HRS DOCUMENTATION RECORD – REVIEW COVER SHEET

Name of Site: Bremerton Gasworks

Contact Persons:

Removal Action Anchor QEA, LLC, January 2011, Completion Report, Former Bremerton MPG Site, Incident Action and Time Critical Removal Action

Emergency Removal

Action Ecology and Environment, Inc., March 2011, Bremerton MGP Waste Release Emergency Removal Action

Targeted Brownfields

Assessment Ecology and Environment, Inc., A ugust 2009, Final Bremerton Gasworks Targeted Brownfields Assessment, Bremerton, Washington

Documentation Record Renee Nordeen, Ecology & Environment Inc., Seattle, WA

Ken Marcy, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Seattle, WA

Pathways, Components, or Threats Not Scored The ground water migration pathway, ground water-to- surface water component and drinking water threat of the surface water migration pathway, soil expos ure pathway, and air migration pathway were not scored as part of this Hazard Ranking System (HRS ) evaluation. These pathways/components were not included because a release to these media does not signi ficantly affect the overall site score and because the overland flow/flood component of the surface wate r migration pathway produces an overall site score well above the minimum required for the site to qualify for inclusion on the National Priorities List. These pathways are of concern to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and may be evaluated during future investigations.HRS DOCUMENTATION RECORD

Name of Site: Bremerton Gasworks

EPA Region 10 Date Prepared: September 2011

CERCLIS No.: WAN001002907

Street Address of Site * : 1725 Pennsylvania Avenue, Bremerton, Washington 98337

County and State: Kitsap, Washington

General Location in the State: Northwest

Topographic Map: Bremerton West, Washington, 1953, photorevised 1981 (Ref. 3).

Latitude: 47° 34 ' 42.76 " North Longitude: 122° 38 ' 31.69 " West (Ref. 3 as

determ ined as the end of the concrete pipe)

Scores Ground Water Pathway NS Surface Water Pathway 100.00 Soil Exposure Pathway NS Air Pathway NS

HRS SITE SCORE 50.00

NS = Not Scored

* - The street address, coordinates, and cont aminant locations presented in this HRS documentation record identify the general area the site is located. They represent one or more locati ons EPA considers to be part of the site based on the screening information EPA used to evaluate the site for NPL listing. EPA lists national priorities among the known "releases or threaten ed releases" of hazardous subs tances; thus, the focus is on the release, not prec isely delineated boundaries. A site is defined a s where a hazardous substance has been "depos ited, stored, placed, or otherwise come to be located." Generally, HRS scoring and the subsequent listing of a release merely represent the initia l determination that a certain area may need to be addressed under the Comprehensive Environmental Respons e, Compensation, and Liability Act. A ccordingly, EPA contemplates that the preliminary description of facil ity boundaries at the time of scorin g will be refined as more info rmation is developed as to wh ere the contamination has co me to be located.



### 1SURFACE WATER OVERLAND FLOW/FLOOD MIGRATION COMPONENTS SCORESHEET

Factor categories and factors Maximum Value Value Assigned

Drinking Water Threat

Likelihood of Release:

1. Observed Release 550 550

2. Potential to Release by Overland Flow:

2a. Containment 10

2b. Runoff 25

2c. Distance to Surface Water 25

2d. Potential to Release by Overland Flow [lines 2a(2b + 2c)] 500

3.Potential to Release by Flood:

3a. Containment (Flood) 10

3b. Flood Frequency 50

3c. Potential to Release by Flood (lines 3a x 3b) 500

4. Potential to Release (lines 2d + 3c, subject to a maximum of 500) 500

5. Likelihood of Release (higher of lines 1 and 4) 550 550

Waste Characteristics:

6. Toxicity/Persistence (a)

7. Hazardous Waste Quantity (a)

8. Waste Characteristics 100 NS

Targets:

9. Nearest Intake 50

10. Population:

10a. Level I Concentrations (b)

10b. Level II Concentrations (b)

10c. Potential Contamination (b)

10d. Population (lines 10a + 10b + 10c) (b)

11. Resources 5

12. Targets (lines 9 + 10d + 11) (b) NS

Drinking Water Threat Score:

13. Drinking Water Threat Score [( lines 5x8x12)/82,500, subject to a max of 100] 100 NS

Factor categories and factors Maximum Value Value Assigned

Human Food Chain Threat

Likelihood of Release:

14. Likelihood of Release (same value as line 5) 550 550

Waste Characteristics:

15. Toxicity/Persistence/Bioaccumulation (a) 5 x 10 8

16. Hazardous Waste Quantity (a) 100

17. Waste Characteristics 1,000 320

Targets:

18. Food Chain Individual 50 45

19. Population

19a. Level I Concentrations 0

19b. Level II Concentrations 0.03

19c. Potential Human Food Chain Contamination 0.31

19d. Population (lines 19a + 19b + 19c) 0.34

20. Targets (lines 18 + 19d) (b) 45.34

Human Food Chain Threat Score:



### 2SURFACE WATER OVERLAND FLOW/FLOOD MIGRATION COMPONENTS SCORESHEET



### 3 21. Human Food Chain Threat Score [(lines 14x17x20)/82,500, subject to max of 100] 100 96.72

Factor categories and factors Maximum Value Value Assigned

Environmental Threat

Likelihood of Release:

22. Likelihood of Release (same value as line 5) 550 550

Waste Characteristics:

23. Ecosystem Toxicity/Persist ence/Bioaccumulation (a) 5 x 10 8

24. Hazardous Waste Quantity (a) 100

25. Waste Characteristics 1,000 320

Targets:

26. Sensitive Environments

26a. Level I Concentrations (b) 0

26b. Level II Concentrations (b) 175

26c. Potential Contamination (b) 0

26d. Sensitive Environments ( lines 26a + 26b + 26c) (b) 175

27. Targets (value from line 26d) (b) 175

Environmental Threat Score:

28. Environmental Threat Score [(lin es 22x25x27)/82,500, subject to a max of 60] 60 60

29. Watershed Score c (lines 13 + 21 + 28, subject to a maximum of 100) 100 100.00

30. Component Score (S of ) c (highest score from line 29 for all watersheds evaluated, subject to a maximum of 100) 100 100.00

a Maximum value applies to waste characteristics category.

b Maximum value not applicable.

c Do not round to nearest integer.WORKSHEET FOR COMPUTING HRS SITE SCORE

S pathway S 2 pathway

Ground Water Migration Pathway Score (S gw ) NS NS

Surface Water Migration Pathway Score (S

sw ) 100.00 10000

Soil Exposure Pathway Score (S

s ) NS NS

Air Migration Score (S

a ) NS NS

S 2

gw + S 2

sw + S 2

s + S 2

a 10000

(S 2

gw + S 2

sw + S 2

s + S 2

a )/4 2500

/(S 2

gw + S 2

sw + S 2

s + S 2

a )/4 50.00



### 4REFERENCES

Reference

Number Description of the Reference

1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, December 14, 1990, Hazard Ranking System, Final Rule, 40 CFR Part 300, 14 pages excerpted. A full copy of the HRS Rule is available in the Regional docket, upon request.

2. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Janua ry 2004, Superfund Chemical Data Matrix (SCDM), Appendix BI, 13 pages excerpted. A complete copy of SCDM is available at http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/npl/hrsres/tools/scdm.htm

. 3. U.S. Geological Survey, 1953, photorevised 1981, 7.5 minute series topographic map, Bremerton West quadrangle, 1 page.

4. Anchor QEA, LLC, January 2011, Completion Report, Former Bremerton MPG Site, Incident

Action and Time Critical Removal Action , prepared for U.S. Coast Guard Sector Puget Sound Incident Management Division, prepared on beha lf of Cascade Natural Gas Corporation, 383

pages. 5. Vasser, Bryan, March 2011, Ecology and Environment, Inc., START-3 Project Manager memorandum regarding Bremerton MGP Waste Release Emergency Removal Action to Renee Nordeen, Ecology and Environment, Inc., START-3 Project Manager, with attached figure, chain of custody forms, site photographs, laboratory sheets, and GPS locations table, explaining sampling methodology, analytical protocol, and GPS information, 72 pages.

6. Reference reserved.

7. Ecology and Environment, Inc., August 2009, Final Bremerton Gasworks Targeted Brownfields Assessment Report , Prepared for United States Environmental Protection Agency, Contract Number EP-S7-06-02, Technical Direction Document Number 07-01-0008, 1,115 pages.

8. Ecology and Environment, Inc., March 2008, Sampling and Quality Assurance Project Plan, Bremerton Gasworks Targeted Brownfields Assessment , prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Contract Number EP-S7-06-02, Technical Direction Document Number 07- 01-0008, 199 pages.

9. Woodke, Mark, April 4, 2011, START-3 Chemis t, Ecology & Environment Inc. memorandum to Renee Nordeen, Project Manager, Ecology & Environment Inc. regarding TDD: 10-11-0007, Example adjusted CRQL calculation for th e Emergency Removal Action, 69 pages.

10. Ecology and Environment, Inc., March 2011, Bremerton Gasworks, Zone of Actual Contamination, 1 page.

11. United States Department of Health and Huma n Services, Public Health Service, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Septem ber 2002, Toxicological Profile for Wood Creosote, Coal Tar Creosote, Coal Tar, Coal Ta r Pitch, and Coal Tar Pitch Volatiles, 394 pages.

12. Reference reserved.

13. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region X, October 11, 2010, POLREP #1, Initial and Final Polrep, Bremert on MGP Waste Release, 6 pages.

14. Woodke, Mark, March 2011, START-3 Chemist, Ecology & Environment Inc. memorandum to Renee Nordeen, Project Manager, Ecology & E nvironment Inc. regarding TDD: 10-11-0007, 10- 11-0007 Example adjusted CRQL calculation for the Bremerton Gasworks TBA , 31 pages.

15. Reference reserved.

16. United States Environmental Protection Agency, November 1996, Using Qualified Data to

Document an Observed Relea se and Observed Contamination , EPA 540-F-94-028, 18 pages.

17. Ecology and Environment, Inc., 2009, Brem erton Gasworks Properties, Field Logbooks, 22

pages. 18. TechLaw, Inc., November 10, 2006, Old Brem erton Gasworks Site McConkey Property Targeted Brownfields Assessment, prepared for United Stat es Environmental Protection Agency, Contract Number EP-S7-06-03, Task Order 06-07-0005, 216 pages.

19. Western Regional Climate Control Center (WRCC) , October 4, 2010, Peri od of Record Monthly



### 5REFERENCES

Reference

Number Description of the Reference Climate Summary Bremerton, Washington (4 50872), webpage http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/cgibin/cliMAIN.pl?wa0872 accessed on October 4, 2010, 1 page.

20. Maguire, Andrew, March 31, 2011, Ecology an d Environment, Inc., GIS Analyst, memorandum regarding GIS Analysis of Environmental Targets and Sample Distances for Bremerton Gasworks Property to Renee Nordeen, Ecology and Environment, Inc., Project Manager, 3 pages.

21. GeoEngineers, Inc., June 1, 2007, Preliminary Upland Assessment Work Plan McConkey/Sesko

Site , prepared for City of Bremerton, 62 pages.

22. United States Department of Health and Huma n Services, Public Health Service, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, June 1995 , Toxicological Profile for Fuel Oils, 231

pages. 23. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, September 1996, Automotive Gasoline, ToxFAQs, 2 pages.

24. US EPA Contract Laboratory Program Generic Chain of Custody, various dates, to KAP Technologies, Inc., Bonner Analytical Testing Co ., and Manchester Environmental Laboratory, 27 pages.

25. O’Sullivan, Allison, Biologist Suquamish Tribe, April 6, 2011, letter to Renee Nordeen regarding Bremerton Gasworks Beach fishing, Project Mana ger, Ecology and Environment, Inc., 3 pages.

26. Nordeen, Renee, June 9, 2011, START-3 Project Manager, Ecology & Environment Inc. memorandum to Bremerton Gasworks file, regarding Bremerton Gasworks Property Identification, 1 page.

27. Woodke, Mark, March 21, 2011, START-3 Chemis t, Ecology & Environment Inc. memorandum to Renee Nordeen, Project Manager, Ecology & Environment Inc. regarding TDD: 10-11-0007, Example SQL calculations for the Em ergency Removal Action, 3 pages.

28. Kitsap Public Utility District, October 1997, K itsap County Initial Basin Assessment, Open File Technical Report Number 97-04, 8 pages excerpted.

29. Fisher, Cameron, July 26, 2011, Fisheries Biologist, Ecology and Environment, Inc. memorandum to Renee Nordeen, Project Manager, Ecology and Environment, Inc. regarding TDD: 10-11-0007 presence of salmonoid species, 39 pages.

30. LaBaw, Joanne, July 27, 2011, EPA Region 10, Brownfields Site Manager, telephone conversation with Renee Nordeen, Project Manage r, Ecology and Environment, Inc., regarding status of Bremerton Gasworks Target ed Brownfields Assessment, 1, page.
31, Marcy, Ken, July 27, 2011, EPA Region 10 NPL Coordinator, telephone conversation with Renee Nordeen, Project Manager, Ecology a nd Environment, Inc., regarding Bremerton Gasworks NPL status, 1 page.

32. Turcotte, Carol M., October 18, 2010, Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife, Public Disclosure Officer, electronic mail to Renee Nordeen, Project Manager, Ecology and Environment, inc., regarding commercia l fish catch data request, 7 pages.

33. Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife, March 1991, Southern Puget Sound Region Aquaculture Management and Catch Reporting Areas map, 1 page.

34. Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife, October 31, 2008, Marine Fish-Shellfish Management and catch reporting Areas within Puget Sound (WAC 220-22-400), 1 page.

35. Richard Brooks, July 27, 2011, The Suquamish Tr ibe, Environmental Program Manager, letter to Linda Costello, Ecology and Environment, Inc., re garding Bremerton Gasworks Site tribal fish usage, 2 pages.

36. LaBaw, Joanne, June 9, 2011, Brownfield s Site Manager, United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 10, electronic mail to Ken Marcy, NPL Coordinator, United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 10, regarding Bremerton Gasworks activity, 3 pages.



### 6BREMERTON GASWORKS SUMMARY:

Bremerton Gasworks is the location of the former Br emerton manufactured gas plant (MGP) in Bremerton, Washington (Ref. 4. p. 5). The former Bremerton MGP was located on the south shore of Port Washington Narrows (Ref. 4, p. 5). The MGP produced gas for lighting and heating through coal gasification from approximately 1930 to the mid-1950s; and through bl ending propane and air from the mid-1950s to 1963 (Ref. 4, p. 5). The MGP structures were removed between 1963 and the early 1970s (Ref. 4, p. 5).

The former Bremerton MGP was located on portions of three existing parcels with two parcels together being referred to as “North Bremerton Gasworks” and the third parcel being referred to as “South Bremerton Gasworks” (Ref. 4, p. 5; Ref. 26, p. 1) . A map depicting features at the property and sample locations is provided following this section (Figure 1). After the MGP was dismantled, the properties were used for industrial purposes including metal fabrication, concrete forming, and boat repair (Ref. 4, p. 5). The majority of the North Bremerton Gasworks Pr operty is currently vacant and unused though a small empty structure spans the southern edge of the Nort h Bremerton Gasworks Property (Ref. 4. pp. 5 and 6; Ref. 26, p. 1). The South Bremerton Gasworks Property al so is vacant and unused (Ref. 4, p. 6; Ref. 26, p. 1). This property formerly was the location of a petr oleum storage and distribution facility from the early to mid-1940s to approximately 1993 (Ref. 4, p. 6). The historical coal gasification plant included approximately 17 petroleum above gr ound storage tanks (ASTs) which have since been removed (Ref. 21, pp. 6 and 7).

On August 20, 2010, intermittent sheens were observe d on the surface water of Port Washington Narrows near the former MGP (Ref. 4, p. 7). Further investiga tion identified a 12-inch concrete pipe in the intertidal area that appeared to be discharging product (Ref. 4, pp. 7 and 25). The pipe was determined to be releasing coal tar waste from the MGP into the mid-intertidal zone of a navigable waterway (Ref. 4, p. 256).

EPA has sampled sediments adjacent to Bremerton Gasworks on two separate occasions: once during a Targeted Brownfields Assessment (TBA) conducted in 2008 (Ref. 7, p. 16) and once during an Emergency Removal Action (ERA) in October 2010 (Ref. 5, p. 1). The TBA field work was conducted in May and June 2008 (Ref. 7, p. 16). During the TBA, five sediment samples were collected from Port Washington Narrows (Ref. 7, pp. 23 and 24). The EPA ERA fi eld sampling event was conducted on October 9 and 10, 2010. During the October 2010 EPA ERA, a total of 31 sediment samples were collected from Port Washington Narrows (Ref. 5, p. 1). No further i nvestigation will be completed under the Brownfields program (Ref. 30, p. 1). Additionally, it was determined that the extent and complexity of contamination at

Bremerton Gasworks was too extensive to handle with in either the Brownfields program or the CERCLA removal program; therefore, Bremert on Gasworks is being proposed for listing on the NPL (Ref. 31, p. 1).

In November 2010, an Incident Action and Time Critical Removal Action (RA) was carried out. (Ref. 4, p. 1, 8, 256). During this removal action, two samples of material in the pipe were collected on November 6, 2010 (Ref. 4, pp. 13, 14, and 362).

The source scored for this HRS documentation record is the Concrete Pipe Outfall (Source 1). An observed

release of coal tar to the marine waters of Port W ashington Narrows has been identified. In relation to targets in the surface water migration pathway, it has been documented that a fishery and critical habitats for Federal-listed threatened species are present with in the zone of actual contamination (see section 4.1.4.3.1.2).

The ground water-to-surface water component of th e surface water migration pathway was not scored because the overland flow/flood component of the su rface water migration pathway generated a higher score. However, the ground water-t o-surface water component of the surface water migration pathway is of concern since it is known that contaminated ground water underlying Bremerton Gasworks property is



### 7present (Ref. 7, pp. 21-23, 79-80). This contaminat ed ground water may be impacting adjacent surface water features. The average annual precipitation n ear Bremerton Gasworks of 45.11 inches per year recharges the ground water with fresh water (Ref. 19, p. 1; Ref. 28, p. 5-1). A total of two wells (MP04 and SP02) were installed as part of the 2008 TBA (Ref. 7, pp. 21 and 22). Additionally, samples were collected from borehole locations (MP01GW, MP03GW, SP01GW, and SP03GW) (Ref. 7, pp. 21-22, 79,-80). All ground water samples were analyzed for semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs), Target Analyte List (TAL) Metals, Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH ) as diesel, and Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) (Ref. 7, pp. 17-18, 79-80; Ref 24, pp. 4, 8, 10, 9, 11, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 20, 22, and 25). Ground water sample results from the North Bremerton Gasworks Pr operty indicated the presence of four TAL metals and three VOCs at concentrations that exceeded their analyte-specific regulatory screening criteria (Ref. 7, pp. 22, 79-80; Ref. 26, p. 1). Ground water sample results from the South Bremerton Gasworks Property indicated the presence of four TAL metals, seven SVOCs, two VOCs, and diesel range organics at

concentrations that exceeded their analyte-specific regulatory screening criteria (Ref. 7, pp. 22-23, 79-80; Ref. 26, p. 1).



### 8THOMPSON DR PENNSYLVANIA AVE Port Washington Narrows Ecology & Environment, Inc. GIS Department Project: 002233.0617.01SS R:\3 START 3\Bremerton Gasworks\GIS\Fig1_SampLoc_20110715.mxd Date: 7/15/2011

WN05SD (Background) GL06W02

GL05W02

WN03SD GL06W03 GL05W01

GL05W03 GL06W01 WN04SD PPE WN02SD GL06E01

City of Bremerton 12-inch

Storm Water Outfall GL04W03

GL04W02 GL06E02 GL04W01
GL06E03 GL03W02 GL05E01 GL03W01 GL05E02

WN01SD GL05E03 GL04E01 GL04E04 (Background) North Bremerton Gasworks

Final Up-gradient GL04E03

Pipe Location (Background)

GL03E01 GL03E03 (Background) GL04E02

South Bremerton

Gasworks SC Fuels

Acronyms

TBA

ERA MGP Manufacturing Gas Plant PPE Probable Point of Entry

Base Map Reference: Anchor QEA, LLC, January 2011, Completion Report, Former Targeted Brownfields Assessment Emergency Removal Action

Bremerton MPG Site, Incident Action and Time Critical Removal Action, prepared for U.S. Coast Guard Sector Puget Sound Incident Management Division, prepared on behalf of Cascade Natural Gas Corporation, Ref. 4, p. 25. (excerpted)

Map Source Information: Former Bremerton Gasworks Property Boundary: Kitsap County Geographical Information System. Parcel base map showing tax ownership, major roads and highways, and Public Land Survey Section boundaries. Digital data directly applied to map. (http://www.kitsapgov.com/gis/metadata/) Base Map Imagery Source: The map features i-cubed Nationwide Prime 1m or better resolution imagery for the contiguous United States. (http://goto.arcgisonline.com/maps/World_Imagery)

Port Washington Narrows label added by Ecology and Environment, Inc

Property names added by Ecology and Environment, Inc. Ref. 26, p.1.

Pipe removal area added by Ecology and Environment, Inc. Ref. 4, p. 29

.

City of Bremerton 12-inch Storm Water Outfall added by Ecology and Environment, Inc. Ref. 4, p. 67.

Probable Point of Entry (PPE)

ERA Sediment Sample Locations Bremerton Gasworks Figure 1

TBA Sediment Sample Locations

12-inch Concrete Pipe Configuration Bremerton, Washington Bremerton Gasworks

12-inch Concrete Pipe Configuration (removed)

Assumed City of Bremerton 12-inch Storm Water Pipe Configuration

Former Bremerton Gasworks Property Boundary

Pipe Removed and Backfilled to Grade 0 25 50 100 150

FeetSD – Characterization and Containment

SOURCE DESCRIPTION

2.2 SOURCE CHARACTERIZATION

Number of the Source: 1

Name and description of the source: Concrete Pipe Outfall (Other) On August 20, 2010, the Kitsap County Health Distri ct (KCHD) observed intermittent sheens on the surface water of Port Washington Narrows near the former MG P (Ref. 4, p. 7). Further investigation by KCHD on October 4, 2010, identified a 12-inch concrete pipe in the intertidal area that appeared to be discharging product to the marine waters of Port Washington Na rrows (Ref. 4, pp. 7 and 25). KCHD reported the finding to the EPA (Ref. 4, p. 7). The EPA relayed the finding to the United States Coast Guard (USGC), since the pipe was within the USCG’s area of responsibility (Ref. 4, p. 7).

The USCG mobilized to the area on October 6, 2010 and took immediate action to contain the sheen by installing a containment system as of October 10, 2010 (Ref. 4, p. 7). On October 16, 2010, the USCG commenced activities to mitigate the apparent discharge from the pipe by breaking off a 4-foot section of the pipe with a hydraulic hammer, plugging the pipe-e nd, and placing hydraulic cement over the temporary plug (Ref. 4, p. 7).

The pipe was determined to be releasing coal tar waste from the MGP into the mid-intertidal zone of a navigable waterway (Ref. 4, p. 256). The sample resu lts indicated the primary constituents detected in all samples were polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (P AHs) with lesser amounts of lighter aromatic hydrocarbons such as benzene, tolu ene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes (BTEX ). The chemical fingerprint is consistent with a coal tar product (Ref. 4, p. 17). The analytes associated with coal tar pitch (a residue produced during the distillation of coal tar) include PAHs such as naphthalene, 2-methylnapthylene, acenaphthene, dibenzofurans, fluorene, phenanthren e, anthracene, carbazole , fluoranthene, pyrene, benzo(g,h,i)perylene, benz(a)anthracene, chrysene, benzo(b)fluoranthene, benzo(k)fluoranthene, benzo(a)pyrene, and dibenz(a,h )anthracene among others (Ref. 11, pp. 220, 225 – 228).

In an effort to identify the origin of the pipe, maps and diagrams of the former MGP and City of Bremerton sewer and storm water records were reviewed (Ref. 4, p. 10). The maps and diagrams showed the pipe was likely an abandoned storm drain or combined sewer outfall that was once connected to or may still be

connected to an abandoned vault on the South Bremerton G asworks Property (Ref. 4, p. 10; Ref. 26, p 1). It was determined that the vault was likely connected by a separate pipe or pipes to one or more former catch basins within the footprint of the former MGP (Ref. 4, p. 10). On November 5, 2010 and November 6, 2010, sediments around the leaking pipe and approximately 60 lineal feet of pipe were removed (Ref. 4, pp. 11 – 14).

In November 2010, an Incident Action and Time Criti cal Removal Action (RA) was carried out in response to releases from the pipe (Ref. 4, pp. 1, 8, 256). During this removal action, two samples of material in the pipe were collected on November 6, 2010: sampl e PIPE-40-110610 and PIPE-80-110610 (Ref. 4, pp. 13, 14, and 362). Material in the pipe is shown in a photograph taken during the removal action (Ref. 4, p. 282). The samples were analyzed for TPH as gasoline using method NWTPH-Gx, TPH as diesel and motor oil using method NWTPH-Dx, total metals by EPA Method 200.8, total mercury using EPA Method 1631.E, VOCs using EPA Method 8260C, and SVOCs us ing EPA Method 8270D (Ref. 4, pp. 321, 322, 323, 324, 326, 328, 329, 331, 332, 336, and 338). Analytical results from th ese samples indicate the presence of gasoline, diesel, motor oil, metals, VOCs, and SVOCs (pp. 321, 322, 32 3, 324, 326, 328, 329, 331, 332, 336, and 338). Samples were collected und er chain-of-custody procedures (Ref. 4, p. 362).



### 10As a component of the November 2010 RA, the concre te pipe was plugged as close as practicable to the shoreline, all portions of the pipe from this new plug to the pipe terminus were removed, the resulting pipe

excavation was backfilled with clean beach material , and an Organo-Clay mat was placed over impacted sediments near the terminus of the pipe (Ref. 4, p. 8).

Location of the source, with reference to a map: The concrete pipe outfall is located on the north end of the South Bremerton Gasworks Property and prior

to the removal action it extended onto the intertidal zone of Port Washington Narrows (Ref. 4, pp. 7, 8, 10, and 25; Ref. 26, p. 1).

Containment Release to Surface Water via Overland Migration and/or Flood: A surface water containment factor value of 10 is assigned because the pipe’s discharge of waste directly to the marine waters of Port Washington Narrows is evidence of hazardous substance migration from the source area (Ref. 1, p. 51609, Table 4-2; Ref. 4, pp. 7, 282, and 296).

Containment Value: 10



### 11SD – Hazardous Substances

Source No.: 1

2.2.2 HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES ASSOCIATED WITH THE SOURCE

November 2010 Removal Action (Ref. 4) :

- Source Samples: Two samples were collected of material from the concrete pipe as presented in

Table 1 below:

Table 1 November 2010 Removal Action

Sample

ID Matrix 1 Date Hazardous

Substance Hazardous

Substance

Concentration Sample Quantitation

Limit a Reference

2-Methylnaphthalene 0.82 mg/kg 0.3 mg/kg Acenaphthene 0.50 mg/kg 0.3 mg/kg

Anthracene 0.65 mg/kg 0.3 mg/kg Benz(a)anthracene 1.7 mg/kg 0.3 mg/kg Benzo(a)pyrene 2.1 mg/kg 0.3 mg/kg Benzo(b)fluoranthene 2.1 mg/kg 0.3 mg/kg Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 1.9 mg/kg 0.3 mg/kg Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.76 mg/kg 0.3 mg/kg Chrysene 1.6 mg/kg 0.3 mg/kg Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 0.30 mg/kg 0.3 mg/kg

Fluoranthene 3.7 mg/kg 0.3 mg/kg

Fluorene 0.40 mg/kg 0.3 mg/kg Naphthalene 57 mg/kg 0.5 mg/kg

Phenanthrene 1.7 mg/kg 0.3 mg/kg PIPE-40-

110610 Soil 11/6/10

Pyrene 5.4 mg/kg 0.3 mg/kg Ref. 4, pp.
328, 336, 362; Ref. 27, pp. 2 and 3

2-Methylnaphthalene 300 mg/kg 6 mg/kg Acenaphthene 88 mg/kg 6 mg/kg

Anthracene 130 mg/kg 6 mg/kg Benz(a)anthracene 120 mg/kg 6 mg/kg Benzo(a)pyrene 110 mg/kg 6 mg/kg Benzo(b)fluoranthene 100 mg/kg 6 mg/kg Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 84 mg/kg 6 mg/kg Benzo(k)fluoranthene 38 mg/kg 6 mg/kg

Carbazole 7.9 mg/kg 6 mg/kg Chrysene 130 mg/kg 6 mg/kg Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 13 mg/kg 6 mg/kg

Dibenzofuran 18 mg/kg 6 mg/kg

Fluoranthene 300 mg/kg 6 mg/kg

Fluorene 120 mg/kg 6 mg/kg Naphthalene 320 mg/kg 5 mg/kg

Phenanthrene 440 mg/kg 6 mg/kg PIPE-80-

110610 Soil 11/6/10

Pyrene 400 mg/kg 6 mg/kg Ref. 4, Part 4, pp. 324,
326, 332, 338, and 362; Ref. 27, pp. 2 and 3

Notes: a – The sample quantitation limit used meets the definition provided in Ref. 1, p. 51586 (Ref. 27, p. 1).

1

– The matrix of these samples is listed as “soil” on the analytical data forms; however, the sample description is noted as “contents of the section of Pipe” (Ref. 4, pp. 13, 14, 324, 326, 332, and 338).



### 12Table 1 November 2010 Removal Action

Sample

ID Matrix 1 Date Hazardous

Substance Hazardous

Substance

Concentration Sample Quantitation

Limit a Reference

Key:

ID = Identification. mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram.

List of Hazardous Substances Associated with Source

Naphthalene, 2-Methylnaphthalene, Acenaphthene, Dibenzofuran, Fluor ene, Phenanthrene, Anthracene, Carbazole, Fluoranthene, Pyrene, Benz(a)anthracene, Chrysene, Benzo(a)pyrene, Benzo(b)fluoranthene, Benzo(k)fluoranthene, Di benz(a,h)anthracene, and Benzo(g,h,i)perylene.



### 13SD – Hazardous Waste Quantity

Source No.: 1 2.4.2 Hazardous Waste Quantity 2.4.2.1.1 Hazardous Constituent Quantity

Available data are insufficient to document a hazar dous constituent quantity (Ref. 1, p. 51590, Section 2.4.2.1.1).

Hazardous Constituent Quantity Value (S): NS

2.4.2.1.2 Hazardous Wastestream Quantity

The quantity of hazardous substances released is not known. As a conservative estimate, a wastestream quantity of greater than 0 is assigned (R ef. 1, p. 51591, S ection 2.4.2.1.2).

Hazardous Wastestream Quantity (W): >0

2.4.2.1.3 Volume

Available data are insufficient to document a volume measure (Ref. 1, p. 51591, Section 2.4.2.1.3).

Volume Assigned Value (V): 0

2.4.2.1.4 Area

Available data are insufficient to document an area m easure (Ref. 1, p. 51591, Section 2.4.2.1.4.

Area Assigned Value (A): 0

Source Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value (Ref. 1, p. 51591): >0



### 14

### 15 SD – Summary

Table 2 Summary of Source Descriptions

Source Number Source Hazardous Waste Quantity Value a Source

Hazardous

Constituent

Quantity Complete? (Y/N) Containment Value

for Surface Water b

1. Concrete Pipe Outfall >0 N 10

a - See Section 2.4.2 of this document.

b - See Section 2.2 of this document; Ref. 1, pp. 51609, 51610, and Table 4-2.

Other Possible Sources Contaminated subsurface soil is present at the Bremert on Gasworks property as demonstrated by analytical results of samples collected during the 2008 TBA. Du ring this field event, four borehole locations (MP01 through MP04) and one monitoring well (MP04) were installed on the North Bremerton Gasworks Property (Ref. 7, p. 21; Ref. 26, p. 1). Subsurface soil samp les were collected at 5-foot intervals from ground surface to a total maximum depth of 40 feet bgs (Ref. 7, p. 21 ). A total of 23 surface soil samples were collected at the North Bremerton Gasworks Property (Ref. 7, p. 21, Ref. 26, p. 1). A total of seven SVOCs were detected in subsurface soil samples at concentrations that exceeded their analyte-specific regulatory screening criteria values (Ref. 7, p. 22). These SVOCs were benz(a)anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene, benzo(a)pyrene, benzo(b)fluoranthen e, dibenz(a,h)anthracene, indeno(1, 2,3-cd)pyrene, and naphthalene (Ref. 7, p. 64).

Three borehole locations (SP01 through SP03) were installed on the South Bremerton Gasworks Property during the 2008 TBA (Ref. 7, p. 22; Ref. 26, p. 1). Soil samples were collected at 5-foot intervals from ground surface to a total maximum depth of 45 feet bgs (Ref. 7, p. 22). A total of 19 soil samples were collected at the South Bremerton Gasworks Property (Ref. 7, p. 22; Ref. 26, p. 1). Soil sample results indicated the presence of arsenic and thallium, ni ne SVOCs [benz(a)anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene equivalents, benzo(a)pyrene, benzo(b)fluoranthene, be nzo(k)fluoranthene, chrysene, dibenz(a,h)anthracene, and naphthalene], three VOCs (benzene, ethylbenzene, and toluene), diesel range organics, and oil & grease

at concentrations that exceeded th e regulatory screening criteria at bor ehole SP03 (Ref. 7, pp. 22, 64, 65, 66, 67, and 68).

Contaminated subsurface soil is not included as a s ource in this HRS documentation record since an overland route from it to the surface water migration pathway has not been adequately documented.

Contaminated subsurface soil also has not been in cluded in this HRS documentation record, since the ground water-to-surface water component of the surface water migration pathway is not being scored.SWOF – Surface Water Overland Flow/Flood Migration Path

4.1 OVERLAND/FLOOD MIGRATION COMPONENT

4.1.1 GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS

4.1.1.1 Definition of Hazardous Substance Mi gration Path for Overland/Flood Component

A 12-inch concrete pipe in the intertidal area was discharging product to the marine waters of Port Washington Narrows (Ref. 4, pp. 7 and 25). The pipe was likely an abandoned storm drain or combined sewer outfall that was once connected to or may still be connected to an abandoned vault on the South Bremerton Gasworks Property (Ref. 4, p. 10; Ref. 26 , p. 1). Photographs of the staked pipe location demonstrate that it extended into the water (Ref. 4, p. 296). Visible black oily contamination at the beach surface appeared to cover approximately 100 square fe et of visible beach surface, starting approximately 60 feet below the high tide mark (Ref. 13, p. 2). Visible contamination extended to an unknown depth of soil (but at least two feet below ground surface in pl aces) and continued out into the water below the low tide line (Ref. 13, p. 2).

The Puget Sound is used for fishing within the TDL (Ref. 20, p. 3; Ref. 25, pp. 1, 2). The Puget Sound provides habitat for two Federal-listed threatened salmon species which occur within the zone of actual contamination in the TDL (see Section 4.1.4.3.1.2)

4.1.1.2 Target Distance Limit

The discharge point of the concrete pipe (Source 1) is the probable point of entry (PPE) of hazardous substances to the surface water migration pathway. This pipe was located in the intertidal area and was discharging product to the marine waters of Port Washington Narrows which is a part of Puget Sound (Ref. 4, pp. 7 and 25; Ref. 18, p. 19). The entire surface water migration pathway 15-mile target distance limit (TDL) is contained in radial arcs within Puget Sound (Ref. 20, p. 3). Puget Sound is a coastal tidal water body and does not have a distinct direction of flow (Ref. 3, p. 1).



### 16SWOF – Observed Release

4.1.2.1 LIKELIHOOD OF RELEASE

4.1.2.1.1 Observed Release

Direct Observation

Basis for Direct Observation: On August 20, 2010, the KCHD observed intermittent sheens on the surface water of Port Washington Narrows near the former MGP (Ref. 4, p. 7). Further investigation by KCHD on October 4, 2010, identified a 12-inch concrete pipe in the intertidal area that appeared to be discharging product to the marine waters of Port Washington Narrows (Ref. 4, pp. 7 and 25). The pipe was likely an abandoned

storm drain or combined sewer outfall that was on ce connected to or may still be connected to an abandoned vault on the South Bremerton Gasworks Property (Ref. 4, p. 10; Ref. 26, p. 1). Photographs of the staked pipe location demonstrate that it extended into the water (Ref. 4, p. 296). Material in the pipe is also depicted in a photograph and appears as a black substance (Ref. 4, p. 282). Visible black oily contamination at the beach surface appeared to cove r approximately 100 square feet of visible beach surface, starting approximately 60 feet below the high tide mark (Ref. 13, p. 2). Visible contamination extended to an unknown depth of soil (but at least two feet below ground surface in places) and continued out into the water below the low tide line (Ref. 13, p. 2) . Two samples of the material in the concrete pipe contained several hazardous substances including naphthalene, 2-methylnaphthalene, acenaphthene, anthracene, benz(a)anthracene, benzo(b)fluoranthen e, benzo(g,h,i)perylene, benzo(k)fluoranthene, benzo(a)pyrene, carbazole, chrysene, dibenz(a,h)a nthracene, dibenzofuran, fluorene, fluoranthene, phenanthrene, and pyrene (see Section 2.2, Source 1) . The majority of these same hazardous substances were also detected in sediments near the pipe ( see chemical analysis tables below). These analytes are components of coal tar pitch (Ref. 11, pp. 225 – 228).

Chemical Analysis:

Basis for Chemical Analysis: Sediment samples collected from Port Washington Narrows during two recent sampling events will be used to document an observed release by chemical analysis as presented below.

October 2010 EPA Emergency Removal Action (Ref. 5) During the October 2010 EPA ERA, sediment samples were collected around the exposed concrete pipe (i.e., Source 1) (Ref. 5, p. 1). The samples collected to document an observed release were generally collected outside of the removal area (see Figure 1) . Samples were collected during the October 2010 EPA ERA from the sediment around the pipe on October 9, 2010 and October 10, 2010 (Ref. 5, p. 1). The samples were placed on ice and stored in cooler s that were continuously maintained under chain-ofcustody (Ref. 5, pp. 2, and 4 through 8). The sa mples were submitted for off-site fixed laboratory analysis of SVOCs using EPA Method 8260 and VOCs using EPA Method 8270 (Ref. 5, pp. 2, 10, and 33). No background samples were collected in conjunction with this ERA (Ref. 5, p. 1). Rocks and other debris were removed as much as possible from the sa mple material before it was placed into sample containers (Ref. 5, p. 2). Collected material was homogenized thoroughly in dedicated stainless steel bowls and placed into pre-labeled sample containers (Ref. 5, p. 2). The VOCs aliquots were removed directly from the sampling locations using 5-gram Co re-N-One TM samplers prio r to homogenization (Ref. 5, p. 2). A Stage 2B manual validation was performed on all data and a Stage 4 manual validation of 10% of the data was conducted (Ref. 9, p. 1).



### 17

### 18 Because no background samples were collected dur ing the October 2010 EPA ERA, three sediment samples (GL03E03, GL04E03, and GL04E04), were sel ected for comparison to release samples since they contained significantly less contamination than the other sediment samples (as shown in Table 3 below), they were composed of similar materials as the other sediment samples, and they were collected below the average high tide line (Ref. 5, pp 1, 2, and 3; Ref. 10). Although these samples may be affected by the release, they are used as background samples as a conservative approach and the release samples still meet the HRS criteria for establishing an observe d release (Ref. 1, p.51589) All sediment samples consisted of dark brown-grayish, ve ry fine to course grained sandy materi al (Ref. 5, p. 2). Table 3 below provides analytical results of the designated background samples. Either the highest concentration, or the highest detection limit if a particular analyte was not detected in the background samples, for each analyte between these samples was selected to represent b ackground conditions for this HRS documentation record. Using this approach, 11 hazardous subs tances are documented to be present at elevated

concentrations in the sediments of Port Wash ington Narrows: anthracene, benz(a)anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene, benzo(b)fluoranth ene, benzo(g,h,i)perylene, benzo(k)fluoranthene, chrysene, fluoranthene, phenanthrene, and pyrene as demonstrated in Table 3 below (see Table 3 for references). For these compounds, the highest background concentration selected per analyte by sample are: sample GL04E03 for anthracene, benz(a)anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene, benzo(g,h,i)perylene, benzo(k)fluoranthene, chrysene, phenanthrene, and pyrene; sample GL03E03 fo r benzo(b)fluoranthene; and sample GL04E04 for fluoranthene.Table 3October 2010 EPA Emergency Removal Action Sediment SamplesSample IDDistancefrom PPESampleDateHazardousSubstanceConcentration(mg/kg)Sample QuantitationLimit (mg/kg)aReferenceAnthracene0.3U0.3Benz(a)anthracene0.3 U0.3Benzo(a)pyrene0.3 U0.3Benzo(b)fluoranthene0.31 JKAC = 3.10.3Benzo(g,h,i)perylene0.3 U0.3Benzo(k)fluoranthene0.3 U0.3Chrysene0.3U0.3Fluoranthene0.340.3Phenanthrene0.3 U0.3GL03E03 –BackgroundSample85 feet10/09/2010Pyrene0.530.3Ref. 5, pp. 4 and 41; Ref.9, p. 2; Ref. 20, p. 2Anthracene3U3Benz(a)anthracene3 U3Benzo(a)pyrene3 U3Benzo(b)fluoranthene3 U3Benzo(g,h,i)perylene3 U3Benzo(k)fluoranthene3 U3Chrysene3U3Fluoranthene3 U3Phenanthrene3 U3GL04E03 –BackgroundSample69 feet10/10/2010Pyrene4.53Ref. 5, pp. 6 and 50; Ref.9, p. 2; Ref. 20, p. 2Anthracene1.5U1.5Benz(a)anthracene1.5 U1.5Benzo(a)pyrene1.5 U1.5Benzo(b)fluoranthene1.5 U1.5Benzo(g,h,i)perylene1.5 U1.5Benzo(k)fluoranthene1.5 U1.5Chrysene1.5U1.5Fluoranthene1.51.5Phenanthrene1.5 U1.5GL04E04 –BackgroundSample84 feet10/10/2010Pyrene2.21.5Ref. 5, pp. 6 and 51; Ref.9, p. 2; Ref. 20, p. 219Table 3October 2010 EPA Emergency Removal Action Sediment SamplesSample IDDistancefrom PPESampleDateHazardousSubstanceConcentration(mg/kg)Sample QuantitationLimit (mg/kg)aReferenceBenz(a)anthracene4.43Benzo(a)pyrene3.93Chrysene4.93Fluoranthene73GL03E0165 feet10/10/2010Phenanthrene33Ref. 5, pp. 5 and 44; Ref.9, p. 2; Ref. 20, p. 2Benz(a)anthracene2415Benzo(a)pyrene1715Chrysene2415Fluoranthene4215Phenanthrene1815GL03W0153 feet10/10/2010Pyrene7215Ref. 5, pp. 5 and 46; Ref.9, p. 3; Ref. 20, p. 2Benz(a)anthracene6.63Benzo(a)pyrene5.43Benzo(g,h,i)perylene43Chrysene4.43Fluoranthene8.33Phenanthrene3.33GL03W0259 feet10/10/2010Pyrene153Ref. 5, pp. 5 and 46 and47; Ref. 9, p. 3; Ref. 20,p. 2Benz(a)anthracene9.43Benzo(a)pyrene7.63Benzo(g,h,i)perylene6.13Chrysene6.93Fluoranthene143Phenanthrene5.33GL04E0137 feet10/10/2010Pyrene253Ref. 5, pp.5 and 48; Ref.9, p. 3; Ref. 20, p. 2Benz(a)anthracene8.13Benzo(a)pyrene6.63Benzo(g,h,i)perylene5.33Chrysene5.83Fluoranthene103GL04E0254 feet10/10/2010Pyrene193Ref. 5, pp. 5, 6, and 49;Ref. 9, p. 3; Ref. 20, p. 220Table 3October 2010 EPA Emergency Removal Action Sediment SamplesSample IDDistancefrom PPESampleDateHazardousSubstanceConcentration(mg/kg)Sample QuantitationLimit (mg/kg)aReferenceBenz(a)anthracene9.63Benzo(a)pyrene9.63Benzo(g,h,i)perylene7.13Chrysene9.83Fluoranthene153Phenanthrene4.73GL04W0135 feet10/10/2010Pyrene263Ref. 5, pp. 6 and 52; Ref.9, p. 3; Ref. 20, p. 2Benz(a)anthracene1615Chrysene1615Fluoranthene2615GL04W0244 feet10/10/2010Pyrene4015Ref. 5, pp. 6 and 53; Ref.9, p. 3; Ref. 20, p. 2Benz(a)anthracene9.73Benzo(a)pyrene8.13Benzo(g,h,i)perylene6.53Benzo(k)fluoranthene3.13Chrysene103Fluoranthene183Phenanthrene63GL04W0357 feet10/10/2010Pyrene303Ref. 5, pp. 6 and 54; Ref.9, p. 3-4; Ref. 20, p. 2Benz(a)anthracene3.33Chrysene3.33GL05E0141 feet10/10/2010Fluoranthene4.73Ref. 5, pp. 6 and 55 and56; Ref. 9, p. 4; Ref. 20,p. 2Benz(a)anthracene113Benzo(a)pyrene9.63Benzo(g,h,i)perylene5.73Benzo(k)fluoranthene3.13Chrysene113Fluoranthene193Phenanthrene6.93GL05E0258 feet10/10/2010Pyrene343Ref. 5, pp. 6, 7, and 56;Ref. 9, p. 4; Ref. 20, p. 221Table 3October 2010 EPA Emergency Removal Action Sediment SamplesSample IDDistancefrom PPESampleDateHazardousSubstanceConcentration(mg/kg)Sample QuantitationLimit (mg/kg)aReferenceBenz(a)anthracene4.43Benzo(a)pyrene53Benzo(g,h,i)perylene5.43Chrysene5.63GL05E0377 feet10/10/2010Fluoranthene63Ref. 5, pp. 7 and 57; Ref.9, p. 4p; Ref. 20, p. 2Anthracene4.53Benz(a)anthracene163Benzo(a)pyrene143Benzo(g,h,i)perylene113Benzo(k)fluoranthene5.73Chrysene163Fluoranthene293Phenanthrene173GL05W0124 feet10/10/2010Pyrene503Ref. 5, pp. 7 and 58; Ref.9, p. 4; Ref. 20, p. 2Benz(a)anthracene6.73Benzo(a)pyrene63Benzo(g,h,i)perylene5.13Chrysene6.83Fluoranthene9.83Phenanthrene4.23GL05W0236 feet10/10/2010Pyrene163Ref. 5, pp. 7 and 59; Ref.9, p. 4; Ref. 20, p. 2Benz(a)anthracene1915Benzo(a)pyrene1715Chrysene2015Fluoranthene3515GL05W0355 feet10/10/2010Pyrene5115Ref. 5, pp. 7 and 59 and60; Ref. 9, p. 4; Ref. 20,p. 2Benz(a)anthracene4.33Benzo(a)pyrene3.53Chrysene4.23GL06E0136 feet10/10/2010Fluoranthene7.63Ref. 5, pp. 7 and 61; Ref.9, p. 5; Ref. 20, p. 222Table 3October 2010 EPA Emergency Removal Action Sediment SamplesSample IDDistancefrom PPESampleDateHazardousSubstanceConcentration(mg/kg)Sample QuantitationLimit (mg/kg)aReferenceBenz(a)anthracene7.63Benzo(a)pyrene7.13Benzo(g,h,i)perylene5.33Chrysene7.83Fluoranthene123Phenanthrene7.63GL06E0255 feet10/10/2010Pyrene203Ref. 5, pp 7 and. 62; Ref.9, p. 5; Ref. 20, p. 2Benzo(a)pyrene3.13GL06E0376 feet10/10/2010Chrysene3.63Ref. 5, pp. 7 and 63; Ref.9, p. 5; Ref. 20, p. 2Benz(a)anthracene3.53Benzo(a)pyrene3.23Chrysene3.33GL06W0116 feet10/10/2010Fluoranthene4.53Ref. 5, pp. 8 and 64; Ref.9, p. 5; Ref. 20, p. 2Fluoranthene1615GL06W0237 feet10/10/2010Pyrene2815Ref. 5, pp. 8 and 65; Ref.9, p. 5; Ref. 20, p. 2Benz(a)anthracene6915Benzo(a)pyrene7615Benzo(b)fluoranthene110 JKAC = 11.015Benzo(g,h,i)perylene6015Benzo(k)fluoranthene3215Chrysene8015Fluoranthene11015Phenanthrene3615GL06W0356 feet10/10/2010Pyrene16015Ref. 5, pp. 8 and 66; Ref.9, p. 5; Ref. 20, p. 2Note:a – The sample quantitation limit used meetsthe definition provided in Ref. 1, p. 51586.Also,Ref. 9 lists SQLs in micrograms per kilogram (μg/kg) units; these have beenconverted to mg/kg to facilitatecomparison to detected concentrations (1 mg/kg = 1,000 μg/kg).Key:AC = Adjusted concentration as per Ref. 16, pp. 8 and 14mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram.K = Unknown bias (Ref. 5, p. 35).2324J = The associated numerical value in an estimated quantity because the reported concentrations were less than the sample quantitation limits or because quality controlcriteria limits were not met. (Ref. 5, p. 35)U = The material was analyzed for but was not detected. The associated numerical value is the sample quantitation limit (Ref.5, p. 35).2008 EPA Targeted Brownfields Assessment (Ref. 7) During the 2008 TBA sampling event which was conducted from May 12, 2008 to May 15, 2008, on May 19, 2008 and June 4, 2008, five sediment sampl es (WN01SD through WN05SD) were collected from the sediments along Port Washington Narrows (Ref. 7, p. 23, 24, and 42). The samples were collected during low tide and below the average high water mark us ing a dedicated stainless steel split-spoon hand augur drilled to a depth of 30 centimeters below ground surface (Ref. 7, p. 23; Ref. 10, p. 1). Product seeps were noted near sample locations WN01SD, WN02SD, and WN03SD (Ref. 7, p. 23). The samples were

stored in coolers on ice and maintained under chain-of-c ustody (Ref. 17, p. 21; Ref. 24, pp. 1 through 3). Sampling for the 2008 TBA was conducted in accord ance with an EPA-approved Sampling and Quality Assurance Plan (SQAP) (Ref. 7, p. 16; Ref. 8, p. 33). Sample material was placed in dedicated stainless steel bowls, thoroughly homoge nized, and placed into pre-labeled sample containers (Ref. 8, p. 16 and 33). The VOC aliquot was removed directly from the sampler prior to homogenization (Ref. 8, p. 16 and 33). The sediment samples were submitted to off-site fixed laboratories for analysis of TAL metals (EPA CLP SOW ILM05.4), SVOCs (EPA CLP SOW SOM01. 2), and VOCs (EPA CLP SOW SOM01.2) (Ref. 7, pp.390 and 502; Ref. 24, pp. 1 through 3). All data underwent data validation (Ref. 7, pp. 17 and 100). Analytical results were validated by EPA chemists and in most cases were reviewed by an E & E chemist (Ref. 7, pp 390 through 396 and 502 through 596).

A designated background sediment sample was not collected during the 2008 TBA. Sediment sample WN05SD is selected for comparison to release sa mples because it exhibited the least amount of contamination (as shown in Table 4 below), is furthest from the Source 1, and was collected from a similar substrate as other 2008 TBA sediment samples as evidenced by photographs of the these samples and their locations (Ref. 7, pp. 24, and 49 – 54). Additionally, all samples were collected on the same date, during the same tide cycle, and on the same beac h (Ref. 7, pp. 49 – 54; Ref. 17, p. 21). Although this sample may be affected by the release, it is used as a background sample as a conservative approach and the observed release samples still meet the HRS criteria for establishing an observed release (Ref. 1, p.51589)

Table 4 below provides information about the designat ed background sediment sample concentrations and hazardous substances present in the Port Washington Narrows sediment samples collected during the

2008 TBA.



### 25Table 42008 EPA TBA Sediment SamplesSample IDDistancefrom PPESampleDateHazardous SubstanceConcentrationAdjustedCRQLaReferenceWN05SD –Background(J8K78; MJ8J78;08204462)306 feet6/4/20082-Methylnaphthalene24 Uμg/kg24μg/kgRef. 7, pp. 589-590, 593; Ref. 14,p. 2; Ref. 17 p. 21; Ref. 20, p. 2;Ref. 24, p. 1Acenaphthene24 Uμg/kg24μg/kgAnthracene34μg/kg24μg/kgBenz(a)anthracene160μg/kg24μg/kgBenzo(a)pyrene260μg/kg24μg/kgBenzo(b)fluoranthene130μg/kg24μg/kgBenzo(g,h,i)perylene190μg/kg24μg/kgBenzo(k)fluoranthene160μg/kg24μg/kgChrysene170μg/kg24μg/kgDibenz(a,h)anthracene47μg/kg24μg/kgDibenzofuran24 Uμg/kg24μg/kgFluoranthene400μg/kg97μg/kgPhenanthrene140μg/kg24μg/kgPyrene500μg/kg97μg/kgWN01SD(J8K74;08204458)46 feet6/4/20082-Methylnaphthalene690μg/kg240μg/kgRef. 7, pp. 520, 523, 524, and 527;Ref. 14, p. 2; Ref. 17, p. 21; Ref.20, p. 2; Ref. 24, p. 1Acenaphthene360μg/kg24μg/kgAnthracene830μg/kg240μg/kgBenz(a)anthracene3200μg/kg240μg/kgBenzo(a)pyrene3600μg/kg240μg/kgBenzo(b)fluoranthene2000μg/kg240μg/kgBenzo(g,h,i)perylene2100μg/kg240μg/kgBenzo(k)fluoranthene2200μg/kg240μg/kgChrysene3200μg/kg240μg/kgDibenz(a,h)anthracene600μg/kg240μg/kgDibenzofuran74μg/kg24μg/kgFluoranthene6600μg/kg2400μg/kgPhenanthrene2200μg/kg240μg/kgPyrene9100μg/kg2400μg/kg26Table 42008 EPA TBA Sediment SamplesSample IDDistancefrom PPESampleDateHazardous SubstanceConcentrationAdjustedCRQLaReferenceWN02SD(J8K75;08204459)87 feet6/4/20082-Methylnaphthalene390μg/kg25μg/kgRef. 7, pp. 535, 539, and 542; Ref.14, p. 3; Ref. 17, p. 21; Ref. 20, p.2; Ref. 24, p. 1Acenaphthene73μg/kg25μg/kgAnthracene1300μg/kg130μg/kgBenz(a)anthracene3200μg/kg1300μg/kgBenzo(a)pyrene3700μg/kg1300μg/kgBenzo(b)fluoranthene2000μg/kg1300μg/kgBenzo(g,h,i)perylene2700μg/kg1300μg/kgBenzo(k)fluoranthene2600μg/kg1300μg/kgChrysene3500μg/kg1300μg/kgDibenz(a,h)anthracene920μg/kg130μg/kgDibenzofuran58μg/kg25μg/kgFluoranthene6000μg/kg1300μg/kgPhenanthrene1900μg/kg1300μg/kgPyrene7100μg/kg1300μg/kgWN03SD(J8K76; MJ8J76;08204460)167 feet6/4/20082-Methylnaphthalene370μg/kg260μg/kgRef. 7, pp. 553, 556, 557, and 560;Ref. 14, p. 3; Ref. 17, p. 21; Ref.20, p. 2; Ref. 24, p. 1Acenaphthene240μg/kg97μg/kgAnthracene1400μg/kg1300μg/kgBenz(a)anthracene3000μg/kg1300μg/kgBenzo(a)pyrene3400μg/kg1300μg/kgBenzo(b)fluoranthene2400μg/kg1300μg/kgBenzo(g,h,i)perylene3000μg/kg260μg/kgBenzo(k)fluoranthene2600μg/kg1300μg/kgChrysene3300μg/kg1300μg/kgDibenz(a,h)anthracene870μg/kg260μg/kgDibenzofuran71μg/kg26μg/kgFluoranthene6500μg/kg1300μg/kgPhenanthrene2900μg/kg1300μg/kgPyrene7500μg/kg1300μg/kg27Table 42008 EPA TBA Sediment SamplesSample IDDistancefrom PPESampleDateHazardous SubstanceConcentrationAdjustedCRQLaReferenceWN04SD(J8K77;08204461)266 feet6/4/20082-Methylnaphthalene210μg/kg24μg/kgRef. 7, pp. 502, 571, 575, and 578;Ref. 14, p. 3; Ref. 17 p. 21; Ref.20, p. 2; Ref. 24, p. 1Acenaphthene97μg/kg24μg/kgBenz(a)anthracene5600μg/kg2400μg/kgBenzo(a)pyrene6300μg/kg2400μg/kgBenzo(b)fluoranthene3400μg/kg240μg/kgBenzo(g,h,i)perylene3800μg/kg240μg/kgBenzo(k)fluoranthene3600μg/kg240μg/kgChrysene6000μg/kg2400μg/kgDibenz(a,h)anthracene860μg/kg240μg/kgDibenzofuran69μg/kg24μg/kgFluoranthene15000JLμg/kg2400μg/kgPhenanthrene8100 JLμg/kg2400μg/kgPyrene18000μg/kg2400μg/kgNote:a – The sample quantitation limit used meetsthe definition provided in Ref. 1, p. 51586.Key:μg/kg = micrograms per kilogram.mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram.L = Low bias (Ref. 7, pp. 509-510).J = The analyte was positively identified. The associated numerical result is an estimate (Ref. 7, p. 513).U = The analyte was not detected at or above the reported result (Ref. 5, p. 513).CRQL = Contract Required Quantitation Limit (Ref. 14, p. 1)28Attribution: Source 1, the 12-inch concrete pipe, was observed to be discharging product to the marine waters of Port Washington Narrows (Ref. 4, pp. 7 and 25). The conc rete pipe was discovered after the Kitsap County Health Department received numerous calls regarding sh eens on Port Washington Narrows (Ref. 36, p. 1). A county employee went to the area near the site on the beach of Port Washington Narrows and after digging discovered the pipe, which contained an oily smelly substance which resembled coal tar (Ref. 36, pp. 1 and 3). Observed release samp les were collected during the J une 2008 EPA TBA and October 2010 EPA ERA, and Source 1 pipe contents samples were collected during the November 2010 RA; the analytes

detected at elevated concentrations in the beach sed iments associated with the 2008 EPA TBA and October 2010 EPA ERA sampling events are the same as those det ected in the Source 1 pipe contents samples. The pipe was likely an abandoned storm drain or combined sewer outfall that was once connected to or may still

be connected to an abandoned vault on the South Brem erton Gasworks Property (Ref. 4, p. 10; Ref. 26, p. 1). Visible black oily contamination at the beach surface appeared to cover approximately 100 square feet of visible beach surface, starting approximately 60 feet below the high tide mark (Ref. 13, p. 2). Visible

contamination extended to an unknown depth of soil (but at least two feet below ground surface in places)

and continued out into the water below the low tide line (Ref. 13, p. 2). Two samples of the material in the concrete pipe contained several hazardous substances including na phthalene, 2-methylnaphthalene, acenaphthene, anthracene, benz(a)anthracene, benzo(b)fluoranthene, benzo(g,h,i)perylene, benzo(k)fluoranthene, benzo(a)pyrene, carbazole, chry sene, dibenz(a,h)anthracene, dibenzofuran, fluorene, fluoranthene, phenanthrene, and py rene (see Section 2.2, Source 1).

Coal tar is the by-product of the high-temperature treatmen t of coal to make coke or natural gas (Ref. 11, p. 1). They are usually thick, black or dark brown liq uids or semisolids with a smoky or aromatic odor (Ref. 11, p. 2). The major chemicals in coal tar that can cause harmful health effects are polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), phenol, and cresols (Ref. 11, p. 3). Coal tar volatiles do not occur in the environment naturally, but are by-products produced in coke or gas manufacturing plants using hightemperature processes (Ref. 11, p. 3). The product discharging from the concrete pipe was described as being creosote (Ref. 13, p. 2), but was more likely coal tar because many of the compounds detected are associated with coal tar pitch (a residue produced duri ng the distillation of coal tar) including PAHs such as naphthalene, 2-methylnapthylene, acenaphthene, dibenzofurans, fluo rene, phenanthrene, anthracene, carbazole, fluoranthene, pyrene, benzo(g,h,i)perylene, benz(a)anthracene, chrysene, benzo(b)fluoranthene, benzo(k)fluoranthene, benzo(a)pyre ne, and dibenz(a,h)anthracene among ot hers (Ref. 11, pp. 220, 225 – 228).

A City of Bremerton stormwater outfall is located appr oximately 15 to 20 feet to the east of the concrete pipe outfall (i.e., Source 1) (Ref. 4, pp. 15 and 27). No samples were collected from this outfall and no sediment samples have been collected between this outfall and the concrete pipe (i.e., Source 1) (Ref. 5, p. 3; Ref. 7, p. 24). During the November 2010 RA , an Organo-Clay mat was reported to be placed over impacted sediments near the terminus of the concrete pipe that had been observed to generate sheen with only minimal disturbance (Ref. 4, pp. 8 and 25). The mat did not extend to the City of Bremerton stormwater outfall indicating that sediments near this outfall did not display visual evidence of contamination (Ref. 4, p. 25). Additionally, during the 2008 EPA TBA event, evidence of visible contamination was noted near sample locations WN 01SD, WN02SD, and WN03SD, which are west (on the opposite side) of the location of the Source 1 concrete pi pe (Ref. 7, pp. 23, 49-50, 53-54; Ref. 17, p. 21; Figure 1). For this reason, the City of Bremerton st ormwater outfall is not considered a likely source of

visible sediment contamination.

SC Fuels is located across Pennsylvania Avenue (a t 1702 Pennsylvania Avenue) from Bremerton Gasworks (Ref. 18, pp. 7, 8 and 14). ASTs are located on this property and provide businesses and homes with products received from Union 76 (i.e., the suppler) to home heating oil [tanks] (Ref. 18, p. 44). This facility is still active and commenced operations in the mid-1940s (Ref. 4, p. 6). Although products (i.e., heating



### 29oil) handled at SC Fuels have some of same cons tituents (i.e., PAHs) (Ref. 22, p. 105) as those found at

observed release concentrations in sediments near S ource 1, there is no documented evidence of a release from this facility to sediments.

Additionally, two petroleum storage and distribut ion facilities were formerly present at Bremerton Gasworks (Ref. 4, p. 6). These facilities included: a facility located on the South Bremerton Gasworks Property, in operation between approximately the early to mid-1940s to approximately 1993; and a facility located southwest of the former MGP in operation between 1942 and 1992 (Ref. 4, p. 6; Ref. 26, p. 1). The plant on the South Bremerton Gaswor ks Property included at least 10 A STs and two unloading racks which have been removed (Ref. 21, p. 7; Ref. 26, p. 1) . An underground fuel pipeline (currently abandoned) connected the bulk plant on the South Bremerton Gasworks Property to adjacent properties to the east and west of a fuel dock (Ref. 21, p. 7; Ref. 26, p. 1). Portions of the petroleum piping were removed in the 1980s or 1990s (Ref. 21, p. 7). The former coal g asification plant included approximately 17 petroleum ASTs, which have been removed (Ref . 21, pp. 6 and 7). Petroleum produc ts stored at Bremerton Gasworks may have included gasoline and diesel. These products contain some of the same constituents as those detected in Source 1 such as benzene, toluene, xylene, and lead for gasoline (Ref. 23, p. 1); and PAHs for diesel (Ref. 22, p. 105). Although petroleum products and heavy metals may have been released to subsurface soils, and may be migrati ng through ground water to surface water, it is clear that Source 1 is releasing hazardous substances to Port Washington Narrows (see Section 4.1.2.1.1). Only those substances associated with coal tar are being used in th is documentation record (Ref. 11, pp. 225 – 228).

Hazardous Substances Released The hazardous substances found in observed releases by direct observation and/or chemical analysis to surface water bodies within the TDL are naphthalene, 2-methylnaphthalene, acenaphthene, anthracene, benz(a)anthracene, benzo(b)fluoran thene, benzo(g,h,i)perylene, benz o(k)fluoranthene, benzo(a)pyrene, carbazole, chrysene, dibenz(a,h)anthracene, dibenz ofuran, fluorene, fluoranthene, phenanthrene, and

pyrene.

Observed Release Factor Value: 550



### 30SWOF/Food Chain – Toxicity/Persistence/Bioaccumulation

4.1.3.2 WASTE CHARACTERISTICS 4.1.3.2.1 Toxicity/Persistence/Bioaccumulation

Table 5 below provides Human Food Chain Threat Waste Characteristics Factor Values for those hazardous substances present in th e source at the Bremerton Gasworks facility (see Section 2.2).

Table 5 Human Food Chain Threat Waste Characteristics Factor Values

Hazardous

Substance Source Toxicity

Factor

Value Persistence

Factor

Value a Bioaccumulation

Factor

Value b Toxicity/Persistence/Bioaccumulation

Value (Ref. 1, p. 51619 Table 4-16) Reference Naphthalene 1 1,000 0.4 5,000 2 x 10 6 Ref. 2, p. BI-9 2-Methylnaphthalene 1 0 0.4 50,000 0 Ref. 2, p. BI-9 Acenaphthene 1 10 0.4 500 2,000 Ref. 2, BI-1

Anthracene 1 10 0.4 50,000 2 x 10 5 Ref. 2, BI-1 Benz(a)anthracene 1 1,000 1 50,000 5 x 10 7 Ref. 2, p. BI-2 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 1 0 1 50,000 0 Ref. 2, p. BI-2 Benzo(k)fluoranthene 1 100 1 50,000 5 x 10 6 Ref. 2, p. BI-2 Benzo(a)pyrene 1 10,000 1 50,000 5 x 10 8 Ref. 2, p. BI-2

Carbazole 1 1,000 0.4 500 2 x 10 5 Ref. 2, p. BI-2 Chrysene 1 10 1 5 50 Ref. 2, p. BI-3 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 1 10,000 1 50,000 5 x 10 8 Ref. 2, p. BI-4

Dibenzofuran 1 1,000 1 500 5 x 10 5 Ref. 2, p. BI-4

Fluorene 1 100 1 500 50,000 Ref. 2, p. BI-6

Phenanthrene 1 0 0.4 5,000 0 Ref. 2, p. BI-9 Pyrene 1 100 1 5,000 5 x 10 5 Ref. 2, p. BI-10 a. River persistence value (Ref. 2; Ref. 25).

b. Food chain bioaccumulation values for salt wa ter (Ref. 1, p. 51617; Ref. 2; Ref. 25).

The hazardous substances having the highest Toxicity/Persistence/Bioaccumulation Value of 5 x 10 8 are benzo(a)pyrene and di benz(a,h)anthracene.

Toxicity/Persistence/Bioaccumulation Factor Value: 5 x 10 8



### 31SWOF/Food Chain – Hazardous Waste Quantity

4.1.3.2.2 Hazardous Waste Quantity

Table 6 Hazardous Waste Quantity

Source No. Source Type Source Hazardous Waste Quantity 1. Concrete Pipe

Outfall Other >0

Targets within the surface water migration pathway ar e subject to Level II concentrations (see Section 4.1.3.3.2.2 below) and source hazardous constituent quan tity is not complete (see Section 2.4.2.1.1). A Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value of 100 is assigned (Ref. 1, pp. 51591 and 51592).

Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value (Ref. 1, p. 51591, Table 2-6): 100

4.1.3.2.3 Waste Characteristics Factor Category Value Toxicity/Persistence Factor Value: 10,000 Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value: 100

Toxicity/Persistence Factor Value x Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value: 1 x 10 6

(Toxicity/Persistence Factor Value x Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value) x

Bioaccumulation Factor Value: 5 x 10 10 subject to a maximum value of 1 x 10 12 (Ref. 1, p. 51620)

Waste Characteristics Factor Category Value (Ref. 1, p. 51592, Table 2-7): 320

Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value: 100 Waste Characteristics Factor Category Value: 320 Ref. 1, p. 51592, Table 2-7



### 32SWOF/ Food Chain – Targets

4.1.3.3 HUMAN FOOD CHAIN TARGETS

4.1.3.3.1 Food Chain Individual

Level I Concentrations Level I concentrations for the Human Food Chain Threat is not being scored.

Level II Concentrations

–

A fishery has historically occurred in the zone of actual contamination (Ref. 25, p. 1). The Bremerton Gasworks site is situated within the Suquamish Trib e’s usual and accustomed fishing area. Within that area, the Tribe has treaty-reserved fishing rights and is a co-manager of fishery resources with the State of Washington. (Ref. 25, pp. 1-2; Ref. 35, p. 1). A food chain individual factor value of 45 is assigned because a fishery is subject to Level II concentrations.

Potential Contamination

–

Potential Contamination for the Human Food Chain Threat is not being scored.

Food Chain Individual Factor Value: 45 Ref. 1, p. 51620



### 334.1.3.3.2 Population

4.1.3.3.2.1 Level I Concentrations

Not scored.

Level I Concentrations Factor Value: 0

4.1.3.3.2.2 Level II Concentrations

Subsistence fishing has historically occurred in th e zone of actual contamination and is within the Suquamish Tribe’s usual and accustomed fishing area (Ref. 25, p. 1; Ref. 35, p. 1). The amount of fish catch is unknown but greater than zero pounds per y ear. A value of 0.03 is assigned to Level II

concentrations.

Level II Concentrations Human Food Chain Factor Value: 0.03 Ref. 1, p. 51621



### 344.1.3.3.2.3 Potential Human Food Chain Contamination

Commercial treaty and non-treaty fish and shellfish ha rvest data is recorded by the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (Ref.32, p. 1). Comme rcial catch data is reported in pounds by statistical area (Ref. 32, p. 2). The most recent year for which co mmercial data is available is 2009 (Ref. 32, p. 1). The statistical areas that are present within the 15-mile TDL include area 10 – Seattle, 42K – Port Orchard, 26B – Seattle-Port Madison, 26C – Port Orchard, and 42A – Bremerton (Ref. 20, p. 3; Ref. 32, pp. 2, 7; Ref. 33, p. 1; Ref. 34, p. 1). It is estimated that 75% of these statistical areas are within the TDL. Because commercial catch data is reported by statistical area, the pounds harvested is multiplied by the percentage of

the statistical area within the TDL to determine fish catch. Commercial fish catch data by species is presented in Table 7.

Table 7 Commercial Treaty and Non-Treaty Fish and Shellfish Harvest Ref. 32, p. 2 Species Total Pounds of Fish (a) Percent within TDL (b) Pounds Harvested

within the TDL (a x b)

Atlantic Salmon Aquaculture 12,367,744 75% 9,275,808

Chinook salmon 21 75% 15.75

Chum salmon 735,732 75% 551,799

Coho salmon 1,879 75% 1,409.25

Pink salmon 347,410 75% 260,557.5

Silver smelt 3,513 75% 2,634.75

Steelhead 7 75% 5.25 Dungeness crab 89,399 75% 67,049.25

Geoduck clams 869,580 75% 652,185

Horse clams 1 75% 0.75

Manila clams 97,435 75% 73,076.25

Native Littleneck clams 1,454 75% 1,090.5 Pacific oyster 4,565 75% 3,423.75

Sea cucumber 21,962 75% 16,471.5 Spots shrimp 9,629 75% 7,221.75

Total 10,912,748.25

Table 8 indicates the calculation for Potential Human Food Chain Contamination Factor Value.

Table 8

Potential Human Food Chain Contamination Factor Value Calculation

Pounds Harvested Human Food Chain Population

Value Dilution Weight Dilution Weighted Target

Value Reference

10,912,748.25 31,000 0.0001 3.1 Ref. 1, pp. 51613, 51614, and 51621, Ref. 32, p. 2 Total dilution weighted target value 3.1 / 10 = 0.31

Potential Human Food Chain Contamination Factor Value: 0.31 Ref. 1, p. 51621



### 35SWOF/Environment – Toxicity/Persistence/Bioaccumulation

4.1.4.2 WASTE CHARACTERISTICS 4.1.4.2.1 Ecosystem Toxicity/Persistence/Bioaccumulation

Table 9 below provides Environmental Threat Wast e Characteristics Factor Values for those hazardous substances present in the source at the Bremerton Gasworks facility (see Section 2.2).

Table 9 Environmental Threat Wast e Characteristics Factor Values

Hazardous Substance Source Ecosystem Toxicity

Factor

Value a Persistence

Factor

Value

b Environmental

Bioaccumulation Factor

Value c EcosystemToxicity/Persistence/Environmental Bioaccumulation Value (Ref. 1, p. 51619, Table 4-16) Reference Naphthalene 1 1,000 0.4 5,000 2 x 10 6 Ref. 2, p. BI-9 2-Methylnaphthalene 1 1,000 0.4 50,000 2 x 10 7 Ref. 2, p. BI-9 Acenaphthene 1 1,000 0.4 500 2 x 10 5 Ref. 2, BI-1

Anthracene 1 10,000 0.4 50,000 2 x 10 8 Ref. 2, BI-1 Benz(a)anthracene 1 10,000 1 50,000 5 x 10 8 Ref. 2, p. BI-2 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 1 0 1 50,000 0 Ref. 2, p. BI-2 Benzo(k)fluoranthene 1 0 1 50,000 0 Ref. 2, p. BI-2 Benzo(a)pyrene 1 1,000 1 50,000 5 x 10 7 Ref. 2, p. BI-2

Carbazole 1 1,000 0.4 500 2 x 10 5 Ref. 2, p. BI-2 Chrysene 1 1,000 1 500 5 x 10 5 Ref. 2, p. BI-3 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 1 0 1 50,000 0 Ref. 2, p. BI-4

Dibenzofuran 1 1,000 1 500 5 x 10 5 Ref. 2, p. BI-4

Fluorene 1 1,000 1 5,000 5 x 10 6 Ref. 2, p. BI-6

Phenanthrene 1 10,000 0.4 5,000 2 x 10 7 Ref. 2, p. BI-9 Pyrene 1 10,000 1 5,000 5 x 10 7 Ref. 2, p. BI-10 a. Salt water values (Ref. 1, p. 51621; Ref. 2; Ref. 25). b. River persistence values (Ref. 2; Ref. 25). c. Salt water values (Ref. 1, p. 51622; Ref. 2; Ref. 25).

The hazardous substance having the highest Ec osystem Toxicity/Persistence/Environmental

Bioaccumulation Factor value of 5 x 10 8 is benz(a)anthracene.

Ecosystem Toxicity/Persistence/Bioaccumulation Factor Value: 5 x 10 8



### 36SWOF/Environment – Hazardous Waste Quantity

4.1.4.2.2 Hazardous Waste Quantity

Table 10 Hazardous Waste Quantity

Source No. Source Type Source Hazardous Waste Quantity 1. Concrete Pipe

Outfall Other >0

Targets within the surface water migration pathway ar e subject to Level II concentrations (see Section 4.1.4.3.1.2 below) and source hazardous constituent quan tity is not complete (see Section 2.4.2.1.1). A Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value of 100 is assigned (Ref. 1, pp. 51591 and 51592).

Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value (Ref. 1, p. 51591, Table 2-6): 100

4.1.4.2.3 Waste Characteristics Factor Category Value

Ecosystem Toxicity/Persistence Factor Value: 10,000 Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value: 100

Ecosystem Toxicity/Persistence Factor Value x Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value: 1 x 10 6

(Ecosystem Toxicity/Persistence Factor Value x Hazardous Waste Quantity Factor Value) x

Environmental Bioaccumulation Factor Value: 5 x 10 10 subject to a maximum value of 1 x 10 12

Waste Characteristics Factor Category Value (Ref. 1, p. 51592, Table 2-7): 320

Waste Characteristics Factor Category Value: 320 Ref. 1, p. 51592, Table 2-7



### 37SWOF/ Environment – Targets

4.1.4.3 ENVIRONMENTAL THREAT – TARGETS

Level I concentrations for the Enviro nmental Threat is not being scored.

4.1.4.3.1 Sensitive Environments

4.1.4.3.1.1 Level I Concentrations

Sensitive Environments

Not scored.

Wetlands

Not scored.

Level I Concentrations Factor Value: 0



### 38SWOF/Environmental – Level II Concentrations

4.1.4.3.1.2 Level II Concentrations

Sensitive Environments

A zone of actual contamination subject to Level II concentrations is present along Port Washington Narrows as described by contaminated sample points WN01SD, WN02SD, WN03SD, WN04SD, GL03E01, GL03W01, GL03W02, GL04E01, GL04E02, GL04W01, GL04W02, GL04W03, GL05E01, GL05E02, GL05E03, GL05W01, GL05W02, GL05W03, GL06E01, GL06E02, GL06E03, GL06W01, GL06W02, and GL06W03 (see section 4.1.2.1.1 and Ref. 10). This zone of actual contamination lies

within the critical habitat for the Federal-listed th reatened Puget Sound Evolutionary Significant Unit (ESU) Chinook salmon (Ref. 20, pp. 2 and 3) (see Table 11 below). Additio nally, the Federal-listed threatened Puget Sound ESU Steelhead is known to be present within the zone of actual contamination (Ref. 20, pp. 2 and 3; Ref. 29, pp. 1 - 3) (See Table 14 below).

Table 11 Species Subject to Level II Concentrations

Sensitive Environment Distance from PPE to

Nearest Sensitive

Environment Sensitive

Environment Value (Ref. 1,

Table 4-23) References

Critical Habitat for the

Federal-listed threatened

Chinook salmon (oncorhynchus tshawytscha) 0 feet 100 Ref. 20, pp. 2 and 3;

Ref. 29, pp. 1 -3

Habitat known to be used by

the Federal-listed threatened Steelhead ( Oncorhynchus mykiss) 0 feet 75 Ref. 20, p. 2; Ref. 29, pp. 1 -3

Sum of Values 175

Wetlands

Not scored.

Sum of Level II Sensitive Environments Value + Wetlands Value: 175 + 0 (not scored) = 175

Level II Concentrations Factor Value: 175 Ref. 1, p. 51625



### 39

### 40 SWOF/ Environment – Potential Contamination

4.1.4.3.1.3 Potential Contamination

Potential Sensitive Environment Targets

Not Scored.

Potential Wetland Frontages

Not scored.

Potential Contamination Factor Value: 0