LAX users begin cleanup of water contamination.

LAX users begin cleanup of water contamination

Fuels and other toxics foul aquifer layer under airport

Work has begun to clean up a slick of jet fuel and other toxic substances 4- to 6-feet deep and an acre wide which sits atop the aquifer under Los Angeles International Airport, according to officials at the Regional Water Quality Control Board.

The LAX situation is "one of the larger" contaminations in Los Angeles County, said Heather Stone, a control engineer with the regional board. "Whether a drinking water acquifer has been contaminated has not been confirmed," she said.

The state water board is currently conducting two investigations into the contamination, to determine the threat to drinking water and the source of the problem, Stone added. The closest drinking water well is about two miles to the east and is somewhat protected by a man-made barrier to keep out saltwater, Stone said.

LAX Fuel Corp., a consortium of 50 airlines which leases land at LAX and provides jet fuel for the planes at the airport, has begun pumping the fuel from the earth, said Steve Jones, an attorney with the Los Angeles office of law firm Jones Day Reavis & Pogue, which represents LAX Fuel. The fuel consortium has not, however, admitted responsibility for the contamination, Jones said.

And according to a manager of a top Los Angeles environmental engineering firm, the contamination under LAX Fuel may be one of many such situations which could take decades and cost millions to clean up. Most of the top environmental firms in Los Angeles are aware of the problem near the airport, said Jim McNally, manager of the geoscience division of Dames & Moore Inc.

"I'd have to say it was bigger than an acre," McNally said of the overall groundwater affected under the airport. "From what we've seen, the groundwater in that region is in very bad shape. . . . It's not just the airlines either. You have fueling companies, trucking companies, you have gas stations around the airport. All of these are contributing to the overall problem."

Although the LAX contamination was discovered about three years ago, the questions of who is responsible, the extent of the problem and the cost of the clean-up have not been answered.

"LAX Fuel stepped right up and agreed to take that on without admitting any responsibility and to work with the oil companies to get it paid for," Jones said. "Basically, LAX Fuel decided to be a good citizen."

LAX Fuel is negotiating with five oil companies -- Atlantic Richfield Co., Shell Oil Co., Unocal Corp., Mobil Corp. and Chevron Corp. -- which previously owned the facility about costs of the clean-up, Jones said. The oil companies previously ran the facility and sold it to LAX Fuel about four or five years ago, shortly before the contamination problem was discovered, Jones said.

Jones disputed the water board's characterization of the contamination, saying he understood that the jet fuel was a maximum of 1 foot deep on top of the aquifer. LAX Fuel is conducting its own investigation into the situation, he said.

Currently the company is negotiating only with the oil companies about the clean-up, although Jones noted that neighboring tenants at LAX also have underground and above-the-ground fuel tanks on the property. "To the extent our investigation reveals neighboring tenants are responsible for this situation, we will talk to them," he said.

Since LAX Fuel is the current occupant of the land, it wanted to take care of the situation, "then we will go back and recover costs," Jones said.

McNally estimated that such a cleanup as LAX Fuel is undertaking could cost about $13 million and take 20 years to complete. He said companies which lease land at the airport may be undertaking similar clean-ups in the next few decades.

Some companies are already investigating contamination and "are doing so because it's their policy to do so and not because some agency is forcing them to do that," McNally said. "I think that right now the clean-ups in the LAX area are being directed based on the attention they are receiving from state and local agencies. Right now there are more pressing things that the authorities are looking at."

A 1988 Department of Airports report on Underground Tanks and Hazardous Substances found that about 80 percent of the 288 fuel and other hazardous materials tanks were not in compliance with state, federal and local regulations regarding storage of fuel and other hazardous materials.

Among the problems detailed in the UTAHS report were fuel tanks that leaked or did not have spill control plans, plus hazardous waste generators which did not have the proper permits. The report stated the problems existed at Ontario, Palmdale and Van Nuys airports, as well as LAX.

Mal M. Packer, chief engineer for the Department of the Airports, said the situation of the tanks that were not in compliance of the law has either been remedied or is being remedied. Packer could not say how many tanks were still in the process of being given permits or fixed and referred questions to a consultant with the environmental firm of Camp Dresser & McKee, who did not return phone calls.

Airport Engineer Packer said, "We feel pretty confident and safe that everything we need to do is being done." About the underground contamination, Packer added, "LAX Fuel is going to do it all. They took over all the fuel-supplying pipelines. They're going to take care of everything."

The Los Angeles office of the Californial Regional Water Quality Control Board is conducting two investigations into the LAX groundwater contamination situation, Stone said. One is to determine the source or sources of the contamination and the other is to determine its extent and if it could threaten the drinking water supply.

The jet fuel, which contains cancer-causing components such as benzene, is currently "sitting on top" of the roughly 96-foot deep acquifer, Stone said. However, "it does have the tendency to sit on top of the water until it dissolves slowly," she said.

In order to determine the extent of the contamination, the water board has recently been granted permission by the Los Angeles Department of Airports to drill another well on the airport property to conduct more tests, Stone said.

"Likely there has been some contamination that has entered the groundwater. That will be the next phase to address," Stone said. If the board determines a clean-up of the groundwater is warranted, that remedy would be many more times expensive than just removing the free-floating oil, Stone noted.

The Pacific Ocean is much closer to the contamination than the drinking water well, but the water board is "more concerned" with the water supply, she said.

Stone explained that the current that affects that pool of groundwater flows east, toward the water well. Historically the current flowed west, but that was changed by the insertion of the water wells, Stone said.

In the western portion of Los Angeles County, where the contamination site is situated, about 15 percent of the drinking water comes from the underground supply, said Chris Nagler, deputy water master for the West Basin for the state Department of Water Resources.

Water wells are constantly monitored and the LAX contamination does not seem to be causing a problem at this time, Nagler said. "We are watching it at all times," he said, adding that a problem could occur if the contamination moves.

LAX Fuel has hired an environmental consultant, Tustin-based Harding Lawson Associates, to conduct the clean-up. Jones declined a request by the Business Journal to interview the environmental consultants who were directly involved with the clean-up effort.

Although the company is currently pumping the fuel directly from the ground, that is not the only component of the clean-up, Jones said. Later the company will use a type of technology called vapor extraction, he said.

PHOTO : Fuel: Residue sits atop airport groundwater