Restoration Advisory Board (RAB)
July 22, 1999
of Game & Fisheries
Handouts Distributed at Meeting:
- Information Repository Fact
Sheet (July 1999)
- Northern and Western Burning
Grounds and Building 4343 Status Report
- SWMU 54 Status Report
#1. Introductory Remarks, Approve Minutes of 5/20/99
Mr. McKenna convened the meeting
at 7:10 PM and asked if there were any comments or questions
about the May 20, 1999 RAB meeting minutes. There were none,
and the minutes were approved as written.
Mr. McKenna explained that Katie
Phillips from WPI is under contract to RFAAP and will be helping
with the RAB. Support of the RAB is funded by headquarters and
will continue dependent upon interest generated from the community.
#2. Information Repository
Mr. McKenna explained that RFAAP
will be establishing an information repository to house site-related
documents, making these documents accessible to the public.
The RFAAP Community Relations Plan specified that there would
be two information repositories located in local libraries.
However, Mr. McKenna suggested that one information repository
be located in a local library and the other version be available
via the Internet (i.e., web site).
The information repository will
include decision-making documents, which are documents that
include validated field data collected to assess human and ecological
health risks and to determine if a cleanup action is needed.
Such documents include RCRA facility investigations, screening
documents, proposed plans, and records of decision. Right now,
RFAAP is in the screening level or first stage of the decision-making
process. RFAAP has prepared draft decision documents, but the
documents have not yet received EPA approval.
Mr. McKenna addressed the Information
Repository Fact Sheet and explained that there are three local
libraries that are willing to house a RFAAP information repository:
Radford Public Library, Montgomery-Floyd Regional Library (Christiansburg
and Blacksburg branches), and Pulaski County Public Library.
He asked for feedback from the RAB. Upon discussion, it was
decided that the Christiansburg branch of the Montgomery-Floyd
Regional Library would be the most suitable location because
of its central location and because it is the regional headquarters
for Christiansburg, Blacksburg, and Floyd (as well as the library
planned for Shawsville). It was also discussed that having a
hard copy of the documents physically located in a local library
(in addition to the web-based version of the information repository)
is a good idea for those not familiar with the Internet and
for those that dont have computer access.
In reference to the web-based version
of the repository, Mr. Rick Parrish suggested that RFAAP may
want to share this opportunity with the library. The library
may be able to receive funding through grants or other vehicles
to help with the repository.
Mr. Boynton asked for clarification
about RFAAP decision documents to date. Mr. McKenna reported
that there have been draft decision documents developed pursuant
to the RCRA permit (e.g., verification investigations, facility
investigations). Mr. Boynton asked about remedial actions, which
Mr. McKenna confirmed have taken place at some sites (e.g.,
the disposal trench, SWMU 54, and Equalization Basin). Mr. Boynton
suggested that the repository contain information about the
remedial action sites so the public knows that while RFAAP is
just now starting a repository, the site cleanup has been going
on for some time.
#3. New River Unit/Building 4343 Status
Mr. McKenna and Mr. Thomas explained
and pointed out on a site map Building 4343s location
in the Horseshoe Area. Subsurface soil, ditch, and sump samples
and interior swipe samples have been collected at Building 4343.
New River Unit (Northern and
Western Burning Areas)
Mr. McKenna reported that preliminary
test borings have been conducted to characterize the material
in the Western Burning and Northern Burning Areas at the New
River Unit. Mr. Thomas added that as of now, they have two rows
of 20 by 20 foot test pits and one row of 20 by 10 foot test
pits for a total of 18 test pits. The crew is getting down to
native soil/bedrock at about 2 ½ feet. The soil is being stockpiled
for proper disposal instead of being put back into place; they
have basically sampled the site away. They will stop digging
once they receive confirmatory analyses that the crew has dug
deep enough to reach the native soil (i.e., soil that is not
contaminated). The stockpiled soil is being tested separately,
and the results thus far have shown the soil is not hazardous.
Mr. Rick Parrish asked what was
in the soil. Mr. McKenna explained that the materials in the
Western Burning Area consist of ash, burning debris, solid pipes,
metal bands, building material, and construction debris. Ms.
Barker asked if there was any contamination at the site. Mr.
McKenna and Mr. Thomas explained that lead is the main contaminant
of concern. Results indicated lead concentrations exceeding
2,000 parts per million (ppm) in four out of five borings. Therefore,
they test pitted further to determine the actual extent of contamination.
Mr. McKenna reported that 400 ppm is usually used as a concentration
standard for residential sites (i.e., sites with unrestricted
use by residents). With the relatively small size of the Western
Burning Area, RFAAP is over-excavating (i.e., taking out more
soil) and removing the contamination now, which is much cheaper
than having to come back and do more characterization later.
Mr. Boynton asked if they are characterizing
the soil in the Western Burning Area extensively (i.e., 100
percent coverage). Mr. McKenna explained that they are characterizing
the soil extensively; they break the area into grids and take
a test pit in each grid.
#4. SWMU 54 Status
Mr. McKenna reported that though
on a larger scale, activities at SWMU 54 are very similar to
whats currently happening at the Western Burning Area
(i.e., test pitting to characterize the site). Contractors also
used a grid pattern at SWMU 54 to take test pit samples. However,
unlike the burning areas, they did not remove the soil; they
put it back in place because it is a much larger site. Mr. Rick
Parrish asked if they had found consolidated materials at the
site. Mr. McKenna explained that they have found different materials
such as laboratory bottles, metal debris, and ash residue. Contamination
at the site is mainly lead and some explosives from propellant
ash. Mr. Rick Parrish asked if there was any concern for detonation
at the site. Mr. McKenna replied that while some explosives
were detected, they were not found at a concentration that would
Mr. McKenna reported that they
moved the fence around SWMU 54 to prevent trespassers. They
are currently looking at options to address the construction
worker scenario (i.e., protect construction workers working
on the site from any health risks). Mr. Cole asked for clarification
about fencing the river from the site. Mr. McKenna explained
that the site used to be outside of the fence, and so they moved
the fence around the site to protect people who may come up
from boating or other recreational activities on the river in
order to keep them away from the site.
Mr. McKenna reported that RFAAP
is preparing a draft decision document for SWMU 54, which will
be submitted to EPA, with different scenarios for cleanup, including
hot spot removal. The document will evaluate the different scenarios
based on specific criteria. For instance, cost is one criterion
that has to be considered in the decision. Mr. McKenna explained
that materials were trucked in and deposited in different locations.
Therefore, some areas have a higher concentration of contaminants
(i.e., hot spots) than other areas. In some of the alternatives
being considered, RFAAP would remove the higher areas of concentration
or the areas with contaminant levels above the cleanup criteria.
Mr. McKenna reported that the decision document produced from
this effort may take several weeks/months to complete. The document
needs to be submitted to EPA before it can be provided to RAB
and the information repository.
Mr. Boynton asked when the physical
work at the Western Burning Area would be finished. Mr. Thomas
of ICF Kaiser, the company doing the work, reported that the
field work should be complete in mid August. They are almost
finished with the test pits, and then they have to backfill
the excavated area, regrade, reseed, and clean up the entire
#5. Closing Remarks, Schedule Next Meeting
Mr. McKenna adjourned the meeting
at 8:00 PM. The next RAB meeting will be held at RFAAP on Thursday,
September 16, 1999, at 7 p.m.
Meeting Minutes Archives