United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response Publication 9320.7-071 September 1997 Descriptions of Six Final Sites Added to the National Priorities List in September 1997 Office of Emergency and Remedial Response State & Site Identification Center (5204G) ^ Intermittent Bulletin yVolume 4, Number 2 This document consists of descriptions of the six final sites added to the National Priorities List (NPL) in September 1997. The size of the site is generally indicated, based on information available at the time the site was scored using the Hazard Ranking System (HRS) or nominated using ATSDR health advisory criteria. The size may change as additional information is gathered on the sources and extent of contamination. Sites are arranged alphabetically by site name. CLEANING UP UNDER SUPERFUND The Superfund program is managed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). It is authorized by the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), enacted on December 11, 1980, as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA), enacted on October 17, 1986. In October 1990, SARA was extended to September 30, 1994. An appropriation by Congress for Fiscal Year 1995 authorized Superfund to continue to operate. The Hazardous Substance Response Trust Fund set up by CERCLA as amended pays the costs not assumed by responsible parties for cleaning up hazardous waste sites or emergencies that threaten public health, welfare, or the environment; Superfund also pays for overseeing responsible parties conducting cleanup. Two types of responses may be taken when a hazardous substance is released, or threatens to be released, into the environment: • Removal actions — emergency-type responses to imminent threats. SARA limits these actions to 1 year and/or $2 million, with a waiver possible if the actions are consistent with remedial responses. Removal actions can be undertaken by the private parties responsible for the releases or by the Federal government using the Superfund. • Remedial responses - actions intended to provide permanent solutions at uncontrolled hazardous waste sites. Remedial responses are generally longer-term and more expensive than removals. A Superfund-financ sd remedial response can be taken only if a site is on the NPL. EPA published the first NPL in September 1983. The list must be updated at least annually. EPA's goals for the Superfund program are to: • Ensure that polluters pay to clean up the problems they created; and * Work first on the worst problems at the worst sites, by making sites safe, making sites clean, and bringing new technology to bear on the problem. ------- REMEDIAL RESPONSES The money for conducting a remedial response at a hazardous waste site and a removal action, as well, can come from several sources: • The individuals or companies responsible for the problems can clean up voluntarily with EPA or State supervision, or they can be forced to clean up by Federal or State legal action. • A State or local government can choose to assume the responsibility to clean up without Federal dollars. • Superfund can pay for the cleanup, then seek to recover the costs from the responsible party or parties. A remedial response, as defined by the National Contingency Plan, the Federal regulation by which Superfund is implemented, is an orderly process that generally involves the following steps: • Take any measures needed to stabilize conditions, which might involve, for example, fencing the site or removing above-ground drums or bulk tanks. • Undertake initial planning activities to scope out a strategy for collecting information and analyzing alternative cleanup approaches. • Conduct a remedial investigation to. characterize the type and extent of contamination at the site and to assess the risks posed by that contamination. • Conduct a feasibility study to analyze various cleanup alternatives. The feasibility study is often conducted concurrently with the remedial investigation as one project. Typically, the two together take from 18 to 24 months to complete and cost approximately $1.3 million. • Select the cleanup alternative that: - Protects human health and the environment; - Complies with Federal and State requirements that are applicable or relevant and appropriate; - Uses permanent solutions and alternative treatment technologies or resource recovery technology to the maximum extent practicable; -- Considers views of the State and public; and - Is "cost effective" — that is, affords results proportional to the costs of the remedy. • Design the remedy. Typically, the design phase takes 6 to 12 months to complete and costs approximately $1.5 million. • Implement the remedy, which might involve, for example, constructing facilities to treat ground water or removing contaminants to a safe disposal area away from the site. EPA expects the implementation (remedial action) phase to average out at about $25 million per site (plus any costs to operate and maintain the action), and some remedial actions may take several years to complete. The State government can participate in a remedial response under Superfund in one of two ways: • The State can take the lead role under a cooperative agreement, which is much like a grant in that Federal dollars are transferred to the State. The State then develops a workplan, schedule, and- budget, contracts for any services it needs, and is responsible for making sure that all the conditions in the cooperative agreement are met. In contrast to a grant, EPA continues to be substantially involved and monitors the State's progress throughout the project. • EPA can take the lead under a Superfund State Contract, with the State's role outlined. EPA, generally using contractor support, manages work early in the planning process. In the later design and implementation phases, contractors do the work under the supervision of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Under both arrangements, the State must share in the cost of the implementation phase of cleanup. CERCLA requires that EPA select the remedy. ------- National Priorities List Final Rule #19 Narrative Summaries Site Name and Location Central Chemical (Hagerstown), Hagerstown, Maryland Del Amo, Los Angeles, California Grand Street Mercury, Hoboken, New Jersey Oeser Co, Bellingham, Washington Ordnance Products, Inc., Cecil County, Maryland Sprague Road Ground Water Plume, Odessa, Texas .3 ------- xvEPA UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST (NPL) September 1997 CSWER/OERR State, Tribal, and Site Identification Center Washington, DC 20460 CENTRAL CHEMICAL (HAGERSTOWN) Hagerstown, Maryland Conditions at Proposal (June 19%): Central Chemical blended and produced pesticides and fertilizers at the 19-acre site on North Jonathan Street in Hagerstown, Washington County, Maryland from the 1930s until 1968. Pesticide operations ceased in 1968 and the company only produced fertilizer from 1968 until closure in 1984. Currently the site is leased for warehousing, auto rebuilding, and other purposes. . The site consists of three sources: an old stone quarry, a sinkhole, and an area of contaminated soil. Soluble materials such as DDT, chlordane, and other pesticides and wastes that became out-of-date or were banned by the government were buried in the old stone quarry. Insoluble wastes were buried in trenches or sinkholes throughout areas east and northeast of the quarry. Following the discovery of elevated concentrations of pesticides and heavy metals in 1976, the State of Maryland ordered Central Chemical to investigate and stabilize the site. After complying with these orders by'capping the quarry and sinkhole areas with clay and soil and vegetating these areas, the State issued a Notice of Compliance to Central Chemical on December 14, 1979. After discovering an on-site dump area during the excavation of a sewer line in 1987, the State began negotiating a Consent Order with Central Chemical to clean up the site. To date, Central Chemical has not signed this order. Through, the Cooperative Agreement with EPA, the State conducted an expanded site inspection at Central Chemical in May of 1993. DDT was detected at elevated levels in sediment samples taken from the storm water runoff system and Antietam Creek. Antietam Creek is used for fishing and recreational purposes. High levels of DDT and other pesticides were also detected in soil samples on and near the site. Status (September 1997): EPA has conducted additional sampling at.the site. Central Chemical extended the fence to enclose the contaminated area in response to the discovery of contaminated soil outside the former fence line. [The description of the site (release) is based on information available at the time the site was scored. The description may change as additional information is gathered on the sources and extent of contamination. See 56 FR 5600, February 11, 1991, or subsequent FR notices.] Superfund hazardous waste site listed under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) as amended ------- OEPA UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST (NPL) September 1997 OSWER/OERR State, Tribal, and Site Identification Center Washington, DC 20460 DEL AMD Los Angeles, California Conditions at Proposal (June 1996): The Del Amo site is located in the city of Los Angeles, Los Angeles County, California. From the early 1940s to the early 1970s, a synthetic rubber manufacturing facility operated on site. The facility consisted of a butadiene plant, a styrene plant, and a copolymer plant; the butadiene and styrene were combined to produce synthetic rubber. In 1972, the entire 280-acre facility was sold to a land development company. The three plants were dismantled and the site was commercially developed. Current land use includes light industrial/manufacturing and commercial office space. The Montrose Chemical Corporation site, another EPA Superfund site, is located approximately 600 feet west of the Del Amo site. A 1993 phase I remedial investigation identified likely sources for groundwater contamination in eight areas. However, the Del Amo site consists of one area, Area 8 (Del Amo pit). This area occupies approximately 4 acres in the southern portion of the site and consists of six disposal pits and two evaporation ponds. The pits and ponds received process wastes such as sulfur tar oil, acid sludge, clay-like sludge, and propane cracking oils from the styrene manufacturing plant. The pits and ponds are currently covered with fill material, weeds, and miscellaneous debris, and the parcel is surrounded by a double row of fences. The waste remaining in the pits contains hydrocarbons with high polynuclear aromatic and volatile aromatic content, which correlates with the chemistry of the styrene manufacturing process wastes. Contaminated soil associated with the pits has come to be located below the top of the water table beneath the Del • Amo site, due to rising ground water levels. Soil sampling results indicate that, by 1987, hazardous substances from the waste in the pits had migrated to a depth of at least 57 feet belpw ground surface (bgs). In 1987, the water table was first encountered at a depth of 59 feet bgs. In 1993, the water table had risen to a minimum depth of 40 feet bgs. There are 13 municipal drinking water wells within 4 miles of the Del Amo site. Status (September 1997): The RI/FS is continuing for ground water. A joint ground water feasibility study is being done with Montrose. A treatability and modeling study is continuing near well MW-20. The EPA is planning the second phase of the RI, which focusses on soils and surface threats at the site. [The description of the site (release) is based on information available at the time the site was scored. The description may change as additional information is gathered on the sources and extent of contamination. See 56 FR 5600, February 11, 1991, or subsequent FR notices.] Superfund hazardous waste site listed under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) as amended ------- UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY &EPA OSWER/OERR NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST (NPL) State, Tribal, and Site Identification Center September 1997 Washington, DC 2046f GRAND STREET MERCURY Hoboken, New Jersey Conditions at Proposal (December 1996): The Grand Street Mercury site is located at 720 and 722-732 Grand Street, Hoboken, Hudson County, New Jersey. The site comprises two buildings, a former industrial building converted into 16 residential/studio spaces with the area of each space between 2,600 and 3,500 square feet and a ,four story townhouse also slated for residential renovation. The former industrial building is approximately 100 feet by 150 feet, five stories high and is constructed of brick and masonry with interior wooden structural and flooring systems. The townhouse is approximately 25 feet by 40 feet, four stories high and also constructed of brick and masonry with wooden structural and flooring systems. The surrounding area is a mix of residential/commercial and industrial properties. Hoboken High School is located across the street to the northeast. More than 40,000 residents live in a one-half mile radius from the site. The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), on January 22, 1996, issued a Public Health Advisory (PHA) that proclaimed "an imminent public health hazard is posed to residents of 722 Grand Street from past, current and potential future exposures via inhalation, direct dermal contact and possible ingestion of metallic (elemental) mercury and mercury vapor." In addition, the PHA states "the potential exists for mercury- contaminated possessions to be taken out of the building to continue to expose residents of 722 Grand Street, contaminate other areas and expose other members of the public." The PHA recommended that the residents be dissociated from mercury exposure in the 722 Grand Street building. Elevated concentrations of mercury have been detected in urine samples from residents. Adverse health effects are associated with mercury levels greater than 20 //g/L (micrograms per liter). Mercury concentrations ranged from 3 to 102 Mg/L, and 20 samples had mercury concentrations equal to or greater than 20 /ug/L. The elevated concentrations of mercury detected ha the residents may be associated with subtle neurological changes and renal tubule effects. A removal action was conducted to dissociate the affected residents from the metallic mercury and mercury vapors, prevent further off-site migration of mercury, and to assess the extent of the mercury contamination. All residents had vacated the building by January 11, 1996. A mercury contamination study conducted at the site determined that mercury is widespread and remediation for residential use is highly unlikely (mercury has been observed in the floor boards^within 13 of 16 residential units and concentrations of mercury absorbed into ulterior brick within common areas exceeds 9,100 parts per million). The site conditions are a result of a prolific production of mercury vapor lamps and mercury connector switches, over 55 years of operation, and absorption of mercury into the porous wood and brick comprising the building. The extent of mercury contamination coupled with an extremely low residential standard makes cleanup highly unlikely. Status (September 1997): EPA completed a Focussed Feasibility Study in early July 1997, which included a technical engineering evaluation and risk assessment, and released a Proposed Plan for remedial action at the Site inviting public comment on the preferred remedy. In mid July 1997, EPA conducted a public meeting to explain the remedial alternatives developed, provide rationale for selection of preferred alternative and answer questions. The preferred remedial alternative includes permanent relocation for the displaced site residents; demolition of the buildings; remediation of contaminated site soil; and groundwater investigations. PRPs assumed building maintenance and site security activities from EPA hi August 1997. Dissociated residents of the Site remain in an ongoing EPA-administered temporary relocation program. [The description of the site is based on information available at the time the site was scored. The description may change as additional information is gathered on the sources and extent of contamination. See 56 FR 5600, February 11, 1991, or subsequent FR notices.} Superfund hazardous waste site listed under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) as amended ------- EPA UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST (NPL) September 1997 OSWER/OERR State, Tribal, and Site Identification Center Washinqton, DC 20460 OESERCO Bellingham, Washington • Conditions at Proposal (December 1996): The Oeser Company site is a wood treating facility located in the northwestern portion of the City of Bellingham, Washington. The facility comprises approximately 23.5 acres and is surrounded by mixed residential and industrial properties. The terrain at the site is relatively flat, but south of the site the terrain drops steeply into a ravine drained by Little Squalicum Creek. The creek is fed by storm water discharges from several outfalls and by ground water and flows approximately 2,100 feet from the Oeser Company outfall into Bellingham Bay. The Oeser Company has operated at the site since 1939 and prepares and treats wood poles for utility companies. Creosote [which contains semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs)] was used as the chemical treating agent until 1973. Pentachlorophenol {PCP) has been used on site since the 1960s in both pressure and thermal treatment. An expanded site inspection (ESI) was conducted by Ecology and Environment, Inc., (E & E) in August/September 1995 at the request of the EPA. Sampling and analysis identified five sources of contamination at the site: the PCP treatment system, the retort drip pad, the treated pole drying areas, gravel filtration beds, and contaminated soil. An observed release to air of several VOCs and SVOCs including PCP was established with ESI air samples collected August 30 and 31, 1996 and September 6, 7, and 8, 1996. Levels of 1-methyl-benzene, ethyl benzene, and naphthalene were above health based benchmarks. An observed release to Little Squalicum Creek of PCP and several other SVOCs was established with sediment and/or surface water samples. Little Squalicum Creek is considered a fishery by the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife; however, fish can no longer survive in the creek due to contamination present. Bellingham Bay and Puget Sound support large commercial, recreational, and tribal fisheries. The peregrine falcon, the bald eagle, and numerous wetlands are also in the vicinity of the site. EPA is considering various alternatives for the site. Status (September 1997): An EPA Removal Assessment was conducted in January, February, and in April 1997. Significant levels of PCP and PAHs were detected in surface and subsurface soil, in shallow ground water, and hi a deep aquifer. The assessment also revealed elevated levels of dioxins in surface soil. Inability to reach agreement on the scope of removal actions resulted in EPA issuing a Unilateral Administrative Order (UAO) to the Company to conduct the work EFA has determined necessary to abate immediate health threats. Work is expected to be underway by September, 1997. [The description of the site is based on information available at the time the site was scored. The description may change as additional information is gathered on the sources and extent of contamination. See 56 FR 5600, February 11, 1991, or subsequent FR notices.] Superfund hazardous waste site listed under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) as amended ------- UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST (NPL) September 199 j OSWER/OERR State, Tribal, and Site Identification Center Washinqton, DC 20460 ORDNANCE PRODUCTS, INC. Cecil County, Maryland j* Conditions at Proposal (May 1993): The Ordnance Products, Inc. (OPI), site is. located 2 miles northeast of the Town of North East in Cecil County, Maryland. The 94.6-acre property, currently occupied by an industrial park and warehousing facility known as Mechanics Valley Trade Center (MVTC), is located in a rural area. OPI purchased the property in 1960 and began operating an ordnance manufacturing facility. During the Vietnam conflict, OPI manufactured grenade fuses,, detonation devices, smoke grenades, and other types of ordnance. Some :off- specification ordnance was burned hi open pits and ordnance was buried onsite. The waste water resulting from manufacturing operations was disposed of into five unlined surface impoundments. Kraus Design, Inc. (KDl) became a holding company for OPI in 1969. OPI ceased manufacturing ordnance in 1972 and closed the facility. In 1986, the site was purchased by MVTC, which planned to develop the site as an industrial park. Since that time MVTC, and the site were sold but retained the MVTC corporate entity. MVTC is currently, renting buildings in a secure portion of the site to several tenants. In 1987, the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) discovered the site while investigating a nearby property. An extensive MDE sampling program detected elevated levels of metals such as selenium and barium in onsite soils, ground water, and surface water. MDE also detected elevated concentrations of trichloroethene; 1,2- dichloroethene; tetrachloroethene;, vinyl chloride; and xylene in two onsite wells and four offsite residential drinking water wells. One onsite well is currently connected to an air stripping tower and is still used as a water source. On June 27, 1988, EPA issued a Unilateral Administrative Order under CERCLA Section 106(a) requiring KDI to investigate the extent of soil contamination and the amount of buried ordnance onsite. The order requires KDI to (1) remove all contaminated soils and buried ordnance from the site, (2) determine the extent the contaminated ground water plume has migrated both on- and offsite, and (3) install a water treatment system on all residential wells where concentrations of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) have exceeded EPA's Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs). In response, KDI has (1) installed 10 offsite ground water monitoring wells to facilitate the offsite hydrogeological study, (2) installed activated carbon filtration units on four residential drinking water wells, and is maintaining the units and sampling the wells every 6 weeks, and (3) removed some drums and ordnance that had been buried onsite. KDI's investigation identified the following hazardous waste sources, some of which KDI has already removed under the order: drums scattered over the site, five surface impoundments reportedly used for disposal of plating wastes and other wastes, three subsurface disposal areas.containing discarded ordnance, three burn areas also containing ordnance, and other areas of contaminated soil. KDI is continuing to evaluate these sources and also plans to sample water and sediments of Little Northeast Creek,, which is adjacent to the site. * On December 31, 1988, EPA issued a Unilateral Administrative Order to MVTC requiring MVTC to maintain site security and to operate and maintain the onsite air stripper. KDI is continuing to remove all contaminated materials from the site and the offsite hydrogeological investigation. Status (September 1997): KDI conducted additional investigations of the sources, ground water, and surface water. KDI Installed additional monitoring wells and also designed and installed a ground water treatment and recovery system. Due to financial difficulties, KDI has now been liquidated and is unable to perform any .additional investigation or remediation at the site. EPA's Removal Program anticipates beginning operation of the ground water treatment and recovery system shortly. [The description of the site (release) is based on information available at the time the site was scored. The description may change as additional information is gathered on the sources and extent of contamination. See 56 FR 5600, February 11, 1991, or subsequent FR notices.] Superfund hazardous waste site listed under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) as amended ------- -EPA UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST (NPL) September 1997 OSWER/OERR State, Tribal, and Site Identification Center Washington, DC 20460 SPRAGUE ROAD GROUND WATER PLUME Odessa, Texas Conditions at Proposal (April 1997): A plume of contaminated ground water has been identified in Odessa, Ector County, Texas. The precise extent of the plume has not yet been identified; however, based on analyses of ground water from 14 wells, it is approximately 180 acres In area. The primary contaminant detected in the ground water plume is chromium. Three chromium plating facilities with various potential sources of contamination have been identified in the immediate area of the plume - Leigh Metal Plating, Inc.; National Chromium Corporation; and Machine and Casting, Inc. Several potential sources at these facilities have been presented in the HRS documentation record as potential sources because of their proximity to the ground water plume and the presence of the same contaminants as those identified in the plume. However, adequate information is not available to directly attribute contamination detected at these facilities with the ground water plume. Therefore, the site has been scored based on a contaminated ground water plume with no single source identified. Based on analytical results from various investigations conducted at the three facilities, a plume of contaminated ground water at concentrations ranging up to 5,240 micrograms per liter (/xg/L) has been identified. The ground water pathway contamination is of concern because of the documentation of observed releases of chromium in ground water (nine ground water drinking wells and five ground water monitoring wells) and the fact that the contaminated aquifer is used as a source of drinking water in the area. Seven of the nine drinking water wells have concentrations of chromium that exceed the Maximum Contaminant Level. Status (September 1997): EPA conducted a response action by removing solid and liquid wastes at Leigh Metal Plating and National Chromium, and contaminated soil at Leigh'Metal Plating. Removal actions by EPA resulted in 6,620 gallons of liquid and solid wastes, 156,320 pounds of vat and tank liquid and sludge, and 5,187,340 pounds of soil removed from the site. EPA has also begun investigation of the ground water contamination near the three facilities by installing 12 monitoring wells and collecting 40 water samples from monitoring wells and nearby private water supply wells. [The description of the site is based on information available at the time the site was scored. The description may change as additional information is gathered on the sources and extent of contamination. See 56 FR 5600, February 11, 1991, or subsequent FR notices.] Superfund hazardous waste site listed under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) as amended ------- United States Environmental Protection Agency For further information, call the Superfund Hotline, toll-free 1-800- 424-9346 or (703) 412-9810 in Washington, DC metropolitan area, or the U.S. EPA Superfund Regional Offices listed below*. For publications, contact EPA Superfund Docket at (703) 603-8917 SUPERFUND.DOCKET@EPAMAIL.EPA.GOV by Mail: EPA Superfund Docket (5201G) 401 M Street, SW Washington, DC 20460 Walk-in Address (by Appt.): EPA Superfund Docket 1235 Jefferson Davis Highway Crystal Gateway #1, IstFloor Arlington, Virginia Office of Emergency and Remedial Response (5204G) United States Environmental Protection Agency -401 M Street, SW Washington, DC 20460 (703) 603-8860 Region 1 Connecticut Maine .Massachusetts New Hampshire Rhode Island Vermont Waste Management Division, HAA-CAN-1 John F. Kennedy Federal Building Boston, MA 02203-2211 (617)573-5707 Region 2 New Jersey Puerto Rico New.Yp.rK ^JlSJnJllands Emergency and Remedial Response Division 290 Broadway, 19th Floor New York, NY 10007-1866 (212) 637-4390 • Region3 Delaware District of Columbia Pennsylvania Virginia Site Assessment Section, 3HW33 841 Chestnut Building Philadelphia, PA 19107 (215) 566-3033 Region 4 Alabama Mississippi Florida North Carolina Georgia South Carolina JCentuckjr JifUflSssee Waste Management Division . 100 Alabama Street, SW Atlanta, GA 30303 (404)562-8651 Region 5 Illinois Indiana Michigan Minnesota Ohio Waste Management Division 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 6th Floor Chicago, IL 60604 (312) 886-7570 Region 6 Arkansas Louisiana Oklahoma Texas Hazardous Waste Management Division, 6H-M 1445 Ross Avenue Dallas, TX 76202-2733 (214) 665-6740 Region 7 Iowa Kansas.- Missouri p_N_ebraska_ Waste Management Division 726 Minnesota Avenue Kansas City, KS 66101 (913) 551-7062 or 551-7595 Region 8 Colorado South Dakota Montana Utah .North. Dakota .Wy.offiiQg.i Hazardous Waste Management Division, 8HWM-SR 999 18th Street, Suite 500 Denver, CO 80202-2466 _ (303) 294-7630 Region 9 American Guam Northern Arizona Hawaii Trust Territories California .Nsyj^JS Waste Management Division, H-l 75 Hawthorne Street San Francisco, CA 94105 (415)744-1730 . • Region 10 Alaska Jdaho__ Oregon Hazardous Waste Division, HW-113 1200 6th Avenue Seattle. WA 98101 ' (202) 553-1677 * All EPA telephone and telecommunications systems may be accessed via the Federal Telecommunications System (FTS). ------- |