I
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
FOR ;
SAN DIEGO (LA-5)
OCEAN DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE
SITE DESIGNATION
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency *•
* Region 9 " *
San Francisco, California
09 OCT
1987
EPA
909
1987.2
-------
U.S. Fnv1 ronroantal Pro*"»tion At«0to"''"
f ^oon> 2404 Pk- '.;.» ;
.reet, 3*fvlt
J\
-------
pQA
<— tTT
- i -
O ^ O /"
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
n FOR
SAN DIEGO (LA-5)
OCEAN DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE
SITE DESIGNATION
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 9
San Francisco, California
Comments on tfris administrative action should be addressed to:
Mr. Patrick J. Cotter
Oceans and Estuaries Section (W-5-3) ,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
215 Fremont Street
San Francisco, California 94105
Comments aust be received no later than:
^ ™
, 1987 which is 45 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 204 (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
Copies of the EIS may be obtained froa:
Ocean Dumping Coordinator
Oceans and Estuaries Section (W-5-3)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
215 Fremont Street
San Francisco, California 94105
-------
f '.
- u.-.
Further information contact'?
* t
Mr. Patrick J. Cotter] '•' '
Oceans and Estuaries Section (W-5r3)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
215 Fremont Street -" ";
San Francisco, California 94105
(415) 97H-0257 or (FTS) 451-0257
Ms. Shannon E. Cunniff ;•
Environmental Resources Branch
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Los Angeles District, , ".•
P.O. Box 2711 ;< '; '
Los Angeles, California 90053-2325
(213) 89^-0239 or (F.TS) 798-0239
-------
ABSTRACT
The proposed action is the designation of an ocean disposal
site for dredged material off San Diego, California. The site
will be used in conjunction with 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-5, has been used
for disposal of material dredged from the navigation channels of
San Diego Harbor 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-5 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) Ho Action, 2} Delayed
Action, 3) Landfilling of Port Areas, 4) Landfilling at Sanitary
Landfills, 5) Beach Nourishment, 6) Ocean Disposal at the LA-5
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-5 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-5
site for continued use. This decision is based on the lack of
significant long-term environmental impacts at the LA-5 site,
the potential for disposal activities to adversely affect the
alternative sites, and the demonstrated need for an ocean
disposal site for dredged material.
-------
- iv -
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
FOR
SAN DIEGO (LA-5)
OCEAN DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE
SITE DESIGNATION
Contract Supervision By:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Los Angeles District
P.O. Box 2711
Los Angeles, California 90053
(213) 894-5606
Charles M. Holt,1 P.E.
Chief, Regulatory Branch
Reviewed by:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 9
Vater Management Division
215 Fremont Street
San Francisco, California 94105
(415) 974-8115
Harrj^ Seraydarian
Director
Hater Management Division
Approved and Submitted by:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 9
215 Fremont Street
San Francisco, California 94105
(415) 974-8153
Ayres
Regional Administrator
-------
- V -
TABLE OF CONTENTS,
COVER SHEET 1
ABSTRACT ill
AGENCY CONCURRENCE iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS v
LIST OF FIGURES ix
LIST OF TABLES x
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS - xiii
LIST OF MEASUREMENTS AND CONVERSIONS xv
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY S-1
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. Generalint roduc11 on .. 1-1
1.1.1. Historical 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
1.4. Areas of Controversy 1-9
1.5. Issues to be Resolved 1-10
1.6. Regulatory Framework 1-12
1.7. Relationship to Pj^evJLous HEPA Actions or
Other Facilities That May be Affected by
Designation of the Disposal Site 1-17
CHAPTER 2. ALTERNATIVES
2.1. Description of Alternatives 2-1
2.1.1. Preferred Alternative (LA-5 ODMDS) 2-1
2.1.2. No Action Alternative 2-2
2.1.3. Delayed Action Alternative 2-3
2.1.4. Landfllling Alternatives in Port Areas ...... 2-3
2.1.5. Land Disposal Alternatives at Sanitary
Landfills 2-4
2.1.6. Beach Nourishment Alternative 2-5
2.1.7. Alternative Ocean Disposal Sites 2-5
-------
- vi -
2.2. Discussion of Alternatives 2-8
2.2.1. Alternatives Mot Considered for Further
Analysis 2-8
2.2.2. Compliance of the Three ODMDS Alternatives
with General Criteria for the Selection
of Sites (40 CFR 228.5) 2-9
2.2.3. Comparison of the Three ODMDS to EFA's 11
Specific Criteria for Site Selection
MO CFR 228.6(a) 2-11
2.2.4. Selection of the Preferred Alternative 2-11
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 Dumping in the
Area, Including Cumulative Effects
40 CFR 228.6(a)(7) 3-3
3.1*3. Feasibility of Surveillance and
Monitoring 40 CFR 228.6(a)(5) 3-4
3.2. Physical Environment 3-4
3-2.1. Meteorology and Air Quality 3-4
3.2.2. Physical Oceanography of the Southern
California Bight 40 CFR 228.6(a)(6) 3-7
3.2.3. Vater Column Characteristics
40 CFH 228.6(a)(9) - 3-11
3.2.4. Regional Geology 3-18
3.2.5. Sediment Characteristics 3-19
3.3. Biological Environment 3-24
3*3 • 1. Plankton Community 3-26
3.3.2. Kelp Community 3-31
3.3.3. Benthic Biology 3-32
3.3.4. Fish 3-41
3.3-5. Coastal Birds 3-47
3.3.6. Marine Mammals 3-48
3.3.7' Rare, Threatened and Endangered Species 3-50
3.3.8. Marine Sanctuaries and Areas of Special
Biological Significance 3-54
3.3.9. Potentiality for the Development or
Recruitment of Nuisance Species in
the Disposal Site 40 CFR 228.6(a)(10) 3-57
3«4. Socloeconoaic Environment ........................... 3—58
3.4.1. Commercial Fishing 3-58
3.4.2. Commercial Shipping 3-58
-------
- vii -
3.4.3. Oil and Gas Development 3-63
3.4.4. Military Usage 3-65
3.4.5. Recreational Activities 3-65
3.4.6. Cultural Resources 3-72
3.4.7. Public Health and Welfare 3-74
CHAPTER 4. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
4.1. Introduction 4-1
4.2. LA-5 ODHDS 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 4-18
4.3- No Action Alternative 4-22
4.4.. Shallow Water Site 4-23
4.4.1. Effects on the Physical Environment 4-23
4.4.2. Effects on,, th_e Biological ^Environment 4-25
4.4.3. Effects on the Socloeconomic Environment .... 4-27
4.5. Deep Water Site 4-28
4.5.1. Effects on the Physical Environment 4-29
4.5.2. Effects on the Biological Environment 4-30
4.5.3. Effects on the Socloeconomic Environment .... 4-32
4.6. Management of the Disposal__SJLt_e 4-33
4.7. Relationship Between Short-term Dse and Long-term
Resource Uses 4-35
4.8. Irreversible or Irretrievable Commitment
of Resources 4-35
CHAPTER 5. COORDINATION
5.1. Public Involvement 5-1
5.2. Interagency Workshop 5-1
5.3. Formal Consultations 5-25
5.4. Requested Reviewers 5-33
CHAPTER 6. LIST OF PREPARERS 6-1
CHAPTER 7. LITERATURE CITED 7-1
-------
-viii-
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 Pane
5-1. Map of Project Region S-2
S-2. Map of the Project Area S-3
S-3. Maps of Major Biological Resources In the
Project Area S-6
S-4. Maps of Major Socioeconomlc Features In the
Project Area 5-8
1-1. Map of the Project Area 1-2
1-2. Evaluation Process for Dredged 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 Diego Shelf and Basin 2-6
3-1 • Location of Discharge Outfalls and Other
Ocean Disposal Sites in the Project Area 3-2
3-2. Generalized Depiction of General Vlnd Regimes
in the San Diego Vicinity 3-6
3-3- Three'Major Currents which Influence the Southern
California Bight 3-8
3-4. Seasonal Variations in Currents of the
Southern California Bight 3-9
3-5. Location of Federal and State Biological
Reserves in the Project Area 3-56
3-6. Principal Commercial Fish Species and Average
Annual Catch by Block in Project Area 3-61
3-7. Commercial Shipping Lanes, Zones of Military
Operation and Other Cultural Features
in the Project Area 3-66
3-8. Sportfishing Resources of the Project Area 3-69
3-9. Principal Recreation Areas in the Project
Region 3-T3
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
S-1. Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures
for the LA-5 Site S-12
S-2. Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for
the Ho Action Alternative S-14
S-3. Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for
the Shallow Water Alternative S-15
S-4. Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for
the Deep Water Alternative S-17
1-1. Permits Issued by the COE for Disposal of
Dredged Material at the LA-5 Site (a) 1-3
1-2. Summary 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 2-7
2-2. Comparison of Alternative Ocean Disposal
Sites Based on EPA's 11 Specific Site
Designation Criteria 2-12
3-1. Concentrations of Trace Metals as Suspended
Partlculates in the Water Column in Micrograms
Per Liter (ug/1) 3-17
3-2. Grain Size Distribution for .the LA-5 and
Reference Sites 3-20
3-3. Concentrations of Trace Metals in Sediments,
Micrograms Per Gram Dry Weight (ug/g), Mean,
Range _ 3-22
3-4. Concentrations of Hydrocarbons in Sediments in
Micrograms per Gram Dry Weight (ug/g) 3-25
3-5. Common Pbytoplankton Species of the Study
Area 3-27
3-6. Major Zooplankton Taxa In the Southern
California Bight 3-29
-------
- xi -
Table Page
3-7. Dominant Bentblc Infauna of the Mainland
Shelf from 9.3 Fathoms (17 m) to 131 Fathoms
(240 m) 3-33
3-8. Dominant Benthlc Infauna of the Slope
Off Huntlngton and Laguna Beaches from
88 Fathoms (161 m) to 284 Fathoms (520 m) 3-35
3-9* Dominant Benthlc Infauna of the Basins of the
Southern California Bight from 340 Fathoms
(622 m) to 485 Fathoms (888-m) 3-36
3-10. Dominant Eplfauna of the LA-5 and Reference
Sites 3-39
3-11. Common Fish Larvae of the Southern California
Bight 3-43
3-12. Families of Fish Inhabiting the Pelagic
Environment In the Southern California Bight ... 3-46
3-13. Marine Mammals of the Southern California
Bight 3-49
3-14. Bare, Threatened or Endangered Species of the
Southern California Bight 3-51
3-15. Height and Value of Landings of Commercial Fish
at San Diego Area Ports and in California,
1981-1983 3-59
3-16. Value of Commercial Fish,Landing by Port,
San Diego Area, 1981-1983 3-60
3-17- Annual Catch in Pounds of Commercial Fish, by
Blocks of Origin in the San Diego Area, 1976,
1977 and 1981 3-62
3-18. San Diego Unified Port District, Vessel __
Traffic 1980 to 1983 3-64
3-19. Existing and Projected Number of Participation
Days for Ocean-Related Recreational Activities
in the LA-5 Area (San Diego County), 1980,
1985 and 1990 3-67
3-20. lumber of Sportflsh Caught and Number of Anglers
on Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessels (Party
Boats), by Port, in the San Diego Area, 1977
and 1981 * 3-70
3-21. Number of Sportfish Caught, by Block of
Origin, in the Vicinity of LA-5 Site, 1977 3-71
-------
- xii -
Table
4-1 .
4-2.
4-3.
4-4.
5-1.
5-2.
Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures
for the LA-5 Site
Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures
for tbe No Action Alternative
Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures
for tbe LA-4 Shallow Water Alternative ....
Summary of Impacts.and Mitigation Measures
for tbe Deep Water Alternative ,
Issues Identified During tbe Scoping Process ..
Attendees at tbe Interagency Workshop on
Ocean Disposal at tbe LA-2 and LA-5 Sites
Page
4-2
4-4
4-5
4-7
5-12
5-22
-------
- ziii -
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
As arsenic
ASBS Areas of Special Biological Significance
B boron
BLM U.S. Bureau of Land Management
BOD biological oxygen demand
CalCOFI California Cooperative Oceanic Fisheries Investigations
Cd cadmium
CDFG California Department of Fish and Game
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
Co cobalt
CO carbon monoxide
COD chemical oxygen demand
COE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Cr chromium
CSWQCB California State Water Quality Control Board
CSWRCB California State Water Resources Control Board
Cu copper
DO dissolved oxygen
DOS U.S. Department of Energy
EIH environmental Impact report
EIS environmental Impact statement
SPA Environmental Protection Agency
Fe iron
FWS . U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
EC hydrocarbons
Hg mercury
-------
- XlV -
JWPCP Joint Water Pollution Control Project
LACSD Los Angeles County Sanitation District
LPC Halted permissible concentration
Mb molybdenum
MMS U.S. Minerals Management Service
Mn manganese
MPRSA Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of
1972
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
HMFS National Marine Fisheries Service
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
HOI Notice of Intent
NOX nitrogen oxides
OCS outer continental shelf
ODMDS Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site
Oz ozone
PAR • Port Access Routes
Pb lead
PCB polychlorinated blphenyl
pH hydrogen ion concentration
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
SCCWRP Southern California Coastal Water Research Project
Se selenium
SHPO State Historic Preservation Officer
IDS total dissolved solids
ISP total suspended particulates
TSS Traffic Separation Schemes
OSCG U.S. Coast Guard
Zn zinc
-------
cm/s
ft .
g/m2
g/C/m2/day
km
m
mg/1
mg/m2
mm
m3
mph
nmi
PPt
ug/g
ug/kg
ug/1
urn
yd3
- XV -
List of He a sur em e nt s
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
miles per. hour
nautical miles
parts per thousand
micrograo per gram
microgram per kilogram
microgram per liter
micrometers
cubic yards
Conversions
1 fathom = 1.829 meters
1 meter » 3.281 feet
1 nautical mile s 1.852 kilometers
1 kilometer s 0.6214 statute miles
cubic meters = 1.308 cubic yards
-------
-------
S-1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
S.I . INTRODUCTION
Tills Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) evaluates the
designation of an ocean dredged material disposal site (ODMDS)
located southwest of San Diego Bay in southern California
(Figures S-1, S-2). The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
Begion 9 is issuing this BIS, 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 SIS has been prepared to document compliance with EPA'a
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 dredged material. The goal of this
management program is to authorize disposal of dredged material
without unreasonable degradation of the ocean with respect to
human health and the marine environment.
The preferred alternative Is to designate the LA-5 site, as
the site for disposal of dredged material from the Port of San
Diego and the San Diego- Naval Station. This site has been used
as an Interim disposal site since the 1970s. Maintenance dred-
.ging of channels and expansion, of dock capacities in San Diego
Bay 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-5 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-5 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-5 Site (Preferred Alternative},
B. No Action,
C. Delayed Action,
D. Landfllling In Port Areas,
B. Landfllling at Sanitary Landfill Sites,
F. Beach Nourishment,
6. Ocean Disposal at a Shallow Water Site (LA-4), and
B. Ocean Disposal at a Deep Water Site.
-------
* /./>
-------
S-3
<^l t
~ \tA5lNTEBlMtSITE
REFERENCE SJTE
4 INTEniM S1TE
< SHALLOW WATER
ALTERNATIVE
1 1
12349 '
i i , \
- '
JCAL£ IN NAUTICAL MIL£S
RQURE S-2. MAP OF THE PROJECT AREA
-------
S-4
Preliminary analyses indicated that alternatives other than
ocean disposal were either inadequate, not feasible, or more
environmentally damaging. The major alternatives evaluated
through detailed environmental analyses were ocean disposal at
the LA-5 site, a shallow water site, and a deep water site. The
other alternatives were considered infeasible for the adequate
disposal of dredged material from the San Diego Harbor area.
S.2. PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
The three potential ocean disposal sites are located on the
mainland shelf off San Diego, on the slope between this shelf
and the Coronado Bank, and in the San Diego Trough. They are
outer shelf, slope, and deep water regions, respectively. The
slope site is the location of the Interim disposal site,
referred to as the LA-5 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.
Physical ooeanographlc 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, geostrophlc currents, and complex
submarine topography. Offshore San Diego, predominant current
direction is to the northwest at net speeds of 2-3 centimeters
per second (cm/s).
Vater quality at the LA-5 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. Vater
quality at the LA-4 shallow water site and the deep water site
are expected to be similar to that of the LA-5 site.
Sediment quality at the LA-5 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
bipbenyls (PCBs) are higher. This is a result of past disposal
activities during the interim designation period.
Sediments at the deep water site are relatively undisturbed
by previous activities, although dissolved oxygen levels would
be low as * result of natural conditions at great depths. The
deeper sediments, composed of silts and clays, are expected to
be finer than the LA-5 site. Levels of contaminants would be
-------
S-5
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 LA-4 shallow water site is expected
to show a moderate degree of grain size alteration and
contamination due to a limited amount of previous disposal
activities.
A field survey conducted for this EIS indicates that
disposal activities have caused significant changes in the
characteristics of bottom sediments. If permanent designation
were approved for dredged material disposal, sediment
degradation would be a continuing effect at the LA-5 site, while
it would be a new effect at the deep water site and a renewed
effect at the LA-4 shallow water site.
S.3. BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT
The benthic community will be affected most by disposal
activities at any of the designated disposal sites. Bentbic
infauna and eplfauna of the LA-5 site are typical of the
southern California slope community (Jones and Fauchald, 1977)
although diversity is depressed in comparison to a nearby
reference site. The benthic Infauna of the deep water site is
low in biomass and diversity (Hartman and Barnard, 1958;
Fauchald and Jones, 1978b), while at the shallow water site it
is more diverse and abundant than at the LA-5 site (SCCWRP,
1973).
Disposal of dredged material may cause lower species
diversity and species abundance of infauna, eplfauna and
demersal fish at each'site. Direct causes of these changes are
smothering, alteration of sediment characteristics, the
potential increase in the concentration of toxic substances, and
increased body tissue burdens of some chlorinated hydrocarbons.
This would be a continuation of the observed conditions at the
LA-5 site, a renewed effect at the LA-4 shallow water site, and
a new effect at the deep water site. Impacts to deep water
infauna and eplfauna may be less than presently occurring at
LA-5 because material reaching the deep basin will be dispersed
over a greater area.
Organisms such as plankton, pelagic fish, coastal birds,
pinnepeds and cetaceans are not expected to be affected by
disposal activities in the ocean. Most of the threatened and
endangered species found in southern California waters do not
require any of the potential disposal areas for critical
habitat. Ho significant impacts are expected on any of these
organisms.
There are four State ecological reserves and a National
Wildlife Refuge at Los Fenasqultas Marsh in the vicinity of the
LA-5 site (Figure S-3). Two of the State reserves and refuges
-------
S-6
Ui
o
IU
o
tr
a.
ui
to
UI
o
cc
3
o
to
IU
GC
O
o
o
o
to
oc
o
eo
o.
CO
UJ
§
o
-------
S-7
are also designated as Areas of Special Biological Significance.
The closest of these reserves, the Point Lorna Ecological
Reserve, is located approximately 6 nautical miles (nml) (19
kilometers or km) north of the LA-5 site. This small underwater
reserve would probably not be Impacted by the ODMDS disposal
activities because of the prevailing currents which carry any
contaminants away from this area. All of the other designated
areas of biological significance are 12 or more nmi (22 or more
km) from the LA-5 site. No significant environmental impacts
are expected to affect any of these State or Federal areas.
S.4. SOCIOECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT
The San Diego area is an important center for commercial
fishing. In 1983, about 85 million pounds of fish and marine
invertebrates valued at $38.0 million were landed at San Diego.
The fish species commonly landed at San Diego Include tuna
(yellowfio, bluefin, skipjack, and albacore), swordfish, Pacific
bonlto, and rockflsh. These accounted for over 90f of all
landings during the 1981-1983 period. In general, the
productivity of most of the blocks of origin in the vicinity of
the LA-5 site Increased over, the 1976-1981 period. The annual
fluctuations in the catch are more a reflection of the market
demand for fish, rather than the productivity of the blocks.
The Port of San Diego Includes one of the largest Navy
establishments in the country.- It. is. the home base for 120 Navy
ships, which constitute more than 181 of the Navy's active
fleet. Areas offshore of San Diego are used extensively for
various military operations. (Figure S-4). Although most of the
military operations take place far beyond the immediate coastal
areas, traffic between the port and the operations areas is
quite heavy. Annually, Navy ships make more than 7,000 trips in
and out of San Diego Bay.
San Diego Bay is a major Naval, commercial and recreational
center for the southwest United States. The Navy has facilities
at.the inner north end of San Diego Bay. Between 1,200 to 1,400
commercial and other vessels called annually at the Port of San
Diego during the 1979-1983 period. While existing ship channnel
depths and widths appear adequate for the foreseeable planning
period, growing ship size is expected to'continue placing
greater demand on the need for deeper channels, and expanded
terminal areas in the long-term future.
There is no oil and gas development offshore of San Diego
County. In the Federal waters, some tracts were proposed for
leasing several times, but have been deleted as a result of
State and local opposition. The State waters within the three
mile limit have been designated by the State as oil and gas
sanctuaries. This precludes any oil and gas development in
these areas.
-------
S-8
UJ
cc
o
Ui
o
E
UI
CO
Ul
£T
Ul
u.
O
O
O
o
o
CO
ac
o
CO
a.
CO
UJ
oc
o
-------
S-9
Sportfiahlng in tbe San Diego area occurs out of several
harbors and at a number of piers (Figure S-3). In 1977 tbe San
Diego area reported alaost 150,000 anglers catcbing more tban
700,000 flab. Over 70 species of flsb bare been recorded in tbe
San Diego area sport catcb. However, only 10 species are caught
in large numbers. California Department of Fish and Game Block
878, which contains tbe LA-5 site, Is not a very productive
block in terms of sport fisheries partly due to Its distance
from the shore, and partly due to tbe depth of water which is
not suitable for sportfishing.
Most recreational boating Is done close to tbe coastline in
shallow waters (Figure S-4). Once the boats leave San Diego Bay
at Point Loma, their destination usually is either to the north
towards Los Angeles, or to. the south along the Mexican coast.
There are approximately 4,000 boat slips in use and there is a
high demand for additional slips.
The offshore region of southern California is believed to
contain numerous cultural resources (Figure S-4). There are
over 50 known and recorded marine prehistoric sites in the inner
basins of southern California extending from Los Angeles to San
Diego. All of these sites are in State waters, close to shore
and relatively shallow. According to the Minerals Management
Service (MMS, 1984}, over 450 known historic shipwrecks have
occurred in the inner, banks area. There are 10 wrecks reported
off Point Loma, and four off the San Diego area. The tract
containing the LA-5 site as well as most other tracts in its
immediate vicinity are-high probability cultural resource areas
as a. result of these wrecks.
As stated in MPRSA, no materials considered to be
hazardous may be disposed at an ODMDS. Therefore, tbe 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 the United States Coast Guard in the zone of
operation will be maintained. Public health and safety effects
are similar at the two alternative disposal sites.
S.5. MAJOR COHCLPSIOHS
1. The preferred alternative Is the formal designation of the
LA-5 site as an ODMDS for continuing use according to EPA
directive 40 CFR 228.5 (e).
2. Tbe alternatives of Ho Action, Delayed Action, Landfilling
in Fort Areas, Disposal at Sanitary Landfills, and Beach
lourishment are not feasible, nor can they accommodate the
•ajor portion of the dredged material expected to be
generated by future dredging projects.
-------
s-io
3* Compared to a nearby reference site and to some extent other
sites in tbe area, the LA-5 site has a greater range of
grain sizes and more poorly sorted sediments, elevated
levels of trace metals and chlorinated hydrocarbons, oils
•nd greases in the sediment, less diverse infauna, less
abundant epifauna, and less diverse demersal fish.
4. Disposal of dredged material at the LA-5 site would maintain
the conditions listed in Conclusion 3* Designation of the
LA-4 shallow water site as a permanent disposal site would
reinstate these conditions, while disposal at the deep water
site would introduce these conditions as new environmental
impacts. Therefore, the LA-5 site is tbe most environment-
ally 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. Disposal is not expected to have significant effects on
socioeconomic resources for any of tbe three alternative
sites.
7. The moderate, localized environmental effects of ocean
disposal of dredged material are considered acceptable in
light of the economic benefits of dredging and the
infeaaibility 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-5 site, no
action, and disposal at the shallow water or deep water 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
aitigatlon measures discussed under each beading.
• Class III - Adverse but insignificant impacts, or no effect
anticipated. Mo mitigation measures are required for these
impacts or effects.
-------
S-11
- Class IV - Beneficial impacta. 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.
_
-------
Table S-l. Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for the LA-5 Site
(Refer to text in Chapter 4 for detailed explanation.)
Impacts Potential Mitigation
Measures
Class
Description I II III IV
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
Air Quality X
Hater Quality X
- turbidity, DO X
- trace metals,
DDTs, PCBs, oils
and greases X
Geology
- sediment grain size X
- sediment quality X
BIOLOGICAL mifiONMENT
Plankton X
Kelp X
Bentbic Inf auna X
Benthic Epif auna X
Demersal Fish X
Pelagic Fisb X
Coastal Birds I
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
X
Term (2)
S E
X
X
X Mo mitigation
measures proposed
because effects
X are short-term.
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
(CONTINUED)
(1) s Scope Definitions
S s site, 1000 yd (914 a) radius from center of designated ODMDS.
L 9 local, up to 1 nai outside of site.
B B region, beyond local vicinity of ODMDS.
(2) e Tern
S * abort) less than or equal to 5 hours.
B B extended, greater than 5 hours.
-------
S-13
Table S-l (continued).
Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for the
LA-5 Site (Befer to..text In Chapter 4 for detailed
explanation.)
Impacts Potential Mitigation
Measures
Class
Description I II III IV
SOCIO-ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT
Commercial Fishing
• fish stocks X
- fishing fleet safety X
Commercial Shipping X
- safety X
• Bounding X
- port access X
Oil and Gas Development 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
Scope (1)
SLR
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
(1) * Scope Definitions
S a site, 1000 yd (914 m) radius from center of designated ODMDS.
L * local, up to 1 nmi outside of site.
R s region, beyond local vicinity of ODMDS.
(2) s Term
S = short, less than or equal to 5 hours.
8 s extended, greater than 5 hours.
-------
S-14
Table S-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 III IV
Scope (1)
SLR
Term
E
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
3IOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT
50CIOBCQNOMIC ENVIRON-
KENT
Commercial Shipping
and Military Use
Public Health, Safety,
Aesthetics
X
(1) 9 Scope Definitions
S * site, 1000 yd (914 m) radius from center of designated ODMDS.
L a local, up to 1 nmi 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-15
Table S-3. Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for the Shallow Water
Alternative (Refer to text in Chapter 4 for detailed explanation.)
Impacts
Description
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
Air Quality
Water Quality
- turbidity, DO
- trace metals,
DDTs,. PCBs, oils
and greases
Geology
- sediment grain size
- sediment quality
BIOLOGICAL ENVIROm-iElIT
Plankton
Kelp
Benthic Infauna
Benthic Epifauna
Demersal Fish
Pelagic Fish
Coastal Birds
Marine Mammals
Threatened and
Endangered Species
Marine Sanctuaries
and ASBS
(1) = Scope Definitions
S = site, 1000 yd
L = local, up to 1
R = region, beyond
(2) = Term
Potential Mitigation
Measures
Class
I II III IV
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
x
V
A
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 No oitigation
measures proposed
because effects
X are short- tern.
X
X
X
X
X. -
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
(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.
-------
S-16
Table S-3 (continued).
Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for the
Shallow Water Alternative (Refer to text in Chapter
for detailed explanation.)
Impacts Potential Mitigation
Measures
Class
Description I II III IV
50CIOECONOHIC ENVIRONMENT
Commercial Fishing
- fish stocks X
- fishing fleet safety I
Commercial Shipping X
- safety X
. mounding X
- port access X
Oil and Gas Development X
Military Usage
• traffic interference X
• naval ship access X
Sport Fishing ' X
Other Recreational
Activities X
Cultural Uses X
Public Health and Welfare
- health X
- safety 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 Close coordination
with the SHPO to
prevent damage.
X
X
(1) a Scope Definitions
S s site, 1000 yd (91* m) radius from center of designated ODMDS.
L a local, up to 1 nmi outside of site.
R s region, beyond local, vicinity of ODMDS.
(2} a Term
S s short* less than or equal to 5 hours.
B s extended, greater than 5 hours.
-------
S-17
Table S~4. Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for the Deep Water
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, DDTs,
PCBs, oils and
greases X
Geology
• sediment grain size X
- sediment quality X
BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT
Plankton
Kelp
Benthic Infauna X
Benthic Epifauna X
Demersal Fish X
Pelagic Fish
Coastal Birds
Marine Mammals
Threatened and
Endangered Species
Marine Sanctuaries and
ASBS
(1) s Scope Definitions
S r 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 « region, beyond local vicinity of ODMDS.
(2) « Ten
8 * abort* less than or equal to 5 hours.
> • extended, greater
than 5 hours.
-------
S-18
Table S-4 (continued).
Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for the
Deep Water Alternative (Refer to text in Chapter 4 for
detailed explanation.)
Impacts Potential Mitigation
Measures
Class
Description I II III IV
SOCIOECOHOffiC ENVIRONMENT
Commercial Fishing I
Commercial Shipping
- interference X
• port access X
Oil and Gas Development X
Military Usage X
Sport Fishing X
Other Recreational
Activities X
Cultural Uses X
Public Health and
Welfare
• health X
- safety X
Scooe (1)
SLR
X X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
Term (2)
S £
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
(1) s Scope Definitions
S a site, 1000 yd (914 •) radius from center of designated ODMDS.
L s local t up to 1 nmi outside of site.
R s region) beyond local vicinity of ODMDS.
(2) a Term
S s short, less than or equal .to 5 hours.
E s extended, greater than 5 hours.
-------
- 1-1 -
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
1-1» GENERAL INTRODUCTION
1.1.1. Historical Background
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) designated
the LA-5 ocean dredged material disposal site (ODMDS) (Figure
1-1) as an interim site for disposal of dredged material off San
Diego, California. This was made possible through EPA's
authority under Section 102 of the Marine Protection, Research
and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA) of 1972 (33 O.SiC. 1401 et sea..).
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 in 1980 EPA extended the interim designation of the
LA-5 site and issued a schedule for final designation by
February 1, 1983 as the result of litigation (National Wildlife
Federation v. Costle, 14 ERC 1600, et seq.. 1980).
Subsequently, an extension until. December 31, 1988 was granted
(50 FR 6943 February 19, 1985) to allow completion of field
studies, environmental evaluation and preparation of the
environmental impact statement (EIS).
It is EPA'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 (COE) for an ODMDS
off San Diego, 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 Diego
Shelf and Basin and they issued permits for ocean disposal at
the interim site. EPA retains responsibility for the EIS and
related public coordination.
Since 1977, COE has issued permits for disposal of
approximately 4.3 million cubic yards (yd*3~) of dredged material
at the LA-5 site (Table 1-1). Most of these permits were issued
for specific disposal projects. According to the information
obtained by COE and the San Diego Unified Port District, the
Port Authority used this site only once between 1977 and 1984,
during the period February through June 1983. At that time,
89,500 yd3 of dredged material were disposed of at the site.
The COE -ts not required to issue itself permits for Federal
dredging projects; however, HEPA documentation is prepared in
which the need for ocean disposal Is evaluated.
-------
INTERIM SITE -7
REFERENCE SITE
4 INTERIM SITE
( SHALLOW WATER
ALTERNATIVE
SCALE IN NAUTICAL MILES
FIGURE 1-1. MAP OF THE PROJECT AREA
-------
- 1-3 -
Table 1-1.
Permits Issued by the COE for Disposal of Dredged
Material at the LA-5 Site (a)
Year Final
Action Taken
1977
1978
1 07 Q
1 71 5
1980
1 08 1
1 y*J 1
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
TOTAL
Permit
Application
Number
T7-0103
77-0159
78-0157
80-0197
81-0055
82-0069
82-0139
80-0253
82-01 93
82-0167
82-0197
83-0018
84-0026
84-0162
84-176
85-054
85-129
86-066
86-084
86-251
(a) All dredged material
(b) cubic
Source: COE
yards
, unpublished
Amount of Actual Annual
Disposal
Allowed
171,000
35..000
425,000
1,041,000
71 ,1 40
201 ,000
355,000
28,700
300,000
17,000
. 410,000
74,000
331 ,800
60,000
35,000
26,659
100,000
528,000
68,000
36.000
4,314,299
disposed was
information, 1
Disposal Under
(b) COE Permits (b)
165,000
34,000.
425,000
0
7 1 , 1 40
201 ,000
0
28,700
300,000
17,000
410,000
74,000
331,800
60,000
35,000
26,659
80,000 .
528,000
0
0
2,787,299
silt/sand.
987.
-------
- 1.4 -
The U.S. Navy and two private industrial establishments,
Rational Steel and Shipbuilding Corporation, and Southwest
Marine, Inc., have been the other major users of the LA-5 site
over the past ten years. The U.S. Davy has disposed of more
than 1.5 million yd3 and the two industrial concerns
almost one million yd3 of materials at the LA-5 site.
San Diego Unified Port District has a permit for dumping
about 75,000 yd of material at the LA-5 site as part of the
development of East Basin for marina development in 1984. They
have also indicated that permits for disposal of approximately 1
million yd may be requested from COE over the next five years,
If the proposed South Bay dredging project is authorized and
implemented (San Diego Unified Fort District, personal
communication, April 1984).
Prior to 1977, the LA-5 site was used occasionally for
disposal of dredged material and no disposal of dredged material
resulting from COE projects has taken place at LA-5. The total
amount of material disposed at the LA-5 site from COE-permitted
projects has averaged approximately 280,000 yd3 per year, with a
range between 17,000 yd3 and 425,000 yd3 over the past ten
years. Future disposal activity is not expected to be greater
than the historic use of the site because dredged material from
newly planned port projects may be used for landfills in harbor
area or harbor expansion projects.
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 the barge.
Formal designation of the LA-5 site would continue ocean
disposal of environmentally acceptable material at this interim
location. Permitted projects would include disposal of dredged
materials from areas within the port that do not involve
approved diked disposal plans and disposal of acceptable dredged
material from areas within the port, provided that there are no
practicable alternatives to ocean disposal.
1.1.2. Dredged Material Permitting
Use of the LA-5 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-5 site is reviewed for
environmental acceptability in accordance with established
guidelines and in compliance with mitigative restrictions
that will be defined in the final site designation BIS. Figure
1-2 outlines the cycle used by EPA and COE to evaluate permit
requests for ocean disposal of dredged material.
-------
. 1-5 -
APPLICANT OR COB PROPOSES DREDGING PROJECT
HEED FOR OCEAN DISPOSAL ESTABLISHED
APPROPRIATE INFORMATION GATHERED
1) BULK SEDIMENT ANALYSES, 2) BIOASSAT/BIOACCUMULATION TESTS,
3) CHARACTERISTICS AND COMPOSITION OF DREDGED MATERIAL,
4) ALTERNATIVE DISPOSAL TECHNIQUES CONSIDERED,
5) SITE LOCATION, 6} HISTORICAL USE OF SITE,
7) DOCUMENTED EFFECTS OF PREVIOUS DUMPING,
8) LENGTH OF TIME REQUIRED FOR OPERATION, AND
9) EXISTENCE OF OR NEED FOR EIS
COS DISTRICT ENGINEER NOTIFIES EPA REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR
I
REVIEW BY EPA REGIONAL OFFICE
EPA NOTIFIES DISTRICT ENGINEER OF
NON-COMPLIANCE OF MATERIAL WITH EPA CRITERIA
DISTRICT ENGINEER RE-EVALUATES
ALTERNATIVES I
1
EPA NOTIFIES COB OF
COMPLIANCE WITH EPA
DUMPING CRITERIA
FEASIBLE ALTERNATIVE NO FEASIBLE
AVAILABLE ALTERNATIVE. INFORM
EPA ADMINISTRATOR
AND CHIEF OF ENGINEERS
1
CHIEF OF ENGINEERS
CONSIDERS ALTERNATIVES
r~
80 FEASIBLE ALTERNATIVE REQUEST WAIVER
EPA ADMINISTRATOR
I
CONSIDERS WAIVER
PERMIT
GRANTED
GRANT WAIVER
<=I
\
J
SECRETARY OF ARMY SEEKS
WAIVER FROM EPA
REFUSES WAIVER
PERMIT
_v DENIED
Figure 1-2.
Evaluation Process for Dredged Material Permit
Review.
-------
- 1-6 -
Dredged material oust aeet several COE criteria before it
can be considered for ocean disposal. The material can be
disposed of without further testing if it meets the following
criteria (33 CFR 227.13):
A. The aaterial is composed predominantly of rock, sand or
gravel and it will be dredged from areas of high current or
wave energy;
B. The material is composed predominantly of sand, gravel or
shell compatible in grain size with the receiving beach; or
C. The aaterial is substantially the same 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 Hater Resources Control Board as potentially
toxic substances); and the liquid, suspended partlculate, and
solid phases must be subjected to bloassay and bloaccumulation
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 bioassay tests (33 CFR 227 .13(a)(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 limited peraissible concentration (LPC) of
contaminants after allowance for initial mixing (40 CFR 227.27).
When 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 aaterial 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
-------
- 1-7 -
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.
Ocean dumping, which can occur during permitted times, commences
once the barge has moved into the designated position within the
disposal site. The site is typically an area with a 1 ,000 yard
radius (920 meters or m). Material is released by opening the
bottom of the split hull barge, or by pumping the contents
through an onboard pipeline to a submerged outlet.
1.2. PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR 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 CFB 228.12.
Since 1977, ocean disposal of dredged material permitted by
COE Los Angeles District has been authorized at the LA-5 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 the nation's navigation waterways.
In order to maintain waterways in San Diego Bay, COE
considers it essential that an environmentally 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 COE 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 San
Diego area has been dumped at sites on land and in the ocean.
Locations of these disposal sites are decided on a case-by-case
basis, depending upon environmental and economic considerations.
COE first examines material dredged from San Diego Bay 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 -
-------
.- 1-8 -
not appropriate, then materials tbat comply with the EPA's
environmental impact criteria of 440 CFR 227 are usually dumped
in the ocean. A designated ocean disposal site is required to
meet COfi'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 this EIS have eliminated options other
than ocean disposal due to feasibility of disposal and economic
criteria.
Final designation of the LA-5 dredged material disposal
site will provide a long term means for ocean disposal of
dredged material principally from the Fort of San Diego and the
San Diego Naval Station within San Diego Bay. The Port of San
Diego is an important commercial harbor. Foreign and domestic
cargo ships annually carry as much as 2 million tons of cargo to
and from this port. The majority of these ships are deep-draft
vessels. Additionally, naval vessels calling at the San Diego
Naval Station include aircraft carriers, destroyers, submarines,
supply and tender ships, amphibious vehicles, and others.
Maintenance of channel depths and expansion of dock capacities
are critical to sustaining the port as an important component of
the national defense as well as State and national economics.
COS requested that EPA permanently designate an ocean
disposal site suitable for disposal of dredged material from San
Diego Bay. In response to COE's stated need, EPA and COB have
completed the necessary studies for selection and evaluation 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 San
Diego area.
1.3. PROPOSED ACTION
The proposed action is the designation of an ODHDS for
continued use. A number of alternatives were considered to
identify the most suitable and least environmentally damaging
site. These included: 1) No Action; 2) Delayed Action;
3) Landfilling in Port Areas; 4) Landfill at Sanitary Landfill
Sites; 5) Beach Nourishment; 6) LA-5 ODMDS; and 7) two
alternative ocean disposal sites, the LA-4 shallow water site
and a deep water site. »
Preliminary analyses indicated that 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 most suitable and least
environmentally damaging site for ocean disposal of dredged
materials. Determination of the need for ocean disposal for
-------
- 1-9 -
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 EIS.
The LA-5 site and the two alternative ocean disposal sites
were evaluated according to criteria established in EPA'3 O.cean
Disposal Regulations and Criteria. No advantages were seen
-iamoving the site from the interim location to either the deep
water or the shallow water location. Final designation of.the
existing LA-5 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 estuarlne 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 chemical tests are used to screen the
material before ocean disposal is authorized.
The findings of this EIS support the relatively noncontro-
verslal 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-5 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 Diego
area, BO significant Interference between dredged material
disposal and these other uses has been reported.
• One concern related to designation of ocean disposal sites
is the enforcement of the barge dumping location. 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.
-------
- 1-10 -
Under MPRSA, the United States Coast Guard (USCG) is
assigned responsibility by the Secretary of Transportation for
conducting surveillance of disposal operations to ensure
compliance vltb the permit conditions and to discourage
unauthorized disposal (33 U.S.C. I417(c)). Surveillance is
accomplished by means of spot checks of disposal vessels for
valid permits, interception or escorting of dump vessels, use of
shipriders, and aircraft overflights during dumping.
Alleged violations are referred by USCG to EPA for appro-
priate enforcement action (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 EIS shows that the LA-5 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, this EIS assumes that the differences
listed above are effects of past disposal of dredged material at
the LA-5 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.
COE has 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 of effects of
environmental variations observed in the vicinity of LA-5-
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 tvo Federal agencies
will evaluate potential Impacts through studies of the physical
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
aite to determine cumulative effects on surrounding habitats.
This document Incorporates the results of oceanographlc 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
-------
- 1-11 -
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 (Engraulls mordax) because of its commercial
and ecological importance, its prevalence over the shelf-slope
break area containing the LA-5 site, and the fact that It is a
particulate filter feeder. A specific study of anchovies in the
area of the LA-5 site was not possible for inclusion in the EIS.
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., C-31). Based on this, it is concluded that there
would be no 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
histopathological•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.
Histopatbology 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
transient demersal or pelagic fishes. Tissue burdens of any
absorbed or ingested contaminants might indicate the potential
for pathological effects but actual histopathological evidence
of these effects would be extremely difficult to collect because
the affected animals would either leave the contaminated area or
be sufficiently debilitated to be removed from the population by
predation before detectable histopathologies could be found.
-------
- 1-12 -
Because of the lack of precedent for hlstopatbologlc
studies as part of alte designation and budget constraints, this
type of analysis was not included in the EIS 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. HEGPLATOR7. FRAMEWORK
An international treaty, as well as Federal and State lavs
and regulations, apply to the designation of an ODMDS. 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 laws 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 8165),
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 MFRSA, 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 U.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. EPA'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.
Section 103 of the Act sets forth requirements for
obtaining COE permits to transport dredged material for the
purpose of ocean disposal. COE* a regulations for ocean dumping
are published at 33 CFR 209.145 and 33 CFR 320 to 330.
-------
Table 1-2. Summary of Compliance of Alternatives with
Environmental Protection Statutes and Other
Environmental Requirements
Federal
LA-4
Preferred Shallow Deep
Alternative Water Water
(LA-5 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 seq.-
National Environmental. . Partial*
Policy Act as amended, 42
O.S.C. 4341 et seq.
Clean Water Act as amended N/A N/A
(Federal Water Pollution
Control Act) 33 O.S.C'. 1251
et seq.
Clean Air Act as amended, N/A
42 U.S.C. 1451, et aeq.
Fish and Wildlife Coordina- N/A N/A
tion Act as amended,
U.S.C. 661 et seq.
Coastal Zone Management Partial*
Act as amended, 16 U.S.C.
1456 et seq.
Endangered Species Act as Full Full
amended, 16 O.S.C. 1531
et sec.
National Historic Preserva- Full Full
tion Act as amended, 16
O.S.C. 470, et seq.
Executive Order 11593, Full Full
Protection and Enhancement
of the Cultural Environment,
36 FR 8921.
Full
Full
Partial* Partial*
N/A
Partial* N/A
N/A
Partial* Partial*
Full
Full
Full
(Continued)
-------
Table 1-2 (Continued). Summary of Compliance of Alternatives
with Environmental Protection Statutes
and Other Environmental Requirements
LA-4
Preferred Shallow Deep
Alternative Water Water
Federal (LA-5 Site) Alternative Alternative
Executive Order 12372, Full Full Full
Intergovernmental Review
of Major Federal Programs,
47 FR 3059-
California Coastal Act N/A N/A N/A
of 1976, as amended',
PRC Sec. 3000, et seq .
California Environmental N/A N/A N/A
Quality Act, PRC Sec. 21001.
•Full compliance upon issuance of a Final Environmental Impact
Statement.
-------
- 1-15 -
1.6.2.2. National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969
(42 P.S.C. 4341 ei seq.)
HEPA 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 1500-1506.
EPA*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 U.S.C. 1251 M seq.)
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
COE at this time.
1.6.2.4. Clean Air Act as Amended (42 U.S.C. 1451 e_t 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 D.S.C. 661 et aeq.)
This Act requires that water resource development programs
be performed In consideration of wildlife conservation. The Act
is not applicable to dredged material disposal aite designation,
but is applicable to the evaluation of permits and water
resource development projects. All permitted uses of a
designated disposal site will comply with the Act.
-------
- 1-16 -
1.6.2.6. Coastal Zone Management Act of 1 972
(16 U.S.C. 1456 et aeq.)
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 permit
applications for dredging projects, review Federal determination
of consistency for Federal dredge projects and transport of
dredged materials through the coastal zone, for consistency with
the California plan.
1.6.2.7. Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et sea.)
This Act protects species federally 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 (DSFWS) and/or the National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS) 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 ejt seq.)
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-5 does not involve cultural resources listed
on or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places.
This consultation process is documented in Chapter 5, Exhibit
12.
1.6.3. Executive Orders
1.6.3.1. Executive Order 11593. Protection and Enhancement of
the Cultural Environment (36 FR 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,
-------
- 1-17 -
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
Ma.lor 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 5).
1.6.4. State of California
1.6.4.1. California Coastal Act of 1976.. Public Resources Code
Section 3000 et seq.
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 applications 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 (CEQAJ. June. 1386
Public Resources Code Section 21001
CEQA establishes requirements similar to those of KEPA for
consideration of environmental impacts and alternatives, and
preparation of an environmental Impact report (EIR) 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 CEQA, this
EIS is consistent with CEQA requirements.
1.7. RELATIONSHIP TO PREVIOUS HEPA ACTIOHS OB OTHER FACILITIES
THAT MAY BE AFFECTED BY DESIGNATION OF THE DISPOSAL SITE
There are NEPA 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
-------
- 1-18 -
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
vater quality, sediment quality, and marine biological
environment. These projects are briefly described below and
their locations are shown in Figure 1-3•
The sewage treatment plant of the City of San Diego has a
single outfall pipe at Point Lorna which discharges an average of
177 million gallons of advanced primary treated municipal waste
per day. The discharge pipe extends approximately 2 nmi (4 km)
seaward from Point Loma to a "I" shaped diffuser end located In
approximately 37 fathoms (67 m} of water. This outfall is more
than 5 nmi (9 km) from the LA-5 site, 5 nmi (10 km) from the
LA-4 shallow water site, and 10 nmi (19 km) from the deep water
site.
The nearest interim or finally designated dredged material
disposal site is the San Diego Point Loma Site (LA-4), which is
located approximately 3 nmi (5*5 km) southeast of the LA-5 site.
The shallow water alternative to final designation of the LA-5
site is final designation of the L'A-4 site, whose interim status
is scheduled to expire in December 1988. This site is located
south and inshore of the LA-5 site, in approximately 45 fathoms
(82 m) of water. This site has received little disposal use in
the past; however, if any continued use of this site were made
in the future, some cumulative effects with impacts from the
LA-5 site could be expected.
-------
- 1-19 -
DEPTH IN FATHOMS
2349
^
•
SCALE IN NAUTICAL MIUES
CITY OF SAN OIEOO
SEWAGE DISCHARGE
POINT LOMA
S INTERIM (SITE -7
REFERENCE SITE
LA 4 INTERIM SITE
( SHALLOW WATER
ALTERNATIVE }
FIGURE 1-3. OTHER MAJOR FACILITIES IN THE PROJECT VICINITY
-------
-------
- 2-1 -
CHAPTER 2. ALTERNATIVES
This 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 NEPA at 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-5 ODMDS)
The preferred alternative' for designation of a- site for
disposal of dredged material from the Port of San .Diego and
adjacent areas is final designation and continued use of the
LA-5 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-5 site is located at coordinates 32° 36* 50" north
and 117° 20« 40" west, which is about 10 nautical miles (nmi)
(5 kilometers or km) offshore from San Diego, California and
outside of the 3 mile territorial sea limit (Figure 1-1). The
site includes all areas within a 1,000 yard (914 m) radius of
the center coordinates. The underlying seafloor is a west
facing slope with a minimum depth of about 80 fathoms (146 m)
and a maximum of about 110 fathoms (201 m). Beyond the site
limits, the slope continues downward, eventually ending at a
bottom depth of about 160 fathoms (293 a) east of the Coronado
Escarpment.
The nearest interim or finally designated dredged material
disposal site is the San Diego Point Loma Site (LA-4)vwhich is
located approximately 4 nai (2.2 km) southeast of the LA-5 site.
The LA-4 site has interim designated status that ends in
December 1988.
Vhen the LA-5 site is fully designated, EPA will formally
remove interim designation of the LA-4 site. This procedure
will remove LA-4 from the list of sites under
40 CFR 228.12UH3).
The LA-5 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,
-------
- 2-2 -
B. The 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,
C. The site has been used for dredged material disposal on an
interim basis since 1977* and
D. The.site characteristics comply with EPA'3 siting criteria
(40 CFR 228.5 and 228.6).
2.1.2. Ho Action Alternative •
Selection of the Ho 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-5 and LA-4
sites to expire and there would no longer be a readily
accessible site of ocean disposal of dredged material in the
vicinity of San Diego..
Under the EPA's Ocean Dumping Regulations and Criteria
(40 CFR 228.12(a) and in accordance with the requirements of
Section 102(a) of MPRSA, "various sites were approved for ocean
dumping ... on 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 EPA selected the No Action Alternative, which would
prevent final designation of the site for continued use and
prohibit further use of the LA-5 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 undef~Section 103(d) of
MPRSA, or
C. Modify or cancel dredging projects that depend on ocean
disposal as the only feasible method for disposal of the
dredged material (40 CFR 228.4).
As discussed in Chapter 1, dredging Is essential to the
maintenance and operation of the nationally important Port of
San Diego and the San Diego Haval Station, as well as other
adjacent areas. Therefore, the Ho 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 uses of San Diego Bay.
-------
- 2-3 -
2.1.3* DeXajed^ Ac.t1on Alternative
EPA designated the LA-5 site as an Interim site for a three
year period (42 FR 2462, January 11, 1977). In 1980, the agency
extended the Interim designation and Issued a schedule for
publishing the EIS and final designation based on a consent
agreement 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 EFA 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 December 31, 1988.
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-5 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-5 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, nor 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. Landfilllng Alternatives In Port Areas
Use of dredged material for landfllling, also referred to
as the creation of fastlands, is reviewed here as a possible
alternative to ocean disposal. Although several landfill
projects can be anticipated in the San Diego Harbor, the timing
of. these projects may or- may not coincide with the timing of
maintenance dredging. This alternative is already being
utilized for creating fastlands (landfills) as the need arises
and as the dredged material is found to be acceptable for
landfill use. This, however, does not eliminate the need for
ocean disposal or disposal at other sites.
2.1.4.1. Landfilllng of Marine Areas
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
-------
- 2--A -
possible that a large portion of dredged material may not comply
with guidelines issued to regulate dredging and filling projects
under Section 404 of the Clean Hater Act. Material dredged from
the harbors is not always suitable for fill because the
proportion of fine sediments may be high compared to the
requirements of permits and the Section 404(b)(1) guidelines.
COB must have alternative means for disposal of the dredged
material if the landfllling alternatives are not approved.
Options for landfilling will be evaluated on a project-by-
project basis. For the purposes of this EIS, EPA and COE are
assuming that a major portion of the material dredged from the
ports will have to be disposed of at a suitable ocean disposal
site. Consequently, the landfilling alternative in marine areas
is not a viable alternative to dispose of this material.
2.1.5. Land Disposal Alternatives at Sanitary Landfills
There are three large sanitary landfill sites in San Diego
County which could be considered as possible alternative sites.
These are: the San Marcos site in North County, the Sycamore
site in the central part of the County, and the Otay site in the
southern part of the County. All three sites are Class II-1
landfills. A Class II-1 landfill can accept solid waste,
certain solid hazardous wastes, some nonhazardous liquids such
as petroleum products, but no liquid hazardous waste. All
material disposed at these Class II-1 landfills must comply with
the provisions of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA). The three landfills can accept- dredged material
suitable for ocean disposal, or dredged material considered too
contaminated for- ocean disposal, if it aeets permit conditions
under the RCRA, and the capacity of the landfills can
accommodate the dredged material.
The Otay landfill is limited to accepting a maximum of
1,000 tons of material per day. Port dredging usually produces
much more than 1,000 tons (dry) of materials per day for a
period of several weeks. This would use all of Otay capacity
for the duration of a dredging project. The port cannot be
permitted to monopolize this landfill capacity for this period
of time because it is needed by many other users.
The San Marcos and .Sycamore sites are both located in the
interior of the County--the San Marcos site is almost 40 miles
(25 km) away in the North County area and the Sycamore Landfill
is more than 20 miles (12 km) east of San Diego Bay. Handling
of wet dredged material through the City streets will create
unacceptable traffic and sanitation problems. These sites are
therefore not considered viable alternatives to ocean disposal.
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.
-------
- 2-5 -
2.1.6. Beach Nourishment Alternative
The use of dredged material for beach nourishaent 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
infeaslble for dredging projects because grain size distribution
of the material is not compatible with beaches in the area.
A large dredging project in the Port of San Diego would produce
large quantities of primarily fine sediments, most of which
could not be used for beach nourishment due to grain size
incompatibility, nor disposed of In a sanitary landfill due to
dewatering, odor, capacity, and transport problems.
Selection of the beach nourishaent and/or' land, disposal
methods are evaluated by COE 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 bay.. Therefore,
the- beach disposal alternative has been eliminated from further
consideration In this EIS.
2.1.7. Alternative Ocean Disposal Sites
The disposal of large amounts of acceptable dredged
material, in the ocean- may be the best solution to long-term
management of: the overall dredging program, for the Port of San
Diego and the San Diego Naval Station. The Purpose of and Meed
for Action section of this EIS (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 NEPA
alternatives to the- preferred alternative.
The LA-5 and LA-4 sites are presently the only sites with
established locations (Figure 2-1). Table 2-1 is 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. There
is no advantage In moving the site to a new location at a
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 previously experienced
disposal activities or one that has been undisturbed.
Discussion of the deep water alternative site Is not limited to
any specific site within the deep water region. This approach
precludes an arbitrary choice of a site location.and allows
maximum consideration of the feasibility of using a particular
site within the region.
-------
- 2-6 -
REFERENCE SITE
oerm IN FATHOMS
^> V
.?"... \\
1 •• • ' I \
JCAU IN NAUTICAL MILES
•£)-•— LA 4 INTERIM SITE
( SHALLOW WATER
ALTERNATIVE j
\_USA_
Mexico
FIGURE 2-1. LOCATION OF ALTERNATIVE DISPOSAL SITES IN THE SAN DIEGO SHELF
AND BASIN
-------
- 2-7 -
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- 5
Shallow
Vater
Deep
Water
Coordinates or
Region
Centered at
32° 36' 50"
North by 117°
20* 401* West
Centered at
32° 35' 00"
North by 117°
17' 30" West
Slope or Basin
Region
Water .Depth
Fathoms (m)
100
(182)
45
(82)
600
(1,092)
Bottom
Topography
Ridge
Slope
Ridge
Slope
Gently
Sloping
. to Flat
Plain
Distance
Offshore
(nmi/km)
6/11
6/11 .
12-16/22-30
-------
- 2-8 -
2.1.7.1. Shallow Water Site
The shallow water alternative to final designation of the
LA-5 site is final designation of the LA-4 site, whose interim
status is scheduled to expire in December 1988. This site is
located south and inshore of the LA-5 site, in approximately 45
fathoms (82 m) of water (Figure 2-1). This site has received
little disposal use in the past. Principal considerations in
evaluating this site are the likely enriched bentbic fauna due
to the shallower depth (compared to LA-5), conflicts with
fishing and recreational boating, potential for cultural
resources, and proximity to the Mexican border.
2.1.7.2. Deep Water Site
The location of the deep water region was determined by the
need for the site to be far enough offshore to have the
environmental advantages of a deep water offshore location, but
also close enough to San Diego Bay to keep barging distance
feasible. The site would be located west of the LA-5 site in a
basin area west of the Coronado Escarpment, at a depth of about
600 fathoms (1100 m) (Figure 2-1). This site would be 6-11 nmi
(11-20 km) west of the LA-5 site and 12-16 nmi (22-30 km) from
shore.
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 this EIS.
2.2. DISCUSSION OF ALTERNATIVES
2.2.1. Alternatives Hot Considered for Further Analysis
The No 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 San
Diego Harbor. 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.
-------
- 2-9 -
The alternatives for Landfilling in Fort 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 ODHDS Alternatives with General
Criteria for the Selection of Sites UP CFR 228.5)
2.2.2.1. General Criteria UP CFR 228.5(a)
The dumping of materials into the ocean will be
permitted only at sites or in areas selected to minimize
the interference of. disposal activities with other
activities in the marine environment, particularly
avoiding areas of existing fisheries or shellfIsheries,
and regions of commercial or recreational navigation.
Disposal at the LA-5 site has not interfered with commer-
cial fishing, sportflshlng or recreational activities in the
area. 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 U.S.C.G. 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 the disposal sites will be
so chosen that temporary perturbations in water quality
or other environmental conditions during initial mixing
caused by disposal operations anywhere within 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-5 and LA-4 sites are 6 nml (3 km) from the nearest
beach or shoreline, 12.3 nml (7 km) from the nearest federal
wildlife sanctuary at the mouth of the Tla Juana River, and 17
nmi (9 lea) from the nearest Area of Special Biological
Significance (ASBS) at the San Diego-La Jolla Ecological
Reserve. Dilution and dispersal by local mixing currents will
reduce water quality perturbations resulting from disposal at
the LA-5, LA-4 shallow water site, 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 these sites. There are no geographically limited
fisheries in the region.
-------
- 2-10 -
2.2.2.3- General Criteria 40 CFR 228.5(o)
If at any time during or after disposal site evaluation
studies, it is determined that existing 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 vill
be terminated as soon as suitable alternate disposal sites
can be designated.
There is no Indication that disposal at the LA-5 site or
the alternate sites do not or would not meet these criteria.
Chapters 3 and 4 discuss these criteria in detail.
2.2.2.4. General Criteria 40 CFR 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 present
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 disposal 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 DSC 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 CFR 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-5 site is located at the 100 fathom (182 m) contour
on the continental shelf. The LA-5 site has been used for
disposal of dredged material on an Interim basis since 19T7-
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-5 site. The
deep water site was chosen in an oceanic basin, off the
continental shelf, while the shallow water site was chosen close
to shore on the shelf, neither of these sites completely
satisfy the above general criteria.
-------
- 2-11 -
2.2.3. Comparisonof the Three ODHDS to EPA's 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 the
decision process in selecting the preferred alternative over the
other viable alternatives.
2.2.4. Selection of the Preferred Alternative
Introduction of large amounts of sediment are expected to
alter the natural environmental conditions at any site. The
LA-5 site has been affected by the disposal of dredged material
in the past. The key issue for the LA-5 ODMDS is that the
dredged material disposal impacts have not unreasonably degraded
the marine environment over the past ten years.
The predicted environmental effects of a dredged material
disposal site in the deep water region are similar to those
identified for the LA-5 site, although 'greater impacts to
pelagic fish and lesser impacts to benthic organisms may occur
at the deep water site. The severity of the environmental
impacts at the deep water site are expected to be Insignificant.
The predicted environmental effects for a dredged material
disposal site at the shallow water site are predicted to be
similar to the effects at the other two sites.
Changing the location of the ODMDS from- the LA-5 site would
impact the deep water site which previously has not been
affected by disposal of large amounts of dredged material, or
disposal would contribute significantly to environmental impacts
already imposed on the shallow water- site. If a new site was
designated, two sites off the California coast would be
experiencing environmental impacts, Including tbe initial
recovery phase at the LA-5 site and tbe initial detrimental
phase imposed on the newly designated site. Surveillance of
dumping by OSCG and other agencies which, necessary to
discourage illegal dumping activities, would be considerably
more difficult at tbe deep water site than it is presently at
the LA-5 site. For these reasons and others, the U.S. Pish and
Wildlife Service opposes moving the site to an unlmpacted
location (Jack Fancher, FVS, personal communication, June 26,
1984).
EPA and COE have determined that the final designation of
the ODMDS site should be the preferred alternative. Implementa-
tion 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 t'he site management program
is released in a final form, a draft will be made available for
public review and comment.
-------
- 2-12 -
a.
e
o
o
a
a
a
a
0
• a
a
o
a.
n
•rt
a
a
a
0
a
o
o 44
44 O O.44 «
0 a. - o d
0 0 »- iH CVJ O
co -o --r n «- o
X •
JO 0
Q.
JC 44 O •
44 01 01 PH 44
b 0 a n a
o » o d
B 43 0 O
8 44 no a
B o d -a
0 *0 *- •* B
O b O
- in b
- e- * ***
in ••
^ B
B TJ
O 0
•* 0
44 b
01 JO
O •
O O
J 44
.
(VI
a
n
0
•H a
«
d 0 B
B iH «4
3'
d -o E
d js
44
• 44
a B 0
0 d oi
•H -0 b
O B 0
0 3 >
CX A «rt
n d -a
X
B b
* X 0
o b n
C O b
^ 44 3
d B
0 b
z to b
•H 0
. .___ M
• 00
B -H S
0 d 0
b -H
O r* 44
tOWi 3
B O -0
•H d
« a
0 d s
0 0 -H
*-« b
• a
- 0
X 0 0
b to b
0 d s
a a o
ban
S d 0
B a. b
x
d
b
to
x
J3
b b
0 d
d z
JK
* •
rH O
<— 1 TH
d to
•G 0
01 b
0
44
X 3
at o
b b
to
B
X 0
J3 -H
b *>
d d
0 b
8 tO
•»-*
a
B 0
d r->
0 d
b 43
d s-
X
d
CM
ao
B
X 0
.0 -H
(M ^
d d
0 b
SB tO
•H
a
n 0
d FH
0 d
b JS
d *
•
n
0
to
d
44
"
0
^4
•H
a
0
>
3
B
O
^H
44
d
b
to
•r4
a
0 0
•H 44
d 3
J3 O
* **
-
•
O
4>
3
0
fa
•H
B
B
(vi a
(VI d b
a 0
X O 43
-H J 44
0 O
44 44
d c
B -H •
^ o n
K 04 0
0 JS
b B 0
Q. 0 d
0. b 0
< V.43
•rt
S
B
vo d b
a 0
X 0 JS
^H _) 44
0 0
44 44
d~s
a -H •
•H O 0
M OU 0
0 JS
b a o
O. O d
a b 0
< W J3
i-l
B
B
vo d b
a 0
X O JS
»H -3 44
0 O
44 44
d B
B -H »
*4 Q n
H a, 0
0 J=
b B 0
Q. O d
0. b 0
•< t* .a
B b
0 0
•H JS
44 44
d o
•H
0 -0 •
b B n
d d
B 0
* d
B JS
O 0 X
•H d 4>
44 0 •*
d 43 fi
O 0
On ta
o el
•J ** at
*
pr,
0
J3
o
44
44 •
B B
d b
44 0
01 O
•H B
TJ 0
O
O
O 4-i
44 O
0
J3
O
44
b
d
%M •
B
Ob'
O 0
44 O
B
01 O
0 O
0
b
d o
3 b
0* 0.
v a
B 0
d 44
n
a d
0 *
a.
.
*
0
to
o d
60 b
0 0
,_( >
O 4
B
d •
BO b
O
S 43
O b
b d
** *
03
•a
- o
W JS
O 44
0
•0 B
0
e -o
0 0
a o
•H Q.
V O
b
0 a.
43
•o
0
0
0
-
o
o
in
0
0 43 X
S *"4
3 O 0
t-4 44 44
o d
> -o a
0 *-4
i— ( 44 M
0 0 O
3 0 b
B a. o*
S M A
d 0 d
i to
3 B
i-l -H
O Wi t>
B O 3
•H PH
a o
-•O B
n js
d 44 .
000
r-l B 0
0 d
b tO 0
B r-t
'o S b
s
1
X
** • 1
44 09
E 0
d 60
C b
•rl a)
a A
"O "—I
0 rH
b 3
ou ^
44
. »<
n rH
•a o.
x 01
60 •
B X
•H B
J< d
O
d ««
0.-H
O 0
44
v d
o *
JS
44 0
»f+
JS
-------
o
•H
««
•M
O
0
a,
co
«
a,
H
B
O
•o
0
a
0
a
0
4*
•H
•H
itlve Ocean Dispose
,eria
B -H
b b
0 U
rH B
•m o
«j-t
!). Comparison of
Site Deslgnat
-2 (Contlnue<
CM
0
rH
l*«
4J
•H
b
O
4»
*
a
0
Q
O
b
0
*
o
1-4
0
X!
«0
_3
0
EO
1
0
•H
b
0
4*
b
U
0
CO
CM
CM
as
Ou
U
o
- 2-13 -
1 4» 4> 0 1 b
•H90 "03 f! *-• 3 «
4> B XI O rH t3 r-l 0 4» OO 0'
OOb 9 0 X! b • O t«
ax - «s os -H 4* o 0 fi *> o b
flXtO 4i n 0 rH O 4i 3 O TJ • jB
B*XtXtB r-l 4* X! 4> O 4* *0 OChrHB O
4» o •») o • 0 o *> 0 -o B c b n 3 o n
O O •) *O r-1 0 «--JXiaB*rl*00«HHSO4» -H •
9B00 8 b 0 * 0 -0314* -OHO
*O 0 O 4J *O -rl 00*0*0 4» +J a O b O B
Br1t40B4» 4* J3 OObnOt04>HXI C -H
O -H 60 -H i-l S OB a O •O -rl O *-l 0 OB
0 C r-l fi 0 fi +» 0 -O « fi O M b fi B3
O b b B a 0 n0OQ909nB4J4>
C09OO0b 00b9ObO00*H04a Ob
*
1 0 0 1 J=
X JS 1 b 4i I X 4J
B r-l 43J3O0-H0-H
|4>*O 01 r-H Xl« bO*0£!*OB *C
1-130 *OX!0 0*O -H 0 • O (0 •— 1 W 60 O
4*BXI4A| rH4»Xt T-lr-l'*On4J4JC«3*H O -H Z C *
OO 0O 3 « b 3 E M -H C bOB) 0 .
az>oa os0-H0ooon00 * o c -ri n
n 0<*4O > O -l-> 4»*c*Ha b£!-H r-t-H>4>0
r-l rH •*•* 44*-«-4 00 0 0 ' b- 4* *Q~d**O 0 93 O bO
n-xta rH *> n *j x TJ -oxis -^00 «-O4J0b
*> 0 -H B -O 0O *H 0-OCj->OOt,jJJ-> O0Ob0
oonoB ' •HXtinQ «v>00 4-> v ••-> LI ag00x!
3B0O0 b 1 ••HOI «*&0 4*OO 093t«4>0
O r-t 04>« 04> 4»»aa00r-l-.-t OB b *O
o ^H eox: a >» B 0 o o n o b -H *> a a 0 a*a -o
0B**OX! A£t0rHb *H B0b
o>v40'*"'a 0 o ** n ^ *o £>O4J *j 4->js04>0
f_^ b b S 0 b 0 3 0 ^J O 0 0 b B) frfl ^^ 4J £) Q J^
"3 W *^ 81 £1 00 X &•- 0O8}BXl4>iHOU*OtK^-l fi 0b O B O 60
4*BXt4>l B|04*4> a O 0 OO-Hb
oo 00 0n*H»B3 eo A uo a b z *i 0o E -o n c B 13 *-> OA
rHr44* B 4»0b b J3 3 <— C EX 0*O*bB)
0«Xia «H*H03f 3' b0OOO03* . 0 OrHO-v-l
x> « -H a -o M*HBxtooa03t 30 > n *> a *> -a
o o n o c -H -H 4* bo -o n r-i a ^4>ons
3B0O0 B**ObQO«0bBO4»aO 4*B0O«Hb
-O0O BOBBO O *J C r-l (S <» +» a 0
o *H «ox; ax OB 0 -H *> 0 o a b 0 « s*o -o *> o
0 C » 0 fi *4OOXi00n3axi 00 V
O > -r-4 0 T3 a 4*ba4*>O4*«rl C O -r4 4-1 O04*4*0J3
o b b s 0 bbb 0 b n -o 0 0 -a a o « a *J
COSOOXb O9OOb-H00x:bX0B O E -H 0 X --t
904*0X160 t**oa4*a*o0n4>4*xino cooxiaorx
rH rH a 6Q
•H - r-l 0 0 B VT1
0 HO 0 0 -H -H -H
>B +> -H 4* *o t on<-^
b*H fi 4* M 3 *i O 0 0 0 f)
3 b O b -H rH E rH V. 60 fi 4*
no M o b o 0 0 *w b 4> o
V, -H b 4> -H b •OjBBBbi
OB O *O O 3 -O • *OBO-H
•H 6 0bo««*)o*M • o 0 « a B -H
•H0 BO iH*>4-H B b 3 a *H *>
XI b a BO 0 -H 4* ObO9— '0
•HO 0 0 E J3 0 O - 4» 3 -H -0 r-l
ej o a E 09
b«rH o 4* a o a «a o u o a 0 0 o
in «o t-
-------
- 2-14 -
o
•H
-H
•H b
4* O
0 4»
c •*
b b
o u
4»
i-l C
«* O
o a
B
e to
o •*
a n
•H o
b a
0
a o
a 4*
O -H
O CO
9
C
*H
4*
C
o
u
CM
I
(V
0
4*
•H
CO
b
9
4*
0
*
a
9
9 .
9
4*
•rj
m
b
0
4*
0
JB
*
O
rH
rH
0
JS
n
~
a-
i
J
9
44
•H
CO
in
t
4^
• j
0
T|
b
n 0 jo
•H «H ^H O JS -H
X £ t* 44 4» dO
4>
•H .
S M
B b
9
0 TJ 0
s B avi
0 0 a o
b iH
9 to C
O JC J3 O 0
B 4* 0 0
•H -H -H O 0
X > t-> 4* O
1 1 0
0 rH b
i-4 B rH 0 0
• 0 *H 0 0 0 JS 4*
•H «-| fi B 0 iH 0
31 JS ^ O "O 41X70
a B ^3 B 4» B B 0
9 -H 09903
0 V, - - b -H
B & B JS 3 0 O 0 •
b GO •** --I » 4> -H
4> > -0
•H "O
rH 0 44
0 0
3X0
o* rH a
4)
b B (M
O 0 O
4> O
0 vH 0
S V. 4>
•H 0
•0 B 0
O 60 CM
O *H 4h«
0 « 9
1
b
X 9
60 4>
Ott
w
rH W
O
b o 0
4*
0-09
9 B 4*
«^j
^^
to a
e x
•H 4» 9
4» *H J3
•I rH 4*
^j Hi
«HI CD
M D W,
W cr O
*
0>
'b
0 1
O -H
B 73
B
•o o
B 0
0
•O 0 •
0 b a
A 3 B
b 44 O
3 0 iH
44 B 44
|
X 0
4> 44 3
n iH b
0 i— 1 44
a 0 m
3
0 cr x
JS 4»
4* 4* -H
B B
B 9 3
•H B a
•H a
ra *Q o
B 9 0
o ra
•H "O
4> B B
000
•O 1
B B 0
003
b
n X44
B 44 0
O iH
iH rH X
44 0 4»
0 3 TH
b or S
0 3
a*> a
o B a
0 O
rH B 0
0 iH
n -o o
O 0 JS
1
0 9
--m (A
i^f Wff
J3 T> 0
0 B J3
rH 0
0 4* O
>
0 X4»
.A O
•Ml M
X 0
ja b a
O 0
TJ 0
900
C, ^ n
4* BJ
•H 0 0
B -O 0
0
B
3
0
VM JB
0
O -H
•H ,
rH
j3
0
ja
O
b
^
•
v
0
4J
O
9
44
9
•o
B
0
9
ja
0
>
0
•*
a
0
iH ^
0 0
0
a44
a B
0
o a
O 9
B b
0 a
oa
•H 4*
3 0
Z B
1 1
. « S
~4 O
b 0
9
4» -O
0 9
0 8)
b «
0 0
•J= b
O 44
«
9>
0 *M
-H 0
O
0 O
a IH
to *>
i
n
i-t
b
0
4* T3
O 0
0 01
b 0
0 0
J3 b
0 44
n
a
0 V,
•H O
O
0 O
a-r<
M 44
0
JS 1
44 -r4
b B
O
V, V,
X
4* 4*
•H C
^j Jt|
^^ "w
0 a
•»H a
4* O
B rH
9 9
0 0
04 -Q
O
^"
•
9
X 44
rH *H
n a
3
o -a
iH 9
> J3
0 b
b 3
a*j
n
a in
JS B
44 3
4*4
0 0
44
iH B
x a o
rH iH
J3 0 «4
0 jS 0
JO 4» B
0 -H
b 44 B
a 0 b
o
0 44 44
B B 9
O 0 -0
iH 4^
4» 9 -0
•H b B
~o a. a
C JS 44
0 44 «
JS B
44 -H
0 0 a
B b
o -o *
*1 0 44
44 44 0
•H 0 TJ
T) 9
B 44 -0
O 0 6
O TJ 0
9
JS
44
44
0
»
9 4*
•H «4
o a
a 0
a
0 O
o a
0 -H
0 V
rH •
rH TJ
•H V
4> -H
0 CM
^
n 44
3 C
4> «
0 -0 .
44 iH
01
9
9 J3
O
B 0
0 44
n
IH n
3 0
C J=
rH •
rH T3
•r4 V
44 -H
0 «»
^
ra 44
3 B
4> V
0 -a
44 -H
n
9
0 J3
0
B 0
0 4>
a
•H 0
3 0
B JS
b
O 0
*•« JS
44
rH
0 B
iH iH
44
C 19
0 JM
44 0
O 9
a b
ai
9 a
a -H
0 JS
co ra
ra
M
0
9 O
b Z
S
o.
•H •
JS X
ra 44
•H
B B
91 iH
O 0
B -H
X >
o e
Z -H
n
jt
o
9 O
b Z
at
a
•r4 •
JS X
a *4
i-i
B B
* i-4
O 0.
e i-»
.* >
0 B
Z -H
B O
^j «|iA
b X
O 4»
44 a
0 -H
M
• n
V
0 b
B a
9
44 9
a n
M rH
H 0
«-
^
B B
0 O
T4 9
60 a JS
9 -O 4»
b e
9 44 iH
O 44
•a 0 o
9 a o
0 a o
<0 -H rH
•
9
4J>
iH
rH A
0
B «
iH JS
SO *J
•H
b 4>
O 0
j3
0 n
e
e -H
3 0
o a
e 9
x b
.
0
jj
^
rH ra
fl
B 9
•H JS
6044
1-t
b *>
O 0
ja
0 n
B
B iH
> 0
o a
e 9
x b
n
rH 9
0 b
e . g
M ^
3 44
X44 0
B 0 9
«c t-
•4 V4
CM 44 rH
0 B 0
«t ,
b
0 O 3
44 iH 44
ra ^ 3
B 0
J3 -r4 b
4> 0 O
1
ra •
fiau
*^^H
B (HP]
x a
O 9
B b
.at
rH
O 0
Z S
^
60
* -H
9 b
44 0
H J3
ra 0
'
0
o •
•H 9
-_ tfi
•4 V
O B
4» 0
JS'l^
«w^r
O -H
-------
- 3-1 -
CHAPTER 3. AFFECTED EHVIHOHMENT
3-1- OCEAN DISPOSAL SITE CHARACTERISTICS
The three alternative disposal sites are within an open
embayment 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 LA-4, LA-5. and deep water disposal sites are
respectively outer shelf, slope, and basin environments (see
Figure 3-1). The shallow water LA-4 site at. approximately 45
fathoms (82 m) is located on the outer edge of the mainland
shelf on gently sloping surface 6.5 nmi (12 km) from the
entrance to San Diego Bay. The LA-5 site is located on a ridged
slope at a depth of 100 fathoms (183 n) and 7 nmi (14 km) from
the entrance to San Diego Bay. The deep water site is in a
basin called the San- Diego Trough, at depths greater than 600
fathoms (1,097 m) and 13-16 nmi (24-31 km) from the entrance to
San Diego Bay.
The ocean floor, off San Diego has a complex topography and
does not have a continuously deepening slope- from shore to the
deep basin of the San Diego Trough. Instead, a portion of the
intervening ocean floor rises 65 fathoms (120 m) to form the
Coronado Bank, somewhat isolating the LA-5 and LA-4 sites from
the deep water basin to the west. On the western side of the
Coronado Bank, the Coronado Escarpment descends steeply into the
San Diego Trough. On the southern aide of the Coronado Bank and
somewhat south of the LA-5 and LA-4 sites, is a steep submarine
canyon, the Coronado Canyon.
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 mainland, shelves, slopes, and deep
water basins are presented for comparison. It should be
recognized that the LA-5 and LA-4 sites are in close proximity
and do not have a great difference in depth. Consequently, they
can be expected to have similar physical and biological
features.
Values are also presented from a field survey undertaken
for this EZS at the LA-5 site and a nearby reference site. The
reference site has depths approximately the same as the LA-5
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 February/March
-------
- 3-2 -
DEPTH IN FATHOMS
'* SCALE IN NAUTICAL MILES
CITY OF BAN DIEGO
SEWAGE DISCHARGE
5 INTERIM SITE -7
LA 4 INTERIM SITE
(SHALLOW WATER
ALTERNATIVE
FIGURE 3-1. LOCATION OF DISCHARGE OUTFALLS AND OTHER OCEAN DISPOSAL SITES
IN THE PROJECT AREA
-------
- 3-3 -
and April/May 1984. Data from the field survey (Appendix A) Is
presented In this chapter as an Indication of the existing
conditions of the LA-5 alte. In Chapter 4, field survey data is
further examined as an Indication of past and future impacts of
dredged material disposal.
3-1.1. Proposed Use 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), and authorized for dumping under Section 103 of
MPRSA. The site will 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.V1).
The total amount of -material to be disposed at the site
should average 280,000 yd3 per year. The dredged material
consists predominantly t»f sand, silt, and clays dredged from
projects within San Diego Bay or nearby locations. 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 Effectsof Current and Previous Discharges
and Dumping in the Area. Including Cumulative Effects
40 CFR 22B.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 ODMDS alternatives where potential
cumulative or synergistic impacts are possible. Consequently,
the only discharge described is the municipal sewage outfall
from the City of San Diego. There are no other current
significant discharges to the marine environment close enough to
any of the alternative sites to have a potential for interacting
with the environmental effects of dredged material disposal.
3.1.2.1. Municipal Waste Discharges at Point Loma
The sewage treatment plant of the City of San Diego
discharges an average of 177 million gallons per day of advanced
primary treated municipal waste through an outfall seaward of
-------
Point LOBa (Figure 3-1). The discharge pipe Is approximately 2
ami (4 km) long with a seaward T-shaped diffuser end at an
approximate depth of 37 fathoms (67 m). This discharge has been
shown to have significant adverse effects on water quality,
sediment quality, benthic invertebrate communities and demersal
fish populations in the vicinity of the discharge pipes. These
effects are limited to local areas near the outfall and do not
extend to the vicinity of the LA-5 site (5 nmi or 9 km from the
outfall), the LA-4 shallow water site (5 nmi or 10 km from the
outfall), or the deep water site (10 nmi or 19 km from the
outfall). Therefore, there is little likelihood of cumulative
interaction between dredged material disposal at any of the
alternative sites and the discharge from the City of San Diego
sewage outfall.
3.1.3. Feasibility of Surveillance and Monitoring
40 CFH 226.6(a)(5)
Surveillance and site management are conducted by OSCG, EPA
and COB. Under Section 107 of MPRSA, the OSCG 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 CFB 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 CFB 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 LA-4 shallow water site would
require a similar effort to that needed to monitor the LA-5 site
as they are similar in distance from the entrance to San Diego
Bay. On the other hand, the shallower depth would reduce
sampling time for deployment and retrieval of sampling gear.
Monitoring the deep water site would require more time to
deploy and retrieve sampling equipment, and travel time to and
from the site would be longer. In 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-5 site.
3.2. PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
3.2.1. Meteorology and Air Quality
The climate of the southern California coastal and offshore
area is of the Mediterranean coastal type, with warm dry summers
and relatively wet, mild winters. Temperature extremes are
-------
- 3-5 -
uncoamon. The mean air temperature ranges from about 12° to 15°
C (53° to 59°F) In January, and from 14° to 22°C (58° to. 72°F) .
in August. ..Mean maximum temperatures for January are 16°to 17°C
(61° to 63°F) over the water and 18° to 19°C (64° to 66*F) at
adjacent aoastal stations. The mean maximum temperatures for
August are about 6°C (10°F) higher for the offshore region, and
approximately 8°C (15°F) greater for the coast than the mean
maximum temperatures for January. The mean sea surface
temperatures are about 14°C (58°F) in January and 20° C (68°F) 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, but wide variations
take place 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 daytime
hours, the predominant winds from the northwest blow at an
annual average speed of 9*5 miles per hour (mph). In the
evening, the winds calm to an average of 4.1 mph but retain
their northwesterly pattern (San Diego Air Pollution Control
District, 1959). The night-time hours experience a shift in
wind"direction from northwesterly to northeasterly as the air
drains toward the ocean (Figure 3-2). The average speed of the
night-time winds measures 3.6 mph. The spring and. early summer
winds are influenced by the Catalina Eddy which causes
northwesterly winds to shift southeasterly along the coastal
gradient (Kimura, 1974). The winds follow the orientation of
the mountains and. the coast and the eddy is caused by the abrupt
change of their orientation from north-south to east-west. This
occurs immediately north of Point Conception.
No wind measurements are available for the Individual dump
sites. As the alternative sites are relatively close, wind
conditions are expected to be similar.
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 partlculates (TSP) , nitrogen oxides
(NOX), 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 I0x, CO, TSP, and hydrocarbons (HC) 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
-------
- 3-6 -
MISSION VALLEY
iO. BAY
U.S.A.
MEXICO
Source: Sen Diego Air Pollution Control Board, 1069
FIGURE 3-2. GENERALIZED DEPICTION OF GENERAL WIND REGIMES IN THE
SAN DIEGO VICINITY
-------
- 3-7 -
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 CFH 228.6(a)(6)
This section summarizes regional and local information
concerning ocean currents, upvelling, 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 filckey (1979).
3.2.2.1. System of Curren ts
The dominant hydrographic 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.
Near 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
Countercurrent. 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).
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.
-------
- 3-8 -
iie*w
iie*w
NO SCALE
34*N
DIEGO
.S./MEX1CANB02PER.
32°N
Major surface currents
••••••sN Major bottom currents
Seasonal or intermittent currents
FIGURE 3-3. THREE MAJOR CURRENTS WHICH INFLUENCE THE SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA BIGHT
-------
|_*5
- 3-9 -
r
i
o
ffi
z
DC
O
u.
cc
ttl
I-
o
CO
u
i
u.
O
CO
UJ
QC
ac
o
09
Z
o
CO
UJ
CO
Ui
cc
§
a
ul
O
0
-------
- 3-10 -
C. During the Upwelllng period from March to June, alongshore
winds strengthen and drive surface vater offshore due to the
Corlolls 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 upwelling 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 tine 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).
Several studies Indicate how current conditions may vary in
the San Diego area of the bight. Hendricks and Harding (1974)
used parachute drouges to measure currents off Point Loma, San
Diego at the surface and at a depth of 21 fathoms (39 m) in Hay
1972. South flowing surface currents of 15 to 71 cm/a,
averaging 45 cm/s were recorded. The deep drouge moved at
speeds of 3.1 to 12 cm/s, averaging 7.3 cm/s to the south.
In a study of currents at 33 fathoms (60 m) off the City of
Del Mar, Winant and Bratkovlcb (1981) found mean surface
currents to the south in all seasons. Mean surface currents
were weakest during the fall. During the spring and summer when
the water column is thermally stratified, they found longshore
surface- currents to the south while longshore* bottom currents-
were to the north. During the fall and winter when the water
column is less stratified, they found longshore flow did not
reverse with depth, instead, southerly flowing currents
decreased in intensity with depth. Upwelling is known to occur
south and southwest of the Point Loma headland.
Offshore San Diego, predominant current direction is upcoast
(north to north-northwest) at depths of 11 to 33 fathoms (20 to
60 m) (SCCYBP, 1973). Currents In the downcoast direction-are
common also, so that net current speeds are only 2 to 3 cm/s
upcoast. Typical instantaneous current speeds are 10 to 20
cm/s. Current periodicities on the order of a few weeks are
-------
- 3-11 -
prevalent. Currents have apparently not been measured in the
range of the 109 fathom (200 m) depth of the LA-5 site, but
currents there can be expected to be somewhat slower but
comparable in direction and variability to those in shallower
water.
In the deep waters of the bight's basins, bottom waters are
filled by the California Undercurrent flowing across the
continental slope (Halouta et al., 1981), and moving through the
basins in a northwesterly direction. Emery (1960) infers that
deep water currents in the San Diego Trough move in a northerly
direction.
3.2.2.2. Waves
Waves (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.
Wind waves (sea) formed locally respond to northwest winds
from the Pacific high pressure regions, winds of the Santa
Catalina Eddy, and the offshore Santa Ana winds. Wave
convergence zones affect bottom topographic features to depths
of approximately 182 fathoms (100 a).
No large tsunamis have been recorded1 in the southern
California area because the wave refraction over the basin and
ridge bathymetry of the region dissipates the force of the
waves. No tsunamis have been formed by local earthquakes during
historical times.
3 .2.2 .3 . Tides
Southern California, 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 dally tidal range varies from 1 to 3 m.
3.2.3. Water Column Characteristics 40 CFH 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 (Maloney and Chan, 1974), with maximum variations between
11°C and 23°C (BLM, 1978). Maximum temperatures in the surface
nixed 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). Spring upwelllng events bring
cold water nearshore, displace warm water, and so create strong
thermal gradients.
-------
- 3-12 -
In a study of vater conditions at 33 fathoms (60 a) off the
City of Del Mar, Vinant and Bratkov.ich (1981) found that the
vater column during the summer shoved a warn surface layer
rarely greater than 3 fathoms (5 m), a tbermocline approximately
11 fathoms (20 m) thick in vhich the temperature gradient vas
nearly constant, and a colder bottom layer. In the winter,
temperature throughout the vater column vas much more constant
vlth no distinct thermocline and the bottom only a fev degrees
colder than the surface. At depths betveen 55 and 165 fathoms
(100 to 300 m), the vater temperatures of the Southern
California Bight generally decrease to a range betveen 6.5°to 11°
C (BLM, 1978).
Water temperature measurements made during the field study
compared favorably vith these values (Appendix A, p. A-19).
Maximum surface temperatures recorded in the August survey
ranged from 21.6° to 22.5°C. Minimum surface temperatures
recorded in the March survey ranged from 14.9° to 15.6°C. The
yearly surface temperature variation vas betveen 6.6° and 7.4°C
depending on the station.
At 55 fathoms (100 m), temperatures shoved a smaller range
from 9.8° to 13«2°C. Maximum temperatures vere again found in
the August survey, vhlle minimum temperatures at most stations
vere-found during the May survey. With the maximum depth at the
eight sampling stations ranging from 73 to 102 fathoms (131 to
186 m), the bottom temperatures ranged from 8.7° to 13.1°C.
Maximum values vere found for all stations during August, while
minimum values for most stations vere found during the May
survey.
These figures indicate stratification in the vater column.
During the summer, the field survey Indicated an upper vater
column thermocline existed betveen 5 and 27 fathoms (10 and 50
m). The thermocline vas essentially absent in winter, vith
temperatures decreasing more or less steadily from surface to
bottom.
There vere no significant vater temperature differences
betveen LA-5 and the reference site (Appendix A, p. 22). In
vaters of the Southern California Bight deeper than 165 fathoms
(300 m), temperatures are generally less than 8° C (Chan, 1974).
In the deep vaters of the San Diego Trough, Emery (1960) found
average temperatures at 3«*°C near the bottom of the basin.
3.2.3.2. Salinity
Salinity values are not knovn to be highly variable in the
Southern California Bight. The surface vater is more saline
during the summer and autumn than in the vinter and spring due
to the greater amount of rain in the vinter and the increased
evaporation in the summer. The salinity variation of offshore
San Diego Is small both horizontally and vertically ranging
betveen 33.5 and 34.5 parts per thousand (ppt) (Allan Hancock
Foundation, 1965).
-------
- 3-13 -
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
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 33-8 to 34.4 ppt
depending on the dominance of these currents (Maloney and Chan,
1974).
Salinity measurements taken during the field survey showed a
wider range with many values lower than has been historically
reported. Although the wet months of November and December of
1983 may explain some of the low values, other values are
considered errors in measurement. Not including those values
considered most questionable, the range was 30.9 to 35.7 ppt
with many of these values falling near the lower half (Appendix*
A, p. A-22). There were no significant salinity differences
between the LA-5 site and the reference site. Salinity
generally incresed slightly from surface to bottom.
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 3-.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 7.1 to 8.6 with a mean
of 7.9. At 55 fathoms (100 m), the pH ranged from 7.3 to 8.1.
Concentrations of pH showed a general decrease with depth and
there were no significant differences between the LA-5 and
reference sites (Appendix A, p. A-25).
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 upwelllng. 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
light penetration. Sewage outfalls Introduce both organic and
inorganic sediments which locally increase turbidity.
-------
On mainland shelves, 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 by local water circulation patterns (Gorsline et
al. , 1984).
Water clarity conditions at the alternative disposal sites
is expected to follow these general patterns but vary widely
under natural conditions. Transmissivity Is a measurement of
light transmitted through the water column, and is one
Indication of turbidity. Transmissivity measured during the
field survey averaged 94.8J and showed little variation with
depth (Appendix A, p. A-25). Ho 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 1.8 to 2.2 mg/1 at 110 fathoms
(200 m) (National Ocean Data Center, 1974).
During the field surveys, surface DO levels ranged from 6.4
to 10.0 mg/1 (Appendix A, p. A-22). DO levels were lower at the
bottom, ranging from 3.6 to 7.4 mg/1. Much of this variation
was due to variation in the depth of bottom stations. Although
dissolved 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 December surveys. Such a subsurface maximum has been
associated in other studies with thermal stratification in the
water column. Under such a condition, oxygen is entrapped in
upper layers by the seasonal tbermocllne (Reid, 1962). There
were no significant differences in dissolved oxygen between LA-5
and the reference site (Appendix A, p. A-22).
In the deeper waters of the basins, dissolved oxygen levels
are extremely low. For example* in San Pedro Basin, where the
depths can be as great as 500 fathoms (896 m), the DO at the
bottom of the water column has been reported at a level of 0.2
mg/1 (EPA, 1985). The San Diego Trough would be expected to
have simlliarly low levels.
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
-------
- 3-15 -
surface and generally increase In concentration vitb depth until
approximately 275 to 825 fathoms (504 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
phytoplankton. Surface nitrate concentrations vary from 0.1
mg/1 during the Davidson period to more than 8.0 mg/1 during the
upwelling period. At 50 fathoms (90 m} nitrate concentrations
range from 0.2 to 0.4 mg/1 (SCCVRP, 1973). 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 is reached at 195 fathoms (900 m) (Chan,
1974; BLH, 1978). Silicate concentrations increase more or less
steadily with depth. Surface silicate concentrations vary
between 10 and 20 mg/1.. Nutrient concentrations-were not
sampled during the field survey.
3.2.3.7. Trace Metals
Low concentrations of trace metals are essential for
metabolic processes. Some of these metals include boron (B),
cobalt (Co), copper (Cu), iron (Fe), manganese (Mn), molybdenum
(Mb), selenium- (Se), and zinc (Zn). These same metals may also
be toxic- at higher concentrations when bioaccumulation of the
elements causes diverse affects higher trophic levels (SCCVRP,
1973).
Trace metals enter the 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 the main sources of heavy
metals. Through various chemical pathways over a long period of
time, heavy metals precipitate out of the water column and
become incorporated into the 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 the metals
and sample contamination add a degree of analytic
variability; and
-------
. 3-16 -
C. Concentrations of particular heavy metals vary vitb distance
from shore or discharge points, depth, rainfall, currents,
upwelling, plankton populations, size of suspended
particulate and sediment grain size (SCCWRF, 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 U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) (Bruland and
Franks, 1977), compared the concentrations of heavy metals as
suspended particulates in nearshore and basin water masses off
southern California. They found that nearshore waters away from
pollution sources tend to have lower metal concentrations than
offshore areas. Suspended particulates include only a portion
of the trace metals in the water column, as dissolved metals are
also present. However, the particulate trace metal concentration
is 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 values found in the BLM study
which indicate possible levels prior to dumping at the LA-5 and
LA-4 sites; this table also shows values found in inner basins
such as the San Diego Trough.
In the'field study, concentrations of arsenic (As), cadmium
(Cd), chromium (Cr), copper (Cu), lead (Pb), mercury (Hg), and
zinc (Zn) were not detected in the water column (Appendix A, p.
A-29). 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, p. A-16). As a consequence, the
only conclusion which can be drawn from the field survey is that
previous dumping at the LA-5 site has not appreciably elevated
the level of these metals in the water column on a long term
basis.
Most trace metal analyses have been limited to nearshore
studies in the Southern California Bight related to municipal
discharges (SCCVRP, 1973). Because of the difficulties in
measuring low levels of trace metals in the water column in
areas away from such discharge points, more emphasis has been
placed on examining metal concentration in sediments. Section
3.2.5-3 discusses typical levels found in sediments.
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 to 0.02
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.
-------
- 3-17 -
Table 3-1* Concentrations of Trace Metals as Suspended
Participates in the Hater Column in Micrograms
Per Liter (ug/1).
ARSENIC CADMIUM CHROMIUM COPPER
(Ar) (Cd) (Cr) (Cu)
BLM Study (a)
Near shore
Surface Water
Deep Water
Inner Basins
Surface Water
Deep Water
Field Survey
(b)
Levels of
Detection
(a) s Bruland
(b) s Appendix
ND s No Data
ND
ND
ND
ND
No
the
2
and
A,
0.0012.. ND £0.0038 0
10.0015 0.062 0.012 0
0.0016 ND <0.0025 0
0.0005 ND <0.0034 0
concentrations of metals were
field survey at these levels
2 20 10
Franks, 1977-
p. A-29
LEAD MERCURY
(Pb) (Hg)
.0032 ND 0
.0053 ND 0
.0025 ND 0
.0018 ND 0
detected in
of detection:
50 0.2
ZINC
Un)
.016
.011
.016
.008
5
-------
- 3-18 -
Historically, natural offshore oil and gas seeps have been
observed in several locations in the Southern California Bight
near the numerous faults and folds of the Los Angeles area
(Dennis, 1974). The San Diego area is not known for such
natural seeps.
Oils and greases are also Introduced to the bight's water
by human activities, with the highest concentrations generally
found in. or near harbors and urban centers.
In the field survey, oil and grease, were undetected at
levels of 0.1 mg/1.
For chlorinated hydrocarbons such as DDTs and PCBs,
McDermott and Heesen (1975) found levels outside the San Diego
Harbor fell within a range of 0.000001 to 0.000015 mg/1. 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-5 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 (1975) and
Payne et al. (1976), 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 previous dumping at the LA-5
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 San Diego area are a submerged
extensions of the Peninsular Ranges of southern California and
Baja California (Figure 3-1). The Irregular topography of the
basins and ridges parallel the structural orientation of the
onshore ranges. The mainland shelf seaward of the San Diego
Harbor consists mainly of tightly folded late Neogene sandstone
and shale, covered extensively with Quarternary sands and muds
(HMS, 1983). It is wide and. slopes gently downward for 5 nmi
(9.5 km) offshore to depths of approximately 55 fathoms (100 m),
and then drops off into a steeper slope of approximately 2 to 4
nmi (3 to 8 km) with depths as great as 137 fathoms (250 m).
The Coronado Bank forms a submerged terrace at approximately 82
fathoms (150 m) before the Coronado Escarpment drops off sharply
into the deep basin of the San Diego Trough.
The Coronado Bank fault is an active fault in the area.
Several other fault traces trending northwest to southeast have
also been mapped. However, very few earthquakes have been
reported off the San Diego coast since 1900.
-------
- 3-19 -
3-2.5- Sediment Characteristics
Mainland shelf areas are cbaracterized by tbe 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 unstable
substrate on tbe continental slope and also provides sediment to
tbe 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. Tbe characteristics of
sediment in the slope areas are intermediate between that of
shelf and basin areas.
3-2.5.1. Grain Size
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-5 and LA-4
sites, roughly equal proportions of sand and fine sediment are
typically found. In shallower waters on the mainland shelf,
coarser sand fractions increase.
In the field survey, samples of bottom sediments were
generally sandy-silt (Appendix A, p. A-56). The size of the
sediments at the LA-5 site showed a greater range on the average
than those at the reference site (Table 3-2). The mean grain
size of samples taken at the LA-5 site was 4.31 phi units (50.4
urn) (variance of 1.01, 95} confidence level of ± 0.22), while
the mean grain size of samples taken at the reference site was
4.51 phi units (43*9 urn) (variance of 0.41, 95} confidence level
of ± 0.12). The LA-5 site samples averaged. 3} gravel,. 52} sand,
33} silt, and 12} clay. The reference site averaged less than
1} gravel, 57} sand, 35} silt, and 3} clay (Appendix A, p. A-58
to A-61).
In studies of another inner basin of the Southern
California Bight, San Pedro Basin, bottom sediments at
approximately 250 fathoms (457 n) consisted of primarily
greenish mud and varying amounts of 'oozy, blue, green gray
muds'1. Mean particle size was less than 62 urn in diameter
(Hartman and Barnard, 1958). The San Diego Trough is expected
to also have fine particles as bottom sediments.
3.2.5.2. Sediment Transport
Sediment is expected to follow the surface and bottom
currents as described in Section 3.2.2.1. Met movement at all
three of tbe offshore alternative dumping sites is expected to
be in a north to northwest direction at moat times, although
transport may occasionally be in a southerly direction. Most
-------
- 3-20 -
Table 3-2.
Grain Size Distribution for tbe LA-5 and Reference
Sites.
Range
of
Grain Size
(PHI)
-1
00
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
13
14
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
1 1
12
13
14
15
95? Confidence
PHI unit
Appendix
s -lOg
A, p.
' X
1 .4
4.7
... ,.10.0
20,7
14.4
16.7
8.6
4.1
3.2
2.3
'1 .3
3-5
1.6
2.3
0.9
0
Interval
2x where
A-62 to
LA- 5
Site
95? C.I.
1
3
. 8
16
12
14
7
3
2
2
1
3
1
2
0
(C.I.
x is
A-65
.0
.7
.4
.6
.9
.2
.4
.6
.6
.0
.1
.1
.3
.0
.8
0
>
- 1.9
- 5.6
- 11.5
- 22.9
- 15.8
- 19-3
- 9.7
- 4.6
- 3.8
- 2.5
- 1 .5
- 3.9
- 1.9
- .2.6
- 1.1
s x ± 1
diameter
Reference Site
x
<0.1
0.2
0.8
9-2
46.2
22.5
7.3
3.1
2.1
1 .7
1 .2
1 -9
1 .1
1 .2
0.6
0
•96^
in mill
95? C.I.
<0
<0
0
6
43
20
6
2
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
^B
.,
. i
.4
.7
.7
.5
.8
.7
.9
.4
.0
.5
.8
• 9
.4
0
- 0
- 1
- 11
- 48
- 24
- 7
- 3
- 2
— 2
1
- 2
- 1
- 1
- 0
.3
.1
.8
.7
.4
.9
.5
.4
.0 .
.4
.3
• 3
.5
.8
imeters
-------
- 3-21 -
material initially deposited on the mainland shelf is expected
to be resuspended and eventually transported down the gradient
of slopes and basin floors (Scbwalbach 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.
Within the San Diego Trough, sediment is expected to flow
slowly to the north with the weak currents and descend through
the water column until it reaches the bottom or achieves neutral
buoyancy (Appendix C).
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 (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 consider-
ably in coastal waters and average values are too easily
misinterpreted (SCCVRP, 1973).
The first.set of values presented for comparison shows
ranges for trace metals which have been found in dredged
materials of San Diego Bay. Even though the LA-5 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 Vord and Hearns (1978)
study undertaken in 1977. Various parameters along the 33
fathom (60 m) isobath were measured from Point Conception to the
OS/Mexico border, and control stations were chosen as rep-
resenting background levels not overly influenced by pollutants.
This set of values represents shallow water concentrations of
metals under relatively undisturbed conditions. They are
presented here as general indicators of undisturbed conditions.
The third and fourth set of values for comparison are from
a BLM study of baseline conditions in the Southern California
Bight on the mainland shelf and in the southern inner basins
(BLM, 198lb). These shelf and inner basin values are presented
in Table 3-3 as an indication of pre-dredglng conditions at the
LA-5 and LA-U sites.
-------
- 3-22 -
I
a>
e
03
CO
3
o
>>
o
I
2
I
1
CQ
e
a
§
a
B
O
O
o
I
a>
IS
M *-»
•9t
t.
3 •— >
0 00
b X
m *~*
•o *-•
0) .0
« 0,
*J ^^
5^
S.9
§"3
t^
B6
a"
JU
is
u
CM VO O
OJ CM in S (^fAt^ CM fl ^0
CM ^™ dr "^ C\l Q \O ^™ ' CO
• j_ . i i a « t +i •*•( i
CM vo ^* vo in * c^ tf^
... CM * •
e- ^ t- t* •*
CM ^
CM m o m
- . »- •- a- o
^- . . co
5* ro ™ CM S «- m *° *° M
• i > I i I • i +| +| I
.» CM «— OO^- O*«O OO
o^ cZ) ^^ u^ so • * c^ ^o ^si
• • • O CM • *
nj o CM eo 9 «-
i- »- *- en
m
o% .— . t- o m c>
*^ « • m in eo a
gj-^t-.»'»-t^ *!poj CM*n
^I cnclci i ^iA *' +l 2
C^ %o - **^ IF* ^5 • (\j • ^o js^ Ov
^ CM »^ a- *° (^. eo
^ in eo
— . a- o
o o t— • JT • • o
* »»CM *O O*
« co ««
t. w •« *> eo •Bvn
td ' ^" fc S t« O 3j M ^si ***
Ei ^ PC ee 55 * aageco m
O Z Hi Gk
9
cK
'-
.
?
4)
B
§
i-H
O
fl
^ t.
d =
m
a 5
Os vH
*~ _
* -^
t, eo {-
O ^^ C^^
-------
- 3-23 -
The final set of values is froa anaerobic sediments in the
deep waters of Santa Barbara and Soledad Basins. It is
presented here as an indication of existing conditions at the
deep water site.
In the field study, concentrations of Cd, Cr, Cu, Pb, and
Zn at the reference site were within the range of values found
for sediments in other studies within the region (Table 3-3)*
None of .the other studies reviewed Included measurement of As or
Hg. Concentrations of all the metals studied at the LA-5 site,
however, generally exceeded regional values and also those found
at the reference site (Appendix A, p. A-42) with the following
exceptions:
The mean concentration of As at the LA-5 site was slightly
less than at the reference site. The LA-5 site had a
range with higher values, however.
The mean Cd concentrations at both sites were almost
equal, again with the LA-5 site showing some higher values
in the range.
Samples from the LA-5 site of all the metals showed inconsistent
contamination.
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 nonrefinery industrial wastes, and
urban and river runoff. Matural sources of hydrocarbons include
biological production by organisms and submarine oil seeps.
Distinction of environmental hydrocarbons among these various
sources has only recently been attempted (Winzler and Kelly,
1977). For example, pentacycllc triterpenes have been used to
distinguish crude oils from biologically derived hydrocarbons
(BLM, I98lb).
Baseline studies found a wide range of hydrocarbon
concentrations in sediments throughout the bight, with the
highest associated with harbors and urban centers (BLM, 198lb}.
Kaplan (1977) states that the wide range of values reflects the
variety of deposltional environments and the complexity of
contributing sources. In stations south of Newport Beach
(including the San Diego area), Kaplan found hexane and benzene
fractions of 50 ug/g to 100 ug/g in basin sediments, and less
than 50 ug/g in sediments of the outer banks and ridges. Word
and Nearas (1979 ) reported an average level of 243 +. 44 ug/g of
hexane extractable materials in sediments of the bight, with
values that ranged up to several thousand ug/g.
-------
- 3-24 -
Total hydrocarbons were not evaluated in the field survey;
however, concentrations of oil and grease at the LA-5 site
averaged 90 ug/g and were not significantly greater than those
at the reference site (Appendix At p. A-37). Contamination
appeared to be variable.
The major input of chlorinated hydrocarbons, especially
pesticides and PCBs, to southern California sediments is thought
to be municipal wastewater 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 Water Resources
Control Board, 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. Total DDTs and total PCBs in
sediments of control stations near San Diego have been found in
dry weight concentrations of 0.0034 ug/g and 0.015 ug/g,
respectively (Heesen and loung, 1977).
Sediment concentrations of DDTs and PCBs at the LA-5 site
were higher than those at the reference site and .showed variable
contamination (Appendix A. p. A-37) (Table 3*4}. The mean total
DDT dry weight concentration at LA-5 was approximately 0.023
ug/g which is within the range for control stations of Vord and
Mearns, but is higher than the 0.005 ug/g mean total DDT dry
weight concentration for the reference site. Of the DDT laomers
at the LA-5 site, only p,p-DDT showed significantly elevated
levels above the reference site. The mean total dry weight
concentration of PCB at the LA-5 was 0.138 ug/g which exceeds
the range for control stations of Vord and Mearns and the 0.033
mean total PCB dry weight concentration at the reference site,
but is less than levels at other sites in the bight. In this
field survey, there was considerable variation in levels of PCB,
and analytical difficulties with Interference from other
substances. As a consequence, all values for PCB levels should
be interpreted with caution. Other pesticides were not detected
in sediments during the field survey at the levels of detection
indicated in Appendix A (p. A-16).
3.3. BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT
Tbe 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 Panamlc Province south of Magdalena
Bay, Mexico. Intermixing of currents from these two provinces
in this region of extremely variable geology, from rugged
submarine rock outcroppings to very fine sediment deposits,
-------
- 3-25 -
Table 3-4. Concentrations of Hydrocarbons In Sediments in
Micrograms per Gram Dry Weight (ug/g)
CHLORINATED
HYDROCARBONS
Shallow Vater Control
Sites (a)
Mean, (95% Confidence Interval)
Range
DDT 3
0.02 (0-0.04)
<0.001 - 0.09
Southern California Bight, (b) <0.03 - 0.7
San Diego Control Sites (c) 0.0034
Field Survey (d)
LA-5 Site
Reference Site
PCBs
0.01 (0.002-0.02)
<0.002 - 0.04
<0.002 - 0.4
0.015
0.138
0.023
(0.008 - 0.038) (0.098 - 0.179)
0.001 - 0.303 0.011 - 0.541
. 0.005 0.033
(0.004 - 0.006) (0.014 -0.052)
0.001 - 0.012 0.006 - 0.136
(a) Word & Mearns, 1978.
(b) loung & Gossett, 1980.
(c) Heesen & Young, 1977.
(d) Appendix A, p. A-39 and Appendix C.
-------
- 3-26 -
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 BIS describes the biological
environment to document compliance with EPA's 11 specific site
selection criteria. General ecological descriptions 4"0 CFR
228.6(a)(9) and.the location of these resources in relation to
spawning, nursery, feeding, and 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 eupbotic
zone, the latter usually resulting from the upwelling 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 pbytoplankton from California
waters were reported by Riznyk (1977): 160 diatom; 112
dinoflagellate, and 6 sillcoflagellate species. Phytoplankton
work .previously conducted offshore of southern California
includes the works of Allen (summarized in Riznyk, 1974), Baleen
(I960),. Resig (1961),' and California State Water Quality Control
Board (CSWQCB, 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 pbytoplankton of the Southern California
Bight. The relative abundance of a particular species may vary
somewhat from the inshore reference sites to the offshore deep
sites. The distribution of the species and their abundances are
controlled by several factors including amount of light,
currents, intensity of grazing, temperature and upwelling events
(BLM, 198lb). Phytoplankton variability is evident on a seasonal
basis as well as over long-term periods in which it has been
related to oceanographlc and meteorological events (Baleen,
1960).
California Cooperative Oceanic Fisheries Investigations
(CalCOFZ) data presented for 1969 (Owen, 1974) in BLM (198lb)
displays primary productivity variations for the Southern
California Bight region. Values are highest within the near-
shore regions and decrease with distance offshore. Standing
-------
- 3-27 -
Table 3-5. Common Pbytoplankton Species of the Study Area
DIATOMS
Aaterionella japonica
BiddulPhia longicruris
Chaetoceros compresaua
C. debilla
,£. didyaus
jC. socialls
Ditylum brightwellii
Eucampia zoodiacug
Hltzacfaia spp.
Hhisoaolenla 3pp.
Skeletonema coatatum
Thalaaalonema oitzachioldea
IAPTOPHYTES
Pbaeocystis pouchettl
DIHOFLAGELLATES
Ceratium fusua
C. t r.l JLP_9
C. furca
Dlnophvsis acuminata
Gonyaulax polyedra
Gymnodinlum solendena
Hoctlluca aclntillana
Peridlnium 3p.
grorocentrua micana
SILICQFIAGELLATES
Dlctyocha fibula
Dlstephanus- speculum
Riznyk, 197M.
-------
- 3-28 -
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/n2/day, Integrated over the euphotic zone. Near
sewage outfalls such as Point Loma, productivity can increase to
2.0 to 2.5 g/C/m*/day (Epply et al., 1972).
3.3.1.2. Zooplankton
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 (holoplanktonlc) forms which
range in depth distribution from the surface to at least 3,282
fathom's (6,000 m) (Holton et al. 1977).
The primary source of zooplanktonic information is the
California Cooperative Oceanic Fisheries Investigations
(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).
The horizontal and vertical distribution and abundance, as
w.ell as the species composition, of southern California
zooplankton is highly variable. It is influenced by many
environmental factors, including season, advection or currents
and the winds that cause currents, long-term meteorological and
oceanograpbic changes (Berner and Reid, 1961, Radovlch, 1961)
and nutrient/temperature relationships (Reid, 1962). Unlike
phytoplankton, zooplankton are found throughout the water
column, but are generally most abundant in the euphotic zone.
The ability of many zooplankton to migrate vertically affects
their distribution by currents. Seasonal fluctuations in
abundance are highly variable, but zooplankton tend to be most
abundant in spring and summer, and least abundant in the winter.
Seapy (1974) reported zooplankton densities of 64-256 cc/1,000o3
for February - July, and 16-64 cc/1,000m3 from October -
January.
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 Saaitta blerll. the copepod Eucalanus
-------
- 3-29 -
Table 3-6* Major Zooplankton Taxa in the Southern California
Bight
Major Taza
Common Species
Distribution Remarks
CNIDABIA
CTENOPHORA
Syncoryne eximia
Pnialiadium aregarlum
PIeurobracfaia bachel
Beroe ap.
CHAETOGNATHA Sagitta eunerltiea
£. bierel
.§,* enflata
,S. minima
POLICHAETA Vanadls formosa
Torrea Candida
Tomopteris eieaans
Travisiopsia loblfera
MOLLUSCA
Pelecypoda
Pteropoda
Heteropoda
Cephalopoda
CRUSTACEA
Copepoda
Mytllus app.
Limacina hellcina
Atlanta peron
Atlanta sp.
Carinaria .laponica
Abraliopsis fells
Gonatus onyx
Libinocera trispinosa
Acartia tonsa
1« clauai
Calanua helgolandicus
£. pacificus
Rhincalanus naautus
Oithona aimilis
Hydromedusae
Hydromedusae
Common in nearshore
plankton.
Reported from south of
the area. Densities of
less than 50/10,000 m3 of
water in the upper 60
fathoms (110 m).
No aeasonabillty pattern
or inshore to offshore
difference in abundance.
Offshore distribution to
(200 km}.
Can be extremely abundant.
Cold water form.
Dominant in surface samp-
les in Santa Barbara
Channel, maximum abun-
dance in November.
Abundant in summer months.
All stages abundant in
May to June.
Most common species.
Juveniles abundant in- Julj
to August, adults
abundant in May to June.
Most abundant cyclopoid
copepod from samples off
Scripps Institution.
(CONTINUED)
-------
- 3-30 -
Table 3-6 (Continued)
Major Zooplankton Taxa in the Southern
California Bight
Major Taza
Common Species
Distribution Remarks
Cirripeda Balanus app.
Amphipoda Yibilia armata
Cladocera Pen!la aviroatris
Evadne nordmanni
Podon DO1yPbemo 1 d e a
Evadne splnifera
E. tergestina
Euphausla pacifica
Hematoscelis difflcilia
Myctipnanes simplex
Stylocfaeiron longicorne
Thysanoeasa gregaria
T_. spinifera
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
August, 1968 in nearshore
waters off La Jolla
Euphausida
Decapoda Serge ates similis
C a n c e r m a g i a t er
Pandalus .lordanl
Pugettia producta
Crangon spp.
THALIACEA Dollolum dentleulatum
Recorded from 356 fathoms
(650 m) trawls.
Dungeness crab
Pink shrimp
Kelp crab
Shrimp
Abundant in nearshore
waters in summer.
(BLM, 1978)
-------
- 3-31 -
bunel californicus. the hyperild amphipod Hyperietta atebbing!•
and the squid Abcaliopsis Jells. Table 3-6 summarizes the major
zooplankton taxa in the bight (BLM, 1978).
Nearahore waters have been found to support higher
populations of benthic invertebrates and fishes than offshore
waters, Including the larval stages of the Dungeness crabs
Cancer magiater, pink shrimp Pandalus jordanni• Crangon shrimp,
and several species of bottom dwelling flatfishes (BLM, 19&1b).
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 (Alvarino, 1964). Host species within the waters of the
continental slope are neritic forms, with occasional oceanic and
migratory abyssal forms found during upwelllng periods.
3 «3-.2 . Kelp Community
Beds of giant kelp, Macrocytis pvrifera, grow on rocky
substrate off La Jolla, the Point Loma peninsula, and near
Imperial Beach. 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 Schiel, 1985.
In 1977, the Point Loma kel'p forest was approximately 6 nmi
(11 km) long and. one half nmi (1 km) wide at depths between 3
and 14 fathoms (6 and 25 m) (Foster and Schiel, 1985). Between
1964 and 1982 the Point Loma beds have increased from 670 acres
to 1,880 acres (Dale Glantz, Marine Biologist, Kelco, personal
communication, June 19t 1987).
Man-made and natural factors have been identified as
Influencing progressive decline in size since the 1930s and
recent recovery since the 1970s of these kelp beds. Negative
factors include: ocean disposal of sewage, overgrazing by sea
urchins and other herbivores, the elimination of 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 sewage outfalls, the
relocation of the City of San Diego sewage discharge site from
San Diego Bay to a deepwater location 1 nautical mile (2 km)
offshore of the kelp beds, control of sea urchins, and favorable
environmental conditions such as improved transparency of the
ocean waters (Vilson et al., 1980).
-------
- 3-32 -
3-3.3. BenthieBiology
The macrofauna of aubtidal benthic communities in general
within the Southern California Bight are influenced by a variety
of factors including bathymetry, substrate type, oceanic and
localized currents, biogeographic location, and oxygen concen-
trations. To facilitate comparisons of various sites and
coordinate findings with those in the literature, benthic
invertebrate fauna are divided into infauna, animals living in
bottom sediments and eplfauna. 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 benthic 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; SCCWRP, 1973; Jones and Fauchald, 1977; Fauchald
and Jones, 1978a,b,c; Word and Mearns, 1979). These studies
have described five major marine benthic 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 m),
3) the slope and irregular areas between 55 fathoms (100 a) 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 most relevant to the alternative
ODMDS sites.
Mainland shelf environments exhibit high species abundance
and standing crop compared to other major habitats.
Polychaetes, mollusks and crustaceans are the major taxonomie
groups represented. Total infaunal density varies greatly,
averaging approximately 5,000 organisms/m2 (BLM, 1978).
Species richness, biomass, and density of the mainland
shelf benthos has been shown to be significantly reduced in the
area of sewage outfalls compared to other inshore shelf
locations (Thompson, 1982, Swartz 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, current 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
mainland shelf.
-------
- 3-33 -
Table 3-7« Dominant Benthic Infauna of the Mainland Shelf from
9.3 Fathoms (17 nt) to 131 Fathoms (240 m) .
_ Abundance
Taxa (x Individuals/sample)
POLYCHAETA
'LumbrinerJ.3 oruzensls
PrionosPio nalmgranl
Pectinaria calif orniensia
Cirratulidae spp.
GlYcera 3pp.
MOLLDSCA
Pelecy poda
Parviiucina- tenuiaculpta
Teilina earp.en.teri
Axiaopsida serricata
Ma com a yoldif ormis
CRUSTACEAN
Ostracoda
Euohilomedes carcharondonta
NEMERTEA spp.
ECHINODERMATA
Opiuroidea
Amphiuridae sp.
4.8
3.6
1 .7
8.1
2.9
10.7
3.2
2.7
1 .3
4.8
3.2
5.8
(Jones, 1969)
-------
- 3-3* -
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. is with the shelf fauna, polychaetes
tend to dominate, followed by crustaceans, mollusks and
echinoderas.
Total density of infauna ranges from approximately 2,000
organisms/m2 to 11,000 organisms/in2 (Jones, 1969). Table 3-8
lists the dominant benthic infauna of the slope offshore of
Huntington Beach/Laguna Beach, an area in the Southern
California Bight 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 faunal communities because environmental
conditions remain relatively constant.
The deep-sea basins of southern California support a
depauperate benthic fauna (Hartman and Barnard, 1958; Fauchald
and Jones, 1973c), due primarily to extremely low. dissolved
oxygen levels... Infaunal density ranges from 1 1 organiams/m2 to
120 organisms/m2 (BLM, 1973). Surface deposit feeders dominate
the community .and populations of species vary considerably among
basins; however, a few species of polychaetes and mollusks -are
present in most of the basins- Two species of polychaetes,
Solysippe trilobatus and Phylloehaetopterus limicolus. are
particularly widespread. Dominant benthic Infauna of the basins
of the Southern California Bight are listed in Table 3-9'
3.3.3.2. Infauna of LA-5 Site
The LA-5 site lies on the continental slope and encompasses
approximately 238 to 347 fathoms (130 to 190 m) water depth.
The benthic infauna of the site are generally similar to those
reported for other slope locations in the region. Surface
deposit feeders and suspension feeders predominate. In
approximate order of abundance and diversity, the dominant
groups are polychaetes, crustaceans, mollusks and echinoderms.
Abundant species in samples using a modified Van Teen grab were
the polychaetes Mediomastus anbiseta. Tauberia gracilis. and
Splopfaanes berkeleyorum; the ostracod Euphilomedes producta; the
brittlestar Ampfaiodia urtioa; and the bivalve mollusks
Adonthorina cyclia and Axinopsida aerricata.
Total density of infauna ranged from 1,600 to 8,000
organisma/m2. Humber of species per 0.1 »2 ranged from 34 to
89, and neither density nor number varied significantly between
the depths of 65 to 95 fathoms (130 to 190 m) (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
-------
- 3-35 -
Table 3-8.
Dominant Benthlc Infauna of the Slope Off
Huntington and Laguna Beaches from 88 Fathoms
(161 m) to 284 Fathoms (520 m) .
Taxa
_ Abundance
(x Individuals/Site)
POLICHAETA
Peetinaria californensia
Maldane aarsi
Luabrineria sp.
Paraprionospio Dinnata
Mediomastus calif omens! s
Prionospio cirrifera
MOLLUSCA
Aplacophora
Liaifossor fratula
Pelecypoda
Mysella turnIda
Cycloeardia yentricossa
CRUSTACEA
Ampelisca macrocephala
ECHINODERMATA
Amphiodia urtica
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)
-------
- 3-36 -
Table 3-9.
Dominant Benthic Infauna of the Basins of the
Southern California Bight from 340 Fathoms (622 m)
to 485 Fathoms (888 m).
Taxa
POLICHAETA
Eclyaippe trilpbatus
Aricldea complex
Ihy 1 1 o cfa aetooteros spp.
Spiopfaanes sp.
MOLLOSCA
Mitrella permodesta
Tooburchus redondoensis
Cadulus calif ornicus
CRUSTACEA
Lil-1eborgia cot a
_ Abundance
(x Individuals/sample)
4.9
1.4
4.9
1.9
2.7
0.4
. 0.3
0.3
Pauchald and Jones (1978c)
-------
- 3-37 -
were different; however, comparisons between LA-5 and the
reference site were possible. Compared to tbe reference site,
infauna at LA-5 were less diverse but approximately equally
abundant, and the most abundant species were more dominant
numerically. These differences were associated with differences
between the two sites in sediment characteristics. LA-5
sediments were both coarser and more poorly sorted than the
reference site (Appendix A, p. A-62).
The species composition of the LA-5 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-5 include
Mediomastas sp., Axinopsida aerrlcata. Parvilucina teniusculpta.
and Euphilomedes orodueta. Species that characterize the
control zone, Ampbiodia urtica. and Spjophanes missionensis. and
the contaminated zone, Gaol tella capitata and Tharyx sp., were
also prevalent. This would seem to indicate an overall level of
pollution or disturbance comparable to. Thompson1s transition
zone.
3*3*3*3« Epifauna
Unlike the infauna, the abundance of epifauna generally
increases with depth over the mainland shelf and much of the
continental slope (Word and Hearns, 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. Echinoderms, for example,
are the numerically dominant class of organisms at most depths,
although their diversity is often low. Common species include
the sea urhlns Lyteoblnua pictus and Allocentrotus fragilis. the
sea cucumber Parastionopus californicus. and the seastar
Astropecten Yerrilli. The shrimp SicTonia ingentis is also a
species- that is commonly collected in trawls. Surveys by the
Southern California Coastal Water Research Project (SCCWRP) have
shown tbe epifauna off Point Loma to be dispersed in both
biomass and number of species, presumably an effect of sewage
discharge from the Point Loma outfall (Vord and Mearns, 1978;
Moore et al., 1983).
The two most commonly used methods of sampling benthlc
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, eplbentbic
fauna. The two methods produce very different results, as can
be seen by comparing species lists from grab/core studies in tbe
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 Vater Research Project
(SCCWRP, 1973; Moore et al., 1963). 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
-------
- 3-38 -
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, for
example, by careful measuring the area swept by each trawl.
Therefore* the data cannot support detailed quantitative
analysis of density, diversity, bionass, etc. The data can be
used, however, to characterize in general the epibenthic
macroinvertebrate 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 epibenthic microinvertebrates captured
in otter trawls at the LA-5 disposal and reference sites, by
sampling period (season) and depth of trawl station. In all,
sampling at these two sites produced 98 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 (69 to 93
fathoms or 135 to 186 m) and duration (64 mostly 5-minute
trawls) of the sampling.
The trawls were dominated by crustaceans and echlnoderms in
both species composition and abundance (Appendix A, Table A-30).
Five species dominated the catch in terms of abundance: the sea
urchins L. Diet us (4,128 Individuals in 31 of 64 trawls) and A.-
fragllla (1,280 in 38 trawls), the shrimps Crangon zacae (1,389
in 42 trawls) and S_. in gent is (1,091 in 31 trawls). Together,
these caught account for 86 percent of the total number of
macrolnvertebrates caught in the trawls.
fleurpncodes Planlpes, often referred to as the "red crab,"
is a primarily pelagic species brought into southern California
water by warm water masses moving in from the south. It is
abundant only when such a water mass makes a major intrusion in
the area, usually in the summer, as happened in the summer of
1983 during the "El Nino" phenomenon. During most summers, _P.
Dlanioes occurs in the Southern California Bight in low numbers,
but Its presence in large numbers in an Infrequent, somewhat
anomalous condition. This is reflected by the fact that, even
during "El Nino," £. planioes was abundant in only one of this
study's trawls. Twenty-nine hundred (2,900) £. planipes were
caught in a trawl at Station 3 (mid-depth) at the disposal site
in August 1983. Although .P. planipes is primarily pelagic, it
also adopts a benthic existence at 2-3 years of age. Therefore,
it la possible that the .P. Planipes in this trawl were caught on
the bottom, in the water column as the trawl descended or
ascended, or a combination of both. Individuals caught were not
aged. Discounting this trawl, £. Planipes appears to be a
widely distributed but not very abundant species (263 in 36
trawls).
Discounting the 2,900 P_. Planipes in this one trawl, the
other four species listed above represent 19% of the trawl catch
by abundance during all the surveys. These four species are
-------
- 3-39 -
Table 3-10. Dominant Epifauna of the LA-5 and Reference Sites
Shallow
Station
(135 m)
Mid-Depth
Station
(168 m)
Deep
Station
(186 m)
Overall
Site
Shallow
Station
(135 m)
Mid-Depth
Station
(168 m)
Deep
Station
(186 m)
Overall
Site
Appendix A
Fathom s 1
DISPOSAL SITE
Dumber of Number of
Principal Species Species Individuals
Lytechinus pictus 36 1,997
Crangon zacae 33 1,216
Sicyonia ingentia
Opfaiura lutkeni
Allocentrotus fragilis
Crangon zacae 46 838
Crangon zacae 86 1,051
Sicyonia ingentia
Allocentrotus fragllia
REFERENCE SITE
- . Number of Number of
Principal Species Species Individuals
Sicyonia ingentls 23 2,769
Lytechinua pictus
Crangon zacae 35 5*7
Lyt echinus pictua
Crangon zaoae 30 375
Sicyonia ingentis
Lytechinua pictus
Crangon zaoae 48 3,691
Sicyonia ingentis
Lytechinua pictus
, p. A- 86
.829 meters
-------
common components of trawl samples from the region (SCCWHP,
1973; Moore et al. , 1983)1 but they do not generally dominate to
the extent they did in our trawls. The other abundant species
in the trawls are also common benthlc invertebrates of the
region: the shrimp Pandalus platyceros. the brittlestar Ophiura
lutkeni t and the basket star G or go nocepfaalua eucnemis. Species
that occurred frequently in the trawls but usually in low
numbers Included Octopus sjp.. the shrimp Crangon resima. the
nudibranch Pleurobranohaea californica. the brittlestar
Qphiacantfaa diplasia. the sea cucumber Parastichopus
californicus. and the seastars Astropecten verrilli and Luidia
fiololata.
There is no clear depth-related trend in number of species
at either site, but there is a clear pattern of decreased
abundances in trawls with depth, particularly at the reference
site (Table 3-10}. Hany more invertebrates were caught at the
shallow 69 fathoms (135 m) station than at the deeper stations.
Trawl studies by SCCWRP (Word and Mearns, 1977; Moore et al.,
1983} have shown Increasing epibenthic Invertebrates abundance
and diversity with depth, but over a much larger depth range
than the present study (all present stations are within the
mid-depth category 25 to 110 fathoms (50-199 m), of Moore et al.
(1983)). The relatively small depth range of this study limits
the assessment of depth-related trends. There are no apparent
depth-related patterns in the distribution of the principal
species, except that the shrimp Crangon zacae was seldom
abundant at the shallow stations.
There is little evidence for a difference between the
disposal and reference site in abundance of invertebrates, but
more species were caught at the disposal site (86) than at the
LA-5 site (48) during 3 of the 4 surveys, during 11 of 12
stations samplings, and over all surveys combined. If the
epibenthic macroinvertebrate infauna is in fact more diverse at
the disposal site, it seems unlikely to be a result of disposal
(infauna show the opposite pattern) and is most likely due to
environmental factors such as heterogeneity of habitat type.
Among the principal species, £. zacae is more common at the
disposal site, while Sicyonia ingentis is more common at the
reference site. Since these are both shrimp, this may be an
instance of niche replacement, with an unknown relation to
disposal. The other principal species are approximately equally
prevalent at the two sites.
For this EIS it was determined that a common .benthlc
epifanual organism should be tested for toxic substances.
Studies of tissue samples from £. ingentis were tested for the
accumulation of toxic substances. There was DO significant
difference (p = 0.05) in the concentration of any heavy metals
in the muscle tissues of shrimp from either the LA-5 site or the
reference site. Concentrations of oil and grease were below
detection limits and it is assumed that there is no significant
difference between the two areas (Appendix A, p. A-37).
-------
- 3-41 -
Similarly, there is little or no evidence of a consistent eleva-
tion of DDT isomer or FOB tissue concentrations at the disposal
site relative to concentrations observed at tbe reference site
(Appendix A, p. A-42). Tissue levels of pesticides and FCBs
vary among surveys, and among samples within each survey. Tbe
significance of these variations is uncertain because of tbe
small number of successful analyses at the reference site.
Batural 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, (2) feeding habits of individuals or (3) differential
ability of individuals to metabolize contaminants (Jeff Cross,
SCCWRP, personal communication, 30 September 1985). 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.
It should be noted that tissue levels of trace metals and
chlorinated hydrocarbons at LA-5 were much lower than levels in
£• iagentis from locations near the Hyperion outfall in Santa
Monica Bay and the Whites Point outfalls off tbe Palos Terdes
Peninsula near Los Angeles (Brown et al. , 1984).
3.3.4.- Fish
The fish fauna of the San Diego region consists of distinct
vertically distributed fish communities, including species
common, to mainland and Island shelf areas, mesopelagic deep sea
or midwater species, bathypelagic demersal fishes, and various
transient and resident species (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 (875) 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. As the
distance north from southern California increases, the number of
species decreases. Fish abundance and blomass 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 Mearns, 1977). Below 109 and 164 fathoms (200 and
300 m) tbe number of species varies directly with decreasing
temperature and dissolved oxygen concentrations.
Ahlstrom (1959, 1965, 1969) summarized Information on the
extensive CalCOFI collections of fish eggs and larvae in the
California Current. Tbe distribution of fish larvae is highly
dependent upon the spawning areas of tbe parents and the
hydrographic conditions prevailing in tbe 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 (Richardson and Pearcy, 1977). The distribution
and abundance of fish larvae and eggs vary by season over tbe
-------
- 3-42 -
Southern California Bight depending on the species. For some
species, for example the northern anchovy (Engraulis mordax) and
the several species of rockfisb (Scorpaenidae 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 (ji. mordax) and Pacific hake (Herluccius
produetus) represented 40 to 60} of the catch. Larvae of deep
sea pelagic fishes composed 20 to 40) of all larvae taken in
CalCOFI 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
myctophid lanternfishes, the gonostomatid llghtfishes and the
deep sea smelts (Bathylagidae) (Ablstrom, 1969). Ahlstrom
(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; SCCWRF,
1973; Stephens et al.., 1973; Allen and Mearns, 1977; Word et.
al., 1977; Moore and Mearns, 1980; Moore et al., 1983). In
nearshore areas between 6-50 fathoms (10-100 m), common'demersal
fish are speckled sanddab (Cltharichtfays stlgmaeus). California
tonguefish (Sympfaurua atricauda), horheyhead turbot
(P.leuroniohtvs vertlcalls) , white surf perch (Phanerodon
furcatus), shiner, surfperch (Cyaatogaster aggregata), and white
croaker (Genyonemua llneatus).
In deeper shelf environments between 55 to 219 fathoms
(100-400 m), demersal fish tend to be dominated by flatfish
(Pleuronectidae) and rockfish (Scorpaenldae). Common species
include: Dover sole (Microstomus pacificus). slender sole
(Lyopsetta exllla), rex sole (Glyptocephalus zachirus), Pacific
sanddab (Cltharichtfays sordidus), stripetail rockfish (Sebastes
saxicola). splitnose rockfish (Sebastes diporproa). shortspine
thornyhead (Sebastolobus alascanus), pink surfperch (ZaJemblus
rosaceus), plalnfin midshipman (Porichthys notatus), and
shortspine combfish (Zaniolepis frenata). These fish feed on a
variety of prey species Including: epifauna such as ostracods,
mysid shrimp and other crustaceans, infauna such as polychaetes
and bivalves; zooplankton such as copepods and tunicates; and
other demersal fish.
3-3.4.2. Demersal Fish of the LA-5 Site
Otter trawl sampling within the LA-5 site produced 37
species in 14 families (Appendix A, p. A75-79). The catch was
dominated by flatfish (primarily family Pleuronectidae) and
rockfish (Scorpaenidae). numerically, one species, the slender
sole (Lyopsetta exilis). was particularly dominant, accounting
-------
- 3-43 -
Table 3-11* Common Fish Larvae of the Southern California Bight
Genus Species
Common Name
Engraulis mordax
Herluccius productus
Sebastes spp.
Citharicfathys spp.
Bathylagidae
Myctophidae
Gonostomatidae
Sardlnopa caerulea
Tracfaurus symaetricus
Parophrys vejtjiias
Isopsetta isolepis
Microgadua proximus
Northern anchovy
Pacific hake
Rockfish
Sanddabs -
Deep-sea smelts
Lanternfishes
Lightfishes
Pacific sardine
Jack mackerel
English sole
Butter sole
Pacific tomcod
(BLM, 1978)
-------
- 3-44 -
for almost half of the total individuals caught. The slender
sole was also frequently encountered, occurring in 61 of the 64
trawls, indicating a widespread distribution. The Pacific
sanddab (Cithariohthvs aordidus) was the second most abundant
species. Two additional species, although not so abundant as
the slender sole and the Pacific sanddab, occurred in a large
number of trawls: the shortspine combfish (Zaniolepis frenata)
and the Dover sole (Microstomua pacificus). These two species
thus appear to be widely distributed but not generally abundant.
Other commonly caught species were the stripetail rockfish
(Sabastes saxlcola), the halfbanded rockfish (Sefaastea
semiclnctus), the rosethorn rockfish (Sebaates helvomaculatua),
the plainfin midshipman (Porich thya notatua), and the pink
surfperch (Zalembius rosaceus) . All of the above species are
well-known common components of the mid-depth 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 yellowchln aculpin (Icelinua
ouadriaeriatua). and the California tonguefish (Symphurua
atricauda) were perhaps underrepresented.
There is some indication that demersal fish are leas
abundant and less diverse at the LA-5 site, compared to the
nearby reference site (Appendix A, p. A-74). More fish were
caught at the reference site during 3 of the 4 surveys, and
almost twice as many were caught there overall (2,267 vs. 1,205)
Appendix A, Table A-29). 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 epibiota 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
aitea 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-5 relative to the reference site is due to natural
differences between the sites.
-------
Contaminants In demersal fish of the Southern California
Bight vary according to the type of toxicant. Levels of
pesticides and PCBs tend to be low in offshore areas and other
areas distant from pollutant sources (SCCWRP, 1973; Kaplan,
1977). These same contaminants tend to be higher in nearshore
species, particularly near sewage outfalls such as the Whites
Point outfall on the Palos Verdes Peninsula near Los Angeles
(BLM, 1978). Trace metal levels do not show this pattern (BLM,
198lb).
Levels of heavy metals (As, Cd, Cr, Cu, Hg, Pb, and Zn),
oil and grease, and chlorinated hydrocarbons (pesticides and
PCBs) were analyzed in tissue samples of JL. exills and C.
sordidus collected at the LA-5 site. Tissue levels of metals at
the LA-5 site were not higher than those at the reference site
(Appendix A, p. A-37), and compared favorably with levels
reported in the literature for the Southern California Bight
(Appendix A, p. i-42). For pesticides and PCBs, there was
little or no evidence of a difference in DDT isomer or FOB
tissue concentrations at the LA-5 site relative to
concentrations at the reference site (Appendix A, p. A-42).
Levels at the LA-5 and reference site also compared well with
literature values (Appendix A, p. A-42; Sherwood et al., 1980).
3.3.4.3. Pelagic Fish
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.
Population diversity is illustrated in the list of fish
presented in Table 3-12.
The Southern California Bight offers both nearshore or
coastal and offshore or high seas environments and the habitat
diversity is partially Illustrated by this list of fishes. Some
of those listed are rare, such as the Zeidae (dories),
Lophotidae (crestfishes), Regalecidae (oarfishes),
Trachipteridae (ribbonfishes}, and Luvaridae (louvars), whereas
others are common such as the Engraulidae (anchovies),
Merluccildae (hakes), and Scomberesocldae (sauries). Certain
species are truly epipelaglc (in surface layers of open waters)
such as the Exocoetldae (flylngfisbes), Hemirhamphidae
(halfbeaks), Belonidae (needlefishes), and Molidae (molas),
whereas others have a wider depth range such as the Bramidae
(pomfrets), Ilphiidae (swordfish), Scombridae (mackerels),
Centrolophldae (meduaafisbes) and Tetragonurldae (squaretails).
Some species are coastally-oriented such as the Engraulidae
(anchovies), Clupeidae (herrings), Carangidae (jacks), and
Stromateldae (butterfishes), while others are more offshore or
high seas fishes such as the Lampridldae (opahs), Coryphaenidae
(dolphin-fishes), Trichiuridae (cutlass-fishes)', Istiopboridae
(billfiahes), Bramidae, and Tetragonuridae.
More than 50% of the 80 species of pelagic fish are rare
and almost 75$ are either rare or uncommon based on an
occurrence evaluation by Miller and Lea (1972), and Horn (1974).
-------
. 3-46 -
Table 3-12. Families of Fish Inhabiting the Pelagic Environment
In the Southern California Bight
RARE
Dories (Zeidae)
Crestfish (Lopbotldae)
Oarfish (Regalecidae)
Ribblonfish. (Trachlpteridae)
Louvars (Luvaridae)
EPIPELAGIC
Flyingfish (Exocoetidae)
Halfbeaks (Hemlrhamphidae)
Needlefish (Belonidae)
Molas (Molidae)
COASTAL
Anchovies (Engraulldae)
Herrings (Clupeldae)
Jacks (Carangldae)
Butterfish (Stromateidae)
COMMON
Anchovies (Engraulldae}
Hakes (Merlucciidae)
Sauries (Scomberesocidae)
WIDE DEPTH RANGE
Pomfrets (Bramidae)
Svordfish (Ilphildae)
Mackerels (Scombridae)
Medusafish (Centrolophidae)
Squaretails (Tetragonuridae)
OFFSHORE
Opahs (Lamprldidae}
Dolphinfisb (Coryphaenidae)
Cutlassfish (Trichiuridae)
Billfish (Istiophoridae)
Pomfrets (Bramidae)
Squaretails (Tetragonuridae)
(Miller and Lea, 1972)
-------
- 3-17 -
The numerically dominant species are several of sport and
commercial species Include the following: Engraulia mordax.
Pacific saury (Cololabis sal,ra), Jack mackerel (Tracfaurus
avmmetricus). yellowtail (Seriola dorsalis). California
barracuda (Sphvraena araentea). Herlucciua productua. Pacific
mackerel (Scomber Jaoonicua). Pacific bonlto (Sarda efailienais).
albaoore (Thunnus alalunaa) and Pacific butterfish (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
with silvery reflective aides and frequently with luminescent
organs. Members of the families Myctophidae (lanternfish),
Bathylagidae, and Gonostomidae are the most abundant deep sea
fishes off southern California, and they occupy central
positions In oceanic food webs. These families, especially the
Myctophidae, appear to occupy Important positions in the trophic
structure of offshore waters comparable to. that, of the anchovy
in shallow, more Inshore waters (Horn, 1974). Deep-sea fish
feed primarily on deep sea crustaceans such as euphausiids and
copepods, chaetognaths, and other fish. In turn, the deep-sea
fish serve as food for cetaceans, 'tunas, sharks, and blllfish.
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 (Horn, 1974). According to Fitch and Lavenberg
(1968) two deep-sea families, lanternfish (Myctophidae) and
llghtfish (Gonostomatidae), 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 (Melamphaeidae), 9 species; hatchetflsh
(Sternoptychldae), 7 species; Gonostomatidae, 6 species; and
deep-sea smelts (Bathylagidae), 5 species. The species most
frequently collected by Bbeling et al. (1970) were Leuroalossus
atilbius. a mesopelagic bathylagld, and two mesopelagic
myctophids, Stenobraehiua leucopsarus and Tripfaoturus mexicanus.
3.3.5. Coastal Birds
The avifauna of the San Diego region of the Southern
California Bight is extremely varied and highly transient.
Birds which might occur in the LA-5 area or other offshore areas
-------
- 3-48 -
consist of pelagic or littoral species which feed on eplpelagic
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, Eared Grebe, Pied-billed Grebe, Pink-footed Shearwater,
Sooty Shearwater, Black-vented Shearwater, Black Storm-petrel,
Brown Pelican, Double-crested Cormorant, Brant, Surf Scoter,
Red-breasted Merganser, Glaucous-winged Gull, Vestern Gull,
California Gull, Ring-billed Gull, Hew Gull, Bonaparte's Gull,
Heerman's Gull, Forster's Tern, 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 (Farallon Islands northward) it
does contain the entire California breeding populations of Black
Storm-Petrels, Zantus Murrelets and Brown Pelicans (Sowls et
al., 1980). The breeding colonies of these three species are
located on the Channel Islands at considerable distance from the
LA-5 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 LA-5 disposal site is not likely to affect any of the avian
species which occur in the San Diego region.
3.3«6. Marine Mammals
Vithin 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 Diego 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 (Arctooepfaalus 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 (NOAA, 1980). The most important rookeries are on San
Miguel Island. Other important pinniped areas are located on
San Nicolas, 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 nearshore and offshore waters, with some species
swimming daily across the channel to feed over offshore banks
-------
. 3-49 -
Table 3-13* Marine Mammals of the Southern California Bight
Species
Estimated North American
Pacific* Population
A. PINNEPEDS
California sea lion
(Zalophus californlanus)
Steller sea lion
(Eumetopias jubata)
Northern elephant seal
(Hirounga angustirostris)
Harbor seal
(Phoca yjtulina)
Northern fur seal
(Callorfainus ursinua)
Guadalupe fur seal
(Arctocephalus townaendi)
TOTAL PINNEPEDS
B. CETACEANS
Common dolphin
(Delphinua delphis)
Pacific bottlenose dolphin
(Tursiops truncatus)
White-sided dolphin
(Lagenorhynchus obliquidena)
Northern' right whale dolphin
(Lissode1Phis borealls)
Dall's porpoise
(Pnoooenoides dalli)
Pacific pilot whale
(Globlcephala macrorhyncus)
California gray whale
(Esehricfatlus robustus)
TOTAL CETACEANS
157,000
10,000
100,000
42,000
11,000
1 .600
314,600
900,000
ND
40,000
ND
920,000
ND
18.000
1 ,878,000
• Excluding Alaska
ND B No Data Available
(NMFS, 1986)
-------
- 3-50 -
and ridges. The California sea lion (Zalophus californianas)
and the harbor seal (Phoca vitalina) are the two most common
pinniped species along the mainland coast and in the vicinity of
the LA-5 site.
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 (Dailey, 1974}* All of these species are either
transient or migratory in the area and, with the exception of
the gray whale (Eschrlchtius robustus) and harbor porpoise
(Delpfainus del phis), tend to occur offshore over the continental
slope between the 175 to 1,000 fathom (300 and 2,000 meter)
Isobaths (Dailey, 1974). Gray whales and bottlenose dolphins
(Tursiops truncatus) are common inshore, normally occurring
within 8 ami of the coast. The gray whale and six other
cetacean species are listed as endangered by the 0.5. National
Marine Fisheries Service.
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 Endangered Species
Table 3-14 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 near the San Diego coast 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 (Eschrichtlus robustus)
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 National Marine.
Fisheries Service (NMFS, 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 Diego region is a principal gray whale migration
route. Gray whales pass near and/or through the alternative
disposal sites in the San Diego region on their twice-yearly
migrations. The major migratory route is between the mainland
shore and the Channel Islands. The whales tend to swim closer
-------
. 3-51 -
Table 3-1*.
Bare* Threatened or Endangered Species of the
Southern California Bight
Species
California
Distribution
Federal State
Status Status
PLANTS
Salt marsh
bird's beak
(Cordylanthus
martinimus spp.
martlmus)
REPTILES
Leatherback
turtle
(Permocfaelys
coriacea
sechleeeli)
Loggerhead sea
turtle
(Caretta caretta)
Coastal marshes of Santa
Barbara, Ventura, Orange
and San Diego Counties.
Tropical and subtropical
seas of west coast; some
stray as far north as
Vancouver Island, B.C.
Offshore.
£
N/A
Green sea turtle Offshore.
(Chelonia mydas)
Pacific Ridley's
turtle
(Lepidocbelys
olivacea)
BIRDS
American pere-
grine falcon
(Falco pere-
grinus anaturn)
Southern bald
eagle
(Haliaeetus
leucooepfaalus
California brovn
pelican
(Peleoanua
occidentalis
californicus)
Rare visitors offshore.
E
N/A
N/A
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
(CONTINUED)
-------
- 3-52 -
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 alblfrons
brown!)
Lightfooted
clapper rail
(Ballus longj-
rostrls levipes
California black
rail
(Lateralls
jamaoensis
carturnioulus)
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-
wicfaensis beldingi)
MAMMALS
Southern sea otter Santa Cruz south to
(Enhydra lutris Pismo Beach.
nereis)
Guadalupe fur seal Offshore, Channel and
(Arctooephalus San Nicolas Islands.
townsendi)
Blue whale
(Balaenoptera
musculua)
Fin whale
(Balaenoptera
physalus)
Sel whale
(Balaenoptera
borealis)
Gray whale
(Eschrichtius
robustus)
Offshore.
Offshore.
Offshore.
Hearshore, normally
within 8 nmi of the
mainland shore.
E
N/A
H/A
N/A
E
E
E
E
N/A
H/A
H/A
N/A
(CONTINUED)
-------
. 3-53 -
Table 3-14 (Continued). Bare, Threatened or Endangered Species
of the Southern California Bight
Species
California
Distribution
Federal State
Status Status
Humpback whale
(Megaptera
DovaepglInae)
Hearshore.
Pacific right Offshore.
whale
(Eubalaena
glacialis .laponica)
Sperm, whale
(PhYseter
catondon)
Offshore.
H/A
N/A
N/A
E s Endangered
R s Rare
T. s Threatened..
N/A s Hot Applicable
-------
- 3-54 -
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. Point Loma is
a favorite whale watching location.
3.3-7.2. California Brown Pelican (Pelieanus occidentalis
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 3iOOO 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
Mexico. The closest of these, Los Coronados, is located
approximately 10.5 nmi (19.4 km) south of the LA-5 site. 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 common throughout coastal
southern California and they feed in nearshore areas, offshore
waters and close to their resting places along the coast.
3-3-7.3- California Least Tern (Sterna albifrons brownl)
Arriving from unknown wintering areas, California least
terns nest from approximately April to August on sandy beaches
from Baja California to San Francisco Bay. The California
population is currently estimated at approximately 1,200 nesting
pairs (California Department 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.
Nesting sites in the vicinity of the LA-5 site are the
mouths of several lagoons in northern San Diego County, Mission
Bay, San Diego Airport, Coronado Haval Air Station, several
sites in south San Diego Bay and the Tijuana River mouth. The
closest of these, Coronado Naval Air Station, is approximately 8
nmi (15 km) north of the LA-5 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 Border Field Federal Wildlife Refuge, located at the
mouth of the Tiajuana River, Is the only federally administered
-------
- 3-55 -
reserve la the LA-5 region (Figure 3*5). It Is located 12.3 nmi
(22.8 km) east-southeast of the LA-5 site near the international
border between the United States and Mexico. This estuarine
habitat is an important area for many rare species of plants and
birds. Prevailing longshore currents and its distance from the
LA-5 preferred site effectively protect this refuge from any
impact by ODMDS activities.
Two Areas of Special Biological Significance (ASBS) are
located around the LA-5 site (Figure 3*5). These ASBS were
designated by the California State Water Resources Control Board
(CSWRCfl) in 1976 to protect species or biological communities
from alteration of natural water quality (CSWRCB, 1976). The
San Diego-La Jolla Ecological Reserve ASBS and the San Diego
Marine Life Refuge Include the shores and coastal waters from a
point near Point La Jolla northward to the Scripps Institute of
Oceanography and the.U.S. Fishery Oceanography Center.
Prevailing longshore currents and their distance, 17 to 19 ami
(31 to 35 km) north-northeast of the LA-5 preferred site,
effectively protect these sensitive underwater preserves from
any impacts from continued use of the ODMDS.
Two additional state administered refuges located in the
LA-5 region are the Torrey Pines State Reserve and the Point
Lorna Ecological Reserve. Within the Torrey Pines Reserve is
located the Los Penasqultas Marsh Natural Preserve, one of the
few remaining salt marsh and lagoon areas in southern
California. It is the habitat of a number of rare and
endangered bird, species such as the Least Tern and the
Light-footed Clapper Rail and is an important feeding and
nesting place for migratory waterfowl and shoreblrds. Because
of its location more than 20 nmi (37 km) northwest of the LA-5
site, no impact is expected. The closest reserve, 6 nmi (11 km)
east of the LA-5 site, at the southern end of Point Loma
Includes a small underwater preserve. Its distance from the
preferred ODMDS makes any impact from disposal activities very
unlikely.
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
MPHSA is to preserve or restore natural areas, recreation
activities and ecological and aesthetic values through
conservation of unique areas. KOAA's 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-5
site Is approximately 88 nmi (163 km) northwest of the LA-5
site. Movement of suspended material from the ODMDS is not
expected to impact the Channel Islands National Marine
Sanctuary.
-------
- 3-56 -
DSP WATER
REGION
[.V.ENCINITAS
{•vTorrey Pines ER
,8an Diego Marine Life
Refuge ASBS
Olego-La Jolla
/;.:£cologlc»l Reserve ASBS
ER: State of California Ecoiogical Reserve
ASBS: State of California Area of Special
Biological Significance
SAN DIEGO
.CHULA VISTA
':'::'- Border Field Federal
lldllfe Refuge
LA-48ITE
(SHALLOW WATER)
FIGURE 3-5. LOCATION OF FEDERAL AND STATE BIOLOGICAL RESERVES IN THE
PROJECT AREA
-------
- 3-57 -
The State of California has designated oil and gas
sanctuaries within the three mile limit of its Jurisdiction
(Figure 3-5). 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 San Diego County are
designated as oil and gas sanctuaries administered by the State
Lands Commission. The preferred LA-5 site is located within an
area of Proposed Southern California Lease Offering and 3.5 nmi
(6 km) west 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 orRecruitment of
Nuisance Species in the Disposal Site 40 CFR 228.6(a)(10)
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:
Polychaetes Capitella caoitata
Tharyx tesselata
Bivalve Paryilucinia tenulaculpta
Amphipods Corophiurn acfaeruslcum
Coroptaium insldeiosum
Podocerus brasillensis
Three of these species, C_. capitata. Tharyx sp.. and 2*
tenulBculpta. are common at the LA-5 site, but they are much
less dominant than in highly polluted areas such as Industrial
ports and sewage discharge sites. These species also occur at
the reference site, although in lesser numbers. It is possible
that the somewhat elevated abundance of these species at the
LA-5 site is due to disposal of dredged material, and continued
disposal would be likely to maintain this situation. However,
the present abundance of these species at the LA-5 site is not
considered high enough to indicate a highly polluted or
•nuisance* condition, and it Is unlikely that continued disposal
would result in such a condition.
Disposal is most likely to promote 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 most similar to those of the shallow
habitats in which these species are normally most 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 very different from those of the
shallow habitats where the species-are normally most abundant.
-------
- 3-58 -
3.4. SOCIOECONOHIC ENVIRONMENT
3*4.1. Commercial Fishing
The San Diego area is an important center for commercial
fishing. The 85 million pounds of commercial fish and
invertebrates landed in 1983 at San Diego area ports were valued
at $38.0 million. This represents approximately 16.5* of the
total catch weight and 20.3* of the total value of all
commercial landings in California (Table 3-15). Between 1981
and 1983, the value of landings at the San Diego area ports
declined from about $89.0 million to $38.0 million due primarily
to decline in the catch produced by the tuna fleet based in San
Diego.
The annual landings of fish and Invertebrates by ports in
the San Diego area are shown in Table 3-16. Although landings
were- reported from several ports in the area, the Fort of San
Diego accounted for almost 99*8* of all landings in the area.
The species of fish commonly landed at San Diego include
tuna (yellowfin, blue fin, skipjack, and albaeore), swordfish,
Pacific bonito, and rockflsh, accounting for over 90* of all
landings during the 1981-1983 period.
Figure 3-6 and Table 3-17 show, the principal, speei.es and
the average annual catch by blocks of origin in the San Diego
area. This information is based on unpublished data from the
California Department of Fish and Game (1984). Fish and Game
Block 878 which contains the LA-5 site, has not been very
productive for commercial fishing.
The total catch in Block 878 in 1981 amounted to
approximately 235,000 pounds of fish and Invertebrates. Even
though it represented a four-fold increase over the 1976-77
catch, it still amounted to only one-fourth of the average catch
per block in the San Diego area. Blocks 860 and 861, to the
north of this block are, however, much more productive, partly
due to the presence of rocky substrate, kelp beds and other fish
habitat. In 1981, these two blocks accounted for almost 4.0
million pounds of fisheries amounting to about 23* of the total
catch in the local waters of the San Diego area. In general,-
the productivity of most of the blocks increased over the
1976-1981 period. The annual fluctuations in the catch are more
a reflection of the market demand for fish, rather than the
productivity of the blocks.
3.4.2. Commercial Shipping
San Diego Bay is a major Haval, commercial and recreational
center for the southwest United States. To enter the bay, ships
travel north for four miles from Point Lorna to the northern end
of the Silver Strand, then turn east for several miles, and
finally south to the central harbor areas. The Mavy has
-------
- 3-59 -
Table 3-15. Weight and Value of L-andings of Commercial Fish at
San Diego Area Ports and in California, 1981-1983
DESCRIPTION
1981
1982
1983
Landings (Iba)
San Diego Area
California
San Diego as
percentage
of California
158,768,201 112,167,526 84,773,494
779,966,447 687,684,354 513,200,668
16.3
20.4
Valueof Landings ($)
San Diego Area 88,624,184 59,949,483 37,692,723
California 280,077,311 229,323,050 186,091,668
16.5
San Diego as
percentage
of California
31.6
26.1
20.3
California Department of Fish and Game, Computer Printouts of
Unpublished Data, March 1984.
-------
- 3-60 -
Table 3-16. Value of Commercial Fish Landing by Port, San Diego
Area, 1981-1983
PORT
1981
Value %
1 982
Value %
1983
Value %
San Diego 88,454,717 99-8 59,810,489 99.8 37,546,276 99-7
Oceanslde 162,188 0.2 130,629 0.2 127,993 0-3
Mission Bay 4,677 -- 5,661 -- 7,017
La Jolla 2,485 -- 204 -- 6,640
San Diego 88,624,184 100.0 59,949,483 100.0 37,692,723 100.0
Area TOTAL
California Department of Fish and Game, Computer Printouts of
Unpublished Data (March 1984}.
-------
- 3-61 -
SAN DIEGO CO
";• 822 •:•;¥* i":$'£$W$"
,*.V.V,vivV.V*W*.V.%
CHULA VISTA
879 SrW&SSiSSS;
LEGEND: ANNUAL CATCH ti97e-8t AVERAGE)
MORE THAN 500.000 US
100.000 • 500.000 UBS
BELOW 100.000 LBS
PRINCIPAL SPECIES
ICATCH EXCEEDS 100.000 LBS PER BLOCK
IN ANY YEAR DURING 1978-19811
1. ANCHOVY. NORTHERN
2. iONlTO. PACIf 1C
3. MACKEREL. JACK
4. ROCKFISH. UNSPECIFIED 7. TUNA, AtBACORE 10. TUNA.
B. SHARK. COMMON THRESHER 8. TUNA. BLUEFIN 11. URCHIN. SEA
6. SQUID. MARKET 9. TUNA. SKIPJACK
FIGURE 3-6. PRINCIPAL COMMERCIAL FISH SPECIES AND AVERAGE ANNUAL CATCH BY
BLOCK M PROJECT AREA
-------
. 3-62 -
Table 3-17- Annual Catch In Pounds of Commercial Fish, by
Blocks of Origin In the San Diego Area, 1976, 1977
and 1981
Block Number 1976
821
822
823
824
842
843
844
845
859
860
861
862
863
877
•• 878
879
880
881
N/A = Not
California
Unpublished
25,753
1 ,012,877
1 ,554,782
122,454
N/A
397,361
592,934
38,814
N/A
1,254,040
650,716
119,1 97
9,562
1,722
72,721
• 52,465
106,507
172,316
Available
Department of Fish
Data (March 1984)
1977
6,439
106,550
32,409
213,113
615,480
410,960
153,610
3,392
79,000
. 1,583,582
357,239
297,295
76,205
224
40,063
54,567
71,435
146,559
and Game, Computer
t
1981
9,752
291 ,134
924,282
10,012
170,372
6,693,322
47,185
3,683,971
4,160
3,349,643
500,234
212,769
163,705
47,173
235,002
320,665
304,264
102,547
Printouts of
-------
- 3-63 -
facilities at the inner north end of the San Diego Bay, about 7
miles from the harbor entrance. Commercial facilities at San
Diego, National City, and Chula Vista are primarily on the east
side of the bay, from 7 to 15 miles from the entrance (William
J. Garrett, Manager, San Diego Unified Port District, personal
communication, 1984).
The harbor serves the San Diego metropolitan area and is a
major shipping point for agricultural goods from southern
California, Arizona, and Hew Mexico. Approximately two million
tons of cargo passes through the port annually. Between 1,200
and 1,400 commercial and other vessels annually called at San
Diego Bay ports during the 1979-1983 period (Table 3-18). Port
users anticipate future shipping and trade with China,
Indonesia, Malaysia, New Zealand, Australia, Hong Kong, and
Taiwan as well as coastal shipping from Alaska, Seattle, San
Francisco, and Oakland.
The San Diego Unified Port District has responsibility for
providing safe navigation in San Diego Bay. A maintenance
dredging project involving several sites along the waterfront
was carried out recently to restore a number of commercial
berthing spaces and some marina areas to their authorized
depths. While existing ship channel depths and widths appear
adequate for- the foreseeable planning period, growing ship size
is. expected to continue placing greater demand, on the need for
deeper channels and expanded terminal areas in the long, term
future. A second entrance to the harbor has been contemplated
and studied several times by the Corps of Engineers to reduce
congestion and inconvenience due to distance from the central
harbor to the channel entrance, but has not been found
economically feasible.
3-4.3- Oil and Gas Development
There is no oil and gas development offshore of San Diego
County. The State waters within the three-mile limit have been
designated by the State as oil and gas sanctuaries. This
precludes any oil and gas development in these areas.
In the Federal waters, some tracts were proposed for
leasing in the initial call area for lease 48 anticipated to be
held In 1977. A number of issues were raised during the comment
period on the call and throughout the environmental impact
statement process. Subsequently, all tracts off San Diego were
deleted from the final offering in June 1979. These areas were
again Included in the call for lease sale 68, but were dropped
before the final sale offering in June 1982. For the third
time, the lease sale proposed for January 1984 again Included
the San Diego area in its initial study and the EIS. This time,
Congress put a moratorium on funding and asked the Interior
Department to review the entire sale offering. Large areas
including those outside San Diego have been deleted from the
proposed sale as a result of this congressional action. Only
about 34f of the proposed sale area studied in the December 1983
EIS was offered in Lease Sale 80, held in October 1984.
-------
- 3-64 -
Table 3-18.
San Diego Unified
1980 to 1983
Port District, Vessel Traffic
1
1
1
1
YEAR
979-1
980-1
981-1
982-1
980
981
982
983
San Diego
1980-81 ,
VESSEL
COMMERCIAL
256
261-
195
217 1
ARRIVALS
OTHER TOTAL
968
945
981
,204
Unified Port District,
1981-82, 1982-83.
1
4
1
1
1
,224
,206
,176
,421
Annual
TOTAL TONNAGE HANDLED
(MILLION METRIC TONS)
1
- '2
1
1
Reports for
.91
.33
.79
.66
1 979-1980,
-------
- 3-65 -
3.4.4. Military Usage
The Port of San Diego includes one of the largest Navy
establishments in the country. San Diego Bay is the home base
for 120 Navy ships, which constitute more than 18$ of the Navy's
active fleet. San Diego also is home to the Navy's Fleet Area
Control and Surveillance Facility. The area offshore of San
Diego is extensively used for various military operations
(Figure -3-7). These Include: surface and submarine fleet
maneuvers and training, aircraft carrier operations, amphibious
vehicle training and assault operations, and antisubmarine
warfare. The area offshore of San Diego is the principal
training ground for the Navy and the Marine Corps (MMS, 1983).
Most of the military operations take place far beyond the
immediate coastal areas outside San Diego. It is only the
military vessel traffic In and at the mouth of San Diego Bay,
off Point. L'oma, that may be of any. concern in connection with
the- activities related, to. the- dredged material dumping- at the
LA-5 site. Annually, Navy aircraft carriers make- about 50
trips, cruisers and destroyers about 1,300 trips each,
amphibious fleet about 4,600 trips, and service fleets about
V,250 trips in and out of San Diego Bay (U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, 1983).
3.4-.5. Becreatlonal Activities
The major ocean-related, recreational activities in the San
Diego- area?, are-' aigh.tseeingy beachcombing, picnicking, swimming,
wading, sunbathing, diving, surfing, sailing, and power boating.
Most of the beach-related activities are confined to ocean-front
areas north of San Diego Bay, particularly from Mission Bay to
Oceanside, although some recreational areas do. exist along the
Coronado Peninsula. The shore-related activity closest to the
LA-5 site is diving which occurs off Point Loma.
Table 3-19 gives the number of participation days for
ocean-related recreational activities in 1980 and projected
demand for 1985 and 1990. In 1980, San Diego County recorded
25*2 million participation days of ocean-related recreational
activity and this demand is expected to grow by more than 1 4J
during the 1980-1990 period. (California Department of Parks and
Recreation, 1984). Activities which are expected to experience
highest growth between 1980 and 1990 Include: sailing (25%},
sportfishing (23%), powerboating (17-5$), and scuba diving
C16J).
3.4.5.1. Sportfiahing
Sportfishing in the San Diego area occurs out of several
harbors and at a number of piers. Five fishing methods
predominate in the area's ocean sportfishery: shore, pier,
skiff, party boat (commercial passenger fishing vessel), and
skin and SCUBA diving. Shore and pier fishing are by far the
-------
- 3-66 -
ENONITAS
SUBMARINE TRANSIT LANES
SAN DIEGO CO.
.SAN 01 EGO
£"» CHUUA-VISTA,
"Jtxico
UG END
[////I
AREAS OF HIGHER PROBABILITY OF ABORIGINAL
SITES
PROHIBITED DUMPING AREA
MILITARY OPERATING AREAS
SUBMARINE TRANSIT LANE
FIGURE 3-7. COMMERCIAL SHIPPING LANES, ZONES OF MILITARY OPERATION AND
OTHER CULTURAL FEATURES IN THE PROJECT AREA
-------
- 3-67 -
Table 3-19. Existing and Projected Number of Participation Days
for Ocean-Related Recreational Activities in the
LA-5 Area (San Diego County) 1980, 1985 and 1990
NUMBER OF PARTICIPATION
ACTIVITY
CODE
2
3
6
19
21
22
23
24
25
26
ACTIVITY
Power Boating
Sailing
Salt Water
Fishing
Ocean
Swimming :
Scuba and
Snorkel ing
Body Surfing
Board Surfing
Sunbathing
Beachcombing
Beach Games
TOTAL
California Department
Printouts
(IN.
1980
1
9
4
2
3
845
708
,843
,132
455
,144
,957
,175
629
1.310
25
of
of the "PARIS"
,200
Parks
model
THOUSANDS1}
1985
923
824
2,048
9,959
497
4,264
3,030
3,418
-675
1.388
27,026
DAYS
PERCENT
CHANGS
1990
2,
10,
4,
3,
3,
1 ,
28,
and Recreation
(April 1984
).
996
885
268
622
528
572
232
591
709
477
880.
1980-
17.
25.
23.
16.
16.
10.
9.
13.
12.
1 9?0
5
0
0
3
0.
3
3
1
7
12.7
14.
6
, Computer
-------
- 3-68 -
most popular methods, although more fish per hour are caught
from boats. Due to the location of the LA-5 site away from the
shore, party boat fishing is the activity most likely to be
affected by the project-related activities (Figure 3-8). The
discussion below, therefore, pertains mainly to this method of
sportfishing.
Party boats in the San Diego area operate mostly from
Mission Bay, San Diego, and Oceanside Harbors vith some activity
seen in recent time from Coronado as well. Table 3-20 provides
the number of fish caught and the number of anglers reported by
boats operating from these harbors for 1977 and 1981. In 1977,
San Diego reported almost 98,000 anglers catching more than
400,000 fish which amounted to 8.5$ of the total sportfish
caught in the State. Second was Mission Bay with 50,000 anglers
and almost 260,000 fish caught, with Oceanside a distant third
reporting a catch of 54,000 fish. By 1981, number of anglers
and catch out of Oceanside increased' by almost 1001, and anglers,
began using the Coronado Harbor (863 anglers). As a result, the
number of anglers at Mission Bay and San Diego dropped somewhat
from 1977 levels. These locational changes did not affect the
overall activity in the area which experienced increases both in
the number of anglers and fish caught. However, the area did
experience a moderate decline In its share of the State catch as
well as the number of anglers, partly due to increasing activity
in the neighboring Los Angeles area.
Over 70 species of fish have been recorded in the. San Diego
area- sport catch. However, only about 10 species are caught in.
large numbers. The commonly caught species by number and by
block of origin, as defined by the California Department of Fish
and Game, are shown in Table 3-21. Block 878, which contains
the LA-5 site, is not a very productive block in terms of sport
fisheries partly due to its distance from the shore, and partly
due to the depth of water which is not suitable for sportfisbing
activity. In 1977* it reported a catch of only 22,000 compared
to its northerly neighbor, block 860, which reported a catch
almost 13 times larger.
3-4.5.2. Boating
The recreational activity most likely to be affected by
the project-related activities, particularly transportation of
dredged material by barges, is boating. Most recreational
boating is done close to the coastline in shallow waters. Once
the boats leave San Diego Bay at Point Loma, their destination
usually is either to the north toward Los Angeles, or to the
south along the Mexican Coast. In 1979, about 34,500 boats were
registered in San Diego County and they accounted for over 40
Billion participation days of boat use. There are approximately
4,000 boat slips in use for privately owned recreational craft
in the harbor and there is a high demand for additional slips.
In addition, thousands of trailerable boats use launch
facilities.
-------
- 3-69 -
SAN DIEGO CO.
ENONITAS
LEGEND
SHORE PISHING
ARTIFICIAL REEFS
MAJOR HALIBUT PISHING AREAS
MAJOR MARUN ANO/OR SWOROFISH PISHING AREAS
GENERAL FINFISH . FISHING AREAS INCLUDE:
ROCK FISH. KELP BASS. SHEEP HEAD. WHITE SEA BASS.
•LACK SEA BASS. BARRACUDA. BONITO
FIGURE 3-8. SPORTRSHING RESOURCES OF THE PROJECT AREA
-------
- 3-70 -
Table 3-20. Number of Sportfisb Caught and Number of Anglers on
Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessels (Party Boats),
by Port, In the San Diego Area, 1977 and 1981.
Port
Mission Bay
San Diego
Oceanside
Coronado
State Total
Mission Bay
San Diego
Oceanside
Coronado
State Total
California
Unpublished
1
Number-
259,628
413,283
53,525
4-, 8 4 9, 4-7 2
1
Number
50,267
97,562
11,605
716,536
Department of
Data (July 1
Soortf ish
977
% of
State- Total
5.4
8.5
1 .1
100.0 6,
Number of
977
% of
State Total
7.0
13-6
1.6
—
Fish and Game,
984).
Caught
1 981
Number
270,284
456,115
130,670
1 ,840
314, 53**
Anglers
1
Number
48,874
93,017
19,877
863
830,653
Computer
% of
State Total
4.3
7.2
2.1
100.0.
981
% of
State Total
5.8
11 .2
2.4
0.1
100.0
Files of
-------
- 3-71 -
Table 3-21. Humber of Sportfiah Caught, by Block of Origin, in
the Vicinity of LA-5 Site, 1977
SPECIES
CODE
3
51
130
250
260
277
278
435
478
490
— —
FISH
SPECIES
Bonlto, Pacific
Mackerel,
Pacific
Barracuda,
California
Rockf ish,
Unspecified
Scorpion Fish,
Spotted..
Baa sv, Kelp
Bass Barred
Sand
Croaker White
Halfmoon
Vhitefish,
Ocean
Others
TOTAL
California Department
Unpublished Data (July
FIRST
878
313
4,858
223
1,550
44-
1,93.1
12,957
44
1
13
465
22,117
of Fish
1 984 ) .
TIER OF BLOCKS FROM
SITE BLOCK
859 860
— 42,734
-- 121-.164
8,888"
— 67,985
84-V
— 33, .124
6,320
138
126
14
5.935
— 287,269
861
10,925
26,932
1 ,286
15,200
233.
3,636.
697
30
47
--
1 .400
60,386
SITE BLOCK
877
375
1,161
61
259
27
587
2,767
495
--
6
5,784
979
171
8
12
92
--
3
--
—
--
__
121
679
and Gaae, Computer Files of
-------
- 3-72 -
3.*.5.3. Other Recreational Activities
Other major ocean-related recreational activities in the
San Diego 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 3-9). 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 San Diego area
are used by large numbers of people each summer day. Diving
occurs along the San Digeo County coast.
Surfing is a popular sport activity along the San Diego
coast to the northeast of the LA-5 site. 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. None, of these activities will be
affected by designation of an ODHDS.
3.4.6. Cultural Resources
Cultural resources relevant to offshore areas are prehis-
toric and historic remains comprising a nonrenewable resource
base that provides archaeologists and historians with informa-
tion! for reconstruction- of pa-sf cultural, systems and behaviors.
The offshore region of southern California is believed to
contain numerous cultural resources (Figure 3-7)• Types of
submerged resources are aboriginal remains* and sunken ships and
aircrafts. There are over 50 recorded marine prehistoric sites
in the inner basins of southern California extending from Los
Angeles to San Diego. All of these sites are in State waters,
close to shore and relatively shallow. The most probable
resource that could be encountered near the LA-5 site is
shipwrecks.
The Minerals Management Service (MMS) has compiled a list
of shipwrecks with their known or suspected locations (MMS,
1984). Over 450 known historic shipwrecks have occurred in the
inner banks of southern California, most of which occurred near
either Los Angeles or San Diego (MMS, 1983). Based upon water
depth and known cultural resource location data, MMS has also
identified 16 Federal oil and gas lease tracts in the LA-5 study
area having cultural resource sensitivity (MMS, 1983). There
are 10 wrecks reported off Point Loma, and 4 off the San Diego
area (BLM, 1979). The tract containing the LA-5 site as well as
most other tracts in its immediate vicinity are highly sensitive
cultural resource areas as a result of these reported wrecks.
Aboriginal sites are unlikely in the project study area
except in the shallow Coronado bank area. Intertidal gathering
occurred mostly near Point Loma.
-------
- 3-73 -
SAN DIEGO CO.
ENCINITAS
SAN OIECO
•"•CHUUt VISTA
LfGENO
A SURFING AREAS
• DIVING AREAS
— — MAJOR BOATING ROUTES
MAJOR AREAS OP BOATING CONCENTRATION
EXISTING RECREATION SITES
FIGURE 3-9. PRINCIPAL RECREATION AREAS IN THE PROJECT REGION
-------
- 3-74 -
3.* .7. Public Health and Welfare
Ensuring tbat public health and welfare are not adversely
affected by ocean disposal of dredged materials is a primary
concern. Public health and welfare can be affected in a number
of ways. Here only three issues, health, safety, and
aesthetics, are discussed.
Health hazards may arise if the chemical nature of the
materials has the potential for bioaccumulatlon of tozic
substances in organisms. Potential impacts on human health can
be inferred from bioassay and bioaccumulation tests performed on
marine animals. Since the LA-5 study area provides a large
amount of fish and invertebrates for human consumption, the
public health issue gains added importance. (See Sections 3*4.1
and 3.4.5.1* Commercial and Sportfishing, for details on local
fish and invertebrates. Refer also to Section 3-3> Biological
Environment-...)
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, traffic in the LA-5 study area is fairly heavy. In
addition a large number of fishing and recreational boats also
use this area-
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-5 site is used by people engaged in
sportfishing and recreational boating. They may encounter
discoloration of normally clear water particularly at times when
dumping is in operation. Potential impacts and mitigation
measures related to public health will be discussed in Chapter
4, Environmental Consequences.
-------
- 4-1 -
CHAPTER 4. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
4.1. INTRODUCTION
This chapter assesses the impacts of the proposed project
alternatives on the physical, biological, and socloeconooic
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 EIS to determine the probable or known severity
of impacts expected at the site and the significance of
potential impacts outside the boundaries of the ODHDS 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 irguello Oil Field
Development. Flan.. The. environmental impacts are divided into
the following, classes:;
Class1 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.
— d'ass- II - Significant adverse impacts that can be
mitigated to- iagrgnif-icance'.. These? impacts; are
potentially similar, in significance to Class I impacts,
but:, ther-severi.ty; 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 17_j-__Benef JciaiL. 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-5 Site
(Refer to text in Chapter 4 for detailed explanation.)
Impacts
Potential Mitigation
Class
Description I
ffilSICAL ENVIRONMENT
Air Quality
Water Quality
II III IV
X
X
- turbidity,, DO X.
- trace metals,
DDTs, PCS s, oils
and greases X
Geology
- sediment grain size X
- sediment quality X
BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT
Plankton
lelp-
Bent hie Inf auna X
Benthic Epif auna X
Demersal Fish X
Pelagic Fish
Coastal Birds
Marine Mammals
Threatened and
Endangered Species
Marine Sanctuaries
and ASBS
(1) s Scope Definitions
S 8 site, 1000 yd
L s local, up to 1
H 8 region, beyond
(2) • Term
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)
Measures
S E
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
No mitigation
measures proposed
because effects
are short-term.
(CONTINUED)
(914 m) radius from center of designated ODMDS.
mi outside of site.
local vicinity of ODMDS.
8 x abort, less than or equal to 5 hours.
E * •attended, greater than 5 hours.
-------
- 4-3 -
Table 4-1 (continued)
Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for the
LA-5 Site (Refer to text in Chapter 4 for detailed
explanation.)
Impacts Potential Mitigatioi
Measures
Class
Description I II III IV
SOCIOBCOHOKXC ENVIRONMENT
Commercial Fishing
— fish stocks-. X.
- fishing fleet safety X
Commercial Shipping Z
• safety X
• Mounding X
- port access X
Oil and Gas Development X
Military Usage
- traffic- interference X
.- naval, ship access- X.
Sport Fishing X
Other* Recreational-
Activities X
Cultural Uses X
Public Health and Welfare
'- health X
• safety X
Scope (1)
SLR
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
*
(1) = Scope Definitions
S a site, 1000 yd (914 a) radius from center of designated ODMDS.
L s local, up to 1 nmi outside of site.
R s region, beyond local vicinity of ODMDS.
(2) s Tern
S s short, less than or equal to 5 hours.
E s extended, greater than 5 hours.
-------
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 III IV
Scope (1)
SLR
Tern (2)
E
PHYSICAL aiV IRON KENT
JIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT
.OCIOECONOMIC ENVIRON-
MENT
Commercial Shipping
and Military Use
Public Health, Safety,
Aesthetics
(1) -Scope Definitions
S = site,- 1000 yd (914 m) radius from center of designated ODMDS.
L 9 locali up to 1 nmi outside of site.
R = region, beyond local vicinity of ODMDS*
(2) s Term
S s short, less than or equal to 5 hours.
£ a 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
-
Description
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
Air Quality
Water Quality
- turbidity,- DO
- trace metals,,
DDTs, PCBs-, oils
and greases
Geology
- sediment grain size
• sediment quality
BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT.
Plankton
Kelp
Benthic- Inf auna
Benthic Epifauna
Demersal Fish
Pelagic Fish
Coastal Birds
Marine Mammals
Threatened and
Endangered Species
Marine Sanctuaries
and ASBS
(1) a Scope Definitions
S = site, 1000 yd
L = local, up to 1
R = region, beyond
(2) = Term
Potential Mitigation
Measures
Class
I II in iv
X
X
x.
X.
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
X No mitigation.
aeasures proposed
because effects
X are short-tern.
X
X
X
X
x;
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
(CONTINUED)
(914 m) radius froa center of designated ODMDS.
nmi outside of site.
local vicinity of ODMDS.
S 9 short, less than or equal to 5 hours.
E * extended, greater than 5 hours.
-------
- 4.6 -
Table 4-3 (continued).
Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for the
Shallow Hater Alternative (Refer to text in Chapter 4
for detailed explanation.)
Impacts Potential Mitigation
Measures
Class
Description I II III IV
SOCIOECOHOMXC ENVIRONMENT
Commercial Fishing
• fish stocks 2
• fishing fleet safety I
Commercial Shipping I
- safety Z
- Bounding X
- port access Z
Oil and Gas Development Z
Military Usage
— traffic interference Z
- naval ship acoeas; Z
Sport Pishing Z
Other Recreational
ictivities Z
Cultural Uses Z
Public Health and Welfare
• health Z
• safety Z
Scope (1)
SLR
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z Z.
z:
Z
z
Z I
z
z
Term (2)
S E
*
Z
Z
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
x
z
Z Close coordination
vltb the SHPO to
prevent damage.
Z
Z
(1) s Scope Definitions
S = site, 1000 yd (914 m) radius from center of designated ODHDS.
L s local, up to 1 nml outside of site.
It « region, beyond local vicinity of ODMDS.
(2) s Term
S s short, less than or equal to 5 hours.
B 9 extended, greater than 5 hours.
-------
- 4-7 -
Table 4-4. Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for the Deep Vater
Alternative (Refer to text In Chapter 4 for detailed explanation.)
Impacts
Potential Mitigation
Class
Description I
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
Air Quality
Vater Quality
- turbidity, DO X
- trace metals,. DDTs,
PCBs, oils and.
greases X
Geology
- sediment grain size X
- sediment quality X
BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT
Plankton
Kelp
Benthic Infauna X
Benthlc Epifauna X
Demersal Fish X
Pelagic Fish
Coastal Birds
Marine Mammals
Threatened and
Endangered Species
Marine Sanctuaries and
ASBS
(1) = Soope Definitions
S 9 site, 1000 yd (914
L « local, up to 1 nmi
II III IV
X
X
X
X-"
X
X
X
X
X
Scooe (1)
SLR
X
X
I-
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
2.
X1
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
(CONTINUED)
m) radius from center of designated ODMDS.
outside of site.
R = region, beyond local vicinity of ODMDS.
(2) m Term
S m short, less than or equal to 5 hours.
B * extended, greater
than 5 hours.
-------
- 4-8 -
Table 4-4 (continued)
Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for the
Deep Water Alternative (Refer to text in Chapter 4 for
detailed explanation.)
Impacts
-
Potential Mitigation
Measures
Class
Description I
SOCIOECONOMXC ENVIRONMENT
Commercial Fishing
Commercial Shipping.
- interference
* port access
Oil and Gas Development
Military Usage
Sport Fishing
Other Recreational
activities
Cultural Uses-
Public Health and
Welfare
- health
- safety
(1) s Scope Definitions
S s site, 1000 yd
L s local, up to 1
R s. region* beyond
(2) s Term
II III IV
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X'
X
Scooe (1)
SLR
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
(914 m) radius from center of designated ODMDS.
ami outside of site.
local vicinity of ODMDS.
S s short, less than or equal to 5 hours.
B s extended, greater than 5 hours.
-------
- 4-9 -
u-2- LA-5 ODMDS ALTERNATIVE (PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE)
The principal effect of disposal of dredged material at the
LA-5 site is the introduction of substantial amounts of sediment
and associated contaminants into a small area. It is important
to note that significant impacts may be expected at any site
designated as the. final ODMDS by virtue of the accuaulation of
large amounts of disposed dredged material. Furthermore, this
SIS is on designation of a. permanent disposal site, while
dredged material is specifically reviewed under the COEs
permitting regulations. Designation of the LA-5 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 smothering 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- dr.edged. nateria-Is disposed at the site nay be reflected in
the levels found.in the. tissues of invertebrates and fish at the
LA-5 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-5 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 Physical 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 sites.
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 benthic
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-5 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. Physical Oceanography
Final designation of the LA-5 site for dredged material
disposal will have no significant effect on physical
oceanography- (Class-III). Physical oceahographic parameters
such as currents, waves, and tides are important in how they
determine the- mixing; of- the, water column and the transport of
sediment. These1 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-5 site.
4.2.1.3. Water Quality
Continued disposal of dredged material at the LA-5 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-5 site which has been used for disposal for the last ten
years and the reference site. These levels since 1977 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 sediment, the volume and dilution
capacity of the local water column and currents, and the ambient
concentrations of suspended partlculates 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-5 site Is indistinguishable from that of the reference
site despite at least 10 years of disposal at the LA-5 site.
Short term Impacts to water quality In the Immediate
vicinity of the LA-5 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. As
discussed in more detail under Section 4.2.1.5, after the
Initial disposal and with a prevailing northwest current, it is
predicted that, the: plume cloud will have a peak concentration of
at. least 40 mg/1 but. will' dilute, to a- neglible concentration.
within 2 hours. Elevated suspended sediment concentrations are
expected to extend approximately 2,000 feet downcurrent from the
discharge site and. to affect an area of approximately 27,370 m2
(300,000 ft*) and a volume of approximately 1.4 million m2 (51
million ft*).
Increased turbldl.ty; 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: aeasure- 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 bightr-
4.2.1.4. Geology
The final designation of the LA-5 site for dredged material
disposal will add a layer of sediment to the ocean floor. Since
the. LA-5 site Is on a slope from the mainland shelf, 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.
4.2.1.5. Sediment Transport
To evaluate the effect of disposal on turbidity and bottom
sedimentation at the LA-5 site, a model was developed simulating
-------
the dispersal of the dredged material (Appendix C). The model
assumes that Disposal will be from:a barge with a load of 1500
yd3 (1,147 m3 of dredged material stored and released from
either separate bin compartments or a split hull. A simulation
was run at 100 fathoms (183 &) vlth ambient surface current to
the northwest at 55 cm/s (1.8 feet/a), and a near bottom current
in the same direction at 30 cm/s (1.0 feet/a).
In-this simulation, most of the sand particles from the
barge load will settle to the bottom of the water column within
one half hour and 305 m (1,000 feet) downcurrent of the
discharge point.
Within one and a half hours and 488 m (1,600 feet} down-
current of the point of discharge, 55 to 100? of the finer
particles will also be deposited on the bottom. Stratification
of, the water column during the summer lessens, the rate at which
the^ fine; particles, disperse, and it is; at this; time- of the year
when, the percentages- of deposition under the influence of
gravity are higher.
The rest of the fine particles, silt at a suspended
concentration of 10 to 100 mg/1 after a period of one and a half
hours, will descend in a plume cloud down the water column at a
slower- rate and will be transported by northwest currents to
deeper waters-.- As these- finer, particles- are- transported by
currents, they will continue to be dispersed and diluted.
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
weeks, cumulative effects to the concentration of the plume
or the total area of deposition are not expected. However,
numerous disposal activities will result in a progressively
thicker layer of deposition with time in the local area of the
disposal site (Class I).
4.2.1.6. Sediment Quality
Sediment in the vicinity of the LA-5 disposal site is the
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 the 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-5 site due to past disposal operations. The
sediments of the LA-5 site show a greater range of grain sizes
than those at the reference site (see Table 3-2).
-------
- 4-13 -
Concentrations of trace metals, chlorinated hydrocarbons,
oils and grease in sediments at the LA-5 site were higher than
those at the reference site and other unpolluted areas of the
bight (see Tables 3-3 and 3-4 for comparative values). These
differences nay be due to disposal activities or natural.
factors, but they are probably due to both.
Assuming the worst case, that all differences between the
LA-5 site and reference site have been caused by past disposal
activities, grain size differences and contaminant levels in
sediments can be expected to persist at the LA-5 site if final
designation allows continued disposal (Class I). It is also
likely that bacteria and organic matter associated with disposal
sediments have caused and will continue to cause increased BOD
and COD in the sediments at LA-5 (Class I).
4.2.2. Effects on Biological Environment
Potential, effects on marine- communiti.es- 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 the., site if Impacts to biological
communities- are-, not. expected: to occur' outside of a 1 ,000
yard (914 m) radius of the designated ODHDS,
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 nmi (1.8 km) outside of the project site, and
C. Regionally slgnlflcnat 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 photosynthetlc
productivity due to lowered light levels (Pequegnat, 1978;
Vright, 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
-------
- 4-14 -
temporary effects from the disposal of dredged material should
be insignificant (Class III).
Modeling of the disposal plume at the LA-5 site (see
Section 1.2.1.5) shoved that the discharge is expected to sink
to the bottom quickly, and that significant suspended sediment
concentrations would occur well below the euphotic 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 pbytoplankton, but no long-term effects on primary produc-
tivity (Wright, 1978; Hirsch, 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 (FWS, 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, San. Diego Bay have shown no significant mortality
for planktonic species in, the- initial nixing zone.
Beyond the initial mixing zone, dilution and transport will
reduce turbidity and contaminant levels quickly. Mortality due
to entrainment of zooplankton in the plume will be small. The
effects of disposal on zooplankton should be localized,
temporary, and negligible in comparison to the reproductive
capacity of zooplankton species. Sullivan and Hancock (1977)
concluded that any adverse impacts of disposal on plankton would
be so small as to be undetectable among the well-known large
natural fluctuations in plankton populations (Class III).
4.2.2.2. Kelp Community
Disposal at the LA-5 site is not expected to have a
significant effect on the nearest kelp beds off Point Loma since
more than 5 nmi (9 km) separate this site from the closest kelp
bed and no disposal material is expected to travel this distance
toward shallow waters (Class III).
4.2.2.3. Benthic Invertebrate Community
Benthic 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
-------
- Jj-15 -
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
settle over an area centered 1,600 feet (488 m) downcurrent from
the point of release from the split-hull barge. Significant
mortality of benthic 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
turbidity of near bottom waters up to 5 hours after disposal
(see Section 4.2.1-5). Suspended sediments will Interfere with
feeding processes of bentbic 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 tine for- partial, recolonization^
and recovery of benthic fauna from disposal effects.
Some tests of materials disposed at LA-5 showed accumula-
tion of pesticides and PCBs, but levels were not sufficient to
cause significant mortality (Salazar et al., 1980; Salazar and
O'Ren, 1981; Lockheed Ocean Science Laboratories, 1982; Vestec,
1984; Salazar and Salazar, 1983 a, b and 1984). Levels of
neither metals (Cd, fig, Pb, Cr, Cu, is, Zn) nor chlorinated
hydrocarbons (pesticides and PCBs) were consistently elevated in
the shrimp Sicyonia ingentis at the LA-5 site as compared to the
reference site (Appendix A, A-40). Tissue concentrations of
metals and chlorinated hydrocarbons were much lower than those
reported for £. ingentis from locations near sewage outfalls in
the Los Angeles area (Brown et al., 1984).
Species diversity and abundance of both infauna and
epifauna at the LA-5 and reference sites showed no consistent
trends. Infauna at LA-5 were less diverse but approximately
equally abundant, and the most abundant species were more
dominant numerically* More eplfaunal species were caught fairly
consistently at the LA-5 site than at a nearby reference site,
but there were no apparent differences between the two sites in
number of individuals caught. Sediment differences between the
two sites, which may be responsible, for any differences in the
benthos, oould 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 two, are plausible.
-------
-4-16 -
Resolution of this issue would require more extensive sampling
and analysis of the sediments and fauna of the region than was
possible for this study. EPA and COE will develop a site
management program (see Section 4.6) as a mitigative measure to
manage and monitor the site in an attempt to resolve these
Issues.
The preceding analysis indicates that measured differences
between -LA-5 and the reference site in benthic communities could
very well 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 will continue if the LA-5 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 will prevent the benthic
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 EIS
study indicate that past, disposal actions may have-had some-
effect on the fish fauna of the LA-5 site. Compared to the
reference site, fewer individuals (1,205 vs. 2,267) and fewer
species (30 vs. 40) were collected at the LA-5.
At this time the only known explanation which could account
for the differences observed between LA-5 and the reference
site is disposal at the site. There is some Indication of
elevated levels of PCBs and pesticides in tissues of the slender
sole at the LA-5 site (Appendix A, Table A-11). Interpretation
of the tissue contaminant levels is difficult because of the
mobility of this species, but there is no readily apparent
alternative explanation (to disposal) of the fairly consistent
differences observed between LA-5 and the reference site.
Despite the elevated PCS and pesticide levels observed at LA-5,
the fact that dredged material disposed at the site has been
shown by bioassay tests not to cause significant mortality in
demersal fish (usually the speckled aanddab) argues against
direct toxicological on fish. The somewhat depauperate fish
fauna at the LA-5 site relative to the reference site may also
be due to the depauperate benthic infauna, the principal food
source for demersal fish. As described above, differences in
sediment characteristics between LA-5 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.
-------
_ J,.1T .
If populations at the site are affected by disposal
operations, or if disposal quantities increase significantly in
tbe future, additional adverse effects (Class I) may result from
continued use of tbe site. Assuming that future disposal
quantities and actions will be similar to those in the past, and
bioasaay tests 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 vould be greater
(Class I), but regional Impacts on the San Diego region and
Southern California Bight are still expected to remain
Insignificant (Class III).
b. 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 (Enaraulis morda*).
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-5
site, and there la- no reason to believe that the site waters are
any exception.. Anchovies are- pelagic (open- water/surf ace)
species, and so are not likely to be affected by the benthlc
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).
4.2.2.5. Coastal Birds
The continued use of the LA-5 site will not adversely
affect any of the coastal birds living in or immigrating through
the San Diego region (Class III). The location of this site,
more than 6 nmi (11 km) from the nearest shore at Point Loma,
effectively eliminates any Impacts on Inshore species. More
pelagic forms may utilize the brief supply of food provided from
dredged materials (i.e.* dislocated or dead marine organisms) at
the time of disposal (Class IT). This additional food supply
would be considered Incidental in the diet of scavengers.
4.2.2.6. Marine Mammals
Disposal at the LA-5 site should not have any adverse
effects on marine mammals (Class III). Their large size,
_
-------
- 4-18 -
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-5 site, situated
on the slope of the San Diego shelf minimizes its use as a
preferred feeding area for most marine mammals which utilize
richer areas nearer shore.
4.2.2.7. Threatened and Endangered Species
Disposal at the LA-5 site is not expected to adversely
affect any threatened or endangered species (Class III). The
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FVS) and the National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS) 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-5 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.
4.2.2.8. Marine Sanctuaries and Areas of Special Biological
Significance
No state or national wildlife or marine refuge or Area of
Special Biological Significance (ASBS) is in the immediate
vicinity or within an area of influence of the LA-5 site (Figure
3-5). Continued disposal of dredged materials will not impact
any such areas (Class III).
4.2.3* Effects on SoeloeconomieEnvironment
In this section, potential Impacts on aocioeconomic
resources are identified and possible mitigation measures are
introduced. Each individual component of the socloeconomic
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 NEPA planning and
-------
- 4-19 -
review process. Where possible, mitigation measures are
proposed to reduce any impacts. Met 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* Commercial Fishing
The demersal fish fauna of the LA-5 site Is depauperate
compared to that of the reference site, and it is possible that
this is an effect of disposal of dredged material at LA-5.
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-5 site 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, in
San Diego Harbor and not all dredged materials are disposed at
the LA-5-slte, the numbe-r 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 Cunnlff, COE Los Angeles
District, personal communication). Mo Interference or accident
between these barges and the commercial fishing fleet has been
reported: by OSCG. In the past (Class- III)..
U-'.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. Mounding may temporarily occur at the LA-5 site following
dumping. But due to the depth of water (80-110 fathoms) at the
site, no hazard to vessel traffic is possible, and mounded
material will eventually be dispersed by currents and slumping.
The potential for interference does exist since the disposal
barges-and the ocean-going vessels would travel the same route
between San Diego Bay and the LA-5 site. However, the frequency
of ocean disposal is so low that the probability of Interference
is almost negligible. 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).
A net beneficial impact of the ocean disposal of dredged
material is the Improvement and maintenance of shipping lanes,
channels and docking areas in San. DJ. ego Bay (Class IT)..
Dredging associated with channel deepening projects provides
access to the area for larger, more efficient commercial vessels
which results in transportation savings since larger vessels can
carry more goods.
-------
. 4-20 -
4.2.3.3* Oil and Gas Development
No oil and gas development occurs offshore of San Diego
County either in the State or Federal waters, and none is
expected in the foreseeable future. Therefore, no Impact is
expected on oil and gas development as a result of the final
designation of the LA-5 site for dredged material disposal
(Class III). Final site designation of the .LA-5 site would not
impact consumption of petroleum resources (Class III}.
4.2.3.4. Military Usage
Although the area off southern California is the most
heavily utilized naval operating area in the nation, most of the
military operations take place far beyond the immediate coastal
areas outside San Diego Bay. The disposal of dredged material
at the LA-5 site does not pose any danger to military activities
(Class III)..
Military vessels which travel in and out of San Diego Bay
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 eight years since the
disposal site was given Interim designation (Class III). A net
beneficial impact of the ocean disposal, of. dredged, material is
the improvement and maintenance of shipping lanes and port
facilities, used by the Navy at. Its-Fleet Area Control and
Surveillance Facility.
4.2.3.5. Recreational Activities
4.2.3.5.1. Sportfishing
Because of the somewhat depauperate demersal fish fauna of
the LA-5 site, bottom fishing within the site boundaries could
be adversely affected by disposal. Sportfishing in this area is
rare, however, due to the depth and distance from shore. The
effect of disposal on demersal fish is likely to be localized,
so that disposal should not affect demersal fish populations in
shallower areas which support sportfishing. This includes the
kelp beds off Point Loma, a popular and productive fishing area
(Figure 3-8), which are approximately five miles north of the
disposal site, too far to be affected by disposal. Many of the
most important sportfish of the area are pelagic species, which
are not expected to be affected by disposal. Therefore,
disposal is not expected to significantly affect sportflshing in
the general area (Class III).
Sportfishing is usually carried out in shallow waters close
to the shore. The 100 fathom (163 m) line at which the LA-5
site is located forms approximately the outer boundary for
sportfishing by party boats. The area close to the LA-5 site is
-------
not very productive and is not particularly frequented by
sportfishing boats. A larger number of sportfishing boats,
however, pass through the LA-5 vicinity on the vay to fishing
areas farther offshore. While the potential of 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 which requires only a small number of
trips to the site per year (Class III)* No incidents have been
reported by OSCG over the past ten years since the LA-5 site has
been used on an interim basis.
4.2.3*5*2. Boating
The recreational activity most likely to be affected by the
project-related activities is pleasure boating. Most of the
boats turn north or south almost immediately after coming out of
San Diego Bay at Point Loma. This reduces the potential of
conflict with the disposal barges on the open sea.. No Incidents
of conflict have* been-reported' during the ten year'period during
which the LA-5 site has been used for disposal on an interim
basis. Hence the Impact on recreation is considered to be
minimal and insignificant (Class III).
4.2.3.5.3. Other Recreational Activities
Most ocean-related-recreational activities occur at the
beaches or- in: nearshore-areas. These include sightseeing,
beachcombing, picnicking, swimming, wading, sunbathing, diving,
and. surfing-... Disposal activities: at. the: LA-5 site will not
impact*, these* aearahore, recreational activities•• (Class. Ill).
Reduced 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
boaters happen to be in the Immediate area during actual
disposal (Class I). However, the LA-5 site is not visible from
the San Diego Bay beaches and other amenity areas except the
Silver Strand area. Even from this area, the site is more than
five nml away. Ho impacts on the visual aesthetics of beach
visitors are expected from the disposal activity (Class III).
4.2*3*6. Cultural Jte^sources
MMS has identified 1.6 Federal oil and gas lease tracts in
the LA-5 study area having cultural resource sensitivity. This
is based on the water depth and known cultural resource location
data, particularly location of shipwrecks.. The tract containing
the LA-5 site is one of these 16 tracts but the exact location
of any shipwreck is not certain. The site has been in use for
ocean dredged material disposal for more than ten years, and the
remains of shipwrecks, if any, have probably been burled under
the previously disposed material. Ho new Impacts are,
therefore, anticipated as a result of the proposed action (Class
III). The State Historic Preservation Officer (SBPO) has
-------
. 4.22 -
concurred in this assessment. SHFO has also indicated that no
National Register or eligible properties would be impacted by
the proposed action (see Chapter 5, Exhibit 12).
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 bioaccumulation of toxic
substances in organisms. Under the COE permitting system,
sediment analyses, bioassaya and bioaccumulation tests are
conducted on all materials prior to disposal at the LA-5 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 sportfishing boat traffic, recreational boat
traffic,, and Navy vessel traffic. The LA-5 site has been used
on an interim basis over the past ten years and no incidences of
conflict or accidents have been reported during this period.
With 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- and unavoidable (Class III)..
4.3.- SO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
If the No Action Alternative is selected by EPA, interim
designation of LA-5 would expire and there would be no ocean
site for disposal of dredged materials in the San Diego area
(Class I). Discontinued use of LA-5 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. Concentration of contaminants in fish and
Invertebrate tissues could change, 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 with commercial fishing, recreation, shipping,
oil and gas development would be reduced to zero (Class IV);
however, cessation or significant curtailment of dredging in San
Diego Bay could impair the ability of these facilities to fully
support commerce and trade or the needs of the U.S. Navy 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.
-------
. 4-23 -
As stated in tbe "Purpose of and Need for Action" (Section
1.2), it is the intent of this EIS to identify and designate an
ODMDS that is suitable for use by COE for Federal, projects and
permitted projects under Section 103 of MPRSA. Selection of tbe
Ho 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
Disposal of dredged material at the shallow water (LA-4)
site would damage an area used only occasionally in tbe past as
a dump site. The partially or perhaps wholly recovered benthic
community would, be significantly degraded, with, continued use as-
an- ODMDS (Class I) .
Since the LA-4 site is located very near to the LA-5
preferred site (.3 nmi to the southeast), tbe same type of San
Diego shelf habitats and biotic assemblages would be present at
both sites. Most, if not all, of the same impacts discussed
earlier for LA-5 would be expected to develop at LA-4.. This new.
damage at LA-4- would, be somewhat offset by the gradual recovery
at- LA-5 but no- particular gain would, accrue- from such- a* change;
of ODMDS siting..
4.4.1. Effects on tbe Physical Environment
The same impact criteria used to evaluate the physical
environment under tbe Preferred Alternative apply to this
section.
4.4.1.1. Meteorology and Air Quality
Final designation of the LA-4 shallow water site for ocean
dredged material will not have a significant effect on tbe
meteorology or air quality of the area (Class III). This is due
to the similar locations of the LA-4 and LA-5 sites. 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-5
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
-------
- 4-24 -
such as currents, naves and tides will determine the effects of
disposal on water and sediment quality.
4.4.1.3. Water Quality
Less material is expected to be initially deposited on the
bottom at the LA-4 shallow water site than at the LA-5 site
according to the plume models discussed in Sections 4.2.1.5 and
4.4.1.5* The Class I effects of turbidity, dissolved oxygen,
nutrients, and contaminants in the water column would,
therefore, occur in a larger area.
4.4.1.4. Geology
Disposal at the LA-4 shallow water site would cause
increased sedimentation to the ocean floor (Class I).
4.4.1.5. Sediment Transport
A plume model was developed to evaluate the effect of
disposal on turbidity and bottom sedimentation at the LA-4
shallow water site. A simulation was run at 45 fathoms (82 m)
with ambient surface currents at 15 cm/s (0.49 feet/a), and a
near bottom current in the same direction at 5 cm/s (0.18
feet/s).
In this-, simulation, all of. the sand particles-from the
barge load will settle to the bottom.of the water column within
17 minutes, and 305 m (1,000 feet) downcurrent of the discharge
point.
Within one and a half hours and 762 m (2,500 feet) down-
current of the point of discharge, 65 to 851 of the fine
particles will also be deposited on the bottom. The rest of the
fine particles, silt at a suspended concentration of 10 to 100
mg/1 after a period of one and one half hours, will descend in a
plume cloud down the water column at a slower rate and will be
transported by northwest currents to deeper waters. As these
finer particles are transported by currents, they will continue
to be dispersed and diluted.
This model does not include resuspenslon and slumping which
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 weeks, cumulative
effects to the concentration of the plume cloud or the total
area of deposition are not expected. However, numerous disposal
activities will result in a progressively thicker layer of
deposition with time at this site which has previously
experienced only a limited amount of disposal (Class I).
-------
. 4-25 -
4.4.1.6. Sediment Quality
As described above, a proportion of disposed dredged
material is expected to be initially deposited at the LA-4
shallow water site and therefore affect grainsize and
contaminant concentration in an area which can be expected to
have lower concentrations of these contaminants due to the
limited amount of previous disposal (Class I).
Compared to the LA-5 site, a smaller amount of BOD, oil and
grease, trace metals, and chlorinated hydrocarbons would
concentrate in the sediment at the LA-4 shallow water site based
on the assumption that less material would be initially
deposited on the bottom. However, the relative impact of
contaminants at the LA-4 shallow water site is presumed to be
greater because of the relatively degraded existing condition of
the LA-5 site.
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- LA-4 site should, not.
be significant or substantially different from effects at the
LA-5 preferred: site- (Class* III.)..
4.4.2.2. Kelp Community
Disposal of dredged materials at the LA-4 site is not
expected to have a significant effect on the nearest kelp beds
off Point Loma since more than 6 nnl (11 km) separate this site
from -the closest kelp bed and no disposal material is expected
to travel this far towards shallow waters (Class III).
4.4.2.3. Benthic Invertebrate Community
Disposal at LA-4 is expected to adversely affect the
benthic community in a similar way to that encountered at the
LA-5 site (Class I). These sediment impacts include smothering,
interference with feeding, toxic effects of associated
contaminants, and changes in the physical properties of the
bottom sediments. In areas of the shallow water site, the
benthic fauna is likely to be more diverse and abundant than
that at the LA-5 site. In these areas, disposal would have a
greater relative impact on benthic fauna, particularly where
they have .not been affected as much by past dredged material
disposal.
-------
. 4.26 -
4.4.2.4. Fish Community
Disposal of dredged material at LA-4 would have a
significantly adverse effect on demersal fish (Class I}.
Effects would occur due to turbidity, reduced dissolved oxygen,
t'oxic effects of contaminants, and effects on their principal
benthic food sources.
In the shallow water region, the demersal fish fauna is
likely to be more diverse and abundant than the naturally
occurring populations found in the vicinity of the LA-5 site
(Allen and Mearns, 1977). Because of the proximity of the two
sites, disposal activities would be expected to have similar
impacts on demersal and pelagic fish populations at both the
LA-5 and LA-4 sites (Class III).
4.4.2.5. Coastal Birds
The use of the LA-4 site would not adversely affect any of
the coastal birds living in or immigrating through the San Diego
region (Class III). The location of this site, more than 6 nmi
from the nearest shore, effectively eliminates any impacts on
Inshore species. More pelagic forms 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).
Ho significant- impacts on bird populations are expected at the-
shallow water site.
4.4'.2.6. Marine Mammals
Disposal at the LA-4 site would not have any adverse
effects on marine mammals (Class III). Their large size,
mobility and intelligence minlmmlzes 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 naturally less productive environment of the LA-4 site,
situated on the slope of the San Diego shelf, minimizes its use
as a preferred feeding area for most marine mammals which
utilize richer areas nearer shore. The disposal site is not in
or near any important marine mammal feeding or breeding areas.
As in the case of the LA-5 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 LA-4 site as they are near the LA-5 site, should not be
affected by disposal. Disposal at LA-4 is not expected to
significantly affect the pelagic fish of the region which are
-------
- 4-27 -
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
lo state or national wildlife or marine refuge or Area of
Special Biological Significance (ASBS) (see Figure 3-8} is in
the immediate vicinity or within an area of influence of the
LA-4 site. Disposal of dredged materials at the shallow water
site would not impact any such .areas (Class III).
4.4.3. Effects on the Soeioeconomic Environment
The same impact criteria used to evaluate the socloeconomic
environment under the Preferred Alternative apply to this
section.
4.4.3.1. Commercial Fishing
Disposal activities at the LA-4 site will affect commercial
fishing to approximately the same extent as at the LA-5 site
(Class III).
4.4.3.2. Commercial Shipping
. The- potential for conflict between, disposal vessels .and
commercial shipping is the same at all alternative sites. Due
to the. infrequent, dredging, activity, as veil as Its short
duration, the probability of conflict is considered to be
minimal and no adverse impacts are anticipated (Class III).
4.4.3.3. Oj,l 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 if
the shallow water site is used over the deep water site, because
the distance to the shallow water site is less than the distance
to the deep water site, but this effect is negligible.
4.4.3.4. Military Usage
Although the area offshore southern California is the most
heavily utilized Haval operating area in the nation, most of the
military operations take place far beyond the immediate coastal
areas outside San Diego Bay. The disposal of dredged material
at the shallow water site does not pose any danger to the
military activities. -Military vessels which travel in and out
of the San Diego Bay may face Interference from the disposal
barges. However, no incidences Involving the disposal barges
have been reported over.the past eight years since the disposal
site has been used on an Interim basis. With no anticipated
-------
- 4-28 -
increase In dredged material disposal activities in tbe
foreseeable future, the impacts on military activities are
considered to be negligible and insignificant (Class III).
4.4.3.5. Recreational Activities
4.U.3.5.1. Sportfishing
Spo.rtfisbing is usually carried out in shallow waters close
to tbe shore. The potential for Impacts on sportfishing is the
same at the LA-4 site, tbe LA-5 or deep water sites. No unique
areas for sportfishing occur in the LA-4 area and disposal
operations, would not cause significant infringements on present
sportfishing efforts (Class III).
4.4.3.5.2. Boating
The potential for impact on boating from disposal at tbe
LA-4 site is similar to the impact expected from disposal of the
LA-5 site (Class III).
4.4.3.5.3. Other Recreational Activities
Similar to sportfishing, recreational activities (excluding
boating) are usually carried out closer to the shore. Potential
Impacts on nearsbore activities are tbe same at the shallow
water site,- the LA-5 or- deep water sites (Class III).
4.4'.3 .6. Cultural Resources
The shallow water site lies closer 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
fathoms (91 m) depth. In order to mitigate these potential
impacts close coordination with the SHPO 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-5 preferred site (Section 4.2.3.7.)
are expected to be similar for the shallow water site.
*-5. DEEP VATEH SITE
Any significant impacts predicted for the 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 tbe
Impacts observed at the LA-5 site. This is based on the
assumption that disposal at the two sites will have similar
adverse effects on sediment quality, benthic Invertebrates and
-------
- 4-29 -
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 have less immediate
impact on the benthic environment and a greater impact on the
pelagic environment because more disposed material would be
suspended and dispersed in the water column. In addition, the
benthic invertebrate and demersal fish fauna of the deep water
site are less diverse and less abundant than those of the LA-5
site. However, a counterbalancing consideration is that the
sediments, benthos, and fish population of the deep water site
are in an undisturbed condition, while, these resources at the
LA-5 site have already been affected by past disposal.
Recognition of the undisturbed nature of the deep water site was
instrumental in the selection of the LA-5 site as the preferred
alternative. No significant adverse Impacts to the Southern
California- Bight ecosystem are expected from ocean disposal at
the deep water site...
4.5.1. Effecta on the Physical Environmen t
The same impact criteria used to evaluate the physical
environment under the Preferred Alternative apply to this
section.
4-.5 . T". 1 . Meteorology and Air Quality
Final designation: of., the- deep water 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-5 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 water site.
4.5.1.2. Physical Oceanography .
Disposal at the deep water site would not affect physical
oceanography (Class III). Physical oceanographic parameters
such as currents and waves will determine the extent of disposal
Impacts on water quality and sediment quality.
4.5.1.3. Water Quality
At the deep water site, more material is expected to remain
inrsuspenslon in the water column than at the LA-5 site due to
the greater depth and the presence of a permanent tbermocl~ine,
although the suspended material will be diluted in a much
greater volume of water than at the LA-5 site. Therefore, the
effects on turbidity, dissolved oxygen, nutrients, and
-------
. 4-30 -
contaminant levels on water quality would be more widespread
than at the LA-5 site but the effect would be temporary and
concentrations would quickly become dilute (Class I).
4,5 .1 ;4. Geology
Disposal of dredged material at the deep water site would
not affect the geological parameters of the area (Class III).
4.5.1.5. Sediment Quality
Deposition of dredged material at the deep water site would
be spread out over a wider area compared to the LA-5 site due to
the deeper depths and the movement of fine material by deep
currents along the thermocline. 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-5 and LA-4 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-5 site,
4.5.2'. Effects 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 deep water site
should not be significant or substantially different from
effects at the LA-5 site (Class ITI).
4.5.2.2. Kelp Community
Disposal at the deep water site is not expected to have a
significant effect on the nearest kelp beds off Point Loma since
the designated site would be at least 17 nmi (31 km) from the
closest kelp bed and no disposal material is expected to travel
this far toward shallow'waters (Class III).
4.5.2*3* Bentbic 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-5 preferred site (Class I). Less sediment and
-------
- 4-31 -
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-5
site.
In addition! the deep water benthic invertebrates are
tolerant- of low DO levels (Hartman and Barnard, 1958; Fauchald
and Jones, 1978c) and may be less affected by altered DO than
species inhabiting the LA-5 site. Bentbic 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 would cause environmental impacts of a
significant nature which could alter the benthic 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 Mearns, 1977). Therefore, the fish fauna of the deep
water site is naturally less diverse and less abundant than that
of the LA-5 site.
If the deep water site is designated as the ODMDS for the
San Diego area, the effects associated, with dredged material.
disposal could significantly impact, the demersal fish fauna in a
aanner similar,-'to, that observed- at. the-LA-5 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 toxicological 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 location more than 13 nmi offshore, 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 location more than 13 nml offshore, 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 location more than 13 nmi offshore, disposal
at the deep water site is not expected to impact threatened or
endangered species (Class III).
-------
- 4-32 -
4.5*2.8. Marine Sanctuaries and Special Resource Areas
Because of the more than 13 nmi offshore 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 theSocioeconomie Environment
The criteria used to evaluate the socioeconomic environment
of the deep vater site are the same as the criteria described
for the preferred alternative.
4.5.3*1* Commercial Fishing
Commercially important fish are more abundant in the deep
water site area than at the LA-5 or LA-4 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-5 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. Commercial Shipping
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-5 site.
The probability of conflict is, however, minimal due to
infrequent use of disposal sites (Class III).
4.5.3.3. Oil and Gas Development
Since no oil and gas development activity is presently
proposed or planned off the San Diego Coast, no impacts are
anticipated (Class III). Energy consumption associated with
transport of dredged material to the site is likely to double as
the distance to the deep water site is approximately twice that
to the LA-5 site.
4.5.3.4. Military Usage
No military operations take place in the deep water region.
Military vessels which travel in and out of San Diego Bay may
face interference with the disposal barges, but the probability
of such interference is negligible (Class III). Impacts at the
deep vater site will be comparable to those at the LA-5 site and
the LA-4 shallow water site.
-------
- 4-33 -
4.5.3*5. RecreationalActivities
4.5.3*5.1. Sportfishing
Little, if any, sportfishing occurs in water depths greater
than 100 fathoms. No impacts on sportfishing are anticipated if
dredged Material disposal occurs in the deep water site area
(Class III).
4.5*3*5.2. Other Recreational Activities
Impacts of disposal activity on recreational boating in the
deep water site area will be similar to those at the LA-5 site s.
and the LA-4 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).
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-5 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-5 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 BPA procedures, including bulk sediment
analyses* acute and chronic toxiclty tests, and bloaccumulation
tests will continue to be required for MP8SA 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 • *j
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 minimise interferenoe 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.
-------
- 4-3* -
COB 103 Permit Conditions
A. All ocean dumping permits shall be sent to the Captain of
the Port. The permittee shall 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
San Diego, California 92101
(619) 577-5877
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,
7. 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.
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 tbe ODMDS.
The plan will include long-term management and monitoring
of the site. The broad list of management areas listed below
identifies general considerations pertinent to site management.
Major elements of the site management program will include:
-------
- 4-35 -
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
alte, and
C. Evaluation of sediment quality at the site and adjacent to
the -area.
*».7. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SHORT-TERM USE AND LONG-TERM RESOURCE
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
p.ersist as- long as the site continues to be used, for disposal.
Cessation of disposal would permit a-gradual recovery of the
benthic communities to normal levels over time.
The LA-5 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- near. San.. Diego Bay..
Ho oil and- gas development, occurs off shore of. San. Diego
County either in the State or Federal waters, and none is
expected in the foreseeable future. Therefore, no Impact is
expected on oil and gas development as a result of the final
designation of the LA-5 site for dredged material disposal.
Final site designation of the LA-5 site would not impact
consumption of petroleum resources.
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 San Diego Harbor 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 San Diego area.
*•*• IRREVERSIBLE OR IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES
The Irreversible or irretrievable resources committed to
the proposed action of final designation of the LA-5 site will
remain the same as those committed to the Interim site. These
Include:
-------
- 4-36 -
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-5
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 (HOI) to prepare an environmental impact
statement was published in the Federal Register on November 17»
1963 (Exhibit 1). This NOI vas published concurrently with COB
Publication 84-LA5-SCHB) (Exhibit 2). Public and regulatory-
agency comments were accepted regarding the of the EIS for the
designation of the LA-5 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.
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-5
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 to:
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
the EPA and the 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
QSCG was concerned that the LA-2 site is located too close
to veaael. 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
-------
- 5-2 -
EXHIBIT 1
Federal Master / Vot 48. No. U3 / Thursday. November 17. 1983 / Notice*
Department of tno Air Force
lie OMB for
Toe Department of Defense has
submitted to OMB far review U>e
following proposal for the collection of
(nfcnnatioa under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35). Each entry contain* the
fbilowiag information: (1) Type of
submission; (2) Title of information
coiieetion and form number. If
applicable (3) Abstract •(element of the
need for and the uses to be made of the
information collected: (4) Type of
respondent {5) An estimate of the
amnber of responses; (0] An estimate of
the total number of hours needed to
provide the information: (7} To whom
comments regarding the information ..
collection are to be forwarded; (8) The
point of contact from whom a copy of
the information proposal may be
obtained.
Revision of a Currently Approved
Proposal for aa Atfrortuing Copy
SnJuatioa Survey
The purpose of this collection Is to*
dtvaiop e quantitative testing technique
far Air Force advertising. A pretesting
system is needed to evaluate preftiushed
print ads prior to final production.
discriminate between eltematives and
provide diafnotie information to fine
tune the execution prior to final
production. This copy testing system has
as its evaluative criteria both a ore and
Cist exposure measurement of Interest
die Air Force versus other military
mdividuals. men and women, ages 17-
9 years; gOO responses, 93$ hours.
Forward comments to Edward
Springer. OMB Desk Officer. Room 3239,
NBOa Washington. DC 20503, and John
Wendanth. DOD Clearance Officer.
WHS/DIOR. Room 1C335. Pentagon.
Washington, DC 20301. telephone (202)
•M-Olo?.
A copy of the information collection
proposal may be obtained from Mr. O. F.
Brumbaugh. U8AFRS/RSAA& Randolph
AFBTXTSm telephone (812) 682-4701
or AUTO VON 487-1701.
M. mealy.
OSD/Mfra//t«f/«ter £A*o0 QffJotr.
D*paria*at of ft/toss
jUMCOK ;
Public Information Coftectlon
Md to OMB for
The Department of Defense has
nbmitted to OMB for review the
following proposal for the collection of
information under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35). Each entry contains the
following information: (1) Type of
submission: (2) Title of information
collection and form number, if
applicable; (3) Abstract statement of the
need for and the uses to be made of (he
Information collected; (4) Type of
respondent (5] Aa estimate of the
number of responses: (a) An estimate of
the total number of hours needed to
provide the Information; (7) To whom
comments regarding the information
collection are to be forwarded; (0) The
point of contact from whom a copy of
the information proposal may be
obtained.
Revision of a Carnally Approved
CoUaetkw
Proposal fora Proprietary "nocking
Study of AJr Fores Adwtiting
The purpose of.ths research study is>
to gather proprietary data with which to
develop the most effective Air Force
advertising and marketing program.
Current Air Force imagery must be
discentable at a point in time which is
most reflective of Air Force advertising
efforts. Study will be conducted among
a nationally representative sample of
young men and women, ages 17-28
years.
Individuals, men and women, ages 17-
30; 610 responses, 255 boors.
Forward comments to Edward
Springer. OMB Desk Officer, Room 3233.
NEOB. Washington. DC 20503. and John
Wenderoih. DOD Clearance Officer.
WHS/DIOR. Room 1C335. Pentagon.
Washington. DC 20301. telephone (202)
•B4-OU7.
A copy of the information collection
proposal may be obtained from Mr. O. F.
Slumbeugb, USAFRS/RSAAS. Randolph
AFB TX 78150, telephone (512) 65*4701
or AUTOVON 4*7-1701.
IMtodB NOVMaaWV 101 1
M.I.HeeJy.
OSD Arftin/Jtefffeeir Uaittm QfflMf.
Department of the Army
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
(DEIS) for a Proposed Final
Designation of LA 5 Interim Ocoansng
Dumping SHe, Offshore of San Diego
County. California; Intent To Prepare
AOtMcr: US. Army Corps of Engineers.
DOD.
ACTION: Notice of Intent to prepare a
draft environmental impact statement
(DEIS).
l. Proposed Action. The Los
Angeles District (LAD) of the \J3. Army
Corps of Engineers will prepare a Draft
Environmental Impact Statement to
identify the impects associated with the.-
final designation of an ocean disposal
site for dredge material off of San Diego
(Site No. LA 5). The LA S dumpsite
consists of the area within 1000 yards of
a center point of 32* 3T 4T N, 117* Tff
'
Preparation of the DEIS regarding the
final designation of the disposal site will
be accomplished by the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers at the request of the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Since documentation in support of final
desiginetion must have EPA approval
SPA is responsible far fioml disposal site
designation). theU.3. Army Corps of
Engineers will be coordinating closely
with the EPA.
To establish baseline data for the site.
LAD began comprehensive field
sampling began in summer 1963 which
will repeat for three consecutive
seasons. The sampling plan includes 5
sampling stations at the dumpsite: one
station is located at the center of the
dumpsite and the other 4 are spaced el
•0* intervals around the outer edge of
• the dumpsile. 1000 yards from the
Three sample stations will be located
•I the adjecent Reference (control) site.
These stations represent similar depths
as those stations located at the
dampsite's center, shallowest and
deepest sampling stations.
The center coordinates of the LA 5
reference site Is: • - -
tr sr 44-«. iir jr IT-w
Project tasks an focused primarily on
benthic resources, although other
biological, physical, cultural and socio-
economic aspects wfll be considered
The DOS will analyze the need for the
ocean disposal sils by addressing the
present and potential future ose of the
site for disposal of uncdntamiaatad
dredge spoil and by addressing the
-------
- 5-3 -
Federal Ragbtar / Vol 4& No. 323 / Thurtday. November 17. 1883 / Noticei 82349
availability of land disposal sites,
2. Alternatives. Alternatives to the
proposed profeet include (a) no action.
(b) utilization of lend dispose) rites, or
(c) designation of alternative ocean
disposal sites. Other eltemetlve* may
be identified through the scoping
process.
3- Scoping Process.
a. Public Involvement. An extensive
mailing list hu been prepared which
includes affected Federal. State, and
local agencies 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 analysed in depth in the DEIS will
include: The need for the project.
alternatives to the project, impacts to
benthic habitats and biota {inducting
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 Carps of
Engineers will circulate a public notice
soliciting comments regarding the scope
of (he DEIS rather than holding a
•coping meeting.
ft. 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.
FenJW.Teytar.
CoJoMi Corp* ofSagiauun. District
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION-
National Cantor for Reaaarch in
Vocational Education Advmery
Council; Uavting
•, AOCMCT: National Center for Research in
Vocational Education Advisory Council,
Ed.
ACnoae Notice of meeting.
•UKMMY: This notice seta forth the
schedule and proposed agenda of a
forthcoming meeting of the National
~ iter for Research in Vocational
•education Advisory Council. This notice
also describes the functions of the
Council Notice of this meeting is
required under Section 10(a](2) of the
Federal Advisory Committee Act This
document Is Intended to notify the
general public of their opportunity to
attend.
MTC December 12. 1983.
•nomtft The National Center for
Research to Vocational Education. Ohio
SUte University. 1900 Kenny Road,
Columbus. Ohio 43210,
•on FWTMUI mronunoM COMTACI:
Dr. Howard P. Hf elm. Director. Division
of Innovation and Development, 400
Maryland Avenue SW, Rm. 3044. ROB
3. Washington, D.C. 20202. (202) 245-
2278.
B*?OM«ATIOM: The
National Center for Research hi
Vocational Education-Advisory Council
is established under Section 171 of the
Vocational Educational Act of 1963 as
amended by the Education Amendments
of 1976 (Pi. 94-482) (20 U-S.C 2401). The
primary purpose of the Council is to
advise the National Center Director on
the operation of the National Center and
the Secretary on regional center*. In
addition to advising the Director, the
Council, at the request of the Secretary.
may be consulted on current issues in
vocational education as they affect the*
National Center.- Meetings held at the
request of the Secretary are conducted
hi accordance with the Federal
Advisory. Committee Act (FACA).
That portion of the meeting of the
Council under FACA is open to the
public on December 12, 1983 from 1:00
pjn. to 430 p jo. The proposed agenda
includes:
M0-l:45 Raport back IB Adviaory CoondL-
•asohitloa No. 1 (Technesaodale*, be.
Evaluate!) Report)
Reaohittaa No. 1 (NOIVE Scop* of War*}
14&-340— toriaw of Ibo National Academy
fetter far year HI
i far Option
Records are kepi of all Coundl
proceedings and are aveiUbls for public
'Inspection at the office of Glenn
Boerrigter, nogiem Improvement
Systems Branch. 400 Maryland Avenue
SW, Rm. 5018. ROB 3. Washington. D-C
20202: telephone: (202) 24*4817.
Data* November MU
•ooart M. Worthmftaa.
Assistant Sfcntary for Vocatioaol and Adult
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory
(Docket Mas. CT73- 184-000. C173-SB»>
000),
Colorado Interstate Oaa Co, «t at;
Informal Conreranc*
Novwobir in 1883.
ID the matter of Colorado Interstate
Gas Company, a division of Colorado
Interstate Corporatioo and QC
Exploration, too; CIC Exploration. Inc.
Take notice that oa Wednesday.
December 7. 1983. an Informal
conference wtfl be held in the above*
captioned dockets. The subject of the
informal conference is the offer of*
settlement submitted by Colorado '
Interstate Caa Company in these
dockets oa March 11. 1983. The informal
conference will convene at ZXOpjn. in a
conference room at the offices of the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
823 North Capitol Street NE,
Washington. D.C. 20428. All interested
persons are invited to attend. For further
information contact: P.). Roidakis (202}
357-3307 or RD- Long, (202) 357-83G7.
Acting S»a*torr.-
(Deck*! No*. RMJ-41-O01 and *Ht*-104~
801)
IPS Ow.
ftncj FKno. e* Tariff Sh«wt
Mooaabar tt 1983.
Take notice that oa November 4 1983,
mtei^Oty Minnesota Pipelines Ltd. Inc.
(MPL) tendered for filing Second
Substitute Twentieth Revised Sheet No.
4 to Original Volume No. 1 of Minnesota
Pipelines' FERC Gas Tariff.
MPL represents that the tendered
•heel affects the base rate approved by
the Commission la IU order of October
8. 1983, and cumulates that base rate to
the PGA filings made by the Company in
the interim since the settlement offer
was made on Mey 13. 1983. Since the
rate effects no new application but only
the approved base rate and PGA - •
adjustment* already In effect MPL
requests that it be made affective
November 1. 1983. MPL requests all
necessary waivers of notice and all
suspension policies to allow the
requested data. MPL further represents
that approval of the tariff sheet so
tendered will allow MPL to calculate the
refund owed its customers In this docket
-------
- 5-4 -
Public Notice
US Army Corps
of Engineers
Los Angetes District
P.O. Box 2711
lot AngtlM, CA 90053
8PLCO-R (84-LA5-SCHB))
EXHIBIT 2
Oat«NOY 3 0 1983 Comment Deadline: j*N j « 1934
To Whom It May Concern:
Tour comments are Invited on the scope of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the
proposed Final Designation of the LA 5 Interim Ocean Dumping Site, offshore of San Diego
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 5 dumpsite is a 100 fathom (600 foot) deep circular disposal site with a radius of. 1000
yards and a center located at 32° 36' 50" N, 117° 20' 40" 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 5 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
£30). 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 2 Interim Ocean
Dumpsite located off of Los Angeles.)
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. The project tasks primarily focus upon benthic resources, although
other biological, physical, cultural, and socio-economic aspects will 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.
-------
_ 5-5 -
SUBJECT: The Scope of an Environmental Impact Statement on the Proposed Final
Designation of the LA 5 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 mz bottom grab. Otter trawl stations win 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 wilTbe sufficient to define the major
pycnoclines in the water column and to satisfy any requirements of biological or physical
modeling analyses.
3) CHEMICAL OCEANOGRAPfflC SAMP LING. 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 win 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 fCithariehthvs
•erdidus) and 2) the filter-feeding shrimp. Sicvonia spp..
Speed, direction and vertical structure of water body movement at each site win 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 win 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
aport fisheries, coastal recreation, cultural resources, offshore on development, marine
transportation, dredge and disposal operations, and sewage outfalls.
-------
- 5-6 -
SUBJECT: The Scope of an Environmental Impact Statement on the Proposed Fine!
Designation of the LA 5 Interim Ocean Dumping Site
CONTENT AND STRUCTURE OF THE EC
The SIS wiU 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)
8. 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
-------
- 5-7 -
SUBJECT: The Scope of an Environmental Impact Statement on the Proposed Final
Designation of the LA 5 Interim Ocean Dumping Site
(5) Use plans - (coastal and ocean route)
b. Alternatives to the Proposed Action
(1) Ho 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. EnvironmentalConditions
(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
(e) Sedimentology
(4) Water resources, quality, and uses: ocean
(5) Water quality standards:
(a) Federal
(b) State
(c) Local
-------
. 5-8 -
SUBJECT: The Scope of an Environmental Impact Statement on the Proposed Final
Designation of the LA 5 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
effected).
(7) Recreation and recreational values
(a) Historic trends
(b) Present trends
(8) Use plans, controls, and constraints:
(a) Coastal and ocean transportation routes
(b) Existing policies
^
(c) Trends of conflicts
b. Significant Resources
(1) 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.
S. Environmental Consequences
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
(e) Sedimentology
(3) Water resources and quality: marine
(4) Biota: marine
(5) Use plans - (coastal and ocean route)
-------
- 5-9 -.
SUBJECT: The Scope of an Environmental Impact Statement on the Proposed Final
Designation of the LA 5 Interim Ocean Dumping Site
(a) Transportation (marine)
(b) Socioeconomic characteristics
b. Alternatives to the Proposed Action:
(1) 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
Tour 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:
U.S. Army Engineer District
ATTN: SPLCO-R (M-LA2-8(HB))
P.O. Box 2711
Los Angeles, California 90053
For further information, call Harvey Beverly, Regulatory Branch, (213) 688-5606.
PaulW.Tay
Colonel, Corps of Engineers
District Engineer
-------
- 5-10 -
FIGURE Is H*A REGION IX OCEAN DISPOSAL SITES
-------
- 5-11 -
jrr- .- - ..•"••'-
&*£&£*'*? F- • . .;
M^SHTOW. -rS, ' -
..•_._.-• *..-••.
- / : '
/.-/.It
% •-•< \'=r?
'^/,
'X
a^jm^jpit
* -I
. ,
7 •' I.
"• '•• • ••'llS :
; .-» IIS,
- -
-
jj B ^
H
*--
II
2' W
< r-
o _^
»n s
< =3
(d
02
i
-------
- 5-12 -
Table 5-1. Issues Identified During the Scoping Process
AGENCY
ISSUES AND COMMENTS
National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration
U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service
The Resources- Agency of
California (representing
nine other state agencies)
Regional Water Quality-
Control Board (San
Diego Region
City of San Diego
Sunset Beach Community
Association
Recommend that topics of
commercial and recreational
fishing be highlighted in
the EIS.
Suggest use of a beam trawl
in place of otter trawl fisfe
sampler. Also suggest
midwater trawl samples.
No comments now. Would like
to review DEIS. Conveyed
California Coastal
'Commission comment that a
Federal consistency certifi-
cation will be required.
This was later retracted by
the Commission. (See
Section 5.^> Formal
Consultation.)
Suggest" analyzing1 wafer'
column samples and vertical
core samples for tin.
EIS should clearly state the
source of the dredge
material.
Do not wish to comment.
-------
EXHIBIT 3
- 5-13 -
UNITED STATES DEPMRTMEFtfT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NATIONAL MARINE RSHBVES SERVICE
Southwest teflon
300 South Perry Street
Terminal Island, California 90731
Dece*ber 20, 1983
P/SWB33:JJS
1303-01.d
Colonel Paul V. Taylor
District Engineer
Corp* of Engineers
P.O. Box 2711
Los Angeles, CA 90053
Deer Colonel Taylor:
Be have reviewed Public lotices Vos. S4-LA2-S sad S4-LA5-S requesting
eooaents on the- scope of environmental lapeet statements (£15) for the
proposed final designations of the 1A-2 and LA.-3 Xnteria Ocean Dumping Sites
off Los Angeles and San Diego respectively. In general, the content and
structure proposed for each US thoroughly cover* those area* of concern to
the national Marine Fisheries Service.
The- only- apparent deficiency «; can see concerns the subjects-of
eomereial and recreational fi»hing. The text* of both Public Notices state
thaf these topics; wtll be; covered^ in- the- diacuaclotur involving,- socio-eeososic-
settings. Because of the ia^ortanee of thoroughly considering,the
Implication* of long-tera diaaping at each of the interia site* en fishing, we
recoanaend that the topic* of coo»ercial sad recreational fishing be
specifically highlighted' In the content section of each EZS.
Sincerely TOOTS,
laden. Jr.
"Acting tegional Director
OPG, Long Beach
PWS, Laguna ffiguel
SESPOHSE: See Sections 3.4.1, 3.4.5.1, 4.2.3.1, 4.2.3.5.1
-------
- 5-14 -
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
ECOLOGICAL SERVICES
24000 Avila Road
Laguna Nigucl, California 92677 "
EXHIBIT 4
January 5, 1984
Commander
Los Angeles District
Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 2711
Los Angeles, California
90053
Attention: Regulatory Branch
Re:. PS 8-i-LA2-S and ?S 84-LA5-S EIS Scoping Notices
for Ocean Dump Site Designation
Dear Colonel Taylor:
The Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) 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. r..?S be
given the opportunity to review and comment on the biological study plan
prior to- its iaplesentation. Further, we suggest that the proposed otter
trawl fish sampler be replaced with a bean trawl which includes a' device for
measuring the actual bottom area swept by the trawl. Often, a significant
failing of otter trawl sampling is that bottom tise and area swep"t by the
net is only estisated, 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 noraally associated.
with the water column, as well as the bottom.
Please contact Mr. Jack Fancher on this matter, should the need arise, at
FTS 796-4270.
Sincerely yours,
4£ C I'^-s'"
'.Dale A. Pierce '"
Acting Field Supervisor
cc: CDFG, MRR, Long Beach, CA
NHFS, Terminal Island, CA
EPA, Reg. IX, San Francisco, CA
RESPONSE: See Section 5.2.2
-------
141* N'"t» Strwt GOVERNOR OF '. Cli.lom.. C8«£Sli£!x^ ' *°"° '*«'*•
OtwrlRMntolBaaitnflMdWtnmmri -**SS.^ jut. CMMJ
Slat* Cinai Cammmion
THE RESOURCES AGENCY OF CALIFORNIA «*«• »««~»« •«•'«
SACRAMENTO. CALIFORNIA
EXHIBIT 5
Colonel Paul W. Taylor
Army Corps of Engineers
Post Office Bex 2711 January 13, 1934
Los Angeles, CA 90053
Public Notice 84-LA2S (Interim Ocean Dumping Site)
Dear Colonel Taylor:
The State agencies listed below have reviewed the subject public
notice and have provided comments used in writing this resocr.se.
The Resources Agency concurs in these findings.-
The Coastal Commission comments that it will provide comments re-
garding this proposed action for: (1} EPA's 2SI3 on Designation.cf
an Ocean Dumping Site in the San Pedro Basin for the Ocean Disposal
of Drilling Fluids and Cuttings* (August 1983) and (2) the C. 5.."Army's
DSIS' for the- Proposed" Final Designation of LA 2 Interim Ocean Dumpir.s
Site-.. ' " ' " ' ••'"",
In addition, .the Commission comments that a federal consistency
certification will be required for ZPA's final disposal site
designation action.
Because we have received no advsrse comments, the State will not
object to issuance of the Corps permit.
Sincerely,
;i*~ = A =-> * /y
ta*^%G^3Z~
Assistant Secretary for- Resources
cc: Department of Boating and Waterways
Department of Parks and Recreaticn
State Hater Resources Control Board
Department of Fish and Game
Wildlife Conservation 3card
Department of Water Resources
State Lands Commission
Coastal Commission
Department of Health Services
RESPONSE; See Section 5.3
-------
.*) - 5-16 -
•R OF TAI iFQMMA . " «"'
CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
SAN DIEGO REG ION
6J51 MiMinn Gnrnn Roari
(Mail: Suit* 205- Inter; Suite 1061
San Oiono. California 92120-1939
•619)205-511.1
EXHIBIT 6
December 16, 1933
I.I (MKiC- Uk'IK.Mf JIAH Go.-',,n<
U.S. Army Engineer District
Attn: S?LC£M(34-LA5-S(KS)
P. 0. Sox 2711
Los Angeles, California 90053
Dear Sirs:
Re: LA 5 Bumping Site
Thank you for providing the opportunity to consent en i-',s -ublic notice
for a draft environmental imoact statement for final designation of the
LA 5 dumping site off San Diego. Althougn my staff wnserstancs LA 5
lies more than three ailes off the coast'of California, there are octen-
tial impacts on state waters; therefore,
for the Corps.' baseline sampling program.
offer the fell swing succesticns
Chemical OceanosraDhic Ssrrortng: analyze" water cciu-n se~2ies for
tin.
Sediment Sa~s1ir.g: analyze vertical core saroies for tin.
U.S
Presumably, most of the material dumped at the LA S sit= will pe dredge
spoil taken from San Ciego Say. The bay supports three stea
power plants and is home port to approximately one-fcurtn of the
Navy's ships as well as- a large fleet of commercial anc rscrea
vessels, in the future, i anticioate a mucn greater yse of oraanc tn.
anti-foul ing paints, such as tributyl tin oxide (TBTQ) from these sources.
It v^ould, therefore, ce appropriate to establish baseline concentrations
for appropriate species of organo tins in both bottom jecir.er.ts and in
tne water which overlies the bottom at the disposal site.
species of organo tins might be to analyze for total tin sna to areserve
samples for later analysis.
-------
EXHIBIT 6-Page 2 " - 5-17 -
U.S. Army engineer District
December 15,.1?32
Although it woulti require a Biajor effort to establish baseline concen-
trations of organo tins, I believe such an effort is'warranted for
protection of waters of the Pacific Ocean off S^n Ciego. As the use
of TBTO coatings increases, it will soon be impossible'to obtain valid
baseline data for the LA 5 dumping site.
Again,"thank you for allowing me to comment on this issue. Should your
staff have any questions, they may call Mr. Pete Michael at (619)255-5.1 U.
if,*.— j— '
Very truly yours,
ARTHUR L. CUE.
Supervi s ing:Enginee
PH:ej
cc: Mr. Jim Anderson, Executive Officer, Region S, Sanca Ana
Mr. Sob Ghirelli, Executive Officer, Region 4, tos Angeles
Mr. 2ocsr James, Executive-Officer, Region 2, Oakland
Mr. Gave Cohen, Program Manager, Special Projeczs, State ;.-.'3zer
Resources Cor.trol Soard,. Sacramento
Kr. Jonn Ladd, OFG, Technical Services, State Water Resources
Control Board, Sacramento
RESPONSE: No response needed.
-------
- 5-13 -
EXHIBIT 6-Page 3
r
Tf LEPHONE OR VERBAL CONVERSATION RECORD
r»» ••• •* HM» «•»••.. ••• A* I40-I& *• ***••*•«• •t««€T i» Tfc« AdM*M €•*«•!•• 0»'<«.
3.' I ^^,
j
19 January 1934 '•
Clarification of Comment on LA 5 Ocean Disposal \
Site Public Notice " !
t
INCOMIMC C*WL i
Or'iCC
i
!
i
i
i
OUTGOING CALL
SHANNON. CUNNIFE
• t»»O» C41LCO
MR. PETE MICHAEL
SPLPD-RQ
»-0*C ..',:-..••«"•"•» >0 t*'t-» .;«. i
X2934- 1
*eo"c"San Diego Regional "0*t ^-"" *"° "**-'*'' )
feTSt§? Quality Control : (61?) 255-5114 i
SOaJTC ! i
Of COMV
Pete Michael of San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board
(SDRWQC) informed me that organo-tin compounds are being used by
the Navy in; their, anti-fouling paints. It is probably tha.t. by
1991 the-entire-Naval fleet will be coated with this crgano-tln
containing anti-fouling paint. The paint is available to the
public- Its; use- is increasing at a rate- of- 20% per year. -Organs-
tins are toxic at 1 ppB, are attracted and persistent in sediments,
and have a half life on the order of months. At present there are
no standards for analysis, in short, different analytical techniques
.produce different results. Normal handling and analytical techniques
used for metals are not applicable due to organo-tin's ability to
rapidly degrade.
The purpose of SDRWQCB's letter was to. inform the Corps of Engin-
eers- that organo-tins were likely to be on the increase in the
sediment and water column. The letter was not meant to be a State
of California demand that we include organo-tin in our water and
sediment sampling plan.
I mentioned to Mr. Michael that we, the Corps, could:
1) investigate the possibility of including organo-
tin in our Bioassay Procedure Manual; and
2) suggest that testing for organo-tins be included
in the Disposal Site Monitoring Plan.
Until a standard for organo-tin (including a standard analytical
procedure) are determined, results of organo-tin surveys would be
close to useless.
Mr. Michael gave me a list of persons to contact fcr further infer
mation on organo-tin and the U.S. Navy's Environmental Assessment
on its conversion to organo-tin based anti-fouling paints. .The
best contact appears to be:
MPI.ACCS COITION or i ft*
•ILL IE uno.
-------
EXHIBIT 6-Page 4
- 5-19 -
TELEPHONE OR VERBAL CONVERSATION RECORD
.. Aft J40-I1 *• •'•••«•*• •00*CI«
San Diego Regional Water
Quality Control Board
(619) 265-5114
Mr. Bill Bailey
SRA Corporation
Arlington-,. VA~-
(703) 486-0600 ' .
Mr. Michael suggested that if the Corps had any concerns concern-
ing the Navy's use of these paints, thac we contact Mr. Baily.
I thanked Mr. Micheal for the information and his conunenns on ch«
LA S Public Notice and informed him that we desired to cooperate
with the State agencies as much as possible.
3 A, :;:«751
COITION or i rca M-VMICN WILL ac wtto.
-------
- 5-20 -
EXHIBIT 7
'THE CITY OF
SAN DIEGO
CITY ADMINISTRATION BL'ILDINC • 202 C STREET • S.4.V D1ECO, CALIF S22
ENVIRONMENTAL
DUALITY DIVISION
PLANNING
DEPARTMENT
236-5775
January 10, 1984
U. S. Army Engineer District
ATTN: SPLCO-R (84-LA5-S(HB))
P..O. Box 2711
Los Angeles, CA 90053
SUBJECT: LA 5 INTERIM OCEAN DUMPING SITE
Thank you for sending the public notice regarding the scope of a draft
environmental impact study that your office will be preparing on the
proposed final designation- of the LA-5 Interim Ocean Dumping site located
offshore of San Diego.
The Environmental Quality Division has reviewed the scope of work for the
project and believes that it adequately identifies the potential issues
which should be addressed in the environmental impact study. The
environmental impact study should clearly state the source of the dredge
material. The scoping notice was not clear in this regard. . •
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the scope of work for the
project, and please send a copy of the draft environmental impact study for
our review and comment.
Sincerely,
Allen M. Jones, Deputy Director
City Planning Department
GW:AMJ:as
RESPONSE: No response needed.
-------
- Sunsef Beech Community Association
EXHIBIT 's P. 0. Box 215 • Sunset Beach - California 90742
December 12, 1983
Department ofthe Army
Los Angeles District
Corps of Engineers
Sox 2711
Los Angeles,. CA 90053
Gentlemen:
The Sunset Beach Community Ass. does not wish to c
on the following pubic notices :
33-lVi-RA (An endv 1)
8^ - LA5-S(K3)UIS)
83-I30-RA-.
Sincerely,
^
George Tuck, Chairman
Engineering Advisory Committee
' GT/nb
RESPONSE: No response needed.
-------
- 5-22 -
Table 5~2. Attendees at the Interagency Workshop on Ocean
Disposal at the LA-2 and LA-5 Sites
NAME
ORGANIZATION
Eric Yuxrker
Harvey Beverly
Terry Breyman
Shannon Cunniff
William Van Peeters
Jack Fancher
Martin J. lenney
James- E. Mahoney
Lewis A. Schinazi
Jim Steele
Pete Zander
Don Cadien
Michael Sowby
Rick Ware
Tom Grieb
Raj Mathur
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. Fish and Wildlife Service
O.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
U.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.
-------
- 5-23 -
USCG, SPA 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) opposed
moving the site because this would cause impacts to an as yet
undisturbed location. Shannon Cunnlff (Environmental Section,
COE Los Angeles District) agreed with this point and noted that
the LA-2 interim site had been used since 1977. It was
generally agreed that the site should not be moved to another
location.
5.2 .2. Issuei 2
Jim Steele of the California Department of Fish and Game
and Jack Fancber of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service stated
that site designation studies strould 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 old-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 benthlc 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 aeans. of assessing
the Impacts of suspended fine sediment'.
Jack Fancher noted that the FVS -comment letter on the
Notice 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 hlstopathologlcal studies be
performed in lieu of or in addition to muscle tissue contaminant
analyses of 'selected organisms. Shannon Cunnlff pointed out
that COE 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 blstopathological
analyses are not yet a standard technique and the proper
protocols would require research and development. If this study
-------
- 5-21 -
or future monitoring studies indicate a need for such studies,
then the requirement for histopathological analyses could be
included in the scope of work for site characterization.
5.2.4. Issue M
Jim Steele recommended that the ice cream cone worm,
Pectinaria sp., be used for tissue burden studies. Don Cadien
(MBC Applied Environmental Sciences) noted that the small size
of this polychaete requires that an unacceptable 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. USCG is
responsible for monitoring proper disposal positions. Jim
Steele and Bill Van Peeters (Environmental Section, COE Los
Angeles District) suggested that a radar target could be placed
on the disposal barge to allow veriflcalton of the dump location
by USCG 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 of National Marine Fisheries Service asked
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 had 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 Russ Ballmer, formerly COE's District Senior
Bcologist 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 Junker (EPA) noted that a detailed site
monitoring program would probably not be incorporated into the
-------
- 5-25 -
EIS, but that it oould be part of EPA's Record of Decision on
the EIS that is published concurrently with the final
designation package.
5.3 FORMAL COHSOLTATIOHS
Formal consultation required by the Endangered Species Act
vas initiated with the D.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on January
4, 1 981 and with the National 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.
-------
- 5-26 -
EXHIBIT 9-Page 1
National Oceanic and Mtmospheric Administration
NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SE3V1C5
Southwest Region
300 South Ferry Street
Terminal Island, California 90731
February 2, 1984
F/5WR31.-DJS
1514-05
Mr. Carl F. Enson
Chief, Planning Division
Los Angeles District
Army Corps -of Engineers
P.O. Box 2711
Los Angeles, CA 90053
Dear Mr. Enson:
This responds to your January 11., 1984 information requests concerning
endangered, threatened, or candidate species that may be affected by the
proposed designation of the LA2 and LA5 ocean disposal sites.
The enclosed list indicates those species which may be present in the
project area. The gray whale -is most likely of these species to be found in
these areas. As this species would occur only transiently in these seall
Areas as it migrates along, the west coast, we believe that conducting an
inforaal consultation may satisfy the requirements of Section 7(c) of the
Endangered Species Act. We would appreciate receiving a copy of the DEIS for
these projects and believe these documents may be used in place of submitting
formal . Biological. Assessments .
We have- received, another request from, the Corps, of Engineers (COE) for a.
similar project- in the Rumboldt Bay, California region. We recomnend that all
three documents address the cumulative effects of these projects to listed or
candidate species. In addition, if the COE concludes in the DEIS that the
projects may affect populations of any listed or candidate species, the COE
should initiate the foraal consultation process.
If you have any further questions please contact Mr. Dana J. Seagars of
our llariae Mammal Program at (FTS) 796-2518 or (213) 548-2518.
Sincerely yours,
Rodney R. Mclnnis
Acting Regional Director
Enclosure
-------
- 5-27 -
EXHIBIT 9-Page 2
Natse
Species Which May Be Present in ProjectAreas
Gray whale
Sight whale
Blue whale
fin whale
Sei whale
Humpback whale
Spera whale
Green sea turtle
Leatherback sea turtle
Pacific Ridley sea turtle
Loggerhead sea turtle
Guadalupe fur seal
(Eachricheius robustua)
(Eubalaena giacialisj
(Balaeneotera ausculus)
(B. bore alls)
(Megaotera aovaengliae)
(Physeter aacroceona-Ius)
(Chelonia aydas)
CDenaochelya eorlacea)
(Lepidochelya ollvacaa)
(Care tea earetta)
[£atodonl
(Aretocephal
.ua_...towns endi)
Status
Endangered
Endangered
Endangered
Endangered
Endangered
Endangered
Endangered
Endangered
Endangered
Endangered
Threatened
Candidate
RESPONSE: Mo Response Needed.
-------
5-28 -
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMENCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Admiflistratior
NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE
•
£outrv«»c Kegica
330 i«:sh Ferry 5sra«.
r*x=l=ml Island, Caiii=r=i* f073i-
EXHIBIT 10
Koveaber 26, 1984
F/SWR33:DJS
1514-05
Mr. Carl ?. Eason
Chief, Planning Division
Los Angeles District
Army Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 2711
Los Angeles, CA 90033
Dear Mr. Enson:.
We have reviewed your November 11, 1984 determination that populations of
lilted endangered, threatened or candidate tpecies will not be affected
adversely by the proposed final designation of the LA2 and LA5 ocean disposal
Sites for dredged materials. We concur with your conclusion. Ve see no need
to proceed further with the consultation process prescribed in Section 7 of
the Endangered Species Act.
-EyC. Fulltrtoa
eglonal Director
KESPOXSE; Ho response needed.
-------
- 5-29 -
EXHIBIT 11
United Stales Department of the Interior
I1SH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
SACRAMENTO EXDftGEKO SPECIES OFFICE
1230 *l* Street, Uta floor
Sacraaeato, Call/oral* 95814
. -: nw 17 W4
IB reply r*f*r to: SESO
I1-1-84-SP-117
. Mr. Carl F. Ens on
Chief, Planning Division
Department of thejkray
Los Angeles District
Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 2711
Los Angeles, California 90053
Subject:; Request'for List of• Endangered and Threatened Species in-
the Area of LA 5 Ocean Disposal Site, offshore San Diego
County, California ....-,. ' -
Dear Mr. Enson:
Tula is in reply to your letter of Decenfcer 30, 1983, rw,ne»ting a
list of Jlsted- aad proposed endangered eod threatened apeelea that may
occur wlthia the area of the subject project, lour request and this;
response- are? aadec pursuant* to Section. 7(e) of toe- Sodaagered Species Act
of 1973 as aoended (PL 95-632).
We have: reviewed" the aos t receat information cad to the best of our
knowledge there are no listed or proposed species wtthia the area of the
project. We appreciate your concent for endangered species "aad look
forward to continued coordination. If yon have farther questions.
please contact Mr. lalpb Swaaaon of our office at (ITS) 446-2791 or
(916) 440-2791.
Sincerely,
Project Leader
-------
- 5-30 -
EXHIBIT 12
tatt of CilifOfni» — Th« ftvtourcM Agency
OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
F.O. Box 2390
facranunto. CA9S811
(91 SI 4494006
TITLE; LA 2 ar.d LA 5 DUMP 5I72S
7 Deceamer 1
Projtct No.: r.t*T
and CoS 84102!*. C
item cited tbovt was rectived in thi» office on
Thank you for consulting us pursuant to 35 CFR 300.
We concur in your determination That ttm undertaking:
oes not involve National Register or eligible prepares. -- ' -
O will not affect National Register or eligible properties.
The provisions of 36 CFR 800.7 apply if previously unidentified National Register or eligible
resources arc discovered during construction.
Contact _.?Tiehalas Dal.. Ciorgo
, af our staff if you have any questions.
Marion Mitchell-Wilson, Oeputy State Historic Preservation Officer
Acting Chief. Office of Historic Preservation
RESPONSE: No response needed.
-------
State of California. George Deukmepan, Cmmar
CafifofTM Coastal Commission
SOUTH COAST DISTRICT
245 West Broadway, Suite 380
P.O. Box 1450
Long Beach, Cafiforrna 90801-1450
(213)590-5071
November 9, 1984
.- 5-31 -
EXHIBIT 13-Page 1
Shannon Cunnif£
Environmental Section
Department of the Army
L. A. District, Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 2711
Los Angeles, CA 90053
•
Re: LA 2 and LA 5 Ocean Disposal Site Selection
Dear Shannon,
Thank 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: aware, on-January. 11, 1984, the- U. S. Supreme- Court issued
a decision in Watt vs. California concerning consistency deter-
minations by ther State of California- for federal' activities
which may affect the coastal zone. The 5-4 ruling reversed
two lower court rulings and determined that an administrative
action, such as an Outer Continental Shelf oil and gas lease
sale, 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
•tate review of these federal agency decisions, the Bill —
SR 4589 — died in committee. It is expected that it will be
reintrodueed when the 99th Congress convenes early next year.
In the meantime, the Coastal Commission would continue to have
consistency review and permit authority over dredging projects
and the shipment of materials through the coastal zone that may
•adversely affect coastal resources. We appreciate the level
of involvement that you have afforded the Commission, and I am
confident that the "unofficial" review of the potential impacts
RESPONSE; No response needed.
-------
r
Page 2
- 5-32 -
EXHIBIT 13- Page 2
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 COS.
Sincerely yours,
Peter F-. Xander
Staff Planner
PFX/SWS
cc: Tom Tobin
Liz Fuchs
Mary Hudson
-------
- 5-33 -
5-4. REQUESTED REVIEWERS
Comments were requested from tbe following organizations:
5.4.1. Federal Agencies and Offices
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
5.4.3. Private Organizations
American Cetacean Society
Audubon Society
Cousteau Society
National Wildlife Federation
Oceanic Society
Sierra Club
5.4.4. Academic/Research Institutions
California State University, Long Beach
Scripps Institute of Oceanography, La Jolla
University of California, Los Angeles
University of California, Santa Cruz
-------
-------
-6-1-
03
as
M
as
ta
as
a*
03
M
-J
as
H
cc
o
M
§••
M
J
M
pa
H
03
X
o
OM
M
M
as
M
u
z
M
M
OS
H
O.
X».
M
M
09
M
H
a5
M
flu
M
H
H
X
<«
•
B B
0 O
fH
o. a
o
0] CO M -H
M H b «*
M H O <0
* E *>
T> Vi -V «* -H > *4 > .».
0 0 0 0 OB 0«
•on B 0 o * 0 c
• BO «* 01 0 0 -H
b 0 O, 0 U 0Q.
0 0 « 0 O 93 b Q
Ob«4 b 0 -H 03
IK O O 4J 0 -H CD. b 9O
* O 0 b 0 X
9 0-C 0» «H 0: i.B* SO* B
0 . 0 a o A> > e 301.
A. 0 0 O * 0-0-0 O 0-0
fH OS O O >H H 03 ac fc, O *»
I t
0 | 0
b 0 b
o* b i a.
00 «
» B rH
090 000 0
• b 0 00 fe 0
o a, o o • • js o
a. o o> 0 B a. a
• 03 0 O O 0 0
*H W ^3 ^ ^ ^4 ^ 4R^
OMB Ct DO *» «0 OB
0 >• 0O 0
B - js fi - 3 C Bb
0 • B a 0 • ^ 0 0«o
9000 9009 90
Obvlb O b > O Ob
O tO *» to OtOMO O 0.
•
o
^^ ^ M^ m.
^ * oa •
fl U b • o
<* 0 9 X (0
B B *» .
9 9 *» . -• JB
• « 0 0 i
B 4 U -0 -
0 «H b
b B . jo 9
-H o ••» a M
•• -H O fl
B *» M 9
MOO a H
9 -H . v<
• *> b 0 ^ 0
01 O 4* 03 «4 «4
• b 0 « J3 b
DfH 0, X ON M
*
9
•H
> X
9 b
b O
43
~4 0
0 -H «
O 3 B
«4 M b
890
JS b 0
O B
0 t, 0
H O 0
4>
«H 0.
fl b
b 0
0 0
a, >,
o
0 B -H
0 0 A
> a
000
b 0 b
0 00
0 o O b
>» b b O
0.TJ >..
a. to >• «
0 0 B >
> B t.
0, 0,0-3. j
03 X « SO
>H
0
0
O 0
a B
0 O
^j ^j
^^ ^^
0 *>
0
B M
0 3
0 «0
0 0
o as
*. .1
W
0 fe
t-t
0 b
0 0
b >
0 9
u m
* 0 .
•T b *
b 0
«* 0 K
B 0
* «4 »»
« ei b
* a •
D|M] as
-------
- 6-2 -
H
I-l
.J
M
B)
M
W
- as
o
a*
BO
B)
as
M
U
as
as
a.
M
M-
^4
O
*
0
0
b
p^
0
0
^4
B
J3
0 CO
0 M
H H
0
b
0
0
X
fid CO
o «-
u
•o
0 B
0 0
0 4*
b 0
0 -H
* 00
X 0
M> O
-^ O
n H
fl
B
0
4*
J8 B
4* 0
•* B
* B
b
4* 0
O >
H O
tO 60
O
•H »-t
0 0
•H J.
BQ 0
fl
0 0
0 b.
0
a
b
•H
**
«0
B
ft
4J
iH
9
0
B
O-'
O
iH
0
4*
B
a
B
o
b
•H
^
B
DO
4*
o
o
v^
o
b
a.
i
s
o
b
v4
^
B
M
0
0
Q
b
0
«
X
b
3
O
k.
b
O
4>
0
B
•H
fl
b
O
O
U
B
0
V >
B 0-
0. n
^4
b • 0
O M *>
4» O C
49 t£ 49
B B
«4 b B
« 0 0
• «^ »
b *• b
O -H
O 4J > C
U 0 C O
*4 O <«4
•H 90 *»
0000
4» rH b 0
e 0-0 a-
0 O 0 TJ
a M x 0
CO
M
H
V.
O
J
0
•H
>
0
K
1 «•
B t,-
O 0 1
b -H 0
H £ 0
> U O
B
M B 0
O 0
0 -H
0 b
000
b CO *
0 X
0. *H -
X 0 B
4» 0
H B >
«4 •: 0
QQ 0. ATI
X
«*
^
B-
9
S
a H
o o
u u
B O
« U
b b~
0- 0 •
A B
a e
0->0>
b -1-
tocu
fH
0
b
9
*>
rH
9
(^
4*
O
0
»•>
o
b
a.
M
o
a
0
0
g.
0
0
X
0
0
b
^
fr«
b
o
4»
0
fl
(.
o
o
a
0
o
b
9
O
0
0
as
0
^
•r4
Wi ao
B
•0 -H ,
B *J
0 ^H
9
*> « *J
0 B 0
«ou to
0 O
•H •} r-4
O 0 0
0 0
000
J3 b £
O 0-0
b «• b
^ x<
^
o
£
0 -0
•H B
> «
0
b X
M
pH 0
0 iH
0 O
*4 0
B 0
O O
9 b
f-l 0
W
O
o
0
0 4*
n
b ^0
0 O
0 -1
X O
0,
*J 0
S JS
vt o
•H. b
H <
0
O
b
9
O
0
0
b
r4
0
b
9
4*
I-l
9
O
- •
M
•O B
e -H
0 B
B
0
0
O
•O b
a 9
0
0
O
XI b
e 9
M
to
I-l
H
OS
DO
flu
M
H
M
X
^
M
O
O
O
aa
B
s
0
A
v
«J
0
O
e
b •
b BQ
0 •
t* X
fl
6
' 0 0
a
0 0
4* -H
0 0
X X
0 -H
O 0
O B
DO ««
•h
m .
%4
•H
B
fl
9
•
M
B
O
fl •
* •<
*J *
« X
0
^
^
0
B
^
4»
O
0
0.
a
M
^1
0
4*
B
0
a
a
o
b
^4
*•
B
H
•h
^
0
B
fl
0
M
•
pa
B
O
*"
0
,_!
CM
X
4*
H
B
9
a
a
o
*
•«
•
X
0
X
te
o
^
o
0
0
JB
0
b
•
X
m
b
9
4*
9
0
.J
0
b
o
i-l
o
0
0
0
as
^4
0
b
9
4*
I-l .
9
U
0
X
to
o
^4
O
0
0
^
0
b
d
*
*G
0*
M
4*
b
0
X
0
^4
O
b
4*
0
a.
0
0
«
OX
p-4
0
b
9
^
lH
9
U
-------
-6-3-
H
£*
M
^3
IH
B)
M
03
K
O
a*
0]
M
as
M
o
X
H
IH
as
M
B*
K
M
H
oa
HI
H
K
U
a.
M
M
M
X
4
SB
1
O
e
0
£
o
o
fH
0
0
•H
O
X
JB
CU
fl
0
4*
B
9)'
a
B
o
b
«4
>
B
0
0
b
0
*
X
S
0-
H
1
O
S
0
0
o
o
^4
0
O
^4
0
X
a
a*
•
M
0 •
b X
4*
0 *
* it
O
o
M O
b *l JO
O 0 0
4* a 0
O M
0 b
b • 9
4* a jo
a o 4*
00 b
OF. •«
4*
B
b «
9 B
4» 0
0 0
* 0
^ 0
B 0
0
X
X4»
43 *4
O.fl
0 0
b 9
to a1
48
a
b
0
JJJ
w*
qj.
b
^
S
0
M
B
•H
4J
3-
81
B
O
a
X
43
a.
0
b
to
r4
0
1 0
b
X 0
•H 4» 0
0 0 4»
B b 0
4 0.-0
•H 43
0 0
*> b
B. B
B -rt-
0 *»
*4
0 3
b 0
0 B
0 O
X 0
*?.''«"
B., ^
0 C
* 0
H- a-.
X
to
o
H-
O
0-
CJ
0
e
^4
b
0
X
o
«
40
04
•b
a
o
«»j
e
0
b
0
^
r4
0
O
4J
B
0
B
0
0
0
0
O
0
43
a
a
o
a
e
b..
0
^4
0
X
0
B
0
•H 0
0 4*
0 0
4>
0 ft
»4 ^4
4> 0
0
4* «H
o> o
^
0 0
4* -H
B 43
0 jj-
a c
B 9
O 43 *»
b B
** -0 «'
> B a
B 0 0
0 0
to »
0 B 0
b -4 »v
0 4» 0
«^m
fW^
x s
to 0
O «4
P^ 4«
O 0
•H 4»
0 a
o
0 -H
e a
b -0
0 B
X 0
^
X
0>
^J
0
^4
b
0-
*
X
0
0
fl
o
48
*"
•H
tO 0
B 0
•H O
ft a.
0 0
o «
a
ft O
0
0 0
•H 4*
b 0
0 *-
a
9 V.
X O
ft
0
^
B
4>*
a t
s *
O b
b
*4 TJ
> B
B 0
0
M
0 B
b *4
0 *>
X 9
0
B B
0*0
H'O
to
B
^4
b
0
0
B
•H
to
B
oa
B
0
0
O
O
to
e
9
0
0
0
a
o
43
**
.
•H
Ob.
X
43
a.
0
b
BO
o
B
0
0
O
o
0)
0
„
B
b
0
4»
03
X
b
0
^
0
""
•+
0
•H
B
0
f*
0
*-,
O
B
O
^4
4>
0
4) 0
0 4>
b 0
O.T3
^
B
0'
to
S
-H
At
i-4
3
O
B
O
0 43
O
0 a
JJ-D
B 0
» V
a- b.
J
-------
-6-4-
H
l-i
M
.J
M
a
M
n
m
O-
cu
CQ
BO
05
ta
u
z
H
^H
K
H
O.
H
M
•
H
OJ
M
fr<
B
ta
e>
£CJ
H
M
X
**?
9B
B *»
0 T> C
B 0 <-«
4» 0 B tO 0
O0 B 0
0 b 0 -HO
*"» 0 0 «H B>
o to n 00
b 0 I) 9 -H
A< B < O 9
0 B
b X PH %4
O 0 MO
4* 4J O 0 M
0 B *4 O 0 0
0 0 W to
O B b BB
b -H -H JB * -H
^4 4* ^ C) *>
> ,-« B b 0 M
B 3 0 0 b 3
000 00
B 0 0 OB
0 O b 0 X O
b O 0 b «0 O JZ
0 0 B S 0
0 *4>Xi-H i-t 0-1-4 b
x>0 0 .B. .0-00
•^ 0 ** O •** 4J> 0
MB>B0 VtBO
^H0-H0« -HV0
« a *. a-**' jDh-a^b
to
B
X b
00 0
O 0
M B
O i-l
o to
H B
M
0
B B
•H 0
b 0
0 0
X 0
0
o
•
JB •
At O
•
* JB
M A.
b
a
H 3
•jBf
0
0S JW
B
•O 0
0 b
H Du
t
X 0 i-l 1
B 4» 00 b 0
Ob O O 00
B 0 . «* a to M
o > *» ax 0 i IH
K B n 0_i BOO
0 M -H .80 0BO
*» B OB X 0
O 0 00
%4 • B %• 41 O 4»
O X O OX O O 0
b H b 0 tJ
b O 0 b O "-»M
O *» *> O4» O00
4* 0 4* 0 b O «4
Ob® Ob A»*4JB
0O4* 0O 0Q.fi
bA0 t, JS O X A O
•H 0 b -H 0 CO £ b -H
O*HA Or4 X Q. BO-tJ
1 Tt
S S t t
000 B
b *» -O 0 ^H
^ .to b B JB o 0
>B00 O -H O TJ X
B-H> OB -( C 60
0 *» C X -^ 0 00O
^ -H a A 00 X rH
0 3 O b J3 X O
b 0 B B HO O.JB 0
0 C -H O CO b 0.0
0O MB 0-OX «0l
XOJS0-H 0Sb bbB
O4*4* x 0 ** 0 eo o
X
4J 0,0 O-3 44 JH-^t X C -X
E+»04J>0 jBbB 0B
0 e 0 0 e to *» 0 B 0 0
»00-bO ~40.c:. « o r-<
ioBb^-O M -H 0 {lOO.
« -o x
4* B JS
00 O.
b X 0
JB X b b
0 B X 4* tO
4> O tO 0 O
b B O •H B
0 0 »H B 0
> K O 0 0
B 0 0 JS 0
M H H O O
0
*»
e •
0*> OK
Wj B B -H M
A B 0 M M
X 0 -H tO 0
b X> -H C
•H 0 »- B
- > U B O
b B O U
OH* 09
** 0 m •
090 • »
0009 BE
4«H00O BO -HO
ao«HE« JB • * m
OBOOJ3 OJ3 0 •
u|^nj o a. *9 a. ox
-------
- 6-5 -
^4
t*
J
H
«
1 09
O
00
H
0-
M
O
x
u
H
M
04
X
M.
u
M
H
a:
H
flk
W
u
M
tajf|
m
0
0 *>
o c. 0
•H 0 tJ
4» a to
O -H 0 0 43
0 a 0 *> «
.H X X 00 «H
O O 0 43
9 4> 0 4» 0 «-4
00 O *» OB
0 (. 0 t. O
4> O »4 "-» 0 X t. -H
0^>0 o > a o 4*
•o ce o c. B o *» o
^ -H a, -H c 00
js m o 0 **
a '**j ^- ^ O - 0 0O
ij«-a s- -• -H o, ** -H
%«30 0 O O ««O
Ik. a a. H0ft >• «
M
o
X «4
no o
X 0 -H
•H ft O
00 *4 0
o t. m 0
wf ttt vl
no o 0 b
OB B 0
** a H 43
O0 (. 0
•HO « <*
no x A.
•
•k X *
X 4*
ja - «.
» 0 0
0 ft. «
•000
3ft v4
* *
CB M
"0 4* 0
0 C. . L, •
J3 • 0 o a
0 « 43 .
-H • 0 • 40
XX «s • *ea.
i
•o
0
0
0 i« a i -H
to o 4* 0 o 0
(. *» 0 0 *4 U *>
0 0 0 x m 0 o
43 B C. a ~H 00
O -HO00 V. 0 -^
•o «- no B o no o
0 C 0 0 (<
•H o 0 0 B -o a.
O F-I 0 ^ OB
^ OAB0 ^t « -
0 *4 O *» 0
•H OBOtO C.0O0
0 0O0O 0 0 -H CO
B »7O.^-»F^ 0.^(410
»H O a O O 0QOOB
(. U 0 t. 0 t.O00
a. a,bo.o cw^ox
IX
•H-t.
C. *» 1 1
0 0 B B
O> H O9 O TJ
Ma ». B t. B
0 0 «H 0 «rt 0
J= > >
«4 0 00 B 43
O 0 -H 00
i. a u
00 0 X «0
t, 4» t. -H C. 0
00 00- tO 00tO
0s 0 c-c 0- 0 a
• 'x x -a.** x t. -H
: 0 *» *>
Hh. «rf C *W «rf • *fc_ M01 jvd
^^ ^^ *• ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^~»
4* 0: «*- 3* «> <0-3
0* 0r b» 4^ a- 0 4^ 0r
00 0BB 0BB
H0 MHO 1-1 a o
-
r>4
0 i
^J
**
B
0
a
• X 0 X
o no o to
•HO t, O
0 ** -H ^
x o » o
43 O C -H
o. ea u BQ
a •
0 a. js
0 «
L. -0 •
00 09 B , .
OH. 0
i. o x •*
0 «J »H
0 « 3
0 f-l «H X
H • 43
4*| 0 no •
• p4 ttt ^at
J3 V ••fl
«| O O A
'•H *4 *O
K. X X ' -H
4* «. •>
O « • 0 0
u(x| o o ct
-------
^4
1*
M
^J
M
oa
M
09
OB
o
a*
m
m
as
&o
0
X
H
OS
DO
CU
^4
H
M
09
M
H
OS
H
O«
M
M
M
X
B
1 0
•H O
0 -O >H
x a *»
J3 0 0
flu •
4* 0
«« 0
O « 0
a IH
0 0 A
o o a.
•H t. CD
*» -H I.
« > to
C. 0 O
0 M 0
a 0
(.00
a* o o
-
0
^
B *»
0 C
O 0
0 B
0 60
C 0
0 0
m 0
x a
3 0
O O
ht M
X
to
o
P4
0
•H
eq
O
0 *4
t. B
0 O
a B
• 0
S. 0
a. «
o
B I
O 0
0 0
O 0
0
• -o
ft
0 0
K.
0 e
» -H 60
X « B
3 4 -1
O B 3
b> 0. «
B
X
0
B
^
0
vl
B
O
0
0
a
M
09
9
5
•o
R
(.
43
0t
0
•9
(^
•ri
•« B
0
V. 0
O -H
4*
e o
O 0
•H B
^
0 X
t. *>
0 -H
« *«
b 3
». O
O
j %
•**
0
9
c. a
^ a
0 0
C
O 0
0
0
« X
0 -U
0 0
03-
^ er
0
*> 60
0 0
« -H
B «.
0 O
O «
t. 0
*4 vH
> to
0 B
H M
.
*
oa
0
•
4£
0
*» •
09
0
0
**
-------
- 7-1 -
CHAPTER 7. LITERATURE CITED
Ahlstrom, fi.H. 1959. Vertical distribution of pelagic fish
eggs and larvae off California and Baja California. U.S.
Fish Bull. 60:106-146.
. 1965. Kinds and abundance of fishes in the
California Current region based on egg and larval surveys.
California Coop. Oceanic Fish. Invest. Rep. 10:31-52.
. 1969. Mesopelaglc and bath/pelagic fishes in
the California Current region. CalCOFI Report, 13:39-44.
Allan Hancock Foundation. 1959. Oceajiographic survey of the
continental shelf area of southern California. Publication
No. 20. State Hater Pollution Control Board, Sacramento, CA.
.. 1965. An- oceanographie- and- biological survey
of the southern California mainland shelf. Publication No.
27. Resources Agency, State Water Quality Control Board,
Sacramento, CA. 232 pp.
Allen, M.J. and A.J. Mearns. 1977. Bottom fish populations
below 200 meters. Southern California Coastal Water
Research Project, annual report,. 1977- W. Bascom {ed.}. El
Segundoy CA. 109-115.
Al.varino,, A-.. 1 96"4,. Bathymetr.ic. distribution of ehaetognath-3.-
Pac. Sci. 18:64-82-
Balech, E. 1960. 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
Pollolum dentlculatum Quoy and Cairard 1835. Limnol.
Oceanogr. 6(2):205-215.
Brown, D.A., R.W. Gossett, G.P. Hersbelman, C.F. Ward, and J.H.
Cross.- 1984.. Metal and organic contaminants in sediments
and animals. Southern California Coastal Water Research
Project, biennial report, 1983-1984. W. 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, Rockville,
MD.
Bruland, K.W., and R.P. Franks. 1977. Trace metals in the
water column. Southern California baseline study final
report. Bureau of Land Management.
-------
- 7-2 -
Bureau of Land Management, D.S. Department of the Interior.
1978. POCS Reference Paper No. II. In Volume I.
Description of the coastal environment from Point Reyes to
Punta Eugenia. POCS Office, Los Angeles.
. 1981 a. Results of the 1975-78 BLM baseline
studies and analysis program: Subtidal bentbic environments
of the Southern California Bight. POCS Technical Paper No.
81-8". BLM-IH-P/T-81-OC9-1792.
. 198lb. Final environmental Impact statement.
Proposed 1982 outer continental shelf oil and gas lease sale
offshore southern California. DCS Sale No. 68. BLM-TN-ES-
81-002-1792.
California Air Resources Board. 1981. California Air Quality
Data. Summary of 1981 Air Quality Data, Gaseous and
Particulate- Pollutants. Published by GARB, Sacramento,. CA.
California Department of Fish and Game (Bureau of Commercial
Fisheries.) 1935- Commercial Fish Catch for California,
1930-1934. Fish Bulletin 44.
California Department of Fish and Game.
status of least tern nesting sites.
1983. Summary data on
California Department' of " Fish- and Game. 1984. Unpublished
data. (Contacts: Paul Gregory and Mac Ollphant.)
California- Department of Parks and Recreation. 1984.
Unpublished data. (Contact: Jack Bechtel.)
California State Water Quality Control Board. 1965. An
oceanographlc and biological survey of the southern
Calif ornia. mainland shelf. Vol. I and Vol. II (Appendix).
Publication No. 27.
California State Water Resources Control Board. 1976. Areas of
Special Biological Significance. Resolution No. 74-28.
1980. Vol. 3.
Organic "pollutants in mussels
California State Mussel Watch.
along the California coast.
California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento,
CA.
Chan, K.M. Chemical oceanography. 1974. Chapter 4. In Vol. I.
Physical environment. M.D. Dalley, B. Hill, and N. Lansing
(eds.). A summary of knowledge of the southern California
coastal cone and offshore areas. Southern California Ocean
Studies Consortium, Long Beach, CA.
Corps of Engineers. 1983* San Diego Harbor,
Second Entrance, Final Report.
California.
-------
. 7-3 -
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 & 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. In A summary
of knowledge of the southern California coastal zone and
offshore areas. M.D. Dailey, B. Hill, and N. Lansing
(eds.). Southern California Ocean Studies Consortium, Long
Beach, CA.
Drake, D.E., D.A. Cacchione, and H.A. Karl. 1985. Botton
currents- and sediment transport on San Pedro- Shelf,
California. Journal of" Sediaentology Petrology.
55(D:15-28.
Ebeling, A.W., R.M. Ibara, F.J. Lavenberg, and ?.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., New York.
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 cuds
and cuttings.
Epply, H.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. 1973a. Benthic macrofauna.
Chapter 2.4. In Year 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 Year II benthic study. Prepared by Science
Applications, Inc. for Bureau of Land Management, .POCS"
Office, Los Angeles. Contract No. AA551-CT6-40.
-------
- 7-4 -
1978c. Variation in community structure of
shelf, slope and basin macrofaunal communities of the
Southern California Bight. Chapter 1 9« Is. Tear II benthic
study. Prepared by Science Applications, Inc. for Bureau of
Land Management, POCS Office, Los Angeles. Contract No.
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 investigations' reports, Series 2. Prepared by
Science Application, Inc. for Bureau of Land Management,
Pacific OCS Office. NTIS PB80-166101.
Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. 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 depositlonal environments of the Pacific Coast.
M.S. Field. I.P. Colburn, and A.H. Bourna (eds.).
Fitch, J.2. and R.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.
Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior,
Slidell, Louisiana.
Gorsline, D.S. and D.J. Grant. 1972. Sediment teztural
patterns on San Pedro Shelf, California. In Shelf sediment
transport processes and patterns. D. Surft (ed.) Dowden,
Hutchinson and Ross, Stroudsburg, PA. 575-600.
Gorsline, D.S. , R.L. Kolpack, H.A. Earl, D.E. Drake, P.
Fleischer, S.E. Thornton, J.R. Schwalbach and C.E. Savrda,
1984. Studies of fine-grained sediment transport processes
and products In the California Continental Borderland. In
Fine-grained sediments: deep water processes and fades.
D.A.V. Stow and D.J.W. Piper (eds.) Blackwell Scientific
Publications, Palo Alto, CA.
Hartman, 0. 1955. Quantitative survey of the benthos of San
Pedro Basin, Southern California: Part 1, preliminary
results. Allan Hancock 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.
-------
. 7-5 -
Hartman, 0. and J.L. Barnard. 1958. The bentbic fauna of the
deep basics off southern California. Allan Hancock Pacific
Expeditions. 22:1-67.
Heesen, T.C., and D.J. McDermott. '1975. Inputs of DDT, PCS,
and trace metals from harbors. Southern California Coastal
Water Research Project, annual report, 1975. W. Bascom
(ed.}t El Segundo, CA.
1977. Precision of chlorinated hydrocarbon
measurements. Southern California Coastal Water Research
Project, annual report, 1977. W. Bascon (ed.), El Segundo,
CA.
Hendricks, T.J. and J.M. Harding. 1974. The dispersion and
possible uptake of ammonia in a wastefield, Point Loraa, Hay
1972. Southern California Coastal Water Research Project,
TM2.10.-
Hershelman, G.P.,. P. Szalay, and C. Ward. 1982. Metals in
surface sediments from Point Dume to Point Hueneme.
Southern California Coastal Water Research Project, biennial
report, 1981-1982. W. Bascon (ed.), Long Beach, CA.
Hickey, B.M.. 1979. The California current system: hypothesis
and. facts,.- Progress- in. Oce:..:03raphy 8: 181-279.
I-lirsh, N.D.., L.H. 'DiSalvo, and R. Peddicord. 1978. Effects of
dredging:, and disposa'l. on^ aquatic- organisms- U.S. Aray Corps
of. Engineers,. Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS."
Holton, R.L., R.D. Leatham,-. and G. F. Crandell. 1977.
Zooplankton. In- Winzler 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. Dailey, 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, C.F. and K. Fauchald. 1977. Benthic macrofauna. In
Vol. III. Southern California baseline study.
Jones, G.F. 1969. The benthic 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.
-------
- 7-6 -
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
Kimura,-John C. 1974. Climate. Chapter 2. In Vol. II.
Physical environment. M. D. Dailey, 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.
Kramer, D., and F.E. Smith. 1972. Seasonal and geographic
characteristics of fishery resources. California Current
region-VIOII. Zooplankton Commercial Fisheries Review.
Reprint No. 934.
Lockheed Ocean Science Laboratories. 1982. Bloassay
investigation of sediments from the site of the proposed
Atkinson marine pier and floating drydock. Prepared for
Ferver Engineering Company. San Diego, CA.
Maloney, J.J. and K. Chan. 1974. Physical oceanography.
Chapter 3. In Vol. II. Biological environment. H.D.
Dailey, 3.. 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.,
Malouta, D.N., D.S. Gorsline, 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.
Mauer, D.L., R.T. Keck, T.C. Tinsman, V.A. Leathern, C.A. Yethe,
M. Buntzinger, C. Lord, and T.M. Church. 1978. Vertical
migration of benthos in simulated dredged material
overburdens. In. Vol. 1. Marine benthos, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Vicksburg, MS.
McDermott, D.. and T.C. Heesen. 1975. Inputs of DDT, PCS, and
trace metals from- harbors. Southern California Coastal
Water Research Project, annual report, 1975. V. Bascorn
(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 R.N. Lea. 1972. Guide to the coastal marine
fishes of California. California Department of Pish and
Game, Sacramento, CA.
-------
- 7-7 -
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, Los
Angeles.
Moore, H., V. Bascom, 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 bottoafish
populations off Palos Verdes 1970-80. Southern California
Coastal Hater Research Project, annual report, 1980. W.
Bascom (ed.) Long. Beach, CA. 21-33.
National Marine Fisheries Service. U.S. Department of Conmerce.
1985. Results of the 1980 survey of gray whales. National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Adoinistration, Long Beach, CA.
. 1986. Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972
Annual Report 1985/86.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric: Administration-, Office of.
Coastal Zone Management. 1980. Final.Environmental Impact
Statement, on, .the'. Proposed Channel Islands Marine-Sane tuary .
Washington,, D.C.
Rational Ocean Data Center, U.S. Department of Commerce. 1974.
Temperature, salinity,.oxygen and phosphate in waters off
United States. V. Ill, Eastern North Pacific. Washington,
D.C.
Owen, Jr., R.H. 1974. Distribution of primary production,
plant pigments, and Secchi depth in the California Current
region, 1969. CalCOFI Atlas No. 20.
Payne, J.8., J.R. Clayton, Jr., B.W. de Lappe, P.L. Milikin,
J.S. Parkin, R.K. Okazaki, E.F. Letterman and R.W.
Risebrough. 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, Vioksburg, MS.
-------
- 7-8 -
Radovich, J. 1961. Relationships of some marine organisms of
the north-west Pacific to water temperatures particularly
during 1975 through 1959. California Fish Game Fish Bull.
112.
Reid, Jr., J.L. 1962. Distribution of dissolved oxygen in the
summer tbermocllne. J. Geophy. Res. 68:4819-22.
Reaig, J.M. 1961. Microplankton over the mainland shelf of
southern California. In. Vol. II. Microplankton and benthlc
•marine flora. R. E. Stevenson
-------
- 7-9 -
Salazar, M.H. and S.C. U'Ren. 1981. Ecological evaluation of
dredged sediments for NA7STA San Diego drydock facility.
Naval Ocean Systems Center Technical Report. Prepared for
•aval Facilities Engineering Command. December.
San Diego Air Pollution Control District. 1959* Unpublished
Annual Report.
San Diego Unified Port District. 1980. Annual Report for
1979-1980.
San Diego Unified Port District. 1981. Annual Report for
1980-1981.
San Diego Unified Port District. 1982. Annual Report for
1981-1982.
San'Di.ego. Unified-Port District. 1983. Annual Report for
V982-1983.
Sehwalbach, J.R., and D.S.. Gorsllne. 1985. Bolocene sediment
budgets for the. basins of the California Continental
Borderlands. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology.
55(6):829-842.
5eapy>, R.H. 1974. Zooplankton.- Chapter 8. In. Biological
environment. M. D; Daily,. B. Hill and N. Lansing (eds.) A
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. loung, B.B. McCain, R.A.
Hurchelano. 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, YA. ~~
Sowls, A.L.,. A.R. DeGange, J.W. Nelson and G.S. Lester. 1980.
Catalog of California seablrd colonies. U.S. Department of
Interior, Fish 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. Jn. D. F. Soule and M.
Oguri (eds.) Part 2. Biological investigations. Allan
Hancock -Foundation Publications USC-SG-6-72.
Sullivan, B. and D. Hancock. 1977* Zooplankton and dredging
research perspectives from a critical review. Water
Resources Bulletin 13:461-7.
-------
- 7-10 -
Swartz, R. C., F. A. Gale, D. V. Sbults, and V. A. DeBen. 1986.
Ecological Changes In the Southern California Bight near a
large sewage outfall: benthic conditions in 1980 and 1983*
Marine Ecology Progress Series. 31:1-13*
Thompson, B. 1982.* Variation in benthic assemblages. Southern
California Coastal Vater Research Project, annual report
1981-1982. V. Bascom (ed.) Long Beach, CA.
Vestec Services, Inc. 1984. Bloassay Investigations of
sediments from the South Bay Boat lard, south San Diego Bay.
Prepared for South Bay Boat lards, Inc.
Wilson, K.C., A.J. Mearns, and J.J. Grant. 1980. Changes in
kelp forests at Palos Verdes. Southern California Coastal
Water Research Project, biennial report for the years
1979-1980. W. Bascom (ed.) Long. Beach, CA. 77-91*
Winant, Clinton D., and Alan W. Bratkovlch. 1981. Temperature
and currents on the southern California shelf: a
description of the variability. Journal of Physical
Oceanography 11(1):71-86.
Winzler 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 Sequndo, 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.
Word, J.Q., B.L. Meyers and A.J. Mearns. 1977. Animals that
are indicators of marine pollution. Southern California
Coastal Water Research Project, annual report, 1977. W.
Bascom (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.B., 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. 191-195.
-------
DRAFT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
FINAL DESIGNATION OF A
DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE
OFF OF SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA
San Diego 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.U Data Analysis A-17
A.3 RESULTS AND,. DISCUSSION. A-19
A.3.1 Physical Oceanography... A-19
A.3.2 Chemistry A-25
A.3.3 Benthic Fauna A-U«
A.3.2* Denersal Fish and Epibenthie Macroinvertebrates A-73
A.»- REFEHENCES
ill
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Number • Page
A-1 Sampling Stations 'at Disposal and Reference Sites A-2
A-2 temperature Profiles at LA 5 Disposal Site,
Station 1 A-21
A-3 Dissolved Oxygen Profiles at LA 5 Disposal Site,
Station 1 A-2*
;
A-M Salinity Profiles at LA 5 Disposal and Beferenee
Sites A-26
A-5 Mean and 951 Confidence Intervals for frace Metals
Sediment Concentrations (Dry Wt..) at LA 5 Site A-30
A-6 Mean and 95%' Confidence Intervals for Tissue Trace
Metal Concentrations (Dry Wt.) Sicyonia ingentia,
Survey 1 LA 5 A-3*
A-7 Mean and 95* Confidence Intervals for Tissue Trace
Metal Concentrations (Dry Wt.) Cithariefathy_3 aordidus,
Survey 2. LA. 5 ' ' A-35
i-3 Mean and' 95J-Confidence- Intervals-for- Tissue-Trace-
Metal Concentrations (Dry Wt.)- Lypesetta_ exilis_,
Survey" 3 LA.5V..... A-36
A-9 Mean and 951- Confidence- latervaig- far-Oil and Grease
Sediaent Concentration (Dry Wt.) at LA 5 Disposal and
Reference Sites • A- 38
A-10 Mean Values and 95S Confidence Intervals for Infaunal
Community Indices, Survey 1 A-45
A-11 Mean Values and 95% Confidence Intervals at Each
Sampling Station for Infaunal Community Indices,
Survey 2 '. A-46
A-12 Mean Values and 35% Confidence Intervals at Each
Sampling Station for Infaunal Community Indices,
Survey 3 A-47
A-13 Mean Values at Each Sampling Station for Infaunal
.Community Indices, Survey 4 A-48
A-14 Numerical Classification Results, Dendrograms
Depict the Similarity in Infaunal Community
Structure Among Eight Stations A-55
A-15 Inverse Classification Results A-68
A-16 Nodal Constancy Diagram, Survey 1 A-69
iv
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Number Page
A-1 Sampling and Collection Dates A-3
A-2 Isobaths (In meters) of Otter Trawl Sampling
Stations at the LA 5 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 (H) 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 LA 5 A-20
A-7 Dissolved Oxygen Profiling Data-at LA 5 A-23
A-3 pH Profiles at LA 5 A-27
A-9 Transmissivity Profile at LA 5 A-28
A-10 Comparison-of the Range-and Median of'Selected
Pesticide and PC3 Concentrations-in Sediments........ . A-39-
A—n Comparison-of * the-Range-of."Selected Pesticide-and
PCS Concentrations in Tissues .'..... ..- A--r
A-12 Metals Concentrations at Control Sites in the
Southern California Bight ..... A-U3
A-13 Results of ANOVA Tests for Differences in the Mean
Value of Biological-Community Variables A-50
A-14 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-51
A-15 Comparison of the Mean Number of Taxa per Replicate
Sample at the Reference- and Disposal-Site-
Sampling Locations A-53
A-16 Comparison of the Mean Number of Individual
Organisms per Replicate Sample at the Reference-
and Disposal-Site Sampling Stations A-5M
A-1? Mean Values of Number of Taxa, Number of Indivudals
and Shannon-Weiner Diversity for Individual Replicate „
Samples (0.1 M2) A-57
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS, Continued
Number . Page
A- 18 Summary of Sediment Grain-Size Analysis. Survey 1 ....... A-58
A- 19 Summary of Sediment Grain-Size Analysis. Survey 2 ....... A-59
A-20 Summary of Sediment Grain-Size Analysis. Surrey 3 ....... A-6.0
A-21 Summary of Sediment Grain-Size Analysis. Survey 4....... A-61
A-22 Grain Size Analysis - Sediment Weight Distribution
by Phi Interval . Survey 1 ............................... A-62
A-23 Grain Size Analysis - Sediment Weight Distribution
by Phi .Interval. Survey 2 ..... .... .............. . ....... A-63
A-24 Grain Size Analysis - Sediaent Weight Distribution
by ?hl Interval. Survey 3 . . ......... ........... . . . . ..... A-6<*
A-25 Grain Size Analysis - Sediment Weight Distribution
by Phi Interval. Survey 4
4-25 Most Abundant Senthic Infaunal Taxa. Survey 1. .......... A-67"
A-27 Abundance of Taxa from Specias Groups 2, 3 and ^ at
Stations within- Site Groups A, 3 and C. .... ..... .... ...... . A-71
Pearson Product -Moment- Correlation- Coeff icisnta
between Selected Infaunal Community Indices and
Physical-Chemical Variables ......... .. . . . ................. .4-72
A-29 Summary of ?lsh Caught in Otter Trawls at LA 5
Disposal and Reference Sites ............. * ............... A- 75
A-30 Summary of Hacroinvertebrates In Otter Trawls
from LA 5 Disposal and Reference Sites ................... A-62
vi
-------
APPENDIX A - REPORT OF FIELD SURVEY
A.1 INTRODUCTION
A.1.1 A field survey was conducted to collect site-specific biological,
sedimentological, physical and chemical data for the LA 5 (San Diego) interim
dredged material disposal site, and at a nearby reference site, between August
1983 and May 1984. 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 MBC Applied Environmental Sciences. Data analysis and
interpretation were performed by Tetra Tech, Inc.
A.1.2 The biological aspects of'the survey focused on benthic 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 the grain size of bottom sediaents and suspended particle loads in
the water column. In addition, vertical profiles of water temperature,
salinity, dissolved oxygen, hydrogen ion concentration (pH), and
transmissivi-ty-were gathered. Chemical analyses included trace metals,.
chlorinated-hdyrocarbons, and-petroleum.hydrocarbons in the water column,
sediments, and fish and invertebrate-tissues..
A.2.- METHODS;-
A.2.1 FIELD METHODS
The LA 5 interim dumpsite (Figure A-1) is located approximately six miles
offshore Point Loma, San Diego. Field surveys were conducted during August
and December 1983, February/March and April/May 198*1. Dates of sampling for
each task are 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 48 ft. vessel equipped with a Raynav 6000 LORAN C navigation
system which electronically interfaces with the autopilot and an EPSCO
navigational plotter. Sampling gear was deployed and retrieved with a stern-
mounted "A" frame.
A.2..1.1 Benthic Infauna
A.2.1.1.1 Infaunal samples were taken at five (5) stations at the disposal
site at three (3) stations at the reference site (Fig. A-1). At the disposal
site, three stations were located across the bathymetric gradient (one at the
center of the site, one 1,000 yds (911 meters) inshore, and one 1,000 yds (91^
m) offshore from the center) to characterize changes in the benthic fauna over
the depth range encompassed in the site boundaries (1,000 yd (914 m) radius
from center). Two additional stations were located at the upcoast and
downcoast boundaries of the site, a the same depth as the center station, to
characterize spatial variation within the site at a constant depth. The three
A-1
-------
KiY:
* 8INTHIC STATION
A BKNTMIC * PHYSICAL QCSANGGflAPHIC STATION
• 86NTHIC. PHYSICAL ft CHEMICAL OCSANOGBAPMIC STATION
— OTTW TBAWL TRACK
< V V
(A)
C3)
flEFERENCE SITE (B) '
FIGURE A-1 SAMPLING STATIONS AT DISPOSAL AND REFERENCE SITES
A-2
-------
TABLE A-1. SAMPLING AND COLLECTION DATES1
Benthic Infauna
Sediment, and
Sediment Chemistry
Fish and Macro-
invertebrates and
Tissue Chemistry
Physical Oceanographic
and Water Column
Chemi stry
LAS 22-27 August 1983
August Survey
24-25 August 1983
23 August 1983
December Survey
LAB 12-14 December 1983 8 December 1983
13 December 1983
LAS 27 February,
1-2. March 1984
February/March Survey
28-29' February 1984
1 March 1984
LAS 2-3 May 1984
April/May Survey
30 April 1984-
4' May- 1984
1£very means possible" (see A.2.1} was used to locate the sampling stations,
however, it is highly improbable to relocate exactly bottom grabs and trawl
stations due to extreme depth of the site and relocation techniques.
Therefore it is highly likely that performance of trawls prior to grab
samples had no effect on -grab sample data.
A-3
-------
stations at the reference site, were located across the 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 Tan Veen grab. The gear
used was chain-rigged, as recommended by Word (1976), and sampled a 0.1 m2
surface area. In order 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 HOB, and 0.5 mm) on a high volume, low
pressure wash box developed by Dr. A.G. Carey of Oregon State University.
Retained sediments and organisms were rinsed into shallow plastic pans and
anesthetized in 5 percent magnesium chloride solution for 1/2 to 3/tt hour,
then bagged, labeled,. *nd fixed in 10 percent aeawater formalin solution..
A.2.1.2 Demersal "iahes and Macrqtnvertabrateg/Tlssue Collections
A. 2. 1.2.1 Demersal fishes and epibenthie aacroinvertebrates were sampled at
the same intervals as infauna. Sampling dates and the location of sampling
stations are presented in Table A- 1 and Figure A-1.
A. 2. 1.2. 2 ?lve (5) stations were- established., at both the disposal aite, with
three (3) stations- at" each of the corresponding reference site. Gttar trawl
.stations were located along iaobaths rhac corresponded to the ieoths ?? .•
iafaunai sampling- stations'-- (Table*- A-2K
A. 2'. 1.2.3 Sampling waa conducted using a 7.6 a semi -balloon otter -rawi net.
All tows were made in the daytime between 0800-1300 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 aanner.
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 remained
relatively unchanged 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 would have been collected in
10 minute tows. (The lack of tissue data reported from some surveys results
from discovering faulty 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 LOR AN
C coordinates for these points.
A. 2. 1.2.3.1 The 7.6 m semi-balloon otter trawl is a standard sized net used
in southern California 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 indicate that similar
segments of the demersal fish and epibenthic populations would be collected.
A-4
-------
TABLE A-Z. ISOBATHS (IN METERS) OF OTTER TRAWL SAMPLING
STATIONS AT THE LAS DISPOSAL AND REFERENCE SITES
Site "Station
Disposal 1
2
3
4
5
Reference- 1
2
4
Isobath (m)
168
135
168
186
168
168
135
186
TABLE-A-3.. SUMMARY OF THE-. NUMBER-OF. OTTER TRAWL-COLLECTIONS OBTAINED
AT EACH-STATION FOR' EACH SITE
Season
Site
Station
wi
Su3 F4- Total"'
Disposal 1
2
3
4
5
Reference 1
2
4
Total
2
2
2
2
2
TOT
2
2
2
T
16
2
2
2
2
2
TU"
2
2
2
r
A. »
16
2
2
2
2
2
TO"
2
2
2
7
16
2-
2
2
2
2
UT
2
2
2
F
16
8
8
8.
8
8
W
8
8
8
W
64
1 * Winter, 2* Spring, 3 « Summer, 4 « Fall
A-5
-------
A,2.1.2.U 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.
4.2.1.2.5 All" other trawl stations were processed in the field. All
collected fishes ad naeroinvertebrates 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. Kacrolnvertebrates were identified using current
taxonomic information. Fish or invertebrates whose field Identification was
uncertain were returned to the laboratory for further examination. Toucher
specimens for all fish and macroinvertebrate species were retained, and
preserved for delivery to the Corps of Engineers.
A.2.1,2.5* Target fish and aacroinvertefarate species far tissue, contaminant
analysis ware:- selected on She basis of having aufficiant tissue from the
desired .species and the close association of those species vlth the lumpsits
and reference areas.. During the August 1983 survey, a sanddab (Cltharlahythya
aordldus), the slender sole (Lyoosetta exilis), and a shriap (Sicyonla
ingentis) satisfied these requirements. Pacific sanddab (Citharichthys
aordiduaO and. the-rtdgeback prawn (Sicyonia ingentls) were selected at this
time by the COE and the contractors with, verbal, approval of" i?A" - 3e?ion IX.
During subsequent"surveys,. Cjtharlehthys sordidua- -«s not captured in
sufficient-quantities- Tor analysis-, and the-slander sola-(Lyooaecra axilla)
was-substituted for ilasue analysis, • The slender 'sole- was- seiactea because it
shares-a^conmon-habitat-..with- then Pacific, sanddab.. and. because- it vas. one-3f
tha=-aw* flan.,oaugnt, in..sufficient quantities to perform ;i3sue- anai'/ses-.
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 tubiculous
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. Flatfish (i.e., slender sole and Pacific
sanddab) and shrimp were removed from the otter trawl collections and
composited by species. Approximately 50 grama of tissue from each species
were obtained when sufficient tissue was available. The composite technique
was required, as neither individual flatfish nor 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-6
-------
A.2.1.3 Sedlmentological and Chemical Collections
Four replicate sediment samples were collected at each of the infaunal
stations (Fig. A-1). Each replicate was collected Independently using a 0.1
tn modified Van Veen sampler. Geological and sediment chemistry samples were
taken within the same 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 em 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 procedures 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-.2.1.4 Physical and Chemical Oceanographle Sampling
A.2.I.U.I The oceanographic sampling plan was divided into physical
oceanographic and chemical oceanographic components. Physical oceanographic
sampling included water column profiles of temperature (°C), salinity (°/oo),
hydrogen ion concentration (pH), dissolved oxygen (mg/1), and water
transmissivity (J). 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 two sampling sites.
Profiles 'were* recorded at. the center station at the duapsite as- well as the. "
innermost: (closest1 to shore-) station— 111, parameters.- werer-recorded? oa:-
descending and ascending-phases cf the profile. & Martek-Mark- 71 Water-
Quality Profiler, coupled with a Martek Mark VIU IMS 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.
4.2.1.4.2 Chemical oceanographic collections included suspended solids
(mg/1), heavy metals (ppm), total chlorinated hydrocarbons (ppm),
polychlorinated biphenyls (ppm), pecticides (ppm), and petroleum hydrocarbons
(oil and grease; ppm). Three replicate samples were collected from a depth of
5 a below the surface and 5 m above the bottom at the center of the 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
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 pecent 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
A-7
-------
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.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.
3). Specimens of all specific level taxa were removed from the samples,
labeled, and placed in- a Toucher auseum to be aaiatained at the COE Los
Angeles District- office.
A.2.2.1.3 Data on "he bench sheets was reviewed by the supervising aystematist
for completeness and accuracy. A backup file copy of each corrected sheet was
made and the original forwarded for data analysis.
A.2.2.1.1* Fishes and Maeroinvertebratea. ?!shes and.aacroinvertebrate
speciaens which wer« not field identifiable were returned So the laboratory
for positive identification, oamplas-. of species which- aould not be- identified
•Jith certainty- '37 MBC staff were submitted to outside- specialists far
identification: or--confiraation. Field data, were- reviewed, by super-rising fish
afed invertebrate systaaatista for' completeness .and. accuracy, copied,, and- :he-
original forwarded :'or- data analysis.
A.2.2.1.5 Sedlnentology. '• Sand grain size distributions of each sediment
sample were- determined using a- settling tube similar to that described by
Gibbs (19W. 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 aa would be expected from Gibbs' (1974) technique. The silt-olay
distribution was determined by hydrometer method based air 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 a 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 (Krurabein and PettiJohn 1938, Sharp and Fan
1973).
A-3
-------
A.2.2.1.7 Sedimentological 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.2.2.2 Sediment Chemistry
A.2.2.2.1 Inorganic Chemistry. Sediment samples were analyzed for arsenic,
cadmium, chromium, copper, mercury, lead, and zinc. Metals other than arsenic
and mercury were digested using the HNOj digestion procedure described by
Plumb (1981). Samples were filtered to remove mineral residue 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 HgSOu and HNO-s followed by the- addition of
potassium permanganate and potassium persulfate. Analyses were performed on a
Varian 875 atomic absorption spectrophotometer fitted with a mercury vapor
generator.
A.2.2.2.3 Arsenic samples were also prepared according to the procedure of
Plumb (198D.- Weighed'sediment, samples were fused with potassium pyrcsulfate
at- 320°C for- 15 minutes-. The cooled sample was dissolved in deionized
distilled water and concentrated HC1. Analysis was performed or. a Varian 8?"
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 (PCSs), and pesticides (including chlorinated hydrocarbons).
Petroleum hydrocarbons were analyzed in sediment samples according to Method
U03E in Standard Methods for Examination of Water and Wastewater (APHA, 1980).
Weighed samples were extracted with trichlorotrifluorethane and the extract
removed. Extracts were- then treated with silica gel to remove biogenic
material, filtered into tared flasks and the halogenated solvent removed in
vaeuo,i 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 aeetone/nexane. The
resultant extract was reduced to 30 ml in vaeue. The extract was then
subjected to Florisil partitioning. Fraction I was eluted from the Florisil
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 interference 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-9
-------
A.2.2.2.6.1 The Interference peak was found when running Aroehlor 1242
analyses. The interference Is caused by a contaminant that is found to
extraction thimbles and other apparatus used in the extraction. It was
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 1242 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 -13°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 xO.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 re-pinaed.-ri.th a 20 percent altrle acid solution, tap watar and
distilled. --rater prior to-aach dissection. To minimise 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: ahrlmp 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 3hrimp were also recorded. All apeciaens were
then scrubbed and rinsed in deionized water to remove any sediment particles-
that may have"been.attached to the tissue surface.
1.2^2.3.* Fish; dissection.-«S' initiated with. a., sross-out incision using a-
stainless steel scalpel with a carbon steel blade. The incision penetrated. l
to 2 mm through the akin beginning at a point approximately in line with the
end of the operculum at the base of the dorsal fin and extended posteriorly
paat 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 skln^layer was then peeled away from the
underlying muscle tissue using stainless steel forceps and the exposed tissue
was scraped away ualng 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 wars needed from each station to obtain sufficient
tissue for analysis.
A.2.2.3.5 Shrimp (Sicyonia ingentisj muscle tissue dissections were Initiated
by removing the tail section from 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-10
-------
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-pale" bags for heavy metal analysis, while the other half was
wrapped in hexane-rinsed, oven-dried aluminum foil for hydrocarbon anlysis.
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, chromium, 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/bydroxylamine-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 or a
7arian 875 atomic absorption spectrophotometer following the procedures
outlined for sediments. In cases where sufficient tissue for separate
digestion and-analyses-of arsenic, mercury, and the remaining heavy metals
were not available, the priority for analyses was: (1) the suite of metals
Cu, Cd, Cr,,Pb, and Zn;: (2) Hg; and (3) Aa.
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 ehronatography using silica gel as described in the
procedure-.. The.1 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 * 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
Elorisil column with 1 percent methanol in hexane. Two fractions were
collected, concentrated to 1 ml and injected into the gas chromatography unit
for analysis.
A.2.2.U Physical and Chemical Oeeanographie Analysis
A.2.2.4,1 Physical oceanographlc 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.U.2 Total suspended solids in the seawater were determined using Method
290C in Standard Methods for Examination of Water and Wastewater (APRA, 1980).
One liter of seawater was filtered through a standard glass-fiber filter. The
•
A-11
-------
retained material and the filter were dried at 103 to 105°C. The weight of
the suspended material was then determined and expressed as mg/1.
1.2.2*4.3 Analyses of seawater for heavy metals were performed following the
methods described in Plumb (1981). For all metals except mercury and arsenic,
a chelation-extractlon procedure was performed on 100 ml of water samples.
The extract was then analyzed on a Varlan 375 instrument.
A.2.2.4.4 Arsenic levels in the seawater samples were determined using the
arsine generation method. Samples were treated with concentrated nitric dacid
and the resultant solution analyzed on a Varlan 875 instrument fitted with an
arsine generator.
A.2.2.4.5 Chlorinated hydrocarbons in seawater samples were extracted using
the methylene chloride/hexane (MC/hexane) procedures outlined in Plumb (1981).
One liter of seawater was extracted using MC/hexane. The extract was
concentrated and subjected to partitioning.using a Floriail column. Fraction
I was alutad with 5 percent in petroleum other. Fraction II was- slutad with
15 percent dlethylether in petroleum: -sther..
A.2.2.4.S Petroleum hydrocarbon (grease and oil) levels In seawater were
determined following Method 503A at Methods of examination of Water and
tfastewater (APHA, 1980). Oil and grease were extracted from 1 liter -water
samples using trichlorotrifluoroethane.. The weight of the grease and ail -JHS
then determined and the,- results, reported,, in ppm (mg/1)..
A.2.3 QUALITY. COBTBOI;-'
Ai2V3;i' 3enthic 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 ("control") 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 (Handricks, 1979) and so the reference site was selected to the
southeast of the disposal sites (Fig. A-1). Two factors required selection of
a reference site nearer the LA 5 site than desired.. Only a limited distance
southeastward from the LA 5 site, the head of the Coronado Submarine Canyon
Intersects the Coronado Escarpment. Faunas of canyons tend to be modified
from those at equivalent slope depths by Inshore displacement of organisms
more typical of deeper water (Hartman, 1963) and are aot well-suited to act as
references for disposal site biotas. A very short distance beyond the canyon
lie Mexican waters. The alternative of selecting a reference site to the
northwest was similarly constrained by Input of the Point Loma Sanitation
District wastefleld which flows primarily northward along the coast (Hendricks,
1979), and by the La'Jolla Submarine Canyon.
A-12
-------
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.
Data on sample depth variability are 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.2.3.1.4 Criteria for acceptance of a grab sample as adequate were: (1)
penetration depth of at least 6 cm a 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 used, they were.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 depth 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 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 aaeh gear drop, were recorded on a-
benthie 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 damge
or abnormalities, and checked for proper fixation and storage. A ore-selected
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: H. Bergen- Holothuroldea, J. L^ubenkov -
Cnidaria, 3. Myers - Ostracoda, P. Scott - Blvalvla, J. Shrake -,Aplachophora,
B. Thompson - Echlura and Sipuncula, S. Williams - Polychaeta.
A.2.3.1.7 The supervising systematist checked the Identifications for
accuracy, consistency and.spelling. Voucher type specimens of undescrlbed
species were prepared for reference to ensure- consistency throughout the
entire program.
A-13
-------
TABLE A-4. DEPTH VARIATION («) OF SAMPLING STATIONS*
Station
Aug
Sampling Month
Dec Feb/Mar
Apr/May
DISPOSAL
1
2
3
4
5
169-172
137-139
167-171
185-133
168-17.Q
169-171
130-137
162-170
187-188
165-167
166-171
134-138
167-168
183-185
165-163
168-171
133-137
168-171"
183-187
166-169
169*1.8 m
136+2.4 m
168+1.8 m
186+1.6 m
167+1.8 ai
flErtRENCS
1
2
4
169-174
134-137
186-187
165-172
129-133
184-189
165-1S8
132-138
183-138
165-163
132-133
183-188
168+2.5 m
134+2.9 m
186^1.3 m
Unadjusted for tidal variations.
A-14
-------
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. He 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. 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, 198V; EPA,
I979a,b; 1960}.. 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 U°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 (SPA, 1979a,b; I960.) until analysis.
i.2.3.3.3 'A eheckout-fram-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.2.3.3.1 Sample preparation for each analysis was performed following the
methods outlined in Plumb (1981), EPA C1971a,b; 1980) or Standard Methods for
the Examination of Water and Wastewater (APRA, 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 the
limits. Randomly selected samples were sent to an outside laboratory for
inter-laboratory comparison of results.
A-15
-------
Table A-5. OETECTA8ILITY LIMITS FOR THE VARIOUS HEAVY METALS AND
ORGANIC COMPOUNDS ANALYZED
Metals
Detect ability
Limits (ppm)
Organics
Oetectabi11 ty
Limits (ppm)
Arsenic
Cadlum
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Z1nc
0.002
0.002
0.02
0.01
0.05
0.0002
0.005
O'P-OOE
O'P-OOE
O'P-ODO
O'P-000
O'P-QOT
P'P-QOT
PC3 1242
PC3 1254
PCS taso
A-3CH
Llndane
3-3HC
Heptactilor
.Epoxi de
Petroleum Hydrocarbons*
0.001
' 0.002
0.001
0.002
0.001
0.002
0.007
Q.Q13
0.024
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0,001
0.1
01T" and,, grease*.
A-16
-------
A.2.3.3.6 The reliability and precision of all Instrumentation wag cheeked
daily. Both analytical blanks and standards were analyzed with actual samples
were under normal operating conditions. The results of all analyses were
recorded in a project log and maintained in a fireproof file.
A.2.3.3.7 All stock standards were prepared on a bi-yearly basis using the
highest grade solvents, metals, and organlcs. 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 were questionable were re-analyzed to ensure their accuracy.
A.2.4 ° DATA ANALYSIS
A.2.U.1 Study Design
The sampling stations at LA 5 are- shown in Figure A-1. Five sampling
locations*were selected from within the disposal site. Three stations were
located on the bathymetrie center-line of the site and a single station was
positioned on both the inshore and offshore nominal edges of the site. This
configuration forms a cross pattern with a station located in the center of
the site- and transect, of three- stations both longshore and across the
bathymetric gradient. Three stations were selected within Use reference site.
These- were-located across the bathymetric gradient at the same depth as the
stations- wlthla. the disposal site. rThis sampling layout provided reference
stations--for-comparison-of- physical-chemical and biological variables at three
depths'* within: the disposal" site-. The- three- stations -.located-along- ther same-:
isobath within* the disposal site^prcvided. data;, for making similar comparisons
within the disposal area.
A.2.4.2 Statistleal^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-17
-------
r
A.2.4.2.1 The underlying assumptions of the AKOVA 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 sane variance (i.e., variances are homogeneous), and
3. .The errors associated with all measurements are statistically
independent (i.e., ho 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 et_ _§!,., 1972; Grieb, 19W. For all analysis
presented in this report testa for homogeneity of variance were conducted. In
those data sets which violated the assumption of homogeneity of variance,
transformations were applied to reduce the- degree of heterogeneity. All
statistical comparisons were 'Bade with data collected during a single survey,
and based on the sampling procedures spatial correlation was assumes to be
minimal. •-- ~
A.2.4.2.2 In all one-way analyses in which a signfieant 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 ^ jl., 1975) was used for all AHOTA tests.
A.2.^.2.3 Numerical classification methods (Clifford and Stephenson, '97?)
were*used:Ln the* analysis of.: She- benthic .Infauna data (Section: A.3.3?.
Numerical classification encompasses a-wide- variety of techniques- that can-^e
used to distinguish groupa-of entities (e.g., sample-sites) according to
similarity of attributes (e.g., species). Using these techniques, the
similarity of group attributes is expressed using a variety of resemblance
measures, including commonly used similarity coefficients such as Jaccard,
Bray-Curtis, Canberra metric, and Euclidean distance. Classification begins
with the compilation of a 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 association among entities and to
graphically display groups of entities with similar attributes.
A.2.4.2.4 For all numberical 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 palr-groupd method using
arithmetic averages (Sneath and Sokal, 1973) was used as the clustering
strategy. The numerical 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 r1972).
A-18
-------
A.3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIOH
A.3.1 PHYSICAL OCEANOGRAPHY
This section describes the results of the vertical profiles taken at each
station measuring temperature, dissolved oxygen, (salinity) conductivity, pR,
and transparency (transmissivity). All water profile data are compiled in
Table B-1 in Appendix B.
A.3.T.I Temperature
A.3-1.1.1. Historical data sources indicate that the sea surface temperature
in the Southern California Bight normally ranges from 12.5°C to 19.5°C
(Maloney and Chain, 1974) with extreme ranges from 11°C to 23°C CBLM, 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,
A.3.1.1.2 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
21.6°C to 22.5°C. Minimum surface temperatures occurred during Survey 3
(March) and- ranged from 14.9°C to 15.6°C.. The yearly range in surface-
temperatures was between 6.6°C and 7.4°C, depending on the station, which
compares favorably with that expected normally.
A.3.1.1.3 The temperatures at 100 m. showed a much smaller range, as expected
(BLM, 1978), with temperatures from 9.8°C to 13.2°C. Maximum temperatures
were again found in August (Survey 1) but, minimum temperatures at 100 m were
found during Survey 4_ (May 1984). 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 (2-4°C). Maximum bottom temperatures were experienced during Survey 1
(August) while minimum temperatures were -found during survey 4, the same as
the 100 m depths. 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 than by the climatic heating and cooling which
control temperatures in the upper 100 m (Chan, 1974).
A.3.1.1.4 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 items. The seasonal thermocline 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 the any thermocline 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.
A-19
-------
•"ABLE A-6. TEMPERATURE PROFILING DATA AT LAS
Disposal
Station 1- Station 2
Reference
Station 1 Station 2
Survey 1 (Aug)
Surface 22.3'C 22.2'C
100 m 12.7 12.8
Bottom 10.3 11.2
21.6«C
12.7
12.1
22.5'C
13,2
13.1
Survey 2 (Dec)
Surface 15.3
100 n • 11.2
Bottom 9.2
15.7
10.9
9.5
16.0
11.5
8.7
15.3
11.0
9.7
Survey 3 (Mar)
Surface 14.9
100.. m- 10.3.
Sottcm 9.1
14.9
10.a
10.3
15.0
10.5
9.3
15.6
10.3
9.3
Survey 4 (May)
Surface 17.3
100 m 9.3
Bottom 9.0
17.3
9.3
9.2
17.6
9.9
9.0
17.5
9.3
9.4
A-2Q
-------
so
IU
Q
TOO
ISO
TEMPERATURE (°C)
10 15
^ r,' /
25
———•— SURVEY 1 (AUG 1983)
—.-.._— SURVEY 2 (DEC 19831
___ ... —. SURVEY 3 (MAR 1984)
——' - —— SURVEY 4 (MAY 1984)
200!-
FIGURE A-2 TEMPERATURE PROFILES AT LA 5 DISPOSAL SITE, STATION 1
A-21
-------
A.3.1.1.5 So 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
A.3.1.2.1 The Allan Hancock Foundation (1965) found that dissolved oxygen
levels in the California Bight are dependent on temperature, salinity, and
biological processes such as respiration, photosynthesis, and oxidation.
Dissolved oxygen values are normally near or at saturation levels at the
surface with generally declining values with depth.
A.3.1.2.2 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 8.4
ppm to-10.0 ppm. Values at 100 m depths showed the concentration decline
mentioned above with values ranging from 4.7 ppu to 7.5 ppm. At the bottom
values showed a wider range (3.6 to 7.* ppm) due to the variance in water
depth at each, station, but continued to show declining concentration vrLth
depth..
A.3.1.2.3 Figure A-3 shows the dissolved oxygen profiles at the LAS 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
a and 50 B 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 :pper layers and was found when the seasonal
theraocline-was present. This seasonal subsurface maximim Is a phenomenon
found throughout, such of the- Pacific-Ocean- and is" though to be- associated with-
entrapment of oxygen- by the- seasonal thermocline and not with increased
photosynthetic 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, 1965). 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.
A-22
-------
TABLE A-7, DISSOLVED OXYGEN PROFILING DATA AT LAS
Dashes Indicate no data.
Di sposal Reference
Station 1 Station 2 Station 1 Station 2
Survey 1 (Aug)
- Surface 10.0 9.2 8.4 8.5
100 m 6.8 6.8 6.8 7.5
Bottom 4.4 5.0 6.1 7.4
Survey 2 (Dec)
Surface 8.9 9.4 7.8
100 m
Bottom 3.4
Survey 3 (Mar)
Surface 9.7 10.C 8.9 8.8
100 m 5.1 5.2 4.7 4.5
Bottom- 2.9 5.2" 3".9 4.0
Survey 4 (May)
Surface 8.4 8.6 9.1 8.7
100 m 4.8 4.7 4.8 5.1
Bottom 3.6 4.1 4.2 5.4
A-23
-------
DISSOLVED OXYGEN (ppm)
5
10
=0
g
111
O
150-
SURV8Y 1 IAUC3 1983)
— — — SURVEY 2 I06C 19831
— "•— SURVEY 3 IMAH 19»4>
_-__ SURVEY 4 (MAY 19841
200 ^
FIGURE A-3 DISSOLVED OXYGEN PROFILES AT LA 5 DISPOSAL SITE, STATION 1
A-24
-------
Figure A-1* presents representative salinity profiles for the LA 5 Disposal and
Reference Sites. Additional salinity data are presented in Table B-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 M 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 U results, and moreover is not normally seen below the
upper 10-20 m. Very snail 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-1? "shows a slight salinity increase with depth and is due to the
mixing or 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.3-1.1* Hydrogen Ion Concentration (pH>
All values-of pK at the LAS site fell within the range of 7.1 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 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 disposal 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 are
presented in Table A-9. Values averages 9*1.8 percent and showed little
variation with depth. So 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 LAS disposal site and
the reference site. Detection limits are included for each parameter
A-25
-------
32
SAUNITY (put)
33 .
50
\
g tOOt-
Ul
Q
150
200 '—
|| SUSV6Y 3. DISPOSAL S1T5. ST.l
——•— SURVEY 3. H6FSR6NCS SITE.
34
FIGURE A-4 SALINITY PROFILES AT LA S DISPOSAL AND REFERENCE SITES
A-26
-------
TABLE A-8. pH PROFILES AT LA 5
Dash indicates no data due to equipment malfunction
realized after return from study sites.
Disposal
Station 1 Station 2
Reference
Station 1 Station 2
Survey 1 (Aug)
Surface 8.3
100 m 7.8
Bottom- 7.9
8.3
7.9
7.6
8.2
7.8
7.8
8.4
8.0
8.0
Survey 2 (Dec)
Surface 8.3
100 ra 8.1
Bottom 8.1
•8.3
7.5
7.1
8.2
7.3
7.1
8.2
7.9
7.5
Survey 2 (Mar)
Surface 8.5
100 m 8.1
Bottom 7.9
8.4
8.1
8.1
8.5
7.8
7.6
3.1
7.6
Survey 4 (May)
Surface
100 m
Bottom
8.2
7.6
8.2
7.6
8.2
7.4
7.6
8.2
A-27
-------
r
TABLE A-9, TRANSMISSIVITY PROFILE AT LA 5
Disposal
Station 1 Station 2
Reference
Station 1 Station 2
Survey 1 t'A'ug)
Surface 96.3%
100 m 96.7
Bottom 97.2
95.1%
97.7
97.7
96.52
95.5
95.6
95.7%
95.9
96.4
Survey 3 (Mar)
Surface 93.5
100 m 98.1
Bottom 95.5
loo. a
100.a
100.0
99.1
96.S
96.2
96.3
99.2
93.2
Survey 4 (May)
Surface- 98.3
100 m 100.0
• Sottom- 89.0
96.3
96.9
91.1
96.0
88.9
90.2
loo. a
86.2
81.3
A-28
-------
analyzed. Statistical analyses were conducted on at least one survey from
each site, for each parameter, to teat 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
location.
3. Two-way ANOVA with stations 1, 2, and it from both the disposal
location and the reference location. The two factors are station and
type (reference or disposal).
Multiple Range Tests were conducted for those one-way analyses with
significant (at. =0.05) test results. A' test for homogeneity of variance was
run for each analysis. The purpose of these tests is described in the data
analysis section (A.2.U). Interpretation of these results is presented below.
A.3.2.1 Metals
A.3.2.1.1 Sediments; Sediment acid-extractable metals concentrations for all
four surveys are compared in Figure A-5 for the disposal and reference site.
Inspection of Figure A-5 indicates for aach metal that levels at the disposal
site are elevated over levels at the reference stations. Significant ANOVA
results (o5.sQ.05) for'heterogeneity among stations and between .the disposal
and reference.-site-support' this: conclusion.. The-increase in. the-variance-
among replicates at disposal site stations over the reference stations
suggests spotty concentrations of the metals at the dump site. Significant
differences among dump 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 mosi: 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 macrinvertebrate and two demersal fish
species were used for tissue analyses. The ridgeback prawn (Sicyonia
ingentis) was sampled during all four surveys. The Pacific sanddab
(Citharichthys 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 metal data are not plotted to conserve space.
Complete metals analyses were not possible for all surveys due to lack of
sufficient tissue. The lack of sufficient tissue results iri many cases from
discovering faulty analytical techniques; insufficient tissue remained to
A-29
-------
vt
u
i
I
S 1
T.
i * t i
\
i i i
\
A
77
IWd -
LU * — '
S " 2
-
? '-0
x < a
c
Z
x
o ^ c
u.
a > -
i
i C C
« CJ !—
O »• tu
525s
a
S «J -J
10
tu
C
O
A-30
-------
in
s
^ «/»
< |
o «
I/I U.
^ UJ
O oe
4 0
z
/T
I 1
-»i» «•
> •*
1
*
* 1 1
MIIMO
•« 5
I 4 t
'/i
3 5 5
S § '« s e
Mdd - UiddOO
2
2
O
U
1C
in
oc
i
A-31
-------
I
n a
en ae
( I I
•»*»u
1l
\
i <•» z
- 5
VI
•<= s
i ! vi
3
3
e o
S 3
a
a
at
2
P
a
o
in
fi
O
A-32
-------
«rt
oc
Si
SPOSAL SI
FERfNCE S
4 a
A--
/ :.i
v
1 i t O
T
s
a
I
i
*» £
i T I
§ I §
Wd- DNIZ
O
uu
2
2
O
u
IO
UI
s
o
A-33
-------
•: i
II
.4
3
'^^-••gm=sj
5
a •> ••F.*n»«M-
-aoooooaeo
k».r
U*«*««»b<»—••
52:2233333
3S38S8S2<»
**£
o••••••h *~-•«
< £
- ?
pii --u
Q 3
ui cj
> -;
* a
5 i
^E *^
vu ?
S 2
at Z
S w
^ -i m
2 < >
< h a
UJ
C
3
a
A-34
-------
II
as
S S S 3 S 2
5.
s p
1-5
2 >
~ X.
|£
2. oj
ui Z
a o
2 <
O S
U i-
« <
2 -*
O IN
UI
ee
A-35
-------
Mr
5 14
1.4
u
f IJJ
n
-------
allow complete reanalysis for chlorinated hydrocarbons, PCBs and metals. All
tissue metals data are presented in Table B-2. There is no significant
difference («c =0.05) in the concentration of any metal in the muscle tissue
between disposal and reference sites. The slender sole had higher tissue
concentrations of some metals than the Pacific sanddab (Figs. A-7 and A-9,
Table B-2). This may be due to dietary or physiological differences between
the 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 U. Samples were not collected for analyses
during the first survey. Results of these analyses for the disposal site and
reference site are plotted in Figure A-9. Mean values of the control sites
were compared in a one-way AHOVA test and the values for Survey 2 are
significantly different (oC»=0.05) from Surveys 3 and U. Therefore, Survey 2
will not be included in the interpretation of the results.
A.3.2.2.2 Oil and grease concentrations at the disposal site are not
significantly elevated (oC^-OSO over the reference values. The homogeneity
among stations (oc*0.05) supports the interpretation that elevated levels are
not exhibited at the disposal site. The high mean values shown in Figure A-9
for Station 5 from Survey 3, and Station 3 from Survey U, are the result of
single high values that could be explained by sample or analytical variability
as well as by spot contamination- at the disposal site. Because of the lack of
repetition of these values a* other stations in the LA5 disposal site the
former explanation appears more plausible^-
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 dump and reference site water quality conditions cannot be made.
A.3.2.2.K 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
dump 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 limit
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 extract sometimes
containing DDTs and PCBs was not analyzed and added into the totals in Surveys
1 and 2. The procedural error involved the extraction of four different
chlorinated hydrocarbon fractions: (1) hexane fraction, (2) 6 percent ether
in hexane, (3) 15 percent in hexane and CO chloroform. Compounds in
fractions 1 and 2 do not clearly separate and the chemical technician
A-37
-------
SURVEY 2
^"
;g
at 2SO '
i
jg 200 "
1
a W
si 10°"
5
z SO '
LU
O A
u
M (J 1
I
513-
4
/
/
/
/
'
L
\
)
k *
2 3
* DISPOSAL SITE
r
I 352 CCHFIDEHCa IMTESVALS
«' aErsSENCi SITE • MO DATA
SURVEY 3
-
-
i
Vil
T-—
EUHVEY i ^
1
575 . :75
"* -^ "T
<
k
"
-
>
.
/ \"
/ \
i ./ V]
n M
* 5 0 1 2 3 * 5 0123*3
- Station
i i
•188.994 -174.339
FIGURE A9. MEAN AND 95% CONFIDENCE INTERVALS FOR OIL AND GREASE
SEDIMENT CONCENTRATION (DRY WT1 AT LA S DISPOSAL AND
REFERENCE SITES. CONNECTING LJNES ARE TO ENHANCE READABILITY
AND DO NOT SHOW TRENDS.
A-38
-------
TABLE A-10. COMPARISON OF THE RANGE AND MEDIAN OF SELECTED
PESTICIDE AND PCS CONCENTRATIONS IN SEDIMENTS3
Parameter
(ug/kg
dry wt) Site
Survey 3
Survey 4
p.p'-ODE
p.p'-DOO
p.p'-QOT
PCB 1242
PCB 1254
PCS 1260
D
Ref
0
Ref
D
Ref
D
Ref
0
Ref
0
Ref-
2-13 (2)b
2-5 (4)
2-13. (2).
2-7 (2)
2-22 (3)
2 (2)
7-180 (45)
7-39 (7)
13-170 (43)
13 (13)
34-320 -(34)
34-130 (76)
2-46 (2)
2-7 (4)
2-54 (2)
2 __ (2)
2-75 (2)
2 (2)
7-300 (14)
7-33 (7)
13-120 (18)
13 (13)
34-340 (34)
34 (34)
a Data for surveys 1 and 2 are excluded because of analytical procedure
differences (see text for discussion).
b Median values given in parentheses.
D a Disposal site
Ref » Reference site
A-39
-------
misidentified the compounds based on their respective retention time 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 Surveys 3 and 4 results in a clearer picture of the pattern
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 disposal site exhibits significantly elevated (o^=0.05) levels
only of p,p'-DDT in the sedlatents. High values of p,p'-DDD and p,p'-DDE
reported in Survey 4 occurred in a limited number of replicates at a single
station. Multiple range tests produced significant elevation (0^=0.05) of
only p,p»-DDD at Station 1 in Survey 4. Ho depth trends are exhibited for any
isomer.
A.3.2.3*3 Table A-TO also compares PCB levels at the disposal and reference
sites. PC3 1260 concentrations are not statistically elevated over reference
values at the disposal 3ita based on Survey 3 results. Survey & PCB 1260
results are significantly different (o<.=G.Q5j between the LA5 disposal site
and the reference area, but PCB 1260 was undetected in all reference area
samples from Survey 4 resulting in zero variance. This fact, coupled with the
considerable variability in PCB 1260 concentrations observed among dump site
stations and among replicates at stations, likely accounts for the significant
difference found in Survey 4. Based an these results and the comparison of
aedian values presented in Table A-10, there appears -to be no justification to
conclude that PCB 1260 is statistically elevated at the' disposal site relative
to reference--conditions*., There* is no depth trend in-.the? distribution- of. ?CB
1260.. ' " •
A.3.2.3.4 The increased in the ranges and median values of PCB 1242 and 1254
at LAS dump site over reference levels suggest possible elevation of both
Arochlor mixtures at the dump site. However, these data must be interpreted
with caution because of the considerable interference observed in the
chromatographic region used to quantitate these Arochlors (particular? in the
region used for PCB 142). These interferences result from elemental sulfur
and from additional coeluting organic residues. Ho statistical tests were
conducted with PCB 1242 or 1254.
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 sediments 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 analysis than was possible under the
limitations of this study may be able to determine trends. Table A-11 lists
the range of selected pesticides and PCB concentrations in tissues from the
disposal and reference sites. Median values were not calculated because of
the limited number of samples at each site.
A-40
-------
TABLE A-ll. COMPARISON OF THE RANGE OF SELECTED PESTICIDE AMD
PCS CONCENTRATIONS IN TISSUESa
Parameter
fug/kg
dry wt)
p,p'-ODE
o.p'-OOT
p,p'-ODT
PCB 1242
PCB. 1254 '
Speci es
S
L
S
L
S
1 •
S
L
S
L
irvey 1 and 2 are excluded
;ee text for discussion).
mples.
Sicyonia ingentis
lyopsetta exit is.
•
Site
D
Ref
0
Ref
0
Ref
D
Ref
0"
Ref
D
Ref-
0
Ref
D
Ref
D
Ref
D
Ref
because
PCB 1260
Survey 3
17-27 •
13-14
66-100
72-190
3-9
9-15
57-110
1-50
5-15
4-12
22-44
2-17'
12-22
7-18
3-49
3-17
130-240
82-140
240-450
6-200
Survey 4
14
19-23
27-34
46-70
13
9-25
19-33
1-12
-17
3-8
6-13
2-6.
3
3-40
3-72
3
6
6
6-290
6-54
of analytical procedure
was undetected at 34 u<
D * Disposal site
Ref * Reference site
A-41
-------
A.3.2.3.7 There is little or no evidence of a consistent elevation of DDT
isomer or PCS tissue concentrations at the disposal site relative to 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 in individual tissue samples are often, but not always,
observed at the disposal site. The significance of these apparent elevations
is uncertain because of the small number of samples 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 E1S)
or (2) feeding habits of individuals (for example a marked preference of
sediment-ingesting polychaetes over mysid shrimp) or (3) differential ability
of individuals to metabolize contaminants (Jeff Cross, SCCWRP, pers. ccmm. 30
Sept. 1985). Although standard analytical techniques were used, insufficient
data on analytical variability are available to sake an appropriate evaluation
of the potential natural and analytical variability at these sites.
A.3.2.4 Comparison to Literature Tallies
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 metals concentrations
for sediments, water column, and tissues at control sites from' various studies
in the- southern California Bight. Metals concentrations in aerlizients from
both reference sites are' within the range of literature values, tfatar column
analyses detection- limits- ire- all' above- reported. aetals concentrations in "he
literature and it follows "hat no metals would be detected. Tissue
concentrations corrected to wet weight for Lyopsetta (17.1* solids) and
Citharichthys (19.0? solids) also compare favorably with published values;
both range from the less than, to slightly greater than, the values listed in
Table A-12. There are no reported values in the literature for Sieyonia or
other panaeid shrimp.
A.3.2.4.2 Information on pesticide and PCS concentrations for control sties
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 same DDTs and PCSs,
respectively (Young and Gossett, 1980; Word and Mearns, 1979) bracket the
median sediment values for those parameters listed in Table A-10. Meaningful
values for total PCBs cannot be calculated' because PCBs were undetected in
many samples and detection limits were relatively high. 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 sole (Lyopsetta exilis) tissue concentrations
reported in Surveys 3 and 4 based on an average 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 e_£ jil^ (1980) for
the Dover sole (Citharehthys sordidus) 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 the ridgeback prawn
(Sioyonia ingentis). Values for Pacific sanddab are not compared because of
questions about the pesticide and PCS from Surveys 1 and 3 (A.3.2.3.1).
A-42
-------
o
c
«• r- io r- *o «•*
i i i i i i
«r CM GO * CM ir>
^ <*» • in <••» GO
CO
O "O
O O 01
• *
o c
VO
I
CM
vr> en
O O
* *
o o
esj *r
o o
• •
c o
§«n
o
* *
oo
o
I
in
o
£
"5
IX
LU
10 3
+> CM — -* t-- m
i i i i i i
<»» CM r-. CM C \r>
• « • (NJ
Ifi CVI iO
. er> ••* •-* eo K>
en ••• f» e ••• cc
• « • rt «-4
v
o>
o
o
V
o
•
o
LkJ
s.
CJ
e
a% O <*» us —
i i i i i i
«o *r in «r ve o
<—< esj • o c^j 9>
OO
o
•
o
00
o
c
•
c
"3
o
-» .— O OJ 01
u —
10
^^
^ -
f « O tt) -C £.
to 3: 3 Z U 03
O)
e
o
to X
—« X
QO % CT)
»-*-
A-43
-------
A. 3. 3 BENTHIC FAUNA
All infaunal data collected at the LA 5 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 3ite. Thrse 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 provide below.
A. 3. 3-T.1 Community Indices - tour community Indices were calculated for aach
infaunal. sample:. Shannon-Weaver-Diversity (Shannon, and. Weaver,
Margalef'3 Species - Richness (Margalaf, 1957), the total number of taxa and the
total number of individuals. Shannon-Weaver Diversity CH') and Species
Richness (D) were calculated as:
H-
N
D =
In
where:
S
number of taxa
H s number of Individuals
a, s 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
making comparisons of the selected biological variables among collection areas
(disposal site versus reference site) and between stations. For example, .
A-44
-------
o
Q£
S-i
STATION
STATION
I-
O
LU
Q.
T" I
STATION
STATION
OReference Site Station
ADisposal Site Station
FIGURE A1Q. 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
-------
VI "
Q£
ku
=»
s ..^
STATION
Si
I--
S-
O
OS
3-
STATION
vi ,• _
ui
u
UJ
0.
STATION
a. -i
a _
a
1 2 3
STATION
OReference Site Station
^Disposal 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 00 NOT INDICATE TRENDS.
A-46
-------
UJ
>
Q
STATION
2 3
STATION
<_J
UJ.
c.
STATION
I J
STATION
DReference Site Station
^Disposal Site Station
FIGURE A12. MEAN VALUES AND 95% CONFIDENCE INTERVALS AT EACH SAMPLING
STATION FOR INFAUNAL COMMUNITY INDICES. SURVEY 3. CONNECTING
LINES ARE TO ENHANCE READABILITY AND DO NOT INDICATE TRENDS.
-------
LU
STATION
X
2•-
25.1-
s-
,STATION
1 —--
u
«
LU
U
UJ
I I
2 3
STATION
3 3
3»
| 9
o «,
STATION
(3Reference Site Station
& Disposal Site Station
FIGURE A13. MEAN VALUES AT EACH SAMPLING STATION POR INPAUNAL COMMUNITY
INDICES. SURVEY 4. CONNECTING LINES ARE TO ENHANCE READABILITY
AND DO NOT INDICATE TRENDS.
A-48
-------
Stations 1, 2 and 4 are located at different depths, but each station Is at
the sane approximate depth at both the disposal and reference sites (see Fig.
A-1).
A.3.3.1.3 As indicated In Figures A-10 - A-13, the mean values for all four
biological variables at reference-site Stations 1, 2 and 4 were greater than
or equal to the reported values at the corresponding disposal site stations in
all but two cases. These differences were not pronounced in the first two
surveys. For example,, the mean number of taxa at the reference site in Survey
1 was approximately 50 percent greater than report values at the disposal site
(Fig. A-10).
A.3.3.1.4 Examination of these plots also indicates consistent differences in
the mean values of all variables between Stations 1, 3 and 5 within the
disposal site. These stations are all located on the bathymetrlc centerline
of the site (Fig. A-1) at a depth of approximately 170 m. Reported values for
all variables were always lowest at Station 5 which is located at the northern
edge of the site, and in all but one survey the maximum values were observed
at the southern edge of the site (Fig. A-1). Thus, an Increasing gradient in .
species richness, number of taxa and number of individuals was observed along
the north-south centerline of the disposal site.
A.3.3.1.5 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, 2 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 aean: value of community indices
between the reference- and disposal* sites.
summarized in Table A-13-
The results of these analyses are-
A.3.3.1.6 The-results of the one-way ANOVAs presented in Table A-13 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 both number of taxa and number of individuals were
statistically significant in all but one survey, and species diversity among
the three stations was significantly different in two of the four surveys.
A.3.3.1.7 In those,_e_ses in which a significant AN07A test result was
obtained, on a posteriori multiple-range test was performed to identify where
differences were located among the group means. The results of these tests
for differences in the mean number of taxa and number of individuals among
disposal Stations 1, 3 and 5 are presented in Table A-1U. As indicated in
this table, the mean number of taxa at Station 3 was significantly higher than
at Station 5 in each of the three surveys compared. The number of taxa at
Station 1 was always intermediate between Stations 1 and 5, and the mean value
at this station formed a significant subset with one of these stations or
both. Similar results were obtained for the comparison of mean values for
number of individuals among the three stations (Table A-1MK The abundance of
organisms was always greatest at Station 3, and the differences between the
Stations 5 and 3 were always statistically significant. .
A-H9
-------
TABLE A-13, RESULTS OF ANOVA TESTS FOR DIFFERENCES IN THE MEAN VALUE OF
BIOLOGICAL-COMMUNITY VARIABLES
SURVEY
1
.
2
^ -i.
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 Oumpsite)
' *1
•> *
*
*
n.s.2
•*
*
*
.
#
*
n.S.
n.s.
n.s.
*
*
*
TOG-WAY ANOVA
'(Source of Variation)
Depth
n.s.
n.s.
n.s.
n.s.
n.s.
n.s.
n.s.
n.s.
n-.s.
n.s.
n.s.
n.s.
n.s.
n.s.
n.s.
n.s.
Type
*
*
*
*
•*
*
*
n.s.
•^c
*
*
n.s.
*
*
*
n.s.
Death x i.ype-
n.s.
n.s.
n.s.
n.s.
n.s. !
n.s.
n.s.
n.s.
V
n.s. 1
i
n.s.
n.s.
n.s.
n.s.
n.s.
*
*
1 Statistical test results significant at p a 0.05
2 Statistical test results not significant at p * 0.05
A-50
-------
TABLE A-14. ONE-WAY ANOVA RESULTS FOR COMPARISON OF THE MEAN NUMBER
OF TAXA AND NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS AMONG DISPOSAL SITE STATIONS i, 3
AND 5. Values enclosed in the same symbol (circle or square) are not
significantly different by a multiple-range test.
Survey
Mean Number of Taxa/0.1 m
Station
. -
Survey
Mean Number of Individuals/Q.l m
Station
5
1
262.7
A-51
-------
A.3.3.1.8 The results of two-way ANOVA testa for differences In the community
indices due to depth and type of station (reference of disposal site) are
presented in Table A-13. These results reflect the differences observed in
the plots of these data (figs. A-TO - A-13). Mean values of these-variables
did not differ significantly over the range of sampling depth (140 to 190 M),
but the values of three of these variables (Diversity, Species Richness and
Number of Taxa) showed significant differences associated with sampling
location. The values of these three community indices at the reference site
were significantly higher than the reported values at the disposal site
sampling locations. In general, there was a lack of evidence for depth X
sample-type interaction, and it appears as if the effects of sampling location
(reference or disposal site) are not influenced by sample depth.
A.3.3.1*9 An example of the observed effects of sampling location indicated
in the two-way ANOVA is presented in Table A-15. The mean number of taxa per
replicate sample at Stations .1,2 and 4 within the reference site is compared
with the aean value observed at the corresponding stations within the disposal
area. The aean number of taxa at che reference site was on the average
approximately 38 percent greater than the number of taxa observed at the
stations within the disposal site.
A.3-3.1.10 As shown in Table A-13» significant differences between the
reference and disposal sites for the number of individuals per replicate
sample were observed only in Survey 1. The aean values for this variable
which were compared in the two-way ANOVAs are presented la Table A-16. Large
differences- were observed .between the- reference and disposal aitas in the
first survey., However, in the remaining surveys the difference in. the aean
number-of." individuals- between- the;- reference-' and. disposal, sites was • reduced._
and, for five of the aamplea the -raiues recorded at the disposal site txceeded
those at the corresponding reference location.
A. 3.3.1.11" Numerical Classification - Numerical classification aethods
(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 for each survey with replicate
samples combined at each station.
A.3.3.1.12 The results of the numerical classifications conducted for each
survey with sampling stations as entitles are presented in Figure A-14. For
each survey, the similarity In infaunal species composition among eight
stations (five disposal-site and three reference-site stations) is depicted in
dendrograms. For each survey, these stations can be partitioned into three
groups. These 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 (Fig. A-14).
Using this criterion, the same three groups of stations, designated A, 3 and
C, were identified in each survey. Group A consisted of the three stations
located within the reference site. Group B consisted of disposal-site
Stations 3 and 4, and the third group (Group C) consisted of Stations 1, 2 and
5 within the disposal site. The location of each of these eight stations are
depicted in Figure A-1.
A-52
-------
TABLE A-15. COMPARISON OF THE MEAN NUMBER OF TAXA PER REPLICATE SAMPLE AT
THE REFERENCE- AND DISPOSAL-SITE SAMPLING LOCATIONS
SURVEY
1
2
3
.
4
STATION
1
I
4
1
2
4
1
2
4
2
4
MEAN NUMBER OF TAXA/ O.lm2
REFERENCE SITE DISPOSAL SITE
84,75 (57. 61-111. 89)*
82.25 (58.93-105,57)
81.00 (69.31-92.69)
86.75 (65.24-108.26)
83.75 (76.59-90.91)
78.50 (71.45-85.55]
67.75 (55.61-79.89)
• 45.75 (34.93-56.57)
64.50 (53.74-75.26)
93.5C. (67;3i:-119.69)
82.25' (74 ;35-89. 65)
81,00 (61.18-100.82)
56.75 (46.74-65,76)
60.25 (53,58-66.92)
46.75 (37.62-55.88)
65.00 (44.09-85.91)
75.75 (62.93-88.57)
60.50 (56.71-64.29)
50.25 (21.65-78.31)
47,75 (10.46-85.04)
50.75 (40.25-61.25)
' 4r.7S (ll.S2i.71..9S) '
67.00 (29.39-104.61)
63.75 (57.85-79.65)
95» Confidence Interval
A-5 3
-------
TABLE A-16. COMPARISON OF THE MEAN NUMBER OF INDIVIDUAL ORGANISMS PER
REPLICATE SAMPLE AT THE REFERENCE- AND DISPOSAL-SITE SAMPLING STATIONS
SURVEY
1
STATION
1
2
4
1
2
4
2
4.
MEAN NUMBER OF INOIVIDUALS/O.lnT
REFERENCE SITE DISPOSAL SITE
505.75 (226,75-784.75)*
509.25 (91.10-927.40)
411.25 (342.14-480.36)
492.75 (233.32-752.18)
553.25 (509.37-597.13)
394.75 (346.73-442.77)
271.50 (208.21-334.79)
133,25 (73.06-193.44)
177.75 (133.47-222.03)
262.75 (215.18-310.32)
379.75 (214.95-544.55)
225.75 (172.61-278.89)
354.25 (219.94-488,56)
456,25 (322.32-590.18)
4S5.75 (386.44-527.06)
277.75 (-63.50-619.10)
181.75 (-3.41-366.91)
180.50 (37.73-273.27)
r
2
5Q5-.00-(349-.33-360.57:
531.25 (420.54-841.96)
446.25 (200.37-691.63)
320.00--149.75-490.2*)
585.00' (386.55-783.45)
648.25 (313.42-983,08)
»
95% Confidence Interval
-------
JM. M.0 M.0
J OISSIMIUUtm STATION
M.0 W.O 0,0 M.O U.O lt.0 .M
«F ST» I
ttf rr» 2
ttf jn >
fnil -"
sn i:
otsrosu JTA i I OOP c
sn;
M.O m.a M.O a.o 0.0 «.» »•» Ji-fl •*
S OISSWILAHITY STATION
SURVEY 1
STATION
M.O n.o
M.O M.B Jto .«
• 8ISTCSM. Hi J
• 9ISWK rrt <
. «r jn i
• «r sn <
. vr sn : •
>' gismu. rr» i
• 9ISKUL ST* 2
1 S
IM. M.g M.O 71.0 M.0 «-0 O.1
i OISSIHIURITT
STATION
SURVEY 2
I QISSINILAHITr ' STATION
M.O M.B- n.0-- M.O «».o «.o ««.o ifco^ i"-0" •*•"
JT» • i ~~^
wr st» « I «"»" *
«r st» : '
St» i i
sn s OWM» c
* 2 '
L» «.g TI.O 0.0. m.a 0.0 M.O
S DISSIMILARITY
STATION
SURVEY 3
I DISSIMILARITY
fcO M.0 0.0 M.0
IS.O .M
STATION
D1SWW. SM 1 1 _gy. .
OISTOML ST» • I
«tr sn z I «••» *
»H»OVU, IT* Z ;
0!Sr«U SU i 1 6WW C
sn ;
M.O M.0 M.0 B.O 0.0
S DISSIMLARITY
M.0 «-0 tt.0 .»
STATIOH
SURVEY 4
FIGURE A14. NUMERICAL CLASSIFICATION RESULTS. DENDROGRAMS DEPICT
THE SIMILARITY IN INFAUNAL COMMUNITY STRUCTURE AMONG
EIGHT STATIONS.
' ' A-55
-------
A.3.3.1.13 These numerical classification results indicate the existence of
consistent differences between reference and disposal-site benthic infaunal
communities. These results also point to differences in infaunal community
structure between Stations 3 and 4 (Group B) and Stations 1, 2 and 5 (Group C)
within the disposal site. In an effort to account for these differences,
values of the previously defined community Indices as well as the physical
(i.e., sediment) characteristics of the habitats within each of the three
defined groups were compared. The data from Survey 1 were also used in an
inverse numerical classification analysis, i.e., with individual taxa as
entities and the abundance at stations as attributes. Nodal analyses were
then used with these data to describe differences among groups of stations on
the basis of the occurrence and abundanace of members of the defined groups of
taxa.
A.3.3.1.14 Consistent differences in the values of computed community indices
(see A.3.3.1) were evidence among station Groups A, B and C (Fig. A-14). In
Table A-17, the mean values of Shannon-Weave Diversity, Number of Taxa and
Number of Individuals are presented by Individual stations within these thr«a
groups. Additionally, the rank af these gtations based on the somputed values
ara shown for each survey. In aost surveys, the largest Talues for each
infaunal community index usually occurred in station Group 1-. In half the
survey-index rankings presented in Table A-17, the stations within the
reference site were ranked 1, 2 and 3. Additionally, large values for these
variables were consistently observed at Stations 3 and 4 within the disposal
site (Group 3). These two stations also showed close associations with the
reference stations in the numerical classifications (Fig. A-14). The lowest
values-far-these" computed-indices were-alaost:. alyaya found In Group-d
•consisting of Stations 1, .2 and 5 within the disposal site. In particular-,
the. lowest: Talues for number' of taxa-,. number-of Individuals and.. .Diversity vere
aost frequently found at. Station 5 within Group C.
A.3.3.1.15 The sediment grain size characteristics at the sampling stations
(Fig. A-1) are presented in Tables A-18 - A-25. Similarities were observed
between disposal- and reference-site sediment characteristics based on the
percentage of material in the gravel, sand, silt and clay components.
Generally, sediments at all stations exhibited large proportions of both sand
and silt. However,'based on the sediment grain size distribution in one-unit
phi intervals over the range -1 to +13 (Tables A-22 - A-25), distinct
differences were observed between reference-site ad disposal-site stations.
Characteristically, the reference-site sediments were composed primarily of
very fine sand to coarse silt (phi intervals 2-5). The larger sediaents (phi
Intervals greater than 2) represented less than 2 percent of the total in all
but four reference-site samples. Likewise, a consistent pattern was observed
in the «ma"n contribution of very fine sediments to the total. At the
disposal-site stations, sediments were generally well distributed over the
different phi Interals, and both the coarse and fine sediment intervals were
well represented at all stations. Differences In the distribution of
sediments, however, were also observed among the disposal site stations.
Stations 3 and 4 consisted primarily of coarse silt and exhibited a greater
similarity to the reference-site stations than to disposal-site stations 1, 2
and 5, which consisted primarily of medium to fine sand.
A-56
-------
TABLE A-17. MEAN VALUES OF NUMBER OF TAXA, NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS AND
SHANNON-WEINER DIVERSITY FOR INDIVIDUAL REPLICATE SAMPLES (0.1 M*)
Survey
Group
Station2
A
Rl R2 R4
B
03 04
C
01 02 D5
Munoer of .Taxa •
(rank3)
1
2
3
4
84.7 32.2 81.0
(1) . (2) (3)
36.7 33.7 78.5
U) (2) (3)
67.7 45.7 64 .3
(1) (7) (2)
f?;5 82.5" 81.0
(1) (3) (4)
. 62.5 46.7
(4) (7)
76.2 60.5
(4) (7)
57.5 50.7
(3) (4)
t9.2 SB. 7
(2) - (5)
56.7 60.2 34.0
(6) (5) - (8)
65.0 75.7 -S3.S
(6) (5) {3}
50.2 47.7 36.7
(5) (6) (8)
41.7 67.0 39.1
(7) (6) (8)
i
Nuaber of Individuals
. (rank)
«
2
3
4
505.7 509,2 411.:
(2) (1) (3)
492.7 • 553.2 394.7
(3) (2) (6)
271.5 133.2 177.7
(2) (8) (5)
605.0 631.2 446.2
(4) (3) (7)
375 .5 225.7
(5) (7)
638.2 456.7
(1) (4)
155.5 180.5
(7) (4)
752.5 648.2
(1) (2)
262.7 379.7 154.7 i
(6) (4) (8)
354.2 455.2 373.0
(3) (5) (71
277.7 181.7 166.7
(1) (3) (6)
320.0 585.0 469.0
(8) (5) (6)
Diversity
(rank)
1
2
3
4
S.16. 5.04 S.19
U) (2) (3)
5.08 4.97 5.23
(2) (3) (1)
5.02 4.31 5.13
(3) (5) {2)
5.13 4.73 4.95
(1) (3) (2)
4.39 4.48
(4) (7)
4.39 4.31
(6) (8)
5.24 4.90
(1) (4)
4.63 4.08
(4} (5)
4.76 4.57 4.10
(5) (6) (8)
4.66 4.31 4.38
(5) (4) (7)
4.44 4.61 4.10
(7) (6) (8)
3.14 3.93 ' 3.49
(8) (6) (7)
lStat1on grouos defined on the basis of nuneHcal classification results (Figure A-14).
Station designation: R * Reference site; 0 « Disposal site.
Stations are ranked within each survey on the basis of computed values of the Indicated
community Index.
A-57
-------
V)
i
«c
UJ
(/I
PERCENT
CLAV
s
is
hO
3a
*J O
!i
mtCENf
(iflAVEi.
3Z«,
* ««e
•«
ESS!!
55S2
S338
52*2
oonr*
San*
aanai
n
*<»»K
i««oin
«««4
*••«*«
Sfkctn
* 4
ata««-4
n^»r«o — »-<
n * * *«i « * •*
* «•«*
on * *
r»»ap» «
M «*
s?s;
on* n
r»f» ••*
*«*»
ar>nn
•«ar%a
••^••i n
n«aM
nona
n *N (i
QP> <«!«
r> nan
nn«>«
Ra-«(*
)>•»••«
- «»>>
Mnnci
» o a oita » o ijio o •» ajn K n. -a to a a o-
^ r> K r*o n n nif* f» ». r««8 di a «IP» -i r» <*
-J--
'MCI*
' --"•-
— «rt«
nnnn
-•Mfl*
nnnn
«•<»«*
» »**
M<*r>*
oana
•A
w«
O
a.
4/f
a
n n o a
» « •» •
tin *f«
« * a *»
o nun
o e-<
4n -o -
a* an
3S3§
9600
**» n *
» nn »
*****
-»(Dffl -«
*-
n -«f» »
•4-4 -4 4
ooo e
a <3 o o
o a d o.
!
«• -Q * 44* tt M *t^ ~I -4 N
^ r« Ni ~&n n n ntcff o ca fi -
-(HO*
«• ^ «• «w
— mnun
eininn
j
i
-•« n*
****
IM
kl
s
tat
a
M*
te
tat
A-58
-------
trt
trt
i
ts>
i
»•
z
h
*d
*•
S.
5d
£«
i
it
FENCtNf
CMAVEU
»*u.
5«B
is:
2
iss
A 0 ^ n
SO-RI
»f>f» f?
N- n
* Ana
r*^n»
8"*S
«• «•«
«» 4 n
4 « 4 »
$ss;
§4no
4 * a
on 4«
» t» — «
««r n*i
9- O - -
4| (IH M> IK
• W W M
DISPOSAL
n 4f» «
« -a n
so»n
-c« — -
4 l» w ^
• » o »
** » — *»
— 01 01 N
ri *. — e
4 O O ft
b o »• »
4 n n n
f» »» •
anon
» — o •»
— (!((»»•
— o -n
» » n »
80 o o
a o o
b do b
a a o»
•>• •
«3 n BID
In- •* 4 4
n n nn
rs o -«
noon
n 4 «n
» — oo
» 4 o n
w «i n »
«» 44«
»>on*
o«-n*
p» ^ n *>
n-n»n
Boo o
ooo
e ood
^ n 4 4
*
n •>*«
IM »sr a
a a a -a
«r » » »
_ * — ra
-no «
•^ 4 - n
n » as —
» «CB -4
•»»»»•
— « — n
o^«o
• — — -4
»«f» n •
r-rw4 «
S3S3
pi — 6 -
4 » O «
P»«»»
14 •» «l «>
4444'
n n n n
fi 3 » o
-f» -K
o a rt a
«ft h.f»
» >• n r»
n » » »
— k o _
9- W - 4
a n » »
3S§S
bo oo
O - 4 4
-
O *1 0 *»
4444
«• ^ ^ ^
W
w
*
w
w
Ito
Itt
«
n » a n
O 4 - 4
» O f» n
& r. f n
Ofl «•«
.• a K. n
nnnn
o »> ^ n
o » o «
4444
S8SS
ooo o
•• •/ n n
""
none
nnnn
nnnn
n n n o
» » 03
— » » N
— • —
Sn^
Sn2S .
n *> rt a
-------
(^
MM
VI
U4
f»a
:
I/I
£
£
vt
?
Ul
rc«ct*r
CLAY
PEHCEHT
6ILT
PCHCEMT
BANG
•»
ii
"ffa
23 =
is!
a a--
i
i
i
3
I ivrt BTAIIUM
1.1.35
r» »a re
*SS5
££3£
ssss
5553
3S3S
•moo-
'JJ5S
a •««•" «
^- -1 -4 -J
-^n
n -a*.*
p> a «
aom-
aoo n
n » 00
tlf-91?
4 r> 9 s
ft rt ^ fl
^ d ^ —
a - «••
**""
» mo -
n r» n.is.
•« — «*)
* * 2 ^
•. — tn —
i±5#
•i fii » o
a »-3 »i
OM-94I>~
0-0-
w ^ ^( ^
a.tg a •*
-J ^J -J -4 •
1 •• ft (PI *^
It MO A
8
W)
a
n o « •»
-4 Wf Q
— ** —
3252
5333
S32S
n » i". f«
o» »«
. aa g o
3 a3o
OOO<3
ssss
K o a o
e«m ^
« a — n
» » -a o
mm n n
»i n » »
» -n as
OQOOQ<3g^
i
a « a oje a o a
i l"
v o ^3 ffifli ^ ^ ^*w ^ »^ a
*^»o-aif«-» < »»i
o a a a-
•
IM
u*
tM
A-60
-------
a
LU
w>
^
>.
(/I
i
PEHCCN1
CLAV
PfHCENI
BILI
PEHCEHI
BAND
Z-J
si-
rs
*53
, tut
.MIJ33
eurt.iuvg
u
u
GTATIOI4
li we ai AII on
30 n*.
TOO
n »» —
rv<*~n
r» * o n
SO 4 Q
• a *
2S33
2525
4a «o
«f» a n
— «•«.«
•• n r* -a
•r li re 3
SSS2
•'••-•n
^ «• v ^
fl ^ O ^
•» ri a a
•*« 4 4
n 4»K
an n«
ni ^ o rt
4 nf» 4
^ o n fk
*»» a
i> n Q a
» * ra m
m >.n n
•>«» n
P» •» » 4
» n o 4
n 4 *«•
nn »n
oboo
r» o M >
i» na n
a -« ni
-
oaaa
w P» ^» a
onn —
a «r » 4
?S5n
^SS
SSiS
6 »oo
S— m nlo v » 4
4 .» »M ra n n
1
» n n »
0>-O 4
» n nn
SiSo
rr n. n n
OO 4 O
4 » a n
4 a n n
I» ^ a **
f» «n r
a 4 N K
n n n o
0-CL»JX.
*»> 0 t^ n
» »» o
tvnnn
« — n a
»» >» 0 4
— 4 BJ «
4444
o o g o
o oo o
o oo o
n 4 * ^
» n PI o
n ff o oio o 01 0
-»««•! •
« n ct n
1*1
IM
5S> ?
» O N >
44-4
f» — n »
nnnn
Ii* * p» »
a n v •>
» — a fi
a 4 4 4
ssss
oo a o
I* !»'» 9-
4 n n »
n 2 2 2
-•ft n*
•r T » «
A-61
-------
CM
«i — »n-
5 :
in
3S3«83S3Sss*::55St'.
ooonoooooooo
8 2
In
• n.—«-——ein*>no«-'*nn-oao
OS
uj
- 2
S • X
fl ••
a a
1:1
h»*«*ih4**'*oifci»*4.fiiia4 —•
9 Wall -« rriVii >rb
««»-4>«««<«o»«n
O--
a-
_
i/i
5
»—
LU
^-
i
s
UJ
U1
I
irt
«st
»
2.3
3 3
8 3
M
? 8
•H* KM a• in» • » «>» » • a p •» a.-. — -
fkOMfii^^-VO — — OwtO^O*."**!.
nO«*n^MM*l»^w* »^
»»-»o^*»*t-«— rt»^
!858SasS-2*i-<*"-S585
«ot»S*«S85«42
J"2"**"-SSSS
«4nfi
«rt?
<«cia4*>*i»ooaooaoaavo->4
ooooaaaooono
333333333833
ooooaooaoaoo
uj
rg
•n* 4*4
I/I
ZJ-
ii
u> ui
inannnt
S
s
A-62
-------
-23
1:1
oooooooaooaoooooooo
SS8SS83S838S
oooaoocooooo
fl n4n
^ — nn*N94hO******nr«fl»*^*»*H
1
n-o»ioi»-»oo-»o- — ooo — ^«
J?*?-S22*S2S
oooo-0ft-oo«»
.
t * *
5 2
Svf»*fr — no*MO»»**i
»n«r»*nn«»M»«» —«<
—oooo—oooooo-ivo*
S 5
1:1
itfffr***v««Mwrt«fi9»»»nv«
va«»o*«««vv«n*«o»nn**4
s s
;iss??-e-*«s:s:?S:
.»*f*«*ffn«»«»«i»oo*»
0 0
I si
8 2
«**»»—o^^****
5 A «««r *
««k nO p»
4 o n - • • n •• -
O
i
«• r ^iof»~'»*»'«'«'»'i»'~">»*'5*'£I*22
O O »-.i»O*'»1'l«l»**B*'*'*€»O*****"lli
•* • «P «nfl»«*.*fc****fc*k*'*l*
^ •
a
3 S ;ss3:£S8s;nR:$S=:ss:
Iri zsassssa8S28="*5ssa:
___»nnii —-«•'
UJ
»••
Uj'
5
LU
I
I/)
I/)
>•
5?
UJ
PNI .
»• oj
»?
ii
Oi^
7 3
I.I
><**»*>*O»f»" — — »*>Ot
SMOOf* V
n» o—»
eoooooeeoooo
888888888888
oooooooooooo
• ••^n»«*n**w
TABLE
1
A-63
-------
UJ
22
2*5
O <"
1:1
smmmssmasm
aoeooooooooaoooooooa
ooooooooeooo
oanaopaonoa-
1:1
00*100-— *-«'
a -
!:I
S 2
-o—noo-
i S
2 !
: *z
* * *
*Q«1WAA«n»4^OnRt4H''IV
r> —••(••nniinnnvn* —«nan-
a.
>•>
a
o
H-
S S
!:!
* * *
a a
3 3
i;i
<»fi|ni<|
3 3
ill
*
o
Lkl
«n
i
wi
3 S
I ?
88S31S3SI32S
oooaaaoaoooa
33333S3333S3
aaoaoaaaoooo
A-64
-------
C A-25. GRAUI SIZE ANALYSIS - SEDIMENT WEIGHT DISTRIBUTION BV Pill INTERVAL
Survey 4.
1 All OH ylAIIOH MfLICAIf VHI'I FHIOO rHIOl FMlOa .PMI01 HII04 f«IOJ »HIU4 HtlO/ »HI t> I* I* • «• «• l» I* >• I* t*
PHMM PHIBI ptiioa PMIOI ftno« rnio) fMio» rmo/ PHIIM »Hia« PHIIO fiiln fHiu • PHII> PMII* fHiia
M.
88888888883838888888
eeeoaaoeeeeoaaoeeeoe
onoa- — ooooooeoeoonoo
So35:Sr""3SS3e-;sS2S
(•wvrtww*** '3^"2lS'25""'222
... .
n««.««.«P.«»*f>««>.»n
S88B»M3»*IKH*m
»:S8S8»£K8»»85ZS
(•^••••C«« — — — —
-•-— •••
838881888838
oooooooooooo
OOOOOOOOOOOP
OQOOOOOOoeOO
nnnnnn-—noon
n f»« ••»«*• — <
8« 4~
•»0
SS5SSJ3SSSS5
5SSSSSSS3S35
-—000*00
ooooo-oooaoa
888888S88S88
ooaaoaoaoooe
A-65
-------
A.3.3.1.16 To demonstrate the observed differences In infaunal community
structure among the three groups of stations, the data from Survey 1 was used
to compare the occurrence and abundance of individual taxa among the
identified groups of stations. Three analyses were conducted. First, an
inverse numerical classification was performed to identify groups of taxa with
similar distributional characteristics among the sampling areas (stations).
Second, nodal analyses were conducted to identify those assemblages of
organisms which showed the most consistent differences in their distribution
among the stations. Third, the abundance of these groups of organisms was
tabulated for the three groups of stations (A, B and C, see Fig. A-14)
previously defined.
A.3.3.1.17 The seventy-two most abundant infaunal taxa were selected for the
Inverse classification analysis from the 298 taxa identified in Survey 1.
These taxa represented over 90 percent of all the individuals enumerated in
this survey and included all taxa present in at least 12 of the 32 individual
replicate samples. A listing of these taxa, their abundance, the proportion
of the- total number of Individuals enumerated in the survey represented by
these taxa, and their frequency of occurrence in individual replioata samples
is-presented in Table.A-26..
A.3.3-1.18 The results of the inverse numerical classification for Survey 1
are presented in Figure A-15. The selected taxa were partitioned into 7
Species Groups by drawing a line across the dendrogram at the indicated level
of similarity. The use of this method for defining species groups excluded
six taxa which joined these1 groups afc- lower levels of similarity. The seven
species-groups defined in. ?igure A-15 were used in nodal analyses (Boesch,
1977) to- demonstrate*differences- In. infaunal assemblages amon? the three •
previously defined groups of 3tations~.(Groups* A$ 3 and-C',. ?ig. A-lU). The
index of constancy was used to express- the degree of station-group and
species-group coincidences for each species-group and station-group pair. The
degree of constancy of taxa in particular station groups is expressed as:
where **•« = number of occurrences of members of species group i in
collection group j
o^ * number of taxa in species group i
Q, a number of stations in station group j
w
A.3.3.1.19 The nodal constancy diagram for this analysis is presented in
Figure A-16. The value of the constancy index is arbitrarily graded as very
high, high, moderate, low and very low based on the proportion of the number
of occurrences of taxa in the station group to the total possible number of
such occurrences.. The dimensions (width and height) of each ceil in the
constancy diagram are drawn proportional to the number of taxa in the species
group and the number of stations in each station group.
A-66
-------
A-25. MOST ABUNDANT BENTHIC INFAUNAL TAXA. SURVEY 1
rCBICfiASIXIS
TAUBEXIA MACIUS
UN JO.
14J.1A RAMOSA
WWDUCTA
urricA
•OOWTOHHINA CYCI-1A
mwraciNCT*
AXCY37ATA
U*ONICE CIJIRATA
P**VIUK:N* TEM
CA*tTB_L> CAPITATA
or
IN01VIIXMLS
77«
.MS
930
343
311
308
i«a
111
t93
143
194
137
134
11*
117
113
1«
to*
1
3
3
4
9
»
7
a
»
10
tl
13
13
14
19
1*
17
ia
»»
30
31
MUONOSPtO SP: * OF 9CAH1T
OLA«I»A
COHNIST* FftANCISCANA
UNiD.
«F. i OF nac
u»a i AT A
JCC3T* CATHAN1MAE
•XYCER* SF.
7TQBMATHI*. S^: A. OP- FI»C.
»*cinc*
AIIMQP91DA SEJJBICATA
BOUOOU1PV.U8 M»"1I»C,>HTX*
.IB
»TMIA
sci_ERoeowcn»
ATHtA
>p. t or nac
•CCSTA SIFW-Tl
I
SETOS*
IIOOIA
SMBONUPtltS
P15TA OI80UMCTA
•1
7*
?»<•
TO-
70
a
a*
94
90
9O
47
49
•43
43
43
37
37
3*
39
39
34
33
33
33
37
3*
3*
3*
39
39
39
33
39
39
34
34
CAC1FOBHICA
3V
30
31
39
3*.
37
40
41
43
•3
44
49
4*
47
90
91
99
3*
37
•O
•1
*a
4*
70
71
73
TOTAL INDIVIDUALS
0. 137
0. 070
0. 0*0
0. 0*0
0.047
0. 043
0. 043
0. 031
0.030
0.01*
0.01*
0. 01*
0.01*
0. 013
0.013
0.013
0.011
0.011
0. 010
0. 010
0. OIO
o.oto
0.00*
0. OO*
O. OM<
o. ooa
o. ooa
O. OO7
0.007
0.007
0. OO7
0. 007
0. 007
0. 00«
0. OO*
0. OO*
o. oo* -
0. OO*
0.009
0.009
0. OO9
0. OO4
0. OO4
0. 004
0. 004
0. OO4
0. O04
0. OO4
0. OO3
0.003
0. OO3
a. ooa
0. 003 .
O. 003
0 003
O n«1
O OO3
6 ocs
o. ooa
o. ooa
o. ooa
o. ooa
0.003
o. ooa
0.003
o. ooa
o. ooa
o. ooa
0.003
o. ooa
o. ooa
o. ooa
CUnULATIVE
PMOPOftTION
0. 13
0. 30
0.37
0.33
0.37
0. 41
0. 4*
O. 4Q
O. 93
0. 94
0. 99
O. 97
0. 9V
0. *1
0. *3
0. *4
o. *a
0.**
0. »7
o. *•
o. *«
0. 70
a. TO
a. 7t
0. 73
0.73
0.74
0.74
0. 79
O. 7*
0. 77
0. TT
0. 7«
o. TO
0. TV
a. BO •
0. BO:
o. at
o. at
0.83
0.83
0. 83
0.83
0.83
0. 84
0.84
0.84
0. 89
0.89
O. 89
O. 8*
o. a*
0.8*
0 87
0 87
O 87
0.87
0.88
O. 88
O. B8J
0.88
0.8*
0.8*
0.8*
0.8*
0.8*
0. *O
o. *o
o. *o
o. *o
O. *1
PKCOUENCY OF
OCCURRENCE
1. OOO
0. 9*«
1.000
0.***
0. 781
1. OOO
0. TOt
0. 71*
0. »**
0. 781
0. *8B
0. 71*
0.781
0.879
0. 9OO
0. fc39
0.608
0.8*4
. O. 844
o. aaa.-
0.63*
O. 879
0.331
0. *39
o. an
a, 90*
0.43*
0.84*
0. 975
0. «**
0. 9*4
0. *39
O. 3*3
a. «**
Q. 636
a. «o* •
Q. 5OO.
Q. 3*3.
a. «*»
o. *o»
0. 931 "
0.379
0. 900
0.344
0. 373
0.379
0.63*
0.313
0.40*
0. 344
0. MO
O. 40*
0.344
O 931
9*3
438
a 331
9*3
31*
O31
•O*
O. 331
0.438
O. 373
0.438
O. 9OO
0.344
0.344
O. 4O*
O. 390
0. 900
0. *»*
RAMK
IV PIIEQUENCY
I
4
a
»
IB
3
1*
30
6
19
33
I*
17
10
49
38
31
14
13
23
17
»
3*
3*
a
7
29
12
U
««
31
30
39
*7
2*
»*.
37
37
61
*O
*3
34
79
99
70
41-
33
33
40
34
*O
38*-
38
3*
31
*3
S3
43
71
73
43
3O
A-67
-------
DISSIMILARITY
.O ».a u.0 M.O
TAXON
tcRKCUCvatiii
WHIS.
TAUIWIA SflACIU*
OU.J* IMH03A
*«3T»
W.TCW* O^ITATA
GROUP 1
GROUP 2
.
GROUP 3
GROUP 7
0.0 H.O
X DISSIMILARITY
TAXOM
FIGURE A-1S INVERSE CLASSIFICATION RESULTS
A-G8
-------
COHSTHHCY
SPECIES GROUPS
3 1
6 7
H 2 09
U«ry H.gn
.High
|.» 0.3
flooerate
Low
U. < ° r
Uery
FIGURE A16. NODAL CONSTANCY DIAGRAM
SURVEY 1.
A-69
-------
A.3.3.1.20 The results of the nodal analysis summarized in Figure A-16
demonstrate infaunal community differences between the three station groups.
All seven species groups ware wall represented in samples collected at the
reference site (station Group A). Therefore, none of the three station groups
were characterized by taxa which are well represented within a particular
group and not elsewhere. The major difference between the disposal site
(Group A) and the reference sites (Groups B and C) was the occurrence of taxa
from Species Groups 2, 3 and 4. Differences In the occurrence of these taxa
were also evident among stations within the disposal site (Groups B and C).
A.3-3-1.21 The nodal constancy diagram provides information on the patterns
of presence or absence of taxa among the station groups. Quantitative data on
the abundance of taxa from Species Groups 2, 3 and 4 at individual stations
within Site Groups A, B and C are presented in Table A-27. As indicated,
large differences between the reference and disposal sites were found in the -
abundance of taxa from Species Groups 2, 3 and 4, Large differences in the
abundance of the taxa from Species Groups 3 and 4 were also found between
station Groups A and 3 even though the frequency of occurrence of these taxa
was similar.
A.3'.3.1.22 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. Fifty-three of the 128
samples (41 percent) collected in the four surveys represent paired infauna/
sediment samples. The data from these 53 samples were used to determine the
correlation between biological and environmental variables.
A.3.3.1-23 A summary of the correlations that existed between the infaunal
community indices and. environmental variables measured during this.study is
presented in Table- .1-28.. Statistically significant- correlations were' observed
between infaunal community indices and the proportion of medium, fine, and
very fine sand in the sediments. Species Richness, Number of Taxa and Number
of Individuals were negatively correlated with the proportion of very fine
sand in the sediments. These results generally support the previous
observations concerning the effects of station location on these infaunal
community indices. Both the number of taxa and number of individuals were
highest at stations within the reference site where sediments had a large
component of very fine sand. The lowest values for these community indices
were found at Stations 1, 2 and 5 within the disposal site where the sediments
were primarily medium sand (phi interval 1-2).
A.3.3.1.24 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. However, the
results presented in Table A-28 do not indicate that the elevated metal
concentrations have affected the benthic infaunal community. The only
statistically significant correlations between sediment metal concentrations
and infaunal community indices were the positive correlations between arsenic
concentrations and Species Richness, Number of Taxa and Number of Individuals.
However, other results not presented In Table A-24 indicate that arsenic
A-70
-------
TABLE A-27. ABUNDANCE OF TAXA FROM SPECIES GROUPS 2, 3 AND 4 AT
STATIONS WITHIN SITE GROUPS A, B AND C
Species Group
2
Konobrachlun parasltun
Tomburchus redondoensis
SptiaeresylUs brandhorstl
Nephtys cornuta frandscana
P1sta dlsjuncta
leptostylls SB. £ of MBC
Anygdalun palildulum
Acesta simplex
Slycera caoitata
Sathyleberis calif omica
Cadului auadrff issatus-
Honoeu lodes enarglnatus
Eucnone Incolor
Sarsonuphts parva
3
Heteroonoxus oculatus
iutiorella aaciflca
HyHochele oracHis..
Prarmeila graclTIs
Terebellldes stroenl
SnatMa SB.
Anpnlclionorius granulosus
Onupnls so.
Stlaphasna genlnatun
Ampnlpholls squanata
PtKwocephalus homilis
Daugaloplus anphacantha
4
Hemertea unid.
Slycera sp.
Paraorionosplo plnnata
Anpellsca unsocalae
Praxniella afflnls pacifies
Pholoe glabra
Rut1 derma lomae
Kenatoda unid.
Leptognathl a $9. 8 of MBC
Leptognathla sp. A of WC
AxlothelU rubrodncta
Amphlura areystata
Clrrophorus branchlatus
Station
Grouol
Station2
A
Rl R2 R4
49
39
56
137
33
19
19-
9
4
10
16
23
10
13
13"
14
16.
37
19
17
61
13-
15
14
16
9
30
-26
33
26
5-
6
3
1
175
4
5
5
1
2
8
5
4
2
2
•2 ! 19
'7- 14
21 19
17 7- S
15 6 5
17
13
3
8
3
20
12
49
SO
34
30
37
28
36
60
60
73
33
30
25
5
1
4
1
2
.
11
11
9
13
11
7
6
-
24 19
35
36
35
23
12
14
11
10
17
34
19
25
22
36
23
13
36
42
45
33
SB
39
52
B
D3 04
17
14 j
13
3
-
a
2
3
•
.
1
2
1
1
21
2
1
2
•
-.
1
^
-
2
•
a 3
-6 3
6
1
5 Z
3 7
i <•
6
9
5
3
15
19
15
6
4
S
12
17
8
_
3
4
.
2B
33
8
1
.
9
5
3
3
9
6
1
9
6
7
2
1
1
2
7
29
C
01 02 OS
10
4
1
27
3
3
4
5
9
2
1
4
7
1
.
i
I
7
1
4
4
5
_
>
_
•
4
11
_
_
«
5
3
4
•
.
2
9
6
6
6
4
8
1
9
4
2
2
2
1
4
9
6
.
1
3
-
-
3
9
5
1
>
.
•
5
8
2
«
16
18
3
.
.
34
2
1
2
.
2
.
2
I
i
2
2
.
4
S
1
«
-
.
..
.
4
1
1
1
-
-
»
7
8
.
.
.
2
1
6
.
.
1
_
6
groups defined on the basis of nunerlcal classification results
(F1gureA-14).
Station designation: R - Reference site; 0 • Disposal site.
A-71
-------
TABLE A-28. PEARSON PRODUCT-MOMENT CORRaATION COEFFICIENTS BETWEEN SELECTED
INFAUMAL COMMUNITY INDICES AND PHYSICAL-CHEMICAL VARIABLES. Correlations
based on 53 samples.
Grai n-Si ze Character! sties
(phi Intervals)
Medium Sand
(01-02)
*
Fine Sand
(02-03)
Very Fine Sand
(03-04)
Coarse Silt
(04-05)
Medium Silt
(05-06)
Species
Diversity
-0.1739
P-0.106
0.0800
P«0.285
0.0371
P-0.396
0.1295
P-0,180
-0.0016
P-0.496
Species
Richness
-0.3960
P-0.002
-0.1193
piQ.197-
0.4101
P-0.001
0.1659
P'o.na
-0.0373
P=0.39S
Number
of Taxa
-0.4034
P»d.OQl
-0.1652
P-0.119
0.4723
P-0.000
Q.1765
P=0.103
-0,0572
P=0,342
Number
of Individuals
-0.3493
P=O.Q05
-0.2532
P=0.034
0.4857
PO.QOQ
0.17 SO
P-0.10S
-0.0464
P=0.371
Sediment Metal Concentration
Cu
Pb
Hg
Zn
As
Cd
Cr
Sample Depth
0.0073
?^0.479*
0.0565
PMJ.344
0.0829
P»0.299
0.0180
P«0.449
-0.0484
P-0.373
0.1287
P-0.179
0.1043
P»0.229
0.0718
P*0.305
-0.0944
P-0.251.
• O.OQ19
P<*0.495
0.0111
P-0.472
-0.0196
P»0,445
0.3175
P«0.015
0.1036
P«0.230
-0.0397
P»0.389
-0.1632
P=0.122
-0.1150 .
P-0.206.-
-0.0156
P«0.456
-0.0056
P»0.486
-0.0037
P=0.490
0.3947
P«0.003
0.0946
P^O.250
-0.0844
P"0.274
-0.2097
P«0.066
' . -0.1471^
P -0.1.47'
-0.0718
P=0.3Q5
-0.0740
P=0.319
0.0476 .
P=0.368
• 0.4415
P=O.OOl
0.0177
P=0.45Q
-0.1746
P=0.106
-0.2547
P=0.033
A-72
-------
concentrations are highly correlated with the percentage of silt in the
sediment. Previously, it was shown that these infaunal indices are also
positively correlated with silty sediments.
A.3-3«1-25 A statistically significant negative correlation was also observed
between station depth and number of individuals. This result supports the
information presented in Figures A-10 through A-13 on the relationship between
depth and number of individuals within the disposal site.
A.3.3-2 Summary
The results presented in this section indicate the existence of differences in
the benthic infaunal commuity between the reference- and disposal-area
sampling sites and between sampling sites within the disposal area. . Graphical
and statistical methods were used to demonstrate the existence of elevated
values at the reference site for three community indices (Diversity, Species
Richness and Number of Taxa). Statistically, significant differences in both
number of taxa and number of individuals were also identified between stations.
within the disposal site. Numerical classification analysis was used to
identify consistent differences in the infaunal community characteristics
between the reference and disposal sites. These differences were related to
both the occurrence and abundance of dominant infaunal taxa.
A.3.3.2.1 These observed biological differences were attributed to
differences in sediment grain-size characteristics and sampling depth. There
was no evidence that the observed biological, differences were related to the
accumulation of toxics (i.e., metal's..) within the sediment. The major
difference in the sediment-characteristics between the reference and disposal
sites- was the greater- percentage' of "sand; in the- disposal-site- sediments-..
Based on the modling results of the dredge-spoil plume during dumping
(Appendix C), the deposition of sand sediments within the disposal site is
possible. However, given the differences of sediment grain-size
characteristics within the disposal site-and the lack of information on the
specific location of dumping activities there is insufficient evidence to
attribute observed biological differences to dredge-spoil dumping.
A.3.« DEMERSAL FISH AND EPIBENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATES
A complete list, enumerated by species, of fish and invertebrates captured in
otter trawls at the LA 5 disposal and reference sites during each of the four
sampling periods is provided in Appendix B, Table B-4. The following sections
summarize the 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 carefully 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
epibenthie macrinvertebrate fauna of the sites by assessing major -trends and
patterns in principal species present, number of species, and overall
abundance.
A-73
-------
A.3.4.1 Demersal Fish
A.3.4.1.1 Overall Characterization, Table A-29 3hows principal species,
number of species and total number of individuals of demersal fish captured in
otter trawls at the LA 5 disposal and reference sites, broken down by sampling
period (season) and depth of trawl station. In all, sampling at these two
sites produced 45 species representng 19 families. Miller and Lea (1972) list
481 species In 129 families as occurring in southern California (Ft.
Conception to Mexican border). Earlier, more extensive studies of demersal
fish have reported 213 species in 66 families (Horn, 1974 and 121 species in
41 families (SCCWHP, 1973). The present study, therefore, represents a'
minority of the southern California demersal fish fauna, which is not
surprising considering the limited depth range (135-l86m) and duration (64
mostly 5-oinute trawls) of the sampling.
A.3.4.1.2 In terms of species composition, the trawl catch was dominated by
flatfish (primarily family Pleuroneetidae) and rockfish (Scorpaenidae) (Table
3-4). Numerically, one species, the slender sola (Lyopaetta exilis) was
particularly dominant,, accounting for almost naif of the total individuals
caught (2,176 of 4,2525). The slender sole was also very frequently
encountered, occurring in 61 of the 64 trawls, indicating a widespread
distribution. The Pacific sanddab (Citharicfathys sordidus) was the second
most abundant species (680 in 29 trawls). Two additional species, although
aot.so abundant as the slender sole and the Pacific sanddab, occurred in a
large, number of trawlar the- ahortspine-combfiah (Zanioleois frenata) (177 in
53 trawla.); and the 'over sole (Mlrcoatomus oacificus) (199 in *7'. trawls)..
These:- two. species?, thus? appear to.-be widely distributed, but-not generally
abundant. Other commonly caught- species were the stripetail rockfiair
(Sebastes 3axicoj.a), the- aalfbanded rockfish (Sebaates semicintus), the
rosethorn rockfish (Sebastes helvomaculatus), the plain-fin midshipman
(Porlchthya notatus), and the pink seaperch (Zalembiua rosaceus). All of the
above species are well-known common components of the aid-depth demersal fish
fauna of southern California (Horn, 1974? SCCWHP, 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 strlptall rockfIsh, the yellowchin sculpin (Icelinua
quadrlseriatus), and the California tonguefish (Symp_hurus_ atrieauda) are
perhaps under-represented (Table B-4).
A.3.4.1.3. Variations with Depth. There appears to be no depth-related trend
in number of species caught at either site, and there is no trend in total
abundance at the disposal site (Table A-29). At the reference site, however,
there is some evidence for greater abundance at the shallow station (135 m)
that the other stations: the greatest number of fish were caught at the
shallow station during each of the four surveys. The lack of any strong
depth-related trends in the data is not surprising considering the relatively
small depth range (135-186 m) Involved.
A.3.4.1.4 Regarding principal species, the slender sole tends to be most
dominant at the deep stations (186 m). This is largely due to a generally
decreasing abundance of other principal species, although the Pacific sanddab
A-74
-------
o m
u-g
II
•I
IP
u •«
a v »
M c «J
to
O"
* • =
tn " ° _
S ." -S
2K il
^ m 9 s*
in «n *"»
1*1
—
IM O
** i ,_
< «"-C •£
-"-•£ « — • J
^ •* IB ^
S ^ « 5*
4 ** " ••> ^r •
•f * 1*1 ^ % ^
• LM w ** CO •
*" 2 IB L.
^S5 - =;
I^= a! -1 «
• • •/» j c "5.
S— u £ ^-« *
C1! <• ^
^ ^
3 OT 2 «
S*5 u
«C| &
^le & • o
fe=- o
» & w T
OC •) V. >
< W «l ^
o
«%
X
5
£
u
h»
«
5
w
4T
Al
CW 0
'
£« x:
• * —
} *• 2
Si a
g " « 5-
I.E 1 *S^
^ 4O ¥• ^ H
« « w o. « « »•
* i^r I 1"
£
^
j
e
^
u
Q
w
M
Ml
•t
Ml
M
a
at
/>
fBP
1*
M
M
«
«
**
«•
^1
- I
.J
*> ** *> V *•
l« •- — •«
•
*^
«
U
t»
M
**
put
O
01
•M
«
«4
** •" —
P*
0
u
p^
•c
0
M
Mfe
s
M
i
IV
M "»W—
— S S
5 sta
w •
«rf ** «»
** ** «
tt • ** 41 **
M «•
_ii J"»
il
A-75
-------
ai c
•
1
w
«l —
*s —
-s
£ *•
o
— o «• o
«l*«1
siH
sbi
at
u
3-
-!'I
«
lii *
t.
u
111
en
CM
1/1 —. jr — *-
,« i.« 3-
o in v o o> i/i
«- <*> 0--»0 _ '
A- 76
-------
ii
U
1*1 U
W
«
I
e •>
o «•
S*^ ** ^m* ^*M^ >
x vt a o
A-77
-------
1;
at e
r-
• (•
21
ul
D
it
_»
4 U
Is
1*1
U*
i
o
•H
o
»
s
k
e
••
41 w
u •-
4t ^*
a *
wt V
— •
« «*
a *•
— 41
U M
s ^
t 2
e
a
7
*
i/>
g
•
£
•
2 .
S S
^
a t>
O 41
3
i
«
o
M
««
e
k
u
^M
1
41
«l
•»
K
«
4rf
**
41
M
&
>,
A
•s 3,
tft C*l
rS i
«*• ^1
"" 5
g
•S 41 •
| S 2
« u ' k
_« a 41
«•
|
u
|
M
41
IA
«•
a
«i
1 1
- "V
— • «•
X •
• w
« *
< x
e 4i
2 **
— ^— =
SB S8 =
— in
-------
u-€
12
gtO f»
fsj Iff
in «r CM
-s s
"g i
Hi *y «1~
« • «<—
v
**
7
A-79
-------
is frequently abundant In the trawls at the deep stations. No other depth-
related trend In the distribution of the most common species is apparent.
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 fish were caught at the reference site
during 3 of the 4 surveys, and almost twice as many were caught there overall
(2,267 vs. 1,205) (Table A-29).
These differences may be related to the disposal of dredged material, although
the reason for lower catches at the disposal site is act 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 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 support that disposal site
organisms ware unacceptable as prey to the fish community. Major diffarences
were found in trawl epiblota density between the first two -and last two
surveys. Since fish abundance and diversity trends did act very similarly is
it unlikely there ia a direct relationship between epibiota density and fish
catch. The difference in fish catch between disposal and reference aites say
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.
1.3.4.V.6" Regarding principal species^- the- Pacific aanddab -(Citharchthya
aordldua) is less abundant at the disposal site than at the reference site
(Tables-A-29-and. 3-4)., The.-relation: of. this to-disposal ia not known.
although the-differences between the- 3ltes in benthlc fauna could result In
there being less suitable food for this apeeies at the disposal site. No
other differences between the two sites in abundance of principal apecies are
apparent.
A.3.4.1.7 Seasonal Variation. In assessing seasonal differences, the
inclusion of the August data is problematic because this survey employed
10-mlnute trawls, whie 5-minute trawls were used in the other surveya. Over
the last three surveys, there is evidence of a decline in the number of
species and number of fish caught at the both sites. This may indicate that
demersal fish are more abundant at the sites in the fall than in the winter
and spring, or may be the result of variation in.the effectiveness of the
trawls, which ia known to be sensitive to small changes in operating
procedures.
A.3.4.1.8 The slender aole (Lyopsetta exills) is more dominant in the
December 1983 trawls than in the following two surveys, primarily due to an
increase in its abundance rather than lower abundance of other apecies (Table
B-4). This may indicate movement by the slender aole into this site in the
fall, and movement out by February-March.
A-80
-------
A.3-4.2 Spibenthie Macroinvertebrates
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,
eplbenthic fauna. The two methods produce vary 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 (SCCWBP, 1973; Moore et_.al.» 1983). Therefore, it Is
not worthwhile 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 Characteristization. Table A-30 shows principal species,
number of species, and number of individuals of epibenthic mierinvertebrates
captured in otter .trawls at the LA 5 disposal and reference sites, broken down
by sampling period (season) and depth of trawl station. In all, sampling at
these two sites- produced 98 species. Extensive trawling by SCCWHP (Moore et^
al«t 1983) produced over 500 species. The comparatively limited results of
the present study are not surprising considering the limited depth range (135-
186 a) and duration (64 most of which were 5-minute trawls) of the sampling.
A.3.4.2.2 The trawls were dominated by crustaceans and echinoderms in both
species composition and abundance (Table A-30). Five species dominated the
catch in terms .-.of abundance. The sea urchins Lyteehinus pietus (f, 128
individuals in 31 of 6U trawls) and Allocentrotus fragilis (1,280 in 38
tr^awls), the shrimps' Crangon zacae.(1,389 in U2 trawls) and Sioyonia.ingentis .
(1',091 in 31" trawls), and" the. decapod: crustacean- Pleuronoodes- planipes-- (3.163'
in 37 trawls). Together,, these caught account for 86 percent of the total
number of macroinvertebrates caught in the trawls.
A.3.4.2.3 Pleuroneodes planipes, often referred to as the "red crab,", is a
primarily pelagic species brought into southern California water by warm water
masses moving in from the south. It is abundant only when such a water mass
makes a major intrusion in the area, usually in the summer, as happened in the
summer of 1983 during the "El Nino" phenomenon. During most summers, £.
planipes occurs in the Southern California Bight in low numbers, but its
presence in large numbers In an infrequent, somewhat anomalous condition.
This is reflected by the fact that, even during "SI Nino", £. planipes was
abundant in only one of this study's trawls. Twenty-nine-hundred (2,900) £.
planipes were-caught in a trawl at Station 3 (mid-depth) at the disposal site
in August 1983. Although JP_. planipes is primarily pelagic, it also adopts a
benthic existence at 2-3 years of age. Therefore, it is possible that the ?_.
planipes in this trawl were caught on the bottom, in the water column as the
trawl descended or ascended, or a combination of both. (Individuals caught
were not aged.) Discounting this trawl, _P_. planipes appears to be a widely
distributed but not very abundant species (263 in 36 trawls).
A.3.4.2.4 Discounting the 2,900 £. planipes in this one trawl, the other four
species listed above represent 79 percent of the trawl catch by abundance
during all the surveys. These four species are common components of trawl
A-81
-------
5 S
(5 «M
o
^;a sjote
•SJol alkSj
k -a c
***- »i
£-
i
lie
v*Ui
u
i
3- 1 I:
t t I-
O '•»
£ s
a o
tut
•a3
•-.—
u »
i!
s
~
-------
o •
m
in
o
10
«si e
o «•
«
w v
•| £
I
•g
•v
s
*t i
£ «S
u
£
f^tO*.
ow
w «
9j
5
•
•
•
«
p
.
<•
t
•
•o e
e
e
w
*
s
1
S
*
w
i . *
•g • s :
b •> •
a «
M
• «r>
M|
* M •
i a ^
> U
1 "aj a
0 *«
M1 O
; i £
a. — B
• Jg «
J U U
: H £
• a*. ••
i- _ii <
••
•k
O. &*
S 51
i i:
i
*> « j
u o •
•o « :
M *4{p
c e «
e o i
en 01 5
e c -
« ID J
k. t. (
LJ U If
e
O
Z e
• e
5!— .e — Z
•
B
«
*
0
V
«
* &
: 1
* la .
< •
i «
» M
• e
. a
a 01
• B
H S
•i
Zr!
Sm ^ B 3"? ••
If) *l 0
-------
i- -o
ii
ttl
m
i-
ii
3t
**F
w
•!"
ir
• tc
3
uf
u
iX
«l 9J «l
J—! «'
"1 i
si |
u
M
•»
1
i/i
A
a
u
e
. k
•e a.
* • 41
& fr= 2
I HL £1
M
W
^
44
e
01
IOl
s
*••
m
"a
o
>i
u
VI
M
«»
4rf
e
u
Ol
e
«
B
O
>,
u'
I/I
I
M
3
o
k
44
e
w
w
o
•c
•
^
k
e
W)
«l
s
M
B
O
OI
e
m
V.
^
01
«
k
«l
a
o
k
^
e
«i
SI
Q
<
II
OI
«
w
M
a
44
«
k
44
B
•I
3
<
«•
M
Ml
e
«i
OI
e
m
e
o
>»
u
^1
1 ' §
<•> ^ -• «4
** c *>
. « O "
o *J «, S S
?• a. B a *• s —
™ « o «/» —
— u» o — <» «» 5
*M. «^ i ««^ aoo Vk
• -. -o «-. v— «
^ ^^ ^^ ^ «^ 01 «^ 9*
S X i« ' O O
A-84
-------
II
u
=
3p
f s
w w
_
w
*
u
* t
£5
A-85
-------
?!
ii
I
S
551
c c
« a.
MS
U
«i
i I i |
2 0_B 3 O..C
wax <".s »
«»| V. Ml
aLS«-
•_ —t 9t>
« »( »•
S
5ibLi 5
T 5
«
at
C
e
e
*:
•i a C
«?=«
.C _ ^
wt S
wt— O
A-86
-------
samples from the region (SCCWHP, 1973; Moore _et_al., 1983), but they do not
generally dominate to the extent they did in our trawls. The other abundant
species in the trawls are also common benthic invertebrates of the region:
the shrimp Pandalus platyceros, the brittlestar Ophiura lutkeni, and the
basket star Gorgonocephalus eucnemis. Species that occured frequently in the
trawls but usually in low numbers included Octopus sp., the shrimp Crangon
resima, the nudibranch Pleurobranchaea californica, the brittlestar
Ophiaeantha diplasia, the sea cucumber Parastichopus californicus, and the
seastars Astropeoten verrilli and Luidia fiololata.
A.3.M.2.5 Variation with Depth. There is no clear depth-related trend in
number of species at either site, but there is a clear pattern of decreased
abundances in trawls with depth, particularly at the reference site (Table
A-30). Many more invertebrates were caught at the shallow (135 m) station
than at the deeper stations. Trawl studies by SCCHRP (Word and Mearns, 1977;
Moore jt_,al.«j 1983) have shown increasing epibenthic invertebrates abundance
and diversity with depth, but over a much larger depth range than the present
study- (all present stations are within the mid-depth category, 50-199 m, of"
Moore et al. (1983)). The relatively small depth range encompassed by the
present study limits the assessment of depth-related trends. There are no
apparent depth-related patterns in the distribution of the principal species,
except that the shrimp Crangon zaeae was seldom abundant at the shallow
stations.
A.3..4--2.6 Differences Between Disposal and Reference Sites. There is little:
evidence--for-a difference, between. the.- disposal and reference-site in. abundance
.of invertebrates, but more species were caught at the disposal site during 3
of" the;-1 -surveys,, during M of 12. stations: samplings, and. over all surveys
combined (86 vs. 48). If the epibenthic macroinvertebrate infauna is-in: fact1
more, diverse at the disposal site, it seems unlikely to be a result of
disposal (infauna show the opposite pattern) and is most likely due to
environmental factors (heterogeneity of habitat type, for example) not related
to disposal.
A. 3.^.2.7 Among the principal species, Crangon zaeae is more common at the
disposal site, while Sicyonla ingentis is more common at the reference site
(Table A-30). Since these are both shrimp, this may be an instance of niche
replacement, with unknown relation to disposal. The other principal species
are approximately equally prevalent at the two sites.
A.3.4.2.8 Seasonal Variation. In assessing seasonal trends, the Inclusion of
the: August survey data is problematical because this was the only survey which
employed 10-mlnute trawls. As with the fish data, there is evidence for
declining abundance and number of species over the last three surveys. This
may Indicate epibenthic invertebrates are more abundant at these sites during
the fall than the winter and spring, although such a rapid change in -abundance
seems less plausible for invertebrates than for the.more mobile fish. Because
the demersal fish at these sites feed on epibenthic fauna as well as infauna,
a decrease in abundance of epifauna could be at least part of the cause for
decrease in fish abundance. Another explanation for concomitant decrease in
fish and and invertebrates caught is variation in trawl effectiveness, as
discusssed in A.3.1.1.7. All four of the most abundant species also decrease
in abundance in the trawls over the last three surveys.
A-87
-------
A. 4 REFERENCES
Allan Hancock Foundation. 1965. An oeeanographie 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
(AHWA), 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. 00422-63:108.
Andenberg, M. 1973.. Cluster Analysis for Application. Academic Press, New
York. 310 pp.
Boesch, 3.?. 1977. Application of Numerical Classification in Ecological
Investigations of Water Pollution. 2PA-600/3-77-033- U.S. SPA acol. Hes.
Serv. 115 pp.
Bruland, S.W,, S. Bertine, M. Xoide, and S.D. Goldberg. 1971. History of
metal pollution in southern California coastal zone. Snvir. Sci. Sng. 3:425-
432.
Bureau of'Land Mangementv 1978- POCS 3efarence-Paper Mo. H. Volume 1 of'3-
Description of the Coastal Environment from Point 3eyes to Punta, Eugenia.
U.3.. Department' of. Interior. - '
Callahan, M.T M. Sliaak, M. Gabel, I. May, C. Towler, -it al., 1979. Water-
related environmental fate of 129 priority pollutants. 7ol. I. EPA U40/4-70-
029a
Chan, S.M. 197U. Chemical oceanography Pages tt-1 through H-18 ^n_ M.D. Daily,
3. Hill, and H. Lansing (eds). A sumnary 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-CM-1.
Chen, S.I., and C.S. Lu.- 1974. Sediment composition in Los Angeles-Long
Beach Harbors and San Pedro Basin. In: Marine Studies of San Pedro Bay, Part
7t Sediment Investigations. Heports OS6-SG-8-74, University of Southern
California, Los Angeles.
Clifford, H.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 for analytical methods for the
analysis of pesticides in humans and environmental samples. EPA-600/8-80-38.
Fauchald, 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 Year) Benthic Program. Volume II, 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 analyisis. 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 covariance. Rev.
Sdue. Res. 42(3): 235-288.
Grieb, T.M. 1984. Robustness of the. ANOVA model in environmental modelling
applications. Prepared for Electrical' Power Research Institute by Tetra Tech,.
lac. • Project '729-97. 65. pp-.
Hartaanv Q... 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 ppo.
Hendricks, T.J. 1979. Forecasting changes in sediments near wastewater
outfalls. Pages 127-143 _In 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 Jn 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 the years 1981-1982. Southern California
Coastal Water Research Project, Long Beach,.California. 294 pp.
Hershelaan, G.P., T.S. Jan, and H.A. Schafer. 1977. Pollutants in sediments
off Palos Verdes. In; SCCWHP, Annual Report 1977.
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.
A-89
-------
Horn, M.H. 1974. Chapter II ^ 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. 08550-
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.
Kruobein, V.C. and E.G. PettiJohn. 1983.
D. Appleton-Century, Hew tork. 549 pp.
Manual of sedimentary petrography.
Maloney, N.J., and K. Chan. 1974. Physical oceanography. Pages 3-1 to 3-65
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 of California State
Colleges and Universities, Report to the Bureau of Land Mangement.
Manzanilla, S. and J.N. Cross. 1982. Food habits of demersal fish in Santa
Monica 3ay. P. 119-124 In W. Bascom, Ced.), 1981-1982 Biennial 3eport.
Southern California Coastal Water Hesearofa Project. Long 3eaehr, California. -
Margalef, H. 1957. La teoria de la Informacion en acologia. Mem. Heal Acad.
Ciene. Artes Barcelona 32: 373-449 (Trans). _In_ Gen. Syst. 3:36-71.
Miller, O.J., and 8.N. Lea. 1972. Guide to the coastal aarine fishes of
California-.. . Californla? Department of ?ish 4 Game; Fish 3ull.. 157. 249 pp.
Moore,.. Mi.,^W.._3ascom-, and. 3.. Stufabg.- 1983. Trawl-caught. ?iah and!
invertebrates. la. W. 3ascom (ed). Biennial report for -he /ears 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. 3d. Techn.
9:756-761.
Hie, N.H., C.H. Hull, J.G. Jenkins, K. Steinbrenner, and D.H. Bent. 1975.
Statistical Package for .the Social Sciences. McGraw-Hill Company, New Tork.
657 pp.
Plumb, H.H., Jr. 1981. Procedure for handling and chemical analysis of
sediment and water samples. Technical report SPA/CE-S81-1 prepared by Great
Lakes Laboratory, State University College at Buffalo, Buffalo, N.Y., for the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency/Corps of Engineers Technical Committee on
Criteria for Dredged and Fill Material. Published by the U.S. Army Engineer
Waterways Experiment Station, CS, Tlcksburg, Miss.
Held, J.L., Jr. 1962. Distribution of dissolved oxygen in the summer
thermocllne. J. Mar. Res. 10:138-148.
Shannon, C.E. and W. Weaver. 1949. The Mathematical Theory of Communication.
Urbana, 111.: Univ. Illinois Press. 117 pp.
A-90
-------
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.H. 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. Numerieal 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, PS 27W62/AS, U.S. Dept, of Commerce, Springfield, VA..
Stephens, J.S., D. Gardener and C. Terry. _1973. The demersal fish populations
of San Pedro Bay _In D.F. Soule and Mr. 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 U8:578.
Word, J.C- 1976. Biological comparison of 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-. SI.
Segundc, California. 263 pp.
Word, J.Q., and A.J. Mearns. 1977. Bottom invertebrate pooulations 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 anc
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. 12:13^-139.
A-91
-------
-------
DRAFT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
FINAL DESIGNATION OF A
DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE.
OFF OF SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA
San Diego Councy, California
APPENDIX B
DETAILED FIELD SURVEY DATA
AVAILABLE"UPON REQUEST
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
-------
-------
DRAFT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
FINAL DESIGNATION OF A
DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL SITE
OFF OF SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA
San Diego Councy, California
APPENDIX C
NUMERICAL SIMULATION
OF
DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
-------
-------
APPLICATION OF THE INSTANTANEOUS
DUMP DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL
MODEL TO THE DISPOSAL OF SAN DIEGO HARBOR
MATERIAL AT THE 45 FATHOM (LA 4) AND 100 FATHOM (LA 5) DISPOSAL SITES
By
Billy H. Oohnson
November 1979
Sponsored by:
Conducted by:
Office, Chief of Engineers, U.S. Army
Hydraulic Analysis Division
Hydraulics Laboratory
USAE Waterways Experiment Station
Vicksburg, Mississippi 39180
-------
-------
DISCUSSION OF DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL MODELS AND
THEIR APPLICATION FOR THE LOS ANGELES DISTRICT
PART I: INTRODUCTION
1. In August 1979, the Los Angeles District of the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (LAD) requested that the Waterways Experiment Station (WES)
provide assistance in determining the fate of dredged material after
open water disposal at the San Diego 45 and 100 fathom disposal sites
shown in Figure 1.
2.. Under the Dredged Material Research Program (DMRP) of the U.S. Array
Corps of Engineers, two numerical models have been developed by Tetra
Tech; Inc. to provide the DMRP with tools to predict the short-term
fate of dredged material discharged in the estuarine environment. 1
One model is for an instantaneous dump disposal and the other is for
a continuous--fixed (pipeline) or moving discharge. The development of
these- models was based upon the Environmental Protection Agency's.
Koh-Chang-model for the; barged, ocean, disposal of wastes..2
3. A major assumption in the models is that once material is deposited on
the bottom, if remains- there; i.e.., neither erosion- nor bed load move-
ment of material is allowed. This is the primary theoretical limita-
tion of the models that restricts their usefulness to the study of the
short-term fate of discharged material, other than computer-related
operational" constraints.
4. The models have been applied to data collected by Gordon during a
barge disposal operation in the Ouwamish Waterway in the State of
Washington and a hopper dredge disposal operation in Lake Ontario.3
Although the models have not undergone sufficient calibration of the
many coefficients contained within and a subsequent verification using
these data to warrant confidence in a quantitative sense, the limited
calibration and in-depth evaluation presented in reference 4, do
justify confidence in a qualitative sense, especially if the material
is properly characterized, and the models are judiciously applied to
adequately represent a real disposal operation. A brief discussion of
-------
the theoretical structure of the models along with the input data
required and output provided are presented below.
PART II: THEORETICAL DEVELOPMENTS
In both models, 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, dynamic
collapse, occurring when the descending cloud either impacts the bot-
tom or arrives at the level of neutral buoyancy at which descent is
retarded and horizontal spreading dominates; and long-term passive
dispersion, commencing-, when the material transport and spreading is
determined more by ambient currents and turbulence than the dynamics
of the disposal operation. Figure 2 illustrates these phases for the
instantaneous dump model.
Convecti ve- 0 escent
In the instantaneous dump model, a single cloud is assumed to be
released which 'maintains a hemispherical shape during convective'
descent. Since the solids concentration in dredged material is
usually low, the cloud is expected to'behave as a dense liquid and
thus a basic assumption 1s that a bouyant thermal analysis is
appropriate. The equations governing the motion are those for conser-
vation of mass, momentum, buoyancy, solid particles, and vorticity.
These equations are straightforward statements of conservation prin-
ciples and will not be presented here. In the continuous discharge
model, the flow phenomenon near the discharge opening is that of a
sinking momentum jet in a cross current. Basic assumptions in the
formulation of the conservation equations for the jet convection phase
are that the jet cross section remains circular and that velocity,
density, and material concentration distributions may be approximated
by "top-hat" profiles.
Dynamic Collapse
During convective descent, the dumped material cloud or jet grows as a
-------
result of entrainment and eventually either the bottom 1s encountered
or the density difference between the discharged material and the
ambient becomes small enough for a position of neutral buoyancy to be
assumed. In either case, the vertical motion is arrested and a
dynamic spreading in the horizontal occurs. With the exception of
vorticity, which is assumed to have been dissipated by the stratified-
ambient, the same conservation equations used in convective descent
but now written for the particular shapes assumed in dynamic collapse
are applicable. For the case of collapse on the bottom, the only dif-
ference is the inclusion of a frictional force between the bottom and
the collapsing-cloud..
•— - Passive °ispersion
When the rate of horizontal spreading in the dynamic collapse phase
becomes less than an estimated rate of-spread!ng* due- to turbulent dif-
fusion, the collapse phase-is-terminated. During1 collapse, solid-par-
ticles can settle as a result of their fall velocity. As .these
particles leave the main body of material', they are stored in small
clouds which are characterized by a uniform concentration, thickness,
and position in the water column, these small clouds are then allowed
to settle and disperse until they become large enough to be inserted
•u.
into the long-term two-dimensional passive dispersion grid positioned
in the horizontal plane. Once small clouds are inserted at particular
net points, those net po-ints then have a concentration, thickness, and
top position associated with them. This is the manner in which the
three-dimensional (3-0) nature of the problem is handled on a 2-D"
grid. Figure 3 illustrates a typical concentration profile at a net
point. Computations on the passive dispersion grid are made using
Fisher's backward convection concept rather than attempting -a-numeri-
cal solution of the governing convection-diffusion equation. In the
backward convection solution technique, a mass!ess particle at each
net point at the present time level is moved backward in time by the
ambient current to the position it occupied one time step before. The
concentration at the net point it presently occupied is then taken as
a five-point average of the points surrounding its old position (see
Figure 3).
-------
9. In addition to the horizontal convection and diffusion of material,
settling of the suspended sol Ids also occurs. Therefore, 1n addition
to computing a concentration profile at each net point, the amount of
solid material deposited on the bottom and a corresponding thickness
1s also determined. A basic assumption 1n the models Is- that once
material 1s deposited on the bottom 1t remains there, I.e., neither
erosion nor bed load movement of material Is allowed. This is the
primary theoretical limitation of the models that restricts their use-
fulness to the study of the short-term fate of discharged material.
Model Input Requirements
10, Input data required for the operation of the model can be grouped into
(a) a description of the ambient environment at the disposal site, (t>)
characterization of the dredged material, (c) data describing the
disposal operation,, and (d) model coefficients. Each is discussed in
the following paragraphs.
11.. The'first taste, to-be-accomplished, when applying the models is that of
constructing a horizontal long-term grid over the. disposal site. The
number of grid points should be kept as small as possible but large
enough to extend the grid beyond the area of interest at the level of
spatial detail desired. Quite- often, it may be desirable to change
the horizontal grid after a few preliminary runs. Water depths a tc
pub wiipntal components of the ambient current must be input at each
net point. Either of the three options of velocity input illustrated
in Figure 4 may be selected, with the simplest case being velocities
at a constant depth disposal site. The ambient density profile at the
deepest point in the disposal site must also be input. This profile
may vary with time but is assumed to be the same at each net point of
the grid.
12. The dredged material can be composed of up to 12 solid fractions, a
fluid component, and a conservative chemical constituent, if desired.
For each solid type, its concentration by volume, density, fall
velocity, voids ratio and an indicator as to whether or not it is
cohesive must be input. Proper material characterization is extremely
-------
important in obtaining realistic predictions from the models. For
example, field observations have shown that the majority of the solids
settle to the bottom of the hoppers in the case of a hopper dredge
disposal with the resulting density of the upper portion of the hopper
being almost that of the ambient water. If a conservative chemical
-constituent is to be traced, its initial concentration and a
background concentration must be given. In addition, the bulk density
and aggregate voids ratio of the dredged material must be prescribed.
13. For the bottom dump model, the position of the disposing vessel on the
horizontal grid, the radius of the initial hemispherical cloud, the
depth below' the water surface at which the material is released, and
the initial velocity of the cloud are required. Normally, the initial
cloud radius is computed from the known volume of material. However,
in some cases, it may be desirable to set the radius from geometrical
considerations, e.g., the vessel'width. I'f this is the case, the bulk
density must be adjusted to-reflect the- initial dilution making sure
the resulting cloud contains the exact amount of solid material con-
tained within the vessel. For the continuous discharge model, the
initial position of the discharge, the vessel's course and speed if
moving, the orientation and depth below the water surface of the
discharge, the radius and flow rate of the initial discharge and the
total discharge time must be input.
14. The models contain suggested average values for the many coefficients
involved but tfie user may input other values, if desired. A brief
sensitivity analysis of the more important coefficients in the instan-
taneous dump model is discussed later.
Model Output
15. As previously noted, the discharged material is traced through three
phases: convective descent, during which the dump cloud or discharge
jet falls under the influence of gravity; 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 dispersion, commencing when
-------
the material transport and spreading 1s determined more by ambient
currents and turbulence than the dynamics of the disposal operation.
Output from the models 1n both tabular and plotted form describing the
movement of the material through each of these phases 1s provided.
16. The time history position in the water column, velocity, and size of
the cloud or jet plume 1s provided at the end of both the convective
descent and collapse phases. In addition, the volume of solids and
their corresponding concentrations as well as the density difference
between the discharged material and the ambient are provided. As a
guide in determining dilution rates, the time history of the conser-.
vative chemical constituent concentrations is also furnished.
PART III: INPUT DATA FOR MODEL APPLICATIONS AT THE
SAN 01 EGO DISPOSAL STTI?
The-Disposal Operations
17. A major problem when attempting to apply the numerical disposal models
to actual disposal operations is that of representing the "real world"
operation by the idealized conditions assumed in the models. Disposal
operations can be approximated in one of three ways within the current
structure of the Instantaneous dump model, first, the model can be
applied to a single bin of a disposal vessel with the model output
multiplied by the number of bins, i.e., the assumption is made that
the^separate dumps do not influence each other. The second method is
to model the complete load as a single instantaneous dump. As a third
way of modeling a disposal operation, material from one bin is
modeled as a single instantaneous dump with material from the
remaining bins "feeding" the bottom collapse of the cloud. This is
accomplished by all.owing the collapsing cloud to entrain material
possessing the bulk density of the cloud from a single bin at the
moment of bottom encounter. This is a modification which was made in
order to handle the disposal from a stationary hopper dredge in Lake
Ontario and is discussed in more detail in reference 4.
-------
18. The disposal operation at both the 45 and 100 fathom sites is
accomplished from a vessel with a total capacity of 1,500 yd^. There
are six separate bins of 250 yd^ each. The disposal vessel is essen-
tially stationary during the disposal operation with disposal alter-
nating between forward and rear bins. Each bin contains a pair of
bottom doors that are each 20 ft long and 5 ft wide. With such a bot-
tom opening for the 250 yd3 of material to pass through, the assump-
tion of an instantaneous dump from each bin is probably a good
assumption. In addition, since the entire load appears to be a
sequence of six individual dumps as opposed to a more continuous
operation in which the latter bins "feed" the bottom surge, it seems
reasonable to assume that superposition holds. Thus, the disposal
operation is modeled by considering the disposal of a single bin and
assuming that the computed results can be multiplied by the number of
bins to yield approximate results for the complete operation. In
•addition, since the LA District has indicated that a newer type of
disposal vessel called a "split, hull" barge might be-used, for-future*
disposal operations, the complete load has also been modeled as a
single instantaneous dump.
Disposal Site Information
19. The instantaneous dump model has been applied at both the 45 and the
100 fathom sites for both a summer and a winter ambient density pro-
file (see Figures-5 and 6). The ambient current is represented by
simple orthogonal velocity "profiles for a constant depth (See Figure
4.a). The coordinate system has been oriented such that the X-
coordinate lies along the direction of the current, i.e., 300° magnet-
ic direction, therefore, the Z-velocity component is set to zero.
These data, along with other input data, are presented in Tables 1 and
2 for the 45 and 100 fathom sites, respectively.
San Diego HarborJIaterial
20. Dredged material from North San Diego Bay is disposed at the 45 fathom
site; whereas, the more polluted material from South San Diego Bay is
-------
disposed at the 100 fathom site. Material dumped at the 45 fathom
site 1s primarily sandy material. From Information provided by the LA
District, 1t was determined that the material to be disposed possesses
a bulk density of 1.88 gm/cc and 1s composed of 46 percent sand and 12
percent silt by volume. Material from the South Bay was determined to
have a bulk density of 1.30 gm/cc and Is composed of 3 percent sand
and 15 percent silt.-
Model Coefficients
21. Only a limited calibration of the dredged material disposal models
based upon a comparison of computed results and field data has been
conducted (reference- 4). Since'the ambient conditions in that study
are quite different from those at the present disposal sites, it is
not believed the values for the coefficients as determined in
reference 4 are applicable here.
22. To provide some insight into the sensitivity of model results to
various coefficients, a series of runs were made for an instantaneous
dump of one bin of material at the 45 fathom sita. It should be
realized that the characteristics of the material being dumped as well
as the depth of the disposal site have a great influence upon such
sensitivity analyses.
23. The entrapment, drag and apparent mass coefficients in the convective
descent phase, as well as the entrainment, drag and friction coef-
ficients in the collapse phase, have_been varied. In a series of tank
tests, J8F Scientific^ found that the three convective descent coef-
ficients above are dependent upon the multiple of the liquid limit
(MIL) of the material being dumped where the M.L increases as the
cloud of material falls-through the water column. In those tests, the
entrainment coefficient a0t *as found to rapidly increase to a value
of 0.285, corresponding to a MIL of 3. A much more gradual increase
up to a value of 0.310 at a MIL of 10 was then observed. As indicated
in Table 3, the model default value is 0.235. The convective descent
drag coefficient was found from the tank tests to decrease from a
value of about 1.0 at a MIL of 1 to a value of 0.25 as the ML
-------
€
. Increased to 3. Similarly, the apparent mass coefficient decreased
from a value of 1.7 at a 1"LL of 1 to a value of about 0.40 as the M_l
increased to 3. The default values of the convective descent drag
coefficient, CD, and the apparent mass coefficient, CM, are 0.5 and
1.0, respectively (see Table 3).
24. As can be seen from Table 4, the computed results are fairly sensitive
to a0. The default value of 0.235 is probably okay at the moment of
dump but should be increased as the cloud moves downward through the
water column entraining ambient fluid with a corresponding increase of
the HL. Increasing. a0 above its default value results in the
collapsing cloud rising from the bottom. Physically, it does not seem
that such a phenomena should be allowed. Of course, one could adjust
other -coefficients to force the cloud to remain on the bottom with the
higher values of OQ.
25.. Decreasing the drag- coefficient (CD) to 0.30-resulted in an execution
mode error; whereas, increasing its value to 1.0 resulted in an ini-
tial rising ofr the cloud and- a corresponding termination of the com-
putations. Thus, it can be seen that for particular disposal
operations the model does not operate over unlimited ranges of
individual coefficients.
26. Several runs were made in which the entrainmnt (oc), drag
friction (FR1CTN) coefficients in the collapse phase were varied.
Results from these runs are also presented "in Table 4.
27. In summary, model results are of course dependent upon the values
assumed for the coefficients. However, as demonstrated by the results
presented in Table 4, model computations are not overly sensitive to
any of the coefficients, i.e., relatively small changes in individual
coefficients do not produce an order of magnitude change in the com-
puted results. In addition, since there is no- real justification for
selecting values other than the default values, the default values
presented in Table 3 were used for the modeling of the disposal opera-
tions discussed herein.
-------
PART IV; MDPa RESULTS
28. As previously noted, the Instantaneous dump model has been applied at
each disposal site for both a single bin as veil as a complete Instan-
taneous dump for both a summer and a winter ambient density profile.
As can be seen from Table 5, approximately 30 sec is required for a
small dump to reach the ocean bottom at the 45 fathom site and about 4
minutes at the 100 fathom site. The corresponding times for the large
dump are 16 sec and almost 2 minutes, respectively for the 45 and 100
fathom sites. As can be seen, the ambient density profile has little
influence on the movement of the cloud through the water column. The
major influence of the ambient density shows up through Its influence
on the vertical diffusion of the top of the concentration profile in
the -long-term diffusion phase. A very small density gradient will
prohibit vertical diffusion; whereas, if the density gradient is zero,
the position of the cloud top moves upward by an amount given by
2 v'ZKyTt,. where Ky is the vertical diffusion coefficient and it is
the long-term time step.
29. At both the 45 and 100 fathom sites, essentially all of the sand is
deposited within 1,000 ft downstream of the dump. This is true for
both small and large dumps under both summer and winter conditions
(see Table 6).
30. From an inspection of Table 7, it can be seen that at the 45 fathom
site 85 percent of the silt from a small dump will be deposited within
about 2,200 ft downstream of the dump site for both a summer and a
winter dump. Approximately the same results are obtained for a large
dump under winter conditions. However, only about 65 percent is
deposited within the same distance for a 1arge summer dump. It
appears this 1s because the top of the cloud has moved above the
ambient stratification over the bottom 30 ft into the constant density
regime (see Figure 5). The model now allows for a vertical growth
which results in .a larger distance for the silt particles to fall
before deposition and thus less deposition within a given time frame.
-------
31. At the 100 fathom site, all of the silt 1s deposited within a rela-
tively short distance for both small and large dumps with the summer
profile. This is because the stratification over the bottom 60 ft
prohibits vertical growth and rapid deposition of the silt occurs.
However, under the winter profile presented in Figure 6, vertical dif-
fusion is allowed which results in only about 54 percent of the silt
from a small dump being deposited within 1,600 ft downstream of the
dumping point within 5,000 sec after the dump and about 85 percent
from a large dump within the same spatial distance and time frame.
32. As indicated in Table 8, suspended silt concentrations are in the
neighborhood of 10-5 to 10-6 gm/cc after 5,000 sec. It should be
remembered that with superposition assumed, the concentrations pre-
sented for a small dump should be multiplied by six to reflect
approximate results of the complete disposal operatio.n. The suspended
silt concentrations extend from the ocean floor upward as high as
150-170 ft, depending uoon the ambient.stratification near the bottom.
After 5,000 sec, the leading edge of the suspended silt cloud at the
45 fathom site is about 3,600 ft from the dump point, except for the
large summer dump where the di stance is 5,400 ft. In this case, the
cloud top has moved 150 ft into the water column which results in the
centroid of the cloud being advected by a larger ambient velocity with
a corresponding greater movement of the cloud in the direction of the
current. Due to a much smaller ambient current at the 100 fathom
site, the maximum extent of the leading edge of the cloud is only
about 2,100 ft, after 5,000 sec. •
33. As a final note, it should be remembered that particle fall velocities
were used for both the sand and silt fractions. If the material had
been assumed to contain clumps of cohesive material with much larger
fall velocities, a corresponding larger percent of the solids would
have been deposited within the time frame tested.
. PART V; LIMITATIONS OF MODEL RESULTS
34. Two different disposal operations have been modeled. The first in
essence consists of six individual dumps and is modeled by neglecting
-------
the Interaction of the separate dumps and assuming superposition
applies. The other 1s a disposal from a "split hull" barge and Is
modeled by assuming the complete load Is discharged essentially
Instantaneously. It should again be emphasized that a major problem
1n the use of the dredged material models is the representation of the
actual disposal operation by the idealized conditions assumed in the
models. Proper characterization of the material and specification of
ambient conditions are also extremely important. For example, if a
significant portion of the material had been composed of "clumps" with
a fall velocity of perhaps 1.0 to 2.0 fps, the results would have been
quite different as far as the percent of material deposited within a
small distance from the dump. In addition, the ambient density
gradient near the bottom is very important in determining the vertical
diffusion of suspended sediment. A zero gradient allows for a rapid
diffusion upward which in turn increases the probability of the
suspended material being swept from the disposal site if the ambient
current is significant. I.t is important to stress that auanritative
reliance should not be placad in model predictions due :o. uncertain-
ties associated with the specification of appropriate irradel coef-
ficients, the ambient density profile, the characterization of the
dredged material and the approximate method employed for representing
the disposal operation. However, it is believed that model predic-
tions do provide a qua!itative.picture of reality and should be useful
in helping to assess the environmental impact of a disposal operation.
-------
LITERATURE CITED
1. Brandsma, M.6. and Divoky, D.J., "Development of Models for Prediction
of Short-Term Fate of Dredged Material Discharged in the Estuarine
Environment," Technical Paper D-76-5, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways
Experiment Station, Vidcsburg, MS.
2. Koh, R.C.Y. and Chang, Y.C., "Mathematical Model for Barged Ocean
Disposal of Waste," Environmental Protection Technology Series EPA
660/2-73-029, December 1973, U.S. EPA, Washington, D.C.
3. Bokunierwicz, H.J. et al_., "Field Study of the Mechanics of the
Placement of Dredged"Material at Open Water Disposal Sites," Technical
Report D-78-7, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, April
1978.
4. Johnson, B.H. and Holliday, B.W., "Evaluation and Calibration of the
Tetra Tech Dredged Material Disposal Models Based on Field Data,"
Technical Report D-78-47, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment
Station, August 1978.
5. Study by JFF Scientific Corporation, Wilmington, Massachusetts, for
EPA at Corvallis, Oregon.
-------
-------
TABLE 1. INPUT DATA FOR 45 FATHOM SITE (LA4)
Number of grid points In Z-direction » 30
Number of grid points In X-dlrection * 30
Grid spacing * 50 ft and 300 ft (2 runs)
Water depth = 270 ft
Depth of discharge * 20 ft
Bulk density = 1.88 gm/cc
Long term time step = 1000 sec
Dump size * 250 yd3 and 1500 yd3 (2 runs)
Characterization of Material
Description
Sand.
Silt
Depth
ft
0.0
60.0
120.0
180.0
240.0
270.0
Density
om/cc
2.6
2.6
Ambi ent
Density
gm/cc
Summer Winter
1.025 1.025
1.025 1.025
1.026 1.025
1.026 1.025
1.026 1.026
1.027 1.026
Concentration
fti/ftl
0.46
0.12
Conditions
X-Velocity
ft/ sec
1.8
1.8
1.0
0.0
Fall Veloci
ft/ sec
0.07
C.01
ty
Z-Velocity
ft/ sec
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
-------
TABLE 2. INPUT DATA FOR 100 FATHOM SITE (LA 5)
Number of grid points in Z-direction * 30
Number of grid points in X-direction = 30
Grid spacing * 50 ft and 300 ft (2 runs)
Water depth = 600 ft
Depth of discharge » 20 ft
Bulk density » 1.30 gm/cc
Long term time step - 1000 sec
Dump size - 250 yd3 and 1500 yd3 (2 runs)
Characterization of Material
Description
Sand
Silt
om/cc
Fall Velocity
0.07
0.01..
Depth
ft
Sunroer
Ambient Conditions
Winter
Q Q
U «W
60.0
120.0 .
180.0
240.0
300.0
540.0
600.0
1.025
1.025
1.026
1.026
1.026
1.027
1.025
1.025
1.025
1.025
1.026
_ j\ttf
1.026
0.49
Q 18
00
°-°
Z-Velocity
0-0
0.0
0.0
0.0
-------
TABLE 3. DEFAULT VALUES OF INSTANTANEOUS DUMP MODEL COEFFICIENTS
Coefficient Default Value
QQ 0.235
6 0.0
Cm 1-0 '
CD °-50
Y 0.25
CDRAG I*0
CRFIC °'01
CDs °'10
CD* 1-0
ac 0.001
FRICTN 0-01
Fl." ' °-10
Xu 0.005
n
x 0.005
-------
•
*
i
i
i
i
VI
«*••
•
3
^
>—
a>
JJ
_
l^
#
*
^
LLl
_l
S
4
H*
«
«4
1
S
i
^
«••
M
^ ^
•»
3
in
u
a
v — •
i §
s ^i
->
O
O
»
Si
CJ
•X
(23
i?
3C
V-
u
s
u.
s
Q£
<. 5
w
k
a
> u
9
I/I 3
*l
41
U
C «
£ w
0
u
J
0
M
« « « *
« * « « *
* 41 * * *
S*r «M to o m «*»
.- oo «r\ r» o 0> •*<<•> 00
«r CM «•» in co «•>
.» •• -« esi — •«.«.» CM
U x X
2-~
u « «
"5-
s o -o
• «ww
O <•"> v« O «^ ^> tn 01
-
O
o
• 1 1 1 ) 1 1 1 1 1 t
o
• 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 J 1
"*
\n
— CM in o
S §83
O OO O
o o
U5 ft O O
• lit • • 1 • 1 t 1
O o — • —
0
O «D •"»
• 1 1 1 1 1 • • 1 1 1
— o —
in
m OO O
CM (*^ ^f U^
• • • • 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
0000
* «
« « « «
41 * 41 ^
* « « «
r- o *r « — o to co u>«- o *•> •
« a O
un w
00 Or;0
1 1 1 "t "I ~ a. °.
OOOOO
O O O OO
UA UD U!) tA tf)
o o o o o
Slto •
e
. e S
Wo*'
« •* o
*J «J J
1 3- -
a a
u *>
c « -o
4> 3.
^ Q
§ S Z
*> ^
*P! U <•»
O O
^ «to
* 0 X
o ••
** M v
S U
1 5. 5
«• « «l
*- OE »
) 1 1
e a s
'*•? -™J -J
*> oe »
^
«•
4>
9
U
*l
e w
§*^
S
•5 w
k O>
*> m
c w
ttl ^B
».
** >w *l
eve
4> O 41
u u w
I/I VI
4 S 4
; § g
^* ^j ^>*
*< e *•
U 41 U
41 k 41
> «B >
§0. c
a a
u <
e
u> e
in a 4i
O. « TS
*-
y IQ Q
•s * »
£ - i
^v *• ^
x o "a
x G ="
i
E t
*" ^ ST
5-i :**# 3P
< — '-0
*te
^
^ §
^ u
41
o e
u —
9 *•
•0 W
•e T
%•
4)
in S
& o •
w —
-OS
4) e u
^ 4> •*
U «l
<•» w a
**• e
4,' i/l
o >a ui
u .X <_;
O 1
1
1 «
4t «
* * *
< * «
-------
TABLE 5. BOTTOM ENCOUNTER INFORMATION
Time
/ eaf\
\ sec /
29.87
29.87
16.12
16.00
230.00
258.40
107.33
108.87
Radius
(ft)
V 1 W f
67.57
67.61
78.68
78.45
139.29'
138.89
150.43
149.80
Velocity
(ft/ sec)
.4.71
4.64
10.00
10.02
1.26
1.06
2.93
2.83
Dump
Site Type
45 (LA 4) Small
» "
" Large
n «
100 (LA 5) Small
» «
Large
n »
Season
Summer
Winter
Summer
Wi nter
Summer
Winter
Summer
Wi nter
-------
TABLE 6. DEPOSITION OF SAND*
Time
(sec)
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
1010
2020
1000
1000
Radi us
(ft)
465
465
650
650
550
450
770
775
775
Centroid
(ft)
165
160
123
.131
113
180
260
85
90
% of
Total
100 .
100
100 •
100
100
30
98
100
98
Site
45 (LA 4)
n
n
n
100 (LA 5)
n
n
11
ii
Dump
Type
Small
n
Large
ii
Small
n
N
Large
ii
Season
Summer
Wi nter
Summer
Wi nter
Summer
Wi nter
Ml nter
Summer
Wi nter
* See Figure 7.
-------
TABLE 7. DEPOSITION OF SILT*
Time
(sec)
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
1000
2000
1010
2020
3030
4040
5050
1000
2000
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
Radius
(ft)
495
865
1015
1150
1350
520
865
1015
1200
1380
845
1220
1445
1665
1870
845
1135
1375
1585'
1725
585
865
500
865 •
985
1110
1210
1095
1395
1095
1395
1405
1405
1405
Centroi d
(ft)
150
450
600
725
825
150
440
.580
710
820
70
210
315
420
520
140
370
530
675
800
175
175
190
295
320
350
365
115
115
145
150
155
160
160
% Of
. Total
24
53
68
78
84
24
55
68
78
85
38
53
59
62
65
26
53
67
77"
84
60
100
6
35
45
50
54
91
100
65
79
82
84
85
Site
45 (LA 4)
II
n
n
n
45 (LA 4)
II
n
n
n
45 (LA 4)
ft
n
u
u
45 (LA 41
11 •
II
II
100 (LA 5)
100 (LA 5)
n
ll
II
ll
100 (LA 5)
100 (LA 5)
n
n
Dump
Type
Small
n
n
u
n
Small
»
M
u
Large
n
n
n
n
Large
tt
11
ti
Small
11
Small
ll
u
H
11
Large
U
Large
ii
u
n
n
Season
Summer.
n
n
n
u
Wi nter
u
H
n
H
Summer
n
u
„
H
Wi nter
il .
«
M
It
Summer
n
Wi nter
II
II
11
ti
Summer
ii
Wi nter
n
n
n
n
See Figure 7,
-------
TABLE 8. SUSPENDED SILT INFORMATION*
Time
(sec)
2000
3000
4000
5000
2000
3000
4000
5000
2000
3000
4000
5000
2000
3000
4000
5000
725
2000
2020
3030
4040
5050
891
2000
2000
3000
4000
5000
CMAX
(gm/cc)
4.7X10-5
2.6X10-5
1.5X10-5
9.6X10-6
4.2X10-5
2.6X10-5
1.5X10-5
7.8X10-6
5.3X10*5
2.9X10-5
2.2X10-5
1.8X10-6
14.3X10-5
9.1X10-5
6.0X10-5
3.9X10-5
18.1X10-5
0.0
3.4X10-5
1.7X10-5
9.9X10-6
5.7X10-6
15.6X10-5
. 0.0
1.9X10-5
10.4X10-6
6.8X10-6
4.7X10-6
DMAX TMAX**
(ft) . _(ft) .
600
1200
1800
2400
600
1200
1800
2400
1200
1500
2400
3600
600
1200
1800
2100
225
-
300
300
600
900
160
-
0.0
300
300
600
32
33
34
32
33
32
31
34
31
131
152
151
31
33
32
32
3.2
—
64
94
129
167
3.44
-
63
93
126
162
CMIN
(gm/cc)
0.13X10-5
0.08X10-6
O.IOXIO-6
0.13X10-6
O.IOXIO-5
O.IOXIO-5
0.10X10-6
0.08X10-6
0.08X10-5
0.08X10-5
0.03X10-6
0.05X10-6
0.05X10-5
0.10X10-5
O.IOXIO-5
0.08X10-5
' -
*
0,03X10-5
0.18X10-6
0.10X10-6
0.08X10-6
-
«
0.10X10-6
0.03X10-6
0.03X10-6
0.16X10-6
DMIM
(ft)
1500
2400
3000
3600
1500
2100
3000
3600
1800
2700
4200
5400
1800
2400
3000
3600
-
1200
1500
1800
2100
-
"
1500
1800
2100
2100
TMIN**
(ft)
32
33
34
32
33
32
31
34
31
. 33
33
33
34
33
32
31
•
58
102
137
172
-
52
87
133
167
Dump
Site Type
45 (LA 4) Small
45 (LA 4) Small Winter
45 (LA 4) Large Summer
45 (LA 4) Large Winter
100 (LA 5) Small . Summer
100 (LA 5) Small VHnter
n .
n
100 (LA 5) Large Summer
100 (LA 5) Large Winter
** TMAX
respectively.
are the thickness of the maximum and minimum concentrations,
-------
45 FATHOM SITE ( LA 4 )
I
V 1
V^--A -----
MEXICO
FIGURE 1 DISPOSAL SITES MODELLED
-------
2
5
o
c
i- >.
O J6
-s O
-------
«. 3ACr.wi.ao COKvECTiON
•J
-"
VC1.0CITT
b. TTPiCAt C3NCt-«TRi.TiOs
ti AT A GSO =CiS'
C. FlVg-POINT GSIO PiTTiS
UStO FOS SIMULATING
Olr FUSION.
Figure 3. Aspects cf passive diffusion
-------
—V
WWI I
w w2
owe
a. .SIMPLE ORTHOGONAL'VELOCITY PROFILES' "OR CONSTANT
DEPTH. APPLIED EVERYWHERE IN FIELD.
w
VERTICALLY AVERAGc.0 VELOCITY ? = G~IL
DEPTHS WITH EQUIVALENT LOGARITHMIC
SUPERIMPOSED.
,= ?. C ?; L - H'
c.
TWO -LAYER PROFILES FOR VARIABLE DEPTH.
4. !lIu3~T2.ticn of the various velocity
fcr -ess in models (frcr Bra-dsrs. and
-------
•*.
SHS5T NO. j
O I
-T3 .
_-. .-j.-r/
r& .
J
*£3 ?3»« HO.
1253
-------
JATS:
SHSS
0 7
try
•'• i / CC
-------
2,
A 'V
Q,
\
*
\
N
5
*
1253
-------
2ATS:
x <<
A
i
J NO.
135*
-------
-------
^v
fc<
.•»#*• •
f
*
------- |