Restoration Advisory Board (RAB)
November 16, 2000
VA Dept. of Game & Inland
Blacksburg Rotary Club
RAB Community Co-Chair
Anderson & Associates
Virginia Tech Museum of Natural
Alliant Ammunition and Powder
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Department of Conservation & Recreation
Item #1. Introductory Remarks,
Approve Minutes of 20 July 2000
Mr. Jim McKenna convened the meeting
at 7:00 p.m. and asked if there were any comments or questions
about the 20 July 2000 RAB meeting minutes. There were none,
and the minutes were approved as written.
Mr. McKenna introduced Ms. Llyn
Sharp and Ms. Carol Zokaites. Ms. Sharp is the Assistant Director
for the Virginia Tech Museum of Natural History. She learned
about the RFAAP RAB through a New River Task Force meeting and
is interested in becoming a member.
Ms. Zokaites works for the Virginia
Department of Conservation and Recreation. Mr. Jerry Redder
invited her to attend because of her interest in groundwater
and karst geology. Mr. McKenna asked whether Ms. Zokaites would
be interested in becoming a RAB member. Ms. Zokaites declined
at this time, but she is interested in attending RAB meetings
and learning more about the program.
Mr. McKenna mentioned that he had
met with Ms. Sharp earlier to give her a site tour and offered
giving site tours to any other interested RAB members.
Item #2. Election of RAB Member
Mr. Joe Parrish nominated Ms. Sharp
for RAB membership. Mr. Steve Cole seconded the motion, and
Ms. Sharp was unanimously voted in as a new member.
Item #3. Installation Action Plan Workshop Summary
Mr. McKenna reported that RFAAP
held its Installation Action Plan (IAP) workshop September 19–21,
2000. The purpose of the workshop was to review sites and future
plans and then prioritize work and structure the budget accordingly.
Mr. McKenna passed out copies of the 2001 IAP, the product of
this workshop, to the RAB members. He explained that the IAP
is the Army’s management tool for addressing (i.e., investigating,
removing soil, and/or cleaning up sites as necessary) sites
under the Installation Restoration Program (IRP). Such sites
must be eligible for Environmental Restoration Account (ER,
A) funding. The IAP includes summaries, projections, and a one-page
site description for each site. It is updated annually in coordination
with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality.
Mr. McKenna explained the "DSERTS
to SWMU Conversion" found in the front of the plan, which
is basically a list that cross references sites by both the
Army identification number and the EPA identification number.
The Defense Site Environmental Restoration Tracking System (DSERTS)
number (e.g., RFAAP-001) is the Army number. The Solid Waste
Management Unit (SWMU) number (e.g., SWMU 51) is the EPA number.
Mr. McKenna reported that RFAAP
initially proposed $95 million as the cost to complete budget,
the funding used to address sites, which goes out 30 years.
At the workshop, the cost to complete budget was set at about
$43 million. The budget was lowered because some sites are not
eligible for the program and some sites were determined after
the investigation phase as needing no further action.
Mr. McKenna explained that the
sites that were not eligible for the program fell into two general
categories. They were either 1) active sites (not eligible because
the IRP addresses only inactive sites with contamination resulting
from past operations) or 2) sites determined to have no hazardous
material deposited or a released to the environment. These ineligible
sites will be addressed using other programs and funding sources.
Mr. David Allbee asked whether
the IAP schedule was reasonable and whether RFAAP had capabilities
to execute within that timeframe. Mr. McKenna replied that the
IAP dates seem reasonable within the next three to four years
and that there is more than enough funding programmed to execute
the projects. He added that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers/Baltimore
District brings additional resources so RFAAP will be better
able meet this schedule. The IAP is updated annually so as more
data is collected, the budget and schedule will be revised as
needed. Mr. McKenna also explained that the Army is encouraging
RFAAP to finish up as soon as possible and that IRP completion
of all high-priority sites is scheduled to be done by 2014.
Discussion among the meeting attendees followed regarding the
IAP, no further action sites, and the cleanup schedule.
Mr. Allen Boynton referenced RFAAP-002
SWMU No. 71, on page 3 of the IAP Site Descriptions. Under IRP
Status, it states, "RRSE Rating: High Risk (1A)."
Under Proposed Plan, it states, "No further action is anticipated."
Mr. Boynton stated that this might cause questions (i.e., why
would a site with a "high-risk rating" be set for
no further action) by members of the public who read the IAP
on the RFAAP website or from the information repository in the
Mr. Redder responded that copies
of the 2001 IAP have already been published. He suggested taking
the comment into consideration at the next IAP workshop in May
2001. Mr. McKenna also mentioned that RFAAP could expand the
Acronym description in the IAP to better explain "Relative
Risk Site Evaluation" (RRSE). RRSE is used by the Army
as an internal score to prioritize funding, it is not a risk
assessment. He stated that the priority goes in descending order
from "1A" as high, "2A" as medium, and "3A"
as low. Mr. McKenna also indicated that most RFAAP sites are
listed as "1A" in the IAP.
Subsequent to the meeting,
Mr. McKenna elevated this issue to the Operations Support
Command (OSC, next level in RFAAP’s chain of command) with
a suggestion to revise the IRP Status box description for
RRSE by replacing the word "risk" with the word
"priority" or simply just dropping "risk."
OSC approved simply dropping the word "risk."
IRP Status Report Update
Mr. McKenna then referenced the
meeting handout, IRP Status Report Update. He reported that
sampling has been conducted at SWMU 6. Mr. Robert Freis asked
about the timeframe for the regional groundwater study. Mr.
McKenna responded that the study is ongoing and provided a brief
update of activities. Discussion among the meeting attendees
followed regarding the groundwater study and planned activities.
Item #4. Closing Remarks, Schedule Next Meeting, Adjourn
Mr. McKenna adjourned the meeting
at 8:40 p.m. The next RAB meeting will be held at RFAAP on Thursday,
18 January 2001, at 7 p.m.
Meeting Minutes Archives