PB95-964617
EPA/ROD/R10-95/127
February 1996
EPA Superfund
Record of Decision:
Arctic Surplus Superfund
Site, Fairbanks, AK
9/28/1995
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 10
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98101
September 28, 1995
MEMORANDUM
Subject:
From:
Through .-
To:
Record of Decision
Arctic Surplus Superfund Site
Neil E. Thompson, Project Manager /^
HWD, Superfund Branch
Michael F. Gearheard, Manager
HWD, Superfund Branch
Chuck Clarke, Regional Administrator
EPA Region 10
Attached for your signature is the Record of Decision (ROD)
for the Arctic Surplus Superfund Site located near Fairbanks,
Alaska. This ROD addresses all of the contamination at Arctic
Surplus and is the final remedy for the site.
Soil contamination from salvage operations is che primary
problem that needs to be addressed. The principal threats at the
site are from PCBs and lead which will be mitigated by the
remedial actions described in the ROD.
This ROD includes for the first time in Region 10: a RCRA
Land Disposal Restrictions, Treatability Variance; and a waiver
for TSCA Chemical Waste Landfill requirements. RCRA wastes
commingled by halogenated organic carbon (HOCs, including PCBs)
require that the HOCs be incinerated or receive a Treatability
Variance. To landfill the treated soil a TSCA chemical waste
landfill waiver must be given if the treatment of the PCBs is not
equivalent to incineration, i.e., 2 ppm. The treatment required
for the contaminated soils at Arctic Surplus is to reduce the PCS
concentrations to less than 50 ppm, and to treat'the lead so it
will not fail the "characteristic". RCRA TCLP test. Treatment to
these requirements provides a high degree of protectiveness for
human health and the environment.
The key elements of the remedy include the following
remedial actions:
Excavation of contaminated soil above cleanup .site
cleanup standards,
Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
Treatment of the PCBs and lead to allow for containment
on-site,
Consolidation of the treated soils into a containment
area,
Capping the.containment area to meet TSCA landfill
requirements.
With these remedial actions the site can be cleaned up for
industrial use, except for a small capped area on-site.
EPA worked closely with the state to develop a protective
and implementable remedy. The state has concurred with this ROD
and a letter will be sent. This remedy was presented to the
public in July and no changes have been necessary, based on
comments.
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 10
1200 6TH AVENUE
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON
RECORD OF DECISION
DECLARATION,
DECISION SUMMARY,
AND
RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARY
FOR
FINAL REMEDIAL ACTION
ARCTIC SURPLUS SUPERFUND SITE
FAIRBANKS, ALASKA
SEPTEMBER 1995
-------
RECORD OF DECISION
ARCTIC SURPLUS SUPERFUND SITE
THE DECLARATION
Site Name and Location
Arctic Surplus
Fairbanks, Fairbanks North Star Borough, Alaska
Statement of Basis and Purpose
This decision document presents the selected remedial actions for the Arctic Surplus
Salvage Yard (Arctic Surplus or Site) located near the city of Fairbanks in the Fairbanks
North Star Borough, Alaska. The remedy was developed in accordance with the
requirements of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act of 1980, 42 U.S.C. §9601 et..seg. (CERCLA) as amended by Superfund Amendments
and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA), and, to the extent practicable, the National Oil and
Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), 40 C.F.R. Part 300. This
decision is based on the administrative record for this site.
The State of Alaska concurs with the selected remedy.
Assessment of the Site
Arctic Surplus is a privately owned 24.5-acre salvage yard. Operations included
storage of large quantities of materials intended for scrap and reclamation. Activities that
contributed significantly to site contamination included battery processing and transformer
scrapping.
Actual or threatened releases of hazardous substances from-this site, if not addressed
by implementing the response actions selected in this Record of Decision (ROD), may
present an imminent and substantial endangerment to public health, welfare, or the
environment.
Arctic Surplus ROD
Declaration
-------
Description of the Selected Remedy
The selected remedy is a series of remedial actions which address the principal
threats, lead and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and other contaminants at the site. These
are considered to be the final actions needed to control the release of contaminants and
reduce the risks to human health, welfare, and the environment from the Site.
The selected remedy combines source remediation, treatment of highly contaminated
soils (hot spot), containment of hazardous substance residuals left onsite after treatment, and
institutional controls to reduce the health risks posed by the contaminants in the soils at
Arctic Surplus. Soil is the media which contain the elevated risks at Arctic Surplus. The
selected remedial actions consist of the following:
> Relocation and processing, including decontamination, of salvage material and debris
that must be moved to provide access to the contaminated site soil;
* Excavation of contaminated soil and stockpiling for treatment or disposal. Soils
outside of the current fenced area with contaminant concentrations above 400 mg/kg
lead or 1 mg/kg PCBs; and soils inside the fenced area with concentrations above
1000 mg/kg lead, 10 mg/kg PCBs, or chlorinated dioxin/furans above risk-based
levels of concern will be excavated;
» Treatment of contaminated soil exceeding 50 mg/kg PCBs by solvent extraction, and
solidification/stabilization of soils exceeding 1000 mg/kg lead. Pesticides will be
transported to an off-site permitted disposal facility;
+ Consolidation of both the contaminated and treated Hot Spot soils into a containment
area over the old, closed landfill located in the southwestern part of the site;
> Capping of the soil in the containment area and the existing landfill with a TSCA
chemical waste landfill cap; and,
* Institutional controls including long-term groundwater monitoring, operation and
maintenance of the fences and cap; and restrictions to prevent use of groundwater, to
maintain a current industrial use, and to prevent any unauthorized access or use of the
capped area.
Arctic Surplus ROD
Declaration
-------
Declaration
The selected remedy is protective of human health and the environment, attains
Federal and State requirements that are applicable or relevant and appropriate for this
remedial action, and is cost effective. This remedy satisfies the statutory preference for
remedies that employ treatment that reduces toxicity, mobility, or volume as principal
elements and utilizes permanent solutions and alternative treatment technologies to the
maximum extent practicable.
Because this remedy will result in hazardous substances remaining onsite above
health-base levels, a review will be conducted within five years after commencement of
remedial actions to ensure that the remedy continues to provide adequate protection of human
health and the environment.
Chuck Clarke Date
Regional Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 10
Arctic Surplus ROD
Declaration
-------
Declaration
The selected remedy is protective of human health and the environment, attains
Federal and State requirements that are applicable or relevant and appropriate for this
remedial action, and is cost effective. This remedy satisfies the statutory preference for
remedies that employ treatment that reduces toxicity, mobility, or volume as principal
elements and utilizes permanent solutions and alternative treatment technologies to the
maximum extent practicable.
Because this remedy will result in hazardous substances remaining onsite above
health-base levels, a review will be conducted within five years after commencement of
remedial actions to ensure that the remedy continues to provide adequate protection of human
health and the environment.
Chuck Clarke
Regional Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 10
Date
CONCURRENCE
Arctic Surplus ROD
Declaration
-------
'A\
DEC 0 4 1995
DEPT. OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION SUPERFUNI'
OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER Telephone: 465-5066
410 Willoughby Ave., Suite 105 Fax: 465-5070
Juneaii, AK 99801 -1795
November 28, 1995
Mr. Chuck Clarke
Regional Administrator, Region 10
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98101
Re: Record of Decision, Arctic Surplus Salvage Yard
Dear Mr. Clarke:
The Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation has reviewed the Record of
Decision for the Arctic Surplus Salvage Yard located on Badger Road in Fairbanks, Alaska. We
have been involved with the development of the cleanup solutions for the site during our review
of the removal actions, remedial investigations, and feasibility study. We concur with the
selected remedy which was presented to the public for review and comment. Concurrence by the
Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation does not in any way constitute acceptance of
responsibility, financial or otherwise, for achieving the remedial design/remedial action goals.
We recognize that contaminants will remain on the site, because removal is not cost
effective. However, the treatment processes that will be employed during the cleanup phase will
provide for long term protection of human health and the environment.
We are looking forward to the cleanup activities at this site.
Sincerely,
Gene Burden
Commissioner
KK\LK\ha(G:\csites\sites\arctic.rod)
cc: Neil Thompson, EPA Seattle
Kalu A. Kalu, ADEC
Jennifer Roberts, ADEC
-------
RECORD OF DECISION
FOR
FINAL REMEDIAL ACTION
ARCTIC SURPLUS SUPERFUND SITE
FAIRBANKS, ALASKA
DECISION SUMMARY
SEPTEMBER 1995
-------
RECORD OF DECISION
ARCTIC SURPLUS SUPERFUND SITE
DECISION SUMMARY
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION TITLE PAGE
1.0 Site Name, Location, and Description 1
1.1 Site Location 1
1.2 Site Description 1
1.2.1 Topography 5
1.2.2 Weather 5
1.2.3 Land Use 5
2.0 Site History and Enforcement Activities 7
3.0 Highlights of Community Participation 10
4.0 Scope and Role of Response Action 12
5.0 Summary of Site Characteristics 13
5.1 Contaminants of Potential Concern in Soil 13
5.2 Contaminants of Potential Concern in Groundwater 18
5.3 Chemical Fate and Transport 19
5.4 Endangered Species/Wetlands 20
6.0 Summary of Site Risks 21
6.1 Human Health Risks 21
6.1.1 Contaminants of Potential Concern 21
6.1.2 Risks Related to Compounds Other than Lead 22
6.1.2.1 Toxicity Assessment . 22
6.1.2.2 Exposure Assessment 23
6.1.2.3 Risk Characterization 25
6.1.2.4 Cancer Risk Estimates 25
6.1.2.5 Noncancer Health Effects 27
6.1.3 Risks Related to Lead Only 27
6.1.4 Uncertainty in the Human Health Risk Assessment 30
6.2 Ecological Risks 30
6.3 Risk Conclusions 31
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 9/25/95
-------
Table of Contents (Continued, page 2)
7.0 Remedial Action Objectives and Cleanup Standards 32
7.1 Remedial Action Objectives 32
7.2 Cleanup Standards 33
7.2.1 Soil Cleanup Standards 33
7.2.1.1 PCB Cleanup Standards 33
7.2.1.2 Lead Cleanup Standards 35
7.2.1.3 Other Contaminants of Concern in Soil 36
7.2.2 Ground water Cleanup Standards 36
7.3 Cleanup Standards Conclusions 37
8.0 Description of Alternatives 39
8.1 Alternative 1: No Action 39
8.2 Alternative 2: Institutional Controls, Monitoring 39
8.3 Alternative 3: Capping 40
8.4 Alternative 4: Consolidation and Capping 42
8.5 Alternative 5: Soil Treatment, Consolidation, Cap 44
8.6 Alternative 6: Hot Spot Soil Treatment, Consolidation, Cap 45
8.7 Alternatives 7 and 8: Soil Washing/Acid Leaching 45
8.8 Alternative 9: Offsite Treatment/Disposal 46
8.9 Alternative 10: Hot Spot Offsite Treatment/Disposal 47
9.0 Summary of Comparative Analysis of Alternatives 49
9.1 Threshold Criteria 49
9.1.1 Overall Protectiveness 49
9.1.2 Compliance with ARARs 49
9.2 Primary Balancing Criteria 50
9.2.1 Long-Term Effectiveness and Permanence 50
9.2.2 Reduction of Toxicity, Mobility, Volume through Treatment 51
9.2.3 Short-Term Effectiveness 51
9.2.4 Implemeritability 52
9.2.5 Estimated Costs 52
9.3 Modifying Criteria 55
9.3.1 State Acceptance 55
9.3.2 Community Acceptance 55
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 9/25/95
-------
Table of Contents (Continued, page 3)
10.0 The Selected Remedy 56
10.1 Description of the Selected Remedy 56
10.1.1 Debris Relocation and Material Processing 60
10.1.2 Soil Excavation 60
10.1.3 Onsite Treatment, Containment, and Disposal 60
10.1.3.1 RCRA LDR Treatability Variance 61
10.1.3.2 TSCA ARARs and TSCA Landfill Waiver 62
10.1.4 Capping 63
10.1.5 Institutional Controls, Operation, and Maintenance 64
10.2 Groundwater Monitoring 64
11.0 Statutory Determinations 66
11.1 Protective of Human Health and the Environment 66
11.2 Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements . 66
11.3 Cost Effectiveness 68
11.4 Utilization of Permanent Solutions and Alternative Treatment
Technologies to the Maximum Extent Practicable 68
11.5 Preference for Treatment as a Principal Element 68
11.6 Modifying Criteria 68
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A .Responsiveness Summary
APPENDIX B State Concurrence Letter
APPENDIX C Index of Administrative Record
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summarv 9/25/95
-------
RECORD OF DECISION
ARCTIC SURPLUS SUPERFUND SITE
DECISION SUMMARY
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE TITLE PAGE
1-1 Site Location 2
1-2 Vicinity Map 3
1-3 Site Plan and Ownership Map 4
2-1 Current Site Status 9
5-1 Lead Concentrations in Surface Soil 16
5-2 PCB Concentrations in Surface Soil 17
10-1 Remedial Action Requirements 57
10-2 Site Closure Conditions 58
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 9/25/95
-------
RECORD OF DECISION
ARCTIC SURPLUS SUPERFUND SITE
DECISION SUMMARY
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE TITLE PAGE
5-1 Contaminants of Potential Concern 14
6-1 Summary Of Exposure Pathways and Scenarios 24
6-2 Summary of Cancer Risks and Hazard Indices for Soil 26
6-3 . Summary of Cancer Risks and Hazard Indices for Groundwater 28
7-1 Soil Cleanup Standards 34
7-2 Groundwater Cleanup Standards 38
9-1 Estimated Costs of Remedial Alternatives 53
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 9/25/95
-------
RECORD OF DECISION
ARCTIC SURPLUS SUPERFUND SITE
DECISION SUMMARY
1.0 SITE NAME, LOCATION, AND DESCRIPTION
Arctic Surplus
Fairbanks North Star Borough, Alaska
1.1 Site Location
Arctic Surplus Salvage Yard (Arctic Surplus, site) is a privately owned salvage yard
located about five miles southeast of Fairbanks, Alaska (Figure 1-1). It occupies
approximately 24.5 acres on the northeast corner at the intersection of Badger Road and the
Old Richardson Highway as illustrated in Figure 1-2. Private residences in the Clear Creek
Estates subdivision and a salvage yard in Tract B bound the northern side of the property,
and the Alaska Railroad and Old Richardson Highway separate the site from private
residences to the south. Badger Road borders the Arctic Surplus property to the west,
separating it from Fort Wainwright and the Defense Reutilization Marketing Office (DRMO);
and McPeak Sand and Gravel Company adjoins the property to the east.
A site plan showing land ownership is presented in Figure 1-3.
1.2 Site Description
The Arctic Surplus site consists of the Arctic Surplus Salvage Yard facility which is
currently fenced (onsite) and includes the surrounding adjacent properties (offsite) which
have been impacted by the operations at the salvage yard. The entire site area has been used
to store, salvage, reclaim, or dispose of material mainly from sale of surplus goods from
local military bases. Tracked vehicles (armored personnel carriers, etc), trucks of all sizes,
metal scrap from multiple sources are all found at Arctic Surplus. The amount of scrap
metal is a factor in managing the site.
A private residential structure owned by Carl Pederson is located in the northwest
corner of the property, and a collection of 81 office trailers (ATCO trailers) occupies an area
along the northern property boundary. A small pond (Arctic Surplus Pond) occupies an
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary
-------
;- ' ""
Project _
Location |T!!M
* ^ .L^/1 I'M rTOjeCTT rvK I
i---*<> \ - - /TWAJNWRIG
I../;' CHEN* ./'I MILITARY
r- REs«^
4>-\::: V
ALASKA
irbanks
BASE MAP REFERENCE: Alaska Atlas and Gazetteer
DeLorme Mapping 1992
Scale: 1"= 4.8 miles
Arctic Surplus Salvage Yard
Fairbanks, Alaska
Figure 1-1
SITE LOCATION
-------
V ;
Fort v
/ Wainwright
N
1/4
1/2
Scale in Miles
NOTE
Map adapted from USGS
topographic map of Fairbanks D-2
SE. AK quadrangle, dated 1966.
Arctic Surplus Salvage Yard
Fairbanks, Alaska
Figure 1-2
VICINITY MAP
-------
Defense
ReutilizatiC'.'i
Marveling O'.ice
(DRMO)
LEGEND
* Site Fence Line
TL-2106 Tax Lot Designation
and Boundary
NOTES
1. Site plan is adapted from drawing
provided by Alaska District, Corps
of Engineers, Anchorage, Alaska.
2. Current ownership based on the
Fairbanks North Star Borough
Assessor's Records.
0 100 200
400
Scale in Feet
Arctic Surplus Salvage Yard
Fairbanks, Alaska
Figure 1-3
SITE PLAN AND OWNERSHIP MAP
-------
abandoned gravel pit in the northeast corner of the site. There are numerous unpaved roads
throughout the site, with piles of scrap and salvaged material covering much of the ground
between the roads. Trees and shrubs have grown in and around the scrap and salvage
materials. An 8-foot-high cyclone type fence was erected around the perimeter of the site in
1989 during a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) removal action. The fence and
locked gates are used to restrict unauthorized entry to the site.
1.2.1 Topography
The site lies in the center of the Tanana River Valley, a broad sweeping valley that
extends through central Alaska. The Tanana River flows generally westerly through the
Fairbanks area. The valley shows little relief around the site, with many wetland areas along
the old meanders and floodways. The site is located within the 500 year flood, but because
of flood control structures on the Tanana River, the site is no longer in the 100 year flood
zone. The elevation of site is about 450 feet above sea level and is over 1000 river miles
from the Bering Sea (Tanana River joins the Yukon River).
The regional aquifer, approximately 400 feet thick, underlies the valley in the
Fairbanks area. This is a major aquifer and supplies many domestic wells. The groundwater
flow beneath the site is in a north-northwesterly direction and is found between eight and
fifteen feet below the land surface. The groundwater contains naturally high levels of iron,
manganese, and arsenic which often exceed the Drinking Water Standards.
Due to the past human activities on the site, there are no defined wetlands. No
endangered or threatened species of plants or animals were found to inhabit or forage the
site. No historic or archaeological sites have been found.
1.2.2 Weather
The interior of Alaska has large temperature range from approximately -60 °F to
+95°F. The surface soils are frozen from about October through April each year.
Permafrost conditions exist under the site. Rainfall is low, 15-20 inches, much of it as snow
in the winter. The groundwater flows in a north-northwesterly direction beneath the site.
Wind predominantly follows the valley, east to west, or west to east.
1.2.3 Land Use
The placer mining activities around Fairbanks during the Alaska Goldrush forever
changed the land around the entire area including that of the site. The site area was entirely
logged to provide firewood for the city. Part of the site became a municipal landfill site for
Arctic .Surplus ROD
Decision Summary
-------
the U.S. Army Ft. Wainwright in the 1940's. The site itself was established as a storage,
recycling, and salvage operation for excessed military material that was surplused by the
Army. Over the years, the metal scrap and salvage operations impacted the surface of the
site by establishing piles of scrap materials and roads throughout the site.
Recently, a residential subdivision was established along the northern side of the site.
As a result, four homes were built on lots adjacent to the site.
Future land use has been projected to continue without much change. Two sides of
the site are established rights-of-way, the adjacent residential area is fully constructed, and
the gravel pit on the east will continue to exist whether or not it is operational.
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary
-------
2.0 SITE HISTORY AND ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES
The first documented land use at the Arctic Surplus site was the operation of a
municipal landfill in the southwest part of the site. The landfill was operated between 1944
and 1956 by the military. At closure, the landfill was capped with ash believed to have been
hauled to the site from Ladd Field (now Fort Wainwright), where it was generated as spent
fuel from a coal-fired power plant.
Between about 1959 and 1989, the site was operated as a privately owned salvage
yard. Activities conducted as part of the salvage yard operation included storage of large
quantities of materials intended for scrap and reclamation, including: drummed wastes,
transformers, batteries, bulk asbestos and asbestos-clad vessels, gas cylinders, and containers
of unknown wastes. Activities that contributed significantly to the present site contamination
included battery processing for lead recovery, transformer (including PCB transformers)
storage and reprocessing, storage of liquid wastes in drums and other containers, and
operation of an incinerator fueled by waste oils, including transformer oil. Frequent site
traffic and movement of materials contributed to the distribution of contaminants across wide
areas of the site.
In 1986, two representatives from the Department of the Army conducted a site
walk-through in response to a complaint about stored waste material with military markings.
The Alaska "Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) conducted a Preliminary
Site Assessment in 1987 that recommended further site characterization. ADEC conducted a
site-screening inspection in 1988 to determine whether the Arctic Surplus site should be
considered for the EPA National Priorities List (NPL). In May and June 1989, EPA's
Technical Assistance Team conducted an investigation under EPA's Superfund Response and
Investigation Section. The site was proposed for the NPL in October 1989 and listed in
August 1990.
Hazardous materials were removed by EPA from the site during the summer of 1989.
Further removal actions were taken in 1990, and 1991 under an EPA Removal Order entered
into with the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA). The site was fenced for the first time and
over 22,200 pound of asbestos, 75 gallons of the pesticide, chlordane, 1700 drums of liquid
waste, contaminated soil, an incinerator with dioxins, and PCBs were removed from the site
during these summer work periods. These actions were taken to control access to the site
and to remove potential source material and stabilize the conditions on the site until the site
could be fully evaluated by the Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Studies (RI/FS) under
the Superfund Remedial Action Program.
Notice letters were sent to the Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs) on February 7,
1992, explaining their potential liability under the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), requesting additional information, and seeking
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary
-------
their input into the Superrund remedial action process. On July 24, 1992, EPA and DLA
entered into an Administrative Order on Consent in which DLA agreed to implement the
RI/FS. On November 4, 1992, EPA entered into an Administrative Order on Consent with
the Alaska Department of Transportation (ADOT) to clean up their Badger Road right-of-way
adjacent to the site as part of the Badger Road improvement project. The other PRPs (land
owners) chose not to participate in these, actions. Both the RI/FS and the ADOT cleanup
projects have been completed. The current status of the site is depicted in Figure 2-1.
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary
-------
iTCO Trailers
x~ '_=
r-ttr-/^'
,/ i ^"
__ ^^^ ^ 'Pjinrpnt Transformer
'^^ ^n; i Storage Area ..
Incinerator «f / / j .Xprimary Drum
. A (Former) i / / .^^^-^j,. storage Area
VFti^zr^ ''
Current Empty
Drum Storage Area
i i *\ §
_____\ S._._Vu__j...
-'\ !
/A !
Incinerator #2
Old Richardson Highway
TiTr, TL2107 \ \TL2109
L2108* '-^ \TL2110
(A)!
Scale in Feet
LEGEND
Site Fence Line
Grid Designation
Approximate Location of Visually Stained Road
Area Capped Prior to 1990 Removal Action
Approximate Location of PCB-Contaminated Area
Excavated and Capped in 1990
Approximate Location and Designation of Previous
Drum Storage Area
NOTE
Site plan is adapted from drawing provided by
Alaska District, Corps of Engineers, Anchorage, AK.
Arctic Surplus Salvage Yard
Fairbanks, Alaska
Figure 2-1
CURRENT SITE STATUS
-------
3.0 HIGHLIGHTS OF COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION
Since March 1990, twelve fact sheets have been distributed to the community
providing information about EPA activities at the Arctic Surplus site. In addition, six
meetings have been held in the community, both informational meetings and formal meetings
to take comments on proposed cleanup plans for the site. Notice of the public meetings and
comment periods were published in the Fairbanks Daily News Miner and mailed to
approximately 300 addresses on the site mailing list.
The first fact sheet (March 1990) announced an open house to be held on April 12,
1990. People were also invited to talk with EPA representatives during the April visit and to
provide information for a Community Relations Plan (June 1990) to guide community
relations activities throughout the removal action.
Fact Sheets announced public information meetings in June and October of 1991 to
discuss that summer's clean up activities.
A local information repository was established at the Defense Reutilization and
Marketing Office on Badger Road. " All documents pertaining to the site were made available
for public review at this location. A copy of the Administrative Record is also located in
this local repository as well as the EPA Regional office in Seattle. The selection of the
remedy is based on the material contained in the Administrative Record.
A June 1992 fact sheet provided information about work to be done that summer
season. In August 1992, individuals were again asked to meet with EPA representatives to
discuss their concerns so that the Community Relations Plan could be updated. A September
1992 fact sheet updated the summer's activities. Another fact sheet, December 1992, was
devoted to.information about groundwater sampling and drinking water quality and provided
detailed information in response to concerns raised by members of the community.
A fact sheet, June 9, 1993, described site study field work underway to complete the
Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study. Later, June 22, 1993, EPA invited comments
on a range of cleanup alternatives for contaminated soil along Badger Road near the site.
In August 1994, a fact sheet announced the beginning of work to widen Badger Road
and described how contaminated soil would be handled during the excavation of the road
right-of-way. EPA also explained the investigations ongoing at the site to complete the study
phase. .
An open house held on June 6th was announced in a May 1995 fact sheet. It also
announced the availability of the RI/FS reports and information about the alternatives being
considered. The open house provided answers to many questions about the proposed cleanup
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 10
-------
alternatives. On July 11, 1995, a fact sheet and the proposed plan were mailed announcing
the public comment period (July 14 through August 14, 1995) and a public meeting to be
held July 26, 1995. A notice of the public comment period and the public meeting was
published in the Fairbanks Daily News Miner on July 19, 1995.
EPA has kept local, state, and federal officials whose constituents that could be
affected by activities at the site informed through frequent updates and briefings.
EPA will continue to keep all interested parties informed about each significant step
of the Superfund process through the final decision and clean up of the Arctic Surplus site.
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 11
-------
4.0 SCOPE AND ROLE OF RESPONSE ACTION
The response action described in this Record of Decision (ROD) addresses all of the
contamination identified during the investigations at the Arctic Surplus site. The remedy
selected by EPA and documented in this ROD includes all of the remedial actions deemed
necessary for the site to protect human health and the environment. All of the remedial
actions are included in this decision, and no additional Operational Units or projects are
proposed. Therefore, this ROD can be identified as the "Final" ROD since no other actions
beyond those included are necessary to be protective.
The risk assessment determined that lead and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in the
soils are the contaminants determined to be the principal threats to human health and the
environment. The control of these threats, lead and PCBs, are a principal part of the
remedial actions described in the selected remedy.
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 12
-------
5.0 SUMMARY OF SITE CHARACTERISTICS
The nature and extent of contamination of the site is discussed in detail in the Arctic
Surplus Remedial Investigation (RI) report which is included in the Administrative Record.
The RI report also summarizes previous site characterization studies and documents a series
of removal actions that were implemented to eliminate primary contaminant source areas and
mitigate potential site risks to human health and the environment.
The removal actions taken by EPA and DLA stabilized the site so that sources of
contamination were removed or controlled to prevent release to the environment. A fence
surrounding the active site was erected to prevent unauthorized access. A large quantity of
asbestos and liquid wastes were taken off site for proper disposal. The small
burner/incinerator was dismantled and transported to a permitted disposal incinerator along
with underlying dioxin containing soils. Small amounts of pesticides, PCBs, TCE, etc. were
also removed from the site and taken to permitted disposal sites. Other hazardous
substances, PCB transformers and over 3000 empty drums with residual materials inside, are
staged for removal from the site as part of the ongoing removal actions. Tests done on the
scrap metal indicate that it is not a source of contamination at the site. Therefore, no
remedial actions are described for any of the scrap material found on site other than to insure
that any soil, which is a source of contamination, is cleaned off any scrap that has to be
relocated as part of any remedial actions.
Chemical data gathered during the RI and previous studies were evaluated to identify
contaminants of potential concern (COPCs). The process, for identifying the COPCs is
discussed in Section 6.1.1. Based upon the results of this evaluation, the soil, and to a lesser
extent, the ground water were identified as the media of concern at the site. A number of
organic and inorganic analytes were identified as COPCs for each of these two media. The
identified COPCs for each medium are listed in Table 5-1 along with their range of
contamination concentrations. COPCs were not identified in the surface water or sediments.
The nature and extent of contamination at the site is summarized briefly below.
5.1 Contaminants of Potential Concern in Soil
The contamination in soil was evaluated by several soil sampling programs beginning
in 1989 and culminating with the RI in 1993. Soil sampling included both grid sampling and
subsequent biased sampling of areas most likely to be contaminated. These sampling
programs, described in detail in the RI, included extensive sampling inside the fence,
sampling around the perimeter outside the fence line, and background sampling. The
majority of samples were collected from near-surface soil (upper 6-inches of soil), with
subsurface sampling used to determine the vertical extent of contamination in hot spots and
areas suspected of receiving contaminated fill materials.
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 13
-------
Table 5-1
Contaminants of Potential Concern
Arctic Surplus Salvage Yard
Fairbanks, Alaska
Contaminants of Potential '-/;' ;,"',
'"' * ^:-:;Concern:iri:Sfei^:#^V'" \ ' V''
.Contaminant-" -
Antimony
Arsenic
Beryllium
Cadmium
Lead
Manganese
Benzo(a)anthracene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene
lndeno( 1 ,2,3-ed)pyrene
Chrysene
alpha-Chlordanc
gamma-Chlordane
ODD
DDE
DDT
Aroclor 1248
Aroclor 1254
Aroclor 1260
Dioxins/I-urans
.Range 'Xmg/kg) ",'* '
*** ° ' "~~'':
Lpw,'v, 6
6.9
1.7
0.15
0.98
2.
106
High ;.-;
2,230
189
4
68.6
80,400
5,740
':,':/^^^^g^f-^^.
43
40
28
47
110
39
45
181
1.95
2.45
2
2
76
21
1 3.67
19,000
18,000
23,000
7,500
7,500
9,500
20,000
161
182
1,740
1 1 ,200
146,000
200
9.300
26,100,100
Range (pg/g)
5.7
29,000
:;,',' , >;>;l, , ' ,,£e6ntaniinants'>6fV'V
" ' '; '"'-"' " ^Concern int-Groiihdwatfer*'' *:S,V- V"J:^:''' '*
Contaminant ,'-
Antimony
Arsenic
Manganese
Tetrach loroethene
Trichlorethene
1 ,2,4-Trichlorbenzene
DDT
PCBs
" ,RangeXpg/L)?4<
-------
A variety of inorganic compounds (metals), as well as polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAHs), pesticides, PCBs, and dioxins/fiirans, have been identified as COPCs
that occur in near-surface site soil. Lead and PCBs are by far the most widespread of the
COPCs in site soil, and the only ones that have been detected in soil outside of the fence
surrounding the salvage yard. As shown in Figures 5-1 and 5-2, soil containing lead and
PCBs at concentrations above 1,000 mg/kg and 10 mg/kg, respectively are primarily
confined to the western half of the site. The area impacted by PCBs for the most part
encompasses that impacted by lead and other COPCs.
Organic COPCs other than PCBs in site soil are generally restricted to small hot spot
areas. PAHs and pesticides in site soil generally are restricted to former drum storage areas.
With two exceptions, these hot spots are in the western half of the site. The exceptions are
in former Drum Storage Area K, where elevated concentrations of the pesticides DDD,
DDE, and DDT were detected in soil samples; and in a small area south of the Arctic
Surplus Pond, where chlordane has been detected. Dioxins/furans have been detected in the
near-surface soil in the vicinity of former Incinerator No. 1 and, at trace levels in the ash cap
over the old military landfill in the southwestern part of the site.
Elevated levels of antimony and arsenic in near-surface soil are confined to a few
areas where lead concentrations are also elevated, and cadmium has been detected in two
former drum storage areas. Beryllium concentrations are fairly widespread, with no clear
association to site use. Only in the northwestern corner of the site (MW-5625, see Figure
10-2) is there any apparent correlation between elevated inorganic constituents in
ground water and observed soil concentrations. The highest manganese concentration was
detected in a subsurface soil sample collected from fill materials in the northwest corner of
the site. That fill material may be a source of elevated manganese concentrations in one
nearby downgradient monitoring well (MW-A).
Lead and PCBs are the only COPCs that have been identified in the soil outside of the
fenced area. PCBs have been detected at concentrations exceeding 1 milligram per kilogram
(mg/kg) in Tax Lot 20 (Figure 5-1) immediately north of the site. Lead has been detected
above a residential land use screening level (400 mg/kg, see Section 6.1.3) in the soil
between the Arctic Surplus Salvage Yard fence and the railroad tracks in the southeastern
corner of the site. Lead and PCBs occurred at elevated concentrations in the soil
immediately west of the site, along Badger Road. This contamination has been cleaned up
by the Alaska Department of Transportation (ADOT), under an Administrative Order on
Consent with EPA, in conjunction with a recent roadway widening and improvement project.
The clean up for the Badger Road soil involved removal and offsite disposal of TSCA
(PCB) and RCRA (lead) wastes greater than 10 mg/kg and 1000 mg/kg respectfully. An
onsite (under the new widened road) containment cell was constructed for soil with PCB
contamination between 1 mg/kg and 10 mg/kg and for lead contamination between 500
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 15
-------
Pederson |
Residence |
£0
400-
Lead Concentrations
o
IEEE
200
Scale in Feet
400
s
/
NOTES
1. Site plan is adapted from drawing provided by
Alaska District, Corps of Engineers, Anchorage,
Alaska.
2. Contour lines are based on concentrations
detected in surface soil samples collected from
1989 through 1993.
3. In the case of duplicate samples or overlapping
sample points, only the highest concentration was
contoured.
LEGEND
Contour Line Indicating
Approximate Concentration of
PCBs in Surface Soil (mg/kg)
Approximate Extent of
Concentrations Above
10 mg/kg
LEGEND
v
-------
E3
610 Ell E1J
PCB Concentrations
LEGEND
LEGEND
0
200
400
Scale in Feet.
NOTES
1. Site plan is adapted from drawing provided by
Alaska District, Corps of Engineers, Anchorage,
Alaska.
2. Contour lines are based on concentrations
detected in surface soil samples collected from '
1989 through 1993.
3. In the case of duplicate samples or overlapping
sample points, only the highest concentration was
contoured.
f Contour Line Indicating # Contour Line Indicating
s Approximate Concentration of / Approximate Concentration o!
' PCBs in Surface Soil (mg/kg) Lead in Surface Soil (mg/kg)
Approximate Extent of
Concentrations Above
10 mg/kg
Approximate Extent of
Concentrations Above
1,000 mg/kg
Arctic Surplus Salvage Yard
Fairbanks, Alaska
Figure 5-2
PCB CONCENTRATIONS
IN SURFACE SOIL
-------
mg/kg and 1000 mg/kg. Only those soils with PCBs concentrations less than 1 mg/kg PCB
and lead concentration less than 500 mg/kg remain in the right-of-way without remediation.
5.2 Contaminants of Potential Concern in Groundwater
The nature and extent of contamination in groundwater has been evaluated by nine
rounds of groundwater sampling (from July 1990 through July 1994) from up to 30 wells on
or near the site. These include 22 monitoring wells, 6 private wells, and 2 wells on Ft.
Wainwright. Six wells are located upgradient from the site; 23 are located inside the fence,
typically near the downgradient boundary; and 7 are located downgradient of the site.
Groundwater flow at the site is in the north-northwest direction.
Eight COPCs have been detected in the groundwater, as listed in Table 5-1. Of these
COPCs, only trichloroethene (TCE), arsenic, and manganese have been detected with any
consistency at elevated concentrations above drinking water standards in one or more wells.
The other COPCs have been detected sporadically, both spatially and temporally, and do not
appear to reflect site-wide groundwater conditions.
TCE is the only organic compound consistently found in site groundwater. It has
been detected at concentrations ranging from 11 to 22 ^g/L in MW-5627 (the well locations
are illustrated on Figure 10-2), immediately downgradient from the former Primary Drum
Storage Area near the center of the site. TCE concentrations have been routinely detected at
concentrations of less than 2 /zg/L in several site monitoring wells further downgradient from
the drum storage area still inside the fenced site. The drinking water standard, Maximum
Contaminant Level (MCL), for TCE is 5 /ttg/L.
Arsenic and manganese are natural constituents of the regional groundwater, generally
occurring at elevated concentrations (above MCLs) in upgradient wells, wells inside the
fence, and downgradient wells. Only in the northwestern corner of the site (MW-5625) is
there any indication that these groundwater constituents could be derived from site
contamination. This area has elevated concentrations of manganese in the soil, and the
groundwater concentration is abnormally high, at about four times the background level.
Similarly, arsenic concentrations detected in this same monitoring well have been consistently
higher than elsewhere on site. These concentrations are not appreciably higher than arsenic
levels detected in wells elsewhere in the aquifer, not associated with the site. The precise
extent of contamination downgradient from the northwest corner of the site is not known,
although lack of contamination in groundwater samples from MW-5623, less than 300 feet
downgradient, indicates that the extent of contamination is very limited.
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 18
-------
5.3 Chemical Fate and Transport
Over the course of about 40 years, contamination of site soil resulted from a variety
of primary sources, including asbestos-containing materials; incineration fueled by waste oils;
and releases from drums or containers, batteries, transformers, and materials deposited in the
landfill and other filled areas. The primary sources of contamination were the focus of
removal actions in 1989, 1990, and 1991. Although primary sources other than the old
military landfill and filled areas have been eliminated, a variety of secondary sources remain.
The most significant of these are the lead- and PCB-impacted near-surface soil that cover
much of the western half of the site. Other secondary sources include near-surface soil
associated with several former drum storage areas, fill materials, and former Incinerator #1.
While many of the primary sources of contamination have been removed, the remaining
contaminated soil has to be addressed as a major remaining source of contamination.
While most of the COPCs are relatively persistent, their chemical properties also tend
to make them relatively immobile through the soil column. The physical properties of the
site that favor contaminant migration, especially infiltration, generally have not overcome the
chemical properties that retard it. Consequently, most COPCs are very limited in their
vertical extent, top six inches of soil, and have had only a minimal impact on site
groundwater. Conversely, horizontal transport of surface soil as paniculate matter has
occurred from the business operations, resulting in a widening distribution of surface soil
contaminants inside the fence.
Contaminant transport to groundwater by infiltration appears to have been very
limited. This minimal site impact on groundwater indicates that factors favoring contaminant
migration through infiltration have thus far been outweighed by factors retarding it. Site
factors that would enhance such transport include the permeable soil, low surface relief,
shallow water table, low organic content in soil, competition for limited binding sites, and
limited competing fate and transport processes for many COPCs. Factors that inhibit such
transport include the low water solubility and strong soil affinity of most COPCs, the
generally alkaline nature of soil, the low precipitation, and long periods (8-9 months each
year) when the ground is frozen.
The contaminants that reach groundwater are likely to be transported by advection and
dispersion. Some readsorption or chemical precipitation may occur as groundwater passes
through uncontaminated soil. The high transmissivity of the aquifer is likely to rapidly dilute
contaminant concentrations, which may explain why elevated concentrations of contaminants
detected in MW-5625 in the northwest corner of the site have not also been detected in
MW-5623, approximately 300 feet downgradient.
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 19
-------
5.4 Endangered Species/Wetlands
The entire site has been disturbed by activities occurring on the property. The
ecological review determined that there are no endangered species that are living on the site
or would be impacted by changes in the site conditions. A wetland evaluation was conducted
and it was determined that there are no defined wetlands on site. One surface pond does
exist which was created from an old gravel borrow pit.
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 20
-------
6.0 SUMMARY OF SITE RISKS
CERCLA response actions at the Arctic Surplus site as described in this ROD are
intended to protect human health and the environment from current and potential future
exposure to hazardous substances found at the site.
To assess the risks posed by site contamination, a "Baseline Human Health and
Ecological Risk Assessment," (Risk Assessment) was prepared by Ecology and Environment,
Inc., a contractor to EPA. The Risk Assessment assumes that there is no site cleanup.
6.1 Human Health Risks
The site is currently used as an industrial metal salvage and storage facility. The
gravel mining operation is active adjacent to and east of the site. Four residences are located
along the northern boundary and one person has a structure used as an office and summer
residence in the northwest corner of the site. The residences use domestic wells for water,
but water is brought to the onsite office/residential structure in containers (no supply well).
An assessment of the risks to human health involve a four-step process: identification
of contaminants of potential concern (COPCs), an assessment of contaminant toxicity, an
exposure assessment for the population at risk, and a quantitative characterization of the risk.
6.1.1 Contaminants of Potential Concern
An initial screening analysis was done to identify the chemicals of potential concern
(COPCs). This screening involved two steps. In the first step, COPCs were selected based
upon a very conservative estimate of potential health risk. Maximum concentrations of
chemicals in media (e.g., soil and groundwatef) on the site were compared to conservative
risk based concentrations. These risk based concentrations were derived assuming residential
exposures; acceptable cancer risk levels of IxlO"7 for soil and IxlO"6 for water; and
acceptable HQs of 0.1 (these terms are explained in more detail in Section 6.1.4). For lead.
the risk based criteria selected were 500 ppm for soil and 15 ug/1 for water. These values
are recommended by Superfund guidance.
The second step in the selection of COPCs was a more refined screening which
narrowed the list of COPCs by considering factors such as frequency of occurrence of each
COPC, detection limits, and background concentrations for inorganics only.
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 21
-------
The final list of COPCs for soil and groundwater are shown in Table 5-1. The
potential for these COPCs to impact health was further evaluated using more realistic and
more specific, site-specific exposure assumptions.
6.1.2 Risks Related to Compounds Other Than Lead
The methods used to assess exposure and toxicity and to characterize risk are different
for lead than for other contaminants. Therefore, lead is discussed separately from the other
contaminants. Sections 6.1.2.1 through 6.1.2.5 discuss the risk assessment methods and
results for contaminants other than lead. Lead is discussed in Section 6.1.3.
6.1.2.1 Toxicity Assessment
Toxicity information was provided in the Risk Assessment for the chemicals of
potential concern (COPCs). Generally cancer risks are calculated using toxicity factors
known as slope factors (SFs), while noncancer risks are assessed using reference doses
(RfDs).
EPA developed SFs for estimating excess lifetime cancer risks associated with
exposure to potential carcinogens. SFs are expressed in units of (mg/kg-day)"1 and are
multiplied by the estimated intake of a potential carcinogen, in mg/kg-day, to provide an
upper-bound estimate of the excess lifetime cancer risk associated with exposure at that
intake level. The term "upper-bound" reflects the conservative estimate of the risks
calculated from the SF. Use of this approach makes underestimates of the actual cancer risk
highly unlikely. SFs are derived from the results of human epidemiological studies, or
chronic animal bioassay data, to which mathematical interpolation from high to low doses,
and from animal to human studies, have been applied.
EPA developed RfDs to indicate the potential for adverse health effects from exposure
to chemicals exhibiting noncarcinpgenic effects. RfDs, which are expressed in units of
mg/kg-day, are estimates of lifetime daily exposure for humans, including sensitive
subpopulations likely to be without risk of adverse effect. Estimated intakes of contaminants
of concern from environmental media (e.g., the amount of a contaminant of concern ingested
from contaminated drinking water) can be compared to the RfD. RfDs are derived from
human epidemiological studies or animal studies to which uncertainty factors have been
applied.
The Risk Assessment relied on oral and inhalation SFs and RfDs. For the two
chemicals for which dermal exposures were able to be estimated (PCBs and chlorinated
dioxins/furans), SFs were derived from oral SFs by adjusting for oral absorption. Toxicity
factors were obtained from the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) or, if no IRIS
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 22
-------
values were available, from the Health Effects Assessment Summary Table (HEAST). For
the few chemicals which did not have toxicity values available at this time, sources other
than IRIS and HEAST were used.
6.1.2.2 Exposure Assessment
The exposure assessment characterizes the exposure scenarios, identifies potentially
exposed populations and their exposure pathways and routes of exposure, and quantifies
exposure in terms of chronic daily dose (mg/kg/day or milligrams of contaminant taken into
the body per kilogram of body weight per day).
A summary of the exposure scenarios and pathways are shown in Table 6-1. For
current land use, exposures to onsite and offsite residents were evaluated. For future land-
use, onsite exposures to workers as well as potential future residents were added for
evaluation. For residential exposures, the following pathways were considered: (1) exposure
to soil contaminants through soil ingestion and dermal contact, and inhalation of soil
contaminants that have volatilized or have been resuspended on particles in the air; and (2)
exposure to groundwater contaminants through ingestion of drinking water and inhalation of
volatiles during showering. For industrial exposures, all of the same pathways were
considered except inhalation during showering.
EPA Superfund guidance recommends that both RMEs (reasonable maximum
exposures) and average exposures be calculated in site risk assessment. RME exposures are
calculated using assumptions that result in higher than average exposures to ensure that the
risk assessment results are protective of the reasonably maximally exposed individual. For
this risk assessment, RME and average exposures were quantified by using Region 10 EPA
default exposure factors (e.g., body weight, contact rate, exposure frequency and duration)
with site-specific exposure point concentrations. Both RME and average (more typical)
exposures were calculated for residents. For workers, only RME exposures were calculated
since default exposure factors were not available.
To estimate exposure point concentrations (EPCs) for soil for ingestion and dermal
exposures, the 95 percent UCLs (upper confidence levels) on the mean were calculated
separately for soils on the West and East sides of the facility and in offsite areas. If the 95
percent UCL exceeded the maximum detected concentration of a given COPC, or if less than
10 data points for a given COPC were available, then the maximum detected concentration of
the COPC was used as the exposure point concentration. Because sampling for chlorinated
dioxins and furans was limited to only a few areas on the western half of the site known to
be contaminated with these compounds, data from the sampling points with the three highest
concentrations of these contaminants were used to estimate exposures to these compounds.
For drinking water, the average values of the COPCs in individual wells were used as the
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 23
-------
Table 6-1
Summary of Exposure Pathways and Scenarios
Arctic Surplus Salvage Yard
Fairbanks, Alaska
Land Use
Current
Future
j t
Exposure Scenario
Off-Silc Residential
On-Sile Residential
On-Sile Residential
On-Site Industrial
. Exposure Pathway
Incidental ingestion
Dermal contact
Ingestion
Inhalation
Inhalation of vapors and particulates
Same as On-Site Residential under future
land use conditions
Incidental ingestion
Dermal contact
Ingestion
Inhalation
Inhalation of vapors and particulates
Incidental ingestion
Dermal contact
Ingestion
Inhalation of vapors and particulates
Medium
Soil
Soil
Groundwater
Groundwater
Air
See below for On-Site
Residential
Soil
Soil
Groundwater
Groundwater
Air
Soil
Soil
Groundwater
Air
-------
EPCs. Models were used to calculate EPCs for particulates and vapors. [These models are
discussed in detail in the risk assessment].
6.1.2.3 Risk Characterization
For carcinogens, risks are estimated as the incremental probability of an individual
developing cancer over a lifetime as a result of exposure to the specific carcinogen. Excess
lifetime cancer risk is calculated by multiplying the SF (see toxicity assessment, section
6.1.2) by the quantitative estimate of exposure, the "chronic daily intake." These risks are
probabilities generally expressed in scientific notation (e.g., IxlO'6). An excess lifetime
cancer of IxlO"6 indicates that an individual has a one in one million (1:1,000,000) chance of
developing cancer as a result of site-related exposure to a carcinogen under the specific
exposure conditions assumed.
The potential for noncarcinogenic effects is evaluated by comparing an exposure level
over a specified time period (lifetime) with a RfD (see toxicity assessment section above)
derived for a similar exposure period. The ratio of exposure to toxicity is called a hazard
quotient (HQ). Hazard quotients are calculated by dividing the exposure by the specific
RfD. By adding the hazard quotients for all contaminants of concern that affect the same
target organ (liver, nervous system, etc), the hazard index (HI) can be calculated.
The RME provides a conservative but realistic exposure scenario for considering
remedial actions at a Superfund site. Based on the RME, when the excess lifetime cancer
risk estimates are below IxlO"6. or when the noncancer HI is less than 1, EPA generally
considers the potential human health risks to be below levels of concern. Remedial action
may be warranted when excess lifetime cancer risks exceed IxlO"4 (one in ten thousand) and
His exceed 1.0. Between IxlO'6 and IxlO"4, clean up may or may not be selected, depending
on individual site conditions including human health and ecological concerns.
The following discussion summarizes the cancer and noncancer risk characterization
results for the Arctic Surplus Superfund site.
6.1.2.4 Cancer Risk Estimates
Table 6-2 presents the upper bound estimates of cancer risk that could result from
exposures to contaminants in site soils (other than chlorinated dioxins and furans) at existing
concentrations. For RME assumptions, under a future residential scenario, the upper bound
cancer risk from soil exposure was estimated to be 8xlO'3 (8 in 1000) on the western half of
the site and 4x10"" (4 in 10,000) for the eastern half. The upper bound cancer risk for
current offsite residents was estimated as 6xlO"4 (6 in 10.000). Under a future industrial
Arctic .Surplus ROD
Decision Summary . 25
-------
Table 6-2
Summary of Cancer Risks and Hazard Indices for Soil
Arctic Surplus Salvage Yard
Fairbanks, Alaska
. ..
Exposure Scenario
Current Off-Site Resident
Future On-Sitc Resident
Western Portion
Future On-Site Resident
Eastern Portion
Future On-Site Worker
Western Portion
Future On-Site Worker
Eastern Portion
Cancer Risks ' ' '
RME
6xlO-4
8xlO'3
4xlO'4
IxIO'3
5xlO"5
.Average
4xlO'5
7xlO-4
3xlO'5
.-
Hazard Indices , ^ >'
RME
3
4
5
0.07
0.08
Average * -,^
0.2
0.0003
0.4
..
Key:
RME
= Reasonable maximum exposure.
= Cancer risk or hazard index was not calculated for this scenario.
-------
scenario, upper bound cancer risk estimates were IxlO"3 for the western half of the site and
5xlO"5 for the eastern half.
The chemicals responsible for these risks depend upon the area sampled (i.e., offsite
versus onsite, West or East side). PCBs are responsible for the majority of the onsite and
offsite risks. As previously described for chlorinated dioxins and furans, risks were
calculated for the three sampling locations with the highest contamination. Upper bound
cancer risk estimates for soil ingestion and dermal contact with dioxins and furans at these
three points ranged from 3xlO~6 to SxlO"4. Site-wide risks from the chlorinated dioxins and
furans are likely to be much lower since these numbers represent the three sampling points
with the highest concentrations.
Estimated upper bound risks from groundwater exposure (ingestion and inhalation of
volatiles) for each well are shown in Table 6-3. Assuming future residential use of the site
and RME assumptions, the risk for the onsite wells range from 3x10"" to 3xlO"7. These risks
range from 2xlO'4 to 9xlO"8 for future industrial use. For the offsite well, residential RME
exposure assumptions result in an upper-bound risk of 5xlO~6. The primary contributors to
these risks are arsenic, PCBs, tetrachloroethene, and trichloroethene.
6.1.2.5. Noncancer Health Effects
Table 6-2 summarizes the evaluation of noncancer health impacts from exposures to
soils using the HI. Assuming RME assumptions, three scenarios result in His above 1.0:
current offsite (HI = 3.0); future onsite resident, western portion (HI=4.0); and future onsite
resident, eastern portion (HI=5.0). All other exposure scenarios were below a HI of 1.0.
The majority of these noncancer impacts are attributable to manganese and antimony.
Noncancer impacts from groundwater exposure are shown in Table 6-3. For RMEs
scenarios, contaminants in some wells exceeded a HI of 1.0. assuming residential and
industrial land uses. His for offsite wells were not above 1.0. The primary contributors to
risk were arsenic and manganese.
A portion of the estimated noncancer impacts (and cancer risks for arsenic) result
from exposures to naturally occurring levels of arsenic and manganese in the soil and water.
These differences are quantified and discussed in the Risk Assessment.
6.1.3 Risks Related to Lead Only
There is a large body of scientific literature on the toxicological effects of lead in
humans. Children appear to be the segment of the population at greatest risk from the toxic
effects of lead. Health impacts from lead are primarily assessed by using levels of lead in
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary . 27
-------
Table 6-3
Summary of Cancer Risks and Hazard Indices for Groundwater
Arctic Surplus Salvage Yard
Fairbanks, Alaska
v .-..,- Exposure Scenario
Future Rcsidcniial Use of
On-Sile Groundwater
Future Industrial Use of
On-Site Groundwater
Current Residential Use of
Off-Site Groundwater
Well
MW-5624
MW-5625
MW-5627
MW-5807
MW-H
MW-5624
MW-5625
MW-5627
MW-5807
MW-H
. TL-19
Cancer Risks _
RME
2xi
-------
blood. At blood lead levels of 40 to 100 micrograms per deciliter (ug/dL), children have
exhibited nerve damage, permanent mental retardation, colic, anemia, brain damage, and
death. Blood lead levels as low as 10 ug/dL (or lower) have been associated with
neurological and developmental defects in children. Blood lead levels of concern for adults
are generally higher than for children. However, studies examining the relationship between
lead exposure and blood pressure suggest that blood lead levels from as low as 7 ug/dL
upward to approximately 30 or 40 ug/dL may increase blood pressure. In addition, studies
suggest that low levels of exposure for pregnant women may increase the risk for
developmental effects in the unborn child.
Lead was not included in the quantitative risk estimates described above for the other
site contaminants because: (1) EPA-approved RfDs and SFs are unavailable, and (2) for the
residential exposure, EPA guidelines specify the use of the EPA IEUBK model for estimating
acceptable lead levels in soil for children.
The IEUBK model estimates the blood lead concentrations expected to result from
exposure to lead concentrations in soil and other media (e.g., air, water, diet, dust, and
paint) for children. EPA recommends a benchmark of either 95 percent of the sensitive
population of children having blood lead levels below 10 ug/dL or a 95 percent probability of
an individual child having a blood lead level below 10 ug/dL. When the IEUBK model is
run using this benchmark and all the model's default parameters, an acceptable soil screening
level of about 400 ppm is predicted for lead. [Note: When the Risk Assessment was done
for Arctic Surplus, the IEUBK model in use by EPA predicted an acceptable soil screening
level of about 500 ppm. The newer version of the model predicts a level closer to 400
ppm.]
The IEUBK model does not address lead exposure to older children or adults.
Therefore, potential risks associated with exposures of adult residents and workers could not
be quantitatively evaluated using the IEUBK model. However, the exposure potential and
sensitivity of older receptors are generally lower than those of young children. To assess the
impacts of lead on workers, a 1,000 ppm soil lead level was chosen as protective. This level
has been used in the past for sites when the expected future land use is industrial.
Health impacts for lead were characterized by comparing the exposure point
concentrations calculated for lead in soil at the site, using the methods discussed in the
exposure assessment for other site contaminants, to 400 ppm (for residential exposures); and
to 1,000 ppm (for industrial exposures). In both cases, risks associated with either
residential or industrial exposures to the elevated concentrations of lead in site soil were
determined to present significant risks to human health. Therefore, a clean up action to
address the lead-contaminated soil at the site is considered warranted.
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 29
-------
6.1.4 Uncertainty in the Human Health Risk Assessment
The accuracy of the risk characterization depends in large part on the accuracy and
representativeness of the sampling, exposure, and toxicological data. Most assumptions are
intentionally conservative so the risk assessment will be more likely to overestimate the risk
than to underestimate it.
Calculations of risk for exposure to soil are likely to be overestimations. Soil
sampling focused on "hot spot" locations of suspected contamination, therefore, calculation
of EPCs are likely biased high. Also due to the cold weather conditions in the winter,
exposures are over estimated because of snow cover and frozen soil.
Uncertainty in the toxicity evaluation may over-estimate risks by relying on slope
factors that describe the upper confidence limit on cancer risk from carcinogens. Also,
evidence for carcinogenicity of the contaminants of potential concern are based on animal
studies and limited human data.. Some under-estimation of risk may occur due to lack of
quantitative toxicity information for some contaminants detected at the site.
6.2 Ecological Risks
A qualitative ecological Risk Assessment was done to assess the ecological effects of
the contaminants present at the Arctic Surplus site. Chemicals identified as potential
stressors of ecological concern include: several inorganic compounds in surface water and
sediment in the Arctic Surplus Pond; and lead, PCBs, several volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) and semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs), and pesticides in near-surface soil.
Threats to terrestrial species were found to be negligible, based on an evaluation of
potential risks to the American Kestrel (a type of raptor) through ingestion of small mammals
that could contain elevated lead and PCBs in their tissues. A small mammal study was
conducted to help determine risks to the animal and subsequent food chain.
Potential risks to aquatic communities from chemicals in surface water and sediment
were also evaluated. Of the naturally occurring contaminants, only iron was elevated above
a level that could produce significant adverse affects in some benthic biological resources.
Based on supplemental information such as the presence of diverse aquatic insect
communities and lush vegetation, it was concluded that stressor concentrations in the Arctic
Surplus Pond sediment and surface water do not pose significant risks to the aquatic biota in
the pond.
Based on the water quality analysis and the terrestrial study, it did not appear that
there was a measurable impact on the ecology of the site or near-site areas. The ecological
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 30
-------
risk assessment indicated that the levels of contamination present at the site were not likely to
cause adverse effects to plants and animals in the site vicinity.
6.3 Risk Conclusions
The Baseline Risk Assessment supports the conclusion that hazardous substances are
found on the site and that the actual or threatened release of these substances from this site,
if a response action is not taken, may present an imminent and substantial endangerment to
public health, welfare, or the environment.
Arciic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 31
-------
7.0 REMEDIAL ACTION OBJECTIVES AND CLEANUP STANDARDS
The overall objective of the remedial actions for the Arctic Surplus site is to provide
an effective mechanism for protecting human health and the environment from contaminated
site soils and groundwater while allowing future access to areas containing salvageable and
recyclable material. The remedial action objectives (RAOs) have been develop to describe
what site remedial actions will need to be accomplished.
7.1 Remedial Action Objectives
The RAOs identified for site soils are to:
» Prevent exposure by ingestion, inhalation, and dermal contact with
contaminated soils and dust that would result in an excess lifetime carcinogenic
risk above 10~5.
> Prevent exposure by ingestion, inhalation, and dermal contact with
contaminated soils and dust that would result in a noncarcinogenic health
effects as indicated by an HI greater than 1.0.
» Prevent offsite migration of contaminants caused by mechanical transport,
runoff, or wind erosion. ».
» Prevent infiltration/migration of contaminants that would result in groundwater
contamination in excess of regulatory standards.
The RAOs identified for site groundwater are to:
» Prevent inhalation of volatiles released from, or ingestion of, groundwater
containing contaminants at levels above regulatory standards (MCLs and non-
zero MCLGs).
If there are no regulatory standards:
> Prevent inhalation of volatiles released from, or ingestion of, groundwater
contaminants that could result in an excess lifetime carcinogenic risk above the
lO'5 level.
> Prevent ingestion of groundwater containing contaminants that could result in
noncarcinogenic health effects as indicated by an HI in excess of 1.0.
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 32
-------
7.2 Cleanup Standards
Using the RAOs, cleanup standards are developed for each of the contaminants of
concern. Once these standards are determined, cleanup technologies can be evaluated so that
the cleanup standards can be achieved.
7.2.1 Soil Cleanup Standards
Based upon future industrial land use inside the fence line, cleanup standards for the
soil on site are required for 3 contaminants/contaminant classes: PCBs, lead, and chlorinated
dioxins and furans. The estimated upper-bound cancer risks exceeded levels of concern
(IxlO"4) for PCBs and chlorinated dioxins and furans. Lead levels above 1000 ppm were
found. Based upon a residential scenario, cleanup standards are required for PCBs and lead
offsite. PCBs have been detected at levels above an estimated upper-bound cancer risk of
IxlO'4 in one property north of the facility. Lead has been detected above the residential
land use risk screening level of 400 ppm outside of the fence near the southeast corner of the
property and along the Badger Road right-of-way at the western boundary of the site.
There are no regulatory cleanup standards for soil contaminants found at the site in
federal or Alaska laws/regulations. The cleanup standards for the site soil are derived from
two main sources:
» EPA and State of Alaska guidance on soil cleanup levels (for PCBs and lead);
* Risk-based concentrations when guidance is not available (for chlorinated
dioxins/furans).
Soil cleanup standards for the Arctic Surplus site are summarized in Table 7-1. The
industrial standards are for the areas inside the fence and the residential use standards are for
the areas outside the existing site fence. Only two small areas outside of the fence were
identified as having contaminants of concern. Only lead and PCBs were identified as COCs
in the area outside the fence.
7.2.1.1 PCB Cleanup Standards
For PCBs in soil, EPA established a nationwide spill cleanup policy under the Toxic
Substance Control Act (TSCA) (TSCA 15 U.S.C. 2601 et. seq.). The requirements specified
under 40 CFR 761, subpart G, particularly with respect to the clean up of PCB-contaminated
soil, are considered as a potential to be considered (TBC) guidance under CERCLA actions.
The TSCA cleanup policy applies to spills containing PCBs at concentrations greater than 50
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 33
-------
Table 7-1
Soil Cleanup Standards
Arctic Surplus Salvage Yard
Fairbanks, Alaska
* c \
' ,'V .^;->V' ?
Contaminant of Concern
Lead
PCBs
Dioxins/Furans
, " > , , Soil Cleanup Standards8;;/, / ,\ « ^V, \
Industrial Scenario :
1 ,000h
10d
0.44e-f
Residential Scenario ,
400°
ld
NAE
Notes:
Concentrations are in mg/kg, unless otherwise noted.
Lead cleanup goal for industrial land use; consistent with cleanup standards for other similar
Region 10 CERCLA sites.
Residential soil screening value for lead using the IEUBK Model (EPA Revised Interim Soil
Lead Guidance for CERCLA Site and RCRA Corrective Action Facilities, OSWER Directive No.
9355.4.12, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, Washington, D.C.)
Cleanup standard for PCBs from 40 CFR 761.25(c)(4)(v).
Cleanup standard is based upon a cancer risk of 1 X 10"-
Units: US/kg
Not applicable. Dioxins/furans were not detected off-site; therefore, only the industrial soil cleanup
standard is provided.
-------
mg/kg. The cleanup standard for spills in restricted access areas is 10 mg/kg and for
nonrestricted access (residential) areas is 1.0 mg/kg.
Less stringent cleanup standards may be approved by EPA on a site-specific basis, as
defined in 40 CFR 761.120(9)(4), if factors associated with the spill "may mitigate expected
exposures and risks or make clean up to these requirements impracticable." Alternatively,
more stringent levels may be required by EPA based on site-specific factors (e.g., depth to
groundwater or presence of drinking water wells) as outlined in 40 CFR 761.120(b).
PCBs are present in the site soil and landfilling involks design criteria and long-term
management controls consistent with TSCA chemical waste landfill requirements (40 CFR
761.75). Certain chemical waste landfill requirements may be waived using the TSCA
waiver provisions, depending on the concentration of PCB remaining and other site-specific
factors.
Based on the above guidances, EPA has selected 10 mg/kg PCB as the cleanup level
for soil within the fenced area (industrial use) and 1 mg/kg PCB for outside of the fenced
(residential) soil areas. The soil above these levels will have to be excavated.
7.2.1.2 Lead Cleanup Standards
For lead in soil, EPA's Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER)
has issued Interim Soil Lead Guidance for CERCLA Sites. In this guidance, a 400 mg/kg
screening level for lead in soil under residential land use is recommended. This level was
derived using the Integrated Exposure Uptake/Biokinetic (IEUBK) Model to estimate a soil
concentration that will not result, under default residential exposure assumptions, in an
unacceptable blood lead level in children. Exceeding this level does not necessarily indicate
that a remedial action is necessary, but does indicate that a site-specific study of risks is
warranted. Residential cleanup standards for CERCLA remedial actions can be developed
using the IEUBK Model on a site-specific basis where site data support modification of
model default parameters. EPA considers this model to be the most appropriate and widely
applicable tool available for evaluating residential risks from lead.
Within the fenced area, an industrial land-use scenario is considered most appropriate.
However, the IEUBK Model is applicable only to children, and no model is currently
available for developing an adult industrial screening level for lead.
At the Arctic Surplus site soil lead concentrations exceed 1000 mg/kg over much of
the western half of the site. When a cost analysis was done to help determine site-specific
cleanup standards, it was found that there was not much difference in soil cleanup costs if the
cleanup standards were set at 1000 or 2000 mg/kg. When cleanup levels were set below
1000. mg/kg, the amount of soil requiring excavation increased greatly and the associated cost
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision .Summary 35
-------
for the cleanup increase sharply. Cleanup levels established for lead at other industrial sites
in the region were considered before establishing an industrial cleanup standard at Arctic
Surplus.
Lead in soil is a RCRA hazardous waste when the results of the Toxicity
Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) test exceeds 5 mg/kg. When a soil fails the
TCLP test for lead it is known as a "characteristic" hazardous waste. Concentrations of
1,000 mg/kg for lead in Arctic Surplus soil typically does not fail the TCLP test, and
therefore, are not considered hazardous waste. Based on the RCRA characteristic waste
criteria, the soil cleanup standard for lead at 1000 mg/kg was selected for industrial use areas
inside the site fence line.
7.2.1.3 Other Contaminants of Concern in Soil
Chlorinated Dioxins and Furans
For dioxins and furans, the soil concentrations corresponding to a cancer risk-based
level of IxlO"5 was selected as the soil cleanup standard (Table 7-1).
None of the other COCs found in the soils presented a risk great enough to change
the overall site risk when added to the risks from PCBs and lead.
7.2.2 Groundwater Cleanup Standards
Based upon industrial land use exposure assumptions, concentrations of arsenic and
manganese were present in a limited number of wells at levels above their RfDs (/. e.,
HQ> 1); estimated cancer risks for arsenic was slightly above IxlO"4 in one well. Levels of
arsenic, manganese, and TCE above the MCLs have been found occasionally in several
onsite monitoring wells. Sources of TCE were removed by EPA removal actions and TCE is
not found in the soil. Groundwater monitoring will continue as part of the remedy. The
remedy will include institutional controls that prevent the use of onsite drinking water.
Levels of arsenic or manganese above the regional aquifer background levels have not
been detected in any offsite wells. However, the onsite well with the highest consistently
elevated levels of arsenic and manganese is in the downgradient northwest corner of the site
(TCE is still detected bur has consistently been below the MCL in this well). The nearest
downgradient well to this onsite area is 300 feet from the fence boundary. It is likely that
elevated levels of arsenic and manganese exceeding both health- and risk-based levels and
background levels continue for some limited distance off site. Both of the two downgradient
properties which may be affected are currently used for industrial purposes (another salvage
yard north, and Ft. Wainwright west of the site), so there is no immediate likelihood that
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 36
-------
domestic water wells would be installed (the area between this northern salvage yard and Ft.
Wainwright is in the Badger Road Right-of-Way). If monitoring at additional downgradient
well(s) indicates site-derived contaminants above the cleanup standards (Table 7-2) on either
adjacent property, restrictions on ground water use may need to be extended in the event that
land use changes.
7.3 Cleanup Standards Conclusions
Based on the information gathered and evaluated in the RI/FS, EPA concludes that
contaminated soil presents an unacceptable risk to human health, welfare, and the
environment. Even after the EPA removal of large quantities of hazardous wastes, PCBs,
lead, and dioxins/furans pose a future risk. The large amount of scrap metal on the site
presents a problem for getting to the soil, but does hot contribute to the contamination and
the scrap can be decontaminated by physically removing any soil that may be on it. In order
to meet the cleanup objectives, the soil requires remediation.
The groundwater contains some elevated concentrations of a few naturally occurring
contaminants and intermittent detections of potentially site related contaminants. These can
be monitored to determine if source controls related to the soils can prevent contaminants
from entering the groundwater and causing a problem that would require future controls.
Therefore, EPA has established soil cleanup standards for residential areas as 400
mg/kg lead and 1 mg/kg PCB, and industrial cleanup standards as 1000 mg/kg lead and 10
mg/kg PCB. EPA has determined the these standards will be sufficiently protective of offsite
residents and onsite workers based on target levels defined by the NCP for additive or.
combined risk effects.
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 37
-------
Table 7-2
Groundwatcr Cleanup Standards
Arctic Surplus Salvage Yard
Fairbanks, Alaska
/ ' ^ '^
Contaminant of Concern * f
Antimony
Manganese
5 - - ^" x ^"\ V"»J>>r - «!,''' *
Groundwater Cleanup" Standards8'0 , ^-^
Highest Concentration.*
at Downgradient s-
Property Boundary >t > '*s
41.8
18,400
Residential Scenario
." t
y<>
25
2,900
Notes:
a Concentrations are in jig/kg, unless otherwise noted.
Cleanup standards are based upon regional aquifer background levels, which exceed
risk-based levels.
-------
8.0 DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES
Each of the remediation alternatives in this section was developed as a way to mitigate
the risks from contamination on the site. The different alternatives provide a range of
actions to provide different levels of protectivness. A general discussion of each of the
alternatives follows.
8.1 Alternative 1: No action.
Under this alternative, no further remedial activities would be conducted at the site.
There would be no provisions for continuing to restrict site access and the current
ground water monitoring program would be discontinued upon issuance of the ROD.
8.2 Alternative 2: Institutional Controls, Monitoring, and Removal of Offsite Soil.
Under this alternative, remedial activities would be limited to excavation of soil
outside of the fence that is contaminated above the residential cleanup standards for either
lead or PCBs. The cleanup standards are described in Section 7.2. The areas of concern
include a part of Tax Lot 20, an area along the outside of the southeastern fence line, and
possibly localized areas near the site fence line in Tract B. The extent of contamination
above the cleanup standards in these areas would be established with onsite screening tests
and confirmatory testing by an offsite laboratory of a representative percentage of the onsite
screening samples. The excavated soil would be transported to a permitted facility for
treatment and/or disposal, and the excavations would be backfilled with clean (i.e., soil that
does not exceed site-specific cleanup standards) soil and graded. No remediation inside the
fence would be performed as part of this alternative. Instead, only institutional and access
controls would be implemented, along with groundwater monitoring, to limit risks of
exposure to site contaminants through direct contact, inhalation, or ingestion of soil or
groundwater.
Alternative 2 would involve the following key elements:
* Excavation of soil outside of the fence contaminated with PCBs and lead above
residential cleanup standards and transportation of these soils to a permitted
facility treatment and/or disposal. Backfilling with clean soil and grading.
» Institutional controls to limit future land and groundwater use.
* Improvements to and maintenance of site perimeter fencing to restrict site
access.
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 39
-------
Long-term groundwater monitoring using the existing groundwater monitoring
network, with the possible addition of one or more new wells, to monitor
potential contaminant migration.
Periodic site performance reviews.
8.3 Alternative 3: Capping
The primary elements of Alternative 3 include on-site relocation of salvage materials
and debris, localized excavation of contaminated soil inside and outside of the fence,
consolidation of excavated soil in the western part of the site, and construction of a
low-permeability soil cap over much of the western part of the site. The purpose of the cap
would be to prevent exposure to site contaminants and to reduce the potential for leaching of
contaminants from site soil to the underlying aquifer. This site cap would also serve as a
cover for the old military landfill, and would be designed and constructed in compliance with
state and federal requirements for municipal waste landfill closure.
This alternative focuses on capping site soil impacted by lead and PCBs; it also
provides for consolidation under the capped area of all other soil both inside and outside of
the site fence containing contaminants above the appropriate cleanup standards with the
exception of two areas of hazardous waste. These areas are Drum Storage Area K, which
contains an estimated 50 cubic yards (cy) of pesticide-contaminated soil, and a
chlordane-contaminated area immediately east of the Primary Drum Storage Area, which
contains an estimated 25 cy of contaminated soil. This soil would be excavated and
transported to an off-site RCRA-permitted facility for proper treatment and disposal.
The key elements of remediation incorporated in this capping alternative are as
follows:
> Staged relocation and decontamination of on-site salvage material to provide
access to the contaminated soil (surface clean up of about 10 acres). This
would involve the construction of a decontamination pad for equipment and
debris, clean staging and storage areas, and a support services area.
> Excavation of small amounts of soil in the northern and eastern parts of the
site containing COCs at concentrations above the industrial cleanup standards
(with the exception of pesticide-contaminated soil in Drum Storage Area K and
a small area adjacent to the Primary Drum Storage Area) and consolidation of
these soils in the western part of the site in the area to be capped. Most of the
contaminated soils would be capped in place.
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 40
-------
Excavation of fill soil in a septic tank drain field area in the northwestern
corner of the site which contains COCs at concentrations above the industrial
cleanup standards, and consolidation of these soils in the western part of the
site in the area to be capped.
Excavation of soil outside of the fence contaminated with PCBs and lead above
residential cleanup standards (Tax Lot 20 and southeastern fence line), and
consolidation of these soils in the western part of the site in the area to be
capped.
Excavation of pesticide-contaminated soil above industrial cleanup standards in
Drum Storage Area K and chlordane contaminated soil immediately east of the
Primary Drum Storage Area, and transport of these soils to a RCRA-permitted
facility for treatment and incineration.
Confirmatory sampling for identified COCs to define the limits of excavated
areas to comply with cleanup standards, and to determine the extent of
capping.
Backfilling and regrading of excavated areas with clean soil.
Abandonment of existing monitoring wells located within the area to be
capped, and installation of new wells beyond the capped area for use in
ground water monitoring.
Construction of a low-permeability (permeability less than IxlO"5 cm/sec) cap
over contaminated soil in the western part of the site, including the old
military landfill.
Construction of an infiltration trench, around the perimeter of the cap to
receive stormwater runoff from the cap.
Implementation of institutional controls to limit future land and groundwater
use.
Construction and maintenance of fencing around the perimeter of the capped
area to restrict access to the containment unit.
Inspection and maintenance of the cap, stormwater drainage/infiltration system,
and monitoring wells to preserve their integrity and effectiveness.
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 41
-------
» Long-term groundwater monitoring for the site and landfill closure.
»> Periodic site performance reviews.
8.4 Alternative 4: Consolidation and Capping
Alternative 4, was developed as a remediation approach that would provide the
protective benefits of both consolidation and containment of the contaminated soil. The
primary elements of Alternative 4 include on-site relocation of salvage materials and debris,
excavation and consolidation of most of the contaminated soil, both inside and outside of the
site fence, then placing the soil over the old military landfill, and construction of a
low-permeability soil cap over the consolidated soil and landfill. The cap would be designed
to prevent a risk of exposure to site contaminants and to reduce the potential for leaching of
contaminants from site soil to the underlying aquifer. The consolidated contaminated soil
would contain RCRA hazardous waste and TSCA hazardous substances in the consolidated
disposal area. However, its closure would not be in compliance with state and federal
requirements for a TSCA chemical waste landfill without landfill waiver, but this alternative
would comply with a solid waste landfill closure. Pesticide-contaminated soil would not be
consolidated after excavation, but would be segregated for transport to an offsite
RCRA-permitted facility for treatment and incineration.
The key elements of remediation that would be required as part of the capping
alternative are as follows:
*- Staged relocation and decontamination of onsite debris covering the
contaminated soil. This would involve the construction of a decontamination
pad for equipment, clean staging and storage areas, and a support services
area.
» Geophysical exploration to delineate the lateral extent of the old military
landfill.
» Excavation of soil inside the fence containing COCs at concentrations above
the industrial cleanup standards (excluding the pesticide-contaminated soil); the
septic tank drain field area soil in the northwest corner of the site; and
consolidation of these soils above the old military landfill which will be
capped.
» Excavation of soil from outside the fence containing PCB or lead at
concentrations above the residential cleanup standards, and consolidation of
these soil above-the old military landfill prior to capping.
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 42
-------
> Excavation of pesticide-contaminated soil above industrial cleanup standards
and transport to a RCRA-permitted facility for treatment and disposal.
» Excavation of dioxin/furan-contaminated soil above the cleanup standard and
transported off site to a permitted treatment and disposal facility.
* Confirmatory sampling and analysis of identified COCs to define the limits of
excavated areas to comply with cleanup standards.
» Backfilling of all excavated areas and regrading of the areas inside and outside
of the fence with clean soil.
> Abandonment of existing monitoring wells located within the area to be
capped, and installation of new wells beyond the capped area for use in
ground water monitoring.
+ Construction of a low-permeability RCRA hazardous waste cap over the
consolidated soil and the old military landfill.
»> Construction of a perimeter drain and stormwater infiltration basin to contain
runoff from a maximum storm event.
» Construction and maintenance of fencing to restrict access to the capped area.
> Implementation of institutional controls to limit future land and water use.
* Inspection and maintenance of the cap and existing perimeter fencing to
preserve their integrity and effectiveness.
* Long-term groundwater monitoring for the site and closed landfill.
» Periodic site performance reviews.
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 43
-------
8.5 Alternative 5: Soil Treatment, Consolidation, and Capping
This alternative, involves excavation, solvent extraction, and
solidification/stabilization of all soil from both inside and outside of the site fence that
contain COCs above the cleanup standards (estimated to be 17,400 tons). Following
treatment, this soil would be consolidated and capped in the south-western corner of the site
over the old military landfill.
On-site treatment by solvent extraction would be used to remove organic
contaminants, primarily PCBs and TCE, from the soil to concentrations below the cleanup
standards. The residual soil would then be mixed with additives that bind the lead and other
inorganic COCs to the soil matrix, and the stabilized product would be placed in a series of
lifts on the ground surface over and adjoining the area underlain by the old military landfill.
A clean soil fill would be imported, placed, and graded as needed to achieve the design
slopes for placement of the overlying cap materials. This fill and treated soil would then be
covered with a low-permeability TSCA chemical waste landfill cap to prevent exposure to
remaining site contaminants and to reduce the potential for leaching of residual contaminants
from the treated soil to groundwater. The TSCA cap would be designed to cover and protect
both the treated soil and the underlying landfill, and would comply with Alaska and federal
requirements for closure of municipal landfills.
The key elements of this treatment alternative include those listed for Alternative 4
and add the following:
» Confirmation sampling and analysis^to establish the limit of excavation and to
demonstrate compliance with cleanup standards.
> Solvent extraction of excavated soil exceeding the cleanup standards followed
by solidification/stabilization and placement over and adjacent to the area
underlain by the old military landfill.
» Incineration of solvent extracted "waste oil" treatment residuals at an offsite
permitted incineration facility.
» Construction of a low-permeability cap over the consolidated soil and the old
military landfill. The design of the cap would have to meet TSCA chemical
waste and solid waste landfill cap requirements.
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 44
-------
8.6 Alternative 6: Hot Spot Soil Treatment, Consolidation, Capping
This alternative has been developed for consideration as a potentially cost-effective
variation of Alternative 5. It differs from Alternative 5 in that the on-site treatment and
solidification/stabilization process would be used on a smaller volume of soil (11,000 tons),
however, the remaining untreated soil with contamination above the cleanup standards would
be consolidated and capped on site. The size of the capped are could be smaller that either
Alternative 4 or 5, but the actual size of the capped area will be dependent on the final
amount of consolidated material and the height of the pile. All of the capping options will
totally cover the old closed landfill.
For Alternative 6, soil containing PCBs above 50 mg/kg and other COCs above the
respective industrial cleanup standards would be treated and stabilized on site. Soil with
PCB concentrations between 10 and 50 mg/kg (or between 1 and 50 mg/kg for soil outside
of the fence) would be consolidated and capped on site. This soil may require
solidification/stabilization prior to consolidation depending on the lead concentration. Soil
with lead concentrations above 1000 mg/kg would be treated by solidification/stabilization
before placement in the containment unit. Like Alternative 5, pesticide- and dioxin/furan-
contaminated soil would be transported to an off-site RCRA-permitted facility for treatment
and disposal. This approach, of Only treating soil containing higher concentrations of COCs,
is estimated to result in a 38 percent reduction in the volume of soil that would be treated on
site.
The key element of this alternative are similar to Alternative 5 but use a slightly
different soil treatment criteria as follows:
* Solvent extraction of soil containing PCB concentrations greater than 50
mg/kg, followed by solidification/stabilization arid placement over and adjacent
to the area underlain by the old military landfill. Excavated soil that does not
exceed 50 mg/kg PCBs or that does not require stabilization, will placed
directly over and adjacent to the area underlain by the old military landfill.
8.7 Alternative 7: Onsite Treatment (Soil Washing/Solvent Extraction), and
Alternative 8: Onsite Treatment (Solvent Extraction/Acid Leaching).
These two alternatives were determined not to be technically feasible after a
treatability study. The separation of the lead from the soil proved to be ineffective. Based
on the technical difficulties with these alternatives, they were not evaluated further. The
solvent extraction process still worked to reduce the PCB concentrations, however, neither
the soil washing nor acid extraction worked effectively for lead separation.
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 45
-------
8.8 Alternative 9: OffSite Treatment/Disposal
Alternative 9 would consist of excavation and offsite treatment and disposal of all soil
containing COCs at concentrations exceeding the cleanup standards. All excavated soil.
would be transported to an offsite, RCRA/TSCA-permitted facility for treatment and
disposal.
The key elements of remedial action required to accomplish this alternative are as
follows:
* Staged relocation and decontamination of onsite debris. This would include
the construction of a decontamination pad for equipment and debris, and a
support services area.
* Construction of a railroad spur and loading ramp for loading contaminated soil
into railcars.
» Excavation of soil containing COCs at concentrations above the cleanup
standards and transport to a RCRA/TSCA-permitted facility for treatment and
disposal.
> Confirmatory screening and laboratory analysis for appropriate COCs to
determine the limit of excavation and ensure compliance with cleanup
standards.
* Backfilling excavated areas with clean fill and grading.
* Geophysical exploration to delineate the lateral extent of the old military
landfill.
> Abandonment of existing monitoring wells within the area to be capped, and
installation of new wells to be used in groundwater monitoring program.
» Construction of a low-permeability solid waste landfill cap over the old
military landfill.
» Construction of a drain around the perimeter of the cap and an infiltration
basin to receive stormwater runoff from the cap.
+ Implementation of institutional controls to limit future land and groundwater
use.
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 46
-------
Construction, inspection, and maintenance of perimeter fencing around the
landfill cap to restrict access.
Inspection and maintenance of the landfill cap, stormwater drainage/infiltration
system, and monitoring wells to preserve their integrity and effectiveness.
Long-term groundwater monitoring of the old military landfill and the site.
Periodic site performance reviews.
8.9 Alternative 10: Hot Spot Soil Offsite Treatment/Disposal with Capping of
Contaminated Residual Soil
Alternative 10 has been developed for consideration as a potentially cost-effective
variation of Alternative 9. It differs from Alternative 9 in that a smaller volume of soil with
contamination above the cleanup standards would be excavated and treated/disposed off site.
For this alternative, it is assumed that soil inside the fence containing PCBs above 50 mg/kg,
lead above 1000 mg/kg, or other COCs above industrial cleanup standards, would be
transported to an off-site facility, whereas soil with PCB concentrations between 10 and 50
mg/kg (or between 1 and 50 mg/kg for soil outside of the fence) would be consolidated and
capped on site. In comparison with Alternative 9, this approach is estimated to result in a 38
percent reduction in the volume of soil that would be disposed off site.
The key elements of remediation required as part of this alternative are similar to
Alternative except for the following:
> Transport excavated soil with PCBs above 50 mg/kg and lead above 1000
mg/kg to an off-site RCRA/TSCA-permitted facility for treatment and
disposal. Consolidate and place other contaminated soil over the old military
landfill and cap.
* Construction of a low-permeability TSCA cap over the old military landfill and
consolidated PCB-^contaminated soil at concentrations of 10 to 50 mg/kg. This
would include construction of a trench drain around the perimeter of the cap
and an infiltration basin to receive stormwater runoff from the cap.
> Implementation of institutional controls to limit future land and groundwater
use.
* Construction, inspection, and maintenance of perimeter fencing around the
landfill cap to restrict access.
Arcik Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 47
-------
» Inspection and maintenance of the landfill cap, stormwater drainage/infiltration
system, and monitoring wells to preserve their integrity and effectiveness.
> Long-term groundwater monitoring of the old military landfill and the site.
» Periodic site performance reviews.
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summarv 48
-------
9.0 SUMMARY OF COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES
The NCP requires that each remedial alternative analyzed in detail in the FS be
evaluated according to specific criteria. The purpose of this evaluation is to promote
consistent identification of the relative advantages and disadvantages of each alternative,
thereby guiding selection of remedies offering the most effective and efficient means of
achieving site cleanup goals. There are nine criteria by which feasible remedial alternatives
are evaluated. While all nine criteria are important, they are weighed differently in the
decision-making process depending on whether they describe a consideration of technical or
socioeconomic merits (primary balancing criteria), or involve the evaluation of non-EPA
reviewers that may influence an EPA decision (modifying criteria).
9.1 Threshold Criteria
The remedial alternatives were first evaluated by comparison with the threshold
criteria: overall protection of human health and the environment and compliance with
ARARs. The threshold criteria must be fully satisfied by candidate alternatives before the
alternatives can be given further consideration in the remedy selection process.
9.1.1 Overall Protectiveness of Human Health and the Environment
Evaluation of this criterion focused on how exposure pathways are eliminated,
reduced, or controlled through engineering or institutional controls.
Alternatives 1 and 2 would not mitigate any site contamination or limit exposure
pathways and are not protective of human health and the environment. Controlling access
would reduce risks only to offsite residents in Alternative 2, therefore, not protective. All
the other alternatives are protective of human health and the environment. A soil cap over
the contaminated soils in Alternatives 3 and 4 would control exposure from ingestion and
dermal contact. Alternatives 5 and 6 are the only alternatives that would result in the
decontamination of a significant volume of soil. These two alternatives (5 and 6) are
effective iri reducing and controlling exposure pathways both on site and off site by treatment
and capping. Alternatives 9 and 10 remove most of the contamination from the site, thereby
reducing and controlling exposures at the site.
9.1.2 Compliance with ARARs
This criterion addressed whether each alternative meets the chemical-specific,
location-specific, and action-specific ARARs identified for the site.
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 49
-------
Alternatives 1, 2, 3 and 4 do not comply with ARARs. These alternatives do not
comply with the TSCA disposal requirements for soil containing greater than 50 ppm PCBs.
The onsite disposal area in Alternatives 3 and 4 will not meet the TSCA chemical waste
landfill requirements and would not qualify for a TSCA landfill waiver. PCB concentrations
above 50 ppm in soil consolidated into a waste containment area would also invoke relevant
and appropriate Alaska chemical waste landfill requirements.
All remaining alternatives (Alternatives 5, 6, 9, and 10) comply with ARARs. Some
of these alternatives, 5 and 6, would comply with RCRA Land Disposal Restrictions with a
Treatability Variance for the soil contaminated with a California list waste (PCB).
Alternatives 5, 6, 9, and 10 would comply with the TSCA chemical waste landfill
requirements with a TSCA landfill waiver. These alternatives would qualify for a waiver
because treatment or off site treatment and disposal would reduce the maximum concentration
of PCBs so that the remaining soil would not pose an unacceptable threat under the selected
long term controls. None of these alternatives would require a SARA ARAR waiver.
Because Alternatives 1, 2, 3, and 4 do not meet the Threshold Criteria for protection
of health and the environment these alternatives will not be considered further.
9.2 Primary Balancing Criteria
For those alternatives satisfying the threshold criteria, five primary balancing criteria
are used to evaluate other aspects of the potential remedies. Not single alternative will
necessarily receive the highest evaluation for every balancing criterion. This phase of the
comparative analysis is useful in refining the relative merits of candidate alternatives for site
clean up. The five primary balancing criteria are: long-term effectiveness and permanence;
reduction of toxicity, mobility, or volume through treatment; short-term effectiveness;
implementability; arid-cost.
9.2.1 Long-Term Effectiveness and Permanence
This criterion addressed the results of each alternative with respect to the risk
remaining at the site after the conclusion of the remedial action. Evaluation of this criterion
includes an assessment of the magnitude of the residual risk from untreated waste or
treatment residuals. It also includes an assessment of the adequacy, reliability, and useful
life of any controls that are to be used to manage hazardous substances that remain on site
after the remediation.
The action alternatives are all adequate with respect to long-term effectiveness and
permanence. Treatment and removal alternatives have the best long-term permanence with
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision -Summary 50
-------
Alternatives 5 and 9 being preferable to Alternatives 6 and 10 because less contamination
remains after the remedial actions are completed.
The treatment alternatives, 5 and 6, are the most protective since the concentration of
PCBs in the residual soil after treatment is reduced. Lead and the PCB residual soils
undergo a further protective step by a solidification/stabilization process. Both of these
treatment steps help to control the long-term release of contaminants to the environment and
reduce exposure. Consolidation and capping the treated soils increases long-term
effectiveness by reducing potential leaching of contaminants into groundwater which
improves the long-term management of the'contained residuals for permanence.
9.2.2 Reduction of Toxicity, Mobility, or Volume through Treatment
Evaluation of this criterion included: an assessment of the treatment processes to be
employed by each remedial action and the types of wastes they would treat; the amount of
waste that would be destroyed or treated: the projected amount of reduction in toxicity,
mobility, or volume; the degree to which the treatment is irreversible; and the types and
quantities of residuals that would remain after treatment. Also considered in this assessment
is whether the alternative would satisfy the expressed preference of the Superfund
Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA), Section 121, for remedial actions that reduce
toxicity, mobility, or volume of hazardous waste.
Onsite treatment (Alternatives 5 and 6) ranks highest with respect to the criterion for
reduction in toxicity, mobility, and volume. These are the only alternatives that use
treatment processes to reduce the toxicity and mobility of contaminated soil. Alternative 5 is
the preferred alternative of the treatment options with respect to this criterion because it
would result in a greater reduction in toxicity, and mobility of contaminated soil.
9.2.3 Short-term Effectiveness
The potential health effects and environmental impacts of each alternative action
during construction and implementation were evaluated by this criterion. The factors
assessed in this evaluation include the protection of the community and site workers during
implementation and construction, environmental impacts during implementation, and the
estimated time required to meet cleanup standards.
All remaining alternatives (5 through 10) would have short-term impacts resulting
from the excavation and handling of contaminated soils. All require similar amounts of
excavation, onsite soil handling, and time to implement. Alternatives 5 and 6 have the most
soil handling because of the onsite treatment processes. Impacts from excavation and
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 51
-------
handling can be mitigated by air monitoring, dust suppression, and worker safety clothing
and equipment.
Transportation risks are the greatest for Alternatives 9 and 10 because nearly all of
the contaminated soil is removed from the site and transported to a disposal facility.
9.2.4 Implementability
This criterion evaluated the terms of technical and administrative feasibility and the
availability of services and materials to accomplish the remediation. Technical feasibility
includes relative ease of installation or constructability; the ease of additional remediation, if
necessary; and the ease of monitoring the effectiveness of the remediation. Administrative
feasibility addresses the degree of procedural difficulty anticipated for each alternative in
permitting and institutional requirements.
Alternative 9 would be the easiest to implement, followed by Alternative 10, with
Alternative 9 being the more reliable. The implementability of Alternatives 5 and 6 is
difficult to assess without the results of a pilot study, although this process has proven
feasible at a variety of other hazardous waste sites. Nevertheless, the complexities involved
in onsite treatment would make implementation of Alternatives 5 and 6 more involved than
the other alternatives.
9.2.5 Estimated Costs
Consistent with EPA guidance, the cost analysis for each alternative consisted of an
order-of-magnitude estimation (accurate to a range from +50% to -30%) of capital, O&M
and present worth costs determined for 30 years at a 7 percent discount rate. Table 9-1
summarizes trie estimated costs and time required to implement for the range of alternatives.
The estimates are based onquotes from vendors and contractors, conventional cost estimating
guides, generic unit prices, and prior experience in the area. They are intended as a guide in
evaluating the alternatives based on information available at the time of the estimate. Actual
costs would depend on true labor and material costs, final scope, schedule, and actual site
conditions.
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 52
-------
Table 9-1
Estimated Costs of Remedial Alternatives
Arctic Surplus Salvage Yard
Fairbanks, Alaska
Alternative. ' ;V;
I No Remedial Action
2 Institutional Controls, Monitoring,
;ind Off-Site Soil Removal
3 Capping and Off-Site Soil
Removal
4 Consolidation and Capping
5 Solvent Extraction and On-Site
Solidification/Stabilization
6 Solvent Extraction and On-Site
Solidification/Stabilization of Hot- .
Spot Soils, with Consolidation and
Capping of Remaining Soils
7 (Eliminated From Consideration)
8 (Eliminated From Consideration)
9 Off-Site Treatment and Disposal
10 Off-Site Treatment and Disposal of
Hot-Spot Soils, with Consolidation
and Capping of Remaining Soils
.-." " '/'Estimated Costs (Millions of Dollars. .
< \Costto: '
Build ;
$0
$0.3
$8^5
$8.8
$ 16.8
$ 14.0
--
-
$ 17.6
$ 15.4
Operation &
t\ .Maintenance
$0
$2.9
$ 2.6
$ 2.7
$2.7
$ 2.7
'
-
$ 2.0
S2.5
3Q-Year:;Present
. Worth Cost8
$0
S 1.5
$9.6
S 10.0
$17.9
S 15.1
-
-
S 18.6
S 16.4
Implementation
Time Frqme ( ,'
0
1 month
8 months of
operations over a
16 month period
9 months of
operations over a
25 month period
11 months of
operations over a
25 month period
12 months of
operations over a
28 month period
--
-
1 1 months of
operations over a
27 month perio'd
1 1 months of
operations over a
27 month period
'aThc 30-year present worth is the total cost over 30 years in terms of today's dollars.
-------
The costs for the various alternatives range from $1.5 million for Alternative 2
(institutional controls and monitoring and off-site soil removal) to $18.6 million for
Alternative 9 (complete off-site disposal). The least expensive of the alternatives that are
responsive to the cleanup standards is Alternative 3 (capping), which is estimated to cost
$9.6 million. Alternatives 5 and 6 (onsite treatment) are estimated to cost $17.9 million and
$15.1 million, respectively, and Alternative 10 (partial off-site disposal) is estimated to cost
$16.4 million. Alternative 6 is the least expensive alternative over a projected 30 years of
operation.
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 54
-------
9.3 Modifying Criteria
The modifying criteria are used in the final analysis of remedial alternatives and are
generally considered in altering an otherwise viable alternative rather than deciding between
very different alternatives. .The two modifying criteria are state acceptance and community
acceptance.
9.3.1 State Acceptance
The State of Alaska, Department of Environmental Conservation, has been involved
with the review of the Remedial Investigation, Feasibility Study, and Proposed Plan for the
site. The State concurs with the treatment options of Alternatives 5 and 6 because they
provide for more permanence and a preference for treatment than simply capping the
contaminated soil. The treatment alternatives provide nearly the same protection to health
and the environment as disposal of contaminated soil off site (Alternatives 9 and 10). A
concurrance letter from the state is included in Appendix B.
9.3.2 Community Acceptance
EPA carefully considered the comment submitted during the public comment period.
The EPA response to the comment is included in the attached Responsiveness Summary.
The single comment was from one of the PRPs. The local community has been kept
informed throughout the process by fact sheets and meetings.
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 55
-------
10.0 THE SELECTED REMEDY
EPA has selected Alternative 6, Hot Spot Soil Treatment, Consolidation, and
Capping, as the Selected Remedy for the Arctic Surplus Site as a result of the alternative
evaluation in Section 9.0. This alternative protects human health and the environment and is
one of only two alternatives that results in the decontamination of a significant volume of
soil. Furthermore, it is the most cost effective when compared to other alternatives that
involve treating or excavating soil with the same or greater contaminant levels.
Excavating contaminated soil arid treating for the PCBs (TSCA waste) and lead
(RCRA waste) allows for the treated soils to be consolidated on site. Treatment of the PCB
soil by a solvent extraction process will reduce the concentration of PCBs below the TSCA
and state regulated control of 50 mg/kg. The lead will be treated by
solidification/stabilization to keep it from failing the RCRA characteristic test (TCLP) for
lead. By treating the contaminated soils, the consolidated soils that will be placed under the
protective low^permeability cap will not be subject to RCRA hazardous wastes disposal
requirements, nor State of Alaska Hazardous and Chemical Wastes disposal regulations. The
design of the capped area will meet RCRAUrfd state standards for solid and chemical waste
landfills. The exposed soil remaining after the clean up will meet the cleanup standards for
residential use outside of the current fence and industrial use for the area inside the current
fence. The soil on the surface of the cap will be clean and access to the containment area
will be restricted by new fencing to prevent breaching of the cap and exposing the treated
and consolidated soils which could represent a source for recontamination of the site.
None of the alternatives included removal of the scrap metal or other
useable/recyclable material that is currently on the site, since this material was not a source
of the contaminants. The only way to allow for the continued use of this material was to
make it accessible in an area which will not interfere with completed remedial actions.
Therefore, the decontamination of the scrap by soil removal and moving it to "clean" soil
areas was a consideration in the selection of this remedy and other alternatives. The
industrial use classification of the site will allow operational access to the salvageable
material. The consolidated and capped area will occupy only small section of the site.
10.1 Description of the Selected Remedy
For the Selected Remedy, (illustrated in Figures 10-1 and 10-2), soil containing PCBs
above 50 mg/kg (Hot Spot) will be treated by solvent extraction, solidified/stabilized if
necessary for lead contamination, consolidated and placed over the old military landfill and
capped. The PCB contaminated soil that is treated will have to be treated to below 50 mg/kg
to be considered treated. Soil with PCB concentrations between 10 and 50 mg/kg (or
between 1 and 50 mg/kg for soil outside of the fence) will not require treatment by solvent
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 56
-------
Drain Field
Fill Area
1. Site plan is adapted from drawing provided by
Alaska District, Corps of Engineers, Anchorage,
Alaska.
2. Extent of contamination is based on
concentrations detected in soil samples
collected from 1989 through 1993.
3. See Figure 4-4 and Section 4.2.6 for debris
relocation approach.
0
fee
100
=d=
200
Scale in Feet
MW-E
LEGEND
Area Containing COPCs in Soil
Above the PRGs
Area Containing COPCs at Levels
Requiring Treatment
Approximate Extent of Soils to be
Excavated and Treated On Site
Approximate Extent of Soils to be
Excavated and Transported Off Site
for Treatment/Disposal
Approximate Extent of Soil to be
Excavated and Consolidated On Site
Existing Monitoring Well to be
Abandoned
Arctic Surplus Salvage Yard
Fairbanks, Alaska
Figure 10-1
REMEDIAL ACTION REQUIREMENTS
-------
MW-5623
120 Ft.
MW-5625
'
MW:5807
Stormwater
Infiltration Basin
80'Wx230'Lx4'D
Sloped Stormwater
Trench Drain
25'Wx1'to3'D
"Y"t I
33% Slope '!
with Riprap *.
400 A.
1 a'Q ravel
1'Riprap on 3:1 Infiltration Layer
Sloped Area
Extent ol
"OldMilitaryLanoliir
J3 _ Slormwalflf
Infillration Basin
Site plan is adapted from drawing
provided by Alaska District, Corps of
Engineers, Anchorage, Alaska.
8- 6'Gravel Armor Qfound Sw
V-3'Sill Sloped 10
Infiltration Baiin
Armored with Gravel
CAP CROSS SECTION
r = 4ff Vertical
I' = 200' Horizontal
(Vertical Exaggeration > So)
LEGEND
s» Approximate Extent of Excavated
&9 Area Replaced with Clean Backfill
0 Existing Monitoring Well to be
MW-H ^secl 'or Gfoundwater Monitoring
ffi New Monitoring Well to be Used
w for Groundwater Monitoring
Arctic Surplus Salvage Yard
Fairbanks, Alaska
Figure 10-2
SITE CLOSURE CONDITIONS
-------
extraction, but may require stabilization for other contaminants prior to consolidation and
capping.
Lead in soil within the fenced area greater than 1000 mg/kg (Hot Spot) will be treated
by solidification/stabilization. Lead in soil outside the fenced area greater than 400 mg/kg
will be excavated and consolidated in the onsite containment unit. Small amounts
(concentrations below cleanup standards) of other soil contaminants that are commingled with
the Hot Spot soil will be treated in the same processes. The organics will be treated by
solvent extraction, and the other inorganics will be stabilized/solidified, prior to consolidation
and capping. The soil that is left on the surface after the excavation of the contaminated soil
will be tested for all COCs before any backfilling, etc. can be done. Pesticide- (part of
Primary Drum Storage areas and area K, Figure 2-1) and dioxin/furan-contaminated (at
location of removed Incinerator #1, Figure 2-1) soil that was identified in several small areas
will be transported off site to a RCRA-permitted facility for treatment and disposal by
incineration. For more detail on the cleanup standards, see Section 7.2.
The main components of the Selected Remedy are listed and then are described
below:
> Relocation and processing, including decontamination, of salvage material and debris
that must be moved to provide access to the contaminated site soil;
> Excavation of contaminated soil and stockpiling for treatment or disposal. Soils
outside of the current fenced area with contaminant concentrations above 400 mg/kg
lead or 1 mg/kg PCBs; and soils inside the fenced area with concentrations above
1000 mg/kg lead, 10 mg/kg PCBs, or chlorinated dioxin/furans above risk-based
levels of concern will be excavated;
» Treatment of contaminated soil exceeding 50 mg/kg PCBs by solvent extraction, and
solidification/stabilization of soils exceeding 1000 mg/kg lead. Pesticides and
dioxin/furans will be transported to an offsite permitted disposal facility;
»> Consolidation of both the contaminated and treated Hot Spot soils into a containment
area over the old, closed landfill located in the southwestern part of the site;
> Capping of the soil in the containment area and the existing landfill with a TSCA
chemical waste landfill cap; and,
* Institutional controls including long-term groundwater monitoring, operation and
maintenance of the fences and cap; and restrictions to prevent use of groundwater, to
maintain a current industrial use, and to prevent any unauthorized access or use of the
capped area.
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 59
-------
10.1.1 Debris Relocation and Material Processing
Debris and salvage material relocation is part of the remedy. Since much of the
contaminated soil lies beneath piles of scrap metal and recyclable/useable material, the scrap
must be moved, and decontaminated if necessary, to allow access to the contaminated soils.
Metal and debris relocation areas will have to be defined on the work plans. All relocations
must be to areas that are not contaminated above cleanup standards.
10.1.2 Soil Excavation
After surface debris relocation, excavation of contaminated soil with concentrations
above the cleanup standards will be accomplished in stages in any given area. Initially, the
first six inches of soil and any remaining debris will be removed from areas found to be
contaminated by previous sampling or additional soil testing. Field contaminant screening of
the excavated area will be performed to determine whether the remaining soil 'is below the
cleanup standards. Both field screening and confirmation laboratory analyses will be
performed to demonstrate attainment of cleanup standards. The excavated soil will be
screened to remove oversize material, and then stockpiled for on-site treatment and/or
disposal. Oversized material will have to be decontaminated or consolidated in the
containment area to be left on site. Pesticide- and dioxin/furan-contaminated soil will be
disposed off site.
10.1.3 Onsite Treatment, Containment, and Disposal
It is anticipated that treatment of the contaminated soil will not begin until the second
field season, and will continue in the third field season of the remedial action. The
contaminated soil exceeding 50 mg/kg PCBs will be treated on site. The contaminated soil
that does not exceed 50 mg/kg PCBs may be consolidated on site, but potentially will require
stabilization for the commingledJead contamination.
The soil treatment will consist of a two-step process; solvent extraction and
solidification/stabilization. A small scale treatability study was done to verify the
effectiveness of solvent extraction process on the site soils. The solvent extraction process
uses a solvent to separate contaminated soil into contaminated PCB oil, water, and solid
fractions. The solvent is recycled in the process, and the oil with PCBs and organics will be
shipped off site to be incinerated at a permitted facility. Recovered water is of a distilled
quality and can be discharged or used to adjust the moisture content of the treated soil, as
necessary, for solidification/stabilization. The solid fraction would be consolidated as a
RCRA treated waste (for PCBs) in the onsite containment area.
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 60
-------
The second step in the treatment process involves mixing a standard construction
binder and water with the dry soil derived from the solvent extraction step and lead
contaminated soils that were not treated by the solvent extraction process. This mixing
process is to stabilize and/or solidify the lead (and other inorganics) contaminated soils. The
putpose is to reduce the leachability of the lead so that it does not fail the TCLP test. The
treated, stabilized/solidified soil will be analyzed to confirm that it is no longer a RCRA
"characteristic waste". Clean water will be added to the treatment process only to enhance
the hydration and compactability of the soil. Once treated, the stabilized soil will be placed
over the old military landfill and adjoining area to solidify. Clean fill will be placed over it
and sloped to drain in preparation for construction of the soil cap.
Stabilization has been most widely successful when applied to inorganic waste
streams. The waste slurry or sludge may be pretreated to adjust pH and insolubilize heavy
metals, thereby reducing their mobility. The high alkalinity of most cements and setting
agents will serve to neutralize acidic leachate, keeping heavy metals in their insoluble, less
mobile form.
Critical parameters in stabilization treatment include selection of stabilizing agents and
other additives, the waste-to-additive ratio, mixing, and curing conditions. All of these
parameters depend on the chemical and physical characteristics of the waste, and will be
adjusted to suit site soil conditions during full-scale testing.
10.1.3.1 RCRA Land Disposal Restrictions Treatability Variance
PCBs alone are not considered hazardous under RCRA, however the RCRA Land
Disposal Restrictions (LDRs) do address PCBs under the California List provisions in.cases
where PCBs are mixed with a waste that is hazardous under RCRA. Under the RCRA LDR
regulations, non-liquid hazardous wastes containing halogenated organic carbon (HOC) total
concentrations greater than 1000 parts per million (ppm) must be incinerated, or obtain a
Treatability Variance (40 CFR 268.44), prior to land disposal. PCBs are on the list that
defines HOCs subject to the California List requirements. Consequently, soils at Arctic
Surplus contaminated with PCB concentrations equal to or above 1000 ppm, that are also
RCRA characteristic wastes for lead (RCRA waste code D008), are banned from land
disposal unless the soil is first incinerated or qualifies for a treatability variance.
»
The NCP and EPA guidance state that a Treatability Variance is available to comply
with the LDRs when a Superfund waste differs significantly from the waste used to set the
LDR treatment standard such that the best demonstrated available technology used to set the
standard is inappropriate for the waste. The LDRs for the California list wastes are based on
treating less complex matrices of industrial process wastes, not soil. In addition, incinerating
large qualities of soil with high levels of lead and PCBs is inappropriate because such
treatment can result in unacceptably high levels of lead emissions.
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 61
-------
The Selected Remedy will comply with the LDRs for HOCs (PCBs) through a
Treatability Variance for the contaminated soil. The selected PGB treatment process will
treat all PCB contaminated soil so that the soil will contain less than 50 mg/kg PCBs after
treatment. This level of treatment will ensure at least a 95% reduction of the PCBs for soil
subject to the California List requirements. This percentage reduction in PCB concentrations
is consistent with the percentage reduction range listed in Highlight 2 of EPA guidance
document Superfund LDR Guide #6A (2nd Edition): Obtaining a Soil and Debris Treatability
Variance for Remedial Actions, OSWER Number 9347.3-06FS, September 1990. No
Treatability Variance is being granted for characteristic lead LDR standard, nor for the non-
soil solvent extracted treatment residual.
10.1.3.2 TSCA ARARs and TSCA Waiver of Chemical Waste Landfill
Requirements
The applicable TSCA requirements for the soils at the Arctic Surplus site require that
any non-liquid PCBs at concentrations of 50 ppm or greater be disposed of in a TSCA-
approved incinerator, or in a TSCA approved chemical waste landfill (40 CFR 761.60(a)(4)),
or by a TSCA approved alternative disposal method (40 CFR 761.60(e)). The alternative
disposal methods can be used without long-term management of treatment residuals if the
alternative disposal method can be shown to achieve a level of performance equivalent to
incineration. EPA's guidance states that an equivalent level of performance requires that the
solid treatment residuals contain less than or equal to 2 ppm PCBs,.using a total waste
analysis. Because the treated soil at this site will achieve a level of 50 ppm or less of PCBs,
long-term management of the treated soil will be required. Such long term management of
the treated soil needs to be considered, under the TSCA regulatory framework, as closure of
an existing-unit consistent with TSCA chemical landfill requirements.
The TSCA chemical waste landfill requirements (40 CFR 761.75(c)(4)) allow a
waiver of any of the requirements as long as operation of the landfill will not present an
unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment. This selected remedy will be
complying with following TSCA landfill requirements through a TSCA waiver: the
requirement for a bottom liner, depth to groundwater, leachate collection system; and surface
water monitoring. Such a waiver is appropriate at this site because only soils with relatively
low concentrations (less than 50 ppm PCBs) will require long-term management. In
addition, the selected remedy includes: solidification/stabilization of the treated soil;
implementation of a groundwater monitoring program; design, installation and maintenance
of a protective cover system; restricted access; fencing; and land use and institutional
controls. This remedy is protective of human health and the environment; complies with
EPA's guidance on long-term management controls of PCBs at Superfund sites; and will not
present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment.
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summarv 62
-------
10.1.4 Capping
The consolidated excavated soil and cap will be configured to occupy the southwest
corner of the site, leaving the remainder of the site available for industrial use (Figure 10-2).
The low-permeability cap will be constructed to cover all of the consolidated soil and the
underlying old military landfill. It will be constructed in accordance with state and federal
chemical waste landfill disposal regulations. A schematic cross section of a soil cap is shown
in Figure 10-2. A 2-foot-thick silt layer (low permeability layer) will be placed directly over
the stabilized soil. The silt (with possible soil amendments) will be compacted to provide a
permeability of 10"7 cm/sec or less. (The low permeability layer may also be accomplished
by a geomembrane material with the same permeability criteria. A geomembrane may have
specific layers of select soils on either side of the membrane to protect it from puncture.)
An 18-inch-thick armoring and erosion control layer of pit run gravel will be placed over the
low permeability layers. The outermost part of the cap will be sloped at 33 percent to
reduce the overall footprint and to make the cap less useable (less likely to be used for
storage of salvage materials). This slope will be covered with a one-foot thick layer of
riprap for erosion protection. The cap will be designed for the extreme freeze-thaw cycles
that can exist in this area.
Runoff water (noncontact with the stabilized, consolidated soils) from the cap will be
directed through the gravel to a lined perimeter drain. This drain will be sloped to an
infiltration basin designed to contain the typical maximum runoff event. The basin will be
located downgradient from the old military landfill to prevent the cap runoff from recharging
to the aquifer directly upgradient of the landfill.
By placing the containment area over the old landfill, the cap will be just as effective
for the old landfill as it will be for the consolidated, stabilized soil.
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 63
-------
10.1.5 Institutional Controls, Operations, and Maintenance
Institutional controls limiting future land use will be part of this remedy. Deed
restrictions, covenants, local ordinances, or other methods may be used to prohibit future
residential use of the entire site within the current fence. Institutional controls may also be
used to prohibit any future use of the capped area without proper state environmental agency
(ADEC) approval. Also, a restriction may be necessary to prohibit groundwater use in parts
of the aquifer that contain site-derived contaminants at concentrations above the health-based
or MCL standards. The conceptual design of this remedy utilizes excavation of contaminated
soils, treatment, and consolidation of treated residual soils to reduce any unacceptable health-
based exposure and allows for access to most of the site. Having the treated soils in a
compact, consolidated area allows for easier inspection and maintenance of the capped area.
The existing site fence will provide sufficient access control for those parts of the site
where industrial use will be permitted. However, new fencing will be installed to control
access to the capped area. These fences will be periodically inspected and maintained to
restrict access. The landfill cap and stormwater drainage/infiltration system will also require
periodic inspection and maintenance to preserve their effectiveness in preventing direct
exposure to treated soil and in reducing the amount of infiltration through the treated soil and
landfill.
10.2 Groundwater Monitoring
Approximately eight wells, as shown in Figure 10-2, will be monitored regularly on
an EPA approved schedule, with the possible addition of new monitoring wells (not shown)
in the area downgradient from the northwest corner of the site and downgradient from the
landfill. A Long-Term Groundwater Monitoring Plan will have to be developed as part of
the Operations and Maintenance Plan to provide details of the groundwater monitoring
schedule, who will be implementing the monitoring, and how modifications, including new
monitoring wells, to the program can be made. If contaminants are detected in groundwater
outside of the fence at concentrations greater than Federal Drinking Water Standards, EPA
will be notified and the effectiveness of the remedial action will be evaluated.
It is assumed that groundwater monitoring will be continued for 30 years. This
period could be shortened or lengthened depending on the groundwater monitoring results or
the general condition of the site based on site performance reviews.
Site performance reviews will be required no less than every five years because
hazardous materials will remain on site. These reviews will evaluate the effectiveness of the
remedy and will include a review of the cap maintenance records and performance, changes
in land use near the site, and the groundwater monitoring results. The purpose of the these
Arx-tic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 64
-------
reviews will be to evaluate the adequacy of the site to protect human health and the
environment, in accordance with CERCLA 121 (c).
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 65
-------
11.0 STATUTORY DETERMINATIONS
The selected remedy satisfies the requirements under Section 121 of CERCLA and the
NCP. The following sections discuss how the selected remedy meets these requirements.
11.1 Protective of Human Health and the Environment
The selected remedy is protective of human health and the environment. The current
points of exposure include residential use through ingestion and inhalation of contaminated
soil off-site and industrial exposures through ingestion and inhalation of contaminated soil
inside the existing fence. Through treatment and containment, the selected remedy will
reduce the concentrations of soil contamination to levels acceptable under federal and state
guidelines.
The groundwater from outside the facility currently does not pose a risk to human
health or the environment. Monitoring will be performed to ensure that the site does not
pose a risk to offsite groundwater from migrating contaminants.
11.2 Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements
The action-specific, chemical-specific, and location-specific applicable or relevant and
appropriate requirements (ARARs) for the selected remedy are:
* 40 CFR 261, RCRA Subtitle C Hazardous Waste Determination is applicable
for identifying soil that must managed as hazardous waste.
» 40 CFR 264, Standards for Owners and Operators of Hazardous Waste Treat-
ment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities is applicable to the treatment of RCRA
characteristic waste (i.e., lead).
» 40 CFR 268, RCRA Land Disposal Restrictions is applicable
and establishes the treatment levels that must be achieved prior
to land disposal of:
- RCRA characteristic waste (i.e., lead); and,
- California List waste (i.e., nonliquid hazardous waste containing
halogenated organic compounds [HOCs] in total concentrations greater
than or equal to 1,000 mg/kg). The LDRs.for the California List
Wastes will be met through the RCRA Land Disposal Restriction
Treatability Variance (see Section 10.1.3)
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 66
-------
40 CFR 258 Subpart F, Criteria for Municipal Solid Waste
Landfills is applicable for onsite landfill closure and post-closure
care.
40 CFR 761.60 and 761.75, TSCA PCB Disposal Requirements
and Chemical Waste Landfill Requirements is applicable to
onsite disposal of PCB-contaminated soil.
40 CFR 141, Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) Maximum
Contaminant Levels (MCLs) is relevant and appropriate for
establishing protective groundwater criteria.
40 CFR 300.440, Procedures for Planning and Implementing
Offsite Response Actions is applicable to the offsite management
of CERCLA waste.
18 AAC 60.410, Alaska Solid Waste Management Regulations is applicable
for landfill closure.
The To-Be-Considered requirements for the selected remedy are:
» 40 CFR 761.120(c)(4)(v), TSCA PCB Spill Cleanup Policy is a
to-be-considered criteria for cleanup of PCB-contaminated soil.
* EPA's Revised Interim Soil Lead Guidance for CERCLA Sites
presents to-be-considered criteria for selection of cleanup
standards of lead-contaminated soil.
» Alaska Interim Guidance for Non-UST Soil Cleanup Levels
present to-be-considered criteria for selection of cleanup
standards of contaminated soil.
+ EPA's Superfund LDR Guide #6A Obtaining, a Soil and Debris
Treatability Variance for Remedial Actions, present to-be-
considered criteria for selection of alternative LDR treatment
levels for land disposal of California List waste (i.e., nonliquid
hazardous waste containing halogenated organic compounds
[HOCs] (PCBs at Arctic Surplus) in total concentrations greater
than or equal to 1.000 mg/kg).
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 67
-------
11.3 Cost Effectiveness
The selected remedy represents the most cost-effective of the alternatives in
comparison to their overall effectiveness proportional to their costs. The selected remedy is
not the least expensive, but does provide the best long-term permanence and risk protection
by reduction of toxicity by use of treatment. This is considered the most effective solution
given the costs of removal for offsite disposal.
11.4 Utilization of Permanent Solutions and Alternative Treatment Technologies to the
Maximum Extent Practicable
The United States Environmental Protection Agency, and the State of Alaska
determined that the selected remedy represents the maximum extent to which permanent
solutions and treatment technologies can be used cost-effectively at the Arctic Surplus Site.
Of those alternatives that are protective of human health and the environment and comply
with ARARs, EPA and ADEC have determined that the selected remedy provides the best
balance of trade-offs in terms of long-term effectiveness and permanence; reduction in
toxicity, mobility, or volume achieved through treatment; short-term effectiveness;
implementability; cost; and the statutory preference for treatment as a principle element and
considering state and community acceptance.
11.5 Preference for Treatment as a Principal Element
The selected remedy satisfies the statutory preference for treatment by utilizing
treatment as a main method to permanently reduce the toxicity, mobility, and volume of
contaminated soil. Solvent extraction will reduce PCB toxicity and volume of the
contaminated soil. Solidification/stabilization of the lead contaminated soil will reduce the
motility of lead in the environment.
11.6 Modifying Criteria
There were no changes between the Preferred Alternative that was submitted for
public comment in the Proposed Plan and the Selected Remedy.
Arctic Surplus ROD
Decision Summary 68
-------
RECORD OF DECISION
FOR
FINAL REMEDIAL ACTION
ARCTIC SURPLUS SUPERFUND SITE
FAIRBANKS, ALASKA
APPENDIX A
RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARY
SEPTEMBER 1995
-------
RECORD OF DECISION
ARCTIC SURPLUS SUPERFUND SITE
APPENDIX A
RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARY
The purpose of this responsiveness summary is to summarize and respond to public
comments submitted regarding the Proposed Plan for. the remedy at the Arctic Surplus
Superfund site located near Fairbanks, Alaska. The public comment period for the Proposed
Plan was held from July 14 through August 14, 1995.
This responsiveness summary meets the requirements of Section 117 of the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980
(CERCLA) as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986
(SARA).
The Proposed Plan, issued July 11, 1995, by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) described the various cleanup alternatives that were considered for the clean
up of the Arctic Surplus site. These cleanup alternatives were based on information collected
during the EPA Removal actions and during the Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study
(RI/FS) actions conducted at the site. The purpose of the various actions was to develop
knowledge about the site so that problems could be identified, stabilized, controlled, and
mitigated using the Superfund processes. The RI/FS documents and Proposed Plan were
available in two official information repositories; at the EPA Region 10 office in Seattle, and
at the Defense Reutilization Marketing Office (DRMO) at Ft. Wainwright, across Badger
Road from the site. A copy of the Proposed Plan, or a Fact Sheet describing the availability
of the Proposed Plan both with the announcement of the public meeting was mailed to the list
of interested parties developed as part of the Community Relations Plan.
A public meeting to discuss the range of alternatives and EPA's preferred alternative
for the clean up of the Arctic Surplus site was held at the North Pole High School on July
26, 1995. Notice of the public comment period and meeting were published in the Fairbanks
Daily News Miner on July 19, 1995. No comments, on the Proposed Plan were received at
the meeting. Written comments from the Defense Logistics Agency, a Potentially
Responsible Party (PRP), were received during the public comment period. The EPA
response to these comments follows.
Arctic Surplus ROD
Responsiveness Summary
-------
Comment on Proposed Plan's Preferred Alternative
The Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) commented on EPA's proposed Alternative 6
as the preferred alternative in the Proposed Plan. DLA is asking that EPA reconsider
Alternative 4 because they suggest that it would provide the same benefits to the community
as Alternative 6 at a cost savings. The comment goes on to identify five ways that
Alternative 4 would provide similar benefits as the EPA's Preferred Alternative. The
primary difference between Alternative 4 and Alternative 6 is the treatment process that
would be applied to the contaminated site soil. The comment suggests that the treatment
process would increase costs, increase time to implement with an increase in potential short-
term exposures during construction, and increase complexity because of the treatment
technology and associated uncertainty involved with its implementation.
EPA Response to Comment
Federal regulations specify that a less effective cleanup action cannot be chosen
simply because it is cheaper. However, if several alternatives are considered to be equally
effective, EPA may select the least costly one.
EPA considers Alternate 4 less effective in protecting human health, welfare, and the
environment than the preferred alternative, Alternative 6, as described in the Feasibility
Study (FS) and Proposed Plan. EPA selected Alternative 6 because the solvent extraction
treatment process would permanently reduce the toxicity and volume of PCBs left in the
environment, and the stabilization/solidification treatment of the lead contaminated site soil
would significantly reduce the mobility of the lead contained onsite. Stabilization and
solidification processes generally increase the volume of the soil being treated, but this has
been accounted for in the estimated size of the containment area. Both of these treatment
processes would enhance the long-term permanence of the remedial actions. The remedial
actions in Alternative 6 also satisfy the statutory preference for remedies that employ
treatment that reduce toxicity, mobility, or volume as a principal element and utilize
permanent solutions and alternative technologies to the maximum extent practicable. Both of
these treatment processed would be employed on contaminated soil that exceed health-based
and regulatory contaminant concentrations.
Alternative 4 does not appear to satisfy ARARs. Excavation of soils containing PCBs
involks TSCA disposal requirements (40 CFR 76l.60(a)) which requires disposal in a
chemical waste landfill. Consolidation does not qualify as treatment for a TSCA landfill
waiver. If the PCB concentration in the soil is greater than 50 ppm then the Alaska chemical
waste landfill regulation may become relevant and appropriate.
The removal of toxicity and reduction of mobility of contaminants is preferable to
simply consolidating and capping the contaminated soils. Although the consolidation and
Arctic Surplus ROD
Responsiveness Summary
-------
capping actions are similar for both Alternatives 4 and 6, the treated soils would be less
harmful to human health or the environment than the untreated soils. The treated soils
would present less impact over the long-term from leaching and any direct exposure if the
cap were breached. The treatment processes destroys PCBs and almost irreversibly reduces
the mobility of lead, thereby permanently reducing the principal threats at the site.
The soil treatment processes do raise the cost of the site clean up, but EPA, in
consultation with other agencies, has determined that Alternative 4 does not provide the same
level of protectiveness as the preferred alternative, Alternative 6. EPA has also determined
that the increased cost of treatment will allow for some reduced operations and maintenance
costs since neither Resource, Conservation, and Recovery Act (RCRA) characteristically
listed hazardous wastes, nor wastes containing Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)
regulated concentrations of PCBs would be contained in the consolidated containment unit.
Alternative 4 would not reveive a TSCA landfill waiver nor comply with the Alaska chemical
waste landfill regulations which would translate into higher design and construction costs
than estimated in the FS because RCRA and TSCA regulated wastes would be contained
onsite.
The preferred alternative will require more time to implement and increase the
potential short-term exposures during construction. Treatment processes are more complex
than simply excavating and consolidating contaminated soil; however, solvent extraction and
stabilization/solidification are proven technologies that have been successfully implemented at
Superfund sites. A bench scale treatability study was done on contaminated site soils to
evaluate the effectiveness of the solvent extraction process.
EPA believes that the increase in cost of Alternative 6 when compared with
Alternative 4 is easily justified by the increased long-term permanence and reduction of
toxicity and mobility of the site contaminants mitigated in the preferred alternative.
The primary reason that Alternative 4 cannot be selected is that it does not comply
with ARARs and is therefore not sufficiently protective to human health or the environment
as those remedies which comply with ARARs.
Arctic Surplus ROD
Responsiveness Summary
-------
RECORD OF DECISION
FOR
FINAL REMEDIAL ACTION
ARCTIC SURPLUS SUPERFUND SITE
FAIRBANKS, ALASKA
APPENDIX B
STATE OF ALASKA
CONCURRENCE WITH REMEDY
SEPTEMBER 1995
-------
"rl. -Y\ : ;-.; .1 .
-'" ' 1 : ' -.- C"
OEC-0* 1995
DEPT. OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION SUPERFUNT
OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER Telephone: 465-5066
410 Willoughby Ave., Suite 105 Fax: 465-5070
Juneau, AK 99801 -1795
November 28, 1995
Mr. Chuck Clarke
Regional Administrator, Region 10
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98101
Re: Record of Decision, Arctic Surplus Salvage Yard
Dear Mr. Clarke:
The Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation has reviewed the Record of
Decision for the Arctic Surplus Salvage Yard located on Badger Road in Fairbanks, Alaska. We
have been involved with the development of the cleanup solutions for the site during our review
of the removal actions, remedial investigations, and feasibility study. We concur with the
selected remedy which was presented to the public for review and comment. Concurrence by the
Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation does not in any way constitute acceptance of
responsibility, financial or otherwise, for achieving the remedial design/remedial action goals.
We recognize that contaminants will remain on the site, because removal is not cost
effective. However, the treatment processes that will be employed during the cleanup phase will
provide for long term protection of human health and the environment.
We are looking forward to the cleanup activities at this site.
Sincerely,
Gene Burden
Commissioner
KK\LK\ha(G:\csites\sites\arctic.rod)
cc: Neil Thompson, EPA Seattle
Kalu A. Kalu, ADEC
Jennifer Roberts, ADEC
-------
RECORD OF DECISION
FOR
FINAL REMEDIAL ACTION
ARCTIC SURPLUS SUPERFUND SITE
FAIRBANKS, ALASKA
APPENDIX C
INDEX TO THE
ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD
SEPTEMBER 1995
-------
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 10
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98101
ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
for
ARCTIC SURPLUS
SUPERFUND SITE
Fairbanks, Alaska
September 25, 1995
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
.HEADING: 1.0. . SITE IDENTIFICATION
SUB-HEAD: 1.1: . Correspondence
1. 1. . - 0000001
DATE: 02/28/89 PAGES: 9
AUTHOR: David Bennett/United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
ADDRESSEE: Lynn Tomich-Kent/Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation
DESCRIPTION: Memo and transmittal of corrections to Arctic Surplus Site
Inspection
1. 1. . - 0000002
DATE: 03/20/89 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Lynn Tomich-Kent/Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation
DESCRIPTION: Transmittal memo for corrections to Arctic Surplus Site
Investigation
SUB-HEAD: 1. 5. . Site Inspection Report/Documents
1. 5. . - 0000001
DATE: / / PAGES: 55
AUTHOR: Unknown/Ecology & Environment, Inc.
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation
(ESCRIPTION: Site Investigation at McPeak Salvage Yard
1. 5. . - 0000002
DATE: 12/01/88 PAGES: 500
AUTHOR: Unknown/Ecology & Environment, Inc.
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Alaska Department- of Environmental Conservation
DESCRIPTION: Site Inspection Report for McPeak Salvage Yard, Volume II.
SUB-HEAD: 1. 7. . HRS/NPL Scoring Package
1. 7. - 0000001
DATE: 10/26/89 PAGES: 7 . .
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Federal Register, Part V Environmental Protection Agency, Vol. 54,
No. 206
1. 7. . - 0000002
DATE: 08/30/90 PAGES: 25
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Federal Register, Part II Environmental Protection Agency,. Vol. 55
No. 169
09/25/95 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
HEADING: 3. 0. . 1990 REMOVAL
SUB-HEAD: 3. 1. . Supplemental 1990 Removal Documents Related to RI/FS
3. 1. . - 0000001
DATE: / / PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Michael Miille/Enseco
ADDRESSEE: Jack Hezig/OHM
DESCRIPTION: Letter of transmittal for Enseco-Cal Lab's Statement of
Qualifications and Experience
3.1. . - 0000002
DATE: / / PAGES: 4
AUTHOR: Unknown/ABS Alaskan
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Packaging Procedure for Spent Lead Acid Batteries, Electric
Storage, Wet, Filled with Acid
3. 1. - 0000003
DATE: / / PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: John Sainsbury/EPA
ADDRESSEE.: Roscoe Davis/DLA
DESCRIPTION: EPA acceptance of the DOD/DLA generated primary documents
pertaining to the Arctic Surplus Removal Action
3. 1. . - 0000004
DATE: / / PAGES: 4
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Air Sample Number Prefix for OHM
3. 1. . - 0000005
DATE: / / .PAGES: 11
AUTHOR: Unknown/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: EPA/TAT review comments for the Alaska District Corps of Engineers
Work Plan for Monitoring Well Installation and Associated Soil and
Water Sampling
3. 1. - 0000006
DATE: / / PAGES: 250
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Arctic Surplus Incident Action Plan
09/25/95 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 . Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
3. 1. - 0000007
DATE: 04/10/90 PAGES: 8
AUTHOR: Richard Fullner/Ecology & Environment, Inc.
ADDRESSEE: Carl G. Kitz/EPA
'-"DESCRIPTION: Transmittal of removal tasks for Arctic Surplus
." 3. 1. . - 0000008
DATE: 04/16/90 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Robert Flanagan/Department of the Army
ADDRESSEE: John Sainsbury/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Notice that the Inventory Project Report for the Arctic Surplus
site is scheduled for approval
3. 1. . - 0000009
DATE: 05/18/90 PAGES: 33
AUTHOR: Richard Fullner/Ecology & Environment, Inc.
ADDRESSEE: Carl G. Kit2/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Transmittal of the Site Safety Plan for the site visit scheduled
for 05/22/90
3.1.. - 0000010
DATE: 05/30/90 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: H. O. Everitt/Department of the Army
ADDRESSEE: John Sainsbury/EPA
)ESCRIPTION: Request for project background, data
3. 1. . - 0000011
DATE: 06/11/90. PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Unknown/Texas Research institute Austin, Inc.
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Arctic Fire Equipment
DESCRIPTION: Compressor Analysis Results using Padi Pure Air Specifications
3. 1. . - 0000012
DATE: 06/15/90 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Richard Fullner/Ecology & Environment, Inc.
ADDRESSEE: Carl G. Kitz/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Letter of transmittal for the Arctic Surplus work plan for the 1985
removal
3. 1. . - 0000013
DATE: 06/15/90 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Richard Brooks/Ecology & Environment, inc.
ADDRESSEE: William Bonneau/Corps of Engineers
. DESCRIPTION: Letter of transmittal for the 1989 removal work plan for Arctic
Surplus
09/25/95 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
3. 1. . - 0000014
DATE: 06/15/90 PAGES: 86
AUTHOR: Unknown/Corps of Engineers
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/DLA
"DESCRIPTION: Revised Draft Work Plan for Monitoring Well Installation and
Associated Soil & Water Sampling
3. 1. . - 0000015
DATE: 06/26/90 PAGES: 7
AUTHOR: John Jacobson/DLA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Memorandum for Record regarding a meterological station for Arctic
Surplus Salvage Yard
3. 1. - 0000016
DATE: 07/09/90 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: William McGee/State of Alaska
ADDRESSEE: Earl Romans/Alaskan Battery Enterprises
DESCRIPTION: Follow up to RCRA inspection performed on 05/08/90 stating that th
portion of the facility inspected was found to be in compliance
3. 1. - 0000017
DATE: 07/11/90 PAGES: 3
AUTHOR: S. L. Carlock/Department of the Army
ADDRESSEE: John Sainsbury/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Transmittal of Arctic Surplus Salvage Yard List of Applicable
Guidance
3. 1. - 0000018
DATE: 07/13/90 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: S. L.- Car lock/Department of the Army
ADDRESSEE: John Sainsbury/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Letter of transmittal for primary documents submitted for review
3. 1. . - 0000019
DATE: 07/16/90 PAGES: 18
AUTHOR: Richard Brooks/Ecology & Environment, Inc.
ADDRESSEE: John Sainsbury/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Transmittal of Book 1 of 3 Air Monitoring Plan
3. 1. - 0000020
DATE: 07/16/90 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Jerome Woods/Department of the Army
ADDRESSEE: John Sainsbury/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Notice of a preconstruction conference to be conducted on 07/33X90
09/25/95 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
3.1.. - 0000021
DATE: 07/18/90 PAGES: 4
AUTHOR: Richard Brooks/Ecology & Environment, Inc.
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Transmittal of review comments for OHM Corporation Air Monitoring
Plan
3. 1. . - 0000022
DATE: 07/19/90 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: S. L. Carlock/Department of the Army
ADDRESSEE: John Sainsbury/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Notice of an On-Board Review meeting to be held in Omaha On
07/25/90
3. 1. . - 0000023
DATE: 07/23/90 PAGES: 4
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Chronology of Major Events of Arctic Surplus Removal - 1990
3. 1. - 0000025
DATE: 07/23/90 PAGES: 90
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Organic Analysis Data Package
3. 1. . - 0000024
DATE: 07/24/90 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Richard Bruden/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: John Sainsbury/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Letter expressing concerns about the Army's conduct in relation to
Arctic Surplus activities
3. 1. . - 0000026
DATE: 07/26/90 PAGES: 35
AUTHOR: Unknown/Ecology & Environment, Inc..
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Existing Site Safety Plan Addendum Form
3. 1. . - 0000027
DATE: 07/26/90 PAGES: 7
AUTHOR: Unknown/Corps of Engineers
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Subsurface Investigation '
09/25/95 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
3. 1. . - 0000028
DATE: 07/30/90 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: POLREP #1, July 30 - August 10, 1990
3. 1. . - 0000029
DATE: 08/01/90 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: S. L. Carlock/Department of the Army
ADDRESSEE: John Sainsbury/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Letter of transmittal for final primary documents provided for
review
3. 1. . - 0000030
DATE: 08/06/90 PAGES: 3
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Sampling date for Arctic Surplus Salvage Yard Removal, 1990
3. 1. . - 0000031
DATE: 08/07/90 PAGES: 4
AUTHOR: Patricia Manning/Hager Laboratories
ADDRESSEE: Andy Majewski/OHM Corporation
DESCRIPTION: Analysis results for seven membrane filter samples for fiber
3. 1. - 0000032
DATE: 08/08/90 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Analysis results for five membrane filter samples and three blanks
for fiber count
3. 1. - 0000033
DATE: 08/08/90 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Patricia Manning/Hager Laboratories
ADDRESSEE: Robert Handley/OHM Corporation
DESCRIPTION: Analysis results for five membrane filter samples for fiber count
3. 1. . - 0000034
DATE: 08/11/90 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: POLREP /2
09/25/95 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
3. 1. . - 0000035
DATE: 08/11/90 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Earl Romans/Alaskan Battery Enterprises
ADDRESSEE: John Sainsbury/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Letter regarding approval of three requests
3. 1. . - 0000036
DATE: 08/13/90 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Unknown/Hager Laboratories
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Tables 1 and 2 listing sample number and air volume for SN 49428IH
3. 1. . - 0000037
DATE: 08/13/90 PAGES: 97
AUTHOR: Linda Vadura/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Steve Dawson/Corps of Engineers
DESCRIPTION: Summary of Air Monitoring Activities from 07/23/90 to 08/07/90
3. 1. - 0000038
DATE: 08/15/90 PAGES: 50
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Air Monitoring Report from 08/15/90 to 08/21/90
3.1.. - 0000039
DATE: 08/15/90 PAGES: 4
AUTHOR: Patricia Manning/Hager Laboratories
ADDRESSEE: Andrew Majewski/OHM Corporation
DESCRIPTION: Analysis results for two membrane filter samples for fiber count
3. 1. . - 0000040
DATE: 08/16/90 PAGES: 58
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Steve Dawson/Corps of Engineers
DESCRIPTION: Air Monitoring Report from 08/08/90 to 08/14/90
3. 1. . ' - 0000041
DATE: 08/20/90 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: POLREP #3, August 20 - 25, 1990
09/25/95 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
3.1. . - 0000042
DATE: 08/20/90 PAGES: 4
AUTHOR: Patricia Manning/Hager Laboratories
ADDRESSEE: Andrew Majewski/OHM Corporation
DESCRIPTION: Analysis results for one membrane filter sample for fiber count
3. 1. . - 0000043
DATE: 08/21/90 PAGES: 4
AUTHOR: Unknown/Hager Laboratories
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Tables 1 and 2 listing sample number and air volume for SN 49443IH
and SN 49456IH
3. 1. - 0000044
DATE: 08/22/90 PAGES: 41
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Air Monitoring Report from 08/22/90 to 08/28/90
3. 1. . - 0000045
DATE: 08/27/90 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: POLREP #4, August 27 - September 1, 1990
3. 1. - 0000046
DATE: 08/29/90 PAGES: 54
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Air Monitoring Report from 08/29/90 to 09/04/90
3. 1. . - 0000047
DATE: 09/01/90 PAGES: 16
AUTHOR: Unknown/Ecology & Environment, Inc.
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Technical Assistance Team Sampling Plan
3. 1. . - 0000048
DATE: 09/01/90 PAGES: 3
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Handwritten summary of positive hits
09/25/95 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
3. 1. - 0000049
DATE: 09/03/90 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: POLREP #5, September 3-7, 1990
3. 1. - 0000050
DATE: 09/10/90 PAGES: . 1
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: POLREP #6, September 10 - 14, 1990
3. 1. - 0000051
DATE: 09/12/90 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: John Sainsbury/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Ecology & Environment, Inc.
DESCRIPTION: Notice that the EPA command post will be located on private
property adjacent to the site
3. 1. - 0000052
DATE: 09/17/90 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: POLREP #7, September 17 - 21, 1990
3. 1. . - 0000053
DATE: 09/21/90 PAGES: 4
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Sampling dates for Arctic Surplus Salvage Yard Removal, 1990
3. 1. - 0000054
DATE: 09/24/90 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: POLREP #8, September 24 - 28, 1990
3, 1. . - 0000055
DATE: 09/26/90 PAGES: 68
AUTHOR: Unknown/GSX Services of California
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Transportation Safety Plan
09/25/95 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
3. 1. . - 0000056
DATE: 09/26/90 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Unknown/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Field Sample Data and Chain of Custody Sheet
3. 1. . - 0000057
DATE: 09/29/90 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: William Carberry/Ecology & Environment, Inc.
ADDRESSEE: Carl G. Kitz/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Letter of transmittal for the sampling plan
3. 1. . - 0000058
DATE: 09/29/90 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: POLREP #9, September 29 - October 5, 1990
3. 1. . - 0000059
DATE: 10/06/90 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown .
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: POLREP #10, October 6 - 12, 1990
3. 1. . - 0000060
DATE: 10/11/90 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: John Jacobson/DLA
ADDRESSEE: John Sainsbury/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Letter regarding return of EPA keys to the security fence gates
during final inspection on 10/11/90
3. 1. . - 0000061
DATE: 10/15/90 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: POLREP #11, October 15 - 24, 1990
3. 1. - 0000062
DATE: 10/26/90 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: John Jacobson/DLA
ADDRESSEE: John Sainsbury/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Summary of on-site activities completed for the Arctic Surplus
Removal Action
09/25/95 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
3. 1. - 0000063
DATE: 11/08/90 PAGES: 7
AUTHOR: William Carberry/Ecology & Environment, Inc.
ADDRESSEE: Kathy Talbert/Alaska Department of Transportation
DESCRIPTION: Transmittal of soil sample data and location map of samples
collected along Badger Road
3. 1. - 0000064
DATE: 11/26/90 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Delwyn Thomas/Unknown .
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Memo regarding chemical data reports for Arctic Surplus site
.3.1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000065
12/26/90 PAGES: 5
John Erve/Ecology & Environment, Inc.
Richard Brooks/Ecology & Environment, Inc.
Memo regarding PCB Data Quality Assurance Review
3. l.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000066
01/14/91 PAGES: 11
William Carberry/Ecology & Environment, Inc.
Carl G. Kitz/EPA
Transmittal of a summary of groundwater sample data, sample
location maps, and Chain of Custody forms
3. i.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000067
01/23/91 PAGES: 1
Carl Lautenberger/EPA
John Sainsbury/EPA
Memo regarding COE waste disposal problem with three rail cars of
waste oil that were transported offsite during the summer cleanup
3.1..
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000068
02/08/91 PAGES: 1
Wayne Rowe/Department of the Army
John Sainsbury/EPA
Letter of transmittal for Chemical Data Reports from sampling of
monitoring wells at the Arctic Surplus site
3.1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000069
02/20/91 PAGES: 20
Unknown/Unknown
Unknown/Unknown
Chemical Quality Assurance Report for Arctic Surplus site, Round 2
09/25/95
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
.3.1. . - 0000070
DATE: 05/21/91 PAGES: 23
AUTHOR: Cecil Gore/OHM Corporation
ADDRESSEE: Leroy Bohnet/DRMS
DESCRIPTION: Transmittal of Waste Profile Sheet
3. 1. . - 0000071
DATE: 10/02/91 PAGES: 7
AUTHOR: John DiPietro/DRMS
ADDRESSEE: John Sainsbury/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Fax transmittal of request for an extension for completion of the
OHM Final Report for the Removal Action
09/25/95 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
HEADING: 4.0. . 1991 REMOVAL
SUB-HEAD: 4.1. . Supplemental 1991 Removal Documents
4. 1. - 0000015
DATE: / / PAGES: 250
AUTHOR: Unknown/Ecology & Environment, Inc.
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Ecology & Environment, Inc.
DESCRIPTION: Appendix C (continued), Data Quality Assurance Review Memoranda
4.1. .
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000016
/ / PAGES: 250
Unknown/Ecology & Environment, Inc.
Unknown/Ecology & Environment, Inc.
Appendix C (continued), Data Quality Assurance Review Memoranda
4. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000001
06/23/91 PAGES:
John Sainsbury/EPA
Unknown/Unknown
Polrep #7
4.1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000002
06/24/91 PAGES:
John Sainsbury/EPA
Unknown/Unknown
Polrep #8
4. 1. .
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000003
06/25/91 PAGES:
John Sainsbury/EPA
Unknown/Unknown
Polrep #9
4.1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000004
08/24/91 PAGES:
John Sainsbury/EPA
Unknown/Unknown
Polrep #11
4.1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000005
08/27/91 PAGES:
John Sainsbury/EPA
Unknown/Unknown
Polrep #12
09/25/95
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
4. 1. . - 0000006
DATE: 08/29/91 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: John Sainsbury/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
'DESCRIPTION: Polrep #13
4. 1. - 0000007
DATE: 08/31/91 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: John Sainsbury/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Polrep #14
4. 1. - 0000008
DATE: 09/04/91 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: John Sainsbury/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Polrep #15
4. 1. . - 0000009
DATE: 09/05/91 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: John Sainsbury/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Polrep #16
4. 1. . - 0000014
DATE: 01/08/92 PAGES: 700
AUTHOR: Unknown/Ecology & Environment, Inc.
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Ecology & Environment, Inc.
DESCRIPTION: Appendix C, Data Quality Assurance Review Memoranda
4. 1. - 0000010
DATE: 03/01/92 PAGES: 53
AUTHOR: Unknown/Ecology & Environment, Inc.
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/EPA
DESCRIPTION: On-Scene Coordinator's Report for Arctic Surplus 1991
4.1. . - 0000011
DATE: 03/01/92 PAGES: 223
AUTHOR: Unknown/Ecology & Environment, Inc.
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Continuation of the Arctic Surplus 1991 On-Scene Coordinator's
Report
09/25/95 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
4. 1. . - 0000012
DATE: 03/19/92 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: William Carberry/Ecology & Environment, Inc.
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Letter of transmittal for the On-Scene Coordinators report
4. 1. . - 0000013
DATE: 03/31/92 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: William Carberry/Ecology & Environment, Inc.
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Letter of transmittal for the Quality Assurance review addendum to
Table 3 and Appendix C and Quality Assurance review document for
data contained in Table 2
4.1. . - 0000017
DATE: 01/08/93 PAGES: 4
AUTHOR: Unknown/Ecology & Environment, Inc.
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Excerpt from a report, 7.4 Buried Material Exploration Results
09/25/95 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Page 1!.
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
HEADING: 6. 0. . REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION/FEASIBILITY STUDY (RI/FS)
SUB-HEAD: 6.1. . Correspondence
6. 1. . - 0000001
DATE: 08/30/83 PAGES: 5
AUTHOR: Douglas Lowery/Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation
ADDRESSEE: Roger McPeak/Unknown .
DESCRIPTION: Letter and transmittal of Solid Waste Permit with Specific Permit
Conditions and General Permit Conditions
6. 1. - 0000002
DATE: 09/12/91 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Ellen Hale/EPA
ADDRESSEE: John DiPietro/Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service
DESCRIPTION: Letter confirming meeting with representatives of the Defense
Logistics Agency on 10/16/91 in Seattle
6.1.. - 0000003
DATE: 10/10/91 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Cynthia Mackey/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Tamela Tobia/Department of the Army
DESCRIPTION: Confirmation of meetings scheduled in Seattle on 10/21-22/91
6. 1. - 0000004
DATE: 10/16/91 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: John Sainsbury/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Charles Parliment/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Invitation to discuss the Arctic Surplus site during a visit to
Fairbanks on 10/23/91
6. 1. . - 0000005
DATE: 10/16/91 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: John Sainsbury/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Carl Pederson/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Invitation to discuss the Arctic Surplus site during.a visit to
Fairbanks on 10/23/91
6. 1. . - 0000006
DATE: 10/16/91 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: John Sainsbury/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Roger McPeak/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Confirmation of a meeting on 10/23/91 during a visit to Fairbanks
09/25/95 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
1. . - 0000007
DATE: 10/16/91 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: John Sainsbury/EPA
Charlotte Maskey/Unknown
Confirmation of a meeting on 10/23/91 during a visit to Fairbanks
6.
ADDRESSEE
DESCRIPTION
6. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000008
01/02/92 PAGES: 12
Robert Wrentmore/Department of the Army
Ellen Hale/EPA
Letter and transmittal of unsigned draft of the Defense
Environmental Restoration Program Formerly Used Defense Sites
Findings and Determination of Eligibility
6. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000009
02/24/92 PAGES: 1
Ellen Hale/EPA
John DiPietro/DRMS
Letter proposing a meeting in Seattle to conduct negotiations
associated with the Arctic Surplus site
6.1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000010
02/27/92 PAGES: 4
John DiPietro/DRMS
Ellen Hale/EPA
Handwritten request for documents requested in attached letter fro:
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
6. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000011
02/28/92 PAGES: 1
Ellen Hale/EPA
John DiPietro/DRMS
Letter confirming correct dates for an upcoming meeting on April 1
and 2, 1992
6. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000012
05/13/92 PAGES: 2
Judy Malmquist/DRMS
Cynthia Mackey/EPA
Letter to confirm an understanding that the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers' Memorandum for the DRMS Commander is a preliminary
document and not a final work plan
09/25/95
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
6. 1. . - 0000013
DATE: 06/01/92 PAGES: 3
AUTHOR: Ellen Hale/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Clare Jaeger/Corps of Engineers
DESCRIPTION: Summary of a telephone call on 05/28/92 and transmittal of
documents provided to help in preparing Quality Assurance plans ar
needs
6.1. . - 0000014
DATE: 06/05/92 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Ellen Hale/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Jim Baker/Corps of Engineers
DESCRIPTION: Handwritten note transmitting the Region 10 Data Management Packag
6. 1. . - 0000015
DATE: 06/10/92 ' PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Judy Malmquist/DRMS
ADDRESSEE: Cynthia Mackey/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Letter offering assistance of the Public Affairs Officer for the
RI/FS portion of the cleanup
6. 1. . - 0000016
DATE: 06/18/92 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Ellen Hale/EPA
ADDRESSEE: John DiPietro/DRMS
DESCRIPTION: Summary of a conference call on 06/17/92
6. 1. - 0000017
DATE: 06/26/92 PAGES: 14
AUTHOR: Ellen Hale/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Jim Baker/Corps of Engineers
DESCRIPTION: EPA comments on the Work Plan and Quality Assurance Project Plan
for the Soil and Groundwater Contamination Survey 1992
6.1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000018
06/29/92 PAGES: 1
Ellen Hale/EPA
John DiPietro/DRMS
Letter transmitting the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease
Registry Preliminary Public Health Assessment
6. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000019
07/07/92 PAGES: 1
Carol Rushin/EPA
John DiPietro/DRMS
Letter acknowledging plans to collect soil samples at the Arcl
Surplus site for screening evaluation of treatment technologie
09/25/95
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
6. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000020
07/09/92 PAGES: 1
Ellen Hale/EPA
John DiPietro/DRMS
Conditional approval of the Sampling Plan for Technology Evaluation
6. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000021
07/10/92 PAGES: 1
Ellen Hale/EPA
John DiPietro/DRMS
Letter transmitting the revised Statement of Work and Schedule of
Deliverables for the Arctic Surplus Remedial Investigation and
Feasibility Study
6. 1. . - 0000022
DATE: 07/20/92 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: J. W. Eggenberger/DRMS
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Response to a letter of 06/18/92 regarding storage of suspected
dioxin contaminated material
6. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000023
07/28/92 PAGES: 2
Claude Vining/Department of the Army
Ellen Hale/EPA
Notification of a meeting and site visit scheduled on August 18,
19, and 20, 1992
6. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000024
07/28/92 PAGES: 1
Claude Vining/Dept. of the Army
Ellen Hale/EPA
Notification of the proposed primary contractor and known
subcontractors to be used in conducting the Remedial
Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS)
6. l.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000025
OB/07/92 PAGES: 1
Judy Malmquist/DRMS
Cynthia Mackey/EPA
Letter requesting clarification of the State of Alaska's role in
the cleanup under the National Contingency Plan
09/25/95
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Page
1'
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
6. 1. . - 0000026
DATE: OB/17/92 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: List of attendees at a meeting held 08/17/92
6. 1. . - 0000027
DATE: 08/25/92 PAGES: 4
AUTHOR: Ellen Hale/EPA
ADDRESSEE: John DiPietro/DRMS
DESCRIPTION: Summary of points discussed during a recent site visit (two
enclosures attached)
6. 1. . - 0000028
DATE: OB/26/92 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Ellen Hale/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Jim Baker/Corps of Engineers
DESCRIPTION: Letter regarding receipt and review of requested laboratory
information
6. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000029
OB/27/92 PAGES: 2
Claude Vining/Department of the Army
Ellen Hale/EPA
Proposed schedule for the 1992 Extent of Contamination Survey
performed by the Corps of Engineers
6. 1. . - 0000030
DATE: 10/16/92 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: John DiPietro/DRMS
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Fax cover sheet and attached record of telephone conversation
between John DiPietro, Kathy Matlin, and Dave Bloom on 10/05/92
6. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000031
11/05/92 PAGES: 1
Michelle Pirzadeh/EPA
Carol Simpson/DRMS
Letter transmitting the draft revised Community Relations Plan and
requesting comments
6. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
0000032
12/01/92
PAGES:
21
Unknown/PTI Environmental Services (PTI)
Unknown/EPA .
Draft Comments on Three Technical Memoranda Regarding the RemeJ
Investigation and Feasibility Study for the Arctic Surplus Site
09/25/95
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
6. 1. . - 0000033
DATE: 12/17/92 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: List of attendees at a meeting held 12/17/92
6..1. . - 0000034
DATE: 12/18/92 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Ellen Hale/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Jim Baker/Corps of Engineers
DESCRIPTION: Transmittal letter for documents requested by the Defense Logistic
Agency
6. 1. . - 0000035
DATE: 12/23/92 PAGES: 17
AUTHOR: Jim Zitnik/Shannon & Wilson
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Fax cover sheet and attached overheads used in a recent
presentation to summarize the 1992 data
6. 1. - 0000036
DATE: 01/08/93 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: List of attendees at a Phase II RI/FS meeting held 01/08/93
6. 1. . - 1040112
DATE: 05/13/93 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Unknown/
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/
DESCRIPTION: Agenda for a conference scheduled on 05/13/93
6. 1. - 1040113
DATE: 09/09/93 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Ellen Hale/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Jim Baker/Alaska District Corps of Engineers
DESCRIPTION: Letter regarding review of the revised draft of the Phase II Work
Plan for Arctic Surplus Salvage Yard, Fairbanks, Alaska
SUB-HEAD: 6. 2. . Scoping Meetings/Documentation
6.2. . - 0000001
DATE: 11/01/91 PAGES: 33
AUTHOR: Unknown/PTI
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Scoping Memorandum
OB/25/95 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Page 2.
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
6. 2. . - 0000002
DATE: 11/12/91 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Ellen Hale/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown /Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Memorandum requesting involvement in scoping the RI/FS and notice
of a meeting to be held 11/18/91
6. 2. - 0000003
DATE: 11/18/91 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Unknown /EPA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/ Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Agenda for RI/FS Scoping Meeting 11/18/91
6. 2. . - 0000004
DATE: 11/21/91 PAGES: 7
AUTHOR: Ellen Hale/EPA
File/Unknown
Meeting Summary for RI/FS Scoping (Confidential portion of the
Administrative Record filed in the Arctic Surplus Remedial site
file section 22.1 at EPA Region 10 Headquarters, Superfund Branch,
Seattle, WA)
ADDRESSEE
DESCRIPTION
6. 2. - 0000005
DATE: 12/02/91 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Marsha Lee /EPA
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Comments on the Arctic Surplus Scoping Memorandum
6. 2. - 0000006
DATE: 03/25/92 PAGES: 7
AUTHOR: Marsha Lee /EPA
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Comments on the Final Air Monitoring Report dated 11/05/91
6. 2. - 0000007
DATE: 03/30/92 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Bill Ryan/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Response to PRP comments on the need for air modeling for the RI/F
6. 2. - 0000008
DATE: 03/31/92 PAGES: 3
AUTHOR: Stephen Whittaker/PTI
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Letter regarding identification of Contaminants of Primary
09/25/95
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
6. 2. - 0000009
DATE: 05/07/92 PAGES: 7
AUTHOR: Marcia Knadle/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Letter regarding observations and recommendations following reviev
of existing information on the Arctic Surplus Superfund site
SUB-HEAD: 6. 3.
Water Quality Monitoring Data
6. 3. - 0000001
DATE: 10/01/91 PAGES: 295
AUTHOR: Unknown/Corps of Engineers
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Chemical Data From Groundwater Monitoring
6.3. . - 0000002
DATE: 03/19/92 PAGES: 9
AUTHOR: Robert MeIton/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Quality Assurance review and comments on the Data Summary Report
for Groundwater Monitoring
6. 3.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000003
06/03/92 PAGES: 290
Jim Baker/Corps of Engineers
Ellen Hale/EPA
Transmittal of the Chemical Data Report for the 1991 groundwater
monitoring program
6. 3.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000007
01/13/93 PAGES: 500
Joy Rogalla/Radian Corporation
Ellen Hale/EPA
Transmittal of the data validation package for groundwater sample
ASSW103WA collected for the Arctic Surplus RI/FS
6.3.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000004
01/15/93 PAGES: 1
Unknown/EPA
Unknown/Unknown
Chain of Custody Record for Arctic Surplus Private Well Retest on
01/13/93
OB/25/95
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
6. 3. - 0000005
DATE: 01/19/93 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Daniel Gillespie/Applied Research & Development Laboratory (ARDL)
ADDRESSEE: Timothy Seeman/Corps of Engineers '"
DESCRIPTION: Letter transmitting ARDL's report on analysis of samples received
on 01/15/93
6. 3. - 0000006
DATE: 01/19/93 PAGES: 35
AUTHOR: Unknown/ARDL
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: ARDL Report No. 9344, Corps of Engineers - Portland District,
Arctic Surplus Site
6. 3. - 0000008
DATE: 01/19/93 PAGES: 35
AUTHOR: Unknown/ARDL, Inc.
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: ARDL Report No. 9344 regarding Inorganic Analysis Data Package
6. 3.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000009
02/08/93 PAGES: 10
Donald Matheny/EPA
Ellen Hale/EPA
Transmittal of Data Validation Report of Lead Analysis of Samples
from Arctic Surplus
6. 3. - 0000010
DATE: 02/12/93 PAGES: 500
AUTHOR: James Zitnik/Shannon and Wilson
ADDRESSEE: Jim Baker/Corps of Engineers
DESCRIPTION: Transmittal of Technical Memorandum on Chemical Data from the 1992
Soil and Groundwater Contamination Survey
SUB-HEAD: 6. 5. 1.
6. 5.
Draft Plans, Reviews
1. - 0000001
DATE: 10/01/89 PAGES: 5
AUTHOR: Unknown/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Excerpts from the Handbook of Suggested Practices for the Design*
and Installation of Ground-Water Monitoring Wells
09/25/95
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
6. 5. 1. - 0000002
DATE: 09/01/91 PAGES: 200
AUTHOR: UnJcnown/NET Atlantic Inc.
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: NET Atlantic, Inc., Thorofare Division Laboratory Quality Assuranc
Plan
6. 5. 1. - 0000003
DATE: 09/01/91 PAGES: 250
AUTHOR: Unknown/NET Atlantic, Inc.
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Attachments to the Laboratory Quality Assurance Plan
6. 5. 1. - 0000028
DATE: 10/24/91 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Ahmed Halouma/Martin Marietta Energy Systems
ADDRESSEE: Kathy Ford/Naval Energy and Environmental Support Activity
DESCRIPTION: Pre-approval of NET Atlantic-Thorofare Division Laboratory
6. 5. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
pESCRIPTION:
- 0000029
02/25/92 PAGES: 2
Ahmed Halouma/Martin Marietta Energy Systems
Kathy Ford/Naval Energy and Environmental Support Activity
Additional approval of NET Atlantic-Thorofare Division Laboratory
for the Naval Shipyard Philadelphia site
6. 5. 1. - 0000004
DATE: 05/13/92 PAGES: 29
AUTHOR: Unknown/Corps of Engineers
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Part I, Work Plan for the Investigation of Dioxin Contaminated Soi:
6. 5. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000005
05/13/92 PAGES: 34
Unknown/Corps of Engineers
Unknown/Unknown
Part III, Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Investigation of
Dioxin Contaminated Soil
6. 5. 1. - 0000006
DATE: 05/28/92 PAGES: 6
AUTHOR: Robert Melton/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Quality Assurance comments on the Work Plan and Quality Assurance
Project Plan for Investigation of Dioxin Contaminated Soil
09/25/95
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
6. 5. 1. - 0000007
DATE: 05/28/92 PAGES: 112
AUTHOR: Unknown/Corps of Engineers
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Draft Work Plan: Part I, Sampling and Analysis Plan for Soil and
Groundwater Contamination Survey, 1992
6. 5. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000009
05/28/92 PAGES: 19
Unknown/Corps of Engineers
Unknown/Unknown
Work Plan: Part III Quality Assurance Project Plan for Soil and
Groundwater Contamination Survey, 1992
6. 5. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000008
05/29/92 PAGES: 52
Unknown/Corps of Engineers
Unknown/Unknown
Work Plan: Part II Site-Specific Health and Safety Plan for Soil
and Groundwater Contamination Survey, 1992
6. 5. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000010
06/16/92 PAGES: 2
Cathe Bell/EPA
Ellen Hale/EPA
Review of the Health and Safety Plan for the Investigation of
Dioxin Contaminated Soil
6. 5. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000011
06/16/92 PAGES: 7
Robert Melton/EPA
Ellen Hale/EPA
Quality Assurance comments on the Sampling Plan and Quality
Assurance Project Plan for Groundwater Contamination Survey
6. 5. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000012
06/17/92 PAGES: 2
Marcia Knadle/EPA
Ellen Hale/EPA
Comments on the Work Plan: Part I Sampling and Analysis Plan for
Soil and Groundwater Contamination Survey
6. 5. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000013
06/23/92 PAGES: 6
Robert Melton/EPA
Ellen Hale/EPA
Quality Assurance comments on the E & E Sampling Plan and QualT
Assurance Project Plan as they relate to the Army COE's plans for
the site
09/25/95
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
6. 5. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000014
07/01/92 PAGES: 5
Edward Armstrong/Department of Environmental Conservation
Claude Vining/Department of the Army
Review of Work Plans for the 1992 Soil and Groundwater
Contamination
6. 5. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR;
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000015
07/07/92 PAGES: 2
Donald Matheny/EPA
Ellen Hale/EPA
Comments on the Sampling Plan for Arctic Surplus, Fairbanks,
Alaska, Alaska District Corp of Engineers, 06/29/92
6. 5. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000017
07/21/92 PAGES: 36
Unknown/Corps of Engineers
Unknown/Unknown
Work Plan: Part III Quality Assurance Project Plan for Soil and
Groundwater Contamination Survey, 1992
6. 5. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000016
07/22/92 PAGES: 38
Unknown/Corps of Engineers
Unknown/Unknown
Revised Work Plan: Part I Sampling and Analysis Plan for Soil and
Groundwater Contamination Survey, 1992
6. 5. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000018
07/23/92 PAGES: 1
Claude Vining/Department of the Army
Ellen Hale/EPA
Letter transmitting the revised work plan for the 1992 Soil and
Groundwater Contamination Survey
6. 5. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000019
07/31/92 PAGES: 79
Claude Vining/Department of the Army
Ellen Hale/EPA
Letter requesting a meeting to discuss requirements for chemical
data validation and transmittal of the COE regulation on Chemical
Data Quality Management for Hazardous Waste Remedial Activities
09/25/95
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
6. 5. 1. - 0000020
DATE: 08/07/92 PAGES: 8
AUTHOR: Robert Melton/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Quality Assurance comments on the revised Sampling Plan and Qualit
Assurance Project Plan for Soil and Groundwater Contamination
Survey, 1992
6. 5. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION;
- 0000021
08/12/92 PAGES: 1
Unknown/Corps of Engineers
Unknown / Unknown
Arctic Surplus possible compromise construction related to FIGURE
Generalized Schematic Construction of Monitoring Well in Soil
exerpted from Work Plan: Part I
6. 5. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000022
OB/12/92 PAGES: 10
Ellen Hale/EPA
Jim Baker/Corps of Engineers
Comments on the revised Work Plan and Quality Assurance Project
Plan for the Soil and Groundwater Contamination Survey 1992 and
approval based on listed conditions
6. 5. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000023
08/24/92 PAGES: 3
Raleigh Farlow/EPA
Ellen Hale/EPA
Comments on NET Pacific Laboratory's submittal supporting their
program and capabilities
6. 5. l.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000024
08/26/92 PAGES: 3
Raleigh Farlow/EPA
Ellen Hale/EPA
Comments on ARDL, Inc. Laboratory's submittal supporting their
program and capabilities
6. 5. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000025
09/02/92 PAGES: 2
Raleigh Farlow/EPA
Ellen Hale/EPA
Followup review for ARDL, Inc. in support of monitoring at Arctic
Surplus
09/25/95
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Page 2;
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
6. 5. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000026
09/02/92 PAGES: 2
Raleigh Farlow/EPA
Ellen Hale/EPA
Followup review for NET Pacific, Inc. in support of monitoring at
Arctic Surplus
6. 5. 1. - 0000027
DATE: 09/03/92 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Ellen Hale/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Jim Baker/Corps of Engineers
DESCRIPTION: Transmittal letter for two memoranda from EPA Quality Assurance
Management Branch regarding a concern about subcontracting
procedures used by the laboratories
SUB-HEAD: 6. 5. 2.
Final Plans
6. 5. 2. - 0000004
^ DATE: 07/21/92 PAGES: 50
AUTHOR: Unknown/Corps of Engineers
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Work Plan: Part II Site-Specific Health and Safety Plan for Soil
and Groundwater Contamination Survey, 1992
6. 5. 2. - 0000001
DATE: 08/17/92 PAGES: 1 .-
AUTHOR: Mary Slowinski/National Environmental Testing, Inc. (NET)
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Transmittal letter for documents in support of qualifications
6. 5. 2.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000002
OB/20/92 PAGES: 1
Claude Vining/Department of the Army
Ellen Hale/EPA
Letter transmitting the final revised work plan for the 1992 Soil
and Groundwater Contamination Survey
6. 5. 2.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000003
08/21/92 PAGES: 58
Unknown/Corps of Engineers
Unknown/EPA
Work Plan: Part I Sampling and Analysis Plan for Soil and
Groundwater Contamination Survey, 1992
09/25/95
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
. 6. 5. 2.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
. ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000005
08/21/92 PAGES: 34
Unknown/Corps of Engineers
Unknown/EPA
Work Plan: Part III Quality Assurance Project Plan for Soil and
Groundwater Contamination Survey, 1992
6. 5. 2. - 0000006
DATE: 08/27/92 PAGES: 19
AUTHOR: Donald Matheny/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Quality Assurance review and comments on the COE regulation for
Chemical Data Quality Management for Hazardous Waste Remedial
Activities
6. 5. 2. - 0000007
DATE: 08/28/92 PAGES: 6
AUTHOR: Jim Baker/Corps of Engineers
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Fax cover sheet and attached revisions to the Work .Plan
6. 5. 2.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000008
09/01/92 PAGES: 2
Raleigh Farlow/EPA
Ellen Hale/EPA
Documentation review for NET Atlantic, Thorofare Division, in
support of monitoring at Arctic Surplus
6. 5. 2. - 0000009
DATE: 09/02/92 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Ellen Hale/EPA
ADDRESSEE:.Jim Baker/Corps of Engineers
DESCRIPTION: Letter acknowledging receipt of remaining laboratory information
and notification of approval of the COE 1992 Work Plan and Quality
Assurance Project Plan
. 5. 3.
- 0000001
09/04/92
Progress Reports
PAGES:
SUB-HEAD:
6. 5. 3.
DATE:
AUTHOR: Jim Baker/Corps of Engineers
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Fax cover sheet and attached Monthly Report for August, 1992
09/25/95
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
6. 5. 3. - OOOOQ02
DATE: 01/08/93 PAGES: 8
AUTHOR: James Zitnik/Shannon & Wilson
ADDRESSEE: Jim Baker/Corps of Engineers
DESCRIPTION: Transmittal of Monthly Progress Report for December, 1992
SUB-HEAD: 6. 5. 6.
Screening-Level Treatability
6. 5. 6. - 1040114
DATE: 12/01/91 PAGES: 83
AUTHOR: Howard M. Feintuch/Foster Wheeler Enviresponse, Inc.
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/
DESCRIPTION: Engineering Design Forum Assistance Review of Scoping Memorandum
6. 5. 6. - 0000001
DATE: 12/18/91 PAGES: 3
AUTHOR: Michael Royer/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Comments regarding Treatment Technology Selection Aspects of
Scoping Memorandum dated November, 1991
6. 5. 6. - 0000002
DATE: 06/15/92 PAGES: 10
AUTHOR: Joan Mattox/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Fax Cover Sheet transmitting START acceptance form for completion
and revised Sampling Plan
6. 5. 6.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000003
06/29/92 PAGES: 23
Clare Jaeger/Corps of Engineers
Ellen Hale/EPA
Fax cover sheet and transmittal of Arctic Surplus Superfund site
Sampling Plan for Technology Evaluation by USEPA START Program
6. 5. 6.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000004
07/09/92 PAGES: 1
Ellen Hale/EPA
Joan Mattox/EPA
Superfund Technical Assistance Response Team (START)
requesting soil samples be taken on 07/13/92
form
6. 5. 6.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
INSCRIPTION:
- 0000005
07/17/92 PAGES: 22
Claude Vining/Department of the Army
Ellen Hale/EPA
Letter transmitting the final Sampling Plan for Technology
Evaluation by USEPA START Program
09/25/95
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
6. 5. 6. - 0000006
DATE: OB/18/92 PAGES: 12
AUTHOR: Unknown/ EPA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/ Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Field Sample Chain of Custody Record with attachments
6. 5. 6. - 0000007
DATE: 11/17/92 PAGES: 28
AUTHOR: Benjamin Blaney/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Summary of findings and recommendations based on treatability
screening tests and attached final report for Results of the Arctic
Surplus Site Treatability Screening
6. 5. 6. - 0000008
DATE: 01/20/93 PAGES: 5
AUTHOR: Robert Stamnes/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Memorandum transmitting discussion of results from the Remedy
Screening Program for the Arctic Surplus Superfund Site
6. 5. 6. - 1040115
DATE: 02/19/93 PAGES: 7
AUTHOR: Ellen Hale/ EPA
ADDRESSEE: Eugene Harris/ EPA
DESCRIPTION: Memo regarding comments on Treatability Protocols used on Arctic
Surplus Superfund Site Soils
6. 5. 6. - 1040116
DATE: 06/25/93 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Joan Mattox/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Fax transmittal page and attached Table 4 PCB Results for Arctic
Surplus Site
6. 5. 6. - 1040117
DATE: 07/01/93 PAGES: 9
AUTHOR: Benjamin L. Blaney/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Memo regarding recommendation from the Remedy Screening Program
the Arctic Surplus Superfund site and attached final report for th<
results of The Arctic Surplus Site Treatability Screening
SUB-HEAD: 6.5. 7.
Site Visit, 1992
09/25/95
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
6. 5. 7. - 0000001
DATE: 09/23/92 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Christopher Darrah/Shannon & Wilson
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Form transmitting photographs taken during a site visit on
08/19-20/92
SUB-HEAD: 6. 5. 8. Corp of Engineers Field Report
6. 5. 8. - 0000001
DATE: 11/09/92 PAGES: 83
AUTHOR: Jim Baker/Department of the Army
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Transmittal of the October monthly report which includes the Trip
Report for the 1992 Soil and Groundwater Contamination Survey
SUB-HEAD: 6. 6. 3. Deliverables
6. 6. 3. - 0000001
DATE: 08/17/92 PAGES: 42
AUTHOR: Unknown/PTI
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Site Safety Plan - Short Form
6. 6. 3. - 0000002
DATE: 10/01/92 PAGES: 32
AUTHOR: Unknown/PTI
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/PRC, EPA
DESCRIPTION: Field Activities Report, September 1992 Compliance Oversight and
Wipe Sampling
6. 6. 3. - 0000003
DATE: 10/30/92 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Greg Bawden/PTI
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Letter transmitting the Field Activities Report
6. 6. 3. - 0000004
DATE: 11/01/92 PAGES: 50
AUTHOR: PTI/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/PRC, EPA
DESCRIPTION: Quality Assurance Project Plan for Wipe Sample Collection and
Analysis
09/25/95 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
6. 6. 3. - 0000005
DATE: 11/16/92 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Greg Bawden/PTI
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Letter transmitting the Quality Assurance Project Plan
6. 6. 3. - 0000006
DATE: 11/19/92 PAGES: 35
AUTHOR: Greg Bawden/PTI
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Transmittal of the September 1992 wipe sampling event and an
evaluation of the analytical data
6. 6. 3. - 0000007
DATE: 12/16/92 PAGES: 7
AUTHOR: Greg Bawden/PTI
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Transmittal of revised tables summarizing information needs for
human health and ecological risk assessment activities at the
Arctic Surplus site
SUB-HEAD: 6. 7. 2.
Work Plans and Amendments
6. 7. 2. - 1040118
DATE: 06/01/93 PAGES: 53
AUTHOR: Unknown/Ecology and Environment, Inc.
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Split Sampling and Analysis Plan, Quality Assurance Project Plan,.
and Health and Safety Plan for Arctic Surplus Remedial
Investigation Oversight
6. 7. 2. - 1040119
DATE: 06/07/93 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Paul W. Jpnmaire/Ecology and Environment, Inc.
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Letter to confirm that 2 E & E employees who will be working on th>
Arctic Surplus RI/FS are compliant with the training and medical
requirements mandated by OSHA regulation 29 CFR 1910.120
6. 7. 2. - 1040120
DATE: 06/08/93 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Robert G. Melton/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Memo regarding guality assurance review of Final RI/FS Oversight
QAPjP for Arctic Surplus Site
09/25/95
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
6. 7. 2.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 1040121
06/14/93 PAGES: 2
Sheila Fleming/Ecology and Environment, Inc.
Ellen Hale/EPA
Weekly Field Activity Summary for Arctic Surplus RI/FS Oversight
from 06/07/93 through 06/12/93
6. 7. 2.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 1040122
06/22/93 PAGES: 2
Sheila Fleming/Ecology and Environment, Inc.
Ellen Hale/EPA
Weekly Field Activity Summary for Arctic Surplus RI/FS Oversight
from 06/14/93 through 06/18/93
6. 7. 2.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 1040123
06/28/93 PAGES: 2
Sheila Fleming/Ecology and Environment, Inc.
Ellen Hale/EPA
Weekly Field Activity Summary for Arctic Surplus RI/FS Oversight
from 06/21/93 through 06/25/93
6. 7. 2. - 1040124
DATE: 07/01/93 PAGES: 30
AUTHOR: Sheila Fleming/Ecology and Environment, Inc.
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Field Activity Summary and Photographic Documentation for Arctic
Surplus Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study Oversight
6. 7. 2.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 1040125
07/06/93 PAGES: 2
Sheila Fleming/Ecology and Environment, Inc.
Ellen Hale/EPA
Weekly Field Activity Summary for Arctic Surplus RI/FS Oversight
from 06/28/93 through 07/01/93
6. 7. 2. - 1040126
DATE: 09/08/93 PAGES: 7
AUTHOR: Sheila Fleming/Ecology and Environment, Inc.
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Letter and attached Addendum to the Split Sampling and Analysis
Plan, Quality Assurance Project Plan, and Health and Safety Plan
for the Arctic Surplus site
SUB-HEAD: 6. 7. 5.
Status Reports
09/25/95
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Page
3!
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
6. 7. 5. - 0000001
DATE: 11/03/92 PAGES: 6
AUTHOR: James Zitnik/Shannon & Wilson
ADDRESSEE: Jim Baker/Corps of Engineers
DESCRIPTION: Transmittal of the Monthly Report for October 1992
6. 7. 5. - 0000002
DATE: 12/07/92 PAGES: 7
AUTHOR: James Zitnik/Shannon & Wilson
ADDRESSEE: Jim Baker/Corps of Engineers
DESCRIPTION: Transmittal of the Monthly Report for November 1992
SUB-HEAD: 6. 8. 1. Contractor Resumes (October 1992)
6. 8. 1. - 0000001
DATE: 10/06/92 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Claude Vining/Department of the Army
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Letter transmitting names, titles, and qualifications of key
contractor personnel
SUB-HEAD: 6. 8. 2. Interim Debris Plan (October 1992)
6. 8. 2. - 0000002
DATE: 10/16/92 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: J. W. Eggenberger/DRMS
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Request for an extension for submission of the Site Visit Report
6. 8.2. - 0000003
DATE: 10/23/92 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Ellen Hale/EPA
ADDRESSEE: J. W. Eggenberger/DRMS
DESCRIPTION: Approval of request for an extension for submission of the Site
Visit Report subject to listed conditions
6. 8. 2. - 0000001
DATE: 10/27/92 PAGES: 19
AUTHOR: Unknown/Shannon & Wilson
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Interim Debris Inventory and Management Plan
6. 8. 2. - 0000004
DATE: 10/28/92 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Unknown/Shannon & Wilson
. ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Form for transmittal of the Interim Debris Inventory and ManagWffen
Plan
i
09/25/95 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Page 3
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
6. 8. 2. - 0000005
DATE: 11/02/92 PAGES: 13
AUTHOR: Jim Baker/Dept. of the Army
ADDRESSEE: . Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Letter and transmittal of the Arctic Surplus Site Visit Summary
Report
6. 8. 2. - 0000006
DATE: 11/16/92 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: James Zitnik/Shannon & Wilson
ADDRESSEE: Jim Baker/Corps of Engineers
DESCRIPTION: Letter of transmittal for three Technical Memorandums for the
Arctic Surplus Salvage Yard site
SUB-HEAD: 6. 8. 3. Technical Memorandum on Data Quality Objectives
6. 8. 3. - 0000001
DATE: 10/05/92 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Claude Vining/Department of the Army
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Letter regarding a meeting scheduled for review of the Technical
Memorandum on Data Quality Objectives to be held on 12/17/92 in
Seattle
6. 8. 3. - 0000002
DATE: 11/16/92 PAGES: 151
AUTHOR: Unknown/Shannon & Wilson
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Technical Memorandum on Draft Data Quality Objectives and Site
Conceptual Model
SUB-HEAD: 6. 8. 4. Technical Memorandum on Candidate Technologies
6. 8.4. - 0000001
DATE: 11/16/92 PAGES: 51
AUTHOR: Unknown/Shannon & Wilson
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Technical Memorandum on Identification of Candidate Technologies
SUB-HEAD: 6. 8. 5. Technical Memorandum on Preliminary Remedial Action
6. 8. 5. - 1040127
DATE: 11/01/92 PAGES: 36
AUTHOR: Unknown/Shannon & Wilson
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
DESCRIPTION: Technical Memorandum on Preliminary Remedial Action Objectives
09/25/95 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
SUB-HEAD: 6. 8. 6. Monthly Reports
6. 8. 6. - 0000001
DATE: 02/10/93 PAGES: 6
AUTHOR: James Zitnik/Shannon and Wilson
ADDRESSEE: Jim Baker/Corps of Engineers
DESCRIPTION: Transmittal of the Monthly Report for January 1993
6. 8. 6. - 0000002
DATE: 03/10/93 PAGES: 5
AUTHOR: James Zitnik/Shannon and Wilson
ADDRESSEE: Jim Baker/Corps of Engineers
DESCRIPTION: Transmittal of the Monthly Report for February 1993
SUB-HEAD:
8. 7.
Draft RI Work Plan/QAPP/Reviews (February 1993)
6. 8. 7.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
- 0000001
: 02/01/93 PAGES: 550
; Unknown/Shannon & Wilson
: Unknown/Corps of Engineers
DESCRIPTION: Draft Arctic Surplus Salvage Yard Remedial
. Investigation/Feasibility Study
6. 8. 7. - 0000002
DATE: 03/08/93 PAGES: 33
AUTHOR: Ellen Hale/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Jim Baker/Corps of Engineers
DESCRIPTION: Transmittal of EPA comments on the Draft RI/FS Management Plan
prepared by Shannon and Wilson
6. 8. 7. - 1040128
DATE: 04/16/93 PAGES: 8
AUTHOR: James F. Zitnik/Shannon & Wilson
ADDRESSEE: Jim Baker/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
DESCRIPTION: Response to EPA comments regarding revised Management Plan
SUB-HEAD:
8. 8.
Final RI Work Plan
6. 8. 8. - 0000001
DATE: 04/01/93 PAGES: 600
AUTHOR: Unknown/Shannon & Wilson
Unknown/Corps of Engineers
Final Arctic Surplus Salvage Yard Remedial
Investigation/Feasibility Study
ADDRESSEE
DESCRIPTION
09/25/95
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
6. 8. 8. - 1040130
DATE: 09/01/93 PAGES: 147
AUTHOR: Unknown/Shannon & Wilson
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
DESCRIPTION: Phase II Work Plan for Arctic Surplus Salvage Yard
SUB-HEAD: e
6. 8. 9. .
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
8. 9.
Treatability Study
- 0000001
04/01/93 PAGES: 8
Unknown/Shannon and Wilson
Unknown/Corps of Engineers
Treatability Testing Statement of Work for Arctic Surplus Salvage
Yard RI/FS
6. 8. 9. - 0011386
DATE: 08/10/93 PAGES: 5
AUTHOR: Ellen Hale/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Jim Baker/Alaska District Corps of Engineers
DESCRIPTION: Treatability Testing Work Plan - Specific Comments
SUB-HEAD: 6. 8.10.
Containerized Materials Sampling Plan
6. 8.10. - 0011385
DATE: 08/09/93 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Ellen Hale/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Jim Baker/Alaska District Corps of Engineers
DESCRIPTION: Review of July 1993 Draft Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) for
Containerized Ash and Soil, Arctic Surplus Superfund Site,
Fairbanks, Alaska
SUB-HEAD: 6. 8.11.
Technical Reports & Comments (1993 to present)
6. 8.11. - 1040140
DATE: 07/01/93 PAGES: 41
AUTHOR: Unknown/Shannon & Wilson
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
DESCRIPTION: Sampling and Analysis Plan for Containerized Ash and Soil
6. 8.11. - 1040141
DATE: 09/01/93 PAGES: 78
AUTHOR: Unknown/Shannon & Wilson
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
DESCRIPTION: Treatability Study Work Plan Soil Washing. Technology
09/25/95
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
6. 8.11. - 1040151
DATE: 12/01/93 PAGES: 115
AUTHOR: Unknown/Shannon & Wilson
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
DESCRIPTION: Groundwater Monitoring Plan
6. 8.11. - 1040150
DATE: 02/01/94 PAGES: 225
AUTHOR: Unknown/Shannon & Wilson
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
DESCRIPTION: Summary of Sampling and Analysis Results for Containerized Ash and
Soil RI Project Report, 1993 Field Season
6. 8.11.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 1040143
06/01/94 PAGES: 104
Unknown/Shannon & Wilson
Unknown/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Treatability Study Work Plan Soil Washing Technology
6. 8.11.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 1040144
06/01/94 PAGES: 100
Unknown/Shannon & Wilson
Unknown/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Technical Memorandum on the Development of Remedial Action
Objectives and Alternatives
6. 8.11.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 1040149
06/01/94 PAGES: 25
Unknown/Shannon & Wilson
Unknown/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Work Plan for the Disposal of Contaminated Soil, Ash, and Debris
6. 8.11.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 1040145
08/01/94 PAGES: 76
Unknown/Shannon & Wilson
Unknown/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Technical Memorandum on the Comparative Analysis of Alternatives
6. 8.11.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 1040148
09/01/94 PAGES: 48
Unknown/Shannon & Wilson
Unknown/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Treatability Study Work Plan for Solvent Extraction/Fixation
09/25/95
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
6. 8.11. - 1040139
DATE: 12/01/94 PAGES: 120
AUTHOR: Unknown/Shannon & Wilson
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
DESCRIPTION: 1994 Groundwater Monitoring Report
6. 8.11.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 1040142
01/01/95 PAGES: 72
Unknown/Shannon & Wilson
Unknown/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Summary of Solvent Extraction Treatability Study Results for Lead-
and PCB-Contaminated Soil for the Arctic Surplus Salvage Yard
6. 8.11.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 1040138
02/01/95 PAGES: 35
Unknown/Shannon & Wilson
Unknown/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Technical Memorandum for Scoping of Removal Action Design
6. 8.11.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 10.40147
02/01/95 PAGES: 34
Unknown/Shannon & Wilson
Unknown/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Summary Report for the Disposal of Contaminated Soil, Ash, and
Debris
6. 8.11. - 1040146
DATE: 03/01/95 PAGES: 67
AUTHOR: Unknown/Shannon & Wilson
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
DESCRIPTION: 95 Percent Design Submittal Delivery Order Request for Proposal
Arctic Surplus Salvage Yard Drum and Transformer Removal Action
SUB-HEAD: 6. 8.12.
Preliminary Site Characterization Summary
6. 8.12. - 1040134
DATE: 02/01/94 PAGES: 500
AUTHOR: Unknown/Shannon & Wilson
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
DESCRIPTION: Arctic Surplus Salvage Yard Preliminary Site Characterization
Summary Volume I
6. 8.12. - 1040135
DATE: 02/01/94 PAGES: 600
AUTHOR: Unknown/Shannon & Wilson
, ADDRESSEE: Unknown/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
DESCRIPTION: Arctic Surplus Salvage Yard Preliminary Site Characterization
Summary Volume II
09/25/95
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
SUB-HEAD: 6. 9.
Remedial Investigation Report
6. 9. - 1040136
DATE: 05/01/94 PAGES: 700
AUTHOR: Unknown/Shannon & Wilson
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
DESCRIPTION: Remedial Investigation Report Volume I
6. 9. - 1040137
DATE: 05/01/94 PAGES: 900
AUTHOR: Unknown/Shannon & Wilson
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
DESCRIPTION: Remedial Investigation Report Volume II
SUB-HEAD: 6. 9. 1.
6.
Correspondence/Response to Comments
9. 1. - 1040132
DATE: 05/17/94 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Neil E. Thompson/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Sheila Fleming/Ecology and Environment, Inc.
DESCRIPTION: Letter requesting oversight review of the Remedial Investigation
Report submitted by the Potentially Responsible Party's contracto"
6. 9. 1. - 1040133
DATE: 07/27/94 PAGES: 300
AUTHOR: James F. Zitnik/Shannon & Wilson
ADDRESSEE: Jim Baker/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
DESCRIPTION: Replacement pages for the Remedial Investigation Report for the
Arctic Surplus Salvage Yard site and response to comments received
from EPA
SUB-HEAD: 6.10.
Feasibility Study Report
6.10. . - 1040131
DATE: 01/01/95 PAGES: 500
AUTHOR: Unknown/Shannon & Wilson
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/
DESCRIPTION: Feasibility Study Report
SUB-HEAD: 6.10. 1.
Correspondence/Comments
6.10. 1. - 1040453
DATE: 04/28/95 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Ronald G. McCallister/State of Alaska
ADDRESSEE: Neil E. Thompson/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Transmittal letter and attached comments concerning the Feasib
Study
09/25/95
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
6.10. 1. - 1040452
DATE: 05/11/95 PAGES: 3
AUTHOR: Neil E. Thompson/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Ronald G. McCallister/State of Alaska
DESCRIPTION: Letter in response to request for review of the applicable or
relevant and appropriate regulation (ARAR) pertaining to Arctic
Surplus Superfund site
6.10. 1. - 1040454
DATE: 06/19/95 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Paul D. Gates/United States Department of the Interior
ADDRESSEE: Neil E. Thompson/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Letter with comments following review of the Feasibility Study
Report
SUB-HEAD:
6.11.
6.11.
Risk Assessment
- 1040129
DATE: 07/01/94 PAGES: 400
AUTHOR: Unknown/Ecology and Environment, Inc.
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/EPA
DESCRIPTION! Final Baseline Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment
pB-HEAD:
6.12.
Proposed Plan
6.12. . - 1040181
DATE: 07/11/95 PAGES: 13
AUTHOR: Unknown/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/
DESCRIPTION: Proposed Plan for Arctic Surplus Superfund Site at Fairbanks North
Star Borough, Alaska
SUB-HEAD: 6.12. 1.
Comments
6.12. 1. - 1040456
DATE: 08/08/95 PAGES: 3
AUTHOR: Thomas H. Trent/Defense Logistics Agency
ADDRESSEE: Neil Thompson/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Letter with comments on the Proposed Plan for the Arctic Surplus
Superfund site
6.12. 1. - 1040455
DATE: 08/29/95 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Neil E. Thompson/EPA
ADDRESSEE: John DiPietrO/Defense Logistics Agency
DESCRIPTION: Letter stating that EPA will respond to specific comments on the
Proposed Plan in the Responsiveness Summary which will be part of
the final Record of Decision
09/25/95
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
HEADING: 8. 0. . RECORD OF DECISION (ROD)
SUB-HEAD: 8. 1. . Correspondence
8. 1. . - 1040457
DATE: 08/29/95 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Neil E. Thompson/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Kalu Kalu/State of Alaska
DESCRIPTION: Letter requesting review of the draft Record of Decision for Arcti
Surplus Superfund site
SUB-HEAD: 8. 2. . ROD
8. 2. - 1040463
DATE: 09/30/95 PAGES: 150
AUTHOR: Unknown/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/
DESCRIPTION: Record of Decision
09/25/95 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX .
HEADING: 9. 0. . STATE COORDINATION
SUB-HEAD: 9. 1. . Correspondence
9. 1. - 0000001
DATE: 02/21/91 PAGES: 3
AUTHOR: John Sandor/Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation
ADDRESSEE: Dana Rasmussen/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Summary of the State of Alaska's commitment to proceed with plans
to assume greater responsibility for clean up of hazardous waste
sites within the State
SUB-HEAD: 9. 3. . State Guidance
9. 3. - 0000001
DATE: 04/01/92 PAGES: 43
AUTHOR: Unknown/Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation
ADORES S EE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Guidance No. 001 on Recommended Practices for Monitoring Well
Design, Installation, and Decommissioning
09/25/95 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
HEADING: 12. 0. . ENFORCEMENT
SUB-HEAD: 12. 1. . Correspondence
12. 1. . - 0000001
DATE: 09/20/89 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Judy Malmquist/DRMS
ADDRESSEE: John Sainsbury/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Request that EPA provide information which it may already have
indicating that DRMS may have generated property found at the site
12. 1. . - 0000002
DATE: 10/05/89 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Bonnie Bailey/Alaska Railroad Corporation
ADDRESSEE: John Sainsbury/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Letter transmitting ARRC Contract No. 6250, Encroachment Permit,
for signature
12. 1. . - 0000003
DATE: 11/02/89 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Monica Kirk/EPA
ADDRESSEE: William Fashouer/Federal Railroad Administration
DESCRIPTION: Letter transmitting the Technical Assistance Team Assessment Report
and stating availability to meet on 11/15/89 to discuss removal
activities
12. 1. . - 0000004
DATE: 05/23/90 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Unknown/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: List'of attendees at a meeting held 05/23/90
12. 1. . - 0000005
DATE: 05/25/90 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Cynthia Mackey/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Joel Zimmer/DRMS
DESCRIPTION: Letter transmitting a draft Consent Order negotiated in May, 1990
12. 1. . - 0000006
DATE: 04/12/91 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: John Jacobson/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Jim Volz/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Memo requesting designation of a new DLA project manager to
complete the removal action this spring
09/25/95 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Page 4<
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
12. 1. . - 0000007
DATE: 05/03/91 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Cynthia Mackey/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Judy Malmquist/DRMS
DESCRIPTION: Summary of a meeting held on 04/29-30/91
12. 1. . - 0000008
DATE: 05/15/91 PAGES: 3
AUTHOR: Cynthia Mackey/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Judy Malmquist/DRMS
DESCRIPTION: Letter transmitting a draft Administrative Consent Order for the
1991 Removal
12. 1. . - 0000009
DATE: 05/16/91 PAGES: 5
AUTHOR: Cynthia Mackey/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Judy Malmquist/DRMS
DESCRIPTION: Transmittal of the Scope of Work which is an attachment to the 199
Removal Order
12. 1. . - 0000010
DATE: 05/29/91 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Cynthia Mackey/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Judy Malmquist/DRMS
PRESCRIPTION: Letter of transmittal for the final Administrative Consent Order
for the 1991 Removal
12. 1. . - 0000011
DATE: 10/08/91 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: George Beam/DRMS
ADDRESSEE: John Sainsbury/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Letter regarding extension of time for submission of the OHM Final
Report
12. 1. . - 0000012
DATE: 10/16/91 PAGES: 2
.AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Agenda and attendance log for a meeting held 10/16/91
12. 1. . - 0000013
DATE: 04/17/92 PAGES: 3
AUTHOR: Cynthia Mackey/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Leone Hatch/State of Alaska
DESCRIPTION: Letter transmitting a draft Administrative Order on Consent
09/25/95 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
12. 1. . - 0000014
DATE: 05/07/92 PAGES: 5
AUTHOR: Leone Hatch/State of Alaska
ADDRESSEE: Cynthia Mackey/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Letter addressing concerns and modifications to the draft
Administrative Order on Consent
12. 1. . - 0000025
DATE: 05/19/92 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Randall F. Smith/EPA
Dana Rasmussen/EPA
Memo requesting approval of a 30-day extension of the 90-day
negotiation moratorium for a RI/FS at the Arctic Surplus Superfunc
site
ADDRESSEE
DESCRIPTION
12. 1. . - 0000015
DATE: 05/22/92 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Cynthia Mackey/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Leone Hatch/State of Alaska
DESCRIPTION: Letter of transmittal for another draft order incorporating
concerns and proposed changes
12. 1. . - 0000016
DATE: 06/17/92 PAGES: 3
AUTHOR: Cynthia Mackey/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Judy Malmquist/DRMS
DESCRIPTION: Letter of transmittal for another draft order and outline of
further issues that need to be resolved before the order can be
finalized
12. 1. . - 0000017
DATE: 06/17/92 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Cynthia Mackey/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Leone Hatch/State of Alaska
DESCRIPTION: Letter of transmittal for another draft Administrative Order on
Consent
12. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000018
06/30/92 PAGES: 2
John Stewart/DRMS
Carol Rushin/EPA
Letter regarding negotiations being conducted on the Consent Order
(Confidential portion of the Administrative Record filed in the
Arctic Surplus Remedial site file section 22.1 at EPA Region 10 -
Headquarters, Superfund Branch, Seattle, WA)
09/25/95
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
fl.2. 1. . - 0000019
DATE: 07/27/92 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Cynthia Mackey/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Leone Hatch/State of Alaska
DESCRIPTION: Letter suggesting abbreviated change proposed to Section 1.2 of th<
Order
12. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000020
08/04/92 PAGES: 1
Cynthia Mackey/EPA
Leone Hatch/State of Alaska
Notice of incorporated change to Paragraph 1.2 of the Order
12. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000021
08/14/92 PAGES: 43
Ellen Hale/EPA
Carol Standefer/Unknown
Letter documenting telephone conversation of 07/29/92 and providing
more information about EPA plans at the Arctic Surplus Superfund
site. (EPA guidance document attached)
12. l.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000022
10/22/92 PAGES: 3
Cynthia Mackey/EPA
Leone Hatch/State of Alaska
Letter of concern about delays in signing the negotiated
Administrative Order on Consent
12. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000023
11/09/92 PAGES: 2
Cynthia Mackey/EPA
Leone Hatch/State of Alaska
Letter of transmittal for a conformed copy of the Administrative
Order on Consent
12. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000024
12/02/92 PAGES: 3
Cynthia Mackey/EPA
Judy Malmquist/DRMS
Letter of transmittal for an amendment to the Arctic Surplus RI/FS
Administrative Order on Consent and outline of changes suggested b;
the U.S. Department of Justice
09/25/95
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
12. 1. . - 1040458
DATE: 06/14/95 PAGES: 3
AUTHOR: Judy Ma linguist/Defense Logistics Agency
ADDRESSEE: Cynthia L. Mackey/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Letter regarding funding to meet EPA Region 10's demand for paymei
of costs associated with the Arctic Surplus Superfund site for.
10/01/92 through 09/93 and attached request to the Defense Finance
and Accounting Service to prepare a check
SUB-HEAD: 12. 2.
Access to Property Agreements
12. 2. . - 0000001
DATE: 09/18/89 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Roger McPeak/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Consent for Access to Property
12. 2.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000002
09/18/89 PAGES: 1
Carl Pederson/Unknown
Unknown/Unknown
Consent for Access to Property
12. 2.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000003
09/18/89 PAGES: 1
Charlotte Maskey/Unknown
Unknown/Unknown
Consent for Access to Property
12. 2.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000004
09/20/89 PAGES: 1
Dick Bruden/Unknown
John Sainsbury/EPA
Response to EPA request for signature on the Consent for Access to
Property
12. 2. . - 0000005
DATE: 10/17/89 PAGES: 4
AUTHOR: Larry Houle/Alaska Railroad Corporation
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Encroachment Permit between the Alaska Railroad Corporation and -th
EPA
09/25/95
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
j.2. 2. . - 0000006
DATE: 06/15/90 PAGES: 24
AUTHOR: Judy Malmquist/DRMS
ADDRESSEE: John Sainsbury/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Letter stating that the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) has been
unable to obtain written access agreements with the Arctic Surplus
CERCLA site owners (memoranda and conversation records attached)
12. 2. . - 0000007
DATE: 07/23/90 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Richard Bruden/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Rental Agreement for trailer space on property adjacent to the
Pederson property off of Badger Road
12. 2.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 1040459
10/19/94 PAGES: 3
Carol A. Fortier/Alaska Railroad Corporation
John Sainsbury/EPA
Transmittal letter with Supplement No. 1 to Contract No.
extending the term of Encroachment Permit
6250
SUB-HEAD:. 12. 3.
CONFIDENTIAL/FOIA EXEMPT
T2. 3.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000001
05/07/91 PAGES: 5
Unknown/Unknown
Unk nown/Unknown
Minutes from a negotiation meeting held 05/07/91 (Confidential
portion of the Administrative Record filed in the Arctic Surplus
Remedial site file section 22.1 at EPA Region -10 Headquarters,
Superfund Branch, Seattle, WA)
12. 3.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000002
04/01/92 PAGES: 22
Unknown/Unknown
Unknown/Unknown
Minutes from a negotiation meeting held 04/1-2/92 (Confidential
portion of the Administrative Record filed in the Arctic Surplus
Remedial site file section 22.1 at EPA Region 10 Headquarters,
Superfund Branch, Seattle, WA)
12. 3. ..
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
- Q000003
06/22/92 PAGES: 4
Carol Rushin/EPA
John Stewart/DRMS
Letter regarding negotiation of the Consent Order (Confidential
portion of the Administrative Record filed in the Arctic Surplus
Remedial site file section 22.1 at EPA Region 10 Headquarters,
Superfund Branch, Seattle, WA)
09/25/95
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
12. 3. . - 0000004
DATE: 07/24/92 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Leone Hatch/State of Alaska
ADDRESSEE: Cynthia Mackey/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Proposed changes to Section 1.2 of the Order (Confidential portior
of the Administrative Record filed in the Arctic Surplus Remedial
site file Section 22.1 at EPA Region 10 Headquarters, Superfund
Branch, Seattle, WA)
12. 3. . - 0000005
DATE: 10/05/92 PAGES: 10
AUTHOR: Leone Hatch/State of Alaska
ADDRESSEE: Cynthia Mackey/EPA
Negotiations on the Consent Order for the State Right of Way
(Confidential portion of the Administrative Record filed in the
Arctic Surplus Remedial site file section 22.1 at EPA Region 10
Headquarters, Superfund Branch, Seattle, WA)
DESCRIPTION:
12. 3. . - 0000006
DATE: 10/29/92 PAGES:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
Leone Hatch/State of Alaska
Cynthia Mackey/EPA
Letter regarding endorsement of the compliance order (Confidei
portion of the Administrative Record filed in the Arctic Surplus
Remedial site file section 22.1 at EPA Region 10 Headquarters,
Superfund Branch, Seattle, WA)
12. 3. . - 0000007
DATE: 12/17/92 PAGES: 17
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Minutes from a negotiation meeting held 12/17/92 (Confidential
portion of the Administrative Record filed in the Arctic Surplus
Remedial site file section 22.1 at EPA Region 10 Headquarters,
Superfund Branch, Seattle, WA)
12. 3. . - 0000008
DATE: 01/08/93 PAGES: 12
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Minutes from a negotiation meeting held 01/08/93 (Confidential
portion of the Administrative Record filed in the Arctic Surplus
Remedial site file section 22.1 at EPA Region 10 Headquarters,
Superfund Branch, Seattle, WA)
SUB-HEAD: 12. 4.
Administrative Orders on Consent
09/25/95
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
12. 4. . - 0000001
DATE: 06/18/90 PAGES: 41
AUTHOR: Cynthia Mackey/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Joel Zimmer/DRMS
DESCRIPTION: Transmittal of a revised final Consent Order for signature
12. 4. . - 0000002
DATE: 07/09/92 PAGES: 82
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Administrative Order on Consent for Remedial
Investigation/Feasibility Study, U.S. EPA Docket No. 10.92-07-03-12
12. 4. . - 0000003
DATE: 08/06/92 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Cynthia Mackey/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Judy Malroquist/DRMS
DESCRIPTION: Letter transmitting conformed copy of the final Administrative
Order on Consent
12. 4. . - 0000004
DATE: 08/25/92 PAGES: 29
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
PRESCRIPTION: Administrative Order on Consent for Removal Response Activities,
U.S. EPA Region 10 CERCLA Docket No. 1092-08-02-106
12. 4. . - 0000005.
DATE: 12/23/92 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Amendment No. 1 to Administrative Order on Consent for Remedial
Investigation/Feasibility Study
12. 4. . - 0000006
DATE: 12/23/92 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Judy Malmquist/DRMS
ADDRESSEE: Cathy Sheafor/U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ)
DESCRIPTION: Letter of transmittal for the signed Amendment No. 1
12. 4. . - 0000007
DATE: 01/14/93 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Vicki O'Meara/Dept. of Justice
ADDRESSEE: Dana Rasmussen/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Concurrence to the Administrative Order on Consent as amended by
Amendment No. 1
09/25/95 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
12. 4. . - 0000008
DATE: 01/21/93 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Catherine Sheafor/Dept. of Justice
ADDRESSEE: Cynthia Mackey/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Letter of transmittal for the original signed Amendment No. 1 to
the Arctic Surplus Administrative Order on Consent
SUB-HEAD: 12. 5. . Notice Letters/Responses
12. 5. . - 0000001
DATE: / / PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Unknown/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: List of Potentially Responsible Parties notified
12. 5. . - 0000002
DATE: / / PAGES: 13
AUTHOR: Unknown/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Enclosures 1 and 2 of PRP notification package
12. 5. . - 0000005
DATE: / / PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Return receipt for certified mail to Charles Parliment
12. 5. . - 0000003
DATE: 02/07/92 PAGES: 13
AUTHOR: Philip Millam/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Charles Parliment/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: EPA information request letter and response
12. 5. . - 0000004
DATE: 02/07/92 PAGES: 4
AUTHOR: Philip Millam/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Harold Fields/Department of Defense
DESCRIPTION: Notification of further remedial activities at the Arctic Surplus
Superfund site and request for participation in these activities
12. 5. . - 00.00006
DATE: 03/31/92 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Charles Parliment/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Handwritten letter responding to EPA request
SUB-HEAD: 12. 5. 1. McPeak
09/25/95 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
12. 5. 1. - 0000002
DATE: / / PAGES: 16
AUTHOR: Roger McPeak/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Response to EPA request for participation and information related
to cleanup activities (Confidential portion of the Administrative
Record located in CBI files at EPA Region 10 Headquarters,
Superfund Branch, Seattle, WA)
12. 5. 1. - 0000001
DATE: 02/07/92 PAGES: 6
AUTHOR: Philip Mi11am/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Roger McPeak/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: EPA request for participation in cleanup activities
12. 5. 1. - 0000003
DATE: 04/07/92 PAGES: 5
AUTHOR: Roger McPeak/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Handwritten response to EPA request with attachments
SUB-HEAD: 12. 5. 2.
Maskey
|L2. 5. 2. - 0000005
₯ DATE: / / PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Return receipt for certified mail to Charlotte Maskey
12. 5.2. - 0000004
DATE: 02/07/92 PAGES: 4
AUTHOR: Philip Millam/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Charlotte Maskey/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: EPA request for participation and information
12. 5. 2. - 0000001
DATE: 03/17/92 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Charlotte Maskey/Arctic Redi-Mix
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Notification of a visit to Seattle and request for an appointment
12. 5. 2. - 0000002
DATE: 04/08/92 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Ellen Hale/EPA
ADDRESSEE: File/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Summary of a meeting with Charlotte Maskey on 04/08/92
OS/25/95
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
12. 5. 2. - 0000003
DATE: 04/24/92 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Charlotte Maskey/Arctic Redi-Mix
ADDRESSEE: Philip Millam/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Response to EPA request
SUB-HEAD: 12. 5. 3. Pederson
12. 5. 3. - 0000004
DATE: / / PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Return receipt for certified mail to Carl Pederson
12. 5. 3. - 0000001
DATE: 12/29/58 PAGES: 4
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Warranty Deed between George H. Bentley and H. J. Bentley,
Grantors, and Carl Pederson and John Parks, Grantees
12. 5. 3. - 0000002
DATE: 08/26/74 PAGES: 9
AUTHOR: Woodrow Johansen/State of Alaska
ADDRESSEE: Carl Pederson/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Packet of correspondence concerning fencing of junkyard along
Badger Road and encroachment upon the highway right-of-way
12. 5. 3. - 0000003
DATE: 02/07/92 PAGES: 5
AUTHOR: Philip Millam/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Carl Pederson/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: EPA request for participation and information
SUB-HEAD: 12. 5. 4. Alaska Department of Transportation (ADOT)
12. 5. 4. - 0000001
DATE: 07/01/87 PAGES: 90
AUTHOR: Unknown/Department of Transportation and Public Facilities
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Design Study Report for Badger Road Reconstruction and Bike Path.
12. 5. 4. - 0000002
DATE: 04/30/90 PAGES: 60
AUTHOR: Unknown/Hargesheimer Engineering/Nortech
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Department of Transportation and Public Facilities
DESCRIPTION: Hazardous Materials Investigation for Badger Road Reconstruct±cm
09/25/95 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Page 5<
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
12. 5. 4. - 0000003
DATE: 08/01/91 PAGES: 55
AUTHOR: Unknown/Hargesheimer Engineering/Nortech
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Department of Transportation and Public Facilities
DESCRIPTION: Hazardous Materials Investigation for Badger Road Reconstruction,
Phase. Two Site Sampling
12. 5. 4. - 0000004
DATE: 02/07/92 PAGES: 5
AUTHOR: Philip Millam/EPA
ADDRESSEE: John Horn/Alaska Department of Transportation
DESCRIPTION: EPA request for participation and information
12. 5. 4. - 0000005
DATE: 03/10/92 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Leone Hatch/State of Alaska
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Response to EPA information request
SUB-HEAD: 12. 5. 5.
12. 5.
Alaska Railroad Corporation
5. - 0000001
DATE: 11/10/88 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Charles F. Findley/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Phyllis Johnson/Alaska Railroad Corporation
DESCRIPTION: EPA information request
12. 5. 5.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000002
02/07/92 PAGES: 4
Philip Millam/EPA
Eugene Hardy/Alaska Railroad Corporation
Letter advising of activities relating to the Arctic Surplus site
and requesting cooperation with the cleanup activities
12. 5. 5.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000003
02/18/92 PAGES: 5
Eugene Hardy/Alaska Railroad Corporation
Ellen Hale/EPA
Response to EPA request for cooperation
12. 5. 5.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000004
03/19/92 PAGES: 1
Ellen Hale/EPA
File/Unknown
Summary of a meeting with Counsel for Alaska Railroad Corporation
on 03/19/92
09/25/95
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
SUB-HEAD: 12. 5. 6. Federal Railroad Administration
12. 5. 6. - 0000001
DATE: 11/10/88 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Charles F. Findley/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Joseph King/Federal Railroad Administration
DESCRIPTION: EPA information request
12. 5. 6.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000002
11/14/89 PAGES: 2
William Fashouer/Federal Railroad Administration
Monica Kirk/EPA
Transmittal of response to EPA information request
12. 5. 6.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000003
02/07/92 PAGES: 4
Philip Millam/EPA
Unknown/Federal Railroad Administration
Letter advising of activities relating to the Arctic Surplus site
and requesting cooperation with site investigation and cleanup
activities
12. 5. 6. - 0000004
DATE: 02/21/92 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: S. Mark Lindsey/Federal Railroad Administration
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Response to EPA request for cooperation
SUB-HEAD: 12. 5. 7.
12. 5.
Defense Logistics Agency (DLA)
7. - 0000001
DATE: 02/07/92 PAGES: 7
AUTHOR: Philip Millam/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Harold Fields/Department of Defense
DESCRIPTION: Notification of further remedial activities at the Arctic Surplus
site and request for participation in these activities
12. 5. 7. - 0000002
DATE: 02/07/92 PAGES: 7
AUTHOR: Philip Millam/EPA
ADDRESSEE: John Stewart/DRMS
DESCRIPTION: Notification of further remedial activities at the Arctic Surplus
site and request for participation in these activities
09/25/95
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
^1.2. 5. 7. - 0000003
DATE: 04/10/92 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: George VaRalis/Department of the Army
ADDRESSEE: Philip Millam/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Response to EPA request for participation
SUB-HEAD: 12. 6. . Other Legal Documents
12. 6. . - 0000001
DATE: 09/06/90 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Cynthia Mackey/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Charlotte Maskey/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Response to request for information about the remedial activities
occurring on and adjacent to requestors property
09/25/95 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
HEADING: 13. 0. . HEALTH ASSESSMENTS
SUB-HEAD: 13. 1. . Correspondence
13. 1. . - 0000001
DATE: 01/17/91 PAGES: 4
AUTHOR: Charles Bickley/Department of the Army
ADDRESSEE: John Sainsbury/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Response to request for chemical data for the Arctic Surplus site
groundwater monitoring program
SUB-HEAD: 13. 2. . ATSDR Health Assessment
13. 2. . - 0000001
DATE: 06/22/92 PAGES: 38
AUTHOR: Unknown/Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Preliminary Public Health Assessment for Arctic Surplus
09/25/95 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
HEADING: 14. 0. . NATURAL RESOURCE TRUSTEES
SUB-HEAD: 14. 1. . Correspondence
14. 1. . - 0000001
DATE: 11/14/91 PAGES: 1 .
AUTHOR: Ellen Hale/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Paul Gates/Department of the Interior
DESCRIPTION: Letter of transmittal for the scoping memorandum to determine if a
preliminary natural resource damage assessment will be conducted
14. 1. . - 0000002
DATE: 12/03/91 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Chris Mebane/National Oceanic and Atmosphere Administration (NOAA)
ADDRESSEE: Ellen Hale/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Decline to participate in scoping the remedial investigation
14. 1. . - 0000003
DATE: 03/03/92 PAGES: 3
AUTHOR: Jonathan Deason/Department of the Interior
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Work Plan for conducting a preliminary natural resource survey
|4. 1. . - 1040460
DATE: 05/10/95 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Neil E. Thompson/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Paul Gates/Department of Interior
DESCRIPTION: Notification of Federal Natural Resource Trustees Site at Arctic
Surplus, Fairbanks, AK
s
SUB-HEAD: 14. 2. . Preliminary Natural Resource Surveys
14. 2. . - 0000001
DATE: 06/15/92 PAGES: 23
AUTHOR: Jonathan Deason/Department of the Interior
ADDRESSEE: Randall F. Smith/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Letter and transmittal of the Preliminary Natural Resources
Analysis
09/25./95 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
HEADING: 16. 0. . PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
SUB-HEAD: 16. 1. . Correspondence
16. 1. . - 0000001
DATE: / / PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Unknown/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Public Contact Log
16. 1. . - 0000002
DATE: / / PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Public Notice entitled "Beware Residents of Six-Mile Village"
(Badger Road Area)
16. 1. . - 0000005
DATE: / / PAGES: 12
AUTHOR: Gerry Yarab/Ecology & Environment, Inc.
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Response to a citizen requesting results for domestic water v !
sampling near the Arctic Surplus Superfund site
16. 1. . - 0000003
DATE: 06/18/90 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Michelle Pirzadeh/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Record of phone communication with Wayne Rowe of COE
16. 1. . - 0000004
DATE: 07/02/90 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Wayne Rowe/Corps of Engineers
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Transmittal memo for the Community Relations Plan
16. 1. . - 0000006
DATE: 08/30/90 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Bub Loiselle/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Debbie/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Handwritten note regarding a report of a potential hazardous waste
problem in Fairbanks
09/25/95 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
16. 1. . - 0000007
DATE: 10/04/90 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: John Sainsbury/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Handwritten note forwarding a complaint by a neighbor about dumpin
chemicals
16. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000008
11/03/90 PAGES: 1
Michael Silva/Unknown
Michelle Pirzadeh/EPA
Letter from a citizen expressing interest in having a wel^. tested
16. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000009
12/18/90 PAGES: 2
Rick Feller/Cook Inlet Region, Inc. (CIRI)
John Sainsbury/EPA
Request for information regarding the spread of hazardous waste at
the Arctic Salvage site to neighboring lands and a written
statement as to the contamination of CIRI's lands
16. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000010
06/27/91 PAGES: 1
Michelle Pirzadeh/EPA
Unknown/Unknown
Response to a citizen request for information regarding EPA's
Technical Assistance Grant program
16. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000011
01/02/92 PAGES: 2
Unknown/Unknown
Philip Millam/EPA
Letter from a citizen concerned about action taken at the Arctic
Surplus yard
16. 1.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000012
01/23/92 PAGES: 1
Dianne Pond/Fairbanks Daily News-Miner
Michelle Pirzadeh/EPA
Letter of transmittal for requested tearsheets for the Arctic
Surplus ad that ran in the Fairbanks Daily News Miner
16. 1. .
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
ESCRIPTION:
- 0000013
10/02/92 PAGES: 1
Michelle Pirzadeh/EPA
Jim Sampson/Fairbanks North Star Borough
Letter of thanks for participation in EPA's community interview
process
09/25/95
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
16. 1. . - 0000014
DATE: 10/02/92 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Michelle Pirzadeh/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Lute Cunningham/City of North Pole
DESCRIPTION: Letter of thanks for participating in EPA's community interview
process
16. 1. . - 0000015
DATE: 10/06/92 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Ellen Hale/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Leroy Bonnet/DRMS
DESCRIPTION: Letter of transmittal for key documents to be added to the
information repository
16. 1. . - 1040152
DATE: 07/27/93 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Ellen Hale/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/
DESCRIPTION: Letter to interested citizens regarding concern that people
entering the site may not be aware of the risks they may encounter
SUB-HEAD: 16. 2. . Community Relations Plan
16. 2. . - 0000001
DATE: 06/26/90 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: John Killoran/Department of the Army
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Memo of distribution for the Community Relations Plan for removal
of material from Arctic Surplus Salvage Yard
16. 2. . - 0000002
DATE: 12/01/92 PAGES: 28
AUTHOR: Unknown/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Revised Community Relations Plan
16. 2. . - 0000003
DATE: 12/22/92 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Ellen Hale/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Leroy Bohnet/DRMS
DESCRIPTION: Letter of transmittal for the revised Community Relations Plan
SUB-HEAD: 16. 3. . Notice of Public Availability
09/25./95 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
16. 3. . - 0000001
DATE: / / PAGES: 4
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Public Notice for public availability sessions held by the Agency
for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry on 12/04/91
SUB-HEAD: 16. 4. . Public Meetings/Transcripts
16. 4. . - 1040461
DATE: 07/26/95 PAGES: 38
AUTHOR: Unknown/
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/
DESCRIPTION: Transcript of public meeting of the Superfund Program at Arctic
Surplus Superfund site on 07/26/95
SUB-HEAD: 16. 5. . Fact Sheets/Press Releases
16. 5. . - 0000001
DATE: / / PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Unknown/Alaska Health Project
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Press Release "Fairbanks Hazardous Waste Site Ranks as one of Wors
in U.S."
16. 5. . - 0000002
DATE: 03/28/90 PAGES: 3.
AUTHOR: Unknown/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Superfund Fact Sheet on the background and removal work at Arctic
Surplus
16. 5. . - 0000003
DATE: 09/13/90 PAGES: 4
AUTHOR: Unknown/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Superfund Fact Sheet announcing public meeting and open house
16. 5. . - 0000004
DATE: 11/14/90 PAGES: 4
AUTHOR: Unknown/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Superfund Factsheet of EPA responses to questions presented at a
public meeting 09/26/90
09/25/95 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
16. 5. . - 0000005
DATE: 05/01/91 PAGES: 3
AUTHOR: Unknown/ATSDR
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Press release "ATSDR Announces Public Comment Period on Health'
Assessment"
16. 5. . - 0000006
DATE: 09/12/91 PAGES: 3
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Draft Superfund Fact Sheet on the status of the Arctic Surplus
Superfund site
16. 5. . - 0000007
DATE: 02/11/92 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Unknown/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Congressional/Legislative Update on the Arctic Surplus Superfund
site
16. 5. . - 0000008
DATE: 08/03/92 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Unknown/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Superfund Fact Sheet
16. 5. . - 0000009
DATE: 09/14/92 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Unknown/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Superfund Fact Sheet
16. 5. . - 0000010
DATE: 12/21/92 PAGES: 4
AUTHOR: Unknown/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Superfund Fact Sheet
16. 5. . - 1040153
DATE: 06/09/93 PAGES: 3
AUTHOR: Unknown/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/
DESCRIPTION: Superfund Fact Sheet regarding site study field work underway
09/25/95 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
16. 5. . - 1040462
DATE: 05/12/95 PAGES: 3
AUTHOR: Unknown/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/
DESCRIPTION: Superfund fact sheet announcing that a final cleanup proposal will
soon be available and inviting the public to an open house to
discuss the alternatives being considered for cleanup of the site
16. 5. . - 1040180
DATE: 07/11/95 PAGES: .2
AUTHOR: Unknown/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/
DESCRIPTION: Superfund Fact Sheet inviting public comment on EPA's proposal for
final cleanup action at the Arctic Surplus site
SUB-HEAD: 16. 6.
Newspaper Articles
16. 6. . - 0000001
DATE: / / PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Anna Farneski/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Survey targets 33 hazardous waste sites in area
16. 6. . - 0000002
DATE: / / PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Kris Capps/Fairbanks Daily News-Miner
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Cleanup outlined
16. 6.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000003
/ / PAGES: 1
Unknown/Unknown
Unknown/Unknown
More water-monitoring wells planned
16. 6.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000004
/ / PAGES: 1
Unknown/Unknown
Unknown/Unknown
Year study of Arctic Surplus health concerns inconclusive
16. 6.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
.DESCRIPTION:
- 0000005
/ /.. PAGES: 1
Unknown/Unknown
Unknown/Unknown
EPA to give battery briefing
09/25/95
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
16. 6. . - 0000006
DATE: 03/15/89 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Patti Epler/Anchorage Daily News
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Toxic yard; State puts testing, cleanup on hold
16. 6. . - 0000007
DATE: 10/25/89 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Unknown/Fairbanks Daily News-Miner
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: EPA targets salvage yard
16. 6. . - 0000008
DATE: 08/10/90 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Kris Capps/Fairbanks Daily News-Miner
ADDRESSEE: Unknown /Unknown"
DESCRIPTION: Waste cleanup raises dust cloud
16. 6. . - 0000009
DATE: 08/23/90 PAGES: - 2
AUTHOR: Ingrid Martin/Fairbanks Daily News-Miner
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: 22 groups told to fund cleanup
16. 6. . - 0000010
DATE: 09/27/90 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Ingrid Martin/Fairbanks Daily News-Miner
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Fairbanksans question EPA on cleanup
16. 6. . - 0000011
DATE: 09/27/90 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Kelly Bostian/Fairbanks Daily News-Miner
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Arctic Surplus cleanup finds more toxic waste
16. 6. . - 0000012
DATE: 05/17/91 PAGES: 3
AUTHOR: Leroy Bonnet/DRMS
ADDRESSEE: John Sainsbury/EPA
DESCRIPTION: Handwritten note commenting on attached news article "Feds continu
investigation of Toxic dump; clean up cost may total 15 million"
09/25/95 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
16. 6. . - 0000013
DATE: 12/10/91 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Tim Parker/Fairbanks Daily News-Miner
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Officials gather cleanup site data
16. 6. . - 0000014
DATE: 12/13/91 PAGES: 4
. AUTHOR: Unknown/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Dianne Pond/Fairbanks Daily News-Miner
DESCRIPTION: Public voucher for advertising
SUB-HEAD: 16. 8.
16. 8.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
Community Interviews
- 0000001
04/20/90 PAGES: 7
Richard Fullner/Ecology & Environment,
Inc.
Carl G. Kitz/EPA
Notes taken during community interviews held 04/12-13/90
(Confidential portion of the Administrative Record filed in the
Arctic Surplus Remedial site file section 22.1 at EPA Region 10
Headquarters, Superfund Branch, Seattle, WA)
16. 8. . - 0000002
DATE: 08/17/92 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Unknown/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Schedule of community interviews held 08/17-19/92
SUB-HEAD: 16. 9.
Mailing Lists (CONFIDENTIAL/FOIA EXEMPT)
16. 9.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000001
08/09/90 PAGES: 4
Unknown/Unknown
Unknown/Unknown
List of attendees at a Public Meeting held 08/09/90 (Confidential
portion of the Administrative Record filed in the Arctic Surplus
Remedial site file section 22.1 at EPA Region 10 Headquarters,
Superfund Branch, Seattle, WA)
16. 9.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000002
06/19/91 PAGES: 2
Unknown/Unknown
Unknown/Unknown
List of attendees at a Public Meeting held 06/19/91 (Confidential
portion of the Administrative Record filed in the Arctic Surplus
Remedial site file section 22.1 at EPA Region 10 Headquarters,
Superfund Branch, Seattle, WA)
09/25/95
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
HEADING: 17. 0. . GRAPHICS
SUB-HEAD: 17. 1. . Photographs
17. 1. . - 0000001
DATE: / / PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Aerial photo of Chena River Flood
17. 1. . - 0000002
DATE: / / PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: 1986 photos of McPeak Salvage taken by the State Fire Marshall
17. 1. . - 0000007
DATE: / / PAGES: 6
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Photo documentation of 1989 Asbestos Removal Activities
17. 1. . - 0000003
DATE: 06/18/87 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Photos of McPeak Salvage
17. 1. . - 0000004
DATE: 07/01/88 PAGES: 12
AUTHOR: Unknown/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Aerial Photographic Analysis of McPeak Salvage
17. 1. . - 0000005
DATE: 08/16/88 PAGES: 3
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Photos of McPeak Salvage
17. 1. . - 0000006
DATE: 09/20/88 PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Photos of McPeak Salvage
09/25/95 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
17. 1. . - 0000008
DATE: 06/07/90 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Aerial photo of Arctic Surplus site
17. 1. . - 0000009
DATE: 09/24/90 PAGES: 34
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Aerial photos of Arctic Surplus site
17. 1. . - 0000010
DATE: 02/19/91 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Wayne Rowe/Department of the Army
ADDRESSEE: Roscoe Davis/DRMS
DESCRIPTION: Letter of transmittal for one set of photo positives taken 09/24/9«
of the Arctic Surplus Salvage Yard
SUB-HEAD: 17. 2. . Maps
17. 2. . - 0000001
DATE: / / PAGES: 2
AUTHOR: Unknown/Alaska Arctic Publications
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Fairbanks Area Map
17. 2. . - -0000002
DATE: / / PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Unknown/Corps of Engineers
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Blueprint of Arctic Surplus/Salvage Yard Hazardous Waste Cleanup
Site
17. 2. . - 0000003
DATE: / / PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADORES S EE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Grid of Six Mile Village at the Arctic Surplus Site
17. 2. . - 0000004
DATE: / / PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Unknown/Ecology & Environment, Inc.
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Sketch of Arctic Surplus site indicating concentrations of drums
and containers and proposed fence perimeter
09/25/95 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
17. 2. . - 0000005
DATE: 07/10/80 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Unknown/U.S. Geological Survey
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Locations of observation wells and water-table configuration fcJr
high water-table conditions
17. 2. . - 0000006
DATE: 07/13/87 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Unknown/Tryck Nyman & Hayes
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Map of Alaska Hazardous Waste Program Preliminary Assessment at
McPeak Salvage
17. 2. . - 0000007 **
DATE: 09/14/87 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Unknown/Tryck Nyman & Hayes
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Map of Alaska Hazardous Waste Program Preliminary Assessment at
McPeak Salvage
17. 2. . - 0000008
DATE: 10/01/87 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Sketch of excavation project at Arctic Surplus
17. 2. . - 0000009
DATE: 08/28/89 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Unknown/Ecology & Environment, Inc.
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Sample Locations Map
17. 2. . - 0000010
DATE: OB/09/90 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Drawing of excavation project at Carl Pederson property
17. 2. . - 0000011
DATE: 08/06/91 PAGES: 1
AUTHOR: Unknown/Ecology & Environment, Inc.
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Grid of well sampling locations
SUB-HEAD: 17. 3. . Video/Audio Cassettes
09/25/95 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
17. 3. . - 0000001
DATE: / / PAGES: 0
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Undated video cassette of site work and a public meeting with Carl
Pederson (This document is filed in the Arctic Surplus Remedial
site file section 17.3 at EPA Region 10 Headquarters, Superfund
Branch, Seattle, WA)
17. 3. . - 0000005
DATE: / / PAGES: 0
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Video cassette of Arctic Surplus 1990 Removal, tape 1 (This
document is filed in the Arctic Surplus Remedial site file section
17.3 at EPA Region 10 Headquarters, Superfund Branch, Seattle, WA)
17. 3.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000006
/ / PAGES: 0
Unknown/Unknown
Unknown/Unknown
Video cassette of Arctic Surplus 1990 Removal, tape 2 (This
document is filed in the Arctic Surplus Remedial site file section
17.3 at EPA Region 10 Headquarters, Superfund Branch, Seattle, WA)
17. 3.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000007
/ / PAGES: 0
Unknown/Unknown
Unknown/Unknown
Video cassette of Arctic Surplus 1990 Removal, tape 3 (This
document is filed in the Arctic Surplus Remedial site file section
17.3 at EPA Region 10 Headquarters, Superfund Branch, Seattle, WA)
17. 3.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000008
/. / PAGES: 0
Unknown/Unknown
Unknown/Unknown
Video cassette of Arctic Surplus 1990 Removal, tape 4 (This
document is filed in the Arctic Surplus Remedial site file section
17.3 at EPA Region 10 Headquarters, Superfund Branch, Seattle, WA)
17. 3.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000009
/ / PAGES: 0
Unknown/Unknown
Unknown/Unknown
Video cassette of Arctic Surplus 1990 Removal, tape 5 (This
document is filed in the Arctic Surplus Remedial site file section
17.3 at EPA Region 10 Headquarters, Superfund Branch, Seattle, WA)
09/25/95
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
17. 3. . - 0000011
DATE: / / PAGES: 0
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Audio cassette of a public meeting held by DLA regarding the 19)9*0
removal (This document is filed in the Arctic Surplus Remedial sit
file section 17.3 at EPA Region 10 Headquarters, Superfund Branch,
Seattle, WA)
17. 3. . - 0000002
DATE: 08/09/90 PAGES: . 0
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
Unknown/Unknown
Video cassette of a public meeting held 08/09/90 {This document is
filed in the Arctic Surplus Remedial site file section 17.3 at EPA
Region 10 Headquarters, Superfund Branch, Seattle, WA)
ADDRESSEE
DESCRIPTION
17. 3.
DATE:
AUTHOR:
ADDRESSEE:
DESCRIPTION:
- 0000003
08/09/90 PAGES: 0
Unknown/Unknown
Unknown/Unknown
Audio cassette of a public meeting held 08/09/90, tape I (This
document is filed in the Arctic Surplus Remedial site file section
17.3 at EPA Region 10 Headquarters, Superfund Branch, Seattle. JJA1
17. 3. . - 0000004
DATE: 08/09/90 PAGES: 0
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Audio cassette of a public meeting held 08/09/90, tape II (This
document is filed in the Arctic Surplus Remedial site file section
17.3 at EPA Region 10 Headquarters, Superfund Branch, Seattle, WA)
17. 3. . - 0000010
DATE: 06/19/91 PAGES: 0
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
Unknown/Unknown
Video cassette of a Public Meeting held 06/19/91 (This document is
filed in the Arctic Surplus Remedial site file section 17.3 at EPA
Region 10 Headquarters, Superfund Branch, Seattle, WA)
ADDRESSEE
DESCRIPTION
09/25/95
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
Page
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
HEADING: 18. 0. . GUIDANCE/TECHNICAL REPORTS
SUB-HEAD: 18. 1. . EPA Guidance/Federal Register Notices
18. 1. . - 0000002
DATE: / / PAGES: 4
AUTHOR: Unknown/Unknown
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Summary of PCB Spills Cleanup Policy
18. 1. . - 0000003
DATE: 09/07/89 PAGES: 3
AUTHOR: Unknown/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Interim Guidance on Establishing Soil Lead Cleanup Levels at
Superfund sites
18. 1. . - 0000004
DATE: 06/21/90 PAGES: 4
AUTHOR: 'Unknown/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Cleanup Level for Lead in Ground Water
*8. 1. . - 0000005
DATE: 08/01/90 PAGES: 5
AUTHOR: Unknown/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: A Guide on Remedial Actions at Superfund Sites with PCB
Contamination
18. 1. . - 0000006
DATE: 04/01/91 PAGES: 10
AUTHOR: Unknown/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Superfund Engineering Issue; Treatment of Lead-Contaminated Soils
18. 1. . - 0000007
DATE: 03/12/92 PAGES: 11
AUTHOR: Unknown/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Instructions for Submitting Data to EPA Region 10 and Ground Water
Data Element Descriptions and Definitions
09/25/95 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Page 7f
-------
(ARTAR) ARCTIC SURPLUS - REMEDIAL ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
18. 1. . - 0000001
DATE: 03/03/93 PAGES: 9
AUTHOR: Unknown/EPA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: List of EPA guidances used to give direction and aid in the
investigation and decision-making processes for the Arctic Surplus
Superfund site
SUB-HEAD: 18. 2. . Regional Studies/Reports
18. 2. . - 0000002
DATE: / / PAGES: 22
AUTHOR: Unknown/Department of the Interior
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: 1982 Hydrologic Information for Land-Use Planning, Badger Road
Area, Fairbanks, Alaska
18. 2. . - 0000003
DATE: / / PAGES: 8
AUTHOR: Unknown/NOAA
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Local Climatological Data; 1988 Annual Summary with Comparative
Data
18. 2. . - 0000001
DATE: 09/01/63 PAGES: 73
AUTHOR: Unknown/Soil Conservation Service
ADDRESSEE: Unknown/Unknown
DESCRIPTION: Soil Survey, Fairbanks Area Alaska
09/25/95 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 Page 7<
------- |