EPA, County and State Outline year-plus cleanup plan at Moss Landing battery fire site

Federal, state and county agencies on Tuesday described how they will dismantle and remove damaged lithium‑ion batteries from the Moss Landing Energy Storage Facility and continue environmental testing around the site, saying the cleanup will be methodical and may take up to two years.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said it has an enforceable agreement with Vistra Energy, the site operator, under which Vistra will pay for and perform a “time‑critical” removal of batteries and burned building materials while EPA provides oversight. Mike Montgomery, director of Superfund and Emergency Management for EPA Region 9, said EPA’s priorities are worker safety, preventing further fires and preventing contaminants from moving offsite.

Nikki Fowler, a toxicologist with the Monterey County Environmental Health Bureau, told the board that early soil testing from 108 surface samples showed “only 3 out of the 108 samples showed exceedances for battery‑related metals, and no widespread contamination was observed.” Fowler said additional sampling of marsh and slough areas has started and preliminary results are expected in October; the county aims to release findings after state review.

Lynn Keller, EPA’s acting assistant director for Superfund emergency response, said the agency and Vistra developed an approach that focuses on the most damaged areas first. She said roughly 55% of the battery modules in the burned building were consumed by the fire and about 45% remain intact and will be handled as potential ignition sources. Keller said Vistra’s contractor teams are on site, including structural engineers and demolition crews, and that batteries will be categorized on inspection and then either discharged for recycling or characterized for appropriate disposal.

“Because of the risks associated with handling these materials, we’re being very thoughtful,” Keller said. “The goal is to remove the highest‑risk batteries first and reduce the chance of another fire during dismantling.”

Jim Barath of Sonix ESD, the firm conducting sound and technical studies at Laguna Seca (present at the same meeting), described the technical tools EPA will use to model how contaminants and dust might move offsite during demolition: multiple fixed and mobile monitors, LIDAR terrain mapping and detailed frequency analysis to guide mitigation.

EPA and county officials emphasized precautions intended to reduce dust and fugitive emissions during demolition and battery handling. Keller and EPA field staff described HEPA vacuuming and wipe‑down of battery modules, dust suppression using water trucks and foggers, capture of site runoff through existing stormwater containment systems, decontamination stations for workers and a plan to halt operations if wind conditions exceed safety thresholds.

EPA also said it will use a recycling contractor in McCarran (near Reno, Nevada) for intact batteries that can be discharged safely and recycled. Batteries and debris that cannot be recycled will be characterized and sent to appropriate hazardous‑waste disposal facilities, EPA said.

County officials said outside‑the‑fence testing is proceeding under a separate state‑led effort. Fowler said the county has posted daily summarized air monitoring plots on its website and will use a GIS viewer for soil and water testing results once state review is complete.

Community members urged clearer public data access, publication of raw air and soil data, testing for any unexpected contaminants and more real‑time notification when on‑site work is underway. EPA and county staff said they will post additional summaries and that many raw datasets will be made available after quality checks.

Agencies declined to offer a specific completion date but said the on‑site battery removal and building demolition could take 18 to 24 months, with long‑term remediation decisions to follow once waste characterization and preliminary environmental assessments are complete.

Why it matters: The Moss Landing fire released smoke and combustion products into neighboring communities in January and again briefly during a flare‑up in February. Residents and community groups have reported respiratory symptoms and found residues at homes, and officials face pressure to show that the cleanup will be protective and transparent.

What’s next: EPA said it will continue perimeter air monitoring and on‑site oversight, DTSC and state partners will lead outside‑the‑fence ecological sampling, and county health staff will continue to coordinate public communication and health guidance.