Puget Sound Estuary Program
ELLIOTT BAY TOXICS
ACTION PROGRAM
INTERIM WORK PLAN
PREPARED BY:
TETRA TECH, INC.
PREPARED FOR:
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS:
City of Seattle
Elliott Bay Citizens Advisory Committee
King County
METRO
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Port of Seattle
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Washington Department of Natural Resources
Washington Department of Social and Health Services
-------
Final Report
TC 3991-01
ELLIOTT BAY TOXICS ACTION PROGRAM:
INTERIM WORK PLAN
by
Tetra Tech, Inc.
for
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region X - Office of Puget Sound
Seattle, WA
Washington Department of Ecology
Olympia, WA
October, 1985
Tetra Tech, Inc.
11820 Northup Way, Suite 100
Bellevue, Washington 98005
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Previous studies of Elliott Bay and the lower Duwamish River have
revealed extensive contamination by toxic metals such as copper, lead,
zinc, and arsenic, as well as organic compounds such as petroleum products
and PCBs. Some of these substances may accumulate at high concentrations
in tissues of marine organisms, posing a hazard to the aquatic ecosystem.
For example, toxic contamination may decrease the abundance and diversity
of benthic or bottom-dwelling communities and increase the prevalence of
tissue disorders such as liver tumors in fish.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Washington Department
of Ecology, working with the city of Seattle, METRO, and others, have developed
an Action Program to correct the toxic problem in the Elliott Bay system.
The Action Program 1) identifies existing problems of toxic contamination,
2) locates sources of toxics, 3) implements corrective actions to eliminate
existing problems, 4) identifies appropriate agencies for implementing
corrective actions, and 5) provides a schedule for implementing corrective
actions. Corrective actions include source controls and the removal of
contaminated sediments. Source controls can include permit revisions to
reduce the strength or volume of discharges and management activities to
reduce the contamination of surface runoff.
Priority problem areas were identified by analyzing data on contamination
and biological effects. Areas received a ranking of high priority if they
exhibited a particularly high level of contamination and/or biological
effects such as high prevalence of liver tumors among bottom-dwelling fish,
or a very low number of bottom-dwelling species. Actual and potential
contaminant sources were identified for each priority problem area, and
for the study area in general. This Work Plan focuses on controlling identified
sources and better characterizing potential ones.
The Work Plan is unique in its approach to controlling contamination,
in that it brings many regulatory and management organizations together
in an Interagency Work Group to take coordinated action to address particular
problem areas and specific sources of contamination. The Work Plan represents
the input of many agencies and local governments; and citizen groups and
users (via a Citizen's Advisory Committee). Business, industry, environmental,
and citizen groups were represented in a Citizen's Advisory Committee.
The Citizen's Advisory Committee was consulted to provide direct input
into all stages of program development.
This Work Plan is being carried out through the existing regulatory
and resource management mechanisms of agencies and local governments and
by a special Action Team for Elliott Bay. The five members of the Action
Team are funded by the Washington Department of Ecology and METRO with
the support and participation of the city of Seattle and U.S. EPA.
The regulating and management efforts of the Interim Work Plan will
focus on priority problem areas. Most of the high priority areas are located
in the lower Duwamish River adjacent to Harbor Island. Others include
11
-------
the Denny Way CSO area, the Seattle Waterfront near Madison Street, and
Slips 1-4 in the Duwamish River. The Fourmile Rock dredged material disposal
site ranked as a moderate priority. However, because of public concern,
the area is included in the Interim Work Plan. Table 2 is the Site Specific
Interim Work Plan for the Elliott Bay Toxics Action Program. A summary
of the actions in the Work Plan follows:
0 Twenty-one NPDES and state discharge permit actions, including
issuance of new permits, issuance of stormwater permits,
assessment of tighter controls, and site inspections
Three RCRA permit actions, including two site closures
Two criminal investigations and resultant cleanup actions,
including the removal of severely contaminated sediment
from the Florida Street storm drain
Review of historical activities and practices at 12 sites
to determine significance of past toxic contamination
t Cleanup of contamination by the removal of sediments from
five drains
Eleven groundwater contamination investigations
t CSO planning, including the removal of the lower Rainier
Valley stormwater component from the Hanford CSO
Facilities planning, including the transfer Renton sewage
treatment plant effluent from the Duwamish River to a deep-
water site in Elliott Bay
Numerous sampling and analysis studies to better characterize
environmental conditions and identify sources.
Because actions in this Work Plan were defined based on a review of
existing environmental and contaminant source data, it is referred to as
an Interim Plan. However, the plan is actually a working document designed
to be refined as new data are made available. The Interagency Work Group
and Citizen's Advisory Committee will be responsible for updating and imple-
menting the Work Plan. They will meet on a regular, basis (at least quarterly)
to review progress made on implementation of the plan, resolve any problems,
and refine the plan to reflect new information.
111
-------
CONTENTS
Page
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ii
LIST OF FIGURES vi
LIST OF TABLES vii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS viii
GLOSSARY x
INTRODUCTION 1
STUDY AREA 2
APPROACH 2
PRIORITY PROBLEM AREAS 7
REPORT ORGANIZATION 9
INTERIM WORK PLAN FOR ELLIOTT BAY TOXICS ACTION PROGRAM 10
AREA-WIDE ACTIONS 10
SITE-SPECIFIC WORK PLAN 15
DECISION FRAMEWORK FOR CONTROLLING POLLUTANT SOURCES 30
APPENDIX A. MAPS
Map 1. Public Access Points and Recreational
Areas
Map 2. Contaminant Sources and Selected Industry
Locations in Elliott Bay and the Lower
Duwamish River
APPENDIX B. ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL
SOURCES OF CONTAMINANTS FOR STUDY AREA
SEGMENTS OF ELLIOTT BAY AND THE LOWER
DUWAMISH RIVER
NORTH HARBOR ISLAND
EAST WATERWAY
WEST WATERWAY
1v
-------
SOUTH HARBOR ISLAND
DENNY WAY CSO
SEATTLE WATERFRONT
SLIP 1
SLIP 2
SLIP 3
SLIP 4
FOURMILE ROCK DISPOSAL SITE
-------
FIGURES
Number Page
1 Study area drainage boundaries 3
2 Preponderance-of-evidence approach to evaluation of
toxic contamination problems 5
3 Classification of study area segments in terms of
priority for interim action 8
4 Approach to characterization of direct discharges and
ultimate pollutant sources 32
5 Control of problem drains and CSOs 33
6 Control of categorical sources 34
7 Control of illegal dumping 35
v1
-------
TABLES
Number Page
1 Primary kinds of data used in problem area identi-
fication and priority ranking 4
2 Work Plan for Elliott Bay Interim Action Program 16
vi i
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This document was prepared by Tetra Tech, Inc., under the direction
of Dr. Robert A. Pastorok, for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
in partial fulfillment of Contract No. 68-03-1977. Mr. John Underwood
and Ms. Martha Burke of U.S. EPA were the Project Officers, and Dr. Thomas
C. Ginn of Tetra Tech was the Program Manager.
The primary authors of this report were Mr. Pieter N. Booth and Dr. Robert
A. Pastorok of Tetra Tech. Mr. Gary Brugger of the Washington Department
of Ecology and Mr. Thomas P. Hubbard of the Municipality of Metropolitan
Seattle prepared drafts of the Interim Work Plan table. Their contribution
in developing specific agency actions and implementation schedules was
invaluable. Dr. John Armstrong of U.S. EPA provided critical technical
review and coordination with other agency activities. Ms. Joan K. Thomas
of the Washington Department of Ecology and Mr. John Underwood of U.S. EPA
provided managerial guidance, encouragement, and review throughout the
project. Ms. Marcy B. Brooks-McAuliffe of Tetra Tech performed technical
editing and supervised report production.
The Elliott Bay Action Program has benefited from the participation
of an Interagency Work Group (IAWG) and a Citizen's Advisory Committee
(CAC). Duties of the IAWG and CAC members included: 1) reviewing program
documents, agency policies, and proposed actions; 2) providing data reports
and other technical information to U.S. EPA; and 3) disseminating action
program information to respective interest groups or constituencies, and
to the general public. We thank the IAWG and CAC members for their past
and continuing efforts. Ms. Patricia O'Flaherty of SAIC/JRB Associates
provided support for the CAC activities. Mr. Hunter MacDonald of Ecology
provided support to the IAWG. We are especially grateful to Ms. Joan Thomas
to Mr. David Schneidler and Ms. Janet Anderson for
to the following individuals for insightful comments
the project; Dr. John Armstrong; Mr. Douglas Briggs;
Thomas Hubbard and other METRO personnel; Mr. James
Heil; Mr. Douglas Hotchkiss; Mr. David Jamison; Mr. Edward Long; Dr. Charles
Muller; Mr. Dan Petke; Mr. James Puckett; Dr. Richard Rutz; and Mr. Frank
Urabeck and other COE personnel. Members of the IAWG and CAC are listed
below.
for chairing the IAWG.
co-chairing the CAC, and
on technical aspects of
Mr. Ralph Domenowske, Mr.
Name
John Armstrong
Ralph Domenowske
Charles J. Henry
Douglas Hotchkiss
Elsie Hulsizer
David Jamison
Carl Kassebaum
Edward Long
ELLIOTT BAY INTERAGENCY WORK GROUP
Affiliation
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
METRO
1984 Puget Sound Water Quality Authority
Port of Seattle
City of Seattle
Washington Department of Natural Resources
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
viii
-------
Jane Lee Seattle-King County Department of Public Health
Dan Petke Washington Department of Ecology
Carl Sagerser Washington Department of Social and Health
Services
David Schneidler Citizen's Advisory Committee
Martin Seybold King County
Joan Thomas Washington Department of Ecology
John Underwood U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Frank Urabeck U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Alternates and Other Participants^
Jeffrey Bauman METRO
William Clindaniel City of Seattle
John Dohrman Port of Seattle
Vi11 amor Gamponia METRO
Burt Hamner U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
John Lampe METRO
Robert Matsuda METRO
Stephen Norsted Washington Department of Social and Health
Services
Joseph Ralph City of Seattle
Robert Swartz METRO
Wally Swofford Seattle-King County Health Department
Joseph Talbot City of Seattle
William Yake Washington Department of Ecology
ELLIOTT BAY CITIZEN'S ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Janet Anderson Magnolia Community Club
Douglas Briggs Puget Sound Industrial Council
Harriett Bullitt Friends of the Duwamish
Virginia Van Engelen League of Woman Voters
Donald Hamilton Seattle Poggie Club
James Heil Puget Sound Alliance
Paul Hickey Muckelshoot Indian Tribe
Dee Ann Kirkpatrick Suquamish Indian Tribe
Minor Lile Greater Seattle Chamber of Commerce
Charles Muller Sierra Club
James Pickett Puget Sound Alliance
Tom Putman Seattle Audubon Society
Annette Ramsour Washington State Sports Diving Council
David Schneidler Seattle Marine Business Coalition
Diana Swain Port Watch
Terry Thomas Northwest Steel head and Salmon Council
Mike White Northwest Marine Trade Association
Robert Williscroft Washington State Sports Diving Council
Alternates and Other Participants
Chris Luboff Western Washington Toxics Coalition
Richard Rutz Seattle Audubon Society
ix
-------
GLOSSARY
Agency and Program Names
CAC
CATAD
COE
DCLU
DNR
DSHS
Ecology
EPA
EPA/CID
IAWG
METRO
NOAA
NPDES
PSWQA
PSEP
RCRA
SPCC
SUPERFUND
- Citizen's Advisory Committee
- Computer Augmented Treatment and Disposal System used
by METRO to control flows and locations of combined
sewer overflows.
- U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
- Department of Construction and Land Use (City of Seattle)
- Washington Department of Natural Resources
- Washington Department of Social and Health Services
- Washington Department of Ecology
- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
- EPA/Criminal Investigation Division
- Interagency Work Group
- Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle
- National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
- National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (EPA/
Ecology)
- Puget Sound Water Quality Authority
- Puget Sound Estuary Program (EPA/Ecology), including
urban embayment action programs such as the Elliott
Bay Toxics Action Program
- Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
- Spill Prevention and Control Contingency Plan
- EPA and Ecology programs to clean up hazardous waste
sites or other areas of toxic contamination
TOSCA
- Toxic Substances Control Act
-------
TPPS
USCG
Toxicant Pretreatment Planning Study (METRO)
U.S. Coast Guard
Chemical Names
As
Cu
HPAH
LPAH
Pb
PCB
Zn
Arsenic
Copper
High Molecular Weight Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons
Low Molecular Weight Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons
Lead
Polychlorinated Biphenyls
Zinc
Pollutant Source Names
CSO
CSO/SD
SD
- Combined Sewer Overflow. A discharge of raw sewage
diluted with storm water, which occurs whenever the
hydraulic capacity of a combined sewer line is exceeded.
- Combined Sewer Overflow and Storm Drain. A combined
source that discharges storm drainage during low flows
and raw sewage diluted with storm water during high
f1ows.
- Storm Drain. A source of stormwater discharge only.
Other Terms
Amphipod
Benthic
Bioaccumulation
Bioassay
A small organism that superficially resembles a shrimp
and lives on the sea bottom. Amphipods are used in
laboratory bioassays to test the toxicity of sediments.
Pertaining to the bottom of a water body.
Concentration of a substance in tissues of an organism.
Bioaccumulation of toxic substances may lead to disease
or other health problems.
A laboratory test used to evaluate the toxicity of
a material (commonly sediments or wastewater) by measuring
behavioral, physiological, or lethal responses of
organisms.
xi
-------
Community
Diversity
Dominance
Elevation Above
Reference
Histopathology
Infauna
Invertebrate
Larvae
Lesion
Loading
Nonpoint Source
Pathology
Sediment
Toxic
Toxicity
Toxic
Contamination
A group of interacting species populations found within
a defined area.
The number of species in a community, or a mathematical
index of the variety of species that also accounts
for the relative abundance of each species.
An index that measures the relative distribution of
individuals among species. When dominance is high,
a few species are very abundant and others are rare.
An index of toxic contamination or biological effects,
which is equal to the value of a variable (e.g., chemical
concentration) at a study site divided by the value
of the same variable at a relatively "clean" reference
area.
Study of tissue disease
Animals living within the bottom sediments
Animals without backbones
(singular larva) A juvenile stage with a body form
that differs greatly from the adult stage (e.g., an
oyster larva is a small free-floating organism).
An abnormal structural change in the body due to injury
or disease (e.g., a liver tumor in fish)
Quantity of a substance that enters a water body during
a specified time interval (e.g., pounds per year)
A nonspecific source of pollutants, often from a large
area (e.g., stormwater drainage)
Study of disease
Material that settles to the bottom of a water body
Relating to a poisonous substance
Poisonous quality of a substance
Presence of toxic substances, often caused by releases
of metals or synthetic organic chemicals to the environ-
ment
xi 1
-------
INTRODUCTION
Previous investigations of Elliott Bay and the lower Duwamish River
have revealed extensive contamination by toxic metals (e.g., copper, lead,
zinc, mercury, and arsenic) and organic compounds (e.g., petroleum products,
PCBs). Some of these substances may accumulate at high concentrations
in tissues of marine organisms, posing a hazard to the aquatic ecosystem
or to human consumers of local seafood. Ecosystem perturbations associated
with anthropogenic inputs of toxic substances may include decreases in
abundance and species diversity of benthic (bottom-dwelling) communities
and increases in the prevalence of tissue disorders (e.g., liver tumors
in fish).
In cooperation with other resource, management agencies, the U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) and the Washington Department of Ecology
(Ecology) are developing an action program to correct toxic problems in
the Elliott Bay system. Corrective actions may include, for example, source
controls to reduce toxicant emissions and cleanup of contaminated sediments.
The objectives of the Elliott Bay Toxics Action Program are to:
Identify problem sites based on toxic contamination and
associated biological effects
t Identify toxicant sources
Rank problem sites and sources in terms of priority for
action
Outline actions by individual agencies and cooperative efforts
among agencies to correct the identified problems.
The ultimate goals of the action program are to protect the marine and
estuarine ecosystem against further degradation from anthropogenic inputs
of toxic materials, to restore areas degraded previously, and to protect
beneficial uses that may be affected by toxic contamination.
The action program is being developed in two phases. In the first
phase, interim actions are specified for high priority problem areas based
on available data. These short-term actions mainly involve source controls
and field investigations planned for the 1-2 yr as part of ongoing regulatory
and management programs. The Interim Work Plan described in this report
serves as an immediate vehicle for interagency coordination. In the second
phase, additional field data will be collected and analyzed to develop
a Comprehensive Work Plan (scheduled for 1986). Companion documents for
the Interim Work Plan are the following:
Elliott Bay Toxics Action Program: Review of Existing Plans
and Activities. A detailed summary of ongoing remedial
action programs and plans.
-------
Elliott Bay Toxics Action Program: Initial Data Summaries
and Problem IdentificatioTr! A synthesis of available data
on toxic contamination and biological effects, and a decision-
making approach for ranking problem areas.
Sampling and Analysis Design for Development of Elliott
Bay Toxics Action Program. A detailed study design for
further investigation of pollutant sources, sediment contami-
nation, and biological effects to provide a complete database
for development of the comprehensive action program.
The study area, the approach used to identify problem areas, and the
locations of high priority problem sites are described in the remainder
of this introduction.
STUDY AREA
The study area is defined as Elliott Bay east of a line drawn between
West Point and Alki Point, including the Duwamish River from its mouth
to the turning basin located approximately 6 mi upstream. The study area
drainage basin consists of about 26 square miles of highly developed land
in metropolitan Seattle (Figure 1). Basin boundaries are roughly defined
by Beacon Avenue on the east side and 35th Avenue S.W. on the west side.
The basin includes residential areas in the southern portions of the Queen
Anne and Magnolia neighborhoods, and most of West Seattle; the industrial
areas along the Duwamish Waterway; the Interstate 5 corridor from James
Street to about S. Dawson Street; and the downtown business district.
Public access points and recreational areas are illustrated in Map 1 (Appendix
A).
Locations of storm drains, combined sewer overflow (CSO) points, and
other potential sources of toxic contaminants are shown in Map 2 (Appendix A).
The residential areas are generally served by partially separated storm
and sanitary systems. Runoff from the business district is served entirely
by combined sewers, and is transported to the West Point treatment plant
via METRO'S interceptor system. Runoff from Interstate 5 is collected
in two large storm drains and discharged to the Duwamish Waterway at Slip 4
and Diagonal Way. The remaining industrial areas, excluding Harbor Island,
are served by combined sewers, and private and municipal storm drains.
Harbor Island has its own storm drainage system which discharges to the
East and West Waterways.
APPROACH
The primary kinds of data used in the decision-making process are
shown in Table 1. Contamination and effects data were integrated and evaluated
in a decision framework based on the "preponderance-of-evidence" approach
to problem area evaluation (Figure 2). Study areas that exhibited high
values of environmental indicators relative to a reference site received
a ranking of "high priority" for evaluation of pollutant sources and remedial
action. The environmental indices are a ratio between the value of variable
(e.g., concentration of PCB in sediments) at a site in the study area and
the value of the same variable at a reference site (i.e., "clean" area
remote from urban centers). Each ratio is called an Elevation Above Reference,
-------
Figure 1. Study area drainage boundaries,
-------
TABLE 1. PRIMARY KINDS OF DATA USED IN PROBLEM
AREA IDENTIFICATION AND PRIORITY RANKING
General Category
Specific Indicator Variables
Pollutant source
Habitat condition
Indigenous organisms
Mass emissions
Sediment quality
Bioaccumulation
Benthic community
structure
Toxicity
Fish pathology
Acute lethal
Sublethal
0 Pollutant concentrations
Discharge flow
0 Pollutant concentrations
0 Contaminant concentrations
in tissues of English sole
and crabs
0 Total abundance
0 Species richness
0 Dominance
0 Amphipod abundance
0 Prevalence of liver lesions
in English sole and rock
sole
0 Amphipod mortality
0 Oyster larvae abnormality
-------
CONTAMINATION
SEDIMENT
FISH
SHELLFISH
BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS
SEDIMENT TOXICITY
BENTHIC COMMUNITIES
FISH DISEASE
HUMAN HEALTH THREAT
(I) MAGNITUDE OF INDICATORS
[T) NUMBER OF INDICATORS
ACTION I CRITERIA
EACH
AREA
CLASSIFIED
AS:
HIGH PRIORITY
MEDIUM PRIORITY
LOW PRIORITY
NO IMMEDIATE ACTION
Figure 2. Preponderance-of-evidence approach to evaluation of
toxic contamination problems.
-------
because the value of the index increases as the deviation from reference
conditions increases.
Contamination of sediments and biota was evaluated by examinating
the following chemical concentrations:
Low Molecular Weight Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons (LPAH):
the sum of light petroleum compounds such as naphthalene,
acenaphthalene, and fluorene
High Molecular Weight Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons
(HPAH): the sum of heavy petroleum compounds or combustion
products such as fluoranthene, pyrene, benzo(a)pyrene, and
chrysene
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs): the sum of PCBs
Copper (Cu), Lead (Pb), and Zinc (Zn): the sum of selected
metals
Arsenic (As): a toxic metal known to be present in emissions
from the ASARCO smelter, in sandblasting material used by
shipyards, and in natural seawater.
The rationale for choosing these selected indicator variables and supporting
data for the study area and reference areas are provided in the Initial
Data Summaries and Problem Identification report.
Because available data are limited, the prioritization of specific
problem areas for this Work Plan was based mainly on sediment chemistry
and toxicity bioassays using amphipods and oyster larvae. Elevation Above
Reference (EAR) values for these indicators are provided for each priority
area in Appendix B of this report. Given the uncertainty associated with
the original sample analyses and pooling of data sets from different investi-
gators, EAR values are presented as ranges, for example:
Chemical Concentrations
t Very high >1,OOOX reference
High 100-1,OOOX
t Moderate 10-100X
Low <10X
Not significant Below the maximum concentration observed
in reference areas.
-------
V:'''-"'
SPOKANE STREET
BRIDGE
Figure 3. Classification of study area
segments in terms of priority
for interim action.
HIGH PRIORITY INTERIM ACTION
MODERATE PRIORITY INTERIM ACTION
NO IMMEDIATE ACTION
INSUFFICIENT DATA
-------
REPORT ORGANIZATION
The remainder of this document describes interim actions to be taken
to control the input of contaminants to Elliott Bay and the lower Duwamish
River. Two kinds of interim actions are addressed: area-wide actions
and site-specific actions. Area-wide actions generally apply to large
portions of the study area, whereas site-specific actions are unique measures
taken (by a regulatory agency or other entity) within each study area segment.
Because many area-wide actions are regulatory programs that affect specific
sites (e.g., discharge permitting programs), area-wide actions are described
first. For a more complete description of area-wide actions, refer to
the Review of Existing Plans and Activities.
Site-specific actions are described in the Site-Specific Work Plan
(Table 2). The introduction to the second section describes how interim
actions are defined, and the steps for implementing them. The Work Plan
contains an annotated list of actions and an agenda for implementation.
The actions are organized according to study area segment (see Figure 3
above) and appear in approximate order of priority for interim action.
Following the Site-Specific Work Plan are several figures that outline
the decision framework for controlling pollutant sources. The decision
framework illustrates the regulatory and management decisions that occur
throughout the source control process.
The appendices include additional information which the reader may
find helpful:
Appendix A contains two maps of the study area. The first
map illustrates public access points and recreational areas,
and the second map shows contaminant sources and selected
industry locations.
Appendix B describes each study area segment in terms of
existing environmental conditions (based on recent data,
1979-present) and potential sources of toxic contamination.
-------
INTERIM WORK PLAN FOR ELLIOTT BAY TOXICS ACTION PROGRAM
AREA-WIDE ACTIONS
The following programs and plans are described in terms of actions
that can be taken to identify or control sources of toxic contamination.
Regulatory measures in some areas would be greatly facilitated with better
information about the extent of existing contamination, and/or information
about sources of toxicants. For this reason, ongoing or planned studies
(sampling and analysis) are considered interim actions.
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (EPA)
t Superfund: This program provides for the identification,
study, and cleanup of dangerously contaminated sites. Western
Processing in Kent and the Harbor Island Superfund site
may be contributing toxic contaminants to the study area
via surface runoff or groundwater. The Final Remedial Investi-
gation Data Report was released for Western Processing in
December, 1984. A draft report on the preliminary assessment
of Harbor Island was released in June, 1985. Superfund
also provides for on-site testing, which may lead to further
source identification. Section 104(e) of Superfund legislation
requires private industry within designated areas to release
any pertinent information, such as data on groundwater testing
or past spills. Under a joint U.S. EPA/Washington Department
of Ecology program, preliminary assessments of potential
hazardous waste sites are being performed. Several such
sites are in the study area.
Elliott Bay Sampling and Analysis Design: This plan has
two purposes:1) to fill in data gaps needed to better
characterize existing problems, and 2) to obtain data needed
to relate contaminant sources to environmental problems.
The sampling and analysis was initiated in September, 1985
as part of the Elliott Bay Toxics Action Program. The final
report on the results of the field investigation is scheduled
for late 1986.
WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY (Ecology)
t National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES);
Permits are generally issued on a site-by-site basis, and
can include more than one discharge or source of pollutants.
Permits for sewage treatment plants extend throughout the
plant's service area and include combined sewer overflows
(CSOs). Industrial permits can include a storm drain component
(for surface runoff) as well as wastewater discharges.
New NPDES regulations require land users in certain land
use categories to submit data regarding surface water runoff
10
-------
by December, 1987. Washington Department of Ecology will
review this information to assess the need for issuing stormwater
permits.
Superfund: The Washington Department of Ecology is the
lead agency for the Harbor Island site. A contractor has
been retained to start evaluating the extent of the problem.
Washington Department of Ecology reviewed the initial assessment
of Harbor Island (mid-1985) and will make a decision about
future action. Several action alternatives exist, including
1) de-listing the area, 2) recommending a sampling and analysis
plan, or 3) proceeding with a remedial investigation.
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA): This is
a joint U.S. EPA/Washington Department of Ecology program
that governs the generation, handling, and disposal of hazardous
wastes. Spill prevention and containment measures, material
handling requirements, and groundwater monitoring can be
required as part of a RCRA permit. There are six RCRA permits
(pending) in the study area.
Sampling and Analysis: Under various Washington Department
of Ecology programs, sampling and analysis will provide
additional information about existing conditions and possible
sources of contamination in the study area. Specific study
designs are not yet available.
MUNICIPALITY OF METROPOLITAN SEATTLE (METRO)
Duwamish Industrial Non-Point Source Investigation: Several
source-control actions are pending as a result of this program.
Future investigations are not yet defined, but in general,
the program includes 1) visits to 20 additional industrial
and commercial sites, 2) follow-up monitoring and control
measures at 10 previously identified sites, 3) sediment
and water analyses for selected heavy metals and toxic organic
compounds at 4 storm drains, and 4) follow-up sampling to
determine the effectiveness of control measures.
Industrial Pretreatment: METRO grants permits for industries
discharging into its collection system. METRO and its component
agencies are identifying new businesses and evaluating their
need for pretreatment.
CSO Planning: METRO has begun CSO planning as an integral
part of facilities planning. New treatment plant permits
will include revised conditions for CSOs (schedules of com-
pliance, monitoring requirements). Short-term actions include
the ongoing effort of improving CATAD to maximize in-line
storage (thus reduce CSOs) and to prioritize the overflow
sequence.
11
-------
Facil ities Planning: Facilities planning includes upgrading
the West Point plant to secondary treatment capacity and
determining the fate of the Alki plant. A draft EIS was
released in July, 1985.
Renton Effluent Transfer System: METRO plans to divert
Renton treatment plant effluent from its current discharge
point in the Duwamish River to a site offshore from Duwamish
Head in Elliott Bay. METRO recognized the need to divert
the Renton effluent from the river in the Renton 201 Wastewater
Plan. In March, 1982, Washington Department of Ecology
issued an order and compliance schedule to relocate the
discharge. METRO is now revising facility plans for the
diversion pro-ject.
Household Hazardous Waste Project: This is a public education
program aimed at reducing the disposal of household toxic
materials to the sewer system.
Sampling and Analysis: Current knowledge about toxicant
sources and existing contamination may be augmented by the
sampling and analysis components of some of METRO'S programs.
Specifically, sampling and analysis of storm drains is planned
as part of the continued Duwamish Industrial Non-Point Source
Investigation (1985-1986). Sampling and analysis of selected
CSOs will be required as part of METRO'S new NPDES facilities
permits. The baseline study for the Renton outfall relocation
to Duwamish head will include subtidal , intertidal, and
water column monitoring.
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS (COE)
Sampling and Analysis: The COE may contribute valuable
source and contamination information as a result of various
dredging projects. As part of the COE "widening and deepening"
project, sediment in the East and West Waterways and the
lower Duwamish River up to the 1st Avenue South Bridge will
be sampled. If the project is authorized and proceeds,
some contaminated sediment will be removed. The COE also
has a major role in the "Puget Sound Dredged Disposal Analysis"
(see below, Interagency Coordination). As a result of this
project, the future of the Fourmile Rock Disposal Site will
be determined. At this time, it is unclear whether or not
the COE will be sampling the sediments in this area.
CITY OF SEATTLE
CSO Planning: With direction from Washington Department
of Ecology, the City of Seattle is continuing efforts to
reduce the frequency and severity of CSOs. The city's CSO
planning will depend in large part on METRO'S planning efforts,
as the two systems are closely related. The city, however,
has taken several actions to increase storage and to separate
or partially separate stormwater from sewer lines.
12
-------
Shoreline Master Program and Grading and Drainage Code_s_;
Recent amendments to the Program and Codes include considerations
for the storage and handling of hazardous or dangerous
materials. It should be noted, however, that these regulations
are not retroactive and only apply to future construction.
Water Supply Corrosion Control Program: The City of Seattle
treats its water with hardeners to reduce the leaching of
zinc, copper, and iron from distribution pipes, thus reducing
the input of these metals to receiving waters.
INTERAGENCY COORDINATION
Elliott Bay Toxics Action Program: As part of the planning
process, U.S. EPA has established an interagency workgroup
composed of representatives from U.S. EPA, Washington Department
of Ecology, Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR),
Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle (METRO), U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (COE), Port of Seattle, City of Seattle,
King County, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA), and the Washington Department-of Social and Health
Services (DSHS). This work group provides a communication
network whereby involved agencies can reduce duplication
of effort and bridge institutional and regulatory gaps.
Work group representatives review the approach, progress,
and results of the Elliott Bay Action Program project.
Work group sessions were instrumental in developing the
interim actions specified in this report. One obvious result
from increased interagency coordination will be seen in
the Elliott Bay Sampling and Analysis Design, which combines
the resources of several agencies to meet a common goal.
Puget Sound Dredged Disposal Analysis: A 3-yr cooperative
project by DNR, COE, U.S. EPA, and Washington Department
of Ecology. The objectives are to identify acceptable sites
for open-water unconfined disposal of dredged material,
to define chemical and biological evaluation procedures
for assessing disposal alternatives, and to formulate management
plans for disposal sites. The draft EIS for Phase I, which
includes Elliott Bay and the Fourmile Rock Disposal Site,
is scheduled to be available by December, 1986.
CSO Planning: Strategies for reducing City of Seattle CSOs
will be based upon METRO planning efforts for their CSOs.
METRO intends to set priorities for reducing CSOs, partly
in response to input from U.S. EPA and Washington Department
of Ecology (based on the results of the Elliott Bay Toxics
Action Program findings). A draft report on alternatives
for reducing major CSOs in the project area will be released
in November, 1985.
13
-------
Nonpoint Sources: Increased coordination between Washington
Department of Ecology, U.S. EPA, METRO, King County, and
the City of Seattle would facilitate control of toxicant
loading from nonpoint surface runoff. For example, the
Seattle Department of Construction and Land Use (Shoreline
Management Program, Grading and Drainage Codes) will interact
closely with Washington Department of Ecology's permit branch
to coordinate on-site control (storage, handling, etc.)
of toxic substances. A consistent strategy for control
of stormwater runoff will be developed.
Puget Sound Water Quality Management Plan: The Puget Sound
Water Quality Authority (PSWQA) is directed by the Washington
State Legislature to prepare a comprehensive, region-wide
plan for managing water quality. At the time of this writing,
a focus for this plan has not been developed, but it is
expected to include toxic contamination. Current legislation
calls for preparation of the plan by January, 1987.
Toxic Spills: The Coast Guard, U.S. EPA, METRO, municipal
fire departments, the Port of Seattle, the City of Seattle,
King County, and Washington Department of Ecology will continue
to develop procedures for systematic cooperation during
emergency cleanup operations.
14
-------
SITE-SPECIFIC WORK PLAN
The Elliott Bay Action Team was created by Washington Department of
Ecology, U.S. EPA, and METRO to implement the Interim Work Plan. The multi-
disciplinary team consists of professionals who will be responsible for
on-site investigations, permit-writing, and permit inspections. The Action
Team will also be responsible for helping personnel from other agencies
with cleanup and sampling activities. Two Washington Department of Ecology
positions are funded directly by Washington Department of Ecology and two
are funded (for a period of at least 1 year) by METRO. Additional personnel
from METRO and the City of Seattle will participate in source investigations
and cleanup. The Action Team will coordinate the team's activities with
U.S. EPA contractors and agencies responsible for ongoing investigations
in Elliott Bay and the Duwamish River. The Action Team is expected to
be fully operational in October, 1985, and its agenda through 1987 includes
27 site investigations.
The Action Team provides the regulatory link between problem identification
and source control. The responsibility of the Action Team is to control
or eliminate sources of toxic contaminants in a timely manner, through
negotiations with responsible parties, permitting mechanisms, or compliance
orders.
Table 2 presents the Work Plan for the Elliott Bay Action Team and
associated agencies for late 1985, 1986, and 1987. The study area segments
refer to priority areas defined in the Initial Data Summaries and Problem
Identification report. Refer to Figure 3 above for a map of the study
area and locations of these segments. The personnel column in Table 2
indicates the agency and program (where relevant) responsible for overseeing
or carrying out the actions. The last column refers to the quarter, or
month and year, in which implementation will begin. This Work Plan is
the product of the coordinated, intensive efforts of many organizations
and individuals (see Acknowledgements at front of this report). The actions
noted in Table 2 were agreed upon after a great deal of discussion among,
and planning by, members of the Interagency Work Group and Citizens Advisory
Committee. Appendix A contains a summary of environmental conditions and
lists potential sources of contaminants for each priority segment. The
sources identified are probably not the only sources of contaminants, but
they are subject to interim actions pending further source investigations.
15
-------
TABLE 2. SITE SPECIFIC WORK PLAN FOR ELLIOTT BAY INTERIM ACTION PROGRAM
NORTH HARBOR ISLAND
SEGMENT 48
Source
Action
Personnel
Implementation
Dates
Waste disposal area
Mobil 011
Todd Shipyards
CSO/SO 077
Non-specified
Perform search of ownership and business-license records to determine
Identities of former owners. Classify amounts and types of previous
on-site wastes. Determine disposal practices of former occupants.
Perform NPDES Inspection.
Sample sediment directly under discharge of oil separator.
Review number, severity, and recovery methods of historic spills at site.
Review SPCC plans and Implementation.
Perform groundwater Investigation.
Inspect Todd Shipyard. Interview Todd personnel. Document historic and
present disposal practices of sandblast waste, paint and paint overspray,
bilge water and stack cleaning wastes, waste oil, and solvents. Document
previous occupants on site. Review SPCC plan and Its Implementation.
Review present NPDES permit and modify 1f necessary based on FY 86
U.S. EPA samples.
Sample storm drains and perform regular maintenance If necessary - and
probably corrective measures.
Investigate groundwater contamination (waste paint and oil storage area
was unpaved until 1984).
Interview prior owner of part of site (I.e., Mobil 011) and Its employees
for Information on former waste handling and disposal practices.
Characterize sediment contamination, toxldty, Infauna, b1oaccumulat1on,
and liver pathology 1n Immediate vicinity of CSO/SD. Analyze for
priority pollutants 1n CSO/SD sediments and relate to environmental
conditions.
Complete Initial assessment of Harbor Island toxic contamination and
sources by June, 1985. Issue sampling and analysis plan, Including
Identification of groundwater sources. Also, Superfund legislation
requires Industries to disclose Information on toxic spills, hazardous
waste, and groundwater testing.
U.S. Status and Trends Program: Conduct annual long-term monitoring of
sediment contamination, toxldty, and fish pathology at station north
of Harbor Island.
City of Seattle
Ecology
Ecology/USCG
Ecology
Ecology
H.I. Superfund
U.S. EPA/Ecology
Ecology
Ecology
Todd
Todd/H.I. Superfund
U.S. EPA/Ecology
METRO/Ecology
Mobil 011
U.S. EPA
H.I. Superfund
U.S. EPA/Ecology
NOAA
10-12/85
1-3/86
1-3/86
1-3/86
7-9/86
To be scheduled
To be scheduled
4-6/87
10-12/85
To be scheduled
1-3/86
9/85 - ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
-------
TABLE 2. (Continued)
Source
Seattle Iron and Metal
Oil tank farms (Texaco, Shell,
GATX, Golden Penn, Chevron)
A
j
Major storm drains
Major CSOs
Crowley Environmental Services
Terminal 30 contaminated
sediments
1 EAST WATERWAY
| SEGMENTS 4A/5A/5B
Action
Monitor and verify removal of copper wash effluent from Hanford St.
storm drain to sanitary sewer with adequate pretreatment.
Sample Hanford St. storm drain for metals and organic toxicants,
prioritize relative to other sources, and relate to waterway contamina-
tion and bloeffects.
Determine sources of PCB-laden transformers, chemical content of
transformers from each owner, and treatment practices of transformer
owners. Submit report to Washington Department of Ecology.
Investigate historic spills for on-site quantity and recovery. Include
sites which have been redeveloped Into Port container terminals, e.g.,
Shell. Check for on-site wells (7,000 gal at Chevron).
Perform NPDES inspections for disposal of oil separator wastewater.
Inspect Texaco truck wash discharge to check for detergent Intruding
Into separator.
Review and Implement SPCC plans.
Sample river sediment below discharge of NPDES outfalls (except Chevron).
Review Chevron stormwater permit and require stricter controls 1f
necessary.
Sample storm drain sediment at critical junctures of the major storm
drains that discharge into the East Waterway(Hanford St., Hinds St.,
Spokane St., Florida St.). Relate sources to waterway contamination and
bloeffects. Identify ultimate sources and develop control measures.
Continue mapping storm drains at Terminals 19, 102, 30, 37, and 25
Implement CSO sampling concurrently with a key manhole sampling study to
determine wastewater sources. Priority CSOs include Lander and Hanford.
Analyze priority pollutants in major CSO sediments and relate to
waterway contamination and bloeffects.
Divert upper Rainier Valley/Capitol Hill storm water from sanitary
system by constructing Hanford St. tunnel.
Issue RCRA permit, Including consideration of groundwater monitoring.
Remove 50,000-90,000 cubic yards of contaminated sediments by dredging.
Personnel
METRO/Ecology
U.S. EPA
City Light
Ecology
Ecology
Ecology
U.S. EPA
USCG/Ecology
Ecology
U.S. EPA, METRO,
Ecology, City of
Seattle
Port of Seattle
METRO
U.S. EPA
METRO,
City of Seattle
U.S. EPA
Port of Seattle
Implementation
Dates
7/85
9/85-ongoing
Begin 1/86
1-3/86
1-3/86
1-3/86
1-3/86
1-3/86
12/85
9/85-ongoing
Ongoing
9/85 to 1987
9/85 - ongoing
9/85 to 1989
To be scheduled
1985-1986
-------
TABLE 2. (Continued)
EAST WATERWAY
SEGMENTS 4A/5A/5B
Implementation
Source Action Personnel Dates
Non-specified Superfund: Complete Initial assessment of Harbor Island toxic contamlna- Ecology Ongoing
tlon and sources by June, 1985. Issue sampling and analysis plan,
Including Identification of groundwater sources. Also, Superfund
legislation requires industries to disclose Information on toxic spills,
hazardous waste, and groundwater testing.
Implement Elliott Bay Sampling and Analysis Design to characterize entire U.S. EPA 9/85-ongo1ng
area In terms of sediment contamination, toxicity, and bloeffects.
Dredging: Develop plans for removal of contaminated sediments from COE 1985
portions of East Waterway as part of Widening and Deepening Project.
Conduct sampling and analysis of deep sediment cores.
CO
-------
TABLE 2. (Continued)
Source
SeaFab Metals
WEST WA
SEGMENT
Action
Investigate groundwater disposal practices.
TERWAY
S 6A/6B
Personnel
Ecology/RCRA
Proceed with RCRA closure plan for SeaFab Metals. Ecology/RCRA
Verify Lander St. cleanup, resample storm drain sediment. U.S. EPA
Pioneer Sand and Gravel
Lockheed Shipyards 112
Perform site Inspection.
Ecology
Inspect Lockheed Shipyards. Interview Lockheed personnel and document Ecology
Implementation
Dates
4-6/86
4-6/86
9/85 - ongoing
4-6/87
10-12/85
Florida St. storm drain
(Purdy Lot, Wyckoff)
Tank farms (Texaco, Shell,
Arco)
Seattle Iron and Metal
Waste Disposal Areas
West Seattle Landfill
historic and present disposal practices of sandblast waste, paint and
paint overspray, bilge water and stack cleaning wastes, waste oil, and
solvents. Document previous occupants of site.
Review present NPDES permit and modify 1f necessary based on results of
U.S. EPA Elliott Bay Sampling and Analysis.
Sample storm drains and perform regular maintenance and corrective
measures 1f necessary.
Investigate groundwater contamination.
Review SPCC plan and Its Implementation.
Clean out sediments contaminated with PCB, PCP, PAH, copper, and arsenic.
Control source of PCBs at head of storm drain.
Investigate historic spills for on-s1te quantity recovery (e.g., check
for on-s1te wells). Include sites that have been redeveloped Into Port
container terminals.
Perform NPDES Inspections for disposal of oil separator wastewater.
Inspect Texaco truck wash discharge to determine If discharge 1s
Intruding Into oil/water separator.
Review SPCC plans and Implement them.
Sample river sediment below discharge of NPDES outfalls.
Investigate groundwater disposal practices.
Investigate groundwater contamination.
Investigate groundwater contamination.
Ecology
Lockheed
Lockheed Superfund
U.S. EPA
Ecology, METRO, City,
Wyckoff, Purdy
U.S. EPA TOSCA
Ecology
Ecology
Ecology
Ecology
USCG/Ecology
Ecology/RCRA
H.I. Superfund
U.S. EPA/Ecology
H.I. Superfund, Sea-King
Co. Health Dept., Ecology,
U.S. EPA Emergency Response
4-6/87
10-12/85
To be scheduled
To be scheduled
7/85 (completed)
10/85
1-3/86
1-3/86
1-3/86
1-3/86
1-3/86
4-6/86
4-6/87
Ongoing
-------
TABLE 2. (Continued)
Source
Bethlehem Steel liquid and
slag waste disposal area
Small storm drains discharging
Into West Waterway
Mono Roofing
Fischer Mills
Shell
Chelan St. CSO
Other CSOs
Non-specified
WEST WATERWAY
SEGMENTS 6A/6B
Action
Continue RCRA closure proceedings. Investigate drainage history of
Longfellow Creek.
Sample small drains (Florida St. /Harbor Island, Spokane St. /Harbor
Island) to determine 1f they are contributing contaminated sediment
and water to the river.
Continue mapping of storm drains on Port properties (especially
Terminal 5).
Resolve issue of dumping solvents and roofing wastes into Spokane St.
storm drain.
Review cooling-water NPDES permit.
Review stormwater permit, apply stricter controls if necessary.
Review West Point treatment plant permit with monitoring requirements
for discharge.
CSO Planning: Construction was completed 1n 1984 to allow Longfellow
Creek system to contain runoff from up to a 10-yr storm without CSO
events. Begin planning to reduce or eliminate other CSOs.
Superfund: Complete Initial assessment of Harbor Island toxic contami-
nation and sources by June, 1985. Issue sampling and analysis plan,
including Identification of groundwater sources. Also, Superfund
legislation requires Industries to disclose information on toxic spills,
hazardous waste, and groundwater testing.
Implement Elliott Bay Sampling and Analysis Design to characterize
area further, Including source evaluation.
Dredging: Develop plans for removal of contaminated sediments as part
of Widening and Deepening Project. Conduct sampling and analysis of
deep sediment cores.
Personnel
Ecology /RCRA
METRO, City of Seattle,
Ecology, U.S. EPA
Port of Seattle
Ecology, METRO
Ecology
Ecology
Ecology, METRO
City of Seattle
H.I. Superfund
U.S. EPA/Ecology
U.S. EPA
COE
Implementation
Dates
7-9/86
9/85-ongoing
1985
7/85-6/86
1985
1985
1985
Ongoing
Ongoing
9/85-ongo1ng
1985
-------
SOUTH HARBOR ISLAND
SEGMENT 7A
Source
Action
Personnel
Implementation
Dates
Diagonal Way storm drain
Ash Grove Cement
Diagonal Way CSO
Ideal Cement
r\>
-Port of Seattle T-105
Janco-Unlted, Inc.
Port of Seattle storm drains
Hanford 1 CSO
Non-Specified
Resample Diagonal Way storm drain sediments to prioritize relative to
other sources and relate to Waterway contamination and bloeffects.
Implement cleanup of pole treatment yard (stabilize site).
Monitor storm drain discharge.
Determine 1f unllned surge pond on rlverbank 1s a pollutant source.
Perform Washington Department of Ecology state discharge permit
Inspection.
Document historical storage methods and use of ASARCO slag, flyash, and
coal.
Implement CSO sampling concurrently with a key manhole sampling study to
determine wastewater sources.
Divert upper Rainier Valley/Capitol H111 storm water from sanitary system
by constructing Hanford St. tunnel.
Conduct a permit Inspection.
Conduct grountjwater study, Investigate upland disposal of contaminated
sediments.
Proceed with criminal Investigation.
Continue mapping storm drains on Port properties (especially Terminal
102 and shorelines south to Diagonal Way).
Review West Point Treatment Plant NPDES permit with monitoring require-
ments for discharge and receiving environment.
CSO Planning: Evaluate alternatives for reducing CSOs. Monitor
Hanford 1 CSO discharges.
Superfund: Complete initial assessment of Harbor Island toxic contamina-
tion and sources by June, 1985. Issue sampling and analysis plan,
Including Identification of groundwater sources. Also, Superfund legis-
lation requires industries to disclose information on toxic spills,
hazardous waste, and groundwater testing.
Implement Elliott Bay Sampling and Analysis Design to further
characterize this area.
Dredging: Develop plans for removal of contaminated sediments as part
of Widening and Deepening Project. Conduct sampling and analysis of
deep sediment cores.
National Cancer Institute Study: Conduct sampling in June, 1985, to
characterize sediment contamination, chemistry of English sole muscle
and bile, and English sole histopathology.
U.S. EPA
9/85-ongo1ng
Seattle City Light, Ecology 10/85
METRO 1985
Ecology 1-3/86
Ecology 1-3/86
Ecology
METRO
METRO, City of Seattle
Ecology
Port of Seattle
U.S. EPA
Port of Seattle
Ecology
METRO
H.I. Superfund
U.S. EPA/Ecology
U.S. EPA
COE
NOAA
1-3/86
9/85 to 1987
9/85 to 1989
1-3/86
Ongoing (ground-
water study
complete)
To be scheduled
1985
1985
To be scheduled
Ongoing
9/85-ongo1ng
1985
Ongoing
-------
TABLE 2. (Continued)
DENNY WAY CSO
SEGMENT 2A
Implementation
Source Action Personnel Dates
Denny Way CSO NPDES: Renew METRO West Point Treatment Plant permit and require Ecology To be scheduled
monitoring of Denny Way CSO discharges.
CSO Planning: Evaluate alternatives for reducing CSOs. Assess METRO Ongoing
benefits and Impacts of onslte storage or treatment and transfer of (Report 11/85)
Denny Way CSO load to subtldal dlffuser.
Implement 1985 Elliott Bay Sampling and Analysis Design to test for U.S. EPA 9/85-Ongoing
contamination and toxlcity of Intertldal sediments. Analyze priority
pollutants 1n CSO sediments to prioritize Denny Way CSO relative to
other sources.
National Cancer Institute Study: Conduct sampling 1n June, 1985, to NOAA Ongoing
characterize sediment contamination, chemistry of English sole muscle
and bile, and English sole hlstopathology.
ro
ro
-------
TABLE 2. (Continued)
SEATTLE WATERFRONT
SEGMENT 3C
Implementation
Source Action Personnel Dates
CSOs CSO planning: Begin planning to reduce or eliminate Number 071 CSO City of Seattle Ongoing
and Number 164 CSO.
CSOs and historical sewage Characterize sediment contamination, toxldty, benthlc Infauna, bloac- U.S. EPA 9/85-Ongo1ng
dlshcarge cumulation, and English sole liver pathology off Piers 53/54.
isi
-------
TABLE 2. (Continued)
Source
Ideal Basic Industries
Non-specified
1 SLIP 1
1 SEGMENT 7B
Action Personnel
NPDES: Issue permit and require stricter controls 1f necessary. Ecology
Characterize sediment contamination, toxldty, and benthlc Infauna at U.S. EPA
Implementation
Dates
7/85-6/86
9/85-Ongolng
ro
-P.
head of Slip 1 to prioritize area relative to other potential problem
areas.
Require local Industries to supply data on storm drainage. Ecology To be scheduled
-------
TABLE 2. (Continued)
Source
SLIP 2
SEGMENT 8A
Action
Personnel
Implementation
Dates
Michigan St. CSO
Chempro
Historic dumps/waste
disposal areas
Non-specified
Implement CSO sampling concurrently with a key manhole sampling study
to determine wastewater sources. Evaluate alternatives to reduce or
eliminate Michigan CSO.
Determine 1f groundwater 1s contributing to contaminated sediment 1n
Slip 2.
Perform Inspection and Issue status report.
Identify potential contaminated areas. Research ownership and business
license records to obtain names of previous owners and site-use Infor-
mation.
Characterize sediment contamination and toxiclty at head of Slip 2 to
prioritize area relative to other potential problem areas.
METRO
METRO/Ecology
RCRA
City of Seattle
U.S. EPA
9/85 to 1987
1-3/86
To be scheduled
To be scheduled
9/85-Ongoing
en
-------
TABLE 2. (Continued)
SLIP 3
SEGMENT 88
Source
Action
Personnel
Implementation
Dates
Marine Power and Equipment
Fox Street storm drain
Possible groundwater contami-
nation from Chempro and his-
toric site
Michigan St. CSO
Inspect MP&E. Interview personnel. Document historic and present dis-
posal practices of sandblast waste, paint and paint overspray, bilge
water and stack cleaning wastes, waste oil and solvents. Determine
previous occupant of site.
Review NPDES permit.
Proceed with Issuance of Ecology fine and U.S. EPA criminal Investi-
gation.
Map and identify storm drains.
Identify sources, resample storm drain sediment.
Remove sediment from storm drain.
Determine 1f groundwater is contributing to contaminated sediment 1n
Slip 3.
Implement CSO sampling concurrently with a key manhole sampling study
to determine wastewater sources.
CSO Planning: Evaluate alternatives to reduce or eliminate Michigan CSO.
NPDES: Renew permit for West Point treatment plant and require METRO
to monitor CSO to determine degree of Influence on conditions 1n Slip 3.
Ecology
Ecology
U.S. EPA
City of Seattle
U.S. EPA, METRO/Ecology
City of Seattle
METRO/Ecology
City of Seattle
U.S. EPA/CIO WDOE
METRO
METRO
Ecology
10-12/85
Draft 1/86
Final 6/86
To be scheduled
9/85
9/85-ongolng
To be scheduled
To be scheduled
9/85 to 1987
Ongoing
To be scheduled
Non-specified
Characterize sediment contamination and toxldty at head of Slip 3.
U.S. EPA
9/85-Ongo1ng
-------
TABLE 2. (Continued)
Source
SLIP 4
SEGMENT 80
Action
Personnel
Implementation
Dates
Georgetown Flume
Storm drains, CSOs
Remove flume sediments and clean up upland site.
Characterize priority pollutant concentrations in drain and CSO sedi-
ments and relate to sediment contamination and toxidty at head of Slip.
Seattle City Light,
Ecology
U.S. EPA
10/85
9/85-Ongoing
ro
-------
TABLE 2. (Continued)
FOURMILE ROCK DISPOSAL SITE
SEGMENT IDA
Source
Action
Personnel
Implementation
Dates
Four-mile Rock Disposal Site
Puget Sound Dredged Disposal Analysis: Investigate suitability of Four-
mile Rock Disposal Site for future dredged material disposal. If site
Is selected for further use, develop final criteria for disposal and a
management plan.
Disposal Criteria: Issue Interim criteria for material to be disposed
at this site before Puget Sound Dredged Disposal Analysis 1s completed.
Proposed Interim criteria were Issued April 7, 1985.
Implement Elliott Bay Sampling and Analysis Design to characterize
contamination and effects at 30 ft depths Inshore of the designated
disposal site.
Analyze toxic contaminant levels 1n samples of clams and sediments from
an Intertldal site on Magnolia Beach.
COE/DNR, EPA/Ecology
U.S. EPA
U.S. EPA/COE, DSHS
METRO
1985
4/85
10/85 to 3/86
8-10/85
r\>
ca
-------
TABLE 2. (Continued)
Source
Sunset Demolition
Ma larky Asphalt
Duwamlsh Shipyard
Monsanto
Whitney Fldalgo
Lone Star
Northwest Glass
Time O.C.
Seattle Rendering
Shell 011
| ADDITIONAL ACTIONS IN STUDY AREA |
Action
Perform site Inspections.
Inspect for PCBs and zinc.
Perform Inspections and draft NPDES permits.
Perform Inspections and draft NPDES permits.
Perform Inspections and draft NPDES permits.
Perform Inspections and draft NPDES permits.
Perform Inspections and draft NPDES permits.
Perform Inspections and draft NPDES permits.
Perform Inspections and draft NPDES permits.
Perform Inspections and draft NPDES permits.
Personnel
Lang Co., BALD, WDOE,
Sea-King County Health
Ecology
Ecology
Ecology
Ecology
Ecology
Ecology
Ecology
Ecology
Ecology
Implementation
Dates
7-9/85
7-9/85
7/85-6/86
7/85-6/86
7/85-6/86
7/85-6/86
7/85-6/86
7/85-6/86
7/85-6/86
7/85-6/86
ro
vo
-------
DECISION FRAMEWORK FOR CONTROLLING POLLUTANT SOURCES
Pollutant sources are controlled via several regulatory and management
processes. The avenue for control depends on many factors, one of which
is the nature of the source. Direct discharges and illegal dumping, for
example, are controlled differently. This section outlines the principal
strategies for source control and the decision-making steps inherent in
each.
There are three principal stages in the process of contaminant source
control:
Characterization of direct discharges
Characterization of ultimate sources
Source control and cleanup.
Figures 4-7 illustrate the major steps taken by regulatory agencies to
characterize and control sources of toxicants from drainage systems to
the Elliott Bay/lower Duwamish River area. For a single drainage system
(e.g., storm drain and its upstream sources), the entire process of problem
identification and source control is anticipated to take 1-5 yr. The actual
time spent depends on many variables, including 1) the complexity of the
drainage system, 2) the nature and extent of contamination, 3) the feasibility
of controlling the identified sources, and 4) the nature of enforcement
and regulatory action.
The first stage - characterization of direct sources, such as drains
discharging directly to waterways - involves the identification of problem
storm drains and problem contaminants. This is accomplished primarily
by analyzing storm drain sediments collected from drainage conduits close
to the point of discharge into the waterway.
In the second stage, the highest priority drains are further investigated
to determine the ultimate sources of the contaminants. Drainage system
mapping and additional sampling may be required to identify and rank the
ultimate sources of contaminants. Additional sampling may be required
in several instances, for example when data about existing conditions are
not adequate to identify ultimate sources or when legally defensible information
is needed for a criminal investigation. Once ultimate sources are identified,
responsible parties may be required to perform effluent analyses and estimate
loading.
The third stage of regulatory activity involves actual cleanup and
control of sources. Cleanup and control strategies vary widely depending
on the nature of the source. Figure 5 presents procedures related to identified
or point sources. If a discharge permit is required, the source can be
controlled by 1) pretreatment, 2) discharge to a sanitary sewer, or 3)
installation of a best management practice (BMP). If a discharge permit
is not required, the responsible party may be called on to halt its discharge.
30
-------
In either case, the discharger may have to assume costs related to sampling
and site or sediment cleanup.
Nonpoint or categorical sources (Figure 6), such as direct runoff
from urban areas, are predominantly controlled by designing and implementing
BMPs. BMPs are usually designed for categories of sources (e.g., site
runoff from oil tank farms or city streets).
For illegal dumping (Figure 7), criminal investigation and enforcement
depend heavily on apprehending the violator in the act. Until a violator
is identified, regulatory activity involves primarily monitoring or "staking
out" an area where illegal dumping is suspected.
31
-------
Stage of
Process
Technical Decision/Action
Regulatory Decision/Action
Agency/Program
characterization
of direct <
discharges
(locate and nap direct Inputs (drains) \
of pollutants to waterway }
(evaluate existing daU for each drain)
(define problem chemicals)
decision feedback loop
' noV|1s drain a proble
(document decision)
f( require further sampling )
[noV-hs sampling plan part of EBAP?)(yes)
/analyze sediments \ /proceed according \
I In drain near d1s- \ I to EBAP sampling I
1 charge point and I \plan design I
Vevaluate results / I
(prioritize drains for con- \
slderatlon of upstream J
sources I
c
nap drainage system: contrlbutarles
present and historical Industrial/
connerclal activities, etc.
/Identify responsible
( parties to recover
Vcosts of sampling
characterization
of ultimate
sources
source control
and cleanup
1 N,
(
no
prioritize Identifiable sources ^ J notify aooroorlate Dirties
of problem chemicals
1
-J1s further sampling needed?
/ '{ of potential hazard
(yti)
decision feedback loop
(
1 i
design sampling plan and
QVQC to further Identify
sources
M Identify responsible parties, require '
analysis of stormwater/CSO discharges
and estimate loading for problem chem-
icals
i
(prioritize sources based on newly
acquired Information
proceed with control/cleanup\
action I
[sufficient Information?]^no;
(yes)
1
Problem
Drains
See Figure 5
1
Categorical
Sources
See Figure 6
Illegal
Dumping
See Figure 7
EPVEBAP, (Ecology,
METRO. CITY)
EPVEBAP. KDOE
EPVEBAP. also METRO,
CITY, Ecology, others
EPA/EBAP, Ecology/task
force, METRO/DNPSI, CITY
HETRO/lndustrlal waste.
facilities planning,
C1TY/DUU. comnunHy
development, licenses
«nd consumer affairs
EPVEBAP
EPVEBAP
EPVEBAP, also METRO,
Ecology, CITY
EPVEBAP
EPVEBAP
Regulatory actions Include: 1) notification of pernlt compliance violation,
2] administrative order (e.g., to cease discharge, to cleanup stte).
3) permit Issuance or modification, and 4) Issuance of penalty
' EPA
Ecology
METRO
CITY
EBAP
DCLU
COUIITY
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington Department Of Ecology
Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle
City of Seattle
Elliott Bay Action Program
Department of Construction and Land Use, City of Seattle
King County
Figure 4. Approach to characterization of direct discharges
and ultimate pollutant sources.
32
-------
Technical Decision/Action
|mega 1 pollutant discharge?)(yes
[permitted discharge?
Regulatory Decision/Action"
perform permit compliance
Inspection
Veview permit and modify for
roblem chemicals, BMP, or BATj
issue notice of violation
can source be controlled by
on-s1te treatment, BMP, or BAT?
issue permit with limits on N
problem chemicals J
Iissue notice to cease discharged
require pretreatment and/or
diversion to sewer system j
^l
compliance achieved?
4- ^-^
is cleanup feasible? Kyes)*
JL
decision feedback
[ require site-cleanup and/or
\ removal of drain sediments
J
loop
\
/
\
I
V .
r
Agency/Program0
Ecology
Ecology
Ecology
Ecology
Ecology, EPA, METRO
Ecology, EPA
Ecology, EPA
I Ecology. EPA
I
I
8 Regulatory actions include: 1) notification of permit violation,
2) administrative order (e.g., to cease discharge, to cleanup site),
3) permit issuance or modification, and 4) issuance of penalty
EPA
Ecology
METRO
CITY
EBAP
DCLU
COUNTY
BMP
BAT
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington Department of Ecology
Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle
City of Seattle
Elliott Bay Action Program
Department of Construction and Land Use,
King County
Best Management Practices
Best Available Treatment
City of Seattle
Figure 5. Control of problem drains and CSOs,
33
-------
Technical Decision/Action
/approach similar sources as a group'' i
and review existing plans or develop'
plans for pollutant control; e.g. BMP/
shipyards and oil tank farms.
Regulatory Decision/Action*
decision feedback loop
Agency/Program
EPA/EBAP. Ecology
are recommendations feasible
or adequate?
return to Issuer for revision) EPA/EBAP,Ecology
^/require implementation of plan or
^ program and require periodic
V performance or monitoring reports
EPA/EBAP.Ecology, also
METRO, CITY and COUNTY
Regulatory actions Include: 1) notification of permit violation,
2) administrative order (e.g., to cease discharge, to cleanup site),
3) permit Issuance or modification, and 4) Issuance of penalty
EPA
Ecology
METRO
CITY
EBAP
DCLU
COUNTY
penalty
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington Department Of Ecology
Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle
City of Seattle
Elliott Bay Action Program
Department of Construction and Land Use, City of Seattle
King County
Figure 6. Control of categorical sources.
34
-------
Technical Decision/Action
Regulatory Decision/Action*
Agency/Program''
c
revl
comp
con<
\- 1s dumping a recurrin
X problem?
(no)
g, serious -(yes) »f initiate criminal Investigation^
^S ^and enforcement /
1
(require site cleanup \
and/or removal of I
drain sediments /
(defer action^
ew manifests and
uct interviews
l( monitor suspected \
rl problem site J
i
EPA/EBAP. Ecology
decision feedback loop
8 Regulatory actions Include: 1) notification of permit violation,
2) administrative order (e.g., to cease discharge, to cleanup site),
3) permit Issuance or modification, and 4) Issuance of penalty
EPA
Ecology
METRO
CITY
EBAP
DCLU
COUNTY
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington Department of Ecology
Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle
City of Seattle
Elliott Bay Action Program
Department of Construction and Land Use, City of Seattle
King County
Figure 7. Control of illegal dumping.
35
-------
APPENDICES
-------
APPENDIX A
MAPS
-------
COMBINED SEWER OVERFLOW (MAJOR)
* COMBINED SEWER OVERFLOW (MINOR)
* COMBINED SEWER OVERFLOW/STORM DRAIN
- 48") .
O TREATMENT PLANT OUTFALL
S) OTHER POTENTIAL SOURCES
GEORGETOWN
ELLIOTT
BAY
Public access points and
recreational areas
MAPI
, «. , RECREATIONAL SHELLFISH
HARVEST AREA
0 EXISTING PUBLIC ACCESS ,-/'V'v/ 4 PROPOSED WILDLIFE REFUGE
© FISHING
ED PROPOSED PUBLIC ACCESS
A FUTURE PUBLIC ACCESS
millllMIIIIIIIIII CITY PARKS
GEODUCKS
KELP
EELGRASS
-------
COMBINED SEWER OVERFLOW (MAJOR)
COMBINED SEWER OVERFLOW (MINOR)
COMBINED SEWER OVERFLOW/STORM DRAIN
STORM DRAIN (8" to 24")
STORM DRAIN (25' 10 48')
STORM DRAIN (> 48")
TREATMENT PLANT OUTFALL
OTHER POTENTIAL SOURCES
GEORGETOWN
\ DISPOSAL /
V AREA S
ELLIOTT
BAY
Contaminant sources and selected industry locations
in Elliott Bay and the lower Duwamish River
MAP 2
.V-
-------
APPENDIX B
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS AND POTENTIAL SOURCES OF CONTAMINANTS
FOR STUDY AREA SEGMENTS OF ELLIOTT BAY AND THE LOWER DUWAMISH RIVER
-------
NORTH HARBOR ISLAND (4B)
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
At Site 4B (North Harbor Island), sediments at the highest ranked
stations exhibited the following environmental characteristics:
Variable Elevation Above Reference
LPAH Very high >1,OOOX
HPAH Very high >1,OOOX
PCB High 100-1,OOOX
Cu+Pb+Zn High 100-1,OOOX
As High 100-1,OOOX
Amphipod mortality Moderate 3.6-7.IX
This site ranked highest among all areas based on "worst-case" stations.
Nearshore stations exhibited extremely high levels of PAH, PCBs, and metals
in sediments from the mouth of the West Waterway east along the shore of
North Harbor Island to Pier 16. Although the outflow of the Duwamish River
contributes to high levels of pollution in this area, gradients in sediment
concentrations of toxic chemicals suggest that local sources are important.
Moreover, this is one of the few known locations in the study area where
concentrations of LPAH in sediments exceeded 1,000 times the reference
value of 41 ppb. The high levels of LPAH in sediments suggest an ongoing
source of petroleum pollution. Much of the high arsenic content in sediments
may be accounted for by historical releases of sandblast material containing
50 ppm or more of arsenic. However, some arsenic contamination may be
related to historical treatment of shipyard dry docks with sodium arsenite.
In sediment toxicity bioassays, amphipod mortality was 25-50 percent at
the mouth of the West Waterway (Reference = 7 percent mortality), but was
not significantly elevated at about the 50-ft depth off Pier 14. Finally,
the prevalence of liver tumors in English sole collected from North Harbor
Island and adjacent areas was 5.5 percent (Reference = 0 percent prevalence).
Although sediment chemical concentrations showed some variation among
stations, the entire area displayed moderate to high elevations of all
chemical indicators. Based on average conditions, this area ranked as
one of the top four priority problem areas.
POTENTIAL SOURCES
t Todd Shipyards t NPDES discharge of sandblast
material and cooling water
(24 M gal/yr) until 1975,
Dry docks treated with
(1,940 Ib/yr arsenic),
Storm drains
-------
Mobil Oil Company NPDES stormwater discharge
Pier 15 Oil Transfer Pier, possible
oil spills.
-------
EAST WATERWAY (4A/5A/5B)
Segments 4A, 5A, and 5B are considered together as part of the East
Waterway system for two reasons. First, each of these sites may be influenced
by sources throughout the waterway. Therefore, source control actions
are similar for all of the sites. Second, when data become available for
areas between these sites, extensive toxic contamination may be found throughout
the waterway.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
Within the East Waterway, the highest ranked stations exhibited the
following conditions for sediment chemistry and sediment toxicity:
Variable Elevation Above Reference
LPAH Moderate 10-100X
HPAH High 100-1,OOOX
PCB High 100-1,OOOX
Cu+Pb+Zn Moderate 10-1OOX
As Moderate 10-100X
Amphipod mortality High ^7. IX
Oyster abnormality High ^8.2X
Segment 5A, which ranked third among all high priority areas based on "worst-
case" conditions, accounted for the high ranking for the East Waterway
overall. Contamination was heterogeneous within the waterway. For example,
the head of the waterway (Segment 5B) ranked 17th, and the mouth of the
waterway (Segment 4A) tied for the 12th position among priority problem
areas. Based on the most contaminated sediment samples, PCBs, with an
elevation of 770 times reference (6 ppb) , and HPAH, with an elevation of
240 times reference (79 ppb), were the main problem chemicals. Also, the
sum of copper, lead, and zinc exceeded an elevation above reference of
25 at two stations. Average EAR values were about 23 for LPAH, 120 for
HPAH, 150 for PCBs, 3 for arsenic, and 16 for the other selected metals.
Both the amphipod bioassay and the oyster larvae bioassay exhibited
above 50 percent response for samples from several locations within the
waterway. The only bioassay response above 90 percent for the entire Elliott
Bay system was found in an amphipod bioassay (98 percent mortality) near
the Lander Street CSO. Based on the available pooled data for West and
East Waterways and the North Harbor Island area, the prevalence of liver
tumors in English sole was 5.5 percent, which was significantly elevated
relative to reference conditions of 0 percent prevalence.
-------
POTENTIAL SOURCES
t
Connecticut CSO
Hanford CSO
Lander CSO
Hanford CSO/SD (162) t
Seattle Iron and Metal
S. Hinds CSO/SD (107)
S.W. Spokane CSO/SD (163) 0
S.W. Florida SD
S. Spokane SD a
GATX
Chevron Oil Company t
Groundwater sources
- Shell/Chevron
- Golden Penn
- SEAFAB
Value Plating
30-100 M gal/yr
100-700 M gal/yr
20-330 M gal/yr
SD = 60 M gal/yr, emergency
CSO only
Cu wash > settling pit overflows
to Hanford SD
SD = 40 M gal/yr, emergency
CSO only
SD = 3 M gal/yr, emergency
CSO only
20 M gal/yr
Unknown flows
NPDES - storm water
NPDES - storm water
"Product recovery" wells
Waste solvent recycler, sludge
lagoon possible (historical)
Old seepage pond (battery
acid, spent chemicals, yard
drainage) closed 1982,
Monitoring well installed
1970-1978 wastewater discharged
on grounds.
-------
WEST WATERWAY (6A/6B)
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
The most contaminated stations within the West Waterway exhibited
the following conditions for sediment chemistry and sediment toxicity:
Variable Elevation Above Reference
LPAH
HPAH
PCB
Cu+Pb+Zn
As
Amphipod mortality
Oyster abnormality
The West Waterway ranked among the top seven priority areas based on "worst-
case" stations and among the top three priority areas based on average
conditions. Sediment chemistry was relatively homogenous throughout the
West Waterway, although for some contaminants, sediment concentrations
near the shore were slightly higher (e.g., 2-3 times) than those near mid-
channel. Sediment toxicity bioassays and fish pathological indices indicate
biological problems within this area (see section on East Waterway above
for fish pathology data). Several stations exhibited bioassay responses
above 40 percent response (47 and 63 percent mortality of amphipods and
78 percent abnormality of oyster larvae).
High
High
High
Moderate
Low
High
High
100-1, OOOX
100-1, OOOX
100-1, OOOX
10-100X
<10X
>7.1X
>8.2X
POTENTIAL SOURCES
Chelan CSO
S.W. Hinds CSO/SD (099)
S.W. Florida CSO/SD (098)
S.W. Lander CSO/SD (105)
S.W. Florida CSO/SD (106)
S.W. 16th CSO/SD (104)
S.W. Lander SD
t Fischer Flour
1-50 M gal/yr
t SD = 280 M gal/yr,
CSO = 60-90 M gal/yr
t SD = 20 M gal/yr, emergency
CSO only (PCBs, PAH, metals)
50 M gal/yr (Pb),
Cleaned 1984
SD = 30 M gal/yr, emergency
CSO only
SD = 10 M gal/yr, emergency
CSO only
t 8 M gal/yr (Pb, oil and grease)
t NPDES cooling water
(23.4 M gal/yr),
Storm drain
-------
Lockheed Shipyards
t
Arco
Shell
Texaco
SEAFAB/RSR
Golden Penn
Harbor Island Machine
Old W. Seattle landfill
NPDES cooling water
(43.8 M gal/yr),
Storm drains,
Dry dock - Na^AsOo treatment
(1,490-2,980 fbs As/yr) until
1982
NPDES - storm water
NPDES - storm water
NPDES - storm water (historical
source of truck wash water)
NPDES - cooling water (Pb)
Groundwater - old seepage
pond
Groundwater source
t Oil-contaminated surface runoff
(source removed 1984)
Possible groundwater source.
-------
SOUTH HARBOR ISLAND (7A)
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
The highest elevations of sediment chemistry and toxicity bioassay
variables observed in the South Harbor Island area were the following:
Variable Elevation Above Reference
LPAH Moderate 10-100X
HPAH High 100-1,OOOX
PCB High 100-1,OOOX
Cu+Pb+Zn Moderate 10-100X
As Low <10X
Amphipod mortality High >7.IX
Oyster abnormality Moderate 4.1-8.2X
Based on the worst-case stations, this area tied with Segment 6B (West
Waterway) for the 7th priority position. PCBs were the main problem chemical
in sediments at this site, with elevations ranging from 170 to 805 times
the reference value of 6 ppb. Although HPAH were elevated in the same
order of magnitude range as PCBs, elevations of HPAH at all stations were
below 150 times reference. In general, metals in sediments were not excessively
high (i.e., metals indicators were less than 20 times reference at all
but one station).
Average chemical conditions in the sediments indicated low to moderate
contamination for all indicators. Based on average conditions, this area
tied with Segment 5B for the 10th priority position.
Sediment toxicity bioassays at the worst station and fish pathology
reflected the high levels of contamination in this area. The prevalence
of liver tumors in English sole collected from this area and adjacent areas
of the Duwamish River was 13-16 percent, among the highest values observed
throughout Puget Sound. Average oyster larvae abnormality was very high
(78 percent). However, average amphipod mortality for all stations was
relatively low (22 percent), indicating heterogeneous conditions in this
area.
POTENTIAL SOURCES
Diagonal Way CSO/SD (111) t CSO = 80-550 M gal/yr,
SD = 430 M gal/yr
(1-5 - metals, PAH)
S.W. Dakota SD 20 M gal/yr
S.W. Idaho SD 60 M gal/yr
-------
Ash Grove Cement NPDES cooling water
(78 M gal/yr)
Storm water/wastewater discharged
to unlined surge pond (metals)
Seaboard Lumber NPDES cooling water (4 M gal/yr).
-------
DENNY WAY CSO (2A)
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
Based on the highest ranked stations, environmental conditions for
this site are as follows:
Variable Elevation Above Reference
LPAH High 100-1,OOOX
HPAH Very high >1,OOOX
PCB High 100-1,OOOX
Cu+Pb+Zn High 100-1,OOOX
As Moderate 10-100X
Amphipod mortality Moderate 3.6-7-1X
Oyster abnormality Moderate 4.1-8.2X
Among the high priority areas, this area ranked as the second most important
site. Although lack of adequate reference data precluded calculation of
Elevation Above Reference values for the site, available data show that
benthic infaunal communities are degraded (i.e., low species richness,
high abundance of pollution-tolerant species). Amphipod and oyster larvae
bioassays of sediment also suggest that biological problems may be caused
by the existing contamination of sediment at this site. Based on average
conditions represented by sediment chemistry variables and bioassays, this
site ranked only as a moderate priority, indicating heterogeneous conditions
at the site. Nevertheless, HPAH were on average more than 300 times the
reference level of 79 ppb, and PCBs were about 190 times the reference
level of 6 ppb. Average concentrations of metals were of relatively minor
concern.
POTENTIAL SOURCES
The ongoing source of toxic contamination in this area is the Denny
Way CSO, the largest CSO in the Elliott Bay system (flow = 80-620 M gal/yr).
No other potential sources have been identified.
-------
SEATTLE WATERFRONT (3C)
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
Based on the two highest ranked stations sampled in this area, sediment
conditions for this site are as follows:
Variable
LPAH
HPAH
PCB
Cu+Pb+Zn
As
Amphipod mortality
Oyster abnormality
Elevation Above Reference
High
High
High
Moderate
High
High
Not significant
100-1,OOOX
100-1,OOOX
100-1,OOOX
10-100X
100-1,OOOX
>7.1X
This area tied with two other areas for the 5th rank among 14 high priority
sites. Conditions at the two stations in this area were similar. Based
on average sediment chemistry and bioassay data, the area ranked 5th in
terms of environmental problems. On average, LPAH and total PCBs in sediments
were each 260 times reference, and HPAH was 570 times reference. The sum
of copper, lead, and zinc was 190 times reference at one station, but only
8 times reference at the other station. Arsenic concentrations in sediments
did not indicate a problem, but only one data point was available.
POTENTIAL SOURCES
Several CSOs under the jurisdiction of the City of Seattle may be
a continuing source of pollution in this area. Raw sewage was discharged
into this area from the late 1800s to the early 1970s. Historical spills
along the waterfront may also account for some of the contamination in
this area.
The ongoing sources are as follows:
City CSOs (071, 164)
Seattle Steam
Total flow = 1.14 M gal/yr,
approximately 12 events per
year
NPDES discharge of cooling
water (23.5 M gal/yr).
-------
SLIP 1 (7B)
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
Only sediment chemistry data were available for Slip 1. Based on
three stations, the highest levels of contamination were:
Variable
LPAH
HPAH
PCB
Cu+Pb+Zn
As
Elevation Above Reference
Very high
High
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
>1,OOOX
100-1,OOOX
10-100X
10-100X
10-100X
Slip 1 tied with Segment 6A (West Waterway) for the 4th highest priority
position based on environmental contamination and effects. The very high
concentrations of LPAH (up to 42,000 ppb in sediments at the head of the
slip) indicated an ongoing source of petroleum pollution. For all chemical
indicators, there was a gradient from high concentrations at the head of
the slip to relatively lower concentrations at midchannel of the Duwamish
River adjacent to the slip. Based on average contaminant concentrations
relative to other areas, Slip 1 ranked as the highest priority area.
POTENTIAL SOURCES
PCB spill (1974)
Manson Construction
Ideal Cement
t 255 gal AROCLOR 1242
Storm drain
t NPDES cooling water
(5.5 M gal/yr),
Settling Pond - Kiln and truck
wash water.
-------
SLIP 2 (8A)
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
The entire Slip 2 area ranked as a low priority area based on average
conditions as well as on "worst-case" stations. However, the head of the
slip is included in this Interim Work Plan because contamination gradients
from the mouth to the head of the slip are indicated by the limited data
available. Concentrations of HPAH, PCBs, and the sum of copper, lead,
and zinc in sediments were each elevated 10-100X reference levels. Elevations
of HPAH and PCBs were about 35 times reference levels. Data on LPAH were
not adequate for analysis. Arsenic in sediments did not appear to be a
problem. No bioassay, benthic infauna, or fish pathology data were available.
POTENTIAL SOURCES
Michigan CSO 90-210 M gal/yr
-------
SLIP 3 (8B)
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
Slip 3 and the adjacent river channel ranked 9th (tied with Fourmile
Rock Disposal Site) based on "worst-case" stations, and 14th based on average
conditions. The most contaminated station within Segment 8B was at the
head of Slip 3. Because of the limited data available and the relatively
high contamination indicated by this one station, the head of Slip 3 is
included in this action plan.
Both LPAH and HPAH in sediments from the head of Slip 3 were elevated
about 120 times above the reference value (Reference = 41 ppb for LPAH;
Reference = 79 ppb for HPAH). PCBs were elevated 38 times above the reference
value of 6 ppb. Arsenic in sediments was 24 times
of 3.4 ppm. Although the sum of copper,
reference value of 34 ppm, this elevation
with respect to biological effects. Data
the reference level
lead, and zinc was 17 times the
is not of particular concern
on sediment toxicity bioassays,
benthic infauna, and fish pathology were not available for Slip 3.
POTENTIAL SOURCES
t Michigan CSO
S. Fox CSO/SD (116)
t 90-210 M gal/yr
t SD = 30 M gal/yr, emergency
CSO only
-------
SLIP 4 (8D)
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
Relative to other study sites, Slip 4 and the adjacent river channel
area ranked only as a moderate priority based on average conditions and
"worst-case" stations. Nevertheless, the head of Slip 4 is included in
this plan because of extremely high concentrations of PCBs in sediments
and the known importance of nearby sources.
The time-averaged concentrations of toxic chemicals in sediments from
the U.S. EPA 1982-1983 surveys were used to characterize conditions at
the head of Slip 4. The contaminant group of major concern in Slip 4 is
PCBs. The concentrations of PCBs in sediments at the head of the slip
were 1,600 ppb in the 1982 survey and 4,600 ppb in the 1983 survey, yielding
an average of 3,100 ppb or 517 times the reference value of 6 ppb. HPAH
was of less concern, with an Elevation Above Reference of about 90. Metals
were of no immediate concern, since elevations were less than 20 times
reference values. No adequate data were available for LPAH and biological
indicators. However, the observed concentrations of PCBs in sediments
of Slip 4 are expected to cause biological problems.
POTENTIAL SOURCES
Georgetown Flume PCBs in sediments = 137 ppm
(dry weight)
t Slip 4 CSO/SD (117) PCBs in sediments = 103 ppm
(dry weight); SD = 150 M gal/yr,
emergency CSO only
Slip 4 SD 140 M gal/yr
1-5 drain 10 M gal/yr
East Marginal Pump Sta CSO t Emergency CSO only.
-------
FOURMILE ROCK DISPOSAL SITE (10A)
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
Based on the highest ranked stations within Fourmile Rock Disposal
Site, environmental conditions for this area are as follows:
Variable Elevation Above Reference
LPAH Moderate 10-100X
HPAH High 100-1,OOOX
PCBs High 100-1,OOOX
Cu+Pb+Zn Moderate 10-100X
As Low <10X
Amphipod mortality High >_7.IX
Among the high priority areas, this area was ranked lowest in terms of
environmental problems. However, the disposal site is considered for interim
action because 1) available data are limited, 2) the public is concerned
about transport of disposal material to beaches along Magnolia, and 3) the
disposal area will be evaluated as part of the Puget Sound Dredged Disposal
Analysis.
Environmental conditions at the Fourmile Rock Disposal Site are relatively
heterogeneous. Based on average conditions, this area ranked lower than
some of the moderate priority areas in the Elliott Bay system. Nevertheless,
average PCB and HPAH concentrations in sediments were about 100 times the
respective reference concentrations. The average concentration of PCBs
in sediments at Fourmile Rock Disposal Site was 584 ppb, which is high
enough to be of potential environmental concern.
The Fourmile Rock Disposal Site was the only priority area with both
adequate data on benthic infauna (bottom-dwelling invertebrate organisms)
and adequate reference data that could be used to calculate Elevation Above
Reference values. These values indicated that benthic infaunal communities
were modified slightly relative to corresponding communities found in clean
areas near Seahurst in the main basin of Puget Sound. At the disposal
site, dominance was moderately elevated (1.12-4.90 times Reference), total
abundance was not depressed (<1 times Reference), the total number of taxa
was moderately depressed (1.12-4.90 times below reference), and amphipod
abundance was moderately depressed (1.12-4.90 times below reference).
Because the available data are limited, no definitive conclusions about
biological conditions at the Fourmile Rock Disposal Site can be made at
this time.
POTENTIAL SOURCES
Disposal of dredged material is the primary source of toxic contamination
at the Fourmile Rock Disposal Site.
------- |