The meeting was held at the Hilton Hotel in Anchorage, and the Bob Reeves High School Conference Room in Adak. In attendance were the following:

1. Welcome and Opening Remarks:

Cathy Villa called the meeting to order at 7:35 PM (Anchorage time). A quorum was not present. Cathy proposed a change to the agenda, she asked Dave Jenson, the Chief Executive Officer of The Aleut Corporation, to speak about land transfer. She also asked Kevin Oates to talk about a letter dated October 9, 2001, that was addressed to The Aleut Corporation. She asked that the September meeting with Dr. Scrudato be put on the next RAB meeting agenda. Mark Murphy also stated that Mary Lou Sullivan was present to answer questions regarding lead based paint and asbestos fact sheets that were distributed at the previous RAB meeting.

2. Land Transfer:

Mr. Jenson stated that the land transfer legislation had been introduced by Senator Frank Murkowski and Representative Don Young. He said prior to the terrorist attacks on September 11, it looked like there would be a hearing in November. Everything seems to be in a flux, and what was important before September 11 is now changing. He said it now looks like it will be next spring before there are hearings regarding the Adak land transfer.

Mr. Jenson stated that in regards to Adak, there are 47,000 acres of like acreage of trade. That is, trading an asset for an asset. Before Mr. Jenson can consider Adak an asset it has to get a return or, in other words, it has to appreciate in value or it's probably not of value and The Aleut Corporation won't want it. He stated that The Aleut Corporation had to have an asset for an asset. He stated that The Aleut Corporation must have three things happen in order to have the property trade.

He stated that the first consideration is that there be a year around fishing industry to support the local economy. There were discussions that NORQUEST would shut down in August and come back in January. That would be very bad for the local economy. Thanks to Sandra Moller of the Aleut Enterprise Corporation, there is now an ongoing fishing industry in Adak. Mr. Jenson stated that the second consideration is that there must be a viable, functioning municipality that supports the community infrastructure. By a viable municipality, he stated there must be a mayor and city council and public works. Schools must be open. He said that's happening now, and the Adak community has worked very hard to make that happen. The third consideration is that the airfield operates at full capacity, that is, handle airplanes with over 30 seats. He stated that if any of those considerations or criteria is not there, then the other two couldn't survive. He said the first two are considerations, a fishing industry and a municipality, are well on their way to succeeding. He said that the Adak Reuse Corporation consumed $750 thousand per year operating the airfield. He said that they simply couldn't afford to operate the airfield; there isn't anything in return for the money being spent.

In regards to environmental concerns, he said that they are very important to The Aleut Corporation. The Aleut Corporation is going to honor CERCLA, and meet TAC's needs and the Navy's needs. The Navy will continue with their restoration activities, and TAC will focus on business issues. He stated that environmental cleanup and business decisions could go hand in hand. He did say that it would be important for TAC to maintain a presence on the RAB and the project teams.

Mark Murphy asked whether or not the environmental restoration activities had interfered with the marketing of the island. Mr. Jenson recalled his work with Reeves Airline at Cold Bay. He said the city didn't go away just because there was 180-octane aviation gasoline there, and that Adak can be remediated in a similar way. He said he rejected the notion that the unexploded ordnance will stop Adak development. Unalaska and Cold Bay have a far worse UXO problem than Adak and they are viable. He said that The Aleut Corporation should not be held responsible for pollutants/contaminants for which it is not responsible. Mr. Jenson said the he knows that when the land transfer is signed, everyone will now where the line is. He said he would take the trade with Palisades closed. Pam Miller asked Mr. Jenson to identify Adak's top priority areas. He said that 47,000 acres to be traded; only about 3,000 acres are affected by environmental cleanup. He said that The Aleut Corporation doesn't want to be saddled with anything it's not responsible for, such as the UXO and the fuel spills.

Ms. Miller asked if Mr. Jenson had specific areas of concern. He said that The Aleut Corporation is at the threshold of a good deal, however his concern was to keep the 800-acre airfield operational; however, The Aleut Corporation does not want to have to operate it. He said it played a major role on September 11 and 12 with the Air Force. He said there might be opportunities there for them to take over operation. He said the US Fish and Wildlife Service might also have an interest, as well as other federal agencies. He said he would really like it turned over to the State of Alaska for operation. He did note that there are people who don't want Adak to happen on a political level.

Mr. Jenson closed by stating that he appreciated Mr. Oates' letter to The Aleut Corporation. He agreed that they didn't want to look back, that they wanted to focus on the future.

3. Oates' Letter to The Aleut Corporation:

   Mr. Oates said he appreciated Mr. Jenson's candor. The idea is that let's get it cleaned up and have the community move ahead is refreshing. Mr. Oates noted that one is not an impediment to the other. The point of his letter is that there gets to be a point where you see your name is print and it is not accurate, and his primary focus was to set the record straight regarding Rommel stakes. He said EPA never stated that they would put Rommel stakes under CERCLA. He said that one of the conditions of the dispute was that TAC and APIA had a seat at the table, bringing information away from the table. The Aleut Corporation's participation lagged behind that of other stakeholders and the confusion resulting from the letter was already plowed ground. He noted that it was nice to see Mr. Jenson at the meeting, and he recommended that TAC be more consistent with their participation so they know what they have an understanding of what they're buying into.

Bob Berenstein asked when the cleanup of the Rommel stakes would be completed. Mr. Murphy stated that as of two months ago when the Navy received TAC's letter, the Navy believed they had completed the cleanup of the Rommel stakes during the field season in the year 2000. He said there were some areas where they could not be removed, such as areas blown over by boulders, or areas that could not be accessed by hikers. The Navy removed the more accessible Rommel stakes. There may be some out there to be removed. Cathy Villa asked if Ron O'Toole looked at the areas identified in the letters. Mr. Murphy stated that they haven't been able to access the area. Mark Burnham stated that they just became aware of it a few weeks ago, and they planned to go with folks to see where they are. Langston Walker stated that the Rommel stakes were placed in different formations, and prior to the Rommel stake removal, they had UXO techs in front of the Rommel stake removal crew. He said it was almost impossible to visually locate the stakes. Mr. Murphy stated that he wouldn't be surprised if there are a few, the Navy will look and see if there are more out there. Cathy Villa asked if it was special funding that was used to remove the Rommel stakes. Mr. Walker stated that a special appropriation by Senator Stephens was used to fund the removal of Rommel stakes.

4. A/PIA Debris Letter:

   Chris Riggio discussed the recent A/PIA letter sent to the Navy at the end of last week addressing potentially hazardous debris on the island. He said during the August 22 RAB meeting, the issue was raised about a dog that had to be put to sleep because of injuries received when it came upon hazardous marsten matting. He said that this is a sad legacy on much of the Aleutian Islands. Throughout the Aleutian, frequently the debris left behind, sheet metal and Quonset huts and some of the old marsten matting, rebar, and concrete, are certainly a hazard to pets and wildlife. A concern about the debris left behind that may be accessible to the public. Mr. Murphy stated that the Navy has gone a long way to address the letter's concerns. The Navy has addressed live ammunitions, removed buildings that were designated by TAC as unsafe for whatever reasons; removed Rommel stakes; and the Navy plans to remove cabins next year. He said he doesn't want to leave on the radar screen that the Navy plans to remove all the debris on the island that may have been left there over the many years of operation. The issue has tremendous financial indications, and the Navy is not going to undertake that type of project. Mr. Riggio asked how close the marsten matting was to a recreational area. Mr. Burnham stated that it's near Lake Andrew, in a swampy area, and it lays on the Lake Andrew beach

5. Dr. Scrudato:

   Mr. Murphy stated that the Navy would not respond to comments received from Dr. Scrudato until the RAB reviews the comments, and gives some prioritization to the comments.

6. Adak Cleanup Schedule:

   Mark Murphy stated that the latest Adak schedule incorporates what the Navy plans for execution in fiscal year 2002. The timeline for those projects are predictable, others go beyond 2002. Key points in the cleanup process and planned process and where the likely and logical points are for RAB meetings was looked at during the planning. The letter sent to the RAB members proposes scheduling upcoming meetings centering around input on future decisions for proposed remedies. For the 2002 field season, the two key opportunities for RAB meetings were centered on the petroleum. The two proposed dates are March 20, 2002, to address public input and explain the remedy selection for a variety of petroleum sites, SWMU 62, South Runway 18/36, and also those public comment periods scheduled around the end of March to explain the proposed remedies. This provides an opportunity for verbal input and gives more information during a typical petroleum public comment period. Another RAB meeting in 2002 would be scheduled around the public comment periods for NORPAC Hill, NMCB, Power Plant 3, and Arctic Acres. Material will be made available preceding these for RAB members to familiarize themselves with what is being proposed. The primary documents that will require will be in the repositories. There may be other subjects in addition to the petroleum remedies; the Navy is not suggesting that the RAB meetings be limited to petroleum only. In the Navy's view, these two meetings are the most relevant as far as meeting public input. Our proposal is to support these two RAB meetings.

   Kevin Oates asked if those would be formal RAB meetings. Mr. Murphy stated that these are the anticipated RAB meetings the Navy would support given the available topics out there. He said that the next anticipated RAB meeting would be in March. Mr. Murphy stated that this proposal does not mean that there isn't any flexibility. Mr. Oates agreed with the identified topics. He said that he couldn't think of anything else between now and March that are critical to environmental cleanup. Mr. Murphy stated that the fact sheets distributed at the last RAB appeared to be helpful to the RAB members, and it is the Navy's intent to distribute fact sheets more frequently if we have few meetings. This will also help foster discussion at the scheduled RAB meetings. Mr. Oates stated that the major works over the next period of time are the transfer issues. There will be a lot of activities in the next few months on the business part of it between TAC, the Navy and the Department of Interior.

   Cathy Villa stated that the proposed RAB meetings are too far off. She said by March there would be four months of information, and that's too much to absorb. She said that she didn't want the RAB members to lose sight of what was being discussed this month. She said, we don't have half the people here tonight, we don't have a quorum, and most of the RAB members won't have a meeting with us for six more months. She said the RAB needs to get together and that they would like to hear about other things rather than having two marathon meetings. She said she is proposing a December meeting. Mr. Murphy stated that it is unlikely there would be Navy presence, however, there may be some participation by telephone. He asked what her proposed agenda might consist of for the meeting. Pam Miller said that there are missed opportunities to influence decisions regarding the summer field season if the meetings were held twice a year. She agreed with Cathy Villa, and there is benefit to the TAPP Grant Advisor if more meetings were held. Mr. Murphy and Mr. Walker stated that the field season on Adak next year will not be executed from the selected remedies in March and April, those would be executed in 2003 at the earliest. Mr. Walker stated that the Navy wouldn't be executing fieldwork until that process is completed until decisions are made. Mr. Walker stated he would make sure Ron Scrudato gets a copy of the schedules, and the documents are sent to him. Mr. Walker stated that in order to utilize Ron Scrudato's time efficiently, he should focus on the second or third iterations of the reports. He said some of the reports are coming up fairly soon.

7. Institutional Control Management Plan:

   Patty Kelly defined the institutional controls as measures to prevent or limit exposure to chemicals left in place at a site, or assure effectiveness of the chosen remedy until cleanup levels are achieved. She said the Navy is responsible for implementing institutional controls on Adak. The types of institutional controls include land use restrictions, downtown groundwater restrictions, excavation permits, education, fish advisories, and inspections and reporting. Mr. Jenson asked if institutional controls would be in effect after land transfer. Ms. Kelly said yes, the Navy is responsible for institutional controls until it is safe for unrestricted use. She said that right now, the sites are safe for the land use they are presently being used for, such as industrial uses in an industrial area. She said a concern would be if the Aleut Corporation wanted to build housing in an industrial area, other than that, the island were anticipated to operate similarly to the anticipated land uses identified. Under those scenarios, it's safe to use. Ms. Kelly stated that under Alaska State policies, the Navy would be submitting an equitable servitude to The Aleut Corporation, Dept. of Interior, the EPA and Alaska DEC. She also discussed the excavation restrictions, the education programs, the community safety program, and she turned the presentation over to Mary Lou Sullivan to discuss the website. Ms. Sullivan explained that the website would be a tool to disseminate information. She said there have been many changes to already; one requirement was to be able to put it onto a compact disk for the reuser to utilize the information. She went through the screen shots of the various institutional controls. Mr. Jenson asked how long it would take before excavations permit approval would be obtained. Ms. Kelly stated that it would be three working days. Chris Riggio asked when the website would be available for review. Ms. Sullivan stated that the target date is around Christmas. Pam Miller asked if there were only fish advisories in Kuluk Bay or Sweeper Cove. Ms. Sullivan said yes. Chris Riggio asked when the fish advisory signs would be posted. Ms. Kelly said that they would be delivered to the island on Thursday afternoon. Ms. Miller asked about the PCB levels in the waters. Ms. Kelly said she didn't know the concentrations, however, the levels of PCB's were very low in the sediments, and the source was removed from Sweeper Creek. It is anticipated that the levels would go down over time since the source was removed. Kevin Oates said that the arctic was a sink and attracted atmospheric pollution, this has been fairly well documented. Ms. Miller requested that a biologist come and explain the situation regarding the waters off of Adak. Mark Murphy stated that he would try to get someone to present the data at a future RAB meeting.

   Dave Jenson was concerned about the economic impact of the signs. He said that placing the signs next to a fish processing plant couldn't be good for business. He asked if the signs had to stay up forever. Ms. Kelly said the signs had to stay up for as long as it took the Navy to show the fish are safe for subsistence harvesting. Mr. Jenson asked why the Navy was putting up the signs. Mr. Murphy stated that the Navy is legally obligated to place the signs in fulfillment of the Operable Unit A Record of Decision. Mr. Murphy stated that it was unlikely that anyone would consume enough fish to put anyone at risk. Mr. Jenson said he was particularly alarmed at the sign being placed by the fish processing plant. Mr. Oates agreed to discuss the matter with Mr. Jenson in another forum. Cathy Villa asked when the Navy was going to look at PCBs in the fish again. Mr. Murphy stated that the USGS Biological Research Division does the monitoring annually; it's been done since 1999. The data is slowly trickling in, and the Navy is evaluating it.

8. Ordnance Investigation:

   Mark Murphy discussed the remedial action remediated during the Adak field season. He said the ordnance team plans to demobilize on Saturday due to deteriorating weather. Mr. Murphy stated that they were kept on the island longer than originally planned to try and complete all the work planned. He said the Navy planned to remediate 29 remedial action sites, plus complete 1,800 digs the Navy intended to investigate that were left over from the 2000 field season. He said the crews completed surveys of 23 of the 29 remedial action sites and that those sites can be certified as cleared and are ready for transfer. He reported that the dive survey at Finger Bay and Sweeper Cove were done according to the plan and besides metal debris, only one empty 20mm casing was found. Dave Jenson asked if the metal debris was documented so that anchored boats in Finger bay wouldn't be fouled. Al Larken explained that the debris was small and it wouldn't foul anchors. Mark Murphy also talked about the ad hoc dive survey at Heart Lake and that 12 OE items that were apparently kicked out of the adjacent OB/OD pits. Kevin Oates asked about the condition of the bottom. Mr. Murphy said the bottom was clear with some silting, and clumps of vegetation. The vegetation was not a solid mass; there were pockets of it.

   Mr. Murphy explained that those remedial action sites were completed were at Combat Range 8-03, Lake Jean-01, Combat Range 3-01A, Combat Range 3-01E, Blind Cove 01, BF-03C&D, and JM-01. He said of the 1,800 digs planned, approximately 780 remain to be investigated in 2002. Mr. Jenson asked if any TAC representatives regularly attend OU-B project team meetings. Doug Murray reported that over the past 3 years Jimmy Garrett attended one meeting and Tim Roy attended three meetings.

   Cynthia wanted to acknowledge that the Navy's contractor, ECC, trained in the Bob Reeves High School and they were very involved in the community activities on the island.

9. Next Meeting Schedule:

   Cathy Villa suggested that the next RAB meeting be held on December 12. She suggested that the agenda topics to be discussed are Dr. Scrudato and his comments; Navy's response to Chris Riggio's letter; Biologist to discuss Adak data; and a summary of the letters from the State to the Navy. Mr. Murphy said that the Navy will provide a written response to the A/PIA letter and that he would try to get a biologist by the December meeting. If a biologist were not available on that date, a later date would be arranged. Mr. Murphy said that based on the proposed agenda, it may not be necessary to have a Navy presence at the meeting. The Navy would arrange for the dial in numbers for the RAB to utilize.

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