Report Criticized : EPA Solution: Burn McColl Sludge on Site

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced Tuesday that the best way to rid the McColl dump in Fullerton of tons of toxic waste is to excavate and burn the acidic sludge on site, a proposal that drew immediate criticism from nearby homeowners.

After several years of study, EPA officials, along with officials of the state Department of Health Services, said that burning the estimated 150,000 tons of contaminated refinery waste and oil drilling muds is the “preferred method” for permanent cleanup of the abandoned dump on the city’s western border.

Cost Put at $117 Million

Federal officials at a news conference in Fullerton recommended setting up an incinerator at or near the dump to dispose of the noxious sludge, rather than hauling it to the nearest treatment facility in Texas. The estimated cost of the on-site treatment plan is $117 million, compared to $160 million to $500 million for the out-of-state plan.

But questions surfaced late Tuesday about whether burning McColl waste locally would violate federal air quality standards in Southern California, a heavily polluted area that already is under strict federal mandate to meet those requirements.

“It will be very difficult for any incinerator at the McColl site to meet federal air standards,” said Robert Pease, a senior engineer with the South Coast Air Quality Management District.

The EPA plan also met resistance from residents living near the site, as well as a coalition of oil companies that the federal government is suing for payment of the McColl cleanup costs.

The oil companies favor a plan to “cap” or contain the toxic waste in the ground, a project that one oil company spokesman estimated would cost $22 million.

But EPA officials, as well as residents and city officials, oppose leaving the refinery and drilling wastes in the ground.

“That is a wholly unacceptable option,” said Jeff Zelikson, director of EPA’s Hazardous Waste Management Division for California.

But the EPA’S preferred plan came under fire from Betty Porras, who lives behind the dump and leads the McColl Action Group. Porras said she remains unconvinced that on-site burning of the toxic waste is safe for surrounding homeowners.

“We want more data before they start burning that stuff in our back yard,” she said.

The dump now sits under a vacant field and part of the Los Coyotes Country Club golf course, and is bordered on three sides by expensive homes. Controversy over the dump’s noxious odors surfaced in the late 1970s. An attempt to dig up the sludge and haul it to a landfill in Kern County was halted in May, 1985, by the courts, which ordered the state to conduct an environmental impact study.

State and federal officials met Tuesday night with homeowners to outline the incineration plan, which has been endorsed by city officials as well as Rep. William E. Dannemeyer (R-Fullerton) and state Assemblyman Ross Johnson (R-La Habra).

Zelikson said burning the waste is the best option because “it meets the agency’s goal of permanently removing” McColl’s contaminated materials. He said federal officials, as well as state and local authorities, oppose any scheme to encase the sludge in the ground, fearing that it might eventually escape that containment and threaten the ground water.

Recent tests of ground water 250 feet below the site showed traces of the sulfur-based chemicals found in the dump, indicating that the contaminants are seeping into the water table, said John Blevins, a member of EPA’s hazardous waste division.

But he added that there is no evidence that local drinking water supplies have been contaminated. He said the nearest well is about half a mile from the dump, which was created in the mid-1940s. Oil companies then were depositing waste from the production of high-octane military aviation fuel in 12 sumps operated by Eli McColl.

Zelikson said that burning the waste on site is the most cost-effective way to dispose of the materials. But only three states now have incinerators to dispose of such waste, and Texas is the closest.

Federal officials have scheduled a community meeting for March 14 at Parks Junior High School on Rosecrans Avenue, and the public will have until May 15 to comment on the plan. EPA officials then have until August to draft a plan of action for the cleanup and prepare a final environmental impact report. That will be followed by a 6-month period for negotiations with the oil companies responsible for dumping the contaminants.

But even under the best scenario, Zelikson acknowledged, it will be at least a year before the design phase of the project begins, and at least 4 years before excavation of the waste could begin.