¦¦¦¦¦
..-V
¦ v'-.S ••k
-?ppj
'•' ;vf';- v1. : ':T.^££jrVS%
HpliK
1
IWSl
s'"v :-v'('K4
isssi
-------
COf>Lf I
FEB 22 1978
Ffop-^'iy of
US Environmental Protection Agency
Library Roson X
1280 Sixth Avfinu#
Swtte, WA 98101
SOLID WASTE r».'
on Federal Lands in Alaska
A Report to Congress
This report (SW-639) required by Section 3,
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (P.L. 94-580),
was prepared by the
Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation
for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
and delivered on October 21, 1977,
to the President and the Congress
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
1977
U.S EPA LBRARY REGION 10 MATERIALS
RX
~ 515
-------
SOLID WASTE
on
FEDERAL LANDS
in
ALASKA
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY REPORT
-------
FOREWORD
This report presents the findings of the first phase of a
study carried out pursuant to Section 3 of Public Law 94-580,
the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976. It depicts
the solid waste disposal problem that exists on Federal lands
in the State of Alaska. It also describes several complicating
factors — including permafrost, lack of land transportation,
severe climate, delicate tundra--that preclude a simple solu-
tion to the waste disposal problems there.
The study includes data gathered on the quantities and
locations of waste materials on Federal lands. In addition,
ten representative sites were selected and an analysis is pre-
sented of feasible disposal options, their environmental impact,
and their costs.
As also required by Section 3 of the Act, a second report
is already under way and will recommend actions and procedures,
as well as legislation, to remedy the existing problems and to
prevent their recurrence. The second report, which will com-
plete the study, is scheduled to be completed within the next
six months, in accordance with the Act.
—H. LANIER HICKMAN, JR.
Acting Deputy Assistant Administrator
for Solid Waste
October 21, 1977
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
PREFACE . • . . . . . . . .1
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . .2
SELECTED SITE ANALYSES . . . . . . .5
Site 1 - Indian Mountain AFS . . . . .7
Site 2 - Sawmill Bay Cannery . . . . .13
Site 3 - Bethel BIA Facility . . . . .19
Site 4 - Port Clarence CGS . . . . .23
Site 5 - Manning Point . . . . . .31
Site 6 - Salisbury Ridge Power Line . . .35
Site 7 - National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska .39
Site 8 - White Alice Communications System . .47
Site 9 - Barter Island DEW Line Station . .49
Site 10 - Arctic National Wildlife Range . .55
WASTE SITE INVENTORY . . . . . . .59
Category 1 - Active Military . . . . .61
Category 2 - Inactive Military . . . .65
Category 3 - National Parks, Forests, Refuges .67
1. Chugach Forest . . . . . .69
2. Tongass Forest, Glacier Bay, Monument, . .71, 73
St. Lazaria Wildlife Refuge . . .73
3. Kodiak Wildlife Refuge . . . . .74
4. Arctic Wildlife Range . . . . .76
Category 4 - National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska .81
Category 5 - Miscellaneous Waste Sites . . .85
i
-------
FIGIJRES
Pag'e
1. Map - Alaska: Major Geographic Features . .iv
2. Map - Scope of this Study . . , . .3
3. Map - Sites Selected for Disposal Analysis . . 4
4. Plate - West View of Indian Mountain Station . . 8
Plate - Debris on Northeast Slope of Indian
Mountain
5. Plate - Abandoned Cannery at Saw Mill Bay . .12
Plate - Main Cannery Building and Tanks
6. Plate - Sawmill Bay Cannery and Wharf . . .16
7. Plate - Abandoned Dump at Bethel BIA Facility .18
8. Plate - Empty Barrels at Bethel BIA Facility . .20
Plate - Barrels of Roofing Tar at Bethel BIA
Facility
9. Plate - Barrels and Rubble at Port Clarence . .24
Plate - Abandoned Structures, Spools and
Foundations
10. Plate - Foundations and Wood Debris at Port . .26
Clarence
Plate - Piles of Abandoned Landing Mat
11. Plate - Abandoned Vehicles at Port Clarence . .28
Plate - Wooden Crates and Abandoned Structures
12. Plate - 7,500 Empty Barrels at Manning Point . .30
Plate - View of Manning Point From the Southeast
13. Plate - Salisbury Ridge Power Line Project . .34
Plate - Winter Storm on Salisbury Ridge
14. Plate - Wood and Aluminum Towers on Salisbury .36
Ridge
Plate - Lower Elevations on Salisbury Ridge
15. Map - National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska . .37
16. Plate - Skull Cliff Site in the National . .38
Petroleum Reserve
Plate - Collapsed Hanger and Metal Debris at
Skull Cliff
17. Plate - Distribution of Debris at Skull Cliff .39
ii
-------
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
FIGURES (continued)
Page
F±ate - West Oumalik Site, National Petroleum .40
Reserve
Plate - Empty Barrels at West Oumal-ik
Plate - Wooden Pilings at West Oumalik, National .42
Petroleum Reserve
Plate - Assorted Debris at West Oumalik Site
Map - White Alice Communications System . . .45
Plate - Reflectors and Debris at Bethel White .46
Alice Station
Plate - Partially-covered Landfill at Bethel
Site
Plate - West View of Barter Island Landfill . .50
Plate - Landfill with DEW Line Site in Background
Plate - Debris in Tidal Flats at Barter Island .52
Plate - Barter Island Landfill Extending into the
Sea
Map - Arctic National Wildlife Range . . .53
Plate - Vehicle Debris along ANWR Coast . . .54
Plate - LST-642 with ANWR Coast in Background .56
Plate - Southeast View of LST Showing Deck
Structures
Map - Inventory: Active Military Sites . . .61
Map - Inventory: Inactive Military Sites . .65
Map - Inventory: National Parks, Forests, and .67
Wildlife Refuges
Map - Inventory: Chugach National Forest . .68
Map - Inventory: Tongass National Forest . .70
Glacier Bay Monument
St. Lazaria Wildlife Refuge
Map - Inventory: Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge .74
Map - Inventory: Arctic National Wildlife Range .76
Map - Inventory: National Petroleum Reserve in .81
Alaska
Map - Inventory: National Petroleum Reserve in .82
Alaska
Map - Inventory: Miscellaneous Waste Sites . .85
iii
-------
ALASKA
Barrow
V,
yn0t!'K A
Brooks Iiaiiae
Yukon River
Fairbanks
kuskokwini Kiver A V _
Bethel.,® fm>^ >—Anchorage
Alaska Range
ft
-------
SOLID WASTE CLEANUP ON FEDERAL LANDS IN ALASKA
PREFACE
This is the initial report of a study concerning
abandoned debris on Federal lands in Alaska. It identifies
ninety sites containing abandoned solid waste. These sites
comprise less than 20% of the total waste sites throughout
the State. Ten of the sites were selected to represent the
wide variety of environments, debris, and logistics associated
with a cleanup program in Alaska. For five sites, the
report gives a cost analysis of debris disposal and cleanup
operations. For the other five sites, the report discusses
present and anticipated cleanup projects and, where possible,
estimated cost. An inventory section, listing the type and
quantity of abandoned debris at all sites, follows the
analyses.
Over the past half-century, Alaska's Federal lands have
supported much activity. Its strategic position and natural
wealth have encouraged military construction, development of
resources, and a large, governing Federal bureaucracy.
Alaska1s. great size and wilderness character seems to
lead to a "use-it-and-leave-it" attitude on the part of
those who work in its many remote locations. Pioneer workers
on Federal lands often abandoned unneeded materials rather
than pay the high cost of their removal. The result has
been an accumulation of the large amount of debris which is
the subject of this report. It is apparent that any program
to dispose of this waste will be governed by the character
of the land. Throughout its vast territory, Alaska has
probably the most formidable combination of harsh climate,
rugged terrain, and high cost of labor and transportation of
any State. It is therefore concluded that any cleanup
effort will be extremely time and energy consuming, as well
as expensive.
The final report in this study will include a supplement
to the debris inventory, and will recommend methods and
estimated costs for cleaning up additional sites. It will
suggest administrative actions and, more importantly, will
establish cleanup priority among the sites. Assuming a
finite budget, this hierarchy will be determined by necessity.
Degradable debris which is not a threat to humans, wildlife
or the environment and is not highly visible, will be given
low priority for removal. Non-degradable debris at more
visible sites, especially near human habitations and wildlife
refuges will be given highest priority.
1
-------
INTRODUCTION
The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (PL 94-580)
was signed by the President on October 21, 1976. Section 3
of this Act, entitled "Solid Waste Cleanup on Federal Lands
in Alaska", directs the Executive Branch to study the best
overall procedure for removing abandoned debris from Federal
lands in the State.
In April, 1977, the President directed the Environ-
mental Protection Agency (EPA) to implement Section 3. The
EPA contracted with the Alaska Department of Environmental
Conservation (ADEC) to serve as the lead agency and to
provide primary coordination in Alaska. In turn, ADEC
contracted with Environmental Services Limited, of Anchorage,
Alaska, to assist with the study.
The EPA and ADEC determined that this study would
encompass not only land which is currently within the Federal
domain, but also that land which was transferred to the
Native Corporations under the Alaska Native Claims Settle-
ment Act (1971). However, it would not include the Aleutian
Islands west of Port Heiden, Alaska. This area was inven-
toried by the Federal government in 1976 and is the subject
of an extensive report prepared by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers.
This report, required by Section 3, is a summary of all
data obtained prior to September 15, 1977. The study will cul-
minate in another report in April, 1978, which will outline the
actions, procedures, and legislation needed to implement the
study's recommendations.
2
-------
SCOPE OF THIS STUDY
d?
Federal Lands Considered By This Study EH
Alaska Superimposed Over Continental U S
3 Figure 2
-------
ANALYZED WASTE SITES
Barrow
Nome
0 Fairbanks
Vnchoraije
¦fx.Juneau
-------
SELECTED SITE ANALYSES
INTRODUCTION
Ten sites, representative of those in the State, have
been selected for analysis (see figure 3). They depict
Alaska's wide variation in geography, climate, physiography,
and available transportation systems, and represent a cross-
section of the five land use categories presented in the
inventory section of this report. In addition, these site
analyses identify many of the agencies responsible for the
creation of solid waste and those responsible for managing
the sites.
For sites one through five, detailed analyses have been
prepared containing site his"tory, location, debris description,
and alternatives for cleanup. From these alternatives, a
recommended method for disposal' and site restoration is
indicated. This recommendation is based upon the amount and
type of debris, the environmental sensitivity of the area,
appropriate and available logistics, and comparative cost
estimates for the entire cleanup project. Finally, recommended
cleanup operations and a total cost estimate are listed,
using current cost data.
The analyses of sites six through ten, are presented in
narrative format. A brief description of the location and
history is given, with an estimate of the quantity and type
of abandoned debris. On-going or anticipated cleanup projects
are discussed and, when possible, their cost is estimated.
For all ten sites, a careful study was made of specific
conditions at the site, in order to determine the best
possible transportation system to be used for the cleanup
operation and the best'time of year to carry it out. These
-determinations were primarily subject to cost and environmental
considerations. The following is a description of some of
the site conditions and other factors which led to the
cleanup recommendations in the analyses.
5
-------
Many of the analyzed siites are underlain by permafrost
(permanently frozen ground) .| During the short summer season,
the surface or "active" layer thaws to a depth of only
several inches, leaving the ground very wet. Summer travel
on this thawed surface can disrupt the fragile tundra
vegetation. This, in turn, can lead to severe erosion. It
is therefore impossible to use vehicles for ground cleanup
at these sites, during the summer. Winter operations, on
the other hand, are restricted by extremely high winds and
low temperatures. Thus, late fall and early spring are
generally the best on-site work seasons.
For remote sites, only [air and water transportation is
available for hauling debris, since highway and rail systems
are limited in Alaska. Air I transport provides year-round
access to all sites, whereas water transport is restricted
to coastal sites during ice-free summer months. For many
locations, air transport is jalso comparatively less expensive
than sea and river barge. Thus, air transport, even for
heavy equipment, is often the less expensive and more available
mode of transportation.
Cost analyses in this summary report are based on these
and other considerations which need further study. There-
fore, they are only roughlyjestimated; a more refined appraisal
will be furnished in the final report.
6
-------
SITE 1
INDIAN MOUNTAIN
GENERAL:
The Indian Mountain complex is an active Aircraft
Control and Warning (AC&W) station operated by the U.S. Air
Force (see figure 4). It consists of an upper facility on
the top of the mountain and a lower facility adjacent to the
air strip at its base. The distance between the two facilities
is approximately 4.5 miles. They were originally constructed
in 1952 and have functioned as part of the Defense Communi-
cations System and as a NORAD Ground Control Interceptor
station.
There is considerable debris at both the upper and
lower facilities. The debris is a result of upgrading the
facilities as defense warning system technology has advanced,
and also' as a result of past facility operations.
An active landfill disposal program is presently in
progress at both the upper and lower sites. This analysis
considers only that debris which is presently at the site
but has not yet been disposed of in the landfill.
LOCATION:
The complex is ¦ located in the Ray Mountains, 22 miles
west of Hughes, a small village on the Koyukuk River.
Latitude: 66°04'N
Longitude: 153°41'W
DEBRIS INVENTORY:
2,500 crushed and uncrushed P.O.L. barrels, some
filled with used oil.
2 tanks, 3,000 U.S. gallon and 1,000 U.S. gallon
capacity.
Lumber, metal, wire, tires, pipe, covering a total area
of 1,100 acres and weighing approximately 100,000 tons.
Utility poles 10 inches in diameter and 30 feet long
and 12 wire cable spools 6 feet in diameter.
lh ton cargo truck, one D-8 and one D-4 caterpillar
tractor.
7
-------
-------
SITE CLEANUP..
Disposal Alernatives
A. Collect and sort the debris into recyclable
materials, i.e., metals,-' usable timber and utility
poles; and combustible materials (with the exception
of petroleum products).
Pile and store recyclable metals for future
disposal.
Pile and store reusable timber, tanks, etc., for
possible reuse either on-site, or by villages and
towns to which land or river transport is available.
Burn the combustibles and bury the residue.
Burn the petroleum products using modified burners
in existing site heating furnaces or burn them in
State approved incinerators. If this is not
possible, then transport petroleum products from
the site for disposal or reuse elsewhere.
B. Collect and sort the debris into combustibles- and
non-combustible material and break down the tractors
into manageable components.
Compress the metal debris by tractor or compactor
and bury.
Burn the combustibles and bury the residue.
Burn the petroleum products as outlined above.
C. Collect and sort the debris into combustibles and
non-combustibles. Classify and sort debris into
directly reusable material and non-reusable scrap.
Compress and bury the scrap.
Burn the combustibles and bury the residue.
Burn the petroleum products as outlined above.
Overhaul usable equipment such as tractors and
trucks, for reuse at the site. Pile and store
other reusable materials as outlined above.
9
-------
SITE CLEANUP (continued)
Logistic Alternatives
A. Transport the compacted recyclable metal debris to
Hughes by truck, then by river barge, via the
Koyukuk-Yukon River system to mouth of the Yukon
River. Off load ajt St. Marys to sea-going barges
for transport to West Coast, USA, or Japan for
recycling.
B. Transport the reusable materials such as construction
equipment, tanks, poles, etc. to Hughes by road.
Then by the river barge system, transport the
materials to a village where they may be reused.
C. Transport the recy'clable metal debris or directly
reusable equipment as per items A and B immediately
above. Transport jthe petroleum products by C-130
Hercules, or similar aircraft, for disposal or
reuse at some other location.
D. Transport the highj value recyclable metals by
Hercules or similar aircraft to the nearest seaport
for shipment to recycling location.
Recommended Disposal Method
The high cost of river barge transportation precludes
the recycling of low value scrap material. High value
metal scrap, i.e. copper, brass, aluminum, etc. may be
transported by Herculesl aircraft to Anchorage then by
sea shipment to Seattle;.
Collect and sort debris into high value scrap, for
shipment to nearest recycling location.
Collect and store combustible petroleum products
for recycling as fuel in suitably adapted thermal
power plants.
Pile and store reusable construction materials and
equipment for reuse on the site or elsewhere.
Compact remaining debris, burn combustibles, bury
debris and burn residue. Incinerate non-recyclable
petroleum products'.
Air transport highi value metallic scrap to nearest
seaport facility and ship to Seattle, West Coast,
USA, or Japan for recycling.
10
-------
SITE CLEANUP (continued)
Site Restoration
Recontour surface over crushed scrap and debris
landfill areas. Prepare landfill sites for reseeding
where necessary and reseed with species of vegetation
which will eventually revert to natural vegetation
cover.
RECOMMENDED CLEANUP OPERATIONS AND ESTIMATED COST:
Operations Cost
1. Collect and sort debris into high $ 65,000.00
value metallic scrap; usable con-
struction materials; combustible pe-
troleum products; combustible debris;
and expendable metallic scrap.
2. Compact and store high value metallic $ 19,000.00
scrap and store combustible petroleum
products.
3. Pile and store usable construction $ 65,000.00
materials, tanks, and construction
equipment, for on-site use or village
use elsewhere.
4. Excavate landfill site. $ 19,000.00
5. Compact crushable scrap and transport $ 47,000.00
to landfill. Burn combustible scrap,
incinerate non-recyclable petroleum
products and transport residue to
landfill.
6. Transport compacted scrap and burned $ 46,000.00
residue to landfill. Backfill excavation.
7. Transport by air high value metallic $ 10,000.00
scrap to Anchorage. Then transport to
Seattle by sea for eventual recycling.
8. Recontour surface of original debris $ 29,000.00
sites and revegetate where necessary.
OPERATION COST ESTIMATE $300,000.00
LESS SCRAP LANDED SEATTLE 5,000.00
CLEANUP COST ESTIMATE $295,000.00
11
-------
NU& ff
-------
SITE 2
SAWMILL BAY
ABANDONED CANNERY
GENERAL:
Sawmill Bay, also known as Evans Bay or Roberts Bay, is
situated on Evans Island in Prince William Sound. Three
former fish canneries are located on the Bay. One of these
is now in operation as a hatchery. One is partially abandoned
and is presently used for other purposes. The third old
cannery site , is completely abandoned and is the one chosen
for consideration in this analysis (see figures 5 and 6).
This abandoned cannery was originally constructed in
1930 .and operated as the Chatham Stuart Fish Company until
1956. Between 1956 and 1960 the operation was intermittent
due to poor fish-harvests. In 1965 the cannery was sold to
the Washington Fish and Oyster Company, and since then has
been completely abandoned.
The site of this cannery is on lands which have been
selected by the Chenega Village Corporation and is within
the region administered by the Chugach Native Regional
Corporation. However, for the purposes of this study, the
land will be considered Fedeiral land.
SITE LOCATION:
Sawmill Bay is located at the northern end of Elvington
Passage on the. east coast of Evans Island. The abandoned
cannery is situated near the northeast corner of the bay in
a smaller bay, known locally as Crab Bay.
Latitude: 60°04'N
Longitude: 148°02'W
DEBRIS INVENTORY:
The one, main cannery building is of wood construction.
It is "T" shaped in plan, and is supported on 20-foot
piles both over, the water and the land. The main
building faces the bay and is approximately 180 feet
long, 55 feet wide and 35 feet high to the roof ridge.
The remaining portion of the building is also of wood
construction and is approximately 80 feet long, 85 feet
in width and 40 feet high to the ridge line.
13
-------
DEBRIS INVENTORY (continued)
Associated with the main building is a wharf, approxi-
mately 80 feet wide and ±90 feet long, with its longer
dimension facing the water. The wharf is supported by
wood piling and the deck I surface has collapsed in
places. The wharf also extends along the northeast
face of the main building.
On the northeast face of the wharf are two wood buildings.
One is approximately 70 feet by 40 feet in plan and 35
feet high, and the other 35 feet by 20' feet in plan and
30 feet high'.
Immediately behind the main cannery buildings are seven
steel tanks of various sizes which average 20 feet in
diameter and 20 feet high. Five of the tanks have
collapsed roof structures and the remaining tanks are
filled with wood debris.
To the northeast of the main cannery complex are several
small partially-demolished wood structures which contain
assorted wood and metal debris.
Further to the northwestjof the complex and above the
beach is a two-story wood structure in good condition.
This structure is approximately 20 feet by 40 feet in
floor plan and 25 feet high. Some 100 feet from this
building are the remains|of a concrete floor slab,
approximately 20 feet by 20 feet in plan.
SITE CLEANUP:
Disposal Alternatives
A. Completely demolish!the cannery and ancillary
structures. Burn combustible materials and bury
the residue. Breakdown the steel tanks into
manageable segments and bury them.
B. Dismantle the canne_y and salvage both the service-
able wood and steel1 tanks for use elsewhere.
C. Cleanup the site, dismantle and remove debris from
the buildings and ancillary structures. Burn and
bury the burn residue and other scrap. Make the
necessary repairs to remaining structures. Secure
the area for restricted access and retain the site
for its historic value.
14
-------
SITE CLEANUP (continued)
Logistic Alternatives
A. Transport by beachable vessel the necessary dem-
olition equipment from either Whittier, Seward, or
Valdez. Return the equipment by the same method.
B. Transport the dismantled construction materials
and the tanks for reuse elsewhere.
C. Transport by beachable vessel the necessary cleanup
equipment to the site. Return the equipment by
the same method.
Recommended Disposal Method
The abandoned cannery at Sawmill Bay has unique
potential as an historic site. A thriving fishing
industry once existed in the area, as indicated by the
location of three canneries in close proximity. The
industry diminished due to a substantial decrease in
fish harvest. Recently, one of the canneries was
converted to a hatchery. Its purpose is to hasten the
natural return which will increase the present harvest
and eventually bring back the industry. Thus, the
past, the present corrective measures, and anticipated
future returns are visable at one location. The following
procedures are therefore recommended:
Demolish those structures at the site which are in
a condition of incipient collapse and dispose of
the resulting debris.
Remove loose boards and other debris from those
structures which will be retained, and make any
necessary repairs.
Cleanup the miscellaneous scrap and debris that is
scattered over the general site. Burn and bury
the residue and scrap.
Install guard rails and viewing platforms so that
the' site and buildings may be viewed from a distance.
Post .the area with warning signs concerning the
potential hazards of entering the buildings.
Provide for regular inspection visits to the site
¦and maintain the structures as necessary.
15
-------
Sawmill Bay Cannery and YVharf
16 Figure 6
-------
SITE CLEANUP (continued)
Site Restoration
Recontour the surface of those areas from which
buildings have been removed or where debris and burn
residue has been buried. Prepare the surface and
reseed with vegetation similar to that which naturally
existed.
RECOMMENDED CLEANUP OPERATIONS AND ESTIMATED COST:
Operations Cost
1. Transport equipment and portable $15,000.00
camp to site by beachable vessel from
Seward.
2. Demolish structures which are con- $20,000.00
sidered hazardous, burn and bury debris.
3. Cleanup, burn and bury scrap and debris $10,000.00
from entire area.
4. Construct necessary guard rails and $20,000.00
viewing platforms, and post area with
necessary signs.
5. Recontour surface, and prepare and reseed $ 5,000.00
where necessary.
6. Demobilize camp, and transport equipment $20,000.00
and camp to Seward
CLEANUP COST ESTIMATE $90,000.00
NOTE: If the abandoned cannery were to be demolished and
the site completely cleaned up, estimated cost would
exceed $200,000.
17
-------
Abandoned Dump at Bethel BIA Facility
18 Figure 7
-------
SITE 3
BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS
BETHEL
GENERAL:
The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) facility is located
six miles northeast of the City of Bethel which is in the
Kuskokwim River delta (see figures 7 and 8). Associated
with this facility is an abandoned dump. The facility is
connected¦by road to Bethel, the Kuskokwim River, and the
Bethel municipal landfill.
SITE LOCATION:
Latitude:
Longitude:
DEBRIS INVENTORY:
900 P.O.L. barrels, some filled with bituminous
petroleum products (assumed to be roofing tar).
-4 generators and 3 abandoned construction vehicles.
Approximately 1,000 cubic feet of wood, paper, and
other debris.
SITE CLEANUP:
Disposal Alternatives
A. Crush barrels, breakup vehicles and generators,
incinerate combustibles and move out recyclable
scrap.
B. Crush barrels, breakup vehicles and generators,
incinerate combustibles and move debris to present
town landfill.
C. Sort barrels and store those that are in good
condition for local reuse. Store those barrels
which contain roofing tar for future use of the
contents. Crush remaining barrels, breakup vehicles
and generators and transport to present town
landfill'. Incinerate combustibles and move residue
to present town landfill.
6 0° 4 8 ' N
161°471W
19
-------
Empty Barrels at Beihel
Barrels of Roofing Tar at Bethel
20 Figure 8
-------
SITE CLEANUP '(continued,-)
-Logistic Alternatives
A. Transport recyclable metals to loading dock at
Bethel then transport by sea barge to West Coast,
USA.
B. Transport all crushed debris by truck to town
landfill.
C. Transport reusable barrels and those containing
roofing tar by truck to -storage area for reuse.
Move, crushed vehicles and burn residue to town
landfill.
Recommended Disposal Method
The .'quantity of debris at this site is not large,
and part of it may be recycled by direct reuse. The
vehicles and generators are in such disrepair that they
have no value other than scrap. The following recom-
mendations for disposal are therefore made:
Relocate and store those barrels that contain
reusable roofing tar.
Relocate and store the P.O.L. barrels that are in
good condition for local use.
Crush the vehicles and those P.O.L. barrels which
are in poor condition, and transport them to the
town landfill.
Burn the combustible debris and transport the burn
residue to'the town landfill.
Site Restoration
Prepare those areas which require revegetation and
reseed with species which will eventually revert to
natural vegetation cover.
21
-------
RECOMMENDED CLEANUP OPERATIONS AND ESTIMATED COST:
Operations Cost
1. Sort barrels, and transport those in $ 5,000.00
good condition to storage area.
2. Transport barrels containing roofing $ 5,000.00
tar to storage area.
3. Crush vehicles and non-reusable barrels, $ 4,000.00
and transport them to the town landfill.
4. Burn combustible debris and transport $ 3,000.00
residue to landfill or transport com-
bustibles to landfill and burn.
5. Prepare damaged vegetation surface $ 5,000.00
at site and reseed only those areas
necessary.
CLEANUP COST ESTIMATE $22,000.00
22
-------
SITE 4
PORT CLARENCE
GENERAL:
Port Clarence is an active U.S. Coast Guard LORAN
station (long range radio navigation transmitter) (see
figures 9, 10, and 11). The site was occupied by the U.S.
Army during World War II. Presently, four buildings are in
use at the station. There are also thirteen abandoned
structures in various states of disrepair.
LOCATION:
The site is located on the Seward Peninsula at the
northern tip of a twenty-mile-long spit of land which
separates Port Clarence Bay from the Bering Sea.
Latitude: 65°15'N
Longitude: 166°51'W
DEBRIS INVENTORY:
13" single story buildings with concrete foundations
ranging from 10 feet by 10 feet to 150 feet by 40 feet
in floor plan. Three are standing in fair condition,
and 10 are in various stages of disrepair.
10 vehicles, consisting of trucks, snow-tracks, half-
tracks, jeeps, dump trucks and two-wheeled trailers.
3,500 P.O.L. barrels (estimated) some of which contain
petroleum products such as tar. There are 3,000 in a
barrel dump and 500 scattered over the site area.
Abandoned landing mat with an estimated total weight of
1,825 tons.
Miscellaneous wood spools, wood debris and P.O.L.
barrels scattered over an area of approximately 1.25 by
1.75 miles.
23
-------
Barrels and Rubble at Port Clarence
Abandoned Structures, Spools and Foundations
24 Figure 9
-------
SITE CLEANUP:
Disposal Alternatives
A. Demolish the abandoned buildings, break up the
foundations and floor slab, clean up the entire
area, remove all debris from site.
B. Demolish the abandoned buildings, breakup the
concrete foundations and floor slabs, and sort
debris. Burn all the combustibles and bury the
residue. Crush and bury the P.O.L. barrels and
vehicles. Cut the landing mat into small sections
and bury it. Bury the concrete rubble.
C. Demolish the abandoned buildings, breakup the
concrete foundations and floor slabs and bury the
concrete rubble. Sort out the reusable construction
material and store it on the site for future use
or transport by barge to local villages. Burn the
remaining combustible construction residue and
bury it. Crush the empty P.O.L. barrels and
vehicle bodies, and cut the metal landing mat into
small sections. Palletize and band the scrap and
store for transport by barge to recycling depo.t.
Burn the petroleum products in an approved incinerator
and bury the residue. Bury any non-recyclable
metal and other debris.
Logistic Alternatives
A. Transport the necessary demolition equipment and
camp facility equipment to the site by barge.
B. Air transport to the site the necessary equipment
and camp for the cleanup operation to the site.
C. Transport by barge all recyclable materials from
the site. Use coastal barge to transport construc-
tion materials to villages and the metal scrap to
Nome. Transfer the recyclable metal scrap at Nome
to sea-going barge for transport to Seattle.
D. Transport.the demolition equipment and the camp to
its original source. This could be done by barge
or by a combination of air and barge transport.
25
-------
Foundations and Wood Debris at Fort Clarence
Piles of Abandoned Landing Mat
- ;.-Ct :¦ .5»
23 Figure 10
-------
SITE CLEANUP (continued)
Recommended Disposal Method
The high cost of sea transportation for the re-
cyclable metal offsets the value of scrap delivered to
Seattle. Burial of the scrap metal presents no environ-
mental-hazard and ground conditions permit burial.
Local village use of the reusable building materials is
precluded due to high labor and transportation costs.
¦The following recommendations are therefore made:
Demolish the abandoned buildings.
Burn all combustibles and bury the residue.
Breakup the concrete foundations and floor slabs
and bury the resulting rubble.
Crush and bury the P.O.L. barrels and vehicles.
Cut the landing mat into small manageable sections
and bury.
Burn the petroleum products in an approved incin-
erator and bury the residue.
Bury all other debris.
Site Restoration
Recontour and prepare the surface for reseeding
only where necessary. Reseed with species of vegetation
which will eventually revert to the natural vegetation
cover.
27
-------
Abandoned Vehicles at Port Clarence
Wooden Crates and Abandoned Structure
28 Figure 11
-------
RECOMMENDED CLEANUP OPERATIONS'AND ESTIMATED COST:
Operations Cost
1. Airlift the modular camp, the earth- $ 56, 000.0.0
moving and other equipment to the
site. Mobilize the camp.
2. Prepare the landfill debris burial $ 14,000.00
sites.
3. Demolish the abandoned buildings and $ 58,000.00
burn the combustible construction
materials." Bury the'debris and backfill.
4. Breakup the concrete foundations and $ 41,0 00.00
floor slabs. Bury the rubble and
backfill.
5. Crush the barrels, cut up the landing $ 43,000.00
mat by acetylene torch, break up and
crush the vehicles. Bury the debris
and fill in the excavation.
6. Cleanup the entire area, burn the com- $ 41,000.00
bustible petroleum products in an incin-
erator and bury residue.
7. Recontour the landfill and any other $ 17,000.00
necessary areas, then prepare for
reseeding.
8_. Reseed only those areas where the surface $ 3 , 000. 00
has been recontoured and other areas
where damage to vegetation is severe.
9. Demobilize the camp and remove camp $ 56,000.00
and equipment by airlift.
CLEANUP COST ESTIMATE $329,000.00
29
-------
7,500 Empty Barrels at Manning Point
View of Manning Point From the Southeast
mm-' ¦ . -
-------
SITE 5
MANNING POINT
GENERAL:
Manning Point was previously used by the U.S. Air Force
Distant Early Warning (DEW) Line operation at Barter Island
(see figure 12). The debris sites are on land which was
patented (#50-77-0046) by the Kaktovik Inupiat Corporation
on January 14, 1977. For the purposes of this study, the
land will be considered Federal land.
SITE-LOCATION:
On' the northern coast of the Arctic National Wildlife
Range, two miles east of the village of Kaktovik.
Latitude: 70°08'N
Longitude: 143°03'W
DEBRIS INVENTORY (estimated):
7,500 empty P.O.L. barrels.
Collapsed shacks of wood construction, 8 feet in
height and 10 feet by 100 feet in floor plan.
SITE CLEANUP:
Disposal Alternatives
A. Kemove tne barrels without crushing or shredding
them.
B. Crush or shred the barrels and remove them.
C. Crush or shred the barrels and bury them.
31
-------
SITE CLEANUP (continued)
Logistic Alternatives
A. Transport the debris by'coastal barge to Prudhoe
Bay. Use the Prudhoe Bay re-supply barges for
transport to Seattle.
B. Transport the debris by coastal barge to Prudhoe
causeway facility, then by road to Fairbanks, by
rail to Whittier, and by rail-barge to Seattle.
C. Transport the debris via the Mackenzie River
system (thru Canada to Hay River, Northwest
Territories) and then by rail to final recycling
location.
Recommended Disposal Method
Permafrost soils and the shortage of suitable
cover material in the area preclude landfill trenching
and covering of the crushed debris.
Crush or shred the barrels, compact the scrap
steel and remove from the site for future scrap
recycling.
Salvage lumber from the shacks for reuse at site,
or burn if not reusable.
Transport the scrap by coastal barge to Prudhoe
Bay and transport on the Prudhoe re-supply barges
to Seattle.
Site Restoration
Prepare site for reseeding. Reseed only those
disturbed areas with vegetation which will eventually
revert to the natural species.
32
-------
RECOMMENDED .CLEANUP OPERATIONS AND ESTIMATED COST:
Operations Cost
1. Cleanup the site and centralize barrels $ 29,000.00
in one location.
2. Classify lumber from the shacks: usable $ 15,000.00
or nonusable.
3. Burn scrap timber and concentrate the $ 29,000.00
residue.
4. Crush or shred the barrels and compact $144,000.00
and palletize the barrel-scrap.
5. Transport the palletized scrap and $ 29,000.00
burned residue to the beach for barge
loading (winter operation). Cleanup
site and load the barge.
6. Transport the scrap by coastal and $ 66,000.00
resupply barge to recycling depot
(Seattle).
7. Unload barge at Seattle. $ 4,000.00
8. Restore site. $ 3,000.00
OPERATION COST ESTIMATE $319,000.00
LESS SCRAP LANDED SEATTLE $ 8,000.00
CLEANUP COST ESTIMATE $311,000.00
33
-------
Salisbury Ridge Power Line Project
Winter Storm on Salisbury nidge
S4 Figure 13
-------
ANALYSIS - SELECTED SITE 6
SALISBURY RIDGE POWER LINE
The Salisbury Ridge Power Line was constructed in 1972
to "transmit-power from the Snettisham Power Project over
Salisbury Ridge into Juneau, Alaska (see figures 13 and 14)'.
It consists of 5.6 miles (9 km) of conductor lines supported
by wood and aluminum towers. Although the line lies within
the Tongass National Forest, it is managed by the Alaska
Power /Administration (APA) .
By 1974, it became apparent to the APA that Salisbury
Ri-'dge' was unsuitable for transmission lines. High wind,
avalanches, icing, and inaccessibility resulted in many
prolonged"blackouts in Juneau. Consequently, in 1976 the
Power Administration constructed a by-pass line and abandoned
the transmission lines which cross the Ridge.
Currently, the APA is investigating the use of these'
lines for research and development purposes. It has proposed
a privately-funded study of the effect of arctic weather
upon transmission components.
As funds become available,, the APA is planning to
remove the Salisbury section by 1981. This project will be
conducted primarily by helicopter and the majority of the
recovered materials will be reutilized. The Power Admin-
istration •estimates that the cost of this removal will be
approximately $500,000.
-------
Wood and Aluminum Towers on Salisbury Ridge
Lower Elevations on Salis|ury Ridge
-------
Skull Cliff
Pow It 0
Mead T.W.
0 Raoluk
Ounialik - West £
4 >u iiiul ik - East 9
Titaluk 0
• PRESENT WASTE SI TES
¦ AREA COVERED BY
1976 HUSKY CLEANUP
Liberator Lake 0
SITES EXPECTED TO BE
CONSOLIDATED BY
SEPTEMBER, 1977
National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska
37 Figure 15
-------
Skull Cliff Site in National Petroleum Reserve
38 Figu:e 16
-------
ANALYSIS - SELECTED SITE 7
NATIONAL PETROLEUM RESERVE IN ALASKA
The National Petroleum Reserve occupies a 35,938 square
mile area in northwestern Alaska. From its inception in
1923, it was managed by the Navy and was known as "Naval
Petroleum Reserve Numbered Four" (NPR-4). In June of 1977,
the Reserve came under the cognizance of the Department of
the Interior and was renamed "The National Petroleum Reserve
in Alaska" (NPRA).
Distribution of Debris at Skull Cliff
39 Figure 17
-------
West Oumalik Site, National Petroleum Reserve
Empty Barrels at West Oumalik
40 Figure 18
-------
A brief history of operations on the NPRA will serve to
introduce the parties responsible for deposit of solid waste
and debris throughout this extensive land area. From 1923
to 1944, the United States Geological Survey (USGS) conducted
a preliminary survey of the Reserve which resulted in a
brief outline of its general geology. Then, from 1944 until
1953, the Navy sponsored a large-scale exploration program
to gain information regarding the oil resource potential of
NPR-4. This program was begun by the Navy but after World
War II, in 1946, it was placed under civilian contract
(Arctic Contractors). During the nine years of operation,
the program involved geological, geophysical, drilling and
operational support activities which have resulted in the
deposit of thousands of fuel barrels, collapsed structures,
and assorted metal and wood debris (see plates of Oumalik, a
gas drilling site in I960, in figures 18 and 19).
Since 1947, NPR-4 has also been the site of various
military construction, including the erection of several DEW
line and LORAN stations. This activity resulted in the
further deposition of fuel barrels, construction materials,
other burnable and non-burnable debris. Thus, the activities
outlined above have resulted in an enormous accumulation of
solid waste, over the past 54 years, at 30 different sites
throughout the Reserve.
41
-------
Wooden Pilings at West Oumalik, National Petroleum Reserve
Assorted Debris at West Oumalik, National Petroleum Reserve
42 Figure 19
-------
In 1976, Husky Oil NPR Operations Incorporated, was
contracted to begin a cleanup of the Reserve. During that
year, Husky consolidated debris at each of fourteen sites in
the northeastern portion of the Reserve (see figure 15).
During the summer of 1977, Husky intends to move the debris
from tnese sites to abandoned, DEW line sites at POW-A and
POW-B, where fuel barrels will be crushed (POW-A;24,930;
POW-B, 9,000) and metal debris will be stockpiled (80 tons;.
50 tons). Husky-also plans to consolidate scattered debris
at two other coastal sites, Skull Cliff, a LORAN site from
1947 to 1949 (see figures 16 and 17) and Tachinisok, an
abandoned DEW line site. By September, 1977, the cleanup
effort will have cost approximately $2,770,000.
The Husky program is based upon no damage to the tundra.
It employs eleven-man work crews that, are assisted by heli-
copter and Roll'igon all-terrain vehicles. During the summer
months, the crews incinerate burnable debris and prepare
non-burnable debris for movement. During the winter, when
the frozen tundra can support hauling equipment, this debris
is moved to coastal locations where the barrels are crushed
and the other materials are stockpiled for disposal. After
the debris is removed from the original site, the tundra is
left to revegetate itself.
It is recommended that the Department of the Interior
continue to fund the Husky cleanup. Husky personnel estimate
that the program will be completed by September, 1979, at an
additional cost of $2,205,000. Upon completion, the debris
from the reserve will be concentrated at Icy Cape,. Skull
Cliff, POW-A, and POW-B. It will consist of approximately
80,240 crushed barrels and 395 tons of stockpiled metal
debris.
43
-------
There are three alternatives for dealing with the
concentrated debris. The first is to let it remain at the
stockpile locations. This is the least expensive alter-
native and leaves a small degree of aesthetic and environ-
mental damage. However, it does not satisfy the spirit of
total cleanup since the most objectionable debris has merely
been moved from many, smaller locations into fewer, larger
ones.
The second alternative is to bury the debris at the
stockpile sites. This will involve considerable time and
expense. In addition, it will compound environmental
damage, since excavation of trenches in the permafrost will
involve either extensive blasting or melting procedures.
The third alternative, whiph is to transport debris
from the sites and recycle usable scrap, is the most desir-
able method. Although it has the highest initial cost
(estimated to be $539,000), it involves the least environ-
mental damage, achieves total cleanup, and reutilizes the
debris.
After debris removal, waste sites should be revege-
tated. On an average, five ac^es at each site will be prone
to erode and will resist self-revegetation. The estimated
cost of re-seeding this area is $150,000 for all sites.
44
-------
Barrow
£ Fairbanks
^ Bethel £
~ Anchorage
&L
&
B Tropospheric Scatter Stations
^ Representative Station
White Alice Communications System
45 Figure 20
-------
46 Figure 21
-------
ANALYSIS - SELECTED SITE 8
WHITE ALICE COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM
In 1954, the Air Force began construction of the White
Alice Communications System in order to create a communi-
cations network which would meet the combined needs of all
the military and civilian agencies in Alaska. Subsequent
modification and consolidation of the original system have
resulted in the present configuration of sixty relay stations.
The system is currently maintained and operated by a commercial
communications company which has leased all of these facilities
from the government.
Within the next several years, numerous stations are
scheduled to be replaced by satellite communications. The
twenty-nine microwave relay stations in the present network
will be offered for sale to a commercial carrier and are
expected to be integrated into the satellite communications
network. However, twenty-three of the tropospheric scatter
stations (indicated in figure 20) will not be integrated and
will probably not even be reusable, due to their unique
application and materials. Thus, it is likely that they
will be a significant waste disposal problem in the near
future. For that reason, this study will identify the
problem and anticipate the disposal of these facilities.
47
-------
The White Alice facility alt Bethel, Alaska, has been
selected for analysis as a representative of the tropospheric
scatter stations (see figures 20 and 21). It consists of
six 60-foot parabolic reflectors with transmitting towers,
approximately 1,000 yards of elevated conduit piping, two
100,000 gallon tanks, and three wood frame support buildings
(120 ft x 40 ft, 40 ft x 20 ft and 25 ft x 25 ft in floor
plan). In addition, there is a small landfill which may be
similar to the solid waste disposal systems at other tropo-
spheric stations. It contains 11 abandoned vehicles, 13
barrels, and about 50 square yards of assorted debris. This
landfill and those on other sites should not present a solid
waste problem, however. The leases governing these sites
require that the commercial leasee cover all sanitary land-
fills prior to returning the stations to the government.
The tropospheric reflectors would present a major
disposal problem at tropospheric sites. Once dismantled,
however, they would provide a considerable source of high
grade steel. When consolidated, the reflectors at all sites
would total approximately 10,800 tons of steel. The associated
equipment and structures could either be reutilized on the
site, or dismantled and recycled along with the reflector
material. The final report of this study will present a
cost estimate for disposing of this debris.
48
-------
ANALYSIS - SELECTED SITE 9
BARTER ISLAND DEW LINE STATION
At Barter Island, located four miles off the north
coast of Alaska, is an active DEW line station ("Bar-Main")
which is currently operated under the control of the Air
Defense Command, Colorado Springs, Colorado (see figures 22
and- 23). The base is located on the north shore of the
island facing the Beaufort Sea, and is about one-half mile
west of Kaktovik Native Village. Except for Defense Department-
and Native claims withdrawals, Barter Island is now included
in the Arctic National Wildlife Range (see Selected Site
10), which was established in 1952.
Bar-Main deposits its solid waste in an active landfill
area located just north of the base on beaches and other
coastal lands and waters. This landfill consists of about
10,000 cubic yards of uncompacted, miscellaneous debris
scattered over an area of approximately 5,000 square yards.
Since it is currently used by the base, the area is not
technically an "abandoned waste site". However, due to its
longetivity, size, and visibility on the northern coast, it
will be identified by this study.
49
-------
West View of Barter Island Landfill
Landfill with DEW Line Site in Background
50 Figune 22
-------
The .only considerable, truly abandoned solid waste at
Bar-Main is comprised of two demolished antenna towers
(approximately 200 feet high) which were brought to the edge
of the. Beaufort Sea and dumped. Their present location is
on the coastline just west of the landfill area.
The Air Force is considering several alternatives with
respect to the future of this landfill operation. The most
viable, plan to date involves three disposal methods: remove
debris from beaches and transport it from the site on barges
which supply the base; burn all existing and future burnable
wastes.in the base incinerator; and finally, compact all
remaining debris and cover the entire site with gravel.
As funds become available, the Air Force intends to
implement a plan similar to the one outlined above. Because
this project involves several variable factors including the
involvement of; military personnel and the availability of
fill, it would be premature to estimate its cost and environ-
mental impact at this time. This information will be furnished
in the final report of this study.
51
-------
Flats at Barter Island
Baiter Island Landfill Extending into the Sea
52 Figure 23
-------
Arctic National Wildlife Range
(letters refer to AINWK site designation in inventory section)
53 Figure 24
-------
Vehicle Debris along ANWR Coast
54 Figure 25
-------
ANALYSIS - SELECTED SITE 10
ARCTIC NATIONAL WILDLIFE RANGE
The Arctic National Widlife Range (ANWR) consists of
about 8.9 million acres in the northeastern corner of Alaska,
adjacent to the Canadian border (see figures 24 and 25).
Congress is presently considering a Dept. of the Interior
proposal (1977) that approximately 3.8 million acres, including
a 3-mile strip of coastal waters, be added to the Range, and
that the combined areas be designated the Arctic National
Wildlife' Refuge. If approved, this segment of the Brooks
Range, North Slope, and the Beaufort Sea would comprise the
most northerly and most remote wilderness area in the National
Refuge System.
A highly detailed inventory at 31 sites of concentrated
refuse, was recently conducted on the ANWR by the Fish and
Wildlife Service, which is responsible for its management
(see figure 24). A string of abandoned DEW line sites,
which are on Defense Department withdrawal lands, is found
along the coast. These consist of old military buildings,
machinery, oil drums, vehicles, and towers, all in various
states of disrepair. In addition, there is a large amount
of debris scattered throughout the Range, including abandoned
camps, tin cans, wrecked planes, fuel cans, P.O.L. barrels,
and old mining equipment.
55
-------
Southeast View of LST Showing Deck Structures
56 Figure 26
-------
The LST ("Landing Ship Tank") 642 is a large, highly
visible solid waste problem at Demarcation Bay, on the
Canadian border (see figure 26). It was sailed to Alaska in
1947 to assist with construction of the Barter Island DEW
line station. The Air Force used it as a work platform for
a period of about five years, from 1953 to 1957, and in 1958
the LST was decommissioned by the Navy and declared surplus.
At this time, it is reported to have been purchased by
a private barge company. As it was being towed away from
Barter Island in October, 1963, an arctic storm struck and
the ship was cut loose from its tug. It was then driven 4 0
miles west along the coast. The LST is presently grounded
in Demarcation Bay, where it moves only slightly during high
tide and winds. All machinery and usable equipment have
been removed. Since ownership of the LST is currently
claimed by a private company, a cost analysis of its removal
is premature.
The Fish and Wildlife Service estimates that a complete
removal of solid waste materials from the Range would be
relatively expensive. This is because of the amount and
wide distribution of debris as well as the fragility of
tundra in the area, which is underlain by permafrost. A
combination of these factors prevents the use of all land
vehicles to perform a "no damage" cleanup operation, and
therefore requires a costly, labor-intensive effort. A cost
estimate of such a man-hour dependent operation will be
included in the final report.
57
-------
WASTE SITE INVENTORY
INTRODUCTION
In this section- of the report, ninety waste sites are
identified and inventoried. Sites are listed in one of five
categories according to land use: (1) Active Military; (2)
Inactive Military; (3) National Parks, Forests, and Wildlife
Refuges; (4) National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska, and (5)
Miscellaneous Waste Sites.
At the beginning of each section is a map of Alaska
showing the location of sites in that category. In some
sections, additional large-scale area maps are provided to
assist in pinpointing debris sites. Each numbered waste
site is identified by name, type of site, and location (in
latitude and longitude), and is inventoried according to the
nature and quantity of solid wastes. The total waste on all
sites in this report consists of forty structures, 890 up-
rights, 11,302 square feet of surface construction, 49
abandoned vehicles, 90,000 barrels or storage tanks, and
21,843 cubic yards of associated debris.
Inventory data was collected through a survey of those
governmental agencies which hold or control Federal lands in
Alaska. In most instances, these agencies were requested to
provide photographs, reports, or other materials which
identified abandoned debris on their lands. In those cases
where such information was either unavailable of insufficient,
an on-site inspection was conducted. Considering the dimension
of the solid waste problem in Alaska, this initial data was
gathered in a relatively short time. Consequently, it is
estimated that the quantities mentioned above represent less
than 20% of the total abandoned debris in the State. In the
final report of this study, the inventory section will be
supplemented and refined as more data becomes available.
The data which follows should be considered only the first
step in identifying the magnitude of this problem.
59
-------
INVENTORY - CATEGORY 1
Barrow
13.
Nome
0 Fairbanks
Bethel Q
.CP..
Sitka
Ketchikan
(numbers indicate site identity ill inventory)
61 Figure 27
-------
Active Military Sites
Site #1: U.S.C.G. Cape St. Elias (Light station)
Location: 59U54'N 144U36'W
Debris: One collapsed hut, small amount of debris
Site #2: U.S.C.G. Point Higgins (Radio station)
Location: 55U27'N 131U50'W
Debris: Small amount of debris
Site #3: U.S.C.G. Shoal Cove (LORAN station)
Location: 55°261N 131°161W
Debris: One 50 square yard solid waste dump
Site #4: U.S.C.G. Port Clarence (LORAN station)
Location: 65°15'N 166°30'W
Debris: Seven buildings, (ranging from 10 ft x 100 ft to 150 ft x
30 ft in floor plan) three wood poles (20 ft high), ten
vehicles, approximately 1,000 barrels, pipe, concrete and
wood debris
Site #5: Bethel White Alice Communications Station
Location: 60(J47I30"N 161°45'W
Debris: 11 vehicles, 13 barrels, 59.8 sq yards of wood, metal and
paper debris
Site #6: U.S.C.G. Tok (LORAN station)
Location: 63°20'N 142°59'W
Debris: One cabin, one outhouse, wood debris
Site #7: U.S.C.G. Spruce Cape (LORAN station)
Location: 57U49'N 152U20'W
Debris: Two quonset huts (25 ft x 50 ft in floor plan), three concret
quonset hut foundations
62
-------
Active Military Sites (continued)
Site #8: U.S.C.G. Guard Island (Light station)
Location: 55°2 6'N 131°53'W
Debris: • Debris from demolished buildings
Site #9: U..S.C.G. Cape Decision (Light station)
Location: 56°00'N 134°081W
Debris: One steel paint locker, one water tank
Site #10: U.S.C.G. Cape Spencer (Light station)
Location: 58°13'n 136°39'W
Debris: Small amount of debris
Site #11: U.S.C.G. Cape Hinchenbrook (Light station)
Location: 6 0U14'N 146°391W
Debris: Three huts, small amounts of debris
Site #12: U.S.C.G. Kodiak (Support center)
Location: 5 7°4 71N 152°471W
Debris: 300 tons buried metal debris, 100 tons exposed metal debris
Site #13: U.S.A.F. Indian Mountain (Station)
Location: 66°04'N 153°42'W
Debris: Two vehicles, utility poles, 2,500 barrels, 3,000 gallon
tank, 1,000 gallon tank, 100,000 tons of miscellaneous debris
Site #14: U'.S.A.F. Kotzebue (Station)
Location: 66°54'N 162°35'W
Debris: Nine wood pilings, 4 steel pilings, one 16-foot wood beam
crane with cable and winding spool
Site #15: U.S.A.F. Tin City (Station)
Location: 65°33'N 167°31'W
Debris: Twenty wood poles (8 in x 14 ft), one barge, 200 barrels, 500
ft of pipe, 10,000 ft of cable, one 200 ft x 150 ft dump, one
100 ft x 300 ft repair yard, various lengths cable
63
-------
Active Military tiites (continued)
Site #16: U.S.A.F. King Salmon (Station)
Location: 5 8°41'N 156°391W
Debris: Approximately 500 crushed barrels
Site #17: U.S.A.F. Tatlina (Station)
Location: 62°53'N 156°13'W
Debris: Seven steel towers (70 ft high), approximately 60 barrels of
used oil
Site #18: U.S.A.F Barter Island (DEW line site)
Location: 70U07'N 143U40'W ~
Debris: 13,081 cu yards of debris in dump site (vehicles, barrels,
waste, etc.)
The following active military sites reported no solid
waste within the scope of this'study:
Fort Richardson
Fort Wainwright
Fort Greely
All Army National Guard Facilities
All Air National Guard Facilities
Naval Arctic Research Laboratory
Galena Air Force Station
All Coast Guard Cutters
USCG LORAN Stations at Cape Sarichef, Kodiak and Ocean Cape
USCG Air Stations at Sitka and Kodiak
USCG Activities in Anchorage
64
-------
INVENTORY - CATEGORY 2
Barrow
9 Fairbanks
y Bethel |
Anchorage
Sitka
.odiak
Ketchikan
Inactive Military Sites
(numbers indicate site identity in inventory)
65 Figure 28
-------
Inactive Military Sites
Site #1: Flaxman Island (abandoned DEW line site)
Location: 7 0°11'N 146°03'W
Debris: Buildings, barrels, machinery, metal debris, downed com-
munication tower
Site #2: Sitkinak Island (abandoned AF Station)
Location: 56u33'N 154u10'W
Debris: Large, two-story building, tower, 200,000 gallon storage tanki.
debris
Site #3: Manning Point (staging area for Barter Island)
Location: 70°07'N 143°30'W
Debris: 7,500 barrels, building (7 ft x 10 ft x 100 ft), collapsed
shacks
66
-------
INVENTORY - CATEGORY 3
Arctic Wildlife Ranife
Mounl McKinlev Park
.Clarence H hode
Wildlife Range Kenai Moose Range
Glacier Bay Monument
N univak
Wildlife
Refuge
Katmai Monument
Tongass Forest
Kodiak Refuge
National Parks, Forests, and Wildlife Refuges
67 Figure 29
-------
Chugach National Forest
(numbers indicate site identity in inventory)
68 Figure 30
-------
Chugach National Forest
Site #1: Malina Lake Hunter Cabin
Location: 5 8U10 ' N 153°05'W
Debris: One wood cabin
Site #2: Pillar Lake Cabin
Location: 58°111N 152u09'W
Debris: One wood cabin, h acre (2,420 sq yds) of metal and glass
debris
Site #3: FAA Site, Dutch Island Group
Location: 6 0°471N 147°471W
Debris: Partially demolished building (26 ft x 16 ft x 16), two small
shacks, two storage tanks (averaging 7 ft in diameter, 10 ft
high) foundation (20 ft x 20 ft)
Site #4: Port Nellie Juan Cannery
Location: 6 0U 3 41N 148°81W
Debris: Wooden debris from demolished buildings covering 1,800 sq
yards, 2 partially demolished buildings (10 ft x 50 ft x 8 ft,
20 ft x 20 ft x 15 ft), 200 wood pilings
Site #5: Sawmill Bay Cannery
Location: 60°5'N 147°57'W
Debris: Building .(190 ft x 115 ft x 50 ), 600 wooden pilings, wharf
(100 ft x 190 ft), building (70 ft x 50 ft x 40 ft), building
(40 ft x 20 ft x 30 ft), seven storage tanks (averaging 20 ft
in diameter, 20 ft high) , building (20 ft x 50 ft x 25 ft) ,
foundation (20 ft x 20 ft)
69
-------
(J) •Juneau
Sitka
TONGASS NATIONAL FOREST
GLACIER BAY MONUMENT
ST. LAZAR1A WILDLIFE REFUGE
(numbers indicate site identity in inventory)
70 Figure 31
-------
Tongass National Forest
Site #1: Crab Bay
Location: 55U29'N 133°08'W
Debris: One yarder
Site #2: Windy Point
Location: 55°13'N 131°59'W
Debris: Two small buildings, 18.3 cu yards debris
Site #3: Salt Lagoon
Location: 55°31'N 131°27'W
Debris: 11 sq ft of metal debris
Site #4: Carroll Inlet
Location: 55U17'N 131°30'W
DebrisOne 25 ft x 75 ft barge
Site #5: Neets Bay
Location: 55°461N T31°42'W
Debris: One 10 ft x 6 ftx 25 ft double drum yarder on skids
Site #6: Salisbury Ridge
Location: 58°201N 134°28'W
Debris: 5.6 mi of transmission line, 19 aluminum towers, 32 wood
towers
Site #7: Port Bazan
Location: 54°49'N 132°59'W
Debris: One dock float, one water tank, one boat, one yarder
Site #8: Ham Cove
Location: 54U53'N 132°51'W
Debris: Two bulldozers, one bus, scattered debris
71
-------
Tongass National Forest (continued)
Site #9: Dog Salmon Creek
Location: 55u2l'N 132°30'W
Debris: Two boats, two spools !of cable, one tank
Site #10: McKenzie Inlet
Location: 55U25'N 132°22'W
Debris: One fishing boat
Site #11: Paul Bight
Location: 55°24'N 132°23'W
Debris: Two yarders, two cat tracks
Site #12: Stikine Area
Location: 56U20'N 132°59'W
Debris: Four boats, two pieces of heavy machinery, tons of debris on
beaches
72
-------
Glacier Bay National Monument
Site #1: Bartlett Cove
Location: 58°27'N 135°55'W
Debris: Ten 20,000-gallon tanks, assorted pipe, barrels
St. Lazaria National Wildlife Refuge
Site #1: St. Lazaria Island
Location: 56°59'N 135°42'W
Debris: Six wood and metal buildings
73
-------
Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge
(numbers indicate site identity in inventory)
74 Figure 32
-------
Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge
Site #1: Karluk Portage
Location: 57033'N 154°18'W
Debris: Two 3 ft x 6 ft skids, 12-18 barrels, 481 sq yards of wood and
metal debris
75
-------
30J
26
Arctic National Wildlife Range
(numbers indieate site identity in inventory)
76 Figure 33
-------
Arctic.National Wildlife Range
Site #1: ANWR Site A
Location: 68°391N 143°4 31W
Debris: Small amount of debris
Site #2: ANWR Site B
Location: 6 8U57'N 14 3°W
Debris: Abandoned camp
Site #3: ANWR Site C
Location: 69UN 142045'w to 69°N 14 3°25'W
Debris: Large amount of debris
Site #4: ANWR Site D
Location: 69U12'N 143°55'W
Debris: Tin cans
Site #5: ANWR Site E
Location: 69U13'N 144°02'W
Debris: Mining debris
Site #6-: ANWR Site F
Location: 69°N 144°35'w
Debris: Two five-gallon gas cans
Site #7: ANWR Site G
Location: 6 9°61N 14 4 ° 3 71W
Debris: One five-gallon can, one sled runner
Site #8: ANWR .Site H
Location: 6 9°61'N 144°371W
Debris: One stove
77
-------
Arctic National Wildlife Range (continued)
Site #9: ANWR Site I
Location: 69°15'N 144°02'W
Debris: One five-gallon gas can
Site #10: ANWR Site J
Location: 69U20'N 144°24'W
Debris: Small amount of debris
Site #11: ANWR Site K
Location: 69°24'N 144O02'W
Debris: Camp site debris
Site #12: ANWR Site L
Location: 6 9°27'N 14 3°4 71W
Debris: Barrels and camp debris
Site #13: ANWR Site M
Location: 69U30'N 142°57'W, 69°30'N 143°05'W
Debris: Fuel cans, camp debris
Site #14: ANWR Site N
Location: 69°27'N 144°04'W
Debris: Campsite debris
Site #15: ANWR Site 0
Location: 69(J30'N 143°45'W
Debris: Five-gallon gas can
Site #16: ANWR Site P
Location: 69U25'N 144°28'W
Debris: Camp debris
78
-------
Arctic National Wildlife Range (continued)
Site #17: ANWR Site Q
Location: 69°29'N 14 4°041W
Debris: Campsite debris
Site #18: ANWR Site R
Location: 69°28'N 144°20'W
Debris: Three barrels, one 5-gallon gas can
Site #19: ANWR Site S
Location: 69U18'N 145°w
Debris: Campsite debris
Site #20: ANWR Site T
Location: 69°22'N 144°58'W
Debris: One to three 5-gallon gas cans
Site #21: ANWR Site U
Location: 69°25'N 144°55'W
Debris: Barrels, campsites
Site #22: ANWR Site V
Location: 69°22'N 145°05'W
Debris: Three empty barrels, two barrels full of debris
Site #23: ANWR Site W
Location: 69°32'N 144°47'W
Debris: Barrels
Site #24: ANWR Site X
Location: 69U34'N 144°20'W
Debris: Wrecked plane
79
-------
Arctic National Wildlife Range (continued)
Site #25: ANWR Site Y
Location: 69°39'N 143°40'W
Debris: Eleven barrels
Site #26: ANWR Site Z
Location: 69U40'N 144°15'W
Debris: Four barrels
Site #27: ANWR Site A-l
Location: 6 9°401N 144°341W
Debris: One C-ration case
Site #28: ANWR Site B-l
Location: 69U53'N 145°0~9'W
Debris: Wrecked plane
Site #29: ANWR Site C-l (abandoned DEW line site)
Location: 69°59'N 144°52'W
Debris: Barrels, buildings, machinery, metal debris, airstrip
Site #30: ANWR Site D-l (abandoned DEW line site)
Location: 69°55'N 142°20'W
Debris: Four structures, abandoned vehicles, barrels, metal debris,
airstrip
Site #31: ANWR Site E-l (abandcjned DEW line site)
Location: 69U43'N 141°10'W
Debris: One structure, airstrip
Site #32 F-l: LST-642 (abandoned ship hull)
Location: 69°43'N 141°13'W '
Debris: Grounded hull of WWII LST (landing ship tank), no super-
structure
80
-------
INVENTORY - CATEGORY 4
Barrow
National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska
Nome
Q Fairbanks
C Bethel £
Sitka
Ketchikan
National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska
81 Figure 34
-------
National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska
(numbers indicate site identity in inventory)
82 Figure 35
-------
National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska
Site #1: Gubic (Gas drilling site - 1951)
Location: 6 9°25'N 151°26'W
Debris: 2,500 barrels, 20 tons of metal and wood debris
Site #2: Icy Cape (Abandoned DEW line site)
Location: 7 0°17'N 161°52'W
Debris: Approximately 5,000 barrels, 35 tons of metal debris
Site #3: Kaoluk (Oil drilling site - 1952)
Location: 69°56'N 160°10'W
Debris: 3,500 barrels, 30 tons of metal and wood debris
Site #4: Knifeblade (Exploratory site - 1951)
Location: 69°10'N 154°48'w
Debris: 500 barrels
Site #5: Liberator Lake (Abandoned exploration site)
Location: 68U53'N 158°22'W
Debris: 150 barrels
Site #6: Mead T.W. No. 1 (Gas drilling site - 1950)
Location: 69U13'N 157°30'W
Debris: 3,343 barrels, 30 tons of metal and wood debris
Site #7: Mona Lisa (Exploration site)
Location: 6 9°551N r54°10'W
Debris: 500 barrels
Site #8: Oumalik - East (Gas drilling site - 1950)
Location: - 69°55'N 155°05'W
Debris: 2,645 barrels, metal and wood debris
Site- #9: Oumalik - West (Gas drilling site - 1950)
Location: 69056'N 155U32'W
Debris: 5,840 barrels, metal and wood debris
83
-------
National Petroleum Reserve' in Alaska (continued)
Site #10: Skull Cliff (LORAN sitle - 1947-1949)
Location: 71°00'N 157°20'W
Debris: 12,000 barrels, 75 tons scrap iron, 40 tons construction
material, 12.5 tons burnable trash (By October, 1977, it is
expected that the barrels at this site will be crushed, the
burnable trash will be incinerated, and the non-burnable
debris will be consolidated.)
Site #11: Square Lake (Oil drilling site - 1952)
Location: 69°35'N 153015'W
Debris: 2,000 barrels
Site #12: Tachinisok (Abandoned DEW line site)
Location: 70U49'N 158°19'W
Debris: Approximately 5,000 barrels, 35 tons of metal debris (By
October, 1977, it is expected that the barrels at this site
will be crushed, the burnable trash will be incinerated, and
the non-burnable debris will be consolidated.
Site #13: Titaluk (Oil and gas drilling site - 1951)
Location: 69°25'N 154°30'W
Debris: 1,282 barrels
Site #14: Weasel (Abandoned exploration site)
Location: 69°13'N 153°37'W
Debris: 100 barrels
Site #15: Wolf Creek (Gas drilling site - 1951)
Location: 6 9(J23'N 153°16'W
Debris: 1, 950 barrels, metal ;and wood debris
Site #16: POW-A (Abandoned DEW line site)
Location: 7lu0 3'N 154°43'W
Debris: 24,930 crushed barrel's, 80 tons of stockpiled metal debris
Site #17: POW-B (Abandoned DEW line site)
Location: 70°33'N 152°05'W
Debris: 9,000 crushed barrels, 50 tons of stockpiled metal debris
84
-------
INVENTORY - CATEGORY 5
Barrow
Nome
0 Fairbanks
Bethel
Anchorage
Sitka
Kodiak
Ketchikan
Miscellaneous Waste Sites
(numbers indicate site identity in inventory)
85 Figure 36
-------
Miscellaneous Waste Sites
Site #1: Bureau of Indian Affairs [Facility (Bethel)
Location: 60°48'N 161°47'W
Debris: 300 empty barrels, 500 barrels of tar, four generators, three
vehicles, 12 appliances, 119.6 sq yards of wood and paper
debris
86
------- |