The U.S. government sold off aging ships — leaving states in the Pacific Northwest to pay the price
This story was originally published by InvestigateWest, a nonprofit newsroom dedicated to change-making investigative journalism. Sign up for their Watchdog Weekly newsletter to receive stories like this one in your inbox.
Three years ago on a sunny day in August, a nearly 80-year-old steel, navy blue ship with patched holes and streaks of rust drifted down an inlet connecting downtown Tacoma to Commencement Bay. The 169-foot vessel was an unusual sight for local boaters who use the narrow channel to dock their small recreational watercraft. As it passed the Eleventh Street Bridge, the antennae of Pacific Producer got caught, causing its captain to lose control and frantically throw out an anchor to prevent a collision with other docked boats, according to eyewitness reports.
The captain maneuvered it over to the closed Martinac shipbuilding facility and left it there for over a year, floating above an Environmental Protection Agency Superfund site, an acres-long underwater protective barrier blanketing contamination of historical pollution from the rest of the Thea Foss waterway.
Noticing the derelict vessel on patrol, the Tacoma Fire Department conducted an inspection. Upon entering a lower deck, the department's crew noted a smell of ammonia so strong 'it was felt in our eyes and nose.' That sounded the alarm for a myriad of federal, state and local agencies to respond. When Washington Department of Ecology officials arrived, they noticed water in the bottom of the ship that grew heavier each day. Now, the concern was that the Pacific Producer was sinking.
Once response operations were completed, 25,000 gallons of oily water, 5,000 gallons of diesel, 3,500 pounds of ammonia, and 14,000 gallons of miscellaneous and oily waste had been removed, said Courtney Serad, lead spill responder with the Department of Ecology.
The Coast Guard and the Department of Ecology spent nearly a million dollars removing the ammonia, oil and other hazardous waste — including human feces — aboard the ship. Once the vessel is demolished, Washington's Department of Natural Resources expects to have spent nearly $4 million on its demolition and also on moorage fees, on-site security due to trespassers, pest control and the remediation of hazardous materials.
Abandoned and derelict vessels are quietly piling up in Washington and Oregon waterways, posing a threat to fragile marine ecosystems. At least 37 of these vessels in the Pacific Northwest, including the Pacific Producer, were formerly property of the Navy, Coast Guard or another federal agency, then bought by someone who later abandoned it. Together, these former government vessels have cost Washington state and Oregon over $21 million to remove and destroy.
Vessel removal programs in Washington and Oregon are calling on the federal government to destroy its own decrepit vessels and to prevent them from getting into the public's hands.
'There's a lot of stories around these bigger vessels, and usually it starts out with the government selling it to somebody who doesn't have the capacity to really operate it,' said Doug Helton, retired regional operations supervisor at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration who assisted Washington and states across the country in recovering large abandoned watercraft. 'We have a disposal process for a lot of things in our economy, but vessels — there isn't really a standard way of disposing of these.'
These vessels become available to the public through various government agencies — most notably, the General Services Administration, a federal agency that manages and disposes of government property, according to ownership records. Often the ships leak oil, ammonia and other hazardous materials that state agencies and the U.S. Coast Guard are left to clean. All take up swaths of the states' budgets to remediate, remove and destroy.
Of the 37 vessels owned or seized by the federal government to be flagged in the Pacific Northwest, at least 11 served in World War II. One of those was a minesweeper once used to detect and remove enemy mines from the ocean's depths. At least eight ships sank and haven't been recovered. The largest was a 384-foot ship designed to bring Army tanks to shore during the Vietnam War. That vessel would cost around $25 million to destroy, funds that Oregon doesn't have, said Josh Mulhollem, manager of the state's derelict vessel removal program. It sits abandoned in the Columbia River with bolted-in doors to prevent trespassers.
Washington's Derelict Vessel Removal Program has an active inventory of 300 abandoned or derelict vessels. In just over 20 years, it has removed more than 1,200 vessels. A 2022 law allocating the program an additional stream of funding from a watercraft excise tax has broadened its capabilities, but even then, the program waited until the next biennium, which began this July, to destroy the Pacific Producer.
Its total cost — $3.9 million — would have taken up nearly 40% of the program's $10.5 million biennial budget and restricted the agency's scope to manage the hundreds of other abandoned boats. Instead, the program opted to pay off the expenses over two separate budgets. But this ended up costing nearly $300,000 more. It paid to dock the ship at a Seattle marina for over a year with on-site security to prevent trespassers. A rat infestation also racked up pest control fees.
'My question for the federal government is, why are you selling these into private hands when you know that the vessels are at the end of their life?' said Troy Wood, the manager of Washington's Derelict Vessel Removal Program who is part of a national workgroup dedicated to the issue and has helped other state agencies create their own program.
Before private ownership, the former government vessels flagged or removed in Washington and Oregon were property of various agencies like the Defense Reutilization and Marketing Division, the U.S. Treasury Department, or the U.S. Department of Commerce. Records obtained by InvestigateWest show that at least 17 were formerly operated by the U.S. Navy. Six were with the U.S. Coast Guard. Two were former Canadian military vessels. One, the Hero, was the last wooden icebreaker in Antarctica, formerly owned by the National Science Foundation. Most records don't show how the vessels were transferred from the government to the public.
Those familiar with the process for distributing federal surplus materials say it is deeply flawed. Once an old ship is put up for public auction, just about anybody can bid. There are often no requirements that bidders carry insurance or have the financial ability to properly care for an old, broken-down vessel.
In 2017, the Government Accountability Office, a nonpartisan research agency that investigates government agencies at the request of Congress, issued an audit report on the Department of Defense's process for disposing of sensitive equipment. The GAO posed as a fake federal law enforcement agency and was accepted in a surplus property program.
Diana Maurer, director of the defense capabilities and management team at the Government Accountability Office, said DOD officials missed several opportunities to verify the agency's legitimacy.
'No one called us to double-check the fictitious information we provided,' she said. 'Among other things, we gave a phony agency name, a phony address and phony legal authorities that purported to be in the U.S. Code. A simple phone call or Google search could have confirmed that we were not who we said we were.'
After the audit was released, the DOD took 'quick action to close the loopholes' that allowed the GAO to obtain military equipment, Maurer added.
The GAO's fake agency was able to obtain over 100 controlled items — sensitive equipment not to be released to the general public — worth an estimated $1.2 million. Although none of these items were vessels, the report highlights the DOD's — which includes the U.S. Navy and Coast Guard — largely unregulated approval process to buy up surplus property.
In the case of the Pacific Producer, the U.S. Marshals Service sold the ship twice to the same owner hiding behind shell companies following lawsuits spurred by unpaid debts. Each time the Marshals Service stripped it of all liens and the owner bought the boat back with a clean title. Since the final purchase of the vessel in 2007, it acquired over $1 million in unpaid liens and hundreds of thousands of dollars of fines from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. The owner did not respond to inquiries from InvestigateWest.
Under Washington law, the owner of an abandoned or derelict vessel is responsible to reimburse the state Department of Natural Resources and any other authorized public entity for costs associated with surveying the vessel, disposal and any environmental damage. If left unpaid, the DNR can place liens on the owner's assets and take the owner to court. But Wood, the manager of Washington's derelict vessel removal program, says that more often than not, the owner leaves the state or becomes untraceable, leaving the state to foot the bill.
The General Services Administration, a federal agency that manages the excess property of other federal agencies, regularly sells older vessels from the Navy and Coast Guard.
The process goes like this: When a federal agency decides to dispose of a vessel, it's first offered to other federal agencies. If it doesn't draw interest there, the offer extends to state and municipal agencies. If there still aren't any takers, that's where the GSA's public auction comes in.
InvestigateWest reviewed over 100 online sale listings of previous auctions in Washington state. The listings date back only to 2016 but offer a glimpse into typical vessel sales. Only 10 had thorough inspection reports. The majority listed a slew of issues. Vessels were often heavily corroded, sold without an engine or had water leaking into the hull. Two former Navy boats were listed as having engines with excessive heat problems to the point where 'insulation will begin to smoke.' Three were built in the 1940s.
One of those, a 66-foot old Navy tug, sold for just $10,000. It was not inspected and its listing states, 'Boat Is In The Water. This Does Not Imply A Warranty Or Guarantee That The Boat Is Operational.' It also states the bidder is responsible for the disposal of oil accumulated on the boat. None of the listings had stringent bidder requirements such as proving valid insurance or the financial means to care for the boat.
People in the boating world familiar with this issue call the buyers of these boats 'dreamers' with big plans to create an ecotourism business, museum, fishing boat, venue or new home.
'Someone would say, 'That's cool, we could make a nice yacht out of that' and then realize, 'Wait a minute, the Coast Guard, with all their resources and manpower, couldn't keep this boat operational,'' Helton said. 'How was some guy with a pickup truck and a shoestring budget gonna keep it afloat?'
Not all auctioned vessels cause environmental pollution. Some are successfully repaired and continue to operate safely in Washington's waters.
But many do not realize the burden or cost of caring for these old ships. Sometimes half the battle is finding a part that hasn't been manufactured in over 50 years. Sometimes people build their own parts or give up and resell the boat. Then, somehow, they get abandoned and often sink.
'A 140-foot boat should cost more than $50,000,' said Mulhollem, manager of Oregon's derelict vessel removal program.
Over half of the vessels sold by the GSA in Washington came from the Navy, Coast Guard and Army. The Navy has sold more than any other agency in Washington.
Sometimes the Navy sells old ships to foreign allied militaries, sometimes it turns them into museums or artificial reefs. The Navy's decision to send a vessel to the GSA 'is primarily based on their inability to meet current mission requirements,' according to a Navy spokesperson. The Navy did not disclose to InvestigateWest why it doesn't destroy its own vessels.
The Hero was an out-of-service Antarctic research vessel acquired by an oceanic foundation in Oregon with plans to make it the focal point of a larger Antarctic 'exploratorium.' It was bought at a General Services Administration auction in 1985 for $5,000. When plans fell through, the vessel was resold, then sold at least another four times as new owners failed to make the vessel viable.
In 2017, after the Hero's last two owners had stripped the ship of parts to turn a profit, the boat sank at the mouth of the Palix River, a waterway that sustains one of the state's largest oyster farming areas. It cost the Washington Derelict Vessel Removal Program over $3.7 million to remove and destroy it.
'Took us awhile to get the funding, but we eventually did,' Wood said. 'A million of it was for environmental cleanup because we went in and vacuumed the riverbed.'
Every vessel carries aboard some mixture of hazardous materials. All carry necessities like motor oils, flares and batteries. When an old damaged vessel is left abandoned, it may leak hazardous materials without anyone reporting it to authorities.
'The toughest spills we face where we get the worst pollution recovery results are spills that are not reported in a timely manner,' said Byers, the oil response manager at Washington's Department of Ecology. 'In some cases, the oil spreads out… so thin that our response efforts might actually cause more environmental harm than good. We have to literally remove the environment to get the oil with it.'
Found on all vessels for fire protection, but in even larger quantities on larger vessels, are flame retardants containing polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs), which accumulate in an animal's body and are considered toxic. It hasn't been widely studied in natural environments like the ocean, but one controlled study found PBDEs to diminish reproduction in fish.
'A lot of the damage is under the water surface and invisible,' Byers said. 'It's occurring, but it's not obvious.'
Other hazardous materials can include fishing nets, steering gear, cleaning products, fire extinguishers, hydraulic oil and lubricants.
Fishing vessels, like the Pacific Producer, carry ammonia used as refrigerant and chlorine as decontamination material, said Helton, with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in a recent webinar. Some vessels, he said, would store fuel in chain lockers and other void spaces aboard in order to maximize time at sea without having to refill, increasing the amount of hazardous material that could end up in the ocean.
Researchers say it's nearly impossible to quantify how much abandoned and derelict vessels have polluted Washington's waters. The pollution isn't as constant as commercial vessel traffic or stormwater runoff, but spills from abandoned vessels have the potential to harm the environment they're left in for years.
Last year, California U.S. Rep. John Garamendi introduced the Abandoned and Derelict Vessels Act of 2024. The federal bill didn't pass, but one provision was tacked on to the National Defense Authorization Act, the military spending bill Congress passes each year. It established requirements for purchasing federally auctioned vessels, including verifying that the prospective buyer holds proper insurance and has adequate financial resources to care for the vessel.
But, so far, the message hasn't gotten out. Some parties involved with removal of former government vessels were not aware of this provision, the GSA has not included the requirement in its current boat listings and GSA sales employees were not aware of this law.
'I think it's beneficial legislation,' said Mulhollem, who oversees Oregon's vessel removal program. 'I don't think it solves all the issues — I mean insurance and means to take care of a vessel can be temporary.'
There isn't an agreed on solution to this problem, Mulhollem added. These larger abandoned vessels are 'complicated pieces of waste that no one is equipped' to handle.
Other failed provisions in Rep. Garamendi's original bill also called on the government to create a database of all abandoned and derelict vessels across the country and to authorized the Coast Guard and Army Corps of Engineers to remove those vessels.
'Maybe the government shouldn't be selling them at all… or maybe they should be trying to figure out some other way to dispose of them,' said Helton, the retired operations supervisor at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
The U.S. government rarely destroys its own ships. Shipbreaking is a dangerous and labor intensive job. Laborers remove hazardous materials onboard and cut a boat to pieces to later be sold for scrap. There are only three shipbreakers in the country authorized to do business with the U.S. government, and all are located in Brownsville, Texas, where wages are low, and the Environmental Protection Agency imposes strict rules.
'Depending on the weight of the vessel, our cost to process a vessel is going to be somewhere in the region of $200 per ton plus any remediation fees,' said Jeremy Kirchin, chief executive officer of Scrap Metal Services, LLC, one of the nation's three government-authorized shipbreakers. He said that old U.S. Navy ships from Seattle commonly make the journey to his facility.
First, they must be repaired to be seaworthy enough for a last voyage to the southernmost point of Texas, bordering Mexico. The 5,500-nautical-mile journey takes ships down the Pacific Coast, through the Panama Canal up and then through the Gulf of Mexico to Texas. That trip takes over 20 days and often costs over $1 million.
But not all vessels are even worth the journey to destroy.
'It's a life cycle issue,' Helton said. 'That's sort of the dirty secret, is that sometimes it's easier to sell a vessel for cheap than it is to actually properly dispose of it.'
After its multi-agency cleanup in the Thea Foss waterway, the Department of Natural Resources took possession of the Pacific Producer. Unable to give up over half of its biennium budget to destroy the vessel, the department has left it docked at a marina in Seattle since December 2023, racking up nearly $300,000 in moorage, security and pest control fees at Foss Maritime.
Last month, it was taken to a concrete facility in Tacoma that has a dry dock where it will be destroyed this summer. The Department of Natural Resources waited until July this year to get more funding. Destruction will take a month to complete and cost over $1 million. The contractor responsible for disposal will recycle as much material as possible.
Assuming that happens according to schedule, it will have taken nearly two years and nearly $5 million to safely remediate and destroy the Pacific Producer.
InvestigateWest (investigatewest.org) is an independent news nonprofit dedicated to investigative journalism in the Pacific Northwest. Reporter Aspen Ford, a Roy W. Howard fellow, can be reached at aspen@investigatewest.org.
Solve the daily Crossword
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Fox News
36 minutes ago
- Fox News
Radioactive wasp nest discovered by workers at former nuclear bomb site
Officials at a former nuclear bomb site in South Carolina have discovered a radioactive wasp nest. Workers were conducting a routine radiation level check at the Savannah River Site near Aiken when a nest was identified with liquid nuclear waste tanks, The Associated Press (AP) reported. The U.S. Department of Energy filed a report on July 22 stating the nest had 10 times the radiation level that is permitted by federal regulations. Officials said no wasps were found at the nest. "The wasp nest was sprayed to kill wasps, then bagged as radiological waste," the report said. "The ground and surround[ing] area did not have any contamination." It is believed the nest became radioactive through "onsite legacy radioactive contamination" from activity left when the site was fully operational. The site now makes fuel for nuclear plants and cleanup, AP reported. There are still 43 of the underground tanks in use, while eight have been closed. A watchdog group, Savannah River Site Watch, called out the report, saying it lacked details about the source of the contamination and how the wasps encountered it, according to AP. Tom Clements, Savannah River Site Watch executive director, slammed the report in text messages obtained by AP. "I'm as mad as a hornet that SRS didn't explain where the radioactive waste came from or if there is some kind of leak from the waste tanks that the public should be aware of," Clements wrote, as AP reported. The Savannah River Mission Completion monitors the site and provided a statement to the Aiken Standard, a local news outlet. "Upon discovery of the contaminated nest, the immediate area was secured and surveyed; no contamination was found in the area," the statement noted. "I'm as mad as a hornet [about this]." "There were no impacts to workers, the environment or the public." The nest was found in F Tank Farm area, which is "centrally located inside the 310-square-mile Savannah River Site. Generally, wasps travel only a few hundred yards from their nest," it continued. In 1950, President Harry Truman announced that the United States would accelerate the atomic energy program; the plant opened during the start of the Cold War. The plant was in charge of producing "basic materials" in support of American defense programs, primarily tritium and plutonium-239, according to the Savannah River Site. It has produced over 165 million gallons of liquid nuclear waste, reducing it through evaporation to about 34 million gallons, according to Savannah River Mission Completion. Of the remaining 43 tanks, eight have closed. Regarding the radioactive wasp nest, three additional nests have since been discovered at the site, The New York Times reported on Saturday. The Savannah River Site occupies some 310 square miles in the sandhills of South Carolina, near the Georgia border.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
SISD school calendar 25-26: When is the first day of school? Dates for students, parents
The approaching school year already has parents and students back-to-school shopping and looking forward to a new term, including the full calendar of events and holidays. Here are the key dates in the 2025-26 academic year for the Socorro Independent School District. When is the first day of school in Socorro ISD? The first day of school is taking place on Monday, Aug. 4. When is Labor Day break in Socorro ISD? Labor Day will be observed on Monday, Sept. 1. When is fall break in Socorro ISD? Students will have their fall break from Monday, Sept. 29-Friday, Oct. 10. When is Thanksgiving Day break in Socorro ISD? The Thanksgiving holiday break will be observed from Monday, Nov. 24-Friday, Nov. 28. When is Winter break in Socorro ISD? Winter break will be observed from Monday, Dec. 22-Friday, Jan. 2. When is Spring break in Socorro ISD? Student will have their Spring break on Monday, March 16-Friday, March 20. When is the last day of school in Socorro ISD? The last day of classes in the district is Thursday, June 4. What are the important dates for Socorro ISD schools? On Friday, Dec. 19, early release will be scheduled. Parent/teacher conferences will be held on Monday, Oct. 20-Wednesday, Oct. 22. Another round of Parent/teacher conferences will take place on Monday, March 3 and on Wednesday, April 1. The state testing schedule for students for the 2025-26 school year is posted here. Kristian Jaime is the Top Story Reporter for the El Paso Times and is reachable at Kjaime@ This article originally appeared on El Paso Times: Socorro ISD school calendar 25-26: First day of school, holidays, more Solve the daily Crossword


Fox News
2 hours ago
- Fox News
The message about motherhood the media desperately wants you to miss
On a recent podcast, Jen Fulwiler—author, comedian, and mother of six—said something that stopped me in my tracks. "God, I love being a mom," she said with the kind of unselfconscious joy that you don't hear often enough in our culture. She went on: "I was so alone my entire life. I finally have my friends. I finally have my community that I never had. They're my friends and my squad and it's so wonderful." That line—the squad part—hit me like a wave. Because I knew exactly what she meant. Jen has always been an inspiration to me. I was pregnant with my first when she had her sixth, so in many ways, she was already far down a road I was just beginning to consider. She made it look possible, and even more than that, she made it look fun. She wasn't presenting herself as the kind of mother who had always dreamed of a big family, who grew up babysitting or crocheting tiny booties. She was practical and funny and honest—and joyful. It was that joy that stuck with me. I didn't come to motherhood expecting healing. In fact, I came to it wary of what it might stir up. My own childhood wasn't exactly filled with stability or warmth. My mother, who raised me alone, was sick for much of my life. After a long battle with an autoimmune disorder, she passed away when I was sixteen. My father died by suicide when I was nineteen. Just like that, both of my parents were gone. And without siblings, I was essentially alone (though I had incredible cousins who stepped into the breach). When you lose your family of origin so young, you learn to build your own scaffolding. I had to figure out how to survive, how to make decisions, how to be an adult in the world with no safety net. The loneliness of that kind of loss doesn't just come in waves—it settles in. It becomes the background noise of your life. And for a long time, I didn't imagine that would ever change. Then I had children. It didn't happen all at once, but something in me started to shift. Where there had once been a hole, something new was growing. A warmth. A rhythm. A home. There's something almost subversive about saying "I love being a mom" in 2025. We live in a time where motherhood is too often framed as martyrdom or misery. I don't place the burden of healing on my children; that's not their job. But the truth is, they have healed me. Just by being who they are. Just by letting me love them. Just by letting me try. I think of Jen's words "I finally have my friends, my community, my squad" and I smile because I have that now, too. It's not that I don't still parent. I guide. I set boundaries. I say "no" (a lot). I'm not trying to be the "cool mom," and I don't want to be my kids' best friend in the way we sometimes mock on sitcoms. But I am raising people I genuinely enjoy. People I want to be around. And most days, that feeling is mutual. We laugh together. We go on walks. We share inside jokes and read books aloud and blast music in the car. I have a house full of life and energy and connection. I used to dread going home to an empty apartment. Now, I sometimes linger in the car before walking into a loud house just to soak up the peace but I never dread what's inside. Because what's inside is love. Our culture talks a lot about how exhausting motherhood is. And it is. There are days when the dishes don't end and the whining never stops and you feel like all you did was referee arguments and sweep up Cheerios. But that's only part of the story. The other part, the part that doesn't make it onto social media nearly as often, is how profoundly fun it can be. How life-giving. How healing. There's something almost subversive about saying "I love being a mom" in 2025. We live in a time where motherhood is too often framed as martyrdom or misery. You're supposed to talk about how touched-out you are, how much wine you need just to survive the bedtime routine, how suffocating the mental load is. And yes, all of that can be real. But it's not the whole truth. The truth is also this: I love being around my kids. I look forward to them coming home from camp. I count down to the end of the summer—not because I hate their camps, but because I miss them. Come fall, they're back home with me, homeschooling. I genuinely like them. And I like who I am around them. Motherhood gave me more than a new identity. It gave me the kind of family I had long thought I'd never have again. one I didn't know I wanted or needed. And it gave me the opportunity to build something that didn't exist in my past: a home where love is stable, and safety is a given, not a hope. Providing that loving, stable home to my children, that I never had, is healing, too It's strange how often we undersell that. How often we whisper about the joys of parenting like they're secrets we're not supposed to admit in polite company. But I think it's time we started saying it out loud. Not to sugarcoat the hard stuff, but to honor the good. To let women know that motherhood isn't just a series of sacrifices, it can also be a source of strength. It can even be… fun. Jen Fulwiler's words reminded me that I'm not alone in feeling this way. That for those of us who came to motherhood with some bruises and battle scars, there can be unexpected redemption. That maybe, like Jen, we were lonely for a long time. And maybe we found, in our children, not just the next chapter, but our people. My squad. And they're not just healing old wounds, they're helping me write a new story. One that starts not with loss, but with laughter. This column was first published on Substack's The Mom Wars: Musings on parenting, marriage, and relationships from Bethany Mandel & Kara Kennedy.