ABATEMENT
NATIONAL FIELD INVESTIGATIONS CENTER-DENVER
DENVER. COLORADO
AND
REGION IX SAN FRANCSSCO CALIFORNIA
DECEMBER 1912
R
/\
il a.
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT
11
11
1
Report on
WATER QUALITY
SOURCES OF POLLUTION
AND
ABATEMENT NEEDS
FOR
SAN FRANCISCO BAY, CALIFORNIA
National Field Investigations Center-Denver
Denver, Colorado
and
Region IX
San Francisco, California
December 1972
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter Title Page
LIST OF TABLES lv
LIST OF FIGURES vi
LIST OF APPENDICES viii
I. INTRODUCTION 1-1
II. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS II-l
III. RECOMMENDATIONS III-l
IV. DESCRIPTION OF AREA IV-1
A. PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION IV-1
B. CLIMATE IV-2
C. HYDROLOGY IV-3
D. WATER USES IV-4
V. WATER QUALITY CONDITIONS V-l
A. APPLICABLE WATER QUALITY REGULATIONS V-l
State Regulatory Activity V-l
Federal-State Water Quality Standards V-l
B. BACTERIOLOGICAL CONDITIONS V-2
South Bay V-16
Central Bay V-17
San Pablo Bay V-17
Carquinez Strait, Suisun Bay and the
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta V-18
C. CHEMICAL CONDITIONS V-19
Heavy Metals V-19
Chlorinated Insecticides and
Polychlorinated Biphenyls V-35
Oil and Petrochemical Residues V-43
D. BIOSTIMULANTS AND ALGAL POPULATIONS V-45
E. RELATIVE TOXICITY V-47
F. DISSOLVED OXYGEN V-48
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont.)
Chapter Title
VI. SOURCES OF POLLUTION
A. GENERAL
B. SUMMARY OF MUNICIPAL AND INDUSTRIAL
WASTE DISCHARGES VI-4
C. MUNICIPAL WASTE DISCHARGES VI-16
Zone 1-South San Francisco Bay VI-16
Zone 2-South San Francisco Bay VI-22
Zone 3-South San Francisco Bay VI-23
Zone 4-Central San Francisco Bay VI-33
Zone 5-San Pablo Bay VI-38
Zone 6-Carquinez Strait VI-41
Zone 7-Suisun Bay VI-41
Zone 8-Delta VI-45
D. INDUSTRIAL WASTE DISCHARGES VI-45
Zone 1-South San Francisco Bay VI-46
Zone 2-South San Francisco Bay VI-48
Zone 3-South San Francisco Bay VI-49
Zone 4-Central San Francisco Bay VI-50
Zone 5-San Pablo Bay VI-53
Zone 6-Carquinez Strait VI-58
Zone 7-Suisun Bay VI-63
Zone 8-Delta VI-66
E. FEDERAL INSTALLATIONS VI-74
F. COMBINED SEWER OVERFLOWS VI-81
G. DREDGING ACTIVITIES VI-85
VII. IMPACT OF POLLUTION ON WATER USES VII-1
A. COMMERCIAL SHELLFISH HARVESTING VII-1
Oyster Fishery VII-2
Clam Fishery VII-7
Economic Impacts VII-13
B. DETRIMENTAL EFFECTS ON AQUATIC LIFE VEI-18
C. RECREATION VII-20
ii
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont.)
Chapter Title Page
VIII. STATUS OF POLLUTION ABATEMENT VIII-1
A. PRESENT AND PAST POLLUTION ABATEMENT
ACTIONS VIII-1
B. FUTURE POLLUTION ABATEMENT ACTIONS VIII-7
ill
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table No. Title Page
V-l Average Coliform Bacteria (MPN/100 ml) in
San Francisco Bay, California, 1960-1961 V-5
V-2 Bacteriological Densities San Francisco Bay
Survey - Water Samples - Spring, 1972 V-7
V-3 Bacteriological Densities - San Francisco Bay
Survey - Shellfish Samples - Spring, 1972 V-ll
V-4 Total Coliforms In Water Overlying Shellfish
Beds: Median Values Per 100 ml and Percent
Exceeding 230 Per 100 ml, By Station V-12
V-5 Fecal Coliforms Per 100 gm Shellfish Meat:
Range Of Values and Comparison to Standard,
by Station V-14
V-6 Results of Metals Analysis of San Francisco
Bay Area Water Samples V-21
V-7 Results of Metals Analysis of San Francisco -
Bay Bottom Sediment Samples V-24
V-8 Results of Metals Analysis of San Francisco
Bay Area Shellfish V-27
V-8a Concentration of Selected Heavy Metals in
Shellfish V-29
V-9 Results of Analysis of San Francisco Bay
Area Bottom Sediment, Shellfish, and
Plankton Samples for Chlorinated Insec-
ticides and Polychlorinated Biphenyls V-36
V-9a Concentration, in ppb, of Selected Chlorinated
Hydrocarbons by Station - San Francisco
Bay Study V-41
V-10 Results of Analysis of San Francisco Area
Shellfish for Petroleum Hydrocarbons V-44
VI-1 Selected Major Municipal and Industrial
Sources of Pollution VI-3
iv
-------
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
Table No. Title Page
VI-2 Summary of Municipal and Industrial Waste
Discharges to the San Francisco Bay System
by Water Quality Zone " VI-6
VI-3 Municipal Waste Discharges, Zones 1 and 2 VI-17
VI-4 Municipal Waste Discharges, Zone 3 VI-24
VI-5 Municipal Waste Discharges, Zone 4 VI-34
VI-6 Municipal Waste Discharges, Zone 5 VI-39
VI-7 Municipal Waste Discharges, Zones 6, 7 and 8 VI-42
VI-8 Industrial Waste Discharges, Zones 1, 2 and 3 VI-47
VI-9 Industrial Waste Discharges, Zones 4 and 5 VI-52
VI-10 Industrial Waste Discharges, Zones 6 and 7 VI-59
VI-11 Industrial Waste Discharges, Zone 8 __ VI-67
VI-12 Waste Discharges From Federal Facilities VI-75
VII-1 Summary of Shellfish Bed Characteristics VII-9
VII-2 Summary of Oyster Harvest Statistics VII-15
VIII-1 Summary of Compliance With State Resolutions VIII-5
VIII-2 Summary of State Enforcement Actions VIII-5
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Title Follows Page
IV-1 San Francisco Bay System IV-1
V-l Beneficial Uses of Tidal Waters to be Protected-
Fish Migration; Fish Spawning; Fish, Shrimp,
Crab and Shellfish Habitat V-2
V-2 Beneficial Uses of Tidal Waters to be Protected-
Waterfowl and Other Water Associated Birds
Habitat; and Hauling Grounds V-2
V-3 Shellfish Bed Locations, San Francisco Bay System V-3
V-4 Geographical and Zone Divisions of the San
Francisco Bay System V-5
V-5a Water Sampling Locations Total Coliform
Concentrations-South Bay-Spring 1972 V-16
V-5b Water Sampling and Total Coliform
Concentrations-Central Bay-San Pablo Bay-
Spring 1972 V-17
V-5c Water Sampling Locations and Total Coliform Con-
centrations-Carquinez Strait, Suisun Bay, and
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta-Spring 1972 V-18
V-6a Shellfish Sampling Locations and Fecal Coliform
Concentrations-South Bay-Spring 1972 V-16
V-6b Shellfish Sampling Locations and Fecal Coliform
Concentrations-Central Bay-San Pablo Bay-
Spring 1972 V-17
V-6c Shellfish Sampling Locations and Fecal Coliform
Concentrations-Carquinez Strait, Suisun Bay,
and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta-Spring 1972 V-18
V-7 Sampling Stations, San Francisco Bay South Bay-
Spring 1972 V-19
V-8 Sampling Stations, San Francisco Bay Central
Bay-San Pablo Bay-Spring 1972 V-19
V-9 Sampling Stations, San Francisco Bay Carquinez
Strait-Suisun Bay-Spring 1972 V-19
vi
-------
LIST OF FIGURES (Cont.)
Figure Title Follows Page
VI-1 Wastewater Discharges to the San Francisco
Bay System VI-4
VI-2 Municipal Discharges of BOD to the San Francisco
Bay System VI-8
VI-3 Discharges of Suspended Solids to the San Fran-
cisco Bay System VI-10
VI-4 Discharges of Oil and Grease to the San Francisco
Bay System VI-12
VI-5 Industrial Discharges of COD to the San Francisco
Bay System VI-14
VI-6 Significant Waste Sources, San Francisco Bay
System, Water Quality Zones 1, 2 and 3 VI-18
VI-7 Significant Waste Sources, San Francisco Bay
System, Water Quality Zones 4 and 5 VI-35
VI-8 Significant Waste Sources, San Francisco Bay
System, Water Quality Zones 6, 7 and 8 VI-43
VII-1 Historic Commercial Shellfish Bed Locations VII-1
vii
-------
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix Page
A CALIFORNIA STATE WATER QUALITY CONTROL
BOARD STANDARDS A-l
B SALMONELLA ANALYSES METHOD B-l
C SHELLFISH POPULATION SURVEY C-l
D COMMUNICATION: STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME D-l
E TOXIC EFFECTS ON AQUATIC LIFE E-l
F FISH KILL RECORDS AND TOXICITY SOURCES F-l
G WASTE SOURCES G-l
H ABATEMENT STATUS H-l
I ANALYTICAL METHODS -1-1
J ALERT LEVELS OF TRACE METALS IN SHELLFISH J-l
viil
-------
1-1
I. INTRODUCTION
In October 1972, the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments
of 1972 became law.— This new legislation sets forth the basis for re-
storing and maintaining the chemical, physical and biological integrity
of the Nation's waters. Implementation of the various programs established
by this comprehensive legislation will have a major impact on the San
Francisco Bay area both in terms of the costs of abating existing pol-
lution and the benefits of improved water quality. To meet the require-
ments of the 1972 amendments, the present local, State and Federal water
pollution control programs will need to be expanded and accelerated.
A national goal to eliminate the discharge of pollutants into navi-
gable waters by 1985 has been established by Congress.— A second national
goal established was that wherever attainable, an interim goal of water
quality which provides for the protection and propagation of fish, shell-
fish, and wildlife and provides for recreation in and on the water be
achieved by July 1, 1983. It is also the national policy that the dis-
charge of toxic pollutants in toxic amounts be prohibited.
In order to meet these national goals, a major change in the present
Federal-State water pollution control program has been directed by the
1972 amendments. Emphasis is to be placed on maximizing the control of
pollution through implementation of high levels of waste treatment or
control for all point sources of pollution. Effluent limitations are to
be established for all waste discharges based on the application of the
best practicable control technology currently available for industrial
sources of pollution and based on secondary treatment for all publicly
-------
1-2
owned treatment facilities must provide pre-treatment if such wastes are
not susceptible to treatment in these facilities.
The new legislation continued the water quality standards program
established under the Water Quality Act of 1965. Implementation plans
established by the State to bring all sources of pollution in compliance
with these standards also remain in effect.
A number of waste sources discharging to the San Francisco Bay system
are not in compliance with State imposed implementation plans for improved
treatment. A majority of the waste sources in the Bay area provide treat-
.ment that will not meet the requirements of the new legislation and sub-
stantial upgrading of treatment facilities x^ill be required. Water quality
in the Bay system does not meet all applicable standards.
This report summarizes presently available information pertaining to
the water quality in the San Francisco Bay system; evaluated that infor-
mation with respect to applicable standards, statutes, regulations, or
critieria; and recommends a program that will lead to compliance with
established water quality uses.
Specific objectives of the report are:
A. To evaluate the water quality in San Francisco Bay.
B. To determine what beneficial uses of the Bay are being
impaired by water pollution and to estimate the economic
impact of such impairment.
C. To determine if water quality in the Bay system is suitable
for a balanced population of fish, shellfish and wildlife.
-------
D. To ascertain if existing and scheduled pollution abatement
measures for major municipal and industrial waste sources
are satisfactory in light of new federal responsibilities.
E. To ascertain if violations of water quality standards are
occurring in San Francisco Bay.
F. To develop recommendations for appropriate abatement action(s).
Sources of information used in the development of this report include:
The California State Water Resources Control Board; the California State
Department of Health; the California Department of Fish and Game;
California Academy of Science; San Francisco Regional Water Quality
Control Board; Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board;
National Marine Fisheries Service; National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA); Marine Minerals Technical Center; U. S. Geological
Survey; the University of California; the United States Public Health
Service; Food and Drug Administration (FDA); and the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA). Limited field studies were also conducted by
the EPA National Field Investigations Center-Denver (NFIC-D), Office of
Enforcement, and by EPA Region IX personnel in San Francisco. The co-
operation and contribution of the various state, local, and private
organizations are gratefully appreciated.
-------
II-l
II. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
A large and complex pollution load is discharged to the San Francisco
Bay system from a variety of sources. The largest pollution load is con-
tributed by waste discharges from municipal and industrial sources.
Other significant sources include combined sewer overflows, dredging ac-
tivities, agricultural drainage, vessel pollution, and Federal installations,
Three sources of data were used to define the magnitude and charac-
teristics of pollution from municipal and industrial sources. All waste
sources are required to monitor their effluents and submit data reports
to State regulatory agencies. Data reports for 1971 were the primary
source of information on waste discharges. For industrial sources, in-
formation was also available from applications submitted in mid-1971 for
permits to discharge in accordance with the Refuse Act of 1899. In addi-
tion, 16 major municipal and industrial sources were sampled on a short-
term basis by EPA regional staff during mid-1972.
A total of about 250 discrete sources of municipal and industrial
wastes are located in the drainage area tributary to the Bay system
between the confluence of the San Joaquin and Sacramento Rivers and the
Pacific Ocean. About 150 sources are located in close proximity to San
Francisco, San Pablo, and Suisun Bays. The total volume of wastewater
discharged by these 150 sources (excluding power-plant cooling water use
of 3,300 mgd) averaged 820 mgd in 1971.
Municipal sources contribute about 58 percent (490 mgd) of the total
wastewater volume. These sources are relatively uniformly spaced along
the western, eastern, and southern shores of the Bay system with the
-------
II-2
largest sources discharging to central and southern San Francisco Bay.
Major sources of industrial wastes are oil refineries, petrochemical
plants, chemical plants, pulp and paper mills, and food processing plants.
These industries are primarily located along the southern shore of Suisun
and San Pablo Bays between Antioch and Richmond. In other Bay areas,
industrial wastes are usually discharged to municipal treatment systems.
In 1971, BOD loads discharged to the Bay system as reported by muni-
cipal sources averaged about 400,000 Ib/day. Only a few industries are
required by the State to monitor effluent BOD. Thus, the total BOD load
to the Bay system cannot be determined. Discharges of COD reported by
industries in 1971 averaged about 310,000 Ib/day. The State requires
only a few municipal sources to monitor effluent COD. The East Bay
Municipal Utility District alone discharges more than 400,000 Ib/day
of COD indicating that COD loads from municipal sources are substantially
greater than from industrial sources.
Municipal and industrial sources together contributed an average oil
and grease load of 91,000 Ib/day to the Bay system in 1971. The major
portion (87 percent) of this load was from municipal sources. Discharges
of suspended solids to the Bay system in 1971 averaged about 409,000 Ib/day
with municipal sources contributing the major load (73 percent).
Only limited data are available on heavy metals discharged to the
Bay system. Three municipal sources (East Bay Municipal Utility District,
1000 Ib/day; City of San Francisco-Southeast Plant, 500 Ib/day; and South
San Francisco-San Bruno, 90 Ib/day) are known to discharge large loads of
heavy metals (chromium, copper, lead and zinc).
-------
II-3
There are 52 municipal sources that discharge an average of more than
0.5 mgd of wastewater each. The three largest sources (City of San Jose,
83 mgd; East Bay Municipal Utility District, 79 mgd; City of San Francisco-
North Point Plant, 64 mgd) together discharge about 28 percent of the
total wastewater volume.
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 require
that all publicly owned treatment facilities must meet effluent require-
ments based on secondary treatment by July 1977. The following twenty
municipal sources provide only primary treatment:
Source Flow (mgd)
Antioch, City of 2.9
Benicia, City of 1.1
Central Contra Costa County Sanitary District 22.8
Contra Costa County Sanitary District No. 7A 0.8
East Bay Municipal Utility District 78.9
Estero Municipal Improvement District 1.4
Marin County Sanitary District No. 5 0.6
Martinez, City of 1.4
Menlo Park, City of 5.9
Pinole, City 1.0
Pittsburg, City of-Camp Stoneman Plant 0.9
Pittsburg, City of-Montezuma Plant 1.4
Rodeo Sanitary District 0.6
San Francisco International Airport 0.9
San Francisco, City of-North Point Plant 64.1
San Francisco, City of-Southeast Plant 22.1
San Mateo, City of 11.0
San Pablo Sanitary District 7.6
Sausalito-Marin City 1.7
Vallejo County Sanitatation and Flood Control District 7.2
TOTAL 234.3
In addition to the above primary treatment facilities, 21 municipal
sources presently provide secondary treatment but discharge wastes that
will not meet effluent limitations based on secondary treatment (20 mg/1
-------
II-4
BOD, 30 mg/1 suspended solids, and 10 mg/1 oil and grease). Sources
providing inadequate secondary seconary treatment include:
Source
Fairfield-Suisun Sewer District
Hayward, City of
Las Gallinas Valley Sanitary District
Marin County Sanitary District No. 1
Marin County Sanitary District No. 6, Ignacio Plant
Marin County Sanitary District No. 6, Novato Plant
Mill Valley, City of
Mountain View Sanitary District
Oro Loma Sanitary District
Redwood City, City of
Richmond, City of
San Carlos, City of
San Jose, City of
San Leandro, City of
San Rafael Sanitary District
San Quentin Prison
South San Francisco-San Bruno
Sunnyvale, City of
Union Sanitary District-Alvarado
Union Sanitary District-Irvington
Union Sanitary District-Newark
Flow (mgd)
190.7
TOTAL
Municipal wastes receiving only primary treatment (234 mgd) consti-
tute about 48 percent of the total municipal waste volume. Wastes re-
ceiving inadequate secondary treatment (191 mgd) constitute an additional
39 percent of the total municipal discharge. Therefore, only 13 percent
of the municipal wastes discharged to the Bay system receive adequate
treatment.
Based on 1971 self-monitoring data, upgrading treatment provided
by the 41 sources listed above to meet Federal effluent limitations would
result in: (a) an 81 percent reduction in BOD loading to 77,000 Ib/day,
-------
II-5
(b) a 46 percent reduction in suspended solids loading to 111,000 Ib/day,
and (c) a 60 percent reduction in oil and grease loading to 36,000 Ib/day-
In the urban areas adjacent to central and southern San Francisco
Bay, almost all industries discharge their wastes to municipal sewage
systems for treatment. A number of municipal facilities receive a sub-
stantial fraction of their inflow (about 75 mgd or 15 percent of total
municipal wastes) from industrial sources. Industrial wastes frequently
contain materials that are toxic or not susceptible to treatment in muni-
cipal facilities. The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of
1972 require that pre-treatment standards be established by mid-1973 to
control the introduction of such deleterious industrial wastes into pub-
licly owned treatment systems. Ten publicly owned treatment facilities
are known to receive substantial volumes of industrial wastes and to
discharge inadequately treated wastes. Implementation of pre-treatment
of industrial wastes in compliance with Federal standards is needed for
industries connected to these ten systems (listed below) in order to
reduce the excessive loads of BOD, COD, suspended solids, heavy metals,
and oil and grease presently being discharged. Deleterious industrial
wastes discharged to other publicly owned systems will also require
pretreatment.
Source Flow (mgd) Percent Industrial
Primary Treatment
Central Contra Costa County S.D. 22.8 10-15
East Bay Municipal Utility Distr. 78.9 25
San Francisco, City of-North Point Plant 64.1 15-20
San Fra-icisco, City of-Southeast Plant 22.1 15-25
Subtotal 187.9
-------
II-6
Inadequate Secondary Treatment
Hayward, City 11.9 12
San Carlos, City of 4.0 15
San Jose, City of 82.8 20-30
San Leandro, City of 7.0 40
South San Francisco-San Bruno 7.2 33
Union Sanitary District-Newark Plant 5.4 25
Subtotal 118.3
TOTAL 306.2
Fish bioassays of several municipal effluents conducted by EPA in
1972 confirmed self-monitoring data that indicated these effluents are
toxic to aquatic life. Toxic effluents were observed at the sources
listed below. The self-monitoring data indicate that additional sources
also discharge toxic wastes. Discharges of toxic materials must be
abated in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act Amendments of 1972.
Sources of Toxic Wastes Flow (mgd)
Central Contra Costa County Sanitary District 22.8
East Bay Municipal Utility District 78.9
San Francisco, City of-North Point Plant 64.1
San Jose, City of 82.8
San Mateo, City of 11.0
TOTAL 259.6
The bioassay procedure used to monitor the toxicity of wastes dis-
charged to the San Francisco Bay system is a static test with pre-exposure
aeration. This procedure tends to reduce the toxicity of the effluents
to the test organism. Thus, the bioassay procedure currently used cannot
be expected to provide the basis for determining if wastes are toxic to
aquatic life within the context of Sections 307 and 502 of the Federal
-------
II-7
Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972. The toxlcity of wastes
discharged to the Bay system is greatly understated by the self-moni-
toring data.
A total of 39 significant industrial sources discharge wastes directly
to the Bay system. Excluding 3,300 tngd of cooling water from electric
power plants, the average discharge from these sources was about 320 mgd
(42 percent of total waste flow) in 1971. Average waste loads include
310,000 Ib/day of COD, 111,000 Ib/day of suspended solids, and 13,000 lb/
day of oil and grease.
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 require
that all industrial waste discharges must, by July 1977. meet effluent
limitations based on the best practicable control technology currently
available. Twenty-six sources that together contribute 98 percent of
the industrial waste load to the Bay system are discharging effluents
that contain one or more constituents in excess of levels achievable by
best practicable control technology. Application of such control
technology would thus result in a major reduction in pollution loads
from industrial sources. The following industries provide less than
best practicable control technology:
Industry Flow (mgd)
Allied Chemical Corporation, Industrial 0.1
Chemicals Division
Allied Chemical Corporation, Nichols 3.2
California and Hawaii Sugar Company 25.5
Cerro Metal Products 0.1
Colgate-Palmolive Company 1.5
Crown Zellerbach, Antioch 14.8
Dow Chemical Compaay, Pittsburg 24.1
-------
II-8
E. I. duPont deNemours & Co., Inc., Antioch 1.3
FMC Corporation-Inorganic Chemical Division 1.5
Fibreboard Corporation, Plant No. 2 4.8
Fibreboard Corporation, San Joaquin Mill 15.6
Hercules, Incorporated 1.6
Hickmott Foods, Inc., Antioch 2.9
Humble Oil and Refining Company, Benicia 3.1
Kaiser Gypsum Company 0.1
Kaiser Gypsum Company, Antioch 0.5
Merck and Company, Merck Chemical Division 4.8
Phillips Petroleum Company, Avon 15.2
Sequoia Refining Corporation 0.1
Shell Chemical Company, West Pittsburg 6.5
Shell Oil Company, Martinez 4.5
Standard Oil Company of California 112.0
Stauffer Chemical Company, Agricultural 1.3
Chemical Division
Tillie Lewis Foods, Inc., Antioch 12.0
Union Oil Company of California 47.0
United States Steel Corporation, Pittsburg 17.7
TOTAL 321.8
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 require
the development of an effluent permit system for all point sources of
pollution including municipal and industrial waste discharges. The per-
mit system must include provisions for the adequate monitoring of waste
effluents. To provide adequate monitoring, the existing self-monitoring
program will need to be augmented by a monitoring program conducted by
governmental regulatory agencies. The self-monitoring program will also
need to be expanded to provide additional data on each source.
Federal installations discharge about 22 mgd of domestic and
industrial wastes to the Bay system. About 75 percent of this waste-
water (16.3 mgd) is from industrial sources, primarily cooling water
from the Mare Island Naval Shipyard power plant (16.0 mgd)- Eleven
Federal installations discharge part or all of their wastes directly
to the Bay system. These installations are all under the control of
-------
II-9
the Department of Defense (nine U.S. Navy installations and two U.S.
Air Force installations). Part of the waste load from these eleven
sources as well as all wastes from numerous other Federal installations
are discharged to municipal sewerage systems. Federal installations
discharging industrial wastes to municipal systems must provide pre-
treatment if such wastes are not susceptible to treatment in municipal
facilities.
Wastewater treatment practices at nine of the eleven Federal instal-
lations are not adequate. The volume of inadequately treated waste is
small, however, averaging about 3.6 mgd. Three sources (1.6 mgd) are
scheduled to connect to municipal systems. An additional three sources
(0.5 mgd) will provide on-site secondary treatment. Abatement plans for
the other three sources providing inadequate treatment (1.4 mgd) are
unknown.
Overflows of mixed storm and sanitary sewage from combined sewer
systems during periods of storm runoff are a significant source of
pollution of the Bay system. By-passing of untreated sewage from
municipal sewerage systems subject to excessive infiltration is also
a source of significant pollution with the by-passing problem the most
severe in the Oakland area. The East Bay M.U.D. sewerage system
serving this area by-passed an estimated 2.3 billion gallons during
the 1968-69 rainy season. Combined sewer overflows are a major problem
in San Francisco. Combined sewer overflows from the San Francisco
system were estimated to total 6 billion gallons in 1971. In comparison
to dry weather discharges of municipal and industrial wastes, combined
-------
11-10
sewer overflows and system by-passes represent a small fraction (3 percent)
of the total waste volume discharged to the Bay system over the entire
year. Such discharges, however, exert a detrimental influence on
water quality conditions because these occur as slug loadings and only
during part of the year.
Dredging and maintenance of navigation channels in the Bay system
result in the movement of about 7 to 11 million cubic yards of sediments
annually. These sediments contain pollutants that can degrade water
quality in the vicinity of spoil areas and dredging activities. Most
sediments dredged from the Bay system will not meet current EPA guide-
lines for disposal of spoil in estuarine areas necessitating higher cost
land or ocean disposal. The EPA guidelines are currently undergoing
review to determine if revision is necessary to minimize the economic
impact of spoil disposal while providing adequate protection of water
quality.
Despite continued attempts at implementing disinfection practices
in order to control coliform bacterial densities in San Francisco Bay as
well as abatement and control programs for reducing other deliterious
contaminants, the EPA investigation, in the spring of 1972, indicated
that bacterial and other contamination interferes with the propagation
or harvest of commercially important shellfish.
Repeated bacteriological analyses of water samples from throughout
the Bay system reveal that, except for Carquinez Strait and Suisun Bay,
mid-chtnnel waters contain low coliform bacterial densities. In con-
trast, more than fifty percent of the waters directly over known shellfish
-------
11-11
beds, on the periphery of the Bay system, contained colifonn bacterial
densities in excess of State and Federal criteria for "approved" shell-
fish growing waters (the coliform median MPN of the water does not exceed
70/100 ml, and not more than 10 percent of the samples oridinarily exceed
an MPN of 230/100 ml measured under the most unfavorable hydrographic
and pollution conditions).
The occurrence of these unacceptably high concentrations of coliform
bacteria were in the western and southwestern sectors of South Bay and in
the vicinity of the densely populated area of Oakland and Alameda. The
central area of the bay system contained two distinct localities of high
coliform densities, one being the inner waters of Richardson Bay and the
other the waters adjacent to Point Richmond on the northeastern shore.
Of several shellfish areas in San Pablo Bay only Molate Point, north of
the eastern side of the San Rafael-Richmond Bridge, was surrounded by
waters of an unsatisfactory bacteriological quality. Waters overlying
one shellfish growing area in Carquinez Strait were of poor bacterio-
logical quality.
Most shellfish samples collected from the intertidal zone throughout
the bay system contained bacterial contamination in violation of shell-
fish quality standards (230 fecal coliforms per 100 gm of shellfish meat)
adopted by the State of California and the National Shellfish Sanitation
Program.
At one time or another during the EPA surveys, shellfish collected
from all Central and South Bay stations showed coliform bacterial densities
in violation of adopted market standards. Samples collected from four of
-------
11-12
the seven locations in San Pablo Bay were in violation of bacteriological
standards, and the only sample obtained from Carquinez Strait also proved
to be of unsatisfactory bacteriological quality.
In addition to the analyses for the accepted coliform indicator
organisms each shellfish sample was examined for enteric pathogens. Two
species of SaLmonefia were found; S. kentuaky was recovered from a sample
collected at Burlingame (on the western side of South Bay), and S. typhi-
mupium was isolated from a sample collected in San Leandro Bay. These
findings indicate contamination of shellfish by inadequately treated
sewage and, consequently, a severe health hazard to anyone consuming
the sea food.
Shellfish from the San Francisco Bay area were found to be contami-
nated with heavy metals, notably cadmium, chromium, copper, mercury, lead,
and zinc. At many bay locations heavy metal contaminations'in the shell-
fish were substantially greater than the background levels. Alert levels
of heavy metals that have been proposed by the FDA as indicators of muni-
cipal and industrial pollution in shellfish were exceeded in eighteen
samples. Zinc and lead were the most widespread contaminants observed
during the study.
In Carquinez Strait mercury concentrations in soft clams exceeded
the FDA recommended levels for shellfish.
Chlorinated insecticides and polychlorinated biphenyls were found
in the shellfish and sediments from most stations. Although the concen-
trations exceeded background levels, these were not sufficiently high at
this time to warrant regulatory action according to presently accepted
alert levels.
-------
11-13
Shellfish in San Francisco Bay were found to be contaminated with
petroleum related hydrocarbons of industrial origin.
A major commercial shellfishery existed in the bay system near the
turn of the century. This industry was essentially eliminated during
the early 1900's by water quality degradation. The propagation and
harvesting of shellfish is presently impaired, to a major degree, by
water pollution resulting from the discharge to the bay system of inade-
quately treated municipal and industrial wastes and by dredging, landfill,
and spoil disposal practices.— The potential exists for reestablishment
of a major shellfishery in the bay system, should existing water quality
be enhanced.
A sizeable standing crop of clams and native oysters is present in
the bay system. Research has shown that Pacific and Eastern oysters can
be grown using modern cultural methods.
Estimates of the oyster productive potential of the San Francisco
Bay system range from 1 to 13 million pounds of oyster meats annually-
At a dockside price of $0.40 per pound, this production would have an
annual value of $400,000 to $5,200,000. The large supply associated
with the upper limit of potential production would probably result in
reduced prices, making an upper limit of $2,600,000 a more realistic
potential value of the fishery.
The total impact, on the economy of the San Francisco area, as the
result of the loss of the oyster fishery, caused by water pollution is
in the range of $820,000 to $10,200,000. This estimate considers only
the economic effect of the harvested oysters. The additional economic
-------
11-14
impact produced by the importation of seed oysters to supply cultural
requirements is unknown.
The San Francisco Bay system exhibits evidence of enrichment at
various locations, mainly along the shores and in tidal reaches of some
tributaries. Nitrogen and phosphrous concentrations in the waters of
the bay system are substantially higher than levels necessary for stimu-
lation of aquatic growths. Decaying aquatic vegetation has reached
nuisance proportions in the Albany tide flats, by producing hydrogen
sulfide odors and by causing blackening of the lead-based paints found
on surrounding shoreline homes.
Agricultural drainage from the Central Valley, entering the bay
system through the Delta, is one main source of nitrogen and phosphrous.
Municipal and industrial waste discharges also contribute substantial
nutrient loads to the bay.
Fish kills have occurred annually in San Francisco Bay, particularly
in the Suisun Bay and Carquinez Strait area. These kills have generally
occurred during the spring and summer in the vicinity of municipal waste
treatment plants and industrial waste discharges and involve thousands of
fish [Appendix F]. More than 56 percent of the reported fish kills were
from unknown causes; however, of those from known causes about 20 percent
resulted from low dissolved oxygen, 7 percent from sewage, 9 percent from
an industrial pollutant, and 8 percent from other causes. Most of these
kills were investigated by the California Department of Fish and Game.
-------
III-l
III. RECOMMENDATIONS
-------
III-2
THIS SECTION TO BE
INSERTED LATER
-------
IV. DESCRIPTION OF THE AREA
A. PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION
San Francisco Bay is a destinctive geographical feature in the
Northern California area. The Bay system covers approximately 435 square
miles and ranges from 3 to 12 miles in width to about 50 miles in length
[Figure IV-1].
Westernmost of the numerous large metropolitan areas is the City of
San Francisco, situated on a land mass immediately south of the Golden
Gate Strait, the bay connection with the Pacific Ocean. The cities
of Richmond, Oakland, and Berkeley are east of San Francisco across
the Bay from Golden Gate. To the northeast are Martinez, Vallejo,
Pittsburg, and Antioch. South of the San Francisco area lie the cities
of San Mateo, Burlingame, Redwood City, San Jose, Hayward, San Leandro,
and Palo Alto. North of the area are Rodeo, San Rafael, Walnut Creek,
Napa, and Petaluma.
The shoreline of the bay is characterized by flatlands and tidal
marshland. Approximately 80 percent of this marshland has been "re-
claimed," chiefly for agricultural use and salt ponds. A great amount
of these lands, or shoreline, has a flat slope. As a result, the area
between mean high and low water is large, totaling 64 square miles. As
a result of this flat-slope topography the bay is shallow with average
depths of about 20 feet. Immediately east of the Golden Gate, which
averages three miles wide, the average depth of the bay increases to
43 feet, while at the northern and southern reaches the average depth
-------
CAROUINEZ STRAIT
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
SCALE IN MILES
Figure IV-1 San Francisco Bay System
-------
remains 18 to 20 feet. In contrast, the scouring action of high-velocity
currents through the Carquinez Strait maintains a maximum depth of 90 feet.
The San Francisco Bay estuarine system consists of South, San Fran-
cisco, San Pablo, and Suisun Bays, the Carquinez Strait, and the Delta
of the San Joaquin and Sacramento Rivers. Within the boundaries of San
Francisco Bay there are several islands including Angel Island, Alcatraz,
Yerba Buena, and the man-made Treasure Island.
For purposes of later discussion, the San Francisco Bay system has
been divided into four hydrographic units. These are: South Bay, Central
Bay, San Pablo Bay and Suisun Bay. South Bay is the portion of San Fran-
cisco Bay lying south of the Oakland Bay Bridge. Central Bay boundaries
are from the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge south to the Oakland Bay Bridge.
San Pablo Bay lies between the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge and the Carquinez
Strait Bridge. Suisun Bay extends easterly from the Carquinez Strait
Bridge to the west end of Chipps Island (including Grizzly and Honker Bays).
B. CLIMATE
The San Francisco Bay area is characterized by a mild and temperate
climate. The warmest weather occurs in the late spring and early autumn.
Average temperatures in the City of San Francisco are about 50°F in January
and about 60°F in July. This slight variation in annual temperature in the
vicinity of the ocean contrasts to much wider ranges in the inland areas.
The rainy season extends from November through April, with maximums
occurring in December and January, Mean annual rainfall varies geogra-
phically, with a high of 22 inches in the City of San Francisco to a low
-------
of about 13 inches in the southern and eastern sections of the Bay system.
The average annual rainfall for the general Bay area is about 19 inches.
In contrast to precipitation, the average annual evaporation is about
48 inches which is more than twice the annual precipitation. This exten-
sive rate of evaporation, highest in July, accounts for a loss of more
than 650,000 acre feet of water annually from the Bay system.
C. HYDROLOGY
Along the Pacific Coast, including San Francisco Bay, one of the
chief characteristics of the tide is diurnal inequality (successive high
or low water heights differ). The largest inequality is usually found
in the low waters. The mean tidal range at Golden Gate is about 4 feet.
At the Dumbarton Bridge, in South Bay, the mean tidal range increases to
7.5 feet, a noticeable change. In the northern section, the mean tidal
range gradually decreases from 4.6 feet in upper San Pablo Bay to 3.1
feet at Antioch in Suisun Bay. These tidal differences in the northern
section are attributed to a progressively dampened tidal surge. In addi-
tion fo affecting the tidal range, this restrained tidal surge causes
conspicuous variations in times of tidal peaks within the system. Tidal
delays, using the Golden Gate as reference, are about 50 minutes at
Dumbarton Bridge, one to two hours in eastern San Pablo Bay, and nearly
four hours at Antioch in Suisun Bay. Tidal velocities (sometimes exceeding
five knots) are variable in the Bay system and are influenced by winds
and run-off from the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers.
Despite its shallow depths, San Francisco Bay (435 sq mi) contains
-------
a relatively large volume of water; at mean tide the volume is approxi-
mately 5.4 million acre feet. The tidal prism (the volume of water between
mean high and low tides) is about 1.1 million acre feet or 21 percent of
the average total volume of water in the Bay. On each tidal cycle about
4 percent of the total volume of the Bay is replaced by new ocean water,
serving to dilute and remove pollutants from the Bay. However, most of
this replacement occurs near Golden Gate, with progressively decreasing
amounts of flushing in the Bay system's interior.
Water transport within the Bay complex is controlled by tides and
advective flow (flow or movement of water resulting from causes other
than the tides). In the northern section of the Bay system the advective
flow is basically the result of river discharge from the Delta region.
However, in the southern section there is very little discharge from
natural streams. The result is that the advective flow is minor and is
governed by waste discharges and evaporation. In general, dominant control
of Bay water transport is achieved by the effects of tides which far out-
weigh the effects of waste discharges, precipitation, groundwater move-
ment, or stream flows, including even the large flow from the Delta.
D. WATER USES
The San Francisco Bay system provides a wide variety of beneficial
uses, recreational and economical, to people in the area. Some of the
most important include water supplies for industrial, agricultural, and
municipal use; a natural habitat for fish and wildlife; a vast, water-
oriented recreational area; accessibility to ocean-going water transport;
and an aesthetically pleasing environment.
-------
IV-
In order to protect these beneficial uses the California State Water
Quality Control Board has established water quality standards that have
been subsequently approved by the United States Environmental Protection
Agency. (These different uses and the water quality criteria will be
discussed more thoroughly later in the text.)
-------
V-l
V. WATER QUALITY CONDITIONS
A. APPLICABLE WATER QUALITY REGULATIONS
State Regulatory Activity
The State Water Resources Control Board and nine regional boards
regulate water quality, including that of the San Francisco Bay and the
Delta area through a system of permits, monitored by self-reporting data.
Abatement of pollution is attained through review of these self-monitoring
data, issuance of Cease-and-Desist orders, and court actions. A more
detailed discussion of these procedures, together with a summary of cur-
rent abatement status, is presented in Chapter VIII.
Federal-State Water Quality Standards
The waters of the San Francisco Bay system and tributary streams
are contained entirely within California. The tidal portions, affected
by the ebb and flow of the tides, as well as the territorial waters
extending seaward a distance of three miles, are subject to the provisions
of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972. In 1967,
the California State Water Quality Control Board established Standards
for the tidal waters of the Bay system pursuant to the Water Quality
Act of 1965.— These Standards subsequently were approved as Federal
Standards, except for the temperature criteria, in January, 1969, and
remain in effect.
The Standards consist of three components: 1) a designation of
beneficial water uses to be protected, 2) water quality objectives
(criteria) that specify limits on various water quality parameters,
-------
V-2
and 3) an implementation plan that sets forth enforcement procedures and
time schedules for abatement of pollution.
Waters of the San Francisco Bay system are used for a wide variety
of purposes. The standards designate that the following beneficial uses
are to be protected:
1. Whole or limited body water-contact recreation;
2. The historic usability of domestic, industrial, and agricultural
water supplies, east of the westerly end of Chipps Island, to
the extent that it is reasonably practicable until alternate
supplies are provided;
3. Industrial water supplies, westerly of Chipps Island, at all
times with respect to all water quality factors except salinity
incursion;
4. Fishing, hunting, and fish-and-wildlife propagation and suste-
nance [as shown in Figures V-l and V-2];
5. Shellfish;
6. Pleasure boating, marinas, and navigation;
7. Esthetic appeal;
8. Dispersion and assimilation of wastes.
Water quality criteria were established to protect the designated
beneficial uses. These criteria [Appendix A] specify numerical or nar-
rative limits for important water quality parameters. Criteria of special
interest are discussed in the following sections.
B. BACTFRIOLOGICAI CONDITIONS
The Standards established in 1967 did not designate specific areas
-------
SAN
:PABLO BAY
RICHMOND
SAN RAFAEL
IIIDCE
CARQUINEZ STRAIT
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
-N-
DELINEATION OF BENEFICIAL
USES OF TIDAL WATERS
TO BE PROTECTED
JFISH MIGRATION [ANADROMOUS)
IFISH SPAWNING
JFISH, SHRIMP, CRAB AND
SHELLFISH HABITAT
•DUPARTON BRIDGE
s
10
SCALE IK MILES
Figore V-1 Beneficial Uses of Tidal Waters to be Protected-Fish Migration; Fish Spawning;
Fish, Shrimp, Crab and Shellfish Habitat
-------
iVALLEJO
SAN
iPABLO BAY
RICHMOND
CENTRAL^
BAY
OAKLAND BAM
-------
V-3
to be protected for shellfish harvesting but indicated such areas would
be designated when studies by the State Department of Fish and Game and
Public Health had been completed. A total of 42 potential shellfish
harvesting areas were subsequently indentified, in 1968, by the Department
of Fish and Game [Figure V-3]. Bacteriological quality of waters over-
lying these shellfish beds was found to be unacceptable for safe con-
sumption of shellfish, when evaluated by the Department of Public Health
during the period 1966 to 1970. These waters failed to meet the require-
ments based upon criteria contained in the U. S. Public Health Service
manual, "Sanitation of Shellfish Growing Areas," 1965, revised. The
criteria for approved shellfish areas are, in summary form:
1. The area is not so contaminated with fecal material that
consumption of shellfish might be hazardous.
2. The area is not so contaminated with radionuclides or industrial
wastes that the consumption of the shellfish might be hazardous.
3. The coliform median MPN of the water does not exceed 70/100 ml,
and not more than 10 percent of the samples ordinarily exceed
an MPN of 230/100 ml (5-tube decimal dilution test) measured
under the most unfavorable hydrographic and pollution conditions.
In addition to the above criteria, which were formulated to safely
classify shellfish growing waters, the State of California also complies
with standards adopted by the National Shellfish Sanitation Program (NSSP)
for all species of fresh and frozen oysters (includes all shellfish within
the NSSP) at the wholesale market level. Shellfish at the wholesale
market level are considered "satisfactory" when a fecal coliform density
-------
PABLO BAY
31-33
RICHMOND
SAN RAFAEL'
IIIDCE
42.
34
RICHMOND
CAROUINEZ
BRIDGE
CARQUINEZ STRAIT
BRIDGE
CENTRAL
BAY
~
**
OAKLAND
BRIDGE
GOIDEK
BRIDGE
^
1L
OAKLAND
SAN FRANCISCO
'1-6
SOUTH
BAY
..-""
>I8
UJ
u
0
y
\L
o
XSAN MATED
BRIDGE
io-ir
SAN MATED
15
CHIPPS ISLAND
DUMBARTON BRIDGE
ANTIOCH
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
-N-
LEGEND
^CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT
OF FISH AND GAME
SHELLFISH BED NUMBER
1968
ID
SCALE IN MILES
Figure V-3 Shellfish Bed Locations, San Francisco Bay System
-------
V-4
of not more than 230 MPN per 100 grams of meat or a 35°C Standard Plate
Count of not more than 500,000 per gram is exceeded.
Prior to the 1972 EPA investigations the most recent comprehensive
water quality study covering the entire San Francisco Bay system was
21
conducted from 1960 to 1964 by the University of California.— During
this earlier study, samples were collected from a total of 51 stations
distributed among 6 main areas of the Bay system. [Average coliform
density characteristics observed during the study are summarized below,
Table V-l, according to the areas of the Bay designated by the University,
as shown in Figure V-4.]
Improvements in waste treatment practices since the 1960-1964
University of California study period (installation of secondary treat-
ment facilities by several municipal waste sources, including the large
City of San Jose facility, and disinfection of essentially all municipal
wastes) have resulted in some water-quality enhancement.
Prior to the implementation of these disinfection practices by all
municipal waste treatment facilities, bacterial concentrations through-
out the Bay system were generally in excess of acceptable limits for
water-contact recreation and far in excess of allowable levels for shell-
fish harvesting. Improved disinfection has resulted in a reduction in
average bacterial levels in open water areas. Water quality at sev-
eral bathing beaches is now acceptable for water-contact sports during
3/
much of the recreation season.— Sanitary surveys of a number of shell-
fish beds during 1969 and 1970 by the State of California Department of
Health, indicated that water overlying several beds was of suitable bacterial
quality to meet the U. S. Public Health Service limits for "Approved or
-------
TABLE V-l
AVERAGE COLIFORM BACTERIA
(MPN/100 ml)
IN SAN FRANCISCO BAY, CALIFORNIA
1960-1961
South Bay
20,000
Lower Bay
500
Central Bay
1,000
North Bay
500
San Pablo Bay
1,000
Suisun Bay
2,000
Source: Extracts from Final Report, A Comprehensive Study of San Francisco Bay,
Volume V, SERL Report No. 67-2.
f
Oi
-------
CARQUINEZ STRAIT
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
RICHMOND-
S*H RAFAEL
BRIDGE
COLDEN GATE
BRIDGE
LEGEND
1 ZONE NUMBER
GEOGRAPHICAL DIVISION
LOWER BAY
SAN MATED
BRIDGE
SOUTH BAY
Figure V-4 Geographical and Zone Divisions of the San Francisco Bay System
-------
V-6
A/
Conditionally Approved" shellfish harvesting areas.— However, bacterial
levels near most shellfish beds still posed a health hazard to human
consumption of shellfish. Also, shellfish from beds with acceptable
water quality were found to have unacceptably high bacterial levels in
4/
their meat.— Proximity to waste outfalls, unreliability of disinfection
facilities at waste treatment plants, and uncontrolled sources of
bacterial contamination were, during this survey period, factors contri-
buting to unacceptable levels of bacteria near shellfish beds.
Despite continued attempts at implementing disinfection practices
to control coliform bacterial densities in San Francisco Bay as well as
abatement and control programs to reduce other deleterious contaminants,
investigations by the Environmental Protection Agency indicate that
bacterial and other contamination interferes with the propagation or
harvest of commercially important shellfish.
These recent bacteriological studies were conducted in the spring
of 1972 and included all of the waters of the San Francisco Bay system
as well as shellfish from certain sections of the surrounding shoreline.
In order to determine bacteriological quality, water samples were
collected for examination twice daily during the peak of each tidal phase
for the open waters and once a day, for a ten-day period, for water
over shellfish beds. All coliform analyses were performed according to
methods prescribed in the 13th Edition, Standard Methods for the Exami-
nation of Water and Wasteuater3 using the Most Probable Number
technique.— [Results of these bacteriological determinations are presented
in Tables V-2 through V-5.] Isolation of pathogenic (Salmonella) bacteria
from shellfish meats was attempted at 33 locations.
-------
TABLE V-2 .
BACTERIOLOGICAL DENSITIES - SAN FRANCISCO BAY SURVEY^/
WATER SAMPLES
SPRING, 1972
Station
Number Station Description
1 Towers Opposite Beards Creek
2 Buoy FIR 4
3 Northeast of Mouth of
Redwood Creek
4 Buoy FI 2.5 Sec
6 Just South of San Mateo
Bridge
7 Buoy FI 4.0 Sec #3
8 - Buoy FI 4.0 Sec #5
9 West of Point San Bruno
TO Buoy F14 Sec #1
11 Half Point Off Sierra Point
13 Buoy FI 6 Sec Ex -A
14 West of Grounded Hulks
No. of
Tide Samples
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
10
8
10
8
10
8
10
8
9
8
9
9
9
9
6
6
9
9
9
7
9
8
8
8
Total Col i forms,
MPN/100 ml %
Maximum Minimum Median Log Mean
920
3,500
3,500
540
1,100
5
920
350
49
5
2
70
8
240
2
<2
no
8
540
350
17
33
5
2
8
33
14
7
2
<2
<2
14
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
5
<2
<2
<2
<2
2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
20
120*
240*
240*
5
2
41
95*
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
46
<2
<2
<2
t
<2
49
27
7
<2
<2
<2
37
210
250
140
6
<2
<33
72
<4
<2
<2
<4
<3
54
<2
<2
<3
<2
27
<23
<6
<3
<2
<2
Samples %
Samples
Fecal Coli forms,
MPN/lOOml
>230 >1,000 Maximum Minimum Median Log Mean
20*
38*
50*
62*
10
0
10
25*
0
0
0
0
0
22*
0
0
0
0
11**
14*
0
0
0
0
0
25**
30**
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
700
1,700
350
130
170
5
49
170
13
2
<2
5
<2
13
<2
<2
no
2
14
23
11
5
<2
2
2
8
2
7
<2
<2
<2
2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
8
79
31
41
2
2
<2
13
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
4
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
12
94
29
36
4
<2
<4
10
<2
<2
<2
<2
<5
<2
<2
<3
<2
<4
<8
<3
<2
<2
<2
-------
TABLE V-Z (CONTINUED)
BACTERIOLOGICAL DENSITIES - SAN FRANCISCO
WATER SAMPLES
SPRING, 1972
BAY SURVEYS/
Station
Number Station Description
15
17
19
21
23
24
26
29
31
33
35
36
37
38
39
Half Mile East of Potrero
Point
Buoy FIR 4 Sec #2
Mid-channel Off
North Point Buoy
End of Berkeley
Pier
Off Berkeley Pier
Near Yacht Harbor
Black Point Buoy A
Richardson Bay
Buoy 6
Off Pt. Richmond
Mid-channel Buoy #2
Buoy FIR #6
Richmond Channel
27 Ft. White Marker,
Left Side of Channel
Off Pier at Pt. Orient
Buoy FIG 4, Sec #3
Petaluma River Channel
Mid-San Pablo Bay
Off Pinole Point
Off Pinole Point
Channel Buoy #5
Off Pier at Pinole
Point
No. of
Tide Samples
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
9
8
9
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
7
8
7
8
8
8
8
Total
Coliforms, MPN/100 ml !
Maximum Minimum Median Log Mean
1,600
1,100
27
23
330
33
33
49
79
49
490
34
70
49
23
49
23
13
5
11
79
17
23
2
49
23
49
no
33
13
22
8
2
<2
<2
4
<2
<2
<2
17
2
<2
2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
2
<2
<2
2
<2
7
<2
2
70
79*
13
<2
41
10
5
3
<2
5
90*
14
5
7
6
4
<2
3
2
<2
8
4
8
<2
6
5
4
33
8
8
75
75
8
<3
<47
9
<4
<6
<3
<6
89
12
<7
8
<6
<4
<3
<4
<3
<3
<6
<4
6
<2
<8
6
<6
32
<7
9
1! Samples
>230
11*
12.5*
0
0
25*
0
0
0
0
25*
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
% Samples
Fecal Coliforms,
MPN/100-ml
>1 ,000 Maximum Minimum Median Log Mean
11.1
12.5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
79
140
8
2
22
8
5
33
5
27
13
8
17
5
5
8
4
5
5
33
5
8
<2
11
8
8
33
8
8
2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
2
<2
5
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
2
<2
2
17
8
2
<2
13
2
<2
2
<2
12
4
2
4
3
2
<2
2
<2
<2
2
<2
2
<2
<2
<2
<2
10
2
4
13
<3
<2
<8
<3
<2
3
<3
<3
12
<4
<3
<4
<3
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<4
<2
<3
<2
<3
<2
<3
9
<3
3
f
00
-------
TABLE V-2 (CONTINUED)
BACTERIOLOGICAL DENSITIES - SAN FRANCISCO BAY SURVEY 2/
WATER SAMPLES
SPRING, 1972
Station
Number
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
Station Description
Off Lone Tree Point
Mid-Channel
Marina Right Side of
Carquinez Strait
Mid-Channel 1-80 Bridge
Dike Nine Entrance to
Napa River
Buoy FIG 4, Sec §7
Off Benicia
Mid-Channel
Benicia Bridge Buoy 2
Buoy #4
Suisun Bay
Buoy FI 4 Sec #1
Buoy FIR 4 Sec #8
Off Point Edith
Buoy FIG 4 Sec #17
Off Middle Point
Tide
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
No. of
Samples
6
7
8
8
6
7
6
7
6
7
6
7
6
7
6
7
6
7
7
7
Tota
Maximum
130
330
13,000
3,500
no
490
130
2,200
490
130
330
330
330
220
230
130
790
490
790
1,300
1 Coli forms, MPN/_
Minimum
n
79
130
330
33
49
33
330
33
70
49
33
33
70
70
70
70
79
79
79
Median
64
130*
1 ,500*
900*
74*
130*
no*
700*
140
79*
no*
110*
190*
130*
160*
no*
280*
170*
170*
230*
100 -ml
Log Mean
54
150
1,400
930
69
150
78
850
130
90
130
no
150
120
140
100
260
150
180
300
% Samples
> 230
0
28.6
75*
100*
0
42.8*
0
100*
16.7*
0
33*
14.3*
33*
0
0
0
50*
14.3*
14.3*
42.8*
% Samples
>1 ,000
0
0
75**
50**
0
0
0
42.9**
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
14.3
Fecal Conforms, MPN/100 ml
Maximum
23
79
2,300
330
49
84
70
330
220
79
79
110
79
140
130
94
230
130
330
700
Minimum
5
22
33
8
2
22
17
63
22
13
17
33
33
23
23
22
33
23
46
33
Median Log
18
33
570
150
17
33
46
220
54
33
48
49
60
49
48
79
79
49
49
49
Mean
14
33
330
95
14
40
37
170
54
38
45
58
53
61
53
54 <
71 vo
52
77
DO
-------
TABLE V-2 (CONTINUED)
BACTERIOLOGICAL DENSITIES - SAN FRANCISCO BAY SURVEYS/
WATER SAMPLES
SPRING, 1972
Station
Number
51
52
54
55
57
Station Description
Buoy FIG 4, Sec #25
Off Simmons Point
Buoy NY
Off New York Point
Buoy #16, Sacramento
Ship Channel
Off Antioch
Point, Buoy #4
Mid-Channel
Antioch Bridge
Buoy #12
Tide
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
No. of
Samples
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
Total ColiformSj MPN/100 ml
Maximum
2,300
700
2i300
1,300
1,300
110
2,300
1,700
1,700
230
Minimum
79
79
.49
70
33
27
79
220
49
no
Median Loq
330
230
490
490
220
49
230
330
170
130
Mean
440
240
390
350
160
55
290
470
220
140
% Samples
> 1 ,000
42.8**
14.3
28.6**
14.3
14.3
14.3
14.3
Fecal Conforms, MPN/
Maximum
490
110
490
330
70
11
1,300
330
94
33
Minimum
17
13
8
13
4
<2
13
17
2
5
Median
49
49
49
110
13
5
17
46
13
13
100 ml
Log Mean
70
48
47
80
12
5
36
44
14
12
Violation of U. S. Public Health Water Quality Recommendations for Shellfish Growing Areas (Median MPN of water not to exceed 70 Total Col If onus/100 ml
and not more than 10 percent of samples to ordinarily exceed an MPN of 230/100 ml).
**Violation of California Water Quality Bacterial Standards for Water-Contact Sports Area (20 percent of samples not to exceed 1,000 Col1forms/I00 ml).
-1 Samples collected by National Field Investigations Center-Denver.
7
-------
TABLE V-3
BACTERIOLOGICAL DENSITIES-SAN FRANCISCO BAY SURVEYa/
SHELLFISH SAMPLES-
SPRING, 1972
Station
Coyote Point
Coyote Point
Forster City
San Leandro
Dumbarton Bridge(East
Dumbarton Bridge (West
Candlestick
Oyster Point
Redwood Creek
Pinole Point
Molate Point
Rodeo
China Camp
Benicia
Drakes Estero Control
Drakes Estero Control
Number (s)
10-11
10-11
14
18
Side) 17
Side) 16
1-6
; 7
15
34
30
35
36-38
A3
Date
3/30/72
3/30/72
3/30/72
3/31/72
3/31/72
3/31/72
4/2/72
4/2/72
4/3/72
4/29/72
4/29/72
4/29/72
4/30/72
4/23/72
4/3/72
4/3/72
Shellfish
Soft-shell Clam
Olympia Oyster
Soft-shell Clam
Olympia Oyster
Soft-shell Clam
Soft-shell Clam
Soft-shell Clam
Soft-shell Clam
Soft-shell Clam
Soft-shell Clam
Soft-shell Clam
Soft-shell Clam
Soft-shell Clara
Soft-shell Clam
Pacific Oyster
Eastern Oyster
Total Coliforms
MPN/100 gms
63,000
1,800
5,400
3,500
3,500
1,300
L60.000
3,500
2,200
330
790
49,000
170
3,300
50
230
Fecal Coliforms
MPN/100 gms
46,000*
630*
3,500*
790*
490*
490*
1,300*
330*
400*
50
490*
13,000*
20
1,100*
<20
230
*Violation of Federal Shellfish Standard "Not to exceed 230 Fecal Collforms/100 gma".
a/ Samples collected by National Field Investigations Center-Denver.
-------
TOTAL COLIFORMS IN WATER OVERLAYING SHELLFISH BEDS:
MEDIAN VALUES PER 100 ml AND PERCENT EXCEEDING
230 PER 100 ml, BY STATION^/
Station
Number
3
9
10
14
19
20
22
23
27
29
30
31
32
33
41
Station Description
Bay view Park
Burlingame
Coyote Point (north of)
Foster City
Oakland Airport
San Leandro Bay
Alameda Beach
Oakland Inner Harbor
Albany Hill
Point Richmond
Mai ate Point
Tara Hills, Left
Tara Hills, Middle
Tara Hills, Right
Strawberry Point West Side
Total Col i forms
Number of
Observations
27
29
27
27
24
30
27
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
Median
per 100 ml
4
59
2
13
79
104
11
50
33
25
94
1
2
2
63
Percent Above
230 per 100 ml
7
21
11
15
29
40
0
17
0
13
37 L
0
0
0
10
Percent Above
1,000 per 100 ml
3.7
6.9
7.4
0
25*
36.7*
0
0
0
0
13
0
0
0
0
f
-------
TABLE V-4 (CONTINUED)
TOTAL COLIFORMS IN WATER OVERLAYING SHELLFISH BEDS:
MEDIAN VALUES PER 100 ml AND PERCENT EXCEEDING
230 PER 100 ml, BY STATION
Total Coliforms
Station Station Description Number of Median Percent Above
Number Observations per 100 ml 230 per 100 ml
42 Richardson Bay, North End 30 170 40
Control Drake's Estero 3 <2 0
Percent Above
1,000 per 100 ml
16.7
0
Violation of California Water Quality Bacterial Standards for Water-Contact Sports Area (20 percent of
samples not to exceed 1,000 Coliforms/100 ml).
i/ Samples collected by Environmental Protection Agency - Region IX.
f
M
CO
-------
TABLE V-5
FECAL COLIFORMS PER 100 gm SHELLFISH MEAT:
RANGE OF VALUES AND COMPARISON TO STANDARD, BY STATION
Station Station Location
Number
3
9
10
14
19
20
22
23
27
29
30
31
32
33
41
Bayview Park
Burlingame
Coyote Point (north of)
Foster City
Oakland Airport
San Leandro Bay
Alameda Beach
Oakland Inner Harbor
Albany Hill
Point Richmond
Mai ate Point
Tara Hills, Left
Tara Hills, Middle
Tara Hills, Right
Strawberry Point West Side
No. Times
Sampled
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Fecal Col i forms
per 100 gm Range
230- 1,700
490- 4,900
50- 80
490- 2,300
1,100-17,000
170-23,000
<20- 330
490- 1,100
1,700-13,000
<20- 1,400
110- 700
20- 330
170- 1,700
20- 130
330- 3,300
Sample Exceeds
230 FC per 100 gm
No. Times
2
3
0
3
3
2
1
3
3
2
2
1
1
0
3
Percent
67
100*
0
100
100
67**
33
100
100
67
67
33
33
0
100
-------
TABLE V-5 (CONTINUED)
FECAL COLIFORMS PER 100 gm SHELLFISH MEAT:
RANGE OF VALUES AND COMPARISON TO STANDARD, BY STATION
Station
Number
42
Control
Station
Richardson Bay,
Drake's Estero
Location
North End
No. Times
Sampled
3
3
Fecal Col i forms
per 100 gm Range
<20-23,000
<2- 13
Sample Exceeds
230 FC per 100 qm
No. Times Percent
2 67
0 0
* Salmonella Kentucky isolated
**'Salmonella typhimua'iwn isolated
—'Samples collected by Environmental Protection Agency - Region IX.
f
M
Ln
-------
V-16
South Bay
At 12 of the 24 sample stations in this section of the bay, viola-
tions of the NSSP bacteriological criteria for shellfish harvesting
waters occurred [Table V-2, Figure V-5a]. At Station 1 twenty percent
of the samples were greater than 230/100 ml during high tide and 38 per-
cent were greater than 230 for the low tide period. Station 2 had 50 per-
cent of the samples greater than 230 during high tide and 62 percent for
the low tide period, the median value was 240 coliforms per 100 ml.
Stations 11 and 15 also showed violations during both tidal phases with
more than 10 percent of the samples greater than 230 coliforms per 100 ml.
Stations 4 and 8 showed violations during low tide only. Of the waters
directly overlying known shellfish beds violations occurred at 6 of the
10 sampling stations [Table V-4], The majority of these stations are
located on the western shoreline in the vicinity of major s"ewage dis-
charges. All shellfish samples (13) collected in the South Bay were in
violation of sanitary quality criteria (fecal coliforms in excess of
230/100 gm shellfish meat with values as high as 46,000 fecal coliforms
per 100 gm [Tables V-3, V-5, Figure V-6a]). In contrast, shellfish
*
samples collected from Drakes Estero, for control purposes, were not in
violation of sanitary quality criteria.
Pathogenic bacteria were isolated from shellfish meats at two
locations in South Bay. So.1mone11a kentuaky was isolated from shellfish
taken from the Burlingame (9) beds and S. typhimuritm from samples taken
at San Leandro Bay (20) [Table V-5]. The presence of pathogenic Salmonella
* Drakes Estero is located on the Pacific Ocean about 30 miles north of
the Golden Gate.
-------
mil PEIIISIU \
^xi
HIEI t«IE IIIDQE
TIEAStlE ISUKO
.OAKLAND INNER HB. (23)
H-70.
SAN FRANCISCO
CANDLESTICK
PT.
LlHY CITT
-N-
L-79
OAKLAND AIRPORT (19)
L-27
_11
S»K FIAKCISCO
nTEHMTIONU »UFO«T
BURLINGAME (9)
COYOTE PT. (1O-11
LEGEND
• SAMPLING LOCATION
STATION NUMBERS
(32) REGION IX
32 DENVER NFIC
FORSTER CITY (14)
iICDNOOD
CITY
NOTE SAMPLES AT SHELLFISH BEDS
TAKEN AT HIGH TIDE ONLY
CAST
Figm V-Sa Water Sampling Locations and Total Coliform Concentrations-South Bay-Spring 1972
-------
fill!! PUIISILt \
OAKLAND INNER HB. (23)
49O-11OO
<2O-33O
LAMEDA BEACI
y
SAN LEANDRO
ANDLESTICK
OAKLAND AIRPORT (19
SAN LEANDRO 7
SOUTH BAY
A*
BURLINSAME
COYOTE PT. 71 (10-11)
FORSTER CITY 72 (14)
I E t £ II D
A SAMPLING LOCATION
REDWOOD CREEK 78
FijBre <-6a Sbelllisb Samplinj Locatias md Fecil Colilorm Coicentrations-Soutli Bajf-Spiinj 1972
-------
V-17
constitutes a severe health hazard to anyone consuming or even contacting
the shellfish. The lack of recovery of similar organisms from other
shellfish beds does not necessarily mean that the organisms are absent
but that the recovery technique used was unsuccessful [Appendix B],
Central Bay
Five sampling stations located in this section of San Francisco Bay
did not meet the NSSP bacteriological requirements for waters over-
lying shellfish growing areas [Table V-2, Figure V-5b]. Stations 19 and
24, located near the San Francisco North Point plant, had bacterial
counts which were in violation during high tide only, both with 25 per-
cent of the samples greater than 230 coliforms per 100 ml. Station 24
had a median value of 90 coliforms per 100 ml. Also, waters in the vi-
cinity of Point Richmond, Strawberry Point, and Richardson Bay contained
excessive amounts of coliform bacteria [Table V-4]. Shellfish samples
collected from the intertidal zone near Richmond, Albany Hill, Strawberry
Point, and Richardson Bay [Table V-5] had bacterial densities which
were in violation of the established market standard for shellfish
meats [Figure V-6b].
San Pablo Bay
Results of bacteriological analyses of water samples from San Pablo
Bay show that sampling stations, 42 and 44, had bacterial counts that
were in violation during both tidal phases. During the low tide periods
100 percent of the water samples from both stations were greater than
230 coliforms per 100 ml with median values of 900 and 700 coliforms
respectively. Station 42, at high tide, had a median value of 1,500
-------
LEGEND
• SAMPLING LOCATION
STATION NUMBERS
{32) REGION IX
32 DENVER NFIC
TARA HILLS (33)
TARA HILLS (32)
PT. PINOLE (31)
IICHUOND S«» l»F»El 1IIDGE
RICHMOND
MOLATE PT. (3OJ
PT RICHMOND (29)
ALBANY HILL (27)
STRAWBERRY PT.
^^ 23
21
OUL»KO
IAT BRIDGE
L-
RICHARDSON B ^Y C42)
NOTE V. SAMPLES AT SHELLFISH
BEDS TAKEN AT HIGH
TIDE ONLY
2. CONTROL AREA
DRAKES ESTERO <2
Figure V-5b Water Sampling Locations aod Total Coliform Concentrations-
Central Bay-San Pablo Bay-Spring 1972
-------
LEGEND
A SAMPLING LOCATION
* OYSTER SAMPLE
NANILTON MR
FOICt BASE
SAN PABLO BAY
CAROUINEZ
BRIDGE
17O-17OO
<2O-33O
CHINA CAMP 9
SAN IAFAF.L
TARA HILLS (33)
TARA HILLS (32)
V
RICHMOND
MOLATE PT. 92 (3O)
11O-7OO
49O
RICHMOND SIN RAFAEL BRIDGE
. PINOLE (31)
<2O- 23.OOO
OAKLAND
BAT BRIDGE
(OLDEN GATE BRIDGE
SAN FRANCISCO
RODEO 9O
STRAWBERRY PT (41)
RICHARDSON BAY
(42)
LBANY HILL (27)
17OO-13.OOO
BERKELEY
RICHMOND (29,)
NOTE CONTROL AREA
DRAKES ESTERO
REGION IX <2-13 *
DENVER NFIC
<2O AND 23O
Figure V-6b Shellfish Sampling Locations and Fecal Coliform Concentrations-
Central Bay-San Pablo Bay-Spring 1972
-------
V-18
with 75 percent of the samples greater than 230 coliforms per 100 ml.
Station 44, at high tide, had a median value of 100. Water samples
from station 41 were in violation during low tide only having 28.6 per-
cent greater than 230 coliforms per 100 ml. Stations 33 and 35 through
39 were of good quality [Table V-2, Figure V-5b].
Shellfish samples collected at China Camp, Tara Hills (33), and
Pinole in San Pablo Bay were within the U. S. Public Health Service
bacteriological requirements [Table V-3, V-5, Figure V-6b]. Samples
from Point Pinole, Tara Hills (32), and Molate Point were in excess of
required standards. A shellfish sample collected near Rodeo (13,000
fecal coliforms/100 gms of meat) greatly exceeded the U. S. Public Health
Service bacteriological standards as did water from sampling stations
41, 42, and 44 located nearby. High coliform counts in all of the water
samples collected at low tide from stations 42 and 44 demonstrate the
poor quality of water flowing into San Pablo Bay from Suisun Bay and Car-
quinez Strait. Contributing sources of pollution to these areas include
discharges from the Maritime Academy, Mare Island Naval Ship Yard, Vallejo
County Sanitation Plant, and numerous commercial vessels which period-
ically dock in the area.
Carquinez Strait, Suisun Bay and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta
All sampling stations from Carquinez Strait and Suisun Bay exceeded
NSSP bacteriological requirements for shellfish harvesting areas
[Table V-2, Figure V-5c], The shellfish sample collected from the
shoreline of Carquinez Strait near Benicia exceeded NSSP bacterio-
logical requirements for market shellfish [Table V-3 and Figure V-6c].
-------
LEGEND
SAMPLING LOCATION
VALLEJO
.H-74
L-13O
CARQUINEZ
BRIDGE
.43
\V
H -1 6 O_
L-11O
47.
H-110
L-11O
H-14O
L-79
^4-fi
BENICIA BRIDGE —
MARTINEZ
45.
.y -ts&y^
'^ o.
'O %J
GRIZZLY BAY
.48
-N-
H-330
L-23O
H-22O
.L-49
^H-170
L-13O
55.
AHTIOCH BRIDGE
H-23O.
L-33O
57_
1 '^ 0 1 I
F^^ feajBEBf
Scale ii Miles
Figure V-5c Water Sampling Locations and Total Coliform Concentrations-Carquinez Strait, Suisun Bay,
and Sacramento-San losquin Delta-Spring 1972
-------
LEGEND
SAMPLING LOCATION
VALLEJO
5
BENICIA 6O
CARDUINEZ
BUDGE
'•:
GRIZZLY BAY
1100
BENICIA BRIDGE
MARTINEZ
*>'
**<
°C
Vt> >J
HONKER BAYf
PITTSBIX6
-N-
ANTIOCN BRIDGE
Figure V-6c Shellfish Sampling Locations and Fecal Coliform Concentrations-Carquinez Strait,
-------
V-19
High coliform bacterial densities in the Delta and Suisun Bay are
attributable to agricultural wastewaters, inadequately treated effluents
from municipal sewage treatment plants and industrial complexes, and
untreated sewage from U. S. Naval ships, freighters, and pleasure boats.
In addition, lower salinities in these locations are less toxic to
bacteria.
Bacterial densities in water samples from stations located in the
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Nos. 51 and 52); San Pablo Bay (Nos. 42
and 44); South Bay (Nos. 1 and 2, Oakland Airport-19, and San Leandro
Bay-20) exceeded California Water Quality Standards for water-contact
sports areas which state that, "20 percent of samples not to exceed an
MPN of 1,000 total coliforms/100 ml in any 30-day sampling period
[Tables V-2, V-4].
C. CHEMICAL CONDITIONS
Samples of bay water, bottom sediment, and of shellfish were col-
lected, in the spring of 1972, to determine whether shellfish from
San Francisco Bay were being exposed to chemical pollution. The EPA
laboratory staff analyzed these samples for the presence of heavy metals,
chlorinated insecticides, polychlorinated biphenyls, and petroleum
hydrocarbons. [Sampling locations are shown in Figures V-7, 8, and 9.]
Results of these analyses are discussed in the following sections.
Heavy Metals
During this investigation, samples were analysed for cadmium,
chromium, copper, lead, zinc, and mercury. Individual results are
-------
OAKLAND INNER HB. (23)
LAKE MERRITT
X*
IOLIEI t«TE HIKE
OAKLAND
ALAMEDA BEACH (22)
SAN LEANDRO BAY (2O)
CANDLESTICK
AKLAND AIRPORT (19)
SAN LEANDRO 73 (18)
KATWUO All
TEIIIIIUL
BURLINGAME
FORSTER CITY 72 (14)
REDWOOD CREEK 78 (15)
WEST 75
WATER
SEDIMENT
SHELLFISH
(•) WATER t SEDIMENT
SHELLFISH I SEDIMENT
STATION NUMBERS
(32) REGION
32 DENVER NFIC
Figure V-7 Sampling Stations, San Francisco Bay South Bay-Spring 1972
-------
44
OS HAVAl IESERVATION
STATION NUMBERS
(32) REGION IX
32 DENVER NFIC
HAMILTON til
FOICE IASE
SAN PABLO BAY
CARQUINEZ
BRIDGE
CHINA CAMP
93 (36-38)
RICHMOND SAD RAFAEL BRIDGE
RICHMOND
MOLATE PT 92 (3O)
RICHMOND (29)
GOLDEN (ATE IIIDGE
SAN FRANCISCO
RODEO 9O (35J
PINOLE 91 (34)
TARA HILLS (33)
TARA HILLS (32)
PT. PINOLE (31)
STRAWBERRY PT (41
RICHARDSON BAY (42),
ALBANY HILL (27)
Figure ¥-8 Sampling Stations, Sin Francisco Bar Central Bay-San Pablo Bay-Spring 1972
-------
o
WATER
SEDIMENT
SHELLFISH
© ) WATER & SEDIMENT
SHELLFISH & SEDIMENT
STATION NUMBERS
(32) REGION IX
32 DENVER NFIC
BENICIA 60/(9
1 K I 1 2
Scale ii Miles
Figure V-3 Sampling Stations, San Francisco Bay Carquinez Strait-Suison Bay-Spring 1972
-------
V-20
summarized by sample type: water [Table V-6]; bottom sediment [Table
V-7]; and shellfish [Table V-8, V-3a]. As noted [Table V-6], water
samples were collected and analyzed from each station during ebb (para-
meters No. 01 and No. 03) and flood tides (parameters No. 02 and No. 04).
Contamination by heavy metals can be a serious pollution problem
in an estuarine environment. They are persistent and can often be
accumulated by living organisms to levels that are many times greater
than those in the surrounding environment. The metals identified in this
investigation are all relatively toxic to aquatic life. Combinations of
these elements, notably copper and zinc or cadmium and copper, etc., can
produce synergistic effects that greatly increase the toxic effect of the
individual elements. [Toxicological effects of metals and other pollu-
tants are discussed in more detail in Appendix E.]
In San Francisco Bay the concentrations of cadmium in the water and
in bottom sediments were found to be at or below detectable concentrations.
Only trace amounts were observed in clams throughout the bay; however,
oysters collected near Pedwood City (Station No. 78) and San Leandro
(Station No. 73) contained from 2.0 to 4.5 rag/kg of cadmium. These con-
centrations are in excess of the alert levels [Appendix J] for heavy
metals proposed by the FDA in 1968, as well as of the levels proposed in
1971 which recommended that cadmium not exceed the range 1.5 to 3.5 mg/kg
in oysters.— The source of these high concentrations of cadmium are
presently unknown and warrant further investigation.
Chromium concentrations in the waters of San Francisco Bay were below
detectable levels (0.01 mg/1) at all but one station (located at the far
-------
FOR INTERNAL
TABLE V-6
Results of Metals Analysis of San Francisco Bay
Area Water Samples—'
Concentration (mg/1)
Sample Number*
01-01-03-0327
01-01-04-0327
01-02-03-0327
01-02-04-0327
01-03-03-0327
01-03-04-0327
01-04-03-0327
01-04-04-0327
01-06-03-0327
01-06-04-0327
01-07-03-0327
01-07-04-0327
01-08-04-0327
01-08-04-0327
01-10-03-0327
01-10-04-0327
01-11-03-0327
01-11-04-0327
01-12-03-0327
01-12-04-0327
01-13-03-0327
Cadmium
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
Chromium
<0.01
0.05
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
Copper
0.17
0.18
0.16
0.14
0.12
0.12
0.11
0.60
0.05
0.05
0.04
0.01
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
Lead Zinc
<0.1 0.09
<0.1 0.15
<0.1 0.06
<0.1 0.07
<0.1 0.04
<0.1 0.06
<0.1 0.04
<0.1 0.05
<0.1 0.04
<0.1- 0.04
<0.1 0.06
<0.1 0.04
<0.1 0.04
<0.1 0.05
<0.1 0.04
<0.1 0.07
<0.1 0.05
<0.1 0.04
<0.1 0.03
<0.1 0.04
<0.1 0.03
-------
TABLE v-6
FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY
Results
of Metals Analysis of San Francisco Bay
Area Water Samples —
(continued)
Concentration (mg/1)
Sample Number*
01-13-04-0327
01-14-03-0327
01-14-04-0327
01-15-03-0327
01-15-04-0327
01-16-03-0327
01-16-04-0327
01-17-03-0327
01-17-04-0327
01-18-03-0327
01-18-04-0327
01-41-01-0423
01-41-02-0423
01-43-01-0423
01-43-02-0423
01-44-01-0423
01-44-02-0423
01-45-01-0423
01-45-02-0423
01-46-01-0423
01-46-02-0423
01-47-01-0423
Cadmium
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
Chromium
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
Copper
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
Lead Zinc
<0.1 0.03
<0.1 0.03
<0.1 0.03
<0.1 0.03
<0.1 0.03
<0.1 0.03
<0.1 0.03
<0.1 0.02
<0.1 0.02
<0.1 0.04
<0.l"" 0.02
<0.01 0.05
<0.01 <0.01
<0.01 <0.01
<0.01 <0.01
<0.01 <0.01
<0.01 <0.01
<0.01 <0.01
<0.01 <0.01
<0.01 <0.01
<0.01 <0.01
<0.01 0.02
-------
J?f5T> Tr.r'T^r V-23xJ'
TABLE v-6 v li<**bitfU.L Uoli C^LY
Results of Metals Analysis of San Francisco Bay
Area Water Samples —
(continued)
Concentration (mg/1)
Sample Number*
01-47-02-0423
01-48-01-0423
01-48-02-0423
01-49-01-0423
01-49-02-0423
01-50-01-0423
01-50-02-0423
01-51-01-0423
01-51-02-0423
01-52-01-0423
01-52-02-0423
01-54-01-0423
01-54-02-0423
01-55-01-0423
01-55-02-0423
01-57-01-0423
01-57-02-0423
Cadmium
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
Chromium
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
Copper
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
Lead
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
-------
V-24
TABLE V-7
Results of Metals Analysis of San Francisco Bay
Bottom Sediment Samples a/
Concentration (mg/kg, dry weight)
Sample Number*
01-01-03-0326
01-02-03-0326
01-03-03-0326
01-04-03-0326
01-05-03-0326
01-06-03-0326
01-07-03-0326
01-08-03-0326
01-09-03-0326
01-10-03-0326
01-11-03-0326
01-12-03-0326
01-13-03-0326
01-14-03-0326
01-15-03-0326
01-17-03-0326
01-18-03-0326
01-23-05-0501
01-30-05-0501
01-32-05-0501
01-35-05-0501
Cadmium
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
0.5
<0.5
0.7
0.7
0.5
1.4
1.3
Chromium
<0.5
30
25
40
30
35
45
50
27
39
46
34
35
38
40
31
39
58
33
71
51
Copper
35
30
NR
NR
25
30
35
24
22
32
23
20
20
20
23
15
15
45
20
68
45
Lead
<5
<5
NR
NR
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
15.
10
<5
<5
<5
14
<7
38
19
41
39
Zinc
95
85
70
65
70
80
100
90
70
120
70
55
63
67
68
55
94
121
72
140
115
-------
V-25
TABLE V-7
Results of Metals Analysis of San Francisco
Bottom Sediment Samples aj
(continued)
Bay
Concentration
Sample Number* Cadmium Chromium
01-39-05-0501 0.9
01-43-05-0423 <1
01-45-05-0423 <1
01-46-05-0423 <1
01-47-05-0423 <1
01-48-05-0423 <1
01-49-05-0423 <1
01-50-05-0423 1
01-51-05-0423 <1
01-52-05-0423 <1
01-54-05-0423 <1
01-55-05-0423 1
01-57-05-0423 <1
01-60-10-0423 <1
01-71-09-0330 <0.5
01-72-09-0330 <0.5
01-73-08-0331 <0.5
01-74-08-0331 <0.3
01-75-08-0331 <0.3
01-76-09-0402 <0.2
01-77-15-0402 <0.3
01-78-08-0403 <0.3
54
12
<1
27
26
<1
17
18
19
16
22
<1
<1
28
22
9
12
13
21
7
12
15
(mg/kg, dry weight)
Copper Lead
32
59
88
54
38
59
11
60
9
18
21
55
10
31
7
4
12
4
4
3
3
10
20
87
45
28
18
29
11
34
7
14"
13
21
13
37
<5
7
<5
16
21
<2
<3
12
Zinc
70
134
141
111
69
58
32
89
38
47
62
152
41
88
28
16
26
30
16
10
22
24
-------
V-26
TABLE V-7
Results of Metals Analysis of San Francisco Bay
Bottom Sediment Samples a/
(continued)
Concentration (mg/kg, dry weight)
Sample Number*
01-79-20-0403
01-90-06-0429
01-91-05-0429
01-92-06-0429
01-93-06-0430
Cadmium
<0.2
0.6
0.4
0.6
0.8
Chromium
8.5
22
29
21
39
Copper
<0.2
19
23
17
33
Lead
<2
26
18
25
28
Zinc
10
57
49
60
81
*Sample Number = Survey Number - Station Number - Parameter Number - Date.
NR = Not Requested.
a/ Samples collected by NFIC-D.
-------
TABLE V-8
Results of Metals Analysis of San .Francisco Bay
Area Shellfish -'
Concentration (mg/kg, wet weight)
Sample Number
01-60-08-0423
01-71-06-0330
01-72-06-0330
01-73-05-0331
01-73-11-0331
01-74-05-0331
01-75-05-0331
01-76-05-0402
01-77-12-0402
01-78-05-0403
01-78-24-0330
01-78-22-0330
01-79-11-0403
01-79-14-0403
01-79-17-0403
01-90-03-0429
Shellfish Type
Soft Clam
it it
it ii
it it
Olympia Oyster
Soft Clam
ii ii
ii M
ti ii
it n
Eastern Oyster
Pacific Oyster
Soft Clam
Eastern Oyster
Pacific Oyster
Soft Clam
Cadmium
0.6
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
2.0
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
2.0
4.5
<0.5
NR
<0.5
0.2
Chromium
0.9
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
1.5
1.0
<0.5
20.0
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
NR
<0.5
0.3
Copper
4.8
8.0
<0.5
<0.5
68.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
30.0
45.5
<0.5
NR
<0.5
5.9
Lead
0.8
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
NR
<5
0.7
Mercury Zinc
0.79 35
<0.1 59
<0.1 21
<0.1 20
<6.1 14
<0.1 25
<0.1 30
<0.1 16
<0.1 20
0.1 25
0.1 608 _
0
0.2 336 S3
<0.1 14 ^ 5
*"-• F-"-!
t~^ '""'•**
<0.1 NR £:' !
<0.1 111 & '<*!
0.25 25 0 ;3
o H
-------
TABLE V-8
Results of Metals Analysis of San Francisco Bay
Area Shellfish-7
(continued)
Concentration (mg/kg, wet weight)
Sample Number Shellfish Type Cadmium Chromium Copper Lead Mercury Zinc
01-91-03-0429
01-92-03-0429
01-93-03-0429
Soft Clam
ii ii
ii ..
0.6
0.9
0.3
1.0
0.3
0.4
3.9
34
3.5
4.2
2.0
1.0
0.42
0.25
<0.02
18
29
21
*Sample Number = Survey Number - Station Number - Parameter Number - Date.
NR = Not Requested.
a/ *=l
— Data collected by National Field Investigations Center-Denver. O
->--i
>-.
I*" "
t~'
-------
TABLE V- 8a
Concentration of Selected Heavy Metals In Shellfish
Wet Weight by Station^/
(In mg/kg)
EPA Lab
Number
16SF042
5SF042
15SF042
6SF042
7SF042
8SF042
14SF042
13SF042
28SF042
36SF042
35SF042
29SF042
30SF042
31SF042
Coll.
Date
4/7/72
4/7/72
4/7/72
4/7/72
4/7/72
4/7/72
4/8/72
4/7/72
4/8/72
4/8/72
4/8/72
4/8/72
4/8/72
4/8/72
Sample
Description
#3/Bayview
# 9 / Bur 1 ing ame
#10 Coyote Pt-N
#14 Foster City
#19 Oakland Airport
#20 San Leandro Bay
#22 Alameda Memorial
State Park
#23 Oakland Inner
Harbor
#27 Albany Hills
#29 Pt. Richmond
#30 Castro Pt. et al.
#31 Tara Hills (L)
#32 Tara Hills (M)
#33 Tara Hills (R)
Cadmium
0.21
0.15
1.41
0.21
0.13
0.33
0.35
0.58
0.21
0.25
0.06
0.14
0.09
0.06
Chromium
2.62
0.88
0.79
0.30
0.53
0.56
1.17
0.67
3.64
0.31
0.84
1.70
6.65
3.99
Copper
5.73
1.20
48.19
1.38
1.12
1.34
1.98
1.21
6.60
1.94
1.25
2.47
4.66
2.62
Lead
10.53
1.32
1.75
0.41
0.42
1.22
0.93
3.82
18.70
0.71
0.23
1.53
1.84
2.17
Mercury
0.03
0.01
0.15
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.05
0.06
0.06
0.09
0.03
0.04
0.09
0.05
Zinc
18.71
8.48
156.63
10.47
9.30
10.62
24.03
35.05
24.53
20.25
9.11
17.41
14.93^
14.60
-------
TABLE V- 8a
Concentration of Selected Heavy Metals In Shellfish
Wet Weight by Station!/
(In mg/kg)
EPA Lab
Number -
33SF042
32SF042
Control—'
Coll.
Date
4/8/72
4/8/72
5/23/72
Sample
Description Cadmium
#41 Strawberry Pt-W 0.29
#42 Richardson Bay 0.16
Johnson Oyster Company 0.33
Drakes Estero
Chromium Copper Lead
1.47 4.05 1.79
2.96 3.52 2.92
0.10 2.03 0.93
Mercury
0.06
0.06
0.04
Zinc
19.32
18.27
57.57
I EPA, Region IX
—' Control is sample of oysters from Johnson Oyster Company, Drake's Estero.
OJ
o
-------
V-31
end of South Bay) where a concentration of 0.05 mg/1 was observed. In
the bottom sediments the chromium concentrations ranged from less than 1
to 71 rag/kg. Oysters from both San Francisco Bay and Drakes Estereo
(Control Station No. 79) contained less-than-detectable concentrations.
Several of the clam samples contained low levels of chromium (0.9 to 1.5
mg/kg); however, a sample from Oyster Point (Station No. 77) contained
20 mg/kg, a value that is four times greater than the proposed FDA alert
level (5 mg/kg) for chromium in soft clams. One other sample in San
Pablo Bay. Tara Hills (No. 32), was also in excess of the FDA alert level
with a concentration of 6.7 mg/kg. Bottom sediments at Oyster Point
contained 12 mg/kg of chromium; contamination of the shellfish by soluble
chromium salts could have occurred.
The State of California has set a threshold limit of 0.05 mg/1 for
the concentration of copper in fresh water, but does not have a standard
value applicable to saline waters. Levels in excess of 0.1 mg/1 are con-
sidered sufficient for oysters to accumulate excessive amounts, while
copper concentrations above 0.5 mg/1 become toxic to shellfish upon
7 8 /
chronic exposure.—'—
In most of the San Francisco Bay waters tested, copper concentrations
were below detectable levels (<0.01 mg/1). In South Bay measurable con-
centrations ranged from 0.01 to 0.60 mg/1. With the exception of the
highest value (0.60 mg/1), observed just northwest of the San Mateo Bridge
(Station No. 4), little variation was detected between high and low tide,
and into the south end of the bay the values generally increased. The
significantly higher concentration of Station No. 4 is likely caused by
a point-source discharge.
-------
V-32
Concentrations of copper in the bottom sediments ranged widely, from
less than 1 to 88 mg/kg, but showed no apparent trends nor appeared to
have any direct relationship to the concentration observed in shellfish.
Oysters collected near Redwood City (Station No. 78) and San Leandro
(Station No. 73) contained copper concentrations from 60 to 140 times
greater than in those from uncontaminated locations in Drakes Estero
(Station No. 79) . These greater concentrations approached the proposed
FDA alert level of 100 mg/kg. Soft clams from near Redwood City (Station
No. 78) did not contain detectable copper (<0.5 mg/kg). Gross copper
contamination was observed near Molate Point (Station No. 92) where
clams contained 34 mg/kg. The proposed FDA alert level for soft clams
is 25 mg/kg.
Previous work by the U. S. Geological Survey had shown that mercury
contamination was not a serious problem in the bottom sediments from
9/
San Francisco Bay.— During this study EPA investigators detected
concentrations of mercury in edible tissue samples for shellfish col-
lected at various parts of the Bay [Table V-S, 8a]. Although most of
the mercury levels were low, one sample of soft calms from Carquinez
Strait (Station No. 60) contained 0.79 mg/kg, or significantly more than
the FDA recommended limit (0.5 mg/kg) of mercury in fish and shellfish.—
Another sample of soft clams from San Pablo Bay (Station No. 91) contained
mercury concentrations (0.42 mg/kg) approaching the recommended limit.
The sources of this contamination are not known, but may be from indus-
trial discharges within the area.
Concentrations of lead in San Francisco Bay waters were found to be
-------
V-33
very low. Samples of water collected south of the Bay Bridge all con-
tained less than 0.1 mg/1 of lead. Water samples collected further north,
in Suisun Bay, contained less than 0.01 mg/1 of lead. Bottom sediment
samples contained variable amounts of lead, ranging from less than 2 mg/kg
near Candlestick Park (Station No. 76) to 87 mg/kg at the mouth of
Carquinez Strait (Station No. 43). The control station in Drakes Estero
(Station No. 79) contained lead concentrations to less than 2 mg/kg.
At a number of shellfish sampling stations the concentration of lead
in soft clams exceeded the proposed FDA alert levels that call for less
than 2.0 mg/kg lead, cadmium, chromium, and mercury combined. The most
seriously contaminated stations were: Albany Hills, No. 27 with 19 mg/kg;
Bay View Park, No. 3 with 11 mg/kg; No. 91 with 4.2 mg/kg; Oakland Inner
Harbor, No. 23 with 3.8 mg/kg; Richardson Bay, No. 42 with 2.9 mg/kg;
Tara Hills, No. 33 with 2.2 mg/kg; and Molate Point, No. 92~with 2.0 mg/kg
of lead [Tables V-8 and V-8a]. At Stations No. 91 and No. 92 the sediment
concentrations of lead were relatively low (18 and 25 mg/kg, respectively);
even greater shellfish contamination could occur at the stations with
greater lead concentrations in the bottom sediments. Unfortunately, the
detection limit of lead in many shellfish samples was not sufficiently
low to determine whether significant uptake of this toxic element was
occurring.
During this investigation of the waters of San Francisco Bay the
levels of zinc found [Table V-6] were low. Concentrations in the bay
south of the City of San Francisco ranged from 0.02 to 0.15 mg/1. In
general, the amounts of zinc tended to increase in concentration toward
-------
V-34
the south end of the bay. North of the City, zinc concentrations in the
water were lower. In Suisun Bay all but one water sample contained less
than 0.01 mg/1 which is the zinc concentration normally found in the
7/
open ocean.—
Measurable quantities of zinc were found in all bottom sediments
collected from the bay. Acid-extractable zinc ranged, in the sediments,
from 10 to 152 mg/kg. For comparison, a control station in Drakes Estero
(Station No. 79) also contained 10 mg/kg of zinc in the sediments. Such
an abundance of zinc throughout the bay indicates multiple sources of con-
tamination. In addition, it is evident that zinc is readily incorporated
into the sediments and is, therefore, transported primarily in the parti-
culate phase.
Oysters tend to concentrate zinc from the environment in their
tissues to a greater extent than do clams.— Eastern and Pacific oysters
collected at Station No. 78, near Redwood City, contained 608 and 336 mg/kg
zinc, respectively, while clams contained only 25 mg/kg. At the control
station (No. 79) Pacific oysters contained 111 mg/kg, or one-third the
concentration found in the bay. The proposed FDA alert level of zinc in
oysters is 1500 mg/kg, three times greater than the highest concentration
found.
Although the zinc concentrations were lower in clams, these organisms
were apparently exposed to more zinc contamination than were the oysters.
Most clam samples in the bay contained more zinc than the 14 mg/kg in
soft clams observed at Control Station No. 79. Serious contamination was
evident near Foster City (Station No. 71) where clams contained 59 mg/kg
-------
V-35
zinc and, to a lesser extent, near Carqinez Strait (Station No. 60),
Palo Alto (Station No. 75), and Oakland Inner Harbor (No. 23) where zinc
concentrations in soft calms were 35, 30, and 35 mg/kg, respectively.
Each of these samples contained more zinc than recommended by the proposed
FDA alert level (30 mg/kg) in soft clams. Therefore, this finding demon-
strates that zinc contamination of shellfish is definitely a problem in
San Francisco Bay.
Chlorinated Insecticides and Polychlorinated Biphenyls
During this investigation samples of bottom sediment, shellfish
tissue, and plankton were tested for the more common chlorinated insecti-
cides, as well as for the polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) mixtures (known
by their Monsanto trade name of Aroclor). [Results of these analyses
are summarized in Tables V-9 and V-9a.]
Chlorinated pesticides are highly toxic chemicals. Typically, they
are persistent compounds, though some may be degraded by living systems
into less toxic metabolities. As residues in the aquatic environment
they may persist unchanged for many years and, consequently, present a
continuing threat to animal communities. Shellfish have the ability to
accumulate these residues in their body fats when only minute amounts
exist in the surrounding environment. As a general rule, the acute
toxicity of these pesticides increases with metabolic activity, being
two or three times more toxic in the summer than in the winter.— More
subtle changes, such as reduced growth, reproduction changes, altered
physiology, and induced abnormal behavior patterns, can occur at much
-------
TABLE V-9
Results of Analysis of San Francisco Bay Area Bottom Sediment, Shellfish,
and Plankton Samples for Chlorinated Insecticides and Polychlorinated Biphenyls£/
Sample Number*
01-01-02-0326
01-02-02-0326
01-03-02-0326
01-03-03-0329
01-04-02-0326
01-05-02-0326
01-06-02-0326
01-07-02-0326
01-07-03-0402
01-08-02-0326
01-09-02-0326
01-10-02-0326
01-11-02-0326
01-11-05-0327
01-12-02-0326
01-13-02-0326
Chlorinated Insecticides (ng/g*)
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (ng/g*)
Aroclor Aroclor Arocior
Sample Type
Sediment
u
u
Plankton
Sediment
"
u
ii
Plankton
Sediment
"
"
u
Plankton
Sediment
"
Chlordane
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ODD
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
DDE
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1
ND
ND
ND
ND
DDT
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
Dieldrin
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
8
ND
ND
3
3
ND
ND
ND
ND
1248
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1254
40
38
18
ND
15
17
18
48
ND
30
22
38
25
ND
89
58
1260
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND *rj
O
ND ^
So
ND ^ s3
t=j :>
ND f>| i-j
25 ^^
c I
ND £j •
TO gf
ND ^
-------
TABLE V-9
Results of Analysis of San Francisco Bay Area Bottom Sediment, Shellfish, .
and Plankton Samples for Chlorinated Insecticides and Polychlorinated Biphenyls —'
(continued)
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (ng/g*)
Chlorinated Insecticides (ng/g*) Arodor Aroclor Aroclor
Sample Number *
01-14-02-0326
01-15-02-0326
01-17-02-0326
01-18-02-0326
01-21-07-0502
01-23-03-0501
01-30-03-0501
01-32-03-0501
01-35-03-0501
01-39-03-0501
.01-43-03-0423
01-45-03-0423
01-46-03-0423
01-47-03-0423
01-48-03-0423
01-49-03-0423
Sample Type Chlordane
Sediment ND
ND
" ND
" ND
Plankton ND
Sediment ND
ND
" ND
" ND
ND
" ND
" ND
ND
ND
" ND
ND
DDD
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
2
1
1
2
ND
3
ND
1
1
7
ND
DDE
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1
1
1
ND
ND
ND
ND
'ND
ND
ND
ND
DDT
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
2
4
3
1
ND
4
ND
ND
3
ND
Dieldrin
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1248
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
9
4
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1254
69
74
48
33
ND
20
26
11
25
10
10
8
40
ND
20
ND
1260
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
18
8
ND
ND 8
ND i:
ND [;;
*"" 1-
ND £..
ND fl!
L/.
ND (-..
ND F
-------
TABLE V- y
Results of Analysis of San Francisco Bay Area Bottom Sediment, Shellfish,
and Plankton Samples for Chlorinated Insecticides and Polychlorinated Biphenyls —'
(continued)
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (ng/g*)
Chlorinated Insecticides (ng/g*) Aroclor Aroclor Aroclor
Sample Number *
01-50-03-0423
01-51-03-0423
01-52-03-0423
01-54-03-0423
01-54-03-0423
01-55-03-0423
01-55-03-0425
01-57-03-0423
01-60-09-0423
01-60-07-0423
01-71-08-0330
01-71-05-0330
01-72-11-0330
01-72-05-0330
01-73-07-0331
01-73-10-0331
01-73-04-0331
Sample Type Chlordane
Sediment
"
it
it
Plankton
Sediment
Plankton
Sediment
ii
"Soft Clam
Sediment
Soft Clam
Sediment
Soft Clam
Sediment
Olympia Oyster
Soft Clam
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
30
ND
ND
ND
35
132
ODD
2
ND
ND
ND
ND
3
ND
ND
1
8
ND
8
ND
3
ND
29
33
DDE
1
ND
ND
ND
ND
1
ND
ND
ND
3
ND
4
1ND
3
ND
24
16
DDT
2
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
3
8
ND
5
ND
2
ND
9
4
Dieldrin
ND
ND
ND
1
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
2
ND
7
4
3
ND
17
1
1248
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
170
200
1254
14
ND
ND
12
ND
22
ND
4
6
36
ND
85
9
41
45
285
120
1260
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND.
ND
ND
ND
ND ^
6
ND <3
ND S>!
ND t?,
ND P^g
ND Co o£
O "*
ND ^
-------
and
Sample Number *
01-74-07-0331
01-74-04-0331
01-75-07-0331
01-75-04-0331
01-76-08-0402
01-76-05-0402
01-77-14-0402
01-77-11-0402
01-78-07-0403
01-78-04-0403
01-78-21-0330
01-78-23-0330
01-79-19-0403
01-79-10-0403
01-79-13-0403
01-79-16-0403
TABLE v-9
Results of Analysis of San Francisco Bay Area Bottom Sediment, Shellfish, .
Plankton Samples for Chlorinated Insecticides and Polychlorinated Biphenyls—
(continued)
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (ng/g*)
Aroclor Aroclor Aroclor
Sample Type
Sediment
Soft Clam
Sediment
Soft Clam
Sediment
Soft Clam
Sediment
Soft Clam
Sediment
Soft Clam
Pacific Oyster
Eastern Oyster
Sediment
Soft Clam
Eastern Oyster
Pacific Oyster
Chlordane
ND
18
ND
25
ND
ND
ND
12
ND
26
• 99
• 33
ND
ND
ND
7
DDD
ND
4
ND
6
ND
ND
ND
4
ND
5
4
10
ND
ND
ND
5
DDE
ND
3
ND
3
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
2
9
9
ND
ND
ND
6
DDT
ND
3
ND
3
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
4
11
6
ND
ND
ND
2
Dieldrin
ND
ND
ND
6
ND
2
ND
4
ND
7
25
11
ND
ND
ND
2
1248
50
ND
ND
15
ND
ND
ND
43
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1254
50
38
13
25
5
22
ND
43
275
63
275
105
21
3
6
18
1260
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND £]
ND :>•
21 ?•
ND I
ND £:
ND r ,
-------
TABLE V- 9
Results of Analysis of San Francisco Bay Area Bottom Sediment, Shellfish, .
and Plankton Samples for Chlorinated Insecticides and Polychlorinated Biphenyls —
(continued)
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (ng/g*)
Aroclor Aroclor
Sample Number*
01-90-04-0429
01-90-02-0429
01-91-04-0429
01-91-02-0429
01-92-04-0429
01-92-02-0429
01-93-04-0430
01-93-02-0430
Sample Type
Sediment
~Soft Clam
Sediment
Soft Clam
Sediment
Soft Clam
Sediment
Soft Clam
Chlordane
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ODD
1
8
1
13
2
8
1
25
DDE
ND
2
ND
2
ND
1
1
3
DDT
3
3
4
9
1
3
2
3
Dieldrin
ND
1
ND
1
ND
1
ND
2
1248
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
1254
35
20
13
4
13
17
33
36
1260
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
13
ND
Sample Number = Survey Number - Station Number - Parameter Number - Date.
ND = None Detected.
Concentration in ng/g, dry weight for sediments, wet} weight for shellfish and plankton.
Detection limit = 1 ng/g.
~ Samples collected by National Field Investigations Center-Denver.
O
l-j ->
£.,, ^
^ H
K
{? ^
O
-------
TABLE V-9a
Concentration, in ppb, of Selected Chlorinated Hydrocarbons
by Station - San Francisco Bay Study—'
Chlorinated
Hydrocarbon 3 9 10
Aroclor
1242-125426.5 10.5 446.0
Dieldrin - 0.9 2.8
op'
PP'
op'
op'
PP'
PP'
DDE 4.2 7.2 28.0
DDE 1.3 4.4 13.0
DDD tr
DDT 1.2 3.6 22.0
DDD 1.1 3.6 7.0
DDT 2.3 4.8 24.0
14 19 20 22 23 27
29 30 31 32 33
23.8 91.0 75.0 64.7 119. 88.0 252.0 25.9 25.4 37.8 39.4
0.9 1.2 1.0 1.0 0.4 4.0
1.9 4.3 5.5 5.8 4.0 7.2
0.8 2.0 3.5 2.9 2.1 2.0
1.2
0.8 2.3 8.0 2.4 1.0 1.6
0.5 1.7 2.5 1.4 2.0 2.8
1.1 3.0 3.5 2.4 2.0 3.6
1.0 1.2 0.8
1.6 1.4 2.2 7.0 3.4
1.2 1.3 0.8 1.7 2.0
tr tr tr - tr
0.4 0.5 0.4 - 1.2
1.2 1.2 1.2 1.7 2.2
1.0 1.2 0.6 0.8 1.6
Unknown -- - ____ _ ______
41 42 C
18.0 29.1 4.7
0.6 -
2.2 1.8 1.2
2.0 1.9 2.6
tr -
0.9 0.7 1.8
0.9 0.7 1.2
0.3 1.3 -
1.8
c2
3. as
-
tr
2.1
-
1.3
0.6
-
2.2
a./ Samples collected bv Environmental Protection Agency - Region IX
-------
V-42
lower levels of exposure than those which cause acute toxicity. [See
Appendix E for a more detailed discussion.]
Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) are also very stable compounds
that have only recently been found to be widespread in the environment.
The higher levels of contamination can usually be traced directly to
industrial activity where these compounds are used for a variety of
purposes. These materials impact the environment in a manner similar
to the chlorinated insecticides. To many organisms, they are nearly
as toxic as the chlorinated insecticides, and, through food chain magni-
fication canrapidly reach acute levels.
*
With the exception of plankton all samples collected in San Francisco
Bay contained measurable amounts of chlorinated hydrocarbon residues.
Of the more common chlorinated insecticides only chlordane, dieldrin,
DDT, ODD, and DDE were detected. Four different polychlorinated
biphenyls were observed: namely, Aroclors 1242, 1248, 1254, and 1260,
compounds that differ primarily by the degree of chlorination.
The bottom sediments contained only very low concentrations of
chlorinated insecticides. Because of biological magnification the shell-
fish contained greater concentrations.
Oysters in samples from San Leandro (Station No. 73) and Redwood City
(Station No. 78) contained the highest levels of insecticides, even
though sediments at the same location contained no detectable residues.
The observed concentrations were from one to two orders of magnitude less
* Samples of plankton were not of great enough volume to permit the size
of sample necessary for the method employed to detect chlorinated
hydrocarbon residues.
-------
V-43
than those reported in past years for the Bay system.— However, while
the current levels do not presently require regulatory action, they do
indicate that contamination levels are at borderline values with regard
to the onset of deleterious effects on growth, reproduction, and behavior
to aquatic life. Thus, they represent a cause of concern.
In general, concentrations of PCB were higher than those of the
insecticides. Sediment samples contained from less than one to 275 ng/g
of Aroclor 1254, as observed at Redwood City (Station No. 78). Again,
the shellfish contained more PCB than did the sediments. Oysters at
Redwood City (Station No. 78), San Leandro (Station No. 73), and Coyote Pt.
(No. 10) were the most grossly contaminated. These levels of PCBs, while
below levels necessitating regulatory action, are of sufficient magnitude
to demonstrate definite industrial contamination.
Oil and Petrochemical Residues
Samples of soft-shell clams, My a arenaarla, were tested for petroleum
contamination by analyzing each sample for aliphatic hydrocarbons. Using
gas chromatography, hydrocarbons of petroleum origin can be easily differ-
entiated from the small amount of aliphatic hydrocarbons that occur
naturally in most aquatic organisms.
The clam samples (6 to 10 organisms/sample) were collected along the
eastern shores of Central and San Pablo Bays between the Oakland Bay Bridge
and Carquinez Bridge. All of the samples tested contained measurable
amounts of petroleum contamination. Hydrocarbons residues in the shell-
fish ranged from 14 to 29 pg/g [Table V-10].
-------
V-44
TABLE V-10
RESULTS OF ANALYSIS OF SAN FRANCISCO AREA
SHELLFISH FOR PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS -
Petroleum Hydrocarbons, yg/g*
Sample No. Shellfish Bed (Station) gas chromatography (gravimetric)
01-01-01-0811 Berkeley (25) 18 (17)
01-01-02-0812 Emeryville (24) 22 (17)
01-01-03-0812 Pt. Isabel (28) 13
01-01-04-0813 Pt. Pinole (31) 29 (20)
01-01-05-0813 Pt. Pinole (34) 14 (14)
01-01-06-0813 Rodeo (35) 15 (21)
*Wet weight based on drained meats.
a/
— Samples collected by National Field Investigations Center-Denver,
-------
V-45
Although the levels of petroleum contamination appear low as compared
to values found in contaminated oyster samples from other areas,— the
deficiency of information relative to petroleum uptake by softshell clams
is such that the degree of contamination is defficult to assess. However,
the lack of a clearly defined, homologous series of n_-alkanes, as deter-
mined by gas chromatographic analysis, suggests that petroleum contam-
ination of the samples is not of recent origin.
Still presently unknown is the magnitude of health hazard of these
petroleum resudues for the consumption of shellfish. However, it is clear
that shellfish in San Francisco Bay are definitely contaminated by
petroleum that originates from industrial sources, such as discharges
from petrochemical and related industries, and leakage or spills from
oil-carrying transport vessels.
D. BIOSTIMULANTS AND ALGAL POPULATIONS
In 1954 in order to protect water quality throughout the San Joaquin
Valley the U. S. Bureau of Reclamation recommended that an agricultural
waste drainage system be constructed throughout this California valley -
With the enactment, in 1960, of the Burns-Porter Act and Public Law 86-488
construction of a "Master Drain" was authorized as part of the California
State Water Facilities. A feasibility study, conducted by the California
Department of Water Resources, concluded, among other things, that the
most practicable and economical method of agricultural waste disposal
was, by way of the western Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, into San Fran-
cisco Bay.—/
-------
V-46
Preliminary data compiled in 1968 by the Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration (FWPCA, now part of EPA) indicated that the drainage
water would be high in nitrogen (30 tng/1 NO -N). and in 1967, the agency
conducted further studies to determine the effect (on biostimulation) of
127
discharging such water into the Bay-Delta system.— In summary, the
investigation revealed that "untreated" drainage water could have signi-
ficant adverse effects upon the fish and recreation benefits of the
receiving waters.
Subsequent studies by various State, Federal, and private agencies
have substantiated earlier findings. A 1969 study concluded that nitrate-
rich agricultural drainage, when mixed with San Joaquin River Delta water,
13/
stimulated algal growth and recommended nitrogen removal from wastewater.—
Also, another study in 1969 found that nitrogen and phosphorus were 10
to 100 times greater in the Delta than those reported necessary for a
substantial growth of algae. This same study found that these two
nutrients have increased significantly over the past 4 to 6 years and
that algal blooms were occurring in certain areas. The blooms are both
147
highly undesirable and indicative of excessive enrichment of Delta waters.—
Further investigations of algal growths found that certain of these
excessive blooms occur along the shore and sloughs in South Bay receiving
wastewater dischargers.—Highest measurements of algal growth are being
consistently found in Suisun Bay.—'—
In contrast to the stimulatory effects of agricultural wastewaters
there appears to be acting, in the bay waters, both industrial-municipal
and natural inhibatory variables that have a locally limiting effect on
-------
V-47
excessive algal growth. Fast studies have shown that effluents from
municipal treatment plants and industrial complexes containing high con-
centrations of ammonia and chlorine convey a toxic effect on algae by
limiting their growth and reproduction.—'— Productivity measurements
throughout San Francisco Bay have shown that the natural phenomena of
high turbidity or low concentrations of silica may also be important
187
factors limiting algal growth.—
Extensive studies, conducted for water quality management purposes,
have recommended that waste discharges be removed from tidal sloughs and
from the southern and eastern extremities of the Bay system as a means
of reducing the adverse effects of biostimulants in these areas of
limited tidal interchange.—
E. KELATIVE TOXICITY
A parameter that has come into common usage in describing the water
quality condition of the San Francisco Bay system is relative toxicity.
This parameter takes into account both the amount and strength of the
waste and, thus, allows comparison of the relative effects of many dis-
charges. The relative toxicity of a wastewater discharge is defined as
the volumetric flow of the discharge divided by the 48-hour median
tolerance limit (expressed as a decimal fraction) determined from a
bioassay using fish.
In the University of California Comprehensive Study of San Francisco
Bay it was concluded that the most significant pollutant discharged to
the bay appeared to be acute toxicity.— The occurrence of toxicity may
be found to a greater or lesser degree in selected areas throughout the
-------
V-48
Bay system. Relative toxicity has been of particular concern in the
South Bay south of Dumbarton Bridge and in Sulsun Bay and the Sacramento,
San Joaquin delta upstream from Carquinez Bridge.
The source of toxicity in the San Francisco Bay system has been
shown, by one study, to be approximately 56 percent from municipal sources
and 44 percent from industrial sources.— Evaluation of the toxicity of
many municipal and industrial sources has shown that almost all of these
wastes are toxic in varying degrees to fish. Moreover, the toxicity of
wastewater has been shown to vary with the degree of treatment provided.
Municipal and industrial discharges receiving only primary or marginal-
secondary treatment are the major sources of toxicity. Many of the
constituents of wastewaters are toxic to aquatic life either occurring
alone or as a result of synergistic effects with other compounds. [Some
of these constituents exhibiting toxicity are tabulated in .Appendix F.]
Studies on the San Francisco Bay system have shown a direct relation
between relative toxicity and serious reductions of the variety of bottom-
dwelling organisms which are an essential link in the natural food chain.
The benthic animals in the food chain represent about 85 percent of the
total protein in the bay waters. The effect of toxicity on fish may be
far more serious than what the value, measured by the relative toxicity
test, would indicate. Problems of long-term, chronic damage (occurring
at low toxicant concentrations) cannot be measured by the relative
toxicity determination.
F. DISSOLVED OXYGEN
Throughout most of the San Francisco Bay system dissolved oxygen
-------
V-49
concentrations are usually 80 percent of saturation; however, signi-
ficant dissolved-oxygen depletions occur in several critical areas
of the bay. Depression of dissolved-oxygen levels to below acceptable
limits occur in tidal streams and sloughs along the westerly shore of
South Bay south of Dumbarton Bridge and the northerly shore of San Pablo
and Suisun Bays. This problem is most severe in Coyote Creek, Guadalupe
River, Mountain View Slough, Redwood Creek, Petaluma River, and Sonoma
and Suisun Sloughs.
The primary factor contributing to dissolved-oxygen depletions is
the discharge of organic materials from municipal waste sources. Waste
sources discharging to somewhat confined areas where dilution water, and
thus assimilative capacity, is limited result in the largest dissolved
oxygen deficits. These discharges are the most damaging during the
canning season in late summer and early fall, when a number"of plants
receive large loads of organic wastes from food processing plants.
The low dissolved oxygen levels have resulted in the elimination
or reduction of fish and other aquatic life populations in several areas
of the bay, especially the South Bay. Some of this exhaustion of aquatic
life may be caused by toxic materials as well as by dissolved-oxygen
depletions.
-------
VI-1
VI. SOURCES OF POLLUTION
A. GENERAL
The San Francisco Bay system is surrounded by the sixth largest
urban area in the United States, with a population of more than six
million people. As a result, a large and complex pollution load is
discharged to the Bay system from a variety of sources. Discharges of
municipal and industrial wastes contribute a major portion of the pol-
lution load. Other sources of pollution include combined sewer over-
flows, dredging and landfill activities, agricultural drainage, and
vessel pollution.
All municipal and industrial sources discharging wastes to the Bay
system are required to monitor their effluents and to report selected
data to the appropriate State regulatory agency. The 1971 self-monitoring
data were reviewed and summarized as the basis for determining the magni-
tude of waste loadings discharged to the Bay system. It should be noted
that not all characteristics of interest are monitored on each effluent,
thus preventing the determination of complete waste loadings for all
parameters. Also, these data are developed by a large number of analyt-
ical laboratories. The extent of quality control and correlation of
analytical techniques and data among laboratories are unknown. The self-
monitoring data were also used to identify sources discharging wastes in
violation of State effluent requirements and to evaluate the present
quality of waste discharges with respect to effluent quality achievable
by the high levels of treatment required by the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act Amendments of 1972.
-------
VI-2
In mid-1971, under provisions of the Refuse Act of 1899, all sources
of industrial wastes submitted applications for discharge permits. These
applications contained detailed data on effluent characteristics. These
data were used to supplement the self-monitoring data in characterizing
and evaluating industrial waste discharges.
Sixteen major municipal and industrial waste sources were selected
for further characterization of their effluents [Table VI-1]. Together
these sources contribute about two-thirds of the total waste volume from
all municipal and industrial waste sources in the Bay system. The eight
municipal sources selected represent half of the municipal sources that
discharged an average flow of more than 7 mgd in 1971 and include the five
largest discharges. The industrial sources selected include the seven
largest industrial sources (excluding power plants) in the Bay area and
represent two-thirds of the industrial dischargers with average flows of
more than 4 mgd in 1971.
Short-term sampling and analysis of the selected waste discharges
was conducted by EPA Region IX staff during Spring 1972. [Waste-source
evalution techniques are discussed in Appendix G, Table G-l.] Specific
results for each waste source are discussed in the following sections.
Aerial remote-sensing missions were flown over the entire Bay system
during April and July 1972 to verify the locations of known waste dis-
charges, to define waste dispersal patterns, to assess the visual impacts
of waste effluents, and to locate unknown or spurious waste discharges.
The missions were flown with high-performance aircraft equipped with a
variety of remote sensing equipment. On April 26 and 27, 1972, daytime
-------
TABLE VI-1
SELECTED MAJOR MUNICIPAL AND
INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF POLLUTION
Flow Percent Total
Source (mgd) Waste Volume
Municipal
City of San Jose 82.8 10.2
East Bay M.U.D., Oakland 78.9 9.7
City of San Francisco,
North Point Plant 64.1 7.9
Central Contra Costa County
Sanitary District, Martinez 22.8 2.8
City of San Francisco,
Southeast Plant 22.1 2.7
City of San Mateo 11.0 1.3
San Pablo Sanitary District 7.6 0.9
City of South San Francisco 7.2 0.9
Municipal Subtotal 296.5 36.4
Industrial
Standard Oil Co., Richmond 112.0 13.7
Union Oil Co., Rodeo 47.0 5.8
California & Hawaiian
Sugar Co., Crockett 25.5 3.1
Dow Chemical Co., Pittsburg 24.1 3.0
United States Steel Corp.,
Pittsburg 17.7 2.2
Fiberboard Corp., Antioch 15.6 1.9
Phillips Petroleum Co., Avon Refinery 15.2 1.9
Shell Oil Co., Martinez 4.5 0.5
Industrial Subtotal 261.6 32.1
TOTAL 558.1 68.5
-------
VI-4
low-altitude aerial imagery of shoreline areas and high-altitude aerial
imagery of the entire Bay system was recorded using ultra-violet, true
color, and false color infra-red films and an infra-red line scanner.
The daytime low-altitude coverage was repeated in late July for selected
target areas. Night time flights with the infra-red line scanner over
selected target areas were also conducted in July-
This chapter summarizes data obtained from the self-monitoring
reports, from Refuse Act permit applications, and from the limited ef-
fluent sampling conducted by EPA.
B. SUMMARY OF MUNICIPAL AND INDUSTRIAL WASTE DISCHARGES
A total of about 250 discrete sources of municipal and industrial
wastes are located in the drainage area tributary to the Bay system
between the confluence of the San Joaquin and Sacramento Rivers and the
Pacific Ocean. About 150 of these sources are located on or in close
proximity to San Francisco, San Pablo, and Suisun Bays. The total volume
of water discharged by the 150 sources (excluding power-plant cooling
water use of 3,300 mgd) averaged 820 mgd in 1971.
For water quality management purposes the Bay system has been divided
into eight zones by the State Water Resources Control Board. [Zone
boundaries and distributions, by zone, of municipal and industrial
waste discharges from the 91 most significant sources (1971 average
flows) are shown in Figure VI-1.]
Municipal sources contribute about 58 percent (490 mgd) of the waste-
water volume [Table VI-2]. These sources are relatively uniformly spaced
-------
VI-5
fi ) ANTIOCH : \ "
AHTIOCH
BRIDGE
CARQUINEZ STRAIT
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
LEGEND
tl*HETEt = 1te tJGO
— BdTEl! DUALITY ZONE BOUK5ASY
4 1 BATES 6UALITY ZOHE
SCALE IK KlttS
tisrliarsrs to the San Frasclsro Itav Svslem
p j *
-------
VI-6
TABLE VI-2
SUMMARY OF MUNICIPAL AND INDUSTRIAL WASTE DISCHARGES^.'
THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY SYSTEM BY WATER QUALITY ZONE
a/
TO
Flow
Zone
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Total
Total
Grand
Type Waste
Municipal
Industrial
Subtotal
Municipal
Industrial
Subtotal
Municipal
Industrial
Subtotal
Municipal
Industrial
Subtotal
Municipal
Industrial
Subtotal
Municipal
Industrial
Subtotal
Municipal
Industrial
Subtotal
Municipal
Industrial
Subtotal
Municipal
Industrial
Total
mgd
133.4
1.6
135.0
19.9
0.3
20.2
158.9
4.9
163.8
83.6
2.9
86.5
33.9
160.9
194.8
2.5
33.1
35.6
33.3
25.0
58.3
5.2
93.7
98.9
470.7
322.4
793.1
percent
16.8
0.2
17.0
2.5
0.0
2.5
20.0
0.6
20.6
10.5
0.4
10.9
4.3
20.3
24.6
0.3
4.2
4.5
4.2
3.2
7.4
0.7
11.8
12.5
59.3
40.7
100.0
BOD
Ib/day
60,400
60,400
12,600
12.600
194,300
194,300
71,700
71,700
27,500
27,500
2,700
2.700
27,800
27,800
5,900
5,900
402,900
402,900
COD
percent Ib/day
15.
15.
3.
3.
48.
48.
17.
17.
6.
6.
0.
0.
6.
6.
1.
1.
100.
100.
0
700
0 700
1
600
1 600
2
2
8
600
8 600
8
139,450
8 139,450
7
61,400
7 61.400
9
21,800
9 21,800
5
86,600
5 86,600
0
311,150
0 311,150
Susp.
percent Ib/day
69
0.2
0.2 69
4
0.2
0.2 4
156
17
174
29
0.2
0.2 30
16
44.8
44.8 16
1
19.7 14
19.7 16
17
7.0 5
7.0 22
1
27.9 72
27.9 74
298
100.0 110
100.0 408
,900
,900
,900
50
,950
,700
,300
,000
,900
160
,060
,600
70
,670
,400
.600
,000
,000
,820
,820
,600
,600
,200
,000
,600
,600
Solids
percent
17.1
17.1
1.2
0
1.2
38.4
4.2
42.6
7.3
0.0
7.3
4.1
0.0
4.1
0.3
3.6
3.9
4.2
1.4
5.6
0.4
17.8
18.2
73.0
27.0
100.0
Oil & Grease
Ib/day
12,700
12,700
1,100
1,100
36,050
36,050
14,000
14,000
6,200
6.990
13,190
500
1,450
1,950
7,600
7,600
900
2,790
3,690
79,050
11,230
90,280
percent
14.1
14.1
1.2
1.2
39.9
39.9
15.5
15.5
6.9
7.7
14.6
0.6
1.6
2.2
8.4
8.4
1.0
3.1
4.1
87.6
12.4
100.0
— Does not include power plant cooling water or federal installation discharges.
-------
VI-7
along the western, eastern, and southern shores of the Bay system with
the largest sources discharging to central and southern San Francisco
Bay. Together the eight largest municipal sources serve a population
of about 2.5 million and contribute 36 percent of the wastewater from
all sources.
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 require
that all publicly owned treatment facilities must meet, as a minimum,
effluent limitations based on secondary treatment by July 1977. Twenty
of the 52 most significant municipal sources [Greater than 0.5 mgd)
presently provide primary treatment only. In addition, 21 municipal
sources presently provide secondary treatment but discharge wastes that
will not meet effluent limitations based on adequate secondary treat-
ment (BOD, 20 mg/1; suspended solids, 30 mg/1; oil and grease, 10 ing/1) .
Municipal effluents receiving primary treatment (234 mgd) constitute
48 percent of the total municipal waste volume. Wastes receiving
inadequate secondary treatment (191 mgd) constitute an additional
39 percent of the total municipal flow. Therefore, in 1971 only 13 per-
cent of the municipal wastes discharged to the Bay system received
adequate secondary treatment.
Biochemical oxygen demand is a commonly accepted indicator of the
pollution potential of municipal wastes. Essentially all municipal
sources in the bay area are required to monitor and report effluent BOD.
In 1971, the BOD load discharged to the Bay system from the 52 most
significant municipal sources averaged about 400,000 Ib/day. [The
areal distribution of reported 1971 average BOD loadings from municipal
-------
VI-8
sources is shown in Figure VI-2.] The State regulatory agencies at
present do not require all industries to monitor effluent BOD. Therefore,
it is not possible to estimate the BOD loading from industrial sources.
Industrial discharges of BOD to Zones 1, 2, 3, and 4 are known to be small
while the remaining four zones receive major BOD loadings from industry.
The provision of adequate secondary treatment for all municipal
sources would achieve a major reduction (81 percent) in the BOD load dis-
charged to the Bay system by municipal sources. If all municipal ef-
fluents were reduced to a maximum BOD of 20 mg/1, at 1971 flow rates the
total BOD load from municipal sources would be 77,000 Ib/day. The largest
reductions would occur in Zone 3 (86 percent) and Zone 4 (81 percent).
Two large sources (East Bay M.U.D. and City of San Francisco-South-
east Plant), together discharging approximately 100 ragd of municipal wastes
which have received only primary treatment, are the main contributors of
the large BOD load in Zone 3. It should be noted that these two sources
are located near the northern boundary of Zone 3. As a result, their
waste discharges directly affect water quality in Zone 4 during ebb-tide
conditions. Another large source providing only primary treatment (City
of San Francisco-North Point Plant, 64 mgd) is located near the same zone
boundary in Zone 4 and affects water quality in Zone 3 during flood tide
conditions. These three large sources together contribute about 54 per-
cent (218,000 Ib/day) of the BOD load from municipal sources. Upgrading
these three sources to secondary treatment would reduce their BOD load
discharged to 28,000 Ib/day, achieving a 47 percent reduction in the total
municipal BOD load.
-------
VI-9
CARQUINEZ STRAIT
X \
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
Figure VI-2. 19«aitipal Bis^-fcargfs ef BOD lo ibe S»n Francisco Bay System
-------
VI-10
Suspended solids concentrations are another measure of the relative
pollution potential of waste discharges. In 1971, suspended solids loads
discharged by both municipal and industrial sources averaged about
409,000 Ib/day of which municipal sources contributed 73 percent. [The
areal distribution of suspended solids discharges from both municipal
and industrial sources is shown in Figure VI-3.] The large load discharged
to Zone 3 can again be attributed to the two large sources discussed
above and the inadequacy of primary treatment in reducing suspended
solids concentrations.
Provision of adequate secondary treatment for all municipal sources
would achieve a 46 percent (187,000 Ib/day) reduction in the suspended
solids load. An additional significant reduction in suspended solids
loads could be achieved by the application of the best practicable con-
trol technology currently available to all industrial waste-sources as
required by the Federal Water Pollution Control Act amendments of 1972.
About 15 percent (75 mgd) of the total waste volume treated by munic-
ipal facilities is from industrial sources. Ten plants together treat
about 65 mgd of industrial wastes. Individual plants receive as much as
40 percent of their waste flow from industrial sources. As a result, major
loads of COD, oil and grease, and heavy metals are discharged. Self-moni-
toring data on COD are available for only a few municipal sources; there-
fore, complete loading estimates cannot be made. The largest source re-
porting COD data (City of San Francisco-Southeast Plant, 116,000 Ib COD
per day) discharges more COD than the largest industrial sources. EPA
sampling in 1972 indicated that the East Bay M.U.D. discharge could con-
tain a COD load as much as four times larger than that reported for the
-------
VI-11
SAN
PABLO BAY
CARCUIHEZ
ItlDCE
'V^BEKECIA BRIDGE
CARQUINEZ STRAIT
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
GOLDEN CUE
IRID6E
......... ESTER QUALITY ZCHE BOUI1BABY
A ) BATEt CSAIITY ZOKE
SAtl FRANCISCO
SAN KATED
BRIDGE
^4-DUHBARTOM BBID6E
V
SCALE Ift MILLS
Figure \\-J6. Uisrhargfs »f Saspradrd Solids (a tte San Francisco Bay Spier,
-------
VI-12
Southeast Plant. Thus, it is apparent that municipal discharges of COD
total several times the industrial COD load. Most of the municipal load
is discharged to Zones 1 through 4, with the major portion to Zone 3.
Only limited data are available on heavy metals discharged to the Bay
system. Three municipal sources (East Bay M.U.D., 1000 Ib/day; City of
San Francisco-Southeast Plant, 500 Ib/day; and South San Francisco-San Bruno,
90 Ib/day) are known to discharge substantial loads of heavy metals
(chromium, copper, lead, and zinc). Other municipal sources may dis-
charge significant loads of heavy metals.
Oil and grease data are available for most sources. The majority
(87 percent) of the total oil and grease load (91,000 Ib/day) is contri-
buted by municipal sources [Figure VI-4] with the largest load again in
Zone 3.
Self-monitoring bioassay data show that_ many of the municipal dis-
charges to the Bay are toxic to aquatic life. [Constituents of waste
effluents toxic to aquatic life and selected municipal and industrial
sources that discharge potentially toxic substances are discussed in
Appendix E.]
High concentrations of COD, oil and grease, and heavy metals as well
as toxicity in municipal effluents are primarily the result of the dis-
charge to municipal treatment facilities of industrial wastes that are
toxic or not susceptible to treatment in such facilities. The Federal
Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 require that pre-treatment
standards be established by mid-1973 to control the introduction of such
wastes into publicly owned treatment facilities. Implementation of
-------
VI-13
SAN
PABLO BAY
CIRtlilftEZ
MIB6E
\
ANTIOCH
(RIDGE
CARQUINEZ STRAIT
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
I E G E K D
,£..„. RICHB6KB
HCBHCBB-
SiK IAFHEL
IIIDCE
C1TEE eetLITY ZCSE
titilllt ZEHE
SCALE It! tilUS
Figare Vl-4. &iM>l»»rffes »f ©il sed Crtasc le ibe S*o Frzacisco Bay Sjstera
-------
VI-14
adequate pre-treatment by industrial waste sources in combination with
secondary treatment by municipal facilities would result in major reduc-
tions in pollution loads discharged to the Bay system. Oil and grease
loads would be reduced by 60 percent to 36,000 Ib/day- Reductions in
COD and heavy metals loads would be substantial. Lack of data precludes
an accurate assessment of the magnitude of reduction.
Major sources of industrial wastes are oil refineries, petrochemical
plants, chemical plants, pulp and paper mills, and food processing plants.
These industries are primarily located along the southern shore of Suisun
and San Pablo Bays between Antioch and Richmond. In other Bay areas,
industrial wastes are usually discharged to municipal treatment systems.
A total of 39 significant industrial sources discharge wastes directly
to the Bay system. Excluding 3,300 mgd of cooling water from electric
power plants, these sources discharged about 320 mgd (42 percent of total
waste flow) on the average in 1971. Average waste loads include 310,000
Ib/day of COD, 111,000 Ib/day of suspended solids, and 13,000 Ib/day of
oil and grease. [The areal distributions of suspended solids and oil and
grease loads were previously shown in Figures VI-3 and VI-4. The indus-
trial COD load distribution is shown in Figure VI-5.] As discussed pre-
viously, large, but undetermined COD loads are also discharged to Zones 1
through 4 by municipal sources.
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 require
that all industrial waste discharges must, by July 1977, meet effluent
limitations based on the best practicable control technology currently
available. These effluent limitations are presently under development
-------
VI-15
SAN
PABLO BAY
V*BEKECI» CIIDEE
„ , AHTIOCK '
g ) tBTIOCK
1SICGE
CARQUINEZ STRAIT
SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
SAN FRAKCISCO
CtlEI E3.UJIT 2ESE EBCECCST
4 IBAIES ea»UTY
HO IE: ItiDUSTISIAL DISCS9SCES 6F CEB
16 ZCilES 1,2,3 £ 4 /.BE t=E
-------
VI-16
by EPA. Twenty-six sources that together contribute 98 percent of the
industrial waste load to the Bay system are discharging effluents that
contain one or more constituents in excess of levels achievable by best
practicable control technology. Application of such control technology
would thus result in a major reduction in pollution loads from indus-
trial sources.
C. MUNICIPAL WASTE DISCHARGES
In 1971, municipal sources discharged an average of more than 490 mgd
of wastewater to the San Francisco Bay system.— Of those sources reporting,
the average BOD load was 400,000 Ib/day while 300,000 Ib/day of suspended
solids and 79,000 Ib/day of oil and grease were discharged.
The largest volumes of municipal wastes were discharged to Zones 1,
3 and 4 [Figure VI-1], Three sources within these zones contributed about
half of the total municipal waste flow, BOD load, suspended solids load,
and oil and grease load.
Zone 1 - South San Francisco Bay
Eight sources [Table VI-3 and Figure VI-6] discharge a total of
133 mgd (28 percent of the total municipal waste flow) to Zone 1. The
combined BOD load from these sources (60,400 Ib/day) is about 15 percent
of the total BOD load discharged to the Bay system from municipal sources.
Suspended solids and oil and grease loads are about 23 and 16 percent,
respectively, of total municipal loads.
-------
TABLE VI -3
-
MUNICIPAL WASTE CIS CHARGES ,- ZONES 1 AND
BOD
Map— Flow Cone.
Key
1-1
1-2
1-3
1-4
1-5
1-6
1-7
1-8
2-1
2-2
2-3
2-4
Discharger
San Jose, City of
Sunnyvale, City of
Palo Alto, City of
Mountain View, City of
Union S. D.-Irvington
Union S. D. -Newark
Milpitas S. D.
Los Altos, City of
Zone 1 Totals
Redwood City, City of—
Menlo Park, City of
San Carlos, City of
Union S. D.-Alvarado
Zone 2 Totals
a/ Includes those discharges with
Treatment
Secondary
Secondary
& stab, pond
Primary—
& chemical
Primary—
& stab, pond
Secondary
Seconary
Secondary
Primary-
Secondary
Primary
& stab, pond
Secondary
Secondary
a flow of 0.5 mgc
(mftd) (m
Zone
82.8
14.0
13.1
7.4
5.5
5.4
2.8
2, 4
133.4
Zone
7.7
5.9
4.0
2.3
19.9
1 or greater
;;/!)
1
39
32
93
143
59
123
18
108
J_
30
95
35
Load
(Ib/day)
26,900
3,700
10,200
8,800
2,700
5,500
400
2,200
60,400
7,200
1,500
3,200
_ 700
12,600
SS
Cone.
(rag/1)
62
80
60
58
56
84
14
47
18
100
31
Load
(Ib/day)
42,800
9,300
6,600
3,600
2,600
3,800
300
900
69,900
900
3,400
600
4,900
Oil & Grease
Cone.
10
8
15
21
11
18
12
19
6
21
6
Load
(Ib/day)
6,800
950
1,700
1,300
500
800
250
400
12,700
300
700
100
1,100
b/ Data from 1971 Self-Monitoring Program
_c/ See Figure VI-5 for locations of waste discharges
d_/ Connected to regional plant providing secondary treatment on 4/72
e/ Data from 1970 Self-Monitoring Program
-------
-N-
\VIBTERKATIOIIH »I«PO«T
L E 6 E N D
ZOKE BOUNDARY
© MUNICIPAL SOURCE
O INDUSTRIAL SOURCE
FEDERAL INSTALLATION
3 ) ZONE NUMBER
Q1-2
I
M
OO
Figure ¥1-5. Sijnifica.nt Wasie Sources, San Franrisco Bay System, Ufatsr duality Zones 1, 2 & 3
-------
VI-19
City of San Jose — This facility serves a population of about
750,000 in the northern Santa Clara Valley including the cities of
San Jose and Santa Clara; Santa Clara County Sanitation Districts
Nos. 2, 3 and 4; and Burbank, Cupertino and Sunol Sanitation Districts.
This source is the largest municipal discharge (82.8 mgd) in the entire
bay area and contributes about ten percent of the waste volume from all
municipal and industrial sources.
Constructed in 1964. this facility is an activated sludge plant with
a design capacity of 80 mgd. Effluent is discharged to a slough tributary
to Coyote Creek which enters the southern end of South San Francisco Bay.
The plant has reached hydraulic capacity and is scheduled for expansion
to 160 mgd in 1972-73.
About 20-30 percent of the plant influent is industrial wastes.
Much of this industrial waste is from food-processing plants and reaches
a peak during the late summer canning season. During the canning season,
BOD and suspended solids loads significantly above average are discharged.
EPA sampled this source in May 1972 prior to the canning season.
[Observed waste characteristics are summarized in Appendix G, Table G-2
and are compared to average 1971 characteristics as defined by self-
monitoring data.] Observed BOD was below average as would be expected
during the non-canning season. A major COD load (74,000 Ib/day) was dis-
charged during the sampling period. Average COD values were not available.
No waste discharge requirements for BOD or COD have been established
for this source by the State. Dissolved oxygen levels must be maintained
above 5.0 mg/1 in the receiving water. In the past, DO levels in the
-------
VI-20
South Bay were severely depressed by this waste source, but completion
of secondary treatment facilities substantially reduced the problem.
As late as 1969 violations of the receiving-water DO limit still oc-
curred in much of the confined southern portion of San Francisco Bay.—
*
Fish bioassays conducted by EPA [Appendix G, Table G-2] found a
zero percent survival of test fish in undiluted effluent (after 24 hours
of aeration) in violation of State waste discharge requirements.
Bacteriological analysis of the effluent [Appendix G, Table G-3] in
August 1972 showed unacceptable levels of total coliform (200 to 7,800/100 ml)
Waste-discharge requirements specify that bacterial levels in the receiving
water (beyond a defined mixing zone) should not exceed a median of
240 MPN/100 ml in five samples. If this limit is exceeded in the re-
ceiving water, it must be met at some point in the waste treatment pro-
cess. Owing to the confined nature of the receiving water and frequent
occurrence of high bacterial levels in the southern extremity of the bay,
this source contributes to violations of receiving water standards. As
a result, substantially lower effluent bacterial levels are needed.
Under provisions of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amend-
ments of 1972, Federal effluent guidelines, based on secondary treatment,
are to be established in 1973 for use in issuing effluent permits to all
publicly owned waste treatment facilities. Also to be issued are Federal
guidelines regarding elimination of waste discharges toxic to aquatic
life and establishing pretreatment requirements for industrial sources
* Limitations of static bioassay tests and pre-exposure aeration are
discussed in the 13th Edition of Standard Methods, pp. 569-570.
-------
VI-21
discharging toxic or non-biodegradable wastes to publicly owned treatment
facilities. It is anticipated that the expanded San Jose facility will
need to achieve a higher quality effluent in order to meet the new ef-
fluent guidelines. Also, pretreatment of industrial wastes will be
needed to reduce effluent toxicity.
Other Zone 1 Sources — In 1971 two additional sources, the City of
Palo Alto (13.1 mgd) and the City of Mountain View (7.4 mgd), discharged
large BOD loads. These two sources, in combination with the San Jose
discharge, accounted for 76 percent of the BOD loading to Zone 1 in 1971.
Also in 1971 three municipal facilities in Zone 1 were providing
less than secondary treatment. At that time Palo Alto and Los Altos pro-
vided only primary treatment while Mountain View provided primary treat-
ment, followed by a stabilization pond. These three sources are now con-
nected to a new 35-mgd regional waste treatment facility at Palo Alto,
completed in April 1972 to provide secondary treatment. This new facility
is expected to have an effluent BOD averaging 20 mg/1 or less, thereby
reducing the BOD loading to Zone 1 by about 29 percent.
Aerial imagery recorded in July 1972 showed large algal growths in
the Moffett channel (a tributary of Guadalupe Slough) in the vicinity of
the discontinued Sunnyvale discharge. A portion of the Palo Alto Yacht
Harbor adjacent to the Palo Alto plant was discolored grayish-green.
Biochemical oxygen demand levels in the effluents from the Union
Sanitary District plants at Newark (123 mg/1) and Irvington (59 mg/1)
indicate the wastes are not receiving adequate secondary treatment.
-------
VI-22
About 25 percent of the Newark plant influent is industrial wastes.
Improved plant operation and pretreatment of industrial wastes will be
required to meet the Federal effluent limitations and pretreatment re-
quirements to be established in 1973, as discussed previously -
Pursuant to EPA regulations (18 CFR Part 601) , the San Francisco
Regional Water Quality Control Board has adopted an Interim Water Quality
Control Plan (Interim Plan) for the San Francisco Bay system.— This
plan divides the Bay system into sub-regions and sets forth a conceptual
plan for all waste dischargers in each sub-region. These conceptual plans
will be used to guide waste-treatment planning until detailed sub-regional
plans are completed in July 1973. For Zone 1, the Interim Plan calls for
all waste discharges to be intercepted and conveyed toward a discharge
point at least as far north as Dumbarton Bridge.
A recent study undertaken in support of efforts to develop a final
sub-regional plan for South Bay recommended that all treated effluent be
intercepted and conveyed to a point north of Dumbarton Bridge for dis-
charge to the Lower Bay. Two outfalls would be constructed, one dis-
charging Union Sanitary District effluents from the east side of the bay
and the other discharging all remaining effluents from Zone 1 to the west
side of the bay. Relocation of these waste discharges would reduce the
present water quality degradation in South Bay-
Zone 2 - South San Francisco Bay
Four sources [Table VI-3 and Figure VI-6] discharge municipal waste
to Zone 2. The combined discharge from these four sources is 19.9 mgd,
or about 4.2 percent of the total municipal waste discharge to the Bay
-------
VI-23
system. Biochemical oxygen demand, suspended solids, and oil and grease
loads discharged are approximately three percent of total and municipal
discharges.
All four sources provide secondary treatment with effluent dis-
infection. With the exception of San Carlos which exhibits effluent
characteristics comparable to wastes receiving primary treatment [Table
VI-3] adequate treatment is achieved. About 15 percent of the wastes
treated by the San Carlos facility are from industrial sources. Adequate
pretreatment of industrial wastes and improved treatment efficiency will
be required to produce an effluent quality that will meet 1973 Federal
guidelines.
The Interim Plan calls for the Menlo Park effluent to be intercepted
toward Central Bay together with waste effluents from Zone 1. Union
Sanitary District-Alvarado plant effluent is to be intercepted toward
Central Bay, to the East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD), or con-
nected to South Bay Interceptor. The Cities of San Carlos and Belmont,
together with Redwood City will discharge to the bay via a joint deep-
water outfall that is currently under construction.
Zone 3 - South San Francisco Bay
The major population concentrations in the bay area are located
adjacent to Zone 3. Oakland is situated on the eastern shore of the zone
while San Francisco is located on the western shore. Eleven municipal
sources [Table VI-4 and Figure VI-6] discharge, to Zone 3, a total of
159 mgd (34 perce.it of the total municipal waste flow) with a combined
BOD load of 194,300 Ib/day (48 percent of the total municipal load).
-------
TABLE VI-4
a/
MUNICIPAL WASTE DISCHARGES,-' ZONE
Kap£/
Key
3-1
3-2
3-3
3-4
3-5
3-6
3-7
3-8
3-9
3-10
3-11
BOD
Discharger
East Bay M.U.D.
San Francisco, City of
Southeast Plant
Oro Locia S.D.
Hayward, City of-'
San Mateo, City of
South San Francisco, City of
San Leandro, City of
Burlingame, City of
Millbrea, City of
Estero M.I.D.
San Francisco International Airport-
Zone 3 Totals
Treatment
Primary
Primary
& chemical
Secondary
Secondary
& stab, pond
Primary
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
& chemical
Secondary
Primary
Primary
Flow
(mgd)
Zone 3
78.9
22.1
13.2
11.9
11.0
7.2
7.0
3.0
'2.3
1.4
0.9
158.9
Cone.
170
217
28
147
104
91
21
17
41
Load
(Ib/day)
111,900
40,000
3,100
13,000
13,500
6,200
5,300
500
300
500
194,300
SS
Cone.
(mg/1)
123
282
28
93
72
69
33
18
70
Load
(Ib/day)
80,900
52,000
3,100
8,500
4,300
4,000
800
300
800
156,700
Oil &
Cone.
(rag/1)
24
71
8
44
16
13
6
8
22
Grease
Load
(Ib/day)
15,800
13,100
900
4,000
950
750
150
150
250
36,053
<
M
1
K3
a/ Includes those discharges with a flow of 0.5 mgd or greater
b/ Data from 1971 Self-Monitoring Program
c7 See Figure VI-6 for locations of waste discharges
dY Data from 1970 Self-Monitoring Program
-------
VI-25
Suspended solids and oil and grease loads discharged in Zone 3 account
for about 53 and 46 percent of the total municipal loads in the Bay system.
Of these eleven sources, two discharge 64 percent of the municipal
flow to Zone 3 and account for about 80 percent of the BOD, suspended
solids, and oil and grease loads. In terras of the BOD load discharged
the East Bay Municipal Utility District wastewater treatment plant is the
single largest source of pollution in the San Francisco Bay system. The
EBMUD plant discharges about 28 percent of the total BOD load discharged
to the Bay system by municipal sources. Municipal waste-treatment facil-
ities in the Cities of San Francisco (Southeast plant) and San Mateo
constitute the other, two major sources of waste loads in Zone 3.
East Bay Municipal Utility District — This facility serves Special
District No. 1, with an estimated population of 600,000, located in the
cities of Alameda, Albany, Berkeley, Emeryville, Oakland, and Piedmont.
After primary treatment, the district effluent is discharged through
a quarter-mile long outfall to San Francisco Bay east of Treasure Island,
near the Oakland Bay Bridge. Owing to the location of this discharge,
the effluent, depending upon the direction of tidal flow, affects water
quality in both Zone 3 and Zone 4. Digested sludge, formerly sluiced
through the outfall line into the bay, is used for commercial purposes
or disposed of in a sanitary landfill.
About one-fourth of the EBMUD plant influent is industrial waste.
As a result, the effluent contains large loads of COD, oil and grease,
and heavy metals and is toxic to aquatic life [Appendix G, Table G-2].
When sampled by EPA in May 1972, effluent BOD was found to be more than
-------
VI-26
270 mg/1 and effluent COD about 700 mg/1. This BOD level was substantially
higher than the 1971 average of 170 mg/1 reported by the self-monitoring
program. Effluent COD is not monitored.
Furthermore, the EPA sampling indicated that the plant is discharging
an effluent with a BOD comparable to untreated domestic sewage and a COD
almost double that of normal domestic sewage. It is evident that pre-
treatment of industrial wastes to reduce oxygen-demanding materials will
be needed before an effluent that will meet 1973 Federal guidelines can
be produced by a secondary treatment facility.
In 1971 [Appendix G, Table G—2] an average of more than 1000 Ib/day
of heavy metals (chromium, copper, lead and zinc) was being discharged
by this facility. Similar loads were observed during the EPA sampling,
with the most significant difference being a 100 Ib/day increase in the
discharge of lead. These heavy metals are known to be toxic to aquatic
life and have been found, in elevated concentrations, in shellfish samples
taken from the Bay [as discussed in Chapter V]. No State waste discharge
requirements on heavy metals have been established for this source.
Fish bioassays, conducted in the Spring of 1972 by EPA, revealed
that the effluent was toxic to aquatic life [Appendix G, Table G-2].
In this case the State waste discharge requirements for toxicity are
applicable to the receiving water and not to the effluent. Compliance
with the receiving water requirements was not determined.
The San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board has
adopted a prohibition against any discharge, to the Bay system, of toxic,
or deleterious substances, including heavy metals, beyond those levels
-------
VI-27
that can be achieved by source control.— Discharges of toxic industrial
wastes to the EBMUD system without adequate pretreatment are in violation
of this prohibition. As in the case of San Jose, pretreatment will also
be needed to meet 1973 Federal guidelines.
When sampled in August 1972 by EPA, the effluent, upstream of its
discharge to the outfall line, was found to have bacterial concentrations
ranging between 200 and 23,000 MPN/100 ml [Appendix G, Table G-3] The
State waste discharge requirements apply to the receiving water only,
limiting bacterial concentrations at any point within one foot of the
surface to an average of less than 1000 MPN/100 ml. Compliance with
this requirement was not determined.
In aerial imagery recorded during July 1972, the EBMUD waste dis-
charge pluine was clearly visible. On a flood tide the plume extended
about 2000 feet south of the outfall with a width approaching 50 feet.
City £f San Francisco, Southeast Plant — This facility is the
second largest waste source in Zone 3. Serving southeastern San Francisco,
the plant provides primary treatment for wastes from a tributary popu-
lation of about 160,000 and numerous industries. About 15 to 25 percent
of the plant influent is industrial waste. The effluent is discharged
directly to San Francisco Bay through an 800 foot outfall.
Effluent characteristics, as defined by both self-monitoring data
and EPA sampling, are similar to those observed for East Bay M.U.D.
[Appendix G, Table G-2]. Biochemical oxygen demand (169 to 217 mg/1) and
COD (371 to 629 mg/1) in the effluent were high, reflecting the effects
of industrial wastes on influent BOD and COD levels. The average,
-------
VI-28
suspended solids levels in 1971 [Table VI-4, 282 mg/1] were also high.
The Southeast Plant is another major source of heavy metals. During
1971 an average of more than 500 Ib/day of heavy metals (copper, chromium,
lead and zinc) were discharged. EPA sampling detected a heavy-metals
load of slightly more than half this amount. In both cases, chromium
levels were excessive (about 1-2 mg/1).
In 1970 San Francisco adopted a stringent industrial xjaste ordinance
designed to eliminate discharges to the sewer system of wastes not amenable
to secondary treatment.— Based on observations of the levels of heavy
metals still being discharged by the Southeast Plant, either pretreatment
requirements have not yet been fully implemented or enforcement of the
ordinance has not been actively pursued. This ordinance should be reviewed
when Federal pretreatment requirements are promulgated.
Fish bioassays conducted by EPA found zero percent survival in un-
diluted waste and a 96-hour TL of 45 percent. This indicates that con-
in
tents of the effluent are highly toxic to aquatic life. The State waste
discharge requirement for toxicity is applicable to the receiving water
only. Thus, compliance could not be determined from the effluent samples.
Low bacterial levels were observed in the effluent, during EPA sampling
[Appendix G, Table G-3], also indicating that the effluent was toxic.
Secondary treatment of this waste discharge is needed to produce an
effluent that will meet 1973 Federal guidelines. As in the cases of San
Jose and East Bay M.U.D., pretreatment of industrial wastes is needed in
order to meet State and Federal requirements and to reduce toxicity and
the discharge of heavy metals.
-------
VI-29
The Interim Plan calls for the Southeast Plant to provide "Improved
treatment" and discharge through a deepwater outfall to Central San
Francisco Bay.— One plan considered by the City would upgrade the
Southeast Plant to provide physical-chemical treatment.— A recent plan,
considered by the City of San Francisco, called for construction of a
complex system of tunnels and pumping stations to intercept combined sewer
discharges, as well as municipal and industrial wastes from the entire
city, for conveyence to a single new treatment facility with ultimate dis-
charge through a 5-mile long outfall into the Pacific Ocean.— The final
waste treatment system and discharge point selected could have a major
impact on water quality in the Bay system.
City of_ San Mateo — This facility provides primary treatment for
municipal wastes from a population of about 150,000. Less than five
percent of the plant influent is industrial waste. The effluent is dis-
charged, through a 3/4-mile outfall, to South Bay. near the San Mateo-
Hayward Bridge.
The average waste discharge presently exceeds the reported design
capacity (10 mgd) by about 10 percent. Deleterious waste characteristics
are high BOD and COD, excessive oil and grease, suspended-solids and
coliform concentrations, and toxicity to aquatic life.
EPA sampling in May 1972 found a BOD level slightly higher than the
1971 average [Appendix G, Table G-2]. The effluent COD was comparable to
untreated domestic sewage. Self-monitoring of COD is not required. A
BOD-removal requirement specifying treatment efficiencies, comparable to
-------
VI-30
secondary treatment, is contained in the State waste discharge require-
ments for this source. High BOD removals are required only if the DO
concentration in the receiving waters falls below 5 mg/1, a level that DO
in this part of the Bay far exceeds.
Discharges of suspended solids (93 mg/1) and oil and grease (44 mg/1)
[Table VI-3] reflected the inadequacy of primary treatment to remove
these constitutents.
Fish bioassays (conducted by EPA) revealed a zero percent survival
in the undiluted effluent and a 96-hr TL of 65 percent, indicating a
toxic effluent. State waste discharge requirements on toxicity apply to
the receiving waters; therefore, compliance could not be determined by
sampling of the effluent. No data are available on heavy-metals discharges.
In August 1972 EPA bacteriological sampling found total coliform
counts in the effluent ranging from 620 to 360,000 MPN/100 ml [Appendix G,
Table G-3]. Chlorine residuals of zero were measured in the effluent after
a 35-minute detention time indicating that disinfection was inadequate.
The high bacterial densities being discharged would indicate a strong
probability that violations of the receiving water standards (240 MPN/100 ml)
were occurring.
South San Francisco-San Bruno — The cities of South San Francisco
and San Bruno jointly operate this facility in order to provide secondary
treatment for municipal sewage from a population of about 55,000 and a
number of industrial sources including chemical producers, paint manufac-
turers, and meat-packing houses. About one-third of the plant influent is
industrial wastes. The effluent is discharged to Colma Creek near the Bay-
-------
VI-31
EPA effluent sampling and analysis indicated that BOD was almost
double the 1971 average [Appendix G, Table G2], The BOD observed was
characteristic of primary treated wastes, thus indicating industrial
wastes adversely affect treatment efficiencies resulting in poor ef-
fluent quality. High COD concentrations (350 mg/1) were also observed.
As for other sources, BOD-removal requirements are tied to violations
of DO limits in receiving water.
Average heavy-metals concentrations discharged during 1971 (0.4 mg/1
each for chromium, copper and lead) also reflected the presence of indus-
trial wastes in the effluent. These levels are excessive and are indica-
tive of inadequate pretreatment of industrial wastes.
Fish bioassays, conducted by EPA, found zero survival in undiluted
effluent and a 96-hr TL of 46 percent, in violation of State waste dis-
m
charge requirements.
Bacterial levels were low with the exception of one sample [Appendix G,
Table G-3].
Aerial reconnaissance in July 1972 revealed that the slough receiving
the Souuh San Francisco effluent and several other minor discharges was
a yellow-brown color in contrast to the greenish cast of Bay waters.
South San Francisco is developing plans for a deep-water outfall to
San Francisco Bay that may also serve San Francisco International Airport,
Merck Chemical Company, and the cities of Burlingame and Millbrae. In
order to meet 1973 Federal guidelines, pretreatment of industrial wastes
will be required before discharge to the proposed treatment system.
-------
VI-32
Other Zone 3 Sources — Of the eleven municipal sources in Zone 3,
only three (Oro Loma Sanitary District and the cities of Burlingame and
Millbrea) discharge effluent of acceptable quality. Effluent quality
[Table VI-3] for these three sources is indicative of domestic sewage
receiving good secondary treatment. The volumes of industrial waste that
are treated are small. Effluent toxicity is relatively low. No heavy
metals data are available.
The City of Hayward facility provides secondary treatment followed
by a stabilization pond. However, the quality of the effluent [Table VI-4]
is more characteristic of a primary treatment facility. About 12 percent
of plant influent is industrial waste. Pretreatment of industrial wastes
and improved effluent quality will be necessary to meet 1973 Federal
guidelines. The Interim Plan calls for this source to discharge, along
with several other east shore sources, through a deep-water outfall to
the Bay.
Aerial imagery recorded in July 1972 showed that a poor quality
effluent was being discharged from the Hayward facility. Low dissolved
oxygen concentrations were detected in both the stabilization ponds and
the effluent canal.
The City of San Leandro operates a secondary treatment facility,
processing mixed municipal and industrial wastes. Owing to the large
industrial flow (40 percent of the municipal plant influent), waste
strengths are high, and inadequate reductions in effluent concentrations
of BOD and suspended solids are achieved [Table VI-4]. Needed are adequate
-------
VI-33
pretreatiaent of industrial wastes and improved effluent quality- San
Leandro could be a participant in the Hayward deep-water outfall.
The Estero Municipal Improvement District provides only primary
treatment. This facility is scheduled to connect to the City of San
Mateo plant in 1973, thus eliminating this discharge.
Zone 4 - Central San Francisco Bay
Water quality Zone 4 is bordered in part by the major population
centers of San Francisco and Berkeley- Berkeley, however, together with
other densely populated areas along the eastern shore of Zone 4, is served
by EBMUD which discharges wastes to Zone 3.
Seven municipal sources [Table VI-5 and Figure VI-7] discharge a
total of 83.6 mgd (18 percent of the total municipal effluent) to Zone 4,
with a combined BOD load of 71,700 Ib/day (18 percent of total municipal).
Suspended solids and oil and grease loads were 10 and 18 percent, respec-
tively, of the total municipal loads.
City £f_ San Francisco, North Point Plant — The City of San Francisco
North Point plant is the only major source of municipal wastewater effluent
in Zone 4. The North Point plant accounts for 77 percent of the flow,
92 percent of the BOD load, 89 percent of the suspended solids load and
91 percent of the oil and grease load discharged to Zone 4, and is the
third largest municipal plant in the bay area.
The area served by the North Point plant includes the major business
districts of San Francisco. As a result, the estimated daytime population
served reaches 800,000. About 15 to 20 percent of the average plant flow
(64 mgd) originates from industrial sources. Following primary treatment,
-------
TABLE VI-5
'
MUNICIPAL WASTE DISCHARGES,- ZONE
Map*'
Key
4-1
4-2
4-3
4-4
4-5
4-6
4-7
BOD
Discharger
San Francisco, City of
North Point Plant
Richmond, City of—
Marin County S.D. #1
Mill Valley, City of
Sausalito-Marin City
San Quentin Prison
Marin Co. S.D. 05
Zone 4 Totals
Treatment
Primary
& chemical
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
Primary
Secondary
Primary
Flow
(mgd)
64.1
9.8
4.8
2.0
1.7
0.6
0.6
83.6
Cone.
(n.R/1)
Zone 4
124
27
25
163
159
180
Load
(Ib/day)
66,300
1,100
400
2,300
700
900
71,700
SS
Cone.
(rns/l)
50
21
29
79
93
85
Load
(Ib/day)
26,700
800
500
1,100
400
400
29,900
Oil &
Cone.
Ong/1)
24
10
4
31
50
38
Grease
Load
(Ib/day)
12,700
400
100
400
200
200
14,000
aj Includes those discharges with a flow of 0.5 ngd or greatet
b_/ Data from 1971 Self-Monitoring Program
_c/ See Figure VI-7 for locations of waste discharges
d/ Data from 1970 Self-Monitoring Program
M
(-0
-------
VI-35
6-41
B-BQ
5-3©
LEGEND
ZONE BOUNDARY
MUNICIPAL SOURCE
INDUSTRIAL SOURCE
FEDERAL INSTALLATION
ZONE NUMBER
t 1 1
Scilt in Kills
Figurt VI-7. Signilicznl Knts Sourcis, San Francisco Bay System, Water Quality Zones 4 & 5
-------
VI-36
the plant effluent is discharged about 800 feet offshore, in the vicinity
of Piers 33 and 35.
EPA effluent sampling confirmed the waste characteristics reported
by the self-monitoring program [Appendix G, Table G-2]. Effluent char-
acteristics were average for domestic wastes receiving primary treatment.
A higher degree of treatment will be required to meet 1973 Federal guide-
lines. As previously discussed for the San Francisco Southeast Plant, a
number of waste-disposal schemes including an ocean outfall are under
consideration for San Francisco.
Heavy-metals concentrations [Appendix G, Table G-2] in this effluent
were significantly lower than in other municipal waste discharges for
which heavy-metals data were available. However, fish bioassays, conducted
by EPA, found zero percent survival in the undiluted effluent and a 96-hr
TL of 92 percent, thus indicating the effluent contains materials toxic
m
to aquatic life. The waste discharge requirement for this source is appli-
cable to the receiving water. Thus, compliance could not be determined.
During the EPA sampling in July 1972 bacterial levels were low in
the effluent.
Aerial photographs taken during April and July 1972 show a brownish
discoloration of the Bay surrounding Piers 33 and 35, the location of the
North Point discharge.
Other Zone 4 Sources — In addition to the North Point plant, two
other sources (Sausalito-Marin City and Marin County Sanitary District
No. 5) provide only primary treatment. The Interim Plan calls for these
two effluents to be intercepted together with the City of Mill Valley
-------
VI-37
effluent and all discharged, by 1974, to the Pacific Ocean via Tennessee
Valley. Marin County S.D. No. 5 has resisted joining the sub-regional
system and wishes to implement a tertiary treatment facility.
The City of Mill Valley provides secondary treatment for its muni-
cipal wastes, but excessive infiltration during wet weather results in
by-passing of untreated sewage and violations of waste discharge require-
ments. A State ban has been imposed on additional connections to the
collecting sewer system. Reduction of sewer system infiltration, in-
creased treatment capacity- and an ocean outfall are needed. As proposed,
removal of waste discharges from Richardson Bay is needed in order to
protect beneficial water uses in this confined embayment.
Marin County Sanitary District No. 1 provides secondary treatment
for its municipal wastes and normally produces, during dry weather, a
reasonably good quality effluent [Table VI-5]. However, as in the case
of Mill Valley, excessive infiltration occurs during wet weather, causing
by-passing of untreated sewage and waste discharge requirement violations.
A State ban has been issued on additional sewer connections. The Interim
Plan calls for this discharge to be intercepted toward Central Bay, at
least as far as Point San Quentin, with improved treatment for wet weather
flows. Litigation has held up implementation of the initial phases of
this plan.
San Quentin Prison provides secondary treatment, but discharges a
poor quality effluent [Table VI-5]. Improved operation of this facility
is needed. The Interim Plan calls for connection of this facility to the
proposed Marin County S.D. No. 1 deep-water outfall.
-------
VI-38
Zone 5 - San Pablo Bay
Zone 5 includes San Pablo Bay and adjacent tidal waters between the
Richmond-San Rafael Bridge and the Carquinez Bridge.
A total of 33.9 mgd of municipal wastewater effluent is discharged
to Zone 5 [Table VI-6 and Figure VI-7]. In 1971 the BOD loading averaged
27,500 Ib/day- Suspended solids and oil and grease were discharged at the
rate of 16,600 and 6,200 Ib/day, respectively. These loads originate from
twelve treatment plants, the largest of which discharges an average flow of
7.6 mgd. As discussed in a later section, a large volume of industrial
wastes is discharged to this zone [Figure VI-1].
Two sources (San Pablo Sanitary District-Main Plant and Vallejo County
Sanitation and Flood Control District) discharge 44 percent of the municipal
flow to Zone 5. In 1971 the same two sources also accounted for 83 percent
of the BOD load, 70 percent of the suspended solids load and 85 percent of
the oil and grease load based on self-monitoring data.
San Pablo Sanitary District — Until March 1972 this facility dis-
charged the largest pollution load in Zone 5. Upgrading the plant from
primary to secondary treatment has substantially reduced the pollution
load discharged.
Serving a population of about 60,000, the plant receives only small
amounts (5-10 percent) of industrial wastes. Effluent is discharged
directly to the east side of San Pablo Bay.
EPA sampling showed that the new secondary treatment facility was
producing acceptable effluent quality [Appendix G, Table G-2] and that a
major reduction in BOD discharged had occurred. Samples of heavy metals
-------
TABLE VI-6
MUNICIPAL WASTE DISCHARGES,- ZONE
-^
Map*'
Key
5-1
5-2
5-3
5-4
5-5
5-6
5-7
5-8
5-9
5-10
5-11
5-12
Discharger
San Pablo S.D.-
San Pablo Plant
Vallejo Co. Sanitation
& Flood Control Dist.
Napa County S.D.
Petaluna, City of
San Rafael S.D.-
Main Plant
Las Gallinas Valley S.D.
Marin County S.D.— '
No. 6-Novato
Sonoma Valley Co., S.D.
Pinole, City oi-
Marin County S.D.—'
No. 6-Ignacio
Rodeo S.D.-^
American Canyon Company-
Water District
Zone 5 Totals
Treatment
Primary^'
Primary
Stab, pond
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
Secondary
Primary
Secondary
Primary
Stab, pond
Flow
(mgd)
7.6
7.2
4.7
2.7
2.5
2.3
2.2
1.-8
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.5
33.9
BOD
Cone. Load
(mp,/l) (Ib/day)
Zone 5
211 13,400
156 9,400
16 600
18 400
48 1,000
48 900
800
20 300
1,200
800
500
27,500
SS Oil & Grease
Cone. Load Cone. Load
(mg/1) (Ib/day) (mg/1) (Ib/day)
105 6,700 46 2,900
84 5,000 40 2,400
66 2,600 8 300
21 500 9 200
36 800 6 100
39 800 9 200
14 200 8 100
16,600 6,200
a./ Includes those discharges with a flow of 0.5 mgd or greater
b_/ Data from 1971 Self-Monitoring Program
_c/ See Figure VI-7 for locations of waste discharges
dj Secondary treatment facility completed March 1972
e/ Data from 1970 Self-Monitoring Program
<
M
VO
-------
VI-40
were not taken, but 1971 data indicated low concentrations in the primary
plant effluent. Fish bioassays (EPA) found 100 percent survival in un-
diluted effluent, a major improvement from the zero percent survival re-
ported in 1971 for the primary effluent. Bacterial concentrations in the
effluent were low [Appendix G, Table G-l].
The Interim Plan calls for San Pablo, by about 1976, to connect to
a deepwater outfall serving Contra Costa County dischargers.
Other Zone 5 Sources — Vallejo County Sanitary and Flood Control
District, the second largest source in Zone 5 [Table VI-6], provides only
primary treatment. As a result, BOD, suspended solids, and oil and grease
loads are excessive. The City of Pinole and the Rodeo Sanitary District
also provide only primary treatment. These sources should provide secon-
dary treatment.
The San Rafael Sanitary District's Main Plant and the Las Gallinas
Valley Sanitary District provide secondary treatment. Effluent quality
is marginal, however, and improved treatment efficiency is needed to
provide an effluent that will meet 1973 Federal guidelines. Napa County
Sanitary District, the City of Petaluma, and Sonoma Valley County Sanitary
District provide secondary treatment and discharge an effluent of accept-
able quality. The Marin County Sanitary District Plants (Ignacio and
Novato) both provide secondary treatment; however, information as to
effluent quality was not available [Table VT-6].
The Interim Plan calls for all Zone 5 sources to connect to deep-
water outfalls that discharge to San Pablo Bay with an alternative ocean
discharge point for west shore sources.
-------
VI-41
Zone 6 - Carquinez Strait
Connecting San Pablo Bay and Suisun Bay is Carquinez Strait, a narrow
channel of water bounded by Carquinez Bridge on the west and Benicia Bridge
on the east. Only small communities are located adjacent to Carquinez
Strait. Therefore, there are only minor discharges of municipal waste in
Zone 6.
Two significant municipal sources [Table VI-7 and Figure VI-8], the
City of Benicia and City of Martinez facilities — both providing primary
treatment effluent, are located in Zone 6.
The Interim Plan calls for re-use of the Benicia effluent by Humble
Oil Company with possible connection to the Contra Costa Interceptor;
the Martinez effluent could also be connected to this Interceptor. In
any case, these effluents should receive secondary treatment prior to
discharging them to the Bay system.
Zone 7 - Suisun Bay
Zone 7 extends from Benicia Bridge east to the western tip of Chipps
Island and encompasses the area known as Suisun Bay including Grizzly and
Honker Bays. With the expection of the Fairfield-Suisun Sewer District,
all municipal sources discharging to Zone 7 are located on the south
shore of Suisun Bay in Contra Costa County [Figure VI-8]. A number of
major industries discharge a large waste load to this zone [Figure VI-2].
Five sources discharge a total of more than 34 mgd to this zone
[Table VI-7], The Central Contra Costa County Sanitary District Main
Plant (22.8 mgd) is the only major municipal source in this zone.
-------
TABLE VI-7
MUNICIPAL WASTE DISCHARGES ,-^ ZONES 6, 7 &
Map*/
Key
6-1
6-2
7-1
7-2
7-3
7-4
7-5
8-1
8-2
8-3
Discharger
Benicia, City of
Martinez, City of—
Zone 6 Totals
Central Contra Costa County
S.D. -Main Plant
Concord, City of
Fairfield-Suisun Sewer D.
Mountain View S.D.
Contra Costa County S.D. No. 7A
Zone 7 Totals
Antioch, City of
Pittsburg, City of
Montezuma Plant
Pittsburg, City of
Camp Stoneman Plant
Zone 8 Totals
a/ Includes those discharges with a flow of
Treatment
Primary
Primary
Primary
Secondary
& stab, pond
Secondary
Secondary
Primary
Primary
Primary
Primary
0.5 mgd or greater
Flow Cone .
(mgd) (mg/1)
Zone 6
1.1 301
1.4
2.5
Zone 7
22.8 136
5.0 13
3.9 36
0.8 24
0.8
33.3
Zone 8
2.9 137
1.4V 173
0.9 77
5.2
BOD
Load
(Ib/day)
2,700
2,700
25,900
500
1,200
200
27,800
3,300
2,000
600'
5,900
SS
Cone. Load
OWl) (Ib/day)
151 1,400
1,400
74 14,100
26 1 , 100
50 1,600
24 200
17,000
76 900
94 700
1,600
Oil & Grease
Cone. Load
(mg/1) (Ib/day)
52 500
500
38 7,200
10 400
7,600
55 600
39 300
900
I
b_/ Data from 1971 Self-Monitoring Program
c/ See Figure VI-8 for location of waste discharges
d/ Data from 1970 Self-Monitoring Program
N3
-------
LEGEND
ZONE BOUNDARY
FEDERAL INSTALLATION
MUNICIPAL SOURCE
INDUSTRIAL SOURCE
ZONE NUMBER
cuouinn BRIDSE
H ^-x^tx-
' *NT"CII IKIDIt
<3
M
CO
Scali i> Mill:
1-8-10
Figure VI-8. Sijnificsat lasts SourcGS, San Francisco Bay System, Water Quality Zones 6, 7 & 8
-------
VI-44
Central Contra Costa County Sanitary District-Main Plant — This
facility serves portions of Walnut Creek, Orinda, and Moraga with an
estimated population of 275,000. Influent COD levels indicate that this
plant receives as much as 10 to 15 percent industrial wastes. The plant
provides primary treatment with about 20 percent of the waste flow receiving
secondary treatment. The effluent is discharged to the west end of Suisun
Bay through a 4-mile-long outfall.
Results of the EPA sampling were comparable to the 1971 self-monitoring
data [Appendix G, Table G-2]. Fish bioassays (EPA) yielded zero percent
survival in undiluted effluent and a 96-hr TL of 51 percent, thus indi-
m
eating that the effluent contains highly toxic materials. The State waste
discharge requirement is applicable to the receiving water. Compliance
with this requirement could not be evaluated from effluent data. No data
on heavy metals are available for this source.
The Interim Plan calls for all of the Contra Costa County effluents
in this zone to be intercepted toward Central Bay at least as far west
as Carquinez Bridge. Reclamation of wastes for industrial re-use is also
planned. No treatment improvements are specified. Upgrading of the
Central Contra Costa County Sanitary District Main Plant to provide secon-
dary treatment of all wastes will be needed to meet 1973 Federal guidelines.
Other Zone 7 Sources — Two sources, the City of Concord and Mountain
View Sanitary District, provide secondary treatment and discharge effluents
of acceptable quality. Fairfield-Suisun Sewer District, located on the
north shore of the zone, provides secondary treatment that produces an ef-
fluent of marginal quality. The Interim Plan indicates that this effluent
-------
VI-45
is to be reclaimed for agricultural re-use or ground-water recharge. Contra
Costa County Sanitary District No. 7A provides only primary treatment; it
needs to be upgraded to secondary treatment.
Zone 8 - Delta
This zone encompasses the western portions of the Sacramento-San Joaquin
Delta, a low-lying area of interconnected channels and islands surrounding
the confluence of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers. The area is
primarily agricultural. Only three small municipal discharges are located
in this zone [Table VI-7 and Figure VI-8], where, however, there are
several large industries discharging [Figure VI-1].
The three municipal sources provide only primary treatment. The
Interim Plan calls for these sources to be intercepted westward toward
Central Bay along with other Contra Costa County sources in_Zone 7. Some
industrial re-use may also be possible. A minimum of secondary treatment
of these wastes is needed to achieve acceptable effluent quality.
D. INDUSTRIAL WASTE DISCHARGES
Industrial wastes discharged, in 1971, to San Francisco Bay averaged
more than 320 mgd. This is in addition to 3,300 million gallons of power-
plant cooling water that was being discharged every day. The dischargers
reporting account for a total COD load of 310,000 Ib/day. plus the
111,000 Ib/day of suspended solids and 13,000 Ib/day of oil and grease
that are discharged.
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 require
that, no later than July 1, 1977, effluent limitations be established
-------
VI-46
for all point sources of industrial wastes which require the application
of the best practicable control technology currently available (best prac-
ticable control technology). Where sufficient data are available, waste
discharges with deleterious characteristics that can be reduced by appli-
cation of the best practicable control technology are identified in the
following discussion.
The major sources of industrial wastes discharging directly to the Bay
system are located in Zones 5, 6, 7 and 8 [Figure VI-1]. In Zones 1 through
4, most industrial wastes are discharged to municipal sewage systems.
Zone 1 - South San Francisco Bay
Direct discharges of industrial wastes to Zone 1 total only 1.6 mgd
[Table VI-8 and Figure VI-6], At least 18 mgd of industrial wastes are
discharged to the municipal facilities located in this zone. The City of
San Jose facility receives most of these wastes while industrial wastes
are also a significant fraction of the wastes treated by the City of
Sunnyvale and Union Sanitary District-Newark facilities.
The FMC Corporation, Inorganic Chemicals Division, operates a plant
in Newark, manufacturing phosphoric acid and sodium phosphates. Cooling
water and process wastes are treated in an aerated pond and discharged to
Plummer Creek about two miles upstream from the Bay- In 1971 the pond
effluent contained phosphate concentrations (220 mg/1) far in excess
of effluent levels achievable by currently available treatment methods
(2 mg/1). Suspended solids concentrations (54 mg/1) were also excessive.
Cerro Metal Products is engaged in the melting, extrusion, and
-------
TABLE VI-8
INDUSTRIAL WASTE DISCHARGES, WATER QUALITY ZONES 1, 2 and
Map^-'
Key
1-1-1
1-1-2
1-2-1
1-2-2
1-3-1
1-3-2
1-3-3
1-3-4
1-3-5
Discharger
FMC Corp., Inorg. Chem. Div.
Cerro Metal Products
Zone 1 Total
Campbell Chain Division
Kaiser Gypsum Company
Zone 2 Total
PG&E - Hunters Point
PG&E - Potrero
PG&E - Oakland
Merck Chemical Division
Fuller O'Brien Corp.
Zone 3 Total
COD SS
Flow Cone. Load Cone. Load
(mgd) (mg/1) (Ib/day) (mg/1) (Ib/day)
Zone 1
1.49 54 700
0.083
1.573 700
Zone 2
0.25
0.072 1,000 600 85 50
0.322 600 50
Zone 3
490
455
140
4.83 54- 17,300
10,200
0.07
1,089.90 17,300
Oil & Grease Other Significant
Cone. Load Pollutant Loads
(mg/1) (Ib/day) (lb/day)i'
P04"2700,220 mg/1
Cr+6-.3 mg/1
Crtotal".6 mg/1
5-12*F temp, rise
11-13*F temp rise
aj Data from 1971 Self-Monitoring Program
b/ See Figure VI-6 for locations of waste discharges
c/ Units are Ib/day unless otherwise noted
-------
VI-48
forging of copper-alloy metal products. Process wastes receive chemical
treatment and neutralization prior to discharge to Mowry Slough. Hexavalent-
chromium and total-chromium concentrations in the waste discharge average
0.3 mg/1 and 0.6 mg/1, respectively- Practicable treatment technology is
currently available that will reduce chromium concentrations to lo'...-r
levels. Thus, this discharge is in violation of the Regional Board pro-
hibition against discharges of wastes containing heavy metals in excess of
levels that can be achieved by source control.—
Zone 2 - South San Francisco Bay
Industrial waste discharges in Zone 2 are very small. Only 0.3 mgd
are discharged directly to the Bay [Table VI-8 and Figure VI-6]. Dis-
charges of industrial waste to municipal facilities are probably less
than two mgd, with the City of San Carlos being the only municipal faci-
lity to treat a significant volume of industrial wastes.
The Kaiser Gypsum Company operates a facility at Redwood City that
produces crushed gypsum rock for a cement plant. Effluent from a wet
scrubber is treated in a settling pond and then discharged through a
ditch to Redwood Creak. Suspended solids concentrations in the pond ef-
fluent (85 mg/1) were, in 1971, in excess of levels achievable by the
best practicable control technology for this industry.
The Campbell Chain Division of Unitec Industries, Inc., operates a
plant in Union City engaged in the manufacturing of welded and unwelded
chain. A small volume of cooling water used to cool equipment and quench
heat-treated chain is discharged to Alameda Creek.
-------
VI-49
Zone 3 - South San Francisco Bay
Three thermal-electric power plants discharge large volumes of
cooling water to Zone 3 [Table VI-8 and Figure VI-6]. Direct discharges
of other industrial wastes to this zone total less than five mgd. At
least 30 mgd of industrial wastes are discharged to municipal facilities
for treatment. The East Bay M.U.D. facility treats about two-thirds of
these wastes. Other municipal plants treating significant industrial
discharges (more than 10 percent of plant inflow) include the City of
San Francisco Southeast Plant and the cities of South San Francisco,
Hayward,,and San Leandro.
The Pacific Gas and Electric Company operates three gas- and oil-
fired, thermal-electric power plants in Zone 3, two located in San
Francisco and the other in Oakland. The largest plant, located on
Hunter's Point in southeastern San Francisco, has four units with a total
generating capacity of 440 mw. Once-through cooling water, averaging
490 mgd, is drawn from the Bay and returned directly to the Bay through
three outfalls. The temperature of the discharge is, on the average,
12°F. warmer than intake temperatures.—
The Potrero Power Plant, located on the east side of the City of
San Francisco, has three units with a total generating capacity of 321 mw.
Once-through cooling water, averaging 455 mgd, is drawn from the Bay and
returned through two outfalls. The average temperature rise, over intake
temperatures, is between 11° and 13°F. Infra-red line scan imagery of the
thermal plume recorded in July 1972 indicated the plume was about 1000 feet
wide and extended 3000 feet offshore.
-------
VI-50
The Oakland Power Plant is much smaller, with a generating capacity
of 106 mw. Cooling water averaging 140 mgd is discharged to Oakland Harbor.
A large suspended solids load (17,300 Ib/day) is discharged directly
into the Bay by the plant of the Merck Chemical Division of Merck and
Company in South San Francisco. This plant manufactures inorganic indus-
trial and pharmaceutical products derived largely from the precipitation
of magnesium hydroxide from Bay water. The suspended solids are primarily
waste magnesium hydroxide, a compound which, because of being slightly
soluble in water, is only slowly leachable. The effluent is discharged
through multiple near-shore outfalls. Aerial imagery recorded in July
1972 revealed that a bottom area of about 20,000 square feet was dis-
colored white by precipitated solids.
No treatment other than in-plant controls was provided in 1971.
Additional in-plant controls designed to reduce waste solids were scheduled
for construction in 1972. The plant effluent is to be connected to the
City of South San Francisco deep-water outfall, when completed by the
City. Additional treatment of the effluent will be required to meet the
Federal best practicable control technology requirement.
Fuller-O'Brien Corporation operates a plant on Pt. San Pedro, in
South San Francisco, to manufacture paints, varnishes, lacquers and
enamels. A small volume of once-through cooling water is discharged
directly to San Francisco Bay. Process and sanitary wastes (0.034 mgd)
are discharged to the South San Francisco municipal system.
Zone 4 - Central San Francisco Bay
Direct discharges of industrial wastes to this zone are minor,
-------
VI-51
averaging less than three mgd [Table VI-9 and Figure VI-7], The City
of San Francisco North Point Plant is the only municipal facility treating
significant industrial waste loads.
A soap and glycerine manufacturing plant is operated in Berkeley by
the Colgate-Palmolive Company. Until late 1972 this plant was returning
barometric condenser water (1.45 mgd), obtained from the Berkeley Aquatic
Park Lagoon, back to the lagoon. This discharge was about 9° to 11°F.
warmer than intake-water temperatures and had an average BOD and COD
concentration of 42 and 81 mg/1 respectively.— Now the discharge is
connected to the Aquatic Park Interceptor Drain which discharges to San
Francisco Bay through the Potter Street Outfall. An effluent ofhigher
quality could be produced by application of best practicable control
technology.
The Agricultural Chemical Division of Stauffer Chemical Company
in Richmond operates both an industrial, inorganic chemicals plant which
manufacturers ferric sulfate and aluminum sulfate and a pesticide pilot
plant. Industrial wastes (1.3 mgd) receive lime neutralization, followed
by sedimentation in settling ponds prior to discharge to Richmond Inner
Harbor. Waste characteristics indicate that this source will probably
need additional treatment in order to meet effluent limitations based
on best practicable control technology. Aerial imagery recorded in
July 1972 revealed that the settling ponds and the discharge canal con-
tained orange colored solids, some of which were being discharged to
tidal waters.
-------
TABLE VI-9
INDUSTRIAL WASTE DISCHARGES, WATER QUALITY ZONES 4 AND 5='
a/
Key
1-4-1
1-4-2
1-4-3
1-5-1
1-5-2
1-5-3
1-5-4
1-5-5
1-5-6
1-5-7
Discharger
Colgate-Polmollve Co.
Stauffer Chem. Co.- Richmond
Pfi::er Co.
Zone 4 Total
Standard Oil Co.
PG&E - Oleum
Union Oil Co.
Hercules, Inc.
Chevron Chem. Co. -Ortho
Sequoia Refin. Co.
Allied Chem. Corp. -Richmond
Zone 5 Total
COD SS
Flow Cone. Load Cone. Load
(mgd) (mg/1) (Ib/day) (mg/1) (Ib/day)
Zone 4
1.45 51-89 600
1.3 15 160
0.1
2.85 600 160
Zone 5
112 83 86,000
58
47 172 53,100
1.6 57-133 1,650 23 50
0.1 77 100
0.1 321 250 15-46 20
0.07
218.87 139,450 70
Oil & Crease Other Significant
Cone. Load Pollutant Loads
(mg/1) (Ib/day) (lb/day)£/
BOD-500, 18-39 mg/1
5 4,200 BOD-15,500, 15 mg/1,
NH3-10,300
6*F temp, rise
1-9 2,750 Phenols-10.8
BOD=5,700, NH3-740
2 30 BOD-70, 4.6-10 mg/1,
N-680
NH3-750, N03-500
4-9 10 NH -250, K-N-270,
NO -30, BOD»200,
24 j mg/1
pH-4.3, temp=87°F,
BOD=32, 54 mg/1,
TOC=450 mg/1, SO - <
6,990 800, 1,300 mg/1 * ^
Ui
aj Data from 1971 Self-Monitoring Program
b/ See Figure VI-7 for locations of waste discharges
c/ Units are Ib/day unless otherwise noted
-------
VI-53
Zone 5 - San Pablo Bay
This zone receives the largest volume of industrial wastewater
(excluding power-plant cooling water) of all the zones in the Bay system
[Figure VI-1], About 219 mgd of industrial wastewater is discharged by
seven sources [Table VI-9 and Figure VI-7]. Excluding cooling water from
the Oleum Power Plant, the other six sources discharge approximately
50 percent of the total industrial waste flow to the Bay system. The
total COD load (139,000 Ib/day) to Zone 5 is about 45 percent of the COD
load from all industrial sources reporting. The two largest discharges
of industrial waste in the Bay system (Standard Oil Company and Union
Oil Company) are located in Zone 5.
Standard Oil Company o_f California — The Standard Oil Richmond Re-
finery is the largest discharger of industrial waste (112 mgd) in the bay
area, contributing about 35 percent of the total industrial flow from all
sources. A fully integrated refinery including petrochemical processes,
the plant manufactures a complete line of petroleum products. Crude-oil
processed averages 190,000 barrels per day.
About 90 percent of this waste stream is salt water, from the Bay,
used for once-through cooling. Before being mixed with the cooling water
for treatment in three large bio-oxidation ponds (totalling 300 acres),
process wastes are treated in six major, parallel systems and numerous
minor systems. Treatment practices on the process waste streams include
sulfide, ammonia, and phenol strippers, and oil-water separators as well
as various other practices. A portion of the oxidation ponds is mechanically
aerated. A single effluent from the treatment ponds is discharged into
-------
VI-54
Castro Creek, a tidal tributary of San Pablo Bay. Castro Creek was dis-
colored greyish-brown in July 1972 when photographed during the remote-
sensing mission.
The July aerial imagery also indicated the possible presence of three
intermittent discharges not reported by Standard. These effluents are
located about one-half mile west of the main outfall. Several waste
treatment units, connected to the main treatment ponds are located in
the vicinity of the discharges.
Based on the COD load of 86,000 Ib/day reported by the Company in
its Refuse Act permit application, this source contributes about 28 per-
cent of the reported COD load from all industrial sources.— EPA effluent
sampling measured a COD load 20 percent greater than the reported average
[Appendix G, Table G—A], With the exception of nickel and total coliform
concentrations, the effluent characteristics observed by EPA were compa-
rable to Company data. A nickel load of 234 Ib/day, measured by EPA, was
more than ten times greater than the reported average load. Other heavy-
metals loads were small. Coliform bacteria in the effluent sampled by EPA
were too numerous to count, thus indicating a violation of State waste
discharge requirements.
Concentrations of BOD, COD, ammonia, and oil and grease being dis-
charged by this refinery are in excess of effluent levels achievable by
best practicable control technology for this industry. Water use is also
excessive for the reported production level.
Union Oil Company of California — This Company's San Francisco
Refinery, located in Rodeo, produces a variety of petroleum products by
-------
VI-55
processing an average of 60,000 barrels of crude oil per day-
Two waste streams are discharged directly to the eastern end of
San Pablo Bay- Discharge 001 (7.2 mgd) is once-through salt water
that is used for non-contact cooling. This water stream receives no
treatment. Discharge 002 contains process wastes, storm runoff, and
sanitary sewage. Sanitary sewage is chlorinated before its release to
the process waste system. Ammonia- and sulfide-bearing waters are steam-
stripped in advance of their release to the process waste system. All
process wastes and storm runoff pass through an API separator, a dis-
solved-air flotation unit, and a series of settling ponds prior to dis-
charge to the Bay.
Several significant differences in effluent characteristics were
noted between the results from the EPA sampling and either the self-moni-
toring data or Refuse Act permit application data [Appendix G, Table G-4].
For example, the COD load discharged by outfall 002 was about 40 percent
higher than indicated by the self-monitoring data. This difference could
be partially explained by the COD load present in the water supply (Bay
water), not sampled by EPA. In both waste streams oil and grease con-
centrations were substantially higher than those reported by the Company.
Concentrations of heavy metals were low, except for nickel concentrations
(in both waste streams) which were substantially higher than those values
reported by the Company- A nickel load of almost 100 Ib/day was discharged
during the EPA sampling period. Coliform counts were low in both waste
* Discharge numbers refer to outfall designations in the Refuse Act
permit applications.
-------
VI-56
streams and fish bioassays showed no toxic effects.
Ammonia, oil and grease, phenols, and BOD and COD concentrations in
the Union effluents are in excess of levels attainable by best practicable
control technology. Water use is also excessive for the reported level
of production.
The thermal plume from the two Union outfalls was observed to merge
with the Oleum Power Plant plume, discussed in the following paragraphs.
Elevated surface temperatures were observed over an area about 1000-by-
3000 feet.
Other Zone _5_ Sources — With the exception of the Oleum Power Plant
of the Pacific Gas and Electric Company, the remaining industrial sources
in this zone are small [Table VI-9]. The Oleum Power Plant is adjacent
to the Union Oil Company refinery. With a generating capacity of 100 mw,
the plant discharges about 58 mgd of once-through cooling water to San
Pablo Bay. Discharge temperatures average 6°F. above intake temperatures.
The thermal plume from this source combines with the Union Oil Company plume.
Hercules, Inc. operates a plant, at Hercules, to produce formaldehyde
solutions, anhydrous ammonia, ammonium nitrate, and urea. Two waste
streams are discharged to San Pablo Bay.
The activities that are tributary to waste stream 001 are production
of nitric acid and of the ammonium nitrate and urea solutions. The treat-
ment provided this waste stream (1.4 mgd) includes neutralization, equali-
zation and sedimentation, and chlorination (septic tank effluents). Waste
stream 002 (0.2 mgd) originates with the production of anhydrous ammonia,
ammonium nitrate prills, and formaldehyde solutions. The treatment provided
-------
VI-57
this waste stream includes neutralization, addition of nutrients, aeration
in a lagoon, biological sedimentation, and chlorination. Concentrations
of COD, ammonia and nitrate in waste stream 001 are in excess of effluent
limitations achievable by best practicable control technology. Low alti-
tude aerial imagery revealed algal mats along the shore between the two
outfalls.
The Richmond Fertilizer Plant of Chevron Chemical Company, Ortho
Division manufactures ammonium sulfate and mixed fertilizers (both liquid
and dry pelleted forms) containing nitrogen, phosphoric acid, and potash.
During 1971 the plant discharged wastes, high in ammonia and nitrates,
to Herman's Slough, (a tributary of San Pablo Bay) which is adjacent to
the Standard Oil Company refinery. In early 1972 the Chevron Company
completed plant modifications, including the construction of cooling
and evaporation ponds to allow re-use or evaporation of most of the waste
effluent from the manufacturing operation.
Sequoia Refining Corporation operates a small gasoline refinery,
adjacent to the City of Rodeo. The average production is 25,000 barrels
of crude oil per day. Process wastes and cooling water are batch-dis-
charged twice daily through a 2,000-foot outfall to San Pablo Bay. Surface
drainage is discharged to the Bay from two on-shore outfalls.
During 1971, effluent characteristics, including high BOD (243 mg/1),
COD (321 mg/1), ammonia (257 mg/1), and nitrate (27 mg/1), were indicative
of poor treatment practices [Table VI-9]. The refinery was scheduled to
implement varioous pollution controls during 1971 and 1972 in order to
abate this pollution. These control measures include pH control, air
-------
VI-58
flotation, pond aerators, ammonia strippers, and crude-water re-use.
Evaluation of the performance of the new equipment is required in order
to determine whether additional treatment will be necessary to comply
with the best practicable control requirement.
The Richmond Works of Allied Chemical Corporation, Industrial Chemicals
Division, manufactures sulfuric acid and converts hydrogen sulfide to
sulfur. The plant is located adjacent to the Standard Oil Company refinery.
Wastes consisting of dilute sulfuric acid are discharged to a slough that
is tributary to San Pablo Bay. Although the wastes are neutralized with
a caustic solution, in the past inadequate pH control has resulted in
low-pH wastes being discharged to the slough. The neutralization equip-
ment was improved in May 1972, but pH violations were again observed in
June 1972.
Bethlehem Steel Corporation operates a plant on Pinole Point. There
are no effluent data available. Therefore, the magnitude and characteristics
of waste discharges are unknown. During the April flights a large thermal
plume (7000 feet long) was observed extending eastward from Pinole Point.
This thermal plume was not observed during the July day or night flights.
However, a reddish-brown discoloration was observed during the July day-
time flight at Pinole Point.
Zone 6 - Carquinez Strait
Three sources discharge industrial wastewater (33.1 mgd) to Zone 6
[Table VI-10 and Figure VI-8]. The COD load (61,400 Ib/day) discharged to
this zone is approximately 20 percent of the total industrial waste COD
load to the Bay. Suspended solids and oil and grease are discharged to
-------
TABLE TO-10
INDUSTRIAL WASTE DISCHARGES, WATER QUALITY ZONES 6 AND 7-
Key
1-6-1
1-6-2
1-6-3
1-7-1
1-7-2
1-7-3
1-7-4
1-7-5
1-7-6
Discharger
C & H Sugar Refin. Corp.
Shell Oil Co. -Martinez
Humble Oil & Refining
Zone 6 Totals
Phillips Petroleum-Avon
Shell Chemical Co.-
Pittsburg
Allied Chemical Co.-
Nichols
Stauffer Chemical-Martinez
PG&E-Avon
PG&E-Martinez
Zone 7 Totals
COD SS
Flow Cone. Load Cone. Load
(mgd) (mn/1) (Ib/day) (mp;/l) (Ib/day)
Zone 6
25.5 180-2,253 55,500 12,700
4.5 348 13,100 30 1,100
3.1 5,900 42 1,100
33.1 61,400 14,600
Zone 7
15.2 19,500 27-41 5,100
6.5 43 2,300
3.2 25 700
0.1 40 20
25.0 21,800 5,820
Oil & Grease Other Significant
Cone. Load Pollutant Loads
(mR/1) (Ib/day) (Ib/day)^
200 BOD-12,800
31 1,200 BOD-900, 25 mg/1
D.O.-nil
2 50 BOD=2,000, 77 mg/1
Phenols»16, NH -2,200
1,450 D.O.-1.7 mg/1 3
3.6-5.2 400 Phenols-12.3, BOD-4,200
NH =3,500, 35 mg/1,
K-N=4,300, 43 mg/1
0.8 20 BOD-100, 3.5 mg/1
1.6 BOD-6, 7.8 mg/1
420 V
Ui
b_/ See Figure VI-8 for locations of waste discharges
c/ Units are Ib/day unless otherwise noted
-------
VI-60
Zone 6 at the rate of 14,600 Ib/day and 1,450 Ib/day. respectively.
California and Hawaii Sugar Company — At Crockett, near the west
end of Carquinez Strait, this Company operates the largest raw cane-sugar
refinery in the world. The refinery processes, daily, about 3,500 tons
of molasses or brown sugar shipped by ocean freighter from the Company's
Hawaiian sugar-cane processing plant.
Wastes totalling about 25.5 mgd are discharged directly into Carquinez
Strait through 11 outfalls. Five outfalls, representative of the pollu-
tional load discharged by this plant, x
-------
VI-61
[Appendix G, Table G-4]. Data from EPA sampling showed characteristics
similar to those reported by the Company. The largest difference were
noted for BOD and COD, especially for Outfall 014. (Such differences can
be expected where short-term sampling is compared to long-term averages
for variable waste discharges.)
Bacterial concentrations in the effluent of Outfall 014 (total coli-
form, 36,000 MPN/100 ml and fecal coliforra, 20,000 MPN/100 ml) were exces-
sive and substantially greater than in intake water levels (total coli-
form, 2,400 MPN/100 ml and fecal coliform, 900 MPN/100 ml). The State
waste discharge requirements do not specify bacterial limits.
Fish bioassays, conducted by EPA, of all five effluents showed that
there were no toxic effects.
Effluents from the C and H Sugar Company contain BOD, COD, and
suspended solids levels in excess of effluent quality achievable by best
practicable control technology. Substantial upgrading of the waste con-
trol and treatment program is needed.
Shell Oil Company, Martinez — The Martinez Refinery is primarily
engaged in the production of gasoline from crude oil and of tertiary
butyl acohol from isobutylene. Raw-material consumption averages 103,000
barrels per day of crude oil and 4,000 gallons per day of isobutylene.
Process wastes and cooling water (4.5 mgd) are treated and then
discharged, to Carquinez Strait, through a submerged diffuser off the
end of the Shell dock (Outfall 001). These wastes are batch-discharged
twice a day on ebb tide, with the discharge rate controlled by tidal
-------
VI-62
velocities at the diffuser to ensure a 100:1 dilution ratio. Waste treat-
ment processes and in-plant controls are complex. Added in late 1971 was
an activated-sludge bio-treatment unit that substantially improved the
quality of the effluent. This improvement is reflected by observing the
differences between the results of the EPA sampling (in mid-1972) and the
self-monitoring (1971) data [Appendix G, Table G-4].
Although substantial improvement of effluent quality has been achieved,
effluent BOD, COD, suspended solids, oil and grease, and total chromium
concentrations are in excess of levels achievable by best practicable
control technology. Fish (EPA) bioassays yielded a 10 percent survival of
test fishes in undiluted effluent and a 96-hr TL of 41 percent, thus
m
indicating the waste is toxic to aquatic life. The State waste discharge
requirement is applicable to receiving waters only.
The Martinez Refinery has two additional waste discharges associated
with the storm water system. Flows in excess of treatment-system capacity
are diverted to holding ponds and returned, when capacity is available, to
the system. If storm runoff is excessive, there can be some discharge
through two onshore outfalls.
Humble Oil and Refining Company, Benicia — This refinery, located
on the boundary between Zones 6 and 7, processes an average of 63,000
barrels of crude oil per day. Wastes from refinery operations are dis-
charged to both zones.
Ballast water from tanker and barge operations is pumped to a separation
tank wh^re it is held for several days for the gravity separation of oil
-------
VI-63
to take place. The tank is batch-discharged through a submerged outfall,
800 feet offshore in Carquinez Strait (Zone 6) about one mile west of
Benicia Bridge (Outfall 002). About 1.2 million gallons are discharged
per batch.
Process wastes and cooling-system blowdown (3.1 mgd) are treated in
a complex system and then discharged to Carquinez Strait (Zone 7) through
a submerged outfall, about 1000 feet offshore east of Benecia Bridge
(Outfall 001). Oily waters and chemically contaminated wastes are treated
separately. Oily wastes are treated in an API separator and in a dis-
solved air flotation unit that includes neutralization and chemical
flocculation. Chemically contaminated wastes are stripped for removal
of volatile contaminants and treated in an activated sludge unit.
The main waste discharge contains BOD, COD, suspended solids, phenols,
and ammonia in excess of effluent levels achievable by best" practicable
control technology.
Zone 7 - Suisun Bay
Four sources discharge to Zone 7 an average of about 25 mgd of indus-
trial wastes [Table VI-10 and Figure VI-8], In addition, an unknown amount
of blowdown from closed cooling systems is discharged by the Avon and
Martinez Power Plants of Pacific Gas and Electric Company. These are
small gas-and-oil fired plants, with a generating capacity of 46 raw each.
Phillips Petroleum Company, Avon Refinery — This Phillips refinery.
with a capacity of 95,000 barrels per day. is the largest waste source in
Zone 7, discharging an average of 15 mgd. Process wastes, cooling-system
blowdown, boiler blowdox^n, and sanitary wastes are treated and discharged
-------
VI-64
through a deepwater outfall (001) at the end of the Phillips Pier. Treat-
ment practices and facilities include ammonia and H.S stripping, pH adjust-
ment, gravity oil separators, air-flotation separators, an equalization
pond equipped with surface aerators, a lagoon with an aeration basin, and
stabilization ponds. Residence time in the stabilization ponds is about
28 days. The pond effluent is pumped to the outfall.
Prior to 1972 whenever the pumps were out of service, the effluent
(effluent 002) was discharged to a slough paralleling the pier. This
practice has been discontinued. Aerial imagery, recorded in April 1972,
showed a grey-green discoloration in Suisun Bay near the mouth of this
slough.
Petroleum coke is sluiced from a coker unit to a storage pile. Water
used in this process is pumped from Hastings Slough. After use, the water
separates from the coke on the ground surface, then runs via a ditch back
to Hastings Slough. The volume of flow is estimated to be about 0.04 mgd.
During the April 1972 aerial reconnaissance Hastings Slough near its mouth
was discolored reddish-brown.
At the time of the July night remote-sensing flights, two outfalls
on the west edge of the refinery were discharging hot liquids to Pacheco
Creek, about one-half mile south of Waterfront Road. No waste discharges
at these locations were observed during the daytime flights. These dis-
charges were not included in the Refuse Act permit application.
Results of EPA sampling are similar to the Company reported data
[Appendix G, Table G-4]. The major exception is bacteriological data on
effluent 001. Observed were fecal-coliform bacteria densities greater
than 600 MPN/100 ml and total coliforms too numerous to count. The
-------
VI-65
State waste discharge requirements specify a median total coliform limit
of 1000 MPN/100 ml, based on five samples. The high bacterial level
observed would indicate a potential violation of this requirement.
However, only one sample was obtained. Thus, a violation of the waste
discharge requirements was not verified.
Wastes discharged by the Company contain BOD, COD, oil and grease,
ammonia and phenols in excess of effluent levels attainable by best practi-
cable control technology. Water use is excessive for the reported level
of production.
Shell Chemical Company, West Pittsburg — The Shell Point Plant of
this division of the Shell Oil Company reclaims carbon for synthetic rubber
and steel manufacturing, formulates epoxy-based adhesives, and manufactures
a solid catalyst. Industrial wastes are diluted with a large volume of
Bay water and discharged into a 72 acre settling pond. The pond effluent
(6.5 mgd) flows through a half-mile-long canal to the east end of Suisun
Bay. The limited amount of data on the effluent indicates that COD
(43 mg/1) is marginal with respect to levels achievable by best practi-
cable control technology.
Allied Chemical Corporation, Nichols — The Industrial Chemicals
Division of Allied operates this Bay Point Works to manufacture sulfuric
acid, hydrofluoric acid, CP acids, and aluminum sulfate. Average production
is 200 tons per day of sulfuric acid, 25 tons per day of hydrofluoric acid
and 30 tons per day of aluminum sulfate.
Process wastes receive sedimentation and neutralization before being
discharged to a rectangular canal that serves as a settling pond. Sanitary
-------
VI-66
wastes receive chemical treatment and sedimentation prior to their dis-
charge to the pond. The canal effluent (3.2 mgd) is neutralized for pH
control and pumped, through a short submerged outfall, into Suisun Bay-
This waste discharge contains total organic carbon (144 mg/1), organic
nitrogen (18 mg/1), fluoride (2 mg/1), and aluminum (17 mg/1) in excess of
effluent levels achievable with best practicable control technology.
Stauffer Chemical Company, Martinez — The Industrial Chemical Division
of Stauffer operates a plant on Bulls Head Point to produce about 400 tons
of sulfuric acid per day.
A small volume of process wastes (0.1 mgd) is neutralized and dis-
charged to a retention pond. The pond contents are recirculated, as is
necessary for pH control, to the neutralization tank. The pond effluent
flows about one-half mile in a small slough to Carquinez Strait at the
West end of Suisun Bay.
In August 1972 the State issued a Cease-and-Desist Order to Allied
for violations of waste-discharge requirements for settleable matter.
April and July aerial reconnaissance indicated that the slough
receiving the Allied effluent was discharging a greenish-brown substance
into Carquinez Strait.
Zone 8 - Delta
Excluding power-plant cooling water, about 94 mgd of industrial wastes
are discharged to this zone from nine sources [Table VI-11 and Figure VI-3].
Two large thermal-power plants discharge about 2,020 mgd of cooling water,
with an additional 50 mgd to be added soon. Five large industries dis-
charge more than 10 mgd each.
-------
TABLE 71-11
INDUSTRIAL WASTE DISCHARGES, WATER QUALITY ZONE tir-
COD SS
Key
1-8-1
1-8-2
1-8-3
1-8-4
1-8-5
1-8-6
1-8-7
1-8-8
1-8-9
1-3-10
1-8-11
Discharger
IG^E-Pittsburg
PG,'24,000
100 ml
BOD=600, 31-42 mg/1
Pb-29, 2.7 mg/1
S0.'a6,600, Cr."3.7
BOD=150, 1.7-45 mg/1
a_/ Data from 1971 Self-Monitoring Program
b_/ See Figure VI-8 for locations of waste discharges
c/ Units are Ib/day unless otherwise noted
<
M
-------
VI-68
Dow Chemical Company, Pittsburg — The largest source in Zone 8,
the Dow Pittsburg Plant, is a producer of organic and inorganic chemicals.
Specific products include sodium hydrozide and chlorine, manufactured
using the diaphram process; chlorinated solvents; carbon tetrachloride;
perchloroethylene; various mining chemicals; styrene butadiene latex;
and sulfonated chloropyridine fungicide.
Wastes from the fungicide production are contained in a solar evap-
oration pond. All other wastes (24 mgd) are chlorinated, neutralized,
equalized, and passed through a small settling pond before diffusion
through a short, sub-surface outfall into New York Slough (002). A small
discharge (003) results from the clarification of river water for cooling-
water use. The clarifier underflow, containing river sediments, is dis-
charged to a settling pond with the decant returned to New York Slough
via a surface channel.
With the exception of oil and grease and mercury loads, a comparison
[Appendix G, Table G-4] of the EPA sampling results for the main waste
discharge and Company reported data shows that EPA sampling detected
lower pollutant concentrations. In the case of mercury a major difference
is noted. EPA results indicate a daily mercury load of 0.9 Ib. Whereas
the Company-reported daily mercury average is 0.08 Ib. This mercury load
exceeds the 0.5 Ib/day EPA guideline. Other waste characteristics occur
in the range of the effluent quality that is achievable by best practi-
cable control technology.
United States Steel Corporation, Pittsburg — The Pittsburg Works of
U. S. Steel is a rolling and finishing mill located on the south bank of
-------
VI-69
New York Slough. Principal products are semi-finished and finished steel
sheets, coils, tin plate, wire, and wire products. About 3,500 tons of
steel coil and 850 tons of steel billets, shipped in from other steel
mills, are used daily.
Wastes are discharged, via two surface outfalls, into New York Slough.
Outfall 001 is no longer used so that wastes are discharged through out-
fall 002. Outfall 002 serves the facilities producing steel sheets and
coils, tin plate, and wire products. Waste treatment includes equalization,
neutralization, and sedimentation. During the July aerial reconnaissance
this outfall was discharging a reddish-brown effluent with a plume extending
out 250 feet from shore and 600 feet westward in New York Slough.
Outfall 003 serves the facilities producing galvanized steel sheets,
coils and pipes. Waste treatment provided is the same as for Outfall 002.
A direct comparison of the EPA sampling results and Corporation-re-
ported data [Appendix G, Table G-4] is not possible for the combined out-
falls 001 and 002 because self-monitoring data were not available for the
combined waste streams. EPA heavy-metal analyses did not detect any
violations of State waste discharge requirements.
The self-monitoring data indicate that discharges of suspended solids,
BOD, oil and grease, and zinc are excessive for the reported level of pro-
duction in comparison to effluent loads achieveable with best practicable
control technology.
Fiberboard Corporation, San Joaquin Mill — This facility is an
integrated Kraft pulp-and-paperboard mill located east of Antioch on the
San Joaquin River. The mill produces about 765 tons per day of corrugating
medium, bleached Kraft food board, and line board from wood.
-------
VI-70
The wastes are discharged from the mill through two outfalls. Com-
bined process wastes (15.4 mgd) are discharged, through a 3700 foot out-
fall (001), to the ship channel on the north side of West Island. Other
than being subject to in-plant controls, such as Save-Alls, this waste
stream receives no treatment other than pH adjustment.
Barometric condenser water (9.3 mgd) from four sets of sextuple
evaporators is discharged, through a 500-foot outfall (002), to a deep
water channel in the San Joaquin River. No treatment is provided.
Comparison of EPA sampling results with Corporation data [Appendix G,
Table G-4] indicates that waste loads discharged during the EPA sampling
were lower than average for most parameters. Even then waste loads were
far in excess of effluent levels achievable by best practicable control
technology.
High total-coliform concentrations (36,000 MPN/100 ml) in discharge
001 made this source the largest industrial contributor of coliform bacteria
in the Bay area. No State waste discharge requirement for coliform bacteria
has been established for this source.
Crown Zellerbach, Antioch — Crown Zellerbach operates a paper-and-
paperboard mill, adjacent to Fibreboard Corporation in Antioch. The mill
produces about 500 tons per day of paperboard, towel, and tissue from
waste paper and slush virgin pulp.
Cooling water and process wastes are discharged through a short com-
mon outfall to the near-shore deepx^ater channel of the San Joaquin River.
Process xjastes receive only neutralization.
-------
VI-71
As would be expected for the low degree of treatment, waste loads
[Table VI-10] are far in excess of levels achievable by best practicable
control technology. Crown Zellerbach is scheduled to provide additional
treatment by the end of 1973.
Tillie Lewis Foods, Inc., Antioch — This is a seasonal cannery
operation processing only tomatoes. The production capacity and length
of the canning season are unknown. (The plant is located on the west
edge of Antioch.)
All wastes (12 mgd) are discharged through a single outfall to a
small slough about 100 feet from the San Joaquin River. Caustic rinse
waters are neutralized before their discharge. All wastes are screened.
The effluent is monitored and the pH adjusted as necessary to meet State
waste discharge requirements. As indicated [Table VI-11], waste concen-
trations are strong and far exceed effluent levels attainable by best
practicable control technology.
This source is scheduled to provide improved treatment to meet new
State waste discharge requirements by July 1973.
Fibreboard Corporation, Plant No. 2^ — The Fibreboard Corporation
operates a paperboard mill in west Antioch, adjacent to Tillie Lewis
Foods. The mill uses about 110 tons of waste paper fiber per day to
produce boxboard, paperboard, folding boxboard, linerboard, and new board.
The plant effluent (4.8 mgd) is discharged, through a surface outfall,
to the same unnamed slough receiving the Tillie Lewis effluent. The ef-
fluent is screened, filtered by vacuum filters, and neutralized before
discharge.
-------
VI-72
Waste loads discharged [Table VI-10] are far in excess of effluent
levels achievable with best practical control technology. This plant might
close rather than install additonal treatment facilities.
Hickmott Foods, Inc., Antioch — A seasonal cannery is operated by
this corporation in Antioch on the San Joaquin River. The cannery pro-
cesses both tomatoes (90-day season) and asparagus (70-day season). During
the seasons the plant processes about 500 tons per day of tomatoes and
50 tons per day of asparagus.
Wastes are discharged from the cannery to the San Joaquin River through
three outfalls. The largest volume (1.3 mgd) of process wastes is dis-
charged through Outfall 001. This waste receives screening, pH control,
and chlorination. A small volume of process wastes (0.2 mgd) is discharged
through Outfall 002, with the same treatment as waste stream 001. Cooling
water (0.7 mgd) is discharged through Outfall 003. All three outfalls are
used during tomato-canning operations, while only Outfall 001 is used during
asparagus canning.
These canning wastes are not receiving best practicable control and
waste loads, as a result, are excessive.
E_. !_. duPont deNemours ^ Co. , Inc. , Antioch — The Antioch Works is
engaged in the manufacture of titanium dioxide pigments, tetraethyl lead
(about 135 tons/day), and Freon (approx. 37 tons/day).
Process wastes (1.3 mgd) are discharged through a 200-foot outfall
to the San Joaquin River, just upstream of the Antioch Bridge. The waste
stream is neutralized and treated for clarification and solids removal.
-------
VI-73
Extensive use is made of recirculation and settling ponds. The effluent
pH is automatically controlled. About 700 to 1200 Ib/day of organic
liquids are disposed of by deep-well injection, 6000 feet undergound.
Discharges of COD, chromium, lead and sulfate [Table VI-10] are in
excess of levels achievable by best practicable control technology.
Kaiser Gypsum Company, Antioch — The Kaiser Antioch Plant manufactures
gypsum wallboard. The only waste from this operation discharged to the San
Joaquin River is a wet scrubber effluent (0.5 mgd) containing gypsum dust.
In early 1972 a cooling tower was installed in order to cool this dis-
charge. The suspended solids concentrations in this effluent are exces-
sive [Table VI-10].
Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Pittsburg — The Pittsburg Power
Plant is the largest thermal-electric generating plant in the Bay area.
Currently on line are six generating units with a capacity of 1,340 raw.
A seventh unit, with a generating capacity of 750 mw, is under construction,
with completion scheduled for late 1972. The existing discharge from once-
through cooling is about 1050 mgd. The temperature rise above ambient
is about 15°-17°F.
The seventh unit was originally scheduled to have once-through cooling
(500 mgd) also, but has been modified to a semi-closed cooling system
using about 50 mgd of cooling water.
Infra-red imagery of this discharge, during July, showed that the
thermal plume above ambient water temperature extended for 800 feet in
and 2500 feet in length.
-------
VI-74
Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Antioch — The Contra Costa Power
Plant is comparable in size to the existing Pittsburg plant. Its seven
units have a generating capacity of 1260 mw. The cooling water discharge
averages about 970 mgd.
Infra-red imagery of this discharge, taken in July 1972, showed that
the thermal plume extends for about 900 feet offshore and 3500 feet in
length.
E. FEDERAL INSTALLATIONS
With the exception of a single source, the volume of all waste dis-
charges from Federal installations is two mgd or less. Collectively,
eleven Federal installations [Table VI-12] discharge, to the San Francisco
Bay system, 21.9 mgd. Of that total wastewater, 16.3 mgd is identified
as industrial discharges and 5.6 mgd as domestic discharges-. Among the
major constituents comprising the wastewater are: 1,700 Ib/day of BOD;
1,500 Ib/day of COD; 1,700 Ib/day of suspended solids; and an undetermined
amount of oil and grease.
The largest discharges among the Federal installations are: Mare
Island Naval Shipyard, Vallejo, with a 16.0 mgd industrial discharge and
1.5 mgd domestic discharge; and Travis Air Force Base with a 1.55 mgd
domestic discharge. Of the twelve wastestreams from eleven Federal
installations, five do not receive any treatment, five receive primary
treatment, and two secondary treatment.
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 require
that Federal installations must meet the same requirements as other point
-------
VI-75
TABLE VI-12
WASTE DISCHARGES FROM FEDERAL FACILITIES
Map
Key
F-l
F-2
F-3
F-4
F-5
F-6
F-7
F-8
F-9
F-10
F-ll
Zone
5
4
7
3
5
5
7
3
3
5
1
Discharger
Mare Island Naval Shipyard
Power Plant
Municipal
U. S. Navy - Treasure Island
Treatment
None
Primary
Secondary
Travis Air Force Base Primary and
Stabilization Pond
Alameda Naval Air Station
Hamilton Air Force Base
Naval Security Group Activity,
Skaggs Island
U. S. Naval Weapons Station-Concord
U. S. Navy - Yerba Buena Island
Hunters Point Naval Shipyard-Industrial
Naval Fuel Department, Point Mo late,
Richmond
Moffett Field Naval Air Station,
Mountain View - Industrial
None
Secondary
Primary
None
Primary
None
Primary
None
Flow
(mgd)
16.0
1.5
2.0
1.55
0.3
0.3
0.15
0.07
0.02
0.012
0.006
0.004
21.912 mgd
-------
VI-76
sources of pollution. Thus, all domestic sewage discharges must receive
secondary treatment by July 1977. All industrial waste discharges must
receive the best practicable control technology currently available by
the same date. If industrial wastes are discharged to publicly owned
treatment facilities, pre-treatment of such wastes could be required.
Mare Island Naval Shipyard, Vallejo
Domestic wastes (1.5 mgd) presently receive primary treatment before
discharge to Mare Island Strait. During wet weather raw domestic wastewater
frequently is discharged. Industrial wastes from ship repairing operations;
including acids, alkalis, heavy metals, cyanides, and phenolic materials;
are discharged, without treatment, to the Strait. Oil from cleaning rail
and truck tank cars and oil spills from transfer operations are discharged
without treatment. In addition, 16.0 mgd of power-plant cooling water is
discharged.
Proposed abatement measures include separation of storm and sanitary
sewers in order to eliminate the overflow of domestic wastes to Mare
Island Strait. The domestic wastes will be routed to the Vallejo muni-
cipal treatment system. Proposed measures for treatment of the industrial
wastes include collection, pretreatment, and eventual connection to the
Vallejo system.
Completion of the industrial-waste collection system and of the
domestic waste connection to the Vallejo municipal system are scheduled
for fiscal year 1974.
Naval Station, Treasure Island, San Francisco
Domestic wastewater (approximately 2.0 mgd) from a secondary treatment
-------
VI-77
plant is discharged to Central San Francisco Bay through an outfall 65 feet
below the bay surface. The plant is currently operating at its design
capacity (2.0 mgd). Industrial wastewater from the washing and sterilizing
of garbage cans is discharged to Central San Francisco Bay through storm
drains.
Travis Air Force Base - Solano County
Domestic wastes are collected from housing, administrative opera-
tional, maintenance, and recreational areas. Non-domestic wastes include
irrigation and cooling water, aircraft and vehicle wash waters, occasional
formaldehyde wastes from aircraft disinfection stations, and waste oils
from maintenance areas.
The base has a separate sanitary and storm sewer system. Domestic
wastes (except those discharging to septic tanks) are connected by sanitary
sewers to one of two sewage treatment plants. The storm sewer system
carries off irrigation wastewater, cooling waters, and storm runoff.
Vehicle- and aircraft-wash waters are primarily carried by the storm
system directly to Union Creek. Wash waters from Strategic Air Command
(SAC) and Military Airlift Command (MAC) washracks pass through oil sep-
arators before discharge to the storm sewer system. The base fire depart-
ments collect and burn waste oils from maintenance areas.
Domestic waste is presently being treated at one of two plants lo-
cated on the base. Wastewater Treatment Plant No. 1 has a design capacity
of 2.5 mgd. The average daily flow to the plant is 1.5 mgd, with a maxi-
mum of 2.6 mgd and a minimum of 1.3 mgd. Treatment provided is screening,
primary sedimentation (with continuous sludge and scum removal to separate
-------
VI-78
digesters in series), sludge-drying beds and stabilization ponds. Ef-
fluent is discharged to Union Creek. Wastewater Treatment Plant No. 2
has a design capacity of 0.07 mgd and is presently treating an average
flow of 0.05 mgd. Treatment units at this plant consist of a manually
cleaned bar screen, Imhoff tank, biofilter, secondary sedimentation tank,
and sludge-drying beds.
Naval Air Station Alameda, Alameda
The Station discharges untreated industrial wastes (0.3 mgd) containing
acids; alkalis; heavy metals; cyanides; paint stripping; filter backwash
(from swimming pool and cooling tower bleed off) ; boiler blowdown; and soft-
water, de-alkalizer wastes. In addition, deficiencies in septic tanks
allow for the discharge of inadequately treated wastewater. There is
minor treatment provided for source wastes in order to remove free oil
and sludge before discharge. Removal of concentrated solutions of oils
and solvents is accomplished by a hauling contractor. Proposed abatement
actions call for an industrial waste treatment plant and collection
system which has been designed; construction is planned in fiscal year
1973. When completed in mid-1973, the proposed system will discharge
the pretreated industrial wastes into the East Bay MUD System. This con-
struction will eliminate all industrial discharges from NAS Alameda into
bay waters.
Hamilton Air Force Base (Near Novato)
The base discharges an average of about 0.3 mgd of Industrial and
municipal wastewater. The industrial waste plant provides pretreatment
by removing gasoline and oils and by neutralizing acids with the addition
-------
VI-79
of lime. The effluent of this plant is sent to the domestic plant for
further treatment. The domestic plant provides secondary treatment for
the base's domestic wastes and pretreated industrial wastes. The plant,
of a trickling filter design, has an outfall discharging to San Pablo Bay.
Naval Security Group Activity, Skaggs Island
The Skaggs Island facility discharges approximately 0.15 mgd of
domestic wastewater. This waste is treated in a primary treatment plant
that discharges at several locations to the Napa and Second Napa sloughs.
One septic tank discharges to a leaching field.
Proposed measures for improving this treatment include construction
of an oxidation evaporation pond system that will remove essentially all
BOD and suspended solids. Completion of this project is scheduled for
fiscal 1973.
Naval Weapons Station, Concord
The station discharges 0.07 mgd of primary treated and untreated
domestic waste. In addition, unknown amounts of boiler blowdown, cooling
tower blowdown, and steam cleaning water are discharged. Existing treat-
ment consists of septic tanks for 5,000 gallons per day of the domestic
waste. All other waste is untreated.
Proposed measures call for a sewage collection system with all wastes
pumped to the Contra Costa County Sanitation District sewerage system for
treatment and final discharge. The proposed schedule stipulates that con-
nection of the domestic waste be completed during fiscal 1973 and of the
industrial waste, during fiscal 1974.
-------
VI-80
U.* S^. Navy, Yerba Buena Island
Approximately 0.02 mgd of domestic wastes are treated through a pri-
mary treatment plant. The plant consists of an Imhoff tank and chlorina-
tion facility. About 35 percent of the BOD and 45 percent of the suspended
solids are removed prior to discharge.
Hunters Point Naval Shipyard
The shipyard discharges most of its domestic and industrial waste to
the City of San Francisco municipal system. Rinse water (12,000 gallons/day)
from a metal plating shop and battery overhaul shop is the only direct
discharge to the bay. Future treatment proposals for this effluent have
not been made available.
Naval Fuel Department Point Molate, Richmond
Unchlorinated primary effluent from the Point Molate wastewater
treatment facility is discharged to San Francisco Bay through an outfall
terminating at the low water level. Raw sewage from restrooms (serving
6-8 men) on the pier discharges directly to the bay. In the event of
major spillage, or rupture of tanks or fuel lines, fuel can flow directly
into San Francisco Bay at Point Molate. Pollution is also caused by
spillage of oil to San Francisco Bay during fuel- or balast-transfer
operations.
The discharge (0.006 mgd) from the station sewer is currently treated
in an Imhoff tank (design capacity 0.002 mgd). The treatment achieves
about 35 percent reduction in BOD and 55 percent reduction in suspended
solids. There is no disinfection. Spills are now handled by commercial
contractor, and the cost is often excessive. Proposed remedial measures
-------
VI-81
are to replace the Imhoff tank with a package plant, incorporating ad-
vanced treatment processes for production of a high quality effluent. It
is planned to lengthen the outfall. A diked catch basin will be con-
structed to contain oil spills. Also for spillage during oil transfer
operations, an oil recovery pipeline and accessories linking a suction
type oil skimming apparatus will be provided. Existing piping will con-
vey the skimmer discharge to existing storage and clarification facilities,
Moffett Field Naval Air Station, Mountain View
Moffett Field generates industrial wastewater from hobby shop wash-
racks (automobile), boiler blowdown, and swimming pool filter backwash.
These sources except for one washrack have been connected, together with
all base domestic waste, to the City of Sunnyvale Municipal plant. There-
fore essentially all discharge of wastes to the bay have been eliminated.
Connection of the remaining washrack (4,000 gpd) to the sanitary system
is in the planning stage.
F. COMBINED SEWER OVERFLOWS
Initially, the older urban developments in the bay area were usually
served by combined sewer systems that were used to convey both domestic
sewage and storm runoff directly to San Francisco Bay. The largest com-
bined sewer systems were found in San Francisco, Oakland, and Berkeley.
Extensive programs have been undertaken in order to separate storm and
sanitary sewers. San Francisco still has large areas served by combined
sewers. Minor areas of Oakland and other East Bay cities are also served
by combined sewers. In addition, storm water infiltration is a problem
in older sanitary sewer systems in a number of cities in the area.
-------
VI-82
Normal operation of a combined sewer system, during dry weather
periods, provides for interception and treatment of all waste flows.
During wet weather periods combined sewage flows, in excess of treatment
plant capacity, are normally by-passed directly to the receiving waters.
Combined sewage during the early stages of storm runoff may have character-
istics comparable to domestic sewage. Thus, the combined sewer overflows
can have an impact on receving waters comparable to raw-sewage by-passes.
In the Bay system, the water quality characterisitics most affected
are coliform bacteria levels and concentrations of oil and grease and
other floatable materials. Combined sewer overflows are a major source
of high bacterial levels observed during wet weather periods. Floating
materials including oil and grease discharged by combined sewers cause
unsightly conditions over large areas following periods of storm runoff.
An extensive study of storm water induced problems in the sanitary
sewer system serving the East Bay Municipal Utility District was made
during the 1968-69 rainy season.— The EBMUD is an area of about 51,400
acres encompassing the cities of Alameda, Albany, Berkeley, Emeryville,
Oakland, and Piedmont. About four percent of the area is still served by
combined sewers, primarily in Oakland and Berkeley. The entire dryweather
flow from the District is treated in the EBMUD primary treatment plant.
During the 1968-69 rainy season it was estimated that about one-
third of the increased flow in the sanitary sewer system, attributed to
storm water infiltration, originated in the small area of combined sewers.
The remaining increase in flow was attributed to infiltration of storm
water throughout the system with the heaviest infiltration occurring in
old sewer sections.
-------
VI-83
A number of problems result from the increased sewage flow during
storms. Some sewers become overloaded and overflow at manholes, causing
public health hazards. In other cases, relief devices by-pass sewage to
the storm sewer system or directly to the Bay. By-passing also occurs at
the EBMUD treatment plant. Because the storm water carries a heavy load
of silt and grease, operational difficulties are encountered at the
treatment facility.
During the 1968-69 rainy season, bypasses at the EBMUD treatment
plant occurred for a total of 186 hours with an estimated 1,300 million
gallons by-passed. Overflows at other points in the system resulted in
the discharge of an estimated 1,030 million gallons.
With the use of water quality simulation models, the effects of the
EBMUD overflows on water quality in Zones 3 and 4 were estimated.— Oil
and grease in excess of allowable limits would persist for two to six
days following a major storm event and would affect about 22 square miles
of the Bay. Violations of applicable bacterial limits would occur for
23 days per year in Zones 3 and 4 as a result of the EBMUD sewer over-
flows alone. Some depressions of DO levels below allowable limits would
also occur in the vicinity of overflow points.
Improvements of sewers in order to reduce infiltration and increase
capacity and the treatment of system overflows prior to discharge to the
Bay were recommended solutions to the EBMUD stormwater problem. Such
improvements and facilities would cost an estimated $50 million.—
Similar, combined sewer problems occur in San Francisco. Owing to
the large area served by combined sewers, the problems are of a larger
scale than those encountered in the EBMUD and water quality impacts more
-------
VI-84
severe. The San Francisco treatment plants were designed to process
approximately three times the average dry weather flow. Therefore, by-
passing and combined sewer overflow would occur when a precipitation
greater than just a light rain occurred. This would result in raw sewage
and storm water overflows from 40 outfalls which discharge into the Bay
and Pacific Ocean.
A study of the San Francisco system, completed in 1967, concluded
that separation of storm and sanitary sewers would not substantially
reduce pollution from storm runoff.— The most effective means of
abating this pollution was determined to be treatment of combined sewer
overflows using the dissolved air flotation process, followed by chlori-
nation. A demonstration project employing this treatment process was
initiated in 1970. The project results and current estimates of costs
for abatement of pollution from combined sewers in San Francisco are not
available.
A recent study prepared by the San Francisco Department of Public
Works in 1971 revealed the magnitude of the problem and recommended a
solution.— Currently, during an average year, combined sewer overflow
occurs 82 times for a total of 205 hours, with a total volume of 6 billion
gallons. The study indicates that such overflow causes the emission of
42 million pounds of suspended solids, 11 million pounds of grease, and
nearly 5 million pounds of phosphates.
As a solution to the problem of wet weather by-passing, the Master
Plan recommended an extensive construction program consisting of four
major components:
-------
VI-85
1. A new 15-ft. diameter, five-mile-long outfall to the Pacific
Ocean, offshore of Fort Funston.
2. A new 1000 mgd treatment plant, westerly of Lake Merced,
for wet weather treatment.
3. A system of inland and shoreline underground retention
basins to retain the combined flow for subsequent treatment.
4. A tunnel transport and storage system to provide the option
of intercepting, storing and transporting flow to the new
treatment plant.
The Board of Supervisors must decide on the design overflow frequency.
This in turn will determine the cost of the project that has been esti-
mated, in 1974 dollars, at from $395 million for eight overflows per year
to $864 million for one overflow in five years.
G. DREDGING ACTIVITIES
A total of about 14 million cubic yards of sediments have been de-
posited in the San Francisco Bay system during the past century. An addi-
tional seven million cubic yards enter the estuary annually- Most of
these sediments are carried on through the estuary to the Pacific Ocean
by tidal flows. Significant volumes of the incoming sediments are de-
posited in the estuary, however, and, in combination with movement of
sediments already in the estuary, cause shoaling of navigable channels.
Dredging of navigational channels to maintain suitable water depths,
in combination with construction of new channels, results in the excavation
and transfer of about 7 to 11 million cubic yards of sediments annually-
Both the dredging activities and the disposal of the excavated material
-------
VI-86
(spoil) can cause pollution problems.
The excavation of bottom materials results in the suspension of
finer sediments in the waters surrounding the dredging activities.
Increased turbidity can result, causing aesthetic problems. More impor-
tantly, pollutants trapped in the sediments can be released into over-
lying waters resulting in water-quality degradation. Suspended sediments
can be transported substantial distances before settling out. If the
volume of sediments is large, blanketing of bottom areas with adverse
effects on the benthos can result.
In the San Francisco Bay area, spoil from dredging activities is
disposed of in three ways: 1) barged to the open ocean and dumped,
2) used for landfill, and 3) dumped at one of six designated spoil dis-
posal areas in the Bay system. Both the ocean and bay disposal of spoil
can produce water quality problems as a result of suspension of sediments
and disperson of pollutants.
EPA has developed guidelines for disposal of spoil in estuarine
areas.— These guidelines specify limits on various pollutants that must
be met if the spoil is discharged to water areas. Much of the sediment
dredged from San Francisco Bay areas will not meet these limits, thus
necessitating higher cost land or ocean disposal. The EPA guidelines are
currently undergoing review to determine whether regional revision of the
criteria is necessary in order to minimize the economic impact on dredging
activities while providing adequate protection of water quality in spoil
disposal areas.
-------
VII. IMPACT OF POLLUTION ON WATER USES
A. COMMERCIAL SHELLFISH HARVESTING
The State of California Regional Water Quality Control Board has
designated propagation and harvesting of shellfish a beneficial use to
be protected in the San Francisco Bay system.— This beneficial use is
impaired, to a major degree, by water pollution resulting from the dis-
charge, to the bay system, of inadequately treated municipal and indus-
trial wastes, by combined sewer overflows, by urban runoff, and by
dredging, landfill, and spoil disposal practices.
A century ago, a major commercial shellfishing industry was centered
on San Francisco Bay. Harvests of oysters and clams reached a peak in
the 1890's and then declined sharply after 1900. Presently, this industry
is non-existent. Water pollution, resulting primarily from discharges
of untreated sewage, has been the most important cause of the elimination
G/
of shellfish harvesting from the Bay system.—
If existing water quality constraints are eliminated, the potential
exists for reestablishment of a major shellfishery in the Bay. Although
illegal — owing to the closure of shellfish beds because of bacterial
contamination, some harvesting of shellfish, by individuals, for food
presently occurs. A sizeable standing crop of clams and native oysters
is present in the bay system. Research has shown that Pacific and Eastern
oysters can be grown using modern cultural methods.
The following sections discuss the history, present status, and
potential development of the oyster and clam fisheries in the bay system
and the estimated economic impact of pollution on the shellfish industry-
-------
VII-2
Oyster Fishery
History — The native western oyster (.Ostrea luridd) was present in
San Francisco Bay in prodigious quantities before the 1890's, and clams
and mussels were plentiful, too. Extensive beds of the oysters were
located in shallow areas along the west side of the South Bay. The extent
to which the shell deposits were built up by the native oysters is re-
flected by the more than 50 million cubic yards of shell that have been
dredged from the bay over the past 30 years; an estimated 75 million cubic
yards still remain in the bay.
The native oyster was exploited commercially by simply harvesting
oysters from the natural beds. No attempt at oyster culture was made.
The introduction of other commercially important oyster species combined
with destruction of oyster beds by siltation and pollution rapidly de-
creased the importance of the native oyster. Since 1945, there has been
V/
little or no commercial harvest of the native oyster in California.—
In 1869, the eastern oyster (Crassostrea virginica) was introduced
to San Francisco Bay. This oyster thrived under culture and provided a
major source of oysters during the next 30 years. The method of culture
was simple. Seed oysters (spat) were imported from East-coast locations.
The spat attached to shell pieces were set out in suitable beds and allow-
ed to reach market size. The adult oysters were then harvested by hand.
The first commercial beds were located at Sausalito, Point San
227
Quentin, Sheep Island, Oakland Creek, and Alameda Creek.— These beds
were soon abandoned owing to bacterial contamination or adverse physical
conditions and, by 1875, all beds were located only in the southern portions
-------
VI1-3
227
of San Francisco Bay.— [Historical locations of commercial oyster beds
are shown in Figure VII-1.] The Oakland and Alameda Creek beds were
22/
abandoned because of sewage and traffic on the bay-,— The Alvarado beds
were abandoned because of adverse hydrographic conditions.
Between 1880 and 1900 the culture of eastern oysters in San Francisco
Bay and the importing of seed oysters from the East Coast was a million-
dollar-a-year business. During the 1890's the oyster industry of San
Francisco Bay was the single most valuable fishery in California. Records
of oyster harvests during this peak period are incomplete and conflicting,
but they do provide an idea of the major oyster production then existing.
Between the years 1888 and 1895 the annual oyster production (whole oysters
including shells) was estimated to range from 9 to 15 million pounds, with
20 /
a value of 500 to 700 thousand dollars.— Other records of oyster har-
vests (meats only) indicated that a peak production of 3,060,000 pounds
227
of oyster meat, valued at $867,000, was reached in 1899.— During the
1887 to 1895 period imports of seed oysters ranged from 1.0 to 3.3 million
pounds annually. Most of the oyster harvest was obtained from commercial
237
beds, totalling 3,000 to 4,000 acres in area.—
About 1900 in the southern end of San Francisco Bay, unknown events
caused a radical change that adversely affected the growth rate and
market condition of oysters grown there. Pollution also affected condi-
tions in much of the bay. The choicest oyster growing locations were
heavily contaminated, yielding oysters of poor quality. As a result, the
oyster industry was short-lived. By 1908, oyster production had decreased
237
95 percent from reported landings in 1892.—
-------
San -Francisco Bay
Oyster Beds
E=DE3Fenced Oyster Beds, 1851-1869
M3 Fenced Oysier Beds, 1870-19 10
Oyster House
© Shellmound
? Precise Location ot Bed Unknown
Figure VII-1. Historic Commercial Shellfish Bed Locations
-------
VII-4
Attempts were made to grow eastern oysters in other California
waters, but met with little success. Shellfish harvests in California
continued a long decline until 1931, when the pacific oyster (Crassostrea
gigas) was imported from Japan. Commercial beds were successfully estab-
lished in Bodega Lagoon, Tomales Bay, and Drakes Estero, small bays on
the coast a short distance north of San Francisco Bay. Culture of the
Pacific oyster was also successful in coastal Humboldt and Morro Bays.
Pacific oysters were not cultured in San Francisco Bay, owing to the
water pollution still being present.
The culture of Pacific oysters revived the California oyster industry
and statewide landings steadily increased except during and immediately
after World War II when imports of seed oysters from Japan were stopped.
At the same time the San Francisco Bay oyster fishery steadily declined
and is, at present, non-existent.
Present Status — A survey of the intertidal zone of the Bay system
in 1967 located 42 shellfish beds containing sizeable standing crops of
247
shellfish.— Native oysters were present in half these beds and numerous
at 11 locations. Five beds contained an abundance of native oysters. No
recent survey has been made of the distribution and populations of native
oysters in areas of the bay lying below low tide elevation.
Eastern and Pacific oysters do not spawn well in the bay system
because water temperatures are unfavorable. These oysters are thus
rarely found except where artifically cultured.
There are no existing commercial oyster beds in the bay system. A
state allotment, for oyster cultural purposes, of 3,000 acreas in San
-------
VII-5
Pablo Bay, was held by an oyster company during the 1960's, but was
abandoned without development. Oystermen express an interest in devel-
oping an oyster fishery in the bay system if restrictions on harvesting
are lifted.-'
Since 1960 the State Department of Fish and Game has been conducting
studies of the rack culture of Eastern and Pacific oysters in Redwood
Creek (in southern San Francisco Bay). The Leslie Salt Company also
experimented with oyster culture in the same area. These studies indi-
cated favorable growth rates can be achieved under present water quality
conditions.
All of the bay system is closed to commercial harvesting of shell-
fish for human consumption because of the bacterial contamination of
shellfish growing areas. In addition, the State Department of Health has
recommended, to local health departments, the posting of most known shell-
fish beds in order to prevent sport harvesting of shellfish for human con-
sumption. A number of beds have been posted. In spite of these prohibi-
tions and postings, illegal harvesting of shellfish has been observed.
In most cases, the shellfish taken were clams; the extent of illegal
harvesting of native oysters is unknown. The State of California Depart-
ment of Health studies have shown that shellfish from many of the beds
are contaminated with bacteria, and, in some cases, with heavy metals and
25/
pesticides, to a degree that poses a health hazard to human consumption.—
Studies, conducted during 1969 and 1970 by the State Department of
Health, showed that, in several limited areas, bacterial concentrations
in waters overlying shellfish beds met applicable limits for "Approved"
-------
VII-6
25 2fi/
or "Conditionally Approved" shellfish harvesting areas.—'— In most
cases, however, shellfish taken from these beds had unacceptable levels
of bacterial contamination. Waste disposal and disinfection practices
at nearby municipal waste sources were also found to be inadequate for
guaranteeing the continued safety of shellfish harvesting, even if
acceptable water quality existed over the beds. Thus, improvement in
both water quality conditions and waste disposal practices will be needed
before acceptable conditions will exist for approval of any shellfish
harvesting areas.
Potential Development — In view of the physical conditions of the
bay system and of the capability for high oyster production that has been
demonstrated in the past, it is possible that an oyster fishery of excep-
tional proportions could be developed using rack culture techniques.
About 175,000 acres of the bay system are potential oyster grounds, based
26 /
on physical conditions.— In the past about 3,000 to 4,000 acres of
oyster beds were commercially maintained. Thus, development of at least
4,000 acres of oyster beds in the bay system would appear to be readily
achievable.
During the 1890's, oyster production was in the range of 2,500 to
267
5,000 pounds of oysters per acre per year.— This corresponds to an
oyster meat production of 400 to 750 pounds per acre. From 1958 to 1967
oyster meat production in California averaged about one million pounds
annually. If it is assumed that this harvest was taken from the 4,400
acres of registered shellfish areas, the average oyster meat production
was about 230 pounds per acre. This compares favorably with a California
-------
VII-7
Department of Fish and Game estimate of yields of 150 to 300 pounds per
27 /
acre for culture of Pacific oysters.— The oysters harvested in the
1890's were eastern oysters, while recent harvests in California were
primarily Pacific oysters.
A yield of 250 pounds of oyster meat per acre, from 4,000 acres,
would produce an annual harvest of about 1 million pounds of oyster meat.
Thus San Francisco Bay has the potential to match or exceed the oyster
production of all other California growing areas combined.
The oyster production figures just mentioned are based on bottom
culture methods historically used in San Francisco Bay. Modern rack
culture methods hold the promise of even greater production levels. State
Department of Fish and Game biologists have estimated that it would be
possible to produce, using rack culture for about 80 percent of the pro-
28 /
duction,— a total of about 13 millions pounds of oyster meat annually
from the bay system. About 70 percent of the oysters would be grown in the
southern portions of San Francisco Bay and the remainder in San Pablo Bay.
Clam Fishery
History — The early shellfish fauna of the Bay system was extensive,
but few species were of commercial importance. The most common edible
species was the bent-nose clam (Maooma nasuta). Large quantities of
these clams were probably dug from the South Bay for the market prior
to 1876. ^J
The soft-shelled clam was accidentally introduced in oyster shipments
about 1870. It soon displaced some native species and became widely dis-
tributed. It is an excellent food clam and formed the bulk of the San
-------
VJ.J.-0
Francisco clam trade. The mud flats of San Pablo Bay and the southern
portions of San Francisco Bay were particularly favorable locations.
Harvests of clams from the bay system exhibited the same rise and
fall as did oyster fishery. Between 1880 and 1900 clam production ranged
between one and three million pounds annually, the highest production
237
recorded. — After 1900 clam production decreased sharply. Pollution
and excessive digging contributed to this decline. Between 1916 and 1935
the annual commercial harvest ranged from 100 to 300 thousand pounds.
The production continued to decline after 1935 and, after 1949, was
essentially zero.
Present Status — A survey of the intertidal zone of the Bay system
in 1967 located 42 definable shellfish beds containing sizeable standing
247
crops of clams. — [Bed locations and clam populations observed in 1967
are summarized in Table VII-1. Bed locations are shown in Figure V-3.]
In addition to the 42 beds, clams were found scattered throughout most
of the intertidal zone. Sizeable clam populations are also believed to
exist in areas below low tide elevation, although no recent surveys of
these areas have been made.
A total of 19 of the 42 beds identified in 1967 were re-surveyed in
early 1972 in order to evaluate possible changes in the size and number
of clams present [Appendix C] . Fifteen of the 19 beds were found to have
significantly smaller total weights of clams than in 1967 Shellfish beds
surveyed and associated changes in clam populations have been summarized
[Appendix C, Table C-3]. The beds that were re-surveyed were the larger
beds with the some potential for commercial or sport shellfishing. Small
-------
TABLE VII-1
SUMMARY OF SHELLFISH BED CHARACTERISTICS
Bad
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Area
Location (1,000 ft2!
Candlestick Point
Bayview Park, northeast of
Bayview Park
Bayshore, to the east of
Visitation Valley, to the east of
Brisbane, to the east of
Oyster Point
Point San Bruno, South Side
Burlingame
Coyote Point, north of
Coyote Point, south of
San Mateo Creek
West end of San Mateo Bridge
Foster City
Redwood City
0.5
0.2
19.0
1.5
15.5
5.4
0.6
17.9
250.0
102.6
78.0
1.0
1.2
799.0
18.0
Shel
) Clams
small
small
medium
small
small
small
small
medium
large
large
medium
small
small
large
small
Ifish Peculations^/
Oysters
present
present
--
--
present
numerous
numerous
numerous
numerous
large
numerous
(Old Commercial Bed)
--
present
(Old Commercial Bed)
numerous
(Experimental Culture area)
Present
Uses
bait
bait
bait
minor bait
minor bait
fish food
minor bait
minor bait
fish food
bait and sport
bait and sport
fish food
minor bait
minor bait
fish food
Potential
Uses
fully utilized
bait
—
bait
bait
bait and sport
bait
bait and sport
commercial bait,
sport shell fishing
bait and sport
bait and sport
bait
limited sport
bait and major
sport
bait and minor
sport
Limiting Factors
—
~
Storm drainage and sewer
overflows
--
Access, bacterial contamin-
ation
Access
Municipal and Industrial
Wastes. Bacterial con-
tamination
Bacterial Contamination. Most
of area recently filled.
Bacterial Contamination.
Bacterial Contamination.
Municipal Wastes.
Municipal Wastes.
Municipal Wastes. [
Bacterial Contamination. '
Municipal Wastes.
Bacterial Contamination. %
Oil Spills.
M
—I
I
VO
-------
TABLE VII-1 (CONTINUED)
SUMMARY OF SHELLFISH BED CHARACTERISTICS
Bad
Nq.
1*
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
Area
Location (1,000 ft2]
Dumbarton Bridge, west end of
Dumbarton Bridge, east side of
San Leandro Marina
Oakland Airport
San Leandro Bay
Alameda Island, southwest corner
Alameda Memorial State Beach
Oakland Inner Harbor, foot of
Alice Street
Emeryville, foot of Ashby Ave.
Berkeley, foot of Bancroft Way
Berkeley, foot of University Ave.
Albany Hill 3
Point Isabel, north of
Point Richmond
1.9
7.2
41.4
84.0
100.8
7.2
17.4
39.0
1.6
22.8
0.8
,780.0
1.1
90.0
Shellfish Populations^/
) Clams
small
medium.
large
small
large
medium
medium
large
small
medium
small
large
small
medium
Oys ters
--
--
--
large
(Major Native Oyster Bed)
numerous
(Old Commercial Bed)
present
numerous
present
present
present
—
numerous
present
Present
Uses
minor bait
fish food
bait
fish food
bait and sport
bait
bait and sport
—
bait
bait
bait and sport
fish food
fish food
minor bait
Potential
Uses Limiting Factors
bait
bait and minor Bacterial Contamination.
sport
commercial bait
bait and sport Bacterial Contamination.
commercial oyster Municipal Wastes.
culturing Dredging Sediment Blanket.
commercial bait Municipal and Industrial
Wastes, Bacterial Con-
tamination.
bait and sport Bacterial Contamination.
major sport Bacterial Contamination.
—
bait
bait
bait and minor Bacterial Contamination.
sport
commercial bait Bacterial Contamination.
-------
TABLE VII-1 (CONTINUED)
SUMMARY OF SHELLFISH BED CHARACTERISTICS
Bed
No. Location (1
30 Castro Point, Molate Point,
Point Orient, & Point San Pablo
Area „
,000 ft*)
128.4
31 Point Pinole, north side unknown
32 Tara Hills
33 Between Tara Hills & Pinole Beds
34 Pinole
35 Rodeo
36 Gallinas Creek, south of
37 Area between Gallinas Creek &
Rat Rock
38 Rat Rock Area
39 San Rafael Bay
40 San Quentin
41 Strawberry Point, west side of
42 Richardson Bay, north end of
Highway 101 Bridge
48.0
(Old
61.5
60.0
5.0
2.3
1.1
2.0
25.0
9.6
28.8
12.0
Shellfish Populations!/
Clams Oysters
medium numerous
unknown unknown
large
Commercial Bed)
medium
large
small dead
small
small
small
large numerous
large
medium present
medium
Present
Uses
fish food
unknown
sport
--
fish food
—
fish food
unknown
bait
unknown
unknown
bait and sport
unknown
Potential
Uses
bait and soort
unknown
sport
—
bait
unknown
bait
unknown
bait
unknown
unknown
major sport
unknown
-Population Legend
Small - Less than 50,000 clams
Medium - 50,000 to 200,000 clams
Large - More than 200,000 clams
Present - Live native oysters present
Limiting Factors
Bacterial Contamination.
Access.
Bacterial Contamination.
Municipal Wastes.
--
Bacterial Contamination.
Municipal Wastes.
Municipal and Industrial
Pollution.
Municipal Wastes.
—
—
Access
~
Bacterial Contamination.
M
H
1
I-1
~¥
- More th?n 5 native ovsters per square foot on rocks and other siiltaMp
-------
VII-12
beds as well as beds located near sewage outfalls were not re-surveyed.
The Point San Bruno Bed was also not surveyed for this bed has been
essentially completely destroyed by landfill. As measured by changes in
the standing crop of legal harvest size clams, the total clam resource,
in the 19 beds evaluated, decreased by about 42 percent. With the loss
of the Point San Bruno Bed, it is probable that the clam resource in
San Francisco Bay has been depleted by about half in the past five years.
Present use of the clam fishery is primarily for fish bait [Table
VII-1] , although some sport shellfishing takes place. As previously
discussed in the section on oysters, such harvesting of clams for human
consumption is illegal for it poses a health hazard to the consumer.
Potential Development — Should public health restrictions be lifted,
the present clam fishery is not considered adequate to support any signi-
ficant commercial harvesting for human consumption. Substantial habitat
improvement would be required to maintain a commercially harvestable clam
population. The cost of such improvements could likely make commercial
development uneconomical.
Based on the 1967 survey are the estimates that the clam fishery
24/
could support more than 400,000 man-days of sport shellfishing. — The
1972 re-survey indicates that the present clam fishery would support
only about half this much sport fishing [Appendix C, Table C-3] . This
sport fishing would include the taking of clams for both fish bait and
human consumption. The primary reason presently limiting full use of
the clam resource is bacterial contamination of growing areas. Several
9 / /
beds could potentially support a commercial fish bait operation. —
-------
Reductions in clam populations are caused by discharges of municipal
and industrial wastes in close proximity to shellfish beds and by destruc
tion of habitat by landfill, dredging, and spoil disposal practices.
Control of these variables, in order to minimize their impact on the clam
fishery, could result in a greater use of this resource.
Economic Impacts
Commercial shellfish harvesting from the San Francisco Bay system
has been eliminated by pollution as a beneficial use of the waters. The
major shellfishing industry existing prior to 1900 has been eliminated as
a ingredient of the regional economy. Since 1930 a major increase has
occurred in the oyster fishery at other California locations, thus indi-
cating the probability that the San Francisco oyster industry would have
thrived economically if water quality constraints had been removed.
Elimination of an industry generating a million dollars annually in
1900 undoubtedly created a major impact on the San Francisco area economy.
It is impossible to estimate the total economic effect the loss of this
fishery has produced during the last 70 years. Two possible approaches
can be taken, however, to estimate the current economic impact. Owing to
the fact that the growth of the shellfish industry in other areas of
California was primarily the result of a shift in commercial beds from
San Francisco Bay to these areas as bay beds became polluted, the value
of the out-state fishery could be considered one measure of the value of
the lost fishery. A second estimate can be obtained from the value of
the potential production discussed previously.
Statistics on California oyster harvest are available for several
-------
VII-IA
20/
years, between 1892 and 1922, and for every year thereafter [Table VII-2] . —
Since the year 1939, the statisitics are also available, categorized by
29/
fishing region. — The San Francisco fishing region includes the bay
system and the coastal waters from Point Arena to Pigeon Point including
Tomales Bay, Bodega Bay, Bolinas Lagoon, and Drakes Estero. Prior to
1939 essentially all of the California oyster harvest came from San Fran-
cisco Bay. In recent years, all of the oyster harvest reported for the
San Francisco fishing region came from coastal waters other than San
Francisco Bay.
By subtracting the value of the oyster harvest in the San Francisco
region from the total California harvest [Table VII-2] , one can determine
the value of the oyster harvest from all other California regions. For
the period 1958 to 1967 the total value of the harvest from other regions
was $2,050,000, an annual average of $205,000.
The California fishery does not produce an oyster supply adequate to
meet the California demand for oysters. Therefore supplies are shipped
in from out-of-state. If water quality constraints are removed, San
Francisco Bay has the potential to produce more oysters than the existing
California fishery. An annual value of $205,000 for the lost fishery is
considered a conservative estimate, as a larger oyster production would
probably have occurred to meet local demands if restrictions on harvesting
were to be removed.
As discussed previously, estimates of the oyster production potential
of the San Francisco Bay system range from 1 to 13 million pounds of
oyster meats annually. At a dockside price of $0.40 per pound this pro-
duction would have an annual value of $400,000 tp $5,200,000. The large
-------
VIT--15
Table VII-2 Summary of Oyster Harvest Statistics
Total Oyster Harvest
(1,000 pounds of meat)
Year
1892
1895
1899
1904
1908
1915
1922
1923
1924
1925
1926
1927
1928
1929
1930
1931
1932
1933
1934
1935
1936
1937
1938
1939
1940
1941
1942
1943
1944
1945
1946
1947
1948
1949
1950
California
1,316
1,145
3,060
1,406
729
387
74
69
53
57
61
55
77
53
78
245
59
86
101
107
105
163
213
246
193
256
85
117
90
48
22
24
66
35
39
San
Francisco*
242
180
240
50
57
35
19
12
19
48
20
32
Value
($1.000)
Unit Price
San
California Francisco
867
536
337
166
24
23
24
26
24
32
27
32
76
19
29
43
40
27
38
50
51
27
48
29
38
48
28
19
26
63
26
36
California
0.28
0.38
0.46
0.43
0.35
0.43
0.43
0.43
0.43
0.43
0.50
0.42
San
Francisco
50
25
42
17
19
24
17
14
22
53
18
35
0.32
0.33
0.33
0.43
0.37
0.26
0.24
0.23
0.21
0.14
0.19
0.34
0.33
0.53
0.59
0.86
1.05
0.95
0.76
0.94
0.21
0.14
0.18
0.34
0.33
0.69
0.90
1.17
1.16
1.10
0.90
1.09
-------
Table VII-2. Summary of Oyster Harvest Statistics
Year
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
Total Oyster
(1,000 pounds
Harvest
of meat)
San
California Francisco *
43
45
38
74
218
756
1,359
1,159
1,653
1,283
1,221
1,339
1,300
1,360
1,063
790
742
41
39
34
36
42
59
64
75
54
32
79
61
186
213
195
234
199
Value
($1
California
46
47
44
54
89
178
287
242
309
289
296
306
226
254
263
222
207
,000)
San
Francisco
53
46
43
47
56
75
41
54
42
34
63
46
36
47
64
92
81
Unit Price
(S/lb)
California
1.06
1.04
1.18
0.73
0.40
0.23
0.21
0.21
0.19
0.23
0.25
0.23
0.17
0.19
0.25
0.28
0.28
San
Francisco
1.29
1.18
1.26
1.30
1.33
1.27
0.64
0.72
0.78
1.06
0.80
0.75
0.19
0.22
0.33
0.39
0.40
San Francisco Fishing Region including the San Francisco Bay System
and coastal waters from Point Arena to Pigeon Point.
-------
supply associated with the upper limit of potential production would
probably result in reduced prices, making an upper limit of $2,600,000
($0.20 per pound) for the potential value of the fishery more realistic.
It is doubtful whether a significant commercial clam industry can be
established in the bay. The value of the potential commercial bait
industry is unknown, but is probably small. It is probable that water
quality constraints are the primary elements preventing the development
of at least one-third of potential recreational shellfishing based on the
existing clam fishery. As previously discussed, the potential recreational
shellfishery has decreased from a value of about 400,000 man-days in 1967
to about 200,000 man-days in 1972. At a value of two dollars per man-day
this decrease represents an economic loss of about $400,000 over a five-
day period. The portion of this loss that can be attributed to water
pollution is unknown, but it is believed to be substantial. Pollution
also prevents the use of much of the remaining potential clam resource,
valued on the same basis at $400,000.
Various studies have shown that the economic impact of the shellfish
industry on the regional economy is about four times the dockside value
30/
of shellfish products.— With this multiplier, the total economic impact
of pollution on the economy of the San Francisco area, as the result of
the loss of the oyster fishery, is in the range of $820,000 to $10,400,000.
This estimate considers only the multiplied economic effect of the
harvested oysters. An additional economic impact would be produced by
the importation of seed oysters to supply cultural requirements. That
economic effect is unknown. Further, an additional but unknown economic
impact is also produced by the loss of the clam fishery.
-------
San Francisco Bay has the potential to produce a shellfish supply
adequate to meet local needs and create a surplus that could be marketed
in interstate commerce. Pollution of the bay prevents the realization
of this potential.
Large-scale commercial production of oysters in San Francisco Bay
would require culture of either Eastern or Pacific oysters. Such cul-
tural practices would require the interstate importation of large numbers
of seed oysters. Pollution of San Francisco Bay prevents the practice of
oyster culture and, thus, prevents the market of seed oysters in inter-
state commerce to provide the basis for oyster production.
B. DETRIMENTAL EFFECTS ON AQUATIC LIFE
San Francisco Bay has been richly endowed with fish life. The fishes
of San Francisco Bay can be divided into six categories: t) schooling,
pelagic, bait, and forage fishes; 2) flatfishes; 3) bottom fishes;
4) sharks, skates, and rays; 5) croakers; and 6) anadromous fishes. The
most valuable (both commercial and sport fishing) group of fishes in
San Francisco Bay are the anadromous fishes; the category includes such
fishes as the striped bass and chinook salmon. The bait and forage
fishes, such as smelt and whitebait, are extremely important as food for
other fishes. Some species of whitebait inhabit the bay throughout the
year; thus, water quality in the bay would affect them more than fish
that occupy the bay only a portion of the year. During the period from
1916-1958, the commercial harvest of whitebait ranged from a high of
161,797 Ib in 1916 to a low of 3,487 Ib in 1943. The opinion has been
expressed that the polluted condition of South Bay is probably among the
-------
VII-19
chief reasons these fish have not been seen in the same numbers as in
20/
former years.—
Fish kills have occurred annually in San Francisco Bay, particularly
in the Suisun Bay and Carquinez Strait area. These kills generally occur
during the spring and summer in the vicinity of municipal waste treatment
plants and industrial waste discharges and involve thousands of fish
[Appendix F]. More than 56 percent of the reported fish kills were from
unknown causes; however, of those from known causes, about 20 percent
resulted from low dissolved oxygen, 7 percent from sewage, 9 percent from
an industrial pollutant and the remainder (8 percent) from other causes.
Most of these kills were investigated by the California Department of Fish
and Game.
Food supply can also limit fish populations. The opossum shrimp is
the most important source of food of a number of fishes at some stage
during their life in San Francisco Bay. This crustacean requires 7-8 mg/1
12/ 227
of dissolved oxygen— and water temperatures below 22.8°C.— The eutro-
phication of Suisun Bay and Western Delta waters that is projected is
2Q/
expected to lead to a dissolved oxygen depression.— If the oxygen con-
centration drops below 6 mg/1, the anadromous fish population, including
20/
striped bass, king salmon, and American shad, is expected to decline.—
Water temperatures in that area approached the critical temperature
for opossum shrimp. When water temperatures exceed 22.2°C, opossum
shrimp populations in the Sacramento-San Joaquin estuary generally
, 20/
decrease.—
-------
VII-20
C. RECREATION
Waters of the San Francisco Bay system are heavily employed for
non-contact recreation including boating, sailing, and fishing. Some
areas of the bay also support contact recreation including swimming and
water skiing. Prior to the late 1960's when widespread improvements in
disinfection of waste effluents were made, bacterial contamination made
most of the bay system unsafe for water contact recreation. In the
vicinity of waste discharges bacterial concentrations posed a serious
health hazard.
As a result of the improved disinfection practices, most of the bay
system has water quality acceptable for water contact recreation during
dry weather periods. Applicable water quality criteria are met most of
the time at the Alameda, Coyote Point, and Point Molate beaches and part
of the time at the San Francisco Aquatic Park and Marina beaches.—
During wet weather, however, combined sewer overflows and sewage treatment
plant bypassing caused by excessive infiltration produce bacterial con-
tamination of recreation areas. Occasional malfunctioning of disinfection
equipment at waste sources also contributes to bacterial contamination. In
many areas bacterial levels are high enough to pose a health hazard to
recreational shellfishing although such shellfishing continues.
Thus, impairment of recreational uses of the bay system has been
substantially reduced in the last decade. However, impairment of such
uses continues and will continue until combined sewer overflows and
treatment plant bypasses are controlled, adequate controls are installed
to ensure continuous disinfection of waste effluents, and until waste
discharge points are relocated to offshore locations remote from beaches
and recreational areas.
-------
VIII-1
VIII. STATUS OF POLLUTION ABATEMENT
A. PRESENT AND PAST POLLUTION ABATEMENT ACTIONS
All sources of municipal and industrial wastes discharged to the
San Francisco Bay system are subject to regulation by the California
water pollution control program. This program is under the jurisdiction
of the State Water Resources Control Board and nine regional boards. The
majority of the San Francisco Bay system is under the jurisdication of
the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board headquartered
in Oakland. Waste sources in the Delta area are regulated by the Central
Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board with headquarters in Sacramento,
All waste dischargers are required to have a discharge permit from
the appropriate regional board. These permits specify effluent limita-
tions, receiving water standards, monitoring requirements, .and an imple-
mentation schedule. The waste discharge requirements are designed to be
compatible with and to supplement the Federal-State water quality standards
[Appendix A] established in accordance with the Water Quality Act of 1965.
Three types of actions are taken by the regional boards to secure
abatement of pollution. The first step is the issuance of resolutions.
General policy, waste discharge requirements, and compliance time schedules
are all issued by resolution. Individual dischargers are required to
report periodically to the regional boards on their status of compliance
with applicable resolutions and to submit self-monitoring data on their
waste discharge and affected receiving waters. The boards then review
the reports and self-monitoring data to assess the status of compliance
with applicable requirements.
-------
VIII-2
In cases where a discharger is found to be in non-compliance with
either waste discharge requirements or compliance time schedules, the
regional board may issue a Cease and Desist Order which specifies cor-
rective actions to be taken including a time schedule for compliance.
The Cease and Desist Order is the first step in the State's enforcement
action.
If a waste discharger does not comply with the requirements of a
Cease and Desist Order, the regional board may then refer the case to the
appropriate legal authority for court action, the second and final State
enforcement action. The State's timetable for completing abatement actions
for all waste sources was set forth in the implementation plan developed
as a part of the Federal-State water quality standards [Appendix H,
Table H-l].
Although the self-monitoring program, supplemented in some cases by
independent State sampling, may adequately assess compliance with waste
discharge requirements, the program in the past has not required as com-
plete a monitoring program as possible in order to assess overall adequacy
of treatment facilities. In many cases, significant sources of pollution
or waste quality parameters were not included in self-monitoring data and
adequate definition of abatement needs was virtually impossible. Presently,
the self-monitoring requirements are being revised and it is anticipated
that all significant parameters will be included in the revised requirements,
All major dischargers to San Francisco Bay are under resolutions
issued by the appropriate regional boards. In almost all cases, resolutions
have been or are presently being revised to reflect new State policies
-------
VIII-3
which include the water quality standards and the interim water quality
management plans. Further revisions of the waste discharge requirements
will be needed as the sub-regional water quality management plans are
finalized and to achieve compliance with the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act Amendments of 1972 discussed in the next section.
The San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board summarized
pollution abatement actions taken by the Board and resulting accomplish-
ments in an informal report to EPA submitted on August 31, 1972. Pertinent
excerpts follow:
".. Forty Three (43) per cent of the volume of municipal waste
discharged to the Bay system now receives secondary treatment
while the remaining fifty-seven (57) per cent which now
receives primary treatment will receive secondary treatment
or better when the subregional wastewater management programs
now being implemented are complete.
".. All industries with the exception of Alameda Naval Air Station
and Hunters Point Naval Shipyard provide treatment prior to
discharge to the Bay System. Many of these industries provide
a degree of treatment equivalent to secondary and the Regional
Boards has initiated hearings on the establishment of secondary
level treatment for all major industrial waste dischargers in
the Region.
".. A total of one hundred twenty-two (122) cease and desist orders
have been issued for violation of waste discharge requirements,
nineteen (19) to industries, seventy-nine (79) to communities
and twenty-four (24) to other types of waste dischargers.
Sixty (60) orders have been issued subsequent to January 1, 1970.
ii
..
Fourteen (14) cleanup and abatement orders have been issued to
persons depositing waste that caused pollution or nuisance.
".. United States Navy (USS Midway) and Phillips Petroleum Company
have been cited to the State Attorney General for causing oil
to be deposited in waters of the State.
".. Six (6) waste dischargers were referred to the county district
attorneys prior to 1970 all resulting in correction of viola-
tions. Twelve (12) waste dischargers have been referred to
the State Attorney General for action since January 1, 1970;
-------
VIII-4
four of these cases have resulted in decisions supportive of
the State, corrective action was taken by four dischargers
prior to court action and four cases are now in process of
litigation or awaiting trial dates.
".. Adoption of requirements which provide for the implementation
of subregional studies by including compliance time schedules
consistent with timing of the subregional facilities. These
actions include interim requirements providing improvement in
treatment during the interim period, require source control of
conservative toxicants and minimization of infiltration."
The present status of compliance with applicable resolutions and
orders for all major waste dischargers and resulting actions by the State
and/or Federal government for cases in non-compliance are summarized in
tabular form in Appendix H [Municipal sources, Table H-2; Industrial
sources, Table H-3; Federal facilities, Table H-4].
Review of the State enforcement actions and the status of abatement
tables indicates one obvious trend. Many waste sources in the past have
delayed construction of necessary treatment facilities. This is indicated
by the numerous revisions of time schedules included in State resolutions.
Recently major progress has been made in some instances, however, progress
is still lacking in other cases.
As shown in Table VTII-1, about 20 percent of the major waste sources
listed in Table H-2, H-3, and H-4 are presently known to not be in compli-
ance with State waste discharge requirements. Table VIII-2 summarizes
the State enforcement actions initiated to bring these sources into com-
pliance with applicable requirements.
No enforcement measures against pollution of interstate or navigable
waters have been taken by EPA in the Bay area pursuant to the provisions
of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. During 1971, however, settle-
ments were achieved, in cooperation with the State, with two industrial
-------
TABLE VIII-1
SUMMARY OF COMPLIANCE WITH STATE RESOLUTIONS
Source Category
Total Sources
In Category
Sources Not Complying With
Waste Discharge Requirements
Total Percent
Major Municipal
Major Industrial
Federal Installation
Total
47
22
8
17
36
TABLE VIII-2
SUMMARY OF STATE ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
Source Category
Major Municipal
Major Industrial
Federal Installations
Total
Total Not Cease and Time Schedule
In Compliance Desist Orders Established
17 19 14
8 8
Presently
Meeting Time
Schedule
6
8
Court
Actions
3
2
1
Ui
-------
VIII-6
dischargers in an effort to abate pollution or achieve compliance with
State discharge requirements. The dischargers were Merck Chemical in
South San Francisco and United States Steel in Pittsburg. In July 1972,
a commitment letter was obtained from Fiberboard Corp. in Antioch.
The U.S. Attorney's office has taken action to prosecute several
Refuse Act violations. Beginning in the Fall of 1970, information was
received by the U.S. Attorney's office from private citizens concerning
alleged industrial pollution of San Francisco Bay. These cases were
referred to EPA for investigation. Several industries involved were
subject to Cease and Desist Orders issued by the State Water Quality
Control Board establishing dates for compliance, and installation of
improved facilites.
The U.S. Attorney's office currently has 22 cases under investi-
gation for alleged water pollution by industrial waste or unauthorized
filling of navigable waters. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has issued
warnings and demands to correct unauthorized fill operations. The com-
panies involved are correcting the situation and the U.S. Attorney
expects the Army to refer only two cases for injunctive relief. All fill
occurrences, except one, were referred by private citizens and turned
over to the Corps for investigation.
As can be seen by the above status report, much can be done to
improve on the Federal-State program to achieve discharger compliance.
A review of the large number of dischargers still not in compliance,
indicates the need for a more agressive abatement program.
The state is strenghtening their program and are developing require-
ments consistent with interim water quality management plans and water
-------
VIII-7
quality standards. In addition to establishment of discharge requirements,
strict but practicable time schedules must be developed. These schedules,
which should be both Federally and State enforceable, should lead to com-
pliance with water quality standards in the shortest possible time. Where
long range goals are too far off and immediate improvements are necessary,
interim requirements and time schedules must be established.
B. FUTURE POLLUTION ABATEMENT ACTIONS
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 require
EPA to promulgate of standards, guidelines, and regulations that govern
many of the enforceable requirements of the Act.
Most important are the limitations on the quantity and quality of
effluents which may be discharged into any of the Nation's waters. All
point sources of pollution (including Federal facilities), .other than
publicly owned treatment works, that discharge directly into the navi-
gable waters (defined as the "waters of the United States including the
territorial seas") are required to achieve, not later than July 1, 1977,
effluent limitations which shall require the application of the best
practicable control technology currently avialable, as determined by
the EPA. Not later than July 1, 1983, the same point sources must
achieve effluent limitations that shall require the application of the
best available technology economically achievable.
Industries, including Federal facilties, discharging into publicly
owned treatment works must comply with pretreatment standards which are
to be promulgated by the EPA.
-------
VIII-8
Publicly owned treatment works must meet by July 1, 1977, effluent
limitations which are based on secondary treatment, and by July 1, 1983,
the best practicable waste treatment technology.
The 1972 Amendments provide for the continuation of the framework
of State water quality standards required under the Water Quality Act of
1965. In addition, water quality standards applicable to intrastate
waters must be submitted to the EPA within a required time frame. In
every case, the promulgated effluent limitations must be sufficiently
stringent to maintain water quality as prescribed by the standards.
Authority is reserved to each State to impose effluent limitations more
stringent than those required by the EPA where the State deems such action
necessary to meet its own State water quality standards.
National Standards of Performance must be prescribed by EPA which
require effluent limitations for new sources of pollution reflecting the
best available demonstrated control technology, including where practi-
cable, no discharge of pollution.
Effluent standards must also be established for the control of
toxic pollutants. Pretreatment standards must be met by industrial
waste sources discharging to publicly owned treatment works.
The discharge of any pollutant by any person is unlawful unless
permitted under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(Permit Program). The EPA is authorized to issue permits for the dis-
charge of pollutants. The issuance of permits is a practical device
whereby the various effluent limitations, standards, and other require-
ments of the Act are actually applied to individual source of pollution.
-------
VIII-9
The Permit Program (NPDES) established under the 1972 Amendments, sup-
plants the permit program previously established pursuant to Section 13
of the Rivers and Harbors Act of March 3, 1899.
The EPA must establish guidelines within which the separate States
must operate their permit programs if they desire to assume this respon-
sibility. Each State program must be approved by EPA and is subject to
assumption of operation by EPA if the State does not administer the pro-
gram consistent with the 1972 Act. When a State permit program has been
approved by the EPA, the State becomes the permit-issuing authority for
sources within its jurisdiction and the EPA ceases to issue permits within
that State. EPA, however, retains a permit-by-permit veto power in cases
where a State permit does not conform to the guidelines and requirements
of the law or where waters of a downstream State are being polluted by
a permitted effluent discharge in another State. Violations of the con-
ditions (effluent limitations compliance schedules, etc.) of a permit
issued by the Administrator or by a State pursuant to the NPDES, are
subject to enforcement.
Enforcement prerogatives are available to the EPA when any person
violates Effluent Limitations, Water Quality Related Effluent Limitations,
National Standards of Performance, Toxic and Pretreatment Effluent Standards,
Inspection and Monitoring requirements or any permit condition including
compliance schedules.
The present Regional Board Permit Program, regulating discharges to
San Francisco Bay, partially fulfills the requirements of the 1972 Amend-
ments. Some of the actions that will be necessary in order to fully
comply are as follows:
-------
VIII-10
1. The requirement that all publicly owned treatment works provide
secondary treatment of all wastes discharged to the Bay by no
later than July 1, 1977.
2. The requirement that the best practicable control technology
currently available be applied to all industrial waste dis-
charges to the Bay by no later than July 1, 1977.
3. The requirement that industrial wastes, discharged to publicly
owned treatment works, be pretreated to remove toxic substances
to levels which will not inhibit treatment of the combined
wastes by biological treatment systems, no pass through the
public systems in concentrations which are deleterious to the
established uses of the waters of the Bay.
4. Revision of toxicity provisions of present Board Resolutions
in order to conform with the requirements of Sections 307 and
502(13) of the 1972 Amendments, and the list of toxic substances
which is to be promulgated by EPA.
5. Augmentation of present self-monitoring requirements to provide
for systematic monitoring of effluents by appropriate regulatory
agencies.
6. The promulgation with Federal approval, of Water Quality Stan-
dards for intrastate waters of the Bay area.
Detailed requirements for approval of State permit programs are con-
tained in the Federal Register, Volume 39, Number 219. "State Program
Elements Necessary for Participation in National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System," published November 11, 1972. Final guidelines are
expected to be published shortly.
-------
VIII-11
Federal activities discharging wastewaters directly to the Bay must
conform to the requirements for best practicable control technology by
July 1, 1977, best available technology economically achievable by July 1,
1983, and the pretreatment provision applicable to industrial wastewater
discharges.
-------
APPENDIX A
-------
APPENDIX A
WATER QUALITY CRITERIA (OBJECTIVES)
APPLICABLE TO THE TIDAL WATERS^OF
THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY SYSTEM*
A. WATER QUALITY OBJECTIVES APPLICABLE TO ALL TIDAL WATERS
Temperature
No significant variation beyond present natural background levels
(Notes A and B);
Turbidity
No significant variation beyond present natural background levels
(Notes A and B);
Apparent Color
No significant variation beyond present natural background levels
(Notes A and B);
Bottom Deposits
None other than of natural causes (Note A);
Floating Materials
None other than of natural causes at any place;
Oil or Materials of Petroleum Origin or Products
None floating in quantities sufficient to cause an iridescence, or
none suspended, or deposited on the substrate at any place;
Odors
None other than of natural causes at any place;
Dissolved Oxygen
Minimum of 5 mg/1; xjhen natural factors cause lesser concentrations,
then controllable water quality factors shall not cause further re-
duction in the concentration of dissolved oxygen;
Pesticides
No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall reach
concentrations found to be deleterious to fish or wildlife at any
place (Note A);
* Excerpts from "Water Quality Control Policy for Tidal Waters Inland
from the Golden Gate within the San Francisco Bay Region," San Francisco
Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board, State of California, 1967
-------
Toxic or Deleterious Substances
None present in concentrations which are deleterious to any of the
beneficial water uses to be protected; none at levels which render
aquatic life or wildlife unfit for human consumption (Note A);
Coliform Organisms
Sewage-bearing waste discharges shall at not time cause the quality of
tidal waters which are determined by this Regional Board to be physi-
cally accessible at any time to the public for whole or limited body
water-contact recreation uses and that are otherwise suitable for such
uses to fail to meet the physical and bacteriological standards as
set forth in California Administrative Code, Title 17, Sections 7957
and 7958;
California Administrative Code, Title 17
7957- Physical Standard. No sewage, sludge, grease or other
physical evidence of sewage discharge shall be visible at any
time on any public beaches or water-contact sports areas.
7958. Bacteriological Standards. Bacteriological standards
for each public beach or water-contact sports area shall be as
follows:
Samples of water from each sampling station at a public
beach or public water-contact sports area shall have a most
probable number of coliform organisms less than 1,000 per
100 ml. (10 per ml.); provided that not more than 20 percent
of the samples at any sampling station, in any 30-_day period,
may exceed 1,000 per 100 ml. (10 per ml.), and provided
further that no single sample when verified by a repeat sam-
ple taken within 48 hours shall exceed 10,000 per 100 ml.
(100 per ml.).
Sewage-bearing waste discharges shall at no time cause areas protected
by this Regional Board pursuant to Paragraph XVII of Resolution No. 803
for shellfishing for human consumption to exceed bacteriological stand-
ards to be adopted by this Board;
Nutrients
Total nitrogen concentration shall not exceed 2.0 mg/1 as nitrogen at
any point within the Region easterly of Carquines Strait; in no case
shall nutrients be present in concentrations sufficient to cause dele-
terious or abnormal biotic grox^ths except when factors which are not
controllable cause greater concentrations (Note A);
Radioactivity
None present in concentrations exceeding levels set forth in California
Radiation Control Regulations, Subchapter 4, Chapter 5, Title 17,
California Administrative Code at any place; and
-------
Hydrogen Ion Concentration - pH
The pH shall remain within the limits of 7.0 to 8.5; when natural
factors cause the pH to be less than 7.0, then further depression by
controllable factors will be determined by the Regional Board on a
case-by-case basis.
B. WATER QUALITY OBJECTIVES APPLICABLE TO TIDAL WATERS EAST OF THE
WESTERLY END OF CHIPPS ISLAND
Following levels in mg/1 shall not be exceeded within 2,000 feet of
diversions when tidal waters are used for domestic water supplies
(Notes C and D):
Lead 0.05 Sulfates 250.
Selenium 0.01 Alkyl Benzene Sulfonates . 0.5
Arsenic 0.01 Carbon Chloroform Extract. 0.2
Chromium, Hexavalent. ... 0.05 Cadmium 0.01
Cyanide 0.01 Barium 0.1
Silver 0.05 Zinc 0.1
Fluoride 0.5 Manganese 0.05
Phenols 0.001 Copper 0.01
Total Dissolved Solids . . 500.
Boron shall not excees 0.5 mg/1 within 1,000 feet of diversions when
tidal waters are used for agricultural supplies (Note C); and
No substance or combination of substances shall be present in concen-
trations sufficient to cause taste and odors in domestic water supplies,
within 2,000 feet of diversions when tidal waters are used for domestic
water supplies (Note C).
The water quality objective will generally apply at the outer limit
of the rising waste plume or beyond a limited dilution area as
determined by the Regional Board on a case-by-case basis pursuant
to the intent stated in the second paragraph of Section II-A. In
prescribing requirements for a particular waste discharge, the
Regional Board may specify receiving water quality limits, other
than the water quality objective contained herein, to apply at
control points at or near the outer edge of the rising waste
plume if time of exposure and other considerations indicate that
adequate protection of beneficial uses is assured.
A significant variation beyond present natural background levels
will be any level of water quality which has an adverse and un-
reasonable effect on beneficial water uses or causes nuisance;
present natural background levels are not known precisely and will
be determined on a case-by-case basis.
-------
A-4
C. This objective shall be maintained to the extent that it is reason-
ably practicable until the domestic, industrial and agricultural
water supplies are provided by alternate means to the satisfaction
of the Regional Board.
D. Lower levels of these constituents may be adopted by the Regional
Board at some future time if evidence becomes available to show
that such limits are necessary for protection of aquatic life or
wildlife.
-------
APPENDIX B
-------
B-l
APPENDIX B
SALMONELLA ANALYSES METHOD
National Field Investigations Center-Denver used a slight
variation of the outlined procedure below in all their attempts to
recover Salmonella in the shellfish.
.The successful isolation of Salmonella is to be accredited to
the Region IX, Environmental Protection Agency Laboratory which
utilized the below described procedure.
Enrichments for Salmonella organisms consisted of the following
steps. Ten gm shellfish meat (suspended in buffered dilution water
and homogenized) was added to each of six flasks - three contain-
ing Tetrathionate Broth (Difco) and three containing Selenite
Broth (Difco)- A set of broths was incubated at each of three
temperatures - 37°, 41.5°, 43°C. On three to five successive days,
a sample from the contents of each flask was streaked onto XLD (Difco)
and Brilliant Green (Difco) Agar plates. Colonies with morphologies
typical of salmonellae were isolated in pure culture, transferred
to Brain Heart Infusion (BHI, Difco) slants, gramstained and screened
for biochemical reactions in Enterotubes (Roche Diagnostics).
Biochemical characters observed in the Enterotubes were as follows:
fermentation of dextrose, dulcitol, and lactose; production of hydro-
gen sulfide and indole, phenylalanine deaminase, urease, and lysine
decarboxglase; and citrate utilization. Isolates giving physiological
reactions typical of Salmonella reaction patterns were screened for
serological reactions with salmonella Vi and somatic group antisera
(Difco) and positive cultures were sent to State of California,
-------
B-2
Department of Health, for final typing and identification.
Initial screening for Salmonellae was performed by the
fluorescent antibody (FA) technique. Plates were prepared (XLD
and Brilliant Green Agars) from enrichment broths after 18 to 24 hours
incubation. The inoculated plates were incubated two to three hours,
and colony smears were made on FA slides. The slides were then
stained with FA salmonella polyvalent serum (Difco) and examined
under a Leitz Fluorescence microscope. Salmonella enrichment pro-
cedures were discontinued for those samples giving less than 3+
fluorescence.
-------
APPENDIX C
-------
APPENDIX C
SHELLFISH POPULATION SURVEY
INTRODUCTION
The biological survey of the shellfish of San Francisco
Bay consisted of three parts:
1. An appraisal of the changes in species composition and density
between 1967 and 1972 of 19 selected shellfish beds.
2. A review of the ecological factors and space requirements
needed for re-establishing oyster beds in San Francisco Bay.
3. A comparison between young market crabs caught in the San
Francisco Bay and those caught in Eureka, California, regarding
their pesticide and heavy metals content.
Shellfish of present and past importance in San Francisco
Bay are listed in Table C-l.
The most extensive part of the survey was that of the
shellfish beds to see if they had changed since the survey
by Theodore Wooster of the California Fish and Game Department
(1968).
The oyster industry had ceased being profitable about 1940
(Barrett, 1963). Pollution of the Bay has been mentioned as
one of the reasons for the decline of oyster productivity in
San Francisco Bay- The amount of oysters marketed in 1888 was close
to a million pounds, but declined to slightly over one thousand
pounds by 1939. Re-establishment of these beds would appear feasible
if pollution discharges into the Bay were stopped.
-------
C-2
Market crab catches off the California coastline have been
declining for the last 10 years. San Francisco Bay serves as a
nursery ground for the market crabs, although legal-sized crabs
are not abundant in the Bay, so commercial fishermen do not attempt
to catch them. Some crabs tagged by the California Fish and Game
in the Bay have been caught outside of the Bay in the ocean.
California Fish and Game personnel feel that more crabs should
be found outside the Bay and there is some cause for their decline
relating to their survival in the Bay. There has been insufficient
data on metal and pesticide content of the crabs in their juvenile
stages for these analyses to be useful in understanding the decrease
in market crab harvest.
METHODS
The shellfish beds, previously surveyed by Wooster (1968),
were sampled for species composition and density following his methods.
Basically this involved taking a square foot of substrate to a depth
that would include all available shellfish, and placing the material
in a wooden-frame sampler having a 1/4 inch hardware cloth bottom.
By shaking the sampler in water, the sand, mud, and small gravel would
be removed, retaining larger material along with any clams. The
shellfish from each square foot of sample were then put into a plastic
-------
C-3
bag and taken back to the laboratory. Each shellfish was measured
for size, and all shellfish of the same species combined to obtain
a total weight for each sample.
Analyses of the differences between Wooster's data and the 1972
data were done by non-parametric methods. This was necessary because
sampling sites were not chosen, nor sample distribution tested, so
that parametric tests could be utilized (Steele and Torrie, 1960).
Where too few samples were taken or no shellfish found, no statistical
analysis was performed. The survey procedure and the validity of the
resulting data was enhanced because of the assistance of Theodore
Wooster in the survey. His assistance was provided by the courtesy
of the California Fish and Game Department.
Possible commercial oyster bed locations were examined and
evaluated in relation to water uses which now exist in San Francisco
Bay.
California Fish and Game personnel caught commercial crabs in
three locations of San Francisco Bay: Paradise Park Pier on Tiburon
Point, a pier near the Carquinez Bridge, and the Red Rock Marina Pier
near the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge. Other samples of crabs were
collected at Eureka, California. Male and female juvenile crabs
were separated, and the flesh from each put into separate jars,
packed in ice, and then subsequently frozen until analyzed. The flesh
from the crabs was to be analyzed for heavy metals and pesticides
by standard EPA methods.
-------
C-4
CLAM BED SURVEY
Nineteen beds were sampled to compare their present clam popula-
tions with those found by Wooster in 1967. The three principal
species that were encountered were the Japanese Littleneck - JL
(Tapes semideoussata), the soft-shelled clam - SS (Aft/a avenaria),
and the Macoma - Me (Macoma i-nconsp-ioua). The first two species
attain legal sizes (ca. 38mm); whereas the third species is too small
for practical use.
The comparisons, between the clams found in 1967 and in 1972,
concerning their average weights per square foot and size and the
economic values of the "angler" days were most important. "Angler"
days are found by dividing the total number of legal clams in a bed
by 50, the legal daily limit.
Results
The location of the shellfish beds are shown numerically in
Figure C-l, with the numbered beds identified in Table C-2. The
sampling results are summarized in Table C-3 which compares for 1967
and 1972 values of nineteen beds sampled in both years. This Table
gives the mean weight of clams per square foot, the total "angler
days", the total weight of clams, and the square foot samples taken
in the beds. Figure C-2 is a graphical presentation of the total
weights of clams in the beds sampled.
Discussion
The main data from over 100 square foot samples taken from 19
clam beds is given in Table C-3. Approximately the same number of
-------
C-5
samples were taken from each bed in each year, with more samples
taken from the larger beds.
2
The three parameters compared for the two years - mean gms/ft ,
total "angler days", and total clam weight - all showed approximately
50 percent decrease from 1967 to 1972.
The mean weight of all clams in grams per square foot of sample
declined from 196 to 113, a 42 percent decrease. The total weight
2
of clams was derived by multiplying the mean weight in grams/ft
for each bed by the size of the bed. Thus large decreases in the
weights per square foot would be of more significance if they
occurred in the large beds. The total weight decreased by 53 percent
from 1967 to 1972. The "angler days" based on legal-size clams in
the beds declined by 50 percent from 1967 to 1972. However, not
all legal-size clams could be used in calculating economic loss.
Only the beds away from sewage outfalls were utlized in this calcula-
tion.
™he value of the "angler days" was established by finding the
prevailing commercial price for 50 legal sized clams, now approxi-
mately $2.00, depending on the weight of the clams. Other approaches
to establishing economic value, e.g. basing it on recreational use
could lead to higher "angler day" values.
Utilizing a value of $2.00 per angling day (a limit of 50 clams,
all 38 mm or above in size) , the decrease in value of the beds sampled
is about $325,000. This represents a 42 percent decrease in the
value of this resource. It must be stressed that this only includes
the beds surveyed, and also leaves out the loss of the completely
-------
C-6
covered Point San Bruno Bed. There are also available an unknown
amount of areas of South San Francisco Bay which do not become exposed
at low tides, but could be harvested by commercial digging machines.
Conclusion
A loss of $325,000 to the clam sport fishery of San Francisco
Bay has been sustained since 1967. However, in most beds there are
many legal and young clams remaining that could be utilized if
they were safe to eat.
Water quality in the Bay should be enhanced in order to prevent
further deterioration of the clam population, and to enable
harvesting activities to resume.
OYSTER BEDS
The presence of commercial oyster beds in San Francigco Bay
before 1940 raises the question of whether or not they could be
re-established. The following facts should be noted before proposals
to re-establish the beds are made:
1. The California Fish and Game have successfully raised oysters
on a limited basis near Redwood City.
2. At present, about 6,000 acres are available for raising
oysters in South Bay in hanging cultures, with an equal area available
for bottom cultures. About the same area is available in San Pablo
Bay for oyster culturing.
-------
C-7
3. If these areas were utilized, the productivity should be equal to
the total oyster productivity in the United States. Much of the
eastern productivity is not in a hanging culture form. Productivity
is lower when oysters grow on substrate.
4. The productivity of the beds started declining in the early 1900's.
About that time, oyster seed planted in the Bay took longer to develop
than elsewhere, and the oysters were thin and watery (Barrett, 1963).
5. Industrial pollution appeared primarily responsible for the decline
in productivity. The amelioration of conditions which were bad in 1910
appears increasingly necessary.
6. Hanging cultures of oyster racks are now widely used. These
are put in deep water where they will be regularly inundated by the
changing tides. Oysters are still cultivated on shallow intertidal
zones. However, this means that the area must be fenced to keep out
rays and the oysters are subjected to siltation.
7- Many of the sites of the old oyster beds and possible new locations
are not usable for the following reasons:
a. Many old oyster beds sites are now partially filled (i.e. Bay
Farm Island, San Rafael Bay, Oyster Point).
b. Areas of restricted rights, such as shipping lanes, throughout
the Bay and the Dumbarton Straits preclude oyster planting in
many previously acceptable beds.
c. Other areas of restricted rights, such as landing zones for
amphibious airplanes, and anchorage locations for explosive-containing
and regular vessels.
-------
d. Some areas are serving in other capacities such as:
1) Access lanes for marinas.
2) Near-shore waterskiing and sailing areas.
3) Near-shore zones througout the Bay with good troll and
bait fishing areas.
8. Esthetic reasons preclude putting the hanging cultures in some
locations.
9. There is dispute over ownership of many submerged parts of the Bay
10. BCDC would have to approve the plantings.
11. Market oysters are now easily flown from the east, making the
economic feasibility of plantings uncertain.
Conclusions
Although there are sites in the Bay available for oyster cultur-
ing, no attempts can be made to do this unless the waters of San
Francisco Bay meet Public Health Standards for shellfish.
The re-established oyster beds in the Bay could yield productivity
comparable to that in the entire United States, which is about 10,000,000
gallons per year. This would be worth $70,000,000 as Pacific oysters.
-------
C-9
LOCATION OF SHELLFISH BEDS
FOR BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENTS
San Francisco Bay, I972
FIGURE C-l
-------
C-10
TABLE C-l
THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY STUDY-SHELLFISH OF IMPORTANCE
Scientific
Name
Common Names
or Names
Comments
(Clams)
Aft/a avencwia
Soft-shell clam, eastern
soft-shell clam, long
clam, mud clam
Tapes Japanese littleneck
semidecussata
Protothaoa
staminea
Maooma
inconspicus
Macoma nasuta
—(Oysters)—
Ostvea
Cvassostvea
virgin-lea
Crassostrea
gigas
— (Mussels)-
Volsella
demissa
Mytilus
edulis
--(Crab)
Canoe?
magi step
Littleneck, hard shell,
rock clam, rock cockle,
Tomales Bay Cockle
Bent-nose clam
Perhaps indigenous in Bay
This clam and the soft-
shell are of the most
important to sportsmen
Very few now found in
Bay. usually near Strawberry
Point
Found frequently in most
beds, but too small for
practical uses
Shells found frequently
Native oyster, Olympia
oyster in Puget Sound
Eastern oyster
Japanese oyster, giant
pacific oyster, pacific
oyster
Small, widespread, but not
commercially important
in San Francisco Bay because
of size and poor flesh
Shells found in great
abundance. Once commercially
important, but imported in
half-grown or near marketing
size and held in Bay until
needed. Commercially
important in east
This is the commercially
important oyster grown
from imported seed along
the Pacific Coast
Ribbed horse mussel
Bay Mussel
Prominent in South San Fran-
cisco Bay in Cord Grass
Found in rock and pilings
throughout Bay
"Edible" crab, Dungeness
crab
The Bay is a nursery area
for females
-------
C-ll
TABLE C-2
IDENTIFICATION OF BEDS
NUMBERED IN FIGURE C-l
Code Bed
A San Leandro Marina
B Oakland Airport
C San Leandro Bay
D Alameda Memorial State Beach
E Oakland Inner Harbor
F Albany Hills
G Point Isabel
H North of feller Beach
I Point Castro-Point San Pablo
J Tara Hills
K Pinole
L China Camp
M Beach Drive - San Rafael Bay
N Strawberry Point
0 Richardson Bridge
P Brisbane
Q Burlingame
R Coyote Point
S Foster City
-------
TABLE C-3
CHANGES IN CLAM POPULATION AND "ANGLER DAYS"
BETWEEN 1967 AND 1972 IN NINETEEN SAN FRANCISCO BAY BEDS
Clam weight
gms/ft2 Total "Angler Total Clam Weight Total Number of
(mean) Days" in kg ft^ Samples
1967
1972
Decrease
196 418911 618033 104
113 208615 287550 116
83 210296 330483
o
-------
FIGURE C-2
TOTAL WEIGHT PER BED OF CLAMS FOR THE 1967 AND 1972 SAMPLINGS
WEIGHT IN KILOGRAMS
o
Albony Hills
illffllpiiii'
. ^,_,.J1 Fos»«r Ci»y
Burllngome
llililil^
j
Oakland Inner Harbor
Beoch Driv, Bed
in Son Rof-?e! Bay
Pt . Costro - Pt. Son Po"Blo
OoKlond Airport
fllfliiiiififiiiilllWfiiillftMlliiiiillil
___ . j Toro Hill*
oiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiijiiiiiyijjiiiiiiiioj
Alomedo Memorial State Beach
China Camp
Strawberry Point
North of Keller Beach
Richardson Bridge
Point Isabel , north side
1967
1972
Bris bane
-------
APPENDIX D
-------
.ATE OF CALIFORNIA—RESOURCES AGENCY
RONALD REAGAN, Governor
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME
lARfflE RESOURCES REGION
[TU,w-«—
Marine Resources Laboratory
Ull Burgess Drive
Menlo Park, California 9*4-025
June 28, 1972
Mr. Bob Campbell
Environmental Protection Agency
Division of Field Investigation - Denver Center
Building 22 - Room ^10 - Denver Federal Center
Denver, Colorado 80225
Dear Bob:
Thank you for your letter and data from Suisun and San Francisco Bays.
In my opinion the possibility of growing oysters in Suisun Bay does
not look promising. Low salinity and lack of suitable oyster food
are probably the main limiting factors. The fact that you found only
limited quantities of soft shell clams and no littleneck clams or na-
tive oysters suggests that conditions are not favorable for growing
Pacific or Eastern oysters.
San Pablo Bay, I feel, has some potential because of higher salinities
and more oyster food production. South San Francisco Bay has the best
potential. Salinities and temperatures are more favorable and there
is probably a greater production of oyster food. The food supply could
probably be enhanced ty the elimination of the contaminants.
I can not offer an explanation for the high cadmium count in the Pacific
oysters. Dr. Craig Ruddell at Davis has obtained similar results from
the same lot of oysters.
I hope that this information will be of help to you.
ther information, please contact me.
Sincerely,
If you need fur-
Walter A. Dahlstrom
Assoc. Marine Biologist
WADrgb
-------
APPENDIX E
-------
APPENDIX E
TOXIC EFFECTS ON AQUATIC LIFE
TOXIC MATERIALS
Discharges to the Bay system of wastes containing materials toxic
to aquatic life have occurred from both municipal and industrial
sources. Both acute and chronic toxicity problems are believed to
result from these discharges. In addition, spills of toxic materials
have resulted in damage to aquatic life.
A survey of the literature on the toxicity of metals and pesti-
cides to marine aquatic life is presented in the Appendix [Table- E-3].
A brief comparison of the data collected during this study to
reported toxic values is discussed below.
HEAVY METALS
Data on the heavy metals cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, zinc
and mercury are available from the recent survey of the San Francisco
Bay Area [Table E-l].
Analysis showed that cadmium, a very common metal, ranged from
<0.01-<0.02 mg/1 in the water. Table E-l shows the LC5Q (for explana-
tion see appendix) for the oyster Crassostrea virginica to be 0.1-0.2 mg/1
thus the water concentrations found during this survey are about 1/100
of the determined toxic level.
Chromium, which is toxic to Nereis virens (polychaete worm) at
<5.0 mg/1 ranged from <0.01-0.05 mg/1 in the water. Sediment samples
ranged from <1.0-90.0 mg/kg while shellfish contained <0.05-20.0 mg/kg.
Chromium levels in the water are about 100 times less than the
reported toxic values^ However, the shellfish contained levels up to
-------
E-2
four times the proposed FDA alert levels. As discussed elsewhere in
this report the high sediment values may lead to contamination of
the shellfish.
Copper, one of the most toxic heavy metals, ranged from
<0.01-0.6 mg/1 in the water. Data in Table E-l shows that marine
phytoplankton are killed by concentrations of 0.027-0.5 mg/1. Because
these species of phytoplankton are important in the food chain of fish
their elimination could reduce or completely eliminate the fish popu-
lation of that area. In addition, copper is lethal to several molluscs
in the range of 0.05-0.2 mg/1 [Table E-l].
Lead concentrations of 0.7-<5.0 mg/1 in water, as reported in
this study, are about 10 times the lethal value of 0.5 mg/1 for C_.
virginica (eastern oyster) [Table E-l]. However, California Fish
and Game personnel have grown several species of molluscs in the Redwood
City area for several years at a sub-chronic level.
Zinc levels of <0.01-0.15 mg/1 in the water are well below toxic
levels. However, oysters tend to accumulate the metal and values of 336
and 608 mg/kg were recorded. These values are about one-third the
FDA alert level of 1,500 mg/kg.
PESTICIDES AND PCB'S
Data on the chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides chlordane, DDT, DDD,
DDE and dieldrin and the PCB (polychlorinated biphenyl) complex also
are available from this investigation of the San Francisco Bay Area.
DDT and its metabolites DDE and DDD are generally toxic under
acute conditions to marine invertebrates in the range of 0.002-0.02 mg/1
(or parts per billion); values that are approached or exceeded in the
Bay area. Table E—2 ahows the oyster C. virginica to have an LC^
-------
E-3
of 0.005 mg/1, a value that was exceeded in portions of the Bay. How-
ever, most values are below the acute toxic level and lead to condi-
tions of reduced shell growth. Monochrysis lutheri, a plankton-
flagellate, illustrates the point by exhibiting a 43 percent reduction
in growth when exposed to 0.02 mg/1 DDT for 96 hours [Table E-2].
Under similar conditions shellfish will often show a 50 percent reduction
in growth.
Reported values for dieldrin range from 0.0055 mg/1 (96 hour I^Q)
for Leiostomus xanthurus (juvenile spot) to 0.005 mg/1 for Palaemonetes
vulgaris (grass shrimp). The oyster C_. virginica has a reported value
of 0.034 mg/1 [Table E-2]. These values are all greater than the value
obtained during this study [Table E-2]. However, the problem of sub-
lethal concentrations again arises and the fact that although not killed
by the compound significant reductions in growth rates, reproductive
capabilities and physiological damage can and does result.
The PCB complex, virtually unstudied until the late 1960's,
poses a threat unsurpassed by chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides.
Toxic levels with these compounds range from 0.005 mg/1 for spot
(L^. xanthurus) to O.0001 mg/1 for Daphnia magna. Current trends
at the Federal level are to establish a maximum water concentration
of 0.002 mg/1 and maximum concentration of 0.5 mg/1 in tissue. Japan
has recently established a maximum tissue level of 0.5 mg/1 for
off-shore and high seas organisms.
-------
TABLE B-J.
TOXIC1TY 01 METALS*TO SELECTED MARINE ORGANISMS
As
Cd
Cr
Cu
Pb
Hg
Sn
Zn
Bacteria
Green algae
132 ppm
0.1 ppm(no
time span
given)
0.002 ppm
(no tine
span given}
Phytoplankton
(various species)
Psaminechlnus
mlliavls
(sea urchin)
Ealanus balanoldes
(adult barnacles)
0.027 rag/1-
0.050 ng/1
ZOO ng/1 egg
abnormalities
(no time span
given)
0.5 mg/1
(B_. bala-
noldes)
8 mg/1
(B. bala-
noldes)
Nereis vlrens
(polychaete
worn)
Fuslnus kobeltl . snail
(molluak)
Haliotls fulgens - abalono
(mollusk)
lmg/1
threshold
0.1 ng/1
threshold
0.20 ppm
threshold
0.10 ppm
<100X mort.
0.05 ppm
<100X mort.
Ischnochlton
consjilcuus
(mollusk)
0.15 ppm
threshold
0.10 ppm
<100% mort.
Paphia staminea
var. laclntata
(mollusk)
3 ppm =50%
lethal
0.10 ppm
threshold
0.05 ppm
<100Z mort.
£. vlrldula var.
llgulata
0.10 ppm
threshold
0.05 ppm
< 100% mort.
-------
TABLE E-l (CONTINUED)
TOXIcm OF METALS*TO SELECTED MARINE ORGANISMS
Al
As
Cd
Cr
Cu
Pb
Hg
Sn
Zn
El. oyster
(Crassostrea
virginica)
0.2 mg/1
LC50
0.1 mg/1
LC50
0.5 mg/1
LC50 (12wks)
0.3 mg/1
(18wks)
0.1-0.2 mg/1
(12 weeks)
Noticeable
tissue changes
Mytllus cali-
fornlanus
(mussel)
M. edulis
(mussel)
Carcinus maenas
(shore crab)
Leander gquilla
(small prawn)
0.15 ppm
<100% mort.
(30 days)
0.10 ppm
<100% mort.
(60 days)
0.20 ppm
(17 days)
LC50
0.10 ppm
(35 days)
<100% mort.
40-60 ppm 1-2 ppm
threshold threshold
5 ppm 0.5 ppm
threshold threshold
*Toxlcltles are for 96 hours (4 days) or more, except where no time span IB given.
and manganese (Mn).
LC50 - Concentration required to kill 50Z of the organisms in a specified length of time (e.g. 96 hours).
Source: Oregon State University. 1971. Oceanography of the nearshore coastal waters of the Pacific Northwest relating to possible pollution.
Vol. II. Environmental Protection Agency, p. 84-98.
-------
TABIE E-2
TOXICITY OF PESTICIDES TO SELECTED MARINE ORGANISMS
M
8 3
C r-{ 0
•H .fl 0) t*t
a u e u Q X
•H -a TI a a o
VJ tH M *J TJ X
3f-i a> -a o. o u
Q -H C 11 -H OJ
•< Q Q W M J S3
Dunaliella 0.02 mg/1 7.5 mg/1
euchlora 17% growth 27% growth
(plankton- inhibition inhibition
flagellate)
Mor.ochrysis 0.02 me/1 1 me/1
lutheri 43% growth 14% growth
(plankton- inhibition inhibition
flagellate)
Crassostrea 0.025mg/l .005 mg/1 0.034mg/l 0.033mg/l
virginiea 50% de- LC,;n 50% de- 50% de-
(oyster) crease in crease in crease in
shell shell shell
growth growth growth
Crassostrea
gi-gas
(Pacific oyster
larvae)
Mytilus edulis
(bay mussel,
larvae)
Crangon 8 ug/1 0.6 Ug/1 7 ug/1 1.7 ug/1 8 Ug/1 5 Ug/1 4 Ug/1
septenspinosa LCjg LCsn LC™ LCsQ LC50 LCSO 1.050
(sand shriap)
Palaemonetes 9 ug/1 2.0 te/l 50 uR/1 1.8 ug/1 440 jig/1 10 ,ij/l \ -]7 V,E/]
Vy1fr^s («ra9S LC50 LC50 LC50 LC50 LC50 ' LC50 LC50
snrlcip^
JS
*H •*-*
2 2
S 1 o £
a £ 3 .H
5 Z «* « j:
t> X -H "
a H S S X
0.1 mg/1 0.01 mg/l
10% growth 10% growth
inhibition inhibition
0.1 mg/1 0.000015
13% growth mg/i 22%
inhibition growth
inhibition
1.0 mg/1
22% de-
crease in
shell
growth
2.2 mg/1 0.8 mg/1
50% de- 50% de-
velopment velopment
prevented prevented
2.3 mg/1 1.3 mg/1
50% de- 50% de-
velopment velopment
prevented prevented
33 Ug/1 2 ug/1
LC50 LC50
82 ug/1 3 ug/1
1C T P
LL50 LC50
I 3
•5 S
u ^
to m
a S
0, CM
1 Ug/1
LC50
69 ug/1
-------
TABLE E-2 (CONTINUED)
TOXICITY OF PESTICIDES TO SELECTED MARINE ORGANISMS
Penaeus aztecus
(brown shrimp)
0.0055
mg/1 50Z
loss of LC5Q
equilibrium
O.OOlmg/1 0.25 mg/1
LC50
Leiostonius
xanchurns
(juvenile spot)
0.0055
mg/1
LC
50
Cyprinodon
variegatus
(juvenile
sheepshead
minnow)
0.002mg/l 0.0055
mg/1
LC
50
LC
50
0.0006
mg/1
LC50
0.025mg/l 0.03mg/l 0.03mg/l
LC50 LC50 LC50
O.OOlmg/1 0.55mg/l
LC50 LC50
0.005mg/l
LC50
0.06mg/l 0.83mg/l
LC50 LC50
*Toxicities are for 48 hour C2 days) periods or longer.
^50 - Concentration required to kill 50% of the organisms In a specified length of time (e.g. 96 hours).
Source: Oregon State University. 1971. Oceanography of the nearshore coastal raters of the Pacific Noitht
egon
Vol. II.
ity.
Environmental Protection Agency, p. 101-110.
thvest relating to possible pollution.
-------
TABL!! B-3
MAMMAtlAN TOXICITY OF SELECTED METALS
Metal
Speclea
Dosa
Effects
Reference
Arsenic
Man
Cadmium Man
(Undefined)
Chronic intoxication
From vater and food
Neurologic changes, increased salivation, hoarse-
ness, cough, laryngitis, conjunctivitis, colicky
abdominal pain and various skin changes.
Hypertension linked to increased retention of Cd
in kidneys.
Vallee, B. L., D. D. Ulmer and W. E. C. Wacker.
1960. Arsenic toxicology and biochemistry.
AMA Arch. Ind. Health 21(2): 132-151.
Lucis, 0. J. and R. Lucis. 1969. Distribution
of cadmium*09 and zinces in mice of inbred
strains. Arch. Environ. Health 19(3): 334-336.
Stokinger, H. E. 1969. The spectre of today's
environmental pollution—U.S.A. brand: new per-
spectives from an old scout. American Ind. Hyg.
Assoc. J. 30: 195-217.
Chro
Cr+
ilum ion
Chromium ion
Cr+3
Mao From water - "high
concentration"
Man 25 mg/1 in drinking
water for 3 years
(<0.9 mg/kg/day)
Rat Diet deficient in Cr.
Disorders of renal function; phosphate level In
the blood serum decreases; sizeable loss of
minerals from the bones, "Itai Itai" disease.
No harmful effects
Antheroaclerosls; relative hypercholesteremla
which increased with age, with mild to moderate
hyperglycemia; increased incidence of aortic
plagues.
Anon. 1970a. when metal can mean hypertension.
Med. World New3 11: 30
Anon. 1970b.
News 48: 16.
Cadmium in Ouch Ouch. Chem. Eng.
Anon. 1971. Cadmium pollution end Ital-Ztal
disease. Lancet 1: 382-383.
Zehnpfennlg, R. G. 1967. Possible toxic effects ot
cyanates, thiocyanates, forricyanides, ferro~
cyanidesf and chromates discharged to surface
vater. In: Proc. 22nd Ind. Waste Conf. (2): 879-
883. Purdue Univ., Eng. Ext. Ser. 129.
Schroeder, H. A. 1970. Metallic micronutrients
and intermediary metabolism. U. S. Clearinghouse
Fed. Sci. Toch. Inform., AD 708581. 22 p.
Copper
(Undefined)
(only acute
dosages given)
Man
Man
10,000 mg/kg
60-100 mg
10-30 mg
Lethal
Gastroenteritis with nausea and Intestinal
irritation.
1
No poisoning even after many days.
Grunau, E. B. 1967. Significance of copper in
drinking vater. Staedtehygiene 18(7): 153-164.
McKee, J. E. and H. W. Kolf (ed). 1963. Water
quality criteria. The Resources Agency of
California, State Water Quality Control Board,
No. 3-A. 548 p.
McKee and Wolf (1963).
Lead Kan
(Undefined)
Man
Man
2.0-4.0 mg/1 for 3
months (<.07-.14 rag/
kg/day)
Harmful range.
From drinking water - Disorder of renal function; phosphate level
high concentration in the blood serum decreases; sizeable loss of
minerals from bone.
Chronic lead poison-
Ing
Microcytic anemia and encej hnlopathy
Offner, H. C. and E. F. Witucki. 1968. Toxic
inorganic materials and their emergency detection
by polarographlc method. J. Aner. Water Works Assoc.
60(8): 947-952.
Anon. (19706)
Shaw, M. W. 1970. Human chromosome damage by
chemical agents. Ann. Kev. Mcd, 21: 409-432.
-------
Metal
Lead
Pb
Species
Dose
Man
MAMMALIAN TOXICITY OF SELECTED METALS
Effects
Much like multiple sclerosis; CNS damage
Reference
Wilber, C. G. 1969. The biological aspects of
water pollution. Charles C. Thomas, Springfield,
111. 96 p.
Manganese
(Undefined)
Mercury*
Rat 25 mg/1 for life
(and mouse) (2.5 and 3.6 mg/kg/
day)
Rat
Han
Nickel
(Undefined)
Zinc
(Undefined)
Man
Man
Rat
Kan
Significant decrease in survival and longevity)
no effect on growth rate.
Significant increase in oerum cholesterol in
female only; decrease in s^rum glucose in male;
no effect on blood pressure or aortic plagues.
Three persons died as a renult of poisoning by
well water contaminated liy manganese derived
from dry cell batteries buried nearby.
Over a long period of Anxiety, excessive self-consciousness, diffi-
tirae - in food, water, culty in concentrating, irritability, resent-
etc. ment of criticism, headache, fatigue, blush-
ing and excessive perspiration.
Small amounts
From drinking water
high concentration.
Produce kidney damage, muscular tremors.
Irritability, and depression.
Decrease In serum cholesterol in male; decrease
in serum glucose- in female; no effect on blood
•pressure or aortic plagues.
Disorder of renal function; phosphate level
in the blood serum decreases; sizeable loss of
minerals from the bones; "Itai Itai" disease.
Schroeder (1970).
Schroeder (1970).
McKee and Wolf (1963).
Anon. 1970c. Mercury menace prompts firm to
offer test data. Int. Res. 12(10): 25.
Anon. 1970d. Mercury and mud. Sci. Amer.
223(3): 82-86.
Schroeder (1970).
Anon. (1970b).
*U.S. Department of Commerce Fishery Market N.ews Report, dated Thursday, August 10, 1972, states that in Italy the mercury tolerance level for frozen
fish is 0.7 ppo) and for canned tuna 1.0 ppo. The FDA haa set a limit of 0.5 ppm of mercury in fish for the United States.
Source: Little, A. D. 1971. Water Quality Criteria Data Book, Vol. 2. Inorganic chemical pollution of freshwater. Environmental Protection
Agency! p. 139-187.
-------
TABLE E-4
INDUSTRIAL POLLUTIONAL S~OURC"S CONTRIBUTING TO THE DETERIORATION
OR TOXICITY OF AQUATIC LIFE IN SAN FRANCISCO BAY
1971S/
Source
Settleable
M.itter
mg/l/hr:.
Union Oil E-2
Suspended Oil and
Solids Grease
mg/1 mg/1
pH Cr Cu£/ Pb
mg/1 m|',/l mg/1
Fish Toxicity
Zn Phenol 96 hr. Fish Toxicity BOD Temp
mg/1 mg/1 I Survival TLm mg/1 *C
0-100 0
(81)
California and Hawaiian
Sugar
Co. E-E
E-H
E-V
Tr-17.7
(1.9)
Tr-3.7
(0.97)
Tr-0.75
(.116)
14-3,236
(353)
9.3-177
(54.9)
13-128
(65)
Phillips Petroleum Co.
Avon Refinery
EA-2
0.03-0.48*
(0.12)
D. S. Steel Corp E-l
E-2
E-3
<.02-3.07*
(0.40)
Shell Oil Co. Pond f5
19-73
(30.7)
6.1-8.6
(7.1)
9.3-11.7
(10.5)
6.8*-8.7
(7.8)
0.11-1.14
(0.43)
N.D.-0.06 N.D.-.27
(0.022) (0.06)
N.D.-0.06
(0.02)
N.D.-0.06
(0.02)
45-100 510-2,820 24.3-52.7
(88.2) (1,395) C41>Q)
27.7-50.5
(37.5)
50-100 320-2.580
(89.2) (l,342)
0-100 25-100
(37.1) (74)
0.04-0.48 40-100
(0.21) (84.2)
13-352 23-94
(182) (34)
Shell Oil Co.
Merck
Humble
Chemical Division
Stream A
Stream B
Stream C
Stream D
Stream E
Stream F
Stream G
Oil 4 Refinery Co.
0-43
(7.1)
0-100
(11.3)
.2-407 1
(236)
92-331 2
(195)
.2-405
(77.8)
0-23
(4.4)
0-16
(1.8)
170-472
(335)
25-71
(53.5)
,246-3,520
(2,330)
,216- 44,300
(10,200)
770-7,564
(2,740)
30-380
(224)
66-290
(179)
7.9-9.1*
(8.6)
8.1-10.3*
(8.9)*
8.2-10.4*
(9.6)
9.7-10.4*
(10.1)*
8.3-10.3*
(9.4)*
9.0-10.3*
(9.6)*
8.9-10.8*
(9.8)*
0-100 0.5-25
(63.5)
0-100 0.28-25
(41.5) (9.9)
0-100 6.7-25
(71.5)
60-100
(94)
0-100 36-100
(35) (80)
<0.1-1.7 43-100 33-186
(0.6) (69) (77)
Colgate PalEOlive
Coopany E-l
31
-------
TABU E-4 >
poLumoKAL SOURCES CONTRIBUTISO TO THE DETEMOIIATIO!!
OR TOXICITT OF AQUATIC LIFE IK SAM PBAKCISCO BAY
Settleable Suspended Oil and
Mxrrer Solids Grease pM
Stream B 3.8-8.1
(7.5)
Chevron Cheaicsl Co. 0.0-5.5 4.9 -7.4
Ortho Division (0.5) (6.6)
Sequoia Refining Co. 3.2-18.5*
(10.6)
Cerro Copper and Braaa
Company
E. I. Dupont 0.8-15.2
(4.5)
Tlllle Lewis Food 31 5(0 3.3
Crown Zellerbaeh 95-132
(110)
Kaiser Cypsua 54-147
(85)
Stauffer Chealcal Co.
Martinez
Fish To»lcltr
Cr Cu£/ Fb Zn Phenol 96 hr. Fiah Toxielty BOO Tes»
«lt/l ««/l M/l .8/1 «B/1 * Survival TL. wt/1 *C
0-0.09
(0.02)
Mil -0.09
(0.03)
1.5-73
(20)
0.1-O.B* 32-100 74«-4I6»
(0.3) (68) (243)«
.Ot-^B*^ 0.05-.35 0.32- .97
(.21) (.24) (.83)
0.10-.70 1.8-3.3 0-53
(0.34) (2.7) (25)
0.005-.07 0.04-0.09 0.10-1.04 0»-100
(0.0)2) (0.07) (0.62)
Pfizer Minerals
Pigments & Metala Division
2" pipe
Kaiser Steel Corporation
Metala Products Dlvialon
Drain No. 4
Drain No. 7
Stanford Linear Accelerator
Center
Granada Sanitary District
Allied Chealcal Corp.
Shell Developaent Co.
Teoeseal Creek.
Fiber/board Corp.
San Joaquln
Stauffer Chemical Co.
Richmond
10.3-10.7
9-Z4
(17)
(0.7)
Canpbell Chain 0,2-3.5
Olv. of United Industrie* (1.8)
FMC Corporation 0.2-3.5
(1.6)
92-1J6
(116)
213-293
(239)
6.8-137.4
(54.3)
6.8-137.4
(54.3)
21-36
(2B)
7.6-33
(30.3)
52-57
(55)
30-100
(87.5)
230-290
(269)
3.2-3.4
(4.3)
7.3-9.2
(8.5)
0.02-0.11
(O.P6)
0.94
*Vlolatlon of effluent requirements.
v'/ n5«r" represent "" r°nge ln 'wcentratloni vlth cha «ean concentration In parentheses.
£.' N.D. + Not detectsbla.
29.4-3S.7
(30.6)
21.7-45.6
(36)
27-41
(33)
-------
•MMBSMfl POLLUTION CONTRIBUTINO TO THE DETERIORATION OR TOXITTT OF AQUATIC LIFE
IN SAN FRANCISCO BAY, AND IS A HUMAN HEALTH 1AXARD
1971S/
Source >>»"«
rc/l/hr.
XAPA Sewage District
City of San Carlos Sewage
Treatnent Plane
North San Mateo County
Seva£< District
Milpltas Sewage District
San Rafael Sewage District
City of Los Altos Sewage
District
Las Callinas Valley Sewage
District
Cltv of Mlllbrae Sewage
Sajsallto-Marln City Sewag«
District
City of rittsburg
>VnteZL,^a Plant
City of Pittsburg
Ca^p Stonecari
Tstro 'Municipal laprovement
district
City of Pacifies.
Linda Han Plant
Cltv of Benicla
Concra Costa County
Sewage District £7-A
Mar in County Sewage
District '5
San Ouentin Prison
Cro,:kett-\'alona Sevaga
nistrlct
Ant-loch Vtaste Treatnene
Hint
Suspended
Solids
riK/1
36-90
(66)
55-126
(101)
98-144
(118)
30-96
(47)
61-129
(79)
68-85
(76)
62-126
(94)
43-142
(70)
82-118
(92)
123-211
(151)
74-222
(121)
62-106
(85)
63-136
(93)
91-158
(134)
Oil nnd
Grease Cr Cu
mH/1 nn/1 ">B/1
1.0-19.0
(8.3)
14.0-33.0
(21.4)
48.7-71.5
(55.8)
4.0-19.7
(11.5)
5.9-18.3*
(9.2)
13.6-26.9*
(18.6)*
5.0-15.4*
(8.9)
24-36
(31)
49.5-61.4
(55.4)
35.1-43
(39)
3.6-40.3
(21.5)
34.1-55.7
(43)
18.2-138
(52.4)
27-37
(32)
20*-94*
(38)"
47*-68*
(50)*
38«-51.4*
(43)*
Fleh Toxlcity
Cd Pb Phenol 96 hr. Fl«h Toxlcity BOD Turbidity
mg/3 Bg/1 ng/1 x Survival TLnt „»/! J.T.I:.
40-131
(95)
176-206
(188)
0*-100 57*-100 4 i 6-12 .4*
(45)* (83) (7.8)
20-80
(38)
69-153
(108)
41-65*
(48)
10 68-88
0-0* 6*-71* 130-212
(0) (34)* (163)
107-240
(173)
47-108
(77)
16.8-115
(40.9)
20-33 103-130
(24) (118)
184-423
(301)
0-0 14-2S 85-150
(0) (20) (112)
0-30* 21*-69* 157-206
(15)* (45)* (108)
76-189
(159)
93-148
(125)
70-275
(137)
Collforo
WN/101) -.1
24-16,900
C.364)
-------
TABLE E-5 (CONTINUED)
DOMESTIC POLLUTIOM CONTRIBUTING TO TI1E DETERIORATION OR TOXICITT 0? AQUATIC Lin
IN SAK FRANCISCO DAY, AND IS A HUMAN HEALTH HAZARD
AY, AN
7li/
Setclcablo
Source Hatter
M/l/hr.
San Jose-&ant« Cltra 0-7.4*
(1.5)
tast Bay HUD - Sev«g«
District 11
*ltv ar,d County of
San Francisco
Worth ?olnc Plant
Southeast Plant 0,58-4.75*
(2.19)*
Rlchnond-Sunset
Sewage District
5'jnnyvala
City of Palo Alto Scvag*
Treataent Plane
San Mateo, City of
San Pablo Sewage District
. Sao Pablo Plant
Tara Rills Plant
City of Mountain View
City of South San Francisco
San Bruno Treatment Plane
Vallejo Sewage District
City of San Leandro
Henlo Park Sewage District
"Union Scvage Dlatrict
Plant *1
Plant 92
Suspended
Solida
mp./l
113-205
(107)
184-368
(282)
54-102
<69)
65~82
(74)
38-125
(60)
49.0-76.0
(59.9)
79-103
(92.5)
48-129
(105)
103-2U
(162)
34-86
(58)
31-146
(72)
72-102
(84)
25-105
(69)
70-100
(84)
50-66
(56)
Oil and
Crease Cr Cu
t»8/l mc/1 me/1
5.4-22.3
(9.8)
16-38 0.121-1.20 0.08-0.36
(24) (.445) (0.19)
16.6-33.3 0.08-O.U
(23.7) (0.10)
58*-89* 1.05-3.3 0.11-0.46
(71) (2.16) (0.24)
35-47.5
(38 .-2)
29—45
(38)
4.8-J7.0*
(15.3)*
32-52
(44)
25-55 <0.02-0.23
(46) (0.11)
62-101
(75)
18.4*-22.9*
(21.2)*
7-26 0.1-1.2 0.25-0.6
(16) (0.38) (0.44)
30-44
(40)
8.7-19.3
(12.8)
14.7-20.0
(18.4)
•Fish Toxlclty
Cd Fb Phenol 96 hr.
mi/1 mo/1 ma/1 * Survival
0.10-0:2) 0.02-0.36 0-70
(0.15) (0.13) (9.2)
0-100
(55)
0.02-0.81
(0.20) 0-100
(15)
0
(0)
0-100
(40)
0-70
(6.4)
0
(0)
0.0-0.1 0.0-1.0 .007-. 251 0
(0.06) (0.45) (0.070) (0)
0-100'
(41)
0-0
Flih Toxlclty
TLo.
15-100
(38)
36-MOO
(88)
12-100
(51)
27-65
(51)
38-100
(72)
14.5-100
(40)*
5.6-21
(8.9)
17-86
(52)
25-49
(34)
26-100
(40)
BOD TurbldUr Collforv
BK/1 J.T.U. M7S/100 nl
113-242
(170)
102-148
(124)
176-281 l.406.000-«1.910.000*
(217) (44.201.285)*
122-146
(139)
114-173
(136)
53-133
(93)
118-179
(147)
145-250
(211)
220-363
f •>«)
109-179
(143)
66-139
(104)
113-195 28-999*
(156) (198)
48-143
(91)
109-U1
(123)
41-86
(59)
*Violation of effluent requirements.
-'?ixura« represent tha range to concentration* irtth th« n*«n cpnc«»tration In p«*nth«»M.
-------
APPENDIX F
-------
i-rancisco Bay Area fish Kill Reports for Period
of January 1, 1S5!> through April, 1972
Reference No.
1
2
Date
July 21, 1965
August 24, 1965
Location
Tidewater Pier
•at Avon-Suisun Bay,
Contra Costa County
Oyster Point
San Francisco
Bay, San Mateo
County
Species
Striped Bass
Minnow
Starry Flounder
Striped Bass
Halibut
Other Fish
Mollusk
Number
90,000
1,000
100
75
25
750
10,000+
Cause
011,
Refinery
waste
Bay Fill
May 2, 1966
May 14, 1966
May 25, 1966
June 1, 1966
June 13, 1966
Novato Creek,
Bell Marin Keyes
Lagoon and San Pablo
Bay, Marin and
Sonoma Counties
Carquinez Strait
at Port Costa,
Contra Costa County
San Pablo Bay
at Union Oil Refinery
Rodeo, Contra Costa
County
Mission Rock Resourt
Center and Boat Center
San Francisco, S. F.
County
Railroad Bridge at
Martirez, Contra
Costa County
Striped Bass
Striped Bass
Striped Bass
Anchovy
Striped Bass
120
7,000
7,200
Unknown
Unknown
Phenol
Unknown
Possibly 011
-------
Reference No. Date
8 June 16,
9 June 24,
10 July 22,
11 August 9
12 May 21,
13 Sept. 7,
14 Dec. 15,
15 June 7,
16 August 6
17 June 8,
1966
1966
1966
, 1966
1967
1967
1967
1968
, 1968
1969
Location
Petaluma River,
Sonoma County
Suisun Bay
Near Mothball
fleet, Solano County
Petaluma River,
Sonoma County
Leslie Salt Co.
Sears Point,
Solano County
San Leandro Marina,
Alameda County
Mare Island,
Solano County
Foster City Lagoon,
San Mateo County
Suisun Bay,
Contra Costa County
Ross Post Office
Ross, Marin
County
Alameda Beach
S. F. Bay, Alameda
Species
Striped Bass
Striped Bass
Carp
Striped Bass
Striped Bass
Shiners
Striped Bass
Staghorn Sculplns
Topsmelt
Anchovy
Striped Bass
Steel head
Sculpin
Roach
Striped Bass
Spiny Dog Shark
Number
150
25
90
1 ,000+
162
2,000
500+
20
18,000
2,000
25
25
250
250
2
3
Cause
Low D.O.
Unknown
Unknown
High Salt
concentration
Low D.O.
Oil
Unknown
Unknown
Raw
Sewage
Possibly Pest
County
-------
Table F-l (Continued)
Reference No.
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Date
Location
Species
Number
Cause
June 11, 1969
June 14, 1969
July 19, 1969
August 21, 1969
Sept. 1, 1969
Oct. '23, 1969
May 18, 1970
May 20, 1970
Bel Marin Keys
Near Novato,
Marin County
Alameda Estuary
Near Government
Island, Alameda County
Port Chicago and
Martinez, Contra
Costa County
Larkspur Lagoon,
Marin County
West of Sears
Point Bridge,
Solano County
Westerly & off
Crawford Slough
(area adjacent
to Grizzly Island),
Solano County
Bel Marin Keys,
Marin County
West Leslie Salt
Pond, Hwy. 37 and
Sonoma Creek,
Solano County
~ *v •
Carp
Striped Bass
Striped Bass
Striped Bass
Catfish
Shad
Striped Bass
Striped Bass
Striped Bass
Sucker
Perch
Bay Mussels
Striped Bass
Striped Bass
Flounder
Bullhead
15
6
6
75
12
2
25
2,500
450
1
1
15
2,000
1
75
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Pollution
Low 0.0.
Unknown
Unknown
Algal Bloom
with possible
Low D.O.
Unknown
Algal Bloom
with possible
Low D.O.
-------
Table f-1 (Continued)
Reference No.
26
27
28
29
30
31
Date
May 20, 1970
May 20, 1970
June 23, 1970
Location
Port Costa
Waterfront,
Contra Costa
County
Nelson Resort
downstream to
mouth of Mare
Island Channel
and Carquinez
Straits, Solano
and Napa Counties
Striped Bass
Striped Bass
Napa River between
Vallejo and Cuttings
Wharf, Napa County
Striped Bass
Number
Several
Hundred
1,100
80
Cause
Unknown
(Annual Loss)
Unknown
May 24, 1970
May 30, 1970
June 1, 1970
Suisun Bay,
Contra Costa and
Solano Counties
Carquinez Straits
from Crockett
upstream to Antioch,
Contra Costa and
Solano Counties
Antioch Bridge
to Crockett,
Solano County
Striped Bass
Striped Bass
Shad
Catfish
Striped Bass
Sturgeon
Shad
Rough Fish
25
123
5
8
750
25
25
25
Unknown
(Annual Loss)
Unknown
(Annual Loss)
Unknown
(Annual Loss)
Unknown
-------
Table F-1 (Continued)
Reference No.
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
Date
Nov. 8, 1970
April 8, 1971
May 6, 1971
May 19, 1971
May 20, 1971
May 22, 1971
May 22, 1971
Location
Redwood City
Municipal Marina,
San Mateo County
Pier 35, South Side
San Francisco,
San Francisco County
Lake Merritt,
Oakland,
Alameda County
Redwood City
Municipal Yacht
Harbor, San Mateo
County
Canal off Petalurna
River and at Bel
Mar in Keys off
Novato Creek,
Marin County
Benecia Flats,
Contra Costa County
Off Antioch near
Kimbal Island,
Contra Costa County
Species
Black Perch
Shiner Perch
Walleye Perch
Northern Anchovy
Rock Cod
Starry Flounder
Assorted Perches
Shrimp
Perch
Gobie
Bullhead
Shiner Perch
Anchovy
Striped Bass
.Striped Bass
Carp
Squawfish
Number
1,000
10,000
1,000
500
40
10
70
5,000
1,000
100
75
2
15
500
Cause
Unknown
Low 0.0. a
contributing
factor
Unknown
Unknown
Possibly Redwood City
S.T.P
Probably D.O.
Extensive algal bloom
Unknown, Red tide conditloi
in Carquinez Strait
from Port Costa to
Crockett
Unknown, Red Tide
conditions in Carquinez
Strait from Port Costa
to Crockett
-------
Reference No.
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
Date
May 29, 1971
June 30, 1971
June 7 to
July 12, 1971
June 7 to
July 12, 1971
June 7 to
July 12, 1971
June 7 to
July 12, 1971
Sept. 17, 1971
Oct. 15, 1971
Location
Midshipmen Point—
Tubbs Island,
Solano County
San Leandro Bay
near mouth of
San Leandro Creek,
Oakland, and
San Leandro Creek
from mouth of
Hagenberger Road,
Alameda County
Lower Napa River,
Napa County
Eastern San Pablo
Bay, Napa and
Contra Costa
Counties
Carquinez Strait,
Solano and Contra
Costa Counties
Suisun Bay, Solano
and Contra Costa
Counties
Redwood Shores
Redwood City,
San Mateo County
Tidal Creek behind
440 DuBois Street
San Rafael,
Marin County
Table P-l (Continued)
Species
Striped Bass
Striped Bass
Striped Bass
Striped Bass
Striped Bass
Striped Bass
Bait Fish
Shrimp
Turbot
Mudsucker
& Unknown Amount
of Cleaned-up Fish
Unknown Fry
Stickleback
100
90
(Boat count)
89
(Boat count)
362
(Boat count)
122
(Boat count.)
2,000
8,000
1
300
35
15
Cause
Entrapment and
Elevated Temperatures
Low Tides, Low D.O.
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Poor Water
Circulation in
a Closed Lagoon
System. Possibly
Low D.O.
Possibly Sewage
-------
APPENDIX G
-------
APPENDIX G
WASTE SOURCE EVALUATION TECHNIQUES
The sampling program for the industrial and municipal dis-
chargers included two visits to each facility. A preliminary visit
was made to determine the unit processes in operation and the
general operating condition of each plant. The effluent sampling
point designated by the Regional Board for plant self-monitoring
reports was inspected at that time and in most cases selected as
the EPA sampling point for the study. In addition, at each muni-
cipal treatment plant an inventory questionnaire, routinely re-
quired by the EPA, and a San Francisco Bay study questionnaire were
filled out to provide general information on the facility for future
reference.
During the second visit, EPA collected both 24-hour composite
samples, and four-hour composite samples, depending on the nature
of the parameter. Table G-l denotes the type of composite samples
taken for each specific parameter.
-------
TABLE G-l
WASTE SOURCE SAMPLING
PARAMETER TYPE OF SAMPLE
BOD 4 hour composite
COD 24 and 4 hour composite
Set Solids 4 hour composite
N03~N 24 and 4 hour composite
Kjeldahl-N 24 and 4 hour composite
Total P 24 and 4 hour composite
Oil and grease 24 and 4 hour composite
Toxicity 4 hour composite
Total coliform GRAB
Sulfide 4 hour composite
Phenols 4 hour composite
Cr (total chromium) 4 hour composite
Ni (nickel) 4 hour composite
Zn (zinc) 4 hour composite
Cu (copper) 4 hour composite
Cd (cadmium) 4 hour composite
Suspended solids 4 hour composite
Mercaptans 4 hour composite
pH Hourly
Temperature Hourly
-------
TABLE G-2
MUNICIPAL DISCHARGES—COMPARISON OF WASTE-SOURCE DATA-'
a/
PARAMETERS
Flow BOD
DISCHARGER
City of San Jose
Self-monitoring reports—
EPA testing^
City of Oakland, East
Bay MUD
Self-monitoring reports
EPA testing
City of San Francisco
Southeast plant
Self-r.onitoring reports
EPA testing
City of San Mateo
Self-nonitoring reports
EPA testing
City of South San
Francisco
Self-monitoring reports
EPA testing
City of San Francisco
North Point plant
Self-monitoring reports
EPA testing
City of San Pablo^
Self-monitoring reports
EPA testing
mgd mg/1
(x
82.9 39
d/ 2Z
[94 ]S/
78.9 170
Ib/d
103)
26.9
15.2
111.9
>277 >180.0
22.1 217
169
11.0 147
175
7.2 104
187
64.1 124
114
7.6 211
34
40.0
31.1
13.5
16.0
6.2
11.2
66.3
60.8
13.4
2.2
COD Oil & Grease
mg/1
(x
107
699
629
371
420
381
350
191
230
51
Ib/d rag/1 Ib/d
103) (x 103)
9.8 6.8
73.7
24 15.8
458.9
115.7 71 13.1
68.2 23 4.2
[30]
44 4.0
38.4
22.8 16 1.0
21.0
101.9 24 12.7
122.7
46 2.9
3.2
NOj-N Total KJ-N Total P
mg/1
0.05
2.6
0.50
0.29
0.04
0.46
0.06
1.3
0.29
1.9
14.24
Ib/d mg/1 Ib/d mg/1 Ib/d
(x 103) (x 103)
34 44.8 30.9 8.9 6.1
1,707 46.8 30.7 8.6 5.6
92
53 44,5 8.2 3.4 0.6
4 49.7 4.5 10.7 1.0
27
4 46.0 2.8 7.5 0.4
693
155 23.0 12.3 2.9 1.5
120
900 4.5 0.3 13.9 0.9
Sett. Solids
jnl/l/hr
<1.0
[1.0]
0.21
0.17
1.88
0.6
0.6
<0.1
0.8
<0.1
Central Contra Costa
County San. Dist.
Self-nonitoring reports
EPA testing
22.8^-' 136 25.9
103 19.5 236 44.8
38 7.2
0.04 7.6 37.8 7,2 9.0 1.7
0.13
-------
TABLE G-2
MUNICIPAL DISCHARGES—COMPARISON OF WASTE-SOURCES DATA (cent.)—
DISCHARGER
pH
PARAMETERS
Toxicity
Survival
96-hr
TL50
Chromium
mg/1
Ib/d
mg/1
Copper
Mercury
Lead
Zinc
Ib/d mg/1
Ib/d
mg/1 Ib/d mg/1
Ib/d
City of San Jose
self-monitoring reports
EPA testing
City of Oakland, East
Bay MUD
self-monitoring reports
EPA testing
City of San Francisco
Southeast plant
self-monitoring reports
EPA testing
City of San Mateo
self-monitoring reports
EPA testing
City of South San
Francisco
self-monitoring reports
EPA testing
City of San Francisco
North Point plant
self-monitoring plant
EPA testing
City of San Pablo
self-monitoring reports
EPA testing
Central Contra Costa
County San. Dist.
self-monitoring reports
EPA testing
8.0
6.7 9.2
0
7.2
6.9
[6.5- . 0
8.5]^
6.9 0
7.5
55
0
6.4
100
76
38
22
45
65
52
46
92
40
51
0.44
0.46
2.16
1.18
0.83
0.06
0.04
292
302
397
217
22.8
32
253
0.19
0.11
0.24
0.06
0.44
0.10
0.11
125
72
44
11
0.001
0.002
0.6
0.3
26 0.004
53 0.07
0.2
36
0.13
0.28
0.20
0.08
0.45
0.18
0.11
85
184
37
15
27
96
0.81
0.48
0.90
0.18
0.2
0.35
534
315
165
33
12
22
a/ There are no "self-raonitorlnp" data reported for coliforras
and chlorine residuals.
b_/ All reports are dated 1971.
£/ All testing was carried out in 1972.
d/ Bracketed figures indicate State Regional Board Requirements.
e/ Recent improvements include a secondary treatment plant.
£/ State Regional Board Requirements call for a value not to ex-
ceed 45 mgd for any consecutive 7-day .average.
£/ State Regional Board Requirements call for pll values to be
between 7,0 (min) and 8,5 (max),
-------
TABLE G-3
MUNICIPAL DISCHARGERS-COLIFORM DATA
1972 SAMPLING BY ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
SAN JOSE S.T.P.
North Point WPCP
San Mateo WPCP
Southeast S.F.
WPCP
Joint, South S.F.
& San Bruno
WPCP
Sample
Nos.
SJ-1
SJ-2
SJ-3
SJ-4
SJ-5
SJ-6
NP-1
NP-2
NP-3
NP-4
SM-1
SM-2
SM-3
SM-4
SE-1
SE-2
SE-3
SE-4
SS-1
SS-2
SS-3
SS-4
Time /Date
Collected
1000/Aug.
1100/Aug.
1200/Aug.
1300/Aug.
1400/Aug.
1500/Aug.
1115/Jul.
1236/Jul.
1336/Jul.
1435/Jul.
1125/Aug.
12 25 /Aug.
1325/Aug.
1425/Aug.
1235/Jul.
1335/Jul.
1435/Jul.
1535/Jul.
1020/Aug.
1120/Aug.
1220/Aug.
1320/Aug.
Coliform
Bacteria/100 ml
2
2
2
2
2
2
31
31
31
31
1
1
1
1
31
31
31
31
1
1
1
1
Total
200
6,600
7,800
5,300
2,000
6,100
580
290
200
200
620
27,000
360,000
360,000
200
200
280
200
200
200
260,000
200
Fecal
200
3,200
3,700
4,500
1,400
4,500
200
200
200
200
200
2,800
160,000
6,000
200
200
200
200
200
200
200,000
200
Chlorine
Residual
ppm
2.40
2.10
2.10
1.90
2.10
2.10
4.00
4.25
3.98
5.50
0.53
0
0
0.20
5.8
4.8
1.3
6.9
8.5
8.2
8.0
8.8
Minutes Holding
Time
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
10
10
10
35
35
35
35
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-------
TABLE G-3 (Cont.)
MUNICIPAL DISCHARGERS-COLIFORM DATA
1972 SAMPLING BY ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
East Bay MUD
WPCP
Redwood City WPCP
Joint San Carlos
& Belmont WPCP
San Pablo WPCP
Sample
Nos.
EB-1
EB-2
EB-3
EB-4
EB-5
EB-6
RC-1
RC-2
RC-3
RC-4
RC-5
RC-6
SB-1
SB-2
SB-3
SP-1
SP-2
SP-3
SP-4
SP-5
SP-6
Time/Date
Collected
1015/Aug.
1115/Aug.
1215/Aug.
1320/Aug.
14 15 /Aug.
1520/Aug.
1200/Aug.
1300/Aug.
1400/Aug.
1500/Aug.
1600/Aug.
1700/Aug.
1300/Aug.
14 5 O/ Aug.
1500/Aug.
10 25 /Aug.
1125/Aug.
1230/Aug.
1325/Aug.
1425/Aug.
15 25 /Aug.
9
9
9
9
9
9
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
14
14
14
14
14
14
Coliform
Bacteria/100 ml
Total
4
7
14
8
23
266
77
180
153
133
,900
,900
,000
,300
,000
200
,000
,000
,000
,000
,000
200
580
200
200
380
580
200
200
200
200
Fecal
350
960
2,400
1,100
2,800
200
51,000
11,300
33,000
3,200
6,200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
Chlorine
Residual Minutes Holding
ppm Time
7
5
6
6
10
11
7
9
8
9
8
2
3
3
1
1
2
2
4
4
.3
.4
.45
.05
.03
.7
.5
.4
.9
.7
.7
.7
.5
.4
.85
.10
.25
.70
.20
.4
0
0
0
0
0
0
30
30
30
0
0
0
0
0
0
-------
TABLE G-4
INDUSTRIAL DISCHARGES—COMPARISON OF WASTE-SOURCE DATA
PARAMETERS
DISCHARGER
Standard Oil. Co.
(Richmond)- ,,
Testing program—
Self-monitoring data
C/E Permit data
Union Oil Co. (Rodeo)
OUTFALL 001
Testing program .
Self-monitoring data—
C/E Permit data
OUTFALL 002
Testing program .
Self-monitoring data—
C/E Permit data
Shell Oil Co.
(W. Pittsburg)
OUTFALL 001
Testing program
Self-monitoring data
C/E Permit data
Phillips Petroleum
( Avon )
OUTFALL 001
Testing program
Self-monitoring data
C/E Permit data
OUTFALL 003
Testing program
Self-monitoring data
C/E Permit data
Dow Chemical Co.
(Pittsburg)
Testing program
Self-monitoring data
C/E Permit data
AVR. Flow
(mgd)
112.6
112
121
7.2
10.1
7.2
38
37
48.4
4.4
4.5
4.3
10.9
14.9
12.1
0.04
1
26.2
24.1
25
BOD
mg/1
8.0
15
0.4
1.0
7.8
18
16
7.8
182
330
22
23
43
2.9
3.6
7.2
30
Ib/d,
(x 10J)
7.5
15.5
0.02
0.08
0.09
2.5
5.6
6.5
0.3
6.8
11.9
2.0
2.8
4.4
i/
0.03
1.6
7.3
COD
mg/1
111
83
65
233
172
153
190
699
1,010
136
157
230
e/
92
166
25
40
Ib/d.
(x 10J)
104.0
86.0
3.9
7.9
73.7
52.9
61.8
6.9
26.2
36.5*
12.3
19.1
23.2
1.4
5.4
9.0
Oil &
mg/1
3.4
4.5
4.0
11.9
0.6
1.1
16.3
8.6
6.9
20
30.7
80
6.2
3.6
5.9
if
5.2
2
0.9
0.5
f/
Grease
Ib/d
(x 10J)
3.2
4.2
4.1
0.71
0.05
0.07
5.2
2.6
2.8
0.7
1.2
2.9
0.6
0.4
0.6
0.04
0.4
0.2
0.1
N03-N
mg/1
0.18
0.17
0.29
0.18
-0.11
0.14
0.05
16.3
25.2
0.04
0.20
0.03
<0.1
0.22
0.22
0.50
Ib/d
168
175
17
16
57
34
57
1.8
612
910
3.6
20.2
0.83
48
44
110
NHr-N
mg/1
8.2
10
0.14
0.42
2.4
1.0
2.35
3.32
6.6
23.6
16
35
0.19
0.07
Ib/d
7,680
10,300
8
18
133
741
404.
85.2
125
240
2,140
1,948
3,540
0.58
Total Kj-N
mg/1
10.6
9
0.35
0.95
1.5
7.15
8.19
10.2
29.7
43
0.81
0.1
0.48
0.50
Ib/d
9,930
9,060
21
38
300
606
259
307
370
2,693
4,350
0.83
104.6
100
Total P
.mg/1
0.18
0.64
0.11
0.12
0.09
0.16
0.19
4.67
0.38
0.64
0.28
0.11
0.09
0.10
0.56
0.5
Ib/d
168
660
7
10
28
49.4
77
169
14
58
28.2
0.75
22
113
100
-------
TABLE G-4
INDUSTRIAL DISCHARGES—COMPARISON OF WASTE-SOURCE DATA (Cont.)
PARAMETERS
Susp. Solids
DISCHARGER
Standard Oil Co. (Richmond)
Testing program
Self-monitoring data
C/E Permit data
Union Oil Co. (Rodeo)
OUTFALL 001
Testing program .
Self-monitoring data—
C/E Permit data
OUTFALL 002
Testing program .
Self-monitoring data—
C/E Permit data
Shell Oil Co. (W. Pittsburg)
OUTFALL 001
Testing program
Celf-monitoring data
C/E Permit data
Phillips Petroleum (Avon)
OUTFALL 001
Testing program
Self-monitoring data
C/E Permit data
OUTFALL 003
Testing program
Self-monitoring data
C/E Permit data
Dow Chemical Co. (Pittsburg)
Testing program
Self-monitoring data
C/E Permit data
mg/1
29'
26
23
-22.7
75
15
-8.33
106
29
21
17
23
41
47
-
15
73
lb/d,
(x 10J)
27.2
26.9
1.4
-1.9
4.5
4.7
-2.6
42.8
1.1
0.8
0*6
.
2.1jy
5.0r[/
4.8-
0.6
Coliforms
Total
MPN/100 ml
£/
Confluent
268
350
h/
<200
<200
1,817
If
68,000
830
k/
m/
3,860
2,400
o/
< 67
< 45
Fecal
MPN/100 ml
£/
colonies
h/
<200
<200
I/
< 67
k/
>600
< 67
< 45
Toxicity
96-hr Survival
TL";o %
90
98
i/
100
99.1
I/
100
81
41 10
27
I/
100
74 37.1
98
i/
100
100
-------
TABLE G-4
INDUSTRIAL DISCHARGES—COMPARISON OF WASTE-SOURCE DATA (Cent.)
Cadmium Chromium
DISCHARGER
Standard Oil Co. (Richmond)
Testing program
Self-monitoring data
C/E Permit data
Union Oil Co. (Rodeo)
OUTFALL 001
Testing program .
Self-monitoring data^-
C/E Permit data
OUTFALL 002
Testing program .
Self-monitoring data—
C/E Permit data
Shell Oil Co (W. Pittsburg)
OUTFALL 001
Testing program
Self-monitoring data
C/E Permit data
Phillips Petroleum (Avon)
OUTFALL 001
Testing program
Self-monitoring data
C/E Permit data
OUTFALL 003
Testing program
Self-monitoring data
C/E Permit data
Dow Chemical Co. (Pittsburg)
Testing program
Self-monitoring data
C/E Permit data
mg/1 Ib/d mg/1
0.03 28.1 0.02
<0.01
<0.01
£/
0.03 1.8 0.03
<0.01 1 0.007
0.03 9.4 0.03
0.03
0.01 <4 0.022
£/
0.005 0.18 0.12
0.29
<0.010 <0.4 0.40
0.005 0.5 0.22
0.68
0.01 0.09
0.43
0.005 0.04 0.034
Ib/d
18.7
< 9.3
<10
1.08
0.4
9.4
9.3
9
4.3
10.9
14
19.9
68
0.52
0.32
Copper Nickel Zinc Mercury
mg/1
0.05
<0.02
<0.02
£/
0.04
<0.01
0.05
-0.03
0.026
£/
0.007
0.02
0.02
0.01
<». 056
0.02
0.055
0.047
Ib/d mg/1
46.8 0.25
<18.7
20 0.02
2.4 0.25
<1 <0.02
15.8 0.26
-9.3
11 <0.02
0.25 0.05
0.75
0.7 0.270
0.9 0.06
5.7
0.11
6.7
0.39 0.880
Ib/d mg/1
234 0.01
<0.05
20 0.02
£/
14.9 0.04
<1.2 0.07
82 0.04
0.02
<8 0.085
tl
1.8 0.02
0.03
10 0.06
5.4 0.03
0.083
0.004
0.08
7.3 0.041
Ib/d ing/1 Ib/d
9.4
<46.7
20
2.4
4.2
12.6.
6.2
34.3
0.72
1.13
2
2.7
8.3
9.7
0.34
0.004 0.9
0.0004 0.08
0.00021 0.044
u/
-------
TABLE G-4
INDUSTRIAL DISCHARGES—COMPARISON OF WASTE-SOURCE DATA (Cent.)
PARAMETERS
DISCHARGER
C & H Sugar Co.
OUTFALL 004 (D) fc .
Testing program—
Self-raonltoring data
C/E Permit data
OUTFALL 005 (E)
Testing program
Self-monitoring data
C/E Permit data
OUTFALL 006 (H)
Testing program
Self-tnonitoring data
C/E Permit data
OUTFALL 008 (J)
Testing program
Self-monitoring data
C/E Permit data
OUTFALL 014 (V)
Testing program
Self-monitoring data
C/E Permit data
Avg
Flow
(mgd)
4.0
1.6
0.35
0.38
0.45
0.030
0.060
0.055
0.002
0.006
0.58
0.68
0.48
v/
BOD
mg/1
nip, /I
43
50
1,670
1,395
2,200
1
2,700
24,600
392
1,342
480
lb/d
(x 10 J)
1.4
0.7
4.9
4.4
8.2
0
0.4
1.2
1.9
7.6
1.9
COD
mg/1
47
185
2,355
3,821
4,350
70
49,230
66,000
570
2,077
1,010
lb/d,
(x 10J)
1.6
2.5
6.8
12.1
16.3
30
0.8
3.3
2.8
11.8
4.0
Oil &
mg/1
8.0
4.0
2.4
1.5
10.0
1.3
1.8
1.0
Grease NOj-N
lb/d mg/1
266 1.33
0.65
12 1.7
7.6
4.0 18.1
0.31
0.2
1.9
6.2 0.29
10.2
6.08 2.9
x/
lb/d
43
8.7
4.9
67.9
0.14
0.09
1.4
11.6
Total
mg/1
0.70
1.32
.9.80
11.01
0.52
14.9
47.70
14.10
5.23
KJ-N
lb/d
23.3
17.6
28.5
41.3
0.24
0.2
2.4
68.0
20.9
Total P
rag/1
0.10
0.04
0.12
0.16
0.43
1.0
0
6.7
0.33
lb/d
3.3
0.50
0.3
0.60
0.20
0.02
0
94.5
1.32
-------
TABLE G-4
INDUSTRIAL DISCHARGES^COMPARISON OF WASTE-SOURCE DATA (Cent.)
PARAMETERS
Toxicity
DISCHARGER 96-hr
TL™
C & H Sugar Co.
OUTFALL 004 (D)
Testing program i/
Self-monitoring data
C/E Permit data
OUTFALL 005 (E)
Testing program
Self-monitoring data
C/E Permit data
OUTFALL 006 (H)
Testing program I/
Self-monitoring data
C/E Permit data
OUTFALL 008 (J)
Testing program
Self-monitoring data
C/E Permit data
OUTFALL 014 (V)
Testing program I/
Self-monitoring data 89.5
C/E Permit data
Survival Total Coliform
% MPN/100 ml
i/
100 < 67
460
< 67
88.2
0
100 < 67
240
100 36,000
0
Fecal Coliform
MPN/100 ml
z/
< 67
460
< 67
0
< 67
240
20,000
0
Iron Chromium
mg/i~ Ib/d mg/1 Ib/d
0.35 12 0.001 0.03
4.4 13 0.001 0.003
28.80 12
0.11 0.03 0.02 0.005
0.02 0.006
31.6 0.5 0.03 0.0004
0.11 0.5 0.02 0.09
1,410 10
-------
TABLE G-4
INDUSTRIAL DISCHARGES—COMPARISON OF WASTE SOURCE DATA (Cent.)
DISCHARGERS
U. S. Steel Corp.
(Antioch)
COMB I NET) OUTFALLS
001 & 002-
Testing program
Self-monitoring data
C/E Permit data
OUTFALL 003
Testing program
Self-monitoring data
C/E Permit data
Fibreboard Corp.
OUTFALL 001
Testing program
Self-monitoring data
C/E Permit data
OUTFALL 002
Testing program
Self-monitoring data
C/E Permit data
Avg. Flow
(mgd)
12.48
11.34
9.53
7.9
8.5
15.4
17.5
9.3
9.6
BOD
mg/1 Ib/d
(x 10J)
0.8
0.3
12.1 0.8
17.5 1.2
185 23.7
357 52.1
65 5.0
248 19.8
COD
mg/1
16.9
6.7
37.9
40.4
710
825
140
405
Ib/d
(x 10-3)
1.8
2.6
1.7
0.5
2.5
2.9
91.0
120.0
10.8
32.4
PARAMETERS
Oil & Grease NO
mg/1 Ib/d mg/1
0.21
0.17
6.9 455
8.7 623 0.25
8.0 1,025 0.15
31.5 3,970 0.5
3.4 263 0.04
0.7
3-N
Ib/d
22
34
13
17.9
19.2
73
3.1
56
Total Kj-N Total
mg/1 Ib/d mg/1
0.77 80 0.14
0.7 5.5 0.10
0 0.36
2.4 307 0.20
<0.1 <15 0.40
1.07 79 0.20
(0.1 < 8 (0.1
P
Ib/d
14.5
22
7.9
25.8
25.6
58
15.5
<8
-------
TABLE G-4
INDUSTRIAL DISCHARGES—COMPARISON OF WASTE-SOURCE DATA (Cont.)
PARAMETERS
Coliforms Toxlcity
DISCHARGERS Total Fecal 96-hr Survi- Iron
KPN/100 ml MPN/100 ml TL5Q val % mg/1 Ib/d
U. S. Steel Corp.
(Antloch)
COMBINED OUTFALLS
001 & 002—' b/ b/
Testing program < 67 < 67 e/ 100
Self -monitor ing
data
C/E Permit data
OUTFALL 003
Testing program < 67 < 67 if 100
Self -monitoring
data >100
C/E Pemit data
Fibreboard Corp.
OUTFALL 001 dd/ ee/
Testing program 36,000 >200 70 0
Self-monitoring
data
C/E Permit data 9,800 2.1 310
OUTFALL
OUTFALL 002
Testing program 31,100 < 67 i/ 100
Self -monitor ing
data
C/E Permit data 63.5 3.5 279
Chromium Mercury Lead Nickel Zinc
mg/1, Ib/d mg/1, Ib/d mg/1 Ib/d mg/1 Ib/d mg/1 Ib/d"
(x 10) (x 10~ )
0.02 2.0 0.04 4.1 0.47 48.7
0.79 43.8
45.2
0.02 1.6 0.03 2.4 0.24 19
0 0 0.27 17.8
130 9.3
Sulfate
mg/1 Ib/d
1.3 0.16 0.05 6.4 255 36,000
<0.23 <3.4 <0.5 0.07 0.047 6.9 187 27,400
2.6 0.20 0.04 3.1 89 6,886
<2.0 O..6 0.5 0.04 <0.002 <1.6 45.8 3,660
-------
FOOTNOTES TO TABLE G-4
&J Available information indicates a) that testing program results
show the concentration of SO, to be 2,195 tng/1 or 2,056,346 Ib/day;
b) that self-monitoring data show 268 Ib/day; and c) that, accord-
ing to C/E Permit data concentration of SO, is equal to 1,750 mg/1
or 1,790,000 Ib/day.
b_/ All testing programs (EPA) were carried out in 1972.
cj Values reported on self-monitoring data are net values (effluent
minus influent)-
d/ State Waste Discharge Requirements (SWDR) stipulate that the average
concentration be 50 mg/1 and never greater than 60 mg/1.
e/ SI-TOR call for a COD limit only when the DO in the receiving water
is at or less than 5.
f_/ SWDR stipulate that oil and grease concentration never exceed 15 mg/1.
gj Coliform data for influent from San Francisco Bay are as follows:
total coliform - < 200 MPN/100 ml; fecal coliform - < 200 MPN/100 ml.
h/ Coliform data for influent streams are as follows:
Station No. 3: total coliform - confluent colonies; fecal coli-
form - < 200 MPN/100 ml;
Pt. Orient: total coliform - < 200 MPN/100 ml; fecal coliform -
< 200 MPN/100 ml.
i/ There is no toxic effect.
j_/ Coliform data for influent canal are as follows: total coliform -
< 67 MPN/100 ml; fecal coliform - < 67 MPN/100 ml.
k/ Coliform data for influent streams are as follows:
Hastings Slough: total coliform - 670 MPN/100 ml; fecal coli-
form - 370 MPN/100 ml;
Contra Costa Canal: total coliform - 67 MPN/100 ml;
fecal coliform - 67 MPN/100 ml.
_!/ This figure represents a net value.
jn/ These are confluent colonies, or "too numerous to count"
(80,000 MPN/100 ml).
n/ SWDR stipulate that suspended solids concentration be 60, as an
average or below, and never any greater than 100 mg/1.
-------
FOOTNOTES TO TABLE G-A (cont.)
£/ Coliform data for an influent stream are as follows: total coli-
form - 10,000 MPN/100 ml; fecal coliform - 2,000 MPN/100 ml.
$ S/» an^ jr/ For heavy metals the following are maximum values estab-
lished by SWDR, respectively:
Max. Limit
chromium
copper
zinc
copper
zinc
1.0
0.5
1.0
0.05
0.10
sj and t/
u/ SWDR call for mercury concentration to be no greater than 0.005 mg/1.
vj SWDR call for average flow never to be less than or equal to 1.3 mgd.
jc/ SWDR stipulate that levels not exceed 15 Ib/day.
y_/ and zj Coliform data are as follows: Salt water influent: 20 MPN/100 ml
each for total and fecal coliforms; EBMUD influent: total
coliform - 2,400 MPN/100 ml; fecal coliform •=. 900 MPN/100 ml.
aa/ Outfalls 001 and 002, listed as separate outfalls on both self-moni-
toring and C/E Permit data, were combined at the time of the 1972
EPA testing program.
bb/ and cc/ Coliform data on influent are as follows: N. Y. Slough: total
coliform - 2,000 MPN/100 ml; fecal coliforra - < 67 MPN/100 ml;
Contra Costa Canal: total coliform - < 67 MPN/100 ml; fecal
coliform - < 67 MPN/100 ml.
dd/ and ££/ Coliform data on influents are as follows: Canal: total
coliform, 800 MPN/100 ml and fecal coliform, 220 MPN/100 ml;
River: total coliform, 800 MPN/100 ml and fecal coliform,
200 MPN/100 ml.
-------
APPENDIX H
-------
APPENDIX H
Table H-l. Time Schedule for Compliance with Water Quality Objectives
1. Review data from checking and self-monitoring programs for existing
waste discharges to determine compliance with this policy - review
data on a continuing basis and complete determination no later than
July 1, 1968;
2. Develop waste discharge requirements and self-monitoring programs
which will assure compliance with this policy and the policy of
Resolution No. 803 as expeditiously as possible and in accordance
with the following schedule:
a. For all new waste discharges - before the discharge commences ;
b. For all existing waste discharge not under requirements at
present - give priority to industrial waste discharges and
complete no later than December 31, 1968;
c. For all existing waste discharges under requirements at
present - complete review and necessary revisions no later
than December 31, 1970; and
3. Initiate formal enforcement proceedings pursuant to the Regional
Board's policy in accordance with the following schedule:
a. For dischargers who are not under waste discharge requirements
at the time this policy becomes effective - initiate proceedings
no later than December 31, 1970 for those dischargers found to
be in violation of requirements which are consistent with this
policy.
b. For dischargers who are under waste discharge requirements
which are consistent with this policy - initiate proceedings
no later than December 31, 1968 for those dischargers found
to be in violation of said requirements .
c. For dischargers who are under waste discharge requirements
which are not consistent with this policy at the time it
becomes effective - initiate proceedings no later than
December 31, 1970 for those dischargers found to be in vio-
lation of said revised requirements.
4. Require all entities to determine and report on conditions contrary
to this policy caused by the discharge of combined stormwater runoff
and sewage including measures needed and schedule for compliance
with this policy no later than July 1, 1968;
-------
TABLE H-l (Continued)
5. Eliminate dairy wastes as a factor causing conditions contrary to
this policy no later than December 31, 1971, through the enforce-
ment of requirements and the support of the dairy industry's self-
policing program;
6. Implement, within budget limitations, a basic data program no later
than December 31, 1967-
* Source: "Water Quality Control Policy for Tidal Waters Inland from
the Golden Gate Within the San Francisco Bay Region," San Francisco
Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board, 1967.
-------
TA3J.E H-l
STATUS OF ABATEMENT
SF BAY D]SCHARGERS
MUNICIPALITIES
DISCHARGER
Alviso, City cf
Los Altos,
City of
RESOLUTIONS AND/OR ORDERS
Resol. 364(6/15/61) WDR,
RNR
69-40(8/28/69)
Bact. reg.
Resol. 212(3/15/56) RWR
641(2/18/65) amends
212 eliminates grease
standard
675(6/17/65)
schedule for compliance
67-53 (10/19/67)
WDR, RWR - rescends 212
reg. for alternatives of
joint treat.
68-16(4/30/68) C&D
order (with schedule)
68-74(12/18/68)
amends C&D order (with
schedule)
70-60( )
reissue of C&D (with
schedule)
(Presently not complying
with active resol.)
MOST RECENT IMPLEMENTATION
SCHEDULE (('R COMM3NTS)
(Resol. 364 indicated that
peremptory older issued by
State Dept. lublic Health
on 3/8/61. Edrects certain
actions with schedule.)
Resol. 70-60*
Compliance with C1-, reg. by
8/15/70.
Other reg.
Complete const.& oper.
11/30/71.
Demo compli. 6/1/72
STATUS
WQM PLAN
(Resol. 364 (1972-73)
also states Connect to
const, of San Jose
new fac. are Main Plant.
contrary to
SFWPLB policy
favoring
consolidation)
Improvements
to STP com-
pleted 11/65.
A contract for
expansion of
facilities was
awarded early
1970.
(See Palo Alto)
COMMENTS
Alviso has been annexed
by San Jose ( ) .
STP now operated' by City
of San Jose. $250^,000
interceptor and pur.ping
to San Jose STP defined
in State needs list for
FY 72-73.
*Revises schedules that
appeared in Resol. 675
(partial schedule),
68-16 (complete const.
3/31/70) and
68-74 (co.Tiolete const.
& oper 2/28/71).
Agreement has been
reached between Los
Altos, Palo Alto and
Mountain View. (See
Palo Alto)
-------
TAEI.15 H-l
(CONTINUED)
STATUS OF ABATEMENT
SF BAY DISCHARGERS
MUNICIPALITIES
DISCHAXGER
RESOLUTIONS AND/OR ORDERS
MOST RECENT IKPLEMENTATION
SCHEDULE (OR COMMENTS)
STATUS
WQM PLAN
COMMENTS
Milpitas
Sanitary Dist.
Resol. 124(4/16/53) RWR
442(1/17/63)
rescends 124 revises
requirements
475(6/20/63)
revises 442
519(12/19/63)
schedules for compli.
530(1/16/64)
C&D order (with
schedule)
67-8 (2/16/67)
amends C£.D order &
revises schedule
69-27 (6/24/69)
revises RWR & WDR
rescends 442 s, 475
70-6(3/14/70)
C&D order •
70-58 (7/23/70)
SWRC formal enforce-
ment action
( )
rescinds 70-6
(Presently complying
with active resols)
Effluent
settling
pond com-
pleted
9/2/69
(1974-75)
Interceptor
toward cen-
tral bay
with deep
water out-
fall.
SF Bay Board
finds SD in
compliance.
CSD order (70-6) in
eluded additional
connection bin sub-
sequent to 3/14/70.
Has been rescinded.
On 4/2/70, SKRCB
rerr.anded to the SF
Bay Board continuing
juri sdiction.
MSD is now participating
with San Jose for
connection to facilities.
Schedules indicates
capacity will be avail-
able by 1/1/73 and will
discontinue operations
at present Milpitas
plant.
-------
TABLE H-l
(CONTINUED)
STATUS OF ABATEMENT
SF BAY DISCHARGERS
MUNICIPALITIES
DISCHARGER
Menlo Park S.O.
Redwood City
RESOLUTIONS AND/OR ORDERS
2^(10/10/50) RWR
(6/20/63) rescinds 2k RWR..WDR
52<4 (12/10/63) schedule
590 (3/20/6^) c&D order
663 (6/17/65) Amends schedule
702 (9/16/65) Amends 590 & 668,
RWR, WOR
67-13W/25/67) C&D amends 590,
663, 702
67-5^(10/19/67) Reg. for joint
treatment alternatives
67-59(11/16/67) U5R, RWR for in-
terim fac.
68-55(9/25/63) reg. for pro-
posed M.P. fac.
68-69(12/18/68) C&O order amends
67-13, 702, 663, 590
69-^0(3/23/69) Bact. reg.
(Presently complying with active
resolutions)
262(12/19/57) RWR
^53(^/13/63) rescinds 262
revises WDR, R>i3
523(12/19/63) schedule
702(9/6/65) amends
67-lS(V28/67) amends schedule
67-5^(10/15/6?) revises W3R, RWR
68-17(V30/63) C&O order &
schedule
68-71(12/18/63). joint treat, alter.
revises schedule
70-M3/1 V7°) C&D revises sched.
70-62(7/23/70) amends C&D deletes
acid, connection ban
Presently complying with active
ri»«/s J nf i nn<5
MOST RECENT IMPLEMENTATION
SCHEDULE (OR COMMENTS)
Resolution 70-^''
ACC 3/31/70
Complete const. V/7'
Demo compll 5/1/71
STATUS
Improvements &
extensions of
stabilization
completed late
19&9
WQM PLAN
Interceptor
sewer toward
Central Bay
with deep-
water outfal 1
Limited Im-
provements -
made periodic-
ally
Faci1i ty for
sludge treat.
& disposal &
excess chlori-
nation completed
7/70. Add.
connections ban
dropped.
(Continued)
COMMENTS
Menlo Park cannot make
decision as to joint
treatment wjth the
subregional facilities
for San Mateo County
or South Bay Dis-
chargers
* Order 70-** revises sev-
eral past schedule. The
C&D also included an add.
connection ban. The dis-
chargers filed a stay
order 5/12/70. Removed
from court calendar be-
cause progress was being
made thru negotiations.
$6,500,000 project for
facilities for Redv/ood
City, San Carlos, Sell-
mont & possibly others
defined in State needs
Jt&t for FY 11 i 7S.
-------
TAI1LE. H-l
(CONTINUED)
STATUS or ABATEMENT
SF BAY DISCHARGERS
MUNICIPALITIES
DISCHARGER
Redwood City, City
of (Continued)
RESOLUTIONS AND/OR ORDERS
MOST RECENT
SCHEDULE
IMPLEMENTATION
;OR COMMENTS)
San Carlos,-Selmont
Cities of
(New tributary, to
Redwood Ci ty
System)
303(5/21/59) RWR
343(10/20/60) rescinds 303,
revises RWR, WDR
(I ncomplete)
STATUS
(Cont'd)
Further im-
provements to
be completed
4/71 - includes
joint treatment
with San Carlos-
Belmont (Joint
Auth. for the
Strategy Con-
solidation
Sewerage Plan)
WQM PLAN
COMMENTS
-------
TAELE H-l
(COI1TINUEO)
STATUS OF ABATEMENT
SF BAY DISCHARGERS
MUNICH ALITIES
DISCHARGER
Mountain View,
City of
Palo Alto,
City of
RESOLUTIONS AND/OR ORDERS
13(8/17/50) RWR
221(10/18/56) revises RWR
rescinds 13
640(2/18/65) revises RWR
rescinds RWR - rescinds
grease & oil standard
650(3/18/65) schedule for
221
788(10/22/66) rescinds 650
requires sunmiary regard-
ing joint treat.
67-53(10/19/67) WDR, RWR
for alternatives of
joint treatment
67-70(12/21/67) revises
WDR, rescinds 221
68-15(4/30/68) C&D order
with schedule
68-73 ( ) amends CSD
order s, schedule
70-61(7/23/70) reissues
C&D order with revised
schedule
(Presently complying
with active resol.)
436(12/20/62) RWR
796(11/17/66) schedule for
436
67-53(10/19/67) WDR, RWR
for alternatives of joint
treatment
68-3(1/18/68) schedule for
67-53
68-14( ) CtD order &
revises schedule
MOST RECENT IMPLEMENTATION
SCHEDULE (OR COMMENTS)
STATUS
70-61 CSD order*
Demo compli. with
Cl2 req.
Complete all const.
and oper.
Demo Compli.
Detention
pond (after)
8/15/70 Drimary clari-
11/30/71 fier) in con-
junction with
6/1/72 chlorination
completed 8/70
(See Palo
Alto)
Resol 70-59 C&D order*
Demo, compli. with
Cl- req. 8/15/70
Complete all const.11/30/71
and oper.
Demo compli. 6/1/72
KQH PLAN COMMENTS
? 1971-72 *Revises schedules
established in Resol 650
(ccrsp. const. 5/1/69),
68-15 (coinolete const.
3/31/70) and 68-73 (com-
plete const. 2/2S/71).
Agreement reached between
Mountain View, Lcs Altos
and Palo Alto for regional
system. (See Palo Alto)
$600,00 for Class A
interceptor defined in
State needs list for
FY 72-73 for Mountain Vie-
Sanitary Dist.
Joint treat-
ment facili-
ties for Palo
Alto, Mountain
View, and Los
Altos com-
pleted 4/72
plant includes
fac. for treat.
of ind. wastes
Will connect to common
central bay deepv.-ater
outfall with South Bay
Dischargers (See Palo
Alto)
-------
TABLi: 'H-l
(CONTINUED)
•STATUS OF ABATEMENT
SF BAY DISCHARGERS
MUNICIPALITIES
DISCHARGER
Palo Alto,
City of
(Continued)
San Jose,
City of
RESOLUTIONS AND/OR ORDERS
68-72(12/18/68) amends CS.D
S revises schedule
70-59(7/23/70) reissues
'CSD & revises schedule
(Presently not complying
with active resol.)
316(11/19/59) WDR
68-11(3/21/68) revises WDR
69-26(6/24/69) CSD order
with schedule
70-57(7/30/70) reissue CSD
order
70-9(11/24/70) revises WDR
71-36(6/24/71) amends
schedule of CSD order
71-78(11/23/71) CSD order
for toxitcity with
schedule
( ) amends
68-11
(Presently complying
with .active resol.)
MOST RECENT IMPLEMENTATION
SCHEDULE (01; COMMENTS) STATUS V?QM PLAN
Resol 70-57*
Division A - C12 facilities Division A- (1974-75)
F - Rnilroad spur Completed Connect to
Ace for spur 8/24/70 5/71 central bay
place in oper 2/28/71 Division F- deep water
Demo with C12 req. 3/31/71 Completed outfall
Division B - Prim s SecondaryDivision B-
additions
C - Sludge cond. &
digesters
Advertise 9/30/70) .
receive bids 11/15/70
Ace 12/19/70
comp. const. - to be estab.
Division E - V.'ater Reclama-
tion Plant
FP 3/31/71
Request auth to
Advertise 4/5/71
bids open 5/5/71
Ace 8/5/71
complete const. 8/5/72
Resol 71-78 foi toxicity
FP 3/15/72
Implement prog, for wastes
to system 5/3/72
Report (feas. cf removing
NH3) 3/1/72
Report on sources S abate-
ment program 5/1/72
Resol for sub. reg. plan
Grant offer
6/71 UC
C - Grant offer
UC
D - Sludge
lagoon grant
offer 6/71
UC
E - Vlater Re-
clamation
Plant
COMMENTS
South-Bay Dischargers
have submitted report for
construction of deep
water outfall to Central
SF Bay. -Tenative
schedule calls for
Federal & State a^roval
by 12/31/72, complete
construction 6/30/77
and conmence operation
7/31/77. .The following
municipalities are
involved in the joint
outfall:
San Jose-Santa Clara systen
San Jose; Santa Clara;
County San. Dist. 2,3 S4;
Burbank S Cupertino
San. Dist.
Palo Alto
Los Altos
Sunnyvale
Mountain View
Milpitas San. Dist.
$240,000,000 project for
subregional treatment
plants, interceptors and
outfall serving
So-uth Bay Dischargers by
State needs list for
FY 73-74
-------
TAPIE H-l
(CONTINUED)
STATUS OF ABATEMENT
SF BAY PISCH'vRGERS
MUNICIPALITIES
DISCHARGER
RESOLUTIONS AND/OR ORDERS
Sunnyvale, City of 123 (3/17/53). RWR
'Jnion S.D.
Irvington
Union S.D.
NewarC
642 (2/18/65). C&D order
723 (2/17/66)' RWR,WDR
(ll/25/69)| Rescinds 723
revises RWR,WDR
69-61 ( ) revises WDR &
schedule
70-13(2/16/70) requests tighter
schedule
70-92(11/24/72) amends 69-61
and revises schedule
(Presently complying with
active resolutions)
Resol 297 (12/18/58) WDR, RWR
646 ( 3/18/65)
653 ( 4/15/65) CfiD order
& schedule
689 ( 7/18/65) CSD -
revised schedule
69-40 (8/28/68) Bact.req.
(Presently complying with
active resol)
Resol 487 (8/14/63)RWR,WDR
652 (4/15/65)CSD order
& schedule
688 (7/15/67)revises 652
69-40 (8/28/69) Bact.req.
69-46 ( ) rescinds'
688 S 67-9
(Presently complying with
active resol)
MOST RECENT IMPLEMENTATION
SCHEDULE (OR COMMENTS)
Resol 70-92*
Compli with OC reg.
Complete subregion study
1/1/72
submit FP 3/15/72
689 C&D order*
F 12/15/65
FP 6/15/65
ACC 3/15/66
Complete Const.
Demo.Compli
3/15/67
10/01/67
69-40 for Cl2 regs.
ACC 5/15/70
Complete Const.7/31/70
Resol 67-9*
Comple Constr.
Demo. Compli.
6/67
10/15/67
STATUS
KQM PLAN
COMMENTS
Facilites (1974-75) Connect *Schedules in past
comolate
19687
New
facilites
completes
9/72
to central Bay
deepwater out-
fall
Partici- (1974-75) Inter-
pation in ceptor sewer
joint toward central
study of Bay with deep-
deep water water outfall
outfall
(See
Hayward)
New
facilities
comoleted
6/67
Partici-
pating in
joint
study of
.deepwater outfall
(1972-73)
Interim improve-
ments
1974-75 Inter-
ceptor sewer
toward central
Bay with deep-
water outfall
resol and/or orders
referred to treat-
ment plant improve-
ments - See Status
*Revises past sche-
dules
Part of East Bay
Discharges (see
Hayward}
'Revises past sche-
dules
Part of East Bay
Dischargers
(see Hayward)
-------
STATUS C? ABATEMENT
SF BAY rsrSCHAKCJSHS
MUNICIPALITIES
DISCHARGER
RESOLUTIONS AND/OR ORDERS
MOST RECENT IMPLEMENTATION
SCHEDULE (OR COMISNTS)
STATUS
WQM PLAN
COMMENTS
Union Sanitary
District
66 (7/19/51). RWR
395(2/15/62) rescinds 66
revises RWR, WDR
(Presently not complying with
active resolutions)
Intermediate (1975-76)
Plant completed Interceptor
1960 Sewer toward
Central Bay
Now tributary
to Union SD -
'Irvington Plant
Participating
in joint study of
deep water outfall
(See Hayward)
Part of East Bay
Discharges (See
Hayward)
Burlingame, City of
Resol. 23 (9/21/50) RWR
254(10/17/57)
rescinds 23,
revises RWR, WDR
472(6/20/63)
rescinds 254,
revises RWR, WDR.
701(9/16/64) schedule
72-40
Forthwith for bypass
prohibition
Schedule for prohibition
of discharges to
nearshore
Submit PP 10/1/72
FP 5/1/73
765(6/16/66) schedule ACC 8/1/73 ••
for wet weather Complete Construc-
flow control tion 6/1/74
67-11(4/28/67) C S D
order
67-51(10/19/67)
rescinds 472,
revises RWR, WDR
67-52(10/19/67) amends 67-11
68-76(12/18/63) rescinds
765 S 701 (bypassing)
Improvements
to treatment
plant - UC
(grant offer
2/68)
1971-72 Connect
to South San
Francisco and
San Bruno joint
plant
Participating
as possible joint
outfall to cen-
tral bay deep
waters (See
So. San Francisco)
72-40 prohibits
bypassing and
prohibits dis-
charge within
200 feet of
shoreline
Participating in
possible joint
outfall (See
So. San Francisco)
Joint study with
Millbrae for com-
mon outfall
-------
TP3.T/E H-l
(CONTINUED)
STATUS O:-' ABATEMENT
SF BAY DISCHARGERS
MUNICIPALITIES
DISCHARGER
RESOLUTIONS AND/OR ORDERS
MOST RECENT IMPLEMENTATION
SCHEDULE (OR COMMENTS)
STATUS
HQM PLAN
COMMENTS
Burlingame (cont.)
71-75(10/28/71) req.
for So. San Francisco
for possible joint
project including
Burlingame
72-40(7/25/72) amends
67-51 schedule
(Presently complying with
active resolutions)
$3,200,000 project for
interceptor sewer from
Burlingame and
Mi librae to So. San
Francisco defined in
State needs list for
FY 72-73
East Bay Municipal
Utility District -
Special District SI
Resol. 73(9/20/51) KDR
718(1/20/66) amends
73 & schedule
68-3 (3/21/68)
rescinds 73 & 718
revises WDR, RWR
7Q-37(4/23/70)
amends 63-8
70-81(10/22/70)
amends 68-8
72-21(5/23/72)
amends 70-31 S
schedule
Resol.72-21 Removal of
FP for primary improvements Discharge
& pumping sl-.ations 6/1/72 of digested
FP for secondary & sludge sludge
treatment & disposal 12/1/72(vacuum
ACC for primary improvement filtration S
12/15/72
ACC for second improvement
6/1/73
F? for bldg. add. & outfall
modifications 5/1/73
Complete Cont.truction
prim, improve. 7/1/74
bldg. add i outfall
modificatiors 9/1/74
secondary improvements,
sludge treatjnent & dis-
posal 2/15/75
(1971-72)
Chemical &
expanded
primary
treatment
Pilot plan tests have
indicated best alter-
native method for
achieving 85% removal
of BOD
(Presently not complying
with active resolutions)
trucking to (1972-73)
land fill Sobrante
completed 7/71)Plant
chemical
Presently flocc., cen-
developing FP trifuge &
for chemical precoat filter
treatment
facility (1973-74)
(completion Walnut Creek
expected 4/1/ Filter Plant
72) Chemical floe.
centrifuging
and precoat filter
EBMUD also participa-
ting in joint outfall
study for East Bay
Discharges (See Haywarr
EBMUD received grant
offer during FY 71-
72 for STP improve-
ments. Total eligibl
costs $53,200,000
-------
(CONTINUED)
STATUS Oi1 ABATEMENT
SF BAY DISCHARGERS
MUNICIPALITIES
DISCHARGER
Estero Municipal
Improvement District
RESOLUTION'S AND/OR ORDERS
414 (5/17/62) TOR, RWR
69-39(8/28/69) Bact. req.
MOST RECENT IMPLEMENTATION
SCHEDULE (OR COt-lMENTS)
STATUS
WQH PLAN
Primary (1972-73)
Facility & Consolidate
Sludge Dis- sludge dis-
posal facil- posal facil-
ity completed ities with
6/69 San Mateo
COMMENTS
An interceptor con-
necting to City of
San Mateo defined in
State needs list for
FY 73-74
(Presently not complying with active resclutiona)
(1972-73)
Connect to
City of San Mateo
plant enlargements
Guadalupe Valley
H.I.D.
281 (8/21/58)
69-40(8/28/69)
Bact. req.
(Presently not complying with active resolutions)
(1971-72) Guadalupe Valley MID
Connect to plant completed in 196 C
Bayshore S.D. Serves Brisbane and
Crocker industrial
park.
Proposes to abandon
plant and become tri-
butary to San Franciscc
plants.
Hayward, City of
422(7/19/62)
718 (. ) schedule
704( ) C & D
Order & schedule
rescinds 422
70-53(6/25/70) WDR to
conform with Porter
Cologne Act
72-9(8/22/72)
sichedule for
deep water outfall agree
with F S adrn. of Phase I
project & authorize pre-
paration of HIS & PP 10/72
Final agreements F &
adm. 1/73
Initiate studies for re-
duction of storm water
infiltration & adopt
sewer ordinance 2/73
'Oxidation
pond complete
9/66
New stabi-
lization
ponds & apr
purtenances
UC (grant
offer 9/70)
(1971-72)
interim im-
provements -
extension of
ponds, sludge
dewatering
facilities,
and aerators.
(1975-76)
Interceptor
Sewer toward
Central Bay.
Outfall project program
involve Hayward, San
Leandro, Union, Oro
Lomo, and Castro Valley
Sanitary Districts.
Also includes wet
weather flow from East
Bay MUD..
-------
DISCHARGER
Hayward, City of
(continued)
Millbrae, City of
RESOLUTIONS AMD/OR ORDERS
(CONTINUED)
STATUS OF ABATEMENT-
SP BAY DISCHARGERS
MUNICIPALITIES
MOST RECENT IMPLEMENTATION
SCHEDULE (OH COMMENTS)
PP 3/73
Auth. FP for P'iase I 5/73
F 12/73
FP 2/74
ACC 9/74
Complete Cons,t. 12/75
Demo. Compliance 4/76
Resol. 72-39"
Submit PP
FP
ACC
Complete Const.
(Not presently complying
with active resolutions)
527(1/16/64) WDR
582(7/16/64) schedule
702(9/16/64) amends 532
736(3/17/63) C & D order
& schedule
67-4(11/19/67) amends
C & D and revises schedule
69-40(3/23/69) Bact. req.
71-75(10/28/71) WDR for
joint treatment
72-39 ( ) amends 527
and 69-40. Revises KDR,
RWR and revises schedule
(Presently not complying with active resolutions)
10/1/72
5/1/73
8/1/73
6/1/74
STATUS HQM PLAN COMMENTS
$57,000,000 project for
East Bay Interceptor
sewer and outfall de-
fined in State needs
list for FY 73-74/
Also parti-
cipating in
East Bay Dis-
charger plan
for joint outfall
to central bay
deep waters.
Consultant has (1971-72) «
been autho- Interceptor
rized to pro- sewer to
ceed with FP eliminate
for central bay wet weather
deep water out- bypasses.
fall. Joint
project with
Burlingame.
Revises several past
schedules.
$143,000 project for
pump station and
interceptor defined
in State needs list
for FY 73-74, Priority
III.
Oro Lona Sanitary
District
(Presently not complying with active resolutions)
Participating
in joint study
of deep water
outfall (See
Hayward)
(1975-76)
Interceptor
sewer toward
central bay
Part of East Bay Dis-
charges (See Hayward)
San Francisco -
Southeast
Proposed con-
solidation with
other SF plants
to new facility
with discharge to
ocean
$33,500,000 project
listed for outfall
from SE plant to Lake
Merced outfall defined
in State needs list fo
FY 72-73.
-------
(CONTINUED)
STATUS OF ABATEMENT
SF BAY DISCHARGERS
MUNICIPALITIES
DISCHARGER
San Francisco -
Southeast
(Cont.)
RESOLUTIONS AND/OR ORDERS
MOST RECENT IMPLEMENTATION
SCHEDULE (OR COMMENTS)
STATUS
—$30,000,000 project for interception of combined dishcarge
(Priority II)
—$ 630,000 project replacing airport pressure force main
(Priority III)
—$30,000,000 project for interception and treatment of combined
discharge also listed for FY 74-75 (Priority II) as well as
FY 75-76 (Priority II) as well as FY 76-77 (Priority II)
WQH PLAN
COMMENTS
(1971-72) The following are de-
Solids fined on State needs
handling, list for FY 73-74:
sludge fil- —$67,0,00,000 project
tration, di- for 'treatment &
gesters and secondary solids
effluent out- handling @ SE plant
fall changes, —$10,650,000 project
grit removal of Northpoint eff.
(1972-76) transported to SE
interception Plant
and treatment —$22,000,000 for trea^
of combined and solids handling
sewer discharges. at Richmond-
Not yet defined. Sunset Plant.
San Francisco
International
Airport (Sewage)
70-25( ) WDS, RWR
70-31(3/26/70) C & D order
(Presently complying with active resolutr.ons)
San Leandro, City of
(Presently not complying with active resolutions)
New STP (1971-72)
completed Treatment of
7/71. individual
wastes with
disposal to
deep water
outfall with
sewage--also
replace inter-
ceptor
Participa- (1971-72)
ting in solids handling
joint study and aerators
of deep water (1975-76)
outfall Interceptor
(See Hayward) sewer toward
central bay.
Case turned over to
State Attorney Gen-
eral 11/10/70.
Attorney General ad-
vised of improvements
No enforcement action
taken.
Part of East Bay
Discharges (See
Hayward
-------
TABLE H-l
(CONTINUED)'
STATUS O7 ABATEMENT
SF BAY DISCHARGERS
MUNICIPALITIES
DISCHARGER
San Mateo, City of
RESOLUTIONS AND/OR ORDERS
MOST RECENT IMPLEMENTATION
SCHEDULE (OR COMMENTS)
STATUS
(Presently complying with active resolutions)
WQM PLAN-
(1972-73)
interim
improve-
ments
COMMENTS
$1,500,000 project
for enlargement of
treatment.plant and
interceptor from
Estero MID defined
in State needs list
for FY 73-74.
So. San Francisco-
San Bruno
(Presently not complying with active resolutions)
Participa-
ting in
joint study
for deep
water out-
fall to
central SF Bay
(1971-72) SSF is acting as
improve- central agent for SSF,
ments & San Bruno, SF Interna-
outfall tional Airport, Merck
extension Chemical, and possibly
Millbrae and Burlingame
for joint outfall project
California State
Prison-San Quentin
575(7/16/64) WDR
67-49(9/21/67) amends
575: better disinfect
68-29(4/30/68) WDR -
rescinds 575 S, 67-49
69-21(4/23/69) Time Schedule
for 63-29
69-41(8/23/69) Revision of 68-29
(1972-73) Flow: dry .94 mgd
Interceptor wet 3.6
to Pt. San design 1.0
Quentin-with pop: 5,000
deep water
outfall to
(Presently complying with active resolutions)
-------
.T A3LE ,H-1
(CONTINUED)
STATUS O7 ABATEMENT
SF BAY DISCHARGERS
MUNICIPALITIES
DISCHARGER
Marin County SD
RESOLUTIONS AND/OR ORDERS
351(2/16/61) WDR
63-28(4/30/68) WDR
rescinds 351, 409, 67-48
71-43(6/24/71) WDR
rescinds 63-28 incl.
schedule
71-52(7/22/71) C & D
MOST RECENT IMPLEMENTATION
SCHEDULE (OR COMMENTS) STATUS
68-28 incl. 90% BOD removal
71-43 submit-comply schedule
by 7/1/72
Comply: floating matter:
forthwith 7/72-on
new const: 7/1/73 schedule
no bypass: 4/1/74
WQM PLAN
(1972-73)
Interceptor
to'Pt. San
Quentin with
deep water
outfall to
Bay—also
wet weather
treatment
interim im-
provements
(Presently not complying with active.resolutions)
COMMENTS
Flow: dry 4.0 mgd
pop: 52,000
wet-15.at plant
design 4.5
71-43: incl. stronger
stds. for collforn
turbidity, BOD,
nutrients.
Bypass prohib.
flow limit 4.5
mgd
71-32 viol: floating
matter
Bypass
Connprt-inn Ran
Sub-regional programs
to be implemented 73-74
part of program held uc
by law suits (Ross Valiey
trunk sewer).
$10,000,000 project fo:
treatment plant enlarge -
ments & joint outfall
with Marin Co. SD 41,
San Quentin Prison &
San Rafael SD (pos=ibly
other dischargers will
be included). Defined
in State needs list for
FY 73-74.
Marin County SD 85
Main Plant
511(10/17/63)WDR (Paradise Cove only)
69-3(1/15/69) Rescinds 511
287(9/13/53) WDR Main Plant
(1972-73)
interim
improve-
ments
Main Plant Flow:
dry: .7 ir.gd
design:1.4 mgd
pop: 6,000
Outfall to Raccoon Streftf
-------
S7 2^V =ISCKA?.C-S;=I
DISCHARGER
Karin County SD S5
Main Plant
(Cent.)
MOST RECENT IMPLEMENTATION
RESOLUTIONS ANP/OR ORDERS SCHEDULE (OR C0:^^::75) STATUS
70-104(12/22/70)•Amend.
to 287 incl. schedule
70-104 : Complete 1lnprovement&_
by 5/1/71.
(Presently not complying with active resolutions)
WQM PLAN
See also
Richardson
Bay SD
COMMENTS
District resists
particularly in
sub-regional plan.
Wants to implement
tertiary treatment on
its own.
Mill Valley, City of
732"(3/16/66)WDR w/schedule
785(9/15/66)Time Sched.
71-13(2/25/71JWDR amends
732
71-34 (6/24/71) C S, D
732: submit sched. by 7/15/66
785: Comply by 7/1/67
71-34: Stop bypass: forthwith,
complete compliance plan:7/1/72
(1971-72)
aerated
lagoon
and chlo-
rination
(Presently not complying with active resolutions)
Programs
to reduce
infiltration
are in pro-
gress. Bond
issue passed,
applied to State
& EPA for interim
'improvements.
Plow: Dry 1.7 mgd
design 1.8 mgd
pop: 16,000
outfall to Richardsoi
Bay
732: no bypass
71-13: Flow limit:
1.8 mgd
Tighter effluent
stds.
Conforms to interim
plan except for out-
fall specs.
71-34: viol: disinfSCt
BOD, to.xiciv
turbidity,_ floating
matter, bypass, ex-
cessive flow.
Connection ban.
-------
TA1-L5 H-l
{CONTINUED)
STATUS 01' ABATEMENT
SF BAY DISCHARGERS
MUNICIPALITIES
DISCHARGER
Richardson Bay S.D.
RESOLUTIONS AND/OR ORDERS
228 (11/15/56) IVOR
71-14 (2/25/71) WDR
71-33 (6/24/71) CSD w/
tine sched
8/22/72 - Board grants
extension of by-pass
prohib.
(presently not complying
with active resols)
MOST RECENT IMPLEMENTATION
SCHEDULE (CR COMMENTS)
71-33: No bypass: 4/1/73
submit comp-sched: 7/1/72
STATUS
7/6/71:
'Connection ban
appealed to
State by dev.
7/27:CB
appealled to
courts
8/5: State
upholds ban
3/15/72: Court
upholds ban
WQH PLAN
1971-72 interim
improvements
1972-73
Marin Muni
Water Dist-
Interceptor
from Richardson
Bay to ocean.
Treatment plant
and deep water
COMMENTS
Flow(Trestle
Glen)
dry: . 2mgd
design: .3mgd
pop: 4200
Sewage from
rest of dist.
pumped to
Sausalito plant
71-14: Mo bypass
7/22:RBSD asks joint project
outfall. PossibleFlow limit . 3mgd
71-33: viol:
1 yr extension with other Marin floating matter
on bypass prohib
so money allo- Co. discharges
cated for
interim com-
pliance can be
spent on long-
range program
foam, BOD, dis-
infect, turbid,
toxicity
threatened viol:
bypass.C onnectior.
ban.
Program to cut
infil, disinfect,
facilities
enlarged
land disposal of
some effluent
-------
TAI'.LE H-l
(CONTINUED)
STATUS OF1 ABATEMENT
SF BAY MSCHARGERS
MUNICIPALITIES
DISCHARGER
Richmond, City of
RESOLUTIONS AND/OR ORDERS
130 ( )WDR
721 (2/17/66) WDR rescinds
130
69-40 ( 69)Amend.
requires disinfect.
69-46 (9/25/69)rescinds
327 (?)
MOST RECENT IMPLEMENTATION
SCHEDULE (OR COMMENTS)
STATUS
Plant
improvement
compl. 10/69
747
68-6
CSD rescinded by
70-9 (1/29/70)
WQM PLAN
COMMENTS
1975-76
interceptor•from
Antioch toward
Richmond-
deepwater
outfall
flow: design:
12.2mgd
pop: design:
98000
San Francisco -
North Point
1971-72
deepwater
outfall, main
sump and pump
alteration,
turbidity and
grease removal
1972-76
interception
and treatment
of discharges
from combined
Sausalito - Marin
City S.D.
1971-72
interim
improvements
-------
TABLE H-l
(CONTINUED)
STATUS OF ABATEMENT
SF BAY DISCHARGERS
MUNICIPALITIES
HOST RECENT IMPLEMENTATION
DISCHARGER RESOLUTIONS AND/OR ORDERS SCHEDULE (OR COMMENTS) STATUS WQM PLAN COMMENTS
Seafirth Estate
Steca Sanitary
District 1971-72 Chemical
(Connected to East and expanded
Bay M.u.D. primary treatment
American Canyon Co.
Water District
Calistoga, City of 1972-73 interim
reclamation for
irrigation
1974-75 land
disoosal facilities
-------
TVELE H-1
(CONTINUED)
STATUS OF ABATEMENT
SF BAY DISCHARGERS
MUNICIPALITIES
DISCHARGER
RESOLUTIONS AND/OR ORDERS
MOST RECENT IMPLEMENTATION
SCHEDULE (OR COMMENTS)
STATUS
WQM PLAN
COMMENTS
Contra Costa County
S.D. No. 7-A
1971-72
expanded
primary
treatment
or ponding
1975-76
interceptor
from Antioch
toward
Richmond,
deepwater
outfall.
$35,000,000 project
for transportation
fac. from Crockett
Valona to Richmond
plant defined in
State needs list
for FY 74-75
$712,000 project for
new secondary plant
defined in State
needs list for FY 72-73
Hercules, City of
1972-73
interceptor
sewer to
City of
Pinole
1975-76
interceptor
from Antioch
toward
Richmond,
deepwater
outfall.
To connect to Pinole
$90,000 project for
interceptor to
Pinole STP defined
in-State needs list
for FY 72-73
-------
TABLE H-1
(CONTINUED)
STATUS OF ABATEMENT
SF BAY DISCHARGERS
MUNICJPOLITIES
DISCHARGER
RESOLUTIONS AND/OR J3RDERS
MOST RECENV IMPLEMENTATION
SCHEDULE (OR COMMENTS)
STATUS
WQM PLAN
COMMENTS
Las Gallinas
Valley S.D.
380 (10/19/61) Long Range
Plan
396 (2/15/62) WDR
69-40 ( /2S/69) Requires
disinfect. Time Sched
72-10 (3/28/72) WDR w/
schedule
72-10 submit compl.
sched: 7/1/72
Comoly w/flow limit:
12/31/73
No bypass: forthwith
Disinfect 1972-73 Flow: dry: 2.1 tngd
begun 4/70 interim wet: 10.5 "
improve- design: 2.25 "
ments pop: 30,000
outfall to H iller Cr
(See also
Marin Co 72-10 conforms to
SD tt6 - interim plan» flow
Ignacio) limit. 2.25 mgd
sub-reg plan to b-
implersented '76-'"
Plant may te ex-
panded in interiir.
$400,000 project for
disinfection and
sludge handling fac.
and enlargement of
biofilter defined in
State needs list for
FY 72-73
-------
TAI.LE H-l
(CONTINUED)
STATUS OJ' ABATEMENT.
SF BAY blSCHARGERS
MUNICII'ALITIES
DISCHARGER
RESOLUTIONS AND/CR ORDERS
MOST RECENT IMPLEMENTATION
SCHEDULE (OR COMiMENTS)
STATUS
WQM PLAN
COMMENTS
Marin County S.D.
No. 6-Ignacio
69-49: comply by 4/15/70
596(8/20/64) WDR
69-8(2/13/69) WDR
Rescinds 470 s 596
69-15(3/13/69) C&D w/Sched.
69-286/24/69) amends 69-15
69-49(9/25/69) amends 69-15
S 69-28
70-72(9/24/70) amends 69-8
70-86 (10/22/70) amends 69-15, 70-86: comply w/70-72
69-28 S 69-49 by 2/1/73
submit subreg. sched by
3/15/71
(Presently not complying
with active resol)
I
Flow: .7 mgd to be
enlarged to 1.2
pop: 10,000
outfall to Novato cr.
seasonal irrigation
use of effluent. 69-8:
strict coliform std.
(concern over irri-
gation use).
(75-76) N. .!
Marin Co. &!
S. Sonoma
Co.-Inter-
ceptor to
Pt. San
Pedro with
deep water
outfall. In-
Construction terceptor may 70-72: requires dev.
is a little go as far as of subreg plan with
behind sched, Pt. San alternative to proposed
but should Quentin or to San Pablo outfall,
meet compli- ocean as "joint Svoass prohi^,
ance sched. project with Plan is to upgrade ?Io-
So. Marin dis-vato & Ignacio
charges plants , & use corbined
outfall to S. Pablo
bay. Reg. bd wants
different outfall lo-
cation. Grants forth-
coming, bonds sold.
$33,000,000 project for
subreg. transport of
treatment and possibly
reclamation fac definec-
in State needs list
for FY 73-74
-------
TABLE H-1
(CONTINUED) .
STATUS OF ABATEMENT
SF BAY MSCHARGERS
MUNICIPALITIES
DISCHARGER
RESOLUTIONS AND/OR ORDERS
MOST RECENT IMPLEMENTATION
SCHEDULE (OR COMMENTS)
STATUS
WQM PLAN
COMMENTS
Marin County S.D.
No. 6-Novato
(See Ignacio)
(See Ignacio)
(Presently not complying
with active resols)
Flow: drV; 1.8 tngd
design: 2.7.(to be
enlarged to 3.0)
pop: 21,700
Outfall to Novato Cr.
within 500" o£ water-
oriented residential
area. effluent used
for seasonal irri-
gation.
(See Ignacio)
-------
TAHLE H-1
(CONTINUED)
STATUS OI1 ABATEMENT
SF BAY DISCHARGERS
MUNICIPALITIES
DISCHARGER
RESOLUTIONS AND/OR ORDERS
MOST RECENT IMPLEMENTATION
SCHEDULE (OR COMMENTS)
STATUS
WQH PLAN
COMMENTS
Marin County S.D.
No. 6-Bahia
470(6/20/63) WDR
69-8(2/13/69) WDR
rescinds 470 & 596
70-72 (9/24/70)
71-16 (2/25/71)
when consti'. is complete,
parts of 70-72 relating
to Bahia are rescinded.
(Presently not
complying with active
resols)
(See Ignacio) Flow: design: .2 mgd
Pop: 2000(design)
ultimate flow .8 mgd
" pop 8,000
outfall to Petaluma R.
To be expanded as
development continues
& abandoned after tie-
in w/subreg plan.
State does not want to
fund Bahia because it
is a one-developer
project.
71-16: no bypass
(See Ignacio)
-------
TMiLE H-l
(CONTINUED)
STATUS OF ABATEMENT
SF BAY DISCHARGERS
MUNICII'ALITIES
MOST RECENT IMPLEMENTATION
DISCHARGER RESOLUTIONS AND/OR ORDERS SCHEDULE (OR COMMENTS) STATUS WQM PLAN COMMENTS
Meadowood Develop-
ment Co.
Napa County S.D. 1975-76
Interceptor
from Napa to
Vallejo and
plant enlarge-
ments at Vallejo.
-------
TABLE H-l
(CONTINUED)
STATUS OF ABATEMENT
SF BAY DISCHARGERS
MUNICIPALITIES
MOST RECENT IMPLEMENTATION
DISCHARGER RESOLUTIONS AND/OR ORDERS SCHEDULE (OR COMMENTS) STATUS WQM PLAN COMMENTS
Peta.luma, City of 1971-72
pump station,
force mains
and new oxi-
dation ponds.
(See also
Marin Co.
SD 16-Ignacio)
Pinole, City of 1975-76
Interceptor
from Antioch
toward Rich-
mond, deep-
water outfall
-------
TABLE H-l
(CONTINUED)
STATUS 0? ABATEMENT
SF BAV DISCHARGERS
MUNICIPALITIES
DISCHARGER
RESOLUTIONS AND/OR ORDERS
MOST RECENT IMPLEMENTATION
SCHEDULE (OR COMMENTS)
STATUS
WQM PLAN
COMMENTS
Rodeo S.D.
1971-72
interim
chemical
facilities
1975-76
Interceptor
from Antioch
toward Rich-
mond, deep-
water outfall.
St. Helena, City of
1971-72
Thomas
Lane inter-
ceptor
1974-75
Land dis-
posal facili-
ties.
370,000 project for
Thomas Lane inter-
ceptor defined in
State needs list for
FY 72-73 (priority
III)
-------
TABLE H-2
STATUS OF ABATEMENT
SP BAY DISCHARGERS
INDUSTRY
DISCHARGER
FMC, Inorganic
Chera Div'
Newark
RESOLUTIONS AND/OR ORDERS
4/16/64
69-
11/25/69
It-
8/10/72
Disch. Reg.
Disch. Reg.
MOST RECENT IMPLEMENTATION
SCHEDUIE '(OR COMMENTS)
STATUS
COMMENTS
Typ. stds.
To be filed 9/15/72 by FMC
Process
waste 4mg
OIS - con-
tinued 4,
Cooling
waste 1.
Viol, of floating mat
setteable
solids
Crown Zellerbach
Antioch
71-14 VTOR (4/20/71)
incl. schedule
revised sched. 6/25/71
No discharge of toxic or
biostim. by 6/76
Complete constr. by 9/1/73 of
all treatment facilities
Fibreboard - Pulp
& Paper
Antioch
302 WDR (1960)
71-17 WDR (4/20/71) incl.
schedule rescinds 302
comply by 1/1/73, later
extended to 7/74
No disch of toxic of biostim.
by 6/76
EPA has proposed a
compliance plan
w/f inal comp. by 7/7
Fibreboard - Board
Mill
Antioch
316 (WDR (7/24/58))
71/18 WDR (4/20/71) (rescinds
316)w/schedule
compliance by 1/1/73
-------
TABLE H-2
(CONTINUED)
STATUS OF ABATEMENT
SF BAY DISCHARGERS
INDUSTRY
DISCHARGER
RESOLUTIONS AND/OR ORDERS
MOST RECEilT IMPLEMENTATION
SCHEDULE '(OR COMMENTS)
STATUS
COMMENTS
duPont
Antioch
71-rl3 WDR (4/20/71)
w/schedule
comply by 3/1/73
Hickmont Foods
Antioch
172 TOR-(4/24/58)•
61-99 CSD (7/20/61) (solids)
64-166 CSD (10/27/64XpH )
71-16 WDR (4/20/71) (rescinds
172)
no toxic or biostim discharge
after 6/76
new equip, installed
early '72
Tillie Lewis Foods 173 (4/24/58) WDR
Antioch 71-15 (1/71) WDR(rescinds 17$ comply by 7/1/73
no toxic or biostim. after
6/76
Merck & Co
South San Francisco
685 Disch. Reg
7/16/65
69-31 Disch. Reg
Reduce Solids Load at Source
12/1/70
Complete wastewater study
8/31/70
Submit final vpt. 4 mos. after
staff consultation on study
Typical stds for rece
ing wtr. & waste sewa
& Ind waste
-------
TABLE H-2
(CONTINUED)
STATUS OF ABATEMENT
SF BAY DISCHARGERS
INDUSTRY
MOST RECENT IMPLEMENTATION
DISCHARGER RESOLUTIONS AND/OR ORDERS SCHED^LS (OR COMMENTS) STATUS COMMENTS
Merck (Cont.) 71-22 CSD limit loads 5/1/71 Files indicate
4/22/71 get agreement w/SSF for compliance w/time
outfall tie-in by 6/1/71 schedule
Complete in plant collection
system 14 mos after approval
of tie-ill compliance w/69-31
within 1 month of tie-in
71-64 Rescinds 685 685 not needed after
sewage is disposed to
city system. Ind was
covered by 69-31
-------
TABLE H-2
(CONTINUED)
STATUS OF ABATEMENT
SF BAY DISCHARGERS
INDUSTRY
DISCHARGER
.RESOLUTIONS AND/OR ORDERS
MOST RECENT IMPLEMENTATION
SCHEDULE (OR COMMENTS)
STATUS
COMMENTS
P G S E
San Francisco
(Hunters Point)
Allied Chem.
Richmond
213 WDR 8/16/72
541 WDR 2/20/64
WDR 1/25/65
WDR 4/25/72
Expands & extends monitoring
program £ stds to include
cleaning process waste
Typical rrfing water stds
(incl. ph 6.5-8.3) but
no pH std for e.ffluent
Adds effluent pH std to be
complied w/ forthwith
Minimal stds for oil,
toxicity in effluent 6
receiving wtr.
Some minor oil spills
noted over past few years
Neutralization
facility installed
2/70
Facility upgraded
5/72
Sulfuric Acid plant
.04 mgd pH 1-3 waste
State F & G sued in '69.
Allied pleaded guilty.
4/13/72 EPA requests
1899 action.8/72-Board
to consider C & D for
violations of effluent
pH in 6/72
-------
TABLE H-2
(CONTINUED)
STATUS OF ABATEM3NT
SF BAY DISCHARG3RS
INDUSTRY
DISCHARGER
RESOLUTIONS AND/OR ORDERS
MOST RECENT IMPLEMENTATION
SCHEDULE (OR COMMENTS)
STATUS
COMMENTS
Stauffer Chem.
Richmond
Chevron Chem-Ortho
Rich.~cr.d
627 TOR (1/25/65)
(6/13/67)627 extended to cover new waste 'E'
70/43 (8/6/70) Mot in file.
New WDR to conform to
interim plan have been
drafted, will require
compliance by 7/73.
EPA questioned CE permit
application (didn't match
actual operations) 8/1/72
Wastes: A, B & D - Toxic
wastes from pesticide mfr.
B is burned, A s D go to
evap. ponds, C is fertilizer
waste, released after
settling pond treatment.
-E is from herbicide m£r. —
~"evap. ponds. Concern is
leakage from ponds & nutrient
level of 'c'. Files indicate
previous violations have
been corrected.
-------
TABLE H-2
(CONTINUED)
STATUS OF ABATEMENT
SF B,\Y DISCHARGERS
INDUSTRY
DISCHARGER
RESOLUTIONS AND/OR ORDERS
MOST RECENT IMPLEMENTATION
SCHEDULE (OR COMMENTS)
STATUS
COMMENTS
SHELL OIL
MARTINEZ
71-8 1/28/71 Prohib. of
ocean discharge of refinery
wastes
Compl. ty 12/31/72
Compliance on
schedule
Has active
program to
route storm
wastes thru
chem.
treatment
ALLIED CHEM.
NICHOLS
PHILLIPS PETROL.
AVON
68-41 WDR (7/18/68)
69-30 Schedule (6/24/69)
70-20 WDR (3/26/70)
72- C & D (8/10/72)
67-31 WDR (6/13/67)
71-9 C & D (2/25/71)
72-45 Rescinds 71-9
(7/25/72)
69-30: Compl. by 12/31/70
70-20: Changes NDR to conform
to process changes
Ind. wastes incl.
5/69 Pesticidem-fir. acids, pesticides
discontinued
72-
suhmit sched.
8/15/72
Compliance with
70-20 achieved by
4/71
residues
2/4/71 State F & G
sues, wins (2 yr.
prolation, fine).
F & G finds Allied
in compliance by
4/71
New KDR under ccr.sic
to conform to Interi:
Plan
72- violation:
settleable matter
71-9 Compl. by 8/71 (toxicity)
7/72 In Compliance,
on schedule
Refinery waste & sewe
2/6/69 Oil spill. F &
sues. Number ofcorplai
in 69 from other spi:
fish kills, odor,
explosions
71-9 viol:
coliform
toxicity
-------
TABLE H-2
(CONTINUED)
STATUS OF ABATEMENT
SF BAIT DISCHARGERS
INDUSTRY
DISCHARGER
Phillips Avon
(Cont.)
SHELL CHEM
.RESOLUTIONS AND/OR 'ORDERS
MOST RECENT IMPLEMENTATION
SCHEDULE ' (OR COMMENTS)
STATUS
STALTFER CHEM
MA2IEEZ
68-36 ViDR (6/20/68)
68-68 V33R (12/18/63)
71-21 C & D (4/22/71)
71-24
72-46 Rescinds 71-21
(7/25/72)
71-24 - To cover new plant ops.
COMMENTS
7/721 New VER to conform to
Interim Plan considered.
Phillips requests delay ur.til
EPA/API Study is cut.
2 mgd ind. waste diluted flf
12 rrgd bay water & sewage.
Board considered C & D, but
main plant was shutdown
8/31/70, reducing waste to
.2 irgd treated in holding :
(ironitored^
71-21 viol: pH, tcxicity
In compliance 7/72
(facilities conpl. late
•71)
U.S. STEEL
prrrssrac
594 KDR (9/17/64)
70-88 VCR (11/4/70) amends,
expands 594
70-97 C S D (11/24/70)
In substantial conpliance
by 8/72
20 mgd ind waste
70-97 viol: Discoloration,
settleables, pH, lead
12/23/70 USS appeal to State
WRCB
3/4/71 SVJECB upholds Rea. 3
(State Res 71-9)
3/9/71 USS appeals STOCB
3/18/71 SKRCB denies appea!
(State Res 71-10)
-------
TA^I.E H-2
(CONTINUED)
STATUS OF ABATEMENT
SF BAY DISCHARGERS
INDUSTRY
DISCHARGER
U.S. Steel Plttsturg
(Cont.)
DOW CEEM
POTSBUH;
.RESOLUTIONS AND/OR ORDERS
MOST RECENT IMPLEMENTATION
SCHEDULE (OR COMMENTS)
STATUS
re 4 E
pnrssuRG
VJDR (IAS/69)
''_ _ revision (3/21/68) for
new plant process
71-40 KER (6/24/71) w/schedule
542 KDR (2/20/64)
68-34 VDR. (5/23/68)
70-51 KDR (6/25/70)
71-82 VDR (11/23/71)
Rescinds 70-51
71-40 tighter, more extensive controls
for specific discharges - ccnpliance by
3/72 except for thenral waste (1976)
542: for cle;ming waste only
68-34: For units 1-6. Thermal
stds not defined
70-51 for unit 7. Thermal std:
not to raise receiving water temp.
irore than 6°
71-82 applies to dredging during
unit 7 constr.
Dow on schedule w/
compliance sched., has
been publicly camfinded
by Board for efforts
COMMENTS
4/2/71 OSS appeals to courts
8/3/71 Settled out of court:
$5000 fine, schedule of
inprovarents
14 ind. wastes, incl. H CI,
pesticide residues.
8/72 - New KDR to ccnfomtt)
interim plan under consider
ation.
Cooling water 724.000
gal./minute (»*#f 1-6?
Unit 7 volure: 51 nigd
Objections by F s G, Fl'3,
F'.-.'QA to once-thru ceding
unit 7 cause delay in CcS
Fenru.t approval. (Reg. Bd.
did_not object). Ey 3/71 FG
decides to switch to a ser.i
closed systen, partly to
response to stateA"ide thertr.
policy adopted 1/7/71 which
permitted max 4° tise. J7 t
be in fp by late '72
-------
TABLE H-Z
(CONTINUED)
STATUS CF ABATEMENT
SF BAY DISCHARGERS
•NOUSTRY
DISCHARGER RESOLUTIONS AND/OR ORDERS
Onion Oil 68-27 WDR (4/30/68)
Kodeo 70-75-Compliance Sched.
(9/24/70)
71-51 C & D (7/22/71)
71-62 Amendment to 68-27
MOST RECENT IMPLEMENTATION
SCHEDULE : (OR COMMENTS)
(Compliance by 1/15/71 (70-75)
Rpt. compl. dates by 1/1/72
(31-51)
71-62 coliform std. restated.
STATUS
2/72 Union claims
compliance on DO/
coliform.will meet
toxicity by 8/73.
COMMENTS
Refinery wastes
40 mgd
71-51 violations
DO, toxicity,
coliform
8/72 new WDR being
drafted to coli-
form to interim
plan: Compl-
iance by '76.
Sequoia
Refining
776 WDR (8/18/66)
69-39 Addition to T76:
bacterial stds.
71-10 C e. D (2/25/71)
71-10: in
substantial
compliance
since
3/71
Sewage & Ind. Waste
0.1 mgd
71-10: viol, of phen
Ph, threatened viol.
of grease, toxicity
ammon. hydrox.
8/72 - Board to
consider lifting
C & D
-------
TABLE H-2
(CONTINUED)
STATUS OF ABATEMENT
SF BAY DISCHARGERS
DISCHARGER
C 4 E Sugar
Crockett
RESOLUTIONS AND/OR ORDERS
•Q Cf- WDR (12/18/68)
70-3"4"C~fi D (3/26/70)
70-96 Amends 70-34
(11/24/70) schedule only
71-
WDR (1/28/71)
MOST RECSNT IMPLEMENTATION
SCHEDULE (OR COMMENTS)
70-34 - sched. incl.
70-96 - ravised sched -
compliance by 3/15/71
STATUS
70-96 New plant
on New plant
in compliance
COMMENTS
21 separate cooling
& process discharges
70-34 viol of toxicity.
settleables, unsight-
liness
70-96 sched. changed
due to strike.
TJ- New std for new
combined outfall.
Eun-ile Oil
Eenicia
67-41 V7DR (8/17/67)
70-2 C S D (3/14/70)
70-50 Rescinds 70-2 (5/28/70)
Complianca by 5/1/70
In compliance
4/70
Refinery wastes 20 ncd
new plant C69). 70-2:
viol, of grease,
toxicity
8/72 Interim Plan KDR
in draft - will requir
compliance by '76.
May be revised tc
'74.
Several oil spill incid-
ents past few years -
no action except
surveillance.
-------
TABLE H-3
STATUS 0? ABATED::? S .F. H.-.V BIS CHARGER
FEDERAL INSTALLATIONS
DISCHARGER RESOLUTIONS AND/OR ORDERS
IKP LE".SH T AT I OK
SCHEDULES
(or
STATUS
VJQM PLAN
COZilENTS
'J.S.K. Yerba
Buena Island
U.S.N. 'Treasure
Island
U.S.N. Radio
Station Skaggs
Island
U.S.N. Mare
Island
U.S. Naval Fuel
Annex, Pt.
Molate
Res£69-47 (25 Sept. 69)
Exec. Order 11507
KQCP.for Tidal Waters
Inland from Golden Gate
R2s§69-47 (25 Sept. 69)
Exec. Order 11507
WQCP for Tidal Waters
Inland from Golden
Gate
Letter from S.F. Bay
WQCB (9June 70)
P-730 went to bid
Karen 1972. No
completion date set
P-750 went to bid
liarch 1972. No
completion date set
Project (P-038)-
Going to Bid
liarch 1972-No
completion date
Resfr70-105 (Dec. 22,1970) Vallejo connection Separate sanitation
S.F. Bay WQCB start:- summer & storm sewer
Exec. Order 11507 1973 systems-open for
KQCP for Tidal Waters finish:fall bid 8 March 1972
Inland from Golden Gate 1975
notification Jan.6,1970
Res370-46 May 28, 1972
Exec. Order 11507
KQCP for Tidal Waters
Inland from Golden Gate
Package Treatment
Plant out to bid
April 25, 1972
Connect to. U.S.N. Treasure
Island secondary treatment
plant (Project P-750)
Abandon existing primary
treatment plant and elimi-
nate it as a discharger
Secondary treatment with
effluent chlorination at
present
(P-038) Spray irrigation for
main treatment plant
effluent. Effluents from
aeration tank and one septic
tank to two new evaporation
ponds
Connect to Vallejo Sanition
£. Flood Control District
Change over to separate
sanitary & storm sewers
Presently: primary treatment
by Imhoff Tank & discharged
to S.F. Bay through an
outfall
-------
TABLE H-3 (Continued)
STATUS OF ABATERS! S.F. H.-.V DISCHARGER
FEDERAL INSTALLATIONS
DISCHARGER RESOLUTIONS AND/OR ORDERS
IMPLEMENTATION
" SCHEDULES
(or coi?Jtients)
WQM PLAN
COMMENTS
U.S. Naval .None-except those for
Weapons Station, Contra Costa S.D.
Concord No. 7B
Hamilton Air
Force Base
Travis Air
Force Base
Fall 1972-Begin con- 28Sept.68-Connection
struction 5 treatment negotiated
Summer 1973-Complete with C.C.C.C.S.D.
connection to FV71 Connection
Central Contra Costa funded
S.D.
Res£69-24(May 28, 1969)
Resif95 (april 16, 1952)
domestic'waste
Res?147 (March 18,1954)
industrial waste
Tentative resolution in
1968 not yet adopted
1973-74 Sub-
Connect to Central Contra
Costa County S.D. for
sewage treatment. P-011
Presently: Industrial wastes
regional treat- pretreated & then mixed with
ment & possible sanitary sewage. Mixture
reclamation - receives secondary treatment
combined plan with & is discharged to San Pablo
S.D. No.6 of Marin Bay
County, etc.
1975-76 Reclamation Present: all wastes given
for groundwater primary treatment followed
recharge and by aerated lagoons, set-
irrigation tling ponds & chlorination.
Discharge to Union Creek
-------
APPENDIX I
-------
APPENDIX I
METHODS OF CHEMICAL ANALYSIS
Methods used by NFIC-Denver in general followed established
EPA procedures. —' These methods are described below showing the
exact procedures used where the established procedures were inadequate
or nonexistent.
1. Hexane Extractables (Oil and Grease)
Sediment samples were analyzed using Soxhlet extraction. Samples
were dried at 105°C overnight and percent moisture calculated. Approxi-
mately 30 grams of the ground sample were extracted with n-hexane for
four hours. The extract was then evaporated to constant weight.
Results were calculated on the dry weight basis.
2. Metals (except mercury)
a. Water Samples. All metals analyses except mercury, were deter-
mined using a double beam atomic absorption spectrophotometer with a
high solids burner head. Optimization procedures were according to
manufacturer's recommendations. Matrix effects were compensated for
in the standards and blanks by using substitute ocean water— as
diluent. One hundred milliliter aliquotes were treated with 5 ml
HC1 and digested for 15 minutes. Samples were then cooled to room
temperature and analyzed by direct aspiration.
b. Shellfish. Approximately 5 grams of the ground shellfish
flesh were weighed and digested using concentrated nitric acid. Aqua
regia was then added and further digestion carried out to near dryness.
— Methods for^ Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes, EPA, National
Research Center, AQC Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1971.
-------
The samples were then brought to 100 ml using distilled water and
analyzed by direct aspiration in an atomic absorption spectrophotometer.
Results were calculated on a wet weight (drained meats) basis.
c. Sediments. Moisture contents were determined on approximately
20 grams of wet sample and 5 gram aliquotes of the wet sample were
prepared and analyzed as for shellfish. Results were calculated on
the dry weight basis.
3. Mercury
Mercury in water, sediment and shellfish tissue was analyzed by
the cold vapor technique of absorption of radiation at 253.7 nm
by mercury vapor. Water and tissue samples were prepared by digestion
with sulfuric and nitric acids at 58°C followed by overnight oxidation
with potassium permanganate. Sediments required digestion in aqua
regia before oxidation. All samples were subjected to a final oxida-
tion with potassium persulfate before analysis.
4. Chlorinated Pesticides, Polychlorinated Biphenyls, and Petroleum
Products
a. Extraction. Aqueous suspensions of plankton were extracted
by direct liquid-liquid extraction using a 75 ml portion of hexane
followed by a 25 ml portion of hexane.
Two hundred gram samples of air dried sediments were extracted in
a blender with 200 ml hexane at high speed for 2 minutes. The centrifuged
supernate was then decanted and concentrated to 5 to 10 ml.
Twenty to 40 gram samples of drained shellfish tissue were weighed,
frozen- chopped and then extracted in a blender with 200 ml hexane.
The centrifuged supernate was then decanted and concentrated to 5 to 10 ml.
b. Acetonitrile Partition. Hexane extracts were diluted to 25 ml
-------
1-3
and partitioned with four 25-ml portions of hexane-saturated acetonitrile.
The acetonitrile fractions were then concentrated to near dryness
and taken up to 10 ml with hexane.
2/
c. Alumina Column Cleanup.—' Ten ml hexane extracts from the
acetonitrile partition were passed through an alumina column (5% lUO).
The column was eluted with 10 percent ethyl ether in hexane. Ten 50-ml
fractions are collected and concentrated to 1 to 10 ml.
d. Flame lonization Gas Chromatography. The hexane layer from
the acetonitrile partitioning were concentrated to 1 to 10 ml and added
to the top of a 5 percent deactivated alumina column. The column was
eluted with hexane. The first 30 ml was collected. Aliphatic hydrocarbons
were determined by gas chromatographic response and by weighing the
evaporated residue. Petroleum hydrocarbons produce characteristic
gas chromatograms that contain a homologus series of n-alkanes, and a
broad evelope of branched and cyclic hydrocarbons.
e. Electron-Capture Gas Chromatography. The alumina column
fractions were run on the electron capture gas chromatograph and indi-
vidual or pairs of pesticides and PCB's identified by comparing reten-
tion times with those of standards run concurrently- Quantitative
estimates are made by peak height comparisons. The order of elution
of pesticides from the alumina column gives confirmation of the tenta-
tive GC identification as well as do p-value determinations.^.'
2/
—' "Infrared Identification of Chlorinated Insecticides in the Tissues
of Poisoned Fish," H. W. Boyle, R. H. Burttschell, and A. A. Rosen.
"Organic Pesticides in the Environment," Advances in Chemistry Series,
No. 60, 207-218, 1966.
3/
— "Extraction p-Values of Pesticides and Related Compounds in Six
Binary Solvent Systems," M. C. Bowman and M. Beroza. J.A.O.A.C.,
-------
APPENDIX J
-------
APPENDIX J
ALERT LEVELS OF TRACE METALS IN SHELLFISH
1968 National Shellfish Sanitation Workshop Proposed Alert Levels
in Shellfish*
Alert Level (ppm drained meats)
1,500
100
Metal
Zinc
Copper
Cadmium, lead, mercury, and chromium
(combined)
*Species not specified.
1971 National Shellfish Sanitation Workshop Proposed Alert Levels
in Shellfish
Metal
Cadmium
Lead
Species
Oyster Northeast
Oyster Southern
Soft Clams
Oyster Northern and Southern
Soft Clam Northern and Southern
Chromium Oyster Northern and Southern
Soft Clam Northern and Southern
Mercury Oyster Northern and Southern
Soft Clam Northern and Southern
Copper Oyster Northeast
Oyster Southern
Soft Clams Northern and Southern 25
Zinc Oyster Northeast 2,000
Oyster Southern 1,000
Soft Clams Northern and Southern 30
Alert Level (mg/kg drained meats
3.5
1.5
0.5
2.0
5.0
2.0
5.0
0.2
0.2
175
42
------- |