| Action Date |
Action |
Description |
DEC Staff |
| 10/28/1983 |
Update or Other Action |
US Army Environmental Hygiene Agency GW Quality Survey No. 38-26-K986-91 Evaluation of Solid Waste Management Units Fort Richardson AK 24 June to 2 July 1991. This survey was performed to evaluate and update
the Solid Waste Management Unit (SWMU) information contained in Fort Richardson's RCRA Facility Assessment (RFA); to determine
which SWMU's require further sampling, investigation, or corrective action; and to identify and evaluate any SWMU's not previously documented.
SWKU's Not Previouslv Identified in the RFA. The following SWMU was not in existence or were not discovered during the RFA. This site should be formally added to the SWMU list, and supporting documentation regarding ongoing work or justification for no further action should be provided to the regulator prior to issuance of the permit. TABLE 2. SWMU'S NOT PREVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED IN THE RFA: Circle Drive Drum Site (SWMU 126). This site was
also listed on the FFCA, with a requirement to determine if the wastes stored there were HW's, and if so, to prepare a formal closure plan for the site. This site should be considered as a WAA with planned investigation. |
Jennifer Roberts |
| 9/20/1990 |
Update or Other Action |
1990 Army (E. Ruff) to EPA (C. Eilo). An abandoned drum site was discovered in a wooded
area near Circle Drive on Fort Richardson. This site contains 57 drums which appear to be several years old. The drums are damaged and leaking. From the labeling on the drums and the characteristics of the leaking material, we suspect the drums contain contain petroleum asphalt
(tar), denatured alcohol, ESTERON 76-E (2,4-D), dry cleaning solvent, antifreeze, and unknown materials.
The U.S. Army Environmental Hygiene Agency is scheduled to sample and analyze the drum contents from October 9 through October 19. 1990. When the analyses are received we will arrange
for proper disposal of the drums. The Army Environmental Hygiene Agency has informed us that, for every 50 samples taken, results will take approximately 60 days. A site investigation
of the contaminated soil will be performed after the drum contents have been analyzed, probably summer 1991.
Point of contact on this matter is Lori Tussey Lay, |
Louis Howard |
| 10/31/1990 |
Update or Other Action |
Previous Site Investigations-In October 1990, the Army Environmental Hygiene Agency sampled or attempted to sample all of the drums present on site. At the time of sampling, there were 59 drums scattered over an area of a few hundred square feet. The majority of the drums were in poor condition and deposits of tar and other unidentified stains were observed on the surface soil at the site. Wooden pallets and remnants of asphalt piles were also present.
Subsequent to sampling and analyzing their contents, the drums were removed from the site by DEH. A soil sampling effort was conducted by the U.S. Army Engineer District, Alaska, in July 1991. Surface samples were obtained from 11 locations and four soil borings were advanced and sampled at five-foot intervals. Three of the soil borings were sampled to a depth of 15 feet below ground surface (bgs) and one soil boring was sampled to a depth of 20 feet bgs. Review of the analytical results indicates that levels of petroleum, oil and lubricants (POLs) present in the site soils to depths of up to 15 feet bgs exceed ADEC criteria. Additionally, trace amounts of volatile and semivolatile organics were detected in the surface soils. |
Louis Howard |
| 9/30/1991 |
Update or Other Action |
CENPA-EN-G-M (200-1c) memorandum for CENPA-EN-MB-C Subject: Chemical Data report Circle road drum site. Per CENPA-PA-HTW 4 June 1991 Mini PA's request, a sampling effort to determine the nature and extent of hazardous and toxic waste contamination at the Circle Road Drum Site was undertaken July 11-12, 1991. At time of sample collection, there were 59 drums at the site. Since then, the drums have been removed, but neither the surrounding soil nor the tar-like material pooled on the soil has been altered significantly.
Thus, data from the July sampling effort still
pertains to the site. This memorandum summarizes the chemical results for
samples obtained during the sampling effort.
Thirty-nine soil samples and one tar sample were collected for analysis. No testing of drum contents was performed. The complete chemical data package, including the laboratories' internal quality control reports, is on file at CENPA-EN-G-H.
Under regulatory guidance from the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC), soils must contain less than 100 parts per million (ppm) petroleum oil and lubricants (POLs). The concentration of POLs in the
majority of surface soil samples exceeded this level. Most of the surface soil samples were contaminated with 100-300 ppm petroleum hydrocarbons as measured by Method 418.1 analysis. The soil samples removed from locations A (130,000 ppm petroleum hydrocarbons), H (950 ppm petroleum hydrocarbons) and I (7400 ppm petroleum hydrocarbons) were especially contaminated. Soil taken from location E was reported to contain 1700 ppm diesel-range hydrocarbons as measured by modified Method 8015.
All of the samples from the 5-foot depth contained more than 100 ppm petroleum hydrocarbons, but only two of the four 10-foot depth samples contained in excess of 100 ppm POLO. One of four 15-foot depth samples were
reported to contain more than 100 ppm POLs, and no POLs were reported above 30 ppm in the sole 20-foot depth sample. Thus, most of the POL contamination is concentrated in the surface soil. |
Louis Howard |
| 10/28/1991 |
Update or Other Action |
America North Inc. letter report to R. Johnson (Dept. Of the Army) received.
Federal Facility Compliance Agreement
In January 1991, EPA and Fort Richardson entered into a Federal Facility Compliance Agreement
(FFCA) to address a substantial number of Resource Conservation Recovery Act (RCRA) hazardous
waste and Toxic Substance and Control Act (TSCA) polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) violations. As part of the required actions under the FFCA, Fort Richardson is required to develop plans for the closure of hazardous waste treatment and storage areas, including Circle Drum Road Site.
ADEC and EPA Inspection Reports
ADEC and EPA inspection reports for Fort Richardson contained no documentation of any site visits to Circle Road Drum Site by the agencies or their contractors. Inspection reports reviewed dated back to 1980.
RCRA Fr,ciliry Assessment Report
In 1989, EPA hired Science Applications International Carp- (SAIC) to conduct a RCRA Facility
Assessment (RFA) of Fort Greely. The ADEC files in Juneau contained a copy of the January 1990
report. Circle Road Drum Site was not mentioned in the Assessment Report.
Previous Site Investigations
In October 1990, the Army Environmental Hygiene Agency sampled or attempted to sample all of the
drums present on site. At the time of sampling, there were 59 drums scattered over an area of a few hundred square feet. The majority of the drums were in poor condition. Subsequent to sampling and analyzing their contents, the drums were removed from the site by DEH. A soil -sampling effort was conducted by the U.S. Army Engineer District, Alaska, in July 1991.
Surface samples were obtained from 11 locations and four soil borings were advanced and sampled at five-foot intervals. Three of the soil borings were sampled to a depth of 15 feet below ground surface (bgs) and one soil boring was sampled to a depth of 20 feet bgs. Review of the analytical results indicates that levels of petroleum, oil and lubricants (POLs) present in the site soils to depths of up to 15 feet bgs exceed ADEC criteria. Additionally, trace amounts of volatile and semivolatile organics were detected in the surface soils.
Site Visit
The Circle Road Drum Site was visited by ANI civil engineers Bob McGill and Chris Gill, and ANI
geologist Greg DuBois. At a later date, the site was re-visited by ANI’s Project hlanager and Site Safety Officer (Teresa O’Carroll and Renata Sweet, respectively). The team members made
observations on overall site conditions and safety and health hazards. A site location map and a site diagram were prepared for the site (See Figures 1 and 2). Figure 2 includes the locations of the four soil borings that were drilled and sampled at the site in July 1991.
SUMMARY
Available information on site conditions suggests that soil sampling and analysis would be necessary to assess the impact past site activities may have had on the site surficial and subsurface environment. It is our opinion that findings of the site visit do not require immediate action.
Eight soil borings will be drilled at the site to evaluate the impacts from past activities to the surface and subsurface soils. The proposed soil boring locations are shown on Figure 2. Each soil boring will be advanced to a depth of 20 feet and soil samples will be collected at five-foot intervals. If groundwater is encountered during drilling, the borings will be terminated at a depth of five feet below the water table or at a depth of 20 feet, whichever is less. The soil boring program and analytical procedures will be described in the Draft Work Plan due 20 November 1991.
ANI has prepared a Schedule of Submittals and Action Items for Delivery Order No. 0005, Attachment C). A site Health and Safety Plan and Sampling/Analysis-Quality Control/Quality
Assurance Plan will be prepared and will be submitted in accordance with the project schedule. |
Louis Howard |
| 11/13/1991 |
Update or Other Action |
American North sent in sampling analysis and QA/QC plan. Mention in plan was a 10/90 sampling event by Army Environmental Hygiene Agency of the drums. After sampling of drums they were removed by DEH. In 07/91 Corps of Engineers sampled soil from 11 surface locations and 4 soil borings. At depth of up to 15 feet petroleum constituents were present in amounts exceeding ADEC criteria for soil cleanup. |
Louis Howard |
| 1/21/1992 |
Update or Other Action |
American North draft closure plan received by ADEC. Plans lists possible remediation techniques and disposal methods for an unknown quantity of contaminated soil impacted by spilled or leaked material from drums. |
Louis Howard |
| 1/23/1992 |
Site Added to Database |
Petroleum, antifreeze. |
Louis Howard |
| 2/14/1992 |
Document, Report, or Work plan Review - other |
Staff reviewed and commented on the sampling/analysis and quality assurance/quality control plan, draft closure plan Circle Road Drum Site. On January 21, 1992 ADEC received copies of the documents "Sampling/Analysis and Quality Assurance/Quality Control Plan" and "Draft Closure Plan for Fort Richardson, Circle Drum Site prepared by American North Inc.".
1. Please note that this work plan is only part of the work plan proposed in the Federal Facility Compliance Agreement which you were to provide to ADEC and EPA by June 29, 1991.
2. Please provide additional information on the origins of the drums and their constituents. The description of constituents mentioned in the plan was too general and not indicative of the extent of contamination. It was mentioned in
section 1.2.2 that the drums were removed from the site by DEH. Please submit
information on the source of the drums, why the drums where stored there, and the ultimate disposal of the drums.
3. Prior to making any decisions, the department must review the prior site
investigations performed by the Army Enviornmental Hygiene Agency in October 1990, and by the U.S. Army Engineer District in July 1991. These reports were not submitted to ADEC. ADEC requests these reports be submitted to the Department within 30 days of receipt of this letter. ADEC will perform a 30 day review on these documents and the complete review of Sampling/Analysis and QA/QC Plan.
4. Figure 3 in the QA/QC report was not adequate. in depicting the area. A scaled
site diagram must be submitted which identifies the locations of the drums, the suspected contaminated areas, the concrete pad, locations and numbers of borings, and any other pertinent information.
5. Per 40 CFR part 265280 site-specific information is required on the contaminated site area explaining the geological and soil profile showing the types of soils and sediment layers. The Department requests at least one continuous soil profile to be taken to document any stratification in soil types.
6. Not enough sampling was done on the site to determine the extent of the contamination. Due to the lack of data on the level of contamination, the department requests that the Army develop surface sampling grid to systematically examine surface samples.
7. In section 1.2.2, the report states that “depth to ground water is greater than twenty feet bgs”, the exact depth of the underlying water table necessary to determine if groundwater contamination has occurred. Because evidence indicates an uncontrolled release, the department requests the Army to install three monitoring wells. The monitoring wells must be placed so as to triangulate perched water tables and to determine the ground water gradient.
Prior to any work being done at the site ADEC must receive/review and approve of the proposed work plan. |
Jennifer Roberts |
| 7/30/1992 |
Document, Report, or Work plan Review - other |
Staff sent a comment letter regarding the Final Sampling/analysis and quality assurance/quality control plans for the closure of the Circle Road Drum Site. Staff requested analysis for diesel range organics using methods such as 3540/8100M to cover C10-C28 range in addition to total petroleum hydrocarbons using method 418.1. Staff also requested backup information for the soil cleanup matrix determination for level "B" criteria.
Project objective of the investigation is to define the potential presence and extent of contamination that may have resulted from the operation of Circle Road Drum site as a solid waste management unit by the Army.
1) Determine whether hazardous constituents as defined by 40 CFR part 261 app. VIII are present in the surface and subsurface soils in the vicinity of the site;
2) Evaluate whether concentrations of hazardous constituents exceed EPA's proposed RCRA corrective action levels (Federal Register July 27, 1990) or recommended ADEC's contaminant levels for NON UST petroleum contaminated soils;
3) define the vertical and horizontal extent of impacted soils associated with solid waste management activities at Circle Road drum site;
4) Determine potential groundwater impacts;
5) Provide data for risk assessment and the selection and design of appropriate remediation methods, if necessary;
6) Develop a Final Closure Plan (under RCRA) for Circle Road Drum Site and provide recommendations for additional remedial investigation as necessary.
Analyses: petroleum hydrocarbons, volatile organic compounds, semivolatile organic compounds, methanol and glycols, PCBs, organochlorine pesticides, chlorinated herbicides, and RCRA metals.
Eight soil borings will be drilled and sampled with each being advanced to 20 feet and samples collected at 5 foot intervals. At least one soil boring to be continuously sampled to develop a complete stratigraphic profile. If groundwater is encountered during drilling, borings will be terminated at a depth of 5 feet below the water table or at a depth of 20ft. whichever is least. If no groundwater is encountered in the upper 20 feet of strata, then one soil boring will be continued to a depth of 50 feet to evaluate the potential for vertical transport of contaminants to the uppermost water bearing zones. |
Louis Howard |
| 11/19/1992 |
Document, Report, or Work plan Review - other |
Staff provided comments to the Revised Plans for Soil stockpile remediation dated November 13, 1992 DACA# 85-92-C-0048. All concerns raised at the October 28, 1992 meeting with the CORPS, SPI contractor, ADEC staff have been adequately addressed in the document. |
Louis Howard |
| 2/28/1993 |
Update or Other Action |
Draft Site Investigation Report Contract # DACA85-91-D-0002 Delivery Order# 0005 for US Army Dist. Engineer District-AK by AN/EMCON Inc. Project 13799.00. This final site investigation report summarizes sampling activities conducted by the U.S. Army in July 1991, and describes sampling activities conducted by AN/E in July 1992. Site investigation and closure activities are part of the U.S. Army Installation Restoration Program (IRP). Extractable petroleum hydrocarbons (EPH) as diesel were found in all samples collected during the July 1991 sampling event except from boring AP-3027 (10 and 15 feet) and boring AP-3028. The only sample in which EPH exceeded the proposed cleanup action
level of 1000 ppm was collected from location A (11,000 ppm at 6 to 24 inches).
Samples were analyzed for TRPH by Method 418.1. The highest level of TRPH, 130,000 ppm, was detected in the surface soil sample collected from location A. The proposed cleanup action level for residual range hydrocarbons is 2000 ppm. TRPH
concentrations exceeded the proposed cleanup action level in suficial samples (6 to 24
inches) collected from location A, location B, and location I.
Sampling Problems:A sample was not collected from boring B-3 at a depth of 20 feet, and boring B-5 was terminated at 45 feet due to auger refusal. Sample spoon refusal prevented the collection of a sample from a depth of 5 feet in boring B-8 and at 10 feet in boring B-6. A sample was not collected from a depth of 0 to 1.5 feet’ in boring B-6 due to an
insufficient volume of soil recovered in the split spoon sampler. The sample collected
from the 5 to 6.5 feet interval from this boring was not submitted for analysis by Method
8260 because the sample matrix was predominantly gravel and therefore prevented
sufficient recovery of a suitable sample for volatile organic compounds. Additionally,
the sample collected at a depth of 20 to 21.5 feet in boring B-6 was not submitted for
metal analysis due to insufficient soil recovery.
The results of the sampling and analysis programs indicate that the extent of impacted
soil is limited to surficial sediments. Proposed site soil cleanup levels for TRPH and
EPH were exceeded in samples collected at surlicial sample locations A, B and I.
Proposed cleanup levels are 2,000 ppm for
residual range hydrocarbons (TRPH minus diesel-range hydrocarbons minus gasoline range hydrocarbons) and 1,000 ppm for diesel-range hydrocarbons. The extent of the
impacts to site soil is directly related to patches of a tar-like substance pooled on the
ground surface. The vertical extent of the contamination is limited to the upper two feet
of soil. Potential pathways for human exposure to hazardous waste constituents ‘in site soil may include dermal contact, ingestion, and inhalation. |
Louis Howard |
| 6/16/1993 |
Document, Report, or Work plan Review - other |
EPA sent comment letter on Fort Richardson and Fort Greely Closure Plans to Colonel Robert D. Wrentmore. On January 21, 1993, you responded to an EPA letter requesting Army priorities
for closure sites and outlined three primary sites as your highest priority: (1) Fort Greely
- Landfill Drum Storage Area, (2) Fort Richardson - Circle Road Drum Site, (3) Fort
Richardson - Building 955 Sludge Bin (EPA comments on the 11/25/92, Fort Rlchardson
- Building 955 Sludge Bin closure plan, were provided on 4/l/93). EPA has considered your prioritization and will make every effort to support your priorities to prevent any funding constraints that may develop due to delays in developing EPA-approvable closure plans. However, EPA’s priqrities may differ somewhat from the Army’s. Closure of Fort Richardson - Buildmg 704, Fort Richardson OB/OD area, and Fort Wainwright- Building 3015 are among those oonsidered priorities by EPA due to the potential risk to human health and the environment.
Fort Richardson entered into a Federal Facility Compliance Agreement (FFCA) ith the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in March 1991. This FFCA did not specifically require that Fort Richardson jllbmit a closure/post-closure plan for Building 700, Unlike the similar FFCA for Fort Greely, this FFCA did not require the Army to submit closure plans for other areas where hazardous wastes activities included treatment, disposal, or storage greater than 90 days. It is EPA’s understanding that this closure plan has been submitted by Fort Richardson as a result of information provided at the “outbriefing” of the 1991 and 1992 RCRA inspections and not the result of an EPA enforcement action or closure of a facility listed as part of Fort Richardson’s permit application.
Fort Richardson submitted a first draft of the cIosure/post-closure Plan for Building
700 on December 30, 1992. This draft closure plan was reviewed by EPA to determine its
technical adequacy, compliance with the requirements of 40 CFR 265, Subpart G, and overall conformance with EPA directive 9470.00-5 - RCRA Guidance Manual for Subpart G CIosure and Post-Closure Care Standards.
Section 1.0, Page 1, Second Paragraph:The text referred to the Circle Road Drum Site as a “Hazardous Waste Management Unit.” This text should be revised to read ‘The purpose of this closure plan is to bring Circle Road Drum Storage Site, identified as a Hazardous Waste Regulated Unit, into compliance with . ..“.
Section 3.2.2, Page 14, First Paragraph:The assumption that the 59 drums of hazardous wastes observed at this site during the October 1990 sampling activity, were the onIy hazardous wastes ever stored at this site is unsubstantiated and potentially misleading. The sentence should be deleted. Additional attempts (review of facility records) should be made to clarify the site history, and to demonstrate that only a limited volume of hazardous wastes were ever staged at this site.
Consequently, the last sentence of this paragraph should be revised to read “Based upon the
available information that the hazardous waste stored on the site was limited to 59 drums,
and even the low permeabilitv of underlying sediments. It is presumed that contaminant
migration will be confined to soils at shallow deaths. and may not impact groundwater beneath the site.”
Section 6.1, Page 36, Second Paragraph:The text indicated that ‘The limits of the impacted area have been defined,” without providing a map to show the delineation. Figure 3 only shows the sample locations. It does not depict the limits of the impacted area. A map showing the approximate boundaries of the impacted area should be provided in the text This delineation is also important for justifying that excavating the lateral extent of the impacted area to a depth of two feet, will indeed onIy generate a volume of soil equal to 70 to 100 cubic yards that needs to be remediated. |
Louis Howard |
| 9/21/1993 |
Update or Other Action |
A.G. letter (Breck Tostevin) to Tamela J. Tobia OS Judge Advocate for the Army. Letter states that a separate petroleum site compliance agreement should be separate from the CERCLA federal facility agreement. The petroleum site restoration agreement would function as a "two-party agreement" under the FFA. It would track the basic provisions of the UST Agreement but be tailored to the State's contaminated site regulations and would interface with the FFA. All petroleum sites addressed under the Two Party agreement would be reviewed in the final operable unit of the FFA and actions taken would be memorialized in a Record of Decision (ROD) under the FFA. |
Louis Howard |
| 11/15/1993 |
Update or Other Action |
Chemical data report CENPA-EN-G-MI for CENPA-CO-RR. Soil samples collected at the site were found to be contaminated with petroleum, primarily diesel-range products. Samples also contained up to 15 parts per million herbicide 2,4-D. No polychlorinated biphynyls (PCBs) or volatile organics were detected at concentrations above regulatory levels. The soil should be excavated and remediated as petroleum contaminated soil. Bioremediation is an appropriate remedial technique.
Petroleum: Both sampling locations are contaminated with petroleum. From 616 ppm to 6200 ppm diesel-range organics were detected. From 3680 ppm to 4620 ppm total petrolem hydrocarbons were reported.
The level of 2,4-D present is too low to force the soil to be treated as a characteristic waste under 40 CF'R 261. This herbicide is not a known carcinqen, and it does not appear on the EPA Region X "cheat sheet" of risk-based concentrations. The amount of 2,4-D present does not require that soil be remediated. However, remediation of the collocated petroleum is necessary. Although the level of 2,4-D at the site does not exceed regulatory thresholds for incineration, it may be difficult to find a company willing to thermally remediate the soil. If so, bioremdiation of the petrolem contamination is recommended. |
Louis Howard |
| 9/30/1994 |
Update or Other Action |
Field Report/Site Assessment for Circle Road Drum Site, Mini Sites, Bryant Army Airfield Fort Richardson, AK. Contract No. DACA85-93-C-0036. This report presents a summary of the soil screening and remediation program for the Circle Road Drum Sites, Fort Richardson, Alaska. Fort Richardson is located approximately 8 miles northeast of downtown Anchorage, Alaska. This property is owned by the U.S. government. This project was to clean the remains of contamination from drums stored on the site. The primary product remaining at the time of cleanup was tar.
This project was solicited by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Alaska Division. Anchorage Enterprises, Inc., was awarded a change order to Soil Remediation, Mini-Sites, Bryant Army Airfield, Fort Richardson, Alaska Contract #DACA85-93-0036 to complete the work. Central Environmental Inc. (CEI) was awarded d subcontract to handle the contaminated waste. CEI subcontracted Environmental Management, Inc. (EMI) to conduct the field screening, soil sample collection and reporting of site conditions.
Field screening and sample collecting were conducted using EMI’s approved Quality Assurance Program Plan (QAPP), on file with the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) and specifications of the contract.
Circle Drive and Totman Road provided access to the site. The access to the site itself was a dirt road that led into the site. Three areas were identified for cleanup of contaminated soil. A cleanup level of 1000 ppm with diesel range organics analysis and 2000 ppm with total range petroleum hydrocarbons analysis was directed. The soil at the original limit of excavation was found to be still contaminated in two of the three areas. Approximately 400 cubic yards of additional soil was removed to try to cleanup the site. The limits of the excavation after the second excavation were all below the established cleanup level. All contaminated soil, tar, tar contaminated debris was removed and the excavation s backfilled with clean soils.
On October 26-27, 1993, three areas were identified for cleanup of contaminated soil. The stated cleanup levels were 1000 ppm with diesel range organics analysis and 2000 ppm with total range petroleum hydrocarbons analysis. Identified areas were excavated to the limits specified. Soil samples were then collected from the sidewalls and the floor of each excavation and submitted for laboratory analysis. The soil at these original limits of excavation was found to be above the required cleanup levels in two of the three identified areas.
On July 26, 1994, further excavation of the two contaminated areas was conducted. Field screening was conducted to direct the limits of final excavation. Approximately 400 cubic yards of additional soil was removed. Soil samples were again collected from the sidewalls and the floor of the two excavations and submitted for laboratory analysis.
No further excavating was done and after laboratory results confirmed cleanup levels were met the excavations were backfilled and compacted. The contaminated soil stockpiled on site was transported to Anchorage Sand and Gravel for final disposition. Thermal desorption was used for the remediation process. The laboratory results verified that the surrounding soils were below the required cleanup levels. The contaminated soils were excavated and treated. Subsequently
the excavations were backfilled and compacted. EMI recommends closure of this site. |
Louis Howard |
| 11/9/1994 |
Document, Report, or Work plan Review - other |
Letter to HQ USARAK APVR-RPW-EV RE: October 21, 1994 Site Work Plan, Sampling Analysis Plan, QC/QA Plan, and Health and Safety Plan, Circle Rd. Heating Oil Tanks Project# DACA8594DOOO9
The Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) has received, on November 4, 1994, a copy of the above documents. Here are our comments regarding the documents. Task'3 Implement Release Investigation Plan Soil Borings page 5 last para. The text states after receipt of lab data one soil boring will be completed as a monitoring well in the area where the highest concentrations and deepest contaminant. impact occur.
ADEC requests two monitoring wells be installed instead of one to characterize the potential
impacts to groundwater at the 12 different project sites. One well will be placed at each of
the two project sites that have the highest concentrations and deepest impacts to soil.
Health and Safety Plan
ADEC does not review health and safety plans, but will keep a copy on fIle in its records. |
Louis Howard |
| 6/1/1995 |
Update or Other Action |
May 23, 1995 Disposal of Waste Soils from Circle Rd. Assessment Project
The Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) has received, on May 24, 1995,
a copy of the above document. After reviewing the plan for disposing of 25 tons of waste soils
generated from drilling activities at 11 former heating oil tanks along Circle Rd. is approved as submitted. ADEC requests copies of the post treatment sampling results and tare receipts of soil accepted by CleanS oils of Anchorage. |
Louis Howard |
| 8/2/1995 |
Update or Other Action |
USARAK is requesting a waiver from the site assessment requirements of 18 AAC 78.90 for an underground storage tank (UST) removal at the Roosevelt Road Command Bunker, to be conducted this field season by Brown and Root Service Corporation. The Roosevelt Road facility is currently part of Operable Unit (OU) A, and initial investigation of the area for petroleum, oil and lubricant (POL) contamination has already occurred this summer.
The UST, number 1111, is located in the command bunkers leach field, and was discovered by Ecology and Environment, Inc, while conducting soil borings in the area. Initial results from the soil borings in and around the leach field indicate the area is not contaminated with POL, however, complete results will not be available until the preliminary assessment/site inspection (PA/SI) report is received. Based upon this information USARAK also requests that this UST site not be encompassed by the Two Party UST agreement, but be moved into OU A, and addressed under any investigative/remedial actions being developed for the OU. |
Louis Howard |
| 2/5/1997 |
Update or Other Action |
Remedial Action Report Soil Pile Remediation received.
On September 20, 1995, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Alaska District, contracted Oil Spill Consultants, Inc. (OSCI) to haul 9,137 cubic yards of soil from the Fort Richardson biocell to the Anchorage Regional Landfill (ARL). This delivery order also required OSCI to provide thermal treatment for 14 stockpiles of petroleum (POL) contaminated soil located at Fort Richardson, Alaska.
Laboratory analyses were submitted to the Municipality of Anchorage to show that the
biocell soil meets ARL's criteria for landfill disposal. Afterward, trucks using the Davis
Highway hauled the biocell soil to ARL where it was used to construct a new landfill cap. Based on scale tickets provided by the Municipality, 13,788 tons or 9,192 cubic yards of soil were hauled from the Fort Richardson biocell to the municipal landfill. Soil hauling began on May 20, 1996 and was completed on June 6, 1996. This included the time required to haul liners and other debris associated with the biocell to ARL. The soil berm surrounding the biocell was stockpiled at the Fort Richardson sanitary landfill.
Based on laboratory results, the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) approved thermal treatment for the 14 POL contaminated soil stockpiles (Appendix A). The soil stockpiles were hauled to Alaska Soil Recycling on June 27, 1996. After laboratory analyses confirmed that the soil was treated to ADEC Level •A• Cleanup criteria, it was returned to Fort Richardson and stockpiled at the sanitary landfill on August 5, 1996. All debris (liners, tires and sandbags) associated with the POL stockpiles was hauled to ARL for disposal.
According to the delivery order, the 14 POL stockpiles were supposed to contain ns cubic yards of petroleum contaminated soil. However, scale tickets provided by the thermal treatment facility revealed that the total quantity was 1,216 cubic yards. A delivery order modification was issued to cover the cost for treating the additional soil.
To satisfy contract requirements, the footprint for each stockpile was sampled (July 2, 1996) for GRO and ORO. A total of two (2) QC samples, two (2) QA samples and twenty (20) project samples were collected. The QC and project samples were sent to CT&E. The QA sample was express mailed to NPDL. Analytical methods and laboratory results for the stockpile footprint samples are summarized in Table 4. Sample point locations are shown in Figures 7 through 10.
The GRO level for all stockpile footprints ranged from non-detected to 23.20 mg/kg. These values are less than the maximum residual GRO concentration (50 mg/kg) allowed under ADEC level "A" Cleanup criteria.
All tasks required by Delivery Order No. 0002 were successfully completed. No additional
work is required to complete contract requirements for this delivery order. |
Louis Howard |
| 9/22/1997 |
Update or Other Action |
Site information submitted by Army showed 1993/1994 removal actions and off site treatment met cleanup level "C" criteria. Staff briefed DoD section manager on soil removal and sampling results from previous removal actions. Section Manager concurred that site may be recommended for closure. (Building 45580 Sewer line project near reserve center also received approval for closure in same email corr.). |
Louis Howard |
| 1/14/1998 |
Site Closure Approved |
Staff reviewed data submitted that showed confirmational sampling at the site met cleanup criteria Level "C". No further remedial action required - site closed out. Decision document signed by the 3 CERCLA RPMs documenting no further action under CERCLA required and no further action is required under SFRERA either.
|
Louis Howard |
| 4/21/1998 |
Site Ranked Using the AHRM |
Ranking action added now because it was not added when the site was originally ranked. |
Bill Petrik |
| 9/28/2000 |
Update or Other Action |
OUD ROD Signed. Originally this site was in the OUD as one of 12 source areas. Former drum storage area investigated in 1991 and 1992. Diesel range organics (DRO) and total residual range petroleum hydrocarbons (TRPH) were the only contaminants of concern (maximum 11,000 mg/kg 130,000 mg/kg respectively). Two removal actions occurred in 1993 and 1994 to Level “C” matrix criteria. Four hundred cubic yards of soil removed and thermally treated at a permitted facility in Anchorage. No further action required under CERCLA or Contaminated Sites Program. Closure plans for RCRA 1991 FFCA were developed and submitted to EPA. Final closure plans that incorporated comments and recommendations from EPA and ADEC were submitted for the Circle Road Drum Site on September 8, 1993. |
Louis Howard |
| 2/22/2001 |
Update or Other Action |
EPA RCRA letter received concerning site. Federal Facility Compliance Agreement required USARAK to determine if wastes at site are hazardous as defined under 40 CF$ 262.11. July 1991/1992 sampling showed the contamination of petroleum to be above Level D. 1993/1994 removal action showed it to be below Level D. Therefore unit will be considered clean closed under RCRA and the FFCA. |
Louis Howard |
| 2/20/2003 |
Update or Other Action |
Jennifer Roberts signed the five year review document for the Post. The objectives of the Five-Year Review are to answer the following questions:
•Are the remedies functioning as intended by the decision document?
•Are the exposure assumptions, toxicity data, cleanup levels, and remedial action objectives (RAOs) used at the time of the remedy still valid?
•Has any other information come to light that could call into question the protectiveness of the remedy?
An additional goal of the FFA was to integrate the Army’s CERCLA response obligations and RCRA Corrective Action requirements resulting from the EPA’s and Army’s 1991 Federal Facilities Compliance Agreement. As stipulated in the OUD ROD, six source areas are subject to RCRA Closure in accordance with the FFCA. Those six sites are: Circle Road Drum site, Building 700/718, Building 704, Building 955, Building 35-752, and Building 45-590. |
Louis Howard |
