ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
FOR
LOS ANGELES/LONG BEACH (LA-2)
OCEAN DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE
SITE DESIGNATION
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 9
San Francisco, California
09 OGI
f987
EPA
5 909/
& 198*7.1
Epi
89,
00
-------
-4s
-------
oo\o
- 1 -
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT '
FOR
LOS ANGELES/LONG BEACH (LA-2)
OCEAN DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE
SITE DESIGNATION
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 9
San Francisco, California
A-
iK.
Cooments on this administrative action should be addressed to;
Mr. Patrick J. Cotter
Oceans and Estuaries Section (W-5-3)
O.S. Environmental Protection Agency
215 Fremont Street -
San Francisco, California 94105
Comments must be received no later than:
88NOV _ t 1987 whieh ls MS days after publication of the
notice of availability in the Federal Register for the DEIS.
Copies of this EIS mav be viewed at the following locations;
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Public Information Reference Unit, Room 201 (rear)
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 9, Library
215 Fremont Street
San Francisco, California
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Los Angeles District Library
7th Floor
301 North Los Angeles Street
Los Angeles, California
University Library
California State University
Long Beach, California
U.S. Environmental Protection Ag*n*7
Library, Room 2404 PM-211-A
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington. DC 20460
-------
- ii -
Copiesof the BIS may be -obtained from!
Ocean Duaping Coordinator
Ooeana and Estuaries Section (W-5-3)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
215 Fremont Street ;
San Francisco, California 94105
Further Information contact:
Mr. Patrick J. Cotter
Oceans and Estuaries Section (W-5-3)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
215 Fremont Street
San Francisco, California 94105
(415) 974-0257 or (FTS) 454-0257
Ms. Snannnon E. Cunnlff
Environmental Resources Branch
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Los Angeles District
P.O. Box 2711
Los Angeles, California 90053-2325
(213) 894-0239 or (FTS) 798-0239
, . "ft"
* 9 *• ' * • *'.
-------
- ill -
ABSTRACT
The proposed action is the designation of an ocean disposal
site for dredged material off Los Angeles, California. _The site
will be used in conjunction vitb dredged material disposal for
Federal projects and permits issued under Section 103 of the
Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, as
amended. The Interim site, referred to as LA-2, has been used
for disposal of material dredged from the navigation channels of
Los Angeles and Long Beach Harbors since the 1970s.
Continued use of the site is not expected to cause any
significant long-term adverse environmental effects. The
sediments and the benthic community have been altered by
previous disposal operations at the proposed site. The
smothering effect on the benthos caused by sediment inundation
is expected to continue, but it is not considered to be a
significant environmental Impact at the LA-2 site. Water
quality Impacts, which are temporarily experienced during
disposal operations, are expected to be minimal. Short-term
effects on Inhabitants of the water column will be negligible.
Few of the potentially adverse environmental effects of dredged
material disposal at the proposed site are likely to be
irreversible or involve any irretrievable commitment of
resources. A management plan, to be developed in a subsequent
document by EPA and COE as a major part of the site designation
process, will ensure that environmental impacts do not become
significant.
The seven major alternatives considered in this draft
environmental impact statement are: 1) No Action, 2) Delayed
Action, 3) Landfilling of Port Areas, 4) Landfilllng at Sanitary
Landfills, 5) Beach Nourishment, 6) Ocean Disposal at the LA-2
Site, and 7) Ocean Disposal at Two Alternative Ocean Sites.
After detailed field investigations and analysis of each
alternative, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles
District determined that ocean disposal at a designated dredged
material disposal site was the only viable alternative for the
proposed action. The three sites considered for designation
include: the LA-2 site, a shallow water site, and a deep water
site. The Preferred Alternative Identified in this
environmental impact statement is the designation of the LA-2
site for continued use. This decision is based on the lack of
significant long-term environmental Impacts at the LA-2 site,
the potential for disposal activities to adversely affect the
alternative sites, and the demonstrated need for an ocean
disposal site for dredged material.
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
FOR
LOS ANGELES/LONG BEACH (LA-2}
OCEAN DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE
SITE DESIGNATION
Contract Supervision by
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Los Angeles District
P.O. Box 271t
Los Angeles, California 90053
(213) 694-5606
M. Bolt, P.E.
Regulatory Branch
Reviewed by:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 9
Water Management Division
215 Fremont Street
Harry''Seraydarian
Director
Water Management Division
Approved and Submitted by:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 9
215 Fremont Street
San Francisco, California 94105
(415) 974-8153
E. Ayres
Regional Administrator
SSI
-------
- v -
TABLE OF CONTENTS
COVER SHEET i
ABSTRACT Ill
AGENCY CONCURRENCE Iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS v
LIST OF FIGURES . viii
LIST OF TABLES x
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS xiii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5-1
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. General Introduction 1-1
1.1.1 Hiatorieal Background 1-1
1.1.2 Dredged Material Permitting 1-4
1.1.3 Dredging Operations 1-6
1.2. Purpose of and Need for Action 1-7
1.3. Proposed Action 1-8
1.1. Areas of Controversy 1-9
1.5. Issues to be Resolved 1-10
1.6. Regulatory Framework 1-12
1.7. Relationship to Previous NEPA Actions, or
Other Facilities That May be Affected by
Desienation of the Disposal Site 1-18
CHAPTER 2. ALTERNATIVES
2.1. Description of Alternatives 2-1
2.1.1. Preferred Alternative (LA-2 ODMDS) 2-1
2.1.2. No Action Alternative 2-3
2.1.3* Delayed Action Alternative 2-3
2.1.4. Landfilling Alternatives in Port Areas 2-4
2.1.5. Land Disposal Alternatives at Sanitary
Landfills 2-5
2.1.6. Beach Nourishment Alternative 2-6
2.1.7. Alternative Ocean Disposal Sites 2*7
-------
- vi -
2.2. Discussion of Alternatives , 2-9
2.2.1. Alternatives Not Considered for Further
Analysis 2-9
2.2.2. Compliance of the Three ODHDS Alternatives
with General Criteria for the Selection
Of Sites (40 CFR 228.5) 2-9
2.2.3. Comparison of the Three ODMDS to BPA's 11
Specific Criteria for Site Selection
10 CFR 228.6(a) 2-12
2.2.4. Selection of the Preferred Alternative 2-12
CHAPTER 3. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
3.1
Ocean Disposal Site Characteristics ................. 3-1
3.1.1. Proposed Use of the Site .................... 3-3
3.1.2. Existence and. Effects of Current and
Previous Discharges and Duoping in the
Area, Including Cumulative Effects
40 CFR 228.6UX7) ............... . ...... .... 3-3
3.1.3. Feasibility of Surveillance and
Monitoring 40 CFR 228.6(a)(5) ............... 3-5
3.2. Physical Environment ........... '*: ..... . ............. 3-6
3.2.1. Meteorology and. Air Quality .......... .. ..... 3-6
3.2.2. Physical Oceanography of the Southern
California Bight 40 CFR 228.6(a)(6) ......... 3-8
3.2.3* Water Column Characteristics
40 CFR 228(a)(9) ............................ 3-13
3.2.4. Regional Geology ............ ................ 3-22
3.2.5. Sediment Characteristics .................... 3-24
3.3. Biological Environment ........................... ... 3-32
3.3.1. Plankton Community .......................... 3-32
3.3.2. Kelp Conmunity .............................. 3-35
3-3.3- Benthic Biology ............................. 3-38
3.3.4. Fish ........................................ 3-47
3.3.5. Coastal Birds ............................... 3-53
3.3.6. Marine Mammals .............................. 3-54
3.3.7. Rare, Threatened and Endangered Species ..... 3-56
3.3.8. Marine Sanctuaries and Areas of Special
Biological Significance ................. .... 3-60
3.3*9. Potentiality, for the Development or
Recruitment of Nuisance Species in
the Disposal Site 40 CFR 228.6UH10) ....... 3-62
3.4. Soeioeeonomlc Environment ......................... .. 3-63
3.4.1. Commercial Fishing .......................... 3*63
3.4.2. Commercial Shipping ......................... 3-68
-------
- vii -
3.1.3- Oil and Gas Development 3-70
3.4.X. Military Usage % 3-75
3.M.S. Recreational Activities 3-76
3.4.6. Cultural Resources 3-83
3.4.7. Public Health and Velfare 3-83
CHAPTER 4. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
4.1. Introduction 4-1
4.2. LA-2 ODMDS Alternative (Preferred
Alternative) 4-9
4.2.1. Effects on Physical Environment 4-9
4.2.2. Effects on Biological Environment 4-13
4.2.3* Effects on Socioeconomlc Environment 4-19
4.3. No Action Alternative 4-23
4.4. Shallow Water Site ..< 4-24
4.4.1. Effects on the Physical Environment 4-24
4.4.2. Effects on the Biological Environment 4-26
4.4.3. Effects on the Socioeconomic Environment .... 4-28
4.5. Deep Water Site 4-30
4.5.1. Effects on the Physical Environment 4-31
.4.5.2. Effects on the Biological Environment 4-32
4.5.3. Effects on the Socioeconomic Environment .... 4-33
',
4,6. Management of the Disposal Site 4-35
4.7. Relationship BetweenShort-term Use and Long-term
Resource Uses ,.... 4-37
4.8. Irreversible or Irretrievable Commitment
of Resources 4-38
CHAPTER 5. COORDINATION
5.1. Public Involvement 5-1
5.2. Interageney Workshop 5-1
5-3. Formal Consultations 5-21
5.4. Requested Reviewers 5-21
CHAPTER 6. List of Preoarers 6-1
CHAPTER 7. References 7-1
-------
APPENDIX A. REPORT OF FIELD SURVEY
APPENDIX B. DETAILED FIELD SURVEY DATA (not included with EIS;
available upon request from COE, LA Office)
APPENDIX C. NUMERICAL SIMULATION OF DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL
-------
- ix -
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
S-1. Hap of the Project Region S-2
S-2. Map of the Project Area S-3
S-3. Map of Major Biological Resources in the
Project Area S-7
S-4. Major Socioeconomic Features in the
Project Area S-8
1-1. Map of the Project Area • 1-2
1-2. Evaluation Process for Dredge Material
Permit Review 1-5
1-3. Other Major Facilities in the Project
Vicinity 1-19
2-1. Location of Alternative Disposal Sites
in the San Pedro Shelf and Basin 2-2
3-1. Location of-Discharge Outfalls and Other
Ocean Disposal Sites in the Project Area ........ 3-2
3-2. Generalized Depiction of Typical Wind Regimes
Offshore of Palos Verdes Peninsula 3-7
3-3. Three Major Currents which Influence the Southern
California Bight 3-9
3-4. Seasonal Variations in Currents of the
Southern California Bight 3-11
3-5. Average Seasonal Variation of Temperature in
Channel Islands Area between Santa Catalina
Island and San Clemente Island .3-14
3-6. Geological Features in the Vicinity of
Palos Verdes 3-23
3-7. Location of Major Sediment Types of San Pedro
Shelf and Direction of Bottom Transport During
an Upwelllng Event 3-26
3-8. Location of Federal and State Biological
Reserves in the Project Area 3-61
3-9. Principal Commercial Fish Species and Average
Annual Catch by Block in Project Area 3-66
-------
LIST OF FIGURES (CONTINUED)
Figure
P age
3-10. Commercial Shipping Lanes and Zones of
Military Operation in the Project Area 3-73
3-11* Oil and Gas Development in the Project Area 3-74
3-12. Sportfiahing Resources in the Project Area 3-78
3-13- Principal Recreational Areas in the
Project Area 3-32
3-U. Other Cultural Features of the Project Area 3-84
-------
- xi -
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
S-1. Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures
for the LA-2 Site S-13
S-2. Summary of Impacts .and Mitigation Measures for
the Mo Action Alternative S-15
S-3• Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for
the Shallow Water Alternative S-16
S-4. Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for
the Deep Hater Alternative S-18
1-1. Permits Issued by the COE for Disposal of
Dredged Material at the LA-2 Site 1-3
1-2. Sumoary of Compliance of Alternatives with
Environmental Protection Statutes and Other
Environmental Requirements 1-13
2-1. General Comparison Between Geographical
Position, Depth of Water, Bottom Topography,
and Distance from the Coast for the
Alternative Ocean Disposal Sites 2-8
2-2. Comparison of Alternative Ocean Disposal
Sites Based on EPA's 11 Specific Site
Designation Criteria .. 2-13
3-1. Concentrations of Trace Metals as Suspended
Particulates in the Water Column in
Micrograms Per Liter (ug/1) 3-21
3-2. Grain Size Distribution for the LA-2 and . •
Reference Sites 3-27
3-3. Concentrations of Trace Metals in Sediments,
Micrograms Per Day Dry Weight (ug/g), Mean
Range 3-29
3-4. Concentrations of Hydrocarbons in Sediments in
Micrograms per Gran Dry Weight (ug/g) 3-30
3-5. Common Phytoplankton Species of the Study
Area 3-33
3-6. Major Zooplankton Taxa in the Southern
California Bight 3*36
3-7. Dominant Benthic Infauna of the San Pedro
Shelf from 9.3 Fathoms (17 m) to 131 Fathoms
(240m) 3-^0
-------
- xii -
Table ' Page
3-8. Dominant Benthie Infauna of the Slope
Off Huntlngton and Laguna Beaches from
88 Fathoms (161 m) to 264 Fathoms (520 a) 3-41
3-9- Dominant Benthie Infauna of the San Pedro
Basin from 340 Fathoms (622 m) to 485
Fathoms (888 m) 3-42
3-10. Dominant Epifauna of the LA-2 and Reference
Sites 3-46
3-11. Common Fish Larvae of the Southern California
Bight 3-49
3-12. Families of Fish Inhabiting the Pelagic
Environment in the Southern California Bight ... 3-52
3-13. Marine Mammals of the Southern California
Bight 3-55
3-14. Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species of the
Southern California Bight 3-57
3-15- Weight and Value of Landings of Commercial Fish
at Los Angeles Area Ports and in California,
1981-1983 3-64
3-16. Value of Commercial Fish Landing by Port, Los
Angeles Area, 1981-1983 3-65
3-17. Annual Catch in Pounds of Commercial Fish by
Blocks of Origin in the Los Angeles Area, 1976,
1977 and 1981 3-67
3-18. Waterborne Commerce and Projected Cargo
Capacity at the Ports of Los Angeles and Long
Beach , 3-69
3-19. Cargo Projections of Waterborne Cargo for the
Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach 3-71
3-20. 1960-2020 Total Acreage Requirements 3-72
3-21. Existing and Projected Number of Participation
Days for Ocean-related Recreational Activities
for Los Angeles and Orange Counties, 1980, 1985
and 1990 3-77
3-22. Number of Sportfish Caught and Number of Anglers
on Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessels for Each
Port in the Los Angeles Area, 1977 and 1981 ....
3-79
-------
- xiii -
Table
3-23-
4-2,
5-1,
5-2,
Number of Sportflsh Caught in Each California
Department of Fish and Game Block in the
Vieinity of the LA-2 ODMDS in 1977
Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures
for the LA-2 Site
Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures
for the Ho Action Alternative
Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures
for the Shallow Water Alternative ,
Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures
for the Deep Water
Issues Identified During the Scoping Process ..
Attendees at the Interagency Workshop on
Ocean Disposal at the LA-2 and LA-5 Sites
Page
3-81
4-5
4-7
5-11
5-18
-------
- xiv -
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
ASBS Areas of Special Biological Significance
BLM U.S. Bureau of Land Management
CalCOPI California Cooperative Oceanic Fisheries Investigations
CDFG California Department of Pish and Game
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
COS O.S. Army Corps of Engineers
CSWQCB California State Water Quality Control Board
CSVRCB California State Water Resources Control Board
DO Dissolved oxygen
DOE D.S. Department of Energy
SIR environmental impact report
BIS environmental impact statement
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
PVS D.S. Flsb and Wildlife Service
JWPCP Joint Water Pollution Control Project
LACSD Los Angeles County Sanitation District
LPC limited permissible concentration
MMS U.S. Minerals Management Service
MPRSA Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of
1972
HEPA Rational Environmental Policy Act
MMFS National Marine Fisheries Service
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NOI Notice of Intent
OCS outer continental shelf
ODMDS Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Sites
-------
- XV -
^
FAB Port icceas Routes
FOB polychlorlnated biphenyls
RCBA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
SCCHBP Southern California Coastal Vater Research Project
SHFO State Historic Preservation Officer
IDS total dissolved solids
TSP total suspended partlculates
TSS Traffic Separation Schemes
DSCG U.S. Coast Guard
As arsenic
B boron
Cd cadmium
Co cobalt
CO carbon monoxide
Cr chromium
Cu copper
Fe iron .
HC hydrocarbons
Eg mercury
Mb molybdenum
Mn manganese
HOX nitrogen oxides
Oz ozone
Fb lead
pH hydrogen ion concentration
Se selenium
Zn zinc
-------
cm/a
ft
ga*
g/C/m2/day
km
m
mg/1
fflg/m2
am
m3
nai
ppt
ug/g
ug/kg
ug/1
urn
- xvi -
List of Measurements
centimeters per second
feet
grams per square meter
grams per Centigrade degree per square meter per day
kilometers
meters
milligrams per liter
milligrams per square meter
millimeters
cubic meters
nautical miles
parts per thousand
microgram per gram
microgram per kilogram
microgram per liter
micro meters
Conversions
1 fathom = 0.547 meters
1 meter = 0.3043 feet
1 nautical mile = 0.54 kilometers
1 kilometer a 1.609 statute miles
cubic meters = 0.7646 cubic yards
-------
S-1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
S.1. INTRODUCTION
This Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) evaluates the
designation of an ooean dredge material disposal site (ODMDS)
located southwest of the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach in
southern California (Figures S-1, 3-2}. The Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), Region 9 is issuing this EIS, in close
cooperation with the Army Corps of Engineers, (COE) Los Angeles
District, according to Title I of the Marine Protection,
Research and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA) of 1972 and as required by
EPA'a national policy on the designation of ocean disposal sites
(39 FR 37119, October 24, 1974).
The EIS has been prepared to document compliance with EPA's
site designation criteria at 40 CFR 228. A full range of
alternatives has been examined to determine the best means for
managing ocean disposal of dredge material. The goal of this
management program is to authorize disposal of dredge material
without unreasonable degradation of the ocean with respect to
human health and the marine environment.
The Preferred Alternative is to designate the LA-2 site, as
the site for disposal of dredged material from the Ports of Los
Angeles and Long Beach. This site has been used as an interim
disposal site since the 1970s. Maintenance dredging of channels
and expansion of dock capacities are essential to sustain
economic growth and strategic use of the ports. The designated
site can be used for the disposal of dredged material from
Federal projects and permit applications only after the
applicant establishes that the dredged material will not exceed
the capacity of the site and that the material is in compliance
with EPA and COE criteria and regulations. The LA-2 site and
the two alternative ocean disposal sites were evaluated
according to EPA's site selection criteria (40 CFR 228.5 and
228.6). Ho advantages were found in moving the disposal site
from the interim LA-2 location to a shallow water or a deep
water location.
A wide range of alternatives were considered in the EIS to
determine the most suitable disposal site. These alternatives
Included:
A. Ocean Disposal at the LA-2 Site (Preferred Alternative),
B. Ho Action,
C. Delayed Action,
D. Landfllling in Port Areas,
B. Landfllling at Sanitary Landfill Sites,
F. Beach louriahment,
G. Ooean Disposal at a Shallow Water Site, and
B. Ooean Disposal at a Deep Water Site.
Preliminary analyses Indicated that alternatives other
than ocean disposal were either inadequate, not feasible, or
more environmentally damaging. The major alternatives evaluated
-------
S-2
z
o
6
ui
a
o
IU
o
£C
O,
u.
o
*
to
UI
ec
-------
S-3
PALOS VERDES V^&^l
. • . PENINSULA
PORT OF
LONG BEACH
OEEP WATER REGION
SANTA CATAUNAL
SCALE M NAUTICAL MLES
FIGURE S-2. MAP OF THE PROJECT AREA
JWPCP: LOS ANGELES COUNTY JOINT WATER POLLUTION CONTROL PROJECT AT WHITES POINT
-------
S-4
,,•
through detailed environmental analyses were ocean disposal at
the LA-2 site, a shallow water site, and a deep water site. The
other alternatives were considered infeaaible for the adequate
disposal of dredged material from the Los Angeles and Long Beach
Harbor areas.
S.2. PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
The three potential ocean disposal sites are located on the
coastal shelf off the Palos Verdes Peninsula* on the slope
leading to the San Pedro Basin, and in the San Pedro Basin.
They are shallow water, near-slope, and deep water regions,
respectively. The near-sTope site is the location of the LA-2
interim disposal site and is referred to as the LA-2 site. This
area of the Southern California Bight is characterized by a
narrow mainland shelf followed by a complex series of basins and
ridges.. Prominent sediment deposits of sands and muds are
present on the shelf, basins, and intervening slopes. Numerous
earthquakes have been reported in the offshore area between Los
Angeles and Orange Counties and Santa Catalina Island.
Physical oceanographic conditions in the Southern
California Bight are dominated by the California current system.
This system consists of the California Current, the California
Undercurrent, the Southern California Countercurrent, upwelling
conditions present from March to June, and associated eddies
that affect coastal areas. The oceanic currents that flow over
the shelf are complex and variable. Surface currents are
influenced by wind patterns, while the deeper currents are
influenced by the tides, geostropbic currents, and complex
submarine topography.
Water quality at the LA-2 site is indistinguishable from
the water quality of nearby areas. Temperature, dissolved
oxygen, pH, salinity, turbidity, and concentrations of metals,
oil and grease, and chlorinated hydrocarbons are not
significantly different from a nearby reference site. Water
quality at the deep water site is expected to be similar to that
of the LA-2 site. Water quality at the shallow water site is a
function of the proximity to the Los Angeles County Joint Water
Pollution Control Project (JWPCP) sewage outfall at Whites Point
on the Palos Terdes Peninsula. The effluent discharged from
these outfalls impacts the quality of nearshore water. Disposal
of dredge material at the shallow water site, although small in
comparison to total effluent output, may cause cumulative
impacts in the immediate area.
Sediment quality at the LA-2 site is significantly
different from a nearby reference site. A greater range of fine
and coarse sediments are present, they are more poorly sorted,
and concentrations of metals, pesticides and polychlorinated
biphenyla (PCBs) are higher. This is a result of past disposal
activities during the Interim designation period.
-------
S-5
Sediments at tbe deep water site are relatively undisturbed
by previous aotivitiest although dissolved oxygen levels would
be low as a'result of natural conditions at great depths. The
deeper sediments, composed of silts and clays, are expected to
be finer than the LA-2 site. Levels of contaminants would be
low; however, concentrations of some metals are naturally high
in deep basin sediments because these ions are released in
reduced, oxygen-depleted environments.
Sediment quality at the shallow water site, not impacted by
the JVPCP sewage outfalls, is coarser than the other two sites
because sand Is the main component. Near the outfalls, the
sediment is finer and sediment quality is degraded by higher
levels of biological oxygen demand, heavy metals, pesticides,
PCBs, and total organic carbon.
A field survey conducted for this EIS Indicates that
disposal activities have caused significant changes in tbe
characteristics of bottom sediments. If permanent designation
were approved for dredged material disposal, sediment
degradation would be a continuing effect at the LA-2 site, while
it would be a new effect at tbe two alternative sites. At the
shallow water site, where sediment quality has been degraded by
discharges of municipal waste, sediment quality would be
additionally degraded by disposal of dredged material.
S-3. BIOLOGICAL BNVIHOHMEHT
The benthic community will be affected most by disposal
activities at any of tbe designated disposal sites. Benthic
infauna and eplfauna of the LA-2 site are typical of the
southern California slope community (Jones and Fauchald, 197?)
although diversity is depressed in comparison to a nearby
reference site. Tbe benthlo community of the deep water site is
low in biomaas and diversity (Bartman and Barnard, 1958;
Pauchald and Jones, 1978a), while* the benthic organisms at the
shallow water site vary directly with proximity to the Vhites
Point outfalls (SCCWBP, 1973).
" Disposal of dredged material may cause lower species
diversity and species abundance of Infauna, epifauna and
demersal fish at each site. Direct causes of these changes are
smothering, alteration of sediment characteristics, tbe
potential increase in the concentration of toxic substances, and
Increased body tissue burdens of some chlorinated hydrocarbons.
This would be a continuation of tbe observed conditions at the
LA-2 site, but these effects would be new at tbe two alternative
sites. The severity of the effects which might result from the
Introduction of toxic substances may be less significant at the
shallow water site, where th-e benthos is already degraded
considerably by discharge of municipal effluents. Impact's to
deep water infauna and eplfauna may be less than presently
occurring at the LA-2 site because material reaching tbe deep
basin will be dispersed over a greater area.
-------
S-6
Upper water column organisms, such as plankton, pelagic
fish, plnnepeds and cetaceans are not expected to be affected by
disposal activities in the ocean. Host of the threatened and
endangered species found in southern California waters do not
require any of the potential disposal areas for critical
habitat. However, because the shallow water site is close to
shore, feeding and nesting activities of the California least
tern and brown pelican, as well as inhabitants of nearshore kelp
beds, could be affected.
There are three State ecological reserves, eight State
marine life refuges, a State reserve for all of Santa Catalina
Island, the Channel Islands national Marine Sanctuary, and a
Matlonal Wildlife Refuge at Seal Beach in the vicinity of the
LA-2 site (Figure S-3). Seven of the State reserves and refuges
are also designated as Areas of Special Biological Significance.
The closest of these reserves, the Abalone Cove Ecological
Reserve, is located approximately 5.1 nautical miles (nmi) (10
kilometers or km) north of the LA-2 site. This small area of
coastal kelp beds would probably not be impacted by the ODMDS
disposal activities because prevailing currents would carry
contaminants away from this area. All of the other designated
areas of biological significance are 15 or more nmi (28 km) from
the LA-2 site* No significant environmental Impacts are
expected to affect any of these State or Federal areas.
S.4. SOCIOECOHOMIC EHVIHOMMEHT
The Los Angeles area la an important center for commercial
fishing. In 1983, landings at Los Angeles area ports accounted
for 51 percent of the weight and 46 percent of the total value
of all landings in California (COE, 1985). Locally, the most
important commercial fisheries are northern anchovy, Pacific
bonito, jack mackerel, Pacific mackerel, rock crab, market
squid, and sea urchin. The effects on commercial fishing are
expected to be negligible.
Los Angeles and Long Beach Harbors play a very important
role In the nation's waterborne commerce. More than 8,000
vessels call at the two ports annually and the number is
expected to Increase to 16,000 If dredging plans are completed
(COB, 1985). Vessel traffic in the harbor vicinity is routed
through a system of Traffic Separation Schemes (TSS) and Port
Access Routes (PAH) established by the U.S. Coast Guard (DSCG)
to enhance safety (Figure S-4). The LA-2 site is located within
a mile of the southbound lane of the TSS and over a mile from
the southwestern corner of a precautionary area.
The dlspos'al of dredge material could present two potential
hazards to commercial navigation Including mounding within the
disposal site, and interference of disposal barges with vessel
traffic. USCG has expressed concern that disposal barges may
cause confusion for traffic as they cross the inbound lane of
the TSS to reach the disposal site. COE has incorporated
-------
S-7
ui
cc
Q
Ui
O
C
a.
UI
z
CO
iU
o
CO
UI
ff
J
C
o
o
o
o
CC
o
u.
o
n
O
UI
CC
-------
S-8
i
III
O
X
Ul
O
o
I
p
O
o
Ul
cc
<
o
UJ
o
cc
Q.
CO
tu
tc
H
IU
U.
U
O
§
a
UJ
2
u
o
CO
a
O
m
ui
-------
S-9
ui
o
a.
CO
o
UJ
(C
0.
2
o
-------
S-10
special conditions Into all permits to dispose Materials at LA-2
site to avoid potentially confusing situations. These
conditions Include: 1) disposal in tbe approved site as far
from the snipping lanes as possible, 2) notification of dumping
to the TJSCGi and 3) aubnittal by the permittee of a disposal
report upon completion of the project. Other conditions may be
imposed aa needed. Potential for vessel conflict Is
considerably less if the shallow water site is used for
disposal; however, mounding problems may be greater.
The area offshore of southern California is one of the
nation's largest naval operating locations. Havy exercises are
conducted continuously throughout the year and involve
substantial vessel movement near the Ports of Los Angeles and
Long Beach. Most of the military operations take place far
beyond the immediate coastal areas, but military vessels travel
between the ports on a regular basis. Disposal activities will
not pose a significant danger or cause Interference with
military vessels. Potential impacts would be lowest at the
shallow water site.
Oil and gas activities offshore of Los Angeles and Orange
Counties are regulated by State and Federal agencies. Six
artificial islands off tbe Port of Long Beach, two platforms,
and two marine terminals are located within the State waters.
Offshore structures in Federal waters include two platforms, and
one production facility approximately 8.8 nmi (16 km) east of
the LA-2 site. .
Federal leases have been awarded for 15 full or partial
tracts and the nearest leased area is approximately four miles
east of the LA-2 site. Helther the tract containing the LA-2
site nor any tracts in the general vicinity were leased during
Lease Sale 80 held in Ootober 1981. Since the tract containing
the LA-2 site was not sold in the lease offering, direct
interference between drilling and disposal activities is not
anticipated in the foreseeable future. The shallow water site
is located within the State designated oil and gas sanctuary and
no impacts to oil and gas development are anticipated if this
site is selected for disposal. The likelihood of future oil or
gas development in the vicinity of the LA-2 site remains
uncertain.
In 1980, Los Angeles and Orange Counties experienced 81
•illlon participation days of ocean-related recreational
activities (California Department of Parks and Recreation,
1984). This demand la expected to grow by more than 10 percent
during the 1980-1990 period. Activities which are expected to
experience highest growth Include sailing, sportfishing, power
boating, and scuba diving. The recreational activity most
likely to be affected by disposal activities is pleasure -
boating. lo incidents have been reported during the nine years
that the LA-2 site has been used as an interim disposal site.
Impacts on other recreational activities are considered to be
minimal.
-------
3-11
The offshore region of southern California is known to
contain numerous cultural resources. Over 450 known historic
shipwrecks have occurred in southern California, most of them
near Los Angeles or San Diego. Neither the tract containing the
Ll-2 site nor any tract in the immediate vicinity of the site
has been identified as a location for historic shipwrecks or
other cultural resources. Potential impacts to cultural
resources are greater at the shallow water site and nonexistent
at the deep water site.
is stated in MPRSA, no materials considered to be hazardous
may be disposed at an ODMDS. Tbereforef the potential for
health hazards is considered to be minimal because increases in
disposal activities beyond those permitted in the past, several
years are not anticipated. Potential impacts to human safety
are considered very low because strict monitoring of traffic by
DSCG in the zone of operation will be maintained. Public health
and safety effects are similar at the two alternative ocean
sites.
S.5. MAJOR CONCLUSIONS
1. The preferred alternative is the formal designation of the
Li-2 site as an ODMDS for continuing use according to EPA
directive 40 CPR 228.5 Designation of
either of the other sites would introduce these conditions
as new environmental impacts. Therefore, the LA-2 site is
the most environmentally suitable site for disposal of
dredged material, primarily because the environmental
effects of disposal activities already exist and designation
will prevent degradation of other areas.
5. Disposal is not expected to have significant adverse effects
on other aspects, of the physical and biological environment.
6. The effects of dredged material disposal would add
significantly to existing degradation of the benthic
environment at the alternative shallow water site, which is
presently affected by large discharges of municipal waste.
-------
S-12
7. Disposal Is not expected to have significant effects on
socloeconomlc resources for any of the three alternative
sites.
8. The aoderate( localized environmental effects of ocean
disposal of dredged material are considered acceptable in
light of the economic benefits of dredging and the
infeasibility and/or adverse environmental effects of
alternative disposal methods.
Tables S-1, S-2, S-3. and S-4 summarize the impacts and
potential mitigation measures for disposal at the LA-2 site,
no action and disposal at the shallow water or deep vater
sites. Classes of environmental impacts used in these
tables are defined as:
- Class I - Significantly adverse Impacts that cannot be
mitigated to insignificance. This means that no measures
could be taken to avoid or reduce these adverse effects
to Insignificant or negligible levels.
- Class II - Significant adverse Impacts that can be
mitigated to Insignificance. These impacts are
potentially similar in significance to Class I impacts,
but the severity of the impact can be reduced or avoided
by implementation of mitigation measures discussed under
each heading.
- Class III - Adverse but insignificant impacts, or no
effect anticipated. No mitigation measures are required
for these Impacts or effects.
» Class IV - Beneficial Impacts. These impacts would
improve conditions relative to the preproject baseline
conditions. They are further subdivided as significant
or insignificant where applicable.
Chapter 4 of this BIS describes these impacts in detail and
discusses their significance.
-------
S-13
Table S-l. Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for the. LA-2 Site
(Refer to text In Chapter 4 for detailed explanation.)
- Impacts
Potential Mitigation
Class
Description I
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
.
Air Quality
¥ater Quality
. turbidity, DO Z
• trace metals,
DDTs, PCBs, oils
and greases Z
Geology
- sediment grain size Z
. sediment quality Z
JIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT
Plankton
Kelp
Benthic Inf auna Z
Benthic Epifauna Z
Demersal Fish Z
Pelagic Fish
Coastal Birds
Marine Mammals
Threatened and
Endangered Species
Marine Sanctuaries
and ASBS
(1) s Scope Definitions
S a site, 1000 yd
L a local, up to 1
R s region, beyond
(2) = Term
II III IV
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Scooe (1)
SLR
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Term (2)
Measures
S E
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
No mitigation
measures proposed
because effects
are short-term.
••
(CONTINUED)
(914 m) radius from center of designated ODMDS.
ami outside of site.
local vicinity of ODMDS.
„
S • abort, less than or equal to 5 hours.
B s extended, greater than 5 hours.
-------
S-14
Table S-l (continued).
Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for the
LA-2 Site (Refer to text in Chapter 4 for detailed
explanation.)
Impacts
Class
Description I II III IV
SOCIOECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT
Commercial Fishing
• fish stocks I
- fishing fleet safety X
Commercial Shipping • X
- safety X
- mounding X
- port access X
Oil and Gas Development
- present drilling X
- future drilling X
•
• future oil transport X
Military Usage
- traffic interference X
- naval ship access X
Sport Pishing X
Other Recreational
Activities X
Cultural Uses X
Public Health and Welfare
- health X
- safety X
Scot* (1)
SLR
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Term (2)
S E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
(1) a Scope Definitions
Potential Mitigatiot
Measures
Siting facilities
away from immediate
, disposal area.
S « site, 1000 yd (914 a) radius from center of designated ODMDS.
L r local i up to 1 nmi outside of site.
R s region, beyond local vicinity of ODMDS.
(2) r Term
S s short, less than or equal to 5 hours.
B s extended, greater than 5 hours.
-------
S-15
Table S-2. Summary of lotpacta and Mitigation Measures for the.No Action
Alternative (Refer to text in Chapter 4 for detailed explanation.)
Impacts
Potential Mitigation
Measures
Class
Description
I II in IT
Scope (1)
SLR
Tern (2)
S
E
PHISICAL ENVIRONMENT
BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT
50CIOECONOMIC ENVIRON-
MENT
Commercial Shipping
and Military Use
Public Health, Safety,
Aesthetics
(1) a Scope Definitions
S = site, 1000 yd (914 m) radius from center of designated ODMDS.
L s local, up to 1 nml outside of site.
R • region, beyond local vicinity of ODMDS.
(2) a Term
S a short, less than or equal to 5 hours.
E s extended, greater than 5 hours.
-------
S-16
fable S-3. Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for the Shallow Water
Alternative (liefer to text in Chapter 4 for detailed explanation.)
Impacts Potential Hltigatioi
Measures
Class
Description I II III IV
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
Air Quality I
Vater Quality
• turbidity, DO X
• trace metals, DDTs,
PCBs, oil and grease X
Geology
. sediment grain size X
. sediment quality X
BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT
Plankton X
Kelp X
Benthic Inf auna X
Benthic Epifauna X
Demersal Fish X
Pelagic Fish X
Coastal Birds X
Marine Mammals X
Threatened and
Endangered Species X
Marine Sanctuaries
and ASBS X
Scooe (1)
SLR
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Tern (2)
S E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
(CONTINUED)
(1) « Scope Definitions
S = site, 1000 yd (914 m) radius from center of designated ODMDS.
L s local, up to 1 ami outside of site.
R s region, beyond local vicinity of ODMDS.
(2) = Term
S = short, less than or equal to 5 hours.
E s extended, greater than 5 hours.
-------
S-17
Table S-3 (continued).
Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for tbe
Shallow Hater Alternative (Refer to text in Chapter 4
for detailed explanation.)
Impacts Potential Mitigation
Measures
Class
Description I II III IV
30CIOECOHOMIC ENVIRONMENT
Commercial Fishing
- fish stocks I
- fishing fleet safety X
Commercial Shipping X
- safety X
Oil and Gas Development X
Military Usage X
Sport Fishing X
Boating
- mounding and
interference X
Other Recreational
.Activities X
Cultural Uses X
Public Health and
Welfare
- health X
- safety X
Aesthetics X
Scope (1)
SLR
X X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
Tern (2)
S E
X
X Disposal only
during daylight
hours to reduce
accidents.
X
X .
X
X
X
X
X
X Close coordinati or
with the SHPO to
prevent damage.
X
X Disposal during
daylight hours of
weekdays only.
X
(1) * Scope Definitions
S * site, 1000 yd (91* m) radius from center of designated ODMDS.
L a local, up to 1 nml outside of site.
B • region, beyond local vicinity of ODMDS.
(2) = Term
S a short, less than or equal to 5 hours.
B s extended, greater than 5 hours.
-------
S-18
Table S-4. Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for the.Deep Vater
Alternative (Refer to text in Chapter 4 for detailed explanation.)
. Impacts
Potential Mitigation
Measures
Class
Description I
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
Air Quality
Vater Quality
- turbidity, DO X
- trace metals, DDT 3,
PCBs, oils and
greases I
Geology
- sediment grain size X
- sediment quality X
JIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT
Plankton
Kelp
Benthic Inf auna X
Bentbic Epifauna X
Demersal Fish X
Pelagic Fish
Coastal Birds
Marine Mammals
Threatened and
Endangered Species
Marine Sanctuaries and
ASBS
(1) = Scope Definitions
S s site, 1000 yd (914
L s local, up to 1 nmi
II III IV
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Scope (1)
SLR
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Term (2)
S E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
(CONTINUED)
m) radius from center of designated ODMDS.
outside of site.
R s region, beyond local vicinity of ODMDS.
(2) * Term
S » short, less than or equal to 5 hours.
B a extended, greater
than 5 hours.
-------
S-19
Table S-4 (continued).
Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for toe
Deep Water Alternative (Refer to text in Chapter 4 for
detailed explanation.)
Impacts Potential Mitigatioc
Measures
Class
Description I II III IV
SOCIOECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT
Commercial Fishing Z
Commercial Shipping
- interference Z
• port access Z
Oil and Gas Development
- present Z
- future Z
Military Usage Z
Sport Fishing Z
Other Recreational
Activities Z
Cultural Uses Z
Public Health and
Welfare
- health Z
- safety Z
Aesthetics Z
Scope (1)
SLR
Z Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Term (2)
S E
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z Site oil facili-
ties in part of
tract far removed
from disposal site.
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z Disposal during
daylight hours of
weekdays only.*
Z
(1) = Scope Definitions
S a site! 1000 yd (914 m) radius from center of designated ODKOS.
L a local« up to 1 ami outside of site.
R 3 region, beyond local vicinity of ODMDS.
(2) 3 Tern
, Ss abort, less than or equal to 5 hours.
Z s extended, greater than 5 hours.
-------
-------
- 1-1 .
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. CBHEHAL INTRODUCTION
1.1.1. Historical Background
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) designated
the LA-2 ocean dredged material disposal site (ODMDS) (Figure
1-1) as aa interim site for disposal of dredged material off Los
Angeles, California (42 PR 2462, January 11, 1977). This was
made possible through EPA's authority under Section 102 of the
Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA) of 1972
(33 O.S.C. 1401 et sec.). The Act established a permit program
for ocean disposal of dredged and nondredged material that
mandated the determination of environmental impacts, designation
of sites, enforcement of permit conditions and management of the
disposal sites. EPA's regulations pertaining to MPRSA require
that, during the interim period, the effects of dredged material
disposal on the marine environment be fully considered prior to
final designation of a site.
Interim designation was originally Issued for a three year
period, but EPA extended the interim designation of the LA-2
site in 1980 and Issued a schedule for final designation by
February 1, 1983 as the result of litigation (National Wildlife
Federation v. Costle 14 BBC 1600, et seq. 1980). Subsequently,
an extension until December 31i 1988 was granted (50 PR 6943,
February 19, 1985) to allow completion of field studies,
environmental evaluation and preparation of the environmental
impact statement (BIS).
It is BPA's policy to publish an EIS for all ODMDS
designations (39 FR 37119, October 21, 1974). As a result of
the need of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COS) for an ODMDS
off Los Angeles, EPA requested that the COE, Los Angeles
District prepare the disposal site EIS because they had the
necessary technical expertise to evaluate conditions on the San
Pedro Shelf and Basin and they issued permits for ocean disposal
at the_interlm site. EPA retains responsibility for the EIS and
related public coordination.
Since 1977, COE has Issued permits for disposal of
approximately 2.1 million yd3 of dredged material at the LA-2
site (Table 1-1). Most of these permits were issued for
specific disposal projects. The Ports of Los Angeles and Long
Beach have multi-year permits for disposal of dredged material
from channel maintenance activities. In 1981, the Port of Los
Angelea was issued a permit to dispose of 100,000 yd per year
of dredged-material between June 1982 and June 1987. A limit of
200,000 yd3 per year was placed on material to be disposed at
the LA-2 site. The Port of Long Beach had a permit from October
1982 to October 1985 to dispose up to 50,000 yd3 of dredged
material per year.
-------
- 1-2 -
.... .. LONG SEACM
*. %_• • . • •
.•'*** ' .1 "•*?." *, «•
POHTOF
LONG BEACH
DEEP WATER REGION
DEPTH H4 FATHOMS
FIGURE 1-1. MAP OF THE PROJECT AREA
JWPCP:
: LOS ANGELES COUNTY JOINT WATER POLLUTION CONTROL PROJECT AT WHITES POINT
-------
- 1-3 -
fable 1-1.
Permits Issued by the COB for Disposal of Dredged
Material at the LA-2 Site (a)
Permit
lear final Application
Action Taken Mumber
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
TOTAL
78-0160
79-0133
81-0089
81-0090
81-0114
81.0127
81-0218
82-0003
82-0061
83-0086
83-0045
85-0042
85*0080
85-0194
85-0201
Permitted Actual Annual
Disposal Disposal Under
Allowed (b) COB Permits (b)
100,000
60,000
330,000
500,000
75,000
340,000
40,000
83,000
150,000
15,000
122,000
0
185,000
65.000
2,065,000
100,000
0
60,000
,430,000 (c)
688,000 (c)
165,000
122,000
8,200
43..000
1 ,616,200
(a) All dredged material disposed was silt/sand.
(b) Cubic yards.
(c) Volumes are higher due to special projects, particularly
the deepening of the Los Angeles Harbor Channel in 1982.
(COB, unpublished information, 1987)
-------
- 1.4 -
Prior to 1977, tbe LA-2 site was used occasionally for
disposal of dredged material and no disposal of d'redged material
resulting from COE projects has taken place at LA-2. Tbe total
amount of material disposed at the LA-2 site from COE-permitted
projects has averaged approximately 180,000 yd3 per year, with a
range between 8,200 yd3 and 688,000 yd3 over the past nine
years. Future disposal activity is not expected to be greater
than the. historic use of .the site because dredged material from
newly planned projects at the ports may be used for landfills in
harbor area or harbor expansion projects (COE, 1985).
Dredging operations are usually short-term activities
Involving a few days or weeks in a given year. During the
dredging .period, barges make two to four trips a day depending
upon the size of tbe barge. Maintenance dredging activity at
the Los Angeles and Long Beach Harbors is small in comparison to
many California harbors. An exception to this generalization
was the dredging project that deepened the Los Angeles Barbor
Channel in 1982. Over a period of three months, the contractor
made 125 trips to the LA-2 site to dispose of 100,000 yd3 of
material.
Formal designation of the LA-2 site would continue ocean
disposal of environmentally acceptable material at this interim
location. Permitted projects would include disposal of dredged
material from areas within the ports that do not involve
approved diked disposal plans and disposal of acceptable dredged
material from areas within the ports, provided that there are no
practicable alternatives to ocean disposal.
1.1.2. Dredged Material Permitting
Use of the LA-2 site for dredged material disposal will be
assessed on an individual project basis in accordance with the
provisions of EPA's Ocean Dumping Regulations (40 CFR 220-225,
227-228) and COE's dredged material disposal permitting process
under Section 103 of MPRSA. Each application for a COE permit
to dispose of dredged material at the LA-2 site is reviewed for
environmental acceptability in accordance with established
guidelines and in compliance with mltlgative restrictions that
will be defined in the final site designation EIS. Figure 1-2
outlines tbe cycle used by EPA and COE to evaluate permit
requests for ocean disposal of dredged material.
Dredged material must meet several COE criteria before it
can be considered for ocean disposal. Tbe material can be
disposed of without further testing if It meets tbe following
criteria (33 CFR 227.13):
A. The material is composed predominantly of rock, sand or
gravel and it will be dredged from areas of high current or
wave energy;
B. Tbe material Is composed predominantly of sand, gravel or
shell compatible in grain size with tbe receiving beach; or
-------
- 1-5 -
APPLICANT OH COB PROPOSES DREDGING PROJECT
MEED FOB OCEAN DISPOSAL ESTABLISHED
APPROPRIATE INFORMATION GATHERED
1) BULK SEDIMENT ANALYSES, 2) CHARACTERISTICS AND COMPOSITION
0? DREDGED MATERIAL, 3) ALTERNATIVE DISPOSAL TECHNIQUES
CONSIDERED, 4) SITE LOCATION, 5) HISTORICAL USE OF SITE,
6) DOCUMENTED EFFECTS OF PREVIOUS DUMPING,
7) LENGTH OF TIME REQUIRED FOR OPERATION, AND
8) EXISTENCE OF OR NEED FOR EIS
COS DISTRICT ENGINEER NOTIFIES EPA REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR
REVIEW BY EPA REGIONAL OFFICE
EPA NOTIFIES DISTRICT ENGINEER OP
NON-COMPLIANCE OF MATERIAL WITH EPA CRITERIA
I
DISTRICT ENGINEER RE-EVALDATES
ALTERNATIVES '.
SPA NOTIFIES COB OF
COMPLIANCE WITH EPA
DUMPING CRITERIA
FEASIBLE ALTERNATIVE NO FEASIBLE
AVAILABLE ALTERNATIVE. INFORM
EPA ADMINISTRATOR
AND CHIEF OF ENGINEERS
I
CHIEF OF ENGINEERS
CONSIDERS ALTERNATIVES
NO FEASIBLE ALTERNATIVE REQUEST WAIVER
EPA ADMINISTRATOR s SECRETARY OF ARMY SEEKS
CONSIDERS WAIVER ~WAIVER FROM EPA
PERMIT GRANT WAIVER
GRANTED ^ I
JL
REFUSES WAIVER
PERMIT
DENIED
Figure 1-2.
Evaluation Process for Dredged Material Permit
Review.
-------
- 1-6 -
C. The material la substantially the sane as substrate at the
proposed disposal site and It is from a location far removed
from known existing or historical pollution sources so as to
.provide reasonable assurance of being unpolluted.
If the material does not meet these criteria, EPA regional
policy requires that the material be subjected to bulk sediment
analyses (including priority pollutant scans* tests for
organotin derivatives and other pollutants identified by the
California State Water Resources Control Board as potentially
toxic substances); and the liquid, suspended particulate, and
solid phases must be subjected to bioassay and bioaccumulation
tests with appropriate sensitive species. The suspended
particulate and solid phase tests must not indicate significant
mortality or sublethal effects, including bioaccumulation of
contaminants. The liquid phase must comply with applicable
State water quality standards and Federal marine water quality
criteria. The liquid phase should not exceed 0.01$ of the
concentration shown to be acutely toxic to the marine organisms
used in the bioaasay tests (33 CFR 227.13U)(2)). In addition,
the dredged material must not contain certain prohibited
materials such as high level radioactive wastes or more than
trace levels of certain other materials such as organohalogens,
mercury compounds, cadmium, oil of all kinds, or known
carcinogens (40 CFR 227.6).
The liquid phase of the disposal plume must be in
compliance with the limit-ed permissible concentration (L.PC) of
contaminants after allowance for initial mixing (40 CFR 227-27).
Vhen there are no applicable water quality criteria, the levels
of contaminants in the receiving water may not exceed 0.01$ of
the concentration shown to be acutely toxic (33 CFR 227*27). If
the dredged material Is found to be unsuitable for ocean
disposal, it must be disposed of by other means, such as a
sanitary landfill or a diked disposal area. Otherwise, a
dredging permit will not be Issued.
1.1.3. Dredging Operations
Several alternative operational procedures for ocean
disposal of dredged material may be used. In general, dredge
operations involve either hopper, clamshell or hydraulic
techniques. The dredged material is emptied into split hull
barges with a capacity ranging from 500 to 4,000 yd3. During
the barge loading phase, attempts are made to maximize the
density of dredged material so that the number of haul cycles
can be reduced.
Barges are towed by tug boats which travel the most direct
route practicable between the project site and the dump site.
For dredging projects within the Ports of Los Angeles or Long
Beach, the breakwater entrance for the respective port is used
to enter the territorial sea. The barges must clear the O.S.
Coast Quard (DSCG) precautionary zone (see Figure 3-10) to
-------
- 1-7 -
prevent conflicts with other vessels. Ocean dumping, vbicb can
occur during permitted times, commences once the barge bas moved
into the designated position within the disposal site. The site
is typically an area with a 1,000 yard radius (920 meters (a)).
Material is released by opening the bottom of the split bull
barge* or by pumping the contents through an onboard pipeline to
a submerge'* outlet.
Cumulative dredge quantities should not exceed the
practicable capacity at the LA-2 site within the foreseeable
future, because the depth of water at the site is great (60 to
170 fathoms) (118 to 320 m), the area of tbe site is large (0.76
square nautical miles (nml) or 2.6 kilometers (km)), and
material dispersal and settling characteristics are
environmentally satisfactory (see Appendix C, p. C-4). If
expansion plans at the ports are implemented, the quantities of
dredged material proposed for ocean disposal may be reduced
(Geraldlne Knatz, Fort of Long Beach, personal communication,
March 1984). A major portion of the dredged material from the
proposed port expansion project for the year 2020 will be used
to create new areas for port use and will.not be dumped at the
LA-2 site.
1.2. PURPOSE OF AND HEED FOB ACTION
MPRSA requires EPA and COE to consider "human health,
welfare, or amenities, or the marine environment, ecological
systems, or economic potentialities* (Section 103(a)) in their
evaluation of Federal projects and permit applications for ocean
disposal of dredged material. As part of this evaluation,
consideration must be given to utilizing ocean disposal sites
designated by EPA pursuant to Section 102(c) of MPRSA and 40 CFR
228.12.
Since 1977i ocean disposal of dredged material permitted by
COE Los Angeles District has been authorized at the LA-2 site
which has been designated by EPA on an interim basis. Use of
this site for ocean disposal has been an essential element of
COE's compliance 'with the requirements of MPRSA and their
ability to carry out their statutory responsibility•for
maintaining tbe nation's navigation waterways.
In order to maintain waterways in tbe Los Angeles and Long
Beach Harbor areas, COE considers it essential that an environ-
mentally acceptable ocean disposal site be identified,
evaluated, and permanently designated for continued use. This
site may be used only after each dredging project has been
reviewed by EPA and COB to certify that the proposed ocean
disposal of dredged material complies with the criteria and
requirements of EPA and COE regulations.
Dredged material from previous dredging projects in the Los
Angeles area has been dumped at sites on land and in the ocean.
Locations of these disposal sites are decided on a case-by-case
-------
. 1.8 -
basis, depending upon environmental and economic considerations.
COE first examines material dredged from the harbor to determine
if it is appropriate for alternative means of disposal
including, but not limited to, land disposal, beach nourishment,
and capping techniques. Past environmental investigations for
port dredging projects revealed that land disposal alternatives
generally "are not practicable due to the densely urbanized
character of the surrounding area. If these alternatives are
not appropriate, then materials that comply with the BPA's
environmental impact criteria of 40 CFR 227 are usually dumped
in the ocean. A designated ocean disposal site is required to
meet COE's permitting needs.
In this EIS several alternatives to ocean disposal of large
amounts of dredged material have been evaluated in detail. The
conclusions reached by COE have eliminated options other than
ocean disposal due to infeasibillty of disposal and economic
criteria.
Final designation of the ODMDS will provide a long-term
means for ocean disposal-of acceptable -dredged material
principally from the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. These
Independent port systems are two of the country's most important
harbors. Foreign and domestic cargo ships annually carry about
85 to 90 million tons of cargo to and from the ports (COE,
1985). The majority of these ships are deep-draft vessels.
Also, the Port of Long Beach contains a U.S. Haval facility that
functions principally as a ship repair and refitting center.
Maintenance of channel depths and expansion of dock capacities
are essential to sustaining the ports as vital components of
national defense, and State and national economies.
COE requested that EPA permanently designate an ocean
'disposal site suitable for dredged material from the Los Angeles
and Long Beach Harbor areas. In response to COE's stated need,
EPA and COE have completed the necessary studies for selection,
evaluation, and designation of the most suitable site for the
ocean disposal of dredged material (40 CFR 228.4(e». This
document, prepared through a cooperative effort between EPA and
COE, provides the public and decision-makers with relevant
information to assess the Impacts associated with the
designation of the ODMDS serving the Los Angeles and Long Beach
Harbors.
1.3. PROPOSED ACTIOH
The proposed action Is the designation of an ODMDS for
continued use. A number of alternatives were considered to
identify the most suitable and least environmentally damaging
site. These included: 1} Mo Action; 2) Delayed Action;
3) Landfilling in Port Areas; 4) Landfill at Sanitary Landfill
Sites; 5) Beach Nourishment; 6) LA-2 ODHDS; and 7) Two
alternative ocean disposal sites, a shallow water site and a
deep water site.
-------
- 1-9 -
Preliminary analyses Indicated tbat all alternatives other
than ocean disposal were either inadequate, not feasible, or
more environmentally damaging. Detailed environmental analyses
were carried out for the three ocean disposal sites. The goal
of this document is to Identify the moat suitable and least
environmentally damaging site for ocean disposal of dredged
materials. Determination of the need for ocean disposal for
individual Federal projects and COE permitted projects is
accomplished as part of the permitting process on a case-by-case
basis; consequently, these determinations are beyond the scope
of the BIS.
The LA-2 site and the two alternative ocean disposal sites
vere evaluated according to criteria established in EPA's Ocean
Disposal Regulations and Criteria. No advantages were seen in
moving the site from the interim location to either the deep
water or the shallow water location. Final designation of the
existing LA-2 ODMDS was determined to be the Preferred
Alternative.
1.4. AREAS OF CONTROVERSY
In general, the issue of disposing of various materials in
the ocean is controversial. This controversy tends to be
focused on ocean disposal of materials such as radioactive'
waste, toxic chemicals, explosives, etc. In sufficient
quantities and at. sensitive locations, these materials pose
significant environmental hazards; however, disposal of these
materials is not permitted at an ODMDS.
Ocean disposal of dredged material has not been
particularly controversial historically because:
A. The permitted material is exclusively composed of marine
and/or estuarine sediment that has passed stringent quality
control criteria (33 CFR 227),
B. Ocean disposal of this type of material is not expected to
have long-term adverse environmental effects, and
C. Detailed bioassay and ohemlcal tests are used to screen the
material before ocean disposal is authorized.
The findings of this BIS support the relatively noncontro-
versial nature of ocean disposal of dredged material. There are
no known major areas of controversy with concerned agencies that
were contacted. Although there is indirect evidence that past
disposal at the LA-2 site has affected sediment characteristics
and biota, these effects appear to be moderate in nature and
localized. There is no evidence of regional environmental
effects. Levels of contaminants In sediments and tissues of
organisms are not significantly elevated above those observed in
organisms from a nearby reference site. Despite heavy
commercial, military, and recreational use of the San Pedro
-------
. 1.1Q -
Shelf and Basin, no significant interference between dredged
•aterial disposal and these other uses has been reported.
One concern related to designation of ocean disposal sites
is the enforcement of the location of barge dumping. There is
widespread concern that barge operators may sometimes dispose of
dredged material outside the dump site. This practice, known as
•short-dumping," is the disposal of material prior to arrival at
the designated site to save costs associated with a longer haul.
Under MPHSA, the DSCG is assigned responsibility by the
Secretary of Transportation for conducting surveillance of
disposal operations to ensure compliance with the permit
conditions and to discourage unauthorized disposal
(33 O.S.C. I4l7(o))* Surveillance Is accomplished by means of
spot checks of disposal vessels for valid permits, interception
or escorting of dump vessels, use of shlpriders, and aircraft
overflights during dumping.
Alleged violations are referred by OSCG to EPA for appro-
priate enforcement act-ion (33 U.S.C. 1415 and 40 CFR 22.36).
Civil penalties include a maximum fine of $50,000, and criminal
penalties involve a maximum fine of $50,000 and/or a one year
Jail term. If administrative enforcement action is not
appropriate, the Department of Justice may be requested to
initiate actions in court for criminal violations of the terms
of MPRSA.
1.5. ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED
This BIS shows that the LA-2 site differs from a nearby
reference site and other nearby sites in sediment
characteristics, abundance and diversity of biota, and
concentrations of sediment contaminants. In order to
conservatively evaluate the environmental Impacts associated
with the proposed project, EPA and COE.assumed that the
differences listed above are effects of past disposal of dredged
material at the LA-2 site. The possibility that these
differences are at least partly due to natural or human
causative factors not related to dredged material disposal is
discussed in Chapter 4, Environmental Consequences.
EPA and COE have collected data and evaluated previous
reports to resolve issues related to environmental impacts from
disposal of dredged material. The dynamic nature of the coastal
marine environment of the Southern California Bight has made it
extremely difficult to determine the exact causes and effects of
environmental variations observed in the vicinity of LA-2.
The mechanisms governing environmental characteristics at
the disposal site will be significantly clarified through a site
management program Jointly developed and administered by EPA
Region 9 and COE Los Angeles District. The two Federal agencies
will evaluate potential impacts through studies of the physical
-------
. 1-11 -
and environmental effects of disposal activities .at the site,
laboratory and field studies of the effects of dredged material
on biological communities, and extensive sampling of environ-
mental parameters along distance gradients from the disposal
site to determine cumulative effects on surrounding habitats.
This BIS"incorporates the results of oceanographic studies at
other sites in the area to provide relevant information on the
direction, magnitude and variability of currents and vertical
mixing characteristics In the offshore environment. A field
survey was also undertaken at the LA-5 site and a nearby
reference site during 1983 and 1984 to collect comparative data
on water chemistry and sediment and biologic characteristics.
The results of this field survey are discussed in detail in
Chapter 3- Appropriate monitoring may also be performed as part
of the site management program. :
During the interagency workshop held for the designation
study, it was suggested that pelagic fish should be sampled and
the potential Impact from suspended sediment on these species
should be assessed. There was particular concern for the
northern anchovy (Enpraulia mordaz) because of Its commercial
and ecological Importance, Its prevalence over the shelf-slope
break area containing the LA-2 site, and the fact that it is a
particulate filter feeder. A specific study of anchovies in the
area of the LA-2 site was not possible for Inclusion in the
BIS. All indications are that dredged material disposal
adversely .affects water quality only temporarily until mixing
and currents disperse the .suspended sediment to background
levels (see Appendix C, p. C-7). Based on this, it is concluded
that there would not be a significant effect on pelagic fish,
including.the northern anchovy.
Despite -these assumptions, the issue of the effect of
disposal activities on pelagic fish species is somewhat
unresolved due to the lack of data on the sensitivity to
suspended sediment of these species. A more conclusive
assessment of the Impact of disposal on pelagic fish would
require sampling of the community at the disposal site at
several depths and on several occasions, preferably in all
seasons of the year. It would also require field and/or
laboratory studies of the effect of suspended sediment and
associated contaminants on anchovies and other pelagic species.
It was also suggested at the interagency workshop that
histopatbological studies be performed on organisms collected at
the disposal site in lieu of determination of contaminant tissue
burdens. Histopathologlc studies are considered to be a more
direct measure of the biological effects of toxic substances
than determining the tissue concentration of the substances.
Hlstppathology is, indeed, a useful diagnostic tool where the
organisms under Investigation are resident in the area of
potential contamination and cannot or would not leave as
contaminant levels rise. However, the usefulness of this
technique would probably be limited in studies of very mobile or
-------
- 1-12 -
transient demersal or pelagic fishes. Tissue burdens of any
absorbed or ingested contaminants night indicate 'the potential
for pathological effects but actual histopathological evidence
of these effects would be extremely difficult to collect because
the affected animals vould either leave the contaminated area or
be sufficiently debilitated to be removed from the population by
predation before detectable histopathologies could be found.
Because of the lack of precident for hlstopathologic
studies as part of site designation and budget constraints, this
type of analysis was not Included in the BIS Investigations. A
systematic histopathologic examination of selected resident
organisms might prove to be a very useful tool in future
monitoring programs of the selected site.
1.6. REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
An international treaty, as veil as Federal and State lavs
and regulations, apply to the designation of an ODHDS. The
relevance of these statutes to the proposed action and related
compliance requirements are described below. Table 1-2
summarizes the compliance status of these lavs in regard to the
proposed action.
1.6.1. International Treaty
The principal international agreement governing ocean
dumping is the Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution
by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter (26 OST 2403: TIAS 8l65),
also known as the London Dumping Convention. This agreement
became effective on August 30, 1975, after ratification by 15
contracting countries, including the United States. Ocean
dumping criteria incorporated into MPRSA permits for ocean
dumping, have been adapted from the provisions of the London
Dumping Convention. Thus, when a material is found to be
acceptable for ocean disposal under MPRSA, it is also acceptable
under the London Dumping Convention.
1.6.2. Federal Laws and Regulations
1.6.2.1. Marine Protection. Research and Sanctuaries Act of
1972. as amended (33 O.S.C. 1401 et sea.)
MPRSA regulates the transportation and ultimate disposal of
materials in the ocean, and prohibits ocean disposal of certain
wastes. Section 102 of the Act allows EPA to promulgate
environmental evaluation criteria for COE permit actions, to
retain review authority over the COE permits, and to designate
ocean disposal sites for dredged material disposal. EFA's .
regulations for ocean dumping are published at 40 CFR 220 to
229. This EIS relates to designation of an ocean disposal site
rather than permitting of dredged material disposal; therefore,
it only relates to the last category of these criteria.
-------
- 1-13 -
Table 1-2 Summary of Compliance of Alternatives .with
Environmental Protection Statutes and Other
Environmental Requirements
Federal
Proposed Shallow Deep
Action Water Water
(LA-2 Site) Alternative Alternative
Convention on the Preven- Full Full
tion of Marine Pollution by
Dumping of Wastes and Other
Matter (London Dumping
Convention),
26 UST 2403: TIAS 8165.
Marine Protection, Research Full Full
and Sanctuaries Act,
22 O.S.C. 1401, et aeflr _.
Rational Environmental Partial*
Policy Act as amended,
42 U.S.C. 4341 et. seo.
Clean Water Act as amended H/A H/A
(Federal Water Pollution
Control Act) 33 U.S.C. 1251
et sea.
Clean Air Act as amended, H/A
42 D.S.C. 1451, et sec.
Fish and Wildlife Coordina- N/A
tion Act as amended,
O.S.C. 661 et seq.
Coastal Zone Management Partial1
Act as amended,
16 U.S.C. 1456 et. sea.
Endangered Species Act as Full Pull
amended, 16 U.S.C. 1531
et seq.
Mational Historic Preserva- Full Full
tion Act as amended,
16 U.S.C. 470, ert aeq.
Executive Order 11593, Full Full
Protection and Enhancement
of the Cultural Environment,
36 FR 8921.
Full
Full
Partial* Partial1
N/A
Partial* H/A
H/A N/A
Partial* Partial1
Full
Full
Full
(Continued)
-------
Table 1-2 (Continued). Summary of Compliance of Alternatives
with Environmental Protection Statutes
and Other Environmental Requirements
Federal
Executive Order 12372,
Intergovernmental Review
of Major Federal Programs,
47 FR 3059.
California Coastal Act of
1976, as amended,
PHC Sec. 3000 et seq.
California Environmental
Quality Act, PRC Sec. 21001
Proposed
Action
(LA-2 Site)
Full
N/A
H/A
Shallow
Vater
Alternative
Full
N/A
N/A
Deep
Vater
Alternative
Full
N/A
N/A
* Full compliance upon issuance of a Final Environmental Impact
Statement.
-------
. 1-15 -
Section 103 of the Act seta forth requirements for
obtaining COE permits to transport dredged material for the
purpose of ocean disposal. COB's regulations for ocean dumping
are published at 33 CFR 209.145 and 33 CFR 320 to 330.
1.6.2.2. national Environmental Policy Act (8EPA) of 1969
U2 O.S.C. 4341 e£ aeq.)
IBPA requires that environmental consequences and
alternatives be considered before a decision is made to
implement a Federal project. It also establishes requirements
for preparation of an environmental impact statement for major
Federal projects having potentially significant environmental
Impacts. This EIS has been prepared to fulfill NEPA
requirements.
The President's Council on Environmental Quality has
published regulations for implementing NEPA at 40 CFR 1500-1508.
SPA'S NEPA regulations are published at 40 CFR 6 and COE's
regulations for Implementing NEPA are published at 33 CFR 220.
1.6.2.3. Clean Water Act of 1977 (33 D.S.C. 1251 et sea.)
This Act was passed to restore and maintain the chemical,
physical and biological integrity of the nation's waters.
Specific sections of the Act control the discharge of pollutants
and wastes into aquatic and marine environments. Section 404
established a permit program to regulate the discharge of
dredged material into the waters of the United States inside of
the boundary line drawn to differentiate coastal waters from
oceanic waters. This section is not applicable to the proposed
action because it does not apply to the designation of ODMDS.
A major section of the Clean Water Act that applies to
ocean disposal of dredged material is Section 401. This section
concerns the certification by the State that the permitted
action complies with State water quality standards. The
applicability of Section 401 water quality certification by the
State for ocean dumping projects is being evaluated by EPA and
COB at this time.
1.6.2.4. Clean Air Act as Amended (42 P.S.C. 1451 et seq . )
This Act Is Intended to protect the nation's air quality by
regulating the emission of air pollutants. It is not applicable
to the proposed action (designation of an ocean dredged material
disposal site). The Act is applicable to permits and planning
procedures related to actual disposal within the three mile
territorial sea limit.
1.6.2.5. Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act of 1958
(16 O.S.C. 661 et sec.)
This Act requires that water resource development programs
be performed in consideration of wildlife conservation. The Act
-------
- 1-16 -
is not applicable to dredged material disposal site designation!
but is applicable to the evaluation of permits and water
resource development projects, ill permitted uses of a
designated disposal site will comply with the Act.
1.6.2.6. .Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972
(16 U.S.C. 1456 et sea.)
This Act regulates development and use of the coastal zone,
and encourages the State to develop and implement coastal zone
management programs. Federally permitted projects must be
certified consistent with approved State programs under Section
307(c) of the Act.
Although the proposed disposal site lies outside the three
mile boundary of State waters, use of the site could potentially
affect the State's coastal zone. In accordance with a 1984
decision by the U.S. Supreme Court (Watt v. California), the
California Coastal Commission has indicated it will not review
administrative actions such as site designations for consistency
with the California Coastal Zone Management Plan. The
California Coastal Commission will continue to review both
permit applications for dredging projects and transport of
dredged materials through the coastal zone, Federal
determination of consistency for Federal dredge projects, and
for consistency with the California plan.
1 .6.2.7. Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.}
This Act protects species designated as threatened or
endangered by prohibiting Federal actions from jeopardizing the
continued existence of such species. Section 7 of the Act
requires that consultation regarding protection of such species
be conducted with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/or the
Rational Marine Fisheries Service prior to project
implementation. This .consultation is documented in Chapter 5,
Exhibits 9, 10 and 11.
1.6.2.8. National Historic Preservation Act of 1966
(16 U.S.C. 470 el sec.)
This Act is Intended to preserve and protect historic and
prehistoric resources. Federal agencies are required to
identify cultural resources that may be impacted by a project,
and to coordinate project activities with the State Historic
Preservation Officer (SHPO). The SHPO has determined that the
designation of LA-2 does not involve cultural resources listed
on or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places.
This oonsultation process is documented in Chapter 5, Exhibit
12.
-------
- 1-17 -
1.6.3- Executive Orders
1.6.3*1. Executive Order 11593. Protection and Enhancement of
the Cultural Environment (36 PR 8921. May 15. 1971)
THis executive order requires the initiation by Federal
agencies of measures necessary to direct their policies, plans
and programs in such a way so that federally owned sites,
structures and objects of historical, architectural or
archaeological significance are preserved, restored and
maintained for the inspiration and benefit of the .people.
Compliance with this order was coordinated with SHPO and Is
documented in Chapter 5, Exhibit 12.
1.6.3*2. Executive Order 12372. Intergovernmental Review of
Halor Federal Programs (47 FR 3059. July 16. 1982)
Requires Federal agencies, to the extent permitted by law,
to .utilize the State process to determine official views of
State and local elected officials and communicate with State and
local officials as early in the program planning cycle as Is
reasonably feasible to explain specific plans of action. The
Resources Agency of California was contacted to notify
appropriate State agencies (see Chapter 5, Exhibit 6).
1.6.4. State of California
1.6.4.1. California Coastal Act of 1976.
Public Resources CodeSection 3000 et sec.
This Act establishes the California Coastal Zone Management
Plan, which has been approved by the U.S. Department of
Commerce. All Federal actions which 'affect the coastal zone
must be determined to be as consistent as practicable with this
plan.
In accordance with a U.S. Supreme Court decision, the
California Coastal Commission has Indicated that it will not
conduct consistency reviews for administrative Federal actions
such as disposal site designation. The Coastal Commission will
conduct consistency review of permit application? for dredging
projects and transport of dredged material through the coastal
zone for disposal (see Exhibit 13).
1.6.4.2. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). June. 1966
Public Resources Code Section 21001
CBQA establishes requirements similar to those of NEPA for
consideration of environmental impacts and alternatives, and
preparation of an environmental impact report (SIR) prior to
Implementation of applicable projects. Although the proposed
action is a Federal action concerning sites outside State
boundaries and does not fall under the purview with CBQA. This
BIS is consistent with CEQA requirements.
-------
. 1.18 -
1.7. RELATIONSHIP TO PREVIOUS HEPA ACTIONS OH OTHER FACILITIES
THAT MAI BE AFFECTED BY DESIGNATION OF THE DISPOSAL SITE
There are several HEPA actions or facilities in the project
area which could possibly be affected by continued disposal of
dredged material at the Preferred or Alternative Sites. Since
disposal activity occurs over open ocean water, no facilities or
structures are directly Impacted. Rather, distribution of
dredged material from the disposal site could interact with
disposal from other projects causing cumulative impacts to the
water quality, sediment quality, and marine biological
environment. These projects are briefly described below and
their locations are shown in Figure 1-3.
1.7.1. THUMS Disposal Site
The THUMS disposal site in the San Pedro Basin was
designated by EPA for the disposal of drilling muds and cuttings
from oil and gas drilling Islands in Long Beach Harbor. The
site is a circular area with a 1.5 nml (2.8 km) radius, centered
at 33° 3*' 30" Horth by 118° 27' 30" West. Water depth at the
site is 485 fathoms (890 m). Approximately 100,000 yd3 per year
of muds and cuttings are authorized for disposal at the site
over the next three years. This site is approximately 10 ami (18
km) west-southwest of the LA-2 site, 4 nmi (7 km) west of the
closest portion of the deep water site, and 11 nmi (20 km)
southwest of the shallow water site.
1.7.2. JWPCP Outfall
The Joint Water Pollution Control Project (JWPCP) of the
Sanitation District of Los Angeles County discharges an average
of 356 million gallons per day of treated municipal waste
through two outfalls at Whites Point on the Palos Verdes
Peninsula. The outfalls are within the shallow water site are
approximately 5 nmi (9 km) north of the LA-2 site, 4 nmi (7 km)
north of the closest part of the deep water site.
1.7.3- Hyperion Outfall
The Hyperion sewage treatment plant of the City of Los
Angeles has two outfall pipes which discharge into Santa Monica
Bay. One pipe discharges an average of 400 million gallons per
day of treated municipal effluent. Its seaward end is located
at 33° 55' 45 " Horth by 118° 33' 15" West at an approximate
water depth of 27 fathoms (50 m). Another pipe discharges an
average of four to five million gallons per day of treated
municipal sludge. It is located at 33° 55' 34* North by 118°
33' 15* West at an approximate water depth of 33 fathoms (60 m).
These outfalls are approximately 22 nmi (41 km) northwest of the
LA-2 site, 14 nmi (26 km) northwest of the shallow water site,
and 18 nmi (34 km) north of the deep water site.
-------
- 1-19 -
LOS ANGELES CO
HYPERION SEWAGE
^!TREATMENT PLANT
r
i
ORANGE CO.
SHALLOW
WATER
REGION
THUM3
SITE
LA- 9 SITE
ORANQE COUNTY
AQE TREATMENT PLANT
DEEP
WATER
REGION
*
REFERENCE SITE
AVAtON
SCALE M NAUTBAL MLES
FIGURE 1-3. OTHER MAJOR FACILITIES IN THE PROJECT VICINITY
JWPCP: LOS ANGELES COUNTY JOINT WATER POLLUTION CONTROL PROJECT AT WHITES POINT
-------
- 1-20 .
1.7.*. Orange County Outfall
Orange County baa a sewage outfall pipe that discharges
approximately 250 million gallons per day in San Pedro Bay. Its
seaward end is located at 33° 35' 36* North and 118° 00' 36"
West. This outfall is approximately 14 nml (26 km) east of the
LA-2 site, 17 nmi (31 km) southeast of the shallow water site,
and 13 nmi (25 km) east of the deep water site.
1,7.5. Avalon Outfall
Off Santa Catallna Island, another sewage outfall pipe
discharges approximately 0.36 million gallons per day in San
Pedro Channel. Its seaward end is located at 33° 20* 25" North
and 118° 18' 42" West. This outfall is approximately 16.5 nmi
(30.5 km) south of the LA-2 site, 21 nml (39 km) south of the
shallow water site, and 10 nml (18.5 km) south of the deep water
site.
1-7-6. 2020 Project
In November of 1985, the Ports of Los Angeles and Long
Beach and the COE Los Angeles District prepared a Programmatic
BIS/EIR on the 2020 Project. The four phase project proposes to
place 2,600 acres of landfill In the San Pedro Harbor area and
breakwater. Phase 1, which may Involve 800 acres of landfill,
is currently being evaluated for feasibility and permitting
action.
-------
. 2-1 -
CHAPTER 2. ALTERNATIVES
Tbla chapter of the EIS includes a description of each of
the major alternatives considered during the development of the
preferred .alternative. Evaluation of a reasonable range of
alternatives is required by HEPA (40 CFR 1502.14). Comparisons
of potentially feasible alternatives in relation to EPA1a five
general disposal site criteria and 11 specific disposal site
selection criteria (40 CFR 228.5 and 228.6) are presented to
summarize the information for the potential sites. The detailed
discussion of each specific criterion can be found in Chapters 3
and 4.
2.1. DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES
2.1.1.Preferred Alternative (LA-2 ODMDS)
The preferred alternative for designation of a site for
disposal of dredged material from the Ports of Los Angeles and
Long Beach Is final designation and continued use of the LA-2
ODMDS. This is also the environmentally preferred alternative
because it is desirable to restrict existing environmental
effects to one site and not Impose them at new sites or compound
environmental Impacts observed at already stressed sites.
The LA-2 site Is located at coordinates 33° 37' 06" North
latitude by 118° 17' 24* Vest longitude, which Is 4.7 nautical
miles (nml) west of the breakwater at San Pedro, California (see
Figure 2-1). The site Includes all areas within a 1,000 yard
(914 m) radius of the center coordinates. The underlying sea
floor slopes toward the west with an approximate depth range
between 65 and 175 fathoms (118 and 320 m). Beyond the site
limits, the seafloor slopes downward to a maximum depth of
approximately 547 fathoms (1,000 m) in the San Pedro Basin.
The nearest Interim ODMDSs are located to the north, about
50 nautical miles (93 km) away, off Port Hueneme (LA-1), and to
the south, about 19.6 nautical miles (36 km) away, off Newport
Beach (LA-3). The LA-1 site and LA-3 site frave interim site
designation status without scheduled expiration dates. In the
future, environmental studies will be conducted and BISs will be
prepared prior to final designations of these sites.
The LA-2 ODMDS has been identified as the preferred
alternative because:
A. The site is close enough to the expected dredging sites to
keep transportation distances and costs to an acceptable
level,
B. Tbe site is far enough offshore and in deep enough water to
prevent disposed material from reaching productive nearshore
habitats or amenity areas and minimize potential
environmental damage,
-------
_ 2-2 -
WRTOF
LONG BEACH
WATER^PORTOF
DEEP WATER REGION
N^ DEPTH IN FATHOMS
FIGURE 2-1. LOCATION OF ALTERNATIVE OCEAN DISPOSAL SITES IN THE
SAN PEDRO SHELF AND BASIN
-------
- 2-3 -
C. The aite has been used for dredge material disposal on an
interim basis since 1977, and
0. The aite characteristics comply with EPA's siting criteria
(40 CFR 228.5 and 228.6).
2.1.2. Ho Action A Item a t i v e
Selection of the Mo Action Alternative would mean that
final designation of an appropriate ODMDS would not be made by
EPA. This would cause the interim status of the LA-2 site to
expire and there would no longer be a readily accessible site of
ocean disposal of dredge material in the vicinity of the ports
of Los Angeles and Long Beach.
Under the EPA's Ocean Dumping Regulations and Criteria
(40 CFR 228.12(a)) and in accordance with the requirements of
Section 1Q2(a) of MPHSA, "various sites were approved for ocean
dumping ... or. an interim basis pending completion of baseline
or trend assessment surveys and designation for continuing use
or termination of use." The criteria further state that the
interim designations were based upon historical usage and were
not Intended to satisfy the criteria for final designation and
continuing use.
If SPA selected the No Action Alternative, which would
prevent final designation of the site for continued use and
prohibit further .use of the LA-2 site, the action would be in
conflict with the intent of MPRSA. COE would then be required
to either:
A; Develop an acceptable alternative disposal method (e.g..,
land-based or within a confined water body),
B. Independently develop Information sufficient to select an
acceptable ocean site for disposal, under section 1p3(d) of
MPHSA, or
C. Modify or cancel dredging projects that depend on ocean
disposal as the only feasible method for disposal of the
dredged material (40 CRF 228.4).
• As discussed in Chapter 1, dredging is essential to the
maintenance and operation of the nationally important ports, as
well as other adjacent areas. Therefore, the No Action
Alternative is not an acceptable alternative because it would
eliminate an ocean disposal site within a reasonable distance of
the ports and severely affect existing and planned port uses.
2.1.3. Delayed Action Alternative
EPA designated the LA-2 site as an interim site for a three
year period (42 PR 2462, January 11, 1977). In 1980, the agency
extended the interim designation and issued a schedule for
-------
- 2-4 -
publishing the EIS and final designation based on a consent
agreenent that was reached in a law suit concerning the
disposition of ocean disposal sites. Three additional
extensions of interim status for the site were granted by EPA in
order to allow time for field studies, EIS preparation, and
public review. The final date.for designation of consent
agreement sites has now been set for Deceober 31, 1983.
A Delayed Action Alternative should be considered only if a
completely new alternative is being developed, and delaying the
start of the process could have some environmental or economic
benefits based on new information. Since the LA-2 site has been
used for a substantial period, EPA and COE do not.anticipate
that alternative sites, other than the two discussed in this
EIS, will be developed for disposal of large quantities of
dredged material. If the proposed action is delayed, the
interim designation may expire and dumping at the LA-2 interim
site would not be authorized unless another extension was
granted by EPA. EPA cannot continue to grant extensions without
valid reasons for doing so in light of the court's decision on
the consent agreement.
In this instance, the need for ocean disposal of dredged
material is a continuing concern and requires conclusion of the
site designation process in the most expeditious manner
possible. Delaying the designation of a site would not be a
viable alternative n'or would it provide any advantage over the
preferred alternative. Unless this study is found to be
unacceptable on scientific grounds, the Delayed Action
Alternative cannot be considered as an acceptable alternative.
2.1.4. Landfilling Alternatives in Port Areas
Use of the dredged material for landfilling, also referred
to as the creation of fastlands, is reviewed here as a possible
alternative to ocean disposal. The dredged material could be
used for landfilling marine areas in the Ports of Los Angeles
and Long Beach, or landfilling subsided areas at the Port of
Long Beach.
2.1.4.1. Landfilling of Marine Areas
The Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach have used dredged
material in the past to create landfills as the need has arisen,
if the available material is suitable for fill (COE, 1980).
Both ports have plans to expand land areas and will need
suitable fill (COE, 1985).
Essential dredging in the harbors is not expected to
coincide with the need to create new land areas, an issue that
has been experienced with previous projects as well. It is also
possible that a large portion of dredge material nay not comply
with guidelines issued to regulate dredging and filling projects
under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Material dredged from
-------
- 2-5 -
the harbors Is not always suitable for fill because the
proportion of fine sediments Bay be high compared to the
requirements of permits and the Section 404(b)(1) guidelines.
COB aust have alternative means for disposal of the dredged
material if the landfllllng alternatives are not approved.
Options for landfilllng vill be evaluated on a project-by-
project basis. For the purposes of this BIS, EPA and COE are
assuming that a major portion of the material dredged from the
ports vill have to be disposed of at a suitable ocean disposal
site. Consequently, the landfilllng alternative in marine areas
is not a viable alternative to dispose of this material.
2.1.4.2. Landfilllng of Subsided Areas
The Port of Long Beach has considered using dredged
material to fill areas at the port that have subsided in
response to the extraction of underground oil. This alternative
avoids the expense of transporting the material elsewhere for
disposal. Port authorities have concluded that this land
filling in subsided areas option is not feasible, because it
would seriously interfere with existing oil extraction
operations at the port, and the operations would require moving
many oil wells at a high cost (Geraldine Knatz, Port of Long
Beach, personal communication, March, 1984). In addition, much
of the dredged material available is not suitable for fill
because the material has a high silt content which is unsuitable
for structural support. Therefore, landfllling of subsided
areas at the Port of Long Beach is not a feasible alternative
for dredged material disposal.
2.1.5* Land Disposal Alternatives at Sanitary Landfills
There are two sanitary landfill sites in Los Angeles County
which could be considered as possible alternative land disposal
sites. The sites are: Puente Hills, a Class II-1 landfill in
Vhittier, and BKK Corporation, a Class I landfill in West
Covina.
A Class II-l landfill can accept solid waste, certain solid
hazardous wastes, some nonhazardous liquids such as petroleum
products, but no liquid hazardous waste. A Class I landfill can
accept all materials that a Class II-1 landfill can accept, plus
liquid and solid hazardous wastes in accordance with the
provisions of applicable Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA) permits, but no bulk liquid hazardous wastes. Both types
of landfills can accept dredged material suitable for ocean
disposal, or dredged.material considered too contaminated for
ocean disposal, if it meets RCRA permit conditions and the
capacity of the landfills can accommodate the dredge material.
The Puente Hills landfill can accept dredged material for
disposal only after it has been dewatered and is odor-free.
Since the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach have little
available land area to store and dewater this material, it is
not possible to meet the disposal criteria of this landfill for
large dredging projects.
-------
. 2.6 -
The Puente Hills site will not accept brines, defined as
materials with conductivity values or total dissolved solids
(IDS) concentrations above certain levels, or heavy metal
concentrations above standards defined in Title 22, Division 4,
of the California Code. In some cases, material dredged from
the Forts .of Los Angeles and Long Beach aay hot meet these
requirements, especially those for conductivity and IDS. In
addition, Puente Hills is limited to accepting a maximum of
113,000 tons (dry weight) of material per day. Port dredging
often produces more than 113.000 tons (dry weight) of material
per day for a period of several weeks. This would use all of
the Puente Hills capacity for the duration of a dredging
project. Monopolizing the use of the landfill in this way will
place a severe burden on disposal needs of urban areas,
especially since Los Angeles County is already experiencing
shortage of sanitary landfill sites close to refuse generating
urban centers.
Finally, the cost of handling and transporting the dredged
material from ports to the Puente Hills site is estimated to be
almost four times higher than ocean disposal (Geraldlne Enatz,
Port of Long Beach, personal communication, March, 1984).
Handling of materials by trucks would create Increased
transportation and air pollution Impacts that may be
unacceptable. This option would be feasible for a limited
number and size of dredging projects; however, It is not
considered a viable alternative to ocean disposal for large
dredging projects.
The BEE Landfill has been a Class I site until recently and
could accept all dredged material whether or not it was
considered too contaminated for ocean disposal. Recent problems
at the site have forced BEK to close. The problems of capacity,
cost of handling, traffic congestion and impacts on air quality
are the same for the BEE site as for the Puente Hills site.
Hence, this site is not a viable alternative to ocean disposal.
2.1.6. Beach nourishment Alternative
The use of dredged material for beach nourishment is
encouraged in areas suffering from erosion, especially If the
material is compatible with the grain size distribution of the
receiving beach. Impacts on biological communities and water
quality must also be considered before beach nourishment is
permitted.
This method of dredged material disposal Is often
infeasible for dredging projects because grain size distribution
of the material is not compatible with beaches in the area.
Selection of the beach nourishment and/or land disposal methods
are evaluated by COB on a case-by-case basis for each permit,
and are not feasible alternatives for disposal of large amounts
of dredged material removed from the ports. Therefore, the
beach disposal alternative has been eliminated from further
consideration in this DEIS.
-------
- 2-7 -
2.1.7. Alternative Ocean Disposal Sites
The disposal of large amounts of acceptable dredged
material la the ocean nay be the best solution to long-term
management of the overall dredging program for the Forts of Los
Angeles and Long Beach. The Purpose of and Heed for Action
section of this BIS (Section 1.2} outlines the major advantages
and necessities for designation of an ODMDS. The two
alternatives discussed below were developed as a range of NBPA
alternatives to the Preferred Alternative.
The LA-2 site is presently the only site with an
established location (Figure 2-1). Table 2-1 la a brief
comparative table that shows the major differences in the three
potential ocean disposal sites. The alternative sites would be
located In two regions: a shallow water region and a deep water
region. These two areas were chosen to assess the relative
logistical and environmental advantages and/or disadvantages of
designating the disposal site In other oceanic locations. COE
has determined that there Is no advantage In moving the site to
a new location at similar depth.
Changing the location of the site to another area would not
result in decreased disposal Impacts, but would cause new
environmental Impacts at a location that is either under
environmental stress from other discharge activities or one that
has been undisturbed. Discussion of the alternative sites is
not limited to any specific site within the shallow water and
deep water regions. This approach precludes an arbitrary choice
of site locations and allows maximum consideration of the
feasibility of using a particular site In either region.
2.1.7.1. Shallow Water Site
This site is located off the Palos Verdes Peninsula near
the JYPCP sewage outfall at Whites Point (see Figure 2-1). -The
maximum water depth here is approximately 70 fathoms (125 m).
The major considerations in evaluating this site are: the
proximity to and synerglstic effects of the sewage outfalls at
Whites Point, fishing and boating areas, kelp beds, cultural
resources, navigation lanes, and shoreline resources. The
affected area is within the three-mile State of California
territorial boundary. Selection of this alternative would be
subject to a consistency determination under Section 307(c) of
the Coastal Zone Management Act and water quality consistency
certification under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act.
This site has the advantage of being located close to
shore, which reduces disposal costs. The shallow water region
was chosen off the Palos Verdes Peninsula because unacceptable
interference with commercial shipping, oil and gas development,
and other ocean disposal activities are possible In other
shallow water areas on the San Pedro Shelf. COB has determined
that this alternative should be evaluated In detail in the EIS.
-------
. 2-8 -
Table 2-1.
General Comparison Between Geographical Position,
Depth of Water, Bottom Topography, and. Distance from
the Coast for the Alternative Ocean Disposal Sites
Site
LA- 2
Shallow
Vater
Deep
Vater
Coordinates or
Region
Centered at
33° 37' 06"
North by 118
17' 2ft" West
Hearshore Region
Slope or Basin
Region
Water Depth
Fathoms (m)
65 - 175
(118 - 320)
11-91
(20 - 165}
350 - 500
(640 - 896)
Distance
Bottom Offshore
Topography (nmi/kn)
Ridge 5/9
Slope
Ridge 1-2/2-4
Slope
Gently 5-10/9-1*
Sloping
to Flat
. Plain
-------
- 2-9 -
2.1.7.2. Deep Mater Site
The deep vater alte is located southwest of the LA-2 site
on the lower portion of toe continental slope in the San Pedro
Basin. This region is approximately five to ten nml (9 to 19
km) from shore with water depth at the site ranging from 350 to
500 fathoms (640 to 896 m).
Major considerations in evaluating this site are: distance
from shore, potential oil and gas activities, conflicts with
commercial fishing, and potential for Increases in short
dumping. Advantages of this site Include a naturally
depauperate benthic fauna and a disposal site that is off the
mainland shelf.
Disadvantages of the site include: increased dispersal of
sediment throughout the water column which could potentially
affect fish populations, and dispersal over a larger area of
ocean bottom creating a larger, unconcentrated area of impact.
Increased distance to the site will result in proportionately
increased degradation of air quality and increased consumption
of limited energy resources; however, these impacts are
considered to be negligible. COE determined that this site
should be evaluated in detail In the BIS.
2.2. DISCUSSION OF ALTERNATIVES
2.2.1. Alternatives Hot Considered for Further Analysis
The Ho Action Alternative and the Delayed Action
Alternative were completely eliminated from further
consideration In the EIS. Neither of these two alternatives
would satisfy the basic purpose of the site designation process,
nor are they In the best Interest of economic growth of the Los
Angeles and Long Beach Harbors. EPA and COE have determined
that one of the best solutions to harbor dredging operations is
to dispose of the dredged material In the ocean at a fully
designated site.
The alternatives for Landfllllng in Port Areas, Land
Disposal at Sanitary Landfills and Beach Nourishment will be
evaluated by COE and EPA on a permit-specific basis. These
options are not viable for disposal of large quantities of
dredged material that are predicted from major port projects in
the coming years. Consequently, these alternatives have been
eliminated from further evaluation in this site designation
EIS, but they remain as options to be considered in individual
permits.
2.2.2. Compliance of the Three ODMDS Alternatives with General
Criteria for the Selection of Sites (40 CFR 228.5)
2.2.2.1. General Criteria 40 CFR 228.5(a)
The dumping of materials into the ocean will be
permitted only at sites or in areas selected to
-------
-•2-10 -
minimize the interference of disposal activities with
other activities in tbe aarine environment,
particularly avoiding areas of existing fisheries or
ahellfisheries, and regions of commercial or
recreational navigation.
Disposal at the LA-2 site has not interfered with
commercial fishing, sportflshing or recreational activities in
the area. Even though the site is located near the USCG Traffic
Separation Schemes (TSS), vessel traffic Interference has been
insignificant despite considerable use of nearby areas by
commercial, military and recreational vessels. The present
situation is sufficiently free from hazard to be acceptable to
the BSCG, and special conditions Imposed by COE on disposal
permits will assure negligible risks from Interference between
disposal operations and shipping. The alternative sites have
been specially selected so as to minimize the potential impact
of commercial or recreational activities.
2.2.2.2. General Criteria 40 CFR 228.5(b)
Locations and boundaries of tbe disposal sites will be
so chosen that temporary perturbations in water
quality or other environmental conditions during
initial mixing caused by disposal operations anywhere
vithin the site can be expected to be reduced to
normal.ambient seawater levels or to undetectable
.concentrations or effects before reaching any beach,
shoreline, marine sanctuary, or known geographically
limited fishery or shellfishery.
The LA-2 site is 4.7 ami (8.7 km) from the nearest beach or
shoreline, 40 nml (74 km) from the nearest marine sanctuary, and
6 nmi (11 km) from the nearest Area of Special Biological
Significance (ASBS) at Abalone Cove. Dilution and dispersal by
local mixing currents will reduce water quality perturbations
resulting from disposal at tbe LA-2 or deep water sites to
background levels in much shorter distances, so that there is
essentially no likelihood of disturbance of such areas from
disposal at either of these sites. There are no geographically
limited fisheries in tbe region.
The shallow water site, however, Is situated near the Palos
Verdes Peninsula. Under certain wave and current conditions,
water quality perturbations from disposal operations may affect
local beaches, shorelines, kelp beds, or the Abalone Cove
Ecological Beserve. The shallow water site also Includes some
popular fishing locations which could be disturbed by these
water quality perturbations. An evaluation of these impacts is
contained in Chapter 4.
2-2.2.3. General Criteria 40 CFR 228.5(c)
If at any time during or after disposal site
evaluation studies. It is determined that existing
-------
- 2-11 -
disposal sites presently approved on an interim basis
for ocean dumping do not meet the criteria for site
selection set forth In Sections 228.5 through 228.6,
the use of such sites will be terminated as soon as
suitable alternate disposal sites can be designated.
there is no Indication that disposal at the LA-2 site or
the deep water site do not or would not meet these criteria.
There Is some indication that dredged material disposal at the
shallow water site might not meet criteria for water quality,
sediment quality, and biologic conditions. Chapters 3 and 4
discuss these criteria In detail.
2.2.2.4. General Criteria 40 CPR 228.5(d)
The sizes of ocean disposal sites will be limited in
order to localize for identification and control any
immediate adverse Impacts and permit the
implementation of effective monitoring and
surveillance programs to prevent adverse long-range
impacts. The size, configuration, and location' of any
disposal site will be determined as a part of the
disposal site evaluation or designation study.
The size of the proposed ocean sites is limited to a
circular area with a 1,000 yard (914 m) radius. This will limit
possible environmental effects to the immediate vicinity of the
designated site. Effective surveillance and monitoring of
disposal operations (33 OSC 1417) at the designated site are
feasible given this restricted area. The size, configuration
and location of the site is prescribed as part of this site
evaluation study.
2.2.2.5. General Criteria 40 CPR 228.5(e)
EPA will, wherever feasible, designate ocean dumping
sites beyond the edge of the continental shelf and
other such sites that have been used historically.
The LA-2 site Is located at the 100 fathom (183 m) contour
near the edge of the continental shelf. The LA-2 site has been
used for disposal of dredge material on an Interim basis since
1977. This Is the only site that meets the criteria for
designation of a site that has been used for disposal of dredged
material in the past.
Selection of other alternative sites was made deliberately
to examine the merits of sites other than the LA-2 site. The
deep water site was chosen in an oceanic basin, off the mainland
shelf, while the shallow water site was chosen close to shore on
the mainland shelf. Neither of these sites completely satisfy
the above general criteria.
-------
- 2-12 -
2.2.3* Comparison of the Three ODHDS to EPA*a 11 Specific
Criteria for Site Selection 40 CFR 228.6(a)
The detailed discussion of each of. tbe 11 criteria Is
contained In the Chapter 3. Affected Environment) and Chapter 4,
Environmental Consequences. A summary table of these
comparisons (Table 2-2) is presented here to support tbe
decision process in selecting tbe Preferred Alternative over tbe
other viable alternatives.
2.2.4. Selectionof the PreferredAlternative
Introduction of large amounts of sediment are expected to
alter the natural environmental conditions at any site. The
LA-2 site has been affected by the disposal of dredged material
in the past. The key issue for the LA-2 ODMDS is that the
dredged material disposal impacts have not unreasonably degraded
tbe marine environment over the past ten years.
The predicted environmental effect-s of a dredged material
disposal site in the deep water region are similar to those
identified for the LA-2 site, although greater impacts to
pelagic fish and lesser impacts to benthlc organisms may occur
at the deep water site. The severity of the environmental
Impacts at tbe deep water site are expected to be insignificant.
Conversely, the predicted environmental effects for a dredged
material disposal site in the shallow water region are predicted
to be quite significant compared to the effects at the other two
sites.
Changing the location of the ODMOS from the LA-2 interim
site would impact an area previously unaffected by disposal of a.
large amount of dredged material, and disposal would contribute
significantly to environmental impacts already imposed on
sensitive coastal ecosystems in the shallow water region. If a
new site was designated, two sites off the California coast
would then be experiencing environmental impacts, including the
initial recovery phase at the LA-2 interim site and the initial
detrimental phase imposed on the newly designated site.
Surveillance of dumping by USCG and other agencies, which is
necessary to discourage illegal dumping activities, would be
considerably more difficult at tbe deep water site than it is
presently at the LA-2 site. For these reasons and others, the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFVIS) opposes moving the site
to an unimpacted location (Jack Fancher, USFWS, personal
communication, June 26, 1984).
EPA and COE have determined that the final designation of
the LA-2 site should be the preferred alternative.
Implementation of this action will involve a detailed site
management program, including a site monitoring program of
biological resources, effects on the surrounding area and
tracking of all disposal activities. This program will be
published by EPA and COE in a separate document. Before the
site management program is released in a final form, a draft
will be made available for public review and comment.
-------
- 2-13 -
V]
o
0,
W
M
e
o
0
41
•H
01
0
0
O
o
o
b -H
• b
B e
O «4
b O
0 «0
• 0
O •
u a
CM
i
CM
0
4*
^4
0)
b
0
4*
0
9|
O>
0
0
a
0
4>
v4
0]
b
04
4
ȣ
Jfl
O
p^
09
4*
•H
01
CM
1
mi •
0
•rt
b
0
4*
v4
b
o
0
^^
^3
•
CO
CM
CM
OS
to.
o
a
4S
41 4*
0. 0
00 i-t -H
•oa «• a
O B
« JS * 0
»- 4».-» 4» O
1 0 B «-
CM «- 0
0 - 0
Ob 4» MB
0 4»
0 •
JS £0j 4,>
4» O O 0
a 01 ^ 0
0 «-* 0 O
9 O
0 0
a* .PA Ml fl
^ B *•» a
~ o 9 o
1 JS -H b
CM 4* b *.
0
0V> --H
b <-* n
3 — B E
£ 0« *"
4* «- O
0 4>
0 «- O
W «- 4» «-
.^
JB O
• CM in
4* 0 -
b 0 in o 0 •
O 31 (— 4* Cb4»
B »- O 0
• CO M 0
• * O ^ 0 O
<0 CM 4* v 0
O — ' 0
• tn «o B
• »»«0 0 10 0
t- «- B
«n •- 9,Vi a B
0
• a o
BOB
O 4* 0
•v4 4* 41
4* O 0
•H A ft O
0 0 O b
O 9 4» Vi
•
*"
tO 0 B
B 0 O
•rt 0 H
0 O b b 4»
9 0 at to b 0 0
B b •>< O 0 b
0 • a at to
b - tO *H
to o o »4 B a
B Vi 0 0 000ja0ab
to
- B
Ml -rt b
a B > o
O «4 b «4
~4 fi O *4 4>
4* a «H
0 0 tot. a •
*4 a B O 9 0
0 0 *4 00
b -B 0 10
• 0 0 a 0
•H e «* b 0
«4 00
B 9 *. .0 0
O 0 X 0 0 ~*
«4 0 b tO b
O O 3 0 0 3
.j 4* B a* b *^
*
M
^4
a
B 0
0
VB -O
b
X 0
•H >
0
4» 0
0 0
B -^
«4 0
M a.
o
b B
a a
w
a. b
•< v>
^4
B
B 0
0
b
0
^
0
o
M
0
*% .
••••
a
o
p b
**
^H
BM
••
0
b
X 0
^ >
0
4» 0
0 O
B ~i
* 0
H 0.
o
B) O
B b
O 0
*4 JS
4* 4»
0 0
^4
0 9
b B
*4 0
0
e js
o o
•H 0
41 0
0 A
o
O 0
•d 41
0
en
o
o
4»
0 V,
b 0
0
J3 0
4» ja
o
o
4>
•
0 41
0 B
JS 0
O 4l
0
•H
0
CM
1
J
0
0
0
0
«
•
0
4*
0
CM
1
J
0
0
a
0
09
0
4*
*4 0
0 tO
9
»4 b
4* 9
B
0 0
B -X
•H 0
a M
O 0
<0
ft. 0
o
0 41
0
*4 Ti*
4* 0
•*4 0
4* 0
B a
0 0
3 b
cr a
•0 0
B 0
0 41
0
0 0
0 a
a
x Vi
H O
,
*
•'
„
B •
0 0
0 0
0 ja
to j:
B
^ j:
a
0 0
O 0
a A
a to
"
XI V,
B 0
0
o
m XI
V, O
•0 JS
4»
^9 0
0 B
0
O XI
a 0
0 0
•H 0
9 a
o
0 b
ja a.
3
B
B
0
0
to
0
b
*
to
B
•H
9
3
*4
o
«4
0>
0
0
0
0
f^
0
b
o
'
o
0
a
M
0
0
a
3
o
>
to
S
^4
J4
0
0
a
^J
o
0
9
0
^
41
0
a
1
X b
f* ft.
41
0 •
Bo
•H 9
M X
o
b O
ao
ao
0 »
0 CM
•
X
B
0
t.
•*
»
0
4*
o
0
a
0
£
41
41
i>4
a
o •
0
X 0
••4 40
41 b
B 0
0 A
B
0 3
9 J8
-------
- 2-14 -
o
0
o.
01
a.
u
B
O
0
«Q
0
4*
»<
n
0
e
a
0
e
0
0
o
o
0 0
»> -H
•H b
4* 0
0 4*
B -H
b b
00
4*
•H B
4 O
O 0
B
8 10
e
0
«o
•
OB
O *H 8 O 4*
0 H 0 4*
O > b 0 M
O b O 4» 0 B
S> 0 -H JO tfl-H
*
1 9 O
O O 4» *4
e»x 0 0
0 *> *4 JS
•H « O
0 * f^ >
4* 0 v4 0 9
3 B 0 4» 0
9 0 «-
B P<« 4* 0
0 -H B O B •
0 -H J3 0 JB
U b O 00.
01 3 4* X«4 0
O 0 «H jO 9 9
1
1 **
4* B «H 9
On « & c
O.X 0 fl 0
a P4 o
a o a
0. * «4 4*
4» 0 0 4* Oi
90s.* a
urvall- DSCO o<
ring. aurvall
itorlni
but aoi
eatad 1
topogri
• o
4»
«4 «4
o a
o
x a
4»
^ *4
5. Paaaibll.
lanoa an<
9 • b
99 e «M a
^iti.p^ e ** o o
3 0 0 ft 60 0
o a .B -H *» *i 0 4* o
* O 4* b X Mb
4* O> 0 r-l O ft O 9 «
0 o 9 0 9 B 0 b 0 3 o
•H W3 B*-I9099CO*>
b b » 0 * 0 » 4)
• ••v *> 4» 4» a. b o
• 06 0. 0 » • 0 «4 0
jeb090ja.coi»4b,B
0otoa»H64>4» 4» 0 4*
a a 0303b04»4>
.j b4»eq»4>0B4».ja0
•
i «
0 JB 1 b
e o 4* JB o
•I 1 <-4 • b 0 -0 £
9 JB 0 090 o o 0 ^4 0
3 0 b 3 4* •* *4 B bovi
4» ** 0 0 B00b4»0a9
«4 *? CM O 4* 0 OP 4> 0 4» b
b i •*•! «* to 4» o o
00«i0b0990BB0.aa.
4»js.jjB0o0B *-i o X 0
• • 00b b -H 4» £0
jaJ30f-l904»O0O • 4* b
O04»0j8OwlOBb-H0B0
Xt<-0o0B90«4a.99*4ja
« B
9 «H i b 0 b o
B | 0 b b 0 A O
• fll vJJ • 4 A II Ml f* Ml
«4 b 4» O b 6 9 0 B
109 0 0 . 0 .H r4 t. 9 -H
e 4t0tQBo.B3v*Ba
«4«H0*BOOooo0a
B O 0 0 4* O *» C 0
^400401 J3 • A n 3 • a
4*b04* 4»4*«4 a O -H
bbb 0B3900 90
030OJ30O0AbX0A
»» O O>4* 4*b0C)4J«»A04*
»P4 0 «0 9H
M 0 0 B *»
0 O «4 9 O
a 4* 0 3 *» o
•4 > 0 B b >
b *» •* b
e -c o 99
A B 0 » 0 B
0 b 0 0
0 0 «0
•^ ^ .a l* fi C
0 b 0 0 «4 O
0O ~* ** •
b Ok to 0 ^ *» >»
0 0 a JQ 0 o B
CX B ** *» > 0 0
0 0 N 0 b
«4 b ^H »- b -H »«
a «* • o ot-o -H
• .
-H
B>b« 9 > 0 **
B B O 0 0 . a o >
b 0 O 00 4* o to
x a
4* 4*
•M ,H O •
B •-( 9 0 9 «
• «4 0 e & e rH
•H 0 4* O -H > 0)
• O 0 *» *» O
0 to B a -H 0 b
ABOVb^FtO,
0 A > s a *
B 0 > 9 9 3 b
«4 O 0 0 0 O 0
J 0 0 b
•H 0 X >*».*>
JB 4» £ 0 0 0 O
4* 3 ^ O t*
«4VtO a -H o
t» 9 0 «4
•H 0 9 9 9 jB •
4» 0 0 4» 0
0 • *> *> -H a>
«0-B 4» 0 0 » BO
B -H B> Oi B 0
0 A H o a
04* 0 « -H «
• O 9 O 4* 0
O 0 B b O O -4
a) o> 0 v, x 09
«*
o
to to
0 B B
4* 0 «4 v4 •
O 3 O. 9 <"•
0 O a 3 0
«• «4 3 >H 4*
W »• 9 0 0
00 B «
b 9 -4 «~
9 0. B «^*«
B 0 0
09 0
B 0 0 0
o «e 0 •*
a 4» b 4*
• a 0 0 •
4* • a JB ~t
0 b O 4» 3
*< b 0 a
M 3
-------
o
0
e»
CQ
a
«
^
0
a
a
a
0
4*
*4
09
a
o
0 a
» -H
•H b
4» 0
m 4*
e -r«
b b
•4 e
•a o
«4
V, 4*
o a
e
a «B
O -H
a a
•H 0
b O
O -H
O 09
a
e
oi
i
Al
- 2-15 -
0
4*
09
b
0
4*
0
4*
•H .
09
b
0
4*
Shallow Va
0
4*
09
01
1
.J
a
b
0
4*
b
O
a
*
CM
(M
OB
Ob
0
e
interference
b
a
interfer- Ml
o
Tl
O
o
a
•H
0
•H
.J
O
a
0
b
0
'• b
0
4*
a
0
e
v4
J3
«*
*
O
a
b
_ 0
b
e
e
00
0
b
a
e e a
a a 4>
o
a •* b
•V* O 4»
a>
a 0
*4 • a
a 100
«4H
4* a a
» v, eo
B a
a a a
tO-H
to
e TI TI
«4 e a
ok a 4*
ex rjr are unknown
La tlae. IB-
4* o a a
o ton
1-4 b v< a
a
1 *4
a js
«4 4* o e
4* 4*
a 4* «4
o a K a
4*
a B -H 09
0 O -H 09
a a M ^
ex* o
a e b TI
M a a. c
a
IN
• b • 0
b 9 -H JB
a -o 4* a
a
0 »
4* O
m ' a
•H «M JS
•o o
a a
a js 0
0 b
• a a
4* 0
_j M ^i^
a a
a «H
0- !K 0
4*
b *4 a
a a «4
at 0*4?
•
X
4* 1
a
O* M 4*
0 a **
«4 0
O «0 b
4* X
•H ja
a 0 TI
9 J3 0
O*4* B
b «M B
0 O b
4* 0
a X4»
*?5
e o a
»4 o a
4* 0
a a
«4 Tl 4*
M B -4
•a a a
iear natural
:lona.
*4
•0 B
a o
e
4*
O
0 4*
t* 0
«*
a 0
to
X b
n adverael
the diaoha
0 X
i
a
b
O 4*
•
a TI
a.
a
a o
1 available data or 1
trend aaaeaBBent 01
a
a
0
a
a
4*
B
0
to
»
a
a
i
B *-
O' O 0
O Tl >
0 e a
a a •
a 4* *j« a
»» o a a
•H 4* a b
a B a B 0
•
a
o
>
b
a
a
o
e
r*
9
a
a
J3
toe apeoiea
•eaent at thia
a ex
«4 4>
f nuiaanoe Mi
ell devel- nc
ulatlona o
clea are w
'aoteria- Pop
taed oon- ape
JS b
0 4*
a
0 t*
«4 e
o
0 O
0) 4*
0
0
B
• a
4» «4
9
a
%•
o
4*
a
m 9
• GX
o
**
9
»
0 0
a* TI
o
a
Tl
e
9 •
0
a a
9
•H 0
>f*
0>4*
0
b
4* O
0 0 •
to 0
m «- a
0 0
a a
0 a **
at* a
4* t*
4*
b • 9
a a o
0 i-4
B >-4 0
a js
Tl V, 4*
O 4*
ex a t.
o o o
i
a
e a
0 0 a
ja a b
4* 0
a a TI
a a e
e 4* a
o o
4* 4* 4*
TI TI a
IH
a
a
e
a
v4
Tl
0
J8
4*
4*
a
a
0
•>•» •
0 0
a 4*
CX«4
a a
the degraded
an diapoaal
terlal Mould
ortant to
dltiona th
dredged oe
a B
a o t.
*4 O 0
O
4*
0 09
o a
s a •
a TI
•4 t-4 •**
B 4* •H
*x B
o a 0
a TI
o a
4* a a
tablishoent
peciea .
for the ea
nulaance a
0 «-.
a o
-------
- 2-16 -
o
0
a.
M
B
o
•o
0
B
a
09
O
a
B
*
O
'O
•H b
-*» «
* 4»
B «4
b b
* W
4*
•« e
* o
O 0
e
0
^)
ft
0
4*
•H
w
b
B
4>
0
*
p4
^4
0
£3
03
0
4*
^4
0}
M
|
^^
mi
^
b
0
4*
^4
b
U
»••>
4g
«•*
^Q
•
oo
CM
«
b.
U
O
e
%•
^•4
a
«4
4t
B
B
4*
O
O.
0
a
o
«
0
A
O
4*
B
>
0
B
M
O
B
b
*
a
•H
J3
to
B
M
O
B
b
^
a.
•H
JB
B
B
9
e
B
34
o
B
«4
b
O
f}
B
9
O
B
0
B
•H
M
M
+
0
J8
4»
B
•H
B
JM
O
0
b
*J|
a
^4
JB
B
b
0
4*
0
a
3P
0
iH
JS
B
0
jg
4*
B
**
e
2
•
X
4*
vl
B
•H
0
«4
^
B
"
O
4*
^^
4*
•H
B,
^
M
O
b
0.
B
O
^H
O
B
O
*H
eg
0
b
b
0
4»
B
»
O,
0
0
•0
B
B
^
^
0
a
A
a
o
•H
to
0
b
r+
a
6
^
a»
•H
b
O
^A
a
B
a
o
B
X
B
B
%4
O
0
4*
"H
0
JB
4*
B
O
a
•o
8
0
0.
0
^
4*
O
a
a
a
•H
•H
0
B
•H
to
^4
b
O
o
a
B
^4
a
fl
0
b
*
0
4*
^4
a
0
jB
4*
4*
a
a
B
«4
a
a
0
b
p^
a
b
3
4*
a
B
4*
B
a
o
•H
*«
B
M
*4
a
0
JB
4*
V.
o
B
O
4*
a
0
o
•-t
a
^
B
0
Oi
0
^
4*
O
Ob
M
0
a
0
4*
•H
a
a
0
b
3
4*
a
0
Wi
g^
a
b
3
4*
O
b
0
B
a
o
B
^
O
9B
•
0
4*
•H
a
V*
o
B
O
v4
4*
a
o
4*
O
a
M
0
B
O
1
a
^4
.H
a
0
^4
ft.
O
4*
a
a
t^
0
a
B
^4
a
a
0
b
^4
a
B
•H
W
•H
b
O
a
,
0
4*
^4
a
0
JB
4*
•
O
o
B
4*
b
O
0.
•
-------
- 3-1 -
CHAPTER 3. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT .
3.1. OCEAN DISPOSAL SITE CHARACTERISTICS
The three alternative disposal sites are within an open.
enbayaent along Southern California, called the Southern
California Bight. This continental borderland consists of a
narrow, shallow and flat mainland shelf; a complex series of
deep basins, submergent ridges or islands; and, at its
westernmost edge, the continental slope which descends to the
abyssal depths of the Pacific Ocean. Slopes leading down to the
basins from the mainland shelf or the intervening ridges are an
additional physical feature of importance. Submarine canyons
bisect the mainland and insular shelves throughout the bight.
The shallow water, LA-2, and deep water- disposal sites are
respectively shelf, near-slope, and basin environments (see
Figure 3-1). The shallow water site at approximately 70 fathoms
(125 m) is located on the Palos Verdes Shelf, a very narrow
section of the mainland shelf directly fronting the Palos Verdes
Peninsula. South of the Palos Verdes Peninsula, a curvature in
the shoreline forms San Pedro Bay. Here the mainland shelf is
called the San Pedro Shelf. It is gently sloping and 11 ami (20
km) at its widest point. Depths on its western edge reach 100
fathoms (175 m) before a steep slope drops off into the San
Pedro Basin (Earl, et al., 1980). The LA-2 site is located at
the top edge of this slope in 65 to 175 fathoms (118 to 320 a).
This location is near the bead of San Pedro Sea Valley, a
submarine canyon. The San Pedro Basin separates the Palos
Verdes and San Pedro shelves from Santa Catalina Island.
Because of its close proximity to land, San Pedro Basin has
received much sedimentation from erosion and is shallower and
flatter than basins further out (EPA, 1985). The deep water
disposal site is located in the San Pedro Basin at depths
ranging from 350 to 500 fathoms (640 to 896 m).
In describing the affected environment, this chapter will
focus on features of the Southern California Bight which are
typical of the three alternative disposal sites. Whenever
possible, values typical of shallow water shelves, deep water
basins, and the intervening slopes are presented for comparison.
In addition, values are presented from a field survey undertaken
for this EIS at the LA-2 site and a nearby reference site. The
reference site has depths approximately the same as the LA-2
site, and no disposal activities have occurred there. Samples
were collected at these two sites of the water column, sediment,
and marine fauna in August and December 1983, and March and
April 1984. Data from the field survey (Appendix A) is
presented in this chapter as an indication of the existing
conditions of the LA-2 site. In Chapter 4, field survey data is
further examined as an indication of past and future impacts of
dredged material disposal.
-------
- 3-2 -
LOS ANGELES CO.
HYPERION SEWAGE
1 TREATMENT PLANT
r
i
ORANGE CO.
SHALLOW
WATER
REGION
LA-2 SITE
ORANGE COUNTY
AGE TREATMENT PLANT
*
REFERENCE SITE
SITE
AVALON
SCALE M NAimCAL MU£S
FIGURE 3-1. LOCATION OF DISCHARGE OUTFALLS AND OTHER OCEAN
DISPOSAL SITES IN THE PROJECT AREA
JWPCP: LOS ANGELES COUNTY JOINT WATER POLLUTION CONTROL PROJECT AT WHITES POINT
-------
- 3-3 -
3.1.1. ProposedUse of the Site
The ocean dredged material disposal site (ODMDS) will be
used solely for the disposal of dredged material that has been
evaluated by permitting criteria of COE and EPA (33 CFR 227 and
40 CFR 225)t and authorized for dumping under Section 103 of
MFRSi. The site vill be designated for continuing use subject
to the design of a site management program, site monitoring
data, and the needs of site users (40 CFR 228.3 and 228.7
through 228.10). If unreasonable environmental Impacts are
detected by EPA and/or COE during any phase of the management
and evaluation process, modification of the disposal site
location or its continued use may be made (40 CFR 228.11).
The total amount of material to be disposed at the site
should average 180,000 yd3•per year. The dredged material
consists predominantly of sand, silt, and clays dredged from the
Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. Dredging operations will
be conducted a few days or weeks In any given year, and will
generate two to four barge trips a day during that time period.
At the dredge site, split hull barges having volumes from 500 to
4,000 yd3 will be loaded and towed by tug boats to the dump
site. At the dump site, material will be released by opening
the bottom of the split hull barge, or by pumping the contents
through an onboard pipeline to a submerged outlet.
3.1.2. Existence and Effects of Current and Previous Discharges
and Dumping in the Area. Including Cumulative Effects
40 CFR 228.6(a)(7)
There are many discharges into the marine environment in
the Southern California Bight. It Is not feasible or necessary
to describe all of them and their effects in the EIS. This
section is Intended to describe significant discharges into the
ocean In the vicinity of the ODHDS alternatives where potential
cumulative or synerglstlc impacts are possible (see .Figure 3-1).
3.1.2.1. THOMS Drilling Muds and Cuttings Disposal Site
The THOMS disposal site, in the San Pedro Basin, was
designated by EPA for the disposal of drilling muds and cuttings
from oil and gas drilling Islands in Long Beach Harbor (50 FR,
9273, March 7. 1985). The site is a circular area with a 1 .5
nml (2.8 km) radius, centered at 33° 34' 30* North by 118 27'
30" Vest, approximately 16 nmi (30 km) southwest of the Long
Beach breakwater. Water depth at the site is approximately 485
fathoms (890 m).
Primary environmental impacts will result from the settling
of drilling mud particles to the basin floor between 0.6 and 14
nmi (1 and 26 km) northwest of the dump site. This will cause
short term turbidity, a small decrease in primary productivity,
temporary loss of zooplankton blomaas, smothering of benthlc
organisms, and alteration of the benthic community structure
-------
- 3-4 -
through a shift In the distribution of sediment grain size.
Fish are not expected to be impacted, as they can move out of
the immediate area during discharge activities. The discharge
material does not contain toxic materials which could accumulate
in the biological system of the basin. Biological loss is
estimated to be minimal, as the impacts within the water column
(turbidity, phytoplankton, zooplankton) will be confined within
the initial dilution zone (428.300 a3), and the existing benthic
community of the basin has low productivity, low density, low
diversity, and random spatial dispersion (EPA, 1985).
The THUMS site is approximately 10 nmi (18 km)
west/southwest of the LA-2 site, 4 nmi (7 km) west of the
closest portion of the deep water site, and 11 nmi (20 km)
southwest of the shallow water site. These distances preclude
the overlapping of sedimentation between the disposal
activities. There is a possibility that diffuse plumes of clay
and silt particles from the LA-2 or deep water sites will
interact with diffuse plumes of mud particles from the THUMS
site. Prevailing currents would tend to keep these plumes
separated, however, and any cumulative effect would occur within
the deep waters of the San Pedro basin at very diffuse levels.
3.1.2.2. Municipal Waste Discharges at Whites Point
The Joint Water Pollution Control Project (JVPCP) of the
Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County discharges an average
of 356 million gallons per day of secondarily treated municipal
waste through two outfalls at Vhltes Point on the Palos Verdes
Peninsula. These discharges have been shown to have significant
adverse effects on water quality, sediment quality, benthic
invertebrate communities and demersal fish populations in the
vicinity of the shallow water site. Consequently, disposal of
dredged material at the shallow water site would allow
cumulative impacts on the marine environment in addition to the
separate environmental impacts of municipal waste discharge and
dredged material disposal. These cumulative impacts would
include the introduction of a greater amount of contaminants to
the area, and the addition of partlculate matter that could
serve as sites for metal adsorption, organic chemical adsorption
and bacterial growth.
Because the discharge from the JVPCP outfall pipes moves
predominantly to the northwest, no interaction or cumulative
impact is expected with any disposal at the LA-2 site which is
approximately 5 nmi (9 km) to the south, or with any disposal at
the deep water site which is approximately 4 nmi (7 km) to the
southwest.
3.1.2.3. Other Municipal tfaste Discharges
There are several other locations in the vicinity where
municipal waste is discharged into the ocean. These include the
City of Los Angeles Hyperion plant which discharges
-------
- 3-5 -
approximately 100 million gallons per day into Santa Monica Bay,
the Orange County plant which discharges approximately 250
million gallons per day into San Pedro Bay, and the Avalon plant
on Santa Catalina Island which discharges approximately 0.36
million gallon per day into San Pedro Channel. The Hyperion
discharge is 22 nmi (41 km), 14 nmi (26 km) and 18 nmi (34 km)
from the LA-2 site, shallow water site, and deep water site,
respectively. Likewise, .the Orange County discharge is an
approximate distance of 14 nmi (26 km), 17 nmi (31 km) and 13
nmi (30 km) from these sites; the Avalon discharge is at an
approximate distance of 16.5 nmi (31 km), 21 nmi (39 km) and 10
nni (13.5 km) from these sites. These distances are great
enough that, along with predominant current directions and
geological barriers, no interaction or cumulative impacts are
expected between these discharges and disposal at any of the
three alternative sites.
3.1.3- Feasibility of Surveillance and Monitoring
40 CFR 228.6UH5)
Surveillance and site management are conducted by the USCG,
EPA and COE. Under Section 107(c) of MPRSA, the DSCG conducts
surveillance to ensure compliance with the permit conditions and
to discourage unauthorized disposal (33 OSC 1417). Additional
surveillance, site management and enforcement responsibilities
are delegated to EPA (40 CFR 22.36) and COE (33 CFB 226).
Monitoring operations at all three alternative sites would
require considerable time and effort to provide the type of high
quality data that is necessary for ODMDS management (40 CFR
228.3). Bottom topographic features, oceanic conditions, and
meteorological conditions affect most sampling efforts.
Sampling difficulty increases as the depth of the site
increases; however, accurate sampling is possible at all sites.
Monitoring the impacts at the shallow water site will be
more difficult because dredged material disposal impacts may not
be indistinguishable from impacts associated with direct
discharges of municipal/industrial wastes and nonpoint. sources.
This is especially true for cumulative or synergistic impacts.
On the other hand, travel to the site would take a relatively
short time, and the shallow depth would reduce sampling time for
deployment and retrieval of sampling gear.
Monitoring the deep water site would require more tine to
deploy and retrieve sampling equipment, and travel time to and.
from the site would be longer. An advantage of the deep water
site is that the bottom is a flat plain of soft sediment and
bottom sampling should be relatively easy. Therefore, the deep
water site may not be much more expensive to monitor than the
shallow water site of the LA-2 site.
-------
- 3-6 -
3.2. PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
3.2.1. Meteorology and Air Quality
The ellaate of the southern California coastal and offshore
area is classified as Mediterranean coastal, vlth warm dry
suamers and relatively vet, mild winters. Extreme variations in
yearly temperatures are uncommon. The mean air temperature
ranges from 12°C to 15°C in January, and from 14°C to 22° C in
August (Kimura, 1974).
Average annual precipitation in the coastal region ranges
between 10 and 15 Inches. Precipitation tends to decrease as
the distance offshore Increases. Most precipitation occurs
during the months of October through April and variations are
possible in monthly and seasonal totals.
The dominant wind pattern for southern California is one of
northwest winds offshore, modified near the coast by local
topography and land-sea breeze phenomenon. During the summer
months, the sea breeze or stratus regime predominates, occurring
50J of the time. It is associated with coastal fog, stratus
olouds and persistent westerly to northwesterly winds averaging
8 knots (Kimura, 1974}. Due to the Santa Catalina eddy, these
northwesterly winds blow southeasterly to southwesterly along
the shore of the bight, especially during the night and early
morning hours (see Eigure 3-2). The eddy is caused by the
orientation of the mountains and the coast Which run north to
south but abruptly change east to west immediately north of
Point Conception.
The winter months experience more variable wind patterns
than the summer months; however, a land-sea breeze regime is the
most common. It is characterized by northeast winds during the
afternoon and evening and westerly winds after sunset (see
Figure 3-2). The northeast winds, known as the Santa Ana winds,
are the result of a high pressure cell over the western states
(Dames and Moore, 1984).
During the spring when strong northwest winds prevail, the
maximum intensity of upwelling occurs. The net direction of
surface waters shows a tendency to a westerly bend. This
phenomenon is due to the Coriolls Effect and it results In an
extensive vertical flow of water.
Ho wind measurements are available for the Individual
disposal sites. As the alternative sites are relatively close,
wind conditions are expected to be similar, with the shallow
water alte experiencing winds of less intensity and more variety
due to its proximity to land.
-------
- 3-7 -
PALOS VERGES
PENINSULA
SANTA BARBARA IS.
O
SANTA CATALINA IS
SUMMER SEA BREEZE
PALOS VERGES
PENINSULA
SANTA BARBARA IS.
SANTA CATALINA IS.
Santa Ana Winds (Afternoon. Evening)
Westerlies (Nightime)
WINTER SEA BREEZE
Source: D*m« & Moor*. 19S4
NO SCALE
FIGURE 3-2. GENERALIZED DEPICTION OF TYPICAL WIND
REGIMES OFFSHORE OF PALOS VERDES PENINSULA
-------
- 3-8 -
Air quality in a particular area depends upon the prevailing
weather conditions, local terrestrial topography and the amount
of pollutants being emitted into the air. In California, the
pollutants that frequently exceed air quality standards are
ozone (Oz), total suspended particulates (TSP), nitrogen oxides
(H0*)f and carbon monoxide (CO) (California Air Resources Board,
1981).
the proposed project would involve ships hauling dredged
material and consequently, there would be an increase in the
amount of HOX, CO, TSP, and hydrocarbons (BC) released in the
region. Utilizing the standard dispersion equations, it was
determined, based on the hauling ships* horsepower, the ships*
fuel consumption, the number of round trips per year, and the "
distance of each trip, that there would be no significant impact
on southern California air quality. Therefore, the amount of
air pollutants generated by hauling dredged material to any of
the proposed dump sites would be insignificant.
3.2.2. Physical Oceanography of the Southern California Bight
40 CFR 228.6(a)(6)
This section summarizes regional and local Information
concerning ocean currents, upwelling, waves, and tides in the
Southern California Bight with an emphasis on nearshore
circulation. A more detailed account of the various aspects of
the regional currents can be found in Hlckey (1979).
3.2.2.1. System of Currents
The dominant bydrographlc feature along the California coast
is the California Current which controls the general water
character and circulation of the area (Jones, 1971) (Figure
3-3). The California Current originates in colder northern
waters and flows southward along the west coast of the North
American' continent. At Point Conception where the coastline
turns in an easterly direction, the California Current continues
in a southerly direction along the continental slope. It is
considered the western boundary of the Southern California
Bight. Beneath the California Current at a depth of
approximately 275 fathoms (500 m), the California Undercurrent
flows in a northerly direction.
Hear the 32° latitude, the California Current swings
eastward toward Baja California, and splits into northerly and
southerly flows. The portion which flows northerly enters the
Southern California Bight and is called the Southern California
Countereurrent. It occupies the top 110 fathoms (200 m) of the
water column. Upon encountering the Channel Islands and Point
Conception, this flow either continues northward or turns back
and flows southeast along the continental shelf. This looping
feature of the surface current system is sometimes called the
Southern California Eddy (Jones, 1971).
-------
- 3-9 -
118*W
116 W
34 N
PALOS VEROES PENINSULA
PROJECT AREA
\ ^
SAN DIEGO
M.ny .ddta. '
-------
- 3-10 -
Gorsllne and Grant (1972) found the southerly inshore
current best developed during the fall and winter when they
•eaaured velocities of 20 to 100 centimeters per second (cm/a).
The inshore current was found to be much more restricted and
compressed toward the shelf during the spring. Measurements of
the oounterourrent revealed that the flow was strongest at the
surface, 5 to 30 cm/3, and closest to shore during the spring.
The geostrophlc speed of the countercurrent was calculated to be
about 12 to 18 cm/a by Sverdrup and Fleming (1941). Pavlova
(1966) demonstrated that the volume transported by the
countercurrent is only slightly less than that of the California
Current.
This current system manifests three seasons as shown in the
seasonal current patterns for the study area (Figure 3-4) and
described below:
A* During the Oceanic period from July to November, the
southward flowing California Current dominates the nearshore
current patterns, and the Southern California Eddy Is well
developed.
B. During the Davidson period from December to February, the
California Undercurrent becomes stronger and partially
displaces the California Current westward. The Southern
California Eddy is weak.
C. During the Upwelllng period from March to June, alongshore
winds strengthen and drive surface water offshore due to the
Coriolis Effect. At deeper layers, cold water flows toward
the shore and rises to compensate for the displaced surface
water. This is a coastal event that may be more intense in
certain locations depending on the bottom topography and
current strength.
Parachute drouge and drift bottle studies show that the
currents in the Southern California Eddy have a complex nature
of flow and that flows calculated based on the geostrophic
currents may not be completely valid. Countercurrents, eddy
currents and upwelllng conditions form a complicated system that
has both large and small scale variations in flow direction
(Maloney and Chan, 1974).
Surface currents are heavily influenced by wind forces and
submarine topography. Deeper currents are mainly influenced by
tides, undercurrent, and basin topography. Localized eddies and
other current features are constantly forming, interacting and
dissipating. Despite the three recognized current periods, the
prevailing current at a particular time and place is changeable
and difficult to predict. Current fluctuations much shorter
than the recognized current periods are observed in mainland
shelf waters (T.J. Hendricks, Physical Oceanographer, Southern
California Coastal Water Research Project, personal
communication, 1984).
-------
si fV — .--^
0
5
(C
o
oc
Ul
X
O
(0
Ul
O
CO
UJ
oc
oc
o
CO
<
E
<
>
o
CO
<
UJ
CO
CO
Ul
§
o
tZ
Ul
o
oc
o
0
-------
- 3-12 -
r
Several studies Indicate bow current conditions nay vary at
the three disposal sites. Hendricks (1980) found net movement
of currents on the Palo Verdes Shelf at 31 fathoms (55 n>) was
northwesterly at speeds of 4.5 to 5.5 cm/sec during a five month
period in the summer of 1979* is the Palos Verdea Peninsula
juts out tnto the bight, the Southern California Eddy has more
influence here than in recessed areas such as San Pedro Bay.
Studies of the JVPCP sewage outfall state that surface currents
are predominately to the east except during autumn and winter
when westerly currents occur. Below the thermocline, currents
usually have a net flow northwest at 3 cm/sec. Effluent plumes
from the outfall are released at depths of approximately 30
fathoms (55 m), and net transport is predicted to the northwest
at flows of 3.0 to 5.5 cm/sec. Upwelling is frequent along the
Palos Terdes Shelf during the spring (EPA, 1987).
The San Pedro Shelf is subject to many eddies and reversals
in current flow. A plume model developed for the LA-2 site
(described in Appendix C), used a northwesterly flow at 7.95
cm/sec as the prevailing current based on observations made in
other studies (Hendricks, 1980 and 1982; Hendricks and Stubbs,
1984; Wlnant, 1983). A southeasterly flow at the same speed was
also evaluated as this is a relatively common reversal in the
area. During a period of spring upwelling, Earl et al. (1980,
1981) found that water moved onto the San Pedro Shelf in the
vicinity of San Pedro Sea Valley and spread southeasterly, winds
moved the surface flow in a similar direction, and a midwater
wedge is hypothesized to have moved shoreward.
San Gabriel Canyon appears to modify the shelf current
system by creating a corridor across the shelf and down Its
slope (Karl, 1980). It is unknown whether San Pedro Sea 7alley
(near the LA-2 site) operates In a similar manner, although both
submarine canyons head on the San Pedro Shelf at a distance
greater than 2 nail (3*7 km) from shore.
In the deep waters of the bight's basins, bottom waters are
filled by the California Undercurrent flowing across the
continental slope (Malouta et al., 1981), and moving through the
basins in a northwesterly direction. The weak flow at the
bottom of San Pedro Basin is normally less than 0.05 cm/sec
(EPA, 1985).
3.2.2.2. Waves
Vaves (swell) from the northern Pacific dominate the winter
and spring oceanic conditions of the bight when major storm
systems are more Intense. Southerly swells occur during summer
and fall when hurricanes are off southern Mexico and tropical
storms are present In the southern Pacific.
Vlnd waves (sea) formed locally respond to northwest winds
from the Pacific high pressure regions, winds of the Santa
Catallna Eddy, and the Santa Ana winds. Vave convergence zones
-------
- 3-13 -
occur over the San Pedro Shelf and affect bottom topographic
features to depths of approximately 182 fathoms (100 a).
Ho large tsunamis have been recorded in the southern
California area because the wave refraction over the basin and
ridge bathymetry of the region dissipates the force of the
waves. Id-tsunamis have been formed by local earthquakes during
historical times.
3.2.2.3. Tides
Southern California, Including the San Pedro Channel, has
mixed semidiurnal tides that move from southeast to the
northwest. These tides are characterized by unequal tidal
amplitudes causing two high and low tides each day. During
periods when the unequal tidal amplitude is great, the tides
tend to resemble diurnal tides, one high and one low per day.
The daily tidal range varies from 1 to 3 a.
3.2.3. Hater Column Characteristics 40 CFR 228.6(a)(9)
3*2.3*1« Temperature " _. .
Surface temperatures in the Southern California Bight
normally range between 12.5°C in the winter, to 19.5°C in the
summer (Halooey and Chan, 1974), with maximum variations between
11°C and 23° C (BLN, 1978). Maximum temperatures in the surface
mixed layer occur from August through October, while minimum
temperatures are reached between February and April. Dally and
seasonal effects are registered in the water column between 5
and 27 fathoms (10 and 50 m).
The shallow water region over the Palos Verdes Shelf Is
expected to follow the patterns. In the month of October
between 1980 and 1983, surface water temperatures were observed
between 16.1° to 22.3°C while in March they ranged between 14.3°
and 17.7° C. Bottom temperatures at 33 fathoms (60 m) during
the same period have been observed at 11.2° to 16.2°C and 10.6°
to 13.1°C respectively (Tetra Tech, 1984b). Satellite
observations Indicate that winter surface temperature patterns
along this shelf are weak and variable, appearing well mixed
across the region. Spring upwelllng events bring cold water to
the nearshore, displace warm water, and so create strong thermal
gradients (Jones et al.t 1984).
At depths between 55 and 165 fathoms (100 to 300 m), the
water temperatures of the Southern California Bight generally
decrease to a range between 6.5° to 11°C (BLM, 1978). See
Figure 3-5 for average seasonal variations with depth at a
location between Santa Catalina Island and San Clemente Island.
Vater temperature measurements made during the field study
compared favorably with these values (Appendix A, p. A-18).
Maximum surface temperatures recorded in the August survey
-------
- 3-14 -
J PMAMJ JASONO
100 •
TEMPERATURE <*C>
SOURCE: JONES. 1971
FIGURE 3-5. AVERAGE SEASONAL VARIATION OF
TEMPERATURE IN CHANNEL ISLANDS AREA
BETWEEN SANTA CATALINA ISLAND
AND SAN CLEMENTE ISLAND
-------
- 3-15 -
ranged from 19.9° to 21.5°C. MlnIBurn surface temperatures
recorded In the December survey ranged from 13.8° to 14.8°C.
The yearly surface temperature variation was between 5.2° and
7.5°C depending on the station (Appendix B, p. B-20).
At 55 fathoms (100 m), temperatures showed a smaller
range from 9.7° to 12.0°C. Maximum temperatures were again
found in the August survey, while minimum temperatures at most
stations were found during the May survey. Vlth the maximum
depth at the eight sampling stations ranging from 70 to 170
fathoms (129 to 312 m), the bottom temperatures ranged from 7.9°
to 11.0°C. Maximum values were found for all stations during
August, while minimum values varied according to the depth of
each station. At the shallower stations (approximately 70
fathoms or 129 m), minimum temperatures were found during the
May survey. At the deeper stations (greater than 100 fathoms or
198 m), minimum temperatures were found during the December
survey.
These figures indicate stratification in the water column.
During the summer, the field survey indicated an upper water
column thermocline existed between 5 and 27 fathoms. (10 and 50
m). The thermocline was essentially absent in winter, with
temperatures decreasing more or less steadily from surface to
bottom.
There were no significant water temperature differences
between LA-2 and the reference site (Appendix A, p. 1 9)• In ,
waters of the Southern California Bight deeper than 165 fathoms
(300 m), temperatures are generally less than 8° C (Chan, 1974).
Temperatures at the bottom of the San Pedro Basin have been
reported at 5°C (EPA, 1985).
3.2.3.2. Salinity
Salinity values are not known to be highly variable In the
Southern California Bight. The surface water is more saline
during the summer and autumn than In the winter and spring due
to the greater amount of rain in the winter and the increased
evaporation in the summer. Variations in salinity measurements
across the San Pedro Channel and vertically in the water column
are generally small, ranging between 32.9 and 34.5 parts per
thousand (ppt) (Allan Hancock Foundation, 1965)-
On the mainland shelf, while the surface water varies due to
the influence of freshwater runoff and evaporation, at depths
below 8 fathoms (15 m), salinity is frequently isohaline. At
the JVPCP sewage outfall, average salinity during the winter was
33.4 ppt with little variation, while in the spring, salinity
varied greatly from 33-5 ppt near the surface to 33-2 ppt at
depths of 7 fathoms (13 »). to 33-7 ppt near the bottom (Tetra
Tech, 1984b). At slope and basin depths of 110 to 275 fathoms
(200 to 500 m), the mixing zone between major surface currents
and undercurrents occurs. Here the salinity can vary from 33.6
to 34.4 ppt depending on the dominance of these currents
(Maloney and Chan, 1974).
-------
. 3-16 -
Salinity measurements taken during the field survey showed a
wider range with many values lover than has been historically
reported. Although the vet months of November and December of
1983 may explain some of the low values, other values are
considered errors in measurement. Mot including those values
considered most questionable, the range was 30*3 to 31.1 ppt
with many of these values falling near the lower half (Appendix
A, p. A-23). There were no signiflant salinity differences
between the LA-2 site and the reference site. Salinity
generally Increased slightly from surface to bottom. Salinity
at the bottom of San Pedro Basin has been reported at 34.4 ppt
(EPA, 1985).
3.2.3.3. Hydrogen Ion Concentration (pH)
A narrow range of pH values is expected for waters in the
Southern California Bight because the ocean is a well buffered
solution. The Allan Hancock Foundation (1965) found a range of
pH from 7.5 to 8.6 along the southern California coast with an
average of 8.1. At 38 to 55 fathoms (70 to 100 m), the pH
generally decreases to a range of 7*6 to 7.8, while at the deep
oxygen-minimum layer in the basins, the pH has been reported at
7.5. In the field survey, pH ranged from 7.0 to 8.5 with a mean
of 8.0. At 55 fathoms (100 m), the pH ranged from 7.0 to 8.2.
Concentrations of pB showed a decrease with depth and there were
no significant differences between the LA-5 and reference sites
(Appendix A, p. A-26).
3.2.3.4. Turbidity
Turbidity in the water column is caused by suspended
inorganic and organic material. It limits the amount of light
transmission and therefore affects the level of photosynthesis.
The inorganic particles are mostly sediments entering the water
through river outfalls and land erosion. Waves and currents may
also resuspend small particles on the bottom of shallow waters
particularly during periods of upwelling. As a result, water
over sandy bottoms tends to be clearer than water over muddy
bottoms. The concentration of plankton influences turbidity,
with seasonal blooms of these organisms restricting the depth of_
llght penetration.
Sewage outfalls introduce both organic and inorganic
sediments which locally Increase turbidity. At the JVPCF sewage
outfall, a oorrelation has been found between the level of
suspended solids discharged and the depth of the euphotic zone
(EPA, 1987). This indicates that turbidity on the Palos Verdes
Shelf has increased due to this discharge. Transmisaivity is a
measurement of light transmitted through the water column, and
is one indication of turbidity. In the month of October between
1980 and 1983, transmiaslvlty at the outfall was measured at 27
to 67$ near the surface of the water, and 23 to 79$ at the
bottom. In the month of March during the same time period,
transmisslvlty was recorded at 30 to 62* at the surface waters,
and 25 to 76) along the bottom (Tetra Tech, 1984b).
-------
- 3-17 -
OB the San Pedro Shelf, turbidity generally decreases
seaward of the shoreline (Karl, 1980). Shallow waters tend to
have a high degree of turbidity throughout the water column.
Turbidity generally decreases as the turbid water moves toward
deeper waters and is diluted by the greater volume of water.
Fine sized sediments such as clays and silts often remain in
suspension for longer periods of time than sands, and are
distributed over greater distances by local water circulation
patterns (Gorsllne et al. , 1984).
Vater clarity conditions at the alternative disposal sites
is expected to follow these general patterns but vary widely
under natural conditions. Transmlsslvity measured during the
field survey averaged 96.4 percent and showed little variation
with depth (Appendix A, p. 26). Mo significant differences were
noted during the study period or at any sample station.
Turbidity is also closely associated with sediment transport as
discussed in Section 3.2.5.2. ;
3*2.3*5. Dissolved Oxygen
The surface layers of the ocean are usually saturated with
dissolved oxygen (DO), and DO concentration generally decreases
with increasing depth. Average DO values in the vicinity of the
project site are 5.5 to 5.9 milligrams per liter (mg/1) in the
surface waters and decrease to 1.6 to 2.2 mg/1 at 110 fathoms
(200 m) (Rational Ocean Data Center, 1974).
In the San Pedro Channel, a subsurface DO maximum develops
in late spring and summer at approximately 27 fathoms (50 m),
and continues through the fall and early winter. This
corresponds to the bottom of the wind-mixed layer, and is
thought to be caused by the temperature/density pycnocline that
prevents the mixing of colder oxygenated water with the surface
water mass (Held, 1962).
Ambient DO levels at the JVPCP sewage outfall have been
reported at 5.1 mg/1 to 6.3 mg/1 (EPA, 1987)- In the month of
October between 1980 and 1983, DO levels at the surface have
been observed between 7.2 and 9*0 mg/1, and at the .bottom (33
fathoms or 60 m) ranging from 5.0 to 7.7 mgVl. In the month of
March during the same time period, the surface DO ranged from
7.6 to 9.8 mg/1, and the bottom DO ranged from 4.0 to 6.5 mg/1
(Tetra Tech, 1984b). However, compounds in the sewage outfall
cause a decrease in DO concentration within the dilution zone
surrounding the outfall pipes.
During the field surveys, surface DO levels ranged from 7.5
to 13.2 mg/1 (Appendix A, p. A-22). Unusually high DO levels of
12 and 13 mg/1 were only found during the December survey and
may be an'error in~measurement. At 55 fathoms (100 m) the range
was from 4.3 to 9.2 mg/1. DO levels were lower at the bottom, '
ranging from 4.3 to 9.2 mg/1. Much of this variation was due to
variation in the depth of bottom stations. Although dissolved
-------
- 3-18 -
oxygen generally decreased with depth, a maximum was usually
noted at depths of 6 to 27 fathoms (10 to 50 m) in'the May and
August surveys. Such a subsurface maximum has been associated
in other studies with thermal stratification in the waster
column. Under such a condition, oxygen is entrapped in upper
layers by .the seasonal thermocline (Reid, 1962). There were no
significant differences in dissolved oxygen between LA-2 and the
reference site (Appendix A, p. A-23).
Maximum DO levels were found in the December survey
throughout the water column. Minimum DO levels at the surface
were found during the March survey for the LA-2 site, and during
the August survey for the reference site. Minimum temperatures
at 55 fathoms (100 m) and at the bottom were found during
December at both sites.
In the deeper waters of the basins, dissolved oxygen levels
are extremely low. In San Pedro Basin, the DO at the bottom of
the water column has been reported at a level of 0.2 mg/1 (EPA,
1985).
3.2.3.6. Hutrients
The most important nutrients for the growth of phytoplankton
in marine waters are nitrates, phosphates, and silicates.
Concentrations of the three nutrients tend to be low near the
surface and generally increase in concentration with depth until
approximately 275 to 825 fathoms (500 to 1,500 m). At these
depths, concentrations of nitrates and phosphates then decrease
(EPA, 1985)* The highest nutrient concentrations occur during
the upwelllng season.
Hear the surface where light penetration is greatest,
nitrate is the primary limiting factor, for the growth of
pbytoplankton. Surface nitrate concentrations vary from 0.1
mg/1 during the Davidson period to more than 8.0 mg/1 during the
upwelllng period. At 50 fathoms (90 m) nitrate concentrations
range from 0.2 to 0.4 mg/1 (SCCWRP, 1973).
Near sewage outfalls, ammonium__concentratlona are often
elevated. Off Whites Point, average organic nitrogen
concentrations in the water column have been reported at less
than 0.1 mg/1 as nitrogen; however, ammonia concentrations
measured in May 1973 ranged from less than 0.1 mg/1 (nitrogen)
near the surface, to as much as 1.6 mg/1 (nitrogen) at a depth
of 24 fathoms (44 m) (Tetra Tech, 19745). Hear the floor of the
San Pedro Basin, ammonium levels of 0.25 to 0.40 mg/1 In the
water column have been reported, with total organic nitrogen
levels reported at 0.10 to 0.12 mg/1 (Chan, 1974).
The concentration of phosphate is between 0.5 and 0.8 mg/1
in surface waters, approximately 3.0 mg/1 at 275 fathoms (500
m), and a maximum of approximately 3*7 mg/1 at 495 fathoms (900
m) (Chan, 1974; BLM, 1978).
-------
- 3-19 -
'r
Silicate concentrations increase more or leas steadily vitb
depth. Surface silicate concentrations vary between 10 and 20
Bg/1.
Hutrlent concentrations were not sampled during tbe field
survey.
3*2.3.7. Trace Metals
Low concentrations of trace metals are essential for meta-
bolic processes. Some of these metals include boron (B), cobalt
(Co), copper (Cu), iron (Fe), manganese (Mn), molybdenum (Kb),
selenium (Se), and zinc (Zn). These same metals may also be
toxic at higher concentrations when bioaccumulation of the
elements causes adverse effects higher trophic levels (SCCW8P,
1973).
Trace metals enter tbe ocean from natural sources
associated with suspended particles, as dissolved ions carried
in runoff, or resuspended from sediment layers. These natural
concentrations plus amounts added by anthropogenic activities,
mainly associated with the discharges of municipal and
industrial waste treatment plants, are tbe main sources of heavy
metals. Through various chemical pathways over a long period of
time, heavy metals precipitate out of tbe water column and
become incorporated into tbe sediments.
Analysis of trace metal concentration is especially
difficult in the water column as water movement makes these
levels highly transitory. Analyses of heavy metal
concentrations are also made difficult because:
A. Concentrations of metals in marine waters and sediments may
be near their limit of detection by present analytical
techniques;
B. Uncertainty about the physical/chemical state of tbe metals
and sample contamination add a degree of analytic
variability; and
C. Concentrations of particular heavy metals vary with distance
from shore or discharge points, depth, rainfall, currents,
upwelling, plankton populations, size of suspended
particulate and sediment grain size (SCCWRP, 1973)*
Concentrations of trace metals tend to be low in the South-
ern California Bight, except near sewage outfalls and other
pollution sources. Most metals detected in the water column are
those associated with suspended particulates. A study conducted
for the D.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) (Bruland.and
Pranks, 1977), compared the concentrations of heavy metals as
suspended particulates in nearsbore and basin water masses off
southern California. They found that nearshore waters away from
-------
- 3-20 -
pollution sources tend to have lover metal concentrations than
offshore areas. Suspended partlculates include only a portion
of the trace metals in the water column, as dissolved metals are
also present. However, the particulate trace metal
concentration la often the only parameter examined as it is more
easily measured with accuracy, and it is assumed to more readily
expose anthropogenic perturbations in the marine environment
(Bruland and Franks, 1977).
Table 3-1 shows nearsbore and inner basin values found in
the BLM study which indicate possible levels prior to dumping at
the LA-2 site and levels in a deep water region.
The Palos Verdes Peninsula area is particularly noted for
the effect of sewage and industrial discharges on nearshore
waters (MMS, 1983). Measurements made in the early 1970'a
showed a clear increase in the concentration of heavy metals in
the water column near the sewage outfall at Whites Point
(SCCVBP, 1973). Since that time, the treatment level at the
J¥PCP has significantly Improved and past values are no longer
Indicative of the current condition. Water samples at the JWPCF
have not recently-been taken to analyze for metals in the water
column. Emphasis is now placed on examining metal concentration
in sediments. Section 3.2.5.3 discusses typical levels found in
sediments near sewage outfalls and In cleaner waters.
In the field study, concentrations of arsenic (As), cadmium
(Cd), chromium (Cr), Cu, lead (Pb), mercury (Bg), and Zn were
hot detected in the water column (Appendix A, p. A-33).
However, the limits of detection In this field survey were near
or above typical levels reported by the BLM study for these
metals (see Appendix A, A-16). As a consequence, the only
conclusion which can be drawn from the field survey is that
previous dumping at the LA-2 site has not appreciably elevated
the level of these metals in the water column on a long term
basis.
3.2.3*8. Hydrocarbons
A BLM study has found a range of dissolved hydrocarbons in
the waters of the Southern California Bight from <0.001 + O.Q2
mg/1 (BLM, 198lb). Because of difficulties in sampling and
analyzing hydrocarbons in the water column, more emphasis has
been placed on.examining levels of hydrocarbons in sediments as
discussed in Section 3.2.5.4.
Historically, natural offshore oil and gas seeps have been
observed in several locations near the Palos Terdes Peninsula
and at the northern tip of Santa Catallna Island. They are
transient seeps associated with the numerous faults and folds in
the region, and could be activated or reactivated by tectonic or
seismic movement (Dennis, 1971).
-------
- 3-21 -
Table 3-1 * Concentrations of Trace Metals as Suspended
Particulates in the Water Column in Mierograms Per
Liter (ug/1).
AHSENIC CADMIUM CHROMIUM COPPER
(Ar) (Cd) (Cr) (Cu)
BLM Study (a)
Nearshore
Surface Water
Deep Water
Inner Basins
Surface Water
Deep Water
Field Survey
(b)
Levels of
Detection
(a) s Bruland
(b) a Appendix
HD = Ho Data
HD
NO
NO
ND
No
the
2
and
A,
•
0.0012 HD 10.0033
10.0015 0.062 ~~0.012
0.0018 HD <0.002
0.0005 ND <0.0034
concentrations of aetals were
field survey at these levels
2 20 10
Franks, 1977
p. A-33
LEAD MERCURY
(Pb) (Hg)
•- . •-
0.0032 ND
0.0053 ND
0.0025 ND
0.0018 ND
detected in
of detection:
50 0.2
ZINC
(Zn)
-
0.016
0.011
0.016
0.008
5
-------
- 3-22 -
Oils and greases are also Introduced to the bight's water
by human activities. Oil and grease levels measured in the
vater at control stations in the bight annually ranged front
<0.01 to 0.46 milligram per square aeter (mg/m2) (surface film
bezane eztractable materials), while at stations near the JVFCP
outfalls they annually ranged from <0.01 to 65.8 ag/m2 (Tetra
Tech, 1984b). In the field survey, volumes of water (rather
than a surface film), were sampled for oil and grease. Using
this sampling method, oil and grease were undetected at levels
of 0.1 mg/1.
McDermott and Heesen (1975) found that levels of
chlorinated hydrocarbons in waters outside Los Angeles Harbor
were higher than for Newport Bay, California and San Diego
Harbors, but were still extremely low: 0.000006 to 0.000012
mg/1 DDT and 0.000002 mg/1 PCS 1254. Payne et al. (1976)
reported ranges of values for surface and nearbottom water in
the Southern California Bight: 0.00003 to 0.02 mg/1 for the
dissolved fraction and <0.000002 to 0.002 mg/1 for the
particulate fraction. In the field survey chlorinated
hydrocarbon concentrations (DDTs and PCBs) in the water column
were below detection limits at both the LA-2 and the reference
sites. The detection limits for the hydrocarbons tested in this
field survey are listed in Appendix A (p. A-16). As the levels
of detection for the field survey were greater than or close to
the maximum levels reported by McDermott and Heesen and Payne et
al., it follows that no DDTs or PCBs would be detected. As a
consequence, the only conclusion which can be drawn from the
field survey is that past dumping at the LA-2 site has not
appreciably elevated the levels of chlorinated hydrocarbons in
the water column on a long-term basis.
3«2.4. Regional Geology
The features seaward of the Los Angeles-Long Beach area are
submerged extensions of the Peninsular Ranges of southern
California and Baja California (Figure 3-6). The highly
irregular topography of the basins and ridges parallel the
structural orientation of the onshore ranges.
The LA-2 site lies on the coastal shelf and the continental
slope at depths ranging from 65 to 175 fathoms (118-320 m). The
shelf consists mainly of tightly folded upper Neogene sandstone
and shale with extensive deposits of Quarternary sands and muds
as much as 656 feet (200 m) thick (Tedder et al., 1980). The
inner shelf is Incised by gullies, most of which were carved by
subaerial erosion during past geologic times.
Many active faults have been found on the mainland shelf
and in .the inner basins including the Newport-Inglewood fault
(see Figure 3-6) and two unnamed potentially active fault zones
along the base of Santa Monica and San Pedro Shelves. Numerous
earthquakes have been reported in the offshore area between the
Los Angeles-Orange County coastline and Santa Catallna Island.
-------
- 3-23 -
o
I
c
i
X
e
I
tt
1
CO
Ul
o
DC
UJ
>
03
O
0.
u.
O
O
Ul
CO
Ul
ce
H-
Ul
U
O
O
o
Ul
o
f
Ul
(T
O
UL
-------
- 3-24 -
Prominent sediment deposits are present on the slope seaward of
Point Permln in the San Pedro Shelf, area as a result of sediment
transport (MMS, 1983).
3-2.5. Sediment Characteristics
Mainland shelf areas are characterized by the presence of
coarse, terrigenous sediments (Allan Hancock Foundation, 1959)*
In deeper slope habitats, finer sediments are present (MMS,
1983); occasional slumping of finer sediments creates an
unstable substrate on the continental slope and also provides
sediment to the basin floors. Nearshore basins typically have
high sedimentation rates dominated by land-derived detritus.
Terrigenous materials have accumulated in the inner basins,
producing extensive basin plains. The characteristics of
sediment in the slope areas are Intermediate betveen that of
shelf and basin areas.
3*2.5*1* Grain 518e
Characteristics of the bottom sediments in the Southern
California Bight are influenced by local submarine features and
oceanographlc conditions. The finer sediment fractions of silt
and clay are common in the deeper portion of the bight, while at
intermediate depth locations, such as that of the LA-2 site,
roughly equal proportions of sand and fine sediment are
typically found. 'In shallower waters on the mainland shelf,
coarser sand fractions increase.
For example, Drake et al. (1985) have identified the major
types of surface sediments on the San Pedro Shelf (Figure 3-6).
Those found in the vicinity of the shallow water site are fine
to medium sized sands and muds at an approximate depth less than
16 fathoms (30 m) with a mean diameter of 92 micrometers (urn) ,
and at deeper depths, finer muds with a mean diameter of less
than 62 urn. In the vicinity of the LA-2 site, the finer muds
predominate as sediment.
In the field survey, samples of bottom
generally sandy-silt (Appendix A, p. A-61).
sediments at the LA-2 site showed a greater
than those at the reference site (Table 3-2)
size of samples taken at the LA-2 site was 4
urn) (variance of 0.90, 95% confidence level
the mean grain size of samples taken at the
4.43 phi units (46.4 urn) (variance of 0.45,
of ± 0.13). The LA-2 site samples averaged
28J silt, and 12$ clay. The reference site
1* gravel, 649 sand, 28* silt, and 8* clay (
to A-65).
sediments were
The size of the
range on the. average
The mean grain
.44 phi units (46.1
of ± 0.20), while
reference site was
95) confidence level
1* gravel, 59$ sand,
averaged less than
Appendix A, p. A-62
Bottom sediments which have been found at 258 to 266
fathoms (470 to 484 m) of the San Pedro Basin in other studies
consisted of primarily greenish mud and varying amounts of
•oozy, blue, green gray muds". Mean particle size was less than
62 urn in diameter (Hartman and Barnard, 1958).
-------
- 3-25 -
3.2.5*2. Sediment Transport
Bet sediment transport in the vicinity of the shallow water
site has been estimated to be toward the northwest (EPA, 1987).
OB the San Pedro Shelf, sediment transport on the bottom and
surface layers has been reported to the southeast during
upwelllng periods, and bottom transport has been estimated as to
the south during nonupwelling periods (Earl et al., 1980).
Sediments from shallow waters appear to accumulate in or at the
beads of San Pedro Sea Valley and other submarine canyons (see
Figure 3-7). Most material initially deposited on the shelf is
expected to be resuspended and eventually transported down the
gradient of slopes and basin floors (Schwalbach and Gorsline,
1985). Fine particles which remain suspended for longer periods
of time are expected to follow the same route in a more direct
fashion (Gorsline et al., 1984). The slopes of the mainland
shelf and canyons are also subject to slides, delivering
additional sediment to the basins (Field and Edwards, 1980).
Some of these slides are several kilometers wide and 50 m thick.
This is an important process transporting sediment downslope and
into the basins.
¥lthln the San Pedro Basin, sediment is expected to flow
slowly northwest with the weak currents and descend through the
water column until it reaches the bottom or achieves neutral
buoyancy (Appendix C, p. C-6).
3.2.5.3. Trace Metals . • -
Trace metals are incorporated into benthic sediments in a
variety of ways similar to the means discussed in the section on
water column characteristics (Section 3.2.3*7). Sediment metal
concentrations tend to be higher in basins than on the mainland
shelf in southern California, but the highest levels occur near
sewage outfalls such as those off Whites Point (SCCVRP, 1973).
Table 3-3 presents values for trace metal concentration in
sediments of. the Southern California Bight, along with those
values found in the field survey. For some studies, only ranges
are given because concentrations of trace metals vary
considerably in coastal waters and average values are too easily
misinterpreted (SCCYRP, 1973).
The first set of values shows ranges for trace metals which
have been found in dredged materials from the Ports of Los
Angeles and Long Beach. Even though the LA-2 site values are
often elevated compared to those at the reference site, they are
considerably lower than those levels found in these undiluted
dredged materials.
The second set of values is from the Word and Mearns (1978)
study undertaken in 1977. Various parameters along the 33
fathom (60 m) isobath were measured from Point Conception to the
US/Mexico border, and control stations were chosen as rep-
resenting background levels.not overly influenced by pollutants.
-------
- 3-26 -
PALOS
VERGES
PENINSULA
Measured Flow
Drecticm
Inferred Flow
Direction
Relict: medium to coarse-
grained sand
Mixed: medium-grained sand
Modern detrital: fine to medium
sand and silt
Modern detrital mud
(^^^^
3OURCES: DRAKE. 1986. KARL «t «L. 1080.
FIGURE 3-7. LOCATION OF MAJOR SEDIMENT TYPES OF SAN PEDRO SHELF AND
DIRECTION OF BOTTOM TRANSPORT DURING AN UPWELLING EVENT
-------
- 3-27 -
Table 3-2.
Grain Size Distribution for tbe LA-2 and Reference
Sites
Range of
Grain Size
(PHI)
• - -.-• i
00
02
02
03
04
05
06.
07
08
09
10
11
12
13
14
951
PHI
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
00 -
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
13
14
15
Confidence
unit
Appendix
8 -lOj
A, P.
X*
>0.1
1.9
10.3
21.6
23.7
11 .8
6.4
5.2
4.6
3.5
1.6
3.2
1.3
1.8
0.6
>0.1
Interval
(.x wbere
A-67 to
LA-2 Site
95* C.I.
>0.
1.
8.
19.
20.
10.
5.
4.
3.
2.
1 .
2.
1.
1 .
0.
>0.
(C.I
x is
A-70
,
4
5
3
2
4
9
5
9
9
3
7
0
6
5
1
*
- 0
- 2
• 12
- 24
- 27
- 13
- 6
- 5
- 5
- 4
- 1
- 3
- 1
- 2
- 0
- 0
) » x
.2
.5
.1
.0
.3
.3
.9
.9
• 3
.0
.8
.6
.7
.1
.8
.2
± 1
diameter
Reference Site
x 95* C.I.
>0.1
>0. 1
0.5
8.4
55.0
17.9
5.4
• 2.4
1.8
1.4
0.9
2.2
0.9
1.5
0.5
0.2
.96-4-
Tn
^ Q'e 1
^ 0 e 1
0.3
6.3
51 .6
15.8
4.5
2.0
1.5
1 .1
0.7
1.9
0.8
1 .2
0.4
0.1
- 0
- 0
- 10
- 58
- 20
. 6
- 2
- 2
- 1
- 1
- 2
- 1
- 1
- 0
- 0
.1
.6
.4
.2
.0
.3
.9
.2
.7
.1
.5
.0
.7
.6
.3
in millimeters
-------
- 3-28 -
The third set of values Is from a 1980 survey .by Hershelman
et al. (1982) of sediment metal levels in the Santa Monica Basin
(just north of the San Pedro Basin). Trace metal concentrations
vere found to increase with vater depth, probably because deeper
vaters have sediments of fine particles vith which trace metals
are often .associated. Only those ranges at stations along the
33 fathom (60 m) isobath of the Hershelman et al. 1982 study are
given la Table 3-3.
The second and third set of values represent shallow water
concentrations of metals under relatively undisturbed
conditions. They are presented here as general indicators of
undisturbed conditions, and also to reveal the level of
disturbance already created at the shallow water site by the
JYPCP sewage outfall.
The fourth set of values is from a study by Swartz et al.
(1986) on the Palos Verdes Shelf along the 33 fathom (60 a)
isobath at the JWPCP outfall and at increasing distances down
current (up to 28 nmi or 15 km to the north) in 1983. The
ranges show the recent Influence of the JWPCP in the vicinity of
the proposed shallow water disposal site, and have maximum
values substantially greater than those for the 33 fathom (60 m)
control sites discussed above.
Information on metal concentrations in sediments of deeper
waters (not close to regulated .discharges) is not as readily
available. However, Hershelman et al. (1977) have collected and
they are presented in Table 3-3 as an indication of the pre-
dredglng condition at the LA-2 site, and the existing condition
at the deepwater site data from other studies in basins west of
the mainland shelf. The Chen and Lu values were obtained in
1974 from sediments around Santa Catalina Island. The Bruland
et al. , 1974 values are from anaerobic sediments in the deep
waters of Santa Barbara and Soledad Basins.
In the field study, concentrations of Cd, Cr, Pb, Eg, and
Zn at the reference site were within the range of values found
for sediments in other studies within the region (see Table
3-3). Hone of the other studies reviewed included measurement of
As. Concentrations of all these metals at the LA-2 site,
however, generally exceeded regional values and also those found
at the reference site (Appendix A, p. A-43). Samples from the
LA-2 site showed variable concentrations of heavy metals.
3*2.5.4. Hydrocarbons
Petroleum hydrocarbons encountered in the marine environ-
ment may originate from man's activities, such as offshore
drilling and production operations, oil tanker operations,
coastal refineries, atmospheric transport of combustion pro-
ducts, coastal municipal and nonreflnery industrial wastes, and
urban and river runoff. Natural sources of hydrocarbons include
biological production by organisms and submarine oil seeps.
-------
- 3-29 -
i
i
ao
eo
I
o
I
o
B
O
O
at
a
o
a
4*
B
o
o
i
m
m
0
2
0-»
B e
•H M
£
3 — «
O 00
gg jjj
4) ^*^
JQ
•3 *^
a A
0 Pu
t.
is
u
l_
o u
|~
i
•H — >
a -a
Is
o
to
«• o
• ao
(M •
C* •- CM to
mo •- oo
• v • 1 O
ao i ao o x
en o in 9
O CM
m
C* to
^ o ao
o • m • to •
m CM o o CM —
• i • i 91
O «- O *- • CM
O O 0 0
0 0 O
V V
00
f&l ffl f*
• it i r«j ^^
• QQ •
99 to • to m
•••to to O • l«-
• CM • CM ^ CM
• o» i m i mi
m o «- CM *- o
CJ 00 £
MS ^f C3
M9 • O
t- to in in t— to
• T *^ i in i
CM «o in •- r» o
in «- «- CM •- •
• • tn
ao ^ •-
o
o «
9? gcA
•• »• ^ m
• 1 • 1 O
*• CM in CM z
m CM
9 O
cn i m • •
* J» * ' " '
tO 9 9
O O O
^^
£
'at « S
•** *) H
•H PB
BCO K
§•
> ® 0 «
as *» a a
9 -H B
« « £ g
Q CM 0 C
M J OB OB
b. a
CM m
CM to »- f-
• 1 t- ao
CM ao I i
o* m ov
a a a
Z Z Z
CM Ot 00
to v- CM m
• it m
to t- CM 1
CM «n m
«•» o^ •*•»
• 1 1 H
-~» a «4 e nu
x o +» a o .j
8«-» a a w
pa w z
as so* BO OT
H k b o -* n
CM 4 ^j ^ *^ fid
a *J II 1
o a a s
d ^o ^o 8
4 o to a to j
x » n «
n a.
o
in o
A I
m oo
d»
o
•
0 0
1 Z
o
o
ao b
e- m
o tn
CM
eo. -in
. .— ' eo
^ (M
o in
to ^
i i
vO Q
CM *»
*T . O
CM
-------
- 3-30 -
Table
Concentrations of Hydrocarbons in Sediments in
Micrograas per Gram Dry Weight (ug/g)
OIL AHD GREASES
Palos Verdes Peninsula (a)
LA-2 Site (b)
Reference Site (b)
291 - 618.0
25 - 287
23 - 87
CHLORINATED
HYDROCARBONS
Shallow Water Control
Sites (c)
Mean, (95% Confidence Interval)
Range
DDTs
0.02 (0-0.04)
<0.001 - 0.09
PCBs
0.01 (0.002-0.02)
<0.002 - 0.04
All Shallow Water Sites (c) <0.001 - 175.2 <0.002 - 10.9
Palos Verdes Shelf (d)
4 nm'i (2 km) down cur rent
from JWPCP outfall
22 nnl (12 km) downcurrent
from JWPCP outfall
Field Survey (e)
LA-2 Site
94-
34
Reference Site
0.103
(0.067 - 0.139)
0.005 - 0.755
0.026
(0.021 - 0.03D
0.008 - 0.048
11
2.2
0.212
(0.154 - 0.270)
<0.010 - 0.648
0.061
(0.040 - 0.082)
0.018 - 0.212
(a) Schwartz et al.t 1986.
(b) Appendix A, p. A-37.
(o) Word & Mearns, 1978.
(d) Heesen & loung, 1977.
(e) Appendix C.
-------
- 3-31 -
Several natural oil aeepa have been reported near Vhltes Point,
in the San Pedro Channel and at the northern tip of Santa
Catalina Island. Hone of these are currently active (Dennis,
1974). Distinction of environmental hydrocarbons among these
various sources has only recently been attempted (Yinzler and
Kelly, 1977)* For example, pentacyclic trlterpenes have been
used to distinguish crude oils from biologically derived
hydrocarbons (BLN, 1 981b ).••••
In 1983* levels of hydrocarbon oil and grease on the Palos
Verdes Shelf ranged from 6180 mlcrograms per gram (ug/g) dry
weight near the JVPCP outfall to 291 ug/g at a station 28 nmi
(15 km} downcurrent (Swartz et al.t 1986).
Concentrations of oil and grease were generally lower than
these values, however, levels in sediments at the LA-2 site were
significantly greater than those at the reference site (Appendix
A, p. A-33). although the concentrations were variable (see
Table 3-4).
The major input of chlorinated hydrocarbons to southern
California sediments, especially pesticides and PCBs, is thought
to be municipal waatewater discharges. Other significant
sources Include industrial wastes, past dumping practices, river
and surface runoff, and aerial fallout. The highest
concentrations of chlorinated hydrocarbons are found in or near
harbors and urban centers California State Hater Resources
Control Board (CSVRGB), 1980.
Although emissions of chlorinated hydrocarbons from
municipal discharges have decreased in recent years,
concentrations in sediments remain high, particularly near
outfalls. Vord and Mearns (1978) reported a mean dry weight
concentration of 0.02 ug/g for total DDT, and 0.01 ug/g for
total PCBs at control stations where the influence of polluting
sources was Judged to be minimal. Near municipal outfalls, dry
weight concentrations were as high as 175 ug/g for total DDT and
11 ug/g for total PCBs.
Sediment concentrations of DDTs and PCBs at the LA-2 site—
were significantly higher than those at the reference site and
showed highly variable concentrations (Appendix A. p. A-38).
The mean total DDT dry weight concentration at LA-2 was
approximately 0.10 ug/g which is slightly higher than the
maximum value In the range for control stations of Vord and
Mearns, and higher than the 0.03 ug/g mean value for the
reference station.
The mean total dry weight concentration of PCB at the LA-2
site was 0.21 ug/g which exceeds the range for control stations
of Word and Mearns, and the 0.06 ug/g. mean..value for the
reference station, but is much lower than levels measured near
outfalls. Other pesticides were not detected in sediments
during the field survey at the levels of detection (Appendix A,
p. A-16).
-------
- 3-32 -
3.3- BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT
The Southern California Bight Is geographically situated in
a biological transition zone between the cold water biota of the
Oregonian Province north of Point Conception and the warm water,
subtropical biota of the Fanamic Province south of Magdalena
Bay, Mexico. Intermixing of currents from these two provinces
in this region of extremely variable geology, from rugged
submarine rock outcropplngs to very fine sediment deposits,
encourages rich and diverse biological associations. A large
number of endemic species and numerous representatives of the
adjacent provinces are found throughout the Bight.
This section of the EIS describes the biological
environment to document compliance with EPA'3 11 specific site
selection criteria. General ecological descriptions
40 CFR 228.6(a)(9) and the location of these resources in
relation to spawning, nursery, feeding, and passage areas of
living resources 40 CFR 228.6(a)(2) are discussed throughout
this section.
3.3.1. Plankton Community
The mixing of waters from northern and southern currents
Influences the species diversity and abundance of planktonic
organisms in the Southern California Bight. Primary
productivity is regulated by water temperatures, light
Intensity, and the availability of nutrients in the euphotic
zone, the latter usually resulting from the upwelllng of colder,
deep waters into warmer, surface waters. Plankton productivity
is highest during the summer (July to October) and lowest during
the winter months (October to December) (Owen, 1974). Primary
productivity varies in proportion to the distance from shore,
higher in nearshore regions and decreasing with distance
offshore.
3«3«1-1. Phytoplankton
Approximately 280 species of phytoplankton from California
waters were reported by Riznyk (1977): 160 diatom, 112
dinoflagellate, and 6 alllcoflagellate species. Sixty species
were reported in Santa Monica Bay (Resig, 1961). Phytoplankton
work previously conducted offshore of southern California
includes the works of Allen (summarized in Riznyk, 1974), Balech
(1960), Resig (1961), and California State Hater Quality Control
Board (CSHQCB) (1965).
Because of the mixing action of the California current
plankton species present at each of the sites discussed in this
section are expected to be very similar. Table 3*5 lists common
phytoplankton of the Southern California Bight. The relative
abundance of a particular species may vary somewhat from the
inshore shallow reference sites to the offshore deep sites. The
distribution of the species and their abundances are controlled
-------
- 3-33 -
Table 3-5* Common Phytoplankton Species of the Study Area
DIATOMS
Aaterionella Japonica
Biddulpfaia longlcruria
Chaetoceroa compreaaua
£. debllla
C_. didymua
£. aocialia
Ditylum brlahtwellii
Eucampia zoodiacua
Hitzacfaia app.
Rhizoaolenia app.
Skeletonema eoatatua ., ' '
Tbalaaaionema nl tzachioidea
COCCOLITHOPBOBES
Coeeollthua huxley1
DINOFLAGELLATES
Ceratiun fuaua
C. triooa
C. furca
Dinophyala acuminata
Gonyaulajc polyedra
Gymnodlnlun aplendena
Hoctiluoa acintillana
Perldlnium ap.
Proroeentrutt micana
SILICOPLAGELLATES
Dictyocha .fibula
Dlatephanua apeculum
Hiznylc, 1974.
-------
- 3-3* -
by several factors including anount of light, currents, inten-
sity of grazing, temperature and upwelling events 4BLM, 198lb).
Phytoplankton variability is evident on a seasonal basis as well
as over long-tern periods in which it has been related to
oceanographic and meteorological events (Balech, I960).
California Cooperative Oceanic Fisheries Investigations
(CalCOFI) data presented for 1969 (Owen, 1974} displays primary
productivity variations for the Southern California Bight
region. Values are highest within the nearshore regions and
decrease with distance offshore. Standing crop estimates,
integrated over the upper 150 m (445 ft.) display differences
between sampling periods (highest between July to October 1969
and lowest between October to December) and area along the
California coast (highest in southern California, decreasing
offshore beyond a highly productive band 51 to 108 nmi (100 to
200 km) along the coast. Production values for an area of
coastal waters from San Pedro to San Diego range from 20 grams
per square meter (g/m2) (October to December) to 90 g/m2 (July
to September). Productivity ranges from approximately 0.3 to
1.4 g/C/m2/day, integrated over the euphotic zone. Hear sewage
outfalls such as Whites Point, productivity can Increase to 2.0
to 2.5 g/C/m2/day (Epply et al., 1972).
3.3.1.2. Zooolankton
Zooplankton are Instrumental in the transfer of energy from
the phytoplankton to the higher trophic levels including fishes,
birds, and marine mammals. Studies dealing with Southern
California Bight zooplankton are listed in Seapy (1974).
In the California Current system, at least 546 invertebrate
and 2,000 vertebrate species of fish larvae are estimated to
occur (Kramer and Smith, 1972), representing 23 major taxa among
9 animal phyla. The zooplankton include both temporary
(nanoplanktonic) and permanent (holoplanktonic) forms which
range in depth distribution from the surface to at least 3,282
fathoms (6,000 m) (Bolton et al. 1977).
The primary source of zooplanktonic information is the
CalCOFI program which originated in 1949. Data are available
from numerous sampling stations within the Southern California
Bight region from surface to depths of 77 fathoms (140 m) .
Bathypelagic coelenterates (cnidarians) in the southern
California basin were Investigated by Hartman and Emery (1956).
Slphonophores dominated the fauna of the bottom of San Pedro
Basin, feeding on bathypelaglc animals living above the surface
of the anoxlc sediments. Atstatt and Seapy (1974) studied
planktonlc decapod crustaceans in San Pedro and Santa Catalina
Basins to depths of 356 fathoms (650 m) using an Isaacs Eidd
midwater trawl. Abundances never exceeded 49/1000 m3.
Seraestes simills was the dominant species in each sample.
-------
- 3-35 -
Factors influencing zooplankton density and distribution
within the study area Include advection or currents and the
vlads that cause currents long-term meteorological and
oceanographic changes (Berner and Reid, 1961, Radovich, 1961)
and nutrient/temperature relationships (Reid, 1962}.
Several endemic species occur within the California Current
system. Most species, however, vary geographically, seasonally,
and yearly due primarily to changes in current patterns. These
include the chaetognath Sagitta bier11. the copepod Eucalanus
bungi californicus. the hyperlld amphlpod Hyperletta stebbinai.
and the squid Abcaliopaia lei is. Table 3-6 summarizes the major
zooplankton taxa In the bight (BLM, 1978).
Hearshore waters have been found to support higher
populations of benthlc invertebrates and fishes than offshore
waters, including the larval stages of the Dungeness crabs
Cancer magi ater. pink shrimp Pandalua Jordanni. Crangon shrimp,
and several species of bottom dwelling flatfishes (BLM, 198lb).
Patterns of vertical distribution of zooplankton relate to
such variables as light, phytoplankton density, food, and life
history patterns. Individual species show differing depth
maxima (Alvarlno, 1964). Most species within the waters of the
continental slope are nerltic forms, with occasional oceanic and
migratory abyssal forms found during upwelllng periods.
3.3.2. Kelp Community
Beds of giant kelp, Macrocytia pvrifera, grow on rocky
substrate off the Palos Terdes Peninsula Including the entire
area designated as the shallow water site. Kelp beds are a
valuable and expanding underwater habitat in the shallow water
site. These kelp forests provide food and shelter for marine
fish and Invertebrates, many with importance, to sport and
commercial fisheries. They are also popular diving areas and
the kelp is harvested for commercial use. A detailed
description of the ecology of kelp beds can be found in Foster
and Schlel, 1985.
In 1982, the Palos Terdes beds covered 287 hectares (700
acres) generally to a depth of no greater than 6.5 fathoms (12
m). Historically, these beds have fluctuated greatly in size
and location. In 1928, it is estimated that they covered 728
hectares (1,800 acres) to a depth of 10 fathoms (18 m). In the
19*0's, the beds began a period of decline until 1968 when the
Palos Terdes giant kelp beds had completely disappeared. In
197*» kelp plants began to reestablish and kelp communities have
shown a significant rate of recovery since then (Vilson, 1982).
Man-made and natural factors seem to have-influenced both
the decline and recent recovery -of these kelp beds. Negative
factors include: disposal of sewage at Whites Point, over-
grazing by sea urchins and other herbivores, the elimination of
-------
- 3-36 -
Table 3-6.
Major Zooplankton Taxa in the Southern California
Bight ••
Major Taza
Common Species
Distribution Remarks
CNIDAHIA
CTENOPHOHA
CHAETOGNATHA
POLICHAETA
MOLLDSCA
Pelecypoda
Pteropoda
Heteropoda
Cephalopoda
CRUSTACEA
Copepoda
Synooryne eximia
Phialiadlum aregarlum
Pleurobrachia bach el
sp.
Sagitta euneritlca
S. blerel
.§. enflata
S. minima
Yanadls formoaa
Torrea Candida
Tomopterls eiegana
Travlsiopsla lofaifera
Mytllus app.
Limaclna heliclna
Atlanta peron
Atlanta sp.
Carinaria laoonlca
Abrallopsia fells
Gonatus onyx
Libinooera trlspinosa
Acartia tonaa
A., clauai
Calanua helgolandieus
_C. pacificua
Rhincalanus nasutus
Olthona slmllls
Hydromedusae
Hydromedusae
Common in nearshore
plankton.
Reported from south of
the area. Densities of
less than 50/10,000 m3
of vater in the upper 60
fathoms (110 m).
No seasonability pattern
or Inshore to offshore
difference in abundance.
Offshore distribution to
(200 km).
Can be extremely abundant
Cold vater form.
Dominant in surface samp-
les in Santa Barbara
Channel, maximum abun-
dance in Hovember.
Abundant in summer months.
All stages abundant in
May to June.
Most common species.
Juveniles abundant in Juljj
to August, adults
abundant in May to June.
Most abundant cyclopold
copepod from samples off
Scrlpps Institution.
(CONTINUED)
-------
- 3-37 -
Table 3-6 (Continued).
Major Zooplankton Taza la the Southern
California Bight
Major Taza
Common Species
Distribution Remarks
Cirripeda Balanua spp.
Aopbipoda Tibllla armata
Cladoeera Penila avlrostris
Evadne nordmanni
Podon polyphemoldea ,
Bvadne splnifera
J. teraestlna
Buphauaia paciflea
Hematoaeells dlfflcills
Hyetlpnanea simplex
Sty lochelron lonaicorne
Thysanoeysa gregaria
2. splnlfera
Suphausida
Deeapoda Seraeates slmllls
Cancer magister
Paodalua Jordanl
Pugettla produeta
Crangon spp.
FHALIACEA Dolloluia denticulatum
Barnacles
Captured at surface at
night and at 109 fathoms
(200 m) In the day.
Maximally abundant in
December, 1969 in Santa
Barbara Channel
Abundant in July to
Augustt 1968 in nearshore
waters off La Jolla
Recorded from 356 fathoms
(650 m) trawls.
Dungeness crab
Pink shrimp
Kelp crab
Shrimp
Abundant in nearshore
waters in summer.
(BLM, 1978)
-------
- 3-38 -
sea urchin predators such as the sea otter (Enhydra lutris),
increased sedimentation, storm damage, and perhaps: warm
temperatures with an associated decrease In nutrients in ocean
waters. Positive factors include: a reduction in the volume of
suspended solids and toxic substances discharged from the Whites
Point outfall, commercial harvesting of red sea urchins
(Strongylocentrotus franc!seanus). kelp transplantation
programs* direct control of sea urchins* removal of competing
vegetation, and favorable environmental conditions such as
Improved transparency of the ocean waters (Wilson et al., 1980).
3.3.3. BenthieBiology
The macrofauna of subtidal benthlc communities in general
within the Southern California Bight are Influenced by a variety
of factors Including bathymetry/ substrate type, oceanic and
localized currents* biogeographlc location, and oxygen concen-
trations. The nearshore deep sea basins located between the
mainland and first line of islands and ridges are quite broad
and relatively shallow 4.92 fathoms (900 m) as a consequence of
rapid sedimentation. Offshore basins are deeper with less
plains and greater slope habitat than Inshore basins. Outer
basins also have relatively higher levels of oxygen than inner
basins (BLH, 198la).
To facilitate comparisons of various sites and coordinate
findings with those in the literature, benthlc invertebrate
fauna are divided into Infauna. animals living in bottom
sediments and epifauna. animals living on the surface of the
sediments. This distinction is not completely valid for some
forms which occupy both habitats but is useful for the following
discussion.
3.3.3.1. Infauna
The bentnic infauna communities of the Southern California
Bight have been the subject of many studies (Hartman, 1955 and
1966; Hartman and Barnard, 1958; Allan Hancock Foundation, 1965;
Jones, 1969; SCCVRP, 1973; Jones and Fauchald, 1977; Fauchald
and Jones, 1978a,b,c; Word and Mearns, 1979). These studies
have described five major marine benthlc environments in the
Southern Callfonia Bight* each with several habitats determined
primarily by sediment characteristics. The five environments
are: 1) the mainland shelf between the shoreline and 5 fathoms
(10 m), 2) the Island shelf between 0 and 55 fathoms (100 a),
3) the slope and Irregular areas between 55 fathoms (100 m) and
the deep-sea basins, 4) the ridge and bank tops between (55 and
164 fathoms (100 and 300 m), and 5) the deep basin habitats in
excess of 164 fathoms (300 m). Various biological communities
occur within each habitat. The mainland shelf, continental
slope, and basin habitats are moat relevant to the alternative
ODMDS sites.
-------
.. 3-39 -
Mainland shelf environments exhibit high species abundance
and standing crop compared to other major habitats'.
Polychaetes, aollusks and crustaceans are the major taxonomlc
groups represented. Total infaunal density varies greatly,
averaging approximately 5»000 organisms/*2 (BLM, 1978).
Species richness, biomass, and density of the mainland
shelf benthos has been shown to be significantly reduced in the
area of sevage outfalls compared to other Inshore shelf
locations (Thompson, 1982, Svartz et al., 1986). Seasonal
changes in inshore benthic communities are more evident than
those in deeper areas of the shelf and basin owing to storm
patterns, currents and water temperature effects. Peak
reproduction occurs in late winter through early summer and
juvenile recruitment occurs through late summer. Dynamic ocean
processes and high community diversity in nearshore mainland
shelf habitats produce patchy distributions of organisms (Jones,
1969). Table 3-7 lists dominant infaunal Invertebrates of the
San Pedro Shelf.
The continental slope macrofauna populations exhibit random
patterns with respect to distribution, abundance, and diversity
of species. These values are lower than mainland shelf areas
because the population factors are related to depth. The slope
fauna is a transitional community between shelf species and
obligate deep-sea fauna. As with the shelf fauna, polychaetes
tend to dominate, followed by crustaceans, mollusks and
echinoderms.
Total density of infauna ranges from approximately 2,000
organisms/a2 to 11,000 organlsms/m (Jones, 1969). Table 3-8
lists the dominant benthic Infauna of the slope offshore of
Buntlngton Beach/Laguna Beach, the closest slope area to the
LA-2 site for which extensive data are available* Species
abundance decreases with depth, due to decreasing dissolved
oxygen concentrations (Jones and Fauchald, 1977). The dominant
feeding methods of the fauna are surface deposit feeding and
suspension feeding. Little seasonal change has been observed in
deep slope fauna! communities because environmental conditions
remain relatively constant.
The deep-sea basins of southern California support a
depauperate benthic fauna (Bartman and Barnard, 1958; Fauchald
and Jones, 1978c), due primarily to extremely low dissolved
oxygen levels. Infaunal density ranges from 11 organisms/m2 to
120 organlsms/m2 (BLM, 1978). Surface deposit feeders dominate
the community and populations of species vary considerably among
basins; however, a few species of polychaetea and mollusks are
present in most of the basins. Two species of polychaetes,
Bclysjppe trilobatua and Phylloenaetopterus limicolus. are
.particularly widespread. Common benthic infauna of the San
Pedro Basin are listed in Table 3-9.
-------
. 3-40 -
Table 3-7.
Dominant Benthic Infauna of the San Pedro Shelf from
9.3 Pathoma (17 a) to 131 Fathoms (240 a).
Taxa
_ Abundance
(z individuals/sample)
POLICHABTA
Lumbrineris sp.
Prionospio malagranl
Pectinaria californiensis
Cirratulidae spp.
QjLTeera spp.
MOLLDSCA
Peleoypoda
Parvilueina tenuisculota
Teilina carpenteri
Axinopsida serrieata
Maooma yoldiformis
CBQSTACEAN
Ostracoda
Euphilomedes caroharondonta
NEMBETEA spp.
BCHINODERMATA
Opiuroidea
Amphiuridae sp.
4.8
3.6
1 .7
8.1
2.9
10.7
3.2
2.7
1-3
4.3
3.2
5.8
(Jones, 1969)
-------
- 3-41 -
Table 3-8.
Dominant Bentblc Infauna of the Slope Off
Huntlngton and Laguna Beaches from 88 Fathoms
(161 m) to 284 Fathoms (520 a).
Taza
_ Abundance
(z individuals/site)
FOLtCBAETA
Peotinarla calif omen si a
Maldane sapsi
Lumbrineris sp.
Paraprionosolo pinnata
Mediomastus califOPnensis
Priooospio cl.r.rif.9.ra
MOLLOSCA
Aplacopbora
Linifossor fratala
Pelecypoda
Mysella tumida
Cyclooardla ventrlcossa
CRUSTACEA
Amgelisca macroceohala
ECHINODERNATA
Anpblodla urtiea
3.2
2.1
1.4
0.9
0.7
0.5
0.6
1.0
0.5
1.4
1.1
Jones and Faucbald (1977)
-------
. 3-42 -
Table 3-9. Dominant Benthic Infauna of the San Pedro Basin
from 340 Fathoms (622 a) to 485 Fathoms (888 m).
Taxa
POLYCHAETA
Selyaippe trilobatua
Aricidea oomol ex
Phy 1.1 oco aet opt eroa 3pp.
Spiophanea ap.
MOLLDSCA
Mitrella peraodeata •
Tomburchus redondoenals
Cadul ua cal if ornicua
C8DSTACEA
LilJeboraia eota
_ Abundance
(x indivlduala/saople}
4.9
1.4
4.9
1.9
2.7
0.4
0.3
0.3
Fauehald and Jonea (1978c)
-------
- 3-43 -
The San Pedro Basin benthic aacrofauna community is
randomly distributed and numerically dominated by minor pbyletic
groups (BLM, 198lb). Similar to other basin habitats, San Pedro
Basin supports few species and low population densities. The
benthio fauna are typically deposit feeders, since the basin
acts as a .food trap. In comparison to other basins, San Pedro
Basin exhibits the lowest standing crop (Bartman and Barnard,
1958) and lower species richness and diversity than Santa Cruz
and San Nicholas Basins.
An area within the middle and deeper, areas of the San Pedro
Basin, delineated by a contour near the 458 fathoms (837 B)
depth and about 55 fathoms (100 m) below the sill depth,
supports a very sparse and impoverished fauna. Seventy samples
from subslll depth yielded a total of 115 species (Hartman and
Barnard, 1958) and a density of 31 animals per m2. In this
area, two polychaetes (Phylloenaetopterus sp. and Protis
paclflea) and a scallop (Cyelopecten sp.) were the dominant
organisms. This Impoverished habitat is a result of the
.extremely low oxygen levels. The minimum oxygen levels
generally correspond to the sill depth at 274 to 383 fathoms
(500 to 700 m) caused by-decompos!tlon—of organic material
before reaching the basin floors (Emery, I960).
3.3.3.2. Infauna of LA-2 Site
The LA-2 site lies partly on the continental shelf and
partly on the continental slope. Depth ranges between 11 and 91
fathoms (20 and 165 meters). The benthic infauna taxa of the
site are generally similar to those reported for other slope
locations in the region (Appendix A, p. A-72). Surface deposit
feeders and suspension feeders predominate. In approximate
order of abundance and diversity, the dominant groups are
polycbaetes, crustaceans, mollusks and echlnoderma. Abundant
'species in samples collected using a modified van Teen grab
were: the polychaetes Spiophanes berkeleyorun. Tharyjc sp. , M.
ambiaeta. _£. calif or nieoala. and ,T. uracilis; and the clam, A.-
aerricata.
Total density of infauna ranged from 2,000 to 11,000
organisms/a2. The number of species per 0.1 m2 ranged from 42
to 105. Both species density and abundance decreased with depth
(Appendix A, Figures A-10 to A-13). It is difficult to compare
these values to those of other studies because sampling gear and
mesh sizes were different; however, comparisons between LA-2 and
the reference site were possible. Values for species diversity
and species richness were generally higher at the reference site
and the number of individuals at the disposal site was greater
than the recorded values at the corresponding stations in the
reference area. These differences were associated with
differences between the two sites in sediment characteristics.
LA-2 sediments were both coarser and more poorly sorted than the
reference site (Appendix A, p. A-70).
-------
- 3-44 -
The apeclea composition of the LA-2 site is indicative of
moderate pollution stress, according to the classification of
Thompson (1982). Of the Indicator species identified, those
typical of the transition zone that are found at LA-2 include
Mediomastas ap., A,* serrieata. Parviluoina teniusoulpta. and
Buphllomedes products. Species that characterize the control
zone, Amphiodja urtica and Splophanes missionensis. and the
contaminated zone, Capltella eapitata and Tharyz sp., were also
prevalent.
3«3.3«3. Bplfauna
Unlike the infauna, the abundance of eplfauna generally
Increases with depth over the mainland shelf and much of the
continental slope (Vord and Mearns, 1977). Species abundance
and diversity of epifauna decrease very sharply in the deep
basins (Brown and Shenton, 1973). Many classes of epifaunal
species have very large depth ranges. Bchinoderms, for example,
are the numerically dominant class of organisms at most depths,
although their diversity is often low. Common species include
the sea urhlns Lytechlnus plotus and Allocentrotua fragilis. the
sea cucumber Par'ast i eh OPUS californicus . and the seastar
Astropecten verrilli. The shrimp Sieyonla indentis is also a
species that is commonly collected in trawls.
The two most commonly used methods of sampling benthic
fauna are grab/core samplers, and trawls. Grabs and cores are
used primarily to sample infauna, while trawls are used to
sample demersal fish and, somewhat incidentally, epibentbic
fauna. The two methods produce very different results, as can
be seen by comparing species lists from grab/core studies in the
Southern California Bight such as Fauchald and Jones (1979) and
Jones (1969) to those from trawl studies such as those conducted
by the Southern California Coastal Water Research Project
(SCCVBP) (SCCWHP, 1973; Moore et ml. , 1983). It is, therefore,
not useful to compare the present data to results from grab/core
studies. The following sections summarize and discuss these
data in a manner commensurate with the nonquantltative nature of
the sampling. Because the primary purpose of the trawling was
to collect animals for tissue contaminant analysis, no attempt
was made to sample in a rigorous quantitative manner (by careful
measuring the area swept by each trawl, for example). There-
fore, the data cannot support detailed quantitative analysis of
density, diversity, biomass, etc. The data can be used,
however, to characterize in general the epibentbic macroinverte-
brate fauna of the sites by assessing major trends and patterns
in principal species present, number of species and overall
abundance.
Table 3-10 shows principal species, number of species, and
number of individuals of eplbenthic microlnvertebrates captured
in otter trawls at the LA-2 disposal and reference sites, by
depth of trawl station. In all, sampling at these two sites
produced 93 species. Extensive trawling by SCCUHP (Moore et
-------
- 3-45 -
al., 1983) produced over 500 species. The comparatively liaited
results of the present study are not surprising considered the
Halted depth range (71 to 171 fathoms or 129-312 a) and
duration (64 mostly 5-mlnute trawls) of the sampling.
The trawls were dominated by crustaceans and echinoderms in
both abundance and species composition. Three species were
particularly abundant: the sea urchins Alloeentrotua fj-agilis
and Lytechinus pic tus. and the shrimp Sicyonia ingentis.
Together these three species accounted for 72 percent of the
intervertebrate individuals caught in the trawls. L. pi c tjis was
the most abundant species but occurred in relatively few trawls,
indicating a patchy distribution. Other common species in the
trawls were the sea cucumbers Parastichoous californicus and
Soatangua californicus. and the shrimp Crangon zacae and
SPirontoearis holmes!,. All of these species are common com-
ponents of trawl samples from the region (Moore et al., 1983).
Neither site shows any obvious depth-related trend in
number of species, except for some indication of lower number of
species at the mid-depth station 108 fathoms (198 m) at the
reference site. There Is a clear pattern, however, of highest
abundance at the mid-depth station at the disposal site, and at
the shallow station at the reference site. This is somewhat at
odds with the results of SCCWRF surveys, which generally show an
Increase in the abundance of epibentblc invertebrates with depth
over this depth range (Word and Mearns, 1977; Moore et al.,
1983). Moore et al. (1983) also found increasing numbers of
species with depth. It should be noted that, in the SCCWRF
surveys, increasing depth generally coincides with increasing
distance from sewage outfalls, which have been shown to depress
benthic populations. Of the commonly encountered species listed
above, only A_. fragilis was consistently abundant at the deep
station 171 fathoms (312 m); this species was also abundant at
the mid-depth stations. C,. zacae was most abundant at the
shallow station.
there is no clear difference between the disposal and
reference sites in number of species. There is evidence,
however, that Invertebrates are more abundant at the reference
site. More individuals were caught at the reference site during
each of the four sampling periods, and almost twice as aany
total individuals were caught at the reference site as at the
disposal site. Disposal of dredged material may have caused a
reduction in the epibenthic invertebrates population at the
disposal site, through smothering, change in sediment
characteristics, or change in food supply.
Begarding principal species, L. pjctua and .S. californious
are more abundant at the reference site. £. zacae is more
abundant at the disposal site, and this appears to be true for
£• ingentia also. The relation between this pattern of more
abundant eohinoderms at the reference site and more abundant
crustaceans at the disposal site is not known, nor is the
relation of either of these patterns to disposal. On the other
hand, the second most abundant species, .A. fragilis. shows no
apparent preference for either site.
-------
- 3-46 .
Table 3-10. Dominant Bpifauna of the LA-2 and Reference Sites
Shallow
Station
(129 a)
Mid-Depth
Station
(198 a)
Deep
Station
(312 a)
Overall
Site
Shallow
Station
(129 m>
Mid-
Depth
Station
(198 a)
Deep
Station
(312 a)
Overall
Site
Appendix A
Pathoa c 1
DISPOSAL SITE
Muaber of Huaber of
Principal Species Species Individuals
Slevonia ingentis 30 586
Par asticb OPUS calif or nicus
Craaaoa zacae 31 1,670
Sicrpnia ingentis
Spirontocaris holaesi
Allocentrotua fraallis
Allocentrotus frazil is 28 770
Sicyonla ingentis 70 3»026
Allocentrotus frapills
REFERENCE SITE
Nuaber of Muaber of
Principal Species : Species Individuals
Sicyonia ingentia 32 4,262
Soatanaua californicus
Lyt echinus plot via
SicTonia ingentis 19 855
Parastlchopua oallfornicus
Allocentrotua frakilia
Allocentrotus fragilis 31 555
Sicyonia i agent is 53 5,672
Allocentrotua fragilis
, p. A-85
.829 aetera
-------
- 3-47 -
Aa part of the BIS, EPA and COE determined tbat a common
benthlc epifanual organism should be tested for toxic sub-
stances. Studies of tissue samples from jS. ingentla were tested
for the accumulation of tozio substances. There vaa no
significant difference (p » 0.05) in tbe concentration of any
heavy metals in the muscle tissues of shrimp from either the
LA-2 site or the reference site. Concentrations of oil and
grease were below deteotloa limits and it is assumed that there
la no significant difference between tbe tvo areas (Appendix A,
p. A-34). Similarly, there la little or no evidence of a
consistent elevation of DDT isomer or PCS tissue concentrations
at tbe disposal aite relative to ooncentrationa observed at the
reference site (Appendix A, p. A-40). Tissue levels of
pesticides and FCBs vary among surveys, and among samples within
each survey. The highest values (1740 ug/kg dry weight) in
individual tissue samples were often, but not always, observed
at the disposal sites. The significance of these apparent
elevations is uncertain because of the small number of
successful analyses at the reference site.
Hatural variability in the tissue concentrations of
chlorinated hydrocarbons may result from: (1) expoaure to any
of tbe other contaminated areas within the Southern California
Bight, (2) feeding habits of individuals, or (3) differential
ability of individuals to metabolize contaminants (Jeff Cross,
SCCVRP, personal communication, 30 September 1985). In
addition, although atandard analytical techniques were uaed,
there la not adequate data to quantify analytical variability,
ao tbat no firm conclusions can be made regarding natural
variability.
It should be noted that tissue levels of trace metals and
chlorinated hydrocarbons at LA-2 were much lower than levels in
S_. iagentis from locations near tbe Hyperion outfall. In Santa
Monica Bay and the Whites Point outfalls off the Palos Terdes
Peninsula (Brown et al., 1984).
3.3.4. Pish
The San Pedro Basin fish fauna consists of distinct
vertically distributed fish communities, including species
common to mainland and Island ahelf areas, mesopelaglc deep sea
or midwater apeclea and batbypelagic demersal fishes. Various
transient and resident species occur within tbe basin area
(Ebellng et al., 1970). Of the 554 species (representing 129
families) of coastal marine fishes known to occur off California
(Miller and Lea, 1972), 481 species (87*) are found in southern
California waters from Point Conception to the Mexican border.
The list compiled by Miller and Lea includes only part of the
deep-sea fauna. Aa the dlatance north from aouthern. California
inoreaaea, the number of apeclea decreases. Fish abundance and
biomasa Increase with depth to the lower, portions of the coastal
slope. These factors decrease in the deep-sea basin where few
juveniles are found (Allen and Mearna, 1977). Below 109 and 164
-------
. 3-48 -
fathoms (200 and 300 •) the number of species varies directly
with decreasing temperature and dissolved oxygen concentrations.
ihlstrom (1959* 1965, 1969) summarized information on the
extensive CalCOPI collections of fish eggs and larvae in the
California Current. The distribution of fish larvae is highly
dependent upon the spawning areas of the parents and the
bydrographic conditions prevailing in the area. Because most of
the coastal waters are transported in either a northern or
southern direction* larvae spawned in coastal areas tend to be
retained there (Bichardson and Pearcy, 1977)* The distribution
and abundance of fish larvae and eggs vary by season over the
Southern California Bight depending on the species. For some
species, for example the northern anchovy (gngaulia rn.prd.ax.) and
the several species of rockflsh (Scoroaenidae spp.), larvae
occur throughout the bight area during most of the year.
In the CalCOFI data, 12 larval types (species or genus)
comprised 90 to 93 percent of all larvae collected (Table 3-11).
The northern anchovy (E. mordax) and Pacific hake (Merlucciua
productus) represented 40 to 60S of the catch. Larvae of deep
sea pelagic fishes composed 20 to 40? of all larvae taken in
CalCOPI cruises from 1955 to 1960. Three families represented
90$ of the deep sea fishes and were the most important species
in offshore oceanic waters. These were the larvae of the
myctophld lanternfishes, the gonostomatid llghtfisbes and the
deep sea smelts (Bathylagidae) (Ahlstrom, 1969)* ihlstrom
(1965) found larvae of subarctic species in winter and spring
and those of subtropical species in the warmer summer months.
3.3.4.1. Demersal Fish
The demersal fish of the Southern California Bight have
been the subject of numerous studies which have reported several
basic distribution patterns (Mearns and Allen, 1973; SCCVRP,
1973; Stephens et al. , 1973; Alien and Mearns, 1977; Word et
al., 1977; Moore and Mearns, 1980; Moore et al. , 1983). In
nearshore areas between 6-50 fathoms, common demersal fish are
speckled sanddab (Citharichthys stiamaeus). California tongue-
fish (Symohurus atricauda), horneyhead—turbot (Pleuronichtya
verticalis). white surfperch (Phanerodon fureatua). shiner surf-
perch (Cyaatogaater aearegata), and white croaker (Genvonemus
lineatua).
In deeper shelf environments between 55 and 219 fathoms
(100.and 400 m), demersal fish tend to be dominated by flatfish
(Pleuronectidae) and rockfish (Scorpaenldae). Common species
include: Dover sole (Microatonus paeificua). slender sole
(Lyopsetta exilis). rex sole (Glyptocephalus zaehirua). Pacific
sanddab (Citharicnthya sordidua). stripetail rockfish (Sebaatea
saxicola). aplltnose rockfish (Sebastes diporproa). sbortspine
thornyhead (Sebastolobus alasoanus), pink surfperch (Zalembiua
roaaeeua), plalnfIn midshipman (Popichthys notatua), and
sbortspine combfish (Zaniolepis frenata). These fisb feed on a
variety of prey species Including: epifauna such as ostracods,
mysid shrimp and other crustaceans, infauna such as polychaetea
and bivalves; zooplankton such as copepods and tunlcates; and
other demersal fish.
-------
- 3-49 -
Table 3-11« Common Flab Larvae of the Southern California Bight
Genus Speclea
Common Name
Enaraulia mordax
Merluociua productua
Sebaatea app.
Citharicfathys app.
Bathylagidae
Myctophidae
Gonoatomatidae
Sardinopa caerulea
Trachurua aymmetricus
Parophrya vetuiua
Isopaetta iaolepia
Microgadua proximua
Hortb,ern anchovy
Pacific hake
Bockflab
Sanddaba
Deep-aea aaelta
Lanternfianea
Ligbtflabea
Pacific aardlne
Jack mackerel
Bngliab aole
Butter aole
Pacific tomcod
(BLM, 1978)
-------
- 3-50 -
S.3-^.2. Demersal Fish of the LA-2 Site
Otter trawl samples at five stations within the LA-2 site
collected 38 demersal flab species from .15 families (Appendix A,
p. A-75 to A-79). The trawl catch was dominated by
Pleuronectldae and Scorpaenldae. Three species were
particularly abundant and frequently collected in the trawls, L.
exills* £. sordldus and I. freoata. Together tb«se tbree
species accounted for 76% of the individuals caught* Other
commonly caught species were M. pacificus. JP. notatus. the
halfbanded rockfish (Sebaates aemicinetus), S_. dioorpora. S_.
aaxioloa. S.. alaseanus. and the yellowcbln sculpln (Icelinus
Quadrlseriatua). All of these species are well known common
components of the demersal fish fauna found over the continental
shelf of soutbern California (Horn, 1974; SCCVRP, 1973; Stephens
et al., 1973; Moore et al., 1983)). Based on the results of
previous studies listed above, Z,. frenata and I±. enil is were
more abundant than expected, while £. saaci col a. £• zaohirus. and
£• rosaceua less abundant than expected.
"There is some indication that demersal fish are less
abundant and less diverse at the LA-2 site, compared to a nearby
reference site (Appendix A, p. A-7*). More individuals were
caught at the reference site during each of the four sampling
periods, and in 9 of .12 stations sampling (3 depths, 4 periods)
(Appendix A, Table A-30). More species were caught at the
reference site overall (13 vs. 38), during 3 of the 4 sampling
periods,, and in 8 of 12 station samplings. These differences
may be related to the previous disposal of dredged material,
although the reason for lower catches at the disposal site is
not clear.
Infaunal benthlc community density was greater at the
disposal site stations during all four surveys than at almost
all corresponding depth reference site stations (see Appendix A,
Section A.3.3). Although the Infaunal community at the disposal
site could be separated from that at the reference site, in many
of the classification analyses there is nothing to suggest that
disposal site organisms were unacceptable as prey to the fish
community.
Major differences were found in trawl eplbiota density
between the first two and last two surveys. Since fish
abundance and diversity trends did not vary similarly it is
unlikely there is a direct relationship between epibiota density
and fish catch. The difference in fish catch between disposal
and reference sites may simply reflect avoidance of the disposal
sites by some species and individuals as a response to the
increased frequency of disturbance within the disposal site. Of
course, it Is possible that depauperate fish and Invertebrate
fauna at LA-2 relative to the reference site is due to natural
differences between the sites.
-------
- 3-51 -
Contaminants in demersal fish of the Southern California
Bight vary according to the type of toxicant. Levels of
pesticides aad PCBs tend to be lov In offshore areas and other
areas distant from pollutant sources (SCCWRP, 1973; Kaplan,
197?)* These same contaminants tend to be higher in nearshore
species, particularly near sewage outfalls such as the Whites
Point outfall on the Palos Terdes Peninsula (BLM, 1978). Trace
metal levels do not show this pattern (BLM, 19&1b).
Levels of heavy metals (As, Cd, Cr, Cu, Eg, Pb, and Zn),
oil and grease, and chlorinated hydrocarbons (pesticides and
PCBs) were analyzed in tissue samples of L, exilis and C.
aordidus collected at the LA-2 site. Tissue levels of metals at
the LA-2 site were not higher than those at the reference site
(Appendix A, p. A-40), and compared favorably with levels
reported in the literature for the Southern California Bight
(Appendix A, p. A-42). For pesticides and PCBs, there was
little or no evidence of a consistent elevation of DDT isomer or
PCB tissue concentrations at the LA-2 site relative to
concentrations at the reference site (Appendix A, p. A-40).
Levels at the LA-2 and reference site also compared well with
literature values (Appendix A, p. A-40, A-43; Sherwood et al.,
1980).
3.3.4.3. Pelagic Pish
Pelagic fish were not sampled as part of the present study.
Horn (1974) provided a list of 80 species from 30 families that
are pelagic species found in southern California waters. . The
Southern California Bight contains nearshore as well as offshore
pelagic communities. Population diversity is illustrated in the
list of fish presented in Table 3-12.
More than 50% of the 80 species of pelagic fish are rare
and almost 75) are either rare or uncommon baaed on an
occurrence evaluation by Miller and Lea (1972), and Horn (1974).
The numerically dominant species are several of sport and •
commercial species include the following: J5. mordax. Pacific
saury (Cololabis saira), jack aackerel (Trachurus symmetricus),
yellowtall (Seriola dorsalis). California barracuda (Sphyraena
araentea). M. productua. Pacific mackerel (Scomber Japonious) .
Pacific bonlto (Sarda Chilians!a), albacore (Thunnus alalunga)
and Pacific butterflsh (Peprilus simillimus). These species
feed primarily on zooplankton and other pelagic fish.
3.3*4.4. Deep-Sea Fish
Many deep sea fishes undergo periodic vertical migrations
and, therefore, may be found in the upper 55 to 274 fathoms (100
to 500 m) layer of the ocean. However, they are members of a
rather distinctive group since.they live at least part of their
lives In waters several hundred to thousands of meters deep.
These fishes are generally small «300 mm long), black or dark
-------
- 3-52 -
Table 3-12. Families of Fish Inhabiting the Pelagic Environment
In the Southern California Bight
BARE
Dories (Zeidae)
Crestfish (Lophotidae)
Oarflsh (Regalecidae)
Blbblonfish (Traohlpteridae)
Louvars (Luvaridae)
EPIPELAGIC
Flyingfish (Exocoetidae)
Halfbeaks (Hemirhamphldae)
Heedlefish (Belonldae)
Kolas (Molldae)
COASTAL
Anchovies (Engraulldae)
Herrings (Clupeidae)
Jacks (Carangidae)
Butterfish (Stroaateldae)
COMMON
Anchovies (Engraulldae)
Bakes (Merlucciidae)
Sauries (Scomberesocidae)
WIDE DEPTH RANGE
Pomfrets (Bramidae)
Swordflsh (Ziphlidae)
Mackerels (Scombridae)
Medusafish (Centrolophidae)
Squaretalls (Tetragonuridae)
OFFSHORE
Opabs (Lamprididae)-
Dolpbinfish (Coryphaenldae)
Cutlassfish (Trlchluridae)
Blllfish (latiophoridae)
Pomfrets (Bramidae)
Squaretalls (Tetragonuridae)
(Miller and Lea, 1972)
-------
- 3-53 -
with silvery reflective sides and frequently vitb luminescent
organs. Members of the families Myctophldae (lantsrnfIsh),
Bathylagidae, and Gonostomldae are the most abundant deep sea
fishes off southern California, and they occupy central
positions in oceanic food webs. These families, especially the
Myotophidae. appear to occupy important positions in the trophic
structure 'of offshore waters comparable to that of the anchovy
in shallow, more inshore waters (Born, 1974). Deep-sea fish
feed primarily on deep sea crustaceans such as euphausiids and
copepods, ohaetognaths, and other fish. In turn, the deep-sea
fish serve as food for cetaceans, tunas, sharks, and billfish.
The heterogeneity and transitional nature of the southern
California deep water environment produces a relatively diverse
fish fauna for the region. Approximately 30 families and 93
species of deep water fishes are known in the Southern
California Bight (Born, 1974}. According to Fitch and Lavenberg
(1968) two deep-sea families, lanternflsh (Myctophldae) and
lightflsh (Gonostomatldae), are the two most abundant fish
groups in the world oceans.
This generalization also holds for southern California
waters. The five principal deep water families for the region
in terms of number of species are: Myctophidae, 16 species;
bigscales (Melaaphaeldae), 9 species; hatchetflsh
(Sternoptyohidae), 7 species; Gonostomatidae, 6 species; and
deep-sea smelts (Bathylagidae), 5 species. The species most
frequently collected by Bbellng et al. (1970) were Leuroglossus
stilbius. a mesopelaglc bathylagid, and two mesopelaglc
ayctophids, Stenobrachius leuoops'arus and Trlpboturua mexioanus.
Paxton (1967) concluded that .S. leucopaatua and T_. mexicanus
were the dominant myctophlds in the San Pedro Basin.
3.3.5. Coastal Birds
The avifauna of the San Pedro Basin region of the Southern
California Bight is extremely varied and highly transient.
Birds which might occur in the LA-2 area or other offshore areas
consist of pelagic or littoral species which feed on epipelaglc
fishes and marine invertebrates either at the surface or by
shallow diving. Common offshore pelagic species include Common
Loon, Arctic Loon, Red-throated Loon, Western Grebe, Horned
Grebe, Bared Grebe, Pied-billed Grebe, Pink-footed Shearwater,
Sooty Shearwater, Black-vented Shearwater, Black Storm-petrel,
Brown Pelican, Double-crested Cormorant, Black Brant, Surf
Scoter, Red-breasted Merganser, Glaucous-winged Gull, Western
Gull, California Gull, Ring-billed Gull, Mew Gull, Bonaparte's
Gull, Heerman's Gull, Porstor's Gull, Elegant Tern, and Caspian
Tern.
Although the Southern California Bight is not as
significant a breeding locale for coastal species as is the
northern portion of the State (Parallon Islands northward), it
does contain the entire California breeding populations of Black
-------
- 3-5« -
Storm-Petrels, lantus Murrelets and Brown Pelicans (Sowls et
al., 1980). The breeding colonies of tbeae three species are
located on the Channel Islands at considerable distance froa the
LA-2 and other sites under consideration. Little effect upon
the breeding efforts of these species would be expected.
Preferred breeding areas for most of the other common pelagic
species are either dispersed along the California coast or
located at more northerly breeding colonies. The designation of
the Li-2 disposal site is not likely to affect any of the avian
species which occur in the San.Pedro Basin.
3.3.6. Marine Mammals
Within the Southern California Bight, 32 species of marine
mammals have been recorded. The bight is the richest of all
temperate water areas in terms of abundance and species. Most
marine mammals are broadly distributed, seasonal migrants that
are not dependent on the habitat that will be affected by the
project. Therefore, the designation of the San Pedro Basin
disposal site is not likely to affect any of the listed species.
3.3.6.1. Pinnipeds
The Southern California Bight supports a large number of
seals and sea lions (Table 3-13A). Six species are present,
although the Guadalupe fur seal (Arctocephalus townsendi) is
considered a rare visitor to this area. Pinnipeds tend to be
concentrated offshore at the northern Channel Islands, where
essentially all breeding, pupping, most foraging and hauling out
occurs. The most important rookeries are on San Miguel Island.
Other Important pinniped areas are located oh San Hicolas, San
Clemente and Santa Barbara Islands.
Pinnipeds are found in smaller numbers along the mainland
coast as well, where the main activity is hauling out. Feeding
occurs in both nearsbore and offshore waters, with some species
swimming dally across the channel to feed over offshore banks
and ridges. The California sea lion (Zaloofaus californianus)
and the harbor seal (Phoea vitulina) are the two most common
pinniped species along the mainland coast and in the vicinity of
LA-2.
3.3*6.2. Cetaceans
Of the 29 species of cetaceans that have been Identified in
the Southern California Bight (Table 3-13B), 10 species are
common (Dalley, 1974). All of these species are either
transient or migratory. The gray whale (Bachrichtius robustus)
and the Pacific bottlenose dolphin (Turslops truncatus) are the
most common inshore species in the vicinity of the LA-2 site and
shallow water region within 8 nmi (15 km) of the coast (Dailey,
197*).
-------
- 3-55 -
Table 3-13* Marine Mammals of the Southern California Bight
Speelea
Estimated North American
Pacific* Population
A. PIHNEPEDS
California sea lion
( Zal ODhus calif ornianua )
Steller sea lion
(Eumetoplas jubata)
Northern elephant seal
(Mirounga angustirostris)
Harbor seal
( Ph oca
Northern fur seal
(Callorhinua ur sinus)
Ouadalupe fur seal
(Arctoceohalus townsendi)
TOTAL PINNIPEDS
B. CETACEANS
Common dolphin
(Delphlnua del phis)
Pacific bottlenose dolphin
(Tursiops truneatus)
White-sided dolphin
(Lagenorhypcnus obliquidens)
Horthern right vbale dolphin
(LiasodelPhis bo real is)
Dall's porpoise
(Phocoenoldes dalli)
Pacific pilot whale
(Globicephala macrorfayneus)
California gray vhale
(Eschriehtius robustua )
TOTAL CETACEANS
157,000
10,000
100,000
42,000
4,000
1 .600
314,600
900,000
NO
40,000
ND
920,000
ND
18.000
1,878,000
* Excluding Alaska
ND « No Data Available
(NMFS, 1986)
-------
. 3-56 -
Five cetaceans which occur in California waters (California
gray whale, blue whale, Sei whale, humpback whale, and sperm
whale) are designated as endangered species by the federal
government, ill marine mammals, however, are afforded complete
protection under the Marine Mammals Protection Act of 1972*
3-3»7» Hare.Threatened and EndangeredSpeclea
Table 3-1* lists rare, threatened and endangered species
that occur in the offshore Southern California Bight and
immediate coastal areas. Most of these species do not occur in
the project vicinity, nor do they make regular use of the area;
Designation of an ODMDS in or near the San Pedro Basin is not
expected to affect any endangered species. Species of
particular interest in the project area are discussed below.
3.3-7.1. Gray Whale (Eschrichtius robuatus)
The gray whale population has shown marked recovery in
recent years as a result of protection under the Endangered •
Species Act. In the most recent survey by the Rational Marine
Fisheries Service (HMFS, 1985)» the present population is
estimated to be 17,000. These animals migrate through the
Southern California Bight twice a year between their summer
feeding grounds off Alaska and Canada, and their winter calving
areas in the coastal lagoons of Baja California.
The San Pedro Basin is a principal gray whale migration
route, and the Palos Terdes Peninsula is a favorite whale
watching location. Gray whales pass near and/or through the
alternative disposal sites in the San Pedro Basin on their
twice-yearly migrations. The major migratory route is between
the mainland shore and the Channel Islands. The whales tend to
swim closer to shore, often less than 0.5 nmi (1 km}, from
February to March on their northward migration when calves are
present, than on the southward migration from December to
January.
3.3.7.2. California Brown Pelican (Pelicanua Occident alia
californicus)
The brown pelican population has shown strong recovery in
recent years since the banning of the use of DDT. Due to the
mobility of this species, it is difficult to estimate the total
size of the California population, but breeding pairs have
numbered roughly 2,000 to 3,000 in recent years (FVS, 1985). A
notable exception to this estimate was that only 850 breeding
pairs were observed in 1984. This was thought to be a temporary
decrease, and the California pelican population is expected to
grow or remain constant in the near future.
In the Southern California Bight, pelican rookeries are
located on Anacapa Island, Scorpion Rock on Santa Cruz Island,
Santa Barbara Island) and the Los Coronados Islands off northern
-------
-3-57 -
Table 3-14.
Bare, Threatened or Endangered Species of the
Southern California Bight
Speoiea
California
Distribution
Federal State
Status Status
PLANTS
Salt aarsh
bird*s beak
(Cordylanthus
atartinimus 3pp.
•artlaus)
REPTILES
Leatberback
turtle
(Dernochelys
coriacea
aeefalegeli)
Loggerhead sea
turtle
(Caretta oaretta)
Coastal marshes of Santa
Barbara, Ventura, Orange
and San Diego Counties.
£
E
Tropical and subtropical
• seas of vest ooaat; some
stray as far north as
Vancouver Island, B.C.
Offshore.
N/A
Green sea turtle Offshore.
(Chelonia mydas)
Pacific Ridley'3
turtle
(Lepidoenelys
olivacea)
BIBDS
American pere-
grine falcon
(Palco jjexs-
ariaus anatun)
Southern bald
eagle
(Haliaeetus
leueoeepfaalus
California brown
pelican
(Feleoanus
oecidentalis
californicus)
Rare visitors offshore.
T N/A
B N/A
E N/A
Territories along coastal
California between
Oregon and Mexico.
Mainly in interior of
state some found along
the coast and on
Catallna Island.
Statewide along coast.
Breeding only on Anacapa
Island and Scorpion Rock
in So. California.
E
E
E
B
(CONTINUED)
-------
. 3-58 -
Table 3-14 (Continued). Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species
of the Southern California Bight
Species
California
Distribution
Federal State
Status Status
California least Breeding from San
tern Francisco Bay to Mexico.
(Sterna albifrona
browni)
Lightfooted
clapper rail
(Hallus longi-
rostris levipes
California black
rail
(Lateralis
jamaoensls
oarturniculua)
Salt marshes of Santa
Barbara, Ventura, Orange,
and San Diego Counties.
Salt marshes of Santa
Barbara, Ventura, Orange
and San Diego Counties*
Belding's Tidal estuaries; So.
savannah sparrow California to N. Baja,
(Passerculus sand-
wich enais beldingi)
MAMMALS
Southern sea otter Santa Cruz south to
(Snhydra lutris Plsao Beach.
nereis)
Quadalupe fur seal Offshore, Channel and
(Arctocephalus San Nicolas Islands.
townaendi)
Blue whale
(Balaenoptera
Buseulua)
Fin whale
(Salaenoptera
physalua)
Sel whale
(Balaenoptera
borealis)
Gray whale
(Bschriehtius
robustus)
Offshore.
Offshore.
Offshore.
Mearshore, normally
within 8 nmi of the
mainland shore.
E
E
N/A
E
E
H/A
E
E
E
B
E
H/A
R
N/A
M/A
N/A
N/A
(CONTINUED)
-------
- 3-59 -
Table 3-14 (Continued). Hare, Threatened or Endangered Species
of the Southern California Bight
Speolea
California
Distribution
Federal State
Status Status
Humpback whale
(Meaaptera
noTaenclinae)
Hearshore.
Pacific right Offshore.
whale
(Bubalaena
glacial is Japonica)
Sperm vhale
(Phyaeter
eatondon)
Offshore.
E
E
N/A
N/A
N/A
E a Endangered
H a Rare
T a Threatened
H/A a Hot Applicable
-------
_ 3-60 -
Mexico* The rookeries on Santa Barbara Island are approximately
40 oni (74 ka) west-southwest of the LA-2 site and 35 nni (65
ka) from the deep water region. During the nesting season
between March and July, pelicans feed primarily in the vicinity
of the rookeries. During the remainder of the year, pelicans
are ooaaon throughout coastal southern California and they feed
in aearshdre areas, offshore waters and close to their resting
places along the coast.
3-3»7.3« California Least Tern (Sterna alblfrons brown!)
Arriving from unknown wintering areas, California least
terns nest from approximately April to August on sandy beaches
froa Baja California to San Francisco Bay. The California
population is currently estimated at approximately 1,200 nesting
pairs (California Departaent of Fish and Game, 1983). The
endangered status of this species is partly due to encroachment
on its nesting and feeding areas by development and other
disturbance by humans.
Heating sites in the vicinity of the LA-2 site are Venice
Beach, Playa del Bey, Terminal Island, San Gabriel River mouth,
Cerritos Lagoon, Costa del Sol, Anaheim Bay, Surf side Beach,
Buntlngton Beach, Bolsa Chlca, and upper Newport Bay. The
closest of these sites, Teralnal Island, is approximately 7 nal
(13 lea) north of the LA-2 site. Least terns feed in estuaries,
rivers and streams, and to a lesser extent in nearshore marine
waters near their nesting locations. ;
3.3.8. Marine Sanctuaries and Areas of Special Biological
Significance
The 1,200 acre Seal Beach Hatlonal Wildlife Refuge and the
1,200 acre Bolsa Chlca Ecological Reserve which encompass most
of the estuaries and salt marshes inland from Anaheim Bay and
southward along the coast are approximately 15 and 18 nai (28
and 33 ka) east respectively froa the LA-2 site (Figure 3.8).
The location of these two Important refuges behind the Anaheim
Bay breakwater effectively prevents any Impact upon thea from
the ODMDS. The Upper Newport Bay Bcological Reserve is
similarly protected froa the Influence of aarlne water flow by
Hewport Bay and a breakwater.
The Abalone Cove Ecological Reserve on the Paloa Terdes
Peninsula is the closest biological reservation. 5.5 nai (10
ka) directly north of the LA-2 site, this sensitive area of kelp
beds would probably not be impacted by the LA-2 ODMDS disposal
activities because prevailing currents would carry any plume
contaminants away froa this area.
Sevan Areas of Special Biological Significance (ASBS) are
located around the LA-2 site. These ASBS areas were designated
by the California State Vater Resources Control Board (CSWRCB)
in 1976 to protect species or biological communities from
-------
- 3-61 -
LOS ANGELES CO.
ORANGE CO
SEAL BEACH NATIONAL
WILDLIFE REFUGE
SHALLOW
WATER
REGION
BOLSA CH1CA ER
UPPER NEWPORT BAY ER
NEWPORT BEACH ASBS
RVINE COAST ASBS
CATALIN*
ISLAND
ER: State of California Ecological Reserve
ASBS: State of California Area of Special
Biological Significance o
SCIA: Santa Catallna L Area of Special
Biological Significance
SCALE M NAUTCAL MLES
FIGURE 3-8. LOCATION OF FEDERAL AND STATE BIOLOGICAL RESERVES IN THE
PROJECT AREA
-------
. 3-62 -
alteration of natural water quality (CSVRCB, 1976). Newport
Beach Marine Life Refuge, Irvine Coast Marine Life Refuge and
Belaler Park Ecological Reserve are 20 to 24 nol (37 to 44 ka)
east of the LA-2 site. The prevailing northwest currents flow
away from these sites. Along with the distance from the LA-2
site to these areas, northwest currents are expected to prevent
any impact from the ODMDS on the sites. The same criteria of
distance and removal from prevailing currents effectively
prevent any impact from the LA-2 site upon the four ASBS areas,
Santa Catallna Island-Subareas 1-4, situated on the seaward side
of Santa Catallna Island. These sites are located between 15
and 25 nml (28 and 46 km) southwest of the LA-2 site.
The Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary is the only
established Federal marine sanctuary in the southern California
area. Marine sanctuaries are ocean areas designated under the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA)
authority in Title III of MPRSA. The purpose of this section of
MPRSA is to preserve or restore natural areas, recreation
activities and ecological and aesthetic values through
conservation of unique areas. NOAA1a Office of Coastal Zone
Management is authorized to carry out the provisions of Title
III of MPRSA. The closest part of the sanctuary to the LA-2
site is the area around Santa Barbara Island which is 35 nmi (65
km) to the west. Movement of suspended material from the ODMDS
is not expected to impact the Channel Islands National Marine
Sanctuary.
The State of California has designated oil and gas
sanctuaries within the three mile limit of its jurisdiction
(Figure 3.8). The oil and gas sanctuaries are specifically
excluded from oil and gas leasing in order to protect the scenic
and wildlife values of the area. Except for those areas already
leased, almost all coastal areas of Los Angeles and Orange
Counties are designated as oil and gas sanctuaries administered
by the State Lands Commission. The preferred LA-2 site is
located within an area of Proposed Southern California Lease
Offering and it is less than 2 nmi (4 km) south of the coastal
zone deleted by the State from lease sale. Some movement of
suspended material from the ODMDS could be expected to enter
this area.
3.3«9. Potentiality for the Development or Recruitment of
Nuisance Species in the Disposal Site 40 CFH 228.6(a)(lQ)
The sediments of some southern California ports and outfall
discharge areas support high densities of characteristic
Invertebrate species that are considered indicators of polluted
sediments. Common species of this type are:
Polyohaetes
Bivalve
Capitella capitata
Tharyx teasalata
Parvilucinla tenulsculpta
-------
- 3-63 - •
Aaphipoda Coropfalua acherusicua
Corophlun inaidelosum
Podocerus brasillensis
Three of tbeae species, £. oapitata. Thary* ap.. and JP.
tenuisculota. are 000000 In highly polluted areas such as
industrial ports and sewage discharge sites. It Is possible
that any elevated abundance of these species at the LA-2 site is
due to disposal of dredged material, and continued disposal -
would be likely to aalntaln this situation.
Disposal is aost likely to proaote development of nuisance
species at the shallow water site, because these species are
likely to be uncommon there at present and because environmental
conditions there are aost similar to those of the shallow
habitats in which these species are normally aost abundant. At
the deep water site, the potential for disposal to result in
establishment of nuisance species is uncertain, but would seem
to be low because of low dissolved oxygen levels, low food
supply, and general conditions are very different from those of
the shallow habitats where the species are normally aost
abundant. ~~ - —
3.«. SOCIQECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT
3.4.1. Commercial Fishing
Los Angeles area ports are an important center.for
commercial fishing. .The 260 million pounds of commercial fish
landed In 1983 were valued at about $85.1 million. This
represents approziaately 51.5} of the total eatch weight and
45.7$ of the total value of all eoaaerclal landings in
California (Table 3-15). Between 1981 and 1983, the value of
landings at Los Angeles area ports declined from about $112.0
Billion to $85.1 million. However, the Los Angeles area portion
of the state total value for commercial landings has increased
from 3.9.91 to 45.7V due to a greater overall decline In the
total state landings.
The landings of commercial fish between 1981 and 1983 for
each port In the Los Angeles area are shown In Table 3-16• In
1983, the aost important port was Terminal Island which
accounted for 88.41 of the value for coaaercial landings in the
area. However, a large part of the landings were tuna that were
not caught In local waters. The most important local coaaercial
fisheries include the northern anchovy, Pacific bonito, Jack
aackerel, Pacific mackerel, rock crab, market squid, and sea
urchin.
Figure 3-9 shows the principal species and the average
annual oatoh by blocks of origin in the Los Angeles area. This'
information is based on unpublished data from the California
Department of Fish and Gaae (1984). Fish and Gaae Block 740
which contains the LA-2 site, as well as moat of the neighboring
blocks, produced an average of more than 500,000 tons of
commercial flab for 1976, 1977 and 1981 (Table 3-17).
-------
- 3-64 -
Table 3-15. Height and Value of Landings of Commercial Fish at .
Los Angeles Area Ports and In California, 1981*1983
DESCRIPTION
A. LANDINGS
(millions of Iba)
Los Angeles Area
California
Los Angeles Percentage
of State Total
B. VALUE OF LANDINGS
(thousands of $)
Los Angeles .Area
California
Los Angeles Percentage
of State Total
California Department of
1981
337.4
780.0
43-3
111,950
280,077
39.9
Pish and Game
1982
339.8
687.7
49.4
89,207
229,323
38.9
(1984).
1983
262.3
513.2
51.1
85,079
186,092
45.7
-------
- 3-65 -
Table 3-16.
Value of Commercial Fish Landing by Port,
Angeles Area, 1981-1983
Los
1981
POST
Terminal Island
San Pedro
Los Angeles
Wilmington
Long Beach
Hewport Beach
Dana Point
Avalon
Other Ports
TOTAL
Value
($1,000
98,929
9,774
168
1,451
89
348
380
168
625
111,950
California Department of
*
}
88.4
8.7
0.2
1.3
0.1
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.5
Fish and
1982
Value
(41,000)
75,654
10,402
1,216
377
144
431
395
122
466
89,207
Game (1
j
84.8
11.7
1.4
0.4
0.2
0.5
0.4
0.1
0.5
984).
1983
Value
($1,000)
73,600
9,189
96
963
114
224
384
100
409
85,079
J
86.5
10.8
0.1
1.1
0.1
0.3
0.5
0.1
0.5
-------
- 3-66 -
iV4ANTA MONICA
RANGE CO.
UAGUNA BEACH
SANTA
CATALItUf-
ISLAND
V///A KLOW 1J000.000
SCALE M NAUTBAL Ml£S
(CATCH EXCEEDS 100.000 UU ^OH ILOCK
IN ANY ONC TCAM OUMINC 1fl7*-lMll
1. ANCHOVY. MOHTHfMN
X iONJTO. PACIFIC
3. CM AC. HOCK
4. HACKEHiU.JACK
8. MACKUIL. PACtPIC
ft. SHAMK.IUUI
7. SQUID. MARKET
t. UMCHIN.StA
FIGURE 3-9. PRINCIPAL COMMERCIAL FISH SPECIES AND AVERAGE ANNUAL
CATCH BY BLOCK IN PROJECT REGION
-------
- 3-67 -
Table 3-17.
Annual Catch In Pounds of Commercial Fish by Blocks
of Origin In the Los Angeles Area, 1976, 1977 and
1981
Pish
Blook Humber 1976
701
718
719
720
737
738
739
740
7*1
757
758
759
760
761
803
SOU
805
806
807
TOTAL
NA s Mot
California
227.9
113.2
1,290.6
13,250.6
59.8
1,440.1
5,584.1
23,480.8
30,329.2
855.9
3,427.9
6,068.8
3,326.5
7,039.0
1,149.8
1,430.2
1,284.1
1 93 . 9
8,275.1
108,827.5 1
Available
Department of Pish and
Catch (1.000
1977
149.7
175.5
1,759.2
7,614.8
HA
1 ,904.0
7,669.6
25,597.0
41,509.8
599.6
3,280.2
8,566.3
5,691.8
3,623.0
4,296.6
1,778.8
706. 6
443.9
7,725.4
23,091 .8
Game (1984).
Ibs)
1981
1,095.2
390.7
1,231.0
5,948.0
29.6
1,390.7
3,847.2
6,983.9
31,153.6
1,214.5
2,218.0
2,338.1
6,732.3
1,495.9
. 266.3
84.0
28.7
2,972.2
10,607.6
80,027.5
-------
- 3-68 -
The total catch in Block 740 amounted to approximately 23-5
•illion pounds in 1976 and 25.6 Billion in 1977. In 1981, it
fell to 7-0 Billion pounds, but moat other blocks in the area
also experienced decline in catch during that year. Although 31
species of fish and invertebrates were reported caught in Block
740 in 1981, five species, including Pacific bonito, Pacific
Mackerel, 'Jack aackerel, northern anchovy, and market squid,
accounted for 99.5J of the total catch.
The total annual landings of commercial fish varies consid-
erably froB year to year depending in part on fish availability,
aarket demand, weather conditions, and harvest regulations. For
ezaaple, in Block 740 there was a large drop in the catch for
northern anchovy and jack mackerel from about 23.0 million
pounds in 1976 to about 3.5 million pounds in 1981. it the same
time, Pacific aackerel catch Increased from 124,000 pounds in
1976 to 3.3 Billion pounds in 1981.
3.4.2. Commercial Shipping
Los Angeles and Long Beach Harbors play a very Important
role in the nation's waterborne commerce. The two ports
combined account for more than 30 Billion tons of foreign trade
annually (COG, 1985). In addition, they handle an equivalent
amount of domestic cargo that is shipped to or from destinations
in the United States.
One of the fastest growth areas in international trade for
the United States is landbrldge (water/rail) operations. The
Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach are well positioned to
expand their market share of this traffic during the next two
decades with increasing eapbasis on trade aaong the Pacific rim
countries. In 1980, over 10 million tons of containerized cargo
passed through the ports, of which almost 40* was related to
landbridge activities. More than 8,000 vessels call at the
Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach annually (Table 3-18).
Petroleum continues to be an important component of the
port tonnage and, with discovery of Santa Maria crude oil,
domestic crude oil handling may-increase, A major shift in
energy resource demands could result in the ports becoming a
aajor outbound shipping point for coal and other conventional
fuels.
The demand for cargo throughput in the Ports of Los Angeles
and Long Beach is expected to increase 167) over 1980 levels by
the year 2020. By optimizing the existing-lands within the port
boundaries, the ports would be able to handle 150.13 million
short tons as shown in Table 3-18. The forecasts for the
harbors are based on the expected demands within their market
areas. Alternate ports were surveyed to determine their own
capacity and anticipated growth to determine whether cargo could
be rerouted. These other ports have in the past twenty years
had to embark on their own expansion plans to accommodate the
-------
- 3-69 -
Table 3-18. Vaterborne Commerce and Projected Cargo Capacity at
the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beacb
A. MATERBORNE COMMERCE
LOS ANGELES
Million
No. of Metric
Tear Vessels Tons
1978 3,881 38.6
1979 3,950 40.2
1980 3,865 41.0
1981 4,196 38.4
1982 3,750 35.1
B. PROJECTED CARGO CAPACITY
1983 Base Tear
Cargo Type Cargo Demand
Dry Bulk 10.55
Liquid Bulk 53-32
General Cargo 8.98
Container 10.67
Total 83.52
LONG BEACH
Million
No. of Metric
Vessels Tons
3,293 33.9
3,789 39.5
4,132 43.8
4,287 49.1
4,685 54.5
WITHOUT PROJECT
Tear 2020
Cargo Demand
63-39
84.96
12.35
62.51
223.21
TOTAL
Million
No. of Metric
Vessels Tons
7,180 72.5
7,739 79.7
7,997 84.8
8,483 87.5
8,435 89.6
Tear 2020
Cargo Capacity
30.60
83-48
10.44
25.61
150.13
Cargo projections are in millions of short tons.
COS (1985)
-------
- 3-70 -
general increase In cargo through Vest Coast ports. Within tbe
State of California the Coastal Commission has established a
policy of encouraging expansion of existing commercial harbors
rather than developing nev ports. Due to the remoteness of any
other large commercial harbor to service tbe Los Angeles-Long
Beach Harbor market area, rerouting of anticipated commerce is
not eoat effective*
The flow of cargo through the ports is thus expected to
increase to the extent that existing water depths cannot
accommodate the ships in the projected cargo fleet. COB cargo
projections for the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach indicate
total cargo demand to be 223*21 million short tons by the year
2020. These totals and their distribution by cargo class are
shown on Table 3-19- Under tbe most likely "Future Without
Project Condition,' meeting the projected growth in cargo will
be impaired by tbe limitation posed by the existing channel
depths and the lack of adequate terminal facilities. The ports
have determined that 2600 acres of new land will be required to
meet the projected year 2020 cargo demands. This assumes the
highest and best use of existing port lands. The shortfall in
terminal acres by type is shown on Table 3-20.
Vessel traffic offshore of southern California is routed
through a system of traffic separation schemes (TSS) and port
access routes (PAR) that are established by the OSCG (Figure
3-10). The TSS serves to provide a separation of opposing flows
of traffic and PAR provides for precautionary areas where
vessels must navigate with particular caution. Two TSSa,
consisting of a northbound lane, a southbound lane and a
separation zone between the two lanes, feed into the Los Angeles
and Long Beach Harbor region. The TSS and PAR were both
modified in Hovember 1983 to Increase safety and ease of vessel
movement in this area. The LA-2 site is located within a mile
of the southbound lane of tbe Santa Barbara Channel TSS and a
little over a mile from tbe southwestern corner of the
precautionary area.
3.4*3. Oil andGas Development
The southern California offshore area contains large
reserves of oil and gas. MMS (1983) has estimated recoverable
reserves in the southern California Outer Continental Shelf
(OCS) to be 860 million barrels of oil and 1.73 trillion cubic
feet of gas.
Offshore oil and gas activity in the Los Angeles and Orange
County area is regulated by State and Federal agencies. State
agencies regulate resource development in areas from the mean
high tide line seaward to the three-mile limit. Areas beyond
tbe three-mile limit are managed by MMS of the U.S. Department
of the Interior. Six artificial islands off tbe coast at Long
Beach, two platforms and two marine terminals are located within
State waters (Figure 3-11). Offshore structures in Federal
waters include two platforms and one production facility located
about 8.8 nml (16 km) east of the LA-2 site.
-------
- 3-71 -
Table 3-19. Cargo Projections of Vaterborne Cargo for the Ports
of Los Angeles and Long Beach
(millions of sbort tons per year)
Cargo Class
Container
Automobiles
Break-bulk
Petroleum bulk
Other liquid bulk
Dry bulk - grain
Dry bulk - other
TOTAL
1983
10.67
.60
8.38
52.67
.65
2.95
T.60
83-52
2020
62.51
1.32
11 .03
83.88
1 .08
6.10
57.29
223.21
-------
. 3-72 -
Table 3-20. 1980-2020 Total Acreage Requirements
Terminal Type
Container
Break Bulk
Automobile
Petroleum
Other Liquid Bulk
Grain
Other Dry Bulk
Total Terminal Acres
Ancillary Acres
Total Acreage
Requirements
1980
.0.
-o-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
iflr
-0-
rfii
.0-
8SS
1990
282
25
23
6
-1
2
JLfl
407
201
610
3 = S
TEAS
2000
533
50
52
11
-2
4
86
734
367
1,101
523 = =
2010
904
63
77
7
-1
6
209
1,265
632 -
1,897
= = = = 3
2020
1,271
77
102
4
• 1
8
297
1,758
879
2,637
= 32 = =
-------
- 3-73 -
LOS ANGELES
SANTA MONICA
LOS ANGELES CO.
ORANGE CO
LOS ANGELES
SHALLOW
WATER
EG
5|C tA-2 SITE
DEEP
WATER
REGION
UNA BEACH
SANTA BARBARA
CHANNEL TSS
2ILP Of SANTA
tTALINATSS
meCAUTIONAMY ARIA
SIMULATED LOW UlVf L tOMSINC AND SIMULATCO SCALE M NAUTBAL MtES
MOCKCT FIRING
FIGURE 3-10. COMMERCIAL SHIPPING LANES AND ZONES OF MILITARY
OPERATION IN THE PROJECT AREA
-------
- 3-74 -
LOS ANGELES CO.
SHALLOW
WATER
. BEQI
SANTA'*}
CATALIN*
mtVIOUSLY LEASED TWACT3
I-1
TRACTS OILfTBO
SOUTMtRN CALI^WNIA
TiWItM
SCALE M NAimCAL MLES
AHTIHCJAL ISUtNOS
suiMERceo wreuwe
FIGURE 3-11. OIL AND GAS DEVELOPMENT IN THE PROJECT AREA
-------
m
- 3-75 -
At the present tine, all of tbe oil and gas produced in
the Los Angeles area Is transported to tbe shore by pipelines.
One pipeline connects tbe platforms and production facility in
tbe Federal waters to Pier J at Long Beacb. Anotber pipeline
connects tbe platform in Federal waters to tbe two platforms in
tbe State waters and tben continues to Huntington Beacb. All of
tbe six artificial islands are also connected to tbe shore at
Long Beacb via tbeir own pipeline system.
Leases have been awarded for 15 full or partial tracts in
tbe Federal waters off Los Angeles and Orange Counties. Tbe
nearest leased area is about 3.5 ami (6 km) east of tbe LA-2
site. Tbe tract containing tbe LA-2 site* and tracts to tbe
south of tbe site, were offered in OCS Lease Sale 80 in October
1984. Neither tbe tract containing LA-2 nor any in tbe general
vicinity were leased in tbe sale. Tbe tracts nortb of tbe site
were deleted from consideration due to tbe requirements of tbe
TSS implemented by tbe USCG for tbe safe navigation near tbe Los
Angeles-Long Beacb Harbor area, and concerns expressed by tbe
State.
Tbe likelihood of future oil or gas development in tbe
vicinity of the LA-2 site is uncertain at this time. No OCS
tracts have been leased in the deep water region. Tbe shallow
water region is in tbe State oil and gas sanctuary. No
production facilities exist or are planned in tbe vicinity of
eitber of these regions.
3.4.4. Military Usage
Tbe.area offshore of soutbern California is one of the
nation's largest naval operating area (see Figure 3-10). Tbe
largest amphibious marine training base on the west coast is
located at Camp Pendleton about 35 ami (65 km) southeast of Long
Beach. Activities at this facility Include simulated low
altitude bombing, rocket and gunnery practice, and other activi-
ties which require unencumbered maneuvering space for airplanes,
surface vessels and submarines. Naval exercises are conducted
continuously tbrougbout the year and involve substantial vessel
movement near the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach (MMS,
1983).
Most of the military operations take place far beyond the
Immediate coastal areas outside the Los Angeles-Long Beach
Harbor. It is only the military vessel traffic in and out of
tbe harbors that may be of any concern in connection with the
activities related to the LA-2 site. The D.5. Navy maintains a
shipyard and a support activity center on Terminal Island. In
conjunction wltb this facility, the Navy has planned to move 25
to 30 ships from San Diego to Terminal Island between 1981 and
1986. According to USCG records, an average of 2 to 3 mi-litary
vessels come into or leave tbe Terminal Island facility each day
(L.A. Onstad, Commander, USCG, 11th District, personal
communication, March 1984).
-------
- 3-76 -
3.4.5- Becrea11ona1 Activ111ea
Major ocean-related recreational activities in tbe Los
Angeles area are sportsfishlng, sightseeing, beachcombing,
picnicking, swimming, vading, sunbathing, diving, surfing,
sailboatlng, and powerboatlng. The two activities affected will
be aportfiahlng and boating.
Table 3-21 gives the number of participation days for
ocean-related recreational activities In 1980 and projected
demand for 1985 and 1990. In 1980, Los Angeles and Orange
Counties recorded 81.3 million participation days of ocean-
related recreational activity and this demand is expected to
grow by more than 10% during the 1980-1990 period
(California Department of Parks and Becreation, 1984).
Activities which are expected to experience highest growth
between 1980 and 1990 include: sailing (21%), sportflsblng
(18%), powerboating (15%), and scuba diving (14%).
3-4.5.1. Sportfishing
Sportfishlng charters in the Los Angeles area originate
from a number of harbors and sportfishing takes place at most of
the piers in the area (Figure 3-12). Four fishing modes are
commonly used for sportfishing: shore casting; pier fishing;
skiff, party boat or commercial passenger fishing vessels; and
skin and scuba diving. Shore and pier fishing are by far the
•ost popular methods, although more fish are caught per hour
from boats. Since party boat fishing is the activity most
likely to be affected by the project-related activities, the
discussion below pertains mainly to this method of sportfishing.
Party boats in the Los Angeles area operate mostly from Sao
Pedro, Long Beach, Seal Beach, Balboa, and Dana Point Harbors.
Table 3-22 provides the number of sportfish caught and the
number of anglers reported by boats operating from these harbors
for 1977 and 1981.
In 1977, Seal Beach reported the largest number of fish
caught, representing 8.3% of the total sportfish catch in tbe
State (California Department of Fish and Game, 1984). The five
harbors combined reported a catch of almost 0.9 million fish
accounting for about 23% of the total State catch of 4.8
million. The local percentage of anglers was somewhat lower
(21%) than the percentage of fish caught, indicating a larger
catch per angler ratio compared to the State figure as a whole.
In 1981, the total number of sport fish caught in the Los
Angeles area increased to almost 1.4 million; however, the
portion of the area State total catch remained unchanged at 23%.
Sportfishing has fluctuated from year to year, perhaps as a
result of improved facilities at some of tbe harbors. For
example, Seal Beach, which reported the second largest number of
anglers in 1977, ranked fifth among the five Los Angeles area
-------
- 3-77 -
fable 3-21.
Existing and Projected Number of Participation Bays
for Ocean-related Recreational Activities for Los
Angeles and Orange Counties, 1980, 1985 and 1990
Participation Days
Los Anaeles
Activity
Power boating
Sailing
Salt water
fishing
Ocean swimming
Scuba and skin
diving
Body surfing
Board surfing
Sunbathing
Beachcombing
Beach games
TOTAL PER TEAR
1
2
1
3
17
1
7
7
10
2
4
55
980
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
051
785
483
440
223
745
745
306
026
319
922
1
2
2
3
18
1
7
7
.-10
2
4
558
985
,202
,048
,776
,102
,329
,729
,729
,857
,128
,494
,158
(In thousands of days)
County
1
2
2
4
18
1
7
7
11
2
4
60
990
,330
, 1 45
,039
,788
,394
,992
,992
, 174
,195
,695
,432
1
1
9
4
4
3
1
25
Study
1980
Power boating
Sailing
Salt water fishing
Ocean swimming
Scuba and skin
Body surfing
Board surfing
Sunbathing
Beachcombing
Beach games
TOTAL PER: TEAR
diving
.
California Department of
2
2
5
26
1
11
11
13
2
5
81
,898
,493
,326
,752
,678
,889
,889
,481
,655
,629
,302
Parks and
Orange County
980
847
708
,843
,312
455
,144
,144
,175
629
,310
,380
Area
1985
3,
2,
5,
28,
1 ,
11 ,
11,
14,
2,
5,
85,
125
872
824
061
826
993
993
275
803
882
184
Recreation (
1985 1
923
824
2,048 2
9,959 10
497
4,264 4
4,264 4
3,418 3
675
1,388 1
27,026 28
Total
1990
3,298
3,030
6,307
27,410
1,9922
12,564
12,564
14,765
2,904
6, -173
89,283
1984).
990
966
885
,268
,622
528
,572
,572
,591
709
,478
,851
-------
- 3-78 -
LOS ANGELES CO.
ORANGE CO.
^HUNTtNGTON BEACH
SANTA
CATAU
ISLAND
SHORE FISHING
ARTIFICIAL PISHING REEPS
MAJOR MAR UN ANO/OR SWOROPISH PISHING
AREAS
GENERAL FINNISH - FISHING AREAS INCLUDE:
ROCK PISH. KELP BASS. SHEEP HEAD. WHITE SEA BASS.
BLACK SEA BASS. BARRACUDA. BONITO
ro»lMte location of Horseshoe KtTp b»d.
SCALE M NAUTCAi; MtES
FIGURE 3-12. SPORTFISHING RESOURCES IN THE PROJECT AREA
-------
- 3-79 -
Table 3-22.
HUBbar of Sportfiah Caugbt and Humber of Anglers on
Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessels for Each Port
In the Los Angeles Area, 1977 and 1981.
Port
San Pedro
Long Beach
Seal Beach
Balboa
Dana Point
Los Angeles
Area Total
State Total
Number
of Fish
250,800
130,094
404,495
151,278
182,265
1,118,932
4,849,472
Soortf iafa
1977
* of
State
5.2
2.7
8.3
3.1
. 3.8
23.1
Anglers
1977
Huaber of % of
Anglers State
San Pedro
Long Beach
Seal Beach
Balboa
Dana Point
Los Angeles
Area Total
State Total
California
24,904
12,506
37,529
. 30,003
44,739
149,681
716,536
Department of
3.5
1.7
5.2
4.2
6.2
20.9
Fish and Game (
Caught
1981
Number
of Fish
522,583
378,620
272,031
346,927
267,705
1,787,866
6,314,534
1981
Number of
Anglers
58,874
40,754
33,723
45,123
43,474
221,939
830,653
1 984 )
% of
State
8.3
6.0
4.3
5.5
4.2
28.3
% of
State
7.1
4.9
4.1
5-4
5.2
26.7
-------
- 3-80 -
harbors in 1981. Overall, the party boat fishing activity
appears to be increasing in popularity over the years as shown
by the increasing number of anglers as veil as a larger catch
reported at almost all the harbors.
Over 100 species have been recorded in the southern California
sport catch (California Department of Fish and Game, 1984}.
However, only about 10 species are caught in large
numbers. The most commonly caught species by number and by
block off origin are shown in Table 3-23. In Fish and Game
Block 740, which contains the LA-2 site, the 10 most commonly
caught species accounted for 98) of the total catch. Three
species (Pacific mackerel, unspecified rockfish, and spotted
scorpion fish} alone represented 76} of the total catch from the
block. Similarly, these 10 species accounted for more than 95J
of the total from almost each block in the project site
vicinity.
3.4.5.2. Boating
The recreational activity most likely to be affected by the
project-related activities is boating. Boating is not limited
to any specific area although concentrated activity can be found
in areas with suitable harbors and marinas such as Los Angeles
and Long Beach Harbors, Long Beach Marina, Huntington Harbor,
Newport Beach Harbor and Dana Point Harbor along the Los
Angeles-Orange County coastlines. Avalon Bay and Two Harbors on
Santa Catallna Island are also areas of concentrated boating
activity.
In terms of ocean traffic, the offshore islands are one of
the major destinations for boaters. The boats usually follow a
straight route between the harbor or marina on the mainland to
the harbors at Santa Catallna Island* From the Los Angeles and
Long Beach Harbors, this route passes over or very close to the
LA-2 site. Santa Catalina is the most visited destination
because landing there is relatively unrestricted and major
anchorages are located at Avalon and Two Harbors. In addition
to privately owned pleasure boats, regular ferry service is
available from Los Angeles, Long Beach, and Hewport Beach
Harbors to Santa Catallna Island.
3.4.5.3. Other Recreational Activities
Other.major ocean-related recreational activities in the
Los Angeles area are sightseeing, beachcombing, picnicking,
swimming, wading, sunbathing, diving, and surfing. Sightseeing
and beachcombing are enjoyed along the entire coast.
Picnicking, swimming, wading, and sunbathing tend to be
concentrated along public beaches where recreational facilities
are easily accessible (Figure 3-13)- Due to a large
concentration of population in southern California, the warm
climate of the region, and a worldwide reputation for beautiful
beaches, coastal recreational facilities in the Los Angeles area
are used by large numbers of people each summer day. Hone of
these activities are expected to be affected by designation of
an ODHDS.
-------
- 3-81 -
Table 3-23• Hunter of Sportfisb Caught In Each California
Department of Fish and Game Block in the Vicinity of
the LA-2 ODHDS in 1977
-
Huaber of Fish Caught
oer Block
LA-2 Site Block Block Block
Fish Species
Pacific bonlto
Pacific mackerel
California barracuda
Unspecified rockflsh
Spotted acorpionfiab
Kelp bass
Barred sand bass
Vbite .croaker
Halfnoon
Ocean vhitefisb
Other fish
ABBA TOTAL
•
Pacific bonito
Pacific mackerel
California barracuda
Unspecified rockflsh
Spotted scorpionflsh
Kelp bass
Barred sand bass
Vhlte croaker
Halfnoon
Ocean Whiteflah
Other fish
AREA TOTAL
HA a Data for block
California Department
Block 740 718
1,887 78 1
30,940 5,220 54
4,595 1,425 5
58,719 3,058 167
11,025 1,557 25
10,653 1,356 6
6,656 6,225 1
75 7,550
3,385 217
4,624 171 25
2,047 1,663 2
132,358 28,951 293
Block Block Block
739 741 759
1,622 HA
17,466 HA
473 HA
75,358 HA 798
2,876 HA 4
1,812 HA
H/C HA 113
866 HA
19 HA
574 HA
1,185 HA 10
110,158 HA 812
741 not available.
of Fish and Game (1984).
719 720
,078 8,935
,055 47,092
,135 2,605
,461 67,070
,899 1,300
,135 11,224
,641 7,907
15 1,455
351 16,100
,446 7,167
,015 2,914
,815 167,503
Block Block
_Z£P_ _IiJ_
1,177 6,053
1,242 4,749
17 279
7,410 7,746
55 385
1,288 13,039
85
1,209 5,668
8 498
282 1,774
12,801 40,276
-------
- 3-82 -
LOS ANGELES
SANTA MONICA
LOS ANGELES CO.
ORANGE CO
LOWS BEACH
LOSANGELE&
..HARBOR
00
SHALLOW
WATER
REGION
'"iMUNTINGTON BEACH
DEEP
WATER
REGION
IAGUNA BEACH
HARBORS
O O
UGENO
A
O DIVING AREAS
BOATING ROUTES
SCALE W NAimCAL MLES
EXISTING RECREATION SITES
FIGURE 3-13. PRINCIPAL RECREATIONAL AREAS IN THE PROJECT AREA
-------
- 3-83 -
Diving occurs along the coast off Paloa Terdes Peninsula
in Los Angeles County, along the Orange County coast, and along
the shores of Santa Catalina Island.
Surfing is a popular sport activity along the Santa Monica
Bay to the northwest of the LA-2 site, and along the Orange
County coast to the east. There has been a large increase in
surfing over the past few years due to the use of wet suits to
protect the surfers from the cold. This allows the sport to be
practiced over the entire year rather than just during the
warmer season.
3.4.6. Cultural Resources
Cultural resources relevant to offshore areas are prehisto-
ric and historic remains comprising a nonrenewable resource base
that provides archaeologists and historians with inforaation for
reconstruction of past cultural systems and behaviors. The
offshore region of southern California is believed to contain
numerous cultural resources. Types of submerged resources are
aboriginal remains, and sunken ships and aircrafts (see Figure
3-14). Extensive dredging and construction in the Los Angeles
and Long Beach Harbor areas has already destroyed almost all
traces of prehistoric cultural data in the harbor areas (Tetra
Tech, 1984a). The most probable resource that could be
encountered in the study area is shipwrecks.
The shipwrecks and other historic resources previously
known in the study area were inventoried and assessed by a
number of former studies (Marshall, 1978). A recent study by
MMS (1983) has updated an earlier study conducted by Stlckel et
al. in 1978. These reports have documented the potential for
the presence of shipwrecks which may be a significant cultural
resources. Over 450 known historic shipwrecks have occurred in
southern California, with most of them either near Los Angeles
or San Diego. Based upon water depth and known cultural
resource location data, MMS has identified 26 Federal oil and
gas lease tracts in the LA-2 study area having cultural resource
sensitivity. Neither the Federal tract containing the LA-2 site
nor any tract in the immediate vicinity of the site has been
Identified as sensitive for historic shipwrecks or other
cultural resources. The nearest tract with known cultural
resources is about 7 nmi (13 km) southeast of the LA-2 site.
3.4-7. Public Health and Welfare
Ensuring that public health and welfare are not adversely
affected by ocean disposal of dredged materials is a primary
concern to EPA and COE. Public health and welfare can be
affected in a number of ways. Only three issues, health,
safety, and aesthetics, are discussed.
-------
- 3-84 -
^HUNTtNGTON BEACH
LfGSNO
PS&
AREAS OP HIGHER PHOSAilLlTV OP ABORIGINAL
SITES
PROHIBITED DUMPING AREA
SCALE M NAUTICAL HUES
FIGURE 3-14. OTHER CULTURAL FEATURES OF THE PROJECT AREA
-------
- 3-85 -
Health hazards nay arise if the chemical nature of the
materials has the potential for bloacoumulatlon of..toxic
substances In organisms. Potential Impacts on human health can
be Inferred from bloassay and bloaccumulatlon tests performed on
marine animals. Since the LA-2 study area provides large
amounts of commercial fish for human consumption, the public
health issue gains added importance.
The disposal of dredged material could present hazards to
navigation either as a result of mounding within the disposal
site, or as a result of interference of the disposal barges with
shipping traffic. As described in the commercial shipping
section (Section 3.4.2), traffic in the Los Angeles-Long Beach
Harbor area is heavy and a precautionary area has been
established by OSCG to reduce navigation hazards. In addition
to commercial shipping traffic, Navy vessels and a large number
of fishing and recreational boats also use the area between the
Los Angeles-Long Beach Harbor and the LA-2 site. Another
possibility of traffic hazard exists as a result of Interference
between the disposal barges and the traffic generated by
offshore oil and gas developments. The LA-2 site lies in an
area where federal tracts were open for lease offerings in •.»—'.,.
October 1984, however neither the tract containing the LA-2 site
nor any tracts in the general vicinity were leased during the
lease sale in October 1984. Therefore, since the tract
containing the LA-2 site was not sold in the lease offering,
direct Interference (traffic hazards) between drilling and
disposal activities is not anticipated in the foreseeable
future.
A third aspect of the public health and welfare issue Is
the effects of dredged material disposal on the aesthetics of
the area. The LA-2 site Is located only about 4.4 nmi (8 km)
offshore from the breakwaters at San Pedro, California. These
waters are heavily utilized by people engaged in sportfishing
and recreational boating. The site also lies along the main
traffic route between the Los Angeles-Long Beach Harbor and
Santa Catalina Island, which is one of the major tourist .
attractions in southern California. Potential impacts and
mitigation measures related to public health will be discussed
la the Environmental Consequences chapter.
-------
-------
- 4-1 -
CHAPTER 4. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
4.1. INTRODUCTION
This chapter assesses the impacts of the proposed project
alternatives on the physical, biological, and aocloeconomic
environmental segments discussed in Chapter 3. Any site desig-
nated ODMDS is expected to have some environmental impacts on
the biological community within the designated area. It is the
purpose of this BIS to determine the probable or known severity
of impacts expected at the site and the significance of
potential Impacts outside the boundaries of the ODMDS related to
human health and the marine environment.
The classification system used in this EIS to determine
levels of environmental impact is similar to that used by MMS
(1984) to evaluate impacts for the Point Arguello Oil Field
Development Plan. The environmental Impacts are divided into
the following classes:
- Class I - Significantly adverse impacts that cannot be
mitigated to insignificance. This means that no measures
could be taken to avoid or reduce these adverse effects to
insignificant or negligible levels.
- Class II -Significant adverse impacts that can be
mitigated to insignificance. These impacts are
potentially similar in significance to Class I Impacts,
but the severity of the Impact can be reduced or avoided
by implementation of mitigation measures discussed under
each beading.
- Class III - Adverse but insignificant impacts, or no
effect anticipated. No mitigation measures are required
for these Impacts or effects.
- Class IV - Beneficial impacts. These Impacts would
improve conditions relative to the pre-project baseline
conditions. They are further subdivided as significant or
insignificant where applicable.
The term "significant* is used in this chapter to
characterize the magnitude of the potential Impact. For the
purposes of the EIS, a significant Impact is a substantial or
potentially substantial change to resources in the vicinity of
the ODMDS or the area adjacent to the ODMDS.
In the discussions of each subject area below, criteria
used to distinguish between significant and insignificant
impacts are provided. To the extent feasible, distinctions are
also made between the scope of local and regional significance,
and short-term versus long-term duration. Mitigation measures
are discussed where appropriate. A summary of the., impacts and
mitigation measures Is presented in Tables 4.1, 4.2, 4.3 and
4.4.
-------
. 4-2 -
Table 4-1. Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for the LA-2 Site
(Refer to text in Chapter 4 for detailed explanation.)
- Impacts
Potential Mitigation
Class
Description I
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
Air Quality
Water Quality
. turbidity, DO X
• trace metals,
DDTs, PCBs, oils
and greases X
Geology
- sediment grain size X
* sediment quality X
ilOLOCICAL ENVIRONMENT
Plankton
Kelp
Benthic Infauna X
Sentbic Epifauna X
Demersal Flab X
Pelagic Fish
Coastal Birds
Marine Mammals
threatened and
Endangered Species
Marine Sanctuaries
and iSBS
(1) a Scope Definitions
S a site, 1000 yd
L a local, up to 1
R s region, beyond
(2) * Term
II III IV
X
X
x ..
X
X
X
X
X
X
Scooe (1)
SLR
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
. x
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Term (2)
Measures
S E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Ho mitigation
measures proposed
because effects
are short- tens.
(CONTINUED)
(914 m) radius from center of designated ODMDS.
nmi outside of site.
local vicinity of ODMDS.
S s short, less than or equal to 5 hours.
E a extended, greater than 5 hours.
-------
Table 4-1 (continued).
- 4-3 -
f
Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for the
U-2 Site (Refer to text In Chapter 4 for detailed
explanation.)
lapacts
Class
Description I II III IV
SOCIOBCONOMXC ENVIRONMENT
Commercial Pishing
:ish stocks Z
- fishing fleet safety I
Commercial Shipping Z
- safety Z
- Bounding Z
- port access Z
Oil and Gas Development
- present drilling Z
- future drilling Z
- future oil transport Z
Military Usage
- traffic interference Z
- naval ship access Z
Sport Pishing Z
Other Recreational
Activities Z
Cultural Uses Z
Public Health and Welfare
- health Z
- safety Z
Scooe (1)
SLR
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z Z
Z
Z
' Z
Z
Z
Z
Potential Mltigatioi
Measures
Term (2)
S E
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
• z-
Z
z
(1) n Scope Definitions
Siting facilities
away from immediate
disposal area.
•
S s site, 1000 yd (914 m) radius from center of designated ODMDS.
L s local, up to 1 nml outside of site.
R s region, beyond local vicinity of ODMDS.
(2) » Tern
S » short, less than or equal to 5 hours.
B « extended, greater than 5 hours.
-------
- 4-4 -
Table 4-2. Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for the Ho Action
Alternative (Refer to text In Chapter 4 for detailed explanation.}
Impacts
Potential Mitigation
Measures
Class
Description
I II in IT
Scope (1)
SLR
Term (2)
S E
ICAL ENVIRONMENT
IOLOGICAL ENVIBOHHENT
OECONOKIC ENVIRON-
MENT
Commercial Shipping
and Military Use
Public Health, Safety,
Aesthetics
(1) a Scope Definitions
S * site, 1000 yd (914 m) radius from center of designated ODMDS.
L » local, up to 1 nml outside of site.
R « region, beyond local vicinity of ODMDS.
(2) * Term
S * abort, less than or equal to 5 hours..
E s extended, greater than 5 hours.
-------
. 4-5 -
Table 4-3. Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for the Shallow Water
Alternative (Refer to text In Chapter 4 for detailed explanation.)
-Impacts Potential Mi tl gat lor
Measures
Class
Description I II III IT
fflXt -AL ENVIRONMENT
Air * 'ity I
Vater 11 ty
- turbiL.-y, DO X
• trace metals, DDTs,
PCBs, oil and grease X
Geology
- sediment grain size X
- sediment quality X
-1C1L ENVIROHMENT
Plankton X
Kelp X
Benthic Inf auna X
Bentbic Bpifauna X
Demersal Fish X
Pelagic Fish X
Coastal Birds X
Marine Mammals X
Threatened and
Endangered Species . X
Marine Sanctuaries
and ASBS X
Scooe (1)
S L It
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Term (2)
S E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
(CONTINUED)
(1) * Scope Definitions
S a site, 1000 yd (914 m) radius from center of designated ODMDS.
L s local, up to 1 nml outside of site.
B » region, beyond local rlclnity of ODMDS.
(2) * Term
S a abort, less than or equal to 5 hours.
B « extended, greater than 5 hours.
-------
. 4-6 -
Table 4-3 (continued).
Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for the
Shallow Water Alternative (Refer to text in Chapter 4
for detailed explanation.)
Impacts
Potential Mitigation
Measures
Class
Description I
50CIOECONOHIC ENVIRONMENT
Commercial Fishing
- fish stocks
- fishing fleet safety
Commercial Shipping
- safety
Oil and Gas Development
Military Usage
Sport Fishing
Boating
- mounding and
interference X
Other Recreational
Activities
Cultural Uses
Public Health and
Welfare
- health
- safety
Aesthetics
(1) » Scope Definitions
II III IV
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Scope (1)
SLR
X X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
Term (2)
S E
X
X Disposal only
during daylight
hours to reduce
accidents.
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X Close coordinatior
vith the SBPO to
prevent damage.
X
X Disposal during
daylight hours of
weekdays only.
X
S 9 site, 1000 yd (914 m> radius from center of designated ODMDS.
L = local, up to 1
I » region, beyond
(2) » Term
nmi outside of site.
local vicinity of ODMDS.
S • short, less than or equal to 5 hours.
B a extended, greater than 5 hours.
-------
- 4-7 -
Table 4-4. Summary of Impacts and Hltigation Measures for the Peep Water
Alternative (Refer to text in Chapter 4 for detailed explanation.)
. Impacts
Potential Mitigation
Class
Description I
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
Air Quality
Vater Quality
• turbidity, DO Z
• trace metals, DDTs,
PCBs, oils and
greases Z
Geology
- sediment grain size Z
• sediment quality Z
ilOLOQICAL ENVIRONMENT
Plankton
Kelp
Benthic Infauna Z
Benthic Bpif auna Z
Demersal Fish I
Pelagic Fish
Coastal Birds
Marine Mammals
Threatened and
Endangered Species
Marine Sanctuaries and
ASBS .
(1) * Scope Definitions
S « site, 1000 yd (914
L « local , up to 1 ami
II III IV
Z
Z
I
Z
z
z
z
z
z
Scope (1)
SLR
Z
Z
Z
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
Term (2)
Measures
S E
Z
Z
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
•
(CONTINUED)
m) radius from center of designated ODMDS.
outside of site.
H * region, beyond local vicinity of ODMDS.
(2) • Term
S • short, less than or equal to 5 hours.
E * extended, greater
-
than. 5 hours.
-------
- 4-8 -
Table 4*4 (continued).
Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for the
Deep Vater Alternative (Befer to text in Chapter 4 for
detailed explanation.)
Impacts
Potential Mitigatioi
Measures
Class
Description I
SOCIOECONOHIC ENVIRONMENT
Commercial Fishing
Commercial Shipping
- interference
• port access
Oil and Gas Development
• present
- future
Military Usage
Sport Fishing
Other Recreational
Activities
Cultural Uses
Public Health and
Welfare
- health
-- safety
Aesthetics
(1) » Scope Definitions
S = site, 1000 yd
L s local, up to 1
R « region, beyond
(2) » Term
n Hi iv
X
X •
X
X
X
X
• x
X
X
X
X
X
Scooe (1)
S L B
X X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Term (2)
S B
X
X
X
X
X Site oil facili-
ties in part of
tract far removed
from disposal site.
X
X ' . -
. X
X
X
X Disposal during
daylight hours of
weekdays only.
X
(914 m) radius from center of designated QDMDS.
nmi outside of site.
local vicinity of ODMDS.
S « short, less than or equal to 5 hours.
B * extended, greater than 5 hours.
-------
4.2. LA-2 QDMD5 ALTERNATIVE (PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE)
The principal effect of disposal of dredged material at the
LA-2 site is the Introduction of substantial amounts of sediment
and associated contaminants into a small area. It is important
to note tbat significant impacts may be expected at any site
designated as the final ODMDS by virtue of the accumulation of
large amounts of disposed dredged material. Furthermore* this
EIS is on designation of a permanent disposal site, while
dredged material is specifically reviewed under the COEs
permitting regulations. Designation of the LA-2 site is
expected to maintain the observed effects of past disposal, such
as fluctuations in grain size distribution and Increases in
concentrations of trace metals, oil and grease, pesticides, and
PCBs. In turn, these factors are expected to continue affecting
the benthic fauna of the site, causing less diverse infauna and
less abundant epifauna and encouraging the presence of several
species Indicative of moderate pollution.
Other mechanisms by which disposal is expected to. affect
benthic fauna at the disposal site include soothering and
interference with feeding processes. These effects on benthic
fauna are expected to be at least partly responsible for
maintaining a less diverse and reduced demersal fish fauna
compared to populations that exist at the reference site. In
addition, any elevation in the levels of pesticides or PCBs in
the dredged materials disposed at the site may be reflected in
the levels found in the tissues of invertebrates and fish at the
LA-2 site, . ... . - -
Significant effects of disposal on the sediment and benthic
fauna are likely to be limited to the immediate site vicinity,
and no significant effects are expected on the sediments or
benthic fauna of the area surrounding the LA-2 site or the
region in general. The effects of disposal on water quality of
the site are expected to be localized and transitory, so that no
significant long-term effect is expected on the plankton or
pelagic fish of the site or of its surroundings and no
significant effects are expected on marine mammals or endangered
species.
4.2.1. Effects on Physloa-l Environment
Environmental effects on the physical environment were
assessed for each alternative by identifying and/or quantifying
potential sources of contamination or alteration. This approach
included review of existing literature, modeling of the dredged
material discharge plume, and analysis of field data collected
at the LA-2 and reference site.
Criteria for assigning Impacts to aspects of the physical
environment as significantly adverse under Class I or Class II,
were:
-------
. 4-10 .
A. The likelihood of a relatively large degree of change
from baseline conditions as indicated by analagous
situations and previous studies,
B. The persistence of adverse impacts long enough to
measurably affect receiving waters or bentbic
environments, or
C. The relative volume of water or area of the sea floor
adversely affected thereby determining whether the
level of significance is local or regional.
4.2.1.1. Meteorology and Air Quality
Disposal of dredged material at the LA-2 site will not have
a significant effect on the meteorology or air quality of the
local area (Class III). COE does not anticipate that there will
be any increase beyond the current number of disposal trips to
the site, and there have not been any significant air quality
Impacts detected to date.
4.2.1.2. Physieal Oceanography
Final designation of the LA-2 site for dredged material
disposal will have no significant effect on physical
oceanography (Class III). Physical oceanographic parameters
such as currents, waves, and tides are Important in how they
determine the mixing of the water column and the transport of
sediment. These forces, in turn, affect the fate of the
disposed dredged material. Bottom currents and mid-water
currents are especially Important in determining the direction
and extent of sediment transport at a disposal site. Tidal
currents may also contribute to the transport of disposal
material, but these currents do not usually add net directional
effects. The role of these parameters in determining water
column and sediment quality Impacts are discussed below. It
should be noted that the effect of waves mixing bottom sediments
and increasing turbidity by resuspenslon of bottom sediments
were not projected for the LA-2 site.
4.2.1.3- Water Quality
Continued disposal of dredged material at the LA-2 site is
not expected to have any long-term effects on water quality in
the local area or region. This conclusion is based on water
quality data from the field survey that show no significant
difference in water temperature, pH, turbidity, and DO between
the LA-2 site which has been used for disposal since 1977 and
the reference site. These levels are also within the range of
values found for these parameters in undisturbed areas of the
bight. Values for salinity were lower than has been
historically reported but this variance appears to be due to
errors in field measurement rather than disposal activities.
-------
- 4-11 -
Considering the frequency of disposal, the anticipated
quantities of suspended sedinent, the volume and dilution
capacity of the local water column and currents, and the ambient
concentrations of suspended particulates and contaminants,
disposal is not expected to have a significantly adverse effect
on the water quality of the project area (Class III). This
overall rating is supported by the fact that the water quality
of the LA-2 site is indistinguishable from that of the reference
site despite at least 10 years of disposal at the LA-2 site.
Short term Impacts to water quality in the immediate
vicinity of the LA-2 site can be expected at the time of dredged
material disposal (Class I). The dredged material will be
dispersed by currents in a plume cloud causing an Increase in
turbidity and possibly a reduction In dissolved oxygen. Aa
discussed in more detail under Section 4.2.1.5, after the
initial disposal and with a prevailing northwest current, it la
predicted that the plume will be diluted to a negllble
concentration of 4 to 5 mg/1 within 5 hours. Levels of
increased turbidity are predicted to occur up until this tine
for a pathway 1524 m (5,000 feet) long at a maximum diameter of
914 m (1,000 feet) and maximum depth of 100 fathoms (55 m).
Original turbidity levels of 150 mg/1 will decrease markedly
down current and towards the outside edges of the plume.
Increased turbidity and reduced DO in the water column have
been determined as a Class I Impact since they cannot be
mitigated. This is a local effect of short-term duration so no
mitigation measure is proposed.
'. Trace metals, chlorinated hydrocarbons (pesticides and
PCBs), oils and greases were not detected during the field
survey in the water column. Such contaminants that are
associated with the dredged material sink to the bottom or are
greatly diluted by currents. Impacts immediately after disposal
would be of a temporary nature and in a local area (Class I);
therefore, no mitigation measure is proposed. It should be
noted that the levels .of detection in the field survey were
often above or near levels of these contaminates reported for
other unpolluted areas of the bight.
4.2.1.4. Geology
The final designation of the LA-2 site for dredged material
disposal will add a layer of sediment to the ocean floor. Since
the LA-2 site is a slope from the mainland shelf to San Pedro
Basin, cumulative sedimentation could lead to slumping of
material down the slope's gradient. This is a common natural
occurrence, and disposal activities are not expected to add to
it significantly.
-------
'. H-12 -
L
4.2.1.5. Sediment Transport
To evaluate the effect of disposal on turbidity and bottom
sedimentation at the LA-2 site, a model was developed simulating
the dispersal of the dredged material (Appendix C). The model
assumes that disposal will be from a split hull barge with a
load of 800 yd3 (612 m3) of dredged material. Simulations were
run with currents either to the northwest at 8 cm/a (0.261
feet/s), or to the southeast at 8 em/s (0.261 feet/s).
For the simulation of prevailing northwest currents, all of
the gravel (1 yd3 or 0.8 m3) will settle to the bottom 1.25
hours after barge dumping. It will cover an area of 1116 m2
(12,000 ft2) in a layer 0.07 cm (0.03 Inches) thick, centered 18
m (60 feet) 4own current from the discharge point. All of the
sand (102 yd3 or 78 m3) will also settle to the bottom, and it
will cover an area of 8184 m3 (88,000 ft3) in a layer 0.96 cm
(0.38 inches) thick, centered 396 m (1300 feet) down current.
Within this area of gravel and sand deposition, a small
quantity of the finer particles will also be deposited: 20* or
19 m3 (25 yd3) of silt, and 10* or 1.8 m3 (2-3 yd3) of clay.
The rest of the silt and olay will descend in a plume down
through the water column at a slower rate. It will be
transported by northwest currents to deeper waters where it will
reach neutral buoyancy at a depth of 100 fathoms (55 m).
As these finer particles are transported by currents, they
will be dispersed and diluted. After 1.25 hours the
concentration of the suspended particles in a plume cloud with a
diameter of 427 m (1,400 feet) will be 150 mg/1 at the center,
decreasing to zero at its outside limits.
After five hours, the plume will be transported 1524 o
(5000 feet) down current. At this point, the plume will be
diluted to a concentration of less than 4 to 5 mg/1, with a
maximum diameter of 914 m (3000 feet). The finer particles will
remain in suspension indefinately, over long distances, and will
be greatly diluted by prevailing currents.
For the simulation of prevailing southeast currents,
deposition of all materials will be within 457 m (1500 feet) of
the discharge point at depths between 83 and 100 fathoms (151 to
182 m), covering an area of 10,230 m2 (110,000 ft2) in a layer
averaging 0.29 cm (0.11 Inches) thick. In some areas the
deposition will be thicker than this average value.
This model does not Include resuspenslon and slumping which
would tend to expand the area of deposition but lessen the
thickness of the deposition layer. Furthermore, this is a
simulation of one disposal activity only; cumulative impacts
will result from the total number of trips undertaken throughout
the year. Since disposal activities are expected to be
separated in most instances by several hours if not days or
-------
. 4-13 -
weeks, cumulative effects to the concentration of tbe plume or
tbe total area of deposition are not expected. However,
numerous disposal activities will result In a progressively
thicker layer of deposition wltb tine in tbe local area of tbe
disposal site (Class I).
4.2.1.6. Sediment Quality
Sediment in the vicinity of the LA-2 disposal site is tbe
component of the physical environment expected to be most
significantly affected by disposal, because large amounts of
disposed dredged material will permanently alter natural
sediment conditions at tbe disposal site (Class I). The most
significant potential effects are changes in grain size
distribution, Increased concentrations of contaminants, .
biological oxygen demand (BOD) and chemical oxygen demand (COD).
There is evidence that some of these effects have already
occurred at the LA-2 site due to past disposal operations. The
sediments of the LA-2 site show a greater range of grain sizes
than those at the reference site (see Table 3-2).
Concentrations of trace metals, chlorinated hydrocarbons,
oils and grease in sediments at the LA-2 site were higher than
those at the reference site and other unpolluted areas of tbe
bight (see Tables 3-3 and 3-4 for comparative values). These
differences may be due to disposal activities or natural
factors, but they are probably due to both.
Assuming the worst case, that all
LA-2 site and reference site have been
activities, grain size differences and
sediments can be expected to persist at
designation allows continued disposal (
likely that bacteria and organic matter
sediments have caused and will continue
and COD in tbe sediments at LA-2 (Class
differences, between tbe
caused by past disposal
contaminant levels in
the LA-2 site if final
Class I). It is also
associated with disposal
to cause increased BOD
I).
4.2.2. Effects on Biological Environment
Potential effects on marine communities were examined for
each alternative site based on the susceptibility of each
community to direct or Indirect Impacts resulting from disposal
of dredged material. Potential effects were analyzed in
relation to the baseline data for the various communities
described in Chapter 3*
Criteria used in this section to assign significance to a
potential Impact are considered:
A. Significant only to tbe site if Impacts to biological
communities are not expected to occur outside of a 1 ,000
yard (914 m) radius of the designated ODMDS,
-------
. 4-14 -
B. Locally significant if judged likely to cause or
substantially contribute to a measurable change in
species composition or distribution In a particular
habitat located within 1 nnl (1.8 km) outside of the
project site, and
C. Regionally significant if Judged likely to cause or
substantially contribute to measurable changes in the
function or recovery of any habitat of special
Importance* or a change in population of any species of
recognized regulatory, commercial, scientific, or
recreational importance beyond the local vicinity of the
ODMDS.
4.2.2.1. Plankton Community
Plankton could be adversely affected by dredged material
disposal through mortality due to entrainment in the sediment
plume, -exposure to contaminants, reduction in photosynthetic
productivity due to lowered light levels (Pequegnat, 1978; .
Wright, 1978), or Interference with feeding processes. Sullivan
and Hancock (1977) concluded that any adverse Impacts on
plankton would be so small as to be undetectable superimposed on
large natural fluctuations in plankton populations. Any such
temporary effects from the disposal of dredged material should
be insignificant (Class III).
Modeling of the disposal plume at the LA-2 site (see
Section 4.2.1.5*) showes that the discharge is expected to sink
to the bottom quickly, and that significant suspended sediment
concentrations would occur well below the eupbotlc zone. Some
small amount of fine sediment will be suspended in surface
waters, but should be diluted to background levels relatively
quickly by the ambient current. Decreased light transmittance,
and the associated potential for reduced photosynthesis should
also be temporary, localized, and not significant. Studies show
that increased turbidity and reduction in light penetration from
disposal of dredged materials causes short-term adverse effects
on phytoplankton, but no long-term effects on primary produc-
tivity (Wright, 1978; Hirscb, et al., 1978). Mortality of
phytoplankton due to entrainment should likewise be localized,
temporary, and insignificant.
Zooplankton may also be entrained in the plume and killed
or exposed to contaminants. In addition, suspended sediment may
interfere with filter-feeding zooplankton (FVS, 1980). Because
zooplankton occur throughout the water column, exposure of
zooplankton to the disposed sediment, including the plume of
suspended sediment at deeper depths, will be greater than that
for phytoplankton. However, almost all suspended and liquid
phase bioassay tests on dredged material proposed for ocean
disposal from Los Angeles and Long Beach Harbors have shown no
significant mortality for planktonic species in the initial
mixing zone.
-------
. 4-15 -
Beyond the Initial mixing zone, dilution and transport
reduce turbidity and contaminant levels quickly. Mortality due
to entrainment of zooplankton In the plume will be small. The
impact on this community should be localized, temporary, and
negligible in comparison to the reproductive capacity of
zooplankton species (Class III).
4.2.2*2. Kelp Community
Disposal at the LA-2 site Is not expected to have an
effect on the kelp beds off the Palos Terdes Peninsula since 5
nmi (9 km) separate this site from the closest kelp bed .and no
disposal material is expected.to travel this distance towards
shallow waters (Class III). The nearby Horseshoe Kelp Bed does
not actually include any kelp beds nor is It expected to in the
future.*
4.2.2.3. Bentnic Invertebrate Community
Benthlc communities are the component of the biological
environment most likely to be affected by disposal. Disposal
affects the benthos through smothering by deposited sediment,
deposited or suspended sediment interfering with feeding
mechanisms, toxic effects of contaminants, and altering sediment
characteristics which change the suitability of the habitat
(Class I).
During each disposal operation the sediment discharged will
accumulate to a depth of 0.38 inches (0.96 cm) over an
approximate area of 88,000 ft2 (8,184 m2) centered 300 feet (396
m) downcurrent from the point of release from the split-hull
barge. Significant mortality of benthlc fauna due to smothering
would occur In the areas of deepest sedimentation within the
disposal site only (Class I). In surrounding areas experiencing
less sediment deposition, mortality should be high only among
nonmobile species (Richardson et al., 1978). Some mobile
species are known to be capable of burrowing up through as much
as 12.5 inches (32 cm) of overburden sediment (Mauer et al.,
1978). These species and many of the eplfauna species may
survive the temporary inundation following each disposal event.
Modeling results indicate that disposal will cause greater
turbidity of waters up to 5 hours after disposal, in a pathway
5,000 feet (1,524 m) down current from the disposal site and
varying in width from 300 feet (91 m) to 3,000 feet (914 m) (see
Section 4.2.1.5). Suspended sediments will interfere with
feeding processes of benthlc'fauna. Both smothering and
interference with feeding mechanisms will persist during
disposal operations, which can last up to several weeks or
months. This is long enough to cause significant faunal changes
in the affected areas (Class I). The intermittent scheduling of
dredging projects or management of disposal operations within
the site can provide sufficient time for partial recolonizatlon
and recovery of benthlc fauna from disposal effects.
-------
. 4-16 -
Some teats of materials disposed at LA-2 shoved accumula-
tion of pesticides and PCBs, but levels vere not sufficient to
cause significant mortality (Marine Bioassay Laboratories, 1980,
1981, 1982 a,b,o,d, 1984 a,b; Marine Biological Consultants,
1980, 1982). The elevated levels of pesticides and PCBs in the
tissues of S,. ingentis collected at the LA-2 site indicate the
potential'for toxicological effects. These higher tissue levels
of pesticides and PCBs seem likely to be due to disposal,
although the mobility of S; ingentis and lack of statistical
significance for the data complicates interpretation of the
data. Unlike the situation for pesticides and PCBs, there vere
no apparent differences In the levels of metals in the tissues
of S.. ingentis sampled at the LA-2 and reference sites. It is
difficult to determine to vbat extent the observed differences
betveen the LA-2 site and the reference site are caused by
disposal at LA-2.
Lovered species diversity, greater abundance of infauna,
and a lover abundance of eplfauna are attributed to altered
sediment conditions at the LA-2 site. Sediment differences
betveen the tvo sites,' vhich may be responsible for the
differences in the benthos, could be due to disposal or to
natural factors such as slope, currents, or location in relation
to sediment sources. Both explanations, or a combination of the
tvo, are plausible. Resolution of this issue vould require more
extensive sampling and analysis of the sediments and fauna of
the region than vas possible for this study. EPA and COE vill
develop a site management program (see Section 4.6) as a
mitlgative measure to manage and monitor the site in an attempt
to resolve these Issues.
The preceding analysis indicates that measured differences
betveen LA-2 and the reference site in benthic communities could
very veil be due to previous disposal activities, although
natural factors could also be involved. Assuming that all of
the observed differences are effects of past disposal, it is
predicted that these effects vill continue if the LA-2 site is
designated as the ODMDS. In this case, continued disposal at
levels similar to past activity may not have any additional,
significant effects on benthic populations. It is quite certain
that continued disposal at the site vill prevent the bentblc
community from returning to predisposal or "normal* conditions.
Because the impacts are restricted to an already affected site,
no significant adverse environmental impact to the Southern
California Bight is expected from continued disposal at this
site (Class III).
4.2.2.4. Fish Community
A. Demersal Fish
The results of demersal fish sampling conducted for the BIS
study indicate that past disposal actions nay have had an
adverse effect on the fish fauna of the LA-2 site. Compared to
-------
- 1-17 -
the reference site, fewer Individuals and fewer species were
collected at the LA-2. .
it this time, the only known explanation! which could
account for the consistent differences observed between LA-2 and
the reference site, Is disposal at the site. The somewhat
depauperate fish fauna at the LA-2 site relative to the
reference site aay also be due to the depauperate benthic
infauna, the principal food source for demersal fish. As
described above, differences In sediment characteristics between
LA-2 and the reference site appear to have caused the
depauperate benthic Infauna. Differences between the fish fauna
of the two sites could also be related to topographic relief,
currents and proximity to locally significant habitats.
If populations at the site are affected by disposal
operations, or if disposal quantities Increase significantly in
the future, additional adverse effects (Class I) may result from
continued use of the site. Assuming that future disposal
quantities and actions will be similar to those in the past, and,
bioaasay testa of demersal fish continue to allow ocean disposal
of acceptable dredged material, regional effects on the Southern
California Bight demersal fish population are expected to remain
insignificant (Class III). Even if dredged material disposal
activities increase, local impacts on the site would be greater
(Class I), but regional impacts on the San Pedro Basin and
Southern California Bight are still expected to remain
Insignificant (Class III).
5. Pelagic Fish
Although pelagic fish were not sampled as part of the
present study, there is little reason to believe that these
populations, Including that of the commercially important
anchovy, would be adversely affected by continued disposal at
the site (Class III).
The northern anchovy (Engraulis mordax), one of the
principal commercial fish species of southern California, is
known to be particularly abundant in surface waters overlying
the continental slope, location of the LA-2 site, and there is
no reason to believe that the site waters are any exception.
Horthern anchovy is one of the principal commercial species
caught in the California Department of Fish and Game Block (878)
containing the site (CDFG, 1935). Anchovies are pelagic (open
water/surface) species, and so are not likely to be affected by
the benthic sediment regime or sediment suspended at depth.
Disposed material is expected to remain confined in the
discharge plume and sink to the bottom. This will remove most
of the disposed material from the surface and mid-water zones
where many pelagic fish live (see Section 4.2.1.5-). Sediments
and associated contaminants remaining in the water column would
be diluted and transported relatively quickly by the ambient
currents, so that any adverse effects on the pelagic environment
would be localized and temporary (Class III).
-------
- 4-18 -
4.2.2.5* Coastal Birda
The continued use of the LA-2 site will not adversely
affect any of the coastal birds living in or immigrating through
the San Pedro Basin (Class III). The location of this site,
•ore than 4 nal from the nearest shore, effectively eliminates
any impacts on inshore species. More pelagic forma may utilize
the brief supply of food provided from dredged materials (i.e.,
dislocated or dead marine organisms) at the time of disposal
(Class IV). This additional food supply would be considered
incidental in the diet of scavengers.
4.2.2.6. Marine Mammal a
Disposal at the LA-2 site should not have any adverse
effects on marine mammals (Class III). Their large size,
mobility and intelligence minimizes the possibility of direct
effects of disposal on marine mammals. These animals will avoid
the disposal vessel and discharged plume, which will be very
localized and temporary. The disposal site is not in or near
any important marine mammal feeding or breeding areas.
The naturally less productive environment of the LA-2 site,
situated on the slope of the San Pedro Basin, minimizes its use
as a preferred feeding area for moat marine mammals which
utilize richer areas nearer shore. The continued use of the
LA-2 site would, therefore, present less disruption to marine
mammal populations than the shallow water alternative.
4.2.2.7. Threatened and Endangered Species
Disposal at the LA-2 site is not expected to adversely
affect any threatened or endangered species (Class III). FWS
and HMFS have concurred with this assessment (see Chapter 5).
The rare, threatened or endangered species in the area either:
A. Conduct feeding and breeding activities in locations
strictly associated with coastal land areas too far from
the disposal site to be affected,
B. Occur farther offshore, to the north or are so rarely near
the disposal site to have a significant potential for being
affected, or
C. They use the area temporarily as a migratory route and
could effectively avoid any disposal operation.
The continued use of the LA-2 site would greatly reduce
potential effects on rare or endangered species which might be
affected by the disposal of dredged materials in either shallow
water or terrestrial alternatives nearer to refuge locations.
-------
, - 4-19 -
4.2.2.8. Marine Sanetuar 1 e sand Areas of Special Biological
Significance
Ho state or national wildlife or marine refuge or Area of
Special Biological Significance (iSBS) is in the immediate
vicinity-or within an area of influence of the LA-2 site (see
Figure 3-8). Continued disposal of dredged materials will hot
impact any such areas (Class III).
4.2.3» Effects on Socioeconomlc Environment
In this section, potential impacts on socioeconooic
resources are identified and possible mitigation measures are
introduced. Each individual component of the socioeconomic
environment is evaluated based the nature of potential impacts.
For the purposes of the assessment, it is assumed that all
resources which may be affected by the proposed action are both
significant and important. This procedure gives all known
resources the full benefit of consideration in HEPA planning and
review process. Where possible, mitigation measures are
proposed to reduce any impacts. Net beneficial impacts are
considered to be those Impacts that preserve or enhance any
natural condition or major resources of the project area.
4.2.3.1*- C o mm e re i a 1 Fishing
Harvesting of commercially important fish from the
California Department of Pish and Game block where LA-2 site is
located has been high (see Figure 3-9 and Table 3-17 even though
the demersal fish fauna of the LA-2 site Is depauperate compared
to that of the reference site. Continued disposal operations at
the site will not adversely affect commercially important
demersal fish on a regional level (Class III). Other important
commercial fish species caught near the LA-2 site and within the
San Pedro Channel are pelagic. Therefore, there should be no
effect of disposal on the stocks of commercially harvested fish
or on the viability of the commercial fishing industry of the
region (Class III).
Since ocean disposal of dredged material is Infrequent from
the Los Angeles and Long Beach Harbors, the number of barges
Involved in transporting dredged material varies considerably
during the year. The normal time span for a dredging project is
usually a few weeks to several months long (Shannon Cunniff,
COE, Los Angeles District, personal communication). No
interference or accident between these barges and the commercial
fishing fleet has been reported by DSCG in the past .(Class III).
4.2.3*2. Commercial Shipping
The disposal of dredged material could present two
potential hazards to navigation: interference of the disposal
barges with vessel traffic, and mounding within the disposal
site. These hazards have already been considered in the
existing permitting program, and actions have been taken so they
no longer pose a significant impact (Class III).
-------
. 4*20 -
Ho hazard to vessel traffic Is expected at the LA-2 site
because it Is located south of the inbound lane of. the Santa
Barbara Channel TSS. USCG has expressed concern that disposal
barges may cause confusion for inbound traffic. This is
possible because disposal vessels will have to cross the inbound
TSS lane to reach the disposal site (L.A. Onstad, Commander,
USCG, 11th' District, personal communication, March 1984). As a
result, COE has already Incorporated a special condition into
all peraits for use of the LA-2 site that requires disposal of
materials "...as far from the Gulf of Catallna Traffic
Separation Scheme as is practical" (Class III). Immediately to
the east of Inbound TSS is the PAR area outside the harbor where
traffic is strictly monitored. Due to this monitoring, inci-
dents involving dredged disposal vessels and commercial shipping
are uncommon.
Extensive mounding of accumulated material at the LA-2 site
is not expected, because disposed material will be dispersed by
currents, slumping or any seismic events. The depth of water
over the site will allow safe passage of all known commercial
vessels (Class III).
A net beneficial Impact of the ocean disposal of dredged
material is the improvement and maintenance of shipping lanes,
channels and docking areas for both ports (Class IT). Dredging
in the Los Angeles and Long Beach Harbor areas is associated
primarily with channel deepening projects. The goal of channel
deepening is to provide access to the area for larger more
efficient commercial vessels which results in transportation
savings since larger vessels can carry more goods. It is
essential to maintain access to the ports and to enable them to
grow, within acceptable environmental management goals, so
southern California can compete with other west coast ports.
4.2.3*3. Oil and Gas Development
Helther the tract containing the LA-2 site nor any tracts
in the nearby surrounding area were leased as a result of OCS
Lease Sale 180 in October 1984. Further oil and gas development
in the San Pedro Channel is uncertain. Existing oil and gas
production facilities are at least 8.8 nmi (16 km) away from the
LA-2 site and the possibility that they will be affected by
disposal of dredged material is not significant (Class III).
MMS is encouraging future development in the southern
California OCS as a whole. With the potential Increase in oil
exploration and development activities, boat traffic between Los
Angeles and Long Beach Harbors and offshore oil and gas
development sites will increase. This will increase the
potential- for accidents between the disposal barges and supply
boat traffic. Most of the area between the harbors and the LA-2
site falls within the precautionary zone established by USCG.
In this zone, traffic is strictly monitored to minimize the
potential for conflicts or accidents. In addition, disposal
-------
- 4-21 -
barges will operate infrequently! averaging approximately 50
trips per year. No interference or accident between disposal
vessels and vessels serving offshore oil and gas facilities has
been reported by DSCG in the past. Transportation conflicts are
expected to be minimal and insignificant (Class III).
Za tb'e event that future oil and gas developments are
proposed for the tract containing the LA-2 site, conflicts
between this development and dredged material disposal oould be
avoided by siting the oil facilities in a part of the tract far
removed from the disposal site if possible (Class II).
Significant sediment accumulation is expected only in the
immediate site vicinity of the ODMDS. This is likely to be
feasible with modern drilling technologies. In addition,
disposal vessels would operate so as to avoid any oil
development structures and operations.
Final designation of the LA-2 site could Indirectly reduce
the consumption of petroleum resources (Class IT). Average con-
sumption of petroleum to transport dredged material to the LA-2
site would remain the same; however* by allowing the improvement
and maintenance of port channels and facilities, the disposal
activity allows use of more efficient commercial shipping as
described in Section 4.2.3*2.
4.2.3-4. Military Usage
Although the area off southern California Is the most
heavily utilized naval operating area on the west coast* moat of
the military operations take place far beyond the immediate
coastal areas outside the Los Angeles and Long Beach Harbors.
The disposal of dredged material at the LA-2 site does not pose
any danger to military activities (Class III).
Military vessels which travel in and out of the Los Angeles
and Long Beach Harbors may face Interference from the disposal
barges, but the probability of Interference is negligible
because the frequency of ocean disposal trips is low and traffic
in the precautionary area Is strictly monitored. No incidents
involving the disposal barges have been reported over the past
10 years slnoe the disposal site was given interim designation
(Class III). Dredged materials from Anaheim Bay are
occasionally disposed at the LA-2 aite. Since this bay is
frequently used by naval vessels, designation of the LA-2 as a
permanent disposal site will allow continued dredging at Anaheim
Bay and therefore continued access by deep draft Naval Vessels
(Class IT).
4.2.3.5* Recreational Activities
4.2.3.5.1. Soortflshlng
Sportfishlng Is usually carried out in shallow waters close
to the shore. The 100 fathom (183 a) line is considered to be
the outer boundary for sportfishlng by party boats. Many of the
-------
_ 4-22 -
•oat important sportfish of -the area are pelagic species, which
are not expected to be affected by disposal (Class,III).
Because the demersal fish fauna of LA-2 site is depau-
perate, bottom fishing within the site boundaries could be
adversely affected by long-term disposal of dredged material
(Class I).* However, sportflshing in this area is rare due to
the depth. The effect of disposal on demersal fish is likely to
be localized, so that disposal should not affect demersal fish
poulations in other areas which do support greater levels of
sportfishing. This includes the Horseshoe Kelp bed, a popular
and productive fishing area which actually does not contain any
kelp beds (Figure 3-12). This area is approximately 1.8 nmi (3
km) east of the disposal site and too far to be affected by
disposal. Therefore, disposal la not expected to significantly
affect aportfishing on a regional level (Class III).
Ho accidents involving sportfishing vessels and disposal
vessels have been reported by OSCG over the past 10 years,
during which the LA-2 site has been used on an interim basis.
While the potential for accidents between dredged material
barges and fishing boats exists, the probability of such
incidents is extremely low due to the low level of dredging
activity, and the small number of disposal trips required each
year (Class III) and the position of the traffic lanes Just
beyond the dump site boundaries.
4.2.3*5.2. Boating
The recreational activity most likely to be affected by
disposal operations at the LA-2 site is pleasure boating. A
considerable number of boats operate between the Los Angeles and
Orange County Harbors and the two harbors at Santa Catallna
Island. Boats from the Los Angeles and Long Beach Harbors
follow a straight route to harbors at Santa Catallna Island.
Almost the same route is followed by the disposal barges.
Hence, a potential for conflict exists; however, the frequency
of ocean disposal activity is so low that the probability of
accidents is almost negligible (Class III). The potential, for
accidents is further reduced Because disposal operations rarely
occur on the weekends when recreational boating is expected to
be highest. Ho incidents have been reported since 1977 when
ocean disposal started at the site on an interim basis.
4.2.3.5.3. Other Recreational Activities
Host ocean-related recreational activities occur at the
beaches or in nearsbore areas. These include sightseeing,
beachcombing, picnicking, swimming, wading, sunbathing, diving,
windsurfing and surfing. Disposal activities at the LA-2 site
will not impact these nearshore recreational activities (Class
III). Seduced water clarity will be caused temporarily by
disposal of material at the site. This may cause some short
term inconvenience and lack of site appeal If some recreational
-------
. 4-23 -
boaters happen to be In the immediate area during actual
disposal (Class I). However, the LA-2 site is more than 5*5
nautical miles (10 km) from the Los Angeles and Orange County
coasts and other amenity areas. No impacts on the visual
aesthetics of beach visitors are expected from the disposal
activity (Class III).
4.2.3*6. Cultural Resources
MMS (1983) has Identified 26 federal oil and gas lease
tracts in the LA-2 study area having cultural resource
sensitivity. Neither the federal tract containing the LA-2 site
nor any tract in the immediate vicinity of the site has been
identified as a location for historic shipwrecks or other cul-
tural resources. Based on this Information and the information
obtained from SHPO (see Exhibit 12) no Impacts on cultural
resources are anticipated (Class III).
4.2.3.7. Public Health and Welfare
~~ "impacts on three aspects of public health and welfare,
including health, safety, and aesthetics, are discussed in this
section. Health hazards may arise If the chemical nature of the
materials has the potential for bloaccumulatlon of toxic
substances In organisms. Under the COB permitting system,
sediment analyses, bloassays and bloaccumulatlon tests are
conducted on all materials prior to disposal at the LA-2 site.
No materials considered hazardous may be disposed of at the
site. Therefore, the potential for health hazards is not
considered to be significant (Class III).
Human safety could be Jeopardized as a result of
interference by the disposal barges with shipping traffic,
commercial and sportflshlng boat traffic, recreational boat
traffic, and Navy vessel traffic. The LA-2 site has been used
on an Interim basis~over the past 10 years and no incidences of
conflict or accidents have been reported during this period.
Vith no anticipated increase In disposal activities in the
foreseeable future and with strict monitoring of traffic by USCG
in the zone of operation, Impacts on human safety are considered
to be very low (Class III).
4.3. NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
If the No Action Alternative Is selected by EPA, interim
designation of LA-2 would expire and there would be no ocean
site for disposal of dredged materials in the Los Angeles and
Long Beach area (Class I). Discontinued use of LA-2 for
disposal would lead to recovery of the ecosystem .at the site
from the impacts of past disposal (Class IT). The rate and
extent of this recovery, and the length of time that residual
effects of past disposal would persist, are not known. As
normal sedimentation occurred at the site, levels of
contaminants in the top layers of the sediment would decrease.
-------
. 4.24 -
Concentration of contaminants in fish and Invertebrate tissues
could changei and the benthic invertebrate fauna and demersal
fish populations would shift toward conditions more similar to
those of the surrounding areas (Class IV) given present
conditions at unimpacted sites. .
Interference vith commercial fishing, recreation, shipping,
oil and gas development would be reduced to zero (Class IV);
however, cessation or significant curtailment of dredging in the
Forts of Los Angeles and Long Beach could impair the ability of
these facilities to fully support commerce and trade or the
needs of the U.S. Navy base at Long Beach and Anaheim Bay Naval
Base. This could have serious adverse effects on the economy of
the region, state, and nation, and on the military readiness of
the Navy (Class I). It is not possible to quantify these
effects at this time.
As stated in the "Purpose of and Need for Action* (Section
1.2), it is the intent of this EIS to Identify and designate an
QDMDS that is suitable for use by COE for Federal projects and
permitted projects under Section 103 of HFRSA. Selection of the
No Action Alternative by EPA will force COE to designate a
suitable ODMDS through their authority under Section 103 of
MPRSA. Selection of the No Action Alternative is not an ade-
quate response by EPA to the request by COE for the designation
of an ODMDS through a cooperative relationship between the two
Federal agencies (Class I). Therefore, EPA will seek to
designate an ODMDS based on the Preferred Alternative described
in this EIS.
4.4. SHALLOW WATER SITE
The ecosystem effects at the shallow water'site would
depend on the exact location of the site. Dredged material
disposal may further degrade the shallow water region to a
significant degree in areas presently impacted by discharges
from the Whites Point outfalls. The effects caused by disposal
operations would be small relative to outfall effects.
Monitoring of environmental impacts in the shallow water region
may not be able to Identify the sources or specific causes of
environmental degradation.
The farther the site is located from the outfalls, the
larger would be the relative impact of dredged material
disposal. The benthic fauna of nearshore shelf areas, except
for demersal fish populations, is generally more abundant and
diverse than that of the slope environment at the LA-2 site. In
areas not significantly affected by the outfalls, environmental
impacts would probably be greater than at the LA-2 site if the
shallow water site was designated as the ODMDS.
4.4.1. Effects on the Physical Environment
The same impact criteria used to evaluate the physical
environment under the Preferred Alternative apply to this
section.
-------
- 4-25 -
4.4.1.1. Meteorology and Air Quality
Final designation of the shallow vater site for ocean
dredged material vill not have a significant effect on the
meteorology or air quality of the area (Class III). The COB
does not anticipate any increase beyond the current number of
disposal trips and there have not been any significant air
quality impacts detected to date due to dumping at the LA-2
site. Therefore, based on the air pollutant dispersion
calculations which provided very similar numbers for all three
sites, there will be no significant air quality Impact due to
disposal of dredged material at the shallow water site.
4.4.1.2. Physical Oceanography
Disposal at the shallow water site will not affect physical
oceanography (Class III). Physical oceanographlc parameters
such as currents, wares and tides will determine the effects of
disposal on water and sediment quality.
4.4.1.3. Mater Quality
More material is expected to be deposited on the bottom at
the shallow water site and at a quicker rate than at the LA-2
site due to the shallower depth. Therefore, the Class I
effects of turbidity, dissolved oxygen, nutrients, and contami-
nants in the water column would occur in a smaller .area. Some
deposited material would be resuspended by wave action, but in
general less material would remain in suspension than at the
LA-2 site. A mitigation measure for these effects could be that
dredged material disposal will not be authorized during times of
heavy wave action or strong onshore currents.
The relative effect of disposal actions on water quality
would be substantially lower than at the LA-2 site, because of
the existing degraded water quality in the shallow water region
in relation to the Whites Point outfalls. Disposal of dredged
material near these outfalls may compound Impacts on water
quality in the area, by increasing input of suspended solids,
particulate material and associated contaminants.
4.4.1.4. Geology
Disposal at the shallow water site would cause increased
sedimentation, and because of the relatively existing shallow
depths, mounding may occur.
4.4.1.5. Sediment Quality
As described above, a greater proportion of 'disposed dredge
material is expected to be deposited at the shallow water site
than at the LA-2 site. This poses a potential for greater
Impact on sediment quality (Class I). Sediments at the shallow
water site are coarser than those naturally occurring at the
-------
- 4-26 -
LA-2 site and difference In grain size distribution between the
disposed dredged material and the shallow water site may be
greater. Therefore, it is likely that overall sediment quality
at the shallow water site would be significantly altered if the
site was designated (Class I).
Qreater input to bottom sediments of BOD, oil and grease,
trace metals, and chlorinated hydrocarbons associated with
disposed sediment would occur at the shallow water site than at
the LA-2 site based on the assumption- that more material would
be deposited on the bottom (Class I). Disposal may add
considerably to the already degraded sediment quality in the
shallow water region due to the Influence of the sewage
discharge at Whites Point. However, the effect of dredged
material disposal alone is small relative to the major effects
of the outfalls.
4.4.2. Effects on the Biological Environment
The same criteria used to evaluate the biological
environment under the Preferred Alternative apply to this
section.
4.4.2.1. Plankton Community
Effects of disposal on plankton at the shallow water site
should not be significant or substantially different from
effects at the .LA-2 preferred site (Class III).
4.4.2.2. Kelp Community
Disposal of dredged materials at the shallow water site
would increase the amount of suspended solids and turbidity of
the water, at least on a temporary basis, after every disposal
activity. Suspended solids and turbidity of the Vhites Point
sewage discharge have been associated with some of the decline
in kelp beds along the Palos Terdes Peninsula (Vilson et al.,
1980). Likewise, the disposal of dredged material at the
shallow water site could be expected to have a similar effect by
covering rocky surfaces necessary for kelp attachment, reducing
the depth of the euphotic zone, and perhaps exposing the kelp to
toxic compounds. This would not only impact the existing kelp
beds but would also discourage the recovery of kelp to areas of
former colonization and to deeper depths (Class I). Fish and
other species associated with kelp beds would be indirectly
impacted.
4.4.2.3. Benthie Invertebrate Community
Disposal at the shallow water site is expected to adversely
affect the benthic community in a similar way to that
encountered at the LA-2 site (Class I). These sediment impacts
include smothering, Interference with feeding, toxic effects of
associated contaminants, and changes in the physical properties
-------
. 4-27 -
of the bottom sediments. In areas of the shallow water region
influenced by the Whites Point sewage outfalls, the benthic
fauna is already disturbed and degraded due to the effects of
municipal waste discharge (Thompson, 1982). Dredged material
disposal would cause additional adverse effects on the benthos;
these effects would be small relative to those caused by outfall
discharges (Class III)* In addition, the organisms that have
colonized areas influenced by the outfalls are likely to be more
tolerant of turbidity, low dissolved oiygen, contaminants and
other short-term impacts associated with dredged material
disposal.
In areas of the shallow water region not significantly
influenced by municipal discharges, the benthic fauna is likely
to be more diverse and abundant than that at the LA-2 site. In
these areas, disposal would have a greater relative impact on
benthic fauna, particularly where they have not been affected by
past dredged material disposal.
4.4.2.4. Fiah Community
Disposal of dredged material at the shallow water site
would have a significantly adverse effect on demersal fish
(Class I). Effects would occur due to turbidity, reduced
dissolved oxygen, toxic effects of contaminants, and effects on
their principal benthic food sources.
In areas of the shallow water region Influenced by the
Whites Point sewage outfalls, the fish community is already
disturbed and degraded due to the effects of municipal and
industrial waste discharges (Allen and Hearns, 1977)' Fish that
exist in areas influenced by the outfalls are likely to be more
tolerant of turbidity, low dissolved oxygen, and contaminants
than those of the Li-2 site. Disposal actions in these areas
would have additional adverse effects on demersal fish, although
the Impacts would be small relative to the overwhelming effects
of outfall discharges (Class III). ">•
In areas of the shallow water region not significantly
Influenced by municipal discharges, the demersal flab fauna is
likely to be less diverse and abundant than the naturally
occurring populations found in the vicinity of the LA-2 site
(Allen and Mearns, 1977)* In these nearshore areas, disposal
would also be expected to have a less severe Impact on demersal
fish (Class III) and disposal of dredged material is not
expected to have any effect on nearshore pelagic fish
populations (Class III). The fish community associated with
kelp beds, however, would be adversely affected if sedimentation
due to disposal activities disturbed kelp beds.
4.4.2.5. Coastal Birds
The establishment of a shallow water, Inshore ODMDS nearer
to breeding and nesting sites of coastal birds, is not expected
to increase the potential for Impacts on such species (Class
-------
- 4-28 -
III). Disposal activities in nearshore waters would be expected
to attract large numbers of opportunistic scavengers (i.e.,
gulls) which might disturb natural feeding assemblages or
predatory activities. Otherwise no significant Impacts on bird
populations are expected at the shallow water site*
4.4.2.6. Marine Mammals
Because of human habitatian and use of the shore areas in
the vicinity of the proposed shallow water ODMDS, only
occassional use of the area is made by pinnipeds for hauling
out. Ho significant rookeries are located near the shallow
water site though some feeding by marine mammals does take place
in the rich inshore kelp beds, is in the case of the LA-2 site,
none of the activities of marine mammals are expected to be
significantly impacted in this area (Class III).
4.4.2.7. Threatened and Endangered Species
Environmental impacts on endangered species are not
expected if the shallow water site is designated as the ODMDS
(Class III). Gray whales, equally abundant in the shallow water
region as they are near the LA-2 sitei should not be affected by
disposal. The shallow water region is more likely to support
feeding by the California brown pelicans and the California
least tern because it is closer to shore. However, disposal is
not expected to significantly affect the pelagic fish of the
region which are their principal food source. Consequently, no
impacts are predicted for pelican or tern populations.
4.4.2.8. Marine Sanctuaries and Areas of Special Biological
Significance
The shallow water site is seaward of ibalone Cove
Ecological Reserve, a sensitive area of tldepools and kelp beds
located off the Palos Terdes Peninsula. Occasional shoreward
ourrents could carry the dredged material disposal plume from
the shallow water site into the reserve (Class I). The kelp
beds are in a recovery phase from past Impacts, and increased
turbidity and sedimentation associated with a .disposal plume
would reduce available light, cover rocky surfaces necessary for
kelp attachment, silt over young plants or benthlc fauna or
foliage, and possibly expose the tidepools and kelp communities
to toxic compounds, causing significantly adverse environmental
Impacts to the area.
4.4.3* Effects on the Socioeconomic Environment
The same impact criteria used to evaluate the socloeconomie
environment under the Preferred Alternative apply to this
section.
-------
•
. 4-29 -
4.1.3*1* Commercial Fishing
Disposal activities at the shallow water site will affect
commercial fishing to a lesser extent than at the LA-2 site
(Class III}. Commercially caught fish are not as abundant In
the shallow water region as they are further out to sea.
4.4.3*2. Commercial Shipping
The potential for conflict between disposal vessels and
commercial shipping la considerably lower if the shallow water
site is used for disposal (Class III). The shallow water site
is closest to the shoreline and fewer disposal barges will have
to cross the designated traffic separation lanes. Only a small
section of the precautionary area will have to be crossed to
reach the shallow water disposal site. In addition, disposal at
the shallow water site would be beneficial for the ports because
dredging could continue (Class IV).
4.4.3*3. Oil and Gas Development
Ho oil and gas development activities are planned or
proposed in the shallow water region and no conflicts or impacts
are anticipated (Class III). Energy consumption, associated
with transport of dredged material, would decrease slightly
because the distance to the site is less, but this effect is
negligible.
I.4.3.4. Military Usage
Except for the military vessels moving in and out of the
ports, no military activities take place close to the shore.
Disposal at the shallow water site would have no Impacts or
interference with military activities off the southern
California coast (Class III).
4.4.3.5. Recreational Activities
*.4.3.5.1. Sportfishing
Sportfishing is usually carried out in shallow waters close
to the shore. The potential for impacts on sportfishing is
greater at the shallow water site compared to the LA-2 or deep
water sites because kelp beds may be affected. Ho unique areas
for sportfishing occur In the shallow water site area and
disposal operations would not cause significant infringements on
present sportfishing*efforts (Class III).
4.4.3.5.2. Boating
The potential for conflict between .disposal vessels and
pleasure boats is somewhat increased by disposal in the shallow
water region as a greater amount of such boating occurs in
shallow water. Also, there is a potential for mounding In the
shallow water region caused by successive disposal, and this
could cause a hazard to boating by decreasing water depth (Class
I).
-------
. 4-30 -
4.4.3-5.3. Other Recreational Activities
Similar to sportfiahing, recreational activities (excluding
boating) are usually carried out closer to tbe shore. Potential
impacts on nearshore activities are somewhat greater at the
shallow water alte tban at tbe LA-2 or deep water sites (Class
II). A mitigation measure for these potential Impacts would be
to locate tbe disposal site in an area as far as possible from
primary nearsbore. recreational locations.
4.4.3*6. Cultural Resources
The shallow water site lies close to the areas of higher
probability of aboriginal sites. Disposal at this site also has
a greater potential for impacting shipwrecks since most of them
have been known to occur In shallow water regions of up to 50
fatboms (91 B) depth. In order to mitigate these potential
Impacts close coordination with the SBPO will be maintained to
avoid locating the disposal site in an area that would affect
cultural resources (Class II).
4.4.3.7. Public Health and Welfare
Impacts on the public health, safety and aesthetics,
discussed earlier for the LA-2 preferred site (Section 4.2.3.7.)
are expected to be similar for the shallow water site. The
proximity to shore of tbe shallow water ODMDS could slightly
inrease safety Impacts because of tbe necessity for dredging
activities to be conducted nearer to activities of sportfisbing
and pleasure boats as well as the shipping lanes. Disposal
activities could be restricted to daylight hours to lessen the
potential for unsafe Inteference (Class II).
4.5. DEEP WATER SITE
Any significant impacts predicted for tbe deep water site
would be new and classified as Class I Impacts. Impacts from
disposal activities on the physical and biological environments
of the deep water site should be approximately the .same as the
impacts observed at tbe LA-2 site. This is based on tbe
assumption that disposal at tbe two sites will have similar
adverse effects on sediment quality, bentbic invertebrates and
demersal fish. Impacts on water quality, pelagic fish, marine
mammals, threatened and endangered species are expected to be
insignificant.
Disposal at the deep water site would bave less immediate
Impact on tbe benthic environment and a greater Impact on the
pelagic environment because more disposed material would be
suspended and dispersed in tbe water column. In addition, tbe
bentbic invertebrate and demersal flab fauna of tbe deep water
site are less diverse and less abundant tban those of the LA-2
site. However, a counterbalancing consideration is that the
sediments, benthos, and fish population of the deep water site
-------
- 4-31 -
are In a relatively undisturbed condition, while these resources
at the LA-2 site have already been affected by past disposal.
Recognition of the undisturbed nature of the deep vater site was
instrumental in the seleotion of the LA-2 site as the Preferred
Alternative. Ho significant adverse impacts to the Southern
California Bight ecosystem are expected from ocean disposal at
the deep water site.
4.5«1. Effects- on the Physical Environment
The same impact criteria used to evaluate the physical
environment under the Preferred Alternative apply to this
section.
4.5*1.1. Meteorology and Air Quality
Final designation of the deep vater site for ocean dredged
material will not have a significant effect on the meteorology
or air quality of the area (Class III). The COE does not
anticipate any Increase beyond the current number of disposal
trips and there have not been any significant air quality
impacts detected to date due to dumping at the LA-2 site.
Therefore, based on the air pollutant dispersion calculations
which provided very similar numbers for all three sites, there
will be no significant air quality impact due to disposal of
dredged material at the deep vater site.
4*5*1.2. Physical Oceanography :
Disposal at the deep vater site vould not affect physical
oceanography (Class III). Physical oceanographic parameters
such as currents and waves will determine the extent of disposal
impacts on vater quality and sediment quality.
4.5.1*3. Water Quality
At the deep vater site, more material is expected to remain
in suspension in the vater column than at the LA-2 site due to
the greater depth and the presence of a permanent thermocllne,
although the suspended material will be diluted in a much
greater volume of vater than at the LA-2 site. Therefore, the
effects on turbidity, dissolved oxygen, nutrients, and
contaminant levels on vater quality vould be more widespread
than at the LA-2 site but the effect vould be temporary and
concentrations vould quickly become dilute (Class I). The
amount of material Introduced to the San Pedro Basin is also
expected to be insignificant compared to the amount of material
brought into the basin by the Southern California Eddy (Hickey,
1979).
4.5.1*4. Geology
Disposal of dredged material at the deep vater site vould
not affect the geological parameters of the area (Class III).
-------
. 4.32 -
4.5.1.5. Sediment Quality
Deposition of dredged material at the deep water aite would
be spread out over a wider area compared to the LA-2 site due to
the deeper depths and the movement of fine material by deep
currents along the tbermoeline. Sediment grain size
distribution, biological oxygen demand, and concentrations of
trace metals, chlorinated hydrocarbons, oils and greases would
be affected by disposal but the effect would be more widespread
and at lower levels. However, the existing sediment quality in
the deep water region is undisturbed compared to that of the
LA-2 site.
The overall Impact on sediments of the deep water site is
adverse because the environmental effects are new; however, the
Significance of the Impact will be spread out over a larger area
(Class I). The regional environmental impact of these effects
to the Southern California Bight should be equivalent to the
observed impact of past disposal at the LA-2 site.
4*5.2. gffects on the Biological Environment
The same criteria used to evaluate the biological
environment under the Preferred Alternative apply to this
section.
4.5.2.1. Plankton Community
Effects of disposal on plankton at the shallow water site
should not be significant or substantially different from
effects at the LA-2 site (Class III).
4.5*2.2. Kelp Community
Disposal at the deep water site will not have a significant
effect on kelp communities because the disposal material is not
expected to travel the 5.5 no (10 km) separating these Locations
(Class III).
4.5*2.3* Benthic Invertebrate Community
The effect of disposal on the benthos of the deep water
site is expected to be approximately the same as that observed
at the LA-2 preferred site (Class I). Less sediment and
associated contaminants will reach the bottom at the deep water
site. The benthic populations of the deep basins are known to
be less diverse and less abundant than the shelf or slope fauna
(BLM, 1978). This is true for benthic fauna at the deep water
site even taking into account the disturbed nature of the LA-2
site.
In addition, the deep water bentbic invertebrates are
tolerant of low DO levels (Hartman and Barnard, 1958; Fauchald
and Jones, 1978) and may be less affected by altered DO than
-------
- 4-33 -
species inhabiting the LA-2 site. Benthlc populations In the
deep water site have not been subjected to significant impacts
related to disposal of dredged material. Designation of the
deep water site vould cause environmental impacts of a
significant nature which could alter the benthlc invertebrate
populations in the area (Class I).
4.5.2.4. Pish Community
Fish populations of the deep basins are known to be more
depauperate than those of the shelf and slope environments
Allen and Hearns, 1977)' Therefore, the fish fauna of the deep
water site Is naturally less diverse and less abundant than that
of the LA-2 site.
If the deep Water site is designated as the ODMDS for the
Los Angeles area, the affects associated with dredged material
disposal could significantly Impact the demersal fish fauna in a
manner similar to that observed at the LA-2 site (Class I). The
impact may be diminished because less dredged material and .
associated contaminants would reach the bottom at the deep water
site, thus the potential for tozlcological effects on fish and
effects on primary food sources would be somewhat reduced.
Disposal operations at the deep water site should not have any
Impact on pelagic fish (Class III).
4.5.2.5. Coastal Birds
Because of the mid-channel location, disposal of dredged
material at the deep water site will not have a significant
effect on coastal bird populations (Class III).
4.5*2.6. Marine Mammals
Because of the mid-channel location, disposal at the deep
water site is not expected, to have significant Impacts on marine
mammals (Class III).
4.5.2.7« Threatened and Endangered Species
Because of the aid-channel location, disposal at the deep
water site is not expected to Impact threatened or endangered
species (Class III).
4.5.2.8. Marine Sanctuaries and Special Resource Areas
Primarily because of its mid-channel location, disposal of
dredged material at the deep water site is not expected to
affect marine sanctuaries or areas of special biological
significance (Class III).
4.5.3* Effects on the Sooioeconomic Bnvironnent
t
The criteria used to evaluate the socloeconomlc environment
of the deep water site are the same as the criteria described
for the Preferred Alternative.
-------
. 4-34 -
4.5-3.1. Commercial Fishing
Commercially important fish are more abundant in the deep
water site area than at the LA-2 or shallow water sites. This
area of the coastal sea does not contain any exclusive or unique
stocks of fisheries resources and the impacts on commercial
fishing would be no greater than at the LA-2 site. Due to the
infrequent disposal needs,.and the short duration of the disposal
activity, the actual interference of disposal with fishing will
be minimal, no significant impacts on commercial fishing are
anticipated (Class III).
4.5.3.2. Comaereia1 Sh1pping
The potential for interference of the disposal barges with
commercial vessels is the same whether the dredged material
disposal takes place at the deep water site or at the LA-2 site.
In both cases disposal.barges will be crossing the precautionary
area and the traffic separation lanes. Close monitoring by USCG
will reduce the significance of this effect to a negligible
level (Class III). The probability of conflict is greater at
sites farther out at sea compared to the shallow water site.
Designation of the deep water site would be a significant
beneficial Impact for the commercial shipping because the
maintenance of the ports would provide continued access for the
industry (Class IV).
4.5.3.3. Oil and Gas Development
Impacts of disposal at the deep water site will be compar-
able to those at .the LA-2 site. Compared to the shallow water
site, the potential for conflict is greater at the deep water
site. However, multiple use of the site would be posssible and
the impacts are considered not to be significant (Class III).
Energy consumption associated with transport of dredged material
to the site is likely to double because the distance to the deep
water site is twice as far as the distance to LA-2.
4.5.3.4. Military Usage
Ho military operations take place in the deep water region.
Military vessels which travel in and out of Los Angeles and Long
Beach Harbors may face interference with the disposal barges,
but the probability of such interference is negligible (Class
III). Impacts at the deep water site will be comparable to
those at the LA-2 site and relatively more than those at the
shallow water site. -
4.5.3.5. Recreational Activities
4.5.3.5.1. Soortfiahing
Little, if any, sportfishing occurs in water depths greater
than 100 fathoms. Ho impacts on sportfishing are anticipated if
-------
- 4-35 -
dredged material disposal occurs in the deep water site area
(Class III).
4.5.3*5.2. OtherRecreational Activities
Impacts of disposal activity on recreational boating in the
deep water site area will be similar to those at the LA-2 site,
but less than the potential Impacts at the shallow water site.
Potential for conflict between the disposal vessels and
recreational boats exists but the frequency of ocean disposal is
expected to be so low that the probability of conflict will be
insignificant (Class III). Positioning the deep water site as
far from major recreational boating traffic areas may be a net
beneficial impact by further reducing the possibility of
accidents (Class IV).
4.5.3*6. Cultural Resources
No known aboriginal cultural resource sites will be
impacted by the disposal activities at the deep water site. The
potential for impacting a shipwreck is much lower at the deep
water site compared to the LA-2 site or shallow water site
(Class III).
4.5.3.7. Public Health and Welfare
Impact on the public health and safety discussed earlier
for the LA-2 preferred site (Section 4.2.3*7) are expected to be
similar for the deep water site. The greater distance from
shore of this alternate site could reduce, to some extent, the
already low potential for significant effects on the public
health and welfare.
4.6. MANAGEMENT OF THE DISPOSAL SITE
Existing COE and EPA procedures,.including bulk sediment
analyses, acute.and chronic toxicity tests, and bioaccumulation
tests will continue to be required for HPRSA Section 103 permits
and Federal dredging projects to evaluate the suitability of the
material to be disposed at the designated ODMDS. These
requirements will ensure that significant environmental impacts
are prevented from developing at the site.
For more effective site management, the COE, Los Angeles
District, has imposed special conditions as discussed below, on
permits to dispose of dredged material at the designated site.
The purpose of Condition 1 is to minimize interference with
commercial shipping and the purposes of Conditions 2 and 3 are
to facilitate surveillance and monitoring, documenting amounts
and characteristics of disposed material, and assessing impacts
of disposal.
-------
. 4-36 -
COB 103 Permit Conditions
A. All ocean dumping permits shall be sent to the Captain of
the Port. The permittee sball notify the U.S. Coast Guard,
Captain of the Port 48 hours prior to dumping of dredged
material at the disposal site at the following address:
Commanding Officer
Marine Safety Office
Los Angeles/Long Beach
165 Horth Pico Avenue
Long Beach, California 90802
(213) 590-2315
B. For every calendar year In which ocean disposal of dredged
material occurs, the permittee shall submit the following
information to COE Los Angeles District before February 1 of
the next year:
1. Permit number,
2. Mode of dredging,
3. Mode of transportation,
4. Form of dredged material,
5' Frequency of dumping,
6. Start date of dumping,
?. Completion date of dumping,
8. Chemical composition of dredged material,
9. Solubility of dredged material,
10. Density of dredged material,
11. pH of dredged material,
12. Percent sand silt and clay of dredged material,
13. Method of packaging,
14. Method of release,
15. Procedure and method for tank washing, and
16. Total cubic yards dumped.
C. Dredged material authorized for ocean dumping must be
disposed of only in the approved dump area, and should be
done as far from the Gulf of Catallna Traffic Separation
Scheme (TSS) as la practical.
A further condition that may be Imposed on some permits
will be a requirement to monitor effects of the disposal
operation on water quality and ecology at the time of disposal.
The need to implement a long-term management and monitoring
program to improve understanding of the environmental impacts of
all disposal at the site will be addressed in a supplementary
Site Management Program and Site Monitoring Plan to be issued
after final designation of the ODMDS.
The site management plan will include long-term management
and monitoring of the site. The broad list of management areas
-------
- 4-37 -
Hated below identifies general considerations pertinent to site
management. Major elements of the site management .program vill
include:
A. Evaluation of sediment movement towards important biological
resources outside of or in close proximity to the site
boundaries,
B. Periodic evaluation of trace metal and/or chlorinated
hydrocarbon levels in tissues of selected organisms at the
site, and •
C. Evaluation of sediment quality at the site and adjacent to
the area.
4.7. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SBORT-TERM USE AND LONG-TERM RESODRCE
USES
The proposed action is not expected to affect biological
resources of the region. Certain components of the biological
environment of the immediate site, such as benthic invertebrates
and demersal fish, may be adversely affected. Impacts will
persist as long as the site continues to be used for disposal.
Cessation of disposal would permit a gradual recovery of the
bentbic communities to normal levels over time.
The LA-2 site has been used for 10 years and disposal
activities have not interfered, nor are they expected to
interfere, with the long-term use of any resources at the site.
Commercial fishing and sportfishing have not been impaired to
any measurable extent because the site constitutes a very small
percentage of the total fishing grounds in the San Pedro
Channel.
Potential for conflict exists if oil and gas discoveries
are made at the site as a result of future leases offered by the
U.S. Department of the Interior, but at the present time this
appears unlikely. In addition, it is possible that recovery of
oil and gas in the vicinity of the site could be achieved
without significant Interference with disposal activities.
Therefore, the economic productivity of the site area or of the
region should not be affected by continued disposal.
In conclusion, the only effect on site resources that is
expected to result from the proposed action is a relatively
minor decrease in the biological productivity of the immediate
site, which is a dynamic effect. The loss of some biological
resources at the site is offset by the significant benefit to
commercial, military and recreational traffic from the future
dredging of the Los Angeles and Long Beach Harbors and the
subsequent disposal of this dredged material at an
environmentally suitable location. Lack of a fully designated
ocean disposal site capable of accepting large quantities of
dredged material would have serious adverse effects on the
economic productivity of the Los Angeles area.
-------
. 4-38 -
4.8. IBBEYERSIBLB OH IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENT OF RESOORCES
The irreversible or Irretrievable resources committed to
the proposed action of final designation of the LA-2 site will
remain the same as those committed to the interim site. These
include:
A. Commitment of energy resources used as fuel for dredges,
pumps, and disposal vessels,
B. Commitment of economic resources Incurred as costs
associated with ocean disposal, and
C. Commitment or dedication of the bentbic environment of the
immediate disposal site in the form of degradation of
sediment quality, benthos, and demersal fish fauna for the
duration of disposal at the site.
These commitments, however, are less significant than the
economic advantages of disposing of dredged material at the LA-2
site and the effect of new environmental Impacts on resources
described in alternative disposal schemes.
-------
- 5-1 -
CHAPTER 5. COORDINATION
5.1. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
A Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare an environmental impact
statement was published in the Federal Register on November 10,
1983 (Exhibit 1). This NOI was published concurrently with COE
Publication 84-LA2-S(HB) .(Exhibit 2). Public and regulatory
agency comments were accepted regarding the scope of the EIS for
the designation of the LA-2 interim site as an ODMDS for
continued use. Several Federal, State and local agencies, and
interested public groups submitted comments by the closing date
of January 16, 1984. These comments are summarized in Table
5-1, and individual letters follow as Exhibits 3 through 8.
• - i
Most of the comments identified in the letters were later
repeated in an interagency workshop held on June 26, 1984. The
responses to these comments appear in the discussion related to
the interagency workshop. A note to that effect is made under
each comment letter. Responses not covered in the interagency
workshop are given directly following the comment letter.
5.2. INTERAGENCY WORKSHOP
An interagency workshop on the designation of the LA-2
interim ODMDS as a final site was held on June 26, 1984 and a
list of attendees is provided in Table 5-2. The purpose of the
workshop was: .
A. Disseminate detailed information about site surveys,
B. Obtain feedback from other agencies on the results of these
studies, and
C. Solicit comments from other agencies on the designation
issues prior to the actual preparation of the EIS.
The workshop participants reviewed the respective roles of
EPA and COE with regard to the site designation process and
monitoring studies. The study plan was discussed and some
preliminary results were displayed. All attendees were given a
booklet covering the information presented in the oral briefing.
Comments recorded during the workshop are presented below.
5.2.1. Issue 1
USCG was concerned that the LA-2 site is located too close
to vessel traffic lanes and that there is a potential for vessel
incidents to occur. They•requested that the site 'be moved
farther offshore. Harvey Beverly (Regulatory Branch, COE Los
Angeles District) outlined the history of discussions between
USCG, EPA and COE. USCG did not pursue their request further
after learning what was involved in the site designation
process. Jack Fancher (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service)
-------
- 5-2 -
51680
EXHIBIT 1
FodatoJ Re*bta* / Vol. 4a No. 219 / Thursday. November 10. 1983 /Notices
Deletion
After consideration of the relevant
matter presented, the Committee has
determined that the commodity listed
below i« no loagtr suitable for
ftrooirsttsnt by the Federal Government
under 41US*. 40-48B. 85 Slat 77.
Accordingly, thr following commodity
la hereby delated from the Procurement
List US*
Pro
;1*MCofT*ctlQn»of
* mFR Doc 83-29355. published '
October 28.1983 (48 FR 49904). the NSN
for the item under Belt. Tool
Repairman's is corrected to read 5140-
00-&E9-2SI7.
Jn FR Doe. 83-29355. published
October 28.1933 (48 FR 49904). under
CUsa850S.whi
change ta> 9503.
CW.
iappeara
f»rocurement LM1984; EstabOsnment;
B. FR Doe. 83-28332 appearing at page
«B41Sin the Issue for Tuesday. October
18.1983. make the following correction*:
1. On page 48417. third column, fifth
Una from the bottom. Table, Wood.
change to mad Table. Office, Wood.-
Same column, second line from the
bottom. Tables. Steel, change to read
Table. Steel".
2. On page 48418. first column, eighth
line from the top. Cottumer. Wood.
change to read "Costumer. Wood.
Executive-.
X Oo page 48423. second column, first
three lines. Food Service.. Department
of Air Force. Sheppard Air Force Base.
Texas should be listed under "SIC 5812".
4. On page 48428, third column, ninth
line fitm the botton. insert "9100
BrookviQe Road. Silver Spring.
Maryland (SH)".
1.1. Altar. |r,
Acting Executive Director.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of thes Army Corp* of
Engineer*
Intent To Prepare Draft Envtronnwntsl
Impact Statement (DBS) for Propose*
Final Designation of LA 2 Interim
Oeoan Dumping site. Off shoe* of
Loa Angela? County, Calif.
: Army Corps of Engineers,
DOD.
ACTION: Notice of Intent To Prepare a
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
(DEIS).
: 1. Proposed Action. The Los
Angeles District (LAD) of the US. Amy
Corps of Engineers will prepare a Draft
Environmental Impact Statement to
identify the impacts associated with the
final designation of an ocean disposal
site for dredge material off of Los
Angeles (Site No. LA 2). The LA 2
dnmpsite consists of the ana within
1000 yards of a center point at
W37WN., vunrw w.
Preparation of the DEIS regarding the
fr"*i designation of the disposal site will
be accomplished by the US. Army
Corps of Engineers at the request of the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Since documentatioA hi support of nnai
designation must have EPA approval
(EPA is responsible for final disposal
ait* designation), the US. Army Corps of
Engineers will be coordinating closely
with the EPA.
To establish basirflfn data for the site,
LAD began comprehensive field
•ampHiig in "ir'Titr ifl83 which wiO
repeat for three consecutive seasons.
The «*mpitnB plan includes 5 sampling
stations at the dumpntr. one station ia
located at the center of the dumpsite
aad the other 4 are spaced at 90*
intervals around outer edge of the
dumpsite, 1000 yards from the center.
Three sample stations will be located
at the adjacent Reference (control) site.
These stations represent similar depths
aa those stations located at the
dumpsite'a center, shallowest and
Thacf
ipling static
i center coordinatea of the LA 2
reference site ia:
sru or N. uni'49- w.
Project tasks are focused primarily on
benthic resources, although other
biological physical, cultural and socio-
economic aspects will be considered.
The DEIS will analyze the need for the
ocean disposal site by addressing the
present and potential future use of the
site for disposal of uncontaminated
dredge spoil and by addressing the
availability of land disposal sites.
2. Alternative*. Alternatives to the
proposed project include (a) no action.
(b) utilisation of land disposal sites, or
(c) designation of alternative ocean
disposal sites. Other alternatives may
be identified through the scoping
process.
9. Scoping Process.
a. Public Involvement. An extensive
mailing list has been prepared which
includes affected Federal. State, and
local agendes and other interested
private organizations and parties. Each
Entity on the mailing list will receive a
:copy of the scoping public notice which
will have details of the proposed
studies.
b. Significant Issues. Significant issues
to be analyzed in depth in the DEIS will
Include: The need for the project.
alternatives to the project impacts to
benthic habitats and biota (including
endangered species); water quality and
circulation, water use. aesthetics, socio-
economic*, and transportation. Tissue
and sediment chemistry will be
analyzed and bioaccumulation potential
addressed as part of assessing the
Impacts to benthic habitat and biota.
Other potentially significant issues may
be identified through the scoping
process.
4. Scoping Meetings. The Corps of
Engineers will circulate a public notice
soliciting comments regarding the scope
of the DEIS rather than holding a
scoping meeting.
8. Publication of the DEIS. The Draft
Environmental Impact Statement is.
expected to be available to concerned
agencies and the interested public for
review and comment in November 1984.
Paul W. Taylor.
Colon*!. Cotp* of Engineer*. Dittrict
r»M
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Western ATM Power Administration
Rto Grand* Prefect; Proposed Power
Rate Adiuatnwnt
aocMCV. Western Area Power
Administration. DoE.
ACTION: Notice of proposed power rate
adjustment—Rio Grande Project New
Mexico.
-------
- 5-3 -
Public Notice
US Army Corps
of Engineers
Los Angeles District
P.O. Box 2711
Los Angtiet, CA 90053
SPLCO-R (8A-LA2-S(HB))
EXHIBIT 2
NOV 3 0 1983 Comment Deadline: JAK 1 g 158,«
To Whom It May Concern:
Your comments are invited on the scope of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the
proposed Final Designation of the LA 2 Interim Ocean Dumping Site, offshore of Los Angeles
County, California (figures 1 and 2).
SCOPING
In the scoping process, public comment helps determine the scope of an EIS, i.e., the plan of study,
the impacts and possible alternatives to be considered. Through the scoping process the significant
issues which should be addressed in depth by the EIS are identified.
PROPOSED PROJECT AND STUDY PLAN
The LA 2 dumps!te is a 100 fathom (600 foot) deep circular disposal site with a radius of 1000
yards and a center located at 33° 3?' 06" N, 118° 17' 36" W. This dumpsite was given
Interim status by the Environmental Protection Agency in 1977. Final designation,
pursuant to the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, as amended,
is necessary if its use as a dumpsite for dredge spoil is to be continued. The EPA
requested that the UJS. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) prepare the EIS required prior
to final disposal site designation by the EPA. Therefore, the UJS. Army Corps of
Engineers will prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the Proposed
Final Designation of LA 2 Interim Ocean Dumping Site pursuant to: the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969; the Council On Environmental Quality
Regulations on Implementing NEPA Procedures (40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
1505-1508); and the Corps* of Engineers regulations: Policy and Procedures For
Implementing NEPA (33 CFR 230). The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has filed a Notice
of Intent to prepare this document. (Concurrently, USAGE is preparing an EIS for the
Final Designation of LA 5 Interim Ocean Dumpsite, located off of San Diego.)
USAGE is undertaking a comprehensive field sampling and data analysis program to: 1)
obtain the information necessary for accurate ecological assessment, and 2) create a
scientifically sound baseline of existing conditions at the site. The project tasks
primarily focus upon benthic resources, although other biological, physical, cultural, and
socio-economic aspects win be considered.
Historic data on biological, physical, and chemical oceanography, transportation
networks, and disposal events will be obtained from the private and public sector. Data
will be obtained from a literature search, published and unpublished government data,
and interviews with local experts. Data will be used to establish a historic baseline
which can be compared to existing conditions.
-------
- 5-4 -
SUBJECT: The Scope of an Environmental Impact Statement on the Proposed Final
Designation of the LA 2 Interim Ocean Dumping Site
Four seasonal field surveys will be conducted with sufficient detail to adequately assess
existing conditions and trends. Sampling is designed to be statistically justifiable,
repeatable, and utilizes technically appropriate methods. Field surveys will include
sampling of the infauna, epifauna, fish, sediment, chemical and physical oceanography at
the dumpsite and the adjacent reference site. Field surveys will include:
1) ORGANISMAL SAMPLING. Quantitative seasonal inventory of benthic marine
fish and invertebrates will be sampled via otter trawls. Infauna sampling will be made
with a 0.1 m2 bottom grab. Otter trawl stations will correspond to infaunal sampling
stations. Voucher specimens will be fixed and stored at the Los Angeles District office
of the Corps of Engineers.
2) PHYSICAL OCEANOGRAPfflC SAMPLING. Water column profiles of
temperature, salinity, pH, dissolved oxygen, and water transmissivity will be performed
at two stations at each site (dumpsite and reference site). Replicate profiles will be
made. Vertical spacing of sampled depths will be sufficient to define the major
pycnoclines in the water column and to satisfy any requirements of biological or physical
modeling analyses.
3) CHEMICAL OCEANOGRAPHIC SAMPLING, Water bottles will collect samples
for analysis of concentration of suspended solids, heavy metals (Cadmium (Cd),
Chromium (Cr), Copper (Cu), Mercury (Hg), Lead (Pb), Arsenic (As), Zinc (Zn), PCBs,
petroleum hydrocarbons, and total organohalogens. Samples will be collected
approximately 4 meters above the bottom and 5 meters below the surface.
4) SEDIMENT SAMPLING. A vertical core sample will be taken from the 0.1 m2
bottom grab. Grain size distribution of each sample will be determined. Laboratory
analysis of sediment chemistry and tissue chemistry will also be performed. Analysis will
be for Cd, Cr, Cu, Hg, Pb, As, Zn pesticides (including chlorinated hydrocarbons), total
organohalogens, PCBs, and petroleum hydrocarbons. Standard methods and
Environmental Protection Agency testing procedures will be followed. Target species for
tissue chemistry will be 1) a benthic-feeding flat fish, the Pacific Sanddab (Cithariehthys
sordidus) and 2) the filter-feeding shrimp, Sicyonia spp..
Speed, direction and vertical structure of water body movement at each site will be
derived from historical data and not measured directly.
This data will in part be used to describe the biotic and oceanographic conditions of the
project environment. Data will also be used to assess the differences between the
dumpsite and reference (control) site; these differences may indicate the impacts of
ocean disposal of dredged material at the dumpsite. The socio-economic setting of the
project will be addressed via discussion of those aspects of the project area most likely
to be affected by the final designation of the dumpsites. These include: commercial and
sport fisheries, coastal recreation, cultural resources, offshore oil development, marine
transportation, dredge and disposal operations, and sewage outfalls.
-------
- 5-5 -
SUBJECT: The Scope of an Environmental Impact Statement on the Proposed Final
Designation of the LA 2 Interim Ocean Dumping Site
CONTENT AND STRUCTURE OF THE EB
The EIS will be structured in accordance with the following outline:
1. Summary
a. Major Conclusions
b. Areas of Controversy
c. Issues to be Resolved
2. Purpose and Need for Action
a. Proposed Action
(1) Route description
(2) Barge description
(3) Dredging type
(4) Scope of disposal
(a) A need for action
(b) Stages of implementation
(c) Life of the project
(d) Historic
b. Interrelationship With Other Policies, Plans, and Projects
(1) Federal Government: Outer Continental Shelf
(2) State: California ~~
(3) Local Ports
(4) Private industry (proposed projects and ongoing studies)
3. Alternatives Including Proposed Action
a. The Environmental Impacts of the Proposed action
(1) Introduction
(2) Existing environment (direct and indirect impacts of operation).
(3) Water resources and quality: Marine
(4) Biota: Marine
-------
- 5-6 -
SUBJECT: The Scope of an Environmental Impact Statement on the Proposed Final
Designation of the LA 2 Interim Ocean Dumping Site
(5) Use plans - (coastal and ocean route)
b. Alternatives to the Proposed Action
(1) No action
(2) Delayed action
(3) Land disposal
(4) Alternative ocean disposal sites
e. Comparative Impacts of Alternatives
d. Mitigating Measures Not Included in the Proposed Action
(1) Methodology for determining mitigating measures
(2) Mitigating measures
(3) Measures required by Federal agencies
(4) Measures required by State of California and other entities
4. Affected Environment
a. Environmental Conditions
(1) Southern Pacific Coastal Climatic Region, emphasizing Ports and
Disposal Sites.
(2) Identification of marine ecosystem components in the area:
(a) Abiotic
(b) Biotic
(3) Physical setting of disposal site and its reference site
(a) Physiography
(b) Geology
(c) Sedimentology
(4) Water resources, quality, and uses: ocean
(5) Water quality standards:
(a) Federal
(b) State
(c) Local
-------
. 5-7 -
SUBJECT: The Scope of an Environmental Impact Statement on the Proposed Final
Designation of the LA 2 Interim Ocean Dumping Site
(6) Water use (how the proposed action conforms or conflicts with the
objectives and specific terms of existing or proposed Federal, State, and
local land/water use plans, policies, and controls, if any, for the area
affected).
(7) Recreation and recreational values
(a) Historic trends
(b) Present trends
(8) Use plans, controls, and constraints: h
(a) Coastal and ocean transportation routes
(b) Existing policies
(c) Trends of conflicts
b. Significant Resources
(!) Resources identified as significant in laws, regulations, and guidelines
(2) Critical resources
(3) Species of concern such as: unique, threatened, rare, and
Endangered species, and ecologically important species.
5. Environmental Consequences
i
a. The Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Actions
(1) Introduction
(a) Methodology of impacts analysis
(b) Existing impacts
(c) Potential for impacts
(2) Existing environment (direct and indirect impacts of operation)
(a) Physical and chemical oceanography
(b) Marine ecosystem
(c) Sedimentology
(3) Water resources and quality: marine
(4) Biota: marine
(5) Use plans - (coastal and ocean route)
-------
_ 5-8 -
SUBJECT: The Scope of an Environmental Impact Statement on the Proposed Final
Designation of the LA 2 Interim Ocean Dumping Site
(a) 'Transportation (marine)
(b) Socioeconomic characteristics
b. Alternatives to the Proposed Action:
(!) No Action
(2) Delayed action
(3) Land disposal
(4) Alternative ocean disposal sites
- - c. Mitigating Measures Not Included in the Proposed Action
(1) Methodology for determining mitigating measures
(2) Mitigating measures
(3) Measures required by Federal agencies
(4) Measures required by State of California and other entities
6. List of Preparers
COMMENTS
Your written comments will help us to identify public concerns over the final designation
of the disposal site and focus the EIS on significant issues. Please send your comments
to:
. Army Engineer District
ATTN: SPLCO-R (84-LA2-6(HB))
P.O. Box 2711
Los Angeles, California 90053
For further information, call Harvey Beverly, Regulatory Branch, (2131 688*3606.
PaulW. Tayl
Colonel, Corps of Engineers
District Engineer
-------
5-9
*•>•.
»»*
50 100
Nautical Miles
42*-
40'-
PIGOHE 1: 6PA REGION IX OCEAN DISPOSAL SITES
-------
5-10
IJI^
lj
S3
i!
\
a
U
OS
(3
M
li
-------
- 5-11 -
Table 5-1. Issues Identified During the Scoping Process
AGENCY
ISSUES AND COMMENTS
O.S. Coast Guard
Rational Marine
Fisheries Service
U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service
The Resources Agency of
California (9 State
Agencies)
Regional Hater Quality
Control Board, Santa
Ana Region.
Southern California
Association of Governments
Concern with respect to traffic
safety if the LA-2 site is
finally designated.
Reconaended that topics of
commercial and recreational
fishing be highlighted in the
BIS.
Suggested use of a berm trawl
in place of an otter trawl for
demersal fish samples. Also
suggested mldwater trawl
samples.
Ho comments at this time, but
they vill review the DEIS.
Conveyed the California Coastal
Commission comment consistency
certification will be required
on the EIS. This was later
retracted by the Commission.
(See Exhibit 13).
Ho comments at this time.
Ho comments at this time.
-------
- 5-12 -
EXHIBIT 3
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
UNITED STATES COAST GUARD
mm MM »tec.
400 OCS*M*T«
MM BEACH. C*.
16475/30COE
9 January 1984
From: Commander, Eleventh Coast Guard District
To: . District Engineer, U. 5. Array Corps, Los Angeles District
Subj: COE Public Notice dated 30 November 1983.
1. A review of the proposed dump site location raises some
concern with respect to traffic safetyj especially if there is
high vessel traffic density associated with a large dumping
project at LA2. Current traffic patterns for the area are
governed by the Traffic Separation Scheme \TSSj, shown in figure
2 of your notice, and the international Navigational Rules.
There is the possibility that vessels going to and from the duap
site may cross the TSS in violation of Rule 10 of the
Navigational Rules. This could result in a dangerous situation
and lead to a casualty. Likewise, because LA2 is adjacent to the
eastbound traffic lane, vessels using the traffic lane could be
confused as to the intentions of the dumping vessel. To mitigate
these potential problems, recommended routes and dump headings
could be established.
2. If you have any questions please call me or LCDR VARANKO at
(213 590-2301).
C-:
.•-
'
L. A. ONSTAD
Commander, 0. S. Coast Guard
Chief, Marine Environmental
Protection/Port Safety Branch
By direction of the District Cossander
Copy: MSO LA/LB
CCGD11 (dpi) (e)
RESPONSE: See Section 5.2.1 for further discussion. As « result of the
——""•" Coast Guard's concern, the COE has incorporated a special
condition into all permits to dispose aaterials at LA 2 site
(see Section 4.2.3.2 and 4.6).
-------
- 5-13 -
EXHIBIT 4
UNITED STATES DEf^RTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Ocaanic and Atmospheric Administration
NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE
Soutbwesc Region
300 south Ferry Street
Tarminal Island, California 90731
December 20, 1983
F/SWR33:JJS
1503-01.4
Colonel Paul W. Taylor
District Engineer
Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 2711
Los Angeles, CA 90053
tear Colonel Taylor:
We nave reviewed Public Notices Nos. 84-LA2-S and 84-LA5-S requesting
contents on the scope of environmental lapact statements (EIS) for the
proposed final designations of the LA-2 and LA-5 Interim Ocean Dumping Sites
off Los Angeles and San Diego respectively. In general, the content and
structure proposed for each EIS thoroughly covers those areas of concern te
the national Marine fisheries Service.
The only apparent deficiency we. can see concerns the subjects of
commercial and recreational fishing. The texts of both Public Notices state
that these topics will be covered in the discussions involving socio-economic
settings. Because of the importance of thoroughly considering the
Implications of long-term dumping at each of the interim sites on fishing, we
recommend that the topics of commercial and recreational fishing be
specifically highlighted in the content section of each EIS.
Sincerely yours,
Anders, Jr.
Acting Kegional Director
cc:
CDPC, Long Beach
TVS, Laguna Niguel
RESPONSE: ' See Sections 3.4.1, 3.4.5.1, 4.2.3.1, 4.2.3.5.1
-------
- 5-14 -
EXHIBIT 5
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SF-RVICE
ECOLOGICAL SERVICES
24000 Avila Road
Laguna Nlguel, California 92677
January 5, 1984
Comaander
Los Angeles District
Corps of Engineers
?.o". Box 2711
Los Aageles, California
90053
Attention: Regulatory Branch
Re: 7S 84-LA2-S and PH 84-LA5-S EIS Scoping Notices
for Ocean Duop Site Designation
Dear Colonel Taylor:
the Fish and Wildlife Service (FJS) has examined the referenced public
notices and finds that no significant topic within our purview has been
overlooked.
With regard to the field sampling program, we suggest that the FtfS be
given the opportunity to review and comment on the biological study plan
prior to its tapleaentation. Further* we suggest that the proposed otter
travl fish sampler be replaced with a bean trawl which includes a device for
aeasuring the actual bottom area swept by the trawl. Often, a significant
failing of otter trawl sampling is that bottom tiae and area swept by the
net is only estimated, rather than actually determined, thus introducing
considerable error. The addition of midwater trawl samples should also be
considered, in order to assess the presence of fishes normally associated
with the water column, as well aa the bottom.
Please contact Mr. Jack Fancher on this matter, should the need arise, at
FTS 796-4270.
Sincerely yours.
r^Daie A. Pierce *
Acting Field Supervisor
cs: CDFG, MRR, Long Beach, CA
NMFS, Terminal Island, CA
EPA, Reg. IS, San Francisco, CA
RESPONSE: See Section 5.2.2.
-------
floMffCB •uiMin«
1418 Nimn Strttt
_-_. .
M814
(916) 443-5656
EXHIBIT 6
ef Pint and GMM
- 5-15 -
GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN
GOVERNOR OF
/• • i I ert o M | A
CALIFORNIA
Air KMAMTCM *««*«
c*«iof»»« Coa»t«i Commm.or
C«ntB»«w« CanMf **iioi» Cur ot
«««*»»»«
cofiMr«*tie-
•""
i camm,»t,o
90.,:
THE RESOURCES AGENCY OF CAU FORNt A
SACRAMENTO. CAL.FORN.A
»"» "«'•«•«««
Colonel Paul W. Taylor
Ar=y Corps of Engineers
Post Office Box 2711 January 13,
Los Angeles, CA 90053
Public Notice 34-LA2S (Interim Ocean Dumping Site)
Dear Colonel Taylor:
The State agencies listed below have reviewed the- sublet public
notice and have provided comments used in writing this response.
The Resources Agency concurs in these findings.
The Coastal Cocnission comments that it will provide coaaents re-
garding this proposed action for: (1) EPA's DEIS on Designation cf
an Ocean Dumping" Site in the San Pedro Basin for the Ocean Disposal
of Drilling Fluids and Cuttings (August 1983) end (2) the U.S. Arsy's
D2IS for the Proposed Final Designation of LA 2 Interia Ocean Dumping
Site.
In addition, the Coasnlssion comments that a federal consistency
certification will be required for £PA's final disposal site
designation action.
Because we have received no adverse comments, the State' will not
object to issuance of the Corps permit.
Sincerely,
?h.D
Assistant Secretary for Resources
cc: Department of Boating and Waterways
Departasnt of Parks and Recreation
State Water Resources Control Board
Department cf Fish and Game
Wildlife Conservation Board
Department sf VJater Resources
State Lands Commission
Coastal Ccraission
Department of Health Services
RESPONSE; See Section 5.3
-------
STATE OF CALIFORNIA •
CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
SANTA ANA REGION
M09 INDIANA AVBNUB. SUITS 200
MIVSftSIDC. CALIFORNIA S1SOC
PHON«i (714J U4-M30
GEORGE
Cov8f*
EXHIBIT 7
December 27, 1983
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - LA
Attn: SPtCO - R (84-LA2 - S (HB)
P.O. Box 2711
Los Angeles t CA 90053
Re: The Scope of an Environmental Impact Statement on the
Proposed Final Designation of the LA 2 Interim Ocean
Dumping Site
Gentlemen:
We have reviewed the. public notice which describes the scoping- process
for this Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and have no comments to
offer at this time. We look forward to review of the data obtained by
the comprehensive field sampling program proposed, as well as the EIS,
when available.
Sincerely,
Joanne E. Schneider
Environmental Specialist
OES:ww
BESPOUSE; So response needed.
-------
- 5-17 -
EXHIBIT 8
/OUTHiftfl CflUFOPnifl
A//oc!ftTion OF GovERnmeni/
6OO ,/ouUl ComnofiuieolUi ftv*nue •/trite IOOO • Lew ftngele/* California • 9OO05 » 213/385-JOOO
AREAWIDE CLEARINGHOUSE MEMORANDUM
PROJECT APPLICANT: US Army Corps of Engineers
PHOJECTTTTLEj LA 2 Interim Ocean Dumping Site
offshore of Los Angeles County
SPLCO.R (84-LA2-S(HB))
8CH NO.:
SCAQNO.: LA 31608-DF
DATE: January 4, 1984
The project till* and SCAG number should be used In ell correspondent:* with SCAG concerning this
project Correspondence should be sent to the attention of the Clearinghouse Coordinator. Staff can be
reached by telephone it (213) 385-1000.
FINAL. DISPOSITION
frj We have concluded review of the above project and have determined that it is of local
significance and does not warrant clearinghouse comments.
G We have concluded review of the above project and have determined that it is of area-
wide significance and generally consistent with regional policies.
n We have concluded review of the above project and have determined that it is regionally
significant Comments on this project are attached.
O In conducting the areawide notification for this project, SCAG received the attached
comments from outside agencies.
WENDY MURPHY
Clearinghouse Official
RESPONSE; Mo response needed.
-------
- 5-18 -
Table 5-2.
Attendees at the Interagency Workshop..on Ocean
Disposal at the LA-2 and LA-5 Sites
NAME
ORGANIZATION
Brie Tunker
Harvey Beverly
Terry Breyman
Shannon Cunniff
William Van Peeters
Jack Fanober
Martin J. Kenney
James B. Maboney
Lewis A. Sohlnazi
Jim Steele
Pete lander
Don Cadien
Michael Sowby
Rick Vare
Tom Grieb
Raj Matbur
Ted Turk
EPA Region 9. Ocean Dumping
Coordinator
COE Los Angeles District,
Regulatory Branch
COE Los Angeles District,
Environmental Section
COE Los Angeles District,
Environmental Section
COE Los Angeles District,
Environmental Section
U.S. Pish and Wildlife Service
U.S. Pish and Wildlife Service
O.S. Coast Guard
California Regional Water
Quality Control Board, Los
Angeles Region (4)
California Department of Fish
and Game
California Coastal Commission
MBC Applied Environmental
Sciences
MBC Applied Environmental
Sciences
MBC Applied Environmental
Sciences
Tetra Tech, Inc.
Tetra Tech, Inc.
Tetra Tech, Inc.
-------
- 5-19 -
opposed moving the site because this would cause impacts to an
as yet undisturbed location. Shannon Cunnlff (Environmental
Section, COB Los Angeles District) agreed with this point and
noted that the LA-2 site bad been used since 1977. It was
generally agreed that the site should not be moved to another
location;
5.2.2. Issue 2
Jim Steele of the California Department of Fish and Game
and Jack Fancher of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service stated
that site designation studies should address impacts to pelagic
and mid-water fish. Jim Steele specifically mentioned that the
effects of suspended fine sediment on anchovies should be
studied. Jack Fancher suggested that mid-water trawls should be
made to sample the pelagic fish population in the area. Shannon
Cunniff explained that field studies bad already been initiated
and that these studies were focused on benthic resources because
this portion of the biological environment would be the most
significantly affected resource of the area. She noted that
monitoring studies included in the site management program could
include a study of mid-water fish and other means of assessing
the impacts of suspended fine sediment.
Jack Fancher noted that the FVS comment letter on the
Hotice of Intent recommended that a beam trawl with a device to
measure bottom time be used in lieu of an otter trawl. Tom
Grieb (Tetra Tech, Inc.) and Shannon Cunnlff noted that
quantitative abundance estimates were not the objective of the
trawl survey and that it is not necessary to know the exact
bottom distance traversed. Furthermore! it was explained that
tow speed, cable angle, cable length and cable vibration are
monitored carefully to ensure uniform bottom time for the
trawls. Sample of a questionable nature, such as those trawls
that bounce along the bottom, are discarded and the trawl Is
made again.
5.2.3. Issue 3
Jim Steele suggested that hlstopathological studies be
performed in lieu of or in addition to muscle tissue contaminant
analyses of selected organisms. Shannon Cunniff pointed out
that COS has limited funding and that this is a preliminary
baseline type of survey. There does not appear to be a
precedent for this level of detail in a study of this nature.
Materials disposed of at the site have already been subjected to
bioassay tests to determine the suitability of the material for
ocean disposal. Therefore, it is assumed that the material is
relatively clean. Tom Grleb added that hlstopathological
analyses are not yet a standard technique and the proper
protocols would require research and development. If this study
or future monitoring studies indicate a need for such studies,
then the requirement for hlstopathologlcal analyses could be
included in the scope of work for site characterization.
-------
- 5-20 -
5.2.4. Issue 4
Jim Steele recommended that the Ice cream cone worm,
Pectinaria sp., be used for tissue burdea studies. Don Cadien
(MBC Applied Environmental Sciences) noted that the small size
of this polychaete requires that an unacceptably large number of
bottom samples would have to be taken in order to obtain
sufficient numbers of the organisms. Furthermore, analysis of
whole Pectinaria sp. would measure toxics in the gut, including
ingested sediment, as well as the tissues.
5.2.5' Issue 5
The problem of short dumping was discussed. OSCG is
responsible for monitoring proper disposal positions. Jim
Steele and Bill Tan Feeters (Environmental Section, COE Los
ingelea District) suggested that a radar target could be placed
on the disposal barge to allow verificaiton of the dump location
by OSCG personnel. Harvey Beverly noted that the COE Regulatory
Branch would consider adding this condition to COE Section 103
permits. Dumping on the way to the site still remains,a
concern.
5*2.6. Issue 6
Robert Hoffman (National Marine Fisheries Service) aslced if
there was any feasible alternative to the designation of LA-2,
since land disposal was not feasible alternative. Shannon
Cunniff noted that several alternative ocean sites and land
alternatives would be considered in the EIS. Alternative ocean
disposal site include a shallow water site and a deep water
site.
5.2.7* Issue 7
Jack Fancher asked why COE bad not coordinated better with
concerned agencies prior to initiation of the field studies.
Harvey Beverly and Shannon Cunniff explained that the scheduling
and funding of the project made extensive coordination
impossible and that Buss Bellmer, formerly COE's District Senior
Ecologist and responsible for the scope of work, reported
coordination on an informal basis with agencies prior to
development of the work plan.
5.2.8. Issue 8
At several points, the site monitoring program was referred
to as a means of Incorporating other agencies' recommendations
for site studies. Eric Tunker (EPA) noted that a detailed site
monitoring program would probably not be Incorporated into the
EIS, but that it could be part of EPA'3 Record of Decision on
the BIS that is published concurrently with the final
designation package.
-------
- 5-21 -
5.3 Formal Consultations
Formal consultation required by the Endangered Species Act
was initiated vltb the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on January
4, 1984 and with the Rational Marine Fisheries Service on
January 11, 1984 and November 11, 1984. The responses to
consultation report letters are shown as Exhibits 9, 10 and 11.
Coordination with the California State Historic
Preservation Officer, as required by the National Historic
Preservation Act, was initiated and a response was received on
December 7, 1984. This response is shown as Exhibit. 12.
Consultation with the California Coastal Commission
regarding coastal zone consistency review was initiated. In the
Commission's letter, dated November 9, 1984, they indicated that
a consistency determination was not required for final designa-
tion of the dredged material site (Exhibit 13)- The Commission
will continue to review all permit actions under Section 103 of
MPRSA to determine consistency.
5,4. REQUESTED REVIEWERS
Comments were requested from the following organizations:
5.4.1. Federal Agencies and Offlees
.Council on Environmental Quality
Department of Commerce
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
National Marine Fisheries Service
Maritime Administration
Department of Defense
Army Corps of Engineers
Navy
Department of Health and Human Services
Department of the Interior
Fish and Wildlife Service
Minerals Management Service
Department of Transportation
Coast Guard
National Science Foundation
5.4.2. State and Municipal Offices
State of California
State Resources Agency
Department of Fish and Game
State Historic Preservation Office
County of Los Angeles
City of Los Angeles . . ....
City of Long Beach
Port of Los Angeles
Port of Long Beach
-------
- 5-22 -
EXHIBIT 9
United Stales Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
SACRAKEK70 ENDANGERED SPECIES OFFICE
1230 "IT Street, 14th Floor
Sacrasesto, California 95814
FEE 0 3 884
la reply refer to: SESO
J1-1-84-SP-129
Mr. Carl F. Enson ;
Chief, Planning Division
Department of the Army
Los Angeles District
Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 2711
to* Angeles, California 90053
Sublect: Request for List of Endangered and Threatened Species in
the Area of LA 2 Ocean Disposal Site, Los Angeles County,
California
Dear Mr. Enson:
This is in reply to your letter of January 4, 1984, requesting a .
list of listed and proposed endangered and threatened species that aay
occur within the area of the subject project, tour request and this
response are aade pursuant to Section 7(c) of the Endangered Species Act
of 1973 as anended (PL 95-632).
We have reviewed the most recent information aad to the best of our
knowledge there are «o listed or proposed species withla the area of the
project. We appreciate your concern for endangered species and look
forward to continued coordination. If you have further questions,
please contact Mr. Ralph Swansea of our office at (TTS) 448-2791 or
(916) 440-2791.
Sincerely,
Project Leader
RESPONSE; No response needed.
-------
- 5-23 -
1
J
i
J
I
I
I
I
*
B
3
3
!EMT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic aWd Mt
-------
- 5-24 -
EXHIBIT 10, Pg. 2
Coaaon Name
Gray while
Right vhale
Blue whale
Tin whale
Sei whale
Humpback whale
Sperm whale
Green sea turtle
Leatherbaek sea turtle
Pacific Ridley sea turtle
loggerhead-sea turtle
Enclosure
Species Which May Be Present in Project Areas
Scientific Name
(Esehrlehtius robustus)
(Eubalaena qlacialis)
(Balaenoptera ausculus)
(B_. physalus)
(£. borealis)
(Megaptera novaengllae)
Status
Endangered
Endangered
Endangered
Endangered
Endangered
Endangered
(fhyseter nacrocephalus) [catodon] Endangered
(Chelonia aydas)
(Deraoche'lys coriacea)
(Lepidochelys olivacea)
(Caretta caretta)
Endangered
Endangered
Endangered
Threatened
Cuadalupe fur seal
(Arctocephalus townsendi)
Candidate
-------
- 5-25 -
EXHIBIT 11
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMENCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administrator
NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE
Soutrve*c Recica
SDO iwrh Ferry Ssri*.
?ftzsisai Island. CaliiS^ai^ f-3731
F/SHI33:DJS
1514-05
November 26, 1984
Mr. Carl F. Eason
Chief, Planning Division
Los Angeles District
Army Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 2711
Us Angeles, CA 90033
Dear Mr. Enson:
We have reviewed your November 11, 1984 determination that populations of
listed endangered, threatened or candidate species will not be affected
adversely by. the proposed final designation of the LA2 and IA5 ocean disposal
sites for dredged materials. We concur with your conclusion. We see no need
to proceed further with the consultation process prescribed in Section 7 of
the Endangered Species Act.
RESPONSE; Ro response needed.
-------
- 5-26 -
EXHIBIT 12
St*l» 01 Ctiilami* — Th« Rnourcw Agvncy
OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION
DEPARTMENT OP PARKS AND RECREATION
P.O. Bo* 2390
fcer*m«ita.CA 95811
I11CI 445400ft
TITLE; U 2 and LA 5 DUMP SITES
Date : 7 December 19 e.
Project No.: ffnP , -
and CoE 841024 C[
The ittm cittd tfaovt was received in this offica on
Thank you for consultinf us pur«u*nt to 36 CFR 800.
Wt concur in your determination that tfiit undertaking:
_ t not involve National Register or eligible propecgei.
Q will not affect National Register or eligible properties.
The provisions of 36 CFR 800.7 apply if previously unidentified National Register or eligi
resources are discovered during construction.
Contact Nicholas Del Cio-ppo
. of our staff tf you have any questif
. Marion Mitchell-Wilson. Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
Acting Chief. Office of Historic Preservation
RESPONSE; No response needed.
-------
- 5-27 -
State of C*:- arwi Ceo^e Deukmepm.
CaWomi* Ciasu Commasion"
SOUTH CC*S7 26T1UCT
245 West &-iic*ay. Sute 380
P.O. Box 1*50.
LongBeac\Ca£f:ma 90801-1450
(213)590-5-1
Nc-rczber 9, 1984
EXHIBIT 13
Shanr.cn Cunniff
Environmental Section
Department of the Army
L. A. District, Corps of Engineers
P.O. Bsx 2711
Lcs As?eles, CA 90053
*
Ea: LA 2 and LA 5Ocean Disposal Site Selection
Dear Shannon,
ThanX you for your coordination with the Coastal Commission
regarding the COE ocean disposal site studies for dredged
material placement at disposal sites LA 2 and LA 5. As you
are avare,- on January 11, 1984, the D. S. Supreme Court issued
a decision in Watt vs. California concerning consistency deter-
minations by the State of California for federal activities
which aay affect the coastal zone. The 5-4 ruling reversed
two Irver court rulings and determined that an administrative
action, such as an Outer Continental Shelf oil and gas lease
•ale, is not subject to review by the State under Section
307 (c! (1) of the Coastal Zone Management Act. While a bill was
introduced a few weeks later to change the CZMA to permit such
state review of these federal agency decisions, the Bill --
HR 45:3 — died in committee. Zt is expected that it will be
reintrsduced when the 99th Congress convenes early next year.
Zn the meantime, the Coastal Commission would continue to have
consistency review and permit authority over dredging projects
and tia shipment of materials through the coastal zone that may
adversely affect coastal resources. He appreciate the level
of ir.-olvement that you have afforded the Commission, and I am
confident that the "unofficial* review of the potential impacts
S; No response needed.
-------
November 9, 1984
Page 2
- 5-28 -
EXHIBIT 13, Pg.
of the designation of two disposal sites for further placement
of dredged materials by our agency and other State agencies
concerned with resource protection and management will ensure
that the projects and monitoring programs will be thorough and
helpful.
Again , thank you for your effort to keep the Coastal Commission
involved and informed. I am looking forward to assisting you
in any way I can in the future on this and other projects by
the COE.
Sincerely yours,
Peter F. Xander
Staff Planner
PFX/sws
ce: Tom Tobin
Liz Fuchs
Mary Hudson
-------
- 5-29 -
5.*.3. Private Organizations
American Cetacean Society
Audubon Society
Couateau Society
National Wildlife Federation
Oceanic Society
Sierra Club
State University, Long
.
«f Calif oral..
-------
-------
- 6-1 -
Cti
0.
u
o
H
at
M
N
CU
^
31
U
x
l1
H
-3
M
0
M
B]
ae
o
e*
CQ
M
OS
H
O
X
M
IH
•«
ta
flu
M
U
U
«
HI
H
M
o.
M
M
pa
x
^
9E
c e
0 0
^j
«F^
a B
o
n 01 J< H
M H b *»
H H 00
» B *>
•O B » B * 0 0
0 <* 0 -H 000
H *» -H *» . H
> H > H > ^O CO
« V 0V 0 B M
as « as 0 os a u
•0 1
SB -H «
O 0 b O X
0 0 E Cd X 0 E W B
0HCfl«> 90« t.Cd
t>>06 O *» > E 90k
jB>0oo > n so co o o o
HOSOU HUCOX h. O *>
1 1
O 1 O
L. m t.
Pk b 1 »>
cd o "O
^ CX B P* X S )H
«d 0 « « » n
o ft o o « - JE o
ft o ft CB E a. &
an a o o M0W ^f^f
ObHb Ob>O Ob
o so-** to o sow O o a.
•
o
^4 - W •
ca H *• * °
*» O 0 X CO
c s ** •
004* " *
a « o -H 0 B
B ** J4 3
MOO & ^
q> H • H
. *> b 0 -H O
CQ O *» CO H H
> b Cd • -B b
9 0. 0. X B* H
3
0
H
> X
0 b
b 0
*>
r-4 M
« »H n
O 9 B
•H tO b
B 0 0
j- b 0
0 B
0 W, O
H O 0
**
H CO
a b
b a
0 0
BU X
o
n B H
0 0 J3
> a.
a 0 a
b n b
0 tO
0 • O b
x b b o
0 -a x
B to x »
0 0 X >
> E b
0 0 n 9
« X 0 W
^H
0
a
o n
ft S
a o
«H H
O *>
0
B -4
0 S
«Mt
W
O 0
O as
o 0
L> tO
> B •
a b *
b 0
^0 X
E 0
• -rt >
09 M b
• B 0
a oa a
-------
- 6-2 -
£pf
H
1-4
m»
H
0
H
M
x
o
so
M
as
H
U
35 •
H
as
M
a.
H
M
h^
H
as
M
a.
u
H
X
SB
tjrt
O
>
•H
0
b
^J
0
O
B
O
0
H
H
O
U
0
0
0
b
. 0
X
M
CO
X
W
o
o
o
u
c
0
a
x
0
b
aa
^
j
0
o
B
0
b
b
H
CO
M
aa
b B
0 0
0
X 4*
JS B
0 vi
0 0 >
•HOW
*» to W 6
0O -H
W O 0 »t
O -H b 3
O tJ B
O 0 0 O
u 0 b. e».
-
•
o
CO
•
X
.-H
0
4*
B
0
a
E
O
^
> b'
B O
A3 ^1
0
*> B
O -H
0 -0
1 b
O 0
b O
a* u
t "O
B B
O 0
b
•H b -
> O DO
B 4* O
H 0 U
B
0 -H b
0 TJ 0
b W
0 O
b 0 4»
0 U 0
(D _j
X.H W
0 O
9 B O
On M
O O
fa* B fid
0
0
•o x
B -H
000
a B
0 0 «t
4* -H
004*
x x o
0 rHI 0
O 0 Ob
0 B B
M *-M
•
t*
t<
4-1
B
e
9
u
.
ta
a
o
B
B •
0 <
«ES •
n x
i
B
O
b
•H B
> 0
C -H
0 4*
0
0 O
b 9
0 T»
0 0
•H
B 0
> B~
«n
V
0 B
CO
M
Da
%«
o
y
0
•H
^
0
BS
1
B
O
•H
>
B
H
0
0
0
b
0
X
M'
CO
•o
e
0
^4
• 0
4*
B
0
• a
B
o
«*4
>
e
«
•
X
^p
0
B
B
0
M
.
S
B
f
O
•9
X
t* ^
0 I ~<
•HOB
JS 0 3
u a a
H U
B 0 0 O
O 0 W U
*> 0 "0 b
0 b B O
0 0 0 W,
co 0
XL. b
M Wi
-H 00
0 B JS B
41 0 On B
B > 0 0
B 0 WA<
W
B
v4
B
B
0
>
W
O
r-l
O
0
0
a
O
b
<
•
^
•
X
•h
b
0
^>
3
0
•J
0
H
b
O
^^
O
b
o
4J
0
B
•v4
•O
b
O
O
tj
0
0
o
1^
9
O
0
0
BS
0
>
•H
V. W
B
« •*
B 4*
0 rt
9
4* 0 4*
0 S 0
•H 0 i-l
wu w
0 0
^ 0 FH
o 0 o
0 0
000
JS b £
o 0 a
< x «<
o
0
o
b
9
O
0
0
as
^4
0
b
9
4*
>H
9
U
C.
0 0
0
» o
0 T> b
•H C 3
> 0 0
0 0
b X 0
to £•
~l O
0 ^ F4
O O 0
•H 0 b
B 0 9
JS JS *»
W O -H
0 b 9
H 0 O
60
O
U
0
0 4*
0
0 -H
b W
0 O
0 -4
X O
0
4* 0
W 0..
H «*
0
0
o
9 b
B 9
0 O
0
>• 0
W as
0
^•4 ^Hf
o 0
0 b
0 9
£ *>
O F*
b 9
< U
a
•
^3
a.
«k
H
4*
b
0
X
0
w*
O
•H
b
**
0
a.
I
9
W
0
b
Ml
co a
M 0
U 9
0
«* 0
O -H
S X
0 b
H .O
&* 4^
0 0
BS --!
1
B
O
b •
H b
> o
B 44
U 0
B
0 -H
0 V
b
0 O
b O
0 U
0
0
0 *>
> B
«4 0
b. B
t-i
0 T!
*J E
E 0
0
B W
B C
O i*4
b B
0
B -*
u a.
*
b
0
^
0
BS
•
O
TJ
b
0
VM
fc* *
•H a
£ O
U CO
0 X
0. b
O
0 *»
b 0
0 -H
0 9
X W
0
0 OS
0
b 0
JS, JSS
*J 44 -
X
b
o
*»
0
(-I
3
W
0
B
-------
- 6-3 -
M
H
H
.4
M
A
M
«
9B
CO
K
M
U
as
so
H
B
m
flu
M
M
M
01
1-4
t*
OB
U
Ou
M
U
H
^
98
1
1
O
B
0
0
O
O
pH
0
*H
O
X
JS
OM
«
«*
S
0
a
B
o
k
T*
>
6
O
0
*
k
0
0
X
B
0
H
1
O
B
0
0
0
0
pH
0
O
•H
O
X
JS
a*
•
0
01
0 •
k X
4*
0
H •*
0
O
•• 0
k •! J3
O O 0
4* B A
0 M
0 k
k - 9
4* JS JS
CO 4*
00 k
Of «
•
4*
6
k «
0 B
4* 0
0 0
* 0
0
-0 0
B 0
0
X
X4»
JS -4
cLtH
0 0
k 9
tO 0-
JS
0
k
0
0
0
0
k
«
B
0
to
B
B
B 0
0
to
0 B
k *<
0 4*
0 *H
X 9
0
M B
*4 O
09 0
X
k
4»
0
•H
B
0
JS
U
•
el
•
A
0>
JM
0
•H
k
k
0
A
4»
k
0
A
0
as
MHM^KM«MMMP«.l^H
X
JS X
Q, *»
0 -H
k r4
tO 0
0 9
B 0*
0
0 4*
0 B
O 0
a
1-4 «4
0 -D
O 0
•H a
a
x-o
JS B
0* 0
t -o
B B
O 0
k
•H tO
> B
B *4
0 **
•H
0 9
k a
0 B
0 O
^. n
^* W
X p^
4* 0
B 4»
0 B
* «
H B
X
to
o
p-l
O
0
t9
0
• B
•H
k
0
X
*
a
•
A
flu
«i
B
O
«
B
0
k
A
0
t-t
0
O
4*
B
0
a
0
0
0
n
0
0
£
0
k
0
0
0
0
k
0
*4
n
X
*4
0
6
0
»H 0
0 4*
O 0
«4 -O
4>
«^«
rH
•H P-*
4* 0
0
4» t*
01 O
p-4
0 CI
4» *4
B JS
0 *>
a B
B 0
O A 4»
k B
»4 "0 0
> B a
B 0 n
0 a
00 0
a B a
b_| M
^H **
* ** a
9 f^
X 9 0
n B
B e 9
000
H « *«
n
o
•H
X4»
to a
O -H
v4 4*
0 0
«4 4»
A •>
o
0 *H
B A
•H
k -9
0 B
X 0
•
««
*
X
•
A
0
•H
k
19
•
X
n
0
a
o
J3
fr"
p*
tO 0
6 n
•H O
•H a.
0 n
•0 "H
o -o
a
^ <•*
k 0
0 t*
a
9 B
B 0
0
00
0 B
•* .^d
!*: **
4 **
V IH
X 9
0
B B
0 0
H 0
to
B
«4
k
0
0
B
•H
to
S '
M
B
0
0
O
O
to
B
9
0
J
0
0
a
o
ss
H
»H
0
^H
k
0
4*
0
a
J3
0
k
0
0
0
1
fl 0
B 0
0 k
9
0 O
•H 0
a »
0 k 4*
B B
0 «H 0
o 0 a
«• 01
k n
o 9 n
*4 4* 0
o -4 n
O 9 «
to a 10
« «
1 B S
B 0 0
O
k tO.B
*4 B O
>-^ k
B 4* 0
0 *4 0
9 «
0 n 0
k B k
0 0
• f\ n *^
v •* w
X k B
^j j(| ^^
«^ (D ™
4» 0 0 JS
JS 4» X 0
tO B 0
«4 0 O 0
H a H
0 0
0 k
O 9
*4 4*
O -H
O 9
01 U
o
•
JS
•
k
9
£.
*»
0
X
«-»
0
as
0
I a
k <*
0 B
*> 0
B JS
*4 O
fl *•
S O
0
B
0 O
•* -H
«jj
*^
X 0
-^ 4*
0 0
B k
* a.
TS
B
1 0
S
0 00
k B
•H -H
> **
S i-4
0 9
n
n B
k O
««
w
0
X_j
•^
0
0 4*
> e
•* «
h. a
X
j=
a.
0
k
to
o
B
0
0
0
o
*
o
n
*
A
•»
S
k
0
*>
(0
X
k
0
-------
- 6-4 -
>4
H
M
j
M
oa
M
CO
O
01
u
K
Qd
u
z
oa
as
M
a.
H
•.
u
0}
M
H
as
a.
H
U
X
Z
B 4>
a -o B
B 0 *
«* a a ao a
on B n .
0 b a MO
•*? o o M a.
own 0 n
ban -a M
a. E •< o -o
a a
b X M fc.
o a MO
«* 4* o a M
OEM o 0 a
a 0 BO M 4> M
b B o b a b
4» 9 M 0 V. 0
BOO B *»
o o -H 9 «« a
U Q A Z O 8
1
T> C -O
e OB
« i -a b a
IBB M
B BO O a > BO
O C b B B
b M M JS 0 M
M 4> > O 4*
> M s b n M
B 9 0 a b 9
0 a 0 an
e a n 06
n o b 0 x o
b o a b to o ft
a 0 B e o
0 M X M M 0Mb
x a a js o a a
^* |M ^j #1 *j| ^* rtl
M E > & a v, c n
M 0 M O 0 M 0 0
co a h. a 4> b. a b
BO
B
X U
BO 0
O 0
•H B
O <*
0 BO
U GS
•u
B B
b<
B
O
X M v4
B an 4* i
o 00 4* o o
B -H n o 0 e
o ax 0 M a
M 0 M «•» M 0
a £ a o o o
4« OB bOO
a a* a
trt ^4 9 ^ ^
ox ox bBaa
b b o a o -o
b O b O 4* -H
o 4» o *> obno
4* a 4* a a 0 X-H
Ob . Ob bBOJSJS
0O 0Q 4> ffl & O.
b A t, A B B a
•na -H « o to <« b
OM QM 0 I o &0
1 V
B B I
o a a
b .0 M
•H ao js o a
> B 0 -H 0 TU X
C -H OB *4 S BO
0 «> Ma n a o
M J3 BO X M
fl 9 b 4S X O
b a no o. j- o
a B b a 0
00 0 jsbS as
0 e a &04>0 c o co
• 00 MUJS 00^
•HBb ta -H o Hoa
0 T> X
4» B JS
a a a.
b x a
J3 X b b
0 a x 4* to
4* o BO n o
b B 0 M B
0 o M B a
> M O 0 0
B a o js o
M H H U O
a
B •
0 . O X
P9 B 0 M M
x o M BO a
b -0 M B
•H a *. B
•• > U B O
b B 00
o u • oa
4* n oa •
o -a 0 • »
« 4) 0 T3 Z
bMBM- • -0-
4*M0 MO BO MO
BQM C . JS> >CO
OOO O J3 OJ3 a*
u •iiw a a. «T» ft. Q x
-------
" - 6-5 -
x-
H
M
M
GQ
M
BJ
B
O
Ob
09
H,
OS
H
U
3B
H
M
OE
H
CU
M
aa
aa
0}
|w|
*•«
ae
fid •
a*
M
u
H
X
^
SB
0
6 1 *>
O 0*0
•H 4» 4* -a
4* « Ob
o vi o 0 a
o a 4-» > a
-H X X O B X *•>
o o 0 a. o
O 4* B -O B V,
00 b B O OB
0 b O 0 M O
4» O •-• 4* 0 b -H
0 A 0 0 b *J O 4*
•e 0 o 00 4* o
. r* *4 t, tO 9 00
JS B 4* 0 4i O ,H
« -0 0 BS0 b ,H .
O O 0O
4* 9 E I-+ «H O 4* >H
b.30 0OO fc.0
•H4*
B b 0 O b
•H o 0 e c -o o.
0 ^ 0 PH OB.
0 v« 0 4» «
fi* 4Afl]4*v4 0>HBb
•H ofioeo b0o0
0 0O0O 00-HW
B *^ ex-^— ; o. -H *> a
•H o n o o 0tooc
b b 0 b 0 bO00
Qb« flUbQtO 0**^HVlX
1 X
•H b
b 4» 1 1
0 n B B
O. -H O -O O •O
M B b e be
00^-10 -H 0
JS > >
•wo B n B js
O 0 -H 00
b n b
no a x 00
b 4* b iH b 0
00 00H) 0 n ao
0» 0BC 00B
X X 0 -H X b -H
B 4* 4*
X*H B«H*H XpHfH
4* 003 4* 0 3
B0 jp>4*99 C+IO)
00 066 0BC
>B .H00 >«O
' «H
0
4*
B
0
B
n x B x
o eo o oo
•HO b O
n -H -H O
js o e -H
A-M &] fid (D
o
a
•O JS •
00. JS
J31 4* a.
4* 0 .
b b S • -
0 O 0 M B
aa a eo • 0
bOX -I
ox -»
••0 » 3
b B >H -H X
O H 0 JS
4* 0 00 •
o a js o <
000 a
b .H
O 0 • 0 0
o x o o a
-------
- 7-1 -
CHAPTER 7. LITERATURE CITED
Ahlstrom, S.H. 1959* Vertical distribution of pelagic fish
•ggs and larvae off California and Baja California. U.S.
Flan Ball. 60:106-146.
. 1965. Kinds and abundance of fishes in the
California Current region based on egg and larval surveys.
California Coop. Oceanic Pish. Invest. Rep. 10:31-52.
. . 1969» Mesopelagic and bathypelagic fishes in
the California Current region. CalCOFI Report, 13:39-44.
Allan Hancock Foundation. 1959. Oceanographlc survey of the
continental shelf area of southern California. Publication
Ho. 20. State Hater Pollution Control Board* Sacramento, CA.
. 1965. An oceanographic and biological survey
of the southern California mainland shelf. Publication No.
27. Resources Agency, State Hater Quality Control Board,
Sacramento, CA.
Allen, M.J. and A.J. Mearns. 1977* Bottom fish populations
below 200 meters. Southern California Coastal Hater
Research Project, annual report, 1977. H. Bascom (ed.) El
Segundo, CA. 109-115.
Alvarino, A. 1964. Bathymetric distribution of chaetognatbs.
Pao. Sci. 18:64-82.
Atsatt, L.H., and R.R. Seapy. 1974. An analysis of sampling
variability in replicated mldwater trawls off southern
California. J. Sip. Mar. Blol. Bool. 14:261-273.
Balech, E. I960. The changes in the phytoplankton populations
off the California coast. State of California Marine
Research Committee. CalCOFI Report, 7:127-132.
Berner, L.D., and J.L. Reid, Jr. 1961. On the response to
changing temperature of the temperature limited plankter
Dollolum dentlculatum Quoy and Calrard 1835* Llmnol.
Ooeanogr. 6(2):205-215.
Brown, D.A., R.H. Gossett, O.P. Hershelman, C.F. Hard, and J.N.
Cross. 1984. Metal and organic contaminants in sediments
and animals. Southern California Coastal- Hater Research
Project, biennial report, 1983-1984. H. Bascom (ed.) Long
Beach, CA. 179-194.
Brown, R.P. and E.H. Shenton. 1973.. Submersible inspection of
deep ocean waste disposal sites off southern California.
national Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Rockvllle,
MD.
-------
. 7-2 -
Bruland, S.W., K. Bertlne, M. Koide, and E.O. Goldberg. 1974.
History of metal pollution in southern California coastal
zone. Envir. Sei. Bng. 8:425-432.
Bruland, K.W., and H.P. Pranks. 1977. Trace metals in the
water column. Southern California baseline study final
report. Bureau of Land Management.
Bureau of Land Management, 0.3. Department of the Interior.
1978. POCS Reference Paper Ho. II. In Volume I.
Description of the coastal environment from Point Reyes to
Punta Eugenia. POCS Office, Los Angeles.
. 198la. Results of the 1975-78 BLM baseline
studies and analysis program: Subtidal benthic environments
of the'Southern California Bight. POCS Technical Paper Ho.
81-8. BLM-IH-P/T-81-OC9-1792.
. . 198!b. Final environmental impact statement.
Proposed 1982 outer continental shelf oil and gas lease sale
offshore southern California. OCS Sale Ho. 68. BLM-YN-ES-
81.002-1792.
California Air Resources Board. 1981. California Air Quality
Data. Gaseous and Particulate Pollutants. California Air
Resources Board, Sacramento, CA.
California Department of Fish and Game.
status of least tern nesting sites.
1983. Summary data on
1984. Unpublished data. (Contacts: Paul
Gregory and Mac Oliphant.)
California Department of Parks and Recreation. 1984.
Unpublished data. (Contact: Jack Becbtel.)
California State Water Quality Control Board. 1965. An
oceanographic and biological survey of the southern
California mainland shelf. Vol. I and Vol. II (Appendix).
Publication Ho. 27.
California State Vater Resources Control Board. 1976. Areas of
Special Biological Significance. Resolution Ho. 74-28.
. 1980. Vol. 3. Organic pollutants in mussels
along the California coast. California State Mussel Watch.
California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento,
CA.
Chan, I.M. Chemical oceanography. 1974. Chapter 4. In Vol. I.
Physical environment. M.D. Dailey, B. Hill, and H. Lansing
(eds.). A summary of knowledge of the southern California
coastal zone and offshore areas. Southern California Ocean
Studies Consortium, Long Beach, CA.
-------
- 7-3 -
Chent K.T., and 5.C. Lu. 1974. Sediment composition in Los
Angeles and Long Beach Harbors and San Pedro Basin. In Part
7: Sediment investigations. Marine Studies of San Pedro
Bay. Reports US6-SG-8-74, University of Southern
Californiaf Los Angeles.
Corps of Engineers, U.S. Army, Los Angeles District* Los Angeles
and Long Beach Harbors,Department. 1985. Final
programmatic BIB/BIS for landfill development and channel
improvements. Los Angeles.
Dailey, M.D. 1974. Marine mammals* Chapter 12. In Vol. II.
Biological environment. M.D. Dailey, B. Hill, and N.
Lansing (eds.). A summary of knowledge of the southern
California coastal zone and offshore areas. Southern
California Ocean Studies Consortium, Long Beach, CA.
Dames ft Moore. 1984. Oil spill trajectory analysis, Platform
Eva, Huntington Beach Field Offshore for Union Oil Company
of California. Job #00111-235-01.
Dennis, J. 1974. Geological features. Chapter 1. JCn. A summary
of knowledge of the southern California coastal zone and
offshore areas. M.D. Dailey, B. Hill, and H. Lansing
(eds.}. Southern California Ocean Studies Consortium, Long
Beach, CA.
Drake, D.E., D.A.. Cacehione, and H.A. Earl. 1985- Bottom
currents and sediment transport on San Pedro Shelf,
California. Journal of Sedimentology Petrology.
55(1):15-28.
Ebeling, A.V., R.M. Ibara, F.J. Lavenberg, and F.J. Rohlf.
1970. Ecological groups of deep sea animals off southern
California. Bull. Los Angeles City Museum Natural History,
Science 6.
Emery, K.O. 1960. The sea off southern California. Wiley and
Sons, Inc., Hew lork.
Environmental Protection Agency, United States, Environmental
Analysis Branch, Marine Operations Division, Office of
Marine and Estuarine Protection* 1985* Final environmental
impact statement on designation of an ocean dumping site In
the San Pedro Basin for the ocean disposal drilling of muds
and cuttings.
Environmental Protection Agency, United States, Region 9» Water
Management Division, Permits and Compliance Branch, Oceans
and Estuaries Section. 1967. Analysis of the section
301(h) secondary treatment variance revised application by
Los Angeles County Sanitation District for Joint Water
Pollution Control Plant.
-------
- 7-4 -
Spply, R.W., A.F. Carlucci, O.D. Holm-Hansen, D. Keifer, J.J.
McCarthy, and P.M. Williams. 1972. Evidence for
eutrophication in the sea near southern California coastal
sewage outfalls, July 1970.
Fauchald, K., and G.F. Jones. 1978a. Benthic aacrofauna.
Chapter 2.1. In Tear I southern California baseline study.
Prepared by Science Applications, Inc. for Bureau of Land
Management, POCS Office, Los Angeles. Contract No.
AA551-CT5-52.
. 1978b. A survey of the benthic macrofauna at
five additional southern California study sites. Chapter
18. .In. Tear II benthic study. Prepared by Science
Applications, Inc. for Bureau of Land Management, POCS
Office, Los Angeles. Contract No. AA551-CT6-40.
. 1978c. Variation in community structure of
shelf, slope and basin macrofaunal communities of the
Southern California Bight. Chapter 19. In. Y.ear II benthic
study. Prepared- by Science Applications, Inc. for Bureau of
Land Management, POCS Office, Los Angeles. Contract Mo.
AA551-CT6-40.
. 1979. Variation in community structure of
shelf, slope and basin macrofaunal communities of the
Southern California Bight. Chapter 18* In Southern
California outer continental shelf environmental baseline
study, 1976/77 (second year) benthic program. Volume II.
Principal investigations1 reports, Series 2. Prepared by
Science Application, Inc. for Bureau of Land Management,
Pacific OCS Office. NTIS PB80-166101.
Fish and Wildlife Service, 0.3. Department of the Interior.
1980. Biological Impacts of minor shoreline structures on
the coastal environment: state of the art review. Vol. I.
Field, M.E. and B.D. Edwards. 1980. Slopes of the southern
California Borderland, a region of mass transport. In
Quarternary depositional environments of the Pacific Coast.
M.S. Field. I.P. Colburn, and A.H. Bourna (eds.).
Fitch, J.S. and B.J. Lavenberg. 1968. Deep water teleostean
fishes of California. University of California Press,
Berkeley, CA.
Foster, Michael S. and David R. Schlel. 1985. The ecology of
giant kelp forests in California: a community profile.
Pish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior,
Slldell, Louisiana.
Gorsllne, D.S. and D.J. Grant. 1972. Sediment textural
patterns on San Pedro Shelf, California. In Shelf sediment
transport processes and patterns. D. Surft (ed.) Dowden,
Hutchinson and Ross, Stroudsburg, PA. 575*600.
-------
- 7-5 -
Goraline, D.S. , B.L. Kolpack, B.A. Karl, D.B. Drake, P.
Fleischer, S.E. Thornton, J.H. Schvalbach and C.E. Savrda.
1984. Studies of fine-grained sediment transport processes
and products in the California Continental Borderland. In
Fine-grained sedlnents: deep water processes and facies.
D.A.V. Stov and D.J.W. Piper (eds.) Blackwell Scientific
Publications, Palo Alto, CA.
Barman, R. 1964. Distribution of foranlnlfera in the Santa
Barbara basin, California. Mlcropaleo. 10:81-96.
Hartman, 0. 1955. Quantitative survey of the benthos of San
Pedro Basin, Southern California: Part 1, preliainary
results. Allan Banoock Pacific Expeditions, 19:1-185.
. 1966. Quantitative survey of the'benthos of
San Pedro Basin, Southern California: Part II, final results
and conclusions. Allan Hancock Pacific Expeditions,
19:187-456.
Bartman, 0. and J.L. Barnard. 1958. The benthic fauna of the
deep basins off southern California. Allan Bancock Pacific
Expeditions. 22:1-67*
Bartman, 0. and K.O. Emery. 1956. Bathypelagic coelenterates.
Lianol. Oceanogr. 1(4):304-312.
Beesen, T.C. and D.S. Young. 197-7* Precision of chlorinated
hydrocarbon measurements. Southern California Coastal Water
Research Project, annual report, 1977* V. Baseom (ed.) El
.Segundo, CA.
Bendricks, T.J. 1980. Currents in the Los Angeles area.
Southern California Coastal Vater Research Project, biennial
report, 1979 - 1980. V. Bascom (ed.) Long Beach, CA.
. .. . 1982. Shelf and slope currents of Newport
Beach. ' Southern California Coastal Vater Research Project,
biennial report, 1981-1982. V. Bascom (ed.) Long Beach, CA.
Bendricks, T.J. and B.B. Stubbs. 1984. Currents in San Gabriel
Canyon. Southern California Coastal Vater Research Project,
blennnlal report, 1983-1984. V. Bascom (ed.) Long Beach,
CA.
Hershelaan, G.P., T.S. Jan, and fl.A. Sohafer. 1977. Pollutants
in sediments off Palos Terdes. Southern California Coastal
Vater Research Project, annual report, 1977* V. Bascom (ed.)
El Segundo, CA.
Hershelaan, G.P., P. Szalay, and C. Vard. -1982. Metals in
surface sediments from Point Dume to Point Bueneae. Southern
• California Coastal Vater Research Project, biennial report,
1981-1982. V. Baacoa (ed.) Long Beach, CA.
-------
. 7-6 -
Hickey, B.M. 1979* The California current system: hypothesis
and facts. Progress In Oceanography 8s181-279.
Hirsh, H.D., L.H. DiSalvo, and R. Peddicord. 1978. Effects of
dredging and disposal on aquatic organisms. U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers, Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS,
Holton, R.L., R.D. Leathan, and G. F. Crandell. 1977*
Zooplankton. In Vlnzler and Kelley (eds.) A summary of
knowledge of the central and northern California coastal
zone and offshore areas. BLM Contract AA550-CT6-52.
Horn, H.H. Fishes. 1974. Chapter 11. In Vol. II. Biological
environment. M.D. Dalley, B. Hill, and N. Lansing (eds.)
Summary of knowledge of southern California coastal and
offshore areas. Southern California Ocean Studies
Consortium, Long Beach, CA.
Jones, B.H., A. Bratkovich, and T. Dickey. 1984. Physical and
chemical oceanographic variability in the region near the
Los Angeles County Whites Point outfall. Unpublished paper.
Jones, C.F. and K. Fauchald. 1977. Benthlc macrofauna. In
Vol. III. Southern California baseline study.
Jones, G.F. 1969* The benthlc macrofauna of the mainland shelf
of southern California. Allan Hancock Foundation Monograph
in Marine Biology. 4:1-219.
Jones, J.H. 1971* General circulation and water
characteristics in the Southern California Bight. Southern
California Coastal Water Research Project, Los Angeles.
Kaplan, I.R* 1977. High weight hydrocarbon analysis in
sediments. Southern California baseline study final report.
Karl, H.A. 1980. Influence of San Gabriel Canyon on
narrow-shelf sediment dynamics, southern California.
Geology, 34: 61-78.
Marine
Karl, H.A. , D.A. Caochione, and O.E. Drake. 1980. Erosion and
transport of sediments and pollutants in the benthic
boundary layer on the San Pedro Shelf, southern California.
U.S. Geological Survey, Menlo Park, CA.
Karl, H.A., D.E. Drake, and D.A. Cacchlone. 1981. Response of
the suspended sediment transport system to continental shelf
dynamics. Geo-Marlne Letters. Vol. 1:243-248.
Kiaura, John C. 1974. Climate. Chapter 2. In Vol. II.
Physical environment. M. D. Dalley, B. Hill, and N. Lansing
(eds.) A summary of knowledge of southern California coastal
zone and offshore areas. California Ocean Studies
Consortium, Long Beach, CA.
-------
- 7-7 -
Kramer, D., and P.E. Smith. 1972. Seasonal and geographic
characteristics of fishery resources. California Current
region-71011. Zooplankton Commercial Fisheries Review.
Reprint No. 934.
Maloney, J.J. and K. Chan. 1974. Physical oceanography.
Chapter 3. In Yol. II. Biological environment. M.D.
Dalley, B. Hill, and H. Lansing (eds.) A summary of
knowledge of the southern California coastal zone and
offshore areas. Southern California Ocean Studies
Consortium, Long Beach, CA.
Halouta, D.N., D.S. Qorsline, and S. E. Thornton. 1981.
Processes and rates of recent (Holocene) basin filling in an
active transform margin: Santa Monica Basin, California
Continental Borderland. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology.
51 (4):1077-1095.
Marine Bioassay Laboratories. 1980. Technical Evaluation of
environmental Impact potential for proposed ocean disposal
of dredged material from Los Angeles Harbor
prepared for Los Angeles Harbor Department.
January.
Final report
Contract 1150.
1981. Technical evaluation
. Harbor.
Material proposed for dredging from Berths 200 Q & H,
Domlnguez Channel. Prepared for Los Angeles Harbor
Department. November.
. 1982a. Technical evaluation of environmental
impact potential for proposed ocean disposal of dredged
material from Todd Pacific Shipyard, Los Angeles Harbor.
Prepared for Dames and Moore. March.
. 1982b. Technical evaluation of environmental
Impact potential for proposed ocean disposal of dredged
material from Los Angeles Harbor. Prepared for Los Angeles
Harbor Department. March.
. 1982c.: Technical ... Harbor, maintenance
dredging sites. 7. Berths 174-181. 71 Berths 136-138. 711
Berths 210-211. Prepared for Los Angeles Harbor Department.
June.
1982d. Technical evaluation ... Los Angeles
Harbor. Maintenance dredging site. Container Terminal,
Berths 233, 234, 235. Prepared for Los Angeles Harbor
Department. December.
I . 1984a. Technical ... Los Angeles Harbor.
Prepared for Los Angeles Harbor Department. January..
LJ_.^m n . . 1984b. Technical ... Los Angeles Harbor.
Fuel Pier Relocation Project. U.S. Naval Station, Long
Beach, California. February.
-------
- 7-8 -
Marine Biological Consultants Applied Environmental Sciences.
1980. Bioassay investigations relating to the proposed
ocean disposal of dredged sediments from Bertha 80-88 and
Berths 62.67. .
1982. Dredge spoil bioassay evaluations for
the Port of Long Beach coal terminal facility.
Marshall, D.B. 1978. California shipwrecks: footsteps in the
sea. Superior Publishing, Seattle.
Mauer, D.L., R.T. Keck, T.C. Tinsaan, V.A. Leathern, C.A. Vethe,
M. Huntzlnger, C. Lord, and T.M. Church. 1978. Vertical
migration of benthos in simulated dredged material
overburdens. In Vol. 1. Marine benthos, 0.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Yicksburg, MS.
MoDermott, D. and T.C. Heeaen. 1975. Inputs of DDT, PCB, and
trace metals from harbors. Southern California Coastal
Water Research Project, annual report, 1975. W. Bascom
(ed.) El Segundo, CA. 133-138.
Mearns, A.J., and M.J. Allen. 1973* Checklist of inshore
demersal fishes from southern and central California.
Miller, D.J., and H.N. Lea. 1972. Guide to the coastal marine
fishes of California. California Department of Fish and
Game, Sacramento, CA.
Minerals Management Service, U.S. Department of the Interior.
1983. Final environmental Impact statement for the proposed
southern California lease offering, April 1984. Los
Angeles.
. 1984. Updated list of shipwrecks off the
southern California coast. Minerals Management Service,
Angeles.
Los
Moore, M. , V. Baseom, and H. Stubbs. 1983. Trawl-caught fish
and invertebrates. Southern California Coastal Water
Research Project, biennial report, 1981-1982. W. Bascom
(ed.) Long Beach., CA. 85-97.
Moore, M.D. and A.J. Mearns. 1980. Changes in bottomfiah
populations off Palos Verdes 1970-80. Southern California
Coastal Water Research Project, annual report, 1980. W.
Baaoom (ed.) Long Beach, CA. 21-33.
National Marine Fisheries Service. O.S. Department of Commerce.
1985. Results of the 1980 survey of gray whales. National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Long Beach, CA.
-------
- 7-9 -
1986. Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972.
Rational Ocean Data Center, U.S. Department of Commerce. 1974*
Temperature, salinity, oxygen and phosphate in waters off
United States. 7.Ill, Eastern Horth Pacific. Washington,
D.C.
Oven, Jr., B.W. 1974. Distribution of primary production,
plant pigments, and Secchi depth in the California Current
region, 1969. CalCOFI Atlas No. 20.
Pazton, J.R. 1967* A distributional analysis of the
lanternfish (family Myctophldae) of the San Pedro Basin,
California. Copela 2:422-40.
Pavlova, T.V. 1966.- Seasonal variations of the California
Current. Ocean 6:806-14.
Payne, J.R., J.R. Clayton, Jr., B.W. de Lappe, P.L. Millkln,
J.S. Parkin, R.K. Okazaki, E.F. Letterman and R.W.
Risebrougn'. 1976. Hydrocarbons in the water column. In
Vol. Ill, Report 3*2.3. Southern California baseline study,
draft final report. Submitted to Bureau of Land Management,
Washington, D.C. University of California Bodega Marine
Laboratory, Bodega Bay, CA, and Science Applications, Inc.,
La Jolla, CA.
Pequegnat, W.E. 1978. An assessment of the potential impact of
dredged material disposal in the open ocean. U.S. Army
Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Ticksburg, MS.
Radovioh, J. 1961. Relationships of some marine organisms of
the north-west Pacific to water temperatures particularly
during 1975 through 1959. California Fish Game Fish
Bulletin 112.
Reid, Jr., J.L. 1962. Distribution of dissolved oxygen in the
summer thermocllne. J. Geophy. Res. 68:4819-22.
Reslg, J.M. 1961. Microplankton over the mainland shelf of
southern California. In Vol. II. Microplankton and benthic
marine flora. R. B. Stevenson (ed.) The oceanography of the
southern California mainland shelf. Allan Hancock
Foundation, Los Angeles.
Richardson, M.D., A.Q. Carey, J.A. Colgate, and W.A. Colgate.
1978. Aquatic disposal field investigations, Columbia River
disposal site, Oregon. In Appendix C: The effects of
dredged material disposal on benthic assemblages. U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, Waterway Experiment Station. Vlcksburg,
MS.
Richardson, S.L., and W.G. Pearcy. 1977* Coastal and oceanic
fish larvae in an area of upwelllng off Taquina Bay, Oregon,
Fish. Bull. U.S. 75(1):125-146.
-------
- 7-10 -
Riznyk, H. 1974. Phytoplankton. Chapter 7. In Vol. I.
Physical environment. M.D. Dailey, B. Hill, and N. Lansing
(eds.) A summary of knowledge of the southern California
coastal zone and offshore area. Southern California Ocean
Studies Consortium. Bureau of Land Management Contract Mo.
08550-CT4-1.
__________• 1977. Phytoplankton. In B. Dornhelm (ed.) A
summary of knowledge of the central and northern California
coastal zone and offshore area. Winzler and Kelley, Eureka,
California. Bureau of Land Management Contract Ho.
AA550-CT6-52.
Schwalbach, J.R., and D.S. Gorsline. 1985. Holocene sediment
budgets for the basins of the California Continental
Borderlands. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology.
55(6):829-342.
Seapy, R.R. 1974. Zooplankton. Chapter 8. In Biological
environment. M. D. Dally, B. Hill and H. Lansing (eds.) i
summary knowledge of the southern California coastal zone
and offshore areas. Southern California Ocean Studies
Consortium, Long Beach, CA,
Sherwood, M.M., A.J. Mearns, D.R. Toung, B.B. McCain, R.A.
Murcbelano. 1980. A comparison of trace contaminants in
diseased fishes from three areas. Report to the National
Marine Fisheries Service. Stony Brook, N.I.
Southern California Coastal Water Research Project. 1973. The
ecology of the Southern California Bight: Implications for
water quality management. U.S. Department of Commerce,
Springfield, VA.
Sowls, A.L., A.R. DeGange, J.W. Nelson and G.S. Lester. 1980.
Catalog of California seabird colonies. U.S. Department of
Interior, Pish and Wildlife Service, Biological Services
Program. FWS/OBS 37/80.
Stephens, J.S. , D. Gardner and C. Terry. 1973* The demersal
fish populations of San Pedro Bay. In D. P. Soule and M.
Ogurl (eds.) Part 2. Biological investigations. Allan
Hancock Foundation Publications DSC-SG-6-72.
Stlckel, E.G., H. Cayman, L. Howard, L. Pierson, A. Ross, and L.
Weinman. 1978. Archaeological sensitivity zone mapping in
the Southern California Bight. SAI, La Jolla, CA.
Sullivan, B. and D. Hancock. 1977• Zooplankton and dredging
research perspectives from a critical review. Water
Resources Bulletin 13:461-7.
Sverdrup, H.0. and R.H. Fleming. 1941. The waters off the
coast of southern California, March .to July 1937. Bulletin
Scrlppa Institute of Oceanography 4:261-378.
-------
- 7-11 -
Swartz, B.C., F.A. Cale, D.W. Shults, and W.A. DeBen. 1986.
Ecological changes in the Southern California Bight near a
large sewage outfall: benthlc conditions in 1980 and 1983•
Marine Ecology Progress Series. 31:1-13.,
Tetra Tech, Inc. 1984a. Cultural resources investigation on
Pier A-East Basin.
1984b. technical review of the Los Angeles
County Sanitation Districts' section 301(h) application for
modification of secondary treatment requirements for
discharge into marine waters. Tetra Tech Inc., Bellevue,
VA.
Thompson, B. 1982. Variation in benthlc assemblages. Southern
California Coastal Water Research Project, annual report
1981-1982. V. Baacorn (ed.) Long Beach, CA.
Tedder,, J.G., J.K. Crouch, E.W. Scott, E.G. Green, D. Craaer, H.
Ibrahim, R.B. Tudor, and G. Vinning. 1980. A summary
report of- the operational consideration in the area of
proposed lease sale Ho. 68, offshore California. U.S.
Qeological Survey.
Wilson, Ken. 1982. The kelp forests of Palos Terdes Peninsula,
1982. Southern California Coastal Vater Research Project,
biennial report for the years, 1981-1982. V. Bascom (ed.)
Long Beach, CA. 67-70.
Wilson, K.C., A.J. Mearns, and J.J. Grant. 1980. Changes in
kelp forests at Palos Terdes. Southern California Coastal
Water Research Project, biennial report for the years
1979-1980. W. Baacom (ed.) Long Beach, Ca. 77-91.
Winant, C.D. 1983. Longshore coherence of currents on the
southern California shelf during summer. Journal of
Physical Oceanography 13:54-64.
Wlnzler and Kelly. 1977. Chapter 5- In Vol. 1. Summary of
knowledge of the central and northern California coastal
zone and offshore areas. Prepared for Bureau of Land
Management (Contract AA550-CT-6-57).
Word, J.Q. and A.J. Mearns. 1977. Bottom invertebrate
populations below 200 meters. Southern California Coastal
Water Research Project, annual report, 1977. W. Bascom
(ed.) El Segundo, Ca. 117*120.
. 1978. The 60-meter control survey. Southern
California Coastal Water Research Project, annual report,
1978. W. Bascom (ed.) El Segundo, CA. 41-56.
. 1979. 60-meter control survey off southern
California. Southern California Coastal Water Research
Project, annual report, 1979* W. Bascom (ed.) El Segundo,
CA.
-------
- 7-12 -
. 1977. Better control stations: -the 60-neter
survey. Southern California Coastal Water Research Project,
annual report, 1977. V. Bascom (ed.) El Segundo, CA.
Vord, J.Q., B.L. Meyers and A.J. Hearns. 1977. Animals that
are indicators of marine pollution. Southern California
Coastal Water Research Project, annual report, 1977 W.
Bascoo (ed.) El Segundo, CA.
Wright, T.D. 1978. Aquatic dredged material disposal imports.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Waterways Experiment Station,
Vicksburg, MS.
Young, D.R., and R. Gossett. 1980. Chlorinated benzenes in
sediments and organisms. Southern California Coastal Water
Research Project, biennial report 1979-1980. W. Bascom
(ed.) Long Beach, CA. 181-195.
-------
-------
-------
DRAFT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
FINAL DESIGNATION OF A
DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE OFF
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA
Los Angeles County, California
APPENDIX A
REPORT OF FIELD SURVEY
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
-------
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
APPENDIX A - REPORT OF FIELD SURVEY
A. 1 INTRODUCTION , A-1
A.2 METHODS A-1
A.2.1 Field Methods A-1
A.2.2 Laboratory Methods A-7
A.2.3 Quality Control A-12
A.2.4 Statistical Analysis A-17
A.3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION. A-18
A.3.1 Physical Oceanography A-18
A.3*2 Chemistry A-26
A.3.3 Benthic Infauna A-43
A.3.^ Demersal Fish and Epibenthic Macroinvertebrates...J A-73
A.4 REFERENCES A-88
LIST OF FIGURES
Number
A-1 Sampling Stations at Disposal and Reference Sites... A-2
A-2 Temperature Profiles at LA2 Disposal Site, Station 1........ A-21
A-3 Dissolved Oxygen Profiles at LA2 Disposal Site, Station 1... A-24
A-4 Salinity Profiles at Site LA2 A-25
A-5 Mean and 95 Percent Confidence Intervals for Trace Sediment
Concentration (Dry Wt.) at LA2 Disposal and Reference
Sites A-29
A-6 Mean and 95 Percent Confidence Intervals for Tissue Trace
Metal Concentrations (Dry Wt.) Sicyonla ingentls, Survey 1
LA2 A-31
A-7 Mean and 95 percent Confidence Intervals for Tissue Trace
Metal Concentrations (Dry Wt.) Citharichthys aordidus,
Survey 2 LA2 A-35
A-8 Mean and 95 Percent Confidence Intervals for Tissue Trace
Metal Concentrations (Dry Wt.) Lypoaetta exilis, Survey 3
LA2 A-36
11
-------
TABLE OF CONTESTS (Continued)
LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)
Page
A-9 Mean and 95 Percent Confidence Intervals for Oil and
Grease Sediment Concentration (Dry Wt.) at LA2 Disposal
and Reference Sites A-37
A-10 Mean Values and 95 Percent Confidence Intervals for
Infaunal Community Indices, Survey 1 A-45
A-11 Mean Values and 95 Percent Confidence Intervals at Each
Sampling Station for_Infaunal Community Indices* Survey 2... A-U6
A-12 Mean Values and 95 Percent Confidence Intervals at Each
Sampling Station for Infaunal Community Indices, Survey 3... A-47
A-13 Mean Value at Each Sampling Station for Infaunal Community
Indices, Survey 4 A-48
A-14 Mean Number of Individuals per Replicate Sample at
Reference- and Disposal-Site Sampling Locations. A-59
A-15 Numerical Classification Results. Dendrograms Depict the
Similarity in Infaunal Community Structure Among Eight
Stations A-60
LIST OF TABLES
A-1 Sampling and Collection Dates, LA 2 Disposal and Reference
Sites A-3
A-2 Isobaths (in meters) of Otter Trawl Sampling Stations at
the LA 2 Disposal and Reference Sites A-5
A-3 Summary of the Number of Otter Trawl Collections Obtained
at Each Station for Each Site A-5
A-4 Depth Variation (M) of Sampling Stations A-14
A-5 Detectability Limits for the Various Heavy Metals and
Organic Compounds Analyzed A-16
A-6 Temperature Profiling Data at Site LA 2 A-19
A-7 Dissolved Oxygen Profiling Data at Site LA 2 A-22
A-8 pH Profiles at Site LA 2 A-27
ill
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Page
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
A-9 Transmissivity Profile at Site LA 2 A-28
A-10 Comparison of tbe Range and Median of Selected Pesticide
and PCB Concentrations in Sediments .* A-39
A-11 Comparison of the Range of Selected Pesticide and PCB
Concentrations in Tissues A-11
A-12 Metals Concentrations at Control Sites in the Southern
California Bight A-42
A-13 Number of Taxa Accounting for a Fixed Proportion of the
Total Individuals at a Sampling Station.. A-49
A-14 Results of ANOVA Tests for Differences in the Mean Value
of Biological-Community Variables A-51
A-15 One-Way ANOVA Results for Comparison of Mean Values for
Species Diversity and Species Richness Among Disposal Site
Stations 1, 3, and 5. A-52
A-16 One-Way ANOVA Results for Comparison of the Mean Number of
Taxa and Number of Individuals Among Disposal Site Stations
1, 3, and 5 A-53
A-17 Comparison of the Mean Value for Shannon-Weaver Diversity
of Replicate Samples (0.1/m2) at the Reference- and
Disposal-Site Sampling Locations A-55
A-18 Comparison of the Mean Number of Taxa per Replicate Sample
at the Reference- and Disposal-Site Sampling Locations. A-56
A-19 Comparison of the Mean Number of Individuals per Replicate
Sample at the Reference- and Disposal-Site Sampling
Locations A-57
A-20 Mean Values of Number of Taxa, Number of Individuals and
Shannon-Weaver Diversity for Individual Replicate Samples
(0.1/m2) A-58
A-21 Summary of Sediment Grain-Size Analysis. Survey 1 >. A-62
A-22 Summary of Sediment Grain-Size Analysis. Survey 2 A-63
A-23 Summary of Sediment Grain-Size Analysis. Survey 3. A-64
iv
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Page
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
A-2H Summary of Sediment Grain-Size Analysis. Survey U A-65
A-25 Grain-Size Analysis - Sediment Weight Distribution by
Phi Intervals. Survey 1 A-67
A-26 Grain-Size Analysis - Sediment Weight Distribution by
Phi Intervals. Survey 2 A-68
A-27 Grain-Size Analysis - Sediment Weight Distribution by
Phi Intervals. Survey 3 A-69
A-28 Grain-Size Analysis - Sediment Weight Distribution by
Phi Intervals. Survey 1 A-70
A-29 Pearson Product-Moment Correlation Coefficients Between
Selected Infaunal Community Indices and Physical-Chemical
Variables A-71
A-30 Summary of Fish Caught in Otter Trawls at LA 2 Disposal
and Reference Sites A-75
A-31 Summary of Macrolnvertebrates in Otter Trawls from LA 2
Disposal and Deference Sites A-81
-------
APPENDIX A - REPORT OF FIELD SURVEY
A.1 INTRODUCTION
A.1.1 A field survey was conducted to collect site-specific biological,
sedliaentological, physical and chemical data for the LA 2 (Los Angeles)
interim dredged material disposal site, and at a nearby reference site between
August 1983 and May 198M. The purpose of the survey was to provide data with
which to assess the effects of past disposal at the site, and to provide a
baseline for comparison with results of future site monitoring to assess the
effects of continued use of the site. Field sample collection and laboratory
analyses were conducted by KCB Applied Environmental Sciences. Data analysis
and interpretation were performed by Tetra Tech, Inc.
A.1.2 The biological aspects of the survey focused on benthlc resources -
benthic infauna, demersal fishes, and epibenthic macroinvertebrates. Demersal
fishes and epibenthic organisms were collected primarily to obtain selected
species for tissue chemical analysis, and secondarily to provide a general
characterization of the fish and macroinvertebrate communities. To
characterize the physical and chemical environment, samples were taken to
determine grain size of bottom sediments and suspended particle loads in the
water column. In addition, vertical profiles of water temperature, salinity,
dissolved oxygen, hydrogen ion concentration (pH), and transmissivity were
gathered. Chemical analyses included trace metals; chlorinated hydrocarbons;
and petroleum hydrocarbons in sediment, fish and invertebrate tissues, and the
water column.
A.2 METHODS ..
A.2.1. FIELD METHODS. The LA 2 interim disposal site (Figure A-1) is located
approximately six miles offshore Los Angeles Harbor. Field surveys were
conducted during August and December 1983, February/March and April/May
1984. Dates of sampling for each task were given in Table A-1, and the number
and arrangement of stations are presented in Figure A-1. All sampling was
performed aboard the R/V Westwind. a U8 ft. vessel equipped with a Raynav 6000
LORAN C navigation system which electronically interfaces with the autopilot
and an SPSCO navigational plotter. Sampling gear was deployed and retrieved
with a stern-mounted MAW frame.
A.2.1.1 Benthic Infauna
A.2.1.1.1 Infaunal samples were taken at five (5) stations at the disposal
site and at three (3) stations at the reference site (Figure A-1). At the
disposal site, three stations were located across the bathymetric gradient
(one at the center of the site, one 1,000 yards (914 meters) inshore, and one
1,000 yards (91^ m) offshore from the center) to characterize changes in the
benthic fauna over the depth range encompassed in the site boundaries (1,000
yard (911 m) radius from center). Two additional stations were located at the
upcoast and downcoast boundaries of the site, at the same depth as the center
stations, to characterize spatial variation within the site at a constant
depth. The three stations at the reference site were located across the
A-1
-------
KEY:
• BENTHIC STATION
A BENTHIC & PHYSICAL OCEANOGRAPHIC STATION
• 8ENTHIC, PHYSICAL & CHEMICAL OCEANOGRAPHIC STATION
—— OTTER TRAWL TRACK
(A)
(S)
LOS ANGELES ^ HARBOR
HARBO
<• HUNTINGTON
V. BEACH
FIGURE A-1 SAMPLING STATIONS AT DISPOSAL AND REFERENCE SITES
A-2
-------
TABLE A-1. SAMPLING AND COLLECTION DATES, LA 2 DISPOSAL AND
REFERENCE SITES1
Benthic Infauna
Sediment, and
Sediment Chemistry
Fish and Macro-
invertebrates and
Tissue Chemistry
Physical Oceanographic
and Water Column
Chemi stry
17-18 August 1983
August Survey
16, 31 August 1983
30 August 1983
15-16 Decmeber 1983
December Survey
5 December 1983
16 December 1983
7*8 March-1984
March Survey
5 March -1984
9 March 1984
5, 11 May 1984
April Survey
9 April 1984
7 May 1984
In the August, December, and March surveys grab samples were taken after
trawl surveys. Even though every means possible was used to locate the
sampling stations, it is highly improbable to exactly land a bottom grab in
the same location as the bottom trawl due to the extreme depth of the site
and site relocation techniques; therefore, trawling surveys performed prior
to grab samples had no effect on grab sample data.
A-3
-------
bathymetric gradient at the same depths as the three cross-gradient stations
at the disposal site. Four replicate grab samples were taken at each station
during each of the four sampling episodes.
A.2.1.1.2 Infaunal samples were collected with a Van Veen grab. The gear
used was chain-rigged, as recommended by Word (1976), and sampled a 0.1 m
surface area. To obtain paired biological and sediment samples, grabs were
deployed in tandem at opposite ends of a 1 m bar when weather and sea state
permitted.
A.2.1.1.3 Collected sediments were screened in running seawater through a
sequence of screens (5.0 mm, 1.0 mm, and 0.5 mm) on a high volume, low
pressure wash box developed by Dr. A.G. Carey of Orange State University. -
Retained sediments and organisms were rinsed into shallow plastic pans and
anesthetized in 6 percent magnesium chloride solution for 1/2 to 3/1 hour,
then bagged, labeled, and fixed in 10 percent seawter formalin solution.
A.2.1.2 Demersal Fishes and Macroinvertebrates/Tissue Collections
A.2.1.2.1 Demersal fishes and epibenthic macroinvertebrates were sampled at
the same intervals as infauna at the designated LA 2 interim disposal site and
reference site. Samples dates and the location of sampling stations are
presented in Table A-1 and Figure A-1 respectively.
A.2.1.2.2 Five (5) stations were established at the disposal site, with three
(3) stations at the reference site. Otter trawl stations at the disposal and
reference sites were located along isobaths that correspond to the depths of --.
infaunal sampling stations (Table A-2). /
A.2.1.2.3 Sampling was conducted using a 7.6 m semi-balloon otter trawl
net. All tows were made in the daytime between 0800-1800 hours. Gear
deployment, towing scope (i.e., cable to depth ratio) and gear retrieval were
rigorously standardized to ensure that all samples were obtained in an
identical manner. All tows were made at a vessel speed of 2.0-2.5 knots for a
duration of 5 minutes except during the initial survey when 10 minute tows
were conducted. These initial 10 minute trawl periods resulted in the loss of
five otter trawl nets. Subsequently, the tow time was reduced to 5 minutes to
minimize survey interruptions and costs. The purpose and quality of the
program were not Impacted significantly by the decreased trawl periods because
the primary purpose was to collect tissue for chemical analysis; the number of
shrimp and fish collected was, however, probably lower than it might have been
with 10 minutes tows. (The lack of tissue data reported from some surveys
results from discovering procedural errors in chemical analyses and having
insufficient tissue remaining for reanalysis.) Towing speeds were monitored
by means of a deck readout flowmeter. Towing distances were estimated by
determining the distance between the starting and ending point of each trawl
track using LORAN C coordinates for these points.
A.2.1.2.3.1 The 7.6 m semi-balloon otter trawl is the standard sized net used
in southern Californian benthic fish surveys. Its dimensions are very similar
to those used by Moore et al. (1982) to sample fish populations in the Bight
between 1977 and 1982. A comparison of net dimensions indicated that similar
segments of the demersal fish and epibenthic populations would be collected. . •-,
...J
-------
TABLE A-2. ISOBATHS (IN METERS) OF OTTER TRAWL SAMPLING STATIONS AT THE
LA2 DISPOSAL AND REFERENCE SITES
Site
Disposal
— — .
Reference
Station
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
4
Isobath (m)
198
129
198
312
198
198
129
312
TABLE A-3. SUMMARY OF THE NUMBER OF OTTER TRAWL COLLECTIONS OBTAINED
AT EACH STATION FOR EACH SITE
Season
Site
LA2 Disposal
LA2 Reference
Total
Station
1
2
3
4
5
1 .
2
4
wi
2
2
2
2
2
Iff
2
2
2
7
16
Sp2
2
2
2
2
2
TO
2
2
2
7
16
Su3
2
2
2
2
2
W
2
2
2
7
16
P*
2
2
2
2
2
TO
2
2
2
7
16
Total
8 ""
8
8
8
8-
W
8
8
8
7*
64
1 = Winter, 2= Spring, 3 = Summer, 4 = Fall
A-5
-------
A.2.1.2.4 Two replicate samples were obtained at each station during each
sampling period, which resulted in the quarterly collection of 16 otter trawl
samples. A total of 64 otter trawl collections were obtained over the one
year study period. A summary of the number of otter trawl collections
obtained at each site and station is presented in Table A-3.
A.2.1.2.5 All otter trawl samples were processed in the field. All collected
fishes and macroinvertebrates were identified and enumerated by species.
Identification of fishes was based on Miller and Lea (1972). Standard lengths
were obtained for 125 individuals per fish species in each replicate sample.
Aggregate weights were also obtained for each fish species in each replicate
sample. Macroinvertebrates were identified using current taxonomic
information. Fish or invertebrates whose field identification was uncertain
were returned to the laboratory for further examination. Vounher specimens
for all fish and macrolnvertebrate species were retained, and preserved for
delivery to the Corps of Engineers.
A.2.1.2.6 Target fish and macrolnvertebrate species for tissue contaminant
analysis were selected on the basis of having sufficient tissue from the
desired species and the close association of those species with the dump-site
and reference areas. During the August 1983 survey, a sanddab (C1tharlohyths
sordidus), the slender sole (Lyopsetta exilis), and a shrimp (Sioyonla
ingentis) satisfied these requirements. The Pacific sanddab (Citharlohyths
sordidus) and the rldgeback prawn (Slcyonia ingentis) were selected at this
time. During subsequent surveys, Cltharlehthys sordidus was not captured in
sufficient quantities for analysis, and the slender sole (Lyopsetta exills)
was substituted for tissue analyses. The slender sole was selected because it
shares a common habitat with the Pacific sanddab, and because it was one of
the few fish caught In sufficient quantities to perform tissue analyses.
Feeding data are not available for the slender sole. Other soles from the
area have been shown to have diets similar to that of the sanddab in that they
are both benthic feeders preying primarily on polychaetes and crustaceans
(Manzanilla and Cross, 1982). The soles' diets differ from that of the
sanddab in containing a slightly higher percentage of burrowing and tublcalous
forms, and somewhat varying proportions of polychaetes and crustaceans.
Overall, the substitution of slender sole for Pacific sanddab Is reasonable.
A.2.1.2.7 Tissue Preparation. Flat fish (i.e., slender sole and Pacific
sanddab) and shrimp were removed from the otter trawl collections and
composited by species. Approximately 50 grams of tissue from each species
were obtained when sufficient tissue was available* The composite technique
was required, as neither individual flatfish or shrimp provided sufficient
tissue to perform all required analyses. The fish were wrapped in labeled,
hexane-rinsed, oven-dried aluminum foil and immediately frozen. At dockside,
the frozen samples were transferred into insulated 60 liter ice chests with
the frozen commercial coolant "Blue Ice" to prevent thawing during transport
to the laboratory.
A.2.1.3 Sedimentologioal and Chemical Collections. Four replicate sediment
samples were collected at each of the infaunal stations (Figure A-1). Each
replicate was collected Independently using a 0.1 m -modified Tan Teen
sampler. Geological and sediment chemistry samples were taken within the same
A-6
-------
sediment grab. A vertical core was taken in the grab centerline for grain
size analysis, transferred to a pre-labeled bag, and stored at ambient
temperature until return to the laboratory. Samples for both organic and
inorganic chemistry analyses were collected through the access panels of the
grab and from the upper 5 cm of the middle of the grab sample to reduce
disturbance and the possibility of sample contamination. Samples were
collected in glass jars and preserved, when necessary, following the procedues
outlined in Plumb,(1981). Collected samples were placed under refrigeration
and returned to the laboratory where they were stored at 4°C until analysis.
A.2.1.H Physical and ChemicalPceanographic Sampling
A.2.1.4,1 The oceanographic sampling plan was divided into physical
oceanographic and- chemical oceanographic components. Physical oceanographic
sampling included water column profiles of temperature (°C), salinity (o/oo),
hydrogen ion concentration (pH)» dissolved oxygen (mg/1), and water
transmissivity (*). The sampling profile was designed to be sufficient to
define the major pycnoclines in the water column and to satisfy requirements
of biological and physical modeling analyses. Physical oceanographic
measurements were conducted at two stations at each of the sampling sites.
Profiles were recorded at the center station at the disposal site as well as
the Innermost (closest to shore) station. All parameters were recorded on
descending and ascending phaes of the profile. A Market «ark 71 Water Quality
Profiler, coupled with a Market Mark VIII XMS Transmissometer with a 0.25 m
light path-length was used to collect the data. Physical oceanographic data
were recorded onto data sheets in the field. Instruments were calibrated
versus factory standards prior to and on return from each sampling cruise.
A.2.1.1.2 Chemical oceanographic collections included suspended solids
(mg/1), heavy metals (ppm), total chlorinated hydrocarbons (ppm), poly-
chlorinated biphenyls (ppm), pecticides (ppm), and petroleum hydrocarbons (oil
and grease; ppm). Three replicate samples were collected from a depth of 5 m
below the surface and 5 m above the bottom at the center of each dumpsite and
reference site using an array of Van Dorn water bottles. Collection, storage,
and preservation of water samples followed EPA (1979a, b) and Plumb (1981)
procedures* > ;
A.2.2 LABORATORY METHODS
A.2.2.1 Benthic Infauna
i
A.2.2.1.1 After return to the laboratory and within four days of collection,
samples were logged in, rinsed with tap water on a 0.5 mm screen to remove
residual formalin, and transferred to 70 percent isopropyl alcohol for
preservation. Each of the three sample fractions from each replicate was
separately sorted under a low-power dissecting microscope to recover organisms
from retained sediments and debris* If the replicate was one pre-selected at
random for quality control re-sort, sediments and debris from each fraction
were saved for examination by the sorting supervisor. Organisms removed from
each fraction were separated into categories to facilitate later
Identification. Specimens from the 5.0 mm and 1.0 mm fractions were combined
prior to identification.
A-7
-------
A.2.2.1.2 Sorted sample fractions were signed out by systematists and
analyzed under dissecting and compound microscopes to identify and count the
organisms they contained. Specimens of all phyla other than Protista and
Nematoda were identified to lowest possible taxon (usually species) and
recorded on laboratory bench sheets. Samples of species which could not be
identified with certainty by MBC staff were submitted to outside specialists
for identification or confirmation. Species for which no description could be
found in existing literature were given provisional names (i.e., Bruzelia
sp. B). Specimens of all specific level taxa were removed from the samples,
labeled, and placed in a voucher museum to be maintained at the COB Los
Angeles District Office.
A.2.2.1.3 Data on the bench sheets was reviewed by the supervising
systematist for completeness and accuracy. A backup file copy of each
corrected sheet was made and the original forwarded for data analysis.
A.2.2.1.4 Fishes and Macrolnvertebrates. Fishes and macroinvertebrate .
specimens which were not field identifiable were returned to the laboratory
for positive identification. Samples of species which would not be identified
with certainty by MBC staff were submitted to outside specialists for
identification or confirmation. Field data were reviewed by supervising fish
and invertebrate systematists for completeness and accuracy, copied, and the
original forwarded for data analysis.
A.2.2.1.5 Sedlaentology. Sand grain size distributions of each sediment
sample were determined using a settling tube very similar to that described by
Gibbs (197*0. The device used a differential transformer to sense the load
exerted by sediment as it settled and accumulated in a pan near the base of
the settling column. The strip chart output from the load sensor was
converted to a cumulative frequency plot of the sizes of the particles
constituting the samples. The results of the modified settling tube are the
same as expected from Gibbs (1974) methodology* The silt-clay distribution
was determined by hydrometer method based on the settling rates of different
sized particles and fluid density (ASTM, 1963). Gravel fraction grain size
distribution was determined on standard sieves using a shaker table.
A.2.2.1.6 Grain sizes were reported in phi units (phi = Iog2 diameter in
millimeters). The range of phi sizes examined were approximately -5 phi to
15 phi. Grain size data were converted to the cumulative frequency of the
occurrence of grain size classes. Statistical parameters (mean grain size,
•sorting, skewness, and kurtosis) of each grain size distribution were
determined using moment measures (Krumbein and PettiJohn, 1938; Sharp and Fan,
1973).
A.2.2.1.7 Sedimentologlcal data were reviewed by the sediment laboratory
supervisor and project manager, copied, and sent through data processing and
computer analysis. Hard copy and computer tapes were forwarded for data
analysis.
A-8
-------
A.2.2.2 Sediment Chemistry
A.2.2.2.1 Inorganic Chemistry. Sediment samples were analyzed for arsenic,
cadmium, chronium, copper, mercury, lead, and zinc. Metals other than arsenic
and mercury were digested using the HNO, digestion procedure described by
Plumb (1981). Samples were filtered-to remove mineral residue and the final
volume adjusted to a convenient size which eased handling but did not effect
results. The sample was subsequently analyzed on a Varian 875 atomic
absorption spectrophotometer.
A.2.2.2.2 Sediment samples for mercury analyses were analyzed using a cold
vapor technique. Digestion of the sediment was accomplished using the
protocol described by Plumb (1981). The procedure consisted of an initial
digestion using concentrated HjSOjj and HNO? followed by the addition of
potassium permanganate and potassium persulfate. Analyses were performed on a
Varian 875 atomic abosrption spectrophotometer fitted with a mercury vapor
generator.
A.2.2.2.3 Arsenic samples were also prepared according to the procedure of
Plumb (1981). Weighed sediment samples were fused with potassium pyrosulfate
at 320°C for 15 minutes. The cooled, sample was dissolved in deionized
distilled water and concentrated HC1. Analysis was performed on a Varian 875
atomic absorption spectrophotometer fitted with an arsenic generator.
A.2.2.2.1} Organic Chemistry. Sediment samples were analyzed for petroleum
hydrocarbons (grease and oils), total chlorinated hydrocarbons,
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and pesticides (including chlorinated
hydrocarbons). Petroleum hydrocarbons were analyzed in sediment samples
according to Method 403E in Standard Methods for Examination of Water and
Wastewater (APHA, 1980). Weighed samples were extracted with
trichlorotrifluoroethane and the extract combined. Extracts were then treated
with silica gel to remove biogenic material, filtered into tared flasks and
the halogenated solvent removed in vacu. The residue was determined by weight
difference.
A.2.2.2.5 .Sediment samples for chlorinated hydrocarbons were analyzed
according to the protocol described in Plumb (1981). Weighed sediment samples
were extracted for 18 hours in Soxhlet apparatus with acetone/hexane. The
resultant extract was reduced to 30 ml in vacu. The extract was then
subjected to Florisil partitioning. Fraction I was eluted from the Florisll
column using 6 percent diethal ether/hexane while fraction II was eluted with
15 percent diethal ether/hexane. Analysis was performed on a Varian Series
6000 gas chromatograph.
A.2.2.2.6 An interferance peak was recorded near the retention time of
Arochlor 1242 in all sediment analyses, so that it was not possible to
quantify the exact amount of this compound present. All values for Arochlor
1242 were therefore reported as maximum concentrations.
A.2.2.2.6.1 The interference peak was found when running Arochlor 1242
analyses. The interference was caused by a contaminant that was found in
extraction thimbles and other apparatus used in the extraction. It was
A-9
-------
corrected by running a blank and subtracting it out. Because the interference
falls on the largest peak produced by Arochlor 1242, another correction method
can be to use a smaller Arochlor 12^2 peak; however, this is often more
difficult because the smaller peaks overlap with other Arochlors.
A.2.2.3 Tissue Chemistry.
A.2.2.3.1 Tissue Preparation. Upon arrival at the laboratory, tissue samples
were logged in and held at a constant -18°C until analysis was begun.
A.2.2.3.2 All dissections were performed in a clean environment on tempered
plate glass, measuring 50 x 30 x 0.3 cm, to prevent contamination of the
tissue samples. Utensils and working surfaces were initially washed with
detergent, rinsed at least three times with tap water and once with distilled
water, and rerinsed with a 20 percent nitric acid solution, tap water and
distilled water prior to each dissection. To minimize possible contamination
during muscle tissue dissections, laboratory personnel wore surgical latex
gloves when handling samples.
A.2.2.3«3 Standard length measurements for the fish and carapace length
measurements for the shrimp were taken to the nearest millimeter prior to
dissection of the muscle tissue. Whole body weights to the nearest hundredth
of a gram for both the fish and shrimp were also recorded. All specimens were
then scrubbed and rinsed in deionized water to remove any sediment particles
that may have been attached to the tissue surface.
A.2.2.3.4 Fish dissection was initiated with a cross-cut incision using a
stainless steel scapel with a carbon steel blade. The incision penetrated 1
to 2 mm through the skin beginning at a point approximately in line with the
end of the operculum at the base of the dorsal fin and extended posteriorly
past the pectoral fin, terminating at the base of the anal fin. For larger
fish in the sample, a second incision was made along the vertebral column
adjacent to the lateral line. The skin layer was then peeled away from the
underlying muscle tissue using stainless steel forceps and the exposed tissue
was scraped away using plain glass microscope slides. The procedure was
repeated on the underside of the fish and the total tissue amount from each
fish was combined and weighed to the nearest hundredth (0.01) of a gram.
Between 10 and 20 fish were needed from each station to obtain sufficient
tissue for analysis.
A.2.2.3.5 Shrimp (Slcyonia ingentis) muscle tissue dissections were initiated
by removing the tail section of the thorax. The surrounding carapace was
peeled away from the muscle tissue, and the digestive gut was removed by
making an incision along the dorsal surface with a glass microscope slide.
The gut and its contents were washed away with deionized water.. Prepared
tissue was weighed to the nearest hundredth of a gram. The procedure was
repeated with sufficient shrimp to form a composite sample of approximately
50 grams per station.
A.2.2.3.6 After the fish and shrimp tissues were composited, each sample was
divided into approximately two equal parts. One-half was placed in labeled
plastic "Whirl-pak" bags for heavy metal analysis, while the other half was
A-10
-------
wrapped in hexane-rinsed, oven-dried aluminum foil for hydrocarbon analysis.
both samples were then immediately frozen for later chemical analyses.
A.2.2.3.7 Inorganic Chemistry. Tissue samples for trace metal analyses
(arsenic, cadmium, copper, chronmium, mercury, lead, zinc) were homogenized,
weighed, and subjected to digestion procedures outlined for sediments.
Samples for all analyses but arsenic were subjected to nitric acid
digestion. Samples for mercury analyses were subjected to further digestion
using the potassium permanganate/hydroxylamine-sulfate procedure, while
samples for arsenic analysis were fused with potassium pyrosulfate and then
dissolved in deionized distilled water and concentrated HC1. Analyses were
performed on a Varian 875 atomic absorption spectrophotometer following the
procedures outlined for sediments. In cases where sufficient tissue for
separate digestion and analysis for arsenic, mercury, and the remaining heavy
metals were not available, the priority for analysis was: (1) the suite of
metals Cd, Cu, Cr, Pb, and Zn; (2) Hg; and (3) As.
A.2.2.3.8 Organic Chemistry. Tissue samples for petroleum hydrocarbons were
analyzed according to the method of Warner (1976). The sample was first
homogenized, weighed, and subjected to a sodium-hydroxide digestion to
saponify any biogenic lipids. The sample was subsequently extracted with
ether several times. The ether layers were combined, dried with magnesium
sulfate, and concentrated to 1.0 ml. The concentrated ether extract was then
subjected to column chromatography using silica gel as described in the
procedure. The fractions were then concentrated to 1 ml, charged with an
internal standard (nonane), and analyzed on a Varian 6000 gas chromatograph.
A.2.2.3-9 Tissue samples were analyzed for total chlorinated hydrocarbons
(including pesticides and PCBs) according to the methods described by the EPA
(1980). The micro-method consisted of homogenizing a 0.5. g sample of tissue
and extracting with acetonitrile several times. The acetonitrile extracts
were combined, diluted with water and extracted with hexane (3 x 50 ml). The
hexane extracts were combined, dried, and concentrated to a final volume of
2 ml. The concentrated extract was further purified by elution through a
small Florisil column with 1 percent methanol in hexane. Two fractions were
collected, concentrated to 1 ml and injected onto the gas chromatography unit
for analysis.
A.2.2.^1 Physical and Chemical Oceanographic Analysis
A.2.2.1J.1 Physical oceanographic parameters (dissolved oxygen, pH,
temperature, salinity, and transmissivity) were recorded onto computer coding
sheets in the field. Chemical oceanographic water samples were analyzed for
total suspended solids, heavy metals, chlorinated hydrocarbons, total
chlorinated hydrocarbons, PCBs, and petroleum hydrocarbons (grease and oils).
A.2.2.4.2 Total suspended solids in the seawater were determined using Method
290C in Standard Methods for Examination of Water and Wastewater (APHA,
1980). One liter of seawater was filtered through a standard glass-fiber
filter. The retaining material and the filter were dried at 103° to 105°c.
The weight of the suspended material was then determined and expressed as
rag/1.
A-11
-------
A.2.2.1.3 Analyses of seawater for heavy metals were performed following the
methods described in Plumb (1981). For all metals except mercury and arsenic,
a chelation-extraction procedure was performed on 100 ml of water samples.
The extract was then analyzed on a Varian 875 instrument.
A.2.2.4.M Arsenic levels in the seawater samples were determined using the
arsine generation method. Samples were treated with concentrated nitric acid
and the resultant solution analyzed on a Varian 875 Instrument fitted with an
arsine generator.
A.2.2.U.5 Chlorinated hydrocarbons in seawater samples were extracted using
the methylene chlorlde/hexane (HC/hexane) procedures outlined in Plumb
(1981). One liter of seawater was extracted using HC/hexane. The extract was
concentrated and subjected to partitioning using a Plorisil column. Fraction
I was eluted with 6 percent ether in petroleum ether. Fraction IX was eluted
with 15 percent diethylether in petroleum ether.
A.2.2.4.6 Petroleum hydrocarbon (grease and oil) levels in seawater were
determined following Method 503A of Methods for Examination of Water and
Wastewater (APHA, 1980). Oil and grease were extracted from 1 liter water
samples using trichlorotrifluoroethane. The weight of the grease and oil was
then determined and the results reported in ppm (mg/1).
A.2.3 QUALITY CONTROL
A.2.3.1 Benthic Infauna
A.2.3*1*1 Quality control procedures start with appropriate design and
execution of field sampling, including appropriate station location and
relocation.
A.2.3*1.2 Rationale for location of reference site was selection of a site as
far as possible from the disposal site in a direction opposite the general net
bottom current flow. This flow was expected to be northwesterly (Hendricks,
1983&), thus reference site was selected to the southeast of the disposal site
(Figure A-1). In the Los Angeles area southeast of LA 2 a number of other
inputs which introduce particulate matter and/or anthropogenic contaminants
are present. Care was taken in siting the reference area to minimize the
potential effect of other extraneous inputs. The site chosen as a reference
for the LA 2 site Included supported a biota which was reportedly similar to
that expected from the site (Hartman, 1955) and was as far to the southeast of
LA 2 along the appropriate depth contours as possible without entering the
Influence of the Orange County Sanitation District wastefield (Hendricks,
1983b).
A.2.3*1.3 The accuracy of station location with the LORAN C system in use on
the sampling vessel is estimated at ±150 ft. or better. Repeatability
(station relocation) is estimated at a minimum of ±50 ft. In practice,
accuracy and repeatability of station location were Increased by application
of a maximum acceptable depth variation of ±3 m about the station mean
depth. This was attainable at most stations, but not at the deepest station
at the LA 2 disposal site. The bottom at this station consisted of a steep
A-12 '
-------
shale slope with pockets and ledges containing accumulated soft sediments. A
wider depth variation was allowed there because of the patchlness of
appropriate bottom type and the Inability of the grab to bite on a shale
substrate. Data on sample depth variability ware provided In Table A-4.
Loran C coordinates were established during the initial August survey. During
subsequent surveys, the position of the sampling station was reestablished
according to the known coordinates. Tidal variation was accounted for in the
selection of each station during each survey, given the tidal condition at the
time of sampling.
A.2.3.1.U Criteria for acceptance of a grab sample as adequate were: (1)
penetration depth of at least 6 cm at the shallowest part of the sample; and
(2) lack of evidence of "washing" or selective removal of fine materials from
the grab during retrieval. Although samples of 6 cm penetration were taken
and use, they are only kept where grab success was low and greater penetration
could not be achieved without excessive effort. Average penetration depth was
11.3±2.5 cm. Penetration depths measurements were made from the grab top to
the sediment surface using a pre-calibrated rule prepared to read distance to
grab bottom. Readings were taken along the grab mldline from near the grab
center prior to removal of the sample from the grab.
A.2.3.1.5 Acceptance or rejection of grab samples was performed by the deck
supervisor for each watch. Data relating to each gear drop were recorded on a
benthic grab collection record. Acquisition of other samples for sediment
chemistry, organic carbon, and grain size was also supervised and verified by
the deck watch supervisor.
A.2.3.1.6 All samples were checked In when they arrived at the laboratory
immediately following field surveys. All samples were inventoried for damage
or abnormalities, and checked for proper fixation and storage. A pre-
selection random 15 percent of the sorted sample residue were examined by a
sorting supervisor for animals passed over during sorting, and a running
efficiency percentage for each sorter maintained. Sorters having efficiencies
of less than 95 percent were replaced. Any additional specimens recovered
during re-sort were combined with those from the first sort prior to
identification. All identifications were double-checked by the supervising
systematist. Questionable or uncertain identifications were confirmed or
corrected by the following outside specialists: M. Bergan - Holothuroidea, J.
Ljubenkov - Cnidarla, B. Myers - Ostracoda, P. Scott - Bivalvia, J. Shrake -
Aplacophora, B. Thompson - Echulra and Sipuncula, S. Williams - Polychaeta.
A.2.3.1.7 The supervising systematist checked the identifications for
consistency and spelling. Voucher type specimens of undescrlbed species were
prepared for reference to ensure consistency throughout the entire program.
A.2.3.2 Fishes. Quality control of the deployment and retrieval phase of
each otter trawl sample was the responsibility of the field team leader. Re
verified proper otter trawl deployment at the beginning of each tow. The
retrieval phase was also closely scrutinized by the field team leader to
determine if any twists in the otter boards had occurred during the descent.
A-13
-------
TABLE A-4. DEPTH VARIATION (M) OF SAMPLING STATIONS*
Station
Aug
Sampling Month
Dec Feb/Mar
Apr/May
Disposal
1
2
3
4
5
195-204
129-134
197-199
307-315
197-201
192-210
127-130
198-206
298-313
193-201
196-200
124-131
196-197
307-315
196-200
198-200
127-131
195-197
307-313
198-200
199+4.2 m
12972.1 m
198+3.0 n»
308+5.2 m
199+2.2 m
Reference
1
2
4
195-197
130-133
303-307
197-198
127-129
304-308
196-497.
125-130
307-312
195-.197
126-131
307-309
197+.98 m
129+2.2 m
307+2.5 m
* Unadjusted for tidal variations.
A-14
-------
If incorrectly deployed, the sample was discarded and the station resampled.
Presence of net tears or large debris which reduced the efficiency of the
trawl also resulted in station resampling.
A.2.3.3 Chemistry
A.2.3.3.1 All collection and handling procedures were performed in the field
in accordance with Army Corps/EPA recommended procedures (Plumb, 1981; EPA
1979a, b; 1980). Collected samples were stored in the appropriate containers
and marked with an identification number. These numbers were recorded on
field collection sheets and returned to the laboratory with the samples.
During the initial storage and transport to the laboratory, water and sediment
samples were stored at approximately 4°C and tissue samples were frozen.
A.2.3.3.2 Upon receipt at the laboratory, all samples were separated by type
and catalogued; against an enclosed packing list and the field data sheets.
Containers were inspected for integrity and numbers or labels for clarity and
any deviations: noted. A systematic custodianship of samples was undertaken to
ensure the samples were not lost or misplaced. Samples were then stored in
accordance with Army Corps/EPA procedures (EPA, 1979, b; I960) until analysis.
A.2.3.3.3 A checkout-from-storage procedure was instituted to track all
samples during the various inhouse analysis procedures or when samples were
shipped to outside contractors. Inhouse analysts signed for all samples on
removal from storage and noted all procedures used for Individual samples
during that analysis* Samples delivered to outside contractors were signed
for on an individual basis.
A.2.3.3.4 Sample preparation for each analysis was performed following the
methods outlined in Plumb (1981), EPA (1979a, b; 1980) or Standard Methods for
the Examination of Water and Wastewater (APHA, 1980). All sample preparation
was conducted with clean glassware that was: (1) washed in Alkonox and rinsed
in distilled water; (2) rinsed with methanol and then acetone before storage
at 100°C overnight; (3) capped with kiln-fired and solvent-rinsed aluminum
foil during storage; and, (4) rinsed with additional solvent immediately
before use. The highest grade solvents were used in sample preparation to
reduce the possibility of contamination. The precision of sample preparation
procedures was checked by analyzing spiked samples and sample preparation
blanks. All sample containers were properly marked with an identification
number during all preparation procedures to ensure that sample contamination
or loss did not occur.
A.2.3.3.5 All analyses were performed following accepted methods outlined in
the publications previously cited. Detection limits for each analysis are
presented In Table A-5. All analyses were performed within the prescribed
time limits. Randomly selected samples were sent to an outside laboratory for
inter-laboratory comparison of results.
A.2.3.3.6 The reliability and precision of all instrumentation was checked
dally. Both analytical blanks and standards were analyzed with actual samples
under normal operating conditions. The results of all analyses were recorded
in a project log and maintained in a fireproof file.
A-15
-------
TABLE A-5, DETECTABILITY LIMITS FOR THE VARIOUS HEAVY METALS AMD
ORGANIC COMPOUNDS ANALYZED
Detectability
Metals Limits (ppm)
Organic*
Detectability
Limits (ppm)
Arsenic
Cadi urn
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Zinc
0.002
0.002
0.02
0.01
0.05
0.0002
0.005
O'P-DDE
O'P-DDE
O'P-DDD
O'P-DDD
O'P-DDT
P'P-DDT
PCB 1242
PCB 1254 '
PCB 1260
A-BCH
Llndane
B-BHC
Heptachl or
Epoxl de-
Petroleum Hydrocarbons*
0.001
0.002
0.001
0.002
0.001
0.002
0.007
0.013
0.034
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.1
* Oil and grease.
A-16
-------
A.2.3-3.7 All stock standards were prepared on a bi-yearly basis using the
highest grade solvents, metals, and organics. Standards for chlorinated
hydrocarbon analysis were permanently sealed. All standards were stored under
refrigeration and protected from ultraviolet light.
A.2.3.3.8 Data developed from the various analyses were examined by both
inhouse personnel and outside consultants. Any data point or group of data
points that were questinable were re-analyzed to ensure their accuracy.
A.2.M STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
A.2.4.1 Study Design The sampling stations at LA 2 are shown in Figure
A-1. Five sampling locations were selected from within the disposal site.
Three stations were located on the bathymetrlo centerllne of the site and a
single station was positioned on both the inshore and offshore nominal edges
of the site, this configuration forms ajsross pattern with a station located
in the center of the site and transect of three stations both longshore and
across the bathymetric grandient. Three stations were selected within the
reference site. These were located across the bathymetric gradient at the
same depth as the stations within the disposal site. This sampling layout
provided reference statins for comparison of physical-chemical and biological
variables at three depths within the disposal site* The three.stations
located along the same isobath within the disposal site provided data for
making similar comparisons within the disposal area.
A.2.U.2 Statistical Analysis. Statistical comparisons of sediment chemistry
and biological variables were conducted with the data from Individual
surveys. The analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to test for statistical
significance of observed differences in selected variables both between sites
and within the disposal site. Three ANOVA models were used. First, the
fixed-effects one-way ANOVA was used to make comparisons among stations from
both the reference and disposal sites. Second, the one-way design was used to
test for differences in selected variables at the three longshore stations
(station 1,3, and 5) within the disposal site. Third, a two-way ANOVA was
used to test simultaneously for differences due to depth and for differences
between the reference and disposal sites.
A.2.1.2.1 The underlying assumptions of the ANOVA can be stated as follows:
1. The measures of the dependent variable at each station are normally
distributed;
2. The distribution of these measures In each treatment population has
the same variance (i.e., variances are homogeneous), and
3. The errors associated with all measurements are statistically
Independent (i.e., no spatial or temporal correlation among samples).
However, simulation studies have shown that the effects of moderate
heterogeneity and deviations from normality have a minimal effect on Type I
error probabilities (Glass jjt_ £l_., 1972; Grieb, 1984). For all analysis
presented in this report tests for homogeneity of variance were conducted. In
A-17
-------
those data sets which violated the assumption of homogeneity of variance,
transformations were applied to reduce the degree of heterogeneity. All
statistical comparisons were made with data collected during a single survey,
and based on the sampling procedures spatial correlation was assumped to be
minimal.
A2.1.2.2 In all one-way analyses in which a significant test result was
obtained, an a posteriori multiple-range test was performed to identify where
differences were located among group means. The Statistical Package for the
Social Sciences (SPSS; Nie jt. .§_!., 1975) was used for all ANOVA tests.
A.2.4.2.3 Numercial classification methods (Clifford and Stephenson, 1975)
were used in the analysis of the benthic infauna data (Section A.3.3).
Numercial classification encompasses a wide cariety of techniques that can be
used to distinguish groups of entities (e.g., samplejsites) according to
similarity of attributes (e.g., species). Using these techniques, the
similarity of group commonly used similarity coefficients such as Jaccard,
Bray-Curtis, Canberra metric, and Euclidean distance. Classification begins
with the compilation of matrix of similarity coefficients (index scores)
between all possible pairs of entities. One of a variety of available
clustering methods is then used to form associations among entities and to.
graphically display groups of entities with similar attributes.
A.2.4.2.4 For all numercial classification analyses presented in this report
the Bray-Curtis Dissimilarity Index (Boesch, 1977) was used to develop the
initial matrix of similarity, and the unweighted pair-group method using
arithmetic averages (Sneath and Skoal, 1973) was used as the clustering
•streatgy. The numercial classification analysis were conducted using a
computer program developed by Tetra Tech, Inc. Many of the programs in this
package are modified versions of those presented by Andenberg (1972).
A.3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
A.3.1 PHYSICAL OCEANOGRAPHY. This section describes the results of the
vertical profiles taken at each station measuring temperature, dissolved
oxygen, conductivity (salinity), pH, and transparency (transmissivity), All
water profile data are compiled in Table B-1 in Appendix B.
A.3.1.1 Temperature. Historical data sources indicated that the sea surface
temperature in the Southern California Bight normally ranges from 12.5°C to
19.5°C (Maloney and Chan, 197*0 with extreme ranges from 11°C to 23°C (BLK,
1978). These extreme temperatures are normally attributable to the local
climate (SCCWRP, 1973). Maximum sea surface temperatures are experienced
during the summer and fall (August - September) with minimum temperatures
during the winter (December to February). Data collected during this survey
agree well with these historical sources.
Table A-6 presents the profiling data for the surface, 100 meters, and bottom
at each station for the four surveys. Maximum sea surface temperatures were
recorded during Survey 1 (August 1983) and ranged from 19«9°C to 21.5°c.
Minimum surface temperatures occurred during Survey 2 (December) and ranged
A-18
-------
TABLE A-6. TEMPERATURE PROFILING DATA AT SITE LA2
Dashes indicate no data.
Disposal
Station 1 Station 2
Reference
Station 1 Station 2
Survey 1 (Aug)
Surface 21.5°C 21.2°C
100 m 12.0 11.8
Bottom 10.1 11.0
20.9°C
11.5
10.4
19.9°C
Survey 2 (Dec)
Surface 14.6
100 m 9.8
Bottom 7.6
13.8
10.0
9.7
14.8
10.2
7.9
14.7
10.3
10.1
Survey 3 (Mar)
Surface 15.6
100 m 11.3
Bottom ' 9.0
15.5
11.0
10.0
15.6
11.1
8.9
16.1
10.7
10.4
Survey 4 (May),
Surface 16.5
100 m 9.8
Bottom 8.4
17.1
9.8
9.0
16.9
9.7
8.5
17.1
9.8
9.6
A-19
-------
from 13.8°C to 14.8°C. The yearly range in surface temperatures was between
5.2°C and 7.5°C, depending on the station, which compares favorably with that
expected normally.
The temperatures at 100 m showed a much smaller range, as expected (BLM,
1978), with temperatures from 9.7°C to 12.0°C. Maximum temperatures were
again found in August (Survey 1) but, apart from Disposal Site, Station 1,
minimum temperatures at 100 m were found during Survey 4 (May 1981). Bottom
temperatures showed a wider range between stations due to the differences in
depth of each station. Yearly fluctuations at each station compared with
those experienced at the 100 m depth (2-3°C). Maximum bottom temperatures
were experienced during Survey 1 (August) while minimum temperatures were
found during Survey 2 at the deeper stations (Disposal and Reference Stations
1) and during survey 4 at the shallower stations. These data indicate that
the fluctuations in temperature at depths in excess of 100 m are controlled to
a greater extent by water mass movements and seasonal currents then by the
climatic heating and cooling which control temperatures in the upper 100 m
(Chan, 1974).
Figure A-2 shows the temperature profiles for each survey collected at the
Disposal Site, Station 1. These profiles are typical of those collected at
all stations for both sites. The seasonal thermocllne between 10 and 50
meters created by summertime heating of the surface layer (Allan Hancock
Foundation, 1965) is well developed during Survey 1. Surveys 2 and 3 show the
absence of any thermocllne with steady decrease in temperature from surface to
bottom. Survey 4 (May 1984) taken at the beginning of the warm season, shows
the Initial stages of development of the seasonal thermocline.
No significant differences between the disposal or reference sites or between
stations at each site in either temperatures, temperature ranges, or seasonal
fluctuations were noted.
A.3.1.2 Dissolved Oxygen. The Allan Hancock Foundation (1965) found that
dissolved oxygen levels in the California Bight are dependent on temperature,
salinity, and biological processes such as repiration, photosynthesis, and
oxidation. Dissolved oxygen values are normally near or at saturation levels
at the surface with generally declining values with depth.
Table A-7 shows the dissolved oxygen levels at the surface, 100 m, and bottom
for the four surveys in this study. Surface values ranged from 7.5 ppm to
13.2 ppm. Values to 100 m depths showed the concentration decline mentioned
above with values ranging from 4.3 ppm to 9.2 ppm. At the bottom values
showed a wider range (2.9 to 8.9 ppm) due to the variance in water depth at
each station, but continued to show declining concentration with depth.
Excluding Survey 2 (December 1983) the ranges become even smaller with surface
values from 7.5 to 9.9 ppm, 100 m values of 4.3 ppm to 6.6 ppm, and bottom
values of 2.9 to 5.7 ppm. Although no consistent differences were found
between sites or between stations at each site, Survey 2 did record
significantly higher values than the other three surveys.
A-20
-------
50
CL
Ul
O
100
150
2001-
TEMPERATURE (°C)
10 15
20
25
SURVEY 1 (AUG 19831
— — — SURVEY 2 (DEC 1983>
"• •" "•—• SURVEY 3
-------
TABLE A-7. DISSOLVED OXYGEN PROFILING DATA AT SITE LA2
Dashes Indicate no data.
Disposal
Station 1 Station 2
Reference
Station 1 Station 2
Survey 1 (Aug)
Surface 8.3
100 m 6.6
Bottom 4.4
8.8
6.5
5.7
7.5
5.9
4.4
7.8
Survey 2 (Dec)
Surface 12.3
100 m 8.5
Bottom 7.8
12.6
8.6
8.3
13.2
9.1
5.7
13.2
9.2
8.9
Survey 3 (Mar)
Surface 8.2
100 m 5.7
Bottom 4.1
8.3
6.1
5.3
9.9
5.8
4.1
9.1
5.3
4.9
Survey 4 (May)
Surface 8.8
100 m 4.3
Bottom 2.9
9.0
4.4
3.5
9.2
4.8
3.5
8.3
4.6
4.4
A-22
-------
Figure A-3 shows the dissolved oxygen profiles at the LA2 Disposal Site,
Station 1, for each of the four surveys. Once again, the decline of
concentration with depth can be noted, as can a subsurface maximum between
10 m and 50 m for Surveys 1 (August 1983) and 4 (May 1984). Reid (1962) found
that this subsurface maximum developed in the late spring and continued
through the fall. He concluded that this maximum was tied to the seasonal
variation in temperature in the upper layers and was found when the seasonal
thermocline was present. This seasonal subsurface maximum is a phenomenon
found throughout much of the Pacific Ocean and is thought to be associated
with entrapment of oxygen by the seasonal thermocline and not with increased
photosynthetio activity.
As with the temperature data, no significant differences In dissolved oxygen
concentrations were found between sites or between stations at each site.
Values recorded fell within those described by historical sources. (Maloney
and Chan, 1974; Chan, 1974? AHF, 1965.)
A.3.1.3 Salinity. Salinity measurements were taken through the use of a
conductivity probe which measures the electrical resistivity of the water.
Salinity values were then calculated from the conductivity and temperature
values using a standard conversion algorithm.
Salinity values in the Southern California Bight normally range from
approximately 32.9°/oo to 34.5°/oo (AHF, 19655). Seasonal salinity variations
are generally small with highest salinities recorded during the summer and
fall. This has been attributed to the increased precipitation during the
winter and the greater evaporation during the summer.
Figure A-4 presents representative salinity profiles for the LA 2 Disposal and
Reference Sites. Additional salinity data were presented in Table 8-1 In
Appendix B. Wider range in salinity was recorded during these four surveys
than has been historically reported. In particular, salinities calculated for
Surveys 2 and 4 are unexpectedly low, raising some question about the
reliability of these values. Questionable data have not been presented in the
profile plots but all but the most questionable data have been included in
Table B-1. Coastal waters are generally susceptible to salinity fluctuations
in the surface layer caused by excessive runoff, and the particularly wet
November and December experienced during 1983 may explain the decreased
salinity values experienced during Survey 2. However, this effect cannot
explain the Survey 4 results, and moreover is not normally seen below the
upper 10-20 m. Very small errors in calibrating or reading the conductivity
sensor can lead to calculated salinity fluctuations of 1-2 ppt and is a more
likely explanation for the decreased salinities experienced throughout the
water column on some surveys.
Figure A-4 shows a slight salinity increase with depth and is due to the
mixing of more saline bottom waters with the surface water (Maloney and Chan,
1974).
No significant salinity differences were noted between sites or between
stations at each site.
A-23
-------
DISSOLVED OXYGEN
-------
SALINITY (ppt)
32
50
i
too
ISO
33
1 • • • "i
34
SURVEY 3. DISPOSAL SITE. ST.1
• — — SURVEY 3, REFERENCE SITE. ST.1
200 L-
FIGURE A-4 SALINITY PROFILES AT SITE LA2
A-25
-------
A.3.1.2* Hydrogen Ion Concentration (pH). All values of pH at site LA2 fell
within the range of 7.0 to 8.6. This compares favorably with the range of 7.5
to 8.6 described by the Allan Hancock Foundation report (1965). A slight
decrease in pH with depth was also noted.
Table A-8 shows the pH profile data at the Disposal and Reference Sites, for
each survey. These data show the pH decrease with depth and the lack of
significant pH differences between sites or stations at each site.
Because the ocean is a buffered solution, a very narrow range of pH is to be
expected. Large transient shifts in pH are usually associated with regions
with sewage outfalls or with transient events such as ocean disposal.
A.3.1.5 Transparency. Transparency measurements were made using a standard
transmissometer. Percent transmissivity was recorded and values for the
surface, 100 m, and bottom were presented in Table A-9. Values averaged 96.4
percent and showed little variation with depth. No significant differences
between the disposal or reference sites or between stations at each site were
noted.
A.3.2 CHEMISTRY. Results from the analyses of sediments, tissues, and the
water column are tabulated at the end of this section (Table B-2). These
analyses include metals, oil and grease, pesticides, and PCBs from the LA2
disposal and reference sites. Detection limits are included for each
parameter analyzed. Statistical analyses were conducted on at least one
survey from each site, for each parameter, to test significance of the results
when obvious trends existed. . Analyses were performed as needed on selected
surveys when no trends were-obvious to facilitate interpretation. Three types
of ANOVA were conducted on the chemistry data:
1. One-way ANOVA with all stations from a selected site included.
2. One-way ANOVA with only stations 1, 3, and 5 from the disposal site.
3. Two-way ANOVA with stations 1, 2, and U from both the disposal site
-and the reference site. The two factors are station and type (reference or
disposal).
Multiple Range Tests were conducted for those one-way analyses with
significant {^C=0.05) test results. A test for honogeneity of variance was
run for each analysis. The purpose of these tests is described in the data
analysis section (A.2.M). Interpretation of these results is presented below.
A.3.2.1 Metals
A.3.2.1.1 Sediments. Sediment acld-extractable metals concentrations for
all four surveys are compared in Figure A-5 for the disposal and reference
sites. Inspection of Figure A-5 indicates that, for each metal, levels at
the disposal stations are higher than those at the reference stations.
Significant ANOVA results (o^=0.05) for the heterogeneity among stations and
between the disposal and reference sites support this conclusion. The
increase in the variance among replicates at disposal site stations over the
A-26
-------
TABLE A-8. pH PROFILES AT SITE LA2
Dashes Indicate no data due to equipment malfunction
realized after return from study sites.
01sposal
Station 1 Station 2
Reference
! Station 1 Station 2
Survey 1 (Aug)
Surface 8.2
100 m 8.1
Bottom 8.1
8.3
8.0
8.0
8.2
8.2
8.2
8.2
Survey 2 (Dec)
Surface 8.1
100 m 8.0
Bottom 7.8
8.3
7.5
7.3
8.3
7.9
7.4
8.3
7.7
7.4
Survey 3 (Mar)
Surface 8.5
100 m 8.2
Bottom 7.6
8.5
8.2
7.8
8.5
7.2
8.5
7.0
7.0
Survey 4 (May)
Surface
100 m
Bottom
7.8
7.8
8.1
7.6
7.5
8.4
A-27
-------
TABLE A-9. TRAMSMISSIVITY PROFILE AT SITE LA2
Disposal
Station 1 Station 2
Reference
Station 1 Station 2
Survey 1 (Aug)
Surface 8.95
100 m 94.7
Bottom 99.2
94.8%
96.9
98.5
85.4%
94.0
99.9
97.3%
94.8
Survey 3 (Mar)
Surface 98.3
100 m 97.7
Bottom 100.0
100.0
97.3
98.6
99.4
97.4
99.4
96.1
97.8
97.9
Survey 4 (May)
Surface 98.2
100 m 96.4
Bottom 93.0
100.0
92.6
87.4
97.5
96.4
90.2
96.2
97.4
95.1
A-28
-------
01 —i
Hdd - 3IN3SW
Udd - WIIWOW
10
IU
K
O
A-29
-------
2 £ w 2
to u. »« _.
•• iu «n o
o oc o> z
O
ui
i
2 5
Wdd -
8 S !S S
Hdd - H3dd03
Ul
ee
o
A-30
-------
to
MT>
-fj
l*f m
i
3
\i
\
I I
\
o
ill
i
8 S S 9
Wdd • QV31
ui
A-31
-------
S
« a
I
M
g
K
^
§1111
Wdd- 3NIZ
£
O
A-32
-------
reference stations suggests spotty concentrations of the metals at the
disposal site. Significant differences among disposal site stations 1, 3, and
5 along the 170 m isobath (to remove depth trends) is additional evidence of
the spotty contamination of metals at the dump site. There are no depth
trends in the metal concentrations at either site. Station 3 approaches
reference levels for each metal. This is the upcurrent station for most of
the year and appears not to receive much input from dumping in comparison to
natural input.
A.3.2.1.2 Water Column. Metals were undetected in the water column analyses
at the detection limits listed in Table A-5. Therefore, a comparison of
disposal and reference site water quality conditions cannot be made.
A.3.2.1.3 Tissues. One epibenthic macroinvertebrate and two demersal fish
species were used for tissue analyses. The ridgeback prawn (Sieyonla
ingentis) was sampled during all four surveys. The Pacific sanddab
CCitharichthys sordidus) was collected during the first two surveys, but was
replaced with the slender sole (Lyopsetta exilis) for the final two surveys
because low catches of the former did not yield enough tissue.for analyses.
Figures A-6, A-7 and A-8 are representative plots of metal concentrations for
all three species. All tissue metals data are not plotted in order to
conserve space, but these data are presented in Table B-2. Tissue metals
analyses are incomplete in some surveys due to insufficient tissue quantities.
The lack of sufficient tissue results in many cases from discovering faulty
analytical techniques; insufficient tissue remained to allow complete analysis
of chlorinated hydrocarbons, PCBs and metals. For each of the three species,
there is no significant difference (C^O.05) in the concentration of any metal
in the muscle tissue between dump and reference sites. Tissue metal
concentrations were consistently higher in the slender sole than in the
Pacific sanddab. This may be due to dietary or physiological differences
between these two species.
A.3.2.2 Oil and Grease
A.3*2.2.1 Sediments. Oil and grease analyses were, conducted on sediment
samples from Surveys 2 through H. Samples were, not collected for analyses
during the first survey. Besults of these analyses for the disposal and
reference sites are plotted in Figure A-9. Mean values of the control sites
were compared in a one-way ANOVA test and the values for Survey 2 are
significantly different (^CsO.05) from the Surveys 3 and %. Therefore, Survey
2 will not be included in the interpretation of the results.
A.3.2.2.2 Oil and grease concentrations at the LA2 disposal site are
significantly elevated (o<.=0.05) over reference values. Differences in the
elevation at individual stations at the disposal site among surveys suggests
spot contamination of the site. Significant test results (0^=0.05) for
heterogeneity among disposal Stations 1, 3, and 5 supports this conclusion.
Disposal Station 5 is not significantly elevated in either survey and the
spatial extent of oil and grease contamination may not reach the deeper
portion of the site. However, because of the spotty nature of the other
stations, elevated levels at Station 5 cannot be ruled out.
A-33
-------
&
urn
s
?
•.•>£
oooooooo
*.•.£
8
1
«
«^
si
3
o o
OOOOOOOOO
< «"
? o
Ul -*
at >
U m
M
ui ca
2 ">
» •**
o i
ik %
tu >
Q
-------
c
•
n
•
• f
« f
r |q
t
i
1.2
1.0
0.8
OA<
0.4
4
1
r
_ _ * * r
n B rh mi L
D Dumpttt*
UiiJ Ri1^ 9f9nC9 Jtt*
4
li
i| 1 o 1 pii|
ARSaiCCAr) CAPMUHCCd) CWOWIUMCCr)
7
J *
n
o ''
» (. 4
« (»
COPPER (Cu)
LEAOCPb)
o
• 40
• P
* f 30
r M
t 20
i
• 10
n
2HCCZn)
FIGURE A>7 MEAN AND 95% CONFIDENCE INTERVALS FOR TISSUE TRACE METAL
CONCENTRATIONS ( DRY WT. \jCITHARICHTHYSSOROtDUS. SURVEY 2 LA2
. jr. ..?--•
A-35
-------
I-1
1 £
D
§ S S
8
KI
e
Q
e
o « c
n
n
o
O.OL r
0-a.E
III
S
O III
il
m wj
i 3
K «**
£5
III *•
i —
i i
2 >
S g
s 5
S »
<
ui O
'
^
ui
S
o
vZ
§•
-------
Z 250-1
i .
% 200-
| 150-
_j 100 -^
3
g " soH
S o
SURVEY 2
...
<^
-•—-•— -• - -;- •-
\ X
DISPOSAL SITE I 95X CONFIDENCE INTERVALS
REFERENCE SITE • NO DATA
SURVEY 3
SURVEY 4
123
STATION
FIGURE A9. MEAN AND 95% CONFIDENCE INTERVALS FOR OIL AND GREASE SEDIMENT
CONCENTRATION (DRY WT) AT LA 2 DISPOSAL AND REFERENCE SITES.
CONNECTING LINES ARE TO ENHANCE READABILITY AND DO NOT INDICATE
TRENDS.
A-37
-------
A.3.2,2.3 Water Column. Oil and grease concentrations in the water column
are below the detection limit of 0.1 mg/1 for all samples. Therefore, a
comparison of disposal and reference site water quality conditions cannot be
made.
A.3.2.2.H Tissues. Oil and grease analyses were not conducted on all tissue
samples because of limited sample size. Concentrations were below the
detection limit of 1 mg/kg for those samples analyzed, and the data are not
included in the tables accompanying this section. Therefore, a comparison of
disposal and reference site tissue oil and grease concentrations cannot be
made.
A.3.2.3 Chlorinated Hydrocarbons
A.3.2.3.1 Sediments. Pesticides and PCBs were analyzed at all sediment
stations. All pesticides other than DDTs were undetected at a detection limtt~~
of 1 ug/kg (dry weight) in all samples. Ranges and median concentrations of
selected DDTs and PCBs at the disposal site are compared with the reference
site in Table A-10. DDT isomers that are excluded do not exhibit any
significant elevation over reference values. Surveys 1 and 2 are not included
in Table A-10 because an analytical fraction of the sample extrace sometimes
containing DDTs and PCBs was not analyzed and added into the totals in Surveys
1 and 2. The procedural error, involved the extraction for four different
chlorinated hydrocarbon fractions: (1) hexane fraction, (2) 6 percent ether
in hexane, (3) 15 percent ether in hexane and (4) chloroform. Compounds in
fractions 1 and 2 do not clearly separate and the chemical technician
misidentified the compounds based on their respective retention times. This
likely resulted in an underestimation of values for the first two surveys.
After the second survey, it was discovered that adding in this additional
fraction resulted in a more reliable analysis for these contaminants, and this
procedure was followed for Surveys 3 and 4. Limiting the discussion to the
data from Survey 3 and 4 results in a clearer picture of the pattern of
chlorinated hydrocarbon levels in the study sites. Chlorinated hydrocarbon
data from Surveys 1 and 2 are included in Table B-2.
A.3.2.3.2 The LA2 disposal site exhibits .significantly elevated levels
(0^=0.05) of p,p'-DDE, p,p'-DDD, and p,p'-DDT in the sediments. The o,p
isomer concentrations are not elevated over reference levels. p,p-DDT
concentrations also significantly increase (oC.sO.05) with depth in Survey 4.
The reason for this is not clear, and could be an artifact of Survey 4 data.
The compound's metabolites, p,p'-DDD- and p,p'-DDE, do not exhibit similar
depth trends although DDT is usually rapidly metabolized in the marine
environment (Callahan et al. 1979).
A.3.2.3.3 Table A-6 also compares PCB levels at the disposal and reference .
sites. Median PCB 1260 values are higher at the disposal site than at the
reference site. PCB 1260 concentrations are significantly elevated (e^=0.05)
over reference values in both Survey 3 and 4. The large ranges suggest spot
contamination of the disposal site. A significant test (o<=0.05) for
heterogeneity among stations supports this conclusion. There is no depth
trend in the distribution of PCB 1260.
A-38
-------
TABLE A-10. COMPARISON OF THE RANGE AND MEDIAN OF SELECTED
PESTICIDE AND PCB CONCENTRATIONS IN SEDIMENTS9
Parameter
(ug/kg
dry wt)
P.P'-DDE ;
p.p'-DDD
p.p'-DDT
PCB 1242
PCB 1254
PCB 1260
Site
D
Ref
0
Ref
D
Ref
D
Ref
D
Ref
D
Ref
Survey 3
3-660 (38)b
8-24 (13)
3-40 (16)
2-12 (2)
2-25 (3)
2-8 (2)
7-590 (27)
7-90 (8)
13-420 (13)
13-15 (13)
34-140 (51)
34-170 (34)
Survey 4
7-97 (50)
24-37 (28)
2-62 (14)
2-5 (2)
2-20 (4)
2 (2)
7-570 (48)
7-150 (48) .
13-190 (16)
13-17 (13)
34-330 (56)
34 (34)
a Data for surveys 1 and 2 are excluded because of analytical procedure
differences (see text for discussion).
b Median values given 1n parentheses.
D » Disposal site.
Ref = Reference site.
A-39
-------
A.3.2.3.4 The ranges and median concentrations of PCB 12^2 and PCB 125U at
the disposal site suggest elevation of these PCB mixtures over reference
values. However, these data must be interpreted with caution because of the
considerable interference observed in the chromatogaphic region used to
quantitate these Arochlors (particularly in the region used for PCB 1212).
These interferences result from elemental sulfur and from additional coeluting
organic residues.
A.3.2.3-5 Water Column. All pesticides and PCBs were undetected in the water
column at the detection limits stated in Table A-5, so that comparisons cannot
be made of the disposal and reference sites water quality conditions.
A.3.2.3.6 Tissues. Interpretation of DDT and PCB results in tissues is
limited to the last two surveys for the same reasons as those stated above in
the sediment section. The limited amount of tissue resulting in few
duplicates per site, combined with the high variability of the results, is
expected to result in no significant separation of these parameters from
reference levels. A more detailed analyses than was possible under the
limitations of this study may be able to determine trends. Table A-11 lists
the range of selected pesticide and PCB concentrations in tissues from the
disposal site stations 2 and 5. Median values were not calculated because of
the limited number of samples at each site.
A.3.2.3.7 There is little or no evidence of a consistent elevation of DDT
isomer or PCB tissue concentrations at the disposal site relative to
concentrations observed at the reference site. Based on the tissue data
summarized in Table A-11, there are no readily apparent trends in
concentrations; apparent elevations of pesticides and PCBs vary among surveys,
and among samples within each survey. The highest values (17^0 ug/kg dry
weight) in individual tissue samples are often, but not always, observed at
the disposal sites. The significance of these apparent elevations is
uncertain because of the smaller number of successful analyses at the
reference site (1 to at most 3 samples per survey).
A.3.2.3.8 Natural variability in the tissue concentrations of chlorinated
hydrocarbons, may result from (1) exposure to any of the other contaminated
areas within the southern California Bight (discussed in the body of the IIS)
or (2) feeding habits of individuals (e.g., a marked preference of sediment-
ingesting polychaetes over mysid shrimp) or (3) differential ability of
individuals to metabolize contaminants (Jeff Cross, SCCWRP, pers. comm., 30
Sept. 85). In addition, although standard analytical techniques were used,
there is not adequate data to quantify analytical variability, so that no firm
conclusions can be made regarding natural variability.
A.3-2.4 Comparison to Literature Values
A.3.2.4.1 One check on the quality of the data is to compare reference site
values with those in the literature. Table A-12 lists metal concentrations
for sediments, water column, and tissues at control sites from various studies
A-40
-------
TABLE A-ll. COMPARISON OF THE RANGE OF SELECTED PESTICIDE AND
PCB CONCENTRATIONS IN TISSUES*
Parameter
(ug/kg
dry wt)
p.p'-DDE
o,p'-DOT
p.p'-DDT
PCB 1242
PCB 1254
Species
S
L
S
L
S
L
S
L
S
L :
Site
D
Ref
D
Ref
D
Ref
D
Ref
D
Ref
D
Ref
D
Ref
0
Ref
D
Ref
D
Ref
Survey 3 Survey 4
270-1 ,740
65
430-950
260-540
1-21
1
1-48
1-22
2-15
2
2-17
8-14
3-43
3
3
3
130-260
6
6-190
6-92
360-860
350-640
180-240
130-370
8-22
4-22
7-30
1-8
6-12
3-17
3-19
2-19
3-85
5-21
3
3
6-200
6-66
6-45
6-51
a Survey 1
(see text
samples.
S •» Slcyoni
and 2 are excluded
for discussion).
a ingentis.
because of analytical procedure differences
PCB 1260 was undetected at 34 ug/kg In all
L s Lyopsetta exills.
D * Disposal site.
Ref = Reference site.
A-41
-------
O
to ~H CM m in O
v r-. to r- to IH
«• CM CO itf* CM tf>
^ fo • in en GO
o -^ o
o o ^
* •
o o
to
I
CM
u»
tn cn
o o
• •
O O
oo
• •
o o
§m
o
• •
00
o
LO
O
en CM CM CO O
LO CM «H *H r^ m
I I I I I I
ft CM r«- CM O tO
• • • CM
in CM to
o oo
* • *
000
o
v
CM
•
O
V
CC
LU
I/I
VI
** 3
I.
O
• Cn ~4 »H CO LO
Cn ^H »v> CM ••* CO
I I I I I I
••« * CO o cncM o in
••* tn <* to *e -*
1 I I I 1 I
ro *fir> ^r to o
•H CM • rO CM Ol
vo
o oo
o oo
* * *
O O CO
V
*4 CM
• •
oo
<*»
en
o
- s
O
«*>
o
cr»
-H o
— < -H O CM CM
I I I I I I
tO «~1 L! L t o> *9
.c a> o o> f &.
W S 3! = O CO
in
cn
co •
cnt-
co c +*
cn o 4>
•N VI
«?£
O A) O
O O S
cn
cn
O
IA
> -H
oco
o en A
CM -o
co « e
cn ^~
-------
in the southern California Bight. Metals concentrations in sediments from the
reference site are within the range of literature values. At the disposal'
site, however, the concentrations of Cd, Cu, Hg and Zu, and to a lesser extent
Cr and Pb, generally exceed literature values. Water column analyses
detection limits are all above reported metals concentrations in the
literature and it follows that no metals would be detected. Tissue
concentrations corrected to wet weight for the slender sole (Lyopsetta exilis)
(17.1% solids) and the Pacific sanddab (Citharichthys sordidus) {19.0* solids)
also compare favorably with published values; both range from less than, to
slightly greater than, the values listed in Table A-12. There are no reported
values in the literature for the ridgeback prawn (Sieyonia ingentis) or other
penaeid shrimp.
A.3.2.4.2 Information on pesticide and PC6 concentrations for control sites
in the southern California Bight is scarce. However, the limited published
values do compare with reference values in this study. Sediment
concentrations of <3 to 70 and <2 to UO ug/kg for the sums of DDT3 and PCBs,
respectively (Young and Gossett, 1980; Word and Mearns, 1979) bracket the
median sediment values for those parameters listed in Table A-10. The
exception is total PCBs, which exceeded literature ranges at some stations at
the disposal site. Ranges of 11 to 101 and 3 to 37 ug/kg wet weight for the
sums of DDTs and PCBs, respectively, were calculated for the slender 17.1
percent solid. These ranges are included in the ranges of 6 to 20 and 13 to
43 ug/kg wet weight for the sum of DDTs and PCBs respectively, reported by
Sherwood et al. (1980) for dover sole (Mierostomus paeifious) at a California
Bight control station. Literature data for the slender sole are not available
for direct comparison. There are no reported values in the literature for
ridgeback prawn. Values for the Pacific sanddab are not compared because of
questions about the data from Surveys 1 and 2 (A.3.2.3.1).
A.3.3 BENTHIC INFAUNA. All infauna data collected at the LA2 interim
disposal site and the corresponding reference area are presented in Appendix
Tables B-3A, B-3B, B-3C and B-3D. Each table summarizes the data collected in
one of the four field surveys. The abundance of individual taxa is presented
for each replicate sample. Additionally, calculated summary information such
as indices of diversity, the total number of taxa and total number of
individuals is presented for each replicate sample and for combined samples
within a station. A complete list of taxa identified in all four surveys is
presented in Appendix Table B-3E.
A.3.3.1 Data Analysis. The infaunal data were analyzed to provide
information on existing biological conditions and to determine the effect of
the disposal of dredged material on benthic communities at this interim
disposal site. Three sets of analyses were conducted. First, biological
community Indices such as diversity, number of taxa and number of individuals
were compared among sampling stations. Second, numerical classification
methods were used to examine the relationship among sampling stations in terms
of biological community structure. Third, the correlation between biological
and physical-chemical variables was evaluated. The focus of these analyses
was on the comparison of spatial differences within the disposal site and
between the disposal site and the reference stations. The results of these
analyses are provided below.
A-U3
-------
A.3.3«1.1 Community Indices. Four community indices were calculated for each
infaunal samples Shannon-Weaver Diversity (Shannon and Weaver, 19*W),
Margalef's Species Richness (Margalef, 1957), the total number of taxa and the
total number of individuals. Shannon-Weaver Diversity (Hf) and Species
Richness (D) were calculated as:
^^^^ n .t n _t
H> , -2jjp1og -jr-
D • S-i
where: In N
S s number of taxa
N = number of individuals
n1 = number of individuals in the Ith taxon
A.3.3.1.2 The mean value of these indices, calculated for each sampling
station, is plotted by survey in Figures A-10 - A-13. The mean values and 95
percent confidence intervals for each station were calculated from four
replicate samples. These graphical summaries provide a useful means for
comparison of the selected biological variables among collection areas
(disposal site versus reference site) and between stations. For example,
Stations 1, 2 and 1 are located at different depths, but each station is at
the same approximate depth at both the disposal and reference sites (see
Figure A-1).
A.3.3.1.3 As indicated in Figures A-10 - A-13, consisted differences were
observed'between the reference and disposal sites for the mean values of
diversity (H') and the number of individuals. The mean value of diversity
measured at stations in the reference area (Station 1,2 and 1) was greater
than or equal to the mean value measured at corresponding stations from the
disposal area in all but a single case. Differences in diversity were most
apparent in the first two surveys. The mean abundance of organisms at the
disposal site was greater than or equal to the mean abundance at the reference
site in all cases except Station 2 in Survey 3. For example, differences of a
factor of two were observed in the mean abundance of organisms between the
disposal and reference areas in Survey 2 (Figure A-11).
A.3.3.1.1 These differences in the diversity of organisms and the dominance
of individual taxa between the disposal- and reference-site stations are
demonstrated in Table A-13. The number of taxa accounting for a fixed
proportion of the total individuals at each sampling station is presented for
Survey 1. At the disposal-site stations, a fewer number of taxa accounted for
each selected proportion of the sample. Examination of the most abundant taxa
at each station Indicates that the dominant taxa were similar at both the
disposal- and reference-site sampling stations, but that these taxa exhibit a
greater degree of dominance within the disposal area.
A.3.3.1.5 Although consistent differences between the disposal and reference
sites were observed in the mean values of species richness and number of taxa
during the first sampling event, these differences were not persistent
throughout the four surveys.
A-UU
-------
in
tx
LU
•l
i-
STATION
STATION
I/I
O 5-
t
2
STATION
STATION
OReference Site Station
ADisposal Site Station
FIGURE A10. MEAN VALUES AND 95% CONFIDENCE INTERVALS FOR INFAUNAL
COMMUNITY INDICES. SURVEY 1. CONNECTING LINES ARE TO
ENHANCE READABILITY AND DO NOT INDICATE TRENDS.
A-45
-------
- 9 —
3C
I-
S-
-
s-
STRTIQN
STflTION
o 9*
UJ
1
11-
I
I
S
I
2
STRTION
STRTION
OReference Site Station
ADisposal Site Station
FIGURE All. MEAN VALUES AND 95% CONFIDENCE INTERVALS AT EACH SAMPLING
STATION FOR INFAUNAL COMMUNITY INDICES. SURVEY 2. CONNECTING
LINES ARE TO ENHANCE READABILITY AND DO NOT INDICATE TRENDS.
A-46'
-------
ts>
B-i
s-
8-
8-
23 4
STRTIDN
I
3
STflTION
— "i
S- 2-
u* „ _
1 2 3
STRTIDN
STflTION
OReference Site Station
^Disposal Site Station
FIGURE A12. MEAN VALUES AND 95% CONFIDENCE INTERVALS AT EACH SAMPLING
STATION FOR INFAUNALCOMMUNITY INDICES. SURVEYS. CONNECTING
LINES ARE TO ENHANCE READABILITY AND DO NOT INDICATE TRENDS.
A-4.7
-------
STRTION
-------
TABLE A-13. NUMBER OF TAXA ACCOUNTING FOR A FIXED PROPORTION OF THE TOTAL
INDIVIDUALS AT A SAMPLING STATION. Survey 1.
Station!
Dl
DZ
D3
04
D5
Rl
R2
R4
Proportion of Total
Individuals in Sample
0.50
4
3
4
5
2
9
8
7
0.60
6
6
7
7
3
13
11
11
0.75
13 '
13
15
13
6
25
19
.21
0.90
37
34
43
34
21
56
48
45
Five Most Abundant Taxa
Tharyx sp.
Spiophanes berkeleyorum
Mediomastus ambiseta
Tauberia gracilis
Axinopsida serricata
Tharyx sp.
S. bericeleyorum
IT. ambiseta "^
Pectinaria cal i form" ensi s
Decamastus gracilis
M. ambiseta
S\ berkei eyorum
Tharyx sp.
T. gracilis
E* 9rac1 ' 1 s
Tharyx sp.
A. serricata
H. ambTs"efa~
ChloeTa pfnnata
Nephtys cbrnuta rranciscana
S. beritel eyoruni
Tharyx sp.
D. gracilis
AY serricata
P. cal ifbrrii ensi s
M. ambiseta
'!>. FerTceTeyorum
T. gracilis
P". calfforTensts
Afflphiodia uriica
Ophiuroidea spp.
M. ambiseta
P'. call form ensi s
S. berkeleyorum
Tharyx sp.
M. ambiseta
IT. cornufa franciscana
T. gracilis
Mi nuspio cirri f era
Nepntys sp.
Station designation: D = Disposal site; R = Reference site.
A-49
-------
A.3.3.1.6 Examination of Figures A-10 - A-13 also indicates the effect of
depth on the mean values of all variables. At both the reference and disposal
sites, the minimum values for all variables were generally observed at the
deepest station (Station 4), which was located at approximately 310 m.
A.3.3.1.7 Observed differences in the four community indices were tested for
statistical significance. The results of two sets of analyses are described
below. First, the observed differences in community indices between Stations
1,3, and 5 within the disposal site were tested with the one-way ANOVA.
second, a two-way ANOVA was used to test simultaneously for differences due to
depth within sites and for differences in the mean value of community indices
between the reference and disposal sites. The results of these analyses are
summarized in Table A-14.
A.3.3.1.8 The results of the one-way ANOVA presented in Table A-14 indicate
the statistical significance of observed differences in the values of all four
community variables at Stations 1, 3 and 5 within the disposal site area.
Observed differences in the number of individuals were statistically
significant in all but one survey, and the values of species diversity, number
of taxa and species richness among the three stations were significantly
different in all four surveys.
A.3.3.1.9 In those cases in which a significant ANOVA test result was
obtained, an a posteriori multiple-range test was performed to Identify where
differences were located among the group means. The results of these tests
for difference in the mean values of community variables among disposal
Stations 1, 3 and 5 are presented in Tables A-15 and A-16. As indicated in
Table A-15 a similar pattern in the differences in mean values of species
diversity and species richness among stations was observed. Maximum values
were observed at Stations 1 and 3 (see Figure A-1), and minimum values were
always observed at Station 5. A similar pattern was observed for the mean
number of taxa reported from the different stations (Table A-16). Significant
differences in the mean number of taxa per replicate sample were observed in
all surveys. The minimum value always occurred at Station 5, and in the
majority of samples the maximum number of taxa was found at Station 1 in the
center of the disposal site. Generally, however, the mean values at Stations
1 and 3 were not significantly different.
A.3.3.1.10 the results of a posteriori tests for differences in the mean
values of number of individuals among disposal Stations 1, 3 and 5 are
presented in Table A-16. Statistically significant differences were observed
in three of the four surveys, but the pattern of these differences was not
consistent. The maximum number of individuals occurred at either Stations 1
or 2 in tiie first three surveys, and the values were approximately equal among
the three stations in the final survey.
A.3.3.1.11 The results of two-way ANOVA tests for differences in the
community indices due to depth and type of station (reference or disposal
site) are presented in Table A-14. These results reflect the differences
observed in the plots of these data (Figures A-10 - A-13). Mean values of all
four variables showed a significant differences associated with sampling depth
(130 to 310 m) and type of station. These analyses also indicate the
A-50
-------
TABLE A-14. RESULTS OF ANOVA TESTS FOR DIFFERENCES IN THE MEAN VALUE OF
BIOLOGICAL-COMMUNITY VARIABLES
SURVEY
1
2
3
4
VARIABLE.
Diversity (H1)
Species Richness (D)
No. of Taxa
No. of Individuals
Diversity (H1)
Species Richness (D)
No. of Taxa
No. of Individuals
Diversity (H1 )
Species Richness (D)
No. of Taxa
No. of Individuals
Diversity (H1)
Species Richness (D)
No. of Taxa
No. of Individuals
ONE-WAY ANOVA
(Location within Dumps ite)
' *1
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
n.s.2
TWO-WAY ANOVA
(Sot
Depth
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
rce of Variation)
Type
*
*
n.s.
*
*
*
n.s.
*
*
n.s.
n.s.
n.s.
*
*
n.s.
*
Depth x Type
n.s.
n.s.
n.s.
n.s.
*
*
*
n.s.
*
*
*
*
n.s.
*
*
*
1 Statistical test results significant at p = 0.05
2 Statistical test results not significant at p a 0.05
A-51
-------
TABLE A-1S. ONE-WAY ANOVA RESULTS FOR COMPARISON OF MEAN VALUES FOR SPECIES
DIVERSITY AND SPECIES RICHNESS AMONG DISPOSAL SITE STATIONS 1, 3, AND 5.
Values enclosed by the same symbol are not different by a multiple-range test.
Survey
Species Diversity
Station
I
4.52
4.67
'4.54
4.80
4.73
4.45
4.69
Survey
Species Richness
Station
1 3
8.21
8.94
8.35
9.22
8.16
8.64
9.24
10.25
A-52
-------
TABLE A-16. ONE-WAY ANOVA RESULTS FOR COMPARISON OF THE MEAN NUMBER
OF TAXA AND NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS AMONG DISPOSAL SITE STATIONS 1, 3
AND 5. Values enclosed by the same symbol are not different by a
multiple-range test.
Survey
Mean Number of Taxa/0.1
Station
5
1
3
76.2
93.2
.
Survey
1
2
3
4*
2
Mean Number of Individuals/0.1 m
Station
5 1 3
M33.0J 1038.2 (574. 7 J
1118.2 1149.0 (648. 5J
722.0 fs24.5j U27.7J
•\
1155.7 1154.5 1104.2
Differences among mean values not statistically significant.
A-53
-------
existence of depth X sample-type interaction. The observed interaction in
Surveys 2, 3 and 4 was due both to the relative magnitude of effects among
stations and to differences In the direction of effects at stations within the
two sampling areas.
A.3.3.1.12 Examples of the observed effects of sampling location and sample
depth indicated in the two-way ANOVA are presented in Tables A-17 - A-19. The
mean value of species diversity in samples at Stations 1, 2 and 4 within the
reference site is compared with the mean values observed at the corresponding
stations within the disposal area in Table A-17. Diversity at the reference
site was In all but a single case greater than the reported diversity from the
disposal area. Minimum diversity values were generally found at the deepest
stations at both sampling locations. The Interaction between sampling depth
and location observed in Surveys 2 and 3 (Table A-14) was due to the relative
magnitude of the effect at Station 4 (Surveys 2 and 3).
A.3.3.1.13 As shown in Table A-14 statistically significant differences
between the reference and disposal sites for the number of taxa per replicate
sample were not observed. The mean values for this variable which were
compared in the two-way ANOVAs are presented in Table A-18. The mean number
of taxa at the corresponding reference and disposal sites was similar.
However, statistically significant differences-due to sampling depth were
observed (Table A-14), and as shown in Table A-18 minimum values for both the
reference and disposal sites were observed at the deepest station (Station 4).
A.3.3*1*14 The results of the two-way ANOVA's indicate the existence of
significant differences In the mean abundance of organisms between the
reference and disposal sites in all four surveys (Table A-14). In three of
the four surveys, depth was shown to have a significant effect on the total
abundance of organisms* As shown In Table A-19 the mean number of individuals
at the disposal-site stations was greater than the number observed at the
reference-site stations. Similar to the relationship observed with the other
community variables, an Inverse relationship was found to exist between depth
and number of individual organisms* The data presented in Table A-20 are
plotted in Figure A-14. These figures indicate the consistent differences in
the mean number of individuals between the reference and disposal sites and
the decreased abundance at the deepest of.the three stations (Station 4).
Seasonal variability in the abundance of organisms was also evident. For all
three stations at both the reference and the disposal sites, the minimum
number of individuals was observed in the third survey which as conducted
during the period March 7-8, 1984.
A.3.3*1.15 Numerclal Classification. Numerical classification methods
(Described in Section A.2.4) were used to define groups of sampling stations
(entities) based on similarities In the abundance of infaunal organisms
(attributes). These analyses were conducted with replicate samples combined
at each station.
A.3.3.1.16 The results of the numerical classification conducted for each
survey with sampling stations as entities are presented in Figure A-15. For
each survey, the similarity in infaunal species composition among either
stations (five disposal-site and three reference-site stations) is depicted
A-54
-------
TABLE A-37. COMPARISON OF.THE MEAN VALUE FOR SHANNON-WEAVER DIVERSITY OF
REPLICATE SAMPLES (0.1/nf) AT THE REFERENCE- AND DISPOSAL-SITE SAMPLING
LOCATIONS
SURVEY
1
2
3
4
STATION
1
2
4
1
2
4
t
1
2
4
1
2
4
REFERENCE SITE
5.40
5.11
4.70
5.20
5.13
4.91
5.05
5.21
4.26
4.98
4.92
4.53
DISPOSAL SITE
4.52
4.26
4.34
4."54
4.48
3.53
4.73
4.38
4.49
4.69
4.27
4.25
•
A-55
-------
sswsw?
NUMBER OF
REFERENCE SITE
101.2 (87.85-114,65)*
94.0 (82.75-105.25)
69.0 (63.34-74.66)
75.5 (63.84-87.16)
89.5 (70.92-108.08)
61.0 (53.20-68.80)
61.2 (50.91-71.59)
78.0 (50.11-105.89)
37.2 (19.24-55.26)
93.7 (79.03-103.47)
106.0 (88.96-123.04)
62.0 (53.28-70.72)
TAXA/O.lm2
DISPOSAL SITE
90.5 (66.95-114.05)
91.0 (58.24-123.76)
55.75 (47.19-64.31)
94.7 (86.19-103.31)
84.2 (74.42-94.08)
57.5 (38.22-76.78)
74.7 (61.48-68.02)
42.2 (7.53-76.97)
52.2 (38.47-66.03)
105.2 (86,49-124.01)
93.0 (74,96-111.04)
52.5 (41.14-63.86)
»
95% Confidence Interval
A-56
-------
TABLE A-19. COMPARISON OF THE MEAN NUMBER OF TAXA PER REPLICATE SAMPLE
AT THE REFERENCE- AND DISPOSAL-SITE SAMPLING STATIONS
SURVEY
I
2
3
4
STATION
1
2
4
1
2
4
1
2
4
1
2
4
NUMBER OF TAXA/O.lm2
REFERENCE SITE DISPOSAL SITE
829.5 (697.16-961.84)*
745.2 (500.33-990.17)
400.7 (333.66-467.84)
424.2 (287.63-560.87)
550.2 (404.48-696.02)
245.5 (207.46-283.54)
233.7 (151.45-316.05)
372.7 (92.91-652.59)
111.5 (37.80-185.20)
740.7 (634.63-846.87)
673.5 (608.09-738.91)
354.5 (186.14-522.86)
1038.2 (634.65-1441.85)
1048.0 (672.52-1423.48)
382.2 (126.58-637.92)
1149.0 (988.69-1309.31)
820.5 (576.36-1064.64)
707.0 (134.91-1279.09)
524.5 (371.13-677.87)
179.5 (-128.10-487.10)
272.2 (168.56-375.94)
1154.5 (784.21-1524.79)
965.2 (600.13-1330.37)
365.7 (257.02-474.48)
95% Confidence Interval
A-57
-------
TABLE A-20. MEAN VALUES OF NUMBER OF TAXA, NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS AND
SHANNON-WEAVER DIVERSITY FOR INDIVIDUAL REPLICATE SAMPLES (0.1/m2)
Group
survey •>
Station*
A
01 D2 03 05
C
04
0
R4
B
Rl R2
Number of-Jaxa
(rank3)
1
I
3
4
90.5 91.0 75.7 48.2
(A) (3) (5) (8)
94.8 84.2 78.7 70.7
(1) (3) (4) (6)
74.7 42.2 76.2 61.0
(3) (7) (2) (5)
105.2 93.0 93.2 66.5
(2) (5) (4) (6)
55.2
(7)
57 .5
(8)
52.2
(6)
52.5
(8)
69.0
(6)
61.0
(7)
37.2
(8)
62.0
(7)
101.2 94.0
(1) (2)
75.5 89.5
(5) (2)
61.2 78.0
(4) (1)
93.7 106.0
(3) (1)
Number of Individuals
(rank)
1
2
3
4
1038 1048 575 433
(2) (1) (5) (6)
1149 820 648 1118
CD (3) (5) (2)
524 179 -427 722
(2) (7) (3) (1)
1154 965 1014 J156
(2) (4) (3) (1)
382
(8)
707
(4)
272
(5)
366
(7)
400
(7)
245
(8)
111
(8)
354
(8)
829 745
(3) (4)
. 424 550
(6) (7)
233 372
(6) (4)
741 674
(5) (6)
Diversity
(rank)
1
2
3
4
4.52 4.26 4.67 3.55
(5) (7) (4) (8)
4.54 4.48 4.80 3.94
(5) (6) (4) (7)
. 4.73 4.38 4.90 3.92
(4) (6) (3) (8)
4.69 4.27 4.45 3.68
(3) (6) (5) (8)
4.34
(6)
3.53
(8)
. 4.49
(5)
4.26
(7)
4.70
(3)
4.92
(3)
4.26
(7)
4.53
(4)
5.39 5.11
(1) (2)
5.21 5.13
(1) (2)
5.05 5.21
(2) (I)
4.98 4.93
(1) (2)
Station groups defined on the basts of numerical classification results from the first two
surveys (Figure A-15)
Station designation: R • Reference site; 0 » Disposal site.
Stations are ranked within each survey on the basis of computed values of the Indicated
comunlty Index.
A-58
-------
* 1000
o
500 J
E 1000
«
i soo-
e
I
2
Survey
2
Survey
Station 2
(130 ra.)
Station 1
{200m.}
1000
r 500
e
01
2
Survey
Station 4
(310 m.)
DReference Site Station
ADisposal Site Station
FIGURE A14. MEAN NUMBER OP INDIVIDUALS PER REPLICATE SAMPLE AT
REFERENCE • AND DISPOSAL-SITE SAMPLING LOCATIONS.
CONNECTING LINES ARE TO ENHANCE READABILITY AND DO
NOT INDICATE TRENDS.
A-59
-------
t oissimuwm
It*. M.O M.O PkO M.O M.O W.O M.O
11.0
p
STATION
DISPOSAL STA 1 I
DISPOSAL STA 2 I „..„ .
DISPOSAL STA 3 ( SWW *
DISPOSAL STA S I
«£F STA
DISPOSAL STA * f GROUP c
ttf HA (
GROUP D
M.B O-O U.O M.B M-O 1I.O
1 C!$S1PilLARITY
STATION
SURVEY 1
oissmuuiirr
OHXIP A
«.o u.0
S DISSIMILARITY
li-tt
STATION
DISMIWI. STA I
oisrasAi. STA s
DISPOSAL STA 3
MSWSAL STA 2 .
OlSKSAt. STA 4 I GROUP C
SSI! !«••
HT STA 4 I y/fflf o
STATTW
SURVEY 2.
1H. «.« MhO
x otssimuwm
PI.O MO it>« o
.a st,o w.a M.a m.«
oissimuwm
STATION
DISPOSAL STA I
DISPOSAL STA ]
OlSPOIL STA S
DISPOSAL STA 4
DISPOSAL STA I
•IF STA I I
nr STA i I
ttf STA « }
STAT1W
GROW A
SURVEY 3
s oissimuwm
M.O 0.0 <«.a
tko
n.a m-a
1 OISSIHILARITY
STATtW
DISPOSAL STA 1
DISPOSAL STA 3
DISPOSAL STA Z
KF STA 1
DISPOSAL STA S
«tF STA 2
DISPOSAL STA «
UP STA <
STATION
GROUP A
\ GROUP B
SURVEY 4
FIGURE A1S. NUMERICAL CLASSIFICATION RESULTS. DENDROGRAMS DEPICT THE
SIMILARITY IN INF AUNAL COMMUNITY STRUCTURE AMONG EIGHT
STATIONS.
A-60
-------
F
In dendrograms. For each survey these stations were partitioned Into two to
four groups. The delineation of the groups Is somewhat of a subjective
process. Group selections were made by drawing a line across the dendrogram
at a selected level of similarity and defining as a station-group each branch
of the dendrogram crossing that level of similarity (Figure A-15). The
objective in the group selection process is to preserve the distinct cluster
of entities in the dendrogram.
A.3.3.1.17 The results of the classification analysis were similar for the
first three surveys. In the first two surveys, four groups of stations,
designated A, B, C and D, were identified. Group A consisted of Stations 1,
2, 3 and 5 from the disposal site, and Group B consisted of Stations 1 and 2
from the reference site. Groups C and D were composed of Station 4 from the
disposal and reference sites, respectively. In Survey 3» Station 4 showed a
greater similarity to the other disposal-site stations, and only three groups
of stations were defined. As shown in Figure A-15, reference-site Stations 1
and 2 display consistent similarity In Surveys 1-3, and reference-site
Station 4 displayed a high degree of dissimilarity with the other station
groups in these surveys. In Survey 1, two groups of stations were defined
(Figure A-15)... One group (Group B) consisted of the deep-water stations
(Station 4) at both the reference and disposal sites. The other group
(Group A) consisted of Stations 1, 2, 3 and 5 from the disposal site as well
as Stations 1 and 2 from the reference site, which in the previous three
surveys showed a high degree of similarity only at each other..
A.3.3*1.8 In an effort to account for the observed similarities among
stations, values of the previously defined community Indices as well as the
physical (i.e., sediment) characteristics of the habitats within each of the
defined groups were compared. Consistent differences in the values of
computed community indices (see A.3.3.1) were evident among station Groups A,
B, C and D (defined in the first two surveys, Figure A-15) over all surveys.
In Table A-20, the mean values of Shannon-Weaver Diversity, Number of Taxa and
Number- of Individuals are presented by individual stations within these four
groups. Additionally, the rank of these stations based on the computed values
are shown for each survey. In most surveys, the largest number of taxa
occurred in station Groups A or B. The greatest abundance of organisms was
always found in station Group A, while the diversity of organisms was always
greatest in station Group B. The deep-station groups (C and D) were generally
characterized by having the fewest taxa and low abundance of organisms.
Although these realtionships between the community indices and the four groups
defined In the first two surveys were consistent over all surveys, Groups A,
B, C and D were not consistently defined. The greatest deviation from this
pattern of similarity among stations occurred in Survey 4 in which reference
Stations 1 and 2 were more similar to those stations within the disposal area
than to each other. This may be related to the decrease in species diversity
at reference Stations 1 and 2 in the final survey.
A.3*3*1.19 The sediment grain size characteristics at the sampling stations
(Figure A-1) are presented in Tables A-21 - A-21. Similarities were observed
between disposal- and reference-site sediment chracteristics based on the
percentage of material in the gravel, sand, silt and clay components.
Generally, sediments at all stations consisted of sandy-silt. However, the
A-61
-------
O
h»
i
5
LU
C/)
Lu
O
CM
I
u >
£
Ii
ii
PERCENT
GRAVEL
ill
I
I
i
|
i
a
1
2758
a -an*
S«S2
nStS
;s$s
S3SS
sssft
oooo
" 2»"S
»Oflf>
SSS*
-nn-
«•••••«•
5?n$
en* r»
SSiJ
;sss
JS5S
;2?3
5588
onoo
« o a n
nr»e —
nn»»
ssss
-nn*
nnnn
nom«
•o n Tffl
n'ririv
S3SS
innn
RSSS
3S23
8^8?
eooo
ssss
*****
t?»?
""*"*
nnnn
?Z3S
IOON
D*«n
?ss;?
828S
r « «o
on« «
ssss
9OOO
ssss
»»»»
828 =
nnnn
-nn«
****
s;nn
;ss8
"-—
J355
35^3
?s;s
0-0
SSSK
nnnn
o «•«•«•
ooea
Anna
-n«»
nnnn
5
— r» » —
n -r- o-
SSE?
3555
nno£
8888
6666
'KNffl
w n ^ vl
»
-------
CM
1-4
I/)
I
CO
CM
K
>
K
Sh.
Is
2
si
It
Ii.
5w
sis
s
Ji§
s
5
-1
a
•i
>-
<
5
i
h.
<
I-
m
£
>
»-
?K •• n
•on w
•o — ••»
— n
MK« •«
o v ^ n
n -* »n
-nn-
SN — »
ana
JSS83
988S
n oo —
4 noa
n* an
nj«c
••
••liBW
-----
S»-o-
n ^ ••
n -c » n
r» — o«
o — •>-
->nr<»ai
Sw-ao
nn>»nn
o -on*
••rann
38,8
opr«o
p»-O«4
onnn
g^inS
-nn«
nnnn
852?
r»4r>>-iH
o»»n
•V •• ^ ••
S2S2
[• n n n
sss;
«rie»
•O-C-O4
8888
oooo
-ooc
»• »•»
8SS$
-nn«
nnnn
-• O B »
en r* a
» o> a»
;;3S
SSn-
KM ^ V
ft ^ ra
SSSS
8882
oeen
noSR
»» vn
no CKB
-
-i»n*
«*«.
?«.n
of n fs n
;?*;
••van
nn n
n»3
n3S3
n888 *
nooo
•* *^ O A
M •* *• 01
»»n»
N on -
»g» g
• MR*
nnnn
1
g
%
a
•a o- — o
CM CD 4 t*
n n in 4
n na n
§8 = "
^2?
""""
8388
oooo
-<»o
o>a ••«•
n»n»
S?SJ
— «n-r
«« IP* •» ••
n -ao- -a
»o n *
d ^ n ^
S3S3
a* «tf •• ^
* — O 4
^ ft O *•
KI^KK
8888
o ooa
••ana
o CMB a
vrin'n
nnnS
-«n»
nnnn
1
& •• • n
f. W O-O
a N N a
N •• n -a
• 4 nn
nvnn
»3nn
nio-rt-
n» no
8838
oooo
Si! ItS
*»»»
a n »n
SSSS
.nn.
-
V W »
Ut
s
E
•Jt
U.
LU
IE
A-63
-------
3
V)
cc,
ta
UJ
o
UJ
IS)
CM
UJ
§
t-
PERCENT
SILT
II
PERCENT
OflAVEL
il»
S! 55
|
3s
xl &, <••
<3e
(BOW
I
i
BTATION
ITVPE STATION
Sirs
o 9> a r-
M *• fl *>
2S38
noon
3888
"""
8888
oeoe
8888
rin4*
m,
"•""*
- —
S?S-
"2SS
RS2S
a«a»
;»c*» »
= 3SS
*"-w
ssss
WOOO
S35S
ri*4«
K «• K K
nnnn
— «n*
nnnn
•a o -»
R$SS
•>non
?S3S
8338
ms
6666
KS5S
»»»»
•vh. 4 -O
^ ^ (r 0*
•'•
•*Mfl«
no n n
s:s?
»»»r»
B»» §»••
»«r «
f^»a»
SS5S
2SSS
S ^ S S
ttriofO
ri ririn
iiii
••ran*
*"*
SSS5
q»o -oo
•r r»e»
K — -«o
Mo W 4
9*0(1
C3SS
5SSS
•*»OO
•ON OIO
nooo
riririri
M«»M
-»«»
nrtttn .
1
S^ W 0*
-o — »
.on a-
•• n
>. f«.N O
?ssa
S3S3
!SS5
S8S8
0000
§?ss
»ri» »
ssss
»nn *
nnn n
4 n 01 n
\etnw
2-2 -
-?ss
0 = 55
SSS5
'***
s§gs
oooo
:=8S
«*>»«
nn n n
-cm*
»*»*
Ul
u.
Ul
E
A-64
-------
tst
L_
O
CM
I
H-
I!
PERCENT
BILT
L
PERCENT
flRAVEL
z5«
*< =
e5o
|
C IL "
3 Sir
OOu
III
1
i
1
3
a
S
a a 4 n
-a-rt-o
* * o »>
28S8
8323
;§ss
sss;
i?gg
M-4OO
— 41» 0>
Brtnn«
•«*•••••
S — » <
•an-
N n nn
?S£S
SSK?
K + «r »
n«ne>
Ka*»
»<• — M
S8S8
eieei 6
an* a
a 4 «a
nn n n
•»r»r>»
f»«M«
KSS2
Offlfflf*
H«
8»« —
aaro
nnnn
OOD«
fc»r* ••
5333
8888
oeee
ei>4 »
ana »
»»»»
5JSS
-«n»
nnnn
mttff
>n-a-
>-aat»
M
5SSS
n»nn
5SSS
?ss:
SS35
-brim
S«na
ana
nnnn
<>»nn
nnnn
••(•n«
»»»»
nr»ca «
n an> n
4n-n
n ^ ^
S5S2
»«n
SSSI
SS2S
8888
oboe
2JS?
no » w
§iii
«nn*
nnnn
S
SK n a
r- r- r»
N n 4 -a
S2SS
«K -a N
S«r» —
nn»
n i»4 »
Nr»r»ro
8888
eooo
$222
»» »»
K -onn
»0-» 0>
•mttftt
§r» » *>
^.n»
•fl » 4N
n — nrv
-C008-
n 40 K
»4 IX
nn-o -
»a vo
K IS N r>
838$
eoon
ona a
— »» a
• nn*
nnnn
• -
— nn*
n MM N
§?ss
...... .a
naoK
n » nn
ss;s
3SSS
«.—»»•
rn« n
i888
BOOO
S = 2n
anon
inll
-nn»
r« « •
|
S
Ui
Ik
Ul
K
A-65
-------
distribution of sediments at the reference-site stations showed less variation
over the four surveys than the disposal-site stations. Sediment at reference-
site Stations 1 and 2 consisted of between 66-79 percent sand and 13-27
percent filt in all surveys. Sediments at reference-site Station 4, the
deepest station at 310 m, consisted of approximately equal fractions of sand
and silt. The disposal-site stations exhibited greater variation both among
replciate samples and between surveys. For example, at Station 2 sandy
sediments represented 41-72 percent of the total in the first survey (Table
A-21)) and 16-36 percent in the second survey (Table A-22). Disposal-site
stations generally exhibited a larger proportion of clays than the reference
stations, but the contribution of these sediments to the total was also highly
variable. For example, clay represented 4-8 percent of the total sediments at
disposal-site Station 1 in the first survey (Table A-21) and 7-21 percent in
the second survey (Table A-22). Sediments at disposal-site Station 3 were
most similar to those at reference-site Stations 1 and 2.
A.3.3«1.20 To further demonstrate the greater degree of variability in
sediment characteristics at the disposal-site stations, the sediment grain-
size distribution for one-unit phi intervals over the range -1 to +13 is
presented for all samples in Tables A-25 - A-28. Characteristically, the
reference-site sediments were composed primarily of very fine sand to coarse
silt (phi intervals 2-4). The larger sediments (phi intervals greater than 2)
represented less than 3 percent of the total In all reference-site samples.
Likewise, a consistent pattern was observed in the small contribution of very
fine sediments to the total. At the disposal-site stations, sediments were
widely distributed over the different phi Intervals, and both the coarse and
fine sediment intervals were well represented at all stations.
A.3.3.1.21 Correlation Analysis. Special sampling gear was used in these
field surveys which allowed infaunal samples and sediment samples for
physical-chemical analyses to be collected In tandem. Sixty-nine of the 128
samples (54 percent) collected in the four surveys represent paired infauna/
sediment samples. The data from these 69 samples were used to determine the
correlation between biological and environmental variables.
A.3.3.1.22 A summary of the correlations that existed between the infaunal
community Indices and environmental variables measured during this study is
presented in Table A-29. Statistically significant correlations were observed
between infaunal community indices and sediment grain-size characteristics.
Species diversity and species richness were negatively correlated with the
proportion of medium to fine sand in the samples and positively correlated to
the proportion of very find sand and coarse silt. Similarly, the total number
of taxa showed a statistically significant negative correlation to the
proportion of medium sand and a positive correlation with the proportion of
very find sand in the samples. This pattern was reversed with number of
Individuals. The total number of individuals per sample was positively
correlated with medium and fine sand and negatively correlated with coarse and
medium silt. These results reflect the differences in the community variables
among stations summarized in Table A-20. The number of taxa and diversity
were highest at the reference stations where the greatest proportion of the
sediments in the samples were between the phi-unit intervals of 3 to 5*
A-66
-------
XJX OOOOOOQOOOOO—-—-OOOO
M M a •*••»» c
_ -. 5nnra«<
S2S «oo ooooo eel ooooo oo ooo
oooooooooooo
22 e«
• .. OK
iH oooo-ooooooo)»ncii«--oo
4nr»nooi»v*vi^»
0000-0000000-00-0000
aoooo-oooeoa
!:£•
s z
:53S5S;s=SSS
n_nnnn«nnnn«
8SS3S8SSSSSS
ooooooeooooe
OJ
8 S
S 8
!:!
Vn^^MOi^v^o* it n ^ ^fi« tv^w
M » • * •« M n
Isi
2 S
i2i
i« *
3 3
tn«««fc«'»*c
«B»*>(t«>>«*>«»eea»a««'~ —
§
S 3
aoooooaoaooo
n>et>-noaaea-
888888888888
oeeeoaooeaoo
O
UJ
I/)
7 8
88888888888888SSSS88
eoooeoeeooooaeeaoaoo
888888888888
boaoooooaaeo
M
_l
-..-nnnnnnnfl'
.itn*-nn*-«n* ™
• •«*»nmnni4vw
ui
CM
I
A-67
-------
-------
: .2 SSmgS88SSgS3oS88S3
s«t ooooooeooooooooooood
s •
a. - «.
ooooooooooooaoeooooo
CM
*/»
5
Ul
§
i
2 s ssRssscsssrssSooSss;
j.j -• • • -=
M n »<• n
— * «b» — ,
zix ee—o—-«-o—oooooo-ooo
o -
£»S •*A4IB»«tB»»«wnni*><,
SO *•* < * O » O Q ^f» 4 »• * » n O Q «»
S ?o«»!!SKn5raeao«-nAna
i«i o^nononn-oo•«—o~W_o«
k »»i
8 s :S2ss;;»S5Ss:i;s=s?u
£"•5 -----:-:-«^^
• *
| 8
f »J «»»<• j«-o.-o«tm»o»TB»
i 5
I:!
S 3
i:!
i s
i'.l
8 8
S 3
iii
|
S
UJ
,8 5
i^I
I I
iii»»«-*a-o».222SHS
.
••«— aooocie — 6o»-~o»nn*
S§S3SS§38§88
25SS2J8SSSS5
000*00000000
eoooooo-
ao-oaoonnnntn
00000000060600000660
• it n v *nn v^ffin v *nrt vMivft* a
--'.-rannnnnnnwvvnonn
-oan-aennnn
2r2;22==S5SS
88J8835I888S
6booo-*o6oeo
88888S88888S
000060660660
888888888888
666066606060
.«!<»»-««•"«•"* 2
to
evj
i
i i
A-68
-------
-------
2
O
v n
111
n »
i • i
ooooBoeeeooeeoooooob
oeeeeoeoeooo
0000*0060000
X •*
k-«.
IP* BK^«rraf»<
'ni*no~<»«nn(tnni»a
5 3 K » R » - 2 S n 3 « »> • r- •» o » 3 2
^^(••W»W*»^«"6eeeede<»e>n
>oeeoo6ooao-o-o
lissrursssss!
ssssssssrsss
'5518-
8881855SSSS8
oeeeoe-Mooae
8888888S8888
o6>eoooeeaoo
888888888888
eeoeeoeeoooo
' ••»• nnnn
CM
I
S
i
»*
<
it*
•
I
Ul
S
A-69
-------
-------
CO
CM
gS88ScS88SSgSgSSSSS8
aeooaooaoaaoooooaoob
mssmsssg
oooooooooooo
ooo-oooooo-o-Qoao—oa
•• n
I • Z
o «* « 6 o - o « o - - -
o -
iiS
inn-rannnnn«nv
S» «
fk.«k
S 3
* o n n n 4 - -
O>
i_
8 S
!:!
S 8
to
5:2
none»»vi
£
CD
i
S 8
I'-I
Mn4»0ffi«w«*««»B«nM(ttit*fc~»
••••»v*n»»*»nvK.e«on
»nn---£a • -2
•i«2StS8
CO
MM
a
8 8
S 8
i?i
»»»i»«an»' —bonnrnr«a«
8 o
&88888SS8SS8
oobbbobobobb
T 8 88888888888888888888
i.x ooob-oeb ob ooooo oob ebb
8888888(8888
boaboobbooob
1/1
— nnv-nnv
rx
i
a
i
»« — ^*»fii
-------
-------
TABLE A-29. PEARSON PRODUCT-MOMENT CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN SELECTED
INFAUNAL COMMUNITY INDICES AND PHYSICAL-CHEMICAL VARIABLES. Correlations
based on 69 samples.
Grain-Size Characteristics
(phi Intervals)
Medium Sand
(01-02)
Fine Sand
(02-03)
Very Fine Sand
(03-04)
Coarse Silt
(04-05)
Medium Silt
(05-06)
Sediment Metal Concentration
Cu
Pb
Hg
Zn
As
Cd
Cr
Sample Depth
Species
Diversity
-0.7456
P=0.000
-0.6039
P=0.000
0.7098
P=0.000
0.3613
P=0.001
-0.2499
P=0.019
-0.5488
P=0.000
-0.4473
P'0.000
0.4604
P=0.000
-0.5361
P=0.000
-0.4354
' P=0.000
-0.2054
P'0.045
-0.3157
P=0.004
-0.2834
P=0.009
Species
Richness
-0.5627
P=0.000
-0.2894
P=0.008
0.3963
P*0.000
0.0914
P-0.228
-0.1515
P=0.107
-0.2931
P=0.007
-0.2550
P-0.017
-0.3547
P=0.001
-0.2385
P=0.024
-0.1188
P=0.167
0.0289
P=0.407
-0.1525
P=0.106
-0.5109
P=0.000
Number
of Taxa
-0.3812
P=0.001
-0.0987
P=0.210
0.2079
P=0.043
-0.0728
P=0.276
-0.1285
P=0.146
-0.1269
P=0.149
-0.1312
P=0.141
-0.2396
P=0.024
-0.0886
P=0.234
0.0245
P=0.421
0.1022
P=0.202
-0.0804
P*0.256
-0.5451
P=0.000
Number
of Individuals
0.2386
P=0.024
0.4045
P*0.000
-0.3569
P*0.001
-0.4258
P*0.000
0.0079
P«0.474
0.3464
P=0.002 .
0.2686
P=0.013
0.1534
P=0.104
0.3074
P'0.005
0.3785
P=0.001
0.2295
P=0.029
0.1320
P=0.140
-0.3676
P=0.001
A-71
-------
V
-------
Moreover, the highest values for total number of individuals were observed at
stations within the disposal area where the coarse sediments were more
abundant.
A.3.3.1.23 Statistically significant correlations were observed between
sediment metal concentrations and infaunal community indices (Table A-29).
These correlations were negative between species diversity and the
concentrations of all seven metals.analyzed. Statistically significant
negative correlations were also observed between species richness and four of
the metals (Cu, Pb, Hg and Zn). Only the correlation between the number of
taxa and mercury concentration was statistically significant. Statistically
significant positive correlations were observed between the number of
individuals and the concentration of five of the metals (Cu, Pb, Zn, As and
Cd). These latter results probably do not mean that higher numbers of
individuals result from higher metal levels, but that both metal levels and
number of Individuals are positively correlated with a third variable, in this
case percent silt.
A.3.3.1.24 All four community Indices were negatively correlated with
depth. These results generally support the previous observations concerning
the effects of station location on these Infaunal community indices. The
minimum values for the community indices were generally observed at the
deepest stations (approximately 310 m) at both the disposal and reference
sites.
A.3.3.2 Summary. The results presented in this section indicate the
existence of differences.in the benthic infaunal community between the
reference- and disposal-area sampling sites. . Graphical and statistical
methods were used to demonstrate the existence of differneces in the values of
three community indices (diversity, species richness and number of
individuals). Values of species diversity and species richness were generally
elevated at the reference site, and the number of Individuals at the disposal
site was greater than the recorded values at the corresponding stations in the
reference area. However, the number of taxa identified at both the disposal-
site and reference site stations were similar.
A.3.3.2.1 Consistent differences were also observed in the number of taxa,
species diversity and species richness between sampling sites within the
disposal area. Values of all three community variables at disposal-site
Stations 1 and 3 were greater than those recorded at Station 5 In each of.the
four surveys. These observed differences were not related to differences in
sampling depth since all three stations were located on the same isobath
within the disposal area.
A.3.3.2.2 Numerical classification analysis was also used to Identify
differences in the infaunal community characteristics between the reference
and disposal sites. These differences were attributed to differences in both
the occurrence and abundance of infaunal taxa among the sampling stations.
These analyses also demonstrated the existence of differences in infaunal
community structure as a function of depth.
A-72
-------
-------
A.3.3.2.3 The observed biological differences appeared to be primarily
related to differences in sediment grain-size characteristics. The major
difference in the sediment characteristics between the reference and disposal
sites was the distribution among size-class intervals. The distribution of
sediments in the disposal-site samples were characterized as much more
variable both between replicates and among surveys. Sediment samples from
within the disposal area also contained a higher percentage of both coarse
sand and clays than samples from the reference area. Within the disposal site
this varaibility was highest at Station 5, which also showed the lowest values
of diversity, species richness and number of taxa among the three stations
located at the same depth. Based on modeling of the dredge-spoil plume during
dumping (Appendix C), it is plausible that these observed differences in
sediment characteristics could result from dumping activity.
A.3*3*2.4 The results of the sediment chemistry analyses presented in Section
A.3.2 indicated that sediment metal concentrations within the disposal area
were significantly elevated above the reference site. Additionally, the
results of the correlation analyses presented In Table A-29 indicated the
existence of statistically significant (albeit low) negative correlations
between three community indices (species diversity, species richness and
number of taxa) and sediment metal concentrations. However, lacking specific
information on the accumulation of metals in the tissue of infaunal organisms
there is insufficient evidence to attribute observed'biological difference to
sediment metal concentrations.
A.3.4 DEMERSAL FISH AND EPIBENTHIC HACBOINVE8TEBRATES. A complete list,
enumerated by species, of fish and invertebrates captured In otter trawls at
the LA 2 disposal and reference sites during each of the four sampling periods
is provided in Appendix B, Table B-4. The following sections summarize and
discuss these data In a manner commensurate with the non-quantitative nature
of the sampling. Because the primary purpose of the trawling was to collect
animals for tissue contaminant analysis, we did not attempt to sample in a
rigorous quantitative manner (by careful measuring the area swept by each
trawl, for example). Therefore, the data cannot support detailed quantitative
analysis, of density, .diversity, biomass, etc. The data can be used, however,
to characterize in general the fish and epibenthic macroinvertebrate fauna of
the sites by assessing major trends and patterns in principal species present,
number of species and overall abundance.
A.3*4.1 Demersal Fish
A.3.4.1.1 Overall Characterization. Table A-25 shows principal species,
number of species and total number of individuals of demersal fish captured in
otter trawls at the LA 2 disposal and reference sites, broken down by sampling
period (season) and depth of trawl station. In all, sampling at these two
sites produced 52 species representing 20 families. Killer and Lea (1972)
list 481 species in 129 families as occurring in southern California (Pt.
Conception to Mexican border); and earlier, more extensive studies have
reported 213 species in 66 families (Horn, 1974) and 121 species in 41
families (SCCWRP, 1973). The present study, therefore, represents a minority
A-73
-------
\
-------
of the southern California demersal fish fauna, which is not suprising
considered the limited depth range (129-312m) and duration (64 mostly 5-minute
trawls) of the sampling.
A.3.4.1.2 The trawl catch was dominated by flatfish (primarily family
Pleuronectidae) and rockfish (Scorpaenidae) (Table B-4). Three species were
particularly abundant and frequently encountered in the trawls. These were
the slender sole, Lyopsetta exilis (618 Individuals In 50 trawls); the Pacific
sanddab, Cithariehthys sordldus (937 individuals in 31 trawls); and the
shortspine combfish, Zaniolepis frenata (363 individuals in 42 trawls).
Together, these three species accounted for 76 percent of the individuals
caught. Other commonly caught species were the Dover sole (Mierostomus
paoificus), the plainfin midshipman (Porichthys notatus) the halfbanded
rockfish (Sebastes semjLeinotus), the spitnose rock fish CS_. diploproa),
the stripetail rockfish (S_. saxleola), the shortspine thornyhead
(Sebastolobus alascanus), and the yellowchin sculpln (Icelinus
quadriseristus). All of these species are well-known common components of the
mid- to deep-water demersal fish fauna of southern California (Horn, 1974;
SCCWRp, 1973; Stephens, 1973; Moore et al., 1983). Based on the results of
previous studies, the shortspine combfish and the slender sole were perhaps
more abundant than would be expected, while the stripetail rockfish, the rex
sole (Glyptocephalus zachirus), and the pinksurf perch (Zalembius rosaceus)
were perhaps under-represented (Table B-4).
A.3.4.1.3 Variation with Depth. The data for the more common species show no
obvious deviations from previously reported depth distributions. The slender
sole, while caught at all depths, tended to be more frequently encountered at
the mid-depth (198 m) and deep (312 m) stations than at the shallow stations
(129 m) (Tables A-30 and B-4). The shortspine combfish was more abundant at
the shallow and mid-depth stations, as was the Pacific sanddab* The plainfin
midshipman and Dover sole were most abundant at the shallow stations. Among
the Scorpaenidae, the stripetail rockfish and the halfbanded rockfish were
most common at the shallow and mid-depth stations, while the splitnose
rockfish and the yellowchin sculpln were most common at the mid-depth and deep
stations* Table B-4 can be referred to for depth-related distribution of less
abundant species.
A.3*4.1.4 As in other studies,
lowest at the deepest station.
the mid-depth station, although
and mid-depth stations (Table A>
abundance and number of species
the mid-depth and deep stations
pattern at the disposal site is
et al., 1983).
abundance and diversity of demersal fish is
At the disposal site, abundance is greatest at
number of species is similar at the shallow
•30). At the reference site, however, both
were greatest at the shallow station, while
were similar in number of species. The
more similar to that observed by SCCWRP (Moore
A.3.4.1.5 Differences Between Disposal and Reference Sites. There is
evidence that demersal fish are less abundant and diverse at the disposal site
than at the reference site. More individuals were caught at the reference
site during each of the four sampling periods, and in 9 of 12 stations
sampling (3 depths, 4 periods) (Table A-30). More species were caught at the
reference site overall (43 vs. 38); during 3 of the 4 sampling, periods, and in
A-74
-------
\
-------
cw
(M
u « £
•»! »
TJ *o>"- •
« >.»• <•>
".e »
At*> &
1
g •§
yj e
o
u
II
11
w
El
•* •• k a
* ».*? -o
'k M
oi a
M M
k W
V) O
•s
S
W
S S
in e.
CNJ ID '
0)
<8 0)
01 w
as c
yj *^
355
i. C
1/1 k>
i—• ttJ (D
u. S e
>- Q. W»
§0) i-
S. U
o "i
=> 2 3
(01—2
-O l
•
1
IS5
1
* I
I
5 1 « S
S - c S
in i
S ,5 58
o SS So.
S %. k
» V U
•5,1 •§,
-
MB,
tr
-sfe
II
i
_ k k **
.„ , k
O.C Bf
M V W V)
"•S
M
e
O
I
B
e
A-75
-------
-------
in ' e«
°s
Is
o
«">
1
A « e A £
-grg 5i
^ *•»- CV V *•*
s s* s s
ox> u
u •» u
cs6 rs
S2
«-».H
I
!: s,
e u
v c u
*iZ 0 iZ c
sri s£ II" ££
01 u
IB
I**
§
!i
Si
f-s
§
S
M IO
CO V
V
S,!
n. « «<
1 1 s
w S -5.
S.S.- 2
IIT
t
I 2
Z2 9-S 0,2
re— ^ «^ oi
-------
-------
s s
I. b
i I
;i
a
O
»«
It
£ L)
B •>
15-
5 « 5-gg 5
S S 25-5. 8
l/> lk> M
S
M
Ol
U
S.
in
a
7 I
** i!
C
O
0
1
4
UJ
^J
CD
H»
•
i i
•2 5
in M
M *•
x 7
01 O>
*> •*
01 oi
i i
Si 5
|
*j
**
1/1 £
let I
*l*~ -O
c
M I
M
^
U
B
U
i
M
01
•V
1
^ V
^
^
S
w
w
••
i
e
M
•4
I/I
J*
X
2
*
1 M
1
.J
1 5
*> v>
c? *>*B —
S"" e"~ o
A-77
-------
N,
-------
o «
k-i
11
X C
PH
O
V
It
2 V)
UJ
u
z
ac
UJ
u.
*
Principal Species
2
ON M
•M ^
S k«?
ll
Zs
-41
V)
V)
3
u
I
T5 £
*j £
1 4
o
<*>
1
<
UJ
h-
(V m» Ul B
— in CM a
~ r~ ^ jj.
* * £s JJ
Ir •* ^
If. I I
£«8 «,£ „ H
»• C _ ta. i£ w
«- — k. o •• e •>
u a at w w S u
* M > « £
"•tj fe°- fe
|^s !| 1
V 0(v M« ?
*• ** to k. u
slic rs s
Jf. ffe 1
•» •• s * «
JB ^ B c w o w e S
ulNGE ifc il S
*• * * S
E »
VB IB » "*
* r
«* c
L '
o ^
•" k*C *5 S ^
a. «r M S2 M
ill |S f
"• ss its *
11= ii i
!J« 5| f
— E
01 »* u *• 0» 5
i— M «l 41 w 4,
O 0 « MM 1 5
B U 0 0 S ! §
6
1 § 5
«/> jj 3 Si
o u e? «/» ?
-8 *?3« cx2 ff
5 C 252 * 5 *
tn """ s«!~ o^ S
S
k
i
M
M
S
s
M
1
A-78
-------
-------
b«
o> —
•6 *
ae B
o m
b 01
ii
£
i?
u
i
• ui
ki_
s
s
s
l/>
«
a
u
B
b
&
M
£ -»
i*i • o a
1 b2
= «* >
*' 11
i *-
•g
!s
II
UJ
n-
5!
3
i
S
M
01
^
k
2
*fl
•M
«
7 s
*j T
i *
fi
*»^
O
CO
«C
UJ
_)
OQ
*—
w e
O r»
eo >n
in ec
cw •«•
1* 1*
•W W -e S
-1 51
MO we
u u
u u
£ g = « »
Si r^1;
SS S8""
»t ••« fe
|i jli
« • M « «C
C M a b M
o • S o • M
£f *> —
O MlW f
srs s-%
»t M i* *» M
-IE Ii5
Z2£ T£«
2£^ 22S
£S£ £SS
^•ll^'IDW fc^^'ta*
1
•rt
a c
M U>
PJ
a • a
•s i
•s £ -s:
— ^ •- ^
». u ^
1 e 1!
u -o u<
g»l «g,
— o « o —
D. M A M D.J
M C HI «
^ b ^» b ^ *
k 01 • 0> *•
5?* -gj =
«/t •> M oi«n
«C> 3 *J> «
*• 0) **
C — •• •• B
01 •• U ^" 01
i «.[« e * •»
01 01 «>P
IM M M
— 0 «K-
a. ** M •* o.
I 0» ** 01 •* 01
^- «l ** 4) —
O M M MO
•V a « B »
BOA OB
W ^ to ^ *
» M Lj !•/> _l 1*4
e
o
7
^^ 5
s» &§•
= S «?3
« mt "O *
5 x w»-
in
91
en
v>*
01
S
1
M
OT
S
4D
s
0>
M
L a
1 S
«»
s
E
1
»
•
\ s
i 1
i s
\ *
• w
s 3
* B
i i
- w
» w
i M
» 2-
" •§ S
M —
S
M
i
w
11
«-r
W b
^o
01 VI
K5
M «
— • C
^ 01
X to
•r
** &
S2
Ml A
ii
>H IV
_jV«i
S
7>
I
A-79
-------
-------
8 of 12 station samplings. These differences may be related to the disposal
of dredged material, although the reason for lower catches at the disposal
site is not clear. Infaunal benthic community density was greater at the
disposal site stations during all four surveys than at almost all
corresponding depth reference site stations (see section A.3.3). Although the
Infaunal community at the disposal site could be separated from that at the
reference site in many of the classification analyses there is nothing to
suggest that disposal site organisms were unacceptable as prey to the fish
community. Major differences were found in trawl epiblota density between the
first two and last two surveys. Since fish abundance and diversity trends did
not vary similarly It is unlikely there is a direct relationship between
epibiota density and fish catch. The difference in fish catch between
disposal and reference sites may simply reflect avoidance of the disposal
sites by some species and individuals as a response to the increased frequency
of disturbance within the disposal site.
A.3.4.1.6 Regarding principal species, there is some indication that the
Pacific sanddab is less abundant at the disposal site than at the reference
site, and that the slender sole is less abundant at the reference site (Tables
A-30 and B-4). The cause of this apparent difference between the sites, and
whether it is relative to disposal, is not known.
A.3.4.1.7 Seasonal Variation. There are no obvious seasonal variations in
the trawl data, except that the December 1983 sampling produced considerably
more individuals and species than the March and May 184 sampling (Table A~30).
The August 1983 sampling, which produced the most individuals and species of
all samplings, consisted of 10-mlnute trawls (as opposed to 5-minute trawls
for the other samplings).
A.3.4.2 Epibenthic Maorolnvertebrates. The two most commonly used methods of
sampling benthic fauna are grab/core samplers, and trawls. Grabs and cores
are used primarily to sample infauna, while trawls are used to sample demersal
fish and, somewhat Incidentally, epibenthic fauna. The two methods produce
very different results, as can be seen by comparing species lists from grab/
core studies in the Southern California Bight such as Fauchald and Jones
(1979) and Jones (1979) to those from trawl studies such as those conducted by
the Southern California Coastal Water Research Project (SCCWRP, 1973? Moore et
al, 1983). It is, therefore, not useful to compare the present data to
results from grab/core studies, and these data will be compared only to
results from previous trawl studies in the region.
A.3.4.2.1 Overall Characterization. Table A-31 shows principal species,
number of species, and number of individuals of epibenthic mlcroinvertebrates
captured in otter trawls at the LA 2 disposal and reference sites, broken down
by sampling period (season) and depth of trawl station. In all, sampling at
these two sites produced 93 species. Extensive trawling by SCCWRP (Moore et
al., 1983) produced over 500 species. The comparatively limited results of
the present study are not surprising considering the limited depth range
(129-312 m) and duration (64 mostly 5-minute trawls) of the sampling.
A-80
-------
-------
U-o
w>
in
s
(v
ii
_• CM
LU
0
i
•o
41
E
O
o
e w
1»*
slH
oi
9 e
'i
g
3
1
u
o
a
CM
i .5
* * Q}
^3 QJ
: i. O
LU <0 <*-
< C «
0£ O S.
eo-^> 10
LU *•>
^ IQ V)
LU in tn
O «3 =
a: oj a)
0 S-
CO
**'
£
s
L.
a
l!
IE
^[u
s
I «
Is s
§.i
*•
e
o*
ii
S S
.S
cu i
wi
en
£S
u
5
v>
s
«rt
II! 15 i
V «« »<*> ca
A-81
-------
-------
./
k.§
il
"5 w
w
.Q W
IS
liW
tn
^3
2
w
U.
£
•A
41
1
•5
CL
t*
a.
I
ee «
1 *I
o Si
si
kS
11
•£
s
o
w
u
m
* ^*
^3 o
— s
^^ *"
^ cu
0
U
i
Ul
i
o e
2 s
k •
i z
9 £
U U
e3 =
f 10 ^
k K a. SB.
IB 9 k •» k
Si5 =5
B en
*> k M ID M
a e w k ~
j* " e ^
"Sjie % S en
U B *» B
M *. O —
SB- 1=
« B e »> e
** « t> *^ u
•o
"^
2 S
€D
M
S 2
1
a 1 &i
. 1 1
a « k i
t- « "'
"k k — •• !
e e ^ a.w «
«•<•. — E ft
•»C 2C e f
s w "* %
a at M « w i
9 9 « i» 1
B a ** o k c
Co 0 B «
f6 i ** O I
^ •» e Bl** i
e w « o E i
o M u en o i
^4 1O O C k 4
U k f* « ^ P
V)|k
Z K
B B
1 1
S 9
* «
W «
W W
~ ^
S1 S
k k
i i
S 2
V S
I 1
£
".
S 8
S
V M
£ e
: 1 f
. a a
1 s i
i s ?
> "» "S
: 4:1 S
! I 2
! I 1
• e B
^ « «t
i e o
• ^ ^
1 5
1- 5
1
5
W
^
i
B
«
B
A
I
i
w
e
i
B
e
>i
u
/i
A-82
-------
-------
o
5J
0
i
ut
ut
K
£
W)
e
fc
S
i>2
4 >
o
w
|l
SE */>
S
i
a
i
I
M
II
*s
11
s
1
l/>
^
^
.1
"k
a.
m»
e
W)
in
e
3
8
M
5
u
M
|
JSf
I
S5
-
1
u
Q
•
M
a
u
£
5
|
2
u
M»
44
M
• (2
,.
1
5
w
M
•A
a
u
e
S
4D
w
i
•9
-
i
w
i
^
ia
S
w
ft
JS
-
I.
0)
|
5
S
M
9
s
£
S
M
0
W
|
I
ft
«n
10 "
^
|
•
g.=
sl
sll
Sl£
*<
e e
|S
uE
o> o
. 10
2 S
e
c.
w
a e
I \
r «
z s
II |
s •
e M
« ;
i i
< i1
s
S 1
(V
^ = 8
f- _
- -
S 1 1
us a
• « ^ —
"c ^ "5
k a a
2 i £
— M M
i • a a
0-5 **
o «
M U k
9 ** *>
Ol B C
: C S «
§2 1 1
B|»| 2 <
*
k
B
w
M
i
^
ip
|
7!
I
UJ
5 5 r
««_ 5 „ *j-. w»
o a* e i/> i—
^« e •• «o
-------
-------
•ii
i.2
is
CM
m
«w
L
01
1
£ =
!
_,o»
OIK
9vO
•I O)
tn •»
§1=
88
I
a>
g
itfti
5
e»-
eu
01 to
s s
UJ
CD
1
5i
i
e
|
8
S
u>
43!
5-5 -
1~ S
1= I
A-84
-------
\
-------
0 «
i!
il
UJ
in
ut
£
u
«
w
V
^
w
•;
Ok
I
a.
1 UJ
w
»» • >k?
uj e 9
11
%
fc —
J"5
^
Ul
M
3
|M
fe
5
w
u
a.
0.
S I
C £
O ^
1
<
UJ
_J
CO
^p
* .
CM
cw
«r
CSI
v
1
e 3
u «
k M
B „!
S|-
OT I*
W •*
•^ —
*Z
Jsf
JB e
u m
at t*
•* »
iv>t
I
o
i.
|
S
M
f|
^ e
M«fe
**P
e
— °
£(§
"c w
O M
V k
VI |b
e
_o
tt
m
v>
8"«
^ a
^ IM
f —
in
in
CO
en
B
I
i :
s 1
E
U ••
s| s
^ 6
: w
I 8
u •»
A «
. "in
fM
^
|
in
m
.
B.
fi
I
a
e
o
e
"
5
f
I
f
i
«
B
C
^
e
o
u
e
jj
«
4A
»•
O)
k
entrotui
8
5
e
o
•Mk
*»
5
k
1
t
u
*•
03
U)
-------
-------
A.3.4.2.2 The trawls were dominated by crustaceans and echinoderms in both
abundance and species composition (Table A-31 and B-4). Three species were
particularly abundant: the sea urchins Allooentrotus fragllia (2,444
individuals in 56 trawls) and Lytechlnus pictus (3,345 individuals in 19
trawls), and the shrimp Slcyonla ingentis (2,232 individuals in 47 trawls).
Together these three species accounted for 72 percent of the intervetebrate
individuals caught in the trawls. Note that _L. pictus was the most abundant
species but occurred in relatively few trawls, indicating a patchy
distribution. Other common species in the trawls were the sea cucumbers
Parastlchopus callfornicus and Spatangus californious, and the shrimp Crangon
zaeae and Spirontocarls holmes!. All of these species are common components
of trawl samples from the region (Moore et al., 1983).
A.3-4.2.3 Variations with Depth. Neither site shows any obvious depth-
related trend in number of species, except for some indication of lower number
of species at the mid-depth station (198 m) at the reference site (Table
A-31). There is a clear pattern, however, of highest abundance at the mid-
depth station at the disposal site, and at the shallow station (129 m) at the
reference site. This is somewhat at odds with the results of SCCtfRP Surveys,
which generally show an increase in the abundance of epibenthic invertebrates
with depth over this depth range (Word and Hearns, 1977} Moore et al.,
1983). Moore jst^al. (1983) also found Increasing numbers of species with
depth. It should be noted that, in the SCCWHP surveys, Increasing depth
generally coincides with increasing distance from sewage outfalls, which have
been shown to depress benthlc populations. Of the commonly encountered
species listed above, only Allooentrotus fragills was consistently abundant at
the deep station (312 m); this species was also abundant at the mid-depth
stations. Crangon zacae was most abundant at the shallow station. The older
common species were abundant at both the shallow and mid-depth stations (Table
A-31).
A.3.4.2.4 Differences Between Disposal and Reference Sites. There is no
clear difference between the disposal and reference sites .in number of
species. There is evidence, however, that invertebrates are more abundant at
the reference site. More individuals were caught at the reference site during
each of the four sampling periods, and twice as many total individuals were
caught at the reference site as at the disposal site. Disposal of dredged
material may have caused a reduction in epibenthic Invertebrates population at
the disposal site, through smothering, change in sediment characteristics, or
change in food supply.
A.3.4.2.5 Regarding principal species, Lytechlnus pletus and Spatangus
californlcus are more abundant at the reference site. Crangon zacae Is more
abundant at the disposal site, and this appears to be true for Sloyonia
ingentis also. The relation between this pattern of more abundant echinoderms
at the reference site and more abundant crustaceans at the disposal site is
not known, nor is the relation of either of this patterns to disposal. On the
other hand, the second most abundant species, Allocentratus fragilis, shows no
apparent preference for either site.
A-86
-------
-------
A.3.4.2.6 Seasonal Differences. The data show no obvious seasonal trends in
abundance or diversity, except for some indication of decreasing abundance
(and possibly number of species) at the disposal site over the course of the
study (Table A-3D. In general, the December 1983, March 198*1, and May 1984
data compare well to the August 1983 data in terms of abundance and number of
species, even though the August survey as the only one to use 10-minute
trawls; the others used 5-minute trawls.
A.3.M.2.7 The>sea urchin Lytechinus piotus is much more abundant in the
winter sample (March) than in the others, possibly reflecting seasonal
recruitment in this species. None of the other principal species shows
obvious seasonal patterns.
A-87
-------
-------
A.4 REFERENCES -
Alan Hancock Foundation. 1965. An oceanographic and biological survey of the
Southern California mainland shelf. University of Southern California, Los
Angeles. State Water Quality Control Board Publ. No. 27. 232 pp.
American Public Health Association (APHA), American Water Works Association
(AWWA), and Water Pollution Control Federation (WPCF). 1980. 15th
Edition. Standard method for examination of water and waste-water.
1134 pp.
American Society of Testing Materials. 1963. Standard methods for gain size
analysis of soils. DD422-63t108.
Andenberg, M. 1973. Cluster Analysis for Application. Academic Press,
New York. 310 pp.
Boesch, B.F. 1977. Application of Numerical Classification in Ecological
Investigations of Water Pollution. EPA-600/3-77-033. U.S. EPA Eool. Res.
Serv. 115 pp.
Bruland, E.W., K. Bertlne, M. Koide, and E.D. Goldberg. 1974. History of
metal pollution in southern California coastal zone. Envir. Sci. Eng.
8:425-432.
Bureau of Land Management. 1978. POCS Reference Paper No. II. Volume 1
of 3. Description of the Coastal Environment from Point Reyes to Punta,
Eugenia. U.S. Department of the Interior.
Callahan, M., M. Slimak, N. Gabel, I. May, C. Fowler, et al., 1979. Water-
related environmental fate of 129 priority pollutants. Vol. I. EPA
440/4-7-029a.
Chan, K.M. 1974. Chemical oceanography. Pages 4-1 through 4-18 IN M.D.
Daily, B. Hill, and N. Lansing (eds). A~summary of knowledge of the
southern California coastal zone and offshore areas, Vol. I. Physical
Environment. Southern California ocean Studies Consortium for Bureau of
Land Management Contract 08550-CT4-1.
Chen, K. I., and S.C. Lu. 1974. Sediment composition in Los Agneles-Long
Beach Harbors and San Pedro Basin. In Marine Studies of San Pedro Bay,
Part 7: Sediment Investigations. Reports US6-SG-8-74, University of
Southern California, Los Angeles.
Clifford, fl.T. and W. Stephenson. 1975. An Introduction to Numerical
Classification. Academic Press, San Francisco, California. 229 pp.
Department of Interior. 1983. Ocean monitoring and research annual report
1980-1981. Los Angeles County Sanitation District.
Environmental Protection Agency. 1979a. Methods for analysis of water and
wastes. EPA 600/4-79-019.
A-88
-------
-------
Environmental Protection Agency. 1979b. Methods for analysis of water and
wastes. EPA 600/8-80-038.
Environmental Protection Agency. 1980. Manual of analytical methods for
the analysis of pesticides in humans and environmental samples.
EPA-600/8-80-38.
Fauehald, K. and G. Jones, 1979. Variation in community structure of shelf,
slope and basin macrofaunal communities of the Southern California Bight.
Chapter 18 In_ Southern California Outer Continental Shelf Environmental
Baseline study, 1976/77 (Second Tear) Benthic Program. Volume H,
Principal Investigations' Reports, Series 2. Prepared by Science
Application, Inc. for Bureau of Land Management, Pacific OCS Office.
NTIS PB80-166101.
Garrison, W.E. 1981. Ocean monitoring and research annual report 1980-1981.
Los Angeles County Sanitation District.
Gibbs, R.J. 1974. A settling tube system for sand size analysis. J. Sed.
Pet. 44 (2) 585-588.
Glass, G.V., P.D. Peckham and J.R. Sanders. 1972. Consequences of failure
to meet assumptions underlying the analysis of variance and covarlance.
Bef. Educ. Res. 42(3): 237-288.
Grieb, T.M. 1984. Robustness of the AKOVA model in environmental modeling
applications. Prepared for Electrical Power Research Institute by Tetra
Tech, Inc. Project 1729-07. 65 pp.
Hartman, 0. 1955. Quantitative survey of the benthos of San Pedro Basin,
Southern California. Allan Hancock Pac. Exped. 19:1-85.
Hartman, 0. 1963. Submarine canyons of southern California. Part II,
Biology. University of Southern California Press, Los Angeles. 424 pp.
Hendricks, T.J. 1979* Forecasting changes in sediments near wastewater
outfalls. Pages 127-143 Ln W. BAscom (ed.), Annual report for the year
1978. Southern California Coastal Water Research Project, Long Beach,
California. 253 pp.
Hendricks, T.J. 1983a. Shelf and slope currents off Newport Beach. Pages
237-245_In W. Bascom (ed.), Biennial report for the years 1981-1982.
Southern California Coastal Water Research Project, Long Beach, California.
294 pp.
Hendricks, T.J. 1983b. An advanced sediment-quality model. Pages 247-257
In W. Bascom (ed.), Biennial report for the years 1981-1982. Southern
California Coastal Water Research Project, Long Beach, California. 294 pp.
Hershelman, G.P., T.S. Jan, and R.A. Schafer. 1977. Pollutants in
sediments off Palos Verdes. In; SCCWRP, Annual Report 1977.
A-89
-------
V
-------
Hershelman, G.P., P. Szalay, and C. Ward. 1982. Metals in surface sediments
from Point Dume to Point Hueneme. In; SCCWRP, Biennial Report 1981-^1982.
Horn, M.H. 1974. Fishes. Chapter II In A summary of knowledge of the
southern California coastal zone and offshore areas. Prepared by Southern
California Ocean Studies Consortium for Bureau of Land Management.
Contract No. 80550-CT4-1.
Jones, G.F., 1969. The benthic macrofauna of the mainland shelf of southern
California. Allan Hancock Monograph In Marine Biology. No. 4. 219 pp.
Krumbien, W.C., and E.G. PettiJohn. 1983. Manual of sedimentary petrography.
D. Appleton-Century, New York. 549 pp.
Margalef, R. 1957. LA teoria del la informacion en ecologia. Mem. Real
Acad. Cienc. Artes Barcelona 32: 373-449 (Trans). Jn Gen. Syst. 3:36-71).
Miller, D.J., and R.N. Lea. 1972. Guide to the coastal marine fishes of
California. California Department of Fish & Game. Fish Bull. 157. 249 pp.
Maloney, N.J., and K. Chan. 1974. Physical oceanography. Pages 3-1 to 3-65
_In_ M.D. Dally, B. Hill, and N. Lansing (eds.). A summary of knowledge of
the southern California coastal zone and offshore areas: Vol. I. Physical
environment. Southern California Ocean Studies Consotrlum of California
State Colleges and Universities. Report to the Bureau of Land Management.
Manzanilla, E. and J.N. Cross. 1982. Food habits of demersal fish in Santa
Monica Bay. P. 119-124 In W. Bascom, (ed.), 1981-1982 Biennial Report.
Southern California Coastal Water Research Project. Long Beach,
California.
Moore, M., W. Bascom and H. Stubbs. 1983. Trawl-caught fish and
invertebrates. In W. Bascon (ed). Biennial report for the years 1981-
1982. Southern California Coastal Water Research Project. P. 85-97.
Morel, F.M.M., J.C. Westall, C.R. O'Melia, and J.J. Morgan. 1975. Fate of
trace metals in Los Angeles County Wastewater Discharge. Enviro. Sci.
Techn. 9:756-761.
Nie, N.H., C.H. Hull, J.G. Jenkins, K. Stelnbrenner, and D.H. Brent. 1975.
Statistical Package for the Social Sciences. McGraw-Hill Company,'New
York. 675 pp.
Plumb, R.H., Jr. 1981. Procedure for handling and chemical analysis of
sediment and water samples. Technical report EPA/CE-81-1 prepared by
Great Lakes Laboratory, State University College at Buffalo, Buffalo, N.Y.,
for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency/Corps of Engineering Technical
Committee on Criteria for Dredged and Fill Material. Published by the
U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, CE, Vlcksburg, Miss.
Reid, J.L., Jr. 1962. Distribution of dissolved oxygen in the summer
thermocline. J. Mar. Res. 10:138-148.
A-90
-------
-------
Shannon, C.S. and W. Weaver. 1949. The Mathematical Theory of Communication.
Urbana, 111.: Univ. Illinois Press. 117 pp.
Sharp, W.E., and P-F. Fan. 1973. A sorting index. J. Geol. 71:76-83.
Sherwood, M. 1982. Fin erosion, liver condition and trace contaminant
exposure in fishes from three coastal regions, pp. 359-377. In;
Ecological Stress and the New York Bight: Science and Management. G.F.
Mayer (ed), Estuarine Research Federation, Columbia, SC.
Sherwood, M.M., A.J. Mearns, D.R. Young, B.B. McCain, R.A. Murchelano, et.
al., 1980. A comparison of trace contaminants in diseased fishes from
three areas. Report to the National Marine Fisheries Service. Stony
Brook, N.Y. 131 pp.
Sneath,.P.H.A. and R.R. Sokal. 1973. Numerical Taxonomy. W.H. Freeman
and Company. San Francisco. 573 pp.
Southern California Coastal Water Research Project. 1973. The ecology of the
Southern California Bight: Implications for water quality management.
NTIS No. PB 274462/AS, U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Springfield, VA.
Stephens, J.S.,f D. Gardner and C. Terry. 1973. The demersal fish populations
of San Pedro Bay In D.F. Soule and M. Oguri (eds). Part 2. Biological
Investigations. Allan Hancock Foundation Publications USC-SG-6-72.
237 pp.
Warner, J.S. 1976, Determination of aliphatic and aromatic hydrocarbons in
marine organisms. Analytical Chemistry 48:578.
Word, J.Q. 1976. Biological comparisonof benthic sampling devices. Pages
159-195 In. Coastal water research report - Annual report for the year ended
30 June 1976. Southern California Coastal Water Research Project. El
Segundo, California. 263 pp.
Word, J.Q., and A.J. Mearns. 1977. Bottom invertebrate populations below
200 meters. SCCWRP Annual Report for 1977. p. 89-97.
Word J.Q., and A.J. Mearns. 1979. 60-meter control off southern California.
Technical Memorandum 229. SCCWRP, Long Beach, CA.
Young, D.R., and R. Gossett. 1980. Chlorinated benzenes in sediments and
organisms, pp. 181-195. In: SCCWRP, Biennial Report 1979-1980.
Young, D.R., M.D. Moore, T.K. Jan, and R.P. Eganhouse. 1981. Metals in
seafood organisms 'near a large California municipal outfall. Mar. Pollut.
Bull. 12:134-139.
A-91
-------
-------
-------
-------
DRAFT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
FINAL DESIGNATION OF A
DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE OFF
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA
•—: -Los Angeles County, California
APPENDIX B
DETAILED FIELD SURVEY DATA
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST
-------
-------
DRAFT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
FINAL DESIGNATION OF A
DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE OFF
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA
Los Angeles County, California
APPENDIX C
NUMERICAL SIMULATION OF
DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
-------
-L .
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
APPENDIX C. NUMERICAL SIMULATION OF DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL
C.I INTRODUCTION .,
C.2 MODEL CONCEPTS
C.3 INPUT DATA ....
C.4 RESULTS
C.5 CONCLUSIONS ...
C.6 REFERENCES ....
Page
C-l
C-l
C-2
C-4
C-10
C-13
-------
-------
APPENDIX C. NUMERICAL SIMULATION OF DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL
C.I INTRODUCTION
To assist in evaluating the effect of dredged material disposal on water
quality (turbidity), and the extent and quantity of deposition of material
on the bottom, disposal from a barge was simulated using models developed
for the Corps of Engineers Dredged Material Research Program by Koh and
Chang (1973). Modifications to these models have been made by Brandsma and
Divoky (1978) and Wu and Leung (1983). The models used were the 1)
instantaneous dump model (DMF) which assumes the entire barge load of
material is discharged instantaneously (as from a split-hull barge); and 2)
continuous discharge or jet model (DMFJ), which simulates the discharge as
coming from a submerged pipe with prescribed pipe size, volume of material,
time for discharge, and velocity of discharge. The characteristics and
application of these models are discussed further in following sections.
C.2 MODEL CONCEPTS
f
Both models assume that release occurs in an ocean characterized by a
prescribed density and velocity gradient. The behavior of the dumped
material is assumed to be separated into three phases: convective descent,
during which the dump cloud or discharge jet falls under the influence of
gravity, entraining water and being influenced by the ambient current;
dynamic collapse, occurring when the descending cloud either impacts the
bottom or arrives at the level of neutral buoyancy at which descent is
retarded and horizontal spreading dominates; and long-term passive disper-
sion, commencing when the material transport and spreading is determined
more by ambient currents and turbulence than the dynamics of the disposal
operation.
Because split-hull barges are typically used for disposal of dredge spoil
at the LA 2 site, it was decided that the instantaneous dump model (DMF)
was a better approximation of disposal operations than the continuous
discharge of the jet model (DMFJ). DMF is an approximation, albeit an
acceptable one, because emptying of a split-hull barge is not instantaneous
but takes approximately 30 seconds. It was felt that the jet system would
C-l
-------
impart unrealistically large momentum to the discharged plume. Subsequent
running of DMFJ corborated this, which predicted the plume reaching bottom
(600 ft) in unreal istically short time (approximately 1 minute) and high
velocity (5.1-7.5 ft/sec). Therefore, the DMF model was used in all simu-
lations. !
C.3 INPUT DATA
Input data required for the operation of the model can be grouped into (a)
a description of the ambient environment at the disposal site, (b) charac-
terization of the dredged material, (c) data describing the disposal opera-
tion, and (d) model coefficients. Model coefficient values used were the
suggested average values built into the model, because these values have
been shown to be good general approximations and because there was no
conclusive evidence to justify changes. The other types of needed infor-
mation are given below with the Input values.
The first parameters required for the model are the horizontal grid over
which the movement of disposed material 1s described, and the total simula-
tion time (in this case, 24 hours). A grid size of 2,000 ft was chosen as
providing acceptable resolution of material dispersion while establishing
an area large enough to contain essentially all of the material after 24
hours of dispersal. The 24-hour simulation showed that the status of the
disposal material changed little after the first few hours, so a 5-hour
simulation was also run.
Number of grids in X-direction (North - South)
Number of grids in Z-direction (East - West)
Grid spacing
Water depth of discharge grid
Long term time step
Total simulation time
Discharge Parameters
Initial radius of cloud
Initial volume of cloud
Initial depth of cloud centroid
Ship traveling towards East at 7.2 ft/sec
24
24
2,000 ft
600 ft (column 12, row 12)
3,600 sec; also 900 sec.
24 hours; also 5 hours
21.77 ft [based on
21598 cu ft. dimensions of
typical split
hull barge]
15 ft
"} i
C-2
-------
Characteristics of
Item
Gravel
Sand
Silt
Clay
Fluid
(gm/cc)
Density
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.6
1.0
Discharged Materials:
(cuft/cuft)
Concentration
.0013
.1276
.1551
.0293
.6867
(ft/sec)
Fall Velocity
1.910
.047
.0021
.0000036
-
Voids Ratio
.8
.8
.8
.8
~
(ft)
Particle Dia.
0.0218
0,000452
0.0000850
0.00000353
Dredged material characterises were calculated from a study of the sedi-
ments of Long Beach Harbor (MBC, 1982).
Bulk Parameters;
BUI* density* 1.5 gm/cc >
Aggregate voids ratio =0.8
Ambient Conditions;
Current - Northwest - 0.261 ft/sec
- Southeast - 0.261 ft/sec
Summer Density Profile;
Depth (ft) 0 33 98 131 328 410 443 2050
Density (gm/cc) 1.024 1.024 1.029 1.029 1.029 1.034 1.034 1.036
Winter Density Profile:
Depth (ft) 0 131 164 410 492 574 623 3000
Density (gm/cc) 1.025 1.025 1.026 1.026 1.027 1.026 1.026. 1.027
Current speeds are based on Hendricks (1980, 1982), Hendricks and Stubbs
(1984), and Winant (1983). Density profiles are based on data from August
and February surveys for the present study. Current velocity was assumed
to decrease from the surface to 0.261 ft/sec. at 40 ft depth, to zero at
the bottom, according to a logarithmic function defining a gradual decrease
in velocity through most of the water column and then rapid decrease to
zero in the last few meters above the bottom.
Case
1
2
3
4
SIMULATIONS
Density
Summer
Wi nter
Summer
WI nter
Current
Northwest
Northwest
Southeast
Southeast
C-3 -
-------
Northwest Current
146.00
122.00
1.39
2.46
(summer)
(winter)
(summer)
(winter)
C.4 RESULTS
End of Convectlve Descent
Bottom Encounter (sec)
Bottom Encounter Velocity (ft/sec)
These results show that the discharged plume does not reach neutral
buoyancy 1n the water column but encounters the bottom with positive velo-
city. Descent 1s slower In the summer because the greater density near the
bottom (below the pycnocline) retards sinking of the plume. Results for
the southeast current are not shown because they are essentially the same
as those for the northwest current.
End of Collapse Phase Northwest Current
Time (sec) after discharge
Distance (ft) from discharge
Percent solid remaining in plume
Gravel
Sand
Silt
Clay
These results show that collapse of the plume on the bottom occurs fairly
rapidly (3l£ to 5 minutes after discharge) and not far horizontally (700-800
ft) from the discharge site. All of the gravel and essentially all of the
finer .sediments no longer remain in the plume, indicating that the plume
has in fact collapsed and ceased to exist as a dynamic entity. This does
not mean that the material no longer in the plume has settled to the bot-
tom (see next section). Again, the results for the southeast current are
essentially the same as those for the northwest current and so are not
shown.
Summer
313
818
0
1.82
2.74
2.68
Winter
206
706
0
1.17
1.55
1.52
.
C-4
-------
Passive Dispersion Phase: Materials Settled to Bottom
SUMMER
WINTER
T1me(hr)
1.25
2.50
3.75
5.00
6
12 .
18
24
Passive Di
Time (hr)
1.25
2.50
3.75
5.00
6
12
18
24
Solid
gravel
sand
silt
clay
silt
clay
silt
clay
silt
clay
silt
clay
silt
clay
silt
clay
silt
clay
spersion
Solid
silt
clay
silt
clay
silt.
clay
silt
clay
silt
clay
silt
clay
silt
clay
silt
clay
1 Settled Distance (ft)
100
100
18.2
10.0
20.1
10.0
20.1
10.0
20.1
10.0
20.1
10.0
20.1
10.0
20.1
10.0
20.1
10.0
Phase: Materials
% Suspended Di
81.8
90.0
79.9
90.0
79.9
90.0
79.9'
90.0
79.9.
90.0
. 79.9 '
90.0
79.9
90.0
79.9
90.0
65
1240
815
815
815
815
815
815
815
815
815
815
815
815
815
815
815
815
Suspended in
stance (ft)
1888
1783
3086
2828
4262
3875
5438
4923
6377
5760
6377
5760
17678
17058
23327
22709
% Settled
100
100
8.4
0
8.4
0
8.4
0
8.4
0
8.4
0
8.4
0
8.4
0
8.4
0
Water Column
Depth (ft)
602
599
610
599
619
599
629
599
636
599
636
599
727
599
772
599
Distance (ft)
61
1375
-
706
•»
706
-
706
-
706
-
706
-
706
-
706
-
706
- SUMMER
Concentra-
tion (mg/1)
130
18
51
51
8.2
15
4.6
2.7
6.52
0.215
6.52
0.215
1.548E3
0.0212
0.452
0.0107
C-5
-------
Passive Dispersion
Passive
Time (hr)
1.25
250
3.75
5.00
6
12
18
24
Solid
silt
clay
silt
clay
silt
clay
silt
clay
silt
clay
silt
clay
silt
clay
silt
clay
Phase: M<
% Suspei
91.6
100
91.6
100
91.6
100
91.6
100
91.6
100
91.5
100
91.4
100
91.3
100
Materials Suspended in Water Column - WINTER
Distance (ft) Depth (ft)
1814
1725
2988
2793
4163
3862
5339
4933
6278
5787
11927
10940
17577
16102
23228
21273
602
601
612
601
621
601
631
601
638
601
684
601
729
601
774
601
Concentra-
tlon (mg/1)
140
20
50
11
8.6
5.8
0.7
3.4
4.85
0.118
3.67E-7
0.0317
1.59E-4
0.0135
0.678 .
0.00728
These results show that, by the first time step in the passive dispersion
phase (1.25 hr), all of the gravel and sand discharged has settled to the
bottom. The distribution of settled gravel is centered about 60 ft down
current (northwest) from the discharge point, while the settled sand is
centered about 1,300 ft northwest of the discharge point. The total volume
of gravel (28.1 cu ft) is deposited in an area of approximately 12,000 sq
ft, with an average thickness of 0.03 in.(0.07 cm). The total volume of
sand (2,756 cu ft) is deposited in an area of approximately 88,000 sq ft,
with an average thickness of 0.38 in.(0.96'cm).
The fate of the finer sediment fractions, silt and clay, is very different.
After 1.25 hours, only about 20% (670 cu ft) of the silt and 10% (63 cu ft)
of the clay have settled to the bottom. This settling is a result of cloud
collapse, as shown by the center of the settled silt and clay approximating
that of the collapsed cloud (815 or 706 ft vs. 818). No appreciable addi-
tional settling of silt or clay has occurred after 1.25 hours. This is
because all silt and clay that did not settle quickly has been transported
by the current northwest into deeper water and has reached neutral buoyancy
in the water column, at a depth of 600 to 770 ft depending on the fraction
and the season (which affects near-bottom density). It is somewhat
surprising that more silt and clay are deposited in the summer when near-
bottom densities are higher. It can only be assumed that greater vertical
C-6
-------
mixing in winter in the absence of a strong pycnocline enhances suspension.
The distribution and concentration of suspended silt and clay in the water
column over time are shown in the above table, and in Figures C-l and C-2.
Suspended silt and clay are shown being transported (together in a single
cloud) from the discharge site to the northwest by the ambient current, and
undergoing dispersion and dilution. After five hours, both fractions have
been diluted to negligible concentrations (less than 3 mg/1 maximum), have
been transported approximately 5,000 feet down current, and have a maximum
diameter of approximately 3,000 ft. Both fractions occur in their highest
shown concentrations after 1.25 hours: silt at 130 mg/1 (winter), and clay
at 20 mg/1 (winter). These peak concentrations occur at the center of the
cloud and decrease to zero over the 1,400 ft maximum diameter of the cloud.
Concentrations are certainly higher before 1.25 hours, but this information
is not available from the model with the time steps used. Clay con-
centrations are lower than silt concentrations because clay made up a much
smaller fraction of the discharged material. Concentrations are higher in
the summer than in the winter because a larger percentage of both fractions
remains suspended in the summer.
With a southeast current, all of the suspended silt and clay is transported
into areas shallower than the neutral buoyancy depth of either fraction,
so that deposition of all sediments is expected within 1,500 ft of the
discharge point ;(depth 500 ft). This results in deposition over an area of
approximately 110,000 sq ft in the following volumes and thicknesses:
Fraction Volume Mean Thickness
Gravel 28.1 cu ft 0.003 in. (0.008 cm)
Sand 2,756 cu ft 0.30 in. (0.76 cm)
Silt 3,350 cu ft 0.37 in. (0.93 cm)
Clay 633 cu ft 0.07 in. (0.18 cm)
Total 6,767 cu ft " 0.74 in. (1.88 cm)
The disposed material will not settle evenly over the area (for example, it
is likely that much of the settling will occur well short of 1,500 ft), so
that thickness of deposition will exceed 0.74 in. in some areas.
C-7
-------
140
120
100
SUMMER-NORTHWEST CURRENT
1
oe
80
O 60
8
40
20
TIME(hn)
O 1.25
U ISA
Q 3.75
V 5.00
.o-"
1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
DISTANCE (ft)
FIGURE C-1 CONCENTRATION OF SILT IN WATER COLUMN VS. DISTANCE FROM
DISCHARGE POINT AND TIME AFTER DISCHARGE
C-8
-------
SUMMER-NORTHWEST CURRENT
ce
z
iu
u
§
u
2 -
1000
2000
3000 4000
DISTANCE (ft)
5000
6000
7000
FIGURE C-2 CONCENTRATION OF CLAY IN WATER COLUMN VS. DISTANCE FROM
DISCHARGE POINT AND TIME AFTER DISCHARGE.
C-9
-------
C.5
CONCLUSIONS
The modeling results show that the fate of the disposed material depends
greatly on the direction of the ambient current. Flow to the northwest
(the prevailing current direction in the site area) carries the plume of
discharged material into deeper water, so that, while all of the sand and
gravel settles to the bottom, most of the silt and clay remains in suspen-
sion indefinitely (centered at 600-800 feet depth) and is transported long
distances by the current and diluted. This suspended silt and clay repre-,
sents almost half of the disposed sediment. The general result would be
the same with any offshore current transporting the-plume into deeper
water. With the current flowing to the southeast (a relatively common con-
dition in the site area), the plume is transported into shallower waters,
and all discharged sediment is predicted to be deposited on the bottom.
Any onshore current would produce the same general result, although the
area over which deposition would occur (and thus the thickness of the
deposition) would depend on exact current direction.
Regarding suspended silt and clay under northwest current conditions, the
model predicts a peak concentration at the center of the cloud of approxi-
mately 150 mg/1 1.25 hr. after disposal, the earliest time that such data
is available in the model (concentrations are certainly higher prior to
1.25 hr.). At this time, the cloud is centered approximately 2,000 ft.
downcurrent from the discharge point, and concentration of suspended sedi-
ment decreases to zero over a cloud radius of approximately 1,500 ft. Five
hours after discharge, the maximum combined (silt and clay) concentration
of suspended sediment has decreased to 4-5 mg/1, and the cloud has a radius
of approximately 3,000 ft. and is centered approximately 5,000 ft. down-
current. These are the results of the disposal of one barge load (800 cu.
yds.) of dredged material. A representative dredging job of 50,000 cu.
yds. would require disposal of approximately 63 barge loads, which poses
the potential for superimposing of disposed barge loads. On most dredging
jobs, however, barge emptyings occur at least six hours apart due to the
time required for filling and transport, so that superimposing of suspended
sediment clouds would be slight.
.
<#
c-io
-------
With a northwest current, deposition of disposed sediment is predicted to
occur over a total area of approximately 88,000 sq. ft. In the area where
deposition of all sediment fractions occurs (32,000 sq ft), combined
average thickness of deposited sediments is 0.59 in.(1.5 cm) per barge
load. For deposited sediment, superimposing of successive barge loads is
expected. In the extreme case of exact coincidence of successive deposi-
tions and no movement of deposited sediments, disposal of 50,000 cu. yd.
(63 barge loads) of dredged material would result in deposition of approxi-
mately 220,000cu. ft. (8,200 cu yd) of sediment over 88,000 sq. ft. (2.0
acres) of bottom. In the 32,000 sq. ft.(0.7 acres) where all four frac-
tions are deposited, total average thickness would be 37.2 in.(94.5 cm).
In the additional 56,000 sq. ft.(1.3 acres), only sand would be deposited,.
to an average total thickness of 8.0 in.(20.3 cm). Although not included
in the DMF and DMFJ models, resuspension, slumping and other movement of
deposited sediment certainly occur at the disposal site. Disposal of
50,000 cu yd would take at least 3-4 weeks, so that these mechanisms would
have considerable time to disperse deposited sediments, thus substantially
reducing thickness of accumulated sediment while increasing the area
affected. The fact the successive depositions would not coincide exactly
would add to this effect. Unfortunately, the models and data that would be
needed to quantify this effect are not available.
With a southeast current, disposal of 63 barge loads of dredged material
would result in deposition of 15,800 cu. yd. of sediment (gravel, sand,
silt and clay) over approximately 110,000 sq. ft.(2.6 acres), at an average
thickness of 46.5 in.(118.0 cm).
These simulations have shown that disposal of a representative 50,000 cu.
yds. of dredged material can result in accumulation of the order of several
feet of disposed sediment over approximately 2-3 acres of sea floor. As
discussed above, accumulated thickness would be significantly reduced, and
affected area increased, by resuspension and/or bed load movement of sedi-
ments during the several weeks required to complete disposal. Regardless
of this effect, this deposition represents a major impact on the benthic
sediment regime of the affected area. With a northwest current, the fact
that most of the material deposited is sand, while silt and clays are
C-ll
-------
largely suspended, means that disposal could result in a significant coar-
sening of the area's benthic sediments if the pre-existing sediments are
largely finer fractions (silt). With a southeast current, all disposed
sediments (approximately 60% silt and clay) are expected to be deposited.
Bottom sediments could be made finer as a result, depending on the grain
size of pre-existing sediments.
•
*
C-12
-------
REFERENCES
Brandsma, M.G. and D.J. Oivoky, 1976, "Development of Models for Prediction
of Short-Term Fate of Dredged Material Discharged in the Marine
Environment," U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station
Report D-76-5.
Hendricks, T.J., 1980. Currents in the Los Angeles Area. In W. Bascom,
etc. 1979-1980 Biennial Report. Southern California Coastal WaTer Research
Project {SCCWRP), Long Beach, California.
Henricks, T.J., 1982. Shelf and slope currents of Newport Beach. In W.
Bascom, ed. SCCWRP 1981-1982 Biennial Report. Long Beach, California.
Hendricks, T.J. and H.H. Stubbs. 1984. Currents 1n San Gabriel Canyon.
I_n_ W. Bascom, ed. SCCWRP 1983-1984 Biennial Report. Long Beach, California.
Koh, R.C.Y. and Y.C. Chang, 1973, "Mathematical Model for Barged Ocean
Disposal of Wastes," Environmental Protection Technology Series EPA
660/2-73-029, U.S. EPA, Washington, D.C., December.
MBC Applied Environmental " Sciences, 1982, "Dredge Spoil Bioassay
Evaluations for the Port of Long Beach International Coal Terminal
Facility," Prepared for Envirosphere Company for submittal to Port of Long
Beach, Long Beach, California, July.
Marine Bioassay Laboratories, 1979, "Technical Evaluation of Environmental
Impact Potential for Proposed Ocean Disposal of Dredged Material from Los
Angeles Harbor," for Los Angeles Harbor Department, San Pedro, California,
August.
Winant, C.D. 1983. Longshore coherence of currents on the southern
California shelf during summer. J. Phys. Ocean. 13(1): 54-64.
Wu, F.H.Y. and T.C.F. Leung, 1983, "Modified Koh-Chang Model," Proceedings
of the Workshop, 7-10 February 1983, Santa Barbara, California. An
Evaluation of Effluent Dispersion and Fate Models for OCS Platforms, Volume
2: Contributed Papers, prepared for Minerals Management Service, U.S.
Department of the Interior by MBC Applied Environmental Sciences and
Analytic and Computational Research, Inc., July.
C-13
-------
------- -------
- 6-6 -
^4
H
H
.J
M
0
X
o
a.
CO
M
as
M
u
jg
H
H
as
H
a.
M
H
U
eo
M
H
as
H
M
M
M
X
Z
n
1 B
H O
0 TJ i-»
X 6 4*
JB a o
a. 9
4* 01
«i B
O 9 0
a -H
6 Cjc
•H t, «
4» H t.
0 > bO
b B O
« U C
A (0
9 -t 9
b a u
a. o o
at
4*
a 4»
a B
O 9
0 8
« eo
b a
«• B
9 «
X B
hM
w
3 e
0 0
b. H
X
«0
o
r4
O
«4
CO
•
to
m
b
9
t)
9
O
as
^
•
^
B
^4
U
1
O
^
0
o a
03 B
o
h« -H
0 4*
o
e 9
•H
4* 0
« -H
b B
a> o
a e
9 O
b 0
B. «
O
B 1
O B
a o
0 0
o
9 -0
a
a ai
i,
a «
9 ••* «0
x n B
X-H
3 « -H
0 B 3
u. a a
01
A
X
«a
9
•c
a
^
B
O
e
0
o
M
m
•
*
-
0
^
«
9
b
^
••A
9
a
9
M
b
•H
*• n
B
\» O
O -H
^A
e o
On
W
v< Q
4*
a x
b 4*
a -H
Ck ^
9 a
b 3
a. o
B
9
t. a
•H 01
« n
9
V, 01
O A
<0
n
9 X
a 4*
X -H
a no
B B
U H
*
CO
(Q
.
B
9
4*
n
9
B
a
""»
|