Community Involvement
restoration advisory board
community relations plan

Restoration Advisory Board

Radford Army Ammunition Plant (RFAAP)
Restoration Advisory Board (RAB)
May 6, 2004

Meeting Minutes




Jim McKenna RFAAP/RAB Co-Chair
Joe Parrish RAB Co-Chair



Jerry Redder RFAAP/AAPC
James Spencer URS
John Tesner USACE/Baltimore
Tina Henderson URS
Jeremy Flint Citizen
Patsy Hosner WPI

Agenda Item #1: Introductory Remarks, Jim McKenna

Mr. Jim McKenna began the meeting at 7:15 p.m.

Because Mr. Flint was present as a new attendee, Mr. McKenna began with an overview of the Installation Restoration Program (IRP).

Agenda Item #2: Installation Restoration Program Status, Jim McKenna

Mr. McKenna reviewed the newest items on the IRP Status Report Update, which is posted on the Web site at

Agenda Item #3: Installation Action Plan (IAP) Workshop, Jim McKenna

Mr. McKenna highlighted the updates to the IAP. At SWMU 35 (RFAAP-010), a Calcium Sulfate Drying Bed, the cost to complete was reduced based on sampling results that indicate the material to be disposed would be nonhazardous, solid waste. SWMU 57 (RFAAP-022) the Pond by Buildings 4931 and 4932, had been closed in the Army database, but is being reopened to allow more data collection and to perform risk assessments. Cost to complete for this effort was added and partially offset the reduction from SWMU 35.

The 2004 IAP is available online at The 2005 IAP will be completed and posted soon.

Agenda Item #4: Question-Answer/Community Input

Mr. Parrish asked about perchlorate contamination in the New River, which had been in the news recently. Mr. McKenna said sampling data from the New River Unit detected perchlorate at 1.71 parts per billion in one stream sample taken at the installation boundary. Therefore, he believes the perchlorate is flowing onto the site from another source. Mr. McKenna said RFAAP has performed more sampling downstream of this sample but perchlorate was not detected. The installation used Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)-approved sampling method, which can sometimes generate false positives. There are other methods of sampling, but EPA has not approved them yet.

Mr. Flint asked about the difference between the Baltimore Corps of Engineers office and the Norfolk Corps of Engineers office. Mr. Tesner said that the Baltimore office is a large design center and handles more complex, multiple-site installations , while the Norfolk office generally handles smaller sites.

Agenda Item #5: Next RAB Meeting and Closing Remarks, Jim McKenna

Mr. McKenna said that WPI's IRP support contract will end on June 30, 2004 and that URS will be taking over this support. He said this should be a transparent change and RAB members should not notice it. He thanked WPI for their efforts over the years.

Thursday, August 19, 2004 was scheduled for the next RAB meeting. A site tour was tentatively planned.

The meeting was adjourned at 8:15 p.m.

Back to RAB Meeting Minutes Archives


Links Site Map Contact Us Search
community involvement information repository investigative activities about information repository investigative activities community involvement about community involvement information repository investigative activities