Question

An example of an RCRA Corrective Action site is Boeing Plant 2 in Seattle, Washington. There was contamination of PCBs, PAHs, phthalates, semi-volatile organic compounds in the soil on-site and in surrounding waterways (including groundwater). Boeing still occupies the area and it is handling the cleanup, which is still ongoing. Part of their process has been implementing pilot projects that have reduced groundwater contamination by 98% (US EPA 2013). Since Boeing is still active on-site, RCRA Corrective Action is appropriate.

An example of a Superfund site is Quendall Terminals in the state of Washington. Located on Lake Washington, on 29 acres, this Superfund site was previously acreosote manufacturing and oil storage facility for many decades. Creosote, coal tar, and other hazardous chemicals have accumulated in groundwater, lake sediment and on land (US EPA 2019). While the lake is not used as a drinking water source, there are swimming beaches within a half-mile from the site (US EPA 2005). In 1999, the state’s Department of Ecology began contamination cleanup. Then in 2005, at the state’s request, EPA took over. The EPA requested the site’s responsible parties conduct a remedial investigation and feasibility study. The remedial study was completed in 2012 and the feasibility study completed in 2017 by the responsible parties. Public comments were received from September to October 2019 and the EPA’s final cleanup plan is scheduled (US EPA 2019). As the location is no longer in use and currently vacant, the CERCLA program is appropriate for this site. Additionally, there are plans to rezone and repurpose the location for residential use.

According to the post above pose questions about the position they took and/or how the regulation was applied?

Answer 1

Question 1. If the facility (Boeing Plant 2) was placed in close proximity to two major environmental justice communities and sits on the Lower Duwamish Waterway, the customary fishing and gathering area for several American Indian Tribes, why this situation was not given a thought about at the time of establishment?

Question 2. Is the amount of contamination curable even after the intervention of EPA applying RCRA, when the site is still ongoing?

Question 3. How exactly Boeing managed to reduce ground water contamination by 98%? What exactly grabbed the attention of EPA to look into the matter? And if the contamination was happening from such a long period that it reached an alarming situation, why RCRA was not applied before?

Question 4. During the time of establishment of Quendall Terminals, why the presence of water bodies near the venue was not given importance? Why there was no long time disposal plan or anti-contamination strategy? What hold EPA to intervene before?

Question 5. What made EPA took over this Superfund program and to what extent public opinion are necessary in these kind of situations?

Question 6. Who is responsible for a 14 years delay in the schedule clean up plan and this rate, will EPA be able to clean up the whole region in the next 20 years?