RAB Meeting Notes template

A view of Downtown Adak, overlooking Sweeper Cove

April 12, 2005

The meeting was held at the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) office in Anchorage and EFA NW office in Poulsbo, Washington, as well as telephone connections to Sitka, Alaska; Port Orchard, Washington; and San Diego, California. The following people were in attendance:

Name	Affiliation	Location
Violet Pearl	Community Co-Chair	Anchorage, AK
Mark Wicklein	Navy Co-Chair	Poulsbo, WA
Jason Weigle	ADEC	Anchorage, AK
Thomas Krantz	USFWS	Sitka, AK
Mary Grisco	RAB Community Member	Anchorage, AK
Michael Mitchell	RAB Community Member	Anchorage, AK
Cathy Villa	RAB Community Member	Anchorage, AK
Jim Brown	Navy	Poulsbo, WA
Mark Murphy	Navy	Port Orchard, WA
JoAnn Grady	Grady & Associates	Anchorage, AK
Bill Rohrer	URS	San Diego, CA
Mary Lou Sullivan	URS	Poulsbo, WA

Welcome and Opening Remarks:

Violet Pearl suggested that Mark Wicklein chair the meeting. Mark Wicklein called the meeting to order at approximately 7:10 p.m. (Anchorage time). There were no participants on the phone from Adak. With the lack of attendance from Adak, there were not enough community RAB members present to approve the September 20, 2004 RAB meeting minutes. Therefore, the approval of these minutes will be delayed until the next formal RAB meeting.

Mark Wicklein proceeded to the next item on the agenda, the summary of planned 2005 field season activities.

2005 Field Season Update

The 2005 field season update was presented primarily by Mark Wicklein, with some additional information provided by Jim Brown. The presentation generally followed the material presented in the printed 2005 Field Season Update, which had been provided to RAB members before the meeting (in the mailed RAB information packets).

Marine Monitoring
A continuation of the Navy's marine monitoring program is planned for the summer of 2005. Mobilization is planned for the first week in July, and the field effort should take three to five days to complete. Two or three people will be on-island to complete this work.

A report summarizing the field effort and results of the investigation will be available late in 2005.

Cathy Villa had a number of questions concerning the marine sampling effort. She asked what was being sampled. Jason Weigle replied that blue mussels and rock sole were the selected shellfish and fish, respectively, that would be sampled (as in previous years). Cathy also wanted to know if halibut or flat fish were being sampled. Mark Wicklein replied that halibut were not being sampled, and that rock sole were chosen to represent flat, bottom-feeding fish. Cathy also wanted to know where the samples would be collected. Jim Brown explained that trawl lines have been established from previous sampling events using Global Positioning System (GPS), and these lines would be repeated in an effort to collect fish from the same areas. He also said that blue mussel beds that have been sampled before will also be sampled this summer. The sample stations where shellfish/fish will be collected from are located throughout Sweeper Cove, and as far north in Kuluk Bay as Palisades Landfill. Cathy also wanted to know if the results from previous sampling events would be reported in the 2005 summary report. Both Jason Weigle and Jim Brown replied yes, that would be the case. Jason also stated that the 2004 summary report contained a summary of all previous year's sampling results as well (and is available on adakupdate.com and in the information repositories, in addition to the summary in the September 20, 2004 RAB minutes).
Sampling at SWMU 17
Sediment sampling will be performed in the summer of 2005 near SWMU 17 (Power Plant No. 3). The latest results for this site are from 1998 and updated information is necessary to include in the Site Characterization / Risk Assessment (SC / RA) report for that site.

This work will be performed by URS, using the same field staff that will be conducting the marine monitoring.

The draft SA / RA report for this site will be completed by October 2005.
Landfill Restoration
Some restoration work is planned for Roberts and White Alice landfills. The work will consist of some minor grading and reseeding of selected areas. The field effort is planned for early summer, either in late June or early July, and should be completed in one to two weeks. There may be as many as 10 people on-island to complete this work.

Cathy Villa asked if there was a particular reason that the grass seed did not grow on the landfills. Jim Brown speculated that the seed used may have been misapplied, or it may have been old seed. The seed could have been affected by wind. The topsoil used was from on-island barrow pits, and was the same source area that provided soil cover that supported successful seed growth elsewhere.
Annual Monitoring and Institutional Control (IC) Inspections
The annual groundwater and landfill monitoring is planned for early September. The field effort will take two to three weeks to complete and will utilize a crew of eight.

During this same time frame, the Navy will be conducting the annual institutional control (IC) site inspections. As part of the IC inspections, as in the previous two years, the Navy will be conducting interviews with local residents and other individuals on the island in order to determine the effectiveness of the IC Awareness training. Mark Wicklein asked for Adak residents / visitors to cooperate in this effort. The information collected will be used to help the Navy update / improve the IC Awareness program.

Jim Brown stated that the purpose of the IC site inspections is to ensure that the current land use remains consistent with the IC in place (for example, areas with commercial / industrial use restrictions do not have housing units built there). Cathy Villa asked how people were selected to participate in the interviews. Jim said that people were interviewed in a random fashion, with the focus of the survey questions phrased to try to gauge how familiar people are with Adak's IC Awareness Plan.
MEC Investigation and Cleanup
No MEC-related remediation work is planned for the 2005 field season. The Navy is planning to initiate Remedial Design activities, including a site visit to Adak Island, in preparation for execution of a removal action during the 2006 field season. The site that will be visited is RG-01, a 40 mm grenade range in the Access Restricted Area by Lake Andrew (aka Parcel 4). This site visit is currently planned for July or August. It is anticipated that a team of five contractor personnel would be required to participate in this site visit. Because contractual mechanisms for execution of the remedial design efforts are not yet in place, the time frame for the site visit is subject to change.
Free-Product Recovery
TetraTech (TTEC) is measuring and removing free-product from the Tanker Shed, NMCB and South of Runway 18-36 sites. In addition, oil-absorbent boom is being maintained at four locations on-island.

Field work for this contract is scheduled for completion in July 2005. However, if endpoints are not reached by that time, free product recovery efforts will be extended. One person for one week a month is required for this project.

Cathy Villa asked how much free product had been recovered last year. Mark Wicklein responded that a total of 20-25 gallons of fuel have been recovered since last August.

Status of Closure for 19 Petroleum Release Sites

Under the Operable Unit (OU) A Record of Decision (ROD) signed in 2000, 46 petroleum release sites were selected for further action. The selected remedies included: limited soil removal at 12 sites; limited groundwater monitoring at 8 sites; monitored natural attenuation at 11 sites; and free product recovery at 14 sites.

Of the 46 petroleum release sites, the Navy has completed cleanups at 19 sites and has prepared the necessary documentation recommending either closure or no further response action planned (NFRAP). According to Alaska State guidance, sites covered by institutional controls cannot be fully closed out until the IC is removed, even if the site meets cleanup goals. For these sites, a NFRAP status is provided. An example of this would be sites located in the downtown area where chemically-impacted soil has been removed, but commercial / industrial land use restrictions remain in place. Of the 19 sites, the Navy is recommending full closure for 1 site and NFRAP for the remaining 18 sites.

The closure report for the 19 sites is currently under review by ADEC. A copy has also been sent to The Aleut Corporation (TAC) for their review, since all 19 sites are on land they received as part of the property transfer. When final, a copy of the 19-site closure report will be posted on the Adak web site and hard copies placed in the repositories (on Adak and at University of Alaska, Anchorage library).

Jason Weigle said that he has drafted a letter of agreement for ADEC that the Navy will receive shortly. He also stated that the Navy was correct in stating that formal closure of a site cannot occur until IC's are released. Jason stated that there is an obvious difference between active remediation activities and the long-term monitoring (LTM) / operations & maintenance (O & M) phase of a project; but as long as legal mechanisms are still in place (ICs), the site cannot be closed.

Partial Delisting Update
As Jim Brown has discussed previously (during the April 14, 2004 RAB meeting), the Navy is moving forward with partial delisting of OU A sites and OU B sites located outside of Parcel 4. The partial delisting will be geographical (sites outside Parcel 4) and will address soils and surface water at sites meeting the following delisting criteria:
- No further response is required at a site or a portion of a site
- All cleanup goals have been achieved (media specific)
- The cleaned site or portion of a site is deemed to be protective of human health and the environment
The partial delisting will cover approximately 50 or so OU A sites and about 140 OU B sites. There are a few OU A and OU B sites located outside the boundary of Parcel 4 that are not complete, and will not be included in the partial delisting.

The current schedule is to have a draft close out report ready for agency review by mid-June. Once the report has been reviewed and approved by the agencies, EPA will then take the lead and prepare a Notice of Intent of Partial Deletion (NOIPD). The NOIPD will be posted in the Federal Register with the prescribed 30-day public comment period. During the public comment period, a copy of the close out report, along with supporting documentation, will be available for review at the local repositories. At the conclusion of the comment period, a responsiveness summary will be prepared and placed in the repository with the final close out report. The final action is the publication on the Notice Of Partial Deletion (NOPD) in the Federal Register.

Mr. Brown reiterated a few points that he had made previously, at the April 2004 RAB presentation, regarding the planned partial delisting:
1. On-going CERCLA activities do not cease when a site is de-listed or partially de-listed. O & M measures and other actions specified in the ROD continue beyond site deletion. For example: groundwater and landfill monitoring, institutional control inspections, annual reporting, marine monitoring, and 5-year reviews will all continue.
2. Secondly, once a site has been deleted or partially deleted, it can still be put back on the NPL if there is a "significant release" at the site. Also, deletion does not preclude future actions under CERCLA at a de-listed site (that is to say further investigations if necessary, additional cleanups, monitoring, etc.).
This is a partial delisting. The Navy will continue its efforts in meeting cleanup goals at all sites and eventually move towards final delisting and full site closure.

Cathy Villa asked what the advantage was to delisting a site. Jim Brown responded that removing a site from the NPL (which typically lists the "worst" sites in the nation) may remove some of the stigma associated with such a listing. This, in turn, may have some advantages related to economic development. Mike Mitchell then asked when the Navy might expect agency comments back on the delisting document. Mr. Brown responded that it may be late July or August before the Navy receives comments (allowing for time to complete the document, provide for 30-day review, and extensions if necessary). Mr. Brown said it might be September or October before the NOIPD is posted in the Federal Register. Since the process, at that time, will be managed by EPA, Kevin Oates would be able to provide a better idea of the schedule. Jason Weigle said that, after the NOIPD, it may be another 3 months before the NOPD appears in the Federal Register.
OU B-1 ROD Amendment Informal / Formal Dispute and Status of OU - B Ordnance Cleanup
Mark Murphy gave a brief summary of the status of Adak's OU B-1 cleanup. Some of the OU B-1 sites that were scheduled to be transferred were instead moved to the Navy-retained Restricted Area, known as Parcel 4. As a result of this change, the likely anticipated land use shifted from potential residential or unrestricted land use to wildlife refuge use only. Therefore, the Navy is proposing to change the selected remedy for these sites to technology aided visual surface clearance vs. 4 ft. deep clearance of target areas currently required by the OU B-1 ROD.

In September of 2004, the Navy notified EPA and ADEC that they would prepare an amendment to the OU B-1 ROD, describing the surface clearance approach and delineating the aspects of this approach that provide sufficient protection for the anticipated use of the land as a wildlife refuge.

In December of 2004, the Navy sent the OU B-1 ROD amendment to EPA and ADEC. Each agency had a number of issues with the ROD amendment, which are covered in detail in the material provided in the RAB packet mailed out prior to the meeting. In the RAB packet, the following materials are present: EPA and ADEC comments on the OU B-1 ROD amendment; EPA and ADEC comments on the After Action report, covering field work conducted during the summer of 2004; and the Navy's response to agency comments received on the 2004 After Action report.

The Navy, EPA and ADEC have been in informal dispute since February 2005. It is possible that the dispute may be elevated to a level beyond the Project Managers and their supervisors. Since the dispute involves national policy / program issues, a higher level of management may need to become involved in a formal dispute. If and when the OU B-1 ROD amendment is agreed to and the informal / formal dispute runs its course, there will be a period of public review and public meetings for the proposed ROD amendment.

Cathy Villa asked if anyone from the community of Adak was on the OU B Project Team. Mark Murphy stated that the OU B Project Team has not had a meeting since March of 2004, when the agencies met to review the Work Plan for the summer 2004 field work. There is a tentatively scheduled Project Team meeting for April/May of 2005 to resolve comments on the After Action report. There has been no Project Team meeting as part of the informal dispute process thus far, and no meetings are planned for the future.

Mike Mitchell asked for a brief summary of the different parties' positions on the OU B-1 ROD amendment. Mr. Murphy stated that it was the Navy's position that the anticipated land use has changed from when the original ROD was signed, and that surface clearance is sufficiently protective for use as a wildlife refuge. Jason Weigle commented that, while the status of the land to be transferred may have changed, ADEC was not convinced about the overall protectiveness of surface clearance and associated IC's. Mr. Weigle said that he believed the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) was in the process of submitting their comments to the Navy, and there may be a formal, stated legal position within the next two weeks.

Both Jason Weigle and Mark Murphy stated that they would take phone calls or e-mails from any RAB members that have questions, and assumed that Kevin Oates would do the same. Mark Murphy requested that RAB members send their questions to all concerned entities, so the appropriate party could answer the question and copy the response to all RAB members. In this way, all RAB members could benefit from the exchange of information.
Petroleum Sites Update
Mark Wicklein then proceeded with the petroleum sites update. He divided his summary into two sections.
1. What has occurred since the last RAB meeting - 9/20/04 to 4/12/05:
  - Decision document prepared for 10 Sites with no unacceptable risk
  - The Proposed Plan public comment period was October - November, 2004
  - No comments were received from the public, except for Alaska Department of Transportation (ADOT) on Tanker Shed (reflecting concern about managing fuel-impacted soil derived from site)
  - Decision document is in draft form, waiting for final comments from ADEC
  - NMCB, site characterization report and risk assessment (SC/RA) was approved by ADEC; focused feasibility study (FFS) is at ADEC for review.
  - South Runway 18-36 - waiting on final comments from ADEC on the site characterization and risk assessment reports.
  - SWMU 17 - no new documents are anticipated until Fall 2005
  - SWMU 62 - Draft SC/RA report at ADEC for review.
  Free-product recovery continued at NMCB, Tanker Shed, and South Runway 18-36.
2. What will occur between now and the next RAB meeting - 4/12/05 to 10/05:
  - For the 10 sites with no-unacceptable risk, the decision document will be signed (hopefully).
  - Implement remedies in the decision document. The comprehensive monitoring plan is being revised now to include this information.
  - NMCB, finalize the FFS and proposed plan and begin work on the decision document. Begin work on the remedial design and remedial action work plan, to allow for possible remedy implementation in 2006.
  - South Runway 18-36 - finalize the SC/RA reports, FFS and proposed plan, and begin work on the decision document.
  - SWMU 17 - perform data gap sampling at nearby creek. Finalize the SC/RA reports
  - SWMU 62 - finalize the SC/RA reports, FFS and proposed plan, and begin work on the decision document.
Other Issues / Questions
Mark Murphy responded to a comment regarding a "discarded bullet" on Adak. He stated that the object was a 20 mm projectile that was inadvertently discovered just as the field work was finishing in early fall 2004. He stated that the decision was made by EOD Mobile Unit 11 Detachment from Naval Air Station Whidbey Island (NASWI), in consultation with EFA NW and its contractor, to store the item in an undisclosed location within Parcel 4, and to dispose of it appropriately in summer of 2005 or during the next site visit of EOD MU Det 11 NASWI . EOD NASWI makes an annual visit to Adak during the summer, to dispose of any suspect ordnance items that have been discovered or washed ashore during the previous year.

Cathy Villa inquired about the incident of contractors finding ordnance items when excavating around the Small Boat Harbor. Mark Murphy said that he had been apprised of this situation. Mr. Murphy had conversations with Ken Hopkins (former Adak Chief of Police) and Steve Hines regarding the shell casings that were discovered. Charles Lyons, a temporary employee of the Navy's contractor, will ensure that the Ordnance Awareness material that has been developed gets passed to the appropriate people prior to beginning any intrusive activity. Residents and visitors on Adak are supposed to view the Ordnance Awareness DVD prior to performing any construction work.
Review Action Items
URS to ensure that the call-in phone number for the Adak RAB meetings is posted on the Adakupdate.com website prior to the meeting.
Preliminary Agenda for Next Meeting
Mark Wicklein proposed an alternate means of setting up the agenda for the next RAB meeting. Instead of calling in for a mini-conference, he suggested that a proposed agenda be e-mailed or mailed out ahead of the actual event. The proposed agenda would be jointly developed by Violet Pearl and Mark Wicklein. Interested RAB members could then e-mail or call their comments into Mark Wicklein and/or Violet Pearl, and adjustments to the agenda could be made.

Cathy Villa asked if any documents were coming out this summer. She also inquired, if people are coming out in the summer for a site visit on Adak, could they have a RAB/community meeting on-island? There will be documents out for review for petroleum sites. These documents will be placed in the information repositories. Jason Weigle stated that he will be making a visit to Adak, and would entertain questions from people on-island.

Mary Grisco said presenting the proposed agenda one month ahead of time was not sufficient time to offer feedback to the co-chairs. Mark Wicklein then suggested two months notice, still using e-mail and mail. There was agreement on this method, with Mary Grisco saying to be sure to include response time requirements in any notification that goes out.
Set Date for Next Pre-RAB and Adjourn
Mark Wicklein then suggested a draft agenda be put together in August, with a RAB meeting scheduled for October. Mike Mitchell asked if the actual RAB meeting could be scheduled to coincide with the receipt of comments back from the agencies on the delisting document.

The meeting was adjourned at 8:05 PM, Anchorage time.