 minutes TAPP Grant BECT Meeting of Mar 21 Petroleum Sites 1 hour FFS Presentation Upcoming Field Season OU "B" Presentation 30 minutes RI/FS Report Summary Plans for Upcoming Field Season
BACKGROUND INFORMATION | ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING | BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE | ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION | UNEXPLODED ORDNANCE ISSUES | CHEMICAL AND PETROLEUM CLEANUP | GLOSSARY OF TERMS | ADAK MAPS | INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS | WEBSITE MAP | | WHAT'S NEW? | NEWSLETTERS & FACT SHEETS | TECHNICAL DOCUMENTS | RESTORATION ADVISORY BOARD MINUTES | WHERE TO GET MORE INFORMATION | INFORMATION REPOSITORY | LINKS OF INTEREST | HOME