Options for finding an alternative site to a monofill selected by the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation last year are limited, according to an exchange between it and the City and Borough last month.
Around 18,350 cubic yards of treated, lead-contaminated soil removed from the former Byford junkyard property last year by contractors for DEC are to be interred indefinitely in a monofill site. Sixty containers of heavier-contaminated soil and debris were barged out for reprocessing, but as the unexpectedly large project had exceeded initial budget estimates, a less-expensive solution of interring the remaining soil was decided upon. The lead present in the soil has been rendered insoluble in water using a phosphate-based compound called EcoBond, effectively reducing its ability to migrate into nearby water sources.
After reviewing local candidates for the project, a state-managed rock pit southwest of the cleanup site was selected, with work scheduled to begin in July. That was delayed after residents and local tribal and municipal governments expressed concerns about the site during a pair of meetings in August, due to the pit’s proximity to Pats Creek, which is an estimated 0.2 miles to the south.
Project coordinators have since delayed resumption of the project to April 1, giving residents a slim window to seek out an alternative to the particular rock pit selected. City manager Lisa Von Bargen’s letter was dispatched to DEC in early September with questions on how to proceed with finding an alternative site for the monofill, or resources to transport the contaminated materials off-island.
A response was received September 27 from Environmental Program manager John Halverson, and was made available to the public on October 11. Below is an abridged exchange edited for house style, with the full letter online at http://www.wrangell.com/community/state-dec-final-phase-clean-former-byford-junkyard, under “Supporting Documents.”
If an alternative on-island disposal location is identified by the community, what is the formal process required to request that DEC review the site for viability, and is funding available through ADEC to conduct the site testing necessary to determine viability?
“As you are likely aware, during 2016, DEC, the City and Borough of Wrangell, and the Department of Natural Resources (DNR), gave considerable attention to evaluating all the potential sites available in the Wrangell area that were either on City or State land.
It is DEC’s understanding that there are no other viable sites on either City or State land beyond those that were evaluated. United States Forest Service (USFS) land would not be an option, and no privately held land is likely to materialize. Other state land managed by the Division of Forestry will be strictly for forest related uses. State land was chosen in large part because the DNR had a share in the liability for contamination at the junkyard property where it had encroached onto state land. Therefore, the contribution of state land for the monofill allowed the agency to provide an in-kind contribution for the cost of the cleanup of that part of the contamination.”
The response goes on to list criteria which would make a site a strong candidate for consideration, as well as issues that would need to be addressed.
If an alternative site is found to be viable, is funding available through DEC for design and engineering of a monofill solution at the new site?
“Due to the amount of funding committed to this current location, DEC would not be able to consider an alternative location without significant additional funding from some other source. At the time of this writing, costs incurred for siting the monofill at the current location include,” $100,000 for engineering design, $112,000 for the DNR development plan and site evaluations, $63,000 for state oversight costs, and $920,000 for mobilization, permitting and site preparation. The latter two numbers have since been explained to be estimates, with costs still being processed.
The estimated cost for off-island disposal is $12 million. The current on-island disposal cost is $5.7 million. If additional funding is obtained, but is not enough to fully bridge the $6.3 million gap, would the state be willing to release additional funds?
“The state has allocated $5.7 million for the project as currently scoped. Please understand that upon the conclusion of work this fall, the remaining balance for this project will be significantly less than $5.7 million by April 1, 2018, and due to project delays this past summer, supplemental funding may be necessary to carry the project through to completion in 2018. Whatever funding remains for this project would be eligible for the effort to ship the material off-island, but the community would need to secure the balance of what is required, which will be in excess of $6.3 million and more likely around $8 million.”
If additional funding is sought for off-island disposal, what is the deadline by which those funds need to be secured?
“In order to complete shipment of all the material in 2018, a firm funding commitment would be needed at least two months prior to April 1, 2018 in order to complete the necessary procurement modifications with contractors, for contractors to coordinate, procure and ship containers to the site, and to secure a loading and staging area in Wrangell that has adequate space for storing the containers and barge access. The local shipping yard lacks this capacity.”
Commenting on the response, Von Bargen explained she has already met with Wrangell Cooperative Association, and after last week’s update to the Borough Assembly she has scheduled a joint workshop at City Hall between the two governments for October 24, at 6 p.m. The public is invited to attend to listen in.
Reader Comments(0)