Radium Scanning Process at Seaplane Lagoon

Radiation scanner with Seaplane Lagoon in background
Testing compartments for metals, PCBs, and DDT

Every scoop of dirt that was dredged from the Seaplane Lagoon earlier this year is first sorted into premeasured compartments.  The piles are then tested for heavy metals, PCBs, and pesticides.  But the piles cannot be tested for radium 226.

In order to test for radium, every pile has to be scooped back into a dump truck, dumped into a screening area the size of a tennis court, and graded smooth to a depth no greater than 12 inches.

Grading soil for the radiation scanner

Then an electric vehicle with a scanning rig and GPS mapping system drives back and forth over every inch at the pace of a turtle.  If any radiation is detected, it is mapped onto a computer, and then this area is scooped up and placed in a special dumpster.  This already time-consuming process was slowed even more with unexpected rains in the fall because the soil cannot be scanned for radiation when it’s wet.

There are no final numbers on how many dumpster loads have gone to a radiological disposal facility.  Most of the other soil, however, that was tested for heavy metals, PCBs, and pesticides is not even leaving Alameda Point it now meets screening standards for clean soil, and it’s being hauled out to the runway area to eventually be reused to cover the old dump known as Site 2.

Recycled soil stockpiled on Wildlife Refuge for use on Site 2 dump.

2012 – More Dredging

When the existing piles of dirt are all gone in a few weeks, it might seem like they are finally done.  But they won’t be.  In January, the second phase of dredging begins on the northwest corner of the Seaplane Lagoon.

SF Bay Estuary Plan Fails to Connect with Alameda Point

Dredging Alameda Point Channel around the clock

On Sunday, November 11, 2011, Dutra Dredging wrapped up five weeks of maintenance dredging in the channel leading to the Alameda Point docks.  This channel is on the south side of Alameda Point where the maritime ships and USS Hornet are docked.  Half of the dredge soil went to the in-bay disposal site at Alcatraz.  The other half, unfortunately, was towed 50 miles out into the ocean—past the Farallon Islands—for disposal at a federally approved disposal site.  A multi-agency effort to divert dredge material to beneficial reuse in the Bay and Delta proved ineffective in this case. Continue reading “SF Bay Estuary Plan Fails to Connect with Alameda Point”

Case Study – Soil Cleanup Process at Island High/Woodstock Child Development Center

Island High School

A Case Study in How the Cleanup Process Works

In November of 2008, after years of testing, evaluation, and one emergency soil removal action, the Navy issued the final report on what to do in the area where Island High School and Woodstock Child Development Center are located.  The area is designated Installation Restoration (IR) Site 30. The Navy’s conclusion, or proposed plan, was that no further action is required.

The following description of the process is taken from the Navy’s 2008 report and proposed plan.  It serves as a case study in how the cleanup process is conducted with regard to soil. Highlighted terms are defined in the “Cleanup Glossary” located on the tab bar above. Continue reading “Case Study – Soil Cleanup Process at Island High/Woodstock Child Development Center”

Video: Alameda Point 2011 Cleanup Update

Dr. Peter Russell, the city’s environmental consultant, made a presentation to the Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority on November 2, 2011, updating them on the status of cleanup at Alameda Point.

This video is an edited version with added images.

(Note:  The phrase “closed site” used in the presentation does not mean off limits.  It means active cleanup is finished.)

Cleaning Up Jet Fuel at Building 5

Tanker trucks sucking jet fuel out of the ground next to Building 5. Looking northwest.

Background

The Navy has three cleanup programs at Alameda Point:  Superfund, Petroleum, and Radiological.  The Petroleum Program takes care of underground concentrations of petroleum, mostly jet fuel, and is organized by corrective action areas.  One such area outside Building 5 made it onto the calendar this year.

Dumping jet fuel – Building 5, the largest hangar at the Point, was a busy aircraft maintenance facility.  Petroleum products like jet fuel were often disposed of down a drain, which in this case would have gone to an underground oil/water separator.  A Navy contractor concluded that jet fuel detected in test wells outside of Building 5 on the south side could have leaked either from the oil/water separator, or the drain line, or both.  The area has been designated Corrective Action Area 5B (CAA 5B). Continue reading “Cleaning Up Jet Fuel at Building 5”

Cleaning up a toxic groundwater plume using heat

Hoses carry vapors to large pipe that leads to filter system. Vapors are created using high-temp electrodes that extend 30 feet into the ground. Seaplane Lagoon and San Francisco are in background.

There are various methods to clean up groundwater contaminated with solvents and petroleum products. Beneficial chemicals can be injected to neutralize the toxic chemicals.  Sometimes bacteria, either those naturally present or some that have been added, can do the job.  In some cases at Alameda Point the Navy inserts steel beams called electrodes into the ground that are hooked up to their own power line.  They dial up the power to 1,100 amps (a household electric stove is around 40 amps), and let the heat turn the chemicals into vapor.  This is the method the Navy is using in a limited application just east of the Seaplane Lagoon. Continue reading “Cleaning up a toxic groundwater plume using heat”

Navy Studies Radium-contaminated Drain Lines at Alameda Point

Building 5. W. Tower Ave. is on right.

Background

Up until passage of the Clean Water Act in 1972, it was common practice to dispose of chemicals by dumping them down sewer and storm drain lines that drained into the nearest surface water.  Many people did this in their homes.

At Alameda’s former Naval Air Station the worst legacy of this practice was in the drain lines leading out of the massive Building 5 and nearby Building 400.  Building 5 is where the radioactive paint with radium-226 was used to paint aircraft dials and markers.

2009/2010 Drain Removal Action – In 2010, the Navy completed the removal and replacement

Radium-contaminated storm drain removal - 2010. Drains deposited in hazardous waste trailers.

of thousands of feet of the most seriously contaminated lines leading to the Seaplane Lagoon.  But questions remained for Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) members about drain lines leading north to the Oakland Estuary and also the Industrial Waste Line that was installed after passage of the Clean Water Act.

Remaining drain lines – September RAB Presentation

The RAB heard a presentation at the September meeting about the Navy’s recent examination of all the remaining drain lines using cameras and sampling equipment.  The drain lines lead out of Building 5 and are part of the cleanup area known as Operating Unit-2C.  Three of the storm drains and the industrial waste line were found to have areas of elevated radium, although nothing close to the levels found in the lagoon drains that were removed last year.  Six alternatives for dealing with the problem, from no action to complete removal ($58 million), were presented.  Two hundred ninety-seven samples were collected.

Drain lines requiring remedial action - OU-2C

Industrial Waste Line Should Not Be Left in Place – The majority of the RAB favored the option that prescribed hydro-jet cleaning, limited excavation and disposal of storm drain lines, and complete removal of the Industrial Waste Line.  Concern was raised about two alternatives that allowed the Industrial Waste Line to remain in place under West Tower Ave, the main thoroughfare between the hangars, and have so-called institutional controls.  Institutional controls can have a way of being forgotten as the decades roll on, which could lead to workers being being exposed to radium during infrastructure upgrades.  The forgotten lines could also lead to unexpected expenses for the city and to the posting of alarming radiation warning signs long after everyone thought the problem had been dealt with.  Update – October 13 – Another reason to remove the old Industrial Waste Line:  The August 8, 2011 Navy feasibility report cited in this post stated, “The industrial waste line is not considered a candidate for hydro-jetting due to the deteriorated condition of the line.”  Better to remove it than have toxic residue leaking out into the water table.

Industrial Waste Line survey results (click on image to enlarge)

RAB co-chair Dale Smith said it was premature to vote on alternatives.  The regulatory agencies still have to review the report.

Nuclear Fallout Residue Also Surveyed – The Navy’s contractor also gathered data on the presence of Cesium-137 and Strontium-90.  The presence of these two radioactive isotopes in drain lines was expected due to worldwide data showing that nuclear weapons testing and nuclear accidents such as Chernobyl have caused widespread dispersal.  There are also records indicating that some observation planes that flew through nuclear fallout during nuclear weapons testing were dismantled and decontaminated at Alameda Point as part of the weapons testing studies.

The main reason for concentrations in drain lines at Alameda Point is because of all the concrete pavement that sends high volumes of water runoff into drains.  The levels of Cesium and Strontium concentrations in the investigative samples were within the range that could be expected from worldwide fallout of nuclear weapons testing.

Updated October 12, 2011, in response to inquiry from reader  –  Below is a map and nine pages of test results for Storm Drain Line G, which partly runs along Pan Am Way.   Also indicated is the Main Trunk of this storm drain, which runs from Building 5 on the left of the map to the Seaplane Lagoon on the lower part.  The three horizontal storm drain lines shown below the Main Trunk are called laterals.  Only the Main Trunk portion is singled out for remediation work.  

The likely alternative that will be chosen will not be complete removal.  Instead, it will (hopefully) be limited removal and replacement in the few areas that show elevated readings for radium.  One alternative is to not do anything, but rather leave the lines in place with “Institutional Controls,” which means a big hassle if anyone ever wants to do infrastructure work.  

The remediation goal for radium 226 is nothing greater than 1.56 pico curies per liter. It’s based on a background level of 0.56 that would be randomly found in Alameda.  This background standard was established by agreement between the Navy and US EPA in prior years.  The remediation goal set by the Navy is nothing in excess of 1.0 above background, or 1.56.  The Navy’s “1-above-background” standard is more stringent than the norm for US EPA.

In looking at the readings in the boxes and on the test result tables, there are only a few locations where radium was found to be a problem.  “MH” in the box means it is manhole that was tested.  “CB” is a catch basin.  One reason for the low readings could be because in 2009/10 when the most seriously contaminated lines – F and FF – were being replaced due to radium contamination, the Navy had Storm Drain Line G power flushed to clean it out.  The contaminated water was properly disposed of.  

Another possible reason for the low radium readings is that the point from which it leaves Building 5 (where the radium paint was once used) could have been the least used for disposing of radium paint waste.  This would correspond with the actual results of testing before and after the recent dredging operation on the northeast corner of the Seaplane Lagoon where line G ends.  Other than a few solid objects containing radium, none of the dredged material from the northeast corner required disposal at a nuclear waste facility.  The upcoming dredging of the northwest corner, however, will likely yield elevated radium in dredged sediment.

Storm drain line G w/street names

Storm Drain Line G – test results – Page 1

Storm Drain Line G – test results – Page 2

Storm Drain Line G – test results – Page 3 

Storm Drain Line G – test results – Page 4 

Storm Drain Line G – test results – Page 5

Storm Drain Line G – test results – Page 6 

Storm Drain Line G – test results – Page 7 

Storm Drain Line G – test results – Page 8 

Storm Drain Line G – test results – Page 9