Site History cont.
(present for over two hundred years), oil storage
facilities, chemical facilities, a fertilizer plant, a
cement storage facility, several hazardous waste
cleanup sites, and a power plant.
EPA placed the site on the National Priorities
List to best address the high levels of contami-
nation . In the late 1980's and early 1990's,
AWI conducted an investigation to assess the
nature and extent of contamination at the site
and to present remedial alternatives for the con-
taminated soil and creosote. EPA issued a ROD
for the soils and creosote in 1995 that involved
treating the contamination with bioremediation,
with a contingency of excavation and thermal
desorption. However, while collecting informa-
tion to implement the ROD, EPA determined
that the 1995 cleanup plan would not be suc-
cessful (neither the bioremediation nor the exca-
vation and thermal desorption) due to newly-
found high concentrations of metals contamina-
tion.
In 2002, EPA began evaluating additional alter-
natives so a new cleanup plan could be selected
for the soil and creosote. Meanwhile, EPA be-
gan studying the contamination in the ground
and in the Southern Branch of the Elizabeth
River.
The primary contaminants found at the site
are PAHs (including visible creosote); ben-
zene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylenes
(BTEX); various metals; PCP; and dioxin.
SITE CONTACTS
EPA Project Manager
Randy Sturgeon
1650 Arch St. (3HS23)
Philadelphia, PA 19103
215-814-3227
sturgeon.randy@epa.gov
EPA Community Involvement
Coordinator
Larry Johnson
1650 Arch St. (3HS52)
Philadelphia, PA 19103
215-814-3239
johnson.larry-c@epa.gov
Agency for Toxic Substances and
Disease Registry
Dr. Karl Markiewicz, Toxicologist
215-814-3141
markiewicz.karl@epa.gov

my
United States
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Region 3
1650 Arch Street (3HS52)
Philadelphia, PA 19103
ATTN: Larry Johnson
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Region 3
Atlantic Wood Industries Superfund Site
Portsmouth. VA
July 2007
EPA Seeks Public Comment on Proposed Cleanup Plan
The U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) has developed a Proposed
Remedial Action Plan (Proposed Plan)
for cleaning up contaminated soils,
sediments and groundwater at the
Atlantic Wood Industries (AWI)
Superfund Site in Portsmouth,
Virginia.
The plan outlines seven options or
alternatives for cleanup, including EPA's
preferred cleanup option.
EPA's preferred cleanup option is
Alternative 4:
•	Cover the soil
•	Consolidation some of the creosote and
contain it
•	Monitor the groundwater
•	Dredge contaminated sediments and
dispose of them behind enhanced off-
shore sheet pile wall on the AWI
•prd^fartytored natural recovery of
sediments.
•	Cost: $45 Million
The Proposed Plan, which explains all seven cleanup
alternatives, can be reviewed on the Internet at: http://
www.epa. gov/reg3hwmd/super/sites/VAD990710410/
index.htm.
To view the Proposed Plan, select 'July 2007 Proposed
Plan'. To view the Administrative Record (the docu-
ments that EPA considered and relied upon to develop
its preferred alternative), select 'on-line' under Admin-
istrative Record Locations.
The following locations have computers that can be used
to view documents: Portsmouth Public Library, 601
Court Street, Portsmouth, VA 23704, Chesapeake Li-
brary, 298 Cedar Road, Chesapeake, VA 23320, Kirn
Memorial Library, 301 E. City Hall Avenue, Norfolk,
VA 23501
Your Role in the Process
Community Involvement is critical to EPA's
decision making process. You have a voice in
telling us what you think about our cleanup
plan.
Public Meeting
When? July 24, 2007
6:30 pm to 8:30 pm
Where? CRADOCK RECREATION CENTER
Social Hall
4300 George Washington Highway
Portsmouth, VA 23704
EPA will hold a public meeting to explain
the Proposed Cleanup Plan and to hear and
record your comments.
We Want Your Opinion!
The public is invited to submit comments
on EPA's Proposed Plan anytime during
the 30-day comment period. Comments
will be accepted from:
July 11 - August 10, 2007
(Must be postmarked by midnight
August 10, 2007)
Please mail comments to:
UNITED STATES
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
1650 Arch Street, 3HS23
Philadelphia, PA 19103
ATTN: Randy Sturgeon
You may also send comments via email
to: johnson.larry-c@epa.gov

-------
EPA's Nine Criteria Analysis
Before a final cleanup plan is chosen, all the op-
tions must be judged against nine criteria to
make sure that EPA is selecting the best cleanup.
The nine criteria are:
1.	Overall Protection of Human Health and the En-
vironment
2.	Compliance with Applicable or Relevant and Ap-
propriate Requirements
3.	Long-term Effectiveness and Permanence
4.	Reduction of Toxicity, Mobility, or Volume
through Treatment
5.	Short-term Effectiveness
6.	Implementability
7.	Cost
8.	State Acceptance
9.	Community Acceptance
Rationale for EPA's Preferred Option
EPA believes that Alternative 4 offers the following
advantages compared to the other alternatives:
•It effectively encapsulates the highly contaminated
river sediments while minimizing the risk of recon-
tamination.
•It reduces the risk of DNAPL migration to deeper
aquifers in the Historic Disposal Area for signifi-
cantly less cost than Alternatives 5, 6, and 7 and is
substantially easier to implement than these other al-
ternatives.
•It provides for flexibility in the reuse of the site for
industrial or recreation purposes, as determined by
state and local authorities, without any reduction in
protectiveness.
•It provides for flexibility in future uses of adjacent
properties, including the Navy Southgate Annex, the
Portsmouth Port and Industrial Authority property,
the City of Chesapeake (potential future expansion of
the Jordan Bridge), and the navigation channel.
•It is among the least costly of the alternatives.
Summary of Cleanup Options
EPA considered seven cleanup options.
Alternative 1: No Action.
Cost: $0
Alternative 2: Soil Cover, Ground Water Monitor-
ing, On-Shore Sheet Pile Wall, Sediment Cover, and
Monitored Natural Recovery of Sediments
Cost: $38 million
Alternative 3: Enhanced Soil Cap, Ground Water
Monitoring, On-Shore Sheet Pile Wall, Partial
Dredging with On-site Disposal, Sediment Cover,
and Monitored Natural Recovery of Sediments
Cost: $49 million
Alternative 4: Soil Cover, Some Creosote Consoli-
dation and Containment, Ground Water Monitoring,
Dredging with Disposal Behind Enhanced Off-Shore
Sheet Pile Wall and on the AWI Property, and Moni-
tored Natural Recovery of Sediments
Cost: $45 million
Alternative 5: In-situ Solidification/Stabilization of
Soil and Creosote, Soil Cover, Ground Water Moni-
toring, Enhanced On-Shore Sheet Pile Wall, Dredg-
ing with Onsite Disposal Except for Sediment Cover
with Habitat Restoration in Wyckoff Inlet, and Moni-
tored Natural Recovery of Sediments
Cost: $61 million
Alternative 6: Low-Temperature Thermal Desorp-
tion of Soil, Pump and Treat Creosote and Ground
Water, Ground Water Monitoring, Enhanced On-
Shore Sheet Pile Wall, Dredging with Onsite Dis-
posal Except for Sediment Cover with Habitat Resto-
ration in Wyckoff Inlet, and Monitored Natural Re-
covery of Sediments
Cost: $119 million
Alternative 7: Combination of Excavation with Off-
site Disposal and In-Situ Solidification/Stabilization
of Soil and Creosote, In-Situ Chemical Oxidation of
Ground Water, Ground Water Monitoring, On-Shore
Sheet Pile Wall, and Dredging with Off-Site Dis-
posal
Cost: $293 million
Record of Decision
After the public comment period has ended and
all the comments have been reviewed and care-
fully considered, EPA will select the final cleanup
plan for the site. The final cleanup will be de-
scribed in a Record of Decision (ROD). The an-
swers to the public comments will be recorded in
a document called the Responsiveness Summary,
which is part of the ROD. If EPA gets any com-
ments or information that change our preferred
cleanup option, that will also be recorded in the
ROD.
2
Risks from Contamination
As part of EPA's investigation, we looked at the
potential for people to be exposed to elevated
levels of contaminated soils, sediment and
some shellfish. The sample results indicate that
there is the potential for people to be exposed to
contamination and that's why it's important for
EPA to clean up the site.
Prolonged exposure to contaminated soils from
the AWI site could result in adverse health
effects to trespassers and on-site workers.
Highly contaminated river sediments just off-
shore the AWI site present a potential health
hazard to recreational users of the river.
Exposure to wind-blown surface soil does not
present a health risk to individuals at or near the
site.
EPA recently evaluated the levels of
contaminants in shellfish caught near the AWI
site. Levels of contaminants were high enough
to present a potential health risk to individuals
who consume a high number of crabs over a
lifetime from this stretch of the Southern
Branch of the Elizabeth River. Pregnant
women, women of child-bearing age, children,
and other sensitive subgroups should limit their
consumption to reduce their potential heath
risk. When eating crabs, individuals should
consider eating the meat only instead of the
whole crab since "the
mustard" (hepatopancreas) of the crab contains
the highest levels of contaminants.
Recreational activities are discouraged in the
western half of the Southern Branch of the
Elizabeth River from the Southgate Annex of
the Norfolk Naval Shipyard (NNSY) north to
the turning basin at the NNSY.
Due to PCB and kepone contamination in the
area, the Commonwealth of Virginia has a fin
fish fishing advisory for the James and
Elizabeth Rivers.
In addition, harvesting oysters and mollusks
from the Elizabeth River is banned because of
bacteria and heavy metal contamination.
Consider Starting a Community
Advisory Group!
Community Advisory Groups may be
formed at any point and serve as a liaison
between EPA and the community.
Community members who wish to
participate on a CAG should contact EPA's
Community Involvement Coordinator, Larry
Johnson at (215) 814-3239 for more
information.
Technical Assistance Grant
EPA's Technical Assistance Grant (TAG)
Program provides funds of up to $50,000 to
qualified citizens' groups affected by a
Superfund site to hire independent technical
advisors to help interpret and comment on site-
related information. Since only one TAG may
be awarded for a site, EPA encourages groups
to consolidate to apply. For TAG information,
please contact Amelia Libertz, TAG
Coordinator at 1-800-553-2509.
What's Next?
Once EPA receives comments from the public,
the Agency will issue a Record of Decision.
Then EPA, along with the Virginia Department
of Environmental Quality will begin
negotiations with Atlantic Wood Industries and
the U.S. Navy (parties potentially responsible
for the contamination) about how to implement
the selected cleanup plan. Once it is determined
who will implement the plan, the design will
begin and then the cleanup.
Site History
The AWI property, the location of a creosote
and pentachlorophenol (PCP) wood-treating
operation from 1926 until 1992, occupies
approximately 48 acres of land on the
industrialized waterfront area of Portsmouth,
Virginia at the west end of the Jordan Bridge.
The AWI property is across the street from
another former creosote wood-treating facility:
the Wyckoff Pipe & Creosote Company.
The Southern Branch of the Elizabeth River
flows through a highly industrialized area,
including the AWI facility, the former Wyckoff
facility, Navy facilities

-------