# .......... .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. 

# Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation



# Alaska Cruise Ship Initiative

Part 2 Report

(June 1, 2000 to July 1, 2001) Division of Statewide Public Service 410 Willoughby Ave., Suite 303 Juneau, AK 99801-1795Alaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 2 of 55 

### Forward
This report is prepared by the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation on behalf of the Alaska Cruise Ship Initiative (ACSI). This ad hoc group and it’s associated work groups were founded voluntarily to mutually identify, study and make advisory recommendations to the participants to improve cruise ship environmental performance in Alaska. Each member organization retains its authorities and responsibilities to act on matters related to the ACSI work. This effort was not designed to be a consensus process to limit each party’s actions. However, except where indicated, much of the work performed under ACSI was in a cooperative atmosphere and resulted in a mutually beneficial experience. Endorsements of the Part 2 Final Report - by each Steering Committee member, with individual comments, are attached to this document as part of the final report.Alaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 3 of 55 

### Table of Contents

Forward ........................................................................................................................ .................. 2 Table of Contents .............................................................................................................. ............. 3 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................... ....... 4 EXECUTIVE SU MMARY............................................................................................................. 6 REPORT OF THE AIR E MISSIONS WORK GROUP............................................................... 8
Ambient Air Monitoring......................................................................................................... ................8 Table 1: Two Highest SO 2 and NO 2Monitoring Measurements by Location ......................................................9 Table 2: Two Highest Particulate Readings at Each Monitoring Location......................................................... ..9 

### Opacity Mo nitoring............................................................................................................. ..................10 New Technologies ............................................................................................................... ...................11 

### REPORT OF WATER AND SOLID WASTE DISCHARGE WORKING GROUP................. 11 Priority Po llutants............................................................................................................ .....................11 Table 3: Highest Concentration of Priority Pollutants Found During Cruise Ship Wastewater Testing, Summer 2000........................................................................................................................... ..........................................12 

### Assessing the Level of Wa stewater Treatment ...................................................................................1 3 Table 4: Sample Ranges for F ecal Coliform, TSS, BOD and COD ................................................................... 14 Table 5: Sources and Characteristics of Graywater .............................................................................. ...............15 

### New Technologies ............................................................................................................... ...................16 

### REPORT OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL LEADERSHIP WORK GROUP ............................. 17 Accomplish ments................................................................................................................ ...................17 Future Steps................................................................................................................... ........................17 

### REPORT OF THE OIL SPILL RESPONSE WORKING GROUP ........................................ 18
NEW STATE OIL SPILL LEGISLATION .......................................................................................19 STATE LEGIS LATION.............................................................................................................. .........19 FEDERAL LEGI SLATION............................................................................................................ .....20 EPA NATIONAL A SSESSMEN T.......................................................................................................2 1 Appendix A: 126 Priority Pollutants ............................................................................................ .......22 Appendix B: Cruise Ship Wastewater Discharges .............................................................................24 Appendix C: Summary of Analyses of Cruise Ship Wastewater for Non-Priority Pollutants, Summer of 2000................................................................................................................. ....................37 Appendix D: ACSI Steering Committee and Work Group Members..............................................45 LCDR Spencer Wood Water Work Group Co-Chair U.S. Coast Guard ............................................................46 

### Appendix E: Core Members of the Science Panel ..................................................................................51 Appendix F: Steering Committee Member Endorsement .................................................................52Alaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 4 of 55 

### INTRODUCTION
The cruise ship industry is not new to Alaska; however its operations and scale have grown significantly. Today’s vessels bring a floating population that exceeds the size of many of Alaska’s smaller communities. Wastewater treatment technology for cruise ships was developed decades ago. International law requirements do not adequately take into account the unique environments in Alaska. In the late 1990’s, one cruise line was convicted of illegally dumping dry cleaning fluids, photo processing chemicals and oil in Alaska waters. Also, in 1994 one cruise line pled guilty to discharging untreated bilge water. Realizations that these types of activities had occurred led to heightened concern about exactly what cruise ships are discharging and what standards they are required to maintain. Therefore in December 1999, Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) Commissioner Michele Brown convened a forum to thoroughly review the cruise industry’s waste management and disposal practices in Alaska, and to discuss what is and/or should be done to improve the situation. The ADEC asked the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the Southeast Conference (a group representing Southeast Alaska communities) to join industry representatives and local concerned citizens in a public discussion. This initial effort, along with subsequent follow-on work has become known as the Alaska Cruise Ship Initiative (ACSI). Under ACSI, four work groups were chartered to undertake fact finding on air emissions, wastewater discharges and waste disposal management, oil spill prevention and response, and environmental leadership. The specific mandate was to:

 Identify the waste streams and spill risks that could impact Alaska’s air and water resources.

Develop pollution prevention and waste management solutions that will eliminate or reduce impacts, including better technology, management practices and shoreside capacity.

Assess what process is needed to verify and monitor compliance.

Keep Alaskans informed. The work groups' accomplishments through May 2000 were presented in “The Alaska Cruise Ship Initiative Part 1, Final Report” and are summarized below:

 Development of a plan for random, third party wastewater analysis of all cruise ships.

 Development of a plan for air monitoring in downtown Juneau.

 A survey of waste stream discharges and solid waste handling practices for all cruise ships operating in Alaska.

Identification of proposals and pilot projects from industry for a number of new technologies.

Approved maintenance and operation plans for eight new oil spill recovery barges, and regional priorities for the purchase of additional spill response equipment. During the 2000 season, large cruise lines voluntarily restricted where they discharged wastewater. The cruise lines agreed to no discharges of untreated blackwater anywhere in the Alexander Archipelago, including areas that are technically outside territorial waters; also, no discharge of graywater or treated blackwater while in port anywhere in Alaska. Additionally, discharges did not occur within 10 nautical miles of the ships last and next ports of call. In the future, large cruise ships will be required to maintain a minimum speed of six knots and keep a distance of at least one mile from shore during discharges, unless specific protective treatment can be achieved under the new state and federal laws. This report (Alaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Report) presents the information gathered by the work groups since May 2000 through June 30, 2001, interprets the information and makesAlaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 5 of 55 recommendations on what next steps should be taken. Work group minutes, previous reports, other fact sheets and handouts are available and downloadable from the ADEC Cruise Ship web pages at http://www.state.ak.us/local/akpages/ENV.CONSERV/press/cruise/cruise.htm

.Alaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 6 of 55 

### EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In response to growing concerns about the emissions and disposal practices of the growing cruise industry, Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation Commissioner Michele Brown convened a public forum to thoroughly review the industry’s waste management and disposal practices. Four work groups were chartered to undertake fact finding on air emissions, wastewater discharges, waste disposal practices, oil spill prevention and response, and environmental leadership. The effort has become known as the Alaska Cruise Ship Initiative (ACSI). The ACSI’s Part 1 Report summarized the planning steps taken to determine sampling and monitoring protocols. This report, ACSI Report Part 2, presents the results and recommendations. Ambient air monitoring for particulates, sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ) and carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) was conducted to determine if pollution levels were approaching or exceeding health based standards regardless of the source. Particulates, SO 2 , and CO 2are common constituents of petroleum combustion found in emissions from cruise ships, buses, automobiles and fuel oil used to heat homes and business. Monitoring was conducted during the cooler and wetter portion of Juneau’s summer - August 14th through September 30, 2000. The highest readings were well below state and federal health based standards. While it is not anticipated that health based standards would be exceeded in the drier, warmer portion of the summer; the work group made the recommendation that a full year of ambient air monitoring would be valuable in determining existing impacts to Juneau’s air quality. Additionally this will establish a baseline from which changes can be gauged. The cruise industry has agreed to fund six months of that study, with an option to extend to a full year. The state has prescribed standards for the opacity of visible emissions from any vessel. Over the past 10 years, the state opacity-monitoring program was eliminated as budgets were reduced. Funding from a cruise ship enforcement settlement is being used for a 5-year opacity-monitoring project and therefore is not a part of the ACSI work group process. However, the results are discussed in this report to provide additional information in understanding the impacts of cruise ships. Thirty-four of the 240 (14%) opacity readings exceeded the standard and 20 ships were cited for violations of the state standard. Opacity monitoring will continue for four more seasons. The wastewater of 21 large cruise ships was sampled for priority pollutants and for the common parameters used to assess the level of sewage treatment. Priority pollutants are a list of 126 toxic compounds used to determine if hazardous chemicals are being mixed with discharges. There was no evidence of hazardous wastes being mixed with overboard discharges. Blackwater (sewage or toilet water) and graywater (from sinks, showers, laundries and galleys) were sampled to determine if there was reason to be concerned that discharges could adversely impact the waters of the state. Blackwater is required to be treated in a Coast Guard Certified Marine Sanitation Device (MSD). Graywater can be discharged overboard at any time without treatment as it is presumed to be less harmful than blackwater. Sampling found that the marine sanitation devices (MSDs) currently being used on the cruise ships were found to be incapable of treating the sewage to the level that the manufacturers claim and the Coast Guard requires through their certification process. 60% of the blackwater samples exceeded the standard of 200 fecal coliforms per 100 ml. More than 75% of the graywater samples exceeded the level required for treated sewage. Only one sample from one MSD met the standard for both fecal coliform and total suspended solids. The Environmental Leadership Work Group sponsored Cruise Ship Awareness Days with public tours of cruise ships’ waste management systems as well as a public discussion. It is anticipated that more attention will be paid to environmental leadership issues once compliance issues are resolved. The Oil Spill Work Group completed the management plan for the four barges and response equipment provided by the Northwest Cruise Ship Association. Future work on spill issues will be carried out by theAlaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 7 of 55 Southeast Alaska Subarea Contingency Plan Committee and will include development of geographic response areas and identification and standardization of response resources and tactics. The Cruise Ship industry has been investing in new technology. Shoreside power will be available for the Princess Ships in the 2001 season; gas turbines have been installed in two new ships coming to Alaska. New types of sewage treatment systems are being tested on various ships. In December 2000, Title XIV -- Certain Alaskan Cruise Ship Operations -- was signed into law prohibiting the discharge of untreated sewage in the waters of Alaska. Blackwater must meet an effluent limit of 200 fecal coliform per 100 ml and total suspended solids of 150 mg/l. All discharges must occur while a ship is at least one mile from shore and proceeding at 6 knots, unless more stringent effluent levels are met. The Alaska Legislature passed new cruise ship legislation in HB 260 that established a “Commercial Passenger Vessel Environmental Compliance Program” during a Special Legislative Session. The legislation was signed by Governor Tony Knowles, and is effective July 1, 2001.Alaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 8 of 55 

### REPORT OF THE AIR EMISSIONS WORK GROUP
The ACSI Air Emissions Work Group was tasked with gaining a better understanding of air pollutants emitted by cruise ships at the dock or at anchor (hoteling) in downtown Juneau. Specifically, the work group was tasked with understanding ground level impacts, determining if these emissions could be causing adverse public health or environmental impacts and if so, identifying ways to alleviate the impacts. The Air Emissions Work Group developed a plan to monitor ambient air quality in downtown Juneau (Alaska Cruise Ship Initiative, Part 1 Final Report available at the ADEC Cruise Ship web page). ADEC and EPA conducted opacity monitoring to determine if visual stack emissions exceeded the state standards. Citizens from other communities have expressed concerns about the air quality in their community. It was determined that air impact analysis would start in Juneau. The need for future air assessments in other communities will be determined by the working group.


### Ambient Air Monitoring The ambient air-monitoring project was designed as an initial survey of air pollution levels in Juneau. The program was developed to determine if pollutant levels were approaching the state’s health based standards for particulates and sulfur dioxide. It was not designed to determine exactly which sources were contributing to the monitored air pollution concentrations. RTP Environmental Associates, Inc. (RTP), a contractor funded by the cruise industry, developed the monitoring and quality assurance plans for the summer 2000 monitoring effort. Once plans were approved by ADEC, RTP installed the monitors, conducted calibrations, routine site operations and prepared the project report titled Northwest Cruise Ship Association and Alaska DEC Air Quality and Meteorological Monitoring Study. As part of the project, ADEC contributed most of the monitoring equipment, reviewed and approved monitoring locations, assisted with field operations, reviewed reports and conducted monitoring site audits. Three locations in downtown Juneau were chosen by ADEC and RTP as monitoring sites. They are listed below with rationale for their selection:

 Capitol School Park – used in a previous study and had no sources of air pollution outside of home heating and car exhaust.

The roof of the Baranof Hotel – representative of uphill residences northwest through northeast of the hotel.

245 Marine Street across from the Marine Park bus stop – below the cruise ship’s plumes, to measure the effect of traffic, buses, commercial activity, and space heating. All three sites monitored fine particulates (PM2.5). In addition, the Capitol School Park site monitored for sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ), and the Baranof site monitored for SO 2and oxides of nitrogen (NO 2 ). All of these chemicals are constituents of petroleum combustion from cruise ships, automobiles, buses, home and business heating, and are commonly found in the ambient air of Juneau. Monitoring was conducted from August 14 through September 30, 2000. Additionally, meteorological data (precipitation, wind speed and direction) was collected in downtown Juneau.

Tables 1 and 2 display the date and location of the two highest readings for each air monitoring station, as well as the ambient standard and the percent of the standard that was achieved.Alaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 9 of 55 Table 1: Two Highest SO 2 and NO 2Monitoring Measurements by Location

Date Measurement (3 hour) Standard (3 hour) Percent of Standard

8/16/2000 41 ppb 500 ppb 8.30% Capitol School SO 2 8/13/2000 28 ppb 500 ppb 5.70% 9/5/2000 52 ppb 500 ppb 10.50%

Baranof Hotel SO 2 8/16/2000 41 ppb 500 ppb 8.20% 8/16/2000 44 ppb
Baranof Hotel NO 2 8/17/2000 44 ppb No State Standards

For NO 2

Table 2: Two Highest Particulate Readings at Each Monitoring Location

Date Measurement (2.5 micron filter/24 hour max) Standard (2.5 micron filter/24 hour max) Percent of Standard

8/24/2000 8.2 ug/m 3 65 ug/m 3 12.6 % Capitol School 8/18/2000 8.1 ug/m 3 65 ug/m 3 12.5 % 9/21/2000 8.7 ug/m 3 65 ug/m 3 13.4 %

Baranof Hotel 8/24/2000 8.6 ug/m 3 65 ug/m 3 13.2 % 9/21/2000 10.0 ug/m 3 65 ug/m 3 15.4 % Marine Way 9/15/2000 7.4 ug/m 3 65 ug/m 3 11.4 %

The highest recorded pollutant levels were far below the state and federal health based standards as listed in 18 AAC 50.010. Because sampling occurred during the coolest and wettest portion of the summer, these results can not be directly translated to pollutant levels during the earlier, drier portion of the summer. However, since the monitored levels were significantly below the standard, it is not anticipated that state health based standards would have been exceeded. The ACSI Air Emissions Work Group met in October and December 2000, January and April 2001 to discuss the results of the 2000 season monitoring and develop recommendations. The work groupAlaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 10 of 55 recommended additional sampling be conducted during the early part of the 2001 cruise ship season, to determine ambient impacts during the warmer, drier portion of the summer. The Northwest Cruiseship Association (NWCA) awarded the Juneau Ambient Air Monitoring Contract to RTP, the same contractor as the previous year. Three monitoring sites were selected by the work group: Wickersham House, Marine Park, and a residence in the Highlands. The start date for air monitoring was May 18, 2001. The work group decided that a year long ambient air monitoring study would be valuable in determining existing impacts on Juneau’s air quality, as well as establishing an air monitoring baseline data set. The cruise industry is funding the first six months of the ambient air study with an option to extend to a full year. Under direction of the work group, a technology committee developed a one-year plan to perform ambient air monitoring. The study was approved by the work group in January; subsequently, the cruise industry has hired a contractor to conduct the first six months of the study. Three monitoring sites have been selected by ADEC, the contractor, CBJ and community representatives. 

### Opacity Monitoring Opacity is the visible emission from a smokestack. Opacity can not be used to measure public health impacts. However, the fact that cruise ships are emitting enough visible smoke to produce a haze over Juneau is of significant concern to local citizens and ADEC. The Alaska Marine Vessel Visible Emission Standard in 18 AAC 50.070 regulates opacity during a particular operating mode. The opacity standard allows for temporary excedences for maneuvering, so as not to compromise a vessel's ability to safely operate. Opacity monitoring is conducted as part of a five-year project funded by Royal Caribbean’s settlement agreement and is not part of the ACSI work group process. The opacity monitoring information gathered during the summer of 2000 is presented in this report as it contributes to a more complete picture of cruise ship impacts in Alaska. Opacity is monitored by gauging the density of smokestack emissions. The well-established method of "reading smoke" and certifying ‘smoke readers" is found in 40 C.F.R. 60 Appendix A, Method 9. The visible smoke emissions are "read" by having the reader positioned so the sun is at the reader’s back. While "hoteling" (tied up at the dock or at anchor), the standard allows a ship to obscure 20% of the background when looking through the smoke plume against a background that contrasts the color of the smoke. In the early 1990’s ADEC routinely monitored the opacity of cruise ship emissions. As the department’s budget shrank, this program was reduced to citizen complaint response. With funding from the settlement agreement, routine opacity monitoring began again in July and continued through September 2000 in Juneau, Ketchikan, Haines, and Skagway. EPA conducted limited opacity monitoring in June 2000, in response to numerous citizen complaints. The National Park Service has been monitoring cruise ship opacity levels in Glacier Bay for the past several years. A ranger shortage resulted in fewer readings this past summer, but those that were taken were all in compliance. The Park Service hopes to resume routine monitoring in 2001. ADEC and EPA conducted a total of 240 opacity readings of cruise ship emissions during the 2000 season. Thirty-four observations exceeded the opacity standard; sixteen ships were cited by the state and four by EPA. The need for documentation of visibility accumulation impacts in downtown Juneau was discussed at the January 2001 Air Working Group meeting. A subcommittee has been formed to develop methods for documenting visibility problems, separate from stack emissions opacity.Alaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 11 of 55 

### New Technologies The cruise lines are investing in new technologies to eliminate problems and concerns about cruise ship air emissions. The following new technologies should be in place by the summer of 2001.

 Princess Cruises expects to be able to use shore side power, instead of main engine generators, at its South Franklin dock beginning in May.

Royal Caribbean Cruise Line and Celebrity Cruise Lines will each have a gas turbine cruise ship coming to Alaska. Gas engi nes burn fuel with less visible emissions.

 Carnival Cruise Lines will have a new ship using electronically controlled fuel injection.

 Numerous retrofits are being made that include direct steam injection and lube oil consumption monitoring, both of which have been shown to reduce emissions by up to 40%.



### REPORT OF WATER AND SOLID WASTE DISCHARGE WORKING GROUP

The ACSI Water Discharge and Solid Waste Work Group was tasked with assessing the nature and extent of wastewater and solid waste discharges, developing pollution prevention and waste management solutions, assessing a process for verifying and monitoring compliance, and keeping Alaskans informed of the situation during this process and on into the future. Wastewater discharges were sampled and analyzed to determine their chemical and biological composition. The work group developed the Cruise Ship Wastewater Monitoring Protocol for 2000 in Southeast Alaska (Appendix A to Alaska Cruise ship Initiative, Part I Final Report) describing the scope of work and sampling plan. Prior to the start of sampling, a Quality Assurance and Project Plan was developed detailing sampling, transportation and laboratory protocols. This plan includes project description work plans and laboratory management plans for participating laboratories. This 28-page document is available from ADEC or downloadable from the ADEC Cruise Ship web page. During the summer and fall of 2000, the wastewater of 21 large cruise ships was sampled for priority pollutants and for the common parameters used to assess the level of wastewater treatment. Priority pollutants are a list of 126 toxic compounds (Appendix A), identified in the Clean Water Act, used to determine if hazardous wastes were mixed with discharges. Each ship was sampled once for priority pollutants and twice for the common wastewater parameters using ship-specific sampling plans. Wastewater discharges vary depending on the particular ship. Wastewater can include one or more sources of graywater (from dishwater, showers, laundry, wash basins, bath and galleys), treated blackwater (from toilets, urinals and medical facility water) or a combination of graywater and treated blackwater. Wastewater samples were analyzed for fecal coliform, total suspended solids, biochemical oxygen demand, chemical oxygen demand, ammonia, pH and chlorine. The cruise lines hired a contractor to conduct the sampling and develop vessel specific sampling plans. The vessel specific plans took into account the variations in how gray and blackwater are discharged.


### Priority Pollutants The work group determined that priority pollutant analyses would be performed on combined samples of graywater and blackwater when there was more than one overboard discharge of graywater or blackwater. Sampling of priority pollutants was done to determine if hazardous toxic chemicals were being improperly discharged in wastewater. Appendix B lists the detected priority pollutants, along with the analytical result in micrograms per liter (ug/l) and the water quality criterion (WQC) applicable to that compound, if any, in the receiving water. Analytical results that exceed the WQC are shown in bold type. It is important to recognize that water quality criteria are not directly applicable to the concentration of a pollutant in a wastewater stream orAlaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 12 of 55 effluent. The water quality criteria are used to calculate effluent limits in a permit, taking into account dilution in the receiving water. In this case, the WQC are shown in order to put the wastewater analytical results in perspective. Although ten pollutants exceeded Alaska’s water quality standards, there was no evidence of hazardous wastes being mixed with overboard discharges. Seven metals – chromium, copper, lead, mercury, zinc, silver and nickel – were present in levels above the water quality standards for aquatic life. Table 3 lists the priority pollutants that were found, the Alaska Water Quality Standard, the highest sample concentration of a pollutant found, and the number of samples that were above the Alaska Water Quality Standards. Additionally, the table lists the drinking water standard maximum contaminant level (MCL) and the number of samples above the drinking water standard.

Table 3: Highest Concentration of Priority Pollutants Found During Cruise Ship Wastewater Testing, Summer 2000

WQS Highest Sample Number Above DW MCL's Number Above DW Metals
ug/L ug/L WQS ug/L MCL’s Chromium 50 430 2 100 1 Copper 2.9 7100 46 1000 6 Lead 5.6 62 12 15 10 Mercury 0.25 0.33 1 2 0 Nickel 8.3 630 11 100 3 Silver 2.3 610 7 Na Na Zinc 86 1800 39 5000 0
Organics Diethyl phthalate 3.4 15 14 Di-n-butyl phthalate 3.4 98 5 Ethylbenzene 430 2600 1 No Drinking Water Criteria for these organic compounds

The water quality standard is frequently a very low concentration in order to protect sensitive life stages of aquatic organisms. Since the drinking water standards for some priority pollutants are higher than state water quality standards, cruise ships could be picking up some of the metals through the drinking water taken on board in Alaska or British Columbia. Follow-up will be necessary to make that determination. The level of phthalates exceeded the water quality criteria. Phthalates are a class of priority pollutant that imparts flexibility or plasticity to substances. Phthalates, at this level, can leach from plastics that might be used in water piping or storage. The presence of the pesticide heptachlor was mistakenly reported in samples from two ships. The mistaken reading of heptachlor sent the industry into a massive hunt on ships, and back through suppliers to find the source of the pesticide. When no evidence turned up, the industry asked the lab to test again with other methodologies. The lab finally concluded it had made a mistake.Alaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 13 of 55 

### Assessing the Level of Wastewater Treatment All overboard waste streams were analyzed separately for the common parameters used to determine the level of wastewater treatment. Listed below is a description of each of these parameters:

 BOD – Biochemical oxygen demand – the potential for pollutants to reduce dissolved oxygen levels in water through biological and chemical processes. This is important because fish “breath” dissolved oxygen.

COD – Chemical oxygen demand – the same as BOD except it only looks at the effect of chemical (not biological) processes on dissolved oxygen. COD and BOD are indicators of how much oxygen a pollutant is going to rob from water. If pollutants consume too much oxygen, it doesn’t leave enough to support aquatic life.

TSS – Total suspended solids – a measure of how much solid material is suspended in water. Solid materials can keep light from penetrating into the water column which is important for aquatic plant life. Solid materials can settle on the bottom where they can smother bottom life and fish eggs.

Fecal coliform – a class of bacteria that are found in the intestines of warm-blooded animals. While some forms of fecal coliform are not harmful, their presence indicates that harmful microbes, bacteria or viruses may also be present. The class of fecal microbes includes many disease causing organisms that can create symptoms, from mild nausea and diarrhea to death, if ingested by humans.

Total ammonia - a by-product of wastewater treatment that can be toxic to aquatic life.

pH - the measure of how acidic or basic a discharge is.

Free/total chlorine measures chlorine that may be used to reduce fecal coliform levels; high chlorine levels can be toxic to aquatic life. In the summer of 2000 only blackwater discharges from cruise ships were regulated. The EPA established standards in 1976 for wastewater treatment plants (Marine Sanitation Devices – otherwise known as MSD’s) aboard vessels. MSD’s constructed after 1980 have to meet effluent limits of 150 mg/l of TSS and 200 fecal coliform per 100 milliliters. 1 The U.S. Coast Guard has the responsibility for certifying that MSD’s meet these standards and ensuring they are properly installed, maintained and operated. There were no federal standards for graywater during the summer 2000. When the cruise ship companies volunteered to eliminate in-port discharges, gray and blackwater were placed in holding tanks until the wastewater could be discharged 10 miles from port. Storing wastewater in a warm holding tank could lead to increased fecal coliform counts and higher total suspended solids readings. Sampling plans were amended so that samples were taken immediately after treatment, instead of from holding tanks. This would determine if the MSD was able to treat wastewater to the required levels. The results of analyses of treated blackwater clearly demonstrated that generally MSDs do not meet the federal standards for TSS and fecal coliform. Only one blackwater sample out of 70 samples met both the TSS and fecal coliform standards. Approximately 57% of the fecal coliform samples exceeded the

1 By State of Alaska requirements, there is no distinction between gray and blackwater. Both are regulated as sewage due to the presence of fecal coliformsAlaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 14 of 55 MSD standard of 200 fecal coliform per 100 ml, and 68% of the samples for total suspended solids exceeded the MSD standard of 150 mg/l. The results of analyses of graywater demonstrated that the strength of the graywater, in terms of BOD, COD and TSS is variable and that it can have high levels of fecal coliform bacteria. Some samples contained fecal coliforms in the millions. Graywater is not expected to contain pollutant levels as high as blackwater. The results indicated that graywater being discharged was not benign. Table 4 displays the number of samples that had fecal coliforms in the 0 to 200, 200 to 1000, 1000 to 1 million, 1 million to 10 million and greater than 10 million ranges. Similar ranges are shown for total suspended solids, BOD and COD.

Table 4: Sample Ranges for Fecal Coliform, TSS, BOD and COD

Fecal Coliform per 100 mL 0 to 200 200 to 1000 1000 to 1,000,000 1,000,000 to 10,000,000 more than 10,000,000 Gray Water 14 2 27 12 9 Black Water* 27 6 16 15 4 Gray & Black Water Combined 1 1 5 2 1 Rev. Osmosis Treated B&G Water 5 *FC results greater than 200 per 100 ml exceed the federal standard for MSD.

0 to 150 150 - 1000 More than TSS mg/L mg/L 1,000 mg/l Gray Water 39 23 3 Black Water* 8 22 6 Gray & Black Water Combined 8 3 Rev. Osmosis Treated B&G Water** 5 *samples >150 mg/l exceed the federal standard for MSDs **All of the samples of gray water and black water treated by reverse osmosis meet the federal standards of <150 mg/l of TSS and <200 FC/100 ml for MSDs. 0 to 100 100 to 1000 More than BOD mg/L mg/L 1,000 mg/l Gray Water 16 36 13 Black Water 18 16 1 Gray & Black Water Combined 1 10 Rev. Osmosis Treated B&G Water 3 2 0 to 100 100 to 1000 1000 to 10,000 more than COD mg/L mg/L Mg/L 10,000 mg/l Gray Water 1 39 15 2 Black Water 2 5 1 Gray & Black Water Combined 10 1 Rev. Osmosis Treated B&G Water 5Alaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 15 of 55 Appendix C provides the results of all the analyses used to assess the levels of wastewater treatment. Values for TSS or fecal coliform that exceed the MSD criteria are in bold type. Graywater is usually characterized as untreated wastewater that has not come into contact with toilet waste. Specifically cruise ship graywater is defined in 33 CFR 151.05 as drainage from dishwashers, showers, laundry, washbasins and galleys, and does not include drainage from toilets, urinals, hospitals, and cargo spaces. Table 5 shows the common characteristics found in domestic graywater from various sources.
Table 5: Sources and Characteristics of Graywater

_______________________________________________________________________________ Water Source Characteristics

____________________________________________________________________________ Automatic Clothes Washer Bleach, Foam, High pH, Hot water, Nitrate, Oil and Grease, Oxygen demand, Phosphate, Salinity, Soaps, Sodium, Suspended solids, and Turbidity
Automatic Dish Washer Bacteria, Foam, Food particles, High pH, Hot water, Odor, Oil and grease, Organic matter, Oxygen demand, Salinity, Soaps, Suspended solids, and Turbidity
Bathtub and shower Bacteria, Hair, Hot water, Odor, Oil and grease, Oxygen demand, Soaps, Suspended solids, and Turbidity Sinks, including kitchen Bacteria, Food particles, Hot water, Odor, Oil and grease, Organic matter, Oxygen demand, Soaps, Suspended solids, and Turbidity

______________________________________________________________________________ The results of the analysis of graywater from cruise ships showed high levels of fecal coliforms (Table 4). Some samples contained fecal coliforms in the millions. As described in Table 5, bacteria can come from bath and shower water as well from sinks and laundry. Analyses of cruise ship graywater discharges during the summer of 2000 (Appendix B) showed 78% of the samples exceeded the effluent limit of 200 FC/100 ml for discharges from marine sanitation devices. Forty percent of the graywater samples for TSS exceeded the MSD effluent limit of 150mg/l. These results indicate that graywater is similar to blackwater in number of fecal coliform bacteria and total suspended solids, and that graywater should be treated prior to discharge. In response to concerns about pollution from cruise ships, the Coast Guard instigated Operation Cruise Watch 2000. Cutters and aircraft were directed to more closely monitor cruise ships in case of unreported discharges. Coast Guard marine safety inspectors were instructed to increase their focus on the proper use and operation of marine sanitation devices and oily water separators. The Coast Guard found five MSD's were not properly operated and maintained, and civil penalties were issued.Alaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 16 of 55 Based on the results of the 2000 season sampling effort, the ACSI working group agreed that wastewater monitoring should continue for the 2001 season to increase the understanding of the characteristics and impacts of cruise ship discharges, as well as evaluating industry initiatives. This work should include:

 Determining whether MSD’s are operating within design specifications.

 Collecting data needed to determine the impacts of gray and treated blackwater on the receiving waters.

Evaluating the effectiveness of new wastewater treatment technologies being tested by various cruise lines.

Analyzing discharges for dissolved metals, in addition to total recoverable metals.

Documenting discharge volumes to determine the total volumes discharged.

Sampling each MSD to determine if it is working properly. In October 2000 the ACSI wastewater and solid waste discharge working group agreed to form a science panel to assist the work group in addressing complex technical issues. The science panel is chartered to:

 Evaluate the 2000 wastewater monitoring data.

 Comment on the appropriateness of certain laboratory analysis.

 Review the 2001 sampling results.

 Evaluate the cumulative impacts of cruise ship wastewater discharges on receiving waters.

Assist with the determination of no discharge zones. The Science Panel began meeting in January 2001. Their initial focus is to review and comment on the Alaska SeaLife Center report on wastewater discharges into Alaska Coastal Waters, commissioned by the Northwest Cruise Ship Association, as well as recommend updates to last seasons quality assurance plans prior to use this summer.


### New Technologies The cruise industry has been working on new wastewater treatment technologies. Listed below are some of the on-going initiatives:

 Princess Cruises is retrofitting one ship’s treatment system with Hamworthy MSDs and biomembrane filtration capable of treating black and graywater. This system will not use chlorination.

Holland America has one ship using 100% Zenon treatment, a combined bio-reactor, ultrafiltration, and UV system. Currently, this system is discharging effluents where total suspended solids are consistently below 5 mg/l and fecal coliform is not detected or is below 2 per 100 ml. Holland America is committed to retrofitting Zenon treatment systems throughout its fleet, but this will take some time -- a function of hardware availability.

Norwegian Cruise Lines is working to enhance performance of traditional MSD treatment. NCL is also evaluating two separate ozone-based disinfections systems that treat both graywater and post-MSD blackwater.

Royal Caribbean Cruise Lines noted that the separate cruise line companies continue to share information and lessons learned, as witnessed by a recent environmental round table. Hydroxyl treatment systems show promise and continue to be investigated. RCCL is employing a number of new strategies to improve MSD performance.

Cruise ships Mercury and Galaxy will continue to use reverse osmosis/ultraviolet treatment for black and graywater.

Crystal Cruises will continue their policy of discharging 12 miles or more offshore. Crystal has upgraded the MSDs on both of its ships. They have developed rigorous standard operating procedures and operational tests to ensure treatment systems are operatingAlaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 17 of 55 properly. The capability to perform on-board water quality measurements is being developed.

 Carnival Cruises will be operating a new “Spirit” class vessel in Alaska in 2001. The Spirit will have state of the art waste management systems.

 The US Cruise Ship Association member companies will continue testing and retesting to optimize performance. They are using and evaluating special solvents to decrease the opportunity for fecal coliform and associated pathogen accumulation and growth within on-board plumbing.


### REPORT OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL LEADERSHIP WORK GROUP
Environmental Leadership is an approach for taking responsibility for the negative effects to the environment by integrating environmental stewardship into business management practices of an organization. Environmental excellence is achieved through employing prevention based environmental management systems and environmental accounting. Organizations move beyond mere compliance with existing regulations by establishing an environmental management system that incorporates pollution prevention into the core business philosophy and practices. The results are efficient, profitable operations that protect the environment. The overall goal of the Environmental Leadership Work Group is a clean Alaska environment through establishment of a long-term sustainable system for environmental excellence and leadership. The work group recognizes that this is a long-term process.


### Accomplishments

Cruise Ship Awareness Days were held July 12 th , 13 thand 14 th , 2000 and were co-sponsored by ADEC, Coast Guard, EPA and industry. The goal was to provide the citizens of Juneau with an opportunity to understand the issues, problems and concerns with cruise ships, and for cruise ship operators and agencies to hear citizen concerns first hand. Cruise Ship Awareness Days included the following:

 A public information document that summarized the cruise ship industry’s environmental management systems in an understandable question and answer format. In addition, the roles of the agencies were outlined.

 The cruise lines offered shipboard tours of waste management systems and operations to the public.

 A panel discussion with DEC, USCG, industry and Citizens Groups with opportunities for citizens to ask questions and voice concerns directly to the parties involved.

 Displays and presentations from DEC, USCG, Citizens Groups and industry. The overall goals of Cruise Ship Awareness Days were achieved. It provided one of the continuous steps in the process of educating and engaging the community, agencies and industry. However, efforts to engage all stakeholders must continue. 

### Future Steps The Environmental Leadership Work Group is involved in a long-term process that requires a “shift” to pollution prevention and responsibility as the guiding principles, moving away from simple compliance of the law. Within the ACSI work groups, focus on these shifts has stalled for the time being, because of limited resources dealing with the significant wastewater sample issues. The Environmental Leadership process has the ability to provide results for long-term solutions. This will require the commitment of industry to correct existing systems and environmental groups to engage in the process, instead of relying solely on government regulations and oversight. In addition, agencies must have the resources and ability to provide oversight monitoring. It is a partnership that involves all parties.Alaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 18 of 55 The work group agreed to begin a long-term process for continuous dialogue and activity in Environmental Leadership. A sub-committee was proposed to develop a format for engagement. Components of this process could include:

 Environmental Performance Measures: An on-going reporting program to measure and rate environmental achievements. Performance measures will require third party verification or evaluation.

Stakeholder involvement: This will require a commitment of both stakeholders and industry for continued engagement, based on the principals of Environmental Leadership.

Regulatory agency involvement: Resources provided to agencies for continued monitoring and reporting programs.

Recognition of superior performance.

Development of Best Management Practices for the cruise ship industry. Standards are to be developed in conjunction with industry, community, citizens and other stakeholders. Examples of Best Management Practices may include, but are not limited to: 1. Corporation commitment, adoption and implementation of IS0 14001. 2. Environmental Management Systems (EMS) based on Pollution Prevention for each vessel. 3. Systematic reporting and sharing of discharge and sampling results. 4. Training and certification of operators of onboard wastewater treatment systems during operation. 5. Reduction and inventory of hazardous materials. 6. Connection to on-shore power. 7. Education of customers on pollution prevention activities. 8. Using community wastewater treatment plants. Since most of the agency and industry effort was placed on air and water quality activities for the 2000 season, little was accomplished beyond the Environmental Awareness Days. We expect environmental leadership to lag behind the air and water quality efforts until those major projects are completed. Environmental Leadership will then pick up activities to incorporate provisions resulting from the Air and Water Quality Work Group efforts.



### REPORT OF THE OIL SPILL RESPONSE WORKING GROUP

The large cruise ships operating in Alaska carry up to 405,000 gallons of heavy persistent fuel oil. The NWCA recognized that the oil spill response capabilities in Southeast Alaska were not designed to effectively recover the heavier more viscous fuel oils used by the cruise ships. The NWCA announced in December 1999 that they were going to build 4 sets of paired oil spill barges positioned in Southeast Alaska. The first barge was delivered to Glacier Bay in May 2000. By the end of the summer, 3 additional sets of barges were located in Haines, Juneau and Ketchikan. Each of the two barges in the set can hold 259 barrels or just over 10,000 gallons of recovered oil. One barge in each set comes equipped with a skimmer for recovery of oil from the surface of the water. The Alaska Cruise Ship Initiative: Part I Final Report discusses, in detail, the accomplishments of the Oil Spill Work Group through the end of May. The management plan developed by the Southeast Alaska Petroleum Response Organization (SEAPRO) for the four barges was approved and the barges have been included as a part of SEAPRO’s oil spill response capabilities. This allows the barges to be used to respond to oil spills from vessels other than just cruise ships. Through the Royal Caribbean settlement, $2.1 million has been given to SEAPRO to increase oil spill response capabilities in Southeast Alaska. In consultation with the DEC and the U.S. Coast Guard a variety of pollution response equipment was selected for purchase. Major purchases include:Alaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 19 of 55  Two 48 foot multi-mission fast response vessels

 One 55 foot oil spill response barge for the Northern Lynn Canal Near Shore oil spill response package

 LORI brush skimming system

 1,000 feet shoreguard boom

 2,000 feet of containment boom

 Seven 21 foot spill response skiffs The Oil Spill Work Group recommended that further oil spill response issues be handled by the Southeast Alaska Subarea Contingency Plan Committee, a federally mandated response preparedness committee led by the Coast Guard and DEC under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990. The Oil Spill Work Group suggested that the following issues be addressed by the sub area committee:

 Proceed with development of geographic response strategies funded through the Royal Caribbean Settlement.

 Standardization of response resources and tactics.

 Identification of additional response equipment shortfalls.



### NEW STATE OIL SPILL LEGISLATION
Senate Bill 273 enacted by the 2000 Alaska Legislature established financial responsibility and oil spill response planning requirements for non-tank vessels of more than 400 gross tons. This includes most cruise ships. The law established a response planning standard for “containment and control of 15 percent of the maximum oil capacity” within 48 hours. Cleanup is required “within the shortest possible time consistent with minimizing damage to the environment.” SB 273 also established the Task Force on Motorized Oil Transport and charged the task force with determining how to implement the response planning standard. The legislature also passed Senate Concurrent Resolution 1, setting the membership of the task force. The resolution directed the task force to recommend statutes and regulations to achieve the response planning standard in a practical and cost efficient manner. The task force recommendations are in the “Task Force and Motorized Oil Transport Final Report, December 15, 2000”. A copy of the report can be downloaded at http://www.state.ak.us/dec/nontank/pdf/tfmot_final_rpt.pdf . Additional information on the task force activities can be found at http://www.state.ak.us/dec/nontank/home.htm

. The task force’s statutory recommendations were concurrently introduced in the House as HB 55 and in the Senate as SB 16. Both are titled: "An Act regarding oil discharge prevention and cleanup involving self-propelled non tank vessels exceeding 400 gross registered tonnage and railroad tank cars and related facilities and operations and requiring preparation and implementation of oil discharge contingency plans for those non-tank vessels and railroad tank cars; amending the definition of 'response action' that relates to releases or threatened releases of oil and thereby amending the duties and liabilities of response action contractors; authorizing compliance verification for non-tank vessels and for trains and related facilities and operations; and providing for an effective date." This bill passed the legislature in March 2001.



### STATE LEGISLATION

During a Special Session of the Legislature convened on June 7, 2001, HB 260 was passed, creating a Commercial Passenger Vessel Environmental Compliance Program. This legislation was signed by Governor Tony Knowles on June 28, 2001 and became effective July 1, 2001. Under the new legislation:Alaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 20 of 55  Cruise ships and Alaska’s marine ferries with 50 or more overnight passengers must comply with the new state law, although some discharge and fee requirements are phased in at a later date (2004) for smaller vessels with between 50 and 249 overnight passengers.

 Vessels must register annually with the state and agree to abide by state requirements on wastewater discharges.

 The discharge of graywater or sewage with fecal coliform bacteria counts greater than 200 colonies per 100 milliliters or suspended solids greater than 150 milligrams per liter is prohibited.

The new law provides flexibility in meeting the graywater standards during the 2001 and 2002 cruise seasons if a large cruise ship submits a plan of “interim protective measures”.

“Large” cruise ships (with 250 or more overnight passengers) must be at least a mile from shore and traveling at a speed greater than 6 knots when discharging wastewater.

Vessels may request assistance from the state in establishing alternate terms and conditions under which they can discharge.

All vessels discharging wastewater in state waters must sample and test their discharges to ensure that they meet the required levels and report test results to the state.

 All vessels must report wastewater discharges that violate the Alaska standards.

 All vessels must provide plans that describe hazardous substances and solid waste disposal practices.

 Large vessels pay an environmental compliance fee roughly equal to $1.00 per passenger. Small vessels will pay the fee beginning in 2004.

 Cruise lines that fail to meet state standards are subject to both civil and criminal enforcement.

 ADEC is authorized to conduct monitoring, as well as, research into the environmental affects of sewage and graywater on marine waters and coastal resources. Details on this legislation can be found on ADEC’s cruise ship web site.



### FEDERAL LEGISLATION
In December 2000, the President signed federal legislation enacting Title XIV – Certain Alaskan Cruise Ship Operations . This legislation gives the Coast Guard and EPA new responsibilities, including the implementation of a cruise ship inspection regimen and the establishment of effluent limits for treated blackwater and graywater. All cruise ship discharges in Alaskan waters must be made while the ship is at a minimum speed of 6 knots and a distance of at least one-mile from shore. No cruise ship can discharge untreated blackwater anywhere in the Alaska waters of the Alexander Archipelago, navigableAlaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 21 of 55 waters of the U.S. within the State of Alaska, and within the Kachemak Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve. The Coast Guard issued regulations on July 26, 2001 to implement this statute during the 2001 cruise season. EPA has not determined if they will evaluate the effluent limits set by this statute, nor have they indicated a time frame for making such decisions. The industry had agreed that all the NWCA lines would comply with the requirements of Title XIV, until the regulations were fully in place.



### EPA NATIONAL ASSESSMENT
EPA is conducting a national assessment of the cruise ship industry in response to a petition received on March 17, 2000, from the Bluewater Network. The assessment addresses the following: 1. Quantification of the volumes of waste streams from large passenger vessels and assessment of the adequacy of existing regulations to control such wastes. 2. Assessment of the impacts of these wastes on water quality, the marine environment and human health. 3. Delineation of options for comprehensive monitoring, record keeping and reporting of pollutants discharged into US waters and wastes offloaded at US ports from large passenger vessels. 4. Evaluation of the effect of requiring National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits for discharges of blackwater, graywater and other discharges. 5. Examination of the need for, and best means of, more strictly defining and regulating graywater. 6. Consideration of the need for clarifying the regulations governing hazardous and toxic wastes generated on cruise ships, both while at sea and once off-loaded, and a delineation of options for whether and how these regulations should be strengthened. 7. Determination and implementation of effective means for EPA to assist the USCG in fully enforcing its current regulations. EPA conducted three public hearings in Los Angeles, Juneau, and Miami. The transcripts are available on the DEC Cruise Ship Web pages. A draft report is currently undergoing internal EPA review.Alaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 22 of 55 

### Appendix A: 126 Priority Pollutants

DEC Criteria for Marine Waters, Compiled 7/13/00, revised 7/20/00 Priority Pollutant Criterion μg/L Priority Pollutant Criterion μg/L chlorinated benzenes chlorobenzene 129 (LOEL) hexachlorocyclobuta-diene 32 (acute LOEL) 1,2-dichlorobenzene 1,970 (acute LOEL) hexachlorocyclopenta-diene 7 (acute LOEL) 1,3-dichlorobenzene 1,970 (acute LOEL) 1,4-dichlorobenzene 1,970 (acute LOEL) tetrachloroethylene 450 (LOEL) (88.5 NTR) hexachlorobenzene 129 (LOEL) (0.0077 NTR) trans-1,2-dichloroethylene None 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene 129 (LOEL) trichloroethylene 2,000 (acute LOEL) (810 NTR) chlorinated ethanes chloroethane None vinyl chloride none (5,250 NTR) chlorinated phenols 1,1-dichloroethane None 2-chlorophenol None 1,2-dichloroethane 113,000 (acute LOEL) (990 NTR) 2,4-dichlorophenol none (790 NTR)
hexachloroethane 940 (acute LOEL) (89 NTR) parametachlorocresol None 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane 9,020 (acute LOEL) (110 NTR) pentachlorophenol 7.9 1,1,1-trichloroethane 31,200 (acute LOEL) 2,4,6-trichlorophenol none (65 NTR) chloroalkyl ethers 1,1,2-trichloroethane none (420 NTR) bis(2-chloroethyl) ether none (14 NTR)
chlorinated organics bis(2-chloroethoxy) methane None bis(2-chloroisopropyl) ether 4,360

carbon tetrachloride 50,000 (acute LOEL) (44 NTR) 4-bromophenyl phenyl ether None 2-chloroethylvinyl ether None 4-chlorophenyl phenyl ether None halomethanes chloroform none (4,700 NTR) bromoform none (3,600 NTR)
2-chloronaphthalene None chlorodibromomethane none (340 NTR) 3,3-dichlorobenzidine none (0.77 NTR) dichlorobromomethane 6,400 (LOEL) (220 NTR) 1,1-dichloroethylene 224,000 (acute LOEL) (320 NTR) methyl bromide 6,400 (LOEL) (4,000 NTR)
1,2-dichloropropane 3,040 (LOEL) methyl chloride 6,400 (LOEL) 1,3-dichloropropylene 790 (acute LOEL) methylene chloride 6,400 (LOEL) dioxin(s) none (0.00000014 NTR)

DEC Criteria for Marine Waters, compiled 7/13/00, revised 7/20/00 Priority Pollutant Criterion μg/L Priority Pollutant Criterion μg/L inorganics organics antimony (TR) 45,000 (4,300 NTR) acrolein 55 (acute LOEL) arsenic III 36 acrylonitrile none (6.6 NTR) asbestos None benzene 700 (LOEL) beryllium None benzidine none (0.0054 NTR) cadmium (TR) 9.3 2,4-dinitrotoluene 370 (LOEL) (91 NTR) chromium VI (TR) 50 2,6-dinitrotoluene 370 (LOEL) copper (TR) 2.9 (acute) 1,2-diphenylhydrazine none (5.4 NTR) cyanide (free) 1.0 (acute) ethylbenzene 430 (acute LOEL) lead (TR) 5.6 isophorone 12,900 (acute LOEL) (6,000 NTR) mercury (TR) 0.025 naphthalene 2,350 (acute LOEL) nickel (TR) 8.3 nitrobenzene 6,680 (acute LOEL) (1,900 NTR) selenium (TR) 71 toluene 5,000 (LOEL) pesticides and metabolites silver (TR) 2.3 (acute) aldrin 1.3 (0.0014 NTR) thallium (TR) 2,130 (acute LOEL) (6.3 NTR) alpha-bhc none (0.13 NTR) zinc (TR) 86 alpha-endosulphan 0.0087Alaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 23 of 55 Appendix A cont. nitrosamines
N-nitrosodimethylamine 3,300,000 (acute LOEL) (81 NTR) beta-bhc none (0.46 NTR)

N-nitrosodi-n-proplyamine 3,300,000 (acute LOEL) beta-endosulphan 0.0087 N-nitrosodiphenylamine 3,300,000 (acute LOEL) (160 NTR) chlordane 0.0040
nonchlorinated phenols 2,4-dimethylphenol None 4,4-DDD none (0.0084 NTR)

2-methyl , 4,6-dinitrophenol 4,850 (acute LOEL) (765 NTR) 4,4-DDE none (0.0059 NTR) 2,4-dinitrophenol 4,850 (acute LOEL) 4,4-DDT 0.001 2-nitrophenol 4,850 (acute LOEL) delta-bhc None 4-nitrophenol 4,850 (acute LOEL) phenol 5,800 (acute LOEL) DEC Criteria for Marine Waters, compiled 7/13/00, revised 7/20/00 Priority Pollutant Criterion μg/L Priority Pollutant Criterion μg/L Dieldrin 0.0019 (0.0014 NTR) acenaphthylene None Endosulphan sulfate 0.0087 anthracene 300 (acute LOEL) Endrin 0.0023 benzo(a)anthracene 300 (acute LOEL) (0.31 NTR) Endrin aldehyde none (0.81 NTR) benzo(a)pyrene 300 (acute LOEL) (0.31 NTR) Gamma-bhc 0.16 (acute) benzo(b)fluoranthene 300 (acute LOEL) (0.31 NTR) Heptachlor 0.0036 (0.0021 NTR) benzo(g,h,i)perylene 300 (acute LOEL) Heptachlor epoxide none (0.0011 NTR) benzo(k)fluoranthene 300 (acute LOEL) (0.31 NTR) Toxaphene 0.0002 chrysene 300 (acute LOEL) (0.31 NTR) Phthalate esters
bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate none (59 NTR) dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 300 (acute LOEL) (0.31 NTR)

Butylbenzyl phthalate none fluoranthene 16 (LOEL) Diethyl phthalate 3.4 (LOEL) fluorene 300 (acute LOEL) Dimethyl phthalate 3.4 (LOEL) indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 300 (acute LOEL) (0.31 NTR) di-n-butyl phthalate 3.4 (LOEL) phenanthrene None di-n-octyl phthalate 3.4 (LOEL) pyrene 300 (acute LOEL) PCBs 0.03 (0.0017 NTR) Acenaphene 710 (LOEL) PCBs 0.03 (0.0017 NTR) Polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) Acenaphene 710 (LOEL)

DEC Criteria for Marine Waters, compiled 7/13/00 Other pollutants Criterion Ammonia (unionized) 35 μg/l PH ≥ 6.5, ≤ 8.5, no more than 0.2 pH unit outside of naturally occurring range BOD none COD none TSS none The amount of total ammonia equivalent to 35 μg/l of unionized ammonia depends on the pH, salinity and temperature of the receiving marine water. For instance at a pH of 7.4, a salinity of 20 ppt and a temperature of 10 oC, 35 μg/l of unionized ammonia is equivalent to ~53 mg/l of total ammonia.

Total residual chlorine ≤2.0 μg/l for salmonids or ≤10.0 μg/l for other organisms Fecal coliform May not exceed 14 FC/100 ml. Not more than 10% of samples may exceed 43 FC/100 ml

NTR means the EPA Na tional Toxics Rule that adopted some criteria for priority pollutants for some states. These criteria are not applicable to the cruise ship sampling program and are presented for information purposes only.

LOEL means the Lowest Observed Effect Level.Alaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 24 of 55 

### Appendix B: Cruise Ship Wastewater Discharges

Cruise ship J (sampled 8/11/00) priority pollutant detected WQC Blackwater composite blkwtr port side stp blkwtr starbrd side stp grywtr 5 tank (composite) grywtr shaft tank Grywtr stabilizer port tank grywtr laundry room phenol 5800 13 NA NA 2.2 NA NA NA2,4,6-trichlorophenol none ND NA NA 0.61 NA NA NA bis(2-ethyl-hexyl) phthalate none 1.9 NA NA 19 NA NA NA
diethylphthalate 3.4 ND NA NA 9.7 NA NA NAbutylbenzylphthalate none ND NA NA 0.61 NA NA NA

cadmium 9.3 ND NA NA 0.35 NA NA NA chromium (total) 50(VI) ND NA NA 5.6 NA NA NA copper 2.9 360 NA NA 480 NA NA NA lead 5.6 ND NA NA 14 NA NA NA silver 2.3 0.76 NA NA 3.5 NA NA NA zinc 86 170 NA NA 1600 NA NA NAbromodichloromethane 6400 NA ND ND NA ND 0.69 ND

chloroform none NA 0.92 1.2 NA 34 25 13 chloromethane (methyl chloride) 6400 NA ND ND NA 23 ND ND

toluene 5000 NA ND ND NA ND ND 1.7 trichloroethene 2000 NA ND ND NA ND ND 0.76 tetrachloroethene 450 NA ND ND NA ND ND 2.3 ethylbenzene 430 NA ND ND NA 1.0 ND 24 heptachlor 0.0036 ND NA NA ND NA NA NA all values in μg/l ND=Non-detect NA=Not analyzed for in this sample values in bold exceed WQC
Cruise ship A (sampled 8/22/00) priority pollutant detected WQC treated blackwater main graywater starboard graywater composite graywater 2,4,6-trichlorophenol None ND NA NA 2.3 bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate None ND NA NA 10 diethylphthalate 3.4 ND NA NA 3.0 di-n-butylphthalate 3.4 ND NA NA 1.1 bromoform None 95 1.3 32 ND chloroform None 21 15 96 ND chloromethane (methyl chloride) 6400 25 ND ND ND

bromodichloromethane 6400 18 0.70 89 ND dibromochloromethane None 40 0.65 64 ND 1,2-dichloroethane 113,000 1.5 0.91 ND ND tetrachloroethene 450 ND ND 0.46 ND chromium (total) 50 (Cr VI) 18 NA NA ND
copper 2.9 560 NA NA 260 lead 5.6 23 NA NA 7.5 zinc 86 1100 NA NA 560Alaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 25 of 55 Appendix B cont.

Cruise ship A cont. (sampled 8/22/00) cyanide (total) 1.0 (free) 25(may be interferences) NA NA 22(may be interferences) Heptachlor 0.0036 ND NA NA ND all values in μg/l ND=Non-detect NA=Not analyzed for in this sample values in bold exceed WQC
Cruise ship T2 (sampled 8/18/00) priority pollutant detected WQC blackwater composite graywater composite 1,4-dichlorobenzene 1970 1.2 ND bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate none 1.9 ND di-n-butylphthalate 3.4 4.8 4.2 bromoform none 1.2 ND chloroform none 1.6 ND bromodichloromethane 6400 1.9 ND dibromochloromethane none 1.4 ND chromium (total) 50 (Cr VI) ND 21
copper 2.9 50 3.4 lead 5.6 ND 16 silver 2.3 0.27 ND zinc 86 210 ND
all values in μg/l ND=Non-detect values in bold exceed WQC app licable to the receiving water
Cruise ship P (sampled 8/15/00) priority pollutant detected WQC graywater port graywater starboard graywater composite blackwater

chloroform none 15 19 ND 2.9 toluene 5000 1.4 1.7 ND ND ethylbenzene 430 1.6 2.6 ND 0.93 bromoform none ND 1.1 ND 3.3 heptachlor 0.0036 NA NA ND ND phenol 5800 NA NA 2.9 29 bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate none NA NA 15 2.0 butylbenzylphthalate none NA NA 1.6 ND diethylphthalate 3.4 NA NA 5.8 2.7 di-n-butylphthalate 3.4 NA NA 4.2 ND phenanthrene none NA NA ND 1.8 cadmium 9.3 NA NA 0.48 0.43 chromium (total) 50 (VI) NA NA 9.0 3.1
copper 2.9 NA NA 1200 210 nickel 8.3 NA NA 99 ND lead 5.6 NA NA 5.4 ND silver 2.3 NA NA 7.5 0.59 zinc 86 NA NA 770 390
all values in μg/l ND=Non-detect NA=Not analyzed for in this sample values in bold exceed WQCAlaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 26 of 55 Appendix B cont.
Cruise ship H [also sometimes called ship Z] (sampled 8/29/00) priority pollutant detected WQC Gray/Black water forward overboard discharge Gray/Black water aft overboard discharge diethylphthalate 3.4 1.6 1.5 di-n-butylphthalate 3.4 1.0 9.8 bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate none 3.6 1.9 chloroform none 15 6.6 1,2-dichloroethane 113,000 1.2 ND bromodichloromethane 6400 3.6 3.6 dibromochloromethane none 8.4 13 bromoform none 30 ND ethylbenzene 430 ND 0.53 chromium (total) 50 (VI) 39 52 (the WQC of 50 is Cr VI. The 52 is total chromium. It is not possible to know if all of the total Cr is Cr VI or whether some is Cr III that is much less toxic) copper 2.9 740 250 lead 5.6 50 16 silver 2.3 ND 1.9 zinc 86 140 120 all values in μg/l ND=Non-detect NA=Not analyzed for in this sample values in bold exceed WQC
Cruise ship F (sampled 8/25/00) priority pollutant detected WQC Gray water overboard Black water composite Black water STP B bis(2-2ethylhexyl) phthalate none 32 ND NA

chloroform none 1.8 NA 18 1,2-dichloroethane 113,000 0.52 NA ND bromodichloromethane 6,400 ND NA 1.1 cadmium 9.3 0.29 0.26 NA chromium (total) 50 (Cr VI) 4.0 1.5 NA
copper 2.9 62 150 NA lead 5.6 2.5 1.8 NA mercury 0.025 0.33 ND NA nickel 8.3 ND 130 NA silver 2.3 0.30 0.18 NA zinc 86 350 350 NA 2-nitrophenol 4,850 ND 5.4 NA cyanide (total) 1.0(free) ND 51(may be due to interference's) NA all values in μg/l ND=Non-detect NA=Not analyzed for in this sample values in bold exceed WQCAlaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 27 of 55 Appendix B cont.
Cruise ship U (sampled 9/8/00) priority pollutant detected WQC Gray water galley tank 4 Black water Gray water accumulation tank 4 Gray water composite (galley, accumulation, laundry) delta-BHC none NA 0.068 (high recoveries in the method blank spike duplicate indicates a possible high bias) NA ND

heptachlor 0.0036 NA ND NA ND 1,4-dichlorobenzene 1,970 NA 1.1 NA ND butylbenzyl phthalate none NA 1.1 NA ND bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate none NA 1.5 NA 14 diethyl phthalate 3.4 NA ND NA 1.1 di-n-butylphthalate 3.4 NA ND NA 6.5 Phenol 5,800 NA 250 NA NA Chloroform none 2.0 0.79 4.0 NA Bromodichloromethane 6,400 0.98 ND 2.0 NA Dibromochloromethane none 1.3 ND 2.8 NA Bromoform none 1.2 ND 2.1 NA Copper 2.9 NA 510 NA 230 Lead 5.6 NA 30 NA 21 Mercury 0.025 NA 0.93 NA ND zinc 86 NA 1,200 NA 480 all values in μg/l ND=Non-detect NA=Not analyzed for in this sample values in bold exceed WQC

Cruise ship B (sampled 9/13/00) priority pollutant detected WQC Gry galley tank H Gry tank C Blk STP A Blk STP B Blk STP C Blk STP D Blk Composite Gry Composite

chloroform none 14 15 180 210 87 57 NA 1,2-dichloroethane 113,000 0.76 ND ND ND ND ND NA bromoform none ND ND ND 170 140 20 NA Bromodichloromethane 6,400 ND 2.1 17 68 77 53 NA dibromochloromethane none ND 0.86 3.3 65 88 38 NA ethylbenzene 430 ND 0.59 ND ND ND ND NA carbon tetrachloride 50,000 ND ND 1.4 4.2 0.90 0.88 NA chromium (total) 50(CrVI) NA NA NA NA NA NA ND 35 copper 2.9 NA NA NA NA NA NA 240 430 lead 5.6 NA NA NA NA NA NA ND 28 mercury 0.025 NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.67(may be interference's) ND
nickel 8.3 NA NA NA NA NA NA ND 46 silver 2.3 NA NA NA NA NA NA ND 1.9 zinc 86 NA NA NA NA NA NA 580 330 cyanide (total) 1.0 (free) NA NA NA NA NA NA 73 (may be interference's) ND
diethylphthalate 3.4 NA NA NA NA NA NA ND 3.3 di-n-butylphthalate 3.4 NA NA NA NA NA NA ND 5.6 butylbenzylphthalate none NA NA NA NA NA NA ND 9.6Alaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 28 of 55 Appendix B cont.

Cruise ship B cont. (sampled 9/13/00) Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate none NA NA NA NA NA NA ND 69 All values in μg/l ND=Non-detect NA=Not analyzed for in this sample values in bold exceed WQC
Cruise ship D (sampled 9/20/00) Priority pollutant detected WQC Gry ballast # 6 Blk ballast # 4 Gry galley # 11 Composite # 4,6,11 Gry tank F
Methylene chloride 6,400 3.2 (pos. lab contamination) 1.0 (pos. lab contamination) ND NA 1.1 (pos. lab contamination) Chloroform none 4.1 6.7 1.4 NA 6.5 Bromodichloromethane 6,400 1.5 6.3 ND NA 1.1 Toluene 5,000 1.3 ND ND NA ND Tetrachloroethene 450 0.74 ND ND NA 4.2 Dibromochloromethane none 1.4 7.8 ND NA ND Ethylbenzene 430 1.5 0.87 1.1 NA NA Bromoform none 1.5 16 1.9 NA 0.54 Dimethylphthalate 3.4 NA NA NA ND 1.1 Diethylphthalate 3.4 NA NA 5.8 ND 15 di-n-butylphthalate 3.4 NA NA NA ND 1.6 (pos. lab contamination) Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate none NA NA NA 11 13
Copper 2.9 NA NA NA 2200 210 Silver 2.3 NA NA NA 1.5 ND Zinc 86 NA NA NA 860 330 all values in μg/l ND=Non-detect NA=Not analyzed for in this sample values in bold exceed WQC
Cruise ship D (sampled 9/20/00) priority pollutant detected WQC Blk STP A Blk STP B Blk STP C Blk STP D Blk STP E Blk STP composite

Chloroform none 13 3.2 ND 5.6 93 NA 1,2-dichloroethane 113,000 0.57 ND ND ND 0.66 NA Bromodichloromethane 6,400 11 6.4 ND 10 53 NA Dibromochloromethane none 17 11 ND 19 56 NA Bromoform none 36 36 1.9 38 80 NA di-n-butylphthalate 3.4 NA NA NA NA NA 2.5 (pos. lab contamination) bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate none NA NA NA NA NA 1.4 (pos. lab contamination) Copper 2.9 NA NA NA NA NA 360 Nickel 8.3 NA NA NA NA NA 89 Zinc 5.6 NA NA NA NA NA 420 cyanide (total) 1.0 (free) NA NA NA NA NA 19 (may be partly interference's) all values in μg/l ND=Non-detect NA=Not analyzed for in this sample values in bold exceed WQCAlaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 29 of 55 Appendix B cont.
Cruise ship E (sampled 9/21/00) priority pollutant detected WQC Blk STP # 3 ? BHW Tank 8 Port Gry tank 7 port and starboard Phenol 5,800 100 17 3.1 di-n-butylphthalate 3.4 2.6 (pos. lab contamination) 2.1 (pos. lab contamination) 3.0 (pos. lab contamination) diethylphthalate 3.4 ND 3.3 11 bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate none ND 8.8 (pos. lab contamination) 14 (pos. lab contamination) chloroform none 1.6 13 16 bromodichloromethane 6,400 ND 1.7 2.0 dibromochloromethane none ND 0.99 1.1 ethylbenzene 430 ND 0.92 0.68 bromoform none ND 1.1 1.2 chromium (total) 50(CrVI) ND 10 ND copper 2.9 130 6400 150 lead 5.6 ND 16 ND mercury 0.025 0.37(may be interference's) 0.84 (may be interference's) ND
silver 2.3 ND 2.1 ND zinc 86 700 1800 740 all values in μg/l ND=Non-detect NA=Not analyzed for in this sample values in bold exceed WQC
Cruise ship F (sampled 9/22/00) priority pollutant detected WQC Gry galley tank # 11 Blk STP B Blk STP C Blk STP D Blk STP E
diethylphthalate 3.4 6.3 NA NA NA NA di-n-butylphthalate 3.4 3.3 (pos. lab contamination) NA NA NA NA bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate none 3.7 (pos. lab contamination) NA NA NA NA
chloromethane 6,400 3.0 ND 19 7.9 81 chloroethane none 1.5 ND ND ND ND chloroform none 48 11 20 39 1500 carbon tetrachloride 50,000 ND 1.1 ND 27 bromodichloromethane 6,400 16 1.2 ND ND 190 dibromochloromethane none 14 ND ND ND 88 bromoform none 9.8 ND ND ND 25 chromium (total) 50(CrVI) 53 NA NA NA NA copper 2.9 650 NA NA NA NA lead 5.6 62 NA NA NA NA zinc 86 530 NA NA NA NA
all values in μg/l ND=Non-detect NA=Not analyzed for in this sample values in bold exceed WQCAlaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 30 of 55 Appendix B cont.
Cruise ship G (sampled 9/10/00) priority pollutant detected WQC Gry/Blk treated by Reverse Osmosis Gry/Blk treated by Reverse Osmosis
Phenol 5,800 2.1 1.3 1, 3-dichlorobenzene 1,970 1.2 ND di-n-butylphthalate 3.4 1.1 ND bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate none ND 1.3

Chloroform none 4.1 4.0 Metals NA all ND
all values in μg/l ND=Non-detect NA=Not analyzed for in this sample values in bold exceed WQC
Cruise ship K (sampled 9/6/00) priority pollutant detected WQC Blk STP #1 Blk STP #2 Blk STP #3 Blk STP #4 Blk Comp. Gry galley Gry laun dry Gry acco m. Gry comp
Chloroform none 7.7 11 20 5.8 NA 6.2 42 75 NA 1,2-dichloroethane none 0.97 ND ND ND NA ND ND ND NA Toluene 5,000 ND ND ND ND NA ND ND 1.5 NA Bromodichloromethane 6,400 6.9 9.9 18 6.8 NA ND ND ND NA Dibromochloromethane none 13 12 18 8.9 NA ND ND ND NA tetrachloroethene 450 ND ND ND ND NA ND 24 ND NA bromoform none 28 17 25 23 NA ND ND ND NA alpha-BHC none NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA ND delta-BHC none NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA ND endosulfan sulfate 0.008 7 NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA ND
copper 2.9 NA NA NA NA 530 NA NA NA 2600 lead 5.6 NA NA NA NA 27 NA NA NA 250 nickel 8.3 NA NA NA NA 41 NA NA NA 59 silver 2.3 NA NA NA NA 1.9 NA NA NA 2.9 zinc 86 NA NA NA NA 1000 NA NA NA 390 cyanide (total) 1.0 (free) NA NA NA NA 19 (may be interference's) NA NA NA ND
diethylphthalate 3.4 NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA 2.6 bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate none NA NA NA NA ND NA NA NA 11 all values in μg/l ND=Non-detect NA=Not analyzed for in this sample values in bold exceed WQC
Cruise ship M (sampled 9/14/00) priority pollutant detected WQC Gry tank # 2 ? ballast tank 5S Blk STP composite Blk STP # 1 Blk STP # 2 Blk STP # 3 heptachlor 0.0036 ND ND ND NA NA ND diethylphthalate 3.4 5.8 3.7 ND NA NA NA di-n-butylphthalate 3.4 2.1 (lab contamination) 2.5 (lab contamination) 3.2 (lab contamination) NA NA NA bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate none 20 17 1.4 NA NA NA
Chloromethane 6,400 ND ND NA ND 9.4 ND Chloroform none 1.8 15 NA ND 140 13 carbon tetrachloride 50,000 ND ND NA ND 2.0 NDAlaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 31 of 55 Appendix B cont.

Cruise ship M cont. (sampled 9/14/00) 1,2-dichloroethane 113,000 0.65 0.75 NA 0.89 ND 0.76 Trichloroethene 2,000 1.6 71 NA ND ND ND Tetrachloroethene 450 7.7 230 NA ND ND ND Bromodichloromethane 6,400 ND 1.1 NA ND 110 8.6 Toluene 5,000 ND 0.77 NA ND ND ND Dibromochloromethane none ND ND NA ND 63 4.8 Bromoform none ND ND NA ND 14 1.4 Copper 2.9 130 150 170 NA NA NA Lead 5.6 ND ND 18 NA NA NA Nickel 8.3 85 46 ND NA NA NA Silver 2.3 ND ND 1.5 NA NA NA Zinc 86 340 460 800 NA NA NA
all values in μg/l ND=Non-detect NA=Not analyzed for in this sample values in bold exceed WQC
Cruise ship N (sampled 9/18/00) priority pollutant detected WQC Blk STP P Gry pump accom. Gry galley Gry composite phenol 5,800 ND NA NA 1.2 1,4-dichlorobenzene 1,970 5.7 NA NA 2.2 diethylphthalate 3.4 ND NA NA 5.1 di-n-butylphthalate 3.4 2.3 (lab contaminatio n) NA NA 1.8 (lab contamination)

bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate none 2.9 NA NA 21
di-n-octylphthalate 3.4 1.2 NA NA ND methylene chloride 6,400 1.2 (lab contaminatio n) 0.69 (lab contamination) 2.6 (lab contamination) NA

chloroform none 2.5 2.3 2.6 NA bromodichloromethane 6,400 6.8 ND ND NA toluene 5,000 ND 1.7 ND NA dibromochloromethane none 6.5 ND ND NA ethylbenzene 430 4.7 2.8 ND NA bromoform none 3.6 ND ND NA chromium (total) 50(CrVI) ND NA NA 22 copper 2.9 110 NA NA 120 zinc 86 190 NA NA 130 heptachlor 0.0036 ND NA NA ND all values in μg/l ND=Non-detect NA=Not analyzed for in this sample values in bold exceed WQCAlaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 32 of 55 Appendix B cont. Cruise ship O (sampled 9/18/00) priority pollutant detected WQC Blk STP # 1 Blk STP # 2 Blk STP # 3 Blk STP # 4 Blk comp Gry accom

. Gry galley Gry comp
chloromethane 6,400 ND 6.6 ND 16 NA 6.3 ND NA methlyene chloride * pos lab contamination 6,400 42 * ND ND 0.55

* NA ND 36 * NA

Chloroform none 6.2 9.3 5.5 12 NA 11 29 NA bromodichloromethane 6,400 6.6 19 8.5 45 NA 15 ND NA tetrachloroethene 450 ND ND ND 7.6 NA ND ND NA toluene 5,000 ND ND ND ND NA 4.0 ND NA dibromochloromethane none 9.2 26 8.1 93 NA 22 ND NA bromoform none 15 47 9.5 130 NA 36 ND NA 1,3-dichlorobenzene 1,970 NA NA NA NA 380 NA NA NA 1,4-dichlorobenzene 1,970 NA NA NA NA 350 NA NA 11 1,2-dichlorobenzene 1,970 NA NA NA NA 390 NA NA ND 2,4,6-trichlorophenol none NA NA NA NA 3.2 NA NA ND diethylphthalate 3.4 NA NA NA NA ND NA NA 4.8 di-n-butylphthalate 3.4 NA NA NA NA 2.7 (pos. lab contaminat ion) NA NA 3.4 pos. lab contaminat ion) bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate none NA NA NA NA 6.2 NA NA 120 chromium (total) 50(Cr VI) NA NA NA NA 14 NA NA 14
copper 2.9 NA NA NA NA 7100 NA NA 810 lead 5.6 NA NA NA NA ND NA NA 17 mercury 0.025 NA NA NA NA ND NA NA 0.33 nickel 8.3 NA NA NA NA ND NA NA 52 silver 2.3 NA NA NA NA 2.0 NA NA ND zinc 86 NA NA NA NA 610 NA NA 1200 all values in μg/l ND=Non-detect NA=Not analyzed for in this sample values in bold exceed WQC
Cruise ship Q (sampled 9/18/00) Priority Pollutant Detected WQC Blk STP #1 Blk STP #2 Blk STP #4 Blk com p Gry gal/ acco Gry accom Gry laund ry Gry comp
chloromethane 6,400 4.4 ND ND NA ND ND ND NA bromomethane 6,400 7.0 ND ND NA ND ND ND NA methylene chloride * pos lab contamination 6,400 0.64 * 23 * 23 * NA ND 1.9 * ND NA

chloroform none 5.3 160 380 NA 19 51 17 NA carbon tetrachloride 50,000 0.99 2.9 5.8 NA ND ND ND NA bromodichloromethane 6,400 14 180 70 NA 1.0 4.8 ND NA toluene 5,000 ND 2.2 ND NA ND 0.81 ND NA dibromochloromethane none 28 270 54 NA ND 3.8 ND NA ethylbenzene 430 ND 2.3 ND NA ND ND ND NA bromoform none 64 440 44 NA ND 5.2 ND NA1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane 9,020 ND 5.9 ND NA ND ND ND NAAlaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 33 of 55 Appendix B cont.
Cruise ship Q cont. (sampled 9/18/00) diethylphthalate 3.4 NA NA NA ND NA NA ND 2.3 di-n-butylphthalate 3.4 NA NA NA 2.7 (p
os. lab conta m) NA NA NA 1.6 (po s. lab. cont.)

butylbenzylphthalate 3.4 NA NA NA ND NA NA NA 1.2 bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate none NA NA NA 3.3 NA NA NA 35
copper 2.9 NA NA NA 440 NA NA NA 610 lead 5.6 NA NA NA ND NA NA NA 120 Mercury 0.025 NA NA NA 0.26 (pos. interf erenc e NA NA NA

Nickel 8.3 NA NA NA ND NA NA NA 73 Zinc 86 NA NA NA 590 NA NA NA 840 cyanide (total) 1.0 (free) NA NA NA 28(p
os. interf erenc e NA NA NA ND

Heptachlor 0.0036 NA NA NA ND NA NA NA ND
Cruise ship R (sampled 9/21/00) Priority Pollutant Detected WQC Blk Gry HTS composite Gry DHTS composite
phenol 5,800 160 ND ND 1,4-dichlorobenzene 1,970 2.8 ND ND 2,4,6-trichlorophenol none 2.0 ND ND diethylphthalate 3.4 ND 8.5 6.0 di-n-butylphthalate 3.4 8.2 (possible lab contamination) 6.8 (possible lab contamination) 5.3 (possible lab contamination) butylbenzylphthalate 3.4 ND 1.1 ND bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate none 3.7 (possible lab contamination) 51 (possible lab contamination) 35 (possible lab contamination) naphthalene 2,350 ND ND 3.0 acenaphthene 710 ND ND 7.7 fluoranthene 16 ND ND 1.2 fluorene 300 ND ND 4.1 phenanthrene none ND ND 3.1 chromium (total) 50(CrVI) 25 ND NA copper 2.9 3900 830 720 mercury 0.025 0.30 (possible interference's) ND ND
nickel 8.3 ND 44 46 zinc 86 390 400 600
all values in μg/l ND=Non-detect NA=Not analyzed for in this sample values in bold exceed WQCAlaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 34 of 55 Appendix B cont.
Cruise ship S (sampled 9/20/00) Priority Pollutant Detected WQC Gry/Blk Gry composite Gry laundry Gry galley Gry accom Diethylphthalate 3.4 2.7 4.4 NA NA NA di-n-butylphthalate 3.4 3.9 (pos. lab contamination) 2.9 (pos. lab contamination) NA NA NA bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate none 6.5 (pos. lab contamination) 22 (pos. lab contamination) NA NA NA

Chloroform none 5.7 NA 28 15 6.0 1,2-dichloroethane 113,000 ND NA ND ND 0.70 Trichloroethene 2,000 1.3 NA 8.2 ND ND Bromodichloromethane 6,400 0.57 NA 0.57 0.58 0.82 Toluene 5,000 0.69 NA ND 1.3 5.1 Tetrachloroethene 450 33 NA 190 ND 11 Copper 2.9 530 160 NA NA NA Nickel 8.3 42 630 NA NA NA Silver 2.3 ND 2.1 NA NA NA Zinc 86 530 1000 NA NA NA
all values in μg/l ND=Non-detect NA=Not analyzed for in this sample values in bold exceed WQC
Cruise ship S (sampled 9/26/00) Priority Pollutant Detected WQC Blk STP composite Blk STP # 1 Blk STP # 2 Blk STP # 3 4-nitrophenol 4,850 7.7 NA NA NA di-n-butylphthalate 3.4 2.1 (pos. lab contamination) NA NA NA bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate none 1.8 (pos. lab contamination) NA NA NA

cadmium 9.3 0.24 NA NA NA copper 2.9 54 NA NA NA zinc 86 250 NA NA NA chloromethane 6,400 NA 120 160 240 chloroform none NA 0.68 3.7 ND
all values in μg/l ND=Non-detect NA=Not analyzed for in this sample values in bold exceed WQC
Cruise ship V (sampled 9/2/00) Priority Pollutant Detected WQC Gry/Blk treated by reverse osmosis Gry/Blk treated by reverse osmosis bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate none 4.1 (pos. lab contamination) 1.6 (pos. lab contamination)
chloroform none 4.6 4.8 1,2-dichloroethane 113,000 1.9 0.74 toluene 5,000 0.58 ND zinc 86 6.1 7.0
all values in μg/l ND=Non-detect NA=Not analyzed for in this sample values in bold exceed WQCAlaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 35 of 55 Appendix B cont. Cruise ship L (sampled 9/20/00) Priority Pollutant Detected WQC Blk STP # 1 Blk ST P # 2 Blk STP # 3 Blk STP comp osite Gry 78 port Gry tank 3C

methylene chloride 6,400 1.8 (lab contamination) ND ND NA ND ND
Chloroform none 7.8 89 2.4 NA 44 26 carbon tetrachloride 50,000 ND 1.6 ND NA ND ND 1,2-dichloroethane 113,000 ND ND 0.49 NA ND ND Bromodichloromethane 6,400 18 38 4.6 NA 1.3 0.51 Toluene 5,000 ND ND ND NA 0.47 ND Dibromochloromethane none 25 35 8.3 NA ND ND Ethylbenzene 430 ND ND ND NA 0.53 0.68 Bromoform none 27 39 12 NA ND ND Diethylphthalate 3.4 NA NA NA ND 4.5 3.6 Phenanthrene none NA NA NA ND 1.4 ND di-n-butylphthalate 3.4 NA NA NA 3.1 (po s. lab conta minatio n) 2.2 pos. lab contaminat ion) 3.3 pos. lab contaminati on)

Butylbenzylphthalate 3.4 NA NA NA ND 1.1 ND bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate none NA NA NA 5.1 (po s. lab conta minatio n) 20 (pos. lab contaminat ion) 7.6 (pos. lab contaminati on)
Cadmium 9.3 NA NA NA ND ND 12 chromium (total) 50(CrVI) NA NA NA 19 ND ND Copper 2.9 NA NA NA 360 180 1500 Mercury 0.025 NA NA NA 0.23 ( possibl e interfer ence's) ND ND

Nickel 8.3 NA NA NA ND ND 140 Silver 2.3 NA NA NA ND 2.3 ND Zinc 86 NA NA NA 620 750 540 cyanide (total) 1.0 (free) NA NA NA 26(po ssible interfer ence's) 22 (possible interferenc e's) ND

Cruise ship C (sampled 9/15/00) Priority Pollutant Detected WQC Blk comp Blk STP 1 Blk STP 2 Blk STP 3 Gry comp Gry accom Gry laundry Gry galley
di-n-butylphthalate * pos lab contamination 3.4 2.0 * ( NA NA NA 3.1 * ( NA NA NA
Diethylphthalate 3.4 ND NA NA NA 3.3 NA NA NA bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate none 2.3 NA NA NA 17 NA NA NA
Copper 2.9 760 NA NA NA 300 NA NA NA Mercury 0.025 0.24 (possible interfer) NA NA NA ND NA NA NAAlaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 36 of 55 Appendix B cont.

Cruise ship C cont. (sampled 9/15/00) Silver 2.3 ND NA NA NA 2.0 NA NA NA Zinc 86 ND NA NA NA 430 NA NA NA alpha-BHC none ND NA NA NA ND NA NA NA Chloromethane 6,400 NA ND ND ND NA 22 ND ND 1,2-dichloroethane 1,970 NA 0.97 ND ND NA ND ND ND methylene chloride * pos lab contamintaion 6,400 NA ND ND ND NA 2.9 * 67 * 2.4 *

Chloroform none NA ND 200 ND NA 170 120 240 carbon tetrachloride 50,000 NA ND ND ND NA 1.8 ND ND Trichloroethene 2,000 NA ND ND ND NA 0.67 ND ND Toluene 5,000 NA ND 0.73 ND NA ND ND ND Bromodichloromethane 6,400 NA ND 43 ND NA 8.9 ND 2.0 Bromoform none NA ND 6.1 ND NA ND ND ND Tetrachloroethene 450 NA ND ND ND NA 0.65 740 2.2 Dibromochloromethane none NA ND 16 ND NA 1.3 ND ND1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane 9,020 NA ND ND ND NA 0.91 ND 1.0Alaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 37 of 55 

### Appendix C: Summary of Analyses of Cruise Ship Wastewater for Non-Priority Pollutants, Summer of 2000

BOD TSS Total Ammonia as N pH COD Fecal Coliform Free/Total Chlorine
Waste Stream (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/L (mg/l) (FC/100 ml) (mg/l) Cruise ship A (sampled 8/7/00) Gry laundry 70 4 0.39 10.5 230 ND 0.4/0.85 Gry 81 67 3.4 7.2 190 50,000 ND/ND Blk 63 100 ND 7.6 NA 300 0.25/2.5 Cruise ship A (sampled 8/22/00) Gry main overboard 1040 480 1.2 6 1140 32,000,000 ND/ND Gry stbrd laundry 6.7 54 0.1 9.6 180 ND >3.5/>3.5 Gry in ballast 420 250 1.7 5.5 860 27,000 ND/ND Blk 98 99 68 7.7 NA ND 3.5/>3.5 Cruise ship B (sampled 8/1 and 8/2/00) Gry (?) Ballast tank 8 1100 623 24 5.8 3860 3,500,000* 0.1/0.1 Gry (?) Ballast tank 1270 612 15 4.8 3460 490,000 ND/ND Gry tanks D,E 1120 497 1.4 6.1 2060 350,000 ND/ND Blk TBW STP composite 75 236 100 5.3 NA NA NA/NA Blk STP B NA NA NA NA NA 350 1.7/3.5 Blk STP C NA NA NA NA NA 3,500,000 0.7/0.9 Blk STP D NA NA NA NA NA 9,200,000 1.9/2.2 Blk STP E NA NA NA NA NA ND 1.1/>3.5 Cruise ship B (sampled 9/13/00) Gry galley composite 1210 320 0.63 9.5 1730 NA NA/NA Gry galley tank H NA NA NA NA NA 3,000 0.2/2.5 Gry tank C NA NA NA NA NA 30 ND/0.5-1.0 Gry ballast tank 4 480 120 0.76 6.2 720 16,000,000 ND/ND Blk STP A NA NA NA NA NA 230 0.1/2.8 Blk STP B NA NA NA NA NA 230 3.0/>3.5 Blk STP C NA NA NA NA NA ND 0.2/1.0 Blk STP D NA NA NA NA NA 13,000 0.2/3.5 Blk STP composite 130 650 64.1 6.9 NA NA NA/NA Cruise ship C (sampled 9/28 and 9/29/00) Gry overboard 190 86 5.3 6.7 286 170,000 ND/ND Gry in ballast 4.8 18 0.21 7.8 320 NA NA/NA Gry in ballast 25 53 ND 7.6 469 NA ND/ND Blk ballast # 1 NA NA NA 7 NA 16,000,000 ND/0.2 Blk ballast # 2 NA NA NA 7.5 NA >24,000,000 0.1/0.2 Blk ballast # 3 NA NA NA 8.3 NA 1,700,000 ND/ND Blk STP # 1 (chlorinator tank) NA NA NA NA 8 ND/1.0 Blk STP # 1 (aeration tank) NA NA NA 8 NA 3,500,000 NA/NA Blk STP # 1,3 (composite) 250 1480 52 7.3 NA NA ? Blk STP # 3 NA NA NA 8 NA 7,000 1.0/2.0Alaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 38 of 55 Appendix C cont.

BOD TSS Total Ammonia as N pH COD Fecal Coliform Free/Total Chlorine
Waste Stream (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/L (mg/l) (FC/100 ml) (mg/l) Cruise ship C (sampled Gry composite 730 190 0.12 7.5 440 NA NA/NA Gry accommodations NA NA NA NA NA <2 ND/ND Gry laundry NA NA NA NA NA <2 ND/0.5 Gry galley NA NA NA NA NA <2 4.0/4.0 Blk composite 150 1430 66 7.6 1400 NA NA/NA Blk unit 1 NA NA NA NA NA 23,000 ND/ND Blk unit 2 NA NA NA NA NA 110,000 0.2/0.5 Blk unit 3 NA NA NA NA NA 2,400,000 ND/ND Cruise ship D (sampled Gry in ballast # 6 200 110 5.1 6.6 380 >16,000,000 ND/ND Gry in ballast-galley 1010 320 1.3 4 1500 170,000 ND/ND Gry overboard 4.3 27 0.37 8.1 425 28,000 ND/ND Blk in ballast 4 340 130 53 6.7 NA 5,000,000 ND/ND Blk overboard 49 130 76 6.4 NA 800,000 ND/ND Cruise ship D (sampled 9/20/00) Gry laundry coll. tank NA NA NA NA NA <2 0.8/1.0 Gry ballast #6 NA NA NA NA NA 170,000 ND/ND Gry galley ballast 11 NA NA NA NA NA 50,000 ND/ND Gry coll tank F NA NA NA NA NA 170,000 ND/ND Gry(?) ballast composite 420 250 30 5.9 1020 NA NA/NA Gry laundry/accom composite 69 30 0.61 7.3 240 NA NA/NA Blk ballast # 4 NA NA NA NA NA 300,000* ND/ND Blk STP A NA NA NA NA NA 110,000 ND/0.2 Blk STP B NA NA NA NA NA <2 >3.5/>3.5 Blk STP C NA NA NA NA NA 16,000,000 ND/ND Blk STP D NA NA NA NA NA 30,000 0.3/3.5 Blk STP E NA NA NA NA NA 2 0.1/0.1 Blk STP A-E comp. 49 300 74 7.7 NA NA NA/NA Cruise ship E (sampled 8/3/00) Gry holding tank 86 171 1.7 4.7 1250 1,300,000 ND/ND Gry laundry 85 19 3 9.2 300 700 ND/ND Gry galley 1720 257 1.6 6.1 1090 >24,000,000 ND/ND Blk TBW # 3 140 589 520 8.4 NA 1,400,000 ND/ND Cruise ship E (sampled 9/21/00) Gry (?) in ballast 1190 2060 48 7.2 2760 5,000,000 ND/ND Gry tank 7 180 110 2.1 6.6 370 280,000 ND/ND Blk STP # 3 320 950 730 8.7 NA 700,000 ND/0.2Alaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 39 of 55 Appendix C cont.

BOD TSS Total Ammonia as N pH COD Fecal Coliform Free/Total Chlorine
Waste Stream (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/L (mg/l) (FC/100 ml) (mg/l) Cruise ship F (sampled 8/25/00) Gry overboard >4500 3000 3.8 3.8 15,700 7,000 ND/ND Blk/Gry ballast 650 380 0.19 5 230 50,000 ND/ND Blk STP A NA NA NA NA NA 50,000 NA/NA Blk STP B NA NA NA NA NA 700 NA/NA Blk STP C NA NA NA NA NA 30 NA/NA Blk STP D NA NA NA NA NA 2300 NA/NA Blk STP E NA NA NA NA NA <2 NA/NA Blk STP composite B-E 58 200 45 6.7 NA NA 0.4/>3.5 Cruise ship F (sampled 9/22/00) Gry galley ballast tank #11 110 55 0.18 6.4 280 900,000 NA/ND Gry collection tank A 150 69 1.2 7 410 70,000 NA/ND Blk STP A <2 NA/5.6 Blk STP B 2 NA/6.2 Blk STP C 23 NA/15 (!) Blk STP D <2 NA/7.6 Blk STP E <2 NA/>20 (!) Blk STP composite A-E 58 250 44 4.6 510 NA NA/NA Cruise ship G (sampled 7/30/00) Blk/Gry treated 220 40 57 5.9 395 35,000 NA/NA Cruise ship G (sampled 9/10/00) Blk/Gry RO treated, sample 1 80 ND 1.22 5.9 130 ND ND/ND Blk/Gry RO treated, sample 2 75 ND 1.24 6.1 130 ND ND/ND Cruise ship H [also labeled ship Z] (sampled 8/19/00) Gry/Blk aft 110 130 8.1 7.5 670 4000 0.2/1.0 Gry/Blk foreward 130 92 13 7.4 710 510 0.75/1.3 Cruise ship H [also labeled ship Z] (sampled 8/29/00) Gry/Blk aft 72 89 3.7 7.8 135 30,000 0.7/1.1 Gry/Blk forward 150 150 8.5 7.6 135 60,000 0.75/1.1 Cruise ship J (sampled 8/5/00) Gry starboard stabilizer room 170 57 0.5 6.4 350 16,000,000 ND/0.1 Gry port stabilizer room 89 37 0.99 6.8 410 22,000 ND/0.2 Gry fuel treatment room 440 98 0.45 10.3 850 490,000 NA/NA Gry shaft tunnel 780 294 0.26 4.7 1160 9,200,000 NA/NA Gry laundry 180 140 11 7.1 430 >24,000,000 NA/NA Gry/Blk ballast tank 4P 110 55 17 7 710 16,000,000 NA/NA Blk port STP (sample # 1) 30 80 75 8 NA 3300* ND/0.2 Blk port STP (sample # 2) 110 160 96 8.1 NA 9,200,000 ND/ND Blk stboard STP (sample #1) 600 1610 98 7.4 NA 940,000 ND/ND Blk stboard STP (sample # 2) 71 140 94 8.2 NA 790,000 NA/NAAlaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 40 of 55 Appendix C cont.

BOD TSS Total Ammonia as N pH COD Fecal Coliform Free/Total Chlorine
Waste Stream (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/L (mg/l) (FC/100 ml) (mg/l) Cruise ship J (sampled8/12/00) Gry starboard stabilizer 130 54 0.52 7.7 380 800,000 ND/ND Gry fuel treatment room 150 67 2 9.1 170 220,000 ND/ND Gry shaft tunnel 810 150 1.1 5.7 1190 1600 ND/ND Gry laundry room 290 420 10 3 1310 ND ND/ND Gry/Blk starboard ballast tank 180 110 13 6.3 680 3,000,000 ND/ND Blk port STP 47 280 70 7.7 NA 1,100,000 ND/ND Blk stboard STP 90 590 62 7.6 NA 500,000 ND/ND Cruise ship K (sampled 9/6/00) Gry galley 11 21 2 7.3 25 NA* ND/ND Gry laundry 86 46 ND 7.6 270 NA* ND/ND Gry accommodations 500 110 0.88 9 800 NA* ND/ND Blk STP # 1 68 290 98 7.2 NA NA* ND/ND Blk STP # 2 91 350 120 7.4 NA NA* ND/0.5 Blk STP # 3 79 390 77 7.9 NA NA* ND/2.0 Blk STP # 4 83 320 93 7.7 NA NA* ND/2.0 Cruise ship K (sampled8/29/00) Gry tank 5 130 51 2.1 7.2 250 8000 ND/ND Gry tank 10 galley 490 160 9.5 6.9 790 28,000 ND/ND Gry laundry 120 39 0.17 7.6 400 8,000 ND/ND Blk SPT # 1 NA NA NA NA NA 5 3.5/>3.5 Blk SPT # 2 NA NA NA NA NA 170 3.5/>3.5 Blk SPT # 3 NA NA NA NA NA 110,000 ND/ND Blk SPT # 4 NA NA NA NA NA 5,000,000 ND/ND Blk SPT composite 65 330 109 7.8 NA NA NA Cruise ship L (sampled 8/9/00) Gry in ballast tank 3C 260 180 0.26 6.6 550 9,000,000 ND/ND Blk STP # 1 NA NA NA NA NA 17,000 ND/ND Blk STP # 2 NA NA NA NA NA ND 0.50/2.0 Blk STP # 3 NA NA NA NA NA 9,000,000 0.20/1.0 Blk STP composite 130 1260 100 6.9 NA NA NA/NA Cruise ship L (sampled 9/20/00) Gry collection tank port 150 51 2.9 7.6 290 <2 0.6/1.2 Gry ballast tank 3C 230 72 ND 6.7 480 <2 ND/ND Blk STP # 1 NA NA NA NA NA >16,000,000 15/125 (!) Blk STP # 2 NA NA NA NA NA 300 0.7/17 (!) Blk STP # 3 NA NA NA NA NA <2 3.5/21 (!) Blk STP # 1-3 composite 140 860 50 7.4 NA NA NAAlaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 41 of 55 Appendix C cont.

BOD TSS Total Ammonia as N pH COD Fecal Coliform Free/Total Chlorine
Waste Stream (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/L (mg/l) (FC/100 ml) (mg/l) Cruise ship M (sampled 8/9/00) Gry tank 1 40 62 ND 7.9 400 ND 3.5/>3.5 Gry tank 5P 350 250 0.59 9.9 750 ND >3.5/NA Blk STP # 1 NA NA NA NA NA 2 3.5/>3.5 Blk STP # 2 NA NA NA NA NA ND >3.5/>3.5 Blk STP # 3 NA NA NA NA NA 500,000 ND/ND Blk STP composite 170 1230 110 7.5 NA NA NA/NA Cruise ship M (sampled 9/14/00) Gry collection tank 2 270 73 ND 6.6 360 2,200,000 ND/ND Gry in ballast tank 5S 230 87 2 7.2 445 5,000,000 ND/ND Gry in ballast pump 5S 260 100 ND 6.8 615 3,000,000 ND/ND Blk STP # 1 NA NA NA NA NA 500,000 ND/ND Blk STP # 1 NA NA NA NA NA >16,000,000 ND/ND Blk STP # 1 NA NA NA NA NA 500,000 ND/ND Blk STP 1-3 composite 82 280 140 8.2 NA NA NA Cruise ship N (sampled 9/2/00) Gry galley 330 190 ND 5.6 785 9,000,000 ND/ND Gry laundry 98 38 0.75 10.2 300 <2 0.4/1.0 Blk strbrd STP 150 200 180 7.6 1210 80 >3.5/>3.5 Cruise ship N (sampled 9/18/00) Gry galley NA NA NA NA NA 130,000 ND/ND Gry laundry tank NA NA NA NA NA 30 ND/ND Gry pump accom. NA NA NA NA NA 1,200 ND/ND Gry galley/laundry/pump accom. composite 230 230 1.4 8 400 NA NA/NA Blk STP port 110 300 130 6.7 NA ND 2.0/3.0 Cruise ship O (sampled 9/9/00) Gry forward strbrd 170 110 26.9 6.8 470 110,000 ND/NA Gry galley 3190 4500 2.37 6.8 10,420 5 1.2/NA

Blk STP forward NA NA NA NA NA 14 1.3/NA Blk STP strbrd NA NA NA NA NA 4 2.5/NA Blk STP midship NA NA NA NA NA 2,800,000 ND/NA Blk composite 250 980 155 7.5 NA NA NA/NA Cruise ship O (sampled 9/18/00) Gry accommodations 210 800 49 7.8 1340 9* ND/1.5 Gry galley 37,030 29,400 8.2 3.7 69,08 0 rejected ND/ND
Blk Trident # 1 160 1010 65 7.7 NA 9,000 ND/0.7 Blk Trident # 2 140 630 58 7.7 NA 5 2.0/4.1 Blk Trident # 3 280 660 102 8.2 NA 7 ND/4.0 Blk Trident # 4 73 270 0.25 6.8 NA <2 >10/>10Alaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 42 of 55 Appendix C cont.

BOD TSS Total Ammonia as N pH COD Fecal Coliform Free/Total Chlorine
Waste Stream (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/L (mg/l) (FC/100 ml) (mg/l) Cruise ship P (sampled 8/6/00) Gry in ballast 360 120 0.76 5.5 780 >16,000,000 ND/ND Gry/Blk 250 320 200 8.3 1030 5,000,000 ND/ND Blk in ballast 210 220 150 8 NA 16,000,000 ND/ND Blk Trident # 2 120 280 160 8.5 NA 23 <0.5/9.0 Cruise ship P (sampled 8/15/00) Gry ballast 8P NA NA NA NA NA >16,000,000 ND/ND Gry ballast 8S NA NA NA NA NA 5,000,000 ND/ND Gry port/strbrd composite 1030 500 1.3 4.8 1530 NA ND/ND Blk in ballast 2P 167 97 150 7.8 690 3,000,000 ND/ND Cruise ship Q (sampled 8/7/00) Gry/Blk in ballast 130 120 1.4 7.5 550 ND ND/>3.5 Blk STP # 1 NA NA NA 6.2 NA ND >3.5/>3.5 Blk STP # 2 NA NA NA 6.5 NA ND >3.5/>3.5 Blk STP # 3 NA NA NA 6.1 NA ND 2.5/>3.5 Blk STP # 4 NA NA NA 5.1 NA ND >3.5/>3.5 Blk STP composite 55 310 1.4 NA NA NA NA Cruise ship Q (sampled9/18/00) Gry galley/accom-modations NA NA NA NA NA 1,400,000 ND/ND Gry accommodations NA NA NA NA NA 5,000,000 ND/ND Gry laundry NA NA NA NA NA 280,000 ND/ND Gry composite 250 120 1.3 6.3 790 NA NA/NA Blk STP # 1 NA NA NA NA NA 13 2.0/1.0(?) Blk STP # 2 NA NA NA NA NA <2 0.5/10 (!) Blk STP # 3 NA NA NA NA NA <2 ND/3.0 Blk STP # 4 NA NA NA NA NA 13,000 ND/ND Blk composite STP #1-4 100 630 120 7.8 NA NA NA/NA Cruise ship R (sampled 9/15/00) Gry HTS composite 270 48 0.96 6.3 460 NA ND/ND Gry DHTS composite 600 68 0.88 5 910 NA ND/ND Blk overboard disch. 480 1180 160 7.8 2720 NA 1.0/2.0 Cruise ship R (sampled 9/21/00) Gry HTS composite 240 41 0.48 6.1 500 NA ND/ND Gry DHTS composite 610 210 0.85 5.1 1150 NA ND/ND Blk overboard 310 580 170 8.2 2400 NA* >3.0/>3.0Alaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 43 of 55 Appendix C cont.

BOD TSS Total Ammonia as N pH COD Fecal Coliform Free/Total Chlorine
Waste Stream (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/L (mg/l) (FC/100 ml) (mg/l) Cruise ship S (sampled 9/20 and 9/22/00) Gry laundry 230 67 0.27 10.1 400 NA* NA/NA Gry galley 1200 540 ND 5.2 1890 NA* NA/NA Gry accommodations 160 66 0.47 6.4 310 NA* NA/NA Gry/Blk in ballast 250 270 14 6.7 990 NA* NA/NA Blk STP # 1 ND 1.37/NA Blk STP # 2 6700 2.20/NA Blk STP # 3 260,000 0.7/NA Blk STP composite # 1-3 43 260 110 7 480 NA NA/NA Cruise ship S (sampled 9/26/00) Gry galley 1320 930 0.34 4.9 7200 1,100,000 ND/ND Gry accommodations 77 65 0.38 6.5 160 1,100,000 ND/ND Gry laundry 50 38 0.15 10.5 200 <2 0.2/0.3 Blk STP # 1 NA NA NA NA NA <2 ND/0.8 Blk STP # 2 NA NA NA NA NA <2 ND/1.0 Blk STP # 3 NA NA NA NA NA 1,700,000 ND/0.5 Blk STP composite # 1-3 220 1110 120 7.1 NA NA NA/NA Cruise ship T (sampled 8/10/00) Gry in ballast 220 160 64 7 690 350,000 ND/ND Gry laundry 63 42 0.37 9.8 300 130 ND/ND Blk STP # 1 50 140 91 7.1 NA 170,000 ND/ND Blk STP # 2 52 120 140 8.3 NA 5000 1.0/4.5 Blk STP # 3 58 290 160 7.9 NA 5,000,000 ND/ND Cruise ship T (sampled 8/18/00) Gry overboard 450 170 4.4 6.3 1160 11,000 ND/NA Gry (?) in ballast tank 8 280 55 3.2 6.5 455 900,000 ND/NA Blk overboard 70 220 75 7.4 455 NA 0.75/NA Blk STP # 1 spigot NA NA NA NA NA 13 NA/NA Blk STP # 2 spigot NA NA NA NA NA <2 NA/NA Blk STP # 3 spigot NA NA NA NA NA 140,000 NA/NA Blk STP # 4 spigot NA NA NA NA NA 13 NA/NA Cruise ship U (sampled 8/24/00) Gry tank # 1 NA NA NA NA NA 50,000 ND/ND Gry tank # 4 NA NA 0.44 NA 455 220,000 ND/ND Gry tank # 1 and # 4 composite 160 35 NA 6.5 NA NA ND/ND Gry in ballast 913 72 64 ND 7 595 220,000 ND/ND Blk # 1 610 350 540 7.6 NA 1,700,000 ND/NDAlaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 44 of 55 Appendix C cont.

BOD TSS Total Ammonia as N pH COD Fecal Coliform Free/Total Chlorine
Waste Stream (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/L (mg/l) (FC/100 ml) (mg/l) Cruise ship U (sampled 9/8/00) Gry composite 820 330 0.31 6.2 1710 NA NA/NA Gry galley NA NA NA NA NA 170,000 NA/NA Gry laundry NA NA NA NA NA 8 NA/NA Gry accommodation tank 4 NA NA NA NA NA >16,000,000 NA/NA Blk 1240 3580 765 8.1 3950 >16,000,000 ND/ND Cruise ship V (sampled 9/3/00) Reverse Osmosis treated Blk/Gry 120 ND 2.5 5.6 170 <2 ND/ND Reverse Osmosis treated Blk/Gry 110 ND 2.4 5.6 170 <2 ND/ND Cruise ship V (sampled 9/11/00) Reverse Osmosis treated Blk/Gry 84 ND 2.24 5.7 120 ND ND/ND
*Sample Exceeded Holding TimeAlaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 45 of 55 

### Appendix D: ACSI Steering Committee and Work Group Members

Steering Committee Members
Rear Admiral Thomas J. Barrett, 17 thCoast Guard District Commander U.S. Coast Guard

Dean Brown North West Cruiseship Association
Michele Brown, Commissioner Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation
Loren Gerhard, Executive Director Southeast Conference (Representing Alaskan Communities) Ron Kreizenbeck, Director, Office of Enforcement and Compliance U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Randy Ray U.S. Cruise Ship Association

Oil Spill Response Work Group Members
Bob Mattson, Co-Chair Environmental Specialist, Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation Commander Rob Lorigan, Co-Chair Commanding Officer, U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety Office, Juneau Commander Stephen J. Ohnstad, Co-Chair U.S. Coast Guard Don Habeger Cruise Line Agencies of Alaska

John Hansen North West Cruise Ship Association Rick Janelle, 17th Coast Guard District Response Action Team U.S. Coast Guard Lt. Cecil McNutt, Chief, Port Operations U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety Office, Juneau David Owings Southeast Alaska Petroleum Resource Organization, Inc. (SEAPRO) Bill Sharp Holland America Line Westours Inc.Alaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 46 of 55 Oil Spill Response Work Group Members continued Rich Softye, Vice President, Compliance Programs Holland America Line Jim Studley NSE Local Emergency Planning Committee Scot Tiernan, Environmental Specialist, Southeast Alaska Response Team Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation Chuck Young, Chief Ranger Glacier Bay National Park & Preserve, Glacier Bay National Park

Air and Water Quality Work Group Members Chair - David Rogers, Director, Division of Air and Water Quality Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation John Pavitt, Air Work Group Co-Chair U.S. Environmental Protection Agency LCDR Spencer Wood Water Work Group Co-Chair U.S. Coast Guard

Hans Antonsen Southeast Alaska Pilots' Association

David Banks Nature Conservancy

Lt. Jim Bartlett U.S. Coast Guard

Bob Berto Cruise Line Agencies LCDR John Bingaman 17th Coast Guard District, USCG Michelle Bonnet, Environmental Specialist Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation

David Brown Princess Cruises

Gershon Cohen Campaign to Safeguard America’s Waters Michael Conway, Director, Statewide Public Service Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation Amy Crook Alaska Conservation AllianceAlaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 47 of 55 Air and Water Quality Work Group Members continued Steven Daugherty Department of Law

Tom Dow Princess Cruises Dave Eley, Contractor Support to Work Group Consultant Cape Decision Int’l. Services Kenwyn George, Environmental Engineer Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation

Loren Gerhard Southeast Conference

Tom Greene Crystal Cruises Gerry Guay, Environmental Engineer Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation Don Habeger Cruise Line Agencies of Alaska

John Hansen Northwest Cruise Ship Association
Richard Heffern, Chemist Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation Paul Johnsen, Port Engineer Alaska Marine Highway System, Alaska Department of Transportation

Michael O. Jones Special Expeditions Marine

Tim June Lynn Canal Conservation Sarah Keeney Southeast Alaska Conservation Council Gretchen Keiser, Legislative Aide Representative Kerttula’s Office Ted Kellogg Southeast Alaska Pilots' Association Annette Kreitzer, Legislative Assistant Senator Leman’s OfficeAlaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 48 of 55 Air and Water Quality Work Group Members continued
Mike Krieber, Chair House Transportation John Kuterbach, Environmental Conservation Manager Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation

Pat Lavin National Wildlife Federation Amber Lee, Legislative Secretary Senator Kim Elton’s Office Don McGlothlin, Engineer Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation Katy McKerney, Environmental Specialist Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation

Kim Metcalfe-Helmar Downtown Neighborhood Association/Community Southeast Conference Glenn Miller, Engineer, Solid Waste Program Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation Commander Stephen Ohnstad U.S. Coast Guard Commander Ed Page 17 thCoast Guard District Al Parrish
Andrew Phillips Norwegian Cruise Line
Representative Jim Powell City & Borough of Juneau Randy Ray U.S. Cruise Ship Association Robert Reges Alaska Conservation Council & Cruise Control, Inc.

Kira Schmidt Bluewater Network

Jim Schoeneman World Explorer Cruises Nick Schoengerdt Holland AmericaAlaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 49 of 55 Air and Water Quality Work Group Members continued
Stan Senner, Executive Director Audobon Society Mary Siroky, Environmental Conservation Manager Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation
John Sisk, Staff Assistant Governor’s Office Rich Softye, Director Compliance Holland America Line Heather Stockard, Environmental Conservation Manager Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation Cliff Stone, Legislative Assistant Senator Austerman's Office Chip Thoma Alaska Conservation Alliance

Steve Torok Environmental Protection Agency Anthony Turrini National Wildlife Federation

Joe Valenti Crystal Cruises
Dr. Richard Wade, Vice President Princess Cruises

Jim Walsh Carnival Cruise Line Nancy Wheatley Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. George Wright Princess Cruises Environmental Leadership Work Group Members Chair - Tom Turner, Compliance Assistance Statewide Public Service, ADEC
Frank Homan, Co-Chair Southeast Conference

Kris Balliet Alaska Conservation AllianceAlaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 50 of 55 Environmental Leadership Work Group Members continued

Stan Deno International Council of Cruise Lines (ICCL) Dave Eley – Contractor Support to Work Group Consultant Cape Decision Int’l. Services

Tom Greene Crystal Cruises

John Hansen North West Cruiseship Association Kjell Hjartnes Norwegian Cruise Lines Capt. Michael Jones Special Expeditions Marine Greg Kellog, Alaska Operations Office U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Rob Lorigan, Commander U.S. Coast Guard John Pavitt, Alaska Operations Office U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Brian Peter, LCDR U.S. Coast Guard Randy Ray U.S. Cruise Ship Association Rich Softye, Director of Compliance Holland America Line

Paula Terrel Alaska Conservation Alliance

Joe Valenti Crystal Cruises

Ron Valentine World Explorer
Dr. Richard Wade, Vice President Princess Cruises

Jim Walsh Carnival Cruise Line Nancy Wheatley Royal Caribbean CelebrityAlaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 51 of 55 

### Appendix E: Core Members of the Science Panel

Marlin Atkinson: Professor of Oceanography, University of Hawaii. Specialty: Nutrient input, physical transport models, remote sensing, and point/non-point pollution. C-J Beegle-Krause: Oceanographer, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Specialty: Modeling chemical transport in oceans. Kenwyn George: Environmental Engineer for Wastewater Discharge for Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation. Specialty: Dispersion modeling, fate and effects of wastewater discharge. Kenneth Hall: Professor, University of British Columbia (Department of Civil Engineering and Institute for Resources and Environment). Specialty: Water quality, water pollution (non-point source, impact analysis). Lincoln Loehr: Environmental analyst for a law firm. Specialty: Dispersion models and mixing zones, municipal wastewater permitting. Charles McGee: Laboratory Supervisor, Orange County (CA) Sanitation District. Specialty: Microbiology, wastewater treatment. Alan Mearns: Senior Staff Scientist, Hazardous Materials Response Division, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Specialty: Marine ecology, benefits and consequences of waste treatment technologies. Michael S. Stekoll: Professor of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Alaska. Specialty: Ocean pollution, shoreline impacts of pollution. Michael Watson: Senior toxicologist for US Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10. Specialty: Marine ecology, toxicology. Dave Eley: Consultant for the Alaska Cruise Ship Initiative, Secretary and Facilitator for the Science Panel. Specialty: Industrial toxicology and environmental health, water ways management, marine environmental protection.Alaska Cruise Ship Initiative 2000 Season: Part 2 Final Report

_________________________________________________________________________________________ Page 52 of 55 

### Appendix F: Steering Committee Member Endorsement

The following arewritten endorsements submitted by members of the Alaska Cruise Ship Initiative Steering Committee.