TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
I Instructions on the revene before completing/
1. REPORT NO.
EPA/ROD/R10-84/003
2.
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
SUPERFUND RECORD OF DECISION
Western Processing, Inc. WA
5. REPORT DATE
08/05/84
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
ยป. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final ROD Report
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
800/00
IS. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
The Western Processing site occupies approximately 13 acres in Kent and King
Counties, WA. Originally Western Processing was a reprocessor of animal byproducts
and brewer's yeast. In the 1960 's the business expanded to recycle, reclaim, treat
and dispose of industrial wastes, including waste oils, electroplating wastes,
waste pickle liquor, battery acids, flue dust, pesticides, spent solvents, and
zinc dross. The facility is presently inactive and consists of 10 buildings in poor
repair, a solvent recycling plant, a fertilizer-plant, 72 bulk storage tanks of
varying capacities, drum storage areas with 2,000 partially .filled drums and 3,600
empty drums, piles of flue dust, and battery chips. The soil and ground water samples
confirmed that hazardous substances had been released into the environment. Among
the more hazardous contaminants found on or below the site are chloroform, benzene,
1,2 -dichloroethane, trichloroethylene, phenol, arsenic, cadmium and cyanides.
The surface clean-up and stormwater control project is the first operable unit
of the overall remedial action at the site. The main elements of the selected
alternative include: characterize all materials identified for removal, -removal of
all bulk liquids, drummed liquids, and waste piles to a permitted off-site facility
for disposal or incineration; removal and proper disposal of all transformers and
substation equipment; demolition and removal to a permitted off -site facility of all
ev
site buildin
dismantling of all on-site bulk storage tanks. Capital Cost $5.0 N
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
COSATi Field/Group
Record of Decision
Western Processing, Inc., WA
Contaminated media: gw, soil
Key contaminants: oils, acids, solvents,
pesticides, VOCs, metals, TCE, DCE,
arsenic, cadmium, cyanides
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
19. SECURITY CLASS (Tills Report/
None
29
20. SECURITY CLASS (TMs page/
None
22. PRICE
-------
ENFORCEMENT DECISION DOCUMENT
ISSUES ABSTRACT
Site:
Western Processing, Inc., Washington
Region:
x
AA, OSWER
Briefing Date:
July 2, 1984
SITE DESCRIPTION
The Western Processing site occupies approximately thirteen acres
in Kent and King Counties, washington. Originally Western Processing
was a reprocessor of animal byproducts and brewer's yeast. In the
1960's the business expanded to recycle, reclaim, treat and dispose of
industrial wastes, including waste oils, electroplating wastes, waste
pickle liquor, battery acids, flue dust, pesticides, spent solvents,
and zinc dross. The facility is presently inactive and consists of 10
buildings in poor repair, a solvent recycling plant, a fertilizer
plant, 72 bulk storage tanks of varying capacities, drum storage areas
with 2,000 partially filled drums and 3,600 empty drums, piles of flue
dust, and battery chips. The soil and ground water samples confirmed
that hazardous substances had been released into the environment.
Among the more hazardous contaminants found on or below the site are
chloroform, benzene, 1,2 -dichloroethane, trichloroethylene, phenol,
arsenic, cadmium and cyanides.
SELECTED ALTERNATIVE
The surface clean~up and stormwater control project is the first
operable unit of the overall remedial action at the site. The main
elements of the selected alternative include: characterize all
materials identified for removal; removal of all bulk liquids, drummed
liquids, and waste piles to a permitted off-site facility for disposal'
or incineration; removal and proper disposal of all transformers and
substation equipment; demolition and removal to a permitted off-site
facility of all on-site buildings and dismantling of all on-site bulk
storage tanks. The estimated capital cost for this project is
approximately $5.0 million.
ISSUES AND RESOLUTIONS
KEY WORDS
1.
The use of alternative technology to destroy/
recycle liquids at the site classified as
synfuels and solvents will be further eval-
uated once the results from the chemical
characterization tests become available.
~ Alternative
Technology
. Solvents
. Synfuels
-1-
-------
Western Processing, Inc., Washington
July 2, 1984 .
Continued
ISSUES AND RESOLUTIONS
2.
Data on the extent of off-site contamination
is still being developed. The results of
these tests will be used to develop the
next operable unit which will address
subsurface and ground water alternatives and
off-site contamination.
-2-
KEY WORDS
. Ground Water
Contamination
. Off-site
Contamination
. Subsurface
-------
Site:
..............
ENFORCEMENT DECISION MEMORANDUM
FIRST OPERABLE UNIT OF REMEDIAL ACTION SELECTION
Western Processing Company, Inc., King County,
Kent, Washington
ANALYSIS REVIEWED
I have reviewed the following documents describinq the
analysis of the cost-effectiveness for the Phase I remedial
measures for the 'lestern .Processing Site.
1.
Summary of First Operable Unit Remedial Alternative
Selection at the Western Processing Site.
Draft Final Focused Feasibility Study for Surface Cleanup,
June 4, 1984, by CH2M Hill, and amended on June 15, in the
Detailed Analysis Condeptual Design for Surface Cleanup.
2.
3.
Proposal for Surface Remedial Activities, prepared by
Chemical Waste Management, Inc., ENRAC Division, June 26,
1984, for Western Processing Coordinating Committee.
Memorandum dated July 12, 1984, from Robert G. Courson to
Jerry Schwartz and Madeline Nawar on Recycling of Liquids
from WP during PRP removal.
r
J
4.
5.
Memorandum dated June 22, 1984, from George Hofer to
Judi Schwarz on CSSI Facility in Arlington, OR.
DESCRIPTION OF SELECTED ALTERNATIVE
The main elements of the selected alternative include:
II.
III.
IV.
I.
On-site arid perimeter monitoring of air quality during
remedial activities.
Removal of all bulk liquids, drummed liquids, and waste
piles to a permitted off-site facility for disposal or
incineration.
Removal and proper disposal of all transformers and
substation equipment. .
Demolition and removal to a permitted off-site facility
of all on-site buildings.
V.
Dismantling of all on-site bulk storage tanks. If tanks
are determined to be structurally sound, such tanks will
-------
-2-
VI.
All other surface debris will be removed and disposed.
Stormwater will be controlled and treated prior to discharge
before, during, and after the surface cleanup. After the
initial pond removal, an on-site treatment plant will be
. set up and operated.
VII.
Each solid waste pile shall be removed down to the existing
grade level at the site location on which it was situated. The
exception will be the accumulated .gyp. pond pile. Up to 750
cubic yards of soil below existing grade level will be removed
in addition to the pile it~elf. . This depression will form a
storm water accumulation area for use subsequent to the surface
cleanup. Adjacent areas to the South will be graded to provide
drainage to the area. The estimated cost for total response
action is reported to be approximately $9 million.
DECLARATION
Consistent with the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), and the National
Contingency Plan (40 CFR Part 300), I have determined that the'
above remedial measures for the Western Processing Site will
effectively mitigate and minimize damage to, and provide for
current and future protection of public health, welfare and
the environment. The State of Washington has, been consulted and
agrees with the selected remedy.
I have also determined that the action being taken which
includes the off-site transport of contaminated materials to
a RCRA approved facility is the least costly alternative when
compared to the other remedial options reviewed, and is necessary
to protect public health, welfare, or the environemnt.
t
I
t/b-/J-Y
Da e
4~~~.~
Lee M. Thomas,
Assistant Administrator
Office of Solid Waste and
------- |