DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY


### April 29, 1993

TO:
FROM: Elizabeth McManus Ecology Solid and Hazardous Waste Michael J. Spencer Toxics Cleanup

### prog~~ SUBJECT: Site Files

I am transmitting to you, at the request of Carol Kraege, site files for the following ten sites: Evergreen Products Georgia Pacific Corporation Griffey Cleaners J.H. Baxter and Co., Inc. Kaiser Aluminum and Chemical Corp. Maralco Aluminum Richardson Airways, Inc. Silicon Metaltech Lab. Site Walla Walla Farmers Coop Weyerhauser Box Plant These have been scored and ranked using the Washington Ranking Method, and were chosen by Carol and Steve Robb as representative of the types of sites in which you are interested. Please return them to me when you have completed your scoring/ranking. You can contact me at 5-3058 if you have any questions. MJS:ms Attachments
cc: Carol Kraege, TCP Steve Robb, TCP

### DEPARTMENT OFECOLOGY May 19, 1993


### TO: Michael J. Spencer, Toxies Cleanup Program FROM:**N~** 

### McManus, Solid and Hazardous Waste Program SUBJECf: WARM/ten-CAPS comparison Attached please find the ten-CAPS ranking sheets for eight of the ten sites for which you provided me files, specifically: GeorgiaPacific Corporation Griffey 

### Cleaners J.H. Baxterand Co., Inc. KaiserAluminum and Chemical Corp. Maralco Aluminum Richardson Airways, inc. Silicon Metaltech Lab. Site Weyerhauser

### BoxPlant Time constraints have precluded me from ranking all ten sites. I hope the data from comparison ofrankings at eight sites 

### will be sufficient. As 

### you know, the Solid and Hazardous Waste Program hopes to use this comparison of rankings to support conversion of ten-CAPS high, medium, low 

### rankings to numerical WARMrankings of 1, 3,

### and 5

### respectively. Alternatively, numericalten-CAPS rankings of 

## o-30 

### could be 

### converted to WARM rankings of 1 - 5, 

### where a ten-CAPS ranking of 30 

### . would be 

### converted to aWARM 

### ranking of 1, 

### a ten-CAPS ranking of 25 

### to a WARM

ranking of2, 

### and so on. Please notify me ofyour findingsregardingthis ranking comparison as soon as possible. It 

### will help the Solid and Hazardous Waste Program's corrective action authorization application if

### you could notify me ofyourfindings in writing. Thankyou for your assistance indevelopmentof the alternativeauthoritiesinitiative and this ranking comparison project. Please contact me at 493-9506 if

### you have any questions. EM:sI Attachments

cc: Tom Loranger Howard Steeley 

# o

o



# o

### Facility Name: Richardson Airways Inc. Date: May 17, 1993 Facility ID Number: none provided Ranked by: Elizabeth McManus (WOO) Site ranking is according to the Region X Corrective Action Priority Ranking System, for discussionpurposes only. Category 1: ExtentofContamination 10 points

10 points

5 points Aerial pesticide applicator. Some rinsed pesticide containers were dumped into a 12 foot diameter pit and burned. Residual solutions of pesticides from aerial spray tanks were drained onto a 5 by 40 foot section of ground. Analysis ofsamples collected at the spray dumping area indicatedEthyl Parathion (Parathion) and Methyl Parathion present in surface samples. At the surface concentrations of EthylParathion were determined to be 19,262 ppm; Methyl Parathion 573 ppm. At a depth of one foot, concentrations of Ethyl Parathion were determined to be 8.2 ppm; Methyl Parathion .006 ppm. At a depth of two feet, concentrations of Ethyl Parathionwere determined to be 2.2ppm; Methyl Parathionwas not detected. Ethyl Parathion was also detected in a background sample taken at a depth of 1 foot, concentration .06ppm. No groundwater monitoring has been conducted. Given the information on disposal practices, Parathion and Methyl Parathion may meet the criteria for listedhazardous wastes P089 and P071. Surface levels ofParathion and Methyl Parathionin soil exceed the MTCAcleanup levels (from Method B Formula Values) of480ppm and 20 ppm respectively. Category 2: Toxicity of Known or Suspected Releases Constituents ofconcern, Parathion and Methyl Parathion have human toxic factors 100 and 10,000 respectively from the hazardous substances factors table for CERClASection 305 hazardous substances. Category 3: Facility Setting Both disposal areas are within 500 feet of Bachelor creek. Constituen-ts of concern are present at the surface. Total Points Categories 1-3: 

### 25 out ofa possible 30. PriorityAssigned: High

### Facility Name: Richardson Airways Inc. Date: May 17, 1993 Facility ID Number: none provided Ranked by: 

### Elizabeth McManus (WOO) Site ranking is according to the Region X Corrective Action Priority RankingSystem, for 

# 0 discussion purposes only. Category 1: Extent ofContamination 10points

10points

5 points Aerial pesticide applicator. Some rinsed pesticide containers were dumped into a 12 foot diameterpit andburned. Residual solutions of pesticides from aerial spray tanks were drained onto a 5 by 40 foot section of ground. Analysis ofsamples collected at the spray dumping area indicated Ethyl Parathion (Parathion) and MethylParathion present in 

### surface samples. At the surface concentrations of EthylParathion were determined to be 19,262 ppm; Methyl Parathion 573 ppm. At a depth of one foot, concentrations of Ethyl Parathionwere determined to be 8.2 ppm; MethylParathion .006 ppm. At a depth of two feet, concentrations of Ethyl Parathion were determined to be 2.2 ppm; MethylParathion was not detected. Ethyl Parathionwas also detected in abackground sample taken at a depth of 1 foot, concentration.06 ppm. Nogroundwater monitoring hasbeen conducted. Given the information on disposal practices,Parathion and Methyl Parathion may meet the criteria for listed hazardous wastes P089 and P07l. Surface levels ofParathion and Methyl Parathion in soil exceed the MTCAcleanup levels (fromMethod B Formula Values) of 480 ppm and 20 ppm respectively. Category 2: Toxicity of Known or Suspected Releases Constituents ofconcern, Parathion and Methyl Parathionhave human toxic factors 100 and 10,000 respectively from the hazardous substances factors table for CERCLASection 305hazardous substances. Category 3: Facility Setting Both disposal areas are within 500 feet ofBachelorcreek. Constituents of concern are presentin the subsurface and in groundwater. Facilityis located approximately 400 feet east of Long Lake, and underlain byhighly permeable, sandy soils. The facility is surroundedby primarily residential usage, with the nearest private drinking well located within .25 miles of the site. Currently, the site is paved and access is controlled by a fence. 

# o

Total Points Categories 1-3: 25 out of a possible 30. PriorityAssigned: High


# o

### Facility Name: SiliconMetaltech Inc. Lab Site Facility

# mNumber: none provided Date: May 13, 1993 Ranked by: 

### Elizabeth McManus (WOO) Site ranking is according to the Region X Corrective Action Priority Ranking System, for discussion purposes only. Category 

### 1: ExtentofContamination 5 points

10points



## opoints SiliconMetaltech is an active silicon smelting plan. When the former quality control laboratorybuilding was razed mercury contaminated soils were discovered. The bulkof the soilswere removed and placed in 

### plasticlined crates and stored outside. 

### An unknown amount ofcontaminated soil remains in the subsurface. Category 2: Toxicity of Known or Suspected Releases Constituent ofconcern, mercury, has a human toxicfactor of 10,000 from the hazardous substances factors table for CERCIASection 305 hazardous substances. Category 3: Facility Setting Site is in 

### an industrial area. Excavated soils are contained. Constituents of concern are present in 

### the subsurface. TotalPoints Categories 1-3: 15 out ofa possible 30. Priority Assigned: MediumFacility Name: Kaiser Aluminum and Chemical Corp. Facillty ID Number: none provided Date: May 11, 1993 Ranked by: Elizabeth McManus (WOO) Site ranking is according to the Region X Corrective Action Priority Ranking System, for discussion purposes only. Category 1: Extent orContamination 

# o

10points

10points

10points Extensive surficial contamination due to historic, unrestricted on-site land disposal of'wet scrubber sludge". Approximate quantity of sludge land disposed, 64,000

### yd' in three general disposal areas. Disposal occurred from the 19505 to 1974. Releases to soil have been documented. Some potential for contaminant migration to shallow groundwater. Potential for migration to adjacent surface water through surficial run-offand/or groundwater discharge. Category 2: Toxicity or Known or Suspected Releases Constituents ofconcern are PAHs, specifically,Benzo(a)antheracene, Chrysene, Benzo(b)fluorantene, Benzo(k)fluoranthene, Benzo(a)pyrene, Indeno(123ed)pyrene, Flouranthene, Pyrene, Benzo(ghi)perylene. Documentedby facility conducted sampling as presentin the wet scrubber sludge and levels sufficient to cause the sludge to fail the Washington state dangerous waste designationtest for persistence. Benzo(a)pyrene"has a human toxicfactor of 10,000 from hazardous substances factors table for CERCLA Section 305 hazardous substances. Category 3: Facility Setting Material ofconcern, 'wet scrubber sludge" ispresent at the surface. Public access to the area is unrestricted resulting in documented direct contact exposure to citizens. Additionally, exposure to facilityworkers and'nearby residential populations via contaminated windblown dusts has been documented at levels ofconcern (according to facilityestimations of 2 x 10"' excess cancer risk to facility workers under average conditions, 1 x 

### lO-s excess cancer risk to facility workers under "plausible maximum exposures"). 

# o

Total Points Categories 1-3: 30 out of a possible 30. Priority Assigned: High 

# oFacility Name: Griffey Cleaners, Vancouver Facility ID Number: none provided Date: May 11, 1993 Ranked by: Elizabeth McManus (WOO) Site ranking is according to the Region X Corrective Action Priority Ranking System, for discussion purposes only. Category 1: ExtentorContamination 5 points

10points

5 points Facility discharged spent stoddard solvent to an underground drum for "many years" ending approximately 1990when the drum was pumped out (30 gallons spent solvent recovered) and removed. According to information provided by the facility, a temporary liner and pea gravel have been placed at the site of the excavated drum. Analysis ofsubsurface soil samples has documented the presence of acetone (estimated at 7000ppb), chlorobenzene (estimated at 6500ppb), ethylbenzene (at 6300 ppb), toluene (at 18000 ppb), and xylene (at 49000 ppb), at levels below the state cleanup formula values (MTCAMethod B formula values from Cleanup standards database). Groundwater quality has not been assessed, however, groundwater 

### in nearby wells isencountered at 50to 100 feet BGS. Site soils are lauren gravelly loam, and believed to be hydraulically connected to the underlying aquifer. Since contamination exists only in the subsurface, exposure by direct contactis not likely. Category 2: Toxicity or Known or Suspected Releases Constituents ofconcern, acetone, chlorobenzene, ethylbenzene, toluene, and xylene, have human toxic factors of 10 to 100 from the hazardous substances factors table for CERClA Section 305 hazardous substances. Category 3: Facility Setting Constituents ofconcern are present in the subsurface and have potential to impact groundwaterin the large underlying aquifer. Groundwaterfrom the underlying aquifer is used as a drinking water source, with greater than 65,000 people served by drinking waterwells locatedwithin two miles of the site. Total Points Categories 1-3: 20 out ofa possible 30. Priority Assigned: MediumFacility Name: Georgia Pacific Corp. Bellingham Facility ID Number: WAC 00925 2297 Date: 

### May 11, 1993 Ranked by: Elizabeth McManus (WOO) Site ranking is according to the Region X Corrective Action Priority Ranking System, for discussion purposes only. Category 1: ExtentofContamination 

# o

10points

10points

10points From 1970 to 1976 the facilitydischarged mercury containing wastes to an on-site unlined pond. In July, 1976 1,500,000 gallons of mercury sludge was removed from the pond, solidified (solidification process utilized 2.4% sodium silicate by volume and 1.7% portland cementbyvolume) and placed in an unlined on-site "landfill". The mercury sludgecontained 1.3 ppm leachable mercury using the old EP TOX leach test (1766 ppm total mercury) and was considered listed hazardous waste K071 and K106. After removal of the mercury sludge, the old sludge pondwas filledwith soils. An unknown quantity of mercury contaminated soil was left in place at the old sludge pond. It is possible mercury contaminationis leaching to BellinghamBay,elevated levels ofmercury have been documented in Bay sediments. Category 2: Toxicity of Known or Suspected Releases Constituent ofconcern is mercury which has a human toxicfactor of 10,000 from the hazardous substances factors table for CERClASection 305 hazardous substances. Category 3: Facility Setting The facility

### islocated adjacent to Bellingham Bay. It 

### isthat mercury_ contamination is leaching to groundwater and via groundwater to BellinghamBay from the landfilled solidified mercury sludge and

### from the old mercury sludge pond. Groundwater occurs at approximately 20 feet BGS. Bellingham Bay isused for fishing and shellfishing. 

# o

Total Points Categories 1-3: 30 out of a possible 30. Priority Assigned: High



# oFacility Name: Weyerhauser Box Plant Facility ill Number: none provided Date: May 13, 1993 Ranked by: Elizabeth McManus (WOO) Site ranking is according to the Region X Corrective Action Priority Ranking System, for discussion purposes only. Category 1: ExtentofContamination 5 points

10 points

5 points Facility discharged wastewatercontaining lead to two on-site drainfields from approximately 1974 to 1979. The old drainfield was used from 1961 to 1974, and received high lead wastewater for one year. The NW drainfield was used from 1975 to 1980 and received high lead wastewater for five years. In 1980 the company switched to a productwith lower lead levels. Wastewaters containing lower levels oflead are currently discharged to a new on-site drainfield. According to facility reports, analysis of groundwater from four on-site monitoring wells around the NW drainfield demonstrated lead levels ofup to 35 ppb in wells downgradiant from the drainfield compared to 

### < 2 ppb in the upgradiant well. Analysis of soils in the NW drainfield indicate lead present at up to 3020 ppm. Lead levels in groundwater are below Federal drinking water standards (50 ppb) but above state groundwater cleanup levels (5 ppb, MTCA method A table value). Category 2: Toxicity orKnown or Suspected Releases Constituent ofconcern, lead, has a human toxic factor of 10,000from the hazardoussubstances factors table for CERClASection 305 hazardous substances. Category 3: Facility Setting Constituents ofconcern are present in the subsurface and in groundwater, Facility is located approximately 400feet east ofLong Lake, and underlain by highly permeable, sandy soils. The facility is surrounded by primarily residential usage, withthe nearest private drinking well locatedwithin .25 miles ofthe site. Currently, the site is paved and access is controlledby a fence. Total Points Categories 1-3: 20 out of a possible 30. Priority Assigned: MediumFacility Name: JH Baxter and Company Facility ill Number: none provided Date: May 11, 1993 Ranked by: Elizabeth McManus (WOO) Site ranking is according to the Region X Corrective Action Priority Ranking System, for discussion purposes only. Category 1: ExtentofContamination 

# o

10 points

10 points

10 points Field screening for pentachlorophenol and phoychlorinated aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in surface soils detected pentachlorophenol in 57 of 59 samples ranging in concentration from 260 ppb to 380,000 ppb. PAHs were also detected in 57 of59 samples in concentrations ranging from 50 ppb to 19,000ppb. Pentachlorophenol contamination ofgroundwater has been documented in concentrations ranging from 1,386ppb to 399 ppb. Sediment sampling from an abandoned on-site lagoon (formerly used as a butt dip tankfor pole treating) indicated pentachlorophenol present at 111,185 ppb. Discharge to Lake Washington'has been documented through analysis oflake sediment samples. ' Category 2: Toxicity ofKnown or Suspected Releases Constituent ofconcern, pentachlorophenol has a human toxic factor of 100 

# 0 from the hazardous substances factors table for CERCIASection 305 hazardous substances. Category 3: Facility Setting Constituents ofconcern are present at the surface and in groundwater. Facility is located adjacent to Lake Washington and is trinsected by at least one unnamed seasonal stream. Facility is located over deposits from May creek, which discharges to Lake Washington less than .5 miles south ofthe site, and shallow groundwater is likely in hydraulic continuitywith the lake. Total Points Categories 1-3: 30 out ofa possible 30. Priority Assigned: High



# oFacility Name: Maralco Aluminum Date: May 11, 1993 

### (WOO) Facility ID Number: none provided Ranked by: Elizabeth McManus

Site ranking is according to the Region X Corrective Action Priority Ranking System, for discussion purposes only. Category 1: Extent oCContamination 10points

10 points

5 points Site is an abandoned aluminum refining/recycling facility. Piles ofrefining wastes, including black dross, KBI dross, aluminum oxide and baghouse dust are located on-site. Wastes are characterizedby antimony concentrations ranging from 2.9 to 107 ppm, chromium concentrations from 21 to 975 ppm, copper concentrations ranging from 198 to 27,800 ppm, lead concentrations ranging from 2441 to 861 ppm nickel concentrations ranging from 15 to 438 ppm and zinc concentrations ranging from 1760 to 16,500 ppm. Waste piles are located next to a seasonal creek, which flows from September to early June. Analysis ofsediment samples collected from the creekindicate antimony present at up to 3.2 ppm, arsenic at up to 19 ppm, cadmium at up to 4.5 ppm, chromium at up to 232 ppm, copper at up to 1,500ppm, lead at up to 144ppm, nickel at up to 74ppm and zinc at up to 1,300ppm. A 96-hour fish toxicitytest conducted on an undiluted sample ofsurface water collected from the creek adjacent to the black dross pile resulted in a fish mortality rate of 100% (sufficient to qualify as a Washington state dangerous waste for fish-toxicity). Category 2: Toxicity ofKnown or Suspected Releases Constituents ofconcern, antimony, arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, nickel and zinc, have human health toxicity factors of 10,000 from the hazardous substances factors table for CERCLASection 305 hazardous substances. Category 3: Facility Setting The facility islocated in an industrial area approximately 2 miles north of the city ofKent. A resident/caretaker lives at the facility, the residence receives drinking water through the city of Kent water system. The facility is trisects by a seasonal creekwhich flows intermittently from Septemberto early June

.. Total Points Categories 1-3: 25 out of a possible 30. Priority Assigned: HighDEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY

June 4, 1993 

# o

TO:
FROM: Elizabeth McManus Solid and Hazardous waste Program Michael J. Spencer

## 11\)

# b Toxics Cleanup

### progr~ SUBJECT: WARM/Ten-CAPS Ranking Comparison
I received back from you ten-CAPS ranking sheets for eight of the ten sites for which I had earlier provided Washington Ranking Method (WARM) scoring files. As shown in the following summary table, there is not a perfect correlation between the rankings achieved under WARM, versus those by ten-CAPS:
Total Priority! priority/ WARM Ten-CAPS Ranking Ranking site name Rank Points Assigned-l Assigned-2 Georgia Pacific Corp. 5 30 High 

## = 1 30 

## = 1 Griffey Cleaners 5 20 Medium 

## = 3 20 

## = 3 

# 0 J.H. Baxter and Co., Inc. 1 30 High 

## = 1 30 

### = 1 Kaiser Alum./Chem. Corp. 4 30 High 

## = 1 30 

### = 1 Maralco Aluminum 2 25

. High 

## = 1 25 

### = 2 Richardson Airways Inc. 2 25 High 

## = 1 25 

### = 2 Silicon Metaltech Lab. site 5 15 Medium 

## = 3 15 

### = 4 Weyerhauser Box Plant 3 20 Medium 

### = 3 20 

### = 3 However, several key points can be drawn, even from this rather small number of sites being compared (you will recall that these were chosen by Carol Kraege and Steve Robb as representative of the types of sites in which you are interested):

--

• There was a much better discrimination of ten-CAPS rankings, resulting in a somewhat better agreement with the associated WARM rank, when the ranking was achieved through the scale of 30 points 

### = a rank of 1, 25 points

= a 2, 20 points 

## = a 3, etc., than using high/medium/low equaling a rank of 1/3/5, respectively.

• The ten-CAPS ranking appear to be more conservative than the WARM, in that the rankings were always equal to the associated WARM rank, or "higher"

- never the 

# oopposite. The attached'sketch-figure illustrates this more graphically.

• The reasons for the divergences from the ideal fit lie, I think, in the apparent conservativeness of ten-CAPS versus the more relative nature of WARM rankings, where the final rank is dependent upon the total number of applicable migration routes (surface water, air, ground water) and. their associated pathways (human health, environmental), along with the quintile placements of their calculated scores. Time does not allow me presently to look at each of the divergences to determine what exactly was the reason, if any?, that they did not correspond

- or even to double check the ones which did agree to see if they really should have, or if it were just coincidence. I do think, though, that these initial results are encouraging and can be built on with rankings of more sites. Please contact me at 438-3058 for any comments/questions you may have about these comparisons, and the specifics of any further, more in-depth, analysis of the data to date which you may . wish/require. MS/mjs Attachment
cc: Carol Kraege, Toxics Cleanup Program Steve Robb, TCP

# ') H',&",**~:'-,** 

# l.uw :0- f

# IJ

# Ir-

.. 

# ,.,

../

. "<. 

### )**~~/ ~e.t.**  / 

# C c- /. 

### '\L / / 

# 3 3 /' 

# •• / \ t, / / 

## .f 

# .. • • "