| Action Date |
Action |
Description |
DEC Staff |
| 11/29/1999 |
Site Added to Database |
Soil and GW contaminated by release from underground heating oil tank. |
Meilani Clark |
| 11/29/1999 |
Site Ranked Using the AHRM |
Air Exposure Index Value modified at entry. |
Meilani Clark |
| 3/23/2001 |
Update or Other Action |
CSRP provided comments to Mat-Su Borough regarding their consultant Shannon and Wilson's site characterization work plan dated 12/13/00. |
Jim Frechione |
| 5/8/2001 |
Site Characterization Workplan Approved |
On 4/13/01 ADEC received by fax a revised site characterization work plan dated 4/13/01 by Shannon and Wilson. It included soil borings and up to 4 monitoring wells to characterize soil and groundwater impacts. ADEC approved the plan on this date. |
Jim Frechione |
| 8/23/2001 |
Update or Other Action |
Part 1 of 2 -
On 8/24/01, ADEC issued a letter to the Mat-Su Borough (MSB) commenting on the report titled “Release Investigation Goose Creek Community Center Mile 94 Parks Highway, Alaska” dated July 2001, which was prepared by MSB's consultant Shannon and Wilson (S&W) and received by ADEC on August 1, 2001. The report provided information obtained after S&W implemented its April 13, 2001 dated work plan that was approved by ADEC on May 8, 2001. The report provided characterization information regarding the contamination that was due to an apparent leaking heating oil non-regulated underground storage tank (UST) located near the former community center, as well as conclusions and recommendations. According to the report, the UST was removed in 1999, but the contaminated soil excavated was used as backfill in the location of the former UST.
Data in the report shows that soil sampled in the area of the former UST exceeds the following most stringent 18 AAC 75 Method 2 cleanup standards for the following constituents of concern (COCs) in the Under 40 inch annual precipitation zone:
-Diesel range organics (DRO)(maximum detected was 1,010 milligram/kilogram (mg/kg) DRO; and the Method 2 cleanup level for DRO as shown in Table B2 is 250 mg/kg for the migration to groundwater pathway); and,
- Benzene (maximum detected was 0.0317 mg/kg benzene; and the Method 2 cleanup level for benzene as shown in Table B1 is 0.02 mg/kg for the migration to groundwater pathway).
Data in the report also shows that groundwater exceeds 18 AAC 75 Table C cleanup levels for the following COCs:
- DRO (maximum detected was 16.6 mg/l DRO; and the Table C cleanup level for DRO is 1.5 milligram/liter (mg/L);
- Gasoline range organics (GRO)(maximum detected was 8.7 mg/L; and the Table C cleanup level is 1.3 mg/L); and,
- Benzene (maximum detected was 0.026 mg/L; and the Table C cleanup level is 0.005 mg/L.
The report shows that the highest exceedances to Table C cleanup levels were detected in the groundwater sample from in the monitoring well that was installed down-gradient from the former location of the non-regulated UST, i.e., MW-2.
The report indicates that MSB has stated that it considers the groundwater beneath the site as unlikely a current or potential future source of drinking water. Based upon groundwater flow data, S&W states that in their professional opinion, Table C cleanup levels are likely to be met within the property boundary and before the groundwater reaches Goose Creek about 1,000 feet to the south of the former UST. The report recommends that MSB apply for the 10 times rule, i.e., the cleanup level if granted by ADEC for a COC, would be 10 times its Table C cleanup level and this process is possible under 18 AAC 75.345(b)(2). The report also recommends that three additional groundwater events occur to provide support for the request for granting the 10 times rule. The S&W report also recommends that the three drums of soil cuttings and four drums of development/purge water be left on site until the “modified” cleanup levels are approved.
The 8/23 letter commented:
1) The application for a 10 times rule requires that a groundwater use determination be made per 18 AAC 75.350 as referenced by 18 AAC 75.345(b)(2). Please review the requirements that a site must meet before ADEC can consider application of the 10 times rule. Several of those requirements that need to be satisfactorily addressed are: (See Part 2 of 2 Update Action for this date) |
Rich Sundet |
| 8/23/2001 |
Update or Other Action |
Part 2 of 2, Continued from Update Action of 8/23/2001, 1:25:17 PM -
-The contamination needs to be adequately characterized. Information in the report shows that the contamination is not defined. The most down-gradient monitoring well, i.e., MW-2, shows some of the highest concentrations at the site and levels are above Table C levels.
- Some concentrations of COCs reported are near or above the 10 times rule. For example, MW-2 showed a DRO level of 16.6 mg/L and the Table C cleanup level is 1.5 mg/L DRO. Therefore, even with the application of the 10 times rule, i.e., provided that it is granted, the site may be above regulatory levels and further cleanup action may need to occur, such as treating the groundwater and/or removal of the contaminated soil.
2) Goose Creek is reported to be 1,000 feet down-gradient from the former UST. 18 AAC 75.345(f) states that groundwater that is close to or near a surface water body may not cause a violation in 18 AAC 70 to surface water or sediment. The report provides inadequate information whether contamination is or may reach Goose Creek that may cause a surface water quality violation. This is a potential concern because the benzene level in the down-gradient monitoring well MW-2 was 26 micrograms/liter (ug/l), and that level is above the 18 AAC 70 standard of 10 ug/l total aromatic hydrocarbons (TAH) and 15 ug/l total aqueous hydrocarbons (TaqH). Please address this concern.
Also, the report indicates that groundwater flow is to the southeast and towards Goose Creek, but does not state what the groundwater flow rate is. This information would be useful in assisting in determining the characterization of the site and the possible extent of the transport of the contaminants towards Goose Creek.
3) The report on page 2 states that the UST was removed and the drinking water well decommissioned. However, the report does not describe how the drinking water well was decommissioned. Drinking water wells must be abandoned in accordance to 18 AAC 80.015(d) and (e). Please provide further information how the drinking water well was abandoned. Please also provide information as well as any report generated regarding the specific removal of the non-regulated UST and status/disposal of any sludge in the tank.
4) The report does not provide a detailed figure/map of the overall site in perspective to property boundaries with neighboring tracts, and proximity to Goose Creek. A better figure/map should be provided to DEC.
5) The report states that seven drums of investigative derived waste is currently stored on-site and recommends that MSB await disposal of their contents until a 10 times determination for groundwater is approved. As noted above, further information needs to be provided to ADEC prior to its approval of the 10 times rule; in addition, regulations require that the request for the 10 times rule be public noticed. Further monitoring also will be needed to support any request for a 10 times rule. Since it may be some time before a 10 times rules is approved, if at all, ADEC is concerned that the contents of the drums are secure. In addition, ADEC is concerned that the drums of wastewater on-site may rupture and spill their contents due to freezing. Please address these concerns.
In summary, further information needs to be provided to ADEC prior to any review of a request for a 10 times rule. Further characterization of the site is necessary and cleanup (e.g., removal of the contaminated soil and/or groundwater treatment) may be necessary. In addition, ADEC agrees with the report’s recommendation that further groundwater monitoring is necessary. However, more than three monitoring events may be necessary, including monitoring on a quarterly basis as well as installation of more monitoring wells/well points down-gradient.
Please provide a response to this letter regarding your future planned actions to address this contaminated site by September 20, 2001.
In addition, please be aware that ADEC is obligated to seek recovery of any costs expended on the cleanup or containment of an oil or hazardous substance release, or to control a threatened release in accordance with AS 46.08.070(a) and (b). The costs may include the cost of response, containment, removal, and/or remedial |
Rich Sundet |
| 9/14/2001 |
Update or Other Action |
On 9/14/01, CSRP issued a letter to the Mat-Su Borough based upon its review of the document “Response to ADEC Comments on Release Investigation Report for Goose Creek Community Center, Mile 94 Parks Highway, Alaska” dated September 5, 2001. The document was prepared by Mat-Su's consultant Shannon and Wilson (S&W) and received by ADEC by facsimile on September 5, 2001. The document was in response to DEC’s August 24, 2001 letter that commented upon S&W’s report titled “Release Investigation Goose Creek Community Center Mile 94 Parks Highway, Alaska” dated July 2001.
The document included a work plan for installing two well points down-gradient of the former non-regulated underground storage tank (UST), a plan for disposal of existing Investigative Derived Waste (IDW) stored on site, and a proposed groundwater monitoring schedule. The document also included a time schedule to provide ADEC information that it requested in the August 24th letter regarding well decommissioning, methods used to remove the former UST and disposal of those contents, and a detailed map of the area.
The letter noted ADEC had no objection to the installation of the well points and landspreading IDW soil from Boring B2, MWs 1 (i.e., B1) and 3 (i.e., B3) on the gravel surfaced parking area of the site next to the respective boring/monitoring well location provided that it is not near a wetland and cause a surface water quality violation to 18 AAC 70.
The letter requested clarification that semi-annual groundwater monitoring would be necessary and that the wastewater could be transported to APC for treatment.
CSRP requested that a sampling plan for the post-treated drill cuttings at Chemron be submitted prior to transport to that facility. Chemron was approved as an off site treatment facility in 1996 and regulations have changed since that time. |
Rich Sundet |
| 9/17/2001 |
Update or Other Action |
On 9/17 at the verbal request of Shannon and Wilson, Jim Frechione granted S&W's request to discharge wastewater that was generated during the development of MW-1 and MW-3 on the gravel surfaced parking area of the site adjacent to the respective monitoring well location. |
Rich Sundet |
| 6/4/2003 |
Update or Other Action |
On 6/4 and 5/03, Sundet replied via email to Roger McRoberts email on that day requesting closure for the site based upon S&W's 10/24/02 dated report and Robert's 11/4/02 cover letter to that report.
Sundet noted that he agreed with S&W's assessment that the plume is not expanding based on the information to date. However, contamination levels still exceed both soil and groundwater on site. Therefore, closure is not
possible. But a NFRAP letter may be possible. Sundet noted that if the borough is still agreeable to wanting a NFRAP status, CSP would require an institutional control in the form of a deed notice placed onto the property and that a groundwater
monitoring plan be submitted for approval and implementation. We will also note on our database the NFRAP and the remaining contamination and issues. If the Borough is agreeable to that, CSP can begin that avenue and send you a letter outlining this and include an example of such a deed notice that we issued on a similar site.
Sundet also identified several alternatives that the Borough could suggest to address the site. |
Rich Sundet |
| 7/12/2004 |
Update or Other Action |
File number issued 2269.38.001 |
Aggie Blandford |
| 6/16/2008 |
Exposure Tracking Model Ranking |
Initial ranking with ETM completed. |
Rich Sundet |
| 5/13/2014 |
Update or Other Action |
File transferred to Danielle Duncan in Juneau 5-13-2014 |
Annie Ariel |
| 6/11/2014 |
Update or Other Action |
Spoke with Shannon & Wilson and they req. closure. Per last communication (2003) soil and groundwater contamination still exists at this site, and therefor was not closed at that time. Consultant happened to be in the area and observed that monitoring wells 1-4 were still there, but was not able to immediately locate numbers 5 and 6. He also noted that the site is being used for camping, shooting, and ATV-ing, and there are gas cans, etc. on site. I suggested that I speak to Mat-Su borough and see about re-sampling the monitoring wells and do a deed notice due to contaminated soil still present but below ground and likely below ingestion level. |
Danielle Duncan |
| 6/13/2014 |
Update or Other Action |
Emailed the Mat-Su Borough and requested that a work plan be submitted by an environmental professional for DEC review for sampling of the monitoring wells per O'Connell (2013) request and Sundet (2003) request. |
Danielle Duncan |
| 6/13/2014 |
Update or Other Action |
RP has hired S&W and expect a work plan soon. Also the pavilion(s) at the site were constructed using LAWCON (NPS) funds which require use of the property for outdoor recreation in perpetuity or replacement. |
Danielle Duncan |
| 6/30/2014 |
Document, Report, or Work plan Review - other |
Rec'd and reviewed a proposal submitted to the Mat-Su borough for sampling of the monitoring wells. The proposal was adequate and provided for the sampling of monitoring wells 2,4,5,and 6. Historically wells 1 and 3 have been non detect for hydrocarbons. |
Danielle Duncan |
| 9/9/2014 |
Site Characterization Workplan Approved |
Approved S&W's workplan to sample groundwater monitoring wells and conduct a drinking water well search. |
Danielle Duncan |
| 12/9/2014 |
Update or Other Action |
Groundwater sampling completed, just waiting for official report per S&W. |
Danielle Duncan |
| 4/16/2015 |
Document, Report, or Work plan Review - other |
Rec'd 17676 GW Monitoring Report from S&W this date. |
Danielle Duncan |
| 4/21/2015 |
Site Characterization Report Approved |
Approved S&W's groundwater monitoring report this date. The report states that MW 5 and 6 could not be located. MW 4 had detections of GRO < DEC cleanup levels. MW 2 had 2.13 mg/L DRO which is > DEC cleanup levels in addition to some BTEX constituents at concentrations < DEC cleanup levels. There are no drinking water wells on site. Will have to continue groundwater sampling next year. |
Danielle Duncan |
| 4/21/2015 |
Exposure Tracking Model Ranking |
A new updated ranking with ETM has been completed for source area 74153 UST home heating tank. |
Danielle Duncan |
| 7/11/2016 |
Update or Other Action |
Requested a work plan for site characterization this date. |
Danielle Duncan |
| 9/20/2016 |
Update or Other Action |
Replied to S&W's email regarding work needed on site. I described the data gaps that need to be addressed prior to site closure. I look forward to reviewing a work plan soon. |
Danielle Duncan |
| 4/11/2017 |
Site Characterization Workplan Approved |
Approved a work plan to collect 2 soil samples (1 from the tank footprint) and the other will be completed as a groundwater monitoring well. Other wells on site will also be sampled. |
Danielle Duncan |
| 8/23/2018 |
Update or Other Action |
The property is part of a community park which was a result of a federal grant. No development plans whatsoever. The Borough will decide if they want closure with or without ICs. Although groundwater contamination is still present, we have a decreasing trend for the most part. |
Danielle Duncan |
| 8/30/2018 |
Site Characterization Report Approved |
Approved the report Site Investigation Activities, Former Goose Creek Community Center, Mile 94 Parks Highway submitted by Shannon & Wilson Inc., dated July 11, 2018. In October 2017, soil boring B7 was completed as monitoring well (MW-7) and was sampled along with MW-2 and MW-4. These were analyzed for GRO, DRO, and BTEX. Additionally, the southeast direction of groundwater flow was verified. All three wells met ADEC cleanup levels. The highest DRO value was 1.4 mg/L in MW-2. In May 2018, MW-2, MW-4, and MW-7 were again sampled and analyzed for GRO, DRO, and BTEX. MW-7 and MW-4 met cleanup levels, but MW-2 had DRO at 2.0 mg/L.
Conclusions:
1. The extent of contamination in the soil has been delineated and the ADEC concurs that the soil concentration of DRO in the UST footprint has decreased by about 80%.
2. Although the groundwater remains contaminated – the petroleum fraction concentrations are decreasing. |
Danielle Duncan |
| 9/10/2018 |
Exposure Tracking Model Ranking |
A new updated ranking with ETM has been completed for source area 74153 UST home heating tank. |
Danielle Duncan |
| 10/25/2018 |
Update or Other Action |
Approved a work plan this date to decommission the groundwater monitoring wells in support of site closure with institutional controls. |
Danielle Duncan |
| 11/7/2018 |
Update or Other Action |
Sent the Notice of Environmental Contamination to the Palmer Recording office. The groundwater monitoring wells were decommissioned in preparation for site closure with institutional controls. |
Danielle Duncan |
| 11/19/2018 |
Public Notice |
Notice of Environmental Contamination: As required by the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, pursuant to 18 AAC 75.375 (Matanuska-Susitna Borough), the Landowner of the subject property, hereby provides public notice that the property located at: 53282 S. Parks Highway 99683, Alaska, has been subject to a discharge or release and subsequent cleanup of oil or other hazardous substances, regulated under 18 AAC 75, Article 3. Further soil cleanup was determined to be impracticable because of the presence of groundwater in the excavation at eight feet belowground. After 18 years of groundwater monitoring, the contamination plume had decreased in concentration markedly and the responsible party opted to end groundwater monitoring and apply an institutional control (groundwater well installation restriction) to achieve site closure. |
Danielle Duncan |
| 11/20/2018 |
Cleanup Complete Determination Issued |
|
Danielle Duncan |
| 11/20/2018 |
Institutional Control Record Established |
Institutional Controls established and entered into the database. |
Danielle Duncan |
| 9/21/2023 |
Institutional Control Compliance Review |
Received at update on the status of compliance from the Matsu Borough, Community Development Department on this date. The letter confirmed that there have been no changes in land ownership or use. All institutional controls are in compliance. |
Evonne Reese |
