ACAT FOIA Repository 48

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYREGION 101200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900Seattle, Washington 98101-3140-REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR2 3 2010Ms. Pamela K. Miller, Executive DirectorMs. Vi Waghiyi, Program DirectorAlaska Community Action on Toxics505 West Northern Lights Boulevard, Suite 205Anchorage, Alaska 99503Dear Ms. Miller and Ms. Waghiyi:Thank you for your letter dated November 11, 2009, to Mathy Stanislaus, theEnvironment Protection Agency's (EPA) Assistant Administrator for Solid Waste andEmergency Response, regarding the FUDS on St. Lawrence Island at Northeast Cape andGambell. Mr. Stanislaus has delegated this matter to the EPA Region 10 Seattle office to takethe lead in reviewing the issues raised by the Alaska Community Action on Toxics (ACAT) anddetermining EPA's future role at these sites. I apologize for the delay in following up with you,but with my recent appointment, I want to bring you up to date on our activities related to thesesites.In 2002 EPA reviewed the work by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) at thesesites and determined that the USACE was proceeding in a manner consistent with EPA'sexpectations for hazardous waste sites. We are in communication with the USACE as we beginto update our evaluation of both the cleanup actions they have taken and their expected futureactions. I also have asked our Site Assessment program to evaluate these sites to determine ifthey qualify to be included on the Superfund National Priorities List (NPL). Based on theoutcomes of the above two activities, we will consider again whether or not the USACE'scleanup is consistent with EPA requirements and the appropriate role for EPA in the cleanup ofthese two sites. We anticipate making determinations on these matters within three months.In your conversation with Mr. Stanislaus and Region 10 staff, you mentioned that ACAThas collected additional data. Now is an opportune time to make any new data available for ourconsideration. Please forward any new information you have to Sylvia Kawabata, Unit Managerof our Assessment and Brownfields Unit. Sylvia can be reached at 206-553-1078 or by e-mail atkawabata.sylvia@epa.gov. Sylvia will be our overall point of contact, so you may also contacther should you have any questions.F10AK096903_01.01_0503_aF10AK069603_01.01_0009_a200-1ef Printed on Recycled PaperThank you for your continued interest in the FUDS on St. Lawrence Island at NortheastCape and Gambell. We will keep you advised of our progress as we proceed with our review.Sincerely,Dennis J. McLerranRegional AdministratorREPLY TOATTENTION OF:DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMYU.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, ALASKAP.O. BOX 6898ELMENDORF AFB, ALASKA 99506-0898APR9 2010Programs and Project Management DivisionEnvironmental Special ProjectsMr. Dan Opalski, DirectorOffice of Environmental CleanupEnvironmental Protection Agency, Region 101200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900Seattle, WA 98101-3140Dear Mr. Opalski:We received a letter from the EPA Regional Administrator, Dennis J. McLerran, dated March23, 2010. Mr. McLerran requested that we respond to you on three specific points regarding theUSACE Formerly Used Defense Sites (FUDS) on St. Lawrence Island, Alaska.The Alaska Community Action on Toxics (ACAT) group has been involved for many yearswith FUDS projects on St. Lawrence Island, specifically our Gambell and Northeast CapeProjects. ACAT has consulted with the two Tribal IRA Councils in Gambell and Savoonga, andthey appear to have a great deal of influence with the Tribal leaders.We understand the need to be responsive to Tribal concerns. We recognize the trustresponsibility we have for the Tribes and the open dialogue we must maintain with their chosenadvisors. We welcome your inquiries and are pleased to provide the information requested inEPA's March 23 letter.The following paragraphs are the US ACE Alaska District's responses to the 10 bulleted issuesACAT presented in their November 11, 2009, letter to the EPA. These are the same issues thatACAT sent by letter November 4, 2010, to US ACE Headquarters (Mr. Stacey Hirata) inWashington, D.C.• Complete removal of the solid and hazardous waste materials at the Northeast Cape Site 7landfillWe believe that the excavations and capping of the Site 7landfill accomplished during thesummer of 2009 removed the contamination sources from this site. Previous investigationsindicated that little if any leachate migrates from the landfill, and the groundwater results were2essentially clean. The effort completed this past summer exceeded our expectations. Drumremoval was extremely thorough, batteries and PCB-ballasts were completely removed, and 50tons of visibly-stained soils were removed. Based on the completed cleanup efforts and new cap,we are confident Site 7 meets protective health-based standards.• Removal and treatment of the White Alice site soils and groundwater to effectively removeassociated contaminantsRemoval of remaining PCB-contaminated soils at the White Alice Site is planned for 2010.The groundwater near the former White Alice site is not contaminated.• Removal/remediation of contaminants in the Northeast Cape Main Complex soils andgroundwater, as well as on-going monitoring to ensure safe drinking water suppliesRemoval ofPCB-contaminated soils at the Main Operations Complex is scheduled for 2010.Cleanup of the petroleum-contaminated soils at the Main Operations Complex is planned for2011. We tested chemical oxidation techniques for both soil and groundwater in 2009 (at theadvice of the Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) meetings). However, it does not appear that theoxidation techniques will be effective in the peat-rich soils that are petroleum contaminated at thenorthern edge of the Main Operations -complex. Since chemical oxidation processes were notsuccessful, the contingency approach of soil excavation will be implemented. Our remediationobjective remains the same: cleanup of petroleum contaminated soils (maximum depth of 15feet, as required for future unrestricted use), to meet the site-specific, risk-based cleanup levelsapproved by the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation and specified in ourapproved Decision Document. After source removal is completed, monitored natural attenuationof the groundwater will be implemented. The Main Operations Complex should not beconsidered a good source for drinking water in the near future. A restriction on installing adrinking water source within the contaminated zone of the Main Complex should be made unlessfuture data confirms cleanup levels are achieved. Clean sources of groundwater for a futurecommunity exist up gradient from the Main Operations Complex.• Effective remediation and long term monitoring of the Suqi River drainage basin sedimentsand surface water (fuels and PCB contamination)Testing conducted by USACE has demonstrated that the Suqi River drainage basin does notexhibit significant levels of contamination in sediments, except near the Main OperationsComplex. The approved Decision Document includes a plan to excavate the contaminatedsediments immediately adjacent to the Main Complex and a portion of the narrow down-gradientchannel.• Complete removal or destruction of the contaminants identified at the former village site atNortheast Cape3The former village site at Northeast Cape was not a DoD facility and is, therefore, not eligibleunder the FUDS program. The DoD has shown a willingness to assess conditions at the formervillage site under the Native American Lands Environmental Mitigation Program (NALEMP).• Restoration of the Suqi River watershed and shallow groundwater resources within thearea of the Main Complex and upgradient regions of the Main Complex to ensure adequateand safe drinking water at Northeast CapeCleanup of contamination sources at the Main Operations Complex and the sediments in thenearby Drainage Basin will significantly improve the overall Suqi River watershed. We believethat our remediation efforts will improve the shallow groundwater at Northeast Cape, but weacknowledge that groundwater in the Main Operations Complex will not be suitable as potablewater in the near future. However, the groundwater just up gradient ofthe Main OperationsComplex is not contaminated and would be a suitable place for a potable water well that couldserve a future community.• Removal of contaminant sources at the Village in Gambell including those up-gradientfrom the municipal water supplies and those beneath the residential areas, the school andcommunity buildingsUSACE conducted active investigation and cleanup efforts in Gambell between 1994 and2006. All known, eligible military sources of contaminants were removed. The State of AlaskaDepartment of Environmental Conservation approved the investigation and cleanup reports andconcurred that no further action is necessary at the site. Debris was cleared from beneath theschool during its construction and moved to Site 8C near the city landfill. The NALEMP projectremoved the military debris material during the summers of 2008-09. We have heard reports thatsome houses were built on top of scrap wastes. Based on previous debris removal efforts, wehave found that only rarely does buried debris in Gambell contain contamination. The NALEMPcrew will address concerns about debris beneath residential areas as close as practical, but wecannot justify moving buildings to access debris that is not a source of contamination. Theremaining buried debris does not constitute a health hazard or endangerment and is therefore noteligible under the FUDS program. The DoD continues to work with the Native Village ofGambell through NALEMP to assess conditions and cleanup additional military impacts ordebris. This NALEMP project is run by the Tribe, and as such, they are responsible for mitigatingenvironmental hazards associated with this buried debris.• Long term, bi-annual monitoring of contaminants of concern within the municipal watersupply areasTo our knowledge, the drinking water source in Gambell has never been compromised byactivities attributed to the Department of Defense. One monitoring well cross-gradient from thecommunity well showed fuel contamination in the past, but subsequent investigationsdemonstrated no significant contamination remains. To our knowledge, the community well inGambell has never been contaminated except for one act of juvenile vandalism.4• Establishment of a safe drinking water source at Gambell that is up-gradient of thecontaminated sitesThe drinking water source in Gambell has not been compromised by activities attributed tothe Department of Defense. Therefore, the DoD is not responsible for creating a new watersource in Gambell.• Institute the tribes as official signatories/Parties to any Records of Decision (RODs)The Corps cannot seek tribal signatures on Records of Decision because the tribe does nothave jurisdiction over the land itself. CERCLA (Comprehensive Environmental Response,Compensation and Liability Act of 1980) regulations (see 40 CFR 300.515) require that Indiantribes have jurisdiction over the site in order to be afforded substantially the same treatment asstates. However, the State of Alaska maintains jurisdictional authority over territory other thanNative allotments or other lands set aside under the superintendence of the federal government.Therefore, it would not be appropriate to request Tribal signatures on Decision Documents.According to FUDS Program Policy (ER 200-3-1, May 2004), the Department ofthe Army,Assistant Chief of Staff for Installation Management (ACSIM) is the approval authority for alldecision documents that have a selected remedy with a present worth cost estimate of more than$10 million. Lt General Robert Wilson approved the overall cleanup plans (Decision Document)for the Northeast Cape Air Force Station FUDS on 3 September 2009.The EPA March 23 letter requested us to provide a summary of site investigation and cleanupactivities performed to date as well as future plans. We have enclosed two Project CloseoutReports {HTRW and CON/HTRW) for our Gambell Project and two Decision Documents forour Northeast Cape Project to summarize work completed on these projects.As mentioned earlier, environmental remediation efforts under the FUDS program atGambell have been completed. However, environmental mitigation efforts continue in Gambellunder the DoD-funded NALEMP. NALEMP eligibility requirements are more liberal than FUDScriteria; buried debris in Gambell can be excavated even though it doesn't present an immediatehazard. The NALEMP Strategic Project Implementation Plan (SPIP) is being updated by theNative Village of Gambell's environmental contractor. The SPIP briefly covers the NALEMPhistory in Gambell from 2003 to present.The remedial actions outlined in the Northeast Cape Site 7 Cargo Beach Road Landfill CONHTRW Decision Document at Northeast Cape were completed in 2009. The final ConstructionCompletion Report is pending. Our contractor went above and beyond the stated scope and dugthrough the entire landfill, removing all drums and stained soils, before placing a new cap on theSite 7 Landfill.The remedial actions outlined within the Northeast Cape HTRW Decision Doc).lment wereinitiated in 2009 with the chemical oxidation pilot study for the petroleum-contaminated soils atthe Main Operations Complex. Unfortunately, layers of peat at this location rendered chem-ox..5treatment ineffective. Our Decision Document included a contingency scenario identified as theexcavation of soils and monitored natural attenuation of groundwater. The remedial actionsoutlined in the Decision Document will be implemented starting this field season, and continueover the next several years as funding is available. Long-term monitoring and 5 years reviewswill extend beyond 2012.Another point the EPA March 23 letter requested that we address was to include a list of anywaste and contaminants that will remain on St. Lawrence Island after completion of remediation,and the plans for long term monitoring. The following paragraphs address those areas.Wastes and/or contaminants that are likely to remain behind in Gambell after completion ofNALEMP remediation efforts include:••••Some debris, largely consisting of scrap metal, that exists under the city water tankEmpty former latrine drums beneath the city snow fenceDebris that is speculated to be beneath the new city housing areaScattered .30-caliber ammunition rounds at the bottom of Troutman LakeNo long term monitoring is slated for Gambell.Wastes and/or contaminants that are likely to remain behind at Northeast Cape aftercompletion of remediation efforts include:• Petroleum-contaminated soils deeper than 15 feet at the Main Operations Complex• Petroleum-contaminated groundwater at the Main Operations Complex• Small residual pockets of petroleum-contaminated soil/sediment within the wetlanddrainage basin below the Main Operations Complex• DRO-contaminated soils in wetlands at Site 8 (monitored natural attenuation)• Non-hazardous solid waste debris beneath the two newly-capped disposal areas(Site 7 and Site 9)Long-term monitoring will occur at the Main Operations Complex, Site 8, and the Site 7 andSite 9 landfills.The last area that the EPA March 23 letter requested that we address was to detail our effortsto honor the Government to Government consultation duties. To honor the Government toGovernment consultation with the Triballeaderships on St. Lawrence Island, we routinely haveour Project Manager meet separately with the Tribal President and IRA Council Members priorto scheduled Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) Meetings. In addition, several former AlaskaDistrict Commanders have met with Tribal Leaders in the past, both on St. Lawrence Island andhere on Elmendorf Air Force Base. The most recent meetings took place in January 2007 (Col.Wilson traveled to Gambell), April 2006 (Col. Gallagher traveled to Savoonga), and July 2002(Lt. Col Gingras here at Elmendorf AFB). I also intend to visit St. Lawrence Island this summer.'..6If you have any remaining questions or concerns, please contact our St. Lawrence IslandProject Manager, Mr. Carey Cossaboom, at (907) 753-2689, or by e-mail atcarey.c.cossaboom@usace.army.mil.Sincerely,~~~Reinhard W. KoenigColonel, Corps of EngineersDistrict CommanderEnclosurescc: S. Bainbridge, ADECJ. Roberts, ADECJ. Halverson, ADECC. Dunkin, ADECD. McLerran, EPA