EPA 910/9-90-013
Pugef Sound Estuary Program
SINCLAIR AND DYES INLETS
URBAN BAY ACTION PROGRAM:
1990 Action Plan
July 1990
-------
Pi I Environmental Services
15375 SE 30th Place
Suite 250
Bellevue, Washington 98007
SINCLAIR AND DYES INLETS
URBAN BAY ACTION PROGRAM:
1990 Action Plan
By
Michael A. Jacobson and Pieter N. Booth
Prepared For
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 10, Office of Puget Sound
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98101
EPA Contract 68-D8-0085
PTI Contract C744-09
July 1990
-------
Table of Contents
Page
List of Figures v
List of Tables v
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations vii
Glossary of Terms ix
Acknowledgments xiii
Executive Summary xvii
Introduction 1
Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Urban Bay Action Program 3
Implementation of the 1990 Action Plan 4
Coordination with Other Areawide Planning Efforts 7
Technical Approach for Identifying and Ranking
Problem Areas 8
Overview of Sinclair and Dyes Inlets and Associated
Contamination Problems 11
General Description of Area 11
Description of Priority Problems by Subarea 15
1990 Action Plan for Sinclair and Dyes Inlets 21
Comprehensive Plans and Programs 21
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 21
U.S.Navy 23
Suquamish Tribe 27
Washington Department of Ecology 28
Washington Department of Fisheries 32
Washington Department of Health 33
Washington Parks and Recreation Commission 34
Puget Sound Water Quality Authority 35
in
-------
Table of Contents
Page
Washington Department of Natural Resources 36
Washington Department of Transportation 37
Kitsap County Department of Community
Development 37
Kitsap County Public Works Department 38
Kitsap County Conservation District 39
Bremerton-Kitsap County Health Department 40
Port of Bremerton 42
City of Bremerton Municipal Utilities 43
City of Bremerton Department of Community
Development 44
City of Port Orchard Public Works 44
Site-Specific Action Plan 45
Data, Planning, and Enforcement Needs 71
Areawide Needs 71
Data Needs 71
Planning and Enforcement Needs 72
Additional Needs by Subarea 74
Puget Sound Naval Shipyard Shoreline 74
Charleston Shoreline 74
Upper Sinclair Inlet 75
Port Orchard Shoreline 76
Central Sinclair Inlet 77
Outer Sinclair Inlet 77
Oyster Bay 77
Port Washington Narrows 78
Dyes Inlet 78
References 81
Appendix A: Administrative Record of Agency Letters of Commitment
IV
-------
List of Figures
Page
Figure 1. Project area of the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action Program 2
Figure 2. Elements of the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action Program 5
Figure 3. Environmental indicators used to define problem areas of sediment
contamination and biological effects 10
Figure 4. Locations of nine sub-areas and their priority ranking within Sinclair
and Dyes Inlets 12
Figure 5. Locations of potential point source and nonpoint source discharges of
contaminants to Sinclair and Dyes Inlets 13
Figure 6. Locations of storm drain outfalls and potentially contaminated sites at
the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard 14
List of Tables
Table 1. Site-specific action plan for Sinclair and Dyes Inlets priority problem
subareas 47
Table 2. Planning and program development actions 55
Table 3. Pollutant control actions 58
Table 4. Remedial investigations 62
Table 5. Monitoring actions 64
Table 6. Resource protection actions 67
Table 7. Educational actions 68
-------
VI
-------
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations
AET apparent effects threshold
Authority Puget Sound Water Quality Authority
BMP best management practice
BOD biochemical oxygen demand
CCMP Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan
CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
(Superfund)
CSO combined sewer overflow
DNR Washington Department of Natural Resources
DOH Washington Department of Health
DOT Washington Department of Transportation
Ecology Washington Department of Ecology
EOF emergency overflow
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
HP AH high molecular weight polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon
HRS hazard ranking system
KCSD Kitsap County Sewer District
LAET lowest apparent effects threshold
LPAH low molecular weight polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon
MOA Memorandum of Agreement
NAVFAC Naval Facilities Systems Command
Navy U.S. Department of the Navy
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
PAH polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon
PCB polychlorinated biphenyl
PIE Public Involvement and Education
PSDDA Puget Sound Dredged Disposal Analysis
PSEP Puget Sound Estuary Program
PSNS Puget Sound Naval Shipyard
VII
-------
Acronyms and Abbreviations
PSWQMP Puget Sound Water Quality Management Plan
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
SEPA State Environmental Policy Act
TFW Timber/Fish/Wildlife Agreement
TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act
WDF Washington Department of Fisheries
WWTP wastewater treatment plant
VIM
-------
Glossary of Terms
Amphipod
Apparent effects threshold
Benthic
Benthic community
Best management practice
Bioaccumulation
Bioassay
Biochemical oxygen demand
Combined sewer overflow
Contaminant
Crustacean
Diversity
Effluent
Small shrimp-like crustaceans, such as sand fleas, that are
often benthic dwellers and feed on algae and detritus.
Chemical-specific sediment concentrations above which a
particular adverse biological effect is always found to be
statistically significant (0.05) for a given data set.
Pertaining to the bottom of a water body.
A group of interacting species populations found within
the benthic zone.
A method, activity, maintenance procedure, or other man-
agement practice for reducing the amount of pollution
entering a water body.
The accumulation of a substance in tissues of an organism.
Bioaccumulation of toxic substances may lead to disease
or other health problems and may render organisms unfit
for human consumption.
A laboratory test used to evaluate the toxicity of a material
(commonly sediments or water) by measuring behavioral
or physiological response (including death) of organisms.
A measure of the amount of oxygen consumed in the
biological processes that break down organic matter in
water.
A discharge of raw sewage and stormwater, which occurs
when the hydraulic capacity of a combined sewer line is
exceeded.
A substance that is not naturally present in the environ-
ment or is present in amounts that can, in sufficient con-
centration, adversely affect the environment.
A group of invertebrate animals with a hard exterior skel-
eton including crabs, lobsters, and amphipods.
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.
The liquid that flows out of a facility (e.g., treated waste-
water).
IX
-------
Glossary
Elevation above reference
Emergency overflow
Erosion
Gastropod
Groundwater
Habitat
Hazardous waste
High apparent effects threshold
Histopathology
Hydrocarbon
Infauna
Influent
Inorganic molecule
Invertebrates
Larvae
Lesion
An index of toxic contamination or biological effects that
is equal to the measured value of a variable (e.g., chemical
concentration) at a study site divided by the measured
value of the same variable at a relatively clean reference
area.
A discharge of untreated sewage as a result of equipment
or power failure.
Wearing away of rock or soil by the gradual detachment
of soil or rock fragments by water, wind, ice, and other
mechanical and chemical forces.
A group of invertebrate animals with a shell including
snails, limpets, and abalone.
Water found in permeable rock layers underground.
The specific area or environment in which a particular
animal or plant lives.
Any solid, liquid, or gaseous substance which, because of
its source or characteristics, is classified under state or
federal law as hazardous and is subject to special handling,
shipping, storage, and disposal requirements.
The highest of several AETs developed for a single
contaminant.
Study of tissue lesions.
An organic compound composed of hydrogen and carbon
(e.g., petroleum compounds).
Animals living within the bottom sediments.
The liquid that flows into a facility (e.g., sewage into a
wastewater treatment plant).
A molecule not containing carbon (e.g., a metal).
Animals without backbones.
(Singular: larva)—A juvenile stage of fish or inverte-
brates with a body form that differs greatly from the adult
stage (e.g., an oyster larva is a small, free-floating organ-
ism).
An abnormal structural change in the body due to injury
or disease (e.g., a liver tumor in fish).
-------
Loading
Low apparent effects threshold
Microtox bioassay
National Pollutant Discharge
Nonpoint source pollution
Nutrients
Organic molecule
Pelecypod
Point source pollution
Polychaete
Polychlorinated biphenyls
Glossary
Quantity of a substance that enters a water body during a
specified time interval (e.g., pounds per year).
The lowest of several AETs developed for a single
contaminant.
A sediment toxicity test that measures the decrease in
bioluminescence in bacteria that often occurs in response
to increasing concentrations of contaminants.
A part of the federal Clean Water Act which requires
Elimination Systempoint source dischargers to obtain dis-
charge permits.
Pollution that enters water from dispersed and often un-
controlled sources (such as stormwater runoff) rather than
through pipes.
Essential chemicals needed by plants and animals for
growth. Excessive nutrients may lead to water quality
problems by promoting excessive growth and subsequent
decay of plants such as algae.
A molecule that contains carbon (e.g., polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbon).
Also known as bivalves, pelecypods have two shells, are
generally filter feeders, and include clams, oysters, and
mussels.
Pollution from a single source such as a pipe (e.g., dis-
charge from a sewage treatment plant or factory).
A large group of segmented worms found in the marine
environment (e.g., feather dusters).
A group of manufactured chemicals including 209 differ-
ent but closely related chlorinated hydrocarbons. These
compounds are toxic, persistent in the environment, and
are probable human carcinogens.
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons A class of complex organic compounds, formed by the
combustion of organic material, that are persistent and
widespread in the environment and are known to cause
cancer. Low molecular weight PAHs have up to three
carbon rings. High molecular weight PAHs have greater
than three carbon rings and are more carcinogenic than
the lower weight PAHs.
XI
-------
Glossary
Primary treatment
Secondary treatment
Sediment
Toxic
Toxic contamination
Watershed
A wastewater treatment method that uses settling, skim-
ming, and chlorination to remove solids, floating materi-
als, and pathogens from wastewater. Primary treatment
typically removes 35 percent of the biochemical oxygen
demand and less than half of the metals and toxic organic
substances from sewage.
A wastewater treatment method that usually involves the
addition of biological treatment to the settling, skimming,
and disinfection provided by primary treatment. Second-
ary treatment may remove up to 90 percent of the bio-
chemical oxygen demand and significantly more metals
and toxic organic compounds from wastewater than pri-
mary treatment.
Material that settles to the bottom of a water body or
collects on the bottom of pipes such as sewers and storm
drains.
Poisonous, cancer-causing, or otherwise directly harmful
to life.
Presence of toxic substances, often caused by release of
metals or synthetic organic chemicals to the environment.
The geographic region within which water drains into a
particular river, lake, or body of water.
XII
-------
Acknowledgments
This document was prepared by PTI Environmental Services under the
direction of Mr. Pieter Booth for the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) Region 10, Office of Puget Sound, in partial fulfillment
of Contract No. 68D80085. The primary authors of this report are Mr.
Michael A. Jacobson and Mr. Pieter Booth of PTI Environmental
Services. Dr. Fran Solomon of the Washington Department of Ecology
(Ecology) and Mr. Michael Rylko of EPA contributed the following
sections: Implementation of the 1990 Action Plan; Tables 2-7; and Data,
Planning, and Enforcement Needs. The development of this report was
funded by the National Estuary Program, under the authority of the
Clean Water Act as amended in 1987. Funding was approved by the
EPA Office of Marine and Estuarine Protection. Mr. Michael Rylko
served as the project manager for EPA Region 10.
The Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Urban Bay Action Program has benefitted
from the participation of members of an interagency and citizens work
group. Duties of the work group members include: 1) reviewing pro-
gram documents, agency policies, and proposed actions; 2) providing
data reports and other technical information to EPA; and 3) dissemi-
nating action program information to constituencies or interest groups.
The past and continuing efforts of the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
Interagency and Citizens Work Group are greatly appreciated. Special
thanks are extended to Dr. Fran Solomon, the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
Action Program coordinator, for chairing the work group activities.
Members of the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Interagency and Citizens Work
Group are listed below.
Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Interagency
and Citizens Work Group
Name Affiliation
Mr. Shayn Alire Kitsap County Department of Community
Development
Ms. Peggy Britt Washington State Parks & Recreation
Commission
Ms. Nina Carter Washington State Parks & Recreation
Commission
Mr. Rich Costello Washington Department of Fisheries
Mr. Jim Cubbage Washington Department of Ecology
xiii
-------
Acknowledgments
Name
Affiliation
Mr. Larry Curies
Mr. John Day
Ms. Dixie Dragich
Mr. Bill Duffy
Mr. Scott Edwards
Mr. Dean Enebo
Mr. Ken Ferjancic
Dr. Willa Fisher
Ms. Louise Forrest
Mr. Marvin Frye
Ms. Charlotte Garrido
Mr. John Gordon
Mr. Jerry Hamling
Ms. Liz Hoenig
Mr. Sam Holcomb
Mr. Thorn Hooper
Dr. David Jamison
Ms. Reva Johnston
Mr. Ben Klein
Mr. Clarence Martin
Mr. Rick McNicholas
Mr. Don Melvin
Ms. Phyllis Meyers
Mr. Don Miles
Ms. Mary Lou Mills
Mr. Mark Murphy
Mr. Francis Naglich
Ms. Kristen Nelson
Mr. Paul O'Brien
Mr. Bruce Oyloe
Port Orchard Public Works Department
Olympic High School
Kitsap County Public Utility District No. 1
Bremerton Municipal Utilities Division
Kitsap County Conservation District
Silverdale Kiwanis
Fish Pro, Inc.
Bremerton-Kitsap County Health Depart-
ment
Puget Sound Water Quality Authority
Naval Submarine Base, Bangor
Kitsap County Conservation District
Naval Facilities Engineering Command,
OICC NW Branch, Western Division
Bremerton Yacht Club
Suquamish Tribe
Clear Creek Council
Washington Department of Fisheries
Washington Department of Natural Re-
sources
Citizen
Washington Department of Transportation
Audubon Society
Kitsap County Department of Community
Development
Washington Department of Health
Suquamish Tribe
Bremerton-Kitsap County Health Depart-
ment
Washington Department of Fisheries
Puget Sound Naval Shipyard
Kitsap County Conservation District
Naval Submarine Base, Bangor
Washington Department of Ecology
Kitsap County Public Works Department
XIV
-------
Acknowledgments
Name
Affiliation
Mr. Ron Perkerewicz
Mr. Darryl Piercy
Mr. Don Pratt
Ms. Vallana Piccolo
Ms. Marcy Reed
Mr. Jim Reeves
Ms. Joanne Richter
Mr. Michael Rylko
Mr. Paul Schmidt
Mr. Glenn Schmitt
Dr. Fran Solomon
Mr. Clyde Stricklin
Mr. Phil Struck
Mr. Ron Swenson
Ms. Anne Watanabe
Ms. Julie Werder
Mr. Harry Wilson
Mr. Bob Wiltermood
Kitsap County Department of Community
Development
Port of Bremerton
Bremerton Department of Community De-
velopment
Puget Sound Water Quality Authority
Naval Submarine Base, Bangor
Naval Submarine Base, Bangor
Puget Sound Water Quality Authority
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Re-
gion 10
Citizen
Puget Sound Naval Shipyard
Washington Department of Ecology
Kitsap County Department of Community
Development
Bremerton-Kitsap County Health Depart-
ment
Trout Unlimited
Puget Sound Water Quality Authority
Puget Sound Naval Shipyard
Sierra Club
Kitsap County Conservation District
xv
-------
XVI
-------
Executive Summary
Previous studies indicate that the sediments within some areas of Sin-
clair and Dyes Inlets are severely contaminated with toxic metals such
as cadmium, mercury, copper, lead, and zinc as well as organic com-
pounds such as petroleum products and polychlorinated biphenyls. In
sufficient concentrations, these substances may pose hazards to the
aquatic ecosystem. For example, toxic contamination may decrease the
abundance and diversity of benthic invertebrate communities, increase
the prevalence of tissue disorders such as liver tumors in fish, and result
in the accumulation of chemicals in the tissue offish and shellfish, posing
a hazard to humans who consume these fish and shellfish.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Washington De-
partment of Ecology, working with the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard,
the city of Bremerton, Kitsap County, local governments, the Suquam-
ish Tribe, and others, developed the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Urban Bay
Action Plan to reduce contamination problems in the Sinclair and Dyes
Inlets system. The Urban Bay Action Program 1) identifies priority
problem areas of contamination; 2) identifies current, historical, and
potential sources of contaminants; 3) establishes schedules to take
corrective actions to eliminate existing problems and to investigate
potential problems; and 4) identifies appropriate agencies for imple-
menting corrective actions.
In 1988, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency analyzed available
data on chemical and bacterial contamination and biological effects and
identified priority problem sub-areas in Sinclair and Dyes Inlets. Areas
received a high priority ranking for action if they exhibited particularly
high levels of contamination or biological effects such as high mortality
rates of organisms in sediment toxicity tests. Key problems identified
during this process include: contaminated sediment adjacent to the
Puget Sound Naval Shipyard, numerous combined sewer overflows,
potential sediment and shellfish contamination near Jackson Park, and
extensive microbial contamination of Dyes Inlet.
Corrective actions may include both source controls and remedial ac-
tions (cleanup) such as capping or removal of contaminated sediments.
Source controls may include permit revisions (or licensing currently
unpermitted discharges) to require reduction of contaminant
concentrations or volume of discharges, or application of pollution
control techniques to reduce contamination of surface runoff. Infor-
mation on proposed corrective actions, implementation schedules, and
responsible agencies is presented in this document.
The 1990 Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Urban Bay Action Plan represents
the concerted efforts and commitments of many regulatory agencies and
local governments to reduce contamination in Sinclair and Dyes Inlets.
XVII
-------
Executive Summary
An interagency and citizen work group, composed of regulatory agen-
cies, local government agencies, the Suquamish Tribe, interest groups,
and citizens, has been developed to formulate a course of action for
controlling contamination in Sinclair and Dyes Inlets. Ongoing coordi-
nation will be provided by the Washington Department of Ecology,
which funds a full time coordinator for the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
Action Program. Authority for implementation of the 1990 action plan
is derived from the Puget Sound Water Quality Management Plan and
various federal, state, and local environmental regulations.
The regulatory and management efforts of the 1990 Sinclair and Dyes
Inlets Urban Bay Action Plan focus on sources that are most directly
related to priority problem sub-areas. The highest priority sub-areas
are located near the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard and the Charleston
shoreline. Additional problem sub-areas include other sections of Sin-
clair Inlet, notably the Port Orchard shoreline, Port Washington Nar-
rows, and the Jackson Park Navy housing complex in Dyes Inlet.
The action plan specifies a broad array of actions proposed to improve
the environmental quality of Sinclair and Dyes Inlets including:
• Planning and Program Development Actions—The city of
Bremerton is developing a comprehensive sewer and combined
sewer overflow control plan to eliminate pollution from sewer
overflows within its collection system.
• Pollution Control Actions—Kitsap County and the cities of
Bremerton and Port Orchard will require stormwater basins and
oil/water separators for all permitted construction.
• Remedial Investigation Actions—The U.S. Department of the
Navy will characterize sediments near the Puget Sound Naval
Shipyard under the Navy's Installation Restoration program to
determine requirements for cleanup activities.
• Monitoring Actions—The Washington Department of Health
will test shellfish for toxic organic compounds near the Jackson
Park complex.
• Resource Protection Actions—The Suquamish Tribe and
Washington Department of Fisheries will enhance salmon pop-
ulations in Dyes Inlet.
• Educational Actions—The Bremerton Department of Com-
munity Development, Bremerton-Kitsap County Health De-
partment, and the Port of Bremerton will develop a water
quality interpretive display at the Bremerton floating pier.
The 1990 Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Urban Bay Action Plan is a working
document that will be refined as new data are made available. An
interagency action team, comprising technical and planning staff from
XVIII
-------
Executive Summary
local, state, tribal, and federal agencies, will meet at least bimonthly to
coordinate action plan implementation, review progress made on im-
plementation, resolve any problems, and refine the plan to reflect new
information. The Washington Department of Ecology's Action Pro-
gram Coordinator has responsibility for the long-term coordination of
the action plan and implementation of source control actions.
xix
-------
Introduction
In response to widespread concern over the environmental health of
Puget Sound, several agencies with regulatory, resource management,
and research responsibilities initiated the Puget Sound Estuary Pro-
gram (PSEP) in 1985. The primary objectives of the program are to
protect the sound and its living resources and to improve the condition
of contaminated areas. As a primary element of PSEP, the Urban Bay
Action Program was established to address the most severe contamina-
tion problems in Puget Sound, which occur in embayments near urban
areas.
The Urban Bay Action Program focuses on identifying and reducing
contaminant releases through a series of coordinated actions by govern-
ment agencies and responsible parties (e.g., owners and operators of
facilities that are sources of contamination). Pollution control activities
may include improving drainage or treatment systems for stormwater
and sewage, developing stricter permit conditions for wastewater dis-
chargers, enforcing hazardous materials regulations, and initiating best
management practices (BMPs) or cleanup measures at sites of concern.
Under the Urban Bay Action Program, Sinclair and Dyes Inlets were
identified as priority areas for problem identification and corrective
action planning in 1986. Sinclair and Dyes Inlets are located in central
Puget Sound on the east side of the Kitsap Peninsula in Kitsap County
(see Figure 1). In April 1988, an initial data summary and problem
identification was completed (Tetra Tech 1988). The 1990 Sinclair and
Dyes Inlets Urban Bay Action Plan is based on this data summary report
and on extensive discussions with many governmental entities that have
responsibility for protecting the environmental quality of Puget Sound.
The 1990 Action Plan describes the comprehensive plans and programs
that address contaminant sources and problem areas on an areawide
basis, and the individual corrective actions developed for specific sites
and sources within the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets project area. The
corrective actions are organized by the priority problem subareas iden-
tified by Tetra Tech (1988). For each priority problem subarea and
associated contaminant sources, the plan specifies the first steps toward
corrective actions, the agencies responsible for implementing those
actions, and approximate implementation schedules. The remainder of
this introduction provides a description of the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
Urban Bay Action Program and an overview of Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
and associated contamination problems.
-------
Introduction
Silvardala .f^c«w
20
SftwxJW*
Shoul '.
Dyes
Inlet
CtHCO
Sty
.60
MuM
Quwrv,
!•»*„
yr
/?Tracyton
Uoni Park
Phlnnty
Biy
BREMERTON
East
tBramerton
•-20
Illaha*
Stata Park
inlet
40 Xnnipoll»
Port
Orchard
nautical milts
0 1 2
SOUNDINGS IN FEET
Sou*?
Reference: Adopted from Tetra Tech (1988)
Figure 1. Project area of the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action Program
-------
Introduction
Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Urban Bay Action
Program
In July 1986, PSEP member agencies initiated the Sinclair and Dyes
Inlets Urban Bay Action Program. Through a process of interagency
coordination, local government support, and public participation, the
Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Urban Bay Action Program has focused new
and continuing pollution control efforts on the priority problem subar-
eas within the inlets. The objectives of the action program are to:
• Identify specific toxic areas of concern based on levels of con-
tamination and associated adverse biological effects
• Identify historical and ongoing sources of contamination
• Rank polluted areas and sources (to the extent possible) to set
priorities for development of corrective actions
• Implement corrective actions to reduce or eliminate sources of
ongoing pollution and restore polluted areas to support natural
resources and beneficial uses.
The Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action Program has followed a process in
which cooperative efforts by federal, tribal, state, and local officials have
helped to define problem areas, focus monitoring efforts, and plan and
implement corrective actions. Interagency coordination was fostered
through the formation of the Interagency and Citizens Work Group.
The work group is composed of representatives from federal, state, and
local agencies; the Suquamish Tribe; environmental groups and other
interest groups; area business organizations; and interested citizens (see
Acknowledgments section for full membership list of the work group).
First, existing data on chemical and microbial contamination, and eu-
trophication were collected and analyzed, and priority problem areas
were identified (Tetra Tech 1988). Next, individual meetings were held
with representatives from agencies with jurisdiction or responsibilities
pertaining to environmental quality within the study area. These meet-
ings provided information concerning the current and planned activities
of each agency. Following the meetings, a source-action matrix was
developed and presented to the work group. The matrix presented the
types of environmental problems and associated actions that agencies
were implementing to address contamination problems. In addition,
the matrix served to identify gaps in source control and data collection
efforts. Following presentation of the matrix, agency representatives
were again consulted during individual meetings. The purpose of these
meetings was to cooperatively negotiate how each agency would commit
resources to help implement preventative or corrective actions or
gather information to fill data gaps. Because of the complexity of issues
involving the two naval facilities, an additional series of meetings was
held between U.S. Department of the Navy (Navy) and PSEP staff.
-------
Introduction
Letters were sent by the EPA and Ecology to confirm agency commit-
ments. These letters and agency replies constitute the administrative
record for the action plan and are contained in Appendix A. A second
work group meeting was held to review and discuss the combined
commitments of each agency and to further enhance interagency com-
munication and coordination. The 1990 Action Plan and the status of
its implementation will be revised in the future as new data become
available to refine the definition of environmental problem areas and
contaminant sources and as agency action agendas evolve.
The 1990 Action Plan focuses on source control to minimize inputs of
toxic contaminants and serves as a blueprint for source control activities
including field investigations and permit reviews. However, other cor-
rective actions may also be specified, including alternatives for cleaning
up contaminated sediments and environmental monitoring to evaluate
program success. Examples of sediment cleanup activities include cap-
ping contaminated sediments with uncontaminated materials and re-
moving the contaminated sediments by dredging. Sediment cleanup
actions are most likely to be implemented only after the achievement
of source control (to minimize the probability of future recontamination
and additional cleanup). Therefore, sediment cleanup actions are likely
to be long-term rather than short-term components of the Sinclair and
Dyes Inlets Urban Bay Action Program. Sediment remediation is an
expensive and complex process that requires considerable site-specific
data and review of environmental effects during the planning process.
To determine the best course of action, regulatory and resource man-
agement agencies must evaluate the environmental benefits and risks
of alternative sediment remedial actions relative to costs. Monitoring
is another long-term component of the action program and is conducted
to evaluate the effectiveness of source control and sediment remedia-
tion (see Figure 2).
Implementation of In 1988, EPA formally designated Puget Sound as an estuary of national
the 1990 Action Plan significance under the Clean Water Act. Section 320 of this law requires
the development of a comprehensive conservation and management
plan (CCMP) for each designated estuary. The 1987, 1989, and 1991
Puget Sound Water Quality Management Plans (PSWQMP), devel-
oped by the Puget Sound Water Quality Authority (Authority), meet
all the requirements of a CCMP. Development of PSWQMP is con-
ducted under Section 90.70 of the Revised Code of Washington. Ele-
ment P-13 of the 1989 PSWQMP states that the "urban bay approach"
is an essential part of a comprehensive strategy to control point source
pollution. Implementation of the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Urban Bay
Action Plan and other urban bay action plans is part of the overall
implementation of PSWQMP.
As part of the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Urban Bay Action Program,
Ecology will establish and lead an interagency Action Team to guide the
implementation of the action plan. The Action Team is a subset of the
-------
Introduction
Initial problem
identification
Sampling and
analysis
Action plan
Sediment
management
Environmental
monitoring program
Action program
evaluation
Potential action
team activities
Source control
Permitting
Inspections
Enforcement
Sediment
remedial planning
Figure 2. Elements of the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Urban Bay Action Program
-------
Introduction
work group, and will comprise technical staff from local, state, tribal,
and federal agencies. Representatives may include the city of Bremer-
ton, Port of Bremerton, city of Port Orchard, Kitsap County, the
Suquamish Tribe, the Washington Department of Health (DOH), the
Navy, and the EPA.
The Action Team will meet monthly during the first year of plan
implementation and every two months thereafter. At these meetings,
the Action Team will track progress in carrying out specific actions,
solve any problems that arise, evaluate the effectiveness of the various
implementation strategies, and maximize interagency coordination. As
new data are obtained about Sinclair Inlet and Dyes Inlet and as the
initial results of implementation efforts are evaluated, the action plan
will be revised and updated. Local governments are key participants in
carrying out the actions.
In addition to establishing an Action Team, Ecology will establish a
citizens' advisory committee comprising representatives from environ-
mental, business, recreational, civic, educational, and neighborhood
groups. This advisory committee will: 1) identify public concerns and
issues relevant to agency actions set forth in the action plan, 2) dissem-
inate action plan information to members of organizations represented
on the committee, 3) review work products and attend scoping meet-
ings, and 4) help ensure that agencies perform the remedial (cleanup)
actions or investigations for which they are responsible.
Ecology, EPA, and many other agencies have regulatory authority to
implement specific elements of the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Urban Bay
Action Plan. This regulatory authority stems from discharge permit
programs and inspection requirements under federal and state water
quality regulations such as the federal Clean Water Act and the state
Water Pollution Control Act. Additional authority is derived from
hazardous substance control regulations, such as the federal Compre-
hensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act
(CERCLA, also known as Superfund), federal Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA), federal Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA), state Model Toxics Control Act, county regulations for solid
waste and hazardous waste, and health department regulations. Other
important laws include the state combined sewer overflow (CSO) con-
trol regulation, the state Shoreline Management Act, and the State
Environmental Policy Act (SEPA).
Under the above regulations, Ecology is the agency responsible for
issuing and revising wastewater and industrial waste discharge permits,
conducting site inspections, and overseeing cleanup plans for contami-
nated sites. Ecology also has regulatory authority over storm drains that
discharge to state waters.
-------
Introduction
Federal facilities such as Puget Sound Naval Shipyard (PSNS) and the
Jackson Park complex are regulated by EPA. EPA has the authority to
conduct inspections, issue and revise National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permits, and require source control and
cleanup actions under the federal Clean Water Act and federal hazard-
ous waste laws. Ecology can also regulate federal facilities, either
through a delegated program such as RCRA or through state laws which
are not overruled by federal law, such as the Model Toxics Control Act.
In addition to Ecology and EPA, other agencies that have participated
in development of the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Urban Bay Action Plan
have specific implementation responsibilities. The Navy is responsible
for controlling stormwater quality, effluent discharged to the city of
Bremerton wastewater treatment plant (WWTP), and hazardous
wastes at PSNS and Jackson Park. The city of Bremerton has respon-
sibility for municipal wastewater and storm drain discharges. The city
also has a limited pretreatment program for discharges from industrial
and commercial facilities to the sanitary sewer system. The city of Port
Orchard owns storm drain and sewer collection systems. Other agencies
(e.g., the Port of Bremerton) and private industries are responsible for
pollution prevention and control related to their property and activities.
Environmental education projects under the 1990 Action Plan will be
important in helping bring about behavioral change in individuals and
businesses.
Ecology has a broad range of regulatory options to initiate source
control and site cleanup actions. The preferred approach to implement
the 1990 Action Plan is to work cooperatively with all involved parties.
Other approaches that can be taken include warning letters, notices of
violation, consent or agreed orders, penalties, and administrative or-
ders. An administrative order is a written order to take a specific course
of action within a specified time period. A consent or agreed order is a
binding agreement between Ecology and the entity under enforcement.
Such an order is accompanied by a notice that specifies the schedule
and negotiation procedures.
In summary, the authority for implementation of the Sinclair and Dyes
Inlets Urban Bay Action Plan is derived from the PSWQMP and various
federal, state, and local environmental regulations. Voluntary commit-
ment to perform the actions set forth in the action plan is the most
efficient and cost-effective approach to addressing point and nonpoint
pollution sources in Sinclair Inlet and Dyes Inlet. Successful implemen-
tation of the action plan will require the cooperation of all parties within
the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets watersheds.
Coordination with
Other Areawide
Planning Efforts
Coordination of the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action Program with other
planning and management programs is essential for efficient and effec-
tive implementation. The PSWQMP, the watershed management plan-
ning process, and the Timber/Fish/Wildlife Agreement (TFW) are all
-------
Introduction
programs which must be coordinated with the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
Action Program.
The Puget Sound Water Quality Authority, one of the PSEP member
agencies, developed the PSWQMP. State agencies, local governments,
and other parties are called upon to implement the 13 programs delin-
eated in the management plan. Several activities described in the
areawide plans and programs of this document are a direct result of the
PSWQMP. The urban bay approach is also explicitly supported by the
plan. The Authority has an oversight and coordination role in imple-
menting the PSWQMP. Coordination of Authority-directed activities
with the urban bay program occurs via the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Work
Group, of which the Authority is a member.
The watershed management planning process is also coordinated with
the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Urban Bay Action Program. Under a
program administered by Ecology, counties have ranked priority water-
sheds for nonpoint pollution management. Grants are given to counties
to develop management plans for controlling nonpoint pollution
sources in these priority watersheds. Kitsap County was given one
watershed planning grant for Sinclair Inlet and one grant for Dyes Inlet.
The Dyes Inlet grant includes a distinct and focused effort to address
nonpoint pollution problems in the Clear Creek watershed within the
Dyes Inlet basin. Watershed management committees are composed
of personnel from planning and implementing agencies and are formed
to develop the management plans and implement the specific actions.
Coordination of this program with the urban bay program occurs via the
Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Work Group. Representatives from both
Ecology and the Kitsap County Department of Community Develop-
ment (the lead planning agency for the watershed management process)
are work group members. A general management framework between
the urban bay program and the watershed management program has
been developed to eliminate redundancy and maximize coordination
between the two processes (see Kitsap County Department of Commu-
nity Development in the Comprehensive Plans and Programs section).
While most forest management issues covered by TFW pertain more to
the watershed management process than to the urban bay process,
environmental monitoring activities done by TFW participants are
pertinent to the urban bay process. Specific coordination between
TFW and the urban bay program occurs via agency and tribal member-
ship in the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Work Group.
Technical Approach
for Identifying and
Ranking Problem
Areas
The Urban Bay Action Program relies on a preponderance-of-evidence
approach to identify and rank pollution problem areas and contaminant
sources. Selected chemical, biological, and toxicological indices are
used to compare conditions at contaminated sites to reference condi-
tions in relatively uncontaminated embayments. Study areas that ex-
hibit high values of multiple indicators of contamination and adverse
biological effects receive a ranking of high priority for evaluation of
8
-------
Introduction
pollutant sources and remedial actions. The following seven types of
environmental indicators were used to identify and rank problem areas
(also see Figure 3):
• Sediment Chemistry
- Concentrations of metals and organic compounds
- Conventional sediment variables (e.g., grain size distribu-
tion, total organic carbon)
• Bioaccumulation
- Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), cadmium, mercury, and
the sum of copper, lead, and zinc concentrations in whole
bodies of clams and edible muscle tissue of starry flounder
• Sediment Bioassays
- Amphipod mortality (10-day bioassay)
— Oyster larvae abnormality (48-hour bioassay)
• Benthic Infauna Abundances
- Polychaete abundance
- Pelecypod abundance
- Gastropod abundance
- Crustacean abundance
• Fish Histopathology
— Lesion (e.g., tumor) prevalence in livers, kidneys, and gills
of English and rock sole
• Microbial Contamination
- Fecal coliform bacteria
• Conventional Water Quality Variables
- Dissolved oxygen
- Nutrients (i.e., nitrogen, phosphorus).
Measurements of contaminant concentrations in sediments are used to
characterize the degree of contamination and to trace pollutant sources.
Measurements of contaminant concentrations in tissues of aquatic
organisms are used to identify large-scale problem areas and potential
human health risks. Sediment bioassays and counts of sediment-dwell-
ing organisms are valuable for characterizing effects of contamination
-------
Introduction
Pb
ci
Cl
C =
Hg
ICHEMISTRYl
SEDIMENTS
IBIOASSAYSI
IINFAUNAJ
BIOACCUMULATION
LIVER DISEASE
Figure 3. Environmental indicators used to define problem areas of sediment contamination
and biological effects
10
-------
Introduction
at specific sampling locations. Measurements of sediment chemistry,
bioassays, and benthic community analyses form the triad of data used
to characterize toxic problem areas in Puget Sound (Chapman et al.
1985; PTI and Tetra Tech 1988a,b). Sediment quality standards being
developed by Ecology will also be used to determine the degree of
contamination. Microbial and water quality parameters are also evalu-
ated and compared with established state and federal standards to rank
problem areas.
Data gaps hindered identification of problem areas in some portions of
the inlets. For instance, no data were available for organic contami-
nants in the southern half of Sinclair Inlet, and benthic infauna data
were lacking for the entire project area. Puget Sound apparent effects
threshold (AET) values were used as sediment quality values to evalu-
ate chemical data relative to predicted biological effects. AET values
are chemical-specific sediment concentrations above which a particular
adverse biological effect is always found to be statistically significant
(P0.05) for a given data set. Because AET values are predictive, they
were especially useful in interpreting historical data on sediment con-
taminant levels. Although many other variables were evaluated
throughout the decision-making process, those described above formed
the basis for problem identification and priority ranking. The nine
subareas and their priority rankings are illustrated in Figure 4. Figure 5
shows the locations of WWTPs, CSOs, emergency overflows (EOFs),
former solid waste sites, storm drain outfalls, and failing septic systems
that are potential sources of contaminants to priority problem areas.
Figure 6 shows the locations of major stormwater outfalls at the PSNS.
Overview of Sinclair and Dyes Inlets and
Associated Contamination Problems
This section describes the project area and summarizes information
about the contamination problems with each subarea.
General Description The project area boundary includes all of Sinclair and Dyes Inlets up to
of Area a line connecting Illahee State Park and Waterman Point. Sinclair Inlet
is a 5.6-km-long estuary with maximum depths of 60 feet. Dyes Inlet is
a 4.8-km-long estuary with maximum depths also of 60 feet. Sinclair and
Dyes Inlets are connected by Port Washington Narrows, a 6-km-long
channel approximately 160 meters wide. Water currents in both inlets
are relatively weak and tidally dominated. Numerous small creeks
provide freshwater inflow to the inlets, with Clear Creek near Silverdale
being the largest. Total freshwater input to Sinclair and Dyes Inlets is
between 1 and 6 cubic meters/second (PSWQA 1988). Natural re-
sources of the inlets include extensive clam and oyster beds, salmon, surf
smelt, and bottomfish. There are commercially important quantities of
11
-------
Introduction
Priority Problem Areas
A Puget Sound Naval Shipyard Shoreline
B Charleston Shoreline
C Upper Sinclair Inlet
D Port Orchard Shoreline
E Central Sinclair Inlet
F Outer Sinclair Inlet
G Oyster Bay
H Port Washington Narrows
I Dyes Inlet
pffijj High priority
2J] Medium priority
TT1 No immediate action
Note: Priority rankings based on pollution
from point sources. Priority rankings may
change with watershed management efforts.
Illahee •?
State Park '
iinpi'"V Lions Park
f \wL
East
^11=* Bremerton 3:
Gorst
Square
Figure 4. Locations of nine subareas and their priority ranking within Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
12
-------
Introduction
Silvardal*
Contamlnuit Murot
V
+
•
X
O
Fomw «oM INHM id*
EKhtlngWWTPouBall
Slorm drain ouBal
CSOorEOFoutfal
Fomwbuk oil ladltty
CSO or EOF outfall dMlgiMtfon
(NPDES permit oUch*fg« numbw)
1. OB-06
2. OB-S
3. OB-4
4. OB-3
5. OB-2
6. OB-1
7. PB-1
8. PB-2
9. CW-3
10. CW-2 (006, 034)
11. CW-1 (005)
12. OF-10A(026)
13. OF-11(025)
14. CW-4
15. CENCOM
16. CE-1 (007, 009)
17. CE-2
18. CE-3(008)
19. EB-6 (004)
20. OF-1 (036)
21. OF-2(030)
22. OF-3 (028)
23. EB-1
24. OF-4 (033)
25. EB-2
26. EB-3
27. OF-7 (003)
28. EB-4
29. CE-4
X. CE-5(010,041)
31. CE-6
32. OF-17(032)
33. WB-3
34. WB-2(011)
35. WB-1 (012)
Jackson Park V
Military Landfill..
Fomw Port Orchard
kUHflllonRouCrMk
Braraiton Aulo
onGontCnMk
Pert Orchard
Ktoap County
Sww Dktrlct
(KCSD) No. 5 WWTP
(lomwKCSDNo.S)
«
nautical mites
S lulorrwtcrs
0123
SOUNDINGS IN FEET
Reference: Adopted from Tetra Tech (1988)
Figure 5. Locations of potential point source and nonpoint source discharges of contaminants
to Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
13
-------
600 1000
I F£fct
MEItHS
0 100 200 300
WASTEWATER
TREATMENT
BUILDING
ULJU
(
L_
STEA
— PLAN
.-. .v: „•::.-,
BREMERTON
0
t
T"
16
l_
1
I
r
v
l
015
l
I
1
i
o
014
p
1
i
c
O
013
>
0
0
0
k
• \
l~t
L ff
L *
3 _
9 a
i't;v\hiVv..'|
012
a
019
• 021
o
j
§
SINCLAIR
INLET
(E
O
O
2
O
z
ir
O
o
2
O
z
o
o
I
o
I
• Exinlng NPDES permitted outlaN
o Former NPDES permitted outfall
CONTAMINATED SITES
(?) Fill Between Mooring A and Drydock 5
(D Building 399 Soil
@ Helioopter Pad Landfill
© Building 845 Transformer
(§) Building 847 Transformer
(6) Drain OuMalls
NOTE: The tocalbnt of former outlalto
020 and 022 were not provided.
Reference: Tetra Tech (1988)
Figure 6. Locations of storm drain outfalls and potentially contaminated sites at the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard
-------
Introduction
shellfish in Dyes Inlet; however, the entire project area is currently
closed to commercial shellfish harvesting due to bacterial contamina-
tion.
The drainage basin of the project area is mostly semi-rural with the
exception of the Bremerton, Port Orchard, and Silverdale areas. His-
toric and current industrial activities have been centered in the Brem-
erton area largely due to the presence of the PSNS. Port Orchard and
Silverdale are residential and commercial centers and have no industrial
activities.
As a result of urban and industrial influences, localized areas of Sinclair
and Dyes Inlets have been contaminated with toxic chemicals. Investi-
gations by the EPA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminis-
tration (NOAA), and the Navy during the mid 1980s revealed high
concentrations of toxic chemicals in sediments on the bottom of the
inlets. Inputs from discrete pollutant sources have resulted in a geo-
graphically heterogeneous distribution of toxic sediments. Sinclair and
Dyes Inlets contain some of the most contaminated sediments in Puget
Sound. Contaminants of concern include potential carcinogens, such
as PCBs, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs); and toxic metals,
such as chromium and mercury. Chromium and mercury values in
sediments of Sinclair Inlet are some of the highest values reported for
Puget Sound. Bioaccumulation studies of contaminants in fish tissue
also showed significantly elevated concentrations of PCBs, mercury,
and chromium. Cancerous liver tumors were found in up to 73 percent
of the English sole, Parophrys vetulus (a bottom-dwelling fish), caught
in contaminated areas of the inlets, whereas these lesions are usually
absent in fish caught in relatively uncontaminated areas of the sound.
Description of
Priority Problems
by Subarea
This section provides a description of each problem subarea and its
associated contaminants and potential sources. Problem contaminants
include: low molecular weight polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
(LPAH), high molecular weight polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
(HPAH), PCBs, cadmium, mercury, copper, lead, and zinc. Concentra-
tions of contaminants were considered significant if levels were elevated
more than ten times above reference levels. Problem subareas were
prioritized in 1988 based on information in the Initial Data Summaries
and Problem Identification report by Tetra Tech (1988) and on infor-
mation provided by work group members and citizens during the plan
development process.
Puget Sound Naval
Shipyard Shoreline
Sediments in most of the nearshore area adjacent to the PSNS are
severely contaminated. While some of the data characterizing surface
sediment conditions may no longer be relevant due to dredging, the data
indicate that these sediments have contaminant concentrations much
greater than those of Puget Sound reference areas (i.e., areas not
directly influenced by pollution) for all organic and inorganic com-
15
-------
Introduction
pounds tested. For example, concentrations of PCBs in some samples
were 1,000 times greater than reference area samples. Muscle tissue of
starry flounder, Platichthys stellatus, caught from the First Street dock
has been found to contain significantly elevated concentrations of
PCBs. The highest concentration of PCBs in sediments within the study
area appear to occur between the pier structures at the PSNS. Gradi-
ents of contaminant concentrations generally decrease with distance
from these pier structures. The most likely source of sediment contam-
ination near the PSNS is from spills, leaks, surface water runoff, direct
or indirect discharges, or past disposal of waste materials generated
from the nearby shipbuilding and repair activities.
Operations began at the PSNS in 18%. Industrial wastes from the PSNS
were discharged directly to Sinclair Inlet from 18% to 1957. Industrial
wastes were discharged from the PSNS to the sanitary sewer system
connected to the Charleston WWTP from 1957 to 1979. Also from 1975
to 1979, some industrial wastes were discharged to a storm drain system
that in turn discharged directly to Sinclair Inlet. Since 1979, the shipyard
has operated an industrial waste treatment plant that collects, treats,
and discharges industrial waste effluent to the city of Bremerton's
sanitary sewer system.
Seven PSNS discharges are permitted under the NPDES program. The
combined effluent volume limitation for these discharges is approxi-
mately 11 million gallons per day and includes noncontact cooling water,
drainage water from six drydocks, and process water from a steam plant.
Additional storm drain discharges currently exist that have no effluent
limitations. Fourteen outfalls are no longer in use, but are likely histor-
ical pollution sources. There is one permitted CSO on PSNS property
that is used by the city of Bremerton. Accidental spills have been
documented on several occasions at the PSNS. The spilled material has
included raw sewage, chromic acids, and alkaline flush solutions.
Charleston Shoreline Sediments at two stations offshore of the Bremerton WWTP in Sinclair
Inlet contain concentrations of contaminants significantly higher than
concentrations in samples from Puget Sound reference areas for all
constituents tested. Concentrations of PCBs, cadmium, and mercury in
samples from this area exceed their respective lowest apparent effects
threshold (LAET) values. The LAET is the lowest concentration of an
individual contaminant above which a significant biological effect is
always observed for one of the following indicators: amphipod bioassay,
oyster bioassay, Microtox bioassay, or benthic macroinvertebrates. The
spatial extent of sediment contamination in this area is not thoroughly
defined.
Discharges from the former Charleston WWTP, a storm drain, a CSO,
and the Bremerton WWTP are the most probable sources of contami-
nation in this subarea. The Bremerton WWTP is a newly upgraded
secondary treatment plant, permitted to discharge 10.1 million gallons
16
-------
Introduction
per day of treated effluent to Sinclair Inlet. The current treatment plant
has been in operation since 1986 and receives industrial and municipal
wastewater from the city of Bremerton and PSNS. Prior to 1986, the
Charleston WWTP operated at the same location as the Bremerton
WWTP. The Charleston WWTP began operation in the late 1940s and
discharged primary-treated effluent, including sewage and wastewater
from PSNS, to Sinclair Inlet.
Upper Sinclair Inlet
Concentrations of HP AH, PCBs, cadmium, mercury, and the sum of
copper, lead, and zinc in samples from a few sediment stations within
upper Sinclair Inlet are significantly higher than concentrations from
Puget Sound reference areas. Only concentrations of LPAH are not
significantly elevated above reference levels. The concentration of
PCBs, DDT/DDD, mercury, and cadmium in these sediments exceed
LAET values. The spatial extent of sediment contamination in this area
is not well defined.
There are several potential contaminant sources in upper Sinclair Inlet.
Two private marinas are located west of Ross Point along the southern
shore of this area: Kitsap Marina and Suldan's Boat Works. Painting
and repairs are conducted at these facilities and may be potential
sources of contamination. Failing septic systems have been identified
at the head of Sinclair Inlet. These septic systems are potential sources
of fecal coliform bacteria. In addition, three former solid waste sites
that may be potential sources of contaminants exist within the upper
Sinclair Inlet drainage area.
Port Orchard
Shoreline
Mercury concentrations in samples from three stations in this area
exceed the LAET and are significantly higher than concentrations in
Puget Sound reference areas. Concentrations of cadmium and the sum
of copper, lead, and zinc do not exceed reference concentrations.
There are no data for concentrations of LPAH, HP AH, or PCBs. The
spatial extent of sediment contamination in this area is not thoroughly
defined.
Potential contamination sources in this subarea include former
WWTPs, marinas with repair and painting facilities, storm drains, and
failing septic systems east of Ross Point. Two former WWTPs operated
in this area. The former Kitsap County Sewer District (KCSD) No. 5
WWTP operated from the late 1950s until 1985. This WWTP dis-
charged primary treated wastewater, which included sanitary and indus-
trial laundry wastes associated with a veteran's home near the town of
Retsil. The plant was demolished in 1985. The former Port Orchard
WWTP operated from 1962 to 1985. Primary treated wastes, consisting
mostly of sanitary wastes, were discharged from this WWTP. In May
1985, flows from both of these plants were diverted to the current Port
Orchard/KCSD No. 5 WWTP. This secondary treatment facility has a
17
-------
Introduction
design capacity of 2.8 million gallons per day and receives sanitary and
light commercial wastewater.
Central Sinclair Inlet
The sediments of central Sinclair Inlet have contaminant concentra-
tions that are significantly higher than Puget Sound reference area
concentrations. Concentrations of di-n-butyl phthalate, DDD, cad-
mium, chromium, mercury, and nickel in the sediments from this area
also exceed LAET values. The spatial extent of sediment contamina-
tion in this area is not well defined. Samples of muscle tissue of English
sole caught in Sinclair Inlet contain significantly elevated concentra-
tions of PCBs, arsenic, mercury, and chromium. Contamination in this
subarea may originate from sources along the PSNS, Bremerton, and
Port Orchard shorelines and from ship traffic.
Outer Sinclair Inlet
Sediment samples from outer Sinclair Inlet contain concentrations of
LPAH, HP AH, cadmium and mercury that are significantly higher than
concentrations in samples from Puget Sound reference areas. Concen-
trations of PCBs and the sum of copper, lead, and zinc do not exceed
reference levels. Concentrations of fluoranthene, pyrene, benz(a)an-
thracene, chrysene, indeno-(l,2,3-c,d)pyrene, DDT, dibenzo-
thiophene, nickel, and chromium exceed LAET values. The spatial
extent of sediment contamination in this area is not well defined. There
are no known potential contaminant sources near Outer Sinclair Inlet.
However, contamination may result from sources in the PSNS shoreline
and Port Orchard shoreline areas.
Oyster Bay
Contaminant concentrations in the sediments of Oyster Bay do not
exceed reference area concentrations or LAET values. The spatial
extent of sediment contamination in this area is not well defined. There
are no data for sediment concentrations of LPAH, HP AH, or PCBs.
Port Washington
Narrows
The sum of copper, lead, and zinc in sediments off Lions Park exceed
Puget Sound reference area concentrations. HP AH concentrations in
sediment from Phinney Bay are significantly higher than Puget Sound
reference area concentrations. Phinney Bay sediments also exceed the
LAET for chromium. Very few data on sediment contamination exist
for the entire Lions Park/Port Washington Narrows area. Fecal coli-
form bacteria levels in this subarea are above state criteria for commer-
cial shellfish harvesting.
Several potential sources of chemical and microbial contamination are
currently located or were once located along Port Washington Narrows.
Potential sources of chemical contamination include: the former pri-
mary Manette WWTP, which received wastewater from residential
areas and light commercial activities as well as approximately 10 percent
of the wastewater discharged from PSNS; the former Chevron bulk
18
-------
Introduction
storage facility; storm drains; nine CSOs; the Bremerton Yacht Club;
and the Port Washington Marina. Sources of microbial contamination
include the numerous existing storm drains and CSOs that are located
in the area, as well as nonpoint pollution sources.
Dyes Inlet With the exception of PCBs and cadmium, concentrations of contami-
nants tested (three organic compounds and five metals) were signifi-
cantly higher than Puget Sound reference area concentrations. LAET
values were exceeded for chromium, nickel, and mercury. The spatial
extent of sediment contamination is not thoroughly defined. English
sole from Dyes Inlet have significantly elevated concentrations of PCBs
and chromium in their tissues. In addition, present levels of fecal
coliform bacteria prevent commercial harvesting of shellfish and pose
a potential threat to the health of recreational harvesters.
The primary historical sources of toxic contaminants to Dyes Inlet are
the Navy's ordnance handling and demilling facility located on the
western shore of Ostrich Bay (Jackson Park), and the former Silverdale
WWTP, which discharged primary-treated effluent to Dyes Inlet from
1954 to 1978. Bacterial contamination sources include numerous CSOs
and emergency lift station overflows, failing septic systems, and
stormwater runoff.
19
-------
20
-------
1990 Action Plan for Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
Many planned or ongoing actions to control contaminant inputs to the
project area are part of comprehensive programs or planning activities
of federal, state, and local government agencies. The first part of this
section describes these programs. The second part of this section
presents a detailed action plan for controlling contaminant discharges
to priority problem areas and implementing other relevant actions.
Comprehensive Plans and Programs
Comprehensive plans and programs apply to a large portion of the study
area (e.g., basin plans) or a category or grouping of sources or activities
(e.g., stormwater management programs or development of best man-
agement practices for an industrial category). The following programs
and plans are described in terms of actions that can be taken to identify
or control ongoing sources of contamination to the project area. Pro-
grams and plans are discussed according to major implementing agency,
local government body, or tribe.
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
EPA oversees state delegated programs and ensures that federal mini-
mum standards are attained. EPA has primary regulatory authority for
ensuring compliance of federal facilities with environmental regula-
tions. EPA also provides technical support to state and local agencies
in the planning and development of environmental protection pro-
grams.
Interagency
Agreements
In conjunction with Ecology and the Authority, EPA is seeking to reach
agreement with each of the military installations on Puget Sound re-
garding the PSWQMP. Because of the similarity of issues to be ad-
dressed by the Urban Bay Action Program and the PSWQMP, the three
agencies and the Navy agreed to use the Urban Bay Action Program as
the primary mechanism for identifying and resolving water quality issues
at the PSNS and Jackson Park complex. If the 1990 Sinclair and Dyes
Inlets Action Plan does not adequately address PSWQMP issues or
concerns, the PSEP agencies will pursue additional discussions with the
Navy.
Superfund Hazard
Evaluation
EPA evaluates hazardous materials sites for inclusion on the Superfund
National Priorities List. This evaluation is conducted through a hazard
ranking system (HRS) that requires information from responsible par-
ties for site ranking. Both the PSNS and the Jackson Park complex are
21
-------
7990 Action Plan
on the federal docket for National Priorities List evaluation and have
been placed in the Navy's Installation Restoration Program. A final
revised HRS is being completed, and EPA has deferred requesting
resubmission of preliminary site assessments until the new HRS is
finalized.
Federal Facility
Permits
EPA regulates point source discharges from federal facilities via the
NPDES program established under the federal Clean Water Act. For
nonfederal facilities, the NPDES program was delegated by EPA to
Ecology, with EPA retaining oversight responsibilities. The NPDES
program requires permits for the discharge of pollutants from any point
source into waters of the United States including stormwater and
certain discharges from vessels (i.e., NPDES permits are not required
for properly functioning marine engines, vessel sewage, or laundry and
galley wastes). NPDES permits may require effluent limitations
(concentration or total loading) for toxic contaminants and may include
provisions for instituting BMPs to reduce nonpoint contaminant inputs
that are discharged through a point source. Such permits will also
regularly require chemical, biological, and volume monitoring to ensure
compliance with the intent of the NPDES regulations. This may include
effluent and receiving water monitoring and sediment sampling.
Under Section 304(/)(1)(B) of the Clean Water Act, all navigable
waters that do not meet water quality standards due to point source
discharges of toxic pollutants are to be identified on a prioritized listing.
Individual control strategies are required for each discharger to these
identified waters. These control strategies may consist of either a draft
or final revised NPDES permit or Superfund record of decision. Sin-
clair Inlet is currently included on the state of Washington's 304(/) list;
therefore, EPA will need to reopen and revise the PSNS NPDES
permit. EPA also conducts multimedia inspections at federal facilities
to evaluate the effectiveness of source control measures for compliance
with NPDES, RCRA, and air and toxics permits. The PSNS and
Jackson Park complex are the only federal facilities regulated by EPA
in the project area.
General Stormwater
Regulations
EPA is scheduled to issue national stormwater management regulations
for cities with populations under 100,000 by October 1992. These
regulations will include permit requirements, prohibition of non-
stormwater discharges to storm sewers, and requirements for control-
ling the discharge of pollutants to the maximum extent practicable. In
addition, Ecology will be preparing guidance and minimum require-
ments for stormwater management programs. The cities of Bremerton
and Port Orchard, and unincorporated areas such as Silverdale will
likely be affected by these stormwater regulations and requirements.
22
-------
1990 Action Plan
Permit Review
EPA reviews and comments on all significant permits for dredging and
fill operations in navigable waters under Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act. While the programs
are implemented by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, modifications
required by EPA concerning environmental protectiveness and wet-
lands impacts may be included as stipulations of the final permits.
Federal facilities with dredging or fill operations are required to apply
for permits under these programs.
U.S. Navy
The U.S. Naval Sea Systems Command operates the PSNS and the
Jackson Park housing complex. The Naval Hospital also administers
part of the Jackson Park complex. The U.S. Naval Submarine Base,
Bangor, which has stormwater runoff to the Dyes Inlet watershed, is
under control of the Commander-in-Charge of the Pacific Fleet. The
Naval Facilities Systems Command (NAVFAC) provides technical sup-
port to Navy projects including management and oversight of environ-
mental studies.
Sediment
Contamination
Existing data indicate that sediments in the area adjacent to the PSNS
are severely contaminated. Some of the data characterizing surface
sediment conditions within the PSNS boundary may no longer be
relevant because dredging has occurred since sediments were sampled.
No post-dredging sampling has been conducted to recharacterize sedi-
ments in the area. Additional sediment characterization is needed to
complete the site investigations and hazard evaluation. The PSNS will
initiate site investigations for sediment contamination near the shipyard
and potentially unidentified sources of contaminants in the spring of
1990. The target date for completing the investigations is mid-1991.
The Navy is developing a more specific schedule for the particular
components of the site investigations. Conducting the site investiga-
tions is a critical step in completing the HRS evaluation under Section
120 of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act.
There are currently no sediment remedial actions planned at the PSNS;
however, the Navy will examine the need and feasibility of sediment
remedial alternatives in contaminated areas of the shipyard, including
areas scheduled for dredging. Pier D (Delta) will be dredged by mid-
1992 (Figure 6). Sediments near Pier D were recently sampled [per
anticipated requirements of Section 10 of the River and Harbors Act,
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, and the Puget Sound Dredged
Disposal Analysis (PSDDA) process] for metals, base neutrals, acids,
and chlorinated pesticides in association with the anticipated dredging.
Based on the sampling results, PSNS will not be seeking in-water
disposal of the dredged material. Pier 5 may also be dredged in the
future. The Navy does not routinely perform post-dredging sampling;
thus, there is no accurate record of the extent of existing sediment
contamination near the shipyard.
23
-------
1990 Action Plan
NPDES Permit
There are seven outfalls (numbers 003,004,008,018,019,021, and 022)
regulated by the shipyard's current NPDES permit. This permit is due
to expire 11 September 1991. The contaminant content of the effluent
from these outfalls is inadequately characterized. Most outfalls have
been characterized using only single grab samples, which may not be
representative due to potential short-term variability in flow and com-
position of the effluent. Outfalls discharge various wastewaters, includ-
ing non-contact cooling water and stormwater.
The NPDES permit required the development of a BMP plan by
March 1989. The plan was to address the prevention or minimization
of toxic releases from site runoff, spills and leaks, sludge and waste
disposal, drainage from material storage, and drydock activities. An Oil
Spill Prevention and Countermeasure Plan, a Non-Radioactive Hazard-
ous Material Spill Contingency Plan, and a Hazardous Waste Manage-
ment Plan were prepared by PSNS in September 1987, August 1988,
and April 1989, respectively. These plans collectively address spills,
leaks, and hazardous waste disposal. A BMP plan was prepared in
September 1987 specifically for drydock activities including sandblast-
ing operations. By definition, BMP design and implementation are
subject to ongoing review and improvement.
Stormwater
Approximately 75 stormwater outfalls are present at the PSNS. Only
seven of the 75 outfalls are covered by the current NPDES permit.
Approximately 60 of the outfalls are relatively small storm drains, but
still have the potential for transporting contaminants from localized
spills and industrial activities. Although the drain system is mapped,
there is no sampling or routine monitoring of the storm drains. PSNS
has no existing BMPs for controlling the quality of site runoff from
general industrial areas. PSNS will develop specific BMP plans for
general site runoff as guidance is received from EPA. Some floor and
sink drains in PSNS facilities may still be directly connected to the
stormwater system. The system has not been evaluated with respect to
cross-connections of small drains or potential pollutant loadings. Exist-
ing plans for stormwater BMPs will be evaluated and revised or ex-
panded as required on an ongoing basis. The stormwater drainage
system will be evaluated and sediment in the storm drains will be
sampled and tested.
Non-NPDES
Discharges and
Potential
Contaminant Sources
PSNS currently discharges boiler light-up effluent directly into Sinclair
Inlet. It is important to distinguish these light-up discharges from boiler
cleaning wastes. Cleaning wastes are pumped to shore facilities for
processing and disposal. Light-up discharges are described by the Navy
as having high temperatures and high pH. The general chemical com-
position of these discharges is described by the Navy (U.S. Navy 1983)
and includes metal-based corrosion inhibitors, caustic detergents, and
other chemical additives that may be classified as dangerous waste or
even extremely hazardous waste by Ecology.
24
-------
1990 Action Plan
The Navy partially completed an Initial Assessment Study of contami-
nated areas in 1983 (U.S. Navy 1983). The Initial Assessment Study
investigated six potentially contaminated sites at the shipyard (see
Figure 6). Five sites were considered by the Navy to present no poten-
tial threat to human health or the environment. These sites were the
fill area between Mooring A and Drydock 5 (site 1), the helicopter pad
landfill (site 3), a leaking transformer site at Building 845 (site 4), the
transformer room in Building 847 (site 5), and drain outfalls (site 6) (see
Figure 6). The helicopter pad area was used to store and dispose of
various liquid industrial wastes including acids, organic degreasers, and
heavy metal plating wastes. If the helicopter pad site is no longer being
used as a waste storage site, then it will need to be formally investigated
and closed under the shipyard-wide RCRA/CERCLA process. Build-
ing 399 (site 2) was considered to present a human health threat and
PCB-contaminated soil was removed in 1983. Building 399 will be
studied as part of the preliminary assessment and site investigation for
the shipyard. Final closure and any necessary cleanup will be performed
based on recommendations of the preliminary assessment and site
investigation. The initial assessment study was not completed and will
be complemented with a preliminary assessment and source identifica-
tion study. Work on this study is scheduled to begin in March 1990.
PSNS has an industrial pretreatment plant that treats some of the
shipyard's industrial waste. PSNS monitors some toxic contaminants
from the pretreatment plant. Each pretreatment batch is sampled and
analyzed prior to its release to the Bremerton WWTP. Results of
testing the pretreatment effluent have shown the total toxic organic
levels to be as high as 1.2 parts per million. The allowable level of total
toxic organic compounds is 2.3 parts per million. Materials that are
pretreated include plating wastes and inorganic contaminants from
sheet metal production. PSNS is investigating the potential for treating
additional types of wastes at the pretreatment plant. Sludge from the
industrial waste pretreatment plant is treated as a hazardous waste.
Sludge cakes are stored in drums and disposed of as hazardous waste in
a hazardous waste landfill, such as the one in Arlington, Oregon.
Sewage from the shipyard and ships at berth is discharged directly to the
Bremerton WWTP.
Best Management
Practice
Implementation
Spills from transfer operations and breaks in system lines have been a
continuing problem at the PSNS. Spills often enter the storm drain
system that discharges directly to Sinclair Inlet. As recently as April
1989, a 50-gallon spill of hexavalent chromium plating solution spilled
into the storm drain system that discharges to the inlet. During fiscal
year 1990, the PSNS plans to install double-walled conduits (i.e., en-
closed pipes) to prevent future spills. Implementation of the hazardous
waste management and spill contingency plans should result in an
improved spill prevention and control record. The Hazardous Material
Spill Contingency Plan calls for' the formation of a spill committee to
25
-------
1990 Action Plan
take responsibility for developing and implementing specific BMPs and
spill prevention programs at the shipyard. The PSNS also plans to
upgrade the hazardous waste minimization program.
Underground Storage
Tanks
An inventory of underground storage tanks was conducted at the
shipyard in 1985. There are a total of 102 underground storage tanks
at the shipyard. Forty-seven tanks are exempt from underground stor-
age tank regulations because they are in basement vaults or are part of
a flow-through process. Two field-constructed tanks are deferred from
the regulatory requirements. There are 38 tanks that are abandoned or
closed and 15 tanks that are active and under regulation. Four tanks in
current use have been tested for leaks and 13 more will be tested by
NAVFAC in the future. A replacement program for abandoned tanks
will be specified in a formal shipyard policy.
Jackson Park
The Jackson Park Complex is currently used for housing resident and
visiting Navy personnel. The site is located on land formerly used as an
industrial landfill and ordnance handling facility. The Jackson Park
housing complex has been divided into two sites, sites 101 and 103, based
on concerns over contamination. The PSNS has jurisdiction over site
101 and the Navy hospital manages site 103. A status report and work
plan for an initial site investigation were developed for the Jackson Park
site (Hart-Crowser 1988). The initial site investigation has not been
completed because no sediment data were collected at the Jackson Park
study area. The PSNS will be revising and finalizing project plans for
conducting a remedial investigation and feasibility study for the Jackson
Park complex. Completion of plans is scheduled for July 1990. The
remedial investigation and feasibility study will be completed by January
1992. Sediment sampling and site assessment for contamination
sources will be addressed during this investigation and study.
Due to the possible contamination of shellfish by leachate from the
Jackson Park landfill, the Navy has considered banning the harvesting
of shellfish from Jackson Park beaches. The Suquamish Tribe has
objected to possible closures because the area is within their usual and
accustomed shellfishing area. Upon the recommendation of Ecology
and EPA, the Navy posted 12 signs in 1989 at Jackson Park indicating
that shellfish may be unsafe to consume. The signs were developed by
Ecology and constructed by the PSNS. The signs read "Warning—shell-
fish may be unsafe to eat due to pollution" in English, Spanish, and
Vietnamese. The PSNS will add the message in Tagalog in order to also
inform the Filipino-American community.
Clear Creek
Investigations
The Bangor Submarine Base will be conducting an investigation to
determine the potential impact of base stormwater in Clear Creek. The
study will include priority pollutant scans of sediment, groundwater, and
surface water samples. Metals, ordnance compounds, and pesticides
26
-------
1990 Action Plan
Suquamish Tribe
are known to have been used in areas that eventually drain to Clear
Creek. The study is being completed under the Navy's Installation
Restoration Program, which is designed to correct environmental prob-
lems due to past storage, handling, and disposal practices regarding
hazardous materials at Navy facilities.
The Suquamish Tribe has usual and accustomed fishing areas in Sinclair
and Dyes Inlets supported by treaty and manages several fish resource
enhancement projects.
Resource
Management
The tribe has salmon incubation faculties on Blackjack, Anderson,
Chico, Barker, and Clear Creeks. The tribe plans to add incubation
facilities to Mosher, Strawberry, and Wilson Creeks within the next
year. The tribe operates the rearing facilities at Gorst where 2 million
salmon smolts are released annually, and at Clear Creek where 50,000
smolts are released annually. Because the rearing facilities at Gorst are
on land owned by the city of Bremerton, their use is contingent upon
the continued use of the Gorst Creek pumping station by the city. The
tribe reviews plans and permits for development projects that could
affect their usual and accustomed fishing areas. The major issue of
concern to the tribe is adverse impacts to aquatic resources including
destruction of aquatic habitat. Adverse impacts can occur by excessive
silt loading, inadequate stream flow, and water quality degradation.
Tribal fisheries staff evaluate salmon spawning escapement on a weekly
basis in the fall of each year. These field evaluations consist of counting
returning adults, assessing habitat, and assisting in future TFW moni-
toring. Information gathered in these evaluations is expanded by spe-
cific habitat evaluations through the spring and summer of each year.
The tribe is increasing its role in shellfish management activities, spe-
cifically the effort to recertify Dyes Inlet for commercial harvest of
shellfish. The Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission is developing a
Puget Sound-wide water quality certification system for shellfish and a
laboratory certification program in conjunction with Ecology and DOH.
The Commission has hired a biologist to coordinate the various shellfish
activities for all western Washington tribes. The Northwest Indian
Fisheries Commission and the Suquamish Tribe will perform the follow-
ing tasks in Sinclair and Dyes Inlets:
• Assist the tribe in developing shellfish enhancement projects
• Develop an information and education program for tribal mem-
bers and the general public about tribal legal rights and respon-
sibilities regarding shellfish
• Coordinate with the Bremerton-Kitsap County Health Depart-
ment to share information on paralytic shellfish poisoning and
other monitoring efforts.
27
-------
T990 Action Plan
Planning
The Suquamish Tribe is involved in many local, state, and federal
planning processes. These include TFW, Kitsap County Groundwater
Management Plan, and Sinclair Inlet and Dyes Inlet Watershed Man-
agement Plans. The tribe provides technical and policy support to these
processes on fisheries, water quality, educational, and water resource
related issues.
Monitoring
The tribe will apply for a Centennial Clean Water Fund grant to sample
and analyze sediment, shellfish tissue, and marine water for toxic chem-
icals. The sampling effort will focus on filling data gaps in Sinclair and
Dyes Inlets, targeting potential shellfish harvest sites for commercial
recertification in Dyes Inlet, and evaluating risks to human health and
the environment. The tribe also plans to continue working with the
Bremerton-Kitsap County Health Department to monitor water quality
in tributaries to Sinclair and Dyes Inlets that contain salmon.
Washington
Department of
Ecology
In addition to the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Urban Bay Action Program,
Ecology has a number of ongoing programs and planning activities
related to toxic contamination and nonpoint pollution in the project
area. These programs and activities are described below.
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
municipal WWTPs authorize discharges throughout the plant's service
area, including CSOs. Ecology maintains two NPDES discharge per-
mits in the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets project area. These permits are for
the city of Bremerton and Port Orchard/KCSD No. 5 WWTP. The
NPDES permits for these facilities will be reissued 29 July 1992 and 7
July 1991, respectively. Industrial permits may include a storm drain
component for surface runoff as well as the wastewater discharge
component. NPDES permits may require effluent limitations (concen-
tration or total loading) for toxic contaminants and may include provis-
ions for instituting BMPs to reduce nonpoint contaminant inputs. New
NPDES regulations require property owners and tenants in certain land
use categories to submit data regarding surface water runoff. There are
currently no permitted discharges of noncontact cooling water or pro-
cess wastewater to waterways of the project area.
Watershed Nonpoint
Pollution Planning
Under Washington Administrative Code 400-12 (developed as part of
the PSWQMP), Ecology is administering a grant program that enables
local agencies to develop plans for controlling nonpoint source pollu-
tion on a watershed basis. A watershed management program for Clear
Creek and Dyes Inlet was funded by Ecology's Shorelands Program
Shellfish Unit. A watershed management program for Sinclair Inlet was
funded by Ecology's Water Quality Financial Assistance Program. The
Kitsap County Department of Community Development is the lead
28
-------
1990 Action Plan
agency for both of these watershed management programs. The Ecol-
ogy Urban Bay Action Program Coordinator attends watershed man-
agement committee meetings to coordinate the Urban Bay Action
Program with the watershed management program activities. In addi-
tion, Ecology program managers for the watershed grants receive all
written materials distributed to the Interagency and Citizen Work
Group of the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Urban Bay Action Program,
including meeting minutes and draft documents. The watershed man-
agement programs are discussed in detail in the Kitsap County Depart-
ment of Community Development section.
Monitoring
As part of the Puget Sound Ambient Monitoring Program (developed
pursuant to the PSWQMP), Ecology's Environmental Investigations
and Laboratory Services division will be collecting one sediment sample
from both Sinclair and Dyes Inlets annually. The samples will be
analyzed for sediment chemistry, sediment toxicity (using bioassays),
and benthic infaunal abundance.
Stormwater
As part of the PSWQMP, Ecology's Water Quality division Stormwater
Unit is developing an initial Stormwater program that focuses on pre-
vention and a long-term comprehensive urban Stormwater program that
focuses on remediation. The initial Stormwater program will apply to
all counties and cities in the Puget Sound watershed. The long-term
comprehensive urban Stormwater program will apply first to the six
largest cities in the Puget Sound region (including Bremerton) and then
to all cities and urbanized areas by the year 2000. In support of both
the initial Stormwater program and the long-term urban Stormwater
program, Ecology will issue rules, guidelines, and model ordinances for
Stormwater management programs by May 1991. Ecology will also
produce technical manuals for use in Stormwater management planning.
The manuals will include BMPs for the control of erosion and sedimen-
tation from construction sites, design operation and maintenance stan-
dards for public and private retention/detention facilities, and
techniques for the reduction or elimination of pollutants in runoff from
problem land uses. Interim manuals for public review will be available
in the fall of 1990, and final manuals will be released in May 1991.
Pretreatment
Ecology's Water Quality division is formulating rules for sewage pre-
treatment programs to be implemented by local jurisdictions. The city
of Bremerton's industrial survey completed in 1989 is currently being
reviewed by Ecology.
Combined Sewer
Overflows
Ecology's Water Quality division has reviewed the draft CSO control
plan that was developed by the city of Bremerton in 1989. Ecology's
comments are currently being incorporated into the final CSO control
plan.
29
-------
7990 Action Plan
Toxics
Bioaccumulation
Study
Ecology's Environmental Investigations and Laboratory Services divi-
sion is carrying out a study requested by the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
Urban Bay Action Program to determine concentrations of toxic metals
and organic chemicals in fish and shellfish in Sinclair and Dyes Inlets,
compare results to concentrations found elsewhere in Puget Sound, and
determine potential public health risks. In September and October
1989, shellfish were collected from eight sites and bottomfish were
collected from five sites where recreational harvesting occurs and where
there is little or no bioaccumulation data. Laboratory analysis of the
samples has been completed. A final report will be released in the
summer of 1990.
Shellfish Protection
Ecology's Shorelands Program Shellfish division is co-chairing an inter-
agency committee that is producing a recreational shellfish plan for
Puget Sound. A draft of the plan will be released in June 1990 and the
final plan will be completed by the end of 1990. The plan addresses the
protection of shellfish resources and the individuals who consume
shellfish. The plan addresses 146 recreational beaches throughout
Puget Sound and will include provisions for site-specific monitoring,
public notification, public involvement and education, community out-
reach, and beach restoration actions. Monitoring actions include con-
ducting sampling of shellfish for paralytic shellfish poisoning and fecal
coliform bacteria, conducting water quality sampling for fecal coliform
bacteria, and conducting upland surveys to identify probable pollution
sources. If identified sources indicate any potential for problems with
toxic chemical contamination, then shellfish would also be tested for the
chemicals of concern at the particular site. Implementation responsi-
bilities of Ecology's Shellfish Unit include: 1) implement public involve-
ment and education actions, 2) administer grants for beach restoration
and cleanup activities, and 3) coordinate with urban bay action teams
on recreational shellfish issues.
As a result of the development and findings of this plan, it is likely that
the following six beaches in Sinclair and Dyes Inlets will be closed for
recreational shellfish harvesting in 1990:
• Silverdale
• Silverdale Shoal
• Port Washington Narrows
• Ross Point
• Pioneer Quarry
• ChicoBay.
30
-------
1990 Action Plan
Education
Ecology is working with Kitsap County Public Utility District No. 1 to
implement the Kitsap Water Watchers program. This educational
program focuses citizen attention on Dyes Inlet water quality. Ecology
has given presentations on contaminated sediment in Sinclair and Dyes
Inlets to citizen volunteers in the Kitsap Water Watchers class. Ecology
is also coordinating with the U.S. Naval Submarine Base, Bangor to
develop cleanup activities related to Dyes Inlet that can be implemented
by Silverdale school children.
Agricultural
Enforcement
Under the Agricultural Compliance Memorandum of Agreement
(MOA) between Ecology, the Washington Conservation Commission,
and the Kitsap County Conservation District, Ecology refers farmers
with water quality problems to the Conservation District. If a fanner
fails to call on the Conservation District for help in developing a
conservation plan or refuses to implement an approved conservation
plan, Ecology may carry out enforcement activities based on water
quality violations.
Hazardous Waste
Sites
Ecology's Solid and Hazardous Waste division is in the process of
inspecting PSNS for compliance with RCRA and negotiating with the
shipyard on closure of Building 614. Ecology also responds to com-
plaints about hazardous waste generators in Sinclair and Dyes Inlets.
Ecology's Hazardous Waste Investigations and Cleanup division over-
sees the development and implementation of remedial cleanup plans at
closed bulk oil facilities near Sinclair and Dyes Inlets. Under the Model
Toxics Control Act, facilities such as the Unocal and Chevron bulk oil
facilities that are no longer in operation may be subject to remedial
actions. Ecology also inspects state hazardous waste sites and negoti-
ates cleanup plans under the Model Toxics Control Act.
Shoreline
Development
Ecology's Shorelands division is responsible for reviewing Shoreline
Master Plans for consistency with the State Shoreline Management Act.
In addition, Ecology reviews shoreline master permits and SEPA doc-
uments. Ecology will be adding pumpout facility requirements to all
new shoreline master permits throughout Puget Sound.
Groundwater
Protection
Ecology will provide technical assistance to Kitsap County Public Utility
District No. 1 and to Kitsap County Department of Community Devel-
opment during the development of a Kitsap County groundwater man-
agement plan. The plan will focus on the total amount of groundwater
available as a drinking water source for Kitsap County, aquifer capacity,
water district coordination, groundwater quality testing, and measures
to protect groundwater quality. A draft plan will be released in summer
1990. The final plan will be integrated with subarea plan updates for
the North Kitsap, Central Kitsap, and South Kitsap sections of the
31
-------
1990 Action Plan
County comprehensive plan. Ecology will coordinate development of
the Kitsap County Groundwater management plan with the watershed
management programs in Dyes Inlet and Sinclair Inlet.
Sediment Standards
Development
Ecology has been a lead agency or key participant in several efforts to
develop tools for evaluating and managing contaminated sediments in
Puget Sound. These efforts have included the Commencement Bay
Superfund project, PSDDA, the Urban Bay Action Program, and the
PSWQMP. Ecology is currently developing sediment quality standards,
criteria for confined disposal of dredged material, and remedial action
(cleanup) standards. In addition, guidelines for unconfined disposal of
dredged material have been developed under PSDDA. These sediment
standards and guidelines would impact sediment remedial actions,
wastewater discharges, and dredging operations in the project area.
The development of interim sediment quality criteria and remedial
standards was completed in October 1989. Final criteria and standards
will be developed by June 1990.
Washington
Department of
Fisheries
The Washington Department of Fisheries (WDF) is primarily respon-
sible for maintaining and enhancing fish resources for commercial and
recreational use, and enhancing public access.
Monitoring
As part of the Puget Sound Ambient Monitoring Program, WDF will
take one composited fish sample per year in Sinclair Inlet and one
composited fish sample every 3 years in Dyes Inlet. However, no
sampling will occur in 1990 due to funding limitations. WDF sampled
Sinclair Inlet near PSNS for bottomfish in May 1989. The results of the
bioaccumulation study done on these fish is contained in the First
Annual Report of the Puget Sound Ambient Monitoring Program
(PSWQA 1990).
Resource
Management
WDF recently completed the construction of a fishway or fish passage
facility on Chico Creek. The fishway will accommodate fish passage at
90 percent of the discharge required for spawning. There are fishways
in operation at Gorst Creek, Dickerson Creek, and Strawberry Creek
(see Figure 1). WDF inspects each fishway at least once yearly.
Fishways may be constructed at Parish Creek and Clear Creek and
upgraded at Chico Creek (upstream of the recently completed fishway)
in 1990 or 1991. There are unresolved fish passage problems at Ander-
son Creek, Heines Creek, and Kitsap Creek; fishways may be con-
structed at these creeks in the future.
32
-------
1990 Action Plan
Washington
Department of
Health
The DOH, formerly part of the Department of Social and Health
Services, is the agency responsible for regulating commercial shellfish
harvesting.
Monitoring
Ambient water quality sampling is conducted on a routine basis in both
Sinclair and Dyes Inlets. There are 14 sample locations in Sinclair Inlet
that are tested for fecal colifonn bacteria. There are 16 sample locations
in Port Washington Narrows and Dyes Inlet that are tested for fecal
colifonn bacteria. Ambient water quality is tested as often as quarterly
or as infrequently as annually, depending on funding, lab space, and
numbers of stations.
In addition to ambient monitoring, DOH will monitor water adjacent
to outfalls during storm events. In Dyes Inlet, DOH monitored marine
receiving waters near 18 stormwater runoff locations at natural drain-
ages for fecal colifonn bacteria during rain events in fall 1989. Sediment
and shellfish may also be monitored for fecal coliform bacteria if the
water quality data indicate the additional sampling is warranted. In Port
Washington Narrows, DOH will monitor six CSOs associated with the
Bremerton WWTP during storm events. Overflow volumes will also be
estimated. These storm event monitoring efforts were implemented
during the 1989-1990 wet season and coincided with significant storm
events causing overflows. This study was completed in spring 1990.
In July 1989 and March 1990, shellfish were collected at Jackson Park
in Dyes Inlet and analyzed for metals and organic chemicals, including
ordnance compounds. Additional shellfish sampling in 1991 will de-
pend on the results of the 1990 study. Shellfish at Ross Point in Sinclair
Inlet were sampled in June 1989 and tested for metals and organic
chemicals. Under the PS AMP, DOH will continue to sample shellfish
at Ross Point Monitoring will include quarterly sampling for fecal
colifonn bacteria and annual sampling (starting in April 1990) for
abundance, paralytic shellfish poisoning, fecal coliform bacteria, total
coliform bacteria, six metals, semivolatile compounds, PCBs, and pesti-
cides.
In November 1989, DOH also conducted fecal colifonn and priority
pollutant analyses in muscle, skin, and visceral tissues of sea cucumbers
harvested from at least two stations in Sinclair and Dyes Inlets.
Shellfish Restoration
Program
Dyes Inlet has been identified as a restoration study area under program
element SF-2 of the PSWQMP.
Recent wet weather marine water quality data compiled for Dyes Inlet
has demonstrated the potential for high levels of bacterial contamina-
tion resulting from stormwater runoff and municipal sewage system
overflow. The recertification of any portion of Dyes Inlet for commer-
cial shellfish harvest will be dependent on the successful implementa-
33
-------
7990 Action Plan
tion of adequate control measures for the following major pollution
sources: stormwater, sewage from failing septic tanks, and cross-con-
nections between sewage and stormwater (i.e., CSOs and EOFs).
DOH will continue to conduct wet weather and ambient water quality
studies in Dyes Inlet. However, DOH will not do any further restoration
studies until the major sources listed above are addressed.
Recreational Shellfish
Regulations
On 13 September 1989, the Washington State Board of Health ap-
proved new recreational shellfish harvest regulations which gave DOH
and local health departments the authority to monitor and classify
recreational shellfish beaches based on bacterial counts, concentrations
of toxic contaminants, and surveys of bacterial pollution sources.
Recreational harvest of shellfish can be prohibited on beaches that have
conditions representing unacceptable health hazards.
In response to the regulations on recreational shellfish harvest, DOH
will develop an MOA with the Bremerton-Kitsap County Health De-
partment by June 1990. The MOA will specify guidelines for imple-
menting and enforcing the proposed regulations and will include
provisions for ambient water and shellfish monitoring and laboratory
accountability. The MOA will also establish a procedure and criteria
for defining areas in which the county health department would post
health warnings for shellfish consumption at beaches. DOH could also
provide assistance to the county health department in conducting shore-
line and watershed sanitary surveys.
DOH will contact the Bremerton-Kitsap County Health Department
by June 1990 to begin developing a cooperative educational strategy
regarding health issues related to shellfish consumption.
Washington Parks
and Recreation
Commission
The Washington Parks and Recreation Commission has a Boater En-
vironmental Education Program to provide information and services to
the recreational boating community. The education program includes
components for boater waste disposal and boater environmental edu-
cation. The commission also operates one sewage pumpout station in
the project area.
Sewage Pumpout
Station
The commission maintains one sewage pumpout station at Illahee State
Park. No new holding tanks or pumpouts are planned for the study area.
New marinas or marinas planning to expand will be required to install
pumpout facilities as part of all new shoreline master permits.
The Washington Parks and Recreation Commission established the
Boaters Task Force to help educate boaters regarding waste issues and
to sponsor legislation to fund new sewage pumpouts. The Boaters Task
Force is a group consisting of representatives of various interest groups
34
-------
1990 Action Plan
associated with boating in Puget Sound. The task force sponsored
legislation that was passed in the 1989 legislature to fund sewage
pumpouts and environmental education efforts. Approximately
$300,000 per year will be set aside from the watercraft excise tax for
purchasing and installing pumpout stations in Washington state over
the next 5 years. The money can be used for up to 100 percent of the
purchase and installation costs of the facilities. It is estimated that
approximately six pumpouts will be installed statewide per year. Envi-
ronmentally sensitive and pristine areas will receive priority for funding
under this program. Local health departments (e.g., Bremerton-Kitsap
County Health Department) will be required to inspect pumpout facil-
ities annually. Application materials for this program are currently
available.
Education
The Boater Environmental Education Program will provide three edu-
cational signs to the marinas in Sinclair and Dyes Inlets that have
pumpout stations. These signs consist of a logo for the pumpout station,
an instruction sign for pumpout use, and an interpretive sign concerning
boating wastes. The Boater Environmental Education Program will
also distribute 400 boating survey summary flyers to people on the Port
of Bremerton mailing list.
The Washington Parks and Recreation Commission is participating in
an EPA-sponsored high school video contest called Video Visions.
Students from selected schools in the Puget Sound area produced
educational videos on the environmental impacts of boating. These
videos were judged in early 1990. These videos are available from the
commission for group presentations.
Puget Sound Water
Quality Authority
The Authority is a state agency charged with developing a comprehen-
sive plan for water quality protection in Puget Sound. A comprehensive
plan was developed in 1987, revised in 1989, and will be finalized in 1991.
The plan is currently being implemented by state agencies and local
governments.
Federal Facilities
In August 1989, PSEP agencies (i.e., the Authority, Ecology, and EPA)
sent letters to all military installations in the Puget Sound basin. The
letters listed applicable programs of the PSWQMP, how these programs
apply to each facility, and what the PSEP agencies understand to be the
status of facility activities related to the programs. The letter is the first
step in developing agreements with the facilities regarding actions to be
taken to achieve implementation of the PSWQMP. The PSNS will be
participating in this process, which will include their jurisdiction over
Jackson Park. The process of developing an agreement with the PSNS
will be coordinated with negotiations pursuant to the Sinclair and Dyes
Inlets Action Plan.
35
-------
7990 Action Plan
NPDES Permits
The Authority will be reviewing, tracking, and providing written com-
ments on NPDES permits, including those issued to military facilities.
In the most serious cases, the Authority might request that EPA reopen
federal facility permits, although the Authority prefers to resolve issues
through voluntary cooperation (e.g., as part of the urban bay process)
and through permit renewals.
Public Involvement
and Education Fund
The Public Involvement and Education (PIE) Fund was created by the
Washington state legislature in 1987 to sponsor model projects that
involve public involvement and education, community cleanup, and
environmental monitoring by members of the general public. An initial
$1,000,000 was distributed in January 1988 and June 1988. The 1988
legislature gave another $1,000,000 to sponsor two more rounds of
funding in 1989 and 1990. Proposals for the third round were due 2
October 1989 and proposals for the fourth round were due 2 April 1990.
Approximately $700,000 was granted in the third round and the remain-
ing $300,000 was distributed in the fourth round.
Washington
Department of
Natural Resources
The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) is responsible for man-
aging state owned aquatic lands, including portions of Sinclair and Dyes
Inlets.
Resource
Management
DNR leases state owned aquatic lands in Sinclair and Dyes Inlets.
During the 1990-1991 biennium, DNR will begin to incorporate into
the leasing process requirements for characterizing (and potentially
cleaning up) sediments in leased areas. DNR will establish a contami-
nated sediment team in 1990 that will address contaminated sediment
issues on DNR-leased lands.
DNR and the Port of Bremerton are in the process of developing a
harbor area management agreement. Under the proposed agreement,
the port will manage a portion of the established harbor area. The port
will also become liable for managing any contaminated sediment in the
area if it is determined that the port is responsible for the contamination.
Because DNR and Ecology do not have an MOA regarding contami-
nated sediment on state-owned aquatic lands, only DNR and the port
would be involved in any negotiations.
DNR manages the Aquatic Land Enhancement Account. This account
has money available for funding projects that involve acquisition of land
for public recreational access and public education. Account funds are
not available for improving problems associated with contaminated
sediment or water quality.
36
-------
1990 Action Plan
Washington
Department of
Transportation
The Washington Department of Transportation's (DOT) Marine Divi-
sion is responsible for operating the state ferry system. The department
is one of three sponsors of the First Street dock improvement project.
This project includes construction of a floating pier that will be used by
the Seattle-to-Bremerton passenger ferry and the Bremerton-to-port
Orchard passenger ferry. DOT will also build a new transfer span at the
existing auto ferry terminal. Construction began in September 1989 and
will be completed in one year.
Kitsap County
Department of
Community
Development
The Kitsap County Department of Community Development is respon-
sible for the Shoreline Master Program, shoreline permit application
and review process, and the SEPA process. The department is also the
lead agency for the two watershed planning efforts occurring in the
project area (i.e., Clear Creek and Dyes Inlet, and Sinclair Inlet).
Watershed Planning
Watershed management planning efforts in the project area include
development of the Dyes Inlet Watershed Management Plan and the
Sinclair Inlet Watershed Management Plan. A subarea management
plan will be produced for Clear Creek, which will be a part of the Dyes
Inlet Management Plan. These two plans are being developed under
two watershed planning grants from Ecology with funding from the
Centennial Clean Water Fund. Because the goals and jurisdiction of
the Watershed Management Program and the Urban Bay Action Pro-
gram are closely allied, a general framework has been developed to
eliminate redundancy or overlapping efforts. This framework is:
• The Urban Bay Action Program focuses on point sources of
pollution including storm drain use and management
• The Watershed Management Program focuses on nonpoint
sources of pollution.
In order to prevent duplication of effort between the Sinclair and Dyes
Inlets Urban Bay Action Program and the two Watershed Management
Programs, Ecology program managers attend meetings and receive
materials related to the other programs.
The Kitsap County Department of Community Development has de-
veloped a scope of work for each element in the Dyes Inlet and Clear
Creek watershed management plans. The department will also develop
a draft scope of work following a similar format for the Sinclair Inlet
watershed management plan. The department formed a watershed
management committee for Dyes Inlet and Clear Creek in May 1989.
A draft watershed management plan for Dyes Inlet will be completed
in April 1991. The final watershed management plan for Dyes Inlet is
scheduled to be completed and submitted to Ecology for approval in
September 1991. Development of the watershed management plan for
Sinclair Inlet will follow the same process as for Dyes Inlet and will
37
-------
7990 Action Plan
include a scope of work similar to that of the Dyes Inlet program. The
final watershed management plan for Sinclair Inlet will be submitted to
Ecology in December 1991.
The department will follow established administrative guidelines, under
Chapter 400-12 of the Washington Administrative Code, in selecting
committee participants and will aim for some overlap in membership
with the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Urban Bay Action Program work
group. In order to ensure effective implementation of the action plans,
citizen representation and involvement will be a significant element of
both watershed management committees.
Shoreline
Management
Kitsap County Department of Community Development reviews appli-
cations for shoreline permits and for compliance with SEP A. In late fall
1989, staff began to update the current Kitsap County Shoreline Man-
agement Master Plan. The county expects to have a final plan by 30
June 1990 for Ecology approval. The planning division will enforce all
regulations of the plan, including those pertaining to boating facilities,
landfills, dredge and fill activities, stormwater management, and the
design and maintenance of catchbasins and oil/water separators. The
Kitsap County Department of Community Development will continue
to work with the Kitsap County Public Works Department and the
Kitsap County Conservation District to develop shoreline master plan
guidelines and requirements for stormwater, including stormwater
BMPs.
Coordination
During development of the Dyes Inlet Watershed Management Plan
and the Sinclair Inlet Watershed Management Plan, the Kitsap County
Department of Community Development will fund staff positions in the
Kitsap County Conservation District. The conservation district will
work with the Bremerton-Kitsap County Health Department to sample
for bacteria in Sinclair Inlet and will coordinate with the Urban Bay
Action Program. The Kitsap County Department of Community De-
velopment and the Kitsap County Conservation District will work with
the Urban Bay Action Program to develop urban stormwater BMPs as
part of an information exchange program.
Kitsap County
Public Works
Department
Stormwater
Management
The Kitsap County Public Works Department is responsible for surface
water management and stormwater control at construction sites.
The department reviews engineering and hydraulics plans, issues per-
mits for grading activities, and conducts routine and emergency inspec-
tions at construction sites. The public works department is also
responsible for maintaining publicly owned stormwater systems (e.g.,
catchbasins). Retention/detention basins and oil/water separators are
38
-------
1990 Action Plan
required for all new permitted construction. Publicly owned oil/water
separators are maintained annually while private systems are required
to be maintained as needed by the owners.
The public works department is instituting a new checkup procedure
for private stormwater systems. A letter certifying that the stormwater
system is clean and functioning must be sent from the property owner
to the department by 15 September of each year. The department has
the right to spot check privately owned systems and bill the owner for
any necessary cleanup performed by the county. Stormwater BMPs are
required for new development and are based on standard engineering
practice and the King County Drainage Manual of 1979. The public
works department encourages the use of bioGltration systems when
stormwater discharges to wetlands, streams, or bodies of water. While
there are no immediate plans for a stormwater utility, the Public Works
Department is in the process of developing a new drainage ordinance.
The department will be evaluating existing ordinances in other counties
and cities for programs that would work in Kitsap County. By the end
of 1990 the ordinance should be completed, with an accompanying
drainage manual completed by June 1991.
Kitsap County
Conservation
District
The Kitsap County Conservation District monitors and controls non-
point source pollution resulting from various land uses. The conserva-
tion district works primarily with agricultural land owners to reduce
erosion, sedimentation, and bacterial contamination. The conservation
district also conducts public education activities related to these pro-
grams.
Monitoring
The conservation district conducts baseline sampling of streams for
fecal coliform bacteria. Sampling is usually linked with implementation
of BMP. The conservation district currently monitors fecal coliform
bacteria in Blackjack, Square, Ruby, and Clear creeks. The conserva-
tion district also conducted ambient fecal coliform bacteria sampling in
Sinclair Inlet from September 1987 to December 1988. Sampling was
conducted near the mouths of Blackjack, Ruby, Gorst, Anderson, Ross,
Parish, and Bailey's creeks (see Figure 1). Sampling was also conducted
at several stations in the inlet.
Resource Protection
The conservation district, in conjunction with the Soil Conservation
Service and county extension agents, develops conservation plans with
landowners. The plans primarily emphasize BMP for controlling fecal
coliform bacteria, erosion, sedimentation, nutrient and pesticide runoff
from agricultural sources. The drainages of emphasis in the project area
are Blackjack, Clear, and Dogfish creeks. The conservation plans are
an important step under the MO A between the Kitsap County Conser-
vation District, Washington Conservation Commission, and Ecology
(see Washington Department of Ecology section). Kitsap County offers
39
-------
1990 Action Plan
a tax break of up to 90 percent to landowners who implement BMPs
such as fencing off streams to prevent livestock from adversely affecting
riparian areas and contaminating waters. The conservation district
emphasizes the tax break program as an incentive for participation in
conservation plans. The conservation district received a grant to de-
velop and implement BMPs and provide technical assistance to land-
owners from September 1989 to September 1990. The conservation
district will receive money from the Dyes Inlet watershed management
process to characterize streams and shorelines, provide technical assis-
tance for developing farm plans, and develop agricultural BMPs. The
conservation district also provides technical information to landowners
interested in wetlands enhancement or restoration.
House Bill 1192, passed by the 1989 Washington legislature, enables
local conservation districts to levy assessments on developers. This law
may provide the conservation districts with a more stable funding base
for their activities.
The conservation district works closely with the Suquamish Tribe in
habitat protection and salmon enhancement projects in Blackjack,
Ruby, Squire, Ross, Anderson, Gorst, Annapolis, Clear, and Chico
creeks (see Figure 1).
Bremerton-Kttsap
County Health
Department
Among its many other duties, the Bremerton-Kitsap County Health
Department monitors water quality and shellfish (for human health
protection) and regulates onsite septic systems and solid waste disposal.
Monitoring
The health department is being contracted to conduct marine, freshwa-
ter, and shellfish monitoring under the watershed planning processes
for Sinclair Inlet, Dyes Inlet, and Clear Creek. As part of this process,
the health department will conduct the following sampling activities in
both Sinclair and Dyes Inlets starting in fall or winter 1989 and contin-
uing over the following 18-24 months:
• Ambient water quality monitoring for fecal coliform bacteria,
temperature, and salinity at 30 marine stations during a mini-
mum of 10 separate monitoring events
• Ambient water quality monitoring for fecal coliform bacteria,
specific conductance, pH, temperature, turbidity, total sus-
pended solids, and flow at 20 stream stations during a minimum
of 10 separate events
• Shellfish monitoring for fecal coliform bacteria (and possibly
heavy metals at some stations) at eight public access beaches
during a minimum of six separate monitoring events
40
-------
1990 Action Plan
• Sampling for fecal coliform bacteria at 15 marine stations and
20 freshwater stations during worst case storm conditions
• Stormwater monitoring for metals and limited organic com-
pounds, fecal coliform bacteria, conductivity, pH, temperature,
turbidity, total suspended solids, and flow at 20 storm drain
outfalls during a minimum of 10 separate monitoring events.
Source Identification
and Control
In addition to the above monitoring activities, the health department
plans to conduct source identification and control activities. Shoreline
and watershed sanitary surveys will take place concurrently with the
water quality monitoring activities. The purpose of these surveys is to
identify existing sources of contamination and subsequently correct
problems using appropriate local and state ordinances. For example:
• Failing onsite sewage disposal systems will be repaired pursuant
to Board of Health regulations
• Livestock owners with a documented need for BMPs will be
contacted and encouraged to cooperate with the Kitsap County
Conservation District
• Stormwater discharges will be assessed for illegal cross-connec-
tions with sanitary sewers, and repairs will be required when
applicable
• Municipal sewage collection systems will be evaluated for integ-
rity, and all unpermitted discharges will be referred to the
appropriate public works agency
• Marinas will continue to be addressed through an existing envi-
ronmental health division program
• Existing and historical solid waste disposal sites will be evaluated
and assessed for basic physical features, period of operation, and
potential for hazardous waste disposal.
The health department will maintain oversight of corrective action on
all regulated discharges. Sanitary surveys will also identify existing
unpermitted discharges (i.e., small industrial discharges). Source cor-
rection will be achieved through local mechanisms, or referred to
Ecology when appropriate.
Marinas
The health department received a grant to increase monitoring and
regulation of bacterial contamination from marinas. The department
has begun to inspect marina facilities, test water quality, and develop
educational programs. Data from the inspections and studies will be
applied to the development of local guidelines and ordinances for
sewage disposal at marinas.
41
-------
1990 Action Plan
Education
The health department has a health education program which includes
school talks, brochures, newsletters, and information fairs. As part of
this program, advisory signs are posted in several locations in Sinclair
and Dyes Inlets to warn citizens about potential health risks from
consuming shellfish. Signs at Evergreen Park, Lebo Field, the Annap-
olis Dock, Ross Point, and the western Sinclair Inlet shoreline warn that
shellfish may be unsafe for consumption.
The health department has a paralytic shellfish poisoning hotline (1-
800-2BE-WELL). In 1989, the message on the hotline was updated to
include information regarding general health issues associated with
water quality problems and seafood consumption. In addition, the
health department and the city of Bremerton received a PIE Fund grant
to develop a water quality interpretive program at the Bremerton
waterfront called "Sedimental Journey".
Coordination
The health department will establish cooperative monitoring agree-
ments with various local and state agencies and the Suquamish Tribe.
These informal agreements will be used to coordinate monitoring ef-
forts that may be undertaken by the various entities. The agreements
will be in place before full scale monitoring activities occur. The
department has coordinated in the past with the Navy via representation
on facility-specific technical review committees for Navy environmental
projects. Such committees are set up by the Navy once a commitment
to conduct a remedial investigation and feasibility study has been made.
The health department coordinates its household hazardous waste
collection efforts with Kitsap County Public Works. A permanent
collection facility may not be available until 1991; however, collection
days may occur in the interim period, depending on funding.
Port of Bremerton
The Port of Bremerton owns or maintains nine recreational boating and
waterfront recreation facilities, and two terminals for the commercial
passenger ferry between Bremerton and Port Orchard. At the Port
Orchard marina, the port offers sewage pumpout and waste oil collec-
tion services for tenants. Boater eduction activities include:
• Announcement of collection days for Kitsap County's house-
hold hazardous waste program
• Production of a flyer for boaters discussing safe disposal of
waste oil and toxic materials
• Inclusion of information on hazardous materials disposal in
monthly billings to marina tenants.
The port does not have any ongoing or planned dredging activities. The
port is one of three sponsors of the First Street dock improvement
project. The project is a combination marina/commuter ferry terminal
42
-------
1990 Action Plan
at the First Street dock in downtown Bremerton. The port will use the
improved ferry terminal for a passenger ferry between Bremerton and
Port Orchard.
City of Bremerton
Municipal Utilities
The city of Bremerton Municipal Utilities is responsible for construc-
tion and maintenance of the Bremerton WWTP (including CSOs and
industrial discharges) and stormwater management.
Combined Sewer
Overflows
The municipal utilities department prepared a CSO control plan as part
of its comprehensive sewer plan. The CSO control plan focused on
separation of sanitary and storm sewers, prioritized individual sewers
for abatement action, and included control of CSO events. The city of
Bremerton Comprehensive Sewer Plan, which addressed the needs and
deficiencies of the city wastewater collection system, was completed at
the end of 1989. Ecology review of the Comprehensive Sewer Plan is
underway. It is not expected that individual EOFs will be reduced
because of their sporadic and infrequent nature. In addition, the city
council recently approved $3 million for sewer improvements, storm-
water separation, and sewer reconstruction.
Industrial Discharges
As part of the NPDES permit for the Bremerton WWTP, the utilities
department recently completed a survey of industrial dischargers in the
Bremerton WWTP service area. In addition, the utilities department
conducts a program for routine industrial source monitoring and iden-
tification. This program consists of periodically testing sanitary sewers
for solids, biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), fecal coliform bacteria,
and some metals and organic compounds at key manholes (sewer line
junctures) in industrial drainage basins to identify unpermitted dis-
chargers. The PSNS discharges all of its domestic sewage and most of
its treated industrial waste effluent to the Bremerton WWTP. The
effluent from PSNS is monitored for conventional pollutants (i.e.,
BOD, total suspended solids, fecal coliform bacteria, and pH) on a
monthly basis. A priority pollutant scan is performed on PSNS effluent
once per year.
Stormwater
The municipal utilities department currently does not have a formal
stormwater program. Under the PSWQMP, the city will be required by
Ecology to develop a long-range comprehensive stormwater plan.
Stormwater management guidelines for cities with populations under
100,000 will be issued by EPA by October 1992. The utilities depart-
ment is currently considering the development of a stormwater manage-
ment utility, and will present a proposal to the city council in 1990 to
consider stormwater management alternatives. Publicly owned
catchbasins are cleaned annually to protect them from damage due to
43
-------
1990 Action Plan
debris. The city will receive approximately $10,000 from the Sinclair
Inlet Watershed Management Program to conduct stormwater quality
testing. The sampling will occur over the winter of 1990-1991.
City of Bremerton
Department of
Community
Development
Among its other duties, the city of Bremerton Department of Commu-
nity Development has responsibility for reviewing development pro-
jects for consistency with environmental regulations. The department
provides shoreline permits, develops land use regulations, is responsible
for shoreline development, and reviews projects within city limits for
compliance with SEP A. The department incorporates requirements
for the installation and maintenance of oil/water separators and deten-
tion/retention basins into shoreline permits for new development. In
addition, the department and the Bremerton-Kitsap County Health
Department received an Authority PIE Fund grant to develop a water
quality interpretive program at the Bremerton waterfront called
"Sedimental Journey".
City of Port Orchard
Public Works
The Port Orchard Public Works Department is responsible for
wastewater collection and treatment, stormwater management, shore-
line permit review, and development of public access.
Wastewater
Treatment Plant
The Port Orchard WWTP is operated jointly by the city of Port Orchard
and KCSD No. 5. Wastewater at the treatment plant undergoes sec-
ondary treatment. The incoming wastewater is 95 percent free of
stormwater due to past stormwater/sewage separation projects. In
1989, the plant influent was sampled by KCSD No. 5 specifically to
detect sources of toluene because toluene had been illegally dumped
into the WWTP system. Plant effluent is tested annually for priority
pollutants according to the plant's NPDES permit by the sewer district.
There is currently no pretreatment program due to the lack of industrial
facilities in the WWTP service area.
Sewage Connections
The public works department maintains sewer lines to reduce infiltra-
tion of stormwater and groundwater to the sewer system. Although the
utility does not have a specific schedule for reducing infiltration, annual
funding is adequate for routine maintenance.
Water Quality and
Sediment Testing
The city of Port Orchard conducts water quality testing of lower Black-
jack Creek. Samples are analyzed for fecal coliform bacteria at five
locations once in April and once in the period October through Novem-
ber. Sediment in Blackjack Creek has occasionally (e.g., annually) been
sampled and analyzed for metals.
44
-------
1990 Action Plan
Stormwater The city of Port Orchard had a stormwater detention ordinance that
applies to new developments with over 5,000 square feet of impervious
surface. The ordinance requires these new developments to have a
stormwater detention system. The ordinance also requires all new
commercial developments that may have an effect on water quality to
have oil/water separators. The maintenance program for the oil/water
separator systems is inconsistently implemented due to the lack of a
formal citywide program. The city will be receiving approximately
$7,000 from the Sinclair Inlet Watershed Management Program to
conduct stormwater quality testing. Sampling will occur over the winter
of 1990-1991.
The public works department and the Kitsap County Conservation
District jointly received an Authority PEE Fund grant to fund the
distribution of a public information brochure to prevent the dumping
of wastes into storm drains. The department is also planning to distrib-
ute educational posters and storm drain stencils in an attempt to mini-
mize the dumping of wastes into storm drains.
Site-Specific Action Plan
The site-specific action plan addresses known contaminated areas and
potential contaminant sources. The site-specific action plan is intended
to prioritize source identification, source control, and remedial activi-
ties according to priority problem areas. Table 1 presents the 1990
Action Plan for Sinclair and Dyes Inlets. Problem areas have been
slightly modified from those defined in the data summaries document
(Tetra Tech 1988) based on new information (see Figure 4). Sources
listed in Table 1 are those identified in the data summaries document
(Tetra Tech 1988) and by the members of the interagency and citizens
work group (see also Figures 5 and 6). Source characteristics and status
were identified in the data summaries document and by work group
members. Actions are those activities specifically related to source
control or contaminant remediation that have been agreed upon by the
individual agencies in the work group. The implementation date lists
actual and projected start and finish dates for each action. Limiting
factors represent requirements needed by agencies to implement spe-
cific actions. Blank areas indicate gaps in knowledge of the source
characteristics or actions to limit or remediate contamination problems.
One of the ongoing tasks of the work group is to further refine priorities
and secure commitments from participating agencies to perform addi-
tional source identification and implement source control measures.
Tables 2 through 7 summarize the actions to be taken under the Sinclair
and Dyes Inlets Action Plan. Table 2 lists areawide planning and
program development actions. Table 3 lists pollution control actions,
Table 4 lists remedial investigations, Table 5 lists monitoring activities
occurring in the project area, Table 6 lists resource protection actions,
and Table 7 presents the various educational activities and programs
45
-------
1990 Action Plan
that will be implemented. Each of these tables gives a brief description
of the action, lists the agencies involved, and notes the starting or ending
target dates when known. More detail concerning activities in the
action column can be found in the Comprehensive Plans and Programs
section of this report.
46
-------
TABLE 1. SITE-SPECIFIC ACTION PLAN
FOR SINCLAIR AND DYES INLETS PRIORITY PROBLEM AREAS
Problem Area and
Potential Sources
Source Characteristics and Status
Actions
Responsible
Entity*
Target
Date"
Limiting
Factors
Puget Sound Naval
Shipyard
PSNS NPDES Permit
Outfall 003
Outfall 004
Outfall 008
Outfall 018
Outfall 019
Noncontact compressor cooling water
and stormwater; limitations for flow and
temperature. Metals are a known
constituent of the effluent.
Seawater used as noncontact cooling
water and stormwaten limitations for flow
and temperature. Metals are a known
constituent of the effluent.
Inactive stormwater; limitations for flow
and temperature.
Drainage water from Drydocks
1-5, noncontact cooling water, and
stormwater; limitations for flow and
temperature. Metals are a known
constituent of the effluent.
Drainage from Drydock 6, noncontact
cooling water and stormwater; limitations
for flow, temperature, and oil and grease.
Metals are a known constituent of the
effluent.
Review permit
Update effluent characterization.
Update effluent characterization.
Update effluent characterization.
Update effluent characterization.
Complete implementation and
documentation of BMPs.
Update effluent characterization.
Complete implementation and
documentation of BMPs.
EPA.
PSNS
PSNS
PSNS
PSNS
PSNS
PSNS
PSNS
6/90
9/90
9/90
Deleted
from
permit
9/90
1/91
9/90
1/91
EFA permit review
EFA permit review
EPA permit review
EPA permit review
EPA permit review
permit review
-------
TABLE 1. (Continued)
Problem Area and
Potential Sources
Source Characteristics and Status
Responsible
Actions Entity'
Target
Dateb
Limiting
Factors
Outfall 021
Outfall 022
Sludge waste
-t>. disposal
Material storage
and drainage
Site runoff
Sediment
Process wastewater from steam plant
including cooling tower and boiler
Wowdown wastes, anti-corrosives, and
washdcwn drainage from coal handling
facilities; limitations for flow, pH,
temperature, suspended solids, oil and
grease, total chromium, chlorine, and
zinc. Other potential constituents of the
effluent have not been adequately
identified.
Stormwater from steam plant; limitations
for flow, pH, oil and grease.
Must address as a condition of NPDES
permit.
Must address as a condition of NPDES
permit.
Must address as a condition of NPDES
permit.
Highly contaminated with priority
pollutants including PCBs, mercury and
chromium.
Update effluent characterization.
PSNS
9/90
EFA permit review
Nonpermrtted storm Storm drains serving PSNS.
drains
Update effluent characterization.
Complete and document BMP Plan.
Complete and document BMP Plan.
Complete and document BMP Plan.
Conduct ons'rte and offeree sediment
characterization.
Update maintenance activities
Conduct engineering survey of all
Stormwater detention and treatment
facilities and conduits.
Review and update engineering plan.
Prioritize drainage areas.
Sample in-line sediments.
Develop BMPs to reduce contaminant
loading from spills.
PSNS
PSNS
PSNS
PSNS
PSNS
PSNS
PSNS
PSNS
PSNS
PSNS
PSNS
9/90
1/91
1/91
1/91
TBDC
Ongoing
6/91
6/91
6/91
6/91
6/91
Complete site
investigation
-------
TABLE 1. (Continued)
-------
TABLE 1. (Continued)
Problem Area and
Potential Sources
EOF CE-5(01 0,041)
Stormwater outfall
west of PSNS
Municipal storm
drains
Bremerton
Wastewater
Treatment Plan
(WWTP)
Bremerton
Municipal Utilities
g WWTP
EOF WB-1 (012)
EOFWB-2(011)
Stormwater outfall
west of WWTP
Upper Sinclair Inlet
Port Orchard landfill
Bremerton Auto
landfill
Source Characteristics and Status Actions
Untreated sewage. Abandoned.
Untreated Stormwater. Address by county drainage ordinance.
Untreated Stormwater. Develop Stormwater program. Consider
development of Stormwater utility
Industrial survey completed; 15 industries Finalize comprehensive sewer plan.
discharge process wastewater; source Review NPDES pe^
monitoring and identification ongoing;
limitations for flow, biochemical oxygen
demand, suspended solids, and fecal
coliform bacteria.
Untreated sewage. TBD
Untreated sewage. TBD
Untreated Stormwater. Address by county drainage ordinance.
Closed municipal landfill. Monitor (annually to semiannually).
Closed automobile landfill Monitor (annually to semiannually).
Responsible
Entity"
BMU
WDOT/Kitsap
County
BMU
BMU
Ecology
KCSD No.1
KCSD No.1
WDOT/Kitsap
County
BKCHD/Ecology
BKCHD/Ecology
Target
Dateb
4/1/90
1990
1990-91
1990
7/92
TBD
TBD
1990
Ongoing
Ongoing
Limiting
Factors
.
-
City Council approval
-
-
-
-
-
-
Former garbage
dump SE of Gorst
Closed since 1950s; sited on shoreline;
pollution potential unknown.
Monitor (annually to semiannually).
BKCHD/Ecology
TBD
Insufficient personnel
-------
TABLE 1. (Continued)
Problem Area and
Potential Sources
Demolition landfill
Kitsap Marina
Suldarfe Boat
Works
Failing septic
systems
Port Orchard
Stormwater outfalls
(4 identified)
Dockside Sales and
Service
Port Orchard
Marina
Port Orchard
Marine Railways
Port Orchard Yacht
Club
Sinclair Inlet Yacht
Source Characteristics and Status
Closed landfill with automobiles, scrap
metal, and construction debris.
Boat repair and painting facilities. No
sewage pumpout facilities.
Boat repair and painting facilities. No
sewage pumpout facilities.
Source of fecal coliform bacteria.
Untreated stormwater.
Boat repair and painting facilities. No
sewage pumpout facilities.
Routine maintenance of pleasure craft
only.
Boat repair and painting facilities. No
sewage pumpout facilities.
Boat repair and painting facilities. No
sewage pumpout facilities.
Routine maintenance of pleasure craft
Actions
Monitor (annually to semiannualry).
Inspect; develop BMPs.
Inspect; develop BMPs
Address interim measures and
maintenance by watershed management
committee.
Correct failed systems.
TBD
Inspect; develop BMPs.
Inspection; develop BMPs.
Inspect; develop BMPs.
Inspect; develop BMPs.
Inspect; develop BMPs.
Entity*
BKCHD/Ecotogy
Ecology
Ecology
KCDCD/
BKCHD
BKCHD
POPW
Ecology
Ecology
Ecology
Ecology
Ecology
Target Limiting
Date" Factors
Ongoing -
6/92
6/92
12/91
Ongoing
TBD Ecology stormwater
guidelines to be
issued 5/91
6/92
6/92
6/92
6/92
6/92
Club
only.
-------
TABLE 1. (Continued)
Problem Area and
Potential Sources
Horluck
Transportation
Company
Failing septic
systems
Port Orchaid/Kitsap
Source Characteristics and Status
Oil sheen; dispersants.
Source of fecal coliform bacteria.
Limitations for flow, biochemical oxygen
Actions
Inspect; develop BMPs.
Address by watershed management
committee.
Review NPDES permit.
Responsible
Entity"
Ecology
KCDCD/
BKCHD
Ecology
Target
Date"
6/92
12/91
7/91
Limiting
Factors
-
_
_
County Sewer demand, suspended solids, fecal coliform
District (KCSO) bacteria
No. 5 WWTP
Central Sinclair Inlet
ui Outer Sinclair Inlet
to
CSO OF-7 (003)
Lion* Park/Port
Washington Narrows
Storrrrwater outfall
(Manette Point)
CSO OF-1 (036)
CSO OF-2 (030)
CSO OF-3 (028)
CSO OF-4 (033)
Untreated sewage and stormwater.
Untreated stormwater.
Untreated sewage and stormwater.
Untreated sewage and stormwater.
Untreated sewage and stormwater.
Untreated sewage and stormwater.
CSO OF-10A (026) Untreated sewage and stormwater.
Consider according to CSO plan.
TBD
Consider according to CSO plan.
Consider according to CSO plan.
Consider according to CSO plan.
Consider according to CSO plan.
Consider according to CSO plan.
BMU
BMU
BMU
BMU
BMU
BMU
BMU
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
Ecology stormwater
guidelines to be
issued 5/91
-------
TABLE 1. (Continued)
Problem Area and
Potential Sources
CSOOF-11 (025)
CSO OF-12 (024)
Stormwater outfalls
(5 identified)
Former Chevron
facility
Former Unocal
facility
Port Washington
Marina
Bremerton Yacht
Club
Oyster Bay
Dyes Inlet
Jackson Park
complex
Underground
storage tanks
Source Characteristics and Status
Untreated sewage and stormwater.
Untreated sewage and stormwater.
Untreated stormwater.
Petroleum products and untreated
stormwater.
Petroleum products and untreated
stormwater.
Boat repair and painting facilities. No
sewage pumpout facilities.
Boat repair and painting facilities. No
sewage pumpout facilities.
Ordnance compounds, waste oils,
solvents, acids, and metals.
Current situation report completed.
Preliminary Assessment incomplete.
Actions
Consider according to CSO plan.
Consider according to CSO plan.
TBD
Oversee development and
implementation of cleanup plan.
Conduct initial investigation.
Inspect; develop BMPs.
Inspect; develop BMPs.
Conduct remedial investigation/feasibility
study including aquatic sediment and
shellfish tissue sampling and general site
assessments.
Final project plans
Draft remedial investigation/feasibility
study
Conduct shellfish tissue sampling.
Confirm tank address or register for
closure.
Responsible
Entity4
BMU
BMU
BMU
Chevron
Ecology
Ecology
Ecology
PSNS
PSNS
DOH
PSNS
Target Limiting
Date" Factors
TBD
TBD
TBD Ecology stormwater
guidelines to be
issued 5/91
1990d
6/91
6/91
6/91
7/90
1/92
1989-91
1/92
-------
TABLE 1. (Continued)
Problem Area and
Potential Sources
Source Characteristics and Status
Actions
Responsible
Entity*
Target
Dateb
Limiting
Factors
Bangor Submarine
Base stormwater
runoff to Clear
Creek
Potentially contaminated with metals,
ordnance compounds, and pesticides.
Finalize work plan.
Conduct final remedial investigation/
feasibility study
Bangor
Submarine Base
Bangor
Submarine Base
6/90
5/92
a BMU - Bremerton Municipal Utilities
BKCHD - BremertorvKitsap County Health Department
Ecology - Washington Department of Ecology
KCDCD - Kitsap County Department of Community Development
KGSD#1 - Kitsap County Sewer District No. 1
POPW - Port Orchard Public Works
PSNS - U.S. Navy Puget Sound Naval Shipyard
WDOT - Washington Department of Transportation.
b Ending date for action, except where noted.
c TBD - To be determined.
d Starting date for action.
-------
TABLE 2. PLANNING AND PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
Action
Agencies Involved
Target Date*
Limiting Factors
Final Puget Sound Water Quality
Management Plan
Watershed management plans for non-
point source pollution control
Dyes Inlet
Clear Creek sub-area
Sinclair Inlet
01 Bremerton harbor area management
01 plan
County shoreline master plan revision
Industrial survey for Gorst and other un-
incorporated areas
Feasibility study for sewer extension to
Gorst area
Agricultural BMP development in
Blackjack, Clear, and Dogfish creek
drainages
Comprehensive sewer and CSO control
plan
Puget Sound Water Quality
Authority
Kitsap County Department of
Community Development, respec-
tive watershed management
committees
Department of Natural Resources,
Port of Bremerton
Kitsap County Department of
Community Development
Kitsap County Department of
Community Development
Kitsap County Department of
Community Development
Kitsap County Conservation
District
Bremerton Municipal Utilities
Draft 12/90
Final 6/91
5/91 - 9/91
5/91 - 9/91
7/91 - 12/91
Ongoing
6/90
TBDb
Ongoing
Draft Final
completed 1990
Not currently funded
Not currently funded
Under review by Ecology
-------
TABLE 2. (Continued)
Action
Agencies Involved
Target Date*
Limiting Factors
Development of rules, guidelines, and
model ordinances for stormwater
Development of BMP manual for
stormwater
Stormwater management requirements
for cities with populations less than
100,000
Development of new drainage ordinance
for Kitsap County
Development of drainage manual
Development of sediment quality
standards, dredge disposal criteria, and
remedial action criteria
Bremerton municipal industrial inventory
and BMP assessment
Port Orchard municipal industrial inven-
tory and BMP assessment
Ecology
Ecology
EPA
Kitsap County Public Works
Department, Ecology
Kitsap County Public Works
Department, Ecology
Ecology
Bremerton Municipal Utilities
Port Orchard Public Works
Department
5/91
Draft 6/90
Final 5/91
1992
12/90
6/91
6/90
Completed
7/91
Need pretreatment guidelines
from Ecology
Ecology NPDES permit review
Note: All actions pertain to both Sinclair and Dyes Inlets unless otherwise indicated.
a Ending date for action.
b TBD - to be determined.
-------
TABLE 2. (Continued)
Action
Agencies Involved
Target Date*
Limiting Factors
Development of rules, guidelines, and
model ordinances for stormwater
Development of BMP manual for
stormwater
Stormwater management requirements
for cities with populations less than
100,000
Development of new drainage ordinance
for Kitsap County
Development of drainage manual
Development of sediment quality
standards, dredge disposal criteria, and
remedial action criteria
Bremerton municipal industrial inventory
and BMP assessment
Port Orchard municipal industrial inven-
tory and BMP assessment
Ecology
Ecology
EPA
Kitsap County Public Works
Department, Ecology
Kitsap County Public Works
Department, Ecology
Ecology
City of Bremerton
City of Port Orchard
5/91
Draft 6/90
Final 5/91
1992
12/90
6/91
6/90
Completed
7/91
Need pretreatment guidelines
from Ecology
Ecology NPDES permit review
Note: All actions pertain to both Sinclair and Dyes Inlets unless otherwise indicated.
a Ending date for action.
b TBD - to be determined.
-------
TABLE 3. POLLUTANT CONTROL ACTIONS
Action
Agencies Involved
Target Date*
Limiting Factors
NPDES Permits:
Review PSNS NPDES permit; evaluate EPA
current discharges including storm-
water, ship boiler light-up and ship
boiler blowdowns.
Implement drydock BMP plan. PSNS
Identify, develop, and implement site- PSNS, EPA
specific BMPs beyond drydock areas.
Develop spill prevention and PSNS
countermeasure plans.
Characterize PSNS outfall effluent. EPA, PSNS
Conduct PSNS industrial drain and EPA, PSNS
storm drain sampling, mapping,
prioritization, and BMP development
and implementation.
Maintain PSNS storm drain systems PSNS
including oil/water separators and
catch basins.
Review Bremerton WWTP NPDES Ecology
permit.
Review Port Orchard WWTP NPDES Ecology
permit.
6/90
1/91
Ongoing6
Ongoing
12/90
6/91
1/91
7/92
7/91
-------
TABLES. (Continued)
Action
Agencies Involved
Target Date*
Limiting Factors
Section 10/404 Permits:
Conduct PSNS sediment sampling
adjacent to Pier D for dredged
material evaluation.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
PSNS, EPA
Mid-1991 to
Mid-1992
RCRA/CERCLA Closure Process:
Continue process for PSNS industrial
storage, disposal, and contaminated
sites.
-------
TABLE 3. (Continued)
Action
Agencies Involved
Target Date*
Limiting Factors
Require construction and main-
tenance of retention/detention basins
and oil water separators for all new
permitted construction within
Bremerton.
Require construction and main-
tenance of retention/detention basins
and oil/ water separators for all per-
mitted construction within Port
Orchard.
Encourage use of constructed biofil-
tration swales for processing storm-
water runoff in unincorporated areas.
Provide technical assistance for devel-
opment of water quality management
plans for farms under Agricultural
Compliance Memorandum of Agree-
ment among Ecology, Washington
Conservation Commission, and Kitsap
County Conservation District.
Conduct enforcement inspections,
and permitting activities under
Agricultural Compliance Memorandum
of Agreement.
Develop BMPs for stormwater
management.
Bremerton Department of
Community Development
Ongoing
Ecology stormwater guidelines
to be issued 5/91
Port Orchard Public Works
Department
Kitsap County Public
Works Department
Kitsap County Conservation
District
Ongoing
Ecology stormwater guidelines
to be issued 5/91
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ecology
Ongoing
Kitsap County Conservation
District, Ecology
TBDC
Not currently funded
-------
TABLES. (Continued)
Action
Establish waste oil collection service
for marina tenants.
Improve sewers, separate stormwater,
reconstruct sewers.
Agencies Involved
Port of Bremerton
Bremerton Municipal Utilities
Target Date*
Ongoing
Ongoing
Limiting Factors
—
Note: All actions pertain to both Sinclair and Dyes Inlets unless otherwise indicated.
a Ending date for action.
b Pending discussion with EPA.
0 TBD - To be determined.
o>
-------
TABLE 4. REMEDIAL INVESTIGATIONS
o>
ro
Actkxi
RCRA/CERCLA investigation of PSNS
RCRA/CERCLA facility assessment at PSNS
PSNS hazard evaluation and site ranking
PSNS groundwater monitoring at Building
Site 614
Sediment characterization of northwest Sinclair
Inlet to define problem areas
Jackson Park hazard evaluation and site
ranking
Jackson Park remedial investigation/feasibility
study (RI/FS) including underground storage
tank investigation, sediment characterization,
and bioaccumulation sampling
Complete draft work plan
Complete final work plan
Draft RI/FS
Final RI/FS
Agencies Involved
EPA, Ecology
PSNS, EPA, Ecology
EPA
PSNS, Ecology, EPA
PSNS
EPA
PSNS
Target Date'
Ongoing
3/90b
Late- 1991
9/91
Mid-1991
Late-1991
5/90
7/90
1/92
TBDC
Limiting Factors
-
--
-
-
To be included in
site investigation
-
-
Bulk fuel storage site inspections in Port
Washington Narrows
Ecology
6/91
-------
TABLE 4. (Continued)
Action
Agencies Involved
Target Date*
Limiting Factors
Clear Creek toxic contaminant investigations
Work Plan
Draft RI/FS
Final RI/FS
Bangor Submarine
Base
6/90
2/92
5/92
Note: All actions pertain to both Sinclair and Dyes Inlets unless otherwise indicated.
* Ending date for action, except where noted.
g>
b Starting date for action.
0 TBD - To be determined.
-------
TABLE 5. MONITORING ACTIONS
Action
Agencies Involved
Target Date*
Limiting Factors
Stream monitoring for fecal coliform
bacteria
Ambient water quality monitoring for
fecal coliform bacteria at marine and
stream stations
Water quality sampling at marinas
Grant application for Centennial Clean
Water Fund for water and sediment
quality sampling in Dyes Inlet
Water quality sampling for fecal coliform
bacteria in Sinclair Inlet
Ambient water quality sampling for fecal
coliform bacteria
Water quality testing for fecal coliform
bacteria in Blackjack Creek
Water quality and habitat monitoring in
salmon-producing streams
PSAMPC sediment triad sampling
Jackson Park shellfish sampling for toxic
chemicals, followup
Shellfish and fish toxic chemical bioac-
cumulation study
Kitsap County Conservation Dis-
trict
Bremerton-Kitsap County Health
Department (Local Health)
Local Health Department
Suquamish Tribe
Kitsap County Department of
Community Development, Local
Health
Washington Department of Health
(DOH)
Port Orchard Public Works
Suquamish Tribe, Local Health
Ecology
DOH
Ecology
Ongoing
Late 1989-
late 1991
1/90b
Early 1991
1990
Quarterly
Semiannually
Annually
Annually
6/89-12/89, 3/90,
1991
9/89-8/90
-------
TABLES. (Continued)
Action
Agencies Involved
Target Date*
Limiting Factors
PSAMP shellfish sampling for fecal coli-
forms
PSAMP shellfish sampling for toxics
Memorandum of agreement on recrea-
tional shellfish beaches
Shellfish monitoring for fecal coliform
bacteria at marine and stream stations
Cooperative monitoring agreements for
water quality and shellfish
Sea cucumber sampling for fecal coli-
form bacteria and toxics
PSAMP fish sampling for toxic chemicals
in Sinclair Inlet
PSAMP fish sampling for toxic chemicals
in Dyes Inlet
Storm event monitoring for fecal coliform
bacteria at natural drainages in Dyes
Inlet
Storm event monitoring for fecal coliform
bacteria at CSOs in Sinclair Inlet
Stormwater monitoring for fecal coliform
bacteria
Stormwater monitoring for fecal coliform
bacteria and metals in Sinclair Inlet
DOH
DOH
DOH, Local Health
Local Health
Local Health, DOH, Suquamish
Tribe, Bremerton Municipal Utili-
ties
DOH
Washington Department of Fish-
eries (WDF)
WDF
DOH
DOH
Local Health
Bremerton Municipal Utilities
1989b quarterly
1989b, annually
Completed
Late 1989-late 1991
1990
11/90-1/91
Annually
Every 3 years
Completed
Fall 1989-
spring 1990
Late 1989-
late 1991
Winter 1990-1991
-------
TABLES. (Continued)
Action
Agencies Involved
Target Date8
Limiting Factors
CD
o>
Stormwater monitoring for fecal coliform
bacteria and metals in Sinclair Inlet
Storm drain monitoring
Advice to agencies on program devel-
opment for monitoring stormwater out-
falls
Monitoring of effluent from Port Orchard
WWTP
Monitoring of sanitary effluent from
PSNS (total suspended solids and bio-
chemical oxygen demand)
Industrial waste treatment plant effluent
monitoring
Metal finishing chemical list
Full priority pollutant list
Sampling of combined sanitary and
industrial pretreatment effluent from
Bremerton WWTP (priority pollutants)
Industrial source monitoring of sewers
for conventional pollutants and some
toxic chemicals
Monitoring of closed landfills
Port Orchard Public Works De-
partment
Puget Sound Naval Shipyard
(PSNS)
Suquamish Tribe
Port Orchard Public Works
PSNS
PSNS
Bremerton Municipal Utilities
Bremerton Municipal Utilities
Local Health
Winter 1990-1991
6/91
As requested
Ongoing, annually
(priority pollutants)
Ongoing, monthly
Ongoing, per batch
discharge
Ongoing, annually
Ongoing, annually
Ongoing
Quarterly
NOTE: All actions pertain to both Sinclair and Dyes Inlets unless otherwise indicated.
a Ending date for action, except where noted.
b Starting date for action.
c PSAMP - Puget Sound Ambient Monitoring Program.
-------
TABLE 6. RESOURCE PROTECTION ACTIONS
Action
Shellfish management in Dyes Inlet
Agencies Involved
Suquamish Tribe, Washington
Target Date
Ongoing
Limiting Factors
—
Habitat protection and maintenance of
salmon enhancement facilities
Fishway construction and operation
Section 10/404 permit review
Section 10/404 permit issuance
Shoreline permit, and building and
rezoning permit review of development
projects
SERA review
Department of Health, Bremerton-
Kitsap County Health Department,
Ecology
Suquamish Tribe, Washington
Department of Fisheries (WDF), Kitsap
County Conservation District
WDF
U.S. EPA
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Kitsap County Department of Commu-
nity Development, Bremerton Depart-
ment of Community Development, Port
Orchard Public Works, Ecology
All agencies
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
NOTE: All actions pertain to both Sinclair and Dyes Inlets unless otherwise indicated.
-------
TABLE 7. EDUCATIONAL ACTIONS
Action
Post Jackson Park shellfish harvest
advisory signs
Post shellfish harvest advisory signs
Agencies Involved
PSNS
Bremerton-Kitsap County Health
Target Date*
Completed
Ongoing
Limiting Factors
Develop shellfish harvest educational
programs
Develop educational materials on
shellfish contamination
Develop water quality interpretive dis-
play at downtown Bremerton waterfront
Provide educational signs to marinas
with pumpout stations
Distribute boating survey summary flyers
Distribute fryers about facilities at
marinas for disposal of waste oil and
toxics
Present boater education programs to
groups
Implement spill prevention and response
educational programs
Implement specific training on pollution
threats to Sinclair Inlet
Department (Local Health)
Suquamish Tribe
Washington Department of Health
(DOH)
Port of Bremerton, Bremerton
Department of Community
Development, Local Health,
Ecology
Washington Parks & Recreation
Commission
Washington Parks & Recreation
Commission, Port of Bremerton
Port of Bremerton
Washington Parks & Recreation
Commission
PSNS
PSNS
1990
1990
3/91
1990
1990
1990
1990
(as requested)
Ongoing
10/91
-------
TABLE 7. (Continued)
Action
Agencies Involved
Target Date*
Limiting Factors
Apply for PIE Fund grant to fund inter-
pretive display at Bremerton floating pier
Implement PIE Fund grant to develop
educational brochure on storm drains
Distribute grants to local agencies for
public involvement and education
projects
Distribute Aquatic Land Enhancement
Account grants to local agencies for
public education and interpretive pro-
jects
Implement PIE Fund grant to teach
realtors and developers about
environmental regulations
Implement PIE Fund grant for Water
Watchers program focusing citizen at-
tention on Dyes Inlet water quality
Develop Dyes Inlet educational and
cleanup activities for Silverdale school
children
Bremerton Department of Commu-
nity Development, Local Health
Port Orchard Public Works, Kitsap
County Conservation District
Puget Sound Water Quality
Authority
Washington Department of
Natural Resources
Suquamish Tribe
Kitsap Public Utility District #1,
Ecology
Bangor Submarine Base,
Suquamish Tribe, Ecology
Completed and
funded
7/90
1990
Ongoing
6/90"
3/90b
4/90b
NOTE: All actions pertain to both Sinclair and Dyes Inlets unless otherwise indicated.
* Ending date for action, except where noted.
b Starting date for action.
-------
70
-------
Data, Planning, and Enforcement Needs
Several data, planning, and enforcement needs are not addressed in the
1990 Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action Plan. These needs will be ad-
dressed in future updates of the plan. This section identifies: 1) data
needs and planning and enforcement needs that apply to the entire
study area or to large portions of the study area, and 2) data needs and
planning and enforcement needs that are specific to one or more of the
nine subareas. Information on additional needs was provided by the
members of the Interagency and Citizen Work Group. Potential lead
agencies are identified for each planning and enforcement need, based
on:
• Agency missions and mandates
• Actions that agencies would initiate if funding were available
• Actions that agencies want to undertake but do not have a
specific time line at present.
Addressing data needs will further define pollution sources and areas
of contamination and identify source control measures. Addressing
planning and enforcement needs will improve the effectiveness of the
Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Urban Bay Action Program in meeting its
objectives.
Areawide Needs
Data Needs * Sediment quality data are needed for a thorough assessment of
marinas as a pollution source. Although water quality will be
monitored near marinas in Sinclair Inlet and Dyes Inlet, there
are no immediate plans to test sediments near local marinas.
Sediment quality testing should consist of the following activi-
ties: 1) assess sediment chemistry (for priority pollutants and
tributyltin), 2) measure sediment toxicity using bioassays, and 3)
measure benthic infaunal abundance, if the first two tests indi-
cate potential problems. These three activities comprise the
triad approach to sediment sampling.
• Data are needed on levels of contaminants in the sediments of
representative storm drain catch basins in order to assess cur-
rent and future pollutant loading from stormwater. This need
will be fulfilled when the city of Bremerton, the city of Port
Orchard, and Kitsap County are required to develop stormwa-
71
-------
Data, Planning, and Enforcement Needs
ter management programs (i.e., when Ecology produces tech-
nical manuals for use in stonnwater planning and issues rules,
guidelines, and model ordinances).
There are no data on water exchange between Sinclair and Dyes
Inlets and between the study area and the Port Washington
Narrows. There are also no data on pollutant transport within
and between the inlets. Data on flushing rate and current
patterns in both inlets would help identify the fate of pollutants.
Although certain areas of sediment contamination are well
documented, the spatial extent of sediment contamination
throughout the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets system is not adequately
characterized. Further sediment characterization may be war-
ranted to accurately define priority problem areas and to deter-
mine where final sediment quality standards are not being met.
Ecology will develop final sediment quality standards and reme-
dial action (cleanup) standards by June 1990.
Planning and « Chemical and bacterial contamination in stormwater is not
Enforcement Needs being addressed. The city of Bremerton, the city of Port Or-
chard, and Kitsap County will be required to adopt guidelines
and model ordinances and are encouraged to form stormwater
utilities. In addition, each of these jurisdictions will need to
establish a priority ranking of its storm drains for stormwater
management activities with respect to current and future water
quality concerns. Potential lead agencies for these activities are
the Bremerton Municipal Utilities Division, Port Orchard Pub-
lic Works Department, Kitsap County Public Works Depart-
ment, and Ecology.
• Local governments need to require comprehensive, routine
maintenance of publicly and privately owned oil/water separa-
tors and detention/retention facilities, to develop a mechanism
for enforcing this requirement, and to evaluate the effectiveness
of system designs. Potential lead agencies for these activities
are the Bremerton Municipal Utilities Division, Port Orchard
Public Works Department, Kitsap County Public Works De-
partment, and Ecology.
• Failing septic systems throughout Sinclair Inlet and Dyes Inlet
are a potential major nonpoint source of fecal coliform bacteria
contamination. Educational and enforcement measures are
needed to control pollution from these sources. This problem
is likely to be addressed via the watershed management pro-
cesses underway in Sinclair Inlet and Dyes Inlet. Potential lead
agencies for these activities include Kitsap County Department
of Community Development, Bremerton-Kitsap County
72
-------
Data, Planning, and Enforcement Needs
Health Department, Sinclair Inlet Watershed Management
Committee, and the Dyes Inlet/Gear Creek Watershed Man-
agement Committee.
• There is a need for planning and implementation of an urban
BMP program for control of stormwater runoff from residential
and commercial land use areas. The program might be similar
to the Kitsap County Conservation District farm management
program where the district works with farmers to develop BMPs
for controlling fecal coliform bacteria, nutrients, sedimentation,
and erosion from agricultural land uses. Although the Kitsap
County Conservation District is interested in developing such a
program, a funding mechanism is required to translate the idea
into reality. This issue may be addressed via the watershed
management processes underway in Sinclair Inlet and Dyes
Inlet. Potential lead agencies for these activities include the
Kitsap County Conservation District, Kitsap County Depart-
ment of Community Development, Sinclair Inlet Watershed
Management Committee, and the Dyes Inlet/Clear Creek Wa-
tershed Management Committee.
• Educational programs are needed for Asian and Native Amer-
ican communities on the risks of eating and preparing fish and
shellfish from contaminated areas of Sinclair Inlet or Dyes Inlet.
These communities harvest large quantities of shellfish from
these inlets. The recreational shellfish plan, which will be re-
leased by Ecology and the DOH in June 1990, should include
educational programs in its public involvement and education
component. This is an excellent opportunity for interagency
coordination. Programs in other areas (e.g., Nisqually Reach
Nature Center) and existing materials developed as PIE Fund
projects could be used in the educational programs. Potential
lead agencies include Ecology, DOH, Bremerton-Kitsap
County Health Department, and the Suquamish Tribe.
• There is a need to expand the Aquatic Lands Enhancement
Account to include problems associated with contamination of
state-owned aquatic lands. Ecology and DNR are in the process
of developing an MOA on contaminated sediments on state-
owned aquatic lands. Potential lead agencies for this activity are
Ecology and DNR.
• There is an increasing need for used oil collection services.
Local collection stations are not accepting oil from the public,
and the cost of oil disposal is increasing. Marinas could make
oil collection services available for tenants. Potential lead agen-
cies for this activity are Ecology, Port of Bremerton, and private
marinas.
73
-------
Data, Planning, and Enforcement Needs
Additional Needs by Subarea
Puget Sound Naval
Shipyard Shoreline
Data Needs
• There is a need for data on the chemical loading and effects of
ship boiler light-up or blowdown discharges on aquatic re-
sources and ambient environmental quality. PSNS currently
discharges effluent from ship boilers directly into Sinclair Inlet.
These ship boiler light-up and blowdown discharges have high
temperatures and high pH levels that can adversely impact
organisms in the receiving waters. They also contain high con-
centrations of specific chemicals that can adversely impact or-
ganisms.
• There is a need for data on atmospheric contribution of pollu-
tants from smokestacks at the shipyard to the estuarine environ-
ment. Multi-media (e.g., soil, water, and air) evaluations may
provide the best mechanism for obtaining this information.
Planning and
Enforcement Needs
• To maximize protection of fish and other marine resources in
Sinclair Inlet, the shipyard needs to coordinate the timing of
ship boiler light-up and blowdown discharges with the WDF.
Potential lead agencies for this activity are the PSNS and WDF.
• Federal, state, and local agencies need to continue to work
closely with PSNS and with the Department of Defense to
ensure that water quality concerns are properly addressed dur-
ing any activities involving radioactive materials. As part of its
defense mission, PSNS handles radioactive materials, such as
the removal of nuclear reactors from Navy submarines. State
and local agencies may lack authority to regulate or oversee
such operations, since the Department of Defense retains pri-
mary authority over any activities involving defense-related uses
of nuclear energy. Potential lead agencies for this activity are
the PSNS, EPA, and Ecology.
Charleston
Shoreline
Data Needs
Current environmental quality data were gathered before sec-
ondary treatment of sewage was begun. These data indicate
high levels of sediment contamination. It is commonly thought
that conditions have improved since the implementation of
74
-------
Data, Planning, and Enforcement Needs
secondary treatment. However, to assess the positive impacts
of secondary treatment on the receiving environment, data are
needed on effluent toxicity and sediment quality in the vicinity
of the Bremerton WWTP. Sediment sampling should be based
on the triad approach: sediment chemistry, sediment toxicity,
and, if needed, benthic infaunal abundance.
Planning and
Enforcement Needs
The city of Bremerton lacks a formal stormwater management
program and a stormwater utility. Ecology's stormwater man-
agement guidelines and model ordinances need to be adopted
as soon as they are available to develop a stormwater manage-
ment program and a stormwater utility. Potential lead agencies
for these activities are the Bremerton Municipal Utilities Divi-
sion and Ecology.
Upper Sinclair Inlet
Data Needs
• There are no data for evaluating the potential contribution of
contaminants from the former solid waste dump located on the
shoreline southeast of Gorst. There is a wildlife preserve adja-
cent to the dump site. Data are needed on ambient water and
sediment quality and on potential impacts on fish and wildlife
of contamination from the former dump.
• Data are needed on nutrient and dissolved oxygen levels in the
water and at the sediment/water interface near the mouth of
Gorst Creek at the head of Sinclair Inlet. Eutrophic conditions
(e.g., high nutrients and low oxygen levels) could exist in poorly
flushed areas of Sinclair Inlet or Dyes Inlet. These conditions
could lead to adverse biological effects such as fish kills. If high
nutrient concentrations or low dissolved oxygen are detected,
follow-up data collection and appropriate actions should be
determined through the watershed management process.
Planning and
Enforcement Needs
• The Gorst area of Upper Sinclair Inlet is presently unsewered.
Failing septic systems are a major potential source of nonpoint
pollution to the inlet. The feasibility of providing sewer utility
service to the Gorst area should be analyzed. Since Sinclair
Inlet watershed planning grant monies cannot be used for this
purpose, an alternative funding source must be found for the
necessary engineering evaluation and feasibility study to install
sewers. The potential lead agency for this activity is Kitsap
County Department of Community Development.
75
-------
Data, Planning, and Enforcement Needs
Port Orchard
Shoreline
A survey of commercial and industrial businesses is needed in
the Gorst area and in other unincorporated areas of Kitsap
County. This survey would collect information on average flow
(gallons per day) of industrial waste and on known or suspected
pollutants in the industrial waste stream. Since Sinclair Inlet
watershed planning grant monies cannot be used for this pur-
pose, an alternative funding source must be found for this
survey. The potential lead agency for this activity is Kitsap
County Department of Community Development.
Data Needs
• The locations of Port Orchard storm drains are not well known.
Mapping the Port Orchard storm drain system is an important
first step in controlling the quality of stormwater discharges to
Sinclair Inlet. Accordingly, there is a need to map the locations
of city and private, commercial, or industrial storm drains and
to determine their respective drainage basins.
• Limited data are available to identify the spatial extent and
magnitude of contamination in the Port Orchard shoreline
subarea. Data are needed on sediment quality to determine the
extent that the former Port Orchard WWTP and the former
KCSD No. 5 WWTP affected the environment. Significantly
elevated concentrations of certain contaminants have been
found in sediments in the area south of Point Herron. Addi-
tional sediment quality data are needed to determine if Point
Herron is the only contaminated area, or if there is a larger area
of contamination. The data should be gathered using the triad
approach (i.e., sediment chemistry, sediment toxicity, and, if
needed, benthic infaunal abundance).
Planning and
Enforcement Needs
At present, the city of Port Orchard lacks a formal stormwater
management program and a stormwater utility. Ecology's
stormwater management guidelines and model ordinances
should be adopted following their release and these guidelines
should be used to develop a stormwater management program
and a stormwater utility. Potential lead agencies for these activ-
ities include the Port Orchard Public Works Department and
Ecology.
Oil/water separators and stormwater detention/retention facil-
ities are required for new development in Port Orchard, but
there is no mechanism for regular inspection and maintenance
of these stormwater controls. A routine maintenance program
should be developed and implemented for publicly owned and
76
-------
Data, Planning, and Enforcement Needs
Central Sinclair Inlet
privately owned oil/water separators and stormwater deten-
tion/retention facilities. Potential lead agencies for this activity
include the Port Orchard Public Works Department and Ecol-
ogy.
Data Needs
• There are no data gaps specific to this subarea. Potential
sources of contamination are from the Bremerton and Port
Orchard shorelines; the 1990 Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Urban
Bay Action Plan focuses on control of these sources.
Planning and
Enforcement Needs
There are no immediate planning and enforcement needs spe-
cific to this subarea. Potential sources of contamination are
from the Bremerton and Port Orchard shorelines. Planning and
enforcement needs that pertain to these sources are addressed
in other subareas. Several of the areawide planning and en-
forcement needs also pertain to central Sinclair Inlet.
Outer Sinclair Inlet
Data Needs
There are no data needs specific to this subarea. This area has
a low priority ranking in terms of immediate action.
Planning and
Enforcement Needs
• There are no immediate planning and enforcement needs spe-
cific to this subarea. This area has a low priority ranking in terms
of immediate action. Several of the areawide planning and
enforcement needs also pertain to outer Sinclair Inlet.
Oyster Bay
Data Needs
• Data are needed on nutrient concentrations and of the sedi-
ment surface dissolved oxygen levels in the water to detect
potential eutrophic conditions. Eutrophication can lead to ad-
verse biological effects such as fish kills. If high nutrient or low
dissolved oxygen concentrations are detected, follow-up data
collection and appropriate actions should be determined
through the watershed management process.
77
-------
Date, Planning, and Enforcement Needs
Planning and
Enforcement Needs
Nonpoint pollution control measures are needed due to high
levels of fecal coliform bacteria. This subarea should be pro-
tected through the watershed management process underway
in Dyes Inlet. Potential lead agencies for this activity include
Kitsap County Department of Community Development and
the Dyes Inlet/Clear Creek Watershed Management Commit-
tee.
Port Washington
Narrows
Data Needs
• There is a need to characterize sediment contamination using
the triad sampling approach near the former WWTP outfall and
near industrial sites to determine the impacts of these sources
on the estuarine environment. The former Manette WWTP
received industrial wastewater from the PSNS, and the Manette
outfall is currently operating as a combined sewer overflow.
Reconnaissance sampling done by EPA in 1988 indicated high
concentrations of toxic chemicals in Phinney Bay, possibly asso-
ciated with nearby industrial sites.
Planning and
Enforcement Needs
There are no planning and enforcement gaps specific to this
subarea. Bremerton Municipal Utilities and the Bremerton-
Kitsap County Health Department have been active in identi-
fying and controlling pollution sources and in committing to
further source control, monitoring, and educational actions.
Dyes Inlet
Data Needs
• Limited data are available to identify the spatial extent and
magnitude of contamination in certain portions of Dyes Inlet.
There is a need to characterize sediment contamination using
the triad sampling approach near the former Silverdale WWTP
outfall and in Chico Bay to assess the effects of local activities
on the estuarine environment.
• Data are needed on dissolved oxygen and nutrient levels at
Chico Bay, Ostrich Bay, Mud Bay, near Silverdale and at several
other locations in Dyes Inlet. Eutrophic conditions can occur
in these relatively poorly flushed embayments.
• Clear Creek, which discharges into Dyes Inlet, may be contam-
inated with toxic leachate from the Submarine Base Bangor and
stormwater runoff from urbanization of the surrounding area.
78
-------
Data, Planning, and Enforcement Needs
Data are needed on concentrations of priority pollutants in the
water and sediments of Clear Creek to evaluate and track
potential pollutant sources.
Planning and The U.S. Naval Hospital needs to become involved in the process of
Enforcement Needs identifying and controlling pollution sources at Jackson Park because
the hospital has jurisdiction over Site 103 of the Jackson Park complex.
Potential lead agencies for this activity are the Navy and EPA. There
is a need to coordinate the watershed management process underway
in Dyes Inlet with the control of pollutant discharges into Gear Creek.
Potential lead agencies for this activity include Kitsap County Depart-
ment of Community Development, Dyes Inlet/Clear Creek Watershed
Management Committee, Bangor Submarine Base, and the EPA.
79
-------
80
-------
References
Chapman, P.M., R.N. Dexter, R.M. Kocan, and E.R. Long. 1985. An
overview of biological effects testing in Puget Sound, Washington:
methods, results, and implications, pp. 344-362. In: Aquatic Toxicol-
ogy, Proceedings of the Seventh Annual Symposium. Spec. Tech. Rpt.
854, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA.
Hart-Crowser. 1988. Current situation report, Sites 101 and 103, Jack-
son Park Complex, Bremerton, Washington. Draft Report. Prepared
for U.S. Navy Pacific Northwest Branch, Western Division, Naval Fa-
cilities Engineering Command, Silverdale, WA. Hart-Crowser, Inc.,
Seattle, WA.
PSWQA. 1988. State of the sound: 1988 report. Puget Sound Water
Quality Authority, Seattle, WA. 225pp.
PSWQA. 1990. Puget Sound update: the first annual report of the
Puget Sound Ambient Monitoring Program. Puget Sound Water Qual-
ity Authority, Seattle, WA.
PTI and Tetra Tech. 1988a. Elliott Bay action program: analysis of
toxic problem areas. Final Report. Prepared for the U.S. Environmen-
tal Protection Agency Region 10, Office of Puget Sound. PTT Environ-
mental Services, Bellevue, WA.
PTI and Tetra Tech. 1988b. Everett Harbor action program: analysis
of toxic problem areas. Final Report. Prepared for the U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency Region 10, Office of Puget Sound. Tetra
Tech, Inc., Bellevue, WA.
Tetra Tech. 1988. Sinclair and Dyes Inlets action program: initial data
summaries and problem identification. Prepared for the U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency Region 10, Office of Puget Sound. Tetra
Tech, Inc., Bellevue, WA. 193 pp. + appendices.
U.S. Navy. 1983. Initial assessment study of Naval Shipyard Puget
Sound, Bremerton, Washington. NEESA 13-022. Prepared for U.S.
Navy Assessment and Control of Installation Pollutants (NACIP) De-
partment, Port Hueneme, CA. U.S. Department of the Navy, Naval
Energy and Environmental Support Activity, Port Hueneme, CA.
81
-------
APPENDIX A
Administrative Record of Agency
Letters of Commitment
-------
Appendix A
Contents
Page
Letter to Puget Sound Naval Shipyard re: PSNS A-l
Letter to Puget Sound Naval Shipyard re: Jackson Park A-2
Puget Sound Naval Shipyard response A-3
Letter to Suquamish Tribe A-7
Suquamish Tribe response A-9
Letter to Washington Department of Fisheries A-11
Washington Department of Fisheries response A-12
Letter to Washington Department of Health A-13
Washington Department of Health response A-15
Letter to Washington Parks and Recreation Commission A-16
Washington Parks and Recreational Commission response A-18
Letter to Puget Sound Water Quality Authority A-19
Puget Sound Water Quality Authority response A-21
Letter to Washington Department of Natural Resources A-22
Washington Department of Natural Resources response A-23
Letter to Washington Department of Transportation A-25
Washington Department of Transportation response A-26
Letter to Kitsap County Department of Community Development A-27
Kitsap Department of Community Development response A-29
Letter to Kitsap County Public Works Department A-30
Kitsap County Public Works Department response A-31
Letter to Kitsap County Conservation District A-32
Kitsap County Conservation District response A-34
Letter to Bremerton-Kitsap County Health Department A-35
Bremerton-Kitsap County Health Department response A-38
Letter to Port of Bremerton A-40
Port of Bremerton response A-41
Letter to Bremerton Municipal Utilities A-42
Bremerton Municipal Utilities response A-44
Letter to Bremerton Department of Community Development A-46
Bremerton Department of Community Development response A-48
Letter to Port Orchard Public Works A-49
Port Orchard Public Works response A-51
A-l
-------
United Stales
Environmental Protection
Agency
Region to
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle WA 98101
Alaska
Idaho
Oregon
Washington
MOV 2 2 i:co
Reply to
Attn of:
WD-139
Commander
Puget Sound Naval Shipyard
Bremerton, Wa 98314
RE: Puget Sound Naval Shipyard (PSNS)/ Urban Bay Action Plan
Dear Commander:
We are finally approaching the writing of the Sinclair and
Dyes Inlets Draft Urban Bay Action Plan. We have reached this
point after approximately 2 years of data synthesis and
evaluation, activities assessment, and problem identification. As
you are aware, this action plan is being coordinated with EPA's
program offices and the Puget Sound Water Quality Authority/
Department of Ecology/ EPA Federal Facility Negotiations.
The purpose of this letter and enclosure is to follow up the
series of meetings held to discuss the PSNS facility with respect
to the Navy's involvement in the interagency action plan.
Specifically, we are seeking clarification of ongoing or planned
activities at the PSNS which may result in improvements in the
environmental quality of Sinclair Inlet. It is our intention to
include the action recommendations described in the enclosure
into the Draft Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Urban Bay Action Plan
which will be sent out to the Urban Bay Workgroup for general
review and comment.
We would appreciate a written response concurring with,
clarifying, or modifying any of the action recommendations
dicussed in the enclosure and a proposed schedule for their
adoption or implementation. We would also appreciate information
on other activities which are geared towards environmental
protection in Sinclair Inlet and which could appropriately be
included in the action plan.
Your assistance and cooperation in the development of this
action plan has been greatly appreciated.
Sincerely,
'Jack H. Gakstatter
Chief, Office of Puget Sound
Glenn Schmitt, PSNS
William Maupin, PSNS
V.L. Vasaitas, EFANW
Commander Clark, NAV Base Seattle
enclosure
-------
United Slates
Environmental Protection
Agency
Region to
1200 Sixth Avenue
SeattleWA98l01
Alaska
Idaho
Oregon
Washington
&EFA
NOV 2 2 1989
Reply to
Attn of:
WD-139
Commander
Puget Sound Naval Shipyard
Bremerton, Wa 98314
RE: Jackson Park Complex/ Urban Bay Action Plan
Dear Commander:
We are finally approaching the writing of the Sinclair and
Dyes Inlets Draft Urban Bay Action Plan. We have reached this
point after approximately 2 years of data synthesis and
evaluation, activities assessment, and problem identification. As
you are aware, this action plan is being coordinated with EPA's
program offices and the Puget Sound Water Quality Authority/
Department of Ecology/ EPA Federal Facility Negotiations.
The purpose of this letter is to follow up the series of
meetings held to discuss the Jackson Park Complex with respect to
the Navy's involvement in the interagency action plan.
Specifically, we are seeking clarification of ongoing or planned
activities at the Jackson Park Complex which may result in
improvements in the environmental quality of Ostrich Bay and Dyes
Inlet. It is our intention to Include the following actions in
the Draft Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Urban Bay Action Plan which
will be sent out to the general workgroup for review.
Based on our earlier discussions concerning Jackson Park, it
is my understanding that:
1) official administrative transfer of the site from
Bangor to the PSNS was completed 10/01/89;
2) PSNS, with assistance from Washington Department of
Ecology and in conjuction with the Jackson Park
Hospital Command, has agreed to the immediate posting
of signs warning people that fish and shellfish from
the area may be contaminated with pollutants.
3) The PSNS will complete a satisfactory Preliminary
Assessment (PA) of the site per EPA's proposed Hazard
Ranking System (HRS) evaluation and will make every
effort to expeditiously implement a site investigation
similar to the Site 101 and 103 Jackson Park Workplan
Draft (written for Bangor by Hart Crowser and dated
07/88), with the addition of aquatic sediment sampling.
He also encourage you to undertake any actions
necessary to limit releases of toxic contaminants into
Ostrich Bay and to remediate any environmental
contamination that poses either ecological or human
health risks. This work will be conducted in close
coordination with EPA and the Department of Ecology
through Bob Kievit (EPA Superfund/ 206 753-9014) and
Fran Solomon (Ecology/ 206 867-7219).
4) It is not clear whether any underground storage
tanks (USTS) at the Jackson Park site have been
registered for closure with the Department of Ecology.
If USTS have been registered, the registration address
of the tanks needs to be confirmed. If these tanks have
not yet been registered for closure. Ecology must be
notified. The contact person is Thorn Lufkin (Ecology
UST Coordinator/ 206 459-6272).
We would appreciate a written response concurring with,
clarifying, or modifying any of the items outlined above and a
proposed schedule for their implementation. We would also
appreciate information on other activities which are geared
towards environmental protection in Dyes Inlet and which could
appropriately be included in the action plan.
Your assistance and cooperation in the development of this
action plan has been greatly appreciated.
Sincerely,
H. Gakstatter
Chief, Office of Puget Sound
Glenn Schmitt, PSNS
William Maupin, PSNS
V.L. Vasaitas, EFANW
Commander Clark, NAV Base Seattle
-------
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
PUGET SOUND NAVAL SHIPYARD
BREMERTON. WASHINGTON 983 I 4-SOOO
C 445.1/476:JW
MAR 0 fi ,ggn
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Puget Sound, WO-139
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98101
Gentlemen:
This letter provides the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard response to two letters sent
by your agency on 22 November 1989 concerning the Urban Bay Action Plan. The
letters requested the Shipyard to provide written clarification, modification,
or concurrence with action recommendations discussed, and asked for proposed
schedules for implementation of these recommendations. Information on other
activities geared towards environmental protection in Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
for inclusion in the action plan was also requested.
Responses are provided as enclosures to this letter. Enclosure (1) is the
Shipyard's response to issues directly relating to Puget Sound Naval Shipyard.
The responses are provided for each issue In the same order presented In the
enclosure to your letter titled "Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Urban Bay Action Plan
Puget Sound Naval Shipyard Involvement'. Enclosure (2) Is the response to
Issues directly relating to the Jackson Park Housing Complex, and Enclosure (3)
Is a list of general comments on the action plan. Although many of the
questions posed in Enclosure (3) have been answered through phone conversations
with your agency, the comments are Included since they serve as the comment of
record on the draft Urban Bay Action Plan. Enclosure (4) provides new target
dates on applicable tables from the draft action plan and Includes corrections
to verbage as necessary. All dates are best estimates; where no date is
provided, the required preliminary action Is identified.
Puget Sound Naval Shipyard looks forward to the continued cooperation between
agencies in improving the water quality of Puget Sound. Questions may be
addressed to Julie Herder at (206) 476-3663 or Glenn Schmitt at (206) 476-4049.
Sincerely,
Encl:
(1) Puget Sound Naval Shipyard Issues
(2) Jackson Park Housing Issues
(3) Urban Bay Action Plan General Comments
(4) Site Specific Action Plan
MAR'
TANNER
CAPT, CEC, USN
Public Words QW'f
Ic0043303
PUGET SOUND NAVAL SHIPYARD ISSUES
Issue No. 1 - Characterization of Existing Sediment Contamination.
1. Current Situation, paragraph 2 says no post dredging samples have been
conducted In Sinclair Inlet and the Preliminary Assessment submitted by PSNS was
Inadequate.
RESPONSE
Although no post dredge sampling was conducted immediately after dredging
operations In the spring of 1987, dredge sampling was conducted at Pier D
in May of 1989. The final sample report was received by the Shipyard in
October of 1989, and a copy was provided to your office on 11 December
1989.
The Shipyard concurs with the statement that the Preliminary Assessment may
be Incomplete as based on currently available information. Although a new
assessment Is not being required until the new Hazard Ranking System is
complete, the Shipyard is being entered into the Navy's Installation
Restoration (IR) program. A Preliminary Assessment/Site Investigation
(PA/SI) will be Initiated In the spring of 1990. A plan of actions and
milestones should be developed by early summer of 1990.
2. Recommended Action was to conduct sediment sampling in front of all outfalls
and along suspected contamination gradients.
RESPONSE
Sediment sampling will be considered as part of the Navy's IR program for
the Shipyard.
Issue No. 2 - NPDES Outfall Monitoring and Effluent Characterization.
1. Current situation for Outfall 022 (stormwater) states that a chemical
characterization was not done for this outfall and that only pH, oil and grease,
and average daily flow are included in monthly DMRs.
RESPONSE
Chemical characterization is not a permit requirement and was therefore not
conducted. Monitoring requirements of the NPOES Permit for Outfall 022 are
being met.
2. Recommended PSNS Actions Include reconsideration of current monitoring
methods for permitted outfalls, full chemical characterizations of effluents or
routine monitoring using a full metals scan and occasional organics chemical
scan, development/ Implementation/documentation of BHPs for all storage area
drainage and general site runoff, and Implementation of all recommendations in
the dry dock 1 through 6 BMP.
Encl (1)
-------
The methods used to perform sampling at permitted outfalls, as well as the
analyses performed, will be addressed when the NPDES permit Is reviewed by
your office.
Existing BMPs and Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasures (SPCC) plans
cover storage area drainage and general site runoff. The Shipyard will
continue to work towards full Implementation of existing documents for
control of contaminants which may enter Sinclair Inlet via the stormwater
drainage system. Existing BMP plans will be reviewed to determine If
revision or expansion Is required by September 1990 and fully implemented
by January 1991. Copies of new or revised BMP plans will be provided to
your office.
Issue No. 3 - Stormwater Effluent Assessment and Management.
1. Current Situation Section says that no stormwater treatment exits, there is
no monitoring of a majority of the outfalls, there are no BMPs to prevent
contaminated surface water runoff from entering Sinclair Inlet, floor and sink
drains are connected to the storm water discharge system, and the storm drain
system was used to dispose of chemical waste as recently as 1979.
The Shipyard does employ treatment of stormwater in areas where
contamination is likely. Oil/water separators are located in many parking
lots and all equipment washing areas. Shipyard policy is for all new
parking lots in the Shipyard to be designed so rainwater runoff is routed
through an oil/water separator. There is no routine preventative
maintenance program currently in place for these separators; users are
responsible for ensuring they are properly maintained. All oil/water
separators will be identified and a maintenance program developed by
January of 1991.
Outfall monitoring is currently performed per the NPDES permit. Monitoring
will be adjusted as necessary when review and revision of the permit is
complete.
Puget Sound Naval Shipyard has BHPs for prevention of pollutant discharge
In Dry Docks 1 through 6. SPCC plans for control of oil and hazardous
substances serve as the BMPs for areas other than dry docks that could
release hazardous substances to navigable waters. The Shipyard has no
existing BHPs for site runoff from general industrial areas. As guidance
1s received from EPA regarding establishment of BMPs for general site
runoff, plans will be developed. The Shipyard covers response to spills of
oil and hazardous substances under existing instructions. These plans
accomplish prevention of spills into the Shipyard's stormwater drainage
system. The BMPs were developed to comply with requirements of the current
NPDES permit for the Shipyard. As stated above, plans will be reviewed and
altered as necessary, and copies of revisions will be provided to your
agency.
End (1)
A project to route all sanitary wastes and unregulated industrial drains,
Including floor drains, to the sanitary sewer system was completed 1n 1979.
Regulated Industrial wastewaters were routed to the Shipyard Industrial
Wastewater Pretreatment Facility. However, 1t 1s possible that some drains
were missed. These lines are redirected to the sanitary sewer system or
pretreatment facility as appropriate upon discovery. Problems are
discovered through process review, dye testing of discharge lines, sampling
of effluent from a discharge pipe or of water from Sinclair Inlet, or
questions from Shipyard personnel concerning work practices.
To the best of the Shipyard's knowledge, there are no nonpermltted
activities which are currently contributing to the sediment contamination
in Sinclair Inlet. The Shipyard is making every effort to ensure continued
compliance with all federal, state and local regulations and is working
toward the enhancement of water quality in Puget Sound.
2. Recommended actions included full evaluation of the stormwater drainage
system to determine effectiveness and adequacy of facility conditions, including
update of the engineering plan drainage system, in-line sediment samples, and
site specific BHPs.
Evaluation of the existing storm and sanitary sewer systems and in-line
sediment sampling will be performed by a firm under contract to the
government as resources become available. Site specific BMPs for areas not
already addressed 1n the existing SPCC plan will be developed and
implemented as review of existing plans identifies the need for them.
Item No. 4 - Other Non-NPDES Discharges/Potential Contaminant Sources.
1. Current Situation section lists a general chemical composition for boiler
light-up effluent.
The composition of boiler light-up effluent listed In your letter Is not
accurate and is considered classified information.
2. Current Situation says the Shipyard has reported total toxic organic (TTO)
levels as high as 1200 parts per billion (ppb).
The allowable TTO level 1n treated effluent Is 2300 ppb or 2.3 parts per
million (ppm), which is twice as high as the level cited in the draft
action plan. TTO levels In treated effluent have not exceeded pretreatment
limits In at least the past two and one half years. The Shipyard performs
a complete organlcs scan once per year and, as specified in the
regulations, analyses for suspected TTOs periodically (once per week).
Because all contaminants are regulated in parts per million (ppm), citing
Shipyard effluent levels in parts per billion (ppb) is confusing and
Encl (1)
-------
>
U1
unnecessarily raises public concern over contaminant concentrations.
Contaminant levels In all documents need to be consistent with EPA
regulations. Also, If specific effluent levels are cited In the plan, so
allowable discharge limits should be Included.
Item No. 5 - Spill Prevention and Response Plan/Hazardous Haste Management Plan.
1. Current Situation Section states that a Chrome spill went unchecked into the
storm system.
RESPONSE
This statement requires clarification. The spill was discovered shortly
after It occurred and was stopped Immediately. The spill plume was checked
and there was no liquid In the Manhole down stream of the spill. The
discharge line was plugged at this location, lines were filled with fresh
water, and the water was pumped out to a collection tank. Only very
minimal amounts of residual chrome solution could have entered Sinclair
Inlet. Shops were reinstructed on proper spill prevention measures.
While reports to EPA stated that the solution entered the storm drainage
system, it was apparently not made clear that efforts were successfully
made to prevent its entry to Sinclair Inlet. These efforts are part of the
Shipyard's routine response measures for spills entering a storm drain.
The Shipyard considers any release of a hazardous material to the
environment to be a spill, whether the material was released to a truck
bed, a bermed containment or the storm system. General policy Is to notify
regulatory agencies whenever a contaminant enters a storm system (even if
it never actually enters the bay) or is discharged directly to the bay.
2. Current Situation Section states that the 1988 annual hazardous waste
minimization report should Include an analysis of any increases in hazardous
waste shipments over the year.
Item No. 6 - Underground Storage Tanks.
1. The current situation says the Shipyard has identified 92 tanks that are
considered underground storage tanks (USTs). Of these, 72 are actively used,
and the remaining 20 are empty.
RESPONSE
There are 102 USTs at the Shipyard. 47 are exempt from 40 CFR Part 280
because they are In basement vaults, contain products which are regulated
as hazardous wastes, or are part of a flow-through process; 2 are deferred
because they are field constructed; 38 are abandoned and/or closed; and 15
are active tanks under the UST regulations.
2. Recommended Shipyard actions reiterated regulatory requirements.
RESPONSE
The Shipyard is aware of the regulations and is complying in full.
The ability to minimize waste at the Shipyard is dependent upon several
factors, two of which are production level and production type. There is
no way of controlling either of these factors, so performing an analysis
for the minimization report would be of no benefit. Furthermore, hazardous
waste minimization is not within the scope of the Urban Bay Action Plan
even though It is addressed in the NPDES permit. Per the permit, solid and
hazardous wastes must be managed in accordance with RCRA regulations, and
management practices required under RCRA shall be referenced in the BMP
plans. RCRA program management and report submission is managed under the
Shipyard's Hazardous Waste Management Program.
Encl (1)
Encl (1)
-------
JACKSON PARK ISSUES
1. As far as Shipyard operations are concerned, responsibility for the Jackson
Park Mousing Complex was transferred to Puget Sound Naval Shipyard on 10/01/89.
2. The Shipyard has posted the beaches with warning signs for potentially
contaminated shellfish.
3. A new preliminary assessment/site Investigation (PA/SI) will not be
completed for Sites 101 and 103. During a phone conversation between your
agency and the Shipyard, It was established that one was not expected. As
discussed, the Shipyard will provide any additional Information requested when
the Hazard Ranking System Is finalized.
4. The Navy Is proceeding with Installation Restoration (IR) work at Sites 101
and 103 and has just negotiated a contract to revise and finalize the Remedial
Investigation/ Feasibility Study (RI/FS) project plans. The contract was
awarded February 7, 1990. Following completion of the project plans, an RI/FS
will be conducted In accordance with EPA guidance for National Priorities List
(NPL) sites. Aquatic sediment sampling and general site assessment for sources
of toxic contamination of Ostrich Bay will be addressed during the RI/FS.
5. The following Is a schedule for upcoming IR work at the sites:
Milestone Date
Draft Project Plans HAY 90
Final Project Plans JUL 90
Draft RI/FS JAN 92
The schedule could be delayed 1f insufficient funds are received this year; IR
work Is funded on a "worst first" basis. Currently It appears that both the
project plans and RI/FS will be funded this year. Remedial actions will be
Implemented following completion of the RI/FS as soon as funding permits.
6. Two underground storage tanks at the Mint-Mart gasoline station have
recently been registered with WDOE as active tanks. The Navy does not plan to
close these tanks and, although leak testing Is not required until December 22,
1991, will test on them In 1990.
7. A potential abandoned UST was suspected to exist as part of the IR study.
The suspected tank's location or presence has not been verified and so it has
not been registered. If a tank is discovered during the RI/FS, it will be dealt
with at that time.
End (2)
-------
( HKMINF O CRFGOIRf
I )irp( tor
MAIF Of \V-\SHINCTON
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
JIWI-IWWi \n- M • Kivlinimi \\.fJw\flon 'IMfiy S 'III . |.'i».l Hn" ~l»»l
August 9, 1989
Ms. Phyllis Meyers
Suquamish Tribal Fisheries Department
P.O. Box 498
Suquamish.|Washington 98392
rh^JL
Dear
This letter is in followup to the recent conference call
about the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action Plan. Michael
Jacobson (PTI Environmental Services) and I talked with you
and Liz Hoenig about potential actions of the Suquamish
Tribe that will be written into the Action Plan. Following
is a summary of my understanding of the resulting identified
actions that will be undertaken by the Suquamish Tribe to
improve water quality and protect fisheries resources in
Sinclair and Dyes Inlets.
Resources
Three years ago, the Suquamish Tribe began to monitor salmon
producing streams on a weekly basis during the autumn
spawning season to count returning adults and assess habitat
conditions. The monitoring involves walking the stream in
0.2 mile sections, recording physical parameters (e.g.
vegetation, substrate, woody debris) on a habitat form
developed by METRO, and entering flow measurements into a
computer data base. These salmon and habitat surveys will
continue, concentrating on high priority areas such as
Blackjack Creek (there is concern about impacts of logging
on fish habitat).
The Suquamish Tribe's salmon enhancement projects will
continue: i.e. salmon hatch boxes on Blackjack, Anderson,
Gorst, Chico, Barker, Clear, Strawberry, and Mosher creeks,
and two rearing ponds that release two million salmon smolt
yearly to Gorst Creek. Please indicate which of these
projects are implemented in cooperation with the Washington
Department of Fisheries. Boxes will be added to Wilson
Creek during the next fiscal year if budget permits. When
will this budgetary decision be made?
The shellfish biologist who recently joined the staff of the
Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission is located at the
Suquamish Tribe's offices. This biologist will assist the
Ms. Phyllis Meyers
August 9, 1989
Page 2
Tribe in increasing their role in shellfish management
activities, specifically the effort to recertify Dyes Inlet
for commercial harvest of shellfish. The biologist will
perform the following tasks that relate to water quality in
Sinclair and Dyes Inlets: (1) develop a tribal shellfish
water quality certification system and laboratory
certification in conjunction with Washington Department of
Ecology and Washington Department of Health; (2) assist the
Tribe in developing shellfish enhancement projects; (3)
develop an information and education program for tribal
members and the general public about tribal legal rights and
responsibilities; and (4) coordinate with the Bremerton-
Kltsap County Health Department with regard to information
sharing on paralytic shellfish poisoning.
The Tribe will continue to collect 30 manila clams biweekly
from a boat ramp north of Chico and to send a composite
sample to the Washington Department of Health (DOH) for
paralytic shellfish poisoning testing. Wouldn't rotational
sampling stations (e.g. 4 or 5 stations) be more effective
than a single sampling station?
The Suquamish Tribe wants to coordinate with the Bremerton-
Kitsap County Health Department and DOH to monitor for
toxics in shellfish. Tribal attorneys will be consulted to
determine the Tribe's role in this regard; what is the time
frame for this?
Water Quality Monitoring
The Suquamish Tribe is in the process of developing a
cooperative agreement with the Bremerton-Kitsap County
Health Department to monitor water quality in creeks that
are tributary to Sinclair and Dyes Inlets and have salmon
enhancement facilities. Fecal coliforms will be measured as
well as other conventional water quality parameters such as
dissolved oxygen and temperature. When will the cooperative
agreement be finalized?
Water quality monitoring will occur as part of the watershed
management planning process for both Sinclair and Dyes
Inlets. The Tribe will participate actively in developing
watershed management plans for both bays.
Stormwater/lmpervious Surfaces
The Suquamish Tribe wants to participate in an advisory
capacity in monitoring stormwater outfalls, especially in
terms of impacts of stormwater on fish and shellfish.
Please clarify with whom the Tribe will coordinate in this
regard (e.g. Kitsap County Conservation District, Bremerton-
Kitsap County Health Department, Washington Department of
-------
Ms. Phyllis Meyers
August 9, 1989
Page 3
Health) , the anticipated monitoring frequency and
parameters, and the time frame for beginning this effort.
After you have reviewed this letter, I would like a written
response from you by August 28 indicating your concurrence
with or modification of the contents and answering the
questions in the letter. If you want to discuss or clarify
any issues beforehand, please call me during the week of
August 21 at 867-7219. The information in this letter and
in the Source/Action Matrix developed earlier will provide
the basis for the Suquamish Tribe's contributions to the
Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action Plan. The draft Action Plan
will be released in September, 1989 and distributed for
review to the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action Program Work
Group.
I appreciate your support for the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
Action Program and look forward to your response.
Sincerely,
Fran Solomon, Ph.D.
Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
Action Program Coordinator
cc: Liz Hoenig
-------
Area Code (20b)
598-3111
£
THE SUQUAMISH TRIBE
P O Box 498 Suquamish, Washington 9B392
September 4, 1989
Fran Solomon, Ph.D.
Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
Action Program Coordinator
Department of Ecology
4350-lSOth Ave. N.E.
Redmond, WA 98052
Dear Ms. Solomon,
SEP 07 1989
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
NORTHWksr RtCJION
The Suquamish Tribe is pleased to respond to your recent letter
regarding the Tribe's participation In the Implementation of the
Sinclair and Dyes Inlet Action Plan. He strongly support the
efforts of Ecology and the EPA In coordinating this critically
Important planning effort, and appreciate the professional and
objective manner with which the process has proceeded. This
Urban Bay Action Plan along with the Nonpolnt Action Plan for the
Dyes Inlet watershed has Involved the Tribe in substantive and
active efforts to revitalize Sinclair and Dyes Inlets.
As you know, the Tribe holds guaranteed Treaty fishing rights In
the waters of these inlets. The health of these systems is
critical in supporting the fish and shellfish populations upon
which we are dependent.
The following actions that will be undertaken to assist the other
parties Involved In implementing the Action Plan.
Resources
1. The Suquamlsh Tribe will continue with the monitoring of
saloon producing streams within the Sinclair and Dyes watersheds.
During the fall spawning season, the Tribe monitors returning
adults weekly. Habitat monitoring, a much more In-depth survey.
Is conducted during summer months, as time permits. Habitat
monitoring entails recording physical parameters on a form
originally developed by Metro, and modified for the Tribe's use.
2. Blackjack Creek has been and will be monitored as part of the
Timber, Fish and Wildlife ambient monitoring program. It was
specifically targeted to Illustrate the affects that differing
land uses have on the stream bed. Since the North Nest Indian
Fish Commission (NWIFC) Is developing a computerized method to
analyze the ambient monitoring data, we anticipate using the
ambient monitoring methodology Instead of the habitat monitoring
methodology previously developed.
3. The Suquaalsh Tribe will continue enhancement efforts in the
systems listed in your letter of 8/9. The Tribe cooperates with
Trout Unlimited In maintaining the fall chlnook rearing ponds on
Gorst Creek and with the Washington State Department of Fisheries
in out-planting fry on Clear, Barker, Strawberry, and Curley
Creeks.
4. The Suquamlsh Tribe plans to adCf eggboxes to the Wilson Creek
system. This project is dependent on the availability of funds,
time for coordination (obtaining necessary permits, talking with
property owners about locating a site and allowing access), and
construction of the eggboxes.
5. As part of the Action Plan, the Suquamlsh Tribe will seek
funding for sediment and/or water quality sampling and analysis
In Dyes Inlet. This program would expand on the information
compiled in EPA's Initial Data Summaries and. Problem
Identification for this Action Plan.
6. The Suquamlsh Tribe is Interested in coordinating with the
Bremerton-Kltsap County Health Department on all programs
relating to shellfish. Dave Fyfe, the NWIFC shellfish biologist,
has concerns about the level of toxicants found within Dyes and
Sinclair Inlets. He has been In communication with the
Department of Health regarding thisj Issue and will be making
further recommendations.
Water Quality Monitoring
1. The Suquamlsh Tribe would like to develop a cooperative
agreement with the Bremerton-Kltsap County Health Department to
monitor water quality In tributaries to Dyes and Sinclair Inlets
which contain salmon. The Tribe will be coordinating a water
quality monitoring program for the Miller Bay watershed In 1990,
which may serve to establish a working relationship regarding
water quality monitoring between the Tribe and the
Bremerton-Kltsap County Health Department.
2. The Suquamlsh Tribe will actively participate In developing
watershed management plans for Sinclair and Dyes inlets. We
anticipate water quality monitoring will occur as part of the
watershed management planning process.
-------
Stormwater/Impervious Surfaces
1. The Suquamlsh Tribe is willing to advise for program
development for monitoring stormwater outfalls, specifically
regarding Impacts of stormwater on shellfish and fish. The Tribe
would provide this advisory function for any agency coordinating
a monitoring program. Tribal biologists can provide information
pertinent to monitoring frequencies and parameters. Timing of
biological processes and seasonal changes as well as historic
information regarding presence of known or suspected toxicants
should be considered for effective monitoring. This monitoring
would also be useful for consideration by members of the
watershed management committee, and related resource managers
currently involved in the centennial grant program.
Thank you for this opportunity to participate in the Action Plan.
We look forward to seeing our efforts come to fruition.
Sincerely,
>
o 7" £~ f
Tony "Foreman
Fisheries Director
-------
( HKISIINF O CREGOIRE
I >|H t
STATE OF WASHINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
\\p Nl • /ut/im>nd lX',i
-------
STATF OF WASHINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES
1 15 General Administration Building . Oil mpw Washington 9S5W
September 5, 1989
Dr. Fran Solcmon
Department of Ecology
4350-150th Ave. N.E.
Redmond, Wa 98052-5301
(SCAN) 234-6600
SUBJECT: Department of Fisheries Activities in the Sinclair and Dyes
Inlet Action Plan
Dear Dr. Solomon,
The Department of Fisheries (WDF) has received your August 9, 1989
letter addressed to Kahler Martinson. As Chief of the Habitat
j> Management Division for the Department, I have been asked to have my
J^ staff coordinate a review of you letter and prepare a response. The
ivj description of the existing conditions you had in your letter are
generally accurate. We have specific comments on individual sections
and questions you asked.
Tour letter has three sections dealing with WDF activities in the
Sinclair and Dyes Inlet area., We concur with the Puget Sound Ambient
Monitoring Program and the Resource Management sections. In
relationship to alternatives for improving fish passage, most of the
passage problems are related to impassable culverts under roads.
Debris removal is generally not needed in these watersheds. You also
asked about barrier removal as another alternative to construction of
fish passage facilities. This might be accomplished by removing the
road culverts or modifying them.
The section entitled "Floating Pier at First Street Dock" could use some
clarification. The fishing amenities have been removed from the plans
for this facility and fishing is no longer listed as a proposed use.
While WDF has continued as lead agency for the dock, we have assigned
"agent status" to the Port of Bremerton to facilitate construction of
the project for non-fishing uses. Concerning post-construction WDF
involvement, it is anticipated to be little or none until significant
changes take place in the area that would make recreational fishing a
viable use of the facility.
Dr. Fran Solomon
September 5, 1989
Page 2
Thank you for the opportunity to comment. If there are specific
guestions concerning our response, please contact Mary Lou Mills
(753-0576).
Sincerely,
DEP:MlM:mlm
cc: Rich Costello
Thorn Hooper
Kahler Martinson
Duane E. Phinney, Chief
Habitat Management Division
-------
( HKIS1INE O GREGOIRE
I >irf>rtnr
CO
F OF WASHINCmN
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
NF . Kiiimnmi. U.ii/un/jlon MMrrtJ i Illl . i.'llti) rt,- -|»»l
August 10, 1989
Mr. Don Melvin
Washington Department of Health
Office of Environmental Health Programs
Mail Stop LD-11
Olympia, Washington 98504
Dear Mr
Mr.^JJeTv
vin:
This letter is in followup to the recent meeting that
Michael Rylko (EPA), Michael Jacobson (PTI Environmental
Services) and I had with you to talk about potential actions
of the Washington Department of Health that will be written
into the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action Plan. Following is
a summary of my understanding of the resulting identified
actions that will be undertaken by the Washington Department
of Health (DOH) to improve water quality in Sinclair and
Dyes Inlets and to protect the health of people who harvest
shellfish from these bays.
Resource Management
DOH will continue to regulate commercial shellfish harvest
to ensure protection of public health. Currently, Sinclair
and Dyes Inlets are closed to commercial shellfish harvest;
however recertification of Dyes Inlet is under
consideration.
DOH has proposed new recreational shellfish harvest
regulations which would give DOH and local health
departments the authority to monitor and classify
recreational shellfish beaches based on bacterial counts,
toxics levels, and sanitary surveys of pollution sources.
Recreational harvest of shellfish could be prohibited on
beaches that have conditions representing extreme health
hazards. If the State Board of Health adopts the proposed
regulations, when would they become effective?
Mr. Don Halvin
August 10, 1989
Page 2
Coordination with County Health Department
In followup to the requirements in the proposed new
regulations on recreational shellfish harvest, DOH will
develop a memorandum of agreement with the Bremerton-Kitsap
County Health Department in 1989. Guidelines will be
established for implementation and enforcement of the
proposed new regulations by the two health departments.
The memorandum of agreement will cover ambient water and
shellfish monitoring, and laboratory accountability and will
suggest a specific mechanism for the point at which the
County Health Department would take action to post a beach.
DOH could also provide assistance to the County Health
Department in conducting shoreline and watershed sanitary
surveys.
Water Quality and Shellfish Monitoring for Bacteria
In order to obtain baseline water quality data for the Dyes
Inlet recertification question, DOH will monitor fecal
coliform bacteria in receiving water near 25 stormwater
runoff locations adjacent to natural drainages. The
monitoring will occur during heavy rain events starting in
fall, 1989. At least two storm events will be monitored at
each station. Timing of sampling and analytical tasks will
depend on laboratory space and schedules. Sediments in Dyes
Inlet and shellfish harvested from Dyes Inlet may also be
monitored for fecal coliform bacteria if warranted by the
water quality data.
DOH will also monitor fecal coliform bacteria in receiving
water near six combined sewer overflows and emergency
overflows in Port Washington Narrows, Ostrich Bay, oyster
Bay, and Phinney Bay during significant storm events and any
equipment failure conditions. The surface water will be
sampled near the end of the pipes and overflow volumes will
be estimated.
DOH will continue annual ambient water quality monitoring
for fecal coliform bacteria at 14 stations in Sinclair Inlet
and at 16 stations in Dyes Inlet and Port Washington
Narrows. DOH follows sampling and analysis protocols
established by the International Shellfish Sampling
Conference.
-at*. ,
-------
Mr. Don Melvin
August 10, 1989
Page 3
Shellfish Monitoring for Toxics
DOH will continue metals and organics analyses in the edible
tissue of clams harvested from the Ross Point area of
Sinclair Inlet and will make every effort to continue
sampling at Jackson Park in Dyes Inlet. This monitoring
will occur semiannually in 1990 and 1991. Data is
forthcoming in August, 1989 for clams sampled at Ross Point
and Jackson Park in June, 1989.
Clams collected from the beach at Jackson Park (sites 101
and 103) will be analyzed for PCBs, approximately 80 other
organic compounds, metals, and nine ordnance compounds by
Analytical Resources Incorporated in August, 1989. DOH will
release the data to the Washington Department of Ecology and
EPA in September, 1989; DOH may recommend that EPA conduct a
health risk assessment if warranted by the data. DOH is
considering requesting that the beach be closed to fishing.
Please keep me abreast of any decisions along these lines.
DOH will conduct fecal coliform and priority pollutant
analyses (both metals and organics) in muscle, skin and
visceral tissues of sea cucumbers harvested from at least
two stations in Sinclair and Dyes Inlets. When will this
sampling begin?
Health Education
DOH will continue their public education program that
focuses on proper harvesting and preparation of shellfish.
Brochures will be distributed while the Brenerton-Kitsap
County Health Department is conducting its shoreline survey.
The educational program coordinator who recently joined DOH
could coordinate with the Bremerton-Kitsap County Health
Department to develop additional educational materials (e.g.
brochures, presentations to school and community groups,
media spots) related to Sinclair and Dyes Inlets. Ecology
recommends that these materials focus on bacterial and toxic
contamination of shellfish in Sinclair and Dyes Inlets: e.g.
causes, health risks of eating contaminated shellfish,
actions that can be taken by individuals to improve water
quality with resulting better quality shellfish, and actions
being taken by local, state and federal agencies through the
urban bay action program and watershed planning processes to
improve water quality and attempt to recertify Dyes Inlet
for commercial shellfish harvest. Please indicate potential
time frames for developing and distributing educational
materials on these topics.
Mr. Don Melvin
August 10, 1989
Page 4
you,have "viewed this letter, I would like a written
wth o'remod?f1y0^by AUgUSt 28' ^i^ting V°"r concurrence
^,.?r mo
-------
Richard J. Thompson
Secretary
>
01
SIATF OF WASHINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL AND HEALTH SERVICES
August 23, 1989
nnr.ss
Dr. Fran Solomon
August 22, 1989
Page Two
Dr. Fran Solomon ',,'•"••'
Department of Ecology ••"''
4350 150th Avenue N.E.
Redmond, Washington 96052-5301
Dear Fran:
Ihe following letter Is the response you requested in your August 10 letter
which described the Department of Health contributions to the Sinclair/Dyes
Inlet action plan. Unless otherwise stated below, our office plans to
implement actions as outlined In you August 10 letter.
Resource Management
Paragraph one: It would be more accurate to state that the possibility o£-
recertifylno: a portion of Dyes Inlet Is under consideration.
Paragraph two: Me are requesting that the Board of Health rule on the
recreational shellfish regulations by September 13, 1989. If they are
adopted, they will become effective at that time.
Mater Quality and Shellfish Monitoring for Bacteria
Paragraph three: International Shellfish Sampling Conference should read
Interstate Shellfish Sanitation Conference.
Shellfish Monitoring for Toxics
Paragraph two: In a phone conversation on August 14, 1989, with Phil Struck
(Kltsap County Health Department), Phil indicated that the beaches had been
posted with warning signs.
Paragraph three: The development of a work plan which will outline protocols
for sample collection, preparation, and analysis should be completed within
one week. Following the completion of the work plan, we anticipate two months
until we have test results and four months until we have a final report.
Health Education
Paragraph one: I have not discussed the distribution of brochures with the
Kitsap County Health Department. The brochures which I distribute during
shoreline surveys provide information on the operation and maintenance of
septic systems.
Paragraph two: Cllve Pepe, the staff member who is working on our public
education program. Is occupying a temporary position at present. Only 50
percent of dive's time is devoted to public education and that constitutes
developing an Inventory of our educational resources. We anticipate filling a
permanent position which will be Involved in public education fifty percent of
the time within one or two months. He should be able to begin addressing the
development of new educational material at that time.
If you need additional Information or clarification, my number in Olympia is
566-4484.
Sincerely,
DON MELVDi
Environmentalist
Shellfish Section
DM:ba
-------
HkMlNf (1 r.RfOOIRF
a>
M \IF (II VVW IINdTI IN
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
M . fcVi/OMnil II,I\/I»IK«»I 'Will.' Mill
August 9, 1989
Ms. Nina Carter
Washington Parks and Recreation Commission
7150 Cleanwater Lane, KY-11
Olympia, Washington 98504-5711
'Yi
Dear Ms.
This letter is in followup to the recent conference call
about the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action Plan. Michael
Jacobson (PTI Environmental Services) and I talked with you
about potential actions of the Washington Parks and
Recreation Commission that will be written into the Action
Plan. Following is a summary of my understanding of the
resulting identified actions that will be undertaken by the
Washington Parks and Recreation Commission to improve water
quality in Sinclair and Dyes Inlets.
Boater Education
The Washington Parks and Recreation Commission is committed
to making educational information available to the boating
community in Sinclair and Dyes Inlets. Parks and Recreation
has distributed 60 environmental education packets to the
Bremerton Yacht Club and has prepared three educational
signs: a logo for pumpout stations, an instruction sign for
pumpout use, and a poster (developed originally by the Hood
Canal Coordinating Commission). What does the logo look
like; does it contain a motivating theme? Parks and
Recreation will distribute these materials to marinas in
Sinclair and Dyes Inlets when Ecology sends a marina list.
Parks and Recreation has used a Public Involvement and
Education (PIE) fund grant from the Puget Sound Water
Quality Authority to prepare 15,000 copies of a flyer that
summarizes the results of a recreational boater survey.
Parks and Recreation will send the flyers to the Port of
Bremerton for mailout in their newsletter or will send the
flyers to the 400 people on the Port of Bremerton's mailing
list if Ecology sends the mailing labels. People who
receive the flyer and are interested in obtaining the full
report about the survey can order it from Parks and
Recreation. What is the cost of the full report? A
followup boater survey will be conducted in three years to
Ms. Nina Carter
August 9, 1989
Page 2
assess the effectiveness of ongoing boater education
programs.
A slide show about boat waste management will be available
for group presentations at the end of 1989 or early in 1990.
Parks and Recreation is producing a video program on the
same topic; the video will be available for loan to boater
groups.
Legislation
The Washington Parks and Recreation Commission is committed
to informing marinas in Sinclair and Dyes Inlets about
availability of financial assistance for installation and
repair of sewage pumpout/dumpout facilities. This year the
Washington legislature passed a bill requiring new marinas
to install sewage pumpout facilities. The bill allocated
$300,000 during the next biennium for public and private
marinas in environmentally sensitive areas to apply for
funding to install and repair such facilities. Parks and
Recreation will mail information about this grant program
and other pots of money (e.g. Centennial Clean Water Fund)
to marinas in Sinclair and Dyes Inlets in summer 1989;
application materials will be available in fall 1989 and the
first batch of awards will be granted in January/Febraury
1990. Parks and Recreation will establish a task force to
choose environmentally sensitive areas; the requirements
will be based on existing studies such as the Sinclair and
Dyes Inlets Data Summaries and Problem Identification
The new law allocates a total of $1,000,000 for the first
biennium (fiscal years 1990 - 1991) and $1,000,000 annually
for each of the following four years. In addition to sewage
pumpout/dumpout grants, one of the other funding provisions
is for ports and local health departments to develop
environmental education programs. Education elements
include information on toxic substances used by boaters
(e.g. oil, paints) and sewage disposal.
After you have reviewed this letter, I would like a written
response from you by August 25 indicating your concurrence
with or modification of the contents and answering the
questions in the letter. If you want to discuss or clarify
any issues beforehand, please call me during the week of
August 21 at 867-7219. The information in this letter and
in the Source/Action Matrix developed earlier will provide
the basis for the Washington Parks and Recreation
Commission's contributions to the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
Action Plan. The draft Action Plan will be released in
September, 1989 and distributed for review to the Sinclair
and Dyes Inlets Action Program Work Group.
-------
MB. Nina carter
August 9, 1989
Page 3
I appreciate your support for the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
Action Program and look forward to your response.
Sincerely,
Fran Solomon, Ph.D.
Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
Action Program Coordinatorp
-------
>
00
STA1F OF WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON SI ATE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
7/50 Ojmv.i/rr /.»«• U-H • O/iin/n.i ll'.n/wifllun '
August 25, 1989
(.'!»•)
Ms. Fran Solomon
Sinclair and Dyes Inlet
Action Program Coordinator
Washington Department of Ecology
Hallstop PV-11
Olympla, Washington 98504
Dear Ms. Solomon:
AUG 28 1989
UFPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
NORTHWEST REGION
I am responding to your letter asking for confirmation of State Parks role in
the Sinclair and Dyes Inlet Action Program. As you may know, H1na Carter has
moved to an Executive Assistant position. I have taken over her position as
the Boater Environmental Education Coordinator. j
State Parks and Recreation, Boater Environmental Education Program, agrees to
the following:
Boater Education
The Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission's Boater Environmental
Education Program will provide three educational signs to the marinas in
Sinclair and Dyes Inlets that have pumpout stations, as Identified in the
Boater's Guide to Clean Water and Good Times brochure. These signs include:
a logo for the pumpout station, an instruction sign for pumpout use, and an
Interpretive sign (Developed originally by the Hood Canal Coordinating
Commission.). Photo copies of these three signs are enclosed.
The Boater Environmental Program also agrees to distribute 400 boating survey
summary flyers either to the Port of Bremerton for mallout or to 400 people on
the Port of Bremerton's mailing list j_f Ecology provides mailing labels.
Ecology must notify Parks of which option they choose and provide reasonable
lead time for the mallout completion. Persons interested In the full boating
survey report may obtain it free from Parks.
Parks cannot commit to producing a video on boat waste management for
distribution In late 1989 or early 1990. The Boater Environmental Education
Program may produce a video In FY91 if funds and time allow. Representatives
from Parks will give presentations to groups in Sinclair and Dyes Inlets as
time allows.
Ms. Fran Solomon
August 25, 1989
Page 2
Parks Is participating In an EPA sponsored high school video contest pilot
program called Video Visions. High School students from select schools in the
Puget Sound area will be producing an educational video on the environmental
Impacts of boating. These videos are due for Judging January 30, 1990. Parks
may be able to distribute these videos for group presentations after the
judging period.
legislation
Parks 1s currently developing eligibility criteria and WAC's for grants to
marinas to Install sewage pumpout and dump stations. Application materials
will be available In Spring, 1990. Marinas in designated "environmentally
sensitive areas" or "polluted areas" will be notified of eligibility. A draft
"fact sheet" on our grant programs 1s Included. Parks will be finalizing the
"fact sheet" 1n September 1989. This "fact sheet" will be sent out upon
request for Information and may be Included in our eligibility notification to
marinas.
Please note the modifications to your letter.
questions, please contact me at 586-2283.
If you have any further
Peggy Brltt
Boater Environmental Education
Coordinator
R7 8-23-a
-------
( HKMINF O CRECOIRf
I >irprior
to
WASHINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
JI5H-ISHF/I -Vir M • Kiiltimmt It.lJmvP"" <<""s- ^ "" • I-'"1' """ ""*'
August 9, 1989
Ms. Vallana Piccolo
Puget Sound Water Quality Authority
217 Pine Street Suite 1100
Seattle, Washington 98101
Dear
ccolo:
This letter is in followup to the recent meeting that
Michael Rylko (EPA), Michael Jacobson (PTI Environmental
'Services) and I had with you, Joanne Richter, Louise Forrest
and Paul O'Brien to talk about potential actions of the
Puget Sound Water Quality Authority that will be written
into the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action Plan. Following is
a summary of my understanding of the resulting identified
actions that will be undertaken by the Puget Sound Hater
Quality Authority to improve water quality in Sinclair and
Dyes Inlets.
Source Control Activities at Navy Facilities
The Puget Sound Water Quality Authority, in cooperation with
Ecology and EPA, will work with the Puget Sound Naval
Shipyard and Naval Submarine Base Bangor to implement those
portions of the 1989 Puget Sound Water Quality Management
Plan applicable to each facility. A letter from the three
agencies will be mailed to the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard
and to Bangor in July, 1989. The letter will list and
describe applicable programs of the Puget Sound Water
Quality Management Plan and the status of facility
activities related to these programs, e.g. stormwater
runoff, municipal and industrial discharges, contaminated
sediments and dredging, shellfish protection, spill
prevention and response, nonpoint source pollution, wetlands
protection, and education. In followup to the letter,
representatives from the three agencies will meet with
representatives from the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard and
Bangor to discuss issues of concern. The end product of
this process will be a formal memorandum of agreement on
actions that will be taken by each Navy facility to achieve
implementation of the Puget Sound Water Quality Management
Plan. Agreements will be signed by early 1990. The process
of negotiating an agreement with the Navy facilities will be
coordinated with the process of negotiating what actions
Ms. Vallana Piccolo
August 9, 1989
Page 2
will be written into the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action
Plan for these facilities.
Oversight of NPDES Permits
The Puget Sound Water Quality Authority will track and
review NPDES permits written by Ecology for consistency with
the Puget Sound Hater Quality Management Plan. Is the
review done in writing? The Authority could request that
EPA reopen permits (e.g. the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard's
permit) based on new information (e.g. spill reports) in
order to include best management practices, education and
oil spill response plans.
Public Involvement and Education Fund
The Puget Sound Water Quality Authority has $1,000,000 in
their Public Involvement and Education Fund. Local agencies
implementing the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action Plan will
be eligible to apply for these awards. A request for
proposals will be out on August 1, 1989. Proposals are due
on October 2, 1989; projects will be selected for awards in
early 1990. Another round of proposals will be due February
1, 1990; projects will be selected for awards in spring
1990. Will high priority for funding be assigned to
projects that involve implementation of urban bay action
plans?
Puget Sound Ambient Monitoring Program
The Puget Sound Water Quality Authority coordinates the
Puget Sound Ambient Monitoring Program (PSAMP), which
involves sediment and fish sampling for toxic chemicals.
Under PSAMP, there are two sediment sampling stations and
one fish sampling station in Sinclair Inlet and one fish
sampling station in Dyes Inlet. These stations were
selected with the objectives of obtaining baseline data and
looking for long-term trends to evaluate implementation of
the Puget Sound Water Quality Management Plan, what is the
anticipated sampling frequency for sediments and for fish?
After you have reviewed this letter, I would like a written
response from you by August 28 indicating your concurrence
with or modification of the contents and answering the
questions in the letter. If you want to discuss or clarify
any issues beforehand, please call me during the week of
August 21 at 867-7219. The information in this letter and
in the Source/Action Matrix developed earlier will provide
the basis for the Puget Sound Water Quality Authority's
contributions to the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action Plan.
The draft Action Plan will be released in September, 1989
-------
Ms. Vallana Piccolo
August 9, 1989
Page 3
and distributed for review to the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
Action Program Work Group.
I appreciate your support for the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
Action Program and look forward to your response.
Sincerely,
Fran Solomon, Ph.D.
Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
Action Program Coordinator
cc: Louise Forrest
Joanne Richter
-------
kMHIKINI FIFKItR
< luir
STATE (If WASHINGTON
PUGET SOUND WATER QUALITY AUTHORITY
217 fine Slrwf ^uili' lll*> • V,i»/t> \Vjihmgttm1HIOI • (JIV>) -!(• I '<.'
-------
< IlklslINF O (,KEC<>IRF
MMI ( H WASHINGTON
DFPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
J <50-/Sflf/t ur Ml • /u'l/mon*/ U'.ishwigfon 'W(^J-5'()/
August 9, 1989
David Jamison, Ph.D.
Washington Department of Natural Resources
Marine Research and Development Center
Mail Stop EX-12
Olympia, Washington 98504
Dear Dr-
f ^
r-J-aflUso
This letter is in followup to the recent conference call
about the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action Plan. Michael
Jacobson (PTI Environmental Services) and I talked with you
about potential actions of the Washington Department of
Natural Resources (DNR) that will be written into the Action
Plan. Following is a summary of my understanding of the
resulting identified actions that will be undertaken by DNR
to improve water quality in Sinclair and Dyes Inlets.
Land Ownership
DNR owns and leases aquatic lands in Sinclair and Dyes
Inlets. During the 1990-91 biennium, requiring lessees to
characterize and clean up contaminated sediments on their
lands will be a high DNR priority. DNR will have a team of
people to work on specific issues related to sediment
contamination. What will be the priority status of state-
owned aquatic lands in urban bay areas, specifically
Sinclair and Dyes Inlets?
Harbor Area Management Agreement
DNR will develop a harbor area management agreement with the
Port of Bremerton by the end of 1989. Under this agreement,
the Port will manage state-owned lands in harbor areas and
waterways. The agreement will include a provision that will
make the Port liable for contaminated sediments found on
these lands. The Department of Ecology will have direct
input in writing the "contaminated sediments" language of
the agreement. Is the Port doing sediment characterization
work as part of their urban redevelopment efforts?
Sediment Characterization
DNR owns the aquatic lands at the existing and planned new
ferry terminals in downtown Bremerton; Washington
David Jamison, Ph.D.
August 9, 1989
Page 2
Department of Transportation (DOT) leases these lands. DNR
will request DOT to characterize sediments at the Bremerton
ferry terminal sites and will request appropriate remedial
actions if warranted by the resulting data. What is the
time frame for making the request for sediment
characterization and for the actual characterization work?
Aquatic Land Enhancement Account
Local governments can apply to DNR for funding under the
Aquatic Land Enhancement Account to carry out projects that
are part of the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action Plan.
Categories eligible for funding include aquatic habitat
protection, resource protection, and recreational access to
harbor areas and waterways.
After you have reviewed this letter, I would like a written
response from you by August 28, indicating your concurrence
with or modification of the contents and answering the
questions in the letter. I would also like a copy of the
current agreement with DOT for managing the aquatic lands at
the ferry terminals. If you want to discuss or clarify any
issues beforehand, please call me during the week of August
21 at 867-7219. The information in this letter and the
notes from the conference call will provide the basis for
DNR's contributions to the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action
Plan. The draft Action Plan will be released in September,
1989 and distributed for review to the Sinclair and Dyes
Inlets Action Program Work Group.
I appreciate your cooperation in this process and look
forward to your response.
Sincerely,
Fran Solomon, Ph.D.
Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
Action Program Coordinator
-------
WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF
Natural Resources
BRIAN BOYLE
Commissioner of Public Lands
OLYMPIA. WA 98504
Fran Solomon, Ph.D. u" SEp 07 iggg UWptember 1, 1989
Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
Action Program CeortlnafifiW™^^Si? GY
Department of Ecology
4350- IJOthAveNZ
Redmond, WA. 98052-5301
Dear Fran:
I am responding to your letter of August 9, 1989 concerning DNR's
role in the Sinclair / Dyes Inlets Action Program.
I will respond to your questions in the order in which they were
presented in your letter.
Land Ownership:
1. DNR manages state owned aquatic lands on behalf of the
people of the state of Washington. DNR is not the owner, only the
manager.
2. During the 90-91 biennium, DNR hopes to begin the process
of dealing with leasees in terms of negotiating environmental
assessments and cleanup. However we do not have staff time at
present to undertake this process other than on the basis of lease
renewals.
3. DNR is beginning the process of establishing a team of
people to deal with contaminated sediment issues We hope to field
such a team in the next fiscal year.
4. When the contaminated sediment lease team is activated,
areas with known or suspected problem areas based on existing
Fran Solomon
Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
9/1/69
Page 2
information will be the first to be reviewed. No decision has been
made to rank one area over another at this point.
Harbor Area Management Agreement:
1. DNR is working with the Port of Bremerton to establish a
Harbor Area Agreement. There is no timeline established for signing
this agreement.
2. Under this agreement the Port of Bremerton will manage a
part of the Harbor Area.
3. There will be provision in the Agreement making the Port
liable for contaminated sediment found on the involved aquatic
lands if they are responsible for its occurrence.
4. Since we do not have as yet a Memorandum of
Understanding with the Department of Ecology on the handling of
contaminated sediment on state owned aquatic lands, we do not
anticipate that DOE will have a 'direct input* into the agreement
language. However we would be happy to keep DOE informed of the
results of our negotiations with the Port of Bremerton.
5. We are not aware of the Ports actions with regard to
evaluation of contaminated sediment in the urban redevelopment
area.
Sediment Characterization:
1. DNR manages for the people of Washington the harbor area
involved in the DOT ferry terminal remodeling activities.
2 and 3- DNR has commented on the Corps of Engineer's
permit application by DOT concerning construction in the area prior
to determining the presence and level of contaminated sediments.
Given the current manpower constraints we do not have time to
begin negotiations with DOT on the issue.
Aquatic Land Enhancement Account:
Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
-------
Fran Solomon Page 3
Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
9/1/59
1 and 2. ALEA is available to local governments for projects
that Involve public recreational access acquisition and public
education. Because of the presence of other funding programs
dealing with sediment and water quality, funds from ALEA are not
available for corrections of those type of problems.
Contaminated sediment is still a new program to the Department As
policy and actions are implemented we intend to keep DOE fully
informed.
•ours.
David W Jamison, Ph.D.
Senior Marine Scientist
Division of Aquatic Lands
cc: Stan Biles
Ann Morgan
Ron Teissere
Mark Green
Bob Hoyser
-------
I IIKIMINE O GREGOME
Direr lor
STMf (IF WASHINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
Nl . Kfdnu
Hr. Ben Klein
Marine Division
Washington Department of Transportation
Hail Stop KF-01
Olympia, Washington 98504
Dear Hr. Klein:
This letter is in followup to the recent meeting that
Hichael Rylko (EPA), Hichael Jacobson (PTI Environmental
Services), and I had with you to talk about potential
actions of the Washington Department of Transportation (DOT)
that will be written into the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
Action Plan. Following is a summary of my understanding of
the resulting identified actions that will be undertaken by
DOT with respect to water quality in Sinclair and Dyes
_ Inlets.
>
tO DOT is contributing 1/3 of the funding for the proposed
W floating pier at the First Street Dock in Bremerton. One of
the uses of the floating pier is ferry berthing and
unloading for the Seattle-Bremerton passenger ferry and the
Seattle-Port Orchard passenger ferry (the latter operated by
Horlucks). DOT is building a new transfer span at the
existing auto ferry terminal. Construction will begin in
early September and will take one year to complete; dredging
will not occur. Will concrete or creosote pilings be used?
Will water jets be used to install the pilings?
The submerged lands under the existing and proposed ferry
terminal sites are owned by the Washington Department of
Natural Resources, but leased by DOT free of charge. These
sediments are adjacent to the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard
and may contain toxic chemicals that could be resuspended
into the water column when pilings are driven during
construction. DOT will consider sampling and analyzing
sediments at the work site for the new transfer span before,
during and after construction. Please clarify whether and
when DOT can proceed with this sediment characterization and
what types of coordination activities are necessary with
Department of Natural Resources or other agencies.
After you have reviewed this letter, I would like a written
response from you by August 28, indicating your concurrence
with or modification of the contents and answering the
Hr. Ben Klein
August 9, 1989
Page 2
questions in the letter. If you want to discuss or clarify
any issues beforehand, please call me during the week of
August 21 at 867-7219. The information in this letter and
in the notes from our earlier meeting will provide the basis
for the Washington Department of Transportation's
contributions to the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action Plan.
The draft Action Plan will be released in September, 1989
and distributed for review to the Sinclair and Dyes inlets
Action Program Work Group.
I appreciate your cooperation in this process and look
forward to your response.
Sincerely,
Fran Solomon, Ph.D.
Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
Action Program Coordinator
-------
Washington State
Department of Transportation
Transportation Building KF-01
Olympia. Washington 9850
-------
< itkMlNF O CRECOIRE
I llfWlOr
SUlf or WViHIN(,I(IN
PAR (MlNT OF FCOIOGY
• K<-iiiti;r 'ttJOS.' 1 IfJJ
August 9, 1989
Ms. Dixie Dragich
Kitsap County Planning
Department of Community Development
614 Division Street MS-36
Port Orchard, Washington 98366
Dear Ms.
This letter is in followup to the recent meeting that
Michael Jacobson (PTI Environmental Services) and I had with
you to talk about potential actions of Kitsap County
Planning that will be written into the Sinclair and Dyes
Inlets Action Plan. Following is a summary of my
understanding of the resulting identified actions that will
be undertaken by Kitsap County Planning to improve water
quality in Sinclair and Dyes Inlets.
Watershed Planning
Kitsap County Planning has submitted a proposed scope of
work to Washington Department of Ecology grant
administrators for the development of a watershed action
plan for Dyes Inlet. The grant agreement will be signed by
August, 1989. Watershed planning committee meetings will
continue on a monthly basis, with representation from
Ecology to oversee the process and to provide liaison with
the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action Program. A consultant
will be selected via an open process (request for proposals,
evaluation of proposals, and candidate interviews) by
October, 1989. A draft watershed action plan will be
developed by August 1990, modelled after the urban bay
action plan for Sinclair and Dyes Inlets, and will address
any nonpoint pollution control actions identified in the
urban bay action plan for Sinclair and Dyes Inlets. The
final watershed action plan will be submitted to Ecology in
April 1991. Development of the watershed action plan for
Sinclair Inlet will follow the same process as for Dyes
Inlet, with a two month time lag for each step.
Shoreline Management/Shoreline Master Plan
Kitsap County Planning will continue to review applications
for shoreline permits and to review projects for compliance
with the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). Starting in
Hs. Dixie Dragich
August 9, 1989
Page 2
fall 1989, planning staff will update the current Kitsap
County Shoreline Management Master Program. The Planning
Division will enforce all regulations of the program,
including those pertaining to boating facilities, landfills,
dredge and fill activities, stormwater management, and catch
basin and oil/water separator maintenance.
Kitsap County Planning will continue to work with the Kitsap
County Public Works Department and the Kitsap County
Conservation District in developing shoreline master plan
guidelines and requirements for stormwater, including
stormwater best management practices (BMPs). Please clarify
the schedule for developing these guidelines and
requirements.
Assistance to Other Agencies
Kitsap County Planning could fund a staff person in the
Kitsap County Conservation District to develop urban BMPs as
part of an information exchange program. Funding could also
be provided to the Kitsap County Conservation District or to
the Bremerton-Kitsap County Health Department to sample for
bacteria in Sinclair Inlet as part of the watershed
management grant. At what point in the watershed planning
process could such funding be arranged? What types of
information do you need from the local conservation district
or health department in order to implement this funding?
In summer-fall 1989, Kitsap County Planning will inform the
Kitsap County Commissioners about the importance of
Substitute House Bill 1192. This bill, passed by the
Washington legislature during the 1989 session, enables
county legislative bodies to finance the activities of a
conservation district by levying assessments on developers
thereby decreasing the County's financial burden.
Gorst/Kitsap County Sewerage Project
As part of the scope of work for the Sinclair Inlet
watershed planning grant, Kitsap County Planning will
include an engineering evaluation (with design drawings) and
feasibility analysis for extending sewer utility service to
the Gorst area. Kitsap County Planning will also conduct an
industrial survey of the Gorst area and other unincorporated
areas of the county including information on average flow
(gallons per day) of industrial waste, and known/suspected
pollutants in the industrial waste stream.
After you have reviewed this letter, I would like a written
response from you by August 28, indicating your concurrence
with or modification of the contents and answering the
-------
Ms. Dixie Dragich
August 9, 1989
Page 3
any issues beforehand, please call me during the week of
August 21 at 867-7219. The information in this letter and
in the Source/Action Matrix developed earlier will provide
the basis for Kitsap County Planning's contributions to the
Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action Plan. The draft Action Plan
will be released in September, 1989 and distributed for
review to the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action Program Work
Group.
I appreciate your support for the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
Action Program and look forward to your response.
Sincerely,
Fran Solomon, Ph.D.
Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
Action Program Coordinator
Shayn Alire
Clyde Stricklin
-------
KITSAP COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
FAX 815-4125 RON PERKEREWICZ, DIRECTOR
t (With. 1 800 87! 4503)
114 DIVISION STREET MS-M. PORT ORCHARD, V
183
September 22. 1989
Ms. Fran Solomon, Ph.D
Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action Program Coordinator
Department of Ecology
4350 - 150th Ave. N.E.
Redmond. WA 98052-5301
Dear Hs. Solomon:
DFPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
"NORTHWEST REGION
This 1s a written response Indicating our concurrence with potential actions
the Kltsap County Planning will undertake to Inprove water quality In Sinclair
and Dyes Inlets. It 1s understood that the Information In this letter and In
the Source/Action Matrix developed earlier will provide the basis for Kltsap
County Plannlng's contributions to the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action Plan.
Watershed Planning
Kltsap County Planning has submitted a proposed scope of work to Washington
Department of Ecology grant administrators for the development of a watershed
action plan for Dyes Inlet and Clear Creek. The grant agreement will be signed
by October. 1989. Watershed planning committee meetings will continue on a
monthly basis, with representation from Ecology to oversee the process and to
provide Hal son with the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action Program. Consultant
will be selected via an open process (request for proposals, evaluation of
proposals, and candidate Interviews) by November. 1989. A draft watershed action
plan will be developed by April 1991, modelled after the Urban Bay Action Plan
for Sinclair and Dyes Inlets, and will address nonpolnt pollution control actions
Identified In the Urban Bay Action Plan for Sinclair and Dyes Inlets. The final
watershed action plan will be submitted to Ecology In September, 1991.
Development of the watershed action plan for Sinclair Inlet will follow the same
process as for Dyes Inlet, with a two month time lag for each step.
Shoreline Management/Shoreline Master Plan
KUsap County Planning will continue to review applications for shoreline permits
and to review projects for compliance with the State Environmental Policy act
(SEPA). Starting in late fall 1989, planning staff will update the current
Kltsap County Shoreline Management Master Program. The Planning Division will
enforce all regulations of the program. Including those pertaining to boating
facilities, landfills, dredge and fill activities, stormwater management, and
catch basin and oil/water separator maintenance.
Kltsap County Planning will continue to work with the Kltsap County Public Works
Department and the Kltsap County Conservation District in developing shoreline
master plan guidelines and requirements for stormwater, including stormwater best
management practices (BMPs).
Mi. Fran Solomon. Ph.O
September 22, 1989
Page 2
Assistance to Other Agencies
Kltsap County Planning Intends to fund staff 1n the KUsap County Conservation
District In contracts for Sinclair Inlet management planning. The County will
work with Bremerton-KHsap County Health Department to sample for bacteria In
Sinclair Inlet and will coordinate with the Urban Bay Action Plan. KUsap
County Planning and KUsap Conservation District would also like to work with
the Urban Bay management planning to develop urban BMPs as part of an information
exchange program.
Gorst/KUsao County Sewerage Project
As part of the scope of work for the Sinclair Inlet watershed planning grant,
KUsap County Planning will Include an engineering evaluation (with design
drawings) and feasibility analysis for extending sewer utility service to the
Gorst area. Kltsap County Planning will also conduct an Industrial survey of
the Gorst area and other unincorporated areas of the county Including Information
on average flow (gallons per day of Industrial waste) and known/suspected
pollutants In the Industrial waste stream.
All of the Information 1n this letter reflects the Intentions of Kltsap County
to support the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action Plan.
ClyHe StrlckHn
KUsap County Department of Community Development
CS/tmo
wp4.2urbanbay.let
-------
F O CRfCOIRE
STMf ( >F \\ '\SHIN(,T< >N
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
r* / • Kfi/niom/ U.is/tin^'fon <'2 r> tut
August 10, 1989
CO
O
Mr. Bruce Oyloe
Kitsap County Public Works Department
Surface Water Management Division
614 Division Street
Port Orchard, Washington 98366
Dear Mr. Oyloe:
This letter is in followup to the recent meeting that
Michael Jacobson (PTI Environmental Services) and I had with
you to talk about potential actions of the Kitsap County
Public Works Department that will be written into the
Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action Plan. Following is a
summary of my understanding of the resulting identified
actions that will be undertaken by the Public Works
Department to improve water quality in Sinclair and Dyes
Inlets.
Development Permit Review
The Kitsap County Public Works Department will continue to
conduct engineering and hydraulics review for all
development permits and will continue to inspect new
development sites to ensure adequate silt and erosion
control during construction. Specific details per these
nonpoint pollution control efforts will be developed in
concert with the watershed planning being coordinated by
Kitsap County.
Storrowater Management
The Kitsap County Public Works Department will continue to
require detention/retention basins and oil/water separators
for all new development, and to conduct annual inspections
and maintenance of all publicly owned systems. The Public
Works Department will continue to send letters to owners of
private detention/retention basins and oil/water separator
systems about the owners' responsibility to maintain these
facilities. Previous response from owners has been good.
In followup to these letters, will the Public Works
Department begin an inspection program for privately owned
stormwater control systems?
Mr. Bruce Oyloe
August 10, 1989
Page 2
The Kitsap County Public Works Department will maintain two
biofiltration projects currently in operation in the Clear
Creek area of Silverdale. Kitsap County will continue to
track biofiltration projects underway in King County and to
apply what is learned from those projects to developing more
effective biofiltration projects in the Sinclair and Dyes
Inlets areas. What are your criteria for developing and
requiring biofiltration systems?
In order to control stormwater runoff, the Public Works
Department will continue to require best management
practices (BMPs) for new development including new roads.
Standard engineering practices and the 1979 King County
manual will be followed. The Public Works Department will
continue to work with Kitsap County Planning in developing
shoreline master plan requirements for stormwater, including
stormwater BMPs. Please clarify the schedule for developing
.these requirements.
Stormwater runoff may result in metals loading to creek's
that are tributary to Sinclair and Dyes Inlets. Would the
Public Works Department be able to monitor metal levels in
Anderson, Gorst, Parish and Ross creeks, using the
analytical capabilities at the Brownsville treatment plant?
After you have reviewed this letter, I would like a written
response from you by August 28, indicating your concurrence
with or modification of the contents and answering the
questions in the letter. If you want to discuss or clarify
any issues beforehand, please call me during the week of
August 21 at 867-7219. The information in this letter and
in the notes from our earlier meeting will provide the basis
for the Kitsap County Public Works Department's
contributions to the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action Plan.
The draft Action Plan will be released in September, 1989
and distributed for review to the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
Action Program Work Group.
I appreciate your cooperation in this process and look
forward to your response.
Sincerely,
Fran Solomon, Ph.D.
Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
Action Program Coordinator
FS
-------
Kitsap
County
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
JOHN A. SWANSON, P.E..DIRECTOR/ENGINEER.
August 24, 1989
ASSISTANT DIRECTORS
Paul A.Doul. P.E. ENGINEERING
H.V.IEntol Loop. OPERATIONS
Randy Cllleil. P.E. UTILITIES
AUG291989
Fran Solomon, PH. D. DEPARTMENT or ECOLOGY
Sinclair and Dyes Inlet Action Coordinator NORTHWEST REGION
Department of Ecology
4350 150th Av. N. E.
Redmond, Hn 98052-5301
Re:
Kitsap County Public Works, Hydraulics Division
Sinclair, and Dyes Inlet Action Plan
Dear Dr. Solomon,
I would like to offer & response to your letter of August 10,
1989 regarding Kitsap County Public Works, Hydraulics Division's
participation in the Sinclair and Dyes Inlet Action Plan. I will
attempt to clarify and highlight several points you have brought
out in your letter, that given current staffing levels and local
ordinance we will not be able to obligate our services.
f> Land Use and Permit Review Process
_». Kitsap County will continue to conduct engineering and hydraulic
review for all land use applications, including commercial
residential, large lot and short plat subdivisions. These
evaluations include the detailed appraisal of site and downstream
impacts, engineering principals applied to the conveyance
systems, review of the form of detention or retention as applied
to the site, and complete evaluation of the temporary erosion and
sedimentation control plan to be Implemented during the
construction phase of the project.
These primary goals, and objectives are specifically outlined in
Kitsap County Drainage Ordinance No. 117, which adopts the King
County Drainage Manual of 1979.
Should additional nonpoint pollution control efforts be required
they may only be implemented by modifying the current standards
adopted by Kitsap County. We have no other means or methods by
which to control nonpoint pollution sources.
Storm Water Management
Kitsap County will continue to follow our existing practices of
requiring detention/retention facilities and oil water separators
as outlined in our current standards.
We do not however have the mechanism nor the manpower to perform
any routine inspection program on privately owned and maintained
systems. Our current ordinance allows for only identifying,
notifying and in emergency situations performing work on failing
systems that were installed after September 1987.
KITSAP COUNTY COURTHOUSE 614 DIVISION STREET MS-26. PORT ORCHARD.WA. 98366-4686 (2061876-7121. FAX NO. 895-4926
Page 2
Dr. Fran Soloman
Kitsap County has Just recently completed the first bio-
filtration system to serve a new C.R. I.D project in Silverdale.
This system will serve a large potential commercial area that
will discharge to Clear Creek.
There is one small bio-filtration system that has been in
operation for the past two years. This small system is currently
being monitored by an number of agencies and design engineers for
its effectiveness. The monitoring however has not included any
water sampling.
Kitsap County encourages the installation of bio-filtration
systems when discharging to bodies of water, wetlands or streams.
Several bio-filtration systems are currently being designed for
land use applications that are in the "preliminary" stages. To
date no specific engineering data on the proposed systems has
been submitted or reviewed by this office. The criteria by which
we will evaluate the final plans will be the most current King
County Surface Water Management design manual.
Until such time a new design criteria or drainage ordinance is in
effect our efforts in the area of bio-filtration will be limited
to the areas described above.
Monitoring Water Quality
At this time the hydraulics division does not have the expertise
or manpower to implement a water quality monitoring program.
Kitsap County Public Works, Hydraulics Division is a small
fledgling organization dedicated to the purpose defined by our
current county ordinance. We are unable to deviate from that
guideline to any great extent until such time as it is amended or
modified.
We will make every effort to work with the Dyes and Sinclair
Action Program within the parameters available to us.
Should you have any additional questions please feel free to call
me at any time.
Sincerely,
John A. Swanson, P.E.
By:
Bruce H. Oyloe
Hydraulics Division
BHO/bho A:doe-l
-------
HWMINf O GRfCOIRf
ST-UE Of W4SHING1ON
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
Uf-' NF • MWmnni/ U ,)s/jintjf()n 'Wlv'-'; <0l
August 9, 1989
6
to
Mr. Bob Wiltennood
Kitsap County Conservation District
Courthouse Annex
614 Division Street
Port Orchard, Washington 98366
Dear Mr.
.ennood:
This letter is in followup to the recent meeting that
Michael Jacobson (PTI Environmental Services) and I had with
you, Scott Edwards and Charlotte Garrido to talk about
potential actions of the Kitsap County Conservation District
that will be written into the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
Action Plan. Following is a summary of my understanding of
the resulting identified actions that will be undertaken by
the Kitsap County Conservation District to reduce pollutant
loading to Sinclair and Dyes Inlets.
Water Quality Monitoring
The Kitsap County Conservation District is currently
involved in water quality monitoring for fecal coliforms in
creeks that are tributary to Sinclair Inlet (e.g. Blackjack,
Squire, Ruby) and Dyes Inlet (Clear Creek) . The 1988-89
data will be available by fall, 1989. These creeks will
continue to be monitored for fecal coliforms before and
after the implementation of farm conservation plans that
include best management practices (BMPs) to control nonpoint
runoff into the creeks. For how long will the monitoring
continue?
The Conservation District will explore the option of
conducting followup fecal coliform sampling under contract
to the Bremerton-Kitsap County Health Department. What are
the likely contractual arrangements? The sampling would
occur at sites in Sinclair Inlet where baseline data was
obtained in the 1987-88 water quality monitoring study by
Joan Miniken.
Farm BMPs Program
The Conservation District received a one year grant to
continue the farm BMPs program. The work will begin on
Mr. Bob Wiltermood
August 9, 1989
Page 2
September 1, 1989 and will involve technical and
informational assistance to landowners for implementing BMPs
such as fencing, streambank revegetation and erosion control
for sedimentation. Public education will be accomplished
with tools such as signs, presentations to school and
community groups, informational packets, workshops, news
releases, and tours.
The Kitsap County Conservation District will also continue
to work with the Kitsap County Department of Community
Development to formalize a cooperative agreement to address
erosion problems in critical sites affecting water quality.
What is the schedule and process for formalizing the
cooperative agreement? Specific details per erosion control
efforts will be developed in concert with watershed planning
efforts being coordinated by Kitsap County.
Urban BMPs
The Conservation District intends to begin an urban BMP
program including stormwater control measures as soon as
funding can be obtained to hire staff to work in this area.
The Conservation District will apply for \ grant from the
Washington Conservation Conunission or from the Washington
Department of Ecology. What is the time frame for applying
for financial assistance? The Conservation District will
also approach the Kitsap County Department of Community
Development for funding from their shoreline budget. Will
this be done in writing or through a meeting?
House Bill 1192, passed by the Washington legislature during
the 1989 session, enables local conservation districts to
levy assessments on developers. When this program gets
underway in a year, the money from assessments could be used
to develop urban BMPs.
Resources
As part of their educational program, the Conservation
District will sponsor a wetlands protection workshop in
October, 1989. Cooperative habitat protection and salmon
enhancement efforts in streams and creeks are ongoing and
planned with the Suquamish Tribe, as well as coordinated
SEPA reviews. Please list the streams and creeks where
these cooperative efforts are underway. What is the process
for the coordinated SEPA reviews?
After you have reviewed this letter, I would like a written
response from you by August 28 indicating your concurrence
with or modification of the contents, and answering the
questions in the letter, if you want to discuss or clarify
any issues beforehand, please call me during the week of
-------
I
CO
Mr. Bob Wiltermood
August 9, 1989
Page 3
August 21 at 867-7219. The information in this letter and
in the Source/Action Matrix developed earlier will provide
the basis for the Conservation District's contributions to
the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action Plan. The draft Action
Plan will be released in September, 1989 and distributed for
review to the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action Program Work
Group.
I appreciate your enthusiasm for the Sinclair and Dyes
Inlets Action Program and your suggestions for interagency
cooperation on specific water quality issues. I look
forward to hearing from you.
Sincerely,
Fran Solomon, Ph.D.
Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
Action Program Coordinator
-------
Kllsap County Conservation District
Courthouse Annex - P O Box 146 - Port Orchard. WA 98366 - Phone (206) 876-7171/876-7172
August 19. 1969
Fran Solomon Ph.D.
V*. State Dept. of Ecology
4350 ISOth. Ave. N.E.
Redmond, Ua. 93052-5301
Dear Fran I
Following are our responses to your letter dated August 9,
concerning the Sinclair and Dye* Inlets Action Plan.
Uater Quality Monitoring
Ue can not predict for how long the monitoring Hill continue.
It t* dependent upon grants, ue never ,know from, year to year
if .ye will be in operation.
It im not likely ue will enter into a oontraot uith the
Brmmerton-Kitmap County Health Department. Ue do our own
tempting and pay the Health Department to run the test. This
if on a need bp basis, no set numbers.
There im no plan to Ho follow-up on the 1987-B8 water quality
monitoring study by Joan Mlnlken. The exception to this is in
the Blackjack stream system.
Farm BHPs Program
The Contervation District uill Implement an informal effort
to assist all county farmers at Installing BMP*, but tht
emphasis uill be Blackjack, Clear and Dogfish Creeks.
There hat been no schedule or prooett uorked out to formal tit
a oooperatlve agreement with Klttap County. This Is, only In
the idea ttage right nou.
Urbmff-'BHPt
It It unknown and iffy at this stage. Ue would like to
eventually set up something like King County hat. I would not
be able to give you a time frame at this time, though House
Bill 1192 should make It a little eatler.
It look*, like the District and DCD will have monies for Dyes
Inlet. This will Include some urban BHPs. The money cotes
from DOE to the county and then to the District, this ties
into the watershed ranking process and Dyes ranking number
one.
Fran Solomon Ph.D.
August 19, 1909
Page 2
Resources
The October workshop will be put on by the Rural Development ,
Committee which the District Is a member and will be a Pohtt* < ,<:,;
Uorkshop. Ue always include wetlands and BHPs at these
workshops though.
The streams where cooperative projects are underway would
include in Sinclair - Blackjack, Ruby, Square, Ross,
Anderson, Gorst, Annapolis. In Dyes - Clear (all trlbs),
Chloo, and about three small streams on the East side of Dyes
Inlet.
There is no SEPA review of these projects. The process is
through a HPA from Fisheries and so far have all been small
enough to be SEPA exempt.
I hope this oleares up some of the details. If you have any
questions please feel free to call me at 676-OS82.
Sincerely,
Bob Ulltermood
-------
( IIRISTINE O GREGQRE
1 lirpcior
STATF OF WASHINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
4350-15
-------
Mr. Don Miles
August 10, 1989
Page 3
£
o
Advisory Signs
The County Health Department will maintain advisory signs
near the Bremerton Wastewater Treatment Plant outfall, the
Port Orchard Wastewater Treatment Plant outfall, areas with
sewage overflow problems, and other areas identified as
posing significant public health risks. The signs state in
seven languages: "Bottomfish, crabs and shellfish may be
unsafe to eat due to pollution." We would hope that the
County Health Department will continue to provide guidance
to the Navy at both Jackson Park and the Puget Sound Naval
Shipyard.
Ecology appreciates the suggestions of the County Health
Department on sampling stations for Ecology's upcoming
shellfish and bottomfish toxics bioaccumulation study.
Based on our recent meeting, we selected as sampling
stations the following recreational fishing areas that are
near sources of toxic contamination: Bremerton First Street
Dock, Port Orchard public access, former Chevron petroleum
storage facility, Annapolis dock, Silverdale County Park,
Chico Bay, Lions Park, Port Washington Narrows, Oyster Bay
and upper Sinclair Inlet. Please let us know if you have
further suggestions. The County Health Department will post
advisory signs in any of these areas where the resulting
data shows significant public health risks.
Other Health Education
The Bremerton-Kitsap County Health Department will continue
their health education program of school talks, brochures,
newsletters and information fairs. Radio, television and
newspaper spots will continue to inform people about testing
for paralytic shellfish poisoning (PSP). The telephone
message on 1:800-2BE-WELL (PSP hotline) will be updated to
include general health issues associated with water quality
and seafood consumption. What is the anticipated time frame
for updating the message? The County Health Department will
also participate in the educational component of the
watershed planning process underway for Sinclair and Dyes
Inlets.
The County Health Department expressed interest in expanding
their educational program to include information on why
certain species of shellfish and finfish are contaminated
and the health risks associated with eating fish that have
high fecal coliform counts or toxics levels in their edible
tissues. The County Health Department will apply to the
Puget Sound Water Quality Authority's Public Involvement and
Education (PIE) fund by October 2, 1989 for consideration in
the next round of awards which will be announced early in
Mr. Don Miles
August 10, 1989
Page 4
1990. If a grant is awarded, a staff person will be hired
to design and distribute educational materials in 1990.
Interaqencv Coordination
The Bremerton-Kitsap County Health Department is in the
process of developing a cooperative agreement with the
Suquamish Tribe to monitor water quality in creeks that are
tributary to Sinclair and Dyes Inlets and have operational
salmon enhancement facilities. Fecal coliform bacteria will
be measured as well as other conventional water quality
parameters such as dissolved oxygen and temperature, when
will this cooperative agreement be finalized?
In addition to developing a cooperative agreement with the
Suquamish Tribe, the Bremerton-Kitsap County Health
Department will coordinate ambient water quality, stormwater
and shellfish baseline sampling and monitoring activities
with the Washington Department of Health, the Kitsap County
Conservation District, and the Port Orchard Public Works
Department, and will coordinate sampling at CSO outfalls and
emergency overflows with the Bremerton Utilities Division.
The purpose of this coordination is to ensure consistency in
sampling stations and protocols and to maximize the quantity
and usefulness of the resulting data. When will this
coordination take place and by what mechanism (e.g.
memoranda of agreement)?
The Bremerton-Kitsap County Health Department will also
coordinate with the Washington Department of Health in
toxics sampling at Jackson Park by reviewing historical and
recently obtained shellfish data and by participating in
future biological monitoring design. The County Health
Department will coordinate sampling and analysis efforts
with the Navy as well. When and how will this coordination
occur?
The County Health Department and the County Public Works
Department will coordinate to establish a permanent dropoff
center for household hazardous wastes. Please clarify when
and how this will be pursued.
Groundwater Seeps
The County Health Department will continue to identify
spills and potential seeps into groundwater. These events
will then be referred to Ecology's Northwest Regional Office
for investigation and enforcement actions.
Landfills
-------
Mr. Don Miles
August 10, 1989
Page 5
The County Health Department will continue to monitor
landfills on a quarterly basis. Which parameters are
addressed at active sites and at non-active sites? Closure
of the Bremerton Auto Wreck demolition site is in progress.
When will that be completed?
After you have reviewed this letter, I would like a written
response from you by August 28, indicating your concurrence
with or modification of the contents and answering the
questions in the letter. If you want to discuss or clarify
any issues beforehand, please call me during the week of
August 21 at 867-7219. The information in this letter and
in the Source/Action Matrix developed earlier will provide
the basis for the Bremerton-Kitsap County Health
Department's contributions to the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
Action Plan. The draft Action Plan will be released in
September, 1989 and distributed for review to the Sinclair
and Dyes Inlets Action Program Work Group.
I appreciate your cooperation in this process and look
forward to your response.
Sincerely,
Fran Solomon, Ph.D.
Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
Action Program Coordinator
FS
cc: Willa Fisher, MD
Phil Struck
-------
BREMERTON-KITSAP COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT
H-//./..I .1 HMIhK. M 1J . M I' H . IIIHECrOR
109 Austin Drive
Bremerton, Washington 98312
Environmental Health Division
(206) 478-5285
August 23, 1989
MB. Fran Solomon, Ph.D.
Department of Ecology, N.W. Regional Office
4350 - ISOth Avenue N.E.
Redmond, WA. 98O52-53O1
Dear Ha. Solomon:
We have the following comments on your letter dated August 10, 1989
regarding action* to be undertaken by this department on the Dyes
and Sinclair Inlets Action Plan:
The apecific monitoring activities which you have outlined, with
respect to ahellfish, marine water, fresh water, and storm water
have been integrated into the overall scope of work being prepared
by KitBap County Department of Community Development (DCD).
In response to specific questionsi
1. We will coordinate monitoring activities with all agencies and
Individual*- having a vested interest in Project area water
quality, including the Department of Health (DOH), Department of
Ecology (DOE), City of Bremerton, Suquamish Tribe, etc.. It IB
our objective to avoid unnecessary sampling replication as much
aa possible.
2. We anticipate that shellfish bacterial monitoring will occur at
all locations proposed for the DOE bio-accumulation atudy except
the lat Street Dock. This station will not be sampled because
recreational shellfish harvest is not known to occur here.
Additional shellfish bacterial stations are proposed in the
Tracyton area, mid-Dyes Inlet along the western shoreline, and
in the H. Beach Drive area of Sinclair Inlet.
1989
"•:•; HV't'T REGION
Ms, Fran Solomon
August 23, 1989
page 2
Ngnpgint_Sgurce_Identification
Falling on-site sewage disposal systems identified during the
sanitary survey of the Dyes and Sinclair Inlet shoreline will be
repaired pursuant to Bremerton-Kitsap County Board of Health
Resolution * 5, 1985, requirements. The set of regulations adopted
under this resolution contain detailed, specific criteria for all
facets of siting, installing, operating and repairing on-site
sewage disposal systems. These regulations stipulate that the
legal owner of the property is ultimately responsible for ensuring
necessary repairs are completed. Our general strategy for
requiring repair has been to determine conclusively, through
bacterial analysis or dye test, that a potential public
health/environmental risk Is present. Bacterial analysis as
documentation of system failure Is generally only used when failure
is relatively obvious and a reasonably discreet sample can be
obtained, e.g. , straight effluent discharge. A more common
approach, particularly for water quality projects, is to identify
possible failing systems and/or problem areas through
bacteriological water samples, then use dye tests for confirmation.
The following procedure is initiated after failure is documented]
1. Notify legal owner of the departments determination, and of
their responsibility to complete repair during a specified time
period, usually no more than 3O days from the date of
notification.
2. Review and approve a construction repair plan prior to actual
repair work. Repairs are required to meet current standards to
the maximum extent practable.
3. Inspect and approve repaired system.
Other sources of contamination, such as unrestricted livestock.
Illegal filling and grading activities, storm-sanitary cross
connections and unpermitted industrial discharges will be
documented and referred to the appropriate regulatory agency for
enforcement.
Specific parameters which will be evaluated at existing and
historical solid waste sites will be determined at a later date.
However, at a minimum, we expect to determine and assess basic
physical features such as waste site footprint, period of
operation, whether potential hazardous waste generators used the
site, and proximity to surface waters and ground water drinking
water supplies. Selection of actual sample parameters, if
applicable, will occur after basic site physical conditions have
been characterized.
-------
Ma. Fran Solomon
August 23. 1989
page 3
KB. Fran Solomon
Auguat 23. 1989
page 4
Our marina grant application focuses on both monitoring and
regulation of contamination from marina*. The program, if fundad,
will inoluda inapaction of pump-out facilities, live-aboard araaa,
davaloplng adueational program*, and other actiona. Wa anticipate
notification of the atatua of thia grant before the and of
October. January, 1990 in aatimated a* an appr9ximate atart date
if thia project la funded.
Adviaory aigna have been posted at Evergreen Park and Lebo Field in
Oyea Inlet I and the Annapolla Dock, Roaa Point, and veatern
Sinclair Inlet ahoreline in the Sinclair Inlet watershed. These
signa have given general warnings that shellfish may be unsafe for
consumption. The multl -language signs have not been posted aa they
make reference to crab and finflsh. The issue of potential health
effects from crab and flnfiah consumption in the project area have
not been adequately resolved. We have coordinated the ahellflah
advisory with Navy repreaentativea at Jaokaon Park who have
aubaequently established shellfish warning signs at several
locations along the Jackson. Park waterfront.
Qthtc_Htil4b_EdyEiiifiD
The up-date of the Health Line 1 :8OO-2BE-WELL message to Include
information on water quality and seafood has been completed.
Staffing and specific products of the Puget Sound Water Duality
Authority PIE grant have not been determined at this time.
However, the PIE grant application will probably propose a joint
educational project between this department and the City of
Bremerton.
Cooperative monitoring agreements with various local agencies,
Including the Suquamish Tribe, will be developed through Informal
consensus rather than memorandum of understanding, contracts or
other foraal mechanism. Theae agreements will be reached prior to
Implementing full-scale monitoring activities.
Coordination with the Havy on sampling efforts occurs through
department representation and participation in Technical Review
Committees which are established to review and comment on Navy
environmental projects.
Kitsap County recently completed a draft Moderate Risk Waste
Management Plan. This draft Plan evaluates existing moderate risk
waste (small quantity generators and household hazardous waste)
conditions and needs County wide. Several alternatives, including
periodic collection days and drop-off centers, are proposed.
Implementation of the Plan will be the responsibility of Kitsap
County Public Works and this department. Due to the significant
coats associated with this type of program, permanent collection
facilities will probably not be available to the community until
1991. However, several collection days may occur in the interim
depending upon funding availability.
We will continue to identify and respond to seeps and spills which
could potentially contaminate ground water.
Bremerton Auto Wrecking Demolition Disposal Site, which was the
only active disposal site in the project area, is under order to
close on or before August 24, 1989. All other sites have been
closed for at leaat 1O years. Parameters evaluated at closed sites
includeI evidence of recent illegal disposal and/or exposed solid
waste, inspection for surfacing leachate, and inspection for other
visible indicators of contamination. Ground water contamination
is addressed through cooperative efforts with the disposal site
owner.
I hope these comments have clarified our involvement in the Dyes
and Sinclair Inlet Action Program, and have answered your questions
satisfactorily.
Sincerely,
Philip Struck
Environmental health Specialist
Bremerton-Kitaap County Health Department
• • ~ . -».
«'i! '-"•••'.5/fft
fl»G SS/gsg ILL'
T •:Fr"'-'*3v
-------
SI INF (> r.RFCOIKF
'sTAH ()l WANING TON
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
•1150-ISIIh 'Uf \l • AV! • fJfV.I I'
August 9, 1989
Mr. Darryl Piercy
Port of Bremerton
8850 S.W. State Highway 3
Port Orchard, Washington 98366
Dear Mr. Piercy:
This letter is in followup to the recent conference call
about the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action Plan. Michael
Rylko (EPA) and I talked with you about potential actions of
the Port of Bremerton that will be written into the Action
Plan. Following is a summary of my understanding of the
resulting identified actions that will be undertaken by the
Port of Bremerton to improve water quality in Sinclair and
Dyes Inlets.
Boater Education
The Port of Bremerton prints and posts a flyer informing
boaters about the availability of facilities at marinas for
safe disposal of waste oil and toxic materials. In addition
to continuing to post a flyer about this service, the Port
will indicate this service is available in their periodic
informational mailouts to boaters. How often do these
mailouts occur? The Port will also mail the flyer to the
400 people on their boater community list. What is the time
frame for this mailing?
The Port of Bremerton will continue to post notices
announcing the semiannual waste oil and toxics collection
days in Port Orchard. The Washington Public Ports
Association has printed a brochure about location of pumpout
facilities; this brochure will continue to be available
through the Port of Bremerton office to all interested
boaters.
Holding Tank Pumpouts
Pumpout facilities for sewage holding tanks will be
installed at all new marinas including the planned marina at
the First Street Dock. Holding tanks at current marinas
(e.g. Port Orchard marina) will be maintained. The use of
these new facilities will be strongly encouraged by the Port
Mr. Darryl Piercy
August 9, 1989
Page 2
using educational materials from the Washington Parks &
Recreation Commission.
First Street Dock Floating Pier
The Port of Bremerton is a 30 percent partner in the
proposed First Street Dock floating pier project. If the
Port becomes the lead agency for the floating pier project
and if the opportunity arises, the Port will negotiate with
the Washington Department of Transportation regarding
sediment characterization and potential capping at the pier
site.
After you have reviewed this letter, I would like a written
response from you by August 28, indicating your concurrence
with or modification of the contents and answering the
questions in the letter. If you want to discuss or clarify
any issues beforehand, please call me during the week of
August 21 at 867-7219. The information in this letter and
in the Source/Action Matrix developed earlier will provide
the basis for the Port of Bremerton's contributions to the
Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action Plan. The draft Action Plan
will be released in September, 1989 and distributed for
review to the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action Program Work
Group.
I appreciate your cooperation in this process and look
forward to your response.
Sincerely,
Fran Solomon, Ph.D.
Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
Action Program Coordinator
-------
Olympic View
Industrial Park
THE PORT OF BREMERTON
Port Orchard
Marina
USD S.W. STATE HIGHWAY 3 • PORT ORCHARD. WA M3S6 • (2M) 174-1311
Bremerton
National
Airport
August 21, 19B9
Ms. Fran Solomon, Ph.D •'" P/1;..,
State of Washington Department of Ecology NOIci'i ' ''•'•'OOV
4350 150th Avenue NE ' '"'" li:'-MM
Redmond, WA 98052-5301
Dear Ms. Solomon:
The Fort of Bremerton is in receipt of your letter dated August 9, 1989
regarding the Port of Bremerton's role in the Sinclair and Dyes
Inlet Action Plan.
Several areas of clarification are required. I have addressed
each of these below based on the individual categories presented
in your letter.
Boater Education; The Port of Bremerton provides information to
tenants of our facility (Port Orchard Marina) regarding the proper
disposal of waste oil. In addition, the Port presently provides
a method for boaters to dispose of waste oil at the Port Orchard
Marina. Your letter fails to address the increasing problem of
waste oil disposal for the Port that threatens to end this voluntary
effort. Federal underground tank regulations have eliminated
previously utilized storage facilities for this purpose. In
addition, other regulations have apparently increased the cost
to waste oil recyclers to the point where waste oil disposal is
becoming unbearably expensive. Therefore, the uncertainty of
this industry in terms of cost and availability makes our ability
to continue to offer this service uncertain as well.
The Port's method of providing information to the boating community
generally includes the following:
1. Information included with monthly billing of marina tenants.
2. Posting of information at strategic locations at the Port
Orchard Marina.
3. Informational news releases to local media. Timing of this
distribution is dependent on the type of material, availability
and topic.
PORT OFFICES LOCATED IN BREMERTON NATIONAL AIRPORT TERMINAL BUILDING
PORT COMMISSIONERS LARRY STOKES . FRED S SGHON€MAN • DICK PEEK
Mrs. Fran Solomon, Ph.D
August 21, 1989
Page 2
Holding Tank Pumpouts: I believe your intent was to indicate ,,r
that the existing holding tank pumpout at the Port Orchard Marihrf
will be maintained. If so, this is correct. In addition, the
Port encourages the use of this facility by providing employee
assisted holding tank pumpouts at no charge. Further, encouragement
to utilize the pumpout facility is by prohibiting the discharge
of sewage into the marina and providing whatever education materials
are avialable.
It is the Port's intention to place a pumpout at any facility the
Port owns where it is reasonable to do so and users would warrant
the placement of such a unit. No commitment to any specific
location has been made at this point.
First Street Dock Floating Pier (recreational breakwater): The
Port of Bremerton is a partner with other state agencies in the
development of a recreational breakwater along the Bremerton
waterfront. Certainly if the opportunity arises, the Port will
explore methods of providing a cleaner environment. The Port
cannot however, commit to any one specific solution to a problem
that has not been adequately identified or studied.
It is hoped that these comments will help clarify our previous
discussions.
Sincerely,
Darryl C. Piercy
Operations Officer
DCP:lb
-------
si -Ml ( )F UASHINCiK )N
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
\f • Kr.y/nnM,/ l\ ,)sh/n£lon 'WSJ S i(J;
August 10, 1989
ro
Mr. William Duffy
Director of Utilities
City of Bremerton
3027 Olympus Drive
Bremerton. Washington 98310
3Ui^-
Dear Mr-^Dtrfty:
This letter is in followup to the recent meeting that
Michael Rylko (EPA), Michael Jacobson (PTI Environmental
Services), and I had with you to talk about potential
actions of the Bremerton Utilities Division that will be
written into the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action Plan.
Following is a summary of my understanding of the resulting
identified actions that will be undertaken by the Bremerton
Utilities Division to improve water quality in Sinclair and
Dyes Inlets. In certain instances, I have asked for
clarification of specific actions.
Combined Sewer Overflows/Emergency Overflows
The City of Bremerton is to be commended for upgrading their
wastewater treatment plant to secondary treatment, thereby
improving the quality of the effluent discharged to Sinclair
Inlet. The Bremerton Utilities Division is currently
developing a combined sewer overflow (CSO) control plan in
concordance with Washington Department of Ecology
requirements of limiting CSO events to one overflow event
per outfall per year. The CSO control plan will focus on
separation of sanitary and storm sewers, prioritize
individual CSOs for abatement actions, and include control
of emergency overflows. This plan will be part of the
Comprehensive Sewer Plan to be completed by the end of 1989.
Ecology commends the City of Bremerton on their efforts in
developing a Comprehensive Sewer Plan and hopes that the
Comprehensive Sewer Plan will assign high priority to
implementation of the CSO control plan.
The emergency overflow to the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard
will be replaced. What is the time frame for this action?
Receiving water near CSOs in Bremerton will continue to be
sampled for fecal coliforms, metals and organics. Please
clarify the frequency of this monitoring.
Mr. William Duffy
August 10, 1989
Page 2
Wastewater Treatment Plant
The capacity of the wastewater treatment plant will be
evaluated as part of the Comprehensive Sewer Plan being
developed by the City of Bremerton this year. In
concordance with the requirements of their NPDES permit, the
Bremerton Utilities Division will continue monthly
monitoring of receiving water near the wastewater treatment
plant outfall for fecal coliform bacteria and other
conventional pollutants (e.g. total suspended solids, BOD).
Unfiltered receiving water near the outfall will also
continue to be monitored annually for priority pollutants.
The Utility will continue to sample sewage effluent from the
Puget Sound Naval Shipyard on a monthly basis for coliforms,
total suspended solids and BOD. There is currently no
monitoring for priority pollutants.
The Utility acknowledges the need to upgrade the monitoring
of their sewage collection system to include toxics. What
is the schedule for adding toxics to the list of parameters
and for monitoring sediments from representative storm drain
catch basins?
Sewer Connections
The Bremerton Utilities Division is evaluating the
feasibility of extending sewer connections to the Gorst
area. What is the time frame for making a decision on this
issue?
Stormwater Management
The Bremerton Utilities Division will continue to clean
public catch basin sumps annually. Please clarify if the
City of Bremerton can require maintenance of private catch
basins, and if so, what mechanism is needed for doing this.
The Bremerton Utilities Division favors the establishment of
a stormwater and surface water utility. Will the Bremerton
City Council make a decision in 1990 if they will head in
this direction?
The Bremerton Planning Department will continue to require
detention/retention basins and oil/water separators for new
development. The City Engineering Department will continue
to maintain these structures.
-------
Mr. William Duffy
August 10, 1989
Page 3
Industrial Sources
The Bremerton Utilities Division is to be commended for
completing its survey of industrial dischargers in its
service area for the Washington Department of Ecology as
part of Bremerton's NPDES permit. The Utility will continue
with its industrial discharge identification and monitoring
program. Under this effort, up to six pump stations within
the wastewater collection system will continue to be sampled
monthly to identify potential industrial discharges.
Parameters that are monitored include fecal coliforms,
solids, BOD, and some metals and organics. Which additional
parameters are likely to be added? Which metals and
organics are currently monitored? Toxics monitoring will
become more comprehensive. What is the time frame for doing
this?
After you have reviewed this letter, I would like a written
response from you by August 28, indicating your concurrence
with or modification of the contents and answering the
questions in the letter. If you want to discuss or clarify
any issues beforehand, please call me during the week of
August 21 at 867-7219. The information in this letter and
in the Source/Action Matrix developed earlier will provide
the basis for the Bremerton Utilities Division's
contributions to the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action plan.
The draft Action Plan will be released in September, 1989
and distributed for review to the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
Action Program Work Group.
I appreciate your cooperation in this process and look
forward to your response.
Sincerely,
Fran Solomon, Ph.D.
Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action
Program Coordinator
FS
-------
City of Bremerton
BREMERTON MUNICIPAL UTILITIES
3027 Olympus Drive
Bremerton, Washington 98310-4799
MAYOR GENE LOBE
August 29, 19R9
Fran Solomon, Ph.D.
Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action
Program Coordinator
Washington State
Department of Ecology
4350 - 150th Avenue NE
Redmond, Washington 98052-5301
Subj: Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action Plan
Dear Fran:
The Utility is in receipt of your letter dated August 10, 1989
requesting information on potential programs by the Utility for
inclusion in the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action Plan. Noted below
are responses to the specific subject matters referred to in your
letter:
Combined Sewer Overflows/Emergency Overflows
The emergency overflows serving the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard
(PSNS) are not being eliminated by the City of Bremerton. At this
time, the emergency overflows are situated within the industrial
area of PSNS and are operated and maintained by the Federal
Government and benefit both parties.
The facilities being constructed along the waterfront will reduce
the frequency of overflows at these facilities to approximately one
(1) event per year as required by State regulations. The new
facilities will incorporate larger pumps, emergency power,
rerouting of discharge effluent from the pump stations to the
crosstown interceptor main thus avoiding repumping of other
downstream stations thereby increasing the capacity of those
stations arid reducing HIP number of overflow events of those
stations.
The frequency of sampling of the. Utility's combined sewer overflows
(CSOs) will be defined in the Utility's CSO plan currently under
development.
Gateway to the Olympics end Home ot the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard
Wasiewater Treatment Plant
The Utility's NPDES permit does not require the Wnstewater Utility
to monitor the receiving water of its outfalls, however, this is
being considered in the Utility's CSO Plan.
A formal program of monitoring toxics within the collect i on system
at various points is being considered at this time ;md t.o a limited
extent being accomplished to avoid impact on the treatment plant
processes. The Utility has not implemented a formal program due
to lack of funding.
Sewer Connections
The installation of sewer mains in the Gorst area including the
Olympic View Landfill and their subsequent connection by the
Utility to its Treatment Plant is not being considered at this time
by the Utility based on available capacity of the treatment plant.
Recent decisions by the Boundary Review Board for annexations in
the area have not been fruitful, therefore, the Utility is
reconsidering the allocation of the limited available capacity to
other areas adjacent to the system.
Stormwater Management
Currently , the Utility does not have a formal stormwater program.
The annual cleaning of catch basins amd manholes is being done in
order to protect the Utility's infrastructures from premature
failure due to excessive wear from pumping of surface debris (sand
and gravel). The side benefit of this action, however, is it
removes possible contaminants from the waste stream of the
wastewater and the combined s t.ormwa t er/snn i t ary sewer systems.
The City of Bremerton (Utility) is in favor of the establishment
of a Storm Water Utility, however, no action is contemplated this
year. We expect to make a presentation to the City Council in 1990
for their consideration.
The Utility will continue to require oil separators and
retention/detention basins on new developments. This requirement
will be addressed through the S.E.P.A. process.
Industrial Sources
The Utility does not contemplate a change in its Industrial Sources
Monitoring Program at this time.
We will assist the State Department of Ecology in monitoring
industrial facilities as our resources permit. However, the
program as we understand it and as outlined in our NPDES Permit,
is the responsibility of the Department of Ecology.
-------
Ol
Should you have any additional questions or require clarification
of the above, please give me a call at 478-5318.
Sincerely,
William Duffy
Director of Utilities
/ga
cc: File
-------
IIKMINF () CKFCOIRf
SI-Ml (II VVWIINC.ION
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
August 10, 1989
I
o>
Mr. Donald Pratt
Director of Planning
Bremerton Planning Department
817 Pacific Avenue
Bremerton, Washington 98310
Dear
This letter is in followup to the recent meeting that
Michael Jacobson (PTI Environmental Services) and I had with
you to talk about potential actions of the Bremerton
Planning Department that will be written into the Sinclair
and Dyes Inlets Action Plan. Following is a summary of my
understanding of the resulting identified actions that will
be undertaken by the Bremerton Planning Department to
improve water quality in Sinclair and Dyes Inlets.
Shoreline Management
The Bremerton Planning Department will continue to review
applications for shoreline permits, develop land use
regulations, and review projects within city limits for
compliance with the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA).
Building and rezoning permits will be conditioned as
appropriate to ensure compliance with local and state water
quality and resource protection objectives.
Stormwater Management
The Bremerton Planning Department will continue to
incorporate reguirements for installation and maintenance of
oil/water separators and detention/retention basins into
shoreline permits for new development. The City Engineering
Department will continue to maintain public oil/water
separators and detention/retention basins.
Mr. Donald Pratt
August 10, 1989
Page 2
The Bremerton Planning Department is proposing to hire an
environmental planner to examine Stormwater management
issues, including Stormwater regulations, best management
practices, and the formation of a Stormwater utility. What
is the time frame for bringing the environmental planner on
board? Local ordinances requiring Stormwater controls for
new development will be required by the Washington
Department of Ecology by June 30, 1991. How and when is the
City of Bremerton planning to address this requirement?
Floating Pier at First Street Dock
The City of Bremerton is one of the proponents of the
proposed floating pier project at the First Street Dock in
Bremerton. The Washington Department of Ecology commends
the Bremerton Planning Department for proposing the
following educational programs at the floating pier site:
(1) development of an interpretive/notice program advising
the public of potential health risks from eating fish
harvested at the site; and (2) preparation and
implementation of an interpretive program explaining the
history, future, causes, effects and other educational
facets of pollution found in sediments in Sinclair Inlet,
and actions underway to improve water quality in Sinclair
Inlet. Ecology agrees with the Bremerton Planning
Department that such programs would greatly help to increase
the public awareness of water quality issues in the area.
We recommend that the Bremerton Planning Department proceed
with bringing a contractor on board (e.g. North Kitsap
Marine Science Center) with oversight from the Sinclair and
Dyes Inlets Urban Bay Action Team to develop an interpretive
program. Please indicate the anticipated time frame for
following up on developing this program.
Ecology's Centennial Clean Water Fund and the Puget Sound
Water Quality Authority's Public Involvement and Education
(PIE) fund are potential sources of financial support;
projects that involve implementation of urban bay action
plans receive high priority for grants from both of these
funds. We encourage the Bremerton Planning Department to
apply for a PIE grant by October 2, 1989 for consideration
in the next round of awards, which will be announced early
in 1990. Application packets are available now from the
Puget Sound Water Quality Authority. We also encourage the
Bremerton Planning Department to apply for a Centennial
Clean Water Program grant by February 15, 1990 for
consideration in the next round of awards, which will be
announced in July, 1990. Application packets will be
available from Ecology in November, 1989.
-------
Hr. Donald Pratt
August 10, 1989
Page 3
After you have reviewed this letter, I would like a written
response from you by August 28, indicating your concurrence
with or modification of the contents and responding to the
questions in the letter. If you want to discuss or clarify
any issues beforehand, please call me during the week of
August 21 at 867-7219. The information in this letter and
in the Source/Action Matrix developed earlier will provide
the basis for the Bremerton Planning Department's
contributions to the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action Plan.
The draft Action Plan will be released in September, 1989
and distributed for review to the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
Action Program Work Group.
I appreciate your cooperation in this process and look
forward to your response.
Sincerely,
Fran Solomon, Ph.D.
Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
Action Program Coordinator
£ «
-si
-------
City*oJ Bremcrto^
:39 FOURTH STREET
HREMERTON. WASHINGTON 98310
(206)478-5252
MAYOR GENE LOBE
August 31, 1989
Fran Soloman, Ph.D
Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action Progran
Department of Ecology
4350 150th Avenue N.E.
Redmond, WA 98052-5301
Floating Pier at Fir3t Street Dock:
The Bremerton - Kitsap County Health Department, in
association with the City of Bremerton, is preparing a PIE grant
request with the development of a water quality interpretive
program at the Bremerton Waterfront site as a key component. The
scope and scale of this grant request will be defined by the amount
of funds available. We will explore other funding alternatives as
our time and resources permit.
Donald L. Pratt, AICP
Director of Community Development
89pll9
Re: Your letter dated August 10, 1989.
oo
My comments to your summary of our previous meeting are listed
below.
Shoreline Management:
No comments.
Storawater Management:
I cannot comment on the Engineering Department activities.
The Planning Department will continue to incorporate
requirements for installation and maintenance of oil/water
separators and detention/retention basins with Shoreline permits
for new development.
At this preliminary stage of the 1990 budget process, the
Planning Department is not proposing the addition of an
environmental planner to the 1989 staffing level. The
administration is currently contemplating a staff cut back on a
city-wide basis.
I cannot comment on the City's intention to implement local
stormttater controls. There are discussions in the budget process
regarding this but no recommendation has been prepared by the
administration.
Gaiewav lo Ilic Olnn/m \ anil Hume of l/ie Plied Simnil Numl
-------
( IIWS1INE O CRECOIW
Director
STAU OF WASHINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
•MW-ISIWi Aic Nf , K,itn*ml \\ .idinwon <«MU-f III I t (Jit,) iu,~--llmi
August 11, 1989
Mr. Larry Curies, P.E.
Superintendent of Public Works
City of Port Orchard
216 Prospect Street
Port Orchard, Washington 98366
L*AM!^
Dear Mr-^OTrles:
This letter is in followup to the recent meeting that
Michael Jacobson (PTI Environmental Services) and I had with
you to talk about potential actions of the Port Orchard
Public Works Department that will be written into the
Sinclair and Dyes Inlets Action Plan. Following is a
summary of my understanding of the resulting identified
actions that will be undertaken by the Port Orchard Public
Works Department to improve water quality in Sinclair and
Dyes Inlets.
Wastewater Treatment Plant
The City of Port Orchard is to be commended for implementing
secondary sewage treatment and separating combined sewers,
thereby reducing raw sewage discharges to Sinclair Inlet.
Receiving waters from the wastewater treatment plant will
continue to be monitored for compliance with the plant's
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
permit. I would like to verify the frequency and
parameters. How often does this monitoring occur and what
parameters are monitored?
Effluent from the Port Orchard Wastewater Treatment Plant
will continue to be monitored annually for priority
pollutants. Monitoring frequency may be changed to a
semiannual basis.
Sewage Connections
The Port Orchard Public Works Department is working on
reducing infiltration of stormwater and groundwater to
sewers due to bad sewer lines and joints. What is the
schedule for completion of this work? Sewage connections
will continue to be inspected and maintained on a regular
basis and sewage pump stations will continue to be checked
on a daily basis.
Mr. Larry Curies, P.E.
August 11, 1989
Page 2
Stormwater/Storm Drain Management
As a first step in controlling stormwater discharges into
Sinclair Inlet, the Port Orchard Public Works Department
wants to map the Port Orchard storm drain outfall system and
will seek funds to do this by the end of 1989. Funding
sources to be investigated include: Kitsap County watershed
management grant monies for Sinclair Inlet, Washington
Department of Ecology's Centennial Clean Water Fund, and
Puget Sound Water Quality Authority's Public Involvement and
Education (PIE) fund. The Public Works Department will
apply to the PIE fund by October 2, 1989 for consideration
in the next round of awards, which will be announced early
in 1990. The Public Works Department will also apply to the
Centennial Clean Water Fund by February 15, 1990 for
consideration in the next round of awards, which will be
announced in July, 1990.
The Port Orchard Public Works Department wants to educate
the public about not dumping waste oil into storm drains.
Educational posters are available from Ecology, stating "Do
not dump waste oil. Recycle it," and conveying the message
pictorially. Storm drain stencils are also available from
Ecology, stating "Dump no waste; drains to stream." contact
Rhonda Hunter at 459-6356 to order posters and stencils. I
strongly encourage the Port Orchard Public Works Department
to obtain and distribute these materials by the end of 1989.
The Public Works Department will continue to require
stormwater detention systems and oil-water separators for
all new development. Upon receipt of guidance from Ecology,
regular maintenance will be implemented.
Contaminated Media
The Port Orchard Public Works Department will continue to
sample Blackjack Creek for fecal coliform bacteria on a
semiannual basis (April and October-November). This
monitoring activity will be coordinated with the Bremerton-
Kitsap County Health Department's monitoring programs.
Metals testing will be performed as allowed by budget and
staff time. How frequently will this be possible?
Nonpoint Pollution Control
The Port Orchard Public Works Department will participate
actively in the watershed planning committee for Sinclair
Inlet. Specific details for nonpoint pollution control will
be developed in concert with watershed planning efforts
being coordinated by Kitsap County.
-------
Mr. Larry Curies, P.E.
August 11, 1989
Page 3
After you have reviewed this letter, I would like a written
response from you by August 28, indicating your concurrence
with or modification of the contents and answering the
specific questions in the letter. If you want to discuss or
clarify any issues beforehand, please call me during the
week of August 21 at 867-7219. The information in this
letter and in the Source/Action Matrix developed earlier
will provide the basis for the Port Orchard Public Works
Department's contributions to the Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
Action Plan. The draft Action Plan will be released in
September, 1989 and distributed for review to the Sinclair
and Dyes Inlets Action Program Work Group.
I appreciate your cooperation in this process and look
forward to your response.
Sincerely,
Fran Solomon, Ph.D.
^ Sinclair and Dyes Inlets
•7 Action Program Coordinator
01
0 FS
-------
Of
Ms Fran Soloman
Sinclair and Dyes Inlet
Department of Ecology
4350 ISOth Ave NE
Redmond, WA 98052-5301
RE: Sinclair Inlet Action Plan
SEP
!tfPAR1MENT OF fCOLOGV
NPRIHWtSI KIC.IflN
Dear Ms Soloman,
Reference is made in regards to your letter dated 11 August 1989.
WASTEWATER TRI'.ATMKNI Pl.AMf
A copy of the NPDES permit for the wastewater treatment plant is attached.
Monitoring frequency will comply with the permit. Any decision to expand that
frequency has to be a joint decision hciw"— 'he City Council nnd i\\e Commissioner?
of Kitsan Countv Sewer District .((5.
M'.WAOC, i^ONNECi lON.s
The City does not have a specific schedule for reduction of infiltration and
inflow of groundwater into its sower system. Annual appropriations of $15,000
arc desircable and w'M hopcfullv '-001111110 ns loni» as ihn utility can afford to
do so.
SI OKMWATF.R/ STORM DRAIN MANAM'MKNT
The City does desire tu map its stormwater system. It may not be aoie to
apply for the Centennial Clean Water Fund for assistance in this in 1989 or 1990.
However, mapping will remain viahlc poal for the deportment.
The City has begun discussions with the Kitsap County Conservation District to
prepare a joint application for the PIK fund. Prior to anv application, the Cltv
Council and Commissioners would'have to puthonVr^it.
Regular maintenance of stormwater catc < uasins and detention systems will not be
implemented until there is a cohesive county and state wide program for this.
The Department of Ecology is currently preparing a program in regards to stormwater
and I am on the review committee. However, the issue of sediment nualiiv still
needs to be resolved for the Puget Sound.
CONTAMINATED MEDIA
The City will continue monitoring fecal coloform corniis in Blackjack Creek on a
semi-annual basis. If the budget allows for the expense, the creek sediments
will be checked for metals annually.
NONPOINT POLLUTION CONTROL
The City is concerned about the environment and the quality of Sinclair Inlet.
Acknowledging the limited staff constraint, it will continue to participate in
the studies. However, it should be noted that only the City Council can commit
the City to any specific course of action. Active staff involcrncnt docs not
obligate the City to any plan or expense.
Respectfully,
Laurence J. Curies, P.p..
,C?tty F.nginecr
I UN MAI I
2ll> F'ros|)C< I
Mlimiiisir.iiinii (Jinil H7ii 4-MI7
Mill)! I lll'.inrflillj! IJIHil H7li4'l'll
MI'MK II'AI.COI'III
711. I'i.i>.|ir( I
IJIH-I H7h 17111
; OKI-AIM MI-:N i
•Vtli ll,iv MIITI
IJIII.I H7li I7IIII
IIKI 111 I'AHIMI.NI
r>4-l 11,1V Slri'd
uniii H7i. mm
------- |