0013S5 I~.% Volume I File. 18G D.B. Remedial Investigation/Feasibitity Study ffioool
Site--- Management Plan Elelson Air Force Base, Alaska
a' ~ J~nei1991-~~~17 ____
Prepared by OI{HILL R.O. Box 428 Corvallis, OR 97339 under contract to O4"Battewi Environmental Management Operations Richiand, Washington
O& opRd.Cyw Site Management Plan DRAFT Eieleon Air Force Base#
DISCLAIMER
[To be prepared by EMO and included with the Draft Final.J
CVOR25fi/74 51 ii17 June 1991 Site Management Pla DRAFT EBelson Air Force Base
. ~PREFACE
This is the first draft of a document prepared by CH2M HILL for review by the parties to a Federal Facility Agreement Under CEROLA Section 120, which is concerned with remedial activities at Elelson Air Force Base, Alaska. The document consists of two volumes, with appendixes comprising the second volume. This Site Management Plan is for use in conjunction with management plans prepared for the operable units of the base.
CVOP2S7IO'5.51 Ii7 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Delolon Air Force Base
CONTENTS
Page Preface ...... Iii
Acronyms and Abbreviations ...... Xiii
Summary ...... 1
1.0 Introduction ...... 1.1 1.1 Federal Facility Agreement ...... 1.3 1.2 Purpose and Scope ...... 1.4 1.3 Organization of Site Management Plan ...... 1.6
2.0 Management Approach ...... 2.1 2.1 Environmental Response Objectives ...... 2.2 2.2 Remedial Goals ...... 2.3 2.2.1 Protection of Human Health and the Environment ...... 2.4 2.2.2 Feasibility ...... 2.5 2.2.3 Permanence ...... 2.6 2.2.4 Remediation Time Frame ...... 2.6 2.3 Preliminary ARARs Evaluation ...... 2.7 0 2.3.1 Chemical-Specific ARARs ...... 2.8 2.3.2 Location-Specific ARARs ...... 2.18 2.3.3 Action-Specific ARARs ...... 2.18 2.3.4 To-be-Considered Criteria or Guidelines ...... 2.20 2.4 Use of Observational Approach ...... 2.20 2.5 Data Quality Objectives ...... 2.22 2.6 Additional Data Requirements ...... 2.23 2.7 Coordination of Activities at OUs ...... 2.25 2.8 Interim Actions ...... 2.27 2.9 Special Considerations ...... 2.28 2.10 Community Relations...... 2.30
3.0 Site Setting ...... 3.1 3.1 Location and Physiography...... 3.1 3.2 Site Background...... 3.4 3.2.1 Site History and Current Mission...... 3.4 3.2.2 Description of Existing Facility ...... 3.5
ctVCVOFQS7IO73.51 iv 17 June 1991 Shte Management Plan DRAFT Veolaon Air Force Base.
. ~CONTENTS (Continued) Page 3.2.3 Waste Management Practices ...... 3.7 3.2.3.1 Industrial Wastes...... 3.7 3.2.3.2 Solid Wastes...... 3.9 3.2.3.3 Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) ...... 3.9 3.2.3.4 Pesticides and Herbicides...... 3.10 3.2.3.5 Wastewater Treatment...... 3.10 3.2.4 Previous Investigations...... 3.11 3.2.4.1 Phase I--Records Search...... 3.11 3.2.4.2 Phase 1l--Confirmation and Quantification...... 3.12 3.2.4.3 Phase Ill--Technology Development ...... 3.13 3.2.4.4 Phase IV--Remedial Action Plans ...... 3.13 3.3 Physical Setting ...... 3.14 3.3.1 Geology ...... 3.14 3.3.2 Surface Soils and Permafrost ...... 3.15 3.3.3 Hydrology ...... 3.17 3.3.3.1 Groundwater Occurrence and Aquifer Characteristics 3.17 3.3.3.2 Groundwater Use ...... 3.20 3.3.3.3 Surface Water...... 3.23 3.3.3.4 Surface Water and Groundwater Interactions ...... 3.28 3.3.4 Ecological Resources...... 3.28 3.3.4.1 Flora...... 3.29 3.3.4.2 Wildlife ...... 3.29 3.3.4.3 Fish ...... 3.30 3.3.4.4 Threatened and Endangered Species ...... 3.31 3.3.5 Climate and Meteorology ...... 3.31 3.4 Cultural Setting...... 3.33 3.4.1 Historic and Cultural Resources ...... 3.33 3.4.2 Socioeconomics...... I... I..... 3.33 3.4.2.1 Demographics and Employment ...... 3.33 3.4.2.2 Housing...... 3.34 3.4.2.3 Transportation...... 3.34
4.0 Source Area Descriptions ...... 4.1 4.1 Operable Unit 1 ...... 4.1 4.1.1 Source Area ST20 ...... 4.7 4.1.2 Source Area ST48...... 4.7 4.1.3 Source Area ST49...... 4.8
. ~~ct/CV0R571073.51 v 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAPT Elelson Air Force. Bae.
CONTENTS (Continued)
Page
4.1.4 Blair Lakes Source Areas ...... 4.S~ 4.1.4.1 Source Area SS50 ...... 4.11 4.1.4.2 Source Area SS51...... 4.11 4.1.4.3 Source Area SS52 ...... 4.11 4.1.4.4 Source Area SS53 ...... 4.12 4.1.4.5 Source Area DP54 ...... 4.12 4.2 Operable Unit 2 ...... 4.12 4.2.1 Source Area ST1O0...... 4.14 4.2.2 Source Area STi 1 ...... 4.14 4.2.3 Source Area ST1 3...... 4.15 4.2.4 Source Area SS1 4...... 4.15 4.2.5 Source Area ST18 ...... 4.15 4.2.6 Source Area ST19 ...... 4.16 4.3 Operable Unit 3 ...... 4.16 4.3.1 Source Area DP44...... 4.16 4.3.2 Source Area WP45...... 4.18 4.4 Operable Unit 4...... 4.18 4.4.1 Source Area DP25 ...... ;...... 4.20 4.4.2 Source Area DP26...... 4.21 4.4.3 Source Area ST27 ...... 4.21 4.4.4 Source Area SS36...... 4.22 4.4.5 Source Area SS37...... 4.22 4.4.6 Source Area S539...... 4.23 4.5 Operable Unit 5 ...... 4.24 4.5.1 Source Area LF03 ...... 4.24 4.5.2 Source Area LF04 ...... 4.26 4.5.3 Source Area FT09 ...... 4.26 4.6 Operable Unit 6 ...... 4.27 4.7 Source Evaluation Report A ...... 4.29 4.7.1 Source Area LF07...... 4.29 4.7.2 Source Area ST12 ...... 4.29 4.7.3 Source Area ST i 7...... 4.30 4.7.4 Source Area DP28B...... 4.30 4.7.5 Source Area WP33...... 4.31 4.7.6 Source Area DP4O ...... 4.31 4.7.7 Source Area DP55...... 4.31 4.7.8 Source Area 5S62...... 4.32
ct/CVOP257/O73.51 vi 17 June 1991 Sit. Managoment Plan DRAFT Eololon Air Force Beo
. ~CONTENTS (Continued) Page 4.8 Source Evaluation Report B...... 4.32 4.8.1 Source Area LFO2...... 4.3 2 4.8.2 Source Area LF0OS...... 4.33 4.8.3 Source Area LF06O...... 4.34 4.8.4 Source Area FT08...... 4.34 4.8.5 Source Area DP29 ...... 4.35 4.8.6 Source Area WP32...... 4.36 4.8.7 Source Area SS35 ...... 4.36 4.8.8 Source Area SS42 ...... 4.37 4.8.9 Source Area SS47...... 4.38 4.8.10 Source Area WP60O...... 4.38 4.9 Source Evaluation Report C...... 4.39 4.9.1 Source Area LFO1...... 4.39 4.9.2 Source Area ST15 ...... 4.40 4.9.Sorce reaST1...... 40 4.9.4 Road Oiling Source Areas (SD21, S022, SD23, SD24)...... 4.41 4.9.5 P08 Storage Source Areas (5530 and SS31) ...... 4.41 4.9.6 Source Area SS41 ...... 4.42 4.9.7 Source Area ST56...... 4.43 4.9.8 Source Area SS57...... 4.43 4.9.9 Source Area ST58...... 4.43 4.9.10 Source Area SS61...... 4.43 4.9.11 Source Area SS63...... 4.43 4.9.12 Source Area SS64...... 4.44 4.10 Other Source Areas ...... 4.44 4.10.1 Source Area WP34...... 4.44 4.10.2 Source Area LF43...... 4.45 4.10.3 Source Area SS46...... 4.45 4.10.4 Source Area ST59...... 4.46
5.0 Site Conceptual Model ...... 5.1 5.1 Contaminant Sources, Characteristics, and Release Mechanisms ...... 5.2 5.1.1 Spills or Releases...... 5.2 5.1.2 Land Disposal Operations...... 5.6 5.1.3 Road Oiling ...... 5.6 5.1.4 Pest Control...... 5.7 5.1.5 General Site Activities ...... 5.7
* ~~cVCV0R257IO73.51 vii 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Eolaon Air Force Ba..
CONTENTS (Continued)
Page
5.2 Migration Pathways...... 5.9 5.2.1 Vadlose Zone ...... 5.9 5.2.2 Groundwater ...... 5.11 5.2.3 Surface Water and Sediment ...... 5.16 5.2.4 Air ...... 5.19 5.3 Exposure Pathways...... 5.20 5.3.1 Human Exposures...... 5.20 5.3.2 Ecological Exposures...... 5.23 5.4 Data Needs ...... 5.23 5.4.1 Nature of Contamination ...... 5.25 5.4.2 Background Concentrations ...... 5.25 5.4.3 Characterization of Subsurface Geology ...... 5.27 5.4.4 Vadlose Zone Attenuation Capacity ...... 5.27 5.4.5 Effect of Ground Freeze and Permafrost on Contaminant Migration ...... 5.27 5.4.6 Groundwater and Surface Water Flow Systems ...... 5.28 5.4.7 Characterization of Contaminant Migration in Groundwater ... 5.28 a 5.4.8 Lateral Extent of Groundwater Contamination ...... 5.2py 5.4.9 Vertical Extent of Groundwater Contamination ...... 5.29 5.4.10 Condition and Usability of Existing Monitoring Well Network .. 5.29 5.4.11 Contaminant Distribution in Bedrock and Alluvial Aquifer Systems Near the Ski Lodge ...... 5.30 5.4.12 Sitewide Surface Water and Sediment Characterization ...... 5.30 5.4.13 Nature and Extent of Surface Soil Contamination...... 5.30 5.4.14 Meteorological Data...... 5.31 5.4.15 Land and Resources Use Patterns ...... 5.31 5.4.16 Ecological Impact Assessment...... 5.31 6.0 Project Tasks ...... 6.1 6.1 Project Management ...... 6.2 6.1.1 Staffing ...... 6.2 6.1.2 General Management ...... 6.3 6.1.3 Meetings ...... 6.3 6.1.4 Cost Control...... 6.3 6.1.5 Schedule Control...... 6.4 6.1.6 Project File Management ...... 6.4 6.1.7 Progress Reporting ...... 6.4
Ct/CVOR57/073.51 viii 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Velston Air Force Base
. ~CONTENTS (Continued) Page
6.2 Remedial Investigation Tasks...... 6.4 6.2.1 Operable Characterizations...... 6.7 6.2.2 Sitewide Characterizations ...... 6.10 6.2.2.1 Meteorology...... 6.10 6.2.2.2 Demographics ...... 6.11 6.2.2.3 Background Concentrations ...... 6.12 6.2.2.4 Soils and Geology ...... 6.26 6.2.2.5 Groundwater ...... 6.27 6.2.2.6 Surface Water and Sediment...... 6.34 6.2.2.7 Biota Investigations ...... 6.36 6.2.3 Identification of Potential ARARs...... 6.41 6.2.4 Human Health Baseline Risk Assessment ...... 6.42 6.2.4.1 Baseline Risk Assessment Process ...... 6.43 6.2.4.2 Baseline Risk Assessment Milestones ...... 6.45 6.2.5 Ecological Assessment...... 6.47 6.2.5.1 Scope of the Ecological Assessment ...... 6.48 6.2.5.2 Identification of Data Needs ...... 6.49 6.2.5.3 Collection and Analysis of Data ...... 6.49 6.2.5.4 Risk Characterization ...... 6.53 6.2.6 Treatability Studies ...... 6.53 6.2.6.1 Treatability Study Tiers ...... 6.54 6.2.6.2 Treatability Study Approach ...... 6.55 6.2.6.3 Treatability Study Needs ...... 6.56 6.2.7 Data Management...... 6.56 6.2.8 Remedial Investigation Report ...... 6.60 6.3 Feasibility Study...... 6.63 6.3.1 Sitewide Feasibilfty Study ...... 6.63 6.3.2 Operable Unit Feasibility Studies...... 6.64 6.3.3 Development of Remedial Alternatives...... 6.65 6.3.3.1 Development of Remedial Action Objectives...... 6. 65 6.3.3.2 Scoping General Response Actions...... 6.66 6.3.3.3 Identification and Evaluation of Potential Remedial Technologies and Processes...... 6.67 6.3.3.4 Assembly, Development, and Screening of Alternatives for the OU ...... 6.70 6.3.3.5 Detailed Evaluation of Feasibility Site Alternatives ... 6.78 6.3.3&6 Ranking of Feasible Site Alternatives ...... 6.79 6.3.3.7 Feasibility Study Re~port...... 6.80
ct'CVOF257/073.51 ix 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT Ejeleon Air Force Base
CONTENTS (Continued)
Page
6.4 Source Evaluation Reports ...... 6.81 6.5 Interim Actions ...... 6.83 6.6 Technical Support for Preparation of the ROD ...... 6.86
7.0 Schedule ...... 7.1
8.0 References ...... 8.1 8.1 References Cited ...... 8.1 8.2 References Not Cited ...... 8.6
cVCVORC57IO73.51 x 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Elelson Air Force Base
. ~TABLES Page
2.1 Chemical-Specific Potential Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements...... 2.9 2.2 Alaska Water Quality Criteria ...... 2.16 2.3 Location-Specific Potential Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements ...... 2.19
3.1 Estimated Stream Characteristics, Eielson AEB, August 20, 1987 ...... 3.27 3.2 Eielson Air Force Base Climatological Data Averaged Over a 40-Year Period, 1944-1984...... 3.32
4.1 Summary of Source Area Descriptions...... 4.3
5.1 Physical and Chemical Constants for Organic Chemicals of Potential Concern...... 5.3 5.2 Physical and Chemical Properties of Hydrocarbon Fuels ...... 5.4 5.3 Summary of Site Data Needs and RI/FS Activities...... 5.26 O ~~6.1 Data Needs for RI Tasks ...... 6.6 6.2 Concentrations of Various Analytes in Soils Near Fairbanks, Alaska ...... 6.14 6.3 Concentrations of Various Analytes in Sediments of the Chena and Tanana Rivers ...... 6.14 6.4 Concentrations of Various Analytes in Groundwater Near Fairbanks, Alaska ...... 6.15 6.5 Summary of Background Soil Sample Analysis Results ...... 6.18 6.6 Summary of Background Well Sample Analysis Results ...... 6.19 6.7 Approaches for Addressing Key Questions for Ecological Assessment of Eielson AFB ...... 6.50 6.8 Potential Treatment Technologies and Treatability Requirements for Soils and Sediment...... 6.57 6.9 Potential Treatment Technologies and Treatability Requirements for Groundwater ...... 6.58 6.10 Source Evaluation Report Groups...... 6.82
* ~~cCcvoR257/073.51 xi 17 June 199 1 Sie Means pnnt Plan DRAFT Ello~n Air For"e ~aa.
FIGURES
Page
3.1 Regional Location Map ...... 3.2 3.2 Physiographic Map ...... 3.3 3.3 Geologic Map ...... 3.16 3.4 Site Groundwater Flow Map (Summary 1989 Water Level Elevations) ... 3.19 3.5 Conceptualized West-East Hydrogeologic Cross Section ...... 3.21 3.6 Generalized Availability of Groundwater in the Vicinity of Eielson AFB ...... 3.22 3.7 Location of Base Water Supply Wells and Nearby Source Areas ...... 3.24 3.8 Surface Drainage Map ...... 3.25
4.1 Source Area Locations ...... 4.2 4.2 Operable Unit 1 Source Areas...... 4.6 4.3 Blair Lakes Source Areas...... 4.10 4.4 Operable Unit 2 Source Areas...... 4.13 4.5 Operable Unit 3 Source Areas...... 4.17 4.6 Operable Unit 4 Source Areas...... 4.19 4.7 Operable Unit 5 Source Areas...... 4.25 4.8 Operable Unit 6 Source Areas...... 4.28 5.1 Elements of a Complete Exposure Pathway...... 5.21 5.2 Conceptual Site Model for Potential Human Exposures ...... 5.22 5.3 Conceptual Site Model for Potential Ecological Exposures ...... 5.24
6.1 Approximate Location of Background Samples Used by SAIC in 1986 ... 6.17 6.2 Proposed Background Sampling Locations ...... 6.25
eVCVOP257/07-1.51 xii. 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Beolson Air Force Bas.
. ~ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
ADEC Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation ARAR applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements AVGAS aviation gas AWQC Alaska Water Quality Criteria bbl barrels bgs below ground surface BLS below land surface BTEX benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene CAA Clean Air Act CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act CPOM coarse particulate organic matter CWA Clean Water Act DMP Data Management Plan DPDO Defense Property Disposal Office DQO data quality objective DRMVO Defense and Reutilization Office EOD explosive ordnance disposal EMO Environmental Management Operations EP TOX EPA toxicity test EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency FFA Federal Facility Agreement FNSB Fairbanks North Star Borough GC gas chromatograph gpd gallons per day gpm gallons per minute
. ~CVOf257/072.51 xiii 17 June 1991 Site Mansagement Plan DRAFT Elelson Air Force Sam.
HARM hazard assessment rating methodology0 HLA Harding Lawson Associates IA interim action IDW investigation-derived waste IRPIMS Installation Restoration Program Information Management System LDR land disposal restrictions MCL maximum contaminant level MCLG maximum contaminant level goals MEK methyl ethyl ketone mgd million gallons per day MIBK methylisobutyl ketone MOGAS motor gasoline msl mean sea level MW monitoring well NAPL nonaqueous phase liquids NPDES National Pollutant Disposal Elimination System NPL National Priorities List OU operable unit OU2MP OU-2 Management Plan PAH polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons POL petroleum, oils, and lubricants
POTW -publicly owned treatment works QA/QC quality assurance/qluality control RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act RI/FS remedial investigation/feasibility study ROD Record of Decision SAIC Science Applications International Corporation SDWA Safe Drinking Water Az-t
CVOF1257/072.51 AiV 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT Liaison Air Force Base
SMP Site Management Plan sow statement of work Ss soil sample SVE soil vapor extraction SVOC semivolatile organic compound TAP Trans-Alaska Pipeline TCE trichloroethylene TCLP Target Compounds List Pollutants TFW Tactical Fighter Wing TIC tentatively identified compound TOC total organic compounds TPH total petroleum hydrocarbons TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act USAF U.S. Air Force UST underground storage tank VOA volatile organics analysis
CV0P257/072.51 xv 17 June 1991 SN. Men.gement Plan DRAFT
BeI.on Air Force Base
0 ~SUMMARY
[To be prepared by CH2M HILL and included with the Draft Final document.]
-0 ~ ct/CVOR257/076.51 1 17 June 1991 Met Management Plan DRAFT Eleison Air Force Be".
. ~1.0 INTRODUCTION
On November 21, 1989, Eielson Air Force Base, located near Fairbanks, Alaska, was listed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on the National Priorities List (NPL) (54 Fed. Reg. 48184). This listing designated the facility as a federal Superfund site subject to the remedial response requirements of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986.
Sixty-four source areas of contamination have been identified at Elelson. Many of these appear to have resulted from leaks or spills of fuel or other petroleum products since the facility commenced operations in the 1940s. Twenty-six of the contaminant source areas have been grouped into six operable units (OUs), which will be the subjects of remedial investigations and feasibility studies (RIIFSs). Each operable unit is composed of contaminant source areas with similar characteristics. In addition, source evaluation reports (SERs) will be prepared for 34 other contaminant source areas, which have been grouped into three categories. The general pur Pose for the SER efforts will be to determine if these source areas warrant inclusion in an operable unit. Four source areas previously identified were not included in either grouping and will be addressed under other Air Force programs.
The purpose for dividing the Site into OU and SER groups was to make the task of overall remedial assessment more manageable.
WCvvoR27/045.51 1.1 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT
EI@IaonAirThe purpose of this Site Management Plan (SMP) is to describe
the approach and methodology that will be used in defining and planning environmentaj response actions at Elelson. Coordination of the OU and SER investigations wili be a major focus of the assessment process and the selection of remedial actions.
This SMP is a comprehensive document that establishes the objectives, procedures, schedule, and general tasks to be used in conducting the RI/FS activities at EBelson AFB. A separate RI/FS management plan will be prepared for each OU, incorporating specific tasks and objectives for the OU and using this document as a master. Preparation of this document, and associated documents, is required by the Federal Facility Agreement (FFA), signed May 21, 1991, by the United States Air Force (USAF), the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC). The primary activities covered in this document include RI/FSs, interim actions (lAs), source evaluations, and technical support in preparation of a Record of Decision (ROD) following completion of each RI/FS.
Previous investigations have provided a significant body of data that has been used in part as the basis for this SMP. Additional data requirements are identified in general in this document, and will be specified in the management plans that will be prepared for individual OUs.
cVCVOF257/045.51 1.2 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT EBefton Air Force Bee
. ~1.1 FEDERAL FACILITY AGREEMENT
The stated general purposes of the EBelson Federal Facility Agreement, signed by the USAF, EPA, and ADEC, are to:
"a) Ensure that the environmental impacts associated with past and present activities at the Site are thoroughly investigated and appropriate removal and/or remedial action(s) taken as necessary to protect the public health, welfare, and the environment, b) Establish a procedural framework and schedule for developing, implementing, and monitoring appropriate response actions at the Site in accordance with CERCLA, the NCP, Super-fund guidance and policy, RCRA, RCRA guidance and policy, and applicable state law, and c) Facilitate cooperation, exchange of information, and participation of the Parties in such actions."
Among the specific purposes of the FFA are the establishment of requirements for the performance of the RIIFS for the Site, and identification of the nature, objective, and schedule of response actions to be taken.
As a result of the NPL listing of Eielso'n AFB, all remedial investigations and responses performed for the facility must comply with CEROLA requirements and CERCLA guidance. Prior to the listing, several remedial investigations were performed for Eielson AFB under the Air Force Installation Restoration Program (IRP). The purpose of the IRP is similar to the RI/FS program under CEROLA. However, there are some requirements under
cVCVOR257/04S5I5 1.3 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT Blelson Air Force Base
CERCLA that are not satisfied by the IRP investigations already0 completed for Elelson AFB. For example, previous baseline risk assessment efforts were not conducted in accordance with EPA guidance for NPL sites. Therefore, additional field investigation and data evaluation must be performed in order to prepare RI/FS reports for the source areas and OUs within EBelson. Data and information gathered during the IRP investigations will be utilized to the maximum extent technically feasible in performing CERCLA RI/FS investigations.
A discussion of previous investigations at Eielson AFB is found in Section 3.2.4 of this SMP. References for report documents from these investigations are found in Section 8.0.
1.2 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The purpose of the SMP is to develop and describe the approach and methodology that will be used in defining and planning environmental response actions at Eielson AFB. Under terms of the FFA, all response actions must satisfy the requirements of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986.
This SMVP applies to all RI/FS and source evaluation activities to be carried out at Eielson AFB. and is intended to provide a uniform- approach and continuity. This SMVP will serve as the master document for the RI/FS management plans to be develojied for individual operable units. Appendixes to the SMVP (see ct/CVOP~57/045.51 1.4 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Bel.son Air Force Base
Section 1.3) will also serve as master plans for the similarly titled appendixes to the operable unit management plans.
This SMVP will be the overall planning document for contaminant characterization and remediation planning activities at Eielson AEB. As investigations and feasibility studies proceed for the Site and for individual OUs, the SMP will be periodically updated to reflect new information and to incorporate additional plans.
The scope of the SMVP includes:
• presentation of the overall Site approach to RI/FS activities
* a conceptual site source/receptor model based on information and data from previous investigations
* identification and description of remedial investigation tasks for OUs and the overall Site
* identification and description of feasibility study tasks for OUs and the overall Site
* description of preparation of SERs
* description of the approach to evaluating the need for interim actions at OU or SER source areas
* presentation of the schedule for RI/FS, SER, and ROD activities, as presented in the EFA, for the Site.
C ctIeCV0R257/045.51 1.5 17 June 1991 Sit. Mans gament Plan DRAFT
El~ftoMr ~ The SMVP does not include discussion or planning of remedial0
design or remedial action activities for the overall Site or for individual OUs.
1.3 ORGANIZATION OF THE SITE MANAGEMENT PLAN
The SMVP will serve as the overall planning document for tile Elelson AFB remedial investigation and response actions. The management approach to the Site RI/FS is presented in Section 2.0. Included in this section are the objectives for the RI/ES, and the development of the remedial goals and objectives for Site response actions. A discussion of the management approach to development of RI/ES and interim action plans for individual OUs is also provided. Key aspects of the approach are the use of existing data to prepare focused RI/FS plans and the coordination of sitewide activities.
Section 3.0 includes descriptions of base operations, base history, and previous investigations in order to provide an introduction to the Site. The physical setting, including geology, hydrogeology, natural and cultural resources, ecology, climate, and meteorology are also included in Section 3.0.
Sixty of the 64 contaminant source areas identified in previous investigations have been grouped into six OUs and three SERs. The OUs were grouped by type or degree of contamination. The SER groups were divided by levels of available information. Descriptions of each of the source aress within each OU or SER are provided in Section 4.0. The descriptions were derived from ctICVOP257/045.51 1.6 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT Eleleon Air Force Bee.
information generated by previous investigations performed under the IRP.
Section 5.0 presents the conceptual model of the Site, as developed from existing information. The major contaminants, contaminant release mechanisms, migration pathways, and exposure pathways are described for the Site. This conceptual model is the basis for the identification of additional sitewide data requirements, and will be modified as new information becomes available. The conceptual model will be a valuable tool for coordinating response actions selected for individual OUs.
Section 6.0 includes discussion of the overall project management approach, and a description of RI and FS tasks to be performed. This section also addresses characterization of the source areas included in SER groups, and the rationale for planning and implementation of interim actions.
The planned schedule for conducting the RI and FS activities and SER evaluations is presented in Section 7.0. Key milestones for submitting draft, draft final, and final deliverables are included.
References cited in this document, and references available but not cited in this document, are listed in Section 8.0.
The SMVP appendixes are master plans for the Site and OU RI/FS tasks and include the Field Sampling Plan (Appendix A), the Quality Assurance Project Plan (Appendix B), the Health and Safety Plan (Appendix C), the Community Relations Plan ctJCVOR2S7/045.51 1.7 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT Elelson Air Force Baa.
(Appendix D), the Data Management Plan (Appendix E), and the Background Sampling Plan (Appendix F). The Federal Facility Agreement is provided as Appendix G.
ct/CVOF157/045.51 1.8 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Veleon Air Force Baee
* 2.0 MANAGEMENT APPROACH
An initial step in planning and selecting environmental response actions, whether they include RI/FS investigations, interim actions, or preparation of SERs, is to establish the rationale and approach that will guide the action. This is especially important for Eielson AFB, since the environmental response actions may address as many as 60 separate contaminant source areas. Continuity in the selection of remedies for each source area and operable unit will depend on the remedial goals and objectives by which they are evaluated.
The general management approach for planning the environmental response actions to be conducted at Eielson AFB is 4 ~~~~~~~toconduct focused investigations of contaminant source areas in order to identify actions that can be implemented in as short a time as is feasible, thereby reducing risk to human health or the environment.
Remedial investigations and feasibility studies will be conducted for individual operable units, and for the Site as a whole. In coordinating these activities, it must be realized that the OUs are not defined geographically, and therefore, are not discrete segments of the Site. Certain RI/ES activities, concerning groundwater, surface water, or sediment may need to be coordinated between two or more OUs, or perhaps be addressed on a sitewide basis.
. c~~VCVOR257/O59.51 2.1 17 June 1991 She Management Plan DRAFT Eoieeon Air Force Base
The investigation of background contaminant concentrations, the preparation of a baseiine risk assessment, and the preparation of an ecological assessment are examples of activities that will need to be conducted on a sitewide basis, with OU-specific components, as appropriate.
2.1 ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE OBJECTIVES
The primary objective of the environmental response actions to be taken at Eielson AFB is to satisfy the requirements of the FFA, leading to a sitewide ROD in 1995. In order to meet that deadline, RILES investigations will be conducted for six OUs, and SE~is will be prepared for three groups of contaminant source areas not included in the OUs. Interim actions may be undertaken for one or more OUs to prevent or minimize a release of a hazardous substance or contaminant. Other actions may also be required if additional OUs are formed from the SER areas.
The RI/FS investigations will be designed to identify and fill those data needs related to preparation of the basewide risk assessment, evaluation of applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements (ARARs), confirmation of the site conceptual model, and completion of the feasibility studies. All field work, including sampling, surveying, and testing, will be geared to filling those needs. Additional site characterization is not an objective. Existing data from previous investigations will be used to the maximum extent technically feasible.
WcvoR257o05.51 2.2 17 June 1991 Shte Management Plan DRAFT OEalean Air Force Base
The SERs will focus on the verification or elimination of areas of concern. EPA guidance on conducting source evaluations is still under development. As appropriate, contaminant source areas verified in the SERs as requiring additional investigation or remediation will be added to one of the six OUs already defined for Eielson AFB, or grouped into one or more additional GUs. The source evaluations will be based on r isk to human health or the environment and will comply with EPA requirements and guidance when it is developed.
2.2 REMEDIAL GOALS
The primary remedial goal for environmental response actions at Eielson AFB is derived from the remedial action goal defined by CEROLA. This goal is to select and implement remedial response
actions that have the following attributes:
a protective of human health and the environment * feasible *permanent *minimal practicable remediation time frame.
At a minimum, selected remedial alternatives must comply with ARARs. Potential environmental response actions for the Eielson AFB will be evaluated by the3se criteria.
0 ~cVICVOR257/0S9.51 2.3 17 June 1991 Site Mane genment Plan DRAFT Elelson Air force Base
2.2.1 Protection of Human Health and the Environment
Protection of human health and the environment is achieved by reduction of unacceptable risk. This can be accomplished by the reduction or removal of site contaminants, or by the elimination of exposure pathways. EPA policy' defines the action level for carcinogens as greater than l x1 0-4excess lifetime cancer risk. This implies that greater than 1x1 0-4 excess lifetime cancer risk is unacceptable. Unacceptable risk for noncarcinogenic effect is defined as exposure at levels exceeding reference dose (RfD)
intake levels, or a combined hazard index exceeding 1.2 Defining protectiveness for the environment is a site-specific process, and will entail evaluation of contaminant-specific detrimental impacts to native species. This effort is described in Section 6.2.5 Ecological Assessment.0
In addition to the risk-based goals for carcinogens and noncarcinogens, protectiveness is defined for certain contaminants by regulatory requirements. An example is the use of the Safe Drinking Water Act Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) in the evaluation of groundwater that is used as a source of drinking water. Regulatory requirements for the Eielson AFB3 will be identified by the ARARs evaluation performed for the overall Site, and for individual OUs. A preliminary ARARs evaluation is presented in Section 2.3.
OSWER Directive 9355.0-30 U.S. EPA memorandum from Don R.Clay, Assistant Administrator, April 22, 1991, Rots of Baseline Risk Assessment in Superfund Remedy Selection Decisions.
2U.S. EPA 1990. 40 CFR Part 300 National Oil and Hazardous Substance Pollution Contingency Plan, Final Rule. March 8,1990. eVCVOPR257/059.51 2.4 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT VEilson Air Force Bass
2.2.2 Feasibility
A response action must also be demonstrated to be feasible. Feasibility includes effectiveness in attaining remedial goals, implementability, and cost-effectiveness. Tradeoffs between these three criteria define the range of remedial action alternatives that may be considered for a given source area. The objective is to identify an action that satisfies all three criteria to the maximum extent practicable without compromising protectiveness.
Effectiveness takes into account the expected reduction in contaminant toxicity, mobility, or volume; the degree of containment of hazardous substances; and the long-term reliability of engineering and institutional controls associated with a remedial response action. These criteria are used to assess the ability of a proposed remedial action to satisfy the remedial goals of protection of human health and the environment.
Implementability is a measure of both the technical and administrative feasibility of constructing, operating, and maintaining a remedial action. Operational reliability and the availability of the technology will be considered. This will be an especially important criteria for EBelson AFB because of the Arctic condmions in which the remedial actions must operate, and the relatively remote location in'terms of equipment procurement.
The evaluation of cost-effectiveness considers the extent to which the remedial response action's short-term and long-term costs are proportional to the results. Cost-effectiveness is used in the
. ~~CtCVOR257/059.51 2.5 17 June '1991 Sit. Mansagemoent Plan DRAFT Eielson Air Force Base
comparison of alternatives to determine if incremental cost is balanced by increased protection, effectiveness, reliability, and permanence.
2.2.3 Permanence
Permanence is a stated goal for remedial response actions conducted under CEROLA. The goal of permanence is manifested as a preference toward remedial actions that reduce the toxicity, mass, or volume of hazardous substances, and minimize long-term management requirements. Permanence is not an absolute criteria but may be achieved in varying degrees by a range of remedial action alternatives.
2.2.4 Remediation Time Frame
The remediation time frame is the period of time required to achieve the remedial goals and objectives for a site. For remedial response actions at EBelson AFB, a preference will be expressed during evaluation of alternatives for response actions that minimize implementation time. The approach to the RI/ES activities for EBelson incorporates that preference by using existing data wherever possible, rather than engage in extended site characterization work, and by focusing investigations on satisfying specific data needs. Additionally, where practicable, actions minimizing the remediation time will be selected, subject to satisfying the site goals and objectives.
ct/0V0R257/059.51 2.6 17 June 1991 Site Maneagement Plan DRAFT Eleleon Mir Force Base
. ~2.3 PRELIMINARY ARARS EVALUATION
Remedial action at the Site must be designed to comply with federal, state, and local environmental laws, regulations, standards, requirements, criteria, and limits that are legally applicable or relevant and appropriate to the situation (40 CFR 3090). Preliminary applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements (ARARs) are identified in this section for selection of actual ARARs by the lead agencies. As other requirements are identified during the RI/ES process, they will be included and the list refined.
Requirements may be "applicable" or "relevant and appropriate." Applicable requirements are cleanup or control standards, criteria, or limits that specifically address circumstances at the CERCLA site. Relevant and appropriate requirements are cleanup or control standards, criteria, or limits that are not legally applicable to the site, but address circumstances that are sufficiently similar to the situation at the site.
In addition, nonpromulgated criteria, adversorys, and guidance need to be considered (TBC) in determining the necessary level of remediation. Thus, ARARs, together with the TBCs, will define the cleanup goals.
EPA has grouped potential ARARs into three categories:
*Ambient or Chemical-Specific Requirements. Health or risk-based numerical values or methodologies which, when
ct/CVC0R257/059.51 2.7 17 June 1991 Site Maneagement Plan DRAFT EBelson Air Force Base
applied to site-specific conditions, establish an acceptable amount or concentration that may be found in, or discharged to, the ambient environment.
* Performance, Design, or Other Action Specific Requirements. Uimitations or requirements that apply to specific technologies or activities, particularly with respect to hazardous waste.
* Location-Specific Requirements. Special requirements or standards that apply because of the site location (EPA, CERCLA, Compliance with Other Laws Manual).
2.3.1 Chemnical Specific Requirements
The chemical-specific requirements establish concentration limits by media for specific hazardous substances pollutants, or contaminants. Specific concentration limits have been established under the following federal and state statutes and regulations, and are summarized in Table 2.1.
Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) and the National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (40 CFR 141). These regulations establish enforceable maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) for inorganic and organic compounds in public drinking water systems. In addition, nonenforceable maximum contaminant level goals (MCLGs) have been set at the level at which no known or anticipated adverse health effects are expected, assuming an adequate margin of safety. Because groundwater is used as the cCt~VOR571059.51 2.8 17 June 1991 A0 Z~~~~
D.C
E'-
P I1W olWI I I I I I c~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~
a -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
a
E~~0
r O0 N a U 9 9~~9 E W WW~~~ W W UWW
- 0<
C E -~~c
a .~~~~~Z1
* S~~~~~~~C r N C C-I LU cI.C& ~ V I q 2w5VO * U LU ~~~~~~~~IW I +~ +1I
- .c 0~~ ~~(*Vi C+ * .0 : ~ o o o.0E 2 3 - a * co*Ea-La x $ =UL
.0~ ~ ~ . 0 0c ii,,~~~ EN
0~~~~
o o5 E-C -60~c E c c 0lu)- - a5 IL I .0 c u L *~~± 0 C ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . a:~~~~*a 00
CJ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~C -u N-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ C ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -U
o ~~0: wNoa Y
w Lb ED x p aa & N 0 N~~~~~~~~~~~
0
C - a~~~ 0~~~~~
E _~~~~EE
C.~~~~~~~~~~ 9- * -c ~ ~ ~ ~~~ idi W w~~~~d N U)m N - I?
~~- ~~~Uto 0 00~~~~~~~~0 0-U
0~~~~ A * 0 ~ 0
'E ~ * C C- a-~~~~~~~~~ a c~~~~~~~~~~~~M0.
C *~~~~~~~~~Co'
0 di U a ~~~~~2 9 9 C - .2 ~~~~~~~~ 9 W 0). . . .2 00
.2~~~~~~~~~~~6 .
C 0 fl~~~~ U)~ N O C N N< 0 0 cli WC~~~~~~~00 i 0
0~~~~~~~~~~~ 0 0 0~~~.1 S I~~i I -
b.C.
5 ~4
La on a ,
*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ --
0. 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
0. c~~~~~~~~~~~
.4 Os .20x= 0 00 ~~*~~0 W U N 0 NW W W w
- OrE -~~~~~.1 cc 0 'i~~~ 0
- 0
0Q~~~t S u
3 -~~~~~~~~~~~ C 1±, 0
-0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
0 di~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
).0~~ ~~~~~~~C VW
w 'U~~~~~~~
04 0 C ------0.~~~~~
a 0
I Cs-.~ CON C ~ ~ w w ~ NV o
4 U. * 'U ,c ' W dU 02. * *9. '
o 0 C~~~~~~~0 , a 0 0~~~~~~~ L
4 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
0 -: :&~~~~~ 1 2 E Er~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ru . L -- 0 3 NdN I I o 0 ~~ 9 99 09 9 9 9 0 M C
2 CO~~~~
o 0~~~~~~~~~~~~
u. 0 0~~~0
MC C:2~~~~~~* -
0 ~~0J 0 . 0, o~~~~~~~~
< x~~~ o 0C C.C
V ~~~~~040 ? O - 0 C . ~ ~~~~~~o CO Z e4 ~~C 4- U M c~U
N 0) 0OC
.0 >. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~. w~~
'a 0 2~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
S ~~~~M
o~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ a.o . o~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0 0 0 0. .~~~~~~ =C ~~~~~C- O '-0 0 C~~~~~-M0 .2 La ~~~~~~~0 CC 0C E '~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~o40 ~ LLC 2 0 0 0 0 .s s cc - ~~~~gS ev, ci q 0o 2; A~~~'5r g n 0~~ _ ~ ~ LU.0 o - .5: ZI C OC ~~~~~~~.13. 4 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Eie~onir Frce primary drinking water source at EBelson AFB, MVCI-s are potentially applicable standards and MCGILs are potentially relevant and appropriate standards. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Groundwater Protection Standards (40 CFR 264.94). These standards establish RCRA MOLs equal to SDWA MCLs for groundwater monitoring and response requirements at RORA regulated units. Clean Water Act (CWA) Water Quality Criteria. The applicability or relevance and appropriateness of water quality criteria as potential ARARs are dependent on the designated use(s) of the water. The water quality criterion for aquatic life both for environmental and human health protection may be relevant and appropriate since surface waters at the site are highly popular fishing areas. Clean Air Act (CAA) and National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) (40 CFR 50). These regulations establish. maximum allowable concentrations in ambient air for a number of air contaminants including particulates and lead. Alaska Drinking Water Regulations (18 AAC 80). These regulations establish maximum contaminant concentrations (MCCs) for organic and inorganic contaminants in public water systems. These concentrations are equivalent to the SDWA MOLs with the exception of fluoride which has been set at a lower limit of 2.4 mg/I. ct/CVOR2S7/059.51 .2.14 17 June 1991 Sit. Maneagement Plan DRAFT Elelson Air Force Ba80 0 ~~~~~~Alaska Water Quality Standards (18 ACC 70). These standards apply to ground and surface waters and establish criteria for protected water use classes. In addition Alaska has adopted a nondegradation policy for waters of higher quality than the criteria. General water quality criteria are summarized in Table 2.2. Chemical specific criteria are those found in Table 2.1. Where water use falls in more than one class, the most stringent criteria shall be used. Alaska Oil Pollution Regulations (18 AAC 75). These regulations set requirements for discharge reporting, cleanup, and disposal of hazardous substances, including oil and other petroleum products. Discharges must be cleaned up to the satisfaction of the regional supervisor or his designee. Public land * ~~~~~~~environments underlain with continuous permafrost are classified as very sensitive terrestrial environments. Fresh water environments classified as critical include surface and subsurface water supplies and rivers, lakes, and streams designated as important for the spawning, rearing, or migration of anadromous fish. Sensitive fresh water environments include lakes and wetlands not designated as critical. Alaska Solid Waste Management Regulations (18 A.AC 60). These regulations set requirements for the management of solid waste, including hazardous waste. Waste must be managed to prevent violation of the Alaska water quality or Alaska drinking water standards. CVCV0~t57/059.51 2.15 17 June 1991 Shte Management Plan DRAFT Eolelon Mir Force Base TABLE 2.2t Alaska Water Qluality, Criteria (18 AAC 70.020)She1of2 Clans (1)(B)PIl) Class (1)(A)(l) Class (1)(A)(~i) Water Recreation Class (1)(C) Waler Supply Water Supply (Secondary Aquatic Life ______(Drinking) (Agriculture) Recreation) and Wildlife Focal Coliform Surface moan shall Moan shall not Same as Class (1)(A)(iiO Not applicable (PC) Bacteria not exceed 20 FCI exceed 2300 PCI 102 ml with~not more 100 ml with not more than 10% of the than 10% of the samples exceeding samples exceeding 40 FC/i100 mi. 400 FC/i100 Groundwater mean shall be less tnan 1 FC/100 ml (MAFT) or <3 FC/I100 ml (MPN) ______ Dissolved Oxygen DO 4 mg/I (surface DO ~3 mg/I (surface DO z 4 mgb DO k 7 mg/I (DO) wate, only) water only) Dissolved Gas Total not to exceed 10% of saturation at ______any sam pling point pH 6.0 s pH s 8.5 5.0 s pH s9.0 5.0 s pH s 9.0 6.5 s pH t9.0 Shall Shall not vary by not vary more than 0.5 more than 0:.5 pH OH units from natural units from natural Turbidity Shall not exceed Shall not cause Shall not exceed Shall not exceed S NTU above natural detrimental effects 10 NTU above natural 25 NTU above natural when the natural < when the natural < conditions0 50 NTU and no more 50 NTU and no more than 10% increate than 20% increase when the natural is > when the natural is > 50 NTtJ. Not to 50 NTU. Not to exceed exceed 25 NTU. an increase of 15 NTU. Temperature Shall not exceed Shall not exceed 30'C Not applicable Shall not exceed 200 C 1SIC at any time, Shall not exceed 15'C in migration routes or rearing areas. Shall not exceed 13'C in spawning areas or egg ______~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~andfry incubation. Dissolved TOS shall not c~ceed TDS shall not exceed Not applicable TDS shall not exceed Inorganic 500 mg/I chlc noes or 1,000 mg/I 1.500 mg/I. Increase Substances sulfates shall rot Sodium absorption shall not exceed one- exceed 200 mg/I ration < 2.5 third of theo natural. Sodium percentage less than 60% Residual carbonate < 1.25 mg/I Boron < 0.3 mg/1 Sediment No increase above Shall not exceed Shall not pose hazards Sediment loads shall natural 200 mg/I not cause adverse eftects on acuatic animal or plant. life. their reproduction, or ______h~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~abitat ct/CVOR259/062.51 2.16 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT VElson Air Force Bass TABLE 2.2. Alaska Water Quality CrIteria (18 AAC 70.020) Sheet 2 of 2 Class (1)(B)(1I) Class (1)(A)(l Class (lfl)(Il)Q Waler Recreation Class (I)(C) Water Supply Water Supply (Secondary Aquatic Ut.e ______(Drinking) (Agriculture) Recreation) and Wildlife Toxic or Shall not exceed Same as Shall not pose hazards Shall not exceed 0.012 Deleterious Alaska MCCs or EPA Class(1)(A)(i) times the lowest Substances water quality criteria measured 96-hour LC,0 for sensitive biologically important species or exceed the I ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~MCCsor EPA criteria Petroleum Shall not cause a Shall not cause a Shall not causes a film, Total hydrocarbons in Hydrocarbons, Oil, visible sheen or visible sheen on the sheen, or discoloration the water column shall and Grease impart odor or taste surface on the surface or floor not exceed 15 ugA, or of the water body or 0.01 of the lowest. adjoining shoreline, measured continuous ficiw 96-hour LC, for fi!o stages of the most sensitive, biologically important species in a particular location, whichever concentration is less. Total aromatic hydrocarbons in the water column shall not exceed 10 ugA, or 0.01 of the lowest measured continuous flow 96-hour LC, for life stages of the most sensitive, biologically important species in a particular location, whichever concentration is less. Concentrations of hydrocarbons, animal fats, or vegetat~le oils in the sediment shall not cause deleterious effects to aquatic life. Shall not cause a film, sheen, or discoloration on the surface or floor of the water body or adjoining shorelines. . ~~~clVCVOR259/062.51 2.17 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Pion DRAFT ElegoAr Frc Bse Alaska Hazardous Waste Management Regulations (18 AAC 62). These regulations apply to hazardous waste generators, transporters, and owners or operators of treatment, storage, or disposal facilities. RCRA groundwater protection standards are incorporated by reference. Alaska Air Quality Control Regulations (18 AAC 50). These regulations adopt ambient air quality standards equivalent to the NMAQS, In addition, more stringent standards for particulates and sulfur dioxide are identified to maintain baseline concentrations in Class I and Class II areas. The Class II area standard for particulates is an annual geometric mean of 19 P/rn 3 or a 24-hour average of 37 pi/m 3 not to be exceeded more than once each year. 2.3.2 Location-Specific Requirements Because the impacts on human health and the environment are determined by site location, site-specific restrictions may be placed on the conduct of activities. Location-specific factors that may add additional ARARs include sensitive habitats (i.e., arctic tundra, permafrost) flood plains, wetlands, endangered species habitat, fault locations, historic or archeological resources, and the sole source aquifer. Table 2.3 summarizes potential ARARs. 2.3.3 Action-Specific Requirements Action-specific ARARs are additional requirements that would apply to ta specific remedial action. Different remedial ARARs will Ct(V08O257/059.51 2.18 17 June 1991 Site Mana gement Plan DRAFT Elelson Air Force Base TABLE 2.3. Location-SpecIfic Potential Applicable or Relevant and ApproprIate Requirements Location Requirement Prerequisite Citation Wetlands' Action to prohibit Wetlands as defined in Clean Water Act discharge or fi:: material U.S. Army Corn's of Section 404; 40 CFR into wetlands without Engineers regulations. Parts 230, 33 CFR permit Parts 320-33. Action to avoid adverse Action involving 40 CFR Part 6, effects, minimize potential construction of facilities or Appendix A harm, and preserve and management of property in enhance wetlands, to the wetlands, as defined by extent possible (see 40 CFR Part 6, Appendix A, discussion in Section 40) Section 3.4.4.1) Within 100-Year floodplain Facility must be designed, RCRA hazardous waste; 40 CFR 264.18(b) constructed, operated, and treatment, storage, or maintained to avoid disposal washout Within floodiplain Action to avoid adverse Action that will occur in a Protection of fioodplains, effects, minimize potential floodplan, i.e., lowlands, (40 CFR 6. Appendix A); harm, restore and preserve and relatively flat areas Fish and Wildlife natural and beneficial adjoining inland and Coordination Act values coastal waters and other (116USC 661 et seg.; flood prone areas 40 CFR 6.302 Area affecting stream or Action to protect fish or Diversion, channeling, or Fish and Wildlife river wildlife other act"vt that modifies Coordination Act a stream or river and (16 USC 661 et seg.); affects fish or wildlife 40 CFR 6.302 nathionalrwld sffceinicodakn or actoshtwilhvsiretin in fActianyiofthet riverAct id(18y n USce 121 tvea.) Withionaarea, affenctigAodtkn or a ssisttati dinrngav ctvtischtaffect fterma on WidndSecRiversAc1US121esel) recreational river adverse effect on scenic specified in 50 CFR Part 200, 50 CFR river Seto 276(a) Part 402 Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 USC 661 et seg.); 33 OFR Parts 320-33 Within 61 meters (200 feet) New treatment, storage, or RCRA hazardous waste: 40 CFR 264.18(a) of a fault displaced in disposal of hazardous treatment, storage, or Holocene time waste prohibited disposal Within area where action Action to recover and Alteration of terrain that National Historical may cause irreparable preserve artifacts threatens significant Preservation Act (16 USC harm, loss, or destruction scientific, prehistorical, Section 469): 36 CFR of significant artifacts historical, or archaeological Part 65 data Historic project owned or Action to preserve historic Property included in or National Historic controllec by federal Properties; planning of eligible for the National Preservation Act, agency action to minimize harm to Register of Historic Places Section 106 (16 UISC 470 National Historic et sea.): 36 CFR Part 800 LandmarksI 40 CFR Part 6 Subpart A sets forth EPA policy for carrying out the provisions of Executive Orders 119838 (Floooplain Management) and 11990 (Protection of Wetlands). Executive orders are binding on the level (e.g.. federal, state) of government for wh~ch they are issued. ctICVOP2591061 .51 2.19 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT Eieleen Air Force Ba.s need to be identified for each remedial alter native during the FS.S Additional requirements for specific technologies or activities may be identified from review regulations. The action-specific ARARs identified during the ES will need to be further refined during remedial design when specific information is available. 2.3.4 To-Be-Considered Criteria or Guidelines Nonpromulagated chemical-specific health advisories, criteria, and reference doses and information, and proposed standards will also be considered in setting clean up goals. While these are not ARARs, they provide useful information for assessing risk and ensuring protection. Guidance particularly useful here will include carcinogen potency factors, reference doses, and drinking water equivalent levels, toxicological profile data, pesticide registration data, federal sole source aquifer requirements, and any areawide groundwater protection plans. In addition, national policy on wetland protection, preservation of arctic habitats, and wildlife coordination will be considered wherever possible, rather than engage in extended site characterization work, and by focusing investigations on satisfying specific data needs. Additionally, where practicable, actions minimizing the remediation time will be selected, subject to satisfying the Site goals and objectives. 2.4 USE OF OBSERVATIONAL APPROACH Uncertainty is a major technical issue for hazardous waste site investigation and remediation. The observational approach acknowledges uncertainty by incorporating flexibility into planning cVCVOR257/059.51 2.20 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT Ealelen Air Force Base activities. Plans are then adjusted as more information becomes available, rather than abandoned. From a technical perspective, the subsurface environment presents substantial uncertainty due to heterogeneous, complex geologic and hydrologic conditions. Subtle changes in these conditions can have significant impacts on the movement of groundwater and contaminant migration. Major uncertainties are also associated with source characterization, assessment of chemical fate and transport in the environment, assessment of exposure risks and health effects, and remedial action performance. The consequences of uncertainty must be considered in the planning of RI/FS activities. Recognition that data gathering will not eliminate uncertainty is needed in order to define a sampling program that efficiently characterizes the general nature and properties of the site without expending an unnecessary level of effort. During the feasibility study, remedial alternatives must be developed that incorporate uncertainty anid are adaptable to a range of potential conditions. An observational approach can be taken to all remedial response actions undertaken at Eielson AFB. In the RI tasks, data generation can be geared to filling gaps in existing data and focusing the data needs on completion of the risk assessment, conceptual model, ARARs, and feasibility study. During the feasibility studies, remedial action alternatives can be developed that incorporate flexibility in capacity and capabilities. For example, a preference could be expressed for groundwater treatment technologies that accommodate a range of contaminant . CtIeCVOR257/059.51 2.21 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Elelson Air Force Base concentratzns and that can be expanded to accept additional flow. In this way, uncertainty in the contaminant concentrations over time and the potential for combining treatment for more than one OU are addressed. The observational approach combines advantageously with coordination of OUs in providing an efficient and effective approach to the management of the remedial response actions at Eieison AFB. 2.5 DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVES The EPA classifies analytical quality levels for contaminant data (U.S. EPA, 1987). Data quality increases with the level of classification. For example, Level I consists of field screening methods; Level 11indicates more advanced onsite analytical techniques; standard laboratory program procedures are designated as Level III; Level IV satisfies the EPA Contract Laboratory Program requirements; and Level V designates specially developed analytical methods where a high degree of sensitivity is required. As data quality increases, laboratory turnaround time and cost also increase. Data to be collected during the OU and overall Site Rls will be of assured quality and defensible to support regulatory decisions and selection of remedial response actions. For each RI, the required analytical level for a specific data need will be defined. The EPA data quality classifications will be used. Data quality objec-,ives (DOOs) will be determined by the use of the data. The DQO for each data requirement will correspond to the highest, or most sensitive use of the data. For example, determination of the el/C V0R257/059.51 2.22 17 June 1991 Site M~anagement Plan DRAFT El. Mon Air Force Base extent of contamination in an area may be done using Level 1Ifield screening methods, whereas Level Ill data that has been validated is required for calculation of risk. Generally, Level Ill data will be specified for routing laboratory analytical work. Level V data may be required for biota analysis since special methods are involved. DOOs will be specified in the FSP prepared for the overall Site and for individual O1-s. Data quality will be ensured by procedures detailed in the overall Site and OU QAPPs. The Data Management Plan (DMP, Appendix E) describes procedures for managing field, analytical, and treatability data. 2.6 ADDITIONAL DATA REQUIREMENTS To the maximum extent technically practical, existing data and information from previous IRP investigations will be used to prepare the overall Site conceptual model, and to evaluate potential remedial actions for individual O~ls. Efforts will be made to obtain validated data from prior investigations to supplement the summary tables and conclusions found in IRP reports. In cases where quality assurance information is not available, or data are suspected to be incomplete, the data will be used in a qualitative manner, and confirmation sampling will be specified to satisfy data needs. The Installation Restoration Program Information Management System (IRPIMS) contains data from the Dames and Moore IRP Phase 11site investigation performed in 1984-1986. These data will be obtained and used to confirm the site conceptual model and to . ~~ct/CVOP,57/059.51 2.23 17 June 1991 Site Men. gemnent Plan DRAFT VEMson Air Force Bss. supplement information on the GUs. Data from later investigations by SAIC and HLA are not in IRPIMS. As discussed in Section 2.1, Environment Response Objectives, primary data needs are related to the baseline risk assessment, confirmation of the conceptual site model, completion of :he feasibility study (for example, treatability studies), and evaluation of ARARs. Specific data needs will be identified in the OU management plans, and justification will be given for individual data requirements. Existing data from previous investigations will be used to define the scope of the field investigations to be conducted under the OU Ris. Risk assessments were completed by HLA and SAIC in earlier IRP investigations for selected contaminant source areas, but they do not satisfy CEROLA requirements. A baseline risk assessment will be required for the overall Site and for individual OUs. The baseline risk assessment will be used to identify the areas and contaminants that require remedial action. Confirmation of the conceptual site model will be accomplished by sampling selected existing wells, and collecting soil samples as needed to fill gaps in the Site conceptual model and to document current conditions. Analytical parameters for confirmation sampling will include those contaminants already identified, but they will also include additional parameters related to suspected contaminants or ARARs evaluation requirements. Coordination between GUs will be important in defining the investigation needs and minimizing duplication of field efforts. Since the GUs are not arranged CV0V0R257/059.51 2.24 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Eleleon Air Force Bae. geographically, data collected for one OU RI may overlap the area of concerrn for another OU, and will be used as appropriate. Additional data will be collected only for the purpose of filling gaps identified in the risk assessment, conceptual site model, ARARs, or feasibility studies. Daja collection efforts will be specifically justified by one or more or those purposes. Additional site characterization is not a goal of the remedial investigations because of the amount of existing data from previous investigations. 2.7 COORDINATION OF ACTIVITIES AT OU The primary purpose of the overall Site RIIFS is to coordinate the OU investigations and the implementation of OU remedial actions. S ~ ~~~~~~Activitiesto be coordinated include data gathering, use of Site information, and selection of remedial action alternatives. Additionally, the overall Site RIIFS will monitor the areas of investigation to be sure that overlapping areas of contamination (between OUs) are addressed. Where appropriate, implementation of sampling programs or response actions may be combined for two or more O1-s, or conducted on a sitewide basis. Data will be shared between OUs and sitewide investigations. The goal of coordination is to provide an efficient and effective use of resources. Collection of data for the OU Rls will be designed to satisfy specific data requirements. However, as these needs are defined . ~ct/CVOR257/059.51 2.25 17 June 1991 Site Mansagenent Plan DRAFT Eialson Air Force Base for each OU, an effort will be made to determine potential dlata requirements for adjacent GUs that may be met concurrently. For example, in several cases, two OUs are located in the same geographic area. Groundwater sampling may provide data for both GUs. By reviewing contaminants of concern for both GUs, analytical parameters can be selected to satisfy both data needs. Cursory review of existing data on adjacent GUs will be done wherever possible to determine data needs. This will add to the body of information available for use in scoping the RI tasks at the adjacent OUs. However, it is not expected that this will completely eliminate the need for additional data collection for adjacent GUs. Similarly, information gathered or developed for an OU RI/ES will be used in the development of RI/FS investigations for adjacent GUs. Information on contaminants identified, source area characteristics, and historic use of the areas, as well as remedial alternative screening results and conclusions, will be passed from one OU to another. In fact, information on treatability and remedial alternatives will be shared by all GUs, regardless of location, as appropriate. It is anticipated that the presence of similar contaminants in a number of the GUs will make this a useful approach. Perhaps the most important aspect of coordination of the GUs will occur during selection of remedial action alternatives and implementation of those alternatives. Because similar contaminants have been identified at a number of the contaminant source areas in several of the GUs, it is expected that similar remedial action alternatives will be selected for several of the cVCVOR257/059.51 2.26 17 June 1991 Shte Management Plan DRAFT Eielson Air Force Soso contaminant areas. For example, treatment of groundwater contaminated with petroleum products may be combined at two OUs located in the same geographic area. Goordinat~on of the implementation of the remedial actions would ensure that efficiencies of scale are realized, Where appropriate, or that treatment units are specified that can be expanded to accommodate additional waste streams. Another opportunity for coordination would be in the siting of remedial actions. Waste treatment or storage facilities may need to be centrally located if they are to accommodate waste from two or more OUs. Future space requirements for expansion of capacity would also be a coordination concern. . ~2.8 INTERIM ACTIONS Interim actions (IAS) may be appropriate for some of the OUs at Eielson AFB. An Aas defined in the NCP (40 CFR 300) is an action that is taken to prevent or minimize the release of hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants so that they do not endanger human health or the environment. [As are a discrete portion of an RI/FS, and must not be inconsistent with or preclude implementation of the final selected remedy. Removal actions,, as well as actions designed to isolate or contain wastes, are most commonly used in lAs. The IA effort requires sufficient field investigation to confirm the release or threat of release, and allow design of the appropriate action. Baseline risk assessments an-c full technology screening are not necessary to support an IA. . ~~ct'0V0R257/059.51 2.27 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT EleeonAkFore Ba. Those elements of the investigation will be included in the RI/FS for the operable unit addressed by the IA. lAs will be developed and implemented where appropriate. The decision to implement an IA may be made during the sitewide baseline risk assessment, or other site~ide RI tasks, or during the RI/ES process for an individual OU. The USAF will notify EPA and ADEC of their intentions to implement an IA and the justification for the action. All lAs will be performed in accordance with the provisions of the EFA, and the requirements of the NCP (40 CER 300). 2.9 SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS Planning and implementation of RIIFS tasks for Elelson AFB and for individual OUs will address some special features of the Site. First, the climate will impose restrictions on field sampling, surveying, and testing. Previous investigations have conducted all field work in the summer, when wells can be accessed and sampled and soil samples can be collected. This limits the use of the data, because seasonal fluctuations inr groundwater and surface water elevation and groundwater flow direction cannot be measured. Similarly, the presence of permafrost in some areas of the Site increases the uncertainty related to use of standard groundwater modeling assumptions or contaminant migration assumptions. Eielson AFB has been the subject of several investigations in the past, but none have attempted to integrate historic information ct'CVOR257IO59.51 2.28 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT Eielson Air Force Base and sampling data for the entire Site. This is an important feature of the site conceptual model. Information gaps that have been identified in this area will be filled, where possible. The use of data from several investigations with varying purposes, approaches, and levels of quality control presents a challenge. These data will be evaluated, and used for the highest purpose for which they qualify. Sixty-four contaminant source areas spread over approximately 20,000 acres on an active USAF base presents a challenge to coordination. The sequential investigation of some of the OUs will allow data to be shared throughout the Site. However, because remedial response actions will need to be implemented for some OUs before others have been investigated, optimization of treatment or disposal systems will be difficult. Continuous sitewide oversight and coordination will be used to address these concerns. This SMP is not a final document, in that it will be periodically updated to reflect information gained by OU Rls and decisions reached through OU FSs. Addendlums will be prepared to define new tasks on a sitewide basis. As appropriate, the SMP will be updated at the completion of each OU RI/FS, or more often if needed. Copies of the addendum will be provided by the USAF to EPA and ADEC'. 0 ~~cVCVOR257/O59.51 2.29 17 June 1991 Sit. Maneagement Plan DRAFT Eielson Air Force Base 2.10 COMMUNITY RELATIONS0 Community relations are a critical component of the SMP. The Community Relations Plan (CRP) that is attached (Appendix 0) to this SMVP contains the tasks and approach for providing information to the community and enables community involvement in the dlecisionmaking process. As required under CEROLA, final RI and FS reports will be available for public comment. This will be coordinated with EPA and ADEC. The CRP will ensure that comments received from the public will be adequately and appropriately addressed before a final remedy is selected for an OU or for the Site. ct'C V0257/059.51 2.30 17 June 1991 Sit. Mana gement Plan DRAFT VEilfon Air Force. Base 3.0 SITE SETTING This section describes the location, history, and physical and cultural setting of EBelson AFB. Information in this section was used to develop the site conceptual model presented in Section 5.0. 3.1 LOCATION AND PHYSIOGRAPHY Eielson AFB is located in the Tanana River Valley in the eastern- central portion of interior Alaska, about 2 miles east of the river (see Figure 3.1). The base is approximately 25 miles southeast of Fairbanks, and 100 miles south of the Arctic Circle. The base encompasses approximately 19,270 acres, and is isolated from- any major urban areas. Nearby communities include North Pole, located approximately 7 miles northwest of the base (population approximately 5,000), and Moose Creek, a small community approximately 3 miles north of the base. A 5-mile section of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline (TAP) crosses the middle portion of the base. Figure 3.2 illustrates the location of the base and the major physiographic features of the area. Most of the base is located on the alluvial plain of the Tanana River. The Tanana River is a braided stream formed within the Tanana-Kuskokwim Lowland Physiographic Province. The lowland is a flat glaciofluvial outwash plain that originates in the Alaska Range approximately 100 miles to the south. A small portion of the eastern part of the base lies in the Yukon-Tanana Upland Physiographic Province. This area is . ~~cVCVOR257/034.51 3.1 17 June 1991 $ (ALASKA4SITE EIELSON ' AFB V. R B Y cr wi Z ice, A, a r ?5 tax% t z LX VAINWRIGHT Cabins .56Z 179, 00 RR, IZ71,i it cl BLAJ ..L JKE BLAIR LAKES FACILITY R FO HANG 4 ZC4 ,. 5 Scale in Mies FIGURE 3.1. Regional Location Mop Site MonOgCrT1cnt Plcri. Eidson Air Force Bose ¾ - C @1 -4 N- * 2• A V - (' 4 -4' -' I' I - - '---1 " k - - " -' - 4 N U C I"C 4 'V Li I- f V/r Al iN,' t- I '- -ca 4 J tV-ti; 2 -A-- - ' , 'A t ZY< C- - - Cr., ' I Atm ii- N 2-r S or * , - W?7 Q r') £ *, 0) -> i#Nt'N • s '' p big' c --1 - > C #. 9 - a: I -Ar-.-Ž-\ - A 7 4t¾ty -' - I) b * - C -C In / 4 / - '7------, $r ' I *--k .'/---'W 4. >gs' - I I ,-- t t1 -s - '1.-i- -- * - -Ž t ' ' At K t9t - I - 1. 'p - A K'- Ii 4¾ 'h' ' i--c - A d 'N - 4 'C 4/ ' -i2 0) it C, -nCCC, r -s. II - AS 'A .1 1 * , 4 ¾t;:t&- ' : 0, aIt C,-D - -4 -- 1' I. 0 -('I0 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT EaiIson Air Force Base characterized by rounded, even-topped ridges with gentle side slopes and broad undulating divides with flat topped spurs (ref. 1300). Topography at Eielson AFB is fiat and somewhat featureless within the developed portion of the base. Elevations within the developed portion of the base range from 550 to 525 feet above mean sea leve: (MSL), sloping downward to the north-northwest. Elevations in the hilly, eastern portion of the base are as high as 1,125 feet above MSL. With the exception of some fuel storage, a ski area, and the TAP, the eastern portion of the base is largely undeveloped (CH2M HILL, 1982). 3.2 SITE BACKGROUND The following sections provide background information concerning activities at Eielson AFB including site history and current mission, description of the existing facility, summary of waste management practices, and a discussion of previous investigations at the site. 3.2.1 Site History and Current Mission Ejelson AFB was originally a satellite installation of Fort Wainwright (previously Ladd Field) called Mile 26. Mile 26 was initially constructed between 1943 and 1944. The field was deactivated at the end of World War 1I, but was reopened again in 1947 as a future strategic base (USAF, 1991). Many of the base facilities were built during a major construction program from 1947 to 1954. The base was used jointly by the U.S. Army and the U.S. ct/0V0R257/034.51 3.4 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Ei.Ison Air Force Base Air Force during the 1950s. Mile 26 was officially redesignated Eielson AFB in February 1948 in honor of Carl Ben Eielson, aircraft pioneer and Alaskan aviator. Eielson's primary mission has been tactical air support for the Alaskan Air Command. Today, the host unit at Eielson AFB is the 343rd Tactical Fighter Wing. Airborne missions of the 343rd Tactical Fighter Wing include emergency war order and contingency planning, tactical air forces training for close air support and battlefield air interdiction, and strategic- reconnaissance/air-refueling operations (USAF, 1991). 3.2.2 Description of Existing Facility The following paragraphs are excerpted from a recent USAF S ~ ~~~~~environmental assessment (USAF, 1991). "Eielson AFB is a major employer in the Fairbanks North Star Borough, a county-scale local government entity. Eielson AFB is contiguous to and dwarfed by its neighbor, the Department of the Army's Fort Wainwright. Eielson AFB is built primarily around its north/south runway which parallels Richardson Highway to the west. Runway 31/13 is 14,500 feet with aircraft aprons, hangars, maintenance facilities, and taxiways to the east of the runway. The taxiway loop on the southeast end of the runway houses the A-los from the 343 TFW along with hangars, the hush house, and other maintenance and operations facilities. The 6th Strategic Reconnaissance Wing cVCVOMzS7/034.51 3.5 17 June 1991 She Management Plan DRAFT EMlson Air Force Base (SAC), and the 168th Air Refueling Squadron (ANG) are located in hangars and other facilities along the flightline. Industrial areas, administrative offices, housing, and community! recreation facilities are all located east of runway 31/13 beyond the flightline area. Munitions storage areas are located farther east of the cantonment area up on Quarry Hill at safe distances from non- related facilities. Only three small communities (Moose Creek, North Pole, and Salcha) lie within a twenty-mile radius of the base. The city of Fairbanks is the urban center of the Borough, with College, North Pole, and Moose Creek as suburban/rural areas within the borough. In 1984, the Borough Assembly prepared a comprehensive plan for orderly development. The land surrounding Eielson AFB is primarily used for military training associated with Fort Wainwright. All lands north and east of Eielson AFB belong to the Department of the Army. Lands northwest, west, and south of the base are predominantly Tanana River and Chena River flatlands which are composed of river (sand/gravel) bottornlands, woods, and scrub lands. Besides the community of Moose Creek (northwest of the base) there are a few scattered residential or commercial activities close to the base. Homesteads and cabins along Twenty-three Mile Slough Road lie west and south of the base, between the Tanana River, Richardson Highway, and the base boundary. All land west of the Tanana River is part of the Fort Wainwright Tanana River Maneuver Area."~ cVCVOP.257/034.51 3.6 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT EBelson Air Force Base 3.2.3 Waste Management Practices In the following sections, past and current waste management practices at EBelson AFB are summarized. Areas covered include industrial wastes, solid wastes, PCBs, pesticides, and wastewater treatment. 3.2.3.1 Industrial Wastes Eielson AEB has generated and continues to generate materials that have been designated as hazardous wastes under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RORA) of 1976. The Phase I IRP Report (CH2M HILL, 1982) provides a detailed summary of industrial waste disposal practices for the * ~~~~~~~period from 1950 to 1982. Industrial wastes have generally been grouped into three primary categories: waste oils, contaminated fuels and sludges, and spent solvents and cleansers. For the period from 1950 to 1982, the total quantity of industrial wastes is estimated to range from 25,000 to 40,000 gallons per year. The estimated quantity of industrial wastes generated between 1982 and the present is not known. The majority of industrial operations at Eielson AFB have been in existence since the early 1950s. Industrial operations and related wastes were insignificant prior to 1950 (CH2M HILL, 1982). Major industrial operations at the base include propulsion shops, pneumatics/hydraulics shops, aerospace ground equipment, maintenance shops, nondestructive inspection labs, and vehicle maintenance shops. These ct/CVOF,257/034.51 3.7 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Ele~onr Forceindustrial operations generate varying quantities of waste oils, fuels, solvents, and cleaners. Oilllwater separators are located at various industrial shops and washracks to recover petroleum, oils, and lubricants (POL) products before entering the sanitary sewer system. The recovered POL is periodically pumped out and treated as an industrial waste (CH2MV HILL, 1982). Prior to 1972, the final disposition of industrial wastes typically included road oiling, burning during fire training exercises, or iandfilling. Undocumented quantities of solvents and cleansers also were discharged to the sanitary sewer system without pretreatment. Some waste oils and contaminated fuels were transported to the Defense Property Disposal Office (DPDO) at Fort Wainwright for recycling or disposal. Since 1982, the final disposition of waste oils has been through the DPDO. Contaminated JP-4 fuel continues to be burned during fire training exercises. Spent industrial solvents are segregated, placed into marked 55-gallon drums, and transported to DPDO to await proper disposal. Aircraft cleaning compounds are discharged to the sanitary sewer system, where all wastewater receives secondary treatment at the base s~ewage treatment plant. Presently, hazardous wastes generated at Beleson AFB are handled, stored, transported, disposed, treated, and recycled according to defined procedures outlined under RORA. These procedures are incorporated into the base's Hazardous CV/CVOR257/034.51 3.8 17 June 1991 Sit. Maneagement Plan DRAFT VEi.Ien Air Force Beat. Material Management Plan which is applicable to all activities assigned or operating from the installation (USAF, 1991). Organizations and activities which handle waste materials are required to provide the Defense and Reutilization Material Office (ORMO) at Fort Wainwright with a complete chemical analysis of the contents of waste submitted for recycling or disposal. 3.2.3.2 Solid Wastes In the past, domestic and industrial refuse were disposed of in several landfills around the base. No solid waste landfills are currently in operation at Eielson AFB. Domestic refuse and industrial refuse classified as nonhazardous waste is disposed in the Fairbanks North Star Borough sanitary landfill (USAF, 1991). Approximately 6,000 tons of solid waste from Eielson AFB is transported to the landfill each year. This landfill is nearing the end of its operational life. A new 100-acre landfill is being designed to meet the area's future waste disposal needs. 3.2.3.3 Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) Until recently, Buildings 2339 and 3424 were used as PCB storage areas. In 1982, these facilities housed all out-of- service transformers and capacitors and PCB-contaminated soil and liquid. These items have since been disposed of, and currently there are no P08 materials stored on base. ct/CVOF257/034.51 3.9 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT EVeleon Air Force Bass 3.2.3.4 Pesticides and Herbicides Pesticides and herbicides are commonly used at EBelson AFB to control insects, rodents, and weeds (CH2M HILL, 1982). The base Entomology Shop controls the use and handling of these chemicals. Until it was banned, up to 40 or 50 drums per year of DDT reportedly was used around the base for pest control purposes. Some aerial spraying of DDT was conducted. Two hundred drums of leftover DDT were turned over to DPDO for offbase disposal when DDT use was banned.- 3.2.3.5 Wastewater Treatment The base sewage treatment plant at EBelson was built in 1953,0 initially providing primary treatment. The plant was expanded to provide secondary treatment in 1973. Effluent from the plant was discharged to Garrison Slough prior to 1979 (CH2M HILL, 1982). Since 1979 the treated effluent has been diverted to an infiltration pond north of Central Avenue, which was previously an old rock quarry. The capacity of the existing treatment plant is 1.2 mgd, but will expand to 3.0 mgd by summer of 1992. The plant is currently regulated under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Standards. CVCVOR257/034.51 3.10 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT Eielscn Air Force Base 3.2.4 Previous Investigations Previous investigations regarding environmental contamination at Elelson Air Force Base have been conducted under the Air Force Installation Restoration Program (IRP). The IRP was operated using a phased approach that included the following four stages: 3.2.4.1 Phase I--Records Search The purpose of Phase I was to identify and prioritize past disposal sites containing contaminants that posed a hazard to public health or the environment from migration to surface water or groundwater, or from persistence in the environment. In this phase, decisions were made as to whether each site warranted further investigation or immediate remedial action. If further investigation was deemed necessary, Phase I provided a basic background document for the Phase 1Istudy. If a site required immediate remedial action, such as removal of abandoned drums, the action could proceed directly to Phase IV. The Phase I Records Search was conducted by CH2M HILL between June and November 1982, and involved interviews with Eielson AFB employees, a detailed search of installation records and relevant government documents, and a ground tour of the Site. Forty-three source areas were identified from this work. During this phase, if the potential for contaminant migration was identified, the site was rated and prioritized using the Hazard Assessment Rating Methodology (HARM) . ~~CVCVOR2S7/034.51 3.11 17 June 1991 Site Maneagement Plan DRAFT E~ftnFoce A ... developed for use in the IRP. Based on the HARM ratings, it was recommended that further investigations be conducted at 17 of the source areas. The details of this investigation and the HARM scores can be found in IRP Phase I Record Search (CH2M HILL, 1982). 3.2.4.2 Phase Il--Confirmation and Quantification The purpose of Phase II was to confirm the presence and extent of contamination, to characterize the waste,, and to identify sites or portions of sites where remedial action would be required in Phase IV. Research requirements identified during this phase would be included in the Phase Ill effort. IRP Phase 11,Stages 1 and 2, involved limited sampling and analysis at the 17 source areas recommended for further study during Phase 1. Stage 1 was performed from July 1984 through February 1985, and Stage 2 was performed from July through November 1985. Both stages were conducted by Dames and Moore. The results of the investigations are documented in IRP Phase II, Stage 1 Confirmation! Quantification (Dames and Moore, 1985) and IRP Phase II, Stage 2 Confirmation/Quantification (Dames and Moore, 19??). In 1988, Harding Lawson and Associates (HLA) contracted to prepare a Work Plan and a Quality Assurance Project Plan (OAPP) for the IRP RI/ES at the base. The RI/ES was to target 23 source areas that were selected through a review of the Phase I Records Search Report, Phase 1IStages 1 and 2 ct/CVOR257/034.51 3.12 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT BElalon Air Force Base 0 ~~~~~~~~Confirmation/Quantification Reports, and additional information obtained from Base representatives about source areas that had been recently identified. HLA conducted field investigations at each of the 23 sites in 1988. The results of these investigations can be found in IRP Phase 11,Stage 3 Report (HLA, 1989). Based on this work, 10 high priority sites were identified for additional field work in 1989; field work at the other 13 was deferred until 1990. The ,IRP RI/FS for all of these source areas was documented in IRP RI/FS Phase 11,Stage 4 Report (HLA, 1990-1 991). 3.2.4.3 Phase Ill--Technology Development The purpose of Phase IlI was to develop a sound data base 0 ~ ~~~~~~fromwhich to prepare a comprehensive remedial action plan. This phase included conducting additional research identified in Phase 11,and choosing appropriate technology for an objective assessment of adverse effects. A Phase Ill requirement could be identified at any time during the program. No information on Phase IIl investigations or reports has been identified for Eielson AEB. 3.2.4.4 Phase lV-Remedial Action Plans Phase IV involved the development and implementation of the remedial action plan. . ~~ct/CVOR257/034.51 3.13 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT Eolelon Air Force Soso Just prior to the HLA investigations, Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) conducted Phase IV-A investigations at 18 source areas designated during Phase I as the fuel-saturated area. The field work was performed during 1986, 1987, and 1988. Six of these source areas were determined to pose no significant threat to human health or the environment from fuel-related contaminants. These source areas are discussed in Decision Document for Selected Sites (SAIC, Feb. 27, 1989). The RI for one source area was expedited over all other fuel-saturated sites and is documented in Remedial Investigation of Site 25, the Weathered Sludge Tank Burial Site (SAIC, Nov. 1988). The RI and ES reports for the remaining 11 sites were completed in 1989 and can be found in Fuel Saturated Area, Remedial Investigation Report (SAIC, Feb. 6, 1989) and Fuel Saturated Area, Detailed Analysis of Alternatives (SAIC, May 1989). 3.3 PHYSICAL SETTING The following sections summarize the physical setting of Eielson AFB. Specific topics include geology, surface soils and permafrost, hydrology, ecological resources, and climate and meteorology. 3.3.1 Geology Eielson AFB is located on the eastern edge of the Tanana River flood plain within the Tanana-Kuskokwim Lowland Physiographic Province. This broad, flat gladiofluvial outwash plain is bounded to ct/CVOR257/034.51 3.14 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Eielson Air Force Base 0 ~~~~~~thenorth by the Yukon-Tanana Upland, and to the south by the Alaska Range. Bedrock is exposed in the uplands, and consists predominantly of Precambrian and Late Paleozoic age quartz-mica schists (termed the Birch Creek schist) with some Mesozoic age intrusives (Hamilton et al., 1988; Tempelman-Kluit, 1976). The regional bedrock is overlain by accumulations of unconsolidated fluvial and glaciofluvial sediments derived from the Alaska Range during the Quaternary. Unconsolidated sediments are approximately 200 to 300 feet thick beneath Eielson AFB, and represent glacial outwash and alluvial stream sediments deposited by the braided Tanana River system (CH2M HILL, 1982). Figure 3.3 illustrates the general geology exposed at or near the land surface. These unconsolidated deposits typically occur as interbedded layers of well-graded sand and gravel with cobbles up to 8 inches in diameter. These deposits are often reworked and remixed due to the depositional dynamics of the braided river system. The silt content is variable, but generally is less than 10 percent (HLA, 1990). 3.3.2 Surface Solils and Permafrost Surficial deposits over most of the base consist primarily of sandy and gravelly loam. Some silty airborne deposits (boess) occur in some of the eastern upland areas. Surficial soils in many developed areas of the base consist of sand and gravel fill mined from on-base borrow pits. Soils near main streams are generally gravelly, with permafrost at depth or absent. Soils located further away from the main streams are more silty, and have a shallow . ~~cVCVOR257/034.51 3.15 17 June 1991 ~ 1/'.... Agy~ ~ ~ 1~~~~~~~~~1 K. 2 <1~~~~~~~~~~;4q~~~~~ T 4 A~~1 - ~~ ~ ~~Jt~~N~~u~ 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -t 4~Mam .3.~~~~~~~~~~~~...... ,,~~~~~~~ Sit. Maneagement Plan DRAFT Eilson Air Force Bass occurrence of permafrost. Surface water bodies and base activities are primary thermal sources precluding permafrost formation (CH2M HILL, 1982). 3.3.3 Hydrology The hydrology information is subdivided into discussions of groundwater occurrence and aquifer characteristics, groundwater use, surface water, and surface water and groundwater interactions. 3.3.3.1 Groundwater Occurrence and Aquifer Characteristics An extensive regional aquifer system occurs within the unconsolidated alluvial/glaciofluvial deposits within the broad valley of the Tanana River basin. The aquifer is approximately 45 to 50 miles wide at Eielson AFB (CH2M HILL, 1982), with a thickness of approximately 200 to 300 feet. The aquifer consists primarily of interbedided layers or lenses of unconsolidated sand and gravel. The occurrence of groundwater in the underlying Precambrian bedrock is not defined. No distinct aquitard units have been identified within the unconsolidated deposits. One deep well is known to have encountered a 20-foot-thick silt layer at a depth of 115 to 135 feet below ground surface (bgs) (HLA, 1990). The lateral . ~~CVCVOPt257/034.51 3.17 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT ElDeisn Air Force Base extent, continuity, and hydraulic properties of this silt unit are unknown. Groundwater occurs primarily under unconfined or se-miconfined conditions. Regional flow generally is to the north-northwest, parallel to the Tanana River; however, the direction of groundwater flow may be influenced locally (Figu~re 3.4) by buried stream channels, local surface drainages, and zones of permafrost. Depth to the water table typically is less than 10 feet (HLA, 1990). The regional horizontal hydraulic gradient within the developed portion of the base is approximately 4 to 6 feet per mile. The magnitude of this gradient is relatively low, resulting in generally slow groundwater movement in the area. The vertical hydraulic gradient within the aquifer is not known given the lack of representative water level data from deep wells on base. Primary sources of recharge to the aquifer include the Tanana River, its tributaries, and vertical percolation of rainfall and snowmelt (CH2M HILL, 1982). According to Harding Lawson Associates (1990), pumping tests have been performed on a number of the water suppk'. wells on the base. These tests have provided information on well productivity, but little useful data on the actual hydraulic characteristics of the aquifer. Due to the coarse-grained nature of the aquifer materials, and the low percentage of silt, the relative permeability of these alluvial/glaciofluvial deposits is moderate to high. ctICVOR257/034.51 3.18 17 June 1991 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0 tr~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ P a~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "C~~~~~~~~~~~~~Y 00 0) 7- _~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~y ~~~/>J~~~~~~ a) 04~~~~~~'4-, I(D~~ S 'U~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ .4-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Sit. Management Pian DRAFT Eiefton Air Force Base A second groundwater flow system occurswithinthhebedrock upland at the eastern edge of the base. Little is known about the hydraulic characteristics of this aquifer. Near the Ski Lodge (Source Area WP-38), groundwater in the fractured Birch Creek Schist occurs under confined conditions. Groundwater appears to discharge from the bedrock aquifer into the alluvial system; however, the degree of hydraulic connection between the bedrock aquifer and the rarionai alluvial aquifer is not well established. Additional Sw~dy is required to better assess the hydraulic characteris.ic-s of the bedrock aquifer, and its interaction with the alluvial aquifer system. A conceptualized hydrogeologic cross section near the east side of the base is shown in Figure 3.5. 3.3.3.2 Groundwater Use Groundwater is the only source of potable drinking water at Eielson AFB and for private citizens in the communities near the base. The aquifer supplying the base has been classified a sole-source drinking water supply. Groundwater also is used for all base operations, including firefighting, industrial, domestic, and household uses (HLA, 1990). CH2M HILL (1982) cataloged information on 26 water supply wells known to exist on-base; 9 of these are designated as abandoned. Flow rates range from 10 to 3,000 gpm, with typ ical specific capacities of 50 to 400 gpm per foot of drawdown. Most wells are approximately 100 feet deep. A map illustrating the typical availability of groundwater in the vicinity of the base is shown in Figure 3.6. ctICVOR257/03451 3.20 17 June 1991 cn~~~~* LU~~~~~~~~~~~~~~C C,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ U) 'n., a) 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~L0 * ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0V Lo C~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~( 0 0 0~~~~~~~~~~~C to~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 0 c~~~~~~~~~~~~~ O CLLO~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ qhno jsU a~Js9120 C~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~C IC E D u~osJOAIJ l LLI~~~~I1 fa~le9 LLU3OQ'K ~l UIA8-i2 C3 C~ * ...... -~~~~~~~~~1 ...'~~~~~~~~~~~~ ...... ...... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c 6~~~~~~~~~~~~...... -O 'I, . .. . . -...... *' C U.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~. I' I~~c 1, ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~1 C~~~~C ?~~~~~~~ I a I OiL~~~~~~~~~~~LJ DRAFT Sn.e Management Plan DelIeon Air For"e Base The main base area currently is served by four water supply wells shown in Figure 3.7. In addition, nine low-capacity wells, which are not connected to the main system. serve remote areas of the base (HLA, 1990). Only three of the main base wells feed into the water treatment facility, which has a capacity of 1.875 million gallons per day (mgd). Treatment includes excess lime, recarbonation, and chlorination. The fourth well feeds directly into the main distribution system and is only used as an emergency source (USAF, 1991). Current average daily consumption is 1.2 mgd, with a peak of 1.5 mg-d. The water treatment facility is scheduled to be upgraded in 1993. increasing the treatment capacity to 2.5 mgd. 3.3.3.3 Surface Water Surface water bodies in the vicinity of Eielson AFB include rivers, creeks, sloughs, lakes, ponds, and wetlands. These are described separately below. Eielson AFB is located approximately 2 miles east of the Tanana River, a major braided stream draining interior Alaska. The Tanana River drainage basin is approximately 44,000 square miles. Surface drainage at Eielson AFB is generally north-northwest, parallel to the Tanana River (Figure 3.8). Several small sloughs or creeks pass through the base and discharge to the Tanana River. Moose Creek is the main receiving stream for small local drainages around the base. 3.23 17 June 1991 0 ctICVOR257/034.51 * - ~~~~~~ST48 - SS31~~~ OWEA @WEI IB ...... - S , SSS7 255 500 750 19000 SCALE:~1w-553 FIGURE 3.7. Location of Base Water Supply Wells * ~~~~~~~andNearby Source Areas SitLe Management Plon. Lielson Air Force Base 0 0.5 1.0 4Scale in MWes- ' 'F,-- EIELSON AFB BOUNDARY Moos v~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 7-,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -- - --- - Kt4jk~~~~~~~ji% F~~~.FY kw Inerd eto fs-aernf - F~~~~~~~~IG R .8 uraeDrci4- a So o -e m A o'e6 . t -01'- ic;-,Ai o :: 3 s FrzgSylm a t, lr Sit. Management Plan DRAF7T Eoseion Air Force Base Both French Creek, along the eastern edge of Eielson AFB, and Piledriver Slough, along the western side of the base, discharge to Moose Creek just above its confluence with the Tanana River. A surface drainage, Garrison Slough, also discharges to Moose Creek. Garrison Slough passes directly through the developed portion of the base and consists prirn-ily of human-made drainage ditches. Portions of Garrison Slough are culver-ted near the refueling loop area. Prior to 1979, effluent from the base sewage treatment plant was discharged to Garrison Slough (CH2M HILL, 1982). Stream characteristics for French Creek, Moose Creek, Piledriver Slough, and Garrison Slough are presented in Table 3.1. Eielson AEB currently contains 13 lakes totaling 313 acres, 54 ponds totaling 265 acres, and 10 designated wetlands totaling approximately 252 acres. One of the lakes and 6 of the ponds are natural; the remaining 12 lakes and 48 ponds are old borrow pits (HLA, 1990). Historically, much of Elielson AFB was built on land that was originally wetland/flood plain areas. According to the USAF (1991), future facility development will likely continue to encroach into wetland areas when base operations dictate growth into areas beyond the developed core of the installation. Mitigation cf any destroyed wetland habitat will be accomplished through creation or enhancement of wetlands elsewhere. . ~~ct/V0Rt257/034.51 3.26 17 June 1991 Shte Mangegmerrd Plan DRAFT Ewelson Ai, Force Bas. TABLF 3.1. Estimated Stream Characierti,'n, Eielson AFB. August 20, 5,987 Width Depth Flow Velocily, Creek Location (feel) (fsee) Subsirale T (tlz)T V/a French Creek Quarry Road 15.20 2-3 Rocky, 1-to 3-inch- 20-30 243 diameter gravel ______ French Creek Manchu Road 20 2-3 Gravel with rubble and 23-30 5-10 _ _ I______~~~~~~~rocks_ _ _ Garrison Slough Division Street I - Sn.segrvel 5-10 1-2 Garrison Sough Manchu Road 8-10 1-2 Sand with gravel 5-10 Garrison Sough Transmitter Road 6-8 2-3 Sane silt, and organic 5 Garrison Slough Unnamed road 6-10 1-2 Mud and muck 1-2 'c1 Moose Creek Transmitter Road 15 2-4 Sandy 25-30 Piedriver Slough Moose Creek 3-0 -6 Gravel 100-200 3-4 Bluff _ _ _ _ _ Source: HLA. 1989.. cVCVOR257/057.5i 3.27 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT Eielson Air Force Base 3.3.3.4 Surface Water and Groundwater Interactions Surface water features such as lakes, ponds, or sloughs affect local groundwater flow patterns, especially in the shallow portions of the aquifer (i.e., depths of 0 to 15 feet). Surface water bodies can act as sources of recharge to the aquifer or as outlets for discharge, depending on the specific channel reach and seasonal changes in surface flow and water availability. Uittle is known about the interaction between the groundwater system and locaI ponds, lakes, and wetlands because of the lack of congruent groundwater and surface water elevation measurements. In general, French Creek is an influent stream losing water to the subsurface system in the eastern portion of Eielson AFB, and an effluent stream gaining water from the subsurface in the western portion of the base (HLA, 1990). Moose Creek is influent in the northeast portion of the base and effluent in the western portion. Garrison Slough is effluent throughout the base (HLA, 1990; SAIC, Jan. 10, 1989). 3.3.4 Ecological Resources The following discussion of the ecological resources at Eielson AFB is excerpted from the USAF's environmental assessment (1991). -ct'CVOAt257/034.51 3.28 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT Eielson Air Force Base 3.3.4.1 Flora 'The natural ecosystem found at Elelson AFB is characterized as lowland spruce/hardwood forest. The 15,892 acres of forest land range from dense to open stands of evergreen and deciduous trees. The primary evergreen species are black spruce (Picea mariana), which is normally found in lowlands with poor drainage, and white spruce (P. trichocarpa). Approximately 6,025 acres of the forest land is commercially forested (HLA, 1990). Understory shrubs include several willow and alder species, dwarf birch, low bush cranberry, and blueberry. Small bogs and muskegs are found in depressions. Vegetation around the periphery of these lakes and bogs include birch, willow, alder shrubs and trees, plus sedges and bog cranberry. The banks of Garrison Slough (the surface drainage canal through the base) also supports some riparian vegetation. However, these banks are predominantly covered by grass and are maintained by mowing. 3.3.4.2 Wildlife 'Wildlife species found in Eielson AFB include moose-, black bear, owls, grouse, ptarmigan, ducks, and geese. Moose and black bear are found mainly east of the cantonment area between Quarry Hill on the south end of the runway and Engineer Hill northwest of the north end of the runway. The few black bears in the area stay towards the eastern border of the base, whereas the migratory moose can be seen in ct/CVOR257/034.51 3.29 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Eleleon Air Force Bease populated areas. While black bear stay around the entire year, moose is normally seen during the summer grazing. The moose normally migrate across the Tanana River during calving and winter grazing seasons. "Owls, grouse, and ptarmigan are also found east of the cantonment area among the shrubs and grassy areas. These can be seen in larger numbers than moose or bear. The lakes and bogs on Eielson provide excellent habitat for ducks and geese migrating to the area. 3.3.4.3 Fish "The major natural aquatic features in this vicinity are the fee ~ ~~~~~TananaRiver, French Creek, Moose Creek, and Piledriver Slough. Both French Creek, along the eastern edge of Elelson AFB, and Piledriver Slough, along the western side of Elelson AFB, discharge into Moose Creek just above its confluence with the Tanana Ri\'er. "Piledriver Slough is a unique system which was cut off from its normal water source (the Tanana River) during construction of the Richardson Highway. Clear spring water supplies this slough so that it is now able to support fish such as the Arctic grayling (Thyrnallus articus), an important recreation species also found in French Creek. Fingerling silver salmon (Oncorhyncus kisutch) are stocked annually in Moose Lake and in 28 Mile Pit. cV/CVOPR257/034.51 3.30 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT Eialeon Air Force Baee 3.3.4.4 Threatened and Endangered Species "No plant or animal species, listed as either threatened or endangered, reside on Elelson AFB. The closest known nesting site for peregrine falcon is approximately 5 miles southeast of the base in the Salcha Bluff Area. This area is avoided by pilots taking off and landing at the base." 3.3.5 Climate and Meteorology Eielson AFB is located in the continental climatic zone that covers. interior Alaska. The climate in this zone is characterized by great diurnal arid annual temperature variations, low precipitation, and low humidity (CH2M HILL, 1982). The semiarid climate is due to blockage of moist maritime air masses from the south by the Alaska Range and from the north by the Brooks Range (Pewe, 1975). Large annual variations in temperature and solar radiation are due to its high latitude location. Historical climatic data for the period 1944 through 1984 are presented in Table 3.2. Average summer temperatures range between 45 and 610F. Average temperatures during the winter season range between -140 and 8SF (HLA, 1990). Extreme temperatures recorded during this time period at Eielson AFB were 930F in July and -640F in January. Annual precipitation in this area averages 14 inches, which includes 72 inches of snow. Average monthly precipitation ranges from 0.5 to 2.5 inches, with rainfall generally highest in July and ctJCVOP.257/034.51 3.31 17 June 1991 site Management Plan DRAFT Elelson Air Force Base TABLE 3.2. Elelson Air Force Base Climatological Data ______Averaged Over 40-year Period, 1944-1984 Maximum Minimum Average Precipitation Temperature Temperature Temperature Month (inches) (OF) (OF)CF January 0.88 +49 -64-1. February 0.62 +50 -60 -5.1 March 0.56 +52 -50 +9.8 April 0.50 +74 -26 +29.0 May 0.77 +92 -01 + 47.0 June 1.61 +93 +31 +57.8 July 2.55 +92 +36 +60.3 August 2.29 +88 +22 +55.6 September 1.34 +82 +05 +44.4 October 1.06 +68 -36 +24T.6 November 0.83 +50 -44 +3.4 December 0.85 +45 -61 -10.0 Average yearly total for precipitation: 13.87 inches. Average temperature over 40-year period: +25.50F. Source: SAIC, 1989, Volume II, Appendix A. ciCVCVOt57IO58.51 3.32 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT El~elon Air Force Bse. August. The evaporation rate is approximately 14 inches per year. equalling the mean annual precipitation. 3.4 CULTURAL SETTING In the following sections, the cultural setting of the Site, including historic and cultural resources and the socloeconomics of the area, is discussed. 3.4.1 Historic and Cultural Resources No sites on Eielson AFB are listed in the National Register of Historic Places. There are no potential World War 11structures eligible for the list. There are no known archeological sites (ref. 1310) and only one historical site on Elelson AFB: a commemorative marker to Ben Eielson (HLA, 1990). 3.4.2 Socloeconomics The following discussion of socioeconomics is excerpted from a recent environmental assessment for the base (USAF, 1991). 3.4.2.1 Demographics and Employment "The Eielson AFB region of socioeconomic influence is entirely within the Fairbanks North Star Borough (FNSB). In 1978, the FNSB's entitlement was fixed at 112,000 acres (HLA, 1990). Total population within the borough was 75,079 in 1990. While Eielson AFB accounts for 11% of the borough's population, the ct/0V0R257/034,51 3.33 17 June1l991 Site Management Plan DRAFT Ejelson Air Force Base combined populations of Elelson and Fort Wainwright households account for 28% of the borough's population. Jobs supported by Eielson's annual operations are estimated at 8,932, of which 4,466 are housed in Eielson facilities. 3.4.2.2 Housing "Onbase housing consists of 1,457 military family housing units; however the base has plans to convert existing eight- plexes into four-plexes because the eight-plexes do not provide adequate floor space or garages. This will result in a loss of 366 units when completed. "There is also a shortage of adequate off-base housing that is affordable to military personnel and does not exceed the maximum allowable housing costs. Currently 510 families live in suitable housing off-base, while the remaining 936 families (63%) live in unsuitable housing according to Air Force criteria. 3.4.2.3 Transportation "Roads, rail, and aircraft are the prime movers of commerce. Boats, aircraft and snowmobiles are the modes of recreation travel. Major highways serving the Fairbanks North Star Borough are State Highway 2 (Richardson Highway) between Fairbanks and the Canadian border, State Highway 4 between Big Delta and Valdez, and Highway 3 between Fairbanks and Anchorage. Travelers to the 'lower forty-eight' traverse the Alcan (trans-Alaska-Canada) highway by way of Richardson * ~~ctCVOR257/034.51 3.34 17 June 1991 Site Mahna gement Plan DRAFT SEI.on Air Force Bas. Highway to Tok Junction and then along the Alcan northeast into Canada. "Interjor Alaska's inbound and outbound air freight and passenger service is through Fairbanks International Airport. Freight weight and passengers served were 51 million pounds and over 500,000 persons during 1989." ct/CV0Rt257/034.51 3.35 She Management Plan DRAFT EBelson Air Force Base . ~4.0 SOURCE AREA DESCRIPTIONS The locations of the source areas defined for Elelson AFB are shown on Figure 4.1. A full-size copy of this map is provided as Plate 1. As discussed in Sez-tion 1.0, the Site's source areas have been organized into operable units (OUs) and source evaluation report (SER) groups. Brief discussions of source areas that comprise each OU or SEA group are presented in the following sections. The purpose of these discussions is to provide a general description of the source areas and to document previous investigations conducted in those areas. The specific results of those investigations, including discussions of the nature and extent of contamination at each source area, will be addressed in the OU and SER management plans. A summary of the source area descriptions is presented in Table 4.1. 4.1 OPERABLE UNIT 1 Eight source areas are included in Operable Unit 1. Three of these areas are shown in Figure 4.2. The others are at the Blair Lakes Target Range Facility, approximately 30 miles southeast of Eielson AFE. !See Figure 3.1). These areas share the common characteristic of having petroleum, oils, and lubricants (POL) contamination with floating product. Also, field investigations were conducted at each of these areas in 1989, so the current WCtV0R257/035.5i 4.1 17 June 1991 - C2) .'" t 4 -, P , .i 'Ii- 3. F or E' -I I : irr * ...... '11W 9' fl!cttlkldlW usik I ziv 'x1 ¼ I. - -t .iQ? ' ,Pj . 'I 4 '.j Ži.. -, -d KAY I. wAmt - 4 I --. - 'I N__ "lit 'C' tt-P ' I P - / - -\ r - rN- V tt1 - - -V vs ---- .. * / 7- -> 2 " if -T . . '4 , I \ --- - - I - I - S..-'. •\t' ... u i z < u u 0 0 0 5 F5 F5 MP; 0 0 0 z Z .2 a LO V t x E E -0 6z OE :E -5 E V 72 t 'E Z 5 E 0 0 V) .=M , E .2 .2 fall L S Z 19 9 I cn Z5 < z 4.3 17 June 1991 C' I- - I: ii I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0 0 LA-_ 'I o<, r ~ r ~ - - . ., a C . . I . .* g U V . U 8! -E.~~ - -- U ,E~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~' 7,e .. ai z '2 -> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~2a ft Cl 0 0 '~~ 'lW - c - --. C~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~**.41 J n 1 9 Z 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ F-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ - W LL~~~~~~ C~. CZ, Z 5 cd~- od C -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- 0 E .5 ~~~~~~Z5 U. . -S c ~~~~~~o--U - 3-C -E ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~ E ;T. ~ C.-oa~ a0 750 *V~~~o -8 Hi~~~~~~:>28L - o ~ E s a ELK L-) Ct ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.0~~~~~~~~ M U ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - .0 - -~~~~~~~~~ 99 4.517Jue Ij~~~~~ C LI~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~L F- In '-.-- -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~( to - 1 ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C~~~~~~~~~~~)~5, ' '4 - -,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~L ______.N. Di~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~f I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ OUon) LA" ~~' C uz-.-N I ZI~~~~tflWM) --. 4 4.~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~U, -0 0 0 C) !, ir~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~, ,, 0~~~ *I LI) u~~~~ *~~~~~~~~'>~~~~t N7~~~~~~~~~~~I~ ~ ~ ~ %N ~ ~ * I A -. 4 .I . - QC~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Q .4. II"' \ / 1 -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I" C,~~~~~~~~~L N . I 4' 4', p1' D~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~L 4/ ...,-.----.I -g C~~~~~~~~DO Do~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.I - I. 1 i. 'I ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~. a~~~~0 'A - I.' Q)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ''¾ - 4 . ,~~~~~~~ ' , a.. c~~~~ 'I C,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~L Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Belson Air Force. Bs" 0 ~~~~~~~condition of the areas is considered to be well characterized. Each source area is described briefly below. 4.1.1 Source Area ST2O-Refueling Loop Fuel Saturated Area Most aircraft refueling operations are conducted at the refueling loop on the south end of the base. The area contains three refueling pad complexes, E-7, E-8, and E-9, each of which consists of an asphalt pad with several fueling and defueling transfer pipes. A pumphouse with four buried 50,000-gallon JP-4 fuel storage tanks and delivery lines is in a sand and gravel area adjacent to each asphalt pad (HLA, 1990). Fuel spills have occurred in the refueling area in the past, and there has been evidence of line leaks. In 1987, an excavation near a fuel line at the E-7 pumphouse revealed a 1-foot-thick floating hydrocarbon layer (HLA, 1990). Information from previous investigations at ST20 can be found in the IRP Phase I Record Search (CH2M HILL, 1982); IRP Phase II, Stage 1 Confirmation! Quantification (Dames and Moore, 1985): Decision Document for Selected Sites (SAIC, Feb. 27, 1989); IRP RI/ES Phase 1I, Stage 3 Report (HLA, 1989); and IRP RI/ES Phase 1I, Stage 4 Report (HLA, 1990). 4.1.2 Source Area ST48-Powerplant Fuel Spill Area Source Area ST48 is located in the area of the base powerplant at the intersection of Industrial Drive and Division Street. Fuel- saturated soil and strong hydrocarbon odors were encountered in cVCVOR257/035.51 4.7 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Eleleon Air Force So". 1987 during construction activities at the west end of the powerplant. Suspected sources are abandoned 3-inch gasoline and diesel pipelines that run along Industrial and Division Streets (HLA, 1990). It is not known if these lines were drained and purged when they were taken out of service. Fuel-saturated soil and some free product were encountered at two construction dewatering wells constructed at the south end of the plant. Well 0, an 18-inch 1,000-gpm base water supply well, is located near the northeast corner of the powerplant. Benzene, trichloroethene, and toluene were detected in water collected from this well in July 1987 (HLA, 1990). HLA conducted two rounds of investigations at the site in 1988 and 1989. The results can be found in IRP RI/FS Phase II, Stage 3 Report (HLA, 1989) and in the IRP RI/FS Phase 11,Stage 4 Report (HLA, 1990). 4.1.3 Source Area ST49-Building 1300 LUST Spill Area Source Area ST49 encompasses approximately eight fenced acres just west of the refueling loop and includes Building 1300, a temporary combat alert hangar complex. The facility has its own auxiliary electrical generator, septic system, and water supply. A utility room houses the generator and a 550-gallon above-ground day tank which supplies diesel fuel for the generator. The above- ground tank is supplied by two 10,000-gallon underground tanks adjacent to the south end of Building 1300. Diesel fuel reportedly has been introduced into the building's septic system leach field on the southwest side of Building 1300, CV/CV0P2571035.51 4.8 17 June 1991 Sit. Mane ,emrnnt Plan DRAFT EMelon Air Force Bass 0 ~~~~~~~presumably through floor drains in the hangar. At least one fuel spill aloentered the floor drain in the utility room. Up to 1.9 feet of free product was measured in a monitoring well adjacent to the utility room in September 1988 (HLA, 1990). The water supply for the hanger is located in Building 1301, approximately 600 feet east and upgradient of the septic system leach field. Also in this building is a fire protection well. HLA has conducted two rounds of investigation at the site, the results of which can be found in IRP RI/FS Phase 11,Stage 3 Report (HLA, 1989) and in the IRP RU/FS Phase II, Stage 4 Report (HLA, 1990). 4.1.4 Blair Lakes Source Areas Source Areas SS5O, SS51, SS52, SS53, and DP54 are located at the Air Force Blair Lakes Target Range Facility, approximately 30 miles southeast of Eielson AFB (see Figure 3.1). The plan for the area is shown in Figure 4.3. During most of the year, the facility can only be reached by helicopter. During the winter, however, an ice bridge is built across the Tanana River, and trucks and 4-wheel-drive vehicles can reach the site. All of the source areas at Blair Lakes were studied by HLA during two rounds of investigations, documented in IRP RI/ES Phase II, Stage 3 Report (HLA, 1989) andl in the IRP RIIFS Phase 11,Stage 4 Report (HLA, 1990). c0VC08257/035.51 4.9 17 June 1991 TO PASSENGER\ HELICOPTER FUEL HELIPAD BLADDER AREA SS53 TANK FARM DITCH / GENERATORS FUELPUMHEIPA L VEHICLEM, C SCALEDNGEE I: \0V030763\c0763S01Dwc~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 75 15030 S/t. Mansagement Plan DRAFT Eol. on Air Force Sea*. 4.1.4.1 Source Area SS5O-BlaIr Lakes Vehicle Maintenance The water supply well for the Blair Lakes facility is located in the southeast corner of the vehicle maintenance building. The well is reportedly 120 feet deep. At least one spill of a significant volume of heating oil occurred at a storage tank located near the wCA. The tank has since been moved, but buried fuel lines that connect the tank to the fuel storage facility are within 100 feet of the well casing. A strong petroleum taste and odor has been reported at the water supply well. In 1988, free product was observed floating on the water surface in a monitoring well installed approximately 30 to 40 feet away from the well (HLA, 1990) 0 ~~~~~~~4.1.4.2 Source Area SS51 -Blair Lakes Ditch A ditch line at Blair Lakes was excavated in 1986 to lay a conduit from the generator building to an electrical box mounted south of the fuel storage facility. Prior to conduit installation, approximately 1/2 inch of diesel fuel was reportedly floating on the water in the ditch. The source of the fuel leak was unclear (HLA, 1990). 4.1.4.3 Source Area SS52-Blair Lakes Diesel Spill Several years ago, a 1-114-inch pipe failed that connects the main diesel fuel storage area to the day tanks behind the ve~icle maintenance building and generator facility. The . ct/eCVOF2S7/035.51 4.11 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT Ealslon Air Force Base resulting spill reportedly released 75 gallons of fuel (HLA,0 1990). 4.1.4.4 Source Area SS53-Blair Lakes Fuel Spill At the helicopter defueling and fuel bladder storage area, a small wooden shed houses pumping equipment for helicopter defueling. The pad on which the shed stands was visibly stained with fuel in 1987, and some stressed vegetation was observed. The quantity of fuel spilled is unknown (HLA, 1990). 4.1.4.5 Source Area DP54-Blair Lakes Drum Disposal Site A mixture of full and partially full drums of unknown material* have reportedly been buried immediately west of the main facility (HLA, 1990). 4.2 OPERABLE UNIT 2 Six source areas are included in Operable Unit 2 (Figure 4.4). Like the source areas in Operable Unit 1, these areas also have P6L- contamination with floating product. However, because the last field investigations were conducted at these areas in 1988, the current condition cf the areas is considered to be less well characterized than those in Operable Unit 1. The results of previous studies can be found in IR~~Phase I Record Search (CH2M HILL, lco82); IRP Phase 11,Stage 1 Confirmation! Quantification (Dames and Moore, 1985); and Fuel Saturated CtVCVOR57I035.51 4.1 2 17 June 1991 I '~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~M N N~~~lyL t .c' 4-.--~~~~~4r x4 4...~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~4 rn-k -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ji 0).44-fl; C. 4, 4 * ii..~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Site Management Plan DRAFT Eelaion Air Force Bass Area, Remedial Investigation Report (SAIC, Feb. 6, 1989). A brief description of each of the source areas follows. 4.2.1 Source Area ST1 O-E-2 POL Storage Source Area STi 0 encompasses part of the E-2 POL Storage and POL Lake. Two MOGAS storage tanks at the E-2 POL storage area (Tanks No. 20 and 21) were found to be Ieakinc~ approximately 200 gallons per day. These tanks were repaired in 1978. Numerous other spills have been reported in the diked area during refueling operations. POL Lake is approximately 200 feet downgradient from Tanks No. 20 and 21. An oily sheen has been observed on the water surface, providing indirect evidence for contaminant migration (SAIC, Feb. 6, 1989). 4.2.2 Source Area STi 1-Fuel Saturated Area Source Area STi 1 is located adjacent to Central Avenue, near Division Street. An oily sheen was observed on Garrison Slough in this area in 1975. Shallow test holes drilled near Faclifty 3224 indicated a hydrocarbon layer floating on the water table. An oil! water separator was installed and operated until 1980. Samples collected indicated that the primary constituent was diesel fuel manufactured around 1950. Facility 3224 was once a bakery and used furnaces that were fueled with diesel fuel. Another possible source is a nearby former boiler house, also fueled with diesel. Ct/VC08257/035.51 4.14 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Ealston Air Force Baa. 4.2.3 Source Area ST1 3-E-4 Diesel Fuel Spill Source Area ST1 3 is located on the runway just south of the E-4 refueling and defueling area and storage tanks. In this area fuel bladders are filled with fuel, primarily diesel and some motor gasoline (MOGAS), and then transported by helicopter to remote training areas. Some spills have occurred due to ruptured, leaking, and overfilied bladders. The fuel would migrate off the paved runway to the local ground surface. 4.2.4 Source Area SS1 4-E-2 Railroad JP-4 Spill Area Source Area SS14 is located along the railroad line adjacent to the E-2 POL Storage Area. It has been the location of numerous fuel spills during the delivery of fuels by railroad. The primary product released was JP-4. Fuels were delivered to the storage area by railroad up to 1977. 4.2.5 Source Area ST18-0iI Boiler Fuel Saturated Area Source Area ST18 is located in the vicinity of an old boiler plant near the south of Division Street, between Central Avenue and Industrial Drive. During the construction activfties in the mid- 1970s, a series of 8-foot-deep holes was dug. These holes were dug below the water table and a hydrocarbon layer was found floating on the water. A potential source is the old boiler house, which was fueled with diesel fuel. CVCVOn:2s7,'0s.51 4.15 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT Eiefton Air Force Bow. 4.2.6 Source Area ST19-JP-4 Fuel Uine Spill Source Area STi 9 is located on Cargain Road at the southern end of the base. Approximately 200,000 gallons of JP-4 were released there during a fuel line rupture in the late 1950s. Evidence of vegetative stress has bee n observed at this location. 4.3 OPERABLE UNIT 3 Two source areas comprise Operable Unit 3 (Figuire 4.5). At both of these areas the primary concern is solvent contamination, particularly trichloroethene. Each source is described briefly in the following sections. 4.3.1 Source Area DP544-Battery Shop Leach Field, Building 1141 Source Area DP44 includes the area around Building 1138 between the runway taxiway and Flightline Avenue west of the North Street intersection. The concern here is that the drains from the battery shop may have at one time drained to a leach field and that the solvents used at the shop may have been released to the environment via this route, It is believed that the drains now discharge to the sanitary sewer. The existence of a leach field has not been confirmed (HLA, 1990). HLA conducted field investigations at the site in 1988 and 1990. The results of the investigation can be found in the IRP RI/FS ctICVOR257/035.51 4.16 17 June 1991 N~~~~~~~:,~ N"' N. 4 I~~ww N'- OIL~~~~~~~~~~~~~i 0~~~~~~~~~~ -~~~~~~~~~~~~>~ ~ 'C''~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~Q '¼ 'I~~~~~2. C V I- I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Lja N~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~r ~~~ r2~~~~~~'P~~~~~~'¾~~~~~L - I,~~~~~~~~~~~ C.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Q c 'Li" If" / -. -~~~~~~~~~~~~ V ~~~~~~~~ ~ ,~ *~~~~~~~~~~ ~ I r ~ ~ Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Elelson Air Force Base Phase 11,Stage 3 Report (HLA, 1989) and the IRP RI/FS Phase II, Stage 4 Report (HLA, 1991). 4.3.2 Source Area WP45-Photo Lab, Building 1183 Source Area DP45 is situated around Building 1183 near the main taxiway along the west side of Flightline Avenue, north and south of the intersection with Division Street. A small photo laboratory is in Building 1183, and photo chemicals from the laboratory have reportedly been discharged to a dry well. It is unclear whether the laboratory drains are presently connected to the sanitary sewer (HLA, 1990).- A field investigation conducted by HLA in 1988 detected trichloroethene and benzene along with several other solvents in the groundwater in the vicinity of the laboratory. The results of this investigation can be found in IRP RI/FS Phase 11.Stage 3 Report (HLA, 1989). HLA took samples from the area again in 1989. These results can be found in IRP RI/FS Phase II, Stage 4 Report (HLA, 1990). 4.4 OPERABLE UNIT 4 The eight source areas included in Operable Unit 4 (Figure 4.6) were used for land disposal for sludge, drums, and asphalt. A brief description of each follows. Ct/CVoF57/M.5.1 4.18 17 June 1991 .4~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~. I, ~~~~~~~.... -~~~~~~~ I Q~~~q---rL ---Z . -J I' ~~~~~~~I-. /~~~~~~~4 N C)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~C Site Management Plan DRAFT Eielson Air Force aSee 4.4.1 Source Area DP25-E-6 Fuel Tank Sludge Burial Site Source Area DP25 is located in the E-6 POL storage area along the north side of Quarry Road. This area contains six fuel storage tanks, each wAth a volume of approximately 300,000 gallons. Each tank is surrounded by earthen dikes, and a fence surrounds the diked areas. The source area also contains a larger fuel tank with a capacity of 1.2 million gallons located east of the fenc-ed area. Weanhered sludge from periodic fuel tank cleaning operations was buried in shallow trenches between the fuel storage tanks. The sludge consisted predominately of water with some rust, dirt, and fuel: These disposal operations occurred from 1955 to 1980. The majority of the residual fuel and volatile components evaporated into the atmosphere during weathering activities, but the lead residue from the leaded aviation gas previously stored in the tanks would still be present. In 1987 a pipeline fuel spill of JP-4 occurred adjacent to the site along Quarry Road (SAIC, Nov. 16, 1988). During previous investigations, significant concentrations of lead were found in the soil and floating hydrocarbon product was observed in three monitorinc wells. However, the contamination did not appear to have migrated outside of Source Area 2.5 (SAIC, 1090). The details of these investigations can be found in IRP Phase I Record Search (CH2M HILL, 1982); IRP Phase II, Stage 1 Confirmation/Quantif~ication- (Dames and Moore, 1985); and IRP RI/ES of Site 25, Weathered Sludge Tank Burial Site (SAIC, Nov. 16, 1988). cvcvOR1257/035.51 4.20 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT Eleleon Air Force Base 4.4.2 Source Area DP26-E-1O Fuel Tank Sludge Burial Pit Source Area DP26 is located just east of Flightline Avenue, near the south end of the runways. It is also one of the locations where weathered sludge from periodic fuel tank cleaning operations was disposed of in the past. As discussed for DP25, contamination from lead potentially present in the sludge is the primary concern. The results from previous investigations conducted at DP26 can be found in IRP Phase I Record Search (CH2M HILL, 1982); IRP Phase 11,Stage 1 Confirmation! Quantification (Dames and Moore, 1985); and Fuel Saturated Area, Remedial Investigation Report (SAIC, Feb. 6, 1989). 4.4.3 Source Area ST27-E-1 1 Fuel Storage Tank Area The E-1 1 fuel storage area is a complex of five fuel tanks and Building 6261 on the south side of Quarry Road near DP2S. Weathered sludge was buried between the tanks until 1980. Since 1980, the sludge has been drummed and sent off-base for disposal. Again, the major concern at this area has been the potential for the presence of lead in the sludge. Previous investigations at ST27 are documented in the IRP Phase I Record Search Report (CH2M HILL, 1982) and in Decision Document for Selected Sites (SAIC, Feb. 27, 1989). WtCVOR257/035.51 4.21 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Eielson Air Force Base 4.4.4 Source Area SS36-Drumn Storage Area Source Area 36 is located near the center of Eielson AFB, southeast of Buildings 6213 and 6215. The location was used as a mixing area for asphalt and as the center for road oiling operations from the later 1960s to the mid-1 970s. A mixing tank was used for mixing tar and asphalt emulsion for road maintenance. Mixing of waste oils and contaminated fuel for road oiling operations is a potential source of POL contamination. Drums of waste oils, hydraulic fluid, diesel fuel, and other POLs stored at the site are other potential sources of past contamination (CH2M HILL, 1982). Previous investigations are documented in Phase I Record Search (OH2M HILL, 1982); Phase 11,Stage 1 Confirmation/Quantification (Dames and Moore, 1985); and Decision Document for Selected Sites (SAIC, Feb. 27, 1989). 4.4.5 Source Area SS37~-Drum Storage Area, Asphalt Mixing Area Source Area SS37 is located east of Flightline Avenue, between Quarry Road and Chena Street. It has been used in the past as a mixing area for asphalt. Until the early 1980s, it was aiso used as a staging area for road oiling operations. Evidence of a POL- saturated ground surface and a pool of water contaminated with POL has been observed adjacent to the mixing tank at the site. The mixing tank was used for mixing tar and asphalt emulsion for road maintenance, as well as waste oils and contaminated fuel for CV'CVOR257/035.51 4.22 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Eiatson Air Force Base road oiling operations. Some drums of miscellaneous liquid waste were stored at the site. Their contents included waste oils, diesel fuels, JP-4, and P0-680. These have since been relocated to a secure hazardous materials storage area. Results from previous investigations- at SS37 can be found in IRP Phase I Record Search (CH2M HILL, 1982): IRP Phase II, Stage 1 Confirmation/Quantification (Dames and Moore, 1985); and Fuel Saturated Area, Remedial Investigation Report (SAIC, Feb. 6, 1989). 4.4.6 Source Area SS39-Asphalt Lake Source Area SS39 is located south of New Richardson Highway approximately 1 mile from the Eielson AFB main gate. Several hundred barrels of asphalt emulsion (tar) were disposed in this area during runway construction at the base in the late 1940s. The drums rusted and leaked most of their contents. An area of approximately 1 acre is covered with asphalt emulsion to a depth of 6 to 12 inches. Drums and miscellaneous debris are embedded in the soft tar (CH2M HILL, 1982). No activities are presently conducted at the site. Previous investigations at SS39 are documented in IRP Phase I Record Search (CH2M HILL, 1982); IRP RI/FS Phase 11,Stage 3 Report (HLA, 1989); and IRP RI/FS Phase II, Stage 4 Report (HLA, 1990). CVCVOP257/035.51 4.23 17 June 1991 8ff. Management Plan DRAFT Ealeon Air Force Ba.e . ~4.5 OPERABLE UNITS5 The three source areas that comprise Operable Unit 5 (Figure 4.7) all involve landfills and potential areas of nearby soil contamination. Brief descriptions of each are provided in the following sections. 4.5.1 Source Area LFO3--Current Base Landfill (inactive) Source Area LF03 occupies at least 100 acres just east of the south end of the runway and north of the northwest portion of the refueling loop taxiway. LF03 was used as the main base landfill from 1967 until 1987 and as a major fire department training area from 1955 to 1976. During landfllling operations, waste materials were reportedly dumped into standing water, as the excavation extended below the water table. The landfill received base refuse, including household garbage, scrap lumber, scrap metal, construction debris, concrete slabs, and empty cans and drums from the flight line industrial shops. It also reportedly received waste oils, spent solvents, paint residues and thinners, and five or six drums of radioactive photographic chemicals. The practice of burying POL wastes was halted in 1972. Fire training activities subsequently involved burning POL wastes, including waste oils, contaminated fuels, and spent solvent. From 1972 to 1976, clean JP-4 fuel mixed with contaminated JP-4 (less than 10 percent water) was used during the exercises (CH2M HILL, 1982). ct/CV0R257/035.51 4.24 17 June 1991 LFO 4 6", ~ -4 / 7. -N.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~AA Y~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 44 :_LF03M FTOO~~~~~~~I t~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I .-.- 0 750 15003000 2250 FIGURE 4.7. Operable Unit 5 Source Areas~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~4 :\CV030768\CO76E--1n~~~~~~nv.-- I Site Management Plan DRAFT VElslon Air Force Lase Information from previous investigations at LFO3 can be found in the IRP Phase I Record Search (CH2M HILL, 1982); IRP Phase II, Stage 1 Confirmation/Quantification (Dames and Moore, 1985); IRP RI/ES Phase II, Stage 3 Report (HLA, 1989); and IRP RI/FS Phase II, Stage 4 Report (HLA, 1990). 4.5.2 Source Area LFO4--Old Army Landfill and EOD Area Source Area LF04 is distant from the highly developed portion of the Base, approximately 3 miles east-northeast from the south end of the runway. The area is an old Army landfill where general refuse was deposited. The landfill probably received small quantities of waste oil and spent solvents and may have received small amounts of munitions and spent cartridges. The Army originally used the site to store ammunition in bunkers, as shown on an old master plan of the base. Currently, the area is an active munitions disposal and explosives detonation area designated as an explosives ordnance disposal (EOD) area (HLA, 1990). The results of previous investigations at LF04 are documented in IRP Phase I Record Search (CH2M HILL, 1982); IRP RI/FS Phase II, Stage 3 Report (HLA, 1989); and IRP RI/FS Phase II, Stage 4 Report (HLA, 1990). 4.5.3 Source Area FTO9-Fire Training Area (Present) Source Area FTO9 is located within the west-central portion of the Source Area LFO3. The area has been used for fire training exercises since 1976. Current procedures at the fire training area CVCVO~t27/035.51 4.26 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT Elelson Air Force Base are to presaturate the ground with approximately 5,000 gallons of water, apply the starter fuel, burn for 30 seconds, and then extinguish the fire with a 6 percent aqueous film-forming foam. Approximately 500 to 1,000 gallons of clean JP-4 fuel mixed with up to 200 gallons of contaminated JP-4 fuel (less than 10 percent water) are used during each exercise (HLA, 1990). The investigations at FT09 have been done concurrently, with those at LFO3 (see Section 4.5.1). 4.6 OPERABLE UNIT 6 Source Area WP38, the ski lodge well contamination, is the only source area included in Operable Unit 6 (Figure 4.8). It has been set aside for separate investigation because it is in fractured bedrock, as opposed to the sand and silt geology seen at other areas of the Site. WP38 includes approximately 200 acres of south-facing hillside near the Eielson Ski Lodge. Part of the area is above the ski lodge and contains an old fuel storage tank area and a pit used for contaminated fuel and sludge disposal from the late 1950s until 1970. Eight 50,000-gallon tanks and a number of smaller tanks were once present. The tanks and associated lines were removed from the site in 1977. Some tanks may have contained aviation fuel, and some may have leaked (HLA, 1990). Water supply wells for the lodge have repeatedly shown signs of petroleum contamination, in particular benzene concentrations that eVCVOR257/035.51 4.27 17 June 1991 .9 9-', if 1 .9. '.9. .99. . . .9 - A .9 .2- - -. 1 ______WP3S <.94.9 - - --. 9--..'' '['.49..-- .9, ¾- - . 9.. 9L 0 .. -. S. .9'.9. - .9 .99' A '4 L 9... - .9 9' .9. .9- -. - .9 '.- - . .9.9.9 .9 K' iP. / -- ' -k( '9 .-- w 9 ,f ,.' - .9 .9 9.- - .9.. .9 /9. - .9-..-. .9.9 'N., .9. - '4 \ ' -- -A -' -4. .9v\ .9 .9. .9 p . .9.9 - .9..9 9.- - ' '.9 .9 . .9.9,. 0 -- / 9- .9 , -.9 .9 -1' .9 - L.9 1'.,, .9.9 .9. .9 97 -' 4-. ,. ¾... 9 .9.9 9 . .9 9 .9.9.9.9.9.9 .9.9 .9.9 .9, .99.9 .9 0 500 1000 00 00 SCALE: 1 000 FIGURE 4.8. Operable Unit 6 Source Areas Site Monogemen t Plan. Ejelsori Air Force Bose I: \Cv030768\co7oaF3s owe Site Management Plan DRAFT Eielson Air Force Bas. exceeded the MOL These wells are no longer used. Previous investigations at this source area have been documented in IRP Phase I Record Search (CH2M HILL, 1982); IRP RI/FS Phase 11, Stage 3 Report (HLA, 1989); and IRP RIIFS Phase II, Stage 4 Report (HLA, 1990). 4.7 SOURCE EVALUATION REPORT A On the basis of available information, the source areas included in SER A are not likely to require further action or perhaps only limited monitoring. 4.7.1 Source Area LFO7-Test Landfill Source Area LF07 was used as an experimental sanitary landfill1 for only a few months around 1967. It was reported that this area received primarily household garbage. The quantity of wastes received from the flightline industrial area, if any, is judged to be very small (CH2M HILL, 1982). LF07 was included in the IRP Phase I Record Search (CH2M HILL, 1982); however, no further investigations have been done. 4.7.2 Source Area ST12--JP-4 Spill, Building 2315 Source Area ST12 was the location of a 5,000-gallon JP-4 spill that occurred in 1981. A malfunction of a gate valve located on the rear of a refueling truck caused the accidental discharge. The spill occurred inside Facility 2351, and the majority of the 5,000 gallons was contained within the building. It was reported cVCVOR257/035.51 4.29 17 June 1991 Shte Management Plan DRAFT Eieiaon Air Force Base that approximately 100 gallons flowed outside of the building, most of which was collected by absorbent pads. Some of the fuel entered a utility corridor, but it was later pumped out and recovered (CH2M HILL, 1982). The only previous investigation at this source area was documented in the IRP Phase I Record Search (CH2M,1 HILL, 1982). 4.7.3 Source Area STi17--Canal Pipeline Spill Source Area ST17 is located along the Old Richardson Highway, in the vicinity of Taxiway 3. It was the site of a pipeline rupture in 1-957 t-hat rele-a W-d4tpioximately 20,000 gallons of diesel fuel onto and adjacent to the highway. Previous investigations of ST1 7 are documented in IRP Phase I Record Search (CH2MV HILL, 1982); IRP Phase II, Stage I Confirmation/Quantification (Dames and Moore, 1985); and Fuel Saturated Area, Remedial Investigation Report (SAIC, Feb. 6, 1989). 4.7.4 Source Area DP2B-Fly Ash Disposal Source Area DP28 is located at the intersection of Quarry and Industriai Roads. It was the disposal location for fly ash generated by the central heating and powerplant from 1972 to 1977. This area was originally an old gravel pit, which was filled with fly ash. DP28 was included in the IRP Phase I Record Search (CH2M HILL, 1982), but no subsequent investigations have been done at this source area. WtCVOR257/o35.51 4.30 17 June 1991/ site Manage m.,*,,PlanDR ElelsOn Air Force Bee RAFF 4.7.5 Source Area WP33-T.reated Effluent Infiltration Pond Source Area WP33 is located in the vicinity treatment of the wastewater plant on the northwestern end of the base. The which was originally pond, an old gravel pit, has been used since 1978 to receive treated effluent. The effluent is discharged year-round to the pond and percolates into the soil. Prior to 1978, the effluent was discharged treated to Garrison Slough and pond was the infiltration used intermittently during the summer. WP33 was included in the IRP Priase I Records Search (CH2M No HILL, 1982). further investigations have been done in the area. 4.7.6 Source Area 0 P40--Powerplant Sludge Pit Source Area DP4O is located south of the base Powerplant Facility 6205. near This area primarily received scrubbers residue from the air in the plant and periodically received small quantities sludge generated of during the acid treatment and cleaning of boilers. The 1-acre area was cleaned out approximately 2 years, every and the sludge was hauled to the base landfill for disposal. DP4o was included in the IRP Phase I Record (CH2M HILL, Search 1982); however, no further investigations have been done in this area. 4.7.7 Source Area DP55--Birch Lakes Burial Site The Birch Lakes site is located about 35 miles on south of the base Richardson Road. Drums of waste oil from the automotive hobby shop (SS41) were disposed of at an unpermitted landfill at 4.31 17 June ~~~1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Eielson Air Force Bae" that site along with other refuse. No investigations have been conducted at this area. 4.7.8 Source Area SS62-Garrison Slough Garrison Slough runs through the center of the base and receives groundwater discharges and surface runoff from the Site. These discharges may be adversely impacting the slough. Only limited sampling of the slough has been conducted to date, so the nature and extent of the impacts are not known. 4.8 SOURCE EVALUATION REPORT B' The SER B source areas are those for which enough information * ~~~~~~hasbeen collected to make a decision on whether an area becomes an SER A site (to be considered for no further action or limited monitoring) or whether it should be put into a current or future OU for an RI/FS assessment. 4.8.1 Source Area LFO2-Old Base Landfill Source Area LFO2 is located at the southeastern end of Bear Lake, between French Creek to the north and the buried Haines- Fairbanks Multi-Product pipeline to the south. The area was the main base landfill from approximately 1960 to 1967. The refuse wszs first burned and then buried at the site. Burning of refuse was halted in approximately 1964. It was reported that, along with general refuse from the base, this source area also received waste oils, spent solvents, and paint residues and thinners. After CVCVORt257/O305.S1 4.32 17 June 1991 Site Mana gement Plan DRAFT Elelson Air Force Baee Iandflhling operations ceased in 1967, a cover of fly ash from the central heating and powerplant was placed on this site (CH2M HILL, 1982). Previous investigations at LF02 are documented in IRP Phase I Record Search (CH2M-HILL, 1982): IRP Phase II, Stage 1 Confirmation/Quantification (Dames and Moore, 1985); IRP Phase 11,Stage 2 Confirmation/Quantification (Dames and Moore, 19__) JRP RI/FS Phase II, Stage 3 Report (HLA, 1989); and IRP RI/FS Phase II, Stage 4 Report (HLA, 1990). 4.8.2 Source Area LFO5-Old Army Landfill Source Area LFO5 is located approximately 1.5 miles south- southeast of the south end of the runway, 2,000 feet east of Richardson Highway. It was used as a landfill by the Army battery station located here from approximately 1956 to 1959. Information pertaining to landfill operations is limited. The landfili probably received small quantities of waste oils and spent solvents, in addition to general refuse such as scrap materials and empty drums and containers (CH2M HILL, 1982). The results from previous investigations at this source area can be found in IRP Phase I Record Search (CH2M HILL, 1982); IRP RI/ES Phase 1I, Stage 3 Report (HLA, 1989); and IRP RI/FS Phase 11,Stage 4 Report (HLA, 1990). ct/0V0R257/035.51 4.33 17 June 1991 Site Manaegment Plan DRAFT Elelson Air Force Bass 4.8.3 Source Area LFO6-Old Landfill Source Area LFO6 covers about 10 acres and is bounded to the west by the Golden Valley Electric Association right-of-way and to the east by two ponds. The area was used as a secondary landfill from 1959 to 1963. - It was reported that this area received general refuse and empty drums and paint containers from the flightline industrial shops. Since the majority of waste materials would have gone to LF02 during this time period, only small quantities of waste paints and thinners and spent solvents as drum residuals are suspected at this location (CH2M HILL, 1982). Previous investigations at this source area are documented in IRP Phase I Record Search (CH2M HILL, 1982); IRP RI/FS Phase II, Stage 3 Report (HLA, 1989); and IRP RIlES Phase II, Stage 4 Report (HLA, 1990). 4.8.4 Source Area FTO8-Fire Training Area (Past) Source Area FT08 is located along the north side of Transmitter Road just west of the Alaska Railroad tracks. The area was used for training exercises from 1948 to 1955. Exercises were conducted on a wrecked aircraft, which was placed in an old gravel pit, using approximately 250 gallons of POL waste per exercise. The POL waste included commingled waste oils, contaminated fuels, and spent solvents. The majority of POL waste would have been consumed in the fire, but some percolation into the ground may have taken place. The gravel pit cVCVOR257/035.51 4.34 17 June 1991 Sit. Manaegmrn Plan DRAFT Vel son Air Force Be" is now filled with water due to a rising water table (CH2M HILL, 1982). Results of previous investigations at FT08 are documented in IRP Phase I Record Search (CH2M HILL, 1982); IRP RI/ES Phase 11, Stage 33Report (HLA, 1989); and JRP RI/ES Phase II, Stage 4 Report (HLA, 1990). 4.8.5 Source Area DP29-Drum Burial Site Source Area DP29 is located west of Bear Lake along the northeast side of the Alaska Railroad tracks, approximately 1,500 feet south of the Transmitter Road railroad crossing. It is an old gravel pit used for disposal of primarily empty 55-gallon drums from 1965 to 1968. Approximately 400 to 500 drums were disposed of in the area. Prior to disposal, these drums contained asphalt emulsion, engine oils, and solvents. Residuals of these materials could have been present in the drums at the time of disposal. Reportedly, some of the asphalt emulsion drums were full when disposed of (CH2M HILL, 1982). Previous investigations at FTO8 are documented in IRP Phase I Record Search (CH2M HILL, 1982); IRP RI/FS Phase 11,Stage 3 Report (HLA, 1989); and IRP RI/ES Phase 11,Stage 4 Report (HLA, 1990). cVCVOR257/=3.51 4.35 17 June 1991 Site Maneagement Plan DRAFT Eleleon Air Force Bae. 4.8.6 Source Area WP32-Sewage Treatment Plant Spill Source Area WP32 is located approximately 1,000 feet north of the intersection of Central and Flightline Avenues near the Main Gate to EBelson AFB. It consists of a small spill pond connected to a much larger spill pond and has been in operation since 1970. The two spill ponds were originally constructed to provide additional contact time for the chlorination of primary treated effluent. For over 10 years, these ponds have served a secon dary function as diversion ponds for POL spills. In 1975, a major spill of an unknown industrial chemical or solvent was reportedly diverted to the ponds (CH2M HILL, 1982). Previous investigations at WP32 are documented in IRP Phase I Record Search (CH2M HILL, 1982); IRP Phase II, Stage 1 Confirmation/Quantiffication (Dames and Moore, 1985); IRP Phase 11,Stage 2 Confirmation/Quantification (Dames and Moore, 19__?); IRP RI/ES Phase 11,Stage 3 Report (HLA, 1989); and IRP RIIFS Phase 11,Stage 4 Report (HLA, 1990). 4.8.7 Source Area SS35-Asphalt Mixing Area Source Area SS35 is located northwest of the intersection of Tenakee Street and Central Avenue, approximately 1,000 feet south of the water treatment plant. Garrison Slough and an unnamed pond border the area to the south and west. From the early 1950s to the late 1960s, it was used as a mixing area for asphalt and as a base for road oiling operations. Commingled ct/cVOR257Io35.51 4.36 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Eielson Air Force Rose 0 ~~~~~~~waste oils and solvents were mixed with contaminated fuels at this location and then used for road oiling to control dust. Approximately 200 empty asphalt drums were reportedly disposed of along the banks of Garrison Slough. There were also reports of asphalt-saturated areas. However, a ground tour of SS35 in 1982 showed no evidence of empty drums or the asphalt- saturated areas (CH2M HILL, 1982). The results from previous studies at SS35 are documented in IRP Phase I Record Search (CH2M HILL, 1982); IRP RI/FS Phase 1I, Stage 3 Report (HLA, 1989); and IRP RIIFS Phase 11,Stage 4 Report (HLA, 1990). 4.8.8 Source Area SS42-Miscellaneous Storage and Disposal Area Source Area SS42 is located along the north side of Garrison Slough, approximately 1,500 feet east of the intersection of Central and Flightline Avenues. Empty drums and containers were reportedly buried in the area during the 1960s. It was also a storage area for miscellaneous materials and small equipment. The potential exists that some small quantities of POL waste, including solvents, may have been present in the drums as residue. The results from previous investigations at SS42 can be found in IRP Phase I Record Search (CH2M HILL, 1982); IRP Rl/FS Phase II, Stage 3 Report (HLA, 1989); and IRP RI/FS Phase 11, Stage 4 Report (HLA, 1990). S ct/0CV0R257/035.51 4.37 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT VElfon Air Force Base 4.8.9 Source Area S847-Commissary Parking Lot Fuel Spill The base commissary is located at the intersection of Central and Broadway Avenues. Fuel-contaminated soil was identified in the parking lot of the commissary in 1987 during a preliminary soils investigation for the commissary addition. The borehole was found to contain fuel-contaminated soil at a depth of 9 feet (HLA, 1990). The parking lot is flat and covers approximately 150,000 square feet in front of the commissary, exchange, and theater. The child care center lies at the south end of the parking lot. HLA performed field investigations at SS47 in 1988 and 1990. The results can be found in IRP RI/FS Phase 1I, Stage 3 Report (HLA, 1989): and IRP RI/ES Phase 11,Stage 4 Report (HLA, 1990). 4.8.1 0 Source Area WP6O-New Auto Hobby Shop The new auto hobby shop is located in Building 3360 on Arctic Avenue just south of Broadway Avenue. An oil/water separator operates inside the building. Water from the separator drains to a leach field; the oil drains to an underground waste oil holding tank. The leach field outside the building to the south has reportedly been overwhelmed by oils caused by lack of servicing of the oil/lwater separator (HLA, 1990). HLA performed field investigations at WP6O in 1988 and 1990. The results can be found in IRP RJI/FS Phase 1I, Stage 3 Report (HLA, 1989); and IRP RIIFS Phase II, Stage 4 Report (HLA, 1990). ct/C VOF;57/035.51 4.38 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Rlan DRAFT Eielson Air Force Base * ~4.9 SOURCE EVALUATION REPORT C SER C source areas are those for which only limited or incomplete information is available. These areas will require more investigation and possible sampling before a decision can be made to place an area in the SER A group or in a current or future OU for an RI/FS assessment. 4.9.1 Source Area LF01 -Original Base Landfill Source Area LFO1 is located along a bend in Piledriver Slough, west of Richardson Highway and approximately 1 mile southwest of the Base Operations Control Tower. The area was the main base landfill from approximately 1950 to 1960. information on landfill operations is limited. Reportedly, no burning of wastes was conducted at the landfill. The area received general refuse from the base, including empty cans and 55-gallon drums from the flightllne industrial shops. It may have also received waste oils, spent solvents, paint residues, and thinners. During a ground tour of LF01 in 1982, numerous old and rusty empty 55-gallon drums were observed (CH2M HILL, 1982). Previous investigations at LFO1 are documented in IRP Phase I Record Search (CH2M HILL, 1982); IRP Phase 11,Stage 1 Confirmation/Quantification (Dames and Moore, 1985); IRP Phase II, Stage 2 Confirmation/Quantification (Dames and Moore, 19__7): IRP RIIFS Phase II, Stage 3 Report (HLA, 1989); and IRP RIIFS Phase 11,Stage 4 Report (HLA, 1990). * ~~ctICVOP257/035.51 4.39 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT EBelson Air Force. Baa. 4.9.2 Source Area STiS-Multiproduct Fuel Uine The multiproduct fuel line that runs along Quarry Road in the southeastern portion of the base has been the location of two major fuel spills that occurred in 1970 and 1973. A 5,000-gallon MOGAS spill is known to have occurred in 1970, and a 5,000- gallon JP-4 spill occurred in 1973. These spills were reportedly due to faulty welding on the line. Evidence of vegetative stress was observed on a ground tour of the area in 1982 (CH2M HILL, 1982). Results from previous investigations at this source area can be found in IRP Phase I Record Search (CH2M HILL, 1982); IRP Phase II, Stage 1 Confirmation/Quantification (Dames and Moore, 1985): and Fuel Saturated Area, Remedial Investigation Report (SAIC, Feb. 6, 1989). 4.9.3 Source Area 5T16-MOGAS Fuel Line Spill Source Area STiG6 is located near the center of Elelson AFB, along Industrial Road in the vicinity of Building 6214. Around 1957 it was the location of a 5,000-gallon MOGAS spill from a pipeline that runs from the E-2 POL storage area to a base vehicle gas station (CH2M HILL, 1982). Previous investigations at this source area are documented in IRP Phase I Record Search Report (CH2M HILL, 1982); IRP Phase 1I, Stage 1 Confirmation! Quantification (Dames and Moore, 1985); and in Decision Document for Selected Sites (SAIC, Feb. 27, 1989). cVCVORt257/035.51 4.40 17 June 1991 Site Management Dian DRAFT Eieison Air Force Bas. 4.9.4 Road Oiling Source Areas (SID21, SD22, SD23, 5D24) Road oiling for dust control was a common practice on Elelson AFB from 1950 until it was discontinued in the early 1980s. Prior to the construction of the majority of the base roads in 1955, road oiling was performed extensively throughout the base. The major roads where oiling has been performed include Quar ry Road (Source Area 5D21), Industrial Drive (Source Area SD22), Manchu Road (Source Area SD23), and Gravel Haul Road (Source Area SD24). Prior to 1978, POL waste, including waste oils, contaminated fuels, and spent solvents, were used for road oiling. Since 1978, waste engine oils and contaminated diesel fuel were primarily used. The POL waste was applied to approximately 3 to 5 miles of compacted dirt roads at a maximum application rate of 0.3 gallon per-square yard (CH2M HILL, 1982). The road oiling source areas were included in the IRP Phase I Records Search (CH2M HILL, 1982) but have not been addressed in subsequent investigations. 4.9.5 PCB Storage Source Areas (SS3O and SS311) POB containing materials were stored in Building 2339 (Source Area SS3O) and Building 3424 (Source Area SS31). All POB materials were located within diked areas inside these buildings. In 1982, these facilities housed all out-of-service transformers and capacitors from Eielson AFB, out-of-service transformers and capacitors from Clear AFS, and POB-contamninated soil and liquid from a cleanup of a PCB spill at Pedro Dome. At that time there VVCVOR257/035.51 4.41 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT Eiefton Air Force Bae" 0 ~~~~~~~hadbeen no reportz of any PCBs spills in these' facilities (GH2M HILL, 1982). Since then, these materials have been properly disposed of and no POB-contaminated materials are currently being stored on the base. The PCB storage areas were included in the IRP Phase I Record Search (CH2M HILL, 198,2). No other investigations have been conducted at those areas. 4.9.6 Source Area SS41 -- Old Auto Hobby Shop The auto hobby shop, a facility used by base personnel for the maintenance of their personal vehicles, was located at Facility 4298 until 1982. Four 55-gallon drums were located outside of this facility for waste oil and contaminated fuel disposal. Small quantities of industrial solvents were also used at this location. During a ground tour of this area in 1982, the ground surface surrounding the waste oil drums was observed to be saturated with POL (CH2M HILL, 1982). This facility was in use over a long period of time, and the careless handling of POL waste has resulted in many spills. Previous investigations at SS41 are documented in IRP Phase I Record Search (CH2M HILL, 1982); IRP Phase II, Stage 1 Confirmation/Quantification (Dames and Moore, 1985); and Fuel Saturated Area, Remedial Investigation Report (SAIC, Feb. 6, 1989). 0 ct/CVCVO257/035.51 4.42 17 June 1991 Sit. Manaegment Plan DRAFT BeIlson Air Force Base 4.9.7 Source Area ST56-Engineer Hill Fuel Spill0 Encineer Hill is located in the northeast corner of the base. A large diesel spill occurred at the boiler plant in this area in 1990. There have been no investigations of the area. 4.9.8 Source Area 8857-Fire Station Parking Lot During construction of the fire station parking lot in 1990. fuel contamination was found under the old asphalt. The source of the contamination is not known. 4.9.9 Source Area ST58--Old OM Service Station The old OM service station is located at the corner of Wabash Avenue and Division Street. There were above ground petroleum tanks at this location that may have leaked. This area has not been investigated. 4.9.10 Source Area SS61 -- Vehicle Maintenance, Building 3213 There is an oillwater separator in Building 3213 that discharges to an oil leach field. No investigations have been conducted in this area. 4.9.11 Source Area 8863-Asphalt Lake Spill Shte During the investigation of SS539--Asphalt Lake pesticides (DOT, DDE, and DDD) were detected in soil sampling from borings ct/CVOR257/035.51 4.43 17 June 1991 Site Mane gement Plan DRAFT Blelson Air Force Base 0 ~~~~~~throughout the area. The concentrations ranged from 0.002 to 0.437 mg/kg (HLA, 1990). A pesticide spill is suspected. No further investigations have been done in this area. 4.9.12 Source Area SSB4-Trans Maintenance Spill Site The gravel area just west of Building 3213 was used as a staging area for hazardous materials including paint thinners, solvents, dlegreasers, oil, and antifreeze. It is not known if any releases occurred in this area; it has not been included in any previous investigations. 4.10 OTHER SOURCE AREAS Four source areas identified at Elelson AEB were not listed in the Federal Facilities Agreement for inclusion in the CERCLA investigation. These areas have either been determined to not present a significant risk to human health or the environment or are being addressed under other programs. They are discussed briefly below. 4.10.1 Source Area WP34-Sewage Treatment Plant Drying Beds Source Area WP34 is located near the wastewater treatment plant at the northwestern end of the base. It consists of two drying beds used to dewater digested sludge from the treatment plant. The eight original sludge drying beds were constructed in 1953 and were operated until 1973. Since 1973, digested sludge has . ~ct/CV0R257/035.51 4.44 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Ejelson Air Pcr Base also been discharged to a natural depression between the digesters and the aeration lagoons. There are no leachate collection systems associated with either of the sludge drying beds. Since industrial wastewater accounts for approximately 5 percent of the total wastewater flow, the sludge and the sludge leachate could potentially contain industrial contaminants such as heavy metals (CH2M HILL, 1982). Results of previous investinations at WP34 can be found in IRP Phase I Record Search (CH2M HILL, 1982); IRP RI/FS Phase II, Stage 3 Report (HLA, 1989); and IRP RIIFS Phase 11,Stage 4 Report (HLA, 1990). The sludge will be removed from the beds during the summer of 1991 for off-base disposal; therefore, the area was not included in the FFA. 4.10.2 Source Area LF43-Asbestos Landfill Source Area LF43 is located near the southern end of the base between Cargain Road and Quarry Road. It is a permitted area for the disposal of construction rubble containing asbestos. The area has been in operation since May 1982 and has been operated in accordance with existing regulations governing the disposal of asbestos. LF43 was included in the IRP Phase I Record Search (CH2M HILL, 1982). It is currently monitored under RORA. 4.10.3 Source Area SS46-KC-1 35 Crash Site, Gate 2 Source Area SS46 is an area near the front entrance to the base where a KC-135 crashed in the winter of 1962. Because the CtVCVOR257/035.51 4.45 17 June 1991 Site Mana gemenut Plan DRAFT Elalton Air Force Base * ~~~~~~~ground was frozen at the time and the fuel was consumed in the fire, it was determined that little or no POL migrated into the soil. Therefore, the area was deleted from consideration in the FFA. 4.10.4 Source Area ST59-Dining Hall A diesel leak from an underground storage tank located across from the dining hall was discovered during construction activities. The contaminated soil in that area has since been removed; therefore, the area is not being considered under the FFA. Ct/CVOR257IO35.51 4.46 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Elelson Air Force Base O ~5.0 SITE CONCEPTUAL MODEL The following conceptual model summarizes the current understanding of the Site based on the information provided in Sections 3.0 and 4.0 regarding the physical setting and source areas. It is meant to generally address the following three questions: *What types of contaminants have been found or should be suspected at the Site and how were they released to the environment? *How would these cohtaminants generally be expected to migrate based on their physical and chemical characteristics and the characteristics of the Site? *What are the potential human and ecological exposure pathways and receptors for these contaminants? The conceptual model presented here in the SMP is meant to serve as a guide for the development of the conceptual models for each operable unit management plan by identifying key issues for the Site. This conceptual model does not address the nature and extent of the contaminants found in the different source areas; instead nature and extent will be discussed in the conceptual model for each operable unit. ct/CVOM59/065.51 5.1 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Eleleon Air Force Bae" Finally, the conceptual model will identify data needs that need to be addressed as tasks in this management plan. These data needs are presented in Section 5.4. 5.1 CONTAMINANT SOURCES, CHARACTERISTICS, AND RELEASE MECOHANISMS Five categories of primary release mechanisms for contarninants have been identified based on the current understanding of past and present waste disposal practices and activities at the Site: spills or releases, land disposal operations, road oiling, pest control, and general ongoing site activities. The physical and chemical parameters for organic contaminants identified or suspected to be present from these activities are summarized in Table 5.1. 5.1.1 Spills or Releases By far the most common type of contamination found on the Site is petroleum, oil, or lubricant (POL) contamination from leaks in tanks and piping or from incidental releases and spills. Approximately one-third of the 60 identified source areas involve POL releases, mainly in the form of diesel, motor gasoline (MOGAS), or JP-4. The physical and chemical properties of these products are summarized in Table 5.2. Because these products are lighter than water, they can form a floating layer on the groundwater table or on surface water. The aromatic components, namely benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene (BTEX), can migrate away from the release area by either WtCV0O259/065.51 5.2 17 June 1991 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0 - - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0 - 8 00~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ C In 0 cv99 -0 L) w I w w t w w U W LU LUw 0 0 I v t M ~ 8 ; a 4 B I IL C * ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~LU * E :2 E o o o oo o to *.. LU 9 o 0+ LU LU8LU L UJ LUw LU LU L U LUw LUw LU oC N *a Ciw U)E i~ ~ ~ 0- - 0) S - ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~. Ea C - 0~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-,0 - *~~~~~~~ ~~~0> co coS 0 0 0 0 o . 0~~~a0~7 0~~~~~ FE 4 C~~~ I~~~ij 20x 0 0 ~ ~~ IC------Site Mane gernent Plan DRAFT El elson Air Force Bae. TABLE 5.2 Physical and Chemical Properties of Hydrocarbon Fuels' JP-4 Diesel CHIl(11-D) Gasoline (<4.32g lead/gal) Physical State (1'Cf 1 atm) Liquid Uiquid Liquid Boiling Point (1 atm) 349-54rF 380,58F 140-390OF 176-287ro I93-29rC 6D-1 99C Freezing Poiit 'Sources: Chemical Hazards Response Information System (CHRIS) Manual, U.S. Coast Guard, DeptL of Transportation: Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology; ASTM specifications. 'Hydrocarbon composition in fuel is often a function of crude oil source composition. This is an example of the 150-288'C kerosene fraction for a U.S. source crude. cVCVOR259/066.51 5.4 17 June 1991 She Management Plan DRAFT O ~~~Eielsor, Air Force Base volatilizing into the air or soil gas or by dissolving into the groundwater or surface water. Components with low solubilities, such as lead or the heavier hydrocarbon components, would remain adsorbed to the soil and could be transported away from the release area by windblown dusts or by surface runoff. Incidental spills and releases of solvents have also occurred at the Site. These releases have generally been of low volumes. In the past, trichloroethylene (TOE) was used for cleaning activities in the flightilne shops and other areas of the Base. TCE and its decomposition product, 1,2-dichloroethene, have been detected at low levels (less than 1 ppm) in groundwater at several of the source areas. Solvents currently used on the Site include 1,1,1- trichloroethane (1,1,1-TCA), methyl ethyl ketone (MEK), methylisobutyl ketone (MIBK), acetone, and Stoddard solvent. Tetrachioroethylene is also used by the dry cleaners on the Base. Besides solvent contamination, heavy metal contamination could also result from spills of spent solvents used for metals cleaning. Except for tetrachloroethylene, these solvents have moderate to high water solubilities; therefore, surface spills would be expected to impact the groundwater or surface water. Downward migration into the aquifer or water column would be controllets by vertical gradients or dispersion. Most of these solvents are a-:so volatile, so they could volatilize into the air or the soil gas. Unlike the ketones, TOE and 1,1, 1 -CA are heavier than water, so if f ree product reached the water table, it could sink and eventually become solubilized or "pond" on a low permeability layer. A iarge release of TOE into the permeable alluvial aquifer could result in cVCVOR259/065.51 5.5 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT Balefeon Air Force Boaa. more rapid vertical migration than would be expected for solubilized contaminants. 5.1.2 Land Disposal Operations As discussed in Section 4.5, there are seven landfill areas on the Site that received general base refuse alcng with expected small quantities of paints, thinners, and solvents nr,drums and cans from the flightline shops. There are also several areas on the Site used for disposal of sludge from tank cleaning operations. The primary contaminant of concern in the sludge is lead from leaded fuels that may have been stored in the tanks. Septic system leach fields have also been identified as possible sources, becaaase solvents and oils were often improperly disposed of into these systems. Other land disposal areas that could be contaminant sources are the powerplant ash landfill (heavy metals) and asphalt lake (petroleum compounds, polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs)). A secondary release mechanism for contaminants from land disposal operations is leaching to the groundwater. During placement of the wastes, contaminants could have also been released via air entrainment or surface runoff. 5.1.3 Road Oiling As discussed in Section 4.9.4, road oiling for dust control was a comrmon practice on EBelson AFB from 1959 until it was discontinued in the early 1980s. POL waste including waste oils, ct/cvopc5s/065.51 5.6 17 June 1991 Site Mana gement Plan DRAFT Eleleon Air Force Bass contaminated fuels, and spent solvents were used at one time. It is possible that PCB-contaminated transformer oil could have been a component of the waste oil. Heavy metals could have been present from the used solvents. Release mechanisms for the solvents and aromatic components of the waste oil mixture include volatilization or leaching. The heavier fuel components, PCBs, and metals would more likely adsorb to the soil particles and be transported via air entrainment or surface runoff. 5.1.4 Pest Control DDT was used extensively on the Site up until 1966. Some aerial spraying of DDT was conducted. Major pesticides currently used are Baygon, D-Tox-4E, Diazinon, Dursban, Malathion, Pyrethrins, and Resmethrin. Major herbicides currently used are 2,4-0 Ester, HWVAR X, and Diqluat. In general, pesticides and herbicides are not water soluble and adhere strongly to organic material in soil and sediment. Therefore the secondary release mechanisms are expected to be surface runoff and air entrainment. 5.1.5 General Site Activities Other site activities that could lead to incidental releases of contaminants to the environment are discussed briefly in the following paragraphs. CtfCV0R259/065.51 5.7 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRMtFT Elel son Air Force Base Exhaust particulates from vehicular and aircraft traffic on the Base would be expected to contain PAHs as products of incomplete combustion. Consequently, trace levels of PAHs would be expected in surface soils over wide areas of the Base. Low levels of lead would also be expected from the past use of leaded gasolines. Because neither PAHs or lead are very soluble, the primary release mechanisms would be surface runoff and air entrainment. All explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) activities are conducted in the EOD area east of the base (LID04). This area has been in operation since the 1960s and is the only known EOD area on the Site. Primarily, small munitions and starter cartridges are burned at this facility. The residue from the detonation and burning operations is buried in the area. The primary contaminants that would be expected from these operations would be lead and possibly other heavy metals and PAHs. The wastewater treatment plant for the base discharges to an infiltration pond near the northern end of the Site. This discharge is regulated under the NPIDES permit program and is therefore not part of the current site investigation. However, the discharge does influence the groundwater chemistry in that part of the Site and should be considered when evaluating groundwater chemistry. In the past, ethylene glycol was used to de-ice the planes. Currently, isopropyl alcohol and methanol are used. These are all very water soluble, so incidental releases would be expected to migrate in surface runoff and percolate down to the groundwater.e ct/CVO08259(065.51 5.8 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT Elelson Air Force Base Waste grit from paint removal sandblasting operations contains high concentrations of leachable lead, cadmium, and chromium. In the past, waste sandblast grit was disposed of indiscriminately around the Site. Currently, it is drummed and disposed of offsite. 5.2 MIGRATION PATHWAYS 5.2.1 Vadose Zone The unsaturated zone, or vadose zone, at Elelson AFB is predominately thin, due to the shallow depth to groundwater in the developed portions of the base and the shallow occurrence of permafrost in the undeveloped lowland areas. Upland areas near the eastern edge of the base have a thicker vadlose zone developed primarily within the fracture system of the native bedrock. Developed areas at Eielson AFB are typically built upon sand and gravel fill material, mined from numerous onsite borrow pits. These soils tend to be well-drained, and have moderate to high permeability. According to the Eielson AFB Fish and Wildlife Management Plan, Fourth Revision, the standard practice during base expansion and construction projects was to strip away all native vegetation and silty surface soil prior to backfilling with gravel. Removal of the native vegetative mat/surface soil would reduce the total organic carbon (TOO) content of the soil, thereby reducing its overall attenuation capacity. Little or no information on TOO content is available from the existing soil analysis data base. ct/CVCR259/065.51 5.9 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT VeMlson Air Force Bese The predominate native soil in the developed portion of the base is the Salchaket series, a mostly sandy loam up to a toot or two thick, underlain by coarse sand and gravel. Within the sand and gravel zone, the fraction of silt generally is less than 10 percent. The attenuation capacity of these soils is expected to be relatively low, given the low percentage of silt and organic carbon. Vertical permeabilities in the upper 5 feet of the soil column typically range from 0.35 feet/hour (0.003 cm/sea) -o 1.2 feet/hour (0.01 cm/sec) (CH2M HILL, 1982). In undeveloped lowland areas, the vadose zone is typically thin or nonexistent. These areas tend to be hummocky, covered by a thin, humus-rich, vegetative mat. Permafrost is often within a few feet of land surface, promoting ponding and boggy condftions. In undeveloped upland areas on the east side of the base, the surface soils are generally a mixture of windblown silt deposits (Ioess) and slope wash (colluvium). These soils typically are less than 20 feet thick and are underlain by bedrock. The upper 10 to 20 feet of bedrock often shows evidence of weathering (HLA, 1990). The unsaturated zone in this area may exceed 200 feet or more. The attenuation capacity of the loess/colluvium deposits is not known. The attenuation capacity of the metamorphic bedrock material is expected to be low. The primary groundwater recharge/soil flushing event occurs during spring thaw. Movement of any residual contaminants from the vadlose zone to the groundwater system is expected to be greatest during this period. Little or no soil leachability data (i.e., ctiCVOR259/065.51 5.10 17 June 1991 Site Man.agement Plan DRAFT VEjlson Air Force Base EP TOX or TC LP) are available in the existing soil analysis data The effects of permafrost on contaminant migration through the vadose zone is not known. During the winter, a liquid contaminant release at or near ground surface would migrate only a short distance downward before becoming frozen or impeded by either seasonally frozen ground or permafrost. Mechanisms for degradation of vadlose zone contaminants (i.e., biodegradation, volatilization, photodegradation) are greatest during the summer months, when biologic activity and solar radiation are at their peak. Rate constants for various biological and chemical degradation processes are expected to be largely * ~~~~~~temperature dependent. 5.2.2 Groundwater Groundwater flow systems within the Site can be divided into two main categories: groundwater flow through unconsolidated alluvial/glaciofluvial sands and gravels, and groundwater flow through fractured metamorphic bedrock. The characteristics of groundwater flow and contaminant transport within these two systems are discussed below. In the developed areas of the base, groundwater occurs under unconfined conditions within a thick alluvial/glaciofluvial aquifer. The water table typically occurs at depths less than 10 feet below ground surface. Coarse and permeable soils in the vadose zone ct/CVORt25S/O65.51 5.11 17 June 1991 Sfte Management Plan DRAFT VEleson Air Force Base permit rapid recharge of rainfall or snowmelt down to the groundwater system; within the aquifer, the coarse sand and gravel material provides little natural attenuation of released contaminants. Although the transmissivity of the aquifer is moderate to high, regional hydraulic gradients are relatively low, limiting the rate of groundwater mcvement. Locally, however, hydraulic gradients may increase near surface water bodies and operating wells, increasing groundwater flow rates. Regional flow within the aquifer is to the northwest, subparallel to the Tanana River. Groundwater discharge to local creeks and sloughs varies locally and seasonally. The interaction between surface water bodies and the local groundwater system is not well dlefined *because the availability of water level data is limited. The magnitude of seasonal water levels fluctuations in the alluvial aquifer is not well known. Water levels are expected to rise significantly in the spring in response to the spring thaw event, and fall slowly throughout the summer months. Any free product layer (e.g., POL contaminants) floating on the water table would be "smeared" or spread over the aquifer materials that were desaturated as water levels in the aquifer declined. The seasonal freeze/thaw effects on contaminant partitioning between the free product and aqueous phases are unknown. Advection and dispersion are believed to be the primary transport mechanisms for dissolved phase contaminants. The aquifer's attenuation capacity is expected to be low, due to limited amounts of TOC and silt/clay. Contaminants are expected to migrate at ct/CVOR259/065.51 5.12 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT Elelson Air Force Baea approximately the rate of groundwater flow. Advection primarily influences horizontal transport of contaminants, while dispersion is expected to influence both vertical and lateral spreading of a contaminant plume. Once in solution, most POL-related contaminants (i.e., BETX compounds) and light nonaquecus phase liquids (e.g., MEK, MIBK, and acetone) are expected to concentrate and migrate near the top of the aquifer. Conversely, nonaqueous phase liquids whose density is greater than water (e.g., TOE, tetrachloroethylene) could migrate vertically downward through the aquifer if free product reached the water table. Chlorinated 'compounds in solution at concentrations much less than saturation will move primarily by advection and dispersion near the top of the aquifer, similar to the BETX compounds. Base water supply wells completed in the alluvial aquifer typically yield up to 3,000 gpm. The capture zones around base water supply wells are expected to be limited in area] extent due to the high transmissivity of the aquifer. Pumping of high yielding base water supply and fire protection wells could locally influence groundwater flow and promote vertical migration of contaminants to intermediate aquifer zones. The drinking water supply wellIs at Eielson AFB are located within the main, developed area of the base. The susceptibility of these wells to contamination will depend on the pumping schedule, their construction details, and their proximity to known sources of groundwater contamination. Three of the water supply wells (wells ct/CVOR259/065.51 5.13 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT VEMIon Air Force Bae. A, C, and D) are within, or close to, identified contaminant source areas. A second groundwater flow system exists in the eastern portion of the base, within the metamnorphic bedrock (Birch Creek Schist). General conceptual features of groundwater flow within an upland bedrock terrain are described below: *ridge tops and upper ridge slopes are areas of groundwater recharge *valleys or lower ridge slopes are areas of groundwater discharge *groundwater flow velocities decrease with depth *secondary openings from fracturing and faulting are the only significant conduits for groundwater flow and contaminant transport. The primary hydraulic conductivity of these rocks is thought to be low. The secondary hydraulic conductivity (which may include faults, joints, bedding planes, and other fracture features) may be several orders of magnitude higher than the primary hydraulic conductivity, but sttW, :s considered low to moderate in magnitude. The open fractures provide a conduit for the movement of groundwvater and contaminants through an otherwise relatively imrpermEable rock mass. OVCVOR259/065.51 5.14 17 June 19941 Site Management Plan DRAFT Eolson Air Force Base Near the Ski Lodge, groundwater occurs within the fractured bedrock under confined conditions. Depth to groundwater locally exceeds 200 feet. Groundwater flow is expected to be toward the west or northwest, under a relatively steep hydraulic gradient. The rate of groundwater flow in the fractured aquifer is not known. BETX compounds have been identified in water from the Ski Lodge water supply wells. Fuel supply tanks were previously located on the ridge crest above the Ski Lodge. HLA (1990) identified significant residual TPH in silty soils and shallow bedrock in the vicinity of the old tanks. Snowmelt and rainfall are believed to infiltrate near the ridge crest and percolate downward through the fractured bedrock. The percolating water carries residual POL contaminants in the dissolved phase down through the vadose zone into the bedrock aquifer. Groundwater from the bedrock aquifer eventually discharges to the alluvial/glaciofluvial aquifer near the base of the ridge slope, introducing contaminants to intermediate and deep portions of the aquifer. The distribution of contaminants beneath the ski lodge area is not known. Because the ridge crest is an area of groundwater recharge and likely forms a groundwater divide, contaminants may have migrated northward as well as southward toward the ski lodge. eVCVOR2W/065.51 5.15 17 June 1991 Skit Management Plan DRAFT VEleon Air Force Race 5.2.3 Surface Water and Sediment Surface water bodies in the vicinity of EBelson AFB include rivers, creeks, sloughs, lakes, ponds, and wetlands. Surface water characteristics are described in detail in Section 3.3.3.3. Within the base boundary, the four primary surface water drainages are French Creek, Moose Creek, Piledriver Slough, and Garrison Slough. The surface drainages collect runoff from rainfall and snowmelt, and receive baseflow contributions from the groundwater system. A brief summary of known or suspected contaminant contributions to the base surface drainage network is presented below: Garrison Slough is the primary receptor of surface water runoff from the main base area and is believed to be a primary receiving body for potentially contaminated groundwater and surface runoff from several source areas on base. Previous investigations have suggested that the slough is in hydraulic connection with the sand and gravel alluvial aquifer underlying Eielson. Piledriver Slough drains the western edge of the base. Source Area LFO1, the Original Base Landfill, is situated on the banks of Piledriver Slough, west of Richardson Highway. Water quality impacts from leachate or surface water runoff are not known. Piledriver Slough also is potentially threatened by pollution sources that include acriculture, road construction and runoff, landfills, land development and septic tanks (HLA, 1990). cVCVOR2?59/065.51 5.16 17 June 1991 5ff. Management Plan DRAFT Ejelson Air Force Bae" *French Creek runs along the east side of the base. Source Area LFO2, Old Base Landfill, lies close to a meander loop of French Creek, near the north end of the base. Purgeable halocarbons were detected in one surface water sample collected in 1988 at a concentration exceeding the ARAR (AWOC). Moose Creek drains the north and northeast portions of the base. Garrison Slough and French Creek discharge to Moose Creek near the north end of the base. Piledriver Slough discharges to Moose Creek several miles northwest of the base. Water quality characteristics of Moose Creek are not well known. Moose Creek is considered a threatened water body based on identified pollutant sources that include land development, petroleum products, road construction, urban runoff, and sewage discharge (HLA, 1990). Leaks and spills at fuel storage and handling areas southeast of POL Lake (Source Areas STi 0 and STi 4) are believed to be responsible for petroleum hydrocarbon and lead contamination in POL Lake. POL contaminants likely migrated to the lake through the groundwater system and/or surface water runoff. A limited number of sediment samples have been collected from the surface water drainages and lakes on base. Sediments from Garrison Slough contained detectable quantities of total petroleum hydrocarbons, semnivolatile organic compounds, pesticides, POBs, and heavy metals (arsenic and lead) possibly above background cVOVOR259i065.51 5.17 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT Ealelen Air Force Base levels (HLA, 1991). Sediment samples from POL Lake contained detectable BETX compounds, and TPH and lead possibly above background levels (SAIC, Feb. 6, 1989). Contaminant migration in surface water and sediment is strongly influenced by the spring thaw event, when large volumes of water are flushed through the surface water drainage system. This event would influence three primary contaminant mig.ration mechanisms: * flushing, solubilization and/or erosion of contaminated surface soils by surface runoff, with eventual discharge to a receiving surface water body * flushing of vadose zone contaminants to the groundwater system, and later discharge to a receiving surface water body * resuspension and downstream transport of sediments during peak discharge periods. Similar processes would occur during heavy summer rain events. Contaminants are mobilized primarily either as dissolved constituents or ad~sorbed to particulate matter. Once introduced to the surface water systems; many contaminants will undergo various transport, transformation or degradation processes, including volatilization, adsorption, biodegradation! bioaccumulation, and photodegradation. cVCVOR259/065.51 5.18 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT Elelean Air Force Base 0 ~~~~~~5.2.4 Air In addition to the emissions from routine basewide operations, the atmosphere is a potential migration pathway for contaminants from Eielson AEB source areas. Contaminant transport to the atmosphere results from two primary mechanisms: volatilization and air entrainment of contaminated particulates. Volatih;zation and windblown dusts are expected to be greatest during the warm summer months, when solar radiation is at a peak, and ambient soil, groundwater and surface water temperatures rise. Constituents most likely to volatilize are high vapor pressure aromatic hydrocarbons (BTEX fraction), solvents such as MIBK, MEK and acetone, and the volatile halogenated organic compounds such as 1,1, 1-TCA and TOE. Where contaminated surface soils are uncovered, or not bound by surface vegetation, contaminants can be transported as windblown dusts. Contaminants of primary concern are those with a strong adsorptive affinity, such as POBs, metals, pesticides, and PAHs. Monitoring of contaminant transport through the atmosphere requires historical meteorological data (e.g., predominate wind directions and wind speed) and surface soil contaminant concentrations. Extensive meteorological data have been generated at Eielson AFB during its operation. Preliminary information on surface soil contaminant concentrations has been generated during the IRP process for many source areas on base. 0 cV~CVOR259/065.51 5.19 17 June 1991 She. Maneagement Plan DRAFT Eleleon Air Force Bas. 5.3 EXPOSURE PATHWAYS The elements of a complete exposure pathway are contaminant source, release mechanism, migration pathway, exposure point, exposure route, and receptor. An example of a complete exposure pathway is shown in Figure 5.1. Contaminant sources, release mechanisms, and migration pathways for the Site were discussed in the previous sections. Exposure pointtd, exposure routes, and potential receptors for both human and ecological exposures are discussed below. 5.3.1 Human Exposures The conceptual site model for potential human exposures is presented in Figure 5.2. Of the exposure pathways represented, groundwater ingestion is critical. The aquifer at the Site is a sole source aquifer that is currently used as the base drinking water supply. The base water supply wells are located in close proximity to some of the designated source areas. These wells typically are screened at a depth of 80 to 100 feet, whereas most of the contamination has been detected near the top of the aquifer at depths of less than 30 feet. Th=erefore, the contamination may not have entered the portion of thc:; aquifer extracted for drinking. The surface water pathway may also play a significant role in exposures to humans to Site contaminants. Garrison Slough is a popular fishing area on the base, as is Piledriver Slough. Contaminants that migrate to these surface waters via groundwater discharge or surface runoff could be ingested or cVCV0R259/065.51 5.20 17 June 1991 * ~~~~~SOURCE Source__ (Rainfall- I Percolation into Soil RELEASE MECHANISM Water Leaches Out Con tamnon ts NO RISK EXISTS Leachate UNLESS PATHWAY Mixes with IS COMPLETE Groundwater MIGRATION PATHWAYI Transport through Groundwater to Surface water EXPOSURE Surface Water POINT Bd Ingestian af ROUTE OF Aquatic ___ EXPOSURE C ganisms FIGURE 5.1 Elements of a Complete Exposure Pathway (e-xampDle only) Site Managem-ent Plan, Ejielsan Air Farce Base is \CvOJ0758\nc2.DWG a uL LLJ 0 ~~~~~~~~~~~~,0 '-~~~~~~ C W~ F- ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c 9' ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~C D C CC IuI (Q ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0 0) C ~~0 0C C x - 0 0 * 00J 0 -_ C 0*-- - u ~ ~ ou V ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~LO < <~~~~~~~ ~0 05I 0 V 0 0 ~~~~~~~0C:2 C u n S 0C F-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~U z~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ z ~ ~C) VCw < D CD ' C ~~- 0 <(n~~~~~~~0 C) C, U<, : 0 C) (A >~~~~~~~~~( a,~ ~ ~ ~ Site Management Plan DRAFT Elelson Air Force Bas. bioconcentrated by fish and other aquatic organisms and subsequently passed onto humans. Exposures could aiso occur from direct contact with contaminated surface soils via ingestion, dermal contact, and inhalation of volatile contaminants or windblown dusts. 5.3.2 Ecological Exposures The pathways for ecological exposures are similar to those for humans (Figure 5.3). Contaminants that reach the surface water from surface runoff or groundwater discharge can be ingested or bioconcentrated by fish and other aquatic organisms. Terrestrial organisms could then be exposed via ingestion of surface water or aquatic organisms. If the contaminants are adsorbed by or deposited as sediments, then uptake by benthic organisms can occur with subsequent exposure to predators. Exposures resulting from contaminated surfa ce soils include ingestion by terrestrial organisms and uptake by plants. 5.4 DATA NEEDS Based on uncertainties in the conceptual model for the Site, the following data needs have been identified. Some of these data needs are best addressed as part of a sitewide investigation, while others should be addressed on an OU-specific basis. Further discussion of how these data needs will be addressed is presented in Section 6.0. The relationship between these data cVCVOR259/065.51 5.23 17 June 1991 >- 7 (a*Th(a~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Z -6~F oa-D~~~~~~~~' zo~~~~~~~u :1~~~~~~~~~~~~~1~ >00F- E E a C' 0 C~~~~~0 0) 0 Ld 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ (~LIJ C1 j 0 0~~~~~~~~~~~ 0- (If L ac 0 LLI~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~. 0 M~~~~~0oF a. n~~~~~~~~~~~~ x~~~~i LLJ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ a 6 a odaoS :E z 0 <~~~~2 Sn-F 0~~~~~ t u~ ~~*0 7( - 0 < z~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 0~~~~a0- u~~~~~ 0( H~~~~~~~Q u - -- - - a~~~~~--- 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Z Cf) < < <~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~U 0 U WM) Site Management Plan DRAFT Eielson Air Force Ba.. needs and the envdronmental response objectives discussed in Section 2.1 is presented in Table 5.3. 5.4.1 Nature of Contamination Previous investigations of soil, surface water, sediment, and groundwater at the Site have concentrated on a limited list of analytical parameters, mainly volatile organics, fuel hydrocarbons, and lead. Other contaminants that may be present, such as POBs and heavy metals, have not been consistently analyzed across the Site; therefore, the nature of the contamination at the Site may not be fully characterized. A complete set of analyses including volatile organics, semnivolatile organics, metals, pesticides, and PCBs needs to be done at least once for a representative group * ~~~~~~ofsource areas to determine the full range of contaminants of concern. After that has been determined, the analyte list for future sampling rounds can be narrowed to include only those analytes detected at the Site. 5.4.2 Background Concentrations Adequate data have not been gathered to define background concentrations of metals, naturally occurring organics, and ubiquitous anthropogeric organics. Background data need to be collected for groundwater, surface water, sediment, and soil to provide a point of reference for the evaluation of Site data. ct/cVOM59/065.51 5.25 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT Eflslon Air Force Base TABLE 5.3. Summary of Shte Data Needs and RI/FS Activties RI/FS Aetdvtty- Refine Conceptual Conduct Risk Conduct Identity Data Needs Shte Model Assessment FeasIbilIty Study ARARs Nature of contamination x X X X Background concentrations Characterization of subsurlaoe geology X Vadose zone attenuation capacity X X X Effect of ground freeze and permafrost on X contaminant migration Groundwater and surface water flow system X X Characterization ci contaminant migration in X X X groundwater Lateral extent of groundwater contamination X X X Vertical extent of groundwater contamination X X X Condition and usability of existing monitoring X well network Contaminant distribution in bedrock and alluvial X X X aquifer systems near ski lodge Sitewide surface water and sediment X X X X characterization Nature and extent of surface soil contamination X X Meteorological data X Land and resources Use patterns X Ecological impa= assessment XX cV/CVOR259I067.51 5.26 17 June 1991 Sit. Mansagement Plan DRAFT VEMIon Air Force Base 5.4.3 Characterization of Subsurface Geology A large collection of well construction logs and soil boring logs are available from previous investigations. Cross sections and fence diagrams of the subsurface geology at the Site have not been developed from this data set. These cross sections are needed to develop an understanding of the types subsurface heterogeneities that exist at the Site and could affect contaminant migration. 5.4.4 Vadose Zone Attenuation Capacity Soil transport data are needed to assess the potential threat to groundwater from residual contamination in the overlying soils. It is suspected that the vadlose zone soils at the Site have a low attenuation capacity with regards to preventing contaminant migration to the water table. However, the data needed to assess how well the contaminants may sorb to the soils, such as total organic carbon (TOC), particle size distribution, or TCLP test results, were not collected during the previous investigations. 5.4.5 Effect of Ground Freeze and Permafrost on Contaminant Migration It is suspected that on a small scale, areas of permafrost will affect contaminant migration patterns. Also, the effect of the yearly ground freeze on contaminant distributions has not been addressed. These issues should be considered for localized areas of the Site as necessary. . ~~cVCVORM/0I65.51 -5.27 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Elalson Air Force flease 5.4.6 Groundwater and Surface Water Flow System Previous investigations at the Site have not adequately characterized the interaction of sitewide groundwater and surface water systems. This characterization would involve synchronous groundwater and surface water elevation measurements and mapping of the potentiometric surface to determine localized groundwater flow directions and establish gaining and/or losing stream reaches. This information is important in establishing spatial and temporal variations in contaminant migration pathways. Issues to be addressed are the zone of influence of surface water bodies on groundwater flow and the seasonal variations in flow patterns. Also, vertical flow gradients need to be assessed. 5.4.7 Characterization of Contaminant Migration in Groundwater Contaminant migration in groundwater is dependent on flow direction (discussed above), flow velocity, and the affinity of the contaminant for the aquifer material. Although the hydraulic conductivity of the alluvial aquifer is relativeiy high, the horizontal gradients in the aquifer are fairly flat resulting in fairly low groundwater flow velocities. Therefore, accurate measurements of hydraulic conductivity from aquifer testing is not as great a data need at this Site as it may be at others. However, like the situation with the vadose zone, parameters to estimate the affinity of the contaminants for the aquifer material are not availac~ie. These parameters include TOG and grain size distribution for the aquifer material. ctVCVOR259/065.51 5.28 17 June 1991 Sit. Management PRan DRAFT O ~~~Ealelon Air Force Base 5.4.8 Lateral Extent of Groundwater Contamination Previous investigations have concentrated on discrete and often noncontiguous source areas. The lateral extent of groundwater contamination related to a particular source area, and the effect of overlapping plumes from separate source areas is inadequately defined. Sitewide water quality sampling is necessary to define the current areal extent of contamination. 5.4.9 Vertical Extent of Groundwater Contamination Most groundwater monitoring wells at Elelson are completed to depths less than 30 feet. Groundwater contamination has been identified in close proximity to several base water supply wells. Installation of a limited number of deep nested wells is necessary to better define the vertical extent of groundwater contamination in the vicinity of base water supply wells, and to refine the conceptual model of the groundwater system. 5.4.10 Condition and Usability of Existing Monitoring Well Network Numerous groundwater monitoring wells have been installed during previous investigations at Eielson. The condition and usability of these wells needs to be assessed to ensure existing and future data collected at these wells are of acceptable quality. cVCVOR259/065.51 5.29 17 June 1991 Sit. Managemenft Plan DRAFT Vels~on Air Force Base 5.4.11 Contaminant Distribution in Bedrock and Alluvial Aquifer Systems near the Ski Lodge (S536) Groundwater contamination has been detected in the bedrock and alluvial aquifers near the Ski Lodge. The distribution of contaminants in the bedrock and alluvial aquifers in this area has not been well defined. Additional monitoring wells are needed in the bedrock and alluvial aquifers to evaluate the nature and extent of contamination both south and north of the fuel tank source area. 5.4.12 Sitewide Surface Water and Sediment Characterization Previous sampling of surface waters and sediments around the Site has been scattered and inconsistent. A sitewide sampling of lakes and streams is necessary to determine the nature and extent of impacts from the Site. Garrison Slough is of particular concern as a primary receptor of surface water and groundwater from the main base area. 5.4.13 Nature and Extent of Surface Soil Contamination Previous characterizations of surface soil contamination have focused on a limited set of analytes and the immediate spill or release area. Surface soil data for a comprehensive set of parameters need to be collected at each of the source areas in order to assess the risks from direct contact and windblown dusts. CVCVOR259/065.51 5.30 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Velson Air Force Ba.* 5.4.14 Meteorological Data Meteorological data, including wind speed and direction, precipitation, and the presence of inversion layers, are necessary to characterize the atmospheric transport of contaminants to their potential receptors. 5.4.15 Land and Resource Use Patterns Land and resource use patterns at the Site need to be assessed to determine the appropriate exposure parameters for the risk assessment and to evaluate the effectiveness of institutional controls for remedial action. Land use patterns include whether an area is primarily residential or industrial or whether access is restricted. Resource use patterns include whether areas are used for fishing, hunting, recreational, or agricultural purposes. 5.4.16 Ecological Impact Assessment Previous assessments of ecological impacts from Site contamination have focused on discrete source areas. However, impacts such as a decrease in biological diversity can go undetected at that level. Therefore, there is a need for a sitewide ecological assessment that includes identification of ecologically sensitive areas, biological diversity assessment, and a biota investigation. cV~CVOP1259I65.51 5.31 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT Eleleon Air Force Baae . ~6.0 PROJECT TASKS This section of the SMP presents descriptions of the management, field, and feasibility study tasks for the sitewide investigation. The project tasks are organized into the following sections: * 6.1 Project Management. A discussion of the general administrative actions to be taken during the project. a 6.2 Remedial Investigation Tasks. A description of the various field and data collection activities, risk assessment, treatability studies, and data management procedures. These tasks are described in broad terms and will be refined in the future with additional event-specific SAP * ~~~~~~~addenda. * 6.3 Feasibility Study Tasks. This section presents approaches to the Site and OU FSs, including general descriptions. of the major feasibility study milestones. *6.4 Source Evaluation Reports (SERs). A description of how the SERs will be incorporated into the overall Site RI/FS. *6.5 Interim Actions (lAs). This section describes lAs and how they may be applied at Eielson AFB. CVCV0~t59/020.51 6.1 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT Elelson Air Force Base 6.1 PROJECT MANAGEMENT The objectives of project management during the performance of RI/FS tasks are to direct and document project activities so that 1) the data and evaluations meet the specified goals and objectives, and 2) the project is kept within budget and on schedule. The initial project management activity will be to assign individuals to each project task as appropriate. Specific project management activities that will occur throughout each RI/ES include: * staffing • general management * meetings * cost control0 * schedule control • project file management • progress reporting. 6.1.1 Staffing The initial project management activity will be to assign individuals to each project task as appropriate. The project manager wiill review the scope and schedule for each activity and determine the resources needed. Personnel will be assigned from the technical disciplines required. Subcontractors will be utilized when specialized skills or capabilities are needed that cannot be provided by the in-house staff available to the project manager. eCvvoR259Io20.51 6.2 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Elelson Air Force Base 6.1.2 General Management This activity consists of the day-to-day supervision of, and communication with, project staff and subcontractors. Throughout the project, daily written and oral communication between office and field personnel will be maintained, along with regular communications with subcontractors. Constant and continual exchange of information is necessary to assess activity progress and to identify potential problems quickly enough to make necessary corrections to keep the work focused on its objectives, on schedule, and within budget. 6.1.3 Meetings Meetings will be conducted, as necessary, with members of the project staff, subcontractors, regulatory agencies, and other appropriate entities to communicate information, assess project status, and identify and resolve problems. 6.1.4 Cost Control Project costs, including labor, other direct costs, and subcontractor expenses, will be tracked monthly. The computerized budget/cost tracking system will be used for the preparation of progress reports and serve as the basis for invoice preparation. cCt~voP259/o20.si 8.3 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Eleleon Air Force Beasei 6.1.5 Schedule Control Scheduled milestones will be tracked monthly for each project activity. 6.1.6 Project File Management The project filies will be kept organized, secured, and accessible to appro-priate project personnel. All field logs and reports, health and safety documents, QA/QC documents, laboratory data, memoranda, correspondence, and reports will be logged into the* project file upon receipt or transmittal. 6.1.7 Progress Repor ting Monthly progress reports will be prepared by the project manager, distributed to each FFA party project manager, and entered into the project file. The reports will summarize activities conducted during the reporting period, identity anticipated problems, and recommend solutions. Upcoming activities, key personnel changes, status of deliverables, and budget and schedule information will also be included. 6.2 REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION TASKS The purpose of the remedial investigation (RI) is to provide project decisionmakers with enough information concerning the nature and extent of contamination and Site characteristics so that a baseline risk assessment for human and ecological exposures can. cVCVOR259/020.51 6.4 17 June 1991 She Management Plan DRAFT Eielson Air Force Base be completed and remedial goals can be formulated. The RI also provides information to support the development of remedial alternatives in the FS. In the development of the conceptual model presented in Section 5.0, data needs for the Site were identified. Some of these data needs will be addressed as part of the overall Site RI while others will be addressed as part of the RI at each operable unit. Table 6.1 lists these data needs and their relation to the RI tasks. The strategy for the OU characterizations is explained further in Section 6.2.1. The details of the sitewide characterization tasks are presented in Section 6.2.2. Other RI tasks include ARARs evaluation, human health baseline risk assessment, ecological assessment, treatability studies, data management, and preparation of the RI report. These tasks are common to both the sitewide and OU remedial investigations. The details of how these tasks are to be carried out for the Site are presented in Sections 6.2.3 through 6.2.8. The information presented here will be incorporated by reference into the management plans for each OU along with any OU-specific considerations for each task. This section describes the following Site RI tasks: * operable unit investigations * sitewide characterizations * ARARs evaluation • human health baseline risk assessment ect/V0R259/020.51 6.5 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Verson Air Force Bas. TABLE 6.1. Data Needs for RI Tasks Data Needs Section No./Task D00a Nature of Contamination 6.2.1 Operable Unit Characterizations III Background Concentrations 6.2.2.3 Background Concentrations III Caatrization of Subsurface 6.2.2.4 Soils and BbnlogyI Vadose Zone Attenuation Capacity 6.2.1 Operable Unit Characterizations 1,11 Effect of Ground Freeze and 6.2.1 Operable Unit CharacterizationsI Permafrost on Contaminant Migration ______Groundwater and Surface Water Flow 6.2.2.5 GroundwaterI System 6.a.2.6 Surface Water and Sediment Characterization of Contaminant 6.2.1 Operable Unit Characterizations 1, I Migration in Groundwater 6.2.2.5 Groundwater Lateral Extent of Groundwater 6.2.2.5 Groundwater 11,1 Contamination Vertical Extent of Groundwater 6.2.2.5 Groundwater1,1 Contamination Condition and Usability of Existing 6.2.2.5 Groundwater Monitoring Well Network Contaminant Distribution in Bedrock 6.2.1 Operable Unit Characterizations I I l and Alluvial Aquifer Systems Near the (OU-6) Ski Lodge ______Sitewide Surface Water and Sediment 6.2.2.6 Surface Water and Sediment 11 Characterization Nature and Extent of Surface Soil 6.2.1 Operable Unit Characterizations l Contamination Meteorological Data 6.2.2.1 Meteorology NA Land and Resources Use Patterns 6.2.2.2 Demography NA Ecological Impact Assessment 6.2.2.7 Biota III,11,V 6.2.5 Ecological Assessment a-Data quality objectives, as discussed in Section -2.5.- CVCVOR259/o6S.51 6.6 17 June 1991 Sit. Manaemertnt Plan DRAFT Eil. on Air Force Base 0 *~~~~~~~ecological assessment * treatability studies * data management * remedial investigation report. 6.2.1 Operable Unit Investigations -Tecontaminant source areas at Eielson AFIB have been organized into six operable units and three source evaluation report (SER) grou~ps. For each of the O1-s, a complete RI/ES is required, in accordance with EPA CERCLA requirements and guidance. The purpose of this section is to desbribe the general approach that will be used in planning and conducting the CU Rig. The specific rationale and approach for individual CU Ris will be developed and described in the OU management plans. The description of the contaminant source areas in each CU is presented in Section 3.0. The locations of the OL~s is shown in Figure 4.1. It is important to understand the rationale for the organization of source areas into O1-s, because it provides the basis for the approach to the sitewide remedial response. This rationale is presented below. *1O1l. Source areas in OWl are characterized by a release of POL and floating product on the water table. The sources were recently evaluated by HILA (1990). The data for these sources are relatively recent anid complete. Therefore, additional characterization is expected to be 0 ~~ctICVOR259IO20.51 6.7 17 June 1991 Shte Manaemgnent Plan DRAFT Eilelon Air Force Bae" minimal. Product removal may be required as an interim action for OU1. * 0U2. 0U2 source areas are similar to OUI in that they are characterized by POL contamination with floating product. However, the existing information for this OU is somewhat dated and of unknown quality. Therefore, confirmation sampling is required. This OU will be investigated before OWl and may also require interim action. * 0U3. 0U3 is comprised of areas where TCE and other solvent contamination has been identified in groundwater and soil. * 0U4. 0U4 is compris ed of weathered sludge burial sites. These sites received sludges from periodic storage tank cleanout. Several of the sites contain empty drums and miscellaneous solid wastes. * 0U5. Sites in 0U5 are landfills. One of the source areas is a fire training area located over a former landfill. • OU6. OUG is a POL storage facility near the Ski Lodge, over 1 mile from the main base. This site is characterized by contaminated groundwater in fractured bedrock. The investigation of this OU is expected to focus on characterization of the extent of the groundwater contaminant plume and the downgradient impacts on water quality underlying the main base area. cVCV0R25S/O20.51 6.8 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT Elelson Air Force Base As discussed in Secti on 2.0, source area characterization is not an objective of the Site RI/FS. The nature and extent of contamination in each of the source areas will be done during the CU RI/FSs. Field investigations conducted for the OUs will focus on fulfilling data needs related to the baseline risk assessment, confirmation of the conceptual model for the source area or the CU, ARARs, or the feasibility study. In developing RI plans, consideration will be made of data that may be available from other CU Ris, or the sitewide RI. Similarly, the plans will consider collection of data that will be of use in other CU studies. An example of this could be in sampling of a well located between two CU contaminant source areas. The inclusion of an additional analytical parameter could make the data useful to both OUs, rather than requiring duplication of the field effort to sample the well twice for different analyte lists. In other cases, coordination of the CU Ris and the Site RI may result in a reduction or deferral of some sampling events. In the case of contaminated groundwater, surface water, or sediments that are located in more than one OU, the Site RI/ES may be a more effective vehicle for selection of a remedy. Decisions on when to expand or defer sampling for an individual CU RI will be made as part of the Site RI/FS effort. RI/FS management plans will be developed separately for each CU. They will depend on this SMVP for general approach and scope, but will describe CU-specific activities and goals. The CU plans will identify sampling locations, analytical parameters, and data quality objectives for the CU. 0 ~ct/CVOR259/020.51 6.9 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT Elelson Air Force Bass 6.2.2 Sitewide Characterizations This section describes the sitewide RI tasks that were identified in the conceptual model (Section 5.0) as data deficiencies or ongoing data requirements. The sitewide characterization program is comprised of programmatic media or factors that cannot be properly evaluated in a risk assessment or feasibility study for an individual OU or SER. These investigations are important for the overall Site risk assessment and Site FS because they evaluate media that are dynamic, such as surface water, or factors that affect the entire Site, such as meteorology. The sitewide characterization program consists of the following tasks: • meteorology * demographics • background concentrations * soils and geology * groundwater * surface water and sediment I biota. These sitewide tasks are described in the following sections. 6.2.2.1 Meteorology Extensive meteorology data are collected on a regular basis by EBelson AFB. This data base will providAe the information required to conduct the sitewide and OU-specific investigations. Pertinent meteorological data include: ct/CVOR259/020.51 6.10 17 June 1991 Sie Munegement Plan DRAFT bE.MIon Air Force Base *precipitation (monthly and annual averages, and extremes) *snowfall records *temperature (monthly avera ges and extremes) *wind (velocity and direction) *monthly daylight hours. Background air quality (particulate and volatile organic) will also be evaluated if the data are available. 6.2.2.2 Demographics The objectives of the demographics characterizations are to identify potentially exposed populations for the baseline risk assessment and to provide land-use information for formulating site goals and evaluating remedial alternatives. Personnel from Ejelson AFB will be contacted to provide records and planning information identifying the location of past and current populations as well as past, current, and future land use. Also, potentially sensitive populations, such as schools and health care centers, will be identified. This information will be collected as a programmatic task and will be distributed to the source investigations as required. Ct/CVO~t59/020.51 6.11 17 June 1991 She Management Plan DRAFT EVelon Air Force Bas. 6.2.2.3 Background Concentrations The objective of the sitewide background sampling task is to provide a statistically significant estimate of the ambient concentrations of metals, naturally occurring organics, and ubiquitous anthropogenic organics in order to provide basis for comparison to concentrations measured on the Site. The approach and proposed sampling plan for soil, surface wcLAer, and sediment are presented in this section. Background concentrations for groundwater will be determined later in the Site RI after a more thorough review of existing data can be completed. Details regarding the sampling methodology, locations, and analytes are presented in the Background Sampling Plan in Appendix F. Approach to Background Sampling. Background samples are used in the .RI/FS process to estimate the naturally occurring statistical distribution of parameter concentrations. The distribution of parameter concentrations in the background may be compared in various ways with sampling results from potentially contaminated areas. Frequently, an upper percentile of the background distribution for a given parameter is used to indicate when sample results from potentially contaminated areas are unusually high. This is the most stringent use of the background data and requires a conservative approach to determining the required number of background samples. CVCVOR259/020.51 6.12 17 June 1991 Sit. Managemenft Plan DRAFT . Lia~Dison Air Force. Base The number of samples proposed is intended to provide a reasonable estimate of the upper percentile of background parameter concentrations in each media without assuming a particular distribution. If a background population distribution can be determined after sampling, the confidence level of the estimate may improve. Previous investigators have developed some background information. These efforts are summarized in the following section. Existing Background Information. During their RI/ES activities on Eielson AFB in 1988 and 1989 (HLA, 1990), HLA did a literature review of background soils, sediments, and groundwater data in the Eielson vicinity in lieu of background sampling. None of the data are from within the Eielson AFB boundary. The results of the HILA literature review are shown in Tables 6.2 through 6.4. Elevated concentrations of arsenic and some other metals appear to dominate these results. The source documents for these summary tables were unavailable during preparation of this plan, so the scope and adequacy of these investigations could not be fully evaluated. In particular, it was not apparent what, if any, other parameters were analyzed. Existing literature will be reviewed as an initial task prior to finalizing plans for additional background sampling. During 1986 (SAIC, 1989), SAIC sampled soil and groundwater to provide background data as part of RI/FS activities then in progress. The location of these samples is shown on Figure 6.1. Analytical results are reproduced in Tables 6.5 and 6.6. From the data presented, the range of analytes measured cVCVO~t259O20.51 6.13 17 June 1991 Shte Mana gement Plan DRAFT Ealoon Air Force Base TABLE 6.2 Concentrations of Various Analytes In Solils Near Fairbanks, Alaska I Analyte Median Range Typical Reference Arsenic, As 30-i150 ppmn NA Hawkins, 1982 (bedrock) could be as great ______as 750 ppm Arsenic. As 8300-4500 ppm 1000 ppm Hawkin: 1982 (surface,_subsurface) ______Cadmium, Cd <4-7 ppm ______Gouoh 1b Conait, co i16-20 ppmrn______Goughi, 1983 Chrome, Cr 25-3C ppmrn______Gough, 198-3 Iron, Fe NA 5% (by weight) Gough, 1983 NA = Not avaiiable. Source: HLA, 1990. TABLE 6.3. Concentrations of Various Analytes In Sediments of the C hena and Tanana Rivers ______Analyte I Median Range Typical Reference Arsenic, As <40-1400 ppm 400 ppm Hawkins, 1982 Iron, Fe ______very NA rich Hawkins, 1982 NA = Not availabie. Source: HLA, 1990. CV/CV0R259/OO3.51 6.14 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Eal. on Air Force Bs" TABLE 6.4. Concentrations of Various Analytes In Groundwater Near Fairbanks, Alaska Anatyte Median Range Typical Reference Arsenic, As 1.0-44 ppb <50 ppb Krumhardt, 1982 10 ppm Hawkins, 1982 0-28 ppmn Krumhardt, 1979 ______ppb_ __ Krum hardt, 1983 Iron, Fe 0.01-43 ppmn 4 ppmn Cederstrom, 1962 <1-73 ppm Krumhardt, 1982 0-18 ppmn Krumhardt, 1979 0-50 ppmn Krumhardlt, 1983 ______0.02-47 Balding, 1976 Manganese, Mn 0.03-4.0 ppm NA Cederstrom, 1962 Magnesium,Mg0.9-1.6 ppm Balding, 1976 Magnesium,Mg ~5.1-73 ppm NA Cederstrom, 1962 ______0.1-56 ppm Balding, 1976 Calcium, Ca 16-144 ppm NA Cederstrom, 1962 ______1.3-87 ppm ______Balding, 1976 Potassium, K 2 4-59 ppm NA Cederstrom, 1962 0.5-23 ppm Balding, 1976 Sodium, Na 3a9-157 ppm NA Cederstrom, 1962 ______3_1-321ppm ______Balding, 1976 Chloride, CI 1-15 ppmn LOW Cederstrom, 1962 < 1-35 ppm 2 ppm Krumhardt, 1982 ______0.2-615 ppm ______Balding, 1976 Fluoride, F <0.1-1 ppm Cederstrom, 1962 ______0.1-19 ppm Balding, 1976 Nitrates, N03 <1-65 ppm 5 ppm Cederstrom, 1962 Low Krumhardt, 1982 0-20 ppm Krumhardt, 1979 0-53 ppm Krumhardt, 1983 ______0.02-.1 1 ppm Balding, 1976 Suffatl~s, S04 2.7-200 ppm 50 ppm Cederstom, 1962 0.5-39 ppmn 15 ppm Krumhardt, 1982 ______0.4-68 ppm ______Balding, 1976 Alkalinity, Total 100-500 ppm 300 ppm Cederstrom, 1962 100-400 ppm 100 ppm Krumhardt, 1982 72-1 ,400 ppm Krumhardt, 1979 12-1,000 pp Krumhardt, 1983 ______14-338 ppm I I______Balding, 1976 CVOF259i004.5 6.15 17 June 1991 N -.~~~~~~7 ¾ -W,l I * rn * - Im~~'k w~~~~~~ - - tE,...~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Q - N U~~~~~~~~~~~~ C /I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~L I U)~~~~~~~~~~Q c a t N :%--n~~~~~k . V ~ ~ ,.J./ i -. vI-.,. I U~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~C (A. -- I I~~~~~~~F, zil -' .. \;7il~~~~~~~~ 'hid~~~ *I L.~~~~~~~~~~;f.- ~~~~ i? ~ C I ci~~~~J 1L o~~~~~~~~~~~~~I aJ Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Eolelon Air Force Base TABLE 6.5. Summary of Background Soil Sample Analysis Resufts Sampling Location Compound EB-i EB-2 EB-3 Lead (mg/kg) is 8 15 TIC (jig/kg) 1-Butanol L L L 2,2 Dimethyl-3-Methylenebicyclo[2.21]heptane 40 L L 3.7 Dirnethyi-1 .3,6-Octatrient 95 L L Methy' Ester Fo-mic Acid L L L VOC (pig/kg) Toluene L L L Total XyIarnes L L L Notes: L = less than 5 pg/kg. TIC = tentatively identified compound. VOC = volatile organic compound. Background soil samples were not analyzed for base/neutral and acid compounds. Regulatory ARARs do not exist for soils. Source: SAIC, 1989. cVCVOR259/006.51 6.18 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plaw: DRAFT Delelon Air Fore. Bate I ~~TABLE 6.6. Summary of Background Well Sample Anmaysls Results SamplingLocation Compound/Parameter 151 ~-T 208-1 27-1 ARARs Lead (pig/i) NS NS 5 50 Oil and Grease (mg/I) 0.4 Li 0.4 NA Petroleum Hydrocarbon Oil and Grease (mg/i) 0.2 Li Li NA TOG (mg/I) 34 5.9 6.5 NA VOC (pg/I) Benzene L2 L2 L2 5 Total Xylenes 12 12 12 NA Trichloroethylene 12 12 1.25 Notes: Ll = Iess than 0.1 mg/I. 1.2 = less than 1 pig/I. NS = not sampled for lead analysis. ARAR = Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements; ARARs shown are Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for drinking water. NA -- ARARs do not exist for these compounds/parameters in groundwater. Source: SAIC, 1989 Ct/CV0R259/007.51 6.19 17 June 1991 Shes Management Plan DRAFT EMeoon Air Forct Beat is not obvious, but it appears that only VOCs and lead were analyzed for in soil, and VOCs, oil and grease, and TOC were measured in water. Preliminary review of the available information indicates that very limited background data are available. Very little background data have been reported from on-base locations and the off-base data appnar to be limited to a few parameters. Consequently, it is assumed that a program of background sampling will be needed to fill the data gaps. Unavailability of some references during the writing of this plan required that assumptions be made and additional sample locations be only tentatively located at this time. The assumptions will be confirmed as a first task prior to finalizing * ~~~~~~~~sampling locations. Proposed Solils Background Sampling. To minimize redundant sampling and analysis, a comprehensive review of existing data will be conducted to confirm the need for and scope of additional sampling. Activities will include: * in depth review of existing boring logs, soils, and geological maps, and profiles to confirm assumptions regarding the distribution and variability of soils (conducted during the Site soils and geology investigation) * review of background sampling conducted off base and referenced in the HILA RILES report cVCVOFQ59/020.51 6.20 17 June 1991 Sit. Management PRan DRAFT Eielson Air Force Bas. *review of background sampling conducted on base by SAIC *additional literature search for background data on or off base *onsite reconnaissance to assure that the general locations tentatively chosen for sampling in this plan are 5~zasibie and well removed from known areas of potential or actual contamination. The proposed background soils sampling program is based on the following assumptions: *Portions of the base are built on fluvial soils that are reasonably similar to those found near the Trans Alaska Pipeline (TAP) access road. The TAP traverses the eastern edge of the base and, with its restricted access road, provides a potentially viable access to what is assumed to be an uncontaminated portion of the base. While other roads on-base are potentially contaminated, pat-cularly from road oiling, the TAP road provides access to areas assumed to be uncontaminated. *The Golden Valley Electric Association powerline right- of-way traverses the southeastern portion of the base and may provide ac-Cess to an uncontaminated area from which to sample the fluvial soils found in the main part of the base. et/CV0F159/02O.51 6.21 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Eiatson Air Force Base *Fill upon which portions of the base were built was taken from local borrow pits, and these pits can be identified and sampled effectively. Borrow sampling will be adjusted, the cobbles may be crushed, or the sampling may be eliminated if lab analysis is found to be impractical. *The majority of the soils on the main part of the base are homogeneous enough that background sampling of the fluvial soil and the borrow will combine to adequately represent background for the contaminated areas on the main part of the base. *The soil underlying the upland portion of the base (reported to be loess) is reasonably homogeneous and an uncontaminated upland background location east of the base off Manchu Road or in the northeast corner of the base (alternate area) that will adequately represent background for the contaminated ski lodge area can be sampled. If the existing data review and site reconnaissance confirms these assumptions, background soils sampling will be conducted as follows: *Fluvial Soil Samples. Thirty near surface and subsurface samples (60 total) will be collected from locations in the southeast part of the base accessible from the Golden Valley Electric Association powerline cVCVOR,259/020.si5.2 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAfl EVeIson Air Force Bass right-of-way. If access or other problems are encountered, all or some of the background fluvial samples will be taken from the area accessible from the TAP access road adjacent to above ground portions of the TAP. Samples will be collected far enough away from the road to preclude influence by road related activities (e.g., dust from road traffiz) c' any spills that may have occurred from the TAP. The buried 8-inch Haines-Fairbanks multiproduct line will be avoided sufficiently to assure that the samples will be uninfluenced by potential leaks. Surface samples will be taken from a depth of approximately 0 to 6 inches and subsurface samples will be taken from a depth of about 18 inches. This number of samples gives a conservative 90 percent confidence that the largest concentration observed from any of these samples for each parameter is greater than roughly 90 percent of all fluvial material concentrations for that parameter. Fill (borrow material) Samples. A total of 20 samples (assumed to consist of five from each of four borrow pits) will be collected from the borrow pits from wnich fill for base construction was obtained. The samples will be taken from unexposed materia~ (i.e., several inches below the surface) and above water. This number of samples gives a conservative 85 percent confidence that the largest concentration observed from any of these samples for each parameter is greater eVCV0R259/020.51 6.23 17 June 1991 Shte Management Plan, DRAFT VeI.son Air Force Bas. than roughly 90 percent of all fill material concentrations for that parameter. Upland (loess) Material. Ten samples (assumed to be five from each of two areas) will be collected. These samples will be taken from a depth of about 18 inches from uncontaminated upland loess soils in the northeast corner of the base. This number of samples gives a conservative 80 percent confidence that the largest concentration observed from any of these samples for each parameter is greater than roughly 85 percent of all loess material concentrations for that parameter. * To the extent practical, sample locations will be randomly selected. Actual coordinates of all sample locations will be determined in the field by a qualified hydrogeologist, and appropriately recorded. * All soil samples will be analyzed for TPH, volatile organic compounds, semivolatile organic compounds, pesticide/PCBs, metals, and conventional parameters. Surface Water and Sediment Background Sampling. No background surface water and only very limited background sediment data were reported (Figure 6.2) in previous investigations. One background surface water and background sediment sample will be collected during each sampling event. Samples taken upstream of contaminated areas of the base on each of the major streams and sloughs cVCVOR259/020.51 6.24 17 June 1991 j 0- 105 1,. " Qt~lC in malestm 16 25is 4 -2---7-'~-'--ALTERNATE"L ." -i ' F 22 EIELr ON AFB BOUNDARY ~ Cek - - I..~~~~~.... Is j~~~~ - PRIARY %~ TSPRMARYN-< AIR ~~-1-CUN1 28 27 Backg~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~PIAR.' .riFlua Sil apin-r F jF -~~~~Bor 21~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~-ak¼an 22e ce Sedim g ~~~~~~~6c~~~ition:~ ¾. 14 f osed Elo~~~~~~kgrour~~~~d.F Samplin Loaton tc u oj-i-t 'Ir.tjlu F- l 21a~ Sit. Management Plan DRAFT baleen Air Force Bas. flowing through the base. This will include French Creek, Moose Creek, Garrison Slough, and Piledriver Slough. Analytical parameters for surface water and sediment samples are specified in the Background Sampling Plan in Appendix F. 6.2.2.4 Solils and Geology The sitewide soils and geology program will consist of two main tasks (described below). These tasks are composed of literature reviews and nonintrusive field mapping. A general characterization of the distribution of soil types across the Site will be perform ed: This work will be done to be certain that adequate background samples are collected and that proper background soil chemistry values are applied to each of the source areas. This task will consist primarily of a literature review and analysis of aerial photos and other Site information. This existing literature review will be supported by limited field verification and interpretations. The soils investigation will be summarized in a technical memorandum prior to the beginning of the background sampling event. A thorough characterization of the Site geology, particularly as it influences the groundwater flow regime, is required. This task will begin by a review of geologic studies at and near Eielson AFB. This will ct/0VOF2S9/020.51 6.26 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Eielon Air Force Bs" include previous Site investigations and siting studies for the TAP. Other information may include USGS, State of Alaska, and University ofl Alaska reports. The Site geology information will be compiled into a technical memorandum to be included in the Site RI report. 6.2.2.5 Groundwater Groundwater conditions at Eielson AEB must be assessed on a sitewide basis in addition to the source-specific investigations. Sitewide data needs include the following parameters. Existing Data Review and Well Inventory. There is an0 extensive amount of available information on sitewide groundwater conditions. The initial task of the groundwater investigation will be to compile and evaluate these data with the objective of optimizing and finalizing the scope of the sitewide groundwater tasks. Much of this work will be conducted during the fall of 1991. The emphasis will be to evaluate existing geologic, hydrologic, and chemical groundwater data. If the existing data are useful, they-WiIl be entered into the project data management system. An important part of this task will be to evaluate existino monitoring well construction and chemical data, and to determine the usability of existing and future data collected at these wells. This task will begin by compiling existing well logs ctVCV0P259/020.51 6.27 17 June 1991 Site Mana gement Plan DRAFT Ejelson Air Force Base 0 ~~~~~~~intoasingle document containing well construction logs and soil boring logs. This document will be periodically updated as additional wells and soil borings are drilled at the site. The well evaluation tasks will include a field survey of the existing wells to assess their present condition and to measure the quantity of fine sediment in the bottort of the casing. The field survey will be conducted in August 1991 and used to scope the field tasks to begin in spring 1992. Well Developmrent. Some of the pre-existing wells may be redeveloped based on observations and measurements made during the well evaluation tasks. Well development procedures are described in the FSP. Surveying. Pre-existing and new completions will be surveyed for elevation to mitigate against misrepresentation of historical water level data due to incorrect measuring point elevations. General surveying procedures and accuracy specifications are presented in the FSP. Water Levels. Sitewide measurement of groundwater and surface water elevations in select (to be determined) monitoring wells and at staff gauges is important in evaluating groundwater flow paths, contaminant migration pathways in groundwater, and establishing a baseline for measuring the hydraulic affect of any future extraction wells (if required). 10 c/C VO~t29/020.51 6.28 17 June 1991 Sit. Mansagement Plan DRAFT VEIlson Al;, Force Base Water levels will be collected on a monthly basis for 2 years beginning in spring 1992 to characterize the annual variations of the groundwater flow system. Measurements will not be made during winter months when ice in the well casings prevent measurement, It is important that the elevations be recorded as near to simultaneous as possible to obtain a snapshot of the hydrologic regime across the entire site. The frequency -of the water-level measurement events will be reevaluated and possibly reduced after 2 years of data are collected. The sitewide events will be coordinated with individual source investigations whenever possible to avoid collection of unnecessary data. Water Quality. The objective of the sitewide groundwater quality program is to evaluate the nature and extent of groundwater contamination on a sitewide scale. These data will be used for assessment of overall site risk and to evaluate feasible remedial actions for groundwater. The details of the program are not finalized at this point; however, it is planned that a minimum of two semiannual groundwater samples be collected at select (to be determined) site wells. The multiple sitewide events is necessary to provide repeatable, seasonal data sets so that risk management decisions and implementation of remedies are made on sound technical footing. As previously stated, the groundwater quality program will consist of a minimum of two semiannual rounds of groundwater sampling and analysis. The needs for additional cVCVOR2SS/020.51 6.29 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Eleleon Air Force Base rounds will be assessed during the implementation RI/FS. Groundwater quality data will be collected in concert with surface water samples and the sitewide water level elevations. Samples will be collected following the spring thaw and again in the fall. It is anticipated that the initial round of sitewide water quality samples will be collected in the spring 1992. An event-specific addendum to the SAP will be prepared before each sampling round. The analyte lists will be developed for the sitewide wells based on a review of existing information and the initial sampling event for- the OU-2 RI. All wells will be analyzed for a basic set of groundwater analytes consisting of conventional, inorganic, and organic parameters during all rounds. It is important that * ~~~~~~~allwells be analyzed using common parameters to provide a basis of comparison of water quality differences and similarities across the Site. Source- or OU-specific analytes will be added to these sets based on specific information for a given well or area. Significant differences in groundwater quality are expected to occur naturally across the site due to the origin of the groundwater, aquifer type, interactions with surface water, and the effect of seasonal recharge. A particular flow system may have a unique geochemnical fingerprint. Therefore, it is useful to obtain sitewide measurements, of conventional water quality parameters to help delineate independent or semi-independent groundwater flow systems. A conventional parameter list will Ct/CVOR259/a20.51 6.30 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Belein Air Force Base be developed and analyzed at each well during each sampling round. Vertical Characterization Program. A limited geologic and hydrologic characterization program will be conducted for the aquifer zone extending from depths greater than apgroximately 30 feet downward until bedrock or other low permeability unit is encountered. Total drilling depth will not exceed 300 feet. There are two primary objectives of the deep well program: * collect limited hydrologic and geologiz data beldw a depth of 30 feet to refine the conceptual model of the groundwater system a provide sufficient data to assess the potential threat of contaminants impacting water quality in the base supply wells. Refinement of Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model. As discussed in the Site Conceptual Model (Section 5.0), the existing investigations provide an incomplete data set for the evaluation of the groundwater system below a depth of approximately 30 feet. A limited deep hydrogcc-tlogic characterization is required to provide baseline information to determine future actions in the deep aquifer zones. This task will require the installation of clustered well sets at three existing well locations within the main part of the Site (to be determined). ct/CVOR259/020.51 6.31 17 June 19.91 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT EMIaon Air Force Ba.. The existing well locations that will be used in this program, and the number of new completions, will be determined during development of a specific drilling and sampling addendum to the SAP for the installations. It is anticipated that a clustered well set will consist of three to five completions at a single location (one of these completions will be a pre-existing well). The final number of wells in a clustered set will depend on the number of distinct aquifer and aquitard units encountered at the location. The clustered well sets will provide the data to determine the following features of the hydrogeology: *vertical hydraulic gradients * stratigraphy and hydrostratigraphy a continuity of stratigraphic units * vertical groundwater chemistry profiles. This program does not address the contamination at the Ski Lodge area on the eastern portion of the base. The groundwater evaluation for this area will be conducted as part of the OU-6 RI. Hydrologic information (water level elevation data and water chemistry) for the site groundwater investigation will be collected from the existing monitoring well network in the vicinity of the Ski Lodge. Protection of Base Water Supplies. The aquifer underlying the base is classified as a sole source aquifer and presently yields water to the base water supply wells. The base wells are completed at depths of approximately 100 to 120 feet deep. Most of the past investigations have been restricted to ctCvVOR5wo/20.51 6.32 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT DelIeon Air Force Base the aquifer zone at or near the water table. Limited dara exist to define groundwater flow and distribution of contaminants in deeper aquifer zones. Data are also inadequate to measure the potential threat to the base water supply. Essential elements of the water supply protection program are: * To define the hydrogeology and flow systems in the aquifer zone(s) that supply water to the base wells. The primary focus would be to determine if the hydrostratigraphic unit(s) is a distinguishable zone within the groundwater flow system. • Identification of releases and mobile contaminant species that would possibly impact the water supply wells (those within the capture zones or recharge zones of the supply wells). * Take appropriate action such as the installation of monitoring wells upgradient of the base supply wells. It is presently the plan to install the nested well completions (see previous section) in the vicinity of the base wells. This will provide the location-specific data required to mieet the objectives of the water supply protection progrmm. Other information such as identification of upgradient sources and contamination will be provided from the OU and SEER investigations. If it is determined the interim actions (lAs) are ct/CVOR259/020.51 6.33 17 June 1991 site management Plan DRAFT Ei~leon Air Force Base needed to prevent contamination of the base supply wells, an IA may be implemented. 6.2.2.6 Surface Water and Sediment Surface water and sediment conditions at Elelson AFB will be assessed during a sitewide program in conjunction with the groundwater program (see Section 6.2.2.5). The scope of work for the sitewide surface water and sediment evaluation includes the following tasks. Existing Data Review. There is scattered information on sitewide surface water and sediment conditions. The initial task will be to compile and evaluate these data with the objective of optimizing and finalizing the scope of the sitewide surface water tasks. The emphasis will be to evaluate existing hydrologic and chemical surface water data. If the existing data are useful, they will be entered into the project data management system. The surface water task will include a field survey of Eielson AFB to visually assess the condition of the surface water features and to probe the stream and lake bottoms to estimate the thickness of sediment deposited in the beds. The main objective of the field survey is to tentatively locate the sample and gauging stations for sitewide chemical and water level elevation. The field survey will be conducted in August 1991 and used to scope the field tasks to begin in spring 1992. eCtJVJP259/020.51 6.34 .17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT Eleleon Air Force base Water Levels. Staff gauges or pressure transducers will be established on select surface water features on the Site. The locations will be determined following a detailed Site reconnaissance. Sitewide measurement of surface water elevations is important in evaluating surface water and groundwater flow paths and potential contaminant migration pathways in surface water. Water levels will be collected on a monthly basis (as a-!owable due to ice) for 2 years beginning in spring 1992 to characterize the annual variations of the flow system. It is important to record the surface water and groundwater elevations as near to simultaneous as possible to obtain a snapshot of the hydrologic regime across the entire Site. The frequency of the surface water elevation measurement events will be reevaluated and possibly reduced after 2 years of data are collected and evaluated. The sitewide events will be coordinated with individual source investigations whenever possible to avoid collection of unnecessary data. Chemical Characterizations. Surface water and sediment quality data will be collected in concert with the sitewide groundwater quality program. Samples will be collected four times on a semiannual basis during the groundwater sampling events. The objective of this task is to obtain additional chemical information that may be useful in identifying unique hydrologic systems within the Site. Surface water and sediment collection methods and analytes will be determined prior to the sampling events. It is anticipated that the initial ctVCVOR25S/020.51 6.35 17 June 1991 She Mansagemnent Plan DRAFT EM/ison Air Force Base round of sitewide surface water and sediment samples will be collected in the spring 1992. 6.2.2.7 Biota Investigations Investigations of the biological resources of the Site will be required to support the ecological assessment described in Section 6.2.5. The source areas and operable units defined for tha Site do not correspond directly with the habitat divisions likely to be affected. Therefore, the ecological risk assessment and biota investigations will be directed toward the Site as a whole. This section will describe the major components of the biological investigations. Specific details of the tasks to be perfor med will be described in addenda to this Shte SAP. Each addendum will describe the work to be accomplished in a defined field event. Organizing the work by field seasons will permit a staged approach to developing the biological information necessary for the ecological assessment. It will also permit the biological studies to be coordinated with the work carried out for each operable unit. During the summer of 1991, studies will focus on reconnaissance surveys of the. Site to establish ecological patterns in relation to the source areas so that additional areas of concern can be identified and ranked. Field events during subsequent field seasons will collect confirming data, if required, on areas of concern. . ~~eCt/voP59/020.51 6.36 17 June 1991 She Management Plan DRAFT Ei.ison Air Force Base The major biologic components that may be affected by toxic constituents identified for the Site are: * nonmigratory. aquatic organisms, including fish * nesting waterfowl * terrestrial vegetation *nonmigratory terrestrial animals. Migratory species are not included because they specnd relatively little time on the Site in contact with the source areas, and they are potentially exposed to contaminants originating offsite. For each of these environmental components it is necessary to determine whether or not toxic constituents are present, and0 whether or not any adverse effect has occurred. Nonmigratory Aquatic Organisms. The objectives of the nonmigratory aquatic organisms investigations are to: * Determine the presence and quantify surface water and sediment concentrations of toxic source constituents. This will be coordinated with the surface water and sediment tasks (Section 6.2.2.6). * Determine if toxic source constituents are accumulating in aquatic biota. ct/CvOPQ59io20.51 6.37 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT Elelson Air Force Base *Determine if adverse effects have occurred to aquatic species that can be attributed to particular source areas or operable units. Surface water samples will be collected from selected stations in the major streams (French Creek, Garrison Slough, and Piledriver Slough), from selected lakes on the Site, and from identified reference stations. Sediment samples will also be collected at each surface water station. These sampling events will, where possible, be coordinated with site surface water and sediment, sampling tasks (Section 6.2.2.6). The aquatic biology investigations will focus on groups of organisms important to the food web, including benthic macroinvertebrates and fish. The study areas for selected aquatic biology sampling will correspond to the surface water and sediment sampling areas. Aquatic biologic samples will be collected from only those stations where the results of the chemical sampling indicate potential deleterious effects. Fish and invertebrate tissues will be analyzed for select chemical contaminants identified in the surface water and sediment sampling. Toxicity tests will be performed to determine the effect of surface water and sediment on laboratory test organisms. The EPA rapid bioassessment protocol (Platkin et aL., 1989) will be used to evaluate aquatic habitat value in relation to measured contaminant levels. Differences observed in aquatic communities at these stations will be related to changes in ct/CVOFQ59/020.51 6.38 17 June 1991 She Mansagement Plan DRAFT Elelson Air Force Base water quality and sediment quality parameters, where appropriate. Nesting Waterfowl. The objective of the waterfowl studies is to determine if toxic constituents identified in source areas affect waterfowl nesting on the Site. Existing data and field reconnaissance, conducted in 1991 and 1992, will be used to determine if there are any areas of special concern in relation to identified source areas and operable units. Tissue samples (egg shell, egg yolk, and feathers) will be collected, if necessary, from the designated areas and analyzed for chemicals of concern. Estimates of adverse ecological effect will be developed from qualitative community assessments and from measured concentrations, if any, and literature reports of toxic effects. Terrestrial Vegetation. The objective of the terrestrial vegetation investigations will be to: * provide a qualitative characterization of the biological attributes of the plant communities on the Site to provide a basis for estimating the impacts from any proposed remedial activities * determine any adverse effect on terrestrial vegetation associated with particular source areas or operable units. ctICVOR259/020.51 6.39 17 June 1991 Shte Mans g.enn Plan DRAFT VEMson Air Forcs~Base Terrestrial vegetation studies, conducted in 1991 and 1992, will include review of available historical aerial photography and vegetation mapping, review of available literature for species of special concern, onsite vegetation characterization, soil sampling and analysis for contaminants, updated aerial photography of selected areas of the Site, and plant tissue analysis as required. Initial reconnaissance level investigations will be conducted during 1991 and 1992. This will permit later data collection efforts, conducted in 1992, to be focused on areas of special concern. Nonmigratory Terrestrial Animals. The objectives of the * ~~~~~~~~terrestrial animal investigations are to: * determine if toxic constituents identified in the source areas are present in terrestrial animals on the Site * determine if adverse ecolonical effects can be attributed to the toxic constituents *estimate possible food chain effects of toxic constituents detected at source areas on the Site. Initial review of the existing data and surveys of the Site will be conducted in 1991 and 1992. These surveys will determine the presence and distribution of terrestrial animals on the Site in relation to the identified source areas and operable units, and Ct/CvOR259/020.51 6.40 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Elelson Air Force Base to identify appropriate reference areas for background comparison. Based on the results of the initial reconnaissance surveys, susceptible species and areas of special concern, if any, will be identified. In subsequent studies, specimens of susceptible species may be collected in the areas of special concern and the reference areas~. Selected tissues will be analyzed for contaminants that will bioaccumulate. Estimates of adverse ecological effects will be determined by review of the relevant literature. 6.2.3 Identification of Potential ARARs A preliminary identification of ARARs for Eielson AFB is presented in Section 2.3. The continued applicability of these, and identification of new ARARs, will be an ongoing sitewide task. It is important to identify ARARs at this early stage of the RIIFS because they provide a framework to scope investigative activities. It is equally as important to continue this process because remedial action at the Site must be designed to comply with federal, state, and local environmental laws, regulations, standards, requirements, criteria, and limits that are legally applicable or relevant and appropriate to the situation (40 CFR 3090). Site ARARs will be provided to the OU investigations. cVCV0R259/020,51 6.41 17 June 1991 Site Mane gement Pion DRAFT EBelson Air Force Base 6.2.4 Human Health Baseline Risk Assessment The baseline risk assessment estimates the risks associated with present and future conditions under a "no-action" alternative (i.e., no further remedial actions implemented). Data obtained during the earlier RI tasks will be evaluated to perform a baseline risk assessment for the Site. The process will assimilate area-specific information into assessments based on probable conditions and deviations to support the overall management plan for the Site. In addition, the assessment will be prepared to address the reasonable maximum exposure conditions required by EPA guidance. There will be three types of baseline risk assessments: Preliminary risk assessment (PRA) is developed on the basis of existing data during the development of a - ~~~~~~~~~sampling plan. The PRA assists in identifying likely important environmental and exposure pathways, chemicals of concern, and data gaps for the completion of the baseline risk assessment, and therefore provides one focus for the sampling plan. The baseline risk assessment is developed at the completion of an RI phase to support the management decision as to whether remedial action is needed. It was the full data from previous studies and the RI phase to assess the health risk. It will be prepared for individual operable units, although it may also address individual source areas within an OU. . ~~Ct/VOR259/020.51 6.42 17 June 1991 sit. Management Pian DRAFT Elelson Air Force Base Sitewide baseline assessment is the assessment that will be completed to integrate the results of all the sitewide activities for OU and SER sources. A major function of this assessment will be to integrate the individual OU assessments for coverage of all pertinent pathways and risks. These assessments will be coordinated to maintain consistency of approach and data usage across the source areas and OUs. 6.2.4.1 Baseline Risk Assessment Process The baseline risk assessments for the Site RI will be conducted according to Environmental Protection Agency guidelines: Risk Assessment Guidance far Superfund Volume 1, Human0 Health Evaluation, Part A, Interim Final, December 1989 (RAGS). A baseline risk assessment will consist of four major steps as prescribed by RAGS: * selection of chemicals of concern * exposure assessment * toxicity assessment * risk characterization. Selection of Chemicals of Concern. This component involves gathering sampling data and identifying which potential contaminants are to be the primary focus of the risk assessment. The criteria for selection of contaminants of ct/CVOR259/020.51 6.43 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT Ejelson Air Force Baa. potential concern will include frequency of detection, toxicfty, mobility, persistence, and presence in background. Exposure Assessment. This component considers the actual and/or potential exposures to human receptors for complete exposure pathways. As part of thi s estimation, exposure point concentrations are derived, and the frequency, duration, and magnitude of exposures, and the pathways by which these exposures could occur, are evaluated. Current or potential future exposure point concentrations will be either measured directly using field data or estimated using modeling techniques. Toxicity Assessment. This component considers the type of toxic effect a particular chemical of potential concern exerts, the degree of toxicity relative to the magnitude of exposure (dose-response assessment), and the weight of scientific evidence supporting the dose-response assessment. The primary sources for toxicity values will be EPA's Integrated Risk Information System (U.S. EPA, 1991b) (IRIS) and Health Effects Summary Tables (U.S. EPA 1991 a) (HEAST). Risk Characterization. The results of the toxicity assessment and exposure assessment are integrated in the risk characterization step. Estimated intakes are compared with critical intake values to estimate risk. This assessment will be quantitative to the extent allowed by the data. cVCVOre2S9io20.51 6.44 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Ei. .on Air Force Base Uncertainties and Limitations. It is important to identify in the baseline risk assessment those factors that affect the level of confidence in the quantitative risk estimates. Categories of uncertainties associated with the baseline risk assessment process include those inherent in: * selection of contaminants of concern for the Site * estimation of exposure * development of toxicity values. Uncertainties for the baseline risk assessment will most likely not be evaluated in a quantitative manner but will be descriptive. Assumptions made during development of the quantitative risk estimates for the Site could cause an over or underestimate of true risks. The effect of given assumptions will be presented in table form, and where possible, described in the text of the risk assessment. 6.2.4.2 Baseline Risk Assessment Milestones Throughout the course of the baseline risk assessment process for the Site, several milestones will be observed to streamline the process and allow interim declsions by Eielson AFB and regulatory agencies. These milestones are defined by critical data-gathering activities, followed by discussions and decisions that will determine the scope of subsequent risk assessment activities for a particular source area. Regular meetings with Eielson AEB and regulatory agencies to discuss the milestone activities can occur during the normal Site CV'CVO259/020.51 6.45 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Man DRAFT EMIason Air Force Bas. progress meetings. The critical data-gathering activities for the risk assessment are: * evaluation of chemicals of concern * exposure point concentrations • toxicity values. Evaluation of Chemicals of Concern. A list of all Site contaminants and rationale for selecting particular chemicals of concern for the risk assessment will be developed. Exposure Point Concentrations. During the course of development of the baseline risk assessment for the Site, exposure point concentrations will be estimated for various assumed exposure scenarios. These are the concentrations of contaminants that will be used to estimate receptor exposure at or near the Site. Contaminant concentrations for each medium will be presented (range, mean, upper 95 percent confidence limit of mean, etc.) for subsequent use in exposure assessment. Included in this will be explanations of how exposure point concentrations were derived, and how nondetect values were handled, and any impact of possible sample matrix effects. Toxicity Values. As part of the risk assessment process for the Site, a list of all contaminants detected at the Site will be evaluated and toxicity values (cancer slope factors of reference dose values) for each of the chemicals of concern will then be identified. Primary sources to be used include EPA's IRIS or CtJCVOR259/020.51 6.46 17 June 1991 Sit. Maneagemient Plan DRAFT Eielson Air Force Bass the quarterly HEAST. These will be used in conjunction with exposure estimates to quantify Site risks. Documentation of these toxicity values will be provided as an interim milestone, allowing Eielson AEB and the regulatory agencies to review this information before Site risks are quantified. If contaminants with unavailable EPA-derived toxicity values are of likely importance to the overall risk estimates, a decision will be needed concerning whether or not to derive a chemical- specific toxicity value using literature sources. 6.2.5 Ecological Assessment The ecological assessment is an appraisal of actual or potential impacts of hazardous releases on plants or animals other than people and domesticated species. This section presents the approach to the ecological assessment portion of the baseline risk assessment to be conducted as part of the overall Site RI/FS for EBelson AEB. The ecological assessment for the Site will evaluate the potential current or future ecological threats in the absence of remediation (the no-action alternative). The ecological assessment for the Site RI will be conducted according to Environmental Protection Agency guidelines in Risk Assessment Guidance For Supedfund, Volume /I, Environmental Evaluation Manual (RAGS), Interim Final, March 1989, and Statement of Work for the RI/FS Environmental Evaluation for Superfund Sites, EPA Region X, November 1989. 0cvC0R259/020,51 6.47 17 June .1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT Eielson Air Force Bas. 6.2.5.1 Scope of the Ecological Assessment The primary objective of the ecological assessment for Eielson AFB3 is the determination of the likelihood of ecological impact. Pre-existing and new data gathered over the course of the RI period will be used to assess past, current, and possible future ecological impacts at the Site. Data will be gathered in areas where the greatest potential for impact is expected, based on a current understanding of the Site. Because the source areas and operable units defined for the Site do not correspond to habitat divisions, the comprehensive ecological assessment will be conducted toward the Site as a whole. The ecological investigations for the individual OUs will consist of a reconnaissance survey, a review of environmental data for the source area, and a qualitative evaluation of potential ecological impacts. An iterative approach is being instituted for assessing potential impacts. The initial assessment will ask whether biological populations or communities are affected at the Site. If the data generated identify possible effects on ecological receptors, an assessment will be made to determine whether these impacts could be caused by contaminant releases from the sources at the Site. Further stages of work may be necessary to define the extent and the possible causes of impact. ct'CVOR259/020.51 6.48 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT EBelson Air Force Base 6.2.5.2 Identification of Data Needs In order to determine the data needed for an ecological assessment, key questions must be identified that will address the general objectives of the assessment. Table 6.7 lists the key questions identified for the Site, the possible approaches for addressing the questions, and the specific measurements that can supply the data. 6.2.5.3 Collection and Analysis of Data The following discussions briefly describe the categories of data to be collected to support the ecological assessment. .The types of data collection and analysis to be done for the ecological assessment include identification of critical habitats or species, contaminant identification, exposure assessment, toxicity assessment, and risk characterization. These are explained briefly in the following discussion. Identification of Critical Habitats or Species. The identification of sensitive habitats (e.g., high value wetlands) or critical species that might require extraordinary protection (e.g., rare, threatened, or endangered species) can be conducted using field survey information, data available from the Eielson AFIB natural resources manager, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife information. ctCV0V~t59/O20.51 6.49 17 June 1991 E E~~00 0 -- ~~~~~~00' 0o ofl Ct C ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 o 0 00 00so CE 0~~~~~Z~ 0 i 0 ; 0 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0 o C ~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~0a0 0P = 0 C 0 - . .-ZC I > a o ~~~~ I .X00 .Z A 26t T > 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 00~~~~~~~~~~ 'Z E cC 0 0 E C CE . W 0~~~~~r(0 ... 0 0 *0 ~~~0 A0 -a 1 . 2 0 0 0 c 0 0~~~~~~~~0 0 0 0~~~~~0 o 0~~~~~ 0 0 0 00~~~~~ 0 o - -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~E 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ C 0 LU 0 0 - V ~ E E 0 0 O 0 0 o . 0 ~~ ~ ~ la >0 C - S= ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ *C E .2V .2 0 0;E E E 0 0 0 ~ : ,0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~O 0 0o E o C c1. 0 0 o -~~~~~- * c*C cS '. 0 0 0 - ~ C p00 - ~~ ~~~-t - j 0~- A ~ S U I- cu~~~~~ CCc. oEE U'3 0 0 0 *~~~ -T~~ 0 C 0 L ~~~~J; ' -0 0 ~~~~~~ ' s.0 >00- . ~~r0V -~~~~~ 0 0 E~~~~~~~~~~~~2 0Z u c E0, 0S ~ (~~0~ - ~ S0 0- 0 ~~~~~~ 0 .0 .2 02 oC' C~ ~. 0 . Co O EE . 0,0 0 00 0 . 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 7~~~ 0 00 - - 7F 0 0 0~~~~~~~~~______6.50~~~~~~~~. She Maneagement Plan DRAFT Elelson Air Force Base Contaminant Identification. The data to be used for identifying contaminants of concern and estimating exposure point concentrations can be obtained either by direct measurement of contaminants in surface water, sediments, surface soils, and biota or predicted by modeling. The methods and approach to be used are described in Sections 6.2.6. The specific sampling frequencies, locations, and artalytes for these four media will be determined by an iterative process in keeping with the observational approach to this RI. Details will be presented in individual OU management plans or in addenda to the SMP. Chemicals may be deleted from the evaluation in the ecological assessment if they are detected in low frequency, lack measurable toxicity, or lack the potential for exposure. Exposure Assessment. The possibility of exposure to Site contaminants can be investigated in the ecological assessment by one or more techniques depending on the type of organism, media, and contaminant. Possible methods to assess exposure are as follows: • Direct measurement of bioaccumulated contaminants in organisms from at least two trophic levels. * Measurements of contaminant concentrations in media to estimate potential exposure point concentrations. If estimation of intake is necessary, the intake values used will be documented from literature sources. cV/CVO0259/020.51 6.51 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DR AFT VElson Air Force. Base * Modeling exposure point concentrations from chemical data. * Direct measurement of toxicity in sediments and surface waters to determine if bioavailability is sufficient to cause toxicity. Toxicity Assessment. The toxicity of contaminants or contaminated media at the Site can be assessed using three approaches: * direct measurement of surface water and sediment toxicity using standard toxicity test methods * comparison of contaminant concentrations at Elelson AFB with EPA-derived reference toxicity values (e.g., ambient water quality criteria), where possible * literature search. The results of the laboratory toxicity testing can be used, where possible, to: * predict population responses to ambient contaminant concentrations * correlate population responses (acute and/or chronic) with chemical gradients onsite ct/CVORZ259IO20.51 6.52 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT EBelson Air Force Base provide preliminary information on onsite and offsite sources of toxicity. 6.2.5.4 Risk Characterization In order to characterize ecological risk at the Site, a comparison can be made of the spatial patterns of the effects measured by toxicity testing, tissue bioaccumulation, field surveys of ecological status, and chemical analysis of site media. Strong spatial correlations among media chemical concentrations, ecological status as determined by field surveys, toxicity testing results, and measures of exposure (e.g., tissue uptake) will suggest the potential for environmental impact. 6.2.6 Treatability Studies The need for treatability studies will be evaluated early in the Site and OU RI/FS process and will be performed as needed. Treatability studies are laboratory or field tests designed to provide specific information for evaluating and screening potential treatment technologies. During the FS, available Site characterization data, physical/chemical waste characteristics, and literature information on remedial technologies are reviewed, and remedial technologies are screened to eliminate inappropriate technologies, while retaining potentially applicable technologies for further consideration (see Section 6.3). When the data available are inadequate to screen or evaluate treatment technologies. treatability studies may be required to obtain information needed cVCVOFQ59/O20.51 6.53 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Eilelon Air Force Base to develop remedial alternatives. For this reason, treatability studies are often performed concurrently with the FS--after preliminary screening of alternatives, but before detailed analysis of alternatives. Hence, the general objectives of treatability studies are to provide information needed to: * develop treatment alternatives during the detailed analysis phase of the FS * reduce performance and cost uncertainties (remaining after the technology literature survey) so that a remedy can be selected in the FS. 6.2.6.1 Treatability Study Tiers 0 ~~~~~~~~There are three possible levels, or tiers, of treatability testing: * laboratory screening * bench-scale testing * pilot-scale testing. Laboratory screening tests are designed to yield, relatively quickly and inexpensively, qualitative information about a technology's performance potential but no design or cost information. Bench-scale testing yields quantitative performance data for a technology and some design and cost information, at modest cost, time to perform, and QA/QC levels. Pilot-scale testing provides quantitative performance data, detailed design and cost information, and performance 0VCVCi:259/020.51 6.54 17 June 1991 Site Managemnent Plan DRAFT EM/lson Air Force Base optimization and assurance, but has high cost, time, and OAIQC requirements. One, two, or all three tiers of testing may be required to fully develop. and implement a treatment alternative. They are normally conducted in a stepwise fashion; with each level of testing providing information needed to design the next tier. In general, laboratory screening and bench-scale testing usually comprise treatability work performed during the RI/FS to allow screerning, evaluation, and development of treatment alternatives, whereas pilot-scale testing is normally performed for the purpose of optimizing technology performance during the RDIRA. 6.2.6.2 Treatabillity Study Approach Treatability testing will be done as part of the OU characterizations. Because of the similarity of contaminants and physical conditions across the Site, it is anticipated that the treatability results obtained for one operable unit will be useful in evaluating treatability options for the other operable units. During the development of the operable unit management plans, a preliminary scoping of remedial technologies will be performed and characterization parameters for the technologies will be identified. Those parameters that are critical or can easily be gathered during OU characterization activities will be incorporated into the analyte lists for the various media of concern. For example, total organic carbon is needed to evaluate the potential CtICVOR259IO20.51 6.55 17 June 1991 Site Mona gemnent Plan DRAFT VElaon Air Force Bae. effectiveness of carbon adsorption for groundwater treatment. This parameter would be added to the analyte list for the groundwater samples to be collected at the OU. Other treatability testing will be incorporated as tasks into the operable unit management. There is the possibility that sitewide treatability testing will be done. If sitewide treatability data needs are identified, they will be included as tasks in an addendum to this management plan. 6.2.6.3 Treatability Study Needs The media requiring treatability studies for the sitewide RI/FS are groundwater, including LNAPL, and dissolved phase contaminants and contaminated sediment. Potential treatment technologies and general treatability requirements for groundwater, soils, and sediment are presented in Tables 6.8 and 6.9, respectively. These are very preliminary and will be refined as an ongoing process during the sitewide RI/ES. Treatability study data needs for the RI will be developed after a review of the existing data and subsequent refinement of the information presented in Tables 6.8 and 6.9. 6.2.7 Data Management During the RI/FS activities at Eielson AFB, the information flow from the field and the laboratory to those persons involved in project decisionmaking is critical. A data management system cVCVOR259/020.51 6.56 17 June 1991 0C ~ C C U.. CD CD ( C 0 - -0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- CDEc .Q I M C O)c w 0) 0) a) CD C- C ) C 0 a) C C -F c C C~ C (D 0 a CD 3 ~ 0) h- 0 (D0)a - (V ( j'D Ccn o- E o E -C C >.0 - a -C 4 CD Wu~5 20) CO U), 0,D 0- (n - En50 CU a) (V) *) 0 0 = o-a~ a" C)l 0 U) .; C a >. (D 0 ~ ~ 0 coC I. 0 0 0 E~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0 0 c 0co (0 .CO 0) C o a~~~~~~~~~~~0) ~ ~ ~ ~ co U 0 0 U) C~~~0 U) CM 0)o C~~~c E _ _ C ~~ N E C E-C 0 -a 0 C5 0 mu CDi0O r > C Eu~ C - 0~~~~~( 0) E W >< C Ca ~~~~~a) C -aE) LU CA CC, co CI LO 0 LV- 0 0 z -6o~ 0~ 0~ (0 6.57 .2~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0 -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 0 0 c~~~~~~ . 0 N. C 0o~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~c or 0 c.2a 1E .0 00 0 C6~ ~ t m S0 0 .k 0 0 0 2 ~~~~ C *00 O. 6 d $= ~ --- -00 - eC0.S noS 0~~~~~ i Z~ ~~ ~~~~~~~~. ' X~ ~ 0 0 ~c0 C 0 0 0~~~ o 0 .0 2~~~ - a Etoz - 02. d Q. C~~QO 0 0 0 a-0 0 .c E a 0 2 o2c .2 o~~~~ n0 E Z 0~~~~~~~~~~~~ C 9 2 0. = V . . 0 0 0 0 1 r0, - < .. 0 0 0~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~C~ ~ 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ o 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~c CL~~~~~~~CC 0 58 She Management Plan DRAFT Elelson Air Force Base assists in this process by providing a means of tracking, cataloging, and organizing information. Such a system includes hardware and software for data handling (the data base), data management protocols such as chain-of-custody and QN/QC validation, and trained personnel to keep the system updated and operational. The primary objective of a data management system is to provide the user with data sets that have been verified and are internally consistent. These data can then be used for data analysis, statistics, plotting, and so on. There are three groups of -data users for this project: * The Air Force personnel responsible for the Installation Restoratiob Program Information Management Systema (IRPIMS) require that certain data be made available to theV Air Force in a format compatible with their data base. * The project team requires that a subset of the IRPIMS data (namely, sample and analysis information) be available in a system that can support data queries, reports, and graphics. * EPA Region X requires well installation information and results from any groundwater sampling. To satisfy the data needs of the users, two data management tools will be used on this project. The IRPIMS Contractor Data Loading Tool will be used to prepare ASCII files in the correct format for the Air Force data base. The data delivery schedule c/C V0R2591020.51 6.59 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT O E~~~elson Air Force Base and valid values lists in the IRPIMS Data Loading Handbook (Version 2.2) will be followed. Once these files are prepared, they will be used to load data into a Paradox-based data base designed for environmental investigations. This data base will be used by the project team to support data analysis activities. The well construction and groundwater dlat a will be extracted from the Paradox based system and/or the IRPIMS files, formatted as requested by EPA, and sent to EPA Region X. All of the data from each of the OU investigations will be entered into a single project data base system. The appropriate operable unit designation will be part of the sample identification so that the data can be queried by operable units. * ~~~~~~Thedata management requirements are discussed in more detail in the Data Management Plan found in Appendix E. Also discussed is the data base system, data management protocols, and the specific data management tasks that are required for both the overall Site and the OU-specific investigations. 6.2.8 Remedial Investigation Report A draft RI report will be prepared that presents and summarizes the new and existing data and evaluates potential contaminant sources, releases, pathways, and receptors on a sitewide basis. The Site RI is scheduled to be completed after the CU RI!FS reports are complete. Therefore, the Site RI report will probably present summary information from the six individual OU investigations. CV/CVOR259/020.51 6.60 17 June 1991 Site Mana gement Plan DRAFT EMlson Air Force Base The Site RI report will focus on sitewide investigations. Discussions of the individual sources or local contaminated soils will be referenced baz-k to the respective OU RI. The major sections of the Site RI report are expected to be similar to those presented in CE-RCLA guidance (Guidance for Conducting Remedial Investigations and Feasibility Studies Under CEROLA, Interim Final, October, 1988): Executive Summary. An executive summary will be prepared and packaged as a separate, stand-alone document. The focus of the executive summary will be to provide general, yet accurate, descriptions of the pertinent features of the Site investigations such as nature and extent of contamination and Site risk. The executive summary will contain numerous summary tables, maps, and figures. * Introduction. This section will present the purpose of the report and will include information of the Site history and previous investigations. An important aspect of this section will be to describe how the operable unit investigations and the Site RI interact. * Study Area Investigation. This section will describe the field activities associated with the Site investigation. These may include physical, chemical, and biological studies. *Physical Characteristics of the Study Area. This section will include the results of the field activities with emphasis WtCVOR259/020.5¶ 6.61 17 June 1991 She. Management Plan DRAFT Eieiaon Air Force Base 0 ~~~~~~~~placed on hydrogeology, groundwater hydrology, surface water hydrology, terrestrial and aquatic biota. * Chemical Characteristics of the Study Area. This section will present the results of the sitewide chemical characterizations for groundwater, surface water, and sediment. The results will include biotoxicity and tissue studies. * Contaminant Fate and Transport. The scope of the fate and transport section will be defined during early baseline risk assessment tasks. In general, the fate and transport section includes information on contaminant persistence and factors affecting the chemical migration in the * ~~~~~~~~environment. * Baseline Risk Assessment. The baseline risk assessment will be composed of two primary sections that describe the human health and ecological assessments. Descriptions of the contents of these assessments are in Sections 6.2.4 and 6.2.5 of the SMVP. *Summary and Conclusions. This section will summarize the findings of the Site RI. The summary will include information on the nature and extent of contamination and the risk the Site presents to human health and the environment. 0 ~ct/CV0R2S59IO2O.51 6.62 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT EBelson Air Force Ba,. Appendixes. The appendixes will be composed of laboratory data, data validation reports, and various memoranda describing field investigations. 6.3 FEASIBILITY STUDY TASKS This section presents descriptions of the feasibility study tasks for the Eielson AFB RIlES. The FS tasks described in this section apply to six separate operable unit FSs and the overall Site feasibility study. The operable unit FSs will be developed by following the general FS tasks described herein. The FS process will follow guidance established by EPA (U.S. EPA, 1988). This section of the SMVP has two objectives: * Outline the approach to the sitewide FS. Specific tasks for the sitewide FS will be incorporated into subsequent revisions of the SMVP. * Provide a template for the feasibility studies to be conducted for the individual operable units. The information in this section will be accessed and referenced during development of the individual OU FSs. 6.3.1 Sitewide Feasibility Study The overall Site FS will be a continuing activity throughout the duration of RI/FS evaluations for the individual OUs. The FS for ct/CV0R259/02O.51 6.63 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT O El~~elson Air Force Base the overall Site will be finalized after completion of the OU FSs (see Section 7.0). The objectives of the overall Site ES are to provide programmatic direction and oversight to cleanup and waste management activities. Specifically, the Site FS will be the mechanism that coordinates individual OU remedies in an effort to combine activities (e.g., plume capture) or equipment (e.g., treatment facilities or piping), as appropriate. An example of this would be utilization of a single facility for soil treatment by several operable units. Coordination of the OU remedies will help streamline implementation, avoid redundancy, and control costs. The sitewide FS will also evaluate contamination included in two or more OUs. An example of this would be commingling groundwater plumes from adjacent OUs. Combining the response action for groundwater could enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of the remedy, as compared to addressing portions of the groundwater under separate OUs. Finally, the sitewide FS will assess the combined effectiveness of the individual remedies to be certain that overall Site remedial goals and objectives are addressed and met. This evaluation will focus primarily on sitewide issues, such as ecological effects. 6.3.2 Operable Unit Feasibility Studies The primary objective of the OU FSs is to develop a range of potential remedial alternatives that are protective of human health oVCVOR259/020.51 6.64. 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Elelson Air Force Baee and the environment. A range of remedial alternatives will be developed to provide project decisionmakers with a choice of several approaches to satisfying remedial goals for the CU and the Site. The development of alternatives for the OUs must be coordinated with the other Site response efforts to eniable attainment of overall remediation objectives. For example, remediation options being considered for one CU could affect the performance and range of options being considered for other operable units. The sitewide FS (see Section 6.3.2) will provide the mechanism of coordination between individual CU FSs. 6.3.3 Development of Remedial Alternatives The development of remedial alternatives for OUs and the Site will be accomplished in the following steps: * development of remedial action objectives * scoping general response actions *identification and evaluation of potential remedial technologies and process options *assembly, development, and screening of alternatives for the operable unit *detailed evaluation of feasible alternatives ct/CVOR259/020.51 6.65 17 June 1991 Site Man.agement Plan DRAFT EIleson Air Force Base 0 * ~~~~~~~~ranking of feasible alternatives feasibility study report. Each task is described below. Additional details can be found in EPA's Interim Final RI/FS Guidance Document (1988). 6.3.3.1 Development of Remedial Action Objectives The results of the baseline risk assessment and ARARs evaluation will be used to develop remedial action objectives, which state medium-specific or source-specific goals for protecting human health and the environment. Contaminants of concern, exposure routes; receptors, and acceptable * ~~~~~~~contaminant levels or ranges of levels for each exposure route will be specified for each medium. Acceptable contaminant levels will be based upon identified, chemical-specific, ARARs, requirements of 'to be considereds" (TBCs), or risk assessment calculations. Remedial action objectives include selection and implementation of a response action that can be characterized as feasible and permanent, and for which the remediation time is minimized. 6.3.3.2 Scoping General Response Actions General response actions, which are broad classes of actions or combinations of actions that will satisfy the remedial action objectives, will be developed on an OU-specific basis, and for the Site, if needed. Examples of general response action . c~V0V0R259/020.51 6.66 17 June 1991 Sit, Management Plan DRAFT Eletsoc. Air Force Bse. categories are no action, institutional controls, disposal, extraction, excavation, containment, and treatment. Critical media and waste characteristics will be identified as part of this task. These characteristics could include physical! chemical characteristics, and contaminant extent or volume to which general response actions might be applied. 6.3.3.3 Identification and Evaluation of Potential Remedial Technologies and Process Options A list of potential remedial technologies will be developed for -each identified general response action. The technologies -considered should be able to address the contaminant source area and waste characteristics identified in the RI report. The technologies should also address the potential range of Site conditions, and be able to accommodate a level of uncertainty regarding those conditions. Process options, which are the different processes that fall within a technology type, will be identified for each remedial technology. Process options are the most basic technological unit used in the evaluation of potential remedial measures during the FS. The identified technologies and process options may not all be suitable for use at all of the operable units. Each identified process option is evaluated to determine whether it can be technically implemented. Technical implementability is Ct/CVOR%259IO20.51 6.67 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Eolelon Air Force Bas. determined by comparing the capabilities for each process option to the physical and chemical characteristics of the contaminant and source area. In some cases, no process option for a given technology is technically implementable, so the technology can be eliminated from further consideration. Remaining process options are evaluated more closely to determine which process options and technologies will be developed into remedial alternatves. This selection is made by comparing the process options on the basis of effectiveness, implementability, and cost. The effectiveness evaluation will focus on the criteria below: *the potential effectveness of the process options in handling the estimated areas or volumes of the contaminated medium and attaining the remedial action objectives for that medium *the effectiveness of the process options in protecting human health and the environment during remedy construction and implementation *how proven and reliable the process option is with respect to the contaminants and conditions at Eielson AFB. cVCVOR259/020.51 6.68 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Eielean Air Force Base Information needed to perform this evaluation includes contaminant types and concentrations, and areas or volumes of contaminated media, and rates of collection of fluid media. Both technical and institutional implementability are considered in evaluating process options. Technical implementability will be used to eliminate from further consideration those options that are clearly ineffective or unworkable at Eielson AFB. Institutional factors include such issues as the ability to obtain necessary permits for any offsite actions, the ability to meet substantive requirements of relevant permits for onsite actions, the availabijity and capacity of treatment, storage, and disposal services, as appropriate, and the availability of any essential equipment and skilled labor. Cost will be the least important of the criteria used to evaluate process options. Reflative capital and operations and maintenance costs, as opposed to detailed estimates, will be developed to the extent possible and will be largely based on engineering judgment. Processes will be evaluated as to whether costs are high, low, or medium relative to other process options within the same technology type. Some innovative techndlogies may be applicable at Eielson AFB; however, it is likely t:eat detailed data on their effectiveness and cost will not be available. Innovative technologies will be carried through the screening steps if they offer the potential for comparable or superior performance of implementability, fewer or less adverse impacts than other ct/CVOR259/020.51 6.69 17 June 1991 Sit, Mansagemient Plan DRAFT bEMIon Air Force Bae" available approaches, or lower costs for similar levels of performance than demonstrated treatment technologies. 6.3.3.4 Assembly, Development, and Screening Alternatives far the OU Assembly of Remedial Alternatives. Preliminary remedial alternatives will be developed by assembling specific process options (or remedial technologies or general response actions, as appropriate) for each contaminated environmental medium determined to require remedial action. Alternatives will be assembled so as to present a range of waste management options for further evaluation. This ensures that project decision-makers have a range of remedial alternatives from which to select the final remedial alternative. To provide such a range, the following types of alternatives, at a minimum, will be assembled, if practicable. • A no-action alternative. * One or more treatment alternatives would be developed representing the range from one eliminating or minimizing the need for long-term management to one that would use treatment as a primary component. Alternatives within this range typically will differ in the type and extent of treatment used and the management requirements of treatment residuals or untreated wastes. Ct/CV08259/020.51 6.70 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT Eleleon Air Fore. Base *One or more alternatives would be developed that involve containment of waste. These alternatives would include little or no treatment but would protect human health and the environment by preventing potential exposure and/or reducing the mobility of contaminants. Section 121 (b)(1) of CEROLA has a statutory preference for permanent and significant waste treatment. Various treatment alternatives, emphasizing different treatment technologies and degrees of treatment, will be assembled, as appropriate. Containment alternatives will also be assembled. Waste removal and offsite disposal alternatives that do not employ treatment are considered the least preferred alternatives. After the technology alternatives have been assembled, the preliminary action-specific ARARs that were identified will be reexamined to eliminate options that are not desirable or feasible. In the process of assembling and developing remedial alternatives, additional RI data needs may be identified.. These data needs will be assessed to determine whether they are critical to the conceptual model for the Site or the OU. Certain data needs may be addressed as uncertainties in the detailed analysis of alternatives and may be evaluated in a sensitivity analysis. Other data needs may require additional charactLeT;zation or treatability studies. ct/CV0259/020.51 6.71 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT VEison Air Force Base Development of Remedial Action Alternatives. Alternatives will be further developed to identify details of process options, process sizing requirements, remedial time frames, and refined remedial action objectives. The information available from the RI reports will be used to refine the estimated areas or volumes of contaminated media so that the sizes of the remedial technologies and process options associated with each alternative can be determined. This will allow for comparison of alternatives with respect to effectiveness, implementability, and cost. If media/operable unit interactions are determined to be significant, the effects or selection of remedies will be evaluated in the sitewide ES. Specific types of information will be developed under this task as appropriate to define the alternatives: * size and configuration of onsite extraction and treatment systems * identification of contaminants that impose the greatest treatment requirements * size and configuration of containment structures *time frame in which treatment, containment, or removal goals can be achieved C/C VOR259/020.51 6.72 17 June 1991 Shte Management Plan DRAFT Eleleon Air Force Base * treatment rates or flow rates associated with treatment processes • special requirements for construction of treatment or containment structures, for staging construction materials, or for excavation *distances for disposal technologies *required permits and imposed limitations. All information and assumptions used in generating this information will be thoroughly documented. Screening of Remedial Alternatives. The objective of alternatives screening is to reduce the list of potential remedial actions that will be further evaluated in detail, based on the criteria of effectiveness, implementability, and cost. This screening ensures that the most promising potential remedial actions are being considered and narrows the scope of the feasibility study to manageable proportions. To the extent practicabie, a range of appropriate remedial alternatives options will be preserved so as to allow project decision- makers significant choices during their selection of an operable unit remedial alternative. Three major steps are performed during the screening of remedial alternatives. First, the remedial objectives are refined based on RI information, potential multiple pathway exposures, dCVCOR259/020.51 6.73 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT . El~~elson Air Force Sees and significant interactions among operable units environmental media. Second, the alternatives are further refined based on the quantities or areas of environmental media affected, the sizes and capacities of remedial technologies or process options, and other pertinent data available from the RI. Third, the refined alternatives are evaluated on a general basis to determine their effectiveness, implementability, and cost. Additional details to these steps are as follows: Refinement of Remedial Action Objectives. Preliminary alternatives are developed to meet remedial action objectives for each environmental medium of interest. However, exposures may occur through more than one pathway and involve several operable units! environmental media. The assembled remedial alternatives are thus evaluated to ensure that they protect human health and the environment from all potential pathways of concern for the Site as a whole. Media and operable unit interactions will be evaluated to determine if ongoing releases significantly affect contamninant levels in other media or operable units (e.g., soil to groundwater). Operable unit interactions will be evaluated in the sitewide FS. Evaluation of Feasible Site Alternatives. The alternatives are evaluated with regard to the short- and long-term effectiveness, implementability, and cost. During this eVCVOR259/020.51 6.74 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Eiselon Air Force ese. screening, comparisons will be made between similar afternatives, with the most promising carried forward for detailed analysis during the FS. The most favorable alternatives will be retained for detailed evaluation. To the extent practicable, selected alternatives will preserve the range of remedial alternatives. Alternatives not retained may be reconsidered at a later step in the detailed analysis if later information shows an additional advantage not previously apparent. Effectiveness Evaluation. Each alternative will be evaluated with respect to the level of protection to human health and the environment that it will provide, primarily through reductions in toxicity, mobility, or vojume of the waste. Short-term effectiveness, occurring during the construction and operation period, and long-term effectiveness, occurring after completion of the remedial alternative, will be evaluated. Sensitivity analyses will be carried out to evaluate the effectiveness of performance. Residual -contaminant levels that can be expected to remain after remediation will be compared to contaminant-specific ARARs, to pertinent TBCs, or to levels established through risk assessment -calculations. cVCVOR259/020.51 6.75 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Belson Air Force Base Implementability Evaluation. Implementability is the measure of both the technical and institutional feasibility of constructing, operating, and maintaining a remedial alternative. Technical feasibility refers to the ability to construct, operate, meet action-specific ARARs, and maintain and monitor the remedial technologies or process options under consideration. Institutional feasibility refers to the ability to obtain approvals from appropriate agencies and the ability to procure required services, equipment, and personnel. Cost Evaluation. Comparative cost estimates, using relative accuracy within an alternative category, will be made. Cost estimates will be based on cost curves, generic unit costs, vendor information, conventional cost-estimating guides, and prior similar estimates, as appropriate. Both capital and operating and maintenance costs will be considered where appropriate. In addition, potential future remedial action costs will be included to the extent they can be determined. Present worth analyses will be used to evaluate expenditures that occur over different time periods, so that costs for different remedial alternatives can be compared on common basis. Alternatives may be screened out that will have excessive costs compared to the overall effectiveness, or which provide similar effectiveness and implementability as another alternative but at a significantly greater cost. ctVCVOR25S/020.51 6.76 17 June 1991 Site Maneagement Plan DRAFT Elelson Mir Force Bas. •Evaluation of Innovative Alternatives. Innovative technologies are those that are fully developed but lack sufficient cost or performance data for routine use at CERCLA sites. Therefore, it is unlikely that alternatives that incorporate innovative technologies will be evaluated to the degree of detail, with respect to effectiveness, implementability, and cost, to which available technologies are subjected. Innovative technologies will be carried through the screening steps if they offer the potential for comparable or superior performance or implementability, fewer or less adverse impacts than other available approaches, or lower cost for similar levels of performance than demonstrated treatment technologies. The need for treatability studies on any retained innovative technologies will be determined at this time. • Verification of Action-Specific ARARs. At the conclusion of screening, the ARARs previously identified will be refined by project staff with input from EPA and ADEC. • Reevaluation of Data Needs. Once the field of alternatives has been narrowed, the need fear any~ treatability testing will be apparent. Additional site characterization data needs may also be identified during the alternatives screening phase. Further details can be found in the interim final EPA RI/FS guidance (1983a). WVCVOF2SS/020.51 6.77 17 June 1991 Site M~anagement Plan DRAFT Eoi.Mon Air For"e Bess 6.3.3.5 Detailed Evaluation of Feasible Site Alternatives The detailed evaluation of feasible site alternati',es provides the basis for-identifying a preferred alternative and preparing the remedial action plan and record of decision (ROD). The detailed analysis of alternatives consists of further definition of each alternative (if appropriate), an evaluation using criteria specified in EPA's Interim Final RI/FS Guidance Document (U.S. EPA, 1988), and a comparative analysis among each of the alternatives that will facilitate the selection of a remedial action. During the detailed analysis, each alternative will be reviewed -to determine whether additional definition is required to apply the evaluation criteria consistently and to develop order-of- magnitude cost estimates (-30 to +50 percent). Information developed to further define alternatives at this stage may include preliminary design calculations, process flow diagrams, sizing of key process components, preliminary layouts, and a discussion of limitations, assumptions, and uncertainties concerning each alternative. Information collected from treatability studies, if conducted, will also be used to further define applicable alternatives. Seven evaluation criteria will serve as the basis for conducting the detailed analysis and for subsequent selection of a cost- effective and protective, corrective measure. The evaluation criteria are: ctVCVOR259/020.51 6.78 . 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFTr VEI.Ion Air Force Bae" * short-term effectiveness * long-term effectiveness and permanence * reduction of toxicity, mobility, or volume * implementability * cost * compliance with ARARs * overall protection of human health and the environment • st2te acceptance * community acceptance. These crfteria encompass technical, cost, and institutional considerations, compliance with specific promulgated requirements, and environrrental and health protection. An assessment of whether an alternative provides adequate overall protection of human health and the environment, complies with ARARs, or provides grounds for invoking a statutory waiver, will be provided for each alternative. The key tradeoffs or concerns among alternatives will generally be based on the evaluations of short-term effectiveness; long-term effectiveness and permanence; reduction of toxicity, mobility, and volume; implementability; and cost. Overall protection and compliance with ARARs serve as a threshold determination in that they either will or will not be met. 6.3.3.6 Ranking of Feasible Site Alternatives Following the detailed evaluation of alternatives, a ranking will be prepared for each of the evaluation criteria. The feasible WCtVOR259IO20.51 6.79 17 June 1991 Sif.Manae menl Plan DRAFT Elelson Air Force Bas. alternatives will be ranked on the basis of expected performance for each criteria. The rankings will then be combined to produce a cumulative ranking. The weighting of criteria will be in the order of protectiveness, implementability, and cost. Factors such as the capacity of the alternative to be adapted to changed conditions, and the inclusion of innovative technology, will be considered. On the basis of the ranking, a preferred remedial action alternative will be selected. 6.3.3.7 Feasibility Study Report Feasibility study reports will be prepared for each operable unit and for the Site to document major steps and decision points in the assembly, development, and screening of alternatives. The format will be similar to the outline presented below: Introduction. This section will provide background information summarized from the RI reports on the overall Site and operable unit. An important part of this section will be a discussion of the interaction between operable units and how the remedies are perceived to be integrated into the overall Site FS and eventual cleanup. Identification and Screening of Technologies. This section will discuss the remedial goals and objectives for each medium of interest in the OU. Pertinent * ~~~~~~~~~~information will include risk based cleanup levels, WtCVOR259/020.51 6.80 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Elalson Air Force Base ARARS, and contaminants of interest. This section will also present the evaluation of general response actions and technologies. Development and Screening of Alternatives. This section will describe the rationale and procedures for combining technologies into alternai~ves. This will be followed by a documentation of the screening procedures (effectiveness, implementability, and cost). Detailed Analysis of Alternatives. The analysis of individual alternatives against the nine criteria will be presented as a narrative accompanied by a summary matrix that assesses each alternative with respect to the criteria. Ranking of Feasible Site Alternatives. The comparative ranking of the feasible site alternatives for each of the evaluation criteria will be presented. A cumulative ranking will be developed, resulting in the identification of a preferred alternative. 6.4 SOURCE EVALUATION REPORTS There are 34 source areas that have been organized into three SER groups: A, B, and C. Each of these groups contains a subset of source areas, as shown in Table 6.10. The locations of the SER areas are shown in Figure 3.1. The rationale for the organization of the SERs are as follows: ct/CV0R259/020.51 6.81 17 June 1991 SNt. Maneagemient Plan DRAFT . El~~eleon Air Force Base TABLE 6.10. Source Evaluation Report Groups Group A (8) Group B (10) Group C (16) LFO7--Test Landfill LFO2--Old Base Landfill LFO1 -- Original Base ______Landfill ST12--JP-4 Spill LFOS--Old Army Landfill 5T1 5--Multiproduct Fuel ______Lin e STi17--Canal Pipeline Spill LFO6--Old Landfill ST16-MOGAS Fuel Line ______S p ill DP28--Fly Ash Disposal FTO8--Fire Training Area SD21, SID22, SD23, S024--Road Oiling Source Areas WP33--Treated Effluent 0P29--Drum Burial Site SS30 and SS31 -- PCB Infiltration Pond Storage Source Areas DP4O--Powerplant Sludge WP32--Sewage Treatment SS41 -- Old Auto Hobby Pit Plant Spill Shop O ~~P055--Birch Lakes Burial SS35--Asphalt Mixing Area ST56--Engineer Hill Fuel Site Spill S562--Garrison Slough SS42--Miscellaneous SS57--Fire Station Storage and Disposal Parking Lot SS47--Commissary ST58--Old QM Service ______Parking Lot Fuel Spill Station WP6O--New Auto Hobby SS61 -- Vehicle Shop Maintenance Building ______32 13 SS63--Asphalt Lake Spill ______S ite SS64--Trans Maintenance ______S pill S ite cVCV0R257/056.51 6.82 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT Elelson Air Force Base SER A--Areas where, based on available information, it is likely no further action or perhaps only limited monitoring will be required. * SER B--Areas where an incomplete RI/ES has been conducted, but where enough information exists to decide whether it becomes an SER A soarce area or will become part of an OU for an RI/FS assessment. * SER C--Areas where limited sampling information is available. More investigation and possibly sampling will be required to determine whether a remedial action is required. EPA is presently in the process of developing SER program0 guidance for CEROLA investigations. Elelson AFB has been notified by EPA that subsequent work at the SERs should be conducted under the new guidance, and EPA recommended that the SER investigations be deferred until it is completed. Therefore, a development of a work plan for these evaluations will also be deferred until guidance is available. 6.5 INTERIM ACTIONS To support a decision to proceed with the remedies, it is the goal of EBelson AFB to implement necessary remedial actions as soon as the data are collected and evaluated. Under the current RIIFS schedule, the final FS for the Site will not be completed until the end of 1994. Therefore, Eielson AFB will utilize interim actions (IA) ct/CVOR259/020.51 6.83 17 June 1991 Shte Management Plan DRAFT Eielson Air Force ease to expedite cleanup of the Site. A discussion of the considerations surrounding an IA is presented in the following paragraphs. Interim actions are initiated to respond to an immediate environmental threat or to take advantage of an opportunity leading to a significant risk reduction quickly. This will typically involve source controi, temporary storage of contaminated materials, or containment of groundwater plumes. For example, an IA may be useful in a potential drinking water aquifer where contamination above the MCLs indicates that remediation of the aquifer is necessary. Quick remedial actions in these cases may be important to prevent further spread of the contaminant plume in a potential drinking source while a final groundwater remedy is selected. Neither a complete baseline risk assessment nor a complete ES is required under an IA. The only requirement for implementation of an IA is there must be enough data to demonstrate a potential for risk and a need to take action. Data to support the interim action decision can be extracted form the ongoing RIIFS process. A focused feasibility study describing the technical basis for selecting the IA is sufficient; not needed in this case are development of alternatives and detailed evaluation against the nine criteria mandated in the NCP. However, the IA must be consistent with remedial goals and objectives for the Site. Also, it is important to recognize that an IA does not preclude implementation of the final expected Site WCtcVOR2591020.51 6.84 17 June 1991 Site Management mlan DRAFT Eleleon Air Force Base remedy as selected in accordance with the NOP. That is, if the IA is to become part of the long-term Site remedy, ft must be incorporated into the FS process at a later time. Therefore, the decision to proceed with an IA is not insignificant. The decision to proceed or abort will involve source-specific and sitewide risk assessment and ES considerations. Implementation of an IA is expected to occur in the following manner: 1. An imminent threat or opportunity to contain a groundwater plume is identified in one of the OU or SER investigations. 2. Documentation of the situation, including the nature of the problem, available data, apparent ecological and human health risks, and potential remedies, will be developed and distributed to the appropriate management, risk assessment, and feasibility study staff. 3. The RI/ES staff along with the Eielson AFB management team will decide whether or not to propose an IA to the agencies. Typically, the agencies will request a statement of work (SOW) that describes the proposed action. 4. The agencies and Eielson AEB will modify the SOW until a mutually satisfactory scope of work is reached and a decision to proceed is made. Depending on the scope of the work, EPA will either issue an administrative order or modify the FFA to include the IA. CVCVORt259/020.51 6.85 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Eieleon Air Force Bse 0 ~~~~~~5.Elelson AFB proceeds with the IA. 6. The [A is incorporated into the source-specific and sitewide FSs. If the IA is an ongoing activity, such as groundwater extraction and treatment, then the decision to stop, modify, or continue this activity will be made in the ES. 6.6 RECORD OF DECISION Upon completion of each OU final RI/FS document, the U.S. Air Force, as the lead agency responsible for implementation of the requirements of the Eielson AFIB Federal Facility Agreement, will prepare a Record of Decision presenting the response actions selected for implementation. The ROD will provide a description of the selected actions, the reasons for their selection, and the expected remedial benefits. The remedial actions specified in the Record of Decision will be jointly agreed upon by the EPA, ADEC, and USAF in accordance with procedures prescribed in the FFA. Each final ROD will be signed by representatives of the signatories to the FFA. A similar sequence will be followed for the sitewide Record of -Decision to be issued upon completion of all operable unit RI/FS activities. ct'0V0R259/020.51 6.86 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT EBelson Air Force Ban . ~7.0 SCHEDULE The Federal Facility Agreement requires that a draft Record of Decision for the entire EBelson Site be submitted no later than April 1, 1995. Thus, the schedule and deliverables for activities of the Site RI/FS, OU RI/FSs, and SERs are staged by milestones between now and then, as presented in Figure 7.1. Within 21 days of issuance of each ROD, the USAF will prcpose target dates for completion of secondary documents identified in Paragraph 20.7 (k)-(1) of the FFA, and deadlines for completion of draft primary documents for the remedial design and the remedial action work plan. 0 ~cVCVOR259i064.51 7.1 17 June 1991 co 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o (A~~~~V 0'm 00- (A N m >> ~- S:,rt 4- SItor 0 t, I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Stitt Star S1. 0t I' - Croft ~~~~~~~~~rof.f I Sor~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I 4. Drift~ ~ . Cof -- - - _ o Q 'ref -Cr ----- ~~~~5-- D v otwtm P Drlt raft P - ID mart~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.Fi~ . it oft Croft a - 7 -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Zf -- N - Croft - 2~~~~~~~~~~8 2 tN2 ~ ~~~~~. IF - Coft o roft o t- FF * Croft- - Croft~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0-011 ei~~~~~~~rrot ~ fncrd N I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Z She. Mane gment Plan DRAFT VElein Air Formceesa. . ~8.0 REFERENCES The references listed injbis4Section 8.1 have been cited in the main part of the SMP (Volume I) or the appendixes (Volume 1I). References listed in Section 8.2 were reviewed in preparation of the SMP but were not cited specifically. 8.1 References Cited CH-2M HILL November 1982. Installation Restoration Program Records Search for Elelson Air Farce Base, Alaska. Prepared for Air Force Engineering and Services Center, Directorate of Environmental Planning, Tyndall Air Force Base, Florida 32403 and Alaskan Air Command, Eimendorf Air Force Base, Alaska 99506. Dames and Moore. 19??. Installation Restoration Program, Phase Il-Con firmationlQuantification Stage 2. Draft Report forK Eielson Air Force Base, Alaska. Document No. ??. Dames and Moore. 1985. Installation Restoration Program, Phase li-Con firmationlQuantification Stage I. First Draft Report for EBelson Air Force Base, Alaska. Document No. F3361 5-83-D-4002. Harding Lawson Associates (HLA), 601 East 57th Place, Anchorage, Alaska 99518. February 1991. Draft Report for Eielso:i AFB, Alaska, Remedial Investigation/Feasibiliy Study, Stage 4, Installation Restoration Program. USAF Contract No. F3361 5-85-0-4536, Delivery Order No. 8. Prepared for Alaska CVOMMo1.51igs 8.1 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT Eom~en Air Fore* ha" Air Command, Elmendlorf AFB, Alaska. HSDNYAO Technical Program Manager Franz Schmidt, Capt, USAF, U.S. Air Force Health Services Division, Brooks Air Force Base, Texas 78235- 5501. Harding Lawson Associates (HLA), 601 East 57th Place, Anchorage, Alaska 99518. May 1990. Draft Report for Elelson AFB, Alasxa, Rec.i;edial InvestigationlFeaSibility Study, Stage 4, Installation Res,,ration Program. USAF Contract No. F33615-85-D-4536, Delivery Order No. 8. Prepared for Alaska Air Command, Elmendlorf AFB, Alaska. HSDIYAQ Technical Program Manager Franz Schmidt, Capt, USAF, U.S. Air Force Heath Services Division, Brooks Air Force Base, Texas 78235- 5501. Harding Lawson Associates CHLA), 601 East 57th Place, Anchorage, Alaska 99518S. April 1989. Report for Elelson AFB, Alaska, Remedial lnvestigationlFeasibifly Study, Stage 3, Installation Restoration Program. Prepared for Alaska Air Command, Elmendorf AFB, Alaska. USAF, Occupational & Environmental Health Laboratory, Technical Services Division (USAFOEHLiTS) Brooks Air Force Base, Texas 78235-5501. Hamilton, T.D., J!.L Craig, and P.V. Sellman. 1988. The Fox Permafrost Tunnel: A Late Quaternary Geologic Record in Central Alaska. Bull. Geol. Soc. Am. 100:948-969. Pewe, Troy L. 1975. Quaternary Geology of Alaska. Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office. CVOR259/Oi9si 8.2 17 June 1991 She Mfans genent P1mn DRAFT Elilo Air Force Bse. Platkin, J.L., M.T. Barbour, K.D. Porter, S.K. Gross, and R.M. Hughes. 1989. Rapid Bioassessment Protocols for Use in Streams and Rivers: Benthic Macroinvertebrates and Fish. Report No. EPN/44414-89-ol. U.S. EPA, Washington, DC. Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC). February 6, 1989. Draft Remedial Investigation Report, Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study of the Fuel Saturated Area at Eielson Air Farce Base, Alaska, U.S. Air Force installation Restoration Program. Volumes 1,11, III, submitted by Hazardous Waste Remedial Actio~ns Program, Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc. For the U.S. Department of Energy. Under Contract No. DE-ACO5-840R21400. Submitted to Alaskan Air Command, Elmendlorf Air Force Base, Alaska. Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC). February 27, 1989. Decision Document for Selected Sites, U.S. Air Force Installation Restoration Program of the Fuel Saturated Area at Eielson Air Force Base, Alaska. U.S. Air Force Installation Restoration Program. Submitted by Hazardous Waste Remed ial Actions Program, Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc. For the U.S. Department of Energy. Under Contract No. DE-A005-84oR21 400. Submitted to Alaskan Air Command, Elmendlorf Air Force Base, Alaska. Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC). November 16, 1988. Remedial Investigation of Site 25, the Weathered Sludge Tank Burial Site, at Eielson Air Force Base, Alaska, U.S. Air Force Installation Restoration Program. Submtted CVOR259/019.51 8.3 17 June 1991 site Men. p-mai PlanDRr El.mon Air Fore* an. by Hazardous Waste Remedial Actions Program, Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc. For the U.S. Department of Energy. Under Contract No. DE-ACO5-840R21 400. Submitted to Alaskan Air Command, Elmendorf Air Force Base, Alaska. Slack, K.V., R.C. Averett, P.E. Greeson, and R.G. Uipscomb. 1973. Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations of the United States Geological Survey. Chapter A4, Methods for Collection and Analysis of Aquatic Biological and Microbiological Samples, Book 5, Laboratory Analysis. Templeman-Kuiut, D.J. 1976. The Yukon Crystaline Terrane: Enigma in Canadian Cordillera. Bull. Geo/. Soc. Am. 87:1343- 1357. U.S. Air Force. March 1991. Environmental Assessment, Proposed Conversion to F-16 CID Squadron, Eielson AFB, Alaska. U.S. EPA. 1991 a. Health Effects Assessment Summary Tables (HEAST), Fourth Quarter, FY-1990, (OERR 9200.6-303 (90-4). U.S. EPA. 1991 b. Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) (for microcomputers), Volume 3: Issue 4, NTIS PB9O-591 330, October. U.S. EPA. Region X. November 1989. Statement of Work for the RILES Environmental Evaluation of Super'und Sites. U.S. EPA. March 1989. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund, Environmental Evaluation Manual. Volume 11,Interim CVOR259/019.51 8.4 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRA. Ejelsan Air Force Bse A.. Final EPA,1540/11-89-001, Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, Washington D.C. U.S. EPA. 1988. Guidance for Conducting Remedial Investigations and Feasibility Studies Under CERCLA, Interim Final, OSWER Directive 4355.3-01, EPAI540IG-89/004, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. U.S. EPA. August 1988. Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Aluminum. PB388-245998. U.S. Department of Commerce, National-Technical Information Source. U.S. EPA. 1987. Data Quality Objectives for Remedial Response Activities: Volume /, Development Process, EPAI540IG-871003, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency/Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, Washington, D.C. U.S. EPA. 1983. Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes. EPA-60014-79-020, Cincinnati, Ohio. U.S. EPA. 1982. Sampling Protocols for Collecting Surface Water, Bed Sediment, Bivalves, and Fish for Priority Pollutant Analysis. Final Report. Office of Water Regulations and Standards, U.S. EPA, Washington, DC. Weber, C.J., Ed., 1973. Biological and Laboratory Methods for Measuring the Quality of Surface Water and Effluents. EPA-67014- 73-001, Cincinnati, Ohio. CVOR259/01 9.51 8.5 17 June 1991 SnO iiihigemat Plan DRAFT7 Eoleln Air force Base 8.2 References -Not Cited CH2M HILL, 229 Peachtree Street, NE, Atlanta, Georgia 30303. May 1991. Remedial lnvestigationlFeasibility Study, Tier 1 Work Plan, Zone 1, Operable Unit 2Z Robins Air Force Base, Warner Robins, Georgia, Hazardous Waste Remedial Actions Program, U.S. Air Force Installation Restoration Program. Operated by Martin Marietta Energy. Systems, Inc. For the U.S. Department of Energy. Under Genera! Task Order No. 182-97777C, Amendment No. 3. Prepared for Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37831. Harding Lawson Associates, 601 East 57th Place, Anchorage, Alaska 99518. October 1990. Draft Report for Elelson AFB, Alaska, Remedial InvestigationlFeasibility Study, Stage 4, Installation Restoration Program. USAF Contract No. F33615-85-D-4536, Delivery Order No. 8. Prepared for Alaska Air Command, Elmendlorf AFB3, Alaska. HSDIYAQ Technical Program Manager Franz Schmidt, Capt. USAF, U.S. Air Force Health Services Division, Brooks Air Force Base, Texas 78235- 5501. Hazardous Materials Technical Center, The Dynamic Building, 11 140 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. June 1986. Statement of Work for Phase NV-A Remedial Action Plan, Eielson Air Force Base, Alaska, Installation Restoration Piogram. Submitted to Air Force Engineering Service Center, AFESC/DEV, Tiyndall Air Force Base, Florida. avoiois01.51 8.6 17 June 1991 Site Management Plan DRAFT Eleleon Air Force Baae Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC). March 1989. Initial Screening of Remedial Technologies and Process Options, Feasibility Study of the Fuel Saturated Area at Eie/son Air Force Base, Alaska, U.S. Air Force Installation Restoration Program. Submitted by Hazardous Waste Remedial Actions Program, Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc. For the U.S. Department of Energy. Under Contract No. DE-ACO5-840R21 400. Submitted to Alaskan Air Command, Elmendorf Air Force Base, Alaska. Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC). April 1989a. Development and Evaluation of Alternatives, Feasibility Study of the Fuel Saturated Area at Eielson Air Force Base, Alaska, U.S. Air Force Installation Restoration Pro gram. Submitted by Hazardous Waste Remedial Actions Program, Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc. For the U.S. Department of Energy. Under Contract No. DE-ACO5-840R21 400. Submitted to Alaskan Air Command, Elmendorf Air Force Base, Alaska. Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC). April 1989b. Feasibility Study Report, Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study of Site 25, the Weathered Sludge Tank Burial Site at Eielson Air Force Base, Alaska, U.S. Air Force Installation Restoration Program. Submitted by Hazardous Waste Remedial Actions Program, Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc. For the U.S. Department of Energy. Under Contract No. DE-AC05-840R21 400. Submitted to Alaskan Air Command, Elmendorf Air Force Base, Alaska. CVOF259o019.51 8.7 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT'' Eoiaon Air Force Base Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC). May 1989. Detailed Analysis of Alternatives, Feasibility Study of the Fuel Saturated Area at Elelson Air Force Base, Alaska, U.S: Air Force Installation Restoration Pro gram. Submitted by Hazardous Waste Remedial Actions Program, Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc. For the U.S. Department of Energy. Under Contract No. DE-ACOS-84OR.21400. Submitted to Alaskan Air Command, Elmendorf Air Force Base, Alaska. Smith, Ellen 0., and L.W. Barnthouse, Environmental Sciences Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37831. 1987. User's Manual for the Harm /l Site Rating System, Environmental Sciences Division, Publication No. ____ P'repared for U.S. Air Force Occupational and Environmental Health Laboratory, Brooks Air Force Base, Texas 78235, Project Officers: Dee Ann Sanders and George New. Oak Ridge National Laboratory is operated by Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc. for the U.S. Department of Energy. Under Contract No. DE-ACO5-840R21 400. Southwest Division, Naval Facilities, Engineering Command, 1220 Pacific Highway, San Diego, California 92132-5190. February 28, 1991. Draft Final Sampling and Analysis Plan, Marine Corps Air Station El Toro, El Toro, California, Installation Restoration Program. Through Contract No. N6871 1-89-D-9296, CTO No. 001 8, Document Control No. CLE-C0l -01 F01 8-B35-0003. With Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc., 365-5 Nobel Drive, Suite 200, San Diego, California 92122P. In association with International Technology Corporation, CH2M HILL, Grigsby/Graves. CVOMss9oi19.51 8.8 17 June 1991 Sit. Management Plan DRAFT EMlson Air Force See* State of Alaska, Department of Environmental Conservation and The Board of Storage Tank Assistance. March 20, 1991. Public Review Draft (For purposes of permanent adoption), Underground Storage Tanks, Emergency Regulations. 18 AAC 78. Effective: March 25 - July 22, 1991. CvOR259/019.51 8.9 17 June 1991 I~~~~~I 'If~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~' I ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ z~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~J No ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Lu0 , ~~~~~~~~~i~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,O ~~,o*8tfl~fl D s""' - '¾-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~mn 1 t- ½~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~2 .7, 4 -. ' _____ "'N J'"" ' p yIN - '~'I '0~~~~~~~ ' \ L ,/' A ~/~ " ! * > j I "N" 3 N./?½,Q~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~i 10~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0~ K~~~~'.*'".Ž'-. - / I 3/'~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ gi~~~~~~~~x