Serving Whitman County since 1877
Serving Whitman County since 1877
Cost pegged at $786,000:
Four years and a few decades coming, the Palouse Brownsfield site was the subject of a public meeting last Thursday in the gym at Garfield/Palouse High school.
Residents listened to representatives from the Washington state Department of Ecology, engineering firm Maul Foster Alongi and Palouse city officials.
The subject was the riverfront cleanup site, which housed pollution beginning in the 1950s when it was a Conoco Station, and through the ‘80s when it was the site of Palouse Producers fertilizer business.
Small-scale cleanup work has been done on the site in the past 25 years, most notably in the mid-’80s. In 2007, the site was designated a Washington state “Brownsfield” site, which led to the public meeting in the gym.
The night opened with a greeting and overview from Mayor Michael Echanove.
“How can you not be optimistic in Palouse?” he asked, citing the construction of the community center, another record-breaking Haunted Palouse and other projects. He touched on the current challenges of the city.
“Assistance from Olympia is a thing of the past,” he said. “That’s the way we’ve got to view it.”
Nonetheless, in the case of the Brownsfield site, assistance from Olympia is key.
Echanove explained the three phases to the project; acquisition, cleanup and re-use.
Carol Bergin, Outreach Coordinator for the state’s Department of Ecology (DOE) took the microphone next to say they are in the draft cleanup action stage now.
Mike Boatsman, site manager for the DOE, Toxics Cleanup Program, ran through the history of the site, noting its long list of uses, from a wagon wheel shop, to a blacksmith’s to saddle and harness shops.
From 1955-70 it was the Conoco Station followed by Palouse Producers from 1977-85.
In 1984, underground storage tanks were removed and trenches were dug, taking out 250 yards of contaminated soil. Oil was also pumped out of the ground, which was visibly seeping into the river.
The trenches were used to collect groundwater and what is called “free product” – or gasoline so concentrated it floats on groundwater. In 1985, a second trench was dug, closer to the river, which took out 600 cubic yards of polluted soil.
Seven years later, the last underground storage tank was taken out.
A total of 4,000 gallons of free product was pumped out when the interim project was completed in 1992.
Now preparing for the site’s final cleanup, Boatsman listed the alternatives the city now has to consider.
A basic first option would involve putting up a fence and monitoring groundwater. The second option would be taking out 100 cubic yards of soil which contains concentrated petroleum.
Option three is to remove soil exceeding what is called remediation levels. These are site-specific numbers which Palouse’s consultants – the environmental engineering firm of Maul Foster Alongi - deem would get the bulk of the contamination out of the site at a reasonable price. In the case of the Palouse location, 2,300 cubic yards exceed remediation levels, which would be removed under option three.
Option four would extend that to include removing groundwater. By the sixth option all of that would be done including installation of a trench, with a pump to remove groundwater.
The cost estimates for the options range from $60,000 for option one to $16 million for option six.
The committee decided to pursue option three with an estimated cost of $786,000.
It would be done in one large excavation and two smaller ones. Existing buildings would be demolished, vegetation planted and groundwater monitored. Then it would come to the re-use phase.
“Question: “Can I bring my grandmother and grandchild over and feel they’re safe?” asked Dean Huber.
“Yes, Yes,” answered Jim Darling of Maul Foster Alongi. He explained that the site has undergone all requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA).
Palouse City Attorney Stephen Bishop told how the $16 million option would be perfect.
“However, our common sense told us, this is ridiculous,” he said.
He talked about liability.
In a rare exception, the state was willing to negotiate a consent decree for what is the smallest Brownsfield site in Washington.
“If we take the title to this property, it’s our obligation to clean it up,” Bishop said. The site’s ownership is tied into Palouse Producers’ bankruptcy.
The consent decree also limits the town’s liability and exempts the city from paying back state funds already put into the site in past years.
“The heart of the decree is that as long as there is a thorough identification of the problem and the plan to clean it up, and we do that, that’s the end of the story,” Bishop explained.
He said the tricky part is that if the town acquires the property and agrees to clean it up but then doesn’t have the money to pay for it.
“I’ve been very conservative about this, but at this point I feel good about it,” Bishop said.
Jim Darling of Maul Foster Alongi stood up from the panel again to address funding.
He noted the site’s title being held in bankruptcy court and that the $786,000 cleanup would go out for competitive bid. It would be paid for by a combination of state funds and federal EPA dollars.
A Remedial Action Grant from the state would cover roughly 75 percent while an EPA revolving loan sub-grant would cover the remaining 25 percent.
The money derives from a state tax on all inbound hazardous materials, which was passed by voter initiative in the late ‘80s. The revenue from the tax is set aside for cleanup of environmental contamination around the state. The bulk of the taxes come from inbound crude oil.
“There are three things which are incredibly unique about this project,” Darling said.
The first is that it’s the first integrated planning grant done in the state – a pilot program. Second, none of the sites in his 20 years’ experience got funded 100 percent, except for this one. Third, the consent decree.
The question period then followed.
One citizen asked how much of the contaminated material will be removed.
Jennifer King of Maul Foster Alongi answered, saying that roughly 25 percent of the soil would be removed. In the chosen option, 2,300 cubic yards, would be removed.
The remaining soil which is considered contaminated would be at a depth where it is deemed safe.
The soil taken out would be replaced with clean backfill material such as soil and gravel.
“In the end, is this parcel of land going to be known for location, location, location – as a prime piece of property?” Huber asked.
“From my perspective, I think it’s going to be awesome,” answered Mayor Echanove. “I think this is ground zero for integrating the river with the community.”
Sandra Treccani, a hydrologist for the Washington state Department of Ecology expanded upon Echanove’s comments.
“If we complete option three there will be nothing to limit the redevelopment of the site,” she said. “Soils will be clean for any use, without any risk to children or plants or pets.”
City attorney Bishop stood up then to note that Palouse Producers is signing over the rights to their insurance policies, which in theory, could be used for later cleanup if needed. Although, he said he had no expectation of that.
Bud Bagott, who owns Bagott Motors next door to the Brownsfield site, asked if any “evidence whatsoever” showed contamination was getting into the river.
“It looks to me like we’re trying to kill mosquitoes with artillery,” he commented.
“We don’t believe the river is being impacted by this as it currently stands,” Treccani from DOE answered.
Bagott asked if the metals present in the soil are any higher than elsewhere in town.
Treccani indicated that metals such as arsenic and lead appear at the Palouse Producers site at significantly higher levels than background samples elsewhere in Palouse.
Treccani and the Department of Ecology work on similar sites throughout the state. In the case of the Palouse site, it was also used to fuel vehicles and store and distribute bulk fuel for Palouse Producers.
Treccani said it is common for these old sites to be polluted, since the storage tanks built back then were much more prone to leak than modern tanks with their double-walls and leak detection alarm systems.
Additional questions and comments may be submitted until the close of business on Dec. 19.
If no changes are made to the plans, cleanup will begin next summer. The cleanup is expected to take two months.
Comments may be addressed to: Sandy Treccani, Department of Ecology, Eastern Regional Office, 4601 N. Monroe, Suite 202, Spokane, 99205, or by e-mail:
tsatr461@ecy.wa.gov.
Garth Meyer is a former Whitman County Gazette reporter.
Reader Comments(0)