| Action Date |
Action |
Description |
DEC Staff |
| 10/2/1992 |
Enforcement Agreement or Order |
State Elmendorf Environmental Restoration Agreement signed. The agreement is designed to remedy environmental contamination due to past practices at the Base & avoid the expense of formal enforcement proceedings. The Air Force will perform any necessary assessment, monitoring, remediation, & closure of the sites.
The agreement addresses the following program areas: solid waste, underground storage tanks (USTs), & petroleum oil & lubricants (POL) spills. LUST sites will be remediated pursuant to 18 AAC 78, POL sites will be remediated pursuant to 18 AAC 75 (non-LUST petroleum); the interim soil guidance for non-UST soil cleanup levels dated July 17, 1991; the guidance for storage, remediation & disposal of non-UST petroleum contaminated soils date July 29, 1991; & for water, the applicable water standards set out in 18 AAC 70; & the applicable federal regulatory requirements for Maximum Contaminant Levels for drinking water; & interim guidance for surface & groundwater cleanups, dated September 26, 1990. ADEC & USAF agree to review new ADEC guidance within sixty (60) days of its formal adoption.
The parties agree to incorporate new guidance into future remediation actions. If the Air Force wishes to reduce soil & water contamination levels to those which exceed the previous mentioned regulations/criteria, it may prepare a risk assessment which sets forth justification for the proposed elevated cleanup levels. Solid waste sites will be remediated pursuant to the levels identified in 18 AAC 60.315 & 18 AAC 60.035(4). |
Jennifer Roberts |
| 3/26/1993 |
Update or Other Action |
DOD and ADEC joint Technical Memorandum of understanding signed concerning the Base wide Groundwater (GW) signed by: ADEC Jennifer Roberts RPM and USAF Joseph Williamson Chief Environmental Programs and Restoration. Due to the base wide GW study and the FY92 field work that occurred at Operable Units (OUs) 1, 2, and 5 it appears a large portion of the GW flows into OU5 (attach. 1-contour map). Based on this fact, Elmendorf (EAFB) will move all upgradient GW into the OU5 Feasibility Study, Proposed Plan and Record of Decision (ROD). This means addressing all GW from upgradient sources (CERCLA (ST20, OUs 3 and 4) and OUs 1 and portions of OU2) and SERA) at OU5 instead of at each individual source area. Sites with free phased product would be looked at to see if there is an available technology to clean them up in a cost effective way. Soil contamination would be addressed at the source areas. NOTE: addressed at the source areas is interpreted by ADEC as removal through excavation or active treatment systems (e.g. high vacuum extraction, bioventing, etc...). |
Jennifer Roberts |
| 11/29/1993 |
Update or Other Action |
The United States Air Force (USAF) owns & operates numerous underground storage tanks (USTs) at Elmendorf Air Force Base (AFB), which are regulated under Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 280 (40 CFR 280) & Title 18, Alaska Administrative Code, Chapter 78 (18 AAC 78). To bring the USTs Into compliance with these regulations, the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) & the USAF have entered into a two-party agreement titled "State-Elmendorf Underground Storage Tank Agreement" dated November 29, 1993.
The agreement states that all USTs at EAFB shall meet release detection requirements by December 31. 1994, or the USTs shall be closed out, either temporarily or permanently, in accordance with 18 AAC 78.080/085 Additionally, USTs removed after December 22, 1988 must be permanently closed in accordance with 18 ACC 78.085.
|
Jennifer Roberts |
| 1/20/1994 |
Enforcement Agreement or Order |
Janice Adair Regional Administrator Southcentral Regional Office signs the November 29, 1993 Underground Storage Tank Agreement. The Parties enter this Agreement to perform necessary inventory, registration, upgrading or closure, & tightness testing associated with USTs at Elmendorf. All draft final work plans for field work must be submitted to ADEC a minimum of 30 days prior to the start of field work or construction. Site Assessment draft reports for closures must be submitted to ADEC within 60 days after completion of field work. All reports of confirmed leaking USTs, or the need for further investigation, will be forwarded to 3 SPTG/CEVR (or its) successor organization) for possible inclusion into the SERA*. Initial abatement activities required under 18 AAC 78.230 will be conducted by the AF prior to transfer of any site to the SERA.
*SERA=Environmental Restoration Agreement between ADEC & the AF dated October 1992.
Discovered USTs-All USTs discovered during the life of this Agreement will be addressed under this Agreement & will be added to Attachment A. The AF will notify ADEC by next day mail of any discovery within five days of the discovery of an UST, unless release notification is required under 18 AAC 78 220, in which case those provisions will control.
Installation: Any new USTs installed by the AF shall be installed in accordance with 40 CFR 280 & 18 AAC 78.022 through 18 AAC 78.090 & will have leak detection, corrosion protection, overfill protection, & spill protection. The AF will notify ADEC at least 30 days prior to initiating installation of an UST. UST installation work will be conducted by a certified UST worker as required by 18 AAC 78.030 & 18 AAC 78.400.
Release Detection: The AF shall install & perform release detection in accordance with the schedules outlined in Attachment A. If release detection is not installed or the tank not previously permanently closed by the date in Attachment A, the AF will close the tank in accordance with the closure requirements in 18 AAC 78. All tightness testing performed to satisfy these requirements will be conducted bv a certified UST worker as required bv 18 AAC 78.030 & 78.400
Operation & Maintenance of Corrosion Protection: The AF shall meet the requirements of 18 AAC 78.045 & 40 CFR 280.31 for any steel USTs, that have corrosion protection systems The testing of the corrosion protection systems shall be done by a certified UST worker as required by 18 AAC 78.400.
Site Assessment or System Tightness Test: The AF shall either conduct a system tightness test on all regulated USTs located at the Base or permanently close the USTs in accordance with Attachment A. If site assessments or system tests have been conducted, the AF shall submit proof of compliance by the deadlines set in Attachment A. All tightness testing work will be conducted by a certified UST worker as required by 18 AAC 78.400.
Release Investigation & Corrective Action: Release investigations, interim corrective action & corrective action on petroleum contamination identified in work conducted pursuant to this Agreement is not within the scope of this Agreement. These activities will be conducted pursuant to the Environmental Restoration Agreement between ADEC & the AF dated October 1992. |
Janice Adair |
| 10/1/1994 |
Update or Other Action |
|
Former Staff |
| 12/30/1994 |
Update or Other Action |
Final Site Assessment report for UST No. 13 (bldg. 9480 formerly Bldg. 5-800) received. In observance of the agreement between ADEC and the United States Air Force, USTs not meeting release detection requirements by December 31, 1994 shall be closed out either temporarily or permanently in accordance with 18 AAC 78.080/085. As a result, Elmendorf has initiated temporary closure at Air Force UST Identification Number (AFID) 13 (UST 13).
AFID 13 was incorrectly identified as UST 813 in that agreement however, the error was detected and the proper modifications were made. To support temporary closure, the system components associated with UST 13 have been deactivated and drained of product A site assessment has been conducted in accordance with 18 AAC 78.090. The objective of the site assessment was to evaluate the presence or absence of petroleum contamination and to determine whether corrective action must be taken in accordance with 18 AAC 78.200-280.
This report presents the results of tile site assessment which was performed for UST 13
Based on the field Investigation, UST 13 is a 2,000-gallon, carbon steel, underground storage tank located in the south-central portion of the AFB adjacent to the northern corner of Building 5-800 within a landscaped area. The UST was installed on January 10, 1965 and was used to store diesel fuel for ar emergency generator located inside Building 5-800. The UST is currently in-place; however, it is not used and does not contain any product As part of the site assessment, two soil borings were installed near the UST Field screening was conducted continuously during placement of the two soil borings with a photoionization detector to monitor organic vapors. In addition, one soil sample was collected from each boring and analyzed at an analytical laboratory.
The results of the site assessment do not show diesel range organic concentrations in the soil which exceed the cleanup levels developed for this site based on ADEC's guidelines. This indicates that petroleum contamination (as defined by ADEC) resulting from the storage of diesel fuel in UST 13 does not exist. It is recommended that UST 13 be permanently closed in accordance with 18 AAC 78.085. Permanent closure should include the removal of UST 13, along with associated piping, followed by the preparation of a closure report for submission to ADEC.
|
Jennifer Roberts |
| 8/11/1995 |
Update or Other Action |
ADEC (John Halverson) sent letter to Air Force (L. Opperman) RE: Disposition of petroleum contaminated soil generated during underground storage tank (UST) Closures at Elmendorf AFB. I met with you & Mr. John Mahaffey on April 18, 1995, to discuss UST closures planned at Elmendorf this summer & the issue of how contaminated soil would be handled. We agreed that if "clean closure" could be reached through excavation, all contaminated soil should be removed & taken to an off-site treatment facility.
We also agreed that petroleum contaminated soil could be placed back in the ground, on the condition bioventing systems would be installed starting this year, if clean closure was not feasible. However, it has become apparent the Air Force has not been able to implement corrective action at leaking underground storage tank sites in a timely manner.
Therefore, our April 21, 1995 agreement on soil management must be revoked. Starting immediately, the department requests that all contaminated soil removed from the ground during closure or upgrade of USTs be completely contained in accordance with our petroleum contaminated soil stockpiling guidelines referenced in the UST regulations. Please notify your project managers, the Army Corps of Engineers project manager & all of your UST contractors of this change. The rationale behind the need to contain all excavated petroleum contaminated soil is provided below.
Failure to implement Corrective Action-Tank #805, at building 24-805, failed a tightness test in 1994 & was removed from the ground. Tanks #96-104 were also removed from the ground in 1994. Petroleum contaminated soil was excavated during removal of the tanks. The Air Force requested approval to place contaminated soil back in the ground at both sites. Department approval was granted on the condition corrective action be started at each site no later than June 30, 1995.
The Air Force had committed to doing this work under Phase IV of the SERA. However, we have been informed that contracts for SERA Phase IV have not yet been awarded, work plans have not been developed, & it does not appear the field work will be started this year. This is a violation of the corrective action requirements outlined in the UST regulations & our prior agreements.
Management Action Plan (MAP) for transfer of LUST sites into the SERA-On several occasions the department has requested a formalized process for transfer of leaking UST sites from the UST agreement into the SERA. The January 3 1, 1995 annual UST report states that a MAP was being prepared to formalize such a process & that a copy would be forwarded to us as soon as it was completed.
We have not received a copy of the MAP. Numerous LUST sites have been identified during the past two years & transfer of sites between the UST & SERA compliance agreements has not been working. It appears the UST agreement needs to be amended to address release investigation & corrective action requirements. Based on the above & the fact that funding for DoD environmental cleanups is being reduced, we are no longer in a position to allow contaminated soil to be placed back in the ground with the hope it will be remediated in a timely manner. |
John Halverson |
| 5/24/1996 |
Site Added to Database |
|
Former Staff |
| 5/24/1996 |
Leaking Underground Storage Tank Release Confirmed - Petroleum |
LUST Site created in CSP for source area ID 76228 |
Former Staff |
| 5/24/1996 |
Leaking Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Initiated - Petroleum |
|
Former Staff |
| 9/30/1996 |
Update or Other Action |
10,000 gallon steel tank (AFID 814) was used to store diesel (JP-8) fuel near building 5-800 (Regional Operations Control Center). JP-8 (1978/1995 to present) is the primary US Air Force and shore-based US Navy aviation fuel. JP-8 is very similar to Jet A/A-1; however, JP-8 contains anti-icing, corrosion/lubricity and anti-static additives. JPTS (1956), developed for the U-2, is a “non-distillate” kerosene with a -64 oF freeze point, 109 oF flash point of (Min) and thermal stability add-pack (CJFA-5).
Due to the limited space between the property fence surrounding bldg. 5-800 and the concrete cap over the new UST installed in the same location as AFID 814, neither soil boring could be placed in the center of the former tank location. Due to the presence of smear zone contamination at ST527, a groundwater sample was collected from soil boring 527-01 and detected only DRO (35.7 mg/L) which exceeds the ADEC groundwater cleanup standards for DRO (1.5 mg/L). Upgradient wells (ST20-03, 62-WL-02, 62-WL05, 64-WL-01) did not detect any DRO above cleanup levels in 1997 sampling. DRO was found at 25 ft. at 266 mg/kg in the smear zone (gw is at 24.3 ft. bgs). The excavated and stockpiled soil was used to backfill the excavation. |
Louis Howard |
| 10/17/1996 |
Institutional Control Record Established |
Air Force memo: Restricted Use of the Shallow Aquifer on EAFB signed by William R. Hanson P.E. GM-14 Chief Environmental Flight dated October 17, 1996 Memorandum for 3 SPTG/CEC/CEO from 3 SPTG/CEV
1) Due to the contamination & commitments to EPA/DEC the use of the shallow aquifer for any purpose on is not allowed. Attached Facilities Board minutes-03/29/1994 0930 Item 9 has Mr. William Hanson, briefing the Board on the policy to not use the shallow aquifer due to contamination. The Board approved this policy. Minutes approved by Thomas R. Case Brigadier General USAF Commander. The IRP has RODs for OUs 3 & 6 which require, the aquifer remain unused. 2) Personnel in the review process within CES must be aware of these policies & review them on a recurring basis. It is imperative this restriction be recognized & observed during engineer reviews & operations. |
Louis Howard |
| 7/28/1997 |
Update or Other Action |
Site Evaluation and bioventing studies for SERA Phase V Sites, 1997 workplan. Recommendations-A limited field investigation (approximately 5 soil borings advanced to groundwater) will be conducted at this site to define the extent of contamination. This site has contaminated soil close to building 5-800 (Regional Operations Control Center (ROCC). Because of the close proximity to this building, a decision will be made during the investigation whether to configure this site for a possible bioventing system and to conduct a treatability study. |
Louis Howard |
| 1/31/1998 |
Update or Other Action |
UST Decommissioning and site assessment AFID 814 Regional Operations Control Center-Sectional description for the UST is southwest 1/4 of northeast 1/4 of southeast 1/4 of Section 4 Township 13 North, Range 3 West, Anchorage. AFID 814.
On June 24-25, 1996, an UST removal was performed at the ROCC (Building 5-800). The
UST, identified as AFID 814, was a 1O,000-gailon, single-wall steel tank used to store diesel
(JP-8) fuel for emergency generators. The approximately 20-yr-old tank was in service as of
May 31, 1996. All tanks slated for removal under this delivery order (DO) have been leak
tested; testing of tank AFID 814 did not indicate tank: failure.
In accordance with the approved QAPP, the soil removed from the excavation was field
screened for the presence of contaminants. The soil consisted of moderate-brown, sandy
gravel, one-quarter inch to 8-inch subrounded gravel, fine to coarse-grained sand, with trace
very fine-grained sand and silt. The materials were damp, with no apparent hydrocarbon odor.
Field screening was performed with a Photovac MicroTIP HL 2000 PID with a 10.2 eV lamp in
accordance with Section 4.4 of the approved QAPP. The PID was calibrated to 97.7 parts per
million (ppm) in the field using isobutylene at 97 ppm ± 2 ppm.
Table I on page 8 provides the results of heads pace field screen measurements. In addition, 13
headspace measurements of the stockpiled soils were taken. These readings ranged from 24.9
to 2,124 ppm, with six of the readings over 100 ppm.
Soil samples were NOT taken from the highest PID reading of 2,124 ppm. Instead sampling focused on 7.4, 4.9, 13.7, 12.3, 12.1, 10.7, 694 and 16.5 ppm.
One sample collected from the excavation wall contained 210 mg/kg DRO.
Based on results of field screening and laboratory analyses of soil samples collected in the
vicinity of the excavated UST. Further corrective action work and soil clean-up confirmation
testing as required by 18 AAC 78.085 are necessary before closure ofUST AFID 814 can be
recommended. |
Tim Stevens |
| 10/29/1998 |
Document, Report, or Work plan Review - other |
Staff sent letter on a review of site assessments associated with the closure of UST AFID 814, located at bldg. 5-800 (Regional Operational Control Center), tank# 257 Facility ID 0-001525. The Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) received and reviewed the draft and final site assessment reports received August 29, 1996 and January 20, 1998. ADEC concurs with the site assessment recommendations to coduct a release investigation and possible corrective action at this site. It is ADEC's understanding that a release investigation is planned for this site under SERA V, and is scheduled for completion this year. ADEC will defer making any corrective action decisions until it has received and reviewed the release investigation report. |
Tim Stevens |
| 3/31/1999 |
Update or Other Action |
Site Evaluation & bioventing studies for SERA Phase V Sites, 1997 report received. ST 527 is a former UST site that contained a 10,000-gallon steel tank (AFlD 814) which was used to store diesel (JP-8) fuel near Building 5-800 (Regional Operations Control Center). This tank was removed in 1996 & environmental samples were taken during the excavation. The results of the excavation & sampling are presented in the UST Decommissioning & Site Assessment- AFID 814, Regional Operations Control Center. This information is also summarized in the Site Evaluation & Bioventing Studies for SERA Phase V Sites, 1997 Workplan.
Two soil borings were advanced to the water table at ST 527 to investigate potential soil contamination around the former UST. Soil samples were collected with a split-spoon sampler from the ground surface to the water table, & PID readings were measured for all intervals. A HanbyTM field sampling kit was also used to identify areas of contamination. Two or three samples were collected & analyzed from each soil boring. Analytical samples were taken from the intervals with the highest PID readings or HanbyTM concentrations, or from an interval that could have been contaminated based on field observations. PID & HanbyTM readings did NOT indicate elevated concentrations of fuel constituents in vadose soils at the two soil borings; however, an elevated HanbyTM result was measured for the saturated soil in one boring.
Due to the presence of smear zone contamination at ST 527, a GW sample was collected from soil boring SB 527-01 & detected only DRO (35.7 mg/L) which exceeds the ADEC GW Cleanup Standards for DRO (1.5 mg/L).
Due to the limited space between the property fence surrounding Bldg. 5-800, & the concrete cap over the new UST installed in the same location as AFlD 814, neither soil boring could be placed in the center of the fanner tank location. The first soil boring was located as near as possible to the center of the former tank. The second (confirmation) soil boring was located outside the fence, approximately two feet northeast of the tank excavation.
Based on GW contours prepared for the Basewide Support & GW Monitoring Program, Annual Report o/GW Sampling Activities, several wells may be potentially "upgradient" ofST 527. These upgradient wells include ST20-03, 62-WL-02, 62-WL-05, & 64-WL-O 1. The most recent GW data for these wells was presented in the Basewide Support & GW Monitoring Program, Analytical Results, for SERA Phase I Sites - Round 2, 1997. DRO was not detected above 1 mg/L at any of these upgradient wells. Another monitoring well (62-WL-06) located approximately 400 feet north & probably cross-gradient to ST 527 did not detect DRO in the GW. Thus, the source of the smear zone contamination is unknown; however, it is likely that the contamination source is located approximately northwest (& upgradient) of the site. Since ST 527 is located within the OU 5 GW Model Area contaminated GW detected at this site does not require treatment at this location.
|
Louis Howard |
| 8/21/2002 |
Update or Other Action |
RECKEY has automatically been generated. |
Cynthia Pring-Ham |
| 6/10/2004 |
Conditional Closure Approved |
On April 26, 2004, the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (the Department) received several decision document packets. After reviewing the data and reports submitted for ST527, the Department agrees that additional remediation or investigation is not required for ST527. However, since smear zone contamination in soil (266 mg/kg diesel range organics (DRO)) has been found at the groundwater interface and groundwater sample indicated DRO contamination (35.7 mg/L DRO), additional monitoring of well OU5MW-05 will be required until applicable cleanup levels in Table C of 18 AAC 75.345 are met.
The Base Master Plan needs to be updated to document the location of residual contamination at ST527 and the need to manage contaminated soil properly during any future construction or excavation work. The Department reserves its rights, under: 18 AAC 75 Contaminated Site regulations, 18 AAC 78 Underground Storage Tank regulations, and AS 46.03 to require additional investigation, cleanup, containment, and/or other necessary actions, if subsequent information indicates: additional contamination remains at the site which was previously undiscovered and presents an unacceptable risk to human health, safety, or welfare, or the environment. |
John Halverson |
| 6/10/2004 |
Update or Other Action |
There is petroleum contaminated soil higher than Method 2 cleanup levels in Tables B1/B2 (18 AAC 75.341) which remains at this site. The Base Master Plan documents the locations of residual contamination and the need to manage, store, transport and treat the contaminated soil properly if it ever excavated in the future for any reason.
ADEC is basing its decision on the most current and complete data provided by the Air Force. ADEC reserves its rights, under: 18 AAC 75 Oil and Other Hazardous Substances, Pollution Control regulations, 18 AAC 78 Underground Storage Tank Regulations, and Alaska Statute 46.03 to require additional investigation, cleanup, or containment if subsequent information indicates that: 1) additional contamination remains at the site which was previously undiscovered and presents an unacceptable risk to human health, safety, or welfare, or the environment; or 2) the information provided was invalid, incomplete, or fraudulent.
The following policy applies for soil regulated under 18 AAC 75 and 18 AAC 78 that is proposed for disposal off site from where it was generated. If the following criteria is met, ADEC approval and/or an institutional control(s) are not required:
1. The soil meets the most stringent Method Two, Migration to Groundwater, Table B2 cleanup level, and the most stringent standards for those chemicals under Table B1; 2. The soil may only be disposed of at any non-environmentally sensitive location in the Under 40" or Over 40" annual precipitation zone; 3. The soil is not placed within 100 feet of water wells, surface waters, and drainage ditches; and 4.The written approval from the landowner of the off-site location is required. |
Louis Howard |
| 8/2/2007 |
Site Reopened |
During excavation project, contractor demolishing concrete wall discovered a spill. Hazmat team responded and sampling results forwarded. Estimation that 1,000 gallons of diesel was released from historic spill. |
Louis Howard |
| 8/6/2007 |
Update or Other Action |
AMDS/SGPB (Nicole Bradley) email to 3 CES/CEVQ (Gary Fink) RE: Response Report.
Mr. Fink,
I went through and highlighted those chemicals we detected in the soil during our 2 Aug response. Benzene and toluene both show in red because they also appeared in our blank sample. The report is hard to read if you're not sure how to use it, so I highlighted everything detected and wrote what chemical it was next to it. First it will list anything in the library and then it will list the results after, so it is very repetitive.
Draeger tubes also showed low levels of xylene and benzene. I hope this helps you in your efforts, but please let me know if you need anything else.
TSgt Bradley
552-3953
|
Louis Howard |
| 8/6/2007 |
Update or Other Action |
Air Force (G. Fink) email to 3 CES/CECC (Mark Sakai) RE: Response Report
Capt Sakai,
Here are the monitoring results from the ALCOM incident that occurred on 2 Aug. The report is difficult to read but the bottom-line is the results for all the constituents were relatively low. Suggest that you forward this to David Shassetz (dshassetz@amerisco.com), Health and Safety Officer at Amerisco so he can determine the appropriate level of PPE for his workers.
Keep in mind that these results are for occupational exposure and not representative of the concentrations in the soil for cleanup purposes.
Additional soil sampling is required to determine the nature and extent of contamination which will direct any subsequent remedial action. A sample and analysis plan must be approved by ADEC prior to any field work. Give me a shout and we can discuss in more detail
|
Louis Howard |
| 8/6/2007 |
Meeting or Teleconference Held |
Ameresco (David Shassetz) sent email to PERP (Dale Gardner)
Dale, As per our phone conversation this morning & this afternoon, I am awaiting notification from EAFB Environmental on further lab results of the soil samples taken from the Bldg. 9480 Exterior Alcove HAZMAT Contamination. I have yet to receive a release for the site, from the EAFB Fire Department or EAFB Environmental.
As a quick recap, late Thursday, 2 August, 2007, Satori Group demolition workers discovered & reported a possible HAZMAT Contamination in an Exterior Alcove at Bldg. 9480, the ALCOM building. I responded to the scene, as did Steve Park & Thomas Oh, & by your direction via phone, Bryan Cherry notified the EAFB Spill Hotline & we isolated the suspected contaminated area. Upon arrival at the scene, the EAFB Fire Department took charge of the scene & further isolated the area as a HAZMAT Spill Site.
Once the EAFB Fire Department had set-up the HAZMAT Emergency Response System, they cordoned off the entire building & surrounding area between 19th & 20th Streets, & Mundy & Pease Avenues, utilizing various units of the Integrated Emergency Response Team. The EAFB HAZMAT Team collected samples of the suspected contamination, & performed an initial assessment.
The On-scene Assessment results were reported to be below Action Levels for Toxic Atmospheres & no Explosive Hazards. It was decided that the samples were going to be taken to a lab for further analysis. The EAFB Fire Department began to demobilize & isolated the area surrounding the alcove, pending further investigation. I asked the Incident Commander if he needed me for anything else.
The IC said there was nothing further I could do & so I departed the base at approximately 1930 hours. At 2007 hours, that evening, the IC called me & said that preliminary lab results indicated Benzene & Xylene in the samples taken & that EAFB Environmental would need to be contacted concerning the site, on the following day.
On the morning of the 3rd, I contacted & met with Gary Fink (EAFB Environmental) & escorted him to outside the Alcove area & explained the situation to him.
Mr. Fink, myself & Bryan Cherry entered the area & Mr. Fink performed an assessment. Mr. Fink said that he had contacted the State of Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) & was awaiting a determination from them concerning this HAZMAT contamination, & that he would contact me as soon as he heard from the state. We then departed the area & left the site as we found it.
This morning I met with the Battalion Chief at the EAFB Fire Department at Fire Station & asked when the site could be released. The Battalion Commander said that they did not have control of the site & that the EAFB Environmental Representative would be the one in control of the site.
I then called Gary Fink again, to see if he had further lab results or could release the lab results he had to me, & when we would have the site released to restart work. Gary stated that he was still waiting on word from the state, but that he believed that the state would probably consider the contamination to be below Clean-up Levels. That would mean that he could work with Ameresco, the COE & the Air Force, on a Remediation Plan.
Gary said that we would need to agree on a Site Characterization Plan, Sampling Plan, Collection Plan, Transportation & Disposal Plan, to ensure the Safety & Health of whoever would be doing the Remediation. Again, Gary said he would contact me as soon as he had more information.
Per the phone conversation this afternoon between yourself, Major Ericson & myself, I am awaiting further direction on a course of action to proceed before we can allow workers into the contamination site, since we still have not been given control of the site.
I just received a report from Capt. Sakai, & will forward.
Respectfully,
David L. Shassetz
Safety & Health Officer
AmerescoSolutions, Inc.
101 N. Post Rd.
Anchorage, AK 99501
907.223.8298 mobile
907.277.1046 office
DShassetz@Ameresco.com |
Louis Howard |
| 8/8/2007 |
Update or Other Action |
Email from Gary Fink (3 CES/CECC) to Mark Sakai (3 CES/CECC) RE: Summary of Events
Capt Sakai,
Let me clarify some points -
Environmental does not control access to the site. My objective is to ensure that the cleanup of the suspected source of contamination meets the requirements of ADEC cleanup regulations. From an environmental standpoint, the soil has been covered and should not be disturbed until a sampling plan/corrective action plan has been approved by ADEC. The plan must be prepared by the contractor who will do the cleanup.
This does not preclude workers from access to the area to do other work as long as the Health and Safety Officer has determined the appropriate level of PPE and the suspected soil remains undisturbed. I sent the results from Bioenvironmental to aid the contractor in making that determination.
In terms of cleanup levels, I did not say that the state would probably consider the contamination to be below Clean-up Levels. I did said that based on the submitted exposure levels, it is possible that the soil concentrations may be below cleanup levels. However, until the soil is characterized for fuels, VOCs and metals that determination can not be made.
Also, to make sure we are all on the same page, below are ADEC's general cleanup procedures -
1). Submit initial spill report to ADEC - Completed by CEV 2). Submit site characterization work plan to ADEC. (Plan must be approved prior to field activities and completed by a "qualified" person) 3). Conduct site characterization activities.
4). Submit results and proposed corrective action.
5). Conduct site cleanup activities.
6). Submit final report and site closure.
Based on the site conditions, these plans should not be extensive and no more than a letter report in size. All correspondence with ADEC must go through this office.
Gary
//SIGNED//
GARY FINK, YD-2, DAF
Program Manager
3 CES/CEVQ
(907) 552-7415
|
Louis Howard |
| 10/18/2007 |
Update or Other Action |
Air Force (G. Fink) email to 3 CES/CECC (Kyle Gebhardt) RE: ALCOM Spill History
Lt Gebhardt,
As a follow-up to our phone conversation, I have attached some past correspondence to give you some background information on the ALCOM 'spill' incident that occurred back in Aug 07. My last conversation with Capt Sakai was that the contract needed to be modified because of changing site conditions but I was assured that progress was being made.
I have informed the Alaska Dept of Environmental Conservation of the status but they are concerned about the lack of action. Please let me know what the status is and let's work to get this promptly resolved. Let me know if you have any questions.
|
Louis Howard |
| 10/30/2007 |
Update or Other Action |
Email Air Force to Gary Fink RE: Contaminated Soil - Way Ahead
Gentlemen -
As discussed in our 23 Oct meeting, please send an email to Mr. Gary Fink (cc'd) outlining the status and plan for the spill at ALCOM. Last report was that the spill had been contained, and will remain contained throughout the winter. Remediation efforts will begin in the Spring.
ADEC is eagerly awaiting the status.
I will be in an exercise for the next week and a half, so please send email directly to Mr. Fink.
Thanks for your time,
Kyle
KYLE J. GEBHARDT, 1 Lt, USAF
Project Manager
3 CES/CECC
Comm: 907 552-2878
DSN: 317 552-2878
|
Louis Howard |
| 11/13/2007 |
Update or Other Action |
USACE (Regan Sarwas) to Air Force (Gary Fink) Contaminated Soil - Way Ahead
Mr. Fink:
This email is to inform you of the status of the contaminated soil incident at the ALCOM HQ on August 2, 2007.
Subsequent to the incident and receipt of your analysis results, the contractor covered the area with 2 layers of 12 mil poly-sheeting, and minimized access to the area.
A modification to the contract was issued to the contractor on August 10th to accomplish the following tasks:
1. Provide all labor, materials and equipment to sample, excavate, and stockpile contaminated soil located at/near basement egress. Stockpile in accordance with appropriate regulations. Subsequent disposal will be handled separately.
2. Provide a sampling and analysis plan in accordance with ADEC requirements.
3. Obtain and analyze a sample of the soil for BTEX, DRO/RRO, 8260, 8270, and RCRA metals.
4. Provide a written copy of laboratory results to the Government.
5. Determine and document extent of remaining contaminants at the excavation limits (if any) and take samples at excavation limit as appropriate.
The contractor has not started these tasks and does not intend to until the spring.
We will provide an update when we have more information.
Regan Sarwas
Project Engineer, ALCOM Renovation
Elmendorf Resident Office
Construction Division
US Army Corps of Engineers, Alaska
907-753-2632
907-382-2233 (cell)
regan.e.sarwas@usace.army.mil
|
Louis Howard |
| 11/14/2007 |
Update or Other Action |
Air Force email to PERP (Frank Wesser) and CS (L. Howard). RE: Contaminated Soil - Way Ahead
Frank/Louis,
Here is the status of the ALCOM spill (# 07239921401) that occurred back in Aug. If you recall, this spill had a localized order but exposure monitoring was way below action levels. The area of concern is contained and isolated from the project and the risk to human health and the environment is considered low. Given the low risk of this spill, is the course of action presented below acceptable to ADEC?
|
Louis Howard |
| 11/14/2007 |
Document, Report, or Work plan Review - other |
PERP (F. Wesser) to Air Force (G. Fink) and CS (L. Howard) RE: Contaminated Soil - Way Ahead
The given approach given by the project manager for the project sounds appropriate. If they wait til Spring, than this will allow them time for a complete interim soil removal plan for ADEC to review.
Monitoring for potential on-site volatiles during the cleanup should be placed within the plan for OSHA permissable exp. limits and worker safety. Along with this the recommended PPE should be included in the plan. Basically, a Site Safety Plan should be attached to the Soil Removal Plan.
I cannot speak for Louis and anticipate he may have some comments as-well.
|
Louis Howard |
| 11/14/2007 |
Document, Report, or Work plan Review - other |
ADEC CS (L. Howard) to Air Force (G. Fink) and PERP (F. Wesser) RE: Contaminated Soil - Way Ahead.
This is acceptable to CS program as well. A laboratory data review checklist (version 2.4 as amended through August 2007) shall be completed in accordance with the technical memorandum (06-002 as amended through October 2006) and accompany any laboratory data submitted for the department's review and comment. See http://www.dec.state.ak.us/spar/guidance.htm#csp
|
Louis Howard |
| 11/16/2007 |
Update or Other Action |
Air Force (G. Fink) to Regan Sarwas USACE RE: Contaminated Soil - Way Ahead
The proposed course of action for the contaminated soil at the ALCOM building is acceptable. Take note of Mr. Howard's and Mr. Wesser's comments below and ensure the procedures are incorporated into the cleanup action.
|
Louis Howard |
| 5/1/2008 |
Meeting or Teleconference Held |
Email from C. Hawe G&S Mgt. Services Inc. RE: Required Analytical for EAFB Bldg. 9480.
Thank you for your time discussing the building 9480 issue today. As we discussed, we are treating the release mentioned as an unknown and will collected a minimum of 1 sample and 1 duplicate sample and analyze for:
GRO/BTEX per AK101
DRO per AK102
RRO per AK103
Total Volatile Chlorinated Solvents per 8260
Metals
I request that the metals listed in the legend of Table 2A of the UST Procedures Manual (November 7, 2002) be reduced to Arsenic, Cadmium, Chromium, and Lead.
Please let me know if I am correct with this summary of the analytical required and if you approve the reduced metals list.
|
Louis Howard |
| 5/2/2008 |
Document, Report, or Work plan Review - other |
Email to C. Hawe and Elmendorf (Gary Fink) RE: EAFB Bldg. 9480 Required analytical blanks and QA/QC Checklist
Approved as stated below with the following additions:
UST Procedure Manual Table 1 will be adhered to for preparation/analytical method, MDL, PQL Container, preservation and holding times.
ADEC will require you to include a Methanol Trip Blank (One per set of 20, minimum of one) is required for all soil samples being analyzed for GRO, BTEX or volatile chlorinated solvents using AK101 field methanol preservation.
Trip Blank and Methanol Trip Blank
A trip blank is used to document if contamination occurred in the sample containers during shipping, transport, or storage procedures. This blank is a sample of contaminant free media taken from the laboratory to the sampling site along with each batch of samples and returned to the laboratory unopened. An aqueous trip blank would contain organic free water and a methanol trip blank would contain methanol.
This type of blank can be especially useful in documenting when trace volatile organic compounds are being investigated. A trip blank would be used for samples being analyzed for all volatile organic compounds such as GRO, BTEX, and volatile chlorinated solvents. If a trip or methanol trip blank is required, at least one trip or methanol trip blank must accompany each set of 20 samples that might contain volatile organic contaminants.
AND
If sampling is conducted with decontamination taking place between samples then a Decontamination or Equipment Blank is required.
A decontamination or equipment blank is used to determine if contamination occurred from sampling equipment to make sure equipment decontamination procedures have been effective. This blank is a sample of contaminant-free media used to rinse sampling equipment. It must be collected after completion of decontamination procedures and before sampling.
Also you must follow the tech memo and complete a Laboratory Data Review Checklist for the analytical results.
|
Louis Howard |
| 5/2/2008 |
Update or Other Action |
C. Hawe email to L. Howard RE: Bldg. 9480 Required Analytical, blanks and QA/QC Checklist.
Thank you for the input. As always we will have a trip blank and run for the volatile compounds - I should have mentioned it. My sampling methods do not require a decontamination blank so there will not be one of them collected. I have been using the checklist as required in the memo and will also on this one. |
Louis Howard |
| 8/15/2008 |
Meeting or Teleconference Held |
Email confirming conversation between Army Corps (B. Glascott) and ADEC (L. Howard) RE: ALCOM Well-40 abandonment (CC Gary Fink EAFB)
Per our conversation, see attached, it looks like the well was installed in 61', then M-W installed a new pump in 84' and test pumped it. If you have any questions please don't hesitate to give a call. Again I am out all next week and I'd guess the work will take place in 2-3 weeks from now.
|
Louis Howard |
| 8/20/2008 |
Document, Report, or Work plan Review - other |
Email back to Bob Glascott (USACE) and Gary Fink (EAFB) RE: Well-40 abandonment.
No questions here except where are others like this on Base and are they active or inactive/open or closed. Approval to decommission/abandon this particular well ALCOM Well-40 is granted by ADEC. |
Louis Howard |
| 7/2/2012 |
Update or Other Action |
Site closure report received. DRO concentrations in soil and groundwater exceeded the ADEC 18 AAC 75 cleanup levels. The site is located within the OU5 modeling area, and groundwater contamination is monitored and addressed under the Environmental Restoration Program (ERP). Remaining DRO contamination above the current ADEC 18 AAC 75.341 Method Two, Table B2 Under 40-Inch Zone, Migration to Groundwater cleanup level is limited to the smear zone.
Analytical results indicate vadose zone soil contamination levels are below ADEC 18 AAC
75.341 Method Two, Tables B1 and B2 Under 40-Inch Zone, Migration to Groundwater cleanup
levels. DRO in groundwater and smear zone soils was above ADEC 18 AAC 75.345 Table C
and 18 AAC 75.341 Method Two, Table B2 Under 40-Inch Zone, Migration to Groundwater
cleanup levels. The site is within OU5, and groundwater contamination is addressed under the
ERP. Excavation/soil movement and groundwater use restrictions will remain in place at the
site.
Recommend ADEC concur with cleanup complete and institutional controls. |
Louis Howard |
| 11/29/2012 |
Document, Report, or Work plan Review - other |
ADEC letter to Air Force. ADEC has determined the site meets the requirements of 18 AAC 75.380(d)(1). The site has been adequately characterized under 18 AAC 75.335 and achieved the applicable requirements under the site cleanup rules. ADEC requests JBER identify which ERP monitoring wells downgradient of ST527 are being sampled for diesel range organics (AK Method 102) and how often they are sampled.
After addressing ADEC’s comment above, please finalize.
|
Louis Howard |
| 12/7/2012 |
Update or Other Action |
Cleanup complete with ICs for ST527.
The site has been adequately characterized under 18 AAC 75.335 and has achieved the applicable requirements under the site cleanup rules. Cleanup at the site is complete, subject to a future ADEC determination that the cleanup is not protective of human health, safety, or welfare, or of the environment. ADEC will, as necessary to ensure protection of human health, safety, and welfare, or of the environment, require the USAF to conduct additional actions that meet the requirements of 18 AAC 75 Contaminated Site regulations and Alaska Statute 46.03 - 46.09.
See site file for additional information. |
Louis Howard |
| 5/7/2014 |
Spill Transferred from Prevention Preparedness and Response Program |
Spill # 07239921401 transferred to Contaminated Sites Program from Frank Wesser to Louis Howard. Spill date = 8/2/07; substance = diesel; quantity = unknown; description: Contamination was discovered during demolition of a concrete wall. |
Louis Howard |
| 5/28/2014 |
Exposure Tracking Model Ranking |
Initial ranking with ETM completed for source area id: 76228 name: ST527 Bldg 9480 - AFID 13 |
Louis Howard |
| 9/22/2015 |
Update or Other Action |
Email from Air Force to ADEC RE: ALCOM Building
The ALCOM site has finally been validated as a new site and will have the AF site ID of SS116. We'll program for a site characterization during our next PRD which occurs in Nov. |
Louis Howard |
| 2/28/2018 |
Update or Other Action |
Draft Site Characterization work plan received for review and comment. The work plan will characterize the nature and extent of contamination in soil and groundwater at SS116 and identify the source area. These goals will be achieved by advancing and sampling up to eight soil borings up to a depth of 40 feet bgs. Five more soil borings will be advanced to groundwater and developed as monitoring wells for the collection of groundwater samples.
See site file for additional information. |
Louis Howard |
| 3/12/2018 |
Document, Report, or Work plan Review - other |
Staff commented on the SS116 Draft SC work plan. Main comments were regarding data soil and groundwater data and compare concentration levels to RSLs or ADEC 1/10th levels for screening purposes to identify whether or not the chemical is a chemical of potential concern for the baseline human health risk assessment and for cumulative risk calculation purposes. If there is no groundwater contamination present, AFEC may wish to conduct a Method Three calculation for cumulative risk for those chemicals which exceed 1/10th ADEC cleanup levels or AFCEC can choose to conduct a risk assessment. Additional comments were made regarding the need to have a risk assessment work plan scoping meeting and develop more than a two page risk assessment work plan.
See site file for additional information. |
Louis Howard |
| 4/19/2021 |
Document, Report, or Work plan Review - other |
DEC evaluated the "JBER SS116 – Alcom Building 9480 Exterior Alcove Contamination Site Characterization Report, Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska, Draft Final Redline” dated December 2020, and provided comments to the U.S. Air Force. The report describes soil and groundwater sampling completed at SS116 site to evaluate known and potential sources of contamination to determine whether any potential remedial actions are necessary to protect human health and environment. |
Melinda Brunner |
| 7/21/2021 |
Document, Report, or Work plan Review - other |
DEC reviewed the US Air Force's Draft Final Redline of the SS116 Alcom Building 9480 Exterior Alcove Contamination Site Characterization Report. DEC does not agree with the recommendation of no further investigation for the original source area for SS116. A chloroform concentration identified in the groundwater corresponds to a carcinogenic risk exceeding 1x10-5, which is above DEC's promulgated cumulative risk threshold. Additionally, there are undelineated exceedances of 18 AAC 75.341(c) and (d) Method 2 migration to groundwater soil cleanup levels, where additional characterization is warranted. DEC requested changes to the Conclusions and Recommendations section of the report to include the DEC recommendations. |
William Schmaltz |
| 10/14/2021 |
Site Characterization Report Approved |
DEC reviewed and provided comments on SS116 Site Characterization Report. DEC requested additional characterization for soil and groundwater at the site. DEC approved the report acknowledging the soil and groundwater data gaps exist at the site. |
William Schmaltz |
