EPA/540/4-90/047
September 1990
NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST SITES:
Washington
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Emergency & Remedial Response
Office of Program Management
Washington, D.C. 20460
-------
If you wish to purchase copies of any additional State volumes or the National
Overview volume, Superfund: Focusing on the Nation at Large, contact:
National Technical Information Service (NTIS)
U.S. Department of Commerce
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield, VA 22161
(703) 487-4600
-------
PAGE
INTRODUCTION:
A Brief Overview...
.111
SUPERFUND:
How Does the Program Work to Clean Up Sites vii
How To:
Using the State Volume
NPL SITES:
A State Overview
.xvii
.XXL
THE NPL PROGRESS REPORT xxiii
NPL: Site Fact Sheets 1
GLOSSARY:
Terms Used in the Fact Sheets
.G-l
-------
11
-------
WHY THE SUPERFUND
PROGRAM?
s the 1970s came to a
close, a series of head-
fc\ line stories gave
Americans a look at the
dangers of dumping indus-
trial and urban wastes on the
land. First there was New
York's Love Canal. Hazard-
ous waste buried there over a
25-year period contaminated
streams and soil, and endan-
gered the health of nearby
residents. The result: evacu-
ation of several hundred
people. Then the leaking
barrels at the Valley of the
Drums in Kentucky attracted
public attention, as did the
dioxin tainted land and water
in Times Beach, Missouri.
In all these cases, human
health and the environment
were threatened, lives were
disrupted, property values
depreciated. It became in-
creasingly clear that there
were large numbers of serious
hazardous waste problems
that were falling through the
cracks of existing environ-
mental laws. The magnitude
of these emerging problems
moved Congress to enact the
Comprehensive Environ-
mental Response, Compensa-
tion, and Liability Act in 1980.
CERCLA commonly
known as the Superfund
was the first Federal law
established to deal with the
dangers posed by the
Nation's hazardous waste
sites.
After Discovery, the Problem
Intensified
Few realized the size of the
problem until EPA began the
process of site discovery and
site evaluation. Not hun-
dreds, but thousands of
potential hazardous waste
sites existed, and they pre-
sented the Nation with some
of the most complex pollution
problems it had ever faced.
In the 10 years since the
Superfund program began,
hazardous waste has surfaced
as a major environmental
concern in every part of the
United States. It wasn't just
the land that was contami-
nated by past disposal prac-
tices. Chemicals in the soil
were spreading into the
groundwater (a source of
drinking water for many) and
into streams, lakes, bays, and
wetlands. Toxic vapors
contaminated the air at some
sites, while at others improp-
erly disposed or stored
wastes threatened the health
of the surrounding commu-
nity and the environment.
EPA Identified More than
1,200 Serious Sites
EPA has identified 1,236
hazardous waste sites as the
most serious in the Nation.
These sites comprise the
"National Priorities List":
sites targeted for cleanup
under the Superfund. But site
discoveries continue, and
EPA estimates that, while
some will be deleted after
lengthy cleanups, this list,
commonly called the NPL,
will continue to grow by ap-
proximately 100 sites per
year, reaching 2,100 sites by
the year 2000.
THE NATIONAL
CLEANUP EFFORT IS
MUCH MORE THAN
THE NPL
From the beginning of the
program, Congress recog-
nized that the Federal govern-
ment could not and should
not address all environmental
problems stemming from past
disposal practices. Therefore,
the EPA was directed to set
priorities and establish a list
of sites to target. Sites on the
NPL (1,236) are thus a rela-
111
-------
INTRODUCTION
lively small subset of a larger
inventory of potential hazard-
ous waste sites, but they do
comprise the most complex
and environmentally compel-
ling cases. EPA has logged
more than 32,000 sites on its
National hazardous waste
inventory, and assesses each
site within one year of being
logged. In fact, over 90 per-
cent of the sites on the inven-
tory have been assessed. Of
the assessed sites, 55 percent
have been found to require no
further Federal action because
they did not pose significant
human health or environ-
mental risks. The remaining
sites are undergoing further
assessment to determine if
long-term Federal cleanup
activities are appropriate.
EPA IS MAKING
PROGRESS ON SITE
CLEANUP
The goal of the Superfund
program is to tackle immedi-
ate dangers first, and then
move through the progressive
steps necessary to eliminate
any long-term risks to public
health and the environment.
The Superfund responds
immediately to sites posing
imminent threats to human
health and the environment
at both NPL sites and sites
not on the NPL. The purpose
is to stabilize, prevent, or
temper the effects of a haz-
ardous release, or the threat
of one. These might include
tire fires or transportation
accidents involving the spill
of hazardous chemicals.
Because they reduce the
threat a site poses to human
health and the environment,
immediate cleanup actions
are an integral part of the
Superfund program.
Immediate response to immi-
nent threats is one of the
Superfund's most noted
achievements. Where immi-
nent threats to the public or
environment were evident,
EPA has completed or moni-
tored emergency actions that
attacked the most serious
threats to toxic exposure in
more than 1,800 cases.
The ultimate goal for a haz-
ardous waste site on the NPL
is a permanent solution to an
environmental problem that
presents a serious (but not an
imminent) threat to the public
or environment. This often
requires a long-term effort. In
the last four years, EPA has
aggressively accelerated its
efforts to perform these long-
term cleanups of NPL sites.
More cleanups were started
in 1987, when the Superfund
law was amended, than in
any previous year. And in
1989 more sites than ever
reached the construction
stage of the Superfund
cleanup process. Indeed
construction starts increased
by over 200 percent between
late 1986 and 1989! Of the
sites currently on the NPL,
more than 500 nearly half
have had construction
cleanup activity. In addition,
over 500 more sites are pres-
ently in the investigation
stage to determine the extent
of site contamination, and to
identify appropriate cleanup
remedies. Many other sites
with cleanup remedies se-
lected are poised for the start
of cleanup construction activ-
ity. Measuring success by
"progress through the
cleanup pipeline," EPA is
clearly gaining momentum.
EPA MAKES SURE
CLEANUP WORKS
EPA has gained enough
experience in cleanup con-
struction to understand that
environmental protection
does not end when the rem-
edy is in place. Many com-
plex technologies like
those designed to clean up
ground water must operate
for many years in order to
accomplish their objectives.
EPA's hazardous waste site
managers are committed to
proper operation and mainte-
nance of every remedy con-
structed. No matter who has
been delegated responsibility
for monitoring the cleanup
work, the EPA will assure
that the remedy is carefully
followed and that it continues
to do its job.
Likewise, EPA does not
abandon a site even after the
cleanup work is done. Every
IV
-------
five years the Agency reviews
each site where residues from
hazardous waste cleanup still
remain to ensure that public
and environmental health are
still being safeguarded. EPA
will correct any deficiencies
discovered and report to the
public annually on all five-
year reviews conducted that
year.
CITIZENS HELP SHAPE
DECISIONS
Superfund activities also
depend upon local citizen
participation. EPA's job is to
analyze the hazards and
deploy the experts, but the
Agency needs citizen input as
it makes choices for affected
communities.
Because the people in a
community with a Superfund
site will be those most di-
rectly affected by hazardous
waste problems and cleanup
processes, EPA encourages
citizens to get involved in
cleanup decisions. Public in-
volvement and comment does
influence EPA cleanup plans
by providing valuable infor-
mation about site conditions,
community concerns and
preferences.
This State volume and the
companion National Over-
view volume provide general
Superfund background
information and descriptions
of activities at each State NPL
site. These volumes are
intended to clearly describe
what the problems are, what
EPA and others participating
in site cleanups are doing,
and how we as a Nation can
move ahead in solving these
serious problems.
USING THE STATE AND
NATIONAL VOLUMES
IN TANDEM
To understand the big picture
on hazardous waste cleanup,
citizens need to hear about
both environmental progress
across the country and the
cleanup accomplishments
closer to home. The public
should understand the chal-
lenges involved in hazardous
waste cleanup and the deci-
sions we must make as a
Nation in finding the best
solutions.
The National Overview
volume Superfund: Focus-
ing on the Nation at Large
accompanies this State vol-
ume. The National Overview
contains important informa-
tion to help you understand
the magnitude and challenges
facing the Superfund pro-
gram as well as an overview
of the National cleanup effort.
The sections describe the
nature of the hazardous
waste problem nationwide,
threats and contaminants at
NPL sites and their potential
effects on human health and
the environment, the Super-
fund program's successes in
cleaning up the Nation's
serious hazardous waste sites,
and the vital roles of the
various participants in the
cleanup process.
This State volume compiles
site summary fact sheets on
each State site being cleaned
up under the Superfund
program. These sites repre-
sent the most serious hazard-
ous waste problems in the
Nation, and require the most
complicated and costly site
solutions yet encountered.
Each State book gives a
"snapshot" of the conditions
and cleanup progress that has
been made at each NPL site in
the State through the first half
of 1990. Conditions change as
our cleanup efforts continue,
so these site summaries will
be updated periodically to
include new information on
progress being made.
To help you understand the
cleanup accomplishments
made at these sites, this State
volume includes a description
of the process for site discov-
ery, threat evaluation and
long-term cleanup of Super-
fund sites. This description
How Does the Program
Work to Clean Up Sites?
will serve as a good reference
point from which to review
the cleanup status at specific
sites. A glossary also is
included at the back of the
book that defines key terms
used in the site fact sheets as
they apply to hazardous
waste management.
v
-------
VI
-------
T ^ he diverse problems posed by the Nation's hazardous
"7 waste sites have provided EPA with the challenge to
- establish a consistent approach for evaluating and
cleaning up the Nation's most serious sites. To do this, EPA
had to step beyond its traditional role as a regulatory agency
to develop processes and guidelines for each step in these
technically complex site cleanups. EPA has established proce-
dures to coordinate the efforts of its Washington, D.C. Head-
quarters program offices and its front-line staff in 10 Regional
Offices with the State governments, contractors, and private
parties who are participating in site cleanup. An important
part of the process is that any time during cleanup, work can
be led by EPA or the State or, under their monitoring, by
private parties who are potentially responsible for site con-
tamination.
The process for discovery of the site, evaluation of threat, and
long-term cleanup of Superfund sites is summarized in the
following pages. The phases of each of these steps are high-
lighted within the description. The flow diagram below pro-
vides a summary of this three step process.
STEP1
Discover site
and determine
whether an
emergency
exists *
1
I
n
< > ""
STEP 2
Evaluate whether
a site is a serious
threat to public
health or
environment
-
4
.. *
I
fl
5
>
STEPS
Perform long-term
£ cleanup actions on
the most serious
hazardous waste
sites in the Nation
* Emergency actions are performed whenever needed in this three-step process
FIGURE 1
Although this State book provides a current "snapshot" of site progress made only by emer-
gency actions and long-term cleanup actions at Superfund sites, it is important to understand
the discovery and evaluation process that leads up to identifying and cleaning up these most
serious uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous waste sites in the Nation. This discovery and
evaluation process is the starting point for this summary description.
vn
-------
SUPERFUND
<" ^ ^W ^
Uli p, 1 ^ '
dw does EPA
^bout potential '"T*v%
azardous
kites?
What happens if
here is an
f any, cleanup
t should be
STEP 1: SITE DISCOVERY AND EMERGENCY
EVALUATION
Site discovery occurs in a number of ways. Information
comes from concerned citizens people may notice an odd
taste or foul odor in their drinking water, or see half-buried
leaking barrels; a hunter may come across a field where waste
was dumped illegally. Or there may be an explosion or fire
which alerts the State or local authorities to a problem. Rou-
tine investigations by State and local governments, and re-
quired reporting and inspection of facilities that generate,
treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste also help keep EPA
informed about either actual or potential threats of hazardous
substance releases. All reported sites or spills are recorded in
the Superfund inventory (CERCLIS) for further investigation
to determine whether they will require cleanup.
As soon as a potential hazardous waste site is reported, EPA
determines whether there is an emergency requiring an imme-
diate cleanup action. If there is, they act as quickly as possible
to remove or stabilize the imminent threat. These short-term
emergency actions range from building a fence around the
contaminated area to keep people away or temporarily relo-
cating residents until the danger is addressed, to providing
bottled water to residents while their local drinking water
supply is being cleaned up, or physically removing wastes for
safe disposal.
However, emergency actions can happen at any time an imminent
threat or emergency warrants them for example, if leaking
barrels are found when cleanup crews start digging in the
ground or if samples of contaminated soils or air show that
there may be a threat of fire or explosion, an immediate action
is taken.
STEP 2: SITE THREAT EVALUATION
Even after any imminent dangers are taken care of, in most
cases contamination may remain at the site. For example,
residents may have been supplied with bottled water to take
care of their immediate problem of contaminated well water.
But now it's time to figure out what is contaminating the
drinking water supply and the best way to clean it up. Or
viii
-------
EPA may determine that there is no imminent danger from a
site, so now any long-term threats need to be evaluated. In
either case, a more comprehensive investigation is needed to
determine if a site poses a serious but not imminent danger,
and requires a long-term cleanup action.
Once a site is discovered and any needed emergency actions
are taken, EPA or the State collects all available background
information not only from their own files, but also from local
records and U.S. Geological Survey maps. This information is
used to identify the site and to perform a preliminary assess-
ment of its potential hazards. This is a quick review of readily
available information to answer the questions:
Are hazardous substances likely to be present?
How are they contained?
How might contaminants spread?
How close is the nearest well, home, or natural resource
area like a wetland or animal sanctuary?
What may be harmed the land, water, air, people,
plants, or animals?
Some sites do not require further action because the prelimi-
nary assessment shows that they don't threaten public health
or the environment. But even in these cases, the sites remain
listed in the Superfund inventory for record keeping purposes
and future reference. Currently, there are more than 32,000
sites maintained in this inventory.
Inspectors go to the site to collect additional information to
evaluate its hazard potential. During this site inspection, they
look for evidence of hazardous waste, such as leaking drums
and dead or discolored vegetation. They may take some
samples of soil, well water, river water, and air. Inspectors
analyze the ways hazardous materials could be polluting the
environment such as runoff into nearby streams. They also
check to see if people (especially children) have access to the
site.
Information collected during the site inspection is used to
identify the sites posing the most serious threats to human
health and the environment. This way EPA can meet the
. ; % *' -" '> -. «." *«.#&!&
ss * f t.. . f' T
«y*v ^^*>% *" **-"* **** ^% *""Xs
*~ybp$jsti$t wfcafte the: ,:
,,V.s
.- " S '% s
', ' "
-. f~. .. AwlS.ss" «VA«.«A MXoMw. ..£.... ''' ..<.-.'' «.",«. . *!
IX
-------
^ 4vf*s f^v. <.\
requirement that Congress gave them to use Superfund mo-
nies only on the worst hazardous waste sites in the Nation.
To identify the most serious sites, EPA developed the Hazard
Ranking System (HRS). The HRS is the scoring system EPA
uses to assess the relative threat from a release or a potential
release of hazardous substances from a site to surrounding
groundwater, surface water, air, and soil. A site score is based
on the likelihood a hazardous substance will be released from
the site, the toxicity and amount of hazardous substances at
the site, and the people and sensitive environments potentially
affected by contamination at the site.
Only sites with high enough health and environmental risk
scores are proposed to be added to EPA's National Priorities
List (NPL). That's why there are 1,236 sites are on the NPL,
but there are more than 32,000 sites in the Superfund inven-
tory. Only NPL sites can have a long-term cleanup paid for
from the national hazardous waste trust fund the Super-
fund. But the Superfund can and does pay for emergency
actions performed at any site, whether or not it's on the NPL.
do people firid ^
tout whether KM ^ j
^considers a site .<
i national priority jfar
I cleanup using
§ Superfund money?
|
The public can find out whether a site that concerns them is
on the NPL by calling their Regional EPA office at the number
listed in this book.
The proposed NPL identifies sites that have been evaluated
through the scoring process as the most serious problems
among uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous waste sites in
the U.S. In addition, a site will be added to the NPL if the
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry issues a
health advisory recommending that people be moved away
from the site. Updated at least once a year, it's only after
public comments are considered that these proposed worst
sites are officially added to the NPL.
Listing on the NPL does not set the order in which sites will be
cleaned up. The order is influenced by the relative priority of
the site's health and environmental threats compared to other
sites, and such factors as State priorities, engineering capabili-
ties, and available technologies. Many States also have their
own list of sites that require cleanup; these often contain sites
not on the NPL that are scheduled to be cleaned up with State
money. And it should be said again that any emergency action
needed at a site can be performed by the Superfund whether
or not a site is on the NPL.
-------
STEP 3: LONG-TERM CLEANUP ACTIONS
The ultimate goal for a hazardous waste site on the NPL is a
permanent, long-term cleanup. Since every site presents a
unique set of challenges, there is no single all-purpose solu-
tion. So a five-phase "remedial response" process is used to
develop consistent and workable solutions to hazardous waste
problems across the Nation:
1. Investigate in detail the extent of the site contamination:
remedial investigation,
2. Study the range of possible cleanup remedies: feasibility
study,
3. Decide which remedy to use: Record of Decision or ROD,
4. Plan the remedy: remedial design, and
5. Carry out the remedy: remedial action.
This remedial response process is a long-term effort to provide
a permanent solution to an environmental problem that
presents a serious, but not an imminent threat to the public or
environment.
The first two phases of a long-term cleanup are a combined
remedial investigation and feasibility study (RI/FS) that
determine the nature and extent of contamination at the site,
and identify and evaluate cleanup alternatives. These studies
may be conducted by EPA or the State or, under their monitor-
ing, by private parties.
Like the initial site inspection described earlier, a remedial
investigation involves an examination of site data in order to
better define the problem. But the remedial investigation is
much more detailed and comprehensive than the initial site
inspection.
A remedial investigation can best be described as a carefully
designed field study. It includes extensive sampling and
laboratory analyses to generate more precise data on the types
and quantities of wastes present at the site, the type of soil and
water drainage patterns, and specific human health and
environmental risks. The result is information that allows
EPA to select the cleanup strategy that is best suited to a
particular site or to determine that no cleanup is needed.
-.w, > x1- f * ,+ A
?*&*$*&*$*$$*--;
;1rteWI^ %tod $K$^
\
v.I.'fcv.'. s
----^'--^vU, "-', s^w^T ^'1
^ ^ -. ^ % > % Xw-ss \x.s'.\%sss->-'
-\^^1"V", -^T^-- t^----,-1-^,'':: "
^t---- v----^>"^x' ;-* -', «--\--;------v ^
"T7~~ -s s^^'- --^ -- -- ' *&"' C;
V.V.V. ' % t^SSSSSSS-.^*. ._ % ^
\ < t.^. k'tl^.SISS'^.Vll. f <.\ *° f4"
;,/* ^^^
-------
SUPERFUND
How are
alternatives
identified and
evaluated?
j - w-*
|Does the public have
a say in the final%
cleanup decision? N _
. r < *- <*
Placing a site on the NPL does not necessarily mean that
cleanup is needed. It is possible for a site to receive an HRS
score high enough to be added to the NPL, but not ultimately
require cleanup actions. Keep in mind that the purpose of the
scoring process is to provide a preliminary and conservative
assessment of potential risk. During subsequent site investiga-
tions, the EPA may find either that there is no real threat or
that the site does not pose significant human health or envi-
ronmental risks.
EPA or the State or, under their monitoring, private parties
identify and analyze specific site cleanup needs based on the
extensive information collected during the remedial investiga-
tion. This analysis of cleanup alternatives is called a feasibility
study.
Since cleanup actions must be tailored exactly to the needs of
each individual site, more than one possible cleanup alterna-
tive is always considered. After making sure that all potential
cleanup remedies fully protect human health and the environ-
ment and comply with Federal and State laws, the advantages
and disadvantages of each cleanup alternative are carefully
compared. These comparisons are made to determine their
effectiveness in the short- and long-term, their use of perma-
nent treatment solutions, and their technical feasibility and
cost.
To the maximum extent practicable, the remedy must be a
permanent solution and use treatment technologies to destroy
principal site contaminants. But remedies such as containing
the waste on site or removing the source of the problem (like
leaking barrels) are often considered effective. Often special
pilot studies are conducted to determine the effectiveness and
feasibility of using a particular technology to clean up a site.
Therefore, the combined remedial investigation and feasibility
study can take between 10 and 30 months to complete, de-
pending on the size and complexity of the problem.
Yes. The Superfund law requires that the public be given the
opportunity to comment on the proposed cleanup plan. Their
concerns are carefully considered before a final decision is
made.
Xll
-------
The results of the remedial investigation and feasibility study,
which also point out the recommended cleanup choice, are
published in a report for public review and comment. EPA or
the State encourages the public to review the information and
take an active role in the final cleanup decision. Fact sheets
and announcements in local papers let the community know
where they can get copies of the study and other reference
documents concerning the site.
The public has a minimum of 30 days to comment on the
proposed cleanup plan after it is published. These comments
can either be written or given verbally at public meetings that
EPA or the State are required to hold. Neither EPA nor the
State can select the final cleanup remedy without evaluating
and providing written answers to specific community com-
ments and concerns. This "responsiveness summary" is part
of EPA's write-up of the final remedy decision, called the
Record of Decision or ROD.
The ROD is a public document that explains the cleanup
remedy chosen and the reason it was selected. Since sites
frequently are large and must be cleaned up in stages, a ROD
may be necessary for each contaminated resource or area of
the site. This may be necessary when contaminants have
spread into the soil, water and air, and affect such sensitive
areas as wetlands, or when the site is large and cleaned up in
stages. This often means that a number of remedies using
different cleanup technologies are needed to clean up a single
site.
st~V
Yes. Before a specific cleanup action is carried out, it must be
designed in detail to meet specific site needs. This stage of the
cleanup is called the remedial design. The design phase
provides the details on how the selected remedy will be
engineered and constructed.
Projects to clean up a hazardous waste site may appear to be
like any other major construction project but, hi fact, the likely
presence of combinations of dangerous chemicals demands
special construction planning and procedures. Therefore, the
design of the remedy can take anywhere from 6 months to 2
years to complete. This blueprint for site cleanup includes not
only the details on every aspect of the construction work, but a
description of the types of hazardous wastes expected at the
t?e, ~v
tailored to a site/ does
ttte design, of the
jreaasdy lieed to fee
tailored too?
Xlll
-------
SUPERFUND
j- Once tlie design is
complete, fiow long * 1
"<«" ?,3jf7, ,' {&#&#&, -
actually clean up roe
site and how j
does it cost?
\^
\ \ i
site, special plans for environmental protection, worker safety,
regulatory compliance, and equipment decontamination.
The time and cost for performing the site cleanup called the
remedial action are as varied as the remedies themselves.
la a few cases, the only action needed may be to remove
drums of hazardous waste and decontaminate them an
action that takes limited time and money. In most cases,
however, a remedial action may involve different and expen-
sive measures that can take a long time.
For example, cleaning polluted groundwater or dredging
contaminated river bottoms can take several years of complex.
engineering work before contamination is reduced to safe
levels. Sometimes the selected cleanup remedy described in
the ROD may need to be modified because of new contami-
nant information discovered or difficulties that were faced
during the early cleanup activities. Taking into account these
differences, a remedial cleanup action takes an average of 18
months to complete and costs an average of $26 million per
site.
I Once the cleanup
"_ action is comple
: the site a«tomatic
I "deleted* from the.
s % 5
* ::
\-OvVX\ \\\ %
No. The deletion of a site from the NPL is anything but auto-
matic. For example, cleanup of contaminated groundwater
may take up to 20 years or longer. Also, in some cases the
long-term monitoring of the remedy is required to ensure that
it is effective. After construction of certain remedies, opera-
tion and maintenance (e.g., maintenance of ground cover,
groundwater monitoring, etc.) or continued pumping and
treating of groundwater, may be required to ensure that the
remedy continues to prevent future health hazards or environ-
mental damage, and ultimately meets the cleanup goals
specified in the ROD. Sites in this final monitoring or opera-
tional stage of the cleanup process are designated as "con-
struction completed".
It's not until a site cleanup meets all the goals and monitoring
requirements of the selected remedy that EPA can officially
propose the site for "deletion" from the NPL. And if s not
until public comments are taken into consideration that a site
can actually be deleted from the NPL. Deletions that have
occurred are included in the "Construction Complete" cate-
gory in the progress report found later in this book.
xiv
-------
Yes. Based on the belief that "the polluters should pay/' after a
site is placed on the NPL, the EPA makes a thorough effort to
identify and find those responsible for causing contamination
problems at a site. Although EPA is willing to negotiate with
these private parties and encourages voluntary cleanup, it has
the authority under the Superfund law to legally force those
potentially responsible for site hazards to take specific cleanup
actions. All work performed by these parties is closely guided
and monitored by EPA, and must meet the same standards
required for actions financed through the Superfund.
Because these enforcement actions can be lengthy, EPA may
decide to use Superfund monies to make sure a site is cleaned
up without unnecessary delay. For example, if a site presents
an imminent threat to public health and the environment, or if
conditions at a site may worsen, it could be necessary to start
the cleanup right away. Those responsible for causing site
contamination are liable under the law for repaying the money
EPA spends in cleaning up the site.
Whenever possible, EPA and the Department of Justice use
their legal enforcement authorities to require responsible
parties to pay for site cleanups, thereby preserving the Super-
fund for emergency actions and sites where no responsible
parties can be identified.
Jx
"S* "
XV
-------
TAX
-------
'- he Site Fact Sheets
, ..".presented in this book
are comprehensive
"summaries that cover a broad
range of information. The
fact sheets describe hazard-
ous waste sites on the Na-
tional Priorities List (NPL)
and their locations, as well as
the conditions leading to their
listing ("Site Description").
They list the types of con-
taminants that have been dis-
covered and related threats to
public and ecological health
("Threats and Contami-
nants"). "Cleanup Ap-
proach" presents an overview
of the cleanup activities
completed, underway, or
planned. The fact sheets
conclude with a brief synop-
sis of how much progress has
been made on protecting
public health and the envi-
ronment. The summaries also
pinpoint other actions, such
as legal efforts to involve pol-
luters responsible for site
contamination and commu-
nity concerns.
The following two pages
show a generic fact sheet and
briefly describes the informa-
tion under each section. The
square "icons" or symbols ac-
companying the text allow
the reader to see at a glance
which environmental re-
sources are affected and the
status of cleanup activities.
Icons in the Threats
and Contaminants
Section
Contaminated
Groundwater re-
sources in the vicinity
or underlying the site.
(Groundwater is often used
as a drinking water source.)
Contaminated Sur-
face Water and
Sediments on or near
the site. (These include lakes,
ponds, streams, and rivers.)
Contaminated Air in
the vicinity of the
site. (Pollution is
usually periodic and involves
contaminated dust particles
or hazardous gas emissions.)
Contaminated Soil
and Sludges on or
near the site.
Threatened or
contaminated Envi-
ronmentally Sensi-
tive Areas in the vicinity of
the site. (Examples include
wetlands and coastal areas,
critical habitats.)
Icons in the Response
Action Status Section
nitial Actions
have been taken or
are underway to
eliminate immediate threats
at the site.
Site Studies at the
site are planned or
underway.
Remedy Selected
indicates that site
investigations have
been concluded
and EPA has se-
lected a final cleanup remedy
for the site or part of the site.
Remedy Design
means that engi-
neers are prepar-
ing specifications
and drawings for the selected
cleanup technologies.
Cleanup Ongoing
indicates that the
selected cleanup
remedies for the
contaminated site or part
of the site are currently
underway.
Cleanup Complete
shows that all
cleanup goals have
been achieved for
the contaminated site or part
of the site.
XVll
-------
Site Responsibility
Identifies the Federal, State,
and/or potentially responsible
parties that are taking
responsibility for cleanup
actions at the site.
EPA REGION
CONGRESSIONAL DIST
County Name
SITE NAME
STATE
Site Description
NPL Listing
History
Dates when the site
was Proposed,
made Final, and
Deleted from the
NPL
Threats ana Contaminants
Cleanup Approach
Environmental Progress
A summary of the actions to reduce the threats to nearby residents and
the surrounding environment; progress towards cleaning up the site
and goals of the cleanup plan are given here.
XVlll
-------
WHAT THE FACT SHEETS CONTAIN
Site Description
This section describes the location and history of the site. It includes
descriptions of the most recent activities and past actions at the site that have
contributed to the contamination. Population estimates, land usages, and nearby
resources give readers background on the local setting surrounding the site.
Throughout the site description and other sections of the site summary, technical
or unfamiliar terms that are italicized are presented in the glossary at the end of
the book. Please refer to the glossary for more detailed explanation or definition
of the terms.
Threats and Contaminants
The major chemical categories of site contamination are noted as well as
which environmental resources are affected. Icons representing each of the
affected resources (may include air, groundwater, surface water, soil and
contamination to environmentally sensitive areas) are included in the margins
of this section. Potential threats to residents and the surrounding
environments arising from the site contamination are also described. Specific
contaminants and contaminant groupings are italicized and explained in more
detail in the glossary.
Cleanup Approach
This section contains a brief overview of how the site is being cleaned up
Response Action Status
Specific actions that have been accomplished or will be undertaken to clean up
the site are described here. Cleanup activities at NPL sites are divided into
separate phases depending on the complexity and required actions at the site.
Two major types of cleanup activities are often described: initial, immediate or
emergency actions to quickly remove or reduce imminent threats to the
community and surrounding areas; and long-term remedial phases directed at
final cleanup at the site. Each stage of the cleanup strategy is presented in this
section of the summary. Icons representing the stage of the cleanup process
(initial actions, site investigations, EPA selection of the cleanup remedy,
engineering design phase, cleanup activities underway and completed cleanup)
are located in the margin next to each activity description.
Site Facts
Additional information on activities and events at the site are included in this
section. Often details on legal or administrative actions taken by EPA to achieve
site cleanup or other facts pertaining to community involvement with the site
cleanup process are reported here.
XIX
-------
The feet sheets are arranged
in alphabetical order by site
name. Because site cleanup is
a dynamic and gradual
process, all site information is
accurate as of the date shown
on the bottom of each page.
Progress is always being
made at NPL sites, and EPA
will periodically update the
Site Fact Sheets to reflect
recent actions and publish
updated State volumes.
HOW CAN YOU USE
THIS STATE BOOK?
You can use this book to keep
informed about the sites that
concern you, particularly
ones close to home. EPA is
committed to involving the
public in the dedsionmaking
process associated with
hazardous waste cleanup.
The Agency solicits input
from area residents in com-
munities affected by Super-
fund sites. Citizens are likely
to be affected not only by
hazardous site conditions, but
also by the remedies that
combat them. Site cleanups
, take many forms and can
affect communities in differ-
ent ways. Local traffic may
be rerouted, residents may be
relocated, temporary water
supplies may be necessary.
Definitive information on a
site can help citizens sift
through alternatives and
make decisions. To make
good choices, you must know
what the threats are and how
EPA intends to clean up the
site. You must understand
the cleanup alternatives being
proposed for site cleanup and
how residents may be af-
fected by each one. You also
need to have some idea of
how your community intends
to use the site in the future
and to know what the com-
munity can realistically
expect once the cleanup is
complete.
EPA wants to develop
cleanup methods that meet
community needs, but the
Agency can only take local
concerns into account if it
understands what they are.
Information must travel both
ways in order for cleanups to
be effective and satisfactory.
Please take this opportunity
to learn more, become in-
volved, and assure that
hazardous waste cleanup at
"your" site considers your
community's concerns.
xx
-------
NPL Sites
State of a W;
The Pacific Northwest State of Washington is bordered by Canada to the north, the
Pacific Ocean to the west, Idaho to the east, and Oregon to the south. The State
covers 68,139 square miles consisting of the Olympic Mountains on the northwest
peninsula, open land along the Pacific coast, the flat terrain of the Puget Sound Low-
land, the highest peaks of the Cascade Mountains, highlands in the northeast, and the
Columbia River Basin in the central region. Washington experienced a 12.5 percent
increase in population during the 1980s and currently has approximately 4,648,000
residents, ranking 18th in U.S. populations. Principal State industries include aero-
space, forest products, food products, primary metals, agriculture and commercial
fishing. Washington manufactured goods include, aircraft, pulp and paper, lumber and
plywood, aluminum, and processed fruits and vegetables.
How Many Washington Sites
Are on the NPL?
Proposed Sites 4
Final Sites 41
Deleted Sites 1
46
Where Are the NPL Sites Located?
Cong. District 07
Cong. District 01, 02, 08
Cong. District 03
Cong. District 06
Cong. District 04,05
3 sites
4 sites
6 sites
7 sites
9 sites
50--
40--
30--
2O--
10--
How are Sites Contaminated and What are the Principal* Chemicals ?
Groundwater: Volatile organic
compounds (VOCs), heavy metals
(inorganics), radiation, and creosotes
(organics).
Soil, Solid and Liquid Waste:
Heavy metals (inorganics), volatile
organic compounds (VOCs),
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs),
creosotes (organics),
petrochemicals, and dioxin.
Surface Water and Sediments:
Heavy metals (inorganics), creosotes
(organics), polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCBs), volatile organic compounds
(VOCs), and petrochemicals.
Air: Volatile organic compounds
(VOCs), gases, radiation, and heavy
metals (inorganics).
*Appear at 11 % or more sites
m
GW Soil& SW Seds Air Solid
Liquid Waste
Waste
Contamination Area
State Overview
XXI
continued
-------
Where are the Sites in the Superfund Cleanup Process*?
Site
Studies
Remedy
"Selected
Remedy
* Design
Cleanup
Ongoing
Construction
Complete
Initial actions have been taken at 21 sites as interim cleanup measures.
Who Do I Call with Questions?
The following pages describe each NPL site in Washington, providing specific
information on threats and contaminants, cleanup activities, and environmental
progress. Should you have questions, please call one of the offices listed below:
Washington Superfund Office
EPA Region X Superfund Office
EPA Region X Public Relations Office
EPA Superfund Hotline
EPA Public Information Office
(206) 438-3039
(206)399-1987
(206)442-1283
(800) 424-9346
(202) 477-7751
"Cleanup status reflects phase of site activities rather than administrative accomplishments.
-------
The NPL Progress Report
The following Progress Report lists the State sites currently on or deleted from the NPL,
and briefly summarizes the status of activities for each site at the time this report was
prepared. The steps in the Superfund cleanup process are arrayed across the top of the
chart, and each site's progress through these steps is represented by an arrow H-) which
indicates the current stage of cleanup at the site.
Large and complex sites are often organized into several cleanup stages. For example,
separate cleanup efforts may be required to address the source of the contamination,
hazardous substances in the groundwater, and surface water pollution, or to clean up
different areas of a large site. In such cases, the chart portrays cleanup progress at the
site's most advanced stage, reflecting the status of site activities rather than administrative
accomplishments.
*- An arrow in the "Initial Response" category indicates that an emergency cleanup or
initial action has been completed or is currently underway. Emergency or initial actions
are taken as an interim measure to provide immediete relief from exposure to
hazardous site conditions or to stabilize a site to prevent further contamination.
* An arrow in the "Site Studies" category indicates that an investigation to determine the
nature and extent of the contamination at the site is currently ongoing or planned to
begin in 1991.
* An arrow in the "Remedy Selection" category means that the EPA has selected the
final cleanup strategy for the site. At the few sites where the EPA has determined that
initial response actions have eliminated site contamination, or that any remaining
contamination will be naturally dispersed without further cleanup activities, a "No
Action" remedy is selected. In these cases, the arrows in the Progress Report are
discontinued at the "Remedy Selection" step and resume in the final "Construction
Complete" category.
* An arrow at the "Remedial Design" stage indicates that engineers are currently
designing the technical specifications for the selected cleanup remedies and
technologies.
> An arrow marking the "Cleanup Ongoing" category means that final cleanup actions
have been started at the site and are currently underway.
«* A arrow in the "Construction Complete" category is used on/ywhen all phases of the
site cleanup plan have been performed and the EPA has determined that no additional
construction actions are required at the site. Some sites in this category may currently
be undergoing long-term pumping and treating of groundwater, operation and
maintenance or monitoring to ensure that the completed cleanup actions continue to
protect human health and the environment.
The sites are listed in alphabetical order. Further information on the activities and progress
at each site is given in the site "Fact Sheets" published in this volume.
xxiii
-------
Proj
Page
1
3
5
7
9
11
13
15
17
20
23
25
27
29
31
33
35
37
40
gress Toward Cleanup at
Site Name
ALCOA (VANCOUVER SMELTER)
AMERICAN CROSSARM & CONDUIT CO.
AMERICAN LAKE GARDENS
BANGOR NAVAL SUBMARINE BASE
BANGOR ORDNANCE DISPOSAL
BON NEVILLE POWER ROSS COMPLEX
CENTRALIA MUNICIPAL LANDFILL
COLBERT LANDFILL
COMMENCEMENT BAY, NEAR SHORE
COMMENCEMENT BAY, S. TACOMA
FAIRCHILD AIR FORCE BASE (4 AREAS)
FMC CORP. (YAKIMA PIT)
FORT LEWIS (LANDFILL NO. 5)
FORT LEWIS LOGISTIC CENTER
FRONTIER HARD CHROME, INC.
GENERAL ELECTRIC CO.
GREENACRES LANDFILL
HANFORD 100-AREA(USDOE)
HANFORD 200-AREA (USDOE)
JNtOr Cttte
County
CLARK
LEWIS
PIERCE
KITSAP
KiTSAP
CLARK
LEWIS
SPOKANE
PIERCE
PIERCE
SPOKANE
YAKIMA
PIERCE
PIERCE
CLARK
SPOKANE
SPOKANE
BENTON
BENTON
s in tn
NPL
Final
Final
Final
Prop.
Final
Final
Prop.
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
e oiaie 01 wasmngton
Initial Site Remedy Remedy Cleanup Construction
Date Response Studies Selected Design Ongoing Complete
02/21/90 "*
10/04/89 * *"
09/21/84 * *
07/14/89 *
07/22/87 *
11/21/89 * '
06/24/88
09/08/83 * *- *- * -1*" '
09/08/83 "^ * * * *"
09/08/83 ' "^ "^ * "^ ^
03/13/89 "^ "^_
09/08/83 *" "^ ^>-
07/22/87 +
11/21/89 "*
09/08/83 ^" "^ * '
10/04/89 «* "*"
09/21/84 *-
10/04/89 "*
10/04/89 ^
-------
Page Site Name
County
Initial Site Remedy Remedy Cleanup Construction
NPL Date Response Studies Selected Design Ongoing Complete
42
44
46
48
50
52
54
56
58
60
62
64
66
68
70
72
74
76
78
HANFORD 300-AREA (USDOE)
HANFORD 1 100-AREA (USDOE)
HARBOR ISLAND (LEAD)
HIDDEN VALLEY LANDFILL
KAISER ALUMINUM MEAD WORKS
LAKEWOODSITE
MCCHORD AFB (WASH RACK/TREATMT)
MICA LANDFILL
MIDWAY LANDFILL
N.A.S., WHIDBEY IS (AULT FIELD)
N.A.S., WHIDBEY IS (SEAPLANE BASE)
NAVAL UNDERSEA WARFARE (4 AREAS)
NORTHSIDE LANDFILL
NORTHWEST TRANSFORMER
NORTHWEST TRANSFORMER (S. HARK.)
OLD INLAND PIT
PACIFIC CAR & FOUNDRY CO.
PASCO SANITARY LANDFILL
PESTICIDE LAB (YAKIMA)
BENTON
BENTON
KING
PIERCE
SPOKANE
PIERCE
PIERCE
SPOKANE
KING'
ISLAND
ISLAND
KITSAP
SPOKANE
WHATCOM
WHATCOM
SPOKANE
KING
FRANKLIN
YAKIMA
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
Final
10/04/89 *
10/04/89 "K
09/08/83 * *
03/31/89 "K
09/08/83 * ' *-
09/08/83 *- °^ *- * +-
07/22/87 *
08/10/86 B^
06/10/86 ' + +-
02/21/90 *
02/21/90 "K
10/04/89 *
06/10/86 *" *- " "K
06/10/86 "^ "^ "K
02/21/90 ' "^
02/21/90 <*-
02/21/90 "K "^ , -
02/21/90 «^
09/08/83 *
xxv
-------
Page Site Name
County
NPL Date
Initial Site Remedy Remedy Cleanup Construction
Response Studies Selected Design Ongoing Complete
80
82
84
86
88
90
92
94
QUEEN CITY FARMS
SEATTLE MUNICIPAL LANDFILL (KENT)
SILVER MOUNTAIN MINE
TOFTDAHL DRUMS
TOSCO CORP. (SPOKANE TERMINAL)
WESTERN PROCESSING CO., INC.
WYCKOFF CO./EAGLE HARBOR
YAKIMA PLATING COMPANY
KING
KING
OKANOGAN
CLARK
SPOKANE
KING
KITSAP
YAKIMA
Final
Prop.
Final
Delete
Prop.
Final
Final
Final
09/21/84 *" *~
06/24/88 *" *
06/10/86 4-4-4-
12/23/88 4-4-4* «*
06/24/88 *"
09/08/83 4-4-4-4-4-
07/22/87 *- "^
03/31/89 "*"
-------
-------
-------
ALCOA (VANCOUVER
SMELTER)
WASHINGTON
EPA ID# WAD0090452791
Site Description
REGION 10
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 03
Clark County
Vancouver
^ Aliases:
Aluminum Company of America - Vancouver
Alcoa-Vancouver
The Aluminum Co. of America (ALCOA) began operating a primary aluminum smelter in
1940 on a 300-acre site adjacent to the Columbia River in Vancouver. In 1986, the
Vancouver Aluminum Company of America (VANALCO) purchased the smelter portion
of the site. About 66,000 tons of waste potlinings containing cyanide, fluoride, and
heavy metals were piled on the ground from 1973 to 1980. ALCOA has been
monitoring groundwater since 1979, and both ALCOA and the State have found
cyanide and fluoride in wells around the piles. One of the wells provides drinking water
and process water for the smelter. An estimated 50,000 people draw drinking water
from public and private wells within 3 miles of the site. Groundwater also is used to
irrigate about 300 acres of cropland.
Site Responsibility:
The site is being addressed through
a combination of Federal, State, and
potentially responsible parties'
actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/24/88
Final Date: 02/21/90
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater and soil are contaminated with cyanide and fluoride.
Additionally, the soil contains reclaimed aluminum. Contaminated
groundwater and soil could pose a health hazard to individuals through
direct contact or accidental ingestion. There is a potential for the
Columbia River to be polluted by contaminants present at the site.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup of
the entire site.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
1
continued
-------
ALCOA (VANCOUVER SMELTER)
Response Action Status
Entire Site: In 1989, ALCOA completed a detailed sampling of the site to
characterize the potlining piles. A report summarizing the sample results
was finished in early 1990 and will be used to evaluate different cleanup
alternatives and to select a final remedy. The Washington Department of Ecology is
reviewing the study.
Site Facts: An Administrative prefer issued by the Washington Department of Ecology
required ALCOA to study the site.
Environmental Progress
After adding the ALCOA (Vancouver Smelter) site to the National Priorities List, the EPA
conducted an initial evaluation and determined that no immediate actions are needed
while the investigations are taking place and cleanup actions are being planned.
-------
AMERICAN
CROSSAR
CONDUIT C
WASHINGTON
EPA ID# WAD057311094
Site Description
ION 1O
SIGNAL DIST. os
.s County
Chehalis
The American Crossarm & Conduit Company {Crossarm) site is located on 16 acres of
land in Chehalis. The site consists of a wood treatment facility, a factory, a cooling
shed, drying kilns, and an impoundment tor surface runoff and wastewater. Crossarm
began operations in 1948, primarily as a treatment facility for utility pole crossarms.
Originally, the crossarms were pressure treated with creosote. Later, the process used
pentachlorophenol(PCP). Beginning in 1952, Crossarm deposited solid waste on the
the property just south of the factory area. In 1983, wood treatment activities ceased.
During a flood in 1986, waters from the nearby Chehalis River flowed onto the site and
were contaminated with PCP and diesel fuel. Residential and commercial
neighborhoods to the north and the northeast were affected by the contamination
transported by the flood. A fire in 1987 left some of the kilns exposed. Later, the site
was operated as a salvage yard storing cars and other machinery in the old factory. The
site is now unoccupied. A warehouse containing dry whey is within 100 feet of the
northern boundary of the site. Apartment buildings are located part of the former wood
treatment operation. There are approximately 200 homes located in residential
neighborhoods northeast and east of the facility. A Softball field is adjacent to the
eastern boundary of the site. Approximately 500 feet away is Dillenbaugh Creek, which
empties into the Chehalis River less than one mile downstream from the site. A
stormwater runoff lagoon, contaminated by Crossarm activities, is a backwater
associated with Dillenbaugh Creek.
Site Responsibility:
The site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/24/88
Final Date: 10/04/89
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater, soil, and sediments are contaminated with PCP and
creosote. Soil also contains dioxins. Accidental ingestion or direct
contact with the contaminated groundwater and soil could pose a health
threat. Some concern has been expressed about the possibility that fish
in Dillensbaugh Creek may be affected by contaminants leaving the site.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
3
continued
-------
AMERICAN CROSSARM & CONDUIT CO.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: immediate actions and a single long-term
remedial phase focusing on the entire site.
Response Action Status
"** Immediate Actions: The EPA began incineration of materials stored on
site in 1988. Approximately 900 tons of material contaminated with PCP
were incinerated by early 1989, using a mobile incinerator. The EPA also
fenced portions of the site to restrict access, due to the safety hazard presented by the
structures on site and the potential for people to come into contact with hazardous
substances.
Entire Site: In early 1990, the EPA began an investigation at the site to
evaluate existing contamination and the extent of the problem. The
investigation will include a study of the soil on and off the site, sediments
in Dillenbaugh Creek, and surface water and groundwater. The EPA expects to
evaluate some of the private properties affected by contamination as a result of the
1986 flood. Alternatives for cleanup of the site will be evaluated once the extent of the
contamination is clearly defined. The investigation is scheduled for completion in 1991.
Site Facts: In 1986, the State issued an order requiring the company to stop
discharging wastewaterto the sewer, investigate all tanks and sumps, and install
secondary containment around all tanks and sumps.
Environmental Progress
The EPA's incineration of 900 tons of contaminated material and fencing of the site
have greatly reduced the potential of direct contact with contaminants at the American
Crossarm site while the investigation continues and final cleanup remedies are planned.
-------
AMERICAN LAKE
GARDENS
WASHINGTO
EPA ID# WAD980833
Site Description
REGION 1O
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 06
Pierce County
Tacoma
Alias:
McChord AFB Area "D"
The American Lake Gardens site occupies approximately 1/2 square mile in a semi-rural
residential community in Tacoma and is surrounded by McChord Air Force Base (AFB)
and Fort Lewis Military Reservation. In 1983, a resident complained to the EPA about
family health problems. The EPA and the Tacoma-Pierce County Health Department
sampled nearby drinking water wells and found high levels of metals and volatile
organic compounds (VOCs). McChord AFB is investigating the contamination that
resulted from Area D, which are former landfills now covered by an on-base golf
course. American Lake Gardens is a residential area with a population of 3,000. There
are two schools nearby. Residences with private wells were connected to an alternate
water supply as part of an immediate action. Parts of McChord Air Force Base and Fort
Lewis are also on the NPL.
Site Responsibility:
The site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 09/08/83
Final Date: 09/21/84
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater is contaminated with VOCs, including trichloroethylene
(TCE), methylene chloride, and benzene, as well as iron. Contaminated
groundwater could pose a potential health hazard to individuals through
direct contact or accidental ingestion. American Lake has the potential to
become polluted from the contaminants present on the site.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: an immediate action and a single long-term
remedial phase focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
5
continued
-------
AMERICAN LAKE GARDENS
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: The EPA drilled and sampled eight monitoring wells
in American Lake Gardens and sampled three monitoring wells
constructed by the Air Force on adjacent property. The laboratory results
showed contamination of the wells to be coming from McChord Air Force Base. The
Air Force provided bottled water to the residents of American Lake Gardens who were
dependent on the contaminated wells. Later, all American Lake Gardens residences
were connected to public water supplies.
Entire Site: The Air Force began an investigation in 1989 to determine the
nature and extent of the contamination. The results of the study will be
used to evaluate alternative cleanup methods. The investigation is
scheduled for completion in 1991.
Site Facts: McChord Air Force Base is participating in the Installation Restoration
Program, a specially funded program under which the Department of Defense {DOD)
Indentifies and controls hazardous wastes on military or other DOD installations.
Environmental Progress
The provision of an alternate water supply to the residents of American Lake Gardens
has significantly reduced the threat of exposure to contaminated groundwater while
site studies continue and final remedies for site cleanup are planned.
-------
BANGOR NAVAL
SUBMARINE I
WASHINGTON
EPA ID# WAS 17002729
Site Description
REGION 1O
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 01
Kitsap County
Siverdale
Aliases:
Sites C, D, & F
US Navy Bangor Submarine Base
US Navy - Naval Submarine Base - Bangor
The Bangor Naval Submarine Base site occupies 10 acres of a 7,000-acre facility in
Bangor. Approximately 42 areas may be contaminated on the active military facility.
Site F, the Wastewater Disposal Area for Demilitarization Operations, has contaminated
the uppermost aquifer. The site received "pink water" wastes resulting from the
demilling (steam cleaning and recovery of solid materials) of ordnance containing
trinitrotoluene (TNT) and cyclonite (RDX) from 1960 to 1971. Approximately 500,000
mines and 75,000 rockets were processed at the site. Other portions of the facility
included in this site involve the disposal of ordnance or ordnance wastewater.
Groundwater underneath the base is used for drinking water, irrigation, and industrial
purposes. The facility, located in a rural area, has approximately 700 people residing
within 1 mile of the site. About 3,900 people living within 3 miles of the site depend on
groundwater for drinking water. Another parcel at this facility, Bangor Ordnance
Disposal, was placed on the NPL in 1987.
Site Responsibility: The site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 07/14/89
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater, soils, surface water, and sediments contain TNT and RDX.
Groundwater is also contaminated with volatile organic compounds
(VOCs), plastics, and heavy metals. People may suffer adverse health
effects if they accidentally ingest or come into direct contact with
contaminated groundwater, soils, surface water, and sediments.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
7
continued
-------
BANGOR NAVAL SUBMARINE BASE
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in three long-term remedial phases focusing on cleanup of
the washout lagoon, the incinerator area, and the dump residue area.
Response Action Status
Washout Lagoon: An investigation of the washout lagoon began in early
1990 to determine the nature and extent of contamination and to identify
cleanup alternatives. The investigation is expected to be completed in
early 1992.
Incinerator Area: In mid-1990, the Navy began an investigation to
determine the nature and extent of contamination in the incinerator area
and to identify cleanup alternatives. The investigation is expected to be
completed in 1992.
Dump Residue Area: The Navy is scheduled to begin an investigation of
the dump residue area in late 1990. Completion of the investigation is
expected in late 1992.
Site Facts: Bangor Naval Submarine Base is participating in the Installation Restoration
Program. Since the development of this program in 1978, the Department of Defense
has been identifying and evaluating military installations for hazardous waste
substances.
Environmental Progress
y^-
An initial evaluation of the Bangor Naval Submarine Base determined that no immediate
actions are needed while the investigations leading to the selection of final cleanup
remedies are under way.
-------
BANGOR ORDNANCE
DISPOSAL
WASHINGTON
EPA ID# WA717002726
Site Description
REGION 10
ONGRESSIONAL DIST. 01
Kitsap County
Bemerton
Aliases:
Site A
Bangor Ordnance Disposal (USN Sub Base)
US Navy Submarine Base - Bangor
The Bangor Ordnance Disposal site is a 6-acre hazardous waste site on the Bangor
Naval Submarine Base used by the Explosive Ordnance Disposal Team as a test range.
It also includes two debris areas totaling 12 acres. Between 1965 and 1973, the U.S.
Navy detonated and burned over 2 million pounds of explosives at the base. Surface
water and shallow groundwater are contaminated as a result of these activities. In
1983, the Navy moved to control the migration of potential chemical waste from the
site by diverting stormwater runoff from the burn site to an area between Vinland and
Cattail Lake. Wilkes Marsh covers approximately 4 acres and is about 500 feet from
the site. Approximately 3,900 people reside within 3 miles of the base and depend on
groundwater for drinking water. An agricultural area surrounds the facility. Another
parcel at this facility was proposed for addition to the NPL in 1989.
Site Responsibility:
The site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/15/84
Final Date: 07/22/87
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater, soil, and surface water are contaminated with
trinitrotoluene {TNT) and cyclonite (RDX). Accidental ingestion and direct
contact with contaminated groundwater, soil, and surface water could
expose people on or near the site to pollutants. The base is 1/2 mile from
Hood Canal, a sensitive marine environment.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
9
continued
-------
BANGOR ORDNANCE DISPOSAL
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on the entire
site.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: The Navy has begun an investigation to determine the nature
and extent of contamination at the site and to identify final cleanup
remedies. The investigation is expected to be completed in 1991.
Site Facts: The Bangor Naval Submarine Base is participating in the Installation
Restoration Program, a specially funded program established in 1978. Under this
program, the Department of Defense has been identifying and evaluating its past
hazardous waste sites and controlling the migration of hazardous contaminants from
these sites.
Environmental Progress
An initial evaluation of the the Bangor Ordnance Disposal site determined that no
immediate actions are needed to protect public health or the environment while the
investigation leading to final cleanup is under way.
10
-------
BONNEVILLE POW
ADMINISTRA
COMPLEX (
WASHINGTON
EPA ID# WA1891406349
REGION 10
:~ CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 03
Clark County-
North of Vancouver
Aliases:
USDOE-BPA Ross Substation
Ross Substation
Site Description
The Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) Ross Complex site has occupied 200 acres
north of Vancouver since 1939. The facility became part of the Department of Energy
(DOE) when the department was established. The complex serves as the control
center for the generation and transmission of electricity throughout the Pacific
Northwest. The site contains a number of storage and disposal areas including the
DOB-1 Drainfield, where laboratory wastes were deposited; the Cold Creek Fill Area,
where soil potentially contaminated with oil, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and
heavy metals was disposed of; and the Fog Chamber Disposal Area, where capacitors
containing PCBs were buried in trenches. In 1987 and 1988, the BPA sampled an on-
site well and found volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Approximately 105,000 people
in Vancouver obtain drinking water from public wells within 3 miles of the site. Cold
Creek is about 450 feet downgradient of the complex and is fed by shallow
groundwater flowing under the site. Vancouver Lake, located 1 1/2 miles away, is used
for fishing and other recreational activities.
site Responsibility:
sjte js being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 07/14/89
Final Date: 11/21/89
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater contains VOCs including trichloroethane and chloroform.
Soil is contaminated with oil, PCBs, pentachlorophenol(PCP), and
mercury. People who ingest or come into direct contact with
contaminated groundwater or soil may be at risk. Contaminants leaching
from the site potentially could flow into Cold Creek, harming wildlife in or
around the water.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
11
continued
-------
BONNEVILLE POWER ADMINISTRATION ROSS COMPLEX (USDOE)
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed through a single long-term remedial phase focusing on
cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: An investigation to determine the nature and extent of
contamination at the site is scheduled to begin in 1990. There are 19
potential source areas that will be investigated. Completion of the
investigation is expected in 1992, and at that time the final site cleanup remedy will be
selected.
Site Facts: The EPA, the State, and Bonneville Power have signed an Interagency
Agreements govern site cleanup.
Environmental Progress
At the time this summary was written, the Bonneville Power site had just obtained
National Priorities List status, and it is too early to discuss environmental progress. A
study will be performed to assess the need for any intermediate actions to make the
site safer while planning an investigation leading to final cleanup actions. Results of
this assessment will be described in our next edition.
12
-------
CENTRALIA M
LANDFI
WASHINGT
EPA ID# WAD9808
REGION 1O
^** eOl^RESSIONAL DIST. 03
Lewis Countv
Centralia
Aliases:
Lewis County Dump
Centralia Sanitary Landfill
Site Description
The Centralia Municipal Landfill is an active landfill covering 50 acres of an 80-acre
parcel of land in Centralia. The landfill began operations in 1958, using a trenching
method where trenches were excavated, filled with wastes, and covered. Presently,
the landfill uses the lift method, where waste is placed in layers and covered daily with
clean fill. None of the fill areas at the landfill have been lined. A system of leachate
collection trenches was installed to intercept the leachate generated by the landfill. The
collected leachate is pumped to the municipal wastewater treatment plant in Centralia.
In some areas, however, leachate containing heavy metals can drain directly to Salzer
Creek, located south of the site. Historically, the landfill accepted municipal wastes and
some industrial wastes including clarif ier sludge, boiler ash, polychlprinated biphenyl
(PCB)-contaminated soil, paint shop wastes, empty pesticide containers, electric burn
wastes, and sulfur wastes. Groundwater at the site reaches the surface during the
rainy season. The upper and lower aquifers are hydraulically connected, so water can
move between them. Over 12,000 people living within 3 miles of the landfill obtain
drinking water from the lower aquifer. The City of Centralia's nearest municipal well is
located 1 1/2 miles north of the landfill. The nearest private well is about 700 feet west
of the site. Salzer Creek is a tributary to the Chelalis River; water from Salzer Creek and
the Chehalis River is used for irrigation. The City plans to close the landfill in 1992.
Site Responsibility: The site is being addressed through
Federal and State actions.
IMPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/24/88
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater contains heavy metals such as manganese, sodium, and
lead. Soil and sediments are contaminated with arsenic. Leachate
emanating from the landfill contains heavy metals. People who
accidentally ingest or come into direct contact with contaminated
groundwater, sediments, soil, or leachate may be at risk. Leachate drains
from the landfill into Salzer Creek, a spawning area, nursery, and migration
route for Coho Salmon. Salzer Creek empties into the Chehalis River,
which is a habitat for Chinook, Coho, and Chum Salmon, and Steelhead
Trout. Any contaminants in the creek and river may harm wildlife in or
around the water.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
13
continued
-------
CENTRALIA MUNICIPAL LANDFILL
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on the entire
site.
Response Action Status
and the environment.
Entire Site: The State is planning to investigate the site to determine the
nature and extent of contamination. The investigation results will lead to
the selection of a cleanup remedy that will be protective of human health
Environmental Progress
An initial evaluation determined that no immediate actions are needed at the Centralia
Municipal Landfill site while awaiting the commencement of an investigation leading to
the selection of final cleanup remedies.
14
-------
COLBER
WASHING
EPA ID# WAD9805
Site Description
REGION 1O
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 05
Spokane County
2 miles northwest of Colbert
Alias:
Colbert Dump
The Colbert Landfill site covers 40 acres 2 miles northwest of Colbert. From 1968
through 1986, the landfill received both municipal and commercial wastes. Between
1975 and 1980, a local electronics manufacturing company, Key Tronic Corporation,
disposed of spent organic solvents at the landfill. These wastes were typically brought
to the landfill in drums and poured down the sides of open trenches to mix with the soil
or ordinary municipal refuse already in the trench. During the same period, Fairchild Air
Force Base disposed of various solvent wastes at the site. In 1980, nearby residents
became concerned over the disposal practices. Several private drinking wells were
sampled and found to contain solvents. The landfill was closed in 1986. The site is
located in a semi-rural area. Approximately 1,500 people live within 3 miles of the site;
many of the nearby residents operate small crop and livestock farms. The Little
Spokane River is about 1/2 mile away from the site.
Site Responsibility:
The site is being addressed through
a combination of Federal, State, and
potentially responsible parties'
actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 12/30/82
Final Date: 09/08/83
T\
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater contains volatile organic compounds (VOCs) including
methylene chloride and trichloroethylene (TCE). Methylene chloride also
is found in the soil. Ingestion and direct contact with contaminated
groundwater and soil may pose a potential health threat.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
15
continued
-------
COLBERT LANDFILL
Cleanup Approach
The site Is being addressed in two stages: immediate actions and a single long-term
remedial phase-focusing on the entire site.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In 1984, Spokane County and Key Tronic began
supplying residents affected by polluted groundwater with bottled water.
In 1985, the EPA extended the public water supply main to 135 affected
residences.
Entire Site: In 1987, the EPA selected a remedy to clean up the landfill
by: (1) installing and operating interception wells to prevent the
contaminants from spreading; (2) removing the contaminated materials
that have entered the aquifers and are contributing to the contaminant
plume, and installing and operating extraction wells in the area where the plumes
originate; (3) reducing the toxicity, mobility, and volume of contaminants by treating all
extracted groundwater from both the interception and extraction wells; and (4)
providing an alternate water supply system to any residents deprived of their domestic
supply due to the contamination or to the construction of interception or extraction
wells. Spokane County, under supervision by the State and the EPA, has drilled wells
for monitoring the groundwater. The pilot extraction wells and treatment plant are
scheduled for testing in 1990. Construction of the final system is expected to be
finished in 1993.
Site Facts: In 1981, the EPA entered into a Cooperative Agreement with Spokane
County to investigate the site. The EPA also entered into a Cooperative Agreement
with the State to investigate the site and to develop cleanup alternatives in 1985.
Environmental Progress
The immediate actions of providing bottled water and extending the municipal water
supply system to affected residents have significantly reduced the threat to the public
from the Colbert Landfill site while the pilot extraction wells and treatment plant are
tested.
16
-------
COMMENCEME
NEARSH
TIDE FLA
WASHINGTON
EPA ID# WAD9807263
REGION 10
GRESSIONAL DIST. 06
Pierce Counly
Tacoma
Site Description
The Commencement Bay, Near Shore/Tide Flats site covers 12 square miles in
Tacoma. The Near Shore area is defined as the point along the Ruston Way Shoreline
from the Head of City Waterway to Point Defiance. The Tide Flats area includes the
Hylebos, Blair, Wheeler-Osgood, Sitcum, Milwaukee, St. Paul, Middle, and City
waterways, plus the Puyallup River upstream to the Interstate 5 Highway Bridge.
Industrial development of the Commencement Bay area began in the late 1800s.
Dredge and fill activities in the Tide Flats area began in the 1920s to open navigable
waterways where numerous industrial and commercial operations have located. These
operations include pulp and lumber mills, shipbuilding, shipping, chlorine and chemical
production, concrete production, aluminum and copper smelting, oil refineries, and
other chemical manufacturing. Hazardous substances and waste material were
released into the terrestrial, freshwater, groundwater, and marine environments. From
1890 until 1986, the American Smelting and Refining Company, Inc. (ASARCO)
operated a smelter on the shore of Commencement Bay. Originally it operated as a
lead smelter, but was converted to a copper smelter by 1911. The smelter specialized
in processing ores with high arsenic concentrations and recovered arsenic trioxide and
metallic arsenic as products for sale. Copper smelting and arsenic operations ceased in
1985 and 1986, respectively, for economic reasons. The Tacoma Tar Pits area of the
site lies between the Puyallup River, the City of Tacoma, and the Wheeler-Osgood
Waterway. These bodies of water are not used as a water supply, but support
extensive fish and shellfish populations. In 1924, a coal gasification plant began
operations, and waste materials from the manufacturing process were disposed of on
site. The plant discontinued operations in 1956. From 1965 to 1966, the plant was
dismantled and demolished. Most of the metal structures were removed from the site;
however, all demolition debris and below-grade structures were left in place, including
tanks and pipelines containing tars. In 1967, a metal recycling company began
operating at the site. Recycling of automobile batteries introduced acid, heavy metals,
lead, and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) into the soil. Commencement Bay supports
important fishery resources and recreational fishing. Approximately 4,000 people
shorefish and boatfish in the bay, and about 15,000 people are exposed to pollutants
through food chain contamination. The City of Tacoma has a population of 162,100
people. Another portion of Commencement Bay, the South Tacoma Channel, also is on
the National Priorities List.
Site Responsibility:
The site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/01/81
Final Date: 09/08/83
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
17
continued
-------
COMMENCEMENT BAY, NEAR SHORE/TIDE FLATS
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater, sediments, and soils are contaminated with volatile organic
compounds (VOCs), polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PNAs), PCBs,
and heavy metals. Fish in Commencement Bay contain VOCs, PCBs, and
heavy metals including arsenic, lead, and mercury. People who touch or
ingest contaminated groundwater, sediments, or soil may be at risk.
Contaminants have bioaccumulated in bay fish and may pose a health
threat to those who eat them. The County has advised people not to eat
bottom fish and shellfish from Commencement Bay.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in seven stages: immediate actions and six long-term
remedial phases focusing on cleanup of the ASARCO Smelter, the Tacoma Tar Pits,
and Ruston; Source Control; and cleanup of Marine Sediments and ASARCO
Sediments.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In 1986, ASARCO, under EPA monitoring,
demolished and cleaned some of the structures used for copper smelting,
arsenic trioxide and metallic arsenic production, and arsenic emissions
control. In 1989, under EPA monitoring, ASARCO began cleaning 11 publicly
accessible properties starting with Ruston Park, Ruston School yard, and a privately
owned vacant lot. Soil is being excavated, and the excavated areas are being filled with
clean soil and reseeded. Ruston Park is being covered with sod. The contaminated soil
removed from the properties is being stored on the smelter property until a final
cleanup plan is selected for the smelter site. ASARCO also will clean up 8 additional
properties. These actions are scheduled to be completed in late 1990.
ASARCO Smelter: Under EPA monitoring, ASARCO is investigating the
extent of contamination at the smelter. Once the investigation is
completed, scheduled for 1990, methods for cleanup will be
recommended.
Tacoma Tar Pits: In 1987, the EPA selected a remedy to clean up the
Tacoma Tar Pits by excavating all contaminated soils and stabilizing them
y^h a polymer/cement mixture; covering the stabilized soil with asphalt;
channeling and managing the surface waters; monitoring the groundwater;
and removing and treating ponded water. The potentially responsible parties are
designing the technical specifications, under EPA monitoring, for cleanup of the tar pits.
Treatability studies are under way. The design phase is expected to be completed in
late 1990, at which time the cleanup will begin.
continued
18
-------
COMMENCEMENT BAY, WEAR SHORE/TIDE JVLATS
Response Action Status Continued
Ruston: The EPA is investigating the total extent of arsenic
contamination in the Ruston/North Tacoma communities. Soil sampling is
expected to be completed in mid-1990. The EPA is scheduled to
complete the investigation in the Ruston/North Tacoma area in early 1991.
Source Control: In 1989, the EPA selected a range of remedies that are
being applied to each of approximately 300 suspected sources of site-
wide sediment contamination. Source control actions may include
permitted discharges from companies and storm drains and cleanup of
contaminated soils and groundwater. The State is overseeing the design of the
technical specifications for the remedies. Source control cleanup has begun in all
waterways and is complete in one of them. The schedule varies among the problem
areas, but source control is expected to be accomplished from 1991 through 1999.
Marine Sediments: In 1989, the EPA selected remedies to clean up the
sediments site-wide after the source of the contamination is controlled.
The following problem waterways will be addressed: St. Paul, Sitcum,
Mouth of Hylebos, Head of Hylebos, Middle, Wheeler-Osgood, and Head
of City. Marginally contaminated sediments will be left alone, because they will
naturally recover over a 10-year period. However, the sediments will be monitored to
confirm that natural cleanup is occurring. The more seriously contaminated sediments
that will not recover naturally will be confined with a substantial physical barrier to
isolate the contaminated sediments and protect aquatic animals. The contaminated
area may be covered with clean sediments, or contaminated sediments may be moved
and disposed of or confined elsewhere. Use of the waterways will be restricted until
the cleanup is completed. The source discharges and sediments will be monitored
throughout the cleanup phase of the project. The EPA will oversee sediment cleanup
operations. Sediment cleanup in each of the problem areas is being phased over the
next 10 years according to the success of the source control remedies.
ASARCO Sediments: A supplemental study is being developed to
further examine contaminated marine sediments off-shore from the
ASARCO smolter. Cleanup of these sediments is being handled
separately from other sediments, because they are relatively unique in terms of grain
size, depth, and steepness of slope. The supplemental study is expected to be ready
for public comment in late 1990.
Site Facts: In 1989, the EPA and ASARCO signed a Consent Order requiring ASARCO
to investigate and clean up its smelter.
Environmental Progress
The demolishing of parts of the ASARCO Smelter and the cleaning of publicly
accessible areas of Ruston have reduced the threat of the public conning into direct
contact with contaminants at the Commencement Bay - Near Shore/Tide Flats site
while investigations and final cleanup activities continue.
19
-------
CHANNEL
WASHINGTON
EPA ID# WAD980726301
COMMENCEMEEKJi
SOUTH
Site Description
REGION 10
GRESSIONAL DIST. 06
Pierce County
Tacoma
Aliases:
Well 12-A
American Surplus Sales
South Tacoma Swamp
Tacoma City Landfill
Union Pacific Railroad Tunnel
Time Oil
The Commencement Bay, South Tacoma Channel site covers 2 1/2 square miles in
Tacoma. The site includes three areas: the South Tacoma Field, the Tacoma Municipal
Landfill, and wells supplying drinking water to the City of Tacoma. The South Tacoma
Field covers about 300 acres of industrial, commercial, residential, and vacant land.
Parts of the area were used for railcar construction and repair, salvage operations, and
the disposal of industrial and construction debris. The Tacoma Landfill covers 190
acres and is operated by the City of Tacoma. Operations at the landfill began in 1960,
and it accepted municipal and industrial wastes, construction and demolition wastes,
and bulk waste. About 4 million tons of refuse have been deposited at the landfill,
including wastes received in the 1960s and 1970s that have since been designated as
hazardous substances. Well 12A is one of 13 wells used by the City of Tacoma to
meet peak summer and emergency water demands. The well was removed from
service by the City when it was found to be contaminated. Investigations by the EPA
found the contaminants present in Well 12A also in the soil and groundwater at the
Time Oil and the Burlington Northern properties. Waste oil and solvent reclamation
processes and paint and solvent manufacturing were operated on these properties.
The landfill is surrounded by residential development and open land, with some
commercial and industrial development. An aquifer beneath the site provides drinking
water to the town of Fircrest and the City of Tacoma. Approximately 24,000 people live
within 1 mile of the South Tacoma Field. Another portion of Commencement Bay, the
Near Shore/Tide Flats site, also is on the National Priorities List.
Site Responsibility:
The site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/01/81
Final Date: 09/08/83
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
20
continued
-------
COMMENCEMENT BAY, SOUTH TACOMA CHANNEL
L\
Threats and Contaminants
Landfill gas, groundwater, and sediments contain volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) including methylene chloride and toluene. Soil and
surface water are contaminated with VOCs and heavy metals. Sewers
and leachate also contain VOCs. People who ingest or come into direct
contact with contaminated groundwater, surface water, soil, and
sediments may be at risk. Inhalation of gas from the landfill may pose a
health threat. Groundwater flows to the southwest toward Leach Creek,
which lies about 1/4 mile from the landfill. Consequently, wetlands
downstream of the landfill could receive contaminants from the surface
water and groundwater.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in four stages: immediate actions and three long-term
remedial phases focusing on the cleanup of Well 12A and Time Oil, the South Tacoma
Field, and Tacoma Landfill.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In 1983, the EPA began pumping and treating the
water in Well 12A by air stripping. In 1988, a carbon adsorption
groundwater treatment system was installed near the Time Oil property to
control the source of contamination. Pumping the well has slowed the contaminant
movement and is cleaning the aquifer. In 1990, Burlington Northern, under EPA
monitoring, dismantled the former brass foundry and removed underground storage
tanks and stained soil around the tanks in the South Tacoma Field area.
Well 12A and Time Oil: In 1985, EPA selected the following remedy to
clean up Well 12A: (1) continuing to operate the air stripper installed as an
immediate action; (2) extracting and treating the groundwater at the
source to remove the volatile organics; (3) drilling and sampling additional
soil test borings during the technical design phase; (4) removing a length of railroad
track adjacent to the Time Oil property and excavating contaminated soils and filter
coke under the railroad spur; (5) performing additional undercutting to remove
concentrated contaminants; (6) installing drain field piping in the excavated areas and
covering it with a permeable material; (7) paving or placing a soil cover on the portions
of the unpaved Time Oil parking lot; (8) transporting and disposing of all excavated
contaminated soil in a federally approved landfill; (9) prohibiting the use of groundwater;
and (10) monitoring the groundwater, and after two years of operation, evaluating the
effectiveness of the cleanup. In 1986, under EPA oversight, Burlington Northern
excavated approximately 1,000 cubic yards of soil and disposed of it in a federally
approved facility. In 1987, the remedy was expanded to include carbon adsorption
treatment for the groundwater and vapor extraction for the soil. In 1988, the EPA
installed a carbon filtration system to remove the solvents from the aquifer at the
source of the contamination. The EPA currently is installing the vacuum extraction
system to clean the remaining contaminated soils.
continued
21
-------
COMMENCEMENT BAY, SOUTH TACOMA CHANNEL
Response Action Status Continued
South Tacoma Field: Burlington Northern had begun investigations at
the South Tacoma Field; however, new potentially responsible parties
have been identified. The investigation has been suspended until the EPA
determines if the new parties should be included.
Tacoma Landfill: In 1988, the EPA selected a remedy to clean up the
Tacoma Landfill by: (1) capping the landfill and directing the runoff into
storm or sanitary sewers; (2) installing a gas extraction system and gas
probes to monitor methane gas in the landfill; (3) installing a groundwater
pump and treat system and discharging the treated water to a local creek or the public
works system; (4) providing an alternate water supply to residents if necessary; and (5)
monitoring the groundwater and surface water. The potentially responsible parties,
under EPA oversight, are designing the technical specifications to clean up the landfill.
The design of the landfill cap is expected to be completed in 1990. Design of the
groundwater remedy is expected to be completed in late 1991.
Site Facts: In 1987, the EPA and Burlington Northern Railroad signed an
Administrative Order on Consent, under which the railroad agreed to investigate and
clean up the property it owns at South Tacoma Field.
Environmental Progress
The immediate actions of pumping and treating the groundwater, the excavation of
contaminated soil, and the removal of underground storage tanks have significantly
reduced the potential of exposure to contaminants from the Commencement Bay,
South Tacoma Channel while cleanup of the site continues.
22
-------
FAIRCHILD
BASE (4
WASHINGTON
EPA ID# WA9571924647
Site Description
FORCE
WASTE
REGION 10
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 05
Spokane County
2 miles west of Spokane
The Fairchild Air Force Base occupies approximately 4,300 acres 12 miles west of
Spokane. The base opened in 1942 as the Spokane Army Air Depot. In 1950, the
name was changed to Fairchild Air Force Base. Its primary mission is to maintain and
repair aircraft such as bombers and tankers. Initially there were four waste areas of
concern covering 85 acres: the Building 1034 french drain and dry well system, two
landfills, and the industrial waste lagoons. However, during investigations additional
areas were found, including a fire training area and multiple spill areas. During past
base activities, the equivalent of over 4,000 drums of carbon tetrachloride and other
solvents, paint wastes, plating sludges containing cadmium and lead, and related
industrial wastes were disposed of in the four areas. Groundwater sampling in 1986
and 1987 detected elevated levels of contamination. A well within base boundaries
serves as a standby water supply for the base's 5,200 employees. Approximately 400
private wells serving about 20,000 people are within 3 miles of the facility. West
Medical Lake, Medical Lake, and Silver Lake are within 3 miles downstream of Fairchild
AFB. These lakes support wildlife and are used for recreational activities.
site Responsibility: The site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
IMPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/24/88
Final Date: 03/13/89
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater contains volatile organic compounds (VOCs) including
trichloroethylene (TCE), and semi-volatile and inorganic compounds.
People who ingest or corne into direct contact with contaminated
groundwater may suffer adverse health effects. The sand and gravel
beneath the site facilitate the movement of contaminants into the
groundwater, as well as the movement of contaminated groundwater. If
contaminants leach from the base into the nearby lakes, wildlife in or
around the water may be harmed.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
23
continued
-------
FAIRCfflLD AIR FORCE BASE (4 WASTE AREAS)
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in seven stages: immediate actions and six long-term
remedial phases focusing on cleanup of the French Drain/Dry Well; the Craig Road
Landfill, and the Fire Training Pit, Flightline Area, Old Base Landfill, and the Wastewater
Lagoons.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In 1989, the Air Force provided bottled water to
nearby trailer park residents when their water supply was found to be
contaminated. The residents were later connected to the base's water
supply. The Air Force also plans to provide nearby Vietzke Village with a new potable
water line.
French Drain/Dry Well: In 1990, Fairchild Air Force Base began
investigating the french drain and dry well system of Building 1034 to
determine the extent of contamination. The investigation is expected to be
completed in 1992.
Craig Road Landfill: The Air Force is investigating the Craig Road Landfill.
Based on the results of the investigation, scheduled for completion in
1992, measures to clean up the landfill will be recommended.
Fire Training Pit, Flightline Area, Old Base Landfill, and Wastewater
Lagoons: The Air Force will conduct 4 separate investigations in these
areas to determine the type and extent of contamination. The
investigations are scheduled to begin in late 1990 and be completed in 1992.
Site Facts: Fairchild Air Force Base is participating in the Installation Restoration
Program, a specially funded program established in 1978. Under this program, the
Department of Defense has been identifying and evaluating its past hazardous waste
sites and controlling the migration of hazardous contaminants from those sites.
Environmental Progress
The provision of an alternate water supply to the residents of a trailer park has reduced
the threat of public exposure to contaminants while investigations at Fairchild Air Force
Base continue and cleanup actions are planned.
24
-------
FMC CORP.
(YAKIMA
WASHINGTON
EPA ID# WAD000643577
\ REGION 1O
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 04
Yakima County
Yakima
Aliases:
Yakima FMC
FMC - Agricultural Chemical Division
Site Description
The FMC Corp. {Yakima Pit) site, covering about 4 acres in Yakima, operated as a
pesticide formulation facility from 1951 until 1986. From 1952 to 1969, FMC disposed
of agricultural pesticides in a "poison pit" on site. Some of the pesticides that may
have been disposed of in the pit include DDT, diazinon, and dieldrin. Access to the pit
area is restricted by a 6-foot chain link fence. There are about 10,000 people living
within 1 mile of the site, with the nearest residence being about 200 yards from the
facility. Area groundwater is used for drinking water, industrial purposes, crop
irrigation, and livestock watering.
Site Responsibility:
The site is being addressed by
Federal and potentially responsible
parties'actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 12/30/82
Final Date: 09/08/83
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater and soil are contaminated with various pesticides including
DDT derivatives. Potential health threats include direct contact with or
ingestion of contaminated groundwater and soil.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: immediate actions and a long-term remedial
phase focusing cleanup of the entire site.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
25
continued
-------
FMC CORP. CYAKIMAPIT)
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In 1988, FMC, under EPA monitoring, began
excavating and removing the contaminated soil from the former disposal
pit. Excavation of the pit was stopped at one point because of the high
level of groundwater and concern over causing further groundwater contamination. In
1989, while the water was at a seasonal low, the remaining contaminated soil was
excavated. Approximately 335 tons of contaminated soil were disposed of in a
federally approved facility.
Entire Site: FMC, under EPA oversight, completed a study of the site in
1990. The EPA selected a remedy that includes incinerating the
contaminated soils on site and monitoring the groundwater.
Site Facts: In 1987, FMC signed an order with the EPA requiring the company to
conduct an investigation of the site. In 1988, the EPA issued a second order to FMC
requiring excavation of contaminated materials from the pit.
Environmental Progress
The excavation and removal of 335 tons of contaminated soil have greatly reduced the
threat of exposure to pesticides while final cleanup actions at the FMC Corp. (Yakima
Pit) site are being planned.
26
-------
FORT LEWIS
(LANDFIL
WASHINGTON
EPA ID# WA921405341
Site Description
REGION 10
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 06
Pierce County
Near Tacoma
Aliases:
U.S. Army 9th Infantry - Fort Lewis
U.S. Army - Fort Lewis
Fort Lewis
The 86,000-acre Fort Lewis Army facility is located near Tacoma on the southeastern
shore of Puget Sound and has been an Army facility since 1917. Industrial operations
include maintenance of aircraft and vehicles, repair and refurbishing of weapons, and
neutralization of caustic paint-stripping waste and battery acids. Prior to the mid-1970s,
wastes were disposed of in on-site landfills covering approximately 225 acres. The
104-acre Landfill No. 5 has been in operation since 1967, accepting mixed municipal
solid waste from Fort Lewis and McChord Air Force Base. Wastes disposed of include
spent solvents, plating wastes, pesticides, and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). The
landfill is scheduled to stop accepting wastes in 1990. Access to the site is restricted.
Approximately 46,700 people live on the post. The closest residence to the site is
located about 2 miles away. Municipal drinking water wells are located within 1 1/2
miles of the site. Another hazardous waste unit at the Fort Lewis Army facility, the
Logistics Center, is also on the National Priorities List.
site Responsibility: The site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/15/84
Final Date: 07/22/87
Threats and Contaminants
Elevated levels of heavy metals and organic compounds have leached
from the landfill into the groundwater. Potential human health threats
include direct contact and ingestion of contaminated groundwater.
Groundwater flows north toward Puget Sound.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on the entire
site.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
27
continued
-------
FORT LEWIS (LANDFILL NO. 5)
Response Action Status
Entire Site: The U.S. Army is conducting a study to determine the nature
and extent of the leachate plume emanating from the landfill. The study
will define the contaminants of concern and recommend alternatives for
final site cleanup. The study is scheduled to be completed in 1991.
Site Facts: Fort Lewis is participating in the Installation Restoration Program. Under
this program the Department of Defense has been identifying and evaluating its past
hazardous waste sites and controlling the migration of hazardous contaminants from
those sites.
Environmental Progress
An initial evaluation of the Fort Lewis (Landfill No. 5) site determined that no immediate
actions are needed while an investigation leading to the selection of final cleanup
remedies is under way.
28
-------
FORT LEWIS
LOGISTIC
WASHINGTON
EPA ID# WA72 lOOQOOi
Site Description
REGION 1O
GRESSIONAL DIST. 06
Pierce County
Tilllcum
Alias:
U.S. Army - Fort Lewis Logistic Center
The 86,000-acre Fort Lewis Army facility is located near Tacoma on the southeastern
shore of Puget Sound and has been an Army facility since 1917. Industrial operations
include maintenance of aircraft and vehicles, repair and refurbishing of weapons, and
neutralization of caustic paint stripping waste and battery acids. The 650-acre Logistics
Center is primarily an industrial facility with some limited commercial use.
Groundwater beneath the site is contaminated with volatile organic compounds {VOCs)
that are migrating toward the American Lake Gardens housing area and the City of
Tillicum. The contamination zone is about 10,000 feet long, 2,500 feet wide, and
extends 80 feet into the ground. Approximately 46,700 people live on the post. The
closest residence to the site is about 2 miles away. Another hazardous waste unit at
the Fort Lewis Army facility, the Landfill No. 5 site, is also on the National Priorities List.
Site Responsibility: The site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 07/14/89
Final Date: 11/21/89
Threats and Contaminants
VOCs including trichloroethylene (TCE) and dichloroethylene have
contaminated soil and shallow groundwater beneath the Logistics Center.
TCE also has been detected in the deeper drinking water Salmon Springs
aquifer and in Lynn Lake. Potential health risks include accidental
ingestion or direct contact with contaminated groundwater, soil, or
surface water. Local residents receive their water from the Lakewood
Water District, which pumps water from deep, uncontaminated sources.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
29
continued
-------
FORT LEWIS LOGISTICS CENTER
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on the entire
site.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: The U.S. Army is conducting an investigation to determine
the nature and extent of contamination at the Logistics Center. The study
will define the contaminants of concern and recommend alternatives for
final cleanup. The study is scheduled for completion in 1990.
Site Facts: Fort Lewis is participating in the Installation Restoration Program. Under
this program, the Department of Defense has been identifying and evaluating its past
hazardous waste sites and controlling the migration of hazardous contaminants from
those sites.
I Environmental Progress
An initial evaluation determined that no immediate actions are needed at the Fort Lewis
Logistics Center site while an investigation leading to the selection of final cleanup
remedies continues.
30
-------
FRONTIER HARD
CHROME, I
WASHINGTO
EPA ID# WAD053614
Site Description
REGION 1O
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 03
Clark County-
Vancouver
The 1 1/4-acre Frontier Hard Chrome, Inc. site is a former chrome plating facility located
in a light-industrial and manufacturing area of Vancouver. Beginning in 1955, the site
was primarily occupied by two companies engaged in the chrome plating business.
Presently, the facility is being used as a storage and staging area for a neighboring
business. From 1970 to 1976, wastewater from the facility's chrome plating operation
was discharged to the sanitary sewer system. In 1976, the City of Vancouver
requested that an alternate disposal method be used until the wastewater treatment
plant could be modified to accommodate the chromium. Plating wastewater then was
discharged into a dry well on the property and into a large depression located beyond
the eastern property line. In 1983, the State ordered Frontier to stop discharging into
the dry well. The plating baths contained variable amounts of dissolved metals and
other contaminants stripped from the metal pieces being plated, including iron, nickel,
and trivalent chromium. The Columbia River is approximately 1/2 mile south of the
facility. Drinking water for 10,000 Vancouver residents is drawn from an aquifer under
the site. The nearest city well is about a mile upgradienttrom a contaminated well.
The closest residence is on adjoining property to the north of the site, and two others
are a few hundred feet farther north.
Site Responsibility: The site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
IMPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 12/30/82
Final Date: 09/08/83
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater and soils are contaminated with heavy metals and volatile
organic compounds (VOCs). People may be exposed to pollutants
through ingestion or direct contact with contaminated groundwater or
soils.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
31
continued
-------
FRONTIER HARD CHROME, INC.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup of
the entire site.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: The EPA selected the following remedy to clean up the site:
0) excavating chromium-contaminated soils; (2) treating the excavated
materials by chemical stabilization; (3) replacing the treated materials; (4)
demolishing the buildings on the site; (5) installing a cap over the site to
prevent leaching of chromium from the soils and to control surface water runoff
resulting from rain; (6) installing groundwater extraction wells; (7) installing a
groundwater treatment system to remove contaminants; (8) discharging the treated
water into the Columbia River or into the City of Vancouver's sewer system; and (9)
developing regulatory controls restricting the use of groundwater and controlling the
drilling of new wells in the groundwater plume. The EPA is preparing the technical
specifications and design for the soil stabilization and groundwater treatment cleanup
technologies. The design phase is scheduled for completion in 1991.
Environmental Progress
The EPA conducted an initial evaluation of the Frontier Hard Chrome site and
determined that no immediate actions are needed while the design of the final cleanup
remedy is under way.
32
-------
GENE:
ELECTRIC
(SPOKANBSft
WASHINGTOT$r~~
EPA ID# WADOO1865450
Site Description
REGION 1O
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 05
Spokane County
Spokane
Aliases:
Spokane Apparatus Service Shop
General Electric-Old Site
GE-Spokane Site
The General Electric Company site covers about 5 acres in Spokane and includes the
company's former industrial service shop and adjacent leased property. From 1961 to
1980, General Electric cleaned, repaired, and restored electrical transformers. The
company stored oils from the transformers, electrical motors, switches, pumps,
compressors, and other related equipment. Some of this equipment contained
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) that entered dry wells on site as a result of steam
cleaning activities. General Electric began a study of the contamination at the site after
the Washington Department of Ecology (WDOE) found high levels of PCBs in soils.
The site is located along the northern edge of a light industrial area in eastern Spokane.
About 200,000 people live within 3 miles of the site. The facility overlies the Spokane
Valley-Rathdrum Prairie Aquifer, which the EPA has designated as a sole source of
drinking water for the area. There are approximately 50 private wells within 4 square
miles of the site. The facility is approximately 1,200 feet south of the Spokane River.
Site Responsibility:
The site is being addressed through
a combination of Federal, State, and
potentially responsible parties'
actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/24/88
Final Date: 10/04/89
Threats and Contaminants
L\\
On-site groundwater and sludge contain PCBs. Soil is contaminated with
PCBs and heavy metals, including copper and lead. Individuals who come
into direct contact with or accidentally ingest contaminated groundwater,
soil, or sludge may suffer adverse health effects.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
33
continued
-------
GENERAL ELECTRIC CO. (SPOKANE SHOP)
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: immediate actions and a long-term remedial
phase focusing on the entire site.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: The immediate actions scheduled for mid-1990
include demolishing the service shop and removing it from the site,
BBssas^^ excavating underground structures, transporting and disposing of building
debris and a limited amount of soil in a hazardous waste disposal facility, drilling soil
test borings, installing additional groundwater monitoring wells, and sampling the
groundwater.
Entire Site: General Electric, under State supervision, is conducting a
study to determine the nature and extent of contamination at the site.
The study is scheduled to be completed in mid-1991.
Site Facts: General Electric and the State signed an Agreed Order, under which the
company will conduct an investigation of the site.
Environmental Progress
Demolishing the service shop and excavating underground structures and soils will
reduce the threat of exposure to contaminants while an investigation leading to the
selection of a final cleanup remedy is under way.
34
-------
GREENACRES
LANDFILL
WASHINGTON
EPA IDS WAD98051
Site Description
REGION 1O
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 05
Spokane County
14 miles east of Spokane
Alias:
Liberty Lake Landfill
The Greenacres Landfill Site is a 45 acre landfill located near Liberty Lake and 14 miles
east of Spokane. The landfill was operated as an open municipal dump from 1951 to
1967. Upon dissolution of the Greenacres Township government in 1967, the County
assumed responsibility for the landfill's operation until 1972, when it was closed. The
landfill accepted a variety of wastes including household, industrial, and agricultural. In
1978, the State found that a well immediately downgradientfrom the landfill was
contaminated with chlorinated organic solvents. Results from an EPA water quality
study show that groundwater adjacent to the site is becoming more contaminated.
Approximately 1,000 people live within a 4-mile radius of the site. There are public
wells within 2 miles of the site, but water quality data show the wells are not
contaminated. The Spokane Valley-Rathdrum Prairie Aquifer underlying the site has
been designated by the EPA as a sole source aquifer and is the source of drinking
water for about 350,000 people.
Site Responsibility: The site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and municipal
actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 09/08/83
Final Date: 09/21/84
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater contains volatile organic compounds (VOCs), acid, and
heavy metals. People who ingest or come into direct contact with
contaminated groundwater may be at risk. The major health hazard posed
by the site is the potential movement of contaminated groundwater into
the sole source aquifer.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
35
continued
-------
GREENACRES LANDFILL
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on the entire
site.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: In 1984, the State began a study of the nature and extent of
contamination at the site. The County took over responsibility for the
study in late 1987. A report on the findings of the investigation has been
submitted to the State for review.
Site Facts: In fall 1987, the State and the County of Spokane entered into a Consent
Decree requiring the County to conduct a study of site contamination.
I Environmental Progress
yr...
An initial evaluation of the Greenacres Landfill site determined that no immediate
actions are needed while review of the investigation is under way and final cleanup
remedies are being planned.
36
-------
HANFO
(USDOE)
WASHINGTd«tt
O-AREA
EPA ID# WA389009
-------
HANFORD lOO-AREA(USDOE)
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater in the 100-Area contains radioactive waste material including
strontium, cobalt, and uranium. People could be exposed to hazardous
substances through direct contact or accidental ingestion of contaminated
groundwater.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in 8 long-term remedial phases focusing on separate
contamination areas at the site.
Response Action Status
100-HR-1 and 100-HR-3 Areas: The State expects to begin investigating
the nature and extent of contamination at the 100-HR-1 and the 100-HR-3
areas in late 1990. The 100-HR-1 area consists of the liquid disposal sites
located within the 100-H subsite. The 100-H subsite contains 1 reactor and support
facilities. The 100-HR-3 area consists of the groundwater underneath the 100-D and
100-H subsites.
100-DR-1 and 100-BC-1 Areas: In early 1991, the State expects to begin
an investigation to study the nature and extent of contamination at the
100-DR-1 area and the EPA is scheduled to investigate the 100-BC-1 area.
The 100-DR-1 area consists of the liquid disposal sites in the lOC^D subsite. The 100-D
area contains 2 reactors and support facilities. The 100-BC-1 area consists of the liquid
disposal sites in the 100-B and 100-C subsites. The 100-B and 100-C subsites each
contain 1 reactor and support facilities.
" 100-BC-5,100-KR-1,100-KR-4 Areas: The EPA is expected to investigate
the nature and extent of contamination at the 100-BC-5, 100-KR-1, and
100-KR-4 areas in 1991. The 100-BC-5 area consists of the groundwater
that underlies the 100-B and 100-C subsites. The 100-KR-1 area consists of the liquid
disposal sites in the 100-K subsite of Hanford. The 100-K area contains 2 reactors and
support facilities. The 100-KR-4 area consists of the groundwater that underlies the
100-K subsite.
100-NR-1 Area: The State is scheduled to investigate the nature and
extent of contamination at the 100-NR-1 area in late 1991. The 100-NR-1
area consists of the liquid disposal sites in the 100-N subsite.
continued
38
-------
HANFORD lOO-AREA(USDOE)
Response Action Status, Continued
Site Facts: In May 1989, the EPA, the State, and the DOE entered into an Interagency
Agreement and a Consent Orderto provide a legal and procedural framework for
cleanup and regulatory compliance at the DOE's waste sites at Hanford. The EPA, the
DOE, and the Washington State Department of Ecology are jointly developing an action
plan that addresses Superfund and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)-
related issues at Hanford. The parties will produce workplans to study the nature and
extent of contamination at the Hanford site.
EXwirortmeniol Progress
\jf.
The Hanford site is a secured DOE facility, and public access is limited. Public
exposure to contamination is unlikely while the EPA and the State plan investigations
leading to the selection of final cleanup remedies for the Hanford 100-Area site.
39
-------
HANFO
(USDOE
WASHING
EPAID#WA189
Site Description
OO-AREA
REGION 1O
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 04
Benton County
20 miles north of Richland
Alias:
US DOE- Hanford Site-2OO-Area
The Hanford 200-Area covers 215 square miles about 20 miles north of Richland. It is
one of the four areas at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation on the National Priorities List;
the other three are the 100-, 300-, and 1100-Areas. These areas are part of a sprawling
Department of Energy (DOE) complex that includes buildings, disposal sites, an
ecological research park, and vacant land covering approximately 560 square miles.
Hanford was built in the 1940s to make plutonium for nuclear weapons. The nearby
Columbia River provided cooling waters for the reactors producing the nuclear
materials. The Atomic Energy Commission was in charge of these operations from the
1940s until Congress created the DOE in 1977. Over the years, Hanford widened its
role to include research and development of nuclear materials for uses other than
nuclear weapons. The 200-Area is in the middle of the Hanford facility. The DOE uses
the 200-Area to reprocess, finish, and manage nuclear materials, especially plutonium.
The DOE and its predecessor disposed of an estimated 1 billion cubic yards of solid and
diluted liquid wastes comprised of radioactive, mixed, and hazardous substances in
trenches, ditches, and landfills on the site. Over 230 waste disposal locations have
been identified in the 200-Area. The shallow groundwater underlying Hanford and
Richland consists of a sand and gravel aquifer, conditions that facilitate the movement
of contaminants through water. Over 3,000 workers at the 100- and 200-Areas of
Hanford use drinking water from intakes on the Columbia River, which are 5 miles north
of the site. The cities of Richland, Pasco, and Kennewick, with a combined population
of approximately 90,000 people, maintain water intakes in the Columbia River for the
bulk of their municipal supply system but occasionally mix it with groundwater from
municipal wells drilled in the sand and gravel aquifer. The Yakima Indian Nation has
exclusive fishing rights to the Yakima River, which borders the site.
Site Responsibility:
The site is being addressed through
Federal and State actions.
IMPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/24/88
Final Date: 10/04/89
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
40
continued
-------
HANFORD 20O-AREA (USDOE)
Threats and Contaminants
Air samples in the 200-Area in 1987 showed the presence of strontium,
iodine, and plutonium. On-site groundwater is contaminated with tritium,
uranium, and cyanide. Surface water intakes on the Columbia River for
the City of Richland contain tritium. People may be exposed to hazardous
or radioactive substances on site through direct contact, accidental
ingestion, or inhalation of contaminated particles, groundwater, or surface
water.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup of
the entire 200-Area.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: In 1990, the DOE began a study of the 200-Area to determine
the nature and extent of contamination at the site and to identify
alternative methods to address the contamination. Due to the size and
complexity of the site, the DOE expects to complete the study in 1994.
Site Facts: In May 1989, the EPA, the State, and the DOE entered into an Interagency
Agreement and a Consent Order to provide a legal and procedural framework for
cleanup and regulatory compliance at the DOE's waste sites at Hanford. The EPA, the
DOE, and the Washington State Department of Ecology jointly developed an action plan
that addresses Superfund and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)-related
issues at Hanford. The parties will produce workplans to study the nature and extent of
contaminations at the site. Similar opposition has been expressed by the Yakima Indian
Nation whose land the Hanford Site occupies.
Environmental Progress
The Hanford site is a secured DOE facility, and public access is limited. Public
exposure to contamination is unlikely while the DOE continues an investigation leading
to the selection of final cleanup remedies at the Hanford 200-Area site.
41
-------
HANFO
(USDOE)
WASHING'
EPAID#WA2890<
00-AREA
Site Description
REGION 1O
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 04
Benton County
2 miles north of Richland
Alias:
USDOE-Hanford Site-300 Area
The Hanford 300-Area covers about 1 square mile 2 miles north of Richland. It is one of
the four areas at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation on the National Priorities List; the
other three are the 100-, 200-, and 1100-Areas. These areas are part of a sprawling
Department of Energy (DOE) complex that includes buildings, disposal sites, an
ecological research park, and vacant land covering about 560 square miles. Hanford
was built in the 1940s to make plutonium for nuclear weapons. The nearby Columbia
River provided cooling waters for the reactors producing the nuclear materials. The
Atomic Energy Commission was in charge of these operations from the early 1940s
until Congress created the DOE in 1977. Over the years, Hanford widened its role to
include research and development of nuclear materials for uses other than nuclear
weapons. The DOE fabricates fuel for nuclear reactors in the 300-Area. The site
contains 25 separate locations used to dispose of radioactive and hazardous wastes.
The disposal areas and plumes of contaminated groundwater under them cover
approximately 2 square miles. The DOE and its predecessor disposed of about 27
million cubic yards of solid and diluted liquid wastes mixed with radioactive and
hazardous wastes in ponds, trenches, and landfills in the 300-Area. The areas used for
liquid discharges had no outlets and liquids percolated through the soil into the
groundwater and the Columbia River located directly east and downgradientirom the
300-Area. The shallow groundwater underlying Hanford and Richland consists of a
sand and gravel aquifer, conditions that facilitate the movement of contaminants
through water. The Columbia River is used for industrial process water, boating,
fishing, hunting, and as a supply of drinking water 3 miles downstream of the 300-Area.
The cities of Richland, Pasco, and Kennewick, with a combined population of
approximately 90,000 people, maintain water intakes in the Columbia River for the bulk
of their municipal supply system but occasionally mix it with groundwater from
municipal wells drilled in the sand and gravel aquifer. The Yakima Indian Nation has
exclusive fishing rights to the Yakima River, which borders the site.
Site Responsibility:
The site is being addressed through
Federal and State actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/24/88
Final Date: 10/04/89
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
42
continued
-------
HANFORD 300-AREA (USDOE)
Threats and Contaminants
Air contains uranium and krypton. On-site groundwater is contaminated
with uranium and trichloroethane. Soils on and off site contain
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), trichloroethylene (TCE), cobalt, and
uranium. The DOE has detected uranium in springs around the area and
the Columbia River. Strontium and uranium are present in vegetation.
People could be exposed to hazardous and radioactive substances from
the site through direct contact, accidental ingestion, and inhalation of
contaminated particles, groundwater, soil, or surface water.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two long-term remedial phases focusing on source
control and groundwater cleanup in the 300-Area.
Response Action Status
Source Control: In 1989, the DOE began a study of the 300-Area to
determine the nature, extent, and source of the contamination at the site
and to identify alternative methods to address the contamination. The
DOE expects to complete the study in 1994.
Groundwater: In late 1990, the DOE is scheduled to begin a study of the
groundwater contamination in the 300-Area and to identify alternative
methods to address the contamination. The DOE expects to complete the
study in 1995.
Site Facts: In May 1989, the EPA, the State, and the DOE entered into an Interagency
Agreement and a Consent Order to provide a legal and procedural framework for
cleanup and regulatory compliance at the DOE's waste sites at Hanford. The EPA, the
DOE, and the Washington State Department of Ecology jointly developed an action plan
that addresses Superfund and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)-related
issues at Hanford. The parties will produce workplans to study the nature and extent of
contamination at the site.
Environmental Progress
The Hanford site is a secured DOE facility, and public access is limited. Public
exposure to contamination is unlikely while the DOE continues investigations leading to
the selection of final cleanup remedies for the Hanford 300-Area site.
43
-------
HANFO
AREA (UBDO
WASHINGTON
REGION 1O
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 04
Benton County
1 mile north of Richland
Aliases:
Hanford Site-llOO
USDOE-Hanford Site HOO-Area
EPA ID# WA4890( &00r$
Site Description
The Hanford 1100-Area covers 150 acres approximately 1 mile north of Richland. It is
one of the four areas at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation on the National Priorities List;
the other three are the 100-, 200-, and 300-Areas. These areas are part of a sprawling
Department of Energy (DOE) complex that includes buildings, disposal sites, an
ecological research park, and vacant land covering approximately 560 square miles.
Hanford was built in the 1940s to make plutonium for nuclear weapons. The nearby
Columbia River provided cooling waters for the reactors producing the nuclear
materials. The Atomic Energy Commission was in charge of these operations from the
early 1940s until Congress created the DOE in 1977. Over the years, Hanford widened
its role to include research and development of nuclear materials for uses other than
nuclear weapons. The DOE conducts maintenance operations in the 1100-Area and
provides services to other areas of the site. The area includes a warehouse, a vehicle
repair shop, a gas station, and a bus depot for Hanford workers. The DOE is specifically
concerned with approximately 10 acres of the 1100-Area containing a landfill, a sandpit,
an underground storage tank, and other areas that are potentially contaminated. Up to
15,000 gallons of waste battery acid may have been disposed of in the pit. The DOE
used the tank to store waste antifreeze, and it may have leaked from the tank. Shallow
groundwater under the 1100-Area is 24 feet below the surface. The shallow
groundwater underneath Hanford and Richland consists of a sand and gravel aquifer,
conditions that facilitate the movement of contaminants through the water. The
Columbia River is used for industrial process water, boating, fishing, hunting, and as a
drinking water supply about 1 mile downstream of the site. The cities of Richland,
Pasco, and Kennewick, with a combined population of about 90,000 people, maintain
water intakes in the Columbia River for the bulk of their municipal supply system but
occasionally mix it with groundwater from municipal wells drilled in the sand and gravel
aquifer. The nearest well in Richland is approximately 2,600 feet from the disposal
area. The Yakima Indian Nation has exclusive fishing rights to the Yakima River, which
borders the site.
Site Responsibility:
The site is being addressed through
Federal and State actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/24/88
Final Date: 10/04/89
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
44
continued
-------
HANFORD 11OO-AREA(USDOEJ
zn
Threats and Contaminants
On-site wells in the vicinity of the 1100-Area contain volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) including trichloroethylene (TCE). Nitrates, sodium,
and sulfate are present in Richland's well water. On-site soils are
contaminated with heavy rnetals and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs).
Possible exposure routes include direct contact with or accidental
ingestion of contaminated groundwater and soil.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleaning
up the 1100-Area.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: In 1989, the DOE began a study of the 1100-Area to
determine the nature and extent of contamination at the site and to identify
alternative methods to address the contamination. The DOE expects to
complete the study in 1992.
Site Facts: In May 1989, the EPA, the State, and the DOE entered into an Interagency
-Agreement and a Consent Order to provide a legal and procedural framework for
cleanup and regulatory compliance at the DOE's waste sites at Hanford. The EPA, the
DOE, and the Washington Department of Ecology jointly developed an action plan that
addresses Superfund and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)-related
issues at Hanford. The parties will produce workplans to study the nature and extent of
contamination at the Hanford site.
Environmental Progress
The Hanford site is a secured DOE facility, and public access is limited. Public
exposure to contamination is unlikely while the DOE and the State continue
investigations leading to the selection of final cleanup remedies at the Hanford 1100-
Area site.
45
-------
HARBOR ISLAN
(LEAD)
WASHINGT
EPAE3#WAD9807:
Site Description
REGION 1O
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 07
King County
Puget Sound
Aliases:
Western Pacific Vacuum Services
Asahlpen America, Inc.
Todd Shipyard Corp.
Puget Sound Tug & Barge - Pier 17
The 405-acre Harbor Island (Lead) site is an island that has been used for commercial
and industrial activities since the early 1900s. The island is located in an area consisting
of inter-tidal wetlands at the mouth of the Duwamish Waterway and Elliott Bay in Puget
Sound. The island was constructed of river sediments dredged to facilitate navigation
and debris from demolition and regrading projects in the Seattle area. Commercial
activities on the island include secondary lead smelting, lead fabrication, metal plating,
shipbuilding, petroleum product storage, shipping, and rail transport. Past metal
smelting practices contributed significant amounts of dust to the atmosphere and
resulted in widespread distribution of contaminated dust. However, the smelter has
been closed since 1984 and is no longer a source of air contamination. Warehouses,
laboratories, and office buildings also are located on the island. There are no
residences on Harbor Island, but approximately 10,000 people are located within 1 mile
of the site. The closest residence is about 1/4 mile away. All residents are supplied
with water from the Seattle public water supply system. Elliott Bay is used by
fishermen for shellfishing and crabbing.
Site Responsibility:
The site is being addressed through
Federal and municipal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 12/30/82
Final Date: 09/08/83
L\
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater contains lead and other metals. Sediments near the island
are contaminated with heavy metals, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
(PAHs), various pesticides, phenols, and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs).
Soils contain heavy metals, PCBs, PAHs, and organics. Fish in Elliott Bay
are contaminated with PCBs. Individuals risk exposure to contaminants
by direct contact or ingestion of groundwater, sediments, soils, or fish.
The site is an estuary, an important habitat for wildlife.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
46
continued
-------
HARBOR ISLAND (LEAD)
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in four stages: immediate actions and three long-term
remedial phases focusing on cleanup of the entire site, the Todd Shipyards, and the
Lockheed Shipyards.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: The City of Seattle paved over areas where lead
contamination in the soils was the highest. Emission control equipment
was placed on at least one production plant to reduce the levels of
airborne lead being released from the stacks. In 1989, the City of Seattle, under EPA
monitoring, completed sampling the storm drains to determine the extent of
contamination in the sediments. The City installed floodgates on the storm drain
outfalls into Puget Sound. These gates allow City crews to clean out the system at any
time and prevent the tidal action from washing offshore contaminants back into the
storm drain system. The storm drains have been cleaned, and contaminated
sediments have been disposed of. The City expects to monitor the storm drain
system.
Entire Site: In 1989, the EPA sampled soil at six areas where there was
evidence of previous contamination or where past industrial operations
indicated possible soil contamination. Twenty groundwater samples also
were taken at various locations around the island. The EPA is conducting an
investigation into soil, surface water, sediments, and groundwater contamination at the
site. The investigation will define the contaminants of concern and recommend
effective alternatives for final cleanup. The investigation is expected to be completed in
1992.
Todd Shipyards and Lockheed Shipyards: The EPA sent notice letters
to Todd Shipyards and Lockheed Shipyards requesting participation in
investigating contamination in their respective areas. Two separate
investigations are expected to be initiated in each area in 1991.
Site Facts: In 1989, the EPA and the City of Seattle signed an agreement requiring the
City to sample and clean up city-owned storm drains on Harbor Island.
Environmental Progress
Paving over contaminated soils, installing emission controls, and cleaning out the storm
drains have significantly reduced the threat of exposure to contaminants at the Harbor
Island site while investigations leading to the selection of final cleanup remedies
continue.
47
-------
HIDDEN VALL:
LANDFILL
(THUN
WASHING
EPAID#WAD980
Site Description
REGION 10
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 08
Pierce County
Near Puyallup
Aliases:
Thun Field
Pierce County Landfill
The 75-acre Hidden Valley Landfill {Thun Field) site, near Puyallup, operated as a landfill
and old gravel pit from 1967 to 1983. The landfill accepted liquid, solid, and industrial
wastes, including heavy metal sludges. Approximately 48 acres have been covered
with waste. The landfill does not have a liner or leachate collection system, but a
methane collection and burn system was installed to reduce odors from the site. The
landfill is open to any commercial operation or private citizen wishing to dispose of solid
waste. The Thun Field air strip, an active gravel pit, and a gun club are adjacent to the
landfill. The area is sparsely populated, with approximately 1,700 people residing about
1 mile from the site. Approximately 7,300 people are served by 35 public water supply
systems drawing from groundwater within 3 miles of the landfill. The nearest well is
1,000 feet away. The County has applied to have the agu/ferthat underlies the site
designated as a sole source aquifer. The County's petition is being reviewed by the
EPA, and a designation is pending. A freshwater wetland is 1 mile from the site.
Site Responsibility:
The site is being addressed through
a combination of Federal, State, and
potentially responsible parties'
actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/10/86
Final Date: 03/31/89
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater is contaminated with heavy metals, volatile organic
compounds (VOCs), and pentachlorophenoKPCP). Liquid waste found on
site contains chromium. People who accidentally ingest or come into
direct contact with contaminated groundwater or liquid waste may suffer
adverse health effects. Wetlands also may be threatened.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
48
continued
-------
HIDDEN VALLEY LANDFILL (THUN FIELD)
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup of
the entire site.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: A potentially responsible party. Land Recovery, Inc., under
State oversight, is conducting a study into the nature and extent of
contamination at the site. The study will define the contaminants of
concern and recommend effective alternatives for final site cleanup. The study is
scheduled to be completed in 1991.
Site Facts: In 1987, the State and Land Recovery, Inc. entered into a Consent Order
requiring the company to conduct an investigation of the site.
Environmental Progress
An initial evaluation of the Hidden Valley Landfill {Thun Field) site determined that no
immediate actions are needed while an investigation leading to the selection of final
cleanup remedies is under way.
49
-------
KAISE:
MEAD
WASHINGK)S
EPAUD#WADO'
Ag ~,
v -[>>SX^ «
<!;«. S1-* ** *
UMINUM
ORK!
Site Description
REGION 1O
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 05
Spokane County
Near Mead
Alias:
Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corp. - Mead
Works
The 240-acre Kaiser Aluminum Mead Works site is an aluminum reduction facility
located near Mead. From 1942 until 1978, pot linings were disposed of in the
northwest section of the plant property. The pots were soaked with water to loosen
the linings for removal prior to disposal. In 1978, cyanide was detected in several
private drinking water wells northwest of the Kaiser facility. Cyanide has contaminated
an agL//ferthat supplies water to a tributary of the Little Spokane River. The
contamination is believed to have originated from the pot lining wastes or wastewater
from the pot soaking. In 1978, Kaiser discontinued the practices of pot soaking and
discharging effluentlo sewage ponds. Since 1980, the pot liner wastes have been
placed in a specially constructed building. The closest residences are located about 1/2
mile northwest of the plant. Approximately 5,500 people are served by the water
system.
Site Responsibility:
The site is being addressed through
a combination of Federal, State, and
potentially responsible parties'
actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 12/30/82
Final Date: 09/08/83
II
Threats and Contaminants
Cyanide and fluoride were detected in soils and the upper portion of the
aquifer underlying the site. Concentrations of cyanide in the groundwater
plume are decreasing with the dewatering of several industrial lagoons or
ponds near the pot liner disposal area. On-site leachate contains arsenic
and cyanide. People may be exposed to contaminants through direct
contact or accidental ingestion of soil, groundwater, or leachate. The
migration of the contaminant plume from the site may potentially affect
aquatic life in the Little Spokane River.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
50
continued
-------
KAISER ALUMINUM MEAD WORKS
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: immediate actions and a long-term remedial
phase focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: Kaiser offered to supply affected residents with
bottled water and physical examinations. The company also offered
residences with contaminated wells the options of a permanent hook-up
to public water, a deionizer for existing wells, or newly constructed wells. One
individual opted for the new well, while 25 affected residences were connected to
public water. In 1979, Kaiser paved the pot linings waste pile with asphalt. An adjacent
area located north of the waste pile was fitted with an underdrain system leading to a
lined pond and also was paved.
Entire Site: Kaiser completed an engineering assessment of the site
contamination and submitted a report to the State for review. The
assessment summarizes the investigations of the site and provides
evaluations of alternative cleanup actions. The State is reviewing the report.
Environmental Progress
The alternate water supply provided to affected residences has significantly reduced
the threat to human health while the State reviews the investigation results and a final
cleanup remedy is chosen for the Kaiser Aluminum Mead Works site.
51
-------
LAKEWOOD
WASHINGTO
EPAID#WAD
Site Description
REGION 1O
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 06
Pierce County
Lakewood
Aliases:
Lakewood Water District Site
Ponder's Corner
Plaza Cleaners
The Lakewood Site is a commercial area that includes a laundry and dry-cleaning facility
and covers about 1 square mile in Lakewood. In 1981, two major wells of the
Lakewood Water District, which serves more than 10,000 people, were found to be
contaminated with chlorinated organic compounds. The Lakewood Water District took
the wells out of production and notified its customers of the problem. Following the
shutdown of the wells, the EPA determined the contaminants were components of
degreasers, solvents, and other substances common in industrial use. Further
investigation showed the contamination was coming from the commercial dry-cleaner.
Site Responsibility:
The site is being addressed through
Federal and State actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 12/30/82
Final Date: 09/08/83
Threats and Contaminants
The solvents trichloroethylene (TCE) and tetrachloroethylene have been
detected in groundwater and soil. Potential health risks may exist for
individuals accidentally ingesting or conning into direct contact with
contaminated groundwater and soil.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
52
continued
-------
LAKEWOOD SITE
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: immediate actions and a long-term remedial
phase focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: Between 1984 and 1985, the State excavated the
septic tanks and some contaminated sludge from the site. The area was
backfilled with clean soils. Two aeration towers were constructed to
remove the organic solvents in the public water supply.
Entire Site: Following an investigation of the soil and groundwater
contamination at the site in 1985, the EPA determined groundwater
monitoring would continue, and contaminated soil would need treatment
to extract the solvents. The groundwater treatment system, installed as
part of the immediate action, continues to successfully remove contaminants from the
drinking water supply. Since 1987, the EPA has been treating the contaminated soils
on the Plaza Cleaners property using a soil vapor extraction system. The cleanup is
expected to be completed in 1992.
Site Facts: In 1983, the State issued an enforcement order requiring Plaza Cleaners to
cease dumping solvent-containing materials into the septic system.
Environmental Progress
The groundwater treatment and soil vapor extraction systems are successfully
removing contaminants and protecting public health and the environment near the
Lakewood Site. The EPA expects to continue operating the treatment systems until
1992.
53
-------
MCCHORD AI
BASE (WA
WASHINGT
EPA ID# WA85700:
Site Description
REGION 1O
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 06
Pierce County
South of Tacoma
Aliases:
USAF - McChord Air Force Base
McChord Wash Rack Area
McChord Air Force Base is an active military base covering almost 4,600 acres just
south of Tacoma. The mission of the base is to provide airlift services to troops, cargo,
equipment, passengers, and mail. Since 1940, almost 500,000 gallons of hazardous
substances have been used and disposed of on the base. The Wash Rack/Treatment
Area is a former aircraft washing facility. The site encompasses the pavement area
where airplanes were washed to remove oil, grease, and other foreign materials with
chemical solvents and 2 unlined leachate pits that received contaminated washwater
runoff from the adjacent pavement. Underneath the site is part of an aquifer that
supplies drinking water to McChord Air Force Base, the Lakewood Water District, and
the American Lake Gardens development. American Lake Gardens is a separate
National Priorities List site. The nearest residence is 1/2 mile away, and over 16,000
people live within 3 miles of the site. Approximately 300 domestic wells are located
within 5 miles of the base.
Site Responsibility: The site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/15/84
Final Date: 07/22/87
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater potentially may be contaminated with heavy metals and
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) including benzene, toluene, and
trichloroethylene (TCE). Stormwater drains that lead to surface water also
contain heavy metals and VOCs. Individuals who accidentally ingest or
come into direct contact with contaminated groundwater may be at risk.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
54
continued
-------
MCCHORD AIR FORCE BASE (WASH RACK/TREATMENT AREA)
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup of
the entire site.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: In 1989, an investigation was begun to determine the type
and extent of contamination at the base. The investigation is scheduled to
be concluded in 1992.
Site Facts: McChord Air Force Base is participating in the Installation Restoration
Program, the specially funded program under which the Department of Defense has
been identifying and evaluating its past hazardous waste sites.
Environmental Progress
An initial evaluation of the McChord Air Force Base site determined that no immediate
actions are needed while an investigation leading to the selection of final cleanup
remedies continues.
55
-------
MICA LA
WASHINGTO
EPAED#WAD98051
Site Description
REGION 1O
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 05
Spokane County
Near Mica
Aliases:
Spokane Co Utilities Dept - Office
Spokane Co - Mica Landfill
The Mica Landfill site has been owned by Spokane County Utilities since 1972 and
covers 180 acres near Mica. Until 1981, the landfill was licensed by the State to handle
hazardous, domestic, and industrial wastes including dross, baghouse dust, and
asbestos. The asbestos is disposed of in accordance with State regulations. A
leachate collection system has been installed; however, leachate continues to migrate
off site. The landfill is located on a hill with intermittent creeks. The creeks empty into
Chester Creek, which flows into the Spokane River 3 miles from the landfill. The
Spokane River is connected hydrologically to the Spokane Valley-Rathdrum Prairie
Aquifer, which has been designated as a sole source aquifer. The closest residence is
1/5 mile from the site. Approximately 115 domestic water wells and 8 irrigation wells
are located within 3 miles of the site. About 425 people use the area groundwater as a
drinking water source. Two municipal wells serving approximately 4,000 people are
within 3 miles of the landfill.
Site .Responsibility: jhe site is being addressed through
a combination of Federal, State, and
municipal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/15/84
Final Date: 06/10/86
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater contains volatile organic compounds (VOCs), heavy metals,
and phenols. Leachate is contaminated with VOCs, including
trichloroethylene (TCE). People who ingest or come into direct contact
with contaminated groundwater and leachate may be exposed to adverse
health effects. A potential physical hazard is the presence of explosive
levels of landfill-generated methane gas.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
56
continued
-------
MICA LANDFILL
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup of
the entire site.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: In 1987, an investigation was begun to determine the type
and extent of contamination at the site. The investigation has found
groundwater contamination at the site boundary, which resulted in the
expansion of the groundwater study to include off site areas. The investigation is
scheduled for completion in 1990.
Site Facts: The County and the State signed a Consent Order governing site cleanup.
Environmental Progress
An initial evaluation of the Mica Landfill site has determined that no immediate actions
are needed while the investigation leading to the selection of final cleanup remedies is
under way.
57
-------
MIDWAY LANDF;
WASHINGTO
EPAED#WAD9806
REGION 10
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 08
King County
Kent
Aliases:
Midway Disposal Site
City of Seattle Midway Landfill
Site Description
The Midway Landfill site is an old gravel quarry covering approximately 60 acres in
Kent. From 1966 to 1983, the landfill, which is on City-owned property, was operated
by the City of Seattle. During operations, approximately 3 million cubic yards of refuse
were deposited in the unlined landfill, including paint sludge, dye and preservative
wastewater, oily wastewater, refinery tank bottoms, and lead-contaminated wastes.
Closure activities began in 1983, when clean soil was used to cover and grade the
landfill, and it was capped with silt or fine sands. Approximately 8,200 people live near
the affected area. More than 10,000 people within 3 miles of the landfill obtain drinking
water from the aquifer underlying the site. The Green River is about 1 mile away.
Site Responsibility: The site is being addressed through
a combination of Federal, State, and
municipal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/15/84
Final Date: 06/10/86
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater contains heavy metals, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs),
and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) including benzene and vinyl
chloride. VOCs are present in landfill gas. People may be exposed to
contaminants by inhaling landfill gas or ingesting or coming into direct
contact with contaminated groundwater.
Cleanup Approach
The site is begin addressed in two stages: immediate actions and a single long-term
remedial phase focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
Mcxchl990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
58
continued
-------
MIDWAY LANDFILL
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In 1985 and 1986, the City of Seattle installed 32 gas
extraction wells around the perimeter of the landfill to control the migration
of gas from the site. Over 130 additional wells have been installed. Four
final flares to burn off the gases were installed on site. Off-site gas extraction wells
were installed to remove pockets of gas from around the most affected residences as
quickly as possible. Monitoring has indicated that the off-site gas problem has been
substantially abated. In addition, a fence was constructed around the site to restrict
access and construction of a cap is under way.
Entire Site: In 1986, an investigation to determine the type and extent of
site contamination was begun. Recommendations for alternatives for final
cleanup will be made when the investigation is completed, expected in
late 1990.
Site Facts: The City and the State signed a Consent Decree requiring the city to cap
the site.
E^rwironmental Progress
The installation of the gas extraction system has substantially reduced the threat of gas
migrating off site from the Midway Landfill site while construction of the landfill cap and
investigations continue.
59
-------
NAVAL AIR STATIC
WHIDBEY ISL
(AULT FIELD1
WASHINGTON
EPA ID# WA5170090059
Site Description
REGION 1O
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 02
Island County
Whidbey Island
The Naval Air Station at Whidbey Island covers over 7,000 acres and consists of Ault
Field and the Seaplane Base, which are 5 miles apart. The station was commissioned
in 1942 to maintain and operate facilities and to provide services and materials in
support of the Navy's aviation activities and utilities. Ault Field contains most of the
military activities. Its major waste-generating activities include aircraft and vehicle
maintenance and washing, engine testing, non-destructive testing, parts cleaning,
painting and paint stripping, battery maintenance, pest control, public work
maintenance, and transformer servicing. Wastes generated included solvents, heavy
metals, paints, and pentachlorophenols (PCPs). The Ault Field site contains 9 waste
areas, including 4 landfills. The site lies on shallow and sea-level aquifers. These
aquifers provide drinking water to approximately 21,000 people within 3 miles of the
site. Local surface water bodies are used for recreation and irrigation. One surface
water intake, about 6,500 feet from the site, is used to irrigate 66 acres of farmland. A
freshwater wetland is within 500 feet of Ault Field. The Seaplane Base also is on the
National Priorities List.
Site Responsibility:
The site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 09/18/85
Final Date: 02/21/90
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater is contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
including trichloroethylene (TCE) and trichloroethane. Accidental ingestion
of or direct contact with the contaminated groundwater could be a
potential health hazard. There is a potential for the contaminants present
on site to pollute the freshwater wetland.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
60
continued
-------
NAVAL AIR STATION, WHIDBEY ISLAND (AULT FIELD)
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in four long-term remedial phases, focusing on cleanup of
the Areas 5 and 6 and Walker Storage Barn, Pesticide Rinsate Area, Clover Valley Fire
School, Runway Fire School, Runway Ditches, Western Highlands Landfill, and Area 3.
Response Action Status
Area 5 (Hoffman Road Landfill) and Area 6 (Current Landfill): The
Navy is conducting an investigation to determine the nature and the extent
of the contamination in Area 5 (Hoffman Road Landfill) and Area 6 (Current
Landfill) of the site. The results of the investigation are expected in 1990.
Walker Storage Barn, Pesticide Rinsate Area, Clover Valley Fire
School, Runway Fire School, Runway Ditches, Western Highlands
Landfill, and Area 3 (1969-1970 Landfill): The Navy will conduct three
separate investigations in these areas to determine the nature and the extent of the
contamination. The investigations are expected to be completed in 1991 and will help
evaluate the different cleanup alternatives.
Site Facts: The Naval Air Station, Whiclbey Island facility is participating in the
Installation Restoration Program, established in 1978. Under this program, the
Department of Defense seeks to identify, evaluate, and control the migration of
contamination from its hazardous waste sites.
Environmental Progress
An initial evaluation of the Naval Air Station, Whidbey Island (Ault Field) site has
determined that no immediate actions are needed while the investigations leading to
the selection of final cleanup remedies are under way.
61
-------
NAVAL AIR STATION,
WHIDBEY ISLAN
(SEAPLANE BA
WASHINGTON
EPA ID# WA6170090058
Site Description
REGION 1O
'NGRESSIONAL DIST. 02
Island County
Whldbey Island
The Naval Air Station at Whidbey Island covers over 7,000 acres and consists of Ault
Field and the Seaplane Base, which are 5 miles apart. The station was commissioned
in 1942, and its mission is to maintain and operate facilities and provide services and
materials in support of the Navy's aviation activities and units. The major waste
generating activities at the Seaplane Base involve aircraft and vehicle maintenance,
paint and paint stripping, and machine and boat shop activities. Wastes generated
include solvents, zinc chromate, lead-containing paint wastes, thinners, acid, and lead-
based sealants. The Seaplane Base site consists of 6 waste areas, including a landfill
and 5 uncontained spills, covering 7 acres. The waste areas potentially affect both the
shallow and the sea-level aquifers. Local surface water bodies are used for recreation.
A coastal wetland Is within 200 feet of the site. The closest residence is 1/2 mile away.
The population on the Seaplane Base is approximately 10,000. The City of Oak Harbor
and the Seaplane Base import fresh water from the mainland via a pipeline as their
primary source of water. Two backup wells are used only in an emergency. The Ault
Field site is also on the National Priorities List.
Site Responsibility:
The site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 09/18/85
Final Date: 02/21/90
Threats and Contaminants
The groundwater and surface water are contaminated with heavy metals.
The sediments contain heavy metals and polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAHs). Soil is contaminated with polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCBs) and heavy metals. Individuals who accidentally ingest or come
into direct contact with contaminated groundwater, surface water,
sediments, or soils may suffer adverse health effects. Multiple leaks and
spills from fuel and oil tank storage areas may affect the surface waters of
Oak and Cresent Harbors. Wetlands also may be threatened.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
62
continued
-------
NAVAL AIR STATION, WHIDBEY ISLAND (SEAPLANE BASE}
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two long-term remedial phases focusing on the landfill
and other disposal areas and the multiple spill areas.
Response Action Status
Landfill and Other Disposal Areas: The Navy is conducting investigations
at the landfill area, auto repair and paint shop, a disposal area, a Nose
Hangar, and a salvage yard to determine the nature and the extent of the
contamination. The investigation is scheduled to be completed in 1991 and will be
used to evaluate the various cleanup alternatives.
Multiple Spill Areas: The Navy is conducting an investigation to
determine the nature and the extent of the contamination in the multiple
spill areas. The results of the study, expected in 1991, will be used to
evaluate different cleanup alternatives.
Site Facts: The Naval Air Station, Whidbey Island (Seaplane Base) facility is
participating in the Installation Restoration Program. Under this program, the
Department of Defense has been identifying and evaluating its past hazardous waste
sites and controlling the migration of hazardous contaminants from these sites.
Environmental Progress
An initial evaluation of the Naval Air Station, Whidbey Island (Seaplane Base) site has
determined that no immediate actions are needed while the investigations leading to
the selection of final cleanup remedies are underway.
63
-------
NAVAL UNDERSEA
WARFARE
ENGINEER!
STATION (4 WAI
WASHINGTON
EPA DD# WAI 170023419
REGION 10
'NGRESSIONAL DIST. 01
Kitsap County
Keyport
Alias:
Keyport Torpedo Station
Site Description
The Naval Undersea Warfare Engineering Station (NUWES) at Keyport was acquired in
1913 to develop a still-water torpedo testing range. The 200-acre site consists of six
separate areas on a peninsula 15 miles west of Seattle. The waste disposal areas are:
the Keyport Landfill, the Van Meter Road Spill/Drum Storage Area, Sludge Disposal
Area, Plating Shop Waste/Oil Spill Area, Otto Fuel Leak, and Liberty Bay Outfalls/
Shoreline. Wastes containing volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and heavy metals
were disposed of or spilled at each of these areas. At the latter area, wastes were
discharged directly into the water. The station is involved in a wide variety of activities,
including the maintenance of torpedoes; storage of fuel and ordnance; and production
functions, such as welding, plating, painting, carpentry, and sheet metal work.
Approximately 3,500 people work at the facility. There are 135 private wells and 22
public water supply wells drawing from the surficial aquifer within 3 miles of the site.
The wells serve about 230 households. The unlined landfill is built on a salt marsh and
may be in contact with the groundwater. The Van Meter area is near an intermittent
creek that flows into a lagoon used for fishing and swimming. Liberty Bay and Dogfish
Bay are used for recreational activities and for commercial shellfishing.
Site Responsibility: The site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/10/86
Final Date: 10/04/89
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater is contaminated with petroleum hydrocarbons and heavy
metals. Sediments, soils, and surface water contain heavy metals.
Contaminants identified in shellfish include phthalates and metals. People
may be exposed to contaminants through direct contact with or accidental
ingestion of contaminated groundwater, surface water, sediments, and
soils. The ingestion of bioaccumulated contaminants in the shellfish also
may pose a health risk.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
64
continued
-------
NAVAL UNDERSEA WARFARE ENGINEERING STATION (4 WASTE AREAS)
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup of
the entire site.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: An investigation to determine the type and extent of
contamination is scheduled to begin in 1990 and is expected to be
completed in 1992. At that time, recommendations will be made on
alternatives for final site cleanup.
Site Facts: The Naval Undersea Warfare. Engineering Station is participating in the
Installation Restoration Program. Under this program, the Department of Defense has
been identifying and evaluating its past hazardous waste sites and controlling the
migration of hazardous contaminants from these sites.
Environmental Progress
An initial evaluation of the Naval Undersea Warfare Engineering Station determined that
no immediate actions are needed while an investigation leading to the selection of final
cleanup remedies is being planned.
65
-------
NORTHS
LANDFILJb
WASHINGTd
EPA E># WAD980&i
Site Description
REGION 10
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 05
Spokane County
Spokane
Alias:
City of Spokane Indian Trails Landfill
The Northside Landfill is located on a 345-acre parcel of land in Spokane. The site was
established as a city /and/7//in 1931 and is still active as the largest refuse disposal
operation in Spokane County. The site was used for open burning until the mid-1950s,
when open burning was replaced with shallow excavation and fill operations. In the
1960s, the process of covering refuse-filled trenches and canyons with soil was used.
In the mid-1970s, excavation was limited to 20 feet below grade using an area fill
technique. Presently, the landfill is being filled vertically using the lift method. The
future use of this site as a sanitary landfill depends on construction of new waste
disposal ce//sthat meet new State requirements for landfills. It is anticipated that
Northside will be used as a demolition waste and incinerator bypass disposal site.
Contaminants have filtered into the aquifer beneath the site. The aquifer is the sole
source of drinking water for the City of Spokane. Approximately 65 residents live in the
area of the groundwater plume.
Site Responsibility:
The site is being addressed through
Federal and municipal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/15/84
Final Date: 06/10/86
Threats and Contaminants
Several nearby domestic water wells are contaminated with organic
solvents including trichloroethylene (TCE) and chloroform. On-site sludge
contains TCE and tetrachloroethylene. Potential health risks exist for
individuals who accidentally ingest or come into direct contact with
contaminated groundwater or sludge.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
66
continued
-------
NORTHSIDE LANDFILL
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: immediate actions and a long-term remedial
phase focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In 1983, the City of Spokane extended municipal
water to homes with contaminated wells and later to the entire area
northwest of the landfill. All residences within the contaminant plume area
have been provided with alternate water supplies. The City is regularly monitoring on-
site wells and a number of off-site wells to determine the location and direction of flow
of the plume.
Entire Site: In 1989, the EPA selected a remedy for the landfill that
includes: (1) closure of the existing landfill units as soon as possible; (2)
installation of a cap after closure; (3) treatment of the groundwater to
reduce the amount of contaminants migrating from the landfill; (4)
continuation of groundwater monitoring; (5) installation of a gas extraction system to
control landfill gas; and (6) deed restrictions to protect the landfill, cap, and monitoring
wells from unauthorized access. If the landfill cannot be closed by January 1, 1992, all
new refuse must be disposed of in lined cells with leachate control systems that meet
State standards for landfills. Refuse in these cells must be covered every day.
Because space in the landfill will be limited, either an incinerator must be operational
within a few years, or another regional waste disposal facility must be constructed.
Site Facts: The EPA and the City of Spokane signed a Consent Order in 1988,
requiring the City to complete an investigation of the Northside Landfill.
Environmental Progress
The provision of an alternate water supply to affected residences has significantly
reduced the threat of exposure to contaminants from the Northside Landfill while final
cleanup of the site begins.
67
-------
NORTHWEST
TRANSFO
WASHINGTON
EPA ID* WAD980833974
REGION 10
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 02
Whatcom County
2 miles south of Everson
Alias:
Transformer - Salvage Yard
Site Description
The Northwest Transformer site covers 1 1/2 acres at Mission and Pole Roads. The
company used the site as a salvage yard from 1958 to 1985 and carried out other
activities on site including dismantling and reclaiming equipment, burning casings for
transformers in an open concrete burn pit, burning waste oils in a space heater, and
draining transformer oils into a seepage pit. Frequently chemicals, including
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), spilled and leaked into the soil on site. In 1985, the
Whatcom County Health Department detected PCBs in private wells near the site. The
site is located in a rural area where berries, dairy products, and Christmas trees are
produced. Grain is cultivated at the southern boundary of the salvage yard.
Approximately 700 acres of agricultural land are irrigated with groundwater within 3
miles of the site. The nearest residence is approximately 300 feet away and about 27
private wells are located within 1/2 mile of the site. Approximately 200 people live
within 1mile of the salvage yard. The Northwest Transformer (South Harkness Street)
site also is on the National Priorities List.
Site Responsibility:
The site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/15/84
Final Date: 06/10/86
L\
Threats and Contaminants
PCBs have been found in soil and groundwater. However, the
groundwater levels are below the maximum contaminant levels
established for safe drinking water supplies. Individuals may be exposed
to contaminants through accidental ingestion of or direct contact with
contaminated soil.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
68
continued
-------
NORTHWEST TRANSFORMER
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: emergency actions and a long-term
remedial phase focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Emergency Actions: In 1985, the EPA conducted an emergency action
involving the removal of contaminated soil, liquids, and structures from the
site. This action removed most of the contamination at the salvage yard.
The EPA constructed a chain link fence around the site and sampled the soils and
groundwater. Transformers were drained and rinsed with diesel fuel above a large
water tank. Approximately 6,600 gallons of contaminated liquids were transported off
site and incinerated. About 1,400 cubic yards of contaminated soil and debris were
excavated and disposed of at a federally approved facility.
Entire Site: In 1989, the EPA selected a remedy to clean up the salvage
yard by: (1) excavating, consolidating, and treating approximately 1,200
cubic yards of soil by in-situ vitrification, a process where the contaminated
soil is melted with an electric current to destroy, remove, or permanently
inmobilize hazardous substances; (2) capping the site with clean soil; (3) abandoning an
on-site well; (4) monitoring on-site groundwater; (5) sampling wood in the barn; and (6)
evaluating the remedy to determine if more cleanup actions are required. A number of
potentially responsible parties are expected to conduct treatability studies. Under the
EPA monitoring, the parties are expected to begin the technical designs for the remedy
in 1991.
Site Facts: In January 1990, a number of potentially responsible parties signed an
Administrative Order with the EPA. Under this order, the parties will carry out a
treatability study.
Environmental Progress
The EPA's emergency actions involving excavating and removing contaminated soil,
debris, and liquids from the Northwest Transformer site have greatly reduced the threat
to human health and the environment while the site awaits the beginning of the final
cleanup actions.
69
-------
NORTHWEST
TRANSFO
(SOUTH HAR
STREET)
WASHINGTON
EPA ED# WAD02731S621
Site Description
REGION 1O
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 02
Whatcom County
Everson
The Northwest Transformer (South Harkness Street) facility began refurbishing and
manufacturing transformers in 1958 on a 1-acre site in downtown Everson. The
company transferred its storage and salvage operations to the downtown site in 1985
from its Mission and Pole Roads salvage yard. Northwest Transformer stored
transformers, drums, and bulk tanks outdoors in an unpaved yard at the site. A
Washington State Department of Ecology inspection in 1985 detected high levels of
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in on-site soils. The company ceased operations at
the South Harkness Street site by 1987. The soil is permeable, and the groundwater is
shallow in some places at the site. These conditions facilitate the movement of
contaminants into the groundwater. Over 10,000 people use wells within 3 miles of
the site for drinking and irrigation. Surface water also is used for irrigation.
Approximately 2,200 people live within 3 miles of the site. The Northwest Transformer
salvage yard site also is on the National Priorities List.
Site Responsibility:
The site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/24/88
Final Date: 02/21/90
Threats and Contaminants
On-site soil is contaminated with high levels of PCBs. People may be
exposed to contaminants through accidental ingestion of or direct contact
with contaminated soil.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed through a single long-term remedial phase focusing on
cleanup of the entire site.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
70
continued
-------
NORTHWEST TRANSFORMER (SOUTH HARKNESS STREET)
Response Action Status
Entire Site: An investigation of the site to determine the nature and extent
of the contamination is scheduled to begin soon. Based on the results of
the investigation, final cleanup remedies will be recommended.
Environmental Progress
An initial evaluation of the Northwest Transformer (South Harkness Street) site has
determined that no immediate actions are needed while awaiting a site investigation.
71
-------
OLD
WASHINGTON
EPA ID# WAD9809825
Site Description
REGION 1O
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 05
Spokane County
Spokane
Alias:
Spokane Steel Foundry
The Old Inland Pit site is located in Spokane and covers 10 acres of a former gravel
mine. It is part of a larger site shared by the Kaiser Aluminum and Chemical Company.
The Inland Asphalt Company used the old gravel mine to dispose of solid waste in
1977. From 1978 to 1983, the Spokane Steel Foundry, located directly across the
street from the site, deposited approximately 180 tons of baghouse dust in the mine.
Wastes in the pit contain heavy metals and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). The pit
is no longer active, and the site is fenced. The pit overlies the Spokane Valley-
Rathdrum Prairie Aquifer, the sole source of drinking water for more than 30,000
people located within 3 miles of the site. Geologic conditions around the pit facilitate
the movement of contaminants into the groundwater. The area surrounding the site
includes industrial activities, a commercial district, and residential areas. The nearest
residence is approximately 1/4 mile away and about 10,000 people live within 3 miles
of the site. The wells for the Spokane Industrial Park are within 2,000 feet of the site.
Site Responsibility:
The site is being addressed through
Federal and State actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/10/86
Final Date: 02/21/90
Threats and Contaminants
Soil contains heavy metals including hexavalent and trivalent chromium
and organic solvents such as methylene chloride and trichloroethylene
(TCE). Individuals risk exposure to hazardous chemicals through
accidental ingestion of or direct contact with contaminated soil.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup of
the entire site.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
72
continued
-------
OLD INLAND FIT
Response Action Status
Entire Site: The State is expected to investigate the nature and extent of
contamination at the Old Inland Pit. Based on the results of the
investigation, various alternatives for site cleanup will be recommended.
Environmental Progress
An initial evaluation of the Old Inland Pit site has determined that no immediate actions
are needed while awaiting the start of the site investigation.
A
73
-------
PACIFIC CAR &
FOUNDRY CO
WASHINGTON
EPA ID# WAD009249210
Site Description
REGION 1O
rRESSIONAL DIST. 07
King County
Renton
Alias:
PACCAR
Pacific Car & Foundry Co. (PACCAR) manufactured trucks, winches, military equipment,
railroad cars, and anodes on 82 acres in an industrial area of Renton from 1907 to 1988.
Until 1964, the facility deposited waste materials, including foundry sand, wood, metal,
paints, solvents, and oils in a marshy area underlain by peat and clay. The wastes are
estimated to have been buried up to 7 feet below the surface in this landfill. The landfill
has been covered with sand and gravel. In 1986, heavy metals were detected in on-
site soil and in shallow groundwater. The City of Renton uses wells drilled in an aquifer
connected to the contaminated shallow aquifer. Approximately 37,200 people obtain
drinking water from municipal wells within 3 miles of the site. A ditch on the property
drains into the Cedar River and John's Creek. The Cedar River flows into Lake
Washington, which is used for recreational activities.
Site Responsibility:
The site is being addressed through
a combination of Federal, State, and
potentially responsible parties'
actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/24/88
Final Date: 02/21/90
Threats and Contaminants
Contaminants identified in the groundwater include heavy metals,
petroleum-products, and solvents. Soil contains heavy metals, petroleum
products, and polycydic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). The potential for
exposure to contaminants exists through accidental ingestion of or direct
contact with contaminated groundwater and soil.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
74
continued
-------
PACIFIC CAR & FOUNDRY CO.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: immediate actions and a long-term remedial
phase focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In 1987, PACCAR, Inc. excavated contaminated soil
containing hydrocarbons and lead and transported it to a federally approved
hazardous waste facility.
Entire Site: An investigation of the site was completed in late 1989. The
State is reviewing the results of the studies and is preparing to propose the
final remedies.
Site Facts: A Consent Decree between the State and PACCAR was signed in 1989,
under which the company agreed to investigate site contamination.
Environmental Progress
Excavating and disposing of contaminated soil have reduced the threat of exposure to
the public and the environment from the Pacific Car & Foundry Co. site while the
selection of final cleanup remedies is taking place.
75
-------
PASCO SANIX
LANDFILL
WASHINGTON
EPA ED# WAD991281874
REGION 1O
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 04
Franklin County
11/2 miles northeast of Pasco
Aliases:
Larry Dietrich
Resource Recovery Corp.
Phillips Petroleum Co - Coulee Plant
Site Description
The Pasco Sanitary Landfill (PSL) is an active landfill located on 280 acres of land 1 1/2
miles northeast of Pasco. The PSL operated as an open burning dump from 1956 to
1971. Municipal wastes were dumped on the surface and periodically burned. In 1971,
the PSL was converted to a sanitary landfill. A portion of the site was leased in 1972
and operated as a regional hazardous waste disposal site. The site accepted hazardous
wastes until 1981. More than 47,000 drums of various hazardous wastes were
deposited in the leased portions of the landfill. Wastes included sludges, paints, resins,
herbicide manufacturing wastes, caustic chemicals, and empty pesticide containers.
Prior to burial, liquid wastes were dried in lined and unlined lagoons. A trailer park is
located approximately 3,000 feet southwest of the site and obtains drinking water from
the municipal water supply. An estimated 10,600 people live within 3 miles of the site.
The confluence of the Snake River and the Columbia River is 2 1/2 miles south of the
site. Groundwater within 3 miles of the site is used by over 1,000 people for drinking
and to irrigate almost 10,000 acres of land. One mobile home trailer and one drinking
water well is located on the site.
Site Responsibility: The site is being addressed through
Federal and State actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/24/88
Final Date: 02/21/90
Threats and Contaminants
On-site groundwater contains volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
including trichloroethylene (TCE), toluene, and xylenes. People who
accidentally ingest or come in direct contact with contaminated
groundwater may be at risk.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
76
continued
-------
PASCO SANITARY LANDFILL
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup of
the entire site.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: The State expects to conduct an investigation to determine
the nature and extent of site contamination. Once the investigation is
completed, recommendations will be made for the final cleanup remedies.
Site Facts: In 1986, the Washington State Department of Ecology issued an
Administrative Order requiring Pasco to monitor on-site wells on a quarterly basis.
Environmental Progress
An initial evaluation of the Pasco Sanitary Landfill site determined that no immediate
actions are required while site investigations are being planned.
A
77
-------
PESTICIDE LAB
(YAKIMA)
WASHINGTON
EPA ID# WAD 120513957
Site Description
REGION 1O
££0IjrGRESSIONAL DIST. 04
Yakima County
Yakima
Aliases:
USDA - Yakima Agriculture Research Lab
Pesticide Pit - Yakima
The Pesticide Lab (Yakima) site covers about 40 acres in Yakima. The site is leased by
the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Over the years, wastes from the pesticide
storage/formulation/mixing facility at the Central Washington Experimental Lab of the
USDA have been discharged into a septic tank disposal system at this site.
Groundwater may have been contaminated by the pesticides. Approximately 10,000
people live within 1 mile of the site, and about 50,750 people use groundwater for
drinking water.
Site Responsibility:
The site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 12/30/82
Final Date: 09/08/83
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater may be contaminated with pesticides. People who ingest or
come into direct contact with potentially contaminated groundwater may
be at risk.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup of
the entire site.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
78
continued
-------
PESTICIDE LAB (YAKIMA)
Response Action Status
Entire Site: A sampling program was begun in 1990, to determine the
extent of groundwater and soil contamination at the site. Based on the
results of the investigation, final cleanup remedies will be chosen.
Site Facts: The Pesticide Lab (Yakima) site is an active facility; therefore, the site will
be cleaned up under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).
Environmental Progress
An initial evaluation of the Pesticide Lab (Yakima) site determined that no immediate
actions are necessary while sampling to determine the extent of site contamination is
under way.
79
-------
QUEEN CITY F.
WASHINGTON
EPA ID# WAD98051
REGION 10
"CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 08
King County
21/2 miles north of Maple Valley
Aliases:
Queen City Disposal Site
Four-Tek
Site Description
The Queen City Farms site is a 320-acre parcel of land located approximately 2 1/2
miles north of the town of Maple Valley. The site includes a wooded area, six industrial
waste disposal ponds, an airstrip, a gravel pit, several residences, and Queen City Lake.
The six ponds were used for the disposal of industrial wastes from 1955 to 1964. In
1980, the ponds were sampled by the EPA and heavy metals and volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) were found in the water, sludge, and sediment. The area
surrounding the site is semi-rural. Approximately 7,800 people live within 3 miles of the
site. About 105 public and private wells are located within 1/2 mile of Queen City
Farms. The King County Cedar Hills Landfill is located immediately north of the site.
Site Responsibility:
The site is being addressed through
Federal, State, and potentially
responsible parties' actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 09/08/83
Final Date: 09/21/84
Threats and Contaminants
On-site groundwater monitoring wells contain VOCs such as benzene and
methylene chloride. Arsenic was detected in residential wells. Soil is
contaminated with polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and metals. Sludge
and surface water contain trichloroethylene (TCE). Individuals may be
exposed to contaminants through ingestion of or direct contact with
contaminated groundwater, soil, sludge, or surface water.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
80
continued
-------
QUEEN CITT FARMS
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: immediate actions and a long-term remedial
phase focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: Between 1985 and 1986, Queen City Farms
excavated, solidified, contained, and safely removed approximately 1
million gallons of liquid wastes and more than 16,000 cubic yards of
solidified material from the site. In 1985 and 1986, the EPA installed an initial
upgradient water diversion system; processed wastes in ponds 1, 2, and 3; installed the
final upgradient water diversion system; and capped, graded, and revegetated the site.
In 1988, soil and drum fragments were taken to a permitted hazardous waste disposal
facility. The remaining materials are being temporarily stored off site in accordance
with hazardous waste regulations in preparation for shipment to an approved
incinerator.
Entire Site: An investigation determining the type and extent of site
contamination is under way. The investigation is scheduled for conclusion
in early 1991.
Site Facts: In 1985, Queen City Farms and the Boeing Co. reached legal agreements
with the EPA and the Washington State Department of Ecology to undertake initial
cleanup measures at the site.
Environmental Progress
The initial measures of removing liquid wastes, soils, and drum fragments and installing
a water diversion system and a cap have significantly reduced the threat of exposure to
hazardous materials at the Queen City Farms site while an investigation leading to the
selection of final cleanup remedies continues.
A
81
-------
SEATTLE MUNIC
LANDFILL
HIGHLAN
WASHINGTON
EPA ID# WAD980639462
REGION 1O
'CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 07
King County
Kent
Aliases:
Kent-Highlands Disposal Site
Military Road Landfill
City of Seattle, Kent Highlands Disposal Site
Site Description
The Seattle Municipal Landfill (Kent Highlands) site is in Kent, approximately 14 miles
south of Seattle. From 1968 to 1986, the City of Seattle leased the site and filled with
refuse about 60 acres of a 90-acre ravine located on a hillside above the Green River.
In addition to municipal wastes from Kent and Seattle, the landfill accepted sand-
blasting grit, industrial sludges, and other industrial wastes. In 1984, contaminants
were detected in on-site monitoring wells. Leachate seeps on the eastern side of the
landfill mix with runoff from the landfill and are routed through drainage lines to settling
ponds discharging into the Green River. Approximately 12,700 people live within 1 mile
of the site. Over 18,000 people obtain drinking water from public wells within 3 miles
of the landfill.
Site Responsibility: The site is being addressed through
Federal and municipal actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/24/88
Threats and Contaminants
Landfill gas contains volatile organic compounds (VOCs) including vinyl
chloride and trichloroethylene (TCE). Groundwater is contaminated with
heavy metals and nitrate. Leachate contains VOCs and heavy metals.
People may be exposed to contaminants through accidental ingestion of
or direct contact with contaminated groundwater and leachate, or through
inhalation of landfill gas. Leachate from the site eventually discharges into
the Green River, which is used for spawning and raising salmon.
Morch 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
82
continued
-------
SEATTLE MUNICIPAL LANDFILL (KENT HIGHLANDS)
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: immediate actions and a long-term remedial
phase focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: Initial actions taken at the landfill include the
installation of a leachate collection and treatment system, installation of a
surface water drainage control system, installation of a landfill gas control
system, and construction of a fence. A temporary cap was installed, and the site was
vegetated.
Entire Site: The City of Seattle began an investigation in 1987 to
determine the type and extent of site contamination. The investigation is
scheduled for completion in 1991. At its conclusion, recommendations
will be made for final site cleanup alternatives.
Site Facts: A Consent Agreement was signed in 1987, in which the City of Seattle
agreed to conduct an investigation of the site.
Environmental Progress
The installation of the leachate collection and treatment system, surface water drainage
system, and landfill gas control system have greatly reduced the potential for exposure
to contaminants at the Seattle Municipal Landfill while an investigation leading to the
selection of the final cleanup remedy continues.
83
-------
SILVER
MINE
WASHINGTON
EPA ED# WAD980722789
REGION 10
ONGRESSIONAL DIST. 04
Okanogan County
Horse Springs Coulee
Site Description
The Silver Mountain Mine site is an abandoned silver and gold mine located in Horse
Springs Coulee, approximately 8 miles northwest of Tonasket. The site covers 5 acres
and was operated sporadically from 1928 to the 1960s. In the early 1980s, cyanide
was used to extract metals from mine tailings. In this process, a solution of sodium
cyanide was pumped over the tailings and drained into a collection basin where metals
were extracted from the solution. By 1983, the site was abandoned, and the mine
tailings and holding basin, which contained cyanide-contaminated water, was left
behind. The nearest residence is approximately 3 miles away, and less than 5 people
live within 3 miles. Private wells within 3 miles are used for domestic purposes,
irrigation, and livestock watering.
Site Responsibility:
The site is being addressed through
Federal and State actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/15/84
Final Date: 06/10/86
Threats and Contaminants
Metal contaminants have been detected in on-site groundwater. The
leachate pit is contaminated with cyanide and arsenic. Individuals may be
exposed to pollutants through accidental ingestion of or direct contact
with contaminated groundwater and leachate.
March 1990
HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
84
continued
-------
SILVER MOUNTAIN MINE
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: immediate actions and a long-term remedial
phase focusing on cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In 1985, the Washington State Department of
Ecology stabilized the site by removing contaminated water from the pond,
capping the heap and pond with a plastic liner, and fencing the site.
Entire Site: The remedy selected in 1990 to clean up the site includes:
(1) consolidating the mine tailings; (2) capping the tailings; (3) fencing the
area; and (4) providing a clean well for domestic stock watering. The
entrance to the mine also will be closed for safety reasons.
Site Facts: The Silver Mountain Mine site was placed on the National Priorities List
because it is a non-coal site with mining operations that occurred after August 3, 1977,
the enactment date of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA).
Thus, it is neither regulated by SMCRA nor eligible for cleanup funds from the SMCRA
Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation Program.
Environmental Progress
Removing contaminated pond water, capping the pond and heap pile with plastic, and
fencing the site have reduced the threat to public health and the environment from the
Silver Mountain Mine site until final cleanup activities are started.
85
-------
*«:""; ^~~^Jt'""
TOFTDAHL DRUMS
WASHINGTON
EPA ID# WAD98072350
REGION 10
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 03
Clark County
Brush Prairie
Site Description
The 15-acre Toftdahl Drums site, located in Brush Prairie, was used in the early 1970s
to clean used drums for resale. The three main areas where hazardous substances
were used are a drum cleaning area, an initial burial trench, and a final drum burial area.
Between 100 to 200 drums containing industrial waste were brought to the site from a
plywood manufacturer. -About 50 of the drums were crushed, placed in a trench, and
covered with dirt because they could not be cleaned. Between 1978 and 1982, 38 of
the drums from the trench were removed to a local landfill. In 1983, site investigations
by the EPA revealed six badly rusted and leaking drums. The area surrounding the site
is rural residential. Approximately 5,770 people live within 3 miles of the site. The
surface of the site slopes downward to a spring and a small westerly flowing tributary
of Morgan Creek.
Site Responsibility:
The site was addressed through
Federal and State actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 10/15/84
Final Date: 06/10/86
Deleted Date: 12/23/88
Threats and Contaminants
Surface water, groundwater, and soil were contaminated with heavy
metals and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). Cleanup actions have
removed any potential health threats that were present at the site.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
86
continued
-------
TOFTDAHL. DRUMS
Cleanup Approach
The site was addressed in two stages: immediate actions and a long-term remedial
phase that focused on cleanup of the entire site.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In 1983, the EPA sampled the 6 leaking drums and
placed them in an excavation trench lined with polyethylene. The drums
were capped with a sheet of polyethylene, excavated soil, and a final sheet
of polyethylene. A 6-foot fence was installed around the excavated area (final burial
area). Three additional drums were found in a second excavation and were placed
within the fenced area. In 1984, 5 potential burial locations were identified outside the
fence and one area inside the fence. Further investigation of the areas outside the
fence uncovered metal debris and paint chip-like debris. Inside the fenced area, 20 pits
were excavated.
Entire Site: The State removed and disposed of the remains of 5 crushed
drums, parts of additional drums, and 40 cubic yards of contaminated soils.
Contaminated soils were placed in polypropylene bags. All contaminated
materials were disposed of off site at a federally approved hazardous waste facility.
Sampling and monitoring of private wells will continue for 10 years.
Environmental Progress
After evaluating the site following cleanup actions, the EPA determined it no longer
poses a threat to human health or the environment and deleted Toftdahi Drums from
the National Priorities List in 1988.
87
-------
TOSCO COR^J
(SPOKANE
WASHINGTON
EPA ID# WAD000641548
REGION 10
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 05
Spokane County
11/2 miles north of Spokane
Aliases:
Spokane Term.
North Market Street Site
Site Description
The 50-acre Tosco Corp. (Spokane Terminal) site is a bulk storage tank farm for
petroleum products 1 1/2 miles north of Spokane. Industrial activities since the 1920s
have resulted in site contamination from petroleum-derived chemicals. The site
operated as an oil refinery until it was decommissioned in 1953. Before 1970, lead-
containing wastes were disposed of on the ground and in holes. An unlined waste oil
lagoon was located in the northwestern corner of the site and extended onto the
adjacent property. The lagoon has been covered with clean soil and is fenced. The
aboyeground petroleum storage tanks are surrounded by soil berms. A 6-foot high
chain link fence topped with barbed wire surrounds the site. The site overlies the
Spokane Valley-Rathdrum Prairie Aquifer, designated as a sole source of drinking water.
Soil overlying the aquifer is highly permeable, facilitating the movement of
contaminants into the groundwater. Groundwater within 3 miles of the site provides
drinking water to over 200,000 people and is used for irrigating croplands.
Approximately 228 private wells are located within 3 miles of the site.
Site Responsibility:
The site is being addressed through
Federal and State actions.
NPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/24/88
Threats and Contaminants
L\
Groundwater and soil are contaminated with petroleum compounds and
volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Soil also contains lead. Exposure to
contaminants may result from accidental ingestion of or direct contact
with contaminated groundwater and soil.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
88
continued
-------
TOSCO CORP. (SPOKANE TERMINAL)
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup of
the entire site.
Response Action Status
Entire Site: As part of a site investigation, the State constructed
monitoring wells and analyzed groundwater from on-site and off-s.ite wells
and soil from test pits and borings in the lagoon area. This investigation
will define the contaminants of concern and result in recommendations for the final
groundwater and soil cleanup remedies. It is anticipated to be completed in 1991.
Environmental Progress
An initial evaluation of the site determined that no immediate actions are necessary at
the Tosco Corp. site while an investigation leading to the selection of final cleanup
remedies is under way.
89
-------
WESTERN PROC
CO., INC.
WASHINGTON
EPA ID# WAD009487513
REGION 10
'NGRESSIONAL DIST. 08
King County
Kent Valley
Site Description
The Western Processing Company site covers 13 acres approximately 20 miles south
of Seattle in the highly industrialized Kent Valley. Originally, the company reprocessed
animal by-products and brewer's yeast. In the 1960s, the business expanded to
include recycling, reclaiming, treating, and disposing of industrial wastes. The wastes
included waste oils, electroplating wastes, waste pickle liquor, battery acids, flue dust
from steel mills, pesticides, spent solvents, and zinc dross. From 1961 until 1983,300
businesses transported their industrial wastes to the Western Processing site. The
company stored approximately 4,000 to 6,000 drums on the site. The property also
contained 72 bulk tanks, open waste piles, 10 lagoons, transformers, and other
containers. Approximately 10,000 people live within 3 miles of the site and 2,000 of
those depend upon groundwater for drinking water.
Site Responsibility:
The site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties'actions.
IMPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 07/01/82
Final Date: 09/08/83
Threats and Contaminants
Contaminants found in groundwater and sediments include phenols and
heavy metals. Soils contain volatile organic compounds {VOCs),
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), as well as phenols and metals. VOCs
and metals were detected in surface water. Individuals may be exposed
to contamination through accidental ingestion of or direct contact with
contaminated groundwater, sediments, soils, or surface water.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in two stages: immediate actions and two long-term
remedial phases focusing on removing the source of the contamination and cleanup of
the entire site.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
90
continued
-------
WESTERN PROCESSING CO., INC.
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: In 1983, the EPA stabilized the site by removing 127
drums of PCB liquids; 1,944 cubic yards of solidified paint sludges; 24,700
gallons of recycled solvents; and 447,450 gallons of mixed contaminated
liquids. The EPA also installed a stormwater runoff system; capped a material pile with
an impermeable, flexible cover; and regraded portions of the site. In 1984, construction
of a lined impoundment for stormwater collection and treatment was completed.
Source Control: In 1984, the EPA selected a remedy to control the
source of contamination by: (1) removing all bulk liquids, drummed liquids,
and waste piles to a federally approved facility for disposal or incineration;
(2) removing and disposing of all transformers and substation equipment; (3)
dismantling, demolishing, and removing all on-site buildings and bulk storage tanks; (4)
constructing a stormwater treatment plant on site; and (5) monitoring air quality. The
potentially responsible parties, under EPA monitoring, completed these actions in 1984.
Entire Site: In 1985, the EPA selected a remedy to clean up the entire
site by: (1) excavating and disposing of highly contaminated soils, drums,
and buried wastes in Area 1; (2) excavating, or cleaning and plugging all
utility and process lines in Area 1; (3) capping all remaining surface soils; (4)
maintaining caps; (5) excavating utility manholes/vaults near the site; (6) removing or
decontaminating the lead-contaminated house in Area 8; (7) constructing a groundwater
extraction and pre-treatment plant; (8) constructing, operating, and maintaining a
stormwater control system; (9) monitoring Mill Creek, the east drain, groundwater, and
the groundwater extraction system performance; (10) excavating contaminated
sediments in Mill Creek; (11) conducting bench-scale tests of soil solidification
techniques, and conducting pilot-scale tests of in-place solidification technologies; and
(12) performing supplemental studies if contamination of the shallow groundwater
spreads beyond the zone now contaminated or significant regional contamination is
detected. The wastewater treatment plant began operating in 1988. As of early 1990,
over 100,000,000 gallons of contaminated groundwater had been treated. Additional
equipment, space, and staff have been added to the on-site laboratory. Extensive
monitoring, including sampling of the extraction wells, treatment plant influent and
effluent, and Mill Creek and the East Drain is continuing. In addition, monitoring of
several wells outside the site is under way.
Site Facts: In 1983, the EPA issued an order to Western Processing to cease
operations due to contamination problems. In 1986, the EPA and Western Processing
Trustees signed a Consent Decree.
Environmental Progress
The removal of liquids and sludges and stormwater and groundwater treatment have
significantly reduced the threat of exposure to contaminants at the Western Processing
Company while cleanup actions continue.
91
-------
WYCKOFF CO V
EAGLE HA
WASHINGTON
EPA ID# WAD009248295
REGION 10
CONGRESSIONAL DIST. 01
Kitsap County
Bainbridge Island
Site Description
The Wyckoff Co./Eagle Harbor site is located on Bainbridge Island. The site occupies
approximately 40 acres at the mouth of Eagle Harbor. A wood treatment facility has
operated at this location since the early 1900s. In the past, wood was pressure-treated
with solutions containing pentachlorophenol (PCP) or creosote to prevent the growth of
sapstain and mould fungi. Until 1981, over 23 million gallons of wastewater were
discharged to a seepage basin, and sludge was buried on site. In 1981, a closed-loop
effluent system was installed. In 1984, an advisory was issued against harvest or
consumption of crabs and shellfish from Eagle Harbor. Approximately 2,000 people live
within 1 mile of the site. The nearest residence is less than 1/4 mile away. More than
150 residents in the Eagle Harbor area rely on 4 public and 8 to 15 private wells from
the sea-level aquifer for their drinking water. The harbor is used for fishing, swimming,
and boating.
Site Responsibility:
The site is being addressed through
Federal and potentially responsible
parties' actions.
IMPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 09/18/85
Final Date: 07/22/87
L\
Threats and Contaminants
Polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PNAs), volatile organic compounds
(VOCs), and PCP have been found in groundwater and in seeps on
adjacent beaches. Marine sediments and soils contain PNAs, VOCs, and
PCP as well as dioxins and furans. Individuals ingesting or coming into
direct contact with contaminated groundwater, sediments, soils, or seeps
may be at risk. The Kitsap County Health Department has a health
advisory in effect, which prohibits shellfishing in the Eagle Harbor.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in three stages: immediate actions and two long-term
remedial phases focusing on cleanup of the Central Harbor and North Shore and the
Wyckoff property and South Shore.
March 1990
NPL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
92
continued
-------
WYCKOFF CO./EAGLE HARBOR
Response Action Status
Immediate Actions: To allow the facility to remain operational, the EPA
and Wyckoff agreed to the following measures to be undertaken by
Wyckoff: (1) daily inspection of all process lines; (2) installing containment
vessels on all pipe joints and valves of process lines; (3) installing impervious surfaces
and upgrading of drainage controls to contain dnppage from treated wood; (4) posting
warning signs on the perimeter of Wyckoff's property to warn against public
consumption of shellfish from the harbor and to prevent unauthorized personnel from
entering the Wyckoff property; (5) inspecting and testing the integrity of tanks on site
and providing tank testing records; (6) removing all liquids from the 1 million-gallon
creosote tank and discontinuing its use; and (7) developing a plan for sludge disposal.
Activities required by Wyckoff to reduce pollutants entering Puget Sound include
recovering floating oil from shallow recovery wells on the site, treating groundwater
pumped from the wells, and monitoring and discharging treated water to Puget Sound.
The groundwater extraction unit commenced pumping in early 1990 and uses bacteria
and carbon filters to break down contaminants. These actions have limited the
migration of the contaminant groundwater plume.
Central Harbor and North Shore: The EPA is investigating Eagle Harbor
to identify the source of sediment contamination, the extent of
contamination, and alternative technologies for cleanup. The investigation
is expected to be completed in 1990. The selection of the final remedy for the Central
Harbor and the northern shoreline is expected in late 1990.
Wyckoff and South Shore: The EPA is scheduled to initiate an
investigation of groundwater resources in 1991 to assess the
effectiveness of the treatment system and to determine if other actions
will be required.
Site Facts: In 1984, the EPA issued an order requiring Wyckoff to investigate soil and
groundwater contamination at the site. In July 1988, the EPA and the Wyckoff
Company signed an Administrative Order on Consent, under which Wyckoff performed
initial cleanup measures at its Eagle Harbor facility. The Eagle Harbor Technical
Discussion Group (TDG) composed of environmental groups, potentially responsible
parties, public health agencies, and local community groups are participating and
commenting on a draft investigative report for the Central Harbor and North Shore
areas.
Environmental Progress
The upgrading of drainage controls, removal of creosote tank liquids, and the treatment
of groundwater have significantly reduced to threat of exposure to contaminants at the
Wyckoff Co./Eagle Harbor site while investigations leading to the selection of the final
cleanup remedy continue.
93
-------
YAKIMA PLATING
COMPANY
WASHINGTON
EPA ID# WAD04018789
Site Description
REGION 1O
ONGRESSIONAL DIST. 04
Yakima County
Yaklma
Alias:
Yakima Plating
The Yakima Plating Company site covers 2 acres in Yakima. Since 1962, the company
has electroplated bumpers for cars and other objects. Yakima Plating has discharged
wastewaters from its operations to an on-site drainfield since the plant opened. The
plant operated under a State permit to discharge its wastewater from 1966 to 1977. In
1986, the EPA found contaminants in the groundwater. The site is located in a
neighborhood of Yakima that includes light commercial and residential areas.
Approximately 98,500 people use groundwater as a source of drinking water within 3
miles of the site. The nearest well is 225 feet from the company's drainfield.
Site Responsibility: jhe site is being addressed through
Federal actions.
IMPL LISTING HISTORY
Proposed Date: 06/24/88
Final Date: 03/31/89
Threats and Contaminants
Groundwater contains heavy metals including copper, lead, and zinc.
Individuals may be exposed to contaminants through accidental ingestion
of or direct contact with contaminated groundwater.
Cleanup Approach
The site is being addressed in a single long-term remedial phase focusing on cleanup of
the entire site.
March 1990
N PL HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES
94
continued
-------
YAKIMA PLATING COMPANY
Response Action Status
Entire Site: In 1989, the EPA began a study to determine the nature and
extent of contamination at the site. The EPA is scheduled to complete this
study in early 1991 and will recommend alternatives for final cleanup of the
site.
Environmental Progress
An initial evaluation of the Yakima Plating Company site determined that no immediate
actions are needed while an investigation leading to the selection of the final cleanup
remedy continues.
95
-------
-------
T" his glossary defines the italicized terms used in the
site fact sheets for the State of Washington. The terms
/ and abbreviations contained in this glossary are often
defined in the context of hazardous waste management as
described in the site fact sheets, and apply specifically to work
performed under the Superfund program. Thus, these terms
may have other meanings when used in a different context.
Acids: Substances, characterized by low pH (less than
7.0) that are used in chemical manufacturing. Acids in
high concentration can be very corrosive and react with
many inorganic and organic substances. These reactions
may possibly create toxic compounds or release heavy
metal contaminants that remain in the environment long
after the acid is neutralized.
Administrative Order On Consent: A legal and enforceable agreement between EPA
and the parties potentially responsible for site contamination. Under the terms of the
Order, the potentially responsible parties agree to perform or pay for site studies or
cleanups. It also describes the oversight rules, responsibilities and enforcement options
that the government may exercise in the event of non-compliance by potentially respon-
sible parties. This Order is signed by PRPs and the government; it does not require
approval by a judge.
Administrative Order [Unilateral]: A legally binding document issued by EPA direct-
ing the parties potentially responsible to perform site cleanups or studies (generally,
EPA does not issue unilateral orders for site studies).
Aeration: A process that promotes breakdown of contaminants in soil or water by
exposing them to air.
Air Stripping: A process whereby volatile organic chemicals (VOCs) are removed from
contaminated material by forcing a stream of air through it in a pressurized vessel. The
contaminants are evaporated into the air stream. The air may be further treated before
it is released into the atmosphere.
G-l
-------
GLOSSARY
Aquifer: An underground layer of rock, sand, or gravel capable of storing water within
cracks and pore spaces, or between grains. When water contained within an aquifer is
of sufficient quantity and quality, it can be tapped and used for drinking or other pur-
poses. The water contained in the aquifer is called groundwater.
Backfill: To refill an excavated area with removed earth; or the material itself that is
used to refill an excavated area.
Berm: A ledge, wall, or a mound of earth used to prevent the migration of contami-
nants.
Bioaccumulate: The process by which some contaminants or toxic chemicals gradually
collect and increase in concentration in living tissue, such as in plants, fish, or people as
they breathe contaminated air, drink contaminated water, or eat contaminated food.
Cap: A layer of material, such as clay or a synthetic material, used to prevent rainwater
from penetrating and spreading contaminated materials. The surface of the cap is
generally mounded or sloped so water will drain off.
Carbon Adsorption: A treatment system in which contaminants are removed from
groundwater and surface water by forcing water through tanks containing activated
carbon, a specially treated material that attracts and holds or retains contaminants.
Cell: In solid waste disposal, one of a series of holes in a landfill where waste is
dumped, compacted, and covered with layers of dirt.
Closure: The process by which a landfill stops accepting wastes and is shut down
under Federal guidelines that ensure the public and the environment is protected.
Confluence: The place where two bodies of water, such as streams, come together.
Consent Decree: A legal document, approved and issued by a judge, formalizing an
agreement between EPA and the parties potentially responsible for site contamination.
The decree describes cleanup actions that the potentially responsible parties are re-
quired to perform and/or the costs incurred by the government that the parties will
reimburse, as well as the roles, responsibilities, and enforcement options that the gov-
ernment may exercise in the event of non-compliance by potentially responsible parties.
If a settlement between EPA and a potentially responsible party includes cleanup ac-
tions, it must be in the form of a consent decree. A consent decree is subject to a public
comment period.
Consent Order: [see Administrative Order on Consent].
G-2
-------
Containment: The process of enclosing or containing hazardous substances in a struc-
ture, typically in ponds and lagoons, to prevent the migration of contaminants into the
environment.
Cooperative Agreement: A contract between EPA and the states wherein a State agrees
to manage or monitor certain site cleanup responsibilities and other activities on a cost-
sharing basis.
Creosotes: Chemicals used in wood preserving operations and produced by distillation
of tar, including polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and polynuclear aromatic hydrocar-
bons [see PAHs and PNAs]. Contaminating sediments, soils, and surface water, creo-
sotes may cause skin ulcerations and cancer with prolonged exposure.
Decommission: To revoke a license to operate and take out of service.
Degrease: To remove grease from wastes, soils, or chemicals, usually using solvents.
Dewater: To remove water from wastes, soils, or chemicals.
Downgradienfc A downward hydrologic slope that causes groundwater to move
toward lower elevations. Therefore, wells downgradient of a contaminated groundwater
source are prone to receiving pollutants.
Effluent: Wastewater, treated or untreated, that flows out of a treatment plant, sewer,
or industrial outfall. Generally refers to wastes discharged into surface waters.
Estuary (estuarine): Areas where fresh water from rivers and salt water from nearshore
ocean waters are mixed. These areas may include bays, mouths of rivers, salt marshes,
and lagoons. These water ecosystems shelter and feed marine life, birds, and wildlife.
French Drain System: A crushed rock drain system constructed of perforated pipes,
which is used to drain and disperse wastewater.
Gasification (coal): The conversion of soft coal into gas for use as a fuel.
Good Faith Offer: A voluntary offer, generally in response to a Special Notice letter,
made by a potentially responsible party that consists of a written proposal demonstrat-
ing a potentially responsible party's qualifications and willingness to perform a site
study or cleanup.
Impoundment: A body of water or sludge confined by a dam, dike, floodgate, or other
barrier.
G-3
-------
GLOSSARY
AWVVI w ww.w-v.w.vsv ws \ f yff f ' /"f/ ** s"- "
v ',->' ,v,f £.?.*. '' *'/&}. " '. """
Influent: Water, wastewater, or other liquid flowing into a reservoir, basin, or treat-
ment plant.
Installation Restoration Program: The specially funded program established in 1978
under which the Department of Defense has been identifying and evaluating its hazard-
ous waste sites and controlling the migration of hazardous contaminants from those
sites.
Intake: The source where a water supply is drawn from, such as from a river or water-
bed.
Interagency Agreement: A written agreement between EPA and a Federal agency that
has the lead for site cleanup activities (e.g. the Department of Defense), that sets forth
the roles and responsibilities of the agencies for performing and overseeing the activi-
ties. States are often parties to interagency agreements.
Lagoon: A shallow pond where sunlight, bacterial action, and oxygen work to purify
wastewater. Lagoons are typically used for the storage of wastewaters, sludges, liquid
wastes, or spent nuclear fuel.
Landfill: A disposal facility where waste is placed in or on land.
Leachate [n]: The liquid that trickles through or drains from waste, carrying soluble
components from the waste. Leach, Leaching [v.t.]: The process by which soluble
chemical components are dissolved and carried through soil by water or some other
percolating liquid.
Long-term Remedial Phase: Distinct, often incremental, steps that are taken to solve
site pollution problems. Depending on the complexity, site cleanup activities can be
separated into a number of these phases.
Migration: The movement of oil, gas, contaminants, water, or other liquids through
porous and permeable rock.
Mine (or Mill) Tailings: A fine, sandy residue left from ore milling operations. Tail-
ings often contain high concentrations of lead and arsenic or other heavy metals.
Notice Letter: A General Notice Letter notifies the parties potentially responsible for
site contamination of their possible liability. A Special Notice Letter begins a 60-day
formal period of negotiation during which EPA is not allowed to start work at a site or
initiate enforcement actions against potentially responsible parties, although EPA may
G-4
-------
undertake certain investigatory and planning activities. The 60-day period may be
extended if EPA receives a good faith offer [see Good Faith Offer] within that period.
Outfall: The place where wastewater is discharged into receiving waters.
Pentachlorophenol (PCP): A synthetic, modified petrochemical that is used as a wood
preservative because of its toxicity to termites and fungi. It is a common component of
creosotes and can cause cancer.
Percolation: The downward flow or filtering of water or other liquids through subsur-
face rock or soil layers, usually continuing downward to groundwater.
Phenols: Organic compounds that are used in plastics manufacturing and are by-
products of petroleum refining, tanning, textile, dye, and resin manufacturing. Phenols
are highly poisonous and can make water taste and smell bad.
Plume: A body of contaminated groundwater flowing from a specific source. The
movement of the groundwater is influenced by such factors as local groundwater flow
patterns, the character of the aquifer in which groundwater is contained, and the den-
sity of contaminants.
Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons or Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs): PAHs,
such as pyrene, are a group of highly reactive organic compounds found in motor oil.
They are a common component of creosotes and can cause cancer.
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs): A group of toxic chemicals used for a variety of
purposes including electrical applications, carbonless copy paper, adhesives, hydraulic
fluids, microscope emersion oils, and caulking compounds. PCBs are also produced in
certain combustion processes. PCBs are extremely persistent in the environment be-
cause they are very stable, non-reactive, and highly heat resistant. Burning them pro-
duces even more toxins. Chronic exposure to PCBs is believed to cause liver damage. It
is also known to bioaccumulate in fatty tissues. PCB use and sale was banned in 1979
with the passage of the Toxic Substances Control Act.
Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PNAs): PNAs, such as naphthalene, and biphen-
yls, are a group of highly reactive organic compounds that are a common component of
creosotes, which can be carcinogenic.
Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs): Parties, including owners, who may have
contributed to the contamination at a Superfund site and may be liable for costs of
response actions. Parties are considered PRPs until they admit liability or a court makes
G-5
-------
GLOSSARY
a determination of liability. This means that PRPs may sign a consent decree or admin-
istrative order on consent [see Administrative Order on Consent] to participate in site
cleanup activity without admitting liability.
Runoff: The discharge of water over land into surface water. It can carry pollutants
from the air and land into receiving waters.
Sedimenb The layer of soil, sand and minerals at the bottom of surface waters, such as
streams, lakes, and rivers that absorb contaminants.
Seeps: Specific points where releases of liquid (usually leachate) form from waste
disposal areas, particularly along the lower edges of landfills.
Seepage Pits: A hole, shaft, or cavity in the ground used for storage of liquids, usually
in the form of leachate, from waste disposal areas. The liquid gradually leaves the pit
by moving through the surrounding soil.
Sludge: Semi-solid residues from industrial or water treatment processes that may be
contaminated with hazardous materials.
Stabilization: The process of changing an active substance into inert, harmless mate-
rial, or physical activities at a site that act to limit the further spread of contamination
without actual reduction of toxicity.
Stripping: A process used to remove volatile contaminants from a substance [see Air
Stripping].
Sumps: A pit or tank that catches liquid runoff for drainage or disposal.
Trichloroethylene (TCE): A stable, colorless liquid with a low boiling point. TCE has
many industrial applications, including use as a solvent and as a metal degreasing
agent. TCE may be toxic to people when inhaled, ingested, or through skin contact and
can damage vital organs, especially the liver [see also Volatile Organic Compounds].
Upgradient: An upward slope; demarks areas that are higher than contaminated areas
and, therefore, are not prone to contamination by the movement of polluted groundwa-
ter.
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs): VOCs are made as secondary petrochemicals.
They include light alcohols, acetone, trichloroethylene, perchloroethylene, dichloroeth-
ylene, benzene, vinyl chloride, toluene, and methylene chloride. These potentially toxic
chemicals are used as solvents, degreasers, paints, thinners, and fuels. Because of their
G-6
-------
volatile nature, they readily evaporate into the air, increasing the potential exposure to
humans. Due to their low water solubility, environmental persistence, and widespread
industrial use, they are commonly found in soil and groundwater.
Wetland: An area that is regularly saturated by surface or groundwater and, under
normal circumstances, capable of supporting vegetation typically adapted for life in
saturated soil conditions. Wetlands are critical to sustaining many species of fish and
wildlife. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, and bogs. Wetlands may be
either coastal or inland. Coastal wetlands have salt or brackish (a mixture of salt and
fresh) water, and most have tides, while inland wetlands are non-tidal and freshwater.
Coastal wetlands are an integral component of estuaries.
G-7
-------
------- |