The Adak Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) met for its regular monthly meeting on April 15, 2000, at 1:00 p.m. (Adak time) and 2:00 p.m. (Anchorage time). The RAB met at the CSO Conference Room, Bob Reeve High School, Adak, Alaska. Others participated by telephone conference from Anchorage, Alaska.

Administrative Note: The summary of discussions during RAB meetings is not intended as a transcript of the meeting. A recording of the RAB meeting is obtained at every meeting and in the event that a more complete transcript of a discussion is needed for a specific issue, this recording can be accessed. While participants at RAB meetings are strongly encouraged to review the meeting minutes prior to finalization of the minutes, it is recognized that there is the possibility that participants in the discussions have not reviewed the minutes to confirm that they accurately reflect the content of the discussion.

1. Welcome, Introductions, and Meeting Purpose

   Ms. Villa called the meeting to order at 1:08 p.m. A quorum was present. The agenda was approved. . Mr. Krukoff noted a spelling error on page 6; "John Gleback" should be "John Gliva."

   1. Approval of March 8, 2000 meeting minutes.

      IT WAS MOVED by Mr. Krukoff AND SECONDED by Ms.Griswold that the minutes of the March 8, 2000 meeting be approved as written with the correction on page 6. THE MOTION PASSED with unanimous consent.

   2. General Announcements.

      Mr. Krukoff said there would be a public hearing on April 28, 2000 regarding incorporation of the City of Adak.

   3. Administrative Issues
      
      
      1. Bylaws Discussion
         
         

         Ms. Villa and Ms. Romig said that their efforts to contact Linda Hendrickson had failed. Ms. Hendrickson and Mr. Arterburn last attended a meeting in October 1999. John Martin and Dan Boone of USFWS are both retiring soon. Jeff Williams will provide USFWS representation. Ms. Villa said that in the future, if the quorum is affected, the RAB might wish to take some action regarding Ms. Hendrickson and Mr. Arterburn's failure to attend meetings. Mr. Stoll said there are attendance requirements. Mr. Arterburn is in the Pribilofs, which may explain his absences. Mr. Stoll suggested that Ms. Hendrickson should be notified that she would be dropped from the attendance list for failure to attend. Mr. Stoll said that in the past both Ms. Hendrickson and Mr. Arterburn had been very productive RAB members. Mr. Stoll suggested that perhaps Ms. Hendrickson and Mr. Arterburn could attend telephonically in the future if they want to maintain membership. There is no attendance requirement for agency members.

         Action Item: Richard Stoll or Cathy Villa will notify Mr. Arterburn and Ms. Hendrickson that they have not been attended enough RAB meetings.

      2. Concerns, Issues, Questions.

         Ms. Griswold said that daytime meetings were very difficult to attend due to job responsibilities.

2. Project Updates and Questions and Answers
   
   
   1. Community Involvement Opportunities
      
      

      Information is available in the information repository on island and at www.adakupdate.com. Mr. Stoll said Operable Unit "B" (OUB) is in the public comment review section. Mr. Stoll announced that Ms. Calugan has began participating in the OUB team as a community representative. Ms. Calugan said she would meet with Mr. Murray after the meeting for a briefing.

   2. Petroleum Spill History Summary
      
      

      Mr. Walker began working on the EFA NW petroleum program several months ago. He presented several maps. Mr. Walker explained the difference between BRAC (Base Realignment and Closure) and environmental issues. BRAC is a fixed program that has a specific time frame, whereas environmental recovery has no time frame. The environmental work is complete when the State, the community, EPA, and the Navy have evaluated the remedies. He said there is no reason to believe that environmental recovery would end when BRAC is complete.

      Mr. Walker said at the last meeting there were several discussions regarding John Curtis and alleged fuel spills in the late 1980's. Court documents have been requested. Discussion was deferred until more facts are available. Mr. Gates said he was astounded that after 10 years, the Navy cannot give a definitive answer as to whether there was a 500,000 or a 1,000,000 gallon spill from the petroleum line and wondered why a referral to counsel was required to answer that question. Mr. Walker said he was on Adak when Mr. Curtis' trial was conducted. Mr. Walker said the Navy installed over 500 monitoring wells on Adak and has not found evidence that indicates there had been a release approaching 500,000 gallons of product. The only documented substantial release was in SWMU 62, the housing area. Mr. Walker said the Navy needs proof of what happened in court. Mr. Walker said allegations went back and forth, and there was a lack of historical fuel documentation on paper.

      Ms. Bailey said she was on Adak during that time period and worked in the controller department. Her job was to bill for fuel, and there was a lot of fuel that was unaccounted for. Ms. Bailey said John Curtis was a "fall guy and did what he was told to do." She said Mr. Curtis pumped fuel through lines that the military knew were leaking. Mr. Walker said he did not want to discuss this subject until the facts are substantiated. Mr. Gates said a tremendous amount of product has been recovered from the southeast corner of Sweeper Creek and the area continues to smell like a refinery today. Mr. Gates added that even though a sentinel well may not detect petroleum contamination, it does not rule out the possibility that product could have migrated into Sweeper Cove and to different area that does not have a well. He stressed that much more investigation must be done to determine what is being missed by the monitoring system.

      Mr. Walker went on to say that there have been many difficulties during the winter months, many of which were maintenance issues such as freezing. He said some systems are beginning to thaw and the fuel recovery team is starting to troubleshoot the systems. The system at the power plant came on line this week and the remaining systems should be operational in the near future. There have been many staff changes on island. The Navy intends to re-evaluate all the ongoing systems this season. Currently, there are 13 free product systems operating. Mr. Walker said the recovery process is explained in the Record of Decision (ROD). There are 5 active free product recovery systems - SWMU 17 (power plant), SWMU 62 (new housing fuel leak), south of the runway, Anchorage head, and the Yakutat Hanger. The Navy is considering updating the SWMU 17 and SWMU 62 systems. Mr. Walker explained that the recovery system south of the runway is not currently operational, however, when it does operate, it will be fairly efficient and the Navy does not foresee any problems. Anchorage Head and Yakutat are currently experiencing maintenance problems that will be corrected soon. SWMU 17 is having difficulties, and the Navy is moving away from a "pump and treat" approach and turning to better technology. Mr. Walker said he felt the system at SWMU 62 has done an outstanding job. The Navy will shut down SWMU 62 on May 1, 2000 and begin the focus and feasibility study.

      Mr. Gates asked what caused the spills in the housing area? Mr. Walker said the housing units were constructed in Portland, Oregon. When the houses were installed, the heavy equipment work over the fuel lines created leaks. Mr. Gates suggested that the Navy talk to Ted Trueblood, of Tryck Nyman & Hayes. Mr. Trueblood is knowledgeable about the John Curtis matter and is willing to share his information.

      Mr. Gates asked why the vapor problem that exists in at least two housing units in SWMU 62 has not been addressed? Mr. Walker explained that the vapor problem is isolated to Unit 160(d). Petroleum contaminated soil will be excavated from under the unit this season. Mr. Gates asked if the vapor was the result of one release or if there were multiple releases that have occurred in SWMU 62? Mr. Walker said personnel who inadvertently left the tank valves open caused the leaks.

      Mr. Gates questioned how the Navy could assume that the plumes are not migrating when there is a lack of monitoring wells in the area? Mark Nichols (URS Greiner) said that conclusions were inferred based on the way the product behaved in the past. Mr. Gates suggested that additional wells be installed rather than relying on inferences.

      A concern was raised during the March RAB meeting that chlorine had been used in the wells. Mr. Stoll confirmed that no chlorine had been used in the wells. Mr. Gates asked to see the well data prepared in January 2000 at the next meeting. Action Item: Mr. Walker will make the January 2000 "Free Product Thickness (SWMU 62)" chart available for the RAB members. Ms. Calugan said that while her husband worked at "303", they did use chlorine to clean the screens. Ms. Calugan asked if chlorine use would have adverse effects? Mr. Nichols said sodium hydrochloride is typically used for cleaning and is not a hazard.

      Mr. Gates asked how the free product in the south end of Sweeper Creek got there? Mr. Walker said the free product came from the power plant, the waste oil ponds, and the retention ponds. Further evaluation of the airport ditch will occur this summer. Another seep was detected this January under the bridge by Traffic Circle into Sweeper Cove. That area is boomed off and will be evaluated. Mr. Gates said he felt that there was too much fuel recovered from South Sweeper Creek to believe that it came from the power plant.

   3. Petroleum Recovery Systems
      
      

      Mr. Nichols said he had been working on Adak for approximately 3 years. His responsibilities are related to free product evaluation, delineation, and its recovery. The maps presented are contoured measures of how the product was distributed on the water table. From 1989 until July 1997 approximately 130,000 gallons had been recovered. As of July 1999, about 167,000 gallons had been recovered. An estimated 35,000 gallons was recovered in the first year after the upgrade. In the previous year, about 1,000 gallons had been recovered.

      Mr. Walker said the Navy's focus feasibility study, will examine potential product pathways to humans and the environment, exposure from those pathways, the airport ditch, and Kuluk Bay. Sentinel wells are in place. A skimmer pump is available on site. The focus feasibility study for SWMU 62 is a CERCLA process. Considerations include overall protection of human health and the environment, compliance with federal and state regulations, long-term effectiveness and permanence, reduction of toxicity, mobility and volume, short-term effectiveness, ability to implement and maintain the alternative, and community acceptance.

      Mr. Walker said a pilot step study would likely be performed in the 303 area to evaluate new potential technologies.

      Mr. Walker said the seep at NORPAC Hill is being evaluated. Last year, the Navy attempted to locate the source of the seep, but was not successful. Work is ongoing to locate the source. The Navy has serious concerns about NMCB and Mr. Walker hopes a pilot study will be conducted there. Many of the systems currently in operation do not have freeze protection, which will also be evaluated.

      All the remedies in place are currently interim remedies. Nothing will be finalized until after the Focused Feasibility Study is completed.

   4. OUB Status Update
      
      

      [Note: Mr. Murray gave a slide presentation to the attendees on Adak. Hard copies of the slide presentation were made available for those attending in Anchorage. Addition copies can be obtained by contacting Ms. Romig at OASIS Environmental Inc.] Mr. Murray said in 1996, the Navy Explosive Ordinance Disposal Team (Mobile Unit 11) from Whidbey Island was invited to Adak by EFA NW to investigate the four ordnance areas known at the time as: SWMU 1, SWMU 2, SWMU 8, and Source Area 93. Mobile Unit 11 has come to Adak every year since 1997. In 1997 and 1998, the Navy began an investigation of historical documents and became aware of additional offensive and defensive ordnance areas. The first area investigated following the historical document research was the downtown area, a Priority I area consisting of 390 acres. This investigation was a wall-to-wall, 100% geophysical survey. Priority II areas were investigated next, which included the unused housing area, the airfield, support areas, taxiways, runways, and the fuel tank farm. Finally, Priority III areas were investigated, which included the remainder of downtown as well as some areas of limited commercial and industrial activities. The Priority I areas contained over 90% of the reuse facilities. Mr. Murray described the fieldwork performed in 1997 through 1999, the areas that were investigated, the methods of investigation, and items/anomalies that were found (see slides).

      Mr. Murray explained that out of 7,000 anomalies found, only 5,000 were excavated. This sampling approach has been formally disputed by the agencies and led to the formation of the OUB project team. The OUB project team is chartered to design the best approach for continuing the unexploded ordnance (UXO) investigation.

      Mr. Murray strongly encouraged RAB members to read the Site Investigation Report, a 2-volume set, which is available in the information repository as well as online at www.adakupdate.com. The Preliminary Assessment, a 3-volume set, is also available in the information repository. The purpose of the Preliminary Assessment was to screen the data that was collected to determine what, if any, further action was necessary. Sites that require further action are then processed through a remedial investigation. Of the 175 areas of potential concern, 80 of them required no further action. There were 26 sites where there was not enough information to make a decision and require more investigation. 67 sites were referred to remedial investigation, and are identified in the Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) work plan. The RI/FS work plan was published this week and comments are welcomed. The work plan emphasizes more data collection and site characterization.

      The next step is to execute the work plan. The first objective of this field season is to construct a test plot of approximately 100' x 100'. A third party will bury ordnance and debris at various depths and orientations. Next, the last year's crew and others will be invited to test their instruments. The instruments meeting the detection probability standard and the confidence level standard will be used this year. This year's goal is to investigate 900 miles of transect walks. Unlike previous years, all UXO anomalies found will be excavated.

      A community member asked if the south side of the island would be investigated? Mr. Stoll said the Corps of Engineers is responsible for the south side of the island, which is a Formerly Used Defense (FUD) site. The Corps will evaluate those areas in the near future. Col. Jahn told Mr. Stoll at a recent briefing that he wants to see how issues on the north side of the island are resolved before proceeding with work on the south side. The Navy cannot address the outlying islands because they fall under the Corps of Engineers' responsibility.

      Mr. Murray said Mobile Unit 11 would use diving gear to locate the source of offshore wash up of ordnance. Mr. Stoll said there was a strong indication that a lot of the materials were "kick outs."

      Ms. Villa asked how many of the items found could actually kill a person? Mr. Murray said out of 160 ordnance, maybe 10 could kill but the item would have to be on the surface. He added that very few items were found on the surface. Mr. Stoll said instrumentation would be installed to test the soil pressures necessary to detonate items. Mr. Murray said the Navy is also evaluating the potential for frost heaves to bring items to the surface.

      Mr. Gates said he felt the "Where We've Been" slides were understated. Mr. Murray said the 4,481 anomalies shown on Slide 6 were all in the downtown area. Mr. Gates asked what the difference was between the total anomalies found and what was actually dug up? Mr. Stoll there was in excess of 60,000 metallic anomalies found in the downtown area, and 10% of those were excavated. Mr. Gates wanted to let people know that everything in the downtown area is not 100% certain.

      Mr. Gates went on to say that this was the first time that he had heard that 1,100 UXO items were found in 216 acres. He said that 5 pieces per acre was a fairly high density. Mr. Murray said they expected to find UXO in these areas. Mr. Gates asked if a risk evaluation was done? Mr. Murray said the risk assessment was not part of the last year's fieldwork. The project is working on a risk assessment protocol based on data collected. The risk model is available in the RI/FS work plan published this week. Ms. Carr said the hazards associated with encountering UXO are discussed in the RI/FS Workplan, and it is important for the public to comment on that document.

      Mr. Gates expressed concern that the minefields were considered no further action sites. There was evidence that a minefield at Clam Lagoon was built. Mr. Murphy explained that the defensive plans described in the archives were never put into place. Mr. Gates did not agree and noted the exception of Clam Lagoon Minefield. Mr. Murray said the presence of training mines in Clam Lagoon would indicate that it was not a defensive minefield. Mr. Gates pointed out that both live and training mines were removed from SWMU 2. Mr. Murray said at that time, live ordnance was at a premium, and sometimes whatever was available was used for training purposes. Live mines were found in Clam Lagoon. Mr. Gates said further investigation of the minefields is needed, and that perhaps the Navy did not investigate the right areas. Mr. Gates requested that a thorough debate should be held regarding the no further action sites.

      Mr. Gates said the "kick out" issue should be investigated further not only on the ocean side, but on the lakeside as well - people could be swimming in Lake Andrew.

      Action Item: Mr. Murray will work with Ms. Calugan to organize an "outdoor class" to teach the Adak Boyscouts UXO awareness - where they might be, what is safe, and what is dangerous.

      Action Item: Mr. Murray will show Ms. Calugan the No Further Action sites.

   5. Comments on ICMP Update
      
      

      Ms. Miller was absent and the update was tabled.

   6. Summary of Tribal Consultation Process of OUA
      
      

      Mr. Oates said the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) suspended concurring on the OUA ROD until the tribal consultation process had finished. The formal consultation has been completed, and informal discussions regarding technical issues continue. Monitored natural attenuation is an important topic of discussion. EPA signed the OUA ROD on March 30, 2000. Ms. Carr reported that the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) signed the OUA ROD on April 13, 2000. Mr. Murphy reported on the follow-up to API/A's letter and said a cooperative agreement will be entered into.

      Mr. Krukoff inquired about the February 24, 2000 letter from A/PIA to EPA and asked Mr. Oates to comment. Mr. Oates said the letter indicated the consultation had been successful however, more work and concerns remain.

   7. TAPP Grant Renewal Status
      
      

      Mr. Stoll said Patty Kelly has received substantial agreement on the scope, which has not significantly changed from what Ms. Miller submitted. The TAPP grant has not been awarded yet, but should be soon.

3. Public Comments.

   There were no public comments.

4. Tentative Topics for the Next Meeting

   Continue discussions regarding John Curtis, the source of missing product, and the quantity of the fuel spill.

   Mr. Gates suggested a Navy briefing on the NMCB area and the NORPAC Hill issues, including the geophysical survey for ordnance. Mr. Stoll suggested that the NMCB, NORPAC Hill and South Sweeper Creek be deferred until reports and information are available.

   Mr. Gates also asked that the Navy help the RAB evaluate whether the UXO teams planted ordnance during the investigation process. Mr. Gates said he was told that ordnance from Lake Andrew was brought to the downtown area in 1998, but did not know if that was true. Mr. Murphy said there is absolutely no basis that anyone brought live ordnance items into the downtown area. Mr. Gates said he had someone saying just the opposite. Mr. Stoll and Ms. Villa said that Mr. Gates needed to supply a name. Mr. Gates said an insurer employed a private investigator that provided this information and will pass on identity of the people and company involved. Action Item: Mr. Gates will provide a statement from the ordnance team subcontractor regarding the alleged UXO planting in the downtown area to Mr. Murphy.

   Ms. Villa requested that the tribal consultation continue on the agenda, if there are any new developments.

   Mr. Gates requested further briefing on no further action sites, especially regarding the minefields.

5. Meeting Adjourned.

   The next meeting is scheduled for June 28, 2000 (6:30 p.m. Adak time, 7:30 p.m. Anchorage time). The meeting was adjourned at approximately 5:38 p.m.

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