United States Off ice of
Environmental Protection Emergency and
Agency Remedial Response
EPA/ROD/R10-93/052
March 1993
&ER& Superfund
Record of Decision:
Alaskan Battery Enterprises,
-------
50272-101
REPORT DOCUMENTATION 1" REPORT NO. 2. 3. Recipient'. Ac:cu.lon No.
PAGE EPA/ROD/R10-93/052
4. Title .nd Subtitle 5. R.port Dat.
SUPERFUND RECORD OF DECISION . 03/02/93
Alaskan Battery Enterprises, AI< 8.
First Remedial Action - Final
7. Author(.) 8. Performing Org.nlzatlon Rept. No.
9. Performing Orgenlzatlon Nama and Addr... 10 Project TaakIWork Unit No.
11. Contract(C) or Grant(G) No.
(C)
(G)
12. Sponaorlng Organization Nama and Add,... 13. ,Type of Raport & Period Cova-
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 800/800
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460 14.
15. Supplementary Note.
PB94-964625
16. Abstract (Limit: 200 words)
The 1-acre Alaskan Battery Enterprises site is located in Fairbanks, Alaska. Fairbanks
is situated on the Tanana-Chen floodplain, does not appear to be impacted by site
conditions. Land use in the area is and commercial and residential. The site is
comprised of the Alaskan Battery Enterprise (ABE) property and the surrounding
right-of-way property, owned by the Alaskan Department of Transportation. The site was
operated a's a battery-relat~d business from 1962 until 1992, when s;i,te operation5-
ceased. Since at least 1969, the owner disassembled, recycled, and sold used and new
batteries. During the 1960s and 197~s, battery casings were crushed and used for fill
onsite, and the associated lead was reused in batteries or shipped offsite for
recycling. Prior to 1986, spent battery acid was discharged onsite directly onto the
ground, but later the acid was collected for reuse. Scrap batteries were stored onsite
and subject to weathering, and domestic wastewater also was discharged onsite into
septic cribs that were constructed from buried automobile bodies. In 1986, after ABE
was connected to the municipal wastewater system, the use of these cribs was
discontinued. In 1980, an EPA site inspection determined that electrolyte fluid from
batteries had been dumped directly onto the ground during recycling and that crushed
batteries had been used as fill in the front lot. Further State and EPA studies
(See Attached Page)
17. Document Analyal. a. Ducrlptora
Record of Decision - Alaskan Battery Enterprises, AK
First Remedial Action - Final
Contaminated Medium: None
Key Contaminants: None
b. IdentiflerslOpen-Endad Terms
c. COSATI FleldfGroup
18. Availability Statement 19. Security Clus (ThIs Rlport) 21. No. of Pagn
None 38
20. Security Class (ThIs Pagl) 22. Price
None
(See ANSI.Z39.18)
SHlns'ructJons on Reverse
OPTIONAL FORM 272 (4-77)
(Formerly NTI5-35)
-------
EPA/ROD/R10-93/052
Alaskan Battery Enterprises, AK
First Remedial Action - Final
Abstract (Continued)
revealed elevated levels of lead in surface soil and subsequently, in 1987, the area was
excavated and the soil was used as fill offsite. In 1988, EPA initiated a removal action
that included extensive sampling and removal of 2,900 yd3 of soil contaminated with
greater than 1,000 mg/kg lead for offsite disposal. In 1989, a subsequent removal action
excavated and removed offsite an additional 860 yd3 of lead-contaminated soil~ In 1992,
the ABE site was selected to be used as a demonstration site for the Superfund Innovative
Technology Evaluation (SITE) Program for the soil washing technology. Previous site
removal actions, coupled with the excavation of surface and subsurface soil for the
demonstration effort, have removed or remediated all onsite contaminated soil to below
cleanup levels; therefore, there are no contaminants of concern affecting this site.
The selected remedial action for this site is no further action, with ground water
monitoring for two years. Results of sampling during the RI and SITE investigations
indicate that there are no contaminants remaining onsite above health-based levels,
therefore no additional action is necessary. There are no present worth or O&M costs
associated with this no action remedy.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS:
-------
'.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Declaration of the Record of Decision
Decision Summary
Section
Paqe
I.
SITE DESCRIPTION. . . . . . . . . . . . .
1
II.
SITE HISTORY AND ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES.
1
III. COMMUNITY RELATIONS HISTORY. . . . . . .
4
IV.
SCOPE AND ROLE OF PRIOR ACTIONS. . . . . . . . . . .
7
V.
SUMMARY OF SITE CHARACTERISTICS. .
7
VI.
SUMMARY OF SITE RISKS.
. . . . . .
. . . 11
VII. DECISION FOR NO FURTHER ACTION. . . . . .
. . . 13
VIII.DOCUMENTATION OF SIGNIFICANT CHANGES.
. . . . . .
. . 14
Appendices
Appendix A:
Figures and Tables
Appendix B:
Responsiveness Summary
Appendix C:
-------
DECLARATION
ALASKAN BATTERY ENTERPRISES
SUPERFUND SITE
SITE NAME AND LOCATION
Alaskan Battery Enterprises (ABE)
Fairbanks, Alaska
STATEMENT OF PURPOSE
This document presents the decision by the U.s. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) for No Further Action at the ABE
Superfund site (Site) in Fairbanks, Alaska. The No Further Action
decision was developed in accordance with the Comprehensive
Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act of 1980
(CERCLA), as amended by the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA), and, to the extent
practicable, the National oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution
Contingency Plan (NCP).
This decision is
Site. The index
selection of the
Appendix C.
based on the Administrative Record for the
for the Administrative Record, upon which the
No Further Action decision is based, is found in
The State of Alaska concurs with the No Further Action decision.
DESCRIPTION OF THE SELECTED REMEDY
EPA's decision for the ABE site is No Further Action. The removal
actions conducted in 1988-89, and the excavation of soil for the
Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) demonstration
conducted in 1992, have reduced concentrations of contaminants in
soils to levels that do not pose a risk to human health and the
environment and have eliminated the need to conduct additional
remedial action at the site. Groundwater monitoring will be
conducted for a period of two years to confirm that the
groundwater has not been contaminated.
DECLARATION STATEMENT
It has been determined that no further remedial action is
necessary at the Site (although groundwater monitoring will be
conducted) to ensure protection of human health and the
environment. In light of EPA's decision not to select a remedial
action, the requirements of CERCLA Section 121, including the
ARARS provisions of CERCLA Section 121(d) (2), are not triggered;
that section applies only in those cases where a remedial action
is selected. Because there are no hazardous substances,
-------
.'
pollutants, or contaminants remaining at the site above health
based levels in areas where there is unrestricted access, a five
year review will not be necessary.
Since EPA has determined that no further remedial action is
necessary, the ABE site qualifies for inclusion in the "sites
awaiting deletion" subcategory of the Construction Completion
category of the National Priorities List.
Signature for the ABE Record of Decision by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency.
{)MJ;u) ~
DANA A. RASMUSSEN
Regional Administrator, Region 10
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
3/2.(q)
Date
-------
DECISION SUMMARY
I.
SITE DESCRIPTION
The ABE site (Site) is located in the southwest portion of the
City of Fairbanks in a mixed commercial. and residential area. The
site consists of the ABE property, located at 157 Old Richardson
Highway, and the surrounding right-of-way property owned by the
Alaska Department of Transportation CADOT) (see Figure 1). The
combined area of the Site is approximately 1 acre. A 5,000
square-foot building, which serves as a residence and commercial
workshop for the ABE business, lies near the eastern boundary of
ABE property. Immediately to the west of the site there is a
commercial business called Arctic Welding and to the east another
business called Persinger Boat Sales. Within the ADOT right-of-
way, 30th Avenue lies to the north, Leasure Street to the east,
and the Old Richardson Highway to the south.
II.
SITE HISTORY AND ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES
A.
History of site Activities
Earl Romans, the owner of ABE, operated a battery related
business at the Site between 1962 and 1992. Since at least 1969,
the owner disassembled used batteries, recycled used battery
parts, assembled new batteries, and sold used and new batteries.
Battery types manufactured included automotive and light truck
batteries. The ABE property was developed by filling a marsh-like
area that extended north and east to the adjacent ADOT property.
Material used in the fill included crushed battery casings.
Recycling and waste disposal methods at ABE were modified
throughout the years of operation. During the 1960s and a portion
of the 1970s, battery casings were crushed and used for fill on
the Site. During the 1970's, a guillotine-type machine was used
in the ABE yard to split the batteries to recover both soft and
plate lead. The soft lead was reused in the batteries
manufactured on site, and the plate lead was shipped to
recyclers. Prior to 1986, spent battery acid was discharged
directly to the ground. After 1986, acid was collected in plastic
drums for the purpose of resale. Excess acid that could not be
stored on site was discharged into the ground. Domestic
wastewaters were discharged to 12-foot deep septic cribs located
along the southern property boundary. The septic' cribs were
constructed of buried automobile bodies lined with battery
casings. Use of these septic cribs was discontinued in 1986 when
the ABE business was connected to the municipal wastewater sewer
system. Throughout the .entire period of operation of the ABE
business scrap batteries were stored on pallets in the yard and
-------
subject to the weather. The ABE business ceased operations in
1992.
B.
summary of site Investigations and Removal Actions
In 1980, the EPA regional Field Investigation Team conducted an
inspection at ABE. It found that used electrolyte fluid from
batteries had been dumped on the ground during recycling, and
crushed battery casings were being used as fill in the front lot
of the property.
In 1986, ADOT conducted a characterization study which involved
taking soil samples from four borings on the site. Soil samples
collected from the boring located along Leasure Street indicated
that surface lead concentrations were as high as 3,600 mg/kg. In
August 1987, ADOT excavated an area approximately 30 feet by 190
feet to a depth of 1 foot within the ADOT right-of-way along
Leasure Street, adjacent to the ABE property. The excavated
material was then used as fill in the construction of an
embankment for the Richardson Highway entrance ramp about 1/4
mile away.
In 1987, the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation
(ADEC) conducted a site inspection. Following the ADEC
inspection, EPA initiated a site assessment in May 1988. The
objective of the site assessment was to characterize the
horizontal and vertical extent of contamination. A total of 62
soil samples were collected at depths down to 5 feet. Lead
concentrations found in this assessment were as high as 128,000
mg/kg, with 20 samples having concentrations exceeding 1,000
mg/kg. As a result of this site assessment, EPA and the Alaska
Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) determined that
the ABE site posed significant environmental and human health
risks due to the high levels of lead contamination.
In August 1988, EPA initiated the first phase of an emergency
removal action at ABE to mitigate the potential risk to human
health due to exposure to Site contaminants. The areas excavated
during the removal were limited to the ABE property (see Figure
1). A cleanup action level of 1,000 mg/kg was selected for the
removal action. During the removal, extensive soil sampling was
conducted to determine lead concentrations in soil using both a
portable X-ray florescent instrument and a conventional .
laboratory analytical method. By the end of October 1988, 2,900
cubic yards of soil had been excavated and transported to a
certified hazardous waste disposal facility called United States
Pollution Control, Inc. (USPCI), located in Clive, Utah. The
second phase of the removal began in August 1989 and resulted in
the removal to USPCI of an additional 860 cubic yards of
contaminated soil. The total volume of soil removed from the Site
during the two phases of the removal was 3,760 cubic yards. The
-------
'.
Site was listed on the Superfund National Priority List (NPL)
March 1989.
in
c.
Enforcement Activities
A Baseline Potentially Responsible Party (PRP) Report was
completed in February 1989. The PRP search was conducted by EPA
civil investigators and' involved interViewing Earl Romans,
reviewing ABE business records, business and property records at
the North star Borough Office, and corporate records held by the
Alaska Secretary of State. A sworn statement was taken from Earl
Romans and a supplement to the Baseline PRP Report was completed
in September 1990 which summarized interviews conducted and
supplied other supporting documentation and photographs of the
Site.
On July 18, 1988, EPA sent a General Notice Letter to Earl Romans
informing him that he was a PRP and provided him an opportunity
to perform the removal response. Mr. Romans did not conduct the
removal. EPA then sent General Notice Letters to four generator
PRPs on June 20, 1989. Those PRPs were also provided the
opportunity to complete the removal response. None of these
generator PRPs offered to complete the removal work.
Subsequently, EPA sent General Notice Letters and a Demand for
Payment to 22 parties on August 16, 1990. The demand was made to
Earl Romans as well as 21 generators who had contributed
batteries to the Site.
After receiving EPA's General Notice Letters, a subgroup of the
22 PRPs deposed Earl Romans on October 24, 1990, in an attempt to
identify additional hazardous waste generators for the Site. As a
result of this deposition, the PRPs provided EPA a list of names
and addresses of individuals or entities who they considered to
be generators. On January 18, 1991, EPA sent information request
letters to 108 parties to gather evidence regarding their
potential liability as generators at this site. Supplemental
information requests were sent to 104 of the 108 parties in April
1991. After reviewing the responses to the initial and
supplemental information requests, EPA civil investigators
conducted interviews and document searches of approximately 32
companies in September 1991.
On January 3, 1992, EPA issued General Notice Letters to 14
additional parties informing them that they were PRPs for the ABE
site; bringing the total number of PRPs to 36. All of these new
PRPs were small businesses which had contributed relatively small
volumes of waste to the site. One additional generator was
noticed in March 1992, bringing the total number of PRPs to 37.
In an effort to settle quickly with small contributors, EPA
determined that those PRPs who contributed less that 1% of the
-------
total documented waste were eligible for a de minimis settlement
as provided in CERCLA Section 122(g). Twenty seven of the PRPs
qualified for de minimis status. In September 1992, a Consent
Order was finalized with all 27 de minimis PRPs, which provided
that upon payment of a proportionate share of the costs, their
liability would be resolved.
Negotiations with the remaining 10 non-de minimis PRPs proceeded
through August 1992 but did not result 'in a settlement.
Subsequently, the Department of Justice filed a cost recovery
action against Earl Romans of Alaskan Battery Enterprises, Inc.,
and all non-de minimis generator PRPs, which seeks the remaining
past costs and projected future costs from these parties.
III. COMMUNITY RELATIONS HISTORY
Highlights of Community Participation
This section describes EPA's activities to fulfill the
requirements of public participation under CERCLA Section 117. It
also includes a list of community relations activities conducted
by EPA during the RIjFS process.
EPA's activities at the ABE site began with a removal action in
the summer of 1988. During the removal activities (1988-1989) EPA
kept the community informed of its cleanup actions primarily
through fact sheets, newspaper articles and personal
communications with EPA's On-Scene Coordinator. Following the
removal action EPA representatives met in Fairbanks with local
officials, congressional representatives, the facility owner,
adjacent property owners and the public at large to identify
community concerns and develop a Community Relations Plan for the
remedial activities. In addition, E~A has held public meetings
during remedial activities at which concerns were raised by the
community.
The Proposed Plan for the ABE site, which called for no further
cleanup action, was published on October 29, 1992, and was
subject to public comment from October 30 through November 30,
1992. To notify the community of the opportunity for public
comment, the Proposed Plan was mailed to individuals on EPA's
mailing list for the ABE site and a newspaper notice was
published on November 1, 1992 in the Fairbanks Daily News Miner.
During the public comment period EPA held a public meeting to
provide additional information and received public comment on the
Proposed Plan, in accordance with the requirements of CERCLA
section 113(k) (2) (i-v). The public meeting was held on November
9, 1992 at the Noel Wein Public Library in Fairbanks. Prior to
the ~eeting (on November 8) EPA ran an additional advertisement
in the Fairbanks DailY News Miner to remind people of the public
-------
meeting. In general, those who commented on the Proposed Plan
supported no further action by EPA and some commenters felt that
further monitoring of the groundwater was not necessary. The
specific comments and questions raised at the meeting are
documented in a transcript. EPA has responded to these comments
in the Responsiveness Summary, which is an attachment to this
ROD.
Chronoloqy of Community Relations Activities
8/19/1988 EPA published a fact sheet announcing the start of a
removal action at the ABE site.
8/9/1989
9/13/1990
9/26/90-
9/27/90
9/26/90
9/27/90
11/14/90
1/18/1991
1/22/91-
2/22/91
5/19/91
EPA published a fact sheet announcing the continuation
of removal activities at the site.
EPA published a fact sheet describing pre-RI work,
early identification of potentially responsible
parties, and public involvement opportunities
including: community interviews a public meeting, and
open house.
EPA conducted community interviews in Fairbanks,
included meetings with local officials, adjacent
businesses, the site owner and other interested
citizens.
which
EPA held a public meeting to provide more information
about the Superfund process in general and to update
activities at the Alaskan Battery Enterprises site.
EPA held an open house as a part of its community
interviews for the site. This allowed citizens to drop
in informally and have one-on-one discussions with EPA
staff about the ABE site.
EPA published a fact sheet, which responded to 14
questions presented to EPA by two members of the
audience at the 9/26/90 public meeting.
EPA published a fact sheet announcing that the agency
had sent letters to 104 parties requesting information
regarding the parties contribution of batteries to the
site. The fact sheet also announced a 30-day public
comment period on EPA's draft Community Relations Plan.
EPA published a draft community Relations Plan for
public comment.
EPA published the final Community Relations Plan.
-------
5/22/91
1/3/1992
2/27/92
4/23/92
5/1/92-
6/1/92
5/4/1992
5/19/92
6/19/92
7/13/92
7/23/92
7/22/92-
8/21/92
8/26/92
8/92
9/21/92
EPA published a fact sheet announcing the start of RI
field work, updating the status of the 1/91 information
requests and announcing the availability of the final
Community Relations Plan.
EPA published a fact sheet updating the status of the
RI and of EPA's efforts in identifying PRPs.
EPA published a fact sheet summarizing the preliminary
RI sampling results.
EPA published a fact sheet announcing its proposal to
conduct a soil washing demonstration under the SITE
program at the ABE site. .
EPA held a public comment period on the SITE
demonstration proposal.
Advertisement in Fairbanks Dailv News Miner announcing
30-day public comment period on Superfund Innovative
Technology Evaluation (SITE) soil washing demonstration
proposal. .
EPA held a public meeting on the SITE demonstration
proposal.
EPA published a Response to Comments document to
respond to the two comments received during the public
comment period on the SITE demonstration proposal.
EPA published a fact sheet announcing that it intended
to go forward with the SITE demonstration. The fact
sheet also announced a visitors day.
EPA published a fact sheet announcing a 30-day public
comment period on an Administrative Order on Consent
between EPA and de minimis PRPs.
EPA held a public comment period on the de minimis
settlement.
EPA held a Visitor's Day for the SITE Demonstration.
EPA issued a Responsiveness Memorandum in response to
comments received on the proposed de minimis
Administrative Order.
EPA published a news release announcing the final de
minimis settlement.
-------
10/29/92
EPA released Proposed Plan calling for No Further
Action for public comment.
10/30/92-
11/30/92
EPA held public comment period on Proposed Plan.
11/1/92
EPA placed an advertisement in the Fairbanks Daily News
Miner announcing the availability of the Proposed Plan
for public comment and announcing the public meeting.
11/8/92
EPA placed an advertisement in the Fairbanks Dailv News
Miner as a reminder of the 11/9/92 public meeting.
11/9/92
EPA held public meeting on Proposed Plan.
VI.
SCOPE AND ROLE OF PRIOR ACTIONS
A removal action was conducted in 1988-89 which removed 3,760
cubic yards of lead contaminated soil. In 1992 a Risk Assessment
was conducted based on data collected during the Remedial
Investigation in 1991. This Risk Assessment identified lead as
the only contaminant remaining on the Site which would pose a
significant human health risk. In the Spring of 1992 the ABE site
was selected for the demonstration of an innovative soil washing
system by EPA's Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE)
Program. This SITE demonstration resulted in the further
excavation and removal of all remaining surface soil and most of
the subsurface soil contaminated with lead above the cleanup
action level. The removal action and the SITE demonstration have
eliminated the need to conduct additional remedial action and
have resulted in the decision for No Further Action.
v.
SUMMARY OF SITE CHARACTERISTICS
The following discussion presents a general overview of the
physical characteristics of the site plus a summary of the nature
and extent of contamination remaining after the 1988-89 removal
action as determined by sampling conducted during the Remedial
Investigation and the SITE demonstration.
A. Geology and Soils
The City of Fairbanks is situated on the Tanana-Chena floodplain
which was formed by the Tanana River and the smaller Chena River.
Both rivers flow from east to west. The elevation of the
floodplain in Fairbanks ranges between 400 to 500 feet, and
slopes west to northwest at approximately 5 feet/mile.
The Tanana-Chena floodplain is underlain by 400 to 800 feet of
unconsolidated silt, sand, and gravel. The ground surface is
-------
typically mantled by 1 to 15 feet of sandy silt which lies above
an extensive sand and gravel unit. Fairbanks has not been
directly impacted by glaciation, though glaciers from the Alaska
Range, located to the south, are reported to have approached to
within 50 miles, causing deposition of sediments in the Tanana
River valley and associated tributary valleys.
Bedrock under the Fairbanks area consists of late Precambrian to
early Paleozoic schists and quartzites of the Yukon-Tanana
terrain. The bedrock is predominantly a metamorphosed marine mud
deposit, termed a pelitic schist. Where the former mud grades
into what were limey mud, calcium carbonate deposits, and quartz
sands, resultant metamorphic processes have produced calc-mica
schist, marbles, and quartzite, respectively. The schist is
locally intruded by granitic rocks.
The Fairbanks area is underlain by discontinuous permafrost of
generally low ice content. The permafrost is typically restricted
to pore spaces and to thin ice seams in silts and clays. The
depth to permafrost, when present, ranges from 2 to 40 feet below
ground surface (bgs). The greater depths are found on cleared and
developed land surfaces. The thicknesses of the permafrost
intervals vary from approximately 5 to 275 feet. The seasonal
frost layer also varies in thickness, and is typically between 2
to 9 feet. Permafrost was found in thicknesses of one to six feet
on the Site in boreholes drilled during the Remedial
Investigation.
B. Hydrogeology
Groundwater in the Tanana-Chena floodplain general exists under
unconfined conditions. Semiconfining conditions may exist where
silt and clay units overlie the typically saturated sands and
gravels. Seasonal confining conditions develop where the depth to
water table is less than the depth of the seasonal frost
penetration. Where permafrost exists, frozen ground forms
discontinuous confining layers which influence groundwater
movement and distribution. The presence of near surface
permafrost can restrict groundwater movement within the shallow
subsurface, as well as limit groundwater movement within unfrozen
intrapermafrost layers which act as groundwater conduits, within
otherwise perennially frozen ground.
The depth to groundwater in the flood plain ranges from
approximately 5 to 15 feet below ground surface and flows to the
northwest. Seasonal elevation changes typically range frorn 3 to 6
feet. Groundwater levels from wells completed at different depths
throughout the flood plain indicate that shallow groundwater flow
is primarily horizontal at a rate of 0.757 ft/I,OOO ft. Local
groundwater movement generally follows a northwest regional
pattern but fluctuates seasonally due to the effects of changing
-------
stage in the Tanana River and to a lesser extent the Chena River.
In a study performed by the USGS to determine background
(natural) groundwater conditions, domestic wells in the Fairbanks
area located 4 miles upgradient (southeast) of the ABE site were
chemically analyzed. Only iron was consistently found in
concentrations above EPA maximum recommended limits for domestic
water supplies. Elevated arsenic groundwater levels are also a
common problem in the Fairbanks region, and exceeded the EPA
drinking water standard in about 10% of the wells sampled.
c.
Nature and Extent of contamination
1. Remedial Investigation
In the summer of 1991, EPA conducted a Remedial Investigation to
fully characterize the extent of contamination remaining in the
soil after the completion of the removal action and to determine
if contaminants were in the groundwater. Based on the results of
the Remedial Investigation, a Feasibility Study was completed
which identified four alternatives for remediating"the remaining
lead-contaminated soil at the Site. These four alternatives were:
1) No Action, 2) Excavation and Off-Site Disposal, 3) Soil
Washing, and 4) Excavation, Off-Site Treatment and Disposal.
During the Remedial Investigation, soil was sampled at 18
locations on the ABE site both at the surface and at several
intervals below the surface at each of these 18 locations (see
Figure 2). The sample locations were distributed around the site
to provide characterization of potential contamination resulting
from direct deposition and/or windblown dust transport. Of the 18
surface locations sampled, 16 of them had lead concentrations in
the range of 11 ppm to 460 ppm. The remaining two locations had
lead concentrations of 1,240 ppm and 7,730 ppm, at locations S-4
and S-11, respectively.
Subsurface soil samples collected from within the ABE property
boundary had lead concentrations ranging from 4.9 to 856 ppm.
Subsurface soil samples collected outside of the removal zone had
lead concentrations ranging from 15 ppm to 5,180 ppm. Only one
sampling location (S-7) had lead concentration exceeded 1,000 ppm
in the subsurface. At this location, which is on the DOT right-
of-way, the concentration of lead was 5,180 ppm at a depth of 1-
2.5 feet, and 1,320 ppm at a depth of 11-12.5 feet.
Other inorganics sampled in the soil, which are potentially
associated with lead battery waste, included arsenic and
antimony. The average level of arsenic across the site was 5.1
ppm. The highest level of arsenic, 15.4 ppm, was found at "
location S-4. Antimony was not detected at any locations sampled.
The analyses for organic contaminants in surface soil showed the
-------
presence of phenol (75 ppb) and pentachlorophenol (940 ppb) at
location S-18. Aroclor 1260 was also detected in concentrations
ranging from 12 to 150 ppb at five surface sample locations (S-2,
-6, -11, -13, and -14).
six surficial sediment samples were also collected within
drainage ways extending from the site (see Figure 3). These
surface sediment samples were collected to identify potential
off-site transport of contaminants through surface water runoff.
Lead concentrations at these locations ranged from 14 ppm to 129
ppm.
Groundwater was sampled from nine groundwater monitoring
installed during the investigation (see Figure 4). These
were sampled three times, once each during the months of
August, and October of 1991. In the first round, the
concentrations of lead ranged from 14 to 372 ppb in unfiltered
samples and was undetected in filtered samples. In the second
round, lead concentrations ranged from 3 to 80 ppb in unfiltered
samples and was undetected in filtered samples. In the third
round, lead was only detected in three unfiltered samples,
ranging from 3 to 18 ppb and was detected in two filtered samples
at 4 ppb and 8 ppb. In each case where lead was detected, it was
observed that the water was turbid.
wells
wells
June,
2. SITE Demonstration
In the Spring of 1992 the ABE site was selected for the
demonstration of an innovative soil washing system by EPA's SITE
Program independently of EPA's activities on the Remedial
Investigation and Feasibility Study. The objective of this
demonstration was to determine the effectiveness of the BESCORP
soil washing system in reducing the volume of lead-contaminated
soil at the site. The BESCORP system is designed to reduce
volumes of contaminated soil by separating the soil into grain
size fractions. The system is most efficient when used on soils
with high content of sand and gravel, which is the case for the
ABE site.
The soil which was to be treated by soil washing included all
soil on the Site with lead concentrations exceeding 1,000 ppm
within five feet of the surface. Before excavating soil for
treatment, extensive soil sampling was conducted in four areas on
the DOT right-of-way on the north and east sides of the site
where lead had been found in concentrations exceeding 1,000 ppm
during the Remedial Investigation. The results of this sampling
are shown in Figures 5 through 9. The lead concentrations at
locations S-4 and S-11 were in the range of 8 to 30 ppm and 16
to 239 ppm, respectively, significantly lower than identified
during the Remedial Investigation. This discrepancy may be due to
the inhomogeneous nature of lead contamination which is typical
of battery recycling operations.
-------
As a result of the SITE sampling, three areas in the subsurface
to the north of the ABE property on the DOT right-of-way were
found to have soil exceeding 1,000 ppm lead and were excavated
for treatment (see Figure 10). One of these areas, sampling
location S-7, had been identified during the Remedial
Investigation, but the other two areas had not. The total soil
volume excavated from these areas was 130 cubic yards.
Confirmational sampling of the excavated areas was conducted to
confirm that all soil exceeding 1,000 ppm lead had been removed
from the excavated areas (see Figures 11 through 13). The results
confirmed that all soil remaining had concentrations less than
1,000 ppm (see Tables 1 through 3). The excavated areas were then
filled with clean sand and gravel material. All soil treated by
the soil washing system was stored in drums in a fenced area on
the DOT right-of-way. The drums will be taken off site and
disposed at a permitted hazardous waste disposal facility in the
spring of 1993. A full report on the results of the demonstration
and the calculated effectiveness of the soil washing system will
be published by the SITE Program in the spring of 1993.
VI.
SUMMARY OF SITE RISKS
Based on sampling conducted during the Remedial Investigation, a
Risk Assessment was prepared to identify the exposure pathways
and to evaluate potential risks to human health and the
environment resulting from exposure to contamination remaining
on-site after the removal actions conducted in 1988-89. This
section reports the results of the Risk Assessment conducted for
this Site. The risks were determin~d according to EPA's procedure
for Reasonable Maximum Exposure (RME), which is EPA's method of
determining a conservative risk level for an exposed individual.
The approach used was also consistent with guidelines established
in EPA's "Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund. Vol. I: Human
Health Evaluation Manual", and guidelines established in "Draft
Supplemental Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund", written by
EPA Region 10. Reasonable conservative estimates and assumptions
were made at every step in the analysis to enhance confidence in
the conclusions of the risk assessment.
The main pathways for a human health exposure to contaminants at
the Site were ingestion or dermal contact with soil, or ingestion
of groundwater. The risks of exposure to contaminants via these
pathways were calculated. for all contaminants which either have a
cancer potency factor or reference dose. The estimated total
cancer risk due to exposure to all carcinogens (arsenic,
pentachlorophenol, phenol, and Aroclor 1260) was calculated to be
less than one in a million. The overall hazard index for exposure
to non-carcinogens (antimony), was calculated to be less than
one. These risk levels for carcinogens and non-carcinogens are
considered to be protective of human health.
-------
The risk of exposure to lead, for which a potency factor or
reference dose has not been established, was determined by using
EPA's UptakejBiokinetic (UBK) Model. The UBK model calculates
blood lead levels in children based on their exposed to lead
concentrations in soil. The purpose of using the UBK model is to
determine if blood lead concentrations in exposed children
exceeds the threshold protective level of 10 micrograms per
deciliter (ugjdl) established by the Centers for Disease Control.
Possible physiological effects associated with elevated lead
concentrations in the body include: nerve damage, mental
disabilities, colic, anemia, digestive disorders, and brain
damage. Using site-specific soil lead concentrations as input
parameters to the UBK Model, it was determined that lead
concentrations below 490 ppm in surface soil for a residential
exposure would not cause elevated blood lead levels and would be
protective of human health.
The results of the Remedial Investigation indicated that there
were two location (S-4 and S-11) where the surface soil exceeded
the 490 ppm action level. Subsequent sampling conducted during
the SITE demonstration showed that lead concentrations at S-4 and
S-11 did not exceed 239 ppm. These results indicate that the
removal actions conducted in 1988-89 achieved the cleanup action
level for the surface soil over the entire Site.
For the subsurface soils, EPA determined that an action level
based on industrial exposure could be justified for the Site
because direct contact with subsurface soil would likely be
limited to workers during an excavation event and would be of
limited duration. Because the UBK Model was not designed for use
in industrial scenarios, EPA based its subsurface action level on
an existing guidance document titled, "Interim Guidance on
Establishing Soil Lead Cleanup Levels at Superfund Site", dated
September 7, 1989. This document states that a protective level
of lead in soil for a residential setting is in the range of 500-
1,000 ppm. Applying this guidance to industrial exposures, EPA
has set a precedent of selecting the upper end of this range,
1,000 ppm, as the cleanup action level at other lead-contaminated
Superfund sites. Therefore, it is appropriate to select this
level for protection of an industrial exposure at the ABE site.
This alternate action level for the subsurface soil will
adequately protect on-site industrial workers who could come into
contact with subsurface soils if future excavation activities
were to occur.
The Remedial Investigation indicated that subsurface soil
exceeded 1,000 ppm only at location S-7. Additional sampling
conducted during the SITE demonstration confirmed the exceedance
at S-7 and identified two adjacent areas also exceeding the
subsurface action level. These areas were all excavated during
the SITE demonstration to a depth of five feet and filled with
clean soil, achieving the subsurface action level for the entire
-------
Site to a depth of ten feet. This situation will be protective of
workers who could come into contact with subsurface soils during
possible future excavation activities.
A specific risk assessment was not conducted for ingestion of
lead in the groundwater because a federal drinking water standard
already exists for lead which is protective of human health. This
drinking water standard is 15 micrograms of lead per liter of
water (ugjL). Lead concentrations in groundwater were found above
the drinking water standard in eight wells during the first
sampling round; in two wells during the second round; and in one
upgradient (background) well in the third round. In each case
where lead was found above the drinking water standard in these
sampling rounds, it was observed that the water was turbid.
Turbidity in groundwater samples is usually caused by silt or
clay particles in the water resulting from incomplete well
development. Most metals, including lead, have a high affinity
for silt and clay particles, and will bind to them instead of
dissolving in the groundwater. When bound to such particles, lead
will not migrate in the groundwater and therefore does not
present a health risk. To verify that lead is only associated
with silt and clay particles, and that the groundwater presents
no health risk, EPA has determined that additional groundwater
monitoring needs to be conducted. This monitoring would consist
of sampling a minimum of three downgradient and one upgradient
wells three times annually for two years.
Sensitive wildlife habitats near the Site were identified during
the Remedial Investigation. However, it was determined that
contaminants from the Site had not migrated to any of these
habitats. Therefore an ecological risk assessment for the Site
was not conducted.
VII.
DECISION FOR NO FURTHER ACTION
EPA's decision for No Further Cleanup Action is based on the
results of the Remedial Investigation soil and groundwater
sampling, the Risk Assessment, and the supplemental soil sampling
conducted during the SITE demonstration. EPA and ADEC conclude
that the removal actions conducted in 1988-89 and the excavations
conducted during the SITE demonstration have eliminated the need
to conduct additional remedial action and that the decision for
No Further Action is protective of human health and the
environment. EPA and ADEC have also decided that it would be
inadvisable for drinking water wells to be drilled in the
immediate area of the'ABE site until it is confirmed that the
groundwater is clean. To minimize the possibility that such wells
are drilled, EPA and ADEC will issue an advisory notifying
drilling contractors in the Fairbanks area of the situation.
-------
VIII.
DOCUMENTATION OF SIGNIFICANT CHANGES
The Proposed Plan for the ABE site was released for public
comment on October 29, 1992. The Proposed Plan recommended No
Further Action for the ABE site. Public comments were evaluated
at the end of the 30-day comment period and are addressed in the
attached responsiveness summary (Appendix B). Public comments
were all strongly in favor of the No Further Action proposal. It
was determined that no significant changes to the Proposed Plan
were necessary.
-------
",
APPENDIX A
-------
ZSI-SfTE
"
- --
--
"
RICHARDSON HICHWA r RAMP
"
"
0<,<::> "
~C "
" +"'-1><::> "
" ;s'0-1.- '
-s;..c. ........
"S-"-'"
"'1)-
,
........
~
/'
~
"
........
........
, .
........
saTH A VENUE
........
UFT S1 A TlON
-=rl,
ARCTIC
WELDING
",,-..
;-.. D/~'"
/ -----.. ......
. '-----..
/ '---
G
l-
e
/
/
/
/
/
(
. -----.. . /
\' -----.. . -----.. -----.. . -----.. . /
~. . -----.. . --- -----... -----.. . Z I
~'~ '~
- '. N~!:CIt
~
PERSINGER'S
BOAT
SAL£S
_0_._-
0(.0
.fIC~
~O.rON
JQG'-7-I-'
-------
-'
ZS1-eH
'-
'-..
----
'-..
RICHAROSON HICHWA r RAMP
/"
~
'-..
'-..
OS-+
@ '-.. ~~
'-..
@
S3
@
S/B4
@
'-
'-
JOTH A VeNUe
'-
'-
S/B2
@
UFT STATION
_lL.
S/B1@
S/87
@
S/BI7@
S/822
@
0_0_'_07
S/88 0
... @ /
.",".°"0.'"'"''''.''' .
"""""""1/
.G::':~:::7j
. . ... ... '::."1"", sl
£B/ij<:"
"',-
;-. ~'.~/tc;;-...,
. ~
/. 0---
/
S/810
i
/
/
824
@
x---
CI:\ x --x
~ ---- x
B19 @
S/820
ARCTIC
WELDING
:I:
U
: x
S/BI60@ I
x
4l.ASKAN
BATTERY
OITERPRISES
B23
@ CSC
PERSINGER'S
BOAT
SP-LES
-.-.-.
@
S/BI5
(
0~~B13 /
ro~.------ o~o~ /
I\.' ------ 0 ---' . ------ 0 Z /
o ~ LEGEND
~/rCl-( (t) BOREHOLEftiONITORING WELL
. . "'f..... @ SURF ACE SOIL. BOREHOLE
D
EXlSllNG BUIU>ING
CULVERT
PROPERlY BOUNDARY
FENCE
HISTORIC BUIU>INGjROAD
EXlSllNG ROAD
ABANDONED SEPllC CRIB
B4SE YAP REFERENCE: AOOT 1986
SCALE IN FEET
o
60
120
180
I
9 ecololD' and environment
CSC
Figure 2
-------
ZS1-$EDSAMP
~
"
"
"
........
---
JOTH A VENUE
"
'-
CSC
SCALE IN FEET
-........
'..........
Sdl
. . .S' d. .2'@""""'''''''''''''''''''''"'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''{i)'"'''UFTST A nON
GRASS SWALE .. . . .. .. . " .. .. ..., 0 n
=~==.====._._._.-LJ.
I
I
I
I
~._._._._._,_._._._,_._. .
Sd6
D
o
ARcnc
WELDING
PERSINGER'S
BOAT
SALES
@
~
D
LEGEND
SURFACE SEDIMENT SAMPLING
REMOVAL ZONE
...... - - J
,.. - -......
EXISTING BUILDING
CULVERT
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
FENCE
HISTORIC BUILDING/ROAD
EXISTING ROAD
ABANDONED SEPTIC CRIB
-"'4--..,
-.-
-x-
'..........
BASE MAP REFERENCE: ADOT 1986
- - -
. ------
'.............
o
80
160
240
I
~ eoo1017 and environment
FIgure 3
SEDIMENT SAMPLE LOCATION MAP
r -. ,
.---.
-------
"
Z$1-WW
. -
- --
--
/'
.Jom A VENUE
UFT STAi10N
-~-
M7@+1046
ARCi1C
WElDING
.1045
-.-.-.
"
RICHARDSON HICHWA r RAMP
"
~
"
o
........
" °<'0 ........
'- -1Z ........
........ iC'+"'-p. ........
'- <:>J': ........
'- 0+
?;-~ ......
........ 'S-..,
"")-
........
~8
........
......
......
......
x---
x ----
M3~1014 x ---- X
"'--
r-."'-.'.~/i;;;-...-
. ----
/ '",
/
I
I
/
/
/
(
."'-.~
1'"'-. ."'-.
. ---- ."'-.
~. '----. ."'-..
. ~ LEGEND
~ ~!!C1t ... MONITORING WELL
~ (i) BOREHOLEjMONITORING VwtLL
o EXlSl1NG BUILDING
CULVERT
- . - PROPERTY BOUNDARY
FENCE
HISTORIC BUILDINC,IROAD
EXlSl1NG ROAD
C SC ABANDONED SEPl1C CRIB
x
I
x
I
x
I
x
: I
x
o I
~ i
xlo4142
csc
AlASKAN
BAm:RY
ENTERPRISES
PERSINGER'S
BOAT
SAlLS
/
/
BASE WAP REF'ERENCE: ADOT 1986
o
9 ecolOD aneS eJ1~IUDOD\
SCALE IN F'EET
60
120
180
I
Figure 4
-------
,.,
/'
..:J
rv
,-
c.JI
...,
. <=>
,-
...
l>-
<=>
c.JI
...,
<=>
<=>
...
N
Q
""
;:I
o
'"
n
N
;0
'"
N
~
!-!'
I>-
'"
ADOT FENCE
AREA ::1
30th AVENUE
~LlFT STATION
AREA #4
ARCTIC
WELDING
PERSINGER'S
BOAT
SALES
~
~
o 50' 100'
~ II
"= 50'
FI~E 3
AREAS INVESTIGATED
BY FIEI IN 1992
OLD
RICHARDSON
HICHWA r
LEGEND
150'
I
0-
NOTE: FIGURE BASED ON BASE MAP REFERENCE:
ADOT 1986. AND A SURVEY CONDUCTED
FOR FWEI IN SEPTEMBER 1992.
14O!1J1X1l1O(
Figure 5
-------
f':>
......
CD
tV
......
......
.....
.,.
<:>
Ut
...,
<:>
<:>
CD
o
C'>
Z
C>
n
,.
N
30th AVENUE
AB-4-13
AB-4-14
AB-4-15
AB-4'-16
AB-4-11
AB-4-12
AB-4-10
AB-4-7
AB-4-8
AB-4-9
~ AB-4-5
AB-4-6
AB-4-4
LIFT
STATION
AB-4-17
AB-4-18
AB-4-19
IV
?'
-
CD
CD
tV
;i?
tV
:-:'
N
....
LEGEND
~ - FENCE LINE.
AB-4-1- FWEI SOIL SAMPLES COLLECTED IN
. JUNE 1992.
T-l - TAT SOIL SAMPLES COLLECTED
o IN 1989.
0- POTENTIAL AREA OF CONTAMINATION BASED ON
THE E&E RI REPORT. VOLUME 1
NOTE: FIGURE BASED ON INFORMATION PROVIDED
IN THE E&E RI REPORT VOLUME 1 AND A SURVEY
CONDUCTED BY FWEI IN SEPTEMBER 1992.
ALL SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED FROM TEST PITS
AT DEPTHS OF BETWEEN 0-5 FEET. .
GRAPHIC SCALE
o 20'
~
40'
,
60'
I
I' = 20'
fiGURE 7
RI AREA OF CONCERN
AREA '4
ALASKA BATTERY ENTERPRISES
FAIRBANKS ALASKA
DRAWN BY. SAW 18-23. SCAlEJ 18.20'-08:
~ FOSTER ~rR oo;;;.~ INC. .
IfJ LMIICSTOII.IO .(RS[Y
148S3H1. DOl
Figure 6 SITE SAMPLING LOCATIONS
-------
n
,.
u;
rv
,.
<.J1
w
<:> N
,.
....
...
<:>
U\
w
<:>
<:>
....
0
~
0
n
...
IV
!7'
:D
'"
IV
!'?
0
~
0
<:)
jeth A VENUE
AS - 3 -~1"l'
AB- 3-13
AB-3-6
-------
EXISTING
BUILDING
......
!:i
~
c.-,
~
~
o
"
LEGEND
~ - FENCE LINE.
AB-3-1- FWEI SOIL SAMPLES COLLECTED IN
. JUNE 1992.
B-7-1 - E&E SOIL SAMPLE COLLECTED
() IN 1991.
T-8Ee - TAT SOIL SAMPLE COLLECTED
o IN 1989.
0- POTENTIAL AREA OF CONTAMINATION BASED ON
THE E&E RI REPORT, VOLUME I
NOTE: FIGURE BASED ON INFORMATION PROVIDED
IN THE E&E RI REPORT VOLUME 1 AND A SURVEY
CONDUCTED BY FWEI IN SEPTEMBER 1992.
ALL SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED FROM TEST PITS
AT DEPTHS OF BETWEEN 0-5 FEET.
GRAPHIC SCALE
o 20' 40"
~ I
/': 20'
FIGURE 5
RI AREA OF CONCERN
AREA '3
60'
I
AlASKAS.R£F
Figure 7
-------
n.
---
;;;
rv
---
'-"
~
C>
---
....
~
C>
'-"
~
C>
C>
'-"
o
~
N
Q
n
...
rv
P'
AB-2-2
88.4
EXISTING
BUILDING
'"
'"
N
!'?
C>
...
.....
LEGEND
SII - E&E SOIL SAMPLE COLLECTED
() IN )991.
1.240- TOTAL LEAD CONCENTRATION IN THE
SOIL IN mg/kg
AB-2-)- FWEI SOIL SAMPLE COLLECTED IN
. JUNE 1992.
0- POTENTIAL AREA OF CONTAMINATION BASED ON
THE E&E RI REPORT. VOLUME 1
NOTE: FIGURE BASED ON INFORMATION PROVIDED
IN THE E&E RI REPORT VOLUME 1 AND A SURVEY
CONDUCTED BY FWEI IN SEPTEMBER 1992.
14e~}ees.OCII
Figure 8
.....
~
~
'-?
~
.5?
~
""-J
PERSINGER'S
BOAT SALES
GRAPHIC SCALE
o 20'
~
": 20'
60'
1
40'
I
FIGURE 3
RI AREA OF CONCERN
AREA #2
SURFACE SOIL
ALASKA BATTERY ENTERPRISES
FAIRBANKS ALASKA
DRA*N BY. SAW 11-23-92 SCAlE. 18.20' -0' :
ilJil OCIS IIIIIIPC; IS II( PIIJ'IRI1 S 11£
FOSTER WHEElER ENVIRESPONSE INC.
LMh'CSTOII.ICr D!LT
8 ,;
AtASKAS.R£F
-------
n
/'
u;
IV
/'
..."
N
/'
....
..
<:>
..."
....
<:>
<:>
....
0
~
<:>
n
..
'"
!1'
;;;
U>
IV
~
U1
!'?
....
\.oJ
STEESE EXPRESSWAY
AB-I-3
23.3
S4
7.730
LEGEND
54 - E&E SOIL SAMPLE COLLECTED
() IN 1 SS1.
7.730- TOTAL LEAD CONCENTRATION IN THE
SOIL IN mg/kg
AB-l-I- FWEI SOIL SAMPLE COLLECTED IN
. JUNE 1992.
0- POTENTIAL AREA OF CONTAMINATION BASED ON
THE E&E RI REPORT. VOLUME 1
NOTE: FIGURE BASED ON INFORMATION PROVIDED
IN THE E&E RI REPORT VOLUME 1 AND A SURVEY
CONDUCTED BY FWEI IN SEPTEMBER 1992.
AS-I-l
29.8
30th A VENUE'
GRAPHIC SCALE
o 20' 40'
~ I
60'
I
I' = 20'
fI CURE Z
RI AREA OF CONCERN
AREA #1
SURFACE SOIL
ALASKA BATTERY ENTERPRISES
FAIRBANKS ALASKA
DRAft.. BY. SAW 18-23-92 SCALE. 18.20' -08 :
8 1III~ IIMIIG IS 11£ PIII'ERIT ~ 11£
FOSTER WHEELER ~SPONSE INC,
LMltCSTOII.IO DS[T
>
.\lASKA5R£F
-------
"
30th AVENUE
d'Q LIFT STATION
SITE EXCAVATION #4
~ ]
..::
"-'
...-
....
~
SITE EXCAVATION #4A
<..J
'"
ARCTI C
If£lOINC
ALASKAN
BA HERr
(NIERPRIS£S
PERSINCER'S
BOAT
SALES
OLD
RICHARDSON
HI CHWA '(
~
GRAPHIC SCALE
o 50' 100'
~ I
I' = 50'
FIGURE 11
SITE DRAWING INDICATING
FIEI AREAS OF EXCAVATION
150'
I
LEGEND
~ - FENCE LINE.
a_AREAS OF EXCAVATION CONDUCTED BY
FWEI IN 1992.
NOTE: FIGURE BASED ON A SURVEY CONDUCTED
FOR FWEI IN SEPTEMBER 1992.
1~
Figure 10
-------
n
---
;0
IV
---
<.JI
w EXCAVATION
<=> N
--- AB-4-31 r AREA .~
.....
A
<=> 323
<.JI
w
<=>
-
w
0
~ ~AB-4-33
o
n
.... 829
IV
!7' ~AB-4-34
;0 AB-4-30
..,
IV 485
~ 717
c..n
C!
..."
<0
LEGEND
~ - FENCE LINE.
8-4-1- FWEI SOIL SAMPLES COLLECTED IN
. JUNE 1992.
0- LIMITS OF EXCAVATION AREA BASED ON
FWEI FIELD INVESTIGATIONS.
NOTE: FIGURE BASED ON INFORMATION PROVIDED
IN THE E&E RI REPORT VOLUME 1 AND A SURVEY
CONDUCTED BY FWEI IN SEPTEMBER 1992.
HIS31 U. OGlf
Figure 11
GRAPHIC SCALE
o 10'
~
30'
I
20'
,
I
,. = 10'
FIGURE 10
EXCAVATION AREA '4
ALASKA BATTERY ENTERPRISES
FAIRBANKS ALASKA
DRA~ BV. SAW 18-23- SCALE. 1° "10' -0" :
lJiI 1MtS IJIWIIG IS 11( NHRITIJ 11(
FOSTER WHEElER ENVIRESPONSE INC.
UVV«:STOIC,IO .tJtS[T
ALASKAS.R£f
-------
'I
n
.-'
u;
""
.-'
(JI
c...
c::>
....-
......
A
c::>
(JI
.....
<:>
A
C
G'J
:z::
Q
("1
-
N
:;;
EXCAVATION
AREA #5
N
!"
;0
<0
""
~
AB-5-3
335
A
.....
AB-5-2
66.8
LEGEND
EXI STING
BUILDING
GRAPHIC SCALE
o ~. 2~
~ I
:50'
I
I' = 10'
--- - FENCE LINE.
AB-4-1- FWEI SOIL SAMPLES COLLECTED IN
. JUNE 1992.
0- LIMITS OF EXCAVATION AREA BASED ON
FWEI FIELD INVESTIGATIONS.
NOTE: FIGURE BASED ON INfORMATION PROVIDED
IN THE E&E RI REPORT VOLUME 1 AND A SURVEY
CONDUCTED BY FWEI IN SEPTEMBER 1992.
FIGURE 11
EXCAVATION AREA 15
7~85JIU.-
Figure 12
-------
o
.....
<.0
IV
.....
""
....
C> N
.....
....
...
C>
""
....
C>
....
0
~
C>
n
...
IV
51'
;0
<.0
IV
~
c.J'I
ry
C>
<0
AB-3-44
388
AB-3-37
138
AB-3-31
300
EXCAVATION~
AREA #3A
AB-3-36
554
AB-3-42
98.6
"
~ AB-3-38
109
EXCAVATION
AREA #3
LEGEND
~ - FENCE LINE.
AB-4-1- FWEI SOIL SAMPLES COLLECTED IN
. JUNE 1992.
EXISTING
BUILDING
GRAPHIC SCALE
o 20' 40' GO'
~ I -1
"= 20'
FIGURE 12
EXCAVATION AREA -3 & 83A
0- LIMITS OF EXCAVATION AREA BASED ON
FWEI FIELD INVESTiGATIONS.
NOTE: FIGURE BASED ON INFORMATION PROVIDED
IN THE E&E RI REPORT VOLUME 1 AND A SURVEY
CONDUCTED BY FWEI IN SEPTEMBER 1992.
741SS'IS.DCII
Figure 13
-------
Sample
Number
Sample
Depth
(Inches)
AB-4-29 36
AB-4-30 36
.AB ....4:31\.. ....":.42',
AB-4-32 36
AB-4-33 36
.":iAB +.4H.34t:':?i::,:..j.:,}{42i'\i.\
TABLE 2
Foster Wheeler Enviresponse, Inc.
POST EXCAVATION ANALYTICAL RESULTS
for
AREA 4
Alaskan Battery Enterprises Site
Fairbanks, Alaska
2G-0el-1K!
ftA. r. D,U
Sample
Date
laboratory
Results
(mg/kg = ppm) Comments/Observations
6/25/92 297
6/25/92 485
. 6/25/92.,...'.' ' "":..,.:323,'"
6/25/92 734
6/25/92 829
:6/25/92..,. . :,:::',i:;:;:,.(.Q1:7tii'/i(}f:
Post excavation (PE) sample form the SW corner of excavation
Duclicate of AB-4-29
.. PE samclefromthe.NW cornet of'excavatiom..'
PE sample from the NW corner of excavation
Duclicate of AB-4-32
-------
.., ,
~
TABLE 1
Foster Wheeler Envlresponse. Inc.
POST EXCAVATION ANALYTICAL RESULTS
for
AREAS 3 & 3A
Alaskan Battery Enterprises Site
Fairbanks. Alaska
Sample
Number
I8-Oct-.
,ou", ..
Sample
Date
Laboratory
Res ults
(mg/kg = ppm)
Comments/Observations
AB~3-21 6/25/92 674 Post excavation (PE) sample from NW side wall
;.AB:~:3.~:22: ::;:'/,:::::.6/25/~2/:::/{ :;::::::.:::.:.::,.:.3.43.0..;::.::::::i:;:::::::i:i(:i::: :};:;::P.E,:;.sampl.e.JromJ\lE:;slcf.e.::wall.,:::::{:::)::;::::}{;:::::;;:;~::::;':::f::::::;i:{:::",':.:.:::::.;::::.:\:"::::;:;':';:"-:::'::::::::::::..:::.:
;AB4'3"¥~~r.::;/;:::6/27192mi;::::r)iifi:';::?6${O:::::frrir:@i::::nt;?R$Sa:mPlj?QtiAB:H:3Bi2~f.ffet:iddltlohanjxcitVatIQ:ni:::f::iti;;:;:::i::::;::::?:;:::::::::
:AB":':;3w40 ;;:(::::6/27/92'(' '.' '::73:9::::::/:;:::;:::t::.(:::;Duplicatff:ofA : :."
AB-3-23 6/25/92 2580 PE samples from SW side wall
AB-3-38 6/27/92 109 Resample of AB-3-23 after additional excavation
ABS3+.24' ..' 6/25/92:)::;;-:::::373. ... :::::;:;;PE:,iuimple::from:;SE::side':wall:::;.:/:::':::':,(::::::;:;:::::::::::)::):::::::::::::::::::.::::::;:::;;':;:;:::.
AB-3-29 6/26/92 1170 PE sample from base of excavation in Area 3A
AB-3-30 6/26/92 490 Duplicate ofsample AB-3-29
AB-3-42 7/20/92 98.6 Resample of AB-3-29 after additional excavation
AB-3-43 7/20/92 67.6 Duplicate of AB-3-42
AB+3"'31:' :\::::::6/26/92:;::':::';::'::::':::: 300'::::{:\,::::;:::: :,;:;:::PE:sample:frotn::NWcotlierofexcaVatlon .lrf'Area::3A\:::;:::;::::;::::
AB-3-32 6/26/92 1010 PE Sample from base of NW corner of the excavation In Area 3A
AB-3-33 6/26/92 365 Duplicate of AB-3-32
AB-3-44 7/20/92 388 Resample of AB-3-32 & AB-3-33 after additional excavation
iAB:83H.34t :::::",,/6/26/92:\/:;.:::{:/trt8.7:0::::/:::::O:;':::;::) tf::Pe':i~ampJe::tr6nt:theI$ErcottietwallioUhQ)~xcavatlori:lri}Ar:ea::;3A
AB¥3'S4.5:?/:::7/20/92{{i .';.;::;f):2940::(:::iiW::;;::;:::;tr :}H:RGs.'mDIG::o.t'AB:4~:*~4:;::aftEir:addltiorianexcavatIO"iti::miift::;:;;::::::};;.
::AB:#$:g4~::fif?1/20/92':i':i;: ;:i:;:;imi';;;1 ;25())::i;;:::;.::}:ji::::i;): :i:fml)upI19atijWjfAB'%:~H;4$m:it::t;i;.:i:;:::{::;i:rJi;:::r:::::t::f:;:;:{!::j:rr:i::::.;:::::i:::;::::f\it:ft:r:.:;:fi\i:::::;'::
'AB ;;;;;;3250' :).::8 01 92;:::':::'::::::/S03:::>::::):f{:)tResamDle;::6fiAB4'34{'4S-M~:::ABA3f;45::8fteiaddltionaliexcavation
AB-3-35 62692 958 PE sample from the base of east wall of excavation In Area 3A
::ABF3436: ((;::::;:6 26 92(}:} ;:;:;::::;:'::;:::::::::564;:::::);::i;:{:;<:::;:;: \:;t;P:E;::s'ampletfrol1ttthe:base:of:excavatlonJnAreat3A\::;:;::://g(:::::;;t\:::::}:
AB-3-37 62692 138 PE sample from the western wall of the excavation
AB""'3~41..:::{.6 28 92: ....:......,...970,,: ..::::;?Sample:frombasc!'ofArea3excaVatlOIi\::::;:::.:::'
... "....
":::;':"':.':
-------
Sample
Number
AB-5-1
...' .,\(AB4. 5.+.2::/:.,;,
AB-5-3
AB...:.5...:.4
AB-5-5
AB-5-9
AB-5-B3
:AS-.5 ~.6:::.\.:
AB-5-7
.. ,.;\ABS5+S\i'\::;:.
N/A - Not Available
RANGE NAME: AREA!£)(
.
Sample
Depth
(Inches)
30-36
\:,'24,;.,;;;30
24-30
N/A
N/A
N/A
NA
.:,:./:).:N A....
NA
/t:.: N A:(' ,
Sample
Date
08 12 92
: 0812 92,.."
08 12 92
08 12 92
08/12/92
08/27/92
09 11 92
08 12 92
08 12 92
::081292
TABLE 3
Foster Wheeler Enviresponse, Inc.
POST EXCAVATION ANALYTICAL RESULTS
for
AREA 5A
Alaskan Battery Enterprises Site
Fairbanks, Alaska
Laboratory
Results
(mg/kg = ppm) Comments/Observations
383 Post excavation lPE} samele from the Middle of East Wall
..H).66.8.:) H HPEsamplefrom:the:Middle'ofSouthWall:t:::i",t .
335 PE samele from the Middle of West Wall
..317...PEsamplefromtheMiddleof.NorthWall""::H
1 030 PE sample from the Base, 6' West of East wall
1190 Resample of sample AB-5-5 after additional excavating
74 Resample of sample AB-5-9 after additional excavation
387.:. PEsample from the Base..12'"Westof East Wall
599 PE samele from the Base 18' West of East Wall
'.:=::.' 985/i::,i :PE:sarrielefrom the Baser6'EastotWestWall( ,.
" .
..
28-Od-1II2
------- |