A Scientific
for
/onnnwntCH
An Environmental
of the District of Columbia
VIRGINIA
U.S. EPA Region 3
841 Chestnut Street
Philadelphia, PA 19107
DC 00006
April 30, 1997
.
-------
9O3R97O27
A Scientific Foundation For
Setting An Environmental Agenda
An Environmental Characterization of the District of Columbia
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Science Center
701 Mapes Road
Ft. Meade, MD 20755-5350
W. Michael McCabe
Regional Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Region 3
841 Chestnut Street
Philadelphia, PA 19107
Draft Final - April 30, 1997
-------
Acknowledgements
This report was prepared by Versar, Inc. for U.S. EPA Region 3 under Contract
Nos. 68-D3-0013 and 68-W6-0023. The Project Officers for these contracts were
Thomas M. Murray and Cathy Fehrenbacher of EPA's Office of Pollution Prevention
and Toxics. Authors of this report were David Bottimore, Mark Southerland, Pat
Wood, and Alison Doherty of Versar's Exposure/Risk Assessment Division and
Ecological Assessment Division.
The authors wish to acknowledge the contributions of EPA's Steering
Committee for guidance and technical oversight for this effort.
EPA Steering Committee
Name
Title/Organization
Address
Jon M. Capacasa
Dominique Lueckenhoff
Reginald F. Harris
Beverly Baker
Frederick W. Kutz
(Committee Chair)
David G. Lynch
James Sweeney
Deputy Director
Chief, Ecological
Assessment and Planning
Branch
Environmental Justice
Coordinator
Regional Scientist
Chesapeake Bay Program Office
EPA Region 3 (3CBOO)
841 Chestnut Bldg.
Philadelphia, PA 19107
Environmental Assessment and Protection
Division
EPA Region 3
841 Chestnut Bldg.
Philadelphia, PA 19107
Office of the Deputy Regional Administrator
EPA Region 3
841 Chestnut Bldg.
Philadelphia, PA 19107
Chesapeake Bay Program Office
EPA Region 3
410 Severn Ave., Suite 109
Annapolis, MD 21401
EPA Region 3
201 Defense Hwy., Suite 200
Annapolis, MD21401
Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics
(7406)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C. 20460
Environmental Regulation Administration
Government of the District of Columbia
2100 Martin Luther King Jr., Ave., SE
Suite 203
Washington, D.C. 20020
-------
The following individuals served as peer reviewers of this report. They
commented on the data sources, the methodology, and the presentation of
conclusions and recommendations. This peer review was conducted during
December 1996 and January 1997. The quality of this document was strengthened
by the input provided by these peer reviewers.
Mr. J. Clarence (Terry) Davies
and Ms. Nicole Darnall
Resources For The Future
Center for Risk Management
Washington, DC 20036
Ms. Laura Seebeck
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore District
Baltimore, MD 21203
Ms. Patricia Harrigan
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Water/Standards and Applied Science Division
Washington, DC 20460
Finally, numerous individuals and organizations provided data and other
information that were critical to this report. These include individuals that participate
in existing efforts in DC as well as organizations such as the D.C. Department of
Consumer and Regulatory Affairs/Environmental Regulation Administration,
Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Interstate Commission of the
Potomac River Basin, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Anacostia Museum, African
American Environmentalist Association, the Nature Conservancy, Chesapeake Bay
Program Federal Agencies Committee, and many others too numerous to mention.
-------
Executive Summary
BXBCUTIVK SUMMARY
This report provides information on the charac-
terization of environmental conditions in Washing-
ton, DC. It is intended to help decision makers, re-
source managers, and the public to make prudent,
informed choices in shaping our environmental fu-
ture. This reports title, "A Scientific Foundation for
Setting an Environmental Agenda," reflects this con-
cept of examining our current knowledge in order to
improve environmental conditions in the future.
In many ways, "A Scientific Foundation for Set-
ting an Environmental Agenda" complements the
ground-breaking work of "Our Unfair Share: A Sur-
vey of Pollution Sources in Our Nations Capital" by
delving deeper into the science to help answer ques-
tions about sources of pollution and exposure of the
population to contaminants in the air, drinking wa-
ter, surface waters, and land. This report expands
the perspective with more quantitative information
on sources of pollution and potential exposures/risks
to human health and ecological resources.
"Strong science provides the
foundation for credible
environmental decision making.
With a better understanding off
environmental risks to people
and ecosystems, EPA can target
the hazards that pose the
greatest risks."
— Expert Panel on
the Role of Science at EPA
Finally, the report presents recommendations for
potential actions that can be taken as well as suggests
further studies to improve knowledge of environmen-
tal impacts to residents of the District and the local
ecosystem.
Scope of Report
A DC's Environmental Setting
A Sources off Pollution
A Human Health Impacts
A Health of Ecological
Resources
A Acknowledgements off
Existing Efforts and
Recommendations for Further
Study and Actions to Improve
Environmental Conditions
The Executive Summary presents a synopsis oj information presented in "A Scientific Foundation jor Setting an Environmental Agenda.'
Readers are encouraged to review the full report for detailed descriptions and citations to the original sources o/in/ormation.
-------
Executive Summary
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
IN DC
It is useful to have a broad perspective of envi-
ronmental conditions, the "environmental setting," in
the District of Columbia. Information and statistics
are available on several general indicators of the con-
dition of the environment in DC. These statistics pro-
vide some perspectives on factors that may influence
environmental condition and related risks to human
health and the environment.
In general, DC's air is cleaner than many other
major metropolitan areas in the United States, and it
has improved over the last few decades. However,
DCs main air pollution problem has been ozone (high-
est in the summer). Although ozone levels vary con-
siderably due to weather conditions, fewer
exceedances of the standard have been recorded dur-
ing the 1990s than in the previous 20 years. Various
pollution sources affect air quality in the DC area,
most notably, motor vehicles. In the overall region,
motor vehicles account for about 28 percent of the
total emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
which contribute to ozone. In D.C., as much as 70
percent of the ozone precursors are emitted by motor
vehicles. Large industrial facilities, such as power
plants, only account for a small portion (about 3 per-
cent) of the emissions that contribute to ozone for-
mation.
1
1
I
Mi
1
•7* H> 81 S2t9S4S6WWWl»-SO»1 •SZ'M
Ozone Eiwedanc* Days lor Washington Metropolitan Area (1979—1994)
A desirable quality of the environment is access
to nature and parks. Washington, DC, is predomi-
nately an urban area within a larger, semi-developed
metropolitan area. DC has 20 percent of its land area
"Researchers should investigate
specific sources and sites,
specific pollutant types, and the
specific impacts and effects of
pollution on human and
environmental health."
— Our Unfair Share: A Survey
of Pollution Sources in Our
Nation's Capital
as parkland, one of the highest in the Nation. These
parklands support wildlife as well as recreational use
by residents.
One overall indicator of environmental condi-
tion, the Green Metro Index, has been developed by
World Resources Institute. This index combines eight
measures such as the average air quality, acute air
quality, water quality violations, toxic releases,
Superfund sites, mass transit use, residential energy
use, and gasoline and electricity prices. Based on
this index, environmental-related conditions in DC
are generally better than in most major cities/metro-
politan areas in the United States.
In summary, Washington, DCs environmental
conditions are generally favorable; however, there are
specific problems to be addressed.
FACTORS INFLUENCING
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONDITIONS IN DC
Pollutants and other forms of environmental deg-
radation come from a variety of sources, both from
within the District and from far beyond its borders.
Pollution comes from "point" sources as well as the
more elusive "nonpoint" sources such as urban
stormwater runoff. While Washington, DC, is not a
heavily industrialized city, more than 1,000 facilities
are permitted/regulated for releases of pollution into
the environment. These facilities include power
plants, wastewater treatment plants, drinking water
treatment plants, printing operations, Federal Gov-
ernment/military facilities, and many types of small
IV
-------
Executive Summary
businesses. The types of point sources inventoried in-
clude:
• Facilities Discharging to Surface Waters
• Air Emitters
• Hazardous Waste Management Facilities
• CERCLIS Sites
• Facilities Releasing Toxic Chemicals
Comparative ranking of point sources (see be-
low) is intended to provide a screening-level indica-
tion of the relative potential for environmental im-
pact from releases from these facilities. In other words,
within each environmental medium (e.g., air, water,
hazardous wastes), facilities are compared among
themselves based on "surrogates for risks," usually
the amount and type of chemicals released from each
facility.
Why Compare
Environmental Risks?
Comparing environmental risks
helps to build a scientific
foundation for setting
environmental priorities.
With limited budgets to address
environmental protection, it is
critical that priorities be set on
the problems that are most
serious.
Facilities Discharging to Surface
Waters
Thirteen facilities in DC currently have active
permits to discharge pollutants into surface waters
(Anacostia and Potomac Rivers). These facilities in-
clude a publicly-owned treatment works, a drinking
water supply facility, electric power generating plants,
and others.
Blue Plains Wastewater Treatment Plant,
Dalecarlia Treatment Plant, and PEPCO-Benning Road
Generating Station are among the facilities with the
discharges of greater potential impact, based on ex-
amination of total loadings (Ibs), permit limit excur-
sions, type of pollutants discharged, and
toxic-weighted loads. Also, it has been estimated that
Blue Plains contributes 95 percent of the nitrogen and
53 percent of the phosphorous loadings from DC to
the Potomac River.
Air Emitters
In 1994, 267 facilities in Washington, DC, had
air permits/were regulated to emit pollutants into the
air. The 11 largest facilities included hospitals, uni-
versities, utility companies, heating/cooling systems
using boilers, and government printing and publish-
ing operations. Comparison was made among these
11 largest facilities based on the magnitude of emis-
sions and types of pollutants emitted. The remaining
facilities were minor facilities such as hotels, dry clean-
ers, property management companies, parking lots,
and government maintenance centers. While ernis
sions from these minor facilities may collectively con-
tribute as much air pollution as the larger facilities,
data were not available to characterize the emissions
from each.
Comparison off Facilities
with Air Emissions
Facility
Ranking
Comparative
PEPCO-Buzzard Point Higher
PEPCO-Benning Road
Capital Power Plant
U.S. Government Printing Office
U.S. Bureau of Engraving & Printing
St. Elizabeth's Hospital
U.S. Soldiers' & Airmen's Home
Howard University
GSA West Heating Plant
GSA Central Heating Plant
Georgetown University Lower
-------
Executive Summary
Hazardous Waste Management
Facilities
In DC, 939 facilities were listed as generators/
managers of hazardous wastes. More than 620 tons
of hazardous wastes were managed by 15 large quan-
tity generators of hazardous waste. The 15 large fa-
cilities were ranked by the total quantity of hazard-
ous waste(s) managed (generated, received, and dis-
posed) by each facility, in descending order, to illus-
trate the relative potential risk associated with these
facilities. These large facilities were likely to have the
potential to pose greater risks than individual small
quantity generators (SQGs). However, taken collec-
tively, the SQGs generated as much hazardous waste
as the 15 larger facilities.
CERCLIS Sites
32 sites in DC were listed in the CERCLIS data
base as having some investigation/actions related to
hazardous wastes. While no National Priorities List
(NPL), or Superfund, sites are in DC, the Washing-
ton Navy Yard was recently proposed by EPA to be
added to the NPL. In general, the other sites have
had limited investigations or remedies of hazardous
waste problems and generally have no ongoing ac-
tivities.
Facilities Releasing Toxic
Chemicals
Six facilities in DC reported emissions/releases of
toxic chemicals in 1994 under the Toxic Release In-
ventory (TRI) program. More than 23,000 pounds
of toxic chemicals (including copper compounds,
chlorine, and glycol ethers) were released to air, wa-
ter, and land. In general, toxic releases in DC (and
the metropolitan area) are among the smallest in the
U.S.
Nonpoint Source Pollution to Air
and Water
Nonpoint source pollution includes stormwater
runoff from farm fields, parking lots, and construc-
tion sites as well as emissions to the air from cars and
buses. Motor vehicles produce much of the air pollu-
tion in DC and the region. Within DC, as much as
Hazardous Waste Management
in Washington, DC
Facility
Quantity Managed
(tons)
PEPCO-Benning Road Generating Station 220.45
U.S. Bureau of Engraving and Printing 134.58
Washington Metro Area Transit Authority 69.01
WMATA 40.24
Boiling Air Force Base 27.72
Washington Gas & Light Company 23.95
Food and Drug Administration FB 8 21.51
Washington Post Newspaper 19.38
Walter Reed Army Medical Center 17.36
Architect of the Capitol 16.54
U.S. Government Printing Office 15.78
Naval Research Laboratory 14.70
Washington Post Newspaper, S.E. Plant 14.22
Naval District - Washington, DC 2.92
Catholic University of America 2.88
Total
641.24
70 percent of chemicals that form ozone are attribut-
able to motor vehicle emissions. Ozone is the pri-
mary air pollution problem in the DC area and the
almost 3 million motor vehicles registered in the
VI
-------
Executive Summary
metropolitan area are significant contributors of ozone
precursors (volatile organic compounds and nitrogen
oxides) and other pollutants such as lead and par-
ticulates.
Nonpoint sources of water pollution include
stormwater runoff and combined sewer overflow.
Stormwater runoff from the streets, parking lots,
parks, and other areas is estimated to produce an-
nual loadings to DCs surface waters exceeding
400,000 pounds of zinc, 94,000 pounds of copper,
and 22,000 pounds of lead. Nonpoint source runoff
is particularly problematic in DC because of the anti-
quated sewer system. Stormwater runoff, from as
much as one-third of DC's area, is drained by a com-
bined sewer overflow (CSO) system. During heavy
rainstorms, runoff from streets is combined with sew-
age, which then flows into the nearest waterbodies.
When severe rainstorms exceed the capacity of the
system, untreated sewage is released from 60 drains
into the city's rivers. The Anacostia River receives 63
percent of the CSO, and the balance is absorbed by
Rock Creek and the Potomac River. This CSO runoff
may contain bacteria, nitrogen, heavy metals, toxic
organic chemicals, petroleum-based oils, and float-
able trash and other pollutants that are detrimental
to the ecological health of DC's rivers (and indirectly
to humans). Bacteria levels in the Anacostia River fol-
lowing rainstorms frequently exceed public health
standards.
The Federal Government, which owns a major-
ity of the lands that lie directly along the Potomac
and Anacostia Rivers, has made a public commit-
ment to reduce its contribution of pollution by 40
percent or more. Efforts are underway to reduce
"Last week the CDC and EPA
announced that tapwater that is
safe enough for healthy
individuals could be dangerous
for immune-compromised persons.
This echoes what advocates for
people with AIDS and others have
said for some time..."
— New York Times, June 22, 1995
Characterizing Human
Health Risks
A Drinking (Tap) Water
A Fish Consumption
A Ambient Air Quality
A Lead
A Contaminated Soil
sources of pollution and excess stormwater, to con-
trol or contain contaminants, and to minimize future
impacts on the environment in the District.
CHARACTERIZATION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL RISKS TO
HUMAN HEALTH
Drinking water, fish consumption, ambient air
quality, lead, and contaminated soil are considered to
be among the most apparent means by which people
can be exposed to pollutants Many of these topics
have been addressed in the local press because they
are of concern to DC residents. This report character-
ized the potential risks for these major sources/issues
of concern with respect to the levels of pollutants in
DC's Drinking Water System
V!
-------
Executive Summary
the environment, opportunities for exposure, and re-
sulting health effects (especially to susceptible sub-
populations such as asthmatics, children, etc.).
Drinking Water
The Districts drinking water continues to be of
concern, especially following several "boil water" ad-
visories over the last few years. These advisories have
been issued because of concerns over disease-causing
bacteria/pathogens (such as Crytosporidium) in drink-
ing water. Despite these problems, the drinking wa-
ter in DC meets regulatory standards and is gener-
ally safe for use by most of the population. However,
individuals who have weakened immune systems
should take precautions (consult their physicians and/
or boil the water) with respect to use of drinking
water. Concern also results from chemical contami-
nants such as metals (especially lead) and
trihalomethanes (THMs) that may be present in
drinking water at levels that could impact human
health. Positive signs for the future include improve-
ments in the operation of drinking water treatment
plants/distribution systems serving DC, as well as new
regulations from EPA requiring increased monitor-
ing for Crytosporidium (and other disease-causing con-
taminants) in drinking water.
Fish Consumption
Contaminated fish and shell fish are potential
sources of human exposure to toxic chemicals. DC
currently has public health fishing advisories in ef-
fect for the consumption of channel catfish, eel, and
carp because of elevated levels of PCBs and chlor-
dane detected in fish caught in DC stretches of the
Potomac and Anacostia Rivers. Unfortunately, the
fish advisory does not appear to be effective in re-
ducing consumption of these species. According to
survey results, shoreline anglers target their catch
(prefer) to species such as catfish, eel, and carp, the
species to which the fishing advisories apply. Of the
anglers surveyed, 78 percent were not aware of a fish
advisory.
Shoreline recreational and subsistence anglers are
the populations believed to be at highest risk. Sub-
sistence anglers may be obtaining a large portion of
their diet from fish. Although these anglers may rep-
resent a small fraction of the total population, they
Concerns for Fish Consumption
A Toxic Chemicals - PCBs and
Pesticides
A Higher Levels in Catfish, Eel,
Carp
A Fish Advisory in DC Waters
A Advisory is Not Effective
A Recreational and Subsistance
Fisherman May be at Higher
Risk
may be representative of the majority of risks posed
by consumption of fish from contaminated surface
waters. Unfortunately, the fish species upon which
they depend may have higher levels of contaminants.
Ambient Air Quality
The air quality in the District is generally good,
with some improvement shown during the last few
decades. The lack of heavy industry in the DC area
partially accounts for the relatively clean air; how-
ever, automobile emissions are major contributors to
the region's ozone problems. Most of the air quality
alerts in the area are caused by high ozone levels
during the summer. Persons most at risk for health
effects are those with pulmonary (lung) diseases, such
as asthma or emphysema. During an air quality alert,
r
•s
i n:t
ManlwtigStaltons
Property Divsjon, S.E.
| aievyd»M,H.W.
I
•n
82 '83 '94 85 'W '87 '89 ?0 '91 >92 93
Year
DKTWW* In L»ad L«v*ls In DC Ambtent Air (1*4—1«M)
VIII
-------
Executive Summary
people at risk should remain indoors as much as pos-
sible, preferably in an air-conditioned environment.
Everyone, regardless of their health status, should
avoid heavy exertion from running, bicycling, lawn
mowing, and similar activities. In general, levels of
pollutants have decreased over time, especially lead;
lead levels have dropped dramatically (90 percent)
since the phase-out of leaded gasoline. Ozone levels
also show improvement with fewer days during which
levels exceed the national standard (0.120 ppm).
Indoor Air Pollution
Example of How One May Be Exposed to Lead
While the ambient (outdoor) air quality in DC is
good, limited information about indoor air quality
raises concerns about potential impacts to human
health. Indoor air pollutants include tobacco smoke,
carbon monoxide, bacteria, radon, formaldehyde, and
many others. Levels of pollutants can be higher in
indoor environments than in ambient air. Because
most people spend 90 percent of their time indoors
(homes, offices, etc.), it is evident that indoor air pol-
lution has the potential to be a major impact on hu-
man health. However, only limited data exist on
levels of air pollutants (carbon monoxide) in indoor
environments m the DC area.
Lead Exposure
Sources of lead exposure for the general popula-
tion include paint, gasoline, and soldered cans. Lead
has also been found in other media such as soil and
dust. Additionally, drinking water is a source of lead
exposure. Lead has been used in service lines; solder
for the pipes, fixtures, and fittings. Information indi-
cates that DC still has some lead in service lines. The
intentional ingestion of soil called "pica" is'another
source of lead exposure (especially for children).
Blood lead levels for inner-city (DC) children are
higher than levels for the suburban and rural chil-
dren. More than 18 percent of the 4,196 inner-city
children studied had levels greater than 10 |-lg/dL,
which is the CDCs acceptable level. Therefore, about
82 percent of the subjects from DC were within the
CDC's acceptable range for blood lead levels.
HEALTH OF ECOLOGICAL
RESOURCES IN DC
The ecological resources in the District have been
degraded from decades of human-induced stress.
Fisheries have been greatly reduced from historical
levels and may
never attain their
original abun-
dance. Other
aquatic resources
are in lair- to-poor
condition because
of degraded water
quality and loss of
habitat. While
many of the
Anacostia Rivers'
problems can be
attributed to non-
point sources, the
Washington Navy
Yard is a source of toxic runoff and has been pro-
posed as a Superfund Site. In addition to the poor
water quality (sedimentation, bacteria,
nutrient-enrichment, and low dissolved oxygen) in
the Anacostia, trash and debris are evident on the
shores of the river. An important aspect of the resto-
ration of the Anacostia River will be controlling com-
bined sewer overflow (CSO) and nonpoint source
runoff.
IX
-------
Executive Summary
Restoration activities for the Anacostia River are
underway, with coordination among Federal agencies,
military establishments, State agencies, DC govern-
ment, and other regional organizations. These efforts
coordinate more than $8 million annually in activi-
ties to improve water quality and promote the health
of ecological resources in the Anacostia. Some of the
benefits are already evident; water quality is improv-
ing and submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) is be-
ginning to return. SAV provides food and cover for
fish, shellfish, and waterfowl, and improves water
quality by reducing sediment and nutrients, and pro-
ducing oxygen. Although the species of aquatic veg-
etation that are growing are not the same as the origi-
nal (native) species, their presence is indicative of im-
proved water quality.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers already has re-
stored 32 acres of wetlands at the Kenilworth Marsh
and plans to restore an additional 75 acres on the
Anacostia River. The completion of these restoration
efforts will double the total amount of emergent tidal
wetlands in the District (from 100 to 200 acres).
The continued protection of Rock Creek Park as
an aquatic and terrestrial corridor for migrating spe-
cies has provided important benefits to the regional
ecosystem. The value of the Rock Creek corridor
would not be realized without the coordinated efforts
of the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning
Commission and adjacent Montgomery County,
Maryland.
Funding for Anacostia Restoration Effort
FY1993
REGIONAL -$357.050
ICPRB
IMC
LOCAL-$1,594,55
Montgomery
Prince Georges
County
TOTAL = $8,142,021
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR
RISK REDUCTION AND
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS OF
EXISTING EFFORTS
Although it appears that environmental condi-
tions in DC are generally favorable, specific recom-
mendations are provided to facilitate risk reduction.
In particular, there is a need to better communicate
the idea of environmental risk to those persons whose
health conditions, activity patterns, and lifestyles may
result in potentially higher risks. In particular, po-
tential risks from fish consumption, air pollution (in-
cluding indoor air), lead paint, and drinking water
need to be communicated to those who may be more
susceptible. Improved communication is intended
to result in steps that can be taken to reduce the risks
for those subpopulations (e.g., reduce fish consump-
tion, boil drinking water).
Other recommendations relate to advocating
continuing existing efforts as well as integrating new
activities that can be undertaken/continued by gov-
ernment agencies to improve environmental condi-
tions with respect to both human health and ecologi-
cal resources:
• Continue to upgrade drinking water treat-
ment/distribution systems, taking into ac-
count the recommendations of many groups;
• Continue/expand tapwater monitoring
throughout DC;
• Monitor blood lead levels (especially in chil-
dren) to better identify possible poisonings
from lead-based paints in houses;
• Improve communication of fish advisories
to recreational and subsistence fishermen;
• Implement an ozone mapping and commu-
nication system to better warn individuals
of high ozone levels and to suggest decreas-
ing outdoor activities during these periods;
• Continue to upgrade the Blue Plains Treat-
ment Plant to reduce inputs of nutrients into
the Potomac River;
-------
Executive Summary
Create an infrastructure to coordinate stud-
ies of human health risks in the DC area.
Similar to groups that coordinate ecological
monitoring/restoration in the area, DC might
benefit from a coordinated effort of the Fed-
eral, State, local, regional, and private orga-
nizations with responsibilities for human
health.
Continue the coordinated efforts to restore
the Anacostia River and its watershed. Some
initial signs of the benefits of such efforts are
becoming apparent; and
Continue efforts to reduce nonpoint source
pollution (combined sewer overflows, sedi-
mentation, and nutrient enrichment) to the
District's surface waters.
Restoration of
The Anacostia
A $8 Million Invested
in 1993
A Benefits Already
Evident
- SAV Returning
- Wetlands
Restoration
The State of
the Anacostia
1989 Status Report
Continued Efforts to Reduce
Non-Point Source Pollution
and Combined Sewer
Overflow
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY iii
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1-1
1.1 Purpose and Scope 1-3
1.2 Background 1-4
1.3 Approach 1-5
1.3.1 Automated Literature Search Strategies 1-6
1.3.2 Contacts Made for Data Collection 1-7
1.3.3 Data Analysis Approach 1-8
1.4 Limitations 1-9
2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING IN DC 2-1
3.0 FACTORS INFLUENCING ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS IN DC 3-1
3.1 Point Sources 3-1
3.1.1 Facilities Discharging to Surface Waters 3-6
3.1.2 Air Emitters in DC 3-26
3.1.3 Hazardous Waste Management Facilities 3-33
3.1.4 CERCLIS Sites 3-40
3.1.5 TR! Facilities 3-47
3.2 Nonpoint Source Pollution in DC . 3-48
„ 3.2.1 Nonpoint Sources of Air Pollution 3-50
3.2.2 Nonpoint Sources of Water Pollution . 3-51
4.0 CHARACTERIZATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL RISKS TO HUMAN
HEALTH 4-1
4.1 Drinking Water 4-2
4.1.1 Overview of Drinking Water Issues 4-2
4.1.2 Drinking Water Supply (Treatment, Problems, and
Improvements) — . 4-4
4.1.3 Levels of Contaminants in DC Drinking Water 4-7
4.1.4 Potential Risks to Human Health from Drinking Water ... 4-10
4.2 Fish Consumption 4-11
4.2.1 Overview of Fish Consumption Issues 4-11
4.2.2 Levels of Contaminants in Fish in DC Waters 4-13
4.2.3 Fish Consumption Patterns in the District of Columbia .. 4-15
4.2.3.1 DCRA Survey 4-16
4.2.3.2 Virginia State University (VSU) Survey 4-18
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Paoe No.
4.2.4 Potential Risks from Fish Consumption 4-18
4.3 Ambient Air Quality 4-23
4.3.1 Overview of Air Quality Issues 4-23
4.3.2 Ambient Air Quality Monitoring in the DC Area 4-24
4.3.3 Ambient Levels of Air Pollutants 4-24
4.3.4 Indoor Air Pollutants 4-26
4.3.5 Potential Health Impacts from Air Pollution 4-31
4.4 Human Exposure: Levels of Contaminants in "Other"
Environmental Media 4-32
4.4.1 Lead in Human Blood in DC 4-33
4.4.2 Contaminants in Soil and Garden-grown Vegetables .... 4-40
5.0 ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA . 5-1
5.1 Historical Change in the District of Columbia Ecosystem 5-1
5.2 Condition of Ecological Resources 5-2
5.2.1 Aquatic Resources 5-2
5.2.2 Wetland Resources 5-31
5.2.3 Terrestrial Resources . 5-34
5.3 Place in the Larger Ecosystem 5-39
5.3.1 Influence of Regional Activities on Condition of District of
Columbia Resources 5-39
5.3.2 Contribution of District of Columbia to the Regional
Ecosystem 5-41
6.0 CONCLUSIONS, RISK REDUCTION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6-1
6.1 Future Studies: Filling Data Gaps 6-8
6.2 Recommendations 6-9
7.0 REFERENCES 7-1
APPENDIX A Data Base Spreadsheets on RCRIS (Small Quantity
Generators) and AIRS-AFS Facilities With Emissions
Below Threshold Levels A-1
APPENDIX B Electronic Data Base Literature Searches B-1
APPENDIX C Rare Plants and Animals of the District of Columbia . . C-1
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1.
Table 2-2.
Table 2-3.
Table 2-4.
Table 2-5.
Table 2-6.
Table 2-7.
Table 3-1.
Table 3-2.
Table 3-3.
Table 3-4.
Table 3-5.
Table 3-6.
Table 3-7.
Table 3-8.
Table 3-9.
Table 3-10.
Table 3-11.
Table 4-1.
Table 4-2.
Table 4-3.
Table 4-4.
Table 4-5.
Table 4-6.
Table 4-7.
Table 4-8.
Table 4-9.
Page No.
Population Density in Major U.S. Cities . 2-3
Air Quality in Selected Metro Areas 2-4
Metropolitan Areas Failing to Meet National Ambient
Air Quality Standards for Ozone (Average Number of Days
Exceeding Standards): 1991 to 1993 2-5
Mass Transit Passenger Miles , 2-9
Access to Nature (Urban Parkland) in U.S. Cities 2-10
Toxic Chemical Releases and Transfers 2-11
Green Metro Index 2-14
Facilities in DC Which Have Active Wastewater
Discharge Permits 3-7
1994 PCS Loading Data from Effluent Data Statistics ... 3-13
1994 PCS Permit Limit Excursions 3-15
Categorization Summary for Pollutants Specified
in Permits 3-21
1994 PCS Annual Loads Using Toxic Weighting Factors . 3-23
Facilities With Air Permits in D.C. and Emissions Data . . 3-28
Approaches Considered for Ranking Facilities with Air
Emissions in DC 3-34
Comparison of Facilities with Air Emissions 3-35
Hazardous Waste Management Facilities (Large Quantity)
in Washington, D.C •.,..• 3-36
CERCLIS Sites in the District of Columbia 3-41
Toxic Chemical Releases in DC in 1994 3-49
Drinking Water Treatment Plant Data 4-8
Levels of PCBs, Dieldrin, and Chlordane Found in Tissues
of Fish from DC Waters 4-20
Estimates of Potential Upper-bound Carcinogenic Risk
from Wild Fish Tissue Samples Collected
in the District of Columbia . 4-22
Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Stations in the
District of Columbia 4-25
Levels of Pollutants in Ambient Air in Washington DC ... 4-27
Mean Lead Concentrations in Inner-City, Suburban, and
Rural Children 4-36
Inner-City Subjects Grouped by Blood Lead Concentration 4-38
Screening Results: Number of Subjects per Blood Lead
Level Grouping 4-39
Metals in Soil and Leafy Vegetables - DC Garden Survey . 4-41
-------
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Page No.
Table 5-1. Comparison of Fish Species Taken from Tidal
District of Columbia Waters at the Beginning (1881-1911)
and End of the 20th Century 5-19
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1.
Figure 2-2.
Figure 3-1.
Figure 3-2.
Figure 3-3.
Figure 3-4.
Figure 4-1.
Figure 4-2.
Figure 4-3.
Figure 4-4.
Figure 4-5.
Figure 5-1.
Figure 5-2.
Figure 5-3.
Figure 5-4.
Figure 5-5.
Figure 5-6.
Figure 5-7.
Figure 5-8.
Figure 5-9.
Figure 5-10.
Page No.
Ozone Exceedance Data for Washington Metropolitan Area
(1979-1994) 2-7
Trends in Hazardous Waste Generation in DC
(1985-1993) 2-13
Location of Facilities Discharging to Surface Waters
(PCS Facilities) in the Washington, DC Area 3-9
Location of Facilities with Air Emissions
(AIRS-AFS Facilities) in the Washington, DC Area 3-32
Location of Hazardous Waste Management (RCRIS)
Facilities in the Washington, DC Area 3-38
Location of CERCLIS Sites in the Washington, DC Area . 3-46
Example of How One May be Exposed to Chemicals/
Pollutants 4-3
Washington Aqueduct - Service Area and Major Facilities 4-5
Days Exceeding Ozone Standard in DC 4-29
Decrease in Lead Levels in DC Ambient Air (1982-1993) 4-30
Example of How One May Be Exposed to Lead . 4-34
Aquatic Resources in the District of Columbia 5-3
District of Columbia Waterbodies Supporting Aquatic Life 5-5
Distribution of Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV) in
District of Columbia Waters 5-12
Condition of Benthic Macroinvertebrate Communities in
District of Columbia Waters 5-15
Abundance of Important Fish Species in Tidal Waters of
District of Columbia (Adopted from DCRA, 1995) 5-24
Distribution of Fish Abundance Among All Families of Fish
Occurring in Tidal Waters of District of Columbia ...... 5-25
Extent of Historical Wetlands Than Have Been Filled in
District of Columbia 5-32
Distribution of Existing Wetlands in District of Columbia . 5-33
Distribution of Parklands in District of Columbia 5-35
Funding for Anacostia Restoration Effort
(FY93 Dollars) 5-40
-------
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report provides information
on the characterization of environmental
conditions in Washington, DC. It
compiles information from a multitude of
sources for an evaluation of the state of
the environment in DC, focusing on
topics that affect human health and
ecological resources. This report is
intended to help decision makers,
resource managers, and the public to
make prudent, informed choices in
Scope of Report
OC's Environmental Setting;
Sources of Pollution
Human Health Impacts
Health of Ecological Resources
Recommendations for Further
Study and Efforts to Improve
'Environmental Conditions
shaping our environmental future. In a sense, this document is a road map - it tells
us where we have been, where we are now, and discusses where we need to go in
the future. This report's title, "A Scientific Foundation for Setting an Environmental
Agenda," reflects this concept of examining our current knowledge in order to improve
environmental conditions in the future.
In many ways, "A Scientific
Foundation for Setting an
Environmental Agenda," complements
the ground-breaking work of "Our
Unfair Share: A Survey of Pollution
Sources in Our Nation's Capital"
(AAEA, 1994), by delving deeper into
the science to help answer questions
about sources of pollution and exposure of the population to contaminants in the air,
"Researchers should investigate
specific sources and sites, specific
pollutant types, and the specific
impacts and effects of pollution on
hwman and environmental health.*
"Our Unfair Share; A Survey of
Pollution Sources tn Our Matron's
Capital" (AAEA, 1994J
1-1
-------
water, and land. While "Our Unfair Share" paved the way to begin assembling the
pieces to solve this puzzle, this report adds pieces that expand the perspective with
more quantitative information on sources of pollution and potential exposures and
risks to human health and ecological resources.
This report provides a value-added assessment of environmental risks in DC;
however, the effort is far from complete. Data are scarce on levels of pollutants in
the environment in DC. As long as there are large data gaps, it will be difficult to
draw definitive conclusions about the impacts of environmental contamination on
human health and ecological resources.
One of the first steps is to better understand the current condition of the
environment in order to address the complex problems facing the District as we enter
the next century. While pollution control efforts of the last three decades have been
successful in improving air quality and reducing contamination of rivers and streams,
the problems we currently face require a new way of doing business. Twenty-five
years ago, the problems were obvious - huge smokestacks billowing smoke into the
air, dead fish on the shorelines, and
drums of hazardous wastes. Today the
challenges are less apparent - trace
levels of chemicals in our drinking
water, lead dust from paints used years
. . . A „ ,. oreatest risks."
ago in houses, and stormwater runoff
from our streets and parking lots.
. at EPA (U,S. EPA,
These new types of problems require
*Strong science provides the
foundation for credible environmental
decision making. With a belter
understanding of environmental risks
target the hazards that pose the
Expert Panef on the Hole of Science
new approaches to environmental
protection. Solutions depend on a better understanding of the complex scientific
issues involved in our local environments. "A Scientific Foundation for Setting an
1-2
-------
Environmental Agenda" is the motto for this report as it is a review of the current
state of scientific knowledge on environmental quality in DC. it also recommends
future efforts to improve environmental quality for all residents of Washington, DC.
This introductory section presents information on the purpose and scope of this
study, the background, and the approaches that were used to obtain and evaluate
information. Also described are some of the limitations of the study, many of which
result from the lack of data. The remainder of the report is organized in a manner that
first presents basic facts and information and then builds details (and complexity) in
the latter sections. Specifically, Section 2 describes the environmental setting in DC,
the overall picture of environmental conditions as summarized by various statistics.
Section 3 describes factors influencing environmental conditions in DC, including
inventories of regulated "point sources" of pollution as well as "nonpoint sources"
that are more difficult to account for. Section 4 examines potential human health
impacts through exposures to contaminants from drinking water, fish consumption,
air, and others. Similarly, Section 5 characterizes ecological health in DC, with
emphasis on the aquatic resources in the District's rivers and streams. Conclusions
and recommendations are provided in Section 6, with respect to the most prevalent
problems facing DC's environmental health. This section includes recommendations
for future studies and efforts to reduce environmental risks. Section 7 lists the
references (journal articles, reports, books, meetings, personal contacts) used to
compile this report.
1.1 Purpose and Scone
The purpose of this document is to review, analyze, and report on
environmental conditions in Washington, DC. This report compiles scientific
information to help answer some of the major questions about the condition of the
1-3
-------
environment in the District. Focusing
within the District's borders, this report
characterizes sources of environmental
pollution, examines relative impacts of
major sources, describes environmental
risks to human health, and
characterizes the health of ecological
resources. Finally, this report presents
recommendations for potential actions
that can be taken as well as further
studies to improve our knowledge of
; , Major Questions
* What is the condition of the
environment?
* Is It getting better or worse?
* What factors contribute to
environmental conditions?
* What are potential
environmental risks to human
Heath and ecological resources?
environmental impacts to residents of the District and the local ecosystem. The
intended use of these recommendations is for consideration by decision makers and
the public in taking action to improve environmental conditions in the District.
This study was designed to take a broad perspective of the condition of
environmental "health" (human and ecological). The scope of this report is broad: it
provides information on specific sources of pollution, it discusses human exposures
to contaminants from the air we breathe and the water we drink; and it talks about
actions that can be taken to reduce potential impacts. However, there are limitations
to the scope of this study and report. (See Section 1.4.)
1.2 Background
EPA Region 3 has established a cooperative program to study community-based
environmental protection (CBEP) in selected urban areas within its boundaries. CBEP
is a geographic-driven process that utilizes science, information sharing, partnership
building, and other considerations to achieve benefits for human and ecological
1-4
-------
communities. Such environmental initiatives involve estimating the relative
environmental health and ecological risks present within the area, and granting awards
to local community groups to develop and implement mechanisms to obtain public
opinion of their local environmental quality and risks. Also, these projects are being
initiated in part out of interest in environmental justice issues. One area selected for
this type of investigation is the District of Columbia. EPA Region 3, in cooperation
with EPA's Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT) and the DC Department
of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs/Environmental Regulation Administration
(DCRA/ERA), is examining the relative risks of numerous aspects of environmental
health and ecological conditions in the District of Columbia.
Numerous studies have been conducted on environmental conditions in DC, but
these studies have mostly addressed separate pieces of the puzzle. Some studies
have examined the condition of aquatic resources in the Anacostia River, while others
have focused on environmental justice issues in DC. These topics, while of critical
importance, are just parts of the overall environmental picture in Washington. A "big
picture" analysis, with a more comprehensive perspective, is needed to integrate
information from previous studies in this broader context. A broader scope of
knowledge will enable decision makers to make more informed decisions about
environmental protection and resource management.
1.3 Approach
This characterization of environmental risks in Washington, DC, is based on
data previously collected by government agencies, universities, private organizations,
and other individuals that have studied these topics. Although data are scarce, it was
possible to characterize some of the potential environmental risks to human health and
ecological conditions. This section summarizes the approaches that were used to
1-5
-------
identify, collect, evaluate,, and analyze
,_ . . . . , _, j. L. Approach
the information included in this report.
In general, data collection was
accomplished through 'the following
Analyze/Interpret Data
Contact local Researchers
means:
Use of in-house libraries/
journals/newsletters;
Utilize Existing Data/Information
Characterize Bisks
• Electronic literature searches of published scientific journals;
• Contacts with known experts;
• Telephone calls to government agencies, private organizations, and
colleges/universities;
• Attendance at public meetings; and
• Electronic data base searches for environmental emissions data. (See
Section 3.)
1.3.1 Automated Literature Search Strategies
Sources of information queried through literature searches included major
bibliographic retrieval services, scientific/medical information systems, and
nonbibliographic data bases. Electronic literature searches were conducted of
numerous journals, reports, conference proceedings, industry papers, dissertations,
newspaper articles, and books. The two primary services used in these searches were
Dialog Knight-Ridder Information, a bibliographic retrieval service, and the National
Library of Medicine's MEDLARS, a scientific/medical information system. Together,
these data bases offer more than 300 component files on all major areas of interest
(which includes science, engineering, industry, business, and reference).
1-6
-------
The searches were conducted using several combinations of key words,
including:
• Washington and environ and human health and risk assessment;
• District of Columbia and human health and environmental {health or risk);
• District of Columbia and (exposure or risk or toxic) and (environ or
pesticide); and
• District of Columbia and health and environ and (exposure or risk or toxic)
and (pollutant or contaminant or pesticide).
A more detailed account of the literature search approach and results is presented in
Appendix B.
1.3.2 Contacts Made for Data Collection
Contacts were made with individuals in many organizations: local government
agencies (DC Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs - Environmental
Regulation Administration, Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments,
Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin), universities (Howard University,
University of the District of Columbia), Federal agencies/military (EPA, Department of
Agriculture, Department of the Navy, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers), organizations
(African American Environmentalist Association), and many private companies. In
addition to these contacts, attendance at public meetings in DC; attendance at the
Anacostia Federal Workplan meeting of the Chesapeake Bay Program Federal Agencies
Committee; and visits to the Dalecarlia Drinking Water Treatment Plant, the Anacostia
Museum, and Anacostia Park (to observe fishing activities) helped in collecting
1-7
-------
information from many individuals. These contacts yielded reports, published articles,
and unpublished data as well as further insight into environmental risks in DC.
1.3.3 Data Analysis Approach
This study evaluated existing data on sources of pollution in DC and
concentrations of chemical contaminants in media, and examined the potential for
human exposure and ecological impacts using approaches that have been tested by
time. The highlights of this report are Sections 3, 4, and 5. These sections present
value-added assessments of information about sources of pollution in DC and potential
environmental impacts to human health and the environment. Procedures to evaluate
the potential of point sources have been used extensively in preliminary environmental
assessments of releases from industrial facilities. For example, the technique used to
assess environmental impacts of discharges of wastewaters to surface waters has
been used in support of EPA's Office of Water since the 1970s in developing
regulatory standards (Versar, 1995). Evaluation of the potential for human health
impacts from a variety of sources is based on approaches devised from more than 20
years of exposure assessment methodology development. Section 4 presents the
evaluation of such human health risks from a variety of potential exposure scenarios.
In general, this study attempted to obtain actual data on levels of contaminants in
environmental media (water, air, soil) to which people may be exposed. Also, data
were examined on activity patterns in DC (e.g., fishing in the Anacostia and Potomac
Rivers) to characterize potential risks. Where possible, existing assessments and
professional judgement were used in assessing impacts to human health. For the
ecological characterization, monitoring data were obtained on levels of contaminants
as well as from surveys of the condition of biological communities (fish, wetlands,
submerged aquatic vegetation, etc.).
1-8
-------
Limitations in Scope
Use of Existing Data
Geographic Scale - Within DC
Certain Human Health Topics
Selected Measures of Ecological
Heatth
1.4 Limitations
While this report takes a broad,
"big picture" perspective of
environmental conditions in DC, it simply
cannot cover every topic, address every
problem, and examine impacts to every
resident. It is important to recognize
that there are limitations to this study
and report. First of all, this study relied
on existing data - no new data were ~
collected (no sampling was conducted). Rather, information was compiled from many
agencies, organizations, and individuals (drawing from the knowledge of hundreds of
experts). Although data are limited, the information sources used in assembling this
report include:
• Articles published in the scientific literature;
• Data obtained from numerous individuals/organizations;
• Reports developed by local governmental agencies; and
• Data from electronic data bases.
Other limitations exist because the scope of the study had to be kept to a
manageable size. Most noteworthy, the geographic scale was limited to within the
boundaries of the District of Columbia. Obviously, water and air quality are affected
by sources of pollution well beyond the District. Similarly, the District influences the
environment of adjoining States. This need to consider environmental quality on a
regional scale is especially apparent for the Anacostia River (and the streams/rivers
that feed into it upstream in Maryland). Degradation of water quality has occurred to
1-9
-------
the Anacostia by the time it enters the District. However, it was necessary for this
study to limit the geographic scope to within DC's borders.1 Similarly, comparisons
of environmental conditions across geographic areas within the District have not been
made as the data are generally insufficient for such purposes.
It should be noted that this report
is not a risk assessment; it uses
qualitative or screening assessments,
based on "surrogates of risk" to
characterize risks (potential impacts of
pollutants on human health and
ecological resources). More definitive
risk assessments would require site-
specific data on the magnitude,
duration, and frequency of releases of
pollutants; site-specific environmental
Characterizing Risks -
Bather Than Risk Assessment
Absence of Detailed
Data Sets
Screening/Qualitative
Assessments
Examination Of "Surrogates
of Risk*
Indicators of Potential
Magnitude of Impacts
conditions; enumeration of human and ecological receptors; and identification of
relevant exposure pathways. Such estimates of risks from each source would be a
monumental effort, taking years and huge sums of money. Therefore, surrogates for
risks are used as indicators of the magnitude of potential impacts to human health and
the environment. By analyzing emissions data from facilities in DC, we are able to
make statements about sources of pollution. However, this study did not attempt to
link sources of pollution with specific effects on human health or ecological condition.
An environmental epidemiology effort to relate cause and effect would require
1 It should be noted that many of the various restoration efforts related to the Anacostia River
are being carried out in the broader, regional context which includes areas of Montgomery and
Prince Georges counties in Maryland.
1-10
-------
extensive (and costly) collection of data on human health statistics, activity patterns,
exposures, and related information.
In the area of characterizing
environmental risks to human health,
the scope was limited to a handful of
issues that were selected as major
topics of concern. Specifically included
in this study were potential for human
health impacts from: drinking (tap)
water, fish consumption, air quality,
lead (in several media), and
contaminated soil. These topics were
Characterizing Human
Health Risks
Drinking {Tap} Water
Fish Consumption
lead
Contaminated Soli
selected by the "Steering Committee" (consisting of representatives from EPA
Region 3, EPA Office of Research and Development, EPA Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics, and the District of Columbia Environmental Regulation
Administration) because they are believed to be the major factors of concern for
human health risks in DC. The Steering Committee considered these topics within the
context of previous studies in DC as well as factors that are involved in similar studies
conducted in Baltimore, Maryland, and Philadelphia and Chester, Pennsylvania. Other
human health-related topics not specifically addressed in this study included asbestos,
radon, pesticide use, solid waste/junkyards, underground storage tanks, or radioactive
materials. Similarly, characterization of ecological health focused on a few limited
measures of the extent, status, and trends of aquatic and terrestrial resources.
In summary, the greatest limitations of this report result from the lack of
comprehensive data. Better data are needed on levels of contaminants in various
media and actual human exposures within specific areas of DC. Surprisingly, it
1-11
-------
appears that the ecological conditions in DC have been studied more extensively than
human health impacts from environmental factors. Some of this disparity is explained
by the need to fulfill specific requirements of the Federal Government for monitoring
and reporting on water quality (e.g., 305(b) reporting) and the fact that an
infrastructure exists to address the District's water quality in the larger context of
programs to protect the Chesapeake Bay. With respect to human health exposure,
very little data could be identified on important topics such as indoor air pollution, lead
paint, wading/swimming, and activity patterns that may result in increased exposures.
While a considerable amount of data were obtained for this effort (and are presented
within), many gaps in knowledge still exist, which made this assessment more difficult
to perform.
1-12
-------
2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING IN DC
This section presents a brief overview of environmental conditions in the
District of Columbia. These descriptions are intended to provide the overall context
for the sections that follow. Various facts and statistics are presented that illustrate
the "environmental setting" in DC. This information describes factors that may
influence environmental risks to human health and the environment.
General Environmental Indicators
* Population Density
* Air Quality
» Access to Parks
• TOXIC Chemicals and
Hazardous Wastes
* "Green Metro Index*
In a sense, the environment is a
living, breathing organism. As such
there are measures, or indicators, that
can tell us something about the health of
the environment. These indicators,
much like a human being's vital signs,
can be examined to determine the health
of the environment. Similar to when one
visits the doctor, who takes measures of
pulse, blood pressure, and weight - the
environment has vital signs that we can examine. Detailed below is information on
several general indicators of the condition of the environment in DC. In some cases,
these indicators are compared to measures from previous years to determine if
conditions are improving. Other measures compare DC with other cities. Overall,
these statistics tell a story about DC's environmental health.
Washington, DC is among the more densely populated cities in the United
States, with a density of 9,528 individuals per square mile (U.S. Bureau of the
Census, 1995). Population density can indicate the burden that urbanization can
place on the environment. In general, higher population densities can be related to
2-1
-------
increases in energy consumption, challenges in providing drinking water, air pollution
from motor vehicles, modification of wetlands and waterbodies, and other
man-induced threats to the environment. Table 2-1 presents information on
population density in DC and other major U.S. cities. The actual resident population
of Washington, DC, in 1994 is reported in the Statistical Abstract of the United States
to be 570,000 (U.S. Bureau of Census, 1995). Population density per square mile of
land area was calculated for a selected number of cities in the United States.
Population data were obtained from 1992 census data, while the land area data were
obtained from the 1990 census data (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1995).
The quality of the air is an indicator of environmental conditions, with respect
to both human health and ecological resources. In general, DC's air is cleaner than
many other major metropolitan areas in the United States (World Resources Institute,
1993). Table 2-2 presents air quality rankings for selected metropolitan areas, based
on EPA's Pollutant Standard Index (PSI). The U.S. EPA provides this information
taking into account daily monitoring of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, particulates,
carbon dioxide, and ozone. PSI levels above 100 are characterized as unhealthful.
DC's average PSI of 32 ranks among the top cities with respect to ambient air quality
(World Resources Institute, 1993). However, DC's major air pollution problem has
been ozone (highest in the summer), and is a nonattainment area for ozone because
of past exceedances of national standards. Levels in the DC metropolitan area are
somewhat lower than in some other major metropolitan areas (Table 2-3). In addition,
ozone levels seem to be decreasing in recent years. Figure 2-1 presents data on trends
in ozone (number of days exceeding standard) levels for the DC metropolitan area
from 1979 - 1994. Although ozone levels vary considerably due to weather
conditions, levels are noticeably lower during the 1990s than in the previous 20 years,
and have resulted in fewer exceedances of the standard (MWCOG, 1996).
2-2
-------
Table 2-1. Population Density in Major U.S. Cities
City Population/Square Mile
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
^~j~«~j
IT*"**
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
New York, NY
San Francisco, CA
Chicago, IL
Philadelphia, PA
Boston, MA
Miami, PL
^^^^^^3ffixl
Baltimore, MD
Los Angeles, CA
Detroit, Ml
Milwaukee, Wl
Seattle, WA
San Jose, CA
Ann Arbor, Ml
San Diego, CA
23,671
15,610
12,183
11,495
11,405
10,309
^vw^^£^™jXjmj|p£^^ aCv'BJSSj!t13jfi
*, ^X£m^^.^__.^™^5
7,437
7,296
6,420
6,198
4,676
4,247
3,546
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census (1995).
2-3
-------
Table 2-2. Air Quality in Selected Metro Areas"
Metro Area
Honolulu
San Francisco-Oakland
Kansas City
^f|i^^rj^£T33iJii3l2
Pittsburgh
Scranton
Chicago
Louisville
Albany
Rochester
Allentown
Cleveland
Harrisburg
Providence
Salt Lake City
New Haven
Nashville
Omaha
Austin
New Orleans
Denver
Baltimore
Philadelphia
Worcester
San Antonio
Cincinnati
Oklahoma City
Dayton
Orlando
Average PSI
15
20
28
ff ffffff <. fff. ft £fri££
9£<£P&.- . J"" &£?$
32
33
33
33
33
34
34
35
35
35
36
36
37
37
38
38
39
39
39
39
39
40
41
42
42
Metro Area Average PSI
Tulsa
Detroit
Grand Rapids
Dallas-Ft. Worth
Milwaukee
Las Vegas
St. Louis
Toledo
New York
Columbus
Jacksonville
Tampa-St. Petersburg
Atlanta
Baton Rouge
El Paso
Phoenix
Memphis
Tucson
Indianapolis
Bakersfield
Sacramento
Knoxville
Charlotte
San Diego
Houston
Raleigh-Durham
Fresno
Los Angeles
42
43
43
43
44
44
45
45
46
46
46
46
47
47
48
48
49
49
49
51
51
52
54
54
56
56
56
73
• EPA Aeromatic Information Retrieval System, Pollutant Standard Index (PSI)
Summary, 1990.
Source: World Resources Institute (1993).
2-4
-------
Table 2-3. Metropolitan Areas Failing to Meet National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone
Average Number of Days Exceeding Standards: 1991 to 1993
Metropolitan Area
1991-93,
avg.
1993'
Metropolitan Area
1991-93
avg.
19931
Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY
Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, PA-NJ -
Altoona, PA -
Atlanta, GA 4.2
Atlantic City, NJ 1.0
Baltimore, MD 4.8
Baton Rouge, LA 1.8
Beaumont-Port Arthur, TX 2.7
Birmingham, AL 0.7
Boston-Lawrence-Salem, MA-NH CMSA2 3.1
Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY CMSA
Canton, OH 0.3
Charleston, WV 0.3
Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, NC-SC3 0.7
Chicago-Gary-Lake County, IL-IN-WI
CMSA 4.7
Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN CMSA 1.3
Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, OH CMSA 1.7
Columbus. OH 0.3
Dallas-Fort Worth, TX CMSA 1.0
Dayton-Springfield, OH 0.0
Detroit-Ann Arbor, Ml CMSA 1.0
Door County, Wl4 1.6
Edmonson County, KY4 —
El Paso, TX 3.7
Erie, PA
Essex County, NY4
Evansville, IN-KY
Grand Rapids, Ml '.''.. 3.4
Greater Connecticut, CT5 7.5
Greenbrier County, WV4 0.4
Hancock and Waldo Counties, ME4 1.3
Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle, PA 0.0
Houston-Galveston-Brazoria, TX CMSA 6.3
Huntington-Ashland. WV-KY-OH 1.0
Indianapolis, IN
Jefferson County, NY4
Jersey Co., IL4 0.7
Johnstown, PA -
Kent County and Queen Anne's Co., MD4 2.8
4.3
0.0
6.2
3.0
0.0
1.0
4.0
2.1
2.4
1.0
2.3
1.0
1.0
4.1
6.6
10.4
1.0
2.0
2.0
Los Angeles South Coast Air, CA' 104.3
Manchester, NH -
Manitowoc Co. Wl 2.0
Memphis, TN-Ar-MS 0.3
Miami-Fort Lauderdale, FL CMSA -
Milwaukee-Racine, Wl CMSA 3.9
Monterey Bay, CA7 0.4
Muskegon, Ml 2.3
Nashville, TN 1.1
New York, NY-NJ-CT CMSA8 6.1
Norfolk-Virginia Beach-Newport News, VA 1.7
Owensboro, KY -
Paducah. KY4 -
Parkersburg-Marietta, WV-OH
Philadelphia, PA-NJ-DE-MD CMSA 10.3
Phoenix, AZ 4.0
Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, PA CMSA 0.7
Portland-Vancouver, OR-WA CMSA 0.7
Portland, ME 11.8
Portsmouth-Dover-Rochester, NH-ME 2.2
Poughkeepsie, NY 1.4
Providence, Rl9 ! 4.0
Reading, PA 0.3
Reno, NV
Richmond-Petersburg, VA 1.4
Sacramento, CA ;. •' 9.7
St. Louis, MO-IL 1.7
Salt Lake City-Ogden, UT
San Diego, CA 1.1.8
San Joaquin Valley, CA 18.9
San Francisco-Bay area, CA 0.7
Santa Barbara-Santa Maria-Lompoc, CA 1.0
Scranton-Wilkes-Barre, PA 0.4
Seattle-Tacoma, WA
Sheboygan, Wl 2.6
Smyth County, VA4 (NA)
South Bend-Mishawaka, IN
Southeast Desert Modified AQMD, CA10 59.3
Springfield, MA 4.6
Sussex County, DE4 1.0
97.6
1.0
1.0
2.4
1.0
2.1
6.0
3.0
5.2
2.0
3.8
1.1
2.0
1.4
3.1
3.6
2.1
4.0
27.5
2.0
(NA)
72.6
6.2
-------
Table 2-3. Metropolitan Areas Failing to Meet National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone
Average Number of Days Exceeding Standards: 1991 to 1993 (continued)
Metropolitan Area
Kewaunee County, Wl4
Knox and Lincoln counties, ME4
Lake Charles, LA
Lancaster, PA
Lewiston-Auburn, ME
Lexington-Fayette, KY
Louisville, KY-IN
1991-93,
avg.
0.8
2.3
1.3
0.3
0.3
—
2.2
19931
0.0
1.2
-
1.0
-
—
2.0
Metropolitan Area
Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL
Toledo, OH
Ventura County, CA
Walworth County, Wl
^^^^^t^y^^t"'" ^'^"r^s
YorCPA
Youngstown-Warren, OH11
1991-93
avg.
mm
0.3
15.9
0.3
^T^^P^^OriXxI^Z
—
0.3
1993'
„
1.0
9.0
-
Si^S^I
w _
1.0
NA
i
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
Zero.
Not Available.
May represent a different monitoring location than one used to calculate average.
Includes also both the Worcester, MA, and New Bedford, MA, MSAs.
Excludes York Co., SC.
Not a metropolitan area.
Primarily represents Hartford-New Haven area.
Primarily represents Los Angeles and Orange counties.
Primarily represents Monterey, Santa Cruz, and San Benito counties.
Excludes the Connecticut portion.
Covers entire State of Rhode Island.
Represents primarily San Joaquin, Turlock, Merced. Madera, Fresno, Kings, Tulare, and Kern counties.
Includes Sharon, PA
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census (1995), citing the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, (1993) Air Quality Update,
October 1994.
-------
-------
Various sources affect air quality in the DC area, most notably, motor vehicles.
Motor vehicles account for about 28 percent of the air pollutants in the Washington
region that form ozone (MWCOG, 1996). Large industrial factories, such as power
plants, only account for a small portion (about 3 percent) of the emissions that
contribute to ozone formation (MWCOG, 1996). With respect to the contribution of
motor vehicles to air pollution, DC has a high level of road usage. Data from the U.S.
Federal Highway Administration (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1995), were used to
calculate the annual vehicle miles of travel per mile of road for States. In 1993, it
was reported that 3,148,000 vehicle miles per mile of road were in traveled in DC.
This high level of motor vehicle usage is one explanation for the DC metro area's
ozone problems. However, DC's mass transit system (METRO), has one of the
highest use rates in the Nation (Table 2-4).
A desirable quality of the environment is access to nature and parks.
Washington, DC is predominately an urban area within a larger, semi-developed
metropolitan area. DC has 20 percent of its land area as parkland, one of the highest
in the Nation (World Resources Institute, 1993). Table 2-5 presents data on urban
parkland in various U.S. cities. These parklands support wildlife as well as
recreational use by residents.
Releases of toxic chemicals and generation of hazardous wastes can be
potentially degrading to the environmental conditions. Table 2-6 presents information
on the amounts of toxic pollutants released in major metropolitan areas. The DC
metropolitan area has one of the lowest amounts of toxic chemicals released (based
on the EPA Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) as reported by World Resources Institute
(1993). In fact, no facilities within DC's borders report toxic chemical releases as part
of the TRI. (See Section 3.1.5 for more information on TRI.) Hazardous waste
generation in DC has declined in recent years. Based on data compiled as part of the
2-8
-------
Table 2-4. Mass Transit Passenger Miles*
Metro Area
Thousand Miles Per Year (per capita)
New York
Chicago
San Francisco-Oakland
Atlanta
Seattle-Tacoma
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Los Angeles
Houston
New Orleans
Miami
Denver
Minneapolis-St. Paul
Cleveland
Cincinnati
Dayton
Dallas-Ft. Worth
Detroit
Buffalo
Phoenix
Las Vegas
Tampa-St. Petersburg
Orlando
Norfolk
Harrisburg
Knoxville
Raleigh-Durham
Oklahoma City
Greensboro
1.0141
0.4648
0.3919
0.3477
0.2992
0.2239
0.2154
0.1986
0.1898
0.1539
0.1520
0.1498
0.1226
0.1128
0.1006
0.0994
0.0885
0.0849
0.0758
0.0731
0.0676
0.0664
0.0588
0.0386
0.0338
0.0297
0.0199
0.0022
• U.S. Department of Transportation, Notional Urban Mass Transportation Stats tics,
November 1990, Table 3.16, p. 3-315.
Source: World Resources Institute (1993).
2-9
-------
Table 2-5. Access to Nature (Urban Parkland) in U.S. Cities
City
Honolulu
Minneapolis
Tulsa
St. Paul
El Paso
Buffalo
Portland
Chicago
Seattle
Omaha
Dallas
Cincinnati
Pittsburgh
Virginia Beach
Oakland
Austin
Wichita
Parkland
(percent of area)
40.68
17.30
14.00
12.00
11.70
11.50
11.00
10.50
10.00
9.80
9.00
9.00
7.30
7.10
7.00
6.80
5.99
City
Columbus
Los Angeles
Toledo
Miami
Indianapolis
Newark
Ft. Worth
Denver
Oklahoma City
New Orleans
Arlington
Birmingham
Tucson
Fresno
Milwaukee
Kansas City
Jacksonville
Parkland
(percent of area)
5.80
5.30
5.30
5.10
5.00
5.00
4.70
4.00
4.00
3.60
3.00
3.00
2.91
1.56
1.00
0.05
0.01
Source: World Resources Institute (1993).
2-10
-------
Table 2-8. Toxic Chemical Releases and Transfers*
Amount (pounds
Metro Area per year)
West Palm Beach 943,459
Fresno 1,054,243
VSrVbWSSAWA&fttWS&MTSS^^^ flfS" *X-».
-------
EPA Biennial Report on hazardous waste management, the amount of waste generated
by large quantity generators was more than 620 tons in 1993. Figure 2-2 displays
trends in hazardous waste generation in DC, with a slight decrease in the more recent
years.
One overall indicator of environmental health is available. The Green Metro
Index is an environmental ranking system for major metro areas compiled by World
Resources Institute (1993). This index combines eight measures such as the average
air quality, acute air quality, water quality violations, toxic releases, Superfund sites,
mass transit use, residential energy use, and gasoline and electricity prices.
Washington DC's position is near the top of this list (Table 2-7), indicating that
environmental-related conditions in DC are generally better than in most major
cities/metropolitan areas in the United States (World Resources Institute, 1993).
In summary, Washington DC's environmental conditions are generally favorable;
however, there are problems that must be addressed. The following sections provide
additional information on sources of pollution and the types of contaminants present
in environmental media that can pose risks to human health and ecological resources
in DC.
2-12
-------
2500 r-
2000
=- 1500
OB
CD
S
75
1000
500
1985 1987 1989
Years
1991 1993
Figure 2-2. Trends in Hazardous Waste Generation in DC
Source: EPA RCRA Hotline (1996).
2-13
-------
Table 2-7. Green Metro Index
Metro
Area
Honolulu
San Diego
San Franciso-Oakland
El Paso
v&si$&t&8&fir"v"x " ""*"** "«"v
Austin
Fresno
New Bedford
Tuscon
New Haven
Rochester
San Antonio
Bakersfield
Pittsburgh
Miami
Atlanta
Boston
Albany
Toledo
Baltimore
Sacramento
Denver
Orlando
Harrisburg
Chicago
Providence
Philadelphia
Phoenix
Worcester
Scranton
New Orleans
Springfield
Las Vegas
Cleveland
Hartford
Jacksonville
Little Rock
Rank*
1
2
3
3
~ gv*?™"'*' "
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
25
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
Rank
Score
4.75
9.78
10.78
10.78
*"""" "4*1 jjEjt
12.14
12.75
13.00
13.29
13.57
13.71
13.88
14.29
14.44
14.86
15.11
15.13
15.25
15.88
16.11
16.22
16.33
16.50
16.57
17.00
17.00
17.11
17.22
17.29
17.33
17.44
17.60
17.63
17.89
18.33
18.33
18.43
Metro
Area
New York
Dayton
Allentown
Los Angeles
Salt Lake City
Cincinnati
Portland
Charlotte
Raleigh-Durham
Syracuse
Louisville
West Palm Beach
Dallas-Ft. Worth
Houston
Oklahoma City
Nashville
Omaha
Knoxville
Norfolk
Milwaukee
Seattle-Tacoma
Richmond
Columbus
St. Louis
Detroit
Memphis
Buffalo
Kansas City
Indianapolis
Tulsa
Birmingham
Grand Rapids
Baton Rouge
Charleston
Minneapolis-St. Paul
Greenville
Greensboro
Rank
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
54
56
57
58
59
60
61
61
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
Rank
Score
18.88
19.00
19.29
19.56
19.63
19.67
19.86
10.00
20.14
20.20
20.56
20.60
21.00
21.22
21.33
22.44
22.44
23.00
23.00
23.22
23.29
23.57
23.89
23.89
24.11
25.00
25.14
25.38
27.44
27.71
27.83
28.57
28.86
30.4,0
30.71
31.40
33.20
NOTE: Except where indicated by equal rank, apparent ties are the result of rounding.
• (1 = best, 75 = worst)
Source: World Resources Institute (1993).
2-14
-------
3.0 FACTORS INFLUENCING ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS IN DC
Pollutants and other forms of environmental degradation come from a variety
of sources, both from within the District and from far beyond its borders. This section
describes factors that influence environmental conditions within DC, including "point"
sources (Section 3.1} as we!! as the more elusive "nonpoint" sources (Section 3.2)
such as urban stormwater runoff. Although people often associate pollution with
"point sources" (smokestacks reaching into the sky or pipes discharging wastewaters
into rivers), other sources may contribute significantly to the overall environmental
picture. While these less obvious sources of pollution often go unnoticed, they can
be major causes of degradation of the local environment. Described below are some
of these factors that impact environmental conditions in DC. As noted in the
limitations section (Section 1.4), this analysis is limited to sources within DC, and
does not consider the broader regional context.
3.1 Point Sources
Characterization of Point Sources
While Washington, DC, is not a
heavily industrialized city, more than . Maps $howjng LoqatJons
1,000 facilities have permitted releases
Inventories/Lists of Point Sources
of Point Sources
of pollution into the environment. These . Comparison/Relative Ranking
facilities include power plants, printing of Sources {by Media)
operations, Federal Government/military
facilities, and many types of small business. These types of pollution sources are
referred to as "point sources." This section inventories, characterizes, and "ranks"
point sources releasing pollutants to each type of environmental media (water, air,
land). Information on these facilities is included, by media, on tables and maps. Also,
facilities are compared among themselves with respect to their potential for impacts
3-1
-------
to human health and the environment. It should be noted that this comparison or
ranking of sources for each environmental medium is not a risk assessment. Rather,
surrogates of the potential for risk (total volume released, concentration and toxicity
of pollutants, etc.) are used where data are available for this purpose. Although there
are limitations to these comparisons, they provide a screening-level indication of the
relative potential risks of these facilities. This information is intended to be useful for
the public and decision makers in the absence of more definitive risk assessments for
sources of pollution in DC.
Point sources are stationary facilities that discharge pollutants from smoke
stacks, pipes, etc. under permits issued by the Federal and/or local governments. As
such, regulations governing these facilities establish limits on the amount and type of
emissions. Furthermore, the permits for these point sources specify monitoring
requirements to track the emissions. Under the authority of Federal laws such as the
Clean Water Act (CWA), the Clean Air Act (CAA), and the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA), these facilities obtain permits which specify the conditions for
the releases (specific type, amount, and limits for the discharges).
i
Releases of pollutants from point sources to water, air, or other media are
regularly measured to track the emissions of each facility. Data from these monitoring
programs are used by DC ERA and EPA for compliance and enforcement purposes.
This information is entered into EPA's computer data bases, which are available for
analysis of potential impacts to human health and the environment. The computer
data bases used in this project to inventory, characterize, and rank point sources
within each environmental medium were:
3-2
-------
Permit Compliance System (PCS) - Discharges to Surface Waters;
Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS) Facility Subsystem (AFS)
- Emissions to Air;
Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System (RCRIS) -
Hazardous Waste Generation/Management;
Comprehensive Environmental, Response, Compensation and Liability
Information System (CERCLIS) - Contaminated Sites; and
Toxic Release Inventory System (TRIS) - Releases of Toxic Substances.
In general, data from the most current year(s) were used in this report. It
should be noted, there are limitations to the information contained in these data
bases. Although some of the limitations (and caveats) are specifically discussed in
the following subsections, several general limitations are worth noting. These data
bases do not contain information on all sources, only those facilities that have permits
and/or are regulated. Furthermore, monitoring data are generally only provided for
larger facilities, inhibiting characterization of smaller facilities that may discharge
pollutants from point sources. Also, monitoring data collected from these data bases
only cover those pollutants that are specified in permits (or are required to be
reported). Therefore, other contaminants could be released that are not addressed in
the permits and are not monitored. Furthermore, some information in these data
bases pertains to past incidents and may no longer be an indication of current
conditions. This is particularly evident in CERCLIS, where sites remain in the data
base even after actions have been taken to remedy the situation (Sweeney, 1996).
Comparative ranking of point sources is intended to provide an screening-level
indication of the relative potential for environmental impact from the releases from
these facilities. In other words, within each environmental medium (e.g., air, water,
3-3
-------
hazardous wastes), facilities are
compared among themselves based on
measures of their potential to impact
human health and the environment.
This comparison is based on
"surrogates for risks," usually the
amount and type of chemicals involved
with the releases from each facility.
For example, in comparing facilities
emitting to air, it is inferred that a
facility with larger releases of more
toxic contaminants could result in more
Wily Compare Environmental Risks?
We need to know which
environmental probtemsare the worst.
With limited budgets to address
environmental protection, it is critical
that priorities be set on the problems
that are most serious. But, how do
we know which problems are
deserving of the most attention?
Comparing environmental risks
helps to build a scientific foundation
for setting environmental priorities.
degradation to the environment than a facility releasing a smaller amount of a less
toxic pollutant. These comparisons do not account for the proximity of potentially-
exposed populations or routes of exposure. As such, these comparative/relative
rankings should be considered to be approximations and are not absolute risks from
these facilities. For more definitive statements about risks from these sources, site-
specific monitoring, modeling, and risk assessments would be needed - a monumental
effort, taking years and huge sums of money. These surrogates for risks are used as
indicators of the potential for the magnitude of impact to human health and the
environment.
The approaches used for these analyses are described in each subsection. In
general, potential risks/hazards from emissions/discharges were characterized using
information on (1) the amount (Ibs/yr) of pollution and (2) the hazard (toxicity) of the
contaminants present in the releases. Procedures such as these have been used
extensively in assessments of wastewater discharges of industrial facilities for EPA's
Office of Water (Versar, 1995). For example, discharges of pollutants to surface
3-4
-------
waters (e.g., Benning Road power plant effluents to the Anacostia River) are
quantified using data from the Permit Compliance System (PCS). This assessment
used measures such as: the volume (loading in Ibs/yr) of wastewater discharged, the
loadings of each pollutant (e.g., zinc) in the effluent, the environmental fate and
toxicity of the types of contaminants released, and toxic weighting factors, to
estimate relative impacts of contaminants present in the discharges.
It should be recognized that the
lack of data limits the rigor of these
analyses. For example, in the case of
facilities emitting pollutants to air,
monitoring data were available for only
the largest facilities. Therefore, these
large facilities were compared among
themselves. Similarly, for hazardous
waste facilities (in RCRiS), data were
available on (1) volume of waste
Challenges In Comparing Risks
As long as there are gaps In data,
comparing risks will be Imperfect*
Better tools are needed to compare
different types of environmental risks.
Without better methodologies to
estimate actual exposures to mixtures
of pollutants or model toxic responses,
conclusions about relative risks will
have to be made with caution.
managed (generated, received, disposed) (tons/yr) and (2) for the "waste code." From
this information, the relative toxicity of the wastes cannot be characterized, and as
such, volume of hazardous waste managed was used as the surrogate for this
comparison of facilities managing hazardous wastes.
3-5
-------
Presented in the following
subsections, for each environmental
medium/data base, are the inventories
of point sources in DC. Versar's
approach for obtaining and evaluating
these data are described in each
subsection. Furthermore, the location
of the facilities are displayed on maps
(U.S. EPA, 1996b), and comparisons of
sources are provided where possible.
Point Sources Inventoried:
* Facilities Discharging
to Surface Waters
« Air Emitters
* Hazardous Waste
Management Facilities
* CERCUS Sites
* Facilities Releasing Toxic Chemicals
3.1.1 Facilities Discharging to Surface Waters
Thirteen facilities in DC currently
have active permits to discharge
pollutants into surface waters
(Anacostia and Potomac Rivers). These
13 facilities include a publicly-owned
treatment works, a water supply
facility, electric power generating
plants, and others. Table 3-1 presents
Facilities Discharging
to Surface Waters
13 Active Facilities in DC
Facilities, include: Wastewater
Treatment Plant, Water Supply
Facility, Sectric Power Generating
Plants, etc.
information on the names, addresses, type of facility, and information about each
facility's permit, such as the chemical components specified in its permit. Figure 3-1
displays a map showing the location of facilities discharging to surface waters in the
DC area.
The remainder of this subsection presents an assessment of the pollutant
discharges from facilities located within DC to surface waters and potential resulting
3-6
-------
Table 3-1. Facilities in DC Which Have Active Wastewater Discharge Permits
Facility Name/ID*
Washington Aqueduct -
Dalecarlia Treatment Plant
DC0000019
GSA West Heating Plant
DC0000035
Amerada Hess Washington
Terminal
DC0000051
PEPCO - Banning Rd.
Facility
DC000094
National Gallery of Art
DC0000167
Super Concrete Corporation
DC0000175
Commonwealth of Virginia
DOT (Rosslyn Metro)
Tunnel, 166
DC0000183
DC Materials, Inc.
DC0000191
Goose Bay Aggregates, Inc.
DC0000205
\ .
**
% *• \ "" % \ *"
, | .; Address * ^x ,
Washington Aqueduct - Div.
5900 MacArtnur Blvd., NW
Washington, DC 20315-0220
GSA Washington, GSA
NCRHOTP, Rm. 6672, 7th & D
Street SW,
Washington, DC 20407
Petroleum Bulk Station
1620 South Capitol St., SW
Washington, DC 20003
PEPCO
3300 Banning Rd., NE
Washington, DC 2001 9
6th & Constitution Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20565
5001 Fort Totten Dr., NE
Washington, DC 2001 1
Interstate Maintenance
9280 Bethlehem Rd.,
Manassas, VA22110
25 Potomac Ave., SE
Washington, DC 20003
2nd St., SW,
Washington, DC
Industrial '
, Classification t
Water Supply
Steam & Air
Conditioning Supply
Petroleum Bulk
Station & Terminal
Electrical Service
Museums & Art
Galleries
Ready-Mix Concrete
Regulations
Administration of
Transportation
Programs
Ready Mix Concrete
Construction Sand
and Gravel
Major/Minor s , ;
Discharge ;;
Pervnft/Recelvfag
, ;HWatert_ ^ f
Major/Potomac River
Minor/Rock Creek
Minor/Anacostia
River
Major/Anacostia
River
Minor/Washington
Channel
Minor/Anacostia
River
Minor/Potomac River
& Little River Branch
Minor/Anacostia
River
Minor/Anacostia
River
s* %\ , •> •• •• v *.\ ^ -
" P*rfltftl^«|raetar«; rX,
pH, Residue (Total Non-
Filterable), Fe (Total), Al (Total
Recoverable) Flowrate
Temp (°F). pH, Residue (Total
Non-Filterable), Oil & Grease
& Flowrate
pH, Oil & Grease & Flowrate
pH, Residue (Non-Filterable),
Oil & Grease, Cr (Total), Zn
(Total), Cl (Free Available) &
Rowrate
Temp (°), pH & Flowrate
Temp (°C), pH, Residue (Total
Non-Filterable), Oil & Grease,
& Rowrate
pH, Residue (Non-Filterable),
Oil & Grease N (Total), P
(Total), Cr (Total), Cu (Total),
Pb (Total), Zn (Total) &
Rowrate
pH, Residua (Non-Filterable),
Oil & Grease & Rowrate
pH, Residue (Non-Filterable),
Oil & Grease & Rowrate
-------
Table 3-1. Facilities in DC Which Have Active Wastewater Discharge Permits (continued)
Facility Name/ID*
Address
Industrial <
Classification
Mafof/Minor;
Discharge
Permit/Receiving
Permit Parameters
Barney Circle Freeway
Modification Project
DC0000213
DC Dept. of Public Works,
Barry Circle Freeway Mod Proj.
2000 14th St.. NW, 5th Floor,
Washington, DC 20009
Inspection & Fixed
Facility
Minor/Anacostia
River
pH, Residue (Non-Filterable),
OH & Grease, Cd (Total), Cr
(Total), Cu (Total), Pb (Total),
Ag (Total), Zn (Total), and
Flowrate
W
CO
DC Dept. of Public Works
Blue Plains Wastewater
Treatment Plant
DC0021199
DC Bureau of Water Treatment
5000 Overlook Ave., SW
Washington, DC 20032
Sewerage System
Major/Potomac,
Anacostia & Piney
Rivers
Temp (°F), Toxicity Cone,
Dissolved O2, pH, Alkalinity
(Total), Residue (Total Non-
Filterable), N (Total), N (as
NH3), Nitrogen, Kjeldhal, N
(as Nitrate), N (as Nitrite), P
(Total), Hardness, Zn (Total),
Flowrate, Cl (Total Residual),
Hg (Total), Fecal Coliform,
CBOD
PEPCO
Buzzard Point Facility
DC0022004
1st and V Streets, SW
Washington, DC 20004
Electrical Services
Major/Potomac River
Temp (eF), Thermal Discharge,
pH, Residue (Total Non-
Filterable), Oil & Grease,
Sulfate (Total), Cu (Total), Fe
(Total), Flowrate & Cl (Total
Residual)
JFK Center for Performing
Arts
DC0000248
New Hampshire Avenue
Rock Creek Pkwy, NW
Washington, DC
Performing Center
(Arts&
Entertainment)
Minor/Potomac River
No data available - (New
Permit-1995)
Source: Permit Compliance System (PCS) Database.
-------
PCS Facilities
Near Wa«hlnBton. DC
// Countv
A' «~
A/
A/
^ PC8 Fxdltt..
IT
.n .»
Souraw US IUBMU ol th» CWMM
US OtolD^Ml Surwy
IM EM
Figure 3-1. Location of Facilities Discharging to Surface Waters (PCS Facilities) In the Washington, DC Area
-------
water quality impacts. Using readily-available data and information sources, annual
pollutant loadings from facilities were estimated, and discharge monitoring data were
analyzed. In addition, potential aquatic life and human health impacts were
summarized, based on a review of known characteristics of the pollutants identified
in the wastewater discharges. The following sections describe the methodology and
results (including data sources and assumptions/limitations) used in: (1) the
identification and quantification of pollutant releases; and (2) the evaluation of the fate
and toxicity of released pollutants.
3.1.1.1 Identification and Quantification of Pollutant Releases. Wastewater
constituents were identified using the Permit Compliance System (PCS). Discharge
monitoring data, if available, were retrieved from PCS for analysis for 12 facilities (one
facility received a new permit in 1995, and no data are available on discharges).
These facilities include two electric power generating (utility) facilities (power plants),
one publicly-owned treatment works (POTW), and a water supply facility with permits
classified as "major" based on consideration of effluent flow, physical and chemical
characteristics of the wastestream, and location of discharge. Annual pollutant
loadings were also generated separately from PCS using an option in PCS called
Effluent Data Statistics (EDS). A brief description of the data base, the methodologies
used to estimate annual pollutant loads and to determine permit limit excursions
(including results), and the assumptions and limitations of the analyses are included
below.
(1) Permit Compliance System. PCS is a computerized information
management system maintained by EPA's Office of Wastewater Enforcement and
Compliance (OWEC). PCS serves as a repository for permit conditions and
monitoring, compliance, and enforcement data for facilities regulated by the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) under the Clean Water Act (CWA).
3-10
-------
Among other items, PCS records may contain information that:
• Identifies and describes the facility (including a primary Standard
Industrial Classification (SIC) code) to which the permit has been
granted;
• Specifies the pollutant discharge limits or monitoring requirements for
that facility;
• Records the pollutants measured in the facility's wastewater discharges;
and
• Tracks the facility's history of compliance with pollutant limits and
reporting requirements.
Facilities with permits classified as "major" must report compliance with NPDES
permit limits, usually on a monthly basis, via Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs).
DMRs provide detailed information on measured concentrations and quantity values,
including those that are in violation of established limits for the permit. Because of
data entry delays, 1994 is the most complete set of data available at this time. The
13 facilities identified in PCS were the only facilities that had "active" status (several
facilities had become "inactive" in the last 2 years) in DC.
(2) Estimation of Annual Pollutant Loads from PCS. Pollutant release data
were compiled from 1994 PCS records for those facilities located within the
boundaries of DC with available monitoring data. Although PCS is a permit tracking
system and not a repository of pollutant release amounts, EDS was used to generate
annual loading values (for applicable parameters) at the parameter/discharge pipe level.
EDS uses existing PCS reported loading values (quantity measurements), or multiplies
reported discharge flows and effluent concentrations to estimate loadings. Loadings
were estimated only for records with valid concentration and corresponding flow data.
3-11
-------
Results
The results of the estimation of annual pollutant loads from PCS are presented
in Table 3-2. Loadings are presented for 12 pollutants (8 conventionals/classicals and
4 toxic pollutants) discharged from 8 facilities (EDS did not estimate loadings for 4
facilities). Total loadings are 159-million Ibs/yr of conventional/classical pollutants and
20.3-million Ibs/yr of toxic pollutants. Total nonfilterable residue (i.e., total suspended
solids (TSS) represents the majority of the estimated classical pollutant loads
(approximately 89 percent), and aluminum represents the majority of the estimated
toxic pollutant loads (approximately 64 percent).
(3) Analysis of PCS Discharge Monitoring Data. In addition to EDS-generated
loadings, measured concentration and loading values from monthly monitoring data
(i.e., DMR data), if available, were retrieved separately from PCS for 1994. This data
set may include data not captured in the EDS loadings analysis. The DMRs provide
monitoring requirements, measurement values, limit values, and violation events for
each parameter monitored at each outfall. Depending on the monitoring requirements
imposed by the permit, measurement values may be reported in many different ways
(average, maximum, and minimum concentrations, and/or average and maximum
loadings). Only parameters with numeric violations of maximum (or minimum for pH)
or average limits were included in the analysis.
Results
Results of the analysis of permit limit excursions are presented in Table 3-3.
Data for concentration-based permit limit excursions represent 8 facilities and 404
observations. Average concentration limits were exceeded (i.e., measured observation
greater than permit limit) 32 times for 7 parameters, including 13 and 12 excursions
3-12
-------
Table 3-2.1994 PCS Loading Data from Effluent Data Statistics (EDS)
NPDES Number DC0000019 Facility Name: WASH AQUEDUCT-DALECARUA PLANT
Parameter
Number
01045
01105
00530
Pollutant
Iron, Total
Aluminum, Total Recoverable
Residue, Total Nonfilterabte
| Total Pounds Per Year
Load 1994
(Ibs/year)
6.97E+06
1.30E+07
1.37E+08
1.57E+08
Pollutant Type
Toxic
Toxic
Conventional/Classical
NPDES Number BCOCCOG35
FacffiiyName: GSA WEST HEATING PLANT
Parameter
Number
00530
00556
Pollutant
Residue, Total Nonfilterabte
Oil and Grease
| Total Pounds Per Year
Load 1994
(Ibs/year)
3.97E+02
8.56E+02
1.25E+03
Pollutant Type
Conventional/Classical
Conventional/Classical
NPDES Number DC0000094
Facility Name: PEPCO-POTOMAC ELECTRIC CO. (BENNING ROAD)
Parameter
Number
00530
00556
01092
50064
Pollutant
Residue, Total Nonfilterabte
Oil and Grease
Zinc, Total
Chlorine, Free Available
| Total Pounds Per Year
Load 1994
(Ibs/year)
2.25E+04
5.68E+03
4.78E+02
2.03E+03
3.07E+04
Pollutant Type
Conventional/Classical
Conventional/Classical
Toxic
Toxic
NPDES Number DC0000175
Facility Name: SUPER CONCRETE CORPORATION
Parameter
Number
00556
00530
Pollutant
Oil and Grease
Residue, Total Nonfilterabte
| Total Pounds Per Year
Load 1994
(tos/year)
4.44E+03
1.39E+04
1.84E+04
Pollutant Type
Conventional/Classical
Conventional/Classical
NPDES Number DC0000191
Facility Name: DC MATERIALS, INC.
Parameter
Number
00556
00530
Pollutant
Oil and Grease
Residue, Total NonfilteraMe
| Total Pounds Per Year
Load 1994
(Ibs/year)
3.86E+00
5.85E+01
6.24E+01
Pollutant Type
Conventional/Classical
Conventional/Classical
NPDES Number DC0000205
FacOity Name: GOOSE BAY AGGREGATES, INC.
Parameter
Number
00530
00556
Pollutant
Residue, Total Nonfilterabte
Oil and Grease
Total Pounds Per Year
Load 1994
(Ibs/year)
1.09E+03
1.38E+01
1.11E+03
Pollutant Type
Conventional/Classical
Conventional/Classical
3-13
5/6/96
-------
Table 3-2.1994 PCS Loading Data from Effluent Data Statistics (EDS)
NPDES Number OCOQ21199 Facility Name: D. C. DEPT. OF PUBLIC WORKS (BLUE PLAINS)
Parameter
Number
00530
00610
00625
00665
01092
50060
71850
71855
80082
Pollutant
Residue, Total Nonffflerabte
Ammonia (As N)
Nitrogen. KjeWhal
Phosphorus. Total (As P)
Zinc. Total
Chlorine, Total Residual
Nitrogen (As Nitrate)
Nitrogen (As Nitrite)
CBOD
| Total Pounds Per Year
Load 1994
(Ibs/year)
4.79E+06
1.78E+06
2.64E+06
1.43E+05
3.23E+05
5.01 E*04
9.98E+06
5.72E+05
2.16E+06
2.24E+07
Pollutant Type
Conventional/Classical
Conventional/Classical
Conventional/Classical
Conventional/Classical
Toxic
Toxic
Conventional/Classical
Conventional/Classical
Conventional/Classical
NPDES Number DC0022004
Facility Name: POTOMAC ELECTRIC POWER CO (BUZZARD POINT)
Parameter
Number
00556
00530
Pollutant
Oil and Grease
Residue, Total Nonfilterabte
| Total Pounds Per Year
Load 1994
(Ibs/year)
1.38E+04
1.20E+04
2.58E*04
Pollutant Type
Conventional/Classical
Conventioful/Ctosslcal
Source: PCS (Retrieval Date, March. 1996)
3-14
5/6/96
-------
Table 3-3.1994 PCS Permit Limit Excursions
NPOES Number DC0000035 Facility Name: GSA WEST HEATING PLANT
Pollutant
Residue, Total Nonfilterable
pH
Number of
Observations
(ConcAoad)
6/0
6/0
Number of
Average Load
Excursions
Number of
Maximum
Load
Excursions
Number of
Minimum
Concentration
Excursions
2
Number of
Average
Concentration
Excursions
1
Number of
Maximum
Concentration
Excursions
0
2
NPDES Number DC0000094
Facility Name: PiPCO-POTOMAC ELECTRIC CO. (BENNING ROAD)
Pollutant
OH and Grease
Zinc, Total
Chlorine, Free Available
Number of
Observations
(ConcAoad)
35/0
11/0
2/0
Number of
Average Load
Excursions
Number of
Maximum
Load
Excursions
Number of
Minimum
Concentration
Excursions
Number of
Average
Concentration
Excursions
2
1
0
Number of
Maximum
Concentration
Exclusions
3
1
2
NPDES Number DC0000167
Facility Name: NATIONAL GALLERY OF ART
Pollutant
PH
Number of
Observations
(ConcAoad)
10/0
Number of
Average Load
Excursions
Number of
Maximum
Load
Excursions
Number of
Minimum
Concentration
Excursions
7
Number of
Average
Concentration
Excursions
Number of
Maximum
Concentration
Excursions
7
NPOES Number DC0000175
Facility Name: SUPER CONCRETE CORPORATION
Pollutant
Oil and Grease
pH
Residue, Total Nonfilterable
Number of
Observations
(ConcAoad)
44/0
44/0
44/0
Number of
Average Load
Excursions
Number of
Maximum
Load
Excursions
Number of
Minimum
Concentration
Excursions
1
Number «f
Average
Concentration
Excursions
0
8
Number cf
Maximum
Concentration
Excursions
1
1
4
NPDES Number DC0000183
Facility Name: COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA.DOT
Pollutant
Residue, Total Nonfilterable
Oil and Grease
pH
Number of
Observations
(ConcAoad)
1/0
1/0
1/0
Number of
Average Load
Excursions
Number of
Maximum
Load
Excursions
Number of
Minimum
Concentration
Excursions
0
Number of
Average
Concentration
Excursions
0
0
Number of
Maximum
Concentration
Excursions
1
1
1
3-15
5/6/96
-------
Table 3-3.1994 PCS Permit Limit Excursions
NPDES Number DC0000205
Facility Name: GOOSE BAY AGGREGATES. INC.
Pollutant
pH
Residue. Total Nonfilterabte
Number of
Observations
(ConcAoad)
6/0
40
Number of
Average Load
Excursions
Number of
Maximum
Load
Excursions
Number of
Minimum
Concentration
Excursions
2
Number of
Average
Concentration
Excursions
2
Number of
Maximum
Concentration
Excursions
2
2
NPDES Number DC0021199
Facility Name: D. C. DEPT. OF PUBLIC WORKS (BLUE PLAINS)
Pollutant
Dissolved Oxygen
Residue. Total Nonfilterabte
Nitrogen (As NH3)
Phosphorus, Total
Chlorine, Total Residual
CBOD
Number of
Observations
(ConcAoad)
15/0
15/12
12/12
15/12
16/0
15/12
Number of
Average Load
Excursions
2
2
2
1
Number of
Maximum
Load
Excursions
2
2
3
1
Number of
Minimum
Cooc£rw8uon
Excursions
10
Number of
Average
Concentration
Excursions
12
2
1
2
1
Number of
Maximum
concwTuwion
Excursions
2
3
2
3
1
NPDES Number DC0022004
Facility Name: POTOMAC ELECTRIC POWER CO (BUZZARD POINT)
Pollutant
Oil and Grease
pH
Number of
Observations
(ConcAoad)
48/0
53/0
Number of
Average Load
Excursions
Number of
Maximum
Load
Excursions
Number of
Minimum
Concentration
Excursions
3
Number of
Average
Concentration
Excursions
0
Number of
Maximum
Concentration
Excursions
1
S
Source: PCS (Retrieval Date, March. 1996)
3-16
5/6/96
-------
for total nonfilterable residue and dissolved oxygen, respectively. Forty-five maximum
concentration excursions (or minimum for pH) are identified for 8 parameters,
including 33 for pH and 9 for total nonfilterable residue. Five facilities have at least
one violation based on the average concentration limits, while eight facilities have at
least one violation based on the maximum or minimum concentration limits.
Data for load-based permit limit excursions represent 1 facility and 48
observations. The results of the analysis of these data are also summarized in
Table 3-3. Average loading limits are exceeded seven times for four parameters (total
nonfilterable residue, ammonia, phosphorus, CBOD). Maximum loading limits are
exceeded at the same facility for a total of eight excursions.
(4) Assumptions and Limitations. The following assumptions and limitations
of these analyses should be noted:
* Only facilities that directly discharge to navigable waters and have a
NPDES permit are included in PCS. PCS may not be complete in terms
of facilities, pollutants, or wastestreams.
• Only facilities considered as "major" by EPA (i.e., considered to pose the
greatest threat to human health or the environment) are required to
submit monthly effluent monitoring data to PCS; 8 of the 12 facilities
within DC with monitoring data are classified as minor.
• Facilities are not required by their NPDES permit to monitor for all
chemicals actually discharged. A facility is only required to report on
particular chemicals as specified in the permit conditions.
• EDS is only able to estimate loadings based on the availability and
suitability of concentration and flow data. Therefore, the pollutant
loading estimates generated in this analysis may underestimate the
actual total pollutant loadings.
3-17
-------
3.1.T.2 Fate and Toxicity Evaluation of Released Pollutants. The environmental fate
and toxicity of pollutant releases were evaluated by: (1) compiling physical-chemical
and toxicity data for identified pollutants; (2) categorizing the pollutants based on their
potential toxicity and environmental fate; and (3) calculating toxic weighting factors
based on toxicity and bioaccumulation potential.
The following analyses, in general, do not evaluate impacts associated with
releases of all of the conventional/classical pollutants and pollutant parameters
because the analyses centered on toxic pollutants. However, the discharge of
conventional pollutants such as total nonfilterable residue (i.e., TSS), oil and grease,
biological oxygen demand (BOD), nitrogen, alkalinity, and phosphorus can have
adverse effects on human health and the environment. For example, habitat
degradation can result from increased suspended participate matter that reduces light
penetration and, thus, primary productivity, or from accumulation of sludge particles
that alter benthic spawning grounds and feeding habitats. Oil and grease can have
a lethal effect on fish by coating surface of gills causing asphyxia, by depleting
oxygen levels due to excessive biological oxygen demand, or by reducing stream
reaeration because of surface film. Oil and grease can also have detrimental effects
on waterfowl by destroying the buoyancy and insulation of their feathers.
Bioaccumulation of oil substances can cause human health problems including tainting
of fish and bioaccumulation of carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic compounds. High
BOD levels can also deplete oxygen levels resulting in mortality or other adverse
effects on fish. Nitrogen and phosphorus addition can make surface water susceptible
to accelerated eutrophication. Alkalinity or acidity can disrupt or alter the chemical
equilibrium necessary to sustain life.
Physical-chemical properties and toxicity data, both measured and estimated,
were compiled from EPA ambient water quality criteria documents and various data
3-18
-------
bases for the pollutants specified in a facilities permit. For some pollutants, neither
measured nor estimated data are available for key categorization parameters. As a
result, this analysis is an incomplete assessment of potential fate and toxicity of
pollutants discharged by DC facilities. The potential fate and toxicity of pollutants
associated with DC facilities (i.e., specified in permit), based on chemical-specific
data, were examined to place chemicals into qualitative groups based on their
potential environmental fate and impact. These groups were based on categorization
techniques derived for:
• Acute aquatic toxicity;
• Volatility from water;
• Adsorption to soil/sediment;
• Bioaccumulation potential; and
• Biodegradation potential.
The primary advantage of the categorization methods is that the results allow
the user to identify the potential impact/threat of a chemical relative to the potential
impact/threat presented by other discharged chemicals. The methods effectively
group chemicals based on their potential to harm the environment or humans. The
results of this analysis can provide a qualitative indication of potential risk posed by
the release of these chemicals. However, these methods are used for screening
purposes only, and do not take the place of detailed pollutant assessments that
analyze all fate and transport mechanisms. Actual risk depends on the magnitude,
frequency, and duration of pollutant discharge loadings; site-specific environmental
conditions; proximity and number of human and ecological receptors; and relevant
exposure pathways. The acute aquatic toxicity, volatility from water, soil/sediment
adsorption, bioconcentration categorization, and biodegradation methods have been
3-19
-------
reviewed by EPA's Office of Water, Office of Health and Environmental Assessment,
and the former Office of Toxic Substances.
Results
The categorization assessment addresses the 20 pollutants identified from the
1994 PCS data. These pollutants include 9 conventionals/classicalsand 11 toxics (10
metals and 1 inorganic compound). A pollutant-specific and facility-specific summary
of categorization group assignment and human health effect designations is presented
in Table 3-4. Approximately 50 percent of the pollutants (10 of 20) are highly or
moderately toxic to aquatic life. About 10 percent of the pollutants (2 of 20) have
a high to moderate potential to volatilize from water. Many of these pollutants,
especially metals, are difficult to categorize according to potential adsorption to
sediment. Metal partitioning to sediment is more a function of stream chemistry than
elemental properties. Approximately 5 percent of the pollutants (1 of 20) with data
are highly or moderately adsorptive to soil/sediment. This pollutant is also highly toxic
to aquatic life. One-fifth of the pollutants have a high to moderate bioaccumulation
potential. Eight pollutants have been classified as priority pollutants.
This evaluation also identified pollutants that: (1) are known, probable, or
possible human carcinogens; (2) are systemic human health toxicants; and (3) have
EPA human health drinking water standards (i.e., maximum contaminant levels
(MCLs), secondary maximum contaminant levels (SMCLs)). Approximately 70 percent
of the chemicals (14 of 20) have MCLs/SMCLs of which 8 have been identified as
human systemic toxicants. EPA classifies three pollutants (cadmium, hexavalent
chromium, and lead) as carcinogens.
3-20
-------
Table 3-4. Categorization Summary for Pollutants Specified in Permits
CAS Number
7664417
7723140
14808798
' 7440439
18540299
7440473
7440508
7439896
7439921
7440224
7440666
7429905
7782505
14797558
14797650
7439976
. ..
Parameter Num.
00530
00556
00610.34726
00625
00665
00945
01027. 6 Jtl3
01032
01034
01042. 01 119
01045
01051,01114
01077
01092.01094
biibs
50060. 50064
71850
71855
71900,71901
80082
NPDES Number
DCOOOOOI9
DC0000035
DC000005I
DC0000094
DCOOOOI67
DCOOOOI75
DCOOOOI83
DCOOOOI9I
DC0000205
DC00002I3
DC002 1 199
DC0022004
NAME
Residue, Total Nonfilterable
Oil and Grease
Ammonia as NH3
Nitrogen (Total Kjetdahl)
Phosphorus
Sulfate
Cadmium
Chromium hexavalent
Chromium
Copper
Iron
Lead
Silver
Zinc
Aluminum
Chlorine
Nitrogen (As NO3)
Nitrogen (As NO2)
Mercury
CBOD
Facility Name
Washington Aqueduct-Dalecarlia Plant
GSA West Heating Plant
Amerada Hess Washington Terminal
PEPCO-Potomac Electric Co. (Benning Road)
National Gallery of Art
Super Concrete Corporation
Commonwealth of VA - DOT
DC Materials. Inc.
Goose Bay Aggregates. Inc.
Barney Circle Freeway Modification
DC Department of Public Works (Blue Plains)
Potomac Electric Power Co. (Buzzard Point)
Aquatic
Toxicant
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Number of
Aquatic
Totlcrnts
1
0
0
2
0
0
4
0
0
5
8
2
Carcinogen
X
X
X
Number of
Carcinogens
0
0
0
0
0
_0|
1
0
0
2
3
0
Systemic
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Number of
Systemic
Toxicants
0
0
0
3
0
0
3
0
0
5
6
1
Volatile
X
X
Number of
Volntiles
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
Bioaccnmulative
X
X
X
X
Number of
Bioaccumntitive
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
3
1
Adsorptive
X
Number of
Adsorptives
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
Priority
Pollutant
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Number of
Priority
Pollutants
0
0
0
2
0
0
4
0
0
6
6
1
Drinking
Water
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Number of
Drinking
Water
Pollutants
2
0
0
3
0
0
4
0
0
6
io
4
Source: PCS (Retrieval Date, March, 1996)
-------
(1) Toxic Weighting Factor Analysis. EPA's Office of Water uses toxic
weighting factors (TWFs) to compare the relative toxicity of industrial effluent
discharges. These factors are necessary because different pollutants have different
potential effects on human and aquatic life. For example, a pound of mercury in a
wastewater stream has a significantly different effect that a pound of iron. Toxic
weighting factors for pollutants are derived using ambient water quality criteria and
toxicity values. For most pollutants, toxic weighting factors are derived from chronic
freshwater aquatic criteria. In cases where a human health criterion has also been
established for the consumption of fish, then the sum of both the human and aquatic
criteria are used to derive toxic weighting factors. The factors are normalized by
relating them to the water quality criteria for copper.
Application to PCS Load Estimates
TWFs were applied to the PCS load estimates generated by EDS to calculate
the toxic weighted load. For each pollutant, the TWF, if available, is multiplied by the
loading to estimate toxic-pound equivalents. These toxic weighted loads provide a
measure for comparison between pollutants and facilities based on the toxicity of
contributing pollutants. Table 3-5 provides a summary of the total weighted 1994
PCS annual loads on a pollutant and facility basis. Based on TWFs, approximately 90
percent of the weighted surface water releases are from aluminum. While there are
no data to suggest that aluminum is acutely toxic to humans, certain subpopulations
(Alzheimers' patients and persons with chronic kidney disease) may be effected
(ATSDR, 1991). Aluminum, however, is toxic to aquatic life and plants. Brook trout
and stripped bass are particularly sensitive and freshwater acute aquatic toxicity limits
for aluminum are 748 i/g/l (ATSDR, 1991).
3-22
-------
Table 3-5.1994 PCS Annual Loads Using Toxic Weighting Factors
NPDES Number DC0000019
FacflByName: WASH AQUEDUCT-DALECARUA PLANT
Parameter
Number
01045
01105
00530
Pollutant
Iron. Total
Aluminum, Total Recoverable
Residue, Total Nonfilterabte
| Total Pounds Per Year
Load 1994
(Ibs/year)
6.97E+08
1.30E+07
1.37E+08
1.57E+08
Toxic Weighting
Factor
5.60E-03
6.40E-02
Toodc Pound
Equivalent
3.90E+04
8.30E+05
8.69E+05
NPDES Number DC0000035
FscSiiy Name: GSA WEST HEATING PLANT
Parameter
Number
00530
00556
Pollutant
Residue, Total Nonfilterabte
Oil and Grease
| Total Pounds Per Year
Load 1994
(Ibs/year)
3.97E+02
8.56E+02
1.25E+03
Todc WelghUng
Factor
Toxic Pound
Equivalent
NPDES Number DC0000094
Facility Name: PEPCO-POTOMAC ELECTRIC CO. (BENNING ROAD)
Parameter
Number
00530
00556
01092
50064
Pollutant
Residue, Total Nonfilterabte
Oil and Grease
Zinc, Total
Chlorine, Free Available
| Total Pounds Per Year
Load 1994
(Ibs/year)
2.25E+04
5.68E+O3
4.78E+02
2.03E+03
3.07E+04
Toxic Weighting
Factor
5.10E-02
4.90E-01
Teaks Pound
Equivmtent
2.44E+01
9.94E«02
1.02E+03
NPDES Number DC0000175
Facflity Name: SUPER CONCRETE CORPORATION
Parameter
Number
00556
00530
Pollutant
Oil and Grease
Residue, Total Nonfilterabte
| Total Pounds Per Year
Load 1994
(Ibs/year)
4.44E+03
1.39E+04
1.84E+O4
Toxic Weighting
Factor
Toxic Pound
Equivalent
NPDES Number DC0000191
Facility Name: DC MATERIALS. INC.
Parameter
Number
00556
00530
Pollutant
OD and Grease
Residue, Total Nonfilterabte
| Total Pounds Per Year
Load 1994
(Ibs/year)
3.86E+00
5.85E+01
6J24E+01
Toxic Weighting
Factor
Toxic Pound
Equivalent
NPDES Number DC0000205
Facflity Name: GOOSE BAY AGGREGATES. INC.
Parameter
Number
00530
00556
Pollutant
Residue, Total Nonfilterabte
Oil and Grease
| Total Pounds Per Year
Load 1994
(Ibs/year)
1.09E+03
1.38E+01
1.11E+03
Toodc Weighting
Factor
Toxic Pound
Equivalent
3-23
5/6/96
-------
Table 3-5.1994 PCS Annual Loads Using Toxic Weighting Factors
NPOES Number DC0021199
Facility Name: D. C. DEFT. OF PUBUC WORKS (BLUE PLAINS)
Parameter
Number
00530
00610
00625
00665
01092
50060
71850
71855
80082
Pollutant
Residue, Total Nonfilterabte
Ammonia (As N)
Nitrogen, KjeWhal
Phosphorus. Total (As P)
Zinc. Total
Chlorine. Total Residual
Nitrogen (As Nitrate)
Nitrogen (As Nitrite)
CBOD
| Total Pounds Per Year
Load 1994
(Ibs/ywr)
4.79E+06
1.78E+06
2.64E+06
1.43E«05
3.23E+05
5.01E+04
9.98E+06
5.72E+05
2.16E+06
Z24E«07
Toxic Weighting
Factor
4.50E-03
5.10E-02
4.80E-01
Toxic Pound
Equivalent
8.01 E+03
1.65E+04
2.46E+04
4.91E+04
NPOES Number DC0022004
FadfityName: POTOMAC ELECTRIC POWER CO (BUZZARD POINT)
Parameter
Number
00556
00530
Pollutant
OB and Grease
Residue, Total NonfUterabte
| Total Pounds Per Year
Load 1094
(Ibs/year)
1.38E+04
1^0E+04
2.58E+04
Toxic Weighting
Factor
Toxic Pound
Equivalent .
Source: PCS (Retrieval Date. March, 1996)
3-24
5/6/96
-------
3.1.1.3 Comparison of Facilities Discharging to Surface Waters. Results from the
analyses presented above were used to as the basis to compare potential impacts of
the 12 facilities in DC that discharge to surface waters. Four different comparisons
were possible, based on: (1) total loadings (Ibs/yr), (2) permit limit excursions, (3)
type (fate/toxicity) of pollutants discharged, and (4) toxic-weighted loads. It should
be noted, again, that these comparisons are approximations and should not be
considered definitive because of the lack of detailed data. The toxic-weighted load
method is the preferred approach, because it accounts for both the amount and
toxicity of pollutants discharged. However, only four facilities had data available
(based on parameters included in the permit and monitoring data) for this approach.
This approach indicates that the Dalecarlia Treatment Plant, Blue Plains Wastewater
Treatment Plant, and PEPCO-Benning Road are the facilities with the loadings of
greatest potential impact (based on toxic-weighted/loadings). Evaluation cannot be
made using this approach about the other eight facilities.
Comparisons based on the other three approaches support the inference that
Blue Plains and Dalecarlia Treatment Plants are among the facilities that have the
greater potential to pose risks to human health and the environment. For example,
based on total loadings (Ibs/yr) of all pollutants monitored, Dalecarlia and Blue Plains
discharged 1.57 x 108 and 2.24 x 107 Ibs/yr, respectively. Most of the other
facilities' discharges are substantially lower (in order): PEPCO Benning Road (3.07 x
104 Ibs/yr), PEPCO Buzzard Point (2.58 x 104 Ibs/yr), Super Concrete (1.84 x 104
Ibs/yr), GSA West Heating Plant (1.25 x 103 Ibs/yr), Goose Bay Aggregates (1.11 x
103 Ibs/yr), and DC Materials (6.24 x 101 Ibs/yr). Examination of permit limit
excursions also indicates that Blue Plains is among the facilities with a higher number
of permit violations. Other facilities having a higher number of violations indicate that
PEPCO Benning Road, National Gallery of Art, PEPCO Buzzard Point, and Super
Concrete Corporation. Finally, review of the types of pollutants discharged and their
3-25
-------
physical/chemical/toxic properties indicates that Blue Plains is one of the facilities with
the higher number of potentially-harmful pollutants. Also, it has been estimated that
Blue Plains contributes 95 percent of the nitrogen and 53 percent of the phosphorous
loadings from DC (Chesapeake Research Consortium, 1995).
3.1.2 Air Emitters in DC
Air Emitters
267 Facilities in DC
11 Major Sources - Power
Plants* Hospitals, Printing
Operations
256 Smaller Sources
Cleaners, Hotels, etc.
In 1994, 267 facilities in
Washington DC (AIRS Data Base
retrieval on March 29, 1996) have air
emission permits and/or are regulated
under the CAA. Of these 267 facilities,
monitoring data are available for the 11
largest facilities, including hospitals,
universities, utility companies,
heating/cooling systems using boilers,
and government printing and publishing operations. The remaining facilities (256) are
smaller sources and no air monitoring data were presented in the AIRS Facility
Subsystem (AFS), because they do not exceed the reporting threshold. These smaller
facilities include hotels, dry cleaners, property management companies, parking lots,
and government maintenance centers (Table A-1 in Appendix A). While emissions
from these smaller facilities may collectively contribute to air pollution, data were not
available to characterize the emissions from each.
Monitoring data are available for regulated air pollutants emitted from stationary
point sources (smokestacks/pipes). EPA's AIRS is the national repository for
information about airborne pollution in the United States. In general data are available
on criteria air pollutants such as particulates, carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, etc.
3-26
-------
Data were extracted from AFS which has emissions and compliance data on air
pollution point sources tracked by EPA and State/local environmental regulatory
agencies. As such, the data collected only accounted for the permitted emissions
from stationary sources (stacks) and do not address fugitive emissions or other
releases to air from mobile sources. The 11 facilities for which emissions data were
available from AIRS/AFS are presented in Table 3-6, and locations of air emitters in
the region are shown on Figure 3-2. This table also presents addresses, general
industrial categories, and emission data (in Ibs/yr) for the five measured parameters:
total suspended particulates (TSP), carbon monoxide (CO), sulfur dioxide (SO2),
nitrogen dioxide (N02), and volatile organic compounds (VOCs).
A system was developed to compare the 11 facilities in DC based on the mass
of pollutants emitted and the potential for risks to human health and the environment.
While an established environmental assessment approach has been developed to
evaluate risks from discharges to surface waters, no similar approach could be
identified for air emissions. Therefore, several different approaches were considered
based on the total mass (Ibs/yr) of emissions and the pollutants of concern. This
ranking used emissions data from AFS on the five criteria pollutants regularly
monitored (TSP, CO, SO2, N02, and VOCs). These ranking approaches were:
• Ranking by Total Mass of Emissions (Sum of Five Parameters);
• Ranking by All Five Parameters Individually;
• Ranking by Each of the Five Individual Parameters separately; and
• Ranking by Toxic Weighting Factor.
This toxic weighting factor approach was developed considering the relative hazards
of the individual pollutants using two standards (i.e., National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) and Time Weighted Averages (TWA) adopted value by the
3-27
-------
Table 3-6. Facilities with Air Permits in D.C. and Emissions Data
FacHity Name/
f , -
Capitol Power Plant
DC8470000003
Georgetown University
Power Rant
DCD0495 15844
GSA Central Heating Plant
DC0470000001
Address
New Jersey Avenue & E St., SE
Washington, DC 205 15
37th & O St., NW
Washington. DC 20057
1 3th &C Street, SW
Washington, DC 20407
4
TSP
CO
SO,
NO,
VOC
TSP
CO
SO,
NO,
VOC
TSP
CO
SO,
NO,
VOC
•ammeter? ' '
W',, ' ., "
40,848
159.215
160,427
796,765
5.419
5,030
16.240
70.210
238.445
2,381
2,929
49,485
167,722
559,104
2,822
%N». of <*oM
,* $aur##
•• Jttot&ttrin? ,
2
3
4
4
4
5
4
5
5
5
6
5
5
7
7
- $l£ rnrfjtftriaf
' Classification
Steam & Air
Condit. Supply
Professional •
School
(one fossil fuel-
fired steam
generator)
Heating & Air
Conditiong
i:\«iv_op*\doeuirant\2994\038\derMc.tpt\Metian.3\tbl3VV.n«»
-------
Table 3-6. Facilities with Air Permits in D.C. and Emissions Data (continued)
Fealty Nanl*/
Ktf
GSA West Heating Plant
DC947000002
Howard University
DC0983969668
PEPCO - Benning Road
Generating Station
DC00081951
•.
, s ^ v Address „
* •."••.•• X% .- -.
1051 29th St., NW
Washington, DC 20407
2240 6th St., NW
Washington, DC 20059
3300 Benning Rd.. NE
Washington, DC 2001 9
Paramet&s - ?--"
ib/yf* - , , --v
•• A \' •" s «iN*.V.1-'^4. %^ . .-. S
TSP
CO
SO,
N0f
VOC
TSP
CO
SO,
N02
VOC
TSP
CO
S02
NO,
VOC
16,147
58,857
324,945
258,261
6,695
7,490
5.350
157,290
24,150
364
123,346
90,390
1,464,964
1,053,187
11,825
* 0>Nfe>otft)tnt\ "
%-\\-"^grtjei
: ^ ^MjttortniB C
OV:..*. iv-> ^\
5
5
8
8
5
2
2
2
3
2
8
8
8
8
8
•5 % % \ % ' ? .• ^ ••
j^jMm^t ?c
* ^Claistfloatlori--
0 o% \-- S 0 ^ %«sN «•.••
Heating & Air
Conditioning
Professional
School
(four fossil-fueled
boilers for
heating)
Electrical
Services
i:\«i«_op*\doGunMnt\2994\038\dcriric.r|>t\Mctlon.3\tfal»A.iMW
-------
Table 3-6. Facilities with Air Permits in D.C. and Emissions Data (continued)
Faulty Napn#
jo# :
PEPCO - Buzzard Point
Generating Station
No ID* not reported
St. Elizabeth's Hospital
DC975 1305997
U.S. Bureau of Engraving &
Printing
DC2200907812
Address ::
^ . ,-
1st& VSt., SW
Washington, DC 20004
2700 Martin Luther King Dr. SE.
Washington. DC 2001 3
14th & C St.. SW
Washington, DC 20228
Parameters
Jb/yr ^ s ,
TSP
CO
SO,
NO2
VOC
TSP
CO
SO,
NO,
VOC
TSP
CO
SO,
NO,
VOC
3.485
10.734
76,112
47.256
3,325
33,957
24,255
713,097
97,020
1,649
NR
NR
NR
NR
251,760
*ft>. OtPOfrtt
Seureeis
MoottOfir^
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
SIC Industrial
, Classification
Electrical
Services
Hospital
Commercial
Printing
J:\wv_op«\doourmnt\2984\038\dori*.ipt\Mctioo.3\tbl3-A.nw»
-------
Table 3-6. Facilities with Air Permits in D.C. and Emissions Data (continued)
Polity Name/
m#
U.S. Government Printing
Office
DC4040005031
U.S. Soldiers and Airmen's
Home
DC8210021160
^ - 5
" * - Address ; , ^
45 G St.. NW
Washington, DC 20401
3700 N. Capital St., NW
Washington, DC 20317
x '•JPBram(jt$f$ %v
•" * '-Jb/Vr '
: - - 0^^ - -- -'•. v". :\{,-
TSP
CO
SO,
NO,
VOC
TSP
CO
SO,
NO,
VOC
NR
NR
NR
NR
145,442
20,220
8,510
267,238
93,610
1,923
r: ]N». ot Print \
s-/^uR0e&"\-.-^
- --^^wJtorirtg^-- ^
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
1
1
1
1
1
\ ^ICJndosW^
x 'Oasstifloaliort^
:• ^ - -5>- v v *; ^xj-\:
Nursing &
Personal Care
Facility
CO
CO
NR = not reported.
Source: AIRS/AFS Database (1996).
J:\«iv_op.Woeum«rt\2994\038V
-------
AFS Facilities
Near Wuhlngton. DC
US BunM of ttw C*n«u<
US O»el»gled •unwy
MEM
Figure 3-2. Location of Facilities with Air Emissions (AIRS-AFS Facilities)in the Washington, DC Area
-------
American Conference of Government and Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH)). CO, N02,
and S02 had both NAAQS and TWA standards; therefore, the concentration limits
of each of these three pollutants were normalized to produce toxic weighting factors
for these air pollutants (e.g., 0.03 ppm for S02/0.05 ppm for N02 = 0.6). The
emissions of each parameter (Ibs/yr) from the facilities were multiplied by these
weighting factors to produce a total emissions equivalency. The total of the three
parameter concentrations was used as a candidate approach for comparing the
facilities.
Based on the examination of the eight different ranking schemes (Table 3-7),
only a limited differentiation among facilities was evident. However, the larger
emitters were fairly apparent, especially with respect to total mass of NO2 and S02.
Taking into consideration all ranking schemes, the 11 facilities were placed along a
continuum from higher to lower emitters (presented in Table 3-8). While two of the
facilities (U.S. Government Printing Office and U.S. Bureau of Engraving and Printing)
had no monitoring data for TSP, CO, N02, and S02 (and as a result were relatively
low on most of the ranking schemes), they have very large volatile organic compound
(VOC) emissions. As such, these larger emitters of VOCs may contribute to an
existing ozone problem in the DC area. Because of this concern, these two facilities
were moved toward the higher end of the scale.
3.1.3 Hazardous Waste Management Facilities
In Washington, DC, 939 facilities were listed in RCRIS as generators/ managers
of hazardous waste (RCRIS retrieval on March 24, 1996, according to 1993 data).
More than 620 tons of hazardous wastes were managed by 15 large quantity
generators (LQGs). These 15 LOG facilities are listed in Table 3-9 (along with the
mass (in tons/yr) and types of wastes handled), and their locations are included on
3-33
-------
Table 3-7. Approaches Considered for Ranking Facilities with Air Emissions in DC
Ranking by
Total Emissions Ranking by All
(Sum of 5 5 Parameters
Facility Parameters) Individually
Capital Power Plant
Georgetown University
GSA Central Heating Plant
GSA West Heating Plant
Howard University
PEPCO-Benning Road
PEPCO-Buzzard Point
CO
co St. Elizabeth's Hospital
U.S. Bureau of Engraving &
Printing
U.S. Government Printing
Office
U.S. Soldiers & Airmen's
Home
2
6
3
4
8
1
11
3
7
10
4
2
7
5
3
9
1
8
4
~
~
6
Ranking
by NO,
2
5
3
4
9
1
8
6
—
..
7
Ranking by
VOCs
5
8
7
4
11
3
6
10
1
2
9.
Ranking by
SO,
6
9
5
4
7
1
8
2
—
~
3
Ranking
by CO
1
6
4
3
9
2
7
5
— '
-
8
Ranking by
TSP
2
7 •
8
5
6
1
9
3
~
-
4
Ranking by
Toxic
Weighting
Factors*
8
8
4
5
7
1
9
2
—
—
6
' Based on NAAQS Standards and TWAs for the criteria air pollutants.
j:\a»v_opi\dociHiiait\2994\038\
-------
Table 3-8. Comparison of Facilities with Air Emissions
Facility
Comparative Ranking
PEPCO-Buzzard Point
PEPCO-Benning Road
Capital Power Plant
U.S. Government Printing Office
U.S. Bureau of Engraving & Printing*
St. Elizabeth's Hospital*
U.S. Soldiers & Airmen's Home
Howard University
GSA West Heating Plant
GSA Central Heating Plant
Georgetown University
Higher
Lower
• Because VOCs contribute to the elevated ozone concentration in the District, and the amounts
emitted from the two facilities were substantially higher than from other facilities, the two
printing facilities were placed higher in this comparative ranking.
j:\ow_op»\documait\2994\038\dcriik.n)»\»ee
-------
Table 3-9. Hazardous Waste Management Facilities (Large Quantity) in Washington, D.C.
Facility Name
Address
EPA ID number
Quantity
Managed
(tonal
Type of waste(s)
CO
CO
0>
PEPCO-Bennlng Road Generating Station
U.S. Bureau of Engraving and Printing
Washington Metro Area Transit Authority
WMATA
Boiling Air Force Base
Washington Gas & Light Company
Food and Drug Administration FB 8
Washington Post Newspaper
Walter Reed Army Medical Center
Architect of the Capitol
U.S. Government Printing Office
Naval Research Laboratory
Washington Post Newspaper, Southeast PI.
Naval District • Washington. DC
Catholic University of America
3300 Banning Road, NE
14th and C Streets, SW
2250 26th Street, NE
601 T Street. NE
Portland Street. SW
1200 N Street. SE
200 C Street, SW HFS.657
1160 15th Street. NW
6825 16th Street, NW
Capitol Hill
45 G St., NW
4555 Overlook Ave., SW
225 Virginia Avenue. SE
901 M Street. SE
620 Michigan Avenue, NE
DCD000819516 220.45 (CRT, spent solvents, discarded CCr*
DC2200907812 134.58 lab pack, ICRT. spent cyanide. WW tmnt sludge, solv wash
DCD980555643 69.01 ignitable. corrosive, spent solvent, toxic
DCD981737422 40.24 ignitabla. corrosive, spent solvent, toxic
DC9570090036 27.72 ICRT. spent solvents, discarded CCP
DCD077797793 23.95 igrdtable, toxic
DC8470000086 21.51 ICRT, spent solvents, discarded CCP, production wastes
DCD003245768 19.38 ignitable, corrosive, spent solvent
DC421O021166 17.36 ICRT. spent solvents, discarded CCP
DC4141707162 16.54 ignitable. corrosive, spent solvent toxic, discarded CCP
DC4040005031 15.78 ignitabla. corrosive, spent solvent, toxic
DCS 170024311 14.70 ICRT, spent solvents, discarded CCP
DCD003238193 14.22 ignitabla
DC9170024310 2.92 ignitable, corrosive, spent solvent toxic
DCD980204879 2.88 lab packs. ICRT. spent solvents, discarded CCP
total: 641.24
ICRT - ignitable, corrosive, reactive, toxic
CCP « commercial chemical products
Source: RCRIS Data Base search, March 24, 1996
-------
Figure 3-3. These facilities include
power plants, printing facilities, transit
authorities, and government
establishments. When a facility
generates/manages a higher mass of
hazardous waste, there may be a
greater potential for risks to human
health and the environment (i.e., the
mass of hazardous waste is considered
a surrogate for potential risk in this
analysis). These large facilities were
Hazardous Waste Facilities
« 939 Facilities in RCRIS
* 15 large Quantity Generators ~
power plants, printing facilities,
transit authorities, government
organizations
» 924 SmaH Quantity Generators -
automobile service stations {body
shops, paint shops), cleaners,
medicaf offices, etc.
considered to be more likely to have the potential to pose greater risks than individual
small quantity generators (SQGs). However, taken collectively, the SQGs generate
as much hazardous waste as the 15 larger facilities (Seeeney, 1996).
Data on hazardous waste management are available from EPA's RCRIS data
base. Under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), hazardous wastes
are regulated from generation until they are disposed ("cradle-to-grave"). RCRIS
tracks information related to all phases of hazardous waste management (facilities,
permits, generation, disposal, etc.). Searches of RCRIS were used to obtain
information on the volume and type of wastes managed by facilities in Washington,
DC. Data were retrieved and analyzed to characterize the volume and toxicity/hazard
of wastes handled by each facility. However, the data on the type of waste (the
waste code) reveal only limited information about the toxic properties of the wastes.
Some waste codes indicate if the wastes are ignitable, corrosive, reactive, or toxic,
while others only indicate the type of industrial process that generates them (with no
information about concentrations of specific pollutants). As a result, the mass
3-37
-------
RCRIS Facilltlaa
Naar Washington, DC
County •oundorlM
SUto Boundwto*
A/
RCRIS F.cH«i. •
I
* Selaotad sltai Will
.71 .»
1 SO 0
FVoJcotfon: Albor.
BOUTM: US Bun«i of *« Cen.u.
US Ocolealori Surwy
US Em
Finnrfi 3-3. Inratinn nf Ha7arHnnc Wacto
/DPDIOI c«,»:
-------
(tons/yr) was examined as the sole indicator of potential risk from facilities managing
hazardous wastes.
The 15 LQGs were ranked by the total mass of all hazardous waste(s) managed
(generated, received, and disposed) by each facility, in descending order, to illustrate
the relative potential risks associated with these facilities (Table 3-9). Those facilities
listed at the top of the table managed larger amounts of hazardous wastes, and are
considered, therefore, to represent a potentially greater risk than the facilities that are
listed toward the bottom of the table.
The other 924 facilities, classified as SQGs, are listed in Table A-2 in
Appendix A. Of these smaller facilities, only about 600 were active generators
(Sweeney, 1996). These facilities include Federal Government offices, gas/service
stations, schools, doctor and dentist offices, dry cleaners, public transit stations,
printing companies, and other similar types of small businesses. A facility is classified
as an SGG if it generates in one calendar month: (1) less than 1,000 kilograms of a
hazardous waste; (2) less than 1 kilogram of an acutely hazardous waste; or (3) less
than 100 kilograms of any residue or contaminated soil, waste, or other debris
resulting from the cleanup of a spill of an acutely hazardous waste. Also, the SQG
status applies to any generator that accumulates less than the amounts listed in (2)
and (3) above of an acutely hazardous waste on site at any one time. Due to the lack
of data on SQGs, a detailed characterization of the nature and volume of the wastes
managed at these facilities was not feasible.
3-39
-------
3.1.4 CERCLIS Sites
The CERCLIS data base lists 32 CEWCIIS Sites
sites in Washington, DC (Table 3-10).
32 Sttes in Data Base
When a hazardous waste site is . No ${tes ^ ^^ p(]omes
discovered (e.g., drums), information
. .... -. • ^,-r,^, it> * Washington Navy Yard Recently I
about the s,te is entered into CERCLIS. PrOp0se(i by EPA as NPL Site
Information regarding the sites in DC
that appear in CERCLIS was extracted
from the EPA home page on the Internet [EPA Home\Superfund HomeXOERR Home;
maintained by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Emergency and
Remedial Response; Revised March 25,1996.] The sites in CERCLIS are investigated
to determine what further actions (if any) are necessary to protect human health and
the environment. None of the sites were listed on the National Priorities List (NPL) as
"Superfund sites" (i.e., none were determined to be harmful enough to be identified
as EPA priorities); however, recently the Washington Navy Yard was proposed by the
EPA to be included on the NPL. One site (Fort Lincoln) was on the interim priority list,
but was later removed. However, when a site is included in CERCLIS, it remains in
the data base even after actions have been taken (e.g., removal of drums) to remedy
the problem (Sweeney, 1996). As such, many of the sites listed have no ongoing
activities.
A total of 32 CERCLIS sites are listed in DC; however, detailed information was
only available on 7 sites (more than the basic information such as the site name and
address). This additional information included: the contaminants (no volume or
concentration data) present at a site, land use restrictions, and brief site histories.
Figure 3-4 presents a map showing the locations of CERCLIS sites in DC. The sites
are not ranked because the data search did not reveal enough information about the
3-40
-------
Table 3-10. CERCLIS Sites in the District of Columbia
Site Name: U.S. BUREAU OF PRINTING AND ENGRAVING
Street: 14TH AND C STs., SW
City: WASHINGTON State: DC Zip: 20228
EPA ID: DCD146729389
Site Name: CUSTOM'S FIELD OFFICE
Street: 1200 PENNA AVE
City: WASHINGTON State: DC Zip: 20004
EPA ID: DC5470090015
Site Name: HUBERT H. HUMPHREY BUILDING
Street: 200 INDEPENDENCE AVE., S.W.
City: WASHINGTON State: DC Zip: 20201
EPA ID: DC6470000104
Site Name: JAMES T WARRING & SONS INC
Street: 1321 S CAPITOL ST
City: WASHINGTON State: DC Zip: 20003
EPA ID: DCD042278994
Site Name: SOLDIERS AND AIRMEN'S HOME
Street: MICHIGAN AVE, N.E.
City: WASHINGTON State: DC Zip: 20317
EPA ID: DC6170090025
Site Name: WASHINGTON OFFICE (GSA)
Street: 2ND AND M ST., SW
City: WASHINGTON State: DC Zip: 20408
EPA ID: DC8470090004
Site Name: WASHINGTON PLATING
Street: 2119 14TH ST NW
City: WASHINGTON State: DC Zip: 20009
EPA ID: DCD047277801
Site Name: NEW POST OFFICE
Street: 1200 PENNSYLVANIA AVE. NW
City: WASHINGTON DC State: DC Zip: 20004
EPA ID: DCD983966433
3-41
-------
c
Table 3-10. CERCLIS Sites in the District of Columbia (continued)
Site Name: ANACOSTIA DRUM SITE
Street: 11TH STREET BRIDGE & GOOD HOPE ROAD
City: WASHINGTON State: DC Zip: 20020
EPA ID: DCD983967662
Site Description: OSC called to assess two drums, 3/4 full of unknown material on
park police property. Drums markings identified "DOT". Drum #1 contained soil,
drum #2 contained mud- 3-6" water over mud.
Site Name: ANACOSTIA NAVAL STATION
Street: ANACOSTIA NAVAL STATION
City: WASHINGTON State: DC Zip: 20374
EPA ID: DC4170000901
Site Description: Contaminants include antimony, chromium, lead, mercury, copper,
iron, nickel, zinc, cadmium, silver, cyanide, chloride, paint, manganese. Contaminants
could leach into the ground water. Dermal contact must also be avoided.
Site Name: BLADENSBURG ROAD SITE
Street: 1900 BLADENSBURG RD.
City: WASHINGTON State: DC Zip: 20002
EPA ID: DC0001090190
Site Name: CUTHBERT ST. MEDICAL WASTE
Street: 1241 CUTHBERT ST.
City: WASHINGTON State: DC Zip: 20040
EPA ID: DC0001096221
Site Name: DALECARLIA WTP/WASH AQUEDUCT DIV
Street: 5900 MACARTHUR BLVD.
City: WASHINGTON State: DC Zip: 203150220
EPA ID: DC1960000908
Site Description: Congressional correspondence requested the investigation of the
alleged dumping of PCB transformer wastes at the facility.
Site Name: FENWICK ROAD TRAILERS
Street: 1800 FENWICK ROAD
City: WASHINGTON State: DC Zip: 20020
EPA ID: DC0000877985
Site Name: FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION
Street: 2ND AND C ST., SW
City: WASHINGTON State: DC Zip: 20204
EPA ID: DC8470000086
3-42
-------
Table 3-10. CERCLIS Sites in the District of Columbia (continued)
Site Name: FORT LINCOLN
Street: BARNEY DR NE
City: WASHINGTON State: DC Zip: 20018
EPA ID: DC9470090003
Site Description: Hazard ranking determined 08/01/82. Site was on interim priority list
and removed. OERR claims site in Federal Register as a removed "R" site from the
NPL. Site was D then N, now it is R. Until the next change.
Site Name: NATIONAL ARCHIVES & RECORDS ADMIN
Street: 7TH AND PENNA AVE.f NW
City: WASHINGTON State: DC Zip: 20408
EPA ID: DC5470000006
Site Name: NPS - ANACOSTIA PARK SECTIONS E & F
Street: 1900 ANACOSTIA DRIVE, S.E.
City: WASHINGTON State: DC Zip: 20020
EPA ID: DCD003254273
Site Description: Site is bordered on the north by the congressional cemetery, on the
east by Anacostia river, west by barney circle. Land use is restricted to park
activities.
Site Name: PEPCO BENNING ROAD FACILITY
Street: 3400 BENNING ROAD NE
City: WASHINGTON State: DC Zip: 20019
EPA ID: DCD983967951
Site Name: SOAP STONE CREEK
Street: 4500 ALBEMARLE ST.
City: WASHINGTON State: DC Zip: 20008
EPAID:DC0001011766
Site Name: ST ELIZABETH'S HOSPITAL
Street: 2700 MARTIN LUTHER KING AVE
City: WASHINGTON State: DC Zip: 20032
EPA ID: DC9751305997
Site Name: TUXEDO VALET
Street: 1715 7TH STREET N.W.
City: WASHINGTON State: DC Zip: 20004
EPA ID: DCD983967928
3-43
-------
Table 3-10. CERCLIS Sites in the District of Columbia (continued)
Site Name: USA FT MCNAIR
Street: 350 P STREET SW
City: WASHINGTON State: DC Zip: 20319
EPA ID: DC8210021004
Site Name: USAF BOILING AIR FORCE BASE
Street: 5 CAPITAL ST
City: WASHINGTON State: DC Zip: 20331
EPA ID: DC5570024443
Site Name: USDA NATIONAL ARBORETUM
Street: 3501 NEW YORK AVENUE NE
City: WASHINGTON State: DC Zip: 20002
EPA ID: DC7120507432
Site Description: Gravel pit site has potential for releasing hazardous substances to the
environment shop area site has potential for accumulation of hazardous substances
to exist in surfical soils.
Site Name: USN NAVAL RESEARCH LAB BLDG A-11
Street: 4555 OVERLOOK AVE
City: WASHINGTON State: DC Zip: 20375
EPA ID: DCS 170024311
Site Name: USN NAVAL SECURITY STATION
Street: 3801 NEBRASKA AVE., NW
City: WASHINGTON State: DC Zip: 20390
EPA ID: DC1170023476
Site Name: WALTER REED ARMY MEDICAL CENTER
Street: 6825 16THSTNW
City: WASHINGTON State: DC Zip: 20305-5001
EPA ID: DC4210021156
Site Name: WASHINGTON CHEMICAL MUNITIONS
Street: 50TH AND MASSACHUSETTS
City: WASHINGTON State: DC Zip: 20015
EPAID: DCD983971136
3-44
-------
Table 3-10. CERCLIS Sites in the District of Columbia (continued)
Site Name: WASHINGTON GAS LIGHT SITE
Street: 12TH&MSTS, SE
City: WASHINGTON State: DC Zip: 20019
EPA ID: DCD077797793
Site Description: The main part of the site is 11.2 Acres. It was used actively as a
coal gasification plant from 1888 to 1948 and sporadically from 1948-85 or 86.
Site Name: WASHINGTON NAVY YARD
Street: WASHINGTON NAVY YARD
City: WASHINGTON State: DC Zip: 20374
EPA ID: DC9170024310
Site Name: INTERNATIONAL TRANSMISSION
Street: 3188 BLADENSBURG ROAD
City: WASHINGTON, D.C. State: DC Zip: 20020
EPA ID: DCD983971011
Source: CERCLIS Data Base Search, March 25, 1996
3-45
-------
CERCLIS Facilities
Near Washington. DC
CERCLIS Sit., with NPL KMM
4\ v .>.'»£" \r(r--'.s-£&,
•ourw: US Buraiu of *• Cwww
Figure 3-4. Location of CERCLIS Sites in the Washington, DC Area
-------
risks associated with these sites to perform such a task. If a site was listed on the
NPL, it would be "scored," using the Hazard Ranking System (MRS), to evaluate its
potential risks to human health and the environment. EPA adopted MRS to assess the
relative threat associated with actual or potential releases of hazardous substances
at sites. Using the MRS, a site is evaluated based on four contaminant migration
pathways: (1} ground water; (2) surface water (threats to drinking water, human food
sources, and the environment); (3) soil exposure (threats to resident and nearby
populations); and (4) air. Three major factors are used to evaluate each pathway: (1)
likelihood of release; (2) waste characteristics (toxicity and quantity); and (3) receptor
targets (human and ecological components). Based on this scoring, a site may be
nominated by EPA for inclusion on the NPL. Recently, the Washington Navy Yard was
proposed by EPA for possible inclusion on the NPL. As mentioned above, most of the
sites in DC have received only limited investigation, and appropriate information is not
available for "ranking." Therefore, sites on this list are presented (Table 3-10) as
retrieved from the CERCLIS database. The site names, addresses, and EPA ID
numbers are provided for ail CERCLiS sites in DC. Some entries also include brief
descriptions on the nature of contamination at the site.
3.1.5 TRI Facilities
Six facilities in DC reported
releases of toxic chemicals in 1994
under the Toxic Release Inventory (TRI)
program (U.S. EPA, 1996; RFF, 1996).
While no facilities in DC reported for
1993, six TRI facilities reported total
releases in 1994 of more than 23,000
Ibs of toxic chemicals. This was the
smallest amount released of any "state"
TRI Releases in DC ,
• £ Facilities Reported Releases for
1994
• Total of 23,000 Pounds of Toxics
Released in 1994
« ChemfcaJs Released - Copper
Compounds, Chlorine, and Glyeol
Ethers
3-47
-------
in the U.S. Only American Samoa reported lower releases (RFF, 1996). Table 3-11
presents the facilities, type/media of release, and toxic chemicals emitted/released
(RFF, 1996). Reporting of releases of toxic chemicals is required under Section 313
of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-know Act (EPCRA). TRI's
purpose is to provide information to the public about toxic chemicals in their
communities. Reporting of environmental releases, off-site transfer, treatment, etc.
is required if facilities meet the following requirements: (1) they are primarily engaged
in manufacturing activities; (2) they have 10 or more full-time employees; and (3) they
manufacture or process greater than 25,000 pounds or otherwise use greater than
10,000 pounds of a toxic chemical. The list of toxic chemicals ("The TRI List") that
are subject to reporting contains approximately 600 specific chemicals and chemical
categories. Such information is submitted to the EPA on the EPA Form R, and is
entered into the Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System (TRIS) data base. TRIS
contains information about the releases to land, air, and water and off-site transfers
of toxic chemicals from the applicable facilities.
3.2 Nonpoint Source Pollution in DC
Most people are familiar with
point-source pollution, which comes
from wastewater discharge pipes or
power plant smokestacks. While this
type of pollution is relatively easy to
regulate through permits and to control
through treatment units, nonpoint
source (NPS) pollution, however,
cannot be directly attributed to a single source. It comes from stormwater runoff
from farm fields, parking lots, and construction sites or other sources such as
Nonpoint Source Pollution
Air - Mobile Sources
Water - Stormwater FUrnoff and
Combined Sewer Overflow
Sottd Waste - Trash Collection and
Illegal Dumps
3-48
-------
Table 3-11. Toxic Chemical Releases in DC in 1994
Facility Name "
Air Force-Boiling AFB
Army Corps of Engineers-Dalecarlia WTP Aqueduct
Army Corps of Engineers-McMillan WTP Aqueduct
Bureau of Engraving
Capital Printing Ink Co., Inc.
Secret Service
I Type of TRI Releases
Releases to Land
Air Emissions
Surface Water Discharges
Underground Injection
Total Releases
Compounds Released
Copper Compounds
Chlorine
Glycol Ethers
Hydroquinone
Lead
Total Releases
Toxic Chemicals Released
hydroquinone
chlorine
chlorine, copper compounds
glyco! ethers, nickel, sulfuric acid
copper compounds, phosphoric acid
lead
Pounds Released
17,300
4,891
1,600
0
23,791
Pounds Released
17,300
5,010
1,481
0
0
23,791
Source: RFF(1996).
3-49
-------
automobile exhaust. Regulating NFS is far more difficult than point sources, because
the pollutants are more diffuse and come from larger areas. In addition to nonpoint
source pollution of air and water, solid wastes are of concern. Residential solid waste
management has changed over the last few years in DC. In 1995, the city cancelled
the curbside recycling program and in 1996, trash collection was cut back to once per
week (RFF, 1996). Recently, the recycling program was re-initiated by the city.
Illegal dumps are also an area of concern, with more than 200 illegal dumps estimated
to exist in DC (RFF, 1996). These dumps can be, at a minimum, an eye sore and
affect the aesthetics of a community. Moreover, they can be threats to human health
because of bacteria, rodents, or the presence of toxic wastes.
3.2.1 Nonpoint Sources of Air Pollution
Motor vehicles produce much of
_ _ . . . Nonpoint AJr Pollution
the air pollution in DC and the region.
Within DC, as much as 70 percent of
of Ozone Precursors
the ozone precursors are attributable to
motor vehicle emissions (RFF, 1996).
MWCOG (1996) has estimated that 28 Ret"Ster"d * DC Me"°
Motor Vehicles are largest Source
2,8 MiHion Motor Vehicles
percent of the VOC emissions for the
entire region comes from motor vehicles. Approximately 250,000 motor vehicles are
registered in DC and 2.8 million are registered in the metropolitan area (RFF, 1996).
Commuting traffic accounts for about one-third of the motor vehicle emissions of
VOCs in the metropolitan area and the remainder comes from other uses (MWCOG,
1996). The DC Department of Public Works estimates that each weekday about
800,000 vehicles enter DC (RFF, 1996). In addition to VOC emissions, other air
pollutants are released, such as carbon monoxide, lead, and particulates. All of the
motor vehicle usage in the DC metropolitan area is estimated to result in the daily
3-50
-------
emissions of 369 tons of hydrocarbons, 1,693 tons of carbon monoxide, and 161
tons of nitrogen oxides (RFF, 1996).
3.2.2 Nonpoint Sources of Water Pollution
Stormwater Runoff Loadings
400,000 Pounds of Zinc
94,000 Pounds of Copper
22,000 Pounds of lead
Nonpoint surface water pollution
comes from stormwater runoff and
combined sewer overflow. Pollutants
include nitrogen, phosphorus, heavy
metals, toxic organic chemicals,
petroleum-based oils, and floatable
trash. Nonpoint source runoff from DC
accounts for 3 percent of the nitrogen and 16 percent of the phosphorus in the
Potomac River downstream from DC (DCRA, 1994a). Excessive levels of nitrogen and
phosphorus are detrimental to rivers, streams and other waterbodies because they
promote excess growth of aigae. Although algae produce oxygen during the day from
photosynthesis, most of that oxygen is used by the algae at night for cell growth.
When the algae dies, it settles to the river bottom and decays, using still more
oxygen. Low oxygen levels impair fish, oyster, and crab populations, reducing the
amount of fish and shellfish available for harvest. In addition, algae overgrowth
blocks out sunlight necessary for underwater grasses, which provide food, shelter,
and nursery areas for aquatic animals. Heavy metals and organic chemicals build up
in fish and shellfish tissues, resulting in consumption bans. Floatable trash is an
eyesore, interfering with enjoyment of our aquatic resources. And petroleum-based
oils contaminate our drinking water, making it taste bad. It has been estimated that
stormwater runoff from DC in a 10-month period in 1989 provided loadings of
400,000 pounds of zinc, 94,000 pounds of copper, and 22,000 pounds of lead to the
3-51
-------
streams and rivers (RFF, 1996). This pollution is believed to exceed the discharges
of these compounds from Blue Plains Wastewater Treatment Plant (RFF, 1996).
Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO)
• Discharge of Stormwater and
Untreated Sewage into Rivers and
Streams ,
* Anaeostia River Receives Much of
CSO Discharge
* Bacteria, Nitrogen, Phosphorous
Loadings
The loadings of pollutants from
nonpoint sources also results from
combined sewer overflow (CSO).
Stormwater runoff, from as much as
one-third of the city's area, is drained
by a CSO system. During heavy
rainstorms, runoff from streets is
combined with sewage which flow into
the nearest waterbodies (Chesapeake
Bay Research Consortium, 1995).
When severe rainstorms exceed the capacity of the combined sewers, untreated
sewage is released from 60 overflow drains to the city's surface waters (RFF, 1996).
This CSO discharge contains bacteria, nitrogen, and other pollutants that are
detrimental to ecological health (and indirectly to humans). The Anacostia River
receives 63 percent of the CSO and the balance is absorbed by Rock Creek and the
Potomac River (Chesapeake Bay Research Consortium, 1995). As a result, the
Anacostia receives higher concentrations of cadmium, zinc, lead, PCBs, chlordaneand
other pollutants than other water bodies in DC. Perhaps of greatest concern is the
bacterial pollution - the Anacostia River's levels of bacteria frequently exceed public
health standards following rainfall. The annual volume of combined overflow has been
estimated to be 2,400 million gallons, accounting for about 70,000 pounds of
nitrogen, 20,000 pounds of phosphorous, and other pollutants to the Potomac and
Anacostia rivers (RFF, 1996).
3-52
-------
3.2.2.1 Reducing Nonooint Source
Pollution to Surface Waters How do
these pollutants enter the watershed?
Unfortunately, NFS pollution comes
from a wide variety of small and diverse
sources. Nitrogen and phosphorus can
result from overuse of fertilizers on
farms as well as residential lawns and
gardens. These nutrients are also
emitted by automobiles and power
plants. Recent studies indicate 25 to
35 percent of the nitrogen that enters
the waters of the District come from air
pollution from coal-fired power plants in
the Midwest. Scientists are conducting
additionai studies to further evaluate
the problem. Maryland and Virginia are
reducing airborne pollutants through
their vehicle emissions testing
programs. Another nonpoint source of
nitrogen and phosphorus is animal
waste, which ranges from cow manure
in agricultural areas to dog droppings
left on city streets. Because animal
wastes may also contain potentially
dangerous bacteria, people should adhere to State and local regulations regarding the
animal waste management. Farmers can store and apply manure as fertilizer at
appropriate times to ensure rains do not carry it into local streams. Pet owners in the
Reducing Nonpoint Source Pollution
In DC's Rivers
Excess nutrients/ sediment and
stormwater runoff in DC overs are
killing the fish and causing algae
overgrowths*
You can help by:
* Using less fertiliser on your yard.
Everyone benefits when lawn care
products are used according to the
manufacturer's directions* Yard
runoff ts a major contributor to
excess nutrients in the rivers of DC,
« Keeping your car tuned* Much of
the excess nitrogen that enters our
rivers comes from the tailpipes of
the thousands of cars that travel
the DC area every day,
• Cleaning up after your animals. It's
not Just the taw.
* Calling the city when you see
construction sites that don't
manage stormwater runoff or
sediment. If there's mud on the
street, it's going into the fiver.
Sediment kills fish, aquatic wildlife,
and plants, and ruins future use of
recreational areas*
3-53
-------
District can clean up after their animals to ensure those wastes do not run into catch
basins on streets.
Heavy metals and oils enter waterbodies through runoff from streets,
driveways, and parking lots. To reduce these pollutants, car owners should keep their
cars tuned, fix fluid leaks, and properly dispose of used motor oil. Many car owners
change their own oil. The problem hinges on what they do with the used oil, which
is toxic to wildlife and can impair water quality in streams and rivers. In the past, car
owners simply dumped the waste oil into the closest storm sewer. We now recognize
that this is both improper disposal and wasteful - recycled motor oil has commercial
value. Most service stations will accept used oil for recycling. In addition, stenciling
programs have been undertaken in the District to remind people that they are living
in an area that generates "Chesapeake Bay Drainage." By painting this legend on a
storm sewer inlet, people remind car owners and others are reminded that out of sight
is not out of mind.
Floatable trash, including foam cups, cigarette butts, plastics, and paper enters
the storm sewer system on a daily basis. Many of these materials do not readily
biodegrade and, therefore, will remain along the shorelines and in the water for years.
Many cities have undertaken programs to manage floatable trash and debris by placing
filter fences across the discharge points of storm sewers. The fencing traps the
floatables for recovery and disposal, which preserves the quality and the beauty of the
waterways. This does not need to be a government project, however; high schools
and neighborhood associations are often active participants in maintaining their
streams and rivers. It should also be noted that shopping centers and malls are now
protecting their storm sewers against floatable trash and debris by fencing off the
inlets and drop boxes with wire to isolate the problem at its source.
3-54
-------
While the report on the nonpoint sources of pollution may seem grim, things are
not all that bad. The Federal Government owns a majority of the lands that lie directly
along the Potomac and Anacostia Rivers. Developed federal lands in Washington, DC
generate as much as 300 million gallons of stormwater per year (Chesapeake Bay
Research Consortium, 1995). The Federal agencies that are responsible for these
lands, which include the National Park Service, the Department of Defense, and the
General Services Administration, have made a public commitment to reduce their
contribution of pollution by 40 percent or more. Federal money is being invested to
reduce or eliminate sources of pollution and excess stormwater, to control or contain
contaminants, and to minimize future impacts on the environment in the District.
On a more personal level, the ban on phosphate-based laundry detergents has
helped reduce water pollution. Since these types of detergents were eliminated,
phosphate levels (nutrients) have dropped measurably in the waters that receive
treated household wastewater, including the DC rivers. Clothes still get clean, and
our rivers are now cleaner. Perhaps the best news is the grassroots effort to protect
and redevelop the environment of the District of Columbia. Schools, neighborhoods,
Scout troops, and senior citizens are actively seeking to improve their quality of life
by preserving and enhancing the Potomac and Anacostia Rivers. It is important to
each of us who enjoys life in the District to take charge of this piece of the
environment.
3-55
-------
4.0 CHARACTERIZATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL RISKS TO HUMAN HEALTH
Environmental risks associated
with human health come in many forms.
What is an environmental risk?
Environmental risk is anything in the
environment that may cause harm or
loss if persons come in contact with it.
What are some of these risks? Risks can
be the results of exposure to
contaminants in foods we eat; the air we
breathe (pollutants in the air from motor
Characterizing Human Health Risks
• Drinking {Tap} Water
» Fish CortsumotIon
• Ambient Air Quality
* Lead
* Contaminated
vehicles); and/or materials we touch (debris on our land and in our waters). We can
also be exposed to pollutants at our places of work and in our homes from products
that we buy and use. Some of these risks are the result of not knowing that adverse
health problems may be caused by exposure to certain pollutants. Other risks may
be caused by intentional actions such as misuse of certain chemicals, or dumping
debris or garbage in areas that are not designed for that purpose. How do these
exposures affect us? When exposed to chemicals or pollutants at levels that are too
high, our health may be affected in various ways. We may be affected for short
periods of time - itchy eyes, skin rashes, difficulty in breathing, etc., or we may be
affected for a longer period of time with health problems such as cancer, emphysema,
kidney or liver disorders. Sometimes these exposures can add to an existing health
problem (e.g., air pollutants indoors and outdoors may aggravate respiratory problems
such as asthma).
i
How do we get exposed to pollutants? There are three major routes by which
a person may be exposed:
4-1
-------
1. Inhalation (breathing in pollutants from the air);
2. Ingestion (eating or drinking contaminated foods and water); and
3. Dermal (pollutants contacting the surface of the skin).
Figure 4-1 presents examples of how exposure may occur through the three exposure
routes, it should be noted that the figure does not provide an exhaustive treatment
of all exposure examples that could be mentioned. To do so, is beyond the scope of
this report. It does however, provide some typical examples of how an individual may
be exposed to chemicals/pollutants.
The following subsections describe some major topics that relate to risks to
human health from environmental conditions in Washington, DC. These topics
(drinking water, fish consumption, ambient air quality, lead, and contaminated soil) are
considered to be among the means by which people can be exposed to pollutants;
however, this list is by no means comprehensive. Described for each topic in the
following subsections are the issues of concern, descriptions of DC's particular
circumstances, monitoring programs to determine levels of contaminants, and the
potential impacts to human health.
4.1 Drinking Water
4.1.1 Overview of Drinking Water Issues
The District's drinking water continues to be of concern, especially following
several "boil water" advisories over the last few years. These advisories have been
issued because of concerns over disease-causing bacteria/pathogens in drinking water.
In addition, these incidents have highlighted the importance of continued
improvements to the water treatment, disinfection, and distribution systems serving
4-2
-------
EXAMPLES AND SOURCES OF EXPOSURE
EXPOSURE
PATHWAY
Outdoor Air
- Emissions from Automobiles, Airplanes, Power Plants,
Factories
Indoor Air
- Tobacco Smoke
- Kerosene Heaters
- Aerosol Sprays
- Carpets
- Household Cleaners (Bathroom and Kitchen Cleaners)
- Cosmetics (Hairsprays)
- Interior Paints
Eating Contaminated Foods
- Vegetables (Root Crops—Carrots, Onions, Beets
- Fruits and Vegetables Treated with Pesticides
- Fruits and Vegetables Contaminated From Air Pollutants That Fall on the
Exposed Plant or Dissolve in the Rainwater or Irrigation Water
- Meats That Have Been Stored Improperly or If the Animals Eat Contaminated
Soil, or Feed Crops
- Fish/Shellfish That was Caught from Contaminated Waters
- Other Wildlife
Ingesting Contaminated Soils (Pica)
Drinking Contaminated Water:
(Ground and Surface Water Contaminated from Runoff, Unintentional Ingestion While
Swimming), Leaching of Substances from Water Pipes (Example — Lead); Water
Treatment Chemicals; Bottled Water
Contact with Contaminated Waters and Sediments (Swimming, Boating, Wading, Skiing)
Contact with Contaminated Soils (Gardening, Playgrounds, etc.)
Use of Household Products (Cleaners, Treated Fabrics, etc.)
Fallout of Pollutants From the Air
Figure 4-1. Example Of How One May Be Exposed To Chemicals/Pollutants
-------
the DC area. Despite these problems,
Tiast week the CDC and EPA
should take precautions (consult their
physicians and/or boil the water) with '
announced that tapwater that Is safe
enough for healthy individuals could
the drinking water in DC meets
regulatory standards and is safe for use
u * * *u i*- n ic c0A °* dangerous for fmmuno-
by most of the population (U.S. EPA, compromfs^ ^^ ^
1996a). However, individuals who what advocates for people with AIDS
... and other* have said for some time,..15
have weakened immune systems
NYTfmes, June 22,193$
respect to use of drinking water (U.S.
EPA, 1996a). Tapwater concerns also include chemical contaminants such as metals
(especially lead) and trihalomethanes (THMs) that are present in drinking water at
levels that may impact human health. The following sections describe the District's
drinking water systems, levels of contaminants in drinking water, and the potential for
risks to human health.
4.1.2 Drinking Water Supply (Treatment, Problems, and Improvements)
The Potomac River is the source for drinking water in the District. No wells
(public or private) exist in DC for use of ground water as a source of drinking water
(Baker Environmental, 1993). Bottled water is used as the primary source of drinking
water by approximately 37 percent of the DC population (CDC, 1994). Water is
removed from the Potomac River at Great Falls and Little Falls, and is treated at the
Dalecarlia and McMillan treatment plants. These plants, operated by the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (USACE), filter and disinfect the river water to produce drinking
water for all of DC and portions of Northern Virginia (including Arlington and Falls
Church). Figure 4-2 presents a map showing the areas served by the drinking water
produced by these plants (USACE, 1994a). While the USACE is responsible for the
treatment plants, the water is distributed to DC residents by the DC Department of
4-4
-------
.TON AQUEDUCT
VLLS DAM AND INTAKES
MacARTHUR BOULEVARD rAB,M inuu
— WATER CONDUITS^ KlMEftSIPHON f/C
W
//
$
^-r*«^
^VGLEN ECHO
«^
LJTTLE FALLS RAW WATER
PUMPING STATION
CHAIN BRIDGE
FAIRFAX COUNTY
'DALECARUA
RESERVOIR
AND WATER
v\ TREATMENT PLANT §
vGEORGETOWN,
RESERVOIR
MCMILLAN
RESERVOIR
AND WATER
TREATMENT PLANT
^
-CITY TUNNEL
CAPITOL 0
ARLINGTON COUNTY
PENTAGONr/
WASHINGTON^ \i«
NATIONAL |\\*
AIRPORT I
ALEXANDRIA
iht blue color indicates service area.
Figure 4-2. Washington Aqueduct - Service Area and Major Facilities.
Source: USAGE (1994a)
4-5
-------
Public Works (DPW), Water and Sewer Utility Administration. This collaborative effort
to supply drinking water, comprised of separate treater and distributor, is unique and
complicates the process to upgrade the system and improve water quality.
On December 8, 1993, DC residents were advised to boil tap water when it
was used for consumption because of increased turbidity (cloudiness due to small
suspended particles) (CDC, 1994). This city-wide boil water advisory was prompted
by poor performance of treatment plant filters to prevent the potential for infectious
diseases (Olson, 1995). The primary concern during this (and subsequent) episode
was the potential for harmful microbial contaminants, such as Cryptosporidium or
Giardia, to cause infections in the population (CDC, 1994). Under normal
circumstances, filtration and disinfection using chlorine are effective in killing microbial
contaminants. However, with increased turbidity, there was a concern that the
treatment plants might not be effective in controlling parasites or microorganisms
(Olson, 1995). The city-wide boil water advisory, as well as more recent incidents
involving elevated levels of bacteria/turbidity, have illustrated the importance of
continuing efforts by the USACE and DPW to upgrade facilities and modify operating
procedures (USACE, 1996a; King, 1996). These actions to improve the drinking
water quality have also been monitored by the U.S. EPA as part of a Proposed
Administrative Order for DC (issued in November 1995). This order addressed the
need for improvements with the operation of the distribution system, prompted by
violations for bacteria (total coliform) and improper maintenance of the distribution
system (U.S. EPA, 1996c).
Specific plans that the USACE and DPW have for improving water quality in DC
include:
4-6
-------
• USAGE - removal of residuals and studies of other disinfection
techniques (USAGE, 1996a), and
• DPW - increased flushing of the distribution system (water mains, pipes,
etc.) and cleaning reservoirs (King, 1996).
4.1.3 Levels of Contaminants in DC Drinking Water
Levels of certain contaminants in DC drinking water may pose risks to human
health. Although public water supplies are regulated by EPA under the Safe Drinking
Water Act and DC's drinking water complies with standards, contaminants are present
in the drinking water. Specifically, the following types of contaminants have been
detected in DC's drinking water supply:
• Bacteria - coliform (fecal coliform and E. coli);
• Metals - lead (from older pipes and others sources); and
• Trihalomethanes - chloroform and other cancer-causing chemicals that
are by-products of disinfection using chlorine.
USAGE monitors its treated water and tapwater for various contaminants at 70
locations throughout the city (USAGE, 1996b). These monitoring results are reported
to EPA to ensure that the drinking water meets standards. Table 4-1 presents a
summary of data from the USAGE'S monitoring of drinking water quality when it
leaves USAGE'S plants (USAGE, 1994a). In addition, USAGE monitors the untreated
water that it removes from the Potomac for potentially-dangerous bacteria and
parasites. Recent studies indicate that Cryptosporidium may be present in 65 to 97
percent of surface waters (lakes and rivers) that are tested in the U.S. (CDC, 1995).
Specifically, Cryposporidium and Giardia have been found in the raw water from the
4-7
-------
Table 4-1. Drinking Water Treatment Plant Data
Concentrations far 1994*
Metals (math
Aluminum
Barium
Calcium
Copper
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Nickel
Potassium
Sodium
Strontium
Zinc
Lithium
Trlhatomethanes fua/l)
Chloroform
Bromodlchloromethane
Chlorodlbromomethane
Bromoform
Total Trlhalomethane*
Pesticides fuo/n
Toxaphene
Volatile Oraanle Compound* fuu/D
Carbon Tetrachtoride
Radtonuclekh (oCM)
Gross Alpha
Gross Beta
Strontium -80
Potvaromatfe Hvdrocarbons fuo/n
Chrysene
Fluorene
Mlcrcoraanlsms ( MPN/IOOm: «)
Total Collform
Fecal Collform
Raw Water
Average Maximum Minimum
0.36
0.044
32
< 0.004
0.56
< 0.002
8
0.054
< 0.002
2.9
10.7
0.164
0.004
0.003
2.3
0.5
0
2.8
.
«2.9
4235
515
1.16
0.064
43
0.009
1.38
0.002
10
0.08
0.002
4.6
17.3
0.267
0.012
0.004
5.4
1.8
0.3
7
<5
10680
1559
0.1
0.029
20
< 0.002
0.16
< 0.002
5
0.038
< 0.002
1.9
4.7
0.077
0.002
0.001
0
0
0
0
<2.7
280
127
Datecarlla
Average Maximum Minimum
0.89
0.051
39
< 0.004
« 0.012
8
< 0.003
2.9
10.3
0.163
0.003
0.002
56.2
13.7
2
0
71
<2.9
HO
3
0.8
1
0.4
0.149
0.073
49
0.007
0.013
11
0.006
4.2
16
0.258
0.014
0.004
115
23.1
3.2
0.1
141
<5
0.5
4
1
3.5
1.7
0.035
0.031
28
< 0.002
<0.01
5
< 0.002
2
4.9
0.084
< 0.002
< 0.001
13.9
5.1
0.5
0
20
<2.7
ND
2
0.4
0
0
McMillan
Average Maximum Minimum
0.08
0.046
39
0.038
< 0.012
8
< 0.002
< 0.002
2.9
11.2
0.163
0.004
0.002
61.4
14.9
2.4
79
<2.9
ND
1
3
1
<0.2
<0.2
1.1
0.3
0.129
0.063
48
0.141
0.01
11
0.002
0.002
42
20.4
0.26
0.018
0.004
138.4
24.8
4.2
167
<5
0.7
2
5
2.3
0.2
02
4.9
1.9
<0.02
0.024
28
< 0.002
<0.01
5
< 0.002
< 0.002
2
6
0.085
< 0.002
< 0.001
13.3
6.9
0.9
22
<2.7
NO
<1.0
2
<05
<0.2
<03
0
0
MCLk(mo/n
2
0.015°
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.003
0.005
ISpCUL
4 fTITBfn
0.0002
00
a - TMs tabto surnnarteM eonomtnoomoTc
b • MCL to the inanniufn oontMwnant InvL
o- AottonUwalferLMd
SOUTM: USAGE (1BB4).
i In drinMno water sennplss ftom mm
-------
Potomac; however, it has never been found in the treated water distributed for
drinking (Olson, 1995).
Lead (and other metals) are of concern, even at low levels (below enforceable
limits) because of its toxic effects, especially to children. Of particular concern are
lead pipes in older homes and apartment buildings that may cause elevated levels of
lead in drinking water. Lead has been found in tapwater samples at levels as high as
68.7 parts per billion (ppb), well above the EPA "action level" of 15 ppb (Olson,
1995). However, USAGE data for 1994 show the monthly minimums, averages, and
maximum levels of lead in water from the treatment plants were consistently low
(below the detection level of 0.02 mg/L) (USAGE, 1994a). DC's lead testing program,
"terminated" in 1994, will be resumed by DPW in January, 1997 (Cochran, 1996).
Chemical contaminants that may pose risks to human health include the
trihalomethanes (THMs). These cancer-causing chemicals are formed in the treatment
plants as a by-product of chlorine disinfection. With the increased use of chlorine to
disinfect the water (against microorganisms), formation of THMs continues to be of
concern (Olson, 1995). Some reports attribute as many as 10,700 cases of cancer
per year in the U.S. population to THMs in drinking water (Schwartz, 1996). While
the average concentrations of THMs are generally below EPA's standard of 100 ppb,
levels of these chemicals occasionally exceed this standard (Olson, 1995). Data from
the USAGE on treated water from 1994 (Table 4-1) indicate that total THMs were
present at concentrations ranging from 20 ppb to 167 ppb (USAGE, 1994a).
Furthermore, if the limit for THMs is reduced in the future to 80 ppb or 40 ppb (as has
been speculated), USAGE may consider changing its disinfection from a chlorine-based
to either a chloramine or ozone disinfection process. Such a change would be
expected to significantly reduce the formation of THMs in drinking water.
4-9
-------
4.1.4 Potential Risks to Human Health from Drinking Water
Human health impacts from consumption of drinking water can be considered
in both the long- and short-term perspectives. Longer-term risks are evident from the
presence of lead and cancer-causing THMs. The shorter-term risks from bacteria,
parasites, and other disease-causing organisms may be the most evident human health
impacts, especially for susceptible portions of the population. For example, the
effects of lead, especially on children, are of concern because of possible brain and
nervous system effects. Furthermore, microbial parasites (such as Cryptosporidium)
are dangerous and potentially fatal to persons with weakened immune systems (such
as those with AIDS). Although Cryptosporidium has never been identified in DC's
drinking water supply, the problems with turbidity in the drinking water continue to
raise concerns about its potential presence during periods of high turbidity. This
parasite sickened 400,000 and killed more than 100 people in Milwaukee, Wisconsin,
in 1993 (CDC, 1994). The Centers for Disease Control (CDC, 1994) reported that the
Milwaukee incident occurred when turbidity levels were much lower (peak of 1.7
NTU) than those observed in the DC drinking water during the boil water advisory
(peak of 9.0 NTU). However, public health surveys conducted by the CDC (1994) in
1993 following the DC boil water advisory found no major increase in diarrhea or
other related illnesses. Turbidity levels in samples analyzed for 1994, ranging from
0.07 to 0.60 NTU (USACE, 1996), were below concentrations when diseases
(Cryptosporidiosis) have occurred (0.9 to 2.0 NTU), according to the Centers for
Disease Control (CDC, 1994). An extra measure of monitoring to protect human
health from Cryptosporidium was recently ordered by the EPA (U.S. EPA, 1996d).
EPA ordered approximately 300 large metropolitan water systems, including DC's, to
test for Cryptosporidium and other disease-causing microbial contaminants.
4-10
-------
4.2 Fish Consumption
4.2.1 Overview of Fish Consumption Issues
\
Contaminated fish and shell fish are potential sources of human exposure to
toxic chemicals (as are other foods - see Section 4.4.2). Pollutants are carried in the
surface waters, but also may be stored and accumulated in the sediments of streams.
Consequently, finfish and shellfish exposed to these pollutants may be consumed by
humans. Human exposures to chemical contaminants through fish consumption
depend on the amount of fish consumed and the concentration of contaminants in the
fish tissue. In general, contamination is highest in catfish, eel, and carp caught from
DC waters.
To evaluate risks to human health as a result of eating contaminated fish or
shellfish, knowing fish consumption rates is important. Fish consumption rates may
vary for specific subpopulations. Because many surface water bodies and, in
particular, freshwater bodies are not commercially fished, consumption of fish from
water is basically limited to fish caught by recreational anglers. Although these
anglers may represent a small fraction of the total population living in the vicinity of
a contaminated body of water, they may be representative of the majority of risks
posed by consumption of fish from the contaminated surface waters. Some
recreational anglers may fish from contaminated sites for sport and not consume the
fish, but other (subsistence) anglers may be obtaining a large portion of their diet from
contaminated sites because they cannot afford to purchase other foods (U.S. EPA,
1992). Therefore, these anglers may be dependent on the fish from the local waters
for food. Unfortunately, the fish species upon which they depend may be the species
(eel, carp, catfish) that have the highest levels of contaminants (Velinsky and
4-11
-------
Cummins, 1994). Examples of such contaminants are PCBs and pesticides. Other
compounds of concern are heavy metals such as mercury (from natural sources).
The results of various surveys have indicted a significant portion of the District
residents consume the fish from DC waters (DCRA, 1994b). DC currently has fishing
advisories in effect because of levels of elevated levels of PCBs and chlordane
detected in fish. A public health advisory was issued in 1989 for the consumption of
channel catfish, eel, and carp caught in the city stretches of the Potomac and
Anacostia Rivers (DCRA, 1994b). The advisory limited the consumption of these
specific fish to 112 pound per week.
In addition, a public health advisory that replaced the 1989 version, was issued
in 1994 for all DC water as follows (DC, 1994):
• "DO NOT EAT: catfish, carp, or eel;
• MAY EAT: 1/2 pound per month of largemouth bass, OR 1/2 pound per
week of sunfish or other fish;
• CHOOSE TO EAT: younger and smaller fish of legal size; and
• THE PRACTICE OF CATCH-AND-RELEASE IS ENCOURAGED."
The advisory recommendations do not apply to fish sold in markets, grocery
stores, and restaurants because the sources for this fish is different. The advisory
also recommended that the fish, if eaten, be prepared and cooked in a manner to
reduce the fat content as follows:
• Always skin the fish and trim away the fat;
4-12
-------
• Always cook fish so that the fat drains away from the meat (i.e., baking,
grilling, broiling);
• AVOID pan frying or making soups and chowders; and
• For poaching and panfrying, discard the broth or oil.
4.2.2 Levels of Contaminants in Fish in DC Waters
Fish may be exposed to and uptake the chemicals from the water, sediment,
or food; therefore, these chemicals may accumulate in the fish tissue. Certain
chemicals accumulate in specific parts of the fish such as the fatty tissues, liver, and
bone. If the fish that we eat are contaminated, we are also exposed to the chemicals,
thereby, potentially impacting our health.
The District of Columbia Environmental Regulatory Administration, in concert
with the Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin (ICPRB), monitored
selected chemicals in fish tissue from the Anacostia and Potomac Rivers (Velinsky and
Cummins, 1994). The objective of the study was to determine the concentration and
distribution of 129 priority pollutants in fish from the DC waters (Velinsky and
Cummins, 1994). According to Velinsky and Cummins, this study represents a part
of DC's efforts to evaluate chemical contaminants as they relate to human health
concerns and aquatic resources. Samples were collected in 1989, 1991, and 1992.
Of the 129 chemicals monitored, 50 were detected in one or more of the species
collected (Velinsky and Cummins, 1994). Examples of chemicals detected are PCBs,
DDTs, arsenic, mercury, and selenium. Concentrations of many of the organics such
as PCBs were greatest in the American eel and channel catfish. Results of the study
indicated that detectable levels of many chemicals were present in the edible portions
of certain species (Velinsky and Cummins, 1994). A brief overview of levels of
4-13
-------
contaminants in fish tissue found in Velinsky and Cummins (1994) are presented
below.
Trace Metals
Arsenic, selenium, and mercury were the three metals detected in most samples
analyzed for all sampling years. In 1991, the highest concentration of mercury and
selenium were found in the largemouth bass composite sample from the upper
Potomac River. A single composite sample of largemouth bass from the lower
Anacostia River had the highest concentration of total arsenic. Chromium, lead,
beryllium, and nickel were detected in at least one sample.
In 1992, levels were also detected for chromium in two composite samples,
and other metals were detected once or were below the detection limit. The highest
concentration of selenium was found in common carp from the upper Anacostia River.
The highest mercury concentration was found in a sample of largemouth bass from
the lower Potomac River.
Volatile and Semivolatile Orqanics
Similar volatile and semivolatile organics were detected in the majority of
samples collected in 1989, 1991, and 1992. Examples are benzene, 1,1,1-
trichloroethane, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). In most samples, the
concentrations were low. The authors noted that there is a great amount of handling
of samples in the laboratory and some of the chemicals detected are routinely used
in the laboratory. Therefore, there is a possibility of some laboratory contamination.
4-14
-------
Oroanochlorine Pesticides
Pesticides were detected in samples for years 1989, 1991, and 1992.
Examples of pesticides detected are chlordane, DDT, and dieldrin. In 1991, the
highest concentrations of total chlordane and DDT were found in channel catfish and
American eel in the lower Anacostia River. In 1992, the highest concentration of total
chlordane was found in the American eel from the upper Anacostia River. Other
species with elevated levels were the largemouth bass and the common carp.
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs). Dioxins. and Furans
Total PCBs, dioxins, and furans and selected congeners were analyzed for the
study (Velinsky and Cummins, 1994). Various congeners of dioxins and furans were
detected, but at low levels (Velinsky and Cummins, 1994). PCBs were detected in
most samples; in 1989, PCBs (total) were found in all samples of brown bullhead
collected in the lower Potomac and the Anacostia Rivers. In 1991 and 1992, the
highest concentrations of most chemicals were found in the American eel, channel
catfish, and brown bullhead. The highest concentrations of PCBs were found in
American eel samples from the lower Anacostia and the Potomac Rivers. In 1992,
the highest concentrations of PCBs were found in samples of the American eel and
largemouth bass from the Anacostia and upper Potomac Rivers.
4.2.3 Fish Consumption Patterns in the District of Columbia
Fishing licenses were sold to 12,916 anglers in DC in 1993; of these, 7,613
were DC residents (DCRA, 1994b). In 1994, DCRA conducted the "1994
Recreational Fishing Surveys" for both the shoreline and boat anglers. EPA summer
interns from Virginia State University (VSU) also conducted a small creel survey in
4-15
-------
1994 along the Anacostia riverbanks. All data presented in this section were obtained
from the OCR A (1994c) survey and the VSU (1994) survey.
4.2.3.1 DCRA Survey. The DCRA (1994c) survey was designed to obtain data for
use of the DC waters and for demographic information including gender, race, age,
and residency. Additionally, the survey captured information on catch and harvest.
The survey period was March through November, 1994.
Shoreline Angler Survey
According to survey results, shoreline anglers target their catch to a variety of
species such as catfish, eel, carp, bass, and perch, and harvest over 86 percent of
their catch. Six sites along the Potomac and Anacostia Rivers were surveyed:
• Fletcher's Boat House,
* Rock Creek/Rooseveit island,
• Washington Ship Channel/Tidal Basin,
• Mains Point,
• Anacostia Park, and
• PEPCO/Roaches Run/Lady Bird Johnson Park.
Surveys were conducted 4 days per month (2 weekday and 2 weekend), from 7 a.m.-
11 a.m.; 11 a.m.-3 p.m.; and 3 p.m.-7 p.m. A total of 110 anglers were interviewed
( 105 males; 5 females). Racial composition was the following:
• Black 85 percent
• White 7 percent
• Hispanic 4 percent
4-16
-------
• Asian 2 percent
• Indian (East) 1 percent
• Armenian 1 percent
The anglers surveyed resided in DC (65 percent), Maryland (25 percent), and
Virginia (10 percent). DC residents were stratified as follows: 39 percent from
Northwest, 34 percent from Southeast, 25 percent from Northeast, and 1 percent
from Southwest.
Most (78 percent) of the anglers eat the fish they catch; 8 percent give them
away; 4 percent release them; and 10 percent release them and/or give them away.
Carp, eel, and catfish caught in DC waters were eaten by 65 percent of the anglers.
The favorite fishing spots were Mains Point, Anacostia Park, and Fletcher's Boathouse,
respectively, and the typical shoreline angler was a Black male.
Boat Angler Survey
Boat anglers usually target bass as their fish of choice, and approximately 100
percent of the anglers release their catch. The boat angler survey was conducted
through (postage paid) mailer questionnaires. The questionnaires were distributed to
anglers along the Potomac and Anacostia Rivers access points, the C & 0 Canal boat
launch, and to anglers in the open waters. The sample period was June to November.
Questionnaires distributed in September and those distributed at the C & 0 canal were
not returned; therefore, the estimates for the boat angler survey may not be entirely
representative. The racial composition of the boat anglers was predominantly
Caucasian, male, and most resided in Virginia (43 percent).
4-17
-------
4.2.3.2 Virginia State University (VSU) Survey. In the study conducted by VSU
(1994), of the anglers interviewed, 52 percent ate 1-3 fish weekly; 16 percent ate 4-6
fish weekly; 6 percent ate 7-9 fish weekly; and 6 percent ate 10 or more fish weekly.
However, quantitative exposure cannot be determined because the weight of these
fish was not reported. It should be noted that 78 percent of the survey subjects were
unaware of the fish advisory and 58 percent fished for food. The specie most
consumed was catfish (60 percent), followed by bass (14.0 percent), and carp (8.0
percent)/year. The annual household income for most (70 percent) of the anglers was
$15,000 and under.
The VSU survey (1994) was conducted along the banks of the Anacostia River
beginning at Buzzard Point and ending at the railroad bridge crossing at Anacostia
Park. Racial composition of the anglers was African American (68 percent); Hispanic
(8 percent); Native American (2.0 percent); Asian American (10 percent); and other
(12 percent). The total number of anglers surveyed was not reported.
4.2.4 Potential Risks from Fish Consumption
Results of both surveys indicate that shoreline anglers target (prefer) carp, eel,
and catfish - the species to which the fishing advisories apply. Additionally, most (78
percent) eat their catch (DCRA, 1994c), and 78 percent (VSU, 1994) were not aware
of a fish advisory. Levels of many chemicals (approximately 50) were detected in
samples of fish from DC waters (Velinsky and Cummins, 1994). Velinsky and
Cummins specifically investigated the concentration of chemicals in fish from the
Potomac and Anacostia Rivers. Metals, pesticides, and PCBs were detected in the
samples. Velinsky and Cummins (1994) have reported a high fat content for fish
tissues from both rivers for the species preferred by the anglers (carp, eel, catfish).
PCBs and pesticides tend to accumulate in fat of organisms. The anglers are exposed
4-18
-------
to pesticides, PCBs, and other organic and inorganic chemicals as a result of eating
contaminated fish that they prefer and are, thus, potentially at risk.
Estimating quantitative risk is difficult, because data on the amount of fish
consumed by the angler fishing in the DC waters were not available. In addition, fish
consumption patterns differ by race, age, gender, and whether the angler is a
recreational sport angler or a subsistence angler. The consumption rate for subsistence
anglers tends to be larger than for the recreational angler (EPA, 1995). EPA in its
"Draft Exposure Factors Handbook" recommends a mean intake rate of 7 g/day and
an upper percentile value of 25 g/day for recreational freshwater anglers for purposes
of estimating exposure (U.S. EPA, 1996a). The recommended mean value for the
subsistence population is 59 g/day, and the upper percentile value is 170 g/day (U.S.
EPA, 1996a). The value for the subsistence population is based on the Native
American population. It should be noted that the Exposure Factors Handbook is in
draft format and these values could change prior to final publication. However, these
values may be used with caveats to conservatively estimate exposure/risk for the
shoreline angler population, because site-specific intake data are not available.
Velinsky and Cummins (1994) performed a risk assessment for PCBs,
chlordane, and dieldrin. These chemicals were chosen because of the historical
concern for their presence in fish tissue in the DC area. A summary of levels for these
chemicals from 1989, 1991, and 1992 is presented in Table 4-2. Human health
effects estimates were based on U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) "action
levels," toxic equivalents for PCBs and dioxins, and a risk model. Although FDA
"action levels" are useful benchmarks for identifying concentrations of contaminants
that may be at levels of concern, they are actually applicable only for seafood sold
through interstate commerce, and are used to remove seafood from the marketplace
(Velinsky and Cummins, 1994). For noncommercial fish, they provide guidance for
4-19
-------
Table 4-2. Levels of PCBs, Dieldrin, and Chlordane Found in Tissues of Fish from DC Waters
1989
Contaminant
Dieldrin (ng/g)
KChlordane (ng/g)
oChlordane (ng/g)
PCBs (pg/g)
N
3'
3
3
3
Min.
<0.5
<7
20
180
Max.
6.9
78
340
1300
Med.
<0.5
47
71
330
N
19
19
19
19
Sampling Years
1991
Min.
<0.5
<1.0
2.0
80
Max.
42
84
150
2600
Med.
4.0
14
37
620
N
14
14
14
14
1992
Min.
<0.5
<1
2.0
40
Max.
37
90
200
1200
Med.
4.2
10
26
470
• One species.
6 All sample concentrations based on wet weight
1*
10 Source: Velinsky and Cummins (1994).
o
-------
regulatory actions but are not regulatory standards (Velinsky and Cummins, 1994).
Therefore, these action levels cannot be used to quantify risk, but are useful for
"screening" concentrations found in the samples. The risk assessment was provided
in a report of Velinsky and Cummins as a screening tool to assess the potential health
effects from levels of contamination in fish from the DC waters. Caveats for the
assessment noted by the authors are best described in Velinsky and Cummins (1994).
Carcinogenic risks were estimated for PCBs, chlordane, and dieldrin. The
estimates are based on cancer potency factors, reference doses, and fish ingestion
rates reported by EPA and a risk model (Velinsky and Cummins, 1994). Two different
fish ingestion rates were used: 6.5 grams of fish/day (for the general populace) and
140 grams fish/day (for the subsistence fishermen and the high end of the sport
fishermen's potential consumption). Potential risk based on these variables are
presented in Table 4-3. These data indicate that PCBs are at levels of concern for
human consumption of fish in DC waters (Velinsky and Cummins, 1994). To better
estimate the risks involved, site-specific consumption data are needed.
The 1994 Public Health Advisory for DC targeted specific groups of the
population at highest risk for adverse effects from eating contaminated fish on a
regular basis. They are:
• Pregnant women;
• Women who are breastfeeding;
• Women who expect to bear children; and
• Children under 15 years old.
In summary, the above-mentioned population targeted by the advisory and the
shoreline recreational and subsistence anglers are the populations believed to be at
4-21
-------
Table 4-3. Estimates of Potential Upper-bound Carcinogenic Risk From
Wild Fish Tissue Samples Collected in the District of Columbia
Ingestion Rate - 6.5 g fish/day
Maximum
Minimum
Median
Mean
Standard Deviation
Ingestion Rate - 1 40 g fish/day
Maximum
Minimum
Median
Mean
Standard Deviation
Chlordane*
5.0 xlO6
2.4 x10-7
5.8x10*
9.0x10*
1.1 xlO-6
1.1 X10-*
5.2 x 10-"
1.2x10-*
1.9X10"4
2.3 x 1O*
Dieldrin
6.2x10*
7.4 x10-7
5.9 x10*
1.2x10*
1.5X10-6
1.3x10-»
1.6 x10*
1.3 X104
2.6 x 10-1
3.2 x 1O4
Total PCBs"
1.9x10-*
2.9 x 10*
3.7x10*
4.8 xlO4
4.7 X1O4
3.9 x10*
6.2x10-*
8.0 x 1O*
I.Ox 10-2
9.9 x ia3
• 19 of 36 composite samples exceeded potential cancer risk of 104 at ingestion rate of 140 g/day.
b 27 of 36 composite samples exceeded potential cancer risk of 104 at ingestion rate of 6.5 g/day and all for
140 g/day.
Source: Velinsky and Cummins (1994).
4-22
-------
highest risk. Additionally, eel, carp, and catfish seem to pose the highest risk because
(1) angler preference for eating, (2) their fat content, and (3) their uptake of PCBs,
pesticides, and metals.
4.3 Ambient Air Quality
4.3.1 Overview of Air Quality Issues
While descriptions of sources of air pollution (both point and nonpoint) were
provided in Section 3, ambient air quality is an indicator to what levels of air
pollutants residents might actually be exposed. The air quality in the District is
generally good, with some improvement shown during the last few decades. The lack
of heavy industry in the DC area partially accounts for the relatively clean air. Levels
of pollutants are consistently below the National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS), which were established to be protective of human health and the
environment. The air pollutants monitored include carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide,
sulfur dioxide, ozone, particulate matter, and lead. While levels of these pollutants
in ambient air are typically low in DC (and surrounding areas), certain weather
conditions contribute to short episodes where ozone (summertime) and carbon
monoxide (fail/winter) may be present at unhealthy levels in the DC area (DC ARMD,
1996). Furthermore, while the ambient (outdoor) air quality in DC is good, limited
information about indoor air quality raises concerns about potential impacts to human
health.
The following subsections describe the air quality monitoring efforts in DC (and
the surrounding metropolitan area), levels of pollutants found in ambient air, the
potential for indoor air quality to contribute to human risks, and the potential for poor
4-23
-------
air quality to affect susceptible populations (older persons, people with asthma, the
infirm, etc.)
4.3.2 Ambient Air Quality Monitoring in the DC Area
Air quality is monitored in DC by DCRA's - Air Resource Management Division
(DC ARMD), which currently operates a network of seven stations throughout the
city. Table 4-4 presents information on these monitoring stations including their
locations, pollutants monitored, and the type of local environment those locations are
expected to represent. Locations for these monitoring stations were selected either
because they represent areas of high population density or because they are expected
to detect high concentrations of pollutants (near to point sources, high traffic areas,
etc.)'. The Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (MWCOG) coordinates
air quality reporting in the DC metropolitan area from a monitoring network of 17
stations throughout the metropolitan area: DC (4 stations), Maryland (5 stations), and
Virginia (8 stations). The "air quality index" (AQI) for the DC metro area that is
reported in the newspapers, on television, and on the telephone weather line, is
computed by MWCOG based on ozone measurements from these 17 stations
(MWCOG, 1996).
4.3.3 Ambient Levels of Air Pollutants
Levels of air pollutants in the District are generally well below the national
standards and have improved over the last few decades (MWLOG, 1996; DC ARMD,
1996). Air quality monitoring data are available for the last 25 years, partially as a
result of the 1977 Amendments to the Clean Air Act and because of improvements/
standardization of monitoring techniques. Summaries of these data for the criteria
pollutants of concern are presented in this subsection. Because of periodic
. 4-24
-------
Table 4-4. Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Stations in the District of Columbia
Site Name
Address
Pollutants Monitored
Monitoring Objective
N)
CJI
Takoma School
West End Library
C & P Telephone
Property Division
River Terrace School
McMillian Reservoir
Chevy Chase Library
Piney Branch Road & Dahlia
Street, NW
24th. & L Street, NW
2055 L Street, NW
2235 Shannon Place, SE
34th. and Dix St., NE
Bryant St., NE
Connecticut Ave. &
Northampton St., NW
N02, Ozone
S02, CO, N02, Ozone,
Particulates (PM-10)
CO
Pb
CO, N02, S02, Ozone,
Particulates (PM-10)
Ozone and VOC's
Particulates (PM-10), Pb
High Concentration
Population
High Concentration
High Concentration
High Concentration
Photochemical
Assessment
Population
Source: DC ARMD (1996).
-------
exceedances of national standards, the District is classified as a nonattainment area
for ozone and carbon monoxide (DC ARMD, 1996). Summarized in Table 4-5 are the
air pollutants of concern (their potential sources and human health effects), levels of
the five criteria air pollutants, and trends information over the last 25 years for
selected pollutants. Figures 4-3 and 4-4 display trends in levels of ozone and lead,
respectively, from the early 1980s to the early 1990s. In general, levels of these
pollutants have decreased during the last few decades, especially lead whose levels
have dropped dramatically since the phase-out of leaded gasoline. Ozone levels also
show improvement with fewer days during which levels exceed the national standard
(0.120ppm).
4.3.4 Indoor Air Pollutants
Levels of pollutants can be higher in indoor environments (homes, offices, etc.)
than in ambient air. Because most people spend 90 percent of their time indoors
(U.S. EPA, 1988), it is evident that indoor air pollution has the potential to be a major
impact on human health. Harmful indoor air pollutants include tobacco smoke, carbon
monoxide, bacteria, radon, formaldehyde, and many others. While much emphasis
has been placed on reducing radon, tobacco smoke, and other indoor air pollutants
from homes and workplaces, site-specific problems still exist.
Limited data exist on levels of air pollutants in indoor environments in the DC
area. However, one study discusses levels of carbon monoxide (CO) in indoor air with
respect to residential location in the Washington, DC Standard Metropolitan Statistical
Area (SMSA) (Schwab, 1990). In-home CO levels were measured, and results
indicated that individuals living in the SMSA center (DC) are exposed to higher levels
of CO than are those living in the suburbs. Schwab (1990) reported that CO levels
appear to be greater in indoor air in the eastern section of the District than in the
4-26
-------
Table 4-5. Levels of Pollutants in Ambient Air in Washington, DC
Pollutant
Description (Source/Effects)
Current levels'
Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Nitrogen Dioxide (N02)
M
Sulfur Dioxide (S02)
Ozone
An invisible, odorless product of
incomplete combustion of fuel
(such as automobiles). Inhalation
of CO can impair vision, alertness,
and other mental/physical
capabilities.
Product of combustion
(automobiles, power plants).
Nitrogen oxides can contribute to
respiratory illness and lung damage
in humans.
Product of combustion, primarily by
power generating facilities.
Contributes to respiratory tract
problems, including lung damage.
The area's primary air pollution
problem. Ozone is formed in the
atmosphere from volatile organic
compounds (gasoline, paints) in the
presence of heat and sunlight.
Ozone causes respiratory tract
problems, eye irritation, and
reduced lung function.
Below standards for most of year
(maximum 8-hr, average
concentrations ranging from
approximately 5.6-8.3 during
1992-93). Higher levels in fall and
winter occasionally exceed
standards of 9 ppm (8-hr, average)
and 35 ppm (1-hr, average).
Levels are approximately 0.027
ppm, 53% of the annual average
standard of 0.053 ppm.
Levels are approximately 0.11
ppm, 28% of the annual standard
of 0.03 ppm.
Washington, DC, is a
nonattainment area for ozone.
Ozone levels of ozone are highly
variable and are highest in the
summer. Exceedances of the
standards frequently occur in the
afternoons during hot, sunny days.
In 1992 and 1993, no exceedances
of the standard of 0.120 ppm
occured in DC.
Decreased by 35% from 1980-
1993 (as determined by average
second highest maximum).
Number of exceedances of 8-hour
student decreased from 19 in 1980
toO in 1991.
Decreased by 20% between 1983
and 1991.
Decreased by 32% between 1980-
1993.
Trends in ozone are highly variable
because of the influence of
weather conditions. However, in
1980, the standard was exceeded
13 times, while in 1991, only 1
exceedance was recorded.
-------
Table 4-5. Levels of Pollutants in Ambient Air in Washington, DC (continued)
Pollutant
Description! (Source/Effects)
Ctttttttt Levels*
Trends
Paniculate Matter (TSP or PM-10)
Lead (Pb)
to
00
Particulates in air such as dust,
smoke, and aerosols are generated
from a variety of industrial facilities
and other sources. Health effects
include long-term respiratory
diseases and eye irritation.
Lead is a metal that presents
serious health threats. Lead can
cause irreversible brain, kidney, and
nervous system damage.
Historically, much of the lead found
in ambient air comes from
automobiles using leaded gasoline
and lead smelters/battery plants.
With the phase-out of leaded
gasoline in the '70s and '80s, lead
levels have dropped dramatically.
Levels of particulates are generally
low, with current levels (annual
average concentration of 24-25
//g/m3) 49% of the annual standard
(50 //g/m3) and approximately 20%
of the 24-hour standard..
Lead levels in DC air average 0.04
//g/m3, well below the national
standard of 1.5 //g/m9.
Levels of particulates fluctuated
between 1980-1987, with a slight
net decrease of 17%. Sampling
methods changed in 1988, with no
trends evident since that time.
Levels of lead in ambient air have
dropped dramatically in the last 20
years. Current levels are
approximately 90% lower today
than in the early '80s.
• Current levels are generally represented by monitoring data from 1992 and 1993.
Source: DC ARMD (1996).
-------
1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 19881989 1990 1991 1992 1993
Year
Figure 4-3. Days Exceeding Ozone Standard in DC
Source: DC ARMD (1996).
4-29
-------
0.5
2 0.4
•e
CO
5
*5
I °-3
5
o
u
J 0.2
O>
1 0.1
0.0
Monitoring Stations
Property Divsion, S.E.
Chevy Chase, N.W.
'82 '83 '84 '85 '86 '87 '89 '90 '91 '92 '93
Year
Figure 4-4. Decrease in Lead Levels in DC Ambient Air (1982—1993)
Source: DC ARMD (1996).
4-30
-------
northwestern section. Shown below are average concentrations of CO in indoor air
for the approximately 700 individuals who were tested in the DC SMSA:
• Northeast, 2.6 ppm CO;
• Southeast; 1.9 ppm CO; and
• Northwest, 1.3 ppm CO.
Possible factors affecting indoor CO levels were briefly described by Schwab.
These factors include: traffic flow, gas stoves, and smokers in the residence. It was
determined that the general distributions of traffic congestion, smokers, and gas stove
use do not adequately explain the spatial variations that were observed.
4.3.5 Potential Health Impacts from Air Pollution
Overall, the air quality in the DC metropolitan area is good. The Natural
Resources Defense Council recently evaluated air quality data between 1982 and
1989, and determined that the District ranked 198 out of 237 cities with respect to
risk of deaths attributable to air quality (Lee, 1996). However, many health effects
have been associated with exposure to air pollution. Persons most at risk for health
effects are those with pulmonary (lung) diseases, such as asthma or emphysema.
However, thousands of otherwise healthy people may experience effects when
concentrations of pollutants (such as ozone) are high, or if they are extremely
sensitive to certain contaminants. MWCOG (1996) has identified the following groups
in the DC metropolitan area as especially high risk:
Any of the estimated 210,000 residents of the area who have serious,
permanent, or chronic lung disease, such as bronchitis or emphysema.
4-31
-------
• Children under the age of 13. It is estimated that 736,400 children live
in the DC metropolitan region.
• Anyone with asthma. It is estimated that 225,700 asthmatics reside in
the DC metropolitan area, including 53,200 children and 108,500 adults.
• Any of the 336,000 residents over the age of 65.
Health effects vary for each contaminant of concern (See Table 4-5), but it is
rare to find a single air pollutant by itself; most pollutants are mixtures. Ozone is the
primary air pollutant of concern in the area, causing most of the air quality alerts in
the District. During an air quality alert, people at risk should remain indoors as much
as possible, preferably in an air conditioned environment. Anyone, regardless of their
health status, should avoid heavy exertion from running, bicycling, lawn mowing, and
similar activities. Table 4-5 summarizes health effects associated with various air
pollutants.
4.4 Human Exposure: Levels of Contaminants in "Other" Environmental Media
Examination of the concentration of contamination in various environmental
media can reveal the potential for human exposure and resulting health effects.
Levels of contamination in media to which we might come in contact (soil, dust, etc.)
can be analyzed to determine if adverse affects would be expected. In addition,
studies of the levels of chemical contaminants in the human body (blood, urine, fat
tissue) can reveal the degree to which chemical exposures have already occurred. If
levels of contaminants are too high (lead for example), health impacts may have
already been observed. As a result of the severe toxic properties (especially on
children where lead affects the nervous system and the ability to learn), blood-lead
monitoring programs have been established nationwide.
4-32
-------
4.4.1 Lead in Human Blood in DC
Lead has been found in the environment in large quantities over a long period
of time. Sources of lead exposure are shown in Figure 4-5. In the 1970s Federal
legislative efforts were undertaken to reduce hazards resulting from lead. Limiting the
use of lead in paint and gasoline was included in these actions. From 1976 to 1991,
the three major sources of lead exposure for the general population were lead in paint,
gasoline, and soldered cans (Pirkle et al., 1994). Lead has also been found in other
media such as soil and dust. Lead in blood is primarily contributed from gasoline
(various ways) and soldered cans (canned foods and soft drinks)(Pirkle et al., 1994).
Lead-based paint remains a problem, especially in older, deteriorating houses.
National Housing Survey data indicate that in 1989, 20.8-million occupied homes
were built before 1940 when lead-based paint was commonly used (Pirkle et al.,
1994). This is a decrease from a previous survey; however, there is a continuing
deterioration of lead-based paint in existing homes. Therefore, these residents in older
homes would be exposed to the lead-based paint used in previous years and become
a high risk population. Other remaining sources of exposure are lead in dust and soil
where the levels have already accumulated, usually from past uses of lead in paint and
gasoline (Pirkle et al., 1994). Additionally, drinking water is a source of lead
exposure. Lead has been used in service lines; solder for the pipes, fixtures, and
finings; and in the lining in drinking water coolers. Information indicates that DC still
has some lead in service lines.
The intentional ingestion of soil called "pica" is another source of lead exposure;
however, it is practiced by a small number of people (mostly children). Pica is the
term used to define deliberate human ingestion of non-food items, such as soil, paint
chips, or plaster. A number of studies have been conducted to measure the amount
of soil ingested by children. Calabrese, et al., (1989) estimated that soil ingestion for
4-33
-------
Industrial
Sources
\ Lead-
.based
Paint
Mlscellanous
Sources
(e.g.. toys, jewelry,
folk remedies)
Ingestion
Humans
Pregnant
Woman
(Developing
Fetus)
Figure 4-5. Example of How One May Be Exposed to Lead
-------
children ranged from 29 to 40 mg/day; pica children may consume 10 or more grams
of soil per day.
Results from a national survey have shown a decrease in blood lead in the
United States general population and in certain subgroups in the last 10 years (Pirkle
et al., 1994). Much of this decrease can be attributed to the phase out of lead in
gasoline, which has substantially lowered levels of lead found in ambient air
(EPA, 1988). However, certain sociodemographics continue to be associated with
higher blood lead levels. They include children, males, non-Hispanic Black
race/ethnicity, and low income level (Pirkle et. al ,1994). The Centers for Disease
Control (CDC) lowered the acceptable blood lead concentrations in young children
from 2S25 to ^10//g/dL (Rafia et al., 1993). Rafia et al. examined lead poisoning in
children aged 9 months to 3 years in three geographic areas. The areas were inner city
(Washington, DC); suburban (Silver Spring, Maryland); and rural (Charlottesville,
Virginia; Waldorf and Clinton, Maryland). Blood specimens were obtained form 4,196
children as part of routine physical examinations in DC. The clinical population
consisted of 95 percent African-American, 7 percent Hispanic, and 3 percent Oriental
or White. In the suburban sample of 212 children; 206 were White, 4 were African-
American, and 2 were Orientals. The rural sample consisted of 120 children; racial
make-up was not provided in Rafia et al. (1993).
Mean blood levels by geographic location are shown in Table 4-6. The blood
lead levels for the inner-city children are higher than levels for the suburban and rural
children. The levels presented in Table 4-6 for the inner-city children are based on
1,000 children. However, 780 (18.6 percent) of the 4,196 inner-city children studied
had levels >10 //g/dL which is the CDC acceptable level (Rafia et al., 1993). In
contrast, only five (2.4 percent) of the suburban and seven (5.8 percent) of the rural
children had levels ^10//g/dL Also, 71 (1.6 percent) of the inner-city children had
4-35
-------
Table 4-6. Mean Lead Concentrations in Inner-City, Suburban, and Rural Children
Community Number of Specimens Blood Lead Concentration*
Inner-city 1,000 10.4 ± 8.0
Suburban 212 4.2 ± 1.79
Rural - Charlottsville, VA 120 4.3 ± 2.58
" Values presented as mean ± SD in //g/dL.
Source: Rafia et al. (1993).
4-36
-------
blood lead levels 5:25 i/g/dL. In contrast, none of the children from the suburban and
rural groups had blood lead levels > 15 //g/dL. Mean blood levels groupings for the
inner-city children are shown in Table 4-7, these indicate that 82 percent of the
subjects from the inner-city were within the CDC acceptable range.
The authors acknowledge that the average blood lead levels in American
children as a whole have declined. However, Rafia et al. (1993) report that "these
data reflect an overall incidence in the general population without reference to factors
such as geographical areas, racial make-up, and socioeconomic status." This study
results indicate that in inner-city children, the mean blood lead levels are 60 percent
higher than for children of similar ages, but from different geographic locations
(Rafia, et al., 1993). In addition, 85 percent of the children in the inner-city group had
Medicaid or no medical insurance, and all patients from the suburban group had
medical insurance (Rafia, et al., 1993). Therefore, Rafia et al. concluded that
socioeconomic status may be another risk factor for the inner-city children.
The District of Columbia Lead Poisoning Prevention Program (DCLPPP) performs
blood lead level screening yearly. The DC blood lead screening data for years 1993-
1995 have been provided by Ms. Ella Witherspoon of DCLPPP. These data are
presented in Table 4-8. The target children are ages 6 months through 6 years.
Table 4-8 shows that the majority of the children are within the CDC acceptable blood
level range for children for all years presented. Unfortunately, the data are not
computerized and could not be presented by geographical location within the city, nor
by age, race, or sex. These types of data will be available in the future for further
analyses (Personal communication with Ms. Witherspoon, DCLPPP, on April 30,
1996).
4-37
-------
Table 4-7. Inner-City Subjects Grouped by Blood Lead Concentration
Blood Lead Groups
U/g/dL)
<10
10-14
15-19
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
^40
Number of
Specimens
3,437
504
144
61
25
13
12
21
Blood Lead Concentration"
U/g/dL)
4.7 ± 1.90
11.5 ± 1.4
16.6 ± 1.4
21.7 ± 1.4
27.0 ± 1.4
31.6 ± 1.3
36.9 ± 1.3
58.8 ± 16.2
8 Results are expressed as mean ± SD.
Source: Rafia et al. (1993).
4-38
-------
Table 4-8. Screening Results: Number of Subjects per Blood Lead Level Grouping
Blood Lead Levels
0 - 9 ug/dL
10- 14ug/dL
15-19ug/dL
20 - 44 ug/dL
45 - 69 ug/dL
Greater than 70 ug/dL
TOTAL SCREENED
1993
(% of Total)
25,164
(90.93)
1,726
(6.37)
463
(21.67)
301
(1.08)
20
(0.072)
0
(0)
27,674
1994
(% of Total)
30,284
(92.4)
1.960
(5.97)
315
(.96)
212
(0.6)
17
(0.05)
1
(0.003)
32,789
1995
(% of Total)
27,793
(92.12
1,789
(5.9)
326
(1.0)
241
(0.8)
18
(0.05)
5
(0.01)
30,172
Source: District of Columbia Lead Poisoning Prevention Program (DCLPPP, 1996).
4-39
-------
4.4.2 Contaminants in Soil and Garden-grown Vegetables
Soil may be contaminated with various pollutants from various sources such as
pesticide application, waste dumping, and pollutants fallout from the air. Examples
of how persons can be exposed to pollutants in the soil through are:
• Foods grown in the soil (root crops such as carrots, beets, potatoes);
• Meats and dairy products (animals eat contaminated soil and feed crops
grown in the soil);
• Soil contact to the body (participating in outdoor recreation such as
playing in parks, gardening, or occupational exposure such as
. construction (roads or building)); and _
• Unintentional ingestion of soil and intentional ingestion of soil (Pica).
Freer et al., (1980) measured heavy metals in garden soil and in leafy
vegetables grown in home and community gardens DC. The major sources of metals
in the gardens are believed to be lead paint, sewage sludge, and automobile exhaust
(Freer et al., 1980). The levels of metals in soil and leafy vegetables are shown in
Table 4-9. Of the metals measured in soil, lead was the most frequently elevated.
Twenty-six gardens had greater than 100 ppm lead. Results from soils in 70 gardens
gave a mean value of 200 ppm of lead. This level was on the lower end of the range
of values when compared with soil levels in other major cities (Freer et al., 1980).
Levels for lead ranged from 6-1410 ppm. Of the 70 gardens sampled, 18 gardens
were within 0-2 miles of center city, 21 were within 2-4 miles, and 31 gardens within
4-6 miles. A decrease in soil lead was observed with distance from center city (Freer,
et al., 1980).
4-40
-------
Table 4-9. Metals in Soil and Leafy Vegetables • DC Garden Survey
Pb
Cd
Zn
Cu
PH
Range
6-1410
.05 - 3.7
20- 1200
3-140
3.7 - 8.0
Soil
Mean
200
.62
160
37
6.2
Median
61
.40
98
29
6.0
Range
1 - 12
.13-9.1
35 - 470
3.6-19
Leafy Vegetables
Mean
4.5
1.3
140
8.6
Median
3.8
.72
99
8.2
Source: Freer et al. (1980).
-------
A mean of 4.5 ppm lead was found in leafy vegetables from 38 gardens in DC;
however, this value is lower than those for other major cities. Freer et al. attributed
this factor to improved analytical techniques, and time of year samples were collected.
The results of the other city were based on sample collection in the fall when the
metal levels are higher; District samples were collected in the summer using plants
that generally have less uptake (collards). Freer et al. also found elevated cadmium
levels in garden soil with low soil pH or elevated levels of cadmium in the soil. The
overall conclusions of Freer et al. were: lead in soil decreased with distance from
center city; lead in leafy vegetables increased with soil lead; and cadmium in leafy
vegetables increased with decreasing soil pH.
4-42
-------
5.0 ECOLOGICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
This section describes the ecological resources of the District of Columbia,
including its plants, animals, and their habitats. The impact of human activities on the
District's ecosystem is presented, along with the extent and current status of aquatic,
wetland, and terrestrial resources.
5.1 Historical Change in the District of Columbia Ecosystem
Prior to European settlement, the area that later became the District of
Columbia was an important village trading center of the semi-agricultural Nacotchtank
Indians (Hutchinson, 1977). These Native Americans came in great numbers each
year to the region they called their "fishing ground" (Smith, 1972). Following 1630,
this largely forested region was progressively cleared for agriculture by European
colonists. By the Civil War, most of the Anacostia River basin was under cultivation
with tobacco the dominant crop (WilHams, 1942). In 1790, the city of Bladensburg
was a deepwater port, receiving ocean-going vessels. By 1853, the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers (USACE) had closed the port due to sediment clogging the river channel
(Hutchinson, 1977). During the late 1800s, the Anacostia became increasingly
sediment-laden; in 1902, the USACE received funding to dredge portions of the tidal
Anacostia to provide a shipping channel and "reclaim" mudflats.
Urban development has gradually transformed the land use of the District of
Columbia over the last 100 years, accelerating soil erosion and sediment deposition
(Kumble, 1990). Since the turn of the century, the human population in the
surrounding region has increased 10-fold and approximately 75 percent of the forest
cover has been eliminated. More than 90 percent of nontidal and tidal wetlands that
once covered half of the District's area have been lost. With this urbanization, the
5-1
-------
Anacostia River and its tributary streams have been altered to the point that floods
are ten times more frequent, summer flows are much lower, and stream water
temperatures are 5°C to 10°C higher (Kumble, 1990). Hydrological effects,
combined with sedimentation and pollutant loading, have degraded aquatic habitats
throughout the ecosystem. Stream habitats for migrating fish have been eliminated
by the construction of dams, culverts, and other barriers to fish passage.
Nonetheless, the District of Columbia continues to support substantial aquatic,
wetland, and terrestrial resources that contribute to the ecological integrity of the
region and the quality of life for the human population. These resources benefit from
the Federal government maintaining 80 percent of the property bordering the Potomac
River, Anacostia River, and Rock Creek drainage basins.
5.2 Condition of Ecological Resources
While the current ecological resources of the District of Columbia have greatly
changed from early historical conditions, they have improved from the highly degraded
conditions in the late 1950s and early 1960s (Bradley, 1959; Leach, 1982).
Described below are the extent, status, and trends in aquatic, wetland, and terrestrial
resources in the District of Columbia.
5.2.1 Aquatic Resources
The substantial aquatic resources (Figure 5-1) of the District of Columbia
comprise several components: (1) 12.5 miles of the Potomac River; (2) the tidal
portion of the Anacostia River; (3) 9.3 miles of Rock Creek; and (4) 29 small streams
with watersheds within the District of Columbia; and (5) 3 lakes (DCRA, 1994b).
5-2
-------
Figure 5-1. Aquatic resources in the District of Columbia
5-3
-------
The Potomac and Anacostia are both jtidally-influenced large rivers. The
Anacostia River is slow-moving and muddy, while the Potomac is faster moving and
less turbid. For example, a solid particle can take more than 100 days to move out
of these rivers (Bradley, 1959). The relatively stagnant nature of the Anacostia is
more likely to concentrate pollutants and is susceptible to low dissolved oxygen
levels. As early as 1957, a marked deficiency in oxygen was reported at Kingman
Lake and the Navy Yard (Bradley, 1959).
The network of streams in District of Columbia derives from the geology and
hydrology of the area (Banta, 1993). The fall line separating hard Paleozoic soils of
the Piedmont from the softer soils of the Coastal Plain runs roughly through Rock
Creek Park. Although most of the eastern tributaries of Rock Creek have been paved
over as part of the combined sewer system, the nearby western tributaries and Rock
Creek itself have been protected by park status. Except for the small part of the city
that drains into Oxon Run, the eastern portion of District of Columbia (Figure 5-2) is
drained by tributaries of the Anacostia that have been drastically altered by
urbanization. Some have been eliminated by development and the six southernmost
streams now connect to the Anacostia through underground concrete pipes. The few
streams with natural streambeds are limited to parklands. Because the upper
tributaries of most streams have been covered and converted into storm drains and/or
sewers that may or may not drain into the same stream, the hydrological pattern of
District of Columbia streams has changed greatly. At present, the District of
Columbia contains 16 Piedmont streams (draining 40 percent of the area) and 13
Coastal Plain streams (draining 60 percent of the area).
5-4
-------
Estuaries]
(86.5%) Supporting
(5.2%) Not Supporting
(8.2%) Partially Supporting
Lakes]
(56.9%) Supporting
(0.0%) Partially Supporting
(43.1%) Not Supporting
Rivers and Streams I
(0.5%) Partially Supporting
(63.1%) Not Supporting
Figure 5-2. District of Columbia waterbodies
supporting aquatic life uses
5.5
-------
5.2.1.1 Support of Aquatic Life Designated Uses
Similar to every state and territory of the U.S., the District has established
water quality standards under the Clean Water Act. Those standards include aquatic
life designated uses (i.e., ability of waterbody to support fish and wildlife) for every
estuary* river or stream, and lake in the District.
Certain water-bodies in the northwestern part of the District have been
designated Special Waters of the District of Columbia (SWDC): Rock Creek (9.5 mi),
its west bank (7.5 mi) and east bank tributaries (3.5 mi), and Battery Kemble Creek
(also known as Fletcher's Run; 1.2 mi). These special waters have "water quality
better than needed for the current use or have scenic or aesthetic importance" and
their water quality "shall be maintained at or above the current level" (DCRA, 1994b).
All other waterbodies within the District have future designated uses of primary
contact, which, with the exception of Mickey Run and Watts Branch, are not currently
attained because of high bacteria levels.
Although the District of Columbia anticipates supporting fish and wildlife in all
its waterbodies, only a percentage currently perform this function (Figure 5-2). While
the majority of estuary areas support the aquatic life use, only one-third of rivers and
streams do. Even among the special waters, Battery Kemble Creek does not support
its aquatic life use because of possible toxic effects from chlorinated water
discharges. The number of waterbodies that support aquatic life (as measured by
water quality standards) may be an overestimate if criteria to assess the biological
integrity of the District's waters have not yet been developed.
5-6
-------
5.2.1.2 Water and Sediment Quality
Aquatic resources in all District of Columbia waterbodies have been adversely
affected by contamination of their water and sediments. Combined sewer overflows
(CSOs) and urban runoff contribute to organic enrichment of waterbodies and create
low dissolved oxygen and high biochemical oxygen demand. Toxic chemicals occur
at high levels in waterbody sediments, particularly in the tidal Anacostia. The sources
of these toxicants are not well understood and are most likely nonpoint in nature.
The Potomac River within the District (12.5 miles of tidal estuary) can be
divided into three sections of varying water quality (ICPRB and Abt Associates,
Inc., 1994):
• Good water quality from the Maryland border to Key Bridge that supports
designated aquatic life and primary contact uses.
• Fair water quality from Key Bridge to Mains Point with stormwater runoff
and CSOs via Rock Creek that marginally supports designated uses.
• Poor water quality from Mains Point to the Woodrow Wilson Bridge with
stormwater runoff and CSOs via the Anacostia River and discharges
from Blue Plains wastewater treatment plant that prevent support of the
aquatic life use.
Rock Creek (9.3 miles) has water quality problems related to more than 200
outfalls into the stream and other nonpoint source inputs. Organic and chemical
pollution are received from upstream and surrounding areas. Metals, pesticides, and
polycyclic aromatics have been found above priority pollutant indication levels (Limno-
Tech, Inc., 1990).
5-7
-------
The tidal Anacostia estuary has some of the poorest water quality recorded in
the Chesapeake Bay system because of CSOs and nonpoint source pollution (ICPRB
and Abt Associates, Inc., 1994). As a tidal river with a flushing time of 44 days,
pollutants transported by channelized tributaries rapidly reach the river and remain
there for extended periods. Siltation results from highly credible soils and
development upstream. CSOs and stormwater runoff produce high nutrient
concentrations and deplete dissolved oxygen. High sediment oxygen demand results
in dissolved oxygen levels below the District's standard approximately 50 percent of
the time (Kumble, 1990). Water clarity is generally poor, ranging from 2 feet to less
than 1/2 foot, decreasing productivity.
High concentrations of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and chlordane led to
a fish consumption advisory in 1989 that is still in effect. Recent studies of the .tidal
freshwater sediments in the District of Columbia area (Velinsky et al., 1994; Wade et
al., 1994; Schlekat et al., 1994), found substantial concentrations of trace metals and
organic hydrocarbons {e.g., PAKs), PCBs, and DDTs in many locations including near
the Washington Navy Yard, at the confluence of Rock Creek and the Potomac River,
and in the upper Washington Ship Channel. The sediment was found to be
moderately to highly contaminated with trace metals (Pb, Cd, Zn, and possibly Hg)
and organics. Concentration gradients between sewer, outfall, and river sediment
samples strongly suggest that urban runoff is the major source of these contaminants.
The distribution of PCBs suggests input from specific outfalls, while chlordane
distribution is indicative of upstream sources (i.e., Northeast and Northwest Branches
in Maryland).
The integrated study by Schlekat et al. (1994) demonstrated that the presence
of toxic chemicals in the sediments of the Anacostia River have adverse ecological
impacts. Analyses of benthic Asiatic clams (Corbicula sp.) indicate that these
5-8
-------
sediment contaminants are bioavailable. Sediment toxicity tests demonstrated
significant mortality associated with organic compounds in Anacostia River sediments.
Benthic macroinvertebrate community structure analyses exhibited variable agreement
with sediment chemistry and sediment toxicity results. When planning restoration and
other activities in the area, the possible mobility of these materials (e.g., during storms
or dredging) should be considered.
Another study confirmed the presence, since 1987, of elevated concentrations
of PCBs and chlordane in fish tissue (Velinsky and Cummins, 1994). Detectable levels
of 50 chemicals (out of 129 investigated) were present in the edible portion of certain
fish species collected in District waters. Although the effects on the life of fish or
their growth were not examined, it is likely that some species or life stages suffer
adverse impacts.
This situation is being addressed by the ongoing development of an Anacostia
River Toxics Management Action Plan that is looking at specific toxic inputs (Barry
Greussner, ICPRB, personal communication, March 14, 1996). Toxic chemical
problems in the Anacostia that have been described to date include the following
areas of concern (from the Maryland border to the mouth of the river):
• Hickey Run - runoff of oils and grease from garages for taxis and
metrobuses;
• Kenilworth Marsh - possible leaching from a capped landfill adjacent to
marsh;
• National Arboretum - historical runoff of pesticides from a dump for
pesticides;
• Pepco plant and incinerator at Benning Road - possible soil or sediment
contaminants;
5-9
-------
• Barney Circle connector - lead in soil from original filling of wetlands;
• Washington Gas facility at 11 St. bridge - plume of contaminants into
the River;
• CSOs - the NE swirl concentrator near District of Columbia General
Hospital and prison, and the O St. pumping station;
• Navy Yard and Southeast Federal Center - contaminants from former
weapons manufacturing activities;
• Pepco plant near Fort McNair - PCBs spill; and
• St. Elizabeth's Hospital - toxic materials in an ash disposal site.
5.2.1.3 Physical Habitat and Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV)
As a necessary consequence of building the city, many streams and springs
have entirely disappeared over the last 200 years (USGS, 1977). Among the natural
waters of the District that have disappeared are Smith Springs, Franklin Park Springs,
Gibson's Spring, Caffrey's Spring, City Spring, Tiber Creek, St. James Creek, Reedy
Branch, and Slash Run. Many other streams survive only in parklands as the lower
segments of their historical reaches (e.g., the last miles of Piney Branch and Broad
Branch within Rock Creek Park). Other streams have had their physical characteristics
drastically changed through channelization, revetment (addition of concrete facing to
stabilize stream banks), and other alterations. The more suburban streams have been
altered through utility installations, construction of storm drain outfalls, and structural
bank stabilization. Urban streams have generally been altered to the point that
floodplain access, riparian vegetation, and aquatic habitat are absent (USACE, 1994b).
The physical habitat of the larger streams and rivers has also been altered by
human activities. Increased sediment deposition has diminished the width and depth
5-10
-------
of the Potomac River, Rock Creek, and Anacostia River. Rock Creek instream habitat
below the fall line has been scoured by uncontrolled runoff and faster stream flows,
eroding the stream bed and depositing silt (ICPRB and Abt Associates, Inc., 1994).
Once 1/4-mile wide, the mouth of Rock Creek is now no wider than the rest of the
stream. The increase in runoff from developed areas and agriculture has also
decimated the submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) in the tidal waters (Batiuk et al.,
1992). Sediment and nutrient loading to these waters, as well as to the Chesapeake
Bay in general, contribute to light attenuation by increasing turbidity, total suspended
solids, and chlorophyll a. The SAV provides an important food source for waterfowl,
and cover and habitat for fish and crustaceans; it also improves water quality by
reducing sediment and nutrients, and by producing oxygen (Hurley, 1991).
The Potomac River historically supported dense stands of natural SAV along its
entire length (including several exotic plants that became established in the past 70
years), but much was lost by the late 1930s (Orth et al., 1995). The tidal freshwater
river was devoid of SAV in 1978 (Carter, 1992); however, in 1982, SAV began
returning to the Potomac south of Alexandria and had spread rapidly by 1984. SAV
continued to be absent from the Anacostia River until it appeared in 1993 at low
levels. The current distribution of SAV in District of Columbia waters is illustrated in
Figure 5-3. Improvements in the Blue Plains wastewater treatment plant that reduced
loadings of total suspended solids and particulates probably has contributed to the
return of SAV to the District of Columbia tidal waters (Hurley, 1991).
5.2.1.3.1 Current Condition of SAV. Field and aerial surveys over the last 3 years
show an increase in abundance and diversity of SAV in many parts of the Potomac
estuary (Orth et al., 1995). The Upper Potomac has had a dramatic increase in SAV
distribution and abundance in the Chesapeake Bay, expanding to 20 percent of the
5-11
-------
WASHINGTON D.C.
area of submerged aquatic vegetation
Figure 5-3.
Distribution of Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV) in District of Columbia
5-12
-------
area where it historically occurred (Tier I Chesapeake Bay SAV Distribution Restoration
Goal) and 7 percent of potentially available areas to a depth of 2 m (Tier III Goal).
Within the District of Columbia, a boat survey of the full extent of the Potomac
and Anacostia Rivers concluded that the return of SAV is a "very welcome site," but
that its abundance is still "fairly low" (DCRA, 1995). The exotic (introduced species)
Hydrilla verticillata is by far the most abundant species of SAV in District of Columbia
waters. Water stargrass, Heteranthera dubia, is the next most abundant with wild
celery, Vallisneria americana, and the exotic eurasian watermilfoil, Myriophyllum
spicatum, the only other species observed. The distribution of the different SAV
species in the District of Columbia appears random, except for a small area of
watermilfoil on the Potomac River between Arlington Memorial Bridge and Chain
Bridge (Figure 5-3). The SAV continues to be absent above the railroad bridge in the
Anacostia River. The recovery of SAV in the District of Columbia waters indicates a
stabilizing trend which parallels reductions in nutrient loads (DCRA, 1994b). The
dramatic return of SAV primarily reflects the establishment of the pollution tolerant
exotic species Hydrillia and, consequently, the composition of the SAV community
that is regrowmg differs greatly from historical conditions. Although the growth of
Hydrilla and other exotic species does not restore conditions of the historical estuarine
ecosystem, the benefits to existing resources (including exotic game fish) are obvious.
Recovery of other aspects of the estuarine ecosystem may follow as native SAV
species increase their proportional contribution to SAV abundance.
5.2.1.4 Benthic Macroinvertebrates
The dramatic changes to the physical habitat and the water chemistry of the
rivers and streams in the District of Columbia leave no doubt that the biological
integrity of the aquatic resources has been compromised. Fish are an obvious
5-13
-------
biological resource of concern, but they are usually too temporally and spatially
variable to use as an indicator of biological integrity for specific waterbodies. Partially
due to their sedentary nature, benthic macroinvertebrates (small organisms living on
or in the bottom sediments) have proven to be an effective indicator of water quality
condition and a useful measure of biological integrity. The composition of aquatic
invertebrate communities is usually summarized in indices that reflect expected
compositions for "healthy" waterbodies. Individual species are rarely part of the
evaluation, but harvestable and rare invertebrates are of special concern. The
freshwater tidal Potomac does not support shellfish of commercial value, but it does
include large populations of Asiatic clams (Corbicula fluminea) which are not harvested
by the public (DCRA, 1994b). Substantial clam populations are absent from the
Anacostia River, probably due to the periodic lack of dissolved oxygen (Anacostia
Restoration Team, 1991) and the presence of sediment contaminants (Velinsky et al.,
1992). Rock Creek contains several rare spring-dependent species of isopods,
ostracods, and amphipods (CH2MHill, 1979).
5.2.1.4.1 Current Condition of Benthic Macroinvertebrate Communities. Two
studies provide systematic coverage of the District of Columbia rivers and streams and
the condition of their benthic macroinvertebrate communities. Edmondson (1988)
sampled the benthos at 12 river stations on the Potomac and Anacostia Rivers and
12 stream stations within the District including Rock Creek; Banta (1993) sampled 29
smaller streams with watersheds within the District. Together, these surveys present
a thorough picture of the biological integrity of flowing water (lotic) systems in District
of Columbia. Figure 5-4 illustrates the results of the Edmondson (1988) and Banta
(1993) studies. Both studies represent evaluations of the condition of individual sites
that may or may not reflect conditions along the entire length of the river or stream,
or even within the sampled segment.
5-14
-------
Map Symbols
Good
Fair
Poor
Banta (1993) sites
Edmondson (1988) sites
Figure 5-4. Condition of benthic macroinvertebrate communities in District of Columbia
waters
5-15
-------
The benthic macroinvertebrate community in the Potomac River is fairly
homogeneous with the high diversity characteristic of a large freshwater river system
(Edmondson, 1988). The communities at individual stations, however, have been
adversely affected by consistently high nutrient levels and isolated toxic effects. The
Hilsenhoff Biotic Index (HBI) is one of the few indices that provide evaluative condition
in the absence of reference sites. Because the HBI focuses on the effects of organic
pollution, it is a useful measure of the condition of rivers and streams in District of
Columbia. All six Potomac River stations revealed benthic macroinvertebrate
communities rated by the HBI as being in poor to fair condition.
By contrast, the benthic macroinvertebrate communities in the Anacostia River
were more severely degraded with all six stations rated by the HBI as in poor
condition. The community composition was dominated by pollution-tolerant
organisms (e.g., oligochaete worms and chironomid dipteran larvae) and was
consistent with severe nutrient and toxic stress. Subsequent studies in the Anacostia
River (Veiinsky et a!., 1S32; Pinkney et ai., 1393) found similar communities of
benthic macroinvertebrates. The Anacostia River tributary streams (Oxon Run, Hickey
Run, and Watts Branch) had benthic macroinvertebrate communities indicative of
habitat degradation from urban runoff, hypertrophic conditions, and toxic
contamination. Both HBI values and diversity were low. The HBI values for Rock
Creek and Soapstone Creek were also indicative of poor benthic macroinvertebrate
communities. As a group, the Potomac River tributary communities were superior in
diversity and HBI value, with the highest values in the C&O Canal and the lowest in
the Delacarlia.
Although biological indices are very useful indicators of water quality, they
often underestimate pollutant loadings in streams where the biota are nearly absent.
Sometimes a more useful method of characterizing severely impacted streams is
5-16
-------
comparing a stream to a stream in more-pristine, less disturbed stream that serves as
a "reference" site. All of the smaller streams in the District of Columbia were
impaired as a result of the urban land use; many have been channelized or completely
eliminated and replaced by pipes and pavement (Banta, 1993). More than 200 taxa
were found in the 29 streams sampled, but very few taxa were found at each site.
The benthic macroinvertebrate communities in each stream were dramatically different
than those found in reference sites (least disturbed examples from surrounding areas).
The impacted communities are characteristic of degradation from physical habitat
alteration, organic (primarily sewage) pollution, eutrophication, and toxic chemical
pollution.
Each District of Columbia stream was compared to the appropriate Piedmont
(Berryville Creek in Montgomery County, Maryland) or Coastal Plain (Cash Creek in
Prince George's County, Maryland) reference stream site. None of the 29 streams
contained more than 50 percent of the benthic macroinvertebrate community (as
measured by EPA Rapid Bioassessment Protocol III; Plafkin et al. 1989) present in the
reference site. According to established EPA evaluation criteria, this translates to
severe impairment in 16 streams and moderate impairment in 13 (Figure 5-4). Nearly
as many Coastal Plain streams as Piedmont streams were ranked at the same level of
impairment. The extreme degree of degradation is evidenced by the presence of less
than three taxa at seven sites and the dominance of the pollution-tolerant chironomids
at many sites.
Indices of habitat quality (RBP per Plafkin et al., 1989) demonstrated habitat
degradation (less than 90 percent of the habitat quality in the reference streams) in
more than two-thirds of both the Piedmont and Coastal Plain streams. The totally
channelized Oxon Run possessed only 15 percent of the habitat quality as the
reference stream. However, even when appropriate habitat structure existed, District
5-17
-------
of Columbia streams exhibited benthic macroinvertebrate communities of depressed
quality in comparison to the reference streams. For example, three streams each in
the Piedmont and Coastal Plain with more than 90 percent of the reference habitat
quality attained less than a 15 percent match with the biological community
composition.
5.2.1.5 Fish
Historically, fish resources in the District of Columbia were the source of a
profitable industry and highly valued recreation (USACE, 1994b). Throughout its
history, the Potomac River has possessed an exceptionally diverse and productive fish
community. For example, the earliest accounts report Native Americans catching 30
sturgeon a night. Populations of American and hickory shad, white and yellow perch,
red-breasted sunfish, striped bass, catfish, and river herring were abundant for many
years before water quality degraded. As large tidally influenced freshwater rivers,
both the Potomac and Anacostia Rivers have the capacity to support many
diadromous (fish spending part of their lives in both fresh and salt water) as well as
resident species. Even though both rivers have been degraded by the effects of
human activities within and beyond the District of Columbia, a wide variety of fish
species still occupy these waters.
Table 5-1 lists fish species (arranged by family) that were present at the turn
of the century and those that were collected between 1986 and 1994. The decrease
in total number of fish species on these lists is only 6.7 percent (from 60 to 56);
however, combined historical and recent records indicate that only 66 species of the
106 fish species known to occur in Potomac and Anacostia Rivers within District of
Columbia have been collected since 1987. Several exotic fish species are represented
in the diversity numbers including largemouth bass, smallmouth bass, and walleye,
5-18
-------
Table 5-1 . Comparison of fish species taken from tidal District of Columbia waters
at the beginning (1881-191 1) and end of the 20th century (Smith and
_ Bean 1899, Bean and Weed 191 -1. Kazyak et al. 1989, DCRA 1995)
Family
Petromyzontidae
Acipenseridae
Lepisosteidae
Anguillidae
Clupeidae
Engraulidae
Ictaluridae
Catostomidae
Cyprinidae
Umbridae
Esocidae
Spades
Petromyzon marinus
Acipenser brevirostnim
A. oxyrhynchus
Lepisosteus osseus
L. platostomus
Anguilla rostrata
Alosa aestivalis
A. mediocris
A. pseudoharengus
A. sapidissima
Brevoortia tyrannus
Dorosoma cepedianum
Anchoa mitchilli
Ictalurus catus
t. furcatus
1. natalus
1. Nebulosus
/. punctatus
Noturus insignis
Carp/odes cyprinus
Catostomus commersoni
Erimyzon oblongus
Hypentelium nigricans
Moxostoma erythrurum
M. macrolepidotum
Carassius auratus
Ctenopharyngodon idella
Cyprinus carpio
Hybognathus regius
Leuciscus idus
Luxilus comutus
Nocomis biguttatus
Notemigonus crysoleucas
Notropis analostanus
N. hudsonius
N. photogenis*
Notropis procne
N. spilopterus
Pimephales notatus
Tinea tinea
Umbra pygmaea
Esox niger
Common Name
sea lamprey
shortnose sturgeon
Atlantic sturgeon
longnose gar
shortnosed gar
American eel
blueback herring
hickory shad
alewife
American shad
Atlantic menhaden
gizzard shad
bay anchovy
white catfish
blue catfish
yellow bullhead
brown bullhead
channel catfish
margined madtom
quillback
white sucker
creek chubsucker
northern hogsucker
golden redhorse
shorthead redhorse
goldfish
grass carp
common carp
eastern silvery minnow
ide
common shiner
homyhead chub
golden shiner
satinfin shiner
spottail shiner
silver shiner
swallowtail shiner
spotfin shiner
bluntnose minnow
tench
eastern mudminnow
chain pickerel
Year
1881-1911
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
1989-1994
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
5-19
-------
Table 5-1 . Continued
Family
Aphredoderidae
Belonidae
Cyprinodontidae
Atnerinidae
Percichthyidae
Centrarchidae
Percidae
Poeciliidae
Salmonidae
Sciaenidae
Soleidae
Species
Aphredoderus savanus
Strongy/ura marina
Cyprinodon variegatus
Fundulus diaphanus
F. heteroclitus
Men/dia beryllina
Morone americana
M. saxatilus '
Ambloplites rupestris
Enneacanthus gloriosus
£. obseus
Lepomis auritus
L. cyanellus
L. gibbosus
L. gulosus
L. macrochirus
L. megalotis
L. microlophus
Micropterus dolomieui
M. salmoides
Pomoxis anularis
P. nigromaculatus
Etheostoma olmstedi
Perca flavescens
Stizostedlon vitreum
Gambusia holbrooki
Oncorhynchus mykiss
Leiostomus xanthurus
Trinectes maculatus
Common Name
pirate perch
Atlantic needlefish
sheepshead minnow
banded killifish
mummichog
inland silversides
white perch
striped bass ..
rock bass
bluespotted sunfish
banded sunfish
redbreast sunfish
green sunfish
pumpkinseed
warmouth
bluegill
longear sunfish
readear carp
smallmouth bass
largemouth bass
white crappie
black crappie
tessellated darter
yellow perch
walleye
eastern mosquitofish
rainbow trout
spot
hogchoker
Year
1881-1911
X
X
X
X
V
/\
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
w
/\
X
X
X
X
X
1989-1994
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
• N. photogenus not an Atlantic coastal species - may be misidentification of N. rubellus, (rosyface
shiner), a similar species that does occur in the Chesapeake Bay drainage
5-20
-------
and important recreational species of catfish, crappie, and sunfish. These introduced
species have been in District of Columbia waters for 80 years; Smith and Bean (1898)
reported 10 introduced species and McAtee (1918) reported 14 introduced species.
While most of the species occurring in District of Columbia rivers have
persisted, the abundance of nearly all species has dropped, many dramatically. The
region supported millions of anadromous (freshwater spawning species with saltwater
adult stages) shad and river herring, whose stocks have collapsed or been severely
depressed throughout the Mid-Atlantic, including the District of Columbia. The
Potomac waters of the District were once a center of striped bass spawning, but the
striped bass stocks declined in the 1970s to the point that a moratorium and,
subsequently, quotas on harvest were instituted in 1984. While white perch and
most other species are also less abundant than they were historically, some are still
common. Barriers to passage of migratory species, overexploitation, and poor water
quality have all played roles in degrading District of Columbia fisheries. The increase
in the abundance of many fish populations in District waters has paralleled reductions
in nutrient loads and other water quality improvements over the last 10 years.
Although improvements are encouraging, species abundance and diversity are still low
compared to historic levels.
As the largest stream in the District of Columbia, Rock Creek has historically
supported substantial populations of recreationally important fish species and, through
its direct connection to the Potomac River, large numbers of anadromous species. Its
National Park status has provided some protection from adverse impacts of
urbanization. Nonetheless, the present anadromous fish populations and resident fish
communities reflect the harmful effects of polluted runoff (increased summer water
temperatures, high concentrations of nutrient, toxic chemicals, suspended sediment,
bacteria, and biochemical oxygen demand) and barriers to fish movement
5-21
-------
(construction of dams, fords, and sewer lines) (Britt et al., 1993). Some species that
were historically present in Rock Creek have apparently been extirpated (wiped out)
of the watershed (e.g., white perch and trout-perch). Non-native fish species (e.g.,
largemouth bass, bluegill, and carp) now constitute a significant part of the fish
community.
5.2.1.5.1 Current Condition of District of Columbia Fisheries. The current condition
of fish resources in the Potomac and Anacostia Rivers within the District of Columbia
is improving for many stocks (DCRA,1994b). Several game fish species have shown
a significant increase in population size, including largemouth and smallmouth bass,
striped bass, crappie, and yellow perch. Cummins (1984) reported that his survey of
fish in the Potomac and Anacostia Rivers produced Shannon-Weiner diversity (H')
values similar to those found in unpolluted major rivers along the west shore of the
Chesapeake Bay, indicating that many areas on these rivers represent healthy habitats
for fish. White perch was the most abundant game species along with the forage
fishes, gizzard shad, spottaiied shiners, and silvery minnows. The diversity of fish
collected and the fact that local fisherman have begun to regularly reel in substantial
numbers of sportfish from the Potomac River indicate that the District of Columbia
fish fauna have rebounded considerably from the period of fish kills in the 1960s
(Leach, 1982). Stressed fish with fin erosion are still found, especially in the
Anacostia River; however, the high average species diversity found at certain
locations in the Anacostia River indicates that even this more degraded river has the
potential to support substantial fisheries if water quality is improved.
Surveys from 1985-1988 also show a trend in improving conditions of many
stocks, including large numbers of young-of-year (YOY) (Kazyak et al., 1990). In
1990, Kazyak et al. collected 45 fish species representing 15 families and 30 genera
from 8 tidewater sites of the District of Columbia using a variety of sampling gear
5-22
-------
(Figures 5-5 and 5-6). Fish collections included anadromous, catadromous, estuarine,
and tidal freshwater taxa of various life stages, and grass carp and hickory shad that
had not been taken recently in District of Columbia. The 1994 fisheries survey by
DCRA reported a similar diversity totaling 47 species, 13 families, and 30 genera
(DCRA, 1994c).
In the Potomac River, 12,000 fish from 40 species were collected with white
perch (Morone americana) the most abundant and most frequently collected.
Pumpkinseed (Lepomis gibbosus) also occurred in more that half the samples. In the
Anacostia River, 15,000 fish from 25 species were collected; white perch (Morone
americana) was most frequently collected, but YOY blueback herring (Alosa aestivalis)
were most abundant. Gizzard shad (Dorosoma cepedianum) also occurred in more
that half the samples. Less than 1 percent of all fish collected was piscivores
(predatory fish that eat other fish). The occurrence of abnormalities (principally
lesions, deformities, and emaciation) was 0.5 percent for the Potomac and 0.7
percent for the Anacostia, reaching a high of 1 percent in the fall for both rivers.
As stated earlier, recreationally important species have declined in abundance
throughout the area. The largemouth bass is the only gamefish found in substantial
numbers much of year, and its populations have declined as well. Chain pickerel and
large striped bass once present in large numbers in District of Columbia are rare or less
commonly encountered. The size of herbivorous/insectivorous panfish has decreased
to the point where yellow perch, white perch, and pumpkinseed are rarely of edible
size and only brown bullhead is of edible size. This may be a result of the absence
of abundant predators to reduce competition among young life stages of fish.
Historically abundant species that now only occur at low levels include the
following (Kazyak et al., 1990; DCRA, 1995):
5-23
-------
Potomac River
1000
Anacostia River
10000
1000 -
100 -
Washington Channel
1000
Figure 5-5. Abundance of important fish species in tidal waters of District of Columbia
(adopted from DCRA 1995)
-------
10000
1000 -
t
too -
Potomac River
Anacostia River
10000
1000 -
Washington Channel
10000
1000 -
Figure 5-6.
Distribution of fish abundance among all families of fish occurring in tidal water
of District of Columbia (adopted from DCRA 1995)
5-25
-------
• Striped bass - Potomac waters of District of Columbia were once a
center of striped bass spawning, but the important commercial and
recreational fishery peaked in the 1960s and declined dramatically in the
1970s causing a moratorium in 1984 and subsequent quotas on
harvests. Recent increases in population levels may lead to increased
quotas in near future (DCRA, 19945).
• White perch - Historically, a white perch fishery existed throughout the
year in the District of Columbia. The take of white perch in District of
Columbia is now limited to 4 percent of Chesapeake Bay catch, and the
growth of individuals is slow.
• River herring - The Maryland catch of river herring was 1-million pounds
per year until 1975. Since then, it has declined 10 to 50-fold, and the
stocks of alewife and blueback herring are considered severely depressed
(ASMFC, 1985 cited in Versar, 1990).
• American shad - Shad stocks collapsed in the 1970s due to
overexploitation, migration blockages, and acidification of poorly
buffered spawning streams. American shad were again collected in
District of Columbia for first time in 1988.
« American eel - There has been a substantial decline from historical
abundance level with a particular reduction of young-of-year.
• Pumpkinseed - Historically, District of Columbia had a pumpkinseed
fishery in the winter, but individuals are now too small to be pursued by
anglers.
• Channel catfish - Channel catfish is an introduced species that has
increased in abundance since the 1970s; however, a consumption
advisory has been placed on catfish because of elevated levels of PCBs
and chlordane.
• Largemouth bass - A substantial sport fishery for the introduced
largemouth bass exists in District of Columbia, but high exploitation rates
are keeping the size of individual fish down.
5-26
-------
Populations of other species in the Potomac and Anacostia Rivers also are
generally less abundant than they were historically, although some remain common.
The present species abundance and diversity represent a decline from historic levels:
this is particularly apparent in many taxa known to be sensitive to environmental
degradation (Kazyak et al., 1990).
At present, populations of semi-anadromous yellow perch and white perch in
Rock Creek are very reduced or absent (Britt et al., 1993). Declines from historical
levels are likely due to overfishing and water quality degradation rather than migration
barriers. In contrast, populations of anadromous alewife and blueback herring appear
to be healthy. Even though instream impediments to fish movement probably affect
these species and prevent them from passing upstream of Pierce Mill dam, schools of
hundreds of individuals occur at several locations.
Historical records from Rock Creek are sketchy, but Smith and Bean (1989)
noted that certain fish species (e.g., northern hogsucker and fallfish) were already
declining at the turn of the century. In 1950, Medford reported that the once
abundant brook trout were gone from the watershed and that all large fish and game
species were absent. By 1975, Dietemann found only the most pollution-tolerant
species within the District of Columbia portion of Rock Creek and attributed declines
to land use changes, sewage runoff, and stormwater runoff. In 1993, however, Britt
et al. found a three-fold increase in the number of fish species collected per site in
Rock Creek. Pollution-sensitive species such as the tessellated darter and cutlips
minnow had returned in relatively large numbers. Improvements in water quality
through conversion to separate sewers and better construction practices may be
responsible.
5-27
-------
In contrast to the mainstem, fish communities in Rock Creek tributaries were
small or absent. No fish were found in nearly half of the tributaries, and where they
did occur, fish density averaged 1.5 fish per 10 miles of stream. These densities are
10-fold less than similar-sized streams in rural south-central Virginia. Episodic water
quality problems such as low flows, flooding, or scouring during storm events, and
polluted runoff are likely contributing factors (Britt et al., 1993).
5.2.1.5.2 Restoration Opportunities for District of Columbia Fisheries. The continued
presence of diverse fish communities in the Potomac River, Anacostia River, and Rock
Creek holds the promise for substantial restoration of fish abundance and the re-
establishment of significant recreational fisheries. Restoration efforts should focus on
three areas:
• Restoring anadromous fish populations;
* Protecting and restoring aquatic habitat; and
• Improving water quality.
The pervasiveness of non-native fishes within the watershed precludes the possibility
of returning to historical conditions. In addition, the dramatic changes in the land use
of the District of Columbia make it unlikely that species sensitive to high runoff events
and sedimentation can become abundant. Species with the potential to increase in
abundance as habitat and water quality improve should be the focus of restoration
efforts.
Anadromous fish may rapidly access new spawning habitat if dams and other
barriers to passage are removed. For example, providing passage on Rock Creek
beyond Pierce Mill Dam (SM 4.4) would open an additional 28 miles of Rock Creek
5-28
-------
and tributaries to migrating spawning anadromous fishes (USAGE, 1989). More than
20 partial and final blockages have been identified in the Anacostia watershed above
the District line where removal would benefit five anadromous fish species. Habitat
restoration efforts range from wetland enhancement in the Anacostia to stormwater
controls (to reduce siltation of tributary streams) throughout the watershed.
5.2.1.6 Endangered and Threatened Aquatic Species
Under the Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (FWS) has the authority to list as endangered or threatened any distinct
species population segments thought to be in danger of being extirpated from an area.
the FWS maintains a national list of endangered and threatened species. Species
designations used to describe the status of plant and animal species protected under
the Endangered Species Act are:
Endangered - any native species in danger of extinction throughout all of a
significant portion of its range; and
Threatened - any native species likely to become endangered within the
foreseeable future.
States, as well as the federal government, may designate species as
endangered, threatened; rare, etc., within the specific state. The State department
of natural resources most often manages these designations. These lists indicate the
status of each species within that specific state. The U.S. Department of the
Interior's National Park Service (NFS), works with the District's Natural Heritage
Program to maintain animal and vascular plant species lists for the District of Columbia
(NPS/DCNHP, 1995). These lists are presented in Appendix C of this report.
5-29
-------
The degraded condition of the main waterbodies within the District of Columbia
makes it very unlikely that they contain rare aquatic species protected by the federal
government or the District. Even small streams in protected areas such as Rock Creek
Park suffer degradation from abnormally high flows caused by runoff from impervious
surfaces. However, uncontaminated ground-water springs do persist in the parks
located in the western portion of the District of Columbia. The District's underlying
geology includes fractured granite rock that produces ground-water springs from
isolated, localized aquifers. Rock Creek Park and several other parks in the western
part of the city have protected these springs from development, and as a result, they
still harbor a number of rare invertebrates (TNC, 1996).
This "ground-water fauna" consists of crustaceans (amphipods and isopods),
aquatic snails, and other organisms that live a mostly subterranean life in water-filled
cracks below the surface. The hydrologic isolation of these springs has protected
many of them from anthropogenic impacts and provided for the evolution of different
species in each. One trogiobitic amphipod, Stygobromus hayei, is a federally listed
endangered species found only from a single spring in Rock Creek Park. Another,
Stygobromus kenki, is found only in Rock Creek Park and a site in Virginia.
Stygobromus tenuis potomacus occurs in nearly half the springs in Rock Creek Park.
Stygobromus pizzini, a Federal candidate species, has not been found in recent
surveys and may be extripated (completely eliminated). A watchlist species,
Bottimer's spring snail, occurs in three different springs. These unique environments
support a high diversity of other invertebrates including a rare ostracod and planarian
(CH2MHJII, 1979).
5-30
-------
5.2.2 Wetland Resources
The District of Columbia was initially built by filling extensive areas of original
marshes and swamps along the Potomac and Anacostia Rivers. These wetlands
comprised about half the area within the boundaries of the city, totaling more than
9,600 acres of wetlands in 1790 (DCRA, 1994b). Only 284.7 acres of palustrine
(marsh), 36.8 acres of lacustrine (lake), and 523.5 acres of riverine wetlands remain
in the District today (Guerrero, 1993). This represents a decrease in wetlands area
of 91.2 percent over the last 200 years. As a result, the ecosystem of the District
is no longer a large wetland complex, but rather a series of isolated wetlands fringing
a highly urbanized area. Many of the remaining wetlands have been degraded and are
of poor quality, but some continue to play an important role as a place for waterfowl,
wildlife, fish, and shellfish (Guerrero, 1993).
The extensive filling of wetlands is evidenced by the parklands created along
the borders of the Potomac River, Washington ship channel, and Anacostia River
(Figure 5-7). The replacement of these tidal wetlands with fill material and seawalls
in the Potomac estuary to eliminate malaria-carrying mosquitos and in the Anacostia
to control flooding and erosion have eliminated the capacity of the natural system to
filter sediments and runoff from the city. Some filtering capacity is being returned
with the restoration of wetlands along the tidal rivers and tributaries.
In the Anacostia River, less than 100 acres of the original 2,600 acres of
emergent tidal wetlands remain. The National Wetlands Inventory maps identify
several wetlands on or adjacent to the river, primarily between the East Capitol Bridge
and Bladensburg (Figure 5-8). The USACE has restored 32 acres of wetlands at
Kenilworth Marsh and plans to restore 75 additional acres on the Anacostia River
around Kingman Lake (45 acres) and along the banks of the river (30 acres)
5-31
-------
EXPLANATION
—Late 1700 drainage
1974 river shoreline
canal
Figure 5-7. Extent of historical wetlands that have been filled in District of Columbia
5-32
-------
WASHINGTON D.C.
MARYLAND
N
A
KM
Figure 5-8. Distribution of existing wetlands in District of Columbia
5-33
-------
(USAGE, 1994b). The success of these and other restoration efforts depends on
addressing the following factors limiting wetland plant regrowth: improper substrate
elevation, inadequate sunlight penetration in turbid waters, and abrading or covering
plants by garbage and debris (Athanas et al., 1991). Monitoring of Kenilworth Marsh
indicates that plant growth was successful and that wildlife use has increased.
Preliminary results indicate that contaminants in the dredged sediments used to create
the wetlands and invasion by exotic plants in the higher elevations may be problems
for current and future wetlands restoration projects (Keith Bowers, Biohabitats Inc.,
personal communication, February 9,1996). Kenilworth is one of few natural wetland
habitats left for flora and fauna along the Anacostia (O'Conner, 1985) and it, along
with the nearby city dump that was closed in 1969, supports a diversity of wildlife.
5.2.3 Terrestrial Resources
The terrestrial environment of the District of Columbia can be divided into four
areas bounded by the Potomac River and the border with Maryland: Piedmont west
of Rock Creek, Coastal Plain east between Rock Creek and the Anacostia River,
Coastal Plain north of the Sunderland escarpment (along Florida Avenue), and Coastal
Plain east of the Anacostia River (O'Conner, 1985). Prior to cultivation of much of
the area for tobacco farming and extensive construction of the city, this was a
forested area that varied in composition from a climax oak-chestnut community in the
Piedmont to an oak-pine association in Coastal Plain. Virtually all of the original forest
was eliminated by human activities, but native communities have returned in isolated
parklands, most notably Rock Creek Park (Figure 5-9). In many places, exotic trees
and other plants have substantially altered the vegetation either by intentional
plantings or by invasions. For example, invasion by the exotic Japanese honeysuckle
has limited the distribution of ferns and herbaceous plants in Rock Creek Park.
5-34
-------
WASHINGTON D.C
MARYLAND
Park Features
National parks
Misc. State Reserves
Mitary Reserves
Misc. Federal Reservation
Local and County Parks
Figure 5-9. Distribution of parklands in District of Columbia
5-35
-------
Historically, the most distinctive plant community in the District of Columbia
region was the magnolia bogs characterized by white sand and gravel soils. This
occurred in areas of the Coastal Plain, such as the Bladensburg and Kenilworth
communities, and were similar to the unique pine barrens habitats of New Jersey
(McAtee, 1918).
5.2.3.1 Vegetation
The largest currently existing area of natural terrestrial vegetation in the District
of Columbia is Rock Creek Park, a maturing upland community of mixed hardwoods
includes oaks, hickories, tulip poplar, and beech (Jorling, 1969). The understory is
dominated by red maple, dogwood, hornbeam, black-gum, mapleleaf virburnum,
arrowwood virburnum, and wild grape. Floodplain areas include basswodd and
American sycamore in the canopy, and box elder, and elderberry in the understory.
Mosses are the most abundant non-vascular plant group in the park, but many fungi,
lichens, liverworts, hornworts, ferns, horsetails, and clubmosses are also present.
Scores of wild flowers occur in the park, many flowering on the floodplain in spring.
Other parks in the western part of the city also have recovering natural
vegetation and include important habitats such as ground-water springs supporting
rare invertebrates. (See Section 5.2.1.6.) Other parklands in the District of Columbia
are generally restricted to fill areas along the rivers, are mostly devoid of trees, and
include many exotic species. These areas contribute little to the terrestrial ecosystem
of the District. One exception may be the closed city dump that borders Kenilworth
Marsh.
Riparian vegetation is especially important to the integrity of the District of
Columbia ecosystem because it provides a buffer for aquatic resources and habitat for
5-36
-------
terrestrial species near water. Contiguous riparian habitats also provide migration
corridors for wildlife, a critical factor in urbanized environments. Because Rock Creek
Park surrounds the whole length of the stream (and Maryland parks surround most of
its length beyond the District), this area is the most important terrestrial resource in
the city. Within the District of Columbia, 9.3 miles of the 33-mile creek are
surrounded by 2,118 acres of National Park Service land. Rock Creek Park is the
largest natural park in an urban setting in the Nation, extending up to 1.25 miles wide
(CH2MHHI, 1979). The parklands along the Anacostia River do not provide similar
benefits but have the potential to do so, especially if riparian restoration is coordinated
with wetlands restoration already underway.
5.2.3.2 Wildlife
At the time of European settlement, the area now encompassed by the District
of Columbia not only "aboundeth with all manner of fish," but also contained "Beuers,
Oners, Beares, Martins and Minks" (McAtee, 1918, citing Captain John Smith).
Native Americans camped and hunted in the Rock Creek valley for buffalo, elk,
beaver, fox, and smaller game animals. The diverse game fauna also included hares,
turkeys, pheasants, woodcocks, partridge, snipes, and ducks.
While many of these species have long since disappeared from all or most of
the District of Columbia, 32 of the original 44 species of mammals still occur in Rock
Creek Park. Once existing bear, bison, bobcat, elk, marten, mink, otter, porcupine,
puma, and wolf are gone, but beaver have returned. Opossums, raccoons, and
squirrels have increased in abundance, as have the exotic black and Norway rats,
house mice, and stray domesticated cats and dogs. These species are tolerant of
human activities and benefit from the absence of larger predators and the abundant
5-37
-------
food source offered by human garbage. Reduction in faunal diversity and dominance
by opportunistic species are common characteristics of urbanized areas.
Populations of amphibian and reptile species in Rock Creek Park have declined
in abundance and diversity over the last 50 years (Shostack, 1977). Similarly, the
118 species of birds found in the park reflect a change from a predominantly typical
forest interior species composition to a combination of species representative of mixed
land uses (CH2MHNI, 1979).
5.2.3.3 Endangered, Threatened, and Rare Terrestrial Species
The Department of the Interior's National Park Service (NPS), along with the
District of Columbia Natural Heritage Program, maintain a species lists of animals and
vascular plant species reported to be extant (exist currently) or historically present
(existing in the past but not existing currently) in the District of Columbia
(NPS/DCNHP, 1995). Reported occurrences of species have been collected from
reports, scientific collections, and literature, and have been verified by only limited
field surveys. Scientists with the NPS's National Capital Region Conservation Data
Center report that currently there are no federally-listed endangered animal species in
the District of Columbia (Karen Cieminski, NPS/DCNHP, personal communication,
April 29, 1996). Federally-listed threatened animal species reported in the District of
Columbia include the peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus), black rail (Lateral/us
jamaicensis), and the loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus) (NPS/DCNHP, 1995).
There are 23 species of vascular plants listed as rare extant species and more than
200 species of vascular plants listed as historically present in the District of Columbia
(Appendix C).
5-38
-------
5.3 Place in the Larger Ecosystem
The ecological resources of the District of Columbia do not exist in isolation.
The District is a part of the Potomac River basin that is itself part of the Chesapeake
Bay watershed. Most of the watershed area supporting Rock Creek and the Anacostia
River are outside the District's boundaries in Maryland. Regional activities have an
important influence on the condition of District resources and the activities within the
city affect regional resources including the Chesapeake Bay.
5.3.1 Influence of Regional Activities on Condition of District of Columbia Resources
Water quality problems in the District of Columbia waters can be attributed, in
part, to loadings delivered by upstream tributaries outside the city boundaries. In the
Anacostia River, problems of low dissolved oxygen, low water clarity, and high
bacterial concentrations can not be solved without control of upstream, as well as
nearby sources. This connection to the watershed is well recognized and was the
basis for the formation of the Anacostia Watershed Restoration Committee in 1987.
The restoration blueprint for the Anacostia targets the largest number of projects and
funding (other than CSO abatement) for stormwater retrofit projects. The combined
financial contributions for FY 1993 from Federal, State, local, and regional participants
was more than $8 million (Wolfe, 1996). Figure 5-10 presents the FY1993
contributions of each participant. Watershed restoration efforts aimed at the entire
watershed are the ones most likely to improve impacts on the tidal river (MWCOG,
1994). A similar situation exists in Rock Creek, where most of the inputs to the
stream come from upstream tributaries. Nutrient loadings from agricultural lands in
Maryland counties upstream and runoff from the increasingly urbanized communities
both strongly affect ecological conditions in the District.
5-39
-------
Federal - $4,394,700
• Corps of Engineers
• Forest Service
• National Park Service
• EPA
State-$1,795,712
• DC
• MD
Regional -$357,050
• ICPRB
• MWCOG
Local -$1,594,559
• Montgomery County
• Prince Georges County
TOTAL = $8,142,021
Figure 5-10. Funding for Anacostia Restoration Effort (FY93 Dollars)
Source: Wolfe, J. (USAGE); Shell, J. (MWCOG) Personal Communication, 1996
5-40
-------
The extensive development of the metropolitan region means that even greater
anthropogenic effects are felt by District of Columbia resources than would result
from the urban area itself. Both District waterways and parklands experience high
levels of human activity, especially from the commuting population. A significant
example is the high level of atmospheric deposition from regional automobile traffic.
The cumulative impact greatly exceeds that of the District population alone.
The condition of migratory fish species populations is an example of the critical
importance of linkages outside the city boundaries. The District of Columbia
populations of anadromous fish rely on access to the city waters via the Potomac
estuary. At the same time, population numbers are limited by the area of spawning
habitat in tributary streams above the District Line. Barriers to fish migration in
Maryland counties upstream of the tidal Anacostia reduce the reproductive success
of anadromous fish such as herring. The Anacostia Restoration Blueprint has
identified 33 fish passage projects, all above the District line. Currently, several
blockages within Rock Creek Park would have to be overcome before additional
blockages in Maryland would impact anadromous fish species in that drainage.
5.3.2 Contribution of District of Columbia to the Regional Ecosystem
The nutrient problem created by upstream and nearby sources does not stay in
District waters but continues to flow downstream and contributes to nutrient loadings
to the Chesapeake Bay. Research has concluded that control of such loadings is likely
the most important step toward restoration of SAV and, ultimately, the living
resources of the Bay. In concert with the Chesapeake Bay Agreement to reduce
controllable nitrogen and phosphorus to the Bay by 40 percent below 1985 levels, all
jurisdictions are completing plans to meet nutrient reduction goals. The District of
Columbia has completed a nutrient reduction strategy that centers on nutrient removal
5-41
-------
enhancements at the Blue Plains regional wastewater treatment plant (ICPRB and Abt
Associates, Inc. 1994). Blue Plains contributes 92 percent of the District's nitrogen
and 25 percent of its phosphorus; CSOs contribute 4 percent of nitrogen and 68
percent of phosphorus; and nonpoint sources contribute 4 percent of nitrogen and 7
percent of phosphorus. The strategy will exceed the nitrogen reduction target, but
the urban nature of the District means that stormwater management and CSO controls
may not be able to meet the phosphorus reduction goal. The District may trade
nitrogen loading "credits" for phosphorus credits within the larger Potomac River
strategy.
In addition to the upgrade of Blue Plains for nitrogen removal, the strategy will
re-evaluate the Phase I CSO abatement program and implement the most
cost-effective CSO controls in Phase II, and coordinate current programs to reduce
nonpoint source pollution (e.g., implement best management practices for stormwater
runoff, pollution prevention, and public education). Atmospheric nonpoint sources,
such as automobiles, are considered "uncontrollable," but they still constitute a major
input to the waters of the District and the Bay.
Although the problems of the District are transported to other places in the
region, the status of the area as a corridor for species migrating upstream from the
Bay is an important benefit to the regional ecosystem. Specifically, the presence of
significant wetlands (i.e., Kenilworth Marsh) and SAV provide important habitat for
regional populations of migrating fish and birds. Although water quality problems may
hinder fish passage at certain times, no structural blockages for species migrating
upstream and downstream occur on the Potomac or Anacostia Rivers. In contrast,
Rock Creek does present complete barriers to upstream migration of fish into the
Maryland portion of the watershed.
5-42
-------
Although the District of Columbia is predominantly urban area in a larger semi-
developed metropolitan area, it does contain parkland that can support the activities
of wildlife from the surrounding region. The fact that these parks are mostly linear
along the riparian zones of Rock Creek and the Anacostia River facilitates the
movement of species. The Rock Creek connection is especially valuable because
Maryland-National Capitol Parks and Planning lands in Montgomery County provide a
nearly unbroken corridor with National Park Service lands in the District. Most of the
Anacostia parks are less valuable because they are not protected natural areas but
rather reclaimed wetlands in the form of sparsely wooded lawns. The exceptions are
Kenilworth Marsh and other wooded riparian areas. Enhancement of the Anacostia
natural area corridor has great potential for supporting biodiversity in the larger
ecosystem. .
The Anacostia Restoration Blueprint has identified 66 riparian reforestation
projects aimed at re-establishing forest habitats within 300 feet of the Anacostia and
its tributaries. Large-scale reforestation and protection of natural areas ranging from
the tidal Anacostia to the 12,800-acre Patuxent Research Refuge near Laurel,
Maryland, would constitute the most important wildlife corridor in the increasingly
urbanized Washington-Baltimore metropolitan area.
5-43
-------
6.0 CONCLUSIONS, RISK REDUCTION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Overall, the environmental health of the District can be considered to be
favorable and the city as a whole should be considered a healthy place to live.
However, there are still areas which need to be addressed, both from the human
health and ecological health perspectives. While DC is not a heavily industrialized
city, there are more than 1,000 facilities that release pollution via air emissions,
wastewater discharges, hazardous waste generation, and toxic chemical releases.
More importantly, nonpoint source pollution from motor vehicles and stormwater
runoff are major factors influencing environmental conditions in DC. Motor vehicles
are the single largest source of chemicals that form ozone in the DC area. Runoff
from stormwater carries many pollutants to DC's surface waters including nitrogen,
phosphorus, and heavy metals. This stormwater runoff problem is compounded by
combined sewer overflow loadings of pollutants and bacteria into the city's surface
waters.
The most apparent human health risks result from drinking water, fish
consumption, air, and lead (from paint, soil, and other sources). Each of these
potential problems can contribute to risks from exposure; however, different
subpopulations may be at risk via different routes of exposure. As a result, it is
difficult to assess the relative importance of different routes of exposure. Regardless,
there is a need to better communicate the idea of environmental risk to those persons
whose health conditions, age, activity patterns, and lifestyles might result in
potentially higher risks (e.g., asthmatics from air pollution, children from lead paint or
lead in soil, and subsistence fishermen). With respect to reducing risks to human
health in DC, conclusions/recommendations are noted below:
6-1
-------
Drinking Water
There have been times when "Boil Water" orders have been issued in the
District. Is the water safe to drink?
water destroys bacterial contaminants.
In general, DC's drinking water is
. . , ,, . If you hear * "Boil Water* order
safe to drmk. However, certa.n issil«|f plea$e coniprY with It. Boiling
individuals that have weakened immune
systems should take precautions
(consult their physician and/or boil
water) prior to drinking the tap water. DC's drinking water is sampled and analyzed
in a laboratory every day (however, some tests take several days/weeks for results
to become available). The DC water supply provides water to more than 1 .3 million
people, including the President at the White House. However, the water system is old
and there is a need to replace some of the aging components. At certain times, the
water is reported to be suspect, since it may contain harmful bacteria. This is true
of the water supply in many metropolitan areas, since disease-causing germs may
enter the water supply at the water plant, or anywhere along the length of the water
distribution system. This does not mean that DC residents need to buy bottled water;
it means that you need to listen to the occasional reports about the need to boil
water. A "Boil Water" alert should be issued when turbidity (cloudiness) rises above
the Federal drinking water standards. This step is linked to the Federal laws for Safe
Drinking Water. EPA has ordered approximately 300 large metropolitan water
systems, including the District, to test for Cryptosporidiufn, a microbial parasite which
can cause intestinal illness. This microbe is considered dangerous, even potentially
fatal, to persons with weakened immune systems, such as those with AIDS.
A second area of concern for drinking water is also related to high turbidity.
In purifying the District's drinking water, chlorine is used to kill bacteria. At certain
times of the year, heavier doses of chlorine are necessary to ensure that the water is
6-2
-------
free of microorganisms. A by-product of chlorination is a group of chemicals known
as "trihalomethanes", or THMs. THMs are known or suspected to cause cancer. EPA
has set strict guidelines for the maximum level of THMs that may be present in
drinking water. In the past, the levels of THMs in District water have occasionally
exceeded these standards.
Fish Consumption
Fish in the rivers of the District
are known to contain pesticides and
other harmful chemicals. Consumption
of certain fish, including eels, carp and
catfish, may be dangerous to human
health. These fish tend to concentrate
chemical poisons in their tissues and
therefore give a higher dose than other
species of fish, such as bass. The
District of Columbia has issued a fishing
Be aware of the fishing advisory
certain fish. The advisory was put Jn
place to protect human health
Children and elderly people, as well as
pregnant women and persons with
serious illness, should particularly not
eat these fish, caught in DC waters,
on a regular basis.
advisory on three types of fish, due to high levels of PCBs and pesticides found in
their flesh. These chemicals are believed to cause cancer and other diseases in
humans. If you eat catfish, carp or eel caught in the waters of the District, you may
be exposed to a higher dose of these chemicals than is considered healthy. It is very
important for fishermen, especially subsistence fishermen, to limit their consumption
of these particular fish. Also, it should be remembered that cooking fish does not
remove all chemical poisons.
6-3
-------
Air Pollution
The air quality in the District is generally good, however, occasional episodes
occur where levels of ozone may be high which can affect human health. Air
pollution affects different people in different ways. Persons with breathing disorders
are the ones we most commonly think of, but there are other persons who should use
caution during times of high ozone (usually the summer) or during air quality alerts.
In addition, there are thousands of people who are especially sensitive to ozone, even
though they may be healthy. MWCOG has identified the following groups as especially
susceptible to the effects of air pollution:
Any of the estimated
210,000 residents of the
area who have serious,
permanent, or chronic
lung disease, such as
bronchitis or emphysema.
Children under the age of
13. There are an
estimated 736,400
children in the Washington
metropolitan region.
Anyone with asthma.
There are estimated to be
225,700 asthmatics in the
Washington metropolitan
area, including 53,200
children and 108,500
adults.
ir Quality Alerts
During air quality alerts, protect
yourself oy avoiding heavy exercise
outdoors, including jogging and
cycling. Persons who are at high risk
(asthma, breathing problems, children]
should stay indoors as much as
possible, preferably in air conditioning.
Since the elderly am particularly at
risk, check up on older family
members and neighbors during afr
quality alerts.
The air quality index is broadcast on
local television weather reports, in
newspapers, and on the telephone
weather line.
• Any of the 336,000 residents over the age of 65.
Ozone mapping (similar to Maryland Department of the Environment's program
in the Baltimore area) may be an effort that could be initiated in the DC area to
6-4
-------
improve tracking and communicating higher ozone levels to those individuals that are
more susceptible to asthma and other respiratory problems aggravated by ozone.
Indoor Air Pollution
Indoor air pollution is also a
serious issue for many residents of the
District. Indoor air quality can be made
dangerous to human health by a variety
of ordinary household items. Sources
of indoor air pollution include:
• Gas cooking stoves
• Kerosene heaters
Reducing indoor Air Pollution
Protect yourself from indoor air
pollution. Have your furnace checked
periodically to ensure that it is
operating correctly. Have your
chimney cteaned. Don't store
flammable or volatile cleaners or
solvents and liquids indoors, where
fumes can build up.
• Woodstoves and fireplaces
• Malfunctioning furnaces
• Paints, thinners, solvents, gasoline and household cleaners
Lead
Children are usually considered to be at most risk from lead poisoning, but lead
affects adults as well. It is much easier to prevent lead exposure than to treat it.
Untreated, lead can build up to toxic levels, causing a wide range of effects, including
brain damage, malnutrition, and high blood pressure. Be aware that there may be lead
in the soils where your child plays. Older homes may have lead water pipes or lead-
based paint. Lead-based paint in the home poses a threat to both adults and children.
Although many people believe that the major route of human exposure is from children
ingesting loose paint chips, inhalation and ingestion of paint dust is even more of a
6-5
-------
threat. Lead-based paint can be sealed
by painting over it to eliminate dust.
Avoid sanding and chipping lead-based
paint. A specially trained and certified
contractor may be needed to do major
renovation or paint removal operations.
Finally, simple hygiene and
housekeeping practices can mitigate
some of the risk posed by lead-based
paint.
lead Exposure
Protect yourself and your family from
lead exposure. Jf you have children
between 3 months and 6 years of age,
have them tested avery year, tat tfla
water run for a few minutes,
especially in tna morning, to flush
dissolved lead from the pipes. Use
cold water for cooking, drinking and
making baby formula.
Ecological Health of DC
From an ecological point of view, there are a number of conclusions and
recommendations on issues that still to be addressed:
Fisheries have been greatly reduced from historical levels and will never
attain their original abundance; however, the creation of a substantial
recreational fishery for several species is possible.
Other aquatic resources are in fair to poor condition because of degraded
water quality and loss of habitat. Rock Creek watershed streams and
the main portions of the rivers can probably be elevated to fair to good
status in the future. The best remaining streams should be rigorously
protected, including institution of stormwater controls. Anacostia River
recovery should focus on controlling CSO and nonpoint source problems
that result in low dissolved oxygen and sedimentation.
Wetlands have been lost, and only persist in less than 10 percent of
historical distribution. Although the historical pattern has been replaced
by fill, the extent of wetlands can be increased two to three fold along
the Anacostia mainstream. Evidence from Kenilworth is that such efforts
will enhance the biodiversity of the area.
6-6
-------
• Terrestrial resources in the District of Columbia are minimal, but Rock
Creek Park provides a significant benefit to the city and to the region.
Unique groundwater springs and rare species should be preserved.
Revegetation along the Anacostia will improve both the aquatic and
terrestrial resources of the District and the region.
• From an aesthetic point, the condition of the Anacostia is poor because
of trash, debris and odors. These factors not only reduce the quality of
the human experience with the natural environment, but can also
adversely affect the ecological resources, by preventing establishment
of SAV and by altering the behavior of organisms.
• The degraded condition of the Anacostia River has warranted its
placement on the list of the 10 most endangered rivers (American Rivers
1993 and 1994). It has dropped into the 20 to "30 most endangered"
list because "it has received increased attention from the Clinton
Administration and others, and by an Army Corps of Engineers wetlands
restoration project."
• Restoration of the aquatic resources of the District of Columbia will
depend on addressing the difficult problem of continuing urbanization of
the watershed. To some degree, urban decay contributes to sprawling
development, and by revitalizing urban areas, the region can slow its
growth and finance projects like runoff control.
• Severs! notable restoration efforts addressing ecological resources of the
District are already underway. Among these efforts are:
- Vision for Potomac Basin
- Blueprint for Anacostia Restoration (1994) and Anacostia Indicators
Project (Warner, MWCOG, personal communication)
- National Park Service restoration of Rock Creek and Kenilworth Marsh
- U.S. Army Corps of Engineers wetlands restoration project
Each effort should be coordinated to ensure that individual activities do
not conflict and that use of financial resources is maximized. In this
way, the vision of desired local and regional ecosystems will come
together.
6-7
-------
6.1 Future Studies: Filling Data Gaps
There are number of data gaps which need to be addressed, as we continue to
evaluate the environmental health of the District of Columbia. DC is not a new city;
its roots go back to the beginning of our history as a country. And yet, it is a new
city - some areas of the District are under development even today.
What affects the District environmentally affects all of us who live or work in
the city. We have a need to establish an environmental baseline, which will allow
scientists to evaluate the conditions which determine our quality of life. We need to
see just how well we are doing in our race to recover our fading resources. We need
to invest in our future.
1. There is a distinct need to conduct a biological inventory of.the
resources of the District of Columbia. This is well demonstrated by the
lack of scientific literature in this area of specialization.
2. It is essential to develop a regional perspective, which extends outside
the boundaries of the District proper. An evaluation should be made of
the dynamics of pollutant migration between surrounding counties and
the District.
3. A database should be established to manage existing information on lead
levels in human blood so that it is easier to identify lead poisoning cases
and possibly tie them to particular sources to help with preventing lead
exposure.
4. More data are needed on human activity patterns (fishing,
swimming/wading) and demographics. In addition, there is a need for
data that are adequate to make comparisons of human risks from
environmental conditions across subpopulations and geographic areas of
the city.
6-8
-------
6.2 Recommendations
Although it appears that environmental conditions in DC are generally favorable,
specific recommendations are provided to facilitate risk reduction for susceptible
subpopulations. In particular, there is a need to better communicate the idea of
environmental risk to those persons whose activity patterns and lifestyles may result
in potentially higher risks. Risks from fish consumption, air pollution (including indoor
air), lead paint, and drinking water need to be communicated to those who may be
more susceptible. Improved communication is intended to result in steps that can be
taken to reduce the risks for those subpopulations (e.g., reduce fish consumption,
reduce activities on days with high ozone levels, boil drinking water). Surveys have
revealed that the fish advisories are not effective in reducing consumption of the
species. This is especially of concern for subsistance or recreational fishermen who
may be consuming the fish species that may pose the highest risks. Also, those at
risk from this route of exposure may also be less likely to understand or adhere to
posted advisories.
Other recommendations relate to activities that can be undertaken/continued
by government agencies to improve environmental conditions with respect to both
human health and ecological resources:
Recognition should be given to the multitude of recommendations
provided by groups such as D.C. Area Water COPs to improve the
District's drinking water quality.
Evaluate drinking water quality "at the tap" across the city. There are
more than 70 locations where monitoring is conducted. Determine if or
how water quality varies across the District.
Lead testing should be resumed in the District. In addition to drinking
water, testing should also include soil in playgrounds and schoolyards,
as well as drinking water, pipes and paint in older homes.
6-9
-------
• Reinstate household hazardous waste pickup, or institute central drop-off
points where people can dispose of paints, pesticides, and other
household hazardous wastes.
• Compare air quality city-wide, from data obtained at the 7 ambient air
monitoring stations.
• Implement an ozone mapping and communication program to better warn
the population of high ozone levels in particular areas and to suggest
decreasing outdoor activities during these periods.
• Continue to upgrade Blue Plains Treatment Plant to reduce inputs of
nutrients into the Potomac River; and
• Create an infrastructure to coordinate acquisition and management of
human health and environmental risk data, to include information
gathered by the multitude of groups currently studying these issues.
Similar to the existing groups that coordinate ecological monitoring in the
DC area (and Chesapeake Bay area), there is a critical need to develop
coherent leadership to coordinate studies on human health. This group
can integrate all these data and thereby maximize their use and
availability, as well as establishing a clear strategy for the future.
• Create a public "grassroots" level of responsibility for preserving and
restoring our natural resources. Every person, regardless of age, social
status, race, religion, culture or ability, has the opportunity to make a
difference in the quality of life that we all share in the District. This city
has more parklandsthan most; more waterfront, more open space, more
green areas. It is incumbent upon every person to enhance their own
way of life by enhancing the environment of the District. Among the
activities that could be implemented include the many recommendations
of the 1991 Action Plan by MWCOG for the Anacostia River basin.
• Continue and expand coordination among federal/state/local government
agencies and other groups that are working to improve water quality and
biological resources in the Anacostia watershed. Controlling nonpoint
source pollution and CSO is an important element in this endeavor.
6-10
-------
7.0 REFERENCES
Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS). 1996. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Air and Radiation.
African American Environmentalist Association (AAEA); National Association of
Neighborhoods, National Wildlife Federation. 1994. Our Unfair Share: A Summary
of Pollution Sources in Our Nation's Capital.
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 1991. Toxicologies! Profile for
Aluminum. Draft
Anacostia Restoration Team. 1991. A commitment to restore our home river (a six-point
action plan to restore the Anacostia River). Metropolitan Washington Council of
Governments.
Anonymous. 1994. Report on the Potomac River watershed visions project. Interstate
Commission on the Potomac River Basin, Rockville, MD.
Athanas, C.; J. Cornwall; and C. Stevenson. 1991. Emergent wetland establishment under
differing habitat conditions in the Anacostia and Potomac River Basins. Horn Point
Environmental Laboratory, CEES and MWCOG Phase I Report.
Baker Environmental, Inc. 1993. Final Preliminary Assessment. Washington Navy Yard,
Washington, DC.
Santa, W.C. 1993. Biological water quality of the surface streams of the District of
Columbia. Vol. 2., no.1. Occasional Publications, Department of Biology, American
University, Washington, DC 20016.
Bowers, K. (Biohabitats, Inc.) Personal communication, February 9, 1996.
Bradley, M.C. 1959. An ecological survey of the Potomac and Anacostia Rivers with special
emphasis on pollution. Ph.D. dissertation.
Calabrese, E.J.; Pastides, H.; Barnes, R.; Edwards, C.; Kostecki, P.T.; et al. 1989. How much
soil do young children ingest: an epidemiologic study. In: Petroleum Contaminated
Soils, Lewis Publishers, Chelsea, Ml.
Carter, V. 1992. Chesapeake Bay submerged aquatic vegetation habitat requirements and
restoration targets: a technical synthesis. U.S. EPA for CBP. 186 pp.
Centers for Disease Control (CDC). 1994. Assessment of Inadequately Filtered Public
Drinking Water - Washington, DC, December 1993. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly
Report (September 16, 1994):43-No. 36.
7-1
-------
Centers for Disease Control (CDC). 1995. "Assessing the public health threat associated
with waterborne Cryptosporidiosis: Report of a Workshop." Morbidity and Mortality
Weekly Report (June 16, 1995):44 RR-6.
CH2MHHI. 1979. Rock Creek Watershed conservation study (Final). Report to U.S.
Department of the Interior.
Chesapeake Bay Research Consortium. 1995. Special Tributory Strategy for Federal Lands
in Washington, DC. Third Draft, September 27, 1995.
Cochran, C., DC Department of Public Works. Quoted statement made at the public meeting
on DC's Drinking Water, April 9, 1996.
Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Information System
(CERCLIS) 1996. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Emergency and
Remedial Response.
Cummins, J.D. 1987. District of Columbia resident fish survey. Federal Project Performance
Report, F-2R-3.
Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs (DCRA). 1994a. DC Tributary Nutrient
Reduction Strategy for the Restoration of the Chesapeake Bay. October, 1994.
Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs, Environmental Regulation Administration
(DCRA). 1994b. The District of Columbia Water Quality Assessment. 1994 Report
to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Congress Pursuant to Section
305(b) Clean Water Act (P.L. 97-117).
Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs, Environmental Regulation Administration
(DCRA). 1994c. 1994 recreational fishing survey of the District of Columbia. Project
Performance Report F-2-R-7.
Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs, Environmental Regulation Administration
(DCRA). 1995. Habitat monitoring - 1993 submerged aquatic vegetation survey of
the Potomac and Anacostia Rivers within the District of Columbia.
District of Columbia. 1995. Lead Poisoning Prevention Program. Screening Results for Years
1993-1995. Written communication from Ella Witherspoon.
District of Columbia, Department of Human Services, Commission of Public Health. 1994.
Public Health Advisory for consumption of fish caught in the D.C. waters.
District of Columbia, Air Resources Management Division (DC ARMD). 1996. Ambient air
quality monitoring network description: a brief 'overview of ambient air quality in DC,
1980-1993. Written communication from Khin Sann Thaung on April 4, 1996.
7-2
-------
Edmondson, S.A. 1988. 1987 macroinvertebrate census of the District of Columbia.
District of Columbia. Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs, Housing and
Regulatory Administration, Environmental Control Division, Water Hygiene Branch.
Greussner, B. (Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin). 1996. Personal
communication, March 14, 1996.
Guerrero, V.C. 1993. Inventory and status of wetlands in the District of Columbia. College
of Life Sciences, University of the District of Columbia. A final report submitted to
the District of Columbia Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs.
Hurley, L. 1991. Habitat requirements for Chesapeake Bay living resources. Chesapeake
Bay Research Consortium, Inc. Solomons, MD.
Hutchinson, L.D. 1977. The Anacostia story: 1608-1930. Smithsonian Institution Press.
ICPRB and Abt Associates, Inc. 1994. District of Columbia nutrient reduction strategy •
revised draft. District of Columbia.
Jorling, T.C. 1969. "An analysis of the vegetation of Rock Creek National Park, Washington,
D.C." M.S. Thesis, Washington State University. 43 pp.
Kazyak, P.P., et al. 1990. 1989 Fishery survey results and habitat enhancement
recommendations for the District of Columbia. Vol. I. Versar, Inc./ESM Operations.
King, L. DC Department of Public Works. 1996. Quoted Statement made at Public Meeting
on DC's Drinking Water, April 9, 1996.
Kumble, P.A. 1990. The state of the Anacostia (1989 Status Report). Metropolitan
Washington Council of Governments.
Leach, P. 1982. Fishing in the Nation's Capitol. D.C. Washington Area Waterfront Action
Group.
Lee, G. 1996. "Air pollution tied to 64,000 premature U.S. deaths." Washington Post.
May 9, 1996.
Limno-Tech, Inc. 1990. Sediment survey of priority pollutants in the District of Columbia
waters, March 5, 1990.
McAtee, W.L. 1918. A Sketch of the natural history of the District of Columbia. The
Biological Society of Washington.
Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (MWCOG). 1994. Blueprint for the
restoration of the Anacostia watershed. 2nd Edition. Prepared for DCRA.
Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (MWCOG) - Department of Environmental
Programs. 1996. Written Communication from Stephanie Benkevic on April 4,1996.
7-3
-------
National Park Service. 1993. Rock Creek fisheries study. Final report. Prepared by Britt,
D.L.; R.J. Lewis; and C. Cooper, Dynamac Corp and International Science &
Technology, Inc.
O'Connor, J.V. 1985. "The District of Columbia, the men who most influenced the
development of the capital of the U.S. used local geologic features to shape the city."
Earth Science.
Olson, E.D. 1995. The troubled D.C. drinking water supply: a preliminary review of
problems. Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC).
Orth et al. 1995. Distribution of submerged aquatic vegetation in the Chesapeake Bay.
Virginia Institute of Marine Sciences.
Permit Compliance System (PCS). 1996. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Wastewater Enforcement and Compliance (OWEC).
Pinkney, A.; W.H. Burton; L.C. Scott; and J.B. Frithsen. 1993. An assessment of potential
residual effects of the January 1992 oil spill in the Anacostia River. Versar, Inc./ESM
Operations.
Pirkle, J.; D. Brody; E. Gunter; R.A. Kramer; D.C. Paschal; et al. 1994. "The decline in blood
lead levels in the United States." JAMA, 272(4):284-291.
Plafkin, J.L.; M.T. Barbour; K.D. Porter; S.K. Gross; and R.M. Hughes. 1989. Rapid
bioassessment protocols for use in streams and rivers: Benthic macroinvertebrates
and fish. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Preer, J.R.; H.S. Sekhon; J. Weeks, Jr.; and B.R. Stephens. 1980. "Heavy metals in garden
soil and vegetables in Washington, DC." Trace Substances in Environmental Health -
XIV. Conference Paper. Columbia MO, University of Missouri.
Rafia, N.; G. Cohen; M. Wolf; L. Cohen; C. Faser; et al. 1993. "Incidence of lead poisoning
in young children from inner-city, suburban, and rural communities." Therapeutic Drug
Monitoring, 15:71-74.
Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System (RCRIS). 1996. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste.
Resources for the Future (RFF). 1996. Environmental priorities for the District of Columbia.
Discussion Paper 97-04. Washington, DC.
Schlekat, C.E.; B.L. McGee; D.M. Boward; E. Reinharz; D.J. Velinsky; and T.L. Wade. 1994.
"Tidal river sediments in the Washington DC area. III. Biological effects associated
with sediment contamination." Estuaries 17(2):334-344.
Schwab, M. 1990. "An Examination of the Intra-SMSA Distribution of Carbon Monoxide
Exposure", Journal of Air Waste Management Association 40:331-336.
7-4
-------
Schwartz. D. (Clean Water Action) 1996. Written Testimony Presented at U.S. EPA Public
Hearing on DC's Drinking Water, April 9, 1996.
Shostack, R. 1977. Rock Creek watershed habitat survey and inventory of fauna and flora
Montgomery County, Maryland. Maryland National Capitol Parks and Planning
Commission, Silver Spring, MD. pp. 94
Smith, H.M. and B.A. Bean. 1898. "List of fishes known to inhabit the waters of the District
of Columbia and vicinity." Bull. U.S. Fish Comm. Vol. 18 (1898).
Smith L.D. 1972. A brief history of the Anacostia and far N.E. - S.E. area.
Sweeney, J. 1996. District of Columbia Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs.
Personal Communication (on RCRIS and CERCLIS sites in DC), May 6, 1996.
Terrell, E.E. 1970. "Spring flora of Chesapeake and Ohio Canal area, Washington, DC to
Seneca, Maryland." Castanea, 35, 1-26.
The Nature Conservancy, District of Columbia Natural Heritage Program. 1995. Rare plants
andanimalsof the District of Columbia. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park
Service.
The Nature Conservancy. 1996. "The closer you look..." Maryland-District of Columbia
Chapter News, XX-2.
Tilak, R. and M.J. Siemien. 1995. Biological sampling of anadromous and resident fishes of
Potomac and Anacostia Rivers.
Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System (TRIS). 1996. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 1989. Anadromous fish passage study: Rock Creek,
District of Columbia. Report prepared for D.C. pp. 51.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 1994a. Annual Report of Water Analysis, Dalecarlia
Water Treatment Plant Laboratory. Washington, DC.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 1994b. Anacostia River and tributaries, District of
Columbia and Maryland, integrated feasibility report and final environmental impact
statement. Vol. I. Department of the Army, Baltimore District, Corps of Engineers.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 1996a. Fact Sheet: Planned Improvements to
Washington Aqueduct treatment process. Distributed at Public Meeting in DC's
Drinking Water on April 9, 1996.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 1996b. Washington Aqueduct Division (Dalecarlia
Water Treatment Plant). Personal Communication with Mirada Brown on March 22,
1996.
7-5
-------
U.S. Bureau of the Census. 1995. Statistical Abstract of the United States: 1995. U.S.
Department of Commerce - Economics and Statistics Administration. Washington,
D.C.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 1988. Office of Policy, Planning, and
Evaluation. Environmental Progress and Challenges: EPA's Update. (EPA-230-07-
033). August 1988.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 1992a. Safeguarding the Future:
Credible Science, Credible Decisions. (EPA/600/9-91/050, March, 1992).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). Office of Water. 1992b. Consumption
surveys for fish and shellfish. A Review and Analysis of Survey Methods.
(822/R-92-001).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 1993. Office of Health and Environmental
Assessment, Office of Research and Development. Wildlife Exposure Factors, Vol. I.
EPA/600/R-93/187a.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 1996a. Office of Research and
Development, National Center for Environmental Assessment. Exposure Factors
Handbook, Prepared by Versar, Inc. (preliminary draft)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 1996b. Office of Information Resources
Management. CIS/Gateway System and Environmentally Sensitive Targeting and
Assessment Tool (ESTAT).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 1996c. Direct Implementation of the
Public Water System Supervision Program in the District of Columbia. Distributed by
U.S. EPA Region 3 at Public Meeting on April 9, 1996. (Fact Sheet)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 1996d. EPA Takes Important Step to
Address Threats to Drinking Water from Cryptosporidium. May 2, 1996. {Press
Release)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 1996e. 1994 Toxic Release Inventory,
Public Data Release - State Fact Sheets. Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics.
EPA745-F-96-001.
Velinsky, D.J.; T.L. Wade; C.E. Schlekat; B.L. McGee; and B.J. Presley. 1994. "Tidal river
sediments in the Washington DC area. I. Distribution and sources of trace metals."
Estuaries 17(2):305-320.
Velinsky, D.J. and J.D. Cummins. 1994. Distribution of chemical contaminants in wild fish
species in the Washington DC area. Final Draft Report for District of Columbia,
Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs, Water Quality Control Branch. ICPRB
Report #94-1.
7-6
-------
Versar, Inc. 1995. Steam electric industry: Preliminary study of environmental issues. Draft
Report. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Office
of Science and Technology, Standards and Applied Science Division.
December 15, 1995.
Virginia State University (VSU). 1994. The forgotten river: a preliminary study of the
Anacostia River. Prepared as a recommendation of the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Water.
Wade, T.L.; D.J. Velinsky; E. Reinharz; and C.E. Schlekat. 1994. "Tidal river sediments in
the Washington DC area. II. Distribution and sources of organic contaminants."
Estuaries 17(2j:321-333.
Wald, M.L 1995. "New Cautions About Tap Water." New York Times. June 22, 1995.
Williams, G.P. 1977. Washington DC's vanishing springs and waterways. United States
Geological Survey Circular, 752.
Wolfe, J. (USACE); Shell, J. (MWCOG). Personal communication.
World Resources Institute. 1993. The 1993 Information Please Environmental Almanac.
New York.
7-7
-------
APPENDIX A
Data Base Spreadsheets on RCRIS (Small Quantity Generators) and
AIRS-AFS Facilities With Emissions Below Threshold Levels
-------
Table A-1. Facilities in D.C. Listed in AIRS-AFS Which Have No Monitoring Data
*fcu»1i,
; FjScTOtHf :
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13 -
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
f ' * J s
;, " fcielfKy*.4. ' , j
DCD983967696
DCD980204929
OCD980204911
DCD043990498
OCD983966516
DCD05442644O
DCDO03259439
DCD0891 88940
DCS 1700243 11
DC4210221004
OCD980204903
DCD000765818
DC41 8000001 6
OCD980204812
DCDO22677413
DCD980204879
DCD074828344
DCD9826616O5
DCD980204945
DC 1170023476
DC5570024443
DCD1 65680257
DCD041 962788
DC521 181 1000
DCD1 22095102
DCDO07972516
DCD980204952
DCD098689227
DCD983969387
DCD980205009
DCD983966805
DCD980205124
DCD983969379
' ' ' , f ' ' ' „ ,
?acWty Jfetttw ' ' , '"' , *"' '" ]'
DISTRICT PAVING CORPORATION, SE
DC VILLAGE
ASPHALT CONSTRUCTION
DC GENERAL HOSPITAL
GEORGE WASHINGTON UN
WASHINGTON NAVY YARD
WASHINGTON HOSPITAL CENTER
BP OIL CORP
GALLAUDET COLLEGE
FAITH CONSTRUCTION
WALTER REED ARMY MEDICAL CENTER
NAVAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
FORT LESLEY J. MCNAIR „
VET ADMIN MEDICAL CT
CORSON & GRUMANN
TYROC CONSTRUCTION
SOLID WASTE REDUCTION CENTER
POST OFFICE-L'ENFANT
ANACOST1A ANNEX
NAT CAP HOUSING AUTH
AMERICANA HOTELS INC
PROVIDENCE HOSPITAL
CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY
SIBLEY MEMORIAL HOSP
HILTON HOTELS CORP
ECKINGTON POWER
AMERICAN UNIVERSITY
NAVAL SECURITY STA
BOLLING AFB
ARISTO CLEANERS
COLUMBIA PLAZA
ARMORY-DC GOVERN
BOARD OF EDUCAT-DC G
D E S-DC GOVERNMENT
FEDERAL CITY COLLEGE
FIRE DEPART
GENERAL SERVM3C GOV
HIGHWAY DEPART
LIBRARY-DC GOV
PUBLIC SCHOOLS
TEACHERS COLLEGE-DC
-------
Table A-1. Facilities in D.C. Lifted in AIRS-AFS Which Have No Monitoring Data (continued)
No.of I
fiwstlttie*
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55 •
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
Facility* :
DCD980205116
DCD980204937
DCD980204978
DCD980205033
DCD043202381
DCDO20290169
DCD097781421
DCD980205058
DCD9802O5066
DCD077791796
DCD980205132
DCD98020514O
DCD0748321O6
DCD980205215
OCD980204804
DC0983969395
DCD006920482
DCD 12652441 2
DCD983969353
OCDO74810110
DC5960011414
DC821 1821 162
OC0980205249
OCDOO3245768
DCD983966714
DCDO20290698
DCD094894565
OCD983969361
OC0007874308
DCD9802O4895
DC84700O0086
DCS 141 799004
OC01 161 97286
Facility Nanw
POUCE DEFT
DOCTORS HOSPITAL
GREENWAY APARTMENTS
IBM CARD PLANT
KENNEDY WARREN HOTEL
MADISON HOTEL
MANHATTAN LAUNDRY
MAYFLOWER HOTEL
MC LEAN GARDENS
MERIDIAN HILL MOTEL
METROPOLITAN HOTEL
NAYLOR GARDENS '
QUEBEC HOUSE N&S
REGENCY HYATT HOUSE
REVIEW AND HERALD
RIVER PARK MUTUAL
SHERATON PARK HOTEL
SHOREHAM AMERICANA
CAPITOL HILTON HOTEL
STERLING LAUNDRY
STUART PETROLEUM CO.
TIBER ISLAND
TOWN CENTER MANAGEM
TRINITY COLLEGE
TRINITY REAL ESTATE
CORPS OF ENG-ARMY
NATIONAL GUARD
NORTH HEATING PLANT
TEMPO ABC
WASHINGTON CATHEDRAL
WASHINGTON POST
WASHINGTON STAR
WESCHESTER CORP
WINGATE HOUSE
WIRE PROPERTIES
YALE LAUNDRY
BERGMAN'S-LAUNDRY
CORRECTION DC GOVERN
FEDERAL BUILDING #8
NATL ZOOLOGICAL PARK
ROUBIN & JANEIRO
-------
Table A-1. Facilities in D.C. Listed in AIRS-AFS Which Have No Monitoring Data (continued)
ftOxftf ,
frwtltees :
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
1C4
105
106
107
1O8
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
„'•" , '•
•'•• •• Facility* ,...;
DCD044757714
DC0982567414
DCO000815431
DCDO00797761
DCOO008 15456
DCD983968744
DCD98 1946841
DCD98396601 1
DCOOO08 15449
DCDO 16444838
DCD024211435
OCD1 26561 307
DCD982674434
DCD077795060
DC021 1621 156
DCD983967142
DCD055191134
OCD983967167
DCD0383345O5
DC247009O018
DCD980204879
OC0983967175
DCD983967183
DCD983967191
OCD983967209
DCD983967217
DCD983967225
OC0983966136
DCD983967233
OCD983967241
OCD983967258
OC0983967266
DCD983967274
DCD983967282
DCD983967290
DCD983967308
DC0983967316
DCD983967324
,"'''''
-' - ' , ', Facility fcfem* ,,'•'",
RAINBOW AUTO BODY & PAINTING CO
Z CLEANERS
POPEYE'S FRIED CHICKEN
BLUE PLAINS WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
CONGRESSIONAL EXXON OF CAPITOL HILL
FLORIDA MARKET MOBIL
MERIT SERVE & SAVE
WATERGATE CENTRAL PLANT
U.S. NAVAL OBSERVATORY
DISTRICT COMMANDANT
TRI-COUNTY INDUSTRIES
AARON'S CLEANERS
ACKERMAN'S CLEANERS
ALLSTATE CLEANERS
DISTRICT PAVING CORPORATION, NE
A QUALITY AUTO PARTS
AMERICAN UNIVERSITY
WALTER REED ARMY MEDICAL CENTER
BOISEY BARNES M.D.
CAPITOL HILL HOSPITA
CARDIVASCULAR DIAG
CARNEGIE iNST Of WA
CARNEGIE INST OF WA
CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA
CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL
CHARLES CITRIN M.D.
COLUMBIA HOSP WOMEN
DC GOVERNMENT
EDLOW INTL. CO.
JULIUS FOGEL. M.D.
GENERAL SERV ADMIN
GEORGE WASH U MED CT
GEORGETOWN U MED CTR
GREATER SE HOSPITAL
MERRITT GROOVER M.D.
GROUP HEALTH ASSOC
HADLEY MEM HOSPITAL
DEPT HEALTH HUMAN SV
DEPT HEALTH HUMAN SV
DEPT HEALTH HUMAN SV
DEPT OF JUSTICE-FBI
-------
Table A-1. Facilities in D.C. Usted in AIRS-AFS Which Have No Monitoring Data (continued)
N*M»f :
fcuctlftfo* ' :
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
' VF*tlilty*-s' ^
OCD983967332
DCD983967340
OCD983967357
DCD983967365
DCD983967373
OCD983967381
DCDO77803757
DCD983967399
OCD983967407
DCDO74828344
OCD98 1038870
DCD983969429
DCDQ74810110
DCD983966797
DCD1 32296039
DCD983967431
DCD983967449
DCD983967456
DCD024283517
DCD98 1733702
DC098 1038946
DCD9811O9275
DC0000815506
DCOO91 342758
DCOO008 15738
DCD98 1041 940
DCD98 1040678
DCDO48010912
DCD981039472
DCD98 1042880
DCD037763349
OCD0242S9988
DCDO38993267
DCD024293524
DCD98 11 05869
OCD074805532
DCD983968504
'",;-',' ? ' JPftcflfty Nwtw "'
ALEX KWAN. M.D.
MEDICAL DIAGNOSTICS
METRO RADIOLOGY ASSO
US NAVY
OSTEO.DIAG.CTR
PEVSNER MD.. PAUL H.
PROVIDENCE HOSP
RAD/1RID.INC
SHIBUYA MD. JO
SIBLEY HOSPITAL
SMITHSONIAN INST.
TREASURY, DEP. OF
TRINITY COLLEGE
V.A. MEDICAL CTR
WASHINGTON HOSP CTR
WATKINS MD.ANTHONY E
WEAVER MD. JOHN A
YATER CLINIC
STERLING TEXTILE SERVICES
SUPER CLEANERS
FARRAGUT VALET
WESTIN HOTEL VALET
SWIFT CLEANERS
HARVEY'S CUSTOM CLEANER
GREENHOUSE BROTHERS
RUSSELL'S CLEANERS
LUSTRE CLEANERS OF GEORGETOWN
NATIONAL CLEANERS
CLEAN ALL
ONE HOUR MARTINIZJNG
DEBONAIR CLEANERS
MAYFLOWER VALET
MACDEE QUALITY CLEANERS
WINDSOR VALET
PALACE CLEANERS
SARGENT CLEANERS
HAN CLEANERS
AARON'S CLEANERS
ACKERMAN'S CLEANERS
AFRO CLEANERS
ALLSTATE CLEANERS
-------
Table A-1. Facilities in D.C. Listed in AIRS-AFS Which Have No Monitoring Data (continued)
PtoxCf
Fscflttiw •
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
,; . facility* |
''-",- '- ' faciltey ««»»' - ' "' „""";;< ''"'•• '•• '
AMERICAN VALET
ANA HOTEL
ARROW CLEANERS
BELAIR CLEANERS
BESSON CLEANERS .
BETTY BRITE CLEANERS
SETTY SRiTE CLEANERS
BILLY'S VALET
BLACK STONE CLEANERS
BRENTWOOO CLEANERS
BRIGHT CLEANERS
C & C CUSTOM CLEANERS
CAPITOL CLEANERS
CASSELL'S CLEANERS
CATHEDRAL CLEANERS
CHESAPEAK CLEANERS
CLEAN EXPRESS CLEANERS
COLTBERG'S CLEANERS
CORNER CLEANERS
CUSTOM CLEANERS
DEAN AVENUE CLEANERS
DUPONT CIRCLE CLEANERS
E & G CLEANERS
EMBASSY CLEANERS
EMPIRE CLEANERS
FAMILY CLEANERS
FRENCH'S CLEANERS
FRIEDRICH'S CLEANERS
GEORGETOWN VALET
GEORGETOWN VALET
GIANT CLEANERS
GILL'S VALET
GLOBAL CLEANERS
GOODY CLEANERS
GRAND HOTEL
GRAND HYATT
HEIGHT CLEANERS
HILLTOP CLEANERS
HOL SALE CLEANERS
IMPERIAL VALET
JET CLEANERS
-------
Table A-1. Facilities in D.C. Urted in AIRS-AFS Which Have No Monitoring Data (continued)
Nf 1
fatitttte* :
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
. ' feeflfcy* - ' i
Paeafcyttam*
KILROY'S CLEANERS
KING LEE LAUNDRY
LASSITER CLEANERS
LEON CLEANERS
LONG BROTHERS CLEANERS
LOUIS CLEANERS
MADISON DRYCLEANERS
MAJESTIC CLEANERS
MASTER CLEANERS
MASTER CLEANERS
MICHIGAN CLEANERS
MID CITY CLEANERS
NAYLOR VALET
NEW MODERN CLEANERS
NEW YORK CLEANERS
NEW TOWN CUSTOM CLEANERS
NORTHWEST VALET
PARAMOUNT CLEANERS
PARK FABRICARE CLEANERS
PARK HYATT WASHINGTON
PARK ROAD CLEANERS
PARKLANE CLEANERS
PEERLESS CLEANERS
PRESIDENT VALET
QUALITY HOUSE CLEANERS
REAL CLEANERS
REGAL CUSTOM CLEANERS
REX CLEANERS
RHODE ISLAND CLEANERS
ROCKET ONE HOUR DRY CLEANING
ROSA'S CLEANERS .
SCOTT'S CLEANERS
SHERATON WASHINGTON HOTEL
SMILE CLEANER J. Y. L. C.
SMILE CLEANERS
SOCIETY CLEANERS
SOUTHERN VALET SHOP
SUN CLEANERS
SUPER CLEAN CLEANERS
TASH CLEANERS
TRUE CLEANERS
-------
Table A-1. Facilities in D.C. Listed in AIRS-AFS Which Have No Monitoring Data (continued)
No.of i
fiscfthiw "j
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
„.., ,,, f ,t ,^,£.
- ^''ftwjlH^*:^/-!
DCD983966O29
DCD983966037
l^r/-'!'' 'T '",', , ' " i4<^^iite»ih»; / *'*„;* '';/,:, ; *", , ^'r '* V
TUXEDO VALET
TWELVETH STREET CLEANERS
UPTOWN CLEANERS
VENUS CLEANERS
WATERGATE VALET
WILKERSON CLEANERS
WILLARD CONTINENTAL
M 0 SANOIDGE, INC
JOHN L RENSHAW INC.
HESS MECHANICAL
-------
TabbA-2 Small Quantity Hazaidous Waste Generatois h Washhgtcn.D.C. (1993)
EPA ID number Facility Name
HtyName
H&KST
Address
EPAIDnumber Facility Name
Address
DCD983866631
DC0983966623
000983070161
DC0983989445
DC0024210775
DC0983970005
000983970690
000983967852
DC0016444838
DCR000000323
OCROOOOOOOS9
DC0983971490
000024211435
DCO983968769
DCO981935836
DCO983989866
OCR000000042
OC0000204545
000041961426
OCO983969169
OCO983970062
000126561X7
OCO983968969
DCR0000004S9
000045493814
000000963561
OCO983971169
DCO 003248176
DCO0777S5060
000024228306
DCO983970682
DCO983970718
000981109275
000983969072
DC0981935960
000983968538
000127174225
DC0981113533
DCO981938681
DC4141707162
OCO9839715S7
OC0000620484
OC2470000520
000003242476
DCO 003247483
DCO981935B93
000981039415
000980831788
000980714034
DCO980551097
DC0000044941
OC0041961657
DC0983969084
DCO054426440
DCO9B3970435
DCO983988581
DCO983970245
000982565568
DCD983969718
OCD983971458
12m a K ST NW
1815 L STREET ASSOCIATES
1912 AUTO
A A LADDER AM) SUPPLY
ABC ELECTRIC MOTOR SE RVKE
A&C AUTO REPAIR
A&RAUTOPARTS
AAMCO TRANSMISSION
AARONS CLEANERS
ABA TEES
ABCBUUEPRINTINQINC
ABSOLUT IMAGES
ACKERMANS CLEANERS
AD HOC SVC
ADAMS MORGAN DENTAL CLINC
ADMIRAL LIMOUSINE
ADVANCED LASER GRAPHICS
AD WORKS
AFRO CLEANERS
AL BEAN AUTO TRUCK INC
ALABAMA AVE SHELL
ALL STATE CLEANERS
ALLEN-MITCHELL & COMPANY
ALLIANCE AUTO
AMERADA HESS COR3
AMERICAN ARTISTIC DESIGN INC
AMERICAN AUTO BODY
AMERCANPRINTINQCO INC
AMERICAN UNIVERSITY
AMERICAN VALET INC
AMTRAK
AMTRAK
ANA HOTEL
ANAC08TIA CHRYSLER PLYMOUTH INC
ANACOSTIA DENT AL CLINC
ANACOSTIA MARINA INC
ANACOST IAS H3
ANDRULIS RESEARCH CORP
ANGELL. ROBERT J MR
ARCHITECT OF THE CAPrTOL
ARCO POWER TECHNOLOGIES INC
AROO PRESTIGE STATIONS INC
AREL RD3 FEDERAL BLDQ
ARROWPRINTINQ SERVICE INC
ART DISPLAY CO INC
ARTHUR CAPPER DENTAL CUNC
ASTOR CLEANERS
AT aT INFORMATION SYSTEMS
AT&T LONG LINES
AT &T LONQ LINES - EO ENQ
AUOUSTE AERONAUTCS CONSULTING
AUTO EQUIPMENT CO INC
BBS AUTO SERVICES
BP OIL INC WASHINGTONTERMNAL
B&LAUTO
B&T STARTERSVCS
BaW GARAGE
BACKUS JHS
BAUDENSBURG AMOCO
BALLARD &ASSOC
1150KSTNW
1615 L STREET NW SUITE 200
1329 KENLWORTH AVE NE
2305 RHODE ISLAM} ME
115LST8E
4S36 BURROUGHS AVE ME
1824 BLADENSBURG RD NE
140 M STREET 8E
1813 BE NNING RONE
5644 3RD ST., NE.
1147 20THST NW
1801BTHSTNW
1623 COLUMBIA RONW
121913THSTNW
2250-ACHAMPLAINST NW
1243 FIRST ST BE
1101 30THST NW
1025 THOMAS JEFFERSON ST NW
1918 BENNINGS PONs
459ISTNW
4107 ALABAMA AVE SE
2026 RHODE ISLAND AVE NE
515V STREET NE
920 BLADENSBURQ ROAD NE
1820 S CAP ITOLSTSE
909 G PLACE NW
633SCH1UJMPLNW
808HSTNW
BEEGHLY CHEMISTRY BLDQ
4519 WISCONSIN AVE NW
18019THSTNE
1ST STREET NE UNDN STATION
2401MSTNW
1708 GOOD HOPE ROSE
1328W3TSE
1900MSTSE
16TH&RST88E
1365 NEW YORK AVE NE
1336HSTNE
CAPITOL HILL
125024THSTNW
2129 RHODE ISLAM) NE
1200PENNSYLVANIAAVE NW
1851 ADAMS STNE
231518THPLNE
601LST8E
3278 M STREET NW
1325GSTNW
72513THSTNW
30ESTSW
653 EAST CAPrrOLSTNs
300LSTNH
129 Q STREET SW
401 FARRAGUT ST
631 HOWARD HD
2928 GEORGIA AVE NW
10153RD STNE
8 DAKOTA AVE a HAMILTON ST NE
1201 BLADE NSBURG ROAD NE
2N3 aEASTOF CAPITOL ST NE
DC0983968751 LEES AMOCO
DCD98396B736 LEES AUTO SVC
OC0983970450 LEES AUTO a TRANS
DCD983970328 LEE'S FOREIGN AUTO PARTS
OC0983971033 LEFANT PLAZA AUTO SERVICE
DC0983970825 LEGAL SERVCES CORPORATION
DCD003473253 LEOADALYCO
DCO024254914 LEON OFFICE MACHINES CO
OCD981112824 LEONS DRY CLEANERS
OCD981936834 LEWIS. RANDALL J MDPC
DC0983971SB1 LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
DCD982565202 LINCOLNJHS
DCD9839700S8 UKENSOFTHE WEEK
OC09B3969783 UNSTRANSMISSON
DC0981043128 LOGAN CLEANERS
DCD055188742 LONG BROS CLEANERS
DCD024243362 LOUIS CLEANE RS
DC0000444562 LOUIS DREYFUS PROPERTY GROUP
DC0983971468 LOVE JOY SCHOOL DCPS
DC0982899639 LUSTRE CLEANE RS MCLEAN GARDENS
DCO043990126 LUSTRE CLEANERSOF CAPITAL HLL
DC0981040678 LUSTRE CLEANERSOF GEORGETOWN
DCD024257024 LUSTRE CLNRSOF PENNA AVE
DC0000093427 MLK MOTORS
OCO983968678 M&M AUTO BODY
DCD038993267 MAC DEE QUALITY CLEANERS
DCD127872711 MACFARLANDJH
000983969528 MACHINISTS INC
DC0983969023 MACKS AUTO CLINIC
DC0983966151 MAD (SON LAUNDRY INC
DC0000444838 MAGIC CLEANERS
DCD981039274 MAJESTC CLEANERS
DC0981936768 MAMIE D LEE DENTAL CLINC
DC0983970666 MANUEL AUTO
DCD983970021 MARSHALL HOTS TO WING
DCD983969973 MARTENS CARSOF WASHINGTON
DCD983968728 MARTIN a BOYD SPRING WORKS
DCD9B3971508 MARTINS AUTO & CAR REPAR
000077811283 MASS TRANSIT
DC09B3970070 MASSACHUSETTS AVE APT8
DCD033292301 MASTER CLEANER
DC09828743B4 MASTER CLEANERS
DC0024259938 MAYFLOWER VALET INC
DCD983970971 MCGREGOR BUILDING
DCD983970773 MCI
DC0127921280 MCKINLEY8HS
DCO983966815 MCPHERSON BUILDING THE
DCD9819370S3 MEDICAL ASSOCIATES OF NE INC
DC0981936545 MEDICAL CLINC
DC0983967506 MEDLANTIC RESEARCH FOUNDATION
DC0981938776 MED9ERVHECHINGERMALL
DC0000144295 MEINEKE MUFFLER
000983970228 MERGE a VOLV MTRS
DC0983968447 MERCHANTS TIBE a AUTO #01018
DCD981946841 MERIT FIORDA
OC0981946833 MERIT OLCORP-WASHINGTON
DC0981739923 MERfTOILCORF-WASHINGTON
DCD074837113 METHODIST HOME OF DC
DCD983970849 METRO AMOCO
OCD980328743 METRO BU3Q GLC11542
1396 FLORDA AVE NE
33158THSTNE
1900B BLADENSBURQ RD NE
1215 KENIWORTH AVE M:
970DSTSW
750 FIRST ST8TE10THFL
1201 CONNECTICUT AVE NW
623H3TNW
300 MISSOURI AVE NW
1919 EYE STNW
101 INDEPEM)ENCE AVE SE
1ST Ha IRVING 8T8NW
713 LAMONT STREET NW
1400 MARYLAND AVE NE
1402 14 STNW
655LEBAUMSE8E
3931 14TH ST NW
2828 PE NNSYLVANIA AVE NW
12THa08TSNE
3402 DAHO AVE NW
311PENNAVE8E
2030 P STNW
3225 PENN AVE SE
1750 MARTIN UJTHER KING AVE 8E
2800 10TH ST ME WASH DC 7
1639 L STNW
4400 DWA AVE NW
1004 FIST ST SE
2030 SHANNON PL 8E
1100 H STNH
1905 Q 9TH ST NE
435 R STNW
FT TOTTEN a HAMILTON OR NE
1437 IRVING ST NW
1715 BLADE NSBURQ TONE
4800 WISCONSIN AVE NW
920 RHODE ISLAM) AVE NE
2109 10TH ST NW
529 14TH STNW
1500 MASS AVE NW
2056 RHODE ISLAM) AVE NE
1648 N CAPITAL STNW
1121VERMONTAVNW
2121 K ST NW
113319TH STREET NW
2ND aT 3T8 N=
90115TH8TNW
1613 RHODE ISLAM) AVE NE
950 8 STNW
108 IRVING ST NW
1532 BENNINQ RDNE
3190 BLADENSBURQ RD NE
152515TH ST NW
1141 BLADE NSBURQ RD
500 FLORDA AVE NE«
1801 NEW YORK AVE NE
1739 NEW JERSEY AVE NW
4901 CONNECTICUT AVE NW
4251 MINNESOTA AVE NE
1200 H STNW
Ibt-iqg.wk3
Pagel
24-Apr-98
-------
TabbA-2 Small Quantity Hazatdous Waste Qeneratos h Washhgton.D.C. (1993)
EPA ID number Facility Name
Facility I1
BALLAU
Address
EPA ID number Facility Name
Address
DCO003247418
DC0104681796
000982565663
DC0983967654
DCO983966468
DCO983B68730
DC0981039530
DC0024217523
DC0981936016
DCO094890340
DCO126508183
DC0982569281
000981107899
DC0072656325
DCD981106354
DC0981042823
000983871268
000983370148
DCD983B70369
DC0983971326
OCR000030364
DC0077810265
000983971532
DC0983967845
DC0983971094
OC0000797761
OC9570090036
DCO983967878
DCD983970823
OCO053380051
DCR000000125
DC0001959410
DC0 132294398
000020293130
DCO981740673
000983969122
DCO983970831
DCD982565574
000983987613
DC0024221251
DC0983970880
DC0001010057
DC0981935B77
DC0024221640
DCD981935992
DC0038988863
DCD983968397
DCD98386859S
DC0983968587
DCD983970443
000983966748
DCR000000034
DC0983967753
DC0983871235
DC0983971565
DCD062010996
DCD981108749
000983967860
DC0982681605
DCO981935935
UF. D MANUFACTURING 00 INC
BALLOU S H S
BANNEKER S H 8
BARRY ROAD SOC QIC 12234
BATTERY SHOP
BAUMGARTENCOOF WASHTHE
BELAIR CLEANERS
SENDEE CORP
BENNING HEIGHT8DENTALCUNC
BEROMANNSINC
BES9ONS CLEANING INC
BEST CAPITOL AUTO BODY
BEST CLEANERS
BEST PRINTER INC
BETTY BRITE CLEANERS
BETTY BRITE CLEANERS
BICYCLE EXCHANGE
BICYCLE EXCHANGE THE
BCYCLE PRO SHOP
BIO PETES AUTO & ROAD SVC
BIQ WHEEL BKES
BLACKSTONE CLEANERS
BLOCKS AUTO
BLUE CROSS BLUE SHELD NCA
BLUE PLAINS UPTOWN
BLUE PLAINS WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT
BOLLING AIR FORCE BASH
BOULEVARD CHEVRON SERVICE
BOWIES INC
BRANCH IRON WORKS INC
BRAWNERCO
BRD OF QOVOF THE FED RESERVE SYS
BRENT WOOD CLEANERS
BRIGHT DRY CLEANERS
BRINKS INC
BRINKS INC
BROWN ft VAZ EXXON
BROWNE J H S
BUCHANAN 8T SOCQLC 12851
BUCHANAN VALET INC
BUDGET RENT A CAR
BUREAU OF ALCOHOL TOBACCO & FIREARMS
BUREAU OF MATERNAL &CHHO HEALTH
BURRELLS SUPERB CLNRS
BURROUGHS SCHOOL DENTAL CLINIC
BUTLER AVIATION WASHINGTON NATL INTL
C A C CUSTOM CLEANERS
C & S AUTO REPAIR
C ft S AUTO SALES
C ft V MOTORS
CABS INC
CAFRITZ CO 1825 K ST BIDQ
CANADIAN EMBASSY
CANNING JOHN 1 COMPANY LIMITED
CAPITAL CITIES ABC INC ABC NEWS
CAPITAL CITY ENGRAVING CO
CAPITAL CLEANER
CAPITAL HILL SERVICE CENTER
CAPITAL HILTON HOTEL
CAPITAL IMAGING ASSOCIATES INC
619-21 H STNW
3401 4TH ST SE
803 EUCLID STNW
2600 BARRY ROSE
1318 9THNWST REAR
825 11TH STNW
6211 GEORGIA AVE NW
2107 ALABAMA AVESE
46TH ft BENNING RD SE
2318 RHODE ISLAND AVE NE
1329 14TH ST NW
319SSTNE
4526 GEORGIA AVE NW
1127 PE NNSYLVANIA AVE SE
5123NANNE HELEN BURROUGHS
2223 MINNESOTA AVE SE
3411 MSTNW
4000 WISCONSIN AVE NW
3405 M STREET NW
188 T STNE
1034 33RD STREET NW
1734 CONNECTICUT AVE NW
1913 GALE STNE
55012THSTSW
1ST&NSTSSE
5000 OVE RIOOK AVE SW
PORTLAND ST SW
4885 MACARTHU R BLVO NW
1337ESTSE
909 FRANKLIN ST NE
1231 25TH ST NW
20TH &CONSTUTUTON AVE
1315 RHODE ISLAM) AVE NE
2207 4TH STNE
1710 17TH STNE
2120 WEST VIRGINIA AVE NE
55018 DAKOTA AVE NE
26THST ft BENNING RD NE
1350 BUCHANAN STNW
4602 14TH ST NW
DULLES AIRPORT N SERVICE 1C
850 MASSACHUSETTS AVE NW
702 15TH ST
3414 GEORGIA AVE NW
18TH&MONHOE STNE
WASHINGTON NATL ARPRT
5511 CONNHCTCUT AVE NW
2912BALDENSBURGRD
2108 RHODE ISLAND AVE NE
221 VINE ST NW
3821 BENNING HONE
1825KSTBLOQ
501 PENNSYLVANIA AVE
GSA NCR LOBBY. 7TH & OSTS
1717 DESALES STNW
1215 H STNW
1308 H STNE
339 PENNSYLVANIA AVE SE
16TH&K STREET NW
3638 16TH ST NW SUITE AG 69
DCR000000257 METRO LAUMJRAMAT
DC098396B680 METROPLIS BKE ft SCOOTER
DCD983970120 METROPOLITAN POLICE
DC0981040124 MCHIGANPARK CLEANING PLANT
000983970419 MDTOWNMTRS
DC0983968579 MDAS
000983969536 MDAS MUFFLER
OC8150090001 MD-ATLANTC REGIONAL LAB
000983969999 MILLER BROS EXXON-CAMARK INC
000981733769 MINNESOTA CLNRS
000047277983 MINTE EDWARD W CO IN
DCD040550592 MINUTEMAN PRESS
DC0883970815 MITCHELL FAGAN
DC0126498443 MITCHELL. CUTTY VALET SHOP
DC0983970668 MKM AUTO SVC
OCO983968405 MOBILO1 CORPORATION fAV3
DCD983966656 MOHAMMED SDDOUE SHEIKH
DCR000000471 MOMENAUTO
DC0003249448 MOORE & MOORE INC
DC0003250990 MORRIS INDUSTRY INC
DCR000000265 MOTOROLA SVC CTR
DC0983971Q29 MR T'S AUTO REPAIR
OC098396B629 MT PLEASANT AUTO REPAIR
DCD980555221 MULTCHEM/DC
000109411918 MURRAY. FRANCIS J MD
DC09839666S4 MYONO KIM TEXACO
DCD983971078 NASA HEADQUARTERS
OC5470000006 NATIONAL ARCHIVES ft RECORDS ADMIN THE
DCROOOG00133 NATIONAL AS90C FOR HOME CARE
DCD981946114 NATIONAL AUTO BODY CO. INC.
DCD983970278 NATIONAL CAB ASSN
DCROOOC00232 NATIONAL CAPITALPARKSE
DC0048010912 NATIONAL CLEANERS
DC0041353203 NATIONAL FOOD PRCES90RSASSOCIATON
DC2330012384 NATIONAL GALLERY OF ART
DC0003247756 NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC 80CETY
OC3141790337 NATIONAL PARK SERVICE-BRENTWOOD MAINT YD
DCD983967605 NATIONALRURALELECTRCCOOPERAT
DCOS83969163 NATIONAL TIRE WHOLSALER
000983987472 NATL ASSOC OF RET FED EMPLOYEES
DC3170090002 NAVAL AIR FACILITY - WASHINGTON
DC9170024310 NAVALDISTRCT - WASHINQTONOC
DC8170024311 NAVAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
DC1170023476 NAVAL SECURTTYSTATDN
DC0003244458 NAVE TYPOGRAPHIC SERVICE INC
DC0982568127 NAYLOR VALET CLEANERS
000983970195 NAZARD CONSTRUCTION CO
000983968546 NE INDUSTRIAL BODY & REPAIR
DCD98267B518 NEIGHBORS CLEANERS LAUNDROMAT
DCD983970484 NERY
DC0981112030 NEW MODEL CLEANERS
DC0982705527 NEWTOWNCUSTOMCLEANERSINC
DCR00000040B NEW YORK AVENUE MOBL
DCD983968918 NEWSLETTER SERVICES INC
DC0000204552 NORTH OFC MACHINES
000881738208 NORTHEAST FORD INC
000983970724 NORTHEAST TRANSMISSONS CARE
DC0089193189 NORTHWEST AUTO BODY
DC0981102759 NORTHWEST VALET DRY CLEANERS
DC0983969627 NY8VCTR
1400 RHODE ISLAM) AVE.. N£.
7098THSTSE
2250 RAILROAD AVE SE
3928 12TH ST NE
4109 9TH STNW
625 NEW YORK AVE NW
1620 RHODE ISLAM) AVE NE
460 NEW YORK AVE NW
264 MISSOURI AVE NW
2918 MINNESOTA AVE SE
1908 BLADENSBURQ RD NE
1200 19TH STNW
5604 CHEVY CHASE PARKWAY NW
804 H STNE
1124 CONGRESS STNE
1442 UST
2201 GEORGIA AVE NW
37 L STREET SE
1840 FENWCK STNE
8130 CRYDEN WAY
58563RD STNE
2200 RAILROAD AVESE
3034 MT PLEASANT ST NW
5001FTTOTTENDRNE
3301 NEW MEXICO AVE NW
1024 PENNSYLVANIA AVE SE
300ESTSW
7TH & PENNSYLVANIA AVE NW
513 C ST NE
3422 GEORGIA AVE NW
1810 EDWIN STNE
1400ANACOSTIADRNE
5018 1ST STNW
1401 NEW YORK AVE NW
6TH ft CONSTITUTION AVE NW
ITTHftMSTSNW
515 NEW YORK AVE NW
1800 MASSACHUSETTS AVE NW
67 K STREET SW
1533 NEW HAMPSHIRE
PUBLIC WORKS DEFT-
WASHINGTON NAVY YD PUB WK8 OPT
4555 OVE RLOOK AVE 8WJ2580
3801 NEBRASKA AVE NW
54553RD STNE
3031 NAYLOR RD
2001 FAIRVEW AVE NE
400-AT STREET
30011STSE
1731 KALARAMARD NW
1412 PENN AVESE
3174 1/2 BLADE NS8URG RD NE
2420 NEW YORK AVE NJE NE
1545 NEW YORK AVE NE
2101 K ST NW
2175 WEST VIRGINIA AVE NE
1049 FRANKLIN STNE
1293 TAYLOR STNW
67 KENNEDY STNW
1801 NEW YORK AVE NE
lbt-sqg.wK3
Page 2
24-Apr-98
-------
TabbA-2 Small Quantity Hazantous Waste Qeneratoa h Washington, D.C. (1993)
EPA ID number Facility Name
Address
EPA ID number Facility Name
Address
T5CR000000026 CAPITAL NOVELTIES
DC0000963695 CAPITAL TEES
DC0074833187 CAPITOL OOMPO3ITONCX) INC
DC0000200220 CAPITOL FORD
DCOB83971474 CAPITOL FORD
DC0055191134 CAPfTOL HILL HOSPITAL
DC0983969060 CAPITOL MOTOR WORKS
000983968983 CAPITOL NOVELTEES
DCD983968710 CAPtTOLPAVINQ
DC000324219S CAPITOL PRINTING INK CO INC
DC00953S4411 CAPITOL VOLKSWAGEN ft 8UBARJ INC
OCOOC0933069 CAPTOLFORD
DC0000345967 CAPTOL HLL SUPPORTIVE SVCSPROQ
DCD104662259 CARDOZO S H 8
DC2470090018 CARNEGE INST OF WASH-GEOPHYSICAL LAB
DC0983868488 CARNEQE INST WASH GEOPHYSLAB
DCD038994SOS CARNEQE INSTITUTONOF WASH
DC0983971334 CARR RE ALE STATE SVCS
DC0983969791 CARS & CYCLES INC
000003242625 CASLON PRESS INC
DCO981107477 CASSELLS CLEANERS
OCOOS3503458 CATHEORALCLEANERS
DCO980204879 CATHOLICUNIVERSITYOF AMERICA
000003242732 CAVALIER PRESS INC
OCO981935703 CENTER 170ENTALCLINIC
000981935760 CENTER 18DENTAL CLINIC
000983971292 CENTRAL ARMATURE
DCD003253168 CENTRAL ARMATURE WORKS INC
DCR000000299 CENTRAL CAB
000024224503 CENTRAL VALET INC
DCD024224545 CENTURY CLEANERS
DCD983971318 CQAS WASHINGTON DC
000000760793 CHARLES OARAGE
000981937196 CHASE.KENNETH H MD PC
DCO983989809 CHEMTRANSINC
DC0981104391 CHESAPEAKE CIEANERS
DCO980551030 CHESAPEAKE & POTOMAC TELEPHONE CO
000980712376 CHESAPEAKE &POTOMAC TELEPHONE CO
DC0980SB0697 CHESAPEAKE &POTOMACTELEPHONE CO
OCD98C651147 CHESAPEAKE &POTOMACTELEPHONE CO
DCD980552434 CHESAPEAKE & POTOMAC TELEPHONE CO
DCD980555370 CHESAPEAKE & POTOMAC TELEPHONE CO
DCO980714323 CHESAPEAKE &POTOMAC TELEPHONE CO
DC09805505SO CHESAPEAKE & POTOMAC TELEPHONE CO
DCO980713259 CHESAPEAKE 8.POTOMAC TELEPHONE CO
000980690705 CHESAPEAKE & POTOMAC TELEPHONE CO
DC0982570715 CHEVRON USA INC
000983987886 CHEVRON USA INC
OC0983970674 CHEVY CHASE BICYCLE SERVICE
DCD074845504 CHLDRENS NATIONAL MEDICAL CTR
DC0000231449 CIANO AUTO REPAR
DC0983970302 CITY BKE3 INC
OC0000931162 CITY WORKS SCREE NPRINTINQ
OC00203168S5 CLARK OIL & REFINING CORP
DC0981039472 CLEAN ALL CLEANERS
000165683822 CLEAN EXPRESS CLEANERS
000981938624 CLINTON CYCLES
000983971052 COIN CENTER (12214)
OCD983B66599 COLBERTS CLEANERS
OCD983971193 COLES AUTO SERVICE
1901 FAIRVEW AVE NE
6925 WILLOW ST NW
1835KSTNW
3010 RHODE ISLAND AVE NE
3010 RHODE ISLAM} AVE NE
700 OONSTITUTDN AVE NE
701 VIRGINIA AVE SE
1212 U STREET NW
2211 CHANNINQ ST NE
80BCHANNINQPLNE
1401 RHODE ISLAND AVE NE
3103 RHODE ISLAND AVE NE
700 CONSTITUTDN AVE NE
13TH4CLIFTONST3NW
2801 UPTON STNW
5251 BRAOO BRANCH RD NW
5241 BROAD BRANCH RD NW
2445 M STNW
1381 H STREET REAR
2400TSTNE
1802DSTNE
3000 CONNECTICUT AVE NW
620 MCHIQANAVENJE NE
1110 CONGRESS STNE
70215THSTNE
4130 HUNT PL NE
1200 3RD STNE
6250 STREET NW
1029 NEW JERSEY AVE SE
1409 H STNW
123 KENNEDY STNW
HANQAR NUMBER 6 NATL ARPRT
5410 GEORGIA AVE NW
1120 19TH STNW
1605 FENWKX AVE NE
605CHESAPEAKESTSE
2815NSTSE
72513THST
3726 MARTIN LUTHER KINO AVE
30ESTSW
120 nH STNE
2055LST
1045 WISCONSIN AVE NW
170014TH STNW
951 VST
263316TH STNW
5014THST
4531 14TH ST NW
5614 CONNECTICUT AVE NW
111 MICHIGANAVW NW
1233 TAYLOR ST NW BAY #4
2501 CHAW LAIN STNW
152814TH ST 3RD FLOOR NW
1150 CONNECTICUT AVE NW
2149 QUEENS CHAPEL RD NE
2310 4TH STNE
2830 BLADE SBJRQ Ft)
6400CHLLUMPLNW
2129 RHODE ISLAND NE
1736 RHODE ISLAND AVE
DC0084917947 OBSTETRICAL & GYNECOLOGICAL OP
DCO983970872 OGDEN AVIATION SERVICES OCR
000983969544 OKE TRK SERV INC
DCD983969098 OKIE TRUCK & BODY SVC
OC7471100035 OLD EXECUTIVE OFFCE BU1DINQ
DCD981042BBO ONE HOUR MARTINIZINQ
DC0983968975 OPPORTUNITY CONCRETE CORP
DCO983967936 OROAMZATDNOF AMERICAN STATES
000983969610 OTIS AUTO REPAIR
DOD09S095360 OXFORD MANOR APARTMENTS
DCD045494184 P S ENTERPRISES INC
DC0000082297 P&P AUTO BODY
DC0983967563 PA SERVICE CENTER INC
DCD983969916 PAKS AMOCO INC
DCO981105869 PALACE CLNRS
DCD980927214 PAN AMERICAN AIRLINES
DCD983971284 PAN AMERICAN HE ALTH ORGANIZATION
DC0000937326 PANC PRESS
DCD024268617 PARAMOUNT CLEANERS
DCD983970006 PARK CITCO AUTO REPAIR
DCO1545813S7 PARK HYATT WASHINGTON
DCD981113475 PARK RD CLEANERS
DCD983969007 PARKER EXXON DBA Wft J ASSOC INC
DCO982580128 PARKLANE CLEANERS
DC0981042948 PARKS FABRCAHE CLEANER
DCD983969817 PARSONS AUTO
000024269210 PAUL BROTHERS INC OLDSMOBLE
OCD112314430 PAULJHS
000983970550 PENSKE TRUCK LEASING
DCR000000224 PEP BOYS MANW MOE JACK 324 THE
DCO000819516 PEPCO BENMNGROAD GENERATING STATDN
DC0000819508 PEPCO BUZZARD POINT GENERATING STATDN
DC0981043003 PEPTIDETECHNOLOGESCORPORATON
DC0982570772 PERFECTON PAINTING
000983970252 PETE'S FRONT END ALIGNMENT
000062005556 PETROVTTCH AUTO REPAR
DCD0667752B9 PH18PHOTO
000983970047 PING AUTO SVCTH
000983971185 PIONEER AUTO
000006920284 POTOMAC ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY
DC0000901538 PRECISDNTUNE
DC0094100468 PRESDENT VALET
OC0983968413 PRESDENT VALET II
DCO983968852 PROTEUS BKE & FITNESS
DCO077803757 PROVIDENCE HOSPITAL
OCD982B61423 PUBLC CLEANER
DC0983969908 PUTNAM EXXON
DC0981935COO PUTNAM &LERNERDRS
DC000014457B QUALI AUTO SVC
000087697355 QUALITY HOUSE CIEANERS - WASHINGTON
DCD983970641 QURE8HIEXXON
DC0083069924 QURESHIEXXON-FAIRWAYCAB
DCO983971524 RJ A ENTERPRISES INC
DCD128852153 R STREET DENT ALCLINC
DCO106741655 RABAUTJH3
DC0048010003 RAFF EMBOSSING &FOLCRAFT INC
DCO044757714 RAINBOW AUTO BODY & PAINTING CO INC
DCD8839698B2 RALPH M PARSONS COMPANY THE
DC0024273203 RANDALLS AUTO SERVICE
DCD983971151 RAP GRAPHICS
730 24TH ST NW f20
OGDE N GARAGE THOMAS AVE
1354 OKE STNE
1356QKE STNE
17&PENNSYLVANIAAVE NW
6143 GEORGIA AVE NW
1601 S CAP ITOL8T8W
1889 F STNW
2251 FAIRLAWNAVE 3E
2697 BO WEN ROSE
4820 STAMP RD
822 HOWARD ROAD SE
1201 PA AVE SE
6300 GEORGIA AVE NW
5019 WISCONSIN AVE NW
1800LST
52523RD STNW
1656KST
608 8TH STNE
3646 GA AVE NW
1201 24TH ST NW
1352PARKRDNW
4812 MACARTHURBLVD NW
4304 CONNECTICUT AVE NW
5535 ILLINOIS AVE
1240 UPSUR STNW
5220 WISCONSIN AVE NW
8TH &OGLETHORPE STS NW
655 TAYLOR STNE
3920 S CAP rrOLST
3300 BENNINQ RD NE
1ST8WST3SW
125 MICHIGAN AVE NE 4368M
3238 R STNW
1218 MT OLIVE RONE
230314TH STNW
2390 CHAM3 LAIN STNW
2713 QOODHOPE RD SE
2040 WEST VIRGINIA AVE NE
1900 PENNSYLVANIA AVE NW
5420 NEW HAMPSHIRE AVE NW
5514 CONNECTICUT AVE NW
4837 WISCONSIN NW
242218TH ST NW
1150 VARNJM STNE
1620 N CAP ITOLNE
6350 GEORGIA AVE
114519TH STNW *802
420 RHODE ISLAND AVE NW
1769 COLUMBIA RD
1F10ROAAVENE
2405 22ND STNE
223 RIGG3 RONS
10TH&RST8NW
NORTH DAKOTA & KANSAS AVE 3 NW
3020 YOST PL N=
1445 CHURCH STNW
113315THSTNWSTE 000
6007-9DK ST NE
6525 CHILLUM PLACE NW
I6t-§qg.wk3
Pages
24-Apr-96
-------
TabbA-2 Small Quantity Hazardous Waste Geneiatoa h Washhgton.D.C. (1993)
EPAIDnumber Facility None
Address
EPA IP number Facility Name
Address
DC009869B178 COLONY CLEANERS
DCR000000422 COLOR IMAGING CENTER
OC0983967191 COLUMBIA HOSPITAL FOR WOMEN
DC0983971201 COLUMBIA WOODWORKING INC
DCR000000349 COMMERCIALOUPLICATINQ SERVICE
DCD981937774 COMMUNITYCLNRS
DCD983970294 COMMUNITY EXXON
DCD983968942 COMPUTER CAR CARE
DC0981935828 CONGRESS HEIGHTS DENTALCUNC
DCO101925949 CONNECTICUT AVE NISSAN
DCO983967761 CONNECTICUT AVENUE AMOCO
OCD9B3969460 CONSOLIDATED WASTE INDUSTRE8
DCO077801827 CONTROL DATA CORP
DC0127686897 COOLDGE S H S
DCO982675787 COPENHAVER
DCO983967498 CORCORAN GALLERY OF ART
DCO982707614 CORNER CLEANER
DCO003242799 CORPORATE PRESS INC
DCD983969049 COUSINS AUTO REPAIR
DC0983969601 CRANE RENTAL COMPANY
DC0000444505 CRANE SVC CO INC
DC0042644047 CREATIVE TYPOGRAPHERS INC
DCD9839666BO CRESTWOOD ENTERPRISE 1983 INC
DCROOOC00307 CROWN AUTO SALES
DC09839686S6 CROWN CAR WAGON SALES
DCO981042908 CRYSTAL DRY CLEANERS INC
DCD98396606S CSX TRANSPORTATION INC
DCO024233355 CURTIS CHEVROLET INC
DCD983967746 CUSTOM CLEANERS
DCD982698789 CUSTOM WOODWORKS
DC5470090015 CUSTOMS FELD OFFICE
DCR000000430 CVS PHARMACY
DC0107931081 DCCLNRS
OCO981106297 D CDEPT OF PUBLIC WORKS DECAOMDR
DC0981040959 D C FIFE DEPARTMENT-APPARATU8DIV
DC0983971367 D C GOVERNMENT PRINTING
DC0981935943 D C MEDICAL EXAMINERS OFFCE
DC0130229867 D C PUBLIC SCHOOLS
DC0122310121 DC TECH RESEARCH CENTERS
DC0000082198 D H AUTO WORKS
DC0980555833 DARWIN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY INC
DCO980654448 DARWIN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY INC
DC0983969148 DAVIS EXXON INC
DCD981035124 DAWES INC
DCR000000218 DC ARMY NATL GUARD DCNQ ARMORY
DC0000444547 DC CROWN INC
DCD981935778 DC DEPT OF CORHECTONS INFIRMARY
DCO983971037 DC FIRE DEPT APPARATUS
DCR000000380 DC FOREIGN CAR SERVICE
DC0021869789 DC GENEL HOSP DEPT OF PATHOLOGY
DC0983969759 DCPUBLC SCHOOLS
DCD983969787 DC PUBLIC SCHOOLS
DCD983970781 DC-DPW VEHICLE MAINTENANCE FAC
DC0982565509 DEAL J H 8
DCO037763349 DEBONAIR DRY CLEANERS
OCO981103138 DEC ONE HOUR CLEANERS
DCO983971300 DELTA AIR LINES INC
DCO064852320 DENNE AVE CLNRS
DC0000082354 DENNY8AUTO REPAIR
DC6470000013 DEPT OF COMMERCE NOAA FEPPO BR
4903 GEORGIA AVE NW
1725 DESALES STREET NW
2425LSTREETNW
945 BRENTWOOD RD NE
1920LSTREETNW
2118 14TH ST NW
4854 BURROUGHS AVE N=
1033 THIRD ST
3855 STH ST SE
4221 CONNECTICUT AVE NW
5001 CONNECTICUT AVE NW
1130 W STREET NE
51NSTMH
STH & TUCKERMAN 8T8 NW
6200CHILUJMPL
1701ESTNW
1730KALORAMARONW
2414 DOUGLAS ST NE
913 FRANKLIN ST NE
1801 MONTANA AVE 1C
1415 KENILWORTH AVE NE
1205-071 ST NW
6201 NEW HAMPSHIRE AVE N=!
2510 BLADE NS8URQFONE
2570 BLADE NSBURQ POKE
3129 MT PLEASANT ST NW
1501ECKINGTONPLNE
5929 GEORGIA AVE NW
2637 CONN AVE NW
6017CHILLUMPLNE
1200 PENNSYLVANIA AVE
6-7 DUPONT CIRCLE
69104THSTNW
4TH ST & MC MILLIAMDR NW
1103 HALF STSW
808 CHANNING PLACE NE
19THST& MASS AVE SE
1709 3RD STNE
900 MICHIGAN AVE NE
4200 BURROUGHS AVE NE
BLDQ 200 WASH NAVY YARD
BLD01300BOLLINQAFB
4501 14TH ST NW
165338THST9E
2001 E CAPITOL ST SE
1825 S CAPITOL STSW
1931 D ST SE
550 MAINE AVE SW
31K STREET SE
1900 MASSACHUSETTS AVE 81:
2115 STH STNE
2000 ADAMS PLACE NE
8833 W VIRGINIA AVE NH
FORT DRIVE ft NEBRASKA AVE NW
2612CONNECTCUTAVE NW
3331 14TH ST NW
WASHINGTON DULLES INTLAIHPOHT
4309NANNE HELENBOURROUGHS
5230 GA AVE NW
15TH&CON8TITUTCNAVE NVV
DCO983969155 RAS SHELL
DCR000000372 RASHE ADS AUTO
DCD9810430BO REAL CLEANERS
DCD9B3969742 FED SEA CAB
DC00611272B8 REGAL CUSTOM CLEANERS
DC0981735244 RE MAC USA INC
DCD126535822 PEX CLEANERS
DC0983968645 RHODE ISLAM} CAR CARE
DCD069275885 RHODE ISLAND CLEANERS
DC0983970740 RICKS AUTO CLINC
DCD983970997 RIGGS DRY CLEANERS
DC0066773771 RING DENTAL LABORATORY INC
DC0982661548 RIVERSIDE CLEANERS
DCR000000190 ROBERT AUTOBODY RAS INC
DCD981108483 FQBINSON CLEANERS
DC0983971066 ROCK CREEK EXXON
DCR000000358 ROCK CREEK PARK
DCO098691371 ROCKET CLEANER
DC0983969171 TONNES AMOCO 3
DC0983970260 RONS'S AUTO SVC
DC0122495443 ROOSEVELT8H8
DC0120288048 ROPERJHS
DC0024291932 ROSAS CLEANERS
DC098396B926 ROYS TOWING
DC0000963860 RUFUS AUTO BODY REPAIR ft PAINT
000983966783 RUFUS AUTO RESTORER
DCD981041940 RUSSELLS CLEANERS
DCROOOC00174 R&RAUTOMDTIVE
OCD983970237 8&T AUTO SVC
DC9751305997 SAINT ELIZABETHS HOSPITAL
DC0983969593 SAMOANEL
DC0074805532 SARGENT CLEANERS
DC0003239332 SAULS LITHOGRAPH CO
DC0983967910 SCHINDLER ELEVATOR CO
DC0020289278 SEVEN SEAS
DC0983970757 8H AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE
DCOS81936826 SHARPE SCHOOL DENTAL CLINIC
DC0981939952 SHAW COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER
DCD982566044 SHAWJHS
DC0980205215 SHERATON WASHINGTON HOTEL
DC0983970104 SHERMAN AVE AUTO
DC0074828344 SIBLEY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL
DCD983968900 SIDWELL FRIEN3S SCHOOL THE
OCO983971540 SILBERNr SALES INC
DC0000144352 SINGLETARY AUTO BODY
DC0982660813 SMILE CLEANERS
DCO982699571 SMILE CLEANERS
DC0000144337 SMITH BOB AUTO RPR KLINCUE
DC7470090005 SMITHSONIAN INST - NATURAL HISTORY BLDQ
DC5470090007 SMITHSONIAN INST NAT ZOOLOGICAL IP ARK
DC3470090033 SMITHSONIANINST-ANACOSTIAMUSEUM
DC0470090010 SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTON - AAJPO BLDQ
DC9470090011 SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTON - FREER GALLERY
DC8470090012 SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTON - HRSHHORN MUSE
DC7470090013 SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION SERVICE CENTER
DC4470090008 SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTON-MUSOFAMER HIST
DC3470090009 SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION-SIBLOG
DC2470090034 SMITHSONIAN INST-QUAD
DC8470090014 SMITHSONIANNATLAIR&8PACE MUSEUM
DCD037759610 SMITHSONIAN-ARTS&INDU8TRE8 BLDQ
6419 GEORGIA AVENW
1124 FLO RDM AVENUE
1319 GOOD HOPE RD SE
1832 FENWCK STNE
5021 CONNECTICUT AVE NW
1525 W STNE
7346 GEORGIA AVENW
604 RHODE ISLAND AVE NE
4235 WISCONSIN AVE NW
3705 BENNING RONE
5585 SOUTH DAKOTA AVE NE
2430 PENNSYLVANIA AVE NW
3401 K STREET NW
416 MORSE ST NE
1214USTNW
1827 ADAMS MIL RDNW
5000 GLOVER ROAD NW
408 H STNE
400 RHODE ISLAM) AVE NE
940 FLOROA AVENW
13TH4UPSHURST8NW
4800 MEADE STREET NE
1963CALVERTSTNW
923 BRENTWOOD HD NE
2117 B LADENSBURQ RD NE
2902 BLADE NSBURG RD NE
5121 GEORGIA AVENW
5913 BLAIR RD NW
1329 F KENNILWORTH AVE NE
2700 MARTIN L KING AVENUE
1551 HEMLOCK ST NW
2420 WISCONSIN AVE NW
2424 EVARTS STNE
800 HAMLIN STNE
601 13TH ST NW
2325 18TH ST NE
4300 13TH ST NE
1707nHSTNW
10TH ST &RHODE ISLAND AVE NW
2660 WOODLEY RD NW
2830 SHERMAN AVENW
5255 LOUGHBORO RD NW
3901 WISCONSIN AVENW
21420UEENSCHAPELRO NE
1358 FLA AVE t£
937 H ST NE WASHINGTON
1501 INDEPENDENCE AVE 8E
2210 STH STNE
10TH&CONSTITUTDNAVE NW
3000 BIX CONNECTICUT AVE NW
1901 FORT PL SE
8TH&GST8NW
JEFFER90NOR @ 12TH ST SW
8TH & INDEPENDENCE AVE SW
iniNCAprroLST
14TH & CONSTTTUTON AVE
1000 JEFFERSON DR8W
1100 INDEPENDENCE AVE 8 W
7TH A INDEPENDENCE AVE SW
900 JEFFERSON OR 8W
ttt-sqg.wrtO
Page 4
24-Apr-98
-------
TabbA-2 Small Quantity Hazardous Waste Generates ti Washington. O.C. (1993)
EPA ID number Facility Name
Address
EPAIDnumber FadlltyName
Address
DC9470000093 DEPT OF ENERGY WASHINQTON
DC0983967530 DEPT OF HU MAN RESOURCES DC QOV
OC0981935885 DHSDC VILLAGE RADIOLOGY DEPT
DCR000000505 DIAMOND CAB
DC0983968454 DIAMOND SQUARE CLEANERS INC
DC0983969015 DICKERSTRANSMISSDN
DC0983969031 DISTADS AMERICAN
DC0000963629 DISTADS AUTO CLINC
DCD983969967 DISTADS TIRE ft. AUTO
DCD983966540 DISTRCT FUR CLEANING CO
DCD024231B96 DISTRICT FUR CLEANING INC
DC0983968fl50 DISTRCT HARDWARE
DCR000000281 DISTRCT LINE AUTO
DCD003244357 DISTRCT LITHOGRAPH CO INC
DCD116197286 DISTRCT PAVING
DC0982674434 DISTRCT PAVING CORPORATION
DCD983968785 DISTRCT PAVING CORPORATION
DC0983S70286 DOUGLAS AUTO
DC0982565517 DOUGLASSJ HS
DCD055183818 DPL MOTORS INC
DCD983971276 DRUG ENFORCEMENT AOMNI8TRATDN
DC0136207784 DUNBAR S H 8
DC0982695785 DUPONT COURT CLEANER
OCR000000521 E&EAUTO
DC0000933085 E&GCLEANERS
DC000090S517 EAGLE PRINTING CORP
DCO983970633 EAGLE PRINTING CORPORATDN
DC0000444455 EARLS DISCOUNT AUTO PARTS INC
DC0981106503 EAST AUTO BODY
DC9141713488 EAST POTOMAC MAINTENANCE YARDS
DC0081049118 EAST SIDE GARAGE INC
DC0981035504 EASTERN CHEMICAL WASTE SYSTEMS
DC0980828867 EASTERN CHEMICAL WASTE SYSTEMS INC
000982565681 EASTERN SHS
DCD983970955 ELEVEN HUNDRED CONNECTICUT AVE
DCO982565459 ELDT J H 8
DCD983968512 EMBASSY CHEVRON SERVICE
OCD9B3967522 EMBASSY CLEANERS
DCD981941065 EMBASSY ROW CLEANERS
DCD132277849 EMPIRE CLEANER
DC0983970013 ETW
DC0983969775 EUROPEAN MOTORS LTD
DCD98256S442 EVANS J H S
DCD9839701S3 EVANS PRINTING COMPANY
DCR000000513 EXPRESS AUTO SERVICE
DC0003245743 EXSPEEDITE SERVCE INC
DCD982566002 EXXON CO U 3ARA5253SB
DCD982573727 EXXON CO U SARAS 25674
DC0982566069 EXXON CO U SARS #2-5381
DC0000082208 EXXON CO U 3 A #21254
DCR000000117 EXXON CO USA 25055
DCR000000109 EXXON CO USA 25377
DC09B3970989 EXXON CO U SA 27581
DCR000000315 EXXON CO USA 27988
DCD98396B470 EXXON CO U SA #25335
DCD9839683S3 EXXON CO USA #25438
DCO983969452 EXXON CO U SA #27582
DCD98396B371 EXXON CO USA #27833
DCD98396B520 EXXON CO U SA #27834
DCD983970930 EXXON CO U 8A #27835
1000 INDEPENDENCE AVE 8W
CTR1770215THSTNE
#2 DC VILLAGE LNSW
1101 RHODE ISLAM) AVENUE l€
1819 WISCONSIN AVE NW
1018 BALDENSBURG FD NE
823PENNAVESE
71014THSTNE
2320 MARTIN LUTHER KINO AVE SE
33PATTER90NSTREETN5
26K8TNE
20D3P8TNW
7825 GEORIQA AVE NW
104829THSTNW
60PSTSE
2001 5TH ST NE
400 T STREET NE
1740 14TH ST NW
DOUGLASS & ST ANTON RD8 8E
4431 ST NW
4006THSTSW
1301 NEW JERSEY AVE NW
1755SSTNW
2628 EVANS STREET NE
413 KENNEDY ST NW
115615THSTNWLL10
1710 RHODE ISLAM) AVE NW
2901 MINNESOTA AVE SE
231018THPLNH
1100OHDDRSW
1293 TAYLOR ST NW
2619EVARTSSTNE
1330 NEW HAMPSHIRE AVE NW
17TH&E CAPITOL STS NE
1100CONNECTCUTAVE NWSTE720
laTHST&CONSTrrUTIONAVE NE
2200PSTNW
4215 CONNECTCUT AVE NW
150917THSTNW
3710MACOMBST
1309 FIRST STSE
1418-24P STREET NW
5800 E CAP ITOLSTNE
2240 25TH PLACE NE
1610 14TH STREET NW
91810TH ST NW
1201 PENNSYLVANIA AVE
1925 BLANDESBURO RD NE
9508 CAPITOL STSE
2800 PENNSYLVANIA AVE
loci s CAP rroLsrsw
1FLORDAAVENE
200 MASSACHUSETTS AVE NE
2230 NEW YORK AVE NE
5831 GEORGIA AVE NW
3700 TE NTH ST N=
1020MCHIGANAVENE
1601 WISCONSIN AVE NW
4881 MASSACHUSETTS AVE NW
1827 ADAMS MILL RD
DCD982571028 SOCIETY CLEANERS
DCD983970567 SOLSALINSINC
DCD003261948 SOLEM, JOSEPH A
DC0000144154 SONNYS AMOCO
DCD982565087 80USA J H S
000983968884 SOUTH CAPITOL STREET EXXON
DC0000444471 SOUTH DAKOTA AMOCO
DC0000606020 SOUTH INTERORBUILDING
DCD983967837 SOUTHEAST CO GLC12237
DC0006920417 SOUTHERN RAILWAY CO AND SYSTEM LINES
DC0045498807 SOUTHERN REGION MOTOR TRANSPORT INC
DCD099B61072 SOUTHERN VALET SHOP
DCD981936883 SOUTH WEST DENTAL CLINC
DCD983970351 SPEEDY MUFFLER
DCD127731750 SPINGARNSH8
DC0000444539 STADIUM EXXON
DCD074813114 STANDARD AUTO BODY INC
DCR000000141 STATE AUTO
DCD024283517 STERLING LAUNDRY
DCD980550974 STEUART PETRO CO M STREET TERMINAL
DCD980551022 STEUART PETRO CO SO CAPITOL TERMINAL
DCD983968843 STEUART PETROLEUM CO FARRAGUT ST
DCD983970385 STIDHAMTIRE
DCD983970377 STIOHAMTIFE
DCD14420B331 STRPPING WORKSHOP
DC098396773B STROMBERG SHEET METAL WK8 INC
DCD983967720 STROMBERG SHEET METAL WKS INC
DCD983969874 STROMBERS SHEET METAL WKS INC
OCD982703365 SUN CLEANERS
DC0000082313 SUNOILCOWANY
DCD000760688 SUNOCO SERVICE STATDN
DC0000760785 SUNOCO SERVICE STATDN
DCD000760801 SUNOCO SERVICE STATDN
DCD000760744 SUNOCO SERVICE STATDN
DCD000760751 SUNOCO SERVICE STATDN
DC0000760702 SUNOCO SERVICE STATDN
DCD000760777 SUNOCO SERVICE STATDN
DCD000760678 SUNOCO SERVICE STATDN
DCD000760694 SUNOCO SERVICE STATDN
DCD000760888 SUNOCO SERVICE STATDN
DCD000760819 SUNOCO SERVICE STATDN
DCD000760835 SUNOCO SERVICE STATDN
DCD000760843 SUNOCO SERVICE STATDN
DC0000760769 SUNOCO SERVICE STATDN
DCD000760736 SUNOCO SERVICE STATDN
DCD000760850 SUNOCO SERVICE STATDN
DCD000760728 SUNOCO SERVICE STATDN
DCD0007B0710 SUNOCO SERVICE STATDN
DCD000760827 SUNOCO SERVICE STATDN
DCD983970591 SUNSET CLNRS
DCD982861944 SUPER CLEAN
DC0981733702 SUPER CLEANERS
DCD007972920 SUPER CONCRETE CORP
DCR000000208 SUPER SALVAGE INC
DC0000082321 SUPER TRAK 676
DCD983969833 9UPERDR ANHEUSERBUSCH
DCD070912845 SUPERDR BODY REBULDING & PAINTING
DC0000144196 SUPERTRAK #624
DCR000000554 SUPPORT TERMINAL SERVICES INC
DCD040550972 SWIFT CLEANERS
439 14TH SE
1325 5TH STNE
92715TH ST NW
5207 BURROUGHSAVE NE
37TH&ELYPLSE
3900 MARTIN LUTHER KING JR AVE
2350 SOUTH DAKOTA AVE NE
1951 CONSTITUTONAVE NW
1325 GOOD HOPE RD SE (12237)
92015THSTNW
92015THSTNW
251 FLORDAAVENW
850 DELAWARE AVE SW
1507 14TH ST NW
26TH ST 4 BENNING RD NE
2851 BENNINQRDNE
1700KALORMARDNW
1355 H ST NE REAR
5909 BLAIR RD NW
1333 M ST SE
1721 8 CAPITOL ST NW
401 FARRAGUT ST NE
39LSTSW
3170 BLADENSBURG RD
411 NEW YORK AVE NE
1120 3RD STNE
2S51VSTNE
1235 WST NE
84 RHODE ISLAND AVE NW
2305 PENNSYLVANIA AVE
1201 MT OLIVET RD NE
12539THSTNW
101 NEW YORK AVE NE
1337 GOOD HOPE RD SE
2305 PENNA AVE SE
3341 BENNING RONE
2643 VIRGINIA AVE NW
115RIGGSRDNE
46358 CAP rrOLSTSW
1000 BLADENSBURG RD NE
424 RHODE ISLAND AVE
4940 CONrCCTCUT AVE NW
2510 PENNSYLVANIA AVE SE
6450 GEORGIA AVE NW
50 M STSE
212514TH ST NW
1248 PENNSYLVANIA AVE SE
4400 BENNING RD NE
4530 WISCONSIN AVE NW
3511 12STNE
4415 BO WEN ROSE
1453 HO WARD ROSE
5001 FT TOTTENORM-
1711 1STSTSW
171114THSTNW
2815V STNE
1940 MONTANA AVE NE
3925 MINNESOTA AVE NE
1333 M STREET SE
1700R8TNW
Ibt-sqg.wkS
Pages
24-Apr-98
-------
TabtoA-2 Small Quantity Hajardous Waste Generates ti Washtigton.D.C. (1993)
EPA ID number Facility Name
lltyK
3NC
Address
EPA ID number Facility Name'
IttyJ
Hra
Address
DCO 982575169
OC09S3966417
000983966698
OCD9839712SO
DC0089188940
DCO982566630
DC0983969635
OC0981038948
D CO 981108426
DCO003239262
DCO983968876
OC0000144501
DC0983967712
DCO983970427
OC0000266130
OC0983967647
OCD983968744
DC8470000086
OC0109415653
DCR000000067
DCO983969965
DC0000444497
DC8210021004
DC0983967698
000095342168
DC0116201476
DCD109411934
DC0000255653
OC0982565731
DC0000144535
0 CO 981042179
0 CO 009830274
DC0981103146
008470090020
D CO 003259439
DCD982565673
OC0983970708
DC8470090004
DCO981940083
OCO981743479
D CO 981108368
DCO 983969577
DC0000444513
DCR000000463
DCO983969488
DCO983969726
DCO049515844
OCO982576316
DCD983966581
000083201855
DCO983967803
DCO982698425
DCO 983966706
OC0981743172
DCO983968421
DCO 983970575
DC0000228270
DCO112624275
000982569329
D CD 983969130
EXXONCOMPANYU S A R3* 2-5669
EXXON COM3ANY USA RS027489
EXXON CO WANY USA RS075343
FC AUTO MOTOR
FArTH CONSTRUCTION
FAMILY CLEANER
FARRAGUT PODIATRY
FARRAQUT VALET & CLEANERS INC
FASHON CLEANERS
FEDERAL LITHOGRAPH COMPANY INC
FEDERAL PAPER STOCK CO
FINE AUTO SVC
FINLEYSAUTO SERVICE CENTER
FLAVD LUZARDO
FLEET MANAGEMENT DIV
FLORDA AVE SOCOLC 19609
FLOROA MARKET EXXON
FOOD «. DRUG ADMINISTRATION FB8
FOOT SPECIALISTS PC
FORMER SAUDI ARABIA EMBASSY
FORT DAVIS EXXON
FORT DUPONT AMOCO
FORT LESLIE J McNAIR MOW US ARMY
FORT MYERCONSTRUCTDNCORP
FOUR SEASONS HOTEL
FOXHALL CLEANERS
FOXHALLOBGYN
FPSD PISTOL RANGE
FRANCISJHS
FREEDOM AUTO
FRENCH CLEANERS
FRENCHSPETROLEUM SERVICE INC
FREDRICHS MODERNDRY CLEANERS
0 S A CENTRAL SUPPORT FEU) OFFICE
OALLAUDET UNIVERSITY
GAHNETT PATTERSON JH3
QEQ EXXON
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
GEORGE WASHINGTONUNNERSITY
GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL
GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY MED CTR
GEORGETOWN AMOCO
GEORGETOWN AUTOMOTIVE
GEORGETOWN CLEANERS
GEORGETOWN LAWN ft YARD
GEORGETOWN ON LANDSCAPE DPT
GEORGETOWN U NIVERSITY
GEORGETOWN VALET
GEORGETOWN VALET
GEORGETOWN VISITATDN PREP SCHOOL
GEORGIA AVENUE AMOCO
GIANT CLEANERS
GLOBAL CLEANERS
GOODY CLEANERS
GOODYEAR AUTO SERVICE CTR 0230
QCODYEARTIRE
GRAFTEC CORP
GRAND HOTEL, THE
GRAND HYATT WASHINGTON
GRAYS AUTOMOTIVE SVC
4886 MASSACHUSETTS AVE NW
2009 18TH ST NW
7401 GEORGIA AVE NW
301KENNEDYST NE
1155 W STREET NE
3106 GEORGIA AVE
1712 1ST NW 200
1601-514THSTNW
5628 GEORGIA AVE NW
6011 BLAIR RDNW
1315 FIRST ST SE
1911B NEW YORK AVE t€.
S1810THSTNE
1411LONGFELLOWSTNW
1501 S CAPITOL STSW
1711 FLORDA AVE NW
400 FLOROA AVE NE
200 C ST SW HFF.-14 RM 6025
1328 SOUTHERN AVE SE #214
152018THSTNW
3825 ALABAMA AVE SE
4101 ALABAMA AVE SE
4TH&PSTSW
2237 33RD ST NE
2800 PE NNYSLVANIA AVE
4590 MACARTHU R BLVO NW
3301 NEW MEXICO AVE NW *340
4THST&MSTSW
24TH&NSTSNW
21105THSTNE
3708 14TH NW
2838 BLADENSBURG RD NE
264-266CARROLL ST NW
10PSTSW
800 FLORDA AVE NE
10TH&USTSNW
4100 HUNT PL NE
2ND&MSTSSW
2033GSTNW
901 23FO ST NW
2300 EYE STNW
2715PENNAVENW
1576 WISCONSIN AVE NW
1070 1/231ST STREET NW
3900 EDU DOS STNW
37&OSTNW
37TH&OSTSNW
2031 FLORDA AVE NW
1215-E SOUTH CAPITOL
152435TH STNW
7605 GEORGIA AVE NW
1833 14TH STNW
3700 MARTIN L KING AVE SE
1911 MICHIGAN AVE NE
5013 GEORGIA AVE NW
3156 BLADE NSBURG RD NE
3409 1/2 M STREET NW
2350 M STNW
1000 H STNW
1630 14TH ST NW
DO0000082339
DCO 983987514
DC0048B58971
DCO 983971518
DC0982565632
DC0983968694
DCO 983968793
DCO983971391
000024285850
DC0000266387
DCD003240140
DC00004444B9
DC0982565095
DCD983968462
DCO 983969551
DCD051758738
DCO 982680316
DC0000937334
DCO 0494 99502
DCD983970393
DCO983968611
DCR000000547
D CD 98396 6672
DCR000000075
DCR000000497
DCO 983969825
DCD982567505
DCO 983966771
DC0074848979
DC0181842281
DC0983970310
DC0983869569
000983967928
DCD126512797
DCO 983969858
DCR000000182
DCO 983971219
DC4141700910
DC2200907812
DC0201990017
DC1750020009
DC3122311001
DC0470000951
DC4470090016
DC4040005031
DC5860000970
DC7279900982
DC3800100981
000983967902
DC4170000901
DC7170023454
DC4180000016
DC2180090019
DC9180000045
DC1200000999
DC3180000017
DC6170000925
DC1470000018
DCO983970492
DCO 046046280
SWINTON BROTHERS
SYDNORS AUTO SERVICE
SYSTEMS PUBLCATDNS INC
T 8. S AUTO CLINIC
TAFTJHS
TAKO MA METRO AUTO
TALLEY REPAIR
TANA AUTO REPAH DBA BERHAN AUTOMOTIVE
TASH CLEANERS
TAYLOR JAMES L TRASH REMOVAL
TELECOMMUNCATDNPUBQ CO*
TENLEYTOWN8VCCTR
TERRELL JHS
TEXACO
THOMASTRANSMISSDN
TIMSCO INC
TIP TOP CLEANERS
TOM WELLS
TONY AND ARKU AUTO REPAIR
TONY&ARKU
TONYS AUTO
TOP SHELF CO
TORSAKTOMROSSAW
TOWER CLNRS
TRAK AUTO #643
TRANS AUTO
TRANS WORLD AIRLINES INC
TRANSCO INC
TRINITY COLLEGE
TRUE CLEANERS
TUNE UPOF CAPITOL HILL
TURF MGMT INC
TUXEDO VALET
TWELFTH STREET CLEANERS
TYSONS GARAGE
T8O AUTO CLINC
U BEST CLEANERS
U S BRENT WOOD MAINTENCE FACILITY
U S BUREAU OF ENGRAVING AMD PRINTING
U S CUSTOMS-RESEARCH BRANCH
USDEPART ME NT OF HUMAN SERVICES
U 8DEPTOFAGRICULTURE-F
U S DEPT OF JUSTICE HOLC BLDG
USDEPT OF STATE
U S GOVERNMENT PRINTINGOFFCE
U S HUD/RHODE ISLAND PLAZA
U S INTELSAT-ENGINEERING DIV
U S NASA HEADQUARTERS
U S NATIONAL PHOTO INTERPRETATION CENTER
U S NAVAL DISTRICT WASHANACOSTU
U S NAVALOBSERVATORY
US POSTAL SERVICE
U S POSTAL SERVICE VEHICLE MAINTENANCE
U 3 POSTAL SERVICE VEHICLE MAINTENANCE
U S TREASURY DEPARTMENT
U SUSPS MAI EQUIPMENT SHOPS
U S WASHINGTON NAVY YARD
U S WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRC CORP
U MARK AUTO BODY
UNITED STATESCPTL HSTRCL 8OC
3670 NEW HAMPSHIRE AVE NW
1240 UPSHUR STNW
1945 47TH AVE
5230 GEORGIA AVE NW WASHINGTON
18TH&PERRYSTSNE
235 CARROLL STNW
233 VAN BU REN STNW
1505 S CAPITOL STSW
1921 BE NNING RONE
5201 HAYES ST >C
529 14TH ST NW
4900 WISCONSIN AVE NW
1ST&PERCESTSNW
340 FLORDA AVE NE
7051 SPRING PL NW
1350OKESTNE
3423 M ST NW
146DSTPEARSE
1900 BLADENSBURQ RD Me REAR
1232 MT OLIVET FONE
1120 CONOR: S3 STNE
5782 SECOND STREET NE
2502 MARTIN LUTHER KINO AVE Si
702 O STNW
1X1 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE NE
1736 RHODE ISLAND AVE NE
WASHINGTON NATL ARPRT
3399 BE NNING RD
125 MICHIGANAVE
700 KENNEDY STNW
B01VAAVESE
5990 SLIGO MILL RD 1C
1715 7THSTNW
3525 12TH ST NE
2119 10THST REAR NW
840 BLADENSBURGH RD NE
1947 14TH STNW
515 NEWYORK AVE ME
14TH&CSTSSW
1X1 CONSTITUTDNAVE NW
300 INDIANA AVE NW ROOM 6154
14TH INDEPENDENCE AVE
320 FIRST STNWRM 126
320 21ST STNW
N CAPITOL » HSTSNW
RHODE ISLAND PLAZA 270613TH
3400INTERNATDNALDR NW
600 INDEPENDENCE AVE SW
1ST&MSTSE
SOUTH CAPITAL ST/ANACOSTIADH
3450 MASSACHUSETTS AVE NW
USP S HO 1025 FRONTAGE ST SW
980VSTNE
6318CHILLUMPLNW
1 ST H & PA AVE NW RM 1204
21355THSTNE
7TH » M STREETS SW
AOC HOBBAII 3RD & D ST8 8W
260028TH8TNE
200 MARYLAND AVE NE
fet-sqg.wkS
Pages
24-Apr-98
-------
TabtoA-2 Small Quantity Hazwdnn Waste Generates ti Washkigton. D.C. (1999
EPAIDnumber Facility Name
Address
EPAIDnumber Facility None
Iftyf
TK
Address
000056600685 OFEATERSE COMMUNITY HOSPITAL
DC0981041494 GREENHOUSE CLEANERS
DCO048007298 GREYHOUND LINES INC
DCR000000168 GRIFFIN GRAPHICS
DC0983969494 GRIFFIN GRAPHICS
DC0146358205 GROUP HEALTH ASSOCIATDN INC
DCR000000091 GROWTH E NTERPRISE 8 IN)
DC0000444521 H & H AUTO & TRUCK SVC
DC0000797902 H&HHAULING
DCD981107220 HAGLER & SONS WASTE REMOVAL INC
DC0983967548 HALL FINANCIAL GROUP INC
DCD112633417 HAMBRAN RECYCLING
DC0126502855 HAMILTON CLEANERS
DCO982565616 HAMILTON J H S
DC0983968504 HAN CLEANER
DC0983969106 HARRIS AUTO RPR
OCD982566061 HARTJHS
DC0127398257 HART SCHOOL DENTAL CLINIC
DC0091342758 HARVEYS CUSTOM CLEANERS
DCD024244588 HAVILAND CLEANERS
DCO040535684 HEALTHCARE PUBLCATDN9
DC0008985527 HEIGHTS CLEANERS
DC0981040488 HENNINGER CAPITAL
DCD983970401 HERMAN'S AUTO SERVICE
DC0983970138 HERMANS GARAGE
OC0983971441 HEROUY AUTO SVC
DC0055181457 HIGHLAND CLEANERS
DCR000000398 HILL AUTO SERVICE
OC0983970064 HILLCREST AMOCO
OC0983970765 HILLTOP CAB
OC0982567960 HILLTOP CLEANER
OC0172094328 HINEJHS
DC0983869890 HINES INTERESTS LTD PARTNERSHP
DC0000444711 HOLDAY INN CAPITOL
DC0980651089 HOLMES OSCAR & SONS TRUCK
DCO983970336 HOLSALE CLEANERS
OC0983969502 HOWARD Q HOFFMAN INC
OCD106341449 HOWARD UNIVERSITY
OCD983968409 HOWAPD UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL
000983968330 HOWAPD UNIVERSITY SERVICE CTH
DCO003249349 HUNDLEY LITHOGRAPH INC
DCD983970542 HYATT REGENCY WASHINGTON
00)980828958 I - TM TRUCKING
DC0003249679 IB MCORPORATION
DCR000000273 IKESVCCTR
DC0024247603 IMPERIAL VALET SERVICE INC
OC0000082180 INTERAMERCAN DEVELOPMENT BANK
OC0003250016 INTERNATDNAL GENERALINDUSTS
DCO983968987 INTERNATDNAL LIMOUSINE SVC
DC0000082222 INTERNATDNAL MONETARY FUND
DC0983971011 INTERNATDNAL TRANSMISSDN SVC
DCD044758159 INTERNATDNAL VAUET
DC09B3987688 INTLAUTO CARE INC
DC3470000115 J EDGAR HOOVER FBI BUIDING
DC0983971080 J W MARRIOTT
DC0983971807 JACKSONSAUTO
000003243905 JARBOE PRINTING CO INC
DCO9839713S9 JD&9 AUTO REPAIR FAD
DCO982565434 JEFFERSON J H S
000983969478 JERRYS CUSTOM AUTOMOTIVE
1310 SOUTHERN AVEsE
4001 GAULT PINE
1345 NEW YORK AVENE
2363 CHAMP LAIN STNW
1712 SUMMIT PLACE NW
2121 PENNSYLVANIAAVE NW
955 LENFANT PLZ STE 4000
1704 BENNING RONE
1609 OLIVE STNE
1329 KENILWORTH AVE
S55 4TH ST NW
2060 W VIRGINIA AVENE
1001 14TH ST NW
6TH STREET 4 BHENTWOODPKWY
4425 WISCONSIN AVE NW
2710 26TH STNE
601 MISSISSPPI AVE SE
601 MISSISSPPI AVE SE
3232 WISCONSIN AVE
2824 P STNW
978 NATIONAL PRESS BUD
333 HAWAII AVENE
2121 WISCONSIN AVE NW
750 18TH ST NE
320 M STNE
1832 FENWICK STNE
2341PENNAVESE
712 E STREET SE
2801 ALABAMA AVE SE
2040 WVA AVENE
2712 GOOD HOPE ROSE
8TH ST 4 PENNSYLVANIA AVE SE
555 13TH STNW
550CSTSW
1116 W STNE
1513V STREET NW
202 RIGGS RONE
24006THSTNW
2041 GEORGIA AVE NW
2244 10TH ST NW
6503CHILLUMPLNW
400 NEW JERSEY AVE NW
4461 CONNECTICUT AVE NW
1818 NEW YORK AVENE
3820 MINNESOTA AVENE
1331 CONNECTICUT AVE NW
1300 NEW YORK AVE
1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVE NW
2300 T STREET NE
700 19TH ST NW
3188 BLADENSBURG RD NE
3420 CONNECTICUT AVE NW
342618TH STNE
935 PENNSYLVANIA AVE NW
1331 PENNSYLVANIA AVE NW
1201 KENNEDY STNW
15OGLETHORPE ST NW
1293 TAYLOR ST NW. BAY 3 REAR
8TH&HST8SW
131 IE STREET SE
DC0983968702
DC0000228619
DC0000228593
DCO983970203
DCO 081068157
DCD981936941
DCO070918206
DCO 983967829
OC0006919809
DCR00000015B
OCD983971342
DC09B3971573
DCO 983988991
DC7120507432
OC0178046868
DC4470000023
DC2470000116
OC8680099011
DCO 983968238
DC7471100118
DC3170023532
DC5170024132
DCR000000414
OCROOOOD0240
DC3330000933
DC8210021160
DC196O000908
DC09839714B2
DC0983967621
DCO983966425
DC0983970179
OCD09S356234
DCO981039803
DCO983967704
DC7380010402
DCO 983969841
DC00712406B3
DCO981111677
DCD980707319
DCO 981937006
DC4210021156
DCO 983967639
OC0042278994
DCO000824748
DCO 000746909
DCO982661480
DCO 983970732
DCR000000331
OCO048851861
DCO 982573031
DCO 983968801
DC0077797793
DCO 983970476
DC0132296039
DCD983966391
OC0983970809
000024362881
DCO 983988892
DCO0032457B6
DCO 003238193
UNITY MTRS
UNIVERSAL BLDG INC
UNIVERSAL NORTH BLDG
UNIVERSAL TIRE & AUTO
UPPER CARDO20 HEALTH CENTER
UPSHU R STREET DENTAL CLINIC
UPTOWN CLEANERS
UPTOWN TOLL CO GLC 16215
URBAN SERVICE SYSTEMS INC
URSOAUTO BODY & PAINT CO
US AIR SHUTTLE
US CAPITOL POLICE
US CAPITOL POLICE
US DA NATIONAL ARBORETUM
US DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERDR
US DEPT OF JUSTICE
USDEPTOFLABOR
USENVIRONMENTALPROTECT AGENCY
US GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFCE
US GENERAL SERVICE ADMINSTRATDN
US MARINE BARRACKS
US MCI COM3ANY MARINE BARRACKS
US POSTAL SERVICE
US SECRET SVC SSO
US SI OFFCE HORTICULTURE
US SOLDERS4 AIRMENS HOME
US WASHINGTON AQUEDUCT DMSDN
USACABASSN
VSTSOC GLC 12243
VAN NESS CLNRS
VAN NESS TEXACO
VENUS CLEANERS
VERSITRONOIVKEENE CORP
VESCOINC
VETERANS AOMINISTRATDN MEDICAL CENTER
VIUE GAS AUTO SVC
VISTA INTERNATIONAL HOTEL
WMATA
W WTECHNDLOOISTS WAREHOUSE
WALKER JO NESDENTAL CLINIC
WALTER REED ARMY MEDICAL CENTER
WAREHOUSE & MAIL GLC 11607
WARRING. JAMEST SONS INC
WARRING. JAMES T SONS INC
WARRING. JAMEST SONS INC
WASHINGTON AIR COMPRESSOR 00
WASHINGTON AUTO CLUB
WASHINGTON CONTRACTORS
WASHINGTON DRY CLEANING PLANT
WASHINGTON ENGRAVING CO.. INC
WASHINQTONEXPRES3 SVC
WASHINGTON GAS LIGHT CO
WASHINGTON GAS & LIGHT
WASHINGTON HOSPITAL CENTER
WASHINGTON INFORMATDNCENTER
WASHINGTON MARRDn HOTEL
WASHINGTON METRO AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY
WASHINGTON PLAZA HOTEL
WASHINGTON POST NEWSPAPER THE
WASHINGTONPOST NEWSPAPER-SOUTHEASTPLT
247 CARROLL ST NW
1825 CONNECTICUT AVE NW
1875 CONNECTICUT AVE NWRM420
1444P STNW
3020 14TH STNW
4200 13TH ST NW
3333 CONNECTICUT AVE NW
1420 COLUMBIA RD NW (16215)
212 VAN BUREN STNW
1317 4TH STNE
WASHINGTON NTLARPRT
RAYBRN BLDG SO CAPITOL
42ISTREET8E
3501 NEW YORK AVENE
1849 C ST NORTHWEST RM1511
10TH4PENNAVE NW
200 CONSTITUTDN AVE NW
401 MSTSW
4410 STNW
330 INDEPENDENCE AVE SW
8TH4ISTSSE
SE FEDERAL CENTER BLDG-160
900 BRENTWOOD ROAD NE
2ND &MSTSSE BLDG 216
3700 NORTH CAPITOL ST NW BL7S
3700 NORT H CAPITOL ST NW #1
5900 MACARTHJR BLVD NW
9251STSTSE
935 VST NE
4481 B CONNECTICUT AVE NW
4225 CONN AVE NW
3923 12TH ST NE
6310CHILUUMPLNW
1717HAMLJNSTNE
50 IRVING STNW
1444 14TH ST NW SECOND FLOOR
1400 M ST NW
4421 SOUTHERN AVE NE
1X7 W STNW
1100 1ST STNW
6825 16TH STNW
1120 1ST ST NE
13218CAP[TOLSTSW
HALF AND OSTSE
13308 CAP (TOLSTSH
1800 4TH STNE
90011THSTSE
4609 POLK STREET NE
33262N3 STNE
2414 DOUGLAS STNE
1440 P STNW 3RD FLOOR
1200 N STREET SE
2500 VA AVE NW
110 IRVING STNW
401 M ST SW
1221 22ND STNW
900 FRANKLIN STNE
10 THOMAS CRNW
115015TH STNW
225 VIRGINIA AVE 9E
lbt-8qg.wK3
Page 7
24-Apr-90
-------
TabbA-2 Small Quantity Huaidous Waste Generates h Washhgton. D.C. (1993)
EPA ID number Facility Name
Address
EPA ID number Facility Name
IftyJ
iHlF
Address
DCD983971433 JESUS AUTO RPR
3C0983968868 JET CLNR
00)983966755 JIFFY LUBE INTERNATDNAL INC
DC0983969585 JIMMYSTIFE
DC0000360651 JIMSORY CLEANER
DCO983971599 JOHNF KENNEDY CTRPERF ARTS NP8
DC0983970799 JOHNNESEXXON
OC0983970468 JOHNS AUTO
OC0074834078 JOHNS MANV1LE SALES CORP
DCO982565384 JOHNSON J H S
OCROOOC00539 JONESTRANSPORTATONCO
DCD983970500 JONESTRANSPORTATON SERVICE
DC0983970039 JR'SAUTO CLIN3UE
DCO003244019 JUDO &DETWEILER INC
OCR000000448 JUUO'S REPAIR SHOP
DC0983969510 J&TTIRE ft AUTO SVCS INC
DC0983968553 K CAR INC
OC0105371B27 KELLY MILLER
DC0983968934 KENILWORTH AMOCO
DCD000765818 KENILWORTH MAINTENANCE YARD
OCD983969066 KENNYS AUTO DVC INC
DC0983969734 KEY BRIDGE EXXON
DCR000000455 KIEWIT & KENNY 3121 PARCEL
OC0024252157 KILROYS CLEANERS
DC0165683798 KIMS FABRICAFE CO (SCOT CLEANERS)
OCD983968603 KIMSTEXAOO
DCO983970518 KM INC EXXON SERVICE STATION
DCD983970526 KM INC EXXON SERVICE STATION
DC0983970534 KM INC EXXON SERVICE STATION
DCO983969932 KM INC EXXON SERVICE STATION
DCD096366780 KONCA BUSINESS MACHINES USA.
DC0100159540 KRAMER J H 3
003044785469 L STREET AUTO BODY REPAIR
DCD983971243 LAM AUTO
DC0003250453 LAMB SEAL & STENCIL CO INC
000006533897 LANDMARK SERVICES TOURMOBILE INC
000982565289 LANQLEY J H S
DC0983966094 LANK WOOD WORK COMPANY
DCO981743115 LANMAN PROGRESSIVE INC
DCD024254161 LASSITERS DRY CLEANERS
DCO983967811 LAUNDRY BASKET INC THE
DC09839701B7 LEACH8 AUTO BRAKE SERVICE
6129 KANSAS AVE NE
3507 WHEELER ROSE
1420 RHODE ISLAM) AVE N5
100 K STREET NE
1608USTNW
2700FSTNW
1545 WISCONSIN AVE NW
306 H ST NE
2825VSTREETNE
BRUCE & ROBINSON 3T8 SE
1342 SOUTH CAPITOL STREET SE
3355 BENNINQ RONE
2016 SHANNON PL SE
1500ECKINGTONPLNE
7053 SPRING ST N.W.
1025 BRENT WOOD RD NE
624 NEW YORK AVE NH
49TH ft BROOKS STSNE
1535 KENIWORTH AVE NE
3200 BE NNINO ROME
645 MARYLAND AVE NE
3607 M STREET
43005THSTFEETNW
828UPSHURSTNW
5004 BENNINQ ROSE
1022 PENN AVE SE
4244 WISCONSIN AVE NW
3535 CONNECTICUT AVE NW
5030 CONNECTICUT AVE NW
5521 CONNECTICUT AVE NW
1700 WISCONSIN AVE NW
17TH&QSTSSE
2130 L ST NW
840 BLADE NSBURG RD NE
1515 14TH ST NW
1000OHODRSW
1ST&TSTSNH
1007 1ST ST SE
140OSTNE
191918THSTNW
313 KENNEDY ST NW
10100THSTNW
000983966607
DC09839683B9
DC0983971045
D CO 038999298
0 CO 054423439
D CD 983966649
DC0000444653
DCO982673824
DC0169088283
DCR000000083
DC5471139480
D CD 983971227
DCO131941684
DCD983968496
DCD009799727
DCR000000018
DCD024293326
DCD003241841
DCD982565988
D CO 983970344
DC0024293524
DCD983969114
DC09839664S2
DCD980555643
DCD983969981
DCO981737422
DCD9839681B5
DC0981111917
DCD981111859
DCO981111792
DCO983969940
DCD982565624
DC0982565939
D CD 007973043
DCO077485084
DC0000444463
DCD062024724
DCD983967670
DC0983968837
DCO077816S32
DC0983970807
DCD982567414
WASHINGTON TIMES THE 2850 PLANT
WATERGATE EXXON
WATERGATE SUNOCO
WATERGATE VALET
WEBERS RITE-WAY AUTO INC
WE I MING UU
WEST VIRGINIA AVE AUTO PARTS INC
WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORP
WHEELER BUILDING
WHITE HOUSE CLNRS
WHITE HOUSE THE
WHITES AUTO
WILLARD HOTEL
WILLIAM PGELBERQ INC
WILLIAM TARANT & SON INC
WILLES COLLISDN REPAR
WILMO CORP
WILSON EPS PRINTING CO
WILSONS HS
WINDSOR AUTO
WINDSOR VALET
WKW AUTO RPR
WMATA
WMATABLADENSBURQ
WMATA BLAIR RD
WMATA BPENTWOOD
WMATA JACKSON GRAHAM BLDG
WMATA NDIV
WMATA SE ON
WMATA WDIV
WOODRDGE CLNRS
WOODSONJHS
WOODSONSHS
WCODSON.APCO
WOODWARD A LOTHROP
WORLD BANK WASHINGTONDC
WRECKING CORP OF AMERCA
WRW FAST TIRE* SVC
YB IMPORTS CAR SVC
YORKTO WN ASSOC LTD PARTNERSHP
YOUR AUTO REPAIR
Z CLEANERS
2850 NEW YORK AVE NE
2708 VA AVE NW
2643 VA AVE NW
2546 VIRGINIA AVE NW
11112KOSTSE
1765 NEW YORK AVE NE
2130 WEST VIRGINIA AVE NE
ADC MADISON 1ST/NDEPEN AVE SE
112019THSTNW
7840 EASTERN AVE NW
1600PENNSYLVANIAAVE NW
1734 BENNINQ RD NE
1401 PENNSYLVANIA AVE NW
6511CHIUJJMPLNW
1351ESTSE
1293 TAYLOR ST NW FRONT
3322MSTNW
7076THSTNW
NEBRASKA AVE &CHESAPEAKE NW
20005THSTNE
49S8 WISCONSIN AVE NW
423FLORDAAVENE
17MSTSE
2250 2251 2BTHSTNE
6211 BLAIR FONW
601TSTNE
6005THSTNW
461514TH8TNW
17MSTSE
5248 WISCONSIN AVE NW
2212 RHODE SLAM} AVE
4101 MINNESOTA AVE NE
55TH ft EAD8 STSNE
818 MICHIQANAVE NE
131 M ST NH
1818HSTNW
525 SCHOOL STSW
SOOFLORDAAVENEfl
615 INDEPENDENCE AVE SE
1720 WISCONSIN AVE NW
3700 12TH ST NW
372014TH ST NW
fet-sqg.wk3
24-Apr-98
-------
APPENDIX B
Electronic Data Base Literature Searches
-------
Appendix B - Electronic Data Base Literature Searches
A search statement is formed using the compilation of technical keywords which
need to appear in the text of each of the articles. The technical staff reviews the
search results to determine the applicability of each article to the desired topic of
interest. Overall, Versar conducted six searches which yielded twenty articles that
were determined to be useful for this project.
An initial search was performed in all of the science related data base files found in
Dialog with the following strategy:
Washington and environ? (all variations of the word) and human health and risk
assessment
Thirty data base files were shown to have at least one or more possible hits. A
"hit" is an article which satisfies the search statement criteria. These "hits" may
or may not be applicable to the desired search topic and are reviewed by technical
staff to determine if they appear to be useful for the study. Toxline was one of
the files with the greatest number of hits. Toxline was searched through Medlars.
Adding "dc" to the search statement produced 417 hits. Approximately 20 titles
were printed out, found not to be relevant to this study, and the search strategy
was re-evaluated.
In a subsequent search, all science related data base files found in Dialog were
searched with the foiiowing strategy:
district of Columbia and human health and environmental (health or risk)
Eight database files were shown to have at least one or more possible hits. From
those eight database files, twenty-two records were retrieved. Bibliographic
citations pulled on these records again revealed that few of the articles were
pertinent to this study (most were articles related to medicine, psychology, etc.)
A new search was devised and executed on all science related data base files
found in Dialog using the following two strategies:
district of Columbia and (exposure or risk or toxic?(all variations of the word)) and
(environ?(all variations of the word) or pesticide)
Seventy-two data base files were shown to have at least one or more possible hits.
The search was run again in the nine data base files which were judged to be most
applicable. After the reduction of duplicate records, there were 241 records
retrieved. All titles were printed out. Eighteen articles of those 241 records were
of interest (other articles were related to medicine, drug abuse, and health related
policies). These articles were obtained for use in this report.
-------
The second (related) search strategy was:
district of Columbia and health and environ?(all variations of the word) and
(exposure or risk or toxic?(all variations of the word)) and (pollutant or contaminant
or pesticide)
Twenty-seven data base files had one or more possible hits. The search was run
again in four of the 27 data base files which seemed most applicable. After the
reduction of duplicate records, there were 18 records retrieved. All titles were
printed out. Of those 18 records, two articles were of interest. These articles
were obtained for use in this report.
Searches for Dissertations
A Dissertations Abstract On-line service through George Mason University was
searched using the following strategy:
district of Columbia and health
There were Sixty-six hits listed. The search was modified to:
district of Columbia and health and environment
There were six hits listed. All six records were printed out.
None of the records retrieved were relevant to this study.
A comprehensive listing of all the science related data base files found in Dialog
and Medlars containing possible hits has been provided in Table B-1.
-------
Table B-1. List of Database Files Searched In Dialog
Aerospace Database_1962-1996/Mar
AGELINE_1978-1996/Feb
AGRICOLA70-1996/Feb
AidslineJ 980-1995/Dec
API Energy Bus News 1975-1996/Apr W3
APILITJ 964-1996/Mar W4
Aquatic Science Abstracts_1979-1996/Mar
BioBusiness(R)_1985-1996/Jan W2
BIOSIS PREVIEWS(R)_ 1969-1996/Mar W4
BNA Daily News_Jun 1990-1996/Mar 27
Bowker Biographical Directory_1995
Business & Industry(TM) Jul 1994-1996/Mar 27
Business Dateline(R)_1985-1996/Mar W4
CA SEARCH(R)_1967-1996/UD = 12414
CAB AbstractsJ 972-1996/Feb
Cancerlit(R)_1963-1996/Feb
Chem Bus NewsBase_1984-1996/lss 13
Chemical Safety Newsbase_ 1981-1996/Mar
Computer News Fulltext_1989-1996/Mar W3
CRIS/USDAJ 996/Feb
Current Contents Search(R)_1990-1996/Mar W5
Diogenes(R)_1976-1996/Mar. W4
Dissertation Abstracts OnlineJI 861-1996/Mar
Ei Compendex»Plus(TM)_1970-1996/Apr W4
Elec. Power DB_1972-1995/Oct
EMBASE_1974-1996/lss 11
Energy SciTec 1974-1996/Feb B2
Enviroline(R)_1~975-1996/Feb
F-D-C REPORTSJ 987-1996/Mar 21
Fed. Res. in Progress_1996/Jan
Fed.Register 1988-1996/Mar 27
GeoArchiveJ 974-1995/Sep
GEOBASE(TM) 1980-1996/Mar
GeoRef_1785-1996/Apr B2
Health News DailyJ 990-1996/Mar 27
Hlth.Plan&AdminJ 975-1995/Nov
IAC NEWSEARCH(TM)_1996/Mar 27
IAC Newsletter DB(TM)_1987-1996/Mar 28
IAC New Prod.Annou.(R)_1985-1996/Mar 26
IAC PROMT(R)_1972-1996/Mar 28
IAC Trade & Industry Database 1976-1996/Feb 15
IAC NEWSEARCH(TM)_1996/Feb 15
IAC Newsletter DB(TM) 1987-1996/Feb 15
-------
Table B-1. List of Database Files Searched In Dialog (continued)
IAC(SM) Health & Wellness DB(SM)_76-96/Mar W4
IAC(SM) Computer Database(TM) 1983-1996/Mar 27
IAC(SM) Health & Wellness DB(SM)_76-96/Mar W4
Int.Pharm. Abs._1970-1996/Jan
lnvestext(R)_1982-1996/Mar 27
Journal of Commerce 1986-1996/Mar 27
Kirk-Othmer Online_1995/Ed4,Vol9
KR/T Bus.News_1989-1996/Mar 28
Life Sciences Collection 1982-1996/Feb
Materials Bus.File(TM) 1~985-1996/Apr
McGraw-Hill Pubs_198~5-1996/Mar26
Mechanical Engineering Abs_1973-1996/Apr
MEDLINE(R)_1966-1996/May W4
MENTAL HEALTH ABSTRACTSJ 969-1996/Feb
Meteor.& Geoastro.Abs. 1970-1996/Feb
NEJM Online 1985-1996/Mar W1
NTIS_64-199*6/May W3
Nuclear Scl. Abs._1948-1976
Occ.Saf.& Hth._1973-1995/Oct Q3
Oceanic Abst._?964-1996/Apr
Pascal 1973-1996/Feb
PHINDJArchival) 1980-1996/Mar W4
Pollution Abs_1970-1996/Apr
RAPRA Abstracts 1972-1996/Mar B2
SciSearch(R)_1974-1996/Mar W2
Textile Techno).Dig._1978-1996/Mar
Toxline(R)_1965-1995/Dec
TRISJ 970-1996/Feb
US Pat.Fulltext 1980-1989
US PAT.FULL._1990-1996/Mar 19
Water Resour.Abs. 1967-1996/Feb
WATERNET(TM)_1971-1995/Dec
-------
APPENDIX C
Rare Plants and Animals of the District of Columbia
-------
RARE
PLANTS AND ANIMALS
OF THE
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
National Park Service
District of Columbia Natural Heritage Program
July, 1995
-------
THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA NATURAL HERITAGE PROGRAM
The District of Columbia Natural Heritage Program, included in the National Capital Region
Conservation Data Center, was initiated in 1994 and is managed by the National Park Service, National
Capital Region, in cooperation with The Nature Conservancy. The D.C. Natural Heritage Program, as a part
of the nationwide Natural Heritage network, evaluates and tracks those elements of the District's flora,
fauna, and natural communities of highest conservation concern. The NCR Conservation Data Center is a
cooperative effort between the National Park Service and the Maryland and West Virginia Natural Heritage
Programs and the Virginia Division of Natural Heritage to facilitate conservation planning and rare species
protection within parks of the National Capital Region.
If you have information on any of the species on these lists for the District of Columbia, can
make recommendations for inclusions, deletions, or rank changes, or can offer suggestions
on how the Osts might be made more useful, please contact the District of Columbia Natural
Heritage Program.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA NATURAL HERITAGE PROGRAM
NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION CONSERVATION DATA CENTER
13025 Riley-s Lock Road
Poolesville, MD 20837
(301)427-1302 or (301) 427-1354
-------
ABOUT THE LISTS
The following lists of extant and historical rare vascular plant and animal species known from the
District of Columbia should be regarded as a preliminary assessment It is provided to give some guidance
to interested individuals and organizations. The District of Columbia Natural Heritage Program has very
recently compiled a list of most species known to have occurred in the District from many historical records
in scientific collections and literature. From this list, those species recognized as rare or extirpated in
Maryland (by the Maryland Natural Heritage Program), Virginia (by the Virginia Division of Natural Heritage),
or both were chosen as immediate candidates for the District's list of rare plants and animals.
Plants
A review of literature indicated that several native species recorded for the District have not been
recorded for Maryland or Virginia. These and several species not considered rare in these two neighboring
states, but obviously locally rare, were added to the preliminary list to yield 239 species. Of this total, the
District of Columbia Natural Heritage Program has assigned a preliminary rank of "Rare" to the 23 species
known to be extant within the District, to form the first plant list (page 3). The other species have been
assigned a preliminary rank of "Historical" and are included on the second plant list (page 4). It should be
understood that, at the time of this document, these ranks are supported by only limited field surveys. Many
of the species listed as "Historical" may still exist within the District and should be considered "Rare" and of
some conservation concern, should they be found to occur naturally within the District
Animals
Rare animals of the District are also presented in 2 lists. The first, "District of Columbia Rare
Animals" (page 9) includes rare animal species which are well documented to be or have been native
species in the District The second list, "Potential District of Columbia Rare Animals" (page 11), is of rare
animal species which probably have existed and, in some cases, may still exist, in the District, but for which
conclusive occurrence evidence is still lacking. Animal species known or believed to be extirpated from the
District are marked and denoted on the lists.
It should be noted that rankings for birds and other migratory species are for breeding occurrences
only. Thus, while species such as the bald eagle, spotted sandpiper, and sharp-shinned hawk may occur in
the District with some regularity as migrants, a breeding occurrence of these species would be considered
rare or historically significant
Other Information About the Lists
These plant and animal lists do not include other locally rare species which may warrant inclusion,
but whose rarity and level of security within the District has not been evaluated.
Conservation ranking is an iterative process that evolves as information from field surveys and
other sources is gained. It is likely that these rankings will change significantly over the next several years.
An update is planned by spring of 1996. Traditional Natural Heritage Global and "State" rankings for the
species will be listed at that time.
The District of Columbia Natural Heritage Program assesses species' rarity for use in conservation
planning, resource management, research, education, and other activities, but is not a regulatory agency.
The rankings assigned by the program are biological opinions and do not represent a legal status, although
plants may be protected by existing laws and regulations. The column "Federal Status" indicates the federal
status of a species, if it has one, as determined by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. Explanations of the
codes used in this column are denoted in footnotes to the lists.
Scientific nomenclature for plants generally follows A Svnonvmized Checklist of the Vascular Flora
of the United States. Canada, and Greenland by J. T. Kartesz (1994). In cases for which a familiar
alternative scientific name has been extensively used in regional references, the alternative name is placed
in parentheses next to the nomenclature used by Kartesz. Common names are provided for convenience of
the user; however, it should be understood that common names for plants are not standardized, and a
species may be known by several common names.
-------
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA RARE PLANTS - EXTANT
Scientific Name
Antennaria solitaria
Azolla caroliniana
Baptisia australis
Carex hirtifolia
Ceanothus herbaceus (= C. ovatus)
Cenutium arvense
Coreopsis tripteris
Erythronium albidum
Geum laciniatum
Helianthus occidentals
Juglans cinema
Kyllinga pumila (= Cyperus tenuifolius)
Maianthemum stellatum (= Smilacina stellata)
Melica mutica
Phacelia rammculacea
Pinuspungens
Quercus macrocarpa
Rumex altissimus
Sagittaria australis (= S. longinatra)
Solidago hispida
Solidago simplex (var. racemosa; - 5. spathulata)
Synosma suaveolens (= Cacalia suaveolens)
Thefypteris simulate
Common Name
Single-headed pussytoes
Carolina mosquito fern
Blue false indigo
Pubescent sedge
Prairie redroot
Field duckweed
Talltickseed
White trout lily
Rough avens
Western sunflower
Butternut
Thin-leaved flatsedge
Star-flowered false solomon's-seal
Narrow melic grass
Coville's phaoelia
Table mountain pine
Bur oak
Tall dock
Long-beaked arrowhead
Hispid goldenrod
Riverbank goldenrod
Sweet-scented indian-plantain
Bog fern
Federal Status
C21
'C2 = Candidate, Category 2. The taxon is possibly in danger of extinction or likely to become endangered within the
forseeable futurethroughout all or a significan portion of its range, but conclusive data on vulnerability and threads) are
not currently available to support listing under the federal Endangered Species Act
-------
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA RARE PLANTS - HISTORICAL
Scientific Name
Aconitum uncinatum
Agalinis auriculata (- Tomanthera auriculata)
Agalinis decemloba
Agalinis setacea
Agastache scrophulariifolia
Agrostis elliottiana
Amelanchier stolonifera (=A. spicata)
Ammonia latifolia
Anagallis minima
Anemone canadensis
Apocynum sibiricum
Arabis patens
Arabia shortii
Arethusa bulbosa
Aristida dichotoma var. curtissii (- A. curtisil)
Arnica acaulis
Arnoglossum muehlenbergii (= Cacalia muehlenbergii)
Asclepias purpurascens
Asclepias rubra
Aster concolor
Aster praealtus
Astragalus canadensis
Bidens discoidea
Botrychium oneidense
Bouteloua curtipendula
Bromus latiglumis
Bromus kalmii
Buchnera americana
Calopogon tuberosus
Cafystegia spithamaea
Carex aggregata
Carex alopecoidea
Carex brevior
Carex buxbaumii
Carex careyana
Carex conjuncta
Carex cristatella
Carex decomposita
Carex emoryi
Carex hystericina
Carex lacustris
Carex leavenworthii
Carex mesochorea
Carex pallescens
Carex rostrata
Carex shortiana
Carex silicea
Carex straminea
Carex tenera
Carex tetanica
Common Name
Blue monkshood
Bated false foxglove
Blue ridge gerardia
Thread-leaved gerardia
Purple giant-hyssop
Elliott bentgrass
Running juneberry
Koehne's ammania
Chafiweed
Canada anemone
Ciasping-leaved dogbane
Spreading rockcress
Short's rock cress
Arethusa
Curds' three-awn grass
Leopard's-bane
Federal Status
C21
Purple milkweed
Red milkweed
Silvery aster
Tall aster
Canada milkvetch
Swamp beggar-ticks
Blunt-lobed grapefera
Side-oats grama
Broad-glumed bromegrass
Canada bromegrass
Bluehearts
Grass-pink
Low bindweed
Glomerate sedge
Foxtail sedge
A sedge
Buxbaum's sedge
Carey's sedge
'Soft fox sedge
Crested sedge
Cypess-knee sedge
Emory's sedge
Porcupine sedge
Lake-bank sedge
Leavenworth's sedge
Midland sedge
Pale sedge
Beaked sedge
Short's sedge
Sea-beach sedge
Straw sedge
Slender sedge
Rigid sedge
3C'
-------
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA RARE PLANTS - HISTORICAL (cont.)
Scientific frlarpe
Carer typhina
Cam vestita
Carex viridula
Carexwoodii
Cenchrus carolinianus
Chenopodium standleyum
Cicuta bulbifera
Cirsium altissimum
Corallorhiza \visteriana
Cornus amomum ssp. obliqua (= C. obliqua)
Cormu rugosa
Crataegiu calpodendron
Cuscuta cephalanthi
Cuscuta coryli
Cuscuta ppfygonorum
Cypenu dentatus
Cyperus pluhenetii
Cypenu refractus
Cyperus retrofractus
Delphinium tricorne
Desmodium cuspidatum
Desmodium laevigatum
Desmodium lineatum
Desmodium obtusum
Desmodium ochroleucum
Desmodium pauciflorum
Desmodium viridiflorum
Dichanthelium oligosanthes
Dichanthelium scabriusculum
Diplazium pycnocarpon {= Athyrium pycnocarpon)
Dirca palustris
Dodecatheon meadia
Echinocystis lobata
Echinodorus cordifolius
Elatine americana
Eleocharis compressa
Efymus canadensis
Erigenia bulbosa
Erigeron vernus
Eriocaulon aquaticum
Eriocaulon decangulare
Eriocaulon parkeri
Erythronium umbilicatum
Euphorbia obtusata
Fraxinus nigra
Fraxinus projunda (= F. tomentosa)
Galactia volubilis
Gentiana villosa
Geum aleppicum
Gfyceria laxa
Common frJame
Cattail sedge
Velvety sedge
Little green sedge
Wood's sedge
Carolina sandbur
Standley's goosefoot
Bulb-bearing water hemlock
TaU thistle
Wister's coralroot
Silky dogwood
Roimd-leaved dogwood
Pear hawthorn
Buttonbush dodder
Hazel dodder
Smartweed dodder
Toothed umbrella sedge
Plukenet's umbrella sedge
Reflexed umbrella sedge
Rough umbrella sedge
Dwarf larkspur
Large-bracted tide-trefoil
Smooth tick-trefoil
Linear-leaved tick-trefoil
Rigid tick-trefoil
Cream-flowered tick-trefoil
Few-flowered tick-trefoil
Velvety tick-trefoil
Few-flowered panic grass
Tall swamp panic grass
Glade fern
Leatherwood
Shooting star
Wild cucumber
Heart-leaved burhead
American waterwort
Flattened spikerush
Canada wild rye
Harbinger-of-spring
Early whitetop fleabane
Seven-angled pipewort
Ten-angled pipewort
Parker's pipewort
Umbilicate trout lily
Blunt-leaved spurge
Black ash
Pumpkin ash
Downy milk pea
Striped gentian
Yellow avens
Tall rattlesnake grass
Federal Status
3C
-------
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA RARE PLANTS - HISTORICAL (cont.)
Scientific Name
Gnaphalium uliginosum
Gratiola viscidula
Helianthemum dumosum
Hoiutonia longifolia var. tenuifolia (- H. tenuifolid)
Hypericum kalmianum
Irucristata
Irisverna
Iris versicolor
Isotria medeoloides
Juncus torreyi
Krigia dandelion
Lactuca hirsuta
Lathyrus palustris
Leptochloafcucicularis
Lespedeza stuevei
Liatris spicata
Liatris squarrosa
Lilium philadelphicum
Unum Jloridanum
. Unum intercursum
Liparis loeselii
Lipocarpha micrantha (= Hemicarpha micrantha)
Ludwigia decurrens
Ludwigia hirtella
Lupinus perennis
Lygodium palmatum
Lysimachia quadriflora
Lythrum aiatum
Matelea carolinensis
Matelea obliqua
Mecardonia acuminate
Melanthium latifolium
Melothria pendula
Micranthemum micranthemoides
Muhlenbergia capiUaris
Muhle nbergia glomerata
Myosotis macrosperma
Oldenlandia unijlora
Onosmodium virginianum
Orthilia secunda (= Pyrola secunda)
Osmunda cinnamomea var. glandulosa
Panicum flexile
Paronychia virginica var. virginica
Paspalum dissectum
Penstemon hirsunu
Phlox pilosa
Plantago cordata
Plantago pusilla
Platanthera ciliaris
Platantheraflava
Common
Federal Status
Low cudweed
Short's hedge-hyssop
Lowfrostweed
Slender-leaved summer bluets
Kalm's SL John's-wort
Crested iris
Spring iris
Blue flag
Small whorled pogonia
70X16/8 rush
Potato dandelion
Hairy lettuce
Vetchling
Bearded spangle-top
Velvety bushclover
Spiked blazing star
Scaly blazing star
Wood lily
Florida yeUow flax
Bicknell's yellow flax
Loesel's twayblade
Small-flowered dwarf bulrush
Primrose-willow
Hairy seedbox
Wild lupine
Climbing fern
Four-flowered loosestrife
Winged loosestrife
Carolina anglepod
Climbing milkweed
Purple water-hyssop
Broad-leaved bunchflower
Creeping cucumber
Nuttall's micranthemum
Long-awned hairgrass
Marsh muhly
Large-seeded forget-me-not-
Clustered bluets
Virginia false-gromwell
One-sided pyrola
Glandular cinnamon fern
Wiry witch grass
Virginia nailwort
Mudbank paspalum
Hairy beardtongue
Downy phlox
Heart-leaved plantain
Slender plantain
Yellow fringed orchid
Pale green orchid
LTJ
C2
C2
3C
3C
-------
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA RARE PLANTS - HISTORICAL (cont.)
Scientific Name
Platanthera peramoena
Platanthera psycodes
Pluchea camphorata
Poapalustris
Pogonia ophioglossoides
Pofygala senega
Potygonwn amphibium var. stipulaceum
Pofygonum ramosissimum
Potamogeton amplifolius
Potamogetonfoliosus
Potamogeton illinoensis
Potamogeton perfoliatus
Potamogeton robbinsii
Pycnanthemum clinopodioides
Pycnanthemum torrei
Pycnanthemum virginianum
Pyrola elliptica
Pyrola chlorantha
Quercus prinoides
Ranunculus ambigens
Rhynchosia tomentosa
Rhynchospora alba
Rhynchospora jusca
Rhynchospora globularis
Rhynchospora gtomerata
Ribes americanum
Rorippa sessiliflora
Rosa seugera
Ruellia strepens
Sagina procumbens
Sagittaria cafycina
Sagittaria rigida
Salixexigua
Salix humilis var. tristis (- S. tristis)
Sahna urticifolia
Sanguisorba canadensis
Sarracenia purpurea
Scirpusfluviatilis
Scirpus verecundus
Selena muehlenbergii
Scutellaria parvula var. aus trails
Scutellaria parvula var. leonardii (= S. leonardif)
Scutellaria nervosa
Sibara virginica
Sida hermaphrodite
Silene nivea
Smilax pseudochina
Solidago latusimifolia (= S. elliottii)
Solidago rigida
Solidago uliginosa
Coimnon Name
Purple fringeless orchid
Small purple fringed orchid
Salt-marsh camphor-weed
Fowl bluegrass
Rosepogonia
Seneca snakeroot
Water smartweed
Bushy knotweed
Large-leaved pondweed
Leafy pondweed
Illinois pondweed
Clasping-leaved pondweed
Robbins'pondweed
Basil mountain-mint
Toirey's mountain-mint
Virginia rpniintain.TTiint
Shinleaf
Greenish-flowered pyrola
Dwarf chestnut oak
Water-plantain spearwort
Hairy snoutbean
White beakrush
Sooty beakrush
Grass-Uke beakrush
Clustered beakrush
Wild black currant
Stalkless yellow cress
Prairie rose
Rustling wild-petunia
Birdseye
Spongy lophotocarpus
Sessile-fruited arrowhead
Sandbar willow
Dwarf prairie willow
Nettle-leaved sage
Canada bumet
Northern pitcher-plant
River bulrush
Bashful bulrush
Muhlenberg's nutrush
Small skullcap
Leonard's skullcap
Veined skullcap
Virginia cress
Virginia mallow
Snowy campion
Halberd-leaved greenbrier
Elliott's goldenrod
Hard-leaved goldenrod
Bog goldenrod
Federal Status
3C
3C
-------
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA RARE PLANTS - HISTORICAL (cont.)
Scientific Name
Spartina pectinate
Spiranthes lucida
Sporobohu clandestinus
Sporobolus neglectus
Stachys aspera
Stenanthium gramineum
Trichostema setaceum
Triosteum angustifolium
Triphora trianthophora
Utnculana macrorhtza
Veronica scutellata
Vicia americana
Vitis rupestris
Wolffia columbiana
Wolffiella gladiata
Common Name
Prairie cordgrass
Wide-leaved ladies'-tresses
Rough nishgrass
Puffsheath dropseed
Rough hedge-nettle
Featherbells
Narrow-leaved bluecurls
Narrow-leaved horse-gentian
Three birds orchid
Greater bladderwort
Marsh speedwell
American purple vetch
Sand grape
Columbian water-meal
Wolffiella
Federal Status
'C2 = Candidate, Category 2. The taxon is possibly in danger of extinction or likely to become endangered within the
forseeable future throughout all or a significan portion of its range, but conclusive data on vulnerability and
threat(s) are not currently available to support listing under the federal Endangered Species Act
23C = The taxon has been considered for federal listing, but has been determined to be more abundant or widespread
than previously believed and/or is not subject to any identifiable threat
JLT = Listed Threatened. The taxon is likely to become endangered within the forseeable future.
-------
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA RARE ANIMALS
Scientific Name
Crustaceans:
Cambanu diogenes
Procambanu acutua
Stygobromus hoyi
Stygobromus kento
Stygobromus tenuis potomocus
Gastropods:
Amnicola pupoideus
Fontigens bottimeri
Stagnicola caperatus
Mussels:
Alasmidonta heterodon
Alasmidonta undulata
Lampsilu cariosa
Insects:
Tachopteryx thoreyi
Fish:
Cottiu girardi
Ericymba buccata
Etheostoma vitreum
Notropis bifrenatus
Notropis chafybaeus
Percina caprodes1
Percina notogramma
Fundulus htciae
Semotilia margarita
Amphibians:
Siren lacertina
Reptiles:
Cemophora coccinea
Clemmys insculpta
Crotahu horridiu1
Birds:
Accipiter cooperii
Accipiter striatus
Asioflammeus1
Asiootus
Botaunu lentiginosus
Chordeiles minor
Cistothonu platensis1
.Haliaeetus leucocephaliu*
Ixobrychus extlit
Laniiu ludovicianus1
Laterallusjamaicensis1
Nyctanassa violacea
Nycticorax nycticorax
Poocetes gramineus
Rallus limicola
Spiza americana
Common Name
Devil CTawfish
White River CTawfish
Hay's spring amphipod
Kenk's subterranean amphipod
Potomac groundwater amphipod
Pupa dusky ^""1
Appalacian spring snail
Wrinkled marsh snail
Dwarf wedgemussel
Triangle floater
Yellow lampmussel
Graypetaltail
Potomac sculpin
Silverjaw minnow
Glassy darter
Bridle shiner
Ironcolor shiner
Logperch
Stripeback darter
Spotfin kUlifish
Pearl dace
Greater siren
Scarlet snake
Wood turtle
Timber rattlesnake
Cooper's hawk
Sharp-shinned hawk
Short-eared owl
Long-eared owl
American bittern
Common nighthawk
Sedge wren
Bald eagle
Least bittern
Loggerhead shrike
Black rail
Yellow-crowned night-heron
Black-crowned night-heron
Vesper sparrow
Virginia rail
Dickcissel
Federal Status
LE2
C2
C2J
-------
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA RARE ANIMALS (cont.)
Common Name Federal Status
Tyto alba Bam owl
Bison bison1 Bison
Cervus canadensu* Elk
Felts concolor cougar1 Eastern cougar LE
Maries americana1 American marten
Sorex longirostris Southeastern shrew
Synaptomys cooperi Southern bog lemming
Ursus americanui* Black bear
'Extirpated or presumed extirpated in D.C.
JLE = Listed Endangered - threatened with extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
3C2 = Candidate, Category 2 - possibly rare, but data are insufficient to support listing.
-------
POTENTIAL DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA RARE ANIMALS
Fish:
Acanthanhia pomotis
Acipemer brevirostrum1
Acipenser oxyrhynchtu1
Clinostomus funduloides
Percopsis omiscomaycus
Amphibians:
Ambystomajeffersonianum
Reptiles:
Clemmys muhlenbergi1
Birds:
Actitis macularia
Aimophila aestivalu1
Ammodraams henslowii
Anasdiscon
Caprimulgus vocifena1
Dendroica cerulea
Empidonax alnorum
Gallinula chloropvs1
Railtu elegant
Mammals:
Lynxrufta1
Myotis leibii
Neotoma maguter*
Reitkrodontomys humulis
Common Name
Mudsunfish
Shortnose sturgeon
Atlantic sturgeon
Redside dace
Trout-perch
Jefferson's salamander
Bog turtle
Spotted sandpiper
Bachman's sparrow
Henslow's sparrow
Blue-winged teal
Whip-poor-will
Cerulean warbler
Alder flycatcher
Common gaUinule
King rail
Bobcat
Small-footed myotis
Allegheny wood rat
Eastern harvest mouse
Federal Status
LE2
C2J
C2
C2
C2
C2
C2
'Extirpated or presumed extirpated in D.C.
*LE = Listed Endangered - threatened with extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
3C2 = Candidate, Category 2 - possibly rare, but data are insufficient to support listing.
------- |