FILED 17 JUL 19 PM 12:19 KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CLERK E-FILED CASE NUMBER: 17-2-19080-2 SEA 1 2 3 4 5 6 STATE OF WASHINGTON KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT 7 8 9 STATE OF WASHINGTON, DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY, 10 Plaintiff, 11 12 v. PORT OF SEATTLE, Defendant. 14 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 CONSENT DECREE RE: TERMINAL 30 SITE 13 15 NO. TABLE OF CONTENTS I. II. III. IV. V. VI. VII. VIII. IX. X. XI. XII. XIII. XIV. XV. XVI. XVII. XVIII. XIX. XX. XXI. XXII. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 3 JURISDICTION ........................................................................................................... 4 PARTIES BOUND ....................................................................................................... 4 DEFINITIONS ............................................................................................................. 5 FINDINGS OF FACTS ................................................................................................ 5 WORK TO BE PERFORMED..................................................................................... 7 DESIGNATED PROJECT COORDINATORS ........................................................... 8 PERFORMANCE ......................................................................................................... 9 ACCESS ....................................................................................................................... 9 SAMPLING, DATA SUBMITTAL, AND AVAILABILITY ................................... 10 PROGRESS REPORTS ............................................................................................. 11 RETENTION OF RECORDS .................................................................................... 12 TRANSFER OF INTEREST IN PROPERTY ........................................................... 12 RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES ................................................................................. 13 AMENDMENT OF DECREE.................................................................................... 15 EXTENSION OF SCHEDULE .................................................................................. 15 ENDANGERMENT ................................................................................................... 17 COVENANT NOT TO SUE ...................................................................................... 18 CONTRIBUTION PROTECTION ............................................................................ 19 LAND USE RESTRICTIONS ................................................................................... 19 FINANCIAL ASSURANCES .................................................................................... 20 INDEMNIFICATION ................................................................................................ 21 CONSENT DECREE 26 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98504-0117 (360) 586-6770 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 XXIII. COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE LAWS ......................................................... 21 XXIV. REMEDIAL ACTION COSTS .................................................................................. 22 XXV. IMPLEMENTATION OF REMEDIAL ACTION ..................................................... 23 XXVI. PERIODIC REVIEW ................................................................................................. 23 XXVII. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ....................................................................................... 24 XXVIII. DURATION OF DECREE ......................................................................................... 25 XXIX. CLAIMS AGAINST THE STATE ............................................................................ 25 XXX. EFFECTIVE DATE.................................................................................................... 26 XXXI. WITHDRAWAL OF CONSENT ............................................................................... 26 EXHIBIT A EXHIBIT B EXHIBIT C EXHIBIT D EXHIBIT E Site Diagram Cleanup Action Plan Scope of Work and Schedule SEPA Checklist List of Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 CONSENT DECREE 26 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98504-0117 (360) 586-6770 I. 1 2 A. INTRODUCTION The mutual objective of the State of Washington, Department of Ecology 3 (Ecology) and Port of Seattle (Defendant) under this Decree is to provide for remedial action at 4 a facility where there has been a release or threatened release of hazardous substances. This 5 Decree requires Defendant to perform final cleanup of the Terminal 30 Site in Seattle, 6 Washington. The final cleanup includes the installation and operation of an air sparging/soil 7 vapor extraction (AS/SVE) treatment system, the recovery of light non-aqueous phase liquid 8 (LNAPL), and the performance of reporting and monitoring activities. 9 10 11 B. Ecology has determined that these actions are necessary to protect human health and the environment. C. The Complaint in this action is being filed simultaneously with this Decree. An 12 Answer has not been filed, and there has not been a trial on any issue of fact or law in this case. 13 However, the Parties wish to resolve the issues raised by Ecology's Complaint. In addition, 14 the Parties agree that settlement of these matters without litigation is reasonable and in the 15 public interest, and that entry of this Decree is the most appropriate means of resolving these 16 matters. 17 D. 18 its terms. 19 E. By signing this Decree, the Parties agree to its entry and agree to be bound by By entering into this Decree, the Parties do not intend to discharge non-settling 20 parties from any liability they may have with respect to matters alleged in the Complaint. The 21 Parties retain the right to seek reimbursement, in whole or in part, from any liable persons for 22 sums expended under this Decree. 23 F. This Decree shall not be construed as proof of liability or responsibility for any 24 releases of hazardous substances or cost for remedial action nor an admission of any facts; 25 provided, however, that Defendant shall not challenge the authority of the Attorney General 26 and Ecology to enforce this Decree. CONSENT DECREE 26 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98504-0117 (360) 586-6770 1 2 3 G. The Court is fully advised of the reasons for entry of this Decree, and good cause having been shown: Now, therefore, it is HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED as follows: II. 4 5 6 7 A. JURISDICTION This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter and over the Parties pursuant to the Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA), RCW 70.105D. B. Authority is conferred upon the Washington State Attorney General by 8 RCW 70.105D.040(4)(a) to agree to a settlement with any potentially liable person (PLP) if, 9 after public notice and any required hearing, Ecology finds the proposed settlement would lead 10 to a more expeditious cleanup of hazardous substances. RCW 70.105D.040(4)(b) requires that 11 such a settlement be entered as a consent decree issued by a court of competent jurisdiction. 12 13 14 15 16 17 C. Ecology has determined that a release or threatened release of hazardous substances has occurred at the Site that is the subject of this Decree. D. Ecology has given notice to Defendant of Ecology's determination that Defendant is a PLP for the Site, as required by RCW 70.105D.020(26) and WAC 173-340-500. E. The actions to be taken pursuant to this Decree are necessary to protect public health and the environment. 18 F. This Decree has been subject to public notice and comment. 19 G. Ecology finds that this Decree will lead to a more expeditious cleanup of 20 hazardous substances at the Site in compliance with the cleanup standards established under 21 RCW 70.105D.030(2)(e) and WAC 173-340. 22 23 H. Defendant has agreed to undertake the actions specified in this Decree and consents to the entry of this Decree under MTCA. III. 24 PARTIES BOUND 25 This Decree shall apply to and be binding upon the Parties to this Decree, their 26 successors and assigns. The undersigned representative of each party hereby certifies that he CONSENT DECREE 26 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98504-0117 (360) 586-6770 1 or she is fully authorized to enter into this Decree and to execute and legally bind such party to 2 comply with this Decree. Defendant agrees to undertake all actions required by the terms and 3 conditions of this Decree. No change in ownership or corporate status shall alter Defendant's 4 responsibility under this Decree. Defendant shall provide a copy of this Decree to all agents, 5 contractors, and subcontractors retained to perform work required by this Decree, and shall 6 ensure that all work undertaken by such agents, contractors, and subcontractors complies with 7 this Decree. IV. 8 9 10 11 DEFINITIONS Unless otherwise specified herein, all definitions in RCW 70.105D.020 and WAC 173-340-200 shall control the meanings of the terms in this Decree. A. Site: The Site is referred to as Terminal 30 (T30) and is generally located at 12 1901 East Marginal Way South, Seattle, Washington, approximately one mile southwest of 13 downtown Seattle, in King County, Washington on the shoreline of the East Waterway. The 14 Site is defined by the extent of contamination caused by the release of hazardous substances, 15 more particularly described in the Site Diagram (Exhibit A). The Site constitutes a facility 16 under RCW 70.105D.020(8). 17 B. Parties: Refers to the State of Washington, Department of Ecology and the Port 18 of Seattle. 19 C. Defendant: Refers to the Port of Seattle. 20 D. Consent Decree or Decree: Refers to this Consent Decree and each of the 21 exhibits to this Decree. All exhibits are integral and enforceable parts of this Consent Decree. 22 The terms "Consent Decree" or "Decree" shall include all exhibits to this Consent Decree. V. 23 24 25 FINDINGS OF FACTS Ecology makes the following findings of fact without any express or implied admissions of such facts by Defendant. 26 CONSENT DECREE 26 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98504-0117 (360) 586-6770 1 A. The Site is located at 1901 East Marginal Way South, Seattle, Washington, 2 approximately one mile southwest of downtown Seattle, in King County, across the East 3 Waterway from Harbor Island. The Site location is depicted in Exhibit A. The facility is 4 depicted in Exhibit A. The Site is listed on the Department of Ecology's Cleanup Sites List as 5 "Port of Seattle Terminal 30" with the Facility Site ID No. 2055. 6 B. The Defendant is the owner of the Site, and has owned the Site continuously 7 since 1985. Since 1905, a Chevron bulk fuel terminal occupied a portion of T30. The Chevron 8 bulk fuel terminal consisted of above-ground fuel storage tanks and associated piping and 9 equipment. The Port purchased T30 from Chevron on January 2, 1985. The fuel terminal was 10 demolished between December 1984 and about November 1985. The Port redeveloped the 11 33.9 acre Terminal 30 as a container facility. 12 C. Since the early 1990s, petroleum contamination caused by releases at the former 13 Chevron bulk fuel terminal has been the subject of a number of investigations and interim 14 actions. 15 D. A product recovery system was installed in the 1980s that removed more than 16 171,000 gallons of petroleum product. As part of the redevelopment in 2007, a site-wide 17 asphalt cover was constructed, and more than 24,000 cubic yards of petroleum-impacted soil 18 were disposed of offsite. However, substantial petroleum product remained in the soil and 19 groundwater at the Site. 20 E. The primary contaminants identified in soil and groundwater are: 21 Petroleum Hydrocarbons 22  Diesel-Range Organics 23  Gasoline-Range Organics 24  Oil-Range Organics 25  BTEX: Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, Xylenes (total) 26 CONSENT DECREE 26 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98504-0117 (360) 586-6770 1 Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds 2  3 Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) 4 F. 2-methylnapthalene As required by the 1991 Agreed Order (AO), a draft Remedial 5 Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) was developed in 1998 by GeoEngineers (1998 RI/FS) 6 to document the nature and extent of contamination and to evaluate remedial alternatives. 7 Ecology did not approve the draft RI/FS. 8 G. A draft final RI/FS was prepared by Pacific Groundwater Group (PGG) in 2013 9 to update the status of petroleum contamination at the site, to identify a preferred final remedial 10 action, and to fulfill the requirements of the 1991 AO. 11 H. Section V of the 1991 AO was amended on October 23, 2013, such that the Port 12 would prepare and submit a draft Cleanup Action Plan (dCAP) for Ecology review and 13 approval. 14 I. 15 All requirements under the 1991 AO, as amended, have been completed to Ecology's satisfaction. VI. 16 WORK TO BE PERFORMED 17 This Decree contains a program designed to protect human health and the environment 18 from the known release, or threatened release, of hazardous substances or contaminants at, on, 19 or from the Site. 20 A. The defendant shall perform a cleanup action at the Site by implementing the 21 Cleanup Action Plan (CAP) (Exhibit B), which establishes the required remedial actions at the 22 Site in accordance with the Scope of Work and Schedule (Exhibit C) and all other 23 requirements of this Decree. The CAP, and Scope of Work and Schedule are incorporated by 24 reference and form an integral and enforceable part of this Decree These remedial actions 25 include implementing air sparging/soil vapor extraction (AS/SVE) treatment in the Sheen Area 26 in the vicinity of monitoring wells (going south to north) MW-36, MW-39, and MW-42; light CONSENT DECREE 26 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98504-0117 (360) 586-6770 1 non-aqueous phase liquid (LNAPL) recovery and AS/SVE treatment in the vicinity of RW-12 2 and MW-59; and confirmation, performance, and compliance monitoring. 3 B. Defendant agrees not to perform any remedial actions outside the scope of this 4 Decree unless the Parties agree to modify the CAP (Exhibit B) and Scope of Work and 5 Schedule (Exhibit C) to cover these actions. All work conducted by Defendant under this 6 Decree shall be done in accordance with WAC 173-340 unless otherwise provided herein. 7 C. All plans or other deliverables submitted by the Port of Seattle for Ecology's 8 review and approval under the CAP (Exhibit B) and Scope of Work and Schedule (Exhibit C) 9 shall, upon Ecology's approval, become integral and enforceable parts of this Decree. 10 VII. DESIGNATED PROJECT COORDINATORS 11 The project coordinator for Ecology is: 12 14 Sunny Becker 3190 160th Avenue SE Bellevue, WA 98008 hlin461@ecy.wa.gov (425) 649-7187 15 The project coordinator for Defendant is: 16 Roy Kuroiwa Port of Seattle 2711 Alaskan Way Seattle, WA 98121 kuroiwa.r@portseattle.org (206) 787-3814 13 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Each project coordinator shall be responsible for overseeing the implementation of this Decree. Ecology's project coordinator will be Ecology's designated representative for the Site. To the maximum extent possible, communications between Ecology and Defendant and all documents, including reports, approvals, and other correspondence concerning the activities performed pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Decree shall be directed through the project coordinators. The project coordinators may designate, in writing, working level staff 25 26 CONSENT DECREE 26 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98504-0117 (360) 586-6770 1 contacts for all or portions of the implementation of the work to be performed required by this 2 Decree. 3 4 Any party may change its respective project coordinator. Written notification shall be given to the other party at least ten (10) calendar days prior to the change. VIII. PERFORMANCE 5 6 All geologic and hydrogeologic work performed pursuant to this Decree shall be under 7 the supervision and direction of a geologist or hydrogeologist licensed by the State of 8 Washington or under the direct supervision of an engineer registered by the State of 9 Washington, except as otherwise provided for by RCW 18.43 and 18.220. 10 All engineering work performed pursuant to this Decree shall be under the direct 11 supervision of a professional engineer registered by the State of Washington, except as 12 otherwise provided for by RCW 18.43.130. 13 All construction work performed pursuant to this Decree shall be under the direct 14 supervision of a professional engineer or a qualified technician under the direct supervision of 15 a professional engineer. 16 Washington, except as otherwise provided for by RCW 18.43.130. The professional engineer must be registered by the State of 17 Any documents submitted containing geologic, hydrologic, or engineering work shall 18 be under the seal of an appropriately licensed professional as required by RCW 18.43 19 and 18.220. 20 Defendant shall notify Ecology in writing of the identity of any engineer(s) and 21 geologist(s), contractor(s) and subcontractor(s), and others to be used in carrying out the terms 22 of this Decree, in advance of their involvement at the Site. IX. 23 ACCESS 24 Ecology or any Ecology authorized representative shall have access to enter and freely 25 move about all property at the Site that Defendant either owns, controls, or has access rights to 26 at all reasonable times for the purposes of, inter alia: inspecting records, operation logs, and CONSENT DECREE 26 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98504-0117 (360) 586-6770 1 contracts related to the work being performed pursuant to this Decree; reviewing Defendant's 2 progress in carrying out the terms of this Decree; conducting such tests or collecting such 3 samples as Ecology may deem necessary; using a camera, sound recording, or other 4 documentary type equipment to record work done pursuant to this Decree; and verifying the 5 data submitted to Ecology by Defendant. Defendant shall make all reasonable efforts to secure 6 access rights for those properties within the Site not owned or controlled by Defendant where 7 remedial activities or investigations will be performed pursuant to this Decree. Ecology or any 8 Ecology authorized representative shall give reasonable notice before entering any Site 9 property owned or controlled by Defendant unless an emergency prevents such notice. All 10 Parties who access the Site pursuant to this section shall comply with any applicable health and 11 safety plan(s) in compliance with Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) 12 requirements, or will be TWIC escorted. Ecology employees and their representatives shall 13 not be required to sign any liability release or waiver as a condition of Site property access. 14 X. SAMPLING, DATA SUBMITTAL, AND AVAILABILITY 15 With respect to the implementation of this Decree, Defendant shall make the results of 16 all sampling, laboratory reports, and/or test results generated by it or on its behalf available to 17 Ecology. Pursuant to WAC 173-340-840(5), all sampling data shall be submitted to Ecology 18 in both printed and electronic formats in accordance with Section XI (Progress Reports), 19 Ecology's Toxics Cleanup Program Policy 840 (Data Submittal Requirements), and/or any 20 subsequent procedures specified by Ecology for data submittal. 21 If requested by Ecology, Defendant shall allow Ecology and/or its authorized 22 representative to take split or duplicate samples of any samples collected by Defendant 23 pursuant to the implementation of this Decree. Defendant shall notify Ecology seven (7) days 24 in advance of any sample collection or work activity at the Site. Ecology shall, upon request, 25 allow Defendant and/or its authorized representative to take split or duplicate samples of any 26 samples collected by Ecology pursuant to the implementation of this Decree, provided that CONSENT DECREE 26 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98504-0117 (360) 586-6770 1 doing so does not interfere with Ecology's sampling. Without limitation on Ecology's rights 2 under Section IX (Access), Ecology shall notify Defendant prior to any sample collection 3 activity unless an emergency prevents such notice. 4 In accordance with WAC 173-340-830(2)(a), all hazardous substance analyses shall be 5 conducted by a laboratory accredited under WAC 173-50 for the specific analyses to be 6 conducted, unless otherwise approved by Ecology. XI. 7 PROGRESS REPORTS 8 Defendant shall submit to Ecology written calendar quarterly Progress Reports that 9 describe the actions taken during the previous quarter to implement the requirements of this 10 Decree. The Progress Reports shall include the following: 11 A. A list of onsite activities that have taken place during the quarter; 12 B. Detailed description of any deviations from required tasks not otherwise 13 14 documented in project plans or amendment requests; C. Description of all deviations from the CAP (Exhibit B) and Scope of Work and 15 Schedule (Exhibit C) during the previous quarter and any planned deviations in the upcoming 16 quarter; 17 18 19 D. For any deviations in schedule, a plan for recovering lost time and maintaining compliance with the schedule; E. All quality assurance/quality control reviewed data (including laboratory 20 analyses) received by Defendant during the past quarter and an identification of the source of 21 the sample; and 22 F. 23 All Progress Reports shall be submitted during the month following completion of a 24 quarter. At Ecology's discretion, the frequency of progress reports may be adjusted. Unless 25 otherwise specified, Progress Reports and any other documents submitted pursuant to this A list of deliverables for the upcoming month if different from the schedule. 26 CONSENT DECREE 26 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98504-0117 (360) 586-6770 1 Decree shall be sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, to Ecology's project 2 coordinator. XII. 3 RETENTION OF RECORDS 4 During the pendency of this Decree, and for ten (10) years from the date this Decree is 5 no longer in effect as provided in Section XXVIII (Duration of Decree), Defendant shall 6 preserve all records, reports, documents, and underlying data in its possession relevant to the 7 implementation of this Decree and shall insert a similar record retention requirement into all 8 contracts with project contractors and subcontractors. Upon request of Ecology, Defendant 9 shall make all records available to Ecology and allow access for review within a reasonable 10 time. 11 Nothing in this Decree is intended by Defendant to waive any right it may have under 12 applicable law to limit disclosure of documents protected by the attorney work-product 13 privilege and/or the attorney-client privilege. If Defendant withholds any requested records 14 based on an assertion of privilege, Defendant shall provide Ecology with a privilege log 15 specifying the records withheld and the applicable privilege. No Site-related data collected 16 pursuant to this Decree shall be considered privileged. XIII. TRANSFER OF INTEREST IN PROPERTY 17 18 No voluntary conveyance or relinquishment of title, easement, leasehold, or other 19 interest in any portion of the Site shall be consummated by Defendant without provision for 20 continued operation and maintenance of any containment system, treatment system, and/or 21 monitoring system installed or implemented pursuant to this Decree. 22 Prior to Defendant's transfer of any interest in all or any portion of the Site, and during 23 the effective period of this Decree, Defendant shall provide a copy of this Decree to any 24 prospective purchaser, lessee, transferee, assignee, or other successor in said interest; and, at 25 least thirty (30) days prior to any transfer, Defendant shall notify Ecology of said transfer. 26 Upon transfer of any interest, Defendant shall notify all transferees of the restrictions on the CONSENT DECREE 26 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98504-0117 (360) 586-6770 1 activities and uses of the property under this Decree and incorporate any such use restrictions 2 into the transfer documents. XIV. RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES 3 4 5 6 A. In the event that Defendant elects to invoke dispute resolution, Defendant must utilize the procedure set forth below. 1. Upon the triggering event (receipt of Ecology's project coordinator's 7 written decision or an itemized billing statement), Defendant has fourteen (14) calendar 8 days within which to notify Ecology's project coordinator in writing of its dispute 9 (Informal Dispute Notice). 10 2. The Parties' project coordinators shall then confer in an effort to resolve 11 the dispute informally. The parties shall informally confer for up to fourteen (14) 12 calendar days from receipt of the Informal Dispute Notice. If the project coordinators 13 cannot resolve the dispute within those 14 calendar days, then within seven (7) calendar 14 days Ecology's project coordinator shall issue a written decision (Informal Dispute 15 Decision) stating: the nature of the dispute; the Defendant's position with regards to 16 the dispute; Ecology's position with regards to the dispute; and the extent of resolution 17 reached by informal discussion. 18 3. Defendant may then request regional management review of the dispute. 19 This request (Formal Dispute Notice) must be submitted in writing to the Northwest 20 Region Toxics Cleanup Section Manager within seven (7) calendar days of receipt of 21 Ecology's Informal Dispute Decision. The Formal Dispute Notice shall include a 22 written statement of dispute setting forth: the nature of the dispute; the disputing 23 Party's position with respect to the dispute; and the information relied upon to support 24 its position. 25 26 CONSENT DECREE 26 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98504-0117 (360) 586-6770 4. 1 The Section Manager shall conduct a review of the dispute and shall 2 issue a written decision regarding the dispute (Decision on Dispute) within thirty (30) 3 calendar days of receipt of the Formal Dispute Notice. 5. 4 If Defendant finds Ecology's Regional Section Manager's decision 5 unacceptable, Defendant may then request final management review of the decision. 6 This request (Final Review Request) shall be submitted in writing to the Toxics 7 Cleanup Program Manager within seven (7) calendar days of Defendant's receipt of the 8 Decision on Dispute. The Final Review Request shall include a written statement of 9 dispute setting forth: the nature of the dispute; the disputing Party's position with 10 respect to the dispute; and the information relied upon to support its position. 6. 11 Ecology's Toxics Cleanup Program Manager shall conduct a review of 12 the dispute and shall issue a written decision regarding the dispute (Final Decision on 13 Dispute) within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of the Final Review Request. The 14 Toxics Cleanup Program Manager's decision shall be Ecology's final decision on the 15 disputed matter. 16 B. If Ecology's Final Decision on Dispute is unacceptable to Defendant, Defendant 17 has the right to submit the dispute to the Court for resolution. The Parties agree that one judge 18 should retain jurisdiction over this case and shall, as necessary, resolve any dispute arising 19 under this Decree. In the event Defendant presents an issue to the Court for review, the Court 20 shall review the action or decision of Ecology on the basis of whether such action or decision 21 was arbitrary and capricious and render a decision based on such standard of review. 22 C. The Parties agree to only utilize the dispute resolution process in good faith and 23 agree to expedite, to the extent possible, the dispute resolution process whenever it is used. 24 Where either party utilizes the dispute resolution process in bad faith or for purposes of delay, 25 the other party may seek sanctions. 26 CONSENT DECREE 26 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98504-0117 (360) 586-6770 1 D. Implementation of these dispute resolution procedures shall not provide a basis 2 for delay of any activities required in this Decree, unless Ecology agrees in writing to a 3 schedule extension or the Court so orders. 4 E. In case of a dispute, failure to either proceed with the work required by this 5 Decree or timely invoke dispute resolution may result in Ecology's determination that 6 insufficient progress is being made in preparation of a deliverable, and may result in Ecology 7 undertaking the work under Section XXV (Implementation of Remedial Action). XV. 8 AMENDMENT OF DECREE 9 The project coordinators may agree to minor changes to the work to be performed 10 without formally amending this Decree. Minor changes will be documented in writing by 11 Ecology. 12 Substantial changes to the work to be performed shall require formal amendment of this 13 Decree. This Decree may only be formally amended by a written stipulation among the Parties 14 that is entered by the Court, or by order of the Court. Such amendment shall become effective 15 upon entry by the Court. Agreement to amend the Decree shall not be unreasonably withheld 16 by any party. 17 Defendant shall submit a written request for amendment to Ecology for approval. 18 Ecology shall indicate its approval or disapproval in writing and in a timely manner after the 19 written request for amendment is received. If the amendment to the Decree is a substantial 20 change, Ecology will provide public notice and opportunity for comment. Reasons for the 21 disapproval of a proposed amendment to the Decree shall be stated in writing. If Ecology does 22 not agree to a proposed amendment, the disagreement may be addressed through the dispute 23 resolution procedures described in Section XIV (Resolution of Disputes). XVI. EXTENSION OF SCHEDULE 24 25 26 A. An extension of schedule shall be granted only when a request for an extension is submitted in a timely fashion, generally at least thirty (30) days prior to expiration of the CONSENT DECREE 26 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98504-0117 (360) 586-6770 1 deadline for which the extension is requested, and good cause exists for granting the extension. 2 All extensions shall be requested in writing. The request shall specify: 3 1. The deadline that is sought to be extended; 4 2. The length of the extension sought; 5 3. The reason(s) for the extension; and 6 4. Any related deadline or schedule that would be affected if the extension 7 were granted. 8 B. The burden shall be on Defendant to demonstrate to the satisfaction of Ecology 9 that the request for such extension has been submitted in a timely fashion and that good cause 10 exists for granting the extension. Good cause may include, but may not be limited to: 1. 11 Circumstances beyond the reasonable control and despite the due 12 diligence of Defendant including delays caused by unrelated third parties or Ecology, 13 such as (but not limited to) delays by Ecology in reviewing, approving, or modifying 14 documents submitted by Defendant; 2. 15 16 Acts of God, including fire, flood, blizzard, extreme temperatures, storm, or other unavoidable casualty; or 3. 17 Endangerment as described in Section XVII (Endangerment). 18 However, neither increased costs of performance of the terms of this Decree nor 19 changed economic circumstances shall be considered circumstances beyond the reasonable 20 control of Defendant. 21 C. Ecology shall act upon any written request for extension in a timely fashion. 22 Ecology shall give Defendant written notification of any extensions granted pursuant to this 23 Decree. A requested extension shall not be effective until approved by Ecology or, if required, 24 by the Court. Unless the extension is a substantial change, it shall not be necessary to amend 25 this Decree pursuant to Section XV (Amendment of Decree) when a schedule extension is 26 granted. CONSENT DECREE 26 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98504-0117 (360) 586-6770 1 D. An extension shall only be granted for such period of time as Ecology 2 determines is reasonable under the circumstances. Ecology may grant schedule extensions 3 exceeding ninety (90) days only as a result of: 4 1. 5 timely manner; 6 2. 7 8 Delays in the issuance of a necessary permit which was applied for in a Other circumstances deemed exceptional or extraordinary by Ecology; or 3. Endangerment as described in Section XVII (Endangerment). XVII. ENDANGERMENT 9 10 In the event Ecology determines that any activity being performed at the Site under this 11 Decree is creating or has the potential to create a danger to human health or the environment, 12 Ecology may direct Defendant to cease such activities for such period of time as it deems 13 necessary to abate the danger. Defendant shall immediately comply with such direction. 14 In the event Defendant determines that any activity being performed at the Site under 15 this Decree is creating or has the potential to create a danger to human health or the 16 environment, Defendant may cease such activities. Defendant shall notify Ecology's project 17 coordinator as soon as possible, but no later than twenty-four (24) hours after making such 18 determination or ceasing such activities. Upon Ecology's direction, Defendant shall provide 19 Ecology with documentation of the basis for the determination or cessation of such activities. 20 If Ecology disagrees with Defendant's cessation of activities, it may direct Defendant to 21 resume such activities. 22 If Ecology concurs with or orders a work stoppage pursuant to this section, Defendant's 23 obligations with respect to the ceased activities shall be suspended until Ecology determines 24 the danger is abated, and the time for performance of such activities, as well as the time for any 25 other work dependent upon such activities, shall be extended, in accordance with Section XVI 26 CONSENT DECREE 26 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98504-0117 (360) 586-6770 1 (Extension of Schedule), for such period of time as Ecology determines is reasonable under the 2 circumstances. 3 4 Nothing in this Decree shall limit the authority of Ecology, its employees, agents, or contractors to take or require appropriate action in the event of an emergency. XVIII. COVENANT NOT TO SUE 5 6 A. Covenant Not to Sue: In consideration of Defendant's compliance with the 7 terms and conditions of this Decree, Ecology covenants not to institute legal or administrative 8 actions against Defendant regarding the release or threatened release of hazardous substances 9 covered by this Decree. 10 This Decree covers only the Site specifically identified in the Site Diagram (Exhibit A) 11 and those hazardous substances that Ecology knows are located at the Site as of the date of 12 entry of this Decree. This Decree does not cover any other hazardous substance or area. 13 Ecology retains all of its authority relative to any substance or area not covered by this Decree. 14 This Covenant Not to Sue shall have no applicability whatsoever to: 15 1. Criminal liability; 16 2. Liability for damages to natural resources; and 17 3. Any Ecology action, including cost recovery, against PLPs not a party to 18 this Decree. 19 If factors not known at the time of entry of this Decree are discovered and present a 20 previously unknown threat to human health or the environment, the Court shall amend this 21 Covenant Not to Sue. 22 B. Reopeners: Ecology specifically reserves the right to institute legal or 23 administrative action against Defendant to require it to perform additional remedial actions at 24 the Site and to pursue appropriate cost recovery, pursuant to RCW 70.105D.050 under the 25 following circumstances: 26 1. CONSENT DECREE Upon Defendant's failure to meet the requirements of this Decree; 26 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98504-0117 (360) 586-6770 2. 1 2 Failure of the remedial action to meet the cleanup standards identified in the Cleanup Action Plan (CAP) (Exhibit B); 3. 3 Upon Ecology's determination that remedial action beyond the terms of 4 this Decree is necessary to abate an imminent and substantial endangerment to human 5 health or the environment; 4. 6 Upon the availability of new information regarding factors previously 7 unknown to Ecology, including the nature or quantity of hazardous substances at the 8 Site, and Ecology's determination, in light of this information, that further remedial 9 action is necessary at the Site to protect human health or the environment; or 5. 10 Upon Ecology's determination that additional remedial actions are 11 necessary to achieve cleanup standards within the reasonable restoration time frame set 12 forth in the CAP. 13 C. Except in the case of an emergency, prior to instituting legal or administrative 14 action against Defendant pursuant to this section, Ecology shall provide Defendant with 15 fifteen (15) calendar days' notice of such action. XIX. CONTRIBUTION PROTECTION 16 17 With regard to claims for contribution against Defendant, the Parties agree that 18 Defendant is entitled to protection against claims for contribution for matters addressed in this 19 Decree as provided by RCW 70.105D.040(4)(d). XX. 20 LAND USE RESTRICTIONS 21 In consultation with Defendant, Ecology will prepare the Environmental (Restrictive) 22 Covenant consistent with WAC 173-340-440 and RCW 64.70. After approval by Ecology, 23 Defendant shall record the Environmental (Restrictive) Covenant with the office of the King 24 County Auditor within three (3) months of completion of performance monitoring. 25 Environmental (Restrictive) Covenant shall restrict future activities and uses of the Site as The 26 CONSENT DECREE 26 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98504-0117 (360) 586-6770 1 agreed to by Ecology and Defendant. Defendant shall provide Ecology with the original 2 recorded Environmental (Restrictive) Covenant within thirty (30) days of the recording date. 3 XXI. FINANCIAL ASSURANCES 4 Pursuant to WAC 173-340-440(11), Defendant shall maintain sufficient and adequate 5 financial assurance mechanisms to cover all costs associated with the operation and 6 maintenance of the remedial action at the Site, including institutional controls, compliance 7 monitoring, and corrective measures. 8 Within sixty (60) days of the effective date of this Decree, Defendant shall submit to 9 Ecology for review and approval an estimate of the costs that it will incur in carrying out the 10 terms of this Decree, including operation and maintenance, and compliance monitoring. 11 Within sixty (60) days after Ecology approves the aforementioned cost estimate, Defendant 12 shall provide proof of financial assurances sufficient to cover all such costs in a form 13 acceptable to Ecology. 14 15 16 Defendant shall adjust the financial assurance coverage and provide Ecology's project coordinator with documentation of the updated financial assurance for: A. Inflation, annually, within thirty (30) days of the anniversary date of the entry of 17 this Decree; or if applicable, the modified anniversary date established in accordance with this 18 section, or if applicable, ninety (90) days after the close of Defendant's fiscal year if the 19 financial test or corporate guarantee is used. 20 B. Changes in cost estimates, within thirty (30) days of issuance of Ecology's 21 approval of a modification or revision to the CAP that result in increases to the cost or 22 expected duration of remedial actions. Any adjustments for inflation since the most recent 23 preceding anniversary date shall be made concurrent with adjustments for changes in cost 24 estimates. The issuance of Ecology's approval of a revised or modified CAP will revise the 25 anniversary date established under this section to become the date of issuance of such revised 26 or modified CAP. CONSENT DECREE 26 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98504-0117 (360) 586-6770 XXII. INDEMNIFICATION 1 2 Defendant agrees to indemnify and save and hold the State of Washington, its 3 employees, and agents harmless from any and all claims or causes of action (1) for death or 4 injuries to persons, or (2) for loss or damage to property to the extent arising from or on 5 account of acts or omissions of Defendant, its officers, employees, agents, or contractors in 6 entering into and implementing this Decree. However, Defendant shall not indemnify the State 7 of Washington nor save nor hold its employees and agents harmless from any claims or causes 8 of action to the extent arising out of the negligent acts or omissions of the State of Washington, 9 or the employees or agents of the State, in entering into or implementing this Decree. XXIII. COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE LAWS 10 11 A. All actions carried out by Defendant pursuant to this Decree shall be done in 12 accordance with all applicable federal, state, and local requirements, including requirements to 13 obtain necessary permits, except as provided in RCW 70.105D.090. The permits or other 14 federal, state, or local requirements that the agency has determined are applicable and that are 15 known at the time of entry of this Decree have been identified in the List of Applicable or 16 Relevant and Appropriate Requirements (Exhibit E). 17 B. Pursuant to RCW 70.105D.090(1), Defendant is exempt from the procedural 18 requirements of RCW 70.94, 70.95, 70.105, 77.55, 90.48, and 90.58 and of any laws requiring 19 or authorizing local government permits or approvals. However, Defendant shall comply with 20 the substantive requirements of such permits or approvals. The exempt permits or approvals 21 and the applicable substantive requirements of those permits or approvals, as they are known at 22 the time of entry of this Decree, have been identified in the List of Applicable or Relevant and 23 Appropriate Requirements (Exhibit E). 24 Defendant has a continuing obligation to determine whether additional permits or 25 approvals addressed in RCW 70.105D.090(1) would otherwise be required for the remedial 26 action under this Decree. In the event either Ecology or Defendant determines that additional CONSENT DECREE 26 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98504-0117 (360) 586-6770 1 permits or approvals addressed in RCW 70.105D.090(1) would otherwise be required for the 2 remedial action under this Decree, it shall promptly notify the other party of this determination. 3 Ecology shall determine whether Ecology or Defendant shall be responsible to contact the 4 appropriate state and/or local agencies. If Ecology so requires, Defendant shall promptly 5 consult with the appropriate state and/or local agencies and provide Ecology with written 6 documentation from those agencies of the substantive requirements those agencies believe are 7 applicable to the remedial action. Ecology shall make the final determination on the additional 8 substantive requirements that must be met by Defendant and on how Defendant must meet 9 those requirements. Ecology shall inform Defendant in writing of these requirements. Once 10 established by Ecology, the additional requirements shall be enforceable requirements of this 11 Decree. Defendant shall not begin or continue the remedial action potentially subject to the 12 additional requirements until Ecology makes its final determination. 13 C. Pursuant to RCW 70.105D.090(2), in the event Ecology determines that the 14 exemption from complying with the procedural requirements of the laws referenced in 15 RCW 70.105D.090(1) would result in the loss of approval from a federal agency that is 16 necessary for the state to administer any federal law, the exemption shall not apply and 17 Defendant shall comply with both the procedural and substantive requirements of the laws 18 referenced in RCW 70.105D.090(1), including any requirements to obtain permits. XXIV. REMEDIAL ACTION COSTS 19 20 Defendant shall pay to Ecology costs incurred by Ecology pursuant to this Decree and 21 consistent with WAC 173-340-550(2). These costs shall include work performed by Ecology 22 or its contractors for, or on, the Site under RCW 70.105D, including remedial actions and 23 Decree preparation, negotiation, oversight, and administration. These costs shall include work 24 performed both prior to and subsequent to the entry of this Decree. Ecology's costs shall 25 include costs of direct activities and support costs of direct activities as defined in 26 WAC 173-340-550(2). Ecology has accumulated $10,840.09 in remedial action costs related CONSENT DECREE 26 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98504-0117 (360) 586-6770 1 to this facility as of March 3, 2015. Payment for this amount shall be submitted within thirty 2 (30) days of the effective date of this Decree. For all costs incurred subsequent to March 3, 3 2015, Defendant shall pay the required amount within thirty (30) days of receiving from 4 Ecology an itemized statement of costs that includes a summary of costs incurred, an 5 identification of involved staff, and the amount of time spent by involved staff members on the 6 project. A general statement of work performed will be provided upon request. Itemized 7 statements shall be prepared quarterly. Pursuant to WAC 173-340-550(4), failure to pay 8 Ecology's costs within ninety (90) days of receipt of the itemized statement of costs will result 9 in interest charges at the rate of twelve percent (12%) per annum, compounded monthly. 10 In addition to other available relief, pursuant to RCW 70.105D.055, Ecology has 11 authority to recover unreimbursed remedial action costs by filing a lien against real property 12 subject to the remedial actions. 13 XXV. IMPLEMENTATION OF REMEDIAL ACTION 14 If Ecology determines that the Defendant has failed to make sufficient progress or 15 failed to implement the remedial action, in whole or in part, Ecology may, after notice to 16 Defendant, perform any or all portions of the remedial action or at Ecology's discretion allow 17 the Defendant opportunity to correct. The Defendant shall reimburse Ecology for the costs of 18 doing such work in accordance with Section XXIV (Remedial Action Costs). 19 Except where necessary to abate an emergency situation, Defendant shall not perform 20 any remedial actions at the Site outside those remedial actions required by this Decree, unless 21 Ecology concurs, in writing, with such additional remedial actions pursuant to Section XV 22 (Amendment of Decree). XXVI. PERIODIC REVIEW 23 24 As remedial action, including groundwater monitoring, continues at the Site, the Parties 25 agree to review the progress of remedial action at the Site, and to review the data accumulated 26 as a result of monitoring the Site as often as is necessary and appropriate under the CONSENT DECREE 26 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98504-0117 (360) 586-6770 1 circumstances. At least every five (5) years after the initiation of cleanup action at the Site the 2 Parties shall meet to discuss the status of the Site and the need, if any, for further remedial 3 action at the Site. At least ninety (90) days prior to each periodic review, Defendant shall 4 submit a report to Ecology that documents whether human health and the environment are 5 being protected based on the factors set forth in WAC 173-340-420(4). Under Section XVIII 6 (Covenant Not to Sue), Ecology reserves the right to require further remedial action at the Site 7 under appropriate circumstances. This provision shall remain in effect for the duration of this 8 Decree. XXVII. 9 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 10 A Public Participation Plan is required for this Site. Ecology shall review any existing 11 Public Participation Plan to determine its continued appropriateness and whether it requires 12 amendment, or if no plan exists, Ecology shall develop a Public Participation Plan alone or in 13 conjunction with Defendant. 14 15 16 Ecology shall maintain the responsibility for public participation at the Site. However, Defendant shall cooperate with Ecology, and shall: A. If agreed to by Ecology, develop appropriate mailing lists, prepare drafts of 17 public notices and fact sheets at important stages of the remedial action, such as the submission 18 of work plans, remedial investigation/feasibility study reports, cleanup action plans, and 19 engineering design reports. As appropriate, Ecology will edit, finalize, and distribute such fact 20 sheets and prepare and distribute public notices of Ecology's presentations and meetings. 21 B. Notify Ecology's project coordinator prior to the preparation of all press 22 releases and fact sheets, and before major meetings with the interested public and local 23 governments. Likewise, Ecology shall notify Defendant prior to the issuance of all press 24 releases and fact sheets, and before major meetings with the interested public and local 25 governments. For all press releases, fact sheets, meetings, and other outreach efforts by 26 Defendant that do not receive prior Ecology approval, Defendant shall clearly indicate to its CONSENT DECREE 26 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98504-0117 (360) 586-6770 1 audience that the press release, fact sheet, meeting, or other outreach effort was not sponsored 2 or endorsed by Ecology. 3 C. When requested by Ecology, participate in public presentations on the progress 4 of the remedial action at the Site. Participation may be through attendance at public meetings 5 to assist in answering questions, or as a presenter. 6 7 8 D. When requested by Ecology, arrange and/or continue information repositories at the following locations: 1. Seattle Public Library Beacon Hill Branch 2821 Beacon Avenue South Seattle, WA 98144 2. Ecology's Northwest Regional Office 3190 160th Avenue SE Bellevue, WA 98008 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 At a minimum, copies of all public notices, fact sheets, and documents relating to public comment periods shall be promptly placed in these repositories. A copy of all documents related to this Site shall be maintained in the repository at Ecology's Northwest Regional Office in Bellevue, Washington. 16 17 18 19 20 21 XXVIII. The remedial program required pursuant to this Decree shall be maintained and continued until Defendant has received written notification from Ecology that the requirements of this Decree have been satisfactorily completed. This Decree shall remain in effect until dismissed by the Court. 24 25 When dismissed, Section XVIII (Covenant Not to Sue) and Section XIX (Contribution Protection) shall survive. 22 23 DURATION OF DECREE XXIX. CLAIMS AGAINST THE STATE Defendant hereby agrees that it will not seek to recover any costs accrued in implementing the remedial action required by this Decree from the State of Washington or any of its agencies; and further, that Defendant will make no claim against the State Toxics Control 26 CONSENT DECREE 26 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98504-0117 (360) 586-6770 1 Account or any local Toxics Control Account for any costs incurred in implementing this 2 Decree. Except as provided above, however, Defendant expressly reserves its right to seek to 3 recover any costs incurred in implementing this Decree from any other PLP. This section does 4 not limit or address funding that may be provided under WAC 173-322. XXX. EFFECTIVE DATE 5 This Decree is effective upon the date it is entered by the Court. 6 XXXI. WITHDRAWAL OF CONSENT 7 8 If the Court withholds or withdraws its consent to this Decree, it shall be null and void 9 at the option of any party and the accompanying Complaint shall be dismissed without costs 10 and without prejudice. In such an event, no party shall be bound by the requirements of this 11 I Decree. 12 13 STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY e T W. 14 15 James J. Pendowski, Program Manager Toxics Cleanup Program Nels Johns BA #28616 Assistant tt rney General (360) 407-7177 (360) 586- 14 16 Date: S Date: 17 18 21- 2117 - PORT OF SEATTLE 19 20 /' 0""'A /" -~ David Soike Interim Chief Executive Officer 21 (206) 728-3000 22 Date: 23 ENTERED this day of 2017. 24 25 26 JUDGE, King County Superior Court CONSENT DECREE 26 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98504-0117 (360) 586-6770 King County Superior Court Judicial Electronic Signature Page Case Number: Case Title: Not available at this time Document Title: DECREE Signed by: Date: Catherine Shaffer 7/19/2017 12:19:45 PM 17-2-19080-2 Judge/Commissioner: Catherine Shaffer This document is signed in accordance with the provisions in GR 30. Certificate Hash: 02A0B1FE28017BAC78E9BF6CE00C462718609D94 Certificate effective date: 7/29/2013 11:40:17 AM Certificate expiry date: 7/29/2018 11:40:17 AM Certificate Issued by: C=US, E=kcscefiling@kingcounty.gov, OU=KCDJA, O=KCDJA, CN="Catherine Shaffer:PCh7R3n44hGZOTo3YYhwmw==" Page 27 of 27 12/3/2015 K:\PONY\T30\GIS\mxds\SiteLayout_2015.mxd Conditional Point of Compliance (CPOC) Wells ( MW-45 ! A ! ! A A MW-84B Tru ck ! A MW-35 Sc K s 2012 USGS Orthophoto ale RW-11A A ! MW-36 ! A MW-46 ! A RW-9 ! A T30 Vessel Tower MW-85B !! AMW-85A A South Vault Soil Area East Marginal Way S MW-64 ! A ! ! MW-59 A RW-12 A MW-84A Port of Seattle Police Office Soil Areas Not Associated with T-30 Site T-30 Site Boundary Water Quality Monitoring Well ! A ! A Gaging/Recovery Well Truck Scales MW-81A ! A ! A MW-88 New Sheet Pile Wall Center Line East Waterway 0 T25 Feet 1,000 T18 ip Sl 27 East Waterway MW-54 ! A RW-5A ! A MW-42 ! A MW-89 ! A ! ! MW-86B A A MW-86C MW-77 ! A ! RW-1 A ! A MW-38 MW-39 ! A ! A MW-58A 27 Pi er 28 Alaska Way Viaduct Pi er Edge of Concrete Face T30 MW-49 ! A ! A MW-92 US Coast Guard Jack Perry Park MW-91 ! A MW-52A A ! MW-87B MW-87A ! ! A A Port of Seattle Terminal 30 ([KLELW$ Site Layout North Substation MW-76A ! A MW-90 ! A West Vault Soil Area Slip 36 0 Gate House Feet 100 CLEANUP ACTION PLAN PORT OF SEATTLE TERMINAL 30 December 15, 2015 CLEANUP ACTION PLAN PORT OF SEATTLE TERMINAL 30 Prepared by: Washington State Department of Ecology December 15, 2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 1 1.1 General Facility Information ............................................................................................ 1 1.2 Background ...................................................................................................................... 2 1.3 Site Description ................................................................................................................ 2 1.3.1 Current Operations .................................................................................................. 3 1.3.2 Potential Future Development ................................................................................. 3 1.3.3 Roads and Utilities Infrastructure ........................................................................... 3 1.3.4 Site Access ................................................................................................................ 3 1.4 Hydrogeologic Setting ..................................................................................................... 4 1.5 Contaminants of Concern................................................................................................. 5 1.6 Points of Compliance ....................................................................................................... 6 1.7 Cleanup Levels................................................................................................................. 6 1.7.1 Soil ........................................................................................................................... 6 1.7.2 Groundwater ............................................................................................................ 6 1.7.3 LNAPL...................................................................................................................... 6 1.8 Remediation Levels ......................................................................................................... 6 1.9 Nature and Extent of Contamination ............................................................................... 7 1.9.1 Soil ........................................................................................................................... 7 1.9.2 Groundwater ............................................................................................................ 8 1.9.3 LNAPL...................................................................................................................... 8 2.0 CONSIDERED ALTERNATIVES ......................................................................... 8 3.0 SELECTED CLEANUP ACTIONS ....................................................................... 8 3.1 AS/SVE System ............................................................................................................... 9 3.1.1 System Configuration ............................................................................................. 10 3.1.2 Phase 1 AS/SVE Configuration .............................................................................. 10 3.1.3 Phase 2 AS/SVE Configuration .............................................................................. 11 3.1.4 System Operation ................................................................................................... 11 3.1.5 Vapor Treatment .................................................................................................... 12 3.1.6 Operation Criteria ................................................................................................. 12 3.2 LNAPL Recovery .......................................................................................................... 13 3.2.1 Conceptual Model for System Operation ............................................................... 13 3.2.2 Recovery Well Design ............................................................................................ 14 3.2.3 Vacuum-Enhanced Recovery ................................................................................. 15 3.2.4 LNAPL Recovery Termination ............................................................................... 16 3.2.5 Recovery Documentation ....................................................................................... 16 3.2.6 Phase II AS/SVE System Installation ..................................................................... 17 4.0 MONITORING .............................................................................................. 17 4.1.1 4.1.2 LNAPL Monitoring ................................................................................................ 18 CPOC Groundwater Monitoring ........................................................................... 18 i Port of Seattle Terminal 30 Cleanup Action Plan 4.1.3 Performance Groundwater Monitoring ................................................................. 19 4.1.4 Interior Groundwater Monitoring ......................................................................... 19 4.1.5 Schedule ................................................................................................................. 19 4.2 Institutional Controls ..................................................................................................... 20 4.3 Contaminated Material Left On-Site.............................................................................. 20 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 6.0 SCHEDULE ................................................................................................. 21 Engineering Design Report ............................................................................................ 21 AS/SVE .......................................................................................................................... 21 LNAPL Recovery .......................................................................................................... 22 Groundwater Monitoring ............................................................................................... 22 CONTINGENCY ACTIONS .............................................................................. 22 6.1 Contingency Action Evaluation ..................................................................................... 22 6.1.1 Unrecognized Environmental Condition................................................................ 23 6.1.2 Change in Site Conditions...................................................................................... 23 6.1.3 Concentrations Above Cleanup Levels .................................................................. 24 6.1.4 Remedial Action Progress ...................................................................................... 24 6.2 Contingency Action Process .......................................................................................... 24 6.3 Contingency Action Schedule........................................................................................ 25 7.0 REFERENCES ............................................................................................. 26 ii Port of Seattle Terminal 30 Cleanup Action Plan TABLES Table 1-1: Table 1-2: Table 1-3: Table 1-4: Soil Cleanup Levels Groundwater Cleanup Levels Groundwater Remediation Levels Select Groundwater Monitoring Data Table 3-1: Groundwater Monitoring Schedule FIGURES Figure 1-1: Figure 1-2: Figure 1-3: Figure 1-4: Site Vicinity Site Layout Site Underground Utilities Extent of Contamination Figure 3-1: Cleanup Action Components Figure 3-2: AS/SVE Subsurface Components Figure 3-3: LNAPL Extraction Well Details Figure 6-1: Contingency Action Decision Framework Figure 6-2: Contingency Action Process APPENDICES Appendix A Supporting LNAPL Information iii Port of Seattle Terminal 30 Cleanup Action Plan 1.0 INTRODUCTION This Cleanup Action Plan (CAP) describes the cleanup action selected by the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) for Terminal 30 (T30) Site. The Site is generally located at 1901 East Marginal Way South, Seattle, Washington, approximately one mile southwest of downtown Seattle, in King County, Washington on the shoreline of the East Waterway. This CAP was developed using information presented in the Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) for the Site, which was prepared by Pacific Groundwater Group (PGG) in 2013 on behalf of the Port of Seattle (Port) in accordance with the Agreed Order (AO) entered between Ecology and Port in 1991. The CAP: • presents selected cleanup alternatives • presents site cleanup standards and remediation levels • provides the schedule to implement the cleanup action The T30 Site is being cleaned up under the authority of Model Toxics Control Act Chapter 70.105D of the Revised Code of Washington (RCW), and the Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA) Cleanup Regulation, Chapter 173-340 of the Washington Administrative Code (WAC). 1.1 GENERAL FACILITY INFORMATION The location and layout of T30 are presented in Figures 1-1 and 1-2. Site Name: Facility Site ID: Site Address: Parcel Number: Current Owner: Current Operator: Project Consultant: Port of Seattle Terminal 30 2055 1901 East Marginal Way South, Seattle, Washington 7666207830 Port of Seattle, Roy Kuroiwa Project Manager SSA Marine (Port of Seattle Tenant) Pacific Groundwater Group, Janet Knox Project Manager 2377 Eastlake Avenue East, Seattle WA 98102 206-329-0141 1 Port of Seattle Terminal 30 Cleanup Action Plan 1.2 BACKGROUND A Chevron Bulk fuel terminal occupied a portion of the T30 site since 1905. The Chevron bulk fuel terminal consisted of above-ground fuel storage tanks and associated piping and equipment. The Port purchased the T30 Site from Chevron on January 2, 1985. The fuel terminal was demolished between December 1984 and about November 1985. The Port redeveloped the 33.9 acres Terminal 30 as a container facility The Port of Seattle (Port) and Ecology entered into an Agreed Order (AO) for cleanup at T30 in 1991, which was amended in 2013 to include preparation of this CAP. As required by the 1991 AO, a draft Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) was developed in 1998 by GeoEngineers (1998 RI/FS) to document the nature and extent of contamination and to evaluate remedial alternatives. The draft RI/FS was not approved by Ecology. A product recovery system was installed in the early 1990s that removed more than 171,000 gallons of product. As part of the redevelopment in 2007, a sitewide asphalt cover was constructed and more than 24,000 cubic yards of petroleum-impacted soil was disposed of offsite. However, substantial petroleum product remains in the soil and groundwater at the Site. A final remedial investigation/feasibility study (RI/FS) was prepared by Pacific Groundwater Group (PGG) in 2013 to update the status of petroleum contamination at the site, to evaluate final remedial actions, and to fulfill the requirements of the 1991 AO. 1.3 SITE DESCRIPTION T30 is located approximately one mile southwest of downtown Seattle, in King County, Washington on the shoreline of the Duwamish River East Waterway (Figure 1-1). The 2013 RI/FS and this CAP focus on approximately 11 acres in the northern portion of the larger 33.9 acre T30 property. The term "T30 site" or "site" refers to the extent of petroleum contamination in the northern portion of T30, inclusive of light non-aqueous phase liquid (LNAPL), soil, and groundwater contamination; the site boundary is shown in Figure 1-2. Soil contamination located at the West Vault and South Vault are from separate sources, and are not considered part of the Terminal 30 site. The T30 site is bordered on the north by an area of public shoreline access to the East Waterway, on the east by East Marginal Way South, on the south by the southern portion of T30, and on the west by the East Waterway. The East Waterway is an operable unit of the Harbor Island Superfund Site as ordered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2 Port of Seattle Terminal 30 Cleanup Action Plan 1.3.1 Current Operations T30 and the contiguous Terminal 25 to the south are currently operated as a 70acre container storage and transfer facility by the Port's tenant SSA Marine, who is leasing the facility through 2023. Containerized freight is transferred between ships, trucks, and temporary terminal storage using a series of rail-mounted overhead cranes and forklifts. Activities are directed from the Vessel Tower and Gate House. The Vessel Tower is within the T30 site, while the Gate House is not (Figure 1-2). The T30 site is entirely paved with asphalt; runoff is controlled by a stormwater management system operated and maintained by SSA Marine (Figures 1-2 and 1-3). 1.3.2 Potential Future Development The Port anticipates continued and long-term ownership of T30 and long-term use as a container facility. The Port has no plans to redevelop this property for alternate use. 1.3.3 Roads and Utilities Infrastructure Vehicle access to T30 is directly from East Marginal Way and is controlled at the security Gate House. The City of Seattle provides water, electricity, and sanitary sewer service to T30. Stormwater runoff is managed by SSA Marine using best management practices. The stormwater management system treats runoff with oil/water separators and filtration media prior to discharge at outfalls to the East Waterway. Two of these outfalls, Hanford and Lander, enter the East Waterway south (upstream) of the site. Utilities on the T30 site have been modified many times with varying levels of documentation. Most recently, additional subsurface utilities including electrical, sanitary sewer, and water were installed during the 2007-2009 container terminal construction (ENSR|AECOM 2010). Underground utilities documented in Port and Seattle Public Utility files are presented in Figure 1-3; additional abandoned or undocumented subsurface utility infrastructure may be present on the site. 1.3.4 Site Access The site is accessed via the Main Gate on East Marginal Way. Site entry is managed at a staffed gate house at the Main Gate. A Transportation Worker Identification Card (TWIC) is required for access to the site to meet Department of Homeland Security regulations for access to marine port facilities. Site access must be arranged in advance with the Port of Seattle and the site tenant, which is currently SSA Terminals. Tenant contact information will be provided by the Port of Seattle as needed. 3 Port of Seattle Terminal 30 Cleanup Action Plan 1.4 HYDROGEOLOGIC SETTING Two stratigraphic units have been identified at the T30 site: fill and native deposits. Fill was derived at least in part from dredging and can be difficult to physically differentiate from similar native tidal flat and alluvial deposits (GeoEngineers, 1998). Key characteristics of these units include: • Fill Unit-consists of sand and gravel with varying amounts of silt, wood, bricks, and construction debris; the unit thickens and dips westward toward the East Waterway (GeoEngineers, 1998). Fill units identified in the 1998 RI/FS by GeoEngineers were described as "laterally discontinuous" with a lower contact approximately 15 to 20 ft below ground surface (bgs) or the approximate historic MLLW tide line. Most of the fill materials tested for grain size distribution were classified as well-sorted sands and less commonly as sandy gravels, silty sand, and silts. During construction of the T30 facility in 19841985, additional fill for an engineered slope was placed after dredging operations were completed. This fill included sand with a surface layer of rip-rap extending to the base of the East Waterway. • Native Deposits-consist of non-glacial, fluvial and estuarine, black, fine-to-medium sand with varying amounts of silt. Shell fragments and occasional organic materials were frequently observed in the native deposits. Native soils and overlying fill comprise a shallow water table aquifer at the T30 site. Average depth to water ranges from 8 to 14 feet across the site. Recharge to the water table aquifer originates as precipitation in uplands and unpaved areas offsite; insignificant recharge originates at the T30 site due to the asphalt cover and the stormwater management system. In the Duwamish Valley groundwater moves from upland recharge zones downgradient to Duwamish Waterway discharge zones. Groundwater at the T30 site generally flows toward the East Waterway, although discharge to the waterway is strongly influenced by tidal fluctuations and man-made structures. The average hydraulic gradient across the site is 0.0028 ft/ft with a slight increase near the sheet pile wall (Figure 1-2). Groundwater contours curve slightly northeast at the north end of the sheet pile wall, which is consistent with increased discharge around the end of the sheet pile wall. As tides rise and fall, flow between the East Waterway and the aquifer reverses in a tidal mixing zone that is relatively narrow; however, the zone of tidal influence on groundwater gradients is significantly wider. Hydraulic conductivity of the shallow aquifer at the T30 site has been estimated based on tidal studies and grain size analysis (GeoEngineers, 1998). Estimates based on grain size analyses range from 0.02 to 0.1 cm/s (57 to 284 ft/day). 4 Port of Seattle Terminal 30 Cleanup Action Plan Estimates based on tidal studies range from 0.2 to 9 cm/s (567 to 25,500 ft/day) and likely overestimate the hydraulic conductivity of the aquifer given the native and fill lithologies observed at the T30 site. The higher tidal study estimates are typical hydraulic conductivities for clean gravels not for silty sands, which are observed in most borings at the site. Additional discussion of the T30 hydrogeologic setting and tidal influence are included the RIFS (PGG, 2013b). 1.5 CONTAMINANTS OF CONCERN The contaminants of concern (COC) in soil and groundwater include: Petroleum Hydrocarbons • • • • Diesel-Range Organics Gasoline-Range Organics Oil-Range Organics BTEX: Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, Xylenes (total) Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds • 2-methylnapthalene Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Acenaphthene Acenaphthylene Anthracene Benzo(a)anthracene Benzo(a)pyrene Benzo(b)fluoranthene Benzo(g,h,i)perylene Benzo(k)fluoranthene Chrysene Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene Fluoranthene Fluorene Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene Naphthalene Phenanthrene Pyrene 5 Port of Seattle Terminal 30 Cleanup Action Plan 1.6 POINTS OF COMPLIANCE For soil at the T30 site, the point of compliance extends through the soil profile to a depth of 15 feet for the direct contact exposure pathway. The standard MTCA groundwater point of compliance is groundwater throughout the site. For the T30 site, a conditional point of compliance (CPOC) for groundwater is selected to be located as close as practical to the source of the petroleum sheen area and LNAPL area. Monitoring wells MW-45, MW-46, MW58A, MW-89, and MW-92 (Figure 1-2), located at the edge of tidal flushing and between the sheen and LNAPL area and surface water receptors, are selected as compliance monitoring wells. 1.7 CLEANUP LEVELS Soil and groundwater cleanup levels are listed in Tables 1-1 and 1-2. 1.7.1 Soil Soil cleanup levels in Table 1-1, applied to the T30 site, are MTCA Method A values for industrial land use or soil leaching to groundwater protective of surface water values. 1.7.2 Groundwater The groundwater cleanup levels in Table 1-2 are surface water criteria for marine water. The marine surface water criteria are applicable for groundwater at the T30 site because groundwater discharges to the East Waterway. Surface water criteria are not established for diesel-, heavy oil-, and gasolinerange organics, and total xylenes. Therefore, MTCA Method A groundwater criteria were selected for those parameters. 1.7.3 LNAPL Measurable thickness of LNAPL in monitoring wells will be considered an exceedance of WAC 173-340-747(10) regardless of groundwater concentrations in samples collected from the well. A measurable thickness is 0.01-feet, the practical measurement limit with an interface probe. The presence of sheen will not be considered an exceedance of the LNAPL criteria. 1.8 REMEDIATION LEVELS Remediation levels will be used to track remediation progress in non-CPOC wells. Remediation levels are developed for a subset of COCs that are indicative 6 Port of Seattle Terminal 30 Cleanup Action Plan of TPH abundance, including: benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylenes (BTEX); diesel range organics; and gasoline range organics. Remediation levels are used to demonstrate reduction in petroleum compound contaminant mass in the sheen area. In this context, remediation levels are a concentration reduction target for operation of the AS/SVE system, and are not a maximum concentration for compliance at performance monitoring wells. Remediation levels (RELs) in Table 1-3 are the maximum of either: • • 75% of the estimated solubility limit or twice the cleanup level The composition of petroleum varies across the T30 site with variable amounts of weathered gasoline and diesel. The equilibrium concentrations of T30's COCs depend on soil and groundwater concentrations and on the petroleum mixtures in that part of the site. As shown in Table 1-3, the solubilities of individual compounds in equilibrium with different petroleum mixtures vary significantly. Therefore, a conservative EPA reference mixture is used to estimate effective solubilities rather than attempting to develop well-specific effective solubilities or one "T30 Product" effective solubility. The solubility limit is estimated based on equilibration with an EPA 1994 Diesel Fuel Oil reference petroleum mixture. The use of 75% of the solubility is based on the assumption that petroleum at the site is primarily sorbed mass rather than residual saturation when groundwater concentrations are 75% of solubility groundwater concentrations. Toluene, ethylbenzene and xylenes have cleanup levels above their respective effective solubilities and are not detected above cleanup levels in current groundwater data (see Table 1-4 and T30 RI/FS Table 2-4; PGG, 2013). For these compounds, the remediation level is set at twice the cleanup level. For benzene, the 75% effective solubility and twice the cleanup level criteria are nearly equivalent. Diesel and gasoline remediation levels are set as 75% of the total BTEX effective solubility. Achieving these remediation levels will indicate a significant reduction in sheen area contaminant mass to residual sorbed levels. 1.9 NATURE AND EXTENT OF CONTAMINATION The nature and extent of contamination are described in the Terminal 30 RI/FS (PGG, 2013). For context, this section briefly describes petroleum contamination at the site pertaining to cleanup action components (Figure 1-4). 1.9.1 Soil The extent of soil contamination is similar to the maximum historical extent of LNAPL with exceedances of cleanup levels for diesel-, oil- and gasoline-range 7 Port of Seattle Terminal 30 Cleanup Action Plan hydrocarbons, and toluene. The extent of soil contamination is shown of Figure 14. Please refer to the T30 RI/FS for additional information (PGG, 2013). 1.9.2 Groundwater Groundwater at the site has exceedances of cleanup levels for benzene, PAHs, and diesel-, oil-, and gasoline-range hydrocarbons. The most recent BTEX, diesel, and gasoline data at wells are shown on Figure 1-4, and data are summarized in Table 1-4. There are no exceedances of cleanup levels at the CPOC in the most recent monitoring data from CPOC wells (Figure 1-4, Table 1-4). 1.9.3 LNAPL Light non-aqueous phase liquid (LNAPL) is present in measureable quantities at MW-59. Measured product thicknesses range up to 1.3 feet at MW-59 (PGG, 2013). 2.0 CONSIDERED ALTERNATIVES The 2013 RI/FS considered five remedial alternatives for the T30 site: • • • • • Alternative 1: In-Situ Thermal Desorption Alternative 2: Expanded Sheen-Area AS/SVE with Targeted Excavation Alternative 3a: Sheen-Area AS/SVE Treatment with LNAPL Recovery Alternative 3b: Sheen-Area AS/SVE Treatment with LNAPL Recovery (Expanded Area) Alternative 4: Compliance Monitoring with LNAPL Recovery All remedial alternatives included groundwater monitoring and institutional controls. Additional details for each of the considered alternatives are included in the T30 RI/FS (PGG, 2013a). Alternative 3a was selected as the preferred alternative through a disproportionate cost analysis and is the cleanup action described in this CAP. As described in Section 3.1, some changes have been made to optimize the remedy. The cleanup actions for the Site were selected in accordance with and comply with the requirements of WAC 173-340-360, Selection of Cleanup Actions. 3.0 SELECTED CLEANUP ACTIONS Selected cleanup actions at the T30 site will include air sparging/soil vapor extraction (AS/SVE) treatment, LNAPL recovery, long-term compliance 8 Port of Seattle Terminal 30 Cleanup Action Plan monitoring, and institutional controls. These actions are intended to address specific cleanup goals, including: • Protect human health and the environment • Maintain cleanup levels at the conditional point of compliance (CPOC) for protection of surface water • Reduce Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid (LNAPL) thickness near MW-59 to sheen • Reduce contaminant mass in the sheen area AS/SVE will reduce groundwater concentrations in the portion of the sheen area between MW-42 and MW-36 (Figure 3-1). LNAPL recovery will address the last remaining area with free product at the water table near MW-59. A later phase of AS/SVE will reduce contaminant mass in the MW-59 area after product thickness has been reduced to sheen. In addition, natural attenuation processes will reduce groundwater concentrations across the site. Institutional controls will prevent contact with subsurface soil and groundwater contamination by maintaining the asphalt cap as a protective barrier and by establishing procedures that prevent exposure below the asphalt cap without appropriate health and safety procedures and Ecology notification. Targeted groundwater monitoring will confirm compliance with cleanup levels at the CPOC, track performance of the AS/SVE system, and document concentration trends in the interior of the site. Details of the cleanup action components are described in the following sections. 3.1 AS/SVE SYSTEM The purpose of the AS/SVE system is to reduce contaminant mass in the sheen area. The AS/SVE system is not intended to reduce CPOC concentrations; concentrations are currently below cleanup levels at the CPOC. The AS/SVE system will extend from near MW-42 to MW-36 (Figure 3-1), bounded on the north by the extent of groundwater exceedances and on the south by the edge of the LNAPL area. The AS/SVE will extend into the LNAPL area once the LNAPL thickness is reduced to sheen as sparging could increase LNAPL migration. AS/SVE will reduce contaminant mass in the sheen area to address primarily gasoline-range organics (Figures 3-1 and 3-2). Contaminant mass reduction will be achieved through a combination of direct extraction of volatile-phase petroleum compounds within the SVE radius of influence and biostimulation in the area downgradient of the AS/SVE system. The AS/SVE system is not expected to reduce contaminant mass upgradient of the sparge well radius of influence (nominally 20 feet). 9 Port of Seattle Terminal 30 Cleanup Action Plan 3.1.1 System Configuration The AS/SVE system will be operated in two arrays (Figure 3-1): • Phase 1 array extending from near MW-36 north to near MW-42 • Phase 2 array extending from near MW-36 to near MW-59 Phase 2 will be implemented after LNAPL in the area near MW-59 has been reduced to sheen. Sparging in this area before LNAPL is reduced to sheen could result in LNAPL mobilization. AS/SVE distribution piping for Phase 2 will be installed during Phase 1 construction, but SVE trenching and sparge wells will not be installed until LNAPL has been reduced to sheen. The AS/SVE system has been modified from the layout presented in the 2013 RI/FS based on subsequently collected soil and groundwater quality and further communications with Ecology (PGG, 2013a; 2013b; 2014). 3.1.2 Phase 1 AS/SVE Configuration The Phase 1 AS/SVE system will include 14 air sparge wells, soil vapor extraction piping in distribution trenches, an equipment shed, and trenching to connect the system components to the equipment shed (Figure 3-1). The location of the equipment shed and other infrastructure will be established in the Engineering Design Report based on evaluation of site operations, electrical infrastructure, and underground utilities. The location of the equipment shed will not substantially influence the operation of the system. Air sparge (AS) wells will be constructed with 2-inch PVC riser pipe and screens 12- to 14-feet below the water table or approximately 21- to 23-feet below ground surface (Figure 3-2). Compressed air will be delivered to groups of AS wells (sparge zones) through 2inch, horizontal PVC or HDPE pipes running below ground surface from a distribution manifold in the equipment shed. Each AS wellhead will be instrumented with a pressure gauge and valve to allow adjustment of air sparge rates at each sparge well. Soil vapor extraction will include a horizontal 4-inch slotted pipe set approximately 4 to 5 feet below ground surface in trenches parallel to AS well alignments (Figures 3-1 and 3-2). The air sparge compressor, soil vapor extraction blower, and exhaust gas treatment/filtering equipment will be housed in an on-site equipment shed just north of monitoring well MW-87A at the approximate location shown on Figure 3-1. The location of the equipment shed may be revised to accommodate tenant terminal operations or to facilitate connection to electrical infrastructure. Equipment location and utility infrastructure details will be refined in the Engineering Design Report, but will not alter the in-situ function of the AS/SVE system. 10 Port of Seattle Terminal 30 Cleanup Action Plan 3.1.3 Phase 2 AS/SVE Configuration The Phase 2 AS/SVE system will include 6 air sparge wells and soil vapor extraction piping in the distribution trenches. The system will connect to distribution piping near MW-36 installed during Phase 1 construction (Figure 31). Phase 2 AS/SVE wells and extraction lines will be operated from equipment in the equipment shed established during Phase 1. 3.1.4 System Operation The 14 Phase 1 air sparge wells will be operated in three zones. Zones will initially be sparged sequentially with 30-minutes on and 60-minutes off to allow sparging-induced air channels to close between sparge cycles; sparge cycling may be adjusted based on operational data. The duration of sparging and recovery is based on empirical observations at other AS/SVE systems and run times may be further optimized based on pressure trends observed during system startup and operation. Phase 1 sparge zones will include (Figure 3-1): • Zone 1: AS-1 through AS-5 • Zone 2: AS-6 through AS-9 • Zone 3: AS-10 through AS-14 Phase 2 sparge zones will be operated as separate zones after installation. Phase 2 sparge zones will include (Figure 3-1): • Zone 4: AS-15 through AS-17 • Zone 5: AS-18 through AS-20 Figure 3-1 shows conceptual Phase 2 locations. Actual Phase 2 locations will be proposed based on the improved understanding of subsurface contamination and air-flow from several years of Phase 1 AS/SVE operation and the LNAPL recovery operations. The proposed Phase 2 design will be provided to Ecology for approval prior to implementation. Each sparge zone will have a cumulative air flow of 40-60 standard cubic feet per minute (scfm). Each zone will be supplied air from a central manifold at the air compressor in the equipment enclosure. Pressure drop between the compressor and wellheads is estimated to be less than 2 pounds per square inch (psi) assuming 17 psi at the wellhead, 60 scfm flow rate, and 500 feet of 2-inch distribution pipe. The air sparge system will be operated at wellhead pressures of approximately 15 psi. With screens located at 12 to 14 feet below the water table, approximately 5.2 to 6 psi will be required to displace water from the well to the screen interval. The remaining pressure will overcome capillary forces in the aquifer and force air into the formation. Each well will be sparged at 10 to 20 scfm. 11 Port of Seattle Terminal 30 Cleanup Action Plan The SVE system will withdraw a minimum of twice the sparge air quantity to control vapor migration from the treatment area. For example, if the AS system delivers 50 scfm, the SVE system will extract a minimum of 100 scfm. A vacuum blower installed in the equipment shed will draw the extracted vapors into treatment (Section 3.1.3). The onsite stormwater system is the primary accumulation point for vapors that may migrate away from the AS/SVE system. Air spaces in the adjacent stormwater system will be checked for accumulated vapors with a PID during system startup when the potential for elevated vapor concentrations is greatest. The AS and SVE flow rates will be adjusted if vapors above acceptable limits are detected in the stormwater system; monitoring criteria will be specified in the EDR. 3.1.5 Vapor Treatment Exhaust vapors from the SVE system will require treatment prior to discharge because of elevated volatiles. Initial vapor concentrations are likely to exceed 1,000 parts per million by volume (ppmV), above which thermal oxidation is generally the most cost-effective treatment technology. Thermal oxidation air treatment uses either a catalytic oxidizer or propane flame to combust volatileladen exhaust vapors; thermal oxidizers typically achieve approximately 99% reduction in VOC concentrations. SVE exhaust vapor concentrations will be periodically monitored in the airstream before treatment to estimate mass loss from the SVE system. The system will be transitioned to carbon filtration as concentrations decrease to below 1,000 ppmV. Exhaust treatment equipment will be specified in the EDR. Soil vapor extraction discharge concentrations will likely require a permit from the Puget Sound Clean Air Authority (PSCAA) as a condition of operation. The permit may require additional vapor concentration monitoring unrelated to achieving remedial objectives. 3.1.6 Operation Criteria The AS/SVE system will be operated in the following progression: • Operate system until groundwater concentrations at performance wells MW-36, MW-39, MW-42, and RW-9 achieve remediation levels (Table 1-3). • Collect SVE exhaust vapor field photoionization detector (PID) measurements during routine system operations and maintenance visits to estimate mass removal rate, coupled with the SVE flow rate. • Cycle the AS/SVE system on as concentrations rebound at MW-36, MW-39, MW-42, and RW-9. Rebound from upgradient groundwater influx is anticipated to occur over a 3- to 9-month timeframe. 12 Port of Seattle Terminal 30 Cleanup Action Plan • Discontinue AS/SVE on-off cycling when the system is no longer significantly reducing contaminant mass in the sheen area, or remediation levels are maintained. Rebound concentrations may exceed remediation levels for some constituents even once the AS/SVE is no longer significantly reducing contaminant mass because of the proximity of performance wells to the upgradient edge of the treatment area. If the system is no longer effectively removing contaminant mass beyond the contaminant mass influx from upgradient, then AS/SVE cycling will be discontinued even if rebound exceeds remediation levels. Efficiency of mass removal will be evaluated from AS/SVE system operational data and groundwater data from performance monitoring wells. With Ecology approval, the AS/SVE system may be decommissioned at this time. • Operational criteria for Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the AS/SVE system may be met and/or evaluated independently. The AS wells will be decommissioned in accordance with WAC 173-160. 3.2 LNAPL RECOVERY The area with remaining free-product is in an active portion of the shipping terminal operations, with most of the area between the rubber tire gantry runways (Figure 3-1). Vacuum-enhanced recovery is preferred over other technologies such as skimmers because it has the smallest equipment footprint, does not require trenching across sensitive structures, and is an effective recovery option. LNAPL will be recovered from a network of recovery wells by vacuum-truck total fluids recovery. Recovery wells will be installed across the area where wells have measurable LNAPL thickness (Figure 3-1). Recovery events will include purging the wells with a vacuum truck. The recovery program will continue until equilibrium LNAPL remains below measurable thickness. Recovery event frequency will decrease with LNAPL thickness to allow the wells time to recover to equilibrium thicknesses between recovery events. 3.2.1 Conceptual Model for System Operation LNAPL is present in pore spaces above and below the water table near MW-59. Recoverable LNAPL estimates are based on the soil type, LNAPL density and viscosity, and historic maximum LNAPL thickness. LNAPL that can drain from pore spaces through gravity drainage accumulates in monitoring wells as recoverable LNAPL. LNAPL that cannot drain from pore spaces under gravity is residual LNAPL. The historic maximum LNAPL thickness and pore size distribution of the aquifer determine the residual saturation. Greater LNAPL thicknesses are able to push LNAPL into smaller pore spaces (greater capillary pressure). The resulting capillary forces to push LNAPL into pore spaces can 13 Port of Seattle Terminal 30 Cleanup Action Plan exceed the gravity drainage forces and leave LNAPL trapped in small pore spaces as residual saturation. Intuitively, LNAPL from small pores will drain more slowly than LNAPL from larger pores will drain. Therefore, the amount of LNAPL observed in a well and the maximum historic saturation together provides the best estimates of LNAPL recovery. LNAPL recovery estimate calculations and modeling estimates are included in Appendix A. Modeling results and empirical field data indicate that: • Recovery will reduce the LNAPL pore-space saturation by approximately 0.1 based on modeling the LNAPL maximum and current thickness at MW-59. • Approximately 275 gallons of LNAPL in the vicinity of MW-59 is recoverable. • At a measurable LNAPL thickness of 0.5 feet, a two hour vacuumenhanced recovery event is expected to recover between 3 and 15 gallons of LNAPL per well; range includes both modeled recovery rates and recorded recovery volumes at RW-12. • The optimal recovery well will have a nominal 17 foot radius of influence (well spacing of 35 feet) to balance between LNAPL recovery rate and number of wells installed in an infrastructure-dense portion of the site. Applied vacuum in the well casing will increase the head (pressure) gradient from the surrounding aquifer into the well (Charbeneau, 2007a,b). The increased head gradient will increase flow of LNAPL into the well proportional to the LNAPL transmissivity (e.g. proportional to the LNAPL conductivity corrected for physical properties and degree of saturation). LNAPL transmissivity will decrease with progressive product recovery, which will decrease LNAPL saturation. Vacuum enhanced recovery does not rely on volatilization of LNAPL for enhanced recovery. The SVE effect of vacuum extraction events is expected to be negligible relative to fluid recovery due to the low vapor pressure of weathered diesel. LNAPL recovery rate is expected to vary between wells depending on the local variations in grain size within the soil matrix and distribution of LNAPL saturation. Therefore some wells will reach the endpoint for LNAPL recovery before others, even if the product thickness is similar at the beginning of the vacuum recovery program (see Section 3.2.4). 3.2.2 Recovery Well Design Recovery wells will be constructed to enhance LNAPL migration from the surrounding aquifer and to accommodate vacuum enhanced extraction (Figure 3- 14 Port of Seattle Terminal 30 Cleanup Action Plan 3). The recovery well network will include 10 new wells and will continue recovery at existing wells MW-59 and RW-12. New recovery wells will be constructed of 4-inch diameter Schedule 40 PVC in a 12-inch borehole. Well screens will extend from 2 feet above the water table at the combined seasonal and tidal high to 2 feet below the seasonal low at low tide. Combined seasonal and tidal variation near MW-59 is approximately 1.5 feet (nominal 6 foot screen). A 3 foot sump will be installed below the screen to allow the contingent use of alternate skimmer or pump configurations. Between recovery events, the recovery wells will be capped with 4-inch diameter expanding well caps and protected by flush-to-grade well monuments. During recovery events, temporary vacuum-caps will be placed in the wellheads that are capable of maintaining a vacuum and yet have ports for extraction piping, an airbleed valve that can also pass a sounder or interface probe, and a pressure gauge (Figure 3-3). 3.2.3 Vacuum-Enhanced Recovery LNAPL will be removed using a vacuum truck to pump total fluids from recovery wells. Total fluids will be extracted from the wells through a siphon tube with the inlet set below the LNAPL-water interface. A vacuum-cap will be placed at the top of the PVC well casing to maintain negative pressure inside the recovery well, and the vacuum-cap will have an air-bleed valve to regulate pressure in the well. The air bleed valve will be used to reduce pressure in the well if adverse effects such as drawing excessive sediment through the well screen are observed. The top of the siphon tube will be connected to the vacuum truck by a flexible hose. The vacuum truck will apply approximately 5 psi of negative pressure to the well. The negative pressure will create a pressure gradient in the aquifer that will draw LNAPL and water into the well enhancing LNAPL recovery rates (Appendix A). Vacuum enhanced recovery will be conducted for approximately 1 to 2 hours at each well each event, and initially may recover about 250 gallons of total fluid per event. Wells will be allowed to recover to equilibrium LNAPL thickness between events. Equilibration/recovery times will increase as LNAPL saturation and transmissivity decrease. Because of uncertainties in equilibration/recovery times, the following schedule of recovery events is subject to change based on actual recovery rates: 15 Port of Seattle Terminal 30 Cleanup Action Plan Project Year Event Frequency Cumulative Events 1 Monthly 12 2 Bi-Monthly 18 3 Bi-Monthly 24 4 Bi-Monthly 30 5 Bi-Monthly 36 6 Based on Review -- Approximately 5 to 10 gallons of product per well will be recovered in the initial recovery events and is expected to decrease to less than 0.5 gallons per well in the later events. Equilibrium product thickness is estimated to approach 0.01 feet after approximately 34 extraction events (Appendix A); Phase II AS/SVE system may be installed at the end of Project Year 5 pending review of LNAPL recovery progress. Individual recovery wells may be removed from the recovery events when they meet termination criteria (Section 3.2.4). LNAPL thickness will be measured at the beginning and end of each extraction event. Recovery wells that do not have measurable thickness (0.01 ft) will not be pumped during that recovery event. 3.2.4 LNAPL Recovery Termination LNAPL recovery events at a well will be terminated when product thickness has been reduced to less than a measureable thickness (0.01 feet) for a period of one year of quarterly measurements. Product thickness will be measured with an interface probe. A clear plastic bailer will be used to measure product thickness if a reliable measurement cannot be obtained with the interface probe. This recovery termination criterion will result in sequential removal of recovery wells from recovery events as the area with measureable LNAPL thickness shrinks. Wells will be left in place for 1 year after the last well meets the termination criteria, after which they will be decommissioned consistent with WAC 173-160. 3.2.5 Recovery Documentation LNAPL remediation progress will be monitored by documenting total recovered fluids per well and per event, estimated product recovery per event, and LNAPL thickness at each recovery well at the start and finish of each recovery event. Direct measurement of recovered product is unlikely to be feasible due to emulsification of total fluids during recovery. Therefore, a sample of the total recovered fluids will be collected from the vacuum truck tank and the concentration used to estimate the recovered product quantity; for example 1,000 16 Port of Seattle Terminal 30 Cleanup Action Plan gallons total fluids at 5,000 mg/L is the equivalent of approximately 5.8 gallons of recovered product, based on a LNAPL density of 0.876 g/mL. Recovered LNAPL will be recycled or disposed of off-site by the vacuum truck contractor. 3.2.6 Phase II AS/SVE System Installation At the end of Project Year 5, the equilibrium product thickness is estimated to approach 0.01 feet. The Phase II AS/SVE system may be then installed to further extract lighter fraction petroleum. 4.0 MONITORING Monitoring will include measurements of LNAPL thickness and groundwater monitoring at wells across the site (Table 3-1). Groundwater will be monitored at conditional point of compliance (CPOC) wells, performance monitoring wells, and interior groundwater monitoring wells. Wells are grouped as follows: • LNAPL Thickness: MW-59 and adjacent LNAPL recovery wells • CPOC Wells: MW-45, MW-46, MW-58A, MW-89, and MW-92 • Performance Monitoring Wells : MW-36, MW-39, MW-42, and RW9 • Interior Monitoring Wells: RW-1, RW-5A, and MW-38 The following contaminants of concern (COC) will be analyzed in performance and compliance monitoring wells. Petroleum Hydrocarbons • • • • Diesel-Range Organics Gasoline-Range Organics Oil-Range Organics BTEX: Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, Xylenes (total) Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds • 2-methylnapthalene Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) (filtered and unfiltered) • • Acenaphthene Acenaphthylene 17 Port of Seattle Terminal 30 Cleanup Action Plan • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Anthracene Benzo(a)anthracene Benzo(a)pyrene Benzo(b)fluoranthene Benzo(g,h,i)perylene Benzo(k)fluoranthene Chrysene Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene Fluoranthene Fluorene Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene Naphthalene Phenanthrene Pyrene Key elements of the monitoring are described below. 4.1.1 LNAPL Monitoring LNAPL thickness will be measured at MW-59 during groundwater compliance monitoring events and at MW-59 and surrounding LNAPL extraction wells at the beginning of LNAPL recovery events. 4.1.2 CPOC Groundwater Monitoring Groundwater monitoring at the CPOC will be used to assess concentrations of site COCs at the CPOC relative to cleanup levels. Due to the considerable sorbed mass contributing to the dissolved phase exceedances, natural attenuation processes are expected to take between 30 and 60 years to reach cleanup levels across the site. Calculations for petroleum hydrocarbon degradation to cleanup levels indicated approximately 30 years based on typical T30 site soil concentrations and estimated groundwater degradation rates from monitoring well data trends (PGG, 2013; AECOM, 2008). Based on the petroleum degradation calculations, groundwater quality will be monitored at the CPOC for 30 years (Table 3-1). Groundwater monitoring at the CPOC may be continued beyond 30 years depending on the status of site-wide groundwater concentrations. Groundwater concentrations above cleanup levels may persist in some non-CPOC wells after the estimated 30 year natural attenuation period due to residual hotspots or physical characteristics of COCs. Residual contamination associated with buried utilities or infrastructure may leave hot spots with localized elevated groundwater concentrations after the majority of the site has reached cleanup 18 Port of Seattle Terminal 30 Cleanup Action Plan levels. PAHs have lower biodegradation rates and higher soil sorption coefficients than gasoline-, diesel-, and oil-range hydrocarbons. Therefore, natural attenuation of PAHs is expected to be slower than for the petroleum hydrocarbons and may persist as localized hotspots in areas where gasoline- through oil-range hydrocarbons have reached cleanup levels. However, because PAHs sorb more strongly to soil particles than petroleum hydrocarbons, they are not as mobile in groundwater; therefore, the downgradient extent of residual PAH hotspots is expected to be limited. 4.1.3 Performance Groundwater Monitoring Performance monitoring wells are located within the AS/SVE system radius of influence and will be used to track system effectiveness. Concentrations are expected to decline as contaminant mass is reduced within the AS/SVE treatment area. Groundwater concentrations are expected to rebound over 3- to 9-months after the AS/SVE system is cycled off and groundwater with elevated concentrations from the interior area flows through the AS/SVE treatment area. 4.1.4 Interior Groundwater Monitoring Interior monitoring wells are located upgradient of the AS/SVE system within the portion of the site with sheen but no measureable product thickness. Interior monitoring wells will be used to track long-term reductions in contaminant mass. Concentrations at the wells furthest upgradient (RW-1 and RW-5A) are expected to first decline to remediation and then to cleanup levels. Groundwater concentrations at MW-38 are expected to decline more slowly due to the downgradient position, and may remain static for 10 or more years due to the persistence of sheen that may maintain groundwater concentrations near saturation for the residual petroleum mixture. 4.1.5 Schedule Monitoring wells will be sampled on a schedule consistent with the anticipated rate of change at that location and a well's role in operational decision making. Biodegradation processes will continue to reduce groundwater concentrations in the interior sheen area in year to multi-year time scales. AS/SVE will locally reduce groundwater concentrations in month-to-year time scales. Proposed monitoring includes (Table 3-1): Performance Monitoring • Performance monitoring will be conducted when the AS/SVE system (Phase I and II) is in operation and when the AS/SVE system is temporarily shut down. 19 Port of Seattle Terminal 30 Cleanup Action Plan • Performance monitoring wells will be sampled semi-annually when the AS/SVE system is in operation (Phase I and II) and when the AS/SVE system is temporarily shut down. • The CPOC wells will be sampled biannually when the AS/SVE system is in operation and when the AS/SVE system is temporarily shut down. • The AS/SVE system is estimated to be in operation for seven years. At the end of seventh year, the system will be temporarily shut down. Compliance Monitoring • Once both Phase I and Phase II AS/SVE system are permanently shut down, long term compliance monitoring begins. • The CPOC wells will be sampled annually for the first 5 years of compliance monitoring, bi-annually for years 5-10, and every 5 years for year 10 and beyond. • Supplemental monitoring may be conducted to inform AS/SVE operational decision making. Interior Monitoring • Interior monitoring wells will be sampled biannually for the first 7 years (4 events), followed by sampling every 5 years. The Interior monitoring well schedule is independent of the transition from Performance to Compliance monitoring at CPOC and Performance monitoring wells. Individual performance or interior groundwater monitoring wells may be removed from the monitoring program early if concentrations achieve cleanup levels for two consecutive sampling events; this does not apply to CPOC wells or wells within the AS/SVE treatment zone while the AS/SVE system is operating. 4.2 INSTITUTIONAL CONTROLS A restrictive environmental covenant consistent with the requirements of WAC 173-340-440 will be filed after construction of the AS/SVE and LNAPL recovery systems. 4.3 CONTAMINATED MATERIAL LEFT ON-SITE The selected remedy may leave concentrations of COCs elevated above soil cleanup levels on site. WAC 173-340-380(1)(a)(ix) requires that remedies with 20 Port of Seattle Terminal 30 Cleanup Action Plan on-site containment specify the amount of hazardous substances left on site and the measures that will be used to prevent migration. The volume of impacted soil or material left on site above cleanup levels is estimated to be the volume of soil between the base of asphalt and the water table within the historic extent of measurable LNAPL. This calculation over-estimates the amount of material left on site because LNAPL initially spread laterally at the water table from the release area. We estimate that approximately 63,000 cubic yards of impacted soil will remain on site following completion of the selected remedy. 5.0 SCHEDULE The schedule for major deliverables and work tasks associated with cleanup actions is included as Exhibit C to this Consent Decree. The schedule provides anticipated submittal task duration for deliverables and actions associated with site cleanup, including progress reports, financial assurances, engineering design documents. Refer to Exhibit C for details on project deliverables and schedules. 5.1 ENGINEERING DESIGN REPORT The forthcoming T30 Engineering Design Report (EDR) will provide technical details and drawings for system installation including equipment specifications, construction drawings, connections to utility infrastructure, and specific permitting issues. The EDR will be completed within the schedule in the new Consent Decree for the cleanup actions. The EDR will include specifications for the Port of Seattle bidding process, which is expected to take between 3 and 6 months from Port Commissioner approval to proceed. 5.2 AS/SVE After construction contract award, the AS/SVE system will be installed. Construction activities will be coordinated with tenant operations. The AS/SVE system will operate until groundwater monitoring meets the shutdown criteria. The system is nominally expected to operate for 5 years in the Phase 1 and Phase 2 areas. 21 Port of Seattle Terminal 30 Cleanup Action Plan 5.3 LNAPL RECOVERY After construction contract award, the LNAPL recovery wells will be installed. LNAPL recovery will continue until measurable LNAPL thickness is less than 0.01 feet at MW-59, RW-12, and additional recovery wells installed during system setup. Recovery operations are anticipated to continue for 10 years with a nominal completion date in 2026 assuming system startup in 2016. 5.4 GROUNDWATER MONITORING Groundwater monitoring will be conducted for 30 years, with possible extension at selected wells based on monitoring results at that time. The forthcoming T30 Compliance Monitoring Plan will describe long term- and operationalgroundwater monitoring associated with the AS/SVE and LNAPL recovery actions. The groundwater monitoring schedule for CPOC wells and additional operational groundwater monitoring for the AS/SVE system will be detailed in the plan. 6.0 CONTINGENCY ACTIONS The selected remedial actions are expected to meet remedial objectives within a reasonable time frame. However, contingency actions may be implemented during the course of remedial activities in response to changes in site conditions, identification of previously unrecognized environmental conditions, or if remedial objectives are not met (Figures 6-1 and 6-2). Section 6.1 describes the process to determine if a contingency action is appropriate. If a contingency action is appropriate, Section 6.2 describes the process for selecting the contingency action. Section 6.3 describes the notification schedule for beginning the contingency action evaluation process. 6.1 CONTINGENCY ACTION EVALUATION This section describes the process for evaluating if a contingency action is appropriate. Broadly speaking, a contingency action is appropriate if the selected remedial actions are not adequately protective of human health and the environment. This situation could arise due to the following conditions: • • • • Identification of a previously unrecognized environmental condition Change in site conditions Groundwater concentrations of site COCs above cleanup level(s) at the CPOC Remedial actions not achieving remedial objectives in a reasonable timeframe 22 Port of Seattle Terminal 30 Cleanup Action Plan Not all occurrences of the conditions listed above will trigger a contingency action. Figure 6-1 diagrams an evidence-driven decision framework for evaluating if contingency action is appropriate. The process and context for evaluating conditions that might trigger a contingency action is described in the following sections. 6.1.1 Unrecognized Environmental Condition Substantial characterization has been completed at the T30 site since environmental investigations began in the 1980s. It is unlikely that substantial new environmental conditions will be identified at the site. The most probable scenario for an unrecognized environmental condition is discovery of localized hot-spots associated with historic buried materials. These would most likely be encountered during excavation associated with utility work 1 or construction of the AS/SVE or LNAPL recovery systems. Unrecognized environmental conditions will be assessed on a case by case basis in the following steps: 1. Do CPOC groundwater concentrations exceed site cleanup levels? Contingency action is not appropriate under MTCA if concentrations are below cleanup levels. 2. If CPOC groundwater concentrations exceed site cleanup levels, do existing remedial actions adequately address the contamination? Contingency action is not appropriate within the site context if remedial actions already in progress will address the contamination in a reasonable timeframe. Contingency action will be initiated if an environmental condition is recognized with concentrations above groundwater cleanup levels that will not be addressed by ongoing remedial actions. 6.1.2 Change in Site Conditions Changes in site conditions that alter potential exposure pathways could trigger contingency action specific to the exposure pathway. Examples could include: 1 • Change in groundwater flow system • Change in site infrastructure resulting in an increased exposure potential • Natural disaster (flood, earthquake, etc.) causes redistribution of contamination or site boundaries Future excavation work will be conducted consistent with institutional controls discussed in Section 4.2 23 Port of Seattle Terminal 30 Cleanup Action Plan Changes in site conditions will be evaluated on a case by case basis with consideration of concentrations relative to T30 site cleanup levels and whether remedial actions already in progress will address the change in site conditions. 6.1.3 Concentrations Above Cleanup Levels Contingency action could be initiated if groundwater concentrations of site COCs are both above cleanup levels at COPC wells and are demonstrated to have a statistically significant increasing trend. An increasing trend at concentrations below cleanup levels, or exceedances at performance or interior monitoring wells would not trigger contingency action. Concentrations may exceed site cleanup levels at some CPOC wells at the beginning of remedial action. Therefore, an exceedance of cleanup levels at the CPOC will not automatically trigger a contingency action if remedial measures to reduce concentrations are already in progress. Satisfactory progress towards cleanup objectives is discussed in Section 6.1.4. Increasing trends will be evaluated using the statistically-based methods for evaluating plume status (Ecology, 2005). The method uses the non-parametric Mann-Kendall and Whitney-U tests to evaluate if constituent concentration trends at monitoring wells are increasing, stable, or decreasing. These tests require four or more independent sampling events to produce valid results. 6.1.4 Remedial Action Progress Remedial progress will be tracked through groundwater monitoring described in Section 4 and the forthcoming T30 Compliance Monitoring Plan. Progress relative to remedial objectives will be evaluated during Ecology periodic reviews. Contingency actions will be considered if remedial actions do not meet the remedial goals. 6.2 CONTINGENCY ACTION PROCESS This section describes the process for planning contingency actions if a contingency action is appropriate after the evaluation in Section 6.1. The contingency action process is divided into three phases: 1. Action Selection: this phase describes the nature and extent of the exceedance triggering contingency action and selects an appropriate remedy. This phase may determine that a contingency action is not required to meet remedial objectives. 24 Port of Seattle Terminal 30 Cleanup Action Plan 2. Design: this phase prepares the necessary engineering and design plans and reports, addendum to the Compliance Groundwater Monitoring Plan, or other documentation to implement the contingency action. 3. Implementation: this phase implements the selected contingency action. The contingency action process parallels the remedial investigation and feasibility process under MTCA, but is intended to be streamlined towards efficient implementation. Steps may be combined for efficiency. The action selection phase will define the media to be addressed, the nature and extent of the contamination to be addressed, and the objectives of the contingency action. Depending on the scope of the identified environmental issue, this first phase may also include investigation to fill data gaps and focused assessment of contingency action alternatives. 6.3 CONTINGENCY ACTION SCHEDULE The Port of Seattle will notify Ecology within 14 days of identifying an environmental issue that potentially meets the criteria for contingency action. The Port of Seattle will provide a schedule and preliminary plan for moving through contingency action selection in consultation with Ecology. The plan may include additional investigation and characterization prior to selecting a contingency action. Environmental issues that do not meet the criteria for contingency action will be discussed as appropriate in routine monitoring reports submitted to Ecology under the forthcoming T30 Compliance Monitoring Plan. 25 Port of Seattle Terminal 30 Cleanup Action Plan 7.0 REFERENCES Charbeneau, R., 2007a. LNAPL Distribution and Recovery Model (LDRM) Volume 1: Distribution and Recovery of Petroleum Liquids in Porous Media. API Publication 4760. January, 2007. Charbeneau, R., and Beckett, G., 2007b. LNAPL Distribution and Recovery Model (LDRM) Volume 2: User and Parameter Selection Guide. API Publication 4760. January, 2007. Pacific Groundwater Group, 2013. Terminal 30 Supplemental Remedial Investigation / Feasibility Study. June 11, 2013. Ecology, 1991. In the Matter of Remedial Action by: Port of Seattle Agreed Order: Terminal 30. Effective Date: August 30, 1991. Ecology, 2013. First Amendment to Agreed Order: Terminal 30. Port of Seattle. Effective Date: October 23, 2013. ENSR|AECOM, 2008. Supplemental Data Report, Revision 2. Prepared for Port of Seattle Terminal 30 by ENSR., Seattle, Washington. June. ENSR|AECOM, 2010. Terminal 30 Cargo Terminal Construction Completion Report. Prepared for Port of Seattle Terminal 30 by AECOM. Seattle, Washington. January 2010. Ecology, 2012a. Ecology online CLARC Database. https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/clarc/Reporting/CLARCReporting.aspx. Accessed January 2012. GeoEngineers, Inc., 1998. Terminal 30 Final Report Remedial Investigation/ Feasibility Study. Prepared for the Port of Seattle. December. Pacific Groundwater Group, 2013a. Terminal 30 Monitoring Well Installation and Data Gaps Sampling. November 6, 2013. Pacific Groundwater Group, 2013b. Terminal 30 Remedial Investigation / Feasibility Study. November 2013. Pacific Groundwater Group, 2014. Port of Seattle Terminal 30 Draft Cleanup Action Plan Key Revisions. March 26, 2014. 26 Port of Seattle Terminal 30 Cleanup Action Plan Table 1-1. Soil Cleanup Levels 3RUWRI6HDWWOH7HUPLQDO Constituent Cleanup Levels (mg/kg) BTEX Compounds %HQ]HQH 7ROXHQH (WK\OEHQ]HQH ;\OHQHV WRWDO 0.03 7 6 9 Semivoliatile Organic Compounds 0HWK\OQDSKWKDOHQH NV PAH Compounds $FHQDSKWKHQH $FHQDSKWK\OHQH $QWKUDFHQH %HQ]R>D@DQWKUDFHQH %HQ]R>D@S\UHQH %HQ]R>E@IOXRUDQWKHQH %HQ]R>JKL@SHU\OHQH %HQ]R>N@IOXRUDQWKHQH &KU\VHQH 'LEHQ]R>DK@DQWKUDFHQH )OXRUDQWKHQH )OXRUHQH ,QGHQR>FG@S\UHQH 3KHQDQWKUHQH 3\UHQH 1DSKWKDOHQH NV NV NV NV 0.35 0.44 NV 0.44 0.14 0.64 89 547 1.25 NV 3,532 5 Petroleum Hydrocarbons 7SKGLHVHOUDQJHRUJDQLFV 7SKKHDY\RLOV 7SKJDVROLQHUDQJHRUJDQLFVEHQ]HQHSUHVHQW 7SKJDVROLQHUDQJHRUJDQLFVQRGHWHFWDEOHEHQ]HQH 2,000 2,000 30 100 19LQGLFDWHVWKDWQRYDOXHLVDYDLODEOH PortofSeattleTerminal30 Table 1-2. Groundwater Cleanup Levels 3RUWRI6HDWWOH7HUPLQDO Constituent BTEX Compounds %HQ]HQH 7ROXHQH (WK\OEHQ]HQH ;\OHQHV WRWDO Cleanup Levels (ug/L) 23 15,000 2,100 1,000 Semivoliatile Organic Compounds 0HWK\OQDSKWKDOHQH NV PAH Compounds $FHQDSKWKHQH $FHQDSKWK\OHQH $QWKUDFHQH %HQ]R>D@DQWKUDFHQH %HQ]R>D@S\UHQH %HQ]R>E@IOXRUDQWKHQH %HQ]R>JKL@SHU\OHQH %HQ]R>N@IOXRUDQWKHQH &KU\VHQH 'LEHQ]R>DK@DQWKUDFHQH 'LEHQ]RIXUDQ )OXRUDQWKHQH )OXRUHQH ,QGHQR>FG@S\UHQH 3KHQDQWKUHQH 3\UHQH 1DSKWKDOHQH 643 NV 25,900 0.018 0.018 0.018 NV 0.018 0.018 0.018 NV 90 3,460 0.018 NV 2,590 4,940 Petroleum Hydrocarbons 7SKJDVROLQHUDQJHRUJDQLFVQRGHWHFWDEOHEHQ]HQH 7SKJDVROLQHUDQJHRUJDQLFVEHQ]HQHSUHVHQW 7SKGLHVHOUDQJHRUJDQLFV 7SKKHDY\RLOV 1,000 800 500 500 19LQGLFDWHVWKDWQRYDOXHLVDYDLODEOH PortofSeattleTerminal30 Table 1-3. Remediation Levels XJ/ XJ/ XJ/ XJ/ XJ/ XJ/ XJ/ %HQ]HQH 7ROXHQH (WK\OEHQ]HQH ;\OHQHV WRWDO 7RWDO%7(; *DVROLQH5DQJH2UJDQLFV 'LHVHO5DQJH2UJDQLFV Cleanup Level Remediation Level** 75% Effective Solubility*** 1994 Diesel Fuel Oil No. 1 Diesel No. 2 Diesel 3RUWRI6HDWWOH7HUPLQDO 7KHUHPHGLDWLRQOHYHOIRUJURXQGZDWHULVWDNHQDVWKHKLJKHURIHLWKHUWZLFHWKHFOHDQXSOHYHORURIWKHHIIHFWLYHVROXELOLW\)RUGLHVHODQGJDVROLQHUDQJHVWKLVLVWDNHQDVWKH HIIHFWLYHVROXELOLW\RIWRWDO%7(;FRPSRXQGVZKLFKLVFRQVHUYDWLYHDV%7(;FRPSRXQGVFRQVWLWXWHOHVVWKDQRIWKRVHSHWUROHXPPL[WXUHV7KH(3$'LHVHO)XHO2LO UHIHUHQFHLVXVHGDVWKHHIIHFWLYHVROXELOLW\UHIHUHQFH2WKHUHIIHFWLYHVROXELOLWLHVDUHDOVRLQFOXGHGIRUFRPSDULVRQ 7KHVHYDOXHVDUHRIWKH'LHVHO)XHO2LOHIIHFWLYHVROXELOLW\ Diesel Fuel 87 Octane 93 Octane Oil (Alaska) Gasoline Gasoline EPA Effective Solubility Reference Values %7(;LV%HQ]HQH7ROXHQH(WK\OEHQ]HQHDQG;\OHQHV (IIHFWLYHVROXELOLW\RIDFRQVWLWXHQWLQZDWHULQFRQWDFWZLWKDSHWUROHXPPL[WXUHLVORZHUWKDQZKHQLQFRQWDFWZLWKDSXUHVRXUFHVXFKDVDSXUHEHQ]HQHUHOHDVH (IIHFWLYHVROXELOLWLHVDUHFDOFXODWHGXVLQJWKH(3$(IIHFWLYH6ROXELOLW\&DOFXODWRUDWKWWSZZZHSDJRYDWKHQVOHDUQPRGHOSDUWWZRRQVLWHHVKWPO 7KHUHPHGLDWLRQOHYHOIRUOLJKWQRQDTXHRXVSKDVHOLTXLG /1$3/ ZLOOEHUHGXFWLRQWRVKHHQ QRPHDVXUDEOHWKLFNQHVV &OHDQXS/HYHOLVXJ/LIEHQ]HQHLVSUHVHQW Units Constituent 3RUWRI6HDWWOH7HUPLQDO Cleanup Level Sample Date Toluene ug/L 15000 8 Interior Wells 0: 5:$ 5: 8 8 3RUWRI6HDWWOH7HUPLQDO 8 8 8 8 8 o-Xylene ug/L 1000 8 8 8 8 Total ug/L 1000 8 8 Gasoline mg/L 0.8 8 1.7 8 8 1.3 Sheen Present, No Measurable Product Thickness, No Analytical Data Available Sheen Present, No Measurable Product Thickness, No Analytical Data Available Sheen Present, No Measurable Product Thickness, No Analytical Data Available Sheen Present, No Measurable Product Thickness, No Analytical Data Available 8 8 8 Ethylbenzen m, p-Xylene ug/L ug/L 2100 1000 %ROGLQGLFDWHVH[FHHGDQFHRIWKHFOHDQXSOHYHO &8/ :HOOVZKHUHVKHHQRUSURGXFWZDVREVHUYHGZHUHW\SLFDOO\QRWVDPSOHG 28 Performance Monitoring Wells 0: 0: 0: 5: Conditional Point of Compliance (CPOC) Wells 0: 8 8 0: 8 8 0:$ 8 0: 8 0: 8 8 Well Benzene ug/L 23 Table 1-4. Summary of Most-Recent Analytical Results 3RUWRI6HDWWOH7HUPLQDO 8 120 8 8 Diesel mg/L 0.5 8 28 8 8 8 8 8 8 Motor Oil mg/L 0.5 1 2 Bi-Annual X X X X X X 4 X X X 5 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Semi-Annual X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 6 X X X X X X X X X X X X 7 9 10 Year : X X X X X Annual 1 X X X X X 2 X X X X X 3 Compliance Monitoring Period 5-Year Interval 8 X X X X X 4 11 X X X X X 5 X X X 12 X X X X X Bi-Annual 6 13 7 14 X X X X X 8 15 9 16 15 Port of Seattle Terminal 30 X X X 22 X X X X X X X X X X 5-Year Interval 10 X X X 17 Project Year 1 sampling will be conducted just prior to AS/SVE system startup. * The Interior monitoring well schedule is independent of the transition from Performance to Compliance monitoring at CPOC and Performance monitoring wells. ** The duration of the Performance monitoring period is determined by the operation of the AS/SVE system. The bi-annual and semi-annual monitoring frequency at CPOC and Performance monitoring wells will continue until Compliance monitoring begins. LNAPL thickness will be measured at MW-59 and surrounding wells will on the recovery event schedule. Sampling may continue beyond year 32 on the 5-year compliance monitoring schedule, as discussed in text. Monitoring may be discontinued at individual monitoring wells when concentrations achieve cleanup levels for two consecutive events. x indicates a year with sampling at the indicated wells Notes: MW-36 MW-39 MW-42 RW-9 X X X Performance Monitoring Wells MW-45 MW-46 MW-58A MW-89 MW-92 Bi-Annual Performance Monitoring Period ** Conditional Point of Compliance Wells MW-38 RW-1 RW-5A Interior Monitoring Wells * Project Year 3 Table 3-1. Groundwater Monitoring Schedule Port of Seattle Terminal 30 X X X X X 20 X X X 27 X X X X X 25 X X X 32 .?321 0.1 Feet 2011 Maximum Extent of Produce Plume 1984-1991 (GeoEngineers, 1998) Conditional Point of Compliance (CPOC) Wells Water Quality Monitoring Well ! A ( Gaging/Recovery Well ! A Site Extent of Contamination Port of Seattle Terminal 30 Extent of Contamination Figure 1-4 ! A ! A ! A ! . ! A MW-10 ! . ! A MW-35 Tru ck ! A Sc ! . ! . ! A MW-73 s ? ale ! A MW-34 ! . ! A MW-47 ! A RW-11 MW-9 ! A AS-11 . !! A ! A ! . AS-10 ! A MW-33 MW-24 RW-9 ! A MW-37 AS-12 ! RW-11AA MW-36 ! AS-14 A AS-13 AS-15 ! . ! A T30 Vessel Tower ! MW-85 A ! ! A A MW-85B MW-85A ! A MW-71 MW-46 AS-16 MW-80 East Marginal Way S ! A MW-46A ! A MW-29 ! . AS-20 MW-64 ! A ! . ! . AS-17 ! A MW-44 !MW-59 AS-18 A MW-45 ! A AS-14 ? RW-12 ! A MW-63 ! A MW-60 Port of Seattle Police Office MW-81A ! A ! A MW-67 MW-88 ! A MW-65 MW-69 MW-66 ! A ! A MW-84 ! !A MW-84A A MW-84B New Sheet Pile Wall Center Line ! A MW-70 12/3/2015 K:\PONY\T30\GIS\mxds\Remediation_Well_Network_Layout_2015.mxd East Waterway ? ! . ! A ! A ! . ! A ! A R6 ! A MW-55 ! A ! A ! . ? ! . A R7 ! ! A MW-74 MW-54 ! A ! MW-61 A ! A MW-43 MW-62A ! A R4 AA ! . AS-2 MW-42 ! A ! . AS-1 MW-89 ! A !A ! A ! A ! A ! A MW-5 ! A MW-25 ! A MW-53 0 ! A MW-50 Feet MW-91 ! A ! A MW-51 MW-52 MW-11 ! A CO-3 ! A CO-2 100 MW-14 ! A ! A !A MW-52A A ! MW-87 ! A MW-87A 2012 USGS Orthophoto ! A CO-4 ! A MW-6 ! A MW-56 ! ! A A MW-87B ! A MW-49 ! A MW-92 MW-4 MW-62 MW-17 ! A MW-86 MW-78 !! MW-78A ! A AS-3 ! MW-41 A AS-4 RW-5A ! A R8 ! . ! A AS-5 ! A MW-40 ! !A A U2 MW-86B MW-79 !A ! A MW-79A MW-86C MW-77 ! A ! A R5 ! . AS-6 MW-38 ! RW-1 A ! A MW-1 ! . AS-8 AS-7 MW-58 MW-39 ! A ! A R10 MW-8 AS-9 !! A A MW-26 MW-58A MW-72A MW-72 Edge of Concrete Face K ! A MW-75 ! A CO-1 MW-90 ! A Phase II Air Sparge Well with Radius of Influence ! . *Extents based on a combination of the historic extent of LNAPL, historic and recent data, and distribution of exceedances. Isolated "hot spots" may exist beyond the outlined soil and groundwater extent. ) Performance Monitoring Wells ) Interior Wells Future Phase II AS/SVE Phase I SVE Pipe in Trench Phase I Air Sparge Well with Radius of Influence ! . LNAPL Extraction Well with Radius of Influence Remediation Elements Soil Extent Groundwater Extent Extent of Contamination* Sheen Area LNAPL > 0.1 Feet 2011 Conditional Point of Compliance (CPOC) Wells Decommissioned Wells ! A ( Water Quality Monitoring Well Gaging/Recovery Well ! A ! A Site Extent of Contamination Port of Seattle Terminal 30 Cleanup Action Components Figure 3-1 :HOOKHDGZLWK3UHVVXUH*DXJH 9DOYH LQ)OXVK0RXQW+LJK7UDIILF0RQXPHQW /DWHUDO&RQQHFWLRQWR:HOO 6FKHPDWLF Asphalt $6'LVWULEXWLRQ3LSLQJ LQFK39& %DFNILOOZLWK &RPSDFWLRQ *UDYHO3DFN +RUL]RQWDO69(3LSLQJ VORWWHGLQFK39& 3RWHQ WLDO*U RXQGZ DWHU0 RXQGLQ J 'HSWKWR:DWHUaIWEJV LQFK39&5LVHU 5DG LXV RI,Q IOXH QFH 'HSWK%HORZ*URXQG6XUIDFH IHHW *URXWHG$QQXODU 6HDO %HQWRQLWH$QQXODU6HDO 6DQG3DFN LQFK IHHW IRRW6FUHHQ,QWHUYDO LQFKVORW39& Figure 3-2. AS/SVE Subsurface Components 3RUWRI6HDWWOH 7HUPLQDO )ORZWR9DFXXP7UXFN :HOOKHDGLQ)OXVK0RXQW +LJK7UDIILF0RQXPHQW 6LSKRQ7XEH SVLYDFXXP $LU%OHHG,QOHW9DOYH :HOO6HDO Asphalt +\GUDWHG%HQWRQLWH $QQXODU6HDO LQFKERUHKROH LNAPL Saturation Profiles Maximum Historic LNAPL Saturation U0RXQGLQJ *URXQGZDWH Current LNAPL Saturation 'HSWKWR:DWHU IWEJV IRRW6FUHHQ,QWHUYDO LQFK39& Depth 'HSWK%HORZ*URXQG6XUIDFH IHHW LQFK39&5LVHU Maximum Historic and Current Measured LNAPL Thicknesses 6DQG3DFN Residual LNAPL Saturation 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Pore-Space Saturation 1 IRRWVXPS :HOOQRWGUDZQWRKRUL]RQWDOVFDOHYHUWLFDOVFDOHLQFK IHHW 'HSWKWRZDWHULVWKHHVWLPDWHGHTXLOLELUXPZDWHUOHYHODFFRXQWLQJIRU /1$3/ZLWKGHQVLW\RIJP/ /1$3/VDWXUDWLRQSURILOHVEDVHGRQ$3,PRGHORISURGXFWDW0: *URXQGZDWHUPRXQGVFKHPDWLFQRWTXDQWLWDWLYH Figure 3-3. High-Vacuum LNAPL Recovery Components 3RUWRI6HDWWOH 7HUPLQDO Figure6Ͳ1.ContingencyActionDecisionFramework PortofSeattleTerminal30 Start Identificationofpreviously unrecognized environmental condition? Nocontingency actionrequired No Yes No Concentrationsbelow cleanuplevels? Changeinsite conditionsthatalters potentialreceptorpathway? No No Concentrationsabovecleanup levelsatCPOC? Yes Yes Adequatelyaddressed by existingremedial approach? 3 No Yes Demonstrationof expanding plume?1 Yes Begincontingency actionplanning4 No Yes Remediationmeeting scheduled objectives?2 No Notes: 1 PlumeexpansiontobeevaluatedusingthestatisticalapproachdescribedinAppendixDofEcologyPublication05Ͳ09Ͳ091,GuidanceonRemediationof PetroleumͲContaminatedGroundWaterByNaturalAttenuation .July2005.Evaluationwillincludeatleast5yearsofmonitoringdata. 2 ScheduledobjectivesdescribedinSections4and5,includingobjectivesforLNAPLremoval,AS/SVEsystembiostimulation,andcompliancemonitoring. 3 ThiswillbeassessedthroughacombinationoftechnicalanalysisandprofessionaljudgementincommunicationwithEcology. 4 Contingencyactionwillbeselectedtoaddresstheidentifiedenvironmentalcondition.SeeFigure5Ͳ2. AdditionaldatabeyondgroundwatermonitoringdescribedintheComplianceMonitoringPlan(notyetcomplete)mayberequiredtoevaluateifcontingency actioniswarranted. 3RUWRI6HDWWOH7HUPLQDO Figure6Ͳ2.ContingencyActionProcess PortofSeattleTerminal30 Start:contingencyactiontriggered (SeeFigure5Ͳ1) NotifyEcologywithin14daysof determination Developprelminary planandschedule forevaluationphase Ecologyreview1 Prepareevaluationanddesignreports 2 Ecologyreview1 Implementcontingency action Notes: 1 EcologyreviewstepincludesrevisiontoaddressEcologycomments. 2 Evaluationreportmaybesubmittedseparatelydependingoncomplexityofselectedcontingencyaction,orif theevaulationdemonstratesthatnoadditionalcontingencyactionsarerequiredtomeetremedialobjectives. EvaluationanddesignreportsdescribedinSecton5.2. 3RUWRI6HDWWOH7HUPLQDO APPENDIX A SUPPORTING LNAPL INFORMATION LNAPL RECOVERY CALCULATIONS This appendix outlines calculations and modeling results conducted in support of LNAPL recovery planning for the Terminal 30 Draft Cleanup Action Plan (PGG, 2013). Modeling was performed using the API LDRM model (Charbeneau, 2007). Baseline LNAPL saturation is based on historic LNAPL measurements at MW-59 and RW-12 (GeoEngineers, 1998; ENSR|AECOM, 2008). LNAPL saturation models were used to estimate current LNAPL saturation profiles, which form the basis for estimating recoverable LNAPL at MW-59 and RW12. Other wells to be installed in the vicinity are expected to have similar or thinner LNAPL thicknesses and similar soil conditions. Baseline LNAPL saturation modeling inputs are listed in Table A1: Table A1. LNAPL Input Parameters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able A2 lists the symbols used in the API LDRM output plots. Table A2. LNAPL Plot Parameters 3DUDPHWHU 6Z 6Z W 6Q 6Q W 6UQ :DWHU7DEOH 'HVFULSWLRQ :DWHU6DWXUDWLRQDW,QLWLDO/1$3/7KLFNQHVV :DWHU6DWXUDWLRQDW,QWHUPHGLDWH7LPH W /1$3/6DWXUDWLRQDW,QLWLDO/1$3/7KLFNQHVV /1$3/6DWXUDWLRQDW,QWHUPHGLDWH7LPH W 5HVLGXDO/1$3/6DWXUDWLRQ (OHYDWLRQRI(TXLOLEULXP:DWHU7DEOH LNAPL and water saturation is measured as the fraction of pore space filled by LNAPL or water while porosity is the fraction of the aquifer not occupied by solids. An LNAPL saturation of 0.1 in an aquifer with a porosity of 0.4 is equivalent to 0.04 of the total soil volume being filled with LNAPL. Modeled LNAPL saturation curves at peak measured LNAPL thickness (Sn (0)) in the MW-59 area (1.25 meters, or 4.1 feet shown as vertical bars at the right of plots) are: Product thickness at MW-59 ranged from 0.59 to 0.21 meters (1.93 to 0.69 feet) in 13 measurements between 2006 and 2008 with an average of 0.3 meters (1.0 foot) (ENSR|AECOM, 2008). LNAPL saturation curves at 0.3 meters LNAPL thickness (current condition, time t) after the peak LNAPL thickness of 1.25 meters is: The maximum recoverable product by gravity drainage at each well is the difference in saturation between the current saturation (Sn(t)) and the residual saturation (Srn). The total volume of recoverable product is the difference in saturation scaled to the recovery radius. For the plot above with an average 0.1 difference between current and residual LNAPL saturation, and a recovery radius of 17 feet (well spacing), there is approximately 275 gallons of recoverable LNAPL in the vicinity of MW-59. Note that this likely overestimates the practically recoverable LNAPL because LNAPL transmissivity will decrease with LNAPL thickness and LNAPL may not be adequately mobile to migrate even under the gradient induced by the applied vacuum. Uncertainties in recovery rate increase as the recovery progresses because small-scale heterogeneity becomes more important in overall LNAPL migration. PRODUCT RECOVERY The API model predicts approximately 2.25 gallons of recovery per well, per event with an initial product thickness of 0.3 meters (1.0 foot); 5 psi vacuum; an assumed water production rate of 1 gpm; and a 2 hour duration. Records of manual recovery events at MW-59 and RW-12 suggest that the modeled recovery rates are overly conservative. Approximately 3 gallons of product were manually recovered from MW-59 starting at an initial thickness of 0.96 feet in November 2008. Recovery rates and product thickness relative to actual recovery at RW-12 suggest that recovery rates on the order of 5 to 20 gallons per well per event are reasonable during initial recovery events. Recovery rates will decrease to less than a gallon per event as product thickness decreases to below 0.1 feet. Vacuum-truck total fluids recovery is a more aggressive approach than manual purging and recovery rates are expected to be greater than manual recovery. LNAPLThickness(ft) RecordedRWͲ12LNAPLRecovery 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 GallonsPerManualRecoveryEvent Assuming a nominal 8 gallons of LNAPL per recovery event, approximately 34 extraction events would be required to remove the estimated 275 gallons of recoverable LNAPL in the vicinity of MW-59. LNAPL recovery rates will decrease substantially as product thickness declines below 0.1 feet, and 50 LNAPL recovery events are assumed. The actual number of product recovery events is likely to vary due to the uncertainties in the actual LNAPL saturation at MW-59 and at the new recovery wells to be installed. Exhibit C Scope of Work and Schedule Deliverable/Milestone Estimated Start Date/Period Estimated Time Required to Complete Task After Start Date Signed Consent Decree Progress Reports November 2016 Calendar Quarterly after effective date of Consent Decree 60 days after effective date of Consent Decree --- 60 days following Ecology approval of the Cost Estimate for Consent Decree implementation 2 months Annually, within 30 days of the anniversary date of Consent Decree 2 months Immediately following execution of Consent Decree Within 12 months following approval of EDR Within 12 months following approval of EDR 3 months after the start of the AS/SVE system Within 10 days of completion of performance monitoring 18 months Cost Estimate for Consent Decree Implementation (per Consent Decree Section XXI) Proof of Financial Assurances (per Consent Decree Section XXI) Annual Financial Assurance Report (per Consent Decree Section XXI) Engineering Design Report (EDR) Construct and Operate AS/SVE Construct and Operate LNAPL Recovery Performance Monitoring Submit proof of recording of Environmental Covenants to Ecology Periodic Reviews Conducted by Ecology Compliance Monitoring 2 months 60 months* 120 months 60 to 120 months -- Every 5 years from the effective -date of Consent Decree 3 months after the start of the 360 ** AS/SVE system * AS/SVE operation and associated performance monitoring may be adjusted based on operational information, including possible extension beyond 5 years. Note that the schedule in Phase 1 and Phase 2 AS/SVE areas will be staggered with a later start date for the Phase 2 area. The AS/SVE system will be discontinued when the system is no longer significantly reducing contaminant mass in the sheen area, as described in the EDR. **The duration of Compliance Monitoring will be based on achieving compliance goals specified in the Cleanup Action Plan. Implementation of Cleanup Action Plan (CAP) T30 Cleanup Site December 15, 2015 Page 1 of 16 Environmental Checklist Implementation of Cleanup Action Plan (CAP) at the Port of Seattle Terminal 30 Cleanup Site A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Implementation of Cleanup Action Plan (CAP) at the Port of Seattle Terminal 30 (T30) Cleanup Site 2. Name of applicant: Port of Seattle 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Sunny Becker Site Manager Washington State Department of Ecology 3190 160th Avenue SE Bellevue, WA 98008 425-649-7187 Paul Meyer Environmental Permitting Manager Port of Seattle 2711 Alaskan Way Seattle, Washington 98121 206-787-3127 4. Date checklist prepared: December, 2015 5. Agency requesting checklist: Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): In 1991, Ecology, and the Port of Seattle (Port), entered into a legal agreement in the form of an Agreed Order (AO). This AO specified that the Port shall prepare and submit a final remedial investigation and feasibility study (RI/FS) for the site. A 2013 RI/FS was prepared to update the status of petroleum contamination at the site and to identify a final, preferred remedial action. The requirements under the 1991 Agreed Order were completed to Ecology's satisfaction in 2013. An amendment to the AO requires the Port to prepare a draft Cleanup Action Plan (CAP) and an Environmental Checklist in accordance with the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) process. The checklist is essential in determining the environmental impacts anticipated from the CAP proposed for the site. This document is the SEPA checklist. Ecology conducted a 30-day public comment period for the CAP and RI/FS in the second quarter of 2015. Final design and cleanup will commence once the final CAP is approved under a new Consent Decree (CAP CD). This schedule anticipates the design and construction of the cleanup system will occur during the 2018 to 2019 timeframe. Ongoing operation of the below ground systems will occur over 10 years in conjunction with long term monitoring. 1 Implementation of Cleanup Action Plan (CAP) T30 Cleanup Site December 15, 2015 Page 2 of 16 Cleanup Action Task Public Review of Draft CAP and CD Finalize CAP Finalize Consent Decree (CAP CD) Draft and Finalize Engineering Design Report Cleanup Action Construction Operation -AS/SVE and LNAPL recovery Monitoring Estimated Completion Date Q2 2015 (actual) Q2 2016 6 months from CAP finalization 18 months from CAP CD effective date 2018-2019 2018-2028 30 years from construction completion 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. The Port will maintain the project area in a manner consistent with the terms of the CAP CD following implementation of the cleanup remedy. The site is currently operated as an active marine cargo facility, a use that is not expected to change in the future. As an active terminal, the site is currently paved and fenced and access is restricted to industrial adults with appropriate identification and clearance. The Port will coordinate with Ecology as required by the restrictive environmental covenant so that the site remains protective of human health and the environment. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. The following documents are related to this proposal: x Ecology, 1991. In the Matter of Remedial Action by: Port of Seattle Agreed Order: Terminal 30. Effective Date: August 30, 1991. x GeoEngineers, Inc., 1998. Terminal 30 Final Report Remedial Investigation/ Feasibility Study. Prepared for the Port of Seattle. December. x Ecology, 2013. First Amendment to Agreed Order: Terminal 30. Port of Seattle. Effective Date: October 23, 2013. x Pacific Groundwater Group, 2013. Terminal 30 Remedial Investigation / Feasibility Study. November 2013. x WA Department of Ecology, 2015. Cleanup Action Plan, Port of Seattle Terminal 30. December 15, 2015. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. The CAP received public comment and review in Q2 2015 with final CAP anticipated in 2016 Q2. The CAP will direct the work to meet CAP CD remedial requirements. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. Remedial actions at a facility under an AO are exempt from state and local government permits or approvals for the remedial actions. Ecology ensures substantive compliance with requirements of state and local authorization and permits. 2 33 6 32 n al 4 Elliott Bay 05 Term i § ¦ ¨ 90 06 04 S MASSACHUSETTS ST ¬ << 1ST AVE S S HOLGATE ST EAST MARGINAL WAY S Terminal 30 S WALKER ST 08 S STACY ST 09 S LANDER ST S FOREST ST S HANFORD ST AIRPORT WAY S Terminal 18 East Waterw ay 27 West Waterway Terminal 5 Harbor Island 07 ip Sl 12 Terminal 10 Jack Block Park T24N R3E T24N R4E 99 6TH AVE S Jack Perry Park S ATLANTIC ST 4TH AVE S Slip 36 ALA SKA NW AY S S ROYAL BROUGHAM WAY Terminal 18 Park SW SPOKANE ST Terminal 102 Park 13 Duw § ¦ ¨ 16 5 Terminal 106 s ami ater hW K:\PONY\T30\GIS\mxds\VicinityMap.mxd , 4/29/2014 17 18 wa y Terminal 107 Park Terminal 13 99 ¬ << Maplewood Playfield Kellogg Island 19 24 20 Slip 1 § ¦ ¨ 5 Site Boundary Figure 1 ¬ << 99 ¬ << Site Location Map Terminal 30 Sections 520 0 0 Feet Miles Seattle 2,000 § ¦ ¨ 90 0.5 K ¦ ¨ ¬ <<§ 5 509 Port of Seattle Terminal 30 21 12/3/2015 K:\PONY\T30\GIS\mxds\SiteMap_2014_Fig2.mxd Port of Seattle Police Office ! A MW-81A MW-88 ! A AAMW-84B ! A Tru ck ale s AS-14 Sc T30 Vessel Tower MW-39 ! A MW-58A AA MW-42 ! A MW-89 MW-86C !! MW-86B A ! RW-1 A MW-77 ! MW-38 ! A ! A MW-54 ! A RW-5A ! A ! A AS-1 AS-3 AS-4 AS-5 AS-7 AS-6 ! AS-13 AS-12 AS-11 AS-10 AS-9 AS-8 A ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . ! . AS-2 ! . ! A ! RW-9 A RW-11A MW-36 ! A AAMW-85A MW-85B !! South Vault Soil Area MW-46 MW-35 East Marginal Way S ! A MW-64 ! A !MW-59 RW-12 A ! A MW-45 MW-84A !! East Waterway ! A ! A MW-49 MW-92 0 ! A MW-91 A MW-52A ! 1:1,000 100 2012 USGS Orthophoto Feet ! A MW-90 West Vault Soil Area Equipment Shed MW-87A ! ! A A MW-87B K North Substation ! A MW-76A Water Quality Monitoring Well ! A ! . Utility Trench Future Phase II AS/SVE Expansion Phase I SVE Pipe in Trench Phase I Air Sparge Well with Radius of Influence LNAPL Extraction Well with Radius of Influence Remediation Elements Soil Areas Not Associated with T30 Site Site Extent of Contamination Gaging/Recovery Well ! A Port of Seattle Terminal 30 Site Map Figure 2 List of Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements - City of Seattle electrical permit or permits for installation of remediation equipment Puget Sound Clean Air Authority (PSCAA) Air Emission Permit, or Permit Requirements for discharge from the air sparging system