EPA910-F-93-002
               United States
               Environmental Protection
               Agency	
Region 10
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle WA 98101
Alaska
Idaho
Oregon
Washington
               Hazardous Waste Division
Superfund Branch
                                                   November 1993
               A Region  10
               Superfund  Update

-------

-------
A Region 1O Superfund Update

   Are you interested in what is going on at Superfund
Sites in communities like yours in Washington, Oregon,
Idaho, and Alaska? Do you wonder if contamination is
really being cleaned up, and if affected neighborhoods
become safe, pleasant places to live in? What about
cost? Are we getting our money's worth?

   This update is intended to answer those questions
and to tell you much more about Superfund in Region
10. We want to share some of the experiences that we
feel especially good about. We encourage you to read
this update to learn more about your federal agency.


Superfund Responsibilities

   The U.S. Congress passed the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act (CERCLA), known as Superfund, in 1980 to
identify and clean up hazardous materials spills and
contaminated sites. As the U.S. Environmental
 Protection Agency (EPA) began finding sites and
 determining their potential harm to people and the
 environment, it became evident that this would be a
 major responsibility.

    It often takes a very long time to investigate a
 Superfund site, to determine the best remedy, to get
 the cleanup technology in place, and to finally succeed
 in cleaning up the site. Sites that meet the criteria for
 listing on the National Priorities List (NPL) are
 considered the worst in the country, so it wouldn't be
 reasonable to expect a quick fix.

    However when public health is at risk, EPA moves
 very quickly to stabilize and secure the site so that
 people are not exposed to  harmful contaminants. In
 some cases, EPA's emergency cleanups or other
 immediate actions succeed in completely cleaning up
 the.site. In others, further investigation and cleanup
 must follow to ensure that there will be no future
  problems at the site.

   ' Whether a short-term removal action to address an
  imminent danger to the public or a long-term remedial
  response is undertaken at an NPL site, EPA attempts
  to locate and require the parties responsible for the
  contamination to pay the cleanup costs whenever
  possible.

   • As of September 30,1993, EPA has spent
    $169,803,997 for work on Region 10 Superfund
    sites.

   • It is estimated that $350,000,000 has been spent
    by Responsible Parties in Region 10.

    Federal agencies pay for cleanups at sites such as
  military bases out of their own budgets. They are not
  eligible for monies from the Superfund trust fund. No
  matter who pays for or performs the cleanup work,
EPA is in charge of overseeing site work to make sure
sites are safe and people and the environment are
protected.

  The states play a substantial role in all stages of the
Superfund process. EPA can provide money for states
to take the lead or assist EPA in site cleanup activities
through a cooperative agreement. Once a cleanup has
been completed, states are responsible for any long-
term maintenance required at the site.

   EPA can also provide money to some federally
recognized Indian tribes. The funding is provided
through cooperative agreements that enable tribes to
take the lead or to assist EPA in site cleanup. Tribes,
however, are not required to provide the same
assurances required of states, including long-term
maintenance.

   EPA also relies on citizens to provide valuable
information that can be crucial to experts evaluating a
site and its potential dangers. Although EPA must
determine how dangerous a site is and how best to
clean it up, residents' concerns and their preferences
for what will happen in their community are seriously
considered by EPA as it makes these decisions.
 Superfund Matures

   Learning from experience is a sign of maturity.
 Since 1980, people in the Superfund program have
 learned from their experiences, good and bad, what
 works and what doesn't. Policy has not always been
 flexible enough to allow for significant changes in the
 way Superfund is managed. EPA continues to work on
 ways to streamline Superfund to speed hazardous
 waste site cleanups and quickly reduce risks to people
 and the environment.


 Administrative Improvements to
 Superfund Frojjram

    Nine administrative; improvements to Superfund
 recommended by an agency-wide task force
 established in May by EPA Administrator Carol
 M.Browner are detailed in a recently issued report. The
 intent of the administrative changes is

   • to address liability fairness under the law,
   • to improve the pace and cost of cleanup,
   • to augment the state role in cleanup decisions, and
   • to readily involve local communities - particularly
    disadvantaged communities - in Superfund decision-
    making.         ]

    While implementing the improvements, EPA will
  explore its flexibility under the current statute and
  determine what legislative changes might be
  necessary or desirable. EPA is reviewing possible
  changes in conjunction with the Congress in
  anticipation of Superfund reauthorization  next year.

-------
-
             •£
 — °- "so

 SZS.
 & TJ- O
                                                                               =J -35
                                                                                 "
             ra °
             J?«
             J3 g'
             t!  JS Q.O
— ^

Si
U 0.
            ce •
                                  to ••
                                  ^. =>» to
                                    -°
                                  §3
                                 CO 0-
                                         S S"
                                                                                                    I


                                                                                                    f
                                                                                                    Co

-------
The Super-fund Accelerated Clean-Up
Model (SACM)

  The Superfund Accelerated Clean-up Model
(SACM) not only allows - but encourages - changes
that will speed up and streamline the program within
existing statutory and regulatory constraints.
      J=aster...C/eaner...Safer
   Until now there have been two doors through which
to enter the Superfund program, Remedial or
Removal. Any Superfund action that is taken must
meet the requirements of one of these authorities or
the other. The Remedial program is limited to NPL
sites and dedicated to long-term cleanup of hazardous
waste sites that pose the greatest threat to public
health or the environment. The Removal program was
set up to respond quickly, anywhere, at any time, to
emergencies where hazardous materials were or might
be released. Under SACM all sites will enter through
the same door marked Superfund and either program
may be used to solve problems at the site. SACM will
combine early actions, such as removing hazardous
wastes or contaminated materials, with ongoing
studies so that immediate public health and
environmental threats are taken care of while long-term
cleanups are being planned.

   Many hazardous waste problems can be corrected
by early actions, but some problems will take far longer
- possibly decades. The flexibility that SACM brings to
the hazardous waste cleanup program - in reducing
duplicated efforts, in funding, in greater cooperation
between organizations within the agency - will result in
better protection of people and the environment from
the effects of hazardous materials.
SACM Benefits Yakima Plating
Cleanup

  The Yakima Plating Superfund Site, placed on
ERA'S National Priorities List in 1989, is an example of
how SACM principles were used to good advantage.

  The investigation at the Yakima, Washington, site
was completed and a plan was selected to clean up
metal plating wastes including nickel, cadmium, and
chromium under authority of the Remedial program.
Since the cleanup method selected was similar to
those used by the Removal program at comparable
sites, it made sense to shift the project to that program.

  During the cleanup, begun in June 1992, larger
quantities of contaminates than originally estimated
were discovered with potential pathways to
groundwater. After approximately 2567 cubic yards of
contaminated soil and debris were removed, EPA
backfilled the site with gravel and a layer of topsoil.
Groundwater monitoring indicates that cleanup goals
have been met and EPA is now considering the site for
deletion from the NPL.
 Excavation of contaminated soil from drain field at
 Yakima Plating.

   The Removal program had the ability to adjust to
 conditions at the site, to proceed immediately, and
 completed the cleanup in between three and four
 weeks. If left under the Remedial program, it would
 have taken at least another year to clean up the site.

   In the Yakima Plating case, circumstances
 determined that the Removal program was the best
 choice for action. In other situations it would be more
 appropriate to follow the Remedial processes. The
 important thing is that under SACM, there is a choice.

-------
Innovative Technology Makes
Abandoned Waste Site Safe

  Acids, caustics and solvent wastes containing high
levels of lead, arsenic and mercury stored at an
abandoned battery recycling facility were a threat to
human health and the environment in Amity, Oregon.
Seventy-three thousand gallons of hazardous
substances were discovered in damaged tanks and
drums on the site. Chemical sludges stored inside and
outside the building were easily accessible to anyone
who might enter the unsecured facility.

  Two examples of innovative technology were
employed at the site. Bio-Nebraska immuno assays
provided on-site analyses of waters and soils. A carbon
dioxide blaster (like a sand blaster), never before used
at a Superfund site, was used to etch the interior of the
process room and tanks where mercury contamination
was found.
Cleaning up with the carbon dioxide Blaster.
   In a carbon dioxide blaster, dry ice replaces the
sand used in conventional blasters and sublimates to a
gas cloud upon contact. By supercooling the walls, the
dry-ice technique reduced airborne mercury vapors
which are unsafe for workers. Approximately $380,000
in hazardous waste disposal fees were saved because
130 tons of additional wastes were avoided.

   Meetings were held with students at a school
located within 300 feet of the site and for other
community groups to let people know why workers in
protective clothing and respirators would be appearing
in their neighborhood. An interpreter was recruited so
the Spanish speaking family living nearby could be
reassured about the cleanup activities.

   Citizens who appreciated the way EPA had solved a
serious problem in their community presented cakes to
the clean-up crew on their last day in Amity.
                                                   Early Action Will Save $2 Million at
                                                   WyckoftTEagle Harbor Site

                                                      The Wyckoff/Eagle Harbor site located on
                                                   Bainbridge Island in Puget Sound was listed on the
                                                   NPLin 1987 and is comprised of three units. A capping
                                                   project in the eastern portion of Eagle Harbor began in
                                                   mid September and is expected to take six months to
                                                   complete. EPA will be able to obtain enough clean
                                                   dredged materials from the Corps of Engineers to
                                                   accomplish the capping project.  Under normal
                                                   Superfund Remedial program procedures, EPA would
                                                   not have been able to move fast enough to take
                                                   advantage of the fall dredgjng project. Under the
                                                   Removal program's authority for doing early actions, it
                                                   could be done. The Corps is pleased that materials
                                                   from a routine project (dredging for navigation
                                                   purposes) are being put to good use. By taking
                                                   advantage of this material through an early cleanup
                                                   action, the Superfund program expects to save up to
                                                   $2 million compared to estimates based on other
                                                   sediment sources.
Emergency Response Protects People
and the Environment

  Teams of highly trained technicians handle
emergencies such as train derailments and motor
vehicle accidents, coordinating the cleanup and
removal of hazardous materials to ensure public safety
as quickly as possible. Abandoned wastes sites may
also require emergency cleanups and can'result in
significant efforts. Containers of unidentified materials
must be sampled and safely removed in case of
dangerous reactions or explosions. Proper disposal or
recycling must also be assured for materials removed
from the sites.

-------
Long Term Cleanups at National
Priorities List Sites

   Long-term cleanup of sites that are seriously
contaminated but not immediately life-threatening
includes studies of the contamination and the
technologies needed to clean it up, design and
construction of the chosen remedy, operation of the
treatment system and monitoring to ensure that the
cleanup has been completely successful.
Contaminated soil and groundwater may take years of
treatment until a site meets cleanup standards. Large
sites are often broken down into  smaller units so that
cleanup can progress more  efficiently.


Trees are an Important Part of Bunker
Hill Cleanup

   The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency  is
attempting to restore a 21-square-mile area devastated
by 100 years of mining, milling and smelting activities
in Northern Idaho's Silver Valley. Lead contamination is
widespread in the soils and  water at the Bunker Hill
Superfund Site, which was added to EPA's National
Priorities List in 1983. The site is so large and the
problems so complex that it was divided into 11 sub-
areas for purposes of investigation and development of
cleanup objectives. Altogether the cleanup remedies
selected for Bunker Hill are expected to cost more than
$100 million.
 Revegetation of Hillsides begins with planting of
 seedlings.

    Hillsides is one of the sub-area projects. Part of the
 cleanup agreement for this sub-area is a plan to
 stabilize and revegetate the hillsides within the site
 boundaries. Some hillside areas have been regraded
 to eliminate gullies and then planted with grass, shrubs
 and trees to help prevent future erosion. Terraces have
 also been created to control runoff.

    Trees are an important part of the stabilization and
 revegetation project. Three quarters of a million
 seedlings - White Pine, Larch, Douglas Fir, Ponderosa
 Pine and Lodgepole Pine - have been planted so far. It
will take many years for these trees to grow, just as it
takes many years to cleanup some hazardous waste
sites. But the green on the hillsides at Bunker Hill
symbolizes the possibilities for healing seriously
contaminated Superfund sites across the country.


NPL Sites in Region  1O - Washington,
Oregon, Idaho, and Alaska

   A total of 73 sites have received final Superfund
designation in Region 10. EPA has proposed 14 more
sites for listing and these sites may be added to the
final list after further evaluation.

   Three sites have been deleted from the list since
contamination has been removed or reduced to a safe
level and the sites no longer pose any threat to people
or the environment.  !
 Toftdahl Drums Site
   The first site to be (deleted from Region 10's NPL
 was the Toftdahl Drums site in Brush Prairie,
 Washington. The site where 200 drums of paint, glues,
 and related chemicals had been buried since 1970 was
 added to the NPL in June 1986. Although most of the
 drums had been removed and transported to a landfill
 in 1982, the Washington Department of Ecology and
 EPA agreed that the degree of contamination in soil
 and water in the area must be determined.
 Contaminated soil and remaining drums were removed
 and a study was done that showed the site was free of
 significant contamination. Although there was no
 evidence that chemicals from the drums had moved off
 the property, groundv/ater will be monitored annually
 for another ten years. The Toftdahl Drums site was
 removed from the NPL in December 1988.
 Arrcom Site
   The Arrcom Superfund Site in Kootenai County,
 Idaho, was the second site in Region 10 to be deleted
 from the NPL. The abandoned waste oil recycling
 facility was added to the NPL in September 1983
 because it was contaminated with highly toxic
 compounds includinq lead, polychlorinated
 biphenyls(PCBs), arid pentachlorophenol(PCP).
 Located three miles southwest of Rathdrum, Idaho,
 over an aquifer that supplies 350,000 people with
 drinking water,  it presented a potential for groundwater
 contamination.      ;

    In three separate removal actions between 1983
 and 1990 at the Arrcom facility, contaminated soil,  -
 sludges, waste oil, buildings and machinery were
 removed. Concentrations of contaminants have been
 reduced to levels that do not pose a risk to human
 health or the environment. Sampling has shown that
 groundwater at the site was not contaminated.
 Therefore, Region 10 was able to remove the Arrcom
 site from the NPL in December 1992.

-------
 Yakima Pesticide Lab Site
   The Yakima Pesticide Lab is the most recent site in
 Region 10 to be deleted from the NPL. The site was
 taken off the list on September 1,1993, and brings to
 three the number of sites that EPA has been able to
 remove from Region 10's NPL.

   The Agricultural Research Lab in Yakima,
 Washington, develops insect control technologies for
 fruit and vegetable agriculture in the Pacific Northwest.
 The site consisted of a septic tank, disposal pipe,
 washdown pad, and drainfield system used for the
 disposal of diluted waste pesticide compounds. At one
 time there was concern that some of the pesticides and
 solvents used at the lab may have leached into the
 uppermost drinking water aquifer.

   To ensure that groundwater contamination did not
 occur, EPA and the Washington State Department of
 Ecology decided to remove the waste disposal
 structures and about 40 cubic yards of contaminated
 soils. In addition, monitoring wells were installed to
 make sure the groundwater continued to meet health
 based standards. EPA feels that the remedy is
 protective of public health and the environment and
that no further cleanup action is required.
Superftmd Continues

   EPA is proud of the many accomplishments of the
Superfund program. However, it is clear that
hazardous waste problems remain numerous, complex
and long-term. EPA is committed to using new
management and technological approaches to solve
these problems and to further improve the quality of
the program. The goal will always be to improve human
health and the environment in the most efficient way
possible.
How You Can Participate

   You can report a spill or a site where hazardous
wastes may be illegally stored by calling the
Superfund Response and Investigation 24-hour
emergency number, (206) 553-1263.

   Publications containing more information about the
Superfund program can be obtained from EPA's
Public information Center by calling toll free 1-
800-424-4EPA.

   If you would like information about a specific
Superfund site, call (206) 553-2587.

-------
                                  The National Priorities List
                                          EPA Region 1O
                                     (As of September 30th, 1993)
  Site Name

In Alaska (6 Final & 2 Proposed)
City/County
  Alaska Battery Enterprises	Fairbanks N Star Bor
  Arctic Surplus	Fairbanks
  * Eielson Air Force Base	Fairbanks N Star Bor
  * Elmendorf Air Force Base	Greater Anchorage Bor
  * Fort Richardson	Anchorage
  * Fort Wainwright	Fairbanks N Star Bor
  * Naval Air Station Adak	Adak Island
  * Standard Steel&Met Sal Yd (USDOT)	Anchorage

In Idaho (8 Final & 2 Proposed)

  Blackbird Mine	Lehmi County
  Bunker Hill Mining & Metallurg	Smelterville
  Eastern Michaud Flats Contamin	Pocatello
  * Idaho National Engin Lab (USDOE)	Idaho Falls
  Kerr-McGee Chemical (Soda Springs)	Soda Springs
  Monsanto Chemical (Soda Springs)	Soda Springs
  * Mountain Home Air Force Base	Mountain Home
  Pacific Hide & Fur Recycling Co	Pocatello
  Triumph Mine Tailings Piles	Triumph
  Union Pacific Railroad Co	Pocatello

In Oregon (9 Final & 3 Proposed)

  Allied Plating, Inc	Portland
  East Multnomah County Groundwater	Multnomah Co.
  * White King/Lucky Lass (USDA/FS)	Lake County
  Gould, Inc	Portland
  Joseph Forest Products	Joseph
  Martin-Marietta Aluminum Co	,	The Dalles
  McCormick & Baxter	Portland
  Northwest Pipe & Casing	Clackamas
  Teledyne Wah Chang	Albany
  * Umatilla Army Depot (Lagoons)	Hermiston
  Union Pacific RR Tie Treatment	The Dalles
  United Chrome Products, Inc	Corvallis
Region     1O
  Site Name

In Washington (47 Final & 7 Proposed)
City/County
                 ALCOA (Vancouver Smelter)	Vancouver
                 American Crossarm & Conduit Co	Chehalis
                 * American Lake Gardens	Tacoma
                 * Bangor Naval Submarine Base	Silverdale
                 * Bangor Ordnance Disposal	Bremerton
                 * Bonneville Power Adm Ross (USDOE)	Vancouver
                 Centralia Municipal Landfill	Centralia
                 Colbert Landfill	Colbert
                 Com Bay, Near Shore/Tide Flats	Pierce County
                 Com Bay, South Tacoma Channel	Tacoma
                 * Fairchild Air Force EJase (4 Areas)	Spokane County
                 FMC Corp. (Yakima Pit)	Yakima
                 * Fort Lewis (Landfill IMo. 5)	Tacoma
                 * Fort Lewis Logistics Center	Tillicum
                 Frontier Hard Chrome, Inc	Vancouver
                 General Electric (Spokane Shop)	Spokane
                 Greenacres Landfill	Spokane County
                 * Hamilton Island Landfill (USA/COE) ..Skamania County
                 * Hanford 100-Area (USDOE)	Benton County
                 * Hanford 1100-Area (USDOE)	Benton County
                 * Hanford 200-Area (USDOE)	Benton County
                 * Hanford 300-Area (USDOE)	Benton County
                 Harbor Island (Lead)	,	Seattle
                 Hidden Valley Lndfl (thun Field)	Pierce County
                 * Jackson Park Housing (USN)	Kitsap County
                 Kaiser Aluminum Mead Works	Mead
                 Lakewood Site	Lakewood
                 * McChord AFB (Wash Rack/Treatment)	'.	Tacoma
                 Mica Landfill	Mica
                 Midway Landfill	;	Kent
                 Moses Lake Wellfielcl Contamination	Grant County
                 * Naval Air Sta, Whid Is (Ault)	Whidbey  Island
                 * Naval Air Sta, Whid Is (Seaplane)	Whidbey  Island
                 * Naval Undersea Warf Sta (4 Areas)	Keyport
                 North Market Street (AKA TOSCO)	Spokane
                 Northside Landfill	Spokane
                 Northwest Transformer	Everson
                 Northwest Transformer (S Harkness)	Everson
                 Old Inland Pit	:	Spokane
                 Pacific Car & Foundry Co	Renton
                 Pacific Sound Resources	Seattle
                 Pasco Sanitary Landfill	Pasco
                 * Port Hadlock Detachment (USN)	Kitsap County
                 * Puget Sound Naval Shipyard Complex	Bremerton
                 Queen City Farms	Maple  Valley
                 Seattle Mun Lndfll (Kent Hghlnds)	Kent
                 Silver Mountain Mine	,	Loomis
                 Spokane Junkyard & Associated Prop	Spokane
                 Tuialip Landfill	:	Snohomish County
                 Vancouver Water Station #1 Cont	Clark County
                 Vancouver Water Station #4 Cont	Clark County
                 Western Processing Co., Inc	Kent
                 Wyckoff Co./Eagle Harbor	Bainbridge Island
                  Yakima Plating Co	Yakima
                               EPA Region 10:  14 Proposed, 70 Final
  * Denotes Federal Facility

-------

-------