THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1996, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Saturday, June 15, 1996 TAG: 9606150332
SECTION: LOCAL PAGE: B1 EDITION: FINAL
SOURCE: BY SCOTT HARPER, STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: NORFOLK LENGTH: 88 lines
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will propose next week that Norfolk Naval Base be added to its Superfund list, a roster of some of the most polluted properties in the nation.
If approved after 60 days of public comment, the listing would put Navy officials under strict government scrutiny and deadlines for rectifying myriad toxic-waste problems at the largest Navy base in the world.
Under Superfund, if the base is declared a bona fide cleanup site, the Navy would be required to clean up all suspect waste sites to meet federal standards for clean, water, air and soil. If the Navy fails, it would face possible fines and prosecutions. Timetables for the cleanup would be negotiated.
According to the EPA, 18 potential sources of toxic contamination have been identified on the massive base. They include threats to groundwater and soil from pollutants, such as pesticides, carcinogenic PCBs, petroleum products, paints, solvents and metals.
Six sources flow into the Elizabeth River or Willoughby Bay, both of which empty into the Chesapeake Bay, says the Superfund proposal, which will be published in the Federal Register on Monday, EPA and Navy officials said Friday.
The base, one of 15 new sites being proposed by the EPA, is the only candidate in Virginia.
The announcement did not surprise Navy officials in Norfolk, who said they first inventoried their toxic hot spots 13 years ago in a detailed study and have been cleaning them up ever since.
Since 1994, the Navy has spent an average of $3.7 million a year on environmental restoration, said Dianne Bailey, an environmental engineer at the base.
Bailey was optimistic that a Superfund listing may open the door to additional money that could accelerate cleanup efforts.
``It really doesn't do much to what we're already doing,'' Bailey said. She stressed that, according to Navy calculations, lingering toxic residues pose no danger to the public or base personnel.
Bailey estimated that with or without a Superfund designation, bringing trouble spots up to federal standards will take ``tens of millions of dollars'' and 10 to 15 years.
The base is not the first military installation in Hampton Roads to be a Superfund candidate. Fort Eustis and Langley Air Force Base, both on the Peninsula, were proposed for inclusion on the list in the early 1990s.
Under Republican-led changes to the Superfund program last year, governors are empowered to block a listing in their state. Gov. George F. Allen did so this year when the EPA wanted to consider the former Nansemond Ordnance Depot in Suffolk, which now includes Tidewater Community College's Portsmouth campus.
But Allen did not block inclusion of Norfolk Naval Base, Navy officials said.
Specific contamination sites within the base that the EPA notes in its proposal are: two landfills, an old aluminum smelting site and slag pile, a drum storage yard, a transformer storage area and a pesticide storage site.
According to Bailey, the Navy already has taken the following actions at each location:
One landfill, which accepted regular trash and garbage from the 1940s to the '70s, is being studied to determine whether any materials are leaking.
At a second landfill - which held mostly construction debris and rubble, but apparently also some chemical residues and contaminated soil from a fire on the base - a groundwater treatment plant is being constructed.
At the aluminum smelter, active in the 1950s and '60s, soil contaminated by metals and other pollutants has been removed. More study is under way.
The drum storage yard, active from the 1950s to the '70s, held mostly petroleum byproducts and waste from ships. Leaking oil was discovered, and the Navy is using a new method there that injects air bubbles below the material to force it to the surface for removal.
The transformer storage yard held PCBs, a toxic compound and suspected carcinogen formerly used in power transformers. A study is under way to determine whether any contaminated the soil.
The pesticide storage site, active in the 1960s and '70s, disposed of pesticide-laden wastewater through a pipe into the ground. A study is under way to determine the extent of contamination.
The EPA evaluated the base in the late 1980s for environmental risks associated with the numerous waste sites, said Bailey, the environmental engineer. That score, in conjunction with historical records, aerial photos, inspections and interviews, helped make the base a potential Superfund candidate.
The Navy wants to see the scorecard and other documents before deciding whether to protest the base's proposed listing, Bailey said. MEMO: Library researcher Kim Kent contributed to this story.
KEYWORDS: ENVIRONMENT POLLUTION SUPERFUND U.S. NAVY by CNB