Brownfields Update for the Pacific Northwest

This is the last issue of Brownfields Update for the Pacific Northwest. We asked Brownfields leaders to give their ideas on the future of Brownfields, in their states and perhaps beyond, in light of the economic, financial and other challenges we all face.
Alaska Outlook

By John Carnahan, Sonja Benson and Deborah Williams
Working with Brownfields in Alaska presents its own unique challenges. Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation’s Reuse and Redevelopment (R&R) Program believes the future of Brownfield revitalization in rural areas lies with its close coordination with the Tribal Response Programs (TRPs) that service many parts of the state. The R&R Program will continue to focus much of its efforts on outreach and education, technical assistance to TRPs in building capacity, and help with applying for state and federal Brownfield assessment services. Additionally, in order to see longer term success, we hope to see a State-sponsored Brownfield redevelopment fund similar to that found in some other states. We would also like to see individual Alaska Tribes eligible for the EPA competitive Brownfield grants. We will continue to use state resources to conduct site assessments and cleanups on state-owned properties, which are a ubiquitous Brownfield presence in many rural communities. We have completed numerous projects at old schools and airport sites by working with other State agencies and rural school districts. Our focus is to make the underutilized and contaminated lands and abandoned buildings environmentally sound and available for beneficial reuse by the local communities.
Idaho Program Celebrates its Successes

By Aaron Scheff, Brownfields Program Manager
During its 6? year partnership with EPA Region 10, Idaho’s Brownfields Response Program conducted site specific assessments at Brownfields sites totaling nearly 1,200 acres. Over 260 of these acres were cleared for redevelopment with no further action required. An additional 490 acres were cleared for redevelopment through cleanup and/or environmental covenants and the rest are either in Idaho’s Voluntary Cleanup Program or awaiting additional assessment or risk evaluation. Idaho’s 128(a) assessment costs represent 66% of all Brownfields assessment funding in Idaho while the acres assessed by Idaho’s 128(a) program account for 86% of acres assessed in Idaho utilizing some sort of Brownfields funding. Further analysis shows that Idaho’s 128(a) response program assessments are completed three to five times faster than assessments funded through other programs, at one third the cost per acre assessed.
Since the Brownfields Program is essentially a redevelopment program, the above analysis shows that Idaho’s 128(a) program, in concert with excellent programmatic support from EPA Region 10, is capable of responding to the assistance needs of those seeking to redevelop Brownfields in a timely and cost effective manner. The program also conducts extensive outreach to Idaho communities to assist with their redevelopment planning and implementation needs. The Idaho program is hopeful that the 128(a) program’s importance to western, specifically rural, communities will be fully appreciated and that future funding will reflect that appreciation. Our program focuses heavily on rural communities which lack the capacity, resources, or experience to compete for and successfully manage 104(k) grants. This focus will likely continue as the national grant competition becomes increasingly competitive. It is our sincere hope that 128(a) funding will eventually expand to help offset the increase in requests for funding.
Our program is taking advantage of the current economic downturn to assist local communities turn larger Brownfields sites such as former landfills into community assets such as mixed use commercial and residential developments, public parks, and alternative energy production facilities. We are also looking forward to increasing the success of the Reuse Idaho Brownfields Coalition Brownfields Cleanup Revolving Loan Fund (RLF). Currently, the RLF is funding a cleanup at a nonprofit Children’s Arts Academy in Boise and a former non-regulated dump in Priest River, scheduled to be redeveloped as a public park. Future potential RLF projects include cleanup of a former leaking underground storage tank site to be redeveloped as retail space, and a former confined animal feeding operation scheduled to be redeveloped as a mixed use site including commercial, residential, and a solar energy production facility.
We look forward to a long and productive partnership with EPA Region 10 as we assist Idaho stakeholders with their Brownfields revitalization needs.
Six Thoughts on Region 10 Brownfields, from Oregon DEQ Headquarters

By Charlie Landman, Legal Policy Advisor; and Gil Wistar, Brownfields Coordinator

1. The Market Will Remain the Driver. The market drives all development, including Brownfields. For many reasons, it’s more challenging for developers to move ahead with Brownfield redevelopments in a down market. Activity will likely pick up as the economy improves and private financing becomes more normalized. Location has always been an important determinant of what sites are redeveloped, but even some Brownfields in the best locations aren’t moving in the current economic climate. The good news is that this, too, shall pass; the question, however, is when?
2. Timing and Availability of Public “Bridge” Financing Are Critical. We have learned that a crucial financing requirement is funding to bridge a Brownfields redevelopment through the cleanup stage. While it would be best for commercial lenders to provide this funding, it is not often available, and therefore important for government grants and low-interest loans to be there at the right time to carry a project through to cleanup. After cleanup is completed, the bridge funding can be taken out by commercial lenders and the project can move to traditional financing.
3. Brownfields Will Be Called Upon to Provide High-Quality Jobs. Brownfields redevelopment has focused on high-value land conversions, especially into upscale, mixed-use projects with substantial residential components. Increasingly, Brownfield sites will be expected to provide the high-quality “family-wage” jobs that everyone wants. This will involve vacant industrial land in and near city cores, and will require industrial-to-industrial redevelopments that are the least likely to pencil out and attract private financing.
4. The Challenges of Small and Rural Sites. It’s becoming clearer that redevelopment of smaller properties such as “Ma & Pa” gas stations and dry cleaners is difficult, because these properties have minimal payoffs, with property values that can’t support even a moderate cleanup, or expected returns on investment that are too low to justify paying more for the land. Funding investigation and cleanup remains a challenge for many of these smaller Brownfields. While ideal targets for federal competitive grants, it’s often hard to make the case for small Brownfield redevelopments that fail conventional metrics (e.g., redevelopments that will create only a few new jobs – as critical as those jobs might be to the community). Therefore, a new challenge will be to bring additional resources to these sites from non-traditional funding sources. For example, foundations and nonprofits could play an important role in small projects, especially those with broad community support.
5. It’s No Longer a Niche Enterprise. As inner cities revitalize and smaller communities embrace the Brownfields mantra, Brownfields redevelopments have moved from a niche enterprise to the mainstream. Increasingly, developers – assisted in many cases by consultants with Brownfields experience – will include Brownfields in their search for development opportunities (given the caveats in Observation #1 above). The Brownfields stigma is finally starting to wear off, and with it comes the realization that environmental issues frequently turn out NOT to be the driver or bottleneck at Brownfields.
6. Partnering Is the Key. Successful Brownfields projects are most likely when there are conscious partnerships built on shared objectives between business, government, and the community. Increasingly, government will move to a more collaborative posture in Brownfield redevelopment. State environmental agencies will continue to require cleanup to protective standards, but will use more flexibility, creative thinking, and collaboration to achieve these goals. While this is a shift in style and not substance, it’s likely to provide developers greater certainty and more confidence to tackle even complex Brownfield redevelopments. Finally, it goes without saying that Brownfields partnerships must include property owners – or nothing will happen. Therefore, an increasing area of focus for regulators, developers, and community partners will be honing the tools of persuasion to get site owners on board.

In our last issue, we profiled the Yakutat Tlingit Brownfields Tribal Response Program (TRP) and the work being done to address Brownfields and other environmental contamination issues. This month, we look at the recently created Kuskokwim River Watershed Council TRP, and how they are structuring their Brownfields program.
The Kuskokwim River Watershed region (pop.15,000), consists of 39 federally recognized tribes spread across a 58,000 square-mile area of southwest Alaska along the 724-mile long Kuskokwim River. The region includes the hub communities of Bethel, Aniak, and McGrath and is one of Alaska’s more remote and economically challenged areas. The population has considerably higher levels of poverty and unemployment than the rest of the state.
There are many causes of Brownfields in the Kuskokwim region. They have been traced to previous defense sites; Bureau of Indian Affairs school buildings containing lead and asbestos; mine-scarred land; abandoned dumps; and leaking tanks and drums generated by past development and industrial and commercial activity.
Until recently, the contamination from these sources was not adequately addressed, as the limited environmental programs of the small communities in the region lack a Brownfields component. The effect of contamination on their wildlife and ecosystems is a particularly pressing problem due to the reliance of residents on hunting and fishing for subsistence.
The Kuskokwim River Watershed Council (KRWC) was formed to protect the Kuskokwim River and its drainage area. The organization provides environmental educational programs and technical and networking support for the communities in the watershed. In 2009, the KRWC was awarded an EPA grant to create a Brownfields TRP to develop and implement tools to inventory, assess, and revitalize Brownfields in the region.
Shortly after being awarded the TRP grant, the KRWC hired Joey Billy as Brownfields coordinator. Billy has worked with other TRPs and tribal consortia as mentor and liaison, coordinating and assisting tribes, communities and agencies in the region with various environmental programs. He is a native Yup’ik speaker. This is a significant asset in communicating with and eliciting positive response and active participation from the tribes, 90 percent of whom are Alaskan Native, of Yup’ik Eskimo or Athabascan descent.
This first year of the KRWC TRP is concentrating on capacity building, creating a Brownfields inventory and engaging in a variety of Brownfield and hazardous materials-related training. Site-specific work will follow.
The KRWC TRP staff will attend national and state Brownfields conferences and workshops to familiarize themselves with the components of the Brownfields redevelopment process. Staff will engage with the Indian General Assistance Program (IGAP) of the EPA to coordinate the TRP’s Brownfields work with IGAP activities where possible.
They also will familiarize themselves with the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) Reuse and Redevelopment program. An important part of capacity building will be to develop training materials so that new staff can be trained easily. Turnover in these remote villages can be high.
It will be a challenge to build a Brownfields inventory over the large geographic area the KRWC covers. Most of the small communities in the region are accessible only by boat or small plane. The KRWC plans to build a knowledge base of the area by consulting historical records and maps and creating a record of environmental work already performed in the region. Ten to 12 communities will be selected for the first year’s inventory which will consist of questionnaires, surveys and interviews with community leaders. The purpose of these activities will be to communicate the program’s components to the tribal communities, identify Brownfields and begin to build the inventory. The KRWC will hire students to assist with mapping the inventory, using geographic information systems (GIS).
Training is the third area of emphasis for the KRWC TRP, with staff traveling to the remote communities of the region to acquaint them with Brownfields issues. Community environmental workers will be taught how to catalogue Brownfields for inclusion in the inventory, using a manual Billy developed while working with the Nelson Island Consortium TRP. Other training activities will include HAZWOPER certification (subcontracted to an outside firm) and GIS mapping. The KRWC TRP staff l also will help Kuskokwim River communities to complete application forms for DEC Brownfield Assessments and EPA Targeted Brownfield Assessments funding.
For more information contact:
Joey Billy, Certified Paralegal

Kuskokwim River Watershed Council Brownfield Program

BNC Complex, Suite 119

460 Ridgecrest Dr.

ONC PO Box 927

Bethel, AK 99559-0927

Phone: 907-545-3980

krwc.brownfield@kuskokwimcouncil.org

A group of properties in the northern Idaho city of Sandpoint contaminated by years of industrial activities provide a good illustration of how time, parcelization, and public investment can slowly bring a large area of Brownfield properties back into reuse. The North Sandpoint Wood Treatment Facilities is the name given to the three properties, each with a long history of environmental investigative work related to their redevelopment that continues to this day.
Sandpoint (pop. approx. 8,300) is a small city in the north panhandle of Idaho located on the northern shore of Lake Pend Oreille. For many years Sandpoint was known as the utility pole capital of the west, producing the treated poles used for telephone and other utility lines. The facilities that produced the poles were located on the northern edge of the town in an area that has since become the heart of the city as development has pushed north beyond Sandpoint to the neighboring cities of Ponderay and Kootenai. The wood treatment facilities occupied three adjacent east-west properties totaling about 60 acres bisected by a rail line. Over the years, the properties have been subdivided and reused in a variety of ways. Some are still in light industrial use, others are in commercial use, i.e., retail and office space.
From the 1920s to the 1950s, the approximately 17-acre Division Street Wood Treating Site on the western side of the industrial area was where poles were treated with creosote and later, pentachlorophenol. Work practices and material handling common to that time caused contamination to the soil. Poles were placed in shallow, unlined clay pits in the southeast corner of the property filled with creosote solution for treatment and then were removed from the pits and loaded onto rail cars.
Starting in the late 1970s the Division Street property was parceled off with Bonner County purchasing the northern 2/3 of the property. The remaining southern portion was divided into four parcels. Contamination was first discovered on the furthest east of these parcels in the late 1980s when workers were excavating near the property during a road-widening project. Some of the workers fell ill due to the presence of chemical contamination buried beneath the area where it is suspected that the creosote pits had been located. In response to the discovery, contaminated soil was removed from the area.
The excavation incident prompted a decision by the EPA to conduct a Site Inspection at the North Sandpoint Wood Treating Facilities in 1996. That site inspection and investigation report concluded that there was no immediate threat from the contamination and the EPA took no action. No further investigations of the site took place until 2006 when the owners of the parcel, operating a lumberyard, wanted to retire and sell their business to another building supply company. The sale was delayed when they could not pay for the needed environmental assessment.
To save the sale, the owners approached the City of Sandpoint, which in turn asked the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality for assistance. The DEQ allocated funds from its State Brownfields Program to pay for the site assessment. The outcome of that investigation was a determination that risks from the contamination beneath the site could be mitigated through the use of an environmental covenant under Idaho Title 55, Chapter 30 Uniform Environmental Covenants Act (UECA). The covenant specifies that to prevent exposure to the soil contamination at the property, no groundwater will be used for drinking water; the site cannot be rezoned as residential; and any excavation in the area will require special planning and oversight.
The property was sold, resulting in the retention of jobs and continued economic activity from the new building supply facility.
Owners of the approximately 33-acre L.D. McFarland property east of the Division Street site treated poles until the 1990s. In 1996, the Land Remediation Act (LRA) was enacted by the Idaho legislature to establish a non-adversarial avenue for cleaning up sites. It also established incentives for voluntary cleanup. This led to DEQ’s Brownfields Program in 2004. The property was the first to be enrolled in the Voluntary Cleanup Program, a new term for activities under the LRA. For its first 10 years, the McFarland site was the only participant in the program.
Environmental investigations have determined that the contamination is confined to the center of the property where the pole treating activities occurred. This contaminated portion is being remediated through a chemical oxidation process pilot test. Professional offices occupy the uncontaminated western portion of the site.
Still further east in the line of properties comprising the North Sandpoint Wood Treatment Facilities, the owners of the 12-acre B.J Carney site are pursuing cleanup funding through their general liability insurance policy which was issued before the addition of environmental exclusions.
For more information, contact:
Steve Gill, Brownfields Specialist

Idaho Department of Environmental Quality

2110 Ironwood Parkway

Coeur d’Alene, ID 83814

Phone: 208-666-4632

Cell: 208-818-5326

A small city in Oregon is embarking on its third Brownfield redevelopment in 15 years. Independence, Oregon, a town of 8,230 people 12 miles southwest of Salem, has had significant success working with the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) and Brownfields stakeholders to restore three sites to productive use. Each of these – a shuttered, significantly contaminated lumber mill; a closed gas station; and a prior power company property – has found new life and made a positive impact on the economic and civic life of the city.
Mountain Fir Lumber Company operated a lumber and planing mill in Independence from approximately 1966 to 1990. In the early 1990s, it was discovered that pentachlorophenol (PCP) from wood treatment activities had contaminated the soil and groundwater to the extent that a groundwater plume spread blocks from the mill and threatened the city’s water supply. Mill owners cooperated with the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), entering into a series of agreements to assess and clean up the site. Over a period of nearly 10 years, contaminated soils were removed and groundwater treatment systems operated until the plume was reduced in size and localized under the mill property. Active remediation ceased in 2006 when it was determined that the contamination had been mitigated to a level that protected the off-site groundwater. Institutional controls, capping and other contingency measures were put in place to manage the residual contamination.
In 1998, while the remediation was being conducted, the DEQ entered into a Prospective Purchaser Agreement (PPA) with a new owner. While the PPA contained certain obligations and conditions related to the use of the property, the new owner was able to maintain a profitable pallet making business at the site from 1991 until closing recently. This redevelopment of the mill site is the first of the three Brownfields success story in Independence and illustrates how the combination of a site owner willing to work closely and cooperatively with the DEQ can create a benefit for the community where many others have suffered from closed mills that have languished for years.
The second major Brownfields redevelopment in Independence was in 2003 with the redevelopment of an old gas station and adjoining commercial property into the new 8,000 square- foot Independence Library. The city received a combination of Brownfields grants and loans totaling $800,000 from the Oregon Economic and Community Development Department (now Business Oregon) to purchase the property, demolish the old structures, remediate petroleum contamination from past activities and build the library. Similar to their work on the Mountain Fir site, DEQ facilitated the process of redevelopment, assisting with cleanup planning and assuring that contamination was sufficiently mitigated to eliminate any future risk to human health and the environment at the new library.
The city’s most recent Brownfield-related redevelopment was not known to be contaminated at the onset. This is the site of a new 36,500 square-foot civic center to house city administrative offices, the police department, municipal courts and public meeting space. The facility is designed to accommodate projected municipal needs for the next 50 years.
The city had purchased the property from Pacific Power & Light Company and been using it for public works storage. During the pre-construction phase, petroleum-contaminated soil was encountered. The city’s Community Development Director consulted with the DEQ to see what steps the city should take to address the contamination.
DEQ performed the investigation, using funds from its EPA State Response grant. The agency also engaged consultants to evaluate the ecological impact to any endangered species and an archeological specialist from the Grand Ronde tribe to determine if any Native American artifacts were present.
The investigation concluded that contaminants in the soil were below levels requiring remediation but that groundwater contamination remained a problem, with some contaminants exceeding safe drinking water levels. The DEQ restricted current groundwater use and required that a deed restriction preventing its future use be placed on the property. In response, the city will provide municipal water to the new facility. The archeological survey did not reveal the presence of historical artifacts. Presently, construction of the new Civic Center is half completed.
All three of these Brownfield projects in Independence show the value of DEQ’s involvement in facilitating the successful assessment and cleanup of contaminated property. In addition to providing oversight and regulatory approval, DEQ can offer small communities the experience, guidance and oftentimes the funds to overcome obstacles to Brownfields redevelopment.
For more information, contact:
Mike Danko, Community Development Director

City of Independence

503-838-1212

danko.michael@ci.independence.or.us

Our Washington story this month features an old Brownfields site at the Yakima airport that recently was cleaned up. Although it was discovered soon after the initiation of the Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) Toxics Cleanup Program, it was idle for years until recent legislative changes made Ecology funding of the cleanup possible. The project illustrates it is never too late to find collaborative ways to invest public dollars in Brownfields redevelopment.
Richardson Airways operated an aerial pesticide spraying business at the Yakima airport from the mid-1950s to the mid-1990s. Spray equipment was washed in an area where much chemical contamination accumulated.
After Ecology’s Toxic Cleanup Program staff learned of the potential problem, they conducted site investigations for several years beginning in 1989. Although soil and groundwater sampling revealed several pesticides in the soil at levels above the state’s cleanup standards, they did not find any groundwater contamination. However, restrictions on the amount of allowable state funding kept Ecology from being involved in the needed cleanup.
The site, at the end of an abandoned runway, remained idle for over a decade, interrupting traffic flow and business activities in the area. A restrictive covenant was placed on the site to control exposure to the contamination until remediation could take place.
The turning point occurred in 2007 when the Washington Legislature expanded state policy governing how Remedial Action Grant (RAG) funds can be used. The new policy allows Ecology to fund up to 90% of a site’s remediation costs in cases where local funding would cause severe economic distress. Typically, Ecology funds cleanups at the 50% level.
The possibility of additional funding started a dialogue between Ecology and the city of Yakima in 2008. Ecology ultimately agreed to provide 90% of the necessary funding. The city and Yakima County would share the remaining cost. Ecology understood that cleaning up the site could lead to increased economic activity since the site was impeding redevelopment in the airport area. Also, the city would have had to divert its scarce funds from other priorities to pay more for the remediation. Ecology decided the added investment was a worthy use of RAG funding.
The cleanup was a straightforward dig-and-haul process. Fortunately, the quantity of contaminated soil was less than anticipated and contamination levels were low enough so that the material could be disposed at the local Yakima landfill. Transportation costs increased the overall cost as fuel prices increased substantially during the project’s duration, but the local disposal savings offset the increase. The final cleanup bill was approximately $400,000.
This Brownfields cleanup project is part of a larger plan to enhance the potential of the Yakima Air Terminal for economic development that will benefit the entire Yakima area. The next step is a development plan. Already, private hangars adjoining the property are fully booked; this is considered a good sign for the development potential of the property.
The success of the project illustrates how coordination among the city, county and Ecology achieved the dual purpose of completing a needed e cleanup and advancing important state-local relationships. It also has contributed to community wellbeing and illustrates the value of cooperative problem-solving and financing to pay for needed economic development projects.
For more information contact:
Doug Mayo, City Engineer

City of Yakima

509-576-6678

dmayo@ci.yakima.wa.us