DOCSLIB.ORG

Final Vapor Intrusion Study Report for Joint Base Elmendorf–Richardson Restoration Program Sites, Alaska

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Final Vapor Intrusion Study Report for Joint Base Elmendorf–Richardson Restoration Program Sites, Alaska FINAL VAPOR INTRUSION STUDY REPORT FOR JOINT BASE ELMENDORF–RICHARDSON RESTORATION PROGRAM SITES, ALASKA Prepared for: Department of the Air Force 722 ESS/PKB 2261 Hughes Avenue, Suite 163 Lackland Air Force Base, TX 78236-9853 Contract FA8903-08-D-8772 Task Order 0066 Prepared by: HydroGeoLogic, Inc. 581 Boston Mills Road, Suite 600 Hudson, OH 44236 June 2018 FINAL VAPOR INTRUSION STUDY REPORT FOR JOINT BASE ELMENDORF–RICHARDSON RESTORATION PROGRAM SITES, ALASKA Prepared for: Department of the Air Force 722 ESS/PKB 2261 Hughes Avenue, Suite 163 Lackland Air Force Base, TX 78236-9853 Contract FA8903-08-D-8772 Task Order 0066 Prepared by: HydroGeoLogic, Inc. 581 Boston Mills Road, Suite 600 Hudson, OH 44236 June 2018 This page was intentionally left blank. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................. 1-1 1.1 SCOPE OF WORK ....................................................................... 1-1 1.2 PROJECT OBJECTIVES ............................................................... 1-2 1.3 PROJECT ORGANIZATION .......................................................... 1-2 2.0 BACKGROUND ................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 JBER REGULATORY HISTORY .................................................... 2-1 2.1.1 Installation History ............................................................ 2-1 2.1.2 Regulatory Background ...................................................... 2-2 2.1.3 National Priorities Listing ................................................... 2-3 2.2 JBER PHYSICAL SETTING ........................................................... 2-5 2.2.1 Climate .......................................................................... 2-5 2.2.2 Regional Geology.............................................................. 2-5 2.2.3 Surficial Geology .............................................................. 2-6 2.2.4 JBER-E Hydrogeology ....................................................... 2-7 2.2.5 JBER-R Hydrogeology ....................................................... 2-8 2.2.6 Surface Water .................................................................. 2-9 3.0 INITIAL SCREENING ........................................................................... 3-1 3.1 BUILDING LOCATION EVALUATION ........................................... 3-1 3.2 BUILDING USE EVALUATION ..................................................... 3-2 3.3 BUILDING DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION EVALUATION ............... 3-2 3.4 POTENTIAL BUILDINGS OF INTEREST LIST ................................. 3-3 3.5 CHEMICALS OF INTEREST ......................................................... 3-3 4.0 BUILDING SURVEYS ........................................................................... 4-1 4.1 BUILDING SURVEY PROCEDURES .............................................. 4-1 4.2 BUILDING SURVEY COMPLETION STATUS .................................. 4-2 4.3 BUILDING SURVEY FINDINGS .................................................... 4-3 4.3.1 High Priority ................................................................... 4-3 4.3.2 Moderate Priority .............................................................. 4-4 4.3.3 Low Priority .................................................................... 4-4 5.0 BUILDINGS OF INTEREST .................................................................... 5-1 5.1 JBER-E BUILDINGS OF INTEREST ................................................ 5-1 5.1.1 Site CG704 ..................................................................... 5-1 5.1.2 Site DP098 ...................................................................... 5-2 5.1.3 Site FT023 ...................................................................... 5-2 5.1.4 Site SD029 ...................................................................... 5-3 5.1.5 Site SS022 ...................................................................... 5-3 5.1.6 Site ST032 ...................................................................... 5-3 5.1.7 Site ST036 ...................................................................... 5-3 Air Force Civil Engineer Center i TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Page 5.1.8 Site ST037 North .............................................................. 5-4 5.1.9 Site ST037 South .............................................................. 5-5 5.1.10 Sites ST037 Slammer Avenue/TU091 ..................................... 5-6 5.1.11 Site ST048 ...................................................................... 5-7 5.1.12 Site ST068 ...................................................................... 5-8 5.2 JBER-R BUILDINGS OF INTEREST ................................................ 5-8 5.2.1 Site DA089 ..................................................................... 5-8 5.2.2 Site TU064 ...................................................................... 5-9 6.0 DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVES .............................................................. 6-1 6.1 STATE THE PROBLEM ............................................................... 6-1 6.2 IDENTIFY THE GOALS OF THE STUDY ........................................ 6-2 6.3 IDENTIFY INFORMATION INPUTS ............................................... 6-3 6.4 DEFINE THE BOUNDARIES OF THE STUDY .................................. 6-3 6.5 DEVELOP THE ANALYTIC APPROACH ........................................ 6-4 6.6 SPECIFY PERFORMANCE OR ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA .................. 6-5 6.7 DEVELOP THE DETAILED PLAN FOR OBTAINING DATA ............... 6-6 7.0 FIELD DATA COLLECTION SUMMARY ................................................. 7-1 7.1 FIELD SAMPLING PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION ......................... 7-1 7.2 GENERAL IMPLEMENTATION .................................................... 7-1 7.2.1 Field Staffing ................................................................... 7-1 7.2.2 VI Sample Duration ........................................................... 7-1 7.2.3 Atmospheric Conditions and Ambient Air Monitoring ................. 7-2 7.2.4 VI Sample Documentation ................................................... 7-2 7.2.5 VI Sampling Equipment Protection ........................................ 7-3 7.3 FIELD SAMPLING PROCEDURES ................................................. 7-3 7.3.1 Ambient Air .................................................................... 7-4 7.3.2 Soil Gas ......................................................................... 7-4 7.3.2.1 Sub-Slab Soil Gas Sampling ................................... 7-4 7.3.2.2 Near-Slab Soil Gas Sampling .................................. 7-5 7.4 JBER-E SITES SAMPLING DESIGN AND RATIONALE...................... 7-5 7.4.1 Site CG704 ..................................................................... 7-6 7.4.1.1 Building 8691 ..................................................... 7-6 7.4.2 Site DP098 ...................................................................... 7-6 7.4.2.1 Building 18220 ................................................... 7-6 7.4.2.2 Building 18224 ................................................... 7-6 7.4.3 Site FT023 ...................................................................... 7-7 7.4.3.1 Building 17534 ................................................... 7-7 7.4.4 Site SD029 ...................................................................... 7-7 7.4.4.1 Building 16716 ................................................... 7-7 7.4.5 Site SS022 ...................................................................... 7-7 Air Force Civil Engineer Center ii TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Page 7.4.5.1 Building 12755 ................................................... 7-7 7.4.6 Site ST032 ...................................................................... 7-8 7.4.6.1 Building 13272 ................................................... 7-8 7.4.7 Site ST036 ...................................................................... 7-8 7.4.7.1 Building 27369 ................................................... 7-8 7.4.8 Site ST037 North .............................................................. 7-8 7.4.8.1 Building 6211 ..................................................... 7-8 7.4.8.2 Building 7228 ..................................................... 7-9 7.4.8.3 Building 7265 ..................................................... 7-9 7.4.8.4 Building 7309 ..................................................... 7-9 7.4.8.5 Building 8288 ................................................... 7-10 7.4.8.6 Building 8326 ................................................... 7-10 7.4.9 Site ST037 South ............................................................ 7-10 7.4.9.1 Building 4228 ................................................... 7-10 7.4.9.2 Building 4230 ................................................... 7-11 7.4.9.3 Building 4314 ................................................... 7-11 7.4.9.4 Buildings 5208A/5211A ...................................... 7-11 7.4.9.5 Building 5223 ................................................... 7-12 7.4.10 Sites ST037 Slammer Avenue/TU091 ................................... 7-12 7.4.10.1 Building 7535 ................................................... 7-12 7.4.10.2 Building 8515 ................................................... 7-12 7.4.10.3 Building 8559 ................................................... 7-13 7.4.10.4 Building 8574 ................................................... 7-13 7.4.11 Site
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Black History in the Last Frontier
    Black History in the Last History Black Frontier Black History Black History in the Last Frontier provides a chronologically written narrative to encompass the history of African Americans in in the Last Frontier Alaska. Following an evocative foreword from activist and community organizer, Ed Wesley, the book begins with a discussion of black involvement in the Paciÿc whaling industry during the middle and late-nineteenth century. It then discusses how the Gold Rush and the World Wars shaped Alaska and brought thousands of black migrants to the territory. °e ÿnal chapters analyze black history in Alaska in our contemporary era. It also presents a series of biographical sketches of notable black men and women who passed through or settled in Alaska and contributed to its politics, culture, and social life. °is book highlights the achievements and contributions of Alaska’s black community, while demonstrating how these women and men have endured racism, fought injustice, and made a life and home for themselves in the forty-ninth state. Indeed, what one then ÿnds in this book is a history not well known, a history of African Americans in the last frontier. Ian C. Hartman / Ed Wesley C. Hartman Ian National Park Service by Ian C. Hartman University of Alaska Anchorage With a Foreword by Ed Wesley Black History in the Last Frontier by Ian C. Hartman With a Foreword by Ed Wesley National Park Service University of Alaska Anchorage 1 Hartman, Ian C. Black History in the Last Frontier ISBN 9780996583787 National Park Service University of Alaska Anchorage HIS056000 History / African American Printed in the United States of America Edited by Kaylene Johnson Design by David Freeman, Anchorage, Alaska.
    [Show full text]
  • R. Local Government Profile
    2020 Approved General Government Operating Budget Appendix R Local Government Profile Geography Anchorage is located in south central Alaska situated on a broad plain at the head of the Cook Inlet. It lies slightly farther north than Oslo, Stockholm, Helsinki and St. Petersburg. • Anchorage According to the United States Census Bureau, the Juneau municipality has a total area of 1980 square miles. Organization In 1975, the citizens of the Anchorage area ratified a Home Rule Charter for a unified municipal government. Under the Municipal Charter, the City of Anchorage, incorporated in 1920, the Greater Anchorage Are Borough, incorporated in 1964, and two small incorporated communities, Girdwood and Glen Alps were dissolved as of September 15, 1975, and the Municipality became their legal successor. Being a unified home rule municipality, the Municipality is responsible for a wide range of public services that are commonly provided through both a city and a county government. The chief executive officer of the Municipality is the Mayor, who is elected at-large to a three- year term and who may not serve more than two consecutive terms. Subject to confirmation by the Assembly, the Mayor appoints the Municipal Manager, the Municipal Attorney, the Chief Fiscal Officer, and all head of municipal departments. The Mayor may participate, but may not vote, in meetings of the Assembly. The Mayor may veto ordinances passed by the Assembly, and veto, strike or reduce budget or appropriation measure line items. A minimum of eight members of the Assembly must vote to override a veto by the Mayor. The legislative power of the Municipality is vested in the Assembly comprised of eleven members, elected by district, to three-year staggering terms and who may not service more than three consecutive terms.
    [Show full text]
  • Bryant Army Airfield Bird-Wildlife Aircraft Strike Hazard (BASH) Plan Environmental Assessment
    Bryant Army Airfield Bird-Wildlife Aircraft Strike Hazard (BASH) Plan Environmental Assessment Final EA Alaska Army National Guard P.O. Box 5800 JBER, AK 99505 October 2018 Alaska Army National Guard Bryant Army Airfield BASH Final EA ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ORGANIZATION This Environmental Assessment (EA) evaluates the potential environmental, socioeconomic, and cultural effects of the Alaska Army National Guard’s (AKARNG’s) proposed implementation of a Bird-Wildlife Aircraft Strike Hazard (BASH) Plan for Bryant Army Airfield (BAAF), which is a component of the 73,000-acre Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson (JBER). JBER is located in Anchorage, a 1,961-square- mile unified home rule municipality in Southcentral Alaska. As required by the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA; 42 United States Code (USC) 4321 et seq.), the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) Regulations Implementing the Procedural Provisions of NEPA (40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 1500-1508), and 32 CFR Part 651 (Environmental Analysis of Army Actions, Final Rule), the potential effects of the Proposed Action are analyzed. This EA will facilitate the decision-making process by the AKARNG and the National Guard Bureau (NGB) regarding the Proposed Action and its considered alternatives, and is organized as follows: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Describes the Proposed Action and its considered alternatives; summarizes environmental, cultural, and socioeconomic consequences; and compares potential effects associated with the two considered alternatives, including the No Action Alternative. SECTION 1.0: PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION: Summarizes the purpose of and need for the Proposed Action, provides relevant background information, and describes the scope of the EA.
    [Show full text]
  • Resources Section Resources: Part One - Community Profiles
    COOK INLET SUBAREA CONTINGENCY PLAN RESOURCES SECTION RESOURCES: PART ONE - COMMUNITY PROFILES .................................................................................... B-3 A. Regional Organizations .............................................................................................. B-3 B. Community Profiles ................................................................................................... B-5 RESOURCES: PART TWO – EQUIPMENT ................................................................................................. B-103 A. Commercially Available Equipment ...................................................................... B-104 B. Non-commercially available equipment ............................................................... B-107 C. Industry spill cooperative equipment ................................................................... B-110 RESOURCES: PART THREE - INFORMATION DIRECTORY ....................................................................... B-111 A. Airports and Air Services ....................................................................................... B-111 B. Bird and Wildlife Response ................................................................................... B-115 C. Contractors: BOA and Term .................................................................................. B-116 D. Historic Properties Protection ............................................................................... B-117 E. Emergency Services/ managers ...........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • A. Existing Conditions Analysis
    A p p e n d i x A PHASE ONE REPORT : E x i s t i n g C o n d i t i o n s A n a l y s i s Prepared by: Moore Iacofano Goltsman, Inc. Economic and Planning Systems Kittelson & Associates Land Design North Northern Economics RIM Architects Shannon & Wilson, Inc. TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents 3 List of Diagrams 6 1 Overview 1 1.1 Introduction 1 1.1.1 Project Background 1 1.1.2 Planning Process 2 1.2 Vision and Goals 2 1.3 Opportunities and Constraints Analysis Diagram 3 1.3.1 Description of Key Elements 3 2 Natural, Cultural and Social Analysis 6 2.1 Overview 6 2.2 Key Planning Issues, Considerations and Opportunities 6 2.3 Natural Setting and Open space Conditions 6 2.3.1 Open Space System 6 2.3.2 Downtown Parks and Natural Systems 7 2.4 Historic and Cultural Influences 8 2.4.1 History of the Municipality 8 2.4.2 Cultural Influences 8 2.4.3 Downtown Cultural Events 9 2.5 Social Impacts 9 2.5.1 Streetscape Environment 9 2.5.2 Homelessness/Transient Populations 9 2.5.3 State/Regional Vehicular Traffic 10 2.5.4 Parking Limitations 10 2.5.5 Lack of Public Gathering Space 10 3 Land Use and Development Analysis 11 3.1 Overview 11 3.2 Key Planning Issues, Considerations and Opportunities 11 3.2.1 Commercial / Retail 13 3.2.2 Residential 14 3.2.3 Government/Office 14 3.2.4 Visitor Serving Commercial Land Uses 15 3.2.5 Civic/Cultural Uses 15 3.2.6 Transportation-Related Uses 16 3.2.7 Industrial Uses 16 3.2.8 Institutional Uses 17 3.3 On-Going Projects Affecting Downtown 17 3.3.1 Overview 17 3.3.2 Key Planning Issues/Considerations/Opportunities
    [Show full text]
  • S. Local Government Profile
    2021 Approved General Government Operating Budget Appendix S Local Government Profile Geography Anchorage is located in south central Alaska situated on a broad plain at the head of the Cook Inlet. It lies slightly farther north than Oslo, Stockholm, Helsinki and St. Petersburg. • Anchorage According to the United States Census Bureau, the Juneau municipality has a total area of 1980 square miles. Organization In 1975, the citizens of the Anchorage area ratified a Home Rule Charter for a unified municipal government. Under the Municipal Charter, the City of Anchorage, incorporated in 1920, the Greater Anchorage Are Borough, incorporated in 1964, and two small incorporated communities, Girdwood and Glen Alps were dissolved as of September 15, 1975, and the Municipality became their legal successor. Being a unified home rule municipality, the Municipality is responsible for a wide range of public services that are commonly provided through both a city and a county government. The chief executive officer of the Municipality is the Mayor, who is elected at-large to a three- year term and who may not serve more than two consecutive terms. Subject to confirmation by the Assembly, the Mayor appoints the Municipal Manager, the Municipal Attorney, the Chief Fiscal Officer, and all head of municipal departments. The Mayor may participate, but may not vote, in meetings of the Assembly. The Mayor may veto ordinances passed by the Assembly, and veto, strike or reduce budget or appropriation measure line items. A minimum of eight members of the Assembly must vote to override a veto by the Mayor. The legislative power of the Municipality is vested in the Assembly comprised of eleven members, elected by district, to three-year staggering terms and who may not service more than three consecutive terms.
    [Show full text]
  • Contents 9770.3 – Cook Inlet
    Contents 9770.3 – Cook Inlet .............................................................................................................. 2 9770.3.1 – Alexander Creek ........................................................................................ 5 9770.3.2 – Anchor Point ............................................................................................. 7 9770.3.3 – Anchorage/Municipality of Anchorage ..................................................... 8 9770.3.4 – Big Lake ................................................................................................... 12 9770.3.5 – Butte ........................................................................................................ 13 9770.3.6 - Chickaloon ............................................................................................... 15 9770.3.7 – Chugiak .................................................................................................... 18 9770.3.8 – Clam Gulch .............................................................................................. 20 9770.3.9 – Cohoe ...................................................................................................... 21 9770.3.10 – Cooper Landing ..................................................................................... 22 9770.3.11 – Crown Point .......................................................................................... 24 9770.3.12 – Curry .....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Anchorage Historic Preservation Commission INTERPRETIVE PLAN
    South Addition Government Hill FOUR ORIGINAL NEIGHBORHOODS Fairview INTERPRETIVE PLAN DowntownD t Ship Creek Anchorage Historic Preservation Commission Municipality of Anchorage ANCHORAGE’S ANCHORAGE’S 2015 ANCHORAGE’S FOUR ORIGINAL NEIGHBORHOODS 2015 INTERPRETIVE PLAN Anchorage is one of the few cities in the world where you can see dog mushing throughout the city. Prepared for: The Municipality of Anchorage and the Historic Preservation Commission Prepared by: The Municipality of Anchorage and Alaska State Parks Interpretation and Education Program Funded by: Anchorage Historic Preservation Commission CONTENTS 1. Introduction . 3 Purpose and Need . 4 Planning Process ......................................................................................5 Interpreting History and Culture .........................................................................6 2. Historical Context. 9 3. Four Original Neighborhoods ..................................................................19 Government Hill ...................................................................................... 19 Downtown. 22 South Addition ....................................................................................... 24 Fairview* . 27 Landmarks to Save ................................................................................... 30 Ship Creek . 31 4. Interpretive Themes ............................................................................35 Interpretive Equation ..................................................................................35
    [Show full text]
  • Anchorage 2020 Plan
    CHAPTER 2 Anchorage Today Population Economy Land Use Forecasts for Planning Infrastructure ANCHORAGE 2020 Anchorage Bowl Comprehensive Plan 2 Anchorage Today Before realistic plans can be made for future hood, from 83,000 in 1960 to more than 259,000 today. development, it is essential to fi rst understand what the Between 1990 and 1999, Anchorage added almost Anchorage Bowl is like today, how it got that way, 33,000 residents, less than in any other decade since and how it is likely to change in the future. This chap- 1950. Still, its average annual growth rate for the past ter assesses existing population and economic condi- decade was greater than that of most metropolitan tions, recent trends, and makes projections for probable areas in the nation. future growth. It contains analyses of land use trends The Municipality of Anchorage accounted for and land suitability, plus the location, amount and nearly half of the State’s population growth in the zoning of vacant land. These analyses are needed to 1990s, and 42 percent of the State’s population now determine how much and what types of land will be lives here. However, the Kenai Peninsula and Mata- needed to accommodate the Anchorage Bowl’s pro- nuska-Susitna Boroughs are growing more rapidly. jected population. In addition, the future impacts of In 1980, 80 percent of Southcentral Alaska’s residents projected growth on Anchorage’s public facilities, utili- lived in Anchorage, versus 71 percent in 1999. ties, and transportation systems are evaluated. Within the Municipality, the trend has been toward growth at the fringes.
    [Show full text]