Action Date |
Action |
Description |
DEC Staff |
9/11/2000 |
Leaking Underground Storage Tank Release Confirmed - Petroleum |
LUST Site created in CSP for source area ID 77865 (Added by System) |
David Allen |
9/11/2000 |
Site Added to Database |
|
Former Staff |
10/2/2001 |
Update or Other Action |
Changed Project Manager from Paul Horwath to Mike Jaynes |
Cynthia Pring-Ham |
8/26/2002 |
Update or Other Action |
Project Manager change from Jaynes to Wanstall. File review and site evaluation. Tank closure adequate, Corrective Action is not. CAP for remaining contamination needed. |
Bruce Wanstall |
5/6/2004 |
Leaking Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Initiated - Petroleum |
Sorbent pads used to remove free product from water in excavation. 40 cubic yards of contaminated material identified by headspace vapor soil screening and hydrothermally activated irridescent sheen test from single excavation to remove both USTs. Soil was transported with DEC approval to USR Juneau for thermal remediation. |
Bruce Wanstall |
5/6/2004 |
Update or Other Action |
This property shared by DOT and DPS. Three release events from underground storage tank closures are recorded at the site with limited corrective action taken. Migration of residual soil impacts may be influenced by streams on east and west sides of the property. |
Bruce Wanstall |
3/1/2005 |
Update or Other Action |
Noll 2003 Report reviewed; Qualified lab confirmed; Noll Environmental is not listed as qualified sampler for the Underground Storage Tank Program. 25 cubic yard contaminated soil stockpile remains on-site. |
Bruce Wanstall |
7/18/2005 |
Site Visit |
Met shop foreman on-site to discuss history of UST closures and contaminated soil stockpile conditions. Inspected sediments and banks of streams that run along opposite sides of the property; no petroleum impacts were found. Seeps in stream banks are not present; no indication that groundwater is present beneath the former UST closure sites. No wells are located on the property or in the area to indicate existing or potential use of groundwater as drinking water source. |
Bruce Wanstall |
5/22/2007 |
Site Visit |
Site visit to determine status of the contaminated soil stockpile; discuss soil sampling plan with facility manager Nick Barstadt; inspect stream banks for off-site GW seepage. |
Bruce Wanstall |
6/20/2007 |
Exposure Tracking Model Ranking |
Surface soil and subsurface soil exposure routes are deminimis; exposure by future ingestion of groundwater can be controlled using institutional site controls. |
Bruce Wanstall |
8/24/2007 |
Update or Other Action |
Review and comment on workplan for the Ketchikan ADOT&PF Maintenance Shop LUST contamination. Three monitoring wells will be installed and the contaminated soil stockpile will be assessed. |
Bruce Wanstall |
2/7/2008 |
Document, Report, or Work plan Review - other |
2007 UST Groundwater Assessment Report Data meet CSP quality assurance standards. |
Bruce Wanstall |
2/11/2008 |
Document, Report, or Work plan Review - other |
ADEC approved the Groundwater and Soil Stockpile Assessment Report on the ADOTPF Ketchikan Maintenance Station by Shannon & Wilson. Soil samples from the stockpile were non-detect for DRO. Water samples analyzed for BTEX, GRO, DRO, and RRO were all below Table C screening levels. |
Bruce Wanstall |
1/21/2011 |
Document, Report, or Work plan Review - other |
ADEC evaluation of the letter-report titled Groundwater Sampling, ADOT&PF Maintenance Facility, Ketchikan, Alaska by Shannon & Wilson finds the data meet field and laboratory quality assurance criteria and is approved. The tops of the three well casings were observed to have frost-jacked cycles to heights that prevented the monument lids from securing into the monument rings. Submersible pump was used to purge the wells and collect samples. The 2010 well samples have DRO and RRO in concentrations exceeding Table C levels. |
Bruce Wanstall |
9/2/2011 |
Document, Report, or Work plan Review - other |
DEC evaluation of 2011 Groundwater Monitoring Report ADOT&PF Maintenance Facility Ketchikan AK by Oasis finds the site activity met the objectives of the project and an assessment of the sample collection demonstrated that a sufficient number of representative samples were collected and the precision, accuracy and completeness of the resulting analytical data is sufficient to be used to support the decision making process. In accordance with Title 18 Alaska Administrative Code (AAC) 75.360, qualified person(s) used data collection and field screening methods consistent with DEC methodology in the approved site assessment work plan. The DEC laboratory report checklist submitted as an attachment is acceptable and the data meet field and laboratory report quality assurance criteria in Contaminated Sites Program guidance documents, therefore the Report is approved in accordance with 18 AAC 75.335(d). |
Bruce Wanstall |
3/22/2012 |
Exposure Tracking Model Ranking |
A new updated ranking with ETM has been completed for source area 77865 USTs as ID# 2598. Oasis collected samples of groundwater from wells MW-1, MW-2, and MW-3 in July 2011. Samples were analyzed for COCs DRO and RRO with parallel silica gel cleanup to remove potential biogenic compounds contributing to the contaminant levels. No DRO or RRO was detected in any of the samples from the three site wells. |
Bruce Wanstall |
7/3/2012 |
Exposure Tracking Model Ranking |
A new updated ranking with ETM has been completed for source area 77865 USTs as ID# 2598. |
Bruce Wanstall |
7/5/2012 |
Cleanup Complete Determination Issued |
The cleanup actions to date have served to excavate and adequately remove contaminated soil from the site. Based on the information available, DEC has determined no further assessment or cleanup action is required. There is no longer a risk to human health or the environment, and this site will be designated as closed on the Department's database. This determination is in accordance with 18 ACC 75.276(f) and does not preclude DEC from requiring additional assessment and/or cleanup action if future information indicates that this site may pose an unacceptable risk to human health or the environment.
|
Bruce Wanstall |