Naval Weapons Station Yorktown Meeting Minutes Naval Weapons Station (WPNSTA) Yorktown Yorktown, Virginia…
Post on 23-May-2019
Embed Size (px)
Naval Weapons Station (WPNSTA) Yorktown Yorktown, Virginia and
Cheatham Annex (CAX), Williamsburg, Virginia Environmental Restoration Program (ERP) Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) Meeting
Yorktown Library Thursday, June 7, 2018; 1300-1500
Name Organization/Role Captain Matt Kosnar Commanding Officer (CO), WPNSTA Yorktown and
CAX and RAB Navy Co-Chair Steven Oyer Citizen and RAB Community Co-Chair Bryan Peed Navy Remedial Project Manager (RPM) for
WPNSTA Yorktown Cecilia Landin Navy RPM for CAX Jennifer Podbesek Navy Environmental Director for WPNSTA
Yorktown and CAX Rashmi Mathur United States Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA) RPM for WPNSTA Yorktown Chris Evans Virginia Department of Environmental Quality
(VDEQ), standing in for VDEQ RPM for WPNSTA Yorktown and CAX, Wade Smith
Stephanie Sawyer CH2M HILL Program Manager for CAX William Friedmann CH2M HILL Program Manager for WPNSTA
Yorktown Brian Wachter CH2M HILL Field Team Leader for WPNSTA
Yorktown Monica Smeal APTIM Program Manager for CAX Dave Wilburn Navy Environmental Waste Manager Jay Oliver Navy Public Works Department Thomas Olexa Navy Natural Resource Manager Tiffany Goodrich Navy NEPA Manager Nancy Rouse Citizen William Stubbs Citizen Linda Stubbs Citizen
[Note: Attachment 1 is the Public Notice for the RAB Meeting. Attachment 2 is the RAB Meeting Sign-in Sheet.]
Mr. Bryan Peed started the meeting with introductions and welcoming everyone to the meeting. Mr. Peed then gave the floor to Captain Kosnar for opening remarks. Captain Kosnar welcomed everyone and mentioned that it is important to be a good steward of the environment. Mr. Steven Oyer thanked the Navy for being transparent and mentioned that the website was up to date. Mr. Oyer also thanked the Navy for a site visit the previous week. Mr. Peed, Mr. Jay Oliver, and Mr. Thomas Olexa all attended the site visit. Captain Kosnar said that site visits with the public are good for transparency because they can confirm that photographs used in the presentations reflect current site conditions.
PRESENTATIONS WPNSTA Yorktown WPNSTA Yorktown Program Update
Mr. Peed presented an overview of the active WPNSTA Yorktown sites, the work completed since the November 2018 RAB Meeting, and the work in progress.
Mr. Peed informed the RAB on Mission Cleanup, a pilot program for streamlined communication from the Navy, USEPA, and VDEQ, and told everyone that there are basewide and site/topic-specific fact sheets for both Yorktown and CAX available. Mr. Oyer asked if fact sheets had been provided to county representatives in the area, and if not, he suggested giving the fact sheets to them as a quick reference on base environmental activities. Mr. Peed said that was a good suggestion that will be explored, as the Navy, USEPA, and VDEQ want to go above and beyond in communication to keep the public informed.
Mr. Peed reviewed the phase of the CERCLA process for the sites at Yorktown, and informed the RAB that the Yorktown team plans to perform fieldwork at seven sites and start reporting at nine sites this year. Field work has been completed at three sites since the last RAB meeting. Mr. Peed informed the RAB that since the November meeting, excavations were completed at most of the Site 24 removal areas and there were a lot of surprises. Concentrated pockets of munitions and some low level radiological material were identified. Captain Kosnar asked if Site 24 is the old airfield. Mr. Bill Friedmann said yes, the airfield ran along the northern boundary of the site. Mr. Friedmann said this area had a helicopter pad that is still present. Captain Kosnar asked what type of equipment was used to remove items within the excavated areas, and whether any munitions items found were detonated. Bryan said an excavator is typically used to remove debris, and that when munitions were found, Explosive Ordinance Disposal (EOD) was called in and work stopped until munitions personnel could be on site. Mr. Peed said there is also radiological contamination tied to these items, including electronic components, capacitors, vacuum tubes, and control boxes. Mr. Peed says the radiological concentrations are low-level; radiation safety personnel informed him that the levels here are about 10,000 times less than what you would see in a common smoke detector. Captain Kosnar asked how the ongoing work at Site 24 affects the use of the helicopter pad. Mr. Peed said were in the process of determining that now. Mr. Peed says that if the site is determined to be a radiological site, the area will require some kind of land use control (LUC), which he does not think will impact the helicopter pad. Ms. Jennifer Podbesek mentioned that there have been minimal interruptions to the training operations that take place at the site as a result of the excavation activities. In fact, Mr. Friedmann mentioned that the design of the JIEDDO course (used for training) was designed around the known site contamination.
Mr. Peed then reviewed the work completed since the last meeting and presented information on the sites with LUCs. Mr. Peed said that especially if there is a landfill with waste in place, monitoring and LUCs will always be required. Ms. Podbesek mentioned that one of the LUC sites, Site 12, is where John Pulver from Natural Resources maintains the site to be sure the cap integrity is kept up. Mr. Olexa mentioned that the LUC areas are also good habitats for natural resources and increase biodiversity on the base.
Yorktown Five-Year Review (FYR) Summary
Mr. Friedmann presented information on the purpose of a FYR and the findings of the current Yorktown FYR. Mr. Friedmann said that when a site has LUCs, then inspections are required. Mr. Friedmann reviewed the information for each of the FYR sites. Mr. Friedmann said that some of these sites, such as Site 7, only included a remedy for a very small area, and the Navy has been able to do more investigations as activities decreased and buildings were demolished; some of these sites are still being investigated for other media or a larger area than what was identified in the initial remedy. Mr. Friedmann informed the RAB that selected remedies for Sites 1,7, 12, and 19 are still protective of human health and the environment, and the remedies at Sites 6 and 22 are considered short-term protective. Mr. Oyer asked for the definition of short term in years. Mr. Friedmann answered that bringing a site back to being fully protective may not be a physical action, it sometimes requires additional data or documentation as is the case for both Site 6 and 22. In addition, the severity defines the length of time allowed to bring a site into protectiveness. The FYR includes the specific timeframe for completion, and copies are available in the Administrative Record and a hard copy is present in the library. Mr. Friedmann informed the RAB that if there is a severe deficiency in the protection of human health or the environment, work typically is completed within one year. Mr. Friedmann said that the deadline for Site 22 is to finish the RI investigation and figure out the extent of contamination, and the Navy plans to have investigations complete for Sites 6 and 22 by November 2018.
Yorktown Site 25 Field Work
Mr. Friedmann presented an overview of the recent Site 25 field activities, and he informed the RAB that field activities took place between January and April 2018. Captain Kosnar mentioned that lots of people fish at the mouth of Felgates Creek and asked if anyone saw trespassers in Felgates Creek during the field activities. Mr. Friedmann answered no trespassers were observed during the two weeks when the investigation occurred. Captain Kosnar asked what labs the samples are being sent to. Bill said that CH2M/Jacobs has multiple labs that we have bid for work so it depends on the type of analysis for the samples. However, all labs need to be approved by the DOD and EPA. Bill informed the RAB that after the Site 25 data is received, risk assessments will be conducted to see if there is any risk to human health and/or the environment. Captain Kosnar asked about the former use of this area. Mr. Friedmann said that this area was a rocket plant, consisting of mixing and testing. Mr. Friedmann said that there were mixing kettles in the northern part of the building, and as the area got less active, the contamination was investigated. Mr. Friedmann informed the RAB that initial soil and groundwater sampling occurred in 2015/2016, and before writing the remedial investigation report, additional data were required.
Transects were performed in Felgates Creek to determine where and how much groundwater contamination may be getting to the creek, and if anything was running off the surface of the site. The hillside is steep, and there are a series of channels and drainage swales. Mr. Friedmann said that pore water is a function of what is coming in from the groundwater, and sediment/surface water is a function of what is flowing over the land. Captain Kosnar asked where the boat was put into and taken out of the water. Mr. Friedmann answered that the boat was put in at Gloucester Point, a tower on the boat was removed to get through the National Parkway causeway, and the boat was parked on the shoreline by the site after the first day. Mr. Friedmann informed the RAB that pore water is a good indication from an ecological standpoint for what impact you will have on anything living in the sediment or next to the sediment. Captain Kosnar asked what lab was used for the work. Mr. Friedmann answered that multiple labs bid for work so it depends on the type of analysis for the samples. Captain Kosnar asked how many samples were collected. Mr. Friedmann said that about two dozen parent sediment samples were collected, plus another 6 to 12 samples to show that the machinery was working correctly and that the sediment samples did not get cross contaminated. Mr. Friedmann said that the pore water was tested to determine where it was actually discharging, and that determined where samples were collected, and that sediment samples came from deposition areas because the contaminants bind to finer grained material instead of to sand. Mr. Friedmann said there were about 28 sediment samples and 10 pore water samples. Mr. Friedmann said that screening is done to determine contaminant exceedances and then a risk assessment would be performed to verify the level of risk for human health and any ecological receptors, with a conclusion to be made for the risks that will have to be addressed in the future. Mr. Oyer asked if there were any surprises in the data. Mr. Friedmann answered that the results in sediment and surface water were not historically very high, and that groundwater will have to be addressed.
CAX Program Update
Ms. Cecilia Landin presented a review of the CAX ERP. She reviewed the work in progress for each site. Captain Kosnar asked if the level of contamination at Site 7 has any effect on the base drinking water. Ms. Landin said there should be no drinking water issues because drinking water at the base is provided by the city and not from groundwater on base. Ms. Landin said the only risk to contamination from groundwater may be to construction workers who may come in contact with groundwater in excavations or vapors within the excavations. Ms. Landin said that a vapor intrusion investigation will be done in the surrounding cabins at Site 7 to make sure that the indoor air quality of those cabins is not impacted. Ms. Landin mentioned that munitions and low-level radiological material were found at Site 9, stopping debris removal until an Explosives Safety Submission (ESS) is approved. Captain Kosnar asked why Penniman Lake is designated with a catch and release restriction and if there would be any future change to be able to eat the fish. Ms. Landin said the catch and release restriction is as a result of PCBs in the lake, and mentioned that what the Navy wants to be able to do with the fish will impact the extent of the remedy selected. Captain Kosnar asked if PCB concentrations in fish are going
down. Ms. Landin said that we do not know because the fish have only been sampled once to date. Captain Kosnar asked if PCBs impact the size of the fish. Mr. Olexa said that the fish have grown largely because of the catch and release restriction.
CAX Site 9 Field Work Update
Ms. Stephanie Sawyer informed the RAB that electronics debris and vegetation stored in the area had to be removed for the investigation to be completed, because soil samples had to be collected from the entire area. The Navys removal action contractor pulled all of that debris out to provide access to the concrete pad underneath to collect concrete samples and soil samples from beneath the concrete. Ms. Sawyer said the work was started last October, but that work was put on hold when munitions items were found. Ms. Sawyer said Phase 2 work occurred in the eastern half of the site that could be accessed in May 2018. Samples were collected from 28 grids, leaving 20 grids left to complete; grids were about 50 x 70. Samples were collected in 1 intervals below concrete down to 5, and if there was concrete, samples were also collected of the concrete since there were transformers, and there was historical evidence of PCB contamination between buildings CAD6 and CAD16. Ms. Sawyer said that also as part of the Phase 2 sampling, there will be sediment sampling in drainage channels that run through the site with drop inlets. Three sediment sample locations were identified at outfall #2 to determine if PCBs detected in the soil were transported to that outfall. One portion of the storm drain has been completely washed out, so an upgradient sample was included to represent the current outfall, in addition to one at the historical outfall, and another sample downgradient. Sediment sampling has not been conducted yet, and that will be completed during the mobilization to sample the remaining 20 grids. Ms. Sawyer says Phase 3 will include the installation of groundwater monitoring wells to determine if there is contamination in the groundwater. Ms. Sawyer said groundwater is assumed to flow toward the York River, and there will be two piezometers installed off site to confirm groundwater flow direction. Ms. Sawyer said one well was installed on the west while sampling the grids, and the other two wells and two piezometers will be installed in September/October along with the next mobilization for soil sampling. Phase 4 soil sampling was not done as part of Phase 2 because even though some locations have been selected, the analyses will be based on the results of Phase 2 to make sure the analysis reflects what is coming from the s...